No Pics of Seer Stones in our Churches

[Tacenda]

Some of these leaders who've passed on might be turning in their graves.  Please forgive the simile...

“I admire men and women who have developed the questing spirit, who are unafraid of new ideas as stepping stones to progress. We should, of course, respect the opinions of others, but we should also be unafraid to dissent–if we are informed. Thoughts and expressions compete in the marketplace of thought, and in that competition truth emerges triumphant. Only error fears freedom of expression… This free exchange of ideas is not to be deplored as long as men and women remain humble and teachable. Neither fear of consequence or any kind of coercion should ever be used to secure uniformity of thought in the church. People should express their problems and opinions and be unafraid to think without fear of ill consequences. … We must preserve freedom of the mind in the church and resist all efforts to suppress it.”

— Hugh B. Brown

“I did not like the old man being called up for erring in doctrine. It looks too much like the Methodist, and not like the Latter-day Saints. Methodists have creeds which a man must believe or be asked out of their church. I want the liberty of thinking and believing as I please. It feels so good not to be trammeled. It does not prove that a man is not a good man because he errs in doctrine.”

— Joseph Smith, History of the Church, 5:340

“If we have the truth, it cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not the truth, it ought to be harmed.”

– President J. Reuben Clark

“…regardless of your circumstances, your personal history, or the strength of your testimony, there is room for you in this Church.”

— President Dieter Uchtdorf

“I think you’d be as aware as I am that that we have many people who are members of the church who do not have some burning conviction as to [the origins of the Book of Mormon], who have some other feeling about it that is not as committed to foundational statements and the premises of Mormonism. But we’re not going to invite somebody out of the church over that any more than we would anything else about degrees of belief or steps of hope or steps of conviction. … We would say: “This is the way I see it, and this is the faith I have; this is the foundation on which I’m going forward. If I can help you work toward that I’d be glad to, but I don’t love you less; I don’t distance you more; I don’t say you’re unacceptable to me as a person or even as a Latter-day Saint if you can’t make that step or move to the beat of that drum.” … We really don’t want to sound smug. We don’t want to seem uncompromising and insensitive.”

– Elder Jeffrey R. Holland

“Let us have the courage to defy the consensus, the courage to stand for principle. Courage, not compromise, brings the smile of God’s approval. Courage becomes a living and an attractive virtue when it is regarded not only as a willingness to die manfully, but as the determination to live decently. A moral coward is one who is afraid to do what he thinks is right because others will disapprove or laugh. Remember that all men have their fears, but those who face their fears with dignity have courage as well.”

– Thomas S. Monson, “Courage Counts,” Ensign, Nov. 1986, 41.

“As a means of coming to truth, people in the Church are encouraged by their leaders to think and find out for themselves. They are encouraged to ponder, to search, to evaluate, and thereby to come to such knowledge of the truth as their own consciences, assisted by the Spirit of God, lead them to discover. Brigham Young said: ‘I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security. … Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not’ (Discourses of Brigham Young, sel. John A. Widtsoe [1941], 135). In this manner no one need be deceived.”

– James E. Faust, “The Truth Shall Make You Free,” Ensign, September 1998

“Brothers and sisters, as good as our previous experience may be, if we stop asking questions, stop thinking, stop pondering, we can thwart the revelations of the Spirit. Remember, it was the questions young Joseph asked that opened the door for the restoration of all things. We can block the growth and knowledge our Heavenly Father intends for us. How often has the Holy Spirit tried to tell us something we needed to know but couldn’t get past the massive iron gate of what we thought we already knew?”

– Dieter F. Uchtdorf, “Acting on the Truths of the Gospel of Jesus Christ,” Worldwide Leadership Training, 2/11/12

“In this Church there is an enormous amount of room—and scriptural commandment—for studying and learning, for comparing and considering, for discussion and awaiting further revelation. We all learn ‘line upon line, precept upon precept,’ with the goal being authentic religious faith informing genuine Christlike living. In this there is no place for coercion or manipulation, no place for intimidation or hypocrisy.”

