WANDERER

I came across this forum posting and while it's a bit tongue in cheek, I wondered how true the scale was and where people would put themselves and if it was a fair comment... QUOTES: I have a personal witness (i.e. I feel like God has told me) that there is something divine and unexplainable about the Book of Mormon and its message, but I'm also smart enough to know about the undeniable scientific issues that challenge its historicity. So I have things to take on faith, and empirical evidence that contradicts some of those things. Rather than dump science, or dump faith, I try to take the most spiritual value that I can from the things of faith, and then hope that God will explain the details to me some day. Mormons in my shoes, who weigh the alternatives, have some different approaches: 0) Just not approach the issue at all, and stop asking questions. 1) Decide that it's "all or nothing," and trade faith for science 2) Decide that it's "all or nothing," and trade their belief in science for irrationality ("Worldwide conspiracy of scientists to fabricate carbon dating and DNA evidence just to further the plan of Satan!") 3) Accept the science/history, but say that some of the evidence in support of Mormon views has been lost or obscured by time/divine will 3a) Accept the science/history, but say that the scope of the Book of Mormon concerned a very small population of South American peoples, and that evidence of such a tiny population could easily have disappeared over the centuries 4) Reject any literal interpretation or historical context, and instead read the Book of Mormon as "inspired fiction" for the purpose of furthering God's will and spreading a Christian message 5) It is a mystery. I'm somewhere between 4 and 5, myself. Most Mormons I know are in the 0 camp, with sizable minorities in each of the other groups. I think it's too easy to explain away the BoM as the product of an overactive 19th century farmer's imagination, but it's far too hard to explain it as a literal history of people, cultures, languages, and flora/fauna that just don't seem to exist. I'm not sure where the precise definition of truth resides in the whole mess, but I feel like that's not the right question to be asking. For me, "What does God want me to learn from the BoM?" is more informative than "How can I benefit from treating the BoM (or the Old Testament, for that matter) as a literal history?" Your comments? (if this is unacceptable mods please notify me...happy to remove the posting...just trying to make sense out of stuff for myself).

Thanks guys. So the reference to inviting spirits is more of a inviting the wrong feelings than a whole Xfiles kinda thingy. Further looking brought up something else: that certain musical instruments weren't thought to be reverent. What is the perspective on that?

I think you should be able to talk about it with your Dad and trust his judgement on it.

In the same way that people are uncharitable to others, they are also uncharitable to themselves...while it's not always out there and obvious. The connection between charity/ and hope and faith (inspiration)...I'm also reading up on it.

38...hums Those Were the Days: Those were the days, my friend We thought they'd never end We'd sing and dance forever and a day We'd live the life we'd choose We'd fight and never lose Those were the days, oh yes, those were the days LOL.

I ran across a blog where they mentioned that there wasn't clapping in LDS churches. A bit more of a search and I came across the explanation that it wasn't considered reverent, although it was more of a cultural thing and they didn't ban clapping in some churches. I'm just wondering if it's the applause/congratulations version or the whole clapping to a song thingy...where is the line drawn on what is reverent? Secondly I came across another reference to how clapping invited the spirits. Does doing the wrong thing or not being reverent invite the wrong spirits? Is that a belief that LDS people hold? Or do I consign this one to the myths about the LDS religion category?

I came across it online, where the sheet music had been scanned...but just the first page...it sure beats any concept of a hymn I had up until that moment : ) .

No I don't exclude myself from other scriptures than the Bible. As odd as that may seem.

I'm an investigator. I don't matter.

and only 62 for forgiveness and 94 for condemnation and 301 for judge. Judging wins.

Ummm...I'd avoid any kind of interest in spirits....excepting the Holy Spirit.

Admittedly my questions on the topic have always had vague answers, so from a pentecostal fundamentalist point of view with not a whole lot of theology behind it: There's a belief that the Jewish people will be judged according to their covenant with God and that it still stands to some degree...the grafting on idea. That being saved is accepting Christ and being under a new covenant, where grace and repentance and all of that are in effect. That those that are innocent: young children and those that are handicapped or have not had the message of Christ will be judged according to their level of innocence or their works. And all three of those operate under the you cannot be saved except through being born again through Christ clause...so while those beliefs exist...is it an unhappy limbo to be in and do they reconcile with scripture>? I think that most just put it in God's hands and that those things will be understood better post resurrection.

According to works, there isn't the emphasis on ordinations for salvation that the LDS has. Either you are under the covenant of salvation or not.

Best wishes with it all. As an aside...re Morning Stars post...my friend who had multiple abortions later did confide to me that she had an STD...but since her hubby to be had other partners she was going to let him think he had given it to her. While I did everything to help her out...I don't think I made the right decision in that particular circumstance. I didn't respect myself enough or her enough by my actions and decisions. It is possible to tell someone with love and compassion that abortion is something that goes against your beliefs. There are other ways to show friendship and be a friend. Respecting friendship goes both ways. For me, the lies became one too many...and I think that the friendship was not healthy for either of us.

