Posted by: Eric ®
01/14/2002, 18:33:06
Author Profile Mail author
|
And to further your point, one of my friend's mothers (who isn't Mormon) does tithe like that. She is not a Mormon lover, I can assure you, but when I mentioned their tithing practices to her and how fricken rich some Mormons are around here she said, "Our family (consisting of her and her son) tithes like that too, and I'll tell you what, Eric, I believe the good Lord just makes up for it. The money is just there." I was about ready to explode. I mentioned that it was a non-profit organization, but I'm not sure if the paper trail is there for the donations (think tax write-offs). I was ready to tell her, "You should see how much is 'just there' when you don't waste your money on brainwashing." Of course, I'm a bit more polite than than, and I was in their car, hehehehe.
Eric
|
Posted by: mikwut ®
01/14/2002, 19:08:32
Author Profile Mail author
|
Logan and Erik: I have very much enjoyed stimulating comments from both of you and have not yet had a chance at dialogue or interaction. Might I humbly challenge you both that a false dichotomy is created with this narrow view. Zealots, ultra-conservatives, fundamentalists, or just plain immature members of the Mormon church and Christian church's in general are easy targets for what you both so readily notice and cut with a somewhat (no offense) jaded and narrow viewpoint. On the other side of the sword I work with a agnostic/atheist and often discuss theology and politics with him, his superficiality and immaturity would make both of you squirm, maybe what you are viewing is part of a human condition and a pychological one at that and you might be brushing by true spirituality and observations of it by so focusing. mikwut
|
Posted by: Eric ®
01/14/2002, 20:13:04
Author Profile Mail author
|
I can assure you, mikwut, that my view on religions is neither narrow nor jaded. What I got from Logan was that we as humans need to get over the miracle or supersition mindset, and come to realize what we are, and what our place is in the Universe. Even though that was the goal in my 8th grade Science class (ah the good old days), I don't think many came out truly understanding, or at least taking into thought, what our reality truly is. Money doesn't just appear. Nothing "just happens." There is always a reason or a cause for something. I don't see how being logical about something leads my opinion about religions to be jaded. I show a frustrated attitude a lot of times because some things seem so obvious to me.
Eric
|
Posted by: RobRoy ®
01/15/2002, 10:54:07
Author Profile Mail author
|
Money doesn't just appear. Nothing "just happens." There is always a reason or a cause for something.
I don't see how being logical about something leads my opinion about religions to be jaded. I show a frustrated attitude a lot of times because some things seem so obvious to me.I always find these comments interesting in that they attack to some extent exactly what they are defending. That's not to say that I don't see the point, or that I feel Eric and Logan are incorrect in their statements. I just find it interesting that in saying, "We should be more open-minded" and that "There is a reason for everything" that that view doesn't include the possibility of exactly what is being attacked, i.e. a God that takes an active role in every life, and provided a "reason for everything."
|
Posted by: mikwut ®
01/15/2002, 11:38:37
Author Profile Mail author
|
Very well said robroy, I might have come across the wrong way, I don't "disagree" with what has been said either, just that depth often escapes "critical thinkers". mikwut
|
Posted by: Eric ®
01/15/2002, 19:57:00
Author Profile Mail author
|
However, in your argument, God is the reason for everything. In my argument, there is a reason for everything. Do you see the difference?
Eric
|
Posted by: RobRoy ®
01/16/2002, 11:08:14
Author Profile Mail author
|
Yes, Eric, I see what you are arguing. It just always strikes me as odd that one solution for the "reason" can't be God. I'm not saying that God is the solution, but God is one solution. That's all. Your argument seems to put God and your "reason" at loggerheads. I appologize if I misinterpreted.
