The Deeper I Dig The More I Question

[LifeOnaPlate]

Truly, Stuess is a man who might say "I believe, Lord, help thou mine unbelief!"

[moreholinessgiveme]

I have been a member for many years. I guess I have been a simple minded member and have pretty much aligned myself with every teaching of the church exercising complete faith and moving what I believed to be forward. The truth is, I can no longer subscribe to fear-based religion of any kind. Any religion that uses fear as a way to control the masses is in my opinion in error. When I started questioning fear as a way to play on the emotions of the innocent masses, I started questioning other teachings of the church. SNIP Oh this is just the beginning of many discoveries which begged the question "IS MORMONISM JUST ANOTHER RELIGION?"

No discussion of temple content, please.

From what I can tell, you have not been back to clarify your concerns or questions, and your objectionable content, as per the forum rules, has been cut-out.

It seems you make the assertion that the LDS faith might be "fear" based. Now, thinking about some aspects of the Temple ceremony, I think I can see where this feeling might come from. Some of the strong wording and warnings in the ceremonies troubled me at first, also.

What helped me was reading a few books that touch upon this seemingly "harsh" way the Lord appears to deal with us. Those books were "Believing Christ", "Following Christ" and "Clean Hands, Pure Heart" (that should be enough to Google on or search on Amazon, if not, I can help with finding them). The essence of what these books all agree upon is this. God sees us and treats us pretty much like children. And the actual reality is -- we ARE His children. We are children in all of the tender, loving ways that matter. We are children in our understanding. We "come up with" a lot of ideas about God that just aren't correct. In fact, coming to a correct view and understanding about God is crucial to our being able to trust Him. Trusting Him is just another way of saying we have Faith in Him. If we trust Him we'll listen and obey His counsel -- right? That is the definition of trust.

As I recently shared in another thread -- He uses "stern language" in order to warn us away from danger.

Wouldn't you agree that "being afraid" of a real and actual dangerous thing, and never going near it, is far better than walking up to it and asking it to hurt us and make us suffer in actuality?

Think hard about what you would prefer -- a harsh warning that scares you -- or -- finding out for yourself?

Nobody in their right mind goes walking into a mine field, past 100 warning signs, gets their foot blown-off and then says "I know I was warned, but I'm REALLY GRATEFUL I ignored the warnings and found-out for myself and got to personally experience the exquisite agony of having my foot blown off."

I've watched documentaries on TV that talk about Polar Bears. They may "look" kind of cute and cuddly, outwardly, but the reality is -- they are very dangerous animals, with paws the diameter of a man's head. If I went walking out on the ice fields in the arctic and met-up-with one -- well, there'd be a quite sudden and permanent end to my posts in this forum.

Satan and his tactics have similar qualities. His offerings to us in the media that is out there seem outwardly to provide pleasure and fun and fulfillment. And for a season they may actually be and provide what they promise. But inwardly they are ravening wolves -- wild, untamed Polar Bears.

We're God to stand by and let us go walking on the ice and stumble across a Polar Bear -- without saying one word to us about the danger -- well, He would not be a very caring or loving Father.

Like I said -- in His eyes we are wide-eyed, innocent, and yes -- a bit naive. We're children. We "don't know any better" -- and we are naturally curious about the forbidden. We crave it. We're drawn to it. We want to see how close we can get to the Polar Bear without getting our neck broken.

Heavenly Father knows all about Polar Bears. Because He knows about them, He wants to protect us. So He posts some pretty scary messages in scripture to warn us.

"WARNING: Polar Bears are dangerous. If you go near them you will be smitten by their wrath. You will suffer pain and anguish for ETERNITY. It will be to you as a lake of fire and brimstone, ascending up and up forever and ever. And your suffering will be sore...how sore you know not. How equisite you know not. Yes, how hard to bear YOU KNOW NOT. So, STAY AWAY FROM POLAR BEARS, okay?"

STAY AWAY FROM POLAR BEARS!!!

Now, take this above warning (yes it is a bit SILLY and dramatic, I know, but that is on purpose) and COMPARE it to the following REAL scripture:

D&C 19: 15

15 Therefore I command you to repentâ??repent, lest I smite you by the rod of my mouth, and by my wrath, and by my anger, and your sufferings be soreâ??how sore you know not, how exquisite you know not, yea, how hard to bear you know not.

STAY AWAY FROM SIN. REPENT BECAUSE I DON'T WANT YOU TO HAVE TO HURT LIKE I WAS HURT

I hope this allegory provides some perspective (as well as a chuckle).

Love,

Tom

[selek]

The following quote is taken from Dancing's only other post, this one in the George P. Lee thread. There are certain elements which I believe are problematic for a believing LDS, and may shed some light on the OP's interpretation and impression of the Church.

