April 6th And The Fundmentalist Lds

[Jenda]

Originally posted by ExMormon-Jason@Apr 6 2005, 06:02 PM

Who said anything about "stupor of thought"? 

Well, if God told me something, Im pretty sure I'd understand it. Whereas "God" told Smith something, and he was still left in the dark.

He asked a question that no man is to have the answer to, and got a puzzle in answer; it sure wasn't the false prophecy critics try to paint it for. Turns out he saw "the face of the Son of Man" much sooner than he thought he would... 

If no man is to have the answer, then why did "God" give one?

He didn't give and answer. He said "........if thou livest ........"

[Snow]

Originally posted by ExMormon-Jason@Apr 6 2005, 02:21 PM

So he didn't know what "God" was actually telling him?

And I thought Mormons believed a "stupor" of thought wasn't from God....

Sometimes I seriously suspect that you were never Mormon. Of course the stupor is from God. It just represents a negative answer. Did you ever go to church or read the scriptures?

[Snow]

Originally posted by Cal@Apr 6 2005, 03:13 PM

No, you probably are thinking of me. I do have a tendency to overplay the devil's advocate bit. I'm not really as skeptical of Mormonism as my posts sometimes sound.

Egads Cal, don't destroy my faith in you!

[Cal]

Originally posted by Taoist_Saint+Apr 7 2005, 12:01 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Taoist_Saint @ Apr 7 2005, 12:01 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Cal@Apr 6 2005, 04:47 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Taoist_Saint@Apr 6 2005, 04:25 PM

Ok, fair enough  :)

Pardon me for not remembering if you have already told us, but were you ever a Mormon? If so, how did you come to leave mormonism?

Cal,

I think I first saw you on the message boards a long time after I told my story.

I just wrote out my updated story on this post, but decided it was too long, so I moved it...It is now posted on my new website:

I hope that answers your question.

:)

Tao--when I click on the website statement, my computer just goes "boink"--is there some reason you can think of why it won't connect to your website?

[Guest Taoist_Saint]

Have a nice summer!

[Cal]

Originally posted by Taoist_Saint+Apr 7 2005, 12:01 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Taoist_Saint @ Apr 7 2005, 12:01 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Cal@Apr 6 2005, 04:47 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Taoist_Saint@Apr 6 2005, 04:25 PM

Ok, fair enough  :)

Pardon me for not remembering if you have already told us, but were you ever a Mormon? If so, how did you come to leave mormonism?

Cal,

I think I first saw you on the message boards a long time after I told my story.

I just wrote out my updated story on this post, but decided it was too long, so I moved it...It is now posted on my new website:

I hope that answers your question.

:)

Tao--thank you for your posting on the website--it was quite open of you to share your thoughts this way, and I can understand your thought process better, and respect what you have gone through. You sound like a very good person--one, who like the rest of us in one way or another, has struggled with the ambiquities of life, and have had the courage to face up to them. Keep on keepin on, Bro.

[Guest Taoist_Saint]

Have a nice summer!

[Cal]

Originally posted by Snow+Apr 7 2005, 08:05 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Snow @ Apr 7 2005, 08:05 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Cal@Apr 6 2005, 03:13 PM

No, you probably are thinking of me. I do have a tendency to overplay the devil's advocate bit. I'm not really as skeptical of Mormonism as my posts sometimes sound.

Egads Cal, don't destroy my faith in you!

Don't worry, Snow, I'm sure I'll find something to annoy you with before too long!

[Cal]

Originally posted by Taoist_Saint@Apr 7 2005, 08:50 PM

Thanks. I like it when people understand me :)

So I guess the website worked for you after all?

Oh well, now my story is copied into my last post.

I have removed it from my website so I can improve the writing and re-post it.

Thanks for taking the time to read it.

I too find that I just can't be all that active in Church otherwise they start trying to be me so involved that I have no time to think of anything else, and it starts being a real burden to me.

Unlike yourself, I was raised in Mormonism and took it the whole way in my early years, but at some point, instead of feeling up lifted, I started feeling really burdened. It was to the point that I had to lighten up or get ulcers. At first I thought that if I didn't attend church every sunday, I was going to feel terrible, but he opposite happened--I felt like a burden had been lifted, and I can to accept myself just for being ME, as an individual, and not some extention of a big organization.

I now recognize that Mormonism has much to offer many, and it does a lot of good for a lot of people. I still like attending church (at least sacrament meeeting), but I can't let it consume me, or I start losing my identity (I guess that is the result of being mormon as a child---I must have lost my own sense of who I was somewhere in the mantra of "follow the prophet, follow the prophet.........." At this point I now realize, "follow your good sense and independent thinking" is what God REALLY wants from me, and I feel a lot better for it. Still believe in the same God that has always been in my heart--even though I have often argued against the logic that some people put forward to try to prove His existance.

