cinepro Posted October 6, 2011 Posted October 6, 2011 It's common in the Church for us to say, in reference to people that belong to other churches, "Keep the good you have, and let us add to it". In other words, we acknowledge that people in other churches probably believe in some true things (even if it's just a basic belief in God), and that they should maintain their belief in true things when they join the LDS Church, and then replace anything they believe that is false (i.e. trinity, no eternal marriage) with the truth.It seems to me that this would be a universal belief among all religions. Is there any church that doesn't want people to join it and maintain the beliefs they hold in common, while rejecting the beliefs the new church doesn't believe in and adding in the beliefs of the new church that the convert hadn't previously believed?Are there any churches that don't feel this way?
Jesterss Posted October 6, 2011 Posted October 6, 2011 I actually went to non-denominational church's as a kid and yes, there were many different preachers, all with differing opinions. They went off the bible and did their sermons, and of course had their beliefs on them, but you weren't required to believe everything they felt strongly about. It was more important that you came up with your own understanding and beliefs. They guided by the bible as they saw fit, but didn't enforce those beliefs on anyone in order to be in the church..So as far as church's go, yes, they do exist.. As far as religions go, I haven't heard of one or seen one who doesn't have an alterior motive...
Questing Beast Posted October 6, 2011 Posted October 6, 2011 @Jesterss: As far as religions go, I haven't heard of one or seen one who doesn't have an alterior motive...What would be Mormonism's "ulterior motive"? If you study a religion carefully, their motivation is pretty clear, it seems to me. Mormonism when studied shows a motivation toward high family values, self discipline and sacrifice for the needs of others less fortunate than yourself. The religion is pretty up front with the nature of that sacrifice: money, time, talents and everything you are blessed with. Talking with anyone deeply involved in the church will reveal just how much of a time commitment can be anticipated. I live in the culture of the Mormon community. And I do not see any other motivation behind what the church does. It really is about improving people. If your mileage doth vary, please elucidate.... 1
KevinG Posted October 6, 2011 Posted October 6, 2011 Questing- My experience as an investigator was similar to what you describe. The members and local leaders were very up front about Mormonism being a lifestyle and not just a Sunday experience.Our ulterior motive if it can be described that way is to commit people to a course which we believe will help them return to their Father in Heaven. While we are up front about that I'm not sure investigators always comprehend the depth of the lifetime (and eternal) commitment they make. Becoming a member of the LDS Church is joining a community and belief system that is not easily converted "from" due to its comprehensive and dogmatic nature. (I don't use dogmatic in a negative sense here - it just is what it is.)No complaints here. As I grow and learn the greater nature of my commitment every day. month and year - I also receive accompanying blessings. It really isn't a conversion that can be taken lightly.
Jesterss Posted October 6, 2011 Posted October 6, 2011 (edited) @Jesterss:What would be Mormonism's "ulterior motive"? If you study a religion carefully, their motivation is pretty clear, it seems to me. Mormonism when studied shows a motivation toward high family values, self discipline and sacrifice for the needs of others less fortunate than yourself. The religion is pretty up front with the nature of that sacrifice: money, time, talents and everything you are blessed with. Talking with anyone deeply involved in the church will reveal just how much of a time commitment can be anticipated. I live in the culture of the Mormon community. And I do not see any other motivation behind what the church does. It really is about improving people. If your mileage doth vary, please elucidate....Perhaps my comment wasn't very accurate with what I meant... Ulterior motives was misspoken.. Didn't mean it in the sense of any hidden agendas, was more of a correlation to the question about any churches that don't expect someone to change their opinions on any non-truths... As it's been my experience that all "religions" want you to conform because they obviously think they are right, and they want to save the individual and make sure they go to heaven, so they would expect someone who has an issue or disagreeance to try to understand their truth...In fact, DaddyG made the connection I was trying to make when he said:Our ulterior motive if it can be described that way is to commit people to a course which we believe will help them return to their Father in Heaven.That's what I meant. Sorry for the confusion.. Edited October 6, 2011 by Jesterss
De Groote Posted October 6, 2011 Posted October 6, 2011 Can anybody find the original quote in context of "Keep the good you have, and let us add to it"? Most people attribute it to Pres. Hinckley, but I seem to recollect it originating with Pres. George Albert Smith. I haven't had any luck locating it. Maybe somebody else can find it. Thank you.
volgadon Posted October 6, 2011 Posted October 6, 2011 @Jesterss:What would be Mormonism's "ulterior motive"? If you study a religion carefully, their motivation is pretty clear, it seems to me. Mormonism when studied shows a motivation toward high family values, self discipline and sacrifice for the needs of others less fortunate than yourself. The religion is pretty up front with the nature of that sacrifice: money, time, talents and everything you are blessed with. Talking with anyone deeply involved in the church will reveal just how much of a time commitment can be anticipated. I live in the culture of the Mormon community. And I do not see any other motivation behind what the church does. It really is about improving people. If your mileage doth vary, please elucidate....I gave you a rep point for this.
