LDS Mamas and Papas #39 - Page 24

[Brisen]

I don't have much time to post right now, but Katie, I just wanted to point out something that helped me when I was having the same thoughts as you are. Everyone who comes to the Earth knew what the Plan of Salvation entailed before they chose to come here. They had a choice, and they chose coming to the earth, knowing what all of the potential consequences were.

[klg47]

Originally Posted by Leiahs

I had been starting to get really down about how critical others on the board were viewing those of us with that belief, and was forgetting something that you pointed out so nicely (at least my interpretation of what you posted) - that we believe what we do because it's a Godly thing to do, and we are not trying to be like the world.

This is more about chastity in general, but we really do believe differently than most of the world. Chastity is getting to be an unpopular belief, even in churches that used to teach it.

Right at this moment I'm listening to Def Leppard's Have You Ever Needed Someone So Bad?, and it says "why save your kisses for a rainy day? Just let them roam and take your heart away. . . " It seems like just an innocent love song, but the anti-chastity message certainly is there! 80's rock definitely isn't known for its ultra-moral viewpoints, but it's just another illustration of how differently the world thinks.

[klg47]

Originally Posted by Brisen

Everyone who comes to the Earth knew what the Plan of Salvation entailed before they chose to come here.

Good point

[fericito]

I can't think of ANYTHING more difficult than our day to day struggle of living in the world but not being wordly.

It is a struggle of nearly every minute.

Sometimes I can't wait until we're done with it!

[Laurel]

[QUOTE=klg47;7670219]

I wonder how this Church could be true and have so much baggage that needs to be 'explained' away.

Most if not all churches have this kind of baggage. The difference is that for most churches, the baggage is ignored by others (except with maybe the Catholic Church). I don't really think we have that much baggage. When it is there, it is because the Church is made up of imperfect people...just like any other organization on earth. Sometimes there appears to be "baggage" when there really isn't any, just because people (ourselves and others on the outside) don't understand whatever it is that is being seen as baggage.

If anything, the opposition to the Church is a greater indicator that it is true (to me, anyway). It very well illustrates the principle of opposition. There are many ideas and doctrines in churches and in the secular world that are just ignored by those who don't believe in them. Why can't it be that way with our doctrines? Why do some people feel such a need to pick and pick at it? Why can't other people just accept that people have different beliefs and leave it at that. IMO it's because the adversary is at work. The adversary couldn't be content to just leave it be.

And sometimes doctrinal things just sound so off to me. Like when ds5 came home and told me what he had learned in church - that you can't live with Heavenly Father unless you are baptized. It just hit me so harshly. I know that the Church teaches that, but it just sounded so harsh. I know that people who don't receive the gospel will have a chance to accept it, but what about people who hear it and then don't accept it or don't always live it for whatever reason? I always tell myself that Heavenly Father will work it out and they will have another chance in heaven, but I was just kidding myself.

Why were you kidding yourself? (I'm asking in a genuine way, not to be snarky.) What you described is what I've always believed. I believe that the foundation of the gospel is the Atonement of Jesus Christ, and that because of the Atonement, Christ is the perfect judge because He perfectly understands everything we've been through and experienced. I believe that Christ will have a perfect understanding of whether someone really knew what they were doing when they rejected the gospel. I believe that everyone will have as many chances as they need to truly understand what they are doing when they reject the gospel plan and that God will work with them to give them the understanding and experiences they need in order to make a truly informed choice. As far as not living it, well, I think that falls under the umbrella of the Atonement too.

I do think that our doctrine presents the most merciful view of "heaven" of any Christian denomination out there. There are many who truly believe that it's heaven or hell and nothing in between. But we are taught that all three degrees of glory are part of "heaven" and like someone mentioned, Joseph Smith taught that even the Telestial Kingdom has glory greater than we can imagine. Only those who are sons of perdition will be in hell as we think of it.

If people in the Church have questions, the questions are rarely answered - the people are just asked "are you reading your scriptures? Are you praying? Are you going to the temple?" I'm not sure what I'm looking for here.

Hmm, this hasn't been my experience. I've always felt like I could get answers to any question I wanted. It might not always be that people would know the answers. Maybe there really wasn't an answer to the question I had. But I could always seek. I've never felt like questions of mine were blown off. I think the Lord wants us to question, to seek, to learn, to understand. When I look at the apostles, they are not only men of faith, but gospel scholars too. They are highly intelligent people who in my mind are gospel "academics". I do think that it is possible to be so caught up in getting answers to questions that we neglect what is really important, which IS scripture study, prayer, and temple attendance. Also, those things open the door for us to find answers to our questions and to feel the spirit. I think if we are not doing those basic things, then we will never be at peace regardless of whether or not our other questions are answered.

