[swimordie]

I haven’t posted in a while due to professional obligations but I came out of retirement for this one:

Packers description of the family proclamation as a “revelation” in the context of doctrine is no longer in the text version of the talk.

http://lds.org/conference/talk/display/0,5232,23-1-1298-23,00.html

The word and qualifying phrase for revelation were replaced simply by the word “guide”, as in the proclamation is a guide.

This is actually more important due to the language about “men work, women stay home” that is prescribed in the proclamation than the definition of marriage found in the proclamation (imho).

[swimordie]

I agree with canadiangirl. Based on what you said, I think it’s courageous that you want to be an active member of the church but I’m not sure it’s the healthiest thing to do right now. My brother is a recovering sex/porn addict as well and based on what I know from him, the shame and guilt that you feel around porn is probably a big part of your addiction.

Have you sought out a 12-step program? You’re a good person. You have no reason to feel shame and guilt. It does not come from God. We create shame and guilt for ourselves based on emotional brokenness. Embrace yourself and love yourself truly in the same way that an unconditionally loving God would love His child.

[swimordie]

I sense that alot of the arrogance surrounds the concept of “chosen people”. The same issues you brought up are relevant to Jews. As an ethnic group, Jews tend to overachieve and skew per capita statistical categories. So, there must be something to the firmly held belief of being “chosen”.

[swimordie]

Welcome, Kyle! This site is the best for working out so many issues of intellectual and spiritual import. It’s a blast! And super-constructive. I would say, just keep participating, it will be worth it.

[swimordie]

Cadence wrote:

I feel there is so little left there for me at church but I go to be with my daughter and keep up appearances I guess.

I don’t want to be too blunt but…

You may have answered your own question. If you’re there to “keep up appearances” then you probably aren’t going to be asking those tough questions. I’m not advocating starting faith-shattering discussion, but I think it would be fascinating to be the one who starts to stir the pot. I think you’re giving everyone at church a little too much credit. For many, it’s not that they’re just regurgitating, it’s that they really don’t care. So, you shaking it up a bit could be really interesting. If you do, I’d love to hear the results…

[swimordie]

I love the thought process!

You believed that you wore the blue shirt for you but really it was for “them”. You realized this and now “believe” you wear the white shirt for them but really it’s for you. Brilliant! And a great lesson in intent. We should always be aware of our intent. Therein lies the real battle.

[swimordie]

Well, I’ve never passed up an opportunity to put in my two cents so… why start now? 😳

This one’s really tough and I make up that it may be tough for you too, Ray, because on the surface it elicits a black/white construct. With my current “view”, I feel that “iniquity” is simply a lesson being taught by the universe. And truth is the “light” inside all of us. Therefore, “iniquity” is not following the “light” and “truth” is embracing the “light”.

Sorry if this is oversimplified but I think there is another part of charity and that is being charitable to oneself. In that context, one accepts that one will make mistakes, go against the “light” but in that process one learns, re-embraces the light and rejoices in the “truth” learned. In many ways, this is the whole point of life: learning, growing, progressing and loving. But loving oneself is equally as important as loving others.

I come to this conclusion in part because my own “view” supposes that both iniquity and truth are personal. Therefore the charity extended in this context is charity to oneself.

[swimordie]

I think that the doctrinal hang-up is not the saving ordinances, per se. I think it has everything to do with the idea of pre-mortal gender and post-mortal gender. I know that Ray argues that we actually have no idea what the post-mortal life will look like and argues for a very gender-less communal “family”. But doctrinally, the idea that we were all assigned genders in the pre-existence supposes that creation and/or procreation can only happen between two members of the opposite sex. Hence, the idea that this concept is divine and universal.

The most obvious problem with this “universe view” is simply biology. Intersex/hermaphroditism, transgender and gender identity confusion are unaccounted for in that “universe view”. And, of course, there are a multitude of other biological factors that come into play beyond simply opposite sex intercourse. (Incestual pregnancy, cloning, age, etc.)

There is some movement in the church away from this universe view. Although some see it as a negative, the church’s de-emphasis on Heavenly Mother is a step away from the “universe view” of opposite sex creation/procreation.

