I think that I have some sort of Benjamin Button thing happening. Heaven knows that I'm not looking any younger, and I've never felt young, but I seem to be experiencing a lot of things backwards.
As a kid and a teen, I deeply resented the stereotype that kids felt immortal and invincible. I never felt either. I was always the kid saying, "But someone could get hurt!" I was not a risk taker or a thrill seeker. I was acutely aware that death, dismemberment, pain or scarring were very real possibilities. I worried, I fretted, I avoided risk and danger as best I could. I've never "bailed out" of swings or jumped off of a diving board. (Really.)
Describing my behavior as a child to my middle daughter recently elicited The Look and the verdict, "So you were a wet blanket." The wettest, thank you very much.
Said child, in contrast, had no fear as a child. None. I remember clearly having to repeatedly grab the back of her swimsuit and haul her into the shallows at age 2, because she'd just keep walking into the water, even after it was over her head. Not just once, mind you, but over and over. It never occurred to her, in any situation, that she might get hurt or experience an unpleasant outcome. She looked at people as though they were crazy or unintelligible if they warned her. When she did get hurt, she brushed it off like Monty Python's Black Knight - "It's only a flesh wound."
It wasn't until her 20s that it started occurring to her that she might get hurt, and that hurt was bad. Facing situations that she'd never given a second thought to suddenly had her realizing, "Someone could get hurt." Slowly, she noticed that situations caused her worry, and that she was being more cautious.
"This is how the other half lives," I told her. "Welcome to adulthood."
"I hate it! How do people function like this?" she wanted to know.
I, on the other hand, am slowly growing into feelings of invincibility.
More and more, I find myself mentally spreading my arms and saying, "Bring it on. I've got this." Fear of water? I'll go in a submarine, and then across the Atlantic on a ship. Fear of being disliked? Recently I ran into a kid I'd gone to high school with, a kid who was so much cooler than I was that I spent all of high school awed and intimidated. I may have spoken three sentences to this kid during the entire four years we went to school together. Now that I'm much older, twice my high school weight and going gray (and, unfortunately, bald), what did I do? Run up and say hello, then hug him/her.
Kids are supposed to be the dreamy ones, too, setting ridiculous life goals like, "marry a prince." I was such a practical kid. My goals were things like, "be able to afford groceries." I was clear that I could choose any one of hundreds of paths through life, could be a doctor or teacher or lawyer or painter - but I never imagined, or wanted, the usual things kids covet: obscene wealth, fame, privilege. I still don't, but now I see no barriers to pie-in-the-sky plans. If somebody had told me when I was 18 that they wanted to be something ridiculous and impractical, I would have given them the "It's really difficult to make it" speech, and meant it. Now, I'd give them the "Go for it!" speech, and mean it. Sure, it takes hard work and more than a little luck, but it's not impossible. Knock 'em dead, kid. You can do it.
As a kid, I was easy to psych out or intimidate. I know that there were times that I lost competitions just because I let the other guy(s) get to me. Not any more.
Children are supposed to be trusting; I had severe trust issues. OK, I still have some, and there's good reasons for them, but I no longer feel that I have to do everything, or that something is doomed to failure if multiple people have multiple jobs to do. I only have to do my job, my little part, and not worry, or even necessarily think about, anyone else's job. (Sometimes you carry The One Ring and sometimes you kill the Orcs - am I right?)
I never was young, and I never will be, but that's OK. I may have the best of both worlds.
Friday, May 30, 2014
Friday, May 9, 2014
Let Me Explain
Just so we're all on the same page, I want to point out, again, that I share my opinions so that others will understand me, not so that I can change their minds.
Compare it to someone who refuses to eat breakfast until they've made an origami flower for the table first. You, especially if you're the caregiver, maybe of an elderly relative with this trait, find it to be an aggravating waste of time. But, when Granny explains that this is her good luck charm, and that her days just seem happier and more successful if she has that flower on her breakfast table, you can understand her, and maybe even help her make it. You still don't think that the flower affects anything, but that's not as important as understanding Granny.
Also, people who might already agree with me can feel supported, and not quite so alone. That's important, too.
Now - let's discuss religion.
