mfbukowski Posted March 16, 2022 Posted March 16, 2022 (edited) error Edited March 16, 2022 by mfbukowski
CV75 Posted March 16, 2022 Posted March 16, 2022 (edited) 23 hours ago, mfbukowski said: Disagree. It's what I talk about all the time, but seldom define because it is unlikely to be understood here. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deconstruction "The term deconstruction refers to approaches to understanding the relationship between text and meaning. It was originated by the philosopher Jacques Derrida, who defined it as a turn away from Platonism's ideas of "true" forms and essences which take precedence over appearances, instead considering the constantly changing complex function of language, making static and idealist ideas of it inadequate.[1] Deconstruction instead places emphasis on the mere appearance of language in both speech and writing, or suggests at least that essence as it is called is to be found in its appearance, while it itself is "undecidable" and everyday experiences cannot be empirically evaluated to find the actuality of language." Yes, the symbol is not the "thing" it represents, and the relationship between the two changes over time, both for individuals by virtue of their personal experience and groups as their experience is shared among them. So we try to understand the relationship, for example, between Joseph Smith's "statements" to Emma concerning his sealing to the Partridge sisters (the text) to what that meant to Emma, Joseph and the sisters respectively and together (the meaning). Some conclude that he out-and-out lied. Some conclude that the marital relationships and communication between middle-aged couples under an extreme level of stress (such as those experienced by the saints at the time) are extremely complex and it was not necessarily a lie or deceitful given the ongoing tête-à-tête and nonverbal cues between any of them. Some will use either conclusion, but usually the former, to decide Joseph was in error/evil; plural marriage was an error/evil; the Church is false/imperfect; the Church is not/still is the Lord's. The overarching bias seems to be that their view of how things should be in the Church is correct -- what other model can we work with, and who can prove anyone wrong, and how (and why)? This is the value in my mind of councils and how they operate in the Church along with common consent (procedurally) and with charity, humility and faith (attitudinally). Our membership can be viewed as a 16-million member council, and our behavior and feelings within that council originating from our relationship with the Lord. ETA: @mfbukowski do I understand what you were explaining? Edited March 16, 2022 by CV75
SwedishLDS Posted March 16, 2022 Posted March 16, 2022 The problem with the fallible notion when people bring it up, it is almost always just a matter of they think differently or want something differently. Like the people that lobby for same-sex sealings in the temple and call the church leadership misguided and ask them to evolve on the issue. Problem is that we aren’t necessarily supposed to agree with things, what matters is what God thinks and he thinks differently than us. Isaiah 55:8 ► New International Version “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the LORD. Sure prophets might not be a carbon copy of us or our own personal views, neither is he a ascended God; that said, we will never falter if we follow the prophet.
SwedishLDS Posted March 16, 2022 Posted March 16, 2022 Imagine these scenarios. You were a jew but didn’t follow Moses out of Egypt because he killed a guard (Exodus 2:11); going back to Jerusalem because Lehi faltered and was chastised by the lord (1 Nephi 16); didn’t follow Alma the younger because of his sinful past; disregarded Joseph Smith because he lost the pages. How would your life change, how would your children and their childrens childrens life change? People are people, I don’t follow President Nelson because he is a Heart Surgeon, he could be an unemployed bum before he was called a prophet for all I care, but I still think God can do great things with him.
Tacenda Posted March 16, 2022 Posted March 16, 2022 42 minutes ago, SwedishLDS said: The problem with the fallible notion when people bring it up, it is almost always just a matter of they think differently or want something differently. Like the people that lobby for same-sex sealings in the temple and call the church leadership misguided and ask them to evolve on the issue. Problem is that we aren’t necessarily supposed to agree with things, what matters is what God thinks and he thinks differently than us. Isaiah 55:8 ► New International Version “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the LORD. Sure prophets might not be a carbon copy of us or our own personal views, neither is he a ascended God; that said, we will never falter if we follow the prophet. I'd love a link to those asking for same sex sealing in the present day. I know that Joseph sealed himself to some males back in the early church. But I'd love a link that same sex attracted, or gays, are asking to be sealed in the temple. Because in my opinion it's just not happening. IOW, CFR. Call for References...that's a common abbreviation people use to have the poster supply a link. And if they don't then they have to take back what they said.
