- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
hawkgrrrl wrote:
Quote:He was very abrasive, was always commenting on the bodies of girls, and in general, didn’t strike me as the prototypical righteous missionary. There were times he yelled at me and a few times got really angry and verbally abusive over routine matters.
Quote:We had a name for people like that in my mission: Zone Leader.
Ouch Hawk,.,J was a ZL but I wasn’t like that.
Quote:It has more to do with your ability to see the potential in people and to listen to them and care about them wherever they are.
For me, success came when I was able to understand the needs of the people I was teaching, and to tailor the discussion to them personally. My most effective period had me using the discussions as a mere guide, with the person’s life situation, family situation, personal questions, and background woven into the discussion. That background would often drive much of the content when I had such information about them through the trust-building phase of the relationship. Gospel principles that spoke to that background, woven into the 7 ways of inviting the spirit seemed to be the most effective.
In Teachers Council, one woman is steeped in the obedience/compliance/manual based teaching. I explained to her the need to throw out the manual sometimes. I questioned the quality of some of the questions the manual suggests you ask, and to delve deep into her own experience and inspiration to design her own questions if the book questions didn’t speak to her. In fact, I told the class that I had thrown out the manual that very day.
I was speaking about this phenomenon with a Muslim friend today — what happened to me at church
My biggest doubts have stemmed from realizing how easily the “Spirit” can be manipulated by man. Just look at the examples from Jim Jones, to AJ Miller, to Kumare. If they can inspire the feelings of the “Spirit” in their followers, than the “Spirit” is not an objective indicator of truth or righteousness. I like what everyone has written. My suggestion is: embrace the experience. My strongest spiritual experiences usually occur as a surprise to my soul.
SD, thanks for sharing.
dande48 wrote:
My biggest doubts have stemmed from realizing how easily the “Spirit” can be manipulated by man. Just look at the examples from Jim Jones, to AJ Miller, to Kumare. If they can inspire the feelings of the “Spirit” in their followers, than the “Spirit” is not an objective indicator of truth or righteousness.
My thoughts exactly.
OK, but is that denying the Holy Ghost, which is supposed to be a grievous sin? To say you had a spiritual witness the “church is true” but then later say that spiritual witness cannot be relied upon?
SilentDawning wrote:
OK, but is that denying the Holy Ghost, which is supposed to be a grievous sin? To say you had a spiritual witness the “church is true” but then later say that spiritual witness cannot be relied upon?
Exactly why so few members of the Church ever doubt it! I have testified to the world that I know the Church is true, and I believed it as assuredly as any member. But later I realized that feeling what I believed to be the “Spirit” is not necessarily an indication of truth (or even goodness for that matter). I can’t speak for anyone else; It’s very possible I never felt what so many members of the Church refer to as the “Spirit”. But I certainly thought I did, and was willing to testify accordingly.
Now, I interpret those feelings as the beautiful songs of the soul. Inspiring, invigorating, enlightening… full of beauty, in every sense of the word. I cherish it. But I wouldn’t stake my life on it.
dande48 wrote:
SilentDawning wrote:
OK, but is that denying the Holy Ghost, which is supposed to be a grievous sin? To say you had a spiritual witness the “church is true” but then later say that spiritual witness cannot be relied upon?
Exactly why so few members of the Church ever doubt it! I have testified to the world that I know the Church is true, and I believed it as assuredly as any member. But later I realized that feeling what I believed to be the “Spirit” is not necessarily an indication of truth (or even goodness for that matter). I can’t speak for anyone else; It’s very possible I never felt what so many members of the Church refer to as the “Spirit”. But I certainly thought I did, and was willing to testify accordingly.
Now, I interpret those feelings as the beautiful songs of the soul. Inspiring, invigorating, enlightening… full of beauty, in every sense of the word. I cherish it. But I wouldn’t stake my life on it.
Echoes my thoughts as well. All my life, I believed those feelings came from heaven to testify of truth. I believed that because I had been taught that. But when I questioned that fundamental belief and studied more about human emotion, psychology, and the physiology of the brain, I came to the personal conclusion that those emotions are generated from within, rather than being communications from heaven.
