Re:Documents raise questions about religious influ (1 viewing) (1) Guests
Favoured: 2
|
|
|
TOPIC: Re:Documents raise questions about religious influ
|
bearyb (User)
Platinum Boarder
Posts: 3085
|
|
Re:Documents raise questions about religious influ 5 Months ago
|
Karma: 4
|
Just Reading wrote:bearyb wrote:
Just Reading wrote:
bearyb wrote:
Jaye wrote:
And as I said...you have failed to comprehend that unless and until a revelation is canonized into scripture...it is NOT doctrine.
How long did it take before what Christ taught during His ministry became doctrine?
it's hard to say but I believe it was around 300 AD
So somehow, according to your estimation, it took almost 300 years before what Christ said way back during His ministry became true doctrine.
But if it was true doctrine then, wouldn't it have always been true doctrine from even before the time He taught it?
Well to answer this question and as far as I've learned is that Rabbi Y'sua Ben Yosef (AKA Jesus Christ) was just a Rabbi when he was alive, then in 325 the Council of Nicaea made Rabbi Y'sua Ben Yosef what he is today and a precedent was set for subsequent general councils to create creeds and canons, So in effect "yes" what Jesus said became doctrine 300 years after he said it!!  So, men made Christ who He is? (That is what a lot of people believe of course, particularly atheists.) And what of the several times when Christ declared that His words were not His, but were His Father's that sent Him? Wouldn't that mean that the doctrine Christ taught was around before He was born?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are two ways to live your life - one as if nothing is a miracle, the other as if everything is.
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
bearyb (User)
Platinum Boarder
Posts: 3085
|
|
Re:Documents raise questions about religious influ 5 Months ago
|
Karma: 4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are two ways to live your life - one as if nothing is a miracle, the other as if everything is.
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
Dubbs (User)
Platinum Boarder
Posts: 6621
|
|
Re:Documents raise questions about religious influ 5 Months ago
|
Karma: -377
|
|
I irritated you enough to not understand a joke was being made and ask "what kind of person" would do that. Again, relax bud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Last Edit: 2008/05/12 11:02 By Dubbs.
|
|
|
My ignore list... The The The The Betz, Kitcat, and the blonde. They have nothing of substance to say anyway, but just like to add smarmy comments to the conversations, so why bother with the the constant smariness?
Wren would like to think he's ignoring me, but he can't, won't and will not.
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
Wren (User)
Platinum Boarder
Posts: 11927
|
|
Re:Documents raise questions about religious influ 5 Months ago
|
Karma: -8
|
|
Dubbs wrote:
I irritated you enough to not understand a joke was being made and ask "what kind of person" would do that. Again, relax bud.
Bearyb was not being rude, but you are, to one who believes as you. Be polite.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
Wren (User)
Platinum Boarder
Posts: 11927
|
|
Re:Documents raise questions about religious influ 5 Months ago
|
Karma: -8
|
Dubbs wrote:Wren wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Wren wrote:
BLogan wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
ThomasK wrote:
I want to state that Brigham Young's teachings concerning Blacks, in my opinion, was wrong. I do not know why the Priesthood was withheld. It has been restored, I sustain this. Any other statements that Brigham Young made concerning Blacks I consider not to be of God and I condemn them. That does not mean that I do not sustain him as a Prophet of God.
In the Bible...it is written that a man may be known by his words and his actions.
Jesus said..."Either make the tree good, and his fruit good, or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.
O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? For out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh.
A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.
But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.
For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned."
So...is it possible that a man who has spoken such hateful and bigoted words regarding our black brothers and sisters can still be considered to be the mouthpiece of the Lord?
The Lord also said..."Not everyone that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of My Father, which is in heaven.
Many will say to Me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? And in thy name have cast out devils? And in thy name done many wonderful works?
And then I will profess unto them...I never knew you: depart from me, ye that worketh iniquity."
