Leaderboard

There is nothing in the brief write-up that I find reason to dispute. However, I will not follow such a movement, even if I agree with its stated principles. I will follow our leaders. If and when they embrace or extol the idea of "radical orthodoxy", then I will, too. Until then, I will follow the path I see before me, and the name I will give it will be simply "the gospel".

It's Thanksgiving Day, so I figured I'd announce that, yes I am thankful for the nearly 23 years the LORD has allowed me to serve as a prison chaplain. Alas, mandatory retirement is fast approaching, and I prayerfully put in to do so at the end of this year. Next steps likely include my continuing as a volunteer pastor and transitioning to my first love--teaching. It's not yet certain how that will look, but I am convinced that what lies ahead will be even better than that which is passing. Oh … and no, I'm not retiring from here. Mercy has its limits.

As one who's essentially left the forum I can comment (as I happen to have joined back in for a day or two for a specific discussion). But since this thread is here during that time, (I won't be around long), I'll comment from my perspective. I think the reason I left the forum may be the issue at hand. When the division becomes as great as it has between two factions, those factions struggle for civility. I'll label those factions conservatism and progressivism, but those are relative terms. Still, it should be understood. And I don't mean politically. Politics only interest me as to how they relate to the eternal. These two factions, so divided, struggle to bond in any regard. And, really, in my opinion, they should not bond, because one of them is team Satan and the other is team God. But the result is conflict. So I find myself at an impasse. I have two desires -- two principles -- that are at odds one with another. 1. Civility and unity. 2. The need to stand strong and fight against what I see as the increasing growth of evil and its encroachment upon society. Keep in mind, the struggle I'm talking about on these two things is not with others. It is with myself. I wish to be civil and united. I also cannot engage with what I consider evil without taking a stand against it. I do not feel I can or should abandon either of these principles. And yet...how? And so I finally came to a point where the only option for me was to walk away. I can't fight the one fight without losing the other and vice versa. So I retreated instead. The plain truth is that the divide between good and evil is growing. And that, I believe, is the root of the problem. The growth of evil demands a violent, bloody fight! (I'm not suggesting literal, physical, fighting. I'm just being metaphorical here). It demands it! And yet...who wants to be in bloody, violent fights all the time? It's depressing, disheartening, discouraging, unpleasant, and just no fun. And yet, part of me feels like I've pulled a Jonah. But still.... Yes...I realize I'm worse than pretty much anyone else in my views in this regard. And therefore it is, frankly, surprising I engaged as long as I did. But it was, for the most part, no fun. And I came to the point where it broke me. And maybe that is a good thing. Maybe I've been wrong all along in my views on fighting the good fight. Or maybe I just suck at it.

My honest thoughts. I joined about 2 years ago because I enjoyed the conversations and felt there were some great insights... today I feel like all insights have been exhausted. Conversations seem to be rehashes of old and few are posting gospel questions anymore. politics have a negative effect, but it’s the lack of honest and thoughtful gospel questions. That is/was the life blood of this forum.

I saw this on Facebook. As a convert, it didn't seem super controversial to me or what the reasoning was behind it. Thoughts?

That would actually be very interesting to see! I remember one hot source of conversation was the forum posts of articles put out by TH, but those have long gone (probably because they were often met with back lash from us). ask Gramps questions would be great

Well it is quite the coincidence that Grunt put up this thread... And I'm seeing this thread next to his thread and considering that my family just saw Fiddler on the Roof together. We had a nice discussion about the differences and similarities between tradition and traditional religion. There are points we have to bend on and points we simply cannot bend on, lest we break. For many questions, we need to listen to the Prophet and pray about his counsel. For other questions, we rely on the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost to guide us. There is always the question of where to draw the line, and when to firmly hold the line. One primary reason that Pres Nelson is pushing the "Hear Him" message is that we're constantly innundated with information. It is all too easy to rely on most of that information as true without even screening it or considering how our faith is affected by it. But through it all, we need to Hear Him.

