Dubbs wrote:
itchy peaches wrote:
The other daughter suggested it, but LR said not to bother.

How disgusting, I have very little respect for any man who would do this to his daughter, especially knowing the covenants she is making and how important this to her. Wow, I'm sorry for your marriage, you are married to a slug.


Ok, enough. I do not know if LR will ever post here again. I may have ruined it for him. I will go back and add a Life Rocks said: in front of his post, for the sake of clarity. I did not mean to ruin his fun.

I'm sure he'll have some more "fun" by continuing to ruin his family relationships, and fighting against God. If you've been to the temple yourself, you know what the phrase, you will be in my power means, that's your husband. Good luck to you, you need it.

Dubbs, do you truly believe that your bishop, your stake president, and the regional authorities would approve of what you are doing here?

You are the perfect example of how one letter turns "reason" into "treason", and that is what you are committing against the LDS church with your antics. You lie, you cheat, you fabricate, you swear, you name call, and you say you are a good LDS person.

Dubbs wrote:
Abinadi Junior wrote:
Girl Raised in the South wrote:
Remember Mark Hoffmann (he's been brought up before, I believe)? He was our home teacher, and my husband was theirs. I never liked the guy. . .gave me the creeps. We'd go to his house with our kids for game night, but were only allowed in certain rooms in his basement. (The locked doors were where he was forging.) He would accompany me with my kids to the bathroom so we wouldn't "investigate" other rooms in the basement. For our entertainment at his house, he would ALWAYS want to watch movies with violence and explosions. (Can you see where this is going?) My husband, being the really nice person he is, told me I was too judgemental of Mark. I stood my ground, telling my husband I was afraid, and then guess what started happening to Mark's acquaintances?
It's a shame none of the priesthood holders had the power of discernment when it came to Mark Hoffman. It's a shame that the one woman who does seem to have had an accurate spirit of discernment about him, being a woman, was disregarded by her priesthood 'betters'.

"Where there is no prophet, the people perish."


Ever hear the story of the Prophet in the Old Testement who was "fooled" by his son trying to get the birthright? Are you going to say the same to this great Prophet?

Dubbs, do you truly believe that your bishop, your stake president, and the regional authorities would approve of what you are doing here?

You are the perfect example of how one letter turns "reason" into "treason", and that is what you are committing against the LDS church with your antics. You lie, you cheat, you fabricate, you swear, you name call, and you say you are a good LDS person.

Dubbs wrote:
Abinadi Junior wrote:
If there is any error in it, Pratt said, point it out. (But when it is pointed out, the pointer is slandered . . .
I've found most apostates have little problem with the Bible and what it says, it's usually the protestant bible thumping "Christians" that think they know the bible and think there are contradictions, when there really isn't.
The quote by Pratt was not referring to the Bible.
There is no denying that there are contradictions in the Bible. Explanations of the contradictions do not remove the contradictions; they explain the contradictions.

(2) Why can't Mormons leave the ex-members and non-members alone?
Uhh, if you've spent any time here, you know it is exactly the opposite. Ex Mormons can leave the church, but can't leave it alone. Met liferocks?
Yes, I have.

I have also met and communicated with tens of exmormons who have absolutely nothing to do with the Mormon church, so you statement is false. Whether that is an act of intentional deception or the result of innocent ignorance, only you know.

It is painfully obvious to anyone who has gone through the tedium of reading this thread, that Mormons absolutely are not leaving LifeRocks alone. Do they think they're going to perform some kind of miracle, by the sheer power of magic words change LifeRock's perception of what he has experienced?

(3) If God doesn't love and have a way to save apostates, his love is finite. If God's love is finite, God is finite. If God is finite, he is no god.
No one said God doesn't love everybody. Your getting silly now.
How so, "silly"?

I did not say God doesn't love everybody!
Discussion of determinants of salvation and the possible universality of salvation may be "silly" to those who understand neither the issue nor its ramifications, but is grist for the mill of genuine theological inquiry.

