The uniqueness of the LDS Church

[Calm]

2 minutes ago, Chum said:

Our challenge is that love wanes in the best relationships, perhaps to where it isn't felt.

Or at least unable to be felt, perhaps because of depression or the drugs they give to help with depression even as those can numb feelings for some, for example.

[Chum]

34 minutes ago, pogi said:

Love is a feeling.  It manifests as an action/verb.  To do things in love is to do things by feeling.  To worship God in love, is to worship by feeling.  The scriptures are clear that obeying the commandments is a manifestation of love - in other words actions done by feeling. 

Consider this to compliment that.

Love in action is when someone else's feelings manipulate our own (and sometimes our actions).

That manipulation is something we can measure. Another is the amount of trust that's grown (which permits manipulation).

[Rain]

42 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Thanks for sticking around, we need good dialogue Ranch! For the most part the Book of Mormon passes the mustard for non LDS Christians and the other stuff or the meat not milk is in the D&C and PoGP. But there is the scripture on Grace in the BoM that says this: 15:32 (Mosiah 3:24). We know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do,

"The prophet Nephi made an important contribution to our understanding of God’s grace when he declared, “We labor diligently … to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.”

"However, I wonder if sometimes we misinterpret the phrase “after all we can do.” We must understand that “after” does not equal “because.”

"We are not saved “because” of all that we can do. Have any of us done all that we can do? Does God wait until we’ve expended every effort before He will intervene in our lives with His saving grace?

"Many people feel discouraged because they constantly fall short. They know firsthand that “the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.” They raise their voices with Nephi in proclaiming, “My soul grieveth because of mine iniquities.”

"I am certain Nephi knew that the Savior’s grace allows and enables us to overcome sin. This is why Nephi labored so diligently to persuade his children and brethren “to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God.”

"After all, that is what we can do! And that is our task in mortality!" - Elder Uchtdorf

42 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

2 Ne. 25:23. Teach them to never be weary of good works, Alma 37:34.

Look at the whole verse of 34:

"Teach them to never be weary of good works, but to be meek and lowly in heart; for such shall find rest to their souls."

[Chum]

20 minutes ago, Calm said:

Or at least unable to be felt, perhaps because of depression or the drugs they give to help with depression even as those can numb feelings for some, for example.

Agree with all of that. I am reminded that relationships sometimes need to change to fit a changed reality.

We like to use fables about growing plants to talk about love - it differentiates what we do (craft healthy relationships = garden prep/nurturing) with what we get (okra!).

Edited July 29, 2022 by Chum

[Tacenda]

23 minutes ago, Rain said:

"The prophet Nephi made an important contribution to our understanding of God’s grace when he declared, “We labor diligently … to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.”

"However, I wonder if sometimes we misinterpret the phrase “after all we can do.” We must understand that “after” does not equal “because.”

"We are not saved “because” of all that we can do. Have any of us done all that we can do? Does God wait until we’ve expended every effort before He will intervene in our lives with His saving grace?

"Many people feel discouraged because they constantly fall short. They know firsthand that “the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.” They raise their voices with Nephi in proclaiming, “My soul grieveth because of mine iniquities.”

"I am certain Nephi knew that the Savior’s grace allows and enables us to overcome sin. This is why Nephi labored so diligently to persuade his children and brethren “to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God.”

"After all, that is what we can do! And that is our task in mortality!" - Elder Uchtdorf

Look at the whole verse of 34:

"Teach them to never be weary of good works, but to be meek and lowly in heart; for such shall find rest to their souls."

Thanks I'd googled some things and the scriptures came up like that, didn't know there was more to the one, since I'm so bad at scripture reading. But today, I watched a snippet of Al Carraway, the tattooed Mormon girl. Well her book is called, The Tattooed Mormon, and she's in Utah promoting her children's book. Well I follow her on FB and today she shared video of her at the Bible Shoppe or Moon's Rare Books in Provo, Utah. Made me want to be a scripture reader.

[pogi]

1 hour ago, Chum said:

You're not wrong but I prefer a relationship-centric focus; because when love is the goal, it's is also the barometer.

