HappyJackWagon Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 11 hours ago, MormonVideoGame said: Okay, let me try again. Why do people leave the church? it has nothing to do with facts and research, at least not for most of them. One of the problems with this kind of statement is it assumes that facts are independent of testimony, emotion, trust, etc. All of these things work together in a soup of reasons why people leave. I doubt there is ever just one reason why people leave because a real person is influenced by myriad of stimulus. Perceived problems with church truth claims can impact a person in many ways, some rational, some emotional. New facts could lead to feelings of betrayal and lack of trust, a change in general belief. I dislike the claim that facts have nothing to do with people leaving because it seems like an effort to excuse the incorrect facts that people were taught, and instead blame the individual. I've often heard that people don't have faith crisis as much as they have truth crisis. They learn new things that impact the way the view the church and interact with it. Just like in any relationship, if there are strong feelings of betrayal, it will impact the relationship. If a couple divorces because one spouse learns of infidelity (fact) would we say that the marriage broke up because of facts? I doubt we would say it that way, but that fact is a massive influence on the emotional connection between spouses so the fact really is important. 1
Spammer Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 19 hours ago, Gray said: Yes, but I'm struggling a bit to understand what that means exactly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consubstantiality Perhaps someone who believes in this doctrine can clarify? This topic always brings me out of lurk mode. Rather than attempt to clarify consubstantiality, it may be better to say that, to understand the trinitarian doctrine, you must first begin with the idea that God is in neither time nor space. Those concepts do not apply. This is taken as axiomatic. In fact, since we are contingent beings rooted in time and space, all of our our language and concepts do not apply. Our thoughts and ideas can never in principle, no matter how refined, rise to such a level that we can grasp what an existence beyond time and space is like. Think about that for a while and let the implications sink in. Only then will we be ready to discuss what consubstantiality means. 4
MiserereNobis Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Spammer said: Rather than attempt to clarify consubstantiality, it may be better to say that, to understand the trinitarian doctrine, you must first begin with the idea that God is in neither time nor space. Those concepts do not apply. This is taken as axiomatic. In fact, since we are contingent beings rooted in time and space, all of our our language and concepts do not apply. Our thoughts and ideas can never in principle, no matter how refined, rise to such a level that we can grasp what an existence beyond time and space is like. Think about that for a while and let the implications sink in. Only then will we be ready to discuss what consubstantiality means. Please think over Spammer's post here people, because it is important. Language cannot ultimately describe God, because He is utterly transcendent -- He is beyond space and time and all such categories and boundaries. This also means that He transcends being transcendent, since that is also a category/boundary, so He is also immanent, which is the Incarnation. Yes, it is a paradox to be both transcendent and immanent, but that's what happens when we try to use language, which is rooted in space and time, to discuss something that is beyond space and time. We always end up wrapped up in paradox. We're at a place where logic breaks down and we're left with direct mystical experience and the reports of those who have had those experiences. Poetry and paradox are the closest we can come to communicating such things. We call them mysteries because ultimately language and language-based logic cannot fully grasp them. In Holy Mass, when the priest elevates the consecrated Host, he declares "Mysterium Fidei" = "The Mystery of Faith!" A transcendent God is now immanent in this Host. It is a mystery because it is a paradox yet it is true. Before any criticisms of the basic idea of religious mysteries occur, please don't overlook the fact that there are mysteries in Mormonism, too Edited March 3, 2017 by MiserereNobis 4
Gray Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 22 minutes ago, Spammer said: This topic always brings me out of lurk mode. Rather than attempt to clarify consubstantiality, it may be better to say that, to understand the trinitarian doctrine, you must first begin with the idea that God is in neither time nor space. Those concepts do not apply. This is taken as axiomatic. In fact, since we are contingent beings rooted in time and space, all of our our language and concepts do not apply. Our thoughts and ideas can never in principle, no matter how refined, rise to such a level that we can grasp what an existence beyond time and space is like. Think about that for a while and let the implications sink in. Only then will we be ready to discuss what consubstantiality means. Thanks Spammer, I appreciate your thoughts. Given that presupposition (God is outside of space and time) it makes sense that we would have difficulty understanding God's nature.
