Please can I ask your advice on finding a church to attend with my girlfriend.


AbramM
 Share

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

Honestly, in reading the back and forth, it felt like @AbramM was being cajoled into a conversation he repeatedly said he did not want to have. He has his faith, is committed, and demonstrates a pretty solid understanding. He has not had experience with LDS folk, did not want to engage in an interfaith debate at a predominantly LDS public platform, and yet did attempt to engage in your questions. His goal is to find a woman he can serve the LORD with, and to avoid being "unequally yoked," with one who does not share the same faith. I doubt any here would contend that LDS and Protestants believe the same things, and that the differences are mostly semantics. So, why call a 20-year old judgmental etc.? He's exercising spiritually healthy caution about one of the most important decisions he will ever make. I respect him greatly.

Again, point taken, but I do think it's worth keeping in mind that we're talking about a person who, in essence, has walked into a Latter-day Saint forum and, after a few doctrinal questions were tossed back and forth,  said "I won't marry my girlfriend unless she converts out of your religion," knowing she would be willing to do so, to followers of a belief system that places a VERY high value on its particular denomination.  That is an ultimatum, which tastes like manipulation.

Yeah, people are gonna react.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay...but @AbramM also indicated he had no idea LDS was anything other than another Protestant denomination, because the girl did not let on, and he's only 20. In his discussion here he has come to realize that the differences are vast, and yeah, they can't marry so long as they do not share common faith. He also gave no indication he would attempt to convert her out of her LDS beliefs. Instead, he said she was evasive about her faith, and acted willing to be in a traditional Christian church. So, granted, I've got very little skin in this game (the girl's not Assemblies of God, after all), but  it could be possible to look at his declarations and say, "Oh good. He'll respect her faith and walk away, if she's truly committed to being LDS." No?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

The minute a person defines "being" and "person" to be two different things, or talks about essense/substance, they are doctrinally citing the Creeds.  

Honestly, most do so without realizing it. The vast majority of Evangelical/Baptist/non-denominational churches are Bible-only. Yet, when describing the Trinity they will use language that is in the creeds. You might see the one-God in Deut 6:4 and think that the oneness could be of purpose. Non-LDS look at it, without thinking of the creeds, and think the oneness must be more than that--must be on some deeper level. The creed defines that by giving us the word "essence/essential."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

Okay...but @AbramM also indicated he had no idea LDS was anything other than another Protestant denomination, because the girl did not let on, and he's only 20. In his discussion here he has come to realize that the differences are vast, and yeah, they can't marry so long as they do not share common faith. He also gave no indication he would attempt to convert her out of her LDS beliefs. Instead, he said she was evasive about her faith, and acted willing to be in a traditional Christian church. So, granted, I've got very little skin in this game (the girl's not Assemblies of God, after all), but  it could be possible to look at his declarations and say, "Oh good. He'll respect her faith and walk away, if she's truly committed to being LDS." No?

We don't know what she said/did/beliefs.  We only know for sure that they have really poor communication along those lines.

A respectful talk and walk away (if things are dealbreakers) is... frankly I don't see anyone doing anything but applauding that.

But it is needed to be careful to avoid a situation where it's "well, if you convert, then we can get married".  Such puts a lot of pressure on a person and can easily become manipulative (even if the person say it totally does not mean for it to be).  

Note: I would say the EXACT same things on here, if it was the same situation with affiliations reversed.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

Okay...but @AbramM also indicated he had no idea LDS was anything other than another Protestant denomination, because the girl did not let on, and he's only 20. In his discussion here he has come to realize that the differences are vast, and yeah, they can't marry so long as they do not share common faith. He also gave no indication he would attempt to convert her out of her LDS beliefs. Instead, he said she was evasive about her faith, and acted willing to be in a traditional Christian church. So, granted, I've got very little skin in this game (the girl's not Assemblies of God, after all), but  it could be possible to look at his declarations and say, "Oh good. He'll respect her faith and walk away, if she's truly committed to being LDS." No?

Maybe, and I hope that's how it is.  My concern is that if she's really as willing to convert as he suggested, she may very well do so anyway.  Maybe she's not that committed, or maybe she's prioritizing the prospect of marriage over her religion.  Either way, we have folks right here who have demonstrated that there's a middle ground, where both parties can respect each other's beliefs and still be a couple.  If that's still a deal breaker for him, well ok fair enough, and maybe she gets the lion's share of the blame for not having been more open sooner.

