Popular Post rodheadlee Posted June 5 Popular Post Share Posted June 5 (edited) History is a handmaiden you can dress her up anyway you like. I think that's a Chinese proverb. Anyways I don't see how someone's interpretation of the past of the church could outweigh spiritual experiences. If I denied the experiences that Heavenly Father gave me I would be a traitor. There is absolutely nothing in the history of the church that can make me loose faith in Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ. We should never forget that this is the Church of Jesus Christ. He started it up and he is running it through imperfect men and women. Edited June 5 by rodheadlee 7 Link to comment
Devobah Posted June 8 Author Share Posted June 8 On 6/3/2024 at 12:32 PM, Stargazer said: What has energized me was, as you say, "for God to be just, He must offer that salvation and the chance to hear to everyone, both living and dead." I consider that to be the summum bonum of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The grace of Jesus Christ must be offerable to all who have ever lived, or else God is a respecter of persons. God not being a respecter of persons, it must follow that the true faith involves the salvation of the dead. Who else does this? And who else offers prophetic vision and guidance. There's only one. When one goes online and asks the question “What happens to dead people who never heard of Jesus Christ” one finds numerous answers from non-LDS sources. Here’s a selection: • One answer is to answer without answering (as if to say “Who knows?”). • Another starkly states: “The Bible is clear that those who perish without Christ will face an eternity in hell.” • Yet another says that they had their chance in life, despite not hearing the Word, because if they didn’t hear the Word it was their own fault, because if they had really wanted to know God, God would have enlightened them in some way. • Another is to say that they get resurrected at the end of the Millennium and will then get the chance to believe, and presumably be saved. • Catholic doctrine holds that some of those who never heard the gospel in this life are somehow saved via a so-called “baptism of desire.” Could mainstream Christianity be more confused about the subject? It is actually amazing that so many different, and starkly non-biblical answers could be trotted out, especially from some denominations that claim to follow the Bible and only the Bible. I've looked at videos, reddit posts, and blog posts on the subject. Ultimately this is a huge issue. You have the people who try to play god, by saying such things as "well they would have rejected God anyways so it doesn't matter." I believe that was Frank Turek who said something along those lines. Then you have others that play the card of "creation denotes that there is a God" a la Alma 30 and various verses in the scripture. And through this knowledge they have enough that they should be saved or damned. This is a flawed argument because there is nothing to denote one specific God whom you must rely upon for your salvation. Then you have the camp of "the law is written on their hearts and they will be judged according to that." The problems with this? All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Jesus Christ is the only way to the Father. No one has been, is, or will be saved outside of Jesus Christ. So this offers another path to salvation, and also decommissions the Great Commission. Many theologians of our day have tried to answer this question, but haven't really done that to satisfaction. Allan Parr (Youtube Channel "The BEAT with Allan Parr) takes a very Dante(esque) approach to this question by saying that there will be different levels of hell for people. So those people who fall into the category of "haven't heard" or "didn't get the chance" will receive lighter punishment for their crimes. The crimes, of course, of being born in a part of the world that didn't have Christianity preached yet, living and learning from mistakes (sins) and dying. In this group you have a couple thousand years worth of Native Americans, most of Asia and Oceania. It's a conundrum for sure. 1 Link to comment
Stargazer Posted June 8 Share Posted June 8 17 hours ago, Devobah said: I've looked at videos, reddit posts, and blog posts on the subject. Ultimately this is a huge issue. You have the people who try to play god, by saying such things as "well they would have rejected God anyways so it doesn't matter." I believe that was Frank Turek who said something along those lines. Then you have others that play the card of "creation denotes that there is a God" a la Alma 30 and various verses in the scripture. And through this knowledge they have enough that they should be saved or damned. This is a flawed argument because there is nothing to denote one specific God whom you must rely upon for your salvation. Then you have the camp of "the law is written on their hearts and they will be judged according to that." The problems with this? All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Jesus Christ is the only way to the Father. No one has been, is, or will be saved outside of Jesus Christ. So this offers another path to