Posted on 10/31/2014 5:22:14 AM PDT by Colofornian
Do not let those who are (obviously) intolerant define you as intolerant over your (understandable) intolerance!
Stand and deliver!
Check the sidebar.
It IS 'primarily' political site.
Tired of the 'anti' stuff?
Post some 'pro' stuff!
Over here now with your same stuff?
Sigh...
http://www.nearingkolob.com/mormonism-the-internet-and-the-magic-of-disappearing-gospel-topics/
(btw...here's my "nine cents" (inflation) re: the subject of "tolerance")
Here's the reality:
Everybody is tolerant and everybody is intolerant of something. Everybody draws the line somewhere on what they won't oppose. But opposition in and of itself does not = "intolerance" or "hate" (I get the feeling some people grew up in homes of conflict and project any disagreement as hate-filled)
Some posters speaking my way thru the years are intolerant of certain religious views (like mine) because they've decided to draw the line at some point. It shows they were intolerant of some things. I say, "Well, good for you. Everybody's intolerant of some things. And some people are tolerant of false teachers, deception, and counterfeiters." (That's just the way things run)
Bottom line, "tolerance" is not touted as any great virtue in the Bible. Why? Because it's so dependent upon what is being discussed! It actually falls more into the licentious camp.
Although patience IS a virtue -- as well as a certain level of civility, respect and giving honor; not all lifestyles and worldviews are to be respected -- and thus, Biblically speaking, tolerance is NOT usually presented as a virtue.
So usually when I discuss "tolerance" -- it's only after somebody else has made some appeal to it on the thread. IoW, they appeal to it as their basic operative ethic.
I don't go around on these threads asking for "tolerance" -- unless & until -- I encounter a poster who appeals to it as one of their key ethics.
And the reason I do that is that IF tolerance is so high in their field of vision, then they should already be practicing it toward religious views they disagree with...like mine.
Otherwise, what it amounts to is: 'TOLERANCE FOR ME; BUT NOT FOR THEE' (Or to put it another way: "I have a license to be intolerant toward your religious convictions and expressions -- all as I chew you out for exercising your right to express your own religious convictions!" Sorry, but that attitude is both self-refuting as well as hypocritical)
And what are common in these expressions I post? Simply that we don't cuddle up to religious falsehoods, deceptions, and other aspects that the Bible warns us not to "tolerate" as counterfeit Christianity.
So anybody who wishes to be intolerant toward my religious convictions & expressions, fine. 'Tis OK with me. (Please just don't -- in almost the same breath -- be appealing to religious tolerance if you can't practice it!)
(See post #24)
“Post some ‘pro’ stuff! “
Why?
Not the place in my opinion.
Life’s too short.
If you want to reach people for Christ; go out and talk to and do things for people face to face.
LDS church demonizes itself. Nobody here does. We just point out what they are. The vitriol comes from Mormon supporters.
Only a cursory interest, but some of it is intriguing stuff. I had an ancestor from Hancock Co, IL who was called to be a juror in the murder trial of Joseph Smith’s assailants, but he did not serve.
I don’t need to see post #24 — I already know you’re the smartest guy in the room.
That’s rather easy to do. That passage is not talking about baptizing the dead at all. Read the entire chapter. It says if Christ was still dead the people are being baptized in the name of a dead person. Believers are baptized in the name of Jesus who is raised from the dead. Verse 29 simply says what we do if we were baptized in the name of somebody who is dead? It would have no power whatsoever.
Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
When Christians are attacked, I can hear satan laughing with delight.
I don’t come to FR for religious commentary. Plenty of other good places for that.
I don’t think so...
“The anti Mormons [sic] here have blood on their hands....... they are the scum left from the Mormon killers of old.”
Maybe that works for you, and really, good for you. You do have a choice in which forums you can participate in here at FR, it’s not compulsory. The RF is but one of dozens of forums here.
I on the other hand am grateful, eternally grateful for the commentary.
I read to comprehend vs. read to get offended and actually investigated what I had believed as a result. I found that what was posted here was in fact, truth.
I had been led to engage in rituals and rites that are unBiblical in nature as a display of my then faith. Created by a false prophet.
I am an ex-mormon, currently evangelical [Gracer] as a result of the tireless and thankless efforts of folks here who endure great ridicule and challenges to their character and integrity.
And yet here you are on the religion forum, making multiple comments on a thread that has "mormonism;' in its title.
I am always amused by people get on the religion forum then criticize the poster, never addressing the post.
When words of lds leaders are used, how then is that not an adult conversation?
It appears that you are bothered by those very words.
Are you aware you are on the religion forum?
It’s Still Free Republic = which was my point...and comes though on the regular feed -
If you want to reach people for Conservatism; go out and talk to and do things for people face to face.
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.