I can not believe the comment about someone ruining Mormonism. What a judgement. What if we could come from the space of love and not place judgement on anyone? What if we could start standing up for ourselves and be accountable. What if we could extend love to all mankind and strip ourselves of ego? Does anyone believe that God has an ego? I would say absolutely not. Furthermore I would add that I believe that God has no opinions. I also believe God does not get angry and any reference in the BOM and the Bible about the anger of God is simply man adding his answer the the simple law of cause and effect. I believe God comes from the pure space of love and that is what we get to aspire to. I do not believe in "saving ordinances". I believe that we get to move closer to our source by choice not by being compelled out of fear.

I don't beleive that this particular set of characterizations of God is accurate or consistent with LDS belief. I don't think there are many LDS who would accept such a position.

Particularly troubling are the ideas that any anger attributed to God is merely man "projecting", that God has no opinions, and the lack of belief in saving ordinances.

The ordinances are commandments of God, and the Scriptures are replete with other commandments and statements of "opinion" from the All-Mighty.

It is not a stretch to imagine that someone who rejects these fundamental truths and foundations might be looking at a carnival mirror image of the Church itself.

My only question is how they got past the Baptismal/temple recommend interviews holding such unusual views.

The only way one man can ruin anything is if we support him in the belief he can. The statement "ruining Mormonism" is like saying anything that is lovely, virtuous, or of good report must be Mormon. Let's get real and know. The beauty of lif is we have a choice to live and not judge.

This statement shades earlier comments from leaders such as Brigham Young and slightly twists the Articles of Faith.

Frankly, it's not much a of a stretch to believe that, Mormon or not, anything that is lovely, virtuous, or of good report just might be of God.

On the other hand, the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil was also lovely and virtuous, yet our first parents were commanded not to partake of it.

[Garden Girl]

I'm noticing also that Dance has not been back... but I'm going to just assume she had to run out to the store, etc.

Dance... hello...

I'm reading Nibley's "Temple and Cosmos" and loving it... fascinating... to say the least... I highly recommend it to you...

Another is S. Michael Wilcox's "House of Glory."

There is a paper by John A. Tvedtnes available at fairlds.org in the Topical Guide, titled "Early Christian and Jewish Rituals Related to Temple Practices." I highly recommend this to you also... after studying some of these things, I have so much more of an appreciation of the endowment... and the Masonry thing doesn't even faze me... it's irrelevant...

And I, too, have to question... fear based religion? What in the world are you talking about?

The Garden Girl

Edit to add... Selek... I just saw your post (it wasn't there when I started typing). Hmmm, yes... Dance's views do not exactly project the LDS view... particularly about "saving ordinances"...

[LifeOnaPlate]

This thread can have great implications for all Latter-day Saints. Like Nephi there are times when all of us must say, as Nephi of old, "I know not the meaning of all things." Indeed, the more we learn, it seems, the more we learn we need to learn more. This is an exciting challenge, not a daunting discovery.

"But I am proud to say of my religion, I have studied it faithfully for twenty-two years, day and night, at home and abroad, upon the rivers, and upon the lakes, when traveling by sea and by land; have studied it in the pulpit; from morning till night; whatsoever might be my pursuit, I have studied it with as close an application any college student ever did any subject he wished to commit to memory; and I can say I have only just got into the A B C of it; it leads the vision of my mind into eternity." (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 1:41)

This is the "line upon line" method of learning.

More shameless self-promotion ahead, check out my blog post on the subject

"Brigham young and the Mysteries of the Kingdom"

[Bsix]

I'll confess that I love Mormonism and the LDS Church in particular.

The notion that the LDS Church is a 'fear' based religion is completely not reprentative of my experience as a convert.

Regards,

Six

[Alf O'Mega]

My church doesn't use fear as a way to play on the emotions of the innocent masses.

Isn't your church one that believes such scriptural injunctions as "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling" (Philippians 2:12)? The Book of Mormon relates approvingly how King Benjamin's people "had fallen to the earth, for the fear of the Lord had come upon them" (Mosiah 4:1).

In another instance, Ammon is delighted to use fear as an entree to a missionary discussion:

Now the servants of the king began to murmur, saying: Now the king will slay us, as he has our brethren, because their flocks were scattered by the wickedness of these men. And they began to weep exceedingly, saying, Behold our flocks are scattered already. Now they wept because of the fear of being slain. Now when Ammon saw this, his heart was swollen within him, with joy; for, said he, I will shew forth my power unto these my fellow servants, or the power which is in me, in restoring these flocks unto the king, that I may win the hearts of these my fellow servants, that I may lead them to believe in my words (Alma 17:28â??29).

Read Alma 36 and tell me that fear is not an important part of Alma's conversion experience.

