Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
All very good comments. So fear is an effective motivator at times. Especially when we need to compel individuals to do the right thing, such as the example of keeping a child out of the street. I agree with this. I guess my concern comes in when fear is used to get compliance with a principle that is false or of minimal importance. I guess I could use the WoW as an example. YOu have the fear of losing your TR if you do not comply, but this is really a minor issue that has been elevated to a level of importance beyond rational. So in this case fear is used for no reason. Of course that is just my opinion. Someone else will come along and say the WoW is so very important. But for sure there are things within the church that we do out of fear that are of minimal or no importance in the big scheme of things. katielangston wrote:But I never extended that faith to the God of Mormonism. I assumed He was still what I’d always thought Him to be: scary, strict, demanding, unforgiving. He wasn’t good. He was a distant stake president on a cloud somewhere who cared about me the way I assume my stake president does — theoretically, not personally; out of obligation, not sincerity.
The real challenge is not letting that Stake President get between you and your loving God.
Bruce in Montana wrote:This is an interesting thread. The WoW being a measure of one’s rightousness, while obesity/lack-of-exercise seem to be the actual major health threats, appears to have outlived it’s practicality.
I agree very much with this but my belief is that the WoW has little to do with health anymore. That is why we claim to obey it but being the pessimist that I am on this issue I think it is more about control and setting us apart from the rest of the world. We might as well say dairy products are bad and we need to abstain from them. Its not about what is good or bad, but what we can demonize. The science is becoming more clear that items such as red wine and coffee are actually beneficial. Especially when used in moderation. Sure tobacco is still considered bad so why do we not keep that and adjust the rest. Because we are afraid we will become to much like the world, and it is part of our culture now. The church is so much like the government. It just has a hard time adapting to changing condition and people want to hang on to what they perceived worked in the past.
You best get all this worked out long before you get married, or even engaged. If you do not you are most likely going to be in for a very rocky marriage that neither of you bargained for. My best advice is tell her soon and tell her as much as you think she can handle without going into details. If she is receptive you can go further. If she is not it may be painful but I would not try and force the issue but walk away. Do not convince yourself that some day she will come around and everything will be alright. This could happen but most likely not. Remember it is always easier to change yourself than change someone else. IF you are unwilling to become the perfect TBM she is less likely to become more agnostic as you put it. Religion can be one of the most divisive issues in any marriage next to maybe money, so do not handicap yourself going in. Good luck but remember you have your whole life ahead of you. Do your best to make sure you spend it with someone you are compatible with.
Bruce in Montana wrote:I heard/read a quote somewhere that went something like:
“If one insists on empericism (sp?), one can’t entertain spirituality” … or something like that.
I think of the whole delemna as ying and yang, masculine and feminine, emotion and intellect, etc. … in other words I feel we need both and the “truth” lies somewhere in the middle between the extremes.
Just random thoughts…
So what do you do when you are confronted with a major contradiction, say a personal life altering experience, where empericism contradicts spirituality, or vise versa. Most members have not experienced this I am sure but when it smacks you in the face you will have to make a choice.
Tom Haws wrote:Don,
I can hear your explanation, and I can agree with it. But when all is said and done, I still can’t tell what difference it makes. What I don’t understand is the purpose of the article. Who does the article help? How does it help you? What question does it answer for you? What puzzle does it solve for you?
What does Official Doctrine matter when I am sitting in a temple recommend interview?
What does Official Doctrine matter when I am in Sunday School class?
What does Official Doctrine matter when I am trying to teach a class?
What does Official Doctrine matter when I am in tithing settlement?
I think if you can get clarity on questions like these and answer them in the introduction to the article, it would really increase its utility. Just my opinion.
I’m with Tom
I do not believe everything about the church is true. Actually I do not believe most of it. At the same time I have no problem going to the temple. I pretty much keep up on all the requirements so I can answer as honestly as any true believer. Maybe some questions I just say I am trying my best. Anyway my point is that I figure being a cultural Mormon gives me just as much right to the temple as any member, at least for things such as weddings. Besides if it is all made up what does it matter, and if it is all true I am in trouble anyway. I am not going to let others rob me of the experience of seeing people I love getting married. I personally would not take the stance of making a point by staying outside. To me that is a lose lose proposition, but I do respect your position. The temple has become to much of a control mechanism in the church to compel individuals to conform. I am not sure it is conducive to a real Christian church.
I doubt it. For over 2000 years the end has been near but it never comes. It would be a better world if everyone of different religions stopped acting like the world was ending and worked to make the world we have better The big flaw with this statement and the general approach is the claim that happiness will ensue if you stay faithful and do not question. This is a blatantly false assumption. I have heard this many times from church members. Just keep the commandments and follow the prophet and you will be happy. This may work for some members but not all. I know individuals who were miserable until they left the church. I myself have a much better outlook and less anxiety not feeling compelled to believe everything I am told. Being naive and unwilling to address your doubts is just as likely to make you unhappy. The day I was willing to admit I could be wrong about the church and a host of other things was the day I woke up and began to see the world as it really is. The forums were a good support in allowing me to ask questions and get real answers. If you go to a church leader for advice you will only get one side of the issue and the entire conversation will be to get you to narrow your thinking to conform to doctrine. I think the forums absolutely can have an impact on your decisions about the church. Why do you think you are warned to stay away. Tom Haws wrote:[quote=”Cadence”
Cadence wrote:It is not rational to assume God is directing the whole thing and yet say he is not giving any instructions other than a cryptic message once in awhile.
Hmm. I stumble on the word “cryptic”. What would I say if the Highest gave all the time a message that was cryptic, not because She is tricky, but because I am deaf and blind?
Cryptic as in hard to understand the actual meaning. But that is an interesting thought, but not so sure that makes me feel any more confident in the leaders receiving revelation if they are deaf.
Enjoy? Yes I have decided to enjoy staying LDS. Strange as it may seem I look forward with more anticipation than ever, in seeking out truth and being with my brothers and sisters in my cultural Mormon world allquieton wrote:Ray,
I guess I could have been more clear. I mean that being satisfied with a prophet receiving nothing more than promptings is unsettling for me. That is where the bar has been lowered I think.
Yes this is the issue for me. I have always seen a large difference between inspiration and revelation. All individuals can receive inspiration. But when we say the prophet receives revelation for the whole church it just as to be more than a warm feeling. It is not rational to assume God is directing the whole thing and yet say he is not giving any instructions other than a cryptic message once in awhile. On the other hand I am fine with leader saying they are doing the best they can and believe they are inspired from time to time, but when they ask us to confirm them as prophets, seers, and revelators then my expectations of them goes way up. this is the issue at its core. If you claim to be a seer then you muse see, if you claim to receive revelation then you must reveal, and it must be more substantial than a good business decision or organizational change. If they can not do this then I shall accept them as leaders doing thier best and support them as I would any person in a position of responsibility, but I reserve the right to disagree and not be labeled an apostate, or someone trying to bring down the church.
In reality the title President is much more accurate than Prophet.
Tom Haws wrote:Can I just say really quickly that if I had it all to do over again, YES, I would go to church, and YES, I would teach my kids to go to church, but NO, not necessarily on any given Sunday. NO, not 100%. NO, not to the point of habit. NO, not to the exclusion of a) other churches, b) a day journalling on a mountain saddle.
Yes I agree. Going to church often is good for you and your family. It is your culture and your people so to speak. The support structure of the church can be great, but like Tom Haws says not to the exclusion of other things that are important to you. I fear we have made church attendance another checkmark of our righteousness and obedience. And when it becomes mandatory it loses some of its effectiveness at least as far as spirituality goes.