But I can't help but wonder... Our friend here seems very, very specific on what his expectations are in terms of a relationship.  Is it possible that she didn't feel secure telling him all the details?  Is it possible that she knows him well enough to know that she'd lose  him if he knew the details of LDS doctrine?  Because the situation now seems to be at a head.  Either she breaks from the LDS church, or she breaks from him.  Those are the options he's given her.  In either case, she's going to lose something precious to her.

That doens't sit well with some of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

25 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

Honestly, most do so without realizing it. The vast majority of Evangelical/Baptist/non-denominational churches are Bible-only. Yet, when describing the Trinity they will use language that is in the creeds. You might see the one-God in Deut 6:4 and think that the oneness could be of purpose. Non-LDS look at it, without thinking of the creeds, and think the oneness must be more than that--must be on some deeper level. The creed defines that by giving us the word "essence/essential."

That is true.  The fact that a Protestant is defining God through a specifically Creedal lens is SUPER important.  The fact that many Protestants nowadays do so without even realizing it... (*Jane search for a better way to say this and mostly fails*)... if faith is important to you, you should take the time to do in-depth study and development, let alone the very basics of the faith (like the Creeds for Protestants).  I feel like something that important should be thoroughly taught to every Protestant kid by elementary school graduation.  But again, I how I feel about it doesn't remotely matter.

Edited by Jane_Doe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, unixknight said:

Maybe, and I hope that's how it is.  My concern is that if she's really as willing to convert as he suggested, she may very well do so anyway.  Maybe she's not that committed, or maybe she's prioritizing the prospect of marriage over her religion.  Either way, we have folks right here who have demonstrated that there's a middle ground, where both parties can respect each other's beliefs and still be a couple.  If that's still a deal breaker for him, well ok fair enough, and maybe she gets the lion's share of the blame for not having been more open sooner.

But I can't help but wonder... Our friend here seems very, very specific on what his expectations are in terms of a relationship.  Is it possible that she didn't feel secure telling him all the details?  Is it possible that she knows him well enough to know that she'd lose  him if he knew the details of LDS doctrine?  Because the situation now seems to be at a head.  Either she breaks from the LDS church, or she breaks from him.  Those are the options he's given her.  In either case, she's going to lose something precious to her.

That doens't sit well with some of us.

This may be so; but at least for me, in spite of my natural inclination to stick up for my co-religionist, I’ve tried to take the OP’s statements at face value.  My takeaway from all that is that she maybe doesn’t take her religion 100% seriously, but blanches at the prospect of outright breaking from it—but that she also isn’t being completely forthright with the OP about her motivations and intentions.  I don’t see manipulation coming from the OP; I see a young man who knows what he wants and wants to know if this young lady meets his criteria; and he’s frustrated at the fact that he can’t know that because she can’t or won’t give him a straight answer.  

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Just_A_Guy said:

This may be so; but at least for me, in spite of my natural inclination to stick up for my co-religionist, I’ve tried to take the OP’s statements at face value.  My takeaway from all that is that she maybe doesn’t take her religion 100% seriously, but blanches at the prospect of outright breaking from it—but that she also isn’t being completely forthright with the OP about her motivations and intentions.  I don’t see manipulation coming from the OP; I see a young man who knows what he wants and wants to know if this young lady meets his criteria; and he’s frustrated at the fact that he can’t know that because she can’t or won’t give him a straight answer.  

Fair enough, but it's hard for me to imagine a hard break over that.

My first wife was LDS and I was Catholic*.  I had -zero- expectations that she should convert for my sake, because even though we were of different religions, I would not have come between her and her sincere belief and worship of God.  Nu-uh.  Not a chance... because I loved her for who she was.  Her religion is what made that woman who she was and it felt like pressuring her (either deliberately or not) to change for my sake just felt incredibly selfish. 

That said, I get why someone, especially LDS, might want to stay within their denomination so I don't mean to sound like I'd expect everybody to handle it the way I did, but at the same time it just seems weird to me that the third option-coexistence-doesn't even seem to be on the table. 

But yea, I do agree that these folks need to work on their communication in a big way.  That really ought to be the takeaway from this discussion.

(*for the curious, these days I'm the LDS and she's gone inactive/borderline hostile to the Church.  I guess wine coolers and the new husbands were preferable.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

Actually @Maureen did that for him. There are many verses that declare the oneness of God. There are also verses that identify the Father as God, the Son as God, and the Holy Spirit as God. So 3 are 1. It's the HOW that the Bible does not explain.

