- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Chapter 19: Our Commitment to GodFrom the Life of Howard W. HunterI was curious about what was said in the part that was replaced by the ellipsis in the very first paragraph so I went back to the source. Nothing incredibly profound but I feel like what was said immediately after the quoted paragraph was important to bring up. This is the full paragraph with the parts that were left out highlighted in
redQuote:President McKay, I want you to know, and all of the membership of the Church to know, thatwhich you haveSister Hunter joins me in this pledge.I love that last sentence that was left out of the quote. It shows Hunter acknowledged and cared about the sacrifice his wife was making. The manual does point out in this same section that Sister Hunter was making a sacrifice as a result of Hunter being called into apostleship.
1. Our Father in Heaven requires our total commitment, not just a contribution.Quote:The ability to stand by one’s principles, to live with integrity and faith according to one’s belief—that is what matters, that is the difference between a contribution and a commitment. That devotion to true principle—in our individual lives, in our homes and families, and in all places that we meet and influence other people—that devotion is what God is ultimately requesting of us. …
The lesson uses the story of Shadrach, Meshach, Abed-nego, and the furnace to talk about being committed to god. What are the modern day fiery furnaces we are threatened with? Who are the kings that would throw us in them? Are we to stand by our individual principles, our shared communal principles, or attempt to find a balance between the two when there is a conflict? I think it’s probably much easier to stand for our principles when our principles are being tested by “external” forces. How might we find a balance in standing for our principles in cases where our principles do not align with others within our own community? How do we handle situations where people are standing behind different principles or belief? Where both people feel justified in entrenching?
Does being in a position of authority change the dynamic? How do we handle differences when we are in a position of authority? How do we handle differences when we are subject to someone else’s authority?
2. Be committed to obeying the Lord regardless of what others decide to do.Quote:The record states that after Israel had rested from the wars with their enemies, Joshua, who was now very old, called all Israel together. In his farewell address he reminded them they had been victorious because God had fought for them, but if they now ceased to serve the Lord and keep his law they would be destroyed. …
This great military and spiritual leader then urged a commitment, and made one himself and for his family: “Choose you this day whom ye will serve; … but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”
Be committed or be destroyed. Choices, choices.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/XSKOisn.png [/img] Learning from their mistakes, Jericho would go on to implement the best sonic building codes of the ancient world.3. Decide now to choose the path of strict obedience.Quote:Surely the Lord loves, more than anything else, an unwavering determination to obey his counsel. Surely the experiences of the great prophets of the Old Testament have been recorded to help us understand the importance of choosing the path of strict obedience. How pleased the Lord must have been when Abraham, after receiving direction to sacrifice his only son, Isaac, did as he was instructed, without question and without wavering.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/eGlqaOv.png [/img] There’s a thread here at StayLDS that discusses whether Abraham passed his test.
http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5456 ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5456 Besides, everyone knows that the first law of heaven is: you don’t talk about heaven.
4. Belief alone is not sufficient; we also need to do Heavenly Father’s will.5. “Living members” strive to have a total commitment.I wasn’t feeling it much during this lesson. The latter sections include some of the teachings that fueled my scrupulosity back in the day. We can’t be perfectly obedient, trying to follow that path is the path to unhappiness… for certain personality types I guess.
For me the elephant in the room is never discussed. I’m fine with being totally committed to god, but what does that mean? Committed to god’s instructions found in the scriptures, committed to god’s instructions given through modern day prophets, committed to the words god has written in my heart? What do you do when there is a conflict or contradiction? Do you follow what god has revealed to you or do you follow what god has revealed to the community or an authority within the community? This would be a good lesson to talk about finding a balance between Oaks’ personal line and priesthood line of revelation.
nibbler wrote:For me the elephant in the room is never discussed. I’m fine with being totally committed to god, but what does that mean? Committed to god’s instructions found in the scriptures, committed to god’s instructions given through modern day prophets,
committed to the words god has written in my heart? What do you do when there is a conflict or contradiction?Do you follow what god has revealed to you or do you follow what god has revealed to the community or an authority within the community? This would be a good lesson to talk about finding a balance between Oaks’ personal line and priesthood line of revelation.Thanks for this whole post.
(I still hope the Nibbler Avatar Gallery will open someday.)
I agree totally to being committed to God. I beleive we have broadened that concept far beyond what it actually is – or narrowed it, depending on how you want to look at it.