Do Mormons believe their God is finite? Can God save apostates, as apostates, in the Mormon scheme of things, or can He not? It has been my understanding that Mormons believe that apostates cannot be saved. By "saved" I do not, of course, mean "get a body". What I mean by "salvation" is what is normally understood by most speakers of English; you may replace it with the word "exaltation" if you wish. It is not (just) the return or rising of a corporeal body; it is the spiritual elevation to a condition of "dwelling with God".

So in other words, for Mormons, can an apostate reach as high a level in the heavens (namely, the Top rung of the Three Levels in the Celestial Kingdom, which normally require "the New and Everlasting Covenant of Celestial Marriage" and a calling and election "made sure) as can a Mormon who has not apostatized? If he cannot, then that God's "plan of salvation" ("exaltation" is by that same amount ineffective, impotent, second-rate. Please note, I am not saying the true God who is the First Cause is ineffective, impotent, second-rate, but that any so-called god conceived by the mind of man, who cannot save apostates, that god is ineffective, impotent, second-rate, finite.

If all God can do for apostates is what mortal Mormons can do for them, namely call them "apostates" and feel sorry for them, then his love is finite, and that god himself is finite. His feeble plan of salvation is unworthy of genuine Divinity, and such an alleged god is in fact no god at all. Such a god and such a plan meet the definition of "silly" better than I.

Fact is, even the very elect will be fooled in the last days.
That pretty much lets me and other more or less normal people off the hook.

How about you? Jesus came for the sinners, not the righteous. When he comes again, do you believe he comes not for the merciful (who forgive and embrace apostates), but for the elite?

Dubbs wrote:
Abinadi Junior wrote:
It's a shame none of the priesthood holders had the power of discernment when it came to Mark Hoffman. It's a shame that the one woman who does seem to have had an accurate spirit of discernment about him, being a woman, was disregarded by her priesthood 'betters'.

"Where there is no prophet, the people perish."


Ever hear the story of the Prophet in the Old Testement who was "fooled" by his son trying to get the birthright? Are you going to say the same to this great Prophet?

What do you think? Now who's being silly? Of course I've read it. So many things could be said about that, I hardly know which would serve the purpose of the question best. I will try.

I repeat: It's a shame none of the priesthood holders had the power of discernment when it came to Mark Hoffman. It's a shame that the one woman who does seem to have had an accurate spirit of discernment about him, being a woman, was disregarded by her priesthood 'betters'.

The Mormon prophets - all of them then living, which includes the Fourteen Apostles and God-knows-how-many Seventies and Regional Representatives, and Hoffman's own Stake Officers, Bishopric, and Home Teachers, none of them had the power of discernment that I have been assured all priesthood holders have.

Isaac was pretty much alone as far as prophetic priesthood is concerned (for those who believe that he had a prophetic priesthood). The Mormon prophet had no such excuse. There were many he could have called on, many who should have informed him (that is, if they had had a genuine power of discernment), and some whom he should have believed, and would have, had he had the spirit of discernment at least for the people who were telling him the truth.

The Hoffman affair was not a question of a patriarchal handing down of the birthright, which by the way seems to have been accomplished according to God's will, regardless of Jacob's method.

The Hoffman affair had nothing to do with bequeathing a birthright. It had to do with fraud, theft, forgery, murder, and with the Mormon Church, in the person of the Mormon prophet, being played for a sucker.

I would be curious to know in what way you believe Isaac a "great prophet". He was a patriarch, an important nexus in the Abrahamic lineage. But I do not see that he was "great" compared to other prophets. Perhaps you would elaborate.

What I or anyone else might say to a dead prophet has no bearing whatsoever on the appropriateness or inappropriateness of the actions of the Mormon Church's 20th century prophets. I believe your reference is intended to distract readers from the issue at hand: Where there is no prophet the people perish. You will remember that a number of people perished in Salt Lake City, whose deaths could have been prevented had there been an effective prophet to warn people of what was coming. He could have put the peoples' tithes and offerings to better use, too, than to buy forgeries. That's not responsible stewardship.

(2) Why can't Mormons leave the ex-members and non-members alone?
Uhh, if you've spent any time here, you know it is exactly the opposite. Ex Mormons can leave the church, but can't leave it alone. Met liferocks?
Yes, I have.