salvation, and also decommissions the Great Commission. Many theologians of our day have tried to answer this question, but haven't really done that to satisfaction. Allan Parr (Youtube Channel "The BEAT with Allan Parr) takes a very Dante(esque) approach to this question by saying that there will be different levels of hell for people. So those people who fall into the category of "haven't heard" or "didn't get the chance" will receive lighter punishment for their crimes. The crimes, of course, of being born in a part of the world that didn't have Christianity preached yet, living and learning from mistakes (sins) and dying. In this group you have a couple thousand years worth of Native Americans, most of Asia and Oceania. It's a conundrum for sure. Actually, it isn't a conundrum at all. To the Latter-day Saints, anyway. I've posted here a little of what I've written on the subject, but if you're interested, you can read a little more on my personal web page. LINK <- Try the topic "Baptism for the Dead is Evidence for the True Church" under Soteriology. 1 Link to comment
The Nehor Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 On 6/4/2024 at 8:46 PM, rodheadlee said: History is a handmaiden you can dress her up anyway you like. I think that's a Chinese proverb. Anyways I don't see how someone's interpretation of the past of the church could outweigh spiritual experiences. If I denied the experiences that Heavenly Father gave me I would be a traitor. There is absolutely nothing in the history of the church that can make me loose faith in Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ. We should never forget that this is the Church of Jesus Christ. He started it up and he is running it through imperfect men and women. Then we really should just ignore history. If it is infinitely malleable and can mean anything why bother? Link to comment
bluebell Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 19 minutes ago, The Nehor said: Then we really should just ignore history. If it is infinitely malleable and can mean anything why bother? I asked my history professor (who had a doctorate) the same question because I was really annoyed with the implications. He laughed and said that just because we can't always know exactly what happened, it doesn't mean there is no value in the evidences and interpretations that we can come up with. I would add that not being able to prove that you are correct in an interpretation or belief doesn't mean you're not. We leave room for the possibility of error and re-interpretation but we don't live there. We live in the spaces that we've created using the evidences that we've found and we make ourselves comfortable there until we discover something new that gives us reason to redecorate or maybe even to move. Ultimately studying history, like everything else, is just one more exercise in realizing how limited our perspectives and abilities are, and learning how to be ok with that. 4 Link to comment
The Nehor Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 3 hours ago, bluebell said: I asked my history professor (who had a doctorate) the same question because I was really annoyed with the implications. He laughed and said that just because we can't always know exactly what happened, it doesn't mean there is no value in the evidences and interpretations that we can come up with. I would add that not being able to prove that you are correct in an interpretation or belief doesn't mean you're not. We leave room for the possibility of error and re-interpretation but we don't live there. We live in the spaces that we've created using the evidences that we've found and we make ourselves comfortable there until we discover something new that gives us reason to redecorate or maybe even to move. Ultimately studying history, like everything else, is just one more exercise in realizing how limited our perspectives and abilities are, and learning how to be ok with that. I agree. I love history and eat it up. I was pointing out that if you want to trivialize it as “that’s just like….your opinion man” then we shouldn’t bother with it. 1 Link to comment
rodheadlee Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 4 hours ago, The Nehor said: Then we really should just ignore history. If it is infinitely malleable and can mean anything why bother? You have to balance it from different sources and then weigh it against your spiritual experiences. 3 Link to comment
brownbear Posted July 5 Share Posted July 5 On 5/31/2024 at 9:03 PM, Devobah said: If you have researched the church history, what has made you stay? Why have you chosen to stay? One of the most interesting things about "church history" is where people end up. Some become more committed. Others see the restoration as a massive fraud. However, I would say the mass majority of people who really study church history go towards the middle/gray area. They can see God and man in the restoration... or at least man's attempt to understand their understand of God. Link to comment
brownbear Posted July 5 Share Posted July 5 Just now, brownbear said: However, I would say the mass majority of people who really study church history go towards the middle/gray area. In addition, I would add that people in this middle/gray area accept that people in other faith's can have a relationship with God. 3 Link to comment
