[Katzpur]

Brown wrote:

Katzpur wrote:

I’m reminded that no matter what I pray for, God will always give me what I need.

To me that seems like you might as well not ask for anything because you will only get what God was already going to give you. I am not trying to criticize, it is just that the logician in me has a hard time with these kinds of statements.

I can see where you’re coming from, but I try to think of my relationship to God as being similar to my kids’ relationship to me. I have always tried to give my kids what I felt they needed, but sometimes I would also give them something they really didn’t need at all, but wanted very much. I did this for two reasons: (1) I love them and wanted them to have the things that will make them happy, and (2) — I think this is the key element — if they actually asked me for something they would not be able to get on their own, I recognized that they were acknowledging that I was in a position to be able to give it to them. One of my favorite scriptures is that very, very short one which says simply, “Be still and know that I am God.” I think God wants us to recognize that He is the source of every good thing we have. When we ask Him for something that we really want, and know that He can make it happen, I think He will often give it to us just as His way of saying, “Thank you for appreciating the fact that I am God and that the decision whether to give you what you want lies solely with me. Thank you for trusting me in this.” When I don’t get what I want, I try really hard to accept that there must have been a reason why it was denied. I’m definitely not saying I am successful at this. Most of the time I really kind of suck at it, so I’d have to say that it’s a goal for me more than anything else. I think that what God wants is a relationship, and when we are willing to be gracious in letting Him call the shots, He appreciates our trust and faith and rewards us accordingly. I don’t know if that made one ounce of sense. 😳

[Katzpur]

Old-Timer wrote:

5) The Priesthood lesson was on tithing, and it had its moments for me that were hard to take (like the term “fire insurance” – AARRGGHH!!), but the consensus in the end was that each of us has to decide what tithing means to us individually – and that HOW we decide to calculate our tithing is between us and the Lord. Period. There were at least four former Bishops in the room, one of whom is a former Stake President and current Patriarch, and they all agreed with that conclusion.

I really like the Church’s position on tithing, that it is between us and the Lord. I wish it took the same stance with respect to the Word of Wisdom.

[Katzpur]

Tom Haws wrote:

Katzpur wrote:

I can’t say I “know” he is with 100% certainty, but I really can say I “know” he is with about 99.999999% certainty. I sometimes even find myself thinking, “I exist, therefore God is.” The concept that I even could exist without Him having created me is beyond the realm of reason for me. So, with respect to my belief in God, it would actually be pretty accurate for me to say that I have no choice in the matter.

I find this is true for me as well. My standard maxim is “I believe I am a child of God like I believe I am real.” Likewise, I believe that an atheist is in the same position, and I don’t begrudge it to him. Perhaps it all boils down to semantics; and perhaps not. In any case, there’s no use fighting about it.

To me, when it comes to a belief in God, I simply don’t think it’s possible that we can either will ourselves to believe or will ourselves not to believe. It just is what it is. Is that pretty much what you’re saying?

[Katzpur]

cwald wrote:

Katzpur wrote:

I’m just getting to know you, cwald, but as a liberal Mormon myself, I’m finding that I like you more with each post I read.

Well, thanks, that’s nice…but I’m sure eventually I will end up offending you like I’ve done to most everybody else on this board — and in my life. 🙂

Or, it could work the other way around and I will end up offending you. I’m generally only offended by people who are self-righteous. There don’t seem to be too awfully many of them around here.

[Katzpur]

GBSmith wrote:

At sacrament meeting today one of the speakers made the point that faith was just a matter of deciding to believe. I was struck by that since my loss of faith came from a combination of not feeling a connection with the Spirit and not being able to explain problems with JS, polygamy, the BoM, historical problems, etc.. Do I just decide not to think about them and say they don’t matter? I’d appreciate other’s opinions.

I have had this conversation with people so many times in the past, and most of them don’t agree with me. I’ll just start by saying that. I was introduced to the idea of a Heavenly Father when I was probably about three and starting to go to Primary. I’ve had atheists tell me that means I was indoctrinated to believe in Him. If that’s the case, my parents did a phenomenal job of being very subtle about the process. I honestly feel today that I was born believing in God. I have entertained the idea that there is no God and it doesn’t matter how hard to try to convince myself that maybe He really isn’t there at all, I simply cannot do it. I can’t say I “know” he is with 100% certainty, but I really can say I “know” he is with about 99.999999% certainty. I sometimes even find myself thinking, “I exist, therefore God is.” The concept that I even could exist without Him having created me is beyond the realm of reason for me. So, with respect to my belief in God, it would actually be pretty accurate for me to say that I have no choice in the matter.

