Evolving Views Since Joining Mormon Dialogue

[Peacefully]

48 minutes ago, california boy said:

Having grown up in the church and being a member for more than half of my adult life, I know full well that one can be very happy being in the Mormon community and embracing its beliefs whether they are true or not.  Most don’t really care if concerning beliefs are true or not. If it works for them , then what difference does it really make if things like the Book of Abraham was actually written by the hand of Abraham or a number of other issues some have a hard time believing. 
 

I left the Church for none of those reasons.  I left because the Church made it impossible for me to find a partner that I could love and share my life without feeling ashamed for being gay and wanting a loving partner.  Yes, I am so significantly happier since I left the Church as most other LGBT members are.  But that is a totally different reason for leaving because of doctrinal and historical issues

 

  I completely understand why most on this board stay in the Church and I have no desire to try and convince them to leave.  What I do hope is that I  can bring a different perspective to members who have very ridged views on how the Church deals with LBBT issues.  Eventually I think the Church will come up with a solution that works better than current policies. It isn’t about appeasing those who advocate for better LGBT policies. Hopefully it will come decause of a desire to develop policies that keep those LGBT members on a better path towards Christ that they can live with. 

I had an interesting chat with my Bishop about this subject during my temple recommend interview. Basically, he told me that I was worthy even with my progressive ideas as long as I wasn’t encouraging others to go against church doctrine. We talked about a gay member of his family and how much they and their partner are accepted. Neither the Bishop or I can change the church’s stance on this, but it is amazing how openly we can have these types of conversations and I feel like the same is going on in many other wards and stakes. I feel like something will change for the better, but who knows how long it will take. 

Edited May 29, 2024 by Peacefully

[Calm]

9 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Such as?

Most often I have heard suggestions that same sex relationships will be treated the same outside of temple sealings.  Since exaltation requires male-female couples, sealings would serve no purpose unless revelation expands on that, but unless/until there is an actual revelation that same sex relationships are sinful outside of scripture where it is unknown if a verse is an actual revelation or if an interpretation of actual revelations took condemnation too far, many see it as possible for legal same sex marriages to be seen as parallel to nontemple marriages in the present (proxy ordinances would not be done for them for the same reason no temple same sex marriage sealings of living members weren’t done).
 

 

Edited May 29, 2024 by Calm

[ZealouslyStriving]

46 minutes ago, Calm said:

but unless/until there is an actual revelation that same sex relationships are sinful outside of scripture

"We further declare that God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife." (The Family Proclamation)

*Revelation has been received.

As I read in Mosiah 26 this morning about how those too young to understand King Benjamin's words rejected the Gospel and led many church members astray, I realized that the same thing is happening in our with the "Family Proclamation".

"Now it came to pass that there were many of the rising generation that could not understand the words of king Benjamin, being little children at the time he spake unto his people; and they did not believe the tradition of their fathers.

2 They did not believe what had been said concerning the resurrection of the dead, neither did they believe concerning the coming of Christ.

3 And now because of their unbelief they could not understand the word of God; and their hearts were hardened.

4 And they would not be baptized; neither would they join the church. And they were a separate people as to their faith, and remained so ever after, even in their carnal and sinful state; for they would not call upon the Lord their God.

5 And now in the reign of Mosiah they were not half so numerous as the people of God; but because of the dissensions among the brethren they became more numerous.

6 For it came to pass that they did deceive many with their flattering words, who were in the church, and did cause them to commit many sins..." (Mosiah 26)

😔

[Calm]

19 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

"We further declare that God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife.

So?  Since at this time neither two men or two women can procreate, what is the issue?

Just to be clear I am not advocating for a straightforward policy change.  If it happens, I personally believe it needs to happen by revelation.  That is too much of a change to happen by policy, which would raise imo the possibility of error in formulating the policy change as I believe occurred with the Priesthood Ban (Brigham choosing to implement it because he believed he understood scripture to have revealed previously that Blacks from Africa were the children of Cain when he was wrong, we are all children of Cain).

Though to be clear, in my view there is a massive difference between opening up access to blessings to more people vs shutting down.  Opening access out of compassion is very different than closing doors out of fear.

