Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
To be fair, members of a particular religion or denomination often have no clue what it actually teaches.
Well, there are a heck of a lot of websites like CARM out there where they can find out what they really believe -- you know, the stuff they don't hear taught in church every Sunday year after year after year, but that everybody on the outside seems to know and is dying to tell them.
Well, there are a heck of a lot of websites like CARM out there where they can find out what they really believe -- you know, the stuff they don't hear taught in church every Sunday year after year after year, but that everybody on the outside seems to know and is dying to tell them.
You realize my statement was that I learned directly FROM Catholic radio, right? And it was stuff that we didn't actually hear in church. The usual Sunday morning Mass doesn't really talk about a lot of the deeper stuff of Catholic doctrine. It's assumed that one already understands it. Likewise, I think a lot of other religions/denominations assume that.
It's amazing how many times I've heard a Mormon missionary tell me that they had never heard of stuff like men becoming gods, even though Joseph Smith taught it.
Has anybody besides me noticed that the OP has never been back to comment on the thread he started? Wouldn't you think that if you care enough to start a thread, you'd have something to say on the subject?
I noticed that a few days ago, I noticed who started the thread and knowing his post history I had suspected he only started the thread to bait people into a poo flinging contest. Why would someone with a facebook meme ministry with thousands of people need to become a Mormon anyway?
Any insight would be greatly appreciated! I've tried a lot of different churches and this one just has a very strong presence of the Holy Spirit. Would love some advice...
This is what the scholars at the Irkle Academy of Truth™ call a teaching moment.
Diligently investigating as many religions and philosophies as you can is a wise and wonderful thing. That’s how you’ll eventually arrive at a set of beliefs that will sustain you in the face of life’s challenges and not collapse like a house of cards.
It's not clear to me what you mean by having tried different churches and feeling the Mormon church has a "strong presence of the Holy Spirit." I've lived in predominately Mormon areas almost my entire life. There is no question that the Mormons have an enviable organization in worldly terms. Their towns are invariably clean and tidy, they are generally clean, tidy and health-conscious people, they are often very successful in business, they take care of their own in times of sickness and distress, their churches and temples are models of tidiness and Christian symbolism, and they're enthusiastically welcoming of anyone who shows the slightest interest. They do indeed seem on the surface to be model Christians, and perhaps this is what you're describing.
However, to attach any weight to how superficially nice the members of a particular religion may seem, or to how welcoming, appealing or successful in worldly terms the religion may be, is a grave mistake.
All religions and philosophies, from Christianity (including Mormonism) and Buddhism to Scientology and even atheism, are ultimately about Truth. They are about ultimate ontological Truth. They purport to explain Reality.
If someone were simply looking for a congenial landing spot for social, economic or political reasons, any religion or philosophy might suffice. In my area, Mormonism would be an obvious choice. For that matter, lots of secular clubs and organizations might suffice. Things like the “niceness” of the members and the social, economic and political benefits would be highly relevant to the choice of landing spot. None of this would necessarily have anything whatsoever to do with ultimate Truth.
Lots of people – indeed, most people – really aren’t concerned with Truth at all. They fall into some belief system, be it Christianity or Buddhism or Scientology or atheism, for reasons such as I’ve suggested above. They’re raised into a particular belief system and mindlessly remain there, or they gravitate to one on the basis of what they see as social, economic or political benefits.
Many people have things exactly backwards: They seek out a landing spot that endorses the lifestyle they’ve already chosen and that teaches what they’d like to believe anyway. They aren’t seeking Truth but merely confirmation and acceptance. Since you indicate that the presence of the Holy Spirit is important to you, I assume you're sincerely concerned about Truth.
It’s entirely possible that the religion or philosophy most closely approximating Truth is an unappealing one one filled with unappealing people. Naturalistic atheism isn’t very appealing or comforting to most people – certainly not as appealing or comforting as a religion promising an eternity of bliss – but if it were True then I’d want to know it because Truth is what the quest should be about.
