Mormonism's accomodating nature

[_the road to hana]

Continuing revelation means first, that we can only be given so much at a time. You can't teach a first grader calculus.
Second, it means that God loves His children in all ages. Which is why we driving aren't driving buggies and refusing to use electricity.

Are you suggesting that "continuing revelation" has never disappeared, and has always been available?

[_Runtu]

I would refer you to Elder Holland's talk in October conference. Some on the MA&D board called this "Elder Holland Hts One out of the Park."

http://LDS.org/conference/talk/display/ ... 15,00.html

Exactly. The nature of the Godhead is a good example of an unfalsifiable claim. Thanks for pointing it out. :)

[_charity]

How about you step back and think about this a little. We have all heard this over and over and it means nothing. It is such nonsense. It is as if someone came up with this idea, people repeated it and no one has even considered its meaning.

Continuing revelation means first, that we can only be given so much at a time. You can't teach a first grader calculus.

What in the world does this have to do with anything? Are you saying humans, (or believing members), aren't ready to hear how to improve our world? How to feed the starving children? How to treat the Earth more respectfully? How to bring peace to our planet? How to cure HIV? What?

Are you suggesting that the earring limit, white shirts, no tatoos, a new SLC mall, etc. etc. etc. etc. are the only things members are ready to hear?

Are you suggesting that until EVERYONE passes kindergarden, NO one will be able to move up to first grade? ;-)

Are you suggesting until members have FHE, one billion of our Earth's population will just have to drink impure water? Or until people go to the temple more regularly, the wars of the earth will just have to continue?

I truly do not get this line of "reasoning," in any form whatsoever.~dancer~

Obviously, you don't. There is no reason for wars, starvation, racism, genocide, bad water, or smog. And everything to solve all those problems is contained in the gospel. So why do we still see all of it? Because people are choosing between good and evil. And too many of them are chosing evil.

Take starvation, for example. There is enough food to feed eveyrone on the planet. But a lot of available grain goes to make alcoholic beverages, which don't nourish anyone. And people still eat too much meat, which produces less nourishment than grain it takes to produce all those steaks. Anyone who drinks alcholic beverages and eats meat mroe than "sparingly" is contributing to world hunger. If just half the population went without two meals a month and gave those resources to those who need it, no one would starve.

So what do you want dancer? What about a law that eliminates all booze, and rationing for meat? And the World Health Organization taxes the richer half of the world for the cost of those two meals?

Of course, if the Church were to try to enforce any of those with a Danite band you would be screaming bloody murder. So, until people start to chose unselfishly, we are stuck with wars, starvation, etd. . . .

Why don't you think the Churchis helping and not hindering?

I don't understand your reasoning at all.

[_Gadianton]

charity,

you make some of the worst arguments I've ever read in my life.You aren't trolling us are you?

Anyone who drinks alcohol and eats steak is contributing to world hungar? Are you a complete freaking (to keep this BYU and all) moron?

A good portion of the world takes all that grain and turns it into ethanol to power their cars. One trip from PE to the Cape for a temple session will waste more grain (in the spirit of solving some of the other world resource problems) than all the vodka I'll drink and cows I'll eat in my life.

Further, you can't solve world hunger merely by shipping corn to ethiopia. Not that it's a bad idea, and I hate to sound like Coggins, but if you save all today's ducks by throwing them 100 loaves of wonder bread, you've just produced millions more that will require 1000 loaves next year.

[_charity]

charity,

you make some of the worst arguments I've ever read in my life.You aren't trolling us are you?

Anyone who drinks alcohol and eats steak is contributing to world hungar? Are you a complete freaking (to keep this BYU and all) moron?

A good portion of the world takes all that grain and turns it into ethanol to power their cars. One trip from PE to the Cape for a temple session will waste more grain (in the spirit of solving some of the other world resource problems) than all the vodka I'll drink and cows I'll eat in my life.

Further, you can't solve world hunger merely by shipping corn to ethiopia. Not that it's a bad idea, and I hate to sound like Coggins, but if you save all today's ducks by throwing them 100 loaves of wonder bread, you've just produced millions more that will require 1000 loaves next year.

Sure, you can rationalize away your resonsablity for world hunger. Truth dancer wants to know why the church doesn't solve all the world's problems. Millions of people with your same idea is why the Church can't solve the world's problems.

[_ludwigm]

We've come a long way in Mormon thought over the past century.

Sorry, Kevin, you have got it pretty much all wrong. You write about what people thought. Of course, people can think things. But you can't speak for the Church. I can't speak for the Church. And individual members can have ideas which are not correct. Why do you think we have the General Conference, the Ensign magazine, talks in sacrament meeting, and Gospel Doctrine. To INSTRUCT the Saints.

