RevTestament Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 I will add that it seems inevitably people like Stemelbow are not really having issues with the restored gospel per se, but rather become troubled with historical concerns, perceived church faults, faulty theories various leaders (usually not presidents) have propounded, and sometimes authority issues, and the like. I believe some of those things can be addressed, but some are just inherent in running a large church - people, including leaders - sometimes do and say stupid things. I believe it applies to every Church. I see one modern option is to avoid teaching by singing for the whole service.... That seems to appeal to this modern age in which people want to be entertained. The Word is just not about that - it is about hearing the Word and being doers of the Word. I believe this Church does this reasonably well. Much better than virtually all modern Protestant options, which is why they are dying off. Stemelbow, if you don't already know that, you will likely find that out.
RevTestament Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 14 minutes ago, Meadowchik said: There's a theory of argument I've read before, can't remember the source at the moment, but it basically affirms that individuals will get closer to truth and enlightenment when they argue with each other as long as it is in good faith. I believe that. I'm glad that you seem to share similar beliefs. I believe in the end the truth will overcome all argument. But yes, I think respectful debate definitely plays a role in ferreting out truth. Protestantism was born in this notion, but I believe fell short of the complete truth. I think it took someone like Joseph Smith to point those things out, but many Protestant leaders before him pointed out various truths the Church had lost. Prayer about these truths - and not the person - I believe will be answered when a person comes to that point in their life.
Meadowchik Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 6 minutes ago, RevTestament said: I will add that it seems inevitably people like Stemelbow are not really having issues with the restored gospel per se, but rather become troubled with historical concerns, perceived church faults, faulty theories various leaders (usually not presidents) have propounded, and sometimes authority issues, and the like. I believe some of those things can be addressed, but some are just inherent in running a large church - people, including leaders - sometimes do and say stupid things. I believe it applies to every Church. I see one modern option is to avoid teaching by singing for the whole service.... That seems to appeal to this modern age in which people want to be entertained. The Word is just not about that - it is about hearing the Word and being doers of the Word. I believe this Church does this reasonably well. Much better than virtually all modern Protestant options, which is why they are dying off. Stemelbow, if you don't already know that, you will likely find that out. I used to think that. But I do think there is something inherently less healthy that is more likely in Mormonism, the spiritual answers based on feelings alone. The most perverse is when feelings go beyond merely bridging a gap of the unknown, to actually replacing or taking precedence over the known.
The Nehor Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 1 hour ago, stemelbow said: The Spirit exists to follow. If no person follows the Spirit then the Spirit's existence means nothing. There is a happy medium between everyone listing to follow the Spirit and no one following the Spirit.
RevTestament Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 8 minutes ago, Meadowchik said: I used to think that. But I do think there is something inherently less healthy that is more likely in Mormonism, the spiritual answers based on feelings alone. The most perverse is when feelings go beyond merely bridging a gap of the unknown, to actually replacing or taking precedence over the known. This sounds like it might need its own thread Meadowchick. If you are alluding to Joseph Smith's polygamy - definitely. And I will admit that I have not made myself an expert in that history. I have expressed what I perceive to be faults in the usual arguments of critics. But again, I don't believe that is determinative concerning whether polygamy is legal before the Lord or perhaps maybe in our own future best interests. There are many areas people consider to be "known" which really aren't and which don't really conflict with the gospel or scriptures, so to be able to specifically respond to you, I would need to know what you are alluding to. And I may be able to make one or two more responses, but then I have to go for the day. I don't believe there is anything perverse about having faith in answers given by the Spirit. I have done it many times, and it has always brought more light. And I don't believe the investigators of the Church need to be reliant only on feelings alone. We have the Bible which I believe supports almost all the major restored gospel principles. I believe there is also much archaeological evidence to support both the Bible and the Book of Mormon, and am doing my best to bring that out.
