Favorite and Least Favorite Doctrines

[Traveler]

Traveler, one aspect of your post that I especially appreciate is that you do not shy away the foundational LDS doctrine that we can become Gods. The teaching is shocking to most traditionalists, and I perceive that many LDS shy away from discussing the belief in interfaith conversations. I will grant you that I find this doctrine difficult. On the other hand, it is intriguing. I wonder if the magnitude of the doctrine is such that even some of your fellow members fail to embrace it boldly.

I think you have hit on the reason that this doctrine resonates so profoundly and seems to sit at the very core of and reason even for war and rebellion. On one hand there always seems to be an argument for those that are noble and great in society – to rightfully hold to that which they have or even justify more. Regardless of the means by which it came. They are the upper crust – the élite, the deserving. They are the leaders, the refined, the more intelligent, the more enlightened and the best. All of the traits that in general we worship and honor as great and worthwhile and in what we perceive and define as a good and great deserving G-d worthy of worship.

But in my mind the notion of G-d is not like that. But rather someone with all the rights and privileges – whose place it is to be over everybody – and yet such a great and powerful one willing to forgo all privileges and place of honor to come and live with those of lowest possible privilege in our same condition. Not as a pretense and certainly not to improve their place but for the sole and only reason to improve our lowly and cast from the society of heaven place – and then to declare openly that their motivation for such a sacrifice is that we might obtain (inherit or enjoy) all that they have. Even to offering that our status and state be that we are one in the same way that they are one with all the highest and most noble possible – G-d.

It is the ultimate liberty, the greatest freedom the highest possible achievement – to create a society –even a kingdom where all truly are indeed equal. Where everyone is a royal king and queen and no one is “above” another – where the greatest is the servant of all. A quest that even and only a G-d would be willing to die for.

I believe it to be the difference between those that think they will be honored as better and that others deserve to and must be cast down. That salvation is the ultimate blessing to obtain and have for one’s self despite that others be cast down and be punished - all in contrast to the notion that service and what we offer to others even G-d in that which is of “eternal divine” value.

Thus the conflict between good and evil is not a struggle between those that deserve better and those that deserve less – but between those that honestly think they are better thinking that they must preserve and prevent the lessor deserving and those cast out for good and deserving reason from ruining their heaven, their glory, their place and their right to be exalted.

The Traveler

[Justice]

Traveler, one aspect of your post that I especially appreciate is that you do not shy away the foundational LDS doctrine that we can become Gods. The teaching is shocking to most traditionalists, and I perceive that many LDS shy away from discussing the belief in interfaith conversations. I will grant you that I find this doctrine difficult. On the other hand, it is intriguing. I wonder if the magnitude of the doctrine is such that even some of your fellow members fail to embrace it boldly.

This stems from the fact that we are the offspring of God, literally.

This is also the single specific thing I chose as well.

We cannot back away from it. It is the very foundation that drives the rest of our beliefs... that verily, life is found in the faimly.

[Backroads]

Favorite LDS Doctrine: We existed before this life.

Least favorite traditional Christian doctrine: ...this is hard. I really have no complaints with traditional Christianity. I suppose that I do struggle with the Christian view of God as this incorpereal being... I wind up interpreting that view as mere philosophy.

[JudoMinja]

I think you have hit on the reason that this doctrine resonates so profoundly and seems to sit at the very core of and reason even for war and rebellion. On one hand there always seems to be an argument for those that are noble and great in society – to rightfully hold to that which they have or even justify more. Regardless of the means by which it came. They are the upper crust – the élite, the deserving. They are the leaders, the refined, the more intelligent, the more enlightened and the best. All of the traits that in general we worship and honor as great and worthwhile and in what we perceive and define as a good and great deserving G-d worthy of worship.

But in my mind the notion of G-d is not like that. But rather someone with all the rights and privileges – whose place it is to be over everybody – and yet such a great and powerful one willing to forgo all privileges and place of honor to come and live with those of lowest possible privilege in our same condition. Not as a pretense and certainly not to improve their place but for the sole and only reason to improve our lowly and cast from the society of heaven place – and then to declare openly that their motivation for such a sacrifice is that we might obtain (inherit or enjoy) all that they have. Even to offering that our status and state be that we are one in the same way that they are one with all the highest and most noble possible – G-d.