I belong to a religion. It affects everything I do, every day - what I wear, say, watch on TV, eat and drink; it's important to me. I realize that others live differently, and I'm OK with that. Free will is the most important thing that humans possess.
Whenever someone shares why they left their religion, especially if it's my religion, I always hear a chorus of voices in agreement - "Me, too!" "I thought the same thing!" "That's why I left." Nobody seems to want to hear a dissenting voice, one saying, "I think that's a mistake." Those comments are deemed rude. So, in case anyone wants to peruse, at their leisure, what I may be thinking when I hear or read those reasons and/or comments, I've written them down here.
The thoughts or reasons will be like this, in bold type.
My thoughts will be below that, in regular type.
I just have to live my own life and make my own decisions.
Well, that's a good thing. As I stated, free will is the most sacred of human rights.
I do find, though, that overwhelmingly, people say this when they are disagreeing with their family, and/or the way they were raised, and very infrequently when they are disagreeing with their friends or mentors. Very rarely does anyone say, "I have to make my own decisions, and that's why I do things differently than my friends/classmates/mentors do."
People tend to pat someone on the back for being "brave" and "independent" and "free thinking" when they disagree with their parents. Keep in mind, though, that if I was brave for, say, leaving my parents' Christian faith to become an atheist, then my children would be brave to leave what I had taught them, and become fundamentalist Christians. I know many people who congratulate others for leaving any faith, but say to someone who's joining one, "Are you sure you've thought this through?" They say that they will support whatever their children decide, "provided that they've really thought it through," but would be horrified if their child converted to Islam, or became a Buddhist monk or a Catholic nun. ("I raised you better than that! How can you turn off your brain that way?")
The problem here is using the thoughts and decisions of others to determine what YOU, yourself, think and do, and why. I understand all of the built in human needs to be part of a group, to feel accepted and protected. I understand, too, the necessity of differentiating oneself from one's parents. I just find popular, or unpopular, opinion to be a very unreliable way to make important life choices. That's NOT thinking for yourself, that's a herd mentality. "Others that I admire are doing it this way. I feel protected and accepted when I am like them. Therefore, I must believe what they believe." Or, "Because most people think this, and I am more intelligent and educated than they are, I cannot agree with them." I just can't understand someone seriously thinking that the best way to decide what you believe is to gauge what others believe - or how well spoken those beliefs are.
This church leader (or church member) is someone I don't like. They've done things that upset me.
If an individual hurts, upsets, annoys or confuses you, that's normal. That's OK. It's about them individually, as a person, though (even if what they've done or said is based on their understanding and practice of their religion). Using this to dismiss an entire religion is like saying, "Because no human being is perfect, I don't think that truth exits," and that should be an obviously flawed conclusion.
I've seen them make mistakes (or do something hurtful).
See above answer.
The church leaders seem to be wrong on scientific issues.
In my case, people have frequently pointed out to me that one of my church leaders said publicly that he didn't think men would ever reach the moon; he said it only a handful of years before men did land on the moon. People love to crow, "How could he talk to God and not know that?"
Simple. Did Moses invent the internal combustion engine? Did Abraham understand molecular biology? Did the Apostle Paul invent the airplane? No. I don't go to my accountant to fill my cavities, or my surgeon to repair my home, or the guy who built my deck to do my taxes, either. People have areas of expertise. Religious leaders are inspired to tell the people about how God wants them to behave. These are the things that will do the most good on Earth, and bring us the most happiness after this life. Those things - be honest, be kind, be hardworking, be compassionate, be trustworthy - are the same whether we're living in caves and just discovering fire, or building a self sustaining colony on Mars.
There are huge worlds of knowledge and accomplishment for humans to discover on their own, because learning on our own is what best benefits us, but the religious basics will never change. And unless a religious leader is a doctor, I won't ask him/her about medicine. It's not in their job description.
I think that their youth group (or Scout) activities are lame.
I'm not making this complaint up. Sincerely, folks? If you were talking about leaving a club, or skipping your neighbor's next party, I'd be with you. I think, though, that you're missing the point of religion. You're going to decide what you think that the creator of the universe wants you to do for the eternal salvation of your soul based on whether or not you thought that a group's youth activities were lame? I'm sorry, I have a hard time taking that thought process seriously.
