DigitalShadow
-
Posts
1314 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by DigitalShadow
-
-
I'm trying to understand the differing points of view here and not come across as judgemental.
If the Gospel, as taught in the LDS Church, is true, then we all need it. It gives us the plan to return to our Father in Heaven. There is only one way. That said, I didn't mean that LDS people are better than anyone else--though I can see how I implied that. I should have said that LDS people are better off in that they have the truth. However, we will be judged by what we have been taught and this puts most LDS people in a position of stricter judgement, meaning more will be expected of us.
Again, if the Gospel is true, then we ALL need it--your children, my children, their children, etc.
This is not meant to be mean, and if it is not the case feel free to ignore it, but if you don't want to come across as judgemental, then simply don't judge people for not being a part of the church. Not everyone has felt the spirit in the same way or been raised in the church or had life changing experiences bringing to them to the church. That doesn't say anything about them other than that they don't share your beliefs.
Hypothetical question, but what if the Gospel is not true? Have you ever even considered that possibility? Only a fraction of a percent of the world's population agree with you and many have VERY different views on the way to ensure a happy afterlife. I don't think that there is enough evidence to claim for certain (for anyone but yourself) what the one true religion is and even according to your own religion children have the free agency to choose whatever religion they want. Isn't that the entire point of our mortal test? to come to the church of our own free will, not simply to be forced or guilted into it by our parents? If we were meant to have the Gospel imposed on us, wouldn't God simply do it himself?
-
If you are referring to faith of being that price, this is not the case. The price, I was referring too, are those visions and dreams that are given to members who are called to the Church of the First Born. The faith now becomes knowledge for that individual, witnessing it for themselves. Now, it does come with a heavy penalty if one later does not live what was given and whom refuses to repent.
True, negative actions could come with a price in any religion.
Ahhh... thank you for clarifying :)
-
I think you missed the point - if logic is not a part of the order in the universe then the use of logic to understand the universe is counter productive. Therefore, if you do not believe in order by logic - why use logic to try to understand an assumed order - this plays to an event horizon or what follows.
Even Chaos Theory implies that the introduction of logic to a system that is not order by logic will skew the results. As I said before - I am not willing to abandon logic. Why would you employ ordered logic to a system you believe is not ordered by logic? I just do not see the logic in that.
The Traveler
Trying to parse your post gave me a bit of a headache. Perhaps we should start a new thread about this since we have gotten quite off topic?
-
You clearly misrepresent what I said. I made a qualified statement of fact and it was intended to be interpreted as a standard procedure that applies to ALL. I was not directing it to you, specifically. There is NO other way to to receive a witness and awareness of the existence of God. In fact, you do not have to convert to the LDS Church to experience such. I did, and then it took seven more years to find the church.
My friend, that is the beauty of agency. You are free to believe or not, to struggle, to antagonize and certainly do what you will and you will never hear a word from my mouth about your choices. Since you alluded to logic, empirical evidence and proof, I simply pointed to the fact that your frame of reference is better suited for the study of physical sciences. Such may present to you appealing, tangible evidence of the experimental archetypes you desire to be satisfied of the presence/existence of deity.
I'm sorry if that is not what you meant. It's just that I have been told many times that I simply need to have more humility to receieve a witness which I find ironic coming from people who claim to know for certain the word of God and are unwilling to entertain any other possibilities.
I do use my logic in my career as a software developer quite a bit, it serves me well :)
-
I really didn't mean to be condescending and I worried you'd take it that way. Not really understanding the Gospel is not an insult. Most of us don't fully understand it. I've spend many years increasing my understanding and have a long way to go.
Forcing anyone to be LDS is pointless. But we are responsible to teach our children truth after which they do have agency to accept or reject it.
No you don't really understand it. How could you? You've never been a member--or maybe you have--I don't know. You've never been to the temple? Have you read and reread the scriptures and prayed for understanding? Have you listened to every word in General Conference and applied it to your life? I'm not judging you, just pointing out that you can't expect to really understand the Gospel/Plan of Salvation without a lifetime of study.
I've been studying the Gospel for decades and continue to learn new things. And I continue to learn how much I DON'T know. We learn bit by bit. But I have learned enough that I know we are better with the Gospel than without. I've seen how it changes people for the better. I've experienced the blessings.
So to say it doesn't matter if your children embrace the Gospel or not, says you don't really know what life is like with it, very well.
Oh, btw, the statement "good little LDS members" is a bit condescending.
