- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
This is my first Official post, I feel that if I am going to stay lds then I truly need support from those that have been there before and know what I am going through, plus it is good to get thoughts out of the brain and onto “paper”. What initially led me on my current journey, was studying different religions and studying Islam. seeing the similarities between Joseph Smith visions/book writing/church starting and that of Mohammed. And the question of how can I preach and testify the “my prophet and church” can have these heavenly visitation and is true, but the same occurrences by a different religion has to be false. Those of every faith have similar conviction/testimony and dedication to their god(s)/holy books and doctrines as I do/did to mine.
Yet the core difference is that of messiahship(lds) versus holy prophet(Islam) concerning Jesus.
In a fascinating book, The Shack by William Young the main character is talking to Jesus and in conversation asks to Jesus, “does that mean all roads will lead to you?” Jesus responds,”not at all, most roads don’t lead anywhere, what it does mean is that I will travel any road to find you.”
How have any of you reconciled this, or made peace that it is possible that we all have it wrong? And is it possible that “truth” can be in the eye of the beholder and not universal?
Welcome Asher, These are the type of questions we love to dive into. Please take time to look around the boards and dig up similar topics. There have been many insightful voices on this.
For myself, I think religions are more the same than different. Kind of like people. Most people have some basic traits. There are always anomaly’s in the basic structure. But if I go anywhere in this world, some standard people-ing appears. Among those peoples there are a ton of variations.
I believe that is how religions are. Now I know each one wants me to give it the final stamp of approval. For some people one religion becomes that. I prefer to try and collect the best bits from all the ones I can and add them to my plate.
That’s just me. Again, welcome.
asher wrote:
How have any of you reconciled this, or made peace that it is possible that we all have it wrong? And is it possible that “truth” can be in the eye of the beholder and not universal?
That’s a tough question to answer. If “truth” is in the eye of the beholder and the beholder firmly believes that they have truth, then doubts about whether they have it all wrong melt away. A person with that sort of conviction can live their entire life comfortably within the boundaries of their truth.
I’ve found some measure of comfort in knowing that I currently have it all wrong. I was once as certain as I could possibly be that the LDS church was the one true church. Later in life I felt like that conclusion was very wrong. I recognized that life has always kind of been like that, moving from one certainty to another. I knew Santa was real, I knew the LDS church was True, I knew the LDS church wasn’t True, I knew good things happen to good people, etc.
I took those thoughts and applied them to my present and my future. 20 years ago I believed
xyzand I now feel like I was wrong. Today I believe 123. In 20 years I’ll probably feel I was wrong to have believed 123and will have moved on to abc. Given enough time abcwill turn out to be wrong too. So… how much effort will I spend chasing truth and certainty? :think: Maybe that will never change… but how much energy will I spend concerned with whether or not I am right? I wonder how much of my journey is me trying to discover some universal truth and how much of it is me seeking validation.The chances of me currently being in possession of actual truth are both close to 0% and close to 100%, depending on how I view truth. What I have may not be truth that every other external source imaginable could validate but my truth could be exactly what I need for right now. If truth is what I need right now, then I am always enveloped in truth.
I’ll continue to ramble…
I often hear that perfection is the enemy of good. I think that goes for churches and belief systems as well.
There’s the concept that living life in pursuit of material possessions does not satisfy. There are always more possessions to acquire. What if Truth (capital T) was just another possession? Does attaining Truth satisfy, or is there always more Truth to acquire? On this front, I’d say that orthodox believing members of the church have a leg up on most of us. An orthodox believer doesn’t typically expend much energy on seeking Truth, they believe they already know it. They’ve reached the summit, there is no more climb. Compare that to the truth seeker; always seeking, self doubt leading them to seek forever.
I’m not saying it’s cool to stop learning new things, just that perfection (in this case Truth) is often unattainable. Are we discarding the good in our quest for perfection?
All religions are not the same, nor are all churches, but I think the thread of truth in all religions is the same. One of the reasons I stick to “love your neighbor” is because I see it as a commonality in all major religions and belief systems. Thus, it’s likely an actual Godly truth. Beyond that I have nothing truly believe to be a God given truth, although there are possibilities. As far as the one true church idea, I have given up on that. Jesus asked us to believe in Him and that’s all he really asked. That’s partly why I lean universalist. If there is a Celestial Kingdom, I believe there will be many Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus and others there and maybe not as many Mormons as some Mormons seem to think. Generally speaking, I believe the 11th AoF and I believe it includes those inside and outside the church (it does say all men): Quote:We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.
