Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Quote:
“It was more like a screen scrape”
– hawkgrrrl
LOL– ‘cut and paste’, right? I like it. Is it yours?
How about considering this along with a ‘mind stretch, which goes hand-in-hand with another kind of ‘mind’– a ‘mind ___’?
I remember years ago attending a lecture by Hugh Nibley saying, “There is far, far more that we don’t know [and never will], than what we do.”
So sure, in reference to Troy anything is possible, but you have to consider all of the many red flags that have surfaced, which are not mind stretches, and of which there is a lot to ‘scrape’ in iLand, and garnered from a lot of well written (researched) books, and interesting interviews.
This, and not to discount the “spirit of discernment”, regardless of being either that of a ‘real’ supernatural, divine source, or just plain logic of the heart/mind, or both.
Nevertheless, perhaps Swami Vivekananda was on to something when he affirmed, “I accept all the religions of the past, and I worship God with them all. I leave my heart open to those of the future.”
Peace.
@ dingobex I found this article to be very informative, and it’s an actual Masonic source:
http://www.jjcrowder743.com/history.htmlhttp://www.jjcrowder743.com/history.html” class=”bbcode_url”> After you peruse the article, I’m sure you will agree with the author of this article that no one knows, and there are only theories.
Of course the LDS church will have these ‘theories’ imbedded in ‘revelation’ That’s when “the thinking has been done,” and there is no longer any need to wonder like others have to–we know!
As of interest, I was on a BYU travel tour to Egypt many years ago, and we had the opportunity to visit one of the more remote, ancient temples. The LDS tour leader pointed out some aspects of the figures in the reliefs that were carved in the temple walls and had us note the similarity to temple clothing and the arm and hand positions of some of these relief figures. He also stated that in one of the rooms of this temple we walked into, which had numerous columns very close to each other, all of these columns would have been elaborately painted ‘back in the day’ so as to look like a forest, hence ‘a garden room’ just like what is to be found in an LDS temple. Wow! I thought at the time. He also told us that another room we visited was the ‘Holy of Holies’ wherein only the Pharaoh and his queen were allowed to go and “make covenants” to be eternally espoused (sealed) to be king and queen in the eternities of the afterlife. We were told that all of this (and more!) was a bastardization of what Abraham had revealed to the Pharaoh when he was in Egypt, but the Pharaoh wanted God’s priesthood power only for himself and his household, and for his own agenda. Obviously, then, he was not worthy, so when Abraham left Egypt the Pharaoh made up his own ‘religion’ patterned after God’s. Mmm…seems like quite the believable story, eh!
At the time I was TBM all the way and bought this stuff hook, line and sinker. However, go talk to an Egyptologist (a REAL one) and compare what he has to say about this information (assessment) to that of this LDS tour leader. I’ll leave you with this ‘homework’ in order for you to come to your own conclusions, i.e., don’t let me, nor anyone else, do “the thinking” for you.
Peace.
P.S. Would have really enjoyed having you ‘at the table’!
Quote:Admin Note]: It’s been said enough to be clear. Let’s be careful not to pile on and do the same in reverse.
LOL! Yeah, I hear ya. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. It’s starting to get pretty warm in here–quite a bit more so than my own cooler, past comments, me thinks.
Onward and upward to better things.
Peace.
– Morzen
This just popped up in my email. Talk about synchronicity!
https://hbr.org/2016/05/7-things-to-say-when-a-conversation-turns-negative? ” class=”bbcode_url”> https://hbr.org/2016/05/7-things-to-say-when-a-conversation-turns-negative? @ LookingHard and @DarkJedi I would like to respond to this for my own ‘education’ (for the lack of a better term, perhaps).
If all four of us were casually sitting around a table and dingobex recounted what he wrote here and I respond to him with the very same words, I fail to understand how that would be taken as offensive. I’m sure he would defend his stance in some way to which I may, or may not keep the ball in the air, but to be sure no one is going to be ‘oh so’ offended, but rather understanding and accepting of the fact that we just have differing opinions about a subject that has certainly generated a lot of controversy and suspicion about it’s validity. Hence, on this forum there is nothing ad hominem in what I said; there wasn’t any denigrating name calling; there was just a calmly ‘spoken’ opinion that I shared (or ‘volunteered’). If the roles were reversed I would have even gladly welcomed my comment as something to consider, and perhaps respond to.
