The Need for a Church

[Anonymous]

nibbler wrote:

Ann wrote:

I feel uneasy when “doctrine of Christ” stands in for the church. The love of Christ, the sacrifice of Christ, the example of Christ – are not the church.

The church, the gospel, Christ, etc. Those terms get conflated all the time. It’s to the point where it’s nearly impossible for me to tell if someone is being intentional with their language or whether they’re conflating terms. General conference talks have this problem. The “gospel” is brought up all the time but from context I think the speaker really means “church.”

I think it’s safe to say that most people never think to make the distinction. For them the church is the gospel and the gospel is the church, as opposed to the church simply being one vehicle for support in living the gospel. And with quotes like that coming from our GAs, it’s understandable why many would not think otherwise.

nibbler wrote:

SilentDawning wrote:

I feel that when we as a church start putting the whole onus on the members for staying in spite of anything that happens, we are in dangerous, holier than thou, territory.

Personally I believe the attitude that it’s all on the individual produces abusive behaviors as fruits.

When Peter tries to walk on water and begins to sink, Christ is there to help him up as soon as he cries out for help. I wouldn’t be surprised if those with the it’s-on-the-invidual mentality would have made Peter swim back to the boat himself.

[Anonymous]

Such a good topic, nibbler. Thanks for outlining it. Had you not brought this up, I wouldn’t have known this talk existed. It’s now the first general conference talk I’ve read from the past session.

And…..sigh.

I don’t even know what to think about it. That’s not negative, or angry… simply…. Meh. It is what it is in church.

I see this in what they preach:

Quote:

In church we are taught how to apply religious principles…

[Snip]

The scriptures God has given Christians in the Bible and in modern revelation clearly teach the need for a church.

I will stop there…but…

If the source of what is “needed” is the same source of what they are selling…well…it’s a biased take from the start.

Is that talk for Kenneth and Lucille? Or even their children?

I don’t think so.

It’s for Kenneth’s Bishop or EQP or Kenneth/Lucille’s neighbor who sees them not attending and wonders how they get away with that.

You know…my daughter has a membership to the Orange theory gym and feels so good with that program to get healthy. She loves it when I go with her as a guest, and recently got her husband to go with her and get a membership and she loves it so much more having her favorite people go workout with her. It’s a good healthy thing. And if I ask the Orange theory gym manager why I should have a membership, she would tell me it is the best thing and something I can’t do as well trying to be healthy on my own without them.

But there are other options. Even if Orange theory (or the church) will position themselves as the best.

I have nothing against going to church. It’s a good thing to do, and better when families go together.

But there are other options.

I love the members of my Ward. I had someone recently tell me “hey, we haven’t seen you in a while…you should come back to church.”. It doesn’t offend me. I appreciate the gesture.

I’m not sure they’d appreciate it, tho…if my reply was…”hey…looks like you need Orange theory…you’d feel better about yourself if you lost some weight, looks like you need it. I’ll go to church when you go the gym.”

It’s just not a loving thing to do. But the point is the same. My judgment of what others need is not something I want to be sharing. And I need to not care what others think I need. I just choose what is best for me.

If someone thinks it would be better for me to go…I can just ask them to explain why it is better for me. The answers are telling. They are all biased affirmations of their faith, and that is good for them, and I respect that. For them. Doesn’t change the fact I choose what is best for me. And there are options.

[Anonymous]

nibbler wrote:

DarkJedi wrote:

I think there are plenty of members who are trying to earn or buy their way to heaven and won’t admit it – but the evidence points to it.

I’d alter that slightly to say there are plenty of members who are trying to earn or buy their way to heaven and don’t realize it.

Fear also plays a big role. We’re truly scared about our eternal status so we invent things that we believe will guarantee us a spot in heaven and then spend our lives satisfying those requirements. If we do a good enough job of satisfying the requirements it can hold the fears at bay.