We have (who are the we ?)
- the General Conference (as far as I know, only the Standard works count, and things signed by the 15)
- the Ensign magazine (as far as I know, only the Standard works count, and things signed by the 15)
- talks in sacrament meeting (as far as I know, only the Standard works count, and things signed by the 15)
- and Gospel Doctrine (even it is non-doctrinal)
- or 70+15 men only (or are they x times 70?)
- or 15 men only
- or 3 men only
- or The Prophet, mouthpiece of the Lord, a simple device for convey the revelations, not a thinking individual?.
As Stalin was. As Hitler was.
Pinochet, Saddam, Kadhafi, Putin, Castro, Pol Pot, Tito, Enver Hodga, Honecker ...
Do You know these names? There are many more. Dictators from the worst kind.
I can vomit.

Who may speak for the Church (Why "Church"? Why not "this church"? There are many. Thousands.)
Who? The members. I repeat: THE MEMBERS. Not the leaders. And not ONE leader.

My favourite:
"And individual members can have ideas which are not correct."
Prophets can not have ideas which are not correct. OK. Those ideas are private opinions only.

[_the road to hana]

There were different ideas going around. If peopple are getting their ideas from others, it proves they are not studying on their own, getting their own spiritual confirmation of the truth. That is their fault.

Charity, you're speaking out of both sides of your mouth here.

Either there is official policy, doctrine and practice, or there isn't. Either the church leaders speak on behalf of what is official, and correct, or they don't. Either truth is relative, or it isn't.

Saying it's an individual member's "fault" if they believe what they are taught from the pulpit, in official church publications, in religious instruction classes like Seminary, Sunday School, Relief Society, Priesthood, Young Women's, Young Men's, or Primary, or in the writings or speeches of church leadership, is borderline silly. "Faithful" members are expected to heed the counsel of their leaders.

What you're actually suggesting in terms of each member getting an individual witness is exactly what leads many out of the church. When they get that witness, it's that what they were being taught wasn't correct in the first place. So they act on it. And then what do you say?

They weren't following their leaders. They didn't have faith.

You're suggesting that each member approach the heavens individually for a spiritual confirmation of the truth. But when that truth differs from your version of it, it's apparently faulty.

If there aren't twelve million different realities for twelve million different members of your faith, then there is someone authorized to give the official version. If the members believe it, after being counseled to do so, that doesn't make it "their fault" if it is incorrect.

[_truth dancer]

So what do you want dancer?

Nothing. Why do you think I want anything from you or the church. I have never requested anything or suggesting I want anything whatsoever. (sigh)

Why don't you think the Churchis helping and not hindering?

Why in the world would you assume I think the church is hindering not helping. We are talking about continuing revelation here. I'm wondering why, in a church that claims continuing revelation from Jesus Christ himself, there is no continuing revelation pertaining to our modern day challenges.

I don't understand your reasoning at all.

OK... I'll try again, I do not see continuing revelation of any import. All I see is a few little token inconsequential items like, how many earrings a woman can wear, what color shirt men must wear to church, a mall, and new buildings scattered across the world. I do not see any modern revelation that addresses any of the problems of our world.

Doest that help?

You seem to agree. I believe you are asserting that there is no new revelation addressings our current problems because the information is already available in the church.

Ok then we agree there is no new revelation addressing the world's problems. Continuing revelation, (with a few minor exceptions like those above), seems limited to changing the doctrine/teachings of previous prophets and leaders.

Truth dancer wants to know why the church doesn't solve all the world's problems. Millions of people with your same idea is why the Church can't solve the world's problems.

When have I EVER asked why the church doesn't solve all the world's problems? Come on Charity... (sigh)

I have asked about revelation from God that may be valuable for our world, and YOU have actually said that we do not need any, that all the information to solve the world's problems is available, which I guess means, there is no continuing revelation because there is no need.

Charity, I have politely asked you to stop with this nonsense of pretending people are stating what they are not! It is tiresome to have to address your nonsense rather than the topic. I'm not sure if you do this on purpose, if it is a tactic, or if you think you are responding appropriately but I am kindly and respectfully asking you to refrain from this practice at least when you respond to me.

Thanks,

~dancer~

[_Nephi]

Imagine what two millenia would do to Mormonism.

