Wayne's World, Wayne's World, Wayne's World…. nananananana

Sorry, my guitar licks, via written symbols, are sorely lacking. Wayne is DETERMINED for one and all to hear his point, as he has referred us to his long, winding, run-on-sentence-filled diatribe yet again. So here, today, in Wayne’s World, I will give him his fiddy cents. Or 15 minutes, whichever comes first.

Wayne says:

Hypocrisy on display—

[This was previously posted in regards to the section about Mitt Romney. I think it applies to this subject as well. (With some editing and many additions)]

I thought it interesting that someone would comment on the Book of Mormon and then refer the readers to the so-called “excellent” article about the fallacies of the Book of Mormon written by the owner of another website, Richard Packham.
I am assuming that Natalie herself, and most of the participants on her website, are of the “Christian” persuasion. If that’s the case, I am wondering why anyone of the Christian persuasion would use him (Richard Packam) as someone that could be trusted on any subject concerning any kind of a belief in God.
Out of curiosity, I clicked on his name just to see what he had to say about the “Mormons”. What I found was kind of interesting. He is a devout Atheist. He even writes “why he is not a Christian any more” articles, and even has a long list of Bible contradictions. Don’t believe me, see for yourself. See what a so-called, self-proclaimed expert can do with the sacred beliefs of Christians. Then compare his techniques with the techniques that are being used against Mormonism.
Some seem so anxious to break out their ”Big Guns” of fault finding, and demonstrate their “intellectuality”, in regards to the “History” of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Just “partially” for fun, let me demonstrate just how easy it can be done:
I know some people don’t like to “put the Bible on trial.” And, if it is quoted or talked about, they call it an “attack on God’s final and infallible and forever word.” But let me take that chance and see what you think.
First off, let me suggest that you go to the local library, and check out a book by a Biblical scholar of your choice (one that you have a lot of trust and faith in) and research the History of the Bible. Learn not only who put it together, but how it came about. Learn about the process of translating thoughts from one language to another, and the difficulties of getting the same message, or meaning, of a certain scripture when the translation is complete. As you are aware, there are a lot of people retranslating the Bible, because they apparently seem to think the King James Version has some problems in it. Learn about other faiths that have additional scriptures in their Bibles, and other Christian faiths, that have chosen to leave them out. You know how important it is to some, that Mormons have “added” to “Gods word.”
I listen to the Bible on cassette as I drive, and suggest that you do the same. Start from the very first page (or cassette/CD). Go all the way through (word for word), (Old and New Testaments), and see what is in them. I know some people just like to go to the references in the scriptures that refer them to other scriptures that back up the same point. But this time, just read the whole book from the beginning (Genesis) to the end (Revelation). If you do, I really don’t think you will be so quick with your “trigger finger in regards to the LDS faith.

Let me further make my point by using some (tongue in cheek) comments. Some of it is said in “jest” just to demonstrate what can be done if a person should “shift” his mind into the faultfinding mode, (although some of it is factual). It is also done with the thought in mind of how some people in the “shift’ mode, go to the LDS Church history to find some evidence or problem with the doctrine (or leaders) of the Church to prove it unworthy of believing in it. It is also done with the idea in mind that the “Bible is your Church History.” It is a record of the beginning of your Christian beliefs. It is the history of the Jesus you believe in as Lord and Savior. It is a record of the early leaders “and Prophets” that you believe in and trust, and their writings you go to (hopefully), to reinforce your belief in God and His Son Jesus Christ. It is your book of God’s instructions of how he wants you to live your life so you can change your attitudes and lifestyles to be what He wants you to be.
Now: If I were to “shift” (or allow someone to shift) my mind into the faultfinding mode in regard to what you believe, and if, I used your test of “perfection, without tolerance,” I would go to the Bible and read all of the things that the “so called” prophets were guilty of doing. Things like; running around in public naked like David (see Micah 1:8). Getting drunk like Noah (see Gen 9:21). And another getting drunk, and then having sex with his two daughters and getting them pregnant like Lot (see Gen 19:30-38).
And then, I would read a few false prophecies like the one Jonah made, when he said God told him to go to Nineveh (see Jonah 1:1-2), and tell them that “Nineveh shall be overthrown.”(See Jonah 3:4). Guess what? It didn’t happen. Even Jonah was “mad” at God (see Jonah 4:1, 9), which is a big “NO, NO.” Why was he mad a God? Because God apparently “changed his mind,” (see Jonah 3:10), and made Jonah look like a fool, (maybe even a “false prophet.”)
I know you have already read your own material and you know all about these things.
How about talking donkeys? (See Numbers 22:28) Let’s ask the prophet Balaam about that one. Or better yet, let’s ask the witnesses that were there (see Numbers 22:22), maybe they will tell us what really happened. I might even question the good relationship between your God and Lucifer, when they got together and made a deal concerning Job (see Job 1:6-12). Even God’s sons were there to witness what took place on that occasion (see Job1:6). I might even stumble across another little incident by the prophet Elisha in 2 kings 2:22. No, better not read about that one. And, I definitely wouldn’t want to read what God told a prophet to use for fuel to bake his bread. (See Ezekiel 4:12)
Then, as I read, I would come across the little, and of course, unimportant, incident that took place in Gen. 34, that seems to implicate a prophet of God:
Let me paraphrase: The son of a leader of another country, raped one of Jacob’s daughters. Jacob and his sons (needless to say) were a little upset about it. The leader of that country and his son were sorry for what had taken place and ask Jacob and his sons for forgiveness. They even offered gifts for their “grace.” Anything Jacob would ask, they would give. The sons of Jacob told them: “If you will become as us, and be circumcised, we will forgive you.” I would read on and find out what Jacob’s sons did after they had made Hamor, and his son Shechem, feel forgiven. And this was done even after Hamor and Schechem went back to their city and had, all the males in their group, do the same (be circumcised), to prove that they were sincere. And, just maybe, I would have a hard time trying to convince myself that Jacob didn’t, in some way, have something to do with what his sons did. Especially so, when I read on and found out that Jacob seemed a little more concerned about his own “skin” than was his concerns as to what had taken place. And then, I might even take note as to how they were trading their daughters back and forth as if they (the daughters) were cattle. I just might have a flash come to my mind and compare another incident in “Mormon Church history,” the Mountain Meadows Massacre and Brigham Young, to the rest of Jacob’s story. And then I just might go back and read what the Savior said about the “mote and the beam.”
Oh yea, I know you could give me a bunch of answers about these subjects, but that is not part of the process in discussing “religious” matters, is it? You will say that I have twisted the information, or “you are just looking for the bad.” OK, I concede, I’m guilty.
I just don’t think I could belong to a group that believes in those kinds of leaders. I just couldn’t follow leaders that would do those kinds of things. But, only if I used “your test”!!! Keep in mind that we are reading in Christian “Church history” (the Old Testament).
And then I would go to the New Testament, (more “Christian Church history”) and read stories of “your Jesus” and the irresponsible things that He did. Things like; casting evil spirits into some poor man’s pigs, so that they would run off a cliff into the ocean (see Mark 5:13). And then another time when He was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to fast and pray to His Father (see Luke 4:1), for forty days. Guess who shows up to answer His prayers? (See Luke 4:2)