And when D&C 19:7 says, "Again, it is written eternal damnation; wherefore it is more express than other scriptures, that it might work upon the hearts of the children of men, altogether for my nameâ??s glory," what effect do you believe is being worked upon the hearts of the children of men by the term eternal damnation?

There's nothing to be embarrassed about in acknowledging that the Church uses fear as one of its motivators. I certainly consider it an active tool in my duties as a parent, along with other Mormon favorites such as guilt, shame, pain, and sharp reproof. I try to take care not to overuse them, nor indeed to start with them. But they are there in the toolbox, and I have used them all.

There is absolutely no way that Joseph Smith could have gotten his entire "temple script" from the Masonic rituals. The differences are numerous and fundamental.

And the similarities are numerous and striking. The endowment is clearly dependent on Masonry.

"Begging the question" [Latin petitio principii] is a specific kind of logical fallacy, and it has nothing at all to do with what you've just described. Misuse of the term begging the question is a common error, but it's an error all the same.

Merriam-Webster's entry for beg the question says:

1: to pass over or ignore a question by assuming it to be established or settled

2: to elicit a question logically as a reaction or response <the quarterback's injury begs the question of who will start in his place>

I never use the second sense, but it has been attested often enough in edited prose that it is now a recognized usage. It will never survive in anything I have editorial control over, but there are less fastidious editors who have quit the barricades.

[Daniel Peterson]

Isn't your church one that believes such scriptural injunctions as "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling" (Philippians 2:12)?

Many Christian churches besides mine believe in the New Testament. Some emphasize fear of hell. Mine doesn't.

The Book of Mormon relates approvingly how King Benjamin's people "had fallen to the earth, for the fear of the Lord had come upon them" (Mosiah 4:1).

The "fear of the Lord" is a thoroughly scriptural notion. Some believers in the Bible put a great deal of emphasis on fear. Some put considerably less. Latter-day Saints are among the latter group.

In another instance, Ammon is delighted to use fear as an entree to a missionary discussion:

Read Alma 36 and tell me that fear is not an important part of Alma's conversion experience.

No Christian church of which I'm aware has canonized the book I'm OK, You're OK, and none worship Barney the dinosaur.

Nevertheless, if one were to classify Christian churches along a spectrum of how much they emphasize damnation and the torments of hell, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints would fall far over to the end of the spectrum among those that place relatively little emphasis on fear, damnation, and eternal torment.

And when D&C 19:7 says, "Again, it is written eternal damnation; wherefore it is more express than other scriptures, that it might work upon the hearts of the children of men, altogether for my nameâ??s glory," what effect do you believe is being worked upon the hearts of the children of men by the term eternal damnation?

The "fear of the Lord" is a thoroughly scriptural notion. Some adherents of the biblical tradition heavily emphasize fear. Some place little emphasis on it. Latter-day Saints are among the latter group.

If a reasonably mainstream Latter-day Saint is living in abject and debilitating terror of God, he or she doesn't understand the gospel and/or needs counseling.

And the similarities are numerous and striking. The endowment is clearly dependent on Masonry.

I don't deny a relationship. I do deny that the endowment can be entirely derived from Masonry. That's flatly untrue.

It will never survive in anything I have editorial control over, but there are less fastidious editors who have quit the barricades.

I'm not among them. I don't permit it in anything I publish, and whenever I see the error elsewhere, I point it out.

[LifeOnaPlate]

Isn't your church one that believes such scriptural injunctions as "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling" (Philippians 2:12)? The Book of Mormon relates approvingly how King Benjamin's people "had fallen to the earth, for the fear of the Lord had come upon them" (Mosiah 4:1).

In another instance, Ammon is delighted to use fear as an entree to a missionary discussion:

Read Alma 36 and tell me that fear is not an important part of Alma's conversion experience.

And when D&C 19:7 says, "Again, it is written eternal damnation; wherefore it is more express than other scriptures, that it might work upon the hearts of the children of men, altogether for my nameâ??s glory," what effect do you believe is being worked upon the hearts of the children of men by the term eternal damnation?

There's nothing to be embarrassed about in acknowledging that the Church uses fear as one of its motivators. I certainly consider it an active tool in my duties as a parent, along with other Mormon favorites such as guilt, shame, pain, and sharp reproof. I try to take care not to overuse them, nor indeed to start with them. But they are there in the toolbox, and I have used them all.

And the similarities are numerous and striking. The endowment is clearly dependent on Masonry.

Merriam-Webster's entry for beg the question says:

I never use the second sense, but it has been attested often enough in edited prose that it is now a recognized usage. It will never survive in anything I have editorial control over, but there are less fastidious editors who have quit the barricades.

