cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board  

Go Back   cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board > non-Sports > Religion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-05-2008, 03:20 PM   #31
MikeWaters
Demiurge
 
MikeWaters's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,363
MikeWaters is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

I would say Elaine Jack and Chieko Okazaki, but I'm not sure the male leaders in the church are ready to tangle with these two.

They would be vault to the top of the list in terms of influence and popularity as well as relevance.

Why can't they set up a new category of GA, something like "The Council of Sisters/Women". Or establish a council among the Relief Society that has GA status.
MikeWaters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2008, 07:18 PM   #32
Dan
Junior Member
 
Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Elk Grove, California
Posts: 211
Dan is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Seattle Ute

I am not angry, it was a little late night grumpiness after seeing another post of your making your own bootstrapping arguments. Let me clarify that when you said it was this particu;ar post of your that set me off in some way, you are wrong. I do not care so much the actual topic you were discussing related to Mormonism per se, just that I read your post (and, BTW I only read maybe 10 posts per day total on the sight as I am usually just lightly scanning and periodically commenting and getting involved) and it seems that whenever you post you are quite fond of lifting yourself by yanking your boots up into the air. I do not care to play the part of the apologist, those days are a decade behind me.

In my studies on Mormonism I know enough to be able to call you on your BS. Once I did it is no surprise that you dug in your heels (like a good little contra-Mormonism apologist) and reiterated your position with more bravado. I could talk with you point by point on different topics of historicity, but it would take too long and I really just am not interested in it enough to debate you. You try to claim I have not specifically refuted your claim, but I really do not care. The way you are trying to set up this debate structure is to make me provide masses of data on small issues to make a case that you are not justified in the general claim you made. No, I am not going to play by your rules. If you want to support your claims with minutia and data for various issues and assertions to show that you are justified in making the conclusive statment you did, then so be it. I suspect you will have as much excitement to do that than I have to do the same that you would want me to do with presenting evidences.

You know, a couple thousdand years ago everyone KNEW that man and other creatures had not been on the earth prior to Adam. A thousand years ago the consensus KNEW that earth was flat. 500 years ago the consensus KNEW that the earth was the center of the universe. Today Seattle Ute KNOWS all sorts of things. Well, I don't know a whole lot, but I do KNOW from years of my own study that Seattle Ute cannot make the blanket claim he did that I first commented on. Your absolutist comments are for the most part laughable. but the more you may choose to argue against me I suspect you will make more comments to the effect that you really really really were correct with a cherry on top.
__________________
Dan

Temet Nosce - \"Know Thyself\"
Dan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2008, 07:24 PM   #33
Hazzard
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 158
Hazzard
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeWaters View Post
I would say Elaine Jack and Chieko Okazaki, but I'm not sure the male leaders in the church are ready to tangle with these two.

They would be vault to the top of the list in terms of influence and popularity as well as relevance.

Why can't they set up a new category of GA, something like "The Council of Sisters/Women". Or establish a council among the Relief Society that has GA status.
I like the female council idea. Kind of reminds me of my mission, where two of the best missionaries were sisters. We told our AP's that these two sisters should be called as Assistant AP's. Not sure if they liked the idea.

I have heard from multiple people that Okazaki has already tangled heavily with church leaders and she's been on the losing end. Apparently some of the brethren don't agree with some of her "doctrines."

I would nominate Brooke White.
Hazzard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2008, 07:33 PM   #34
SeattleUte
 
SeattleUte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
SeattleUte has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan View Post
I am not angry, it was a little late night grumpiness after seeing another post of your making your own bootstrapping arguments. Let me clarify that when you said it was this particu;ar post of your that set me off in some way, you are wrong. I do not care so much the actual topic you were discussing related to Mormonism per se, just that I read your post (and, BTW I only read maybe 10 posts per day total on the sight as I am usually just lightly scanning and periodically commenting and getting involved) and it seems that whenever you post you are quite fond of lifting yourself by yanking your boots up into the air. I do not care to play the part of the apologist, those days are a decade behind me.

In my studies on Mormonism I know enough to be able to call you on your BS. Once I did it is no surprise that you dug in your heels (like a good little contra-Mormonism apologist) and reiterated your position with more bravado. I could talk with you point by point on different topics of historicity, but it would take too long and I really just am not interested in it enough to debate you. You try to claim I have not specifically refuted your claim, but I really do not care. The way you are trying to set up this debate structure is to make me provide masses of data on small issues to make a case that you are not justified in the general claim you made. No, I am not going to play by your rules. If you want to support your claims with minutia and data for various issues and assertions to show that you are justified in making the conclusive statment you did, then so be it. I suspect you will have as much excitement to do that than I have to do the same that you would want me to do with presenting evidences.

You know, a couple thousdand years ago everyone KNEW that man and other creatures had not been on the earth prior to Adam. A thousand years ago the consensus KNEW that earth was flat. 500 years ago the consensus KNEW that the earth was the center of the universe. Today Seattle Ute KNOWS all sorts of things. Well, I don't know a whole lot, but I do KNOW from years of my own study that Seattle Ute cannot make the blanket claim he did that I first commented on. Your absolutist comments are for the most part laughable. but the more you may choose to argue against me I suspect you will make more comments to the effect that you really really really were correct with a cherry on top.
It's meaningless to consider what people thought they knew over five-hundred years ago (except arguably for the Greek Isles and othere Greek-influenced parts in ancient times) because until the seventeenth century there was no such thing as a scientific ethos. The world was ruled by superstition and tradition, and the idea of an examined world or empiricism was unheard of much less even foreign.

Seizing on the (scientific ethos) that nothing can be known for sure and there are always gaps in our understanding to defend the posibility of Book of Mormon historicity is the same thing we hear from Creationists in response to science. Such conclusory assertion and sheer speculation isn't a genuine and critical search for truth.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be.

—Paul Auster

Last edited by SeattleUte; 05-05-2008 at 07:58 PM.
SeattleUte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2008, 07:38 PM   #35
RC Vikings
Senior Member
 
RC Vikings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Rexburg, Idaho
Posts: 2,236
RC Vikings is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazzard View Post
If the LDS church had two female apostles, who would the other one be (Sheri Dew would be the first, obviously)?
Jewel and Katherine Heigl
__________________
"I always rode to my limit. If I won by three minutes, that's because I couldn't make four."

Eddy Merckx
RC Vikings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2008, 03:27 AM   #36
exUte
Senior Member
 
exUte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,326
exUte can only hope to improve
Default They will be out of business soon

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeWaters View Post
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_of_Christ

Interesting, they have added and continue to add to the Doctrine and Covenants (their version).
and then the Church will buy the rest of the Nauvoo historical sites.
exUte is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
chieko okazaki, church of peace, community of christ, elaine jack, female apostles, julie beck, rlds, women apostles

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.