[mackay11]

hawkgrrrl wrote:

Check back with me in three weeks. We will be at a very different place by then I hope.

Is this supposed to sound as criptic as it does?

[mackay11]

DarkJedi wrote:

Ann wrote:

The other hard thing about it all is that it (at least for now) deflates my optimism about the new members of the quorum.

I had this same thought, Ann, considering the timing. I would full well expect something like this from Packer and Perry but not necessarily the new ones.

The speed of movement in the church means this was probably signed off months ago.

It bothers me more that Elders Uchtdorf & Eyring would have perhaps had the opportunity to veto this and didn’t. Perhaps. Purely speculation.

[mackay11]

churchistrue wrote:

I have kind of set myself up to be a Mormon apologist, so I feel obligated to defend the church. This is the safest place online I have to complain. I’ve had some angry moments the last few days. It’s very, very difficult not to see this as a spiteful, immature reaction to the gay community after losing every fight it’s picked recently on the subject. I thought we were moving on, but it doesn’t look like it. Yesterday, I’m talking at home with wife and older kids and younger kid says “can someone please tell me whether or not my church hates gays.” The situation just sucks. I hope we can make it right soon. I was very hopeful when I heard the church was making a clarification that it would be something like “oops that got out into the media before it was finalized.” or at least “it’s been interpreted wrong, it only applies to adopted children of same sex parents not split parents”. But instead, Elder Christofferson seemed to double down and remove wiggle room in his clarification. None of the logic being used to defend it makes any sense. It hurts a lot of children and families in LGBT community. And not just that. Members who don’t hate gays are assumed to be gay bashers. Just four years ago, we were in the middle of the Mormon moment. Mitt Romney was running for president. Book of Mormon musical was popular. Mormons had reputation of being faithful, a little weird, but super nice, hard working, high achievers. Dammit, that’s how I want to be perceived! Now we’re quickly trying to ruin that reputation for one that is obsessed with discriminating against gays.

Thanks for your honest reaction. One of the things that bothers me most about this policy is that it will twist people’s arms to feel obliged to support it. Intuitively many people will feel uncomfortable about it, but feel a loyalty pushing them to accept it and post-rationalise it.

I think that’s what bothers me the most. It pushes people to be something they’re not and believe something they don’t.

Any your youngest’s question was a corker…

[mackay11]

Hi everyone.

It’s been a while. With everything kicking off over this latest mess it occurred to my that you wonderful folks who walk a middle way would probably be really hurting right now.

I can’t offer much in words of comfort. I just wanted to visit with you for a while. Job 2:13 style.

[mackay11]

Just saw this on Bill Reel’s Facebook. For any of you who like using a non-KJV of the Bible occasionally I thought you might like to make a little bookmark out of it.

Quote:

“Is there any value then for the Latter-day Saint in using modern English translations?

Although the Church prefers to continue with the KJV for its English-speaking members, we should not assume that the many other translations are not useful. They oftentimes explain passages that are difficult to understand. In cases of confusing phrases and archaic words, readers can quickly compare the verses with those in other translations. In addition, comparing many different translations will often expand one’s understanding of a particular verse.”

The Ensign, June 1986

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1987/06/i-have-a-question?lang=eng

[mackay11]

Thanks for sharing. I pop by and lurk a bit from time to time to find positive stories to help me remind myself that there is good in the church. It also gives me something positive to say/share about the church when I’m with my active family.

[mackay11]

I’ve shared one line from conference on my FB wall:

“I was willing to extend courtesy to those without doubts if they would extend courtesy to me.”

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/watch/2015/04?lang=eng&vid=4154712152001&cid=5

[mackay11]

Have you read the church’s article on DNA?

https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-mormon-and-dna-studies?lang=eng

[mackay11]

Quote:

At the same time it should be remembered that not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. It is commonly understood in the Church that a statement made by one leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, not meant to be official or binding for the whole Church. The Prophet Joseph Smith taught that “a prophet [is] a prophet only when he [is] acting as such.

Elder D. Todd Christofferson

http://www.lds.org/general-conference/2012/04/the-doctrine-of-christ?lang=eng

[mackay11]

An a antidote to the “living prophet outranks a dead one:”

Quote:

“It makes no difference what is written or about what anyone has said, if what has been said is in conflict with what the LORD has revealed, we can set it aside. My words, and the teachings of any other member of the church, high or low, if they do not square with the revelations we need not accept them. Let us have this matter clear. We have accepted the four standard works as the measuring yardsticks, or balances, by which we measure every man’s doctrine.”

Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, Volume 3, Page 203

https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-and-church-history-student-study-guide/the-worldwide-church/president-joseph-fielding-smith-gospel-theologian-and-writer?lang=eng

[mackay11]

So as an antidote or in preparation for the lesson, let’s harvest the quotes thread for helpful quotes to use in the lesson.

