Uncomfortable at church - any suggestions?

[Jeanne]

Does anyone learn anything new?  Is there learning in all these meetings?

[Eek!]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

And I must admit there is still a lot of the altar boy left when I get to officiate in an endowment session in the temple, getting everything "just right" but not robotic. 

I've never been an altar boy but have participated many times in events where getting every little (seemingly unimportant) thing "just right" really mattered, because doing so prevented distractions, and thereby helped clear the way for the higher purpose of the event. 

[mfbukowski]

58 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

Does anyone learn anything new?  Is there learning in all these meetings?

Nope, just the same old stuff until we get it right.

Acts 17:

Quote

 

18 Then certain philosophers of the Epicureans, and of the Stoicks, encountered him. And some said, What will this babbler say? other some, He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods: because he preached unto them Jesus, and the resurrection.

19 And they took him, and brought him unto Areopagus, saying, May we know what this new doctrine, whereof thou speakest, is?

20 For thou bringest certain strange things to our ears: we would know therefore what these things mean.

21 (For all the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell, or to hear some new thing.)

22 Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious.

 

3 Nephi 11

Quote

 

31 Behold, verily, verily, I say unto you, I will declare unto you my doctrine.

32 And this is my doctrine, and it is the doctrine which the Father hath given unto me; and I bear record of the Father, and the Father beareth record of me, and the Holy Ghost beareth record of the Father and me; and I bear record that the Father commandeth all men, everywhere, to repent and believe in me.

33 And whoso believeth in me, and is baptized, the same shall be saved; and they are they who shall inherit the kingdom of God.

34 And whoso believeth not in me, and is not baptized, shall be damned.

35 Verily, verily, I say unto you, that this is my doctrine, and I bear record of it from the Father; and whoso believeth in me believeth in the Father also; and unto him will the Father bear record of me, for he will visit him with fire and with the Holy Ghost.

36 And thus will the Father bear record of me, and the Holy Ghost will bear record unto him of the Father and me; for the Father, and I, and the Holy Ghost are one.

37 And again I say unto you, ye must repent, and becomeas a little child, and be baptized in my name, or ye can in nowise receive these things.

38 And again I say unto you, ye must repent, and be baptized in my name, and become as a little child, or ye can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God.

39 Verily, verily, I say unto you, that this is my doctrine, and whoso buildeth upon this buildeth upon my rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against them.

40 And whoso shall declare more or less than this, and establish it for my doctrine, the same cometh of evil, and is not built upon my rock; but he buildeth upon a sandyfoundation, and the gates of hell stand open to receive such when the floods come and the winds beat upon them.

41 Therefore, go forth unto this people, and declare the words which I have spoken, unto the ends of the earth.

 

Revelation  is  the "rock", not Peter!

You would need your own revelation to follow him  anyway!!  So what good is someone telling you what doctrine is if you have to still get the answer from God?

And so we are to develop our own beliefs about what is outside these basic principles.

That is what personal revelation is for.  So if you are wanting something new,find it  for yourself directly from  God!  

He will give you your own  intelligence if you only ask.

What we CAN learn is other people's take on these basic principles  and how they interpret them  and so  with the help of revelation, grow our  own "doctrine" so that God himself is our personal tutor.

If anybody else told us, we would not believe  it anyway!   Do  you believe what  you were taught?  No- because it did not come from your  own heart.  So put off childish things and learn directly from God and let him show you the way he wants you to go.

That's my advice.  But of course you should not take it. 

 

Edited May 5, 2018 by mfbukowski

[Jeanne]

3 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Nope, just the same old stuff until we get it right.

Acts 17:

3 Nephi 11

And so we are to develop our own beliefs about what is outside these basic principles.

That is what personal revelation is for.  So if you are wanting something new,find it  for yourself directly from  God!  

He will give you your own  intelligence if you only ask.

Your last paragraph implies there is no need for Sunday School.☺️  Learn good principles..practice them and do good.  Personal revelation will follow on all your questions.  I agree.

[mfbukowski]

3 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

Your last paragraph implies there is no need for Sunday School.☺️  Learn good principles..practice them and do good.  Personal revelation will follow on all your questions.  I agree.

