Dubbs wrote:
Wren wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Wren wrote:


I used the example in San Diego County as another one, similar to what BY did more than a century earlier, taking from the church monies.


Your logic is faulty, because we are discussing whether the Brethen are mostly honest men, one example of what two church members did who aren't even paid is not an example of anything, no more than Jeffrey Dahmer being a "born again Christian" is proof all of christianity is nuts. Well it does hold true with you.

That does not compute.

Most of your leaders are good men . . . however, some have certainly benefitted at the trough of the church.


As has your pastor.



If you conider the percentage of church members who are not paid, and serve and teach, and work in the gospel, it kinda shows how a church should be run, and how it was supposed to be set up.

According to Joseph Smith, the Lord had quite a different opinion as to how a Church should be run.

And that was for those who served in the capacity of spiritual leaders, and those who served in any capacity of leadership or service within the Church should be remunerated for their service.

The Church failed in this commandment as far as the lower administrative sector was concerned...but have never failed when it came to providing remuneration for the hierarchy in the upper echelons.

Has it occurred to you Kent...that since the LDS Church remunerates it's hierarchy (as you so recently have come to terms with and admitted) then you ought to lay off your smarmy remarks about other denomination's clergy being fairly compensated for their time?

And has it occurred to you, that even as our faith has it's members who serve in voluntary and unpaid capacities...so do these Churches who have paid ministry, who you keep making derogatory comments about?

Jaye wrote:
Just Reading wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Just Reading wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Wren wrote:
Dubbs replies, "So again, what does gaslighting mean to you? And how was I gaslighted? // What I showed that if I found an LDS person using LDS computers and time to bash the church, I would turn them in, yes, I would, as would most good LDS people who want to protect the church. // So how was I 'gaslighed again?"

By revealing your rotten character for one, and that you were made a fool of for two.


How is it rotten character protecting my church? I look at that as an honorable person.

Dubbs what you do doesn't protect your Church, it just makes you and your church look bad.....

and by trying to get someone fired from their job for having a different opionion then you!!! there is NOTHING honorable in that......nothing at all....

Don't want to get fired? Don't use company resources and time to bash said company. Espeically my church, I'll turn you in in a heart beat, deal with it.

What ever you say Judas Iscariot....

Interesting isn't it? The teachings found within the gospel indicate that Christ's followers are not to seek ways to put stumbling blocks, or occasions to fall in the paths of their brothers and sisters.

Yet old Kent is just ITCHING to cause trouble, and to do real harm to someone just because he disagrees with him on this forum.


This is not a matter of putting stumbling blocks, it's a matter of looking after the welfare of the church, and having an employee bad mouthing the church, while sitting at a desk and drawing a paycheck from the church, which is wrong, and I would turn them in everytime.

There goes Dubbs: flippety flop, flippety flop, flippety flop.

Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Just Reading wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Just Reading wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Wren wrote:
Dubbs replies, "So again, what does gaslighting mean to you? And how was I gaslighted? // What I showed that if I found an LDS person using LDS computers and time to bash the church, I would turn them in, yes, I would, as would most good LDS people who want to protect the church. // So how was I 'gaslighed again?"

By revealing your rotten character for one, and that you were made a fool of for two.


How is it rotten character protecting my church? I look at that as an honorable person.

Dubbs what you do doesn't protect your Church, it just makes you and your church look bad.....

and by trying to get someone fired from their job for having a different opionion then you!!! there is NOTHING honorable in that......nothing at all....

Don't want to get fired? Don't use company resources and time to bash said company. Espeically my church, I'll turn you in in a heart beat, deal with it.

What ever you say Judas Iscariot....

Interesting isn't it? The teachings found within the gospel indicate that Christ's followers are not to seek ways to put stumbling blocks, or occasions to fall in the paths of their brothers and sisters.

Yet old Kent is just ITCHING to cause trouble, and to do real harm to someone just because he disagrees with him on this forum.


This is not a matter of putting stumbling blocks, it's a matter of looking after the welfare of the church, and having an employee bad mouthing the church, while sitting at a desk and drawing a paycheck from the church, which is

No, Dubbs, you would not. You had the opportunity and bailed. You are a flippety-flop coward.

Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Wren wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Wren wrote:


I used the example in San Diego County as another one, similar to what BY did more than a century earlier, taking from the church monies.


Your logic is faulty, because we are discussing whether the Brethen are mostly honest men, one example of what two church members did who aren't even paid is not an example of anything, no more than Jeffrey Dahmer being a "born again Christian" is proof all of christianity is nuts. Well it does hold true with you.

That does not compute.

Most of your leaders are good men . . . however, some have certainly benefitted at the trough of the church.


As has your pastor.



If you conider the percentage of church members who are not paid, and serve and teach, and work in the gospel, it kinda shows how a church should be run, and how it was supposed to be set up.

According to Joseph Smith, the Lord had quite a different opinion as to how a Church should be run.

And that was for those who served in the capacity of spiritual leaders, and those who served in any capacity of leadership or service within the Church should be remunerated for their service.

The Church failed in this commandment as far as the lower administrative sector was concerned...but have never failed when it came to providing remuneration for the hierarchy in the upper echelons.

Has it occurred to you Kent...that since the LDS Church remunerates it's hierarchy (as you so recently have come to terms with and admitted) then you ought to lay off your smarmy remarks about other denomination's clergy being fairly compensated for their time?

And has it occurred to you, that even as our faith has it's members who serve in voluntary and unpaid capacities...so do these Churches who have paid ministry, who you keep making derogatory comments about?


I would imagine you'd go to church if they "renumerated" you. That might do the trick ehhh Jaye?

Dubbs wrote:
KitKat wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
KitKat wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
KitKat wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Wren wrote:
The BoM is equal only in your mind, Dubbs. You are not going to find any church publication that says otherwise.



If it is the keystone to our religion, I'd say it's pretty equal.


Even the Book of Mormon itself says it "shall grow together, unto the confounding of false doctrines and laying down of contentions, and establishing peace" (2 Nephi 3:12)

Pretty equal in my mind if it clears up contentions the Bible has caused.
But it's NOT the cornerstone of our religion. Christ is!

I said Keystone dar dar. Read, comprehend.
You said cornerstone earlier, and you know it. Besides, there's not much difference between the two if any.

Betz is right. You are a totally arrogant SOB.


And I corrected it, even appolgized for making the error, guess you don't read much.

But in that post I didn't say cornerstone, now did I?
Yes, I read, and I saw it. So what? Keystone? Cornerstone? Technically, not much difference between the two.


There is a difference if you understand that the PRophets have taught that Christ is the Cornerstone, and the Book of Mormon is the Keystone to our religion, and study what those two words significance is. Course why would a LDS lady know this?

Do you even know that the church calls the Book of Mormon the keystone to your religion? They don't say that about the Bible now do they?

Here is what the LDS Church has to say about the Bible:

This found in LDS Newsroom LDS.Org

"SALT LAKE CITY 25 January 2008 During the past several years, scholars, religious leaders, journalists and the general public have steadily shown an increased interest in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Much of this attention has been focused on the question of whether it is a Christian faith. Central to this inquiry is the Church�s relationship with the Bible. Many have wondered whether Latter-day Saints believe in the Bible at all. Still others have supposed that the Church uses the Bible only when convenient, while shrugging it off as an inessential part of scriptural canon. With so many conflicting voices participating in this discussion, it may seem difficult to know where the Church stands on this issue.

The truth is that the Church reveres the Bible as a sacred volume of scripture. Latter-day Saints cherish its teachings and engage in a lifelong study of its divine wisdom. Moreover, during worship and instruction services the Bible and its teachings are pondered and discussed. To increase biblical understanding, the Church provides extensive resources and tools: lesson manuals, cross-reference materials, Bible maps, a Bible dictionary, and articles in various magazines. Thus, the Bible is much more than simply a collection of antiquated writings and revelations that have only scant relevance to the modern world. On the contrary, it stands in the center of the Latter-day Saints� spiritual lives.

In a recent sermon, Church apostle Elder M. Russell Ballard characterized the Bible as the �bedrock of all Christianity� and one of the �pillars� of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Furthermore, he described the Bible as a miracle: �It is a miracle that the Bible�s 4,000 years of sacred and secular history were recorded and preserved by the prophets, apostles, and inspired churchmen. � It is a miracle that the Bible literally contains within its pages the converting, healing Spirit of Christ, which has turned men�s hearts for centuries, leading them to pray, to choose right paths, and to search to find their Savior.� It instills real, tangible power in the lives of Latter-day Saints and offers practical solutions and spiritual guidance that inspire them to overcome challenges and trials.

