Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I would just think that, as a church that puts millions into temples and culturally and socially pressures youth and young adults to prepare for and get married in the temple, to stress the importance of eternal families and to constantly remind us to have a temple recommend for these purposes… that the church with all of this would also teach and believe in a Jesus that was married. We claim to follow Jesus, or at least to want to. Heck, Nelson changed the church logo during a pandemic to “convince” us that Jesus is in charge of the church. Yet, if he wasn’t married, that’s fine, but why do we claim to need to do so much in 2020 as mormons if Jesus didn’t do half of it? He got baptized, and we emphasize that. Great! if he wasn’t marriage, why do we live and breath temple marriages? I am reminded of a talk from Ucthdorf a few years back. His message was about a simple flower, being covered by decorative leaves and multiple layers. His message? We take the beauty of a flower and cover it with our own distractions. To me, that is the mormon church. The church HAS a message. It HAS a product to sell. But a lot of the time we only hear about the new logo, chant and another reason why it’s great to have Nelson as CEO, that we forget the church sells a product in the first place.
My dad put it best when I went on my mission. Remember the church’s message is this, “Jesus is the Christ. He lives! He loves us and wants us to become as he is, and the LDS church provides a way for everyone to follow him.” There was no Joseph Smith story, there was no how many temples can we announce this conference. It was truly just about Jesus.
My problem is, im an introvert and find extroverted social gatherings without a use to be pointless. I’m talking meetings at church, social functions led by the church. Sure, it was fun attending church dances as a youth, but they’d always sneak in a spiritual thought that was quickly dismissed for the loud and crazy music. I noticed that when I was in the YSA wards. Fun activity planned? Awesome! Here’s 5 minutes reading a scripture or listening to a talk from the prophet. Ok, let’s have fun! On my mission we had three hour church and two hour pre-church meetings. We didn’t attend the bishop meeting. So imagine how many hours the bishop spends NOT with family, NOT doing actual service and NOT resting, just being a figurehead for the ward. From 6am to 8pm. Every Sunday. Imagine the stake president. Imagine a church that claims that Jesus runs it, demanding long free hours from working husband and fathers.
I think this whole virus shutdown situation has been very, very eye opening to nearly every single member who has never questioned their lifestyle. When you’re told that “we do this because it’s how we do it”, you learn to not ask why. It’s how I was growing up. Now that everyone doesn’t have to stress about looking good for the bishop and the rich family in the ward (because I just do not feel convinced that Jesus cares what color shirt you wear passing the sacrament… or if you grab the bread with your left hands… Oaks…), doesn’t have to stay alert all two (used to be three) hours AND worry about tithing, fast offerings or HT/VT, they see the freedom of being an inactive member. That it’s possible to believe in Jesus and not feel burdened and stressed from a cultured world of religious idealistic. it’s such a new perspective when you decide your destiny.
Anyway, I think this consequence is good, I hope people open their eyes and see that there’s other ways to be happy and have a relationship with God than just following a strict lifestyle set by a church that makes “adjustments” as public pressure persists.
nibbler wrote:
I wish we could move away from temple recommends, worthiness interviews, and even the word “worthy” or any of its variants (qualified, drawing distinctions between worthiness and worth, etc.).
This is the best thing I think the church could learn from. If god is all loving, why does he care so much about the most first world-like commandments that we have culturally evolved into hard letter of the law regulations?
I never fasted growing up. I was taught all it did was make people hungry and give the church money. My dad paid his tithing annually. The end of the year bishop meeting he’d give a check to the bishop. He had figured out how much tithing he ‘owed’ each paycheck and hid it. When I was newly married I had some struggles with self-harm and went to my local bishop at the time for help. He refused to help me, saying I had to demonstrate at minimum 3 months of consistent fully active membership involvement before he’d “start thinking about” giving me the help I was asking for. He even said he might have to remove my recommend if I’m struggling with sins.
The church should just be a vehicle to get to heaven. You can walk or run or jog to heaven, but you shouldn’t need the church. because leadership in lower and higher levels are convinced and teach that you cannot make it without the church, we get an unfair culture that is toxic. It’s why so many of us end up leaving or going inactive.
