Interesting Interview with Spencer Fluhman

[smac97]

10 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

You’re saying that Brigham Young and Hugh Nibley advocated continually asking for answers that one has already been given through the power of the Holy Ghost? That being confident in revelation one has personally received amounts to “living on borrowed light”? I don’t see that in any of the quotes you have cited. 

I am curious as to how the "borrowed light" concept meshes with D&C 46 (particularly the bolded parts):

Quote

8 Wherefore, beware lest ye are deceived; and that ye may not be deceived seek ye earnestly the best gifts, always remembering for what they are given;
9 For verily I say unto you, they are given for the benefit of those who love me and keep all my commandments, and him that seeketh so to do; that all may be benefited that seek or that ask of me, that ask and not for a sign that they may consume it upon their lusts.
10 And again, verily I say unto you, I would that ye should always remember, and always retain in your minds what those gifts are, that are given unto the church.
11 For all have not every gift given unto them; for there are many gifts, and to every man is given a gift by the Spirit of God.
12 To some is given one, and to some is given another, that all may be profited thereby.
13 To some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that he was crucified for the sins of the world.
14 To others it is given to believe on their words, that they also might have eternal life if they continue faithful.
15 And again, to some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know the differences of administration, as it will be pleasing unto the same Lord, according as the Lord will, suiting his mercies according to the conditions of the children of men.
16 And again, it is given by the Holy Ghost to some to know the diversities of operations, whether they be of God, that the manifestations of the Spirit may be given to every man to profit withal.
17 And again, verily I say unto you, to some is given, by the Spirit of God, the word of wisdom.
18 To another is given the word of knowledge, that all may be taught to be wise and to have knowledge.
19 And again, to some it is given to have faith to be healed;
20 And to others it is given to have faith to heal.
21 And again, to some is given the working of miracles;
22 And to others it is given to prophesy;
23 And to others the discerning of spirits.
24 And again, it is given to some to speak with tongues;
25 And to another is given the interpretation of tongues.
26 And all these gifts come from God, for the benefit of the children of God.

For example, if, per verse 14, it is a gift of the Spirit to believe on the words of those described in verse 13 (to whom it is "given by the Holy Ghose to kow that Jesus Christ is the Son of God"), is that gift fairly described as "borrowed light?"

Thoughts?

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited September 27, 2019 by smac97

[Scott Lloyd]

19 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I am curious as to how the "borrowed light" concept meshes with D&C 46 (particularly the bolded parts):

For example, if, per verse 14, it is a gift of the Spirit to believe on the words of those described in verse 13 (to whom it is "given by the Holy Ghose to kow that Jesus Christ is the Son of God"), is that gift fairly described as "borrowed light?"

Thoughts?

Thanks,

-Smac

To me the spiritual gift to “believe on their words” implies a catalyst for doing as is directed in Alma 32, to plant the word in one’s heart as a seed and then to nurture it over time until it becomes a tree springing up unto eternal life. I don’t see this as “living on borrowed light.” 
 

If one does nothing but passively accept the words of another, that might be regarded as living on borrowed light. We see this illustrated by those who abandon their faith on the flimsiest of pretexts and then claim they were deceived by the Church. They had been living on borrowed light, and it was not sufficient to sustain them. 
 

Furthermore, celebrating or lionizing doubt  or wearing it as a badge of honor seems to me to run the risk of casting the seed out with one’s unbelief, which Alma 32 explicitly says not to do. 

Edited September 27, 2019 by Scott Lloyd

[Robert F. Smith]

30 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

You’re saying that Brigham Young and Hugh Nibley advocated continually asking for answers that one has already been given through the power of the Holy Ghost? That being confident in revelation one has personally received amounts to “living on borrowed light”? I don’t see that in any of the quotes you have cited. 

I just assumed that you were long since familiar with the term "borrowed light," which suggests that one has no real testimony of his own, but depends on the testimony of others.

30 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

When I used the word “bewildered” in reference to Joseph, I was contrasting that with “doubtful,” which you seem to want to ascribe to him. I was not intending to imply that he was unstable or imbalanced. Sheesh. Consider Joseph’s autobiographical account in Joseph Smith 1 to see why I used the term “bewildered.” I think it is an apt descriptor of the state of confusion he was in regarding which of the competing sects was right, but It is not a reference to his mental health or stability. 

