Jump to content

Sunstone Magazine


EllenMaksoud

Recommended Posts

I've been invited to attend a NW Sunstone Magazine Event. I am surprised at the speaker list, and was not going to attend but one of the sisters persuaded me. That Mormons would be willing to listen increases my respect and admiration for the church.

Link to comment

I've been invited to attend a NW Sunstone Magazine Event. I am surprised at the speaker list, and was not going to attend but one of the sisters persuaded me. That Mormons would be willing to listen increases my respect and admiration for the church.

 

Would your respect and admiration for Islam also increase if you

met some Muslims in attendance who would be willing to listen?

 

Gail

Link to comment

Would your respect and admiration for Islam also increase if you

met some Muslims in attendance who would be willing to listen?

 

Gail

I actually did not meet anyone to subvert by telling them my Muslim story. :)

 

Not that I have an opinion, one of the speakers feels that the Ordination of Women will come soon. I don't care one way or the other.  I did learn about significant research that arouses my curiosity. It seems that in the early church, women were much more involved, than even now.  The same is true in Islam. When Muhammad PBUH was alive, women had a much larger role.

 

It also sounds like full gay, lesbian rights will come as a result of legal challenges.  Not that it matters to me because I am neither gay, lesbian, trans-gender or heterosexual. Our society thinks we must be properly oriented, but having no sexual organs what so ever ...  At least the GA could do me the service of establing a Mormon Nun service.

 

It probably has not occurred to anyone yet that I go to church there because it is a nice place, good things happen, and they practice the 2nd commandment better than any group I have ever encountered. Though I do not expect them to erect a minaret, have a call to prayer, remove the pews to facilitate kneeling, or establish a place to do wudu.

Edited by EllenMaksoud
Link to comment

Our children are our future...

Agreed.  I do not wish to seem to be advocating anything, but just reporting what I heard and saw. There is the fact that the Torah forbids homosexual activity between men, but a Jewish man said it was odd that it was not forbidden among women. Then, of all things, he said that in the Torah (first five books of the Old Testament) a woman exposing her hair was more serious than lesbian relations.

 

I was more surprised at who was there than anything, and no I am not saying. The gay issue was just one of three subjects discussed. Women and the Priesthood was one, and the other was discussion around certain items in Mormon Theology being open for debate now. And of the 70 or so people there, some seemed heart broken at the doctrinal debate on the latter item.

 

My own opinion of the church comes from my own experiences with the Holy Spirit on and after march 13th 2011, and the fact that the Mormon church excercises the 2nd commandment better than anyone in my prior experience.

Link to comment

Agreed.  I do not wish to seem to be advocating anything, but just reporting what I heard and saw. There is the fact that the Torah forbids homosexual activity between men, but a Jewish man said it was odd that it was not forbidden among women. Then, of all things, he said that in the Torah (first five books of the Old Testament) a woman exposing her hair was more serious than lesbian relations.

 

I was more surprised at who was there than anything, and no I am not saying. The gay issue was just one of three subjects discussed. Women and the Priesthood was one, and the other was discussion around certain items in Mormon Theology being open for debate now. And of the 70 or so people there, some seemed heart broken at the doctrinal debate on the latter item.

 

My own opinion of the church comes from my own experiences with the Holy Spirit on and after march 13th 2011, and the fact that the Mormon church excercises the 2nd commandment better than anyone in my prior experience.

Well, I've heard wisps of the church being humanistic or universalistic, that it seems we would accept it eventually, along with women in the Priesthood.  I would not be saying this a year ago though, my mindset has changed drastically.  Not that I was against either of these, just that I thought it would be a cold day in heck before it ever happening.     

Edited by Tacenda
Link to comment

You do realize that Sunstone represents a small portion of the church, politically and theologically progressive? I have read some of the papers presented there and found them interesting, but it is not a place to hear the voice of orthodoxy by any means. 

