- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
SamBee wrote:
I think the GAs and Ensign etc are bad for encouraging such stories. How often do we see stories where the source, location or person are not named?
A classic “what the hey” moment, for me, is in
Gospel PrinciplesQuote:For example, President David O. McKay had a great desire to speak to the Saints in New Zealand without an interpreter. He told them that he hoped that the Lord would bless them that they could understand him. He spoke in English. His message lasted about 40 minutes. As he spoke, he could tell by the expression on many of their faces and the tears in their eyes that they were receiving his message. (See Answers to Gospel Questions, 2:30–31.)
NZ has always been a majority English speaking nation. Even the Maori are nearly all bilingual, and would have been back then, thanks to the education system.
I think a higher percentage of NZers speak good English than people from the US, due to the immigration patterns etc.
😆 It’s kindof funny to think about some leaps to conclusions.
Yet, it could also be sad… I mean if one is truthful about one’s reasoning, then if it didn’t work out favorably (like they started throwing tomatoes and raw eggs after McKay spoke) – then what would be the reason?
Maybe a lack of faith or something?
About the caffeine thing… I remember an “emotionally traumatic” moment when I was young.
My older sister was & is very strict about certain religious
interpretations. She saw me drinking a Mountain Dew when we were at a skating ring, which I thought was like Sprite & didn’t know it had the dreaded “caffeine” in it.
She freaked out and made me feel like I had just drank spiritual poison! I felt so bad.
Now, I see how ridiculous that was, but at the time, I respected her and believed whatever she said.
My newest podcast episode deals with some of this as the topic is what is official doctrine http://mormondiscussion.podbean.com/2012/10/23/what-is-official-doctrine/ Here is the core of what is true: Have faith. Repent. Be baptized. Receive the Holy Ghost. Read 3 Nephi Chpt 11. I probably think of those terms a lot differently now, but I still see them as a broad pattern towards enlightenment. The moment Christ appears to the people in the Book of Mormon, he declares these simple four things as his Gospel, that he was specifically sent from God to teach them.
Quote:Verily, verily, I say unto you, that
this is my doctrine, and whoso buildeth upon this buildeth upon my rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against them. And whoso shall declare more or less than this, and establish it for my doctrine, the same cometh of evil, and is not built upon my rock; but he buildeth upon a sandy foundation, and the gates of hell stand open to receive such when the floods come and the winds beat upon them. 3 Nephi 39-40
Theological speculation is fun. It is soul and mind expanding. It is beautiful to dream and imagine what the heavens are like, and to try and grasp God. But the foundation is faith, repentance (change), baptism (re-birth) and receiving the Holy Ghost (enlightenment, the transcendent). Everything else is STILL on a foundation of sorts, but it is a SANDY FOUNDATION. It will shift. It will take on new shapes. It will be eroded and shaped by the environment. It is not the rock, the solid foundation of The Gospel of Jesus Christ.
God / Jesus appears to be a big fan of K.I.S.S. — keep it simple stupid! I agree with Jesus.
All the other details and speculations, including anything more or less than that taught by a prophet, are on sandy ground. You are free to take them or leave them, do what you want with them.
We’ve always been taught that the gospel of Christ is simple
yet so many people seem to complicate it. some of them are very well versed in scriptures and know lots of important history and facts that others don’t—-but do you ever wonder if it is really necessary for us to know all those things? But, human nature makes me want to know all the answers to the questions—because i want to do everything right that I can—then I fill myself with guilt when I can’t—-and maybe the Lord doesn’t expect me to.The Gospel really is simple. Jesus is the personification of the will of God; Hope for, believe in and act on the promises of the Lord, even if you can’t see the results at the time (faith); try to change – both reactively to mistakes you make and proactive to become who you want to become (repent); symbolically participate in a spiritual cleansing ritual (be baptized); “receive” comfort and guidance from God (the gift of the Holy Ghost); rinse and repeat your entire life (endure to the end). Living life amid the necessary rules and regulations of communal living isn’t simple. That isn’t simple at all, especially for those who play a different instrument than most others in the community – who hear a counter-melody or harmony most others don’t hear.
