Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
Post Reply
User avatar
Thinker
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 12975
Location: The Universe - wherever that is.

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by Thinker »

I don’t think people on this thread have been “extreme” in being concerned about a bishop turning regular church time into promoting homosexual lifestyles. In fact, I think if anything, there needs to be vigilance toward discerning between loving people and loving sin, because it has been plainly shown that homosexual activists want to either take down - or even more so to infiltrate the church - to subtly persuade everyone they can trick, to support their behavior that statistically proves to be harmful in multiple ways. They have and will continue to make evil look good and good evil... by calling you names like, “hater, homophobe & bigot” it you don’t support their harmful lifestyles.

The bishop has been sucked into their identity politics by labeling a person their sin. He doesn’t refer to someone as one who has developed homosexual preferences, or one who practices homosexuality - he said, “being gay.” Right there tells me that he has fallen for the lie in not seeing any difference between a person and their sin. So, from that standpoint, when you criticize sin/behavior for being harmful and wrong, he, as homosexual fanatics do, deem it as criticizing them personally and is not allowed. This is damning (holding people back) because if a person’s actions cannot be analyzed and critiqued - then they cannot see how to repent/correct their actions and progress. Homosexual action is not only immoral- it goes against anatomy and is anti-truth, which is why it hurts people physically, psychologically and spiritually.

Jesus saw how some of the most damning behavior was such deception and unwillingness to acknowledge sin. Jesus was extremely politically incorrect - calling people out on their sin and hypocrisy. His priority was genuinely loving people - even if he had to tell them the harsh truth. He cared more about love based on truth, than being politically correct - even to the point of being harassed and killed for it.

User avatar
David13
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7072
Location: Utah

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by David13 »

Thinker wrote: February 18th, 2018, 7:17 am I don’t think people on this thread have been “extreme” in being concerned about a bishop turning regular church time into promoting homosexual lifestyles. In fact, I think if anything, there needs to be vigilance toward discerning between loving people and loving sin, because it has been plainly shown that homosexual activists want to either take down - or even more so to infiltrate the church - to subtly persuade everyone they can trick, to support their behavior that statistically proves to be harmful in multiple ways. They have and will continue to make evil look good and good evil... by calling you names like, “hater, homophobe & bigot” it you don’t support their harmful lifestyles.

The bishop has been sucked into their identity politics by labeling a person their sin. He doesn’t refer to someone as one who has developed homosexual preferences, or one who practices homosexuality - he said, “being gay.” Right there tells me that he has fallen for the lie in not seeing any difference between a person and their sin. So, from that standpoint, when you criticize sin/behavior for being harmful and wrong, he, as homosexual fanatics do, deem it as criticizing them personally and is not allowed. This is damning (holding people back) because if a person’s actions cannot be analyzed and critiqued - then they cannot see how to repent/correct their actions and progress. Homosexual action is not only immoral- it goes against anatomy and is anti-truth, which is why it hurts people physically, psychologically and spiritually.

Jesus saw how some of the most damning behavior was such deception and unwillingness to acknowledge sin. Jesus was extremely politically incorrect - calling people out on their sin and hypocrisy. His priority was genuinely loving people - even if he had to tell them the harsh truth. He cared more about love based on truth, than being politically correct - even to the point of being harassed and killed for it.

You can't say it anymore truthful than that.

This bishop was simply promoting sin, the acceptance of sin, encouraging sin, fostering and promoting it, and helping to indoctrinate others into this agenda.

Which is just perfectly and exactly opposite of what the church should be about. Or is about.
dc

User avatar
inho
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3286
Location: in a galaxy far, far away

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by inho »

He calls it "special meeting". Does that mean that it wasn't a regular third hour meeting, but more like a fireside?
Anyway, based on this text, there was nothing heretical going on. It was just a meeting to promote a better understanding.

eddie
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2405

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by eddie »

David13 wrote: February 18th, 2018, 9:08 am
Thinker wrote: February 18th, 2018, 7:17 am I don’t think people on this thread have been “extreme” in being concerned about a bishop turning regular church time into promoting homosexual lifestyles. In fact, I think if anything, there needs to be vigilance toward discerning between loving people and loving sin, because it has been plainly shown that homosexual activists want to either take down - or even more so to infiltrate the church - to subtly persuade everyone they can trick, to support their behavior that statistically proves to be harmful in multiple ways. They have and will continue to make evil look good and good evil... by calling you names like, “hater, homophobe & bigot” it you don’t support their harmful lifestyles.