On the other hand, when it comes to believing in the doctrines of Christianity and Mormonism in particular, I feel differently. I feel like there are certain compelling reasons why I believe, but that it would, at least in theory, be possibly for someone to persuade me not to believe (which is different from the way I view my belief in God). I have come to the conclusion that I believe in those things (i.e. Joseph Smith’s First Vision, etc. and all of the miraculous things concerning the restoration of the gospel) because I want to. I love the doctrines of the Church, from the idea of personally knowing God in a pre-mortal life to the concept that He is not going to turn billions of people into His eternal firewood for having had the misfortune to be born at the wrong time or in the wrong place. It’s because I find these and other doctrines so compelling that I have to believe in the events that brought them back to the Earth. If the doctrines weren’t so uplifting and satisfying, I could very easily not believe that a 14-year-old kid saw God. So, to some extent, I think we do choose to believe what we want to believe and just do so on faith. I hope that all makes sense.

[Katzpur]

Well, here are just some random thoughts…

I’m a prayeraholic. I pray at my bedside morning and night, and then in a less formal way throughout the day as I feel I need help. I think that of all the things a person could possibly have a testimony on, prayer is probably the area where my testimony is the strongest. Sometimes when I start my prayers, it’s with an apology that goes something like this: “God, I’m really sorry to say the same things and to say them in exactly the same order every time I pray. But I’m really thankful for the same things every time I go to talk to you, and most of the time, I really feel like I need the same things, so please just realize that I’m not trying to make this a ‘vain repetitions’ kind of thing.” Then I proceed to say the same things, in the same order that I do every time I pray.

Once in awhile, if I’m really not in the mood to pray, I will actually begin by reciting the Lord’s Prayer. It seems to help me get in the mood, and it serves as a reminder of how my Savior told me I should be praying. I think, “hallowed be thy name,” and it reminds me that I am addressing the most holy being in all of existance. When I say, “thy will be done,” I am reminded that no matter how justified I may feel in asking for certain blessings and even for help and guidance, it’s ultimately going to be up to God whether to grant me what I’m asking for, and if I truly want to show Him that I am trying to be humble, there is no better way to do so than to accept His will, no matter how difficult it may be. “Give us this day our daily bread” always reminds me of one of the songs in Michael McLean’s “Forgotten Carols.” The words to that song are as follows:

A mansion on a hill, a love like in the movies,

Perfect little dreams where no one has a problem.

Instead of all those things I thought I really wanted,

I’ve been given what I need.

Even when I didn’t understand,

When I thought you had no heart,

Thank you for rejecting my demands

And always giving me the better part.

All I ever wanted, all I ever I dreamed of,

Everything I hoped and all the things I prayed for

Couldn’t hold a candle to what I’ve been given.

I’ve been given what I need.

I’m reminded that no matter what I pray for, God will always give me what I need. Many times He blesses me with things I don’t really need, but that I want nevertheless. But by praying for “our daily bread,” I know that all I really should expect from Him are the necessities of life. “As we forgive our debtors,” is a hard phrase for me to say because I have a hard time forgiving my debtors. When I say that, I’m reminded that I have a ton of sins I need to be forgiven of and the only way that’s going to happen is for me to forgive others. “Deliver us from evil.” To me, this just means, “Help me to be a better person tomorrow than I was today.” That’s something I pray for every night. Now, I have to admit that when I think of the words to the Lord’s Prayer, I often think of the song, and when it gets to the ending, “For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever, Amen.” I hear the creshendo of the music in my mind. By then, I’m normally ready to offer my own personal prayer.

Once in a great while (maybe two or three times a year is all), I will say a prayer of thanksgiving only. I don’t ask for anything, not even safety for my loved ones or that I’ll be given the strength to be a better person. You would be surprised at how hard this is. You get so used to asking for things, that it almost becomes second-nature. When you are forced to just think of your blessings, it really humbles you.