I have also met and communicated with tens of exmormons who have absolutely nothing to do with the Mormon church, so your statement is false. Whether that is an act of intentional deception or the result of innocent ignorance, only you know.

It is painfully obvious to anyone who has gone through the tedium of reading this thread, that Mormons absolutely are not leaving LifeRocks alone. Do they think they're going to perform some kind of miracle, by the sheer power of magic words change LifeRock's perception of what he has experienced?

I think one of you (maybe both) is getting a bit mixed up or misspoke. Life Rocks has absolutely been "left alone" by the LDS Church. In fact, sometimes this has bothered him "if they miss me, why don't they call?" and sometimes it bothers him that they even acknowledge him in the community when they see him. When he asked to be taken off the records of the church, it was done in a timely manner - no one tried to meet with him to discuss it, or to try to persuade him to change his mind. Sorry, guys, but this definitely isn't a case of the Church not leaving him alone to let him "get on with his life." This is a case of him not leaving the Church alone.

If, instead, you mean that there are Mormons on this list who won't "leave him alone", remember - he started the thread and (until recently) seemed to want it to continue in an effort to try to get his point across.

I think his gripe wasn't that they weren't leaving him alone, I'm pretty sure it was that he wasn't allowed in the temple to see the temple weddings of his daughters - who chose with their husbands to get married in the temple, knowing full well that he wouldn't be able to attend (since he officially left the Church a year before and, by LDS standards, wasn't worthy.)

My perspective - for what it's worth

Abinadi Junior wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Abinadi Junior wrote:
It's a shame none of the priesthood holders had the power of discernment when it came to Mark Hoffman. It's a shame that the one woman who does seem to have had an accurate spirit of discernment about him, being a woman, was disregarded by her priesthood 'betters'.

"Where there is no prophet, the people perish."


Ever hear the story of the Prophet in the Old Testement who was "fooled" by his son trying to get the birthright? Are you going to say the same to this great Prophet?

What do you think? Now who's being silly? Of course I've read it. So many things could be said about that, I hardly know which would serve the purpose of the question best. I will try.

I repeat: It's a shame none of the priesthood holders had the power of discernment when it came to Mark Hoffman. It's a shame that the one woman who does seem to have had an accurate spirit of discernment about him, being a woman, was disregarded by her priesthood 'betters'.

The Mormon prophets - all of them then living, which includes the Fourteen Apostles and God-knows-how-many Seventies and Regional Representatives, and Hoffman's own Stake Officers, Bishopric, and Home Teachers, none of them had the power of discernment that I have been assured all priesthood holders have.

Isaac was pretty much alone as far as prophetic priesthood is concerned (for those who believe that he had a prophetic priesthood). The Mormon prophet had no such excuse. There were many he could have called on, many who should have informed him (that is, if they had had a genuine power of discernment), and some whom he should have believed, and would have, had he had the spirit of discernment at least for the people who were telling him the truth.

The Hoffman affair was not a question of a patriarchal handing down of the birthright, which by the way seems to have been accomplished according to God's will, regardless of Jacob's method.

The Hoffman affair had nothing to do with bequeathing a birthright. It had to do with fraud, theft, forgery, murder, and with the Mormon Church, in the person of the Mormon prophet, being played for a sucker.

I would be curious to know in what way you believe Isaac a "great prophet". He was a patriarch, an important nexus in the Abrahamic lineage. But I do not see that he was "great" compared to other prophets. Perhaps you would elaborate.

What I or anyone else might say to a dead prophet has no bearing whatsoever on the appropriateness or inappropriateness of the actions of the Mormon Church's 20th century prophets. I believe your reference is intended to distract readers from the issue at hand: Where there is no prophet the people perish. You will remember that a number of people perished in Salt Lake City, whose deaths could have been prevented had there been an effective prophet to warn people of what was coming. He could have put the peoples' tithes and offerings to better use, too, than to buy forgeries. That's not responsible stewardship.

LDS Prophets are supposed to be omnipotent? My understanding is that the purpose of the Prophet is to keep the people of the church informed, and in tune with, the will of God as it relates to their salvation. Not to go around foretelling the future. If Prophets were truly omnipotent than what would be the purpose of Faith?