CASteinman Posted August 22, 2012 Posted August 22, 2012 So you and the LDS church say and claim. Well, it is the True Church. That counts for something.
Damien the Leper Posted August 22, 2012 Posted August 22, 2012 I would say it is not the evidence that is the problem but rather where you choose to put your credence.An aquaintance of mine refuses to join any other church but one that is charismatic. She wants to see miracles and the 'signs of the times'. She stated that when there is a moment when her pastor attempts to 'heal' an afflicted member the healing is only guaranteed based on the persons faith. IOW, unless you have an unquestionable faith that never doubts then you cannot be truly healed.This is silliness.It is not easily concluded that any problems a person has with the church is by their own fault. That is pretentious, presumptuous and assinine.I don't mean to accuse you of doing this. But I wanted to make clear the silliness of such perspectives.
Damien the Leper Posted August 22, 2012 Posted August 22, 2012 Well, it is the True Church. That counts for something.That is a claim not a fact. It counts for something only to those who believe it.
Damien the Leper Posted August 22, 2012 Posted August 22, 2012 This is not merely applicable to called missionaries. Every member a missionary.Not only that, but bearing testimony produces specific benefits we can -- each of us -- use.I am not questioning your personal decisions. I was merely pointing out that it the Lord takes a different view of things than this.Since I am not a member then the standard goes untarnished.
why me Posted August 22, 2012 Author Posted August 22, 2012 I think you should do whatever your own convictions tell you to do. If you believe in the Book of Mormon and choose not to be part of the Restoration movement then so be it. I will still call you friend. You don't have to be any kind of "Mormon" to believe in the book. That's just silly.My recommendation...unless you absolutely feel a call from God to the LDS church then stay where you are at if it suits you but I wouldn't get bent out of shape over which church to join. That was Joseph Smith's problem and it doesn't necessarily mean that we all have the same problem in some form.I have known Bart from the internet forums for quite some time. He is making quite a spiritual journey at the moment. I can also understand two loyalties. The catholic church is a beautiful church with beautiful people. I was just hanging out with some of my catholic friends playing dominos and we had a nice discussion with a priest. But i also know that the early claims of the witnesses are very hard to refute. Why would david want his testimony on his tombstone? And oliver giving his testimony on his deathbed to wife, daughter and friends. It must have been a powerful experience for his wife and daughter.Also, when I give a reading at the catholic church I can see the lds church in that reading. It is a hard nut to crack. And I can understand the anger of some exmos. The truth claim of the lds church are strong and some of the anger is directed at that because the exmo no longer chooses to believe.
Damien the Leper Posted August 22, 2012 Posted August 22, 2012 True there are many claiming to be authoritative. That makes it difficult and imperative that we chose with care. The consequences are much to important to leave to others. That is why it is important for each to make the choice for himself. Then if you have decided to follow one claime or another without the personal revelation (witness) thing then we are responsible for that choice.I'm not looking nor am I encouraging anyone to look for an 'authoritative' church. It is unnecessary. We go where we believe God is calling us. If that means we are called to the LDS church from another denomination then so be it. But it is a two way street because there are some who are called out of the LDS church to another denomination by God.
why me Posted August 22, 2012 Author Posted August 22, 2012 Since I am not a member then the standard goes untarnished.But do you have any anger inside you about the lds church? And if so, why do you have anger?
CASteinman Posted August 22, 2012 Posted August 22, 2012 That is a claim not a fact. It counts for something only to those who believe it.It is both a claim and a fact! You don't have to believe it but that does not change its nature.
CASteinman Posted August 22, 2012 Posted August 22, 2012 (edited) Since I am not a member then the standard goes untarnished.You are right! I agree!but there is still a blessing available. Edited August 22, 2012 by CASteinman
Damien the Leper Posted August 22, 2012 Posted August 22, 2012 But do you have any anger inside you about the lds church? And if so, why do you have anger?No. I think some silly things have been said by the GAs and by members but I'm not overly concerned.For example, in Gospel Essentials the instructor said that the church's teaching material caters to a specific perception of history. He also said that if the ideas of that history are not 100% factual then the church's claims and beliefs are still untarnished because the church is still authoritative.All I could do was laugh.
