Ushuaia Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 All this is very interesting. But for me the best way to process it is to simply allow Pres. Eyring to be incorrect. None of these good, inspired leaders are infallible, even in their conference remarks.
JAHS Posted October 11, 2017 Author Posted October 11, 2017 6 minutes ago, Calm said: The Lord may have in mind someone for a calling; less sure that person is always called though. My guess is sometimes it is the bishop, SP, or other leader doing the calling, not the Lord. And they make mistakes. This I can understand. God does not make mistakes, but he puts mortal leaders in charge that might sometimes make mistakes in who they choose to fill a calling. Then of course there are those callings that are more out of desperation than inspiration. I had moved into a ward once that was full of high priests and two elders with me making a third elder. I was called to be in the Elder's quorum presidency even before I attended my first Sunday meetings in the ward. 2
SmileyMcGee Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said: SmileyMcGee is wrong, and you are on the right track here, hope. Not that his view is not held by a lot of people who fail to think the problem through systematically. They think that foresight effectively gives God Calvinistic sovereignty, forgetting about the undistributed middle term in their unstated syllogism. For, as Rabbi Akiba states in Tractate Abot 3:15 in the Talmud, "All is foreseen, and free will is given." Hmmm...so in an effort to side-step the problem of evil, hope attributes to God a lack foresight that is contradicted by the BoM and current church materials and leaders (which is the only argument I'm making, I've said nothing regarding the soundness of the problem of evil, only that Mormonism appears to clearly accept one of the premises---an omniscient God) and somehow you twist this into labeling me an unthinking calvinist... Edited October 11, 2017 by SmileyMcGee 1
Calm Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 44 minutes ago, Ushuaia said: All this is very interesting. But for me the best way to process it is to simply allow Pres. Eyring to be incorrect. None of these good, inspired leaders are infallible, even in their conference remarks. I love your avatar, btw. 1
SmileyMcGee Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, hope_for_things said: I don't deny that there are scriptures that one could interpret the way you are explaining Per lds.org under Gospel Topics, God the Father: "God the Father is the Supreme Being in whom we believe and whom we worship. He is the ultimate Creator, Ruler, and Preserver of all things. He is perfect, has all power, and knows all things." https://www.lds.org/topics/god-the-father?lang=eng Per the Bible dictionary under "God": "...God created all things and is the ruler of the universe, being omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent..." https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bd/god Edited October 11, 2017 by SmileyMcGee
mfbukowski Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, JAHS said: Yes I understand that. I just don't think it's right to assume all callings are inspired of God and are not mistakes. What if the imperfect people making the calling are not in a spiritual frame of mind to be able to receive inspiration at the time they make the calling and so the wrong person is called. Perhaps God was willing to inspire them but they could not receive it. Because you had such a terrible experience, I will not discuss it farther with you- I cannot imagine how you feel I think it is not good to harbor any illusions about the abilities of humans nor about the ability of God to test and simultaneously teach us. All my best to you! Edited October 11, 2017 by mfbukowski 1
changed Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 5 hours ago, mfbukowski said: So the assumption of the thread is that priesthood leaders are fallible and make mistakes, right? yet Elder Eyring claims infallibility. That contradicts the basic assumption, therefore ignore the rest and go have lunch BUT There is more to this. On the other hand, I agree with Elder Eyring in that it is up to each of us seek a testimony of our calling, and sacrifice to make the best of it we can. All of life is a test on how well we handle things when they do not go well AND assume that the calling came from the Lord For all we know that "terrible calling" was given precisely to test us. For all we know the sinful stake president may be encouraged by such a calling to change his ways. The point is that we are to BELIEVE in the callings we are given and that assumption itself will bring us closer to Christ for obedience alone if nothing else. So let's BELIEVE Elder Eyring and assume he is right and see what we have to learn by doing so instead of making the self-contradictory observation that though leaders make mistakes, Elder E is claiming infallibility. In other words, this whole life is about learning from mistakes, those we make and those others make. We call this "The Gospel of Jesus Christ" and the "Plan of Happiness". Remember Adam and Eve and the fortunate fall? So what's the big deal? It's possible to make excuses and justify anything as being just part of the "test". I'm not convinced that mistakes are justified because they are "educational". That is equivalent to saying the blind should lead the blind - that we can learn by following blind people stumbling around. Another example - if you want to make an apple pie, there are an infinite number of ways to make it wrong - you could waste your entire life studying mistakes, and never learn what was correct. The best way to learn anything is not from mistakes - it's learning from a master who has it figured out. 1
mfbukowski Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 2 minutes ago, changed said: It's possible to make excuses and justify anything as being just part of the "test". I'm not convinced that mistakes are justified because they are "educational". That is equivalent to saying the blind should lead the blind - that we can learn by following blind people stumbling around. Another example - if you want to make an apple pie, there are an infinite number of ways to make it wrong - you could waste your entire life studying mistakes, and never learn what was correct. The best way to learn anything is not from mistakes - it's learning from a master who has it figured out. Yeah just like Edison with the light bulb right? Anyone can follow someone else. We are here to build our OWN worlds. And you talk about the blind leading the blind? Can you see the irony in that?
