Mystery Meat Posted June 30, 2014 Posted June 30, 2014 I gained a testimony of the Church because of my investigation which convinced me it was the closest to the Biblical teachings. I also felt that its teachings were ironically radically unique compared to Christianity in general. There was also this sense that Joseph Smith was praying for answers unhampered by cultural filters or political ideology and as a result was getting a unique perspective on religion. I also felt that the early Prophets of the Restoration carried this on, and that President Kimball embodied that same approach. No one seemed to be shying away from our uniqueness. Here was a Church that was tapped into a way of life and community. It stressed in modern America a community focused on religion, the environment, and family as a true building block.However, it is clear that certain things were setting in. Namely, a strong emphasis on orthodoxy, and especially under President Hinckley a certain cult of normalcy coupled with a Madison Avenue approach to marketing the gospel, along with a growing political alliance in America with certain economic ideologies that have little relevance to the Gospel. With that came a plateau of growth amongst amongst the college educated. That usually indicates a drive away from intellectual endeavors, innovation, new inspiration or that aspect of Mormonism which delves into ancient Judaism and early Chritianity and then incorporates it into our modern faith...it is also a sign of hitting mainstream status in America which normally means stagnation. Rep point for the thoughtful explanation. I may or may not agree with every word, but I respect what you wrote.
Popular Post mfbukowski Posted June 30, 2014 Popular Post Posted June 30, 2014 Why do people make ridiculous generalizations based on ambiguous definitions which cannot possibly be proven? 5
mfbukowski Posted June 30, 2014 Posted June 30, 2014 Rather than answer your question, I'm going to point out that your view of the Middle Ages is quite biased. Anyone who thinks that there was no culture flourishing in Europe during the Middle Ages needs to read all the incredible works of literature and philosophy, visit all the amazing architectural wonders, listen to the spirit moving chants, etc. Even the title "Middle Ages" is biased. The enlightenment (also a biased term) thinkers, coupled with protestants, wanted to denigrate what came before them because it was Catholic through and through. This biased way of viewing the time from the fall of Rome to the rise of protestantism is without merit when looked at with an objective eye. Yes, there were problems during the Middle Ages. Every age has its problems. Modernity (post and otherwise) hasn't exactly been a utopian paradise either. /rant Only 8 rep points so far? Gosh I would have thought this would be at 20 by now. You're slipping. 2
Mystery Meat Posted June 30, 2014 Posted June 30, 2014 I gained a testimony of the Church because of my investigation which convinced me it was the closest to the Biblical teachings. I also felt that its teachings were ironically radically unique compared to Christianity in general. There was also this sense that Joseph Smith was praying for answers unhampered by cultural filters or political ideology and as a result was getting a unique perspective on religion. I also felt that the early Prophets of the Restoration carried this on, and that President Kimball embodied that same approach. No one seemed to be shying away from our uniqueness. Here was a Church that was tapped into a way of life and community. It stressed in modern America a community focused on religion, the environment, and family as a true building block.However, it is clear that certain things were setting in. Namely, a strong emphasis on orthodoxy, and especially under President Hinckley a certain cult of normalcy coupled with a Madison Avenue approach to marketing the gospel, along with a growing political alliance in America with certain economic ideologies that have little relevance to the Gospel. With that came a plateau of growth amongst amongst the college educated. That usually indicates a drive away from intellectual endeavors, innovation, new inspiration or that aspect of Mormonism which delves into ancient Judaism and early Chritianity and then incorporates it into our modern faith...it is also a sign of hitting mainstream status in America which normally means stagnation. Also, I still think it is possible, and I am just throwing this out there for your consideration, that you are letting your politics affect your religion. Who is to say that the Lord did not want those political alliances? I think it would be safe to say that you are referring to conservative alliances. What if your political ideas were clouding how your view said alliances. What if the Lord alligned itself with more progressive organizations. Would you be praising those alliances? Furthermore, I think there are more than a few faulty assumptions built into the the second half of the second paragraph quoted above. Firstly, education, at least of the worldly kind has always had a way of prejudicing people against God (just read in the Book of Mormon if you don't believe me). Secondly, you seem to equate education with an increased ability for intellectual endeavors, innovation and new inspiration. Yet, how many of the leaders of the Church in the earliest days, when it would qualify for your definition of "radical", were highly educated? Joseph Smith sure wasn't. Education is good, but it is not an end all, be all to intellectual endeavors, innovation or new inspiration. The scriptures in fact, not to mention experience, seem to suggest that in many cases it gets in the way of such things within the Lord's kingdom. Thirdly, the idea that education is what allows us to take ancient practice and apply it to the modern Church and embrace those practices is not founded on solid doctrine or history. The Lord can take an uneducated farm boy, a man with a speech impediment, or the most simple minded, backwater, country bumpkin and use him in ways to reveal long since forgotten truths, practices, and rights in ways that an educated academic would be unable or even willing to comprehend. And if you think Mormonism is in danger of hitting mainstream, fear not. We aren't even close. Again, I do not mean to offend, but I think you are letting your politics cloud your view on this.
