Posted on 03/18/2009 4:12:59 AM PDT by Colofornian
I-R-O-N-Y
++++++++++++++
How about you take the time to integrate that with the rest of what we teach and you will have a better understanding.
Add Baptism for the Dead to what you just said and see if it changes your understanding.
Wow Jeeves,
I just looked at your homepage. There is nothing of God there - “just a human ego that needs to feel itself part of an “in-group’ so it can look down on an “out-group”
LOL
I just read Colofornian's post again. It mentions Jesus many times. Or is Jesus not God to you?
Interesting huh?
The only reason that Mormons began posting positive stuff was the constant drumbeat of bashing.
+++++++++
I used FR as a bird bog to point me to the news that I had access to at the time. I joined and started posting only after I saw the untruths about this Church go unchanged time after time, even though the untruths had been corrected over and over again.
How about YOU actually explaining something for a change instead of charging all with ignorance and subterfuge.
Show us what you teach and where any of us are wrong.
It is easy to accuse, but as the old saying goes the proof is in the putting...
Or has the empty hand yet spoken again?
He's quoting a rulebook to lecture people who have adopted a slightly different rulebook. Not what Jesus had in mind.
+++++++++++++++
As I see it, your use of directed questions and misguiding comments are designed to guide the thoughts of others, giving good evidence that you are not just posting something for discussion. Just look at your remarks that you posted along with the article you posted.
The evidence points to you doing something other then you have stated here.
The fact that the LDS church has not defined the exact moment of ensoulment "yet" is not a contradiction in Doctrine. I.E. just because God has not yet revealed the exact second ensoulment takes place to us yet doesn't mean we believe it one way or the other. If God reveals ensoulment takes place exactly at attachment I'm fine with that. If he reveals it takes place at fertilizartion I'm fine with that.
However, even fertilization is not necessarily an all in one moment. Anyone who has a basic undeertsanding of biology realizes that the sperm may penetrate the outer shell of the egg (or that more than one sperm may pentrate the egg for that matter) but that actual fusion of the gametes takes more time. IOW, does ensoulment take place when the sperm and egg become one physically (pentrating the outer layer) or when the process of internal gamete fusion is complete. Given that the process of gamete fusion takes time at what point in the fusion process does ensoulment occur? (Ugghh, this biology talk is taking me back to my college biology class where the professor spent most of the semester talking about his own research on splitting Frog Oocytes with hair). Given that twinning is possible up to 16 days after ferilization if ensoulment takes place right at gamete fusion are two sould contained in the egg? Given that soul is generally defined as one spirit and one body at what point does the second soul come along or are they both present at fusion? I.E. can two spirits & one (gamete) body make a soul? (I'm a twin, but we are fraternal, two seperate eggs, so we missed out on this two souls stuck in one fertilized gamete fusion problem).
Given that the pro-life movement has not even answered all these questions or most Christian churches for that matter, I'm guessing this thread is another case of holding Mormons up to a litmus test that many other conservatives and many other Christians would not even pass. Which brings us to a second point about litmus tests.....
Currently the LDS church has the lowest abortion rate of any group, even Catholics, Evangelicals, non-evangelical protestants, Jews etc. While there appears to be an attempt at nitpicking doctrines that have not yet been revealed to us, obviously something the LDS church is doing and teaching on the matter translates to lower abortions in practice. IOW, While the purists may feel outrage on Doctrinal grounds towards the LDS church perhaps a more effetive use of their outrage would be to their own flocks who have fallen behind the Mormons in actual practice when it comes to infanticide.
As a side not, from something I learned on my Spanish speaking mission. In spanish the word for abortion and miscariage are the same. On my mission when teaching about abortion we would distinguish it by "aborto" (miscarriage) or "aborto intencional" (intentional abortion).
Really? And I thought mindreading was above your paygrade!
And he quoted the Bible, is that the "rulebook" you were referring to? Are you somehow offended by the Bible?
By your example we should not discuss the difference between Muslims and Christians because their "rulebooks slightly differ" as well...
Actually, I think the medical term for “miscarriage” is “spontaneous abortion.” At least that’s what I recall from my abortion-litigating days.
Oh my! in English it is also the same word. Ever heard of spontaneous abortion?