ZealouslyStriving Posted July 5 Share Posted July 5 49 minutes ago, brownbear said: One of the most interesting things about "church history" is where people end up. Some become more committed. Others see the restoration as a massive fraud. However, I would say the mass majority of people who really study church history go towards the middle/gray area. They can see God and man in the restoration... or at least man's attempt to understand their understand of God. I ended up thinking the Church wasn't faithful to it's history- but I never lost my testimony of the Restoration, Book of Mormon, or the Prophet Joseph Smith- which made for an interesting 20 year journey before coming to my senses and returning. Link to comment
Tacenda Posted July 6 Share Posted July 6 2 hours ago, brownbear said: In addition, I would add that people in this middle/gray area accept that people in other faith's can have a relationship with God. Agree, and after my faith crisis I've come to believe the gray/middle area is the best for me. Because I got to realize what faith really is, I'd always just believed and never questioned. Now I get to choose my path, and I feel like I'm in a fairly good place. And definitely had my eyes open to others in their different religious beliefs not being set apart from myself. I don't pray like I use to, but those prayers were awful and repetitive of me. Now I feel like I can pray whenever or wherever under my breath. Something I bet most do, but I was too mechanical about prayer before my transition. 2 Link to comment
ZealouslyStriving Posted July 6 Share Posted July 6 2 hours ago, brownbear said: In addition, I would add that people in this middle/gray area accept that people in other faith's can have a relationship with God. Are you saying that those who become even more committed don't believe that folks from other faiths/religions can have a relationship with God? I'm more committed than ever to the truthfulness of the Restored Gospel and I believe that those outside of the Church can have a relationship with God- and sometimes a better relationship than some of your average pew filling Saints. 3 Link to comment
JVW Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 Seer Stones I find a sort of irony that anyone who speaks online against the idea of Joseph using a rock and/or a Urim and Thummim to translate the plates. We are literally communicating via light, rock, and oil right now. The internet transmits information via light. Plastic is made from oil. And every other part of a phone/computer is made out of rock or metal. We are pretty much using the exact same instrument that God had Joseph use (a glowing rock), only ours is a lot more complex and we developed it so we understand how it works. How I Use the Church I am a convert to the church from Atheism. I've been in the church for around 13 years. Because I don't have any strong cultural ties to the church my plan has been to keep with this church until I find something better, and so far I haven't found anything better. This is in large part because my church doesn't shun the notion of using any source possible to gain truth, so I can use unique tools that other church's have. It's kind of a win-win situation. I am very particular about what I know vs what I believe. There are only a handful of things that I truly know, the rest is on a scale of belief. I don't have a strong belief in the Book of Abraham so I don't read it. But whether or not it's God's word isn't really bothering me right now so I haven't taken any time to study and pray about it. On the other hand, I have a strong belief in the Book of Mormon and use that tool pretty often. Personal Experience Dealing With A Church Specific Contradiction How much effort I put into researching something depends on how much it irritates me. A couple of years ago I discovered a direct contradiction between the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine & Covenants. My initial response was to write a letter to the Apostles, but then I realized it would trickle down the levels until it reached my Stake President, and he would defer to the Bishop. So I just called my Bishop (because I like him, I have had Bishops I wouldn't ever call) and chatted with him about it. Over the next year or so I spent a lot of time reading church history, the Joseph Smith Papers, and a variety of other resources to try and find a resolution. Eventually, God did lead me to a resolution and I'm very grateful to Him for that. Because of that experience, and several others, I feel comfortable assuming that if anything irritates me enough that God will lead me to a resolution. I'm also aware that the resolution one day may be to go to another church, but that day hasn't come yet. Typically, when I have a question for God I get an answer roughly between 6 months to 2 years later, that's just kind of the way God works with me, so I'm not really in a rush to get all the answers to all of the problems right now. My current biggest question is repentance and spiritual healing, closely followed by priesthood blessings. I will also note here that critical thinking requires opposition, so in many ways church-critical literature or commentary can be very helpful. My Opinion On Why Church History Hurts Some I think a lot of people take a big hit with church history for two reasons: Because they subconsciously worship modern prophets and view them as more than men. Church History reveals that prophets suck just like the rest of us. Because their rock is the church, not Jesus Christ. (How often have you heard a testimony start with "I know this church is true." vs "I know Jesus Christ is my personal Lord and Savior."