The bishop has been sucked into their identity politics by labeling a person their sin. He doesn’t refer to someone as one who has developed homosexual preferences, or one who practices homosexuality - he said, “being gay.” Right there tells me that he has fallen for the lie in not seeing any difference between a person and their sin. So, from that standpoint, when you criticize sin/behavior for being harmful and wrong, he, as homosexual fanatics do, deem it as criticizing them personally and is not allowed. This is damning (holding people back) because if a person’s actions cannot be analyzed and critiqued - then they cannot see how to repent/correct their actions and progress. Homosexual action is not only immoral- it goes against anatomy and is anti-truth, which is why it hurts people physically, psychologically and spiritually.

Jesus saw how some of the most damning behavior was such deception and unwillingness to acknowledge sin. Jesus was extremely politically incorrect - calling people out on their sin and hypocrisy. His priority was genuinely loving people - even if he had to tell them the harsh truth. He cared more about love based on truth, than being politically correct - even to the point of being harassed and killed for it.

You can't say it anymore truthful than that.

This bishop was simply promoting sin, the acceptance of sin, encouraging sin, fostering and promoting it, and helping to indoctrinate others into this agenda.

Which is just perfectly and exactly opposite of what the church should be about. Or is about.
dc
David, you got this gospel figured out pretty quick, you converts are amazing! I'm so pleased with you I could burst with joy!

User avatar
Thinker
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 12975
Location: The Universe - wherever that is.

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by Thinker »

inho wrote: February 18th, 2018, 9:56 am
He calls it "special meeting". Does that mean that it wasn't a regular third hour meeting, but more like a fireside?
Anyway, based on this text, there was nothing heretical going on. It was just a meeting to promote a better understanding.
No, it means he was taking special advantage of his position planning & conducting a meeting that held up homosexual behavior as good and healthy despite facts showing otherwise. A bishop leading his ward against church doctrine in such a way hasn’t previously happened in lds church, so it was a “special” meeting. If it were really about understanding - there would have been more anatomical and statistical facts presented regarding the harm of homosexual lifestyles rather than an onslaught of leftist emotional reasoning deception.

The most deceptive manipulative gesture was attempting to justify homosexuality by falsely implying Jesus would support it. In reality, Jesus taught marriage between a man and a woman. Jesus loved based on truth and spoke harsh truths that were so politically incorrect, he was tortured and killed for it.

User avatar
Robin Hood
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13110
Location: England

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by Robin Hood »

inho wrote: February 18th, 2018, 9:56 am
He calls it "special meeting". Does that mean that it wasn't a regular third hour meeting, but more like a fireside?
Anyway, based on this text, there was nothing heretical going on. It was just a meeting to promote a better understanding.
I read the link.
The first speaker was from an organisation called Affirmation. The leader of this group is an excommunicated church member who is "married" to his same sex homo partner.
Enough said.

User avatar
inho
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3286
Location: in a galaxy far, far away

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by inho »

Robin Hood wrote: February 18th, 2018, 10:58 am The first speaker was from an organisation called Affirmation. The leader of this group is an excommunicated church member who is "married" to his same sex homo partner.
Enough said.
I wasn't familiar with the president of Affirmation, so I googled him. I found a Deseret News opinion piece written by him. You're right, he is an excommunicated member, and in relationship with another man. Yet he still attends church regularly and have even informal "callings". I might not agree with him in all things, but I do agree with this:
Regardless of one’s membership status or activity in the church, regardless of one’s family configuration, one of the most concrete ways for a person to feel loved is to feel that he or she is heard and understood. When people feel the need to leave the church, their friends in the church should do everything possible to preserve friendships, with no strings attached. They should seek to learn rather than to judge. Even an awkwardly posed question, if asked with evident good intent, will signal respect and a desire to understand.

User avatar
David13
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7072
Location: Utah

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by David13 »

inho wrote: February 18th, 2018, 9:56 am
He calls it "special meeting". Does that mean that it wasn't a regular third hour meeting, but more like a fireside?
Anyway, based on this text, there was nothing heretical going on. It was just a meeting to promote a better understanding.
The only "better understanding" that was to come from all of this was ... that sin only used to be sin, and that now it is perfectly all right, ok, and even desirable, very desirable to the taste. Which is pure heresy.

