New Pew research shows LDS retention rate worsening for those raised LDS

[MG 2.0]

There you go. That wasn’t so hard now, was it? I’d go more than 50/50. Each person, of course, will have their own knobs to turn and fine tune to reach “a guess”. We don’t necessarily have to agree on the odds in regard to the literal/objective resurrection of Jesus.

Believing gets believers on the same page. And that’s a good place to start, wouldn’t you agree?

Regards,
MG

I don’t appreciate the “that wasn’t so hard” remark. I’m perfectly capable of explaining what I believe without being guided toward some predetermined conclusion.

As for getting believers on the same page, I’m not sure we are. We may both agree that Jesus was resurrected, but I suspect we have rather different understandings of what that resurrection means.

If you have a point you’re trying to make, I’d prefer you just make it. This is part of the reason I don’t trust you.

OK. That could have been perceived as a bit condescending. I apologize.

What do you understand the resurrection of Jesus to mean?

I’m sure that there will always be an element of distrust between us going both ways. I think we can work through that…even if it’s baby steps along the way. Honestly, you have some interesting insights. It is apparent you take your take on the Christian faith seriously or I don’t think you would be here.

In your earlier life you went door to door sharing your faith? That’s actually quite commendable. Something we have in common. I did so in Washington D.C. Mission of all places.

If I offend you in any way again please call me out. I will do likewise.

On the other hand we might also, from time to time, cut each other some slack. I’m human as I am fairly confident you are also. We’re both big boys and have been around the block a few times.

At times that can be difficult. They should be scrutinized. Over time I’ve come down on the grace side. And that can look different from time to time and situation to situation. When I play the odds I am prone to give them the benefit of a doubt, over all, but not always in specificity. Play by play action as we’d say in the sports world.

Regards,
MG

Forgiving someone's mistakes is different from continuing to accept their claims of authority to speak in God's name.

I don’t see these two things as being mutually exclusive.

You can extend grace to someone who deceived you without continuing to believe what they told you. Forgiveness is one thing. Continued trust after being deceived is another.

Yes, you could choose to do that. I mentioned grace earlier. This is where it comes into play. Jesus is the prime example of One who looks at our mistakes and misunderstandings with a great deal of grace…and if we repent, forgiveness. He’s the role model I would try to follow…however imperfectly.

If someone fooled me into believing he was a prophet, why would I continue giving him the benefit of the doubt about his prophetic claims?

I suppose it comes down to whether or not you believe his/their intent is to simply fool you. I see things differently in this respect.

So since we’re playing the odds, where do you put the odds that Joseph sincerely believed his claims from the odds that those claims were actually true? I think Vogel said something like Joseph actually believed his claims. I put it at zero.

I’d put the odds in favor of Joseph sincerely believing his claims and that they were also true. Earlier I mentioned “specificity” and how that comes into play. It does in response to your concern.

You put it it at zero. That’s not surprising. You’re not alone. It’s a hard thing to believe that God calls prophets in our day.

Thinking deeply is hard for some, isn't it?
Regards,
FIbber

So it would seem.

My track record speaks for itself. Does yours? If so, name a thread where your "thinking deeply" comes through page after page without throwing insults, etc.

Not gonna play this game with you this time around. Or anyone else.

Your friend,
MG

[I Have Questions]

I don’t take your questions as offensive at all. I think they’re fair. I’m really just describing how I understand my own relationship with God, rather than trying to offer proof of his existence. I acknowledge that if I’d grown up in Saudi Arabia, or in Utah, I might believe something completely different. And sure, I can recognize the Texas sharpshooter fallacy as a possible criticism if I were looking for evidence to justify a belief I’d already settled on. I can even see that playing out in looking for Old Testament prophecies fulfilled in Jesus. It’s just that I don’t attend church, pay tithes, or have much invested in defending a particular religious system. That doesn’t mean I’m immune to bias, of course. I think where I’ve landed is simply the result of an honest examination of myself and what I believe.

I don’t think Christians have a monopoly on love, forgiveness, or goodness. And I wouldn’t suggest that an atheist who demonstrates those things is secretly practicing Christianity. There may be other systems out there that speak to the human condition but I agree with the idea that the world has “fallen” and is in need of redemption.

As for whether God was imprinted on me from childhood, my experience was different from what I understand to be typical in LDS families. My family wasn’t particularly religious, although I was baptized Catholic as an infant. My parents divorced when I was nine, and I remember my mother taking solace in the church at that time. I also remember looking at the large crucifix behind the altar and feeling horrified and afraid.

I had something of a “found” moment when I was about 24. At the time I probably would have described it as having “caught fire.” I went around knocking on doors and probably mostly just irritated people.

I’ve explained elsewhere on the board that I’ve had experiences that brought me face to face with death, having even delivered it, and those experiences led me to critically examine myself and who it is I claim to be. I’ve landed at the understanding of Christ that I described upthread.