Would it have been okay if I had prefaced my comment with, “
IMHO and not wanting to be disrespectful with regard to your spiritual experiences,there is no way that I can…. IMHO, what ever spiritual experience you think you had…”? I understand and agree there has to be ’rules’ as to how people are to behave on a forum such as this one, but
IMHOthis beyond the limits of required censorship and political correctness. Are we really so thin-skinned and delicate in that we can’t stand a little heat of disagreement, or differing opinions? Dingbex shared something publicly AND anonymously, which to me invites comment and feedback. If this was so sacred to him then he shouldn’t have shared it in a public forum where most obviously there are going to be people who don’t agree with him (although hopefully, in a reasonably, non-abrasive manner–like I think I did). Hey, this is just my opinion on the matter, but this your forum and you set the rules, although I don’t understand your limits about those rules.
@ dingobex There is no way that I can accept that the “one and only true religion” of Jesus Christ has a lot to do with or being that your salvation is based upon the Masonic rituals of the Mormon church temple ceremony. I feel pretty confident is saying: “Impossible.”
What ever spiritual experience you think you had in the temple has nothing whatsoever to do with “the one and only true church/religion” of God Almighty and the living Christ, if in fact there is a “God Almighty” and “living Christ”.
Thank you for appreciating what I wanted to share. It makes a difference. It prompted a thought:
Sharing what little there is on my table is not the essence of that which is lacking, but the abundance of its potential to bring us to the table, which then becomes our table laden with sufficiency to sustain us.
Good story (and funny comment). I’ve heard a few variations of it over the years, but it’s always fun to hear them again in all their variety. And all the additional comments are germane and there is nothing that I would disagree with.
I should explain that my feelings as of late have been focussing less on the church and a lot more on religion. I have been ‘forced,’ for the lack of a better word, or constrained due to circumstances to look beyond the local church hubbub and really examine *what* my *religion* is instead of *what* and *how* my *church* operates. Ever since I have rid my mind, and I’ll even say heart, of the clutter (false LDS mantras and urban myths, etc) I feel more free and less burdened with quilt. I am beginning to understand or view God differently notwithstanding the years of influence by the whole spectrum of the LDS church; I am no longer creating God in my image by relying totally on just the ideas and concepts taught to me by former authority figures. I am getting a sense of a more marvelous, although still perplexing, feeling of something far more complex than I ever realized before. There is a greater sense of wonder now. It’s perplexing and can even be stressful, but it’s also more peaceful, i.e, the universe is unfolding as it should and I am just trying to be a good person that I reasonably can be.
I know it’s a tired cliché, but I am not totally “throwing the baby out with the bath water,” i.e., I am still grateful for a lot of LDS teachings and for the influence it has been in my youth instilling good teachings to be a good person. And to be sure, being a member of the LDS church has been a real learning experience in the school of hard knocks a lot of times — but as we all know, that’s partly how we really learn and develop. But returning to the main point, I don’t know if you would describe my current personal paradigm shift as being ‘more’ or ‘greater’ or whatever, but there is certainly ‘something other’ that I have a greater and more acute sense of. It doesn’t necessarily exclude the LDS church, but I am realizing more and more that the LDS church with all of its ornaments, doctrines and memes is not at the center of the stage — it’s just playing its own role like everything else in the world.
And to Tom Haws: I have never heard of that express before — “weasel words” being grace words, but you’re right I do consciously insert them. I just hope it doesn’t come across as being insincere or worse — ‘weaselly’ obsequious.
Appreciate the comments. Very kind. Brain said, “Yes. The world changes the Church. God is the God of the world too.
Yes, the world does change the church — think end of the Negro priesthood ban, changes in the temple ceremony, etc.
When you say, “God is the God of the world, *too*” take a step back a look at that statement. What do you see?
My wife told me about a pet peeve that she has experienced a few times. She’ll be talking to a member of the church and a non-member’s name will come up. Then the member will say something like, “Oh, yes, I know them. They’re not members of the church, BUT they’re still good people.”
