LDS Doctrine: the Sources and Scope

[Pahoran]

Pahoran, just so you’re aware: if you feel that a post goes against the rules of this forum, you can click the “report” button, and write the rule broken, which alerts the moderators to the post. The moderators here have banned multiple Catholic posters in the LDS-related threads, and they really don’t give Catholics the slide (I recently reported a “Catholic” that was being very offensive in a thread (not an LDS-related one), and they were promptly suspended). The problem though is that you have to report the post, otherwise they don’t see it (since this forum is much larger than MADB).

Thank you, CGNY. I have reported some of STM’s more obvious nasties. I’m not sure what good, if any, it did.

Regards,
Pahoran

 

[LongJourney]

I am not responsible for the personal attacks. I am commenting on your behavior. if you wish to engage in combat, one person against-- five I think, on our home turf, perhaps you have taken on more than you can handle.

 

[twopekinguys]

Which is actually irrelevant to the question at hand.

Actually, it is quite relevant to the fact that you are trying to state an authoritative position on something, and your own lds brethren disagree with you.

That rather egregiously misrepresents our position. But even if it did not, it would be entirely irrelevant to the matter at hand, which is that the Bible is one of a handful of canonised texts that is recognised as a binding repository of doctrine.

It is right on target. It is well known that the lds use the Bible, in as far as it has been translated correctly.

Call for references, please. I’m not prepared to comment on your probably not completely impartial interpretation of something until you place the primary source in front of us

BY said"

“I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call scripture.” (Journal of Discourses 13:95).

That should do for starters.

 

[SirThomasMore]

SirThomasMore,

 

[twopekinguys]

Thank you, CGNY. I have reported some of STM’s more obvious nasties. I’m not sure what good, if any, it did.

Regards,
Pahoran

So when you called someone a “pretentious buffoon”, that was a term of endearment?

 

[dianaiad]

I am not responsible for the personal attacks.

You are not? Did someone tie strings to your fingers, or hold a gun to your head and force you to type those rather amazing personal attacks in post #17? (I reported that one, by the way.)

I am commenting on your behavior. if you wish to engage in combat, one person against-- five I think, on our home turf, perhaps you have taken on more than you can handle.

Please, LJ, find a quote from Pahoran in this thread or any recent one in which he has addressed the person rather than the post…and that in any way less than courteously.

 

[SirThomasMore]

So when you called someone a “pretentious buffoon”, that was a term of endearment?

My nasties? I have spoken the truth. Pahoran has called me horrible names, mocked my profession, called me a liar, and a host of other rude comments. Perhaps if he were nicer, and would not call people names, his complaints might carry more weight

 

[dianaiad]

Actually, it is quite relevant to the fact that you are trying to state an authoritative position on something, and your own lds brethren disagree with you.

It is right on target. It is well known that the lds use the Bible, in as far as it has been translated correctly.

BY said"

“I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call scripture.” (Journal of Discourses 13:95).

That should do for starters.

…and here you are, proving Pahoran to be exactly correct when he mentions the 'quote mining…" and in this case, a particularly insidious bit of quote mining, taken so completely out of context as to practically mean the opposite of what you would present it to mean. .

Or are you willing to post the entire surrounding paragraph for us, to show the context?

Please do…and then kindly explain how, when taken IN context, this sentence can mean what you are presenting it to mean. If you don’t, you know I will…or Pahoran will…or anybody with access to the JoD online will (which means everybody, actually).

That rather destroys the efficacy of taking this sort of thing out of context, wouldn’t you say?

 

[LongJourney]

Please, LJ, find a quote from Pahoran in this thread or any recent one in which he has addressed the person rather than the post…and that in any way less than courteously.

LOL. You haven’t been resident of the MAD board for very long, have you? I was a long time ago, and my treatment from Pahoran and his cronies was beyond reprehensible. And his belligerent behavior here says he has not changed.

And I would believe STM has the same history with him. Perhaps if he had used a different screen-name, we might have viewed his posts with less prejudice.

 

[SirThomasMore]

…and here you are, proving Pahoran to be exactly correct when he mentions the 'quote mining…" and in this case, a particularly insidious bit of quote mining, taken so completely out of context as to practically mean the opposite of what you would present it to mean. .

Or are you willing to post the entire surrounding paragraph for us, to show the context?

Please do…and then kindly explain how, when taken IN context, this sentence can mean what you are presenting it to mean. If you don’t, you know I will…or Pahoran will…or anybody with access to the JoD online will (which means everybody, actually).

