Is there free agency in Mormonism?

[Calm]

Just now, Tacenda said:

Does this conflict with the teaching in our just to become like Him?

No

[Rain]

21 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Does this conflict with the teaching in our church to become like Him?

Become like him, not become him.  Become compassionate, faithful, virtuous, patient like him.  Not do his job.

Edited February 14, 2021 by Rain

[AtlanticMike]

52 minutes ago, Calm said:

No, I think the right way to phrase it is not “what would God do”, but “what would God want me to do”. Not only does it put the question imo into a more accurate framework, it is not as emotionally overwhelming. 

Again,  I really like what you said here. I like how you said "it's not as emotionally overwhelming."  I think the reason I always ask myself what would God do is because when I was young,  my mom asked me, ""would jesus do that if he was here?"" Atleast a million times when I was young. It's permanently seared into my brain. 

[AtlanticMike]

9 hours ago, Tacenda said:

When Elder Bednar said there is no such thing as "free agency", but moral agency. It reminded me of when he said there are no homosexuals in the church. I guess it's how we all look at something, and he makes us think outside of the box, or outside of the way we were originally taught to think. But he didn't convince me of there being no homosexuals in the church, even though what he's trying to say is that there are no labels like that in the church, I'm thinking. So I guess when he says we go line upon line, we do change how we believe in the church. 

Your absolutely 100% correct, it comes down to how we were taught tacenda. I've made this point before, having one parent active mormon and one a Christian can totally change how you see certain aspects of the gospel. Maybe you have two mormon parents, or a mormon parent and an atheist parent,  this makes a huge difference in how you view certain topics. All religions experience this. Great point.

[JustAnAustralian]

25 minutes ago, AtlanticMike said:

having one parent active mormon and one a Christian

Mormons are Christian.

[AtlanticMike]

11 minutes ago, JustAnAustralian said:

Mormons are Christian.

Nevermind

 

 

Edited February 14, 2021 by AtlanticMike

[Calm]

1 hour ago, AtlanticMike said:

Atleast a million times when I was young. It's permanently seared into my brain. 

Yeh, I got the same seared thing with Grandma and kids in Ethiopia not having enough to eat when I didn’t finish everything on my plate.  I am still somewhat horrified when family and guests leave stuff on their plate because they took too much (take smaller servings people and then take seconds if you want).  And I get stuck eating leftovers because everyone else forgets they are there even if I don’t like them or I shouldn’t even be eating them because not that healthy. 

[Rain]

17 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

Again,  I really like what you said here. I like how you said "it's not as emotionally overwhelming."  I think the reason I always ask myself what would God do is because when I was young,  my mom asked me, ""would jesus do that if he was here?"" Atleast a million times when I was young. It's permanently seared into my brain. 

I lucked out because my parents never did that.  It was later years that I started hearing people suggest you ask yourself "what would Jesus do?"  and it always drove me crazy.  Besides the idea of not doing his work I think "if I knew the answer I wouldn't need to ask the question!"

[InCognitus]

This morning I was reminded of this quote from the talk of Elder Neal A. Maxwell, of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, from the October 1995 General Conference, and I thought of the topic of this thread.  His talk was titled, “Swallowed Up in the Will of the Father”.  

"[T]he submission of one’s will is really the only uniquely personal thing we have to place on God’s altar. The many other things we “give,” brothers and sisters, are actually the things He has already given or loaned to us. However, when you and I finally submit ourselves, by letting our individual wills be swallowed up in God’s will, then we are really giving something to Him! It is the only possession which is truly ours to give!"

[Calm]

4 hours ago, InCognitus said:

This morning I was reminded of this quote from the talk of Elder Neal A. Maxwell, of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, from the October 1995 General Conference, and I thought of the topic of this thread.  His talk was titled, “Swallowed Up in the Will of the Father”.  

"[T]he submission of one’s will is really the only uniquely personal thing we have to place on God’s altar. The many other things we “give,” brothers and sisters, are actually the things He has already given or loaned to us. However, when you and I finally submit ourselves, by letting our individual wills be swallowed up in God’s will, then we are really giving something to Him! It is the only possession which is truly ours to give!"