I think I'm going to try something on a facebook group that I help to admin. I'm going to put out an invitation for people to come join us.

I am grateful for the good teachers I have had throughout my life. Whether it be school, sports, church, etc…I have always had great examples around me to help me learn and grow. My leaders not only cared about me personally, but had a great amount of experience that always seemed to apply to my circumstances at the time. They were able to share their knowledge with me in a manner that I would understand in my various levels of development from my youth until now. I would not be where I am today without their influence and example.

It's been sad over the last few years to see the forums dwindle to almost nothing. I realize that we lost a lot of people each time we changed software. Lately I've gotten numerous requests from members to delete their accounts. Many are stating it's due to the toxic nature of the forums. With a big part of the problem being the moderators adding to it. Not my words. Words of those asking for their accounts to be deleted. For me, the forums aren't fun anymore. We used to really have a lot of fun. We could joke and laugh, we played games. It was such a different world than it is now. Everything is so serious now. What can we do to make it better? How can we draw more people into the forums that will participate in a civil manner? How can we make it fun again? This won't be a thread to attack the moderators or other members. If we want the forums to continue we need to do something to show there is a need for it.

Thank you so much for your service PC!

I wasn't referring to Latter-day Saint forums. Most of the forums I'm on that are very active are gun related.

I see this as a number of LDS apologists and thinkers—some, very popular in progressive LDS circles—pushing back and saying “guys, you need to know that we actually do accept the Church’s truth claims.”

It is really good to see you back in for forum. This post may be longer that it should - for that please for give me. When I was in high school we had a ping pong table in our basement activity room. It was part of the competitiveness among friends and family. I developed a killer serve that no one could handle. I was guaranteed a point every time I used it. I began to rely exclusively on this serve - the more I used it the better I got at it. But I was not aware of something else that was happening. Those that I was playing against were getting better at returning the serve. Eventually, I went from winning every game to loosing every game. I was much surprised at how quickly that transition happened. So why this little story? I believe it is just one of lives great lessons. It does not matter how effective we are at a single task - we cannot rely on our own devises. Our opposition is better at whatever "game" or "strategy" we may think to employ of our own intelligence and abilities. I am not an expert at reading people but my impression of you is that you are very good a discipline and commitment. I like to think of myself in such terms - I believe such to be of great honor. Where I have difficulty is caring about others (with some few exceptions). I struggle with emotional attachments - especially to things but it also includes people and ideas. When I say emotional attachments I am referencing emotions mostly without logic. I struggle even with spiritual things that I cannot connect to logically. Why this post to you? I am not sure but what comes to mind is Moroni chapter 10. Moving beyond verses 4 and 5 we get into an interesting and strong reference to spiritual gifts. It is my understanding that every person in this mortal existence has a quiver of spiritual gifts. I believe it is that person's genus - the spiritual gifts with which they excel to greatness. But it seems that Moroni is suggesting (exhorting - which is a very strong word that he uses many times) to rely on the spiritual gifts of others - and not just our own. The trick - at least for me - is recognizing the spiritual gifts - both within ourselves and others - especially under conditions that we become completive or in opposition. At least for me it is more exciting and fun to explore differences but the reality is that there is wisdom in finding supplementary and complimentary ways to work with others of differing views and opinions. Obviously I lack certain spiritual gifts and the more we (as Latter-day Saints) can see beyond ourselves the better off we will all be. Especially in dealing with our common opposition and accuser. The Traveler

I think for me, I would, by a thousand fold, rather hide behind religion in an effort to exercise faith than I would abandon faith in an effort to not hide behind religion. Really, my consternation over the article, can probably be summarized that simply.

