Does the LDS Church Change Hearts?

[_truth dancer]

I wonder...

If there is such a thing as God, and if God did have some ultimate truth, wouldn't it make sense that this truth would help people live a holy life?

Wouldn't one think that being a part of God's church would move them toward goodness?

Doesn't it make sense that God would provide for something in truth teachings that would bring a person toward Godliness?

I'm not talking about not drinking coffee, making sure one attends various church meetings, or doesn't go shopping on Sunday.

I'm talking about a change of heart, where one moves beyond the cruel or hurtful human tendencies, and embraces a more decent, kind way of life; where selfishness and harm are replaced by care, concern, and compassion.

While I think the LDS church and other religions, for the most part don't actually harm people, more and more it seems to me that the LDS church has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus, teachings of goodness, or just general kindness towards others.

Something seriously seems to be missing.

:-(

~dancer~

[_The Nehor]

I wonder...

If there is such a thing as God, and if God did have some ultimate truth, wouldn't it make sense that this truth would help people live a holy life?

Wouldn't one think that being a part of God's church would move them toward goodness?

Doesn't it make sense that God would provide for something in truth teachings that would bring a person toward Godliness?

I'm not talking about not drinking coffee, making sure one attends various church meetings, or doesn't go shopping on Sunday.

I'm talking about a change of heart, where one moves beyond the cruel or hurtful human tendencies, and embraces a more decent, kind way of life; where selfishness and harm are replaced by care, concern, and compassion.

While I think the LDS church and other religions, for the most part don't actually harm people, more and more it seems to me that the LDS church has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus, teachings of goodness, or just general kindness towards others.

Something seriously seems to be missing.

:-(

~dancer~

It does for those who actually embrace the teachings. Many don't. I'm still trying to.

[_John Larsen]

Based on the personal experiences related to me by others, I think the change of heart comes first. Individuals reach a critical mass in their life that causes them to look for new things and new ways to process issues in their life. It is that experience that predates their relationship with the Church.

If it were the other way around, people would encounter the Church while following their current life style and decide to change because of the Church. Alternatively I think people choose to associate with the church because what the Church says resonates with their current views of right and wrong and preferable life style.

So in short, the Church is capitalizing in the goodness and truth that exists already in peoples hearts. It traffics in the natural good tendencies of human beings. Its real trick is to make the members believe that their own moral behavior is a result of the Church. What it is doing, in essence, is selling you what you already own.

[_The Nehor]

Based on the personal experiences related to me by others, I think the change of heart comes first. Individuals reach a critical mass in their life that causes them to look for new things and new ways to process issues in their life. It is that experience that predates their relationship with the Church.

If it were the other way around, people would encounter the Church while following their current life style and decide to change because of the Church. Alternatively I think people choose to associate with the church because what the Church says resonates with their current views of right and wrong and preferable life style.

So in short, the Church is capitalizing in the goodness and truth that exists already in peoples hearts. It traffics in the natural good tendencies of human beings. Its real trick is to make the members believe that their own moral behavior is a result of the Church. What it is doing, in essence, is selling you what you already own.

It's actually selling eternal lives.

[_John Larsen]

Based on the personal experiences related to me by others, I think the change of heart comes first. Individuals reach a critical mass in their life that causes them to look for new things and new ways to process issues in their life. It is that experience that predates their relationship with the Church.

If it were the other way around, people would encounter the Church while following their current life style and decide to change because of the Church. Alternatively I think people choose to associate with the church because what the Church says resonates with their current views of right and wrong and preferable life style.

So in short, the Church is capitalizing in the goodness and truth that exists already in peoples hearts. It traffics in the natural good tendencies of human beings. Its real trick is to make the members believe that their own moral behavior is a result of the Church. What it is doing, in essence, is selling you what you already own.

It's actually selling eternal lives.

I bought mine at Crazy Abibi's for 75% off of retail.

[_solomarineris]

[/quote]
It does for those who actually embrace the teachings. Many don't. I'm still trying to.[/quote]

Which means you're failing, failing and failing to see.
Which there's actually nothing to see.

[_beastie]

I put this on the MAD Juliann thread, but it really belongs here:

(response to nehor's cluelessness)

No, nonbelievers don't imagine that the fraudulent LDS church would have any significant impact on the "heart" of believers, although it has impact on certain behaviors, like the WoW.

It is believers who imagine that the LDS church would have a significant impact on peoples' "hearts". So threads like this are designed to help believers purchase a tiny clue. But since apparently you don't have the currency to purchase even a tiny clue, I'll buy it for you and spell it out:

The fact that the LDS church has no significant impact on the hearts of its believers, as manifest by the fact LDS believers - including prophets - demonstrate the same predictable behaviors and attitudes as others members of the larger culture - is just one more piece of evidence that the LDS church is a man-made institution like every other church on the face of the earth.

Hope that helps.