– Jeffrey R. Holland, “A Prayer for the Children,” Ensign, May 2003

“Some are lost because they are different. They feel as though they don’t belong. Perhaps because they are different, they find themselves slipping away from the flock. They may look, act, think, and speak differently than those around them and that sometimes causes them to assume they don’t fit in. They conclude that they are not needed.  Tied to this misconception is the erroneous belief that all members of the Church should look, talk, and be alike. The Lord did not people the earth with a vibrant orchestra of personalities only to value the piccolos of the world. Every instrument is precious and adds to the complex beauty of the symphony. All of Heavenly Father’s children are different in some degree, yet each has his own beautiful sound that adds depth and richness to the whole. This variety of creation itself is a testament of how the Lord values all His children. He does not esteem one flesh above another, but He “inviteth them all to come unto him and partake of his goodness; and he denieth none that come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female; … all are alike unto God.”

– Joseph B. Wirthlin, “Concern for the One,” Ensign, May 2008

“Sometimes, well-meaning amplifications of divine principles—many coming from uninspired sources—complicate matters further, diluting the purity of divine truth with man-made addenda. One person’s good idea—something that may work for him or her—takes root and becomes an expectation. And gradually, eternal principles can get lost within the labyrinth of “good ideas.”  This was one of the Savior’s criticisms of the religious “experts” of His day, whom He chastised for attending to the hundreds of minor details of the law while neglecting the weightier matters…Because love is the great commandment, it ought to be at the center of all and everything we do in our own family, in our Church callings, and in our livelihood. Love is the healing balm that repairs rifts in personal and family relationships. It is the bond that unites families, communities, and nations. Love is the power that initiates friendship, tolerance, civility, and respect. It is the source that overcomes divisiveness and hate. Love is the fire that warms our lives with unparalleled joy and divine hope. Love should be our walk and our talk.”

– Dieter F. Uchtdorf, “The Love of God,” Ensign, November 2009

“Some members exclude from their circle of fellowship those who are different. When our actions or words discourage someone from taking full advantage of Church membership, we fail them–and the Lord. The Church is made stronger as we include every member and strengthen one another in service and love.”

– Jeffrey R. Holland, “Helping Those Who Struggle with Same-Gender Attraction,” Liahona, October 2007

“We have heard men who hold the priesthood remark that they would do anything they were told to do by those who preside over them (even) if they knew it was wrong; but such obedience as this is worse than folly to us; it is slavery in the extreme; and the man who would thus willingly degrade himself, should not claim a rank among intelligent beings, until he turns from his folly. A man of God would despise the idea. Others, in the extreme exercise of their almighty authority have taught that such obedience was necessary, and that no matter what the saints were told to do by their presidents, they should do it without any questions. When the Elders of Israel will so far indulge in these extreme notions of obedience as to teach them to the people, it is generally because they have it in their hearts to do wrong themselves.”

– Joseph Smith, Millennial Star, Vol. 14, Num. 38, pp.593-595

“More thinking is required, and we should all exercise our God-given right to think and be unafraid to express our opinions, with proper respect for those to whom we talk and proper acknowledgment of our own shortcomings. We must preserve freedom of the mind in the church and resist all efforts to suppress it. The church is not so much concerned with whether the thoughts of its members are orthodox or heterodox as it is that they shall have thoughts.”

– Hugh B. Brown, “A Final Testimony,” Edward B. Firmage, The Memoirs of Hugh B. Brown: An Abundant Life, Signature Books, Salt Lake City, 1988, pg. 135-140  http://www.sciencemeetsreligion.org/lds/brown-final.php

“But while the Atonement is meant to help us all become more like Christ, it is not meant to make us all the same. Sometimes we confuse differences in personality with sin. We can even make the mistake of thinking that because someone is different from us, it must mean they are not pleasing to God. This line of thinking leads some to believe that the Church wants to create every member from a single mold—that each one should look, feel, think, and behave like every other. This would contradict the genius of God, who created every man different from his brother, every son different from his father. Even identical twins are not identical in their personalities and spiritual identities.  It also contradicts the intent and purpose of the Church of Jesus Christ, which acknowledges and protects the moral agency—with all its far-reaching consequences—of each and every one of God’s children. As disciples of Jesus Christ, we are united in our testimony of the restored gospel and our commitment to keep God’s commandments. But we are diverse in our cultural, social, and political preferences.  The Church thrives when we take advantage of this diversity and encourage each other to develop and use our talents to lift and strengthen our fellow disciples.”