There's no evidence for it.
There's no "evidence" of most of my ancestors. There's no birth certificates or death certificates; even when they were "recorded," that meant that it was hand written in a family Bible. Go far enough back, and there's no military service records, employment records, bank accounts, census records. Yet, because I am here, they obviously existed.
For most of human history, "recording" something meant that the community leaders memorized it. The idea that everything important can be verified to the satisfaction of most people is a very new (in terms of human history) idea. And, for crying out loud, if we can't agree on whether the moon landing was real, whether OJ Simpson is a murderer, whether the Holocaust happened or whether the trails left by airplanes are part of a sinister plot, despite those events being recent and the fact that we have pages and pages and volumes upon volumes of scholarly research and conventional, modern documentation on the subject, there is NO way that we will agree on things that happened long ago, or that defy conventional documentation.
("But only people who are being deliberately ignorant disagree with me on those things!" people say to me frequently. They disregard the fact that the opposite side says exactly the same thing about them.)
Does it matter to me whether we have the actual stone tablets containing the Ten Commandments, or if we can examine Noah's Ark? Not in the slightest.
I've had doubts for most (or all) of my life.
OK. Doubts are legitimate. Still, you need to allow for the fact that reality is not shaped by opinion, yours or others. When the best and brightest scientific minds on the planet thought that the earth was flat and that the sun revolved around us, it didn't affect the actual shape of the planet or the orbits of heavenly bodies or the laws of physics or anything else.
Look back at law enforcement during my early lifetime, and I'm not even out of my 40s. Science could only determine a person's blood type if they were a "secretor." DNA identification was impossible and unheard of. Almost every year, a discovery is made that "changes everything" in a certain field.
The brightest and most educated humans tend to be the ones who know that we as a species have hardly scratched the surface of the knowledge that's out there. Believing that you, personally, hold all the possible knowledge in the universe, or that everything can, and should, be explained to your personal satisfaction is just arrogance. You don't have all the answers because no one ever will have all the answers.
I don't understand/agree with certain principles.
See above answer.
The meetings are boring.
Again, this strikes me as self centered. "Because I am not entertained, this can't possibly be true." Churches could, and sometimes do, dress up meetings with rock music, dancing and any number of other efforts to be engaging. If they offered alcohol, snacks and scantily clad dancers, they'd draw bigger crowds, and the people would be more enthusiastic. Would that be "success"? I do't think so, because it would have zero effect on whether the message was true.
I feel uncomfortable (or like I don't belong) in church (or in this congregation).
See above answer. Truth is unaffected by whether you're having fun, or even understanding something, or whether other people are "nice." Again, I assume that you're searching for a religion, not for a club or for entertainment.
God can't possibly punish me for doing my best.
This assumes that God's primary purpose is to punish, which I think is flawed thinking, but look at it like this: the world is a classroom. In a classroom, each child can try their very hardest, and stretch their very farthest, but only some will do A work. Should everyone else be handed an A, on the theory that it's "unfair" otherwise? Are the kids getting Bs or Cs (or even lower) being punished, or picked on by a teacher who hates them? No.
If you are working hard, and doing what you believe is right, you will receive rewards, whether you recognize them or not. This is especially true if you actually are doing what's right. Does that mean, that in the interest of fairness, every person who ever existed should get exactly what you get?
If God existed/if this church were true, the teachings would make sense to me.
Remember that God is a parent. He has lived longer than we have. He has more experience and knowledge. He wants what is best for us. This means, almost by definition, that He will occasionally ask us to do things, or give us information, that makes no sense to us. That doesn't mean that He's non-existent, or cruel.
Every day, especially when they were young, I told my children things that confused, annoyed, frustrated, baffled or angered them. I insisted on behavior that they thought was "stupid." I gave them unpleasant tasks, and unpleasant consequences when they broke the rules. Is that because I'm mean and I don't love them? They sure thought so, many times. Instead, it was a reflection of the fact that I knew more than they did, I had more experience than they did, and I truly wanted them to be happy. Sometimes, that meant not caring how they felt about me or my rules.
