Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I think there is a HUGE difference between drinking Near beer and Aduls verses drinking 2.5% beer. Near Beer and Aduls is .5% alcohol. Domestic beer in Utah like Coors or Budwiser is only 3.2%. So from this post, Some Finland Bishops are drinking ALMOST the equivalent of our domestic beer and apparently SLC is okay with it. AND I’m happy for them. 
Quote:What are the things that you would most like to see simplified in your church experience?
Do away with the 3 hour block.
Scouts
Correlation committee meetings
Most other Sunday morning meetings
Stake Priesthood training meetings on Saturday night
Meetings in general
More meetings
EQP PPIs
Most ward socials
These meetings I have to go to when YM or YW enter the program. Why?
Potlucks on High Council Sunday
Ward Missionary meetings
cub scouts
I’m a huge South Park fan. Can’t wait to see the Broadway. I will be a little bit careful and not say that the writers of South Park are “inspired”, but I certainly believe they are brilliant, insightful and have a great capacity to understand the human psyche. Usually the folks who criticize the show are the folks who haven’t watched it enough to understand the agenda of the writers. Can’t wait to see the play. I just got back from church and I DID NOT put on my suit. In fact, I wore a blue shirt, no tie, a cross (tucked into my shirt), khaki pants and my dress sandals. I’ll be honest, I did not feel like I was being uncharitable to the weak. I just don’t feel that way. I’m glad there are those who will do those things, for whatever reason, but it just doesn’t work for me. In fact, wearing a blue shirt and sandals is a great coping mechanism that helps me “keep going.” Old-Timer wrote:… Of course, since I’m Mormon and headed to Hell anyway, does it really matter?
š š Thought I would post this link from the SLT about the theory of the BofM location east of the Mississippi. kind of an old news article (March 31), but it was new to me when I came across it today. http://www.sltrib.com/faith/ci_14750506http://www.sltrib.com/faith/ci_14750506” class=”bbcode_url”> I prefer the KJV simple because it is by far the most poetic. IMO. Someone else mentioned the fact that many of our popular quotes and saying that define a lot of America’s culture come from KJV. Yeah. The world would certainly be a more dismal place without the KJV of ECCLESIATES or The Preacher. It’s beautifully written, even if not inspired. Old-Timer wrote:… I used the Word of Wisdom and the Sabbath as examples – and I am willing to bet that MANY “TBM’s” know they could be “responsible social drinkers” but don’t drink socially in order to support the communal standard and avoid creating an environment in which the weak would become alcoholics or simply drink to excess. I am saying ANYONE who follows the Word of Wisdom out of a sense of concern for the weak is exhibiting this aspect of charity – and
those who fight the Word of Widsom SIMPLY because it is inconsequential to them are not being charitable in this regard. I would LOVE to put that theory to the test. Do away with the WofW temple requirement and lets just see how many of “us” will continue to follow it, JUST because we were concerned that our neighbors might become alcys.
I might respectfully disagree with this thought
Quote:those who fight the Word of Widsom SIMPLY because it is inconsequential to them are not being charitable in this regard
Yeah, they are being uncharitable (and rude) if they drink around those who they know don’t drink because of their religious beliefs. But I don’t know if they are being uncharitable if they drink on their own?
I would certainly agree with your main point however. I do feel a responsibility to not tear down others faith, and if that means I have to keep my opinion to myself, and not discuss what I believe and have faith in with other members who are not prepared to handle it- than so be it. I will keep my mouth shut, and vent on this website.
Nor should we tear others’ beliefs down in our own attempts to find our faith and pathway, and I do agree these are some good examples:
Quote:R-rated movie to a house where the people there abstain from watching such movies – or serving pork to your Muslim friends – or refusing to take off your shoes in the house of Japanese friends who follow that custom – or serving Coke and Pepsi at a ward party in some units – or wearing a french-cut bikini to a ward pool party – or insisting on watching porn at almost any religious gathering
I would also include that one should not smoke or drink tea in the homes of members, whether they follow the WofW or not.
BUTis Paul saying that X should not drink coffee just because they were raised in the church and their parents don’t drink coffee, and their siblings don’t drink coffee, and their hometeachers don’t coffee – and if X DOES drink coffee on his own time he is being uncharitable and doing spiritual damage to the weak? I just don’t see it that way??? Maybe I’m just seeing it and empathizing more from the X point of view? Quote:In summary, Paul restates his point – and he does so primarily to those for whom “eat(ing) flesh” and “drink(ing) wine” are not an offense and do not make weak. He is saying, in essence, that those who can handle it should not partake among those who can’t. In our modern Mormon vernacular, he is saying that those who are strong should adapt their behavior to accommodate “the weakest of the weak who are or can be called saints”.
I would add only this, to bring the entire discussion full circle:
Not only should be adapt our “physical actions” to accommodate the weak (by not eating and drinking that which would offend or weaken them), but we also should adapt our “verbal actions” to accommodate them (by not participating in doubtful disputations with them over standards that are “unsettled” and open to interpretation).
