One true church - Virtue or Vice?

[hope_for_things]

11 minutes ago, pogi said:

If we are to believe that all men are authorized to speak for God all the time, then all beliefs are of equal value.  The value of this teaching is in understanding that not all teachings, principles, practices, etc. are of equal value in the eyes of God. 

I agree with your second sentence.  I never said that all men are authorized to speak for God all the time, not sure where you got that from.  I honestly don't believe anyone is authorized to speak for God.  

[bluebell]

1 minute ago, hope_for_things said:

No, I'm talking about equality, human dignity, and agency.  Not sanction from God for actions people take.  But a fundamental belief that people are dignified and entitled to respect, fair treatment and social justice.  People are responsible for their own actions.  

I'm not sure how a belief in divine authority impacts or negates any of those rights though.  If someone has authority from God and I don't, that does not at all impact my dignity, or entitlement to respect, fair treatment, or social justice.  I can not have authority and still have all of those things.

God does not have to treat us all equally in order for Him to treat us equitably.  

[kiwi57]

19 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

The opposite to a belief that Mormonism is the one true religion is a belief that Mormonism is the one false religion.  Everyone else is somewhere in between those two polls.  A belief that no one true religion exists is one of many beliefs in the in between space.

I don't agree. "There is no X" explicitly negates the claim that "Some A is X."

19 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

I’m just making observations about some of the negative outcomes that I believe are related to this claim.  If you want to participate in the commentary, feel free, I’m trying to discuss in a respectful manner.  

Oo-kay. So what you are essentially saying is that you can play offense all you like, but I have to either limit myself to playing defense, or shut up.

Is that it?

Questioning the assumptions underlying your attack list of "negative outcomes" is not permitted?

[pogi]

3 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

No, I'm talking about equality, human dignity, and agency.  Not sanction from God for actions people take.  But a fundamental belief that people are dignified and entitled to respect, fair treatment and social justice.  People are responsible for their own actions.  

As a libertarian, you are speaking my language.  I full-heartedly agree with one exception.  All people are not dignified or worthy of respect.  I can respect their life, but to say that all people's actions, teachings, etc. are dignified is a gross vise.  Why are some actions dignified and others not?  Because of law. Law implies that God sanctions some actions and not others.  If a person teaches the law, are they not sanctioned by God?  And if someone teaches contrary to the law, would it not be accurate to state that they are not sanctioned by God?  In other words, there must be sanctioned magistrates of the law for a law to be administered from person to person. 

Lets start out on this fundamental level to understand the value of God sanctioning some and not others.  Are you agreed?

 

[kiwi57]

9 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

Your comment seems to best fall into either bullet #4, the shunning of family and friends who are seen as a threat, or #7 the hyperjudgmental one.  

And your response seems an illustration of the rather interesting phenomenon that whatever we are hyper-vigilant for, we usually see. 

Medieval witch-finders and heresy-hunters never failed to find witches and heretics, just like you will never fail to find Mormons "shunning family and friends" (whether it happens or not) or "hyperjudgmentalism," which appears to be a projection of your own mind.

[kiwi57]

4 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

The authority doesn't come from God, its a claim that the tribe makes.  The whole concept of authority is a human construct.  

Thank you for preaching your beliefs at us, but our beliefs don't have to agree with yours. They only have to be internally consistent.

 

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

There are many other arguments for the value of religion.  Authority is a weak argument in my opinion.  

Again, I am more interested in whether it is true rather than whether it is valuable.

[CV75]

1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

I could make an argument that someone in the boarderlands is more qualified to comment on these ideas because they aren't as likely to be constrained to follow the party line.  Certainly anyone who's spent their life in the church and the culture has a certain amount of experience, enough to make observations about it.  But I don't think membership is required.  Many non-member scholars in Mormon studies like Jan Shipps or Ann Taves are excellent scholars and have contributed to our community in very valuable ways.  The most important thing is the content of the discussion, not formal qualifications of any individual person.  

You could make that argument, but you haven't, and you haven't addressed the salient point... Have Shipps or Taves contributed to resolving the specific concern laid out in the OP?

1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

Can you stop with the insults?  

