- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I am just curious what the current state of belief is for members of this forum. At what level to you give credence to the claims and doctrines of the church. I am not asking if you find value in it or if your find good things or bad things. That is a separate question. I simply wonder at what level you believe the claims. No need to elaborate unless you want to I just would appreciate the vote. Since I do not post here much anymore because I felt my views had become to controversial for the members I am trying to see who this forum currently caters to. There probably are different options but these are the ones that came to mind. Just for the record I would go with number 6
I was torn between 6 and 7, but ultimately went with 6. I do not view the LDS Church (or earlier incarnations) as being what it claims to be. I believe they are all man-made organizations of like-minded believers and were never ordained and endorsed by God. My selection would read something like: “The church is and always has been a mix of wisdom from both man and God.” From this we obviously have much room for erroneous “man made” ideas to gain prominence, among these in my opinion is the idea that God is exclusive and creates hoops for his children to jump through before they can return home. The mortal experience in my mind is all about learning and personal growth, it is a divine plan that we all grossly misunderstand. In other words I see the church as claiming to be many things, but the exclusive authority of God, or one source of true salvation, is simply not a big one or meaningful to me even though the BY contingent has placed a heavy weight of importance on it. The idea of such narrow exclusivity makes a true acceptance and living of the 11th article of faith impossible in my understanding of it. I don’t understand all the exclusive talk in a similar way (I like to think) that some members before 1978 didn’t understand why black members didn’t get the priesthood or temple blessings. While I tend to “tune out” such talk at church I still find other points that edify me.
I would go with 6, if I had to choose one, simply because I do believe there was and is “nobility” in the theology but also that humans always screw up noble ideals – but I like 2, as well. I believe strongly in lots of things that can constitute “The Restoration”, but I also don’t believe anything in the Church is or ever has been perfect (either as “mistake-free” or as “complete, whole, fully developed”). I also have studied just about everything else out there, and Mormon theology works best for me – especially when the cultural aspects of any particular time period are factored out of the equation.
Mine is sort of a combination between two and three, but I ultimately went with two because I don’t think the church is in complete apostasy. The early church was what it claimed to be but after Joseph Smith died some major errors crept in and have been perpetuated to one degree or another since then. I believe this because women healing by the laying on of hands was taken away as well as blacks holding the Priesthood. I was torn between 2 and 6. Looks like so far those are the possibilities most are choosing. I voted for 6. I also have some comments.
“1. The church currently is just as it claims to be the one and only true church with all the authority to act in gods name” Seems clear enough. There could be multiple understandings of what is meant by “true” and “all the authority” but I get what you are saying.
“2. The church currently is mostly as it claims to be, but some errors have crept in over time” Yup, some stuff I consider to be errors creeps in over time. Some stuff I really like has also crept in over time. There are some things the modern church considers to have been errors. There are some things the modern church considers to have been improvements or line upon line advancements.
“3. The early church was what It claimed to be but the current church has strayed and is mostly lost” This seems a lot like #2. I don’t like the characterization of “straying” or “lost” because it assumes that there was a correct way that has been deviated from. The church has changed a lot in some really great ways and some not so great ways. I personally believe that there have been more good changes than bad.
“4. The early church was what it claimed to be but the current church is in complete apostasy” Seems like #1 and #2 but with harsher wording.
“5. The church started as the idea of a man but now it has Gods endorsement and represents the truth as close as possible.” I would say that it started as the inspired idea of a man and it now represents the contributions (both inspired and uninspired) of many individuals (mostly men as they have been in more impactful positions) as the church has progressed, grown, and changed over time. No word yet on God’s position on the matter but I understand that there is a press conference scheduled for judgment day.
“6. The church may have started as a noble idea but never was what it claimed and today it is still not what it claims” This comes closest to representing my opinion.
“7. The church and its doctrines are a total fabrication” Again with the harsh judgment words? I might change this to – “the church and its doctrines are the product of noble speculation”
That’s my $.02 x 7 or $.14. Keep the change.
:wave: I find these hard because often, these statements don’t fit anything I believe. But I would go with something between 3 or 6. I personally believe the Lord responded to my insistent requests for a confirmation of my decision to join because there would be some net good from belonging. Either that or he knew my mind was made up, or that I’d stop believing in God entirely if I didn’t get a clear answer. I don’t know.
For the longest time, I believed it was true all the way up and down. Now, I’m not sure. But my life is so wrapped up in it, I have to go, and I don’t want to confuse my kids. And who knows what work God might do to change my mind if I’m wrong.
Personally, I think the church has become a wealthy organization that has discovered doctrine and policies that generate high levels of commitment from a large enough portion of members that it can operate without accountability. Nor does it appreciate its members who go the extra mile, but fall all over the inactive to ask them to come back. Totally strange and upside down.
6.5 Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
SilentDawning wrote:For the longest time, I believed it was true all the way up and down. Now, I’m not sure. But my life is so wrapped up in it, I have to go, and I don’t want to confuse my kids. And who knows what work God might do to change my mind if I’m wrong.
Personally, I think the church has become a wealthy organization that has discovered doctrine and policies that generate high levels of commitment from a large enough portion of members that it can operate without accountability. Nor does it appreciate its members who go the extra mile, but fall all over the inactive to ask them to come back. Totally strange and upside down.
Oh, my gosh! That’s where I am!!
I go b/c I’m not sure one way or the other and I’d rather just go…in case the church organization IS a divinely authorized organization.
And…yes…your comment on the wealth creating “fear” is about right too!
cwald wrote:6.5
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
+1The hardest part for me in answering was trying to figure out what the church claims to be. In the beginning I don’t think the church claimed to be what it claims to be now. I went with 2, I’m reasonably sure JS would not recognize the current church. I really think it’s between 2 and 3 in that I don’t think the church is mostly lost but it has strayed. I went with 6 also. I think that the church claimed less the newer is was. I believe the claims have increased over time to make up for the flaws in its members. I’m currently between 1 and 2. Wow.. hard choice! Even though I am gong to a Community of Christ Church, I am going with #2. I do think that after BY left for the west, things started to change a lot. Don’t get me wrong about BY, I do have a testimony of him because the whole succession crisis was tough on everyone. He did the best he could, but I wonder sometimes if the interpretation of what The Lord wanted could have been misunderstood. JS (and his family) had a gift of communication with the Lord, I would imagine that it would be harder to get everything right the same JS did.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.