That turned me off when I first read it because it sounds like he is saying we need to lose the only thing that is unique to us.  But I believe the Lord does not destroy our will and replace it with his when we submit, but rather he gives us his understanding so that our will becomes his not because we accept whatever he says without question, but because he answers our questions and we learn of and then embrace his reasoning and plans (since as God he is capable of making the best plans ever, we won’t see the need to change them in order to achieve what we also want to achieve as godly beings).

IOW, I believe that God doesn’t cause our will to disappear and we become a hive mind with him as our Overlord (which wouldn’t be bad given who he is), but rather he ‘returns’ our will to us refined, more powerful and life changing for ourselves and others so we can now achieve the righteous desires of our hearts fully....something we can’t do if mixed in with those righteous desires are selfish, self limiting, and even sinful ones. 
 

We need to become a pure vessel without faults or weaknesses so we can without shattering or injuring ourselves hold the power he flows into us through his Spirit and blessings.  As his children we have the potential, but we needed strengthening and the ability to focus and not be distracted by the nongodly attributes we have carried since the ‘beginning’ as well as impurities picked up along the way. 

Edited February 15, 2021 by Calm

[Islander]

On 2/12/2021 at 9:59 AM, AtlanticMike said:

Aren't we supposed to represent him in all times, in all places and all things? 

 

Mom, teachers, apostles 

 

Covenant starts in the water of baptism, it's a life long process, continuing in the temple, then living a life of following the commandments and representing God. Unlike Christian's, who think   they take upon them the name of christ fully in the waters of baptism, I could be wrong on that, we believe the waters of baptism is only the beginning, it's a life long process for us. 

     As far as the people who didnt get a chance,  i dont know, i dont think we will truly know until we die and gain further knowledge. 

Agency never stop. We are free at all times to act for ourselves. Agency predates life on earth as we were always endowed with the freedom to chose, even in pre-mortality. All earthly covenants are symbolic. The evidence of true conversion is the fruit of the Spirit operating in our lives as an outward expression of the hand of the Lord in our hearts. Many fall away after their covenants and are lost. And that is an expression of agency. It never ends.

We take upon us the name of Christ at baptism as part of the covenant. Sanctification is a life long process in which the Spirit works on us, shaping us and molding us until "Christ be formed in us". That is the journey of mortality.

[Hamba Tuhan]

22 hours ago, Calm said:

... (take smaller servings people and then take seconds if you want).

This was the rule in my parents' house. My father spent several years of his childhood in extreme poverty, including one year when the family had only a tent to live in. In the morning, his father and elder siblings would wake up and go to work/school, but he, his little sister, and his mum would spend the entire day huddled in the family's sole bed under a stack of quilts because they didn't have enough heating fuel to warm themselves nor any food to cook. For many months, the only food they had was potatoes, and my father said they ate them boiled, roasted in the coals, and occasionally -- just for a change -- raw. So to him, wasting food was the sin next to murder. I still only take a small portion of food, finish it, and then take a bit more if necessary because of how I was raised.

I'm literally pained when I see people at a ward potluck fill their plates with food and then bin the half they inevitably don't eat. I can't help but see it as the result of gluttony.

Edited February 15, 2021 by Hamba Tuhan

[InCognitus]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

That turned me off when I first read it because it sounds like he is saying we need to lose the only thing that is unique to us.  But I believe the Lord does not destroy our will and replace it with his when we submit, but rather he gives us his understanding so that our will becomes his not because we accept whatever he says without question, but because he answers our questions and we learn of and then embrace his reasoning and plans (since as God he is capable of making the best plans ever, we won’t see the need to change them in order to achieve what we also want to achieve as godly beings).