While we are on the subject of scriptural injunctions, let's check out the Bible dictionary on "fear":

Care should be taken to distinguish between two different uses of this word. The â??fear of the Lordâ? is frequently spoken of as part of manâ??s duty (e.g., Ps. 111: 10; Eccl. 12: 13; Isa. 11: 2-3; Luke 1: 50); it is also described as â??godly fearâ? (Heb. 12: 28). In such passages fear is equivalent to reverence, awe, worship, and is therefore an essential part of the attitude of mind in which we ought to stand toward the All-holy God. On the other hand fear is spoken of as something unworthy of a child of God, something that â??perfect love casteth outâ? (1 Jn. 4: 18). The first effect of Adamâ??s sin was that he was afraid (Gen. 3: 10). Sin destroys that feeling of confidence Godâ??s child should feel in a loving Father, and produces instead a feeling of shame and guilt. Ever since the Fall God has been teaching men not to fear, but with penitence to ask forgiveness in full confidence of receiving it.

[sethpayne]

There seems to have been a lot of critisism of this post. I think it is important to remember that while many (if not most) of us have had extremely positive exeriences with the Church, some have been seriously hurt and left feeling marginalized and outside the community of Saints.

We shouldn't cast doubt on a person's experience. Whatever the causes, the emotional pain and disenfranchisement is very real for those who experience it. Rather than say: "Well... my experience hasn't been that way..", "You are wrong for feeling hurt in this situation..." or therwise casting doubt on the legitimacy of a person's experience and perspective - we should express both sympathy and empathy and seek to help the person heal whatever pain or hurt they have may have felt.

Heaven knows that I have, in my various Church callings, said and done things (mostly inadvertently) that hurt people or made them feel seperate from the Ward or Quorum. It has only been with the passing of time that I have realized the impact my actions may have had. We are a church of people.... and people sometimes hurt each other.

Also - it is also important to recognize that legitimacy of certain questions about Church doctrine or practice. Even if we have personally resoved our own questions - it is important to allow others to find their own answers rather than chastise them for not having reached the conclusions we may have. I'm not suggesting that this has been done during this post... but in my brief time on these boards, I have seen these types of reactions to what appear to be sincere questions.

[Luigi]

I have been a member for many years. I guess I have been a simple minded member and have pretty much aligned myself with every teaching of the church exercising complete faith and moving what I believed to be forward. The truth is, I can no longer subscribe to fear-based religion of any kind. Any religion that uses fear as a way to control the masses is in my opinion in error. When I started questioning fear as a way to play on the emotions of the innocent masses, I started questioning other teachings of the church. SNIP Oh this is just the beginning of many discoveries which begged the question "IS MORMONISM JUST ANOTHER RELIGION?"

No discussion of temple content, please.

Dance in the Light,

I understand what you mean by using fear. All religions do and it certainly is a question of degree. While the LDS religion is not big on the 'fire and brimstone' stuff it is certainly there and the LDS religion also uses social stigma through, for example, not allowing temple recommends to non compliant members or requesting them to not partake of the sacrament. LDS members will defend these acts as not being motivated out of hate but out of a sincere desire to maintain the sanctity of sacred things and as an act of love to those who 'stray' and I think the majority of members sincerely feel that way.

Ultimately though if you find yourself complying with any religion, LDS or otherwise, simply out of fear of social stigma or even hell I think it is safe to say you will not be very happy. I have come to the conclusion that most of the 'rules' of religion, and even the LDS 'rules' in particular, have common sense reasons for doing them that have little to do with hell or social stigma and I try to focus on those. I think you can also find some rewarding personal experiences through the spirituality that is found in the LDS Church. I think as you focus on that and decide not to be motivated out of fear but by positive emotions like the desire for friendship, service, and peace that you will discover whether the LDS Church or some other Church or no Church at all is the course which brings you the greatest happiness.

Best Wishes,

Luigi

[LifeOnaPlate]

There seems to have been a lot of critisism of this post. I think it is important to remember that while many (if not most) of us have had extremely positive exeriences with the Church, some have been seriously hurt and left feeling marginalized and outside the community of Saints.

We shouldn't cast doubt on a person's experience. Whatever the causes, the emotional pain and disenfranchisement is very real for those who experience it. Rather than say: "Well... my experience hasn't been that way..", "You are wrong for feeling hurt in this situation..." or therwise casting doubt on the legitimacy of a person's experience and perspective - we should express both sympathy and empathy and seek to help the person heal whatever pain or hurt they have may have felt.

Heaven knows that I have, in my various Church callings, said and done things (mostly inadvertently) that hurt people or made them feel seperate from the Ward or Quorum. It has only been with the passing of time that I have realized the impact my actions may have had. We are a church of people.... and people sometimes hurt each other.

Also - it is also important to recognize that legitimacy of certain questions about Church doctrine or practice. Even if we have personally resoved our own questions - it is important to allow others to find their own answers rather than chastise them for not having reached the conclusions we may have. I'm not suggesting that this has been done during this post... but in my brief time on these boards, I have seen these types of reactions to what appear to be sincere questions.