In fact, beyond that, it is just another of Satan's lies.

"Affirmation", affirmation of the sin.
dc

Older/wiser?
captain of 100
Posts: 538

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by Older/wiser? »

In my ward we are the emergency preparedness specialist, I can't even get a table as a display to show things I have found useful and as a reminder to "act on it", the bishop doesn't want anyone to want something and yet feel like they can't afford it, I agree, I get it..but as a bishop his cross over lines seem blurred you can invite members on a LGBT Cruise? Call me a straight shooter, but that seems weird and over the top. I want my kids to know the lines and not be seduced by the world's view . The line is marriage between a man and a women, if the main speaker advocates anything than that (which by example alone he is) then the pulpit is being used for a different agenda whether the bishop intended to use it for that purpose or not. Where were the authorities recommending we abstain from that lifestyle, yea I get it we wouldn't want to offend the speakers.. wrong time, wrong place, and wrong platform.

User avatar
BringerOfJoy
captain of 100
Posts: 827

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by BringerOfJoy »

Welcome to the LDS church, only-slightly-future version.

It does remind me of the pre-1978 change in Priesthood for all worthy males. Previous to that time, at least one bishop just took the matter in his own hands, and ordained an African-American. I THINK he was ex-communicated at the time, but shortly thereafter, the church changed it's policy.

Lizzy60
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 8520

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by Lizzy60 »

BringerOfJoy wrote: February 18th, 2018, 12:10 pm Welcome to the LDS church, only-slightly-future version.

It does remind me of the pre-1978 change in Priesthood for all worthy males. Previous to that time, at least one bishop just took the matter in his own hands, and ordained an African-American. I THINK he was ex-communicated at the time, but shortly thereafter, the church changed it's policy.
What will the average church member do if/when the church changes its policy on homosexuals?

Older/wiser?
captain of 100
Posts: 538

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by Older/wiser? »

Blacks not having or having the priesthood has never been a moral sin. The focus should be the clear line "marriage between a man and women". I don't love the lifestyle choice they make. If the speakers at a "fireside" not at the Church (where the platform should be promoting repentance, faith in our Lord Jesus Christ) were gays who repented or being celibate and seeking love and acceptance from their LDS friends , I would open my arms as would most. You can't live the sin and tell me to get used to it, love your lifestyle and accept it. A cruise for LGBT does just that. IMHO

User avatar
Mark
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6929

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by Mark »

Lizzy60 wrote: February 18th, 2018, 12:14 pm
BringerOfJoy wrote: February 18th, 2018, 12:10 pm Welcome to the LDS church, only-slightly-future version.

It does remind me of the pre-1978 change in Priesthood for all worthy males. Previous to that time, at least one bishop just took the matter in his own hands, and ordained an African-American. I THINK he was ex-communicated at the time, but shortly thereafter, the church changed it's policy.
What will the average church member do if/when the church changes its policy on homosexuals?
Another "what if" non starter. Do you think that the Brethren are going to just tear up The Family: A Proclamation to the World and say " just kidding"? When hell freezes over..


User avatar
BruceRGilbert
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1472
Location: Near the "City of Trees," Idaho

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by BruceRGilbert »

French Philosopher Montaigne: "He who stands for everything, stands for nothing."

It is against nature. "Like" cannot procreate. This was the first commandment. In the interest and the preservation of society, such things should be recognized as non-conducive to progression or development. In a very real sense, it is a damnation; the restriction of progress in what God intended.

Lizzy60
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 8520

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by Lizzy60 »

BruceRGilbert wrote: February 18th, 2018, 1:33 pm French Philosopher Montaigne: "He who stands for everything, stands for nothing."

It is against nature. "Like" cannot procreate. This was the first commandment. In the interest and the preservation of society, such things should be recognized as non-conducive to progression or development. In a very real sense, it is a damnation; the restriction of progress in what God intended.
I agree with you 100%.

However, "married" gays are using artificial insemination (lesbians) surrogate mothers (gay men) and adoption to create families. LDS gays will counter that infertile couples use the same means to have children, so the "cannot procreate" excuse becomes a moot point for them. Satan is having a heyday with all this.

User avatar
Arenera
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2712

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by Arenera »

Lizzy60 wrote: February 18th, 2018, 1:51 pm
BruceRGilbert wrote: February 18th, 2018, 1:33 pm French Philosopher Montaigne: "He who stands for everything, stands for nothing."