|
Posted by: mikwut ®
01/15/2002, 11:52:11
Author Profile Mail author
|
I apologize if I came across in any way as dogmatic or attempting to defend such nonsensical behavior, I am just careful that nonsense remains nonsense and doen't begin to define in a universal type way, I reread the posts and have seen them in "lighter" perspective. mikwut
|
Posted by: Logan ®
01/15/2002, 18:52:01
Author Profile Mail author
|
Dear mikwut... Thank you so much for such a fantastic contribution to this thread! I am with you 100%! I, in no way, meant to sound narrow or closed-minded in my original post, nor did I intend to divide all persons into one of two groups with no room for a middle-ground. Of course this is not the reality. As I mentioned (below), in a response to grendel, I know plenty of religious believers who don't exactly believe in an "all-pervasive" God. There are indeed many -- more liberal ideas -- which hold to the notion that there IS a God out there who simply does not interact with us to the extent that more conservative believers would like to think. For example, perhaps this God has "a plan" for us, but He does not care what I had for lunch or how much money I've payed to my church.
Consequently, I commend you for your open-mindedness and sensitivity to what might be better defined as "true spirituality" or the "human condition" (as you call it). I, too, try to stay sensitive to these things. In my search for truth, I don't want to "brush by" anything. =) Lovingly / Sincerely,
Logan
|
Posted by: mikwut ®
01/15/2002, 19:02:01
Author Profile Mail author
|
Well said my friend, I am impressed with your maturity and keen ability to look with a sensitive and keen mind into the church. Best of luck on your search for truth. mikwut
|
Posted by: zip ®
01/15/2002, 08:24:23
Author Profile Mail author
|
Logan, You wrote: "If I could live two lives and graph the good and the bad -- with and without garments (or tithing, or faith) in each instance -- would the graphs be any different?" I bet they would. Why? Because you would have different values for things depending on whether or not you would attribute them to God. If you wore your garments, tithed and all of that other stuff, you would presumambly want to make it seem worthwhile, i.e. you would really want to believe that God is active in your life. How would you do that? You would look at a lot of things with rose-colored glasses. And other things would strike you as bad simply because it would be in conflict with the God that you are trying so hard to impress with your garments et al. Without your garments, you would place independent values on the things that happen in your life, and I think you would get a different set of "good" and "bad" then. This is all just my opinion, of course. zipperhead
|
Posted by: RobRoy ®
01/15/2002, 10:59:47
Author Profile Mail author
|
That's an interesting premise, that "going through the motions" as it were, would actually bring us closer to our respective God. I wonder if that's always the case? I would think that some people go through the motions more as a community or social service then as a belief structure. And that while the supposition that this might, in some manner at some point, start them down the road to making it "worthwhile" and "meaningful" that that road may not alway be trodden. On the other hand, I prefer to pray on my knees with my hands clasped. I find that this process, learned from my youth in Catholic school, helps put me in the mindset of prayer. Is it necessary to pray on your knees with your hands clasped? Certainly not. I'm certain that my prayers on my knees are just as viable as those given by someone standing or sitting with their arms crossed. But action (e.g. wearing garments, tithing, praying, etc.) can place one in a particular mindset that is more . . . receptive (?) to belief.
|
Posted by: Sarah ®
01/15/2002, 12:12:42
Author Profile Mail author
|
I think I understand what you are saying. I find myself unable to enjoy a meal if I have not first asked a blessing on it, regardless how hungry I am. So, do ritualistic motions invite the Lord's spirit ("bring us closer to our respective God"), or, is that resultant mindset more of a Pavlovian response? What thinkest thou? (Y'all?)
|
Posted by: RobRoy ®
01/15/2002, 13:04:49
Author Profile Mail author
|
For myself, personally, I prefer to go through the physical motions, though I have made it a point to actually think about what I am doing, instead of just following learned/taught tradition. It is very easy to fall into the trap of simply saying or doing what has been said and done so many times before. But at least for me, I find that certain traditions, given their reverance (prayer for meals, on knees, Amens, etc.) do lend themselves to the mindset that helps me, in some ways, open up myself to "talking" to God.