?) I've spoken with several ex-Mormons in person and they are all agnostic/atheist now because their views of God are so tied to the church and not to their own personal experiences with Him. It's tragic, because regardless of how "true" the church is, God does exist, and He does want a relationship with us. They just wanted an excuse to leave the church. Their real issue is deep and secret and painful (not necessarily sin). Talking about church history isn't personal and, frankly, the secret hells we each face are no one's business. I personally find beauty in the fact that the LDS church is so... human. I find that the more I learn about church history and the more I ask, seek, and knock about real concerns I have the more intentional I become in my worship and the more value I get when I make righteous decisions with the intent to draw closer to God. 1 Link to comment
JVW Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 During Covid I got really plugged into the scientific community. I spent hundreds of hours reading peer-reviewed research and having scientific discussions with a variety of other people. One thing I learned from all of that time spent and all of those conversations is this: whatever someone wants to believe, there is scientific evidence to support their views. As time has gone on and I've expanded the scientific fields I research as a hobby I find this truth reinforced. What's even more remarkable is that regardless of whether someone is pro- or con- on any given scientific issue there are always weaknesses that can be found in any given scientific paper, whether it's a meta-analysis of PCRs or an unrepeated one-off study. No matter how crazy someone's perspective may seem, if one spends the time, they can find evidence to support their views. Learning this really changed my world and how I interact with others in conversation, and my life has been richer as a result. I mention this because this principal applies in the church as well. If you want to believe that the Book of Mormon is God's word, you can find plenty of evidence to support that; if you want to believe it's made-up, there's plenty of evidence for that too. If you want to believe that Brigham Young murdered Joseph, or that he didn't, you can find evidence to support either view. An example of this in my life is that my wife believes that the Earth was organized, like God took a bunch of old pieces from other Earths and put them together like a puzzle to form our Earth, and she has evidence to support that view. My view is that God created the Earth out of raw elements, and I have evidence to support my view. It's kind of a silly example, but hopefully it's illustrative. It is wise to be aware of this fact and to be intentional about what you choose (or want) to believe. Christ's words "seek and ye shall find" do not only apply to seeking truth, they apply to seeking anything. You can find whatever you are looking for. This may also be a reason why Church History impacts people differently. Maybe the impact it has on you depends on what you are looking for. 1 Link to comment
poptart Posted July 29 Share Posted July 29 (edited) Something I don't know if any of you consider, those of us outside your world gain a lot by reading things like this. LDS history is interesting but so is the Christian religion period, esp. in the USA. So many of the people who fled here were either trouble makers for legit religious refugees. The history of the Lutheran church/synods in the USA is a complicated mess, from Stephanism Martin Stephan - Wikipedia, the Prussian Union of Churches right up to Seminex, it's been a headache here just like most other religious bodies. As someone who really didn't grow up in a solid Christian/LDS/W.religious household, the bigger question I'd have about something like this is why would you stick around. Most of the Buddhist orgs I belonged to growing up were sketchy, some outright cultish but they provided community and culture, when you're mixed race that's a lifeline. For a Latter Day Saint I'd imagine it's difficult for you guys, if you do leave/go inactive I don't see the bigger Christian community being accepting so like a lot of non Christians in the USA I'd think that aspect of your faith would come into play a lot more. The community involvement and Ward Luaus were legendary back in the day, everyone heard about them. Edited July 29 by poptart 1 Link to comment
