Problems with church

[prisonchaplain]

Churches sometimes have problems--aspects that outsiders criticize and aspects that older teenagers and young adults find more difficult to accept than past generations did. Examples:

1. Politics are too conservative: Both of our churches lean right. The last U.S. president was particularly difficult for some to stomach. My short answer is that how members vote, despite their insistence to the contrary, is more a mark of their politics than it is a religious distinctive. The #1 reason many in my fellowship vote conservative is that they are prolife. Members will sometimes say, "I don't know how a true Christian could vote for a proabortion politician." They can say that, but there is no political litmus test in church.

2. Church doesn't do enough for the environment. My church might be especially guilty on this because we believe Jesus will return at any time. So, some members disregard environmentalism. Nevertheless, "creation care," is something Christians of many stripes embrace. We may not be the most earth friendly, but taking care of what God made is scriptural.

3. Sexual holiness codes are hypocritical and especially hurtful to LGBT. First, they are not hypocritical. Adultery, fornication, and porn viewing are all sinful. We don't talk as much about this because very few Christians are advocating porn viewing, fornication or adultery. They know it is sinful even if it happens a lot. We love LGBT folks, just as we love those who fornicate, commit adultery, or view porn. Nevertheless, if there is sin the call is to repentance--not affirmation.

4. History: The two biggest TV evangelist scandals of the 1980s were of Assemblies of God ministers--Jimmy Swaggart and Jim Bakker. What most don't know is that both men were defrocked. We don't speak ill of them. What they do is now between them and God. As a result, some believe that they faced no accountability. They did. Rather than submit to our restoration process they gave up their ministers' credentials.

5. Overemphasis on doctrinal distinctives. Usually this has to do with our belief that speaking in tongues is the initial, physical evidence that one has been baptized in the Holy Spirit. This is our teaching, and the belief can be explained biblically. However, we're quick to add that when people convert to Christianity they immediately walk with the Holy Spirit, and many will enter the kingdom who have not and will not speak in tongues. 

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints faces many of these broad issues. Some can be answered fairly quickly. Nevertheless, there seems to be lingering struggles. What we grapple with is different, but there are some similarities. Call this a commiseration string.

[JohnsonJones]

3 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

Churches sometimes have problems--aspects that outsiders criticize and aspects that older teenagers and young adults find more difficult to accept than past generations did. Examples:

1. Politics are too conservative: Both of our churches lean right. The last U.S. president was particularly difficult for some to stomach. My short answer is that how members vote, despite their insistence to the contrary, is more a mark of their politics than it is a religious distinctive. The #1 reason many in my fellowship vote conservative is that they are prolife. Members will sometimes say, "I don't know how a true Christian could vote for a proabortion politician." They can say that, but there is no political litmus test in church.

I think this is a problem that is not actually factored in to a degree.  The point I've heard over this is that Church's regularly ignore the teachings of the New Testament.  The most recent was actually in National News (so not from Young People at all) where it was pointing out that Church's were ignoring or outright trying to teach against what the Lord taught.  The reason was that it was seen that the teachings of the Lord in the New Testament were too liberal and thus did not equate with the political ideas of the congregations.

I've heard some young folks say that this feels like Churches today are hypocritical.  They feel that the things taught in the New Testament are actually teaching something that's been termed in modern times as Religious Socialism or Religious Communism.  I've said this before as well, though I am still deeply religious and hold strongly to my Church, that the things taught and lived in the New Testament as well as the early Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints during the 19th century equated to the same ideas of Religious Socialism and Religious Communism (not to be confused with Marxist Socialism which is where a LOT of conservatives get confused about and upon).

There is something referring to a false image of our Lord but propped up by Conservatives where the Lord pushes the Supply Side rather than Charity.  This is due to the idea that many young people actually LIKE what is taught in the New Testament but see it as teaching things such as feed the poor, help those who need help, love they neighbor.  They feel that many of the people who are members of the Churches these days may pay service to those things with their lips, but in actual practice, do the exact opposite. 

This is where I think there is a dichotomy of thought in the Republican and Democrat parties.  The Republicans tend to lean more towards Moral Chastity (being more Chaste in action, no homosexual relations, etc), which is where they win over many of the Church going members.  However, they seem to be very against the idea of Charity in general as a society.  On the otherhand you have Democrats that seem to focus more on the Charity aspects, but completely abandon Chastity.  The best combination may be a combination of the two of those (Chastity AND Charity). 