Link to comment

Well, I've heard wisps of the church being humanistic or universalistic, that it seems we would accept it eventually, along with women in the Priesthood.  I would not be saying this a year ago though, my mindset has changed drastically.  Not that I was against either of these, just that I thought it would be a cold day in heck before it ever happening.     

I've just been talking to my Relief Society President and she said that I should not get involved with this group. And one thing separates me from so many of those who attended. I believe in Heavenly Father and his connection with the Presidency, so I know that eventually this will all get worked out. I do not know enough church history to properly separate things out. One thing that interested me was they said that Joseph Smith was moving toward ordaining women, but when he was murdered, Brigham Young put a stop to it and disbanded the Relief Society.

 

I don't feel like I have a voice, nor do I want one, in the priesthood debate. Also, the whole diversity thing just confuses me, so I won't get involved in that. According to my Relief Society President, I am a Molly Mormon. :)

Link to comment

I've just been talking to my Relief Society President and she said that I should not get involved with this group. And one thing separates me from so many of those who attended. I believe in Heavenly Father and his connection with the Presidency, so I know that eventually this will all get worked out. I do not know enough church history to properly separate things out. One thing that interested me was they said that Joseph Smith was moving toward ordaining women, but when he was murdered, Brigham Young put a stop to it and disbanded the Relief Society.

 

I don't feel like I have a voice, nor do I want one, in the priesthood debate. Also, the whole diversity thing just confuses me, so I won't get involved in that. According to my Relief Society President, I am a Molly Mormon. :)

Being on this board and NOM and Staylds, have opened my eyes.  If I brought up even a quarter of it to a member of my ward they would think I was a nut.  Probably never speak to me again and the truth of what I read on here, they would think was anti.  Sunstone would seem outside of Mormonism to people in my ward.  So you're RS President has a point.  But some have just found out too much about un-whitewashed church history that they are compelled to talk about it, research it and then maybe have a bullet proof testimony of it, so if something comes up about it, they aren't running for the exit door.  So yes discuss here, but in church GD class, I guess we just squirm in our seats when something is said that doesn't include the rest of the story.      

 

ETA:  Ellen I just saw that they are having a Symposium right in your home state of Oregon!  Now I understand the connection.  I've been to one Sunstone Symposium that was held last year at the U of U in Salt Lake, because it featured Maxine Hanks and Don Bradley where they speak about returning to the church.  So there is a lot of good at Symposium and some not so good, as far as a testimony builder.  Probably safest going or listening to the Fair Mormon conferences.  But after you hear it all, either work, if you're not worried about a shaky testimony.    

 

https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pillars-of-my-faith-2012/

Edited by Tacenda
Link to comment

Being on this board and NOM and Staylds, have opened my eyes.  If I brought up even a quarter of it to a member of my ward they would think I was a nut.  Probably never speak to me again and the truth of what I read on here, they would think was anti.  Sunstone would seem outside of Mormonism to people in my ward.  So you're RS President has a point.  But some have just found out too much about un-whitewashed church history that they are compelled to talk about it, research it and then maybe have a bullet proof testimony of it, so if something comes up about it, they aren't running for the exit door.  So yes discuss here, but in church GD class, I guess we just squirm in our seats when something is said that doesn't include the rest of the story.      

Some of these conversations that I hear long time Mormons having make me feel like a child that has walked in on an adults conversation, and I have no idea what they are talking of. :)

Link to comment

I think predictions that the church will embrace homosexual marriage or lifestyles, or ordain women are fanciful.   Sunstone would be a place that would encourage people to believe that lobbying and protesting will persuade leaders to change (what those  members apparently believe are manmade rather than doctrinal concerns).    

 

While it is always possible that new revelation will come, and members believing in continuing revelation from God, members therefore being willing to accept such changes, that seems a far cry from what "mornon feminists" push.    It doesn't hurt members to know what Sunstone publishes.  It would hurt if they believe what Sunstone publishes should be considered a solid source of information about LDS doctrine or faith.  Your RSP is simply letting you know that Sunstone isn't like reading the Ensign, and one shouldn't believe everything they hear in that venue (not that they should do that for the Ensign either without their own seeking pondering and prayerful confirmation).

