Because some in our day chose to limit the scope of scriptural application to only testify of Christ, or who take scriptural references speaking against their life choices to be hard, I will, offer this final post on taxes in the Gospel of Christ, strictly using only my observations how the church is now and how Christ's church deals with principles of taxation, charity, and agency.
Nothing in the modern day church is a tax. We are not taxed into tithing, we are not taxed into Fast Offerings. Why? It is well within the rights of the Church and its head to make it so. In fact one can be a member of the church without having paid a dime into its system. Why? Because agency is so valued in determining worthiness for eternal blessings, and because being able to chose whom we return tribute needs to be a choice. God knows that, shouldn't we know that as well?
God did not create us to be mindless obedience-bots singing praises to Him at an eternal rock concert in heaven. The plan of salvation is for our Salvation not his adulation. He experiences greatest joy as agency is used properly and in righteous ways. As such, we are granted agency. In fact, without agency we would cease to exist. It is this principle that lies at the heart of why I BELIEVE taxes, especially repressive taxes that are borne under the false assumption that doing so will provide charitable acts for those in need is a lie of evil men and women who are in temporal power over this nation and who are being led by the adversary.
Satan has deceived many into thinking that universal health care and other tax laden plans are ways of charity. Upon a righteous study of the gospel, the Lord has taught and demonstrated through His own church, that taxation, especially forced charity through taxation is wrong. Agency, as preserved in our choice to come to this Earth, shows that we all once believed this truth and hailed agency over being forced to do what is right. Such a concept demonstrates how truth is eternal. Tithing is not a forced tax, fast offerings are not forced charity. To me, the gospel of Jesus Christ is a gospel of agency and freedom to act - not without consequences, but freedoms to act and not be acted upon. I choose to oppose principles, eve those in government, that are opposed to such truths.
The problem with your tax idea is that you fail to recognize the role of government vs. church. The Mormon church does not pave our roads. Neither does it pay for our public schools. The government does that. Where does that money come from? You guessed it, taxes.
ReplyDeleteThe church uses tithing to pay for the building and maintenence of temples and chapels. It also helps with aid to places experiencing crisis and tradegy.
To say that taxes is part of Satan's plan is just whacked!
Actually thinking its the governments responsibility to educate the children you choose to bring into the world is whacked. Who cares though? I'm sure they know better how to educate your kids after all they know better how to use your money.
ReplyDeleteThe government does not educate our kids, but does pay for the services. Parents are the ones who should teach values. Teachers should teach how to read and count.
ReplyDeleteThe church serves a different role but it is still an organization and it is GOD's organization at that. So if there is an example worth emulating it would not be our government of men but an organization that is headed by Christ. If we are to find ourselves leaning to one "side of the isle" or the other, I would think it would be towards the side that embraced common principles with God and his church. In this case, namely agency and paying money that goes towards good things.
ReplyDeleteMake no mistake, there is no failure to recognize the role of government on MY side. Find a part of our constitution past or present that gives the government authority to buy up auto companies, to take tax dollars and give it away to private companies simply because they are having a slow couple of months and to do so without the consent of the American people at that?
My fight is not against roads or protective and enforcement services, it is against the actions of OUR government that spends 2.6 million dollars of our tax money to study the danger and related effects of alcohol consumption in working prostitutes of China. Yes its true (click here).
Instead of doing "charitable acts" as you feel our tax money tends to go to, it is going to support iniquity as was the tax in place by king Noah as mentioned in the previous blog entry. Perhaps you should re-think and research just where tax money goes to and stop believing everything that every liberal politician tells you. Shut off the Daily Show and read some facts. Perhaps you will be less likely to think that taxes are part of God's plan.
It is true that there is waste in how our tax money is spent. Don't throw out the baby with the bath water.
ReplyDeleteI am a ways off from throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I gave one example in a sea of examples. The deeper you dig, the more crap you find. Perhaps, if you did dig deeper, the more you would begin to see how the scriptures do apply in what we speak of.
ReplyDeletePerhaps a significant difference is that I believe that government run health insurance is wasteful spending and violates my freedoms as a citizen of this country to chose. We would be forced to pay for something that no one has the right to. The more money that is taxed, the less each individual will have to solve their own problems and take care of their family. As a people we teach people to help themselves. How can anyone help themselves do anything if the government is doing it all for them or taking away their means to solve their own problems?
Remember, Lucifer proposed a plan that would not allow for people to suffer. God didn't want that. If you look to the Atonement and the suffering that Christ went through, you would also understand that in such circumstances often the work of the Lord is done. Priesthood service is performed under periods of suffering; learning and humility are products of suffering, repentance comes from Godly sorrow. God sees merit in people needing to struggle and suffer. The lessons from agency teach us how to fulfill our potential.
Taking away suffering is the plan of the adversary and denies us our potential as God's in embryo. MAKING everyone hold hands and be Christ-like is impossible because no man can be forced to be like Christ. The only way we get to the celestial kingdom is if we chose to be there. Bruce C. Haffen once wrote, "we can have eternal life if we want it, but only if there is nothing else we want more". Celestial law does not force us to be worthy of it. We must be allowed to chose it.
IF IT IS A TAX, IT IS NOT CHARITY, IF IT IS NOT CHARITY IT IS NOT OF CHRIST.
This is not advocating not paying taxes, but rather the endorsement of a lowering of taxes and a call to fiscal responsibility. We as a people have to be examples of righteous principles such as honesty and in not supporting iniquity through the use of public funds.
