Betzz wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Never mind, found it on the Tanners website, bunch of lieing blood sucking pigs.

my first thought after reading your statement was "takes one to know one!" I know, I'm bringing myself down to your childish level . . .

as you always do.

Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Your problem appears to be this Kent. You are not capable of seeing the big picture.

You are not capable of grasping the enormity of truth...in all it's forms.

You have never gotten past requiring the milk of the gospel...and have never developed a taste for the meat of the matter.

Perhaps one day you will grow out of this infantile stage, and perhaps then we can carry on a mature conversation.

But until you get over this phase...this is not possible.


Ahhh, there's the arrogance coming out of cliffy, the guy who doesn't believe 95% of the Gospel, but then lectures others (in his long winded diatribes) about how they don't know the gospel

I'll stick with the spirit, and the Prophets for my beliefs Jaye, but thanks.

If your beliefs are the more enlightened and mature, I wonder why the Prophets and most of the church disagree's with your beliefs? Telling.

1. You are not capable of seeing the big picture.

2. You have never gotten past requiring the milk of the gospel...and have never developed a taste for the meat of the matter.

3. Perhaps one day you will grow out of this infantile stage, and perhaps then we can carry on a mature conversation.

But until you get over this phase...this is not possible.

Dubss said:

Ahhh, there's the arrogance coming out of cliffy, the guy who doesn't believe 95% of the Gospel, but then lectures others (in his long winded diatribes) about how they don't know the gospel

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

4. You have an inaccurate grasp of the gospel, as is indicated by your comments, and your behavior on this forum.

Your elder brother will continue to correct you.


Dubss said:

"I'll stick with the spirit, and the Prophets for my beliefs Jaye, but thanks."

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

5. Your comments, and your behavior on this forum are not an indication that you listen to the Prophets, nor are they any kind of indication that you are in contact with any spirit but the spirit of contention.

But never fear...Your elder brother will continue to correct you.

Opinion conjecture, blah blah blah arrogance.

Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Your problem appears to be this Kent. You are not capable of seeing the big picture.

You are not capable of grasping the enormity of truth...in all it's forms.

You have never gotten past requiring the milk of the gospel...and have never developed a taste for the meat of the matter.

Perhaps one day you will grow out of this infantile stage, and perhaps then we can carry on a mature conversation.

But until you get over this phase...this is not possible.


Ahhh, there's the arrogance coming out of cliffy, the guy who doesn't believe 95% of the Gospel, but then lectures others (in his long winded diatribes) about how they don't know the gospel

I'll stick with the spirit, and the Prophets for my beliefs Jaye, but thanks.

If your beliefs are the more enlightened and mature, I wonder why the Prophets and most of the church disagree's with your beliefs? Telling.

1. You are not capable of seeing the big picture.

2. You have never gotten past requiring the milk of the gospel...and have never developed a taste for the meat of the matter.

3. Perhaps one day you will grow out of this infantile stage, and perhaps then we can carry on a mature conversation.

But until you get over this phase...this is not possible.

Dubss said:

Ahhh, there's the arrogance coming out of cliffy, the guy who doesn't believe 95% of the Gospel, but then lectures others (in his long winded diatribes) about how they don't know the gospel

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

4. You have an inaccurate grasp of the gospel, as is indicated by your comments, and your behavior on this forum.

Your elder brother will continue to correct you.


Dubss said:

"I'll stick with the spirit, and the Prophets for my beliefs Jaye, but thanks."

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

5. Your comments, and your behavior on this forum are not an indication that you listen to the Prophets, nor are they any kind of indication that you are in contact with any spirit but the spirit of contention.

But never fear...Your elder brother will continue to correct you.

Opinion conjecture, blah blah blah arrogance.

Dubbs wrote:
Betzz wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Never mind, found it on the Tanners website, bunch of lieing blood sucking pigs.

my first thought after reading your statement was "takes one to know one!" I know, I'm bringing myself down to your childish level . . .

as you always do.

So you agree you are childish?

Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
[.

You always throw out your 'continued revelation' excuse.

It's always funny to see a "supposed" LDS person say that continuting revelation is an "excuse"

Classic. One of the basic tenants of the church, and you don't believe it.



And the leadership claimed that God withdrew the commandment.
.


Correct, it is currently not in practice, and you say you understand this, yet still ask the question why they are not paying bishops as they did when we WERE in united order.

I believe in continued revelation. Never said I didn't. I personally see no good reason why God would suddenly decide that people in the modern world had no need of a liason.

