Deznat (deseret nation) = White nationalism? - Part 3

[Bernard Gui]

21 hours ago, jkwilliams said:

I'm sorry you thought they were derogatory. To me, that implies intent. Scott made some statement about "reaming him out," and I said, truthfully, what I would like to ask Joseph Smith about: his motivations and whether he was surprised at the church's staying power. I've only thought about that at all because some church members have told me I will have to answer to Joseph Smith, and I've thought what I would ask him if I met him after this life. I would have thought it was a given that I don't believe he was a prophet. You guys all know that, so I'm surprised that you would find my well-known opinion to be "derogatory." Maybe I could have worded it differently, I suppose. 

This was the message Joseph gave starting in 1829 or even earlier and repeated consistently throughout his life. This does not sound like someone who would be surprised if it turned out to be true.

Quote

And to none else will I grant this power, to receive this same testimony among this generation, in this the beginning of the rising up and the coming forth of my church out of the wilderness—clear as the moon, and fair as the sun, and terrible as an army with banners.

 

Edited May 7, 2021 by Bernard Gui

[Kenngo1969]

13 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

I wonder how well that confidence will serve you when the moment of truth comes, but, to each his own, I suppose.

 

10 hours ago, Teancum said:

The odds are largely in my favor.

Ipse dixit?  OK.  Again, we'll see how well that confidence serves you when the moment of truth comes, but, again, to each, his own.

[Scott Lloyd]

10 hours ago, jkwilliams said:

I would have thought it was a given that I don't believe he was a prophet. You guys all know that, so I'm surprised that you would find my well-known opinion to be "derogatory."

An opinion is not made less derogatory by the fact that it is “well known.” And where I come from, opining that someone intentionally lied for the purpose of defrauding others is  scarcely short of derogatory and, if unproven, defamatory. 

[jkwilliams]

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

An opinion is not made less derogatory by the fact that it is “well known.” And where I come from, opining that someone intentionally lied for the purpose of defrauding others is  scarcely short of derogatory and, if unproven, defamatory. 

It's really hard to have a discussion when one participant is hell-bent on putting the worst spin on things and then turning the dial up to 11. 

[AtlanticMike]

20 hours ago, Teancum said:

I am fairly confident my chances of meeting Nephi or Moroni (Pater, James and John were real people) is about as high as my chances of meeting Frodo or Gandalf. 

I was wondering if you could answer a question for me? First I'm not trying to be a smart butt, I'm actually interested in knowing something about what you believe if you're willing to share. I'm assuming your an atheist or maybe agnostic? If not I apologize. If you are, then my question is, what's your end goal? Let's say Mormonism isn't true, possibly even Christianity and at some point in the future it's replaced, what's it replaced with? Is that "something" better than what we have now? 

     Have you ever considered religion, all religion, helps people cope with the thought of dying and rotting in the ground? If that's true, then religion is a form of therapy, a coping mechanism, if it is, why deny or rail against someones coping mechanisms? 

  Does religion have to be 100 percent true to be beneficial? Is there a percentage of mysticism in religion that would be acceptable to you, maybe 20 percent, or even 30percent? 

Lastly, I've known some really good and moral atheist. I've also known some who are obsessed with proving religiosity wrong, so much so, their quest has almost become a "religion" to them. Have you experienced that in others? 

 

Edited May 7, 2021 by AtlanticMike

[Teancum]

12 hours ago, Calm said:

What are the “facts” is debatable though. They are not always accessible.

I think there is a fairly accurate history for things surrounding the LDS Church and its founding.  I know apologists feel that all they need to do is reach a level of plausibility, and that a rather low level, and then someone can pray for a witness. If that is enough for you to commit all that the LDS Church asks of its members  terrific for you. However, historically the Church does not offer a level of disclosure that allows those who commit to make a well informed decision.  Missionaries certainly do not offer that. Children baptized at 8 that are brought  up in LDS home don't likely have the ability to make an informed decision.  Of course today it is fairly easy to find information and I believe that is one reason why baptism rates have been declining dramatically especially in the USA. 

[Teancum]

6 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

 

Ipse dixit?  OK.  Again, we'll see how well that confidence serves you when the moment of truth comes, but, again, to each, his own.