I'm thinking that the logical progression is to allow him to play there first and check things out before signing up for a sleep over...um just because it's a place that you don't know and have never seen and more to the point he hasn't been there. Most parents go by the 'we need to meet them first rule on sleepovers' (even if it's just at dropoff or pickup from play situation). Umm, wouldn't you find it odd if someone's parents just left their kid with you knowing nothing? You will have to do the two mums conversation...but if it's okay in other respects I don't think there should be a problem with it.

Progression between kingdoms...perhaps not. What we do know is that progression from spirit prison to telestrial is not going be much fun. If it were possible to progress to other kingdoms I do not think it would be all that easy and much more of a trial than progression to telestial.

Ah, actually Funkytown, perhaps I DO need to be reminded that saying no is not exactly the Christian thing to do. I wore thin on the whole situation of never saying no...but it would seem that I need to resolve a few issues of my own.

Jesus and the woman who was taken in the act of adultery: 10When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? 11She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more. 12Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life. So simple: Neither do I condemn thee. Go and sin no more. There is the template of what to do about it. Zero accusation, zero judgement and no warning...just a commandment.

Justamere...repentance is nothing without loving God and feeling God's love. "teach only REPENTANCE to this generation" ...well teach what repentance is.... to repent only because something is within the commandments is not true repentance. Something about having the law but not love...love is the fulfilling of the law. When you understand that fornication and adultery and the consequences for yourself and others and how detrimental it is, you will keep His commandments. This is the same for those who are not Christian and for those who are Christians but are sinning. Teach repentance, but not separately from law. To teach that you are going to hell if you don't live chastely leads to the misunderstanding that if you do live chastely without committing fornication or adultery you are going to heaven. Fear of hell doesn't make you a follower of Christ...though it might inspire you to follow the commandments...and you don't need to be a Christian in order to do that. I would think that what this generation most needs is repentance...and understanding that they can have it. Sadly, many feel the weight of failure, beyond repentance. They are overwhelmed by depression and a hopelessness about life and the future. And this lie shackles them. Wouldn't it be better to let the truth set them free? Just my opinion.

Say no. She'll find someone else. They always do. I had a friend who had three..two while I knew her (ugh, no responsibility)....happy to help her out and be a friend to lean on..but no direct involvement in that decision: no transport and no helping her out on the day. I got asked for advice: should I do it? I said this is not my decision. Of course the confidentiality issue... is so hard to deal with..because it upset me and I couldn't talk about it and definitely not to her or anyone else ... and it just is rather taxing to be that person for them. Sorry, but...it's a pattern thing...you're there to support them and keep the secrets of all the stuff that they don't want anyone to know...but they tell you, because the people that they truly value (parents, boyfriends, relations and all the others that are close friends if not closer friends) must not know.

But have to do the rather tough bridging course...if you make that. So I guess any preliminary work with the tares might help out a little.

I think people oriented might be a slightly better understanding...judgements on God's elect seems like rather shakey ground to be treading.

And then getting your tares back again later...is inevitable...from what I understand. Therefore there isn't really any point to separating them.

I'm just perplexed by it all. Morman beliefs are so different culturally in terms of it's restored gospel and practices. Being remotely interested in history, the restoration word leaves me feeling uncomfortable...as it was the period when England turned against the Puritan movement...which continued on in the U.S. Obviously not news to you, but UK or US history wasn't part of my school curriculum. So looking at that and the things that happened in the U.S in terms of religious movements has been instructive. I take too much forgranted. One of the side effects of a *grace* centred religion is not really having to think about the past or future ...just the now. So I find myself doing a bit of catchup in the theology and understanding Christianity department. Why...I don't really have any frame of reference and if it is a restored truth then where did the truth get all muddled. It's news to me. I think the *know that it is true* complexity means that knowledge is involved. It's not that I don't care...it's just that it opens up a degree of complexity about faith that I hadn't really considered and is rather confusing. There is a difference between knowing that it is not true (therefore I don't care except about what is true to me), knowing that is true (therefore I don't care about things that are not true as I have focus) and not knowing what the truth is (I care, and essentially this is a problem until I work out what it is that is true...sometimes labelled an investigator or apostate...and not all that welcome because either you're in the second category or you're not, and if you're not you might as well be in the first in all practicality..thus I guess most people realise that category by default). I do think that you could spend your whole life not knowing...where does that fit into things? It doesn't really. You can do that in any other Christian denomination and work yourself out along the way...but investigating LDS is by nature isolating and a soloistic endeavour because of restricted involvement (to my understanding). Perhaps I misunderstand.

Thanks PC for the explanation...I wasn't aware of that either....explains why rosary crosses (Catholic prayer beads) are detailed as are the ones in their churches. I think my mother did know and had far more objections to my attending a Catholic school than I ever realised (objected to my wearing a particular cross or worried about wearing red or green hair ribbons on St Pats day). Umm Dutch reformed church origins...and I thought the Dutch were pretty mild about these things...but perhaps not in Drenthe LOL. Figures.