Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - mtbikemom

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 13
121
Rants and Stuff / Re: General Religious discussion
« on: July 08, 2009, 09:18:24 PM »
Quote from: mtlhddoc2 on July 08, 2009, 07:02:41 PM
explain the system of "works" - for example, would Bill Gates get a better place in heaven because he gave more? Or would a poor widower working two jobs to support his 4 children get more for leaving a bigger than normal tip for a waitress? How do you quantify your "works"?

Don't know and don't care.  My own works are all I really need to concern myself with.  Are they things God would have me to do?  Then they are good and will accrue for eternity.  I need a close relationship with Him to be able to discern this, though.

It's quite the deal, when you think about it.  God gives the strength and power to do His work on earth and we get the reward.  It's a win-win.

122
Rants and Stuff / Re: General Religious discussion
« on: July 08, 2009, 02:17:28 PM »
Quote from: The Jade Knight on July 08, 2009, 09:25:56 AM
Quote from: mtbikemom on July 08, 2009, 12:21:59 AM
All religions do not teach equality of women in the afterlife, faith-based salvation (most of them require works of various kinds to achieve Nirvana, etc . . . )

You know, Christianity implies the requirement of Works (James is quite clear on this).  Of course, it's not the works that save, but the works are a necessary part of the faith.  Muslims believe as much.

James says that "faith without works is dead" but not that a redeemed life devoid of works necessarily separates one from the "true vine."  Sometimes good works are so hidden that only God knows of them, like the agoraphobic who prays constantly and quietly.  "Man sees the outward things, God sees the heart."  Please pardon my paraphrase.

The same non-denominational theological system that taught me OSAS, which doctrine i now reject, also taught that works are not necessary for salvation (a careful reading of the book of Romans brought Martin Luther to a similar conclusion) and I have not yet rejected that interpretation.  I could be wrong, though.  A true lack of good works, I believe, is a signal that true repentance has not occurred and that said pew-warmer may need to be evangelized, even though he is a member in good standing.  That is a tough thing to do, even more difficult than diving into this thread with all my humble opinions.

Although the man who buried his talents was "cast into the outer darkness (hell, I believe).  There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." Matt. 25:30  This seems to support your view, that good works are necessary for salvation (did I misunderstand you?), at least for the best kind of salvation, but it could still also mean that this man was never saved and showed that by his lack of productivity.  Problem is, my way of thinking often leads to spiritual laziness, but I still believe that spiritual deadness does not keeps a person from all the fullness of heaven if they have truly repented.  They will just go with less treasure, which we are told we can build up while on the earth.

BTW, no one has answered my question about how exactly one gets to the higher levels of heaven that you have described.   I am not baiting you here, I truly do not know.  And are women given the same eternal inheritance, according to your Mormon scriptures, as men?  Co-inheritors?   

123
Rants and Stuff / Re: General Religious discussion
« on: July 08, 2009, 01:43:08 PM »
Quote from: sortitus on July 08, 2009, 02:24:59 AM
How about this: I will promise to read this book and ponder it well if you promise to read the Book of Mormon with an open mind and pray earnestly about it. I bet that most people here would agree to that arrangement, on our individual honors.

You're on!  I have already read about a quarter of it, but I will get a copy and read more of it accompanied by sincere prayer.  I only ask that you do the same and, if possible, don't comment until you have finished the whole thing.  If you are near Salt Lake City, you can even look up some of his documentation for yourself!  With my daughter's current series of illnesses, I am home-bound much more than expected this summer.  I covet your prayers.  Fortunately, there is some great singletrack just minutes from my house. 

124
Rants and Stuff / Re: General Religious discussion
« on: July 08, 2009, 01:29:32 PM »
Quote from: The Jade Knight on July 08, 2009, 09:22:29 AM
Quote from: mtbikemom on July 07, 2009, 07:10:36 PM
I personally believe that any Mormon who counts Jesus death as payment for their sin and has repented in their heart is going to the same place as me.

Then you believe good Latter-day Saints will be going to your heaven, and good Latter-day Saints believe that you will be going to your heaven.  So what's the problem?

The answer to this lies in things we will discuss apart from this forum, as you have requested.