changed Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 (edited) 5 hours ago, JAHS said: He didn't change his ways and is excommunicated and now in prison. My wife and some fellow stake members were some of his victims. I'm struggling with a similar situation now - he was a first councilor in the bishopric, he is in jail now, my children were some of his victims. I'm a convert to the church, I joined because of some spiritual experiences. Right now I am not angry at the church - it is mostly filled with good people stumbling around doing the best they can. I am angry at God though. I no longer want to be in the celestial kingdom, I do not want to become like God, nor do I want to spend eternity with someone who administers such "tests". It's not just, it is not loving, not merciful. Edited October 11, 2017 by changed 1
mrmarklin Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 1 hour ago, Ushuaia said: All this is very interesting. But for me the best way to process it is to simply allow Pres. Eyring to be incorrect. None of these good, inspired leaders are infallible, even in their conference remarks. True. Likely Eyring would edit his remarks, given the chance.
Button Gwinnett Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 (edited) 7 hours ago, JAHS said: President Eyring made this rather bold statement in General Conference: "For instance, it takes faith to believe that the resurrected Lord is watching over the daily details of His kingdom. It takes faith to believe that He calls imperfect people into positions of trust. It takes faith to believe that He knows the people He calls perfectly, both their capacities and their potential, and so makes no mistakes in His calls." He goes on to explain a little what he meant" "That may bring a smile or a shake of the head to some in this audience—both those who think their own call to serve might have been a mistake as well as those who picture some they know who seem poorly suited to their place in the Lord’s kingdom. My counsel to both groups is to delay such judgments until you can better see what the Lord sees. The judgment you need to make, instead, is that you have the capacity to receive revelation and to act on it fearlessly." The Lord Leads His Church I have known a couple Bishops and even a Stake president who it seems should never have been called to such a position, because of what sins they were hiding and things they did while they were serving as a Bishop or Stake President. There is one in the news right now as an example. I know no one is perfect as President Eyring said, but how do you justify to someone who was hurt by such a person, that President Eyring is right when he says mistakes are not made in who is called to a certain position of trust and leadership? I can't imagine that he was referring to the Mapleton Bishop just sentenced to a minimum of 15 years in prison for molesting some of the deacons in his ward. This is why I hate broad all inclusive statements, there always an exception im just going to assume that President Eyring was speaking in his capacity as a man and not in his capacity as a prophet Edited October 11, 2017 by Button Gwinnett
changed Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 (edited) 9 minutes ago, mfbukowski said: Yeah just like Edison with the light bulb right? Anyone can follow someone else. We are here to build our OWN worlds. And you talk about the blind leading the blind? Can you see the irony in that? So you are saying we need to ignore all the leaders, and learn we have no one but ourselves to count on? That evil leaders force us to realize we cannot depend on anyone but ourselves, force us to be strong and all that? I agree - can't count on anyone. Anyone can follow someone else... The last will be first, and the first will be last.... the first will be last.... push all those leaders to be last, and learn who the real leaders are? Edited October 11, 2017 by changed
Calm Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 10 minutes ago, changed said: So you are saying we need to ignore all the leaders, and learn we have no one but ourselves to count on? That evil leaders force us to realize we cannot depend on anyone but ourselves, force us to be strong and all that? I agree - can't count on anyone. Anyone can follow someone else... Edison depended first on others as he learned how far others' learning could take him. A good foundation makes for a stronger building.
