Flyonthewall Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 I would say we would not want to attract apostates, but would want to attract the faithful...We can most likely help those that have fallen away by simply continue being their freind, and be Christ-like to them. 1
mercyngrace Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 Hmmmm.... what if you are the only, or last ward to use a building?Seems like this would be a local matter in places like Utah, Idaho, and Arizona.We just had dinner with the ward last Sunday and we're the last ward to meet.We do this regularly. If there was a letter, it missed our stake.
The Nehor Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 In the parable the angels are given the injunction to allow the field to remain as it is. We however as Heavenly Father's children are directed to "seek and knock" after truth so that we may be free from the world and the doctrines of men. As you recall the OP asked what "the church could do" to bring back "apostates".Okay, that is true. Denying everything might bring some apostates back if their main purpose is to fellowship with their old family and friends. It will also create a mass exodus from the church as faithful members who believe in prophecy, Book of Mormon, and the like will all apostasize and leave. I expect you might be left with a few liberal LDS and a few returners.It would gut church membership.Still, we are discussing tactics obviously not truth. If that were the way to be right I would have to endorse it. I do consider it to be completely and utterly wrong.
Palerider Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 Okay, that is true. Denying everything might bring some apostates back if their main purpose is to fellowship with their old family and friends. It will also create a mass exodus from the church as faithful members who believe in prophecy, Book of Mormon, and the like will all apostasize and leave. I expect you might be left with a few liberal LDS and a few returners.It would gut church membership.Still, we are discussing tactics obviously not truth. If that were the way to be right I would have to endorse it. I do consider it to be completely and utterly wrong.And I certainly don't blame you for your feelings. 12 years ago I felt exactly the same way.I see this situation as being very similar to what occured when plural marriage was renounced. There were quite a few members (even some among the 12) who were utterly committed (and with good reason, for that is what they had been taught) to the policy that living plural marriage in THIS life was neccesary to one's salvation.When the new policy was announced they left the church considering it in a state of apostacy just as you would if the church were to implement the policies we are currently discussing.I feel quite secure that if President Monson were to announce a re-evaluation of Joseph Smith's status as a prophet, etc. that there would be a faction in the church who would not believe him and would create a schism in the church.The question is, how do you decide what is right? Do you follow the current leadership even though you may not have a testimony of the new policy yet? Or do you get hung up on the past like those goofy apostates?I know how I decide these things and with spiritual confirmation, I can live with my decisions very well. 1
rodheadlee Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 Don't paint such a dreary picture!Can you be sure that if you had sought God in as determined way without the LDS faith that He would have refused to reveal His will to you for your life? Maybe the church is just one of a number of vehicles available for people to draw near to Christ.Would Heavenly Father refuse your sincere petition just because Joseph misrepresented himself?Postively sure, I'm a convert. My wife and I sought God in as determined of a way as we could. The LDS faith is where we were led. It is His will for us to be members of His Son's Church. We are the pioneers of our respective families. 3
blackstrap Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 Some say there are many paths to God,just like there are many ways to get to Denver.If I live in Dallas I could go by way of Moscow or New York or Sidney. There are bound to be many neat sites and adventures and side trips along what ever path I choose.God has spoken of the "strait and narrow path" and says that is the best(only?) way.I'm sure that doesn't mean what it seems to.
KevinG Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 (edited) I take issue with the accusation that Joseph Smith misrepresented himself. I don't expect President Monson will have a revelation to denounce him either. This conversation is out there in whackyland.I have no desire to welcome apostates back into the fold. I have a strong desire to have them repent of apostacy and find themselves firmly in the fold of the arms that never rejected them. Edited February 4, 2012 by DaddyG 1
The Nehor Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 The question is, how do you decide what is right? Do you follow the current leadership even though you may not have a testimony of the new policy yet? Or do you get hung up on the past like those goofy apostates?Revelation. 1
Tarski Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 It's how I have raised my kids- it IS the "reality" of the situation I think, and they all understand the church that way- so far we are 4 for 4 in temple recommends, both who are married were sealed, and my one daughter just returned from her mission.It works for me The key is not worrying about "what is true"- it is having a correct understanding of what "truth" IS. Then all the alleged "problems" go away.Really?I hope you don't make air quotes when you use the word "true" in testimony meeting while you are at the podium.The church is "true"God "exists"Joseph Smith was a "prophet".