Damien the Leper Posted August 22, 2012 Posted August 22, 2012 It is both a claim and a fact! You don't have to believe it but that does not change its nature.Prove it beyond a reasonable doubt with ALL fact that is both known and that which transcends our known reality then. Since you claim it is fact then this shouldn't be too hard for you to accomplish.
why me Posted August 22, 2012 Author Posted August 22, 2012 No. I think some silly things have been said by the GAs and by members but I'm not overly concerned.For example, in Gospel Essentials the instructor said that the church's teaching material caters to a specific perception of history. He also said that if the ideas of that history are not 100% factual then the church's claims and beliefs are still untarnished because the church is still authoritative.All I could do was laugh.instead of laughing you could have brought up your own perspectives. We humans need to share our perspectives to have a dialogue so that we can learn from each other. We need to remember that the teacher gave his own opinion. And opinions vary.
CASteinman Posted August 22, 2012 Posted August 22, 2012 It is not easily concluded that any problems a person has with the church is by their own fault. That is pretentious, presumptuous and assinine.This is a matter of perspective.Master Gutei raised his finger whenever he was asked a question about Zen. A boy attendant began to imitate him in this way and would answer questions with a raised finger. Gutei heard about the boy's pretension and, asked him a question. When the boy raised his finger to answer, Gutei quickly cut the finger off. As the boy began to cry and run away, Gutei called to him. When the boy turned his head to Gutei and asked a question: "Why did you do that?"Gutei raised up his own finger.In that instant the boy was enlightened.
CASteinman Posted August 22, 2012 Posted August 22, 2012 Prove it beyond a reasonable doubt with ALL fact that is both known and that which transcends our known reality then. Since you claim it is fact then this shouldn't be too hard for you to accomplish.Really? Facts are always provable? Are you sure?
CASteinman Posted August 22, 2012 Posted August 22, 2012 For example, in Gospel Essentials the instructor said that the church's teaching material caters to a specific perception of history. He also said that if the ideas of that history are not 100% factual then the church's claims and beliefs are still untarnished because the church is still authoritative.All I could do was laugh.Ahhh yes. Because you are smarter than he is.. you get to laugh at his foolishness!
Damien the Leper Posted August 22, 2012 Posted August 22, 2012 Ahhh yes. Because you are smarter than he is.. you get to laugh at his foolishness!I wasn't laughing at him it was at the comment. Nor did it so as to embarrass him. I also did not claim that I was smarter...to ignorantly assume that out of my post shows more about you than me.
Damien the Leper Posted August 22, 2012 Posted August 22, 2012 Really? Facts are always provable? Are you sure?I get that you have a bias in favor of the church's authority. That's neat. But a Catholic can make the same claim and provide a substantial argument in favor of the RCC. What would be your response be? Hopefully not an arrogant one such as this:"I respect your belief." While thinking "Nuh uh...mine is." I know you're not capable of such silliness but I just wanted to make sure we didn't delude ourselves.
Damien the Leper Posted August 22, 2012 Posted August 22, 2012 instead of laughing you could have brought up your own perspectives. We humans need to share our perspectives to have a dialogue so that we can learn from each other. We need to remember that the teacher gave his own opinion. And opinions vary.The guy is probably in his 70s. I'mnot going to change his opinion and I ave no desire to correct such a perception. He has every right t believe as whe does.
CASteinman Posted August 22, 2012 Posted August 22, 2012 I wasn't laughing at him it was at the comment.Oh -- I see. A random voiceless sourceless comment floating in the classroom and not ascribable to anyone. Despite your story that he made the comment. mmm hmmm.I also did not claim that I was smarter...to ignorantly assume that out of my post shows more about you than me.Just as your comment in return shows more about you than it does about me. That is the nature of comments.
Recommended Posts