The truth has come to light already.  Thus my confidence.  Passive aggressive threats don't motivate me much. If that is all you have it is not at all compelling and rahter childish.  "Just you wait and see....!!" is essentially your argument.  

[jkwilliams]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

The truth has come to light already.  Thus my confidence.  Passive aggressive threats don't motivate me much. If that is all you have it is not at all compelling and rahter childish.  "Just you wait and see....!!" is essentially your argument.  

I almost forgot that this thread is supposed to be about cosplay fascists. 

[Teancum]

2 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

I was wondering if you could answer a question for me? First I'm not trying to be a smart butt, I'm actually interested in knowing something about what you believe if you're willing to share. I'm assuming your an atheist or maybe agnostic? If not I apologize. If you are, then my question is, what's your end goal? Let's say Mormonism isn't true, possibly even Christianity and at some point in the future it's replaced, what's it replaced with? Is that "something" better than what we have now? 

     Have you ever considered religion, all religion, helps people cope with the thought of dying and rotting in the ground? If that's true, then religion is a form of therapy, a coping mechanism, if it is, why deny or rail against someones coping mechanisms? 

  Does religion have to be 100 percent true to be beneficial? Is there a percentage of mysticism in religion that would be acceptable to you, maybe 20 percent, or even 30percent? 

Lastly, I've known some really good and moral atheist. I've also known some who are obsessed with proving religiosity wrong, so much so, their quest has almost become a "religion" to them. Have you experienced that in others? 

 

I call myself a skeptical seeker of truth.  Perhaps agnostic but still open and hopeful that there is a higher power.  I just don't believe anyone really knows what that higher power is or whether it really exists. Religions, and their adherents, insist they do know and use that to create dogma that controls the lives of the adherents. Especially high demand religions like the LDS Church.  
 

So I seek and am open. Even to going  back as an active LDS participant though I do not think I would even be as all in as I once was.

What should religion be replaced with?  I do not have an answer. Currently for me it has been replaced with nothing other than I am seeking. Does it need to be replaced?  If so why? 

Yes religion offers all sorts of balm and comfort. There are time I miss that. But I honestly think I am a better person without relying in it. I don't think religion is going away soon. I don't have a problem with religion in general. I do have a problem with religions that claim the only or best way.  The idea of having to accept Jesus, and the right Jesus or burn forever seems repugnant to me. The idea that a little tiny sect on a world wide basis is the possessor of priesthood keys and authority over all other is also repugnant to me. The intrusion of the religious right into our secular government is dangerous to other religion in the US especially minority religions including the LDS Church.  I also think religion can be bad for people in many ways and for some persons more than others. 

I am quite fine with mysticism and not knowing. But when discussion the LDS faith there is no such position to teach it as such.  Sure you or I can believe that but that is not what the church teaches nor practices. Nor would an open approach like that be welcome.  I think the CoC is more along those lines and if there were a congregation of that faith near me I would check it out.  Maybe I should see if they Zoom in.  Just thought of that. But the closest to my is a three hour drive. 

I do not know any atheist personally that have a quest to prove religion wrong but I guess some of the you might  consider some of the big name atheists in that camp.  Not sure I do. I certainly am not. I discuss and debate here because it is a form of entertainment and plus as lifelong Latter-day Saint and fifth generation member I still have an interest in the topics and I am still seeking.

 

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

I think there is a fairly accurate history for things surrounding the LDS Church and its founding.  I know apologists feel that all they need to do is reach a level of plausibility, and that a rather low level, and then someone can pray for a witness. If that is enough for you to commit all that the LDS Church asks of its members  terrific for you. However, historically the Church does not offer a level of disclosure that allows those who commit to make a well informed decision.  Missionaries certainly do not offer that. Children baptized at 8 that are brought  up in LDS home don't likely have the ability to make an informed decision.  Of course today it is fairly easy to find information and I believe that is one reason why baptism rates have been declining dramatically especially in the USA. 

It'd be nice if the church wasn't as insular, and I wish it could be a big umbrella to all belief or unbelief. And a community of love for all. I guess they could be, but it's hard for those that attend to feel apart when lines are made in how they can. 

