The Gospel is not as big as it use to be.

[Monster]

There was a time when the gospel seemed to have an answer for everything. When I was young with little life experience it seemed natural to believe what those around me instructed me to believe. Most of it was sage and good advice. Even those in the church were looking out for me to the best of their knowledge. Problem is I got older. I studied so many other things. I got in involved in reading about the nature of the universe. So many things explained through the experimentation of great thinkers over time.

Now the gospel as explained by Mormonism seems so small. Such a linear line of reasoning. No divergence into other realms of thinking. Mostly a progression through a list of checkmarks to obtain a vague promise of some future glory. But nothing really tangible beyond hope and faith. Those are not bad qualities by any means, just not sufficient to spend a life on for me.

When you live in a world that constanly reinforces your belief structure that belief seems all encompassing. When you venture out you realize how little you actually know.

At least that is what happened to me.

 

[carbon dioxide]

The gospel is not about learning about black holes, the causes of cancer,  ect.  It is about the the purpose of live and the redemption of mankind. Faith and hope are important parts of it.  Having lots of scientific evidence to back up the gospel defeats the purpose of the gospel.  We are here to live by faith.  Living by knowledge and evidence was a task we all passed in the first estate.  We all proved we could be faithful to God with overwhelming evidence in the premortal world.  This existence takes the testing to the next level.  Seeing if we will be faithful with very little evidence. 

[mrmarklin]

The gospel has the answer to all life's problems.  It is very tangible, but of course one must make the investment in God's method of problem solving by study and prayer. The latter can be a stumbling block for many reluctant to believe. 

 

The world is is a big place. I went through my atheistic phase, but it ultimately leads nowhere. There is by definition no starting point to a systematic study of anything. 

[JLHPROF]

The gospel encompasses ALL truth, whether it has been revealed or not.

The gospel only gets smaller when you start dismissing truths because you think you know better.

[pogi]

The gospel of Jesus Christ is very simple, but pure discipleship and self-mastery takes more than a life-time.

Edited April 17, 2017 by pogi

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, Monster said:

There was a time when the gospel seemed to have an answer for everything. When I was young with little life experience it seemed natural to believe what those around me instructed me to believe. Most of it was sage and good advice. Even those in the church were looking out for me to the best of their knowledge. Problem is I got older. I studied so many other things. I got in involved in reading about the nature of the universe. So many things explained through the experimentation of great thinkers over time.

Now the gospel as explained by Mormonism seems so small. Such a linear line of reasoning. No divergence into other realms of thinking. Mostly a progression through a list of checkmarks to obtain a vague promise of some future glory. But nothing really tangible beyond hope and faith. Those are not bad qualities by any means, just not sufficient to spend a life on for me.

When you live in a world that constanly reinforces your belief structure that belief seems all encompassing. When you venture out you realize how little you actually know.

At least that is what happened to me.

 

I find this kind of silly frankly and quite pompous.  We are poor little folks in a "linear" path while you sir are "divergent" and "into other realms of thinking"

Relgion is about finding a purpose in life and giving life meaning, it is not about Great Theories or how to get to the moon, or about nebulae or medical breakthroughs.

I suggest you study a little about atheist churches and why they exist.  Rorty, an atheist wrote a book extolling the virtues of religion and how religions without God would soon predominate.  I of course disagree with that portion of the premise because frankly I think is understanding of God is rather infantile.  We have gotten beyond a god of hellfire and brimstone- at least some of us have, and though there are elements of fundamentalism in Mormonism still, I think we are rapidly getting beyond that.  This is one reviewer's summary of this volume:

Quote

 

Though coming from different and distinct intellectual traditions, Richard Rorty and Gianni Vattimo are united in their criticism of the metaphysical tradition. The challenges they put forward extend beyond philosophy and entail a reconsideration of the foundations of belief in God and the religious life. They urge that the rejection of metaphysical truth does not necessitate the death of religion; instead it opens new ways of imagining what it is to be religious―ways that emphasize charity, solidarity, and irony. This unique collaboration, which includes a dialogue between the two philosophers, is notable not only for its fusion of pragmatism (Rorty) and hermeneutics (Vattimo) but also for its recognition of the limits of both traditional religious belief and modern secularism.