– Dieter F. Uchtdorf April 2013, “Four Titles”

“The first and fundamental principle of our holy religion is, that we believe that we have a right to embrace all, and every item of truth, without limitation or without being circumscribed or prohibited by the creeds or superstitious notions of men, or by the dominations of one another, when that truth is clearly demonstrated to our minds, and we have the highest degree of evidence of the same.”

– Joseph Smith, Jr., Letter from Joseph Smith to Isaac Galland, Mar. 22, 1839, Liberty Jail, Liberty, Missouri, published in Times and Seasons, Feb. 1840, pp. 53–54

“I want to say to my friends that we believe in all good. If you can find a truth in heaven, earth or hell, it belongs to our doctrine. We believe it; it is ours; we claim it.”

– Brigham Young, Discourses of Brigham Young. Selected by John A. Widtsoe. 1941.

ETA: I found these on this link.  http://mormonstories.org/are-there-any-quotes-from-lds-church-leaders-which-either-support-or-inspire-you/

Edited March 28, 2016 by Tacenda

[ksfisher]

14 minutes ago, Keq82 said:

That is why facebook is banned in communist China.  If we have the truth and are the one true church, why do opinions on social media matter?  

So the church should not be worried when members of the church speak against it?  Do the social media posts of church members have zero influence over the beliefs of others?  If no one is paying attention to what you say on social media why should you bother posting in the first place?

[Keq82]

12 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

If you are teaching or speaking against the church you are abandoning your loyalty to it.  Expressing your opinion in a public venue influences others and may lead them away from the church. 

Are leaders so insecure that they monitor members social media posts?  How many hours a week do you imagine a bishop spending monitoring Facebook posts?  I would imagine that the bishop is either friends on Facebook with this member of another member brought it to the bishops attention. 

It seems like there are quite a few people on this board who are rushing to show the church in a negative light without seeing any evidence in the matter.

I personally know several members who have been called to see the bishop or SP, simply because of something they shared on social media. Where in the baptismal covenant does it say we can't have our own opinion on certain church topics?   

https://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/content/images/gospel-library/manual/34594/34594_000_014_02-covenants.pdf

[JulieM]

4 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

So the church should not be worried when members of the church speak against it? 

Have you read what this sister posted?  Do you know she was speaking "against" the church?

Why won't her local leaders read the essays?  That's very odd.

[ksfisher]

5 minutes ago, Keq82 said:

I personally know several members who have been called to see the bishop or SP, simply because of something they shared on social media. Where in the baptismal covenant does it say we can't have our own opinion on certain church topics?   

https://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/content/images/gospel-library/manual/34594/34594_000_014_02-covenants.pdf

No where does it say that we cannot have our own opinions.  We do covenant, at baptism, that we will follow Christ.  When we partake of the sacrament we are covenanting that we will always remember Christ and that we are willing to take his name upon us.  I don't know how a person can teach or speak against Christ's church and still  expect that they are keeping those covenants.

Edited March 28, 2016 by ksfisher

[ksfisher]

6 minutes ago, JulieM said:

Have you read what this sister posted?  Do you know she was speaking "against" the church?

Why won't her local leaders read the essays?  That's very odd.

No, I have not.  I have not been addressing this specific sisters Facebook posts since they have not been provided in this thread.  I have been speaking about the church's right to address apostasy in general and about the influence of social media on others.

Why won't her local leaders read the essays?  How do you know they haven't?  Unless you have personal knowledge that they have not they anything you do know is hearsay.

[Keq82]

10 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

So the church should not be worried when members of the church speak against it?  Do the social media posts of church members have zero influence over the beliefs of others?  If no one is paying attention to what you say on social media why should you bother posting in the first place?

If the church has the truth, and a testimony is gained through personal faith, prayer, etc., social media posts should not matter, IMO.  Surely bishops and SPs, as you stated, are very busy and should have other things to tend to (other than having to discuss with members what they post on social media).  

