Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Kalola, The only thing I’d like to briefly add is that for the most part (and this is just my opinion) — those who have been disciplined by the church over the past 20 years were disciplined not for having personal or even opposing opinions….but instead for either:
1) Publicly and sometimes brazenly denouncing the church and/or its leadership, or
2) Openly calling the church’s foundational claims fraudulent
In my experience, it is extremely rare for the church to after someone for their personal views.
swimordie wrote:Would my “suggestion” then be the next step, moving from the current “image” of openness to an “actual” openness?
Baby steps.
Tom, Based on my readings from Chaim Potok….it would be bad for the church to completely lose its orthodoxed leaders and members (like the lady in the article you mentioned). They keep the church alive. If religion loses the literal strand of belief, it usually withers (in my observation).
So if we love the church and believe that it’s a good thing for the world — then we want the orthodoxed around…and we even want them spouting their rhetoric. Who else would do the callings we don’t want to do?
What we should want/strive for is a welcomed place at the table. Not agreement with our positions — but acceptance and welcoming of us as valid participants.
Plus, by having us at the table (in a non-closeted way) the dinner conversations will be all the more interesting. And we’ll get fed too (hopefully). I think the church needs orthodoxed AND liberals to stay healthy. It’s a balance.
So it will take some time — but things are moving fast now. I think that in 5-10 years we’ll be a sizable, non-closeted portion of church membership.
Tom, I think this quote provides important cover. I think it shows an important direction of tolerance and of a “big tent” approach.
It will definitely take a while for the approach to trickle down — that’s always the toughest part of managing a very large organization.
But I see the writing on the wall. The tolerance and space for people like us is only growing.
We just have to 1) help create the space by being loving, non-threatening people (while still being open about our position)…and 2) hang on until the sun fully comes up.
But it will come. I guarantee it.
Catholicism made a place for folks like us. So did Judaism. Most protestant churches have. And we’re on deck.
Orson wrote:This may be a great topic for a new thread but it brought to mind how I have transitioned from using the metaphorical/actual terms to preferring spiritual/physical. In a strange twist of fate spiritual things have become much deeper and more meaningful to me since I have separated them from the physical.
I also take literal/physical truths to be extremely important. I may have categorized everything spiritual to a different sphere than the physical, but both are highly valuable in their own right. Maybe in time I’ll get to expound on this further. I’m sure others have similar thoughts as well.
Orson — Kinda crazy, but I’ve been arriving in parallel at the same conclusion as of late. I used this analogy this Morning with my own daughter. She asked, “Do we know for sure if Jesus lives?”
I replied, “It’s hard to know for sure with our head, but many people feel like they know for sure with their hearts.”
Another daughter immediately chimed in, “I know it in my heart.”
And I wasn’t about to mess with that.
Tom Haws wrote:You want me to look into possible phpBB mods that could do this? If necessary, I could program something, but we
don’twant to do that. Sure, Tom. Thanks!
Poppyseed, I’m actually very interested in the topics that you enjoy/like.
I’ll look into applying some type of ratings system here.
Feel free to email me w/ links to your favorite posts.
Primarycolor, Interesting comments. Welcome to StayLDS.com! Thanks so much for stopping by.
It’s a real coincidence that you write the following: “A Moses did exist, a David did exist, Abraham…”
I have a really thoughtful (and faithful) friend who just wrote the following text on another board:
“In the Old Testament, it now appears, from exhaustive archaeological and textual analysis, that basically anything before roughly the reign of David in 1000 BCE is unhistorical. The creation story is taken from some much older Mesopotamian myths, as is the story of the flood. The story about Joseph, Moses and the Exodus cannot be taken seriously. There are numerous contradictions even within the story — for instance, we read in one place that two midwives sufficed for the children of Israel (indicating a population of no more than 5000 or so), whereas in other places we are told that they numbered over 600,000 men, plus women and children (ie total = 2 or 3 million). In the NT, a significant portion of the gospels, for instance, appears to be embellishment on a few earlier accounts. All of this has been documented in readily available books, such as Friedman’s book on the Old Testament, and Bart Ehrman’s several books on the New Testament.”
Now I haven’t read any of the research that backs up this man’s argument, so please know that I’m not in any way trying to cast doubt. But I did want to note that from what I’ve read about Jews and Judaism — this is how most modern Jews actually view their own scripture……that most of it is allegory and not history. This is why “Reform Judaism” is the largest branch of Judaism in the US (and Reform Judaism, as you might know, does not hold the Jewish “Torah” to be historical or literal.
This is not necessarily where my head/heart is with the Old Testament….but I did want to note the irony. I don’t think that the LDS are in much tougher shape than pretty much anyone else (religion-wise). I think all of “us religious” are in basically the same “faith boat” — fwiw. The question is — can we find a way to enjoy the ride.
But it totally works for me for some reason….doubts and all. I love the ride.