No insult was intended; and I don't see any insult in describing a behavior I am evidently not the only one noticing. Now can you address the salient point? I'm not trying to personalize, insult or nag; just trying to focus on the OP.

[Maestrophil]

3 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

What makes you think Mormonism is in exact accordance with what God desires?  I don't think that's what D&C 1 says at all, and I'm not even aware of any statements in Mormonism that claim exact accordance to God.  This sounds to me like you are making a stronger claim than what even most traditional orthodox Mormons I know would be willing to state.  

Poor wording on my part...  I am not sure what God desires in every aspect.  I meant more along the lines of how God desired his church on earth to be organized by flawed humans.  The most like it was as established by Christ.  Which is pretty much the claim I always felt came from the restoration. 

[hope_for_things]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

I'm not sure how a belief in divine authority impacts or negates any of those rights though.  If someone has authority from God and I don't, that does not at all impact my dignity, or entitlement to respect, fair treatment, or social justice.  I can not have authority and still have all of those things.

God does not have to treat us all equally in order for Him to treat us equitably.  

Sounds like fair treatment and equality mean something different to you than to me.  A group with God’s exclusive authority can restrict access to God to just its members or to certain races or those with specific sexual preference or gender or gender expression.  We see this in Mormonism today.  

[hope_for_things]

2 hours ago, kiwi57 said:

I don't agree. "There is no X" explicitly negates the claim that "Some A is X."

Disagreement with the one true church claim is not the same thing as describing the opposite position of that claim.  

[hope_for_things]

2 hours ago, pogi said:

As a libertarian, you are speaking my language.  I full-heartedly agree with one exception.  All people are not dignified or worthy of respect.  I can respect their life, but to say that all people's actions, teachings, etc. are dignified is a gross vise.  Why are some actions dignified and others not?  Because of law. Law implies that God sanctions some actions and not others.  If a person teaches the law, are they not sanctioned by God?  And if someone teaches contrary to the law, would it not be accurate to state that they are not sanctioned by God?  In other words, there must be sanctioned magistrates of the law for a law to be administered from person to person. 

Lets start out on this fundamental level to understand the value of God sanctioning some and not others.  Are you agreed?

 

I agree with you that actions are not all dignified.  However I disagree that laws are sanctioned by God.  The laws we have are built on a social contract and I don’t see any reason to assume God sanctions or condemns any of them.  

[hope_for_things]

2 hours ago, kiwi57 said:

And your response seems an illustration of the rather interesting phenomenon that whatever we are hyper-vigilant for, we usually see. 

Medieval witch-finders and heresy-hunters never failed to find witches and heretics, just like you will never fail to find Mormons "shunning family and friends" (whether it happens or not) or "hyperjudgmentalism," which appears to be a projection of your own mind.

I’ve seen and experienced some shunning first hand and I’m aquatinted with others who’ve experienced it much worse.  We have statements from current leaders essentially condoning the concept and statements from past leaders that equate heresy with some of the worst sins imaginable.  Shunning is not unique to Mormonism, it happens in many of the fundamental conservative religions around the world.  Are you claiming it doesn’t happen?  

[hope_for_things]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

Again, I am more interested in whether it is true rather than whether it is valuable.

If it isn’t valuable then it isn’t true.  That’s the Alma 32 test in a nutshell.  

[hope_for_things]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

Now can you address the salient point? I'm not trying to personalize, insult or nag; just trying to focus on the OP.

I thought I was answering your question, I’m lost about what specifically you’re asking me to clarify.  

[hope_for_things]

35 minutes ago, Maestrophil said:

Poor wording on my part...  I am not sure what God desires in every aspect.  I meant more along the lines of how God desired his church on earth to be organized by flawed humans.  The most like it was as established by Christ.  Which is pretty much the claim I always felt came from the restoration. 

The earliest impulses articulated by Joseph seem to be restoring an idea that God is again speaking to humans and that the gifts of the spirit are real and that the Bible should be taken seriously and the BoM is proof of God working with humans again.  

Only later did this turn into a restored church movement.  Some scholars think Cowdery was a large influencing factor about establishing a formal church organization.  Christopher Smith gave a very compelling presentation on this idea at Sunstone this summer.  Supposed to have an essay out on this soon.  