changed Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 (edited) 25 minutes ago, Calm said: Edison depended first on others as he learned how far others' learning could take him. A good foundation makes for a stronger building. Edison did not invent the light bulb - did not invent most of the things his name was on. He got ahead because he was very charismatic. (As opposed to Tesla who really was a genius, but died alone and penniless ... 3 days before anyone found his dead body in a hotel room... because Tesla was a bookworm who did not like to talk or be around people). Newton - "If I have seen farther than others it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants" ... Newton really was a giant though .... except when he signed those orders to kill people for defacing money, but then no one is perfect. Learn from others, but when push comes to shove, we are the ones who make the final decision on what to do and where to go. We are ultimately responsible for ourselves.... It would be nice to just have someone reliable to be able to follow without question, that we could blame all our problems on, push all the consequences on... but taking personal responsibility entails recognizing that we really do have to be self-sufficient. even self-sufficient is not enough though, you have to take care of yourself and have enough left over to also try and take care of the little ones too - those little ones, that's where it gets scary, where I get angry... what kind of a plan sends little ones to earth to be tormented? Everyone who is not saved? it means the test was bad - the educational experience was bad, they were not put in the right family, they were not given the right teacher - I've felt the spirit, I know god is real, I'm not convinced he's perfect and all knowing though. I think many callings are directed - I don't blame people for following god, I blame god for handing out the wrong directions. Edited October 11, 2017 by changed
JAHS Posted October 11, 2017 Author Posted October 11, 2017 29 minutes ago, changed said: I'm struggling with a similar situation now - he was a first councilor in the bishopric, he is in jail now, my children were some of his victims. I'm a convert to the church, I joined because of some spiritual experiences. Right now I am not angry at the church - it is mostly filled with good people stumbling around doing the best they can. I am angry at God though. I no longer want to be in the celestial kingdom, I do not want to become like God, nor do I want to spend eternity with someone who administers such "tests". It's not just, it is not loving, not merciful. The thing is I don't think God Himself inflicts these tests on us on purpose (except maybe in the case of Job). I think He has just set things in motion and allows us, by our agency, to test each other and He watches to see how we handle things. This must be an eternal principle that has been going on in eternal past and future in other universes. But if we let Him He can inspire us to do things that are right.
Robert F. Smith Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 1 hour ago, SmileyMcGee said: Hmmm...so in an effort to side-step the problem of evil, hope attributes to God a lack foresight that is contradicted by the BoM and current church materials and leaders (which is the only argument I'm making, I've said nothing regarding the soundness of the problem of evil, only that Mormonism appears to clearly accept one of the premises---an omniscient God) and somehow you twist this into labeling me an unthinking calvinist... As Mark Bukowski has said on this board: Quote There is no need to postulate any immaterial substance to get "all knowing" and "all powerful". He knows everything because he organized it. That's like saying the main architect on a building project knows every nook and cranny of his project- because he created it!! That is pure human knowledge- not immaterial substance knowledge. He has every ability we are able to understand because he like us is a "human"- so he has all abilities we can know or talk about = "omnipotent." http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/67331-a-different-god/?page=17#comment-1209617954. In other words, since there is no word in the Hebrew scriptures for omnipotent or omniscient, we are dealing with Greek theological constructs which mislead us into an unnecessary problem of theodicy, which does not comport with us being coeternal with God, and having free will. There is no problem of evil, if God is not solely responsible for everything. The Calvinist is locked into his dilemma due to his false preconceptions of an absolute and sovereign God. Indeed, those BofM references, manuals, and leaders represent nothing more than poetic and symbolic language (translation English) speaking about the relative greatness of God, which means hyperbolic phrasing (exaggeration for effect). Otherwise, since LDS theology posits possible apotheosis for humans, the notions of omniscience and omnipotence become self-contradictory and paradoxical. 2
Robert F. Smith Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 2 hours ago, JAHS said: Sure they are and I am still wondering why God chose them. Because He had high hopes, and all have to be tested, and the test has to be real.
carbon dioxide Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 7 hours ago, JAHS said: President Eyring made this rather bold statement in General Conference: "For instance, it takes faith to believe that the resurrected Lord is watching over the daily details of His kingdom. It takes faith to believe that He calls imperfect people into positions of trust. It takes faith to believe that He knows the people He calls perfectly, both their capacities and their potential, and so makes no mistakes in His calls." Unless one believes God does make mistakes, one would have to assume that God would not make mistakes in his callings. However should we believe that all callings are based on revelation? It is possible that some people call person to certain positions simply because they are friends of someone giving the calling? It is possible that some people are called to a teaching position because the person giving the call thinks they would be a good teacher even though the Lord would prefer someone else? Is it also possible that some people are given a calling so that it might help them to repent of thins they are doing wrong? Finally does God remove a person's agency away if they are given a calling? Looking for examples in the Church to disprove his statement perhaps could be done on the surface but perhaps there is more involved than simply deciding that God can be wrong when he calls someone. 2
mfbukowski Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 37 minutes ago, changed said: So you are saying we need to ignore all the leaders, and learn we have no one but ourselves to count on? That evil leaders force us to realize we cannot depend on anyone but ourselves, force us to be strong and all that? I agree - can't count on anyone. Anyone can follow someone else... The last will be first, and the first will be last.... the first will be last.... push all those leaders to be last, and learn who the real leaders are? Give me a break you go from one extreme to the other Listen to the leaders. Try what they say. If it works for you, fine- use the principles and go forward and modify them as you desire. Again the Edison analogy. He investigated all that he could find out about what would work and then experimented on his own. You are just being argumentative obviously and are not interested in a discussion, exaggerating every word to the extreme interpretation
changed Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 7 minutes ago, JAHS said: The thing is I don't think God Himself inflicts these tests on us on purpose (except maybe in the case of Job). I think He has just set things in motion and allows us, by our agency, to test each other and He watches to see how we handle things. This must be an eternal principle that has been going on in eternal past and future in other universes. But if we let Him He can inspire us to do things that are right. Someone once told me the opposite of love is not hate, it's indifference. To not do anything, to stand by and watch someone get hurt? Do you want to become like god - have a world of your own, then sit back and watch year after year, child after child, murder after murder - and just sit there watching all the horror - is that what heaven is? is that what having your own world is? I don't want it. I'm inspired by beauty, not by evil. I'm a teacher by profession, and I disagree with god's educational philosophies.
