Would you attend Church if...

[_Themis]

Okay, I'll blink.

The LDS Church has a living prophet that God inspires to ensure that it keeps heading in the direction God wants it to go (actually God inspires pretty much all the LDS leaders), and the LDS Church does a better job of balancing its teaching about the nature of God between what scripture says and between basic requirements of a good God, than any other Christian-oriented organization of which I'm aware.

Actually, I guess the best answer is that I don't know what aspects of the LDS Church make it better suited for the long term welfare of the human race. I take it on faith that God has oriented it so that it will have that effect.

So you have nothing to list. I thought not. Again your questions assumes the church is not true or why ask it. When we get to the question of the truthfulness of it's claims it fails miserably.

But I'm certainly not going to put my trust that an organization will be better suited to provide that benefit when that organization teaches things about God that can't possibly be true for a good God, or alternately when nobody seems to know any reason why they should believe God inspired that organization.

I am not sure what specifically your are referring to or which groups, but you might try looking out side of Christianity as well, not that I think you are describing them very well.

[_KevinSim]

It sounds as if he considers the status of the Book of Mormon as a genuine ancient text as a major teaching of his church.

Well, I'm not going to argue with Gordon Hinckley. If he says the Book of Mormon is historical and the Book of Abraham is authentic, then yes, I agree with him.

Why, if there is a deity resembling the one believed in by the CoJCLDS, then he could use the Simpsons to teach viewers about his will if he felt like it. Or even a book of cross-word puzzles. He could do anything he fancied doing.

But what kind of deity would it be who messed around with human beings in such a way?

I think my whole point is that among the deities described by the faith organizations of the world, the deity described by the LDS Church is the one that messes "around with human beings" least.

[_KevinSim]

So you have nothing to list. I thought not. Again your questions assumes the church is not true or why ask it.

How do my questions assume the LDS Church is not true?

When we get to the question of the truthfulness of it's claims it fails miserably.

Whatever. Maybe now you can answer my question, the one I originally asked. I said I would attend the LDS Church even if Thomas Monson did reverse both Official Declarations One and Two. What is the alternative for someone with the conscience I described?

I am not sure what specifically your are referring to or which groups, but you might try looking out side of Christianity as well, not that I think you are describing them very well.

I'm willing to look into any faith group that stands a chance of having been inspired by God, whether it be part of Biblical Christianity or not.

Note though, in case any of you have read any of Aristotle Smith's posts on the subject, I see no reason to personally investigate any faith without knowing beforehand something that might indicate God inspired it. If that's what's required to give a faith group a fair chance then there simply is no way that anyone could give all faith groups such a fair chance; there's simply too many.

[_KevinSim]

"George Washington killed Genghis Khan in a lightsaber duel in an underwater city in 10,000 B.C., and that is how he became the first President of the United States."

Is this statement true or untrue?

Untrue.

[_KevinSim]

The LDS organization is damaging. It perpetuates a broken system of patriarchy. It wounds people. It distances people from the Divine and from their inner truth. It is rarely inspired...no more than the Chicken Soup for the Soul books. It often promotes wrongful thinking and feeling.

Just Me, why should I believe that any of these assertions that you have made are true?

[_KevinSim]

But since you would hypothetically would testify to those things, then I guess you really do know what it would mean for the Church to be true, your rhetorical question notwithstanding.

I know what it means to me anyhow.

we should not misinterpret His statements as implying that the Lord has any particular concern with objective reality.

Actually, I agree with that. Objective reality is overrated.

People obsessed with objective reality sometimes come to the conclusion that necessary things are, in their opinion, impossible. The key is to balance objective reality with the things that need to be true in order for humanity to achieve its long term goals.

[_just me]

The LDS organization is damaging. It perpetuates a broken system of patriarchy. It wounds people. It distances people from the Divine and from their inner truth. It is rarely inspired...no more than the Chicken Soup for the Soul books. It often promotes wrongful thinking and feeling.

Just Me, why should I believe that any of these assertions that you have made are true?

Is the church a patriarchal organization? Yes or no.

[_Themis]

How do my questions assume the LDS Church is not true?

You mean question. It has to assume the church is not true since what point would it be to assume it is true. The same could be said if a catholic was asking the same question, or a Muslim, Hindu, Wicca, Scientologist, etc

Whatever. Maybe now you can answer my question, the one I originally asked. I said I would attend the LDS Church even if Thomas Monson did reverse both Official Declarations One and Two. What is the alternative for someone with the conscience I described?

What was the conscience you described? IF you believe the church is true the way most LDS do then anything the prophet says comes from God is supposed to come from God. If you continue to make this assumption with any religion or non-religious views you will end up with the same conclusions there is no alternative. How can there be a better alternative to Scientology if they are right about their claims?

I'm willing to look into any faith group that stands a chance of having been inspired by God, whether it be part of Biblical Christianity or not.

Note though, in case any of you have read any of Aristotle Smith's posts on the subject, I see no reason to personally investigate any faith without knowing beforehand something that might indicate God inspired it. If that's what's required to give a faith group a fair chance then there simply is no way that anyone could give all faith groups such a fair chance; there's simply too many.

This statement if full of assumptions, and I am willing to bet they are very LDS oriented. You can't get very far if you have similar assumptions about Scientology and are looking at other groups, and why limit it to what you call faith groups. If you want to evaluate other groups fairly you will need to let go of these assumptions and try to view it the way they would.

[_Themis]

The key is to balance objective reality with the things that need to be true in order for humanity to achieve its long term goals.

LOL What needs to be true and what do you think humanities long term goals are? I am not sure how something that needs to be true to achieve a certain goal is going to make it true.

[_Drifting]

...President Monson confessed at Conference that Joseph Smith was indeed a fraud, but he was keeping the Church going.

Then I'd really be confused.

At that point I'd probably go to my wife and say, "I know I promised you I'd never leave the LDS Church, but in view of what Monson said, are you still going to hold me to that promise?"

So you'd defer the decision about Church attendance to your wife rather than make a decision yourself? It's no wonder women are starting to run the wards....