In "Anticlericalism and Atheism" Rorty discusses Vattimo's work Belief and argues that the end of metaphysics paves the way for an anti-essentialist religion. Rorty's conception of religion, determined by private motives, is designed to produce the gospel's promise that henceforth God will not consider humanity as a servant but as a friend. In "The Age of Interpretation," Vattimo, who is both a devout Catholic and a frequent critic of the church, explores the surprising congruence between Christianity and hermeneutics in light of the dissolution of metaphysical truth. As in hermeneutics, interpretation is central to Christianity, which introduced the world to the principle of interiority, dissolving the experience of objective reality into "listening to and interpreting messages."

The lively dialogue that concludes this volume, moderated and edited by Santiago Zabala, analyzes the future of religion together with the political, social, and historical aspects that characterize our contemporary postmodern, postmetaphysical, and post-Christian world.

 

The fact is that all these elements still DO exist in Christianity - oddly Vattimo who co-authored this book still considers himself a devout Catholic.Mormon scriptures repeatedly speak of Christ seeing his people as "friends" and the Father himself being "Human"

Mormonism takes humanism and makes it into theology.  We seek to be the best possible humans and create the best possible humanized world and consider the world itself to be "organized" as humans organize their realities.  Some humanists think men created god and in an odd twist that is literally true in Mormonism.  Our central myth is that as part of the council of gods, human gods socially organized, and create others.

"Our Father" himself had a father from whom he learned how to be God and we can do likewise.  For me this is the ultimate apotheosis of humanism itself.

I am sorry you did not learn that in Sunday school but it has been there for you to find had you wanted to practice "divergent" thought and were "into other realms of thinking"

But we don't always see it in those terms- yet that sort of belief is certainly open to Mormons and I have found many who believe things like that AND hold perfectly good temple recommends which we treasure and use frequently in exploring further what the symbols reveal to us who see them "divergently" since we are into "other realms of thinking"

Christianity started without Neoplatonism and it is in the process of re-defining itself.

Ronald Dworkin, himself an atheist, wrote a book called "Religion Without God",  Before he died he reviewed his own book and sent the review to the New York Times.

These are some excerpts from that review http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2013/04/04/religion-without-god/

 

Quote

 

There are famous and poetic expressions of the same set of attitudes. Albert Einstein said that though an atheist he was a deeply religious man:

To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their most primitive forms—this knowledge, this feeling, is at the center of true religiousness. In this sense, and in this sense only, I belong in the ranks of devoutly religious men.¹

Percy Bysshe Shelley declared himself an atheist who nevertheless felt that “The awful shadow of some unseen Power/Floats though unseen among us….”² Philosophers, historians, and sociologists of religion have insisted on an account of religious experience that finds a place for religious atheism. William James said that one of the two essentials of religion is a sense of fundamentality: that there are “things in the universe,” as he put it, “that throw the last stone.”³ Theists have a god for that role, but an atheist can think that the importance of living well throws the last stone, that there is nothing more basic on which that responsibility rests or needs to rest.

President Hinckley felt some of that same sentiment when he said this, but of course He saw it as a theist, and he interpreted the enemy to be "humanism" without seeing humanism in my alternate sense

 

Quote

 

Of course we believe in the cultivation of the mind, but the intellect is not the only source of knowledge. There is a promise, given under inspiration from the Almighty, set forth in these beautiful words: “God shall give unto you knowledge by his Holy Spirit, yea, by the unspeakable gift of the Holy Ghost.” (D&C 121:26.)

The humanists who criticize the Lord’s work, the so-called intellectualists who demean, speak only from ignorance of spiritual manifestation. They have not heard the voice of the Spirit. They have not heard it because they have not sought after it and prepared themselves to be worthy of it. Then, supposing that knowledge comes only of reasoning and of the workings of the mind, they deny that which comes by the power of the Holy Ghost.