I could go on with a lot more, but I won’t. There are a lot of reasons for not believing in your brand of religion. And I just know, I could discourage a few believers by going out and holding up a banner encouraging them to go to a web-site with all kinds of negative information designed to discourage them. Just like the ones you and others have, in regard to the Church and Joseph Smith. Another interesting thing is: I have never found any indication or even a hint in the Bible or any place else, that anyone had “apologized” to anyone for what they did, or what their ancestors did.
There is a difference between you and me. I can except the weaknesses in the Prophets of God and still believe that they were inspired by Him, and talked to Him (face to face, like Moses). And for some reason I can’t explain, is, that God works through weak humans, (I think you would call them sinners), and calls them Prophets, to get His message to His children (you and me), as He says in Amos 3: 7.
You can’t do that. Prophets have to be “perfect” in every way for you, or you can’t believe in them, especially LDS Prophets.

Other things comes to mind that your people did to the “Mormons” even before the MMM.
Click on your search and read about the Hauns Mill Massacre. Let me help you find one:
http://www.web-books.com/Classics/YoungFolks/Church/YoungFolks_ChurchC21P1.htm There was even a young child shot “point blank” and killed. His young brother had his whole hip blown away by (possibly) one of your own Christian ancestors.
Read other reports about what the early “mobs” (some of them “Christians”) did, and how they burned the early saint’s homes, and drove the members of the Church out of their warm homes in the middle of winter without even coats or shoes.
Let’s talk about the rapes of our women, and murders of helpless old men, women and children. One sick old man was slashed to death with a sickle, (a long bent knife used to cut corn). The person who committed that crime was heard bragging about it later in a saloon.
Shall we talk about how some of the “mob” (possibly some of your ancestors or former Christians) took turns raping one young woman to death on a bench, while they forced her husband to watch?
How many died crossing the plains trying to get away from people with attitudes like yours.
These are but a few of the hundreds………

Things have gone wrong on both sides of the issues. But, as yet, I only hear one side demanding an apology for an incident that “the big bad Mormons” did.
I have yet to hear an apology for those crimes (afore mentioned), by your ancestors, or from your former or present leaders.

It is interesting to me too, that having listened to a lot of preachers on Christian radio and television: I have never once heard them talk about those incidents. And if they did, they could always come up with some kind of excuse or softening reason for it taking place. Could they be hiding something from their followers? I am convinced that the Old Testament should be rated ‘X’ or at the least ‘PG’ for the things that are in it.
I am convinced that those who are professing to be Christians, and that are so adamant in criticizing the Mormons have never read their own Bible. If they had, they wouldn’t be so judgmental about Mormonism. I am not going to quote any specific scriptures, because I think the basic theme, and one of the main points, that the Savior taught, was on the subject of “Hypocrisy”.

I know many of you are going to want to make some kind of an explanation of why I am way off base on some of the things I have said. But let me say this: “My mind is made up” and “no matter what you say or how much evidence or intellectual information you have to refute my comments: It will make no difference. That is of no use. Because my mind is blocked and there is no room for any kind of explanation or excuses.” Does that Sound Familiar???

Wayne

Just one more thing: This is part of an e-mail sent to me by a friend. With a little effort, you may be able to go to the original article and see the photograph for your self. As a member of the “Mormon” faith, it is quite encouraging.

Editor’s Note: We wish to thank Jeff Brooks for bringing this very
interesting discovery article to our attention. The long debated
question about bound metal records existing in the Middle East 2500
years ago as claimed by the Book of Mormon can now be put to rest.
Critics should take note and check that item off their list of
objections to the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.

Copyright © 1999-2002 Ancient America Foundation. This message may be forwarded with identifying information. For more information or to subscribe or unsubscribe to AAF Notes or utilize the AAF order form, visit http://www.ancientamerica.org and click “Contact us”. Refer, by e-mail, comments or questions to aaf@ancientamerica.org

Unique book goes on display
The world’s oldest multiple-page book – in the lost Etruscan language – has gone on display in Bulgaria’s National History Museum in Sofia.
It contains six bound sheets of 24 carat gold, with illustrations of a horse-rider, a mermaid, a harp and soldiers.