Young people unfortunately (at least where I teach) seem to want to ignore the Chastity portion and try to make any and all excuses on not following it, but are all in their thoughts about the Charity parts (perhaps because over half of them are starving students).  Hence, why they probably lean more liberal in some ways and see Church going members trending towards Conservative values as not following the teachings of the Lord or the New Testament.

3 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

2. Church doesn't do enough for the environment. My church might be especially guilty on this because we believe Jesus will return at any time. So, some members disregard environmentalism. Nevertheless, "creation care," is something Christians of many stripes embrace. We may not be the most earth friendly, but taking care of what God made is scriptural.

I see this as well.  On the religious side though, we see in Genesis 2:15 that Adam was taken to the Garden to take care of it.  He basically was told to be in charge of it and take care of it.  We can apply this to the world as well.  We should be doing our best to take care of the world as best we can (as well as other people).  I think the bigger question is how we actually can do that.  There is a lot of political raff to confuse the picture at times of what is actually true and what is not.  There is a LOT of media sensationalism that fogs up the picture at times of what actually is occurring in regards to pollution and climate change.

3 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

3. Sexual holiness codes are hypocritical and especially hurtful to LGBT. First, they are not hypocritical. Adultery, fornication, and porn viewing are all sinful. We don't talk as much about this because very few Christians are advocating porn viewing, fornication or adultery. They know it is sinful even if it happens a lot. We love LGBT folks, just as we love those who fornicate, commit adultery, or view porn. Nevertheless, if there is sin the call is to repentance--not affirmation.

I think sometimes we do NOT focus enough on the more widespread sins of Fornication.  WE also don't focus as much on Adultery which is terribly rampant, but fornication is far more rampant among our young folks. 

That said, many of the young folks don't want to be reprimanded for their own infidelities in these matters, and Churches don't want to make a lot of their young folks angry.  It's safer to target the sins of Homosexuality and such because there are less of them out there. 

ALL the sins of immorality (fornication, adultery, homosexuality, etc) should be addressed, but I see a lot of avoidance in regards to fornication, though it is probably the most prevalent of all the immoralities practiced among young people today.

I'm not sure that would bring them back to church though.  They seem to already know what they are doing is against what is in the scriptures, and seem to want to make excuses on why it's okay for them to do so, or other such things.

3 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

4. History: The two biggest TV evangelist scandals of the 1980s were of Assemblies of God ministers--Jimmy Swaggart and Jim Bakker. What most don't know is that both men were defrocked. We don't speak ill of them. What they do is now between them and God. As a result, some believe that they faced no accountability. They did. Rather than submit to our restoration process they gave up their ministers' credentials.

5. Overemphasis on doctrinal distinctives. Usually this has to do with our belief that speaking in tongues is the initial, physical evidence that one has been baptized in the Holy Spirit. This is our teaching, and the belief can be explained biblically. However, we're quick to add that when people convert to Christianity they immediately walk with the Holy Spirit, and many will enter the kingdom who have not and will not speak in tongues. 

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints faces many of these broad issues. Some can be answered fairly quickly. Nevertheless, there seems to be lingering struggles. What we grapple with is different, but there are some similarities. Call this a commiseration string.

Yes, there are similarities, though overall I think we, as a Church are doing better to a small degree on the immorality, or WERE prior to 2015.  More of our young people who were ACTIVE (in otherwords, were active in going to church and it's activities) were obeying the law of chastity (compared to a national average of less than 5% of US citizens were following the law of chastity, 95% were having pre-marital relations of that sort).  That was when we actively taught about obeying the law of chastity and certain rules about not seeing certain films with a hard top set at R-rated movies and a hard bottom of the age 16 for dating (we have since gotten rid of those so, not sure how it will go in the future). 

We know this was going to occur though.  It says in the Bible about the last days and how wickedness will only increase.  It will probably only get worse as time goes on, up until the coming of the Lord to rule the earth comes. 

[Vort]

4 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

I've heard some young folks say that this feels like Churches today are hypocritical.

As an experiment, ask the aforementioned young folks what they think is hypocritical about churches. Really dig for their fundamental answer (in a polite way, of course). I guarantee that you will quickly find that the large majority believe religious people and organizations are hypocritical simply because that is what they have been told all of their lives.

