readstoomuch Posted July 26, 2015 Posted July 26, 2015 MOF spent most of the book reminding me of my every sin. It isn`t always wrong to be reminded of one`s sins. I thought the forgiveness part (towards the end), made up for the first part. SWK signed my mission call and I read this book as well as Faith Precedes the Miracle and the biography by his son. He was a prophet. I got that witness as well as with ETB and GBH. Is grace being taught more often and fully today than when MOF was writtten? It seems so. Do we get reminded of works and that it is a covenant relationship that we have that involves our works showing our love and respect for Christ who returns his part of the covenant? Yes, Christ blesses us, even when we can only show a pittance in keeping our part of the covenant. I felt like some of that change was actually happening towards the end of SWK`s ministry. 1
BCSpace Posted July 26, 2015 Posted July 26, 2015 You could replace it with Clement of Alexandria's 'The Instructor' book 3.
why me Posted July 26, 2015 Posted July 26, 2015 (edited) When the book was written most churches were against masturbation etc. It was not that far out of it when it was published. It was the norm. In the catholic faith, the common notion of masturbation for us young boys in the 60s was that one would go blind if one did it. So, spencer's book was quite mild really. But he did go over the top in that book on other issues. So, the book is confined to a quote here and a quote there in manuals. I don't think that no one would be encouraged to read the book now. Time has moved on. But the book has been a favorite for critics to mock and laugh at. However, I have to say that when one reads any book published by a GA one must read it reflectively and questioningly. And no book published by a member a GA or a church member should be confused with it being scripture. It is just words on paper....where the author is attempting to have a dialogue with its reader. And as such, the reader can ask questions and come to their own conclusions about the ideas in it. The mistake is to read Spencer's book as god's word. It isn't. And maybe it never was. But it was spencer's ideas at the time of the book's writing. Edited July 26, 2015 by why me 2
JAHS Posted July 26, 2015 Posted July 26, 2015 Miracle of Forgiveness is a bit dated in its context and examples. My daughter came to me after reading it, and expressed some concerns. I immediately prepared to discuss the "death vs. rape" statements but she stopped me and said that wasn't what bothered her. It turns out she was more confused by some of the language that was bound up in the response to the 60s and 70s counterculture movement. Like any literature, even the scriptures, it can be dated and require updating for modern language and cultural contexts."The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet." (Ezra Taft Benson) 1
rpn Posted July 26, 2015 Posted July 26, 2015 (edited) President Kiimball's son says that he was sorry to hear the feedback that the book caused despair and hopelessness. The son suggested that he pondered rewriting it in response. But it does name homosexuality as a sin, and that has now been repudiated. I think this is an excellent example of the fact that our leaders, indeed all of us, seek to know God's will, listen with ears and hearts that are trained by experience and have their own bias, and are nevertheless willing to go where we feel inspired to go. Sometimes we are wrong and in the course of our figuring that out, we do things that harm others. Doesn't mean we are false prophets or liars. It means that the business of knowing God and His will is complex to access and difficult to distinguish from the other voices we hear. (Though most of us at one time or another have had that pure flow of spirit that we absolutely recogized at the time and which wasn't complex at all.) It also means that Heavenly Father does not see such misunderstandings as reason to cut His leaders off from being leaders. eta correction identified by duncan Edited July 27, 2015 by rpn
why me Posted July 26, 2015 Posted July 26, 2015 (edited) But it does name homosexuality as a sin, and that has now been repudiated. I think that if we put this in a time context, we can assume that he was referring to the homosexual act. So, homosexuality would be a given that having sex was implied. We all knew that liberace was gay. And we all knew that bob newhart was gay. (Two gay celebrities among many on TV in the 60s) No one thought of them as sinners for just being gay. However they also didn't push their gay lifestyle forward but we did assume that both were having sex with guys. However we did not know that Rock Hudson was gay because he tended to make movies with beautiful women in romantic themes. So, that was a shock. But I don't remember anyone thinking that such gay celebrities were sinners for just being gay and I am sure that spencer didn't either. However, being in NYC in the 70s and hanging out in the greenwich village, I certainly knew that gay men were having multiple partners. And it was no different during the time that spencer's book was written. Thus, homosexuality as a word has 'having sex' implied in it. Edited July 26, 2015 by why me
Calm Posted July 26, 2015 Posted July 26, 2015 "bob newhart was gay"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Newhart#Personal_life
why me Posted July 26, 2015 Posted July 26, 2015 (edited) "bob newhart was gay"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Newhart#Personal_life Oh...I meant Paul Lynde on hollywood squares. Edited July 26, 2015 by why me
Duncan Posted July 26, 2015 Posted July 26, 2015 President Kiimball's father says that he was sorry to hear the feedback that the book caused despair and hopelessness. The son suggested that he pondered rewriting it in response. But it does name homosexuality as a sin, and that has now been repudiated. I think this is an excellent example of the fact that our leaders, indeed all of us, seek to know God's will, listen with ears and hearts that are trained by experience and have their own bias, and are nevertheless willing to go where we feel inspired to go. Sometimes we are wrong and in the course of our figuring that out, we do things that harm others. Doesn't mean we are false prophets or liars. It means that the business of knowing God and His will is complex to access and difficult to distinguish from the other voices we hear. (Though most of us at one time or another have had that pure flow of spirit that we absolutely recogized at the time and which wasn't complex at all.) It also means that Heavenly Father does not see such misunderstandings as reason to cut His leaders off from being leaders. Pres. Kimball's? Father?????????? Wouldn't he have died prior to the book's publication?