Plus, there's that whole, "My judgement is infallible and all knowing" thing again. There are some things you personally don't know, because there is no person who has all knowledge.
A loving God would never want some of His children to be separated from Him eternally.
God's been pretty clear on this subject; He loves us all. He wants us all to return to live with Him eternally. The things that will make this possible are available to everyone who ever lived or will live. God has said that the requirements can be met by the weakest and most rebellious of us. The choice is up to us, and it pains Him when we make choices that separate us from Him.
Think about being a parent. Do you say, "Because I love you kids more than life itself, because I want you to be successful and happy, there are no rules. It is not possible for you to ever do anything wrong. There will never be any punishments or negative consequences." Of course not. God doesn't say that to His children, either.
I don't agree with the church's stance on this issue.
Here you have two main options. You can decide that the religion itself is valid, and therefore, you might be wrong about this issue. Or, you can decide that disagreement on one issue will cancel out every agreement on every other issue, and that therefore, the entire religion has no merit.
For me, I again have to allow for the fact that I do not possess all the knowledge in the universe, so there may be a part of the big picture that I don't see.
I think that the church asks too much of us/you.
Nothing worthwhile is easy.
The Bible describes the same event differently in different books.
Of course - they were written by different authors. Think about the family stories your family has. Will it sound different if you or Uncle Bob or cousin Cyril tells the story? Do those differences mean that it never happened, or that you're being deliberately deceitful?
The Bible never mentions this subject. How can this rule about it be valid?
Imagine, again, that you're a parent. You go out for the evening, leaving your oldest in charge. You say something like, "Be good while we're gone!"
When you come home, and discover chaos, how will you feel if your child says, "You never said that I couldn't tie Timmy up and leave him in the closet. You never told me that I couldn't use your coin collection for the ice cream man. You can't be mad, and you can't punish me."
The best rules are broad enough to be applicable across many behaviors, time periods and eventualities. Just because the Bible never tells us not to sell national or company secrets doesn't mean that it's OK to do so.
All of the above arguments are pretty standard, no matter what your religion, although a couple of them are specific to Christianity. There's a couple more that I hear frequently that are peculiar to my specific religion. These include:
There are scriptures in the Book of Mormon that are identical to scriptures in the Bible.
Of course there are. If something is important, you make sure that you repeat it to every group that you speak to. Think about any story that you tell over and over. Think about instructions that you give, and methods that you use to teach. You will say the same things over and over. Others telling the same story or teaching the same subject will do so, as well. To me, this simply shows that the source - God - is the same.
I'd be worried if the Book of Mormon said, "That whole 'love your neighbor' thing? Forget it. And baptism isn't necessary any more."
I don't believe that the leaders in Salt Lake are prophets. What are the chances that most of the modern prophets would be old, white American men?
Do you believe that there were prophets in the Old World? Well, what are the chances that God would have chosen only people from the same race and the same geographic area?
(Plus, we're taught that there were prophets across the earth, and on all the "isles of the sea," in antiquity. We have the writings of only a few. Plus, if anyone missed the chance to hear the message on Earth, they have that opportunity later. Each community no longer needs their own prophet in order to receive instruction, because ideas can be so widely distributed in written or transmitted form.)
The church has too much money/I don't agree with tithing.
I'd worry more about this if we had paid clergy. We don't. Leaders, teachers, organists, cleaning crew, nursery staff - we're all volunteer. You won't find us going on TV to plead for people to send in additional offerings, only to have it go toward buying a new Lexus for the bishop.
Of course there are many more complaints, and many more answers. I'm not trying to Create the Final Word or mold official doctrine. As I said, I'm just writing it down because I hear these things so often, and I've been told that it's rude or intolerant to reply.
That doesn't seem OK to me either. If it's OK for someone else to tell why they think one thing, it's OK for me to say why I think another.
Thanks for listening.
Compare it to someone who refuses to eat breakfast until they've made an origami flower for the table first. You, especially if you're the caregiver, maybe of an elderly relative with this trait, find it to be an aggravating waste of time. But, when Granny explains that this is her good luck charm, and that her days just seem happier and more successful if she has that flower on her breakfast table, you can understand her, and maybe even help her make it. You still don't think that the flower affects anything, but that's not as important as understanding Granny.