That rather destroys the efficacy of taking this sort of thing out of context, wouldn’t you say?

lol…we do not so quote mining. We show quotes and y;all do “quote scrubbing”

 

[dianaiad]

LOL. You haven’t been resident of the MAD board for very long, have you? I was a long time ago, and my treatment from Pahoran and his cronies was beyond reprehensible. And his belligerent behavior here says he has not changed.

And I would believe STM has the same history with him. Perhaps if he had used a different screen-name, we might have viewed his posts with less prejudice.

Every once in awhile I take someone out of ‘ignore,’ to see what that person’s posting style is like. I don’t put him/her BACK until AFTER he or she has proven that s/he isn’t worth responding to. In other words, I am willing, in a different venue, a different time and a different thread, to give ‘new starts,’ or at least ‘wait and see.’

You are taking something that happened at a different time, in a different venue, and holding all sorts of grudges. You realize, don’t you, that for those of us who DON’T post in MADB all that often, this looks very odd; we are dropped in the middle of this feud, and frankly, you are doing all the insulting.

You see, this isn’t MADB. This is CAF.

…and as far as I can see, Pahoran has been behaving with a great deal more courtesy than most of you have treated him.

 

[twopekinguys]

lol…we do not so quote mining. We show quotes and y;all do “quote scrubbing”

Some things just make you wanna giggle ya know.

 

[SirThomasMore]

Every once in awhile I take someone out of ‘ignore,’ to see what that person’s posting style is like. I don’t put him/her BACK until AFTER he or she has proven that s/he isn’t worth responding to.

The thing is, this isn’t MADB. This is CAF.

…and as far as I can see, Pahoran has been behaving with a great deal more courtesy than most of you have treated him.

Never mind. From where I sit it is business as usual in here.

lol…she ignores the misconduct of fellow mormons like she ignores the miscondict of Joe and Brigham, etc.

 

[Pahoran]

Actually, it is quite relevant to the fact that you are trying to state an authoritative position on something, and your own lds brethren disagree with you.

That’s an instance of the fallacy of appeal to authority.

It is right on target. It is well known that the lds use the Bible, in as far as it has been translated correctly.

Which is not the same as the false accusation that “Actually, it is the Bible just so far as y’all agree with it.”

BY said"

“I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call scripture.” (Journal of Discourses 13:95).

That should do for starters.

Indeed, it does very well. It is an excellent example of the kind of quote mining that some people try to pass of as responsible scholarship.

Here is the very next sentence of that quote:

“Let me have the privilege of correcting a sermon, and it is as good Scripture as they deserve.”

Just a little bit more nuanced, isn’t it?

Well, here’s another little nuance for you. On 8 May 1854, Brigham Young said: “It is not the place for any person to correct any person who is superior to them, but ask the Father in the name of Jesus to bind him up from speaking false principles. I have known many times I have preached wrong.”

There is a saying that “Half the truth is a great lie.” It is true that various Church leaders said various things. A responsible effort to honestly report their actual views will look at everything those leaders said on those subjects, and not simply stop as soon as the most polemically useful tidbit is found.

Regards,
Pahoran

 

[LongJourney]

edit and repost

Do modern LDS really choose Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, Nephi, Moroni, and Mormon and Alma as models for behavior? Or perhaps you would rather take Moroni as a model for life:

Quote:

For example, Captain Moroni convinced the nation to give him the power to force people to go to wars. The alternatives were imprisonment and execution…

Another example is Captain Moroni’s administering of possibly poisoned food and drink to his prisoners of war. While this may seem a type of poetic irony, it strikes me as a great abuse of prisoners, who are wholly dependent on their jailers for food…

While not a war crime, Moroni’s tendency to insist on unconditional surrender and treaty acceptance seems to prolong the war… Perhaps Zarahemnah and Ammoron would have responded better to Nephite peace overtures if Moroni hadn’t insisted on implying they were the children of hell.

Mormon, a participant in a scorched earth campaign, presents these details without comment… Why else the inclusion of Moroni’s threats of military coup when writing to the legally-elected, civil authorities of his country?

bycommonconsent.com/2008/09/0…-war-criminal/

Would you do what Moroni did?

What would Moroni do? What would Joseph do? What would Brigham do?

or:

What would Jesus do?