I agree 100%.  I think that's also the idea conveyed in the context of Elder Maxwell's talk:

Quote

So many of us are kept from eventual consecration because we mistakenly think that, somehow, by letting our will be swallowed up in the will of God, we lose our individuality (see Mosiah 15:7). What we are really worried about, of course, is not giving up self, but selfish things—like our roles, our time, our preeminence, and our possessions. No wonder we are instructed by the Savior to lose ourselves (see Luke 9:24). He is only asking us to lose the old self in order to find the new self. It is not a question of one’s losing identity but of finding his true identity! Ironically, so many people already lose themselves anyway in their consuming hobbies and preoccupations but with far, far lesser things.

Ever observant, in both the first and second estates, consecrated Jesus always knew in which direction He faced: He consistently emulated His Father: “The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise” (John 5:19), for “I have suffered the will of the Father in all things from the beginning” (3 Ne. 11:11).

I also like what he says later on:

"Thus, brothers and sisters, consecration is not resignation or a mindless caving in. Rather, it is a deliberate expanding outward, making us more honest when we sing, “More used would I be” (“More Holiness Give Me,” 1985, Hymns, no. 131). Consecration, likewise, is not shoulder-shrugging acceptance, but, instead, shoulder-squaring to better bear the yoke."

[Calm]

Quote

What we are really worried about, of course, is not giving up self, butselfish things

I agree with his other stuff, but I don’t agree with this. I do believe there are those who fear losing oneself....similar to dying and becoming nonexistent. It kind of creeps me out to think of it that way myself (we all somehow become cookie cutter puppets of God). 

[Hamba Tuhan]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

I agree with his other stuff, but I don’t agree with this. I do believe there are those who fear losing oneself....

I don't think he's stating that this fear doesn't exist, merely correcting it: you are worried about losing your self, but since that doesn't actually happen, please realise that all you'll be giving up are selfish things.

I absolutely believe that people are afraid of losing themselves as they draw closer to God. I have personally found the outcome to be the exact opposite. The most righteous in my circle of close friends are all the most intensively individual.

[Kenngo1969]

Now, granted, Christ was asked to do things that we never would be asked to do because of His unique role and stature, and I'm not suggesting that anyone who is bothered by the question "What would Jesus do?" shouldn't feel that way.  (Too often, the question is asked by smarmy, self-righteous pricks who are absolutely certain that they know what Jesus would do, while you don't ...  But that's another topic for another day ... Personally, I like the comeback that some here have suggested: Remind your interlocutor that He wasn't above braiding whips and overturning tables ... )  But I do think there's utility in pondering what might (indeed, I believe it would ) have happened if Christ had shrunk after drinking the bitter cup.

P.S.:  If God asks us to "lose" or to sacrifice something, does what, in the short term, might seem like a huge sacrifice end up actually being one in the long term?  (Of course, the problem for us human beings is that, often, it's only possible to see that in retrospect ...  We "see through a glass, darkly," and so on: We don't know we're getting the "pearls of great price"; that, actually, we're "finding" our lives by losing them; or that we're getting the "hundredfold, and life everlasting" until after the fact.  That's why it's called "faith." )

P.P.S.:  Does foregoing the blessings God would like to give us mean that we lack agency if we choose to not obey Him?  No.  People forego such blessings all the time by choosing to not obey him, but that doesn't take away anyone's agency.  Sometimes, even we do that.  But saying that one won't get [X] if one fails to do [Y] isn't taking away anyone's moral agency.  If I obey the Word of Wisdom rather than, for example, do drugs, does that take away my moral agency?  No.  In fact (while I'm not saying that everyone who even so much as tries drugs becomes addicted), it enhances my moral agency, because I don't have to worry about becoming a slave to addiction.  While not everyone who doesn't obey the Word of Wisdom becomes an addict, it's beyond dispute that no one who does obey it becomes one.

Edited February 15, 2021 by Kenngo1969

[Calm]

12 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Too often, the question is asked by smarmy, self-righteous pricks who are absolutely certain that they know what Jesus would do, while you don't

This is why I never could get into that view. 
 

I prefer for myself my own “God can see me, am I okay with that right now?”  It is more immediate and more personal (though got to admit when I am feeling sick and sorry for myself I would like some alone time to do embarrassing wallowing in self pity, etc)

 

  I think people should come up with reminders that connect with themselves rather than go the generic slogan route. 

