No Pics of Seer Stones in our Churches

[Calm]

I find it strange that on the one hand some people are slamming church leaders for being so judgmental, but on the other they are condemning these leaders based on partial information in many cases such as this one.

I have no doubt that leadership can make major errors in this area; I just don't see consistency of treatment here at all.

[deli_llama]

3 hours ago, consiglieri said:

…Kristallnacht.

There is a point where rhetoric becomes so wrapped up and bound tightly to absurdity that boggles reason. Perhaps you have legitimate concerns, but do you really think that language and thoughts like this will help soften the ears of others?

A person might express concern about the recent run of excommunications, but there are boundaries, and to compare fellow saints with those that unleashed the terror that is the Kristallnacht seems a step too far over that line.

I want to be able to understand what you express and feel in your postings, but sometimes. . .

Poor form, sir. 

[Calm]

Thank you, deli.

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Keq82 said:

  Should the way we treat others be based on their beliefs and/or actions?  

So are you suggesting we should treat everyone the same exact way no matter how they behave or believe?  That we should just ignore them as individuals and have a set way of behaving no matter what they do?  That we should respond in the same way to someone who goes the extra mile to help others and someone who is an abuser?  Or we should not treat someone's choices to behave as meaningful at all?  Such cookie cutter response seems more like disrespect of the individual than actual tolerance if that is what you really mean.

If it isn't, you need to rephrase your comment.

My opinion, of course we should treat people based on their beliefs and behaviour.  Actually engaging with them is the best wy to show respect and love for them as individuals.

[Keq82]

39 minutes ago, Calm said:

So are you suggesting we should treat everyone the same exact way no matter how they behave or believe?  That we should just ignore them as individuals and have a set way of behaving no matter what they do?  That we should respond in the same way to someone who goes the extra mile to help others and someone who is an abuser?  Or we should not treat someone's choices to behave as meaningful at all?  Such cookie cutter response seems more like disrespect of the individual than actual tolerance if that is what you really mean.

If it isn't, you need to rephrase your comment.

My opinion, of course we should treat people based on their beliefs and behaviour.  Actually engaging with them is the best wy to show respect and love for them as individuals.

I was using the example of how I saw members treat somebody different because he smoked.  I see people get ostracized all the time in the church over dumb stuff, especially once some members find out about somebody's behavior. 

[Calm]

So what are you actually saying?  Ignore belef behaviour or something else?

[Keq82]

21 hours ago, Calm said:

So what are you actually saying?  Ignore belef behaviour or something else?

I'm saying a lot of LDS members need to stop being judgemental a** ***** and just treat people with respect.  

You are now on Limited.

[Calm]

You mean like consig's judgment of leaders?

[mfbukowski]

On 3/30/2016 at 0:12 PM, flameburns623 said:

Respectfully, it fair astonies me that you are apparently a Mormon and I am not.

I LIKE Mormonism: you telegraph the impression that you do NOT.

It's a lot stronger than that.

There are several like him here, it is a totally a mystery to me.

[Keq82]

3 minutes ago, Calm said:

You mean like consig's judgment of leaders?

No, as in members ostracizing somebody because he/she smokes, drinks, watches a rated R movie, didn't go on a mission, married a non-member, and the list goes on a on.  

[Calm]

14 minutes ago, Keq82 said:

No, as in members ostracizing somebody because he/she smokes, drinks, watches a rated R movie, didn't go on a mission, married a non-member, and the list goes on a on.  

But it is okay for a member to treat another member as if he were a Nazi in your view or is that one ofyour lists?

---------

I am not sure there are any on the board who would disgree with your encouragement of not ostracizing individuals because of breaking simple WoW  covenants, watches R movies, didn't go on a mission, married a nonmember.  These actions more than likely occur from time to time in our wards, humans beings what they are, and we should not participate in them anymore than applaud when one member calls another a Nazi, right.

Edited April 1, 2016 by Calm

[Keq82]

7 hours ago, Calm said:

But it is okay for a member to treat another member as if he were a Nazi in your view or is that one ofyour lists?

---------

I am not sure there are any on the board who would disgree with your encouragement of not ostracizing individuals because of breaking simple WoW  covenants, watches R movies, didn't go on a mission, married a nonmember.  These actions more than likely occur from time to time in our wards, humans beings what they are, and we should not participate in them anymore than applaud when one member calls another a Nazi, right.

No, I don't think a member should call another member a Nazi...