Indeed it is the "HOW"...  It is the "HOW" that is the difference between Protestant Trinity and the LDS Godhead..  It is the HOW that @AbramM has been repeatably asked to provide scriptural references for.. which he can't.. And we all know he can't.

Yet that difference is what he cites as a major stumbling block.   He is free to believe what he wants to believe but he does not have the scriptural proof for his belief to back up the position he is taking.  All he has is because that is what he wants. 

He is going up against someone that (presumably) believes in modern revelation due to a spiritual witness from God himself, and therefore has every reason believe God has clarified the "HOW" with modern revelation.

He is comparing what he wants ... to what (presumably) his Girlfriend feels God has revealed to to her.  Yet he thinks if he wins that contest he isn't damaging her relationship with God.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jane_Doe said:

But it is needed to be careful to avoid a situation where it's "well, if you convert, then we can get married".  Such puts a lot of pressure on a person and can easily become manipulative (even if the person say it totally does not mean for it to be).  

@AbramM actually said he would move slow, because he does not want her converting for his sake. If she does so, he wants to take the time to see if it is something between her and Jesus, and not just her attempt to appease him. Like I said before, I really see that he is handling this with a good measure of wisdom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, prisonchaplain said:

@AbramM actually said he would move slow, because he does not want her converting for his sake. If she does so, he wants to take the time to see if it is something between her and Jesus, and not just her attempt to appease him. Like I said before, I really see that he is handling this with a good measure of wisdom.

I totally agree that taking it slow and careful (as Abram( is a GREAT thing.  It is just something to be cautious of.  I've seen way too many folks convert for the boy/girlfriend (even if they claim otherwise) and seen it backfire a decade later.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

Why this insistence?

I would assume it is because many individuals and denominations claim that the lack of belief in the doctrine of the Trinity is equivalent to not being Christian, and therefore not being eligible to inherit salvation in the Kingdom of Heaven.  (I have personally had this said directly to my face on more than one occasion)  The recognition and acknowledgment that the 'how' in the doctrine of the Trinity cannot be proven by an appeal to the Bible is to also validate the acceptability of an alternative interpretation.  To the Christian community at large, accepting both ends of this reality is heretical, therefore, to a Latter-Day Saint, the onus is on one who holds such a position to validate said position by providing proof/evidence of the 'how'.  I believe these concepts are at the root of the insistence on display.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

Indeed it is the "HOW"...  It is the "HOW" that is the difference between Protestant Trinity and the LDS Godhead..  It is the HOW that @AbramM has been repeatably asked to provide scriptural references for.. which he can't.. And we all know he can't.

Yet that difference is what he cites as a major stumbling block.   He is free to believe what he wants to believe but he does not have the scriptural proof for his belief to back up the position he is taking.  All he has is because that is what he wants. 

He is going up against someone that (presumably) believes in modern revelation due to a spiritual witness from God himself, and therefore has every reason believe God has clarified the "HOW" with modern revelation.

He is comparing what he wants ... to what (presumably) his Girlfriend feels God has revealed to to her.  Yet he thinks if he wins that contest he isn't damaging her relationship with God.

I have no idea how you have come to this conclusion with the information that @AbramM has provided in regards to his beliefs and his situation.

He has stated he believes in the Trinity, he has faith in Christ and in Christ's power to save. He seems to have dedicated his life to God. He is looking for someone with the same beliefs as him to spend the rest of his life with. He thought he found her and was surprised to find out that who he thought she was and what she believes may not be so. He has a dilemma, because this girl does not appear to want to share her beliefs with him. She agrees to attend church services with him and then doesn't keep her word. He can't read her mind, so all he can do is have patience that she will eventually open up to him. If it turns out they do share the same beliefs then they can move forward in their relationship. If they do not share the same beliefs, then @AbramM has said he will end the relationship.

M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Maureen said:

I have no idea how you have come to this conclusion with the information that @AbramM has provided in regards to his beliefs and his situation.

He has stated he believes in the Trinity, he has faith in Christ and in Christ's power to save. He seems to have dedicated his life to God. He is looking for someone with the same beliefs as him to spend the rest of his life with. He thought he found her and was surprised to find out that who he thought she was and what she believes may not be so. He has a dilemma, because this girl does not appear to want to share her beliefs with him. She agrees to attend church services with him and then doesn't keep her word. He can't read her mind, so all he can do is have patience that she will eventually open up to him. If it turns out they do share the same beliefs then they can move forward in their relationship. If they do not share the same beliefs, then @AbramM has said he will end the relationship.

M.