Sometimes I almost fall asleep when I pray, or find that my mind wanders. I hate myself when that happens, and I think how Heavenly Father must feel to know that my mind is off in la-la land when He’s listening to me. Other times, I am really, really focused. If I’m worried about something or am feeling unusually emotional about something, I’ll cry and cry as I pray. As far as my language goes, I go back and forth between using “thee” and “thy” and using “you” and “your.” I honestly don’t think it matters one way or the other to God.

Well, that was a ramble and a half. Sorry.

[Katzpur]

mormom wrote:

It took me a bit to find the talk, called “Mothers Who Know” not “Women Who Know” and I read it.

😳 Oops! Sorry!

Quote:

Talks like this one are the reason I usually skip church on Mother’s Day.

Talks like that are the reason I always skip church on Mother’s Day. I’m supposed to be happy on Mother’s Day. A guilt-trip is the last thing I need.

Quote:

Probably, I’m more bewildered that any thinking person could read/listen to — that talk and not feel at least astonished or dismayed that is was approved for worldwide consumption.

I’m just curious. Who approves these talks? I have always wondered if they even are “approved”? And where along the line would they not be? I mean, I can’t imagine President Monson having to approve President Uchtdorf’s talks. I can’t imagine any of the First Presidency having to approve the talks of any of the Twelve. Must the Seventies’ talks be approved? Or would it just be the women’s talks? My gut feeling is that by the time a person is in a position to be speaking in General Conference, no approval of his or her message would be required. I’ve also wondered what, if anything, was said behind closed doors to Sister Beck in the weeks after Conference. The General Authorities could not have been oblivious to the stir her talk caused. Obviously, she didn’t say anything that ran counter to the Church’s teachings, so there wouldn’t have been anything to chastise her for. I just wonder if she might have been counseled to tone it down just a bit in the future.

Quote:

Maybe Sister Beck is a great lady, but she this one should have been thought through a bit more. Just one humble opinion.

Among many.

[Katzpur]

Old-Timer wrote:

That talk was really hard for a lot of women, but, as much as I agree that there were elements that were hard to take because of the actual content, I really do think that much of the reaction was about what many women assumed she was saying and not based on what she actually said. I have read quite a few things from women who had extremely negative reactions initially who read it later after the emotions subsided and realized she hadn’t said what they thought she had said in quite a few places in the talk. Their early anger took their minds away, and they missed or over-reacted to later things, in many cases.

I was actually physically and verbally ranting and raving during that talk, and of course this was before I had so much as a clue that any other women out there were reacting the same way. I just found the talk to be incredibly guilt-inducing, particularly since I have raised two kids, both of whom are completely inactive. There is not a day goes by that I don’t think, “Maybe if I’d done this or that differently… maybe at least one of them would have remained active.” I know I made a ton of mistakes, and there were times I probably went against the Church’s counsel. But I never made any choices in child-rearing that at the time did not feel right to me. I felt like she was condemning me personally, from the beginning of the talk to the end. On the other hand, the next time she spoke in Conference, I was prepared for the worst and was very pleasantly surprised. I can’t even remember what that talk was about, but I found absolutely nothing in it to offend me in any way.

Quote:

As to why Pres. Beck has impressed me, first, just having a strong woman who speaks authoritatively in an adult voice is a simple thing I like.

😆 Yeah, I give her kudos for not talking in that sweet, soprano voice so many of the women have. That just drives me nuts. I don’t even know how a woman could maintain that voice throughout the duration of a talk.

Quote:

She also interrupted Elder Holland and Elder Ballard in one of the CHI training sessions, and it came across as both unscripted and common as I watched it. By “common”, I mean that both of them appeared to be accustomed to being interrupted by her, just like one of the male apostles might have interrupted them in a different setting.

I’ve also heard her say more than once that a Relief Society President doesn’t need to get permission from the Bishop or any other Priesthood leader to take care of her responsibilities as the RS Pres. In one instance, in the same training session I mentioned above, she said explicitly that an auxiliary president should do what needs to be done and then report what she did – not wait for permission to do it. She has said that YW should enter RS knowing how to act as independent leaders by actually presiding as presidents over their YM classes – exactly as YM are supposed to be doing in their quorums. I don’t think it’s totally coincidental that Ward Council being made the highest council in the Church (replacing PEC) occurred during her presidency.