Why should the quest focus on Truth and not on “niceness” or other non-Truth-related considerations? Well, for one thing most religions and even secular philosophies have something to say about eternity. If, for example, Christianity were more likely to be True than Buddhism or atheism, a rational person would want to know this. Ditto if Mormonism were more likely to be True than some other version of Christianity.
Beyond this, the answers one arrives at will greatly influence this life. A Christian, a Buddhist, a Scientologist and an atheist don’t view themselves, their fellow humans and the world around them in the same way, and this greatly influences the way they lead their lives and respond to life’s challenges.
An investigation into Truth must concern itself with the explanatory power of a religion or philosophy. How well does it conform to the best scientific understanding of the natural order? How well does it explain what you experience and observe about yourself and the world around you? Is it philosophically sound and rational? To the extent it purports to deal with metaphysical issues, the answers to which we simply can’t know with certainty, is it at least consistent with what we can know, consistent with your experiences and observations, and intuitively believable to you?
If I were advising someone with an interest in Mormonism, I'd advise him to focus on the following (as I have done in considerable depth over many years):
1. The history of Joseph Smith and the milieu in which he came to prominence, which is extensively documented. Does Smith seem to you like a plausible individual for God to have chosen as a prophet? (Perhaps he does.)
2. The history of the Book of Mormon and other core Mormon documents, which is likewise extensively documented. Does it seem plausible to you that these were revealed by God in the manner Smith claimed? (Perhaps it does.)
3. The core doctrines of Mormonism as originally taught by Smith and the early church leaders, which are easily researched. If Mormonism is True, then these doctrines are the Truth. Do they strike you as True? (Perhaps they do.) Can you reconcile them with what Orthodox, Catholics and Protestants believed for 18 centuries before Joseph Smith was born? (Perhaps you can, or perhaps you’ll conclude that Mormonism is True and the others are simply Wrong.)
4. The evolution of many core Mormon doctrines and teachings, which is likewise well-documented. Does it seem plausible to you that Truth evolves in this manner? (Perhaps it does.) You’ll find an extensive body of Mormon scholarship – i.e., written by Mormon scholars – discussing the importance of the church continuing to evolve in the direction of mainstream Christianity and away from Smith and the early teachings. Is this troubling to you? (Perhaps it isn’t.)
It seems to me that the investigation into any religion must start with historical and scientific truth. If that part isn’t true, or at least plausible, the religion isn’t True. If Jesus never existed or the Resurrection never occurred, Christianity isn’t True. It simply goes poof, regardless of how appealing or successful it may be. Hence, whether Jesus plausibly existed and the Resurrection plausibly occurred are vital – dispositive – threshold questions.
Ditto for Mormonism. Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Protestantism and Mormonism aren't fungible versions of Christianity. Although they are broadly related, they posit some pretty different notions of Truth. This is certainly true of historical Mormonism vis-a-vis the other three. Someone who is concerned with Truth can't simply try on churches like they were coats and pick one that "seems" to fit.
If Mormons were the most Christ-like people on earth, if being a Mormon afforded unquestionable social, economic and political benefits (as it actually does in the areas in which I’ve lived my entire life), and if Mormon theology evolved to a point where its core doctrines were indistinguishable from (for example) Eastern Orthodoxy, it would nevertheless be impossible for me to be a Mormon. To me, the history of Joseph Smith, the core Mormon documents and the original teachings stops me from ever crossing the threshold. To me, this would be like buying a house that was appealing in every way except the minor facts that it sat on a polluted site and rested on a crumbling foundation.
Your mileage, of course, may vary. I'd urge you to be very cautious and careful, as you try different churches, about confusing superficial niceness with the "strong presence of the Holy Spirit."
This is what the scholars at the Irkle Academy of Truth™ call a teaching moment.
Diligently investigating as many religions and philosophies as you can is a wise and wonderful thing. That’s how you’ll eventually arrive at a set of beliefs that will sustain you in the face of life’s challenges and not collapse like a house of cards.
