Wow, I must have pecked at a nerve. An entire blog dedicated to me!!! And there isn't any references to Crow excrement. I compliment you.
And of course its an open invitations for everyone else to add their pot shots. To attack the intolerant, to belittle the zealot with their smug sarcastic and enlightened statements that aren't clouded by the repressive influences of the church. So now that we are all in our respective corners with our dander up and ready to attack how should we proceed?
I love the way Zeal for the gospel is now a bad thing. And defending things that the church says will prevent us from progressing is now en vogue.
Okay, first of all. I'm really not sure why there is dissent. The church isn't forcing anyone to stick around if they don't want to. No one if forcing anyone to believe anything. That's why its called faith. That's why we need to use our agency to make a choice. We aren't hear following Saten's plan. Yes, if you want to be faithful to the church you do need "to be of one heart and one voice." Yes, it is possible to do this and retain your own sense of individuality.
That is what agency is all about. If you disagree or feel something is wrong, then please by all means develop a backbone and follow through with your beliefs. Stop wallowing in self loathing. If you choose to leave the church, that's your choice and we need to respect it, love you and accept you.
Of course those of us who do have testimonies will think you are making a eternally devastating mistake. If we love you and also believe in the church we would of course feel that way. Oh perhaps you need to walk way and lose it in order to realize what you do have and desire to get it back. Who knows. We don't receive revelation for you, your the only one that can do that. All I can do is pray for you and hold to what we believe is the gospel.
But please have respect for those of us who do want to stay and remain faithful and and leave the church alone.
Its ironic that the same person who who accuses me of "preaching" items that are not official stances of the church is the same person who rejected my friendship after I offered what I thought was a heartfelt and public apology and is now using my blogs or at least thats the implication in his comment here as one of his excuses to "go elsewhere." I really would like someone to clue me in what apostate doctrine I'm exposing. What untruths am I guilty of spreading.
Bloggers here can bash the prophet and his appearance on Larry King and other interview and attack leaders like Elder Bateman for his statements. They can tear apart and parody the Elder Oak's and Wickman Interview. They can offer their version of what the Church should say in their opinion since they seem to think they now receive inspirations to lead the church and guide those to go against those called to be Prophet, Seers and Revalators.
They can come right out and say that church leaders are wrong and then they can go off and say I'm somehow intolerant and closed minded because I have the nerve to stand up for things that I do consider sacred and that I clearly remember making a covenant not to be part of "evil speaking of the Lord's anointed" and to stand up for the church when I encounter this. I'm a bad person for sticking to what I said I would do.
I've been told if you don't like what I've blogged don't read it. Well what's the point? Do you only blog so that those who agree with you can back you up? Are you saying you don't want dissent? Are you saying you want to crush anyone who has an opinion that goes against yours?
I posted today why I had taken a step back. Why I had stopped reading these blogs. I felt that was a peace offering and a move towards more tolerance on both parts. But apparently that's not how bloggers play. Today I let curiosity get the best of me and I returned. And what do I find and entire attack based on me. All I can say is wow, I'm flattered that I've had this kind of effect on everyone. I am sorry that the attacks have to continue. I guess being Christlike in the Moho community is another word for conditional love and acceptance.
I have found those who demand tolerance don't normally understand what it is to be tolerant. In fact they are normally the least tolerant ones out there. It's there way or no way, it's black and white. You are either with us or you're not. You don't have a right to an opinion if you disagree with us its because you are a ignorant bigot. Ironicly isn't that sorta what I'm accused of here? Seeing things as black and white?
If they can't debate in a civil and respectful way, they resort to petty insults and attacks. If they can't argue against the message their next move is to belittle the messenger. If they can make that person message appear tactless and simple-minded they can win by default or at least feel smug in that they have been attacked.
I'm sorry if I mistakenly believed that it was somehow admirable to stay faithful to the church. That my CTR ring meant choose the right. Apparently it means Choose the relative.
If I'm standing for what I believe, I honestly don't care if you tolerate or not tolerate me. Because I know whom I'm standing up for. If I'm bad for believing that I'm right then I suppose anyone who argues with me is also guilty of the same offense. I only worry about one judge.
I've heard so many people blog about being tolerant and Christlike. But apparently thats only reserved for those who go along with what is the group think here. Again more of what I'm being accused of.
That's one thing you can't accuse me of. I may disagree with you but I'd never openly attack you. I may defend myself as any human would who is attacked. I may disagree with you and tell you why. If you want to take it as an attack that's your issue. But I also would rather us work it out and be friends then continue to take pot shots at each other.