For me, this didn’t demean the value of these experiences. I can still regard them as “beautiful songs of the soul,” as Dande described. But I also don’t have to be confused by them anymore. When they happen, I can accept them, embrace them, and take comfort in them, but I personally believe they come from within and so can also be manufactured and manipulated. So I value them for myself in as much as they inspire me, but I don’t put much weight in them other than that in terms of being reliable “truth” indicators.
+1 to Dande and DT. I think there may be some subtle difference in feeling between an actual spiritual experience and my own emotional response to something, but I don’t know there is and if there is I struggle greatly to distinguish it. It’s easier to just accept it for what it is and go with the flow. And, no, SD, that is NOT denying the Holy Ghost in any manner. I think part of the reason that is so hard to do is precisely because it is so difficult for us to distinguish in our dark/dim glass/mirror.
DarkJedi wrote:
And, no, SD, that is NOT denying the Holy Ghost in any manner. I think part of the reason that is so hard to do is precisely because it is so difficult for us to distinguish in our dark/dim glass/mirror.
Just as a follow-up – even TBM doctrine posits that to deny the HG is extremely rare. I have read that it would be impossible for the typical member. One would need to know the truth 100% and then discredit it. Judas was not guilty of it. Perhaps only Cain in the history of the world….
Roy wrote:
DarkJedi wrote:
And, no, SD, that is NOT denying the Holy Ghost in any manner. I think part of the reason that is so hard to do is precisely because it is so difficult for us to distinguish in our dark/dim glass/mirror.
Just as a follow-up – even TBM doctrine posits that to deny the HG is extremely rare. I have read that it would be impossible for the typical member. One would need to know the truth 100% and then discredit it. Judas was not guilty of it. Perhaps only Cain in the history of the world….
Someone once told me, upon reflection, that Denying the Holy Ghost happens when the person has perfect knowledge, and then denies it every happened. The closest example I could come up with would be the Brother of Jared. He saw the finger of the Lord. IF he then denied he’d ever seen it, that would be denying the holy ghost. Thanks for awakening that memory I heard somewhere. But recognize that I can’t justify it from the scriptures or any authoritative source — just something I heard…
From the Brother of Jared’s perspective, it could have been the devil, part magic mushrooms and part lucky discovery, or something completely unknown to him that he wouldn’t have the words or even concepts to describe (e.g. aliens, Cthulhu). Even he didn’t have perfect knowledge. Strictly speaking, nobody can, because there’s no such thing. There’s always a valid, competing explanation, even if it’s extremely unlikely. This particular doctrine seems to apply only in impossible circumstances. Why do we even have it?
dande48 wrote:
My biggest doubts have stemmed from realizing how easily the “Spirit” can be manipulated by man. Just look at the examples from Jim Jones, to AJ Miller, to Kumare. If they can inspire the feelings of the “Spirit” in their followers, than the “Spirit” is not an objective indicator of truth or righteousness.
What if Kumare was a tool of the infinite and didn’t realise it? Guru means teacher, and his documentary teaches things.
Jim Jones’ church started out good more or less – never forget that. Unlike many other US denominations at the time, it was not racially segregated. It offered hope for a better world. It is even possible it all started out godly but was slowly corrupted.
But it is a bit unfair to lump him and Kumare together.
SamBee wrote:
But it is a bit unfair to lump him and Kumare together.
I was giving them as three distinct examples. Kumare… I love Kumare. I fully agree with the message he was trying to teach. But unlike most religious leaders, he admitted to lying from the beginning. And yet his followers strongly felt what I’d call “the Spirit”. Because of it, they “knew” Kumare was a prophet.
In the end, a lie will remain a lie.
Quote:
In the end, a lie will remain a lie.He did the exercise to prove a point. What he was not prepared for was the fact that he was part of a bigger picture that he had little control over. He assumed everything he did and caused was through his own free agency, a highly western individualist view, whereas he and his disciples were products of many things and were acted upon themselves in ways they did not realise.
Even false prophets are teachers – not always in the way they intend to. We can learn a lot from both Kumare and Jim.Jones and it is not just a matter of feeling the spirit.
The Dalai Lama hit on something similar when he said Chairman Mao was his greatest teacher.
By the way, while gurus do produce results only a few seem analogous to the LDS “spirit”. The chanting of mantras or heavy asceticism are quite different to our ways. Meditation works quite differently too – I speak from experience. Never assume Mormon-style “burning in the bosom” is the only spiritual experience out there. That’s a whole thread in itself.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.