The book dates back to 600BC
The small manuscript, which is more than two-and-a-half millennia old, was discovered 60 years ago in a tomb uncovered during digging for a canal along the Strouma river in south-western Bulgaria.
It has now been donated to the museum by its finder, on condition of anonymity.
Reports say the unidentified donor is now 87 years old and lives in Macedonia.
The authenticity of the book has been confirmed by two experts in Sofia and London, museum director Bojidar Dimitrov said quoted by AFP.
The six sheets are believed to be the oldest comprehensive work involving multiple pages, said Elka Penkova, who heads the museum’s archaeological department.
There are around 30 similar pages known in the world, Ms Penkova said, “but they are not linked together in a book”.
The Etruscans – one of Europe’s most mysterious ancient peoples – are believed to have migrated from Lydia, in modern western Turkey, settling in northern and central Italy nearly 3,000 years ago.
They were wiped out by the conquering Romans in the fourth century BC, leaving few written records.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2939362.stm

World’s Oldest Book Found – and It’s on Gold Plates

From BBC News, 26 May, 2003, we learn that the world’s oldest multiple-page book in the lost Etruscan language was recently found in Bulgaria. It contains six bound sheets of 24 carat gold. And the book dates to when? About 600BC.
Just a little reminder: the idea of writing on a book of gold plates may have been laughable in 1830, when no one had heard of such a thing, but it wasn’t laughable in Nephi’s time!

I’ve read it six times, folks, and it never gets less meandering. If you can wrap your mind around Wayne’s post, please take a minute to explain it to me. However, I can tell you that this is written by a man GRASPING at straws. You found examples of a “golden book” so that means that Joseph Smith was NOT A con man, because somewhere in the universe, someone used GOLD to write a BOOK? That’s pretty thin, baby.

Grasp away, Wayne.

Wayne’s world, Wayne’s world, Wayne’s world….

Advertisements

About Natalie R. Collins

Natalie has more than 30 years writing, editing, proofreading and design experience. She has written 20 books (and counting), has worked for the Sundance Film Festival, and as an investigative journalist, editor, and proofreader. She embraces her gypsy-heart and is following her new free-thinking journey through life. Follow her as she starts over and learns a bunch of life's lessons--some the hard way.
This entry was posted in Natalie's Posts. Bookmark the permalink.

37 Responses to Wayne's World, Wayne's World, Wayne's World…. nananananana

  1. Lucy says:

    How “could” you have read “that” six times? “I” couldn’t “even” make it “through” once. Point (or lack thereof) aside, someone needs to take away his quotation mark key.

    Like

  2. Natalie says:

    Well, I’m taking percocet for pain, so it eased the agony a bit… LOL.

    Like

  3. Renee says:

    We’re of the “Christian” pursuasion? Does that mean Wayne says he isn’t? I’ll be darned, we’ve had a breakthrough here, Natalie.

    I am kidding, I know lots of people say Mormons aren’t Christian…the jury is still out with me on that one. But it was a telling comment.

    Keep on with the percocet Natalie! Best wishes for your surgery.

    Like

  4. Elaine says:

    I’ve heard it said many times that the Book of Mormon is “chloroform in print”. Well, at the risk of being uncharitably critical, I’m afraid the same can be said of Wayne’s style.

    Oh, and I’m afraid that I can’t quite see how the fact that someone found some engraved metal plates bound together in some way, in Bulgaria of all places, somehow translates to the conclusion that the Book of Mormon must be what the Mormons claim it to be.

    Like

  5. Pingback: University Update - Noelia - Wayne’s World, Wayne’s World, Wayne’s World…. nananananana

  6. Johnny says:

    Wayne, this is way too long and complicated to follow accurately. Part of it is good, where you say: “There is a difference between you and me…..” That is cause those on the other side of the fence will not be able to see Joseph Smith as a prophet; probably never. We do because of the Spirit part which tells you when something is coming from God and not just the man Joseph or the very racist man Brigham.. They never see that and so this is all ‘foolishness’ to them.

    But we also need them, need them for us to see some of our own mistakes and shortcomings. I suppose FARMS is up there for us mainly to answer our critics, but they, the critics, still dismiss most of the answers given there, but wtf.

    We also need the critics for the people who are new to the church, so they can read their works, their almost vitriol, and then read our things, like at lds.org, farmsresearch.com and others and ‘feel’ the differences, the different agendas between the two. So for me, I’m glad the critics now have a free medium to publish (Internet) and still survive in their world which may be the terrestrial one remember.
    Bye need some sleep.

    Mormon Johnny.

    Like

  7. azteclady says:

    Gee whiz!

    Nope. Not reading that again.

    And Johnny? Definitely on the mark on one point: I will NEVER–were I to live eternally–will see Joseph Smith as a prophet. And you know what else? The God I believe in cares much more for my actions regarding my fellow men than about whether I wear special undies or have a secret name.

    Then again, the God I believe in doesn’t care what ANYONE believes in but does care about their actions and feelings towards others. So hey, as far as I’m concerned, there are plenty of mormons, jews, muslims, atheists, catholics, protestants of several colors, etc., and any and all ethnicities, sexual orientations, what have you, that will go to Heaven and bask in God’s presence.

    Like

  8. Cele says:

    my eyes are crossing and I think I’m falling asleep.

    Like

  9. Heather says:

    I got about halfway through this screed before my eyes threatened to roll out of my head. Good grief, Wayne. If everything about this website and everyone who posts here are so offensive to your delicate Mormon sensibilities then STAY AWAY. Aren’t you supposed to be avoiding even the appearance of so-called evil anyway?

    Like

  10. JulieAnn says:

    Oh.
    My.
    God.
    Insomnia…cured.
    ZZzzzzZZZzzzzzZZZzz

    Like

  11. Kane says:

    Ya I got halfway through and gave up.

    Like

  12. Tracy says:

    I got to Balaam, and remember something about his ass, then my head started spinning, so I had to stop.

    I did try though.

