randyc Posted September 11, 2005 Posted September 11, 2005 Wow. Something just hit me (an idea, of course, not a spatula or whatnot). I know this may seem obvious to some people, but it really just came forward in my mind.I tell people that I used to "know" that the LDS church was true and that I felt the witness of the spirit. I may also tell them that I still have those feelings (or I did until a coule weeks ago), but that I now know that they do not really tell me that anything is true.Many LDS, upon hearing this, will tell me that I never really had the witness of the spirit, because I really would have known if I had experienced it. "When you truly feel it, you will know," etc. I think it strange, though, that every ex-Mormon who says that those feelings do not really attest to truth was confused and never really had the witness (because of unfaithfulness, etc.), whereas the ones who are still LDS can claim that they have felt the reall thing and know (just as many of us ex-Mormons used to claim). If we can end up being wrong, so can you.
Hacedor Costoso Posted September 12, 2005 Posted September 12, 2005 Brentley responded:Thanks for the reply.So far it seems that you are the type that if Christ were to return you would go get your evidence testing and see if it were truly Him.How else would you know Brentley? I guarantee you that if somebody came to you claiming to be Christ - and had all the right answers, and fit the perfect profile and who's timing was right, you'd follow him based on your preconceived notions and feelings.But you could be wrong!The people who believed in David Koresh felt the whispering.The people who believed in Jim Jones felt the whispering.The people who believed in the Heaven's Gate felt the whisperingThe people who attend Calvary Chapel feel the whisperingThe people who have audience with the Pope feel the whisperingThe people who followed Jim Baker felt the whisperingThe people who follow Ellen G. White feel the whisperingThe people who follow Jerry Falwell feel the whisperingMormons feel the whispering.And your whispering is no more or less authentic than their whispering. Does it even make sense that "God" would allow less than 1/100th of one percent of all who have lived to "feel the whispering"?
1973betRP&Glendale Posted September 13, 2005 Posted September 13, 2005 The people who believed in David Koresh felt the whispering.The people who believed in Jim Jones felt the whispering.The people who believed in the Heaven's Gate felt the whisperingThe people who attend Calvary Chapel feel the whisperingThe people who have audience with the Pope feel the whisperingThe people who followed Jim Baker felt the whisperingThe people who follow Ellen G. White feel the whisperingThe people who follow Jerry Falwell feel the whisperingMormons feel the whispering.I always know when people who attack the church are getting desperate when they begin comparing us to David Koresh, Jim Jones and Heaven's Gate. Anti-Mormons love to talk about how Mormons are brainwashed clones who when discussing their faith only hear what they want to hear. They should look in the mirror more often.
Tchild2 Posted September 13, 2005 Posted September 13, 2005 1973 Wrote:I always know when people who attack the church are getting desperate when they begin comparing us to David Koresh, Jim Jones and Heaven's Gate. Anti-Mormons love to talk about how Mormons are brainwashed clones who when discussing their faith only hear what they want to hear.
ave maria Posted September 13, 2005 Posted September 13, 2005 If something so apparently wrong can be believed to be right and true like a destructive cult, how much more subtle is the possible self-deception that one's "normal" church could be true, while all others in all the other world's "normal" religions could be less than complete and ultimately wrong? An excellent question.
charity Posted September 13, 2005 Posted September 13, 2005 I would think cults could be at least partly defined by what happens when the charismatic leader is gone. In our Sunday School lesson last week, it was impressed on me more than ever before, the precarious position of the Church at the martrydom of the Prophet. If you have been in the Church for very long, you have seen the orderly way in which a new prophet replaces the previous prophet. In my lifetime there have been 9 prophets, 7 of whom I knew. (Not personally.) But when Joseph was killed, there had never been a prophet replaced. All but three of the Quorum of the Twelve were away from Nauvoo. The people of the Church were being threatened by mobs and the lawless, many of whom were in the government sworn to protect them. But the Church did not come apart and just drift away.