ReplyDeleteElder Oaks states the following, "To wrest the words of a prophet to support a private agenda, political or financial or otherwise, is to try to manipulate the prophet, not to follow him." The words of the prophets in ancient and modern scripture are clear. I am choosing to follow their council as well as follow their example. I don't need a president to tell me to be charitable to those in my community and I certainly don't need a president to take my money away and force me to do what he wants with it. If I want to be charitable with it, I need the freedom to chose to use it that way if there is to be any eternal benefit from it.
Elder Oaks further stated, "Another area in which strengths can become our downfall concerns finances. We are commanded to give to the poor. Could the fulfillment of that fundamental Christian obligation be carried to excess? I believe it can. I have seen cases in which persons fulfilled that duty to such an extent that they impoverished their own families by expending resources of property or time that were needed for family members.
Perhaps this excess explains why King Benjamin, who commanded his people to impart of their substance to the poor—“feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and administering to their relief, both spiritually and temporally”—also cautioned them to “see that all these things are done in wisdom and order; for it is not requisite that a man should run faster than he has strength” (Mosiah 4:26–27).
This statement in combination with others from the scriptures show that to tax the people into charity like Universal Health Care is not being done in wisdom and order, especially when the taxes to come to pay for the stimulus packages, the war in the middle east and other socialist tax based programs will be brought to bear. There is sooo much that we have presented that is doctrinally sound and supported in comment, in the original articles, and in the words of modern day revelation? Why do you foster energy to fight the gospel on these topics?
I don't buy the arguement about having to suffer. It is true that all of us must experience suffering, but the gospel is about giving relief to those in need.
ReplyDeleteIf you follow everything that the leaders tell you to follow, you deny agency. Agency is not about doing what we are told. No, it's about gaining wisdom and understanding each day of our lives and doing our best to make the best choices. The choice is ours, and ours alone. Even when we make a bad choice because of ignorance, we can still repent. I like Elder Oaks, but he is not the Redeemer of mankind. I trust the holy ghost.
Javelin,
ReplyDeleteThe government doesn't educate our children? You throw in there "teachers do" I hate to shoot your argument down with this much ease but here goes. Who pays the teachers? The government. Who approves the curriculum? Government employees, therefore by extension the government educates children.
I no more expect the government to educate my children to read and write then I expect them to teach them morality. I made the choice to have my children therefore they are my reasonability and no one else's. I will not pass this reasonability off to any other human being in the world because it is not my right to demand my children's education at their hands then it is a right for me to demand my health care at their hands.
Actually the Gospel is there that "they MIGHT not suffer" Its our choice through the use of our agency on how much we will suffer to some degree. Yes there are those things we have no control over that affect us but there again we have the agency to decide how we will respond to it.
I disagree with you as well (not a big surprise this would happen at this point) on following leaders means loosing our agency. We have a choice to follow our not, therefore by choosing to follow leaders you are exercising your agency.
So Javelin you are saying that in order to truly use my agency i need to do something that the presidency of the church has urged against. That is such a relief to all those child molesters out there who have no other vices. now they are assured a place in the celestial kingdom. I personally have always wanted to become a swinger, but feared my spouse would not approve, but once I explain to him how important it is maybe he will go along with it and if not I can dump him and find me the partner who will make it to the celestial kingdom with me.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes I am realizing how rude and sarcastic this post is but hey, the holy ghost said I would be ok this one time. Hooray for agency!!!!
MG,
ReplyDeleteThe government pays the teachers, but it is the teachers who do the teaching. Even if they have to teach from a specific textbook, it is the teachers who make the learning connections.
You should teach your children, but it is ignorant to say that no one elsee will teach them. Remember It Takes a Village?
There is nothing wrong with listening and following most of what our leaders say. My point is that the holy ghost is what moves us in our quest for truth. You have to have a very strong testimony to read our church history since their are plenty of examples of men with good intentions. When you make the choice to believe everything that comes from a select few, you lose your agency because you no longer take accountability for your actions. Agency is about taking responsibility for our choices.
CF,
ReplyDeleteDidn't Nephi kill someone who was holding brass plates. Didn't Moses say, Thou shalt not kill?
It's the holy ghost that trumps all of us, including the prophets.
Javelin:
ReplyDeleteNo. It does not take a village. It takes parents. Period. Plain and simple. Modern revelation instructs us that parents are responsible for the education and rearing of our children, not the community. Church education supplements that teaching, but parents are not to shift the responsibility onto others.
And I will give you credit: Yes, parents SHOULD teach values. However, all too often in our modern world the government-paid teachers are the ones trying to impose politically-correct values upon our impressionable children.
And you seem to make a flawed assumption, that parents cannot (and should not?) teach reading and counting. Can you actually be making that argument? That teachers are the ones who can best teach reading and counting? I call BS.
I was taught to read and count by my loving parents. Quite well, actually, if I say so myself. I was also taught a lot of things by my parents that my government-paid indoctrinators (I'm sorry: Teachers. I will use little words for you.) ... teachers could not and would not teach me. In fact, if my parents had relied on those teachers to teach reading and writing, I could well have been illiterate until at least the third grade.
I will not even address the kind of crap that they have the children "read." Also, I will leave alone your assertion that government-paid teachers actually teach; that one is simply too easy of a shot to take.
Additionally, you say that "but the gospel is about giving relief to those in need"--this is true. but we are not FORCED to give relief. We have the AGENCY to choose to give relief and can reap blessings based upon our choices.