Ask for examples, and you won't get many. Perhaps the most popular will be "homophobia" among religious people; but of course, "homophobia" itself is a lie, a term made up not to explain anything but to smear people who hold to certain beliefs and moral standards. Explain that considering homosexuality to be an immoral act is no more intrinsically evil than considering demonstrations against abortion to be an immoral act. If you wade through the levels of argument to reach the core idea of living by a moral standard, they will simply drop the topic rather than grapple with their own inconsistency and hypocrisy. Prepare to be called lots of names, because that's their idea of solid argumentation against evil.

I'm painting with a broad brush, and you will certainly find exceptions, but what I have described is what I have found to be the rule. Today's young adults are no smarter than their parents, and have the added handicap of having been indoctrinated with a much worse, more vile background ideology.

[Jamie123]

9 hours ago, Vort said:

Today's young adults are no smarter than their parents, and have the added handicap of having been indoctrinated with a much worse, more vile background ideology.

Social conventions have changed.

There was a time when, if you took a young lady out, you were expected to open the car door for her.

Nowadays you're expected to have sex with her on the second date.

At least that's the impression I get from the TV shows I've watched over the last 10 or 20 years. Is it true? Or is it just a myth of the media?

P.S. and the church isn't "The Church" anymore. It's that building with the funny windows which you have nothing to do with except when you want to get married or have your baby baptised - unless of course you're one of those religious loonies who goes there every week, like me, or like Sheldon's mum, and even she (since she's a "goody" in the show) needs to get cold-shouldered out of the place by the "the Christian hypocrytes" ("the baddies") coz her son got a girl pregnant and isn't going to marry her.

Edited October 30, 2023 by Jamie123

[JohnsonJones]

11 hours ago, Vort said:

As an experiment, ask the aforementioned young folks what they think is hypocritical about churches. Really dig for their fundamental answer (in a polite way, of course). I guarantee that you will quickly find that the large majority believe religious people and organizations are hypocritical simply because that is what they have been told all of their lives.

Ask for examples, and you won't get many. Perhaps the most popular will be "homophobia" among religious people; but of course, "homophobia" itself is a lie, a term made up not to explain anything but to smear people who hold to certain beliefs and moral standards. Explain that considering homosexuality to be an immoral act is no more intrinsically evil than considering demonstrations against abortion to be an immoral act. If you wade through the levels of argument to reach the core idea of living by a moral standard, they will simply drop the topic rather than grapple with their own inconsistency and hypocrisy. Prepare to be called lots of names, because that's their idea of solid argumentation against evil.

I'm painting with a broad brush, and you will certainly find exceptions, but what I have described is what I have found to be the rule. Today's young adults are no smarter than their parents, and have the added handicap of having been indoctrinated with a much worse, more vile background ideology.

 

Actually, it's normally not homophobia, but charity from the ones I've discussed it with.  One of the more recent talking points we had prior to class (when some of these discussions go) was about states that want to stop giving out free lunches (and/or breakfasts) to children.  It seemed that many of them felt that those states with higher Conservative/Christian groups that were Republicans were the ones who didn't want to have children fed at school for free, or were begrudging funds to feed children under the auspices that some who had wealthier families could get fed along with those in need.

Many had a problem with the thought that those in these states felt the solution then was to just not feed the kids in general.  Thus, those who were above the guidelines for free lunch, but poorer in general, should have children that didn't get fed and such. 

It seems it's normally along the lines of Jesus taught charity and that the poor were more humble than the Rich, but today's society in the US seems to be adverse to charity and praise the rich and put them on a footstool, with many Christians being the epitomy of this.

Homophobia can be in there (normally under the guise of, one should love their neighbor as theyself), but the main thrust normally seems to center on Charity and concern and love for those less able than you...normally in the financial sense (as I said, my own thoughts at times on this...meaning not theirs...is this is because over half of them are probably also struggling financially.  They are starving college students probably...and when you are struggling with money that probably occupies a lot of your thought process). 

