tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-261951162024-03-23T11:17:29.937-07:00The Fork in the RoadBob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.comBlogger95125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-58813455505088458132012-12-19T05:37:00.000-08:002012-12-19T05:37:07.045-08:00It's been awhile since I updated this, because I wasn't going to bother without something to say.<br />
<br />
Probably more details in the future, but I want to start adding more stuff to this and some sort of historical bringup is in order.<br />
<br />
The last chapter chronicled my joining of a Protestant church and the non-event that was with my leaders. We were mostly focused on trying to get settled in that church and accordingly scaled back our LDS activity, although we had home teachers and went every few months.<br />
<br />
I'll write more about this later, but the executive summary is that our Protestant church had a change in leadership and direction. One of the new pastors offered the opinion that I wasn't really a Christian unless I could accept some specific doctrinal things, and I really reject that opinion. I really have no intention of being exposed to an arbitrary inquisition about my Christianity, so I resigned my membership in this other church, although we still contribute and attend.<br />
<br />
After that they closed down the campus we were attending, and the new facility and situation is much less appealing. Really it was like getting started in a new church, and I'm not sure I have the energy for that again when it seems like we were basically pushed off the ship and provided with a lifeboat with a capacity for ten people with about fifteen in the water.<br />
<br />
From a doctrinal standpoint I still hold onto the First Vision story as my model for Mormonism, and believe the BoM to be the best articulation of what I believe doctrinally, even though I don't think it's historical. So if I have to belong somewhere I guess I may as well accept that I am a jack Mormon and get on with it.<br />
<br />
We are back to partial attendance at our ward and I have a home teaching assignment and a calling, although it doesn't involve much.<br />
Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-44250565368839460682011-01-29T16:51:00.000-08:002011-01-29T16:51:01.463-08:00Epilogue --<br />
<br />
I got a reply back from my stake president, and it looks like I'm not going to a church court after all.<br />
<br />
It would be inappropropriate to quote the letter without permission, but I'll summarize as best I can. I really disagree with some of his points, which I'll address later.<br />
<br />
He apologizes that my spiritual needs are not being met by the LDS church and that I felt I needed to join another church. Based on an interview we had a few years ago he expresses understanding that I have concerns.<br />
<br />
Just disagreeing with the leaders or mere loss of belief is not generally a reason for having to hold a church court. Generally when people decide the church is no longer right for you, the right thing to do is to resign. He doesn't encourage that, but if I really feel the church is inconsistent with my beliefs and I'm unlikely to return, it's the best thing. A simple signed letter to my bishop will do the job.<br />
<br />
Remaining a member of the LDS church causes others to need to seek me out. My baptismal and temple covenants still remain in force. This may not be what I want, but if I want to keep contact and would welcome attempts to reach out I can keep my membership in the LDS church, regardless of whether or not I am active.<br />
<br />
Church discipline is reserved for situations where members openly defy the LDS church, such as publishing articles against the doctrines or leaders or attempting to lead others to adopt incorrect doctrines or leave the church. He doesn't feel this is what I'm doing, nor what he expects me to do.<br />
<br />
This situation is my choice and he has no wish to force me, except he would want to keep my fellowship in what he firmly believes to be the church of Jesus Christ in its fullest form.<br />
<br />
Regardless of what I decide, he wants to remain my friend and welcomes any opportunity to discuss my beliefs and spiritual journey. <br />
<br />
He signs the note,<br />
<br />
"Your brother in Christ, H____ M______, Stake President"Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-53031279135843270682011-01-20T19:14:00.000-08:002011-01-20T19:17:54.812-08:00Writing My Stake President--<br />
<br />
I sent this e-mail this morning:<br />
<br />
President M_____,<br />
<br />
<br />
I just wanted to inform you that I am now a member of Vintage21 Church in downtown Raleigh.<br />
<br />
I have no interest in resigning my membership or severing my LDS connections. Mormonism was and is extremely foundational in who I am and how I look at the world, even as an adult convert. I could just as easily take out my liver as remove the “Mormonness” from my worldview.<br />
<br />
I am giving you this information because I am aware that the more recent versions of the Church Handbook of Instruction mention joining another church as grounds for excommunication, although I’m told there is a lot of latitude for local leaders to make their own decisions. I have done what I have done, and if you choose to take this to a church court I would rather just get it over with and not have it hanging over my head as some random event to be worried about in the future.<br />
<br />
I am informing you directly because my bishop, Bishop A___, is one of the best men I have known in the LDS church. He has enough problems of others to deal with, without having to decide how to handle this and feeling responsible for any negative consequences. As a Melchizedek priesthood holder you have jurisdiction over this anyway, so you are the best person to decide.<br />
<br />
To be clear my “issues” are not with Mormonism as I interpret it from the Book of Mormon and much of the Doctrine and Covenants. Nor have we been offended to any great degree by anyone locally. It has more to do with the institutional church and the oversimplification of the gospel, to include the rich history we have as a people and the breadth of the doctrines preached in the standard works. I cannot sustain a church president who largely remains in Salt Lake City and preaches simple Christian ethics to the faithful and seems to mainly go to temple dedications, as opposed to a lion of the Lord who preaches Christ crucified at every opportunity to audiences both hostile and friendly. And much much more.<br />
<br />
Accordingly I can never serve a meaningful role again in the LDS faith community, so I have to belong somewhere I can serve without being considered such damaged goods. Honestly, I feel like Vintage21 Church is closer to the spirit of the Book of Mormon than the current LDS church is, which is why I have taken this step.<br />
Enough about my “issues”, I think. I respect your dedication to serving the Saints in our stake. You have always gone the extra mile in everything you have done, and I think you are truly one of the “good guys” here. Despite everything I have said, I think we have some of the best leaders in this area that can be found in any area of the LDS church. I will respect and abide by whatever decision you choose to make in this matter.Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-7179551819666836192011-01-19T04:59:00.000-08:002011-01-19T04:59:24.748-08:00Crossing the Rubicon --<br />
Well, I did it. <br />
<br />
I've been attending Vintage21 Church for about two years, served, tithed, volunteered, attended the required membership class, met with the pastors, etc.<br />
<br />
The final step was filling out the on-line membership covenant.<br />
<br />
It was a very different experience. When I joined the LDS church I was baptised in front of new friends by priesthood holders who had met with me in my home for a period of months. Previous missionaries came back from other places to share the day with me. I still remember it well.<br />
<br />
The process of joining Vintage21 church was much more 21st century. There was a web form to fill out with my personal information, a tithing pledge, radio buttons to click on indicating that I agreed to certain doctrinal and behavioral norms, and finally, at the bottom of the web form, a button labelled "Submit!". Whether that was intentional irony I have no idea. i.e. "submit the form", "submit to the Lord", or all the above.<br />
<br />
Since this affected Sarah I wanted to share this with her, so we sat down at the computer together while I filled out the form, we held hands, and I clicked on the "Submit!" button.<br />
<br />
The form rejected my entry because I left out a required field. Apparently the angels were not going to descend in rings of flame at this point.<br />
<br />
I corrected the entry, Sarah and I held hands, and once I again I attempted to "Submit!".<br />
<br />
This time I was successful, and I am now a member of Vintage21 Church, Raleigh North Carolina, with whatever privileges come with that.<br />
<br />
The fork in the road has been taken.<br />
<br />
Next up: the letter informing my stake president. Will that lead to some kind of disciplinary action, or just become lost in his in-box? Time will tell.Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-69504128916096897352011-01-16T03:28:00.000-08:002011-01-16T03:28:03.628-08:00The Gospel Unchained --<br />
I spent about an hour and a half on Wednesday doing scripture study, basically correlating accounts from different gospels, reading scholarly material on their origins, and writing my own notes and thoughts on what I think it all means.<br />
<br />
It's just a blessing to be able to think for myself and to not be constrained by "official" interpretations of what it means. Rather than having the chance to just repeat someone else's opinions or be silent, I can weigh the evidence and make the Gospel mine. I can rely on the Holy Spirit as my guide to figure this out and not some long-dead LDS general authority like Bruce R McConkie or Marion G Romney.<br />
<br />
