CougarCorner
Sign in
Archived Topic

Jake Heaps and the "Football/Tebow Mission"

by snoscythe · 1/11/2010

Sponsored Advertisementad content
S
Schmoe
Mars wrote:
who needs Apostles when we've got all of you? I'm glad that everyone here has all the answers. Anyway, ultimately Heaps is the only person affected by this. And if anyone is going to say that people who should be baptized will suffer for his decision, then perhaps they ought to be studying the gospel more than preaching it.

I rarely have any idea what you're talking about anymore.


You mean you used to have an idea of what he was saying? :skeptic:
S
snoscythe
Schmoe wrote:
Italics wrote:
who needs Apostles when we've got all of you? I'm glad that everyone here has all the answers. Anyway, ultimately Heaps is the only person affected by this. And if anyone is going to say that people who should be baptized will suffer for his decision, then perhaps they ought to be studying the gospel more than preaching it.

I rarely have any idea what you're talking about anymore.

You mean you used to have an idea of what he was saying? :skeptic:


I love it when posters come in at the end of a thread and try to skewer everyone else, but all they do is demonstrate that they haven't read the thread.
U
urroner
snoscythe wrote:
Mars wrote:
who needs Apostles when we've got all of you? I'm glad that everyone here has all the answers. Anyway, ultimately Heaps is the only person affected by this. And if anyone is going to say that people who should be baptized will suffer for his decision, then perhaps they ought to be studying the gospel more than preaching it.

I rarely have any idea what you're talking about anymore.

You mean you used to have an idea of what he was saying? :skeptic:


I love it when posters come in at the end of a thread and try to skewer everyone else, but all they do is demonstrate that they haven't read the thread.


Schmoe was being a smart-ass, and it was funny. Mars is just Mars, never changes, never will.
S
snoscythe
urroner wrote:
Schmoe wrote:
Italics wrote:
who needs Apostles when we've got all of you? I'm glad that everyone here has all the answers. Anyway, ultimately Heaps is the only person affected by this. And if anyone is going to say that people who should be baptized will suffer for his decision, then perhaps they ought to be studying the gospel more than preaching it.

I rarely have any idea what you're talking about anymore.

You mean you used to have an idea of what he was saying? :skeptic:


I love it when posters come in at the end of a thread and try to skewer everyone else, but all they do is demonstrate that they haven't read the thread.


Schmoe was being a smart-ass, and it was funny. Mars is just Mars, never changes, never will.


Yeah, but I wasn't referring to either of them....
A
ABYUFAN
snoscythe wrote:
snoscythe wrote:
Mars wrote:
who needs Apostles when we've got all of you? I'm glad that everyone here has all the answers. Anyway, ultimately Heaps is the only person affected by this. And if anyone is going to say that people who should be baptized will suffer for his decision, then perhaps they ought to be studying the gospel more than preaching it.

I rarely have any idea what you're talking about anymore.

You mean you used to have an idea of what he was saying? :skeptic:


I love it when posters come in at the end of a thread and try to skewer everyone else, but all they do is demonstrate that they haven't read the thread.


Schmoe was being a smart-ass, and it was funny. Mars is just Mars, never changes, never will.


Yeah, but I wasn't referring to either of them....

:) :D :lol: :P
Sponsored Advertisementad content
I
Italics
snoscythe wrote:
Mars wrote:
who needs Apostles when we've got all of you? I'm glad that everyone here has all the answers. Anyway, ultimately Heaps is the only person affected by this. And if anyone is going to say that people who should be baptized will suffer for his decision, then perhaps they ought to be studying the gospel more than preaching it.

I rarely have any idea what you're talking about anymore.

You mean you used to have an idea of what he was saying? :skeptic:


I love it when posters come in at the end of a thread and try to skewer everyone else, but all they do is demonstrate that they haven't read the thread.


I just think it's funny how everyone seems to think they are the beacon of truth when it comes to gospel matters. Any of you who actually DID serve a mission ought to know by now how easy and how possible it is to twist scriptures/beliefs into any possible direction to support your own opinions. And I'm referring to BOTH sides of this argument, not just one or the other.



Ultimately, I'm not certain how posting about how stupid Heaps' words were is furthering the effort of "wanting the best" for him.



But hey, these laughs were much needed after getting my client off with 2nd Degree Manslaughter after the original charge was 1st Degree murder, so....



Calm and down a take some deep breaths, Sno ;)
M
Mars
Italics wrote:
I just think it's funny how everyone seems to think they are the beacon of truth when it comes to gospel matters.

And how we think Mormons should listen to the prophet. Hilarious stuff, I know- really silly.
S
snoscythe
Italics wrote:
I just think it's funny how everyone seems to think they are the beacon of truth when it comes to gospel matters.




Sez they guy trying to be the beacon of truth when it comes to gospel matters.......
I
Italics
Mars wrote:
I just think it's funny how everyone seems to think they are the beacon of truth when it comes to gospel matters.

And how we think Mormons should listen to the prophet. Hilarious stuff, I know- really silly.


