LDS: King Follett Sermon - WOW! WOW! WOW!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_Dude
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
why_me said:
I would much rather have a god that experienced the flesh and understands, than a god that has no idea of what it means to be human. To create a human life does not give understanding of the experience. Experience comes through experience. Hence, the wisdom of a grandmother or grandfather to their grandchildren.
Click to expand...
There’s your problem. Your “God” is a man made creation of how you want God to be, not God as He is.
 
why_me said:
I think that Joseph Smith was a bold revolutionary who preached what he preached. I prefer to have an open mind about it all. I can see JS from an unbiased perspective. I know about his life and what he accomplished before his death. The lectures that he gave were bold and groundbreaking.
Click to expand...
Nothing groundbreaking about them at all, as I already stated. Our minds are given us to know the truth and hold fast to it, not to let all sorts of detritus float through without discernment. For you, Joseph Smith is just such detritus that you refuse to relinquish for the truth of God and His Christ.
 
why_me said:
God didn’t need to come to earth to add to his knowledge. But he needed to come to earth as man to taste what it means to have a body and to have human life.
Click to expand...
If you were a Catholic you would know that in God there are no needs; but you have hitched your wagon to Joseph Smith with his Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride version of theology.
 
xixxvmcm85 said:
And so can the King Follett discourse be brushed off as the mere opinion of Smith.

You forget that the LDS have no way to objectively define their doctrine. While a prophet is living, he is assumed (given the benefit of the doubt) that everything he utters is a godsend.

After he dies however and one of his successors alters their “deposit of faith”, any contradictory, previous statements are sent to the dustbin.

A Mormon prophet is only a prophet when the Mormon faithful say he’s a prophet and only at the exact moments the Mormon faith decide he is acting as a prophet.

Isn’t the hindsight bias great!?
Click to expand...
In THIS instance I don’t think this can be brushed off as a mere opinion. In this Sermon Smith spoke clearly as under direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit, spoke clearly about how he was a true prophet and everyone else was false, etc, etc. This cannot fall into the “opinion” category, and even if it did it would be so off the rails that it would have to be condemned (if it really was contrary to LDS teaching).
why_me said:
And yet, it does make sense. For example: If god is all knowing, how can he know the trials and wonders of human life if he never experienced it?

I would much rather have a god that experienced the flesh and understands, than a god that has no idea of what it means to be human. To create a human life does not give understanding of the experience. Experience comes through experience. Hence, the wisdom of a grandmother or grandfather to their grandchildren.
Click to expand...
This concept of God is pagan at its very root, it is the age old attempt at man CREATING God in man’s own image.
What you say is as illogical as saying how can a computer programmer know how a computer works if he was never a computer himself.
RebeccaJ said:
Indeed, just mormonism seems to be based entirely on it (IMO).

**Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe.
**Frank Zappa

Maybe stupdity is the “existent matter” that Mormons believe in.
Click to expand...
That - as a general observation of our world - is pretty funny.
Lion_of_Narnia said:
BTW, since your liz hoax, I am still praying a novena of conversion (for you) to Our Lady of Perpetual help. Don’t bother trying to convince me you’ve already converted–its obvious you have not.
Click to expand...
This is important. I and others have been deceived here, it is becoming more and more clear that Tsuzuki is not really Catholic. The sig saying “Tiber Swim team 2008” is deceptive. I think the Mods need to remove such references.
 
why_me said:
And yet, it does make sense. For example: If god is all knowing, how can he know the trials and wonders of human life if he never experienced it?
Click to expand...
He does. Because Jesus is God. So He DID experience human life. Helloooooooooooooooooooo:rolleyes:

in Christ
Steph
 
Catholic_Dude said:
In THIS instance I don’t think this can be brushed off as a mere opinion. In this Sermon Smith spoke clearly as under direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit, spoke clearly about how he was a true prophet and everyone else was false, etc, etc. This cannot fall into the “opinion” category, and even if it did it would be so off the rails that it would have to be condemned (if it really was contrary to LDS teaching).
Click to expand...
Ah, but a Mormon believes the Holy Spirit can inspire a prophet of yesterday (Smith) to say one thing, and another prophet of today (current LDS prophet) to say something else. At which point, the previous prophetic inspiration is delegated to the “just opinion” bin.

To add to this cacophony of Holy Spirit direction, Mormons also believe that each person should seek direction and guidance from the Holy Spirit, which direction, can go directly against what a previous prophet has said, but not the current prophet.

This is Tsuzuki’s paradigm, that as long as he doesn’t go against the current Mormon prophet’s teachings, the Holy Spirit can, will, and does lead him all over the place. Apparently, he believes the Holy Spirit has led him to paradigm piracy, ie, chaos magic. His involvement in chaos magic makes any contradictory inspiration he receives welcomed, even desired.

Yet, all can see that he seeks to harmonize chromatic thoughts, ideas and beliefs, which, is circular, in that, he seeks harmony in the midst of chaos, while seeking to create chaos in the midst of harmony.

One of these days Tsuzuki, you are going to come unraveled.
This is important. I and others have been deceived here, it is becoming more and more clear that Tsuzuki is not really Catholic. The sig saying “Tiber Swim team 2008” is deceptive. I think the Mods need to remove such references.
Click to expand...
I believe he was baptized, but I see that it was done for the purpose of showing to himself, and his chaotic peers, that one could be a baptized member of two, opposing, religions.

