LDS Marriage

[Truth_Faith13]

These are valid questions. You made the claim that another poster was able to ask you anything. What about these questions? Can you answer these? Will you answer these?

There is nothing hostile or hateful in Chris-WA’s post. Your reaction to it however is indicative of the LDS mindset that asking the hard questions is not okay. I can imagine a convert learning the above and asking leadership in his/her area and being told he/she can be excommunicated for persisting in these questions.

To be fair to Jane, she is very good at answering any question I have along with other posters over on RF.

My particular post was more about the LDS I have met. To give an example, I have been talking to them now (sometimes several times a week) for about 5 weeks (maybe longer), we’ve had meals together, talked, just chilled etc and I’ve been to the branch presidents house for Sunday lunch. The basic questions or general info on the LDS and what they believe, they are very good at answering. Right at the start, the president asked me to write a list of my questions…which I did. I know he is a very busy man and has many other thing he needs to do, but the one he attempted to answer “archaeological or historical evidence for lamanites etc”, he gave me paperwork on chiasms in the book of Mormon and said it was about faith.

They are lovely people and I hope he is just busy but I’m still waiting on answers…

 

[Horton]

One person’s sins do not excuse another’s.

And yes, I call out such hateful comments regardless of whom is making them or whom they are directed at.

So will you answer the questions or continue to deflect & misdirect them?

 

[Horton]

To be fair to Jane, she is very good at answering any question I have along with other posters over on RF.

My particular post was more about the LDS I have met. To give an example, I have been talking to them now (sometimes several times a week) for about 5 weeks (maybe longer), we’ve had meals together, talked, just chilled etc and I’ve been to the branch presidents house for Sunday lunch. The basic questions or general info on the LDS and what they believe, they are very good at answering. Right at the start, the president asked me to write a list of my questions…which I did. I know he is a very busy man and has many other thing he needs to do, but the one he attempted to answer “archaeological or historical evidence for lamanites etc”, he gave me paperwork on chiasms in the book of Mormon and said it was about faith.

They are lovely people and I hope he is just busy but I’m still waiting on answers…

But has Jane answered any of the questions you’ve asked of the branch president? Ask the questions Chris-WA posted on RF or with your local LDS and I’m sure you will get a different reaction.

I agree many are lovely people just as there are lovely people in the Catholic Church. Have you been in contact with your local parish? RCIA should be going on and often they will let people come in & sit through a few classes to get questions answered. Have you spoken to the priest? I’m not trying to badger you at all with these questions. Just trying to get a feel on where you are with your search of information on Catholicism.

 

[Truth_Faith13]

But has Jane answered any of the questions you’ve asked of the branch president? Ask the questions Chris-WA posted on RF or with your local LDS and I’m sure you will get a different reaction.

I agree many are lovely people just as there are lovely people in the Catholic Church. Have you been in contact with your local parish? RCIA should be going on and often they will let people come in & sit through a few classes to get questions answered. Have you spoken to the priest? I’m not trying to badger you at all with these questions. Just trying to get a feel on where you are with your search of information on Catholicism.

The ones I have asked, yes she has!

I went to mass on Sunday, didn’t speak to the priest though. I’ve probably been looking into Catholicism for a few years. I will just need to take a leap of faith at some point (the LDS are correct there) as I keep going around in circles. I have quite a few books I want to read and probably need to reread a few!

 

[Chris-WA]

Quotes such as “Then you’re not asking the tough questions or digging very deep” shows condenses and hostility to the poster it was addressed ( KarenAnne) and to LDS. The truth of the matter is Chris-WA has NO way of knowing what questions KarenAnne has been asking or the answers she has been received. Rather Chris-WA assumes that “well, if she’s gotten answers, then she must not be asking question that I (Chris-WA) consider to be hard”. It is condescending, hostile, and self-centric.

Likewise the quote “If you have been able to get good answers to these questions, then congratulations, you are the first person ever.” is dripping sarcasm, egotism, and hostility to KarenAnne and LDS. Same with rest of Chris-WA’s following that.

Yet more questions dodged. Standard.