    Like

  13. Natalie says:

    ACK! Johnny, blame the percocet. I think I just accidentally deleted your comment. I was TRYING to respond to it, not delete it. Sheesh. I’ll try to recover it.

    Like

  14. Will says:

    This needs to be tagged with
    “Warning INCOMING WALL OF TEXT”
    o.O O.o O.O!!!

    Like

  15. [This is what I received for Johnny’s comment in my feed reader. Please note: these are Johnny’s words, not mine.]

    Well Azteclady: So you have a new religion there? New church? One that allows BOTH atheists and people of any sexual orientation go to Heaven?? Really. So you’ll be there with both Bill Maher and Elton John?

    And does that so called “any and all….sexual orientations…” include pedophiles??

    Really????!!!!!! How bizarre?

    The New religious order according to Azteclady:

    “”the God I believe in doesn’t care what ANYONE believes in…. So hey, as far as I’m concerned, there are plenty of mormons, jews, muslims, atheists, catholics, protestants of several colors, etc., and any and all ethnicities, sexual orientations, what have you, that will go to Heaven and bask in God’s presence.””

    Wtf? just about everyone can go to heaven then,?? How nice

    Like

  16. Johnny,

    I would certainly hope that pedophiles can go to heaven. Let me note that pedophiles are people who feel primarily attracted to prepubescent children. This doesn’t mean that they act on that attraction.

    I think you’re talking about child molesters who may or may not be pedophiles. If there is a loving God, which I doubt, then I would expect to see some child molesters in heaven. I had a recent discussion along those lines on my blog: Jailbait.

    Please also allow me to quote from a comment I made at The Slapdash Godliness of a Good Girl.

    By way of introduction, I don’t believe in God – I’m an atheist. I am a husband and father. I love my wife and children dearly. I do my best to help them be happy. I try to be kind to everyone and do what I can to alleviate suffering. I’m no saint, but I do my best.

    In these things, I’m probably very much like everyone else here. One difference between me an many of the other commenters is that I lack a faith in God.

    I prayed for many years that he would help me to have faith in him. From what I could tell, no one was listening. So now I live my life the best that I can according to my conscience.

    Is anyone really willing to say that – if I meet God when my life is over – that God will say to me “You did your best to do good and to love other people, but you never really had much faith in me. You’re going to Hell.”?

    If so, is that really the kind of loving God you want to worship?

    If God will show compassion and not judge me harshly, then does faith in God really matter?

    Like

  17. azteclady says:

    Thank you, Jonathan Blake.

    Johnny: if you READ correctly, you’d see it’s fairly evident that the God *I* believe in cares about people’s actions (meaning, being DECENT human beings, not spewing hatred, not being cruel, not causing harm to others), than about religion, or politics.

    That means that I don’t think that a Mormon who abuses (sexually, emotionally, physically) his/her children will go to heaven–no matter what undies they wear or how many missions they go to, or what have you. Unless they repent IN THEIR HEARTS–not with their empty words.

    Would a pedophile go to heaven? I don’t know–the God I believe in is LOVE and forgiveness, but *I* would like to think that ANYONE who has harmed others would have to REPENT and do PENANCE in some way.

    So yes, in MY belief system, just about everyone can go to heaven. It *is* extremely nice, in fact.

    The fact that *I* believe these things does NOT a religion make.

    Check what MAKES a religion, dear, please. Cause you seem to be confused there.

    Like

  18. Johnny says:

    “I would certainly hope that pedophiles can go to heaven. Let me note that pedophiles are people who feel primarily attracted to prepubescent children. This doesn’t mean that they act on that attraction.”

    bloody lawyer talk!!!!!

    Dude, mate, you’re a drongo! left me gobsmacked there!

    if a man has an attraction to prepubescent children (correctly said) well then,… nope can’t get into heaven in my book or ,(dare I say it), God’s book. They have to get rid of that attraction first. As do gays with their atractions too (to other gays!!!)

    And this: “If God will show compassion and not judge me harshly, then does faith in God really matter? ” well…………………He is God and so judges people, his children. Compassion…..sure, when they seek it…………….

    And hey, Azteclady, you called me ‘dear’ ………ahhhhh

    Like

  19. azteclady says:

    Johnny, in your case, read “dear” (from me) as “you narrowminded, bigoted asshat.”

    Like

  20. Johnny,

    Let’s leave the insults on the playground.

    I have a question: when did you decide to be a heterosexual?

    If (as I suspect) you can’t remember when you made such a choice, then how can you count yourself as more righteous than a homosexual or pedophile who similarly made no such choice?

    If there is a loving God, then I suspect that a compassionate pedophile or homosexual will stand a much better chance of making it into heaven than a bigoted heterosexual.

    Also, a loving God requires people to ask for compassion before he gives it? Is that really compassion then? Seems like pretty conditional love to me.

    Frankly, I’m disappointed. I saw you as a rational voice trying to represent your point of view. Thank you for disabusing me of that illusion.

    Unless you too are on medication?

    Like

  21. Natalie says:

    Oh boy, PLEASE, don’t make me deal with this serious stuff right now. Pedophiles who don’t act on their urges? Extremely rare. Should a pedophile go to heaven? Do we really even need to CONSIDER THIS? Even if you are an atheist, surely you realize this is not your job! And thank God, literally, for that. This is one time I’d be glad someone else was making the rules.

    I have a very hard time feeling compassion for pedophiles, who are motivated by abuse, terror, and TRULY unnatural urges.

    Like

  22. I don’t mean to get all heavy, so disregard as necessary. If you’re up to it, read my post and the comments if you want to know where I’m coming from. Let me just say two things here.

    1) Pedophiles who don’t molest children are more common than you might think. Most molesters aren’t pedophiles.

    2) Being an atheist, it is my job to decide who gets compassion because without God there is no other source of compassion. If we don’t love pedophiles, child molesters, and the victims of child molesters, then no one else will.