mfbukowski Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 (edited) Sometimes I think it is almost as if our bishops don't have a clue about what fellowship means to the members and to sharing the gospel. I would make it mandatory for every ward in the Church to have these activities at a minimum of four times a year, if not every month. It may be a problem in Utah, but it is the life blood of a ward outside of Utah.I wish the Lord did not have to work so hard to move his kingdom forward in spite of his Church's leadership organizations and membership.So how does this work with 3 wards meeting in the same building, using the cultural hall while others are having sacrament meeting?And since when do we have ward activities on the Sabbath forcing some to prepare meals etc for others? Aren't we supposed to minimize extraneous meetings, especially on Sundays?What about those who start with a 6:30 AM bishopric meeting, then PEC/ Ward Council, then the block from 9 to 12, counseling and tithing afterwards til 2 or so, a baptism at 3 and then a fireside at 7 until 8:30 pm?Do those folks really need to plan and attend another meeting? Remember there is no longer an activities committee.... I guess we can make the Relief Society handle it- they have nothing to do on Sundays.... and who needs to rest or have family time on Sunday anyway?? Edited February 4, 2012 by mfbukowski
mfbukowski Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 The only experience I have had with the "longer-longer," I found it to be chaotic, loud, irreverent, unseemly and not at all in keeping with the sabbath day, especially at the meetinghouse immediately after the worship service and at a time when many people are eager to get home and relax after three solid hours of meetings. I was grateful that was the last and only time our ward held that event. I certainly wouldn't have attended had they had been continued.I'm not opposed to ward socials and dinners or using them as a missionary tool if it can be done effectively. But propriety of time and setting needs to be considered.I have some of the same concerns- I have never known of them being done "around here" in my 30 plus years in the church.But maybe I am missing something- on an abstract level they sound like a great idea but I am not sure about the practicalities you bring up.Maybe just regular pot lucks on a Saturday would work just as well.
mfbukowski Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 Yes, and you just go on eating the pablum and drinking the whitewash. Keep on rationalizing the peepstones, the polyandry, the Masonic rituals, etc. etc.We'll both be happy.........It must be wonderful to be so certain about how everything in the universe works. I guess I am just too skeptical to take things so simply.
mfbukowski Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 Really?I hope you don't make air quotes when you use the word "true" in testimony meeting while you are at the podium.The church is "true"God "exists"Joseph Smith was a "prophet".LOLThat's pretty funny actually. No, I know what those words mean and I use them all the time.Statements in religious contexts can be just as true as statements in scientific contexts- it's just that their purposes are totally different.
Scott Lloyd Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 (edited) What's the concern? The consumption of more Sunday family time? Personally one of the best things I like about Sunday is the chance to be in the company of my fellow Latter-day Saints -- both in worship and socially. The more opportunities to do that seem like a pretty good thing to me.Seems to me you could accomplish that by home teaching, visiting the lonely, sick, or shut-ins, and doing other sabbath appropriate things. Leave the partying for ward activity nights and Saturdays. See Isaiah 58:13-14. Edited February 4, 2012 by Scott Lloyd
Tarski Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 (edited) LOLThat's pretty funny actually. No, I know what those words mean and I use them all the time.Statements in religious contexts can be just as true as statements in scientific contexts- it's just that their purposes are totally different.Sometimes there ought to be quite a big overlap in the senses.For example, consider the statement "The Book of Mormon was translated from an ancient record enscribed on metal plates".Are there totally different purposes and contexts associated with this that would make your point?Is this true or "true"? Edited February 4, 2012 by Tarski
mfbukowski Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 Sometimes there ought to be quite a big overlap in the senses.For example, consider the statement "The Book of Mormon was translated from an ancient record enscribed on metal plates".Are there totally different purposes and contexts associated with this that would make your point?Is this true or "true"?God has told me it is true so who am I to argue with that?