"If you follow everything that the leaders tell you to follow, you deny agency. Agency is not about doing what we are told.... There is nothing wrong with listening and following most of what our leaders say.... When you make the choice to believe everything that comes from a select few, you lose your agency because you no longer take accountability for your actions."
Wow. Where to even begin with this argument. Sounds like you're one of these so-called "New Order Mormons" that believe the Gospel is true so long as you like what it says. There is a difference between what NOMs claim as "blind obedience" and following the brethren according to what the Holy Ghost tells you is true. Do not dare deign to tell me that what I choose to follow is evil, blind obedience, or giving away my agency. How dare you.
You have no stewardship over me and cannot tell me that my choices for myself and my family are not led by the Spirit.
Back to Agency: When the government of man tells me what they think is best for me -- whether it is about health insurance, smoking, seatbelts, etc. -- they are taking away my agency. They are imposing THEIR will on to mine in an effort to "save" me. That is tyranny; that is evil. Perhaps the Spirit has told me that feeding my family is more important than paying exorbitant insurance premiums to a company who never pays for any of my medical issues. Perhaps I choose not to have medical insurance after much pondering and prayer. Who are you -- and who is this President of man -- who deigns to tell me that I am wrong, and what the Spirit has told me is wrong for me and my family?
ReplyDeleteIn a Zion society, when the Lord is governing, the Law of Consecration will be in effect. I hesitate to believe that there will be substantial benefit given to those who are able to contribute to the community through work, and refuse to work or contribute, who will reap the benefits. In other words, if Brother Jones does not choose to work, but sits his able-bodied butt on his porch chewing straw instead, I doubt that the Bishop is likely to help provide for Brother Jones. That is not a Gospel principle. Even those who receive Church assistance today are strongly urged to contribute their service in some way, whether in a Bishop's storehouse, cannery, or something similar.
Church assistance today is also a short-term solution. Members who take advantage are eventually cut off (locally, the rule of thumb is no more than 6 months). Members who receive welfare assistance are also urged, counseled, and assisted with getting back on their feet or putting themselves in a better situation.
The government of man, however, offers up a permanent teat to all who cry and whine, with no threat -- ever -- to wean them or for the people to take responsibility for their own support.
And before you say it, yes, there are those who for limited reasons cannot support or care for themselves. Those are they for whom our charitable works are essential. But again, the charitable works should be of our own choice, not forced. The blessings or consequences of helping or not helping are for the Lord to assign, not the government of man.
Choose ye this day whom ye will serve, but for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.
Also, before you jump all over me and call me names, I have nothing against NOMs acting according to the dictates of their own conscience and the promptings they receive from the Holy Ghost. They are free to worship in their way. I may not agree with it, but that is their choice.
ReplyDeleteLikewise I do not necessarily agree with those who practice true "blind obedience" -- those who do not carefully consider things and ideas for themselves. But they are free to worship in their way as well.
In return, all I ask is that neither group -- make that NO group -- try and tell me that the manner in which I choose to worship or follow the Brethren is wrong, or that the revelation and divine counsel I receive for those over whom I have stewardship is misguided.
I am not judging you; do not judge me.
IM,
ReplyDeleteI remember Ralph Reed saying the same thing about "it's not the village, it's the parents". I think that is so silly since the whole idea is about the community influencing the child. Parents are still in charge of raising their children. Think of Elder Oaks being part of the "village" in showing gooodness to your child/children. He is not taking away your parental responsibility when he speaks twice a year at conference.
Now, I know you are sincere when you write about how crazy things are in the the way you see it, but I just can't live with those blinders.
You are free to worship and believe what works for you. I don't have a problem with that. I think you have built this huge wall around you that makes it difficult for any different thought or idea to enter. That I find to be dangerous. The holy ghost is not going to tell you or I to run into the streets buck naked in order to bring salvation to some wandering stranger. Let down some of those bricks and allow the holy ghost guide you.
What blinders Javelin? What gives you this superiority complex that reeks of anti-mormon sentiment? To follow a prophet has opened my eyes to many gospel truths. The only times in which I feel limited agency is when I chose wrong, or chose to act in a way contrary to the will of God. Those that are blind are those that chose to follow their own way above the councils of the Lord and his mouth pieces on this earth. You have said that you feel that following prophets restricts agency. You know who else felt this same way? Laman and Lemuel. Two men who fell short of righteousness and apostatized away from the Lord in wickedness.
ReplyDeleteI am not sure that you are an active member of the LDS church in the way that you speak. If you consider yourself to be a faithful member, you might want to remember this with respect to worthiness of the spirit to which you claim to cling. We are to not affiliate or support ideals or organizations that are contrary to the teachings of the church. We are to sustain the current prophet. You have claimed that following a prophet brings about bondage. In no way does choosing to follow a prophet limit my agency. If so then following God would produce the same effect. The scriptures and life experience teaches me otherwise. The gospel sets us free.
Javelin:
ReplyDeleteYou do not know me, any more than I know you. I am an anonymous individual somewhere in cyberspace. For all you know, I am nothing more than a troll whose sole purpose in life is to bait you.
That being said, how dare you presume to know what walls and so-called blinders I have on. You do not know what I believe or the extent of my beliefs. All you have are a few words in front of you.
You say that you don't have a problem with what I believe or how I worship. I think you do. I think it drives you crazy because you really do not understand people who believe in liberty and freedom. It drives you crazy because you cannot understand what we believe. It drives you crazy that we will not blindly follow the rest of the sheep into bondage and oblivion.
