I Want to Know What's Real

[Guest]

Godless, let me understand your position...

So, suicide is okay in your moral standard right?

So is euthanasia?

So is sex, drugs, and rock-and-roll as long as you're doing it in places where you're not in a position to hurt somebody?

So is abortion at any stage before birth?

How about animal cruelty - like Michael Vick?

How about survival of the fittest (when resources are scarce, selective killing of a population may be needed - like in China or India)?

Just wanting to get a good feel of how you view things...

[Guest Godless]

Godless, let me understand your position...

So, suicide is okay in your moral standard right?

So is euthanasia?

So is sex, drugs, and rock-and-roll as long as you're doing it in places where you're not in a position to hurt somebody?

So is abortion at any stage before birth?

How about animal cruelty - like Michael Vick?

How about survival of the fittest (when resources are scarce, selective killing of a population may be needed - like in China or India)?

Just wanting to get a good feel of how you view things...

I'm not quite sure where you're drawing these conclusions from. My morality comes from a different source than yours, but that doesn't mean that my sense of right and wrong is completely different from yours. Sure, there are some differences, but I think you'll find that my sense of right and wrong is fairly similar to your own. The beautiful thing about self-awareness is that it allows us to think critically and logically about the world we live in. Your perception of the world points you towards religion, mine points elsewhere. However, that doesn't mean that we don't share some of the same values.

[Guest]

I'm not quite sure where you're drawing these conclusions from. My morality comes from a different source than yours, but that doesn't mean that my sense of right and wrong is completely different from yours. Sure, there are some differences, but I think you'll find that my sense of right and wrong is fairly similar to your own. The beautiful thing about self-awareness is that it allows us to think critically and logically about the world we live in. Your perception of the world points you towards religion, mine points elsewhere. However, that doesn't mean that we don't share some of the same values.

That's why I wanted to see your answers to those questions to get an idea of your moral compass and where it stems from. It's easy for me to understand the "God believers" and how their logic operates. It's not as easy for those who have a different basis for their choices - especially when I have no idea what that basis is.

So, yeah, humor me.

[Seminarysnoozer]

I'm not quite sure where you're drawing these conclusions from. My morality comes from a different source than yours, but that doesn't mean that my sense of right and wrong is completely different from yours. Sure, there are some differences, but I think you'll find that my sense of right and wrong is fairly similar to your own. The beautiful thing about self-awareness is that it allows us to think critically and logically about the world we live in. Your perception of the world points you towards religion, mine points elsewhere. However, that doesn't mean that we don't share some of the same values.

The hard to understand part is not the values, it is understanding what significance those values have if there is no afterlife as there are some shared values that seem to have no meaning like "preserving the species." Even then I have a hard time understanding why you care if the species is preserved after you are dead and gone. Its like playing a video game that doesn't keep track of your score, sure it is fun for the moment but there is no need to put any effort into it if there is no score keeping. ... And top of that, after you play the game you don't retain any memory of having played the game. I accept the fact that I don't understand that way of thinking even though I've tried.

[Moksha]

and why do you care about selfishness?

Because we are social creatures. Altruism is an essential part of our existence, unless you're a hermit.

An obvious sign of atheism if you argue against selfishness.

You shall be made to answer to the Golden Rand!

[candyprpl]

I'm not being argumentative Maxel - I am looking for an answer that I don't have.

What is qualitatively better about our belief that sets it above other faiths - other than we say we are right.

I have read all the posts but I needed to come back to this statement. One of the things that bothered me the most about the LDS church was how they proclaimed to be THE church. I once asked my sister -- how do you know? I really can't remember much about that conversation -- but I know I wasn't satisfied with her reasoning. Now that I'm a member (hehe) I get frustrated with myself because I can't explain to anyone how I know that this is the TRUE church. I spent many years not believing and in a matter of moments I came to believe. Yes, it was a feeling but it gave me knowledge that was also reasonable. It is not based on blind faith -- it took me many years wondering, searching, denying and being sick of it all before I surrendered.

Ohhhhhh how I wish I could explain. Why does it matter -- because it does. It's now time for a hair-pulling episode, lol!