It's not clear to me what you mean by having tried different churches and feeling the Mormon church has a "strong presence of the Holy Spirit." I've lived in predominately Mormon areas almost my entire life. There is no question that the Mormons have an enviable organization in worldly terms. Their towns are invariably clean and tidy, they are generally clean, tidy and health-conscious people, they are often very successful in business, they take care of their own in times of sickness and distress, their churches and temples are models of tidiness and Christian symbolism, and they're enthusiastically welcoming of anyone who shows the slightest interest. They do indeed seem on the surface to be model Christians, and perhaps this is what you're describing.
However, to attach any weight to how superficially nice the members of a particular religion may seem, or to how welcoming, appealing or successful in worldly terms the religion may be, is a grave mistake.
All religions and philosophies, from Christianity (including Mormonism) and Buddhism to Scientology and even atheism, are ultimately about Truth. They are about ultimate ontological Truth. They purport to explain Reality.
If someone were simply looking for a congenial landing spot for social, economic or political reasons, any religion or philosophy might suffice. In my area, Mormonism would be an obvious choice. For that matter, lots of secular clubs and organizations might suffice. Things like the “niceness” of the members and the social, economic and political benefits would be highly relevant to the choice of landing spot. None of this would necessarily have anything whatsoever to do with ultimate Truth.
Lots of people – indeed, most people – really aren’t concerned with Truth at all. They fall into some belief system, be it Christianity or Buddhism or Scientology or atheism, for reasons such as I’ve suggested above. They’re raised into a particular belief system and mindlessly remain there, or they gravitate to one on the basis of what they see as social, economic or political benefits.
Many people have things exactly backwards: They seek out a landing spot that endorses the lifestyle they’ve already chosen and that teaches what they’d like to believe anyway. They aren’t seeking Truth but merely confirmation and acceptance. Since you indicate that the presence of the Holy Spirit is important to you, I assume you're sincerely concerned about Truth.
It’s entirely possible that the religion or philosophy most closely approximating Truth is an unappealing one one filled with unappealing people. Naturalistic atheism isn’t very appealing or comforting to most people – certainly not as appealing or comforting as a religion promising an eternity of bliss – but if it were True then I’d want to know it because Truth is what the quest should be about.
Why should the quest focus on Truth and not on “niceness” or other non-Truth-related considerations? Well, for one thing most religions and even secular philosophies have something to say about eternity. If, for example, Christianity were more likely to be True than Buddhism or atheism, a rational person would want to know this. Ditto if Mormonism were more likely to be True than some other version of Christianity.
Beyond this, the answers one arrives at will greatly influence this life. A Christian, a Buddhist, a Scientologist and an atheist don’t view themselves, their fellow humans and the world around them in the same way, and this greatly influences the way they lead their lives and respond to life’s challenges.
An investigation into Truth must concern itself with the explanatory power of a religion or philosophy. How well does it conform to the best scientific understanding of the natural order? How well does it explain what you experience and observe about yourself and the world around you? Is it philosophically sound and rational? To the extent it purports to deal with metaphysical issues, the answers to which we simply can’t know with certainty, is it at least consistent with what we can know, consistent with your experiences and observations, and intuitively believable to you?
If I were advising someone with an interest in Mormonism, I'd advise him to focus on the following (as I have done in considerable depth over many years):
1. The history of Joseph Smith and the milieu in which he came to prominence, which is extensively documented. Does Smith seem to you like a plausible individual for God to have chosen as a prophet? (Perhaps he does.)
2. The history of the Book of Mormon and other core Mormon documents, which is likewise extensively documented. Does it seem plausible to you that these were revealed by God in the manner Smith claimed? (Perhaps it does.)
3. The core doctrines of Mormonism as originally taught by Smith and the early church leaders, which are easily researched. If Mormonism is True, then these doctrines are the Truth. Do they strike you as True? (Perhaps they do.) Can you reconcile them with what Orthodox, Catholics and Protestants believed for 18 centuries before Joseph Smith was born? (Perhaps you can, or perhaps you’ll conclude that Mormonism is True and the others are simply Wrong.)