There is a long religious tradition of “rejecting” the imperfect in deference to the “perfect” as believed by the group. Iow, the theology of “as it is on earth, so it is in heaven”. Therefore, whatever imperfections are found “on earth” are discarded as evil or anti-God. It’s the total rejection of the “other”. And, of course, this has led to most of the greatest tragedies of human-on-human violence.

[swimordie]

I was thinking about this exact thing today! Coincidence?? 🙄

I think what makes the whole transition through stage 4 and the crisis of faith, is that there is such a chasm between someone RECOGNIZING that they are buffet and, maybe even more importantly, ACCEPTING that everyone’s buffet journey is just as valid as everyone else’s.

Iow, the buffet individual feels that they are entitled at some level to be the way they are because of a sense of superiority, being “chosen”, or being “certain”, and this allows them to see the sliver in the others eye (or whatever the term is 😳 )

[swimordie]

Old-Timer wrote:

I just believe what we do trumps what we feel

Absolutely love this Ray!

Charity trumps Certainty….

I’m not sure you would agree but that’s how I see it…

[swimordie]

I really love that idea too, Ray! It gets to the heart of some feelings we’ve all encountered: resentment.

Cake, I just posted on your intro too, but to expand a little here, I have felt the exact same feelings as you have now. There’s a bitterness and resentment towards those that we perceive could not or would not accept us as we are in this current place on our journey.

The biggest trick of all is letting go of those perceptions. If we concern ourselves with how others may perceive us, we’ll always be left with resentment.

[swimordie]

Welcome, cakelady!

I agree with heber. I think that in some ways there is something bigger at play then just wearing garments. Why do you feel subservient to what you perceive is “God’s command”??

There is obedience out of fear and obedience out of love. Discovering that difference may be the key… Based on your comments, it sounds like you recognize the intellectual part of this dichotomy but your heart may be in a different place. It might also be your own perception of who “God” is.

[swimordie]

Welcome, roadless!

Your intro really hit home to me. It’s very similar to alot of stories that I’ve become aware of from people very close to me.

I’ll agree with everyone else. Keep going. That fantastic place of honesty and openness with your husband is key to greater intimacy which is probably why you feel closer to him than when you married. Don’t stop. It keeps getting better and better. Learn to love and accept each other as two completely separate people, each taking care of oneself, not trying to take care of the other. It sounds counter-intuitive but it works. I came from the exact same background as you and all of my family and in-laws had a really tough time with it all; until they saw that I was becoming a better father, husband and person after “leaving” the church. It turns out that it’s not the church that makes the difference one way or the other. It’s me.

[swimordie]

Devil’s Advocate mentioned something in a totally different context to what I’m going to say but it’s interesting.

The idea of paradox and the “real” world strike me in this case. The “real” world being the harsh reality of the physical world. I saw the documentary “Grizzly Man” over the weekend and it is alarming. Alarming in the total and absolute “immorality” of the physical world. The film was a study of a man who lived amongst grizzlies in Alaska for many years. Of course, eventually, one of the grizzlies killed him and ate him. He had set up a world view wherein he could as a human man, live amongst the wild animals, with the same human ideals of morality. He cried when he saw that wolves had killed a fox cub. He lamented the carcass of a bear cub, killed by other bears so that the mother grizzly would stop lactating and be ready for reproduction sooner. Or, when the salmon didn’t run the river, the bears turned on themselves, eating each other.

And this was all so horrific to the man with his human sensibilities and moralities. But the physical world doesn’t have a moral and an immoral. Humans create morality. Obviously, this morality serves us in communal living but I can’t help but wonder if there isn’t some value in the reminder that we are all part of the cold, heartless, moral-less physical world.

Just a thought.

[swimordie]

That is so fantastic, Ray! (even though you didn’t write it, you did bring it to me)

Schadenfreude is one of the baser emotions of humans. And humility may be the highest, noblest. Unfortunately, for orthodox religious groups, this is the greatest struggle of all. Certainty is the father of schadenfreude and the destroyer of humility.

Hypocrisy is the great revealer, but mostly about those who perceive it.

[Author]

Posts