Dale Posted September 13, 2005 Posted September 13, 2005 Martin Luther & his faithful remnant either reformed the church, or they didn't. If they Jesus would need what people slander as a cult. I personally find the term cult as name calling as I reject the logic & reason of the critics. It's not Joseph Smith's gospel. It's Jesus gospel. I have to believe whats genuine currency among men's religions isn't legal tender in heaven.
ave maria Posted September 13, 2005 Posted September 13, 2005 But the Church did not come apart and just drift away. Some would dispute that.The transition from Joseph Smith to Brigham Young was not exactly a smooth one, and the church founded by Joseph Smith did not survive it intact.At last count, there were over 200 sects worldwide that had originated with the church that Joseph Smith claimed to have "restored."
charity Posted September 13, 2005 Posted September 13, 2005 Ave, the small groups that are barely hanging together, reorganzing, combining, etc. are not THE Church. I would dispute that the transition was smooth after Brigham Young returned and the authority of the Quorum of the Twelve, which Jospeh had spent months preparing, was established. What I would dispute of what you said is that the Church did not survive intact. No organization is held accountable for small, non-prospering rebellious factions. The true Church has continued to grow and prosper. More translations of the Book of Mormon, more countries open to the preaching of the Gospel, temple dotting the land. Drifting off into nothingness?
randyc Posted September 13, 2005 Posted September 13, 2005 Ave, the small groups that are barely hanging together, reorganzing, combining, etc. are not THE Church. I would dispute that the transition was smooth after Brigham Young returned and the authority of the Quorum of the Twelve, which Jospeh had spent months preparing, was established. What I would dispute of what you said is that the Church did not survive intact. No organization is held accountable for small, non-prospering rebellious factions. The true Church has continued to grow and prosper. More translations of the Book of Mormon, more countries open to the preaching of the Gospel, temple dotting the land. Drifting off into nothingness? That's great for you to say, Charity, but all those other groups do think that they are THE church. You have no more claim on that (to an impartial observer) than they do. You say it was smooth after Brigham Young returned and this and that happened, but anyone could come up with some time when things became smooth again for one of the groups. The fact remains that after Smith died, the church was broken up (even if I have to resort to using "church" to mean the church membership).No organization is held accountable for small, non-prospering rebellious factions. The true Church has continued to grow and prosper.No, your church is not held responsible for theirs, but that does not mean that the original church is the one you are in today. But it seems that your basic point is that the one that prospers most is obviously the original one. This is arbitrary.
randyc Posted September 13, 2005 Posted September 13, 2005 The people who believed in David Koresh felt the whispering.The people who believed in Jim Jones felt the whispering.The people who believed in the Heaven's Gate felt the whisperingThe people who attend Calvary Chapel feel the whisperingThe people who have audience with the Pope feel the whisperingThe people who followed Jim Baker felt the whisperingThe people who follow Ellen G. White feel the whisperingThe people who follow Jerry Falwell feel the whisperingMormons feel the whispering.I always know when people who attack the church are getting desperate when they begin comparing us to David Koresh, Jim Jones and Heaven's Gate. Anti-Mormons love to talk about how Mormons are brainwashed clones who when discussing their faith only hear what they want to hear. They should look in the mirror more often. Since Tchild's cool and reasoned response was probably lost on you...I always know when people who blindly follow a dogma are getting even more pitiful when they begin implying that a discussion of the seeming unviersality of the "spiritual witness" is nothing more than "cult branding."Anti-Mormons love to talk about how Mormons are brainwashed clones who when discussing their faith only hear what they want to hear. They should look in the mirror more often.No need. You've just given me a prime example.
randyc Posted September 13, 2005 Posted September 13, 2005 Your accusations are silly. People leave for real, deep, heartfelt reasons (such as knowing in your heart that the church is not what it claims to be).
1973betRP&Glendale Posted September 14, 2005 Posted September 14, 2005 I always know when people who blindly follow a dogma are getting even more pitiful when they begin implying that a discussion of the seeming unviersality of the "spiritual witness" is nothing more than "cult branding."Please translate. I'm afriad you lost me after the word "unviersality"Anti-Mormons love to talk about how Mormons are brainwashed clones who when discussing their faith only hear what they want to hear. They should look in the mirror more often. No need. You've just given me a prime example. Again, please translate. I'm not sure where you're coming from.
randyc Posted September 14, 2005 Posted September 14, 2005 I always know when people who blindly follow a dogma are getting even more pitiful when they begin implying that a discussion of the seeming unviersality of the "spiritual witness" is nothing more than "cult branding."Please translate. I'm afriad you lost me after the word "unviersality"Anti-Mormons love to talk about how Mormons are brainwashed clones who when discussing their faith only hear what they want to hear.
