https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151807530633687&set=a.10150527833908687.394782.26592653686&type=1&theater

Nothing like classifying the whole world into 4 squares in order to manipulate people into "working" towards being more "obedient"

And the assumption that religion is good is pure BS.

Disciple = Obedient Follower. Aren't they adorable when they think they've found a whole new way to look at Obedience.

Another cute little chart top make them feel good about being sheep. It's too easy.

"And the motives for posting this chart were...?"
Great comment AC.

Natural man ???
What is that ?

I took it as one who bathes rarely.

Another one of God's enemies.

A guy with real breasts. . .

Natural man? As in the way God created him?

According to the chart you just need to have impure motives and unrighteous actions.

Hmm, the Big 15 probably know more about that than anyone here.

Where does unrighteous actions + impure motivations + pretending to be righteous + claiming to be a disciple fit in? This chart is missing someone in my family...

They've changed a couple of the terms but have essentially taken a great quote from St Augustine and turned it into a dodgy diagram!

Adolf Hitler would love the obedient....the Church is setting up a group of people "ripe" for tyranny ..... I wonder if that is why the government built the new NSA computer facility in Utah?
Tons of "Enders" available .....

The problem is that most Mormons I know fall into the "hypocrite" category. They want to be good but they do terrible, judgmental, condescending things that hurt people. Unrighteous actions with righteous intent. Things like posting this chart, come to think of it.

Well, "pure" vs. "impure" are subjective terms. So are "righteous" and "unrighteous.

And isn't subjectivity the very lifeblood of the Mormon church? Shapeshifting definitions of words are very handy.

You always win when you make your own rules.

I remember when the Mormons replaced "white and delightsome" with "pure and delightsome." I assume the chart refers to white motives, since pure and white are interchangeable.

I don't have FB, else I might post a comment on how subtly the most desirable type of person is a white box while the lead desirable type of person is a dark box... I work in PR, people, and it's all about messaging.

Perhaps a hangover from the good ol' solid racism days is all.

But it IS a fair improvement over their earlier two-box black/white right/wrong view.

https://www.lds.org/broadcasts/ces-devotionals
https://www.lds.org/church/leader/tad-r-callister?lang=eng
"Elder Callister received a bachelor of science degree in accounting from Brigham Young University in 1968. He later attended UCLA Law School, graduating with a law degree in 1971. The following year, he earned an LLM (Master’s) degree in tax law from New York University. Prior to his call as a mission president, he was employed as a practicing attorney with the firm of Callister & Callister."

This is theology from the firm hand of the firm of Callister & Callister.

Jesus Christ need not save anyone. The Law will save.

As long as my motives are pure, I couldn't care less whether some judgmental religious fanatics consider my actions to be "righteous" enough.

And I don't usually consider the term "disciple" to be a good thing.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/07/2014 02:08PM by nickname.

Black and white, either/or thinking.

Fundamentalists like to make concepts as simple as possible--it's infantile, but it's easy to grasp, like a rattle. This little chart is as simplistic as a four-square checker board. Doesn't that sound like a fun game?

Real life is infinitely complex. To believe the same way as the Simpleton who dreamed up this trite little box, you have to prune away most of reality.

When is a life-path decision black or white? Is the death penalty idea the result of good or bad motives? Let's consult the chart....hmmmm, nothing helpful here.

Should I steal that piece of candy from the store? That's a question no one needs a chart to answer, but is the only level of decision making to which this thing applies.

The same basic thing is used in science classes at BYUI.

www.byui.edu/Documents/instructional.../Dan%20moore.pdf‎ scroll to pages 4 and 5 for the box charts.

The message is: You can reconcile science and religion because "we don't know everything, but someday (when we die) we will learn the truth." They promote the wrong idea that the gospel includes all truth and thereby confuse science truth with religious BS and offer the weak minded with an easy out. Science is not the search for "truth" it the search for the best explanation we can find based on the data. As we get more data the explanation changes. Religion "truth" is supposed to be absolute - commandments etc.

This is total BS. The MORG can't lose with this answer and it keeps people from coming to the conclusion that both science and religious answers can't be right (i.e., either there was a worldwide flood or not, either there was an Adam and Eve or not etc.)