[prisonchaplain]

I still remember when the Reagan administration (which I still love) claimed that ketchup was a vegetable. At the time I fancied myself a strong conservative and tried to defend providing minimal school lunches. As I've aged I've moderated. Sadly, for some kids their best meals are the ones schools provide. They should be filling and yummy. I suspect that a strong school lunch program would do more to prevent crime and violence than a boatload of gun restrictions. Oh...and I suspect Jesus would favor generous school lunches. 😉

[askandanswer]

12 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

Oh...and I suspect Jesus would favor generous school lunches. 😉

When Christ had people staying over for dinner, the only items on the menu were bread and fish  

[Just_A_Guy]

18 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

When Christ had people staying over for dinner, the only items on the menu were bread and fish  

Is there any record in scripture of Christ eating a vegetable?

[prisonchaplain]

28 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

When Christ had people staying over for dinner, the only items on the menu were bread and fish  

Still...the context of the story is that the 12 baskets of leftovers was a miracle not a commentary on the over-simplicity of the meal. 😉

[laronius]

11 hours ago, askandanswer said:

When Christ had people staying over for dinner, the only items on the menu were bread and fish  

You forget the amazing wine. 

[prisonchaplain]

1 hour ago, laronius said:

You forget the amazing wine. 

Funny...different story, but funny. Of course, that miracle wine was literally glorified grape juice. Unfertilized wine had about a 4% alcohol content after typical dilution--about 1/3rd of today's variety. 😉 

Edited October 31, 2023 by prisonchaplain

[Traveler]

Before I get into the heart of my intent of this post – I first want to thank and recognize those that are not LDS for their contributions.  Other perspectives are critical to my understanding of things – especially things taking place in various societies during these “Last-days”.  Though there are critical differences in understanding of LDS and those not of our theology – there is great need for inspired individuals that are influenced directly by that member of the G-dhead (element of the Trinity if you will) that is recognized as the Holy Ghost or Holy Spirit.   Thank you for being here and sharing your insights.

The name of our LDS church is, “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”  This title designates two parts of both ownership and participation in the Church.   The official and legal ownership and participation the Church is jointly held by Jesus Christ and his covenant Saints.  The covenant Saints are call Latter-day Saints to distinguish the covenant Church or “Kingdom” of G-d on earth for the last time – according to the plan of G-d.  At the core of this organization is the exact same core organization that Jesus organized and established when he walked and taught while he lived among mankind.  That is 12 Apostles and a presidency of 3 (a presidency patterned after the presidency of Heaven) to teach and prepare a priesthood class to fulfill the organization which is directed to include every individual covenant family unit of the Church organization.

The cycle of covenant families of Saints throughout history has (as testified to and prophesied by Isaiah) been a constant struggle between apostasy and restoration of the laws, ordinances and covenants – which initially were first established with Adam and Eve when they were driven out from Eden.  Scriptures were recorded to testify and prophesy of the struggles of apostasy and restoration throughout the covenant generations established since Adam and Eve to this time, the last days.

This is the last time that the Church of Jesus Christ will be established among mortal mankind.  It is the last refuge for the Saints of G-d to establish a covenant with G-d and raise up and ensign unto the nations of the world.  The most critical covenant of G-d is called the New and Everlasting Covenant.  This covenant seals in heaven the covenant of marriage that the Saints of G-d have been given in mortality here on earth.  To prepare the Saints of G-d for this New and Everlasting Covenant, G-d has given preparatory covenants of Chastity, Love and care of others, tithes and offerings, Word of Wisdom and others.

Jesus prophesied that in the last days that the virtuous Saints of G-d that were waiting upon him would be divided (the parable of ten virgins) and that some (half) would not have prepared themselves by covenant (oil for lamps) – indicating that even among the Saints of G-d that there would be a great challenge of covenant.

Here is a link to the Proclamation given by G-d through his presidency of 3 and his Apostles in 1995 (almost 30 years ago):

https://site.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/the-family-a-proclamation-to-the-world/the-family-a-proclamation-to-the-world?lang=eng

 

The Traveler

[NeuroTypical]

Fun list PC!

On 10/29/2023 at 3:55 PM, prisonchaplain said:

1. Politics are too conservative

Lol we don't have that problem.  If I remember correctly, in the 1992 presidential race, Bill Clinton actually came in third in half the counties in Utah, behind both Bush and Perot. That said, the two liberals in my ward are universally beloved and protected by all of us.  Someone messes with one of them, you mess with all of us.  

I even like @LDSGator, even though he worships Disney and probably drives a Prius.

 

Quote

2. Church doesn't do enough for the environment.

 

We go with the concept of stewardship.  We own the earth, and we'll answer (both individually and collectively) for how we managed it.  So you can find plenty of environmentally energetic LDS folks.

