- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
When I came here many moons ago, I introduced myself to the audience here at the time. There are many new people, and I thought it would be useful to make clear my background, why I’m here, and my worldview. Here is a link to my introductory post: “
finding my wayI continue to stay LDS, active, temple-recommending holding, but I do not have the least bit of orthodoxy with respect to my testimony. This lack of orthodoxy is inherent in my worldview, and often, when I’m sharing here, people coming in with a more traditional believing worldview struggle a bit with my statements. I don’t wish for that struggling, nor do I wish to be misunderstood.
The problem with my approach is that I use terms common to traditional belief but mean, to me, something nearly the opposite to the traditional definition. This causes confusion, and I’m sorry for that.
So in this post, I would like to refer to
what I believeblogIn summary of what I believe:
– I believe that the divine nature within us that we inherited from God the Father is god.
– I believe that god works entirely through natural law without supernatural intervention.
– I believe that through the atonement, we are one with god when we submit to our divine nature. This is what Jesus meant when he said, “Come, follow me”, and “What manner of men ought ye to be? even as I AM”.
– I believe that the atonement is more meaningful and normative when we adopt its symbolic meaning as distinct from the mythologized aspects of physical events.
– I believe that the gospel is all truth: and that the means of the gospel is to discern truth properly and not through dogma or the commandment of men.
– I believe that Joseph Smith restored the ‘gospel’ – that is the means to find out all truth by rejecting dogma and openly seeking the truth through whatever means it may come.
– I believe the church exists to help provide the framework for us to come to all truth.
– I believe that we ought to participate in the church to assist us in becoming more whole human beings, to support one another, and to help us become one.
– I believe that scripture, church history, and church teaching are symbollically true and necessary to help us learn eternal ideas that are not apparent from evidence alone.
– I believe that active membership in the church requires one to teach according to the requirements of the church within the culture of the church and edify those whom I teach.
I would also like to be clear what I don’t believe, or what I don’t think I need to believe.
– I do not believe in anything that operates outside of laws of nature.
– I do not believe in an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-good, and all-present god who was once man and is now unchangeably god.
– I do not believe in a personal god separate from humanity that directs the affairs of this world, church, etc.
– I do not believe that the hand of god has been in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints from the beginning.
– I do not believe any aspect of the creation myth in Genesis, repeated in Abraham, Moses, and in the temple is in any way factual.
– I do not believe that the people in the book of mormon represent any true history of any people of the americas.
– I do not believe that the Book of Abraham represents abraham’s words at all.
– I do not believe that revelation happens through physical means: no physical angels, no physical visit by god and Jesus, no verbal/audio dictation. no visions. (I do believe that all revelation occurs through the mind and heart as noted in D&C
.– I do not believe or accept that polygamy was an inspired principle.
– I do not believe or accept that withholding the priesthood from blacks was an inspired principle.
– I do not believe or accept that withholding the priesthood from women is an inspired principle.
– I do not believe or accept that gay marriage destroys the family.
– I do not believe or accept the 14 fundamentals of following the prophet.
– I do not believe that the natural man is an enemy to god.
– I do not believe that any merciful god would create a hell where people endlessly suffer.
– I do not believe in a personal being called the devil or satan.
While I don’t know the following, I don’t believe that I need to accept these principles:
– I do not believe that any scripture need be physically true or factual.
– I do not believe that physical resurrection makes any sense whatsoever.
– I do not believe that god needed to kill his son to atone for the sins of the world.
– I do not feel I need to believe the supernatural aspects of Christ’s life.
I hope this helps provide an understanding of where I’m coming from.
Wayfarer posts his “ninety-five theses” on the wall of StayLDS.com. I always love your views my friend. Glad to have you in our community.
Brian Johnston wrote:Wayfarer posts his “ninety-five theses” on the wall of StayLDS.com.
I always love your views my friend. Glad to have you in our community.
Just tryin’ to be clear. It saves a little time when someone is trying to help me understand the true believing position, which I know and already teach when called to do so in the church. When I see people arguing with me that “polygamy is a true principle” when their worldview starts with the concept that god revealed it, then understanding that my worldview makes such a revelation impossible, at least we can quickly agree to disagree.Is it hypocrisy to hold private beliefs that are distinct from what I publicly declare in the real person of me in a church setting? According to Holland, having private beliefs is no issue — but when we preach it, then it becomes an issue. I consider what I share here my private beliefs zone. It certainly is hypocrisy when I require obedience and belief to that which I’m not willing to do. And I don’t do that.