MiserereNobis Posted June 30, 2014 Posted June 30, 2014 (edited) Firstly, education, at least of the worldly kind has always had a way of prejudicing people against God By all means, let the President of BYU know about this. The poor guy has been helping foster a prejudice against God! (PS the university system as we historically know it was a Catholic invention during the Middle Ages ) Edited June 30, 2014 by MiserereNobis 2
Calm Posted June 30, 2014 Posted June 30, 2014 Plus with LDS, the stats are the higher the education, the higher the commitment.
MiserereNobis Posted June 30, 2014 Posted June 30, 2014 (edited) Plus with LDS, the stats are the higher the education, the higher the commitment. Pretty cool. The idea behind Catholic universities was that all truth was from God, so learning truth of any sort would lead one to God. (and that's TRVTH to you, Mark!) Edited June 30, 2014 by MiserereNobis 2
volgadon Posted June 30, 2014 Posted June 30, 2014 The OP is operating under a skewed view of history. http://books.google.com/books?id=VUy1RFS01yIC&printsec=frontcover&dq=the+inheritance+of+rome&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RhKxU_aSJI2gyASx54GICQ&ved=0CBwQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=the%20inheritance%20of%20rome&f=false 2
manofthecloth Posted June 30, 2014 Posted June 30, 2014 I gained a testimony of the Church because of my investigation which convinced me it was the closest to the Biblical teachings. I also felt that its teachings were ironically radically unique compared to Christianity in general. There was also this sense that Joseph Smith was praying for answers unhampered by cultural filters or political ideology and as a result was getting a unique perspective on religion. I also felt that the early Prophets of the Restoration carried this on, and that President Kimball embodied that same approach. No one seemed to be shying away from our uniqueness. Here was a Church that was tapped into a way of life and community. It stressed in modern America a community focused on religion, the environment, and family as a true building block.However, it is clear that certain things were setting in. Namely, a strong emphasis on orthodoxy, and especially under President Hinckley a certain cult of normalcy coupled with a Madison Avenue approach to marketing the gospel, along with a growing political alliance in America with certain economic ideologies that have little relevance to the Gospel. With that came a plateau of growth amongst amongst the college educated. That usually indicates a drive away from intellectual endeavors, innovation, new inspiration or that aspect of Mormonism which delves into ancient Judaism and early Chritianity and then incorporates it into our modern faith...it is also a sign of hitting mainstream status in America which normally means stagnation.Thank you Stone holm for this thread. It is bold and courageous. Everyone loves biography and yours sounds interesting. I am a newbie and haven't gotten out much yet. My wily cousin coaxed me on to this board a few times to try and get me to open my inexperienced heresy-trending mouth because he likes the entertainment. I am a lifelong member of the Church and can't stand what I am seeing. It's like being inside a train bracing with full expectation of a wreck in slow motion. I loved the days of LeGrande Richards at the pulpit of a split session stake conference on a full Sunday with real meat at the table. By then, correlation was only in it's beginnings and hadn't converted everything back to milk. Sometimes the very best committee ideas are exactly what we don't need, but faithful we should remain to help our Church make its way to the Millennium. What we see with stagnation, correlation, the "oversight committee" and the re-spate of excommunications is all contributing to what must be a necessary cacophony of chaos for our times. Out of chaos only can there be rebirth which is the only thing that will lift the fossilization curse from us.
bcuzbcuz Posted June 30, 2014 Posted June 30, 2014 Why do people make ridiculous generalizations based on ambiguous definitions which cannot possibly be proven?Isn't your comment a "ridiculous generalizations based on ambiguous definitions which cannot possibly be proven?"
