Lol-I think you answered the question even though that wasn’t your intent but your comments are always interesting but God’s actions are often precipitated by society, just ask Noah and God’s commandments do change as society changes or we would still be living by the simplicity of the ten commandments and blacks would still not have the priesthood and we may be still living with the practice of polygamy, unless you are suggesting that the government had zero influence in that arena-yes I know “touchy subject” Yes man does not control God, but what man does often dictates an appropriate reaction from God. I also disagree with your assessment of President Monson-He would ask for donations for the cost of the new found cure but would not exempt the poor who were unable to contribute-an exact replica of the church welfare system-after all it costs money to package and distribute and grow and transport all those products and even those who are really flush pay a greatly reduced rate from the church orchards if they are so inclined to buy. Many good points about government, however, but I wouldn’t feel too comfortable about aligning myself with the Tea Party, but I wish you well in your quest. In due time all of us will be afforded a first rate education at the knee of the Master
I do appreciate your reply KC. And before I address your points let me just say that I know my actions on this board have not exactly been exemplary. I came in with the misunderstanding that grasshopper had posted a political rant on a sports board and tore into him in a not very kind way. Then you guys very nicely explained that there is an Off Topic portion of the site where this kind of stuff was discussed. I felt pretty dumb and apologized to grasshopper, but he wouldn’t accept my apology and continued to shower me with his righteousness, and again I lost it and tore into him with my own self-righteous rant telling him basically that Jesus wouldn’t like him, in an also not very kind way. I apologized again knowing that he wasn’t going to accept (he didn’t) but pledging to be kinder to him unilaterally and basically decided not to try to have discussions with him anymore. Then I got into it with Jim when I should have let some stuff slide… etc. I now need to apologize again, and unfortunately, knowing me this probably won’t be the last time. All I can do is try to be better, or if even one of you would rather I left, just email me and I will.
Secondly, you are correct to say that I have a different way of seeking and understanding truth than you do. I do believe it is a more reliable one than relying on supernatural explanations, but that doesn’t mean I don’t respect others like you that don’t agree with me. If I came across that way I think it was at least partially because others told me my evidence wasn’t any good and there’s was, and I felt it was only right to say why I didn’t think the evidence pointed to what they thought it did. I don’t think this makes me evil, and I don’t understand why anyone would think so, and I think you would probably agree with me. In spite of our huge religious differences, I can’t ever imagine us having a serious argument about religion because we both have respect for the other one’s viewpoint, and that is something I haven’t experienced from the other members of this site. Of course as a liberal and an agnostic, maybe I just don’t belong here at all and should never be respected, as grasshopper and others have suggested. I hope this isn’t the case, though I do think it is counterproductive to discuss politics or religion here so perhaps I should stay off the Off Topic part of the site altogether.
Now I want to respond to your other points one by one so I don’t miss something:
"I was not going to reply to this topic. However, I feel that there are some misconceptions that need to be clarified. First of all, Mike, let me be the first to say that I recognize that your position is not one that is born out of neglect or lack of sincerity. It is likely that you not only sincerely considered the issues that you have accepted to be truth, you also likely anguished over these decisions prior to accepting them. Please know that I recognize this and I am not judging the process that you went through in any way. "
Thank you KC. I think you are the only one that read my intentions correctly from day one, and its nice that at least someone here doesn’t see me in the light most here apparently do. I think if they give me a chance they will likely change their mind over time.
"I would like you to recognize that many others have also sincerely considered the issues that you have considered and have come to different opinions and conclusions. The fact that we have come to different conclusions does not mean that we were not open enough to and/or willing enough to consider the facts any more than your conclusions indicate that you were not sincere enough in your investigation. It simply means that we came to different conclusions.
