- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Thank you very much. John is a great interviewer, it comes very natural to him. He handling makes the interview go well. DBMormon wrote:I think an advanced Sunday School could be considered. My issue is that think about a regular class based on apoligetics… what does that say. What message is it giving? If one went to it regularly would one begin to mis understand what the gospel is and begin to falsely blend both areas?
What I think would be the best answer is a well constructed website linked from LDS.ORG where members can get official statements on what we know and what we don’t on all these faith crisis issues subjects. FAIR has lot of good answers (some insuffcient as well) but it seems weird that they tell us more about doctrine and historical issues then the Church leaders are willing to say, though I understand the risk.
Permit me to disagree that FAIR or any apologetics should be used as a resource. I find that the entire approach of polemic defense to be truly evil in it’s motives, approach, and outcomes.We need a different truth paradigm in the church: one which returns to BH Roberts approach in the Truth, The Way, and the Life–where truth is openly accepted regardless of how inconvenient or non-faith-promoting it seems to be.
Once we set aside silly apologetics and seeing who can argue the best, when we embrace truth, we also embrace the unity of the core message of Christ as unity in love.
Personally, I found greater testimony teaching CTR or Gospel Essentials than any “advanced Sunday school”. I had the most advanced of all — Hugh Nibley was my ward gospel doctrine teacher — and my wife would pinch my baby daughter to find a way to get out of it…(not really but she was tempted).
Wayfarer, to some degree I’ll agree. I do think way too many LDS leave the church or some non-memebrs who otherwise would have been interested never take it seriously because of the critical material that is nonsense and could be easily explained. I also agree we ought to find ways to be able to share multiple viewpoints on most issues and let people find truth, but realistically, no church or faith does that. DBMormon, it’s a great pleasure to meet you. I really liked when you were on Mormon Stories. Welcome to the forum. wayfarer wrote:DBMormon wrote:FAIR has lot of good answers (some insuffcient as well) but it seems weird that they tell us more about doctrine and historical issues then the Church leaders are willing to say, though I understand the risk.
Permit me to disagree that FAIR or any apologetics should be used as a resource.I find that the entire approach of polemic defense to be truly evil in it’s motives, approach, and outcomes…We need a different truth paradigm in the church…where truth is openly accepted regardless of how inconvenient or non-faith-promoting it seems to be…Once we set aside silly apologetics and seeing who can argue the best, when we embrace truth… The general apologetic approach actually bought me many additional years of believing in the Church. Before my mission I was seriously bothered by polygamy, the racial priesthood ban, and attempts to deny evolution but I came up with my own rationalizations to help me feel better about the Church in spite of this. On my mission I ran into anti-Mormon propaganda talking about the Book of Abraham translation and Joseph Smith’s polyandry but I tried to deny it and shrug it off as mostly made up lies because of the source and their agenda and after that I had no interest in reading any “anti-Mormon” material again for years (not until after I already didn’t believe in the Church anymore).
If there were only about 5 problems to get past then I would have already been done but I kept running into more and more simply reading scriptures or listening at church. Once I could see at least 20 major issues at the same time I started to think the explanation that actually made the most sense to me was simply that Church leaders quite often don’t know what they are talking about and also that scriptures should not be taken literally in many cases. At that point, I thought if Church leaders have already been wrong so many times so far then they could just as easily be wrong about things like tithing and temple marriage. However, maybe some members don’t pay quite as much attention to all this and mostly just want to hear that the Church is still true in spite of 1-2 issues they know about and that’s exactly what they will get from FAIR and other apologetic sources.
DBMormon wrote:…I have a TBM testimony though it is much more nuanced then most. I have had many faith crisis and some of them major. I have come out the other side of each of them having grown in Faith and understanding.
I see the church as absolutely True in it’s main Principles and Doctrine but see much of what we hear in church as speculation, urban legend, false doctrine, and false standards that members set up but the church doesn’t as nonsense.I am here to serve, so if anyone is struggling with a historical issue please don’t be afraid to say hi and drop me a line and ask me anything. Also right now I currently am serving as a LDS Bishop and am happy to answer questions about that calling as well. Welcome to StayLDS. Personally, I would be interested in hearing which main principles and doctrines you think are true and which ideas we hear in the Church you think are false doctrines and standards, speculation, urban legends, etc. Even though I don’t believe very much of what I hear at church or in Church publications I think Church leaders could still make some major improvements without necessarily having to completely overhaul most of the traditional doctrines. For example, with the 3 hour block and all the different callings and classes we have now I’m not sure how much of a doctrinal basis there really is for this setup. Why not do a 2 hour block instead and reduce the number of different classes?
Quote:Welcome to StayLDS. Personally, I would be interested in hearing which main principles and doctrines you think are true and which ideas we hear in the Church you think are false doctrines and standards, speculation, urban legends, etc. Even though I don’t believe very much of what I hear at church or in Church publications I think Church leaders could still make some major improvements without necessarily having to completely overhaul most of the traditional doctrines. For example, with the 3 hour block and all the different callings and classes we have now I’m not sure how much of a doctrinal basis there really is for this setup. Why not do a 2 hour block instead and reduce the number of different classes?
My opinion only
Truth = Doctrine of Christ = Faith, repentance, baptism by immersion, Gift of the Holy Ghost, enduring to the end, temple ordiances needed. Book of mormon based on real angels, real plates, a real first vision. Church has authority but that does not mean it has all the answers as article of faith #9 still implies there is always more to learn and new info to discover.