It is an interesting document. The main thing that has stood out to me is this idea It is an interesting idea. I kind of roll my eyes at the language ("spiritual monsters -- really?"), but I find the overall idea compelling. I'm not sure how narrow (or wide) this path really is (and we all know what scripture says about wide and narrow paths). The idea seems somewhat vague, because the basic ideas are (intentionally?) poorly defined. What do they really mean by fundamentalism or progressivism? I agree with them that it is often a difficult path -- perhaps because of the vagueness of the definitions. In some ways it feels like a document by academics for academics, so maybe it won't amount to much among those of us "lay" members of the Church. If so, maybe it's much ado about nothing, because it will only be something academics take seriously.

I think every "movement" is an idea of "what we're all supposed to be doing anyway". "The Oxford Movement" maintained the Church had become too worldly, and Christians needed to get sacred again. The "Abolitionist Movement" thought that people (not just people who wore the "abolitionist" badge) shouldn't keep slaves, and ought therefore to free them. The Nazi movement thought that Aryans were the "Master Race" and should expand and that other races should make "lebensraum" for them. I guess if you agree with "radical orthodoxy" you're "in the movement".

I think that is the part that I just didn't get. The "movement" is to be doing what we're all supposed to be doing anyway? I just don't understand what the point is, I suppose.

I am grateful that our cars that are in good working condition right now. Hopefully the Ford Fusion we own gets us over another 125,000 miles without any major mechanical issues.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/mormonhub It says mormonhub in the URL but it goes to Third Hour Community Group

Perhaps if I started some of these discussions using questions that went to Ask Gramps that we haven't been able to answer. Most times it's a time restriction on th team.

I'm blessed with work. #GiveThanks

Here's my post that sparked yours.

I have never met these beings, but I was thinking about those who are considered to be the one-third of Heavenly Father's spirit children who rejected his plan of salvation. I think these are classified as the sons of perdition, destined for outer darkness.

So 'Spiritual Bypassing' is a thing, but not 'Gender dysphoria?' Seems like the world is using Psychological Bypassing.

Memorized it verbatim. I usually censor the taking of the Lord's name in vain. (two times in the movie).

I am grateful for the health and strength that my family enjoys despite the challenges we have faced. I am very grateful for the blessings of having a family sealed for eternity in the temple of God. I cannot imagine not having this blessing in my life and love my family so much. #GiveThanks

I am grateful for the blessing of good health, for me and for my loved ones. We have had a few scares that help us appreciate it more but by and large my family and I have been very blessed in this matter.

As much as I enjoy talking politics—that’s been behind most of the major bannings / withdrawals that I’m aware of over the last year. Maybe we need to reconsider bringing back the ban on political discussion?

Good catch. I think I had misread the part about being a "a therapist and Buddhist teacher", where she was referring to someone else and not herself. Maybe she is LDS. In which case my thumbs down increases by 20 thumbs.

Similar to my thoughts. The idea of avoiding things by sticking your head in the "positive" sand isn't a "spiritual" thing. One might as well say, "if you see someone smiling they may be putting on a façade and secretly miserable inside." Yes...this is definitely a potential. But when you turn that into, "smiling might be a evidence of 'happy bypassing'", then one is just being silly. Responding that way to things is a result of psychological and emotional immaturity. That is the cause and the problem that should be addressed. The blaming of the "spirituality" boogeyman is turning things upside down. (Now, to be fair, I don't think the article was that unfair or uneven. I'm just sharing some thoughts.) I think I agree. But I am concerned that the article sets it up so any time anyone suggests to another, for example, that they be positive in the face of difficulties, that such a suggestion must be engaging in something harmful. Moreover, the close relative is sharing the article, proselytizing it to others, to perhaps lead them into the same sort of "positive is negative" type think. Even more harmful...when said relative first shared the article with me they stated, "I have been long trying to study and compile and write about how codependency is taught culturally in our wards and stakes...." followed by having found the article that validates this. Of course, it's what's being taught at church that's the problem here, right? Essentially what I read into this (and I might be biased...but...) is that said relative is trying to convince others that if anyone suggests at church that we, as Jesus taught, turn the other cheek it's encouraging codependency. Yes...you are right...responding with that type of argument is unlikely to do anything but cause hurt feelings all around. But it sure bothers me. (In point of fact, the return to the forum for the day for me was to give me an outlet to express my frustration so I can get it out of my system without causing real harm with close loved ones.)