But you, and others, are constantly and consistently explaining away the contradictions and sudden changes of 'eternal or everlasting doctrines, or principles' to continued revelation.

You are using an excuse that is not valid.

Do yourself a favor Kent. Google the definitions of the words, eternal...and everlasting.

Their definitions do not coincide with the fact that the LDS Church has claimed revelation of eternal and everlasting principles which are commanded to be obeyed until the end of days, until Christ returns...only to turn around a claim a scant few years ago that God has suddenly changed His mind.

Continued revelation? Or convenient excuse?

Yes, we see you mock and deride the scriptures as usual, and the brethern, par for the course.


The law of consecration is an eternal concept, it will be practiced in the hereafter, so it is correct to say an eternal principle, as is temple blessings, but they have not always been on the earth either, and not always practiced.


1. The Law of Consecration was revealed to Joseph Smith to be an EVERLASTING PRINCIPLE and a COMMANDMENT FROM GOD, TO HIS PEOPLE, TO BE OBEYED AND ADHERED TO UNTIL SUCH TIME AS HE RETURNED TO EARTH TO REIGN.

2. The Law of Consecration will not be practiced in the hereafter...and I'll explain why.

Because in the hereafter, we will not be working for a wage, we will not be plowing, or reaping harvests, we will not be amassing wealth and we will not have ownership.

We will dwell, as provided for by the Lord.

The Law of Consecration was intended for the Saints in their Second Estate...or mortal life.

It was intended as an earthly test of our obedience to whatever He asked of us.

Your lack of comprehension regarding the gospel, God's commandments, the nature of His commandments, and eternal principles is astounding.

Jaye wrote:
Dubss said:

"Can you say anything in less than 800000 words? Holy crap!!

I doubt they look at their church calling as burdens, if they have the proper attitude, I'm sure you used to see your callings as burdens, says alot why you don't go anymore and don't have a calling anymore."
***************************************************

1. Yes I can. But since your level of comprehension is so very low...I have been attempting to explain so that you can understand. If and when you indicate that your comprehension level has improved, I shall shorten my responses.

2. The Prophets throughout History have often referred to their responsibilities as being a burden.

When God instructed Jonah to admonish the people to repentence, lest they be destroyed...Jonah shrunk away from the burden of that responsibility.

He attempted to run away. He was reluctant to take the burden of this responsibility upon his shoulders, and he was fearful for his life.

And he did NOT obey the Lord's calling until after the Lord sent the great fish to swallow him up. He remained in the belly of that fish for 3 days, until he cried unto the Lord in repentance and asked for deliverance.

When God instructed Moses that he was to be His instrument in leading the Children of Israel out of captivity...Moses questioned the Lord.

"Who am I, that I should go unto Pharoah, and that I should bring forth my people, the Children of Israel out of Egypt?"

And God answered, explaining that He would be with him. He instructed Moses what he should say.

And Moses questioned yet again...saying..."Behold they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice: for they will say, The Lord hath not appeared to thee.'

The Lord taught him the signs and wonders he should display as proof.

And again Moses questioned...saying...'Lord, O my Lord, I am not eloquent, neither heretofore, nor since thou hast spoken to thy servant: but I am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue.'

The Lord explained that He would teach Moses what to say, and fill his mouth with words.

And again Moses questioned...saying...'O my Lord, send, I pray thee, by the hand of him whom thou wilt send.'

(He was basically asking the Lord to send someone who could better handle the task.)

And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Moses for his doubts.

Moses was reluctant to take the mantle of leadership upon his shoulders. But he obeyed.

And finally...Jesus Christ Himself.

Not only the Son of God, but also accepted as a great Prophet in many faiths outside of the Christian faith.

Jesus shouldered a great burden of responsibility.
He knew for many years the fate that lay in store for Him.

This would be a burden to any man.

And when He knelt in the Garden of Gethsemane, He implored God to take this burden from Him, if there were any other way to accomplish what He must accomplish.

Nevertheless...He said...'Thy will, not mine, be done.'

The mantle of leadership is always a burden of responsibility.

And this applies not only in religion...but in every other facet of leadership...including politics.

Ever noticed how quickly the Presidents age during their term(s) in the White House?

I've had this discussion with a relative who is a seventy, from all he portrays and mentions on the subject, the brehren all love what they do, have good attitudes, and realize they are doing the LOrds work, is it hard at times ? yes, I'm sure it is, but "burden" is the wrong word.