I wanted to post more specifically about reading anti-LDS literature, but my baby needs me. I'll try to come back later.

[klg47]

Thanks for your reply. It was all very helpful. I'll just address this one thing:

Originally Posted by Laurel

Why were you kidding yourself? (I'm asking in a genuine way, not to be snarky.) What you described is what I've always believed.

The quote that I linked to basically said the opposite of what I thought or hoped might be true. But perhaps it's not the entire story. For example, the quote says

"There is no promise in any revelation that those who have a fair and just opportunity in this life to accept the gospel, and who do not do it, will have another chance in the spirit world to gain salvation. On the contrary, there is the express stipulation that men cannot be saved without accepting the gospel in this life, if they are given opportunity to accept it." (emphasis added by me)

But the article doesn't define "fair and just". Perhaps that falls under the atonement as you described.

[danaalex]

coming in late here, and mind you i'm very new to the church, but while alot might need to be "explained" or whatnot, this church makes far more sense to me than any other i've ever belonged to.

i guess for me, the biggest issue i had was how come people before Christ had SOOOO much from God/ Heavenly Father. there were prophets and revelation, etc. then after Jesus and his apostles died, that was it? the end? there was never anymore? so decades of God and miracles and revelation and then POOF! it's all gone????? that just never made sense to me.

i was explaining to my DH, who doesn't really even believe in God, how LDS differs from most of Christianity. i was explaining the no hell aspect and while he knows about the different levels he still equates it with "good" and "evil." i basically brought it down to what someone else said, it's about a level of happiness that we get to in THIS life! we are given choices and allowed to make them. so, the better your choices, usually the more happy you are and therefore tend to follow that path. the worse your choices the less happy you tend to be. but it's a learning process, so you learn from that choice and work hard to make a better choice the next time

so, while someone might not have heard the gospel, and might not have been baptized in this life they have the chance to hear it again after death. and if they still make the choice to not accept it, then they do end up where they would be most comfortable with that choice. and i believe that to be an amazing gift!!!!!!! like for my DH, he will have the chance to hear the gospel again, he will have the chance to accept it and be baptized after he dies. or, he can go on in denial and chose to pretend it doesn't exist. that is his choice, HE knows NOW though enough about the gospel that i would hope he'd finally believe after being able to see it for himself

the chaste life might be hard to live, but i also feel that it is liberating you no longer have to worry about making the choice between something you feel might be wrong and what you know is right, you KNOW the right answer when things like that appear. as long as you stick to your beliefs and morals i find that a lot of people will respect them if you try to make excuses or explain them away, people will see that as wavering or questioning and will push you on the topic.

at least that's MY view on things anyway

[Brisen]

Originally Posted by klg47

Like when ds5 came home and told me what he had learned in church - that you can't live with Heavenly Father unless you are baptized.

I'm going to be the nitpick and point out that your 5 yo ds, right now, could live with Heavenly Father without being baptized. Those who don't reach the age of accountability on the earth don't need to be baptized, and they go to the Celestial kingdom.

[klg47]

Originally Posted by Brisen

I'm going to be the nitpick and point out that your 5 yo ds, right now, could live with Heavenly Father without being baptized. Those who don't reach the age of accountability on the earth don't need to be baptized, and they go to the Celestial kingdom.

He actually did say "when you're 8". So they taught them right But I had issue with that too :-P I mean, what if a kid doesn't want to be baptized or isn't ready when they're 8? My intent is to make sure that my kids are choosing to be baptized at 8, not doing it just because it's the thing you do (being a "Cultural" Mormon). I explained to him that when he's 8 he'll get to choose if he wants to be baptized.

This kind of leads to a related question. Do you teach your kids the gospel as fact, with no reservations whatsoever, or do you teach things as "this is what I believe" and acknowledge that other people believe different things?

[klg47]

People need to check Snopes!

I was reading my mom's ward newsletter and it had an article from the editor. I don't even remember what the point of the article was, but the writer talked extensively about Captain Kangaroo's military experience and then went on to describe Mr. Rogers' experience as a Navy SEAL, including his tattoos and 25 confirmed kills. I told my mom that someone needs to teach the editor how to check Snopes! (This rumor has been around for a long time - Mr. Rogers was never in the armed forces, let alone the SEALs!)