The things of God are understood by the Spirit of God. That Spirit is real. To those who have experienced its workings, the knowledge so gained is as real as that which is acquired through the operation of the five senses. I testify of this. And I am confident that most members of the Church can so testify. I urge each of us to continue to cultivate a heart in tune with the Spirit. If we will do so, our lives will be enriched. We will feel a kinship with God our Eternal Father. We will taste a sweetness of joy that can be had in no other way.

Let us not be trapped by the sophistry of the world, which for the most part is negative and which so often bears sour fruit. Let us walk with faith in the future, speaking affirmatively and cultivating an attitude of confidence. As we do so, our strength will give strength to others.15

 

https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-of-presidents-of-the-church-gordon-b-hinckley/chapter-7-the-whispering-of-the-spirit?lang=eng

I heartily endorse President Hinckley's vision and joyfully point to both the logic behind humanism as well as the reality of spiritual experience and I do so with "divergent thinking" perhaps and "other realms of thinking"

If you have not seen things from this perspective, I would encourage you to practice some divergent thinking of your own.

Edited April 17, 2017 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, mrmarklin said:

The gospel has the answer to all life's problems.  It is very tangible, but of course one must make the investment in God's method of problem solving by study and prayer. The latter can be a stumbling block for many reluctant to believe. 

 

The world is is a big place. I went through my atheistic phase, but it ultimately leads nowhere. There is by definition no starting point to a systematic study of anything. 

Nor an ending.  I traveled that path too.

Quote

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, 
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy. 
- Hamlet (1.5.167-8), Hamlet to Horatio

 

Edited April 17, 2017 by mfbukowski

[sunstoned]

Christianity, which includes Mormonism, attempts to explain the unexplainable.  These are things that cannot be explained by science or the reasoning of men.  Two thousand years ago most of physical experiences of the world could not be explained by science, so religion flourished.  The trouble is that in the last 2000 years religion has remained stagnate. It is tied to the writings of a iron age middle eastern superstitious tribe.   The reasoning of men (science) has not stood still.  But has flourished. We see the fruits of science in our daily lives.  Science has helped millions live a better, healthier, and longer life. 

As science progresses and gives us new light and knowledge, superstitions retreat into the shadows.  Religion continues to hold sway over small areas that science has not entered...yet.  This is called god of the gaps.  One quick example:  Twenty five years ago most LDS believe the Nephites/Lamanites were the sole residents of the new world, just like the BoM states.  Now, since advances in DNA and archaeology, the Nephites and Lamanites are now relegated to a small non-discrip group within the vast civilization of "others".  The BoM cover page has even been re-written to concede this fact.  Another example is the Book of Abraham...Well, lets not go there.  Suffice it to say the honest light of scientific scrutiny has not been kind to the BoA.

[PeterPear]

57 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

Christianity, which includes Mormonism, attempts to explain the unexplainable.  These are things that cannot be explained by science or the reasoning of men.  Two thousand years ago most of physical experiences of the world could not be explained by science, so religion flourished.  The trouble is that in the last 2000 years religion has remained stagnate. It is tied to the writings of a iron age middle eastern superstitious tribe.   The reasoning of men (science) has not stood still.  But has flourished. We see the fruits of science in our daily lives.  Science has helped millions live a better, healthier, and longer life. 

As science progresses and gives us new light and knowledge, superstitions retreat into the shadows.  Religion continues to hold sway over small areas that science has not entered...yet.  This is called god of the gaps.  One quick example:  Twenty five years ago most LDS believe the Nephites/Lamanites were the sole residents of the new world, just like the BoM states.  Now, since advances in DNA and archaeology, the Nephites and Lamanites are now relegated to a small non-discrip group within the vast civilization of "others".  The BoM cover page has even been re-written to concede this fact.  Another example is the Book of Abraham...Well, lets not go there.  Suffice it to say the honest light of scientific scrutiny has not been kind to the BoA.

You don't know the difference between science and technology. Maybe you would like to comment on the scientifically-approved Piltdown Man, a fraud accepted for almost three decades based on the superstition of the Organic Theory of Evolution which demotes you to a mere beast without moral compunction. Is this the fruits of science? Or do you believe science is the ability to produce a microwave oven and an automobile with a bluetooth interface thus not necessitating one to believe in God because he can access the internet while speeding down the highway at 85 mph?