Link to comment

I think predictions that the church will embrace homosexual marriage or lifestyles, or ordain women are fanciful.   Sunstone would be a place that would encourage people to believe that lobbying and protesting will persuade leaders to change (what those  members apparently believe are manmade rather than doctrinal concerns).    

 

While it is always possible that new revelation will come, and members believing in continuing revelation from God, members therefore being willing to accept such changes, that seems a far cry from what "mornon feminists" push.    It doesn't hurt members to know what Sunstone publishes.  It would hurt if they believe what Sunstone publishes should be considered a solid source of information about LDS doctrine or faith.  Your RSP is simply letting you know that Sunstone isn't like reading the Ensign, and one shouldn't believe everything they hear in that venue (not that they should do that for the Ensign either without their own seeking pondering and prayerful confirmation).

Well stated imo.

 

I don't think one can be comfortable predicting where the Church is going unless one is pretty certain where God wants it to go....that is if one believes the Church operates at least in part through revelation and not public demand.  I wouldn't have predicted back in the early parts of 1978 that by the end of the year the Priesthood would be opened to all worthy men.  When asked, I told people I didn't have a clue why (it never made sense to me when we taught people weren't to be punished for the sins of their parents, I never bought the less valiant in heaven claims as I always thought how much more difficult and therefore strong blacks had to be then whites given the difference in advantages during the time of my youth even in the US) my expectation was it was probably going to have to wait until the second coming...if it hadn't changed already, I couldn't think of a reason why it would change then...save for the Will of God.  I see the same thing in regard to the claims for the LGBT as changing the understanding of practicing homosexuality from a sin to a temple worthy behaviour (which is completely different from what happened with blacks) and with women and the Priesthood, which is more parallel in the sense that it is not seen as a sin that was keeping either the blacks or women from holding the Priesthood but the experience of women in the here and now is not, imo.  Women are allowed to go to the Temple with all that implies, are seen as sharing the Priesthood with their husbands, are presidents of YW, RS, and Primary and hold Stake and General offices as well, etc.  Blacks had no sense of sharing, had no chance at getting their endowments, no positions of ward or higher up leadership, etc.

Link to comment

I think predictions that the church will embrace homosexual marriage or lifestyles, or ordain women are fanciful.   Sunstone would be a place that would encourage people to believe that lobbying and protesting will persuade leaders to change (what those  members apparently believe are manmade rather than doctrinal concerns).    

 

While it is always possible that new revelation will come, and members believing in continuing revelation from God, members therefore being willing to accept such changes, that seems a far cry from what "mornon feminists" push.    It doesn't hurt members to know what Sunstone publishes.  It would hurt if they believe what Sunstone publishes should be considered a solid source of information about LDS doctrine or faith.  Your RSP is simply letting you know that Sunstone isn't like reading the Ensign, and one shouldn't believe everything they hear in that venue (not that they should do that for the Ensign either without their own seeking pondering and prayerful confirmation).

After spending the night sleeping and praying on it, and then talking to to several long time Mormons today while at work at the storehouse, it feels like my original opinion if the best and that is: I believe in Heavenly Father and his connection with the First Presidency of the church. I will rely on their guidance, and plan to stay out of the conversation in the future. Sadly, there are some very smart people who have gotten dragged into this conversation, and if they ask me, they will not hear what they expected to hear.  Sometimes very smart people rely on their own council when they should be listening to the Holy Spirit, IMOH

Link to comment

Being on this board and NOM and Staylds, have opened my eyes.  If I brought up even a quarter of it to a member of my ward they would think I was a nut.  Probably never speak to me again and the truth of what I read on here, they would think was anti.  Sunstone would seem outside of Mormonism to people in my ward.  So you're RS President has a point.  But some have just found out too much about un-whitewashed church history that they are compelled to talk about it, research it and then maybe have a bullet proof testimony of it, so if something comes up about it, they aren't running for the exit door.  So yes discuss here, but in church GD class, I guess we just squirm in our seats when something is said that doesn't include the rest of the story.      