I suppose it is a matter of semantics to some extent. But I also think there are some who are absolutely convinced and are trying to buy their stairway to heaven. I think there are others who have thought it through at least some and have recognized the paradox and shelved it (some of them eventually end up in places like this when the shelf collapses). There are still others who have thought it through and have a mature enough view of the gospel that we recognize what’s happening. Again, semantics, but I do think it’s some of both – people who don’t realize and people who might but won’t admit (or acknowledge) what they’re doing.

Quote:

It’s a tangled mess because our concepts of justice and mercy also factor in. I’m sure a sense of fairness and justice drive a lot of those beliefs. It wouldn’t be “fair” for a person that’s been obedient to get the same reward as someone that’s been less obedient, so the focus becomes obedience. It wouldn’t be “just” if a person disregarded obedience and had the mindset that they would rely on mercy to fill in the gaps, so the focus becomes obedience.

And that’s where church comes in. It wouldn’t be fair if I had to suffer through all these meetings and someone that didn’t attend church was able to get into heaven too! 😈

Yes, the commonly [mis]understood concepts of grace, mercy and justice do complicate the matter. I agree that there are many who think they have tried so hard to do everything right and get to the CK and would be very upset that “sinners” end up there as well. But that’s the misunderstanding of the whole thing – justice is actually all about fairness (as opposed to punishment). Is it fair that God forgives you and not your neighbor (AKA God’s other child)?

[Anonymous]

DarkJedi wrote:

But that’s the misunderstanding of the whole thing – justice is actually all about fairness (as opposed to punishment). Is it fair that God forgives you and not your neighbor (AKA God’s other child)?

Right. If I am undeserving of forgiveness but I am forgiven anyway then fairness suggests that other undeserving individuals would also be forgiven. If I take steps to “qualify for the mercy of forgiveness” then fairness suggests that others that did not take those steps should not be forgiven.

[Anonymous]

Roy wrote:

DarkJedi wrote:

But that’s the misunderstanding of the whole thing – justice is actually all about fairness (as opposed to punishment). Is it fair that God forgives you and not your neighbor (AKA God’s other child)?

Right. If I am undeserving of forgiveness but I am forgiven anyway then fairness suggests that other undeserving individuals would also be forgiven. If I take steps to “qualify for the mercy of forgiveness” then fairness suggests that others that did not take those steps should not be forgiven.

Yes! And that’s where the other part of the misunderstanding comes in – nothing you can do gains forgiveness. Mercy and grace bring that to everybody. Another facet that comes into play is and understanding of what sin is (or isn’t). Is sin something that is simply and wholly offensive to God, even though God clearly knew we were all going to sin? Or, are sins mistakes or poor choices we make in life from which we learn and grow? I know this isn’t really an either/or question or dichotomy but I think it’s important to recognize that seeing sin as solely offensive to God clouds the understanding of justice, grace, and mercy. As has been pointed out, the church (and many other churches) seem to work to some extent on fear and guilt – but the most important thing I have done in “repenting” (changing) is letting go of the guilt and fear and recognizing the love of Heavenly Parents.

[Anonymous]

Just for historical perspective and understanding:

Pres. Oaks is the Paul of our time, right down to their shared profession. They were lawyers for a reason – and they were critical to their organizations. (Elders Bednar and Christofferson are similar in mindset.)

Elder Uchtdorf and others are the John of our time. They were NOT lawyers for a reason – and they were critical to their organizations.

As to the question of forgiveness, the Bible says God will forgive by conscious choice – and forget (erase) the offenses of those who are forgiven. We are the ones who are commanded to forgive, but we are NOT commanded to forget or continue association. So, “earning God’s forgiveness” is not anti-scriptural.

I personally don’t see it that way, but I understand why other people do.

[Anonymous]

I have been reading Gosples. It seems evident Jesus did not organize a church per se with strict rules and regulations. That seems to have come after with followers.

I do not disagree that church can have positive aspects, but I also think you can live a Fulfilling life never setting foot in church.

Personally I find church to mind numbing to participate anymore, yet i don’t feel any kind of void in my life. If anything I hunger for more knowledge which I can access multiple places without the filter a church wants to put on it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Author]

Posts