changed Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 (edited) 10 minutes ago, mfbukowski said: Give me a break you go from one extreme to the other Listen to the leaders. Try what they say. If it works for you, fine- use the principles and go forward and modify them as you desire. Again the Edison analogy. He investigated all that he could find out about what would work and then experimented on his own. You are just being argumentative obviously and are not interested in a discussion, exaggerating every word to the extreme interpretation Edison did not experiment "on his own". Edison's greatest strength was was the people he pulled together. Mark Twain - "If you want to tell the truth, you must lie. If you do not exaggerate the truth, your audience will not see it." Most Mormons grow up in sheltered lives, sheltered families - they are not familiar with how most of the world lives, not familiar with the "tests" most people on earth are given... my bishop is not qualified to deal with my current situation as an example - he has no experience with child molestation, does not know what to say, and I forgive him for it. I know not to ask for help from him, he's just a random goofy guy who is in way over his head. The world is growing evil... when I first started teaching, and they give us stats on our students each year - 15 years ago it was 1 out of every 10 girls. 1 out of 10. Know what it is now? it's one in 5. god is not loving. men are not the "protectors and providers". PPI's? - NOT a good idea. Put people who are in trouble alone in a room with a leader who is not professionally trained to deal with the issues that are becoming more and more common? not a good idea... Edited October 11, 2017 by changed
mfbukowski Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 3 minutes ago, changed said: Edison did not experiment "on his own". Edison's greatest strength was was the people he pulled together. Mark Twain - "If you want to tell the truth, you must lie. If you do not exaggerate the truth, your audience will not see it." Most Mormons grow up in sheltered lives, sheltered families - they are not familiar with how most of the world lives, not familiar with the "tests" most people on earth are given... my bishop is not qualified to deal with my current situation as an example - he has no experience with child molestation, does not know what to say, and I forgive him for it. I know not to ask for help from him, he's just a random goofy guy who is in way over his head. OK I have no clue what your point is- I am wrong and you "win"! Discussion over 1
changed Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 2 minutes ago, mfbukowski said: OK I have no clue what your point is- I am wrong and you "win"! Discussion over I'm really not trying to argue here - I'm scared out of my mind - I'm scared of god, I'm scared of heaven. it would be nice if someone had answers.. it's at least therapeutic to vent though. sorry, I would have never had kids if I knew then what I know now. it's a cruel world for them.
Pete Ahlstrom Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 I don't think one can support the infallibility of the leaders who chose other leaders. The choices cannot be perfect as there are too many examples of all too human leaders, of leaders who make criminal mistakes. Given this, what does everyone suppose was Pres. Eyring's purpose in making this indefensible proposition? 2
strappinglad Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 We teach our children to ride a bicycle , knowing full well that they are likely to fall over and scrape a knee or maybe be hit by a car . Why do we still do it? We send our children to school knowing that there may be bullies to taunt them or teachers with strange rules or even disgruntled workers who return to wreck havoc . Why do we still do it? We encourage our youth to go to university well aware that their ideas and standards will be challenged and perhaps changed. Why? We want our children to work and do well at jobs that at times may be dangerous. How can we countenance such thinking ? We send our young people to war. Do we actually Hate our children ? A life span of 80 years out of a million year existence ( just picking a number ) is the equivalent of 55 hours in an 80 year existence. What we gain from experiencing this " simulation " must be very valuable for God to love us enough to allow us to do it knowing all the bumps and bruises inherent .
Recommended Posts