11th Article of Faith

[pam]

There have been many investigators using this website to get some basic doctrinal information about the Church. Each week I will post an Article of Faith so that the discussion of each can be done. Keep in mind..this is based on LDS doctrine and debating of that will not be tolerated. Let's try and make this more personal. Copy and paste is wonderful but reading personal testimony and understanding of this doctrinal subject is far more meaningful.

We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

This subject at times has been very touchy. Let's please discuss with respect from all sides.

[MorningStar]

I love the 11th Article of Faith. Because we have the freedom of religion in this country, it made it possible for the church to be restored and no one's religion can be forced on anyone here. Considering everything the church has been through, I couldn't imagine wanting to force our beliefs on anyone else or deny them the right to practice their religion. :)

[Gwen]

what about "worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience" within our own faith? do we as lds "worship" differently one from another? do we allow those that don't fit the stereotype lds that same privilege that we claim for non-lds?

[Prodigal_Son]

I find the ramifications of this doctrine to be interesting. After 9/11 there was such an anti-islam movement here in the US. These people were heavily berated and belittled. Yet, according to this article of faith, we are supposed to be respectful and mindful of our own religious freedoms.

[rastler00]

How does this apply to people who are athiests?

[pam]

I find the ramifications of this doctrine to be interesting. After 9/11 there was such an anti-islam movement here in the US. These people were heavily berated and belittled. Yet, according to this article of faith, we are supposed to be respectful and mindful of our own religious freedoms.

That was unfortunate. Comes from ignorant people. Yes even some of those being LDS unfortunately. Mistake of a group of people does not make an entire religion the same. Just the way I see it. Nor does it make a particular country evil. Example..in Utah just over a year ago..a young man from Bosnia entered a mall and shot and killed several people. Many members of our Bosnian community were threatened and harrassed. Does the actions of one make for an entire country? I think not.

But again unfortunately that's how many many think. Again this also includes many LDS. I wish it were different. Then again. I've always been so passionate about no racial/ethnic jokes, no racial/etchnic slurs etc etc. So things like this get to me more than they might others.

[pam]

How does this apply to people who are athiests?

I can respect their thoughts and feelings. I might not agree but I can respect it.

[rastler00]

That's nice that you do personally, but I was really wondering how the Article of Faith applied. :)

[pam]

I thought my response would have answered it. I'm sure atheists have some kind of a belief system in something. I can respect that..allow them their beliefs though I might not agree. Isn't that what the 11th Article of Faith says. Allow them to worship how, where or What they may.

[Prodigal_Son]

How does this apply to people who are athiests?

President Faust labeled Athiests as those who exercise faith in non-religion.

[Prodigal_Son]

That was unfortunate. Comes from ignorant people. Yes even some of those being LDS unfortunately. Mistake of a group of people does not make an entire religion the same. Just the way I see it. Nor does it make a particular country evil. Example..in Utah just over a year ago..a young man from Bosnia entered a mall and shot and killed several people. Many members of our Bosnian community were threatened and harrassed. Does the actions of one make for an entire country? I think not.

But again unfortunately that's how many many think. Again this also includes many LDS. I wish it were different. Then again. I've always been so passionate about no racial/ethnic jokes, no racial/etchnic slurs etc etc. So things like this get to me more than they might others.

I did not mean to impune the LDS. I just think we should be trying harder. Makes me think of Faust's talk in General Conference about the forgiveness and mercy the Quakers exuded after their horrible incident.

[pam]

I did not mean to impune the LDS. I just think we should be trying harder. Makes me think of Faust's talk in General Conference about the forgiveness and mercy the Quakers exuded after their horrible incident.

Listening to President Faust as he talked about that was amazing. Perhaps we should all take lessons from them in learning about forgiveness. Truly amazing people.

[Prodigal_Son]

If your church is one dispensation of a gospel which is meant for all people of the earth throughout history, how do you resolve this Article with the assorted commandments throughout scripture to suppress other religions? In the Bible, other cultures were conquered with the justification of doing away with their idols and assorted other gods and so forth. I would like this question to be taken seriously, and not dismissed as an attempt to rile people up. Please don't turn it into some kind of argument because that's not why I'm asking.

Modern revelation ALWAYS trumps ancient revelation.

[a-train]

We simply have no right to control a man's belief or disbelief. Satan's effort was to control the faith of nations, the Saviour gives freedom.

The FLDS are today persecuted. Whereas, their charges are child abuse, we are compelled to protect the life and liberty of those children not able to defend themselves. However, if polygamy is the charge, and the union is between consenting adults, we over step our bounds.

The Pinoeers of the Church endured Washington's painful rejection of Constitutional principles when Congress issued a federal mandate against plural marriage. The First Presidency and the leadership of the Church decried the great error of our government who trampled the first amendment rights of the people.

I'll be the first to admit that it looks bad that today we call for the same trampling for gays and lesbians. It is not even slightly likely that we will see the government get out of marriage, an institution our government has no right to be involved in anyway. We are taxed and regulated on the basis of our marital status. The Welfare state is deeply involved in marital concerns.