I would agree.

[Maidservant]

But isn't this "toxity" based in a teaching and ideal espoused by church doctrine? Isn't what the parent is saying true under church doctrine--that if one family member chooses not to do the plan, they won't be part of the family in the after life, which presumably would make the other family members sad? (BTW, I've never found an emotionally believable answer beyond divine amnesia to explain how a righteous parent could be eternally happy if they were denied a familial connection to their evil offspring).

If the person felt this conflict--that they'd make the rest of their family sad if they weren't in heaven together--without any suggestion from the parent, but simply a result of their understanding of church doctrine and how the rest of the family feels about it, would this change things?

I didn't record the conversation, but that's my recollection.

Thanks for the discussion, Christian. I know I'm repeating myself, but I really did have to ask myself these questions a few years back in my spiritual journey. I know that you know that the way we treat people is the heart of the gospel of Jesus Christ and if we fail at that, specifically in our families, then being a full tithe payer (for one example) is not going to help us with what we have lost by being a cruel (more or less) person. In other words, the information/ commandments are one thing. How we teach them is another. The information/ commandment may be correct or close, but we could teach something terrible by being a terrible person when we teach the information. By the way, this is a Satanic formula straight up -- once again an instance of combining truth with lies. The information that it is a commandment to attend church (or whatever) (which is truth) is combined with shaming (which is a lie). This may or may not be germane to the conversatin, but I will note that I have (finally!) forgiven my father after these many years and many experiences of perspective, not least that I am highly aware of my failures in trying to impart truths to my children. There's no excuse -- such manner of teaching I think should be strictly warned against -- but many, many people struggle with serious mistakes in how they teach or have taught their children (whether or not they recognize it).

So is this a teaching of the Church? You should be sexually pure or it will ruin your life?

I guess part of the point in asking this is to suggest that almost any or organization that attaches consequences to behaviors is guilty of using fear in a way. I'm afraid of killing my boss at work because I'm afraid that it will inhibit my ability to provide for my family in the future, among other things. Is this a "fear based" teaching I'm being subject to? In the sexual purity context, there is always the fear of damnation available if the fear of pregnancy, STD's and psychological drama (all of which millions of promiscuous people outside of the church are able to succesfully navigate) can't be used to promote chastity.

Well, leaving the angle of how you may have been taught inappropriately by parents or leaders, and coming to the angle where you are deciding for yourself (despite all good, bad, inadequate past experiences of being taught/ attempts to being taught) -- but deciding for yourself what is true and right and what course to lay out in life and what actions and principles to commit to on a daily basis -- let us look at the idea of "ruin your life".

I always ask people what LIFE it is they want. You can't realize if something is "ruining" a life, unless you know what life it is we are talking about. A 'life' is a result (the scriptures like the word 'fruit'), and results come from effort within a system that produces the result/ life. I would suggest to you that the universe and the available systems and possible results are already a finite set -- meaning we can't make stuff up, like what acts go with what consequences, we can only discover and choose pathways that already exist and have existed infinitely.

In the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the life that is offered is eternal life (celestial life, etc.). One has to decide for themselves whether this opportunity is truth or fiction (and should not lightly make a conclusion). The Church of Jesus Christ also provides the system of actions that leads directly to eternal life; or that is the claim. Again, is the claim fact or fiction? (Notice this really has nothing AT ALL to do with Joseph Smith per say -- if it hadn't been Joseph Smith, God would have found someone else for the work.) In any case, if you don't want this eternal life -- if you want something that has a different shape, well then petting may fit very well within the result you want.

Part of the system provided in the Church of Jesus Christ relates to the enjoyment and care of the sexual powers of the human body -- a goal may be stated as sexual purity. If the gospel/ church is correct, then the mishandling of these energies has REAL EFFECTS and the "guilt" or the effect of the darkness and dissolution upon one's spirit is a result of the operation of the law of those powers itself, and not merely a social construction. I expect one best finds this out by experience; I know I did. Although, going back to a leader or a parent, I would LOVE if my children, by heeding my warnings, could avoid the "suffering, how exquisite you know not" I have had to pass through. As well -- so much TIME can be wasted and other things lost with these detours!!! I suppose a slang for all of this could be: "ruin" of life. But obviously "ruin" is not a scriptural term or concept, it doesn't get properly at the true definitions of laws, choices, consequences, harvests.

I would also make a note about consequences (bad ones) -- they don't always have a 1 to 1 relationship to the action. It's more like high probability. Running a red light is most often fatal, and yet statistically we know very well that there are many times when running a red light would have no effect or that we might be able to escape the effect. In terms of sexual laws, one might have to accept that one simply cannot see the situation(s) as well as God, parents, leaders could and not try to risk it.