I’ll start:

Quote:

In Answers To Gospel Questions Joseph Fielding Smith wrote: “… is doubtful that man will ever be permitted to make any instrument or ship to travel through space and visit the moon or any distant planet.”

Following the Apollo moon landings and the death of President David O. McKay, President Smith became president of the Church. At a press conference following his assumption of Church leadership, he was asked by a reporter about this statement. President Smith replied:

“Well, I was wrong, wasn’t I?”

http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_science/Joseph_Fielding_Smith_claimed_that_man_would_never_walk_on_the_Moon

[mackay11]

Maybe we should spend the next 6 months combing the quotes archive for good responses when the lesson happens.

[mackay11]

nibbler wrote:

I had debated on whether the lesson in the new manual would be an appropriate one to skip or whether it was a can’t miss lesson. I could prepare ahead of time (the lesson comes up in 6 months right?) and maybe come up with some constructive comments that are aimed at re-centering the discussion on the gospel.

We recently had a class that was very similar, or at least many of the 14 fundamentals were brought up and many people testified of them. It was a lesson on the FP message in the January Ensign.

It’s a complex issue, at least to me. Most of the 14 fundamentals make perfect sense to the orthodox mind. When we disagree on some points an orthodox person might not be open to the nuance or the “what ifs” they may only think “of course we follow the prophet, he speaks for god, it’s a no-brainer.” Any opinion contrary to that would be completely indefensible. Going into the class in debate mode isn’t going to accomplish anything because the way I see it, everyone is correct in their own way.

It’s tricky to rock that rhyme. We’ve got 6 months or so to meditate on it.

I’ve not been to church in a few months. I’d been asking myself over Christmas whether it would be worth going back from time to time.

I read the first pres message (via other channels) and was reassured in my current choice to stay home with my (long-term not attending) wife and kids.

Pretty much the single biggest thing that keeps me away is the fundamentalism of the attitude of many towards the idea that: “we’re right because we have a prophet.”

If Sunday were a group of people saying: ” here’s my view, but I’m open to lots of others,” then I’d be more inclined to be there.

Joseph Fielding Smith last year was one of the last nails in the coffin for me. Having content like the 14 fundamentals this year, combined with the Oct conference and Jan 1st Pres message is simply the shovels of soil being dropped on top of it.

I had a long conversation with a close friend over the weekend. He has a similar view of Mormonism to many of us in this group. I have huge respect for him as he’s proactively trying to be a small influence in his area for the Uchtdorf “big tent” approach to Mormonism. He spoke about how much like hard work it can often be. I have huge respect for those of you who continue persevering with that approach too. Sorry I jumped out of that particular boat.

[mackay11]

Quote:

“Suppose your youth receive their impressions of church history from ‘pictures and stories’ and build their faith upon these alleged miracles [and] shall someday come face to face with the fact that their belief rests on falsehoods, what then will be the result?

Will they not say that since these things are myth and our Church has permitted them to be perpetuated …might not the other fundamentals to the actual story of the Church, the things in which it had its origin, might they not all be lies and nothing but lies? …

[Some say that] because one repudiates the false he stands in danger of weakening, perhaps losing the truth. I have no fear of such results. I find my own heart strengthened in the truth by getting rid of the untruth, the spectacular, the bizarre, as soon as I learn that it is based upon worthless testimony.”

BH Roberts

Truman G. Madsen, Defender of the Faith: The B. H. Roberts Story (Salt Lake City, Bookcraft, 1980), 363.

[mackay11]

Heber13 wrote:

I really like the quote in the article:

Quote:

Remember this quote from B.H. Roberts, one of the Church’s foremost faithful defenders and historians:

“Suppose your youth receive their impressions of church history from ‘pictures and stories’ and build their faith upon these alleged miracles [and] shall someday come face to face with the fact that their belief rests on falsehoods, what then will be the result? Will they not say that since these things are myth and our Church has permitted them to be perpetuated …might not the other fundamentals to the actual story of the Church, the things in which it had its origin, might they not all be lies and nothing but lies? … [Some say that] because one repudiates the false he stands in danger of weakening, perhaps losing the truth. I have no fear of such results. I find my own heart strengthened in the truth by getting rid of the untruth, the spectacular, the bizarre, as soon as I learn that it is based upon worthless testimony.”

Folklore, meaning explanations that don’t match up with history or the Church’s position, are “worthless testimony.” They will ultimately harm those you are trying to help.

B.H. Roberts lived from 1857-1933, and he speaks as if he lives today with his views on seeking truth amid real information and facts and history.

That is really, really important to me.

That is spectacular!

[Author]

Posts