Ahab Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 1 hour ago, stemelbow said: So? We all live our own path. It may be that we all have to figure out how to align, but none of us are on the same path. And it'll be that we learn truth. We'll be able to see someday. Today, we simply can't. We like to think we can, but we can't. k. Thanks. No, I think there is only one path of righteousness that leads to our Father and many who are on it are just walking at different speeds, or pausing to take a look around them, or turning around to go in the opposite direction that leads to becoming like Satan, or going off in some other direction to try to find another way to become like our Father but which doesn't really get them there and ends up intersecting the one path to either our Father or Satan with them nor knowing which direction to go until maybe someday they figure it out (these are the ones who are lost until maybe, just maybe, someday they are eventually found).
Meadowchik Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 12 minutes ago, RevTestament said: This sounds like it might need its own thread Meadowchick. If you are alluding to Joseph Smith's polygamy - definitely. And I will admit that I have not made myself an expert in that history. I have expressed what I perceive to be faults in the usual arguments of critics. But again, I don't believe that is determinative concerning whether polygamy is legal before the Lord or perhaps maybe in our own future best interests. There are many areas people consider to be "known" which really aren't and which don't really conflict with the gospel or scriptures, so to be able to specifically respond to you, I would need to know what you are alluding to. And I may be able to make one or two more responses, but then I have to go for the day. I don't believe there is anything perverse about having faith in answers given by the Spirit. I have done it many times, and it has always brought more light. And I don't believe the investigators of the Church need to be reliant only on feelings alone. We have the Bible which I believe supports almost all the major restored gospel principles. I believe there is also much archaeological evidence to support both the Bible and the Book of Mormon, and am doing my best to bring that out. I don't refer to any one thing but to the concept of doing this. It is prevalent in the church.
RevTestament Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 10 minutes ago, Meadowchik said: I don't refer to any one thing but to the concept of doing this. It is prevalent in the church. There is certainly nothing wrong with relying on prayer Meadowchick - and that may be the usual response of local Church leaders - and maybe even general authorities. However, that doesn't mean that we must rely on only prayer alone. As I have said there is much supporting archaeological evidence. I've amassed hundreds of pages of it, but right now I have to go. Have a good day
stemelbow Posted April 18, 2017 Author Posted April 18, 2017 46 minutes ago, The Nehor said: There is a happy medium between everyone listing to follow the Spirit and no one following the Spirit. THanks for acknowledging my point.
Meadowchik Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 9 minutes ago, RevTestament said: There is certainly nothing wrong with relying on prayer Meadowchick - and that may be the usual response of local Church leaders - and maybe even general authorities. However, that doesn't mean that we must rely on only prayer alone. As I have said there is much supporting archaeological evidence. I've amassed hundreds of pages of it, but right now I have to go. Have a good day Let's be clear, I am distinctly talking about this: "The most perverse is when feelings go beyond merely bridging a gap of the unknown, to actually replacing or taking precedence over the known."
stemelbow Posted April 18, 2017 Author Posted April 18, 2017 32 minutes ago, Ahab said: No, I think there is only one path of righteousness that leads to our Father and many who are on it are just walking at different speeds, or pausing to take a look around them, or turning around to go in the opposite direction that leads to becoming like Satan, or going off in some other direction to try to find another way to become like our Father but which doesn't really get them there and ends up intersecting the one path to either our Father or Satan with them nor knowing which direction to go until maybe someday they figure it out (these are the ones who are lost until maybe, just maybe, someday they are eventually found). K. Disagree. No one is becoming like satan, almost. I suppose there are some extreme few who are that bad. But by and large I'm assuming most will see salvation some day. God's getting us there. He doesn't care so much if we each have all truths figured out, It seems.
Ahab Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 22 minutes ago, stemelbow said: K. Disagree. No one is becoming like satan, almost. I suppose there are some extreme few who are that bad. But by and large I'm assuming most will see salvation some day. God's getting us there. He doesn't care so much if we each have all truths figured out, It seems. You said you disagreed with me and then you showed me that you agree with me, maybe more than you realized. I was talking about the different paths there are in life, with only one path that leads to us becoming like our Father. I wasn't talking about how many people are on a path, whichever path we/they are on.
clarkgoble Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 1 hour ago, Meadowchik said: But I do think there is something inherently less healthy that is more likely in Mormonism, the spiritual answers based on feelings alone. The most perverse is when feelings go beyond merely bridging a gap of the unknown, to actually replacing or taking precedence over the known. I think characterizing these experiences as mere feelings is misleading at best. Maybe yours were like that but I don't think most are. 1
pogi Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 1 hour ago, Meadowchik said: "...to actually replacing or taking precedence over the known." What is the "known" exactly that said feelings are replacing?