There is a broad range of approaches within the vast mosaic of biblical interpretation. For example, biblical inerrancy maintains that the Bible is without error and contradiction; biblical infallibility holds that the Bible is free from errors regarding faith and practice but not necessarily science or history; biblical literalism requires a literal interpretation of events and teachings in the Bible and generally discounts allegory and metaphor; and the �Bible as literature� educational approach extols the literary qualities of the Bible but disregards its miraculous elements.

The Church does not strictly subscribe to any of these interpretive approaches. Rather, in the words of Joseph Smith, it regards the Bible to be the word of God, �as far as it is translated correctly� (8th Article of Faith). Accordingly, Church members believe that during the centuries-long process in which fallible human beings compiled, translated and transcribed the Bible, various errors entered the text. However, this does not override the overwhelming predominance of truth within the Bible. As Elder Ballard noted, �Without the Bible, we would not know of His Church then, nor would we have the fullness of His gospel now.� Part of that fullness is the Bible�s seminal instruction that God reveals Himself to those who seek Him. The Bible is a living invitation to know personally the sacred revelatory experience that fills its pages.

The scriptures, or �standard works,� of the Latter-day Saints comprise the Old Testament and New Testament of the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price. According to Elder Ballard, these scriptures constitute a �great, indivisible whole� of God�s revealed word that help humankind understand the past, present and future. The great gospel plan contained in these works does not apply to one generation or one people alone but to all of God�s children throughout all time. Thus, in the words of Elder Ballard, �those who think that one part is more important or more true than the other parts are missing some of the beauty and completeness of the canon of ancient scripture.�

During previous periods of time when God organized His church, He added new revelations to pre-existing scripture, forming a connection between believers of the present and believers of the past. For example, the Old Testament book of Isaiah gives shape and meaning to the Gospel of Matthew. The two revelations need not be viewed as rivals competing with each other: the existence of one does not negate the relevance or legitimacy of the other. This ongoing revelation of scripture gives uniformity and continuity to an unfolding gospel narrative and unites people under one standard of doctrine.

Of all the standard works, the Bible remains the best source for an intimate understanding of the character and personality of Jesus Christ during His mortal mission. While the Old Testament offers a prophetic foretelling of that mission, the New Testament provides an unmatched account of the events, experiences, teachings and personal interactions of Christ. The Book of Mormon strengthens and reinforces His teachings through additional witnesses and provides moving accounts of the personal experiences many individuals had with Him. According to Elder Ballard, �The Book of Mormon does not dilute nor diminish nor de-emphasize the Bible. On the contrary, it expands, extends, and exalts it."

**************************************************

So...according to this official source...the Holy Bible 'stands in the center of the Latter-day Saints� spiritual lives'.

According to Church apostle Elder M. Russell Ballard, the Bible is characterized as being the �bedrock of all Christianity� and one of the �pillars� of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Furthermore, he described the Bible as a miracle: �It is a miracle that the Bible�s 4,000 years of sacred and secular history were recorded and preserved by the prophets, apostles, and inspired churchmen. � It is a miracle that the Bible literally contains within its pages the converting, healing Spirit of Christ, which has turned men�s hearts for centuries, leading them to pray, to choose right paths, and to search to find their Savior.� It instills real, tangible power in the lives of Latter-day Saints and offers practical solutions and spiritual guidance that inspire them to overcome challenges and trials.

And...of ALL the standard works, the Bible remains the BEST SOURCE for an intimate understanding of the character and personality of Jesus Christ during His mortal mission.

While the Old Testament offers a prophetic foretelling of that mission, the New Testament provides an UNMATCHED account of the events, experiences, teachings and personal interactions of Christ.

The Book of Mormon strengthens and reinforces His teachings through additional witnesses and provides moving accounts of the personal experiences many individuals had with Him.

According to Elder Ballard, �The Book of Mormon does not dilute nor diminish nor de-emphasize the Bible. On the contrary, it expands, extends, and exalts it."