I'm sorry Thomas...I disagree with you on this point. For one thing...I don't believe that Brigham Young was chosen by God to lead the Church...although the perilous times called for a strong leader...and he was certainly a strong man...a strong willed man...and a man who brooked no argument.
I do not believe that God would select a man who's heart was filled with such hatred and bigotry for his black brothers and sisters.
Especially since Joseph Smith had already been ordaining worthy black men to the priesthood for some time before his death.
And if the founder of the faith, a man who was said to see God the Father, and the Son face to face...and said to receive the priesthood directly from Peter, James and John, had not been informed that the blacks were not worthy to receive the priesthood in their mortal life...I do not believe that God ever instructed Brigham Young to deny it to them.
For me...this places his status as prophet in doubt.
As does his teaching that Christ's Atonement was not sufficient to save sinners...and that their OWN blood must also be shed.
That contradicts everything that Jesus taught...and that the Christian faith believes.
So what are you saying Jaye, if Brigham Young wasn't chosen by God, does that not make every Prophet after him to be in direct line of Authority apostate also?
Not necessarily. It would have to depend upon how closely each man adhered to Christian principles...by their words, and their deeds.
This contradict's LDS doctine though Jay. As we believe the Prophet holds all the Keys as the Prophet, when he dies they are passed to the twelve, who choose a new Prophet, so if Brigham was not supposed to be a Godly chosen Prophet as you are saying, then he didn't hold the Keys, thus none of the other Prophets after him do. Just can't be if your claim is true. The church would not have proper authority, which is what I think you believe but won't say.
First off, being chosen as prophet of the Mormon Church is strictly on a basis of seniority and I don't believe it has ever been done otherwise except for Brigham Young, now if I'm incorrect in my assumption someone please correct me.
Can't you understand that Joseph Smith was clearly never a Prophet of God as evidence proves and never held any such authority or keys so he never had anything to pass onto any successor except a lie.
BY was the senior apostle of the Quorum of Twelve in 1844 and sustained as President in 1847. Every President since has been the senior apostle in the Twelve.
You can state that you don't believe JS was a prophet, blogan, but you can't state categorically that he wasn't because you can't prove it. However, you can and have certainly built a condemning case against JS as a prophet of God.
Blogan can't prove Christ lives either, nor can you, that he would use this lame arguement show's how illogical he is.
Reminds me of the perso who used to ask us to prove we are the one true church, when he can't prove his faith either. Mmmmm who was that? 
It is obvious you never went to or did not graduate from college, because that is a false comparison.
You can't prove the LDS church is "the one true church" because the objective facts don't support it. And I never said my church (not my "faith", Dubbs, don't confuse terms -- that's another problem with your argumentation) was the one true church.
Who was the one who didn't get that? Hmmm. . . LVMIke who would not have anything to do with you, and other TBMs who lost that argument, including yourself.
It's obvious you are not a professor of anything. Does anyone here know Wren in real life? Anyone?
Of course I can't prove we are the one true church, if we could, the whole world would join. As is the case with any religious belief, whether trying to prove Christ lives, or we are the one true faith, it is a matter of faith.
Therefore my point is perfectly logical if you can understand the above paragraph. You never have been able to. Let's see if Blogan is any brighter than you.No one cares what you think. I am concerned about your logic and analysis. Even when you try, they are very poorly constructed. In this case, your point is up in the air with no support.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
Dubbs (User)
Platinum Boarder
Posts: 6621
|
|
Re:Documents raise questions about religious influ 5 Months ago
|
Karma: -377
|
|
Wren wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
I irritated you enough to not understand a joke was being made and ask "what kind of person" would do that. Again, relax bud.
Bearyb was not being rude, but you are, to one who believes as you. Be polite.
Kiss my butt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My ignore list... The The The The Betz, Kitcat, and the blonde. They have nothing of substance to say anyway, but just like to add smarmy comments to the conversations, so why bother with the the constant smariness?
Wren would like to think he's ignoring me, but he can't, won't and will not.
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
|
|
|
|
Generated in 0.89380 Seconds |