125
Rants and Stuff / Re: General Religious discussion
« on: July 08, 2009, 01:27:56 PM »
Quote from: Ookla The Mok on July 08, 2009, 06:25:22 AM
mtbikemom, Jade Knight said he already read the book.

origamikaren (my wife) says the subtitle told her what she needed to know, i.e. that it was about the Mountain Meadows Massacre and what about Brigham Young you (mtbikemom) thought was objectionable. She quoted the review to show that there are legitimate questions about the author's scholarship, not only from the people in this forum.

Meanwhile did you even read the rest of her post?

Unless I missed something, Jade Knight did not say he read the book, he said that I don't know if he did or did not, which is true.  I am not yet omniscient, darn it all.  And, yes, to further exploit the contrast between our approach to literary content, I read every word of Mrs. Ookla's post.  Reaves did a nice job commenting on certain items in the body of her post, so I did not feel the need to add anything.  Plus, one of my kids is a bit sick and I'm having a hard time keeping up with all of you. 

I would so love to discuss some of the points that Mr. Bagley supports with primary sources from the LDS temple archives and personal interviews that had not been available to Mrs. Juanita Brooks.  His is the most impartial and well-researched account of the events that led up to and, most notably, the cover-up of the details of the massacre, as far as I can tell.  Refusing to read this book is akin to a Catholic refusing to believe that there have been problems with child molestation in the priesthood, despite all the evidence.  If I discovered that my church had lied in any point in their history, I would want to know and I would look elsewhere for spiritual authority if I decided it was true. 

That is much easier for me to say, having actually been in that situation and having once rebelled against my mostly-Catholic family partly because of things I saw in our local diocese years ago.  My family was not as religious, not as tightly-knit and not as likely to be really devastated with my declaration of anti-religious sentiment (I called myself an atheist then) as many of yours probably are.  It's the reason my current Mormon friends have so far taken the same tack as your lovely Karen.  They would rather be ignorant than be educated and risk rocking  the boat (there I go again with my word picture) with their Mormon relatives.  We are still friends and they even seem grateful that I care enough for them to challenge them, but they will not engage with me intellectually. 

I hesitate to foment any strife between married people, but if I had been stopped after reading certain Amazon reviews of Brandon's books, I would have  denied myself much that has been delightful and satisfying and I would never have found a place to waste my time as productively as this! 

126
Rants and Stuff / Re: General Religious discussion
« on: July 08, 2009, 02:38:40 AM »
Quote from: mtlhddoc2 on July 08, 2009, 02:06:09 AM
give me just ONE biblical site which is not widely believed to exist, (and a statement from someone who has said "that does not exist!" and have his statement widely accepted).

There are several sites and events that the Bible mentions which have been used (early 20th century) as examples of why the biblical record cannot be trusted.  They were later excavated and the critics just grumbled about something else.  Remind you of anyone?

I may choose to document these for you, but grow tired of your careless lack of referencing in your opinions.  I doubt you will read it, but Michael Behe in his excellent book Darwin's Black Box lists these.   My copy is currently on loan.  And partisan is not necessarily wrong.  Unless it is Nancy Pelosi.

127
Rants and Stuff / Re: General Religious discussion
« on: July 08, 2009, 12:32:20 AM »
Quote from: origamikaren on July 07, 2009, 04:42:31 AM
Since mtbikemom keeps harping on the Blood of the Prophets book, I decided to look it up and see what it's about. The subtitle told me all I needed to know

Since Ms. origami-san (or is it -sama?) hasn't read the book in question and relies on an Amazon review for her opinions, I think that's all I really need to know.  We all know how important it is to choose an Amazon review that agrees with our biases as a sign of good scholarship. 

This has been my unfortunate experience so far with the sweet-but-lazy Mormon friends I have mentioned.  I thought that some of you might be different, but not so far.  Restore my faith, most noble Jade Knight!  Someone read the first half at least before commenting!  I don't even recommend reading the nitty gritty part; it is too graphic by far.

128
Rants and Stuff / Re: General Religious discussion
« on: July 08, 2009, 12:21:59 AM »
Hey, buddy, long time-no argue!

