Elder M. Russell Ballard: "To Whom Shall We Go"

[mfbukowski]

3 hours ago, california boy said:

Well I have stated my views on the issues you brought up.  That is my only intent.  I get that you have a different understanding of what Christ taught.  I also expressed what I view as the core message of Christ.  I don't need you to accept that message if you see something else that is more important to you in his teachings.  Heck, most of the world has a different view of what Christ taught.  So not a big surprise is it?

So then there is nothing more to say about it, right?

Edited October 6, 2016 by mfbukowski

[california boy]

12 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

So then there is nothing more to say about it, right?

I am always willing to discuss more.  I think I have clearly stated my beliefs and why.  If anyone is unclear on what I have stated, I would be glad to clarify.  What else am I suppose to do?  Argue my opinion is more important than someone else?  How does that help?

I would love to here anyone's views on how important the church is when there was no true church on the earth for 1800 years.  Why is it so important now? It looks like God thought it was not important to anyone's salvation for billions of his children.  

[mfbukowski]

22 hours ago, california boy said:

 

Now tell me again how no one can be saved if they don't buy into the Mormon brand of organized religion.  If having a church on earth is of so little importance to God, then why not just let the rest of mankind be baptized after they are dead.  Because it seems to me that for 1800 years, Christ could care less about having any church on the earth.  This tiny tiny .00001% of all of mankind are the only ones that organized religion is important to?  Really?  No one wanted to be a part of Christ's church until 1830?  No one was worthy of Christ's church until 1830? No one would have listened to someone who speaks for God and is guided by him until 1830?  The Holy Spirit could not guide people to the church of Christ until 1830?  

You know I am really trying to follow your argument here- it seems important to you because you keep repeating it.  Help me out please.

Catholics often use this argument in favor of organized religion and against the idea of apostasy.  Their point is that there WAS organized religion on the earth for 1800 years and therefore thee was no apostasy, and no need for a restoration.  Here is a quote from a Catholic website arguing against the LDS idea of the apostasy, using your argument

Quote

Catholics and members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS), the Mormons, can agree on one very important principle. Both Catholics and the LDS believe in an authoritative, hierarchical church that speaks with the authority of Christ. The problem with the Mormon attempt to claim apostolic authority is the obvious fact that there was no such Mormon church until less than 200 years ago. The informed Catholic need only ask the question: "Why would I leave the Catholic Church which was, as a matter of history, founded by Jesus Christ and received apostolic authority directly from Christ and the apostles, to join the LDS? The bishops in union with the pope are the true successors of the apostles and possess apostolic authority."

http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/latter-day-saints-and-the-great-apostasy

So you are arguing in favor of Catholicism?  But that is an organized religion obviously.  How does this help your position AGAINST organized religion?

How does this point defend your idea that organized religion is not necessary?

The only way I can understand your position is if you are still accepting the Mormon Doctrine of the apostasy.  We know of course that we believe in baptism for the dead, and therefore those who lived on earth were NOT "damaged" by NOT being baptized because they could be baptized later, during the millenium etc.

So please help my confusion

God DOES let the rest of mankind be baptized after they are dead.  That is Mormon doctrine.  So you are in favor of that Mormon doctrine?

The Mormon position was that the WRONG position - the Catholic church- was on the earth, continuing at least to preach the name of Jesus Christ to the world and getting some doctrines right- just not the fullness of the gospel.

We believe that many were inspired by the Holy Ghost during the time of the apostasy, 

Quote

 

Then in 1517, the Spirit moved Martin Luther, a German priest who was disturbed at how far the church had strayed from the gospel as taught by Christ. His work led to a reformation, a movement that was taken up by such other visionaries as John Calvin, Huldrych Zwingli, John Wesley, and John Smith.

I believe these reformers were inspired to create a religious climate in which God could restore lost truths and priesthood authority. Similarly, God inspired the earlier explorers and colonizers of America and the framers of the Constitution of the United States to develop a land and governing principles to which the gospel could be restored.

 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1994/10/restored-truth?lang=eng

So I am really confused.

Will you please explain your point to me?   I do not understand the argument at all.