I believe commitment to God is another of those things members often conflate with commitment to the church. One can be totally committed to God and zero committed to the church and vice versa. These are good thoughts and good questions. I think if you want approval of the community…you say they are the same things…and just live as if commitment to church and leaders is commitment to God and the church doesn’t deviate from that.
When there are differences in your mind, it requires explaining that to others in the community and that is not always going to work.
Sometimes you can commit to church…and know God doesn’t care about what the thing is…only where your heart is.
I would just add, I think there are decision points in our lives…not all the time, not about every decision. When you get a testimony the church is sufficient for helping you get closer to Christ, than you have faith (trust) in it and leaders and not every topic or decision is weighed…you work on obeying and living it. At times, big issues come up, and they make you weigh the options. If there is personal revelation that makes it hard to obey or trust or follow…I think you prioritize it and have options:
1) Commitment to God and Church. Not the hill to die on…give in and not worry about it and follow the church. As I said before…I think God knows your heart and some things don’t matter so it also doesnt matter to fight it or deviate from the group’s agreed upon rules. “White shirts…sure…whatev”.
2) Commitment to God and heart and
rejectthe church’s view. The issue is so wrong and so problematic and against personal revelation…it must be decided to not obey. Taken to an extreme…these can actually be things that eventually make a person decide it is no longer a positive environment to stay in the group over far too much distance, or perhaps some protests to voice the dissenting votes over it. It is opposition to the church in hopes there is change, or to leave and make personal change. I just don’t think you can do this on a daily basis, but more on a major issue at some crossroads in life.
3) Commitment to God and heart and church. The single issue may need to be rejected in cafeteria style, but you can stay in the group and see the other things you like about the group, just not focus on that one issue. If the topic does come up in class or somehow, it usually requires talking it out with others in the community and explaining why it is something that can not be supported, but that the intentions are good to be committed to the things in the church that matter most. Sometimes it takes time to understand things or see things clearly to know God’s will…and so this option can also be to stay while figuring it out before knowing if option 1 or 2 above is the choice needed.
In my opinion…in all these…my commitment is to God. But Church and God are sometimes perfectly synchronized, and sometimes not. I must obey God and my heart first and foremost.
While I am committed to my God…I deeply care and respect the association and strength of being with others, and that often means working at coming to agreements and shared visions and coordinated activities. I need to know how to work with others. I strongly believe that is why God doesn’t clarify things more. He wants us to work things out with others. In doing so…there are going to be different points of view, and sometimes changing teachings.
I remember a SS lesson from several years ago where the teacher told the class about something that happened at a high school. The teacher of the high school class asked everyone that was for gay marriage to go to one side of the room and people that were against gay marriage to go to the other side. An odd story to be sure but I won’t focus on that aspect. They mentioned how the anti-gay marriage side only had one student, a member of the church. They didn’t cave to the peer pressure of the group and they stood up for what they felt was right. I wondered… if the SS teacher did the same thing, asking the pro-gay marriage people to go to one side of the room and the anti-gay marriage people to go to the other, would we praise the pro-gay marriage people for standing up for their convictions in an environment where they were in the minority?
That’s what drove some of my initial questions. It’s human nature to celebrate when we see people stand up for shared convictions. We don’t always applaud people on the other side of the fence for standing up for theirs.
No, we call that one the lost sheep and try to reach out and preach to and pray to bring back into the fold with the other 99. We value being right more than individualism.
But when our group is different than other groups, we boast peculiarism of the group.
I’m enjoying this thread. Thank you.
This all reminds me of a talk my DD gave a couple months back. She talked about faith and how doesn’t stand alone as a concept. We don’t have “faith”. We have faith IN something. We don’t just have a testimony. We have a testimony of something. Too often people talk about such broad concepts as if they stand alone. They do not. Commitment is the same. We have a commitment TO something or someone.
Well said, AP So the ward I was visiting today is somehow ahead of everybody else and we had this lesson today – which means I’ll get it again at some point. So as if the content of this lesson wasn’t dry enough, the teacher was in some serious need of Silent Dawning’s help. Serious help. The guy literally lectured the entire time. He did ask questions twice, but didn’t wait for any answers or input, he just went on lecturing as if the questions were rhetorical (I suppose they might have been).
FWIW he pretty much thought commitment equals obedience (in the sense that we obey out of guilt/duty).
I was asked to give this lesson next Sunday (Oct 16). Can anybody share how the lesson was for your Ward, what worked and what didn’t work? We had Stake Confernce today and haven’t had this lesson yet.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.