mercyngrace Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 (edited) Do those folks really need to plan and attend another meeting? Remember there is no longer an activities committee.... I guess we can make the Relief Society handle it- they have nothing to do on Sundays.... and who needs to rest or have family time on Sunday anyway??In our ward, the responsibility rotates from one organization to another (RS, EQ, HPG, etc) and Primary holds the kids an extra 15-20 minutes by showing a video (church or scripture video) while the set up occurs.Planning the event usually amounts to sending out a mass email that says "If your last name begins wih A-L, bring a main dish and dessert, M-Z bring a main dish and salad." and then helping to clean up - which most people do willingly anyway, regardless of which oganization is in charge.We only have two wards in our building so I'm not sure how it would work with three but I know we had a dinner in our old building where 5 (yes, you read that right!) FIVE wards were meeting. Again, though, we were the last ward out. I do recall the second to last ward having a dinner and the only thing that invaded the last half hour of our classes was the delicious aroma...I'll have to ask my folks how wards manage when there are three in a building. Their ward has a "break the fast" meal almost every Fast Sunday. Edited February 4, 2012 by mercyngrace
mercyngrace Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 (edited) Duplicate Edited February 4, 2012 by mercyngrace
why me Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 Yes, and you just go on eating the pablum and drinking the whitewash. Keep on rationalizing the peepstones, the polyandry, the Masonic rituals, etc. etc.We'll both be happy.........These things do not need rationalizing at all. I think that they can be very faith promoting. Let me put it this way: do you think that JS would do anything to jeopardize the fraud? And certainly as a fraudster these things would have caused concern for any fraudster to oringinate. With early mormonism there certainly is a magical element. But then again, relgion should be magical. The peepstones seems like a nice touch of the magical and the temple ritual also. Not to mention the spirits who appeared with the priesthood and early visions. One would need big cajones to think of all this just to bring forth a book.
why me Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 I'm not attempting to change the church. I'm rejecting falsehood where I see it and hoping that the church will take the initiative to change itself.I approach other religious organizations the same way. I recently told one that came to my door that I thought their doctrine regarding the disapproval of blood transfusions was an incorrect interpretation of scripture. I didn't try to change them. I just stated that I couldn't support an organization that upheld such a doctrine.Do you think I was incorrect?It depends on your tone. It seems that you want to find a church that fits your needs or ego. I wish you good luck. However, since we humans are in a constant flux or change, and unless we are somewhat rooted to some foundation, you may find yourself alone in whatever faith you may want to belong to. Churhes are not there for a human being's ego.
sethpayne Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 Seems to me you could accomplish that by home teaching, visiting the lonely, sick, or shut-ins, and doing other sabbath appropriate things. Leave the partying for ward activity nights and Saturdays. See Isaiah 58:13-14.I guess I've never experienced Sunday "parties" after church. The after Church gatherings have always been pretty low-key and Sunday-appropriate. Guess I'm just lucky to have been in wards where people keep things Sunday-appropriate on Sunday.Also, I don't see home teaching/visiting the sick, shut-ins etc... and a 1hr after church gathering as mutually exclusive. Why can't I do both? I get a chance to meet and see people with whom I wouldn't normally have the chance to visit. Anyway, I guess if your ward members turn after church gatherings into all-out raves, then its best you don't have them.
Scott Lloyd Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 (edited) I guess I've never experienced Sunday "parties" after church. The after Church gatherings have always been pretty low-key and Sunday-appropriate. Guess I'm just lucky to have been in wards where people keep things Sunday-appropriate on Sunday.Also, I don't see home teaching/visiting the sick, shut-ins etc... and a 1hr after church gathering as mutually exclusive. Why can't I do both? I get a chance to meet and see people with whom I wouldn't normally have the chance to visit. Anyway, I guess if your ward members turn after church gatherings into all-out raves, then its best you don't have them.They needn't be all-out raves to detract from the spirit of sabbath-day worship and observance. Children uncontrolled by their parents running through the halls and chapel, shouting and loud talking echoing off the walls of the cultural hall, general chaos from the release of pent-up energy after three hours of meetings, extra labor involved in food preparation and the setting up and taking down of tables and chairs, and, yes, the encroachment on family time and personal scripture and gospel study were some of the things I observed in the experience I mentioned a few posts ago. I get it that there may be some positives, but I question the cost-benefit ratio. Edited February 4, 2012 by Scott Lloyd
Scott Lloyd Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 (edited) Duplicate Edited February 4, 2012 by Scott Lloyd
Palerider Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 Postively sure, I'm a convert. My wife and I sought God in as determined of a way as we could. The LDS faith is where we were led. It is His will for us to be members of His Son's Church. We are the pioneers of our respective families.That's great! As you continue to grow you may be led even further, beyond the LDS faith.
Palerider Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 Revelation.I agree. And that is how I have reached my own conclusions regarding the LDS church.
Recommended Posts