I can draw on any author I choose to expand my understanding, whether it be Billy Graham, Bart Ehrman, or Joseph Smith, and I can acknowledge the truth I find, wherever it may be.<br />
<br />
It's great to be unleashed.Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-5651719079630626812011-01-11T05:15:00.000-08:002011-01-11T05:15:26.303-08:00Why Stay, Part 3 --<br />
I was reflecting on this a lot in church on Sunday.<br />
<br />
From the LDS perspective I am damaged goods. I cannot pass a temple recommend interview because there's no way I could sustain the current general authorities as "prophets seers and revelators". I think they're entitled to the same inspiration as anyone else who prays to God with real intent, but I don't see them as the Lord's special witnesses, any different from any other preacher, pastor, or evangelist seeking to humbly spread the truth about Christ.<br />
<br />
As such I am really not able to be a full part of the LDS community. Most serious callings are off-limits to me, not that I would really want them anyway. I'm forever in a support role, like the Christmas cookie delivery from December, the second banana carrying the plate supporting someone with more credibility. In the LDS church what matters is serving within the church, either presiding or teaching, and I can do neither. The most I could aspire to would be generally made up jobs serving within the LDS community performed under the watchful eye of someone with more credibility.<br />
<br />
I contrast this with the opportunities for service in front of me as a member of the church we attend now.<br />
<br />
Before the service on Sunday they showed a video about a Boys Club ministry in downtown Raleigh. There are possibilities in front of me for making up packages of food and supplies for less fortunate students at a downtown elementary school. I may go to a meeting tonight for people putting on a chapel service in a local homeless shelter. I can help teach and encourage fellowship in my community group. As a member I could become a deacon and help lead and organize ministries in the church, for example the parking ministry I'm part of now. I can actually make a difference to the less fortunate outside the church and minister in some way to those in it, even if just a greeter helping people find parking spaces and carrying their babies into the building when their hands are full.<br />
<br />
I can do something meaningful and not just take notes at someone else's meeting, accompany someone else to a home teaching appointment that nobody wants to be involved in anyway, or haul furniture for people who already have lots of helpers and could realistically afford to pay movers if they chose to.<br />
<br />
I can never make a difference in the LDS context. I can make a huge difference in the church I attend now.<br />
<br />
Why would I trade meaningful ministry for marginalized irrelevance?Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-66042233809923657832011-01-07T18:05:00.000-08:002011-01-07T18:05:07.188-08:00<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Why Stay, Part 2 --</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">I’m part of a community group in the church I’m on trajectory to join.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There are three families in our group, because we are the furthest out geographically from where the church meets and there aren’t many others out that far.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One family was sick, so that left me and the leaders, a young couple with two small kids.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We typically meet weekly.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">We read the bible together and talked about the sermon.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One of the couple seemed distant and focused mostly on the kids.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I finally had to ask, “is anybody mad at me?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Am I disrupting something I didn’t know about?”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It turned out that this person was struggling with some personal issues and just needed space.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We’ve discussed some of these issues before, and we prayed together and went our separate ways.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">I had to reflect for a minute on how genuine and honest our meeting had been.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We enjoyed each other’s company for the most part.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We shared from the scriptures and other related works.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I asked an honest question about whether I had given offense, and I got an honest answer back.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We prayed together that burdens would be lifted and the pure love of God revealed.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">How unlike the similar LDS experience of home teaching this was.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We meet because we choose to.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Nobody is keeping score. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There is no “report” to higher authority. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We share.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There is no facade that the home teacher is somehow the superior in the relationship and has authority to instruct and to demand accountability (i.e. the quiz the home teacher is supposed to administer about family home evening, family prayer, etc).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There isn’t the awkward moment where the home teacher has to give some lesson the family hasn’t had the chance to think about, while the kids either run wild or are forced to sit quietly, meanwhile hoping lightning will strike the home teacher so they can go back to playing normally.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We don’t meet out of a sense of dull obligation, all the while checking our watches and hoping the home teachers will shut up and leave.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>No, this is a mutually satisfying relationship.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We meet weekly so we know each other and are honest about our feelings and opinions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Sometimes we share our frustrations about things at church, but not much.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">This is just a warm familiar experience, every week.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">I have typically been a big fan of home teaching, but this is better because it’s not done out of obligation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It’s done out of the pure love of Christian community.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Why would I trade it for the drudgery of most home teaching visits?</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">I have no idea.</span></div>Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-40800378517583128182011-01-05T16:41:00.000-08:002011-01-05T16:41:05.761-08:00Why Stay? --<br />
We attended a great service at our current church on Sunday. I'd like to describe it by way of proving my point, but I know some roll their eyes at listening to others talk about how great their church is. Totally understandable, but please indulge me. If you want, just skip to the end, where I make my point.<br />
<br />
The pastor delivered a thoughtful message about defining ourselves. Do we define ourselves by our relationship to those around us? By our relationship to material things? By our relationship to institutions? Or do we define ourselves the way God sees us, by our relationship to Christ? Defining ourselves the way God does allows us to weather a lot of storms at work and in life. Suddenly worldly success doesn't mean that much, so we don't need to stress when job and position and health and wealth are taken away, as they ultimately will be. He tied his sermon to the Bible rather than his own authority, and based his comments on several verses rather than things scattered all over the place quilted together to make a debating point. If you don't believe him, read the words for yourself and see if you see something different.<br />
<br />
The music afterwards was phenomenal. Not just the quality, but the response. There was energy in the room, people singing loudly, clapping, raising their hands, and responding with joy at the chance to worship. Not charismatic or anything, but just very enthusiastic and emotional. People were involved in the service.<br />
<br />
I just had to contrast this to the times I've attended LDS services lately.<br />
<br />
Now, I'm not one who claims that sacrament meetings have to be hugely entertaining. I enjoy listening to talks and generally comparing them to the same talk I have heard dozens of times before on the same subject, considering what I might have said in their place, and singing the hymns. But I fear I'm in the minority. Looking out at the congregation from the stand is usually not much different from sitting in a doctors waiting room. People are not smiling, they look vacant, and they clearly want to be elsewhere most of the time, especially these days when most sacrament talks are just rehashed general conference talks. When the speaker puts themselves into the talk they are hugely enjoyable, but that seems to happen less and less. More and more people just quote large sections of the general conference talk and then bear a short testimony without adding much of their own thoughts.<br />
<br />
Regardless of the quality of the content, most people are just not that engaged. They want it to be over. Likewise the singing. I'm embarrassed sometimes to sing in LDS congregations because I sound so loud compared to the few people around me who are singing, especially in the back. In our current church people often sing so loud you have no hope of hearing yourself, no matter how loud you are.<br />
