LDS Only: Self-righteousness in our midst

[Orontes]

I'm already following the posts on that thread, with the exception of MadHatter's, and I believe you've already stated your position there. This thread was never intended to be a continuation of that one, although that's clearly what it has become. [/size][/font]

I haven't put forward any argument in the other thread.

Or by both. To me, discrimination is immoral.

How do you define discrimination? On its face, your comment is quite bold and I'm not sure you appreciate its full scope.

 

[Katzpur]

I haven't put forward any argument in the other thread.

Apparently I was confusing you with someone else then.

How do you define discrimination?

I realize that discrimination is not always a bad thing. We have to discriminate between right and wrong every day of our lives. What I was referring to was the showing of favoritism in treatment because of differences.

On its face, your comment is quite bold and I'm not sure you appreciate its full scope.

Well, I'm sure that, being the fine debater you are, you will take this opportunity to educate me. Regardless of how eloquently you might be able to point out the flaws in my statement, I think you know what I meant to say. What you don't seem to get is that I don't want to argue that point on this thread. There are two other threads for that purpose.

 

[Watchmen]

Katz - thanks for a great OP. I think for some the Iron Rod is as large as a the rail of a stairway while for others it's like a thread that only those with 20/20 vision will find.

 

[Orontes]

Apparently I was confusing you with someone else then.[/size][/font]

I realize that discrimination is not always a bad thing. We have to discriminate between right and wrong every day of our lives. What I was referring to was the showing of favoritism in treatment because of differences.

Well, I'm sure that, being the fine debater you are, you will take this opportunity to educate me. Regardless of how eloquently you might be able to point out the flaws in my statement, I think you know what I meant to say. What you don't seem to get is that I don't want to argue that point on this thread. There are two other threads for that purpose.

Ouch!

 

[madhatter85]

Katz - thanks for a great OP. I think for some the Iron Rod is as large as a the rail of a stairway while for others it's like a thread that only those with 20/20 vision will find.

No, the Iron Rod is a constant. it is unwavering and immovable. The only way to not grasp onto it is to draw yourself away from it.

speakign of self-righteousness. the onyl other person i know of that has "ignored" me was "Fish-Hunter" because he couldn't answer any of my questions and proved him wrong on many occasions. Being so self-righteous as to ignore someone jus because they have a differing view is sad.

 

[Watchmen]

No, the Iron Rod is a constant. it is unwavering and immovable. The only way to not grasp onto it is to draw yourself away from it.

You missed the point of my post, which isn't surprising given the size of your rod. In other words, you and Starfish have demonstrated an extremely narrow interpretation of what you think is "right." For you, the iron rod is so thin that only the select can find and grasp it and others, like me and katzpur, who have bigger rods, are open to more liberal interpretations of doctrine.

 

[madhatter85]

You missed the point of my post, which isn't surprising given the size of your rod. In other words, you and Starfish have demonstrated an extremely narrow interpretation of what you think is "right." For you, the iron rod is so thin that only the select can find and grasp it and others, like me and katzpur, who have bigger rods, are open to more liberal interpretations of doctrine.

God is not Liberal, he is pure truth and right. there is only one truth. there are not many different things that "can be true" in the gospel. It really is that black and white.

 

[Watchmen]

God is not Liberal, he is pure truth and right. there is only one truth. there are not many different things that "can be true" in the gospel. It really is that black and white.

Like I said, your rod is as thin as a thread.

Do you even know what "liberal" means?

 

[Starfish]

You missed the point of my post, which isn't surprising given the size of your rod. In other words, you and Starfish have demonstrated an extremely narrow interpretation of what you think is "right." For you, the iron rod is so thin that only the select can find and grasp it and others, like me and katzpur, who have bigger rods, are open to more liberal interpretations of doctrine.

How have I demonstrated a "narrow view"? In another thread you said my words, "exemplifies the fearful thinking that promotes close mindedness, which, in turn, leads to more bigotry. It's making excuses."
Yet when I asked what you meant, you said nothing. Then Orontes gave quotes from Elders Packer and Nelson that agreed with what I had said. Still no response to that. I have made every effort to stay friendly to everyone, and trying to see all sides. Yet we all must be allowed to state our true feelings, especially when we feel the need to defend the 1st presidency's decision in this matter.

So please tell my how I have a narrow view. And if my view is narrow, how do I compare that to "strait is the gate and narrow is the way", or "the way for man is narrow", or "enter into the narrow gate".