Our challenge is that love wanes in the best relationships, perhaps to where it isn't felt. If love is our goal and that falls to zero, we can perceive that as a failed relationship. When we're in that place, it's seamless to just continue to work on the relationship - rather than try to will love into existence.

All very good points. 

I guess I still see it as a semantic distinction without much of a difference, however.  It all depends on how you look at it/interpret it.  I see working at a relationship the same as working at love, where love is the hope/goal.  I 100% agree that It is not something that we can just "will into existence", as you say.  It requires work.  

I think that love should be both the goal and the barometer.  If the love barometer falls to zero, we can interpret that in two different ways.  You describe one way above, the other way we can interpret it (probably the more healthy way) is to use that as an indicator of how much we are working at love.  It should tell us something more about us, and usually less about our spouse.    We shouldn't look at love as a barometer to determine when a relationship has failed, but we should use it as a barometer for how much we are working on our relationship.  That is not to say that the relationship will inevitably succeed when we work at it, because it takes two.  That is the beauty of our relationship with God.  There is ALWAYS at least one party working at love and at the relationship.  As soon as we get on board, it is inevitable that the relationship will succeed as both parties are involved. 

I think we are essentially saying the same thing, but just interpreting what the barometer is telling us differently. 

Edited July 29, 2022 by pogi

[Chum]

26 minutes ago, pogi said:

I guess I still see it as a semantic distinction without much of a difference, however.  It all depends on how you look at it/interpret it.

If I grok correctly, I think you're considering love from a broad conceptual point vs my more narrow focus on rubber-meets-road.

I'm drawn to the latter because (IMHO) what we think is ultimately overridden by what we do.

26 minutes ago, pogi said:

I think that love should be both the goal and the barometer.  If the love barometer falls to zero, we can interpret that in two different ways.  You describe one way above, the other way we can interpret it (probably the more healthy way) is to use that as an indicator of how much we are working at love.  It should tell us something more about us, and usually less about our spouse. 

I only have so much brain. I could be easily overwhelmed by notions of lost love, especially if it's the first or second time. 

Waning love typically happens despite what we do - as opposed to following a major betrayal. It's a bit like means; it may arrive if we do constructive things or it may not. The longer we do constructive things the better our odds but some lives get crapped on more than others. Some are severely hobbled at the start. Given that, I'm not keen on tying love to success.

Edited July 29, 2022 by Chum

[pogi]

24 minutes ago, Chum said:

Waning love typically happens despite what we do .

Waning romance, passion, and hormonal infatuation (eros love) perhaps, but that is not what I am talking about.  Perhaps there could be some disillusionment over time in who we thought we married which could lead to a waning philos (warm affection/friendship) type of love.  But with the exception of emotion/physical/verbal/spiritual abuse, I fully believe that disillusionment can be overcome through work to improve philos love in a relationship.   I don't think it is true that the agape type of love is something that can possibly diminish "despite what we do" though.  It is typically a direct result of what we do/do not do.  I think the other two types of love are also heavily influenced by what we do/do not do - including adjusting our expectations after disillusionment.  We sometimes have to sacrifice what we thought we wanted with what we have.  That requires serious work, but where that work is performed, love (philos and agape) can endure and even thrive, I believe.  Where philos and agape love thrive, and where physical attraction exists, eros love is usually unavoidable.  

41 minutes ago, Chum said:

The longer we do constructive things the better our odds but some lives get crapped on more than others. Some are severely hobbled at the start. Given that, I'm not keen to tying love to success.

 I guess I don't know what should be the measure of success then.  If you are positing that a healthy relationship should be the measure of success, I don't disagree.   But I simply don't think that a healthy relationship is possible without either philos or agape love.  If we are measuring the health of a relationship, we are measuring the health of love of some sort.  So to me it is saying the same thing.

I don't think that external circumstances beyond our control can rob us of love - with perhaps the exception of psychiatrics/mental disorders/drugs/forced separation.  Even then, most people with disorders can still create love through work, though it can hamper it.   That is why I like using love as a measure of success, because it should be seen as something that we actively create, rather than something that passively happens to us that we have no control over. 

 

[Chum]

12 minutes ago, pogi said:

Waning romance, passion, and hormonal infatuation (eros love) perhaps, but that is not what I am talking about. 