Just because we do not accept your world view, do not assume that we have not examined your world view and rejected it. See, you cannot believe that we could do that, and again, it drives you crazy. Just because we believe differently from you does not make us walled-in or close-minded.
Gee. "Ralph Reed said it." So have a lot of other people. That does not make it wrong. I reject the idea that the community raises my children. I reject most of what the community would teach my child. You do not know me and therefore cannot know what it is that the immediate community believes or what influence it would have on my family.
The Lord has given me and my wife that responsibility. It is not the world's responsibility, it is not the country's responsibility, neither is it the state's nor the city's responsibility. It is not even the Church's responsibility. It is mine. I have a sacred duty to rear my children, to provide for their physical and spiritual needs and I will ultimately be held accountable for that duty.
And how dare you presume to know my relationship with the Spirit. I find that highly offensive and insulting.
I am sure that you will swoop in with an attempt at wit in order to get the last word. Do not expect a response. When you malign and question my personal relationship with the Spirit, and thus with the Father and my Savior, you are contemptible and no longer worth my time or attention.
Good day, sir, and may God bless you.
I once saw a bumper sticker that said "how far can you open your mind before your brains fall out?"
ReplyDeleteHmmmmm.....
Javelin,
ReplyDeleteRe: It's the holy ghost that trumps all of us, including the prophets.
What happened to Nephi was not a revelation for the whole church and it did not constitute an endorsement of the behavior to kill. It was a one time event that could have been completed by the Lord himself. Instead Nephi was tested to see if he would follow the Lord. Like Abraham, and like Joseph would come to be tested in with polygammy. These rare and hardly universal events are not comparable to the principle of agency with respect to the original topic of taxes.
A careful study of how the Lord choses his prophets would reveal that these tests were very common for a prophet to go through before being determined to be worthy of such a position. The Lord's mouth pieces needs to be trusted. They need to be a prophet not a puppet. The difference here going back to agency.
God did not force Nephi to do his will, Nephi chose to follow. As a result Nephi was literally and spiritually freed and brought into a land of promise. The spirit that you claim to follow leads us as citizens into a bondage to our earthly government through taxes and forced charity. Please do your eternal self a favor and go confess to your bishop that you don't believe in following the prophets and that you receive revelation that trumps prophets.
Brigham Young said this about personal apostasy, "Whenever there is a disposition manifested in any of the members of this Church to question the right of the President of the whole Church to direct in all things, (note he says all things) you see manifested evidences of apostasy—of a spirit which, if encouraged, will lead to a separation from the Church and to final destruction; wherever there is a disposition to operate against any legally appointed officer of this Kingdom, no matter in what capacity he is called to act, if persisted in, it will be followed by the same results. Men begin to apostatize by taking to themselves strength, by hearkening to the whisperings of the enemy who leads them astray little by little, until they gather to themselves that which they call the wisdom of man; then they begin to depart from God, and their minds become confused."
Following a prophet is perfecting agency. This is my warning to those who feel that following a prophet leads to bondage and loss of agency. Please check your thoughts and words as believing such can bring you no closer to God and can result in being disqualified for exaltation.
James,
ReplyDeleteI am very active in the church.
To sustain the prophet does not mean that you follow everything he says. To sustain means to give support to. A parent can sustain an alcoholic teenager without agreeing with the choice to abuse alcohol.
We all affiliate with people who don't agree with our church. Many christians do not believe we are followers of Christ, yet we still work with them, and invite them to a picnic at the park.
Laman and Lemuel did not follow the holy ghost. I try my best to do that.
IM,
ReplyDeleteI believe that if one has the spirit of the Lord, nothing will offend them. I don't get crazy with these posts. I try to understand why people take the views they do. It helps me to be better able to show empathy.
From your comments it seems silly for you to be so angry. I wish you the best.
James,
ReplyDeleteThere is no need to quote what Brigham Young said about black people.
There is no need to confess to the bishop anything about receiving revelation for the church. Only the current prophet receives revelation for the church. You and I receive revelation for oursrlves and our families.
You seem to think that we can only feel close to God by following the leaders. I would say it also comes from following the holy ghost.
Re: I try to understand why people take the views they do. It helps me to be better able to show empathy.
ReplyDeleteEmpathy is an emotion felt by someone who feels superior to another individual who's circumstances in life they observe to be markedly below their own. Your statement could not be more arrogant. You are not talking to a sunday school class here. You have belittled and insulted individuals who believe strongly about the gospel and find no reason to "open our minds" beyond what the Lord and his Prophets teach.
Re: To sustain the prophet does not mean that you follow everything he says. To sustain means to give support to. A parent can sustain an alcoholic teenager without agreeing with the choice to abuse alcohol.
To sustain a prophet means to CHOOSE to follow what they teach by the spirit. We are not talking about supporting an alcoholic teenager, we are talking about sustaining the Lord's Prophet. To compare the teachings of prophet to a sinful individual is disturbing and possibly revealing.
Re: We all affiliate with people who don't agree with our church. Many christians do not believe we are followers of Christ, yet we still work with them, and invite them to a picnic at the park.