[_The Nehor]

I put this on the MAD Juliann thread, but it really belongs here:

(response to nehor's cluelessness)

No, nonbelievers don't imagine that the fraudulent LDS church would have any significant impact on the "heart" of believers, although it has impact on certain behaviors, like the WoW.

It is believers who imagine that the LDS church would have a significant impact on peoples' "hearts". So threads like this are designed to help believers purchase a tiny clue. But since apparently you don't have the currency to purchase even a tiny clue, I'll buy it for you and spell it out:

The fact that the LDS church has no significant impact on the hearts of its believers, as manifest by the fact LDS believers - including prophets - demonstrate the same predictable behaviors and attitudes as others members of the larger culture - is just one more piece of evidence that the LDS church is a man-made institution like every other church on the face of the earth.

Hope that helps.

I'd like to make a small correction. Nehor should have a capital N.

[_marg]

While I think the LDS church and other religions, for the most part don't actually harm people, more and more it seems to me that the LDS church has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus, teachings of goodness, or just general kindness towards others.

Something seriously seems to be missing.

:-(

~dancer~

Why on earth should one assume a religious individual to be more moral based on their involvement with a religious group? You know better TD. Religions have always been about helping those within one's tribe or religious group not outside it. If BC perceives harmony as a threat or outcast to his group why on earth expect him to treat her with the same consideration as if she's part of his in-group? And as far as morals go the 3 Abrahamic religions have relied upon interpretation of ancient texts to apply morals today, hence you find things like polygamy being justified based upon them.

So the problem with religion goes beyond not teaching goodness to others, it is that some religious individuals blindly or willingly rely upon the dictates of their religious authority. But religious moderates who think religion in general is worthwhile, that the benefits exceed the costs and are supportive of these multi-billion dollar business are part of the problem, perhaps the biggest part of the problem. Sam Harris in The End of Faith in the first chapter has this to say.

"While moderation in religion may seem a reasonable position to stake out, in light of all that we have(and have not) learned about the universe, if offers no bulwark against religious extremism and religious violence. From the perspective of those seeking to live by the letter of the texts, the religious moderate is nothing more than a failed fundamentalist. He is, in all likelihood, going to wind up in hell with the rest of the unbelievers. The problem that religious moderation poses for all of us is that it does not permit anything very critical to be said about religious literalism. We cannot say that fundamentalists are crazy, because they are merely practicing their freedom of belief; we cannot even say that they are mistaken in religious terms, because their knowledge of scripture is generally unrivaled. All we can say, as religious moderates, is that we don't like the personal and social costs that a full embrace of scripture imposes on us. This is not a new form of faith, or even a new species of scriptural exegesis, it is simply a capitulation to a variety of all-too-human interests that have nothing, in principle, to do with God. Religious moderation is the product of secular knowledge and scriptural ignorance - and it has no bona fides, in religious terms, to put it on a par with fundamentalism. The texts themselves are unequivocal: they are perfect in all their parts. By their light, religious moderation appears to be nothing more than an unwillingness to fully submit to God's law. By failing to live by the letter of the texts, while tolerating the irrationality of those who do, religious moderates betray faith and reason equally. Unless the core dogmas of faith are called into question - i.e. that we know there is a God, and that we known what he wants from us - religious moderation will do nothing to lead us out of the wilderness."

[_truth dancer]

Hi Marg,

Why on earth should one assume a religious individual to be more moral based on their involvement with a religious group? You know better TD.

Well that was not quite what I meant. ;-)

I'm suggesting that IF there was a true religion, or a God who gave the truth to human beings, wouldn't one expect these teachings to bring forth goodness in humans?

In other words, I do not think religion helps anyone become more moral or good, in fact I think otherwise in many cases, but I would expect this to be the case if there were a God as claimed by various religions.

Does that make sense?

Religions have always been about helping those within one's tribe or religious group not outside it. If BC perceives harmony as a threat or outcast to his group why on earth expect him to treat her with the same consideration as if she's part of his in-group? And as far as morals go the 3 Abrahamic religions have relied upon interpretation of ancient texts to apply morals today, hence you find things like polygamy being justified based upon them.

Yes, I agree, sadly.

So the problem with religion goes beyond not teaching goodness to others, it is that some religious individuals blindly or willingly rely upon the dictates of their religious authority. But religious moderates who think religion in general is worthwhile, that the benefits exceed the costs and are supportive of these multi-billion dollar business are part of the problem, perhaps the biggest part of the problem. Sam Harris in The End of Faith in the first chapter has this to say.

I well remember reading The End of Faith and contemplating my own beliefs and ideals.

In the past I have had the belief that there are those who benefit from religion, and that if a religious belief helps someone manage life and find peace it is a good thing; maybe I just want to believe this is so, I don't know.

In my community, religious groups come together and do all sorts of great things for one another and for others in the community. OTOH, clearly there are those believers in religion who completely miss any sense of goodness, kindness, or compassion that one would normally associate with those trying to live a good and decent life.

At this point, I'm not totally convinced Harris is correct, but more and more I do wonder if my perspective is part of the problem as he suggests.

~dancer~