4. The evolution of many core Mormon doctrines and teachings, which is likewise well-documented. Does it seem plausible to you that Truth evolves in this manner? (Perhaps it does.) You’ll find an extensive body of Mormon scholarship – i.e., written by Mormon scholars – discussing the importance of the church continuing to evolve in the direction of mainstream Christianity and away from Smith and the early teachings. Is this troubling to you? (Perhaps it isn’t.)
It seems to me that the investigation into any religion must start with historical and scientific truth. If that part isn’t true, or at least plausible, the religion isn’t True. If Jesus never existed or the Resurrection never occurred, Christianity isn’t True. It simply goes poof, regardless of how appealing or successful it may be. Hence, whether Jesus plausibly existed and the Resurrection plausibly occurred are vital – dispositive – threshold questions.
Ditto for Mormonism. Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Protestantism and Mormonism aren't fungible versions of Christianity. Although they are broadly related, they posit some pretty different notions of Truth. This is certainly true of historical Mormonism vis-a-vis the other three. Someone who is concerned with Truth can't simply try on churches like they were coats and pick one that "seems" to fit.
If Mormons were the most Christ-like people on earth, if being a Mormon afforded unquestionable social, economic and political benefits (as it actually does in the areas in which I’ve lived my entire life), and if Mormon theology evolved to a point where its core doctrines were indistinguishable from (for example) Eastern Orthodoxy, it would nevertheless be impossible for me to be a Mormon. To me, the history of Joseph Smith, the core Mormon documents and the original teachings stops me from ever crossing the threshold. To me, this would be like buying a house that was appealing in every way except the minor facts that it sat on a polluted site and rested on a crumbling foundation.
Your mileage, of course, may vary. I'd urge you to be very cautious and careful, as you try different churches, about confusing superficial niceness with the "strong presence of the Holy Spirit."
The presence of the Holy Spirit is indeed reflected in the people and the way they live and love, NOT who the founder of their religion was, or what human-derived beliefs they claim to have about what is patently unknown or unknowable. God is perfectly capable of drawing straight lines even with crooked sticks.
The presence of the Holy Spirit is indeed reflected in the people and the way they live and love, NOT who the founder of their religion was, or what human-derived beliefs they claim to have about what is patently unknown or unknowable. God is perfectly capable of drawing straight lines even with crooked sticks.
If that were true, then anyone who satisfied objective standards (yours, presumably) of being kind and loving, be they Scientologists, Muslims or Turd Worshippers, would be indwelt by the Holy Spirit. (The tenor of your own consistently angry and dismissive posts might call your own status into question, but I'll let it go because I'm one of those genuinely kind and loving sorts.)
In Christian theology, only Christians are indwelt by the Holy Spirit. Ergo, in your theology, anyone who is objectively kind and loving is, voila, a Christian. There is literally nothing to your Christianity other than fuzzy notions of niceness. This has never, ever, anywhere, been the understanding of what it means to be a Christian. Indeed, if the standard were simply "being kind and loving," there would have been no reason at all for Jesus to suffer and die or Christianity to exist. (The historical Jesus - the Jesus of the Gospels, the only Jesus we have - would scarcely qualify as kind and loving by your skewed understanding, a problem you attempt to tap-dance around by claiming we can't trust the Gospels because they don't accord with the Jesus of your, er, "visions." If the real Jesus were posting here, you'd surely despise him!)
While I assume the moderators will allow your slander of Joseph Smith as a "crooked stick" to stand - my post was quite statesmanlike in comparison, I believe - you do seem to be acknowledging that Mormonism has some glaring historical problems. The issue isn't whether there are kind and loving Mormons - of course there are, just as there are militant atheists who are surely more kind and loving than I am. The issue isn't even whether Mormons are Christians - that issue is foreclosed by the Terms of Service, and in any event the determination is solely up to God.