And you misrepresent the Book of Mormon by referring to a theory formulated by a few deceived LDS Scholars who promoted a limited geography theory based on the false premise that Joseph Smith didn't know what he was talking about:

"What may startle some about this situation is that most of what Joseph Smith said or implied about geography indicates that he did not understand or was ambiguous about the fact, as it turns out, that Mesoamerica was the particular setting for Nephite history..."  http://publications.mi.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1099&index=19

But I'm not surprised on finally finding an anti-mormon as yourself using this LGT Theory to criticize the Church, even though you should well know the LDS Church leadership has never endorsed said geography theory.

And Joseph Smith had more papyri than the recovered fragments the Church acquired in the 1960s.

Your statement is a fraud long ago explained:

19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light , that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

Edited April 17, 2017 by PeterPear

[pogi]

1 hour ago, sunstoned said:

Christianity, which includes Mormonism, attempts to explain the unexplainable.

Christ focused less on the the natural universe and more on morality, love, and redemption.  

1 hour ago, sunstoned said:

We see the fruits of science in our daily lives.  Science has helped millions live a better, healthier, and longer life. 

My prediction is that science in the hands of power-hungry and greedy men will destroy the planet and humankind before Christianity will. 

Science can be used as a tool for good or evil.  That is where Christianity shines!  It teaches us about good and evil to save us all from the powers of science. 

Edited April 17, 2017 by pogi

[sunstoned]

36 minutes ago, PeterPear said:

You don't know the difference between science and technology. Maybe you would like to comment on the scientifically-approved Piltdown Man, a fraud accepted for almost three decades based on the superstition of the Organic Theory of Evolution which demotes you to a mere beast without moral compunction. Is this the fruits of science? Or do you believe science is the ability to produce a microwave oven and an automobile with a bluetooth interface thus not necessitating one to believe in God because he can access the internet while speeding down the highway at 85 mph?

And you misrepresent the Book of Mormon by referring to a theory formulated by a few deceived LDS Scholars who promoted a limited geography theory based on the false premise that Joseph Smith didn't know what he was talking about:

"What may startle some about this situation is that most of what Joseph Smith said or implied about geography indicates that he did not understand or was ambiguous about the fact, as it turns out, that Mesoamerica was the particular setting for Nephite history..."  http://publications.mi.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1099&index=19

But I'm not surprised on finally finding an anti-mormon as yourself using this LGT Theory to criticize the Church, even though you should well know the LDS Church leadership has never endorsed said geography theory.

And Joseph Smith had more papyri than the recovered fragments the Church acquired in the 1960s.

Your statement is a fraud long ago explained:

19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light , that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

Science is not perfect, but it is self-correcting.  No so with religion.  Myths and falsehoods are perpetuated on to the next generation and the next and next.  If you want to argue religion vs. science, you are going to lose.  That has been decided by men/women many times over who are smarted than both me and you.

Edited April 17, 2017 by sunstoned

[Kenngo1969]

4 hours ago, Monster said:

... Now the gospel as explained by Mormonism seems so small. Such a linear line of reasoning. No divergence into other realms of thinking. Mostly a progression through a list of checkmarks to obtain a vague promise of some future glory. But nothing really tangible beyond hope and faith. Those are not bad qualities by any means, just not sufficient to spend a life on for me. ....

 

Far be it from me to suggest that you stay in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or that you continue to adhere to the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ if you feel you have outgrown it.  If you have taken the measure of the Gospel and are sure you are not underestimating its value, I'm certainly not going to be the one to dissuade you from that estimation.  I do wonder, though, how recent your last trip to the temple was before you apparently decided to lay the Gospel aside.  Frequent repetition aside, lesser minds such as mine find plenty of depth in the ordinances, rituals, and covenants there.  (That's where we learn, for simply one example, that "all truth may be circumscribed into one great whole.")  I'm glad you've mastered faith and hope.  It's a pity that, by your apparent separation from the Church of Jesus Christ, you've denied the rest of us the opportunity to gain the insights we need from your more advanced understanding.  