As you've said, you enjoy an opinion or have come to a conclusion that any time consequences are articulated (correct me if I didn't understand you), then any reflection of the human spirit upon the possibility or actuality of those consequences that is uncomfortable ("guilt") is a sign, to you, that the information or system if off base. I respect your right to have that opinion, and I think that most people would agree with you that shame in our history, society and including churches and our church -- shame is handed out far too often and is most often not appropriate. I would not equate guilt with shame. Also, I would caution you to re-read and accept the scriptures (in the Book of Mormon) of the mental/spiritual effects of sin and take the advice therein, as your opinion doesn't match the scriptures (I don't think) (which you have that right of course, but just a suggestion). You have some good questions and thoughts about the place of fear (or similar) in making choices about safety. I don't think I have all the answers, so I'd be curious as to how your learning in this progresses; I think I could benefit from what you find out. I personally don't think fear or shame should be part of teaching, but I also do know that in living life and making mistakes we naturally have these effects sometimes, and THAT is when I, personally, come to faith, repentence and the comfort in Jesus -- I get those things removed in the gospel, not heightened.

[California]

I have been a member for many years. I guess I have been a simple minded member and have pretty much aligned myself with every teaching of the church exercising complete faith and moving what I believed to be forward. The truth is, I can no longer subscribe to fear-based religion of any kind. Any religion that uses fear as a way to control the masses is in my opinion in error. When I started questioning fear as a way to play on the emotions of the innocent masses, I started questioning other teachings of the church. SNIP Oh this is just the beginning of many discoveries which begged the question "IS MORMONISM JUST ANOTHER RELIGION?"

No discussion of temple content, please.

I have no idea what you mean by "fear based". I see the Church and God's laws a being "consequence based". Yes, there is an element of fear, but if you look at the ten commandments or the WOW or the small things that LDS people aren't supposed to, or allowed to do, there are perfectly logical and reasonable explanations for doing or not doing things. I think it is interesting that some people call "fear" what they should be calling "consequence".

[moreholinessgiveme]

There seems to have been a lot of critisism of this post. I think it is important to remember that while many (if not most) of us have had extremely positive exeriences with the Church, some have been seriously hurt and left feeling marginalized and outside the community of Saints.

We shouldn't cast doubt on a person's experience. Whatever the causes, the emotional pain and disenfranchisement is very real for those who experience it. Rather than say: "Well... my experience hasn't been that way..", "You are wrong for feeling hurt in this situation..." or therwise casting doubt on the legitimacy of a person's experience and perspective - we should express both sympathy and empathy and seek to help the person heal whatever pain or hurt they have may have felt.

Heaven knows that I have, in my various Church callings, said and done things (mostly inadvertently) that hurt people or made them feel seperate from the Ward or Quorum. It has only been with the passing of time that I have realized the impact my actions may have had. We are a church of people.... and people sometimes hurt each other.

Also - it is also important to recognize that legitimacy of certain questions about Church doctrine or practice. Even if we have personally resoved our own questions - it is important to allow others to find their own answers rather than chastise them for not having reached the conclusions we may have. I'm not suggesting that this has been done during this post... but in my brief time on these boards, I have seen these types of reactions to what appear to be sincere questions.

Speaking only for myself (can I do otherwise?) -- you make an interesting and legitmate point. We should not discard other's experiences or pain as inconsequential just because they don't jive with our own experience, or what we feel is the appropriate or even the "LDS" response. This is a failing of mine...and I'll work on that. Your post touched me...thank you.

We each do have our own path, struggles, and our own "maturity" in the Gospel. As an example, I might judge unrighteously and wonder how someone could possibly struggle with tithing. They might look at me and wonder how I could struggle with drinking or smoking. We're both denied temple recommends, yet there we sit, judging others and feeling smug about ourselves for not having the problems that others have. And even those who do "technically" qualify for a recommend disqualify themselves by looking at those who don't have a recommend (because of some struggle) and make assumptions. Let's be careful not to make assumptions or judge unrighteously. The beam and the mote is an apt parable.

[Alf O'Mega]

While we are on the subject of scriptural injunctions, let's check out the Bible dictionary on "fear":

Care should be taken to distinguish between two different uses of this word. The â??fear of the Lordâ? is frequently spoken of as part of manâ??s duty (e.g., Ps. 111: 10; Eccl. 12: 13; Isa. 11: 2-3; Luke 1: 50); it is also described as â??godly fearâ? (Heb. 12: 28). In such passages fear is equivalent to reverence, awe, worship, and is therefore an essential part of the attitude of mind in which we ought to stand toward the All-holy God. On the other hand fear is spoken of as something unworthy of a child of God, something that â??perfect love casteth outâ? (1 Jn. 4: 18). The first effect of Adamâ??s sin was that he was afraid (Gen. 3: 10). Sin destroys that feeling of confidence Godâ??s child should feel in a loving Father, and produces instead a feeling of shame and guilt. Ever since the Fall God has been teaching men not to fear, but with penitence to ask forgiveness in full confidence of receiving it.