<br />
So, here's the point.<br />
<br />
I really had to ask myself on Sunday. Sound scriptural teaching and not just somebody's opinion glittered with proof texts from the scriptures or general authorities quoting general authorities quoting general authorities. Energetic emotional worship that engaged the congregation. I was free to be myself and not worry about what other people thought of what I dressed or did during the service. I could just open my heart and respond.<br />
<br />
Why would I trade this for an LDS service? Why would I give up this kind of true worship for leaden LDS sacrament meetings where people are just going through the motions? Why would I trade this passionate experience for the equivalent lifeless one?<br />
<br />
I really couldn't think of a good reason.Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-70384966235963227592011-01-01T05:28:00.000-08:002011-01-01T05:28:02.182-08:00The Decision Point --<br />
Most of the last few posts I have made here have been leading up to a church service I went to at the church I attend now, Vintage 21 in downtown Raleigh NC. I used to use the phrase "mostly attend", because my wife and I used to divide our attendance between this church and two others: our LDS ward and whatever our current Anglican/Episcopal church was. For various reasons these other churches have kind of fallen by the wayside, and when we attend church we go to Vintage 21.<br />
<br />
We went the Sunday before Christmas. There had been a four week sermon series from Isaiah 9:6 during Advent where Christ was elaborated as "Wonderful Counselor", "Mighty God", "Everlasting Father", and in this last sermon "Prince of Peace".<br />
<br />
Honestly so far the series was interesting, but not revelational. I've been around the block a few times, and there was not much new to me in the series. It was great to review the names and attributes of Christ, but these were familiar concepts and not earth-shaking.<br />
<br />
The last sermon was different.<br />
<br />
What I was expecting from "Prince of Peace" was a feel-good sermon about how Jesus will make us get along better with the people around us, love one another, and teach us all to have happier lives by being nicer to each other. We can be happy and just rest from the cares of the world by abiding in the warm glow of his love, sort of like sitting next to a warm fire with a glass or cup of your favorite beverage, with a companion of your preferred gender on one side and a Labrador Retriever on the other. There's a nice picture of Jesus over the fire, portrayed in your preferred ethnic extraction, and he's smiling down at you approvingly.<br />
<br />
Except this was not the sermon preached.<br />
<br />
Basically our idea of "peace" is the absence of conflict and trials, and that's not a part of the human condition we can realistically ever expect in the long term. In general, even on their best days people tend to be self-centered and difficult, and the human condition is fraught with trials. We are only ever a short time removed from the diagnosis, the suspicious wet spot that appears in the ceiling under the bathroom, the cold morning where it's suddenly 58 degrees in the house, the morning when you check the news and discover that your 401K has dropped 20% in value overnight, the funny little glass pipe you find in your teenager's drawer, the piece of e-mail left up on the screen where your son or daughter is desperately discussing the results of the pregnancy test with someone else. Any other outcome is the world's view of "peace", and it doesn't jibe with reality.<br />
<br />
True peace is being reconciled to God, which can only be accomplished through Christ. It's a healed relationship with God, rather than healed relationships with the people around us and with our investments and the house we live in. With a healed relationship with God the other things fall into their proper secondary place. Without it, other things can never compensate, can never paper over the deep crevasse between the spiritual life we want and the one we actually have.<br />
<br />
I realized that basically every organization or system I had been a part of before served to focus me on healing my relationship with the organization. I was to align my outward behavior to whatever the leaders dictated or to what the group as a whole expected. There was really no sense of the inner healing described by this sermon.<br />
<br />
I don't expect this to necessarily resonate with you, but it did with me. Without getting all preachy, other religious paths were basically closed doors to me for different reasons, and this one was suddenly an open door leading down a path I was being slowly and powerfully drawn to.<br />
<br />
The rest of the service was a wonderfully positive experience of pure worship I really can't describe if you weren't there. It just was.<br />
<br />
I went up to one of the staff members I had met with before. For the last two years I have been told I can't join this church because of my continuing LDS connection and because my wife and I had to join together or not at all. As a result of the last meeting we had, suddenly the door to membership was being flung open, should I choose to walk through it.<br />
<br />
So, all this was going through my mind this past Christmas week. The doors that were closed. The door that was opening to me. Should I walk through it or not?<br />
<br />
By the time I got to Christmas Day, the choice seemed clear. I'm walking through it.Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-21103829193237645452010-12-31T05:58:00.000-08:002010-12-31T05:58:08.030-08:00Aloneness and Community --<br />
<br />
I found this quote in a book I am reading by Michael Spencer, <u>Mere Churchianity</u>. For some years he was the ringmaster for a website named <a href="http://www.internetmonk.com/">http://www.internetmonk.com/</a>. He died of cancer this year, but I think this book sums up his philosophy pretty well. Mine also.<br />
<br />
A lot of the journey I'm on is described by this quote:<br />
<br />
"I want to be one who values relationships and community, but who is not defined by them. I want to have the certainty, confidence, and contentment that come from knowing who I am in the eyes and heart of God, not just who I am in relation to people.<br />
<br />
"At the foundation of the Christian life, there is a kind of sacred individuality, a sort of holy aloneness that cries out to be left alone with God. This isn't all of the Christian life. It doesn't erase those parts of a Christian's experience that happen in the context of relationships, but this sacred solitude nees to be discovered, respected, and protected".<br />
<br />
Possibly this is a major area the LDS church falls short. So much of the LDS experience is defined by the group that there is really not much structure for establishing a personal relationship with God. Certainly the necessary practices are described, which would be foundational and sincere prayer and scripture study. Yet maybe the end goal isn't laid out very well, nor is a sense of spiritual individualism really valued. Your primary value in the LDS church is your value and relationship to the group, rather than your own intrinsic value. It's not possible to sit in an LDS meeting for more than five minutes without receiving a list of ways to "lengthen your stride" to conform more to the goals of the group.<br />
<br />
Alas this is just not who I am as a person, nor is this the Jesus I see in the Bible. The true gospel is about earnestly seeking out the desires of God and conforming to those, as imperfectly as we understand them, and not merely conforming to a group.Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-28721723034452075152010-12-31T05:52:00.000-08:002010-12-31T05:52:00.247-08:00The Christmas Eve Service --<br />
My wife had to work on Christmas Eve, so I went looking for a Christmas Eve service on my own. There's a large Baptist church in a neighboring town that I've been to before. I know a few people there from a Bible Study Fellowship class I was involved in for about three years. <br />
<br />
The first time I went to this church's Christmas Eve service it was a real eye-opener. As a Latter-day Saint we are familiar with being instructed, guilted, and exhorted to do more. The idea that Christ has done great things for us is largely presented as evidence that much is expected in return. Very few LDS meetings end without the feeling that you're just not doing as much as you could be doing. They really don't want to encourage a comfort zone, because people need to be busy doing the Lord's work.<br />
<br />
The service I went to three years ago was different. Rather than motivating people out of guilt, obedience, or threats, they simply worshiped. The pastor read passages from the Bible and interspersed with that were several devotional musical numbers, a combination of hymns and contemporary worship music. As this church is mixed generational, there was a little something for everyone. It did a really great job of communicating the feelings of hope inherent in the Christmas season, culminating in a candlelight exercise.<br />
<br />
They turned out all the lights, leaving one large candle up near the pulpit. It represented the light of Christ. The pastor lit a single candle from the larger one and used this to light candles for a small number of ushers. The ushers went down the aisle and simply lit the candles of the people on the row ends, who lit the candle of the person next to them.<br />
<br />
All in all no one did a great work. Each helped maybe six other people light candles, but this produced a wave of light in a room of several hundred people that worked its way back. Before, the room was in darkness. Soon, it was bathed in light, and for the most part all we had to do to achieve that was to share the light with one other person.<br />
<br />
Hopefully the message in all this is clear. Generally if we can just share the light of Christ with the people around us, soon our entire surroundings will be bathed in the warm glow of Christian light.<br />