DarkJedi wrote:
nibbler wrote:
I was waiting for the transcript. I was curious as to what people thought about something DFU said during conference.DFU wrote:As we incline our hearts to our Heavenly Father and draw near to Him, we will feel Him draw near to us.
We are His beloved children.
Even those who reject Him.
Even those who, like a headstrong, unruly child, become angry with God and His Church, pack their bags, and storm out the door proclaiming that they’re running away and never coming back.
When a child runs away from home, he or she may not notice the concerned parents looking out the window. With tender hearts, they watch their son or daughter go—hoping their precious child will learn something from this heartrending experience and perhaps see life with new eyes—and eventually return home.
So it is with our loving Heavenly Father. He is waiting for our return.
Your Savior, tears of love and compassion in His eyes, awaits your return. Even when you feel far away from God, He will see you; He will have compassion for you and run to embrace you.
Come and belong.
I’m not sure how I feel about the “draw near unto me, and I will draw near unto you” Jesus. I think I prefer the Jesus that’s been there the whole time and maybe it’s more an issue of noticing Jesus.
I feel a little icky defending this in any way, but parsing it DFU is probably saying there are some that are like a headstrong, unruly child that become angry with church… not that all people that are angry with church are like a headstrong, unruly child. That said, I think in this case it’s going to be more about how the message is received.
It’s still a pretty unfair analogy no matter which way you slice it. Many people that leave home (church) feel like they were run out the door. Some even have been run out the door. There are no parents anxiously awaiting their return, there’s a guard at the door making sure they can’t get back in.
It’s tough because I’ve often felt like there’s no place for me so I might as well leave. When I’m invited back, it doesn’t feel like
I’mbeing invited back, I feel like some orthodox robot version of me is being invited back. But DFU probably isn’t referring to those types? Maybe he’s only referring to people angry at the church. Even then I think the path forward is validation. Maybe even ask Lord, is it I, am I the headstrong, unruly child in this situation?
No question I have a bias in favor of Elder Uchtdorf. I don’t agree with everything he says but I agree with him more than most. I took these comments in the context of one of my favorite passages of scripture, the parable of the prodigal son. I believe our Heavenly Parents (and our Savior) are waiting and watching for our return even though that return may not be until after this life. I agree that I don’t always (or even usually) feel the Savior is close by nor do I often feel the Spirit, and I despise the “footprints” poem because I don’t believe it’s true/correct. But I don’t think that means they are not waiting for us to turn/return (repent) to them and I believe they are willing to meet us while “yet a great way off.”
What makes this still dangerous is the context. It creates the false idea that you can only be happy / a good person if you stay in the church. And that if you chose to leave due to so many various reasons, it’s your fault and you’re problem. The “open arms waiting for me to return” idea doesn’t work because often than not I have chosen to leave because I was told to, asked why I’m even staying or told that I don’t belong. In either case, playing the victim isn’t going to help. I noticed on some post mormon social media sites a lot of #unrulychildren hashtags are being used in peoples photos. Happy people, people who left the church after being denied support, people who were told it was their fault they got raped, people who didn’t understand why the church focused so much NOT on Jesus Christ, etc. These people are happy. The same people the church is trying to teach has gone astray.
DarkJedi wrote:
TinSoldier wrote:
Am I the only one who finds it fascinating that at this point in time, during this virus pandemic, we have a medical doctor as the prophet? I was just thinking about that tonight as I sit here binging on Netflix.
I find it fascinating that the physician prophet’s only offering in response to the virus was “let’s fast again.”
(Yes, he did give a message before and I realize the talks are submitted ahead for translation, etc. But I also believe somebody like GBH would have gone off script. Somebody in another thread said something about maybe having been on home isolation too long and therefore being grumpy – I think that may be true of me as well although in some ways I really like it.)
Don’t forget the new logo.. erm symbol of the church! And the new temples!