Maureen, I get where you and @estradling75 are both coming from.

Obviously Abram is free to believe whatever he does & be 300% dedicated to it.  I get his frustration in not understanding everything and having poor communication with his girlfriend.  Totally get that.  I also get  @estradling75 's frustration here to.  And the girl's beliefs/motivations here are just a giant question mark for us.      

So year, a lot of frustration all around.  There needs to be an increase in respect going BOTH ways (which we humans have a tendency to fail at).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mores
12 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

Most of the contradiction you sense is from the idea that God is speaking to Himself--a much bigger problem under modalism than in the Trinity (which recognizes 3 distinct persons, but insists they are of one essence).

12 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

The Bible does not always explain the HOW. How did God actually carry out his creation of the world? That is not explained very much at all. How are the 3 also 1. The Bible says it is so, without really going into the details of the nature of God. We believe many truths without knowing the details. Why this insistence?

11 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

Honestly, most do so without realizing it. The vast majority of Evangelical/Baptist/non-denominational churches are Bible-only. Yet, when describing the Trinity they will use language that is in the creeds. You might see the one-God in Deut 6:4 and think that the oneness could be of purpose. Non-LDS look at it, without thinking of the creeds, and think the oneness must be more than that--must be on some deeper level. The creed defines that by giving us the word "essence/essential."

@prisonchaplain,

I've had many conversations with friends of other faiths that have actually proven productive.  Times have changed since I was a kid.  I've found that both sides have become more understanding of the other side. 

Even so, a difficulty that I continue to have in such conversations is: it seemed that every time I got an understanding of what the Trinity was, I was told yes.  Then I was told no.  The difficulty seemed to arise from the question of what the word "essence" actually means.  Do you have any idea what it means?  The fact that we simply cannot understand it is why we insist on asking.

As far as oneness being deeper than "one in purpose" is certainly true.  I tend to think that it is simply too easy for Latter-day Saints to make this statements and bish-bam-boom, we're done explaining it.  No, we do need to give it more meaning than we commonly do.

One in purpose seems like a business arrangement, a team, a corporation, etc.  But then I consider how I feel about my wife and my children.  Children will never understand what that is like until they get married and have kids themselves.  I think of them as an extension of myself just as if they were an arm or a leg... or even a heart.

In business, we join forces with others to do things which will be mutually beneficial.  They get something out of it.  I get something out of it.  There is a bargain.  We split profits, etc.  Sounds very cooperative.

But consider the family.  When we're truly one with our spouse or our children, there is no question about "splitting profits" or anything similar.  My digestive system doesn't make a deal with the heart to pump blood properly so that the digestion can occur.  The heart doesn't make a plea to the kidneys to clean the blood, etc.  They all do their job and work together because they are all completely integrated into the whole.  Perhaps that is why the "body of Christ" is such an apt metaphor.

This is what I think of when I consider oneness.  The Savior commanded us to be one.  And if we are not one, we are not His.  I believe this is the same oneness where He and the Father are One.

WHY DO WE INSIST?

Even though children will not fully understand what oneness means until they are married and have kids, they get hints of it when they actively behave this way as part of a family.  They see it on team sports.  They see it in service projects.  They see it when they serve others on their own.  There are intimations of it.  They get a taste of what it is like.  It is just HYPED up to Captain America super-steroid level when they get married.  This is something that can be understood and experienced -- in part.

When we can't really explain what "essence" or "consubstantial" actually means, then we have a problem.  There doesn't appear to be ANYTHING that we can relate to here.  There is nothing that we can say "we kinda get a feel for it, but it will be much stronger as we progress throughout eternity."  Instead we're simply told we can't understand it.  And we won't understand it.

At this point, we depend on faith.  And that's perfectly fine.  Faith is a wonderful thing.  We should have more of it.  But the question is about our relationship to God.

Can we relate to a bactierium?  Can a bacterium relate to us?  Can we even imagine relating to any one-celled creature?  No.  We tend not to care for something until it is much higher up on the evolutionary scale.  We tend to care once it gets to something complex enough to be a pet at least.  But I'd dare say that we tend to care more about pets like birds, fish, and various mammals than we would to some sort of bug terrarium.

If God is so far removed from us that we cannot even relate to Him or He to us, what on earth would be the bond of love that we'd have?  There has to be some kind of common ground, some relatable ground for us to even have a relationship with Him.  The Trinity becomes so incomprehensible that we have no hope of actually having a relationship with Him.  And while I know many of my friends have a sincere faith in that incomprehensible being (and I'm sure you to do) which I do not criticize, I cannot start worshiping such a being that has no way of relating to me nor I to Him.  How could we?  What would our worship even mean to such a being?

