[Katzpur]

Heber13 wrote:

Does that make sense to us? We can KNOW by saying we know? I think it can if the Spirit of God bears a witness that what I said was true, and after feeling that, I have greater confidence in it…but that is a very non-scientific way to prove something, isn’t it?

I don’t know. To me, saying “I know” when I don’t know is dishonest. Bearing one’s testimony doesn’t have to include the statement, “I know the Church is true.” Sometimes I think we forget that, and maybe that’s not what Dallin Oaks was saying in the first place. I know that I could bear my testimony that I know that God hears and answers my prayers and feel 100% honest in saying that. Maybe I don’t know that, either, but I do feel that I do, so it’s not dishonest for me to say it. It would, however, be dishonest for me to say, “I know the Church is true.”

[Katzpur]

HiJolly wrote:

Maybe children don’t know, maybe they can’t analyze. But when I was eight years old, I was filled with living fire from the crown of my head to the soles of my feet, when my Dad said “receive the Holy Ghost”.

And I *knew*.

I previously said that kids don’t know and can’t know. For the most part, I think that’s true. I listened to a little boy bear his testimony once, though, and I knew that he knew something I didn’t know. It was clearly evident to me that he wasn’t just saying something he figured he was supposed to say. I do think he was a very, very rare exception, though.

[Katzpur]

jmb275 wrote:

I’d like to bear my testimony, I know this church is ______________ . I know Joseph Smith was ____________. I know that President Monson is _________________. I know that Jesus Christ ______________. I know that God is ______________. I say these things…

I’d like to bear my testimony. I know this Church is what what works for me personally. It’s what I want to believe. To me, it makes sense of those things which to other Christian denominations are simply “mysteries.” I know Joseph Smith was either (1) one inconceivably brilliant con-man or (2) inspired of God. I tend to go with option 2. I know that President Monson is a good man, with a good sense of humor and a strong commitment to what he believes. Maybe he’s even a prophet. He’s also just a human being, and thus fallible. I know that Jesus Christ is someone whose life I don’t appreciate enough. Even though it is beyond my ability to really comprehend His love as possible (even for a God), I can’t imagine rejecting Him. Maybe that’s fear speaking, but if He really is who He claimed to be, I can’t imagine having to stand before Him one day in the distant future and say, “Oh my gosh! You really did die for me? Uh… I’m really sorry I didn’t take you more seriously.” I know that God is real. I have seriously tried imagining that He doesn’t exist, and I absolutely cannot do it. He answers my prayers. I do know that. It has just happened too many times for me to say, “It was just a coincidence.”

[Katzpur]

Hi, borninit. First of all, I want to say how much I related to everything you said in your post. I pretty much see this whole issue exactly like you do.

borninit wrote:

It especially bugs me when kids get up and say it. How do they know? Well, I don’t honestly think they do. What, are they Samuel the prophet?

I posted something to this effect in another thread, maybe it was even in my introductory thread. It bugs me, too. It bugs me now, it bugged me when I was a teenager, and it even bugged me when I was a kid myself. I am 60 years old and I have only once in my life stood and said, “I know the Church is true.” After I said it, I felt like a liar. It wasn’t a good feeling. When I was a little kid and my friends used to say it, I used to sit there and think, “No you don’t. All you know is that your parents say that and that it will make them happy to hear you say it. What makes you so sure that your know? Maybe Patty’s Church (Roman Catholicism) is true. How do you know it’s not? What do you even know about anybody’s Church but your own?” When I was in Seminary, we had testimony meetings at which there was a certain amount of pressure to stand up and bear your testimony. I can remember one day standing up and saying, “I believe the Church is true.” I hoped no one would notice what I’d said or, if they did, would think anything of it. After I got through, though, several more students got brave and also said, “I believe the Church is true.” I was just starting to think, “Well good for them!” when somebody said, “I know the Church is true and I believe the Book of Mormon is true.” Then, several more students repeated that! At the end of the class, the teacher said what I’d been thinking, which was essentially, “Uh… boys and girls… It doesn’t work that way. The Church can’t be true if the Book of Mormon is false!” Sometimes I just don’t think people give any thought at all to what they’re even saying. It drives me nuts!