Maybe your comment was a compliment? Sorry, I'm not being sarcastic. I would like to know how you feel I am wrong.

Thanks.

 

[Watchmen]

How have I demonstrated a "narrow view"? In another thread you said my words, "exemplifies the fearful thinking that promotes close mindedness, which, in turn, leads to more bigotry. It's making excuses."
Yet when I asked what you meant, you said nothing. Then Orontes gave quotes from Elders Packer and Nelson that agreed with what I had said. Still no response to that. I have made every effort to stay friendly to everyone, and trying to see all sides. Yet we all must be allowed to state our true feelings, especially when we feel the need to defend the 1st presidency's decision in this matter.

So please tell my how I have a narrow view. And if my view is narrow, how do I compare that to "strait is the gate and narrow is the way", or "the way for man is narrow", or "enter into the narrow gate".

Maybe your comment was a compliment? Sorry, I'm not being sarcastic. I would like to know how you feel I am wrong.

Thanks.

Narrow = closemindedness and unaccepting of anything other than one's own narrow interpretation; blindly following

Consider this: The Pharisees took the law and made it as narrow as they could to ensure they wouldn't sin, thereby forgetting the spirit of the law. I think the narrow LDS at the RF are like them - you'd harm the tailor who wears his pin on the Sabbath.

 

[Starfish]

Narrow = closemindedness and unaccepting of anything other than one's own narrow interpretation; blindly following

Consider this: The Pharisees took the law and made it as narrow as they could to ensure they wouldn't sin, thereby forgetting the spirit of the law. I think the narrow LDS at the RF are like them - you'd harm the tailor who wears his pin on the Sabbath.

So do you think that because I agree with the 1st Presidency, I am blindly following? Is that what you're saying?

 

[Watchmen]

So do you think that because I agree with the 1st Presidency, I am blindly following? Is that what you're saying?

It's interesting that of everything I posted in the post you quoted, you chose to focus on those two words.

What I have to say I already said in that post. I was asked for a definition/interpretation and I gave it.

 

[madhatter85]

It's interesting that of everything I posted in the post you quoted, you chose to focus on those two words.

What I have to say I already said in that post. I was asked for a definition/interpretation and I gave it.

Wow dude, you're telling me how "thin" my "rod" is.

God does not walk in crooked paths, Straight is the way and narrow is the gate, and there are few that find it.

There is only one truth, not a thousand. otherwise, God's house would not be a house of order.

We do not blindly follow, but we are commanded to follow and know for ourselves it is true.

I don't care if it's "discrimination" to you or the GLBT community, God asks us to do something, we are to do it. it's that simple. Stop second guessing the first presidency and the Quarum of the twelve.

The Lord has stated he would not let his church go astray ever again. Brigham Young stated that if he were to do something that would cause us to go astray, the Lord would remove him from the presidency.

 

[Apex]

I don't care if it's "discrimination" to you or the GLBT community, God asks us to do something, we are to do it. it's that simple.

This statement makes me cringe.

Stop second guessing the first presidency and the Quarum of the twelve.

They are just as human as us!


Is it really so hard for people to separate their religious views from non-religious issues when the occasion calls for it?

 

[Watchmen]

Wow dude, you're telling me how "thin" my "rod" is.

God does not walk in crooked paths, Straight is the way and narrow is the gate, and there are few that find it.

There is only one truth, not a thousand. otherwise, God's house would not be a house of order.

We do not blindly follow, but we are commanded to follow and know for ourselves it is true.

I don't care if it's "discrimination" to you or the GLBT community, God asks us to do something, we are to do it. it's that simple. Stop second guessing the first presidency and the Quarum of the twelve.

The Lord has stated he would not let his church go astray ever again. Brigham Young stated that if he were to do something that would cause us to go astray, the Lord would remove him from the presidency.

You, sir, are prejudiced, which is an ugly ugly thing.

I never said God walks in crooked paths.

My point is you think the path is narrower than it really is.

 

[Starfish]

It's interesting that of everything I posted in the post you quoted, you chose to focus on those two words.

What I have to say I already said in that post. I was asked for a definition/interpretation and I gave it.

I'm simply asking for clarification and it feels like you're dodging me. I apologize if I'm reading this wrong.

If I am narrow minded, blindly following the prophet, and behaving like a Pharisee, please tell me how. You have implied that I am guilty of these things, and I feel you owe me an explanation.

 

[madhatter85]

This statement makes me cringe.

Why? because i refuse to embrace thier lifestyle and accept it as a social norm?