Tacenda Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, MiserereNobis said: Please think over Spammer's post here people, because it is important. Language cannot ultimately describe God, because He is utterly transcendent -- He is beyond space and time and all such categories and boundaries. This also means that He transcends being transcendent, since that is also a category/boundary, so He is also immanent, which is the Incarnation. Yes, it is a paradox to be both transcendent and immanent, but that's what happens when we try to use language, which is rooted in space and time, to discuss something that is beyond space and time. We always end up wrapped up in paradox. We're at a place where logic breaks down and we're left with direct mystical experience and the reports of those who have had those experiences. Poetry and paradox are the closest we can come to communicating such things. We call them mysteries because ultimately language and language-based logic cannot fully grasp them. In Holy Mass, when the priest elevates the consecrated Host, he declares "Mysterium Fidei" = "The Mystery of Faith!" A transcendent God is now immanent in this Host. It is a mystery because it is a paradox yet it is true. Before any criticisms of the basic idea of religious mysteries occur, lease don't overlook the fact that there are mysteries in Mormonism, too I heard once how Trinity works. And I like that you took God out of a box and that he is incomprehensible. The example I heard is, is to look at a candle's flame. You set three candles up, and light the middle candle, the two on either side are lit by the middle (God). HG and Jesus are on the sides. God is spirit, and Jesus was physical and is God also. Same with the HG who is the spirit of God. This made sense to me. And how in the world does a physical God create the universe? Edited March 3, 2017 by Tacenda 1
bluebell Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 42 minutes ago, Spammer said: This topic always brings me out of lurk mode. Rather than attempt to clarify consubstantiality, it may be better to say that, to understand the trinitarian doctrine, you must first begin with the idea that God is in neither time nor space. Those concepts do not apply. This is taken as axiomatic. In fact, since we are contingent beings rooted in time and space, all of our our language and concepts do not apply. Our thoughts and ideas can never in principle, no matter how refined, rise to such a level that we can grasp what an existence beyond time and space is like. Think about that for a while and let the implications sink in. Only then will we be ready to discuss what consubstantiality means. If it is beyond my understanding and grasp, i'm not sure how to even go about thinking about it? It seems the same as telling my 3 year old to think about calculus and it's implications for a while. Can you explain a bit more what you are asking us to do? (Sincere question, not trying to be snarky).
MormonVideoGame Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, JulieM said: I've found most people leave because they learn facts (mostly from church history such as details regarding polygamy. BofM, or BofA). Do you have a scientific poll that proves that? 12 hours ago, Tacenda said: I disagree! Perhaps online exmos on reddit, but most people leave because 1. no friends 2. don't enjoy it 3. see a lot of hypocrisy in the ward. 4. someone offended them. People join the church because of 1. friends (includes the missionaries) 2. enjoy church 3. people are very nice to them 4. looking for blessings/miracles in times of need 5.Welfare and Temporary help from the Bishop. Trump won the presidency! to most people tradition and feelings are more important than facts Edited March 3, 2017 by MormonVideoGame 1
MormonVideoGame Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said: One of the problems with this kind of statement is it assumes that facts are independent of testimony, emotion, trust, etc. All of these things work together in a soup of reasons why people leave. I doubt there is ever just one reason why people leave because a real person is influenced by myriad of stimulus. Perceived problems with church truth claims can impact a person in many ways, some rational, some emotional. New facts could lead to feelings of betrayal and lack of trust, a change in general belief In my experience most people leave because 1. no friends 2. no longer enjoy it 3. see a lot of hypocrisy in the ward 4. someone offended them. I don't know anyone in person that left because of research and facts. Like I said, to most people tradition and feelings are more important than facts Edited March 3, 2017 by MormonVideoGame 1
Jeanne Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 1 minute ago, MormonVideoGame said: In my experience most people leave because 1. no friends 2. no longer enjoy it 3. see a lot of hypocrisy in the ward 4. someone offended them. I don't know anyone in person that left because of research and facts. Like I said, to most people tradition and feelings are more important than facts Well...now you know one! 1
Tacenda Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 3 minutes ago, MormonVideoGame said: In my experience most people leave because 1. no friends 2. no longer enjoy it 3. see a lot of hypocrisy in the ward 4. someone offended them. I don't know anyone in person that left because of research and facts. Like I said, to most people tradition and feelings are more important than facts I can see a member becoming inactive over those items, but could you see them taking their name off the records of the church over it?Since they may internally believe the church is true. 3
Spammer Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 5 minutes ago, Jeanne said: Well...now you know one! Make that two!