Tacenda Posted July 29 Share Posted July 29 (edited) 20 hours ago, poptart said: Something I don't know if any of you consider, those of us outside your world gain a lot by reading things like this. LDS history is interesting but so is the Christian religion period, esp. in the USA. So many of the people who fled here were either trouble makers for legit religious refugees. The history of the Lutheran church/synods in the USA is a complicated mess, from Stephanism Martin Stephan - Wikipedia, the Prussian Union of Churches right up to Seminex, it's been a headache here just like most other religious bodies. As someone who really didn't grow up in a solid Christian/LDS/W.religious household, the bigger question I'd have about something like this is why would you stick around. Most of the Buddhist orgs I belonged to growing up were sketchy, some outright cultish but they provided community and culture, when you're mixed race that's a lifeline. For a Latter Day Saint I'd imagine it's difficult for you guys, if you do leave/go inactive I don't see the bigger Christian community being accepting so like a lot of non Christians in the USA I'd think that aspect of your faith would come into play a lot more. The community involvement and Ward Luaus were legendary back in the day, everyone heard about them. Absolutely, I remember the Luaus back in the day! And agree with you on the difficult situation when no longer active or all in, in the LDS faith. I couldn't find anything to replace it if I wanted to. I don't think the Bible is the absolute truth. And that's where the LDS church is speaking to me, with the Articles of Faith, that we believe in the Bible as far as it is translated correctly. That little or big thing, is huge to me. Edited July 30 by Tacenda 1 Link to comment
poptart Posted July 29 Share Posted July 29 (edited) 1 hour ago, Tacenda said: Absolutely remember the Luaus back in the day! And agree with you on the difficult situation when no longer active or all in the LDS faith. I couldn't find anything to replace it if I wanted. I am so not in to thinking the Bible is the absolute total truth. And that's where the LDS is speaking to me with it saying in the articles of faith, they believe in the Bible as far as it is translated correctly. That little thing is so huge to me. In the end that was I ran into, what do you replace it with? I had the experiences I did and in the end returned to my practice. As time goes on it's going to be interesting to see how things in the USA go religion wise. You've had the mainlines collapse, the Catholics are having their issues and despite having a fantastic position financially/infrastructure wise I'd imagine even Zion is having issues. Something I'd consider if I was an LDS faithful, you guys did such a good job setting up Deseret/Utah that people flock to (and in many cases ruin) your state. The strengths of family and community plus the economic/educational clout of the LDS church should be proof that they're doing something right. One of the things that put the Christian religion on the map outside of their world? Social welfare/good. Fun fact, that was one of the main reasons why Buddhism spread so fast, education. When you contribute to the local areas and enhance what they already have, you tend to be looked favorably upon. It's interesting, that part of the world doesn't just toss away a folk belief, custom etc. just because something new comes along, they improve on what they have and overall make things better. If people in this country had more of that mentality, imagine what they could do. Edited July 29 by poptart 1 Link to comment
Tacenda Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 16 hours ago, poptart said: In the end that was I ran into, what do you replace it with? I had the experiences I did and in the end returned to my practice. As time goes on it's going to be interesting to see how things in the USA go religion wise. You've had the mainlines collapse, the Catholics are having their issues and despite having a fantastic position financially/infrastructure wise I'd imagine even Zion is having issues. Something I'd consider if I was an LDS faithful, you guys did such a good job setting up Deseret/Utah that people flock to (and in many cases ruin) your state. The strengths of family and community plus the economic/educational clout of the LDS church should be proof that they're doing something right. One of the things that put the Christian religion on the map outside of their world? Social welfare/good. Fun fact, that was one of the main reasons why Buddhism spread so fast, education. When you contribute to the local areas and enhance what they already have, you tend to be looked favorably upon. It's interesting, that part of the world doesn't just toss away a folk belief, custom etc. just because something new comes along, they improve on what they have and overall make things better. If people in this country had more of that mentality, imagine what they could do. Miss your posts, glad your back! 2 Link to comment
poptart Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 4 hours ago, Tacenda said: Miss your posts, glad your back! Work and life keeps me busy. Also, to be fair, I changed a lot the past few years. I'm grateful this place exists, this board has some well read, intelligent people. 2 Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now