I am Shawn and I’m Crumbling

[Anonymous]

Quote:

there isn’t anyone out there who can tell you exactly what the answer is.

But there are plenty of people who will try to tell you exactly what the answer is…

A lot of times we find what works for us, codify it, and then teach it as if it were doctrine that everyone needs to follow. I think that God teaches principles, but men teach rules.

Quote:

men will teach the commandments of men … that’s all they have to offer.

So why do we spend so much time preaching to and teaching one another if we teach our own doctrines but can only find the answers on our own?

I like this scripture:

Quote:

he that receiveth the word by the Spirit of truth receiveth it as it is preached by the Spirit of truth[.] Wherefore, he that preacheth and he that receiveth, understand on another, and both are edified and rejoice together. (D&C 50:21-22)

Maybe our preaching and teaching and scripture study isn’t just about transmitting literal, specific words, but also about inviting the spirit so we can learn truth directly from the source.

[Anonymous]

Earl, good comments.

Earl Parsons wrote:

men will teach the commandments of men … that’s all they have to offer

I think we sometimes forget the prophet and apostles are men. When they teach from what they’ve learned from God, our personal revelation is what makes it meaningful to us.

[Anonymous]

As I was thinking more about these comments – I keep coming back to the very difficult issue of being “ok” with disregarding what leaders or even scripture may say about a given subject. It’s tough not to look at this approach as heretical. At the same time it’s difficult not to completely label the leaders/church/scriptures as false when you can see aspects of what has been said as problematic- or just downright incorrect. Then the mental gymnastics start… do I adopt a non-literal view? Then which things do I accept or reject? This is not easy to find peace with.

I have hope that this is not heresy to exercise discernment. I have hope that seeing things this way is not “being deceived”. I have this hope because if not- I am not sure how to remain…

As it says in the D&C 8- we will be told in our mind AND heart- not just the one or the other. I’d like to think that perhaps one of the ways to judge is according to D&C 121- Is what we are disregarding/not buying, something that is covering our sins, gratifying our pride, or compelling others? I say this not so much because I am asking the question, but more in response to some who have said that it is “foolishness to not pay heed to the prophets”, or that “by mine own voice, or by the voice of my servants, it is the same…”

[Anonymous]

blackout wrote:

As I was thinking more about these comments – I keep coming back to the very difficult issue of being “ok” with disregarding what leaders or even scripture may say about a given subject. It’s tough not to look at this approach as heretical. At the same time it’s difficult not to completely label the leaders/church/scriptures as false when you can see aspects of what has been said as problematic- or just downright incorrect. Then the mental gymnastics start… do I adopt a non-literal view? Then which things do I accept or reject? This is not easy to find peace with.

I have hope that this is not heresy to exercise discernment. I have hope that seeing things this way is not “being deceived”. I have this hope because if not- I am not sure how to remain…

As it says in the D&C 8- we will be told in our mind AND heart- not just the one or the other. I’d like to think that perhaps one of the ways to judge is according to D&C 121- Is what we are disregarding/not buying, something that is covering our sins, gratifying our pride, or compelling others? I say this not so much because I am asking the question, but more in response to some who have said that it is “foolishness to not pay heed to the prophets”, or that “by mine own voice, or by the voice of my servants, it is the same…”

Not only is thinking for yourself ok, it’s required.

Joseph Smith wrote:

The prominent points of difference in sentiment between the Latter Day Saints & sectarian viz: the latter are all circumscribed by some peculiar creed which deprives its members of the right of believing anything not contained in it; whereas the Latter Day Saints have no creed, but are ready to believe all true principles existing, as they are made manifest from time to time.

The only core doctrine you must take on faith is the “Doctrine of Jesus Christ“. All else is in the category of “what is taught”: Current teachings of the church. There is nothing that says we must believe the current teachings, only that we don’t deviate from them as we teach, and we don’t oppose them in our words and practice. “what is taught” is often done for reasons outside of the realm of ‘truth’: in Nauvoo,’what was taught’ included that marriage is between one man and one woman, as was listed in the book of commandments/D&C of the time. people were excommunicated for teaching otherwise, yet we know that Joseph Smith was privately practicing otherwise. “what was taught” then was “not true”. I don’t like the concept, but I can understand it.

There is nothing that says we must blindly obey. To give heed to the words of the prophets is to diligently listen to them and consider if they apply to me. We have three witnesses to whether something is ‘true’ — meaning applicable — to me:

1. What the servants of the lord say in the current time.

2. What the scriptures say.

3. What the holy ghost reveals to me personally.

If anyone preaches to me something that is not in the scriptures, and after consideration, I don’t feel that it applies to me, then I have heeded it: by diligently listening to it, testing it out, and finding it wanting, rejecting it as applicable to me. I do not preach against it (unless moved to do so), I do not complain about it, i simply cast it aside as if it were a weed in my garden, or a seed that didn’t grow.

The same applies to scripture. The majority of scripture was written as counsel for a given time, place, and conditions — it was specific. Sometimes, it even was bigoted and wrong, and this has served to justify slavery and discrimination against blacks in the past, and discrimination against gays and women today. Even if the scriptures and prophets today preach a thing, if you know it to be false, and the holy ghost (your intuition in righteousness) manifests that to be false as well, the doctrine is false. If I choose to preach against false doctrine such as the church’s position on gays and women, then the church may choose to separate me from it. Is this wrong of them to do? Is this wrong for me to speak out? Ah — this is where apostasy really comes to roost. to speak out and openly oppose the church is apostasy — and Jesus said that part of his doctrine is that disputations be done away. Thus, one has to weigh the full consequences of each action in faith.