Quote from: mtlhddoc2 on July 07, 2009, 07:25:50 PM
Quick point...  what ancient cities have they dug up that were not mentioned in other texts besides the bible? Did they dig up Atlantis while I was sleeping?

   http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2020  is a nice article about the problems and benefits of archaeology in relation to Biblical sites.  It corroborates my original statement ad adds more, some of which you will like, I think.

   I may or may not research for you about cities not mentioned outside the biblical record, but I would rather comment on your statement that all the major religions have the same basic beliefs - believing and accepting is fine and dandy, but if you don't actually try and follow the path, and regret and attempt to repent your mistakes, you go see the other guy.  All religions do not teach equality of women in the afterlife, faith-based salvation (most of them require works of various kinds to achieve Nirvana, etc . . . ) or substitutionary sacrifice for sin.  Lumping all religions into a neat box that you can then reject out of hand is probably satisfying, but not very scholarly.  Not to mention dangerous if one of them turns out to be true!

129
Rants and Stuff / Re: General Religious discussion
« on: July 07, 2009, 07:10:36 PM »
Quote from: sortitus on July 07, 2009, 08:55:40 AM
The waterfall metaphor is interesting, but still assumes that you have irrefutable evidence. More accurate would be to say that those warning of the waterfall believe that they have power that enables them to predict the future. Everyone is in the boat in the first place and cannot avoid the waterfall. They can only protect themselves as best they can in case of an accident.

To further belabor my imperfect metaphor (which I borrowed from Ray Comfort of The Ambassador's Alliance), I do not have evidence, but confident faith which is a gift of the Spirit.  My faith is based on Biblical prophesy, which has so far never been proved false in any instance (they keep digging up ancient cities that the Bible speaks of and shutting up the skeptics) and by the lives of people I know who have abandoned the doomed-but-pleasant boat-ride-to-destruction and find themselves safe on the shore.  Safe for all eternity! 

   The shore (or bridge, to borrow from Reaves) is not easy, sometimes downright unpleasant, but it leads to all things good for eternity.  "For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us."  (Romans 8:18)  There is nothing in the Bible which speaks of different levels of glory, btw, for different kinds of believers.  We are all going to be "co-inheritors with Christ," not just those who have been given some new revelation.  I personally believe that any Mormon who counts Jesus death as payment for their sin and has repented in their heart is going to the same place as me. 

The pleasant cruise, which most are choosing and which seems so logical and right, reminds me of this verse in Paul's letter to the Thessalonians (5:3): "For when they say, 'Peace and safety!' then sudden destruction comes upon them . . . and they shall not escape."  This is written in the context of the "day of the Lord," which day is the day of our death as well as His return.

I was incorrect when I attributed this statement to Jesus, but we believe that "every word" of the Bible is "God-breathed" as it claims to be, so when James wrote that "pure and undefiled religion before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world," he was speaking for God.  (James 1:27)

Since you claim to be interested in religion, dear Sort, please tell me.  Does this characterize your life?  I seek to make you temporarily miserable because I truly care about you, risking the wrath of Knights and dread Ooklas!  We try to "be perfect as he is perfect" but we fail every time.  God wants us to fail and acknowledge our failure so that we ask for His help.  He will not force His way in, but gives everyone a chance.  Until we "stand on that beautiful shore" (from a hymn I've heard somewhere), asking forgiveness in humility, we cannot even begin to approach true religion. 

   The rich young ruler (Luke 18:18-27) probably had better morals and ethics than any of us, but walked away rejecting Jesus' free gift because he could not give up all his comforts.  He was trying to tell Him who sees into our hearts, much like you have, that he had done everything right, or at least right enough, that he had lived well and planned to keep on doing it, but did not realize that his possessions had become his idol.  He wanted to stay in the boat and avoid the consequences, but that is not possible. 

   "Look at all these great, interesting, carefree people in my boat!" one might say.  "Look at all those ridiculous Jesus freaks waving their hands over there and telling me to get out of the boat, get all wet and join them.  That's crazy!"  Unless, in fact, there is a waterfall somewhere ahead and there is no surviving the plunge.  And there is rarely time for last-minute repentance.

130
Rants and Stuff / Re: General Religious discussion
« on: July 07, 2009, 06:07:04 PM »
Quote from: The Jade Knight on July 07, 2009, 07:03:54 AM
I will also repeat here that we're not going to devolve this thread into a religious scripture-bashing tit-for-tat which is most likely to turn into a flame war.  If you'd like to discuss this particular issue with me separately via PM or over AIM, you are welcome to; I would personally prefer IM; it's quicker.