It is against nature. "Like" cannot procreate. This was the first commandment. In the interest and the preservation of society, such things should be recognized as non-conducive to progression or development. In a very real sense, it is a damnation; the restriction of progress in what God intended.
I agree with you 100%.

However, "married" gays are using artificial insemination (lesbians) surrogate mothers (gay men) and adoption to create families. LDS gays will counter that infertile couples use the same means to have children, so the "cannot procreate" excuse becomes a moot point for them. Satan is having a heyday with all this.
Modern polygamy?

Finrock
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4426

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by Finrock »

What I'm taking from most of these posts is that simply allowing a same-sex person to speak or to express their views or having a dialogue is the same as condoning, supporting, etc. Apparently if you give an opposing voice a voice, or you give them an opportunity to be heard and to be understood, this means that you condone. What nonsense and falsehood. There are so many posters in this thread who have been put down, mocked, ridiculed, and accused of being apostate because they offered an opposing voice, yet, here in this situation they hypocritically deny this principle to others because apparently this is their peeve sin or whatever. If a principle is good in one situation, it is good in all situations, else its not a principle. If nothing else people ought to be consistent in how they apply principles.

-Finrock

User avatar
Thinker
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 12975
Location: The Universe - wherever that is.

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by Thinker »

Finrock,
I have gone out of my way to care for, hang out with and love people in my extended family and friends who have homosexual preferences. I have listened for hours about how they were sexually abused as children and developed confusing thoughts about sexuality. If anyone wanted someone to talk with- they can feel safe in sharing how they think and feel with me. I don’t encourage homosexual behavior, but I can validate feelings to help them process and manage them well. I have tried to be the best friend I can be to whoever asks of me, but I don’t go to their homosexual support groups with a bunch of others and preach contrary to their values. When it comes to church - that is not the time or place for groups who are so blatantly opposed to essential church family doctrine to preach their contradictions.

User avatar
Thinker
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 12975
Location: The Universe - wherever that is.

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by Thinker »

Mark wrote: February 18th, 2018, 1:06 pm
Lizzy60 wrote: February 18th, 2018, 12:14 pm
BringerOfJoy wrote: February 18th, 2018, 12:10 pm Welcome to the LDS church, only-slightly-future version.

It does remind me of the pre-1978 change in Priesthood for all worthy males. Previous to that time, at least one bishop just took the matter in his own hands, and ordained an African-American. I THINK he was ex-communicated at the time, but shortly thereafter, the church changed it's policy.
What will the average church member do if/when the church changes its policy on homosexuals?
Another "what if" non starter. Do you think that the Brethren are going to just tear up The Family: A Proclamation to the World and say " just kidding"? When hell freezes over..
Exactly. Nobody can “come out of the closet about being Black.” Homosexual fanatics want and are actively trying to normalize their statistically harmful lifestyles. It is their wish that people see their dysfunctional BEHAVIOR as the same as an identity/race - so you can’t criticize their behavior without criticizing them. If you do point out ie, the risks with anal sex etc, then they call you “meanie/hater/homophobe” etc. Of course it’s logically incorrect and evil to manipulate and deceive like that - but they don’t care. Their main concern as pointed out in the systematic mind control plan in books like “The Overhauling of Straight America” is forcing everyone they can to accept their deviated, unhealthy sexual desires as if good and healthy. They encouraged lying repeatedly so by the time it’s discovered to be false, too many people believe the lie and have settled on that conclusion.

It is so illogical to compare race with sexual distortion. A Black professor objected to it and got fined (&/or fired) - homosexual fanatics are anti-free-speech. It also doesn’t make sense to compare church past racial prejudice with the church’s stance on deviated sexual BEHAVIORS. Racial prejudice is counter to scripture teachings like “Man is no respector of persons” & God doesn’t look on the outward appearance but “God looks on the heart.” Marriage between a man and a woman and the Family Proclamation essence is also preached repeatedly in scripture and has been the foundation of societies for centuries. Homosexuality, on the other hand, not only goes against centuries of law and scripture- it goes against the means by which each of us exist! It’s no wonder with so many facts and history stacked against them, that all they can resort to is logical fallacies like ad hominem attacks and emotional reasoning.

