Search results

I"m going to be blunt: "Sam" having it be his number one priority to tell "Bob" how "Fred" is an evil person and secretly the boogeyman strikes me more as sinful gossip and fear--mongroling then anything resembling love. Rather, if Sam loves God, Sam should have his #1 priority to be the most...

If you love your brother: then 2) get down on your knees and love & follow Christ the best you can, 2) love your fellow man.

Because I'm against fear-mongrolling and find that such "we need to expose these people!" tactics are a giant distraction from real issues and more important things. Like: are you humble? Are you loving the Lord your God with all you heart mind and soul?

Nope.

Yep. I get tired of people making it the boogeyman.

(Addressing this specifically, before moving on to the general) Not always, but for the last 106 years, and ending this Dec 31st. This for BSA, and LDS congregations consist of something like 20% of the troops. The break up between LDS Christians and BSA is one that is GREATLY celebrated...

Many people treat Free Masonary as if it was the boogey man. Personally, I see it as a social club that (like all groups) is what that person makes of it.

Thank you for the update Helen! We're all thinking of you and praying for you!

Priest = person to help guide us in our walk with God. I'm speaking much more broadly that the Catholic-centeric definition a lot of people here seem to be using. I'm not talking about a specific class of people whom have this as their professional job, take very specific vows, etc.

We don't live in OT times. The OP here is about the role of a priest in New Covenant times. Looking beyond Catholics specifically, the role priests play in pretty much every denotation is not animal sacrificers fulling Levitical Laws, but people in New Covenant times helping people best live...

Putting aside the word semantics, this is the basic role of a priest. They're not to stand between you and God, but to help you come closer to God.

I'm not sure why this has to be an "either/or" situation. Why can a person not have their own relationship with deity AND have a person to help guide them in that relationship?

ScottA, I do disagree with you on the question "whether or not Christ had/has a physical body after the Ascension". But I do very much agree with you on the critical importance of taking the time to understand another person's beliefs and be honest in that approach.

That was indeed one of many nails in the BSA-LDS relationship coffin. Other ones include the fact that Boy Scouts of America doesn't work outside of the USA, dropping of interest in BSA within American LDS Christians, conflicting goals/resources, etc.

Well thank you for your concern about LDS Christians not knowing LDS Christian doctrines well enough. Would you like to understand things better, or were you just wanting to stay your concern?

Keeping my response pithy here, feel free to ask for elaboration on any part. Same with any part of the Tanner's axe-grinding) Earlier we talked about core beliefs and non-core/fringe beliefs. Every group has this dynamic. For LDS Christians, any possible history of the Father is very much...

I do agree that there is a huge difference between bashing and asking questions-- and it's not a matter of punctuation. A person can bash perfectly well while ending sentences with a "?". The core difference between the two is intent and what to you do with the information/answers: a person...

Yeah.... this thing is horrible skewed axe-grinding "information". Who's hiding?

On that you and I will just very much disagree. Axe-grinders (like the Tanners) don't yield good results. I'm sure there's some anti-SDA folks out there that likewise give horrible info.

It's one of the biggest factors for me. If my choices are: A) a good man/woman with strong principles, integrity, but holds different stances on issues than I do. B) a good man/woman who holds the same stances on issues than I do, but has a downright scum bag character I'll vote for A.