rockpond Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: I think it goes beyond that, but as jkwilliams said, YMMV. Do you have any evidence to suggest that NOM is pushing for change within the church?
jkwilliams Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: I think it goes beyond that, but as jkwilliams said, YMMV. Without knowing what you're talking about, it's difficult to say. Every new order Mormon I have ever known has simply been someone who wants to stay in the church despite not really believing in it. I have never known any who are trying to change the church from within. I do know active members who are trying to change the church from within, but they are generally believers who would be mortified to be lumped in with the unbelieving new order.
stemelbow Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 I guess I dont' see the problem with change. I'd love to see the Church change and I speak up in class, or discuss things one and one for that purpose. Maybe I'm bad, but I like to think things like racism in the Church to disappear.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 2 minutes ago, rockpond said: Do you have any evidence to suggest that NOM is pushing for change within the church? The not-so-subtle call for the Church to repeal its doctrine with regard to homosexual behavior is what I would view as such an effort by some who style themselves by such an appellation. 3
jkwilliams Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 3 minutes ago, rockpond said: Do you have any evidence to suggest that NOM is pushing for change within the church? Good question. They're either really good at hiding their intentions (keeping them from hardened apostates like me), or they aren't actually trying to change the church. I've met NOM bishops, RS presidents, elders quorum presidents, and so on. None I have ever met cares in the least about changing the church. They are just trying to figure out how to stay in the church for their own reasons.
Gray Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 (edited) 9 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: But only on Blue Monday? Blue Monday is the only day I'm not a Depeche Mode Mormon Otherwise you'll find me deep in meditation, as I Enjoy the Silence and seek out my own Personal Jesus. Edited July 18, 2016 by Gray
jkwilliams Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 Just now, Gray said: Blue Monday is the only day I'm not a Depeche Mode Mormon I'm more of a Joy Division Mormon. 1
rockpond Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 5 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: The not-so-subtle call for the Church to repeal its doctrine with regard to homosexual behavior is what I would view as such an effort by some who style themselves by such an appellation. Who is doing that? Or are you just trying to slander a group of people based on your interaction with a couple of individuals?
jkwilliams Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 6 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: The not-so-subtle call for the Church to repeal its doctrine with regard to homosexual behavior is what I would view as such an effort by some who style themselves by such an appellation. Again, the people I know who are trying to change the church's stand on homosexuality are people who believe in the restored gospel. There's nothing particularly new order-ish about them.
ttribe Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 (edited) 33 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: The post, as you quoted, refers to "NuOrder Mormonism," the term that salgare used in his post to me, and one that I interpret to mean a movement, philosophy, pressure group or faction and one that is implicitly at odds with the official and doctrinal positions of the Church. Since I don't believe the Church, which is governed by God through revelation to prophets and apostles, is subject or vulnerable to pressure group tactics, I regard such a movement as irrelevant as it pertains to the progress and ongoing operation of the Church. I don't believe -- nor do I agree that my post gives the impression -- that "those people don't matter." Obviously, all are precious in the sight of God. It certainly wasn't "obvious" that you consider all to be "precious in the sight of God" and I really don't care whether you believe your post to not give an impression of indifference (perhaps, even, disdain) for the so-called "NOM" crowd. As an observer, it did create that impression in me (and, no, I wasn't "looking for a reason to be offended", before you go there). Quote I notice you evaded my question: It's your choice not to respond to it. I will merely point out that you did fail to respond. I didn't respond because it has absolutely nothing to do with my criticism of your post. It's a completely ancillary issue. Edited July 18, 2016 by ttribe 1
consiglieri Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 27 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: In those two years were you trying to pressure the Church into changing to suit your preferences? This comment rankles. I am a member of the LDS Church. That means it is as much my church as it is anybody else's. Change can come from anybody and anywhere. And the most positive changes usually don't come from the top down.
