GC Talk Referring to Being Born Again

[_Gaia]

Hi Gaia, certainly no body minds you joining in. I'm sorry I'm not familiar with you :

GAIA:
Hi Roger == Hopefully, we'll change that *smile* --

ROGER:
But I gather from your post that you are, or seem to be, a fundamentalist, ultra-orthodox Mormon?? While you will be in good company here, with many allies, I find it diffcult to embrace the notions of damnation, and secretive exclusiveness that you declare. If I understand you correctly. Is that your belief?

GAIA:

Wow -- what gave you those ideas?

I have to laugh -- And i'll bet a few others here (Moksha?) who know me from other groups, are really bemused at this point; i've been taking a beating over in another group for being identified (by others) as an "anti-MOrmon" LOL --


I'm afraid that either i poorly represented myself, or you misunderstood quite a bit, perhaps a little of both *rueful grin* --


First of all, you will find as you get to know me, that i actually seldom post much about my own personal beliefs, for various reasons -- including the fact that they are very eclectic and based upon rather wide-ranging interests, experiences and study.


Secondly, i was answering a question about LDS doctrine/ belief, and therefore quoted LDS scripture and doctrine, not my own.

As i said, i have rather wide-ranging interests and background; one of those areas is LDS history and doctrine, so i do enjoy discussing them, and often try to make what i hope will be helpful, revealing or thought-provoking observations and contributions in that area -- but as i do so, you should never assume that i'm speaking my own personal "beliefs", ok?

Certainly there is some justification for that stance. It is constructed by speculative theology, as are most creeds and sectarian doctrines. The one you reference being LDS, supported by LDS hiearchial authority. Totally embraced by some, barely considered by others, and out rightly rejected by those who find such teachings--damnation & exclusivity--to fly in the face of functional Christianity.

The latter taught by Jesus, and principled in His "Two New Commandments". In my seriously considered opinion (IMSCO) that is. Warm regards, Roger

GAIA:

Well, first, let's make sure i understood you correctly -- you seem to be saying that Jesus focused upon just two basic things:
a) Love God
b) Love your neighbor as yourself


And that his teachings were INclusive rather than EXclusive.


Furthermore, you seem to be saying that you felt the LDS doctrines i discussed were EXclusive, perhaps even spiritually elitist? --


I am not quite sure i understand why you feel that way, and i would be interested in your explaining that.


I would certainly agree with you that Jesus was if anything, INclusive -- in his theology as well as his personal practices and attitudes. He associated with those who were considered outcasts in his own culture; and spiritually, he taught (for example):

(Matthew 8:11-13.)
11 And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.
12 But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth."



Pretty inclusive stuff *g*.

In fact, as i've said elsewhere, Jesus praised Pagans (the Roman Centurion in the incident above was undoubtedly Pagan) and used them as examples of righteous behavior (see Luke 10).

In fact Jesus reserved his most scathing condemnations NOT for sinners, NOT for unbelievers, but for those hypocritical elitist Pharisees who prided themselves on having the "right" religion, the "right" dogma, the "right" answers -- and looked down upon everyone else.

All of that is by way of demonstrating just a bit of how inclusive Jesus really was, AND i believe him to have been.


Finally, however - I did not see the LDS doctrines or scriptures i referenced in my previous message, as being exclusive or elitist; in fact just the opposite: According to LDS theology, ALL are "called and elected" to salvation, exaltation and glory. Again, i'm a little bewildered as to why you felt they were.



I hope that clarifies my intent and at least some of my position -- Feel free to ask questions.


Blessings --
~Gaia

[_Roger Morrison]

Hi Gaia, i'll try to 'type' while eating crow, and wiping ege off my face. So please excuse any tipos. Seems we might have more incommon than not, eh?

Don't know if this justifies my hasty conclusion. But when i read, "...calling & election made sure..." i knee-jerked. When i saw you quoting Moses PoGP, i did it again. I don't think i'm blessed with your ability to be sooo objective. Could be i'll learn something from You?

I'm past believing in the "Fall" & the need of a "Redeemer". Man is not the enemy of "God". In fact humanity is the hands and heart of "God". Anything good done, it's by man. AND, anything not-good, it's by man.

I do think we might see Jesus through the same prism?? An "inclusive" guy! Me: a mortal man with a mission, that, as i see it was to teach the masses how to live in harmony with "God" and each other. Also he called the "righteous"--Scribes, Pharasses, 'Church-Leaders' to repentance. With all of their good intentions it is most difficult for them--and for us--to not be negatively influenced by their/our life conditioning.

You said in closing:

Finally, however - I did not see the LDS doctrines or scriptures I referenced in my previous message, as being exclusive or elitist; in fact just the opposite: According to LDS theology, ALL are "called and elected" to salvation, exaltation and glory. Again, I'm a little bewildered as to why you felt they were.

"...According to LDS theology, ALL are "called and elected" to salvation, exaltation and glory..." So they do say. BUT, with THE caveat: "only if & when they are dutiful members of the "only true church," which is .............. (fill in the blank) My evolved to, current understanding of "God", the Universe, and the workings we depend on to sustain ourselvse, leads me to reject the LDS interpretation "ALL". Which to them excludes 'all' who do not 'believe' LDS fundamentals. I also do not believe "...salvation, exaltation and glory..." to be anything but theological imaginings.