asbestosman Posted September 15, 2005 Posted September 15, 2005 Your accusations are silly. People leave for real, deep, heartfelt reasons (such as knowing in your heart that the church is not what it claims to be).
randyc Posted September 15, 2005 Posted September 15, 2005 Your accusations are silly. People leave for real, deep, heartfelt reasons (such as knowing in your heart that the church is not what it claims to be).
asbestosman Posted September 15, 2005 Posted September 15, 2005 You're just better at discerning truth (smarter) than I am.
cacheman Posted September 15, 2005 Posted September 15, 2005 Does it help if I tell you that I don't agree with the usual lessons in church about why people apostatize? I think I'm entitled to my own opinions. I don't need to be a brainwashed sheep. I don't think all the reasons are as trivial as "being offended" or "wishing to sin". The scriptures speak of the very elect being decieved if it were possible (Matt. 24: 24). It doesn't sound trivial at all. I recognize the difficulty. The difference may be more to our experience than our abilities. Abestosman,I hear what you're saying. You seem to have a charitable approach to those who believe different, specifically those who have apostacized from your faith. I don't see it as a superiority complex, but rather as humility. I appreciate that.It would do us all well if all of us could assume the best in others motivations for belief/unbelief. Think of all the good that could be accomplished if a mutual respect was the norm.Thanks,cacheman
randyc Posted September 17, 2005 Posted September 17, 2005 The difference may be more due to our experience than our abilities. Got it. So you were including circumstance in ability to discern truth? Darn. It was so much more fun when you thought you were smarter than me. I never assumed those who left did care.Do I need to say I think your choice is equally likely and good in order not to come off as superior?No. Sorry. It just seemed like you were hastening to give the right advice. I though it was kind of funny. That's why I quoted it.I do not see all options as equally good, and I don't expect you to either. In fact I expect that you think your option is the better optionWell said.I don't see any need to shun you. What more do you expect? A going away party for those who decide to leave the church? Yes, please. Can I still come if I already left?Does it help if I tell you that I don't agree with the usual lessons in church about why people apostatize? I think I'm entitled to my own opinions. I don't need to be a brainwashed sheep. I don't think all the reasons are as trivial as "being offended" or "wishing to sin".Thank you. I, in fact, do want to "sin", but that was not in any way my reason for leaving the LDS church. It is simply a choice I make given my current world view.
asbestosman Posted September 17, 2005 Posted September 17, 2005 I don't see any need to shun you. What more do you expect? A going away party for those who decide to leave the church?
randyc Posted September 17, 2005 Posted September 17, 2005 What if my righteous brother gets jealous?
charity Posted September 17, 2005 Posted September 17, 2005 Ave, As you know, Joseph taught that the authority for the Church lay first in the first Presidency, and if not them, then the Quorum of the Twelve. (Doctrine and Covenants 112:16-17) When Joseph was martyred, the authority and keys for the Church went to the Quorum of Twelve. Brigham Young was the President of the Quorum of the Twelve. There could be no leader or group believing themselves to be the legitimate Church, without denial of Joseph as a prophet, or the revelation contained in Section 112.
ave maria Posted September 17, 2005 Posted September 17, 2005 Ave, As you know, Joseph taught that the authority for the Church lay first in the first Presidency, and if not them, then the Quorum of the Twelve. (Doctrine and Covenants 112:16-17) When Joseph was martyred, the authority and keys for the Church went to the Quorum of Twelve. Brigham Young was the President of the Quorum of the Twelve. There could be no leader or group believing themselves to be the legitimate Church, without denial of Joseph as a prophet, or the revelation contained in Section 112.I had to go back and see what you were responding to here, charity.I would add that this is somewhat how the (Catholic) Church views divergent sects. Paraphrasing, "There could be no leader or group believing themselves to be the legitimate Church, without denial of the words of Jesus Christ, apostolic succession or the successor of Peter."
charity Posted September 18, 2005 Posted September 18, 2005 Ave, that's why it is either you or us. None of the others have a leg to stand on.
ave maria Posted September 18, 2005 Posted September 18, 2005 Ave, that's why it is either you or us. None of the others have a leg to stand on. I'd be somewhat more charitable.I'd give Orthodoxy/Eastern Christianity legs, as I would Judaism.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.