It is the ultimate liberty, the greatest freedom the highest possible achievement – to create a society –even a kingdom where all truly are indeed equal. Where everyone is a royal king and queen and no one is “above” another – where the greatest is the servant of all. A quest that even and only a G-d would be willing to die for.

I believe it to be the difference between those that think they will be honored as better and that others deserve to and must be cast down. That salvation is the ultimate blessing to obtain and have for one’s self despite that others be cast down and be punished - all in contrast to the notion that service and what we offer to others even G-d in that which is of “eternal divine” value.

Thus the conflict between good and evil is not a struggle between those that deserve better and those that deserve less – but between those that honestly think they are better thinking that they must preserve and prevent the lessor deserving and those cast out for good and deserving reason from ruining their heaven, their glory, their place and their right to be exalted.

The Traveler

Traveler thank you so much for this. I think many of the misconceptions about the degrees of Heaven stem from this assumption that those who make it higher are somehow better or more priviledged than others. I do not see it that way at all. It is nothing more than a different position with greater responsibilities, and not everyone is cut out to nor wants to handle such responsibility.

If you look at our economic system, it is easy to see where this misunderstanding comes from. Positions of authority and responsibility receive greater pay and can often result in pride. Yet take away the menial support positions and these leaders have nothing. What would happen if all the custodians or cafeteria aids at a school just one day didn't show up? What would happen if the "techies" in a play didn't do their job? What would happen if everbody's secretaries decided to take a day off? What would happen if everyone who volunteers for an organization just didn't show up?

The amount of responsibility one has and the amount of pay they get for their work is not at all equal or even proportional to the worth of their position. So it is in Heaven. I believe that Heaven will be a very social orgranization, with everyone bearing different responsibilities. We will all be eqauls- even those in the "lesser" kingdoms with "lesser" jobs- and those who are in positions of authority will use those positions to serve. Not to get personal gain. They will be following the example of Christ- that the "greatest" among us will be our servants. To think that those who obtain a celestial glory will be "better" or more "priviledged" than anyone else is a very earthly way of thinking that will not apply in the eternities.

[spamlds]

I do not wish to say anything particularly negative against the teachings of other Christian sects or denominations. We are certainly the target of so many attacks that criticizing the belief system of others is distasteful.

I would reply to the original poster's question in this manner. I was raised Presbyterian, gravitated towards Methodism, and later attended Baptist churches, although I never formally joined any of these denominations. I later investigated Hinduism and Buddhism.

The most appealing doctrine of Mormonism was one that no other religion taught: that I could know for myself that the doctrines were true by the revelations of the Holy Spirit. Every other Christian denomination taught that faith meant blindly accepting the tenets of a particular interpretation of the Bible. My opinion was somewhat like Thomas Paine's--all revelation is hearsay to everyone but the one who receives it. I was unwilling to accept the revelations of others, especially when men's interpretations of them showed such disagreement and variation.

When a Mormon acquaintance gave me a copy of the Book of Mormon and explained that God could speak directly to me through the Holy Ghost and tell me that it was true, I found that to be astonishing. I also found out that it was true. So my favorite "doctrine" would be the principle that God can and does speak directly to seekers of truth.

One of the things that Mormonism does very well is that it teaches people to recognize how God speaks to them. I realize now that I had felt the Spirit of God's presence on a couple of occasions in the Methodist Church in particular. Our pastor took a group of youth on a retreat and one of the things we did was re-enact Jesus' washing the disciples' feet. We didn't wash feet, but instead the hands of the person next to us. It was an intensely spiritual experience, but I didn't understand what I was feeling. I think Mormons do very well at teaching others how to identify the presence of the Holy Ghost when it manifests truth. That's why we're successful as missionaries without theological training. We're not scholars; we're witnesses. Because our teaching helps us understand the role the Spirit has played throughout our lives, that's why Mormons don't turn into anti-Baptists, or anti-Catholics, or anti-whatever. We don't renounce the truths we knew before. We tend to see our religious experiences in other faiths as stepping stones toward a greater light and we bless the Lord's name for his mercy in what he has done in our lives.