3DOP Posted June 30, 2014 Posted June 30, 2014 (edited) In the interest of boldness, I would appreciate some prime examples of what groups the OP identifies as suffering from this malady, and in what way these groups are specifically tending to fossilize. As I suggested before, my hunch is that it means that successive generations that follow the beginning of a movement, successfully maintain core beliefs and practices while increasing their numbers. But I can't say because we don't know what religions we are talking about. Edited June 30, 2014 by 3DOP 2
Stone holm Posted June 30, 2014 Author Posted June 30, 2014 In the interest of boldness, I would appreciate some prime examples of what groups the OP identifies as suffering from this malady, and in what way these groups are specifically tending to fossilize. As I suggested before, my hunch is that it means that successive generations that follow the beginning of a movement, successfully maintain core beliefs and practices while increasing their numbers. But I can't say because we don't know what religions we are talking about.Well, Islam comes to mind. It seemed to generate all types of advanced thinking for a considerable period of time.
teddyaware Posted June 30, 2014 Posted June 30, 2014 (edited) Without getting into the Truth Claims of any religion. Most do not survive much longer than 3-4 generations from founding. The ones that do survive adapt.Whether we will survive remains to be seen.Considering this is a Mormon discussion board, it perplexes me as to why the doctrines and prophecies set forth in the Standard Works are rarely used in answer to many of the questions posed. Perhaps the reason for this ignoring of LDS scripture is due to the fact that many LDS intellectuals do not actually trust in the truthfulness of the scriptures. Another possible reason why the scriptures are all too often ignored is because it's considered unsophisticated and naïve to quote scripture in "polite company." So instead of getting answers to gospel questions from the iron rod of the word of God, we get the opinions of men (not even mingled with scripture!) which, spiritually speaking, is the very definition of stodgy ossification. I will now cite a small sampling of LDS prophecy from the standard works to see if these prophecies suggest the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is going to "fossilize" and lose its original dynamism.13 And it came to pass that I beheld that the great mother of abominations did gather together multitudes upon the face of all the earth, among all the nations of the Gentiles, to fight against the Lamb of God.14 And it came to pass that I, Nephi, beheld the power of the Lamb of God, that it descended upon the saints of the church of the Lamb, and upon the covenant people of the Lord, who were scattered upon all the face of the earth; and they were armed with righteousness and with the power of God in great glory. (1 Nephi 14)61 And the day shall come that the earth shall rest, but before that day the heavens shall be darkened, and a veil of darkness shall cover the earth; and the heavens shall shake, and also the earth; and great tribulations shall be among the children of men, but my people will I preserve;62 And righteousness will I send down out of heaven; and truth will I send forth out of the earth, to bear testimony of mine Only Begotten; his resurrection from the dead; yea, and also the resurrection of all men; and righteousness and truth will I cause to sweep the earth as with a flood, to gather out mine elect from the four quarters of the earth, unto a place which I shall prepare, an Holy City, that my people may gird up their loins, and be looking forth for the time of my coming; for there shall be my tabernacle, and it shall be called Zion, a New Jerusalem.63 And the Lord said unto Enoch: Then shalt thou and all thy city meet them there, and we will receive them into our bosom, and they shall see us; and we will fall upon their necks, and they shall fall upon our necks, and we will kiss each other;64 And there shall be mine abode, and it shall be Zion, which shall come forth out of all the creations which I have made; and for the space of a thousand years the earth shall rest. (Moses 7)66 And it shall be called the New Jerusalem, a land of peace, a city of refuge, a place of safety for the saints of the Most High God;67 And the glory of the Lord shall be there, and the terror of the Lord also shall be there, insomuch that the wicked will not come unto it, and it shall be called Zion.68 And it shall come to pass among the wicked, that every man that will not take his sword against his neighbor must needs flee unto Zion for safety.69 And there shall be gathered unto it out of every nation under heaven; and it shall be the only people that shall not be at war one with another.70 And it shall be said among the wicked: Let us not go up to battle against Zion, for the inhabitants of Zion are terrible; wherefore we cannot stand.71 And it shall come to pass that the righteous shall be gathered out from among all nations, and shall come to Zion, singing with songs of everlasting joy. (D&C 45) Edited June 30, 2014 by teddyaware
thesometimesaint Posted June 30, 2014 Posted June 30, 2014 I never said PEOPLE were cockroaches. I referred to attitudes.The cockroach metaphor is, IMHO , apt in that they are ubiquitous, hard to exterminate, and I am told, would be one of the few survivors of nuclear holocaust. It is never a good idea to compare people to cockroaches even in metaphor. At the very best it is a Ad Hominem.