Quote:

It has bothered me for years to hear adults say it. I used to sit down in the pews an ask with some anger and jealousy, “How do they know, and why don’t I? Haven’t I read and prayed too. Does God love them more. Do they have a speacial calling that I will never have that gives them this speacial knowlege?” It made me feel inferior and I knew that I wasn’t.

Again, that’s been exactly my experience. I had to give a lesson in Relief Society on gaining a testimony. If you don’t think that was a hard one for me! I hemmed and hawed, trying to get around bearing my own testimony, and wanting to make absolutely sure that I didn’t make someone else feel the way I’d felt all my life. I quoted from the D&C: “To some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that he was crucified for the sins of the world. To others it is given to believe on their words, that they also might have eternal life if they continue faithful.” I’ve always loved those verses because they stress that both knowledge and belief are gifts from God. Neither one is said to be superior, and who are we to question whether God’s gift to those of us who “believe” is less valuable than His gift to those who “know.” I felt reasonably good about my lesson. Then, a couple of days later, I received an unbelievably patronizing and condescending letter from one of the women in the class who told me how much Heavenly Father loves me and that He wanted me to “know,” not just “believe.” She went on to give me all kinds of advice on how I could become as spiritual as she was. *gag*

Quote:

I have learned to not take them seriousley anymore. What do they really mean? Do they mean I just had a really good spiritual experience and am still high on confidence before the doubts start coming back in? Is it just an expression of faith?

I wish I could get to that point, but I’m not there yet. It still bugs me to death! What I still wonder is how is it possible for me to “know” that the LDS Church is true when someone else “knows” the Catholic Church is true and when someone else “knows” that the Baptist Church is true? If I were to say I “know,” it would be implying that they don’t and that they’re either insincere, delusional, or lying. I can’t do that!

Quote:

In my personal expression, and I don’t like to say “I know” even though I have been more than blessed with knowlege from both sides of the veil. I know what I know, but I don’t know. I wasn’t there when the Book of Mormon was translated, but from proofs/evidences, especially those spiritual, I am pretty darned sure that the BofM is real and true. It has been a wonderful experience for me. Prayer is the same. I can’t see God, but sometimes when I am in prayer I feel like I am in a warm cucoon(?) and I have connected to a source of knowlege not inside of me. This experience is more than wonderful. Despite how convinced I am I cannot say “I know” because I don’t. Has my calling and election been made sure? No.

I too feel quite comfortable with my testimony. I don’t expect that I will ever “know” the Church is true, but it would be extremely unlikely that I would ever turn my back on it. And that’s not just because I have a certain certain comfort level in the Church but because I have pretty much decided that if it’s not true, nothing else is either. I basically would have nowhere to go. I couldn’t possibly be a non-Christian, and I couldn’t conceivably find a way to believe in the “Trinity” of the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds. I would pretty much be like a person without a country.

Quote:

Anyway, if we live in a world and life where living in faith is really the main point, because there are few people who know much, then why do we put so much value on “knowing?” We don’t graduate to any higher status. There is no Know Club. It’s a Mormon culture thing. We are probably the only christian church that puts this much value on knowing if this church is true.

If my comment didn’t cement together very well I apoligize.

You are absolutely right. Your comments cemented very well together, actually, and they made me realize that I’m not alone.

[Katzpur]

Seriously, I appreciated this info, and especially the list from the New Order Mormon link. I was just about to admit that I had given up on knowing what a TBM was and admit my ignorance when I saw this thread.

[Katzpur]

I loved your intro, Rix! Thanks for sharing it.

[Katzpur]

Valoel wrote:

I’ve gone through periods in my life where I was mostly inactive, for months at a time. One of my sons didn’t even get blessed until he was like 2 years old, and we did it at my parents home (with permission and all that). I guess the only reason I am sharing that is to preface my next statement — I really enjoy going to Church now, and miss it when I don’t.

