Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Post Reply
FakingIt_MakingIt
Guru Gossiper
Guru Gossiper
Posts: 3456
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2013 12:38 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Unread post by FakingIt_MakingIt »

natalka81 wrote: Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:53 pm
FakingIt_MakingIt wrote: Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:34 pm
natalka81 wrote: Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:28 pm So everyone has the right to choose to join the LDS church, but some people, based on their sexual orientation and other things (I am assuming there may be other things) do not have the right to have a temple recommend, meaning that they can't really be full participants in the religion, even if they choose to do so? I admit I am not an expert on this, but it still seems rather exclusionary to me. And I'm not targeting this at you specifically (although I am sure it must feel a little like that and I'm sorry) but I'm just having a really hard time accepting that it's a positive position to have when raising children in the modern world. Those of us who belong to some faith group likely don't endorse everything it stands for, so I'm not saying ALL Mormons hate LGBTQ people or anything like that, but again, it is my personal opinion that kids should be brought up to know that everyone is equal before God.
I don't feel like youre targeting me at all. I'll do my best to answer but Im not a master LDS teacher, nor do I know all things either.

Yes, everyone has the right to join, and yes some don't qualify to hold a recommend to go into the temple. There are many things which would exclude you from entering the temple (sexual preference included). But being worth for the temple or not doesn't mean that God loves you more then someone else. My holding a recommend in NO WAY means that God loves me more then he loves you, or anyone who doesn't hold a recommend. God doesn't work like that. And the church doesn't teach that He does.
The church teaches that we should always be striving and working to be our best selves. For some that is being a recommend holder, for others that's not part of their path. And that's absolutely fine.
If the Griffith kids are being brought up to think theyre more loved by God because of their faith then that is on the Griffiths. That is not at all what we are taught at church. We are actually taught the opposite, nearly every sunday school lessons includes loving everyone because that is how God loves them. Whether theyre straight, gay, rich, poor, a different race, anything. We are taught to love everyone and be kind to everyone because that is what God would do.
But it isn't "absolutely fine", in my opinion, if someone wants temple to part of their path, but are told by the institution that it isn't possible. I really do appreciate you sharing this information, though- there's a lot about the LDS church that I don't know! I think I've said everything I can on this topic.

But if they want it then the flip side would be they believe and support the things that are necessary to get there. So I don't know how many there are that genuinely want to attend the temple, for the right reasons, and cant.
Does that make sense? Like for example, my mom isn't LDS. She hates the church. She has NO desire to want to be there and go to the temple even if she were invited and met the requirements. I however WANT to be able to attend temple sessions, so I do what is required of me to hold a recommend...I actually really love debating/discussing the church. I don't intend to convert anyone and fully understand that most wont support what I say, but I think having a conversation where both parties get to say their opinion is great. If nothing else it makes me think! And as a convert that's always a good thing!
HelloSweetie
Super Moddie
Super Moddie
Posts: 15415
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 7:33 am
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Unread post by HelloSweetie »

FakingIt_MakingIt wrote:

But if they want it then the flip side would be they believe and support the things that are necessary to get there. So I don't know how many there are that genuinely want to attend the temple, for the right reasons, and cant.
Does that make sense? Like for example, my mom isn't LDS. She hates the church. She has NO desire to want to be there and go to the temple even if she were invited and met the requirements. I however WANT to be able to attend temple sessions, so I do what is required of me to hold a recommend...I actually really love debating/discussing the church. I don't intend to convert anyone and fully understand that most wont support what I say, but I think having a conversation where both parties get to say their opinion is great. If nothing else it makes me think! And as a convert that's always a good thing!
They want to be included with their families. They don’t want to feel exiled, or different from everyone else. This is where the depression and shame comes in to play for so many youth.