SwedishLDS Posted March 16, 2022 Posted March 16, 2022 3 minutes ago, Tacenda said: I'd love a link to those asking for same sex sealing in the present day. I know that Joseph sealed himself to some males back in the early church. But I'd love a link that same sex attracted, or gays, are asking to be sealed in the temple. Because in my opinion it's just not happening. IOW, CFR. Call for References...that's a common abbreviation people use to have the poster supply a link. And if they don't then they have to take back what they said. I have seen a lot of people compare it to blacks and priesthood. Likewise I have talked with people personally that are members and wish it happened because it would make things a lot easier for us members. https://affirmation.org/why-same-sex-sealings-for-time-is-logical-next-step-for-lds-church/ https://theamm.org/articles/938-will-the-mormon-church-approve-same-sex-marriages https://eu.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/philboas/2019/04/04/lds-gay-marriage-mormon-light-speed-lgbtq/3368349002/
MrShorty Posted March 16, 2022 Author Posted March 16, 2022 4 hours ago, SwedishLDS said: Imagine these scenarios. You were a jew but didn’t follow Moses out of Egypt because he killed a guard (Exodus 2:11); going back to Jerusalem because Lehi faltered and was chastised by the lord (1 Nephi 16); didn’t follow Alma the younger because of his sinful past; disregarded Joseph Smith because he lost the pages. How would your life change, how would your children and their childrens childrens life change? An interesting set of hypotheticals. How about this less hypothetical: how would my life/marriage be different if I had followed Pres. Kimball's suggestion that married couples should abstain from oral sex? I believe my life and marriage are better for rejecting Pres. Kimball's opinion. I'm not old enough to really experience it, but would my life be better or worse for accepting the now disavowed reasons for the priesthood and temple ban? Perhaps it is my oresetist bias, but I believe my life in the 40s to 70s would ultimately have been "better" for rejecting these teachings of the prophets. I think what Givens is trying to say in his essay is that we each have the privilege and responsibility of deciding for ourselves which teachings of the prophets that we will follow. Sometimes we will be best served by following their counsel, and sometimes we will be better off choosing something else. 3
CV75 Posted March 16, 2022 Posted March 16, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, MrShorty said: An interesting set of hypotheticals. How about this less hypothetical: how would my life/marriage be different if I had followed Pres. Kimball's suggestion that married couples should abstain from oral sex? I believe my life and marriage are better for rejecting Pres. Kimball's opinion. I'm not old enough to really experience it, but would my life be better or worse for accepting the now disavowed reasons for the priesthood and temple ban? Perhaps it is my oresetist bias, but I believe my life in the 40s to 70s would ultimately have been "better" for rejecting these teachings of the prophets. I think what Givens is trying to say in his essay is that we each have the privilege and responsibility of deciding for ourselves which teachings of the prophets that we will follow. Sometimes we will be best served by following their counsel, and sometimes we will be better off choosing something else. Yes, there is a difference between counsel and covenants (a modern example is President Nelson's counsel to get vaccinated). And there is also a difference between upholding policy and doctrine and the covenants (a modern example would be ordaining a woman or a bishop or temple sealer marrying same-sex couples). We even have the privilege and responsibility for for deciding which covenants to make and keep, or how far to go in expressing our rejection before apostasy kicks in. Maybe I'm missing something from the article. Edited March 16, 2022 by CV75 3
mfbukowski Posted March 16, 2022 Posted March 16, 2022 20 hours ago, MrShorty said: If we can't use deconstruction here, what word would you suggest that would convey the idea of "charitably unlearning false beliefs learned at Church and replacing them with more correct beliefs?" See post immediately above yours quoted here. I think CV75 did a pretty good job above in answering you! 1
mfbukowski Posted March 16, 2022 Posted March 16, 2022 1 hour ago, MrShorty said: I think what Givens is trying to say in his essay is that we each have the privilege and responsibility of deciding for ourselves which teachings of the prophets that we will follow. Sometimes we will be best served by following their counsel, and sometimes we will be better off choosing something else. Which is exactly what the church has said from the beginning- to get a testimony of EVERY principle. Think like a convert- you hear this crazy story of golden plates and how do you evaluate it? A feeling in your heart? Moroni 10:3 + YEP! So if you can verify the entire church that way, can you verify or deny one principle of the church? Of course! Nothing new here! 1
Tacenda Posted March 16, 2022 Posted March 16, 2022 7 hours ago, SwedishLDS said: I have seen a lot of people compare it to blacks and priesthood. Likewise I have talked with people personally that are members and wish it happened because it would make things a lot easier for us members. https://affirmation.org/why-same-sex-sealings-for-time-is-logical-next-step-for-lds-church/ https://theamm.org/articles/938-will-the-mormon-church-approve-same-sex-marriages https://eu.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/philboas/2019/04/04/lds-gay-marriage-mormon-light-speed-lgbtq/3368349002/ Thanks for the references, and welcome to the board! As you've probably surmised by now, I'm currently in a struggling to believe the church is true mode. Married in the temple and believed all my life until over 15 years ago, and in limbo ever since.
SwedishLDS Posted March 16, 2022 Posted March 16, 2022 2 minutes ago, Tacenda said: Thanks for the references, and welcome to the board! As you've probably surmised by now, I'm currently in a struggling to believe the church is true mode. Married in the temple and believed all my life until over 15 years ago, and in limbo ever since. thank you, and you are fine. I try to not make to many assumptions. I made a broad statement and it certainly isn’t all or nothing and its hard to gauge how common things are on the internet. I sympathise with people that struggle with these issues. I make broad statements a bit too quickly sometimes. And Thank you for your kindness, it is much appreciated.
Recommended Posts