 

[Peter_J]

One person’s sins do not excuse another’s.

Agreed.

But the bottom line is, I have (thus far anyhow) resisted switching to a different forum because I believe that CAF is as good as pretty much any forum out there – well, better really since most forums don’t have the Ignore List feature.

 

[jane_doe]

Agreed.

But the bottom line is, I have (thus far anyhow) resisted switching to a different forum because I believe that CAF is as good as pretty much any forum out there – well, better really since most forums don’t have the Ignore List feature.

CAF is generally very good, I will agree with you there.
CAF has an Ignore List feature- where’s that?

 

[Peter_J]

CAF is generally very good, I will agree with you there.
CAF has an Ignore List feature- where’s that?

forums.catholic-questions.org/profile.php?do=ignorelist

 

[Horton]

CAF is generally very good, I will agree with you there.
CAF has an Ignore List feature- where’s that?

Putting folks on an ignore list only shows you are unwilling to actually have discussion and/or debate with members that say what you want them to say. Where is the dialogue in that?

Besides you already do a pretty good job of ignoring questions you are either unwilling or unable to answer.

 

[Peter_J]

Putting folks on an ignore list only shows you are unwilling to actually have discussion and/or debate with members that say what you want them to say.

Hi Horton. I don’t really know you, other than your screen name; but I’m guessing that you don’t indiscriminately read whatever you come across on the Internet.

 

[jane_doe]

forums.catholic-questions.org/profile.php?do=ignorelist

Ah, thank you very much!

 

[Horton]

Hi Horton. I don’t really know you, other than your screen name; but I’m guessing that you don’t indiscriminately read whatever you come across on the Internet.

Not quite sure what you are getting at with this comment, but no, I don’t read everything I see on the internet. Even I don’t have that much time.

If you are referring to my comments to another poster in this thread, it’s not a question of whether she reads all comments, she just chooses to ignore any poster who challenges her. When a difficult topic comes up she tends to either deflect or disengage. Just as she did with Chris-WA post. Rather than trying to address the concerns he brought up, she attacked, and then continued to deflect & disengage.

 

[Peter_J]

Not quite sure what you are getting at with this comment, but no, I don’t read everything I see on the internet.

Well alright. I didn’t connect the dots exactly, but I was getting at how it rings pretty hollow for you to say that “Putting folks on an ignore list only shows you are unwilling to actually have discussion and/or debate with members that say what you want them to say.”

 

[Horton]

Well alright. I didn’t connect the dots exactly, but I was getting at how it rings pretty hollow for you to say that “Putting folks on an ignore list only shows you are unwilling to actually have discussion and/or debate with members that say what you want them to say.”

Let me say it this way. There are posters I pretty much skim over (although not many of them) and there are far more threads on any of the forums I never read or post on. Mainly because the topic isn’t something I’m interested in. My position is when you come to any type of discussion forum, religious or not, you should be willing to participate in the discussions you’ve shown interest on by posting on that topic. If one chooses to discontinue their part in the discussion they should just leave the topic. I’ve done that several times. Often when I don’t care for the turn the topic is taking I just bow out rather than continue with selectively posting.

If I am asked a question I will either answer the question or say I’m not comfortable or am unwilling to answer. But playing childish games is not my thing.

As far as I’m concerned the ignore feature should be used for times when a posters is being harassed or threatened, not when one doesn’t like the posts of others. To me it is not a real acceptance of wanting to have a discussion or debate. But we are all free to choose who to not listen to.

 

[Chris-WA]

This post is dripping with hostility, condescension, and hatred.

Ah yes, the old reliable retort by LDS posters who try to deflect or ignore the tough questions.

Given what she said, I’m quite confident that the individual in question has not really delved into these tough subjects with her family. It’s not insulting or hateful in any way to say so. But you in particular, jane_doe, also have a history of ignoring or deflecting the tough questions. In that way you are quite consistent with most LDS I know, so I feel pretty safe in making this generalization because it has been my consistent experience over many years. This experience is also shared by ex-mo after ex-mo, people who agonized over the faith crises they suffered and were marginalized by LDS leaders who excommunicated them instead of answering their questions. I’m also therefore quite confident that if the church leaders can’t answer the tough questions, then the LDS family members of a poster on this forum probably can’t either.