[Guest Taoist_Saint]

Have a nice summer!

[Amillia]

Originally posted by ExMormon-Jason@Apr 7 2005, 03:18 PM

You have got to be kidding right? You know you have just closed the door on understanding.

No, Im not kidding.

Tell me why God would say 2000 years ago that no man, not even the angels in heaven, knows the time of the 2nd coming. And then would turn around and tell joseph smith that if he lived until 1890-91, he would see Him?

He didn't say 'time' ~ he said day or hour. Knowing the year based upon an <span style=\'color:red\'>IF which He knew wouldn't happen ~ isn't the same thing at all.

[Amillia]

Originally posted by ExMormon-Jason@Apr 7 2005, 03:20 PM

PD,

No he wasn't. He was gently telling Joseph Smith that He wasn't going to give him the answer Joseph was asking for, and that Joseph shouldn't be asking to know something that the Lord had previously said no man was to know.

But that's just it. He did give him an answer. If he lived till he was 85, he would see Him!

He did receive an answer, but it was qualified by an IF, so it wasn't absolute.

[Guest curvette]

Tao: I can't access your website to read your story. Is it still there?

[Jason]

And Joseph Smith specifically noted in verse 16 that this message could mean multiple things, including (1) that the Lord would appear on the earth at the Second Coming or (2) that Joseph Smith would himself die and see the Lord within 85 years of his birth. Which he did, when he died in 1844.

True, but that's not part of the "revelation" from "God". Those are Smith's own words after "God's".

I see this as yet another insurmountable difficulty with Mormonism where God has said one thing, and then apparently said another thing to Joseph Smith.

If God really wanted to be gentle with Smith, He should have simply restated what was said before, "Joseph, no man knows the time of my coming" period.

Not: "Gee whiz, if you live till you're 85, you might see my second coming, or maybe you'll die before you're 85 and then you'll see me anyway."

Course to say that it meant he would see God's face doesn't make sense, since according to the accepted version of Smith's so-called "First vision," Smith already has seen His face(s).

I really hope that somebody here understands what Im getting at. That it seems very bizarre for God to even give a rough timeline for His appearance, considering His statements in the New Testament.

[Jason]

Snow,

Sometimes I seriously suspect that you were never Mormon. Of course the stupor is from God. It just represents a negative answer. Did you ever go to church or read the scriptures?

Rather than give a "stupor", why not just tell Him, "Nobody knows but Me."???

See above post to PD.

[Jason]

He didn't say 'time' ~ he said day or hour. Knowing the year based upon an IF which He knew wouldn't happen ~ isn't the same thing at all. 

Day's and Hour's are divided up so that we may determine Time.

You're just reaching now....

[Jason]

He did receive an answer, but it was qualified by an IF, so it wasn't absolute.

In giving an answer, Smith makes God out to be a liar. Smith's so-called revelation in this case is a scandal.

[Amillia]

Originally posted by ExMormon-Jason@Apr 8 2005, 10:38 AM

He didn't say 'time' ~ he said day or hour. Knowing the year based upon an IF which He knew wouldn't happen ~ isn't the same thing at all. 

Day's and Hour's are divided up so that we may determine Time.

You're just reaching now....

It is very specific when the Lord says day, He means day, when he says hour, he means hour. Time is general and non-specific. He said He would rise in three days ~ he didn't mean hours or time.

I can just imagine how it would mean nothing to the people if he stated that he would rise in time.

[Amillia]

Originally posted by ExMormon-Jason@Apr 8 2005, 10:39 AM

He did receive an answer, but it was qualified by an IF, so it wasn't absolute.

In giving an answer, Smith makes God out to be a liar. Smith's so-called revelation in this case is a scandal.

I was chatting with my bishop the other day and we were discussing how and why apostates and sinners saw the exact same things in such a different light from the active faithful members.

We came to the conclusion that is was where they stood, (on one side or the other of sin) which gave different light and different views.

Perspectives are reality to everyone...what makes that perspective what it is, has everything to do with where one is standing. I don't find it really successful to argue perspectives when everyone is going to stick to what their reality is ...

The elephant and the 7 blind men come to mind, but doesn't totally cover it ~

I think blacks who have been raised in a community like is found in MIssissippi are going to have a totally different out look than those who are raised in congenially and well ajusted integrated societies. I have friends in both of these catagories and they don't react to things the same way at all. The one from MIssissippi is alway looking for a fight, and feeling totally paranoid of any prejudice, existent or not ~ The one I grew up with in SLC is very calm about the whole thing and has many many white friends and even married a white girl in the temple.

