Reasons people stopped attending church

[I Have Questions]

I want specifics to back up your assertion. Explain what has changed, specifically, from D&C 76 to now? Or admit you misspoke and it hasn’t evolved at all.

Section 76 hasn't changed. LDS views, as I've already mentioned, have brought breadth and depth to that section in the Doctrine and Covenants.

You said the understanding has evolved since section D&C 76 was penned. I’ve asked you for some specific examples of what has changed. You haven’t given any. Saying “breadth” doesn’t cut it. Back up your assertion with specific examples or just admit you misspoke. Again.

[I Have Questions]

Wow yeah, totally. Let me help you imagine a few things. First of all, if you have any people you care about in the Telestial kingdom, you will never see them again for all eternity. Noted that you are good with that.

I wouldn't be if that was true. Non sequitur.

Let me tell you some of the things you'll need to learn. The vast majority of your inhabitants will suffer. A lot. Imagine this, 24/7 millions are praying to you. Many of those are prayers are from people being brutalized, killed, tortured, raped, they are screaming and calling out to you, and you not only hear the prayer, but as you become omniscient like God, you see everything they are going through. You get to watch people getting cut up and tortured constantly -- they cry out in prayer, and you have to just ignore it and let them suffer.

You good with that? Noted.

There may be more to it.

The question of why God allows suffering, especially given His omniscience and omnipotence, has been a central challenge in theology and philosophy for centuries, often referred to as the problem of evil. Various perspectives attempt to reconcile this issue, offering insights into how suffering might fit within God's purposes.

Theological Responses to Suffering
Free Will and the Fall
One common explanation is rooted in the concept of free will. According to Christian theology, God created humans with free will, enabling them to make choices. However, humanity's rejection of God (often referred to as "the Fall") introduced sin and suffering into the world. This perspective argues that suffering is a consequence of human actions rather than a direct act of God. Free will is seen as necessary for genuine love and moral responsibility, even though it allows for evil.

Soul-Building and Growth
Another view suggests that suffering serves as a means of spiritual growth or "soul-building." This perspective posits that enduring trials can develop virtues such as patience, compassion, and resilience. Biblical references support this idea, emphasizing how suffering can refine character and deepen faith (e.g., Romans 5:3-5).

Higher-Order Goods
The "higher-order goods" theodicy argues that certain virtues—such as courage, forgiveness, and compassion—can only exist in response to suffering or evil. For example, forgiveness presupposes wrongdoing, and courage requires danger. In this view, God permits suffering to allow these goods to flourish.

God’s Solidarity with Suffering
Christianity uniquely emphasizes God's presence in human suffering through Jesus Christ. The crucifixion is seen as evidence that God is not indifferent to pain but intimately familiar with it. Jesus' suffering on the cross demonstrates solidarity with humanity's anguish and offers hope for redemption. This perspective assures believers that God is not distant but actively involved in their struggles.

Mystery and Trust
Many theologians acknowledge that humans may not fully comprehend God's reasons for allowing suffering due to their limited perspective compared to God's infinite wisdom. This concept is often referred to as inscrutability. The story of Job in the Bible illustrates this: Job suffers greatly but is never given a direct explanation by God. Instead, he is encouraged to trust in God's greater plan.

Redemption and Eternal Perspective
From an eternal perspective, suffering is often viewed as temporary and meaningful within God's ultimate plan. Christianity teaches that God will ultimately restore justice, heal all wounds, and "wipe away every tear" (Revelation 21:4). This belief provides hope that present pain will be redeemed in eternity.

Critiques of Divine Indifference
Critics argue that allowing immense suffering—especially when omnipotence could prevent it—might imply callousness or indifference on God's part. Some suggest this creates tension between God's omnibenevolence (perfect goodness) and omnipotence (unlimited power). However, proponents of the above theodicies counter that God's allowance of suffering serves higher purposes beyond human understanding.

In summary, theological responses to suffering emphasize themes like free will, spiritual growth, divine solidarity through Christ's suffering, inscrutability, and ultimate redemption. While these explanations may not alleviate the emotional weight of witnessing or experiencing profound pain, they aim to provide a framework for understanding its place within a broader divine context.
Perplexity A.I.

I'm MG and I approve this message.

Why should I take you seriously?

Regards,
MG

Child rape serves a higher purpose? And you approve of that? Are you serious right now?

[MG 2.0]

Section 76 hasn't changed. LDS views, as I've already mentioned, have brought breadth and depth to that section in the Doctrine and Covenants.

You said the understanding has evolved since section D&C 76 was penned. I’ve asked you for some specific examples of what has changed. You haven’t given any. Saying “breadth” doesn’t cut it. Back up your assertion with specific examples or just admit you misspoke. Again.