I wish you well.  

[sunstoned]

30 minutes ago, pogi said:

Christ focused less on the the natural universe and more on morality, love, and redemption.  

My prediction is that science in the hands of power-hungry and greedy men will destroy the planet and humankind before Christianity will. 

Science can be used as a tool for good or evil.  That is where Christianity shines!  It teaches us about good and evil to save us all from the powers of science. 

I agree with you about science.  There are many who use it for the wrong reason.  Atomic bombs are a clear example of this.  But religion is no different.  Fighting for one's god and defending one's beliefs have been the hallmark of death and misery for centuries.  People don't need much of an excuse to kill one another.

[PeterPear]

24 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

Science is not perfect, but it is self-correcting.  No so with religion.  Myths and falsehoods are perpetuated on to the next generation and the next and next.  If you want to argue religion vs. science, you are going to lose.  That has been decided by men/women many times over who are smarted than both me and you.

No. You'll lose. Science is based on the failings of men most of whom are hucksters, the same who have warped religion requiring the Restoration of the Gospel. A true religion is based on Revelation from God.

You keep harping on science as if it were the end all. Baloney! Is the world better off? No! Where's the Utopia promised long ago? No where. Only inventions, which came about through technological achievements. But conveniences are not Morals, which technology and science do not produce.

For example, science in 2014 proved Charles Darwin was a LIAR! He stole "his" theory from Patrick Matthew then lied about when asked. Darwin was a plagiarist and a fraud.

Patrick Matthew (1831) was the first to fully explain natural selection as new species branching from a common ancestor by way of nature selecting varieties that were best circumstance suited. He even uniquely called it: 'the natural process of selection'. A term Darwin (1859) would uniquely four word shuffle into 'process of natural selection'.

www.PatrickMatthew.com - evidence proves Darwin knew of Matthew's work and stole it as his own.

For you to rely on "science" requires you to rely on men and women who are fallible and frauds and will undercut each other for worldy glory, money and prestige. If these men and women are smarter than you - to quote you - and will do that to each other, then they would also deceive not-so-smart you, because they don't give a rat's rear about you or anyone else. You're just another animal to be tossed into an oven or down a garbage chute into an incerator with the refuse thrown out from an abortion clinic.

Edited April 17, 2017 by PeterPear

[clarkgoble]

1 hour ago, sunstoned said:

Science is not perfect, but it is self-correcting.  No so with religion.  Myths and falsehoods are perpetuated on to the next generation and the next and next.  If you want to argue religion vs. science, you are going to lose.  That has been decided by men/women many times over who are smarted than both me and you.

Why do you say religion isn't self-correcting? People can be dogmatic with any ideology (including science or pseudo-sciences). But there's no requirement they be. Indeed religions not tied to a once and for all text can adapt to new ideas quite readily.  

If the objects of religion are real then of course we'd expect there to be a self-correcting aspect. Even the atheistic views of religion that see it as an evolutionarily selected for set of behaviors will say it has benefits. Further they'll note that it changes over time in response to the environment. Thus the common view in evolutionary psychology of how complex civilization rises hand in hand with changes in religion. There's a reasonable argument now that organized religion is no longer necessary in successful societies which is why they discard religion at a certain point. Even though the individuals in such societies like secular Europe, have about the same level of superstition as those in more religious cultures. Because people are still people with the same basic cognitive traits. Government just becomes their religion in a sense and (according to this theory) they no longer need the theological beliefs.

Now I reject elements of that theory since I think there is an actual set of religious truths. I'd imagine behaviors related to those would be selected for in terms of human behavior. Yet while God is there in vague ways, it takes more to start the process to more detailed knowledge. Without that it's easy to discard religious trappings and just keep the useful parts sublimated into government.