 

Quote

3. Sexual holiness codes are hypocritical and especially hurtful to LGBT.

 

Yeah, as Gen Alpha becomes adults, what with their 6th grade education and their full indoctrination into woke progressivism, things'll get interesting.   For me and my house, our churches say "visitors welcome", but we're not ready to bend to whatever concepts of morality and gender that visitors may bring with them, just because we're friendly and welcoming. 

 

[LDSGator]

14 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

probably drives a Prius.

 

Lol. I actually DO drive a Prius and I absolutely love it. 

[NeuroTypical]

19 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

I actually DO drive a Prius and I absolutely love it. 

 

(Just kidding, of course.  Priii stopped being a liberal pansy only thing like 8 years ago.)

[Vort]

21 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

Lol. I actually DO drive a Prius and I absolutely love it. 

@mirkwood's going to have a lot of fun with that.

[LDSGator]

1 minute ago, Vort said:

@mirkwood's going to have a lot of fun with that.

I have a lot of fun with this being his favorite song, so it balances out. 
 

 

[LDSGator]

3 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Priii stopped being a liberal pansy only thing like 8 years ago

They can call me whatever they want. I save so much on gasoline that I’ll cry all the way to the bank. 😉 

[Vort]

A Prius is a hybrid, right? I could use that right about now. In the People's Democratic Republic of Washington, we're paying just under $5 per gallon for the tank filler.

[Carborendum]

13 minutes ago, Vort said:

A Prius is a hybrid, right? I could use that right about now. In the People's Democratic Republic of Washington, we're paying just under $5 per gallon for the tank filler.

I told you that you could move to Houston where it is currently around $2.75/gal.  But...

I'll just be content to rub that in your nose again. 

[LDSGator]

19 minutes ago, Vort said:

A Prius is a hybrid, right?

Mine is-   but I think they also have a fully electric version too. 

[Ironhold]

4 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

Mine is-   but I think they also have a fully electric version too. 

The problem with electric vehicles is that once you get outside of the densely-packed major metropolitan areas it's hard to find publicly-accessible charging stations. 

Go out far enough, and the only way an EV is traveling from A to B is on the back of a truck. 

[Carborendum]

16 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Is there any record in scripture of Christ eating a vegetable?

This reminds me of the joke that Philip was trying to tell Matthew (The Chosen).

Quote

I have a vegetable joke.  But it's a bit corny.

Two things about this:

• Even though we eat corn as a vegetable, it is botanically a grain or a fruit (depending on what part you're talking about).
• They didn't have the corn we're used to (maize) in the Old World.  "Corn" was just a generic word for grain that could be ground into flour.  But a vegetable?

Meh.  It's a TV show.

[Carborendum]

7 minutes ago, Ironhold said:

The problem with electric vehicles is that once you get outside of the densely-packed major metropolitan areas it's hard to find publicly-accessible charging stations. 

Go out far enough, and the only way an EV is traveling from A to B is on the back of a truck. 

Yes.  But if you use it primarily for in-town traveling (which is 90% of all driving) then that will have a great effect on air quality within the city.

The big problem I have with it is that the price of the hybrid engine is higher than a conventional engine.  And batteries cost a LOT.  When you take that all into account, you're not really saving any money.  By the time you make up the difference in fuel savings, you have to replace the batteries.  The rest of what's under the hood has it's own problems, but it is about the same as a conventional setup.  It just costs a lot more up front.

The death blow, though, is that now auto insurance is going up across the board because of EVs and hybrids.  If they ever get into an accident, then the repair costs are much higher, not only for repairing the batteries, but because of their weight and framework -- accidents are usually more serious.  So, whether you hit an EV or get hit by an EV, all accidents are more costly.

Edited October 31, 2023 by Carborendum

[LDSGator]

2 minutes ago, Ironhold said:

The problem with electric vehicles is that once you get outside of the densely-packed major metropolitan areas it's hard to find publicly-accessible charging stations. 

I totally agree with you. 
 

 

2 minutes ago, Ironhold said:

Go out far enough, and the only way an EV is traveling from A to B is on the back of a truck. 

It IS possible to drive across the country in a totally electric car (I’m not saying it’s a good idea. It’s not) but it requires a great deal more planning.