My description of Joseph did in no way suggest any sort of mental health problem.  Just the opposite.  So I am mystified by your comments here, Scott.

30 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Finally, it seems to me you are circling back to how we began this conversation, which was to discuss the distinction between questioning and doubting, which, as I said earlier, I do not view as synonymous. 

Joseph had real questions and real doubts about the claims being made by the various preachers he had been hearing (he had already spent years listening to them).  In the midst of all the debate and tumult, Joseph found himself in a state of "serious reflection and great uneasiness" (JS-H 8).  It was not clear which claims were true, nor even whether they were "all wrong" (10).  Given the nature of rampant denominationalism, that is not surprising.

Michael Polanyi has said: 

Quote

   . . . there exists no principle of doubt the operation of which will discover for us which of two systems of implicit beliefs is true--except in the sense that we will admit decisive evidence against the one that we do not believe to be true, and not against the other.  Once again, the admission of doubt proves here to be as clearly an act of belief as the non-admission of doubt.  Polanyi, Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy (1964), 294:

Since Joseph accepted an oracular source of knowledge, he ceased to be a victim in the incessant debate about ultimate truth.

 

[Scott Lloyd]

On 9/24/2019 at 9:54 AM, smac97 said:

Here: Latter-day: Celebrating And Silencing Doubt In Mormon Communities

Bro. Fluhman is a professor of history at BYU and was appointed the director of the Maxwell Institute at BYU in 2016.

A few thoughts/observations:

1. The title is a bit misleading.  There is no discussion about "celebrating ... doubt."  

2. I've noticed a few instances of writers attempting to praise or lionize the concept of having "doubt" in a religious context.  I'm not sure I understand the point of this.  Any insights?

3. From the interview:

I very much appreciate this perspective and approach.  This reinforces the ideas espoused in the Hafens' book: Faith is Not Blind (discussed here), which are summarized this way:

I recently bought this book for a friend who has recently had two family members leave the Church.  This book has been a big help in her organizing her thoughts and sorting out her perspective.  I highly recommend it.

Now back to the interview...

4. More from the interview:

I think Bro. Fluhman makes an important point about "certainty" being "celebrated as a badge of belonging."

I question whether "certainty" should be emphasized in this way.  I've summarized my thoughts previously here:

5. More from the interview:

Wow!  This is just really good stuff.  I'm glad to hear it coming from Bro. Fluhman, particularly given his previous (2016) proposal that the Maxwell Institute not utilize its scholarly endeavors to speak to "the LDS audience," and "{s}peak instead to scholars, period."  I am hoping that this is the result of the Institute giving due attention to Elder Holland's charge, issued earlier this year, for it to be “a faithful, rich, rewarding center of faith-promoting gospel scholarship enlivened by remarkable disciple-scholars.”

Having spent the last 20+ years reading scholarly materials about the Restored Gospel, I can attest to what Bro. Fluhman is saying.  That we do need to "buckle up" when we encounter challenges to our faith.  That it does "get good" and "fun" and "transformative because now we're pushing into places that demand something of us."

Living according to, and defending and advocating for, the Restored Gospel is a much more robust and exciting experience when we move beyond complacency and really engage in "the pursuit of truth, pursuit of light, pursuit of the good."

Anyway, read the whole thing.

Thoughts?

Thanks,

-Smac

 

After you gave me a “like” point for my response to this post of yours from last September, I re-read it out of curiosity. So Fluhman really said the Maxwell Institute should ditch the Latter-day Saint audience and speak only to outside scholars? Wow! I guess I had forgotten the extent to which, after the purge of Dan Peterson and company, they really did endeavor to turn it into an ivory-tower bastion that ignores the common man. I’m glad the Church leaders have reined it in. 

[Meadowchik]

On 9/27/2019 at 5:01 AM, Robert F. Smith said:

The way I see it, Joseph clearly had serious doubts about claims by churches to have the truth.  He wondered whether any of them might be true.  That's real doubt.  Yet you are correct, he had great faith in what prayer could do.  I have no problem with someone seriously doubting what he has been told, or what has been handed to him as a fixed tradition.  An individual needs to find out for himself it such claims are true.  That also requires the individual to be open enough to ask for or seek answers.  Someone who is already satisfied that he has adequate answers is not going to ask.  Brother Brigham used to worry about such Saints who lived on borrowed light:

 

And for a community to foster that experience--where an individual asks and seeks answers--can it be done if those answers are already considered settled by the community? 