Edited May 29, 2024 by Calm

[Devobah]

3 hours ago, california boy said:

I completely understand why most on this board stay in the Church and I have no desire to try and convince them to leave.  What I do hope is that I  can bring a different perspective to members who have very ridged views on how the Church deals with LBBT issues.  Eventually I think the Church will come up with a solution that works better than current policies. It isn’t about appeasing those who advocate for better LGBT policies. Hopefully it will come decause of a desire to develop policies that keep those LGBT members on a better path towards Christ that they can live with. 

Hey fellow California Boy! I appreciate your perspective here! I have a friend down here in Arizona who is much the same way. We were actually talking today and he has many of the same conclusions you do. Honestly, it's a breath of fresh air to hear the different perspectives of those who have left the church for one reason or another. We actually have very healthy conversations on what we can do better for each other, those members who leave, those who stay, and how to have a healthy dialogue!

I'm new but I've been watching the board for a bit. I'm a big fan of yours!

[california boy]

2 hours ago, Devobah said:

Hey fellow California Boy! I appreciate your perspective here! I have a friend down here in Arizona who is much the same way. We were actually talking today and he has many of the same conclusions you do. Honestly, it's a breath of fresh air to hear the different perspectives of those who have left the church for one reason or another. We actually have very healthy conversations on what we can do better for each other, those members who leave, those who stay, and how to have a healthy dialogue!

I'm new but I've been watching the board for a bit. I'm a big fan of yours!

Well thank you for your post. And since I can’t give you an upvote yet, consider this an upvote 

[Rain]

17 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

I would have excellent reasons for saying, "Forget it.  This isn't what I signed up for.  The Church of Jesus Christ isn't what its leaders bill it as, or, heck, for that matter, belief in an allegedly-omniscient, allegedly-all-loving, allegedly-omnipotent God isn't all it's cracked up to be, either, so I might as well just get whatever I can get out of this life and 'Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow (I) die,'" (see Ecclesiastes 8:15, Isaiah 22:13, 2 Nephi 28:7) if that's what I were to choose to do.  This would be so particularly if I conceived of God as being akin to Santa Claus, who gives "presents" to His "good/nice" children and "lumps of coal" to the "naughty" ones (such as, apparently, Yours Truly), or if I conceived of God as a candy machine: "Here's my 'quarter' of obedience, now give me my candy!"

I hope you know that many who leave the church do not leave it for these reasons. Many who have left did so after hours and hours of sincere prayer and scripture study just as the church teaches wanting to do as God directs and feeling he directs them out. There are many reasons people leave and you can't always tell why. 

17 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

And yet ...

All I can do, really, is shrug, and, in the words of Peter's answer to the Savior's [rather plaintive, it seems to me] query to the Apostles after many of His disciples "went back, and walked no more with Him," "Will ye also go away?", say, "Lord, to whom shall we go?  Thou hast the words of eternal life."  See John 6:66-68.  All I can do is say, as did Job, "Though He slay me, yet will I trust in Him." Job 13:15.  All I can do is say, as did Nephi, "I know that [God] loveth His children.  Nevertheless, I know not the meaning of all things."  1 Nephi 11:17.

I did a search on the immediately foregoing scripture, and one of the things that came up is this link to an entry from my blog of some time ago, so I can't resist throwing it in!  

https://greatgourdini.wordpress.com/2017/09/12/on-gods-alleged-favoritism/

For what any of this is worth ...  

 

 

[Rain]

10 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

"We further declare that God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife." (The Family Proclamation)

*Revelation has been received.

As I read in Mosiah 26 this morning about how those too young to understand King Benjamin's words rejected the Gospel and led many church members astray, I realized that the same thing is happening in our with the "Family Proclamation".

"Now it came to pass that there were many of the rising generation that could not understand the words of king Benjamin, being little children at the time he spake unto his people; and they did not believe the tradition of their fathers.

2 They did not believe what had been said concerning the resurrection of the dead, neither did they believe concerning the coming of Christ.

 

I had not noticed that before.  It definitely does something different for me than it does for you though. This says to me that the words/doctrine didn't convert, it was the man because if the parents are teaching what he taught then it shouldn't have made a difference. 

Don't get me wrong, there is much I love about his speech especially as it concerns those in need. I'm just saying that if your belief hinges on only certain men speaking and not your parents saying the same things then that is a real concern.