 

ETA:  Ellen I just saw that they are having a Symposium right in your home state of Oregon!  Now I understand the connection.  I've been to one Sunstone Symposium that was held last year at the U of U in Salt Lake, because it featured Maxine Hanks and Don Bradley where they speak about returning to the church.  So there is a lot of good at Symposium and some not so good, as far as a testimony builder.  Probably safest going or listening to the Fair Mormon conferences.  But after you hear it all, either work, if you're not worried about a shaky testimony.    

 

https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pillars-of-my-faith-2012/

Yes, Tacenda I went to the one in Portland, Oregon.  I let myself get talked into something because well meaning people thought that I would be interested because of their inaccurate assumptions of who I am.  They do not seem to realize what Heavenly Father used the church to rescue me from.

Link to comment

Well stated imo.

 

I don't think one can be comfortable predicting where the Church is going unless one is pretty certain where God wants it to go....that is if one believes the Church operates at least in part through revelation and not public demand.  I wouldn't have predicted back in the early parts of 1978 that by the end of the year the Priesthood would be opened to all worthy men.  When asked, I told people I didn't have a clue why (it never made sense to me when we taught people weren't to be punished for the sins of their parents, I never bought the less valiant in heaven claims as I always thought how much more difficult and therefore strong blacks had to be then whites given the difference in advantages during the time of my youth even in the US) my expectation was it was probably going to have to wait until the second coming...if it hadn't changed already, I couldn't think of a reason why it would change then...save for the Will of God.  I see the same thing in regard to the claims for the LGBT as changing the understanding of practicing homosexuality from a sin to a temple worthy behaviour (which is completely different from what happened with blacks) and with women and the Priesthood, which is more parallel in the sense that it is not seen as a sin that was keeping either the blacks or women from holding the Priesthood but the experience of women in the here and now is not, imo.  Women are allowed to go to the Temple with all that implies, are seen as sharing the Priesthood with their husbands, are presidents of YW, RS, and Primary and hold Stake and General offices as well, etc.  Blacks had no sense of sharing, had no chance at getting their endowments, no positions of ward or higher up leadership, etc.

I did share the link to this discussion with Sunstone magazine. I think the views I settled on will surprise them. The incidents surrounding my initially becoming involved with the church and the subsequent developments are too powerful for me to forget.  I wish the Gay community well, but I will not join them. As to intellectually picking at the fabric of the church, I worry that it is flat out wickedness, and I come from the point of view that it is important what the church is TODAY. and picking through one's entrails about the past is fruitless. I learned that from practicing years of self condemnation.

 

As to women in the priest hood, that is not for me to decide.

Edited by EllenMaksoud
Link to comment

I think predictions that the church will embrace homosexual marriage or lifestyles, or ordain women are fanciful.   Sunstone would be a place that would encourage people to believe that lobbying and protesting will persuade leaders to change (what those  members apparently believe are manmade rather than doctrinal concerns).    

 

While it is always possible that new revelation will come, and members believing in continuing revelation from God, members therefore being willing to accept such changes, that seems a far cry from what "mornon feminists" push.    It doesn't hurt members to know what Sunstone publishes.  It would hurt if they believe what Sunstone publishes should be considered a solid source of information about LDS doctrine or faith.  Your RSP is simply letting you know that Sunstone isn't like reading the Ensign, and one shouldn't believe everything they hear in that venue (not that they should do that for the Ensign either without their own seeking pondering and prayerful confirmation).

I agree about SSM there are too many structural doctrinal inconsistencies with it, for it ever to be accepted, and any group holding out that hope to people with SSA in the Church does them a disservice. Ordaining women is another story, that I expect will happen in some form or another within the next twenty years. Sunstone is interesting in that it discusses things that probably need a forum for discussion, so long as people are knowledgeable enough to understand they are operating in the no man's zone between the Church and the anti Mormons .