[holyhelianthus]

DH fixed our computer today so i'm back! missed you all.

[NewCrunchyDaddy]

If y'all'll bear with me here, I'll throw my two cents into the ring (that'd be a good smiley, two pennies clattering to the floor ... anyway ...), diving in ...

Originally Posted by Leiahs

I wish I could remember where I've heard it (probably from Brigham Young or Joseph Smith, or someone from that era), but I remember hearing that if people choose to live the laws of the Gospel on earth, they will be happy in a Celestial state. If they choose not to live the laws of the Gospel, they wouldn't be happy there - they would be uncomfortable in that level of glory. Remember that each degree of glory, including the lowest, is more glorious than any of us here on earth can even imagine.

After all, they are still Degrees of Glory. Even the Telestial Kingdom is still a glorious place. I believe (and, correct me if I'm wrong anyone) that Joseph Smith said that if we were to but catch a glimpse of the Telestial Kingdom, we would kill ourselves to get there, it was so much more glorious than this earth.

Also, remember that Joseph Smith taught that God the Father will preside over the Celestial Kingdom, Jesus Christ will preside over the Terrestrial Kingdom and the Holy Ghost will preside over the Telestial Kingdom (in the case of the later two, preside is probably better stated as "visit" but you get the idea) and that people in the Celestial Kingdom will be able to visit (family members, friends, etc.) the Terrestial and Telestial Kingdoms and people in the Terrestrial Kingdom will get to visit (family members, friends, etc.) the Telestial Kingdom. So ... it's not as "exclusive" as it might sound on paper.

Originally Posted by Leiahs

Okay, so bear with me, because I'm ill and not thinking very clearly today (lol), but basically we'll be happy with where we end up because it will fit the disposition that we moved on with after death. Of course we're taught the difference between happy, more happy, and MOST happy, but I think it will all be happy. Heavenly Father *wants* us to be happy. He is a merciful God, and will judge us with as much mercy as He can within the bounds of the laws he has set. I've heard it said that we are harsher on ourselves than God would be. I hope it's true.

That is my understanding of the doctrine as well. That "Hell" (with the exception of Outer Darkness) is more a state of mind, rather than a place with fire, brimstone and pitchforks. It is the thought that you could have done more to live in God's presence but didn't. This is more directed to "Spirit Prison," per se, but the idea fits...

Originally Posted by klg47

I mean, what if a kid doesn't want to be baptized or isn't ready when they're 8? My intent is to make sure that my kids are choosing to be baptized at 8, not doing it just because it's the thing you do (being a "Cultural" Mormon). I explained to him that when he's 8 he'll get to choose if he wants to be baptized.

I think this is the most wonderful way to teach it. The Gospel is not compulsory. I think people would do well to remember that Church is an eternal decision and not a social club. I think if more people approached it the way you are Katie, we'd be better off. Honest truth, cross my heart

Originally Posted by klg47

Do you teach your kids the gospel as fact, with no reservations whatsoever, or do you teach things as "this is what I believe" and acknowledge that other people believe different things?

What I hope to do with Connor - he's too young right now, so I have time to perfect this - is to do a little of both of what you said. The Gospel is fact. There's no ifs ands or buts about it. It is an eternal truth and that's about as "fact" as you can get. However, there is something to be said for teaching religious tolerance at the same time as trying to instill within your child your belief system. There is nothing wrong with teaching about other religious beliefs while teaching the Gospel ... especially if you incorporate some of those beliefs in you life. Yoga, for example, is a religious discipline for many Oriental Beliefs, I see nothing wrong with talking about the religious implications of yoga and then comparing it to the Gospel and seeing how Gospel teachings on thought and meditation and pondering can incorporate yoga practices.

Originally Posted by klg47

I was reading my mom's ward newsletter and it had an article from the editor. I don't even remember what the point of the article was, but the writer talked extensively about Captain Kangaroo's military experience and then went on to describe Mr. Rogers' experience as a Navy SEAL, including his tattoos and 25 confirmed kills. I told my mom that someone needs to teach the editor how to check Snopes! (This rumor has been around for a long time - Mr. Rogers was never in the armed forces, let alone the SEALs!)

Some people I am a Literary Studies major and have really gotten into critical theory ... and it just amazes me how many people accept what they are told without thinking critically about it. The whole notion of "truth by concensus" is really troubling to me.

Originally Posted by klg47

I wonder how this Church could be true and have so much baggage that needs to be 'explained' away.