Well, I’m liking her more already. Thanks for taking the time to post that.

[Katzpur]

Old-Timer wrote:

ANYTHING said or written by Chieko Okazaki is gold-plated Gospel to me. LOVE that lady!! If ever there was a modern-day prophetess in a leadership position in the recent Church, Sis. Okazaki was it – and Pres. Beck has impressed me in many ways, as well.

I’m not trying to get into an argument or anything, but I really find this confusing. Julie Beck and Chieko Okazaki strike me as night and day. Could you maybe share something about Sister Beck that might help me see her from a different perspective? Her “Women Who Know” talk so pushed me over the edge that I may not have really given her a chance to redeem herself in my eyes.

[Katzpur]

I just thought I’d post a poem I ran across a couple of days ago. My son wrote it when he was probably in about 8th or 9th grade. He is no longer active in the Church and I’m starting to think his perspective is hereditary.

UNTIED LACES

Sometimes I’m made to go to church

and wear itchy pants

tight around my waist

then tuck in a shirt

that doesn’t fit

that’s long and ugly and red

and those tight shoes to match

with untied laces

my tie strangles me

for three straight hours

I go to church praying

that this will all be over soon

Note: If the crotch of his pants was any higher than his knees, he’d have said it was “tight around his waist.”

[Katzpur]

bridget_night wrote:

Thanks Roy,

What amazes me is that he has had the courage to speak at Evergreen and other places about his own personal revelation that God told him he will be married to a man someday. I know he went through alot of hell before God revealed this to him and one needs to follow what is right for themselves.

Bridget

Reading that made me cry.

[Katzpur]

mormom wrote:

I do intend to read Sister Beck’s Women Who Know talk, although it sounds like I’m in for it, and also want to thank whoever posted “Prayer for a Meyers -Briggs ISFJ personality type.

That’s me you’re referring to. I would like to recommend a book for both you and your daughter to read. It’s called “Lighten Up!” and it’s by Chieko Okasaki, former first counselsor in the Relief Society general presidency. It’s several years old and you probably wouldn’t be able to find it in bookstores, but you can find it on Amazon at : http://www.amazon.com/Lighten-Up-Chieko-N-Okazaki/dp/0875796680” class=”bbcode_url”>http://www.amazon.com/Lighten-Up-Chieko-N-Okazaki/dp/0875796680. I think it might help your daughter to look at things just a little differently. (I’m recommending it for you just so that you can know what you’re asking her to read.) Anyway, it’s an easy read. I highly recommend it.

[Katzpur]

cwald wrote:

Brown wrote:

cwald wrote:

Genetics and choice Brown.

I don’t follow.

Are you saying because many gay people are genetically attracted to those of the same gender, they should be exempt from the rules? My brother is genetically depressed and drawn to substance abuse. Should we allow him into the temple?

You’re damn right we should. If the temple is truly necessary for salvation, why wouldn’t we. If God made your brother genetically depressed and prone to substsne abuse, whose fault is it realty? God made him that way.

I am not opposed to same-sex marriage, because in my opinion it is a violation of a person’s civil rights not to be able to have the right to marry whomever they may want to marry. Furthermore, if we were to get into a discussion on Prop 8, my position would be that the Church had no business involving itself in the issue at all. On the other hand, a celibate gay or lesbian person may be endowed just as a heterosexual person can. Genetic depression, as far as I know, is not considered to be sinful, so I’m not sure why you even mentioned it. Being prone to substance abuse is not sinful either. In that regard, it’s more or less in the same category as being gay.

[Katzpur]

Old-Timer wrote:

Bishop Burton’s talk was stunning – simply stunning.

There were some really good ones, bu that one . . . astounding.

I missed his. I’ll have to read it. I would expect him to give a good one; he always does.

[Katzpur]

Old-Timer wrote:

The central plot is that two missionaries go to Africa – one a hardcore traditionalist and one a more relaxed . . . non-traditionalist. The traditional one thinks the world’s problems can be solved by smiling and praying and being happy and obedient, but they encounter people who, for example, sing a song entitled (literally), “F*** You, God”.

See, I think I could handle pretty much anything except that song.

[Author]

Posts