This is a simple equivocation. Israelite prophets meant real fear when they used the word, and modern substitution of reverence or awe is mere semantic lubrication to help ease the tension between modern views of God and that touchy old grump Jehovah. Abraham certainly knew what a volatile deity he was dealing with in Genesis 18:23â??32:

23 And Abraham drew near, and said, Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?

24 Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty righteous that are therein?

25 That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?

26 And the LORD said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes.

27 And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which am but dust and ashes:

28 Peradventure there shall lack five of the fifty righteous: wilt thou destroy all the city for lack of five? And he said, If I find there forty and five, I will not destroy it.

29 And he spake unto him yet again, and said, Peradventure there shall be forty found there. And he said, I will not do it for forty's sake.

30 And he said unto him, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak: Peradventure there shall thirty be found there. And he said, I will not do it, if I find thirty there.

31 And he said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord: Peradventure there shall be twenty found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for twenty's sake.

32 And he said, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for ten's sake.

Context shows that fear usually means fear in the scriptures.

[California]

There seems to have been a lot of critisism of this post. I think it is important to remember that while many (if not most) of us have had extremely positive exeriences with the Church, some have been seriously hurt and left feeling marginalized and outside the community of Saints.

We shouldn't cast doubt on a person's experience. Whatever the causes, the emotional pain and disenfranchisement is very real for those who experience it. Rather than say: "Well... my experience hasn't been that way..", "You are wrong for feeling hurt in this situation..." or therwise casting doubt on the legitimacy of a person's experience and perspective - we should express both sympathy and empathy and seek to help the person heal whatever pain or hurt they have may have felt.

Heaven knows that I have, in my various Church callings, said and done things (mostly inadvertently) that hurt people or made them feel seperate from the Ward or Quorum. It has only been with the passing of time that I have realized the impact my actions may have had. We are a church of people.... and people sometimes hurt each other.

Also - it is also important to recognize that legitimacy of certain questions about Church doctrine or practice. Even if we have personally resoved our own questions - it is important to allow others to find their own answers rather than chastise them for not having reached the conclusions we may have. I'm not suggesting that this has been done during this post... but in my brief time on these boards, I have seen these types of reactions to what appear to be sincere questions.

"sincere questions" tend to have the element of "blaming people" for things. There is definitely a "so-and-so shouldn't have done that" backing for alot of complaints people have about the Church. I agree, some things aren't perfect, but people aren't perfect, and at some point, the fact that culture and humanity get in the way sometimes needs to be considered.

I just don't like the blame game.

[HiJolly]

I have been a member for many years. I guess I have been a simple minded member and have pretty much aligned myself with every teaching of the church exercising complete faith and moving what I believed to be forward. The truth is, I can no longer subscribe to fear-based religion of any kind.

Very good. Fear is the opposite of faith, which the Church has taught for some time! Now you can grow as you never have before. A very good sign!

Any religion that uses fear as a way to control the masses is in my opinion in error. When I started questioning fear as a way to play on the emotions of the innocent masses, I started questioning other teachings of the church. SNIP

Ummm... To the best of my recollections, the church never taught that "fear" was a good thing. Except perhaps in the OT sense, which is really pretty innocuous. I can't know what was SNIP-ped, but if it had anything to do with penalties, you're barking up the wrong tree. They were never intended to bring fear to anyone. Really.

Oh this is just the beginning of many discoveries which begged the question "IS MORMONISM JUST ANOTHER RELIGION?"

No, it's not. Go on, you'll find out. Just don't burn too many bridges in your venturing...

Ummm... This post was made after reading the OP only. I'll start reading the rest now...

HiJolly

[Scottie]

Oh you have got to be kidding me...

ALL Christian based religions are fear based. You do what's right because you are afraid of going to hell.

Why do you think that so many of my friends and family are distraught over my apostasy? Because they are AFRAID that I'm going to hell. I know that as a teenager I woke up terrified in cold sweats after having dreams of dying and not being worthy...even though looking back, I wasn't doing ANYTHING that I should have been worried about.

I seem to remember something about wishing a mountain would fall on me rather than face my redeemer at the judgement seat. Can't remember who said that, but it is oft repeated. How is this not inspiring fear?

No, I'm sorry, but the impossible goal of perfection and the punishments for not attaining this are all too well ingrained in the LDS psyche.

[Scott Lloyd]

This is a simple equivocation. Israelite prophets meant real fear when they used the word, and modern substitution of reverence or awe is mere semantic lubrication to help ease the tension between modern views of God and that touchy old grump Jehovah. Abraham certainly knew what a volatile deity he was dealing with in Genesis 18:23â??32:

Context shows that fear usually means fear in the scriptures.