 

10 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

 

3 And now because of their unbelief they could not understand the word of God; and their hearts were hardened.

4 And they would not be baptized; neither would they join the church. And they were a separate people as to their faith, and remained so ever after, even in their carnal and sinful state; for they would not call upon the Lord their God.

5 And now in the reign of Mosiah they were not half so numerous as the people of God; but because of the dissensions among the brethren they became more numerous.

6 For it came to pass that they did deceive many with their flattering words, who were in the church, and did cause them to commit many sins..." (Mosiah 26)

😔

 

[Rain]

13 hours ago, Devobah said:

Hey fellow California Boy! I appreciate your perspective here! I have a friend down here in Arizona who is much the same way. We were actually talking today and he has many of the same conclusions you do. Honestly, it's a breath of fresh air to hear the different perspectives of those who have left the church for one reason or another. We actually have very healthy conversations on what we can do better for each other, those members who leave, those who stay, and how to have a healthy dialogue!

I'm new but I've been watching the board for a bit. I'm a big fan of yours!

Yes.

You said, "We actually have very healthy conversations on what we can do better for each other, those members who leave, those who stay, and how to have a healthy dialogue!"

If we all said, "We actually can have very healthy conversations on what we can do better for each other, those members who leave, those who stay, and how to have a healthy dialogue!" there would be so much good in it.

Edited May 29, 2024 by Rain

[Kenngo1969]

20 hours ago, Rain said:

I hope you know that many who leave the church do not leave it for these reasons. Many who have left did so after hours and hours of sincere prayer and scripture study just as the church teaches wanting to do as God directs and feeling he directs them out. There are many reasons people leave and you can't always tell why. 

 

Le sigh.    

Nowhere in that post did I refer to anyone who leaves the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and nowhere in that post did I attempt to divine anyone's reasons for doing so.  But, OK, if I need to make that absolutely clear, no, in that post, I wasn't referring to anyone who leaves the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and no, in that post, I wasn't attempting to divine anyone's reasons for leaving the Church of Jesus Christ.

Yes, absolutely, unequivocally, and in every other affirmative way possible, your standing before God is between Him [and Her] and you (and absolutely no one else), my standing before God is between Him [and Her] and me (and absolutely no one else), and anyone else's standing before God is between Him [and Her] and that person (and absolutely no one else).

I used the pronoun I in that post (and no other pronoun, and no other referent, such as you, we, they, others, some people, many people, and so on and so forth.)  By using the pronoun I in that post, I meant to use it according to its usual dictionary definition, and in absolutely no other way.  I would have thought that by using the pronoun I, I would have made it absolutely, perfectly, crystal clear that I was referring to myself and to absolutely no one else.  But since, in the minds of some, apparently (or at least in the mind of one), somehow, by using the pronoun I, I didn't make it absolutely, perfectly, crystal clear that I was referring only to myself, thank you for the opportunity to clarify: Yes, I meant to use the pronoun I according to its usual dictionary definition, and in absolutely no other way whatsoever.  By using the pronoun I, I meant to include absolutely no one else whatsoever: Not you, not him, not her, not them, not others, and so on, ad infinitum.  Indeed, by using the pronoun I, I meant to exclude absolutely everyone else whatsoever, even people who might agree with me ... since I was speaking only for myself.

 

Quote

 

I

²

[ ahy ]

Phonetic (Standard)IPA

pronoun

possessive: our or ours objective: me objective: us plural nominative: we nominative: I possessive: my or mine

1. the nominative singular pronoun, used in referring to oneself, the person speaking, writing, or otherwise communicating.

 

 

I hope I have made myself absolutely, perfectly, crystal clear.  If not, all I can say, in an expression of dismay, surprise, and other intense emotion that often is heard throughout the Spanish-speaking world, is, "Ay, ay, ay!" (Which, in case you're wondering, sounds exactly like, "I, I, I!")

[Rain]

5 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Le sigh.    

Nowhere in that post did I refer to anyone who leaves the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and nowhere in that post did I attempt to divine anyone's reasons for doing so.  But, OK, if I need to make that absolutely clear, no, in that post, I wasn't referring to anyone who leaves the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and no, in that post, I wasn't attempting to divine anyone's reasons for leaving the Church of Jesus Christ.

