Freedom in Religion

[Anonymous]

For what it’s worth, I think the analogy is a good one. Not to say that it is a perfect comparison to real life, but it is interesting and thought provoking – which is the point of a good analogy.

[Anonymous]

Nephite wrote:

Well, I didn’t expect this thread to go this way at all. I thought it was a good, positive analogy about truth setting us free. It was meant to encourage faith in God generally. I am sad that it took a negative turn from the start…Analogies and metaphors are not perfect. Why can’t people just learn something from them rather than knocking them?

I actually like metaphors, parables, analogies, and examples to illustrate different points but in this case I would have never come up with the main point of this story being that the truth will set you free and encouraging faith in God. To me, it sounded more like it was trying to say freedom is overrated so people should just accept and appreciate the restrictions of their freedom because it is supposedly for their own good and maintains an environment that is better than one with unlimited freedom would be. This idea of religion basically providing a safe haven reminds me of the movie “The Village.” When I saw this I immediately saw parallels to the LDS Church; basically the adults were telling their own children scary stories about monsters mostly to maintain a sheltered environment separate from the outside world.

I think the zoo example would make perfect sense if the LDS Church actually did provide a better or at least more comfortable and secure environment on average than what you will find outside the Church but that is precisely where I think the example does not fit with what really happens very well. I can think of a few changes to the story that would make it fit better with what I actually see. For example, suppose the ones that did the most to create the zoo are dead and gone and the only ones with the power to make changes in the zoo are inside the zoo themselves and typically think the zoo should stay the way it is. Not only are the animals trained to stay inside their cage but they are also trained to jump through hoops and sacrifice their own interests for no apparent reason in many cases. The door to the cage is open but many of the animals don’t see it and some of the ones that do see it don’t want to go outside the cage because they are already accustomed to living inside. Some of the animals that do wander outside the cage go back in because it is more familiar to them and/or they like the other animals in the cage but the majority of the animals that go outside for long don’t want to go back inside. If what is inside the cage cannot compete with what is outside very well then eventually the cage will be empty.

[Anonymous]

and others love both living inside and outside the zoo – realizing both environments work for different people – not trying to drive out those who thrive inside or cage those who thrive outside or limit some to staying inside or outside

Yes, there are things we can take from the analogy, but, for me, the only good I can take from it is when it is expanded to fit all types of people I know. One “living condition” simply doesn’t work for everyone, and I believe that never will change – in mortality or throughout all eternity. I think limiting the lesson to one thing (either that all are better in the zoo or that all are better outside the zoo) and adding the type of condescension that both of those extreme interpretations yield really isn’t all that different on either side of the discussion. I really don’t see any philosophical difference between those two positions, when all is said and done.

[Anonymous]

It wasn’t a bad analogy, Shawn. I just didn’t quite get it at first. I’m always surprised when people know more than what I think they know and when people don’t know as much as I think they know.

[Anonymous]

Nephite wrote:

“I know zoos are no longer in good graces. Religion faces the same problem. Certain illusions about freedom plague them both.” –Life of Pi (emphasis added)

This is NOT an argument about zoos being good or bad – I really don’t know where animals are happier or if they care. This is about the comparison to religion and I love the point made. Any thoughts?

Good analogy, which I’ve never considered.

Thanks for sharing that.

This is how I see it:

There is a reason for the scripture, “put off childish things.”

Many adults (myself included for a significant amount of my life) – still look for some type of substitute parental authority.

And although, this may be needed for a time, at a point as adults, we need to take responsibility & become authority over our own thoughts & lives.

By the way some (not all) act after realizing their religion was not all it’s cracked up to be, I can see that religion can encourage basic morality – & order where the legal system cannot. There’s a kid in all of us that “wants what we want when we want it, dangit!” There’s also a con-science/light of Christ in all of us that helps us consider what is best & what we really want in the long run, not just the short run (small cage perspective).

Some, who have left the church, still find substitute “general authorities” – ie liberal leaders or other group dictated belief packages & follow others.

They are not getting out of the “authority cage” – but are simply switching cages.

Some cages have good things in them – healthy food, healthy room to roam around & explore.

Some cages have harmful things in them &/or have very little room to even move.

“Know the truth and the truth shall set you free.” To know the truth takes guts!

There are some ugly things out there! The “circle of life” is more bloody than Lion King makes it out to be.

Most people would rather comfort themselves within their cages of illusion, as if they can’t get out, when they are free to get out.

(Of course, this is NOT speaking for those who are literally incapable of changing their circumstances – ie extreme poverty & children killed through abortion.)

Once out of the cage, it’s a little nerve-wracking.

It can be intimidating to THINK for yourself, instead of going along with ostracizing peer pressure of various “cages.”

When blind, it can be comforting to have some walls or something to feel instead of so much free open space.

And the fact is, no matter how “enlightened” we become, as Moses acknowledged, we still don’t know much – we are still mostly blind.

Yet, in considering more perspectives than what we were limited to in cages – & in realizing that we can think & spiritually feel & decide for ourselves, we have more freedom.