JulieM Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 (edited) 11 minutes ago, MormonVideoGame said: In my experience most people leave because 1. no friends 2. no longer enjoy it 3. see a lot of hypocrisy in the ward 4. someone offended them. I don't know anyone in person that left because of research and facts. Like I said, to most people tradition and feelings are more important than facts I know of no one who left over being offended, but I know many who left when they learned troubling details that weren't previously taught regarding church history, etc. The leaders know this is happening too and are trying to correct it by being more open and teaching more truths about our history. Edited March 3, 2017 by JulieM 1
MormonVideoGame Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 1 minute ago, JulieM said: I know of no one who left over being offended, but I know many who left when they learned troubling details that weren't previously taught regarding church history, etc. The leaders know this is happening too and are trying to correct it by being more open and teaching more truths about our history. I agree there are a lot of people that leave because of troubling details, but that is not the reason for most. Do you have a scientific poll?
rockpond Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 1 minute ago, MormonVideoGame said: I agree there are a lot of people that leave because of troubling details, but that is not the reason for most. Do you have a scientific poll? When you say "that is not the reason for most", do you have any data to back that up? Most of the people I know left when they realized that they no longer believed the truth claims of the church. The only research I am aware of on this subject is at whymormonsleave.com I don't know how scientific the research is but based on their research they produced this list of why Mormons leave the church: http://www.whymormonsleave.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Why-Mormons-Leave-Comprehensive-List-February-2014.pdf 1
MiserereNobis Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 18 minutes ago, bluebell said: If it is beyond my understanding and grasp, i'm not sure how to even go about thinking about it? It seems the same as telling my 3 year old to think about calculus and it's implications for a while. Can you explain a bit more what you are asking us to do? (Sincere question, not trying to be snarky). (I added the bold) This is a great analogy! How would you explain calculus to your three-year-old? You would have to use simple analogies and concepts that wouldn't even really approach what calculus is because calculus is ultimately a mystery to a three-year-old. So with the descriptions we use for the Trinity. They are good attempts at trying to explain God to a mortal human mind bound in space, time, and language, but they ultimately break down because the nature of God is a mystery to us, like calculus is a mystery to the child. So how do we know God, then? Through direct immediate experience. For the chosen few, this would be a mystical experience while here on earth. For others, it is the Beatific Vision, which is "the immediate knowledge of God which the angelic spirits and the souls of the just enjoy in Heaven." 4
rockpond Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 19 minutes ago, MormonVideoGame said: In my experience most people leave because 1. no friends 2. no longer enjoy it 3. see a lot of hypocrisy in the ward 4. someone offended them. I don't know anyone in person that left because of research and facts. Like I said, to most people tradition and feelings are more important than facts 8 minutes ago, JulieM said: I know of no one who left over being offended, but I know many who left when they learned troubling details that weren't previously taught regarding church history, etc. The leaders know this is happening too and are trying to correct it by being more open and teaching more truths about our history. I think that Elder Ballard's Feb 2016 address to CES where he spoke of needing to "inoculate" the younger generation is good evidence that the leaders are aware of people leaving over facts that they discover in the history of the church. 3