"Affiliate" in the temple recommend questioning is does refer to being friends with or speaking with at work. To assume such would be in conflict with the principles of missionary work. That is hardly what the worthiness question refers to. It means to be apart of an organization or to support an organization that holds principles against the doctrines of the church. For example, if you have donated to and publicly support opposition to the church's efforts on Prop. 8 or homosexual marriage you have contributed to a cause that is directly against the words of the prophet. This act disqualifies that individual for the promptings of the spirit until repentance from the Lord is granted.
Your belief that following a prophet destroy's agency leads me to assume that you are an individual who supported gay marriage and therefore have gone against the teachings of the Lord's anointed. We have a choice to follow the Prophet, but we don't have a choice when it comes to the consequences of those actions. One direct result for such apostate thoughts is distance from the spirit of the Lord.
What Brigham Young said about Black People? What are you talking about? This had nothing to do with black people? It is about personal apostasy. Are you currently well in the head? Perhaps it is getting late or something....
ReplyDeleteRe: You seem to think that we can only feel close to God by following the leaders. I would say it also comes from following the holy ghost.
Why do you continue to operate on the assumption that our leaders and our personal revelation are always different or in conflict with each other? You approach these subjects as if they are mutually exclusive principles? Why?
Of course we are entitled to personal revelation, but what does that have to do with anything in the original article of this post?
James,
ReplyDeleteSome Mormons contributed to the Yes on 8 campaign, then voted No in the voting booth. Being worthy of the spirit has nothing to do with how one voted on Prop 8.
People should research all they can on something before voting on it. I did. Did you?
To sustain does not mean "follow what I say without thinking for yourself". We always have the right to search, ponder, and pray. You are confusing your political views with absolute truths.
Should black men not receive the priesthood if one drop of negro blood is in their body? Why did many Brazilians (who had negro blood) hold the priesthood before 1978?
Should a black man be quickly killed if he has a sexual relationship with a white woman? Brigham Young is quoted saying these two things. My problem with you is that you see what you want to see. You quote what you want to quote. My point is that the holy ghost can be trusted.
Re: Some Mormons contributed to the Yes on 8 campaign, then voted No in the voting booth. Being worthy of the spirit has nothing to do with how one voted on Prop 8.
ReplyDeleteThis is absolutely not true! Bishops were given a letter from the first presidency clarifying this to be so. In your temple recommend interview, it is not asking how you voted, but how you acted with respect to the initiative. Plus anyone who says one thing and does another is what we refer to as hypocrites. And as D&C 50:7-8 states, "7 Behold, verily I say unto you, there are hypocrites among you, who have deceived some, which has given the adversary power; but behold such shall be reclaimed;
8 But the hypocrites shall be detected and shall be cut off, either in life or in death, even as I will; and wo unto them who are cut off from my church, for the same are overcome of the world."
I believe that, even if there was no fault in voting against prop 8, such a two faced behavior is an act of hypocrisy which will cut you off from the spirit. So either way you look at it, your statement is inconsistent with gospel teachings.
James,
ReplyDeleteThere was intense pressure to give money to the Yes on 8. My bishop told all of us leaders to not say anything against Prop 8 at church. This was not about being a hypocrite. This was about being scared to voice your opinion.
Once a person goes into the voting booth, they are no longer afraid to let their voice be heard. They are still able to have the spirit with them.
You are not seeing the clear problem. One member can vote against Prop 8 in secret, but still not be allowed to talk about it at church, while another member can openly say in church why they are going to vote for Prop 8.
Re: This was about being scared to voice your opinion.
ReplyDeleteWhat would you have to be afraid of unless you already know that it was against the teachings of the church? Do you fear man, God, or Both? Because the last I checked, good choices have set my conscience free not caused me to fear what man might think of my decisions. The choice to follow the prophet is not one an individual should be ashamed of. Perhaps hypocrisy is only part of this problem. Claiming membership in the church then opposing its leaders is hypocrisy if not the beginnings of apostasy.
Re: Once a person goes into the voting booth, they are no longer afraid to let their voice be heard. They are still able to have the spirit with them.
Perhaps you should learn to differentiate between emotions from some self promoted sense of accomplishment or "enlightenment" with that of the spirit. Your vote, your actions, no matter how public or private are known by God. Your choices, including those in the voting booth demonstrate your willingness to follow the Lord's prophet and his inspired council or not. A choice, regardless of how private can still very much disqualify someone for the constant companionship of the spirit. Only after sincere repentance where that individuals life is brought back in line with God's plan (as opposed to their own) will someone be worthy of the spirit.
Please, stop assuming that I am not seeing the clear problem or the complete issue simply because I disagree with you. I am aware of how the adversary lulls people into certain mindsets and certain actions. This principle is demonstrated quite capably in the temple.
The clear problem is this. When a person makes a decision that stands in opposition to the church and specifically the current revelation of the prophet, especially with regard to a moral issue, whether that decision be public or private, it is a sin. Period. That doesn't mean an individual cannot chose to do what they want and feel the way they want. But they cannot chose the consequences of such actions.
If an individual watches pornography in front of others or in private, it is still a sin. If an individual appears honest and claims to be honest in temple recommend interviews but lies, cheats, and manipulates in the secret corners of his life, that is a sin.
A vote against Prop. 8 is a vote in opposition of the mind and will of the Lord as revealed through his prophet. At the point your "holy ghost" tells you that the prophet is wrong and that you know better, you have entered a dangerous path. Just like an individual who justifies a little sin, or feels that the brethren are not enlightened enough, we place our judgments above that of the Lord's chosen. You speak evil of the Lord's anointed in such a way that also enables the sins of others to find justification. I have yet to find a way that supporting homosexual marriage can be justified when a prophet has spoken so clearly against it.