For all purposes, it is like saying I have dual citizenship, if not more, and carry around passports to show that I am both a US citizen, and a Chinese citizen. Which, isn’t adhering to any particular political ideology of the opposing countries, it’s just following the laws, exactly, of each country in order to maintain dual citizenship. The ideology is secondary, and only considered in the context of preventing or enabling the dual citizenship.

In essence, harmonizing the opposing beliefs of Catholic/Mormon has not been achieved, and was not really the goal. All that has been achieved is baptism into the Catholic Church, which, anyone could do. (ie, baptism seen as a commodity)
 
RebeccaJ said:
Ah, but a Mormon believes the Holy Spirit can inspire a prophet of yesterday (Smith) to say one thing, and another prophet of today (current LDS prophet) to say something else. At which point, the previous prophetic inspiration is delegated to the “just opinion” bin.

To add to this cacophony of Holy Spirit direction, Mormons also believe that each person should seek direction and guidance from the Holy Spirit, which direction, can go directly against what a previous prophet has said, but not the current prophet.
Click to expand...
Even if that former prophet is the founder of their religion? The LDS even have songs praising Joseph Smith as “communing with God”. Okay, they’ve managed to do what you say with their “embarrassment”, Brigham Young, but for Joseph Smith too? I thought that back when the doctrine of “blood atonement” was being practiced (it seemed to have fallen out of practice in the late 1880s) a person could lose his life for talking against Joseph Smith. It’s different now? Joseph Smith, as a former prophet, can be criticized now? Are you telling us that a second after a prophet dies, they no longer are respected and whatever they taught is meaningless and the LDS foundation is “shifting sand”?
 
AMDGtoo said:
Even if that former prophet is the founder of their religion? The LDS even have songs praising Joseph Smith as “communing with God”. Okay, they’ve managed to do what you say with their “embarrassment”, Brigham Young, but for Joseph Smith too? I thought that back when the doctrine of “blood atonement” was being practiced (it seemed to have fallen out of practice in the late 1880s) a person could lose his life for talking against Joseph Smith. It’s different now? Joseph Smith, as a former prophet, can be criticized now? Are you telling us that a second after a prophet dies, they no longer are respected and whatever they taught is meaningless and the LDS foundation is “shifting sand”?
Click to expand...
There you go, Tsuzuki answered your question…it is not shifting sand. There is no foundation at all.

I think it is clear from the handful of Mormons who hang around here that a Mormon can, and does, believe whatever they like.

That goes more to what JS and the original Mormon roots. Independent thought, reflection, ala American enlightenment style (the period in which Mormonism emerged), is more early Mormonism than Brigham Young’s theocratic model.

Seems the “man can become a God” bit is still universally believed, though, the definition of what that actually means, changes.
 
Agreed. Anyone who claims to be Christian knows the parable of a house on sand.

Without a foundation, there is nothing to build on and you have nothing but a floating castle in the sky. Nice fantasies of anime and science fiction, but has nothing to do with what Christ taught, and who a Christian is.
 
RebeccaJ said:
Ah, but a Mormon believes the Holy Spirit can inspire a prophet of yesterday (Smith) to say one thing, and another prophet of today (current LDS prophet) to say something else. At which point, the previous prophetic inspiration is delegated to the “just opinion” bin.

To add to this cacophony of Holy Spirit direction, Mormons also believe that each person should seek direction and guidance from the Holy Spirit, which direction, can go directly against what a previous prophet has said, but not the current prophet.
Click to expand...
Yes, but we are talking the big man himself, Smith.
That is a pretty significant number of doctrines for Smith to be wrong on if a Mormon wants to say Smith got it wrong.

As for Tsuzuki, he is simply a poor confused individual, no direction or foundation whatsoever.
 
Harold Bloom, the literary critic referred to the King Follett sermon as ‘one of the truly remarkable sermons ever preached in America’.

As I have said, it is truly a revolutionary and groundbreaking sermon and Harold Bloom would agree.

However, there is no King Follett sermon written in JS’s hand to my knowledge and what was said by JS during the sermon were taken from four diarists who wrote down what they believed was said. However I could be wrong about this but I don’t think that I am.
 
why_me said:
I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him, but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet

The boasting quotation has often been thrown around on this forum. But like I said the last time that I saw it, I would need to see the context and as to whether it was taken from someone’s notes who heard him speak or from a prepared speech. But I am sure that it has been either published in the books The Words of JS or the Teachings of JS. Both by lds publishers.
Click to expand...
Now more light on the boasting quotation that antimormons are more than happy to quote from. I found the text of the sermon in the lds book: The Words of Joseph Smith. It is published by the lds publisher Desseret Books. Again, the words of the sermon were taken from the personal accounts of two diarists. There is no speech written in Joseph Smith’s own hand. Now the speech was centered on II Corinthians chapter 11 where Paul is boasting. JS drew a comparison with what Paul said.

But again, we can only assume that the personal accounts of the two diarists are correct in what they accounted JS said.
 
why_me said:
Now the speech was centered on II Corinthians chapter 11 where Paul is boasting. JS drew a comparison with what Paul said.
Click to expand...
A comparison! Paul never claimed to be better than Jesus! In fact II Corinthians 11:30 states “If I must needs glory, I will glory of the things which concern mine infirmities.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top