Link to comment

I agree about SSM there are too many structural doctrinal inconsistencies with it, for it ever to be accepted, and any group holding out that hope to people with SSA in the Church does them a disservice. Ordaining women is another story, that I expect will happen in some form or another within the next twenty years. Sunstone is interesting in that it discusses things that probably need a forum for discussion, so long as people are knowledgeable enough to understand they are operating in the no man's zone between the Church and the anti Mormons .

I'm sometimes susceptible to subversive talk. As to the whole SSA issue, I don't understand it.  Should humanity survive, I think it will take many generations to solve that.  If it can be proven that it is genetic, then what? I would need Jesus The Christ himself standing in the room explaining how we are to proceed.

 

Women in the priesthood is a tempest in a tea pot. Women are doing what we are supposed to do now, and if that changes in the future, fine. Not everyone agrees with the idea that under Joseph Smith, women had defacto priesthood.

 

Those who dig around in the church's past looking for dead bodies, in my opinion inflict unnecessary pain upon themselves.  If other churches did the same, then what would they do with the Salem Witch Trials? What would the religious do with the Inquisition? What would those who burned people at the stake say?  Again, what ever some people say about our church in the early days, the important thing is who is the Mormon church today?

Link to comment

I'm sometimes susceptible to subversive talk. As to the whole SSA issue, I don't understand it.  Should humanity survive, I think it will take many generations to solve that.  If it can be proven that it is genetic, then what? I would need Jesus The Christ himself standing in the room explaining how we are to proceed.

 

Women in the priesthood is a tempest in a tea pot. Women are doing what we are supposed to do now, and if that changes in the future, fine. Not everyone agrees with the idea that under Joseph Smith, women had defacto priesthood.

 

Those who dig around in the church's past looking for dead bodies, in my opinion inflict unnecessary pain upon themselves.  If other churches did the same, then what would they do with the Salem Witch Trials? What would the religious do with the Inquisition? What would those who burned people at the stake say?  Again, what ever some people say about our church in the early days, the important thing is who is the Mormon church today?

 

Christ will resolve the SSA issue for the eternities.  When I say that holding out the likelihood of the Church embracing SSM to members with SSA is a disservice, I am talking about the Church in the here and now, and there are too many structural doctrinal reasons against it ever being embraced.  The authority of women is an issue that is not likely to go away, and will, IMNSHO, eventually result in either a separate priesthood for women with authority similar to that of the men, or the calling of couples rather than individual men to offices, or the simple extension of the existing Priesthood to women, or some other change...but change will come and there are no structural doctrinal issues standing in the way.  The search for "dead bodies" as you call it, to the extent it pertains to looking for a foundation for the change regarding women is a useful pursuit.  Pres. Kimball, although it is fairly clear that he already knew there was no doctrinal foundation for the ban against Africans holding the Priesthood, still had BRM do research on the issue.  I suspect it was his way of getting BRM to change his mind on the issue.

Link to comment

Earlier you said, "That Mormons would be willing to listen increases

my respect and admiration for the church".

 

So would your respect and admiration for a mosque increase if

Muslims would also be willing to listen?

 

Gail

I am still partially Muslim; a fact that is interfering with my advancement in the church. And, some Muslims do listen and are respectful to Mormons and certain other Christians. Sadly, it is the loud, noisy and disagreeable Muslims that are getting the press. Only those who do good research and eschew the opinions of the media realize this.

 

Mean while we have certain "Attack Christians" who have completely lost the vision of Jesus Christ and their own insecurities cause them to attack other Christians, Muslims and especially Mormons.

Link to comment

I am still partially Muslim; a fact that is interfering with my advancement in the church. And, some Muslims do listen and are respectful to Mormons and certain other Christians. Sadly, it is the loud, noisy and disagreeable Muslims that are getting the press. Only those who do good research and eschew the opinions of the media realize this.

 

Mean while we have certain "Attack Christians" who have completely lost the vision of Jesus Christ and their own insecurities cause them to attack other Christians, Muslims and especially Mormons.

 

That is true of most faiths, loud and noisy Christians are also likely to get the most press.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...