One thing I'd say to this, is that if you look at a lot of what has to be "explained away." They are - for the most part - things that (1) are from the very early days of the Church when Joseph Smith was still learning and making mistakes or (2) they are things that have been taken out of context.

Originally Posted by klg47

And sometimes doctrinal things just sound so off to me.

Nothing wrong with that. Some sounded "off" to Joseph Smith as well. That's why he asked so many questions and that's why we have the Doctrince & Covenants now: because Joseph Smith asked questions. There is nothing wrong with asking questions. It's kind of like what I said above about critical thinking. Just because "everybody" believes it is no reason you should believe it to. You need to come to your own decision about the Gospel and the only way you can do that is ask questions.

Originally Posted by klg47

It's hard because I can't talk to anyone about this kind of thing. ... If people in the Church have questions, the questions are rarely answered - the people are just asked "are you reading your scriptures? Are you praying? Are you going to the temple?"

For what it's worth, you can always ask here, and I for one will do my best to answer any and all questions you have. Feel free to PM me, if you aren't comfortable asking any questions in an "open" forum.

[Laurel]

Originally Posted by klg47

The quote that I linked to basically said the opposite of what I thought or hoped might be true.

But the article doesn't define "fair and just". Perhaps that falls under the atonement as you described.

I think that's exactly it. The article doesn't define "fair and just". Only God can determine that. We are told to perform vicarious temple ordinances for all those who have passed on. (Even with family members we know have had many opportunities to accept the gospel.) To me, this implies that there are still chances after death. With our mortal eyes, we may think someone has had enough chances, but God may know better. I think it all boils down to believing that He is a merciful God. If we approach all commandments from that POV, then we have to realize that there is not a commandment on this earth that is meant to hurt us--all commandments are for the purpose of bringing us closer to God, not keeping us away from Him.

[NewCrunchyDaddy]

Originally Posted by Laurel

I think that's exactly it. The article doesn't define "fair and just". Only God can determine that. We are told to perform vicarious temple ordinances for all those who have passed on. (Even with family members we know have had many opportunities to accept the gospel.) To me, this implies that there are still chances after death. With our mortal eyes, we may think someone has had enough chances, but God may know better. I think it all boils down to believing that He is a merciful God. If we approach all commandments from that POV, then we have to realize that there is not a commandment on this earth that is meant to hurt us--all commandments are for the purpose of bringing us closer to God, not keeping us away from Him.

I reminded of something a General Authority (He was a 70, I can't remember his name though ... Craven? Rulon Craven? Anyway...) said while I was on my mission: He said when we are on a mission we have to be at our most spiritual because we need the Spirit with us when we testify, because we don't know how touched by the Spirit someone is at any given moment when we are testifying. When we testify, we need to testify with power and authority ... otherwise, we're just flapping our gums. That's paraphrasing, but that's the general idea. So, we have no idea who has had a strong enough testimony to be able to deny or accept the Gospel, so we just have to do the work, keep the Spirit with us, and let God deal with the "fair and just" aspect of it all.

[klg47]

Originally Posted by NewCrunchyDaddy

If y'all'll bear with me here, I'll throw my two cents into the ring

I was wondering where you were!

Originally Posted by NewCrunchyDaddy

There is nothing wrong with teaching about other religious beliefs while teaching the Gospel ... especially if you incorporate some of those beliefs in you life.

Do you realize that many people on MDC believe that teaching a child your belief system is literally child abuse!? That kind of attitude partly explains why I've been a member since 2003 and only had 70 posts until recently! This week in the Religious Studies forum I'm a sick freak for teaching my kids not to masturbate!

Originally Posted by NewCrunchyDaddy

One thing I'd say to this, is that if you look at a lot of what has to be "explained away." They are - for the most part - things that (1) are from the very early days of the Church when Joseph Smith was still learning and making mistakes or (2) they are things that have been taken out of context.

Very true. And I believe that it was OK for Joseph to make mistakes, and that it doesn't change the truthfulness of the church. A lot of times people think "well, if he was really a prophet, he couldn't possibly have done such-and-such." But prophet does not equal perfect.

Originally Posted by Laurel

I think that's exactly it. The article doesn't define "fair and just". Only God can determine that.

I think that explains it very well and gives me much more hope

[Brisen]

Originally Posted by klg47

He actually did say "when you're 8". So they taught them right But I had issue with that too :-P I mean, what if a kid doesn't want to be baptized or isn't ready when they're 8? My intent is to make sure that my kids are choosing to be baptized at 8, not doing it just because it's the thing you do (being a "Cultural" Mormon). I explained to him that when he's 8 he'll get to choose if he wants to be baptized.