Also, people who might already agree with me can feel supported, and not quite so alone. That's important, too.
Now - let's discuss religion.
I belong to a religion. It affects everything I do, every day - what I wear, say, watch on TV, eat and drink; it's important to me. I realize that others live differently, and I'm OK with that. Free will is the most important thing that humans possess.
Whenever someone shares why they left their religion, especially if it's my religion, I always hear a chorus of voices in agreement - "Me, too!" "I thought the same thing!" "That's why I left." Nobody seems to want to hear a dissenting voice, one saying, "I think that's a mistake." Those comments are deemed rude. So, in case anyone wants to peruse, at their leisure, what I may be thinking when I hear or read those reasons and/or comments, I've written them down here.
The thoughts or reasons will be like this, in bold type.
My thoughts will be below that, in regular type.
I just have to live my own life and make my own decisions.
Well, that's a good thing. As I stated, free will is the most sacred of human rights.
I do find, though, that overwhelmingly, people say this when they are disagreeing with their family, and/or the way they were raised, and very infrequently when they are disagreeing with their friends or mentors. Very rarely does anyone say, "I have to make my own decisions, and that's why I do things differently than my friends/classmates/mentors do."
People tend to pat someone on the back for being "brave" and "independent" and "free thinking" when they disagree with their parents. Keep in mind, though, that if I was brave for, say, leaving my parents' Christian faith to become an atheist, then my children would be brave to leave what I had taught them, and become fundamentalist Christians. I know many people who congratulate others for leaving any faith, but say to someone who's joining one, "Are you sure you've thought this through?" They say that they will support whatever their children decide, "provided that they've really thought it through," but would be horrified if their child converted to Islam, or became a Buddhist monk or a Catholic nun. ("I raised you better than that! How can you turn off your brain that way?")
The problem here is using the thoughts and decisions of others to determine what YOU, yourself, think and do, and why. I understand all of the built in human needs to be part of a group, to feel accepted and protected. I understand, too, the necessity of differentiating oneself from one's parents. I just find popular, or unpopular, opinion to be a very unreliable way to make important life choices. That's NOT thinking for yourself, that's a herd mentality. "Others that I admire are doing it this way. I feel protected and accepted when I am like them. Therefore, I must believe what they believe." Or, "Because most people think this, and I am more intelligent and educated than they are, I cannot agree with them." I just can't understand someone seriously thinking that the best way to decide what you believe is to gauge what others believe - or how well spoken those beliefs are.
This church leader (or church member) is someone I don't like. They've done things that upset me.
If an individual hurts, upsets, annoys or confuses you, that's normal. That's OK. It's about them individually, as a person, though (even if what they've done or said is based on their understanding and practice of their religion). Using this to dismiss an entire religion is like saying, "Because no human being is perfect, I don't think that truth exits," and that should be an obviously flawed conclusion.
I've seen them make mistakes (or do something hurtful).
See above answer.
The church leaders seem to be wrong on scientific issues.
In my case, people have frequently pointed out to me that one of my church leaders said publicly that he didn't think men would ever reach the moon; he said it only a handful of years before men did land on the moon. People love to crow, "How could he talk to God and not know that?"
Simple. Did Moses invent the internal combustion engine? Did Abraham understand molecular biology? Did the Apostle Paul invent the airplane? No. I don't go to my accountant to fill my cavities, or my surgeon to repair my home, or the guy who built my deck to do my taxes, either. People have areas of expertise. Religious leaders are inspired to tell the people about how God wants them to behave. These are the things that will do the most good on Earth, and bring us the most happiness after this life. Those things - be honest, be kind, be hardworking, be compassionate, be trustworthy - are the same whether we're living in caves and just discovering fire, or building a self sustaining colony on Mars.
There are huge worlds of knowledge and accomplishment for humans to discover on their own, because learning on our own is what best benefits us, but the religious basics will never change. And unless a religious leader is a doctor, I won't ask him/her about medicine. It's not in their job description.
I think that their youth group (or Scout) activities are lame.