Meadowchik Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 3 hours ago, clarkgoble said: I think characterizing these experiences as mere feelings is misleading at best. Maybe yours were like that but I don't think most are. By feelings I mean subjective experience within oneself which may or may not be the Spirit.
Meadowchik Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 2 hours ago, pogi said: What is the "known" exactly that said feelings are replacing? It could be anything known.
Ahab Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 2 minutes ago, Meadowchik said: By feelings I mean subjective experience within oneself which may or may not be the Spirit. Still more than just feelings, at least to me and many others who have received a testimony from the Holy Spirit. Feelings are conveyed but so are thoughts of wisdom and pure intelligence as the Holy Ghost actually tells me what he tells me. Thoughts and feelings which I know are distinct from my own even though I may choose to agree with him or what he tells me and feel what he inspires me to feel. I know it isn't just me talking to myself because I do that too sometimes and I know how to tell the difference between someone else communicating with me and me just thinking or pondering about my own thoughts. If you'very never experienced that before then you have something to look forward to experiencing, if you want to experience that for yourself someday.
pogi Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 11 minutes ago, Meadowchik said: It could be anything known. I ask because I don't know of anyone who believes in their feelings over what they "know". That would be strange indeed.
The Nehor Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 4 hours ago, stemelbow said: THanks for acknowledging my point. I didn't unless you communicated your point terribly.
clarkgoble Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 57 minutes ago, Meadowchik said: By feelings I mean subjective experience within oneself which may or may not be the Spirit. But I don't agree with that either unless you're using subjective in an odd way.
Meadowchik Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 58 minutes ago, Ahab said: Still more than just feelings, at least to me and many others who have received a testimony from the Holy Spirit. Feelings are conveyed but so are thoughts of wisdom and pure intelligence as the Holy Ghost actually tells me what he tells me. Thoughts and feelings which I know are distinct from my own even though I may choose to agree with him or what he tells me and feel what he inspires me to feel. I know it isn't just me talking to myself because I do that too sometimes and I know how to tell the difference between someone else communicating with me and me just thinking or pondering about my own thoughts. If you'very never experienced that before then you have something to look forward to experiencing, if you want to experience that for yourself someday. Of course I have experienced that. I am not talking about intelligence, but feelings which may or may not be interpreted as the Spirit.
Meadowchik Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 24 minutes ago, clarkgoble said: But I don't agree with that either unless you're using subjective in an odd way. Maybe we could communicate more effectively if you tell me how you describe or define "these experiences."
Ahab Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 16 minutes ago, Meadowchik said: Of course I have experienced that. I am not talking about intelligence, but feelings which may or may not be interpreted as the Spirit. My point was simply that when the Holy Spirit communicates with us there are more things than mere feelings involved. Yes feelings may or may not be interpreted as the Spirit but when the Holy Spirit does communicate with us there are more things than mere feelings involved.
Meadowchik Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 1 hour ago, pogi said: I ask because I don't know of anyone who believes in their feelings over what they "know". That would be strange indeed. Huh. Going with feelings against knowledge is one way to define sin. In other words, prioritising feelings over evidence is something people do frequently.
Meadowchik Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 5 minutes ago, Ahab said: My point was simply that when the Holy Spirit communicates with us there are more things than mere feelings involved. Yes feelings may or may not be interpreted as the Spirit but when the Holy Spirit does communicate with us there are more things than mere feelings involved. I was being more specific than that. I was not criticizing intellectual decisions that might have been guided or developed or gifted by the Spirit. I am being quite specific: "But I do think there is something inherently less healthy that is more likely in Mormonism, the spiritual answers based on feelings alone. The most perverse is when feelings go beyond merely bridging a gap of the unknown, to actually replacing or taking precedence over the known."
Recommended Posts