This kind of leads to a related question. Do you teach your kids the gospel as fact, with no reservations whatsoever, or do you teach things as "this is what I believe" and acknowledge that other people believe different things?

Well, now I feel even sillier for pointing it out... but I'm glad it was taught properly.

We teach it as fact... and that choice is part of that fact. We also teach that it is what we believe, and that other people have different beliefs, and no one can prove anything (basically... I'm simplifying here) and that is where faith comes in. My oldest is a bit of a stickler for finding out how things exactly are and such, so he tends to come across a little strongly when he talks to non-members about church stuff, and I'm trying to teach him to be more considerate of others' feelings with this kind of thing.

Dh's parents are a good example to me of how I want to approach this kind of thing. They teach and live the gospel as truth, but without being... what's the word... they know that others won't believe the same thing as they do, and I think they walk the line really well between respecting others' beliefs and being firm in their own. They are also great (IMO) of being unconditinally loving and supportive of their children, even if they don't support their actions.

[ValarieR]

We plan to teach our kids our faith as fact.

When I was a kid my parents taught their faith as fact, and I still ended up searching for my own truth for years. In the end, after three years of visiting as many churches as possible in search, I was thankful my parents had given me such a great base- I had so many questions to ask of the other churches that I may not have thought to ask otherwise.

The best lesson I have learned about this issue is that you can't teach your children to love Christ, you can only teach them that YOU love Him.

~Valarie~

[holyhelianthus]

Originally Posted by ValarieR

The best lesson I have learned about this issue is that you can't teach your children to love Christ, you can only teach them that YOU love Him.

that was worth quoting, Val!! i totally agree.
DH and i have looked at many paths. we still have literature on Buddhism, Islam, Neo-Paganism, etc etc in our home and for a reason. well, for more than one. we want our children to know that it is okay to disagree with our belief system and it's okay to look at other's with consideration even if you decide not to go down that path. we really feel that acknowledging and respecting these other faiths is important. do unto other's as you would have done unto yourself. not only that but we also believe that all faiths have truth and merit.

Katie- i read about Mr Roger's and his tattoos in your post. it made me think of what i've heard in my life. i don't know how true it is but i have heard so many people say 'oh don't let your kids watch Mr Roger's. he has tattoos!' : i can not stand that attitude and it's everywhere within the church. what does tattoos have to do with the merit and heart of the person? same with people who choose to socially drink or chew tobacco or whatever. i understand that WE don't believe these things are acceptable but the world does not subscribe to our religion or our values and through the greatest gift we have (free agency) they have every right not to. i only bring this up because it seems that every time i venture to a RS get together they are giggling or condemning someone else for their lifestyle choices such as boys having piercings or long hair, etc. 'my children wouldn't be allowed to have a friend like that.' i don't get it. it's such a waste of time and energy and brings a nasty spirit. of course, it has held a mirror up to me. i am quick to judge a parent who won't even consider breastfeeding (and i bottle feed my Mable after i got preggers again and my milk dried up. i don't want this to turn into a debate). seeing how they look when they sit and mock and stick their noses up really makes me stop and think of the type of spirit i'm inviting when i allow myself to judge another based on weather or not they chose to bottle feed. it's just something that has been bugging me. i hope i'm making sense.

[seren]

How do you teach your children those things while still maintaining that you want them to stay in our religion? I will never forget when my friends dad bore his testimony and was crying over his daughter who was marrying outside of the temple. Her fiance was not a member of the church. It reallyhad nothing to do with the guy, it was more that it wasn't in the temple. His eternal family circle had been broken. Since then the guy has joined the church and they have been sealed, but they didn't know that would happen.

My sister shocked me the other day when she said she has decided she would like to get married again one day. She said only in the temple. She's very sad that the choices she has made has *broken* our eternal family circle.

I would be so sad if my children grew up and didn't believe in the church. It wouldn't make me love them any less, but I would be heartbroken. I love them so much and want them to be with me for eternity.

So how do we do that?

[holyhelianthus]

that is the ultimate question, Seren. i wish it had a simple answer, but it doesn't. it comes down to our children and the choices they will make in their lives. i was raised half in the church. my parents didn't feel the need to fully follow the gospel. here i am. i have known so many who were raised in strict LDS homes and have rebelled and swear they will never come back. in the end it is our children's choice. all we can do is do our darndest to teach them the gospel and express our testimonies to them.