These two friends of mine will never see eye to eye. Which one is wrong? I think the guy from Mississippi is because I haven't a prejudicial bone in my body when it comes to the blacks, yet I will say something and he will take offense to it.

[Guest TheProudDuck]

Ex, I guess we're just going to have to disagree on this. I don't presume to tell God how He should have answered Joseph Smith; if He decided to give a cryptic answer, that was His business.

If God really wanted to be gentle with Smith, He should have simply restated what was said before, "Joseph, no man knows the time of my coming" period.

I'll let you know when the position of God's editor comes available for your application. The pay's not great, but there's not a whole lot of work involved either.

In any event, the D&C scripture was hardly less cryptic than the New Testament's "Where the carcase is, there the eagles will be gathered together." Read Matthew chapter 24, and tell me with a straight face that there was anythiing "simple" about Jesus' discussion of the time of the Second Coming. He said a whole lot more than "No man knows the time of my coming."

Also see verse 34 of that chapter: "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." Was that a lie, or a false prophecy? It certainly wasn't true in the ordinary sense; the natural lifespan of that generation has been over for almost two thousand years. The only way this prophecy gets saved is to believe that John the Evangelist became immortal and is still alive.

I think you're holding Mormonism to a standard you don't hold others, which is a sign that you're not arguing in good faith.

[Amillia]

Ex, I guess we're just going to have to disagree on this. I don't presume to tell God how He should have answered Joseph Smith; if He decided to give a cryptic answer, that was His business.

Heck yes! The old testiment is full of criptic responses, coded messages, and stuff like that! God hasn't changed his MO just for JS haters.

I remember getting a very unspectic answer myself on two occassions.

I share one ~ I was sitting on my livingroom couch feeling very intune with the Spirit, praying that I could be more like Christ when my neighbors did things to hurt me intentionally. I prayed that I would be able to say, sincerely, "Father forgive them for they know not what they do."

My answer: "Don't ask for more than you can bear."

What was that supposed to mean? I came up with three separate things it could mean ~ But am I sure which is right? Not yet. It has been years and the longer I live the more these this statement seems to relate to.

But my first at the moment was that Christ was telling me that He already did all the work to be all forgiving, and I wasn't that great, and if I tried to be Him, I would fail because it was more than I could do.

I thought it would have been better if He has given me an answer like, 'I can give you strength according to your faith, to forgive anyone.'

That is what I have experienced ~ added strength and serentity in times of stress~

But to tell me not to ask for more than I can bear, when we are told to pray for strength ~ seemed totally incongruent at the time.

Since then, I have seen that it was a principle He was giving me ~ a principle which is taught in many places and many ways in the scriptures. Don't run faster than you have strength ~

[Jason]

Ex, I guess we're just going to have to disagree on this. I don't presume to tell God how He should have answered Joseph Smith; if He decided to give a cryptic answer, that was His business.

That's just it. I don't believe the answer was cryptic. Smith and later mormon apologists have made it cryptic to cover up the flaw.

But we seem to be getting nowhere, so why not stop. Have a nice day.

[Amillia]

That's just it. I don't believe the answer was cryptic. Smith and later mormon apologists have made it cryptic to cover up the flaw.

The only flaw is yours.

[Cal]

Originally posted by Amillia+Apr 8 2005, 10:03 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Amillia @ Apr 8 2005, 10:03 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--ExMormon-Jason@Apr 8 2005, 10:38 AM

He didn't say 'time' ~ he said day or hour. Knowing the year based upon an IF which He knew wouldn't happen ~ isn't the same thing at all. 

Day's and Hour's are divided up so that we may determine Time.

You're just reaching now....

It is very specific when the Lord says day, He means day, when he says hour, he means hour. Time is general and non-specific. He said He would rise in three days ~ he didn't mean hours or time.

I can just imagine how it would mean nothing to the people if he stated that he would rise in time.

Now Amillia, you could be painting yourself into a logical corner by saying that "when the Lord means a day he means a day". If you use the same definition of a day in Genesis, then, you are requiring the Lord to have created the world and rest of the universe for that matter, in a literal 24 hour day, which is, of course, absurd.

[Jenda]

Originally posted by ExMormon-Jason@Apr 8 2005, 10:39 AM

Ex, I guess we're just going to have to disagree on this. I don't presume to tell God how He should have answered Joseph Smith; if He decided to give a cryptic answer, that was His business.

That's just it. I don't believe the answer was cryptic. Smith and later mormon apologists have made it cryptic to cover up the flaw.

But we seem to be getting nowhere, so why not stop. Have a nice day.

What about the people that aren't mormon or mormon apologists yet have the same belief regarding the incident?