Steam locomotives existed, therefore John Henry was born with two hammers in his hand?
This guy is Mormon?
- Thread starter Beantown
- Start date
Steam locomotives existed, therefore John Henry was born with two hammers in his hand?
Safetydan
Well-Known Member
I don't post very often, but I have some thoughts on the matter.
#1: Beantown is quite possibly the worst spokesperson for the church I have ever seen(read). It's insulting and embarrassing and actually very entertaining.
#2: There is no way to reconcile the black priesthood ban with logic while at the same time going all in 100% on church doctrine. There is no sufficient explanation that we, as humans, could come up with.
#3: Due to #2 and other numerous doctrinal issues/follies/inconsistencies, many Mormons go inactive, many mormons just ignore, and trust that God for some inexplicable reason does these sorts of things as all part of an unknown plan for our benefit. However, many active and semi-active members have come to the conclusion that the church is not "perfect", it's leaders do not get direct and unmistakable revelation from a god, yet are, for the most part, good wise people trying to help it's members to live good lives. The church is a good organization where people can go to meet like-minded individuals trying to live a moral life and who also share a similar background. For them, the kooky, superstitious prophet-worship, can be ignored and passed over because the benefits of the good parts of church outweigh the (admittedly numerous) negatives.
I myself am Inactive currently but wouldn't mind going back to church under this sort of world view. As far as organized religion goes, the LDS church isn't a terribly bad organization.
The current stand of the LDS church on homosexuals is also hard for progressive mormons to reconcile. Many of them hope the church would change their stance on the issue, and become a more open, free thinking forum where many of the churches past issues could be discussed honestly by members at the lowest, and the highest levels.
#1: Beantown is quite possibly the worst spokesperson for the church I have ever seen(read). It's insulting and embarrassing and actually very entertaining.
#2: There is no way to reconcile the black priesthood ban with logic while at the same time going all in 100% on church doctrine. There is no sufficient explanation that we, as humans, could come up with.
#3: Due to #2 and other numerous doctrinal issues/follies/inconsistencies, many Mormons go inactive, many mormons just ignore, and trust that God for some inexplicable reason does these sorts of things as all part of an unknown plan for our benefit. However, many active and semi-active members have come to the conclusion that the church is not "perfect", it's leaders do not get direct and unmistakable revelation from a god, yet are, for the most part, good wise people trying to help it's members to live good lives. The church is a good organization where people can go to meet like-minded individuals trying to live a moral life and who also share a similar background. For them, the kooky, superstitious prophet-worship, can be ignored and passed over because the benefits of the good parts of church outweigh the (admittedly numerous) negatives.
I myself am Inactive currently but wouldn't mind going back to church under this sort of world view. As far as organized religion goes, the LDS church isn't a terribly bad organization.
The current stand of the LDS church on homosexuals is also hard for progressive mormons to reconcile. Many of them hope the church would change their stance on the issue, and become a more open, free thinking forum where many of the churches past issues could be discussed honestly by members at the lowest, and the highest levels.
7StraightIsGreat
Well-Known Member
Safetydan Wrote:
I'm glad you're inactive because the above sentence doesn't usually come from somebody who is a devout believer in the LDS church. The problem with your sentence is that being a Prophet of god and speaking the word of god is pretty much an all or nothing sort of deal. While God may have made man imperfect, he also gives us express warning that he will not make a mistake in regards to who he chooses to bring forth his word.
I have some very close family members and many close friends who are LDS. I love them all very much, but I've never been able to become LDS in good conciensce because I cannot reconcile with what I believe are massive inconsistencies within LDS Doctrine. I don't even know if "my way" is the correct way, but it's where my conscience leads me, just like my friends and family go in the direction that feels best for them. Free will is a beatiful thing.
I'm glad you're inactive because the above sentence doesn't usually come from somebody who is a devout believer in the LDS church. The problem with your sentence is that being a Prophet of god and speaking the word of god is pretty much an all or nothing sort of deal. While God may have made man imperfect, he also gives us express warning that he will not make a mistake in regards to who he chooses to bring forth his word.
I have some very close family members and many close friends who are LDS. I love them all very much, but I've never been able to become LDS in good conciensce because I cannot reconcile with what I believe are massive inconsistencies within LDS Doctrine. I don't even know if "my way" is the correct way, but it's where my conscience leads me, just like my friends and family go in the direction that feels best for them. Free will is a beatiful thing.