False things that get promulgated as truth = age of the earth, evolution is a heresy, SSA is a choice, only men can give opening prayers in sacrament meeting, men have to be the concluding speaker, Prophets + apostles must be obeyed or followed blindly, works earn salvation, ect… all of theses thing that get shared in talks and lessons that are not doctrine but get adopted as truth by the culture at large.
DBMormon wrote:False things that get promulgated as truth = age of the earth, evolution is a heresy, SSA is a choice, only men can give opening prayers in sacrament meeting, men have to be the concluding speaker, Prophets + apostles must be obeyed or followed blindly, works earn salvation, ect… all of theses thing that get shared in talks and lessons that are not doctrine but get adopted as truth by the culture at large.
ah, so you are a heretic like the rest of us
Quote:ah, so you are a heretic like the rest of us
I don’t think so. I think Elder Christofferson’s last conference talk puts him and other leaders in the same group as well. While they likely won’t throw anyone under a bus, they realize too many of us lay members are missing the mark
Everyone is a heretic compared to everyone else. Or to put it in more positive language — we are all doing the best we can with what we find. And each one of us is different.
Brian Johnston wrote:Everyone is a heretic compared to everyone else.
Or to put it in more positive language — we are all doing the best we can with what we find. And each one of us is different.
Absolutely, I bet Elder Holland hold some beliefs or thoughts that differ from Elder Ballard. There is no perfect way of being a TBM or a perfect way to be a middlewayer…. your right all are different
I think what I admire about your Bishop Reel is that you are taking some risks here and doing well with it based on the reactions of your local leaders to your MOrmon Stories podcast. I see myself as similar, in that I take what I feel are risks in teaching adults on Sunday without being deeply offensive, and apparently, helping them see things in a new, and hopefully better way. Strangely, they even called me to be a formal teacher saying “we like how you make everyone think”. I rock the boat, without sinking the ship…in fact, I’m getting the sense that in rocking the boat I’m helping people find greater stability in it. You said earlier, though, that you came to view Mormonism as having a core of true principles surrounded by speculation, urban legends etcetera. What do you consider the core of true principles? If you said this earlier forgive me as this is a long thread and I scanned it.
At this point, I haven’t given much thought to the true principles. My staying is centered on the testimony I gained I should join the church and that it’s true. I stay because of the experience but my head is not where my testimony is. There are certain things I agree with, certain things I don’t, and I amplify the things I agree with in my interactions with others and don’t do anything with the stuff I don’t agree with — other than try to neutralize it with little known statements from GA’s and the Ensign where possible….all mixed with disbelief that the leadership hierarchy is as supernatural as many would have us believe.
I’m interested in your version of what the core principles are…
SilentDawning wrote:I’m interested in your version of what the core principles are…
True Principles
– For me the Book of Mormon is literally what it claims to be
– Joseph had a first Vison seeing the divine and was called to restore the church
– The LDS church has authority and if God chooses to speak to the world it will do so through the current prophet
– The pure doctrine of Christ is faith, repentance, baptism by immersion, laying on of hands for the gift of the holy ghost
– Temple ordinances are needed and essential
– Being in the church in mortality does not give one an advantage in terms of salvation but does act as a tool to help serve and protect it’s members from all the negative life throws at us
– We do not earn salvation, we are saved by the merits, mercy, and grace of God though our works assist us in progression and they help us show our appreciation for God’s love.
– Christ was real and made a real atonement and paid the price for our sin.
I am sure there is more but this is a good solid list to frame how I see things
DBMormon wrote:Absolutely, I bet Elder Holland hold some beliefs or thoughts that differ from Elder Ballard. There is no perfect way of being a TBM or a perfect way to be a middlewayer…. your right all are different
I find many people open to this idea…but the practice and application is another matter.Some things are taboo. We can’t skip church, or miss our meetings we need to be at. We can’t allow our children to skip seminary, even if they are stressed out at school and in life.
We may try to adapt our practice to different ways of being Mormon (TBM, middlewayer or whatever label we inadequately use to describe a person), but the wards and stakes have their cultures of things that are just “not right” … or as Brian was saying, is heretical.
I find it takes inner strength to be the kind of Mormon I feel I need to be, and realize others won’t like it. They’ll always think I need to do more, and they’ll praise me the more I obey unquestioningly. I just have to follow SilentDawning’s example and set boundaries without sending vibes that people think I’m totally lost.
Quote:I find it takes inner strength to be the kind of Mormon I feel I need to be, and realize others won’t like it. They’ll always think I need to do more, and they’ll praise me the more I obey unquestioningly. I just have to follow SilentDawning’s example and set boundaries without sending vibes that people think I’m totally lost.
I taught a lesson a couple months ago on the Word Of Wisdom. I told those who wanted to spell out everything that they were being to stringent. Ex: telling other ward members not to eat meat, suggesting all members eat a certain diet, telling members that if they use alcohol in their cooking, or drink caffinated soda that they are disobeying God. I told these people to knock it off. Then I talked about what the Word of Wisdom was and what the letter of the law was and that members would be blessed as they followed section 89 as close as the spirit directed them.
People on both sides were mad at me. You could see it. Those who felt I advocated too strongly were furious and those who felt I had not interpreted it strong enough were furious. I ended by discussing Moroni 7 and I believe verse 46 where God says the way to judge is by the spirit and what brings you closer to Christ.
No-one liked me that day but perhaps a half dozen. But so be it, I had taught truth and stood up for what the spirit had whispered. Now it was up to them to ponder and adjust false conceptions and false standards….. just as I have done and continue to do with SSA, what is Doctrine, How to handle differences in general within the church… let the Holy Spirit guide.
Don’t worry about what others think, it is not their right to judge
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.