I think the church has all too often clouded our thinking without us ever truly realizing its impact. We are constantly told from primary on up that we are God’s “elect and chosen people” and especially so if we were born in the covenant, and so on and so forth. We are better than all the rest; we have the ‘Truth’! I don’t know about you, but that’s how I was raised and I have witnessed the same thing with other members countless times and in countless ways throughout my life.
Not wanting to offend or confront you, but don’t you think the statement would be better put as, “God is *principally* the god of the world.” or “God is the god of whole world and we are just one, small or otherwise, part of it.”
Something like the new change in the preface of the Book of Mormon, i.e., now it’s “among” not “principally.”
Just my thoughts.
@ Brian Johnston and Old-Timer: Brian said, “I’ve received flawed advice from a Bishops. Do you think we’ve never heard of this before? I am asking that as a dispassionate question. I am sincerely interested in your introspection on that”
Because I stated, “I digress.” It’s just “talk” — prattling. I was in a meeting with President Monson whilst on my mission and he told story after story about errant (*bizarre*) events of members and missionaries. It was both entertaining and enlightening. But now that I have lived life many decades beyond that event, the ‘shock value’ has greatly dissipated — I now have some of my own stories to tell as do perhaps you, hence you were obviously neither entertained nor enlightened by the story I used as an illustration or whatever. But it was just a digression.
Ray said, “Have you read the posts in this forum? If so, how can you possibly ask that question seriously of us? … My disagreement and concern is with the extrapolation from that question and the tone and word choice used in that extrapolation.”
Yes, I poke around here every once in a while, and this place has a better ‘feeling’ (for me) than, for example, the NOM site, although there are good posts (and people) there as well.
But getting back to “tone,” etc. I reiterate that I am at a distinct disadvantage because you cannot ‘read me’ in real time as far as voice inflections and body language. This, of course, is also a reflection on my ineptness in being able to effectively communicate “tone, etc” via the written word. I am quite sure that if we were all sitting around a table at a restaurant having this conversation, there wouldn’t have been an issue made about our individual demeanors or modes of communicating with one another. Me thinks, “What we have hee-eh-re is a failure to communicate.” So maybe we should all take a step back and declare “no harm, no foul,” and move on to …
… @ Heber13: My original comment (although perhaps to some people, inflammatory and insensitively expressed):
“Is this sort of “common sense” worth 10% and more, of your income? I think you can get it for a lot less on Amazon (and even better content a lot of times). And it comes delivered right to you; you don’t even have to dress up and go to it. AND no angst coupled with boring, inane grade three (the constant milk) fluff and filler material.”
was only used for the purpose of putting a concerned frame around the semi-rhetorical question:
“Could God be using the world to correct the church?” Let me ask: Isn’t God the god of the world as well as the church?”.
What I was attempting to say is that it is my opinion that the church is stifling freedom of speech to an inordinate degree more so now than I can ever recall or have experienced. Oh, this may not be the impression you get listening to GC talks, but at the local level it’s another story. It is my opinion, based upon what I hear more and more regarding the focus of “just stick to the manual” that perhaps I am not the only one who has been directly affected by this now current state of church governance. I think that’s what evoked the comments about “Red Guards,” “Nazis,” etc. And for your ‘entertainment’ I’ll illustrate this further by giving an account of the most recent experience I had.
Not to toot my own horn, but I have always been regarded as very good teacher being knowledgeable and interesting to listen to. I would spend a lot of time preparing my lessons. Think ‘Relief Society’ and the indispensable ‘table’ at the front of their class with all of the ‘lady’ stuff used to enhance the lesson. But in this case don’t think, ‘lady,’ think ‘male.’ I would create illustrations and bring in interesting stuff to illicit ‘thinking.’ The most common feedback I would get was that “when Morzen teaches, you sure go away thinking.” In my last teaching position teaching in the HP quorum in our new ward (at the time), I actually received no less than two ‘thank-you’ notes sent via regular mail, from two quorum members expressing how they have been really enjoying my lessons, etc. Yeah, well that’s at least two attendees, but what about the others? During the lesson I could readily discern that there were those “others” who were not as pleased with my lessons. These were mostly the old guard, former stake presidents, bishops (lots of those), a mission president, and even at least one former temple president that I knew of. They would sit there all stiff and stone-faced, and would never contribute much unless really provoked. I really tried ‘reaching’ these guys, and I think I was making some progress actually. But were they ever hard nuts to crack. Anyway, I could see the writing on the wall (I won’t take the time to elaborate), but the pressure of certain ‘public opinion’ was the hand that was doing the writing, and I knew my time in that capacity was coming to an end and it eventually did.