They grow up with the church being a huge part of their life, but then have to decide to choose between who they truly are, or who they NEED to be to maintain the status quo. Most of them come from a position of loving the church, but feel the church doesn’t love them.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
User avatar
rdt1004
Guru Gossiper
Guru Gossiper
Posts: 2145
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 4:04 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Unread post by rdt1004 »

natalka81 wrote: Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:53 pm
FakingIt_MakingIt wrote: Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:34 pm
natalka81 wrote: Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:28 pm So everyone has the right to choose to join the LDS church, but some people, based on their sexual orientation and other things (I am assuming there may be other things) do not have the right to have a temple recommend, meaning that they can't really be full participants in the religion, even if they choose to do so? I admit I am not an expert on this, but it still seems rather exclusionary to me. And I'm not targeting this at you specifically (although I am sure it must feel a little like that and I'm sorry) but I'm just having a really hard time accepting that it's a positive position to have when raising children in the modern world. Those of us who belong to some faith group likely don't endorse everything it stands for, so I'm not saying ALL Mormons hate LGBTQ people or anything like that, but again, it is my personal opinion that kids should be brought up to know that everyone is equal before God.
I don't feel like youre targeting me at all. I'll do my best to answer but Im not a master LDS teacher, nor do I know all things either.

Yes, everyone has the right to join, and yes some don't qualify to hold a recommend to go into the temple. There are many things which would exclude you from entering the temple (sexual preference included). But being worth for the temple or not doesn't mean that God loves you more then someone else. My holding a recommend in NO WAY means that God loves me more then he loves you, or anyone who doesn't hold a recommend. God doesn't work like that. And the church doesn't teach that He does.
The church teaches that we should always be striving and working to be our best selves. For some that is being a recommend holder, for others that's not part of their path. And that's absolutely fine.
If the Griffith kids are being brought up to think theyre more loved by God because of their faith then that is on the Griffiths. That is not at all what we are taught at church. We are actually taught the opposite, nearly every sunday school lessons includes loving everyone because that is how God loves them. Whether theyre straight, gay, rich, poor, a different race, anything. We are taught to love everyone and be kind to everyone because that is what God would do.
But it isn't "absolutely fine", in my opinion, if someone wants temple to part of their path, but are told by the institution that it isn't possible. I really do appreciate you sharing this information, though- there's a lot about the LDS church that I don't know! I think I've said everything I can on this topic.
This might seem slightly off topic, but sort of related to this talk about exclusionary practices in the church. What about the different, for lack of a better word, "levels" in heaven that the LDS church teaches? My basic understanding is that only the best, most righteous and saved people go to the highest "level" and those that don't follow the book of mormon exactly as they are told go to the not as great lower "levels" of heaven. So it's kind of like a scare tactic to get members to follow everything the church tells them or else they risk being locked out of the best heaven with the rest of their family for eternity. Again, this could be totally wrong and I don't want to pick on anyone or single them out, but it's something I always think about when people say that the LDS church isn't exclusionary. Just want to have a discussion about it.
FakingIt_MakingIt
Guru Gossiper
Guru Gossiper
Posts: 3456
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2013 12:38 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Unread post by FakingIt_MakingIt »

There are actually 4 "levels"
- Celestial Kingdom
- Terrestrial Kingdom
- Telestial Kingdom
- Perdition / Outerdarkness

This link explains it far better then I ever could: https://www.lds.org/topics/kingdoms-of-glory?lang=eng

God will judge us all on our hearts intentions, and that will determine the degree of glory. I wouldn't say its a scare tactic, Ive never felt that way (even when I wasn't a member of the church). Just something to keep in mind when you decide how youre going to live your life. You don't have to be perfect to make it to the celestial kingdom, you just have to fully accept God and his son and live the best possible life you can. That means atoning when you sin, loving God, and loving others.
lightasfeather
Amateur
Amateur
Posts: 55
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2018 2:58 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Unread post by lightasfeather »

rdt1004 wrote: Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:26 pm
natalka81 wrote: Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:53 pm
FakingIt_MakingIt wrote: Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:34 pm

I don't feel like youre targeting me at all. I'll do my best to answer but Im not a master LDS teacher, nor do I know all things either.