What, and deprive all those lurker-types the fruits of my insightful research?  O.K., O.K., we'll continue this by PM.  And you can tell me where to send your pie.  Or cake . . .

131
Rants and Stuff / Re: Pie VS Cake: The Official Thread
« on: July 06, 2009, 11:25:16 PM »
French Silk Pie:

Toast a bunch of shredded coconut, cool, add melted butter and sugar and pat into a pie crust. (sorry, I never measure)  Or pre-bake a Marie Callender's or Pet Ritz pie shell and cool.

Plop some homemade chocolate mousse, flavored with vanilla extract or Grand Marnier, into pie shell and top with freshly whipped heavy cream.  Shave dark baker's chocolate all over the top and chill a few hours.  It's so good it's almost a cake!




132
Rants and Stuff / Re: General Religious discussion
« on: July 06, 2009, 11:16:32 PM »
So, the lake of fire is a metaphor or a poetic device, not a real thing?  (Made originally for the devil and his angels, not for man, btw . . . but some choose it by rejecting the free gift of God.  God never sent anyone to hell, they send themselves.)  How about "weeping and gnashing of teeth?"  And why did Jesus speak more about hell, as a really awful, real place, than he did about heaven, also as a real place?  Check it for yourself.  One cannot rationally accept heaven and reject hell without rejecting what Jesus taught.

How can it not be obvious that the writings that you consider holy and indisputable have re-interpreted and changed this most basic of Jesus's teachings, our eternal destiny.  Whoever you think Jesus is and was, I would like to state this unequivocally and I can prove it to all who are really interested: The Bible and the LDS Church's scriptures teach different and, in some major places, opposing doctrines.  The Book of Mormon is your waterfall and there is no gentle pond at the bottom, dear ones.  The "scout" that you are relying on was unreliable.  While Mormons are some of my favorite people in the whole world, I believe this is true and important and millions of mainline Christians agree.  I'm just the one with the great big mouth on your forum.  Call me Jonah, though I am not nearly as big a jerk.  I'd bake you a pie or a cake if I could! ;)

Bagley's aforementioned book does a much better job than I could ever do explaining some foundational things from which I arrive at my conclusions about Smith and Young.  Bagley is no anti-Mormon and neither was Juanita Brooks.  These are pure historians who simply tried to tell the truth and ask some important questions.  Please read their books, but especially Will Bagley's Blood of the Prophets.  He is not even a born-again Christian! 

Ookla, I left out some details for simplicity's sake, but they are important.  My salvation story, which I will not bore you with, includes a vision experience and a lot of crying.  I had been agreeing with the Bible, going to church and acting like a Christian, or what I thought was a Christian, for many months before I realized I was missing the most important thing: realizing that all my sins had put Jesus on the cross just as much as the worst sinner's.  At that moment, I gave my life to him completely (asking forgiveness and turning from my sin) and he has been changing me ever since, guiding me and actively loving me, continuing to bless me with "the fellowship of his sufferings."

 Many born-agains believe OSAS (once saved, always saved), but I do not.  We are allowed such disagreements, I believe, but I also believe that certain egregious sins (there are several lists in the New Testament) separate one from the "True Vine" and that heartfelt repentance is necessary once again in order to be restored to salvation.  This is not a popular modern belief and, I believe, is the excuse many so-called believers use to practice all kinds of lawlessness (from gambling to extortion to fornication . . . see 1 Cor. 6:9 & 10 for more), yet be protected by one prayer they might have said at a young age.  On that one point, I am more Mormon than modern Christian!

So, if you can tell me, are there any special things that one must do, ceremonies or such, to reach the Mormon's better heaven rather than the lesser one that you believe I am headed for?  You don't have to describe them unless you really want to.  Do the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, etc . . . supersede the Old and New Testaments when there are conflicts?  Is my statement that there are disagreements between the two another point of unreconcilable contention?  Just curious.