Old-Timer wrote:The Gospel really is simple. Jesus is the personification of the will of God; Hope for, believe in and act on the promises of the Lord, even if you can’t see the results at the time (faith); try to change – both reactively to mistakes you make and proactive to become who you want to become (repent); symbolically participate in a spiritual cleansing ritual (be baptized); “receive” comfort and guidance from God (the gift of the Holy Ghost); rinse and repeat your entire life (endure to the end).
Living life amid the necessary rules and regulations of communal living isn’t simple. That isn’t simple at all, especially for those who play a different instrument than most others in the community – who hear a counter-melody or harmony most others don’t hear.
Beautiful Ray….. I used to be fascinated by church history and deep doctrinal speculation…. Now all I want to know about is Christ, Grace, Mercy, Sanctification, Holy Ghost, ect…. You put it beautifully… The gospel is to come unto Christ and keep on a coming!
+1 ray. The real doctrine of Christ is just that. Lao Tzu said “My words are very easy to know, very easy to follow.”. Jesus said “I am the Way, the truth, and the life.”
Yeah…so why does the “one true church” make it so complicated and ugly? Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2
cwald wrote:Yeah…so why does the “one true church” make it so complicated and ugly?
Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2
Bureaucracy? Former persecution leading to a paranoia?
cwald wrote:Yeah…so why does the “one true church” make it so complicated and ugly?
you already know the answer to that one, my friend…wayfarer wrote:cwald wrote:Yeah…so why does the “one true church” make it so complicated and ugly?
you already know the answer to that one, my friend…Yes. I do.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2
Why IS it so complicated? I’m thinking that in the internet age the church can’t take the time it has in the past to let go of doctrinal, procedural and cultural albatrosses that weigh us down. Does anyone know if concerns like the ones expressed here are “registering” anywhere of influence? I try not to be critical, so I will ask those of you who are less so: why do you think Elder Anderson used a thirty year-old forgery as an example of faith-weakening discoveries? It seemed to me like side-stepping. I don’t care about one fake letter! Ann wrote:Why IS it so complicated? I’m thinking that in the internet age the church can’t take the time it has in the past to let go of doctrinal, procedural and cultural albatrosses that weigh us down. Does anyone know if concerns like the ones expressed here are “registering” anywhere of influence? I try not to be critical, so I will ask those of you who are less so: why do you think Elder Anderson used a thirty year-old forgery as an example of faith-weakening discoveries? It seemed to me like side-stepping. I don’t care about one fake letter!
I have spoken to both a member of the Q12 and 70 in the past year, they are aware, and plans are being carried out to dispell wrong assertions. It takes time. The new Sunday curriculum is a start in this direction, the Joseph Smith papers published and online, the conference talks by Neil anderson this time and Elder Christofferson last time. It is happening but one of the GA’s I spoke to explained how slow it is happening, way slower then they would like but that in a worldwide church things have to be in lots of languages, edited for incorrect things, go through committees and get the q12 and FP approval. It is slow. They are working on a church link or site on the internet that answers the difficult questions in the best way they can – telling you what they know, what they don’t, and calling on you to have faith where needed. Personally, I agreee, it is too slow, but I am also excited about what is coming…… be patient and have faith… we all see through a glass darkly
It’s interesting to compare this with Terryl Givens comments on the other thread, about people not finding enough intellectual depth in Mormonism. I see my everyday life as fairly simple in the gospel (love God, love thy neighbor – everything else should revolve around them, even if I don’t manage it some days), but the variety makes it interesting. DBMormon wrote:They are working on a church link or site on the internet that answers the difficult questions in the best way they can – telling you what they know, what they don’t, and calling on you to have faith where needed. Personally, I agreee, it is too slow, but I am also excited about what is coming…… be patient and have faith… we all see through a glass darkly
I agree, DB. I can look forward to exciting things ahead.
In the mean time, I don’t need to wait on developing my own opinions. Clearly the church is saying there are some things they don’t know and that take faith by individuals like myself. That seems clear to me. So I don’t need to wait for the Church to sanction everything. If it seems there is enough information and research to support something, I can form my opinion on that thing (study it out in my own mind), and let the church catch up as they steer the giant ship at the pace they can.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.