cinepro Posted July 26, 2015 Posted July 26, 2015 (edited) Oh...I meant Paul Lynde on hollywood squares. That Paul Lynde..."He's just gonna break ya' up" Edited July 26, 2015 by cinepro
toon Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 And we all knew that bob newhart was gay. I didn't know that. And I suspect his wife doesn't know it either.
Gray Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 The scriptures are clear that every man must be reborn have our natures changed by the atonement. That we must put off the natural man and yield to the enticings of the Holy Spirit. That all of this is possible because of Christ.My nature has been changed in many ways with application of the atonement. I see no reason why anyone would be excused from this process. Orientation is not changed by prayer or any other method.
jkwilliams Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 Orientation is not changed by prayer or any other method. Yep. Trying to change one's orientation through prayer has more than a few times ended in suicide.
auteur55 Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 So I had a meeting with a Stake President today who quoted from MOF quite a bit. Said that heavy petting and other non-fornication forms of intimacy were next to murder and were all the same thing. He then went on to remark that he gives this counsel to all the youth and many of them have to wait a year to go on a mission because SWK said there is no difference between heavy petting and having intercourse. He quotes from it likes it's doctrine. I was under the impression the leadership had moved far away from the "next to murder" counsel when dealing with the youth and sexual sin but apparently not. So this book has done anything but gone away.
The Nehor Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 Orientation is not changed by prayer or any other method. I found the method: GIRDLE OF OPPOSITE GENDER When this magical belt is put on, the wearer must immediately make a DC 20 Fortitude saving throw or be transformed into a person of the opposite gender. The character's abilities, mind, and spirit remain unaffected; only the character's sex changes. If the character's saving throw is a natural 1, the item actually removes all gender from the wearer, giving him an androgynous, neutered appearance. The change is permanent unless undone with curse-removing magic. Once its magic takes effect, the belt can be removed without effort. A creature can only be affected by a particular girdle once, though other girdles of this type can cause another transformation. 3
Maestrophil Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 (edited) I was required to read the book as part of a repentance process as a teen and found nothing that was damaging to me - It helped me feel privileged to have the Atonement available to me, and how I, a vile sinner, could rise to higher levels than my nature through Jesus. As I have aged (gracefully!), I have always remembered that this was written by a man who likely had a far greater understanding and testimony than my own - if we truly had an understanding of the importance of the eternities, I think many of us would bellyache less about the difficulty of this life - especially all of the things we think we "deserve" like sexual fulfillment and a fair life. I do not understand the vitriol for the book. Edited July 29, 2015 by Maestrophil 1
Guest Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 In the daily articles the Salt Lake Tribune puts out, there is this new one that says the former popular book by Spencer W. Kimball is dying from regular use by members. The numbers of published copies is decreasing rapidly, ect. http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/2762815-155/lds-classic-miracle-of-forgiveness-fading What is replacing it if there is one? I think the book gets a bad rap. The title really does not fit with the contents. I would have named it "How to repent." or something like that but I did not find it to be a horrible book.Does not all books over time die out in distribution as new generations come along, while the writings of older generations fade away? The Book of Mormon and other standards works, being exceptions as they are canonized scripture.
Avatar4321 Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 I found the method: GIRDLE OF OPPOSITE GENDER When this magical belt is put on, the wearer must immediately make a DC 20 Fortitude saving throw or be transformed into a person of the opposite gender. The character's abilities, mind, and spirit remain unaffected; only the character's sex changes. If the character's saving throw is a natural 1, the item actually removes all gender from the wearer, giving him an androgynous, neutered appearance. The change is permanent unless undone with curse-removing magic. Once its magic takes effect, the belt can be removed without effort. A creature can only be affected by a particular girdle once, though other girdles of this type can cause another transformation.That item is amusing.
Recommended Posts