thesometimesaint Posted June 30, 2014 Posted June 30, 2014 Considering this is a Mormon discussion board, it perplexes me as to why the doctrines and prophecies set forth in the Standard Works are rarely used in answer to many of the questions posed. Perhaps the reason for this ignoring of LDS scripture is due to the fact that many LDS intellectuals do not actually trust in the truthfulness of the scriptures. Another possible reason why the scriptures are all too often ignored is because it's considered unsophisticated and naïve to quote scripture in "polite company." So instead of getting answers to gospel questions from the iron rod of the word of God, we get the opinions of men (not even mingled with scripture!) which, spiritually speaking, is the very definition of stodgy ossification. I will now cite a small sampling of LDS prophecy from the standard works to see if these prophecies suggest the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is going to "fossilize" and lose its original dynamism.13 And it came to pass that I beheld that the great mother of abominations did gather together multitudes upon the face of all the earth, among all the nations of the Gentiles, to fight against the Lamb of God.14 And it came to pass that I, Nephi, beheld the power of the Lamb of God, that it descended upon the saints of the church of the Lamb, and upon the covenant people of the Lord, who were scattered upon all the face of the earth; and they were armed with righteousness and with the power of God in great glory. (1 Nephi 14)61 And the day shall come that the earth shall rest, but before that day the heavens shall be darkened, and a veil of darkness shall cover the earth; and the heavens shall shake, and also the earth; and great tribulations shall be among the children of men, but my people will I preserve;62 And righteousness will I send down out of heaven; and truth will I send forth out of the earth, to bear testimony of mine Only Begotten; his resurrection from the dead; yea, and also the resurrection of all men; and righteousness and truth will I cause to sweep the earth as with a flood, to gather out mine elect from the four quarters of the earth, unto a place which I shall prepare, an Holy City, that my people may gird up their loins, and be looking forth for the time of my coming; for there shall be my tabernacle, and it shall be called Zion, a New Jerusalem.63 And the Lord said unto Enoch: Then shalt thou and all thy city meet them there, and we will receive them into our bosom, and they shall see us; and we will fall upon their necks, and they shall fall upon our necks, and we will kiss each other;64 And there shall be mine abode, and it shall be Zion, which shall come forth out of all the creations which I have made; and for the space of a thousand years the earth shall rest. (Moses 7)66 And it shall be called the New Jerusalem, a land of peace, a city of refuge, a place of safety for the saints of the Most High God;67 And the glory of the Lord shall be there, and the terror of the Lord also shall be there, insomuch that the wicked will not come unto it, and it shall be called Zion.68 And it shall come to pass among the wicked, that every man that will not take his sword against his neighbor must needs flee unto Zion for safety.69 And there shall be gathered unto it out of every nation under heaven; and it shall be the only people that shall not be at war one with another.70 And it shall be said among the wicked: Let us not go up to battle against Zion, for the inhabitants of Zion are terrible; wherefore we cannot stand.71 And it shall come to pass that the righteous shall be gathered out from among all nations, and shall come to Zion, singing with songs of everlasting joy. (D&C 45) I have nothing against the Truth Claims of the Church, but the question was why some radically new religions become overly conservative and then fossilize.Prooftexting doesn't help your cause either.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted June 30, 2014 Posted June 30, 2014 Its OK, we all know that this thread is really about. Conservatism = bad. Progressive = good. SH is so transparent. Epic fail there bud. 2
thesometimesaint Posted June 30, 2014 Posted June 30, 2014 Its OK, we all know that this thread is really about. Conservatism = bad. Progressive = good. SH is so transparent. Epic fail there bud. Conservatism means holding onto the older ways of doing things. Progressive means adopting new ways of doing things. Taken to extreme both are not a good thing. 2
Stone holm Posted June 30, 2014 Author Posted June 30, 2014 Am not sure those definitions of conservative and progressive really work anymore. Conservatism used to mean what you said, but now it is trending to a more radical repeal and stripping of established things back to a perceived "golden era". Progressive used to mean a belief that society represented by the government could intervene to improve the human condition. It was the for runners of the Progressives who attacked not only slavery, but Mormon polygamy, pushed the Temperance movements which eventually established Prohibition, and helped launch not only the abandonment of child labor and improved working conditions, but also set the stage for the modern entanglement of religion and politics because of their desire to reform and improve the lives of individuals. So you have elements of the "Moral Majority" and the "Christian Right", evolving out of progressivism. 1
