Stone holm Posted June 8, 2013 Posted June 8, 2013 I think that the church can begin to cover some of the controversies in the Ensign as they did in the good ol days. And this days were not so long ago. It is really a easy solution. I also think that in the head office there are people who control what information goes in the ensign and what doesn't. These might be typical Utah members who just happen to work in the church office. Also, they might not even know their lds history. For example they can say something about Zina being sealed to Joseph Smith after having a spiritual experience about the principle of plural marriage etc. No problem. I think that once such tidbits begin to come out in church magazines etc, all will be well.Well I have to agree somewhat, I think what you are actually witnessing with regards to Church policy is sticking to religious pablum and a concerted effort to avoid discussing anything which might draw the fire of mainstream Christian sects.
canard78 Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 For those of us who like to peek behind the curtain it adds something for us but for those who are not so inclined and are interested in the spiritual and doctrinal aspects it is not a necessity.The analogy of the curtain is an apt one. The realisation it was just a small man with an impressive AV kit was a shock to Dorothy too. Best to keep the curtain closed for as many as possible.
Stone holm Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 The analogy of the curtain is an apt one. The realisation it was just a small man with an impressive AV kit was a shock to Dorothy too. Best to keep the curtain closed for as many as possible.Except if you think about it some, the good witch knew how to get Dorothy home all along as well. 1
why me Posted June 9, 2013 Author Posted June 9, 2013 I think what you are actually witnessing with regards to Church policy is sticking to religious pablum and a concerted effort to avoid discussing anything which might draw the fire of mainstream Christian sects.I don't think that they are caring too much about mainstream christianity. I think that they just underestimated the internet and just how easy it is for mormons to discard their spiritual experiences and their faith. When I think about it what we have are people who had countless spiritual experiences and feelings of the presence of the holy ghost who just throw them all away when they discover something from lds history. Quite amazing.
Stone holm Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 I don't think that they are caring too much about mainstream christianity. I think that they just underestimated the internet and just how easy it is for mormons to discard their spiritual experiences and their faith. When I think about it what we have are people who had countless spiritual experiences and feelings of the presence of the holy ghost who just throw them all away when they discover something from lds history. Quite amazing.Would have to disagree with you there. Dallin Oakes was specifically called to oversee a make over outreach intended to get mainstream Christianity to accept us as Christians. This was a follow up to the previous alteration of the Endowment. It included amongst other things the change from the bright blue cover with Moroni on it on the paperback B of M, the addition of the subtitle to the B of M, and the slogan used constantly by Pres. Hinckley that we believe the same as you but just have more reading material. The campaign has been largely successful since we now tend to get lumped in with most fundamentalist Christians, except the Fundamentalists still tend to reject us as Christians.
ERayR Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 I don't think that they are caring too much about mainstream christianity. I think that they just underestimated the internet and just how easy it is for mormons to discard their spiritual experiences and their faith. When I think about it what we have are people who had countless spiritual experiences and feelings of the presence of the holy ghost who just throw them all away when they discover something from lds history. Quite amazing.Rev 3:16 So then because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew you out of my mouth.
Stone holm Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 Rev 3:16 So then because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew you out of my mouth.Meaning exactly what in this context?
canard78 Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 I don't think that they are caring too much about mainstream christianity. I think that they just underestimated the internet and just how easy it is for mormons to discard their spiritual experiences and their faith. When I think about it what we have are people who had countless spiritual experiences and feelings of the presence of the holy ghost who just throw them all away when they discover something from lds history. Quite amazing.As one of those you describe I can assure you that I have indeed had "countless spiritual experiences and feelings of the presence of the holy ghost" AND I have discovered "something from LDS history." But your suggestion that I have easily discarded my faith and thrown them all away is a presumption based purely on your observations of the motives of other people's hearts. It has been neither easy nor discarded casually. I have not simply discovered the skeletons in the cupboard and thoughtlessly thrown it all away.I would suggest you spend some time reading the introduction on some of the "fringe" websites (e.g. NOM, faceseast or staylds). The eventual ending may be people who reconcile, abandon or adapt their LDS faith (and there is a full range) but if you read about their emotions and feelings at the time it was happening there is very little casual about it. The introductions tend to be people feeling distressed, upset, confused and anxious about their next steps.Apologies if this post reads as a tirade against you. It's sincerely not intended to. But those who observe the 'doubters' would also do well to appreciate that it is most definitely not done 'easily.' Given they are in the public domain I'd be happy to create a list of the general tone and gist of the stories if it would be illustrative. 4
canard78 Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 Rev 3:16 So then because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew you out of my mouth.If this is an ERayR "special" directed to the 'doubters' and 'leavers' I can reassure you that most have never been 'hotter' - there is very little 'lukewarm' about someone struggling with church history/policy/origins. They are usually more engaged with God, the meaning of life, the words of leaders and revelation and trying to reconcile how best to "be excellent to each other" than at any other time in their life.