No sour grapes, though, just a sad realization that at the end of the road of a long life of participation in the church, your membership just becomes this social bone yard of fossilized relationships with a few very old established friends (if you’re lucky enough to have been in the same ward or area for a long time, or you’re not too old to start afresh), and stale or shallow (in my opinion), ethnocentric-like routines.
If someone makes any attempt to inject some sort of diversity, at least into a lesson, you are met with objections. And yet isn’t it strange what we have to endure many times during so-called ‘testimony’ meetings listening, a lot of times, to anything but a ‘testimony.’ But when it comes to the lesson material you better not deviate from “the manual.”
The world, I am now really discovering, is such a wonderful place full of fantastic ideas, and I am perhaps a little upset or even angry that my church is putting the pressure on its members to put on blinders and not expand their thinking AND tolerance for the ideas of other individuals, belief systems or what-have-you. Real sad.
I still didn’t get a reply to my questions: “Isn’t God the god of the world as well as the church? Do you really think that God has deposited truth and instructions for good, righteous living only in the LDS church?” Anyway…
@ Old-Timer: You said, “the name of this forum is “StayLDS”. There is a reason for that name. Please respect it and those of us here who are tarred by the broad brush you just used”‘
I encourage anyone to “StayLDS” if that is their choice. I have never in my entire life said anything to the contrary (and if I ever have, then I plead temporary insanity). You have erroneously implied that I have or am suggesting that people leave the church because that is what I think (not absolutely certain) I am in the process of doing. In fact, as for my own adult children, (of whom are both active and inactive and of whom most are married), when speaking to them I emphatically encourage them to stay with the LDS church for a great variety of *good* reasons. Hence, if staying LDS works for you then why leave; why fix something if it isn’t broken?
Further, I have not “tarred” anyone, UNLESS they are in fact Mormon Red Guard, ecclesiastical power-tripping yahoos, or LDS Nazi, dogmatic zealots. In other words they are Latter-day *Ain’ts* instead of humble, striving “Latter-day Saints.” And although I consider myself to be a ‘striving’ Christian, I would still prefer describing myself as being an “Honest-Ain’t” instead of assuming the universal, bold moniker of “Latter-day Saint.” Nevertheless, “striving” to be better (honestly or otherwise) can never be an excuse for abject wrong doings and harm perpetrated upon another person. You don’t ratify the abusive actions of a parent or spouse by coming to a justifiable conclusion affirming, “Well, sure he beat the crap out the family member, but he is trying (striving) to be a better person, so let’s just turn a blind eye to the incident.” Instead, you speak up for the intention and with the hope of ending the deleterious behavior, or at the very least, ameliorating the situation. NB: Something very similar to this scenario actually happened as a result of a bishop’s imprudent decision, which resulted in the severe beating of a wife who was told by another LDS leader (her home teacher) to immediately get away and stay away from her husband. But she also decided to speak with her bishop to get a second opinion. The bishop concluded that her husband wasn’t all that bad (perhaps stating that he was “striving”), and to go back and ‘support him.’ The woman, unfortunately (and erroneously), thought that a bishop was more entitled to revelation and inspiration than a mere home teacher (who, by-the-way, was far more closer to and consequently knowledgeable about the various aspects of the situation than the bishop), so she went according to the bishop’s advice instead, and that very night ended up in the hospital and worse. But I digress. If I am or have ever been guilty of harming or offending someone, then I most fervently hope someone would make this known to me so that I can make amends as best as possible. Yeah, sure this may come across as an attempt to make myself appear to be so noble and high minded, but I know from experience that when someone (or some institution — think Toyota) attempts to run away or hide from their sins by not taking immediate responsibility for them, the transgressions *always* come back to do more damage than had you come clean to begin with.