So far Javelin, you have embraced repressive taxation as spoken against in quoted scripture, said that the prophets are not as right as you are, that you support gay marriage, and that the scriptures are limited in how they can apply in our lives. I have yet to hear a reason from your own words as to why you feel at home in the LDS church let alone feel inline with ANY of its teachings?
Javelin,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the insult, typical tactic when peoples arguments get busted wide open, when all else fails call the other person "ignorant." No worries though, name calling doesn't bother me I'll just keep busting you out.
Teachers teach what they are told to teach by the government, if they do not follow the prescribed curriculum they get let go. Hence the government controls what people learn in government schools so we get what we have today where people think this country is a democracy instead of the representative republic which it actually is. This is just one example of how government indoctrinates the people.
As for "it takes village" I reject the premise outright. It is as wrong today as it was when Clinton first spouted it in the 90's. Even according to your own logic in following leaders it is about an individual relationship with the Holy Ghost who will teach us the best way to become like Christ. Therefore if its an individual journey it doesn't take a village at all but rather the individual courage to choose what is right even when the village says no.
I do agree that agency is about taking responsibility for our choices though. That's why every person is accountable for their own health care and the choices they make in that regard, to facilitate greater personal responsibility the government should get out of our way and let us choose our own path.
Again your logic breaks down under deeper critic, keep trying though its fun.
Amen, Mr. Galt. Just a thought James, I think Javelin may just be "bustin' yer butt". I don't think he actually believes most of what he's saying on here he's just dragging it out for the sake of blog conflict.
ReplyDeleteI have to say I believe everything that I post. There is no game of trying to bust a response. Trusting the holy ghost is not about going against the mind of the Lord. The holy ghost is part of the godhead. Our current and past church leaders are not. That being said, I don't have to ignore everything that comes from our leaders. Only the things that the holy ghost does not confirm to be true.
ReplyDeleteI agree with every word from your last comment. That said, I do not understand how the Holy Ghost can confirm to you something contrary to the gospel, such as homosexual marriage being condoned by God. It is not, and any comparison you choose to make about how homosexuals are as oppressed as blacks were and all that schmack then proceed on living in your la-la land, cuz apparently it seems to be working for you. And all this is an example for why I never want to have to live in Utah; because Utards live there, and they are utarded.
ReplyDeleteGWH,
ReplyDeleteSo you are saying God was against a black man marrying a white woman until the fall of 1978. I think God is more intelligent than that.
I would suggest you do a little research on the abuse of homosexuals during the last hundred years. You will see a direct connection to the abuse black people went through.
BTW, who said I live in Utah? I don't.
You epitomize a Utard. And don't put words in my mouth. You and I are just dragging on an argument that has already been hashed over the coals on this post. It is not a valid comparison to compare blacks (a race) to homosexuals (a sexual choice). I'll break it down so it's easier to understand for you. A race is something people are born with. "Engaging" in homosexual acts is a CHOICE. I have already stated that I can concur that some people are born with homosexual tendencies. No one is born with racial tendencies. Life is about learning to master self, fasting is one gospel principle among many which backs this up. Now whether you choose to engage in those homosexual tendencies is where the sin lies. No one can be held accountable for being tempted, the God I believe in would be cruel and unjust if he were to do so. Even Christ was tempted, so if temptation itself were a sin then Christ could not be a Savior. So a person who is tempted with homosexual thoughts etc. I feel empathy for, but they are not accountable for that. A person who gives in to those temptations and engages in homosexual acts I still have empathy for but can not condone their behavior, and there will be an accounting. Christ did teach a higher law to control our thoughts, but there is a difference between a fleeting immoral thought that comes along to tempt (which should be our attempt to immediately dismiss) and dwelling on something immoral.
ReplyDeleteMarriage is also a choice. And as a society, by giving the ok for homosexuals to marry one another, that society then condones a behavior that is wrong. Furthermore that society will crumble. Rome (Pompei), Greece, Sodom & Gomorrah are a few examples. As these societies reached their apex, they began to decline through moral decay. They casually accepted immoral behaviors and I believe this was the primary reason for their downfall. America and any other society that wishes to condone any immoral behavior will achieve the same outcome.
Actually my understanding is that the church does not endorse mix race marriages for the same reason that they don't condone mix-faith marriages - because doing so tends to add difficulties to situations that are already breading grounds for conflict and for the adversary to drive wedges of anger and separation.
ReplyDeleteThe church is hardly out of line to think that it is dangerous ground, and was even more so dangerous to be involved in such relationships before 1978. This church is a practical church and in times where persecutions were already raging against members of the church in times past for polygamy and for simply being a Mormon, there is little GOOD council to come from encouraging a situation that will bring on more ridicule to a marriage.
For the record, marrying a black person was NEVER considered a sin and I dare you to find a source that says such. Encouragement against a certain practice does not constitute that action becoming a sin. It just could lead to such if not guarded.
So can we please drop the argument about race on a blog that was talking about taxes?
GWH,
ReplyDeleteYou complain about this post dragging on, yet you continue to participate in it.
The issue is not race vs. orientation. The issue is the abuse that happens because of unrighteous judgement.
Gay people are born with same-gender attraction. Why should they be treated like second-class citizens. Let them marry and have healthy relationships. By denying them the right to marry, we give them the ok to have multiple relationships at a whim.