[ksfisher]

2 minutes ago, Keq82 said:

If the church has the truth, and a testimony is gained through personal faith, prayer, etc., social media posts should not matter, IMO.  Surely bishops and SPs, as you stated, are very busy and should have other things to tend to (other than having to discuss with members what they post on social media).  

So social media posts don't matter?  When do words matter?  When does what we say or write have a negative effect on others? 

And yes, I said that bishops have more to do than monitor Facebook posts.  The point that I made was that it must have come to his attention through some other means than his "monitoring."

You seem to feel that social media is this playground where a person can write what they want and there are never any negative consequences. 

[JulieM]

9 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

No, I have not.  I have not been addressing this specific sisters Facebook posts since they have not been provided in this thread.  I have been speaking about the church's right to address apostasy in general and about the influence of social media on others.

Why won't her local leaders read the essays?  How do you know they haven't?  Unless you have personal knowledge that they have not they anything you do know is hearsay.

I was only going on Jeanne's personal knowledge on that and have no reason to doubt her.

I agree with you about apostasy.  But we were discussing this specific case and I see no evidence of apostasy (again going from Jeanne's personal knowledge on this).  

Hopefully, she'll continue posting about what happens with this sister.

[consiglieri]

21 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

No where does it say that we cannot have our own opinions?

CHI-1

[consiglieri]

1 hour ago, Jeanne said:

  There should be a limit on Church control!

The only limit on Church control is the limit set by the member.

[Scott Lloyd]

4 hours ago, ALarson said:

Agreed, but if she has posted something that is an attempt to get followers or draw people away from the church (or if she is speaking out publicly elsewhere at all), then her church leaders can at least call her in to discuss it.  From what I've read, she is not doing this (but I have not seen what she posted).

If I were her, I'd insist that her leaders at least read the essays and she will agree to remove any of her commentary (if that is what they find offensive).  That's a good compromise.  

The leaders should be familiar with essays anyway since the youth are going to be taught about them and will be discussing them.  

This would seem to be a reasonable approach (though again, I haven't seen what she posted either, and thus can only respond in theory).

Local leaders should acquaint themselves with the Gospel Topics essays. At the very least, they ought not be upbraiding people merely for referencing or linking to them.

[ksfisher]

4 minutes ago, consiglieri said:

CHI-1

Please quote the relevant passage.

[consiglieri]

48 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

If you are teaching or speaking against the church you are abandoning your loyalty to it.  Expressing your opinion in a public venue influences others and may lead them away from the church. 

 

 

Any organization that equates criticism with disloyalty doesn't merit loyalty.

[Keq82]

2 minutes ago, consiglieri said:

 

Any organization that equates criticism with disloyalty doesn't merit loyalty.

I agree 100%.

 

[consiglieri]

1 minute ago, ksfisher said:

Please quote the relevant passage.

I can't.

It's secret.

But it is plain as day that the LDS Church speaks out of both sides of its mouth on this issue.  On the one hand, a member is free to have opinions, but on the other hand, a member is not free to express those opinions.

You may have your opinions, but don't go round expressing them or bad things can happen to you.

That is the message we see playing out before our eyes.

Welcome to The Church of George Orwell of Latter-day Saints.

[flameburns623]

Social media posts and shares can be part of a pattern of activism.

Or not. 

I have used the "share" button to exchange a laugh even when a meme or caption cut across my actual perspective or position.

Sometimes I share in order to stimulate conversation.

Sometimes out of curiosity. Or boredom.

And I have such a wide spectrum of view represented on my page that if I were questioned about my social networking I would laugh in someone's face.

I am friends with Luciferians, witches, and Evangelical Christians.

Devoutly conservative Mormons, dissident Mormons, practitioners of Asatru, snd Hindu gurus.

Shaman.

Buddhists.

Sufis.

Baha'i. 

People who love DonaldTrump.

People who despise Donald Trump.

People who haven't voted in 20 years, and danged if they're gonna break that streak now.

People who definitely belong to some wing of the lunatic fringe.

Normal people with jobs.

My biggest challenge is keeping this menagerie from fussing at one another.