Because of the things that you have accepted as truth, there are things that appear clear and unquestionable to you, that are not generally accepted by us. "
I have absolutely no problem with this statement. Well OK I actually do, but its not something I would normally argue about. I’m fine if you want to say, “our way of looking at things is just as valid as yours.” That is a statement I can agree with and I’ve tried to make that plain all along. But when you say one conclusion is just as likely as any other based on “looking at the facts” I would have to disagree with you. I’ve simply never seen anyone join the LDS church because they became convinced by looking at the facts. Missionaries don’t try to convince people with rational discussions. LDS believers believe in spite of evidence or out of ignorance of evidence because they believe they have had a spiritual witness. I would never judge that witness. But its simply not accurate to say that the evidence is just as good on one side as it is on the other. In fact the evidence is overwhelming on one side to anyone who doesn’t believe in supernatural explanations. That’s all I’ve said all along. Not that my way is better than anyone else’s. The values and interpretation are simply different. I’m also not sure I agree that some on here are “open to discussing ideas.” So far it seems to me that the discussion is only allowed to go one way before someone gets upset, which doesn’t seem fair from my perspective. Again, from what I’ve seen we’re better off not discussing my beliefs or my politics here, and that is perfectly fine with me. These things should not be discussed in polite company anyway 
"An example of this is your statement that the church has a history of not being fully honest with their members. From your perspective, this is a clear and unquestionable fact. From our perspective, this is not. This, once again is not due to our inability to reason nor is it due to our lack of attention to the issues at hand. It has more to do with our perspective. There is no doubt that the church has emphasized certain faith building portions of its history while at the same time not talking about the imperfections of its leaders and members. Here, you see dishonesty, while at the same time, we see a focus on faith. "
Again, maybe I’m being too literal here, but it doesn’t sound like you are disagreeing that the church has been less than honest with its members, just the motivation for that lack of honesty. I see no problem with that statement and as I’ve said many times, this kind of deception is perfectly understandable and that all organizations engage in these practices. I’m really not attacking the church when I say they haven’t been fully truthful (who has?) and I don’t hate the church, and in fact just the opposite is true. Furthermore, I hope I didn’t leave the impression that I think its wrong for the church to change because I absolutely don’t. I think its the responsible and reasonable thing to do, and if anything I want to speed up those changes, not slow them down. Some on this board would be amazed to know how often I defend the LDS Church in my everyday conversations. I have heard all kinds of crazy nonsense like the church owns Coca Cola and that there’s sex rituals happening in the temples. Now I can’t say for sure but I’m pretty sure that last part is wrong. And many other things of course. In fact I’m currently engaged in several conversations on the Trib website in response to Monson’s call for loosening the honor code, which I personally think is long overdue.) A guy there made the stunningly stupid claim that BYU should change the name of the university because BY was a racist. I tried to nicely explain that pretty much everyone else was racist then too and he came back a couple times with these long arguments of why I was wrong so I finally kind of lost it and told him that we should also tear down the Jefferson and Washington Monuments and scrub the faces off Mt. Rushmore because all these men were also racists. Internet conversations can be pretty dumb. But I digress…
"Please do not be too critical of our efforts to examine all of the evidence simply because we came to different conclusions than you did. I believe that I have examined all of the evidence that is out there. I have, at times, struggled with a various pieces of the puzzle. However, in the final analysis, I found that, for me, there was much more evidence that was in favor than there was against the gospel. Much of that evidence is personal and not something that can be demonstrated. However, in no case did I find any issue that cannot be explained. "
Again, I see nothing to disagree with here. You are making it clear that you find more value in the church than out of it, a perfectly reasonable point of view. You are one of the very small percentage of Mormons that has really been diligent about researching their faith, and I have nothing but respect for your decision. You can’t imagine (actually I’m sure you probably can ) how many LDS people I’ve spoken too that are unaware of the most basic evidence I would think one would want to become familiar with before joining a church. You are correct that I went through the same struggles as you did looking at this evidence. I think Mormonism is a good religion which generally teaches its members to be better people, but the truth claims it makes simply can’t be made based on evidence. Every LDS scholar I know, and believe it or not I do know a couple including Dr. Richard Anderson and Hugh Nibley, will tell you the same thing, so I don’t know why I’m evil for saying this.