I see nothing in the cited passage that is inconsistent with the reverence/awe connotation of the word.

I guess semantic meaning, like beauty, is sometimes in the eye of the beholder.

Oh you have got to be kidding me...

ALL Christian based religions are fear based. You do what's right because you are afraid of going to hell.

Why do you think that so many of my friends and family are distraught over my apostasy? Because they are AFRAID that I'm going to hell. I know that as a teenager I woke up terrified in cold sweats after having dreams of dying and not being worthy...even though looking back, I wasn't doing ANYTHING that I should have been worried about.

I seem to remember something about wishing a mountain would fall on me rather than face my redeemer at the judgement seat. Can't remember who said that, but it is oft repeated. How is this not inspiring fear?

No, I'm sorry, but the impossible goal of perfection and the punishments for not attaining this are all too well ingrained in the LDS psyche.

As one who has never strayed from the faith, I affirm that you are wrong as it pertains to Mormonism.

[Zakuska]

I have been a member for many years. I guess I have been a simple minded member and have pretty much aligned myself with every teaching of the church exercising complete faith and moving what I believed to be forward. The truth is, I can no longer subscribe to fear-based religion of any kind. Any religion that uses fear as a way to control the masses is in my opinion in error. When I started questioning fear as a way to play on the emotions of the innocent masses, I started questioning other teachings of the church. SNIP Oh this is just the beginning of many discoveries which begged the question "IS MORMONISM JUST ANOTHER RELIGION?"

No discussion of temple content, please.

Well there goes Christianity...

Acts 5

11 And great fear came upon all the church, and upon as many as heard these things.

Heb 10

26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,

27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.

28 He that despised Mosesâ?? law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:

29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

30 For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.

31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

[Scottie]

As one who has never strayed from the faith, I affirm that you are wrong as it pertains to Mormonism.

Thank you for that amazingly thought provoking response! I have completely changed my views and now understand that Mormonism does absolutely nothing to inspire fear into the hearts of it's members. Thanks again!!

[LifeOnaPlate]

ALF- thanks for showing that fear can have more than one meaning, which is what I was getting at.

Oh you have got to be kidding me...

ALL Christian based religions are fear based. You do what's right because you are afraid of going to hell.

Why do you think that so many of my friends and family are distraught over my apostasy? Because they are AFRAID that I'm going to hell. I know that as a teenager I woke up terrified in cold sweats after having dreams of dying and not being worthy...even though looking back, I wasn't doing ANYTHING that I should have been worried about.

I seem to remember something about wishing a mountain would fall on me rather than face my redeemer at the judgement seat. Can't remember who said that, but it is oft repeated. How is this not inspiring fear?

No, I'm sorry, but the impossible goal of perfection and the punishments for not attaining this are all too well ingrained in the LDS psyche.

This is a limited perspective indeed. It doesn't even take into account the debate over egoism vs. altruism, etc. Fear as a motivator is the ultimate basis? Yikes, I hardly see that as fact.

We've also had several LDS on this board say they aren't motivated by fear. I suppose they are lying? Maybe out of fear?

Do some parents use fear as a motivator? I would say yes, same for some leaders. Is fear the motivation we view as ideal? I would say no.

[Daniel Peterson]

Oh you have got to be kidding me...

ALL Christian based religions are fear based. You do what's right because you are afraid of going to hell.

I don't sense that at all in myself. Nor do I sense it in my family and in my neighbors and Mormon acquaintances.

To me and, I think, to many others, the gospel is wonderful good news. We do right because we want to live with God in the celestial kingdom and to inherit the blessings he promises us, far more than we do it in order to escape the torments of hell. (Personally, I seldom if ever even think of hell.) And, more fundamentally, we do right because we love God, love his gospel, and love the good. The celestial kingdom attracts me because of the prospect of perfect sociality with the saints and with God. In the words of one of my favorite hymns,

Sweet is the work, my God, my King,

To praise Thy Name, give thanks and sing,

To show Thy love by morning light

And talk of all Thy truths at night.

Sweet is the day of sacred rest,

No mortal cares shall seize my breast.

O may my heart in tune be found,

Like Davidâ??s harp of solemn sound!

My heart shall triumph in my Lord

And bless His works and bless His Word.

Thy works of grace, how bright they shine!

How deep Thy counsels, how divine!

And then what triumphs shall I raise

To Thy dear Name through endless days,

When in the realms of joy I see

Thy face in full felicity.

[Scott Lloyd]

Thank you for that amazingly thought provoking response! I have completely changed my views and now understand that Mormonism does absolutely nothing to inspire fear into the hearts of it's members. Thanks again!!

So, my unsubstantiated personal opinion cancels out your unsubstantiated personal opinion. And I'm on the inside, so I win. Game, set, match!