|
Posted by: T-Bone ®
01/15/2002, 09:58:35
Author Profile Mail author
|
Logan said, "fellow Mormon in the grocery store the other day that if I "just keep on wearing my garments" then "everything will be fine" in reference to my career"
As a still believing LDS man, I find that members comments totally inaccurate and offensive. I have a problem with some of the members of the Church with their attitudes, their quoting doctrine inaccurately, etc.
|
Posted by: Sarah ®
01/15/2002, 10:11:08
Author Profile Mail author
|
Logan, I have had the same thoughts over the years. What is truly ironic to me is that so many church members accord God's handiwork in every GOOD thing that comes their way, but blame misfortune on their own shortcomings (lack of faith being a popular one). I have heard church members in finanacial distress say that they couldn't afford NOT to pay their tithing, they needed to obligate Heavenly Father to bless them financially. This is faith?? To my way of thinking it is fear-based superstition, and not a good reason to part with badly needed money.
As for your comments on the wearing of temple garments and its affect on you r behaviour -- may I relate the following story:
My husband, now retired from active military service, was a Special Forces (the Green Berets) Medic for many years. His specialty was Preventive Medicine, and as such, often ran the STD (sexually transmitted diseases) clinic when they deployed overseas. The Group's theatre of operations was SE Asia, and spent a lot of time in Thailand, which kept my husband pretty busy. Starting the second week of a deployment, he spent a lot of time administering Penicillan shots for a plethora of maladies picked up in Thailand's busy sex trade. He eventually developed a jaded attitude about treating the many married soldiers; but it always bothered him when his Group deployed with 19th Group from Utah, and he had to ask men to drop their garments to get their shots. He treated the same garment droppers year after year.
Action is about choice, and that brings consequences, good or bad. Not so much about faith or superstition.
|
Posted by: shooter ®
01/15/2002, 10:39:18
Author Profile Mail author
|
Another "Paul Dunn" mormon, wanting tangible rewards so others can see how special & spiritual they are by their monetary 'blessings', no matter how ill gotten the gain.
Pure bullshit and nothing else.
Faith is its own reward. All else is nice, but not a 'carrot & stick' type of gospel consequence.
Some people are good people just because they are that way. They don't have to be bribed or threatened and they don't worry about whether God rewards them now or later or with money & prestige, they are just living their beliefs whether they are rich or poor.
They "have sufficient for their needs".
|
Posted by: Sarah ®
01/15/2002, 12:04:41
Author Profile Mail author
|
Some people are good people just because they are that way. They don't have to be bribed or threatened and they don't worry about whether God rewards them now or later or with money & prestige, they are just living their beliefs whether they are rich or poor.
They "have sufficient for their needs".Well said, and thank you.
|
Posted by: grendel ®
01/15/2002, 13:08:38
Author Profile Mail author
|
i agree with many of your points. what's unclear, however, is whether you are assuming that all religious persons subscribe to this lack-of-causality tenet; whether you think all religious persons believe in the notion of an all-pervasive will of God. could you clarify?
|
Posted by: Logan ®
01/15/2002, 18:34:22
Author Profile Mail author
|
Dear grendel... I don't assume anything, or rather, I try not to. =) Anyway, I personally know plenty of "religious" people who don't exactly believe in an "all-pervasive God". I think it's perfectly possible -- and normal -- for a believer to "believe in God" (or whatever), and not think that He's constantly looming overhead with a directive for every little move that we make. So, to answer your question, NO, I don't mean to group ALL religious believers into this category of "excuse-makers". I think there are plenty of intelligent believers out there who hold to more liberal views. Lovingly,
Logan
|
Posted by: Christopher ®
01/22/2002, 21:36:46
Author Profile Mail author
|
I no longer read the Era or the Ensign, but in the years that I did I sensed a strong suggestion of an all-pervasive god. Granted, there are faithful members who shy away from church publications for reasons like that. But they are scripture, right? Chris
|
|