I tried to listen to conference. It was hard. What was more difficult was asking my friends what they thought of conference and being told by them that it was the best most scared experience. I guess the tides are changing and I’m drifting away from finding recycled talks to be spiritually uplifting.
SilentDawning wrote:
I wonder what will happen to church membership and church attendance after this is over? I am sure people are loving having their Sundays to themselves!
From what I’ve gathered from my faithful friends, they either don’t see this as unique because they are too faithful to care “how” or “where” the sacrament is done, or they have been treating it as a trail of their faith to avoid temptation while at home. Either way, it’s crazy the mental gymnastics my friends my age and older are pulling strings to justify this occasion as not a big deal.
SilentDawning wrote:
Just curious is anyone thinks the admittedly widespread, extremely global virus is a sign of the times? Revelations talks about God pouring out several vials onto the earth in preparation for the coming of the Savior. These are signs of the last days. Is this one of those vials, inflicting disease and pestilence on the earth worldwide?
With how I’ve approach church topics recently I’d hate to further solidify my reputation, but I did find this question intriguing.
No, this isn’t a sign of the last days. Or if it is, it’s one of the hundreds that have been witnessed since Joseph Smith became a prophet, or if you would since Jesus departed after his resurrection. It’s really funny how the church and it’s members have interpreted the last days and what that means to them. Ever since I was a young boy I heard both young and old talk about the latest wars or latest changes in the church as a sign. The missionary age change in 2012-13? Sign of the times! The church “hosted” the SLC winter Olympics in 2002? Sign of the times! Then again, my dad was told the second coming was going to happen when he was a young man and the proof then was how many rock songs were cursed with satanic messages hidden in them.
I think we are unhappy and anxious about the world we live in, and if we believe what the church suggests life will be like when we die or when Jesus comes back, it creates a desire to “rush” our earth/mortal life so we can “Hurry up and see Jesus”. This urgency to not appreciate the here and now and just prepare for God is unhealthy IMO. It’s even more baffling when Utah was struck by the earthquake this week. Mormons everywhere panicked and said it’s a sign of the times! Yet… daily earthquakes and famines are surrounding us.
So is this virus (that happens to be happening before an American election, as most of them seem to be) a sign of the times? Sure. As long as every other sign that a prophet since Jesus and Joseph have declared as such, is seen as one too. Otherwise, nah this is just life. Enjoy it, stop hording toilet paper and appreciate your life now,
Khadijah wrote:
Americans are in shock and have not fully grasped our situation. Restarting our utterly complex and tightly wound economy may seem insurmountable when the time comes. I wish I had more confidence in our civil and religious leaders. Many of the ‘olds’, including me may not see it.For years it has been clear to me that certain people in the world have retained the majority of the world’s wealth. Hopefully, in the restart, they will use some of it or we will see chaos. Locally, in my own area, I read about companies that I had always assumed would be around, perhaps disappearing? I just read about Powell’s Books, and Mcmenamins perhaps being gone forever when the smoke begins to clear.
My Church, Yes, the Mormon one has shut its doors, and many who depend upon the Sacrament Service to help them get through the week now must go it on their own. I am likely the most snotty, disobedient Mormon, yet, in the core of my own soul, I am Mormon.
There have been lots of complaints about the 100 million Dollars that the Church has hidden away. Is this the time that was saved for, or are there yet more dire things to happen yet?
There’s a lot to unpack, but I’ll express my reaction to all of this with my disgust that as both members and non members, we have immaturely reacted to the urgency to stock up, hording too much essentials and leaving others dry to struggle. This is unacceptable and anyone who has the status of being a member of any Christian church should be ashamed of themselves for buying hundreds of supplies and hiding them in their basement “just in case”.
With that emotional perspective said, I am still not sure how anyone can justify the church’s 100billion considering how many volunteers they squeeze out of us for cleaning, temple work and callings. Not to mention expecting us to pay for missions that often result in less than adequate housing and transportation. Meanwhile we see these million dollar temples being built that limit even active and worthy members in sessions. I’m still not happy about their PR move with the Rome temple. Sending all the quorum members over “because the Lord told me he wanted a nice photo” is… not convincing. I’m just not happy with how the money is being used. They teach that tithing is required by the Lord to be saved, but this tithing isn’t transparent by the church anymore, and they’ve adjusted the definition of tithing multiple times. Since I have put a lot of money into the church believing I’d be saved, I feel I have the right to be upset by what they have and haven’t done with it.