A couple big things come to mind.

Thanks for your suggestions, Valoel. I’m going to have to give them some thought.

Quote:

1. I feel totally at ease with not going — through lots of practice . I don’t feel any guilt about not showing up and just sleeping in or hanging out with the family. Sometimes it might be a good idea to skip and go do something different, but make sure it is something spiritually uplifting. Make your time special.

This is a good suggestion, although it won’t work for me right now. My husband and I are one year into a two-year calling as part-time missionaries with the Hispanic Initiative. I’m more or less required to be at all three meetings every Sunday, at a small branch across the city from where I live. I think that I probably would be able to find something spiritually uplifting to do instead of attend church, and that would probably help me deal with the guilt to some extent.

Quote:

2. I enjoy going … but I am not sure how much time I am even paying close attention to exactly what speakers are saying. I am happy to have quiet, contemplative, personal meditative time. The Church is all happening in my head and heart.

This is an excellent suggestion. I could even do it now, sitting for three hours listening to lessons, etc. in a language I don’t understand and trying so hard to get something out of the time that I come home every week with a headache.

Quote:

3. I *always* carry extra reading material with me, and it usually isn’t even anything Mormon-ish. I have no guilt about quietly enjoying something else if I need to zone out.

I couldn’t do this and feel right about it. I can’t help but wonder how I’d feel if I was giving a talk or a lesson and looked out into the congregation or class and saw people reading a novel. I just feel like it’s only respectful to at least pretend to be listening. Hypocritical maybe, but that’s just not a good option for me.

Quote:

4. A lot of my joy comes from watching people. I am watching them experience religion, one that we share, but so different than me. It’s a detached sort of state. So people are really not so frustrating anymore. They are fascinating. I learn a lot about myself spiritually by watching other people attempting it all in their own unique way. I am equally flawed.

That reminds me of when I was a child. I was taught, of course, that we’re supposed to think of Jesus during the Sacrament. I had the hardest time doing that. My mind would always wander all over the place. I started wondering one day how many other people actually did as they were told and I decided to see if I could figure it out by looking at them. I’d sit and look over the congregation (the adults especially) to see if I could tell by their facial expressions whether they were thinking about Jesus, about Sunday dinner, about their jobs or about the TV show they’d watched the night before.

[Katzpur]

This thread prompted me to add a signature that I have used at times on other forums. I got it from my sister, and it really cracked me up. It’s exactly how I feel.

[Katzpur]

primarycolor wrote:

Reason for the story? Back then the messianic message of gathering (already such a manifest destiny of Mormonism, literally) was literally supposed to continue. The building of the temple in Missouri, too. Oh, and by the way, the Lamanites were to play a big part in the building.

The tribes of Joseph and Judah (Utah mountain tops & Israel’s fruited plains) and the lost 10 tribes: these beliefs were widely discussed and anxiously anticipated. How about now?

I don’t know about those particular beliefs, but I know that my Book of Mormon Seminary teacher told us (back in 1963) that the Second Coming was going to take place in the year 2000, give or take a year or two. He’s probably in his late 70s now. I wonder what he’d have to say about his prophesy (which, of course, most of his students bought hook, line and sinker).

[Katzpur]

HiJolly wrote:

FIRST: God is in charge. There is an order to heaven and heavenly things, but it is not typically limited as we are taught, or as we tend, to think it is. If God wants someone ‘saved’, then it is so. Regardless of our immature reasons as to why it shouldn’t be so.

SECOND: The Church is a facilitator and introduction to the realities of heaven. My personal belief is that it is the single best one on the earth today. Even so, it is not the reality itself. For every outward, physical ordinance (Baptism, Marriage, Priesthood, Endowment, etc.) in the Church, there is a inner, esoteric fulfillment to that ordinance that is the true essence of the thing. Everything we see & do is simply pointing to, or promising, or leading us to, the inner fulfillment.