Couple love is what I'm mostly talking about.  For everyone else, well, you can't pick your family. In my experience, they're lovable or they aren't.

Edited July 29, 2022 by Chum

[Chum]

8 minutes ago, pogi said:

I guess I don't know what should be the measure of success then. 

Same as everything. Happiness.

[Chum]

9 minutes ago, pogi said:

I don't think that external circumstances beyond our control can rob us of love - with perhaps the exception of psychiatrics/mental disorders/drugs/forced separation.

Those are all extremely common factors. Past that, hunger-level poverty takes the color out of everything, eventually. I can attest to that.

[Ranch2727]

2 hours ago, pogi said:

Love is a feeling.  It manifests as an action/verb.  To do things in love is to do things by feeling.  To worship God in love, is to worship by feeling.  The scriptures are clear that obeying the commandments is a manifestation of love - in other words actions done by feeling. 

God's love which is manifest in our heart is a feeling.

That is how we know that God lives.  That is the only way we can know that God lives - by feeling Him.   We can't prove that God lives through "facts", other than the "fact" that we feel him.  That feeling, that experience, that knowledge is what inspires us to work/worship/serve/love God back.     

When it comes to religion, we can't prove any facts.  We can't prove that Christ atoned for our sins.  We can't prove that God even exists by undeniable and falsifiable facts.  The only way we can know these things is via feelings as bestowed through the Holy Spirit.  When we do anything, including worship, prayer, etc. it is only a manifestation and action performed by feeling.   So, I hope and trust that you actually do do things "by feeling", including loving (the verb) your family. 

John 1
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2The same was in the beginning with God. 3All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4In him was life; and the life was the light of men. 5And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

Sometimes I have to remind myself that Mormons don’t believe in the same Jesus that Christian’s do. Didn’t good ‘ole Gorden say “ we do not believe in the same Jesus? 
Latter-day Saints "do not believe in the traditional Christ. No, I don't. The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak. 1998

We believe that Jesus is God, you believe he is A God, we don’t believe he was the son of God that had sex with the heavenly mother like you all do. If you knew the same God that Christian’s know you would understand how effortless it is to love.  I know I was you, and like Paul said I was not able to comprehend.  So when you say I can’t love or worship God on the couch, you might not be able to but I sure can. We do have facts, it’s called a Bible, like a blue print to help along with Jesus to guide us.  If you are going use the fact theory then we’re you there when Joseph had his visits? Nope that would be a feeling that it happened. Then you need to ask? Which account do I believe? Should I have feelings for the first, second, third, forth or fifth?
   Have you ever tested your prophets? All of them? They would not pass the blue print.  So I can see why you don’t understand me, because we are talking about two different Jesus, mine allows me to Love without strings, yours you must earn his love and fail daily trying to keep his laws. I like my Jesus better!!!

[Chum]

18 minutes ago, pogi said:

I don't think that external circumstances beyond our control can rob us of love - with perhaps the exception of psychiatrics/mental disorders/drugs/forced separation.  Even then, most people with disorders can still create love through work, though it can hamper it.  

Not necessarily. My ex worked thru some issues and developed greater love towards me and the kids. However, she is still so overwhelmingly toxic, all positive emotions (eventually) wither+die in her presence. My best feelings toward her happen while she remains at a distance.

[Chum]

4 minutes ago, Ranch2727 said:

 Have you ever tested your prophets? All of them? They would not pass the blue print.

That's sort of prophets in general. Noah was a drunk. Jonah was a coward. I suspect Isaiah had a developmental disability. The entire point of them wasn't the men themselves but the power of God they exercised thru His mantle. I believe God works thru goofballs and nitwits because the contrast (miracles via meatheads) helps clarify who is doing what.

[pogi]

19 minutes ago, Chum said:

Not necessarily. My ex worked thru some issues and developed greater love towards me and the kids. However, she is still so overwhelmingly toxic, all positive emotions (eventually) wither+die in her presence. My best feelings toward her happen while she remains at a distance.

By toxic I assume you mean abusive/manipulative in some way.   That was an exception I already listed in making love/relationship work.

[Chum]

1 minute ago, pogi said:

By toxic I assume you mean abusive/manipulative in some way.   That was an exception I already listed in making love/relationship work.