stemelbow Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 1 minute ago, consiglieri said: This comment rankles. I am a member of the LDS Church. That means it is as much my church as it is anybody else's. Change can come from anybody and anywhere. And the most positive changes usually don't come from the top down. That's what I've been wanting to convey. I don't get the fear of people who want to see change, and even suggest it. 1
UtahTexan Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 4 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: Again, the people I know who are trying to change the church's stand on homosexuality are people who believe in the restored gospel. There's nothing particularly new order-ish about them. If they want a change...they can stop grandstanding and pray. The Lord will change it....not men....or the Lord won't. The theatrics will not impress the Lord 2
jkwilliams Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 7 minutes ago, rockpond said: Who is doing that? Or are you just trying to slander a group of people based on your interaction with a couple of individuals? Indeed. I know some believers who wish the church's policies were more inclusive of gays, but I they aren't trying to change doctrines. An old friend, for example, is involved with Mama Dragons. I'm sure some people consider them disloyal ark steadiers, but she believes in the gospel and is doing what she believes is right in protecting gay kids from harm. But she's not a NOM, and she's not trying to change doctrine. The NOM folks don't believe in the church, generally speaking, so why would they care about changing doctrines? Unless "new order" means "people I disagree with," Scott's assertions don't make much sense. 1
rockpond Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 4 minutes ago, consiglieri said: This comment rankles. I am a member of the LDS Church. That means it is as much my church as it is anybody else's. Change can come from anybody and anywhere. And the most positive changes usually don't come from the top down. Amen, Consig! 1
stemelbow Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 1 minute ago, CountryBoy said: If they want a change...they can stop grandstanding and pray. The Lord will change it....not men....or the Lord won't. The theatrics will not impress the Lord It feels like the only time the Church changes is when someone, other than the top leaders, actually take a stand and do something about it. I'm just saying it feels like. It can certainly happen either way. 1
rockpond Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 8 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: Again, the people I know who are trying to change the church's stand on homosexuality are people who believe in the restored gospel. There's nothing particularly new order-ish about them. Similarly, my experience has been that people who disagree with the church's teachings/policies regarding homosexuality come from all different points on the spectrum of belief.
UtahTexan Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 (edited) 8 minutes ago, consiglieri said: This comment rankles. I am a member of the LDS Church. That means it is as much my church as it is anybody else's. Change can come from anybody and anywhere. And the most positive changes usually don't come from the top down. If you are true member...not just a member in name only, then you should know that the Lord will be the one who changes things...whining to men doesn't.....if you want change, Pray. Edited July 18, 2016 by CountryBoy
jkwilliams Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 7 minutes ago, consiglieri said: This comment rankles. I am a member of the LDS Church. That means it is as much my church as it is anybody else's. Change can come from anybody and anywhere. And the most positive changes usually don't come from the top down. But change in the church almost always comes from the top down. At least in my experience it does.
rockpond Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 4 minutes ago, CountryBoy said: If they want a change...they can stop grandstanding and pray. The Lord will change it....not men....or the Lord won't. The theatrics will not impress the Lord And yet the Lord still seems to want leaders who will go to Him, ask, and listen. And often something (a wife upset at cleaning tobacco spit, a government threat, a temple being built in a predominantly black area of the world, etc) turns out to be the catalyst of the leader asking the question and listening for an answer. Or at least that is the pattern I have seen.
UtahTexan Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 2 minutes ago, stemelbow said: It feels like the only time the Church changes is when someone, other than the top leaders, actually take a stand and do something about it. I'm just saying it feels like. It can certainly happen either way. No......the Church will not change just because society does. The GAs will not change this just because liberals who dislike the Bible teachings want it so. Any change will have to come from the Lord.... 1
jkwilliams Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 3 minutes ago, rockpond said: Similarly, my experience has been that people who disagree with the church's teachings/policies regarding homosexuality come from all different points on the spectrum of belief. Don't get me wrong. I know a lot of NOMs who are as appalled at the church's recent policy change as I am. But are they agitating for change, organized or not? If they are, I'm not seeing it. Either way, the idea that the brethren care what us unbelievers want is laughable.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, ttribe said: It certainly wasn't "obvious" that you consider all to be "precious in the sight of God" and I really don't care whether you believe your post to not give an impression of indifference (perhaps, even, disdain) for the so-called "NOM" crowd. As an observer, it did create that impression in me (and, no, I wasn't "looking for a reason to be offended", before you go there). So, it doesn't matter that I say I believe all to be precious in the sight of God. ttribe the omiscient knows otherwise. ttribe is a higher authority on what I think and believe than I am. All hail ttribe! Edited July 18, 2016 by Scott Lloyd 2
ttribe Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said: So, it doesn't matter that I say I believe all to be precious in the sight of God. ttribe the omiscient knows otherwise. ttribe is a higher authority on what I think and believe than I am. Oh, good grief. Stop being so childish. As a speaker, or writer, I bear some responsibility for creating impressions I didn't intend. If that was not your intent, consider my post feedback and move on.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 (edited) 6 minutes ago, ttribe said: Oh, good grief. Stop being so childish. As a speaker, or writer, I bear some responsibility for creating impressions I didn't intend. If that was not your intent, consider my post feedback and move on. I consider your post a flat contradiction to a direct statement I made about my own thought and belief, a subject on which I happen to be the world's foremost authority. Perhaps you were looking for a reason to be offended. Oh, wait, you said don't go there. Well, just consider that comment as "feedback, and move on." Edited July 18, 2016 by Scott Lloyd 1
Recommended Posts