[Scott Lloyd]

6 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

And for a community to foster that experience--where an individual asks and seeks answers--can it be done if those answers are already considered settled by the community? 

You don’t say so explicitly, but I presume the “community” you refer to here is the Church. The answer is yes, it can be done. The Church does just that as it invites and encourages the individual to ask God for personal revelation of truth through the power of the Holy Ghost. 

You seem to think a person cannot offer such encouragement unless he himself is unstable in his own faith and conviction. That assumption is not self evident. 

[Meadowchik]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

You don’t say so explicitly, but I presume the “community” you refer to here is the Church. The answer is yes, it can be done. The Church does just that as it invites and encourages the individual to ask God for personal revelation of truth through the power of the Holy Ghost. 

You seem to think a person cannot offer such encouragement unless he himself is unstable in his own faith and conviction. That assumption is not self evident. 

The question is a general one that can apply to the church or any other community. 

I think the answer is more complex than yours: Some knowledge can be confirmed as the best possible knowledge, but not all knowledge can be similarly confirmed. So in order to have a rigorous epistemological process, there must be respect for the difficulty of confirming the latter type of knowledge, and likewise there must be respect for the individual's process of inquiry.

In short, if the individual's dignity cannot be respected because they do not agree with the more ambiguous types of belief, then that community's process of inquiry is comprimised.

[Robert F. Smith]

8 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

You don’t say so explicitly, but I presume the “community” you refer to here is the Church. The answer is yes, it can be done. The Church does just that as it invites and encourages the individual to ask God for personal revelation of truth through the power of the Holy Ghost. 

You seem to think a person cannot offer such encouragement unless he himself is unstable in his own faith and conviction. That assumption is not self evident. 

Meadowchik may have been worried (along with Brother Brigham) that many members just assume that everything they are told is true.  Many of us are so trusting that we don't bother to ask in order to find out for ourselves whether what we are told is true.  And that is true of religious adherents in general.  The mere act of questioning is often regarded as infidelity.  However, at the same time, you are correct, Scott, in claiming that the LDS Church encourages members to pray about it and discover the truth for themselves.  The Brethren know very well that strong adult members don't live on "borrowed light."

[Scott Lloyd]

17 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Meadowchik may have been worried (along with Brother Brigham) that many members just assume that everything they are told is true.  Many of us are so trusting that we don't bother to ask in order to find out for ourselves whether what we are told is true.  And that is true of religious adherents in general.  The mere act of questioning is often regarded as infidelity.  However, at the same time, you are correct, Scott, in claiming that the LDS Church encourages members to pray about it and discover the truth for themselves.  The Brethren know very well that strong adult members don't live on "borrowed light."

Again, I draw a very clear distinction between questioning and doubting. 

[Meadowchik]

10 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Again, I draw a very clear distinction between questioning and doubting. 

If there's no room for doubt, then the epistemological process is compromised. What is "true" is then more about what is the prevailing "truth" of the community, rather than true through any other process.

[Scott Lloyd]

40 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

If there's no room for doubt, then the epistemological process is compromised. What is "true" is then more about what is the prevailing "truth" of the community, rather than true through any other process.

I don’t buy the your-truth-my-truth nonsense. Truth is truth. Whatever falls short of it is opinion at best. 

[Meadowchik]

Just now, Scott Lloyd said:

I don’t buy the your-truth-my-truth nonsense. Truth is truth. Whatever falls short of it is opinion at best. 

Huh, I didn't say that. 

Surely you know that many groups claim to know what is true. I am making the distinction between what is considered truth in a group versus what is true by other processes. 

[Boanerges]

I can't say I celebrate my doubts, and I don't really know what lionize means. I will say that were it not for my doubts I would have no faith. I suppose it could be said I embrace and appreciate my doubts for what they are, much in the same way I embrace and appreciate my faith for what it is. 

I think this is one of those situations where those who have not experienced certain things have difficulty understanding, and no amount of trying to explain or define can fix that. An analogy of this idea is found in Harry Potter. Only those who have seen death can see thestrals, and to those who can't/don't see them there is no way to explain their reality.