Duncan Posted October 7, 2011 Posted October 7, 2011 Can anybody find the original quote in context of "Keep the good you have, and let us add to it"? Most people attribute it to Pres. Hinckley, but I seem to recollect it originating with Pres. George Albert Smith. I haven't had any luck locating it. Maybe somebody else can find it. Thank you.I too recall it coming Pres. Smith and here you go! “I remember upon one occasion a man said to me, after we had talked for some time, ‘Well, from all I can learn your church is just as good as any other church.’ I presume he thought he was paying us a great compliment, but I said to him: ‘If the church I represent here is not of more importance to the children of men than any other church, then I am mistaken in my duty here. We have come not to take away from you the truth and virtue you possess. We have come not to find fault with you nor to criticize you. We have not come here to berate you because of things you have not done; but we have come here as your brethren. We are giving our time and our means voluntarily, and have come to your land with love in our hearts, with the desire to do you good, to encourage you to repent of your sins, wherein you are sinful, and encourage you to retain your virtues wherein you are virtuous, and to say to you: ‘Keep all the good that you have, and let us bring to you more good, in order that you may be happier and in order that you may be prepared to enter into the presence of our Heavenly Father’” ( Sharing the Gospel with Others, 12–13).
Scott Lloyd Posted October 10, 2011 Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) I too recall it coming Pres. Smith and here you go!“I remember upon one occasion a man said to me, after we had talked for some time, ‘Well, from all I can learn your church is just as good as any other church.’ I presume he thought he was paying us a great compliment, but I said to him: ‘If the church I represent here is not of more importance to the children of men than any other church, then I am mistaken in my duty here. We have come not to take away from you the truth and virtue you possess. We have come not to find fault with you nor to criticize you. We have not come here to berate you because of things you have not done; but we have come here as your brethren. We are giving our time and our means voluntarily, and have come to your land with love in our hearts, with the desire to do you good, to encourage you to repent of your sins, wherein you are sinful, and encourage you to retain your virtues wherein you are virtuous, and to say to you: ‘Keep all the good that you have, and let us bring to you more good, in order that you may be happier and in order that you may be prepared to enter into the presence of our Heavenly Father’” ( Sharing the Gospel with Others, 12–13).The wording may have originated with Brother George Albert, but the sentiment is Brother Joseph's:Have the Presbyterians any truth? Yes. Have the Baptists, Methodists, &c,, any truth? Yes. They all have a little truth mixed with error. We should gather all the good and true principles in the world and treasure them up, or we shall not come out true “Mormons.” History of the Church 5:517 Edited October 10, 2011 by Scott Lloyd 1
Scott Lloyd Posted October 10, 2011 Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) It's common in the Church for us to say, in reference to people that belong to other churches, "Keep the good you have, and let us add to it".In other words, we acknowledge that people in other churches probably believe in some true things (even if it's just a basic belief in God), and that they should maintain their belief in true things when they join the LDS Church, and then replace anything they believe that is false (i.e. trinity, no eternal marriage) with the truth.It seems to me that this would be a universal belief among all religions. That would be the intuitive thought. However, strange to say, I don't find that to be the universal belief, particularly among Evangelical Christians who oppose Mormonism.To take a very recent example, Pastor Jeffress (he who, it would seem, has single-handedly revived the issue of Mitt Romney's religion in the presidential campaign) seems to contend that one must believe as he believes about Christ, exclusively and in every whit, otherwise one cannot be regarded as a Christian, regardless of one's declaration of faith in Jesus of Nazareth. So, it would appear that Jeffress refuses to give Mormons credit even for those basic Christian beliefs that would seem by any objective standard to coincide with his own. Edited October 10, 2011 by Scott Lloyd
Storm Rider Posted October 10, 2011 Posted October 10, 2011 That would be the intuitive thought. However, strange to say, I don't find that to be the universal belief, particularly among Evangelical Christians who oppose Mormonism.To take a very recent example, Pastor Jeffress (he who, it would seem, has single-handedly revived the issue of Mitt Romney's religion in the presidential campaign) seems to contend that one must believe as he believes about Christ, exclusively and in every whit, otherwise one cannot be regarded as a Christian, regardless of one's declaration of faith in Jesus of Nazareth. So, it would appear that Jeffress refuses to give Mormons credit even for those basic Christian beliefs that would seem by any objective standard to coincide with his own.Jeffress, the so-called pastor of ignorance, is the typical "educated" pastor so prevalent within the SBC. They are not interested in anything that is not within their specific idea of what is christian. Unfortuantely, their definitions have nothing to do with Christian history, would cast out every follower of Christ in the NT from the body of Christ, and deny any working of the Holy Spirit unless he personally agreed to it. These are the type of pastors that push people into the Church of Jesus Christ. Their stupidity is so overarching that any message our missionaries provide is easier to understand given the worthless message he and his ilk provide. Now if you ask kindly, I will tell you how I really feel.
Vance Posted October 10, 2011 Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) Jeffress, the so-called pastor of ignorance, is the typical "educated" pastor so prevalent within the SBC. They are not interested in anything that is not within their specific idea of what is christian. Unfortuantely, their definitions have nothing to do with Christian history, would cast out every follower of Christ in the NT from the body of Christ, and deny any working of the Holy Spirit unless he personally agreed to it. These are the type of pastors that push people into the Church of Jesus Christ. Their stupidity is so overarching that any message our missionaries provide is easier to understand given the worthless message he and his ilk provide. Now if you ask kindly, I will tell you how I really feel.This has been my experience as well. Edited October 10, 2011 by Vance
Recommended Posts