- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
baldzach wrote:
However, my “faith crisis” has taken a whole new turn. If I was in a somewhat precarious position before, the whole statement on race with the disavowal of previous statements as “opinion and speculation” has taken it to a whole new level. And President Uchtdorf’s talk last conference about how even “church leaders (assuming he means even GA’s) make mistakes because God has only ever had imperfect people to work with” (paraphrased) seems to clash mightily with OD1 where it says the Lord will not permit the leaders of the church to lead it astray. All of a sudden EVERYTHING is now open for question.
Thanks for the update. It is interesting how statments like these can cause or deepen a FC. Is it easier to believe that God has an agenda for not giving blacks the priesthood or that Prophets don’t make mistakes? These statements seem like the honest and forthright thing to do. The problem is the unrealistic expectations. How do you realign other people’s expectations without disillusionment? This is a reminder to me that even the slow pace of change in the church will leave some bewildered as they demand that the “gospel” isn’t supposed to change.
Roy wrote:This is a reminder to me that even the slow pace of change in the church will leave some bewildered as they demand that the “gospel” isn’t supposed to change.
To be honest, for me it was easier to accept that God had a reason, that we may or may not understand exactly what that reason was, but that it was what it was, revealed through his Prophet, and if I don’t understand it, that’s fine, I can take it on faith. But the preaching of something for 100 years as
doctrineand then disavowing the previous statements as “speculation and opinion” leaves everything that is now “doctrine” subject to a future “just kidding, it wasn’t every really doctrine…” baldzach wrote:Roy wrote:This is a reminder to me that even the slow pace of change in the church will leave some bewildered as they demand that the “gospel” isn’t supposed to change.
To be honest, for me it was easier to accept that God had a reason, that we may or may not understand exactly what that reason was, but that it was what it was, revealed through his Prophet, and if I don’t understand it, that’s fine, I can take it on faith. But the preaching of something for 100 years as
doctrineand then disavowing the previous statements as “speculation and opinion” leaves everything that is now “doctrine” subject to a future “just kidding, it wasn’t every really doctrine…” That is so true Baldzach. I think part of the problem, and it has been recently discussed on he forums (I noticed you’ve been gone awhile), is the idea that the prophets are somehow infallible and and every word that proceeds from their mouths is straight from God. Nothing can be farther from the truth. That’s not to say I don’t believe the prophets to be good and honorable men, but the way they are idolized by many members of the church is unexplainable. When we start digging into all of this doctrine, we find much of it has no real scriptural basis and is nothing more than the “speculation and opinion” of someone with power. The challenge for each of us, then, is to figure out what is and what isn’t doctrine and I struggle with that just like many others here. It is much easier to just believe as many do and just take everything out of the mouths of the Q15 as gospel and/or doctrine. I find I need many grains of salt, perhaps even a shaker.
DarkJedi wrote:It is much easier to just believe as many do and just take everything out of the mouths of the Q15 as gospel and/or doctrine. I find I need many grains of salt, perhaps even a shaker.
Interesting story (then I’ll leave the discussion to the discussion forums and take it out of the intros…):
My uncle is in Q12. I don’t see him often, but my daughter runs track and XC in the summer with his granddaughter, so I see my cousin (his daughter) quite a bit. At one track meet last summer, we were sitting together, and my family had a cooler with our dinner and snacks and beverages. I pulled out a diet coke, complete with caffeine, and my cousin in mock horror exasperated, “Sinner!” — the thing is, she was kidding because she was sure it was the caffeine free variety. When she found out it wasn’t, she really was a little — uh, let’s call it “disappointed.”
Fascinating, no?
baldzach wrote:
So it seems that now I’m going to have to take everything I’ve ever known and accepted as “Gospel truth” (*rimshot!) with a very large grain of salt, and it’s a very uncomfortable situation.Yes, it is uncomfortable, but I see it as a part of maturing. Welcome to the “adult” Sunday School class!
This topic is why I appreciate the teaching in our church of “don’t take my word for it, find out for yourself” …but also wish there was a little more room for and acceptance of those members that actually do seek out answers for themselves – and come out with slightly different perspectives than the norm.
Oh how we long for the days when members of the 12 could be observed debating gospel topics…
Hi, baldzach – Glad you’re here. I just listened last night to a podcast you might like – John Dehlin’s interview with Phillip Barlow. (Barlow is a “slow talker” but it’s still a really enjoyable interview. Just allow time for it. 🙂 )He speaks with a different vocabulary than a lot of “disaffected” and/or “knowledgeable” people do and it gave me food for thought.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.