I believe that two millenia we will find that the three major world religions (Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism), along with most religions founded prior to the CE will be the minority, in a big way, like how paganism is a minority now a days. The world is just itching for a "new religion", one that has mythology that is semi-believable and yet also very deep in "lessons" and understanding. I don't see atheism becoming the main viewpoint anytime soon. I think that generally speaking, most people are not able to cope with the idea that there is no God and there is no set purpose for life, and so they cling to the only things they can find currently - the established religions of the societies they live within. However, I think many people have a problem trying to understand and use to their advantage these established religions, which is why you see "Sunday Christians", those who use religion for political power, or those who go through the acts but have no understanding of what it means to them.

This "new religion" will be a unifying banner for mankind as well. It will allow all to search and find God on their own terms, not conforming to other's paths or other's ways. It will allow them to see we all are brothers and sisters, and though unique individuals, we all have common roots and desires. It will give mankind renewed hope and squelch the desires to cause harm to his sisters and brothers. Most of all, it will NOT have written out in black and white the individual's purpose and path in life, and will teach that this path is theirs and theirs alone to find. Two millenia? Way too much time. Assuming we survive technological adolescence, mankind will find that they are one of the most beautiful creations ever made on this tiny bubble of reality.

[_charity]

Who may speak for the Church (Why "Church"? Why not "this church"? There are many. Thousands.)
Who? The members. I repeat: THE MEMBERS. Not the leaders. And not ONE leader.

My favourite:
"And individual members can have ideas which are not correct."
Prophets can not have ideas which are not correct. OK. Those ideas are private opinions only.

Why "Church?" Shortcut way of speaking. I don't want to write out "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" every time. I think CoJCoLDS is disrespectful. And since it is THE true Church, then I capitalize it. Sort of like using God to refer to Heavenly Father, and god to refer to others.

To answer your "ideas which are not correct" thing. All men are fallible and all men can have opinions which are not correct. Prophets, too. Have you heard that little statement: "Catholics believe their pope is infallible, but treat him like he isn't. Mormons believe their prophet is not infallible, but treat him like he is." Which is why we are told to seek our spiritual confirmation of everything.

It is a time consuming proecess, and many people don't go through the work involved. But they should. And they should be in a spiritual condition continually that the Holy Ghost can witness to them when they are hearing the truth.

Why do you think I want anything from you or the church. I have never requested anything or suggesting I want anything whatsoever. (sigh)

We are talking about continuing revelation here. I'm wondering why, in a church that claims continuing revelation from Jesus Christ himself, there is no continuing revelation pertaining to our modern day challenges.

OK... I'll try again, I do not see continuing revelation of any import. All I see is a few little token inconsequential items like, how many earrings a woman can wear, what color shirt men must wear to church, a mall, and new buildings scattered across the world. I do not see any modern revelation that addresses any of the problems of our world.

This is why I think you are asking/demanding something from the Church. Continuing revelation that solves the world's problems. Or else you think there is not such thing as continuing revelation.

You seem to agree. I believe you are asserting that there is no new revelation addressings our current problems because the information is already available in the church. Ok then we agree there is no new revelation addressing the world's problems. Continuing revelation, (with a few minor exceptions like those above), seems limited to changing the doctrine/teachings of previous prophets and leaders.

Not at all. New revelation is given whenever there is a new need. It is true that the solution to most of the world's problems is already contained in revelations given. You can even go back as far as the Old Testament to see the solution to all the world's problems. In fact, Moses brought the revelation down from the mount. The Ten Commandments. If all men lived the 10 commandments, most of the world's problems would be solved.

When you criticize the Church or the prophets for not giving a solution to the world's problems, what are you asking for? Take AIDS. The solution to the problem is for everyone to be monogamous. Two people who only have sex with each other, and there is no spread of the AIDS virus. Or were you thinking that continuing revelation would send down a cure or immunization?

When have I EVER asked why the church doesn't solve all the world's problems? Come on Charity... (sigh) I have asked about revelation from God that may be valuable for our world, and YOU have actually said that we do not need any, that all the information to solve the world's problems is available, which I guess means, there is no continuing revelation because there is no need.

You have to look at what the questions are. One of the most recent revelations was the proclamation on the familiy. It answered some questions. Gender is eternal, for one thing. Which answers the question of what to do about the disorder of transgenderism. You treat the mind, not the body. Just one example.

Charity, I have politely asked you to stop with this nonsense of pretending people are stating what they are not! It is tiresome to have to address your nonsense rather than the topic. I'm not sure if you do this on purpose, if it is a tactic, or if you think you are responding appropriately but I am kindly and respectfully asking you to refrain from this practice at least when you respond to me.

I can only go by what you say. I don't read mnds. I have provided your own quotes to show that you were asking why the Church cannot provide solutions to the world's problems.