THIRD: The weakness and limitations of the membership of the Church REQUIRES that Church leaders and leadership come not from the most spiritually in tune or Godly Saints, but from the men and women that the body of the Church can respect and look up to. Rarely, we get both types of ‘leader’ in one individual. The rest of the time, pragmatism wins, by the will of the Lord.

FOURTH: The Church and the Gospel are NOT the same thing.

FIFTH: Everything we hear in Church, everything in General Conference, in the Ensign, etc. is what the temple endowment refers to as “the doctrines of men, mingled with scripture”. ALL OF IT, even within the Church. The temple tells us where to get the ‘pure’ truth. There’s only one Source for that. “We are true messengers from Father”. “How shall I know…?” Etc.

SIXTH: The veil is BIG. And for very good reasons. A critical aspect of this is that God ALLOWS and/or REQUIRES us to misunderstand practically anything. Even His own revelation to us. Our task is to have clean hands and pure hearts so that the messages we receive are not distorted nor confusing.

WOW! BEAUTIFUL!

[Katzpur]

HiJolly wrote:

Katzpur wrote:

Old-Timer wrote:

…I’ve built up the respect capital over the years – and I don’t abuse it. (I see that in Elder Wirthlin, frankly – which is one of the reasons why I loved him so much. I also see that do an extent in Elders Cook and Christensen. I hope one of them becomes my new Elder Wirthlin.)

Could you expound upon this comment, please?

I note that Ray has not responded, but I am curious. Do you mean more on “respect capital”, or on Elder Wirthlin?

Elder Wirthlin. And Elders Cook and Christensen, too, actually. There are so few of the Apostles that I can really identify with to the extent that I just have to hear what they say in Conference. Most of their talks seem relatively generic. I can pretty much always count on Elders Ballard, Holland and Oaks to say something that impresses me. I was just wondering what it was about Elder Wirthlin (and Cook and Christensen) that is so noteworthy.

Of course, Dieter Uchtdorf doesn’t have to actually say anything at all for him to capture my full attention. All he has to do is stand there and look like a movie star. 😳

[Katzpur]

Tom Haws wrote:

Katzpur wrote:

but what’s with this attitude of hers? How can she let you work 2 to 3 full-time jobs and refuse to work more than 10 hours per week herself? I’m sorry, but that just strikes me as unbelievably selfish on her part.

And having one spouse home most of the time is a great blessing! Sometimes reducing the expenditures is the best answer. Only wendell and DW can figure that out.

I realize that, but it really doesn’t sound to me as if the workload is fairly distributed. Plus, I don’t know what benefit it is to children to have a mom who is pretty much always around if the dad is hardly ever home. Kids need both parents in their lives. I’m just saying that I know so many LDS women who are insistent upon staying home to raise the kids “like the Lord wants.” Meanwhile, the kids have almost no interaction with their dad because he’s working two or three jobs. But again, I realize that I’m zeroing in on just one tiny fraction of the problem. You guys are all offering such great advice. Maybe I’ll just sit back and watch.

[Katzpur]

wendell wrote:

My finances are not really a mess. My wife works about 10 hours per week, but she refuses to do more than that.

I know this will sound like I’m just focusing on one teeny tiny part of the problem, but what’s with this attitude of hers? How can she let you work 2 to 3 full-time jobs and refuse to work more than 10 hours per week herself? I’m sorry, but that just strikes me as unbelievably selfish on her part.

[Katzpur]

Old-Timer wrote:

…I’ve built up the respect capital over the years – and I don’t abuse it. (I see that in Elder Wirthlin, frankly – which is one of the reasons why I loved him so much. I also see that do an extent in Elders Cook and Christensen. I hope one of them becomes my new Elder Wirthlin.)

Could you expound upon this comment, please?

[Katzpur]

I’m an ISFJ to the core. I didn’t take any of the quick on-line tests, but I did take the full-blown official version several years back.

[Author]

Posts