DarkJedi wrote:
All religions are not the same, nor are all churches, but I think the thread of truth in all religions is the same.I think you can go further. Within religions there are significant differences. A friend is Muslim. We talked about what she believes within
her faith & she said there are different “denominations” within Muslim faith. Meaning: there are different belief depending on which congregation
you attend. (Who knew??)
asher wrote:
In a fascinating book, The Shack by William Young the main character is talking to Jesus and in conversation asks to Jesus, “does that mean all roads will lead to you?” Jesus responds,”not at all, most roads don’t lead anywhere, what it does mean is that I will travel any road to find you.”How have any of you reconciled this, or made peace that it is possible that we all have it wrong? And is it possible that “truth” can be in the eye of the beholder and not universal?
This is a fascinating take on religion! ONe that I have settled on myself.
To your question, I believe the answer is “yes” to both.
To the first question, I make peace by minimizing the footprint of the Mormon religion on my life. I do not get involved in callings where I have to make unhealthy sacrifices or work with people who have the power to hurt me. I have people like that in my Ward. I do not put myself into a position where I have to be set apart in a calling form which I’m released only when some uncaring leader feels like it. I have put other boundaries on my life and service that “protect me” from harmful aspects of the church.
I have also fostered good relationships with people in non-church contexts. I have exercising buddies, musicians I work with, work friends — and a rich life outside of church. Very rich.
I also temper my judgmentalism of the church with a great “faith” in my own ignorance about eternal matters. Sure, we can get the warm fuzzies in certain contexts in our church — but I have felt them in many, many contexts. Not just Mormon ones.
To your second question — To reconcile my spiritual feelings toward the church that convinced me to join, and the realization that the church is not all it is cracked up to be, I leave myself open to the fact that I may be wrong about it’s apparently diluted truth. So I stay involved, prepared to change my ways should God direct me otherwise.
I also have wondered if God saw the LDs church as the best way for me to live a good life given all the options available to me when I needed it most — as a young adult. So he answered my prayer about whether to join the church with an affirmative.
After years of dedication, ending in leadership abuse, depression, and walking pneumonia, I realized the church wasn’t working for me. I feel at peace about the decision to scale back my commitment. I have realigned my life’s mission from “celestial kingdom attainment” to finding peace and joy in this life. I ask “will THIS activity bring me joy?”. If the answer is affirmative, then I go with it. And this doesn’t mean I’m imbibing and debauched, it means I pick those activities that will make me happy, in a good, wholesome way. I am experiencing the best religion has to offer while minimizing the organizational egocentrism and self-serving “shoulds” church leaders put on me.
I am glad that someone has articulated the idea Jesus tries to find us on whatever path we are on, and to influence us that way. Makes a lot of sense!!!
Minyan Man wrote:
DarkJedi wrote:
All religions are not the same, nor are all churches, but I think the thread of truth in all religions is the same.I think you can go further. Within religions there are significant differences. A friend is Muslim. We talked about what she believes within
her faith & she said there are different “denominations” within Muslim faith. Meaning: there are different belief depending on which congregation
you attend. (Who knew??)
Indeed. Judaism is somewhere around 6000 years old and there are many sub-brands – Orthodox, Reform, Conservative, etc., and even sub-brands of the sub-brands. Christianity is around 2000 years old, and again there are many sub-brands – Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, etc., and sub-brands of the sub-brands. Islam is close to 1500 years old and also has sub-brands – Sunni, Shia, etc., and while I don’t know as much about Islam, I am willing to bet there are sub-brands of the sub-brands. And those are just the Abrahamic religions. With hundreds of millions of Buddhists and Hindus and given their ages there must be sub-brands there as well (I am not as familiar with them, either).
I worked at a Jewish school for a few years. The only admission requirement was that the kids were Jewish, it didn’t matter what kind of Jew, and we had quite the gamut from very liberal shrimp and bacon eaters to children of Orthodox Rabbis who would only drink cow’s milk imported from Israel. I quickly figured out that there are as many beliefs among Jews as there are Jews (seriously). But here’s the thing I also learned – when it came down to it, if one of them was in need it didn’t matter how liberal or orthodox they were, a Jew was a Jew and the other Jews were going to help them, no question about it. And that brings me back to that commonality – they all believe in being nice (although, like some of our good Mormon friends and neighbors, they didn’t always translate that into practice – but we are all works in progress).
Hi. And welcome. Good question to discuss about religions. I feel not all religions are the same, but they are not all that different.
To me, they are like different exercise and diet programs. Some are fads. Some come and go. Some are pushed by people with an agenda (like making money). Many can work for different people.
But not all are the same and not all stand the test of time.
I think we can look for the good and the truth in them, and find what we are looking for.
And I believe God can find us, along many different roads, as long as we are trying and seeking the truth in our hearts.
Community is a big factor. And where one finds the support is often where one religion can help more than another. But not all people will have e the same experience in one church over another.