[Hemidakota]

Late last night I saw an amazing show called Closer to Truth wherein the host of the show interviewed world class philosophers and thinkers and even the founder of the intelligent design movement all about the teleological argument for the existence of God. While the topic was fascinating, just as fascinating was to see these great thinkers in action and note the differences between them.

It - the topic - is worth a whole discussion but something the host said in answer to why he was pursuing the topic. He responded, because I'd rather know what's real than what makes me feel good.

That resonated with me.

So do I but it is up to the Godhood to reveal it to you. When it does happen, how many people will listen to you?

[Guest Godless]

The hard to understand part is not the values, it is understanding what significance those values have if there is no afterlife as there are some shared values that seem to have no meaning like "preserving the species." Even then I have a hard time understanding why you care if the species is preserved after you are dead and gone. Its like playing a video game that doesn't keep track of your score, sure it is fun for the moment but there is no need to put any effort into it if there is no score keeping. ... And top of that, after you play the game you don't retain any memory of having played the game. I accept the fact that I don't understand that way of thinking even though I've tried.

Believe it or not, you've hit the nail on the head. Life is like a game with no score-keeping. There's no ultimate significance, and yet we're focusing all of our attention on it while the game is being played. It's important to us while it lasts. We have consciousness and self-awareness, and so we feel compelled to use them to the best of our ability even if it doesn't matter later on down the road.

[Traveler]

I have read all the posts but I needed to come back to this statement. One of the things that bothered me the most about the LDS church was how they proclaimed to be THE church. I once asked my sister -- how do you know? I really can't remember much about that conversation -- but I know I wasn't satisfied with her reasoning. Now that I'm a member (hehe) I get frustrated with myself because I can't explain to anyone how I know that this is the TRUE church. I spent many years not believing and in a matter of moments I came to believe. Yes, it was a feeling but it gave me knowledge that was also reasonable. It is not based on blind faith -- it took me many years wondering, searching, denying and being sick of it all before I surrendered.

Ohhhhhh how I wish I could explain. Why does it matter -- because it does. It's now time for a hair-pulling episode, lol!

Part of the problem comes from attempting to express eternal spiritual things in a temporal physical format. In my quest for understanding and purpose, I find the LDS paradigm the only possibility that transcends our current physical limits and takes mankind on a journey that can actually set us free. I find elements of enlightenment in all religions and people devout in faith but for all that I have studied I have found no other faith, doctrine, way or mission that portends to prepare man now to live in the very presents of G-d. And yes, the LDS are one of the very few to openly proclaim that our paradigm is capable of complete divine likeness – which is very unsettling to others devout in religion with little concept of why and for what.

The Traveler

Edited November 12, 2009 by Traveler

[Justice]

They way I see it is that if a church is true it would know it.

If I were looking for a church I would only investigate a church that claimed it was the only true church.

[JiSe]

Part of the problem comes from attempting to express eternal spiritual things in a temporal physical format. In my quest for understanding and purpose, I find the LDS paradigm the only possibility that transcends our current physical limits and takes mankind on a journey that can actually set us free. I find elements of enlightenment in all religions and people devout in faith but for all that I have studied I have found no other faith, doctrine, way or mission that portends to prepare man now to live in the very presents of G-d. And yes, the LDS are one of the very few to openly proclaim that our paradigm is capable of complete divine likeness – which is very unsettling to others devout in religion with little concept of why and for what.

The Traveler

I coming from a background of Transhumanism found the LDS doctrine so refreshing after all the "You have been put onto this earth to be judged and to serve under your supreme ruler for all eternity if you are lucky, or rot in Hell if not" mumbojumbo you get from some other religions.

Some of mu personal thinking have led me to this kind of theories. I do not hold these as a dogma, only something to ponder when not in the mood for anything scientific or religious.

Why does god do what he does according to LDS dogma: Cause its the only way a "Divine Society" could work. When one person wields to our understanding omnipotent power, there has to be:

1) Something productive and "entertaining" for him to do

Why would enjoyment you get from children diminish after ascension

2) Controls to prevent the creation of "unsuitable" new "Gods"

Multi-level organization pyramid in afterlife hmm?

3) Way to be "Fair" with all his creations

One of the key features I think is required from "ascended" person is to be just

Sorry for wandering a little out of topic.. and sorry if im not making much sense, sleepy...