133
Brandon Sanderson / Re: Official Typos Thread -- All of Brandon's books
« on: July 05, 2009, 11:17:59 PM »
Ooh, I just noticed this thread and will add my notes.  I'll try to delete the redundant ones.  The page numbers are from the digitally downloaded first edition:

p.22, pp.4, s. 4 "though" should be through
p.65, pp.8, s.4: all (the) times
p.66, pp.6: "If" should be since?
p.66, pp.5, last s.: "but (he) knew"
p.84, pp.11: "drive him (to)"
p. 92, complete pp.3, s.2 : confusing
p.96, pp. 9, s.3: "with (the) same"
p. 130, pp.6, s.3: "barely" should be barreling
p.208, pp.2, s.4: "rapped" should be wrapped
p.258, pp.2, s.1: "clinching" should be clenching?
p.271, pp.5, s.3: "know" should be known
p.329, cpp.6, s.4: "want" should be wants
p. 358, bottom pp's: Why does Parlin ask about Jewels' well-being when he has just seen/greeted her?
p.359, pp.12, s.1: "Of one thing" should be One thing
p.394, cpp.4, s.1: "surprised at the speed (of) her own . . ."
p.402, pp.3, s.1: needs a comma between "bowed" and "then"
p.409, pp.4, s.3: ""She'd learned that (the) second day."
p.412, pp.4, s.3: "regardless (of?) her hair"
p.414, pp.3, s.1: comma after "Well"
p.422, pp.8, s.4: "As long as he asked them to (do) something . . ."
p.489, (top) s.1: comma between "gates" and "then
                      s.2: no "and" needed
p.516, cpp 9, s.4: unnecessary word: "under"?
p.518, pp. 4, s.5: too many "if"s


It might be too late for this, but I wish Brandon had not made the fact that Vivenna noted Jewels' security phrase for Clod so obvious by restating it.  The first hint of that (p. 353) was enough for me and made me feel somewhat quick for picking it up. Much better-done than RJ's sometimes too-oblique hints, I think.  The second (p. 358) ruined that feeling, making it much too obvious.  = ]

134
Rants and Stuff / Re: General Religious discussion
« on: July 05, 2009, 10:11:24 PM »
Brave and gentle Jade Knight,

Oh, ὕβρις is hubris.  That hurts my feelings just a little bit, y'know.

Let me ask you this, in answer to your last thoughtful and respectful post, which I truly appreciate:

If some great friends of yours were in a boat, having a wonderful time, floating past you who are safe on the shore and you knew for certain that in a short time they would get to a point in the river's current where it would be impossible for them to avoid a deadly waterfall ahead, which they obviously do not realize, what would you do?  If you wave and smile, not wanting to be the one to ruin  even a few minutes of their pleasant cruise, could you really live with the consequences? No, you run shouting into the water, making an utter fool of yourself for their sakes, and even upset the boat in order to save these people.  You are, after all, a noble Knight!

I believe that when Jesus said that he is the door to heaven, he meant that he alone is the door to heaven.  I also think that "I am the way, the truth and the life" means just that, and a good understanding of Greek supports the universally-held Christian belief that there is no other way to heaven than by faith in his work on the cross as payment for the sins that we all have committed. Carrying these sins, even just a few and no matter how much good we have done, make it impossible to even stand in the presence of God.  Jesus paid the fine and did the time for me and, when I finally realized it, I became a citizen of heaven.  I intend to bring as many souls along with me as possible and don't really care much about unpleasant consequences.

If someone tells me that there is another way to be sure to live in eternal bliss with the creator of the universe, sometimes I will risk hurting their feelings for the sake of their eternal soul.  Not always, much to my shame. 

Question (and I will do the reading you suggested and get back to you about it sometime this summer): What does the LDS church teach about the only way to heaven/salvation/eternal life?  Does your church teach that there more ways than one?  I know I've read about this somewhere, but I'm mostly interested in your personal take on it.
 

135
Rants and Stuff / Re: Pie VS Cake: The Official Thread
« on: July 05, 2009, 09:31:11 PM »
Kaz, dear . . . you would beat up a pie lover who also bakes cakes?  This makes no sense at all! 
I think I could save myself by placing one of my famous from-scratch German Chocolate cakes between me and you, so I am not terribly concerned.  But I think even you would have a hard time resisting a perfect French Silk pie.   = ]

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 13