[rodheadlee]

15 hours ago, Jeanne said:

Thank you..and I will tell her that she has friends in the church that more than understand.  A whole life of faith and service done in 15 minutes.  How long consig does it take for a missionary to convert someone?  This is so messed up.

Missionaries don't convert, the Holy Spirit does, my conversion took about 2 seconds. That is why I rolled my eyes in my only post in this thread..Anyone that has been converted does not care about stones and a head in a hat. Everyone must be converted, even BICs or they will never have a testimony. We are not  just some denomination of Christian church, we are Christ's own church. 

Edited April 1, 2016 by rodheadlee

[ksfisher]

8 hours ago, Calm said:

But it is okay for a member to treat another member as if he were a Nazi in your view or is that one ofyour lists?

---------

I am not sure there are any on the board who would disgree with your encouragement of not ostracizing individuals because of breaking simple WoW  covenants, watches R movies, didn't go on a mission, married a nonmember.  These actions more than likely occur from time to time in our wards, humans beings what they are, and we should not participate in them anymore than applaud when one member calls another a Nazi, right.

Perhaps the ward and stake I live in here in Salt Lake is different than others, but I don't think I've seen members ostracized for any of the reasons you've listed (or any reasons actually).  What I have seen is leaders and members reach out to those who are struggling to a greater degree than they otherwise would. 

If anything it seems as though those struggling with WoW issues, or doctrinal or faith issues seem to set themselves apart from others.  I don't know if this is because they intentionally isolate themselves because they perceive themselves as different, or do they sense that people are being "nicer" to them and they don't want to be a project.

Regardless, we need to do a better job of ministering to the needs of the one. 

[rodheadlee]

10 hours ago, Keq82 said:

I was using the example of how I saw members treat somebody different because he smoked.  I see people get ostracized all the time in the church over dumb stuff, especially once some members find out about somebody's behavior. 

I tell you these people's sins are greater than the smokers. This not how Christ would have us be.This is not some fault of the Church, it's the pride of the individual. Pride was the downfall of the Nephites and so will it be of many of our members. 

[Jeanne]

59 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

I tell you these people's sins are greater than the smokers. This not how Christ would have us be.This is not some fault of the Church, it's the pride of the individual. Pride was the downfall of the Nephites and so will it be of many of our members. 

I will be sure and tell my friend she was exed because of her pride. 

[Calm]

Ksfisher, I have also been lucky in wards over the years so while I think it may happen, I have no clue how much.

In the last ward I was in, there were three cases of members smoking I was aware of over the course of +decade. First case was a health issue, he was baptized without requiring him to stop and he was joyously welcomed as a member.  Second and third case, I never heard anyone say one word about their smoking, they held callings and were quite active.  I knew of the one woman because I was her visiting teacher as well as she would come to church smelling of smoke at times.  I could not sit by her at those times not because of ostracizing but because smoke made me ill, same rule for me as women or men who used heavy scents.  The second woman I only knew of because after many years of being fellow ward members I happened to see her smoking in a shopping mall parking lot.  I did not go out of my way to approach her (being shy I probably wouldn't have done it in any case if she didn't see me) because she seemed nervous and I thought she might be embarassed if she knew I knew.  I never mentioned it to her or anyone else but my husband as he was in a position to know and I wondered if there was some way I could help.  He informed me she had been actively working with the leaders for years and it was not to be discussed with her by others as she was quite embarassed about it.  She often turned up right after the sacrament, which pattern I had never noticed, because she felt ashamed to take it.  I thought this unfortunate, she deserved it as much as I did which was also the view of the leaders.  This woman was a YW leader.

In my current ward, the same thing has happened.  I only know of one man who used to smoke as I would see him in the back of his garage next door as I went for walks.  I would wave, but he would not come out to talk so I didn't push.  He was our home teacher for a time.  In the last few years his efforts have paid off and he is sitting happy and tall next to his mother (who never once had a bad word to say about him...never heard one from anyone else and shouldn't as he is a nice guy).  He was ordained an elder and was able to baptize a young relative who reactivated he had helped overcome the same problem.  Wards members were thrilled and loving and still avoid the specifics of his issue. 