I'm not making this complaint up. Sincerely, folks? If you were talking about leaving a club, or skipping your neighbor's next party, I'd be with you. I think, though, that you're missing the point of religion. You're going to decide what you think that the creator of the universe wants you to do for the eternal salvation of your soul based on whether or not you thought that a group's youth activities were lame? I'm sorry, I have a hard time taking that thought process seriously.
There's no evidence for it.
There's no "evidence" of most of my ancestors. There's no birth certificates or death certificates; even when they were "recorded," that meant that it was hand written in a family Bible. Go far enough back, and there's no military service records, employment records, bank accounts, census records. Yet, because I am here, they obviously existed.
For most of human history, "recording" something meant that the community leaders memorized it. The idea that everything important can be verified to the satisfaction of most people is a very new (in terms of human history) idea. And, for crying out loud, if we can't agree on whether the moon landing was real, whether OJ Simpson is a murderer, whether the Holocaust happened or whether the trails left by airplanes are part of a sinister plot, despite those events being recent and the fact that we have pages and pages and volumes upon volumes of scholarly research and conventional, modern documentation on the subject, there is NO way that we will agree on things that happened long ago, or that defy conventional documentation.
("But only people who are being deliberately ignorant disagree with me on those things!" people say to me frequently. They disregard the fact that the opposite side says exactly the same thing about them.)
Does it matter to me whether we have the actual stone tablets containing the Ten Commandments, or if we can examine Noah's Ark? Not in the slightest.
I've had doubts for most (or all) of my life.
OK. Doubts are legitimate. Still, you need to allow for the fact that reality is not shaped by opinion, yours or others. When the best and brightest scientific minds on the planet thought that the earth was flat and that the sun revolved around us, it didn't affect the actual shape of the planet or the orbits of heavenly bodies or the laws of physics or anything else.
Look back at law enforcement during my early lifetime, and I'm not even out of my 40s. Science could only determine a person's blood type if they were a "secretor." DNA identification was impossible and unheard of. Almost every year, a discovery is made that "changes everything" in a certain field.
The brightest and most educated humans tend to be the ones who know that we as a species have hardly scratched the surface of the knowledge that's out there. Believing that you, personally, hold all the possible knowledge in the universe, or that everything can, and should, be explained to your personal satisfaction is just arrogance. You don't have all the answers because no one ever will have all the answers.
I don't understand/agree with certain principles.
See above answer.
The meetings are boring.
Again, this strikes me as self centered. "Because I am not entertained, this can't possibly be true." Churches could, and sometimes do, dress up meetings with rock music, dancing and any number of other efforts to be engaging. If they offered alcohol, snacks and scantily clad dancers, they'd draw bigger crowds, and the people would be more enthusiastic. Would that be "success"? I do't think so, because it would have zero effect on whether the message was true.
I feel uncomfortable (or like I don't belong) in church (or in this congregation).
See above answer. Truth is unaffected by whether you're having fun, or even understanding something, or whether other people are "nice." Again, I assume that you're searching for a religion, not for a club or for entertainment.
God can't possibly punish me for doing my best.
This assumes that God's primary purpose is to punish, which I think is flawed thinking, but look at it like this: the world is a classroom. In a classroom, each child can try their very hardest, and stretch their very farthest, but only some will do A work. Should everyone else be handed an A, on the theory that it's "unfair" otherwise? Are the kids getting Bs or Cs (or even lower) being punished, or picked on by a teacher who hates them? No.
If you are working hard, and doing what you believe is right, you will receive rewards, whether you recognize them or not. This is especially true if you actually are doing what's right. Does that mean, that in the interest of fairness, every person who ever existed should get exactly what you get?
If God existed/if this church were true, the teachings would make sense to me.
Remember that God is a parent. He has lived longer than we have. He has more experience and knowledge. He wants what is best for us. This means, almost by definition, that He will occasionally ask us to do things, or give us information, that makes no sense to us. That doesn't mean that He's non-existent, or cruel.