I was in the process of editing it 

But yep you are right- in a sense!  Sacrament is really the only required meeting except Priesthood for men.

The recommend question  is "do you  attend your meetings"- as I recall.  

Many think Sunday School is in the hall or foyers anyway and no one stops those folks from getting recommends. 

 

[Storm Rider]

5 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

Thanks, yes, I'm aware of the pride angle, and this is precisely why I'm questioning my motives.   I don't believe I'm superior to anyone from a moral or ethical perspective, quite the contrary, I feel like many people that I know are far better than I am on those important qualities, and I believe I have much to learn from them.  

At the same time, I know much about church history that the average Mormon doesn't know.  So sharing resources with them, like the church's essays, or JSP resources, or books and thoughtful essays, this is all information I've tried to share where I see opportunities.  

I think I agree with your assessment that I also have much to learn from them, yet for reasons that I have a hard time fully understanding within myself, I question whether I should be sharing what I have gained in the same way that I hope to gain from others.  

As I have aged I have come to rely more and more on the 13th Article of Faith.  In this context, does the information I share bring someone closer to Jesus Christ, the Father, and the Holy Spirit or not?  Those of us that enjoy history can be inundated with factoids, but much of it does not aid others as disciples of the Savior.  

If I can add beauty, joy, and peace then I try to do those things.  The rest has become much less important to me.

[Rain]

I've had similar feelings though not over historical things as I just don't have that much knowledge about them.  For me it has come down to asking myself,  "are you teaching/commenting because you want to do it or because the Spirit wants you to do it?" I don't ask myself that with every comment,  but when I do ask it becomes pretty clear most of the time which way I am leaning. 

[Rain]

9 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

In my experiences at LDS church the focus has been squarely on sharing insights and educating. In the 3 hour church service, sacrament/communion only lasts for 10-15 minutes. The rest of the time is filled with talking: sermons, lessons, etc. The point of those seems to be share insights and educate. So as far as time is concerned, 12% of LDS church meetings are for covenant renewal, and the rest is for teaching/learning.

I would say you are mostly correct. Directly only about 12% is covenant renewal. The rest church members "speak one with another concerning the welfare of their souls" or as you say, "sharing insights and education" - which indirectly deals with the covenant making and renewal. 

[california boy]

15 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

 

I think what you're sharing sounds like great discussion topics that the right kind of people would find fascinating and uplifting.  But not everyone is ready for or interested in expanding their views, and many people find safety in holding to correlated Mormonism and are fearful of anything other than the basics.  I see this idea being taught as gospel truth, the idea that we should stick to the basics and the simple messages of the gospel.  I think its a position of comfort and fear of trusting their intuition.  Unfortunately this is a position that doesn't allow for much growth.  I wish this kind of a tradition would go away.  

 

D&C 6:36 has played an important part in my life

  36 Look unto me in every thought, doubt not, fear not.

I use to rely heavily on what church leaders said and how they told me to understand the gospel.  The longer I live, the more I study, the more simple the gospel becomes and the less it needs someone to filter through it to tell me what I am suppose to believe.  

Other people's ideas, writings of men now long dead, manuals that are carefully study have just one purpose for me.  To understand someone else's personal point of view and to see if it has meaning in my life.  To stimulate my own ideas and how I can better shape my life.  

This simple scripture has almost become a mantra for me.  For others, they may not have ever even noticed it or paused to think of its significants.  Are they wrong to have not considered its implications?  Are they wrong because this scripture has not resinated with them?  Of course not.  Their lives, their experiences, their relationship with God is going to be completely different than mine.  The danger of correlation is thinking that we all have the same needs.  We all need the same understanding of things.  I personally don't think that is the experience God had in mind when he sent us to the earth.  

'

'

[CV75]

18 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

Thanks, this is good advice.  In trying to psychoanalyze myself, I have to admit that there is a certain level of discomfort I still have in this new skin.   And pressing forward can be scary at times, especially because I'm not a natural extrovert.  Thanks for your encouragement and suggestions.  

How do you describe the new skin? Is it "activity" (church attendance, participation, personal religious practice, etc.)?

