The Sethmeister wrote:Good for the SBC, yet another church whose creeds were an abomination before the Lord. What does that actually demonstrate? That a false church, not of God, and devoid of divine revelation and a divine mandate from God can believe and practice abhorrent things? Ok, great. Is this comparison supposed to actually help out the LDS church, whose creed, if you will, LDS do not think is an abomination in God's sight, and which claims divine revelation and a mandate from God to be his kingdom on earth?
I simply provided it as an example of another religion that restricted activities of black people. Nothing else. That is what TD asked for.
Okie doke. I did always think it was kinda bizarre on MAD when someone would use the beliefs of other, non-true churches from the 1800s to justify bad beliefs in the supposedly true LDS church during that time (and later, as it turns out). Hey, these churches were not believed by LDS to be true, so is a comparison putting the LDS on par with them supposed to help?
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen
rcrocket wrote:Oh I see. It is OK to live one's life one way to one's friends, and another way on-line publicly. I could be mistaken, and hopefully I am not overstating things, but that kind of person will burn in hell.
I know you were talking to Guy Sajer, but I'll just mention that I often go to sacrament meeting because my wife wants me to (though I've skipped a few times lately and gotten away with it, which is good news), and I haven't resigned yet. You might think I'm a hypocrite too. I don't think so. My bishop knows about my unbelief, because we've met a couple of times and I told him. My home teachers also know, and I'm pretty sure my EQ president knows. My wife and daughter know. I have no doubt that the Mormon Grapevine has probably filled in a lot of other wardmembers about my belief status, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out anyhow since I get in my car and go home right after SM on days that I go, and haven't set foot in Sunday School or Priesthood Meeting in many moons. At any rate, it's nobody else's business anyhow, so whoever in my ward doesn't know, that's tough tookies.
When I show up in church, it's to support my wife and honor her wishes, not to lend the church my support, or to appear to believe to anyone else.
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen
Sethbag wrote:Okie doke. I did always think it was kinda bizarre on MAD when someone would use the beliefs of other, non-true churches from the 1800s to justify bad beliefs in the supposedly true LDS church during that time (and later, as it turns out). Hey, these churches were not believed by LDS to be true, so is a comparison putting the LDS on par with them supposed to help?
Yeah, I especially love it when apologists defend the issues in early church history by bringing up the catholic crusades, or the witch trials. As long as the issues with the LDS church are no worse that the worst religious atrocities, that's good enough for them.
"We of this Church do not rely on any man-made statement concerning the nature of Deity. Our knowledge comes directly from the personal experience of Joseph Smith." - Gordon B. Hinckley
"It's wrong to criticize leaders of the Mormon Church even if the criticism is true." - Dallin H. Oaks
Sethbag wrote:Okie doke. I did always think it was kinda bizarre on MAD when someone would use the beliefs of other, non-true churches from the 1800s to justify bad beliefs in the supposedly true LDS church during that time (and later, as it turns out). Hey, these churches were not believed by LDS to be true, so is a comparison putting the LDS on par with them supposed to help?
Yeah, I especially love it when apologists defend the issues in early church history by bringing up the catholic crusades, or the witch trials. As long as the issues with the LDS church are no worse that the worst religious atrocities, that's good enough for them.
I think Joseph had a little cruasade named zions camp that didn't work to well. On another crusade at crooked river people that latter-day saints attacked died. when Danites went through Davies County and burned the homes to the ground and took the loot back to the Bishops's store house that was'New Testament cool either. And then there is the frontier common law which was implemented in Southern Utah. To add something to my signature line that some people don't think and don't remember.
rcrocket wrote:I'll tell you, if I thought the Rosicrucian Society was a bunch of hooey, you wouldn't see me lending my person to its credibility.
Surprisingly, I do agree with Crockett on this issue, though I understand others must do what they can to keep their families intact.
When I decided the Mormon church was not what it claimed to be and that Joseph Smith was a liar and charlatan, I knew I couldn't in good conscience support that organization with my attendance or my membership. I informed my husband that I no longer believed the church to be true, that I would no longer be attending, that my children would only attend every other week, that I would no longer wear my garments and that I intended to resign. Understandably, he was shocked, but the ground rules were clear and he could make a decision to remain married to me under those circumstances or leave. I felt it only right to deal with him openly and honestly, plus, I intended to pry my daughters from Mormonism and didn't want to do it surreptitiously; I wanted to do nothing behind my husband's back.
Since telling my husband I no longer believed, I have not stepped foot in a Mormon church building. After months of misery, my husband decided to look into what caused his wife's apostasy and he eventually left the church, too, along with my four daughters.
Creating clear boundaries and not blurring them by attending church periodically is important, in my opinion. It only creates false hope in the still-believing spouse and confuses the children. In some circumstances, that's not possible. I understand that, but to me, my own personal integrity and protecting my children was the most important thing. If my husband doesn't want a woman who insists on living according to her own conscience, he shouldn't be married to me. I took a big risk and it paid off, but I couldn't have done it any other way.
KA
Bully for you. I am happy it worked out for you. Others may have more complications then you, a spouse that may not be as supportive, other issues that are at risk and they may not be as ready to make the leap. What works for some does not work for others.
And for that matter some may be concerned about some of the LDS Church truth claims but still very desirous of participating and worshiping as and LDS. I know we have the Monolithic Mormonism represented by Bob Crocket here and he finds such and approaching atrociousness, well maybe he is ok about the position but just not talking about in anonymously, and we have the Monolithic angry ex LDS that thinks if one does not do eveery itty bitty LDS thing both doctrinal and cultural just so they are hypocrites as well.