    Like

  23. Johnny says:

    Jonathan, dude, mate, …you’re crossing a line there that shouldn’t be crossed. Whilest point 1) may be true, still they’d have a hard time getting into heaven or near Jesus without changing their hearts completely, something which is apparently difficult for them to do.(So say shrinks)

    You see, respectfully, I think your missing here that religion and religious belief and faith are all carried in the heart, (or in the soul if you wish), and having that heart crowded by what a pedophile thinks makes it extremely difficult to be like Jesus of Nazareth ie the bloke, Son of God, who will judge us to let us into heaven or send us elsewhere.

    I also disagree completely with your compassion statement there (2) because we do have that compassion even though I tell people that peodophile inclinations is a sin, and homosexual thoughts are also sin. This doesn’t make me bigoted, I just define what I see God preaching about sins or right v wrong. But the compassion is still there when we say “Go and sin no more” or “there’s a better way to happiness” . The uncompassionate just wouldn’t care! Ah, & please note that we hold adultery and child abuse at a more serious sin level than homosexuality -that is that adultery is worse than gay sin- mainly because of the inocent being affected: family in adultery especially unborn children and of course children in the child abuse cases. People think we have things different, because many staights are shocked at what gays do, but the true is different; adultery is much worse than homosexuality.

    Like

  24. Whilest point 1) may be true, still they’d have a hard time getting into heaven or near Jesus without changing their hearts completely, something which is apparently difficult for them to do.(So say shrinks)

    I also disagree completely with your compassion statement there (2) because we do have that compassion even though I tell people that peodophile inclinations is a sin, and homosexual thoughts are also sin. This doesn’t make me bigoted, I just define what I see God preaching about sins or right v wrong.

    How do you explain homosexuality and pedophilia? Are they the product of a choice? If so, when was that choice made? If not, are they a trial sent by God?

    I’m sorry to be the one to tell you (OK, maybe not), but your views are bigoted, right up there with black people were less faithful in the preexistence and they will only enter the celestial kingdom as servants. (Bruce R. McConkie and Mark E. Petersen) Denying someone (atheists, people of any sexual orientation, pedophiles, Bill Maher, Elton John) heaven is not an act of compassion. It sounds as though you are trapped in very black and white thinking.

    It’s also frightening that you really think that thoughts are sin, especially those driven so strongly by biology. Not only is that bad doctrine, it’s downright dangerous for your mental health. Do you anticipate being required to purge all sexual thoughts about women other than your wife from your psyche before being allowed into the Celestial Kingdom? I’m assuming so from your statements. Your beliefs would be inconsistent otherwise. Do you expect to do that before the end of your lifetime? Or do you expect a little help when your life is over?

    Ah, & please note that we hold adultery and child abuse at a more serious sin level than homosexuality -that is that adultery is worse than gay sin…

    That’s new Mormon doctrine by me. Never heard that one before. What happened to Spencer W. Kimball’s sin against nature? Things have changed in the seven months since I stopped listening in sacrament meeting. Or perhaps they’re teaching a strange gospel down under.

    I don’t remember any qualifications on the commandment to love our neighbors as ourselves. I don’t remember Jesus saying “except for pedophiles or homosexuals.” If you did love your neighbor as yourself, you would understand how devastating your expectation to go and sin no more really is for homosexuals. For pedophiles, it is unavoidable, yet I still feel empathy for their predicament. When you live a completely celibate, chaste life with no hope for a future outlet to your (hetero)sexuality, then I’ll listen to your sermon about a better way to happiness.

    It’s sad when an atheist has to preach love and forgiveness to the nominal Christian. Atheists for Jesus!

    Like

  25. Johnny says:

    Let’s make this simple.

    1)”How do you explain homosexuality and pedophilia? Are they the product of a choice? If so, when was that choice made?”
    Not choice per se in the ‘choice-born that way’ argument; just temptations which they chose to yield to, ie temptation from old Lucifer.

    2) If not, are they a trial sent by God?
    Definitely not! God doesn’t tempt you to sin but invites you to avoid it.

    3) “Do you anticipate being required to purge all sexual thoughts about women other than your wife from your psyche before being allowed into the Celestial Kingdom”
    Yeap, you’re starting to “see the light” there. It is a high & difficult requirement to reach but didn’t Jesus do that? Is not the kingdom of God a high one? Also, you should try fidelity in mind to your wife and only her (since you seem to imply a different way for mental health?????)

    4) “That’s new Mormon doctrine by me. Never heard that one before.” Not at all; just a statement of fact. Check Handbook -blue one which I’m sure you’re familiar with.

    5) “I don’t remember any qualifications on the commandment to love our neighbors as ourselves. I don’t remember Jesus saying “except for pedophiles or homosexuals.”
    This you just misunderstand. You can love your neighbours even when those neighbours need to be in prison for societys’ safety. But didn’t Jesus himself qualify the practicing pedophile by saying something about a Rock around their necks or something? Remember? Yet they are still granted forgiveness and re-admitted to the church and let into the Temple once this ‘problem’ is overcome and forgiveness obtained…….Is that not love thy neighbour by forgiving him his?

    6) “When you live a completely celibate, chaste life”
    Have done so!!, many years as a single man. And would do again if widowed or divorced.

    I noticed that you ignored my comments of “religion and religious belief and faith are all carried in the heart”. And that you’ve chosen to insult again with the ‘bigot’ remarks because I don’t agree with you??? Why??? No need to answer that.

    And what is actually sad is that some people, like you, not only reject God’s laws for themselves but argue against it for others as you do defending the pedophile person here. And off course it’s sad you reject what Gods’ voice says today through Hinkley (which evidently you knew about once in your life) But only sad

    Like

  26. azteclady says:

    As Natalie said earlier, I’m very very VERY glad that it’s not my place to judge what will happen to other people’s souls, after their deaths.