It's the United States of America.

The Bill of Rights is still law.

And no, I don't think my Luciferian friend is changing a lot of minds nor  winning souls for the Prince of Darkness with her funny memes about Aleister Crowley. My friends are usually pretty strong-minded people.

If someone calls me into an office about something on my Facebook page: well, good luck guilting me over it.

 

[ksfisher]

7 minutes ago, JulieM said:

I was only going on Jeanne's personal knowledge on that and have no reason to doubt her.

I agree with you about apostasy.  But we were discussing this specific case and I see no evidence of apostasy (again going from Jeanne's personal knowledge on this).  

Hopefully, she'll continue posting about what happens with this sister.

I hope Jeanne will continue posting.  It would be a shame to judge anyone without a full knowledge of the facts and that is what is bothering me most about this discussion.  People are judging the church and this particular bishop after only reading about one side of the story, and that second hand. 

I see no evidence of apostasy in this particular case as well, because there has no been no evidence presented.

[Tacenda]

47 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

No, I have not.  I have not been addressing this specific sisters Facebook posts since they have not been provided in this thread.  I have been speaking about the church's right to address apostasy in general and about the influence of social media on others.

Why won't her local leaders read the essays?  How do you know they haven't?  Unless you have personal knowledge that they have not they anything you do know is hearsay.

Interestingly, some leaders who disfellowshipped Grant Palmer, wouldn't read An Insider's View of Mormon Origins, the book that got him disciplined and was once on the bookshelves at Deseret Bookstore.  It might have been too much to take in.  Note his quote in 2009 here...."My research as an honest historian, as you know, is that most of the foundations of the LDS church as taught today are seriously flawed. However, I have always offered when speaking with church leaders to change things in my book that are demonstrated to be false. Unfortunately, they have never bothered to even read the book"....they might think it will hurt their testimonies to read the essays.  It has damaged a few testimonies out there.  I'm glad they put them on LDS.org though.

Edited March 28, 2016 by Tacenda

[ksfisher]

23 minutes ago, consiglieri said:

 

Any organization that equates criticism with disloyalty doesn't merit loyalty.

Criticism and opposition, I'm sure you would agree, are two different things.  Sometimes it's hard to tell when one crosses the line.

[ksfisher]

23 minutes ago, consiglieri said:

I can't.

It's secret.

But it is plain as day that the LDS Church speaks out of both sides of its mouth on this issue.  On the one hand, a member is free to have opinions, but on the other hand, a member is not free to express those opinions.

You may have your opinions, but don't go round expressing them or bad things can happen to you.

That is the message we see playing out before our eyes.

Welcome to The Church of George Orwell of Latter-day Saints.

I appreciate that you have a negative attitude towards the church. 

Also appreciated is your assertion that CH1 states that members may not have their own opinions, and then your failure to back that up with anything except your cynical attitude towards the church.

[Scott Lloyd]

45 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

Please quote the relevant passage.

 

40 minutes ago, consiglieri said:

I can't.

It's secret.

 

So you can't substantiate it then.

This reminds me of Joe McCarthy and his imaginary list of 205 communists who had infiltrated the federal government.

[Scott Lloyd]

21 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

Criticism and opposition, I'm sure you would agree, are two different things.  Sometimes it's hard to tell when one crosses the line.

While at other times, it's not all that difficult to tell.

 

[ALarson]

57 minutes ago, consiglieri said:

CHI-1

We can definitely have our own opinions.  It's just when someone starts preaching them, if they are in opposition to the church, and if someone is trying to develop a following or draw members away from the church, where a person can be charged with apostasy.  I think that's clear and I also think it is the right of church leaders to discipline a member for doing this.

[ksfisher]

1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said:

While at other times, it's not all that difficult to tell.

 

I guess it just depends on your perspective.  Sometimes the beam in ones own eye can blind a person to the fact that they have crossed a line.  To this end a loving Heavenly Father has given us prophets, apostles, bishops, and other church leaders who are charged with particular stewardships.  I would hope that if I ever did or said anything that was damaging to anothers testimony that my bishop or stake president would pull me aside and offer some advice.