[AtlanticMike]

I have a question,on Saturday at 9:44 PM on this page, a few post up, someone responded to me saying that "mormons are Christians". Personally I just dont understand it. Today, we are encouraged to not say the word "mormon" because its viewed as a nickname. But Christianity, more specifically the word "Christian" is also a nickname given back in the time of Christ to his followers by people who hated jesus. Am I missing something? I've been thinking about this alot.

Edited February 16, 2021 by AtlanticMike

[Ahab]

45 minutes ago, AtlanticMike said:

I have a question,on Saturday at 9:44 PM on this page, a few post up, someone responded to me saying that "mormons are Christians". Personally I just dont understand it. Today, we are encouraged to not say the word "mormon" because its viewed as a nickname. But Christianity, more specifically the word "Christian" is also a nickname given back in the time of Christ to his followers by people who hated jesus. Am I missing something? I've been thinking about this alot.

Suffix. -ian. (as an adjective) From, related to, or like. (as a noun) One from, belonging to, relating to, or like. (as a noun) Having a certain profession.

I think the general gist of our Church leaders counsel is to try to be like Christ, and to let others know we are trying to be like Christ, rather than try to be like some guy named Mormon, who most people don't really know.

[AtlanticMike]

4 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Suffix. -ian. (as an adjective) From, related to, or like. (as a noun) One from, belonging to, relating to, or like. (as a noun) Having a certain profession.

I think the general gist of our Church leaders counsel is to try to be like Christ, and to let others know we are trying to be like Christ, rather than try to be like some guy named Mormon, who most people don't really know.

I agree with you that they're trying to get the public to see us as followers of christ and since most people dont know who mormon is or was, removing the word mormon could be beneficial. But, for me, as someone who likes to think outside the box, wouldn't it be cool to say we're SAINTS. The more I think about it, probably could be a good recruitment idea also. There's alot of Christian's who are fed up with Christianity. 

[Ahab]

7 minutes ago, AtlanticMike said:

I agree with you that they're trying to get the public to see us as followers of christ and since most people dont know who mormon is or was, removing the word mormon could be beneficial. But, for me, as someone who likes to think outside the box, wouldn't it be cool to say we're SAINTS. The more I think about it, probably could be a good recruitment idea also. There's alot of Christian's who are fed up with Christianity. 

Sure, and at the same time say we are Christians while we are trying to be true Christians rather than just people who want to reserve the word Christian for only those who think they are but don't act like Christ would act.

[Tacenda]

45 minutes ago, AtlanticMike said:

I agree with you that they're trying to get the public to see us as followers of christ and since most people dont know who mormon is or was, removing the word mormon could be beneficial. But, for me, as someone who likes to think outside the box, wouldn't it be cool to say we're SAINTS. The more I think about it, probably could be a good recruitment idea also. There's alot of Christian's who are fed up with Christianity. 

I wonder though if we have to somehow pay the price and do saintly things. Aren't there some famous saints in the Catholic church that had to earn their stripes?

[Ahab]

2 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I wonder though if we have to somehow pay the price and do saintly things. Aren't there some famous saints in the Catholic church that had to earn their stripes?

A saint is someone who has been sanctified by the atonement of Jesus Christ.  

To be sanctified means to be set apart, also referred to as being holy, cleansed from sin and voluntarily following Jesus Christ as one of his disciples.

The opinions of men regarding who is or who is not a saint are not what determine whether or not a person is or is not a saint, or holy.  It is what we do that defines us.

 

[AtlanticMike]

4 hours ago, Ahab said:

A saint is someone who has been sanctified by the atonement of Jesus Christ.  

To be sanctified means to be set apart, also referred to as being holy, cleansed from sin and voluntarily following Jesus Christ as one of his disciples.

The opinions of men regarding who is or who is not a saint are not what determine whether or not a person is or is not a saint, or holy.  It is what we do that defines us.

 

Just ran across this. Kinda what you're saying.

[2BizE]

No, there really isn’t free agency in Mormonism. Others will make great arguments that there is, but there is not.  It is only an illusion of Agency.