[Ahab]

3 minutes ago, Boanerges said:

I can't say I celebrate my doubts, and I don't really know what lionize means. I will say that were it not for my doubts I would have no faith. I suppose it could be said I embrace and appreciate my doubts for what they are, much in the same way I embrace and appreciate my faith for what it is. 

I think this is one of those situations where those who have not experienced certain things have difficulty understanding, and no amount of trying to explain or define can fix that. An analogy of this idea is found in Harry Potter. Only those who have seen death can see thestrals, and to those who can't/don't see them there is no way to explain their reality.

To have faith is to be sure about something.  Faith is all about the feeling and state of mind of being sure.

To doubt something is to not be sure about something.  Doubt is all about the feeling and state of mind of not being sure.

I have some doubts about some things and I have faith about some things, too but I don't have any doubts about the very same things that I have faith in.  Maybe another aspect of that same thing, but not the same thing, exactly.

Only people who can understand what I am talking about can know about what I am talking about.

[smac97]

9 minutes ago, Boanerges said:

I can't say I celebrate my doubts, and I don't really know what lionize means. I will say that were it not for my doubts I would have no faith. I suppose it could be said I embrace and appreciate my doubts for what they are, much in the same way I embrace and appreciate my faith for what it is. 

Hmm.  I wonder if we are dealing with semantics more than anything.

The scriptures seem pretty consistent in characterizing "doubt" as something to be overcome or avoided:

• "And immediately Jesus stretched forth his hand, and caught him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?" (Matt. 14:31)
• "Jesus answered and said unto them, Verily I say unto you, If ye have faith, and doubt not..."  (Matt. 21:21)
• "And seek not ye what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink, neither be ye of doubtful mind."  (Luke 12:29)
• "I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting."  (2 Tim. 2:8)
• "And now, their preservation was astonishing to our whole army, yea, that they should be spared while there was a thousand of our brethren who were slain. And we do justly ascribe it to the miraculous power of God, because of their exceeding faith in that which they had been taught to believe—that there was a just God, and whosoever did not doubt, that they should be preserved by his marvelous power."  (Alma 57:26)
• "O then despise not, and wonder not, but hearken unto the words of the Lord, and ask the Father in the name of Jesus for what things soever ye shall stand in need. Doubt not, but be believing, and begin as in times of old, and come unto the Lord with all your heart, and work out your own salvation with fear and trembling before him."  (Mormon 9:27)
• "And because of the knowledge of this man he could not be kept from beholding within the veil; and he saw the finger of Jesus, which, when he saw, he fell with fear; for he knew that it was the finger of the Lord; and he had faith no longer, for he knew, nothing doubting."  (Ether 3:19)
• "Look unto me in every thought; doubt not, fear not."  (D&C 6:36)
• "Therefore, doubt not, for it is the gift of God; and you shall hold it in your hands, and do marvelous works; and no power shall be able to take it away out of your hands, for it is the work of God."  (D&C 8:8)
• "But he that doeth not anything until he is commanded, and receiveth a commandment with doubtful heart, and keepeth it with slothfulness, the same is damned."  (D&C 58:29)

So perhaps you could clarify what you mean by "embrac{ing} and appreciat{ing} ... doubts"?

9 minutes ago, Boanerges said:

I think this is one of those situations where those who have not experienced certain things have difficulty understanding, and no amount of trying to explain or define can fix that. An analogy of this idea is found in Harry Potter. Only those who have seen death can see thestrals, and to those who can't/don't see them there is no way to explain their reality.

I have experienced doubt, and I appreciate the experience to the extent it allowed me to foster faith by juxtaposing it against doubt.

Again, I think doubt is something to be avoided or, if encountered, overcome.  Would you agree?

Thanks,

-Smac

[Boanerges]

46 minutes ago, Ahab said:

To have faith is to be sure about something.  Faith is all about the feeling and state of mind of being sure.

To doubt something is to not be sure about something.  Doubt is all about the feeling and state of mind of not being sure.

I have some doubts about some things and I have faith about some things, too but I don't have any doubts about the very same things that I have faith in.  Maybe another aspect of that same thing, but not the same thing, exactly.