Her toxicity stems from mental health issues. Narcissism, BPD, the whole list. She did a few stints of full blown psychosis but most of the time, her moment-to-moment behavior resembles functionality. It takes time to see that it isn't. After 25 years I could climb into her head and take stock; I don't know how to find my way back from where she is.

Also, I'm fairly uncomfortable with lists of what is and isn't overcomeable. I know we want patterns but in the end, what is, is. Reality tends to disrespect any boundaries we plop down.

[pogi]

1 hour ago, Chum said:

Couple love is what I'm mostly talking about.  For everyone else, well, you can't pick your family. In my experience, they're lovable or they aren't.

I guarantee that means different things to different people, so I'm not sure what you mean by "couple love".  I really dislike how generic "love" is in the English language.  I really like how descriptive Greek is with all the different colors of love.  If you had to pick from the list of Greek words for love, which types of love would make the list to define "couple love" for you?

The 7 Greek words for different types of love:

Quote

 

The 7 Greek words for different types of love

1. Eros: romantic, passionate love
2. Philia: intimate, authentic friendship
3. Erotoropia or ludus: playful, flirtatious love
4. Storge: unconditional, familial love
5. Philautia: compassionate self-love
6. Pragma: committed, companionate love
7. Agápe: empathetic, universal love

 

See here for a more detailed description of each:

https://www.wellandgood.com/greek-words-for-love/

I also don't believe in such a thing as an "unlovable" person, when you consider all the types of love and Christs exhortation to love even our enemies.  I used to believe that I was unlovable (toxic shame).  God taught me otherwise. 

Edited July 29, 2022 by pogi

[Chum]

16 minutes ago, pogi said:

so I'm not sure what you mean by "couple love". 

Two people in a couple relationship.

[Chum]

17 minutes ago, pogi said:

I really dislike how generic "love" is in the English language.  I really like how descriptive Greek is with all the different colors of love. 

Yeah. We've got 400 words for love and they're all spelled the same.

[Chum]

24 minutes ago, pogi said:

I also don't believe in such a thing as an "unlovable" person,

Fair. I'm using it for shorthand to describe someone who exacts too high a price to engage with emotionally.

I've got a brother like that. After I remodeled my emotional life, I found that interacting with him hurt too much.

clarify: We siblings treated each other terribly. I made some progress from that.

Edited July 29, 2022 by Chum

[Chum]

19 minutes ago, pogi said:

I used to believe that I was unlovable (toxic shame).  God taught me otherwise. 

That tells me I should use more care with my language choices.

[pogi]

2 hours ago, Chum said:

Same as everything. Happiness.

But by using happiness as a measure of success in a marriage, you run into the same problem that you define with using love as a measure of success.  Happiness is not a constant in any relationship.  It ebbs and flows, and sometimes feels non-existent... etc. etc.   It is always the root and core of love that causes one to push through the lackluster of happiness in a relationship and inspires one to work at the relationship for improvement. 

1 hour ago, Chum said:

Two people in a couple relationship.

Ya, I think we are talking past each other at this point.  I do think we are probably more agreed than it appears, just using different language/interpretations of language. 

[Chum]

3 hours ago, Ranch2727 said:

I like my Jesus better!!!

Cage match?

[Vanguard]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

But by using happiness as a measure of success in a marriage, you run into the same problem that you define with using love as a measure of success.  Happiness is not a constant in any relationship.  It ebbs and flows, and sometimes feels non-existent... etc. etc.   It is always the root and core of love that causes one to push through the lackluster of happiness in a relationship and inspires one to work at the relationship for improvement.

Wow. Perfectly said. : )

[The Nehor]

4 hours ago, Chum said:

That's sort of prophets in general. Noah was a drunk. Jonah was a coward. I suspect Isaiah had a developmental disability. The entire point of them wasn't the men themselves but the power of God they exercised thru His mantle. I believe God works thru goofballs and nitwits because the contrast (miracles via meatheads) helps clarify who is doing what.

Jonah wasn’t a coward. He was worse. He didn’t want to preach in Assyria because he was worried God would forgive them and not destroy them as Jonah believed they so richly deserved.

Otherwise completely agree but not so sure on Isaiah there. I think Isaiah was more just a geopolitical nerd.