I don't think any society fell because of gay people. Sodom and Gomarrah has never been proven to be about gay sex. I would think rape and infantcide would be much more damaging to a society than gay sex.
You seem to forget that interracial marriage was considered wrong to the Mormon community. It took years for that view to be changed. Does God think interracial marriage is wrong? No. He values the healthy relationship of two people who make a covenant with other. Our society will be better off with gay marriage because it will help the next generation to avoid unrighteous judgement that the past generations have made. Just like our slow tolerance for interracial marriage, we are a better community because of it.
James,
ReplyDeleteYou are wearing those blinders again. It's silly to make comments about why interracial marriage could cause more stress. Where does that stress come from. UNRIGHTEOUS JUDGEMENT! You marry someone you love, not someone who has the same color of skin.
You better believe it was taught as a sin. My parents remember fast Sunday being used to testify that interracial marriage was wrong. You and I have heard our present day fast Sunday to used for Prop 8(and other gay marriage propositions) to say God does not approve of gay marriage. To say that interracial marriage is not condone but not a sin either is just plain silly.
I know this is about taxes, but I'm fine with making side comments.
Jav, so let me make sure that I understand you correctly. You are saying that: God condones homosexuality, there is nothing wrong with the act and that homosexuals should get married? This is what I gather from your post, and if this is the case I have nothing further to discuss with you, because you are very misguided in your understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
ReplyDeletePeople say crazy things from the pulpits on Fast Sunday that hardly constitutes doctrine that the church taught interracial marriage as wrong. I reiterate, the CHURCH (not individual nut jobs on fast Sunday) have never taught that inter racial marriage was a sin. NEVER! However, doing anything that can cause stress to a relationship, whether that come from external unrighteous judgment or not is not encouraged. When something is not encouraged that is not to say that they didn't allow it or that they considered it a sin. Stop mixing the two idea because they are exclusive concepts. We are not encouraged to get credit cards either as that causes stress in a marriage but it is not a sin to do so. Same principle apply here, so stop mixing the two ideas please.
ReplyDeleteWhat the hell gives you the right to think that I have blinders on? I would say get off your high horse but that would be a long drop and you might break your metaphorical ankle doing so.
GOD DOES NOT APPROVE OF GAY MARRIAGE. Period. Read the Family Proclamation when you get a chance. Where does God approve of it? A recent official declaration of the church strictly spoke against it and that IS doctrine not apostolic opinion. The true spirit of the Godhead WOULD NOT TESTIFY AGAINST SUCH DOCTRINE. It was an official declaration of the church and as such is binding on the whole earth to chose to follow. Which you have publicly disagreed with. To many that would constitute a violation of temple worthiness. You make the call.
Homosexuality among other sins were absolutely part of the down fall of soddom and gamorah. Have you even heard of the term used today of Sodomy or sodomizing and individual as having anal sex with that person? Where do you think that came from? SODDOM and gamorah. I didn't think that this was a disputable fact. Even individuals from other religions consider this to be a truth, not simply LDS opinion.
I think you have taken a long enough ride on the coo-coo train Javelin. Perhaps the spirit you are listening to is not a good one because you have concluded that homosexual marriage is okay which stands in clear and direct opposition to the teachings of modern day revelation. That is the spirit of apostasy, not of God.
I certainly hope that one day you can see that you are confirmably incorrect in your gospel thinking on this issue. Perhaps soon you will see that it is not I who has the blinders on. James out.
GWH,
ReplyDeleteSo are you saying that God was against interracial marriage until 31 years ago? That WAS the gospel until the fall of 1978.
I'm not misguided about the gospel. The apostle James was right when he said the jew christians needed to do away with the law of Moses. The apostle Peter was wrong to only go halfway by saying the gentle christians were not required to start living the law of Moses customs but the jew christians would not be required to stop their practices.
My point is that James was more right even if he was not the president of the church. There is too much focus on the mind of the president instead of the mind of God. It is the holy ghost who confirms truth to us.
Back in the 50s and 60s worthy asian men and worthy white women had to get permission from church leaders to get sealed in the temple. Black people could not even get into the temple because the priesthood was not given to the african race. How is that justified if God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow?
You avoid these questions because you are afraid to find out that your current world is not as true as you once thought it was. At least I can face truth, even if it hurts.
James,
ReplyDeleteYour blinders come because you only see what you want to see. You keep trying to rationalize things that are very clear.
President Kimball in the 50s was saying that interracial couples who have children are selfish. How is it selfish to love someone and bring children into this world? If some in society judge those families, then the sin is on those who make the judgements, not the families.
Are you familiar with how the Family Proclamation came to be? President Hinckley put together a committee and had them write draft after draft after draft until it was written just right. That is not the same way Joseph Smith received revelation. The Family Proclamation was not presented to the priesthood. No, it was presented to the primary leaders and relief society. Why?
Just because the word sodom means anal sex does not mean that the city Sodom was practicing it. That's silly. It's like saying the swastika is an evil symbol, eventhough history shows that the swastika was a holy symbol to other groups hundreds of years before the nazis came around.
GWH,
ReplyDeleteCorrection. The apostle Paul, not the apostle James. Sorry about that.
Jav, You have a long career in politics ahead of you, because you dodge, duck, dive, and dodge any and every question presented to you. I asked you a simple question, nowhere in the question were the words "interracial" contained. Do you or do you not believe that homosexuality is a perfectly acceptible practice in the eyes of God. Stated more clearly. Javelin, do you confirm this statement
ReplyDelete- "I, Javelin, believe that God condones homosexual behavior."-
I believe you have already answered this in your previous statements and this is where I choose to end my conversation with you. You do believe that there is nothing wrong with homosexual behavior and that it is not contrary to the gospel and teachings of Jesus Christ. This being the case in my perception of your understanding....you are misguided.