Tacenda Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 If this is an ERayR "special" directed to the 'doubters' and 'leavers' I can reassure you that most have never been 'hotter' - there is very little 'lukewarm' about someone struggling with church history/policy/origins. They are usually more engaged with God, the meaning of life, the words of leaders and revelation and trying to reconcile how best to "be excellent to each other" than at any other time in their life.This and the last post to "why me", are exactly right, to put it simply. And when you said hot not lukewarm, that's so true. In the sense, to me that is, that it's all consuming, every thought is about mormonism, and how to hold onto belief despite the house of cards that keep falling down. The gravest thing being the loss of a belief in God is the most serious. Since doubt of the church causes one to quit obedience to whatever the church says to do, you are left with being accountable to Him, without the leaders, teachers voices in your head. Therefore standing on your own. And sometimes it's easy to quit marking off the mental list such as personal/family prayer, scripture reading, FHE...for me that is. The thing that holds me in is the LDS people I observe. They have something, it's hard to put in words. As Forrest Gump says," that's all I have to say about that". 1
Glenn101 Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 If this is an ERayR "special" directed to the 'doubters' and 'leavers' I can reassure you that most have never been 'hotter' - there is very little 'lukewarm' about someone struggling with church history/policy/origins. They are usually more engaged with God, the meaning of life, the words of leaders and revelation and trying to reconcile how best to "be excellent to each other" than at any other time in their life.I believe that ERayR's quote is more about those who are members and believing but not 'anxiously engaged in a good cause", maybe "cultural LDS" rather than those struggling with doubts.Glenn 2
Tacenda Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 Does anyone here still deny that the "new and everlasting covenant" originally meant marrying in polygamy? And was an incentive to live the principle? I know when I first came on the board there were a few that argued about it.
canard78 Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 This and the last post to "why me", are exactly right, to put it simply. And when you said hot not lukewarm, that's so true. In the sense, to me that is, that it's all consuming, every thought is about mormonism, and how to hold onto belief despite the house of cards that keep falling down. The gravest thing being the loss of a belief in God is the most serious. Since doubt of the church causes one to quit obedience to whatever the church says to do, you are left with being accountable to Him, without the leaders, teachers voices in your head. Therefore standing on your own. And sometimes it's easy to quit marking off the mental list such as personal/family prayer, scripture reading, FHE...for me that is. The thing that holds me in is the LDS people I observe. They have something, it's hard to put in words. As Forrest Gump says," that's all I have to say about that".The best thing I can say is: 'I know how you feel.' It's both terrifying and exciting; a crisis and an opportunity.
canard78 Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 I believe that ERayR's quote is more about those who are members and believing but not 'anxiously engaged in a good cause", maybe "cultural LDS" rather than those struggling with doubts.GlennOk, thanks.
ERayR Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 Does anyone here still deny that the "new and everlasting covenant" originally meant marrying in polygamy? And was an incentive to live the principle? I know when I first came on the board there were a few that argued about it.Yes
Tacenda Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 YesOkay, I thought it was you. Just happen to listen to a podcast discussing polygamy and they mention that polygamy was originally "the new and everlasting covenant". I don't have any reference at the moment, but just curious if you'd come around to it or not. Have you come around to some of JS's "sealings" being marriages also yet? Since it shows in some of the wives testimonies that they say they married him?
Calm Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 Dallin Oakes was specifically called to oversee a make over outreach intended to get mainstream Christianity to accept us as Christians. CFR please 1
Calm Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 (edited) Does anyone here still deny that the "new and everlasting covenant" originally meant marrying in polygamy? And was an incentive to live the principle? I know when I first came on the board there were a few that argued about it.According to BY: All Latter-day Saints enter the new and everlasting covenant when they enter this Church. They covenant to cease sustaining, upholding and cherishing the kingdom of the Devil and the kingdoms of this world. They enter the new and everlasting covenant to sustain the Kingdom of God and no other kingdom. They take a vow of the most solemn kind, before the heavens and earth, and that, too, upon the validity of their own salvation, that they will sustain truth and righteousness instead of wickedness and falsehood, and build up the Kingdom of God, instead of the kingdoms of this world (DBY, 160).https://www.lds.org/...pter-9?lang=engThe Gospel is the New and Everlasting Covenant that contains multiple new and everlasting covenants, such as baptism and eternal marriage that might include at times plural marriage.Also: The term new and everlasting covenant is used frequently throughout the Doctrine and Covenants. President Joseph Fielding Smith gave the following definition of it:“The new and everlasting covenant is the fulness of the gospel. It is composed of ‘All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations’ that are sealed upon members of the Church by the Holy Spirit of promise, or the Holy Ghost, by the authority of the President of the Church who holds the keys. The President of the Church holds the keys of the Melchizedek Priesthood. He delegates authority to others and authorizes them to perform the sacred ordinances of the priesthood.“Marriage for eternity is a new and everlasting covenant. Baptism is also a new and everlasting covenant, and likewise ordination to the priesthood, and every other covenant is everlasting and a part of the new and everlasting covenant which embraces all things.” (Answers to Gospel Questions, 1:65.)http://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/sections-21-29/section-22-baptism-a-new-and-everlasting-covenant?lang=eng Edited June 9, 2013 by calmoriah 1
Calm Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 Just happen to listen to a podcast discussing polygamy and they mention that polygamy was originally "the new and everlasting covenant". That contradicts D&C 22 where baptism is described: Behold, I say unto you that all old covenants have I caused to be done away in this thing; and this is a new and an everlasting covenant, even that which was from the beginning.There is a difference between "the" and "a". It is carelessness to use "the" when "a" is accurate.