<br />
Three years ago it was a beautiful service.<br />
<br />
I went the following year, and it was likewise beautiful.<br />
<br />
This time was different. Not so much because the service had changed at all, but because I had. As much as I love this church and what they do, I realized that half the musical numbers were the same ones from the previous services. I also noticed that most people didn't really respond much to the performances. Although we sang the hymns together, there was a sense of passion missing.<br />
<br />
Probably the thing that hit me the hardest was how comfortable the service was for the people there. Most of the people there (now in a new building seating 600 - 700 people) seemed to know each other. Families sat together. As a stranger sitting by myself I had a boundary of three seats on either side of me until the room just began to fill in completely. The fact that this service was being enjoyed by groups of people, of friends, of families, was not lost on me. The one person who spoke to me was there with her husband and was likewise not a member of this church.<br />
<br />
The scriptures were familiar, the songs were familiar, and being part of a family-oriented church was familiar. Although I was a stranger there, were I to join I would know exactly how to play the game, to laugh and make friends and pleasant conversation. There were lots of people my own age, my own race, and my own class. This room was full of people just like me. All I needed to do was to roll the audio tape and put on the mask and I would fit right in. This was a church I could settle right into, know people, come twice a week, get involved in the social groups and Sunday School classes, and would have no need to venture outside for anything.<br />
<br />
The one fly in the ointment here is that the gospel was never intended to be comfortable for us. I think we can point to the examples of Jesus and the apostles as confirmation. The apostles were instructed, they were equipped for ministry, and they were sent out. They were never granted a comfort zone, other than the ultimate promise of salvation and the Second Coming. Nor should we expect anything different.<br />
<br />
In many ways I think a church should be like a bicycle seat. It should provide a place to sit, yet not be so comfortable that you want to remain there for any length of time. A church is a place of worship and rest from the cares of the world, but it's not a destination. It's a beginning.<br />
<br />
The worst thing a church can do is to present an attractive compelling sub-culture that causes you to be a faker to fit into. God made us as individuals, and I think churches should serve to rub off the rough edges that interfere with our ability to be relational with others, yet not interfere with those differences that make us who we are as people.<br />
<br />
So, as much as I enjoy the church I attended on Christmas Eve, it was readily apparent that it was not the place for me.Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-38787168857522515532010-12-29T16:09:00.000-08:002010-12-29T16:09:17.469-08:00Addendum: the ward Christmas party --<br />
<br />
Another confirming detail for me was the ward Christmas party. I know we had one. I found out because they sent e-mail to the Elders Quorum at the last minute looking for people to do set up and takedown. The one personal invitation I got to it was from the automated notification system on the ward calendar, which showed up two days after the party. It was kind of sad to me that neither my home teachers nor my home teaching companion thought enough of me to invite our family to the party. A trivial thing, and not something I'm really offended by. Just kind of disappointed. An indicator that people really don't care about us that much.<br />
<br />
We got some e-mail and a Christmas card from people in our previous ward, but not a single communication from people in our own ward.Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-17176682805088910512010-12-29T05:27:00.000-08:002010-12-29T05:27:16.088-08:00The Dry and Weary Land --<br />
<br />
Even though we haven't been to LDS services since July I'm still assigned as a home teacher, companion to someone in a leadership position. I specifically asked to be assigned as a home teacher because I wanted to maintain that connection to the community. Likewise we have always tried to welcome our own home teachers, the missionaries, or anybody else who would like to engage us.<br />
<br />
Practically this hasn't worked that well. We're not in the social whirl of the ward, which is a generally young ward, and we are "out of sight, out of mind". Practically folks are busy with their families, and people have been ingrained with the culture of obedience, so that's what the leaders get. Obedience, without a lot of passion.<br />
<br />
I went about three months without hearing from our home teachers and finally e-mailed them to set up an appointment in November. We had a nice visit, and they shared a thoughtful message. I didn't e-mail them in December, and we found a plate of cookies with a post it on it wishing us a Merry Christmas on our doorstep. Now, that was a nice gesture, and I appreciated the thought, but our primary phone is my cell phone and I am never more than about twenty minutes from e-mail. I would have really appreciated some kind of personal connection more than cookies and a post it, but we are "inactive", and everybody knows the way you home teach inactives is the non-threatening plate of cookies that will not offend them.<br />
<br />
On the other hand, we are friendly, so maybe a message connecting us to the Christmas spirit with the goal of providing spiritual nourishment and maybe even bringing us back?<br />
<br />
Sadly we just don't fit into people's pre-defined categories, so too bad for us.<br />
<br />
On to my own home teaching appointment this past Wednesday.<br />
<br />
We also did the drive-by with plates of cookies, although my companion had segregated the route into people we should make appts with and people we shouldn't (because they wouldn't be home if they knew we were coming). The father of one family in the latter category had a general look of astonishment for the minute we were on his doorstep, like "why are you people doing this?"<br />
<br />
The other two families were happy to see us. One family was very active and the other friendly, but not so active. We made really pleasant conversation, and I found myself slipping back into the role of home teacher, telling stories from past visits, talking about "church things", "church people", etc. I can play this part, because I did it well for 20 years. Mostly I loved home teaching and loved the LDS church, but many home teaching assignments are just exercises in getting it over with because the families are either busy or don't want to be bothered. So you talk the talk, touch all the bases (message, "is there anything we can do for you", prayer, and run for the car).<br />
<br />
When that was all there was, it was enough.<br />
<br />
Now it feels like a dark shell. Although we shared cookies during these visits, we didn't share any of the spirit of Christ. Our mission was obedience. We are supposed to visit, so we visited, but we stayed off of possibly offensive topics which are the true theological reason we are supposed to be visiting in the first place.<br />
<br />
I guess the worst thing is that I realized what a fake I am. I can talk the talk of an active home teacher, but I will never fit back into this group again. The signal to noise ratio is too low, by which I mean the ratio of real spiritual experiences and enlightenment to just "busyness", going visiting just to fulfill assignments, sitting through meetings as an act of obedience, hearing the exact same lessons over and over again because of the exhortation for teachers never to stray from the script and follow the Spirit. I don't believe in the absolute authority of the leaders. I believe in the authority of God and of Christ, and trying to hear that message of the still, small voice is increasing like trying to communicate with a Mars probe. Through LDS channels it is still out there, but there's too much intervening interference to get a clear signal.<br />
<br />
I can pretend all I want, standing on someone's doorstep with cookies in my hand, but I am really not cut from the same cloth as these people anymore, and we all know it. My perspective is too different, my behavior is too different, what "the gospel" is to me is too different. I will never fit again, even if I wanted to.<br />
<br />
I wanted to reference the First Presidency message from January, which arrived in my home just before Christmas, but it's not online yet. I'll add a link to it when it comes up. It was very deflating. I opened it hoping for a Christian message, and instead got a regurgitated exhortation for more missionaries for the LDS church from the church President.<br />
<br />
Really the December message was no better: <a href="http://lds.org/ensign/2010/12/can-we-see-the-christ?lang=eng">December First Presidency Message</a><br />
<br />
Although it at least references Christ, this is the limpest possible message that could be imagined. It doesn't actually testify of Christ, but instead merely challenges people to think about Christ in the Christmas season. This subject should be a sonnet at Christmas-time, but instead is a little to-do list written on a post it. "Buy milk". "Vacuum the stairs". "Think about Jesus".<br />
<br />
One interesting thought is this. Why is the most important message that could possibly be delivered to mankind offered by one of the counselors to the President, while the "Lord's Prophet" instead offers a useless message in January trying to convince people to merely do things? Why wouldn't the Lord's true prophet on the earth take advantage of this opportunity to stand on every street corner, visit every homeless shelter, preach non-stop in the tabernacle, the Conference Center, on BYU-TV, to buttonhole every visitor to Temple Square, to walk through the streets of Salt Lake City, Orem, Provo, and every other populated town in Utah begging people to share the message of Jesus with their neighbors? Why isn't this man acting as Peter, Paul, John, or even Joseph Smith, intent on sharing this message of hope and salvation? As opposed to what clearly interests him most, advocating the institutional needs of the church for more warm bodies filling seats at the MTC and filling the corporate sales force of LDS incorporated?<br />