Edited October 6, 2016 by mfbukowski

[Tacenda]

49 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Huh? Please clarify.  The word "ventriloquist" keeps running uncontrollably through my mind.  Sorry but that is the truth.

I often wonder who is speaking for God or Jesus in the scriptures, if they really came from Him, or someone is using Him, or taking His name in vain, to get their way.

[mfbukowski]

35 minutes ago, california boy said:

I am always willing to discuss more.  I think I have clearly stated my beliefs and why.  If anyone is unclear on what I have stated, I would be glad to clarify.  What else am I suppose to do?  Argue my opinion is more important than someone else?  How does that help?

I would love to here anyone's views on how important the church is when there was no true church on the earth for 1800 years.  Why is it so important now? It looks like God thought it was not important to anyone's salvation for billions of his children.  

Are you aware that we teach that Christ and his angels preach to the dead?  That we baptize people who are dead by proxy?  That during the Millenium those who seek to be baptized may be able to come and reveal themselves so that they can be baptized?

From the point of view of the argument- THAT is clearly solved by LDS doctrine.  The LDS church is the ONLY one which actually HAS an answer to this question.

One of the reasons I joined the church was that it DID answer the question- I had asked that question myself.  Catholicism did not have the answer- I was taught the idea of Limbo which the Catholics now say was never doctrine- but I was sure taught it in the 1950s as a kid in Catholic school.

Perhaps you don't believe the doctrine- but you cannot say we do not have an answer

Were you unaware that was an LDS belief??

[mfbukowski]

24 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I often wonder who is speaking for God or Jesus in the scriptures, if they really came from Him, or someone is using Him, or taking His name in vain, to get their way.

Well human prophets speak what they think God wanted them to teach.

We read the prophet's words and decide by the spirit if we think they are scripture or not.  That is what Moroni 10 teaches.

Does that help?  

Edited October 6, 2016 by mfbukowski
unclear statement

[JLHPROF]

37 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I often wonder who is speaking for God or Jesus in the scriptures, if they really came from Him, or someone is using Him, or taking His name in vain, to get their way.

Fair question.
But how can you believe in Christ any other way?  100% of everything we know about Christ, from Birth to the Atonement to every teaching and action in between came straight out of scripture.
 

[Tacenda]

17 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Fair question.
But how can you believe in Christ any other way?  100% of everything we know about Christ, from Birth to the Atonement to every teaching and action in between came straight out of scripture.
 

It's a huge stumbling block for me. 

[california boy]

11 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

You know I am really trying to follow your argument here- it seems important to you because you keep repeating it.  Help me out please.

Catholics often use this argument in favor of organized religion and against the idea of apostasy.  Their point is that there WAS organized religion on the earth for 1800 years and therefore thee was no apostasy, and no need for a restoration.  Here is a quote from a Catholic website arguing against the LDS idea of the apostasy, using your argument

http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/latter-day-saints-and-the-great-apostasy

So you are arguing in favor of Catholicism?  But that is an organized religion obviously.  How does this help your position AGAINST organized religion?

How does this point defend your idea that organized religion is not necessary?

The only way I can understand your position is if you are still accepting the Mormon Doctrine of the apostasy.  We know of course that we believe in baptism for the dead, and therefore those who lived on earth were NOT "damaged" by NOT being baptized because they could be baptized later, during the millenium etc.

So please help my confusion

God DOES let the rest of mankind be baptized after they are dead.  That is Mormon doctrine.  So you are in favor of that Mormon doctrine?

The Mormon position was that the WRONG position - the Catholic church- was on the earth, continuing at least to preach the name of Jesus Christ to the world and getting some doctrines right- just not the fullness of the gospel.

We believe that many were inspired by the Holy Ghost during the time of the apostasy, 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1994/10/restored-truth?lang=eng

So I am really confused.

Will you please explain your point to me?   I do not understand the argument at all.

My consistent belief is that organized religion where others tell you what you should believe, what Christ "really" ment. How much money you should give them.  Using fear as leverage to extort and get what they want.  Threatening them by using their children or any other means they can think up against them.  Telling people to fight their military battles or political wars in the name of God.  etc etc etc are all man made.  Step back a little.  This is not the gospel Christ taught, at least in my opinion.