That is why we want to understand the very plain and basic nature of God.  If that first principle of religion cannot be explained, then what on earth are we worshiping?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, unixknight said:

That is an ultimatum, which tastes like manipulation.

Yeah, people are gonna react.

I never manipulated her, I didn't get mad at her or break up with her when she said she didn't like the Baptist church I attend and it was me who offered to go to her church to see if I liked it. I didn't even get mad at her when she didn't show up to all the churches we were meant to try. 

I didn't understand she had a different faith when I asked her to marry me, but I told her then that we have to find a church we both like before we get married. I'm not going back on that but I'm not trying to manipulate her. She can make any choice she wants and if she chooses to come to church with me then I will wait a year to marry her anyway so she can always change her mind. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, unixknight said:

but at the same time it just seems weird to me that the third option-coexistence-doesn't even seem to be on the table. 

It's not what the Lord wants for me or any of his children. The Lord wants a husband and wife to walk together not attend different churches and disagree on fundamental doctrine and confuse their kids so much. It's not for me. 

My future family will have one faith and be united in that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, AbramM said:

I never manipulated her...

I didn't accuse you of manipulating her.  I said the ultimatum 'tasted' that way

6 minutes ago, AbramM said:

It's not what the Lord wants for me or any of his children. The Lord wants a husband and wife to walk together not attend different churches and disagree on fundamental doctrine and confuse their kids so much. It's not for me. 

My future family will have one faith and be united in that. 

Ok.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, AbramM said:

However, if you make it to heaven and find out the trinity is true then I doubt you will care that you were wrong about the trinity. 

I've appreciated and held that notion for a long time.  Jesus said repent and be baptized and be saved.   He didn't say "repent and be baptized, and you have to believe certain things about my nature to be saved".

It goes both ways, right?  If you get to heaven and find out it's not a trinity, it's a Godhood, you won't get all mad and say "never mind, send me below" or something, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, estradling75 said:

Yet he thinks if he wins that contest he isn't damaging her relationship with God.

It's not a contest. It's between her and the Lord what she believes. If she isn't even willing to try to learn and pray about protestant beliefs then obviously the relationship is over.

If she is then we can work through it together and see if the Lord will change her heart and mind. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

I've appreciated and held that notion for a long time.  Jesus said repent and be baptized and be saved.   He didn't say "repent and be baptized, and you have to believe certain things about my nature to be saved".

It goes both ways, right?  If you get to heaven and find out it's not a trinity, it's a Godhood, you won't get all mad and say "never mind, send me below" or something, right?

Yeah I won't care if all my theology is wrong when I get to heaven 😂

I know that I am saved and that's the main thing.  I think you should seek assurance that you are saved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

I've appreciated and held that notion for a long time.  Jesus said repent and be baptized and be saved.   He didn't say "repent and be baptized, and you have to believe certain things about my nature to be saved".

It goes both ways, right?  If you get to heaven and find out it's not a trinity, it's a Godhood, you won't get all mad and say "never mind, send me below" or something, right?

Yeah I won't care if all my theology is wrong when I get to heaven 😂

I know that I am saved and that's the main thing.  I think you should seek assurance that you are saved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, AbramM said:

It's not a contest. It's between her and the Lord what she believes. If she isn't even willing to try to learn and pray about protestant beliefs then obviously the relationship is over.

If she is then we can work through it together and see if the Lord will change her heart and mind. 

Right... But you are not even willing to try and learn and pray about the LDS beliefs either...

You are putting all the blame on her for being unwilling to change for you...  But you are just as unwilling to change... The blame is just as much on you.

You are entitled want what you want in a marriage partner, you are the one putting limits and restrictions and requirements.  (She is also totally entitled to her own but we have only guesses at what they might be)  And you are the one showing an unwillingness to change, learn or pray. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AbramM said:

It's not what the Lord wants for me or any of his children. The Lord wants a husband and wife to walk together not attend different churches and disagree on fundamental doctrine and confuse their kids so much. It's not for me. 

My future family will have one faith and be united in that. 

While I understand that a few here have made interfaith marriages that work, @AbramM is 20, and is expressing the same views I was taught 1,000 years ago--that the "one-flesh" union between husband and wife should be of like, precious faith. "Unequally yoked" was huge in our youth group teachings. "Why date a non-Christian, since you can't marry her?" We heard that a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share