They are just as human as us!

They are, but they have the authority for direct revelation from God. How would you feel about it if President Hinckley came out and asked us the same thing? I'm sure you wouldn't have as many reservations about doing it.

Is it really so hard for people to separate their religious views from non-religious issues when the occasion calls for it?

No it;s not hard, But there has to be a line drawn somewhere. and the Lord has asked us to draw the line here.

There have been peopel that i know of personally who have had promised in thier patriarchial blessing that they are to be in a position that when the constitution hangs by a single thread it will be easy for them to step in and take charge right before the Second Coming.

The government, legislation, and constitution were directed by the Spirit of the Lord or have you forgotten some of D&C?

The Lord not only guides this church but the hands of those whom he sees fit to guide. Just like our forefathers in establishing this government.

 

[ladybug83]

The following was posted by a fellow Latter-day Saint on another forum:

What do you think? I've seen a lot of self-righteousness on the forum lately, and comments made by Latter-day Saints towards other Latter-day Saints. Why do you think we're more tolerant of differences between our members of Church and members of other Christian denominations than we are of differences between us? Why do some Latter-day Saints feel that holding holding one opinion as opposed to another makes them more righteous than another members of the Church? The patronizing tone of posts that imply, "If you were a really good Mormon, you'd believe..." is so un-Christlike! I personally see it as a sign of insecurity. How about you?

It's true, saying "If you were really a good Mormon..." or even "If you were really a good Christian, you'd believe..." is very un-Christlike; but I think it's tough to have a perfectly open mind towards varying beliefs within the same religion when its members are supposed to stand for the same beliefs. Of couse every individual has his/her own life experiences and the use of free agency, so having different opinions within a group of people is inevitable. It's just that it's also understandable for people to have difficulty in accepting every opinion, to say, "Sure that sounds right, too," when you would think that everyone who is a part of the same religion would be unified in their beliefs.

 

[FFH]

The following was posted by a fellow Latter-day Saint on another forum:

What do you think? I've seen a lot of self-righteousness on the forum lately, and comments made by Latter-day Saints towards other Latter-day Saints. Why do you think we're more tolerant of differences between our members of Church and members of other Christian denominations than we are of differences between us? Why do some Latter-day Saints feel that holding holding one opinion as opposed to another makes them more righteous than another members of the Church? The patronizing tone of posts that imply, "If you were a really good Mormon, you'd believe..." is so un-Christlike! I personally see it as a sign of insecurity. How about you?

The righteous must never let the unrighteous majority rule and sway our beliefs in God and his strict commands.

We need to be the "head" and not the "tail".

Deut. 28: 13
And the Lord shall make thee the head, and not the tail; and thou shalt be above only, and thou shalt not be beneath; if that thou hearken unto the commandments of the Lord thy God, which I command thee this day, to observe and to do them:

Call it "self-rightous," I call it righteous words from a righteous God.

Christ has urged us to live righteously, 100 percent, so that we might experience true joy.

The same legislators that legalize sodomy will legalize other addictive behaviors, such as marijuana and much more serious addictive substances and other sinful/addictive behaviors. It's a step in that direction, of which there is sure to be a complete destruction of a people who legalize and practice such behaviors.

Christ has told us to "judge righteous judgement".

John 7: 24
Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

Deuteronomy 1:16 And I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger that is with him.

Proverbs 31:9 Open thy mouth, judge righteously, and plead the cause of the poor and needy.

Alma 19:78 Therefore, my son, see that ye are merciful unto your brethren; deal justly, judge righteously, and do good continually; and if ye do all these things, then shall ye receive your reward;

Alma 22:42 Behold, it came to pass that the son of Nephihah was appointed to fill the judgment seat, in the stead of his father; yea, he was appointed chief judge, and governor over the people, with an oath, and sacred ordinance to judge righteously, and to keep the peace, and the freedom of the people, and to grant unto them their sacred privileges to worship the Lord their God;

DC 10:6 And now, verily, verily I say unto thee, Put thy trust in that Spirit which leadeth to do good; yea, to do justly, to walk humbly, to judge righteously; and this is my Spirit.

Only in this way can we have peace, true peace of mind and spirit, within ourselves and in our world.

 

[Scott C.]

Neither conservative nor liberal thinkers in the church have a corner on the market of humility or self righteousness. Those who accuse others the most are probably those who feel the least certain about their own position. Do we really know who's spirit is the most contrite and who's heart is the most broken? Should we be worrying about others or just ourselves?