Only people who can understand what I am talking about can know about what I am talking about.

I have actually never heard faith defined that way - as something we're sure of. Just saying. 

[Ahab]

Just now, Boanerges said:

I have actually never heard faith defined that way - as something we're sure of. Just saying. 

Yeah, I know.  I've been working on it for years, though, so it's not from my lack of trying.  Before I joined the Church my basic understanding of faith came from Hebrews chapter 11 and then later when I joined the  Church I noticed how Joseph translated the word "substance" in Hebrews 11:1 to "assurance", and then with revelation from God as my support I latched onto what having an assurance is all about, which is all about being sure of something.

I won't mind if you tell others about this.  It is intellectual property I am willing to share with everybody.

[Boanerges]

29 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Hmm.  I wonder if we are dealing with semantics more than anything.

The scriptures seem pretty consistent in characterizing "doubt" as something to be overcome or avoided:

• "And immediately Jesus stretched forth his hand, and caught him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?" (Matt. 14:31)
• "Jesus answered and said unto them, Verily I say unto you, If ye have faith, and doubt not..."  (Matt. 21:21)
• "And seek not ye what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink, neither be ye of doubtful mind."  (Luke 12:29)
• "I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting."  (2 Tim. 2:8)
• "And now, their preservation was astonishing to our whole army, yea, that they should be spared while there was a thousand of our brethren who were slain. And we do justly ascribe it to the miraculous power of God, because of their exceeding faith in that which they had been taught to believe—that there was a just God, and whosoever did not doubt, that they should be preserved by his marvelous power."  (Alma 57:26)
• "O then despise not, and wonder not, but hearken unto the words of the Lord, and ask the Father in the name of Jesus for what things soever ye shall stand in need. Doubt not, but be believing, and begin as in times of old, and come unto the Lord with all your heart, and work out your own salvation with fear and trembling before him."  (Mormon 9:27)
• "And because of the knowledge of this man he could not be kept from beholding within the veil; and he saw the finger of Jesus, which, when he saw, he fell with fear; for he knew that it was the finger of the Lord; and he had faith no longer, for he knew, nothing doubting."  (Ether 3:19)
• "Look unto me in every thought; doubt not, fear not."  (D&C 6:36)
• "Therefore, doubt not, for it is the gift of God; and you shall hold it in your hands, and do marvelous works; and no power shall be able to take it away out of your hands, for it is the work of God."  (D&C 8:8)
• "But he that doeth not anything until he is commanded, and receiveth a commandment with doubtful heart, and keepeth it with slothfulness, the same is damned."  (D&C 58:29)

So perhaps you could clarify what you mean by "embrac{ing} and appreciat{ing} ... doubts"?

I have experienced doubt, and I appreciate the experience to the extent it allowed me to foster faith by juxtaposing it against doubt.

Again, I think doubt is something to be avoided or, if encountered, overcome.  Would you agree?

Thanks,

-Smac

I have neither the desire nor the time to scripture or testimony bash. I agree there is probably some semantics involved. It's difficult to explain, but I embrace and appreciate my doubts because I know what they are and what role they play - in my case allowing me to understand the light because I know what darkness is. FWIW, I don't really care what Luke, Matthew or Mormon think about doubt (and doubt/faith or not, Oliver Cowdery failed in his attempts to translate)  - they see through the same dark mirror I do.

So, that's it, I'm not up for a long discussion on the topic. My testimony is this: were it not for my doubts I would not have faith.

[Boanerges]

5 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Yeah, I know.  I've been working on it for years, though, so it's not from my lack of trying.  Before I joined the Church my basic understanding of faith came from Hebrews chapter 11 and then later when I joined the  Church I noticed how Joseph translated the word "substance" in Hebrews 11:1 to "assurance", and then with revelation from God as my support I latched onto what having an assurance is all about, which is all about being sure of something.

I won't mind if you tell others about this.  It is intellectual property I am willing to share with everybody.

Don't hold your breath, but in the unlikely instance I share this I would give you credit. However since I don't buy that definition it's highly unlikely I'll share. I might ponder it though.

Clearly you and I (and SMAC) don't see eye-to-eye on the subject and that's perfectly OK with me. I don't need or want to convert you or anyone else, I'm just stating my own point of view from my own experiences.