<br />
There is just no content to this any more.<br />
<br />
I can do better.<br />
<br />
I am going to.Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-85904323774839944812010-12-28T19:55:00.000-08:002010-12-28T19:55:14.669-08:00Choosing a Fork --<br />
<br />
This blog has been largely dormant for awhile because I didn't have much different to say. I've been in about the same place spiritually for awhile, kind of stuck between the LDS church on one hand and trying to figure out where I fit into biblical Christianity on the other.<br />
<br />
Maybe "stuck" isn't necessarily the best description. I sort of am what I am spiritually and theologically. Functionally I am a star-shaped peg, and what I have available to me are different shaped holes, none of them being star-shaped.<br />
<br />
I remain converted to the spirit of Mormonism, or at least that spirit that has so far been most compactly described by Mormonism, which I find exemplified by the first vision story. A 14 year-old boy went into the woods, seeking truth and an answer from God, and he got one. In fact he got a personal appearance from both God and Jesus Christ.<br />
<br />
Now, this story has so many versions to it that it's impossible to know what actually happened, or whether anything really happened, but the story itself remains magnetic to me. The prevailing philosophies of the day had "truth" described by authority. Either the authority of a religious institution or the authority of a book that was the physical product of a religious institution. Whether that religious institution was guided by the hand of God is known in the heart of each individual. I believe it was. <br />
<br />
But various institutions certainly reserved the right to tell each individual what the meaning of the text was. Did the words empower the apostle Peter, and thus validate the Catholic church? Did the words constrain the aspiring Christian to keep commandments as the pathway to Heaven? Did the words empower the believer through grace so that commandments were really no longer binding? Pick your preferred institution, and thus choose your yoke and your master.<br />
<br />
The essence of Joseph Smith's first vision story is that God cares about individuals apart from institutions. Revelation comes to the individual directly from God. The institutional yoke is broken. The heavens are open, to the extent we choose to listen.<br />
<br />
That right there is the underpinning of my faith. Whatever we might choose as a church, a creed, whatever, the driving force behind it must be that direct connection to God, achieved through the Holy Spirit. Institutions have value to the extent that they foster that connection, and they are damned to the extent that they impede it.<br />
<br />
Modern day mormonism has become everything Joseph Smith's first vision story was supposed to overcome. It has become a large powerful bureaucratic institution that tells people how they must behave, and it supposes to be the conduit through which most meaningful revelation flows from God to the individual.<br />
<br />
It has taken its place alongside many other large and powerful religious institutions that choose to use people to serve their institutional ends. It's better than many, if not most, but the fact remains that it impedes that channel of revelation, much as the life-giving waters of the Colorado river are siphoned off, bit by bit, until a mighty river becomes a muddy trickle at its disappointing endpoint, somewhere in Mexico.<br />
<br />
So, my star-shaped peg no longer fits into the hole of institutional Mormonism. So where does it fit?<br />
<br />
Largely I'm a scriptural Christian. I believe that God has spoken to men in various ways over time, and the most enduring records are found in the scriptures, primarily the books we consider the Old and New Testaments. These books are and always have been the core of my faith. I believe the Book of Mormon reflects a lot of biblical truth, yet there is no shred of historical proof that it is what it claims to be, a record of an ancient people. Nor does the translation process really seem designed to persuade the vast majority of people that a loving God would want to draw to himself. I don't think the Book of Mormon is the cynical fraud that many, if not most, do, because the principles in it reflect such inspired biblical truth. I find it to be a derivative work, inspired fiction, worthy of reading as one of the most influential books of the 19th and 20th centuries, a clear expounder of truth, yet not one that can doctrinally go beyond its biblical foundation.<br />
<br />
So, where does all this leave a star-shaped peg in search of a hole to fit into?<br />
<br />
Until recently, just sitting on the workbench. I no longer fit into the LDS church. I have a hard-won distrust of denominations and institutional churches. Yet as Christians we cannot stand alone. The core of Christian practice must happen in communities. No church that I felt drawn to would accept me, because my LDS connections and some resulting life circumstances were not acceptable. The points on the star would just not go down the holes.<br />
<br />
Thankfully that may have changed.<br />
<br />
This has been a pretty influential holiday period, and my direction seems increasingly clear. I'll devote the next few posts to sharing the story, and following that to whatever happens next.Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-67160499595224140102010-02-14T05:07:00.000-08:002010-02-14T05:07:49.726-08:00Why Are You So Afraid? --<br />
<br />
Jesus asks the disciples this question in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%208:23%20-%2027&version=NIV">Matt 8:23 - 27</a>. After reading the January 2010 <a href="http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=81be47a27a2b5210VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD">First Presidency Message</a>, (<a href="http://lds.org/churchmagazines/EN_2010_01_00___09201_000_000.pdf">5MB PDF of magazine </a>, illustration on p4) I think he might ask modern day LDS apostles this same question. <br />
<br />
So much to cover.<br />
<br />
Even the picture associated with the article is shrouded in fear. It shows the appearance of Christ to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery, which was certainly the highlight of the Kirtland Temple dedication. Except the actual appearance wasn't out in the open. It happened behind a curtain, so that only they were witnesses to it. The picture in the article only hints at this. Richard Bushman points out in Rough Stone Rolling that there are only 3d person journal accounts of this, Joseph Smith never wrote of it, and few saints at the time were even aware it happened. So, why an illustration that implies it happened in plain view?<br />
<br />
It refers to the apostasy in Kirtland following the bank collapses without mentioning Joseph Smith's involvement in it. It moralizes this apostasy as though people just didn't do enough to sustain their faith after all these marvelous experiences, while totally ignoring the flaws in the church leaders that was such a huge factor.<br />
<br />
The article itself references <a href="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/88">D&C Section 88</a>, known as the "Olive Leaf".<br />
<br />
What a marvelous section. Fundamentally it recaps a lot of the doctrine on the three kingdoms of glory and gives specific details about the millenium, the Second Coming, the battle of Armageddon, and finishes with some instructions about the operation of the School of the Prophets. It's vast in scope and visionary, turning the mind towards the ultimate victory of Christ and the transformation of the earth into its ultimate paradaisical glory. I'm honestly not sure I've ever read it from that perspective before.<br />
<br />
So, where is the fear in this?<br />
<br />
I think it points out that the apostles are scared of the gospel.<br />
<br />
Rather than using Joseph Smith's vision of Christ and revelations like the Olive Leaf to point to the cataclysmic events of the Second Coming, these are the quotes we are most familar with:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>"And I give unto you a commandment that you shall teach one another the doctrine of the kingdom." (v77)</blockquote><blockquote>"Behold, I sent you out to testify and warn the people, and it becometh every man who hath been warned to warn his neighbor. <br />
Therefore, they are left without excuse, and their sins are upon their own heads." (v81 - 82)</blockquote> And of course our perennial favorite:<br />
<blockquote>"Organize yourselves; prepare every needful thing; and establish a house, even a house of prayer, a house of fasting, a house of faith, a house of learning, a house of glory, a house of order, a house of God;" (v119)</blockquote><br />
So, we take a miraculous vision to Joseph Smith that was surrounded in mystery and boil out all the nuances surrounding it. We take a fascinating, thought-provoking vision of the millenium and the Second Coming and reduce it to simple pithy aphorisms about behavior improvement. The youth and Primary suggestions at the end of the article (viewable in the PDF version above) solemnly invite the youth to fast, pray, read their scriptures, keep the commandments, follow the Holy Ghost, and remind them that we draw near to the Lord by following Thomas S Monson.<br />
<br />
We take a complex period of history in the LDS church from which much can be learned about the flaws of men and the importance of basing our testimony on Christ, and instead imply that if only people had been more faithful their testimonies would have survived?<br />
<br />