One finds Christ by implementing His teachings in your life.  It is a message of love, charity, giving yourself to others, loosing yourself to find yourself, visiting those in prison, feeding the poor, taking care of the widows, giving to those that thirst.  None of that requires a structure that does what organized religion claims one needs in order to be "saved".  Helping the poor, taking care of the widow, visiting those in prison, all of those things, does not have to be routed through a church.  Organized religion, including the Mormon church has not saved a single person.  They can not.  Only Christ can do that.  

Building grand cathedrals, temples and even malls are not part of that process.  Having someone, anyone, stand up every sunday and tell you what to believe and threaten you if you don't do what they say is not a part of that.  Reading the scriptures and listening to the Holy Ghost whisper into your heart how you should live your life is the way Christ gave us to be followers of Him and His message.  Trust God.  Putting your trust in the follies of men is not the way back to Him.

Just my opinion.  It is what the Spirt whispers into my heart.  And when I see how the church treats those that try so hard to follow Christ, it only confirms that for me, I am on the path that God wants me to follow.  Where will we go?  To whom shall we turn?  Has organized religion so convinced man to not turn to Christ, that people don't have the answer to that question?

[JLHPROF]

31 minutes ago, california boy said:

One finds Christ by implementing His teachings in your life.  It is a message of love, charity, giving yourself to others, loosing yourself to find yourself, visiting those in prison, feeding the poor, taking care of the widows, giving to those that thirst.  None of that requires a structure that does what organized religion claims one needs in order to be "saved".  Helping the poor, taking care of the widow, visiting those in prison, all of those things, does not have to be routed through a church.  Organized religion, including the Mormon church has not saved a single person.  They can not.  Only Christ can do that.

Building grand cathedrals, temples and even malls are not part of that process.  Having someone, anyone, stand up every sunday and tell you what to believe and threaten you if you don't do what they say is not a part of that.  Reading the scriptures and listening to the Holy Ghost whisper into your heart how you should live your life is the way Christ gave us to be followers of Him and His message.

I think you need to read the scriptures a bit more then.
Even leaving any Church out of the equation, this is still not even close to everything Christ taught or required.
That's an issue of simple reading comprehension.

Nobody tells me what to believe (that should be apparent on my posts).  I can read the scriptures all by myself.
And oddly enough, they seem to match most closely (although not exactly) to what just one of the Churches teach.  Go figure.

Edited October 6, 2016 by JLHPROF

[california boy]

3 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

I think you need to read the scriptures a bit more then.
Even leaving any Church out of the equation, this is still not even close to everything Christ taught or required.
That's an issue of simple reading comprehension.

Nobody tells me what to believe (that should be apparent on my posts).  I can read the scriptures all by myself.
And oddly enough, they seem to match most closely (although not exactly) to what just one of the Churches teach.  Go figure.

Nevermind.  Continue on.

On second thought, I would like to know.  If you were living in 1800 or 1700 or 1500 or whenever prior to the church being restored.  Would you still claim that joining an organized religion was necessary in order to be a follower of Christ.

Edited October 6, 2016 by california boy

[mfbukowski]

15 hours ago, california boy said:

My consistent belief is that organized religion where others tell you what you should believe, what Christ "really" ment. How much money you should give them.  Using fear as leverage to extort and get what they want.  Threatening them by using their children or any other means they can think up against them.  Telling people to fight their military battles or political wars in the name of God.  etc etc etc are all man made.  Step back a little.  This is not the gospel Christ taught, at least in my opinion.

One finds Christ by implementing His teachings in your life.  It is a message of love, charity, giving yourself to others, loosing yourself to find yourself, visiting those in prison, feeding the poor, taking care of the widows, giving to those that thirst.  None of that requires a structure that does what organized religion claims one needs in order to be "saved".  Helping the poor, taking care of the widow, visiting those in prison, all of those things, does not have to be routed through a church.  Organized religion, including the Mormon church has not saved a single person.  They can not.  Only Christ can do that.  

Building grand cathedrals, temples and even malls are not part of that process.  Having someone, anyone, stand up every sunday and tell you what to believe and threaten you if you don't do what they say is not a part of that.  Reading the scriptures and listening to the Holy Ghost whisper into your heart how you should live your life is the way Christ gave us to be followers of Him and His message.  Trust God.  Putting your trust in the follies of men is not the way back to Him.