Did you come in this thread simply as a critic to posters here so you could look down on us? (At least I ask you what your motivation is -- I don't pretend to be an internal judge of another's heart like you just did)
I just read Colofornian's post again. It mentions Jesus many times. Or is Jesus not God to you? [ColorCountry]
I-R-O-N-Y [ejonesie22]
Ejon, I know your post was in regard to a distinct poster, but wow! that fits in this particular exchange as well!
As for Mr. Jeeves' There is nothing of God in your posts......boy, does your post above compared to your posts of June 2008 thru today ever show that your ears need to hear a sermon from your keyboard hands!
On a Feb. 26 post of yours -- your last mention of God -- you actually seemed to compliment Ayn Rand over her LACK of mentioning God:
Rand correctly recognized that most of today's major religions are in fact political organizations (Islam being the most extreme example), striving for power, dominance, and steady cash flows in the same ways collectivist political entities do. She makes no particular comment on God one way or the other - only on the rulebooks promoted by Earthly intermediaries and their eerie similarity to such humanity-enslaving works as The Communist Manifesto. Such intermediaries naturally squeal like stuck pigs at having their scams thus identified. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2194540/posts
So Ayn gets a compliment for NOT mentioning God -- and I get a slam for supposedly NOT mentioning God -- though I regularly mention Him or His embodiment (JC) on my posts!!!
Aside from that, your posts mentioning "God" these past 9 months are pretty slim: You mentioned H.L. Mencken praising God on Jan. 15...
...and then in your ONLY OTHER jot&tittle 'God' mentions over the past ninth months you did so as you made strange efforts on Nov. 16 + July 30 of last year...
...to go to very small threads mentioning "pray for fire victims in CA" in order to accuse posters there of tying CA fires to God's wrath...
...I mean, come on, how controversy-free can you get in a thread titled, “Please pray for the fire victims in CA?”
So what? Were you going to fire threads in 2008 just to blast away as part of ...a human ego that needs to feel itself part of an “in-group” so it can look down on an “out-group?” [The "in-group" being the vast majority of people in our culture who somehow boast of their omniscience, that, "No, God could never use a natural calamity to judge anybody...why strike the thought!"]
You'd think somebody preaching There is nothing of God in your posts... would have streams & streams of God-mentioned posts...-- yet your only 2008 June thru Dec "mentions" consisted of nothing more than what you claimed to know God wasn't involved in? (What? Did He tell you that?)
Here's what you said:
These threads reveal the true face of many so-called "religious conservatives" - glee at the thought that God is wreaking vengeance on someone they don't like. Muslims after 9/11 displayed same base emotions. (Nov. 16 #27 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2132969/posts +
And then on July 30 thread titled “Lodi pastor: Gay marriage didn't cause wildfires”: Well, since the fires mostly affected rural, conservative-leaning Californians and came nowhere near all of the newly married gay couples in the coastal cities, I would say anyone making this claim doesn’t have much confidence in God’s ability to aim his wrath. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2053970/posts
Well, I won't blame you for the thinnest-of-wafer God mentions in your posts. (After all, Las Vegas & San Francisco are pretty God-free places in many of its quarters). But please tell us how living in such sub-cultures has seemed to set you on the edge that you're able to know with 100% sure revelation-like quality that God won't ever use a natural calamity to convey His wrath?
Sure if you define it by state. But the real story is told when you break down the vote by religion. Catholics and Evangelicals voted for Obama in higher rates than Mormons and Non evangelical Protestants.
As for the State vote its simply b/c there are more liberal non mormons there than there used to be. SLC is over 50% non Mormon now (ironically given prop. 8 brouhaha, it has a high gay population). When voting rates are broken down by state it appears Utah was second only to Oklahoma by 1% in voting for Palin (Evangelical). However Baldwin (Evangelical) was not on the ticket in OK while he was in Utah.
Show us what you teach and where any of us are wrong.
++++++++++++++++
This question is an example of how answers are ignored and the same question is reused.
As I have said before, and before, and before, others are doing that, I am spending my time showing the readers how ya’ll use the kings english to direct thoughts.
Really? Do yu have a link for that?
Evangelical Palin? Was she running against Obama? I didn’t recall that!
It is the result of having to defend against the truth.
One of God's greatest creations that sprang from free will.
When one has to defend themselves for not taking his path, or putting another in the place of his, irony is the result of that defense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.