blackstrap Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 James 1:27 " True religion and undefiled ... " So much time spent on the internet discussing rocks , so little time spent following James' admonition. And yes, four of my fingers are pointing at ME ! 1
Tacenda Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 James 1:27 " True religion and undefiled ... " So much time spent on the internet discussing rocks , so little time spent following James' admonition. And yes, four of my fingers are pointing at ME !I was thinking this today, about myself!
Teancum Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 As one of those you describe I can assure you that I have indeed had "countless spiritual experiences and feelings of the presence of the holy ghost" AND I have discovered "something from LDS history." But your suggestion that I have easily discarded my faith and thrown them all away is a presumption based purely on your observations of the motives of other people's hearts. It has been neither easy nor discarded casually. I have not simply discovered the skeletons in the cupboard and thoughtlessly thrown it all away.I would suggest you spend some time reading the introduction on some of the "fringe" websites (e.g. NOM, faceseast or staylds). The eventual ending may be people who reconcile, abandon or adapt their LDS faith (and there is a full range) but if you read about their emotions and feelings at the time it was happening there is very little casual about it. The introductions tend to be people feeling distressed, upset, confused and anxious about their next steps.Apologies if this post reads as a tirade against you. It's sincerely not intended to. But those who observe the 'doubters' would also do well to appreciate that it is most definitely not done 'easily.' Given they are in the public domain I'd be happy to create a list of the general tone and gist of the stories if it would be illustrative.Well said!
Storm Rider Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 As one of those you describe I can assure you that I have indeed had "countless spiritual experiences and feelings of the presence of the holy ghost" AND I have discovered "something from LDS history." But your suggestion that I have easily discarded my faith and thrown them all away is a presumption based purely on your observations of the motives of other people's hearts. It has been neither easy nor discarded casually. I have not simply discovered the skeletons in the cupboard and thoughtlessly thrown it all away.I would suggest you spend some time reading the introduction on some of the "fringe" websites (e.g. NOM, faceseast or staylds). The eventual ending may be people who reconcile, abandon or adapt their LDS faith (and there is a full range) but if you read about their emotions and feelings at the time it was happening there is very little casual about it. The introductions tend to be people feeling distressed, upset, confused and anxious about their next steps.Apologies if this post reads as a tirade against you. It's sincerely not intended to. But those who observe the 'doubters' would also do well to appreciate that it is most definitely not done 'easily.' Given they are in the public domain I'd be happy to create a list of the general tone and gist of the stories if it would be illustrative.PSo what is stronger, the witness of the Holy Spirit or "discovering" what you perceive as historical fact? What is happening when the witness of the Spirit is put aside for faith in the arm of flesh? What exactly are you putting aside? I think it is valid exercise to re-contextualize your testimony of the Church and the purpose of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve; this could easily be a refining of your understanding of the Gospel and Jesus' Church and its purpose. It is a whole other thing to cast the Church aside completely and dwindle in unbelief. 1
why me Posted June 9, 2013 Author Posted June 9, 2013 As one of those you describe I can assure you that I have indeed had "countless spiritual experiences and feelings of the presence of the holy ghost" AND I have discovered "something from LDS history." But your suggestion that I have easily discarded my faith and thrown them all away is a presumption based purely on your observations of the motives of other people's hearts. It has been neither easy nor discarded casually. I have not simply discovered the skeletons in the cupboard and thoughtlessly thrown it all away.And yet, the spiritual experiences that you had did play second fiddle to what you discovered about lds history. And why would such history negate your spiritual experiences? And why do many former lds on the internet boards attempt to write off their experiences as warm fuzzies? I am not the greatest member that is for sure but regardless of how I do life, I can't discard my spiritual experiences. I believe them to be real and genuine.
why me Posted June 9, 2013 Author Posted June 9, 2013 The thing that holds me in is the LDS people I observe. They have something, it's hard to put in words. As Forrest Gump says," that's all I have to say about that".It is dangerous to depend on the people that you are observing. They are after all only people and they certainly are not perfect. Thus, the danger. The most precious holding onto the faith can be found in spiritual experiences that can be experienced with the people that you are observing. Many spiritual experiences can be had by fellowship with the community of saints. And through one's own testimony of the book of mormon.
Recommended Posts