Edited January 28, 2020 by Boanerges

[Ahab]

Just now, Boanerges said:

Don't hold your breath, but in the unlikely instance I share this I would give you credit. However since I don't buy that definition it's highly unlikely I'll share. I might ponder it though.

I should maybe have mentioned that you can also find support for my idea in a dictionary, as well, although faith isn't always what I would consider complete.

From a quick check with Google I got this definition of faith: a complete trust or confidence in someone or something

The words trust and confidence are therefore synonym of the word faith, and assurance, too.

[smac97]

10 minutes ago, Boanerges said:

I have neither the desire nor the time to scripture or testimony bash.

I had no intention to do either of these.  

10 minutes ago, Boanerges said:

I agree there is probably some semantics involved. It's difficult to explain, but I embrace and appreciate my doubts because I know what they are and what role they play - in my case allowing me to understand the light because I know what darkness is.

I feel the same way, but in a "past tense" sort of way.  I am grateful for having had to work through and overcome doubts. 

But holding on to them, continuing to "embrace and appreciate" them, well, no.

10 minutes ago, Boanerges said:

FWIW, I don't really care what Luke, Matthew or Mormon think about doubt (and doubt/faith or not, Oliver Cowdery failed in his attempts to translate)  - they see through the same dark mirror I do.

There is a risk of infinite regression here.

10 minutes ago, Boanerges said:

So, that's it, I'm not up for a long discussion on the topic. My testimony is this: were it not for my doubts I would not have faith.

Same here.  But again, think doubts are something to be avoided or, if encountered, overcome.

I did not intend to give offense.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Boanerges]

36 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I did not intend to give offense.

Thanks,

-Smac

I am not that easily offended, sorry if I gave that impression. I can get along just fine with people who see things differently, I do it every Sunday (and at least every other Tuesday). You happen to see doubt more negatively and I see it more positively and I'm OK with that. I can assume you are an active temple recommend holder, and so am I - we don't have to see things the same to be in our positions. You may see the story of Jonah or the flood as purely and completely literal while I see them as purely figurative/symbolic. That doesn't mean we can't talk about those stories and both get the same message from them. I will never try to convert you to my point of view and only hope others give me the same respect.

Edited January 28, 2020 by Boanerges

[smac97]

3 minutes ago, Boanerges said:

I am not that easily offended, sorry if I gave that impression. I can get along just fine with people who see things differently, I do it every Sunday (and at least every other Tuesday). You happen to see doubt more negatively and I see it more positively and I'm OK with that. I can assume you are an active temple recommend holder, and so am I - we don't have to see things the same to be in our positions. You may see the story of Jonah or the flood as purely and completely literal while I see them as purely figurative/symbolic. That doesn't mean we can;t talk about those stories and both get the same message from them. I will never try to convert you to my point of view and only hope others give me the same respect.

I think we can give each other respect, while still disagreeing about things.  I also don't think it is disrespectful to attempt to correct or persuade someone from an error or misunderstanding in doctrine or belief.

I also don't think fellowship should be contingent on perfect agreement in all things.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Ahab]

1 minute ago, Boanerges said:

I am not that easily offended, sorry if I gave that impression. I can get along just fine with people who see things differently, I do it every Sunday (and at least every other Tuesday). You happen to see doubt more negatively and I see it more positively and I'm OK with that. I can assume you are an active temple recommend holder, and so am I - we don't have to see things the same to be in our positions. You may see the story of Jonah or the flood as purely and completely literal while I see them as purely figurative/symbolic. That doesn't mean we can;t talk about those stories and both get the same message from them. I will never try to convert you to my point of view and only hope others give me the same respect.

I only ever try to share my understanding of something so that who I'm sharing it with can understand it, and I only get frustrated when people do not seem to want to understand.  I take that kind of rejection personally, as if they are rejecting my perspective without even trying to understand it.  In turn I try to understand the perspectives of all other people so that I can at least understand their point of view.  It sometimes bothers me a little when other people don't choose to believe what I believe when I am sure they understand what I believe, but I respect the rights of others to believe whatever they want to believe and to not believe whatever they don't want to believe, too.

[Boanerges]

Quote

Jesus sought me when a stranger
Wandering from the fold of God
He, to rescue me from danger
Interposed His precious blood