Forum Rules Update (2017 Feb 23) - Discussion

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
Sunain
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2719
Location: Canada

Re: Forum Rules Update (2017 Feb 23) - Discussion

Post by Sunain »

skmo wrote: September 19th, 2017, 1:48 am
BrianM wrote: February 23rd, 2017, 10:43 pm is not a good fit for anti-Mormons and most likely not a good fit for bitter ex-Mormons....

I would be interested in your feedback, questions, comments, etc..
One thing DESPERATELY now missing, in my opinion, is a statement that doctrines which directly contradict the basic teachings of the LDS gospel are not allowed.

We can disagree about how our political leaders can uphold the Constitution while still being an active LDS member and without failing to be a faithful follower of the restored gospel.
Indeed it is an issue on the forums here currently. Too many people are starting discussions that contradict the basic teachings of the gospel. These debates shouldn't even be open for discussion. The doctrine of Christ is sound and clear.

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Forum Rules Update (2017 Feb 23) - Discussion

Post by freedomforall »

skmo wrote: September 19th, 2017, 1:48 am
BrianM wrote: February 23rd, 2017, 10:43 pm is not a good fit for anti-Mormons and most likely not a good fit for bitter ex-Mormons....

I would be interested in your feedback, questions, comments, etc..
One thing DESPERATELY now missing, in my opinion, is a statement that doctrines which directly contradict the basic teachings of the LDS gospel are not allowed. There were these similar words, but have since been removed. :roll:

We can disagree about how our political leaders can uphold the Constitution while still being an active LDS member and without failing to be a faithful follower of the restored gospel. However, if the standard is just:
#1: Be kind and respectful.


Here's a list of "Christian Church" discussion topics I've seen which are kind and respectful:
Open marriage
Do Mormons have horns
Christ would be a Communist
Pan-Sexuality is the only way to learn true love
The Book of Mormon will damn you
Mushrooms and LSD can help you find god
Joseph Smith was an adulterer

It's been years since I got deeply involved on these boards with someone who was making claims directly in violation of simple gospel teachings, but even under the old forum rules things like that would sneak in.
Here is another fine example of a poster referring to the written word of scripture to be a fairy tale.

"You are now making things up to keep your fairy tail that Adam dies.
He died only in the fairy tail, In reality he did not die."

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Forum Rules Update (2017 Feb 23) - Discussion

Post by freedomforall »

Sunain wrote: September 19th, 2017, 12:51 pm
skmo wrote: September 19th, 2017, 1:48 am
BrianM wrote: February 23rd, 2017, 10:43 pm is not a good fit for anti-Mormons and most likely not a good fit for bitter ex-Mormons....

I would be interested in your feedback, questions, comments, etc..
One thing DESPERATELY now missing, in my opinion, is a statement that doctrines which directly contradict the basic teachings of the LDS gospel are not allowed.

We can disagree about how our political leaders can uphold the Constitution while still being an active LDS member and without failing to be a faithful follower of the restored gospel.
Indeed it is an issue on the forums here currently. Too many people are starting discussions that contradict the basic teachings of the gospel. These debates shouldn't even be open for discussion. The doctrine of Christ is sound and clear.
Oh, how about the Adam-God doctrine? It is being taught here in full force with no let up. It appears that some people do not agree that the scriptures are clear...scriptures that provide our very doctrine, some of which are now referred to as fairy tales. Is this acceptable on this supposed "LDS" freedomforum?

User avatar
skmo
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4495

Re: Forum Rules Update (2017 Feb 23) - Discussion

Post by skmo »

freedomforall wrote: September 19th, 2017, 11:50 am I meant no offense by what I said above. I know your situation and appreciate the fact that you are striving to work out your salvation with trembling.
Oh, I know this. Sorry if you mistook my words.

I said what I did as both an affirmation and an addendum to what you said.
On another note, anyone that feels the need to throw stones at you had better beware. Here is why:
People are free to throw stones at me all they want. No one on earth, other than my wife, has a single stone capable of hurting me anymore. I'll gladly do what I can to help people who may do so understand they're only hurting themselves. I have been through the emotional hurt the world can throw at me and I've learned to let it bounce off of me.
I applaud you.
I appreciate it. Maybe someday a time will come I can share some of the experiences I've had that will make you laugh at me as well. Spoiler Alert: You'll laugh so hard you'll hurt your sides. You may wet yourself a little, too.

Post Reply