Remember that faith is required, not belief. Faith is the ability to act on something we agree to and hope for, but we do not have knowledge that it is either true or false. Belief is simply a personal opinion that something is true. Two very different things. We teach that Jesus was born of the virgin mary. I am willing to teach that lesson in church, but I can say (here to you now, but not in class) that I don’t believe it. I have faith that there is a good reason to teach it, therefore my faith impels me to teach something I doubt to be true. I do not teach that Jesus was the illigitimate child of a roman centurian named Panthera, although I may suspect that it this is of greater probability than a miraculous virgin birth. Since I don’t know for a fact that virgin birth is ‘false’, I can accept the teaching and continue to promote the myth. It is after all, only a teaching.

You mention that this approach looks heretical. It is most definitely heresy. Absolutely, in the purest, original form of the word.

Oxford English Dictionary wrote:

“Heresy” drives from the greek term “αἵρεσις”, which means “taking, choosing, choice, course taken, course of action or thought, ‘school’ of thought, philosophic principle or set of principles, philosophical or religious sect;” and from the term “αἱρεῖν” meaning “to take” in middle voice “αἱρῖσθαι” meaning “to take for oneself, choose.”

We were not sent on this earth to blindly obey. That was the “other plan”. The Lord’s plan was for us to learn from our own experience to distinguish good from evil, to choose, and through the consequences of our choices learn. It’s really a best practice in teaching. He even provided a living savior to pick up the pieces when we really screw up. Not only that, the Savior is also my learning coach, there to advise me as needed. Like a great teacher (another word would be “Master”), he doesn’t provide the rote, cheat-sheet of answers. That’s the plan I know to be true. Thus, to “pay heed to the prophets” is to listen, consider, test as Alma 32 tells us to test, and then to obey as the spirit directs us. We are commanded to “receive the Holy Ghost”.

Joseph Smith, HC 6:58, wrote:

No man can receive the Holy Ghost without receiving revelations. The Holy Ghost is a revelator

So when we read scripture or listen to the prophets, we are required to ponder these things in our hearts, and if they be true (i.e. relevant to me), God “will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.”

Everything can be tested. It isn’t like we have to test every thing, but the more we get use to the idea that each theory, hypothesis, statement, proposition given to us by church leaders or scripture should be tested, the more we are in the practice of listening to the spirit — the more we are in tune with ourselves.

And yes, absolutely, we do not turn off the logical mind. The process of testing, the process of revelation, the same process used by Moses was to mind and heart. They work hand-in-hand.

[Anonymous]

In my opinion, blackout, to think or to question may be heretical but may be exactly what Christ teaches us to do to own our religion.

But we always have the choice of how we conduct ourselves and what we say and do. And I think that is what makes the difference. Our conduct.

If we know that all the members of the Q12 do not agree on all matters, I would not call them heretics for having their own opinions. The quorum can be stronger for it. Revelation often comes of that dynamic.

This forum may allow us to open up in some ways, and I don’t have to be dishonest or deceptive with others that I interact with (family, ward members), but I can be respectful on what I do or don’t say out loud while I search for clarity on my beliefs. It may just be a different paradigm or perspective to realize things that we thought were so “for sure” and should not be doubted, maybe are maybe not so for sure … and therefore not heretical in an apostasy kind of way to think differently. Truth depends greatly on your point of view.

I feel it is OK to disagree with popular interpretations of scripture or with church leader statements, if God knows my heart and what I’m searching for. But I don’t need to run around the church claiming titles of any kind. I’m just me. And I think there is a place in church for me and my ideas, and I agree on more things in the church than I disagree with. But its ok to disagree if I truly disagree. I like thoughtful mormonism.

But I respect you that you are aware of how you feel and your worries of going too far, or looking beyond the mark. It is a good self-check with your conscience on how you feel comfortable. And it is a good exercise on how we can all discuss it, even if we have varying degrees of opinions. Don’t let us or anyone push you further than you are comfortable going. Find that balance that helps you stay. We’re just all regular joe’s and jane’s here sharing our ideas with each other, trying to maintain faith as we do.

[Anonymous]

wayfarer, I like what you have to say:

Quote:

We were not sent on this earth to blindly obey. That was the “other plan”. The Lord’s plan was for us to learn from our own experience to distinguish good from evil, to choose, and through the consequences of our choices learn. It’s really a best practice in teaching. He even provided a living savior to pick up the pieces when we really screw up. Not only that, the Savior is also my learning coach, there to advise me as needed.

If I ever have the opportunity to give a talk in church, I would like to use some of the things you all have talked about in this forum.

I have learned alot from many of you that I will remember for a long time. It has changed (for the better) my belief system.

Next week we’re going to visit my son & family in Illinois. We will be going to the temple. I will be reflecting on the things all of you have been teaching me this past year. Thanks for making it better.

Mike from Milton.

[Anonymous]

Mike wrote:

wayfarer, I like what you have to say:

Quote:

We were not sent on this earth to blindly obey. That was the “other plan”. The Lord’s plan was for us to learn from our own experience to distinguish good from evil, to choose, and through the consequences of our choices learn. It’s really a best practice in teaching. He even provided a living savior to pick up the pieces when we really screw up. Not only that, the Savior is also my learning coach, there to advise me as needed.

If I ever have the opportunity to give a talk in church, I would like to use some of the things you all have talked about in this forum.

I have learned alot from many of you that I will remember for a long time. It has changed (for the better) my belief system.

Next week we’re going to visit my son & family in Illinois. We will be going to the temple. I will be reflecting on the things all of you have been teaching me this past year. Thanks for making it better.

Mike from Milton.

yeah, I felt really good when that came out — it kind of surprised me.

I’m so glad you’re going to the temple in illinois — which one?

[Anonymous]

Nauvoo. I’ll let you all know how it turns out.

We’re looking forward to the trip.

Plus, (2) grand kids are having birthday.

Mike.

[Author]

Posts