Yes, everyone has the right to join, and yes some don't qualify to hold a recommend to go into the temple. There are many things which would exclude you from entering the temple (sexual preference included). But being worth for the temple or not doesn't mean that God loves you more then someone else. My holding a recommend in NO WAY means that God loves me more then he loves you, or anyone who doesn't hold a recommend. God doesn't work like that. And the church doesn't teach that He does.
The church teaches that we should always be striving and working to be our best selves. For some that is being a recommend holder, for others that's not part of their path. And that's absolutely fine.
If the Griffith kids are being brought up to think theyre more loved by God because of their faith then that is on the Griffiths. That is not at all what we are taught at church. We are actually taught the opposite, nearly every sunday school lessons includes loving everyone because that is how God loves them. Whether theyre straight, gay, rich, poor, a different race, anything. We are taught to love everyone and be kind to everyone because that is what God would do.
But it isn't "absolutely fine", in my opinion, if someone wants temple to part of their path, but are told by the institution that it isn't possible. I really do appreciate you sharing this information, though- there's a lot about the LDS church that I don't know! I think I've said everything I can on this topic.
This might seem slightly off topic, but sort of related to this talk about exclusionary practices in the church. What about the different, for lack of a better word, "levels" in heaven that the LDS church teaches? My basic understanding is that only the best, most righteous and saved people go to the highest "level" and those that don't follow the book of mormon exactly as they are told go to the not as great lower "levels" of heaven. So it's kind of like a scare tactic to get members to follow everything the church tells them or else they risk being locked out of the best heaven with the rest of their family for eternity. Again, this could be totally wrong and I don't want to pick on anyone or single them out, but it's something I always think about when people say that the LDS church isn't exclusionary. Just want to have a discussion about it.
The church itself is such a mess, I cant believe it isnt forbidden, if Im honest. And I am saying this after having spent months researching it because of a friend who is a member - and I feel so sorry for her and the fact she cannot leave or else she would hardly be allowed anywhere near family - including not being allowed to attend weddings of her kids etc. - as for any other brainwashed members of LDS. Sadly the only good part of that religion are those that they stole from Christianity (in terms of values, Bible stories etc. - I am not saying Christanity is only good religion or anything of sorts, before anyone objects, but nothing that LDS added onto it is remotely positive, starting by the fact it is all based on lies by a known criminal and sexual predator who couldnt keep his lies straight even, nothing in Book of Mormon actually make sense and loads of it is provably made up nonsense if you truly think it trough, most of the teaching opposes the Bible and has nothing to do with belief in Christ as saviour, oh, pardon me - he is Lucifer´s brother as they believe so why would he be so important... - there are so many stories of high level Mormons learning its all fake because they wanted to study it more - that doesnt happen in any other religion, usually if you are devoted believer reading and studying religion books will strenghten your faith, not send you running away from it).

As far as it being a source of dysfunction - it absolutely is. But not the sole source, LDS didnt make this family what it is, but also LDS is a problem on its own. Maybe Mormons will eventually pretend they never were against LGBTQ upon pressure from the state - just like their leader !had a revelation" when the state threatened them about the polygamy and suddenly it wasnt church teaching anymore, then when state pressed about racism LDS finally made adjustments in that regard despite the fact that the Book of Mormon actually still says darker skin was a punishment from God (WTF??). They definitely do teach bunch of nonsense and how only devoted Mormons can get to highest level of heaven (and then become Gods on their own planet - not even joking here, its all on official LDS web, just hidden deeper) which in turns makes many of them feel superior by definition... And dont even try to rationalise the baptism of dead - that is such screwed up idea really... I wanted to believe LDS is some misunderstood branch of Christianity when I started reading up on it, but its neither Christian, nor following Bible nor positive influence, its a scam set up by an awful criminal person (imprisoned several times) who forced himself on underage girls and already married women under pretense that it was revealed to him by God he has to do it. And food for thought - look at the symbols on the temples and the secret rituals, handshakes etc. - all that very much resembles freemasonry and their satanistic rituals - Smith was in freemason so that clarifies where it comes from somewhat...
squirmska08
Talker
Talker
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2018 9:16 am
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Unread post by squirmska08 »