Edited November 13, 2009 by JiSe

[Snow]

I have read all the posts but I needed to come back to this statement. One of the things that bothered me the most about the LDS church was how they proclaimed to be THE church. I once asked my sister -- how do you know? I really can't remember much about that conversation -- but I know I wasn't satisfied with her reasoning. Now that I'm a member (hehe) I get frustrated with myself because I can't explain to anyone how I know that this is the TRUE church. I spent many years not believing and in a matter of moments I came to believe. Yes, it was a feeling but it gave me knowledge that was also reasonable. It is not based on blind faith -- it took me many years wondering, searching, denying and being sick of it all before I surrendered.

Ohhhhhh how I wish I could explain. Why does it matter -- because it does. It's now time for a hair-pulling episode, lol!

So you know, just because you know... but for every Mormon that is so certain, there are 100 other non-Mormons who are just as certain about their own faith.

[zippy_do46]

This just means our work is not done.

[Guest]

So you know, just because you know... but for every Mormon that is so certain, there are 100 other non-Mormons who are just as certain about their own faith.

I've answered the question Snow. Your turn to answer now.

[ehkape]

I hate to tell you this, but poolygamy is still recognized as an eternal doctrine in the church, we just don't practice the same way we did 125 years ago. The practice of withholding the priesthood from blacks was also a practice that has changed. The doctrine that a man must receive the Priesthood of God from those who are in authority has not changed.

hi john,

I learned this phrase while serving my mission: "I guess we have to agree to disagree..."

If you want to believe a practice is just a practice, please, feel free.

But as I said, there is no practice without a doctrine behind it.

Its not only a practice to partake of the sacrament, there is a sweet doctrine behind it. Otherwise it would be a foolish and useless practice to eat some bread and drink some water each sunday.

[Snow]

Well Snow, thats THE question. Is there anything "better" in mormonism? Can one even compare it? Is there any religion that is "qualitatively better" than another?

We always claim to be the only ones with "fulness" of the gospel, indicating to others they are limited in their understanding.

What about our own church history?

There are so many doctrinal changes that I wonder what to believe even if our own prophets and apostles said it.

1830s polygamy= sin

1840s polygamy= eternal law, never to be taken away and necessary for salvation

now polygamy = sin, resulting in excomunication

That would be wrong and wrong.

Polygamy now is not a sin. There are plenty of the people in the Church today who are polygamists. The sin is practicing unauthorized polygamy - that is a sin today and that was a sin in 1840 and a sin in 1830.

Brigham taught blacks shall never have the priesthood - now they do

Feel free to demonstrate that BY's opinion was doctrinal - instead of being a mistaken idea.

Think of all the editing that has been done to the "History of the Church" or our lesson manuals to present more "faith promoting" stories. Is the church going with the flow? Is it all about making sure you feel good in sunday school or is it about the truth?

You mean that the Church presents history that is education from a faith promoting stand point rather than from a rigorous, disinterested, academic perspective?

The horror.

I am not really sure what point you are trying to make but it seems like you have chosen some poor examples to show it.

Perhaps you can either clarify your point or choose some better examples.

[ehkape]

Perhaps you can either clarify your point or choose some better examples.

The point I tried to make was to show that its really hard to know what is real and what is not - even within our own church and with the guidance of our prophets.

Maybe my examples weren't the best ones.

I tried to show that things change even in our church wich claims to have the fulness of the gospel. A major doctrine (or practice as john likes to call it) can be turned around within days. The churches stand on marriage has proven to be one of these doctrines. When the church was restored, there was no plural marriage. Few years later you HAD to enter into celestial marriage to enter the celestial kingdom. W.Woodruff stopped polygamie and adviced the Saints to live according to the laws of the land.

Now, imagine you lived during that time. What would be REAL to you?

Until the death of Joseph Smith, there were at least 2 blacks who held the priesthood. No problem at all. By the way, the church was still growing and not even all white male members held the priesthood. When Brigham became prophet, he introduced the ban as the word of god."What chance is there for the redemption of the Negro? The Lord had cursed Cain's seed with blackness and prohibited them the Priesthood."