Edited April 17, 2017 by clarkgoble

[SamIam]

6 hours ago, Monster said:

There was a time when the gospel seemed to have an answer for everything. When I was young with little life experience it seemed natural to believe what those around me instructed me to believe. Most of it was sage and good advice. Even those in the church were looking out for me to the best of their knowledge. Problem is I got older. I studied so many other things. I got in involved in reading about the nature of the universe. So many things explained through the experimentation of great thinkers over time.

Now the gospel as explained by Mormonism seems so small. Such a linear line of reasoning. No divergence into other realms of thinking. Mostly a progression through a list of checkmarks to obtain a vague promise of some future glory. But nothing really tangible beyond hope and faith. Those are not bad qualities by any means, just not sufficient to spend a life on for me.

When you live in a world that constanly reinforces your belief structure that belief seems all encompassing. When you venture out you realize how little you actually know.

At least that is what happened to me.

 

I think the real issue is that you are trying to apply the principles of one form of thinking as sustained by intellect versus another form that has its own set of governing principles.  The tangibles even when we make wrong theories about them, (Big Bang, evolution) have a pacifying effect on intellectual pursuit. These kinds of considerations allow the mind to expand into previously uncharted territory.  We can conjecture and formulate and engage in all of myriad processes that provide a good deal of sustenance to burgeoning intellects and we can do it over a lifetime.  The only criteria for this is a good mind that can resolve varying degrees of complexities of information.  As we do so we draw a sense of satisfaction that feeds a need to advance in a perception of knowing.

The gospel on the other hand demands much more of someone before it can stimulate the sense of satisfaction of new learning or learning that exceeds the exoteric venues that frankly most dwell in. You do not have the potential to get very far if you are not going to conduct your life in a certain fashion.  There are the givens of right and wrong but well beyond that is the energy of effort, studying it out in your mind and applying yourself according to the tenants of how one advances in spiritual knowledge as is the case with the gospel.  It is no where near as easy in terms of exposure to volumes of information to learn of these (divergent realms) as it is to develop a relationship with an entity (Holy Ghost) that is to instruct you but will not do so unless you conform to its requirements.  Some placate by reading the writings of gospel scholars but that is a fall back to the techniques of academic thinking - that we can truly understand simply by gaining familiarity with the data.  

As an example, The worlds referential knowledge was more than sustained by the biblical concepts of the creation in the years prior to 1830. It satisfied or was sufficient for the likes of Newton, Descartes, Pascal, and a multitude of others.  I am convinced that one function of the Pearl of Great Price was that it would provide much more depth to aspects of creation that would keep LDS theology ahead of what was to become sciences great advances in terms of knowledge of the sun, moon and stars.  And so we learn over a hundred and fifty years ago of worlds without number, millions of earths like this one, we find references to time, and relationships of planets one to another that ultimately become expressed in the terms of one of the greatest theories of all - the theory of relativity.  Some of these things were laughed at as impossible and absurd until Kepler and Hubble.  However for the Saints, the restored gospel was ahead in these matters.  And until relatively recently it was only upon one principle that we could claim a prescient perception of these things known only because the they were found in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and that principle was faith.  The average LDS child in 1890 had potential to know more than everything science would claim relative to inhabitable planets until Kepler in 1995 provided evidence of potential.  Was it less fulfilling to exercise faith until the 1990's or is it more fulfilling now that we have proof.

When I was younger, I spent all of my free time engaged in pursuits of knowledge of the multitude of fascinating subjects which were all around me.  I slowly began to refine my efforts reducing my commitment in certain academic studies because of a thought that occurred to me one day in my greenhouse of exceptionally rare and endangered species of plants.  All Satan needed to do to keep me off the track was to encourage the abundant satisfaction of learning new things and being reasonably expert in several disciplines.  I thrived on that process of learning and that provided a sense of satiety which deluded me but I eventually realized that to learn all I could fathom of mortality was worth little in the realms of immortality.  Now after many years of putting the same energy of effort into the Gospel as I did earlier pursuits and being willing to conform as best I can to its requirements I can honestly say that all of the answers of merit are found within the Gospel standard if one is willing to pay the price.