The responsibility is NOT on the weak; it is on the strong. Let me repeat that: The responsibility is NOT on the weak; it is on the strong. If you think, for example, that the Word of Wisdom is trivial and not all that important, prove your strength by being charitable and abstaining for the sake of the weak.
Okay, so firstly, you’re going off the premise that someone like me and other StayLDSers are the strong ones, and the TBMs are the weak one, which I think is very ironic and insightful—but every TBM on this planet would disagree with you.
I guess my second thought that came to mind was your example about the word of wisdom. Paul is talking about the saints, but does this also not apply to all people. So if we are the strong ones, and our neighbor invites us over for coffee — should we not partake of it so we don’t offend someone on an issue that really doesn’t pertain to one’s salvation?
Ray, it’s some good thoughts and insights on Paul. Thanks
SamBee wrote:…According to GameStation, around 7,500 customers carelessly signed their souls away on the day. Were you one of them…?
No.
I thought you were joking about this Stake lagoon Day when I read it in another topic. Here is my two cents — I think it’s BS. I kind of understand the thought behind it, like we need to provide families with wholesome recreational opportunities where other church (ward) members will be around so our kids don’t pick up any bad habits from the heathens and go to hell… Well, I don’t need the church providing and telling me how to spend my Saturday, they already tell me how I’m going to spend half my weekend (away from my family – church). I can decide how to spend time with the fam “all by myself” and i get tired of the church demanding I give up the little free time i have to spend with my kids.
I know we have LDS night at Safeco Field. I’ve never gone on those days. in fact, just to be belligerent, last year i went the next night when it was Gay & Lesbian night.
šæ We have had some of these things in our stake too – Last summer they went to a water park in Boise one weekend. I got a lot of pressure to attend, even asked to supervise a group of teachers from another ward who were going WITHOUT the rest of their family. Of course I said no, i was going to spend the weekend with my own kids and go boating. It ended up that my teen daughter whined and cried enough to “mom” that she got to go to the water park with her group of YW, and we canceled our family activity — and I think this stuff happens a lot. The church comes up with these great activities and programs to help “strengthen the family” and a lot of the time they do just the opposite. IMODevilsAdvocate wrote:Just for the record, I don’t think the Church is falling apart in an obvious and catastrophic way; I think it’s more of a gradual erosion of the base where active members are being slowly whittled away. It could take several generations to fully realize some of the residual effects of the current losses but by that time it could be too late to regain some of what we have now with the communities and positive social influence of the Church.
I think this forest analogy is typical of many Church leaders’ attitude where they don’t really care that much about all the members who have fallen away because they assume they are insignificant and completely wrong to think that way. The idea is that this is nothing new that there have always been inactive members and apostates because of the constant influence of Satan but overall the work is still moving forward right on schedule.
The reason I disagree with this idea is that the tables have turned somewhat in recent years due to the internet, more books on Mormon history, and more atheist evangelists challenging religion in general. Basically, I don’t believe the Church is poised to compete as well as possible in the current environment. What’s worse is that the reason for this predicament is not necessarily as noble as many Mormons would like to believe such as standing up for what is right or true.
It looks more like a case where they simply started out with this prophet and restoration story and once they saw that it gave them some control to be able to tell their followers what to do they just kept on building on this assumption and making even more demands while trying to deny or suppress any challenges to these claims at all costs.
Okay, i think this is well said DA, and let me add two cents. The problem I see with this (WIDELY used in the ranks) forest analogy is that it is dangerous because we don’t take into account the residual effect of losing “a few” of the top notch leaders and members from a local branch or ward. We preach the other way though – a convert who joins the church is going to change hundredss or even thousands of lives as his kids and grand-kids and so on become active faithful members throughout the decades. The same principle applies to those who become inactive. Oh, I suppose it gets taught in Sunday school class some, but we still hear BRM echos of “The Caravan Moves ON” from many members and local leaders. What does it matter if a few barking dogs snap at the heels of the weary travelers? Or that predators claim those few who fall by the way? Another one of my LEAST favorite talks of all time.
Excepts from The Caravan Moves ON. BRM Ensign Nov 1984
Quote:I propose some simple tests that all of us may take to determine if we are true to the faith. They consist of a few basic questions, all of which must be answered correctly in order to gain the full blessings of the gospel in this life and inherit eternal life in the realms ahead…From among many questions that all of us must one day answer, let me test you on these:…
…Test two: Do I believe in the fall of Adam? There is no salvation in a system of religion that rejects the doctrine of the Fall or that assumes man is the end product of evolution and so was not subject to a fall. True believers know that this earth and man and all forms of life were created in an Edenic, or paradisiacal, state in which there was no mortality, no procreation, no death…
…Test five: Do I believe the gospel as it has been restored in this final dispensation of grace?
…Test six: Am I a faithful member of the true Church?…There is no such thing as gaining salvation from a false god, or by conforming to a false plan of salvation, or through membership in a false church. Truthāpure, diamond truthātruth unmixed with error, truth and truth alone can lead a soul to salvation.