Why are we so afraid of our history? Why are we so afraid of the majesty of our doctrine? Why are we so afraid?Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-76528938357816486912010-01-31T16:15:00.000-08:002010-01-31T16:15:30.313-08:00On completing the Book of Mormon for the 17th time, I think it’s timely to apply Moroni’s promise in Moroni 10:3 - 5: “Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts. And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.”<br />
<br />
Indeed, by the power of the Holy Ghost we may truly know all things.<br />
<br />
As I’ve read the Book of Mormon I have continually taken the challenge, and I believe. I believe that the things the BOM testifies of are true.<br />
<br />
What does it testify of?<br />
<br />
The Book of Mormon is another witness of Jesus Christ, that he was and is the Son of God, and that he is God, with no other God before him. The Book of Mormon testifies that Jesus Christ was the God of Israel, that he appeared to the Israelites in a cloud, and that he led them in the wilderness. It testifies that Jesus Christ was the Father of Heaven and earth, and that he came to earth in human form to pay the awful penalty of our sins.<br />
<br />
It testifies over and over again that the way to eternal life is through faith in Christ, repentance, baptism, and enduring to the end in our faith and not turning away from the witness of the Holy Ghost and following Satan instead. In Moroni 6:4 it testifies that when Christ came in 3 Nephi that the people were baptized in faith, being saved wholly through the merits of Christ and nothing else.<br />
<br />
It demonstrates that through keeping the commandments we have access to his grace. Obviously if keeping the commandments means perfecting ourselves we would have no need of having sins remitted; therefore, we can rely on Jesus for a definition of keeping the commandments, which means to love God with all your heart and mind and strength and to love your neighbor as yourself.<br />
<br />
I believe all the things that the Book of Mormon testifies of and I believe in the power of the many inspirational stories.<br />
<br />
There are many things the Book of Mormon doesn’t teach.<br />
<br />
It doesn’t teach that salvation comes through LDS temple ordinances. It doesn’t teach that you have to be married to more than one woman in the temple to have eternal life. It doesn’t teach that God is an exalted man.<br />
<br />
It is primarily written to gentiles and the descendants of the Lamanites to implore them to come unto Christ for their salvation, and it only indirectly testifies of Joseph Smith. It’s a testimony of Christ and not a testimony of Joseph Smith, any later works he might come forward with, or of the institutional church.<br />
<br />
There’s a connection we often make, that if the Book of Mormon is true, then therefore Joseph Smith is a prophet and we can trust everything else he said and did. We also assume that that authority he might receive from our testimony of the Book of Mormon can be transferred to his successors. I don’t think the book itself compels us to make those connections. None of those statements are made anywhere in the Book of Mormon. Its purpose is to testify of Christ and not of Joseph Smith, and we have to be careful not to extrapolate from it things it doesn’t say.<br />
<br />
I don’t believe that the Book of Mormon really belongs in the canon along with the Old and New Testaments, because it only has one witness, Joseph Smith. The testimonies of the other witnesses are compromised by later statements and by their support of other supposed prophets like James Strang. In any case the only thing the witnesses can testify of is that there were physical plates, if they actually saw or handled them at all. They can’t testify anything about the content or the accuracy of the translation. It wasn’t written in a language they or anyone other than Joseph Smith could read.<br />
<br />
Nowhere in the Bible does anything else rest on the testimony of one person. When Moses received the Ten Commandments there were divine manifestations surrounding this event that were visible to all. The cloud was visible to all by day, as was the pillar of fire by night. Certainly the drowning Egyptians were visible to all. Many Old Testament prophets testified of substantially the same message. We have an entire existing Hebrew culture today that has preserved these teachings and witnessed that, whether or not all the events actually happened, the people involved at least existed and taught these things.<br />
<br />
In the New Testament we have the witnesses of four different gospel writers and the doctrinal writings of three apostles, all of whom were personal literal witnesses of Christ in the company of others. We have the witness of the early church that the things they taught were substantially in accordance with what people thought were the core doctrines of the gospel of Jesus Christ.<br />
<br />
<br />
Never before is such a substantial body of teaching given in a hidden language, with only one person having the power to interpret that language, with no independent evidence that any of the events involved actually happened.<br />
<br />
The Book of Mormon is clearly derivative of a more in-depth work. It builds on top of concepts taught in the Bible in an attempt to summarize and clarify them. Some have said that the Book of Mormon addresses every doctrinal controversy raging in Joseph Smith’s day, and it leaves few doctrinal stones unturned. It continually exhorts us to repent and keep the commandments without being specific about what those terms exactly mean.<br />
<br />
It doesn’t contain the depth of the New Testament teachings of Christ, including the parables that help us figure out the nuances of Christian life. I think the stories of Abinadi, Alma the Younger, the mission of Ammon to the Lamanites, the sons of Helaman, and the Anti-Nephi-Lehis are tremendous teaching moments about faith and duty to God, but we miss a lot of the subtle teachings of the rest of the New Testament as we are exhorted over and over again to repent and keep the commandments. <br />
<br />
<br />
It talks about the Nephites keeping Mosaic law without once discussing any of the specifics of that law.<br />
<br />
Especially through 3 Nephi, Mormon, and Moroni the target audience of the Book of Mormon is clearly gentiles who are already familiar with Christian teaching and are being called to repentance. The spirit is a spirit of revival. In that spirit the Book of Mormon builds on a framework of existing teachings.<br />
<br />
The book is clearly written to convince. <br />
<br />
It comes across over and over again as a summary of thousands of years of Jewish and Christian thought. Moses was given a part of the plan, Paul had a part, John had a part, as did many others, but many of the characters in the Book of Mormon have the whole thing. They understand the trinity. They understand salvation by grace. They understand the complex relationship between faith and works, with works not being saving but being an evidence of faith. They have a clear understanding of Christ coming to earth as both God and redeemer to save mankind from their sins.<br />
<br />
The brother of Jared even has the astounding vision of the God of Israel, who spoke to Moses from within a cloud and led them with a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night. Christ steps out of the cloud and into a physical body, just because of the unsurpassed faith of the brother of Jared. Jesus Christ reveals himself physically and lays out his redeeming mission in complete detail. In about two verses hundreds of years of doctrinal debate over the nature of the trinity and the connection between the God of the Old Testament and the redeemer of the New Testament are put to rest. <br />
<br />
<br />
Regardless of the truths taught in the Book of Mormon, there’s an aspect of it that just seems “created”, rather than actually being a historical record.<br />
<br />
The Book of Mormon is completely black and white. Other than maybe Laman and Lemuel and Zeezrom and perhaps Alma the Younger and the sons of Mosiah, people are either good or bad. Entire nations either repent or dwindle in unbelief. When a civil war happens the rival camps gather themselves together and fight to the last man. Nobody deserts. Populations don’t flee the destruction. They fight to the death.<br />
<br />
This contrasts to the New Testament where most characters other than Christ have both good and bad in them. Judas is a complex character, leading Christ to destruction and then killing himself in despair. Peter denies Christ and then is himself martyred. Christ doesn’t put on the mass demonstrations of his power in the New Testament other than healings, appearing only to a relatively small number of faithful and leaving his resurrection in doubt to some even to this day.<br />
<br />
The New Testament has a complex texture that is completely absent in the Book of Mormon. Like comparing a fine cup of freshly brewed coffee with a soda. The coffee mixes the various flavors of the coffee with the cream and the sugar, while the soda is just sugar and water.<br />
<br />
The Book of Ether is a curious addition, and seems to taint the rest of it. It’s kind of a letdown because it seems so clearly manufactured. It’s almost a microcosm of the rest of the Book of Mormon. It’s written in a secret language on plates that require seer stones and a seer to interpret, and thus the content comes from just one source. i.e. the “prophet” that interprets it. It tells the story of a people who were removed from a larger group and sent across the ocean to colonize the promised land. People begin in righteousness and are destroyed through sin. Rival groups attempt to annihilate each other and gather in teams to do so, rather than being scattered as refugees as is the rule in human experience.<br />
<br />
Only the Book of Ether is more extreme.<br />
<br />