If a Baptist or a Methodist tells me that God told him that his religion is the one he should be in, that's perfectly fine with me. God's wisdom is greater than mine and he has a plan for each of us. If a person denies that God can speak and give such guidance, his belief system essentially limits what God can do. Joseph Smith said (paraphrasing) that God never penalized a person for believing too much, but for believing too little.

When I was searching for the truth, another question that other denominations did not answer satisfactorily for me was "What happens to those who die in ignorance of the gospel?" The answers were so varied and contradictory that I knew that it was mere guesswork. The LDS understanding of how the Lord's plan fairly presents the gospel to everyone and allows them to exercise free agency was very appealing. The fairness and justice of it really had the mark of divinity. Again, the principle of personal revelation taught me that I could seek confirmation of the doctrine through prayer and insights from the Holy Spirit.

I have no ill-feelings toward any religion, sect, denomination, or church that is genuinely seeking light and truth in their own way. What I object to is those that deviate from the path of truth to attack latter-day saints. Anti-Mormonism as manifested by various ministries are a terrible waste of resources and personal effort.

Edited November 16, 2011 by spamlds

[prisonchaplain]

Spamlds, however indirectly it happens, when we encounter someone of another faith and say, "I'm LDS," or "I'm Assemblies of God," there is an implied disagreement. Yet, this is not offensive--or should not be. When I ask, "What do you like about being LDS?" it could be interpreted that I am really asking, "Why don't you become Assemblies of God?" Yet again, when you answer, there is no offense.

I would interpret your answer as: I favor the strong LDS belief in personal revelation...and do not appreciate the lack of personal revelation I found in the forms of Protestantism I explored. In this I find no offense.

In fact, I have found no offense in any of the posts in this string. Sometimes I'm tempted to say, "I don't believe that doctrine either." Or, "But, I believe that doctrine too." I quickly realized that doing so was unnecessary, as my purpose for the topic is to see what many LDS have found difficult in the traditional Christianity they have encountered. Sometimes perception is very strong indeed.

So... thank you for your response.

[PrinceofLight2000]

Favorite LDS doctrine: the restoration of the priesthood, and by extension all the ordinances it contains that make the gospel possible.

Least favorite traditional Christian doctrine: TULIP, celibacy, till death do us part, biblical infalliability, & closed scripture.

[Echo2002]

Favorite of the LDS doctrine, probably Temple work and our belief that you are not out of luck if didn't accept the Gospel in your life on Earth.

Least favorite LDS doctrine, something we no longer practice, but I'd have to say polygamy. I'm not sure if that's doctrine or not.

Least favorite of traditional Christianity, the belief that there can be no other witnesses to Christ other than the Bible and that there are no living Prophets on the Earth today.

Favorite of traditional Christianity, doing service unto others. Not that the LDS church doesn't do that, but it's something we have in common.

To the OP, I think a lot of members ignore the "hot drinks" portion of the WoW or they interpret it to mean alcoholic drinks. I know many members who drink herbal teas and hot chocolate. I haven't heard of anyone not being allowed into the Temple because they admit to drinking hot chocolate or herbal teas. Coffee is off limits.

[Backroads]

Ooh, I wanna do a favorite Christian belief!

Well, maybe not a belief, but there is so much good in Christian culture that I just love.

[Traveler]

Ooh, I wanna do a favorite Christian belief!

Well, maybe not a belief, but there is so much good in Christian culture that I just love.

What Christian culture are you talking about?

The Traveler

[Jenamarie]

Ooh, I wanna do a favorite Christian belief!

Well, maybe not a belief, but there is so much good in Christian culture that I just love.

Oh me too! For example, I love how evangelicals pray. I was part of a MOPs group once (Moms of Preschoolers) and the way they prayed was so... conversational, and felt so genuine, like they *truely* believed that God was right there in the room with them. I think LDS culture has gotten so caught up in the "formal" way of prayer, and the habitual sayins ("please bless this food", etc.). My prayers became much more personal after seeing their example.