 

[Tarquin]

One person’s sins do not excuse another’s.
And yes, I call out such hateful comments regardless of whom is making them or whom they are directed at.

Perhaps, but sometimes you are the one who makes the statements, calling what another person says “blasphemy,” uninformed rambling, and referring to their sacred beliefs about salvation as “sack-of-potatoes salvation.” On the internet, sometimes we have to digest a few strong words in order to make progress in a discussion, and to keep it from devolving into spineless jello. As you once said to Iepuras, you are “here to talk to people: exchanges back and forth with people listening to each other.” And, really, what you call hateful and persecution, most grownups know is simply conviction and disagreement. It is sad that so many Mormons get all in a huff when they fail to persuade someone of some Mormon belief, so cry “Persecution!” Let’s get past this, okay. I mean, Mormon history isn’t exactly a shining example of tolerance and love. Despite our pasts, and ancestors that were more often willing to pick up the sword, today and here we can share our beliefs, our differences, our disagreements. Can’t we disagree about beliefs without calling one another’s sincere statements, hateful persecution? Yes, let’s.

 

[Tarquin]

Godhood: all Mormon gods and goddesses are married.

“Temple marriage opens the door to exaltation in the celestial kingdom”

lds.org/manual/preparing-for-exaltation-teachers-manual/lesson-41-eternal-marriage?lang=eng

Then is it sexual fulfillment that marriage is needed for? Or is it to make children through conjugal relations? Or is it like a bishop’s mitre - a decoration to show one’s status, with little or no utilitarian function? To borrow from Mormon demands whenever they *reject *a belief, “What do the scriptures say?”

 

[RebeccaJ]

[Then is it sexual fulfillment that marriage is needed for? Or is it to make children through conjugal relations? Or is it like a bishop’s mitre - a decoration to show one’s status, with little or no utilitarian function? To borrow from Mormon demands whenever they *reject

a belief, “What do the scriptures say?”

“Eternal increase”.

"What do we mean by endless or eternal increase? We mean that through the righteousness and faithfulness of men and women who keep the commandments of God they will come forth with celestial bodies, fitted and prepared to enter into their great, high and eternal glory in the celestial kingdom of God; and unto them through their preparation, there will come spirit children. I don’t think that is very difficult to comprehend. The nature of the offspring is determined by the nature of the substance that flows in the veins of the being. When blood flows in the veins of the being the offspring will be what blood produces, which is tangible flesh and bone; but when that which flows in the veins is spirit matter, a substance which is more refined and pure and glorious than blood, the offspring of such beings will be spirit children. By that I mean they will be in the image of the parents. They will have a spirit body and have a spark of the eternal or divine that always did exist in them” (Melvin J. Ballard—Crusader for Righteousness, 211).

This of course being what Mormons believe about themselves and their Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother.

(And yes you read that right, when Mormons become gods they won’t have blood in their veins.)

 

[Truth_Faith13]

I dont think Jane is dodging questions here. You guys are committed Catholics and are convinced the LDS Church isnt true (nothing wrong with that) but it will mean there is a difference between the intent of asking the questions. (Im aware that sounds very mormon!)

My point is I think Jane would welcome any question asked in honesty ie you are generally interested in what she believes, why she believes it etc. Not that you necessarily want to convert but just want to learn about another belief. Like when you Horton were talking with your friend.

However questions that are thrown at another poster to prove them wrong with no real intent to learn are different and I can understand why any poster wouldnt answer unless they like debate. I dont like debate though so it may just be me!

 

[Peter_J]

However questions that are thrown at another poster to prove them wrong with no real intent to learn are different and I can understand why any poster wouldnt answer unless they like debate.

But if I may say, it is my experience that quite a lot of non-Catholic posters here are more likely to respond to posts like that.

Seriously, sometimes I feel like “What do I need to do to get y’all to pay attention to my posts? Should I start being hyper-rude or something?”