[Duncan]

2 hours ago, california boy said:

D&C 6:36 has played an important part in my life

  36 Look unto me in every thought, doubt not, fear not.

I use to rely heavily on what church leaders said and how they told me to understand the gospel.  The longer I live, the more I study, the more simple the gospel becomes and the less it needs someone to filter through it to tell me what I am suppose to believe.  

Other people's ideas, writings of men now long dead, manuals that are carefully study have just one purpose for me.  To understand someone else's personal point of view and to see if it has meaning in my life.  To stimulate my own ideas and how I can better shape my life.  

This simple scripture has almost become a mantra for me.  For others, they may not have ever even noticed it or paused to think of its significants.  Are they wrong to have not considered its implications?  Are they wrong because this scripture has not resinated with them?  Of course not.  Their lives, their experiences, their relationship with God is going to be completely different than mine.  The danger of correlation is thinking that we all have the same needs.  We all need the same understanding of things.  I personally don't think that is the experience God had in mind when he sent us to the earth.  

'

'

I agree 100% with this. In University I took what they call here seminar classes and for the first 3 years we learned what are the issues in a particular area of study (bio, chem, history, english etc) and we learned what others have said about it and how others have approached it but in seminar classes it's your turn, now you know what XYZ have said, what do YOU think about it? and boy oh boy they made you think about it! basically like a jury, you've heard what both sides have said and so based on that what do you think about it and then you render a verdict.

[Jeanne]

52 minutes ago, Duncan said:

I agree 100% with this. In University I took what they call here seminar classes and for the first 3 years we learned what are the issues in a particular area of study (bio, chem, history, english etc) and we learned what others have said about it and how others have approached it but in seminar classes it's your turn, now you know what XYZ have said, what do YOU think about it? and boy oh boy they made you think about it! basically like a jury, you've heard what both sides have said and so based on that what do you think about it and then you render a verdict.

I would have loved this..to have to think and in the process learn more about yourself.  Sometimes that is what it takes to touch your real feelings...not just feelings but a certain justice that speaks to your core understanding...that even you didn't know.  (I hope this makes sense)  But in high school , I had a wonderful English teacher in my senior year where we studied Shakespear...what I learned about what he was really trying to say...meant so much to my personal understanding of myself. 

[RevTestament]

16 hours ago, Jeanne said:

Does anyone learn anything new?  Is there learning in all these meetings?

As a young convert I learned. Yeah. As a returning active adult, I would say I learned what I believe on my own. I read all the standard works and gained a testimony of them before I got sealed. I don't really learn much in the way of doctrine etc in adult classes. However, we do learn what works and doesn't work in our lives, missionary work, inspiring stories, etc. We could change that. I believe we could make the discussion much more interesting with a little discussion of archaeological evidences etc, but right now I don't think that will happen. I think the Church has grown into a habit of always wanting to appear right, and avoids discussion of "unknown" subjects.

15 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Nope, just the same old stuff until we get it right.

Acts 17:

3 Nephi 11

Revelation  is  the "rock", not Peter!

You would need your own revelation to follow him  anyway!!  So what good is someone telling you what doctrine is if you have to still get the answer from God?

And so we are to develop our own beliefs about what is outside these basic principles.

That is what personal revelation is for.  So if you are wanting something new,find it  for yourself directly from  God!  

He will give you your own  intelligence if you only ask.

What we CAN learn is other people's take on these basic principles  and how they interpret them  and so  with the help of revelation, grow our  own "doctrine" so that God himself is our personal tutor.

If anybody else told us, we would not believe  it anyway!   Do  you believe what  you were taught?  No- because it did not come from your  own heart.  So put off childish things and learn directly from God and let him show you the way he wants you to go.

That's my advice.  But of course you should not take it. 

Here's an example of discussion. Revelation is the rock or stone? Even in Daniel 2?

[mfbukowski]

23 hours ago, SouthernMo said:

So glad you're not alone in thinking this way.  So glad I'm not alone in thinking this way.  Great to see the outpouring of support here.

The history of LDS correlation is complicated, but well-intentioned.  I see changes happening with liberalized lesson schedules and plans, so I don't feel like I'm too far off the mark in 'thinking differently' or not being satisfied with the answers we've all been conditioned to give.