Every day, especially when they were young, I told my children things that confused, annoyed, frustrated, baffled or angered them. I insisted on behavior that they thought was "stupid." I gave them unpleasant tasks, and unpleasant consequences when they broke the rules. Is that because I'm mean and I don't love them? They sure thought so, many times. Instead, it was a reflection of the fact that I knew more than they did, I had more experience than they did, and I truly wanted them to be happy. Sometimes, that meant not caring how they felt about me or my rules.
Plus, there's that whole, "My judgement is infallible and all knowing" thing again. There are some things you personally don't know, because there is no person who has all knowledge.
A loving God would never want some of His children to be separated from Him eternally.
God's been pretty clear on this subject; He loves us all. He wants us all to return to live with Him eternally. The things that will make this possible are available to everyone who ever lived or will live. God has said that the requirements can be met by the weakest and most rebellious of us. The choice is up to us, and it pains Him when we make choices that separate us from Him.
Think about being a parent. Do you say, "Because I love you kids more than life itself, because I want you to be successful and happy, there are no rules. It is not possible for you to ever do anything wrong. There will never be any punishments or negative consequences." Of course not. God doesn't say that to His children, either.
I don't agree with the church's stance on this issue.
Here you have two main options. You can decide that the religion itself is valid, and therefore, you might be wrong about this issue. Or, you can decide that disagreement on one issue will cancel out every agreement on every other issue, and that therefore, the entire religion has no merit.
For me, I again have to allow for the fact that I do not possess all the knowledge in the universe, so there may be a part of the big picture that I don't see.
I think that the church asks too much of us/you.
Nothing worthwhile is easy.
The Bible describes the same event differently in different books.
Of course - they were written by different authors. Think about the family stories your family has. Will it sound different if you or Uncle Bob or cousin Cyril tells the story? Do those differences mean that it never happened, or that you're being deliberately deceitful?
The Bible never mentions this subject. How can this rule about it be valid?
Imagine, again, that you're a parent. You go out for the evening, leaving your oldest in charge. You say something like, "Be good while we're gone!"
When you come home, and discover chaos, how will you feel if your child says, "You never said that I couldn't tie Timmy up and leave him in the closet. You never told me that I couldn't use your coin collection for the ice cream man. You can't be mad, and you can't punish me."
The best rules are broad enough to be applicable across many behaviors, time periods and eventualities. Just because the Bible never tells us not to sell national or company secrets doesn't mean that it's OK to do so.
All of the above arguments are pretty standard, no matter what your religion, although a couple of them are specific to Christianity. There's a couple more that I hear frequently that are peculiar to my specific religion. These include:
There are scriptures in the Book of Mormon that are identical to scriptures in the Bible.
Of course there are. If something is important, you make sure that you repeat it to every group that you speak to. Think about any story that you tell over and over. Think about instructions that you give, and methods that you use to teach. You will say the same things over and over. Others telling the same story or teaching the same subject will do so, as well. To me, this simply shows that the source - God - is the same.
I'd be worried if the Book of Mormon said, "That whole 'love your neighbor' thing? Forget it. And baptism isn't necessary any more."
I don't believe that the leaders in Salt Lake are prophets. What are the chances that most of the modern prophets would be old, white American men?
Do you believe that there were prophets in the Old World? Well, what are the chances that God would have chosen only people from the same race and the same geographic area?
(Plus, we're taught that there were prophets across the earth, and on all the "isles of the sea," in antiquity. We have the writings of only a few. Plus, if anyone missed the chance to hear the message on Earth, they have that opportunity later. Each community no longer needs their own prophet in order to receive instruction, because ideas can be so widely distributed in written or transmitted form.)
The church has too much money/I don't agree with tithing.
I'd worry more about this if we had paid clergy. We don't. Leaders, teachers, organists, cleaning crew, nursery staff - we're all volunteer. You won't find us going on TV to plead for people to send in additional offerings, only to have it go toward buying a new Lexus for the bishop.
Of course there are many more complaints, and many more answers. I'm not trying to Create the Final Word or mold official doctrine. As I said, I'm just writing it down because I hear these things so often, and I've been told that it's rude or intolerant to reply.
That doesn't seem OK to me either. If it's OK for someone else to tell why they think one thing, it's OK for me to say why I think another.
Thanks for listening.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)