[pogi]

44 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

I agree with you that actions are not all dignified.  However I disagree that laws are sanctioned by God.  The laws we have are built on a social contract and I don’t see any reason to assume God sanctions or condemns any of them.  

So no sin or righteousness? Give 2 Nephi 2 a good read.

Edited November 29, 2017 by pogi

[bluebell]

53 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Sounds like fair treatment and equality mean something different to you than to me.  A group with God’s exclusive authority can restrict access to God to just its members or to certain races or those with specific sexual preference or gender or gender expression.  We see this in Mormonism today.  

Do you think it's unfair that police officers or judges or the president of the united states have authority that you don't?  Do you believe that them having authority and you not automatically impacts your dignity or respect?  

And further, does it makes sense to say that because some government's abuse their authority it means that the concept of governmental authority is a negative?

[Calm]

1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

Sounds like fair treatment and equality mean something different to you than to me.  A group with God’s exclusive authority can restrict access to God to just its members or to certain races or those with specific sexual preference or gender or gender expression.  We see this in Mormonism today.  

If God actually exists, no one but God can restrict access to him.

[kiwi57]

1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

I’ve seen and experienced some shunning first hand and I’m aquatinted with others who’ve experienced it much worse.  We have statements from current leaders essentially condoning the concept and statements from past leaders that equate heresy with some of the worst sins imaginable.  Shunning is not unique to Mormonism, it happens in many of the fundamental conservative religions around the world.  Are you claiming it doesn’t happen?  

Of course shunning happens; and it takes many forms.

Just ask a baker who wanted to only make wedding cakes for authentic weddings if they've ever been shunned. Some of them get shunned right out of business.

But the Latter-day Saints don't do that.

[hope_for_things]

58 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Do you think it's unfair that police officers or judges or the president of the united states have authority that you don't?  Do you believe that them having authority and you not automatically impacts your dignity or respect?  

And further, does it makes sense to say that because some government's abuse their authority it means that the concept of governmental authority is a negative?

The U.S. government is based on the idea of justice being blind and not discriminating against anyone.  As a society we agree to a social contract and give authority to the government.  If they misuse this authority by discrimination then yes it would impact dignity and respect.  

Your second point I agree with, just because some governments misuse authority doesn’t mean that authority is fundamentally bad.  But that’s a governmental authority, and I think a belief in a divine authority is different.  

Edited November 29, 2017 by hope_for_things

[kiwi57]

1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

The earliest impulses articulated by Joseph seem to be restoring an idea that God is again speaking to humans and that the gifts of the spirit are real and that the Bible should be taken seriously and the BoM is proof of God working with humans again.  

Only later did this turn into a restored church movement.  Some scholars think Cowdery was a large influencing factor about establishing a formal church organization.  Christopher Smith gave a very compelling presentation on this idea at Sunstone this summer.  Supposed to have an essay out on this soon.  

Ah yes, the popular feel-good revisionist idea of the vague and amorphous "restoration movement" thingy.

The Church was organised eleven days after the Book of Mormon was first published. The restoration wasn't just a bunch of nice "impulses" that only gradually ossified into a church; the Church itself, with specific Priesthood authority, an organised missionary arm and a body of rites and ordinances, was an organic part of the program from the very beginning.

Sorry to disappoint.

[hope_for_things]

57 minutes ago, pogi said:

So no sin or righteousness? Give 2 Nephi 2 a good read.

I didn’t say no sin or righteousness.  And I’m quite familiar with 2 Nephi 2, used to have much of it memorized. 

[hope_for_things]

44 minutes ago, Calm said:

If God actually exists, no one but God can restrict access to him.

Sounds good to me.  I think all attempts to do so aren’t inspired.  

[hope_for_things]

9 minutes ago, kiwi57 said:

Of course shunning happens; and it takes many forms.

Just ask a baker who wanted to only make wedding cakes for authentic weddings if they've ever been shunned. Some of them get shunned right out of business.

But the Latter-day Saints don't do that.

My Dad taught me that two wrongs don’t make a right.