And about the “brainless” comment, did I call you or anyone else on this forum “brainless?” I have been in GD classes taught not just by ‘brainless’ teachers, but one in particular who was also more than that (extremely insensitive) and beyond brainless by making a remark attempting to use the scriptures about members of the church not being “as worthy” as those who were not divorced. The ‘pregnant silence’ that ensued was deafening. Brainless twit? No. Brainless a$$h___!! And I could give accounts of other ‘brainless’ stories. I find it almost incredible that you have not experienced anything like this (or won’t admit to it — “sweeping the dirt under the carpet” because doing so manifests loyalty to the Lord, aka “lying for the Lord”). Or, you really haven’t because you are so new in the church (but I don’t get that impression), or that you have been extraordinarily fortunate never to have been a witness or victim of this kind of behavior — like being forever in an Enochian ward! Must be wonderful for you, but sucks to be me.
And about the H.B. Brown comment. I am stating my opinion. It is *my opinion* that the church is not like it used to be in the days of David O. Mackay, etc. I did not single out any GA, or make any overt, disparaging remarks about any such persons. I would make this exact same affirmation of opinion in a HP quorum, Sunday school class, or before any other *appropriate* audience of adults — such as this forum I would have thought.
I will end on a more positive and less indicting note though (but I am attempting not to accuse you of anything, but rather I am just being defensive and explanatory), in that I acknowledge your efforts in trying to treat me in a sensitive manner. There are far too many others that would not have been so inclined. *THEY* are the power-tripping, Red Guard zealots, not you as it would appear.
@ Tom Haws: I am pleased that you agreed with much of what I wrote, although you and I both know that we are all at the distinct disadvantage on this forum of not being able to dialogue with each other so that that we can hear each other’s vocal intonations and view each other’s body language so that we can more accurately interpret either our motives or pedestrian opinions (i.e., just ‘shootin’ the breeze).
I thought my very last sentence was… creative, but to be sure, there was no intention to malign any GA. I did start off with the word “if,” but then I should have continued into the statement with the addition of “then *perhaps*” in order to soften the comment and not come across as attempting to affront anyone’s sensitivities.
About your little game. Mmm… I don’t think I can play that one because the premisses of the situation are not valid. To be sure, according to every NDE account I’ve heard and studied, I won’t be experiencing it with anyone let alone Boyd K. Packer. And why did you pick him, of all people? Now *that* may be of interest to me. I can’t recall ever meeting him, but I will say that based upon the comments I’ve heard him say and viewing his demeanor, and taking into account other peoples’ interactions and opinions, a reputation does seem to precede him.
Perhaps the question to ask should be, “How would I feel if I ended up in the same place with B.K. Packer?” If that were to happen, then that would indicate that he had repented!
— edited for some grammar and typos
Hawkgrrrl said:
Quote:Many GC talks are simply “common sense” talks – and they have many truthful homilies in them. It may not be revelation to say “You should recycle; you shouldn’t buy more than you need,” but it is useful and true in a pragmatic sense.
Is this sort of “common sense” worth 10% and more, of your income?
I think you can get it for a lot less on Amazon (and even better content a lot of times). And it comes delivered right to you; you don’t even have to dress up and go to it. AND no angst coupled with boring, inane grade three (the constant milk) fluff and filler material.
“Could God be using the world to correct the church?” Let me ask: Isn’t God the god of the world as well as the church? I know some are of the opinion that He has leased it out temporarily to Satan, but He is still the Landlord and ALL of us in the world are still ALL of his tenant children. Do you really think that God has deposited truth and instructions for good, righteous living only in the LDS church?
Ever since I stopped going to church and FINALLY started broadening my scope of religious literature (especially Christian, non-LDS) spending my Sunday time reading “out of _
these_ good books” I have grown more in knowledge and understanding about Christ than I ever could have attending Sunday ‘school’ as it is now supposed to be narrowly taught — those with gifts and talents for teaching and A BRAIN need not apply. Whatever happened to our church that is now so different from the days of dynamic speakers and teachers like Hugh B. Brown who encouraged thinking and expression? Soon you won’t be able to tell the difference from the way the JWs run their church and the LDS church — all control and no allowances for any individual inspiration. No one could have said it better than Jonathan Swift: “When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him.” Hence, ‘When a gifted and interesting teacher is finally called to teach in the LDS church, you may know him or her by this sign, that the Mormon Red Guard and other LDS Nazi, dogmatic zealots are all in confederacy against him or her and cry out, ‘Heretic! Apostate!’ or worse.”
If God is still in this church then its leaders are attempting to give Him a lobotomy.