natalka81 wrote:So everyone has the right to choose to join the LDS church, but some people, based on their sexual orientation and other things (I am assuming there may be other things) do not have the right to have a temple recommend, meaning that they can't really be full participants in the religion, even if they choose to do so? I admit I am not an expert on this, but it still seems rather exclusionary to me. And I'm not targeting this at you specifically (although I am sure it must feel a little like that and I'm sorry) but I'm just having a really hard time accepting that it's a positive position to have when raising children in the modern world. Those of us who belong to some faith group likely don't endorse everything it stands for, so I'm not saying ALL Mormons hate LGBTQ people or anything like that, but again, it is my personal opinion that kids should be brought up to know that everyone is equal before God.
Wow that “everyone is equal before God” Perfect! ImageImage
Couldn’t have said it better myselfImage


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Scar2016
Guru Gossiper
Guru Gossiper
Posts: 2134
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2016 10:06 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Unread post by Scar2016 »

FakingIt_MakingIt wrote: Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:20 pm The LDS church does believe that all can join though, and yes there are requirements. But they do believe that all can make the decision to join if they wish, that's what missionaries, baptisms for the dead and temple ordinances by proxy are all about.
I have a problem with 'baptisms for the dead.' When did those deceased souls ever give consent to be baptised into a religious faith called Mormonism? Sheer probability dictates a percentage of them would have absolutely been:

1) Quite happy with their own religion upon death
2) Non religious/agnostic
3) Atheist
4) Other

You know one religion they wouldn't have been upon their last breath? - Mormonism. Baptised without consent/against their will. And posthumously to boot. Are their surviving loved ones aware, notified or even invited to this 'ceremony?' The very idea is wholly distasteful and disrespectful of the dead. Unless I'm missing something it is also morally and ethically questionable.
I see NapTubers everywhere :coffee:
Scar2016
Guru Gossiper
Guru Gossiper
Posts: 2134
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2016 10:06 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Unread post by Scar2016 »

rdt1004 wrote: Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:26 pm This might seem slightly off topic, but sort of related to this talk about exclusionary practices in the church. What about the different, for lack of a better word, "levels" in heaven that the LDS church teaches? My basic understanding is that only the best, most righteous and saved people go to the highest "level" and those that don't follow the book of mormon exactly as they are told go to the not as great lower "levels" of heaven.
Maybe that's why Mormon's love multi level marketing, because it's relatable to the heavenly home that awaits them.
(Just a light hearted observation is all ;) )
I see NapTubers everywhere :coffee:
HelloSweetie
Super Moddie
Super Moddie
Posts: 15415
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 7:33 am
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Unread post by HelloSweetie »

Scar2016 wrote:
FakingIt_MakingIt wrote: Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:20 pm The LDS church does believe that all can join though, and yes there are requirements. But they do believe that all can make the decision to join if they wish, that's what missionaries, baptisms for the dead and temple ordinances by proxy are all about.
I have a problem with 'baptisms for the dead.' When did those deceased souls ever give consent to be baptised into a religious faith called Mormonism? Sheer probability dictates a percentage of them would have absolutely been:

1) Quite happy with their own religion upon death
2) Non religious/agnostic
3) Atheist
4) Other

You know one religion they wouldn't have been upon their last breath? - Mormonism. Baptised without consent/against their will. And posthumously to boot. Are their surviving loved ones aware, notified or even invited to this 'ceremony?' The very idea is wholly distasteful and disrespectful of the dead. Unless I'm missing something it is also morally and ethically questionable.
Is more important for the LDS youth to get up early (5am!) and go perform proxy baptisms before school, than it is for them to actually focus on their studies. This is considered prize behaviour FYI.