On the resurrection, sure, there are alternative explanations. Maybe it was fabricated, or Jesus survived the crucifixion, or someone else was substituted for him, as suggested by some Muslim thought. I acknowledge the whole thing falls apart if there was no resurrection.

Is your belief in Christ driven by a need to make sense of this life because without that belief it’s hard for you to rationalise just existing, especially given your experiences?

[Everybody Wang Chung]

My track record speaks for itself.

Boy, does it ever.

[Limnor]

Is your belief in Christ driven by a need to make sense of this life because without that belief it’s hard for you to rationalise just existing, especially given your experiences?

What a great question. I mean maybe, yes. Clinging to God and forgiveness is a place to go to that is safe, protective.

To know that you are forgiven is powerful.

[MG 2.0]

My track record speaks for itself.

Boy, does it ever.

Thank you! Would you say the same about yourself?

Regards,
MG

[Everybody Wang Chung]

Fibber, the vile things you’ve done here are beyond sickening and would make a billy goat puke. Stalking and harassing a dying man and his family is the height of evil, yet to you, it was just business as usual. You'd better hope and pray there isn't a God.

[MG 2.0]

Fibber, the vile things you’ve done here are beyond sickening and would make a billy goat puke. Stalking and harassing a dying man and his family is the height of evil, yet to you, it was just business as usual. You'd better hope and pray there isn't a God.

We’ve been talking about “what are the odds”. Yep. Predictable.

Not gonna play your game dredging up a reconstructed past that fits a narrative of your choosing or that of anyone else.

I live in the here and now.

Now, can you point to even one thread where you have demonstrated over the length/breadth/depth of that thread anything close to showing the ability to think deeply and show some originality?

Hoping and praying there isn’t a God? You’ve got to be kidding me. You might do a bit more introspection. Wang, as I’ve said, I didn’t come back here to play any of your silly games or those that anyone else comes up with. Been there, done that. It was an absolute waste of my time then and would be now.

Let’s course correct, shall we?

Pick a few of my substantive posts in this thread for starters and let’s see some constructive thought rather than bullying in the here and now for everyone to see/observe.

What are the odds…?

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

Forgiving someone's mistakes is different from continuing to accept their claims of authority to speak in Gods name.

You can extend grace to someone who deceived you without continuing to believe what they told you. Forgiveness is one thing. Continued trust after being deceived is another.

If someone fooled me into believing he was a prophet, why would I continue giving him the benefit of the doubt about his prophetic claims?

You're making a significant point here, and in my opinion it holds even if the person carrying the title of Prophet wasn't intentionally deceiving you. They may very well sincerely think they are God's mouthpiece, but if you have concluded they are wrong, then their intentionality is irrelevant.

In fact, it seems very dangerous to allow their sincerity to outweigh your assessment that they are not a prophet. If sincerity were a reason to accept their self-appointed status as Prophet, then you might end up relinquishing your own thoughts and concerns and simply accepting and following some very bad and misguided "prophecies."

I'm an atheist, but if there were a god who created human brains, I think they would at the very least expect humans to use their own brains as much and as well as they possibly can. I don't see any conflict between that and a believer using their brain to be Christlike, or an atheist using their brain to be an ethical and moral person. Each is using the resources of their self to try to be their best self, as they understand it.

Following another who has declared themselves a prophet, even to the extent that you 'forgive' them their errors, see them as human just like you, and STILL just follow along doesn't seem to be a path that uses one's own resources in the best way possible.

[Limnor]

What do you understand the resurrection of Jesus to mean?

I’ve been explaining the idea of the vine and the branches as an analogy of Christ living in the believer. So while the resurrection is bodily, physical, and shows that Jesus conquered death, it also means his life can be present in us now.

You're making a significant point here, and in my opinion it holds even if the person carrying the title of Prophet wasn't intentionally deceiving you. They may very well sincerely think they are God's mouthpiece, but if you have concluded they are wrong, then their intentionality is irrelevant.

In fact, it seems very dangerous to allow their sincerity to outweigh your assessment that they are not a prophet. If sincerity were a reason to accept their self-appointed status as Prophet, then you might end up relinquishing your own thoughts and concerns and simply accepting and following some very bad and misguided "prophecies."

I'm an atheist, but if there were a god who created human brains, I think they would at the very least expect humans to use their own brains as much and as well as they possibly can. I don't see any conflict between that and a believer using their brain to be Christlike, or an atheist using their brain to be an ethical and moral person. Each is using the resources of their self to try to be their best self, as they understand it.

Following another who has declared themselves a prophet, even to the extent that you 'forgive' them their errors, see them as human just like you, and STILL just follow along doesn't seem to be a path that uses one's own resources in the best way possible.

Agreed.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

I didn’t come back here to play any of your silly games or those that anyone else comes up with.