Spammer Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 21 minutes ago, bluebell said: If it is beyond my understanding and grasp, i'm not sure how to even go about thinking about it? It seems the same as telling my 3 year old to think about calculus and it's implications for a while. Can you explain a bit more what you are asking us to do? (Sincere question, not trying to be snarky). You've arrived at where I'm asking people to go. Given the presupposition, you inevitably get to a point where all thinking stops. Now you can move on to what we mean by consubstantiality. It's just a word the Church Fathers used to attempt to describe the indescribable. It was chosen to attempt to capture what is meant by the oneness of the Trinity. But 'substance' and 'one' inevitably smuggle 'space' into our thinking. Consubstantiality doesn't apply after all. Thinking too hard about it leads to paradox. But if we must use words and make an attempt at precision, it's perhaps the best we can do. Poetry is a much better language to capture what is meant. MiserereNobis' excellent post expresses this well. 1
HappyJackWagon Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 24 minutes ago, MormonVideoGame said: I agree there are a lot of people that leave because of troubling details, but that is not the reason for most. Do you have a scientific poll? Do you? Without hard data we're all speculating. I asked this on a thread the other day but missed it if you ever responded. Are you also VideoGameJunkie?
Bobbieaware Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Tacenda said: I heard once how Trinity works. And I like that you took God out of a box and that he is incomprehensible. The example I heard is, is to look at a candles flame. You set three candles up, and light the middle candle, the two on either side are lit by the middle (God). HG and Jesus are on the sides. God is spirit, and Jesus was physical and God also. Same with the HG who is the spirit of God. This made sense to me. And how in the world does a physical God create the universe? God didn't created the universe, for the intelligences and matter are just as self-existent as God is. For his own wise purposes, God ORDERS the self-existent matter of universe and helps other uncreated intelligences in the universe to progresss in knowledge, power, and glory. The Lord says all things unto him are spiritual; and if you think about it even gross matter is nothing more or less than latent spiritual energy (the uncreated power of God). This is why very small amounts of gross matter can unleash such awesome amounts of light and energy (the power of God) in thermonuclear detonations. This same divine spiritual energy is what enables our sun to unleash unimaginable amounts of energy every second, for what seems to us like an eternity. even though it is composed of a finite quantity of matter. Bottom line? Ultimately, all forms of light and matter (matter being a latent or stored form of power and light) are all forms of the eternal, uncreated power of God. God's infinite and eternal power, in all of its forms, is just as eternal as he is, for unlimited power is one of his eternal divine attributes. God didn't have to create energy, for his infinite energy (eternal divine power) is just as eternal as he is. This is one of the reasons why sin is such serious business, for it can be rightly said that sin is the misuse of the power of God. God didn't have to create matter because matter is energy, and energy is the uncreated power of God. Edited March 3, 2017 by Bobbieaware 1
MormonVideoGame Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 (edited) 39 minutes ago, rockpond said: scientific the research is but based on their research they produced this list of why Mormons leave the church: Exactly! there is a big difference between non-random online polls and real scientific polls. 18 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: Do you? Without hard data we're all speculating. Okay, fair enough! Here is some data about young people. http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/12/living/pew-religion-study/ "Other experts blame innovations such as the Internet and social web, where religions can be fact-checked in real time and seekers can find communities of like-minded iconoclasts." So facts are a reason why young people leave religion. Edited March 3, 2017 by MormonVideoGame
Spammer Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 (edited) Speaking of poetry and the Trinity, this beautiful poem isn't about the Trinity per se, but captures the experience of an encounter with God, who can only be sought and experienced in the present moment. It's that mystical experience MiserereNobis mentioned. The poet, RS Thomas, was a Welsh Anglican priest. I have seen the sun break through to illuminate a small field for a while, and gone my way and forgotten it. But that was the pearl of great price, the one field that had treasure in it. I realise now that I must give all that I have to possess it. Life is not hurrying on to a receding future, nor hankering after an imagined past. It is the turning aside like Moses to the miracle of the lit bush, to a brightness that seemed as transitory as your youth once, but is the eternity that awaits you. Here's the poem read by the poet himself, set to music by one of my favorite bands, with images from Andrei Tarkovsky, a Russian filmmaker. I think it's just gorgeous. Edited March 3, 2017 by Spammer 2