The Mormon argument is that the deceased will have the opportunity to accept or reject the baptism in the afterlife so it does nothing. MANY victims of the holocaust and their families have spoken out that they feel differently because their family members names were being added to LDS genealogical records. In short, the religion they gave their sacrifices and gave their lives for was being whitewashed over and another was being put in its place.

Oh and the Mormons baptized Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun as wrll. Very morally and ethically questionable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Scar2016
Guru Gossiper
Guru Gossiper
Posts: 2134
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2016 10:06 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Unread post by Scar2016 »

If Mormonism baptized AH and his side piece and added holocaust victims as you state HS, then the religion is hypocritical (on many more lower levels than even other religions) beyond reproach. Getting married at 18 suddenly doesn't seem so bad when you can commit adultery like AF and still get baptized into heavenly father's kingdom. #deepsarcasm
I see NapTubers everywhere :coffee:
FakingIt_MakingIt
Guru Gossiper
Guru Gossiper
Posts: 3456
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2013 12:38 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Unread post by FakingIt_MakingIt »

The souls that are baptized during the baptisms for the dead sessions have the opportunity to accept the baptism or not. So it’s not forcing anyone in the afterlife to become Mormon.
And students don’t get up at 5 am to go to these services. Some might get up early for seminary as it’s before school most times but that’s a completely different thing.
User avatar
lmmomSD
Super Moddie
Super Moddie
Posts: 25258
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2015 12:08 pm
Location: San Diego, Ca
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Re: Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Unread post by lmmomSD »

I went to seminary because my best friend was Mormon. I used to get into debates with the instructor because some of the things he said were just wrong. He would say something, and then look at me, just waiting for my response. Like "Jesus didn't drink wine". His first miracle was turning water into wine at a wedding. But his answer was that "There are many different translations of the word wine in Hebrew". But the New Testament was written in Greek and Aramaic. And the whole polygamy bit that was mentioned earlier. Utah wanted to become a state, so all of a sudden, the prophet of the church had a revelation that polygamy wasn't the policy anymore. And that the Earth was only several thousand years old.
My biggest personal issue with the church stemmed from the experience of my best friend. She was dating a South African exchange student, who was black. Although he didn't like to be called that because under Apartheid, he was "colored" so he had more rights than blacks. Anyway, they put incredible pressure on her. She was sinning just because she was dating him. She ended up breaking up with him because they hounded her so much.
Back to the topic at hand-- I don't think that the LDS church is entirely responsible for the dysfunction of the Griffiths. I don't think it's responsible for the cult of motherhood in that family. Nor the policy that friends are unnecessary, and all you need is your family. Like Bonnie saying that she was going to "pick up some friends" when she was going to Vegas with her sisters. I think the church values motherhood, but the Griffiths warped the belief into their own little cult. I wonder what Jennifer's mother was like.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Scar2016
Guru Gossiper
Guru Gossiper
Posts: 2134
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2016 10:06 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Unread post by Scar2016 »

FakingIt_MakingIt wrote: Wed Feb 13, 2019 7:13 am The souls that are baptized during the baptisms for the dead sessions have the opportunity to accept the baptism or not. So it’s not forcing anyone in the afterlife to become Mormon.
And students don’t get up at 5 am to go to these services. Some might get up early for seminary as it’s before school most times but that’s a completely different thing.
And what of the atheist's (and a good chunk of agnostics too I'd bet) who've been baptized? I'd wager they'd likely feel their name has been maligned in this world because, as atheist's, this is the only (religious/spiritual) world they believe in and it is this world that said baptism takes place.