To me, at this time, "ALL" means every breathing ethnicity in the whole human race. As the sun and rain bless without exception, or ritualism, whatever there is to benefit and advance humanity is there for all who seek, ask, knock and find. That the scientific community is more adept at so doing than the religious community, is to the shame of the latter (Day-Saints?;-0) As i see it... Warm regards, Roger

[_Gaia]

Hi Gaia, I'll try to 'type' while eating crow, and wiping ege off my face. So please excuse any tipos. Seems we might have more incommon than not, eh?

GAIA:

After reading your comments, i think more than you may yet realize *g*

ROGER:
I'm past believing in the "Fall" & the need of a "Redeemer". Man is not the enemy of "God". In fact humanity is the hands and heart of "God". Anything good done, it's by man. AND, anything not-good, it's by man.

GAIA:

You may find the following quote interesting; it's by Starhawk, a well known Visionary, author and Pagan High Priestess:

One regressive tendency is what i call "absolutism", which stems from an intolerance of ambiguity.
Our culture is highly symbol-bound, and we carry the unconscious assumption that symbolic systems
are the realities they describe. If the description is the reality, and descriptions
differ, only one can be true. EITHER God created Adam and Eve, OR they evolved ala Darwin.
Either unresolved unconscious conflicts are the fial cause of our unhappiness, or economic and material
conditions.
We may change ideologies, but we do not examine the underlying idea that there is only ONE Right,
True and Only Way -- OURS! -- and everybody else is wrong.

Absolutism is divisive. It sets up false conflicts -- for example, between politics and spirituality.


{NOTE: Mystical Mormons might suggest that Joseph Smith recognized the error of this, and that's
at least one reason why he didn't stop with a new religion, he created (or revealed) new, hopefully
sanctified and sanctifying political, economic and social systems, so that those who become "new
creatures in Christ" don't just have to go back to the old, fallen and corrupt (and corrupting!) social,
political and economic systems....}


The Judeo-Christian {and it should perhaps be noted that it's only Christians who use this term!}
heritage has left us with the view of a universe composed of warring opposites, which are viewed
as either good or evil. They cannot co-exist.

A valuable insight of {some Pagan religions} is that polarities are in balance, not at war. Energy
moves in cycles. At times, it flows outward, pushing us to change the world; at other times, it
flows inward, transforming ourselves. It cannot be indefinitely exerted exclusively in one direction;
it just always turns and re-turns, pushes and pulls, and so renews.

If we label either end of the cycle "wrong" or unnecessary, we cut ourselves off from any possibility
of renewal or for the exercise of sustained power. We must win clear of the tendency to associate
religion and spirituality with withdrawal from the world and the field of action.

Dualism slides over into what i call the "Righteousness Syndrome" -- When there is One Right and
Only Way -- OURS! -- and everybody else is wrong, then those who are wrong are damned, and
the damned are evil. We are excused from recognizing their humanness and from treating them
according to the ethics with which we treat each other.
(Starhawk, "The Spiral Dance: A Rebirth of the Religion of the Great Goddess", p 201)


(Sounds a bit like some of the disagreements between "True-Blue Mormons" and very Christian "Anti-Mormons", huh?)

ROGER:

I do think we might see Jesus through the same prism?? An "inclusive" guy! Me: a mortal man with a mission, that, as I see it was to teach the masses how to live in harmony with "God" and each other. Also he called the "righteous"--Scribes, Pharasses, 'Church-Leaders' to repentance. With all of their good intentions it is most difficult for them--and for us--to not be negatively influenced by their/our life conditioning.

GAIA:

Absolutely -- and not just the official "Church leaders", but everyone who perceives themselves part of the "In-Crowd" - the "Us" in the "Us-Against-Them" -- the "Right" in the "Righteous" *g*.

ROGER:

"...According to LDS theology, ALL are "called and elected" to salvation, exaltation and glory..." So they do say. BUT, with THE caveat: "only if & when they are dutiful members of the "only true church," which is .............. (fill in the blank) My evolved to, current understanding of "God", the Universe, and the workings we depend on to sustain ourselvse, leads me to reject the LDS interpretation "ALL". Which to them excludes 'all' who do not 'believe' LDS fundamentals. I also do not believe "...salvation, exaltation and glory..." to be anything but theological imaginings.

GAIA:

OK, i think i understand your pov; in fact, it does have some things in common with my own.

I look forward to future conversations with you, Roger!


(PS -- Does anyone mind me using the larger font? I'm getting eye strain, reading the smaller one)

Blessings --
~GAia

[_Roger Morrison]

Hi Gaia, Starhawk is good. Large print is good. (Does that put you over 45, when the telephone book becomes unreadable? ;-) Your thoughts are good. They echo my own.

Now, how do "we" convince "those" others? LOL!!

A valuable insight of {some Pagan religions} is that polarities are in balance, not at war. Energy
moves in cycles. At times, it flows outward, pushing us to change the world; at other times, it
flows inward, transforming ourselves. It cannot be indefinitely exerted exclusively in one direction;
it just always turns and re-turns, pushes and pulls, and so renews.

Sort-of like music. Depends on tension and resolution of strings to make sounds that vary and build into the beautiful...OR, the horrible. Weaving...warp and woof. Staggered joints in brick rows. Magnetic poles. So much in nature that belies conformity and absolutes.

Yet certain personality types are not comfortable as individuals. They seem to need to rule others, or be ruled, at home, in business, in politics, et al. But religion rules/persuaides with the biggest stick and carrot; bonding both the passive and aggressive together in their attempt to conquer the nonconformist, radical, contrarian. Mindless of the fact that they/all owe their/our 'comforts' to the last three types who usually lead the sciences to new discoveries.

Enough already, already... Warm regards, Roger