We turned around to take a look, and my companion made a dismissive hand gesture and said “Crazy ol’ coot.” I replied “But he’s right.”
We walked back to him and arranged to meet him later.
We baptized him.]]>
It seems like we’re missing something there though. As if a deceiving spirit would honestly reach out his/her hand for you to shake only to feel nothing, or as if a deceiving spirit would jump out of the way each time you tried to touch him/her. I can imagine chasing one around the room with my arm extended: “I’m gonna getcha!” “No you won’t!” “Yes I am!” “No you won’t!”
I’ve heard it interpreted that the shaking hands ordeal is pointing to the tokens, but again that doesn’t solve what for me is still an issue of touching. And it’s sort of a circular argument to say that a deceiving spirit can’t use a token; they’re deceiving spirits, so wouldn’t it be natural for them to use a token deceptively? Or are the tokens blessed with some sort of untouchable spell like the garment? Or maybe, and this is what I’m thinking all along, symbolism is something that the modern mind has difficulty understanding… thoughts?
Maybe Joseph thought that lying/deceiving spirits had bodies? I’ve often thought about MMPs (multiple mortal probations) myself, and that would explain how “unborn” personages “do” things in the physical world. But these are just musings…
…or are they?]]>
As we say down here in Kentucky: Git ‘er dun fer God!]]>
I hate it when people do this. It seems like he’s trying to impugn upon regular jello-eating Mormons the idea that they receive angelic ministry all the time. Hogwash, I say! The scriptures, for the most part (probably very few exceptions) use the term “angel” as someone who is seen, and heard, and maybe even “felt” (I’m thinking of Jacob’s subsequent hip surgery after the pile-driver given him by an angel — or was it Yahweh himself??? Hmmmm…). I don’t know what Oaks was thinking (he’s usually the only thinker of the group), but I don’t like it. Yeah, you heard me. I also have issues with Elder Bednar’s “Seed of Abraham” doctrine. You heard that too.
I just don’t like it when that which is both lofty and holy is made low for the common member (or anyone, really) to achieve. We do a lot of that in church, so that it seems like we’re doing okay, when in reality, we’re not.
I say: If you’ve had the presence of an angel, you’d KNOW you had the presence of an angel. No whispers, no feelings, no subjective tools of interpretation or non-existentialist jargon like this. No doubts about it.]]>