My point to the OP was simply that I believe a diligent inquiry into the history of Joseph Smith, the core Mormon documents and the historical teachings of Mormonism would be extremely prudent before concluding that this should be his landing spot. My challenge to him would be the basis on which he so readily concludes he is experiencing "the strong presence of the Holy Spirit." Is he confusing it with the cloying niceness with which Mormons (and others, of course) are famous for welcoming potential converts? Given the history of Mormonism, which can't simply be ignored, why would he conclude that of all possible landing spots within Christianity this is where the Truth is to be found?
The Mormons historically have been among the most dogmatic of denominations about the importance of being within their church and only their church. Despite the evolution of doctrine, they still firmly teach that church membership is essential "to inherit a place in the highest degree of the celestial kingdom," https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/...ation?lang=eng. In short, the kind and loving Mormons do not even vaguely accept your wacky niceness theology!
Last edited by Irkle Berserkle; 09-24-2021 at 02:16 PM..
If that were true, then anyone who satisfied objective standards (yours, presumably) of being kind and loving, be they Scientologists, Muslims or Turd Worshippers, would be indwelt by the Holy Spirit. (The tenor of your own consistently angry and dismissive posts might call your own status into question, but I'll let it go because I'm one of those genuinely kind and loving sorts.)
In Christian theology, only Christians are indwelt by the Holy Spirit. Ergo, in your theology, anyone who is objectively kind and loving is, voila, a Christian. There is literally nothing to your Christianity other than fuzzy notions of niceness. This has never, ever, anywhere, been the understanding of what it means to be a Christian. Indeed, if the standard were simply "being kind and loving," there would have been no reason at all for Jesus to suffer and die or Christianity to exist. (The historical Jesus - the Jesus of the Gospels, the only Jesus we have - would scarcely qualify as kind and loving by your skewed understanding, a problem you attempt to tap-dance around by claiming we can't trust the Gospels because they don't accord with the Jesus of your, er, "visions." If the real Jesus were posting here, you'd surely despise him!)
While I assume the moderators will allow your slander of Joseph Smith as a "crooked stick" to stand - my post was quite statesmanlike in comparison, I believe - you do seem to be acknowledging that Mormonism has some glaring historical problems. The issue isn't whether there are kind and loving Mormons - of course there are, just as there are militant atheists who are surely more kind and loving than I am. The issue isn't even whether Mormons are Christians - that issue is foreclosed by the Terms of Service, and in any event the determination is solely up to God.
My point to the OP was simply that I believe a diligent inquiry into the history of Joseph Smith, the core Mormon documents and the historical teachings of Mormonism would be extremely prudent before concluding that this should be his landing spot. My challenge to him would be the basis on which he so readily concludes he is experiencing "the strong presence of the Holy Spirit." Is he confusing it with the cloying niceness with which Mormons (and others, of course) are famous for welcoming potential converts? Given the history of Mormonism, which can't simply be ignored, why would he conclude that of all possible landing spots within Christianity this is where the Truth is to be found?
The ONLY place the Holy Spirit is to be found is in those who exhibit the following states of mind, period!!!
The Holy Spirit IS the True Nature of God revealed, described, and demonstrated unambiguously by Jesus. He IS agape love, kindness, mercy, compassion, gentleness, unconditional acceptance, empathy, sympathy, tolerance, long-suffering, decency, friendliness, peacefulness, joyfulness, understanding, care, concern, solicitude, solicitousness, sensitivity, tender-heartedness, soft-heartedness, warm-heartedness, warmth, love, brotherly love, tenderness, gentleness, mercifulness, leniency, lenience, consideration, kindness, humanity, humaneness, kind-heartedness, charity, benevolence, and He is non-judgmental.
The ONLY place the Holy Spirit is to be found is in those who exhibit the following states of mind, period!!!
