“I think your intention is to lash out at the ignorance and childishness of others.”

Thanks for the personal attack.

This post is over a month old now. We are not communicating. You are taking my quotes out of context. My patience is thin.

I am going to try to emulate the Savior, and turn the other cheek by not responding.

Please click “home” at the top of the page. I have a real interesting perspective on the Holy Ghost, and Near Death experiences. I would like to see if you think I’m a heretic, or if you think that the author’s explanation is a plausible explanation of the Holy Ghost.

If you really want Jesus to be real then you’re going to have to get divine revelation. He will reveal that reality to you in the name of His Son, and the power of the Holy Ghost. The reality of His perfection will then be clear to you – that Jesus wasn’t spiritually unclean in any way. Abstaining from any act or thought that would have made Him spiritually unclean is something He never did. The perfection taught in Matthew 5:48 is this: total abstinence from any thought or action that would make you spiritually unclean. Stop seeking reality through the world. Divine revelation is what kills myth.

Yes, it is possible to be angry and perfect at the same time: IF that anger is prompted by the power of the Holy Spirit. Bruce McKonkie said that is not possible for mortal man. I tend to agree with him.

As for Jesus being rude, there are three references to the word ‘rude’ in the scriptures and all of them are based in human frailty. Nobody who is based in divine revelation could ever refer to Jesus as rude. The woman who was referred to as a dog was far above the rest of the world. She knew who Jesus was and what he was. Rudeness was definitely not one of them. The idea of a ‘rude Jesus’ is a very ugly myth.

Now listen to yourself talk.

“So, if “be ye therefore perfect” means that we can still be angry and rude, then what else can we do, and still be considered perfect?”

When God is angry, when God kills, or when God hurts people, He does it because He IS perfect. You come across as though you want to do things that would be wrong for you to do (NOT GOD, mind you) just for the sake of doing them. Now I don’t think that’s what you really want to do. What I think your intention is to lash out at the ignorance and childishness of others.

No. I don’t think you are attacking Jesus.

“And this is alife beternal, that they might cknow thee the only true dGod, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast esent. “.

Hey MH! Write a blog sometime on what just God, the Father, has told you about himself and His Son. Not even what the scriptures have told you. Not anybody. Just what He has made known to you, personally. I’m afraid I couldn’t do that. I have had strong feelings but I just don’t trust myself.

I believe (for myself, I suppose ‘gamble’ would be a better word) that there is a Heavenly Father. His Son is Jesus Christ. There is one church on earth that is His. In His church He has defined certain writings that are holy.
If you can interpret those writings correctly then you can learn about God. But If you want to know Him you will have to go beyond that. The feelings I’ve had together with what I know about the scriptures govern everything I say. One of my problems (at least, according to others) is that my frailties seem to govern my tendency toward an attack mode.

I don’t understand this question.

“Why does it matter to you what the Pharisees and the chief priests thought of Jesus?”

Jesus lived in our world. He dealt with the same problems we do. He was unfairly judged just as we are. To me, this makes him real. Too often, people talk about Jesus as myth, and I feel like you treat Jesus as myth. You do not view him as a real person.

Jesus is perfectly understandable in your view. You have no idea why the Pharisees misunderstood Jesus, because if you were a Pharisee, you would have been easily converted. To me, you show a tremendous lack of understanding in your analysis of Jesus.

Yes, you’ve quoted several things I have said, but you have failed to understand my main point. Let me quote it to you again. Comment 15 really outlines my purposes, but let me quote a few things again.

I think we often have an unrealistic view of what “sinless” means. (Found in original post)

I am trying to understand truly what constitutes sin. For example, most people today would consider that a person who got angry enough to tip over tables and chairs would be a sinner. Well, this is not necessarily the case–Jesus was angry and rude, and but did not sin. Ok, so can we all agree that a person can get angry or be rude, and still be considered perfect?

So, if “be ye therefore perfect” means that we can still be angry and rude, then what else can we do, and still be considered perfect? That’s the point of the post–better defining what “perfect” means. What traits might a perfect person have? Can we list them?

Unfortunately, you think I am merely attacking Jesus. You have missed my point completely.

_____________________________________________

God allows temptations of ALL people greater than their capacity. The proof is not a single person except Jesus Christ (according to our doctrine) makes it through this life without sin. If we ALL fail, then we must ALL have been tempted beyond our ability.

Jesus was angry and rude

Relatively undeveloped; primitive: a rude and savage land; a rude…

Here are some cases of Jesus was probably yelling. Note, the exclamation point in many verses. If Jesus was in a church, he would have been pounding the pulpit.

We see how serious Jesus was in Mark 11:16 “And would not suffer that any man should carry [any] vessel through the temple.” This had to require intimidation to prevent people from carrying items through the temple grounds.
Surely this required some use of physical force. And verse 18 shows how angry the leaders were: And the scribes and chief priests heard [it], and sought how they might destroy him.

How does this all relate to losing one’s temper with Pharisees, or fellow bloggers?

I’m not sure where I stand on predestination or foreordination, but I tend to downplay such things. I agree with Seth that this would tend to take away free agency.

I think Mormons tend to overemphasize ize the sinless part of perfection.

After all, I think it is relatively easy to be complete. Many of us are well-rounded individuals.

Is civil disobedience a sin?

It is quite obvious to me that the vendors at the temple were acting legally, or else the Pharisees and Sadducees would have outlawed the vendors. Yes perhaps the vendors were overdoing it, but Jesus cleansing the temple has been argued to be an instigating incident into his own execution. It could be argued that Jesus contempt for Pharisaic authority meant that he got the ultimate punishment, and from a Jewish perspective, an appropriate punishment for disrespecting God’s temple.

Overthrowing tables is not losing control?

Seth and Tara, I agree that anger is not necessarily a sin. But I can’t agree with you on Jesus not losing control. Perhaps it was justified, with him being the Savior, but I have to real issues with this trite phrase: What would Jesus do?

Most people act like Jesus never raised his voice, never got angry, never got drunk, as if he were some sort of Ghandi. I find this characterization ridiculous. It is clearly obvious that many of the Jews considered him a vile sinner.

_____________________________________________

Why do you want to think this way? You say that people tend to view Christ as two dimensional. You then claim he is really three dimensional. So why have you zeroed him out? By the time you’re done with him he could never have been the Savior.
Why does it matter to you what the Pharisees and the chief priests thought of Jesus? There is only one concern you listed that really matters. What would Jesus do? And what is that? His will was swallowed up in the will of the Father (Mosiah 15:7). All he ever did was what the Father told him to do. So now you’ve got even the Father as being a sinner. Who said that. Well, the Pharisees and the chief priests, I guess.
If you are in any situation that is repulsive to you whether at a temple or a basket ball game, your only concern is ‘What would Jesus do?’ or in other words, What does Heavenly Father want you to do? Oh, and please, never mind what the Pharisees and the chief priests want you to do? If you are living right you will have the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost to guide you in obtaining that knowledge. Try not to look on that divine guidance as Heavenly Father not letting you grow up by taking away your agency.
If you think that my conversations, with you, are nothing but unpleasant, you should be in the Sunday School class and the High Priest group I attend. I talk to them the same way I talk to you.
Why do you think the way you think?

http://www.mormonheretic.org/2009/02/04/sometimes-god-says-no/

Thanks for stopping by. This subject has been beaten to death. You are restating several things others have said, and I have no desire to rehash this again.

However, I would be interested in how you react to my “Sometimes God says No” post. Are you interested? Frankly I’m surprised that nobody seems interested in that post. If you’re not interested (perhaps the subject is too hard), then can you tell me why?