    Jonathan, I understand what you mean regarding compassion *IF* there is no God. Indeed, what could be closer to true Christian compassion and love than being able to feel compassion for those who harm others, when you think they’ll face no eternal consequences for said harm?

    But here’s the thing–for me. Compassion does not mean FREE PASS. Forgiveness doesn’t mean “I have no problem with your actions.” And repentance doesn’t equal empty words.

    A bit off topic, and yet relevant to this… Have you seen the movie “The Woodsman”? (http://imdb.com/title/tt0361127/plotsummary). In one line: a convicted pedophile out on parole after 12 years, trying to reenter society. Roger Ebert has an extremely insightful review on his website (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050106/REVIEWS/50103001/1023)
    I’m going to quote three short excerpts from it.

    Talking about the main character, Ebert says: “Maybe he will make it and maybe he will not. He has a deep compulsion, which is probably innate, and a belief that his behavior is wrong. That belief will not necessarily keep him from repeating it. Most of us have sexual desires within the areas accepted by society, and so never reflect that we did not choose them, but simply grew up and found that they were there.” (I love this last sentence.)

    Ebert goes on: “It is not the pedophile that is evil, but the pedophilia. That is true of all sins and crimes and those tempted to perform them: It is not that we are capable of transgression that condemns us, but that we are willing.”

    The review ends with this reflection: “We are quick to forgive our own trespasses, slower to forgive those of others. The challenge of a moral life is to do nothing that needs forgiveness. In that sense, we’re all out on parole.”

    The Gospels tell us that Jesus said, “He who is free of sin may throw the first stone.” I wonder how many of the utterly self-righteous, they who KNOW the mind and will of God, would be truly free of the sins they so willingly condemn in their fellow human beings.

    Like

  27. 1)”How do you explain homosexuality and pedophilia? Are they the product of a choice? If so, when was that choice made?”
    Not choice per se in the ‘choice-born that way’ argument; just temptations which they chose to yield to, ie temptation from old Lucifer.

    It’s not as simple as that. What you call “temptations” are sexual attractions experienced as intimately you experience your own heterosexuality. If they didn’t choose to have those attractions, then they cannot be held responsible for having the attractions. If they cannot be held responsible, then simply having such attractions should not keep them out of the Celestial Kingdom.

    2) If not, are they a trial sent by God?
    Definitely not! God doesn’t tempt you to sin but invites you to avoid it.

    This is inconsistent with what you said in response to the first question. If a person doesn’t choose their temptations, then the temptations are a product of the situation God sent them to, knowing fully that they would be tempted in this way. I imagine it’s like when a parent sends their children to a friend’s house so that they can catch chicken pox from their friend. The parent is then responsible for the infection. Similarly, God is partly responsible for a person’s homosexuality.

    If a child then dies from the chicken pox, the parent is responsible for the death. Similarly, if a person placed in temptation’s path by God falls to that temptation, then God bears some responsibility for the sin.

    3) “Do you anticipate being required to purge all sexual thoughts about women other than your wife from your psyche before being allowed into the Celestial Kingdom”
    Yeap, you’re starting to “see the light” there. It is a high & difficult requirement to reach but didn’t Jesus do that? Is not the kingdom of God a high one? Also, you should try fidelity in mind to your wife and only her (since you seem to imply a different way for mental health?????)

    I suggest that a man can be perfectly faithful to his wife yet feel sexual attractions to other women. If sexual attractions are a temptation placed in one’s mind by Satan, then the person bears no responsibility for the presence of the attraction. Temptations cannot be a sin. Otherwise, how could Jesus be tempted yet sinless. The temptation to sin is not itself a sin.

    Why then does someone need to repent of sexual temptations before entering the Celestial Kingdom?

    You neglected to answer these questions:

    “Do you expect to do that before the end of your lifetime? Or do you expect a little help when your life is over?”

    If you expect that you will be rid of sexual attractions to other women before the end of your life, then you are on the road to disappointment or mental ill health. There is a pornography problem in the church in part because of such high expectations. Attraction to pornography creates guilt. Shame actually causes a person to focus on the reason for the shame. That focus leads to more shame. A vicious cycle.

    If you instead expect to get a little help, then how is your situation different than that of a homosexual or pedophile? Shouldn’t you allow them the same space to receive help after this life is over? Why would you be so shocked to see them in heaven?

    4) “That’s new Mormon doctrine by me. Never heard that one before.” Not at all; just a statement of fact. Check Handbook -blue one which I’m sure you’re familiar with.

    Actually, I’m not privy to the Handbook of Instructions, especially now that I resigned my callings. If that policy is in the handbook, then church leaders have changed their tune. If so, then I’ll give them some praise. I’ll withhold my applause for greater progress.

    5) “I don’t remember any qualifications on the commandment to love our neighbors as ourselves. I don’t remember Jesus saying “except for pedophiles or homosexuals.”
    This you just misunderstand. You can love your neighbours even when those neighbours need to be in prison for societys’ safety. But didn’t Jesus himself qualify the practicing pedophile by saying something about a Rock around their necks or something? Remember? Yet they are still granted forgiveness and re-admitted to the church and let into the Temple once this ‘problem’ is overcome and forgiveness obtained…….Is that not love thy neighbour by forgiving him his?

    I agree. 🙂

    For the record, having compassion on a child molester doesn’t mean a free pass, as azteclady put it. Molesters should be punished and we should protect ourselves from them. But this punishment should be informed by compassion for the tragic course of their lives, not by the all too easy gut reaction of disgust and hatred.

    6) “When you live a completely celibate, chaste life”
    Have done so!!, many years as a single man. And would do again if widowed or divorced.