Anyway, I think we need to realize the church is a business. They run like one. They have a president who makes the final decisions, gives the company a good name and look. They have a board of directors who go around making choices. They recruit believers to spend their early lives teaching a history they limit the information of. They depend on fear and other nasty tactics to scare the young and other believers into not looking into deeper history or questioning their faith. And they make it very difficult to leave if you join. Families reject their children, parents rebuke their not-interested-in-a-mission teenagers, and young adults are shamed for not getting married or having children.
The church has a lot of power to influence. We see people defend the church for the most bizarre reasons. An earthquake hit SLC yesterday and everyone is convinced the Lord is coming, despite evidence of earthquakes daily. Moroni looses his trumpet and everyone thinks its a sign. Nelson wanted to focus on Joseph Smith this April and now the virus is convincing everyone that Nelson knew more (if he did, he failed to protect us). Anyway, I think there’s a lot of progress that needs to be made. Less ignorance. More kindness. We are all in this world together, let’s stop being selfish.
DarkJedi wrote:
Khadijah wrote:
I’m not baiting you, promise.I was told by a lifelong Member, who was told by a Member who serves at the Temple weekly, that to get into the Celestial Kingdom, one must have participated in Polygamy.
Section 132 does seem to allude to that idea. I don’t believe section 132 to be revelation and I don’t really buy the telestial/terrestrial/celestial theology. Truth is I think there’s one heaven and no hell.
I am very curious how you justify Joseph’s authenticity as a prophet then, as half of his claim to fame is revelation for polygamy (And his nasty history practicing it) as well as seeing his brother In a lesser kingdom, learning of the spirit world (and if there is no spirit world the Temple is even more wasteful and useless than it already is) and so on.
DarkJedi wrote:
Minyan Man wrote:
nibbler wrote:Now I have the mental image of a bishop leaping over the pulpit and crawling over people in the pews to smack the sacrament out of someone’s hand seconds before they unworthily put it in their mouth.
Has anyone ever seen a Bishop prevent someone from taking the Sacrament during church? I’ve always wondered about that.
I have not. Many years ago while in a bishopric I was asked to specifically observe to see if an individual did or not, but only report, not interfere. He did not partake. I would think protocol would be for the bishop/SP to talk to the individual privately if they have asked them not to partake and they did.
I personally find it very unfortunate that bishops and state presidents take their callings so personally. Yes, it’s important they observe their responsibilities, but they must not let this artificial power take over their human decency. Slapping the sacrament tray out of someone’s hand is out of line. Isn’t the sacrament representative of the atonement and sacrifice of Jesus Christ? Therefore, what say does any man have over Jesus concerning the worthiness of an individual?
mom3 wrote:
In the last hour 2 or 3 people have asked on Facebook “Are we having regular church?” – Hmm.
My poor humor would chime in, I thought ya’ll were members of the true restored church with God’s priesthood power on the earth? You guys believe in the Bible AND the BOM, both with countless stories of men and Jesus both healing the sick. Why aren’t you stopping this virus yet?
Roy wrote:
I hope that the church might use this opportunity to evaluate how many of our meeting are really critical and how many could be reasonably done by other means.I am especially thinking of leadership training meetings involving travel or an increase in the access to online seminary.
😮 😮 😮
Think of how many hours saved every week leadership could devote to their families? Think about how much personal money could be saved if the church provided better budgets for activities. imagine how quickly we could focus on our savior instead of the prophet if we were “allowed” the bless the sacrament at home, to perform ordinances in local areas. Imagine the progress we could make, if we let go of 1950s living culture and realized the digital age can be a great advantage?