I also love the Orthodox/Catholic Litergical year, how there are "seasons" of worship, and how they use all five senses in their worship (incense for smell, candles for sight, vocal hymns and prayers, etc.) I love it. :)

[Backroads]

What Christian culture are you talking about?

The Traveler

The general non-denominational culture. While there are a lot of damning-to-hell Christians, I think the majority are such good, kind, genuine people who love celebrating Christ and their beliefs.

[prisonchaplain]

Least favorite traditional Christian doctrine: TULIP, celibacy, till death do us part, biblical infalliability, & closed scripture.

I'm curious about why you dislike the doctrine of biblical infallibility. Is it because some traditionalists try to use the Bible as a weapon rather than a guide?

[prisonchaplain]

To the OP, I think a lot of members ignore the "hot drinks" portion of the WoW or they interpret it to mean alcoholic drinks. I know many members who drink herbal teas and hot chocolate. I haven't heard of anyone not being allowed into the Temple because they admit to drinking hot chocolate or herbal teas. Coffee is off limits.

Others here have told me that "hot drinks" is interpreted as coffee and tea...and that many LDS love Starbucks for its WoW-approved hot beverages. :) ... not to mention the non-coffee based Frapuccinos.

[PrinceofLight2000]

I'm curious about why you dislike the doctrine of biblical infallibility. Is it because some traditionalists try to use the Bible as a weapon rather than a guide?

There are certain passages in the KJV that are revised by the JST because they are wholly counterintuitive. Case in point: Exodus 9:12.

The fact that people attempt to rationalize fairly obvious errors like this to support the infallibility viewpoint is annoying to me. I also don't quite understand why the infallibility position is so crucial to their theology.

Edited November 16, 2011 by PrinceofLight2000

[prisonchaplain]

Princeoflight, thank you for the explanation. I will not try to defend Ex. 9:12, since that type of post is for a different string...however, I do see your point. As for why Protestants, in particular, adhere to infallibility, I would explain by suggesting that the doctrine works well with our belief that the Bible is our highest authority. Since we do not rely on living prophets or church authority, it helps us to know that we can trust the Bible to be infallible truth.

[Traveler]

I'm curious about why you dislike the doctrine of biblical infallibility. Is it because some traditionalists try to use the Bible as a weapon rather than a guide?

Pardon me for adding something here. In general I dislike the idea that one has arrived - especially in the quest for truth and understanding. Thus the Bible becomes a wall to enlightenment rather than a bridge. The result is a separation and divergence in beliefs, doctrine and faith. Especially if the truths seem to come from non-Biblical sources - like science.

It is like a broken methodology that no one will consider fixing because they do not think anything is broken. It is like opposing political philosophies, we cannot consider that our opposition has a point because to do so is an admission the we really did not have it right.

You PC are not the rule but rather a very rare and unusual exception.

The Traveler

[AnthonyB]

Got to say there is quite a lot about LDS I like...

The idea that God has actually made an effort to fix up the mess of how divided his people have become.

Eternal Marriage sounds cool, even the idea of being dunked for other people would be cool. As a non coffee and tea drinker, it would be nice to think I was pleasing God every time I had a Milo (type of hot chocolate drink in Australia).

What I would find difficult about LDS, being in some sense cut off from traditional Christians (Even though I have very different beliefs, I can still see myself as one church with Lewis, Tolkein, Scheaffer, Chesterton, NT Wright etc). Even though I see the disunity as wrong, I also love the diversity that it alowed to exist.

What I dislike most of tradtional Christainity is our failure to be one body as Christ prayed for in the garden.

Edited November 17, 2011 by AnthonyB

[FunkyTown]

Favourite about traditional Christianity:

Besides the obvious, I'll go with one I don't personally believe in: Saints. I love the Catholic Saints. The idea that people will be responsible for things they've shown to be good stewards of in this life is one I find personally appealing.

Least favourite thing about traditional Christianity:

Catholic Confession - I just don't know why a Priest should be told, "You can't get married and have sex, but you can at least sit in a dark box and listen to other people's dirty secrets all day."

I understand confession, but I'd rather it was face to face. The latter doesn't seem all that courageous to me.

Favourite thing about LDS doctrine: Eternal progress. I am deeply, deeply troubled by doctrine that suggests eternal stagnation.