I'd place this under the category of: The overarching theory is perfectly valid. I've seen it happen in my life and the lives of others. But the overall tone of the article is that there is no "Genuine Spiritual Remedy" to difficulties. It is all one sided. Does it ever say that? Not specifically. But it makes no allowances for it either. The most it offers is that "sometimes it may be a good thing." No, it's never a good thing. But a Genuine Spiritual Remedy to emotional and psychological issues IS a good thing. It is the complete dismissal of this alternative that makes it a twisted truth.

It’s way over generaling. Are there some people whom like to avoid thinking: yes, the exist in all camps. It’s not remotely a spiritual only thing. Now is is there any pint in responding: zero.

The article is not written from and LDS perspective. And I do think that there is legitimacy to some of the ideas when it comes to the hippy-voodoo "spirituality" that may be common to a lot of people's ideas of "spirituality". Where I have the problem is when you take the world's ideas and try and apply them to the God's religion, and true spirituality. If someone was sharing this article to explain how their Buddhism and yoga were false fronts that were being used to hide from actually facing their problems...sure...I'm on board. When you start trying to apply the same to an actual relationship with the actual God and the actual true processes He has prescribed for us to use, etc., etc... it starts smacking of relying on the arm of flesh pretty quickly. In essence, a lot of the article (if applied by a Latter-day Saint to the Church of Jesus Christ), seems to argue that the Savior's teachings were wrong, the prophets spout useless and harmful platitudes, and we should not take scriptural council as valid or legitimate because... you know...psychology.

To me it is a bunch of hogwash, poppycock, balderdash, malarkey...take your pick. I could say the exact same things in this article apply to philosophy, which is nothing more than man's way of avoiding the real trials and questions in life. The only "proof" or reason to believe in the author's view is her word only. She has no foundation...no ground to stand on, and her argument is, truly, very weak. At it's most basic and simple level, believing in God makes much more sense than mankind's way of trying to explain everything. Unfortunately, spirituality will continue to be mocked and attacked in greater amounts in the future. That isn't to say that God has a hand in all things...because I don't believe He does. I do believe in real coincidences, and sometimes things just happen to us for better or worse. That's part of life on this earth...and we all accepted those potential risks before we came here. Being a fanatic and thinking that every single thing that happens everywhere is all the will of God is actually contrary to His plan, and can ultimately lead people away from Him. Now, the author can say faith is just a shield if they wish, and perhaps there are some who use it that way; who say that faith "helps them" while deep down they are truly struggling with their belief in God. For myself, I know what I have felt in my life, and I am not confusing true spiritual promptings for mere emotionalism. The Holy Ghost has spoken to me, and I know it was not my own thoughts. I have also had many experiences in my life that prove to me that there is a God - far too many little details all fell into place (some years in advance) for said experiences to just be a coincidence. I love Alma 30:40-41. The more I think about this the more I believe it to be true. Too many things on earth denote that there is a God...it cannot all be explained by chance or the opinion of one who has an axe to grind against religion.

Yeah, I agree, it's baloney. The idea of "spiritual bypassing" as described in the opening sentences is probably correct. As human beings, we wrongly use all sorts of explanations and thinking, including the idea of spirituality, to explain away or hide from harsh realities. But the specifics of this idea as developed in the article are pure nonsense. Someone took a simple truth and grafted onto it all their doubts and insecurities, and the result is this "spiritual bypassing".

Happy retirement! 🤗 Maybe you'll find a nice quiet country parish and live in a quaint parsonage with roses round the door, and preach sermons to sweet old ladies who'll invite you to tea and feed you their delicious cakes. 😁 My own retirement is still a decade away, but I'm already dreading the thought of it. But of course I'm not a prison chaplain!

I had no idea. But I'm happy to be living in the future. This will tank Elon Musk's stocks.

I guess I'm going to leave over it.