I just don't know why there's a need for 7 pages about it on a forum. Discussing things like Teo going to Notre Dame are worthy to all the discussion/ridicule IMO, but having this much discussion about someone's not serving a mission is sort of pointless, and saying "well I just care about his well-being" is a pretty stupid coverup.
I
Italics
snoscythe wrote:
I just think it's funny how everyone seems to think they are the beacon of truth when it comes to gospel matters.




Sez they guy trying to be the beacon of truth when it comes to gospel matters.......


How can I be the beacon of truth when I don't live in Provo?
Sponsored Advertisementad content
M
Mars
Italics wrote:
having this much discussion about someone's not serving a mission is sort of pointless, and saying "well I just care about his well-being" is a pretty stupid coverup.

1- Why is discussion of the Gospel "pointless"?

2- Are there parts of our lives that we should apply the Gospel to, and other parts that we shouldn't?

3- What are we "covering up" then?

4- Should we NOT care about others?
I
Italics
Mars wrote:
having this much discussion about someone's not serving a mission is sort of pointless, and saying "well I just care about his well-being" is a pretty stupid coverup.

1- Why is discussion of the Gospel "pointless"?

2- What are we "covering up" then?


1) It's not a gospel discussion, it's a critique of someone's personal decision about serving a mission

2) I'm going to go with either self-righteousness, inferiority complexes, a lack of time/boredom, and/or seeking out the opportunity to prove how extensive your knowledge of gospel topics is. I could be wrong.



EDIT - You added more questions, c'mon!



In all fairness, you shouldn't "care" about others. I suppose actually DOING something to help others is important, but again, how does a 7+ page critique of his decision help further the cause of "wanting the best for him?"



Anyway, I don't care enough about this topic to continue posting on it, so this is the last from me on it. It's beginning to remind me too much of CB, and I'm beginning to sound too much like Bengal :sick:
S
snoscythe
Italics wrote:
Italics wrote:
I just think it's funny how everyone seems to think they are the beacon of truth when it comes to gospel matters.




Sez they guy trying to be the beacon of truth when it comes to gospel matters.......


How can I be the beacon of truth when I don't live in Provo?


Sez the guy living in Rexburg to the guy living in Texas.



The point I was making is this: there's no way for you to come on here and tell us we are doing something wrong by saying that someone else is doing something wrong without looking like an idiot--it's like punching a guy for punching a guy. It didn't help that you came in and completely mischaracterized the thread. The point of the thread is that it is fine if he goes or doesn't go, but that to try and pass off football as a mission is disingenuous at best, and a somewhat offensive idea to those that have served and sacrificed.



I don't think anyone was criticizing his decision, but rather his tact in so doing.
M
Mars
Italics wrote:
1) It's not a gospel discussion, it's a critique of someone's personal decision about serving a mission

2) I'm going to go with either self-righteousness, inferiority complexes, a lack of time/boredom, and/or seeking out the opportunity to prove how extensive your knowledge of gospel topics is. I could be wrong.

1- Mission service isn't a gospel discussion? If you're not Christian, I guess not.

2- According to you, everything Jesus did in the New Testament must have been due to his self-righteousness and an inferiority complex. NO ONE does anything for the right reason in your world I guess.
S
scott715
So when is this topic going to die. I stopped reading long ago.
Sponsored Advertisementad content
C
CougarPeasant
Now that Heaps is with the team, he's surrounded by RMs of the LDS type, not of the Tebow type and I suspect he'll see how trite his words are. Although, it's hard to fault a kid just barely out of high school to praise Tebow when that is all that has been talked about in college football for the past 3 years.



If he really thinks football is his mission, it does a disservice to those who actually served missions. Sounds too much like "gotta paddle my own canoe" to me.
P
prowlincougars
I disagree. I know without a doubt that some people are not meant to serve a mission. Is Jake Heaps not supposed to serve a mission? Well, I can't answer that, that is between him and the Lord. Whether its because of a physical, mental, spiritual or emotional problem there is no question that many missionaries are not meant to serve a mission. Having established that, the line is not clear on what all the exceptions are for someone to serve a mission. I firmly believe that one can be a better missionary as an athlete or other more prominent figure then as an actual missionary. I haven't ever questioned if Steve Young should have served a mission. His continuos fame and spotlight over the years have inspired thousands of members and sparked the interest of thousands more non-members. Considering some missionaries(depending on the mission) are lucky to have 1 or 2 baptisms during the two years they serve I would say there is no comparison. So, yeah I believe he can use the football as a mission card and even though many athletes still go on to be succesful after there missions, generally they are too far behind to catch up to be more then a college star or on rare occasions a third string professional athlete. In a sport like football being the most popular sport in America, a mormon football player really has a chance to be an example and get the word out to millions

Update: I didn't read every post before typing this so sorry for sounding redundant with the Steve Young thing, also I think the Donny and Marie thing is a great example too.
S
SpiffCoug
Wow. Way to resurrect an 11-month old thread.
P
prowlincougars
kitic77 wrote:
Wow. Way to resurrect an 11-month old thread.


Yeah I noticed after my long message how ancient this thread is....oh well, maybe it needed a resurrection
G
Guest
Welcome to the site, prowlingcougars. How'd you find the webpage?
Page 4 of 5
This is an archived topic from the original CougarCorner forum. New replies are not accepted.