[Chum]

A million internet years ago I ran a Minecraft server; tons of kids on it.

In my brain, DezNat is autocorrected to DeezNutz and there is nothing I can do about it.

[Tacenda]

8 minutes ago, Chum said:

A million internet years ago I ran a Minecraft server; tons of kids on it.

In my brain, DezNat is autocorrected to DeezNutz and there is nothing I can do about it.

That's funny! My brother and husband have a back and forth with DeezNutz commentary. 

[jkwilliams]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

It'd be nice if the church wasn't as insular, and I wish it could be a big umbrella to all belief or unbelief. And a community of love for all. I guess they could be, but it's hard for those that attend to feel apart when lines are made in how they can. 

In a way it is a big tent for unbelief, provided that unbelief is not shared publicly. On the surface it looks like everyone is a believer, but once it's known you're a safe person to talk to, people will open up about their unbelief. I was shocked at how many people came out of the woodwork in my ward when I went through my crisis of faith. 

[Tacenda]

10 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

In a way it is a big tent for unbelief, provided that unbelief is not shared publicly. On the surface it looks like everyone is a believer, but once it's known you're a safe person to talk to, people will open up about their unbelief. I was shocked at how many people came out of the woodwork in my ward when I went through my crisis of faith. 

Thanks JK, I did what I was told to try on this board btw, and speak with my new bishop in a new neighborhood and ward, and it didn't go well. I made an appt right off the bat to give my new bishop a head's up about my crisis of faith, that has been on going for many years. And he immediately shut it down. He hasn't once reached out to check on me since. It's like I'm a virus in the ward, and I've only spoken to him and my ministering partner when I told her I would rather not do ministering anymore, because she'd do it without me anyway and also my ministering couple was a couple across the street that would do drop offs, they can't afford that with a family, so I asked to be released from that.

I've told a RS president and the counselor in the ward that a phone call would be amazing as far as visiting. But it hasn't happened yet. I'm very stymied by it. I guess it all depends on the wards out there. But this has really bothered me for a long time. 

Edited May 7, 2021 by Tacenda

[jkwilliams]

6 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Thanks JK, I did what I was told to try on this board btw, and speak with my new bishop in a new neighborhood and ward, and it didn't go well. I made an appt right off the bat to give my new bishop a head's up about my crisis of faith, that has been on going for many years. And he immediately shut it down. He hasn't once reached out to check on me since. It's like I'm a virus in the ward, and I've only spoken to him and my ministering partner or have a ministering couple when I told her I would rather not do ministering anymore, because she'd do it without me anyway and also my ministering couple was a couple across the street that would do drop offs, they can't afford that with a family. I've told a RS president and the counselor in the ward that a phone call would be amazing as far as visiting. But it hasn't happened yet. I'm very stymied by it. I guess it all depends on the wards out there. But this has really bothered me for a long time. 

Understood. That's pretty much what happened in our ward in Virginia when I told the bishop my feelings. No home teachers/ministers, etc. I felt especially bad because my wife would really like to have ward members come over. Come to think of it, we haven't had any church visitors here in Ohio, either (maybe they heard about my penchant for calumny). Our ward in Utah reached out, even after I talked to the bishop. I guess it depends on the ward. Sorry you're getting the cold shoulder.

Edited May 7, 2021 by jkwilliams

[Tacenda]

2 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Understood. That's pretty much what happened in our ward in Virginia when I told the bishop my feelings. No home teachers/ministers, etc. I felt especially bad because my wife would really like to have ward members come over. Come to think of it, we haven't had any church visitors here in Ohio, either. Our ward in Utah reached out, even after I talked to the bishop. I guess it depends on the ward. Sorry you're getting the cold shoulder.

Well that's good! We probably don't live too far away either, haha. It's a gamble. 

[AtlanticMike]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

I call myself a skeptical seeker of truth.  Perhaps agnostic but still open and hopeful that there is a higher power.  I just don't believe anyone really knows what that higher power is or whether it really exists. Religions, and their adherents, insist they do know and use that to create dogma that controls the lives of the adherents. Especially high demand religions like the LDS Church.  
 

So I seek and am open. Even to going  back as an active LDS participant though I do not think I would even be as all in as I once was.