Since you've asked, my guiding principles on why I go to church, and what I do there have been:

• Who defines Mormonism?  For me, I do.  Don't let anyone tell you what you should/should not believe or say.
• Is what I am doing or saying bringing me and or others to the scriptures and closer to Christ?  If yes - then KEEP GOING.  If not - then STOP.
• I have rejected the notion of 'staying in the fold.'  If I am a sheep, I want to follow the shepherd, and not the other sheep.

Lastly - if you simply accept my perspective and advice...  see the third bullet point.

Had to add this to your point here- there was a General Authority (as I recall- maybe it was a conference talk?) visiting and I will always remember this quote:

"Jesus talked a lot about sheep but he sure didn't act like one!"

[Avatar4321]

Have you fasted and prayed to know the Lords will?

[hope_for_things]

On 5/4/2018 at 6:46 PM, Storm Rider said:

As I have aged I have come to rely more and more on the 13th Article of Faith.  In this context, does the information I share bring someone closer to Jesus Christ, the Father, and the Holy Spirit or not?  Those of us that enjoy history can be inundated with factoids, but much of it does not aid others as disciples of the Savior.  

If I can add beauty, joy, and peace then I try to do those things.  The rest has become much less important to me.

In practice I’ve found it often difficult to tell whether what I’m sharing is going to help or not.  I think the best advice I’ve learned is to be sincere, try to think of the interests of the other person and be honest and vulnerable as you share thoughts and experiences.  

Whether what any of us shares actually helps or hurts is largely difficult to predict and outside of our control.  

[hope_for_things]

12 hours ago, california boy said:

D&C 6:36 has played an important part in my life

  36 Look unto me in every thought, doubt not, fear not.

I use to rely heavily on what church leaders said and how they told me to understand the gospel.  The longer I live, the more I study, the more simple the gospel becomes and the less it needs someone to filter through it to tell me what I am suppose to believe.  

Other people's ideas, writings of men now long dead, manuals that are carefully study have just one purpose for me.  To understand someone else's personal point of view and to see if it has meaning in my life.  To stimulate my own ideas and how I can better shape my life.  

This simple scripture has almost become a mantra for me.  For others, they may not have ever even noticed it or paused to think of its significants.  Are they wrong to have not considered its implications?  Are they wrong because this scripture has not resinated with them?  Of course not.  Their lives, their experiences, their relationship with God is going to be completely different than mine.  The danger of correlation is thinking that we all have the same needs.  We all need the same understanding of things.  I personally don't think that is the experience God had in mind when he sent us to the earth.  

'

'

Love it!  This shows a more mature view and it’s excellent.  Thanks for sharing 

[hope_for_things]

10 hours ago, CV75 said:

How do you describe the new skin? Is it "activity" (church attendance, participation, personal religious practice, etc.)?

All of the above and more.  I’ve been changing my ideas on a multitude of subjects in the past few years, in ways that I could never have imagined before.  

[hope_for_things]

3 hours ago, Avatar4321 said:

Have you fasted and prayed to know the Lords will?

Many times, to varying degrees of success 

[Storm Rider]

14 hours ago, california boy said:

D&C 6:36 has played an important part in my life

  36 Look unto me in every thought, doubt not, fear not.

I use to rely heavily on what church leaders said and how they told me to understand the gospel.  The longer I live, the more I study, the more simple the gospel becomes and the less it needs someone to filter through it to tell me what I am suppose to believe.  

Other people's ideas, writings of men now long dead, manuals that are carefully study have just one purpose for me.  To understand someone else's personal point of view and to see if it has meaning in my life.  To stimulate my own ideas and how I can better shape my life.  

This simple scripture has almost become a mantra for me.  For others, they may not have ever even noticed it or paused to think of its significants.  Are they wrong to have not considered its implications?  Are they wrong because this scripture has not resinated with them?  Of course not.  Their lives, their experiences, their relationship with God is going to be completely different than mine.  The danger of correlation is thinking that we all have the same needs.  We all need the same understanding of things.  I personally don't think that is the experience God had in mind when he sent us to the earth.  '

This has a very Protestant feel about it. If you take it to its logical end. humans never needed Jesus - after all, he was just another point of view - no need for the Holy Spirit; again, just another point of view to cloud the highly enlightened ability of mankind to know truth.  