Just using examples of smoking, but the same has happened in other cases including alcohol, extreme dress choices, doctrinal issues and even a case of adultery.  Where I have had close personal contact with some members who express feeling ostracized, I haven't seen it from others but the members creating the situation like refusing to continue attending the home ward because of feeling awkward with another family and then getting angry when the ward didn't move to kick out that other family to stop them from insisting on leaving.  Or another member who had sent police to a YW's leader home and threatened to sue her if the leader allowed the daughter to stay with her when the daughter left because of being kicked out or being verbally abused.  This member claimed the ward was completely standoffish, but her daughters told a different story that she had agressively intimidated the ward by threatening legal means when they tried to be supportive.  i believed it since she had done the same to me and over the years had heard her complain that noone cared aboout her after just hearing her refuse to talk to someone trying to do just that.  Another member goes on about how the Church shuns in general terms, yet he has lost belief for years and makes it plain at church at times but I have heard and seen nothing but love expressed to him and about him and only sadness not so much about his disbelief, but about the intensity of his struggle and his anger.

I am not saying there are nocases of exclusion being done by active members, but if we want to change behaviour it seems to me the emphasis should be on how fellowshipping is done right, to teach by example of what to do rather than obsessing endlessly about what is wrong.  Change does not occur without recognition of both the wrong and the right, but even that is not enough.  Effective behavioural change comes by focusing more on the behaviour one desires and rewarding that with a high level of attention.  Focusing on the behaviour one wants to change may actually increase that behaviour overtime (I am talking on a personal level of interaction which is where we are most effective about changing people's hearts) for a variety of reasons...it is learned that it is attention getting, the individual or group may give up trying to change because the emphasis gives the message that their efforts haven't been effective so far so they see as more efforts being the same, etc.

[Calm]

4 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

I will be sure and tell my friend she was exed because of her pride. 

I believe Rod was commenting on those doing the ostracizing.

[Jeanne]

When I re-activated into the church in the early 2001, I was working on my own smoking issues.  I can tell you it is a very special bisshop that stops to say "hello" when one has a cig in her hand.  I will always admire him for that and it made the process of quitting a little easier because I didn't feel like I had to hate myself for it.  Any issues of the WoW is different than other sins only because it is so visible. 

[Jeanne]

11 minutes ago, Calm said:

I believe Rod was commenting on those doing the ostracizing.

My bad..so misunderstood.  That being said, we are all guilty of ostracizing others on both sides of the fence. 

[Scott Lloyd]

On 3/31/2016 at 8:17 AM, ALarson said:

Other than that chapter, I felt his book was pretty well written and quite accurate (I didn't always agree with his conclusions), but it's been quite awhile since I read it.  I know critics always scoff at the theory regarding the Golden Pot, and that was entertaining to read  

But his book was "an insider's view"....he was an insider (in the church and within the CES) and whether you agree with him or not, he got a lot right (from what I remember).  I was not aware that he'd been writing it for so many years, though.

His book, The Incomparable Jesus, was quite good as well, have you read that?  (I read it years ago too....)

 

He was no more an "insider" than I am. And I am no more an "Insider" than most of the professing members of the Church on this board -- including you.

The phrase "insider's view" was a deceptive piece of marketing at best.

 

[Scott Lloyd]

On 3/31/2016 at 10:21 AM, Jeanne said:

It is a shame that you would have to use another name to write a book isn't it?

Why did Palmer have to use another name?

 

[ALarson]

11 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

He was no more an "insider" than I am. And I am no more an "Insider" than most of the professing members of the Church on this board -- including you.

The phrase "insider's view" was a deceptive piece of marketing at best.

Well, he wasn't an outsider (" a person who does not belong to a particular group ").  He was a member of the church and he worked for the CES for years.  I'd say that qualifies for being an insider within the church (" a person within a group or organization ").  I doubt he had any special, secret knowledge, but I don't recall that he made that claim anywhere in his book, did he?

I can't remember many inaccuracies in his book (the Golden Pot theory was interesting  ).  

Edited April 1, 2016 by ALarson

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, rodheadlee said:

Missionaries don't convert, the Holy Spirit does, my conversion took about 2 seconds. That is why I rolled my eyes in my only post in this thread..Anyone that has been converted does not care about stones and a head in a hat. Everyone must be converted, even BICs or they will never have a testimony. We are not  just some denomination of Christian church, we are Christ's own church. 

IOU a ton of rep points for that one!

[ksfisher]

1 hour ago, ALarson said:

 

I can't remember many inaccuracies in his book (the Golden Pot theory was interesting  ).  

Here is a good place to start.

http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/publications/a-summary-of-five-reviews-of-grant-palmers-an-insiders-view-of-mormon-origins