That seems to be what I find.
God is greater than Religion. It matters less what religion we choose, bit more how we live our chosen religion. The rest takes care of itself in the eternities.
asher wrote:
How have any of you reconciled this, or made peace that it is possible that we all have it wrong? And is it possible that “truth” can be in the eye of the beholder and not universal?
I believe that all churches are similar in that they are an attempt to explain our current environment of pain, sickness, and death and provide purpose and meaning for it all.
I imagine that if you asked everyone on the planet what is the meaning of life you would get many different answers – but I bet some common themes would emerge.
Family: This is one that I personally find compelling.
Community: This involves forming relationships outside of your immediate relatives and helping each other out.
Being a good person: I believe that this stretches even beyond family and community to helping the stranger and the foreigner.
Growth and learning: Perhaps growth and learning is its own reward and needs no further justification.
Obedience to God: Some would say that the purpose of life is a simple obedience test.
Making a difference or Leaving a legacy: many want to contribute to something that will continue after they die.
I believe that the LDS church as well as many other churches have aspects of all of these “purpose of life” answers embedded in their doctrine.
If you asked a person what the purpose of their life is and they answered “family” would that person be wrong or right? Suppose another answered “being a good person” and still another answered to “prove their obedience to God” – would they be wrong or right? Can they all be correct and still give different answers? That goes very much into subjective truth and eye of the beholder. I feel that I can receive and develop the purpose and meaning for my own life. Yet how could I try to dictate to others that their life purpose should look like mine in order for them to find truth or happiness?
asher wrote:
In a fascinating book, The Shack by William Young the main character is talking to Jesus and in conversation asks to Jesus, “does that mean all roads will lead to you?” Jesus responds,”not at all, most roads don’t lead anywhere, what it does mean is that I will travel any road to find you.”
I also enjoyed this book. It gave me some new concepts to think about and expand my thought process. The Shack is a fictional book that is presented as a first person account. My wife was reading it thinking that it was non-fiction. When she found out that it was fiction she stopped reading immediately and never continued. She was very interested in a person’s actual claimed experience with God and Jesus (even in vision or dream state). She was not at all interested in a person’s conception of what God or Jesus could be like.
I think that this too permeates religion. We don’t want to hear from people that say, “wouldn’t it be nice if God was x and did y and asked us to do z.” We want to hear from people that say, “I saw God! God was X! God did Y! God commanded us to do Z!”
Finally I love the concept of Jesus as Savior and Redeemer. I personally like the concept of the trinity as presented in the BoM for no other reason that it allows for God the Father himself to somehow take on human form. He would do so in order to suffer and die so that he would experience mortality to expand his empathy to cover all of us wayward children. He personally would pay the price for all of our errors in order to bring us all back home with him. He personally would “travel any road to find you”, to embrace you, and to tell you that he loves you.
I think it’s funny how most of the Christian world’s beliefs depend on a vote of what was true by people at the Council of Nicea. And the Bible has become this be-all, end-all, final word, when there were many scriptures “rejected” for inclusion. As I have read and reflected, I’m convinced it’s very incomplete on core matters like trust, relationships, and forgiveness. And that leads to some pretty hard-to-accept behavior from others who treat the Bible as the final and complete word on many subjects – particularly with regard to forgiving others and the plight of “victims” who take a while to get over wrongs committed by others. All people are the same – and all people are different. People are more similar than different – but some differences are significant and often appear to outweigh the similarities. Churches are no different.
Some religions are destructive. The People’s Temple, for example. Others are really hard to live and are only for the very committed — Mormonism falls into that category. Others are very healing and helpful. The church I belonged to before I became LDS was like that. Others are a cakewalk and a social club. I think you could create a taxonomy or a set of continuums that distinguish one church from another — something like Hofstede’s Cultural Variables, but adapted for the common factors across religions. https://www.hofstede-insights.com/models/national-culture/ Don’t misunderstand me — I am not saying these cultural values are necessarily adaptable, but some are, like POwer Distance — the extent to which you defer to people in power. Churches would seem to differ on rigidity of doctrine, quantity of rules, Commitment required to be in good standing, familial pressure etcetera.
Old Timer wrote:
All people are the same – and all people are different. People are more similar than different – but some differences are significant and often appear to outweigh the similarities.Churches are no different.
Are all restaurants the same?
Yes, in that they all are designed to bring people prepared food and thus fit the definition of being a restaurant.
Are all restaurants the same?
No, there are many different varieties of restaurants, each with different strengths and weaknesses.
Maybe someone should start putting restaurants in churches??feed the masses, right? Heber13 wrote:
Maybe someone should start putting restaurants in churches??feed the masses, right?
The Sikhs already do this.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.