Just my opinion.  It is what the Spirt whispers into my heart.  And when I see how the church treats those that try so hard to follow Christ, it only confirms that for me, I am on the path that God wants me to follow.  Where will we go?  To whom shall we turn?  Has organized religion so convinced man to not turn to Christ, that people don't have the answer to that question?

I deduced Mormonism before I was a member, and it filled in the gaps in what I already believed.

I would never, and never have, listened to someone telling me what to believe.  I can't imagine why anyone would do that.

If that's the way you see Mormonism clearly you have made the right choice in leaving.

That is still however not a good argument against organized religion or Mormonism. It is at best a good explanation for why you have left. I don't know of any more other Mormons who would agree with your point of view.

Just saying.

I believe a cultural context is absolutely essential to a religious point of view. Service and fellowship are fundamental aspects of all religion in my opinion.

Edited October 7, 2016 by mfbukowski

[california boy]

7 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

I deduced Mormonism before I was a member, and it filled in the gaps in what I already believed.

I would never, and never have, listened to someone telling me what to believe.  I can't imagine why anyone would do that.

If that's the way you see Mormonism clearly you have made the right choice in leaving.

That is still however not a good argument against organized religion or Mormonism. It is at best a good explanation for why you have left. I don't know of any more other Mormons who would agree with your point of view.

Just saying.

I believe a cultural context is absolutely essential to a religious point of view. Service and fellowship are fundamental aspects of all religion in my opinion.

Well that is really what religious dogma is, someone telling you what you should believe.  Heck, they don't limit it to what Christ taught, they tell you what you should think about things that Christ never even commented on.  And the way they justify that is to tell you that "they" are special and God tells them what you should believe.  That is how all religion works, not just Mormons.  Martin Luther believed this, so you should also.  The pope is God's representative on earth, so you should do what he says.  They all use scriptures from the Bible to booster their statements.  The trouble is, there is very few positions that can not be supported by the Bible.  Men argue completely opposite points of view and both use the Bible to support their claims.  The scriptures have been used to support some very hideous things.

And there is usually a reason for them telling you something came from God.  You should kill these people, they are heretics (one of their favorites)  These people are met to serve you because their skin color is a curse from God so that you will know that they are not worthy of the blessings you are entitled to.  You should call these people apostates because they are sinners and God wants us to call them apostates.  The list is endless.  You are lucky if none of those messages effected you.  And yes you are right.  Fresh off a mission and at a time in my life where I would have done anything a church leader told me to do to please God, I naively trusted that church leaders did speak for God to the point that I married someone that I was not attracted to because "god told church leaders that I should."  Making false promises that they looked me in my eye and told me came from god.  Think of the implications of what that means in a person's life.  It is not one of those things you wake up the next morning and say, wow that was a bad idea.  I guess church leaders really are just like everyone else.  The only difference is they claim their opinions come from God himself.  If you don't follow my opinions, you will be forever damned.  

Of course I am happy for you that you find such joy in Mormonism.  Like you said, it works for you.  For me, not so much.  And frankly I see little difference between sects, just different dogma, all justified by scripture.  All justified because God told them that their opinions are the correct ones.  There is not a single religion in the world that does not claim that they have the ear of God. Do you realize how lucky you are to find what 99.9% of the world has not been able to find?  God speaks to your leaders.  The rest are making this stuff up.

[Nofear]

22 hours ago, california boy said:

On second thought, I would like to know.  If you were living in 1800 or 1700 or 1500 or whenever prior to the church being restored.  Would you still claim that joining an organized religion was necessary in order to be a follower of Christ.

Of course one can follow Christ without an organized religion. One can follow Christ without even knowing who he is. Every human has access, Mormon or otherwise, to the light of Christ. And as Joseph Smith taught, we'll only be judged according to the light we've received.

Nevertheless, organized religion allows us to go further, to receive and be accountable for more. Having and following the Gospel and being a member of Christ's Church is a blessing. Apparently most of humanity through most of time was not ready to receive the greater light and truth. Even today, most of humanity isn't ready. Still, we try to offer the blessings to as many as will receive them or whatever degree of light and truth they are willing to receive.