thesometimesaint Posted June 30, 2014 Posted June 30, 2014 Am not sure those definitions of conservative and progressive really work anymore. Conservatism used to mean what you said, but now it is trending to a more radical repeal and stripping of established things back to a perceived "golden era". Progressive used to mean a belief that society represented by the government could intervene to improve the human condition. It was the for runners of the Progressives who attacked not only slavery, but Mormon polygamy, pushed the Temperance movements which eventually established Prohibition, and helped launch not only the abandonment of child labor and improved working conditions, but also set the stage for the modern entanglement of religion and politics because of their desire to reform and improve the lives of individuals. So you have elements of the "Moral Majority" and the "Christian Right", evolving out of progressivism. Those are the standard definitions of the words. Unfortunately those words have taken on a more political meaning to the detriment of both. I'm enough of a conservative that I disapprove of the mingling of religion and politics. To me each has their place in our society. IE; My government can't dictate to me what I have to believe, and my religion can't dictate to me how I have to vote. I have no problem with telling both it is none of their business.
mfbukowski Posted July 1, 2014 Posted July 1, 2014 By all means, let the President of BYU know about this. The poor guy has been helping foster a prejudice against God! (PS the university system as we historically know it was a Catholic invention during the Middle Ages )Since everyone was Catholic, Catholics invented everything. An interesting argument.
JLHPROF Posted July 1, 2014 Posted July 1, 2014 Considering this is a Mormon discussion board, it perplexes me as to why the doctrines and prophecies set forth in the Standard Works are rarely used in answer to many of the questions posed. Oh they are, but just very selectively, just as you have done here. I will now cite a small sampling of LDS prophecy from the standard works to see if these prophecies suggest the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is going to "fossilize" and lose its original dynamism. None of those three quotes refer to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.#1 refers to the Church of the Firstborn#2 refers to Zion#3 refers to Zion And it's important to point out that there are just as many prophecies that can be read to mean the Church will need to be corrected in many things before Christ is ready to return. The OP question is whether the corrections will need to move us in a more progressive direction or whether those correction will need to take us back to our roots.
mfbukowski Posted July 1, 2014 Posted July 1, 2014 Isn't your comment a "ridiculous generalizations based on ambiguous definitions which cannot possibly be proven?"Nope. It's a question and not even a generalization It is itself not even an assertion. People clearly do such things. You might debate whether or not such an assertion is true or if it applies to the OP, but the question itself is none of these things.
Stone holm Posted July 1, 2014 Author Posted July 1, 2014 Those are the standard definitions of the words. Unfortunately those words have taken on a more political meaning to the detriment of both. I'm enough of a conservative that I disapprove of the mingling of religion and politics. To me each has their place in our society. IE; My government can't dictate to me what I have to believe, and my religion can't dictate to me how I have to vote. I have no problem with telling both it is none of their business.I am a progressive with a tinge of libertarianism. I tend to not want to get entangled in foreign wars, which was a conservative position until after WWII. I tend to take exception to the war on drugs which is a libertarian position. I tend to think we over do welfare which is a conservative position, but I tend to favor governmental investment in education, healthcare, environmental protection, and infrastructure which are all progressive issues. But I don't think government should be telling consenting adults how to behave in the bedroom , so I dislike establishment of religious morality by legislation...so I guess I am not a true progressive.
MiserereNobis Posted July 1, 2014 Posted July 1, 2014 Since everyone was Catholic, Catholics invented everything. An interesting argument. Oh, not everyone was Catholic. Read about all the excommunications and anathemas decreed against various heretical sects But yeah, the glory of the Middle Ages is the glory of Catholicism 4
thesometimesaint Posted July 1, 2014 Posted July 1, 2014 Since everyone was Catholic, Catholics invented everything. An interesting argument. The Muslims have a better case. They had universities while Christians were still hiding in the catacombs.
Recommended Posts