This prognosis leads to chaos; pure and simple. Truth becomes relative and can only be what each individual says it is.  More importantly, it denies the existence of any conflicting force to God's plan for his children.  All of the words of Peter, Paul, or any of the ancient apostles are dross - they are just the babblings of others that clouds the individual's true path.

Based upon your position, there was never a need for any of the prophets in the Old Testament - they were only a clouded filter that hindered the growth of the individual. The individual is all; it is the alpha and the omega of all things that deal with God.  

Your entire basis is fraught with error and is a complete distortion of God's working with humanity from beginning until today. The scriptures stand in stark conflict with your entire premise.  Seldom I have read a more grotesque heresy or distortion of the Gospel of Jesus Christ or the Church he created on earth during his day or the Church he restored.

[california boy]

3 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

This has a very Protestant feel about it. If you take it to its logical end. humans never needed Jesus - after all, he was just another point of view - no need for the Holy Spirit; again, just another point of view to cloud the highly enlightened ability of mankind to know truth.  

This prognosis leads to chaos; pure and simple. Truth becomes relative and can only be what each individual says it is.  More importantly, it denies the existence of any conflicting force to God's plan for his children.  All of the words of Peter, Paul, or any of the ancient apostles are dross - they are just the babblings of others that clouds the individual's true path.

Based upon your position, there was never a need for any of the prophets in the Old Testament - they were only a clouded filter that hindered the growth of the individual. The individual is all; it is the alpha and the omega of all things that deal with God.  

Your entire basis is fraught with error and is a complete distortion of God's working with humanity from beginning until today. The scriptures stand in stark conflict with your entire premise.  Seldom I have read a more grotesque heresy or distortion of the Gospel of Jesus Christ or the Church he created on earth during his day or the Church he restored.

Relying on revelation from God leads to chaos?

Relying on revelation from God leads you away from the words of Peter, Paul or any of the ancient apostles?

You obviously have no idea what this scripture means to trust God.  Personal revelation is the foundation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  The only person that can receive revelation as it applies directly to you is you.  Everything in the scriptures point to this.  He will lead you in all things and in all ways.  Doubt not, fear not.

Edited May 6, 2018 by california boy

[Meerkat]

On 5/4/2018 at 11:47 AM, hope_for_things said:

I know much about church history that the average Mormon doesn't know.  So sharing resources with them, like the church's essays, or JSP resources, or books and thoughtful essays, this is all information I've tried to share where I see opportunities.  

I think I agree with your assessment that I also have much to learn from them, yet for reasons that I have a hard time fully understanding within myself, I question whether I should be sharing what I have gained in the same way that I hope to gain from others.  

Good question.  Controversial Church history has been available for a long time-- today more than ever.  Many of us have investigated it and found that it can be quite unsettling and faith destroying.  That's not what people attend Church for.  There are other venues with a more welcoming audience.  I agree with your impression that Church probably isn't the place.

A lot has come out recently in the JSP that is interesting.  If it's faith building, it would probably fit just fine in a Gospel discussion.  Even controversy can be fine when touched on with an attitude of faith.  There are also things in our history that, if we made them the center of our worship, could work against faith in the Restored Gospel.  People attend Church to have their faith strengthened. 

We may be stroking our own ego by imparting special knowledge to others.  We know what it is when we see it, or think about it after expressing ourselves.  Who hasn't done it?  I try to fight that temptation because it never turns out great in that forum.  I walk away thinking  "Why did I say that?  "I wish I hadn't said it that way." "I feel like an idiot.  How can I avoid that in the future?"  And then just wait for time to dissipate my uncomfortable statement.  

I like President Nelson's formula: "Nothing opens the heavens quite like the combination of increased purity, exact obedience, earnest seeking, daily feasting on the words of Christ in the Book of Mormon, and regular time committed to temple and family history work."

Maybe, by doing those things, we change for the better over time and give more focus to the things that matter or are more excellent.