“I personally feel that the Lord will ultimately judge us, not only based on our actions, but also based on the paths we are forced to pass through. Each of our earthly experiences will be different. I feel that there are many members of the church that think that they will be placed above others simply because they attended all of their meetings throughout their lives or because they have pioneer ancestors or because they were faithful and became parents to 8.5 children. I think the gospel requires us to lift each other up in our struggles. In order to do that, we need to acknowledge the struggles of others. As is stated many times in the Book of Mormon, our lack of attention to our responsibilities may result in the state of those who have rejected the things that we have accepted being better than our state if we do not repent. In other words, we may find that God, having a complete understanding of the effort and sufferings of each one of us, may look more favorably on the individual that struggled to obtain an understanding of the gospel, only to fail to gain a testimony than he does on the individual that obtained a witness only to fail to live the gospel.”
I appreciate your testimony, and your post KC. Let me reiterate one more time that I love the LDS people and I do not believe I am superior to them for using an evidence based approach to truth rather than some other method. I do feel locked in to this approach as the only thing that makes sense for me, but of course I can’t prove I’m right anymore than anyone else can. These are value judgments. Science can teach us a lot about where we came from and our place in the universe, but it really can’t take the place of religion and doesn’t try to do so. It explains how things happened - not why. I believe each of us are responsible for finding our own way and for helping others along the best we can in our own imperfect ways. Thanks again for being willing to engage in a conversation about these things K.C. I really appreciate it.
LOL! Now you are expanding your statements to include other ideas into each subject. Of course there would need to be assistance to help the poor. But the non-poor will pay helping defer costs. There will be charitable donners to help with costs. But those who make the cure will have to be paid. You have to agree with this.
With respect to your opinion that God changes based upon society is partially true. Moses came down the first time with the higher law but the people weren’t ready. So, he gave them the Ten Commandments. however, regardless of what man has done since, those commandments haven’t been changed. Neither have other laws and commandments such as Marriage and laws against homosexual acts. Even though society has been extremely corrupted, God hasn’t changed anything.
On the other hand, God gave the Levites authority to administer in the Priesthood. But, excluded all others including the other 11tribes of Israel, gentiles and blacks. At times, this has changed. And it’s not that society changed as much as God decided. Why he took away blacks from the Priesthood for a while, no reason we have heard of was true. God had his reason and maybe someday he will reveal it. But to say BY was a racist and that is why also doesn’t fit the statements by the Brethren that all reasons given were false. That is false too. If it were not false then President Kimball’s declaration was not a revelation. But we know it was.
Thanks man, but you weren’t responding to my post, those were responses to rblack my brother from another mother, not kcblack, but I appreciate the compliments and I don’t doubt we could break bread and see eye to eye on many of the worlds issues. Don’t let the others on here keep you from the off topic section, we need more balance when it comes to current events. Yes you will never convince anyone here to agree with everything you post, but there are some people here who are not afraid to think outside their own understanding and broaden their horizons without the fear of being led astray. Look forward to more discussions in the future.
Think outside your own understanding? LOL! My understanding is true. No reason to waste time on falsehoods
sometimes our own pride clouds our vision
Seems to be happening with you often
Ha ha KC. Well I think its clear, all Blacks look alike to me. Not sure how I managed to conflate the two of you but it seems like you both have similar ways of looking at things. Sorry about that
Mike,
I went back over my posts… I want to apologize to you for the tone… that was not my intent to berate what you believe.
I stand by my content, but I could have presented in a better way… Guess that why English is my third language (behind computer language and Klingon).
If you knew me, you would know I have no problems with people who believe differently than me. If that is how you feel great, not a problem. I try to resect peoples personal beliefs (Religion), because in the grand scheme of things… we must all do what we feel is right…
Sorry if you felt attacked… that was not my intent (just bad English 
).
No problem Floyd. I probably got my feathers ruffled unnecessarily and I was at least as responsible as you. I think you’re a pretty good writer too from what I can tell. From now on I’ll try to save my righteous indignation for football:)
Well done Floyd, it’s one of the reasons I like you, a man of integrity.
I’ll respond here and then wait to see who thinks I’m speaking to them but just an aside here and I think RBlack will agree, like KCBlack will as well.
RBlack and KCBlack have entirely different ideas about the majority of the topics discussed on cougarfan here. By that I mean that KC is relatively liberal and permissive in his views and I believe that RBlack is not so.