Safetydan
Well-Known Member
Absolutely. I wouldn't call myself completely inactive, I went on a mission, and still go to church occasionally. My belief is that God doesn't have a particular church that he calls his own. He uses many tools to accomplish his ends and the LDS church is just one of many. Of course the leaders of the church would claim that god would not make a mistake and that they are called by him to do his will. How else would they be able to make claim to the authority to lead a church whose majority of members would expect nothing less. I kind of wish they would just own up to the facts. And, to be honest it seems like they are sort of distancing themselves little by little from orthodoxy.
I think they are being honest.
It is verified for me every time I listen/watch/read conference talks.
It is verified for me when I listen to them in person.
It is verified for me when I do some introspection and see if what they are saying rings true, and if application of those words will make me a better person.
It is verified for me in many, many ways and in all aspects of my life.
It's easy to get so caught up in what we think the "facts" are that we forget to look at the big picture, and we think we are so smart we can figure everything out on our own. We have to be humble enough to know we will need help to figure some, if not many things out.
An interesting thing about today's world, and science, is that we can get so caught up in "proving" a hypothesis wrong over and over again that its pretty easy to forget how to prove something right.
Safetydan
Well-Known Member
They are telling the truth in most cases and may even be telling to truth in all cases(although this is not likely considering past mistakes), and many things that they say lead many people to better lives. I'm not disputing that this is happening, and I'm absolutely not disputing that your life is benefiting directly from what they teach. The majority of the teachings have value and benefit the world, this is unmistakable.
However, there are things that are hard to explain, things that aren't right. I'm merely exploring the ways in which many people decide to reconcile the differences with what their conscience is saying as opposed to the actions and teachings of their church.
Despite their good words and best intentions, In some ways it's almost impossible for certain people (myself included) to see the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve, as prophets, I.E. men who claim to be the mouthpieces of God on this earth. Why? because the amount and frequency of missteps made by these men is very comparable to that of other churches, ones which don't claim exclusivity of priesthood and prophethood, and, of course, some who do.
One may, and many do, expect a church that is actually being led by a prophet, to be a light on a hill, a beacon of enlightenment and strength. A church actually being led by God would somehow differentiate itself among it's peers with an at least better than average track record. Either that or Heavenly Father needs a new PR director. I don't believe he would need one of those.
That's why I believe the way I do. There is no one "true" church, just a handful of great ones, of which the LDS church is a proud member. They are growing, teach great principles and help many people to live better lives, which is absolutely a compliment. And God uses the LDS church to further his goals on this earth, just as he would use other equally worthy establishments. His hands off approach allows room for error in any organization as they are run by humans who make their own decisions. The Prophets of the LDS church are great wise men who are inspired by god and teach important and extremely helpful principles. However, they are not privy to any special information that we, the masses, are not also privy to. Due to the nature of their calling, they are required to make such claims, otherwise they wouldn't be given the authority to, or have the ability to do such good in the world.
Take this with a grain of salt, but my great uncle who was a stake president was taken in for an interview to become a member of the quorum of the seventy. During the course of the interview he had some nagging concerns that he felt needed to be resolved before being moved to his new calling. He asked questions about, you know, the usual stuff: polygamy, priesthood ban, doctrinal inconsistencies, joseph smith issues, and the like. The interviewer responded saying that many if not all members in the higher organization of the church had to make a decision, whether to accept the burden of responsibility the calling requires, ignoring the past issues of the church and aspiring to a position where one could do great good in this world, or giving all of it up through not accepting the position or leaving the church, whatever. They didn't force my great uncle out or anything but he decided on his own that he would leave the church and had his name taken off the records. He joined a christian group in Montana a couple of years ago.
Thanks for reading,
Craig
How about C. Meiner?
Safetydan
Well-Known Member
That's what i said. You didn't hear me?
Coloradojazzfan
Active Member
That footage reminds me of Burks, but that guy is way bigger.
This... I have trouble reconciling "The One True Church" argument.
We essentially have three groups who have been exposed to the One True Church
1. Pre-Messianic Jews (2-5 million people I would estimate)
2. People exposed directly to Christ and the Apostle Paul (maybe 100,000)
3. Mormons (guessing roughly 20 million, counting deceased)
4. Nephites and Lamanites (5 million???)
So in the history of the world there have been roughly 15 billion people, and 30 million people "know" the truth. I would think that an Omniscient and Omnipotent God with One "True" Plan, would put up slightly better numbers then .2% .
Archie Moses
Well-Known Member
A pause state.
If he is a top ranked prospect, isn't he most likely a one and done?
Safetydan
Well-Known Member
That only jives if you believe this life is people's only chance to be taught the gospel.
We were sent to this life to be tested, yes?
What's the point of taking a test, if only .2% of "the class" even have the study materials?