Furthermore, due to their atheist beliefs they do not believe they would have the opportunity to refuse becoming a Mormon in the afterlife - because they do not believe in the afterlife. Can you not see the ironic oxymoron here? Also (and again), are their living loved ones invited to this ceremony and are their views or consent by proxy at least requested/inquired about?
I see NapTubers everywhere :coffee:
lightasfeather
Amateur
Amateur
Posts: 55
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2018 2:58 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Unread post by lightasfeather »

Indeed,the stories in the Bible have a fighting chance to be believed in today's world - the civilisations mentioned actually existed, towns or even buildings have been documented, archeologists found evidence, cultures of other religions mention a lot of same and thus confirm the stories could be somewhat embellished version of history in order to teach people about values etc. But with Book of Mormon the trouble is not a single archeological or other evidence has ever been found that any civilisation mentioned there existed, quite the opposite, it has been proven impossible - there is no way that battles that left "million dead" would not leave a single trace of anything behind, the whole history and fighting of the clans or however you call them and what not is just made up. Plus like a lot of books written by a single author, it truly did not age well and reflects way too much the thinking typical for men of certain class and background in the years when it was created if you look at how women or other races are spoken of and regarded, what sort of ideas are pushed through.
lmmomSD wrote: Wed Feb 13, 2019 7:44 am I went to seminary because my best friend was Mormon. I used to get into debates with the instructor because some of the things he said were just wrong. He would say something, and then look at me, just waiting for my response. Like "Jesus didn't drink wine". His first miracle was turning water into wine at a wedding. But his answer was that "There are many different translations of the word wine in Hebrew". But the New Testament was written in Greek and Aramaic. And the whole polygamy bit that was mentioned earlier. Utah wanted to become a state, so all of a sudden, the prophet of the church had a revelation that polygamy wasn't the policy anymore. And that the Earth was only several thousand years old.
My biggest personal issue with the church stemmed from the experience of my best friend. She was dating a South African exchange student, who was black. Although he didn't like to be called that because under Apartheid, he was "colored" so he had more rights than blacks. Anyway, they put incredible pressure on her. She was sinning just because she was dating him. She ended up breaking up with him because they hounded her so much.
Back to the topic at hand-- I don't think that the LDS church is entirely responsible for the dysfunction of the Griffiths. I don't think it's responsible for the cult of motherhood in that family. Nor the policy that friends are unnecessary, and all you need is your family. Like Bonnie saying that she was going to "pick up some friends" when she was going to Vegas with her sisters. I think the church values motherhood, but the Griffiths warped the belief into their own little cult. I wonder what Jennifer's mother was like.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
HelloSweetie
Super Moddie
Super Moddie
Posts: 15415
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 7:33 am
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Unread post by HelloSweetie »

FakingIt_MakingIt wrote:The souls that are baptized during the baptisms for the dead sessions have the opportunity to accept the baptism or not. So it’s not forcing anyone in the afterlife to become Mormon.
And students don’t get up at 5 am to go to these services. Some might get up early for seminary as it’s before school most times but that’s a completely different thing.

At least in Provo they do.

[IMG]//uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201902 ... 86898c.jpg[/IMG]

The age for YM/YW has been changed to now start January of the year the child turns 12, so they are eligible for temple recommends and boys are eligible for the priesthood.

Nothing like a woman viewing her 12 year old son as superior to her, because he’s eligible for a post her gender excludes her from. Apparently it’s common for the children to go work in the temple before school because it’s free time that everyone has, so there is no way to excuse yourself. They know the kids aren’t busy. One would argue they have a choice, but they really don’t.

IMO baptizing anyone after they are dead is wrong. They do not consent. People are entitled to their own beliefs and it’s no ones religion to interfere with that. I have to wonder where baptized Adolf would have landed in the tiering system having been a married white man. Would he have ranked higher than unmarried Anne Frank? (Yes, they baptized her too). It also changes history if they are then listed on records as having converted. The holocaust victims do not want their loved ones being documented as having converted. Not to mention, why do the missions at all if you can just baptize everyone after they’ve passed? Answer: dead men don’t pay tithing. (By the way, what happens on missions is awful and also explains a lot of the Griffiths “openness.”)