Not too hard to distinguish one from the other, particularly if you have been on the board for any length of time.
As for MikeH, he has moved into the "I’ve got my wedge in so now I’ll be nice and see if some of my tactics have been effective in instilling some doubt in some of these guys… what with telling Floyd he is a pretty good writer or KC that “all blacks look alike to me” which depending on how you interpreted the comment might have the appearance of being racist… ya know?
Ultimately though, isn’t that what it is all about? Deciding whom and what we will believe? I mean there is all kinds of evidence for this or that and we just decide who we will believe and trust for the truth.
What it really comes down to is this - Is the Book of Mormon true? Did Joseph Smith translate it from a historical record found on gold plates or did he just make up a nice 500 page long fantasy book and write it in a few months? There is plenty of “evidence” for the reality of the truth of the book and a smattering of “evidence” for mistakes and erroneous statements by fallible men over the past 200 years that detractors constantly use to try and discredit its’ veracity and truthfulness.
We all must decide for ourselves, right MikeH, errr KC?
Really Jim? You’re really starting to get into grasshopper crazy town now. Tell me exactly what you’re accusing me of again? I want to get make sure I understand before I comment.
Not accusing anybody of anything. I’m just throwing some comments out there, seeing if they stick and letting everyone decide if they are true or not.
You are pretty good at deciding what is truth, based on factual evidence and all, while most of the rest of us are into the supernatural stuff that has no basis in any evidence, right?
So seriously, what difference does it make what anybody says or accuses someone of? Why does Grasshopper bother you so much and seriously, why do you care to “understand”? Not being sarcastic here or anything, just wondering why it matters?
Well then let’s reverse it Jim. I think you’re probably hiding something. You think you can get away with fooling everyone on here but I am wise enough to see what you really are even if no one else can. Its just what I know and I don’t need any facts or evidence. I can just tell I shouldn’t listen to anything you say or to even talk to you. I might get your cooties or something.
Man, its not as hard to be a total d**k as I thought!
Hey Jim, Floyd did a respectable thing, recognized he may have jumped the gun with how he responded with personal attacks on Mike, I advise you do the same. Mike was baited by some of you, and he took the bait, but I think he has been more than accommodating since then after basically being attacked by “good Christians” for not believing as they believe. An olive branch and a do over seems to be the appropriate response, ala Floyd, so maybe some of you could be a little more tolerant towards a non-believer yet loyal BYU fan??? No harm in that, right?
You got it wrong about Mike. He’s a natural Korrihor. If you have a testimony of the Book of Mormon, which outs falsehoods and Deceivers, you would recognize this in Mike and often times yourself. I was on to him immediately and wasn’t about to continue without calling him on this.
Now, he’s trying to do the progressive method of two steps forward and one step backward. He’s making nice to get a foothold with you and others. Then, he feels he has a foundation to attack our beliefs and the Church. Jim isn’t buying it either. Nor are others. Just the liberal progressives
More Korrihor attacks. Nice try. Won’t work. You are a wolf in sheepskins. I wouldn’t doubt that you once were a member who aposticized. But, still loves BYU sports to feel some connection with your Mormon past.
“We claim the privilege of worshiping almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where or what they may.” There is no reason for anyone to fight over this issue. We have no responsibility to prove the gospel to Mike. Nor do we have the right to call Mike names or to judge the path that he has taken. If Mike has sincere questions regarding a point of the gospel, we are free to answer his question or not. The gospel requires us to respond lovingly.
I personally have a brother that has come to some of the very same conclusions that Mike has come to. He is a good man. He loves his wife and his children. He sincerely believes that the path that I am on is in error. Korrihor was a man that knew he was in the wrong and the lure of wickedness was too great. I would be sad if someone put such a label on my brother. It is not your position to make such a judgement. It is wrong. If you sincerely feel that he is not correct, the D&C has some advice for you…it involves persuasion, long-suffering, gentleness and meekness, and love unfeigned. I personally accept the gospel as truth. As such, we need to act accordingly.
If you wait long enough, I think I will probably find something that I agree with everyone on. However, this is probably the first time that KCBlack and I have been in agreement.