Yes, absolutely, unequivocally, and in every other affirmative way possible, your standing before God is between Him [and Her] and you (and absolutely no one else), my standing before God is between Him [and Her] and me (and absolutely no one else), and anyone else's standing before God is between Him [and Her] and that person (and absolutely no one else).

I used the pronoun I in that post (and no other pronoun, and no other referent, such as you, we, they, others, some people, many people, and so on and so forth.)  By using the pronoun I in that post, I meant to use it according to its usual dictionary definition, and in absolutely no other way.  I would have thought that by using the pronoun I, I would have made it absolutely, perfectly, crystal clear that I was referring to myself and to absolutely no one else.  But since, in the minds of some, apparently (or at least in the mind of one), somehow, by using the pronoun I, I didn't make it absolutely, perfectly, crystal clear that I was referring only to myself, thank you for the opportunity to clarify: Yes, I meant to use the pronoun I according to its usual dictionary definition, and in absolutely no other way whatsoever.  By using the pronoun I, I meant to include absolutely no one else whatsoever: Not you, not him, not her, not them, not others, and so on, ad infinitum.  Indeed, by using the pronoun I, I meant to exclude absolutely everyone else whatsoever, even people who might agree with me ... since I was speaking only for myself.

 

 

I hope I have made myself absolutely, perfectly, crystal clear.  If not, all I can say, in an expression of dismay, surprise, and other intense emotion that often is heard throughout the Spanish-speaking world, is, "Ay, ay, ay!" (Which, in case you're wondering, sounds exactly like, "I, I, I!")

I know you said "I".  That was very clear.  What wasn't clear to me was why you posted what you did.  It could have been something along the lines of "I have every reason to leave, but chose to hang on" or it could have been "I have every reason to leave, but chose to hang on unlike those 'eat, drink and be merry' types" or any number of any other things.  

The way one words things matters and with the abundance of things said wrongly about people leaving it wasn't clear to me why you went on at length about it. It sounded like a hint to me about the people who haven't stayed like you have. And honestly, the way you rolled your eyes and your response doesn't help that.

But I believe in content communication so I'm going to ignore the "tone" of this reply and take for truth that all you meant was...and here I'm at a standstill because I'm still not sure what you were intending to say in that post and need to clear up my understanding of it. Is this what you meant to say, "I have every reason to leave, but chose to hang on"? 

Edited May 30, 2024 by Rain

[Kenngo1969]

Again, your standing before God is between you, Him, and Her, and no one else.  Certainly not me.  Please feel absolutely free to put me on "Ignore."  I won't feel offended in the slightest, and it will make both of our lives easier.

Thx.

Edited May 30, 2024 by Kenngo1969

[MustardSeed]

On 5/28/2024 at 6:44 PM, ZealouslyStriving said:

Such as?

If it comes from God, then our predictions will pale in comparison.  imo. 

[MustardSeed]

On 5/28/2024 at 6:47 PM, Peacefully said:

as long as I wasn’t encouraging others to go against church doctrine

So if I had a child that was being harmed by present church practices, and I encouraged them to do what they believed, God wanted them to do and it didn’t match with church practices I would be in trouble?

[Rain]

1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Again, your standing before God is between you, Him, and Her, and no one else.  Certainly not me.  Please feel absolutely free to put me on "Ignore."  I won't feel offended in the slightest, and it will make both of our lives easier.

Thx.

This really frustrates me.  Rather than assume you meant something negative, I'm trying to understand what you meant.   My last line:

Quote

Is this what you meant to say, "I have every reason to leave, but chose to hang on"? 

Why did you say:

Quote

Please feel absolutely free to put me on "Ignore."  I won't feel offended in the slightest, and it will make both of our lives easier.

 

[Devobah]

On 5/29/2024 at 6:55 AM, Rain said:

Yes.

You said, "We actually have very healthy conversations on what we can do better for each other, those members who leave, those who stay, and how to have a healthy dialogue!"

If we all said, "We actually can have very healthy conversations on what we can do better for each other, those members who leave, those who stay, and how to have a healthy dialogue!" there would be so much good in it.

I thought about this over the last few days. (I overthink. It's a problem for me 😅) I couldn't tell if you were trying to dig at me or if you were genuinely happy.

