JohnBirchSociety

Members
  • Posts

    424
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.rodneymcguire.com
  • ICQ
    0

JohnBirchSociety's Achievements

  1. If your feelings contradict observable reality, I'd recommend you follow what is real, rather than feelings. We are given brains for a reason. To think. There should be a balance, faith doesn't trump reason, or visa versa, unless one component is 100% correct (irrefutable, rational, real).
  2. I know through faith and reason. I have faith that Jesus is the Son of GOD. Reason shows me that the Bible is the most historically accurate and substantiated writing in human history. It has proven to be utterly reliable in all respects, therefore, those items of a spiritual nature that it reports spring from verifiably real people and places. Faith and reason. I use the same for the Book of Mormon, with one difference at this point. As of yet, no artifact or writing from Mesoamerica substantiates any specific and unique claim in the Book of Mormon. That being said, the Book of Mormon contains such unique things that consistent with it being a translation of an ancient Hebriac text that I have reason to believe the physical nature of its' claims as well as the spiritual.
  3. The LDS Antagonists I've dealt with for the past 25+ years have been a lot better prepared than just ridiculing "feelings". And lately they have synthesized their argument to its' base point about the Book of Mormon. It goes like this: The Book of Mormon describes physical people, places and things in regards to the Mesoamerica era. Things like geography, peoples, culture, tools, warfare, etc. Those things are observable realities, not subject to "spiritual" confirmation or not. For instance, no matter how you "feel" about it, George Washington actually existed. Your feelings on the matter are of no importance to the determination of that reality. So, taking the physically demonstrable claims of the Book of Mormon and testing them against what we do physically, really know about Mesoamerica, we find that the claims of the Book of Mormon find no place in Mesoamerican history. In fact, no artifact or writing has ever been found to substantiate any specific and unique Book of Mormon claim about Mesoamerican history. Now, this being said, I find that their biggest problem is that no evidence to the contrary has been found. There is a huge lack of evidence in a positive sense. It is true that no artifact or writing has ever been found to substantiate the unique and specific claims of the Book of Mormon. However, we can say the same about many of the foundational claims of the Bible, yet we both, LDS and LDS Antagonists believe in it. So I think we need to grow up a bit in our viewing of the LDS Antagonist and realize that they do bring up valid questions. To be sure, there are just anti-mormon idiots who use falsehood, etc. But increasingly I've found them to be the ignorant minority, rather than the rule. Hope this helps?
  4. I think we've done very poorly in describing to the world that Jesus Christ is the ETERNAL GOD (as opposed to just be a "god"). In fact, I don't think I ever heard a General Conference talk that proclaimed it and it is absent from "Preach My Gospel" and the previous 6 Discussion methodology. Sad!
  5. But why stop with government sponsored health care? Is the most basic of human needs food? Shouldn't we, in the spirit of liberalism, have free food for all? That way we could control obesity (just ask the people who lived under Stalin about food control by government, they were not overweight, 'course, most of 'em starved to death), which is a major contributor to ill health. And what about the darn sun-light? It causes cancer. The government should do something about it! On and on. Where does it end? How can it rationally end? How can we call for "free" health-care and not "free" food, or housing, for all? And if all are getting it for "free" who's going to pay for it? Government has consistently shown itself the be the poorest of distribution mechanisms. The private sector is almost, without exception, better suited. No, what we need is not more "free" or more "universal" anything. We need less government intervention. We need less government "assistence" (when have they really ever assisted anyone?)... Or, as the phrase goes, "Less Government, More Individual Responsibility, and with GOD's help, A Better World".
  6. I can almost agree with you. Immunizations are probably the greatest hoax in regards to health in all of human history. And what is so very sad about the hoax is that the victims nearly 100% Children.
  7. The real crux of this problem began with the abandonment of sound money as demand by the United States Constitution. Absent a return to sound money (gold or silver coin or notes backed 1:1 by them, issued by the Treasury, no FEDERAL RESERVE), the problem will NEVER be resolved. There are laws of economics at play here. They are being violated. Now we are beginning to see the fruits of our folly. I blame my Great-grandparents (circa 1880-1930) for this mess. They are the ones who abandoned our Constitution. They are the ones who allowed the "secret combination" to murder and get gain. And now we are left to mop up their mess! Disgusting. Simply put, no sound money, and we are doomed, no matter who is President.
  8. Well, to start at the beginning, we might want to understand what money IS. Federal Reserve Notes are currency, but they are not money. It is very telling to note that our divinely inspired founders mandated sound money in the United States Constitution. Sad it is that we not only have abandoned that document, but we cannot even expound upon the nature of money. In effect, as a people, we are "barking up the wrong tree". Absent a return to constitutionally mandated REAL money, none of this mess we find ourselves in will be resolved, no matter how many Federal Reserve Notes we spend / print.
  9. Because, the Scriptures say GOD has always been as he is now. This is one of the few teachings in Scripture that is unambiguous.
  10. Good post. I've a question though: 1) The King Follett Discourse (in its' entirety) is not cannonized or viewed as binding doctrine. However, when parts of it are quoted in authorative manuals used to teach the official position of the Church, then can we safely say those portions are "doctrine"? 2) Though I would HUGELY LOVE to have the Church be "Sola Scriptura", it isn't. We have authoratative teaching manuals that are indeed "binding" in that they present the official position of the Church on many matters. Isn't it a bit of a cop-out to say, "It's not in the Canon?" Thanks!
  11. It greatly disturbs me and "so many people" because the Scriptures clearly, unambiguously declare that GOD has always been as he is now.
  12. I'm very interested, and part of it. Good post. I'm going to make a blunt prediction about it: To the degree the idea is successful or has a positive impact against the global Marxist conspiracy (yes, that's what we face); Mr. Beck will have great opposition. And, if there is REAL impact, he'll find himself of the air very, very quickly...
  13. Yes, it is an ordinance by invitation of the Prophet. It is part of having one's calling and election made sure.
  14. Thank you for the well-wishing, I've the same sentiment for you. It is distressing to think that I'm appearing to "pick-n-choose" doctrine. I'm not. Perhaps an overly-silly example would suffice? Suppose GOD said in scripture "There is one GOD" (no exceptions, no "loop-holes", completely unambiguous). Now suppose Prophet X came along and said "GOD has a GOD". I'd go with the "There is one GOD" and reject the "GOD has a GOD" premise. This is what I'm doing here. In essence, the total context of scripture is saying something clearly different than what some of the LDS leaders have taught. Thus, I'm left with no choice, I must go with the previous, clear, unambiguous scripture rather than more recent "revelations", regardless of how uncomfortable that position makes me. After all, I do believe that Joseph Smith, Jr., was / is a Prophet of GOD.
  15. Good question. I've not received confirmation, so I remain LDS (if only by name).