Edited April 17, 2017 by SamIam

[SamIam]

1 hour ago, sunstoned said:

Science is not perfect, but it is self-correcting.  No so with religion.  Myths and falsehoods are perpetuated on to the next generation and the next and next.  If you want to argue religion vs. science, you are going to lose.  That has been decided by men/women many times over who are smarted than both me and you.

Perhaps you might be willing to provide examples where the Gospel as LDS intend has perpetuated myths and falsehoods.  That might give some substance to your claims.

[SamIam]

1 hour ago, sunstoned said:

I agree with you about science.  There are many who use it for the wrong reason.  Atomic bombs are a clear example of this.  But religion is no different.  Fighting for one's god and defending one's beliefs have been the hallmark of death and misery for centuries.  People don't need much of an excuse to kill one another.

Again, this sort of nebulous statement appears to have merit but it is completely outside of the perspective of the OP.  The Gospel as we know it as members has not fomented this discord as a tenant of our religion.  We have mistaken choices made by those ill informed such as the Mountain Meadows massacre but individual errors should not be laid at the feet of a Gospel that would not sustain such actions. Neither should claims of death and misery for centuries be charged against those of a far more noble understanding wrought by the very fact the latter day revelation abandoned the misguided efforts of an apostate era. 

[The Nehor]

6 hours ago, Monster said:

There was a time when the gospel seemed to have an answer for everything. When I was young with little life experience it seemed natural to believe what those around me instructed me to believe. Most of it was sage and good advice. Even those in the church were looking out for me to the best of their knowledge. Problem is I got older. I studied so many other things. I got in involved in reading about the nature of the universe. So many things explained through the experimentation of great thinkers over time.

Now the gospel as explained by Mormonism seems so small. Such a linear line of reasoning. No divergence into other realms of thinking. Mostly a progression through a list of checkmarks to obtain a vague promise of some future glory. But nothing really tangible beyond hope and faith. Those are not bad qualities by any means, just not sufficient to spend a life on for me.

When you live in a world that constanly reinforces your belief structure that belief seems all encompassing. When you venture out you realize how little you actually know.

At least that is what happened to me.

 

I am glad your genius has led you to ascend to a plane of understanding that we poor religious morons cannot achieve due to our provincial shortsightedness. Please show mercy on us and shed forth this secret knowledge so we too can become non-linear divergent thinkers and not waste our lives on small-minded thinking.

[probablyHagoth7]

7 hours ago, Monster said:

Now the gospel as explained by Mormonism seems so small....nothing really tangible beyond hope and faith. Those are not bad qualities by any means, just not sufficient to spend a life on for me.

My experience has been the exact opposite. 

In my sojourn so far, all truth can be contained within...and made more relevant framed by...Mormon teachings.

7 hours ago, Monster said:

When you live in a world that constantly reinforces your belief structure that belief seems all encompassing. When you venture out you realize how little you actually know.

At least that is what happened to me.

Agreed. Learned long ago the value of rubbing shoulders with books/groups/people that suggest ideas I had never before considered.

Key difference being, I generally check for guidance on which people/groups/books to interact with when. Because the timing/sequence of the thoughts we encounter can be much more important in shaping us than the thoughts themselves.

Edited April 17, 2017 by probablyHagoth7

[RevTestament]

5 hours ago, sunstoned said:

Christianity, which includes Mormonism, attempts to explain the unexplainable.  These are things that cannot be explained by science or the reasoning of men.  Two thousand years ago most of physical experiences of the world could not be explained by science, so religion flourished.  The trouble is that in the last 2000 years religion has remained stagnate. It is tied to the writings of a iron age middle eastern superstitious tribe.   The reasoning of men (science) has not stood still.  But has flourished. We see the fruits of science in our daily lives.  Science has helped millions live a better, healthier, and longer life. 

If by "unexplainable" you mean God, I don't agree. I think God has taught us and continues to teach us through His word. If you mean the world and natural forces, I again disagree. I don't believe the Bible tries to explain those things in any kind of detail. Nonetheless, I believe Yeshua intonated that knowledge would increase, and men would get prideful when day of the Lord comes.

