Mormon Doctrine alive and well

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by myboynoah

It sounds like you are saying that context has nothing to do with language, that words project the same meaning and value (negative vs. positive) no matter who uses them, how, when, and where they are used. Is this what you are saying?

That is not what I am saying.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by jay santos

Like SIEQ said, you should read more of his posts before you jump to judgement. He's clearly an active, believing LDS that loves the church. He's angry towards a certain segment of the church, but who isn't? So is Tex, but you wouldn't question his activity level.

I havent judged anyone. I am making observations, not judgments. Shaking Hands in the Foyer posts negative stuff about the Church, it leaders, or its practices sometimes....as recently as last night. I was basing my observation off that style of posting. I think this is fair.

Your other point is remarkable. Who isnt "angry at a certain segment" of the Church? Me, for one.

Who would I be angry at in the Church? I am not angry at any segment of anything, in or out of the Church.

Out of curiosity, who are you angry at in the Church? And why?

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

That is not what I am saying.

So, then it is possible that the term "mullah", depending on context (who, what, where, when, how), could be just as, if not more offensive than the term "apostate."

[creekster]

It seems to me the board has become more and more acrimonious about religion over time. Indeed, I have enjoyed the religious discussions less and less and have contributed less as a result. Whether or not his is a net gain to the board is perhaps debatable, but either way I know that I am enjoying it less.

I agree with Triple D that the church is too often portrayed with negativity here, and it seems to me the frequency is increasing, so that the discussions just aren’t as interesting to me, let alone edifying. This thread is sort of an example of what I am talking about. What possible benefit comes from this sort of discussion? Whether Tex or SEIQ or Indy or Lebowski or whoever are apostates or mullahs (whatever those terms may mean among a bunch of semi-anonymous internet geeks who may or may not be posing as something they otherwise aren’t in real life) or something else altogether is really pointless. When an apostle’s name becomes shorthand among a group for error and intellectual failure then I think the group may have gone too far, to the extent it professes or seeks to be friendly to the church.

To tell you the truth, I think this is the sort of thing the prophets warn us against when they criticize the learned or intellectualism. We are all trying to find our way to God. It is a difficult path, fraught with doubt and trial and certainly error but also with repentance and redemption and faith and grace. I am not sure that so much negativity under any circumstance benefits any of us on this journey. You can call me a mullah, or an apostate, or anything else, but know that this is my opinion as I wend my own way and try to stay on path

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

I havent judged anyone. I am making observations, not judgments. Shaking Hands in the Foyer posts negative stuff about the Church, it leaders, or its practices sometimes....as recently as last night. I was basing my observation off that style of posting. I think this is fair.

Your other point is remarkable. Who isnt "angry at a certain segment" of the Church? Me, for one.

Who would I be angry at in the Church? I am not angry at any segment of anything, in or out of the Church.

Out of curiosity, who are you angry at in the Church? And why?

You're angry at the segment of the church that plays top 40 music. You already admitted it.

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by creekster

It seems to me the board has become more and more acrimonious about religion over time. Indeed, I have enjoyed the religious discussions less and less and have contributed less as a result. Whether or not his is a net gain to the board is perhaps debatable, but either way I know that I am enjoying it less.

I agree with Triple D that the church is too often portrayed with negativity here, and it seems to me the frequency is increasing, so that the discussions just aren’t as interesting to me, let alone edifying. This thread is sort of an example of what I am talking about. What possible benefit comes from this sort of discussion? Whether Tex or SEIQ or Indy or Lebowski or whoever are apostates or mullahs (whatever those terms may mean among a bunch of semi-anonymous internet geeks who may or may not be posing as something they otherwise aren’t in real life) or something else altogether is really pointless. When an apostle’s name becomes shorthand among a group for error and intellectual failure then I think the group may have gone to far, to the extent it professes or seeks to be friendly to the church.

To tell you the truth, I think this is the sort of thing the prophets warn us against when they criticize the learned or intellectualism. We are all trying to find our way to God. It is a difficult path, fraught with doubt and trial and certainly error but also with repentance and redemption and faith and grace. I am not sure that so much negativity under any circumstance benefits any of us on this journey. You can call me a mullah, or an apostate, or anything else, but know that this is my opinion as I wend my own way and try to stay on path

Thank you.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by jay santos

You're angry at the segment of the church that plays top 40 music. You already admitted it.

Curse you, archives!

Do I have any wiggle room for a "righteous indignation" argument here? We are talking about Top 40, after all.

If not, I will retreat, tail between my legs....

Look, all I am saying is that for a board that claims to be mostly faithful and believing, there certainly seems to be a dominant negative tone about the Church.

I dont even get the negativity on the part of those who are self-professed ex-believers here. Once you have taken your stance, why spend continued energy on attacking the Church? It makes as much sense as a believer repteadly pointing out that you are not active anymore.

[woot]

For the record, I would be much more offended being called a fundie or mullah than I would be being called an apostate. It's extremely dependent on one's point of view.

I think it's fun to point out each other's obsessions and whatnot, but it seems there are certain people who don't take it very well, and they should have the right to not be called names, regardless of which name best applies to them.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by creekster

It seems to me the board has become more and more acrimonious about religion over time. Indeed, I have enjoyed the religious discussions less and less and have contributed less as a result. Whether or not his is a net gain to the board is perhaps debatable, but either way I know that I am enjoying it less.

I agree with Triple D that the church is too often portrayed with negativity here, and it seems to me the frequency is increasing, so that the discussions just aren’t as interesting to me, let alone edifying. This thread is sort of an example of what I am talking about. What possible benefit comes from this sort of discussion? Whether Tex or SEIQ or Indy or Lebowski or whoever are apostates or mullahs (whatever those terms may mean among a bunch of semi-anonymous internet geeks who may or may not be posing as something they otherwise aren’t in real life) or something else altogether is really pointless. When an apostle’s name becomes shorthand among a group for error and intellectual failure then I think the group may have gone too far, to the extent it professes or seeks to be friendly to the church.

To tell you the truth, I think this is the sort of thing the prophets warn us against when they criticize the learned or intellectualism. We are all trying to find our way to God. It is a difficult path, fraught with doubt and trial and certainly error but also with repentance and redemption and faith and grace. I am not sure that so much negativity under any circumstance benefits any of us on this journey. You can call me a mullah, or an apostate, or anything else, but know that this is my opinion as I wend my own way and try to stay on path

Word, brother. Testify.

On a side note, my kids were just given a little stuffed animal that looks exactly like your avatar. We call it "creekster" now.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

On a side note, my kids were just given a little stuffed animal that looks exactly like your avatar. We call it "creekster" now.

I am honored. Please make sure they know that it is a gibbon, which is an ape, not a monkey.