I don't care if you think I don't understand the Gospel, what I found truly condescending and insulting was your implicit assumption that LDS members is inherently better than being non-members and the non-member fathers you were talking about should bear some type of guilt for leading their poor children astray.
I have no trouble agreeing to disagree on spiritual matters, but I will not stand for you implying that my future children are worse off for having me as a father because I am not a member. I apologize if that is not the way you meant it, but that is certainly how it sounded.
-
For those who require absolutely unequivocal, undeniable and empirically verifiable information in order to believe; I would suggest to stick with Chemistry, Botany, Electronics or any other discipline that deals primarily with the tangible physical world. They should leave religion alone since ALL religions rely on a belief in divinity that can not be seen or touched and historical events that, by far, can not be verified.
Beyond that, it takes humility and faith to receive a witness of the reality of the Atonement and the hand of God in all things.
I thought God wanted all his children to know him, including those with a distinctly skeptical and scientific nature?
Keep in mind that it also takes humility to consider that your own religious beliefs may be wrong. Your statement reads like: "It takes humility to realize that my views are absolutely right." Can you not see the irony in that?
-
That says that neither you nor your wife really understands the Gospel.
I understand completely that you believe in order to live happily ever after in the next kingdom you all have to be good little LDS church goers, but I also respect that children are their own individuals capable of making their own choices (see free agency if in doubt) and will love them no matter what. I've seen the family strife that can be caused by the attitude that your children WILL be LDS members no matter what. Whatever you want to force on your kids is your business, but I don't appreciate your condescending attitude.
-
I've known four non-LDS men who married LDS women, allowed her to raise their children in the Church, and eventually were baptized after the children were grown. One man was baptized and went to the temple within a year of his death. We all rejoiced when they joined the Church, especially their families. However, due to the long example of their dad, some of the children of these homes are inactive/non-members today. Would they be active if their dad had been LDS when he raised them? Don't know. However, these men probably deal with self-blame and regret, whether justified or not, because of the situation of these children, their children, and an entire line of posterity.
I don't have any children yet and I'm not planning on it for a long while, but when I do have children I would have no self-blame or regret if they grew up to be members or non-members. It is their own personal choice and I don't think that either me or my wife would be disappointed as long as they turn out to be decent human beings.
-
“Pascal's Wager” is the name given to an argument due to Blaise Pascal for believing, or for at least taking steps to believe, in God. The name is somewhat misleading, for in a single paragraph of his Pensées, Pascal apparently presents at least three such arguments, each of which might be called a ‘wager’ — it is only the final of these that is traditionally referred to as "Pascal's Wager". We find in it the extraordinary confluence of several important strands of thought: the justification of theism; probability theory and decision theory, used here for almost the first time in history; pragmatism; voluntarism (the thesis that belief is a matter of the will); and the use of the concept of infinity. Yes?
Technically yes, but to simplify what it means when people usually refer to it, it is basically that if you live as if God exists, you would get a possible reward if he does exist and there would be nothing to lose if he does not exist. However if you live as God does not exist there is possible punishment if he does exist and no effect if he does not exist. The end result being that it is safer to "bet" that God does exist.
I disagree with that analysis though. With the multitude of religions that exist now and have existed throughout history it is impossible to live as if all of them are true since some require the opposite actions. Putting faith in any religion could just as easily lead to eternal suffering from another religion.
I guess that's going off on a bit of a tangent though. I brought it up because the last part of your statement somewhat reminded me of that line of thinking:
Eventually, my stubborness paid off but it does come with a price if not lived properly.
My thought is that every action could come with a price depending on what religion (if any) turns out to be true.
-
"He granteth unto men according to their desire." This phrase has given me more insight to truths that is not yet taught. I suspect it is due to the ability of those in not being spiritual mature enough to receive it.
I for one would not join the church either DS, without seeing and hearing it from the sole source Himself. Eventually, my stubborness paid off but it does come with a price if not lived properly.
I live my life according to what I think is the right thing to do. Unfortunately it is not possible to be a good and moral person according to the doctrine of every religion in case one of them is right, but any God who would fault me for treating others how I would want to be treated is not one that I would willingly follow even if I knew they existed.
Are you familiar with Pascal's Wager?
-
So was I until I learned the valuable lesson on the Atonement.
I haven't really done anything that needs atoning... I simply prefer more difficult problems to easy ones and live to be challenged.