[california boy]

5 minutes ago, Nofear said:

Of course one can follow Christ without an organized religion. One can follow Christ without even knowing who he is. Every human has access, Mormon or otherwise, to the light of Christ. And as Joseph Smith taught, we'll only be judged according to the light we've received.

Nevertheless, organized religion allows us to go further, to receive and be accountable for more. Having and following the Gospel and being a member of Christ's Church is a blessing. Apparently most of humanity through most of time was not ready to receive the greater light and truth. Even today, most of humanity isn't ready. Still, we try to offer the blessings to as many as will receive them or whatever degree of light and truth they are willing to receive.

So your answer to my question is what?  They were not allowed to go further because they were born at the wrong time?  That's unfortunate isn't it.  Do you realize how incredibly lucky you are?  You got what has been withheld from 99.9% of the rest of mankind.  God must really love you.  Those born before 1830, not so much.  They were not worthy of the insights and blessings you have been given.  Or is it all just bad luck for them.  

[Nofear]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

So your answer to my question is what?  They were not allowed to go further because they were born at the wrong time?  That's unfortunate isn't it.  Do you realize how incredibly lucky you are?  You got what has been withheld from 99.9% of the rest of mankind.  God must really love you.  Those born before 1830, not so much.  They were not worthy of the insights and blessings you have been given.  Or is it all just bad luck for them.  

"Bad luck" presumes our birth time frame is by chance. LDS theology does not assume that.
While there is advantage to having the Gospel in its fullness in mortality, that advantage doesn't deny anybody any blessings.

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

So your answer to my question is what?  They were not allowed to go further because they were born at the wrong time?  That's unfortunate isn't it.  Do you realize how incredibly lucky you are?  You got what has been withheld from 99.9% of the rest of mankind.  God must really love you.  Those born before 1830, not so much.  They were not worthy of the insights and blessings you have been given.  Or is it all just bad luck for them.

Based on pre-mortality.  (See Alma 13, Abraham 3, and others).

And even those born when the gospel is not on the earth will receive salvation and have the opportunity to choose exaltation.

Your argument sees a problem that doesn't exist.

[california boy]

11 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Based on pre-mortality.  (See Alma 13, Abraham 3, and others).

And even those born when the gospel is not on the earth will receive salvation and have the opportunity to choose exaltation.

Your argument sees a problem that doesn't exist.

Then you make my point quite clearly.  There is little value to belonging to organized religion in obtaining exaltation.

[rockpond]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

Then you make my point quite clearly.  There is little value to belonging to organized religion in obtaining exaltation.

Well, that's one conclusion I arrived at during the reconstruction of my faith:  my salvation is not dependent on my membership in the LDS (or any) church.  I stay for a variety of reasons but that is not one of them. 

[Nofear]

11 hours ago, california boy said:

Then you make my point quite clearly.  There is little value to belonging to organized religion in obtaining exaltation.

One still has to accept the Kingdom of God to be saved. If in mortality one has a real, honest to goodness chance at accepting it but rejects it, that isn't a good sign that they'll accept it after mortality. We are not different identities just because of death. Yet, it is not my or any of us's place to judge another's eternal destiny so I shan't.

Note also that the Mormon version of universalism (it's not really universalism) doesn't remove the fact that acceptance of the fullness of the Gospel now, if one because of foreordination is so blessed to have that opportunity, is a significant stepping stone / advantage to our eternal progression. Plus, the Gospel, for me, has greatly enhanced my own mortal experience, now. That, in of itself, is value enough for me.

[california boy]

1 hour ago, Nofear said:

One still has to accept the Kingdom of God to be saved. If in mortality one has a real, honest to goodness chance at accepting it but rejects it, that isn't a good sign that they'll accept it after mortality. We are not different identities just because of death. Yet, it is not my or any of us's place to judge another's eternal destiny so I shan't.

Note also that the Mormon version of universalism (it's not really universalism) doesn't remove the fact that acceptance of the fullness of the Gospel now, if one because of foreordination is so blessed to have that opportunity, is a significant stepping stone / advantage to our eternal progression. Plus, the Gospel, for me, has greatly enhanced my own mortal experience, now. That, in of itself, is value enough for me.