In 1852, while addressing the Utah Territorial Legislature, Young stated, "Any man having one drop of the seed of [Cain] ... in him cannot hold the Priesthood and if no other Prophet ever spoke it before I will say it now in the name of Jesus Christ I know it is true and others know it."[4] This pronouncement was made by Young as a prophet.

1978 Pres. Kimball finally decides to stop the ban and permit the blacks (back) to their priesthood blessings.

Now, what' REAL to you?

The question was to "rather know what's real than what makes me feel good."

Was it really Gods will back then for a man to have many wives or did it just make the people feel good? Or was it really Gods will to stop polygamie or did it just make the people feel good (because they didn't have to brake the law any more)?

Was it really Gods will to ban blacks from the priesthood or did it just make the people feel good at a time when blacks were denied many things in the US? And was it really Gods will to allow them to receive the priesthood at a time, when racism was no longer "socially acceptable" around the world?

I hope I made my point. I don't want to go too deep into both examples. They would be worth their own discussion in another thread.

ehkape

[Guest]

Stidgeion and Maxel,

Can you kind of get to the bottom line of it all - Yes I agree that it is faith and inspiration that matters - but what is the difference between our faith that makes us so certain and all the others of believers who also have faith in their own version of theology and are just as certain that they have the truth?

Snow, I was hoping you'd answer this question too. Pretty please?

[Hemidakota]

What is reality to one person maybe a contest of calling not doctrine by another person of the same belief.

[HiJolly]

Snow: "Can you kind of get to the bottom line of it all - Yes I agree that it is faith and inspiration that matters - but what is the difference between our faith that makes us so certain and all the others of believers who also have faith in their own version of theology and are just as certain that they have the truth?"

Snow, I was hoping you'd answer this question too. Pretty please?

Heh. Talk about opening a can of worms... I'll let you respond, Snow, and if you don't I might just say something. Apparently Stidgeion and Maxel won't be...

In advance.... You say we (as LDS) are "so certain", and that other believers are "just as certain". Do you literally believe that, or do you see a qualitative difference in the two certainties? --- BTW, I'm not making a point, or setting up an argument or rebuke -- I'm just interested in your thoughts.

HiJolly

[Snow]

Heh. Talk about opening a can of worms... I'll let you respond, Snow, and if you don't I might just say something. Apparently Stidgeion and Maxel won't be...

In advance.... You say we (as LDS) are "so certain", and that other believers are "just as certain". Do you literally believe that, or do you see a qualitative difference in the two certainties? --- BTW, I'm not making a point, or setting up an argument or rebuke -- I'm just interested in your thoughts.

HiJolly

anatess, HiJolly,

I don't have an answer about what makes our conviction qualitatively better than anyone else's... we seem more earnest and are clean cut?

I'm like the rest of most Mormons - I agree that our conviction is better, but can't say how or why other than we are right - so there! I acknowledge that any faith tradition can say the exact same thing and I can't rebut it/them.

[HiJolly]

anatess, HiJolly,

I don't have an answer about what makes our conviction qualitatively better than anyone else's... we seem more earnest and are clean cut?

I'm like the rest of most Mormons - I agree that our conviction is better, but can't say how or why other than we are right - so there! I acknowledge that any faith tradition can say the exact same thing and I can't rebut it/them.

Well, the short answer is we don't, unless you believe that we are the only people on earth that can be guided by the Holy Ghost, which of course is false. OTOH I seem to recall it being a point of doctrine that we are the only people who are entitled to the Gift of the Holy Ghost permanently indwelling (assuming our worthiness), which in the aggregate would be a nice logical support for superior convictions.

But the worthiness issue keeps it from being a flat-out victory, IMO.

My view is that God gives us all what we need in the moment that we need it, whether we like it or not, and, 'we' in this case includes EVERYBODY on earth and in heaven. So our inspiration is not generally superior to other's, and for the real kicker, God's inspiration is custom fitted for the culture and circumstances of the faithful (as per the Book of Mormon).

So it's obvious that a good Muslim would be inspired in how to become a better Muslim; would have inspiration as to the truthfulness of those things within his/her religion that bring them closer to communion with God (or, in this case, Allah).

Only when the circumstances were 'just right' would a Muslim (or whatever: Gnostic, Baptist, Occultist, Chaos Magician) be converted by the Spirit into a completely different tradition such as Mormonism.

HiJolly