The barges are more magical than Nephi’s ship. Whereas Mormon has an army in the hundreds of thousands, Coriantumr’s army is in the millions. Whereas the Lamanites mostly exterminates the Nephites, the people of Shiz and Coriantumr gather millions of people together and literally fight to the last man. All the women and children are armed. There are no refugees. Everybody gathers day after day with the aim of killing each other to the last man. There are countless sons who rebel against fathers and take their kingdoms, or sons who fight to regain their father’s kingdoms, one after the other, over and over again. It has a prophet, Ether, who witnesses the destruction of his civilization through pride and wickedness, just as Moroni does. The exhortations to the gentiles to repent or suffer destruction are repeated almost verbatim. The Book of Ether has every element of the Book of Mormon, only more exaggerated.<br />
<br />
<br />
I believe it taints the Book of Mormon in the same way some people try to quit smoking by smoking more, to become sick of cigarettes. The Book of Ether has all the fantastic elements of the Book of Mormon in a much shorter time period, without the inspiring sermons or stories that are the jewels of the Book of Mormon. It makes you think that this fantastic story that came through Joseph Smith about barges crossing the ocean and rival groups destroying each other is hardly believable, and then you realize that the Book of Mormon has all the same elements, and it makes you question the rest of it.<br />
<br />
The Book of Ether is wildly improbable and just repeats many of the same themes in the other parts of the Book of Mormon. It’s as though somehow the story of the Nephites and Lamanites was too subtle and we needed something more black and white, more obvious, with clearer alternatives between righteousness and wickedness, with more obvious consequences of turning away from God.<br />
<br />
The Book of Mormon contains saving truths, whether it’s inspired or a figment of Joseph Smith’s imagination. Rather than testifying of Joseph Smith and his calling as prophet, which is the way we typically use it, it clearly testifies of Christ. That’s its stated purpose and the direction of the content. It’s clearly written to exhort the gentiles of Joseph Smith’s day and afterwards to repent and trust in the merits of Christ for salvation.<br />
<br />
The fact that the Book of Mormon exists would probably keep me from leaving the church. The church itself is as much a receptacle of error as truth, but the fact that it holds the Book of Mormon in such high regard would be the only hope that truth would win out over the idolatry towards the institution.<br />
<br />
We have largely gotten away from the principles of the Book of Mormon, yet the fact that we encourage people to read it drives those truths deep within their souls, and there’s hope that truth may in fact win out over the institution. Ultimately truth cannot be contained and will win out. The spark cannot be contained, no matter how dim it might be. The Book of Mormon fosters and nurtures the light of Christ, and the light will eventually win out. I believe this to be true as much in spite of the institutional church as because of it.Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-71560845693806986182010-01-09T05:35:00.000-08:002010-01-09T05:35:50.883-08:00<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">More Book of Mormon journal comments --</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">27 Aug 2009</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I just read through the first 11 chapters of 3 Nephi, and a comment about the nature of the Book of Mormon seems appropriate. In these chapters especially the black/white nature of the book is apparent. People are either righteous or they aren’t. Whole groups of people either convert or they don’t. The Gadianton robbers either infiltrate the government or the judicial system or they don’t. The Nephites either gather against the robbers or they don’t. The main characters like Nephi, Jacob, the Helamans, the Ammons, etc, are either righteous or they aren’t, Laman and Lemuel being exceptions, because as their story begins in 1 and 2 Nephi they are sometimes righteous and sometimes not. Possibly Lehi fits into this category also, because although he is a prophet he sometimes wavers and is confused about things.<br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Possibly this is due to the abridgement by Mormon, because 1 and 2 Nephi have more developed characters and include women, whereas the parts abridged by Mormon typically are black/white and only one woman, a Lamanite servant if memory serves, is called by name.<br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Contrast this to the New Testament, where Peter and the apostles are well-meaning but not generally with the program, and the 12 apostles are split 11/1 into righteous and unrighteous. Women abound, and gray areas abound.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">We often speak of the Book of Mormon as the most correct book, yet the black/white nature and the absence of women doesn’t reflect our lives that well and the nuanced character of our testimonies. We can identify with Peter and Paul much better than we can identify with Nephi, who is clearly a cartoon character. Possibly Enos is a better fit, and possibly Alma, but the Book of Mormon characters are all firm in the faith and perform great deeds, while we limp along doing our best to figure out matters of faith. The Book of Mormon prophets spring forth fully formed in their faith, while Peter and Paul struggle to figure out the details.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">For most people I think the New Testament is something they can relate to better. We can easily relate to Peter’s denial of Jesus, because we do that every day. The uncompromising faith of the Nephite prophets is less accessible.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">29 Aug 2009</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Having made it through 3 Ne 19 today I went back and re-read the accounts of Jesus’ ministry after his resurrection in the Bible in order to compare the accounts. 3 Ne has always left me kind of lukewarm before, because Christ lacks a certain sense of humility in 3 Ne that is present in the New Testament. I got more insight into that this morning.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In the New Testament Christ has 3 years to get his message across, to heal and to preach. He preaches openly to the multitude in the beginning and then to progressively smaller audiences (in general) because people come for the miracles and fall away because of his hard teachings. Plus it’s not safe for him to appear in public any more because of the opposition of the leaders. By the end of the New Testament he’s had the chance to teach those who will listen, and the only followers he has left is just a small number of disciples. Only the women have enough faith to actually go to the tomb and witness the resurrection firsthand.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">By contrast, in 3 Ne the people have been through a whipsaw of faith and apostasy, over and over again. Even the disciples (apostles) need to start over and be baptized and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">By the end of the New Testament Christ is appearing just to small numbers of people, whom he ministers to individually.<br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In 3 Ne he doesn’t have that luxury, because they haven’t had the personal visitations the New Testament crowd has had. He has to do the mass healings and baptisms because they haven’t had the opportunity to have those things. He has three years of ministry to pack into just a few days. He has to preach himself as the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy and heal and baptize, because there isn’t the time to toy around with parables as in the New Testament. Much of the flow of the New Testament is a winnowing out process, and this has already been done in 3 Ne. Those that didn’t believe are largely dead. People separated themselves out by belief, and like Sodom and Gomorrah the unbelievers were destroyed. The remainder are true believers.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Of course the difference in response is interesting. In 3 Ne all believe and all fall to the earth. In Matt 28:17 even as the great commission is being delivered some are doubting. Whether the doubters are among the apostles depends on your reading of the text, but it seems likely.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In the early chapters of 3 Ne people separate themselves into belief groups where people are either faithful or not, and the unfaithful are destroyed. This is much more black and white than in the New Testament, where the reaction is mixed. Even the disciples/apostles aren’t uniformly convinced. Jesus doesn’t put on the convincing performance at the end, raining destruction through earthquakes and floods and destroying unbelievers and leaving the rest gasping for breath. He merely says “put your hands into my side and feel my wounds and believe”. The resurrection is the “sign”, so perhaps there’s not the need for the convincing display found in 3 Ne. The wheat and tares are still growing together, whereas in the Book of Mormon the winnowing out is much further along.</span>Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-68513415145187531252009-12-30T04:34:00.001-08:002009-12-30T04:34:52.282-08:00The Importance of Faith vs Ordinances --<br />
<br />
It’s interesting to contemplate the discussion of salvation in the Book of Mormon. You have these multiple consistent expositions of faith that are precursors to LDS temple work. Consider the people of Ammonihah, burned for their beliefs. Consider Nephi, Abinadi, Enos, and Jacob, their faith and their testimonies. <br />
<br />
Here are some of my favorite selections from the Book of Mormon on salvation:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/2_ne/9">2 Ne 9</a> deserves to be read in its entirety, as it's a wonderful sermon.<br />
<br />
