- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
The changes are minimal and really aren’t significant in any way. MWallace, Are you aware that many of the Founding Fathers were Masons? There is considerable speculation that the Boston Tea Party was organized by Masons. George Washington was a Mason. As a revolutionary, he did lots of secret things, and killed the British. Paul Revere was a Mason, and subverted the laws of the British government. Does this cause you concern?
As for those scriptures in Helaman, are you trying to say that Joseph was just like Gadianton and Kishkumen?
Yes, I am aware, but George Washington was not a Prophet of God. George Washington held salves and would not allow women to vote. I rest my case.
MWallace, you are conflating multiple issues here. I’m not arguing any particular interpretation or outlook with this comment, but, as I said in another thread, precision is important sometimes – since using a shotgun to kill a dove can be extremely messy. 
I’m curious what your opinions are about MWallace’s “secret combination” verses. Is this an example of evil mimmicking righteousness? Or is the Church mimmicking the evil it once renounced? Both seem farfetched, but there appears to be some copycatting going on. Quote:I’m curious what your opinions are about MWallace’s “secret combination” verses. Is this an example of evil mimmicking righteousness? Or is the Church mimmicking the evil it once renounced? Both seem farfetched, but there appears to be some copycatting going on.
I think it’s a human tendency to create “secret” societies, clubs, etc. Personally, I think the key is in Luke 8: 17: “For nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest; neither any thing hid, that shall not be known and come abroad.” or IOW, whether a thing is done in secret or not, the truth of it will come out. If you conspire to do something bad, the truth will eventually come out. If you do alms in secret (something we are told to do), then the “Lord who seeth in secret will reward you openly.” So, it matters what the nature of the thing being done in secret is. The Danites, IMO, is an example of church members conspiring to do evil things in secret. That’s not the same, IMO, as what takes place in the temple where people make private covenants to bring them closer to God. No matter what we do, we should always ask ourselves if the true nature of what we are doing was revealed, would it bear scrutiny. For each person and each action, the answer may differ.
MWallace, you are aware that Jesus told slaves to submit to their masters, right? If Jesus didn’t denounce slavery, why should George Washington? I remind you that many ministers of both North and South used scriptural justifications for slavery–there are a ton of scriptures supporting slavery in the Bible. Look, I’m not trying to pick a fight here, but I think some of your examples are taken out of context. Of course, you are welcome to your opinion….
I agree with Ray and Hawkgrrrl’s sentiments.
mormonheretic wrote:there are a ton of scriptures supporting slavery in the Bible.
Slavery, murder, polygamy, genocide, capital punishment, human sacrifice, homophobia, witch hunts, racism … the scriptures have been used to justify quite a lot of things. It seems almost all teaching are teachings of men mingled with scripture, because people are the ones interpreting the scripture…some have good intentions, but miss the mark. I have faith there are some that have revelation to speak for God and need to make sure their explanations make sense to me (some, like WoW just don’t make sense to me).In most of these issues, like the secret combinations, it is simply the point of view you take and the virtue you exhibit in practicing it. Secret combinations to murder, steal, and control governments is not so far different than a sacred religious ceremony or ritual in the secrecy or oaths … but differs in the intent and the outcome. Evil acts are evil, whether scripture can be twisted to support it or not.
Hi, Mormonheritic!! I am not trying to avoid your question. I have a strong tendency to hijack posts by going off on tangents. I love this definition:
divergent or digressive, as from a subject under consideration: tangential remarks. I think Ray is just trying to rein me in.
This post is about Church Focus and the History of the Church being taught. I think we should both try to stay on topic. It is unfair and inconsiderate to the person who started this thread if we let things stray too far off topic and I apologize for doing so. Mormonheretic, if you want to continue the subject of Masonry, there is already a post started.
BACK TO THE SUBJECT OF THIS THREAD: I do think that we sometimes “whitewash” Church History. I don’t want to be like the “whitened sepulchres” spoken of by Matthew.
Matthew 23:27 (King James Version)
27Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness.
So how can we be honest when it comes to Church History?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.