What should religion be replaced with?  I do not have an answer. Currently for me it has been replaced with nothing other than I am seeking. Does it need to be replaced?  If so why? 

Yes religion offers all sorts of balm and comfort. There are time I miss that. But I honestly think I am a better person without relying in it. I don't think religion is going away soon. I don't have a problem with religion in general. I do have a problem with religions that claim the only or best way.  The idea of having to accept Jesus, and the right Jesus or burn forever seems repugnant to me. The idea that a little tiny sect on a world wide basis is the possessor of priesthood keys and authority over all other is also repugnant to me. The intrusion of the religious right into our secular government is dangerous to other religion in the US especially minority religions including the LDS Church.  I also think religion can be bad for people in many ways and for some persons more than others. 

I am quite fine with mysticism and not knowing. But when discussion the LDS faith there is no such position to teach it as such.  Sure you or I can believe that but that is not what the church teaches nor practices. Nor would an open approach like that be welcome.  I think the CoC is more along those lines and if there were a congregation of that faith near me I would check it out.  Maybe I should see if they Zoom in.  Just thought of that. But the closest to my is a three hour drive. 

I do not know any atheist personally that have a quest to prove religion wrong but I guess some of the you might  consider some of the big name atheists in that camp.  Not sure I do. I certainly am not. I discuss and debate here because it is a form of entertainment and plus as lifelong Latter-day Saint and fifth generation member I still have an interest in the topics and I am still seeking.

 

Thanks for answering, very thoughtful post. I love the gospel and I'm glad I have it in my life, but I also realize I view its meaning differently than most, especially after joining this discussion board, it has helped me a lot. I've said this before on here, I view the gospel as a tool in my tool box. I use it to help me form a lot of my decisions, but I'm also open to switching "tools" if I need to get a different perspective or outcome in my life. I'm sure you've heard "The right tool for the job" , well, the gospel can help you make correct decisions in a lot of big and small life decisions, but, sometimes I think it's better to switch it up, there are better sources to use sometimes and a lot of people have a hard time realizing that. My mom for instance has lost a couple really important relationships because she's so strict and relies 100percent on the gospel to form every decision in her life. Last year she freaked out on one of her grand children because his girlfriend was wearing a skimpy bikini, we had to actually calm her down 😂, she was going berserk. It was embarrassing and she hasn't talked to that grandson since. 

     Anyways, thanks again for answering, it helps me understand you better when reading your post.

 

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Tacenda said:

Well that's good! We probably don't live too far away either, haha. It's a gamble. 

I think we did live in the same town as you until we moved to Ohio. 

[Tacenda]

3 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I think we did live in the same town as you until we moved to Ohio. 

Oh, I read that you moved but it didn't compute yet with my brain, haha! 

[Kenngo1969]

3 hours ago, Teancum said:

The truth has come to light already.  Thus my confidence.  Passive aggressive threats don't motivate me much. If that is all you have it is not at all compelling and rahter childish.  "Just you wait and see....!!" is essentially your argument.  

Passive-aggressive threats?   Oh, please!   Whatever, Dude!   I don't necessarily agree with Hank Smith's invocation of Korihor, but I'm starting to understand where the impulse comes from!

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Tacenda said:

Oh, I read that you moved but it didn't compute yet with my brain, haha! 

Seriously, though, maybe you could find some social organizations or clubs to join. It can be lonely when your church community shuts you out. 

[Kenngo1969]

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

I call myself a skeptical seeker of truth.  Perhaps agnostic but still open and hopeful that there is a higher power. ...

I am quite fine with mysticism and not knowing. ...

 

Methinks Thou dost tap dance too much.  The foregoing seems to be directly at odds with:

 

3 hours ago, Teancum said:

The truth has come to light already.  Thus my confidence.

 

[Tacenda]

5 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Seriously, though, maybe you could find some social organizations or clubs to join. It can be lonely when your church community shuts you out. 

I'm trying to get out of my mind and just go with the flow and not be shy outside of church stuff. Playing pickle ball, and on a FB group of women that are not active, but they wine and dine a lot and so I don't feel comfortable with that, not a drinker. I'd rather be with my old LDS friends, so you see how I'm just in a tough spot. I'm sure not all the women on the FB group are big drinkers though, and I just need to find them. 