If it’s it’s a choice and harmless because they have passed on, then I’m sure the LDS approve of having their family members “outed” after their passing by the LGBTQ community, and having their legacy changed from one of an upstanding Mormon, to an upstanding gay man (whether they were or not). I mean, it’s just records right? Not what actually happened....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
FakingIt_MakingIt
Guru Gossiper
Guru Gossiper
Posts: 3456
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2013 12:38 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Unread post by FakingIt_MakingIt »

The temples aren’t even open at 5 am. Most open at 9.

Also, having the priesthood doesn’t make you superior.

If an atheist is baptized by proxy they have the ability to deny the baptism.
Scar2016
Guru Gossiper
Guru Gossiper
Posts: 2134
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2016 10:06 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Unread post by Scar2016 »

FakingIt_MakingIt wrote: Wed Feb 13, 2019 9:57 am If an atheist is baptized by proxy they have the ability to deny the baptism.
Please can you tell me how an atheist has the ability to deny the baptism if they are dead?
I see NapTubers everywhere :coffee:
FakingIt_MakingIt
Guru Gossiper
Guru Gossiper
Posts: 3456
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2013 12:38 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Unread post by FakingIt_MakingIt »

Scar2016 wrote: Wed Feb 13, 2019 10:08 am
FakingIt_MakingIt wrote: Wed Feb 13, 2019 9:57 am If an atheist is baptized by proxy they have the ability to deny the baptism.
Please can you tell me how an atheist has the ability to deny the baptism if they are dead?
1. If they’re correct about there being nothing after death then the baptism by proxy is a moot point.
2. If they’re wrong and there is life after death they can choose to deny or accept the baptism by proxy.
HelloSweetie
Super Moddie
Super Moddie
Posts: 15415
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 7:33 am
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Unread post by HelloSweetie »

Read this article and think of the Griffiths for a second. How they are largely isolated, and their one common interest is the church. How does the church encourage this? Read the below article and consider the Griffiths childhood. I maintain the religion has a lot more to do with their dysfunction than people want to let on. The same church after all, made Chad and Jennifer who they are and it just trickled down.

There’s a sort of peer pressure within these groups to try as hard as they can to please the church.

https://www.lds.org/new-era/2013/02/mo ... e?lang=eng


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
FakingIt_MakingIt
Guru Gossiper
Guru Gossiper
Posts: 3456
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2013 12:38 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Comparing The Griffiths (Post at your own risk!)

Unread post by FakingIt_MakingIt »

HelloSweetie wrote: Wed Feb 13, 2019 10:25 am Read this article and think of the Griffiths for a second. How they are largely isolated, and their one common interest is the church. How does the church encourage this? Read the below article and consider the Griffiths childhood. I maintain the religion has a lot more to do with their dysfunction than people want to let on. The same church after all, made Chad and Jennifer who they are and it just trickled down.

There’s a sort of peer pressure within these groups to try as hard as they can to please the church.

https://www.lds.org/new-era/2013/02/mo ... e?lang=eng


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’ve actually read that before....
Do you not prefer to hang out with people who think like you? Or who believe the same general thing as you? I can’t imagine you’d be besties with a member of the lds church?
That talk is a great example of how the church makes friendships stronger and helps kids see how everyone is a son or daughter of god and we should love and treat them accordingly.
We have no way of knowing why Chad and Jennifer are the way they are. We don’t know their parents and we know little of their childhood. I do know however that they way they behave and they way they act is not the norm in the lds church. I still maintain that the Griffiths are a different bunch. The church in no way encourages you to only be friends with your siblings, the church in no way encourages the strange punishments we’ve heard the Griffith kids talk about receiving from their parents.
Post Reply

Return to “Ellie and Jared”