bluebell Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 2 hours ago, Spammer said: You've arrived at where I'm asking people to go. Given the presupposition, you inevitably get to a point where all thinking stops. Now you can move on to what we mean by consubstantiality. It's just a word the Church Fathers used to attempt to describe the indescribable. It was chosen to attempt to capture what is meant by the oneness of the Trinity. But 'substance' and 'one' inevitably smuggle 'space' into our thinking. Consubstantiality doesn't apply after all. Thinking too hard about it leads to paradox. But if we must use words and make an attempt at precision, it's perhaps the best we can do. Poetry is a much better language to capture what is meant. MiserereNobis' excellent post expresses this well. 2 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: (I added the bold) This is a great analogy! How would you explain calculus to your three-year-old? You would have to use simple analogies and concepts that wouldn't even really approach what calculus is because calculus is ultimately a mystery to a three-year-old. So with the descriptions we use for the Trinity. They are good attempts at trying to explain God to a mortal human mind bound in space, time, and language, but they ultimately break down because the nature of God is a mystery to us, like calculus is a mystery to the child. So how do we know God, then? Through direct immediate experience. For the chosen few, this would be a mystical experience while here on earth. For others, it is the Beatific Vision, which is "the immediate knowledge of God which the angelic spirits and the souls of the just enjoy in Heaven." Thank you both for your answers. Can i ask one more question? Where does the idea come from that God is unknowable to us (that He's ultimately a mystery and indescribable, outside of space and time)?
JLHPROF Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 41 minutes ago, bluebell said: Can i ask one more question? Where does the idea come from that God is unknowable to us (that He's ultimately a mystery and indescribable, outside of space and time)? Can I add a third question? Why should such a being be worshipped by us? If He is SO different from us as to be unknowable, why worship him? (It just always makes me think of the pet/master relationship).
pogi Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 4 hours ago, Spammer said: This topic always brings me out of lurk mode. Rather than attempt to clarify consubstantiality, it may be better to say that, to understand the trinitarian doctrine, you must first begin with the idea that God is in neither time nor space. Those concepts do not apply. This is taken as axiomatic. In fact, since we are contingent beings rooted in time and space, all of our our language and concepts do not apply. Our thoughts and ideas can never in principle, no matter how refined, rise to such a level that we can grasp what an existence beyond time and space is like. Think about that for a while and let the implications sink in. Only then will we be ready to discuss what consubstantiality means. I don't view it as self-evident (axiomatic) that God is neither in time nor space. Is that idea part of the trinitarian doctrine, or is it a theory designed to avoid having to clarify the doctrine? I am fine with you saying that it is a "mystery", but I can't agree that it is self-evident. 1
HappyJackWagon Posted March 3, 2017 Posted March 3, 2017 2 hours ago, MormonVideoGame said: Exactly! there is a big difference between non-random online polls and real scientific polls. Okay, fair enough! Here is some data about young people. http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/12/living/pew-religion-study/ "Other experts blame innovations such as the Internet and social web, where religions can be fact-checked in real time and seekers can find communities of like-minded iconoclasts." So facts are a reason why young people leave religion. Good. We agree that facts are a reason people leave religion. Although I'd nuance it a little more by saying "perceived facts". Since you have again avoided my question about whether you are also posting as VideoGameJunkie, I'm going to assume it's you. Why 2 different user accounts and names?
Recommended Posts