Roy wrote:
grobert93 wrote:
I don’t know where in the BOM it talks about sealings? Even if it did, why does it matter what the BOM says? Can’t God enable these blessings without the need for a book? Why would he shut us off from the C Kingdom like that? I’ve read this before and have even shared this view before that I wouldn’t want to be with, return to or live along side a God that requires so much that so many don’t get access to. What’s the point of the atonement? What’s the point of the spirit world, if none of that matters because without the BOM and first vision we won’t “make it”?
Neither the BoM nor the FV talk about sealings. I am of the opinion from the way these questions are framed that the implication is that if we did not have the BoM or FV then we would not have the LDS church. Now imagine your live without the LDS church and without everything good that might have come from the church. For example I met my wife at BYU while I was attending there for a summer on a Spanish language program for return missionaries. If I were not a member of this church it would be highly unlikely that we would meet and fall in love.
Going down the rabbit hole a little further my parents would likely not have met without their mutual involvement in the church. In not for the BoM and the FV, would I cease to exist?!?!
😮 😮 😮 In asking myself these questions, would it be appropriate to include my meeting and falling in love with my wife as “events that followed the first vision?” Maybe, maybe not. It depends on how you define or limit the question. I suppose the invention of cars, telephones, and computers also followed the first vision but that is clearly not the intent of the question.
Ah, so it’s the “if I pray and my prayer is answered that’s proof God is real, loves me, and made sure my prayer was met.” Story. I love how the church depends on so much credit to survive. It’s true, if it wasn’t for BYUI I wouldn’t have met my wife either, at least that’s what the church will have me think. who knows, life is strange.
I think the church should be focused less on “here’s proof we are the best, because if x y and z” and more “we teach ways to become like Jesus, here’s how you can be like Jesus too!”.
DarkJedi wrote:
A few years ago we had a GA at stake conference who was sort of playing fast and loose in the adult session, asking questions, calling people up front, etc. He asked if there were any recent converts there and a couple hands went. He called on them up. One was a guy I knew and his background was that he had met with the missionaries for months (maybe even a year) before being baptized and he actually worked as a lay youth pastor of some sort with the Catholic Church. Being baptized meant he had to change jobs, which he did taking a pay cut. He also moved and ended up in a neighboring ward. Before his conversion he was otherwise a devout Catholic. It was clear the GA was not given any background on either of them. So up he comes and he’s second, deferring to a lady. The GA asked her a couple softball questions that I don’t recall, but not the question he asked our Catholic convert. I don’t recall the exact wording but the gist of the question was “Aren’t you so much happier having the gospel of Jesus Christ in your life?” Our friend, caught off guard a bit, answered that he had had the gospel and the Savior in his life for many years. This caught the GA off balance and he attempted a follow up of something like “But aren’t you much happier now?” to which our friend gave a sort of “meh” answer (I think he actually said “not really”). He was quickly dismissed and the subject abruptly changed.So, going along with what Roy is saying, I agree – the questions do seem to be framed so that the answer is that you would be extremely unhappy without “the gospel” but what many members, including GAs, don’t see to understand is that 1) we have no monopoly on the gospel and 2) there are billions of happy people who are not members of TCoJCoLDS.
Ah, glad our inspired GA was able to discern the thoughts and history of the convert. Hilarious. I’m sure many members considered that convert disrespectful toward the GA and may have even corrected him after for being so “rude”. Makes me wonder why the convert even joined?
nibbler wrote:
At the close of the last session of general conference Russell Nelson asked people to answer a few questions to help them prepare for the upcoming, unique conference that will take place in a few weeks.I’ve heard the word “historic” being tossed around quite a lot when people refer to the upcoming conference. I wouldn’t get too excited… Nelson started off his closing remarks from last conference with, “…as we come to the end of this historic conference…” so I think “historic” just means, “it happened.”
:angel: Anyway, here are the questions:
How would my life be different if my knowledge gained from the Book of Mormon were suddenly taken away?
How have the events that followed the First Vision made a difference for me and my loved ones?
Unfortunately, my responses aren’t really faith promoting but they are honest.