-
Thanks for your honest response. Back to Alma 32, it says it starts with desire. The desire to believe.
Also, I've learned (recently) that God doesn't give us anything we're not ready for. So if you feel you are not receiving anything from Him, maybe it's because you're not ready.
An answer from God demands change. If he gave you an answer, for example, on the truthfulness of the Gospel, you'd be required to start living it. If He sees that you are not ready to change in this way, He won't send you the answer. I think this is part of His mercy.
He'll wait till you are ready, and have a true and sincere desire, then the answers will come. This is the great value of adversity. It tends to humble us, making us more receptive to God and open to what He has for us.
For the most part I am already living the rules put forth by your religion. Most of it is already common sense to me and the rest of it is done out of respect to my wife's beliefs. The only thing that keeps me from getting baptized is that I honestly don't think or feel that the church is true yet despite how much I investigate.
I would also like to note that the strong desire to believe often leads to belief whether it is true or not. If you really want to believe that UFO's (of extra terrestrial origin) exist you will look for evidence and probably find it and not look for any evidence to the contrary, maybe even flat out ignore evidence to the contrary. See confirmation bias.
-
Yes, I imagine it is. :)
But, I would argue that keep the spirit with me takes work! My natural impulse would probably be to take the easy way round everything. :)
My natural impulse is to take the hard way. I guess I'm just stubborn like that.
-
I don't believe that I can't be fooled. That is a whole other side to this story. There are opposites in all things, but that is another subject.
I don't know if I can accurately explain all of human perception, but the scriptures do a pretty good job at describing what happens.
I just know that I have tested the process and that I have discovered that it works. I can know so many different things thru the Spirit. I have been obedient, and by george the Spirit is with me and I have been disobedient, and dang, talk about the closing of the heavens! I can feel that difference in my life and know which course I should follow if I do want to experience the spirit of the Lord. These are observable and measurable occurrences.
But it is more than just believing and always staying in the dark hoping you got it right. Faith without works is dead. There are proofs along the way. There is fruit that comes from what you plant and that is something that can be logically evaluated. In fact, the whole process is very logical and repeatable and provable if you get the vision of it. And a lot of it comes by the doing of it. You can't know China unless you go there. I can tell you all about it, but if you won't get on the boat or you won't accept that boats float and that you will arrive safely , then well.......you get my point. You can even talk about China all day and look at pictures and think it exists but until you get in the boat and go in that direction, you can't know. I think this is why you hear LDS people say stuff like " I know that is true....etc" because they got on the boat.....
Please understand that I believe that many churches have truth. Truth is truth wherever you live and whatever the circumstance. Truth is universal that way. And the spirit will testify of truth point by point.
Another scripture of importance here......
D&C 130: 20-21
"There is a law irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundation of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated --
And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated."
And my experiments and life experience have led me to the opposite conclusion. I am incredibly happy in life and have been given more than most, yet I have no faith.
-
Not yet maybe. :) There is also hope that is a close sister to faith. And I have hope. :) If I can feel what I feel, I have to believe that others can too.
Faith, hope, obedience, desire. They all work together. We have talked about this before, but the skeptics hat......have you been able even for a time to take that out of your thinking yet?
Remaining skeptical and critically analyzing everything is as much a part of me as feeling the spirit is a part of you :)
-
Maybe it's my imagination, but I've noticed that very few people who are non-LDS and who attend a church regularly, stay in one religion. Often they have changed religions several times. (I'm not talking about those who claim a religion, but seldom/never go.)
Has anyone else noticed this?
I wouldn't know, I was born and raised agnostic and remain that way. I will say that I have noticed LDS members (in utah at least) tend to be far more enthusiastic about religion than others in the United States. There are still countries in the world that are ruled by strict religious belief though, far more than Utah, but I wouldn't recommend visiting them.
-
Faith is a choice.
Did I feel the Spirit? I CHOOSE the answer to that question.
Did I receive an answer to my prayer? Again, I CHOOSE the answer to that question.
It's all an experiment, like it says in Alma 32. Is obedience to the Gospel working for you? For me, YES.
So you make a choice, move forward, unsure, unknowing, testing what feels right. This is faith. If it works for you, you continue to move forward in that direction. I've done this my entire life and so far so good.
Every good thing in my life is a direct result of my activity in the LDS Church. I wouldn't leave it for anything.
So far my experiment yields no results. I do not feel the spirit no matter how much I try. (still trying as urged by my wife and members of the forum)
I also feel there are many good things in my life, however I have never had faith in any religion, so I don't think it comes from any particular church.