I realize there are times to be soft spoken, agreeable etc., but there are times to be bold and object to lies and evil. When it comes to the family - we need to be spiritual warriors and defend it with God’s help and guidance.

PressingForward
captain of 100
Posts: 703

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by PressingForward »

Lizzy60 wrote: February 18th, 2018, 12:14 pm
BringerOfJoy wrote: February 18th, 2018, 12:10 pm Welcome to the LDS church, only-slightly-future version.

It does remind me of the pre-1978 change in Priesthood for all worthy males. Previous to that time, at least one bishop just took the matter in his own hands, and ordained an African-American. I THINK he was ex-communicated at the time, but shortly thereafter, the church changed it's policy.
What will the average church member do if/when the church changes its policy on homosexuals?
This member will resign his membership, and encourage all that I know to do the same.

Sunain
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2711
Location: Canada

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by Sunain »

Lizzy60 wrote: February 18th, 2018, 12:14 pm
BringerOfJoy wrote: February 18th, 2018, 12:10 pm Welcome to the LDS church, only-slightly-future version.

It does remind me of the pre-1978 change in Priesthood for all worthy males. Previous to that time, at least one bishop just took the matter in his own hands, and ordained an African-American. I THINK he was ex-communicated at the time, but shortly thereafter, the church changed it's policy.
What will the average church member do if/when the church changes its policy on homosexuals?
I will resign my membership if that ever happens because the leaders of the church will have supplanted revelation from God to dictate their own policies for the church instead of the Plan of Salvation blueprint that was setup before this world began. Basically the Second Coming will come before this happens.

I personally believe this whole tolerance and making a website for the Gay's is going a bit too far for my liking. We need to be hardline on the issue otherwise we get bishops/SP like this one. Homosexuality is a sin.

User avatar
BeNotDeceived
Agent38
Posts: 8960
Location: Tralfamadore
Contact:

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by BeNotDeceived »

I recall reading a prophecy where the devil will reside in the new temple. Prolly somewhere in Prophecy Key to the Future by Duane Crowther. Anyone have a copy?

User avatar
Mark
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6929

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by Mark »

PressingForward wrote: February 18th, 2018, 3:47 pm
Lizzy60 wrote: February 18th, 2018, 12:14 pm
BringerOfJoy wrote: February 18th, 2018, 12:10 pm Welcome to the LDS church, only-slightly-future version.

It does remind me of the pre-1978 change in Priesthood for all worthy males. Previous to that time, at least one bishop just took the matter in his own hands, and ordained an African-American. I THINK he was ex-communicated at the time, but shortly thereafter, the church changed it's policy.
What will the average church member do if/when the church changes its policy on homosexuals?
This member will resign his membership, and encourage all that I know to do the same.

This is just silly. What ifs are non productive and basically a waste of time. What if Pres. Nelson became a Moonie? What if Finrock wasn't a contrarian? What if Amonhi became part of the 144,000? All these things aren't ever going to happen so it's dumb to play that what if game. :?

User avatar
Thinker
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 12975
Location: The Universe - wherever that is.

Re: Apostasy in Riverton (Bishop Paul Augenstein)

Post by Thinker »

Sunain wrote: February 18th, 2018, 4:06 pm I will resign my membership if that ever happens because the leaders of the church will have supplanted revelation from God to dictate their own policies for the church instead of the Plan of Salvation blueprint that was setup before this world began. Basically the Second Coming will come before this happens.

I personally believe this whole tolerance and making a website for the Gay's is going a bit too far for my liking. We need to be hardline on the issue otherwise we get bishops/SP like this one. Homosexuality is a sin.
I guess I’m not the only one who worries about the church succumbing to homosexual manipulative pressures. For many, the one place, once a week that feels like a respite - a sacred place - is church. If that is taken as it was for that ward, where will be such a place? If it comes down to a world overtaken by sexually confused people who demand compliance and cruely force their harmful ways on others while calling out victim - what hell! I and many I know have been hurt various ways by those practicing homosexuality - but these bullies and abusers haven’t made amends - but instead play victim & demand others be responsible for their problems.

I don’t want to jump to conclusions but I think you are right about the direction things are going & it’s concerning. I suppose we can still make our own pieces of heaven - by strengthening ourselves, praying always - especially for others who we can support and derive support from. I realize more & more clearly that apathy is no longer an option - and studying things out along with spiritual guidance is absolutely imperative.

Post Reply