Re: President Kimball in the 50s was saying that interracial couples who have children are selfish.
ReplyDeleteGive the source please. I wish to put this in correct context and not Javelin context.
Re: How is it selfish to love someone and bring children into this world?
It can often be very selfish. The reason is not always to bring children into the world in a selfish act. Do you know how many people in Africa even today let alone 50 years ago got married to white people simply so that they could become citizens and have children simply for income collection on welfare. Are you even aware of the desire of people from other counties to have a white baby for completely selfish reasons? Don't act like it isn't happening or has happened in the past. It was happening all over the place. Do your history and you will find that there is often many selfish reasons why people have children. This is hardly a new concept and in Pres. Kinball's day was a VERY COMMON THING. In fact Elder Kimball at the time was actually doing what he could to protect the children from being born into homes that were quite commonly practicing selfish child bearing.
Did you hear about the teenagers in the north east US just a couple of years ago that made a pregnancy pact stating that they would all get pregnant together and it would be cool? What about Octomom? Why do you act so surprised that people do selfish things?
I refuse to see things? You seem to hold to the line that truth comes from many sources but contend that because a committee had some help in the composing of the fully ratified doctrine of the Family Proclimation that it somehow becomes void. Which way is it with you? On the one hand you say that many people can be the source of truth and then on the other it can't be truth because there was a committee. I am not blind. You simply chose the parts of the gospel that fit your desires. The gospel is not a buffet line where you pick and chose what you like and don't like. You can't defend your point of view with one principle and then dismiss an idea that embraces those same principles in the next breath.
I think that you owe GWH a solid answer to his question. Don't reply to me, I think we are probably done not seeing things eye to eye. His question is legitimate and frankly will determine the validity, even retroactively, to the merit of your words.
GWH,
ReplyDeleteYou are still responding to me. I thought you had left me. Of course I don't have a problem with gay marriage. Why would God have a problem with it if he knows that some of us are born gay? Why would God have a problem with all of us being true to ourselves?
BTW, it's not about dodging questions. I just know how to hook in those who are questioning their own beliefs. If you really thought I was a fruitcake you would of left me a long time ago.
I am wondering though if GWH and James are one and the same. Don't know the answer to that but it doesn't matter to me either way.
James,
ReplyDeleteGoogle President Kimball and interracial marriage. You should find something right away.
Your arguement about a black person having a baby with a white person just to become a citizen is not the issue. The issue is any two people of different color falling in love and having children. There are plenty of white and white marriages or black and black marriages that result in welfare babies.
The pregnancy pact was false. The rumor came because of so many teenage girls getting pregnant at the same time. Most people I talk to already knew that.
The Family Proclamation is not void for being put together by a committee. My point is that many Mormons don't know about the committee, and when I tell them, they respond just like you do. That's where the blinders come in.
BTW, why do I have to respond to GWH when you already know I don't have a problem with gay marriage?
If you knew the history of this blog Javelin you would know that GWH and I am rarely seen things eye to eye.
ReplyDeleteWe are most assuredly not the same person. But thank you for answering the question clearly enough for me to completely discount all of your responses.
Re: Why would God have a problem with it if he knows that some of us are born gay? Why would God have a problem with all of us being true to ourselves?
We are not gay, just like we are not any of our choices. We are children of God and as such are gods in embryo. We have inherited divine characteristics. If you say that we are born gay and that we should therefore be true to such is also to say that God is gay because he has commanded us to be like him. Further it sounds like your take is that being gay is not a sin and therefore nothing that would keep someone from becoming a god themselves. So in your take, God can be gay too?
Please stop being a member of the church Javelin. Please. You hold nothing in connection with its beliefs and you can only do the work harm claiming that you represent its teachings. You clearly don't. I would say that you have missed the boat, but I think you are in a whole different body of water.
For the record, you say that Joseph Smith didn't receive revelation through committee. But the lectures on faith, scripture that was included in the first set of standard works, was not written by Joseph Smith. It is attributed to Sidney Rigdon and others in the school of the prophets who obtained Joseph's approval on the work after some revisions were made. Same way as the proclamation. Both are still doctrine. Swing and miss ay' Javelin.
ReplyDeleteThe reason for bringing up the pregnancy stuff in mixed race marriages is for context. Elder Kimball was not making a blanket statement against all interracial marriages. When you take church leaders out of context you get misguided and false principles. Which in your case has been happening for way too long.
Re: BTW, why do I have to respond to GWH when you already know I don't have a problem with gay marriage?
Because your declaration that you think God is okay with gay marriage puts into context the false teachings from the rest of your comments. Before doing such I wasn't sure if you just thought that secularly it was okay for gay marriage. Now I know that you embrace a false idea of who God is, what the plan of salvation is, and which means all the rest of what you have stated is crap.
I just want to point out the fact that Javelin still didn't answer the question. He twisted it to something that he wants to answer. Typical liberal, they answer what they want to answer rather than answering a specific question. Conversation over.
ReplyDeleteJavelin,
ReplyDeleteSo I assume you accept my logic from August 31st because you have not responded back to me? Glad to see you are seeing things the same way and we have come to a meeting of the minds.