What is a real honest to goodness chance in accepting the gospel?  I don't think any of us can judge what that is.

I think the key to your statement is that the gospel for you enhances your own life.  That is a good reason to stay involved in the church.  But for many, the church can be quite the opposite.  I am sure you can see that side of the coin as well. 

[mfbukowski]

40 minutes ago, california boy said:

What is a real honest to goodness chance in accepting the gospel?  I don't think any of us can judge what that is.

I think the key to your statement is that the gospel for you enhances your own life.  That is a good reason to stay involved in the church.  But for many, the church can be quite the opposite.  I am sure you can see that side of the coin as well. 

And then you leave and don't look back or want your children baptized into such a horrible religion.

That has been my point from the beginning.

[california boy]

10 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

And then you leave and don't look back or want your children baptized into such a horrible religion.

That has been my point from the beginning.

I am not quite sure why you are having such a hard time with this concept.  My children are all baptized in the church.  Not all are active.  Those that are, I fully support their involvement in the church.  Like NoFear, the church seems to work well for them and they enjoy being involved.  

For me, as I have explained, the church is definitely not a good place.  I indeed have walked away from the church and never looked back.  And as you can tell from this discussion, I have no use or need for organized religion in general.  I tend to thrive spiritually away from those that claim to speak for God.  i obviously do not believe their claims.  In fact, they have proven to be demonstratively false.

Edited October 9, 2016 by california boy

[Nofear]

I quite agree the Church isn't for everybody, at least not as they are. Quite frankly neither is the current membership of the Church ready for Zion, at least not as we are.

Still the invitation and necessity for all of us, member or otherwise, to repent and become a better disciple of Christ remains. In his life some were not ready to follow Christ and so walked away. So it so today. Some others tried to follow him as they could despite their imperfections, for who else could they turn to? And so it is today.

Follow Christ as you feel you must. When you are ready the necessary and public covenant to publicly acknowledge and confess submission to Christ and recognition the authority of his Kingdom the invitation to return is there... always.

Of course proselytizing is not the purpose of this board nor is it allowed. We disagree on the utility, necessity, and authority our Lord has placed in an organization administered by imperfect mortals. So my above invitation, to you, holds no merit. Apparently neither of us sees the other's position as incontrovertible. No worries. As long as greater understanding of the other's position is obtained this forum has acheived it's purpose. If I have furher questions to to ask about that which you have shared I know who to ask. But you have a way of avoiding that need by speaking with clarity and without contention even if sometimes there is small misunderstanding of LDS doctrine you hold. For that, thank yu. ☺

[california boy]

10 hours ago, Nofear said:

I quite agree the Church isn't for everybody, at least not as they are. Quite frankly neither is the current membership of the Church ready for Zion, at least not as we are.

Still the invitation and necessity for all of us, member or otherwise, to repent and become a better disciple of Christ remains. In his life some were not ready to follow Christ and so walked away. So it so today. Some others tried to follow him as they could despite their imperfections, for who else could they turn to? And so it is today.

Follow Christ as you feel you must. When you are ready the necessary and public covenant to publicly acknowledge and confess submission to Christ and recognition the authority of his Kingdom the invitation to return is there... always.

Of course proselytizing is not the purpose of this board nor is it allowed. We disagree on the utility, necessity, and authority our Lord has placed in an organization administered by imperfect mortals. So my above invitation, to you, holds no merit. Apparently neither of us sees the other's position as incontrovertible. No worries. As long as greater understanding of the other's position is obtained this forum has acheived it's purpose. If I have furher questions to to ask about that which you have shared I know who to ask. But you have a way of avoiding that need by speaking with clarity and without contention even if sometimes there is small misunderstanding of LDS doctrine you hold. For that, thank yu. ☺

Very well said.  Thank you.  We may differ on what it means to follow Christ.  But we don't differ in the desire to draw closer to Him.  Accepting that others have a different viewpoint and learning from that viewpoint enriches our lives rather than bringing contention.  I appreciate you sharing yours with me as well as mfbukowski's, JLHPROF and others who have added to this discussion.