    I’m asking for you to swear off all women now and forever. Never touch another woman sexually again. If you feel an attraction to a woman, don’t act on it. Don’t sleep in the same bed as your wife. Move out, in fact. Don’t date. Don’t flirt. Don’t even consider having a relationship beyond platonic friendship. I’m asking you to do that today. Then, I’ll listen to your sermon. Until then, you have no right to expect others to take an equivalent course of action.

    I noticed that you ignored my comments of “religion and religious belief and faith are all carried in the heart”. And that you’ve chosen to insult again with the ‘bigot’ remarks because I don’t agree with you??? Why??? No need to answer that.

    Fair enough. I’ll answer by asking a question: who put those inclinations in the heart of the pedophile? I have a simple rule in my house: whoever makes the mess is responsible for cleaning up the mess.

    Calling your beliefs bigoted isn’t an insult (although you may feel insulted) because they are beliefs and can be changed. I’m calling a spade a spade. Your beliefs are bigoted. I cut you a little slack because these are the teachings of the church that you belong to, if that counts for anything. 🙂

    The Mormon doctrines and attitudes toward homosexuality show a deep lack of empathy. At best, they show empathy in tension with loyalty to cultural tradions. Sexual molestation has somehow gotten more of a pass with the church. Go figure.

    And what is actually sad is that some people, like you, not only reject God’s laws for themselves but argue against it for others as you do defending the pedophile person here. And off course it’s sad you reject what Gods’ voice says today through Hinkley (which evidently you knew about once in your life) But only sad

    I argue against what you assert to be God’s law because it lacks compassion. If God came down to me tomorrow, laid down these same laws, but didn’t demonstrate how they really are compassionate, then I would still call the laws bigoted. That is unless God was threatening to send me to Hell. A man has his limits.

    Why should I believe that Gordon B. Hinckley speaks for God or knows the mind of God? God has never communicated this fact to me (despite many prayers and pleadings), and I see no credible evidence that this is true, so I feel no responsibility to accept this as true.

    Like

  28. azteclady,

    Thanks for the recommendation. I just put it in my Netflix queue.

    Like

  29. Pingback: Green Oasis » God Kills Compassion

  30. Johnny says:

    Wow, azteclady, ????? I actually agree with you on something????? On the compassion bit?????????I must be off today???? exept that we don’t throw stones here just excommunicate after confirming prayer…….wow, I know, I know….going off again………………sorry!!!!!

    And Jonathan, while reading your comments I just think to myself, yeap, another one trying to reason out a place for calling homosexuality just OK and not a sin. Off course you can reason backwards to make pedophilia not a sin either, but nope…..definitely pseudo-logic there; calling a half full glass just half emply!!!

    You’re text: “What you call “temptations” are sexual attractions experienced as intimately you experience your own heterosexuality.”……………..well, nice, nice way to justify old Lucifer and give him a break………….but, nope, temptation is temptation since I can be attracted to my wife without any temptations there (Satan would tempt me away actually)

    And this:
    ” If a person doesn’t choose their temptations, then the temptations are a product of the situation God sent them to” ………………well, again nope…. Pseudo-logic here, ie false logic. God isn’t to blame for everything wrong and temptations are just that: temptations from those on Lucifer’s side….ie Satan and his followers who are lots talking to you saying…..”see that hot gay over there, nice body, nice abbs”…..

    And this:
    “Sexual molestation has somehow gotten more of a pass with the church. Go figure.”……….
    Totally false and total myth!! When a child molester is discovered we all get rid of them as quickly as possible as all leaders -Bishopric, Stake presidencies- are all married and 99% are fathers who will protect their own kids. You obviously only look at internet stories about this but you are dead wrong there, mate. Molestation is not overlooked or ‘gotten more of a pass’. Look the repented gay is rebaptised and that’s it, new again, -the repented pedophile has a permanent anotation on their church records so as to keep them away from children, although they’re accepted as repented.

    Look just take a look into God’s way……homosexual, nope can’t get into heavan according to God, if actively so; Oh, and did the Ten Commandments say “Thou shalt not bang your male collegues” but did mention adultery?…………….ahjjhh, I’m going off here and need to get back to work.

    Last of all Temptation is not a sin in itself as you correctly point out, but that doesn’t mean that being tempted to shagg your male friends is natural,….’God made me that way’…….’just normal’…….nope, never was. Sodom & Gomorra way never was. And as to celestial kingdom…well I could find Bill Clinton there eventually if he gets over this chasing younger skirts thing!!! but may also, well, probably will find these REPENTED pedophiles who saw the error of their ways and changed their life around after having done the ‘gone and sin no more’ thing and became Christ like in their hearts and minds. Just maybe because it seems to be a hard thing for them to change…………..as it is for gays also, of course.

    Like

  31. azteclady says:

    Johnny, you can’t agree with me on the compassion issue–because I happen to agree with Jonathan Blake, of whom you keep saying that he’s “another one trying to rationalize sin.”

    I believe, DEAR, that you do have some serious issues with both reading comprehension and logic.

    Like

  32. Johnny says:

    Oh, my my. Its 1:30am here, I can’t sleep and you’re still calling me ‘dear’ , now in capital letters. wow!!

    What you wrote: “But here’s the thing–for me. Compassion does not mean FREE PASS. Forgiveness doesn’t mean “I have no problem with your actions.” And repentance doesn’t equal empty words.”

    That doesn’t agree with Jonathan’s arguments of before ……….(how’s that for comprehension & logic!!!) And I think that small paragraph is well written and well said, & I do agree with you, there at least.

    But, I still agree with you, again, because yeap I must have some serious issues with reading ….since I keep reading what you write!!!!!!!

    Like

  33. And Jonathan, while reading your comments I just think to myself, yeap, another one trying to reason out a place for calling homosexuality just OK and not a sin. Off course you can reason backwards to make pedophilia not a sin either, but nope…..definitely pseudo-logic there; calling a half full glass just half emply!!!