Bully for them as well.
However, if someone the caliber of Richard Bushman can understand that the absolutes of Mormonism do not always work well for many especially given the actual history of the Church, yet believes there is still room for such individuals and he seems among them, then I feel quite fine about things.
Oh I see. It is OK to live one's life one way to one's friends, and another way on-line publicly. I could be mistaken, and hopefully I am not overstating things, but that kind of person will burn in hell.
You are mistaken. I know this is your pet peeve. Get over it. This is a teeny tiny message board. In the big scheme of life it has little to do with much of anything. It is a place for some to vent. That is it. You monotone is getting old and shows that you have little substance to offer. As I have told you before, your monolithic Mormonsim is just that. Yours. Fortunately not everyone who has sway in the Church is as rigid about such things as you seem to be.
rcrocket wrote:I'll tell you, if I thought the Rosicrucian Society was a bunch of hooey, you wouldn't see me lending my person to its credibility.
Surprisingly, I do agree with Crockett on this issue, though I understand others must do what they can to keep their families intact.
When I decided the Mormon church was not what it claimed to be and that Joseph Smith was a liar and charlatan, I knew I couldn't in good conscience support that organization with my attendance or my membership. I informed my husband that I no longer believed the church to be true, that I would no longer be attending, that my children would only attend every other week, that I would no longer wear my garments and that I intended to resign. Understandably, he was shocked, but the ground rules were clear and he could make a decision to remain married to me under those circumstances or leave. I felt it only right to deal with him openly and honestly, plus, I intended to pry my daughters from Mormonism and didn't want to do it surreptitiously; I wanted to do nothing behind my husband's back.
Since telling my husband I no longer believed, I have not stepped foot in a Mormon church building. After months of misery, my husband decided to look into what caused his wife's apostasy and he eventually left the church, too, along with my four daughters.
Creating clear boundaries and not blurring them by attending church periodically is important, in my opinion. It only creates false hope in the still-believing spouse and confuses the children. In some circumstances, that's not possible. I understand that, but to me, my own personal integrity and protecting my children was the most important thing. If my husband doesn't want a woman who insists on living according to her own conscience, he shouldn't be married to me. I took a big risk and it paid off, but I couldn't have done it any other way.
KA
Bully for you. I am happy it worked out for you. Others may have more complications then you, a spouse that may not be as supportive, other issues that are at risk and they may not be as ready to make the leap. What works for some does not work for others.
And for that matter some may be concerned about some of the LDS Church truth claims but still very desirous of participating and worshiping as and LDS. I know we have the Monolithic Mormonism represented by Bob Crocket here and he finds such and approaching atrociousness, well maybe he is ok about the position but just not talking about in anonymously, and we have the Monolithic angry ex LDS that thinks if one does not do eveery itty bitty LDS thing both doctrinal and cultural just so they are hypocrites as well.
Bully for them as well.
However, if someone the caliber of Richard Bushman can understand that the absolutes of Mormonism do not always work well for many especially given the actual history of the Church, yet believes there is still room for such individuals and he seems among them, then I feel quite fine about things.
Jason, I hope I made it clear that I understand others need to do what they feel is best for their families, as I did what I felt was best for mine. I do advocate honesty between marriage partners and also firmly believe non-believers shouldn't be bullied into going to church by their believing spouses, but to each their own. I have a bit of an all or nothing personality, and that's just who I am, so for me, a middle ground with Mormonism just wasn't possible. I was a fully active, line-toeing Mormon and when I decided the church was bogus, I resigned immediately and was happy to be called an apostate. It's all one way or another with me. I completely understand it's not that way for others.
The important thing, Jason, is that you are comfortable with your position in Mormonism and that your conscience is clear. If you feel unsettled, then it's up to you to make the changes you need to satisfy your own integrity. If you are happy where you are, then I am happy for you. But I couldn't care less about Bushman. Just because he's comfortable shouldn't have any bearing on how you feel about Mormonism. You seem like an intelligent man who is capable of determining your own course and don't need him to justify any of your decisions. That's not a slam on you at all; rather it's a compliment. I hope you take it as such.
rcrocket wrote:Oh I see. It is OK to live one's life one way to one's friends, and another way on-line publicly. I could be mistaken, and hopefully I am not overstating things, but that kind of person will burn in hell.
I know you were talking to Guy Sajer, but I'll just mention that I often go to sacrament meeting because my wife wants me to (though I've skipped a few times lately and gotten away with it, which is good news), and I haven't resigned yet. You might think I'm a hypocrite too. I don't think so. My bishop knows about my unbelief, because we've met a couple of times and I told him. My home teachers also know, and I'm pretty sure my EQ president knows. My wife and daughter know. I have no doubt that the Mormon Grapevine has probably filled in a lot of other wardmembers about my belief status, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out anyhow since I get in my car and go home right after SM on days that I go, and haven't set foot in Sunday School or Priesthood Meeting in many moons. At any rate, it's nobody else's business anyhow, so whoever in my ward doesn't know, that's tough tookies.
When I show up in church, it's to support my wife and honor her wishes, not to lend the church my support, or to appear to believe to anyone else.
Well let me see.
I am not a non believer. I am a I am not sure what is up with the Church originations but it sure ain't the way they taught me. I hold to faith though.
That said, my wife knows where I am.
My adult children know I have concerns. My 12 year old does not and that is at my wife;s request and I am not really wanting to bring her into it yet.
My bishop knows and my SP knows.
I have talked to three or four of my closest LDS friends.
So because I post anonymously on a board about these things I will burn in hell. I do hope Bob is a more compassionate bishop then he seem here.