Perhaps it is acknowledge by our church leaders that a return to a time where the State stays out of marriage is impossible, so the current policy is that we should prevent all this meddling from institutionalizing something entirely different and calling it marriage.

I can imagine what state endorsed homosexual unions would have on society long term. The most frightful possiblity is the raising up of children to be homosexual. However, I would not be any more concerned for those children than the countless children raised in homes where drugs and immorality are encouraged without benefit of homosexuality, a circumstance as old as mankind.

Freedom of religion is imperative to the spread of the gospel in the latter days. We, as Mormons, learning of the pains of our Fathers, must be a people of tolerance and faith. We must not fall for the old philosophy that we can legislate, police, and prosecute salvation. That was Lucifer's proposal.

-a-train

[Prodigal_Son]

I'll be the first to admit that it looks bad that today we call for the same trampling for gays and lesbians.

With all due respect, this has NOTHING to do with freedom of religion. And it IS OUR DUTY to keep that type of behavior in check. Think of it as FIRE INSURANCE (ala Sodom and Gomorrah).

[rastler00]

President Faust labeled Athiests as those who exercise faith in non-religion.

I like that description. :)

[a-train]

If your church is one dispensation of a gospel which is meant for all people of the earth throughout history, how do you resolve this Article with the assorted commandments throughout scripture to suppress other religions? In the Bible, other cultures were conquered with the justification of doing away with their idols and assorted other gods and so forth. I would like this question to be taken seriously, and not dismissed as an attempt to rile people up. Please don't turn it into some kind of argument because that's not why I'm asking.

The difference is Mosaic Law verses the Higher Law. The Apostles of Jesus were not instructed to take up the reigns of government and destroy false religion. Their missionary effort was to welcome those who voluntarily accepted the Gospel. Their missions traveled through various jurisdictions, political boundaries, and cultures. They taught in various languages and presented the Glad Tidings to Jews and Gentiles of every sect and background.

Our LORD's kingdom is not of this world, and we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

-a-train

[rayhale]

Modern revelation ALWAYS trumps ancient revelation.

I would also point out that back then, people worshiped idols, and some people sacrificed people, and worse under their so-called god. One God over everything was a new concept, and God’s people needed to stay away from that, as seen though out the Old Testament the Hebrews (Jews) were influenced by other societies by worshiping idols. Today, all major religions believe in one God, none (that I know of) worship idols, and all are good at heart. This is the reason that we can be tolerant to other religions, as, why, for the most part, the Hebrews weren’t allowed to deal with other people.

[rastler00]

President Faust labeled Athiests as those who exercise faith in non-religion.

I like that description. :)

[Maya]

Atheists believe that they dont believe, but they are wrong in their belief, that they dont believe, as they believe not to.... or they believe in nothing, zerro, zip!

[a-train]

Every man has a paradigm through which he views the world. However, there is a group without one. Their condition is known as schisophrenia.

-a-train

[Brother of Esau]

Hello,

I am having a hard time interpreting the 11th article of faith.

If we have the privilege to believe and worship what we want, how we want, why is it that in order to obtain the highest kingdom of God we are required to believe and worship certain things? I 100% agree with this article of faith but I feel its a catch 22?

Any help on this would be appreciated, I am having a very hard time with it.

Thank you.    

[Jane_Doe]

24 minutes ago, Brother of Esau said:

Hello,

I am having a hard time interpreting the 11th article of faith.

If we have the privilege to believe and worship what we want, how we want, why is it that in order to obtain the highest kingdom of God we are required to believe and worship certain things? I 100% agree with this article of faith but I feel its a catch 22?

Any help on this would be appreciated, I am having a very hard time with it.

Thank you.    

Hi, and welcome to the forum!!

The 11th Article of Faith talks about the *right* to worship whom/what/however that person chooses.  It's essentially a statement acknowledging that person's agency.  Of course, we know that some choices lead us to God and other away from Him.  To quote 2 Nephi:

"27 Wherefore, men are free according to the flesh; and allthings are given them which are expedient unto man. And they are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil; for he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself."

We FIRMLY believe that a person has the right to choose.

 

Does that make sense?

[Brother of Esau]

2 hours ago, Jane_Doe said:

Hi, and welcome to the forum!!

The 11th Article of Faith talks about the *right* to worship whom/what/however that person chooses.  It's essentially a statement acknowledging that person's agency.  Of course, we know that some choices lead us to God and other away from Him.  To quote 2 Nephi:

"27 Wherefore, men are free according to the flesh; and allthings are given them which are expedient unto man. And they are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil; for he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself."

We FIRMLY believe that a person has the right to choose.

 

Does that make sense?

So basically I have the right as a member of the LDS church to interpret God how my conscious sees fit. But at the end of the day I am responsible for the consequences of my interpretation? And how do I know if my interpretation of God is leading me towards God or towards the devil. And if my interpretation is different from other members how do you know which pertains to the straight and narrow iron rod and whose is leading them astray?

 

Edited February 8, 2018 by Brother of Esau

[zil]

Welcome, @Brother of Esau!  (Can't add to Jane's post - AoF 11 is an expression of respect for / acknowledgement of the agency of all - just wanted to welcome you to the forums.)