    Have you ever wondered why I want to take homosexuality off the list of sins? I don’t have any same-sex attractions as far as I know, so why should I care? It wouldn’t benefit me personally.

    It would be very easy to dismiss my arguments by saying that I know that God’s Law as understood my Mormonism is the truth but that I just want to be able to sin like Hugh Hefner. That would allow you to go on believing your comfortable beliefs without engaging what I’ve actually said. You can label my arguments pseudo-logic. That would help you ignore them without really demonstrating where my logic is flawed. You can always fall back on “God said thus” and no amount of thinking on my part is required. That would be easy.

    Or you could actually engage what I say and face reality instead of comforting illusions.

    To answer my earlier question, perhaps I don’t think homosexuality is a sin because I have empathy for those who are stigmatized for something they didn’t choose. We all have a right to find the most happiness that we can in this short life. Denying the reality of your own sexuality is not a good strategy to find happiness.

    Off course you can reason backwards to make pedophilia not a sin either, but nope…..definitely pseudo-logic there; calling a half full glass just half emply!!!

    There’s a simple reason acting on pedophillic attractions is different than homosexual activity: the object of the attraction cannot give mature consent because they are a child. So I agree. Justifying child molestation would be illogical given that we want everyone to be in charge of their own bodies.

    ” If a person doesn’t choose their temptations, then the temptations are a product of the situation God sent them to” ………………well, again nope…. Pseudo-logic here, ie false logic. God isn’t to blame for everything wrong and temptations are just that: temptations from those on Lucifer’s side….ie Satan and his followers who are lots talking to you saying…..”see that hot gay over there, nice body, nice abbs”…..

    Why isn’t God to blame? If a father knowingly sent his child into a rave where the child ODs and dies, isn’t the father partially to blame? How is that different than Father sending us into this demonic club scene known as mortality? Why does he bear no responsibility for the circumstances of our birth?

    “Sexual molestation has somehow gotten more of a pass with the church. Go figure.”……….
    Totally false and total myth!! When a child molester is discovered we all get rid of them as quickly as possible as all leaders -Bishopric, Stake presidencies- are all married and 99% are fathers who will protect their own kids. You obviously only look at internet stories about this but you are dead wrong there, mate. Molestation is not overlooked or ‘gotten more of a pass’.

    It was a bit of a low blow, I admit. The LDS church deserves some praise for the reforms that they’ve put in place recently. This hasn’t always been so, however. For many years, and still to this day, child molesters could repent and return to full activity. Homosexuals not so.

    Look the repented gay is rebaptised and that’s it, new again, -the repented pedophile has a permanent anotation on their church records so as to keep them away from children, although they’re accepted as repented.

    What do you mean by “repented gay”? Does this mean someone who no longer has same-sex attractions?

    In any case, a “repented gay” is not accepted back into full fellowship. They can’t serve as a missionary, for example. And since repentance will not generally change sexual orientation, the only way they can become bishop and so on is if they lie to themselves and everyone else to get married.

    Last of all Temptation is not a sin in itself as you correctly point out,

    Glad we agree on something. Does that make three things so far? 🙂

    but that doesn’t mean that being tempted to shagg your male friends is natural,….’God made me that way’…….’just normal’…….nope, never was. Sodom & Gomorra way never was.

    Evidence says otherwise. More and more evidence is mounting that homosexuality is a product of biology, therefore natural.

    And as to celestial kingdom…well I could find Bill Clinton there eventually if he gets over this chasing younger skirts thing!!! but may also, well, probably will find these REPENTED pedophiles who saw the error of their ways and changed their life around after having done the ‘gone and sin no more’ thing and became Christ like in their hearts and minds. Just maybe because it seems to be a hard thing for them to change…………..as it is for gays also, of course.

    Your responses continue to show a lack of empathy for your fellow human beings. Your attitude seems to be one of “Follow God’s Law (according to me) or tough nuts!” If this is your attitude, then I’ll feel justified in calling Mormon attitudes lacking in compassion and bigoted.

    Like

  34. azteclady says:

    Jonathan, I want to address something you’ve said a couple of times, regarding God’s responsibility on the matter of temptation and sin.

    Way back when I started middle school (something like 30yrs ago), I asked one of my Theology teachers (Catholic school in Mexico equals at least one hour of theology a week, by the way). I asked her, “If God created EVERYTHING, didn’t He created evil?” Got kicked of the class for the rest of the school year (which wasn’t a bad thing, more time to read), but to this day no one has answered that question to my satisfaction… and so I’ve come to believe that the answer is “Yes, He did.”

    I do not presume to understand WHY He would have done so, but evil DOES exist, and if God *did* create everything… well, there you go.

    Like

  35. azteclady,

    All the more reason for God to cut us sinners some slack. 🙂

    Thanks, that helps me see where you’re coming from.

    Like

  36. Johnny,

    Insofar as I’ve made my remarks a personal attack, I regret them and I apologize.

    I don’t regret my beliefs, however. 🙂

    Like

  37. Johhny says:

    No worries mate!

    No offense here.

    I do, though, disagree with both your reasoning and your beliefs as they apply to pedophilia and same sex attraction. This is because my attitude is “follow Gods’ Law -according to God; (not me). And God is clear in both these matters.

    Also I have a problem with your reasoning there. Look you’ve told me to live celibate until I die and then ‘lecture’ to you (remember? after my saying that I was celibate until marriage?) but then you can lecture me on what it is like for pedophiles and homosexuals but you aren’t either one? Problem logic there!

    In conclusion: God does cut sinners some slack, actually lots thanks to Jesus’ work and prayer and so on which you should remember from your mormon past?
    Oh, and on that ‘Evil’ created thing, the answer is in ‘free agency’, remember? (for azteclady’s twisted logic)

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s