-
Alma 32 is also a good one......there comes a point after the exercising of faith that faith itself becomes dormant because it is replaced with knowledge. The chapter talks about light and that this light is discernible.....
Give the chapter a read. I know we through it around a lot but it really is the essence of what we are talking about here.
I have read all the sections talking about faith (as directed by missionaries) and I have also read many parables in the Book of Mormon about the virtue of faith, but so far it does not agree with my experiences in life.
-
Without the spirit it is all just speculation.....opinion.
There in lies the problem. How do you (or anyone else) know whether it is the spirit or you are just thinking it is the spirit? Do people in other religions not feel the spirit for some reason? What about all the people who truly believe they feel the spirit but get drastically different results? What makes their feelings of the spirit less accurate than yours? What makes you think that there is no way you could be fooled (like presumably most of the human population since only a fraction of a percent are LDS)?
-
See also: Cognitive Biases
(confirmation bias, which is sometimes brought up when talking about religion is more specifically a cognitive bias)
-
DS revelation can be reproduced but only to the righteous. See the first vision.
There are some here who received the same that can testify with the boy prophet what he did see was infact the same vision they received.
No offense intended, but this is how I see it:
There are some from every religion that can testify that their religion is the one true religion. What does that demonstrate other than that personal revelation varies greatly and that is why we have different religions to begin with?
Any religion can say that their doctrine is true and only the righeous will know this for sure and simply claim that you're simply not righeous or faithful enough if you don't get revelation that their religion is true.
-
Sounds like you are a very strong believer in the non-existence of God.
Both being a theist and an atheist---ultimately take belief.
I am glad you have some doubt-perhaps belief/non-belief is a continum?
What do you think of that concept?
Both types of beliefs-take faith-just a different kind.
Being unconvinced by current evidence (or lack there of) that one of the existing religions is correct does not require faith or belief. I can see how from a faith-based viewpoint it would seem that any view would require faith, but I (and I suspect Godless) truly do not have faith (in a religious sense) in anything. Whatever has the most empirical evidence will be accepted as a working truth (still can be proved wrong) and I see no need to hang on to beliefs (scientific, religious or whatever) beyond what is supported by evidence.
-
Why is it that you have decided that empirical evidence is the ONLY way to determine truth?
I don't mind that there are things that man may never know, but I find it interesting that some appear to me to be closing the door on the possibilities of what we can know or how much we can know about spiritual subjects because the discovery process may require one to move into a different sphere of perspective.
I think what is missing here is the understanding that the end result of revelation IS empirical see, feel, hear types of evidence.
Empirical evidence is the only reasonably reliable way to determine truth and this has been proven throughout history time and time again. The movement toward using empirical evidence (generally called science) has uncovered many truths about the world around us and allows for the amazing comforts we have today.
The problem with calling relelation empirical evidence is that it cannot be reproduced. People all over the world receieve revelation about their own religion all the time. Given the amount of different and conflicting results people receive and have received throughout history, I find it hard to take that as evidence of anything other than that when you base conclusions solely on feelings, you are likely to be wrong.
-
That's true but where did the material that created the snowflake come from? Was it always here? Which by my understanding of the Expanding Universe theory could be possible, but you still don't answer where it came from. Either it was created from nothing: (Which science states is impossible, I can't remember the law though. You know the whole matter and energy can't be created or destroyed thing.) came from outside of the universe which implies something is beyond the nothingness of space (or nothing is something, which is a can of worms better left alone): or, like I said before, it was always here. Perhaps someday science will answer this question or maybe it never will. As for me I say that the lack of logical, scientific answers to these questions is proof that Heavenly Father exists.
Please don't take this the wrong way; I hate how cold and emotionless the written word can be.
I never claimed to know all the answers and neither does science. I find it ironic though that you have no trouble believing God is eternal, but find it impossible to save a step and believe that the matter of the universe is simply eternal.
I would also like to point out that simply because science cannot answer everything does not "prove" Heavenly Father exists any more than it "proves" the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists or Xenu for that matter.
"Antidepressant Use among Latter-day Saints" from FAIR
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted · Edited by DigitalShadow
typo
That was my first thought. More about the alcohol though than the sex. I think most of the people taking these anti-depressants are probably already married and most Mormon families I know have plenty of kids so I don't think that's the problem.
I also think it may have to do with the increased expectations from the community and family.