Quote

As science progresses and gives us new light and knowledge, superstitions retreat into the shadows.  Religion continues to hold sway over small areas that science has not entered...yet.  This is called god of the gaps.  One quick example:  Twenty five years ago most LDS believe the Nephites/Lamanites were the sole residents of the new world, just like the BoM states.  Now, since advances in DNA and archaeology, the Nephites and Lamanites are now relegated to a small non-discrip group within the vast civilization of "others".  The BoM cover page has even been re-written to concede this fact.  Another example is the Book of Abraham...Well, lets not go there.  Suffice it to say the honest light of scientific scrutiny has not been kind to the BoA.

The thing is just because people interpret scriptures a certain way, doesn't mean it is true. Nowhere does the BoM say that all the Americas were the new promised land. While that may have been a common Church interpretation, that doesn't make it so. You seem to be referring to the Mesoamerican model, and guess what? The Lord has never endorsed that.... Science used to be unkind to the BoM, but I posit that has changed, and that science is finding itself directly supporting the BoM. In essence it is speaking out of the dust. Just because we don't fully understand the BoA, doesn't mean science has disproven it. A similar thing may happen with it as is happening with the BoM....

[Tsuzuki]

11 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

The gospel encompasses ALL truth, whether it has been revealed or not.

The gospel only gets smaller when you start dismissing truths because you think you know better.

These words were true when they were first spoken, but the mainstream LDS church has really dropped the ball over the last 100 years or so, and in some ways has become antagonistic to truth. I would have loved to be a Mormon during Joseph Smith's Nauvoo period, though I would have encouraged him to look closer into the religions of Asia. He missed a golden opportunity there.

Edited April 17, 2017 by Tsuzuki

[Monster]

12 hours ago, mrmarklin said:

The gospel has the answer to all life's problems.  It is very tangible, but of course one must make the investment in God's method of problem solving by study and prayer. The latter can be a stumbling block for many reluctant to believe. 

 

The world is is a big place. I went through my atheistic phase, but it ultimately leads nowhere. There is by definition no starting point to a systematic study of anything. 

Never said I was an athiest. I believe after contemplating the universe there must be some higher power than we understand at this point.

[Monster]

8 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Far be it from me to suggest that you stay in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or that you continue to adhere to the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ if you feel you have outgrown it.  If you have taken the measure of the Gospel and are sure you are not underestimating its value, I'm certainly not going to be the one to dissuade you from that estimation.  I do wonder, though, how recent your last trip to the temple was before you apparently decided to lay the Gospel aside.  Frequent repetition aside, lesser minds such as mine find plenty of depth in the ordinances, rituals, and covenants there.  (That's where we learn, for simply one example, that "all truth may be circumscribed into one great whole.")  I'm glad you've mastered faith and hope.  It's a pity that, by your apparent separation from the Church of Jesus Christ, you've denied the rest of us the opportunity to gain the insights we need from your more advanced understanding.  

I wish you well.  

Never said I had left the church. I find value in much of the community. I just find most of the doctrine limiting and without any real substance other than the opinions of many men who have pontificated on the subject. Men can say  things but it does not make it so.

 

The temple? Sure it bonds members to gather and gives them a narrative to bring some measure of meaning to their life. It is also a colossal waste of resources and time. Some what embarrassing in fact. From the life of Jesus who disdained such opulant trappings to modern Mormonism that literally worships the gaudy ornateness of the building inside and out. The temple as it exists today is in direct conflict with the message of the BofM

[Monster]

6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I am glad your genius has led you to ascend to a plane of understanding that we poor religious morons cannot achieve due to our provincial shortsightedness. Please show mercy on us and shed forth this secret knowledge so we too can become non-linear divergent thinkers and not waste our lives on small-minded thinking.

Never said anyone who believes in the gospel is dumb. You may want to infer that from my post but it is not so. Many members I associate with are much smarter that me. They however have not had the same experience or asked the same questions as me. That does not make me smarter or more wise. But I am almost 60 and have had experiences that others have not. I just choose to embrace all knowledge and sort it out the best I can. Just because it conflicts with the church does not make it bad information. It is not a matter of what you know but what you are willing to accept that lets you progress.