Least favourite thing: Tithing. I wanna buy mooooore stuuuuuuuuff!

[Traveler]

As we are talking about favorite doctrines - I think there may be something missed. There is something I find most intriguing about “other” religions and faiths. Well - more than just intriguing - I find in the single un-talked about phenomenon in this thread the greatest hope I hold for mankind. Though it has not openly been discussed - I personally believe it to be the single most important principle that surrounds many and perhaps even the majority of devout people.

This principle transcends doctrine and dogmas. It transcends culture, economic and political status. It transcends wars and hatred, prejudice and mistrust. I do not know that I can define the principle with a single term or a single expression - but I will try.

As I begin my expression, I want to make it clear that I distrust the masses. When someone talks about “traditional” religion it leaves a very bad taste with me. It reeks of the popular - self serving and destructive paths often taken in societies and cultures. If an idea is popular - I approach it with much criticism and skepticism. If everybody is buying it - I back off. I cannot express what I love as a doctrine. I have found this “element” in non-LDS, non-Christians and even at times in non-religious individuals. What I am speaking about is not imbedded in the dogmas and organizational structures. It is the individual that loves people over dogmas, doctrines and organizational structure. It is that element that shines through all else that it is better to be compassionate, loving and kind than it is to be right. That it is better to love than to correct - that it is better to be a friend and advocate for someone than it is to convert them - even in the long term eternal scheme of things.

This element is, I believe, a rare find. When an individual can transcend their own beliefs, their own sacred and honored doctrines to reach out to someone different and diverse from them with real compassion and love - I have to honor and respect that. Even and especially when there is little likelihood that the others will ever convert or even appreciate their efforts. It is to me the great principle and doctrine taught by Jesus in the parable of the Good Samaritan. It is to me - it is true religion regardless of whatever doctrine, whatever faith, religion or even G-d.

I think we are very lucky to have one such person in our midst posting here. Thank you for your posts and attitude PC - you are the example of that element of which I speak.

The Traveler

[gtg166v]

My favorite doctrine is returning to Christ's presence in this life. (The Second Comforter) The endowment teaches us how to do this. It is not merely "work for the dead," it is learning how to converse with the Lord through the veil-now. It happens.

I have no least favorite TRUE doctrine as I love all truth. There are many misinterpreted/misunderstood doctrines that bother me.

[prisonchaplain]

Traveler, thank you for your kind words. The idea that agape love transcends our sense of mission is not something I have meditated on consciously. Frankly, LDS doctrine does lend itself more easily to this approach. Your belief in multiple heavenly kingdoms, in the possibility of redemption after death, in the centrality of free agency, and it allowing others to worship as they will--all of these lend themselves to compassion trumping conversion.

Evangelicals can come to this place, but the journey is a bit less obvious. When you hear us say that it is the Spirit who convicts, compels and converts, then you have someone prepared to favor compassion. Some of our folks get focused on "Win the lost at any cost," and forget that it is the Spirit who uses us, not vice versa.

Perhaps the quality you seek can be found in any person who truly trusts God. After all, if it's his mission, his power, and his kingdom, then we can relax and operate under his divine direction. When we do so, I'd agree with you that compassion will triumph over coercive conversion tactics.

[Snow]

The latter may seem frivilous, but that is my beef. To my mind, these beverages are neutral, if not beneficial for health, and so the idea that they could keep an otherwise faithful member from the blessings of the temple is difficult to grasp.

What blessings? I assume you don't believe that God blesses you for going to the temple... or if you do believe that He does, wouldn't that imply that He set the criteria for attendance?

[Snow]

The doctrine I most appreciate from traditional Christianity is the belief that the very worst sinner can be redeemed and transformed.

The worst sinner, besides Canadians, is Satan. Is he redeemable?

[prisonchaplain]

What blessings? I assume you don't believe that God blesses you for going to the temple... or if you do believe that He does, wouldn't that imply that He set the criteria for attendance?

When I visited the LDS temple in Langley BC, the inscription on the building said something to the effect of "Welcome to the House of the Lord." I assumed that if this was the house of the Lord, that entering into it to engage in spiritual activity would surely bring blessings.