Then, also, we are more capable of making decisions that bring about more health & joy rather than sickness & misery.

[Anonymous]

Today I was chatting with a friend who I’ve considered to be somewhat agnostic, but who nonetheless sees value in religion.

He sent me this article… “Civilization Without Religion” & I thought of how applicable it is to this thread.

http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=06-01-005-f

A couple of quotes…

“Sobering voices tell us nowadays that the civilization in which we participate is not long for this world. Many countries have fallen under the domination of squalid oligarchs; other lands are reduced to anarchy. “Cultural revolution,” rejecting our patrimony of learning and manners, has done nearly as much mischief in the West as in the East, if less violently. Religious belief is attenuated at best, for many—or else converted, after being secularized, into an instrument for social transformation. Books give way to television and videos; universities, intellectually democratized, are sunk to the condition of centers for job certification. An increasing proportion of the population, in America especially, is dehumanized by addiction to narcotics and insane sexuality…

What ails modern civilization? Fundamentally, our society’s affliction is the decay of religious belief. If a culture is to survive and flourish, it must not be severed from the religious vision out of which it arose. The high necessity of reflective men and women, then, is to labor for the restoration of religious teachings as a credible body of doctrine.

‘Redeem the time; redeem the dream,’ T. S. Eliot wrote. It remains possible, given right reason and moral imagination, to confront boldly the age’s disorders. The restoration of true learning, humane and scientific; the reform of many public policies; the renewal of our awareness of a transcendent order, and of the presence of an Other; the brightening of the corners where we find ourselves—such approaches are open to those among the rising generation who look for a purpose in life.”

I believe in the Flynn Effect – that each generation gets more intelligent.

Yet, I also acknowledge that intelligence, like money or power can be used for productive or destructive purposes.

I feel that it is time to wake up & “put off childish things” – to THINK & feel for myself – to improve conditions.

I believe what Joseph Smith taught – that the most powerful battles are not fought on battlefields – but are between principles.

IMO, religion, like everything has healthy & unhealthy aspects.

Legion = many… Most of us are born & raised in groups & naturally gravitate toward groups.

Each group tends to have their own version of “articles of faith” – but as an adult, I can consider what beliefs are most healthy & inspiring of true freedom & focus on those from each group I associate with.

[Anonymous]

Nephite wrote:

The First Presidency and Twelve Apostles are wiser than anyone here, in my opinion. No offense, but I really mean that.

Really, the relatively few Church rules that are in stone are not a problem for me when I have the Spirit. Sadly, that is not often enough. I have been tought to let to let my conscience and the Spirit be my guide. We are given many guidelines to go by, but I still make the choices.

Shawn, you appear to have turned a corner….. I agree with this post by the way. The top 15 men as a whole when united are always smarter then me. When one of them share his opinion outside the bounds of the group then I would say they are not necessarily smarter then me but the Holy Ghost will tell me if they are right.

[Anonymous]

DBMormon wrote:

Nephite wrote:

The First Presidency and Twelve Apostles are wiser than anyone here, in my opinion. No offense, but I really mean that.

Really, the relatively few Church rules that are in stone are not a problem for me when I have the Spirit. Sadly, that is not often enough. I have been tought to let to let my conscience and the Spirit be my guide. We are given many guidelines to go by, but I still make the choices.

Shawn, you appear to have turned a corner….. I agree with this post by the way. The top 15 men as a whole when united are always smarter then me. When one of them share his opinion outside the bounds of the group then I would say they are not necessarily smarter then me but the Holy Ghost will tell me if they are right.

Or maybe 14 of the 15 are wiser than you, but one is not and will not “conform” with the wise words of the 14….so nothing is ever said in GC to fix the problems?

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2

[Anonymous]

cwald wrote:

Or maybe 14 of the 15 are wiser than you, but one is not and will not “conform” with the wise words of the 14….so nothing is ever said in GC to fix the problems?

Interesting thought you expressed – and it has a precedence in church history. There was quite a conflict between Brigham Young and the other apostles with Orson Pratt and doctrine he taught from the pulpit and in publications all over Britain and the United States. It would go back and forth between him accepting lower-level/private “censure” from the others, eventually culminating where they had print a statement in the Deseret News to get people to disregard what he taught as an apostle regarding the Nature of God (involving Adam-God theory and reliability of JST of the Bible at that time).

In Joseph’s day, he was dropped from the Q12 over disagreements. In Brigham’s day, most of the quorum came down on him and labored several times to get him to accept the position of the First Presidency, but not without some coming to his defense. After many years, it finally came to an end, but not before a lot of pain and anguish (my statement).

The article about this is in Dialogue from Summer 1980, Vol. 13 No. 2 by Gary Bergera if anyone is interested in the story. http://www.dialoguejournal.com” class=”bbcode_url”>http://www.dialoguejournal.com I down know if it has been fact checked or how reputable it is, but it made for an interesting read.

Makes for an instance where one of the 12 “almost” went too far and paid the ultimate membership price for it – twice. Cautionary tale?

[Author]

Posts