…Test seven: Do I honor Joseph Smith as the great prophet of the Restoration?
…A wise cleric of a former day leaves us this counsel: āIf you have not chosen the kingdom of God first, it will in the end make no difference what you have chosen instead.ā…With us, in this life and in the life to come, it is and should be the kingdom of God or nothing.
…On every issue it behooves us to determine what the Lord would have us do and what counsel he has given through the appointed officers of his kingdom on earth. No true Latter-day Saint will ever take a stand that is in opposition to what the Lord has revealed to those who direct the affairs of his earthly kingdom. No Latter-day Saint who is true and faithful in all things will ever pursue a course, or espouse a cause, or publish an article or book that weakens or destroys faith. There is, in fact, no such thing as neutrality where the gospel is concerned….If we do not sustain and uphold and support the kingdom of God in all things, we are thereby aiding a cause other than the Lordās. Only the valiant are saved. Members of the Church who are not valiant in the testimony of Jesus, not valiant in the cause of Christ, not valiant in defense of his prophets and in preaching his word are not heirs of the celestial kingdom….These, then, are a few of the many tests of true discipleship.
The Church is like a great caravanāorganized, prepared, following an appointed course, with its captains of tens and captains of hundreds all in place. What does it matter if a few barking dogs snap at the heels of the weary travelers? Or that predators claim those few who fall by the way? The caravan moves on. Is there a ravine to cross, a miry mud hole to pull through, a steep grade to climb? So be it. The oxen are strong and the teamsters wise. The caravan moves on. Are there storms that rage along the way, floods that wash away the bridges, deserts to cross, and rivers to ford? Such is life in this fallen sphere. The caravan moves on. Ahead is the celestial city, the eternal Zion of our God, where all who maintain their position in the caravan shall find food and drink and rest. Thank God that the caravan moves on!
George wrote:“Temple attendance is not mandatory” – even if holding a recommend sometimes is.”
I totally agree with the above, but my stake president really has a different take on this (my bishop as well). We are not only encouraged, but browbeaten if we don’t attend. A minimum number of visits is suggested and phone calls by priesthood leaders can follow up. It reminds me of how Proposition 8 was handled here in California (just saying).
Yeah, I hear ya George. I got to the point where I would purposely NOT get a TR just so folks would back off and leave me alone. Didn’t work – then they just ASSUMED that I was unworthy to get one and pestered me about “getting my life in order.” IMO, TBM just cannot comprehend why a person would, 1. not wish to get a recommend and go to the temple, and 2. when they do have a TR, why they wouldn’t use it.
The other problem I encountered, is everybody kept asking me, “why I wouldnt go, why won’t you go? you have a TR, why won’t you go on the branch temple trip?” How do you explain it to them? Most TBM don’t understand there are folks like us out here. Either you are a mormon, or you aren’t – black and white. From my experience, TBM don’t consider me, and folks like me “buffet mormons” or “unorthodox mormon”. I think those are terms WE use. From my experience, TBMs, IMO – consider us folk
apostates.DA – I agree with you, and I am also concerned that we are/and will continue to lose, at an alarming rate, a lot of talent (great men and women) and that if things do not change, the church will not even realize the extent of the damage for at least 20 years. DevilsAdvocate wrote:The problem is that some of these strict requirements and expectations are starting to look increasingly unreasonable to too many existing members and would-be converts. For example, to be fully accepted into the club by many TBMs you basically need to agree with all of the following:
1. The Books of Mormon, Abraham, and Moses contain true history and were divinely inspired. These books and the D&C are superior to the Bible as the “Word of God” because they didn’t have the same errors of transmission and translation.
2. Joseph Smith’s restoration of the gospel is the best thing to happen since Jesus.
3. The only divinely approved line of succession and authority was transmitted through Brigham Young and other LDS prophets and apostles making the LDS church the one and only “true church.”
4. Paying the Church a full 10% of your income as tithing is required for salvation.
5. Complete abstinence from alcohol, tobacco, tea, and coffee is mandatory for salvation.
6. Spending a significant amount of time for meetings, callings, temple work, etc. is required for salvation.
To me this looks too much like a house of cards because there are so many ways that this structure is likely to break down and fail for way too many different people. The Church has put such a strong emphasis on all of these points that any one of them can be an absolute deal-breaker for serious investigators and existing members who actually like the Church but just can’t stomach one or more of these hard-line doctrines.
Yeah, great observation. I think it is interesting that SL took many of these statements out of the gospel principles manual, and then sent it back to the members to study again this year. It no longer states (in GP) that you have to do all this stuff for salvation – it’s gone from the manual. Now it just says, “you must keep the commandments.” So are the brethern seeing a future problem as well with this house of cards that we have built from decades of cultural practice an control? Are they trying to pull back on the reigns, but the general membership, culture and climate refuses to change? And perhaps most importantly, now that it is no longer in the GP, does that mean it is no longer consider “doctrine” and should not be taught in class, and are we now “allowed” and even encouraged to decide for ourselves if we want to believe and practice every word written in the D&C, and what it means to “keep the commandments?”