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, Tacenda said:

I'm trying to get out of my mind and just go with the flow and not be shy outside of church stuff. Playing pickle ball, and on a FB group of women that are not active, but they wine and dine a lot and so I don't feel comfortable with that, not a drinker. I'd rather be with my old LDS friends, so you see how I'm just in a tough spot. I'm sure not all the women on the FB group are big drinkers though, and I just need to find them. 

I used to go to a regular lunch in Houston with about a dozen ex-Mormons/closet unbelievers. Most of us weren't drinking, and it was no big deal not to be. In fact, the only one I ever saw get drunk was a woman who was at the time serving as a Relief Society President in her ward (she would have been a closet unbeliever, naturally). 

I ended up volunteering as a Spanish translator at a free health clinic for a while and then did Emergency Response certification in Layton. Both were fun and rewarding. I'm sure you have non-church interests, and maybe it's time to explore them. Just a thought.

[smac97]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

It'd be nice if the church wasn't as insular, and I wish it could be a big umbrella to all belief or unbelief.

I don't understand this mindset.  Faith/belief is the sine qua non of the Church.  As Joseph Smith put it: “Take away the Book of Mormon and the revelations and where is our religion? We have none.” (HC, 2:52.)

As I have said before, I don't want members to leave the Church. I want them in it. I want everyone in it. But we are a community of faith. We cohere around faith.  Without faith in the restored truths and revelations and authority, we are not a community.

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

And a community of love for all.

The Church teaches this.  Virtually everyone who wants to join the Church can do so.  But how would you imagine that would work if there was no expectation or requirement to share our beliefs, our standards of behavior, and so on?

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

I guess they could be, but it's hard for those that attend to feel apart when lines are made in how they can. 

I am reminded of a scene in the 1983 BBC adaptation of Jane Eyre, in which Rochester speaks with Jane, somewhat obscurely, about his life experiences and his frustrations:

Here is the dialogue:

Quote

Rochester: I've plenty of faults of my own.  I was thrust onto a wrong tack at the age of 21 and have never recovered the right course since.  I might have been different.  I might have been as good as you.  Wiser.  Almost as stainless.  I envy you your peace of mind, your clean conscience.  Your unpolluted memory.  

Jane: How was your memory when you were 18, sir? 
 
Rochester: Oh, I was your equal, miss Eyre.  Quite your equal.  Nature meant me to be, on the whole, a good man, miss Eyre, but you see I am not.  I am a trite, commonplace sinner, hackneyed in all the petty dissipations of the rich and worthless.  I wish I'd stood firm.  God knows I do.  Dread remorse when you are tempted to err, miss Eyre.  Remorse is the poison of life.

Jane: Repentance is said to be its cure, sir.  

Rochester: It is not its cure.  Reformation maybe.  I could reform, but what's the use? Hampered, burdened...  cursed as I am? Besides, I have a right to get pleasure out of life and I will get it, cost what it may.  

Jane: Then you will degenerate still further, sir.  
 
Rochester: Why should I? If I can get sweet fresh pleasure? And I may get it.  As sweet and fresh as the wild honey the bee gathers on the moor.  

If you know the story, you know what happens next, and then after that, and at the end.  Rochester was, during the above conversation, incapable of forming any meaningful attachment to Jane because, well, he wasn't ready or willing to repent or reform himself.

So it is, I think, with each of us.  As Pres. David O. McKay put it: “The purpose of the gospel is … to make bad men good and good men better, and to change human nature.”

King Benjamin also had some good things to say in Mosiah 3:19:

Quote

For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father.

And the Savior in Luke 5:31-32:

Quote

And Jesus answering said unto them, They that are whole need not a physician; but they that are sick.  I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

The Rich Young Man was good in many respects, but nevertheless refused the Lord's invitation because "he had great possessions."  (Matt. 19:22.)

Paul did not convert and join the Church until he had repented and began to obey the Lord's commands:

Quote

5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
6 And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.

Alma the Younger.  Corianton.  There are many such examples.

To join the body of Christ one must accept Christ.  Acceptance through faith, repentance, baptism, obedience, and so on.

Thanks,

-Smac