The Holy Spirit IS the True Nature of God revealed, described, and demonstrated unambiguously by Jesus. He IS agape love, kindness, mercy, compassion, gentleness, unconditional acceptance, empathy, sympathy, tolerance, long-suffering, decency, friendliness, peacefulness, joyfulness, understanding, care, concern, solicitude, solicitousness, sensitivity, tender-heartedness, soft-heartedness, warm-heartedness, warmth, love, brotherly love, tenderness, gentleness, mercifulness, leniency, lenience, consideration, kindness, humanity, humaneness, kind-heartedness, charity, benevolence, and He is non-judgmental.
The Holy Spirit doesn’t just exist only in a purified place, if that is true how can it work on us to purify, correct, comfort, us?
The Holy Spirit is all those things but it works on, in, through anything that has spirit and the repelling/attraction is a symptom of of its invisible working on us at a soul level individually and also collectively - it depends on our own state how we will react to its working
The ONLY place the Holy Spirit is to be found is in those who exhibit the following states of mind, period!!!
The Holy Spirit IS the True Nature of God revealed, described, and demonstrated unambiguously by Jesus. He IS agape love, kindness, mercy, compassion, gentleness, unconditional acceptance, empathy, sympathy, tolerance, long-suffering, decency, friendliness, peacefulness, joyfulness, understanding, care, concern, solicitude, solicitousness, sensitivity, tender-heartedness, soft-heartedness, warm-heartedness, warmth, love, brotherly love, tenderness, gentleness, mercifulness, leniency, lenience, consideration, kindness, humanity, humaneness, kind-heartedness, charity, benevolence, and He is non-judgmental.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meerkat2
The Holy Spirit doesn’t just exist only in a purified place, if that is true how can it work on us to purify, correct, comfort, us?
The Holy Spirit is all those things but it works on, in, through anything that has spirit and the repelling/attraction is a symptom of its invisible working on us at a soul level individually and also collectively - it depends on our own state how we will react to its working
I think you have simply rephrased what I said to clarify it, Meerkat. The Comforter (Holy Spirit) is within us all, thanks to Jesus, but we do not all allow Him to guide and direct our daily lives because we evoke different, often quite opposite states of mind. Only when we are in the compatible states of mind can we be guided by the Comforter to the truth God has "written in our hearts" and avoid sin ("missing the mark").
The ONLY place the Holy Spirit is to be found is in those who exhibit the following states of mind, period!!!
The Holy Spirit IS the True Nature of God revealed, described, and demonstrated unambiguously by Jesus. He IS agape love, kindness, mercy, compassion, gentleness, unconditional acceptance, empathy, sympathy, tolerance, long-suffering, decency, friendliness, peacefulness, joyfulness, understanding, care, concern, solicitude, solicitousness, sensitivity, tender-heartedness, soft-heartedness, warm-heartedness, warmth, love, brotherly love, tenderness, gentleness, mercifulness, leniency, lenience, consideration, kindness, humanity, humaneness, kind-heartedness, charity, benevolence, and He is non-judgmental.
Fortunately for the other 99.999999999999% of Christians - i.e., pretty much everyone but you - Paul has given us a clear definition of the fruit of the Holy Spirit. Jesus has given us clear direction as to what is required to enter into eternal life. Both the OT and NT have given us a clear understanding of God's love, holiness and justice.
Your Niceness Theology expands this to include unbiblical notions like "unconditional acceptance" and "non-judgmentalness." The God of Christianity is unconditionally accepting and non-judgmental??? The Jesus of the NT is unconditionally accepting and non-judgmental??? Really, ya think? I'm far from a Bible literalist, but I couldn't reach those conclusions if I read the Bible backwards and upside-down while chewing peyote buttons and chanting Om Mani Padme Hum (as I often do, just for the sheer challenge of it).
Once again I point out, because this is theoretically a thread about Mormonism: The Mormons don't even vaguely agree with your theology! But you are so obsessive and one-dimensional that you can't resist flogging your dead horse one more time.
In any event, I'm not following you any deeper down this rabbit hole, on this thread or elsewhere. Can't you find some new shtick, some new theological wrinkle, that is at least mildly interesting?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