If I can say “God Lives! Jesus is the Christ! The Gospel is True!” and truly mean it personally, but yet my definition of “God Lives” is that “God Lives actively within me as my divine nature”, and “Jesus is the Christ” means that “What Jesus taught and symbollically respresents is the Way, the Truth, and the Life”. I really believe these things, yet I don’t mean “God in the person of Elohim is an all powerful, all knowing, all good, all present, and personal physical being who personally hears and answers all my prayers” or “We were so sinful that god had to kill his son Jesus Christ to atone for us, and we still need to work our butts off because we’re saved by grace only after everything we can do…”, etc. Is this hypocrisy to testify using the same words but mean something completely different?
I’m actually a little ‘burned out’ right now. My car has been broken down for a week, I’m not traveling so I need my car, and my boss wonders what I spend so much work time on (little does he know that it’s stayLDS and other stuff…).
ah well.
Quote:Is this hypocrisy to testify using the same words but mean something completely different?
Nope – not at all.
Thanks for the reintroduction. I think it might be a good idea for all of the old-timers here to bump up their introduction posts, just so everyone who is newer can see what we wrote initially. I’ll find mine and do that.
Welcome to staylds Wayfarer… we agree on much and I look forward to your participation. 
Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2
Thanks for posting this Wayfarer. Definitely food for thought. You have somehow been able to make a leap that for whatever reason I am terrified of making. Old-Timer wrote:Quote:Is this hypocrisy to testify using the same words but mean something completely different?
Nope – not at all.
I am no linguist, but I can appreciate the beauty of many languages. I am particulary impressed by the sheer beauty and ingeniousness of the English language. So many shades of meaning that can be conveyed in beautiful and inspiring ways. I understand of course that we can never make ourselves understood perfectly … there is too much that goes on between the mind of the speaker and that of the hearer, but what is the point of such a tool if we don’t make an effort to use it to accurately describe as best we can what goes on in our heads, instead of speaking in a code that only we ourselves understand, as it were? Unless of course we mean to be disingenuous. Perhaps this is a topic for another thread, but if you can’t feel at ease speaking your mind, and you’re not allowed to just sit quietly, what kind of life is that?I like how your discussion of what Middle Way means excludes “lukewarm” since trying to make the LDS experience work is really not an indifferent matter. Great front page. Quote:– I believe that the divine nature within us that we inherited from God the Father is god.
– I do not believe in a personal god separate from humanity that directs the affairs of this world, church, etc.
I’m confused
If Lorenzo Snow’s couplet, “As man is god once was, as god is man may become”, is true, then there is no god outside of humanity. We just don’t preach it and we don’t teach it. Without speculating, there are many ways to reconcile this apparent contradiction. All start with abandoning the the god of the creeds…which was Joseph Smith’s entire point…
I guess we will have to disagree on that. @Wayfarer I’m curious how you reconcile something.
I’m paraphrasing several of your points, but essentially you see the LDS restored church & gospel as the vehicle to the truth.
From what I’ve observed the gospel & church (as nearly all religions) is based largely on dogma. Dogma, essentially assumes “something” to be truth and endeavors to prove that “something” true instead of looking at the evidence to determine what is true. An extreme example is at one point in history the dogma was that the earth was the center of the universe. Those who endeavored to show otherwise were labelled heretics and even killed by the religious. In much the same way scientific truths such as evolution are often dismissed and take longer to spread because of religious dogma.
So how do you reconcile this? Do you disagree that dogma often fights against truth? Do you disagree that the LDS church & gospel is dogmatic?
Or as, I suspect, have you found a path through these issues? If so I am curious what your thought process has been in so doing.
bc_pg wrote:@Wayfarer
So how do you reconcile this? Do you disagree that dogma often fights against truth? Do you disagree that the LDS church & gospel is dogmatic?
Or as, I suspect, have you found a path through these issues? If so I am curious what your thought process has been in so doing.
Good question.
Way…While I enjoy a 95 point thesis pinned on the staylds wall….and agree with 90% of it….perhaps you might just adopt my condensed version and save yourself some time.
The LDS church is a divine pathway, one of many pathways, that some people can follow to find the gods, and peace in this life, and perhaps the next.
Actually I really liked it and saved it to my staylds file…someday I may need it….revised for my own Martin Luther rebellion.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2
Nephite wrote:I guess we will have to disagree on that.
Isn’t the first time, and I am certain it won’t be the last. But I am curious…which part of my last message do you reject? Do you reject Lorenzo Snow’s couplet? Do you accept the God of the creeds?I’m glad to learn all about your views. I’m curious, Wayfarer. How are you still able to be active in the church with all those unorthodox beliefs? I couldn’t do it. There would be too much conflict inside me? Ilovechrist77 wrote:I’m glad to learn all about your views. I’m curious, Wayfarer. How are you still able to be active in the church with all those unorthodox beliefs? I couldn’t do it. There would be too much conflict inside me?
And yet another good question…you have your plate full to tonight.
Preach to me brotha!
Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.