I like the idea of keeping the commandments, avoiding even the appearance of evil, and avoiding controversial subjects in Church.  Find the common denominator of faith, and build on that. Try to contribute from a scriptural point of view.  Your question is a valuable one we should all be asking ourselves often.  "Is it me, Lord?  Am I the one who will betray Thee?"  Speaking for myself, sometimes my ego is so big, it gets in the way of my own progress and salvation.  Thanks for your post.  It's a good one for us all to ponder.   

Edited May 6, 2018 by Meerkat

[CV75]

11 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

All of the above and more.  I’ve been changing my ideas on a multitude of subjects in the past few years, in ways that I could never have imagined before.  

Discomfort is definitely an aspect of change. Resolving a faith crisis can take a couple of routes: address the faith; address the object of faith; or address both together. Faith can be developed or denied, and the object of faith can be magnified or removed from view. Obviously one chooses which way to go with that, and deals with the associated growing pains of the respective disciplines. We can only help others with what we have chosen ourselves. One of the greatest blessings I have enjoyed is an evolution of my ideas (and more:character, abilities, influence, attainments, etc.) over the years, which like you, manifests in ways I could never have imagined before.

[Storm Rider]

8 hours ago, california boy said:

Relying on revelation from God leads to chaos?

Relying on revelation from God leads you away from the words of Peter, Paul or any of the ancient apostles?

You obviously have no idea what this scripture means to trust God.  Personal revelation is the foundation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  The only person that can receive revelation as it applies directly to you is you.  Everything in the scriptures point to this.  He will lead you in all things and in all ways.  Doubt not, fear not.

The scripture you cited was not the problem.

[Stargazer]

On 5/4/2018 at 7:14 PM, hope_for_things said:

I'm going to be somewhat personal and vulnerable in this thread and I'm hoping to tap into some wisdom from this diverse group.   

Over the past few years I've had some ups and downs with respect to active Sunday attendance.  My last stretch of activity I approached my Sundays with two goals.  1.  I wanted to have positive interactions with as many people as possible.  Getting myself outside my comfort zone, and having meaningful exchanges with people.  2.  I wanted to contribute to the discussions in Sunday School and Priesthood meetings with thoughtful comments that at times would provide an interesting alternative perspective or may introduce information that you don't typically hear in correlated Mormonism.  

In many ways everything was going great, I was having meaningful conversations with people, I made new friends and felt like my comments and perspectives that I shared were a net positive to the group. 

Yet over time I kept having this gnawing feeling that I wasn't doing this for the right reasons.  I began to increasingly feel like I was being disingenuous.  I've had this idea creep into my mind and I can't seem to shake it.  Who am I to feel like I should be teaching people information that isn't part of their correlated Mormon world view?   Why do I think that my alternative perspectives are wanted or needed?  Am I doing this for personal reasons, for personal satisfaction, for personal gratification?   Am I really helping the group, or is this a more selfish endeavor?  

Any suggestions on how to cope with these feelings?  Have any of you had similar feelings before?  

 

I am not sure how to advise, but back when I was the main instructor in my high priests group (because one of the other instructors died, and the other moved out) I had two brethren who had rather eclectic views on some things.  I loved their contributions because they frequently had startling, perplexing or brow-knitting insights to offer.  They were both very conventional LDS with strong testimonies, but were not afraid to color outside the box, and they made teaching the high priests group rather more fun than it otherwise would have been.  And I'm pretty sure their contributions got some of the brethren thinking in alternate directions -- and not bad ones, either. But, because they seemed to feel as you suggest you do, even though they continued active in the church they moderated their attendance at the HP lessons to the point where they were seldom there any longer.  I tried to talk them into being there more often, but they largely stayed away.

Maybe some of your alternative perspectives aren't wanted, or needed, but so what?  I cannot make definitive judgements, not being there to hear what you have to say, but even though I don't always appreciate your views on THIS forum, I'd be the last person to suggest that your views are not, at least sometimes, valuable.  So, though the audience there at church isn't quite the same as here, I would be surprised if your contributions there are all negative.  

So keep it up.  Even if it is for personal gratification.  Heck, a large part of the reason why I love being called to teach classes in church is because I like doing it, and I get gratification from it.  

It's like a free-market economy. Even though the motives of those who offer goods and services are at base selfish, they nevertheless benefit all, even if that isn't their intention.  The hidden hand of the market, as it were.