Beyond Mitt's Underwear: Part 3: The Preexistence, Creation, and Plan for Salvation
Father in Heaven (Elohiem) and His wives live near the star called Kolob on a pair of magic stones. They were once mortal humans just like we are and have retained their physical bodies of flesh and bone, but instead of blood they have “spirit matter, a substance which is more refined and pure and glorious than blood”. At the time of creation
( Read more... )
Wait, wait. You're now taking the position that the prophets were wrong, and that their divinely inspired scripture was, in fact, incorrect? Because those dudes *were* the prophets, and they *did* say that dark skin indicated unrepented sin and a lack of righteousness, and they *did* say that a more righteous person would become more white.
By saying that was wrong, you've neatly skewered yourself on the *other* horn of your dilemma. Since you argue that the prophets can be wrong and the scriptures can be false, you have the problem of "what would you do if the prophet reinstated these false and wrong scriptures?" replacing "what would you do if God once again told you to do evil?"
If you see hate, it is because you have hate in your heart.
Or it's because hate really is there. I could be the nicest least-hateful person on the planet, and the Mormon church would still be rabidly and irrationally homophobic. Sometimes, things really *are* real, external to your perception.
FACT: We teach love towards our fellow man. This will never change, ever.
Except that's not fact. You demonstrably do not currently teach love towards your fellow man, even with your unfortunate choice of euphemism laid aside. And you demonstrably did not teach it in the past, ever, when you taught that non-white people were sinful and unworthy and how they would be made white on salvation.
And it demonstrably *has* changed - when your church attempted to correct for it's racist past and decided that non-white people were, in fact, among the neighbours Jesus told them to love, for example, you started teaching a little more love to your fellow man than you did before.
It is the absolute core of the Gospel.
Perhaps, but, and this is important, *you can't justify or defend that claim intelligibly*.
The claim *can* be defended, but you can't do it. You can't even follow the argument well enough to point to someone who *can* make the claim.
And you can't even begin to address the question-begging that is inherent in the term "the Gospel".
While you may not perceive our actions as loving,
Because they are indefensibly not, and because you can't even *mount* the failed defense that others have tried.
you are emotionally predisposed against religion in general,
"Rationally post-disposed" against religion in general, in fact. I, unlike you, have considered the claims of religions, plural, on their merits.
I, unlike you, can explain what each religion believes and where those claims fall short.
I, unlike you, can demonstrate how to test the claims of a religion - and I, unlike you, can explain why untestable claims are irrelevant, and understand both the tests and the dismissal of the untestable.
and Mormons in particular (it seems)
No. You just see that because you argue about Mormonism with me, and I know more about Mormonism than you do. If you were a Scientologist arguing with me, you'd think I was specifically predisposed to dislike Scientologists. It would be for the same reasons, too: I can explain the OT3+ Tech and why they're wrong better than you can understand them at all.
Get rid of your own hate and see if you can perceive things more clearly.
Not hate, pity. You're bad at theology, even your own.
Reply
Leave a comment