Then I read over what you said just now and came to the conclusion that you were sincere. I think that's one of the reasons I like forums like this. It might be skewed towards those that are TBMs, but there is also a good amount of people who share different (maybe even progressive) views and those who have left that share their views on here as well. I see so many arguments on other forms of social media. I see mocking of other's beliefs or lack of beliefs. It's rather polarizing. This has become a haven (maybe not the right term but it's the term that came to mind) from all of that. A place where we actually can have healthy conversations. We may not agree on everything, but we're kept in check and (for the most part) we are respectful of each other. I love that. I don't like debates. I like conversation. I like dialogue.

[Rain]

49 minutes ago, Devobah said:

I thought about this over the last few days. (I overthink. It's a problem for me 😅) I couldn't tell if you were trying to dig at me or if you were genuinely happy.

Genuinely happy. I try to always say what I mean and not hint at something else. But never hesitate to ask me if you're not sure 🙂 - I'm very aware of how badly communication can go because people misunderstand each other. John Lund, on one of his marriage CDs, talked about a study done where even experts at communication got things right only 20% of the time and Stephen Covey talks about how to listen for understanding and I love what they had to teach and try to practice that.  

49 minutes ago, Devobah said:

Then I read over what you said just now and came to the conclusion that you were sincere. I think that's one of the reasons I like forums like this. It might be skewed towards those that are TBMs, but there is also a good amount of people who share different (maybe even progressive) views and those who have left that share their views on here as well. I see so many arguments on other forms of social media. I see mocking of other's beliefs or lack of beliefs. It's rather polarizing. This has become a haven (maybe not the right term but it's the term that came to mind) from all of that. A place where we actually can have healthy conversations. We may not agree on everything, but we're kept in check and (for the most part) we are respectful of each other. I love that. I don't like debates. I like conversation. I like dialogue.

Then we will get along wonderfully. ❤️

Edited May 30, 2024 by Rain

[Calm]

32 minutes ago, Devobah said:

I overthink. It's a problem for me 😅

You will fit in well here, imo.   

Edited May 30, 2024 by Calm

[Calm]

14 minutes ago, Rain said:

John Lund, on one of his marriage CDs, talked about a study done where even experts at communication got things right only 20% of the time and Stephen Covey talks about how to listen for understanding and I love what that had to teach and try to practice that.  

Years ago I read a stat that 75% of communications on the internet involved some sort of misunderstandings.  I can’t remember the source, but I took it seriously, so I think it was a study.

[Devobah]

5 hours ago, Rain said:

Genuinely happy. I try to always say what I mean and not hint at something else. But never hesitate to ask me if you're not sure 🙂 - I'm very aware of how badly communication can go because people misunderstand each other. John Lund, on one of his marriage CDs, talked about a study done where even experts at communication got things right only 20% of the time and Stephen Covey talks about how to listen for understanding and I love what they had to teach and try to practice that.  

Then we will get along wonderfully. ❤️

I'm glad that we aspire to be clear with each other!

[Devobah]

4 hours ago, Calm said:

You will fit in well here, imo.   

Oh great! A forum of over thinkers! I've found my tribe!

[Rain]

13 minutes ago, Devobah said:

I'm glad that we aspire to be clear with each other!

+1

[Peacefully]

7 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

So if I had a child that was being harmed by present church practices, and I encouraged them to do what they believed, God wanted them to do and it didn’t match with church practices I would be in trouble?

I don’t believe that. If I felt my child was being harmed then I would encourage them to do what they need to do for physical and mental well-being. In fact, if anyone came to me and asked for my advice, I would feel free to go by the spirit and give them the best advice I could even if it wasn’t exactly by the book. What I took the bishop to mean is I shouldn’t go around trying to get people to go against doctrine that I may have an issue with. I have no problem with that as I’ve always said that people don’t come to church to hear the gospel of Peacefully, but I will give them my opinion if they ask. 

Edited May 30, 2024 by Peacefully

[Malc]

Is there a reason for the only 3 options in the poll all starting with "I was a "TBM"... "?

I'm not suggesting that there's anything wrong with excluding non-"TBMs", just curious.

[ZealouslyStriving]

32 minutes ago, Malc said:

Is there a reason for the only 3 options in the poll all starting with "I was a "TBM"... "?

I'm not suggesting that there's anything wrong with excluding non-"TBMs", just curious.

Because the system only allows you to offer 3 options.