My life wouldn’t be much different. minus not being a mormon, which meant drinking coffee and avoiding pressures from the mormon culture. After studying the Bible for two semesters, I’ve come to the opinion that if the Bible has been modified so many times and lost it’s authenticity, who knows how impure the BOM truly is?
Likewise, the story of the first vision hasn’t really changed my life or made a difference, especially after learning Joseph rewrote the first vision between 4-8 times with different characters involved. And his historic inconsistency with who and when he shared his story around bothers me too.
So, I guess im not really prepared for this conference?
nibbler wrote:
My cynicism knob is probably turned a few notches higher.I do understand that this was not the intent of the questions, but it’s hard for me to see past the manipulative aspects of those sorts of questions. That aside:
Quote:How would my life be different if my knowledge gained from the Book of Mormon were suddenly taken away?
Perhaps the harder of the two to answer. I honestly don’t know. I don’t think it would be that different. Maybe “it came to pass…” wouldn’t be a thing. The joke about reading the Book of Mormon and running out of steam during 2 Nephi, then starting the Book or Mormon over from the beginning just to fall victim to 2 Nephi again wouldn’t be a thing. We’d probably have a goal to read the NT 15 times per year.
The BoM has some good stuff in it, but my own personal CliffsNotes of the BoM would probably be about two pages long.
Quote:How have the events that followed the First Vision made a difference for me and my loved ones?
I have a stronger opinion with this one. Joseph Smith’s vision was just that,
Joseph‘s vision. It was a vision meant for Joseph and I should be more concerned with my own visions. Traditionally we’ve taught the first vision as being this thing that’s used to establish the authority of the church. What helps me live a more Christlike life? A church that preaches its authority or a church that has no authority but preaches Christlike principles?
I’d hate to say I agree and think you hit the nail on the head with both. Why should the church’s Book of Mormon or first vision be the reason to be a good person, worship Christ or otherwise live in the world? Having grown up in the church and only recently given up on so much of what my life has revolved around, I must say that I am convinced the church thrives off of people having a testimony in it’s validity of authority than anything else. After all, if you can’t convince people you are powerful and offer something they should want, you won’t get anywhere.
I love that you point out his vision was just that, his vision. We are DISCOURAGED from sharing our visions and promptings at church, yet we require everyone who claims membership to believe that his vision happened and was true. I don’t get it.
Roy wrote:
I have heard these questions in my neck of the woods as well. I believe that they are intended to elicit great gratitude. The thinking is that without the BoM and the FV we would not be sealed to our families, nor have any saving ordinances, and would be (at least temporally) shut out from the celestial kingdom. We would be left to our own devices without prophetic leadership or direction in our lives.
I don’t know where in the BOM it talks about sealings? Even if it did, why does it matter what the BOM says? Can’t God enable these blessings without the need for a book? Why would he shut us off from the C Kingdom like that? I’ve read this before and have even shared this view before that I wouldn’t want to be with, return to or live along side a God that requires so much that so many don’t get access to. What’s the point of the atonement? What’s the point of the spirit world, if none of that matters because without the BOM and first vision we won’t “make it”?
Roy wrote:
grobert93 wrote:
I have friends who still insist the church is true regardless of all the issues.
To quote a friend, “the church is as true as a ham sandwich.”The church can be a vehicle to a purpose. For some it works wonderfully. For many, the benefits outweigh the costs. Some others are gluten intolerant and cannot partake without significant negative effects.
One of my buddies said you can get to heaven and live with God again without the church. It will just take longer and be harder. He insisted that the church is just a vehicle that takes you there quicker. I wish my state and ward leaders taught me this attitude growing up. Instead, I was told the church was true and nothing could stop it, that anyone that opposed it was tempted by Satan and led astray because the church was tru. As soon as I found the rabbit hole of church history, I was shocked at how much I was NOT taught, trivial or not. As soon as I went to college and studied western history and christianity in the past, I was more shocked.
My friends insist that God inspired all of these people to prepare and slowly bring about the restored true church in our days. I just see justification for all the human indecency in the past 200 years. It’s a hard part of my life to process. I’m just happy I seem welcome to stay in communities like staylds while I continue to struggle.
