- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Wait – Cwald – they didn’t mention me? 😯 Maybe it was my rants over the past 2 weeks. Thanks for the heads up. I will work on my presentation.Quote:it is also a good indication of how many faithful members read this board and why we need faithful member participating, and why we need to appreciate Ray’s and others input, even when it is aggravating.
Good input.
:clap: I’m glad they didnt’ consider me part of the balancing group here on StayLDS. That would hurt my feelings…. 
No. Ray was the only one mentioned by name.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Old-Timer wrote:Anyway, he wasn’t pointing that at you in any way, and it wasn’t criticism. Really, it’s cool.
:thumbup: Yeah, I’m good! My reply probably sounded much more defensive in print than I meant it to be. If you knew me in person, you would know I was joking back. I do not get offended very easily so feel free to set me back on the right path as needed
🙂 And I hope all of that didn’t come off as anti-LDS because I am not at all. I am still trying to put some things back together and figure out how to navigate church life going forward.
I just find it a bit strange that people want to believe in such a punitive God. That’s all. There is another thread that has some good conversation on all this as well with some great commentary from Roy (can’t find the thread at the moment).
Have a great week everyone!
All joking aside, cwald does make a good point. My view is very similar to Ray’s, and like others have said here I don’t share it openly. There are other views I have which I think some more zealous and more orthodox members might also consider apostate views. In light of this topic, and knowing there are “low information” members, I think even expressing any view in even very limited support of the views of OW might get some jaw dropping in Sunday School, and likewise a deep discussion of Elder Oaks’ talk might get some pushback from the old guard (they seem to really like to focus on the temple part and ignore the rest). Last week in HPG while discussing the Oaks talk relative to OW, a few oldsters brought up that “women would never receive the priesthood.” When I asserted that that’s what most believed abut Blacks before 1978, other than a smile from the Black HPGL, I got silence and a quick subject change – even though I had made it clear earlier where I stood with OW and how I thought their tactics were detrimental to them. Speaking of low information members, I was surprised yesterday at how many knew Kate Kelly was having a disciplinary council, but didn’t know the outcome – even my wife (who spends at least an hour on Facebook every day) shocked me.
Per this discussion forum is my view on the opportunity of post-mortal life progression or the idea of a more inclusive gospel a minority view? Just curious…
In the Church, overall? Minority view for the first and middle-of-the road to larger minority view for the second, I think. Here at this forum? Majority view, I’m sure.
SunbeltRed wrote:Per this discussion forum is my view on the opportunity of post-mortal life progression or the idea of a more inclusive gospel a minority view?
Just curious…
I certainly agree with you.
It is absolutely absurd that if there is no beginning and there is no end, that we would be judged for a mere 80 years of mortal existence.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Quote:“post-mortal life progression”
As with lots of things, I think the response percentage would vary depending on how the concept / question was phrased.
Old-Timer wrote:Quote:“post-mortal life progression”
As with lots of things, I think the response percentage would vary depending on how the concept / question was phrased.
Eternal Progression VS. Mortal Probation
As with the concept of Faith/Mercy VS. Works/Justice, there appears to be some tension here.
Surely the faithful do not become instant Gods on the moment of death so there must be some sort of post mortal progression.
Yet if we have FOREVER to figure stuff out then where is the urgency for right now?
I believe that most church members settle the tension by believing in progression for most but only within the bounds of their assigned kingdom (with only the celestial kingdom being limitless).
Ray, Agreed on the wording. They way I worded my last comment, would probably get a high number of Orthodox LDS who agreed, but if re-worded to convey my doubt about the absolute necessity of the ordinances (or at least a belief that if needed folks can get them later), would probably get a low response rate.
Roy,
Agreed on the tension. As I have stated, its difficult for me to believe that only test is this mortal life, but I do get your point that if “now” doesn’t matter than what’s the hurry. I’m not quite sure I have reconciled that yet, but I think it has to do with attitude. If I am trying to progress toward holiness in this life, whatever path that might be, and I have cultivated an attitude of love, then that attitude should carry me forward in the next life. If I have an attitude of nonchalance and indifference to the spiritual, then perhaps that attitude will hold me back in the next life. I think it will be more us than Him.
Not sure I have a completely usable framework yet, but my two cents…
This life absolutely is the most important segment of our eternal existence, since it is our current present – and the present is all there really is. Now is all we have, since the past and the future are amorphous and theoretical. We always, forever, eternally will have only now. In the pre-mortal existence(s), that time was the most important; when we die, that immediate time will be the most important; 60 billion years from now, that time will be the most important. Now always is most important – and, I might say there is no “most”, since there is no “other”.
Old-Timer wrote:This life absolutely is the most important segment of our eternal existence, since it is our current present – and the present is all there really is. Now is all we have, since the past and the future are amorphous and theoretical. We always, forever, eternally will have only now.
In the pre-mortal existence(s), that time was the most important; when we die, that immediate time will be the most important; 60 billion years from now, that time will be the most important. Now always is most important – and, I might say there is no “most”, since there is no “other”.
I really appreciate this thought Ray. Along with this thought I believe that we should never sacrifice our now for our future. That is not to say that we should not plan for or invest for the future – just that we should not make the investment so onerous that we cannot enjoy the “now” or stage of life that we are in.
I apply this to my children in not focusing so much on their future success that I rob them of the experience and the wonder of being children (i.e. if they were to die young would their lives have been wasted preparing for a future that never came?)
I apply this to faith and living a religious life by not making the demands of my faith so onerous that the joy of living my present is largely deferred to the afterlife. The trade off or opportunity cost must make sense for this mortal life.
Amen, Roy. Joseph didn’t say a happy future is the object of our existence; rather, he said happiness is the object of our existence –
and we only exist in the HERE and NOW. That concept can be hard for someone who struggles (for whatever reason) to be happy in mortality, so a happy future can be appealing – but I believe the proper approach is to try to find happiness to whatever extent possible internally – in the here and now – and carry that internal happiness with us in our continued here and now. We really don’t ever have anything else.
Great thoughts. Thanks!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.