As I said, the section itself has remained the same. There are no specific examples I can give in regards to any changes within the section if there haven't been any. If you go back and read my posts carefully you will see that I have answered your concerns 'outside' of Section 76.

It appears as though you are a BRM literalist without any room for thinking on your own as others, including General Authorities, have done.

I can't help you with that.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

Child rape serves a higher purpose? And you approve of that? Are you serious right now?

I'm not sure whether you're being serious or not with these questions. What I do think is that you are unable or unwilling to give much in the way of deeper thinking on some of these topics.

Either that or you think that the thinking has already been done. Sound familiar?

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

MG, would they have Pad Thai in the Celestial Kingdom or just tuna casserole with fry sauce?

This is a tough one. I had to go to Perplexity A.I. to get some help.

Pad Thai is a well-known Thai dish made with stir-fried rice noodles, vegetables, and often meat or tofu, flavored with tamarind and fish sauce. It is a staple of international cuisine and is enjoyed worldwide for its vibrant flavors and textures.

Tuna casserole with fry sauce, on the other hand, is a more nostalgic or regional dish, often associated with comfort food or specific cultural traditions. Tuna casserole is a classic American dish, while fry sauce is commonly used in Utah and other parts of the Western United States.

In an imaginative context, the "Celestial Kingdom" might serve dishes that are either universally beloved or uniquely symbolic. However, without a specific cultural or religious context, it's impossible to say which dish would be more likely to appear.

It's a toss up.

Regards,
MG

[drumdude]

MG, would they have Pad Thai in the Celestial Kingdom or just tuna casserole with fry sauce?

This is a tough one. I had to go to Perplexity A.I. to get some help.

Pad Thai is a well-known Thai dish made with stir-fried rice noodles, vegetables, and often meat or tofu, flavored with tamarind and fish sauce. It is a staple of international cuisine and is enjoyed worldwide for its vibrant flavors and textures.

Tuna casserole with fry sauce, on the other hand, is a more nostalgic or regional dish, often associated with comfort food or specific cultural traditions. Tuna casserole is a classic American dish, while fry sauce is commonly used in Utah and other parts of the Western United States.

In an imaginative context, the "Celestial Kingdom" might serve dishes that are either universally beloved or uniquely symbolic. However, without a specific cultural or religious context, it's impossible to say which dish would be more likely to appear.

It's a toss up.

Regards,
MG

Russell Nelson said I can’t have pad Thai in heaven unless I pay my 10% to his corporation. It’s going to be cold cheese sandwiches for eternity.

It’s a good motivator.

[I Have Questions]

You said the understanding has evolved since section D&C 76 was penned. I’ve asked you for some specific examples of what has changed. You haven’t given any. Saying “breadth” doesn’t cut it. Back up your assertion with specific examples or just admit you misspoke. Again.

As I said, the section itself has remained the same. There are no specific examples I can give in regards to any changes within the section if there haven't been any. If you go back and read my posts carefully you will see that I have answered your concerns 'outside' of Section 76.

No. You haven't. There is nothing that supports your claim that understanding of the Kingdoms of Glory has evolved beyond what is explicit in the Book of Mormon. YOUR understanding might have evolved. But that's an entirely different thing to "Our understanding" meaning what the Church now promotes as understanding. Stop speaking as if you are a spokesperson for the Church. You ain't, and the faithful viewing in would do well to remember that you sometimes promote apostate views.

[I Have Questions]

Child rape serves a higher purpose? And you approve of that? Are you serious right now?

I'm not sure whether you're being serious or not with these questions. What I do think is that you are unable or unwilling to give much in the way of deeper thinking on some of these topics.

Either that or you think that the thinking has already been done. Sound familiar?

Regards,
MG

You've avoided addressing the point. Again.

[MG 2.0]

As I said, the section itself has remained the same. There are no specific examples I can give in regards to any changes within the section if there haven't been any. If you go back and read my posts carefully you will see that I have answered your concerns 'outside' of Section 76.

No. You haven't. There is nothing that supports your claim that understanding of the Kingdoms of Glory has evolved beyond what is explicit in the Book of Mormon. YOUR understanding might have evolved. But that's an entirely different thing to "Our understanding" meaning what the Church now promotes as understanding. Stop speaking as if you are a spokesperson for the Church. You ain't, and the faithful viewing in would do well to remember that you sometimes promote apostate views.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Of course. Anything you say.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

I'm not sure whether you're being serious or not with these questions. What I do think is that you are unable or unwilling to give much in the way of deeper thinking on some of these topics.

Either that or you think that the thinking has already been done. Sound familiar?

Regards,
MG

You've avoided addressing the point. Again.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Of course, oh thou exalted one.

Regards,
MG