 

[Pahoran]

Snip gratuitous swipes.

lol…from YOUR doctrine. You only believe the Bible as far as it translated correctly. Or didn;t you know that? And no, it is not irrelevant. It shows your post is misleading.

I did know that; it is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

I do not accept collect calls. And posts that support what I just said are numorous on this board. I will not repost everything. Needless to say, I am telling the truth and you have disagreed with your early prophets.

IOW, you can’t back up your accusation, so you wave your hand at an enormous forum.

Got it.

the fact that many LDS do not know their doctrine and what was taught in the past.

You could replace that “LDS” with any religious group you care to name, including Catholics, and the statement would still be true.

But here’s another true statement: Latter-day Saints know their own doctrine better than non-Latter-day Saints – including ex-Mormons and critics – do.

Snip more gratuitous swipes.

lol…a guy dies of old age and that is the Lord choosing? Naaa…

I guess that’s the difference between you and me; I believe in a God who knows the end from the beginning and has the power to put whomever He wants where He wants them to be at a time that suits His purposes.

Evidently, you do not.

nice dodge. The fact you cannot escape is that your alleged prophets allegedly speak to God face to face yet have come up with the oddest and most ungodly statements

That is an irrelevant observation; please see the OP.

Snip more gratuitous swipes.

I posted that in reference to a FACT that Mormons in Germany supported and saluted Hitler. The fact was posted on another thread, and referenced.

That is unfortunately true. It is also true that millions of Catholics in Germany supported and saluted Hitler.

A whole lot more Catholics than Mormons did that. Not to put too fine a point on it.

But don’t worry. I won’t lower myself to accusing Catholics of “goose-stepping.” That’s just too un-Christian.

And I cannot pretend to accept LDS doctrine…that is against God.

But I didn’t ask you to “pretend to accept LDS doctrine.” I asked you to accept an LDS perspective on what our doctrine is.

Regards,
Pahoran

 

[Pahoran]

edit and repost

Must you?

Do modern LDS really choose Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, Nephi, Moroni, and Mormon and Alma as models for behavior? Or perhaps you would rather take Moroni as a model for life:

Please read the OP. What, if anything, does this cut-and-paste have to do with the topic at hand?

It really looks to me like grist for another thread, wouldn’t you say?

Snip attempted derail.

What would Jesus do?

Maybe you think that if He couldn’t answer someone’s argument, He’d attempt to derail the topic of the discussion.

I’m not sure I agree.

Regards,
Pahoran

 

[LongJourney]

That is unfortunately true. It is also true that millions of Catholics in Germany supported and saluted Hitler.

A whole lot more Catholics than Mormons did that. Not to put too fine a point on it.

The context of that statement is totally transformed when one attaches percentages to it. (No I do not have the data at my fingertips. LOL)

Perhaps one might do better by looking at LDS under the Nazis and comparing them to SDA’s or JW’s under the Nazis.

And I am pointing out that emulating one’s leaders or fictional heroes is a dangerous practice. One must take a critical look at their behavior, and apply moral standards to it. Judge, if you will.

Good night.

 

[SirThomasMore]

Snip gratuitous swipes.

 

[Pahoran]

I saw this same thread posted over at madb. Minus your diatribe about CAF and its moderation.

A one-sentence reference to CAF moderation policy is a “diatribe?”

Who knew?

Of course I didn’t mention that point; it is not relevant to MA&DB. I likewise mentioned some details there that I didn’t mention here; again, because of relevance.

You can’t even get your own lds brethren to agree with you on some of your points.

Let’s check that, shall we:

Cinepro: “liberal” or “fringe” Mormon and part-time critic. Raised a question.
John Larsen: about as “Mormon” as SirThomasMore. Disagreed with one point.
Kamenraider: Kind of LDS. Has some funny ideas about animal sacrifices and the end of plural marriage. Took issue with any distinction between “Official” and “unofficial” doctrine.
BCSpace: LDS. Misunderstood point 1. Linked to a Church statement that pretty much agrees with me.
thesometimesaint: LDS. Did not comment on the topic, but took issue with BCSpace.
Storm Rider: LDS. Apparent Jim Morrison fan. Seems to agree with me.
MichaelM: I don’t know his allegiance. Did not comment. Linked to the same statement BCSpace did.
cdowis: LDS. Wonders why such a topic is even necessary. Took issue with nothing in the OP except its existence.
mfbukowski: LDS. Agrees with me.

I’m not exactly seeing a storm of opposition from faithful Latter-day Saints there.

Regards,
Pahoran