Many verses in this point to the orthodox Christian trinity, original sin, and concepts of hell, but for my purposes the meat is here: <a href="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/search?search=2+Ne+9%3A21+-+26">2 Ne 9:21 - 26</a>. I think this states pretty unambiguously that salvation comes through faith, repentance, baptism, and enduring to the end. All because of the power of the atonement.<br />
<br />
Here's another great one: <a href="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/search?search=2+Ne+25%3A23+-+30">2 Ne 25:23-30</a><br />
<br />
And how could we not mention the story of <a href="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/enos/1">Enos</a>? This is a story that warms the evangelical Christians heart. He wrestles with his faith before God in prayer and receives a remission of his sins because of his faith. Consider the elegant simplicity of this statement from God: "wherefore, go to, thy faith hath made thee whole."<br />
<br />
Compare that with a more modern alternative: "wherefore, go to, thy faith hath made thee whole. After, of course, you abstain from coffee, alcohol, tobacco, and tea, sustain the apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators, sustain all your other leaders, attend all your church meetings, magnify any and all responsibilities your leaders assign you, get a temple recommend from your bishop, and travel to the nearest temple to receive all the necessary priesthood ordinances".<br />
<br />
Consider also the ancient original apostles of Jesus Christ in Israel, martyred for their faith. Consider Peter, Paul, James, their faith and their testimonies. <br />
<br />
Consider all the wonderful examples of faith we have considered, from both the New Testament and Book of Mormon, locked outside the door of heaven until a 12 year-old is baptized for them by proxy and a distracted temple recommend holder sits through an endowment session for them, and a gang of temple workers does their sealings. Even Paul, despite his great faith, is locked outside the doors of eternal life without proxy ordinances done by teenagers and distracted adults. <br />
<br />
What does that say about the importance of priesthood authority relative to the importance of faith? It essentially says that depth in faith is not that important relative to priesthood authority, considering that the faith of an eight year-old to be baptized and the worthiness of a 12 year-old to go through temple ordinances and the attention of a gang of temple workers doing mass sealings trumps the level of faith of those for whom the work will be done.Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-6884903196092505632009-12-27T14:04:00.000-08:002009-12-27T14:04:58.860-08:00<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><strong>11 August 2009 - Enthusiasm</strong></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">(This section was written when I was about a third of the way through and reflects a sense of youthful enthusiasm and rediscovery. In many ways this is almost an allegory of most people's journey in the church, when it's still new and exciting and fresh)</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Being reintroduced to the BoM after four years of studying other things, I find it to be a jewel. It’s an amazingly consistent exposition of the kind of “processed” evangelical thought not found in the Bible. What you get in the New Testament is the raw pieces. The commandments. Mosaic law including the sacrifices. Jesus’ ethical teachings. Paul’s teachings on the divinity of Christ and the doing away with the law by Christ’s coming, how we are no longer justified by the law, how we are saved by grace through Christ. Paul’s ethical teachings.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The Book of Mormon processes this doctrine and assembles it into a coherent outline, an “elevator speech” if you will, that sums it up. In many ways the Book of Mormon is almost like a series of setups for the speeches of the major characters. It begins with the speeches of Nephi, Jacob, Benjamin, and Abinadi on God coming to earth as a man and paying the price for our sins. The basic plan of salvation, repeated as a consistent theme by each speaker. It then moves on to Alma, who introduces the theme of revival and more fully lays out heaven and hell.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Then we have the opponents, like the horsemen of the apocalypse, each of whom represents a form of evil. Sherem, the anti-Christ. Nehor, priestcraft. Korihor, atheism. Amlici, political ambition.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I find tremendous truth in the Book of Mormon, because it’s the most coherent exposition of evangelical thought found in the scriptures. It most clearly lays out the orthodox trinity, which is not even mentioned in the Bible, and connects up God coming to earth in human form to accomplish our salvation. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">One of the most difficult things to figure out in Christian thought is the balance between works and grace. On one hand the Bible talks about grace, and on the other hand it talks about works, but it’s never clear just how our thoughts on the toxicity of sin and the importance of ethical behavior impact our salvation by grace, because the subjects are never really dealt with together in the Bible. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">We seem to get that in the Book of Mormon, which is repetitively clear that salvation is accomplished by faith and trust in Christ, repentance, which is a turning of our hearts toward God and away from sin, baptism for the remission of sins, and a process of enduring to the end. Keeping our focus on God and away from wickedness. Keeping the commandments to the best of our ability. Remaining strong in the faith and not returning to our self-centered ways. If your viewpoint is that we don’t have eternal security in our salvation, the Book of Mormon is the clearest, most concise, and most consistent summary of what you need to do to be saved and stay saved and to be a person of faith.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In addition to being a repository of some of the best preaching in the scriptures, outside the Sermon on the Mount, which is mostly concerned with ethical behavior, the Book of Mormon also has the best stories and the most inspiring characters. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Nephi and his persistent faith in the face of opposition by his brothers and the family of Ishmael. Enos and his coming to Christ for the forgiveness of sins. The martyrdom of Abinadi and his lecturing of the priests of Noah. The impact of Abinadi’s one convert, Alma. The radical turnaround of Alma the Younger, which is an inspiration for any father of a wayward son. The martyrdom of the Christians in Ammonihah and the conversion of Zeezrom. The servanthood of Ammon and his mission to the Lamanites, becoming a servant to a bloodthirsty people in order to bring them to Christ. The faith of the Anti-Nephi-Lehis as they are slaughtered by their brother Lamanites, and their example that brings even more of the Lamanites to faith in Christ. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">And more will be added to this list as I finish the book. It would be much harder to be a Christian without these examples of faith to look to for inspiration.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As to the authorship of the Book of Mormon, I definitely believe it’s inspired of God. Even with notes in front of them and a reference library of evangelical preaching to draw from, it would be difficult to write a book like this. Imagine having to craft it and then repeat it back to a scribe while looking at a rock in a hat, never going back to correct words or to re-craft a story line. Think about J. K. Rowling having to dictate the Harry Potter books like this, and the Book of Mormon is much more carefully crafted in terms of the themes it teaches than those books. It’s clearly a masterpiece of some kind of revelation.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Is the Book of Mormon historical? I don’t think so. The story lines are too carefully crafted to represent real people. The characters are too perfect, and the crowds are too consistent. When anyone preaches, all are converted. All reform. To a man and woman they all respond, and human nature just isn’t like that. Just where are the women in the Book of Mormon also? The Old and New Testaments are from a very patriarchal Hebrew society, yet women have consistently important roles to play. In the Book of Mormon women are very much on the sidelines, yet personal experience tells us that women are always the first to respond in faith.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">There is positively no Hebrew influence on Native American culture or language, nor is there any remnant of the Hebrew or “reformed Egyptian” language to be found, yet people could consistently read the writings on the plates for a thousand years, up until at least 400 A.D. The Nephites and Lamanites had very complex cultures based on trading, they had written language, they had records, and absolutely none of this survives. Not one artifact with Hebrew or Egyptian language survives. Not one word in any Native American language that can be traced to Hebrew.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Does that mean it’s not “true”? Just what is truth, anyway? Does something need to be historically true to be “true”? I think the truth of the Book of Mormon is in its content and the fact that we read the Book of Mormon and come to Christ and salvation as a result. The Book of Mormon is true in the sense that it’s another testament of Jesus Christ, perhaps the most consistent one found in the scriptures. It’s true in the sense that it leads us to greater faith and commitment. It leads us to greater faith and perseverance. It inspires us to endure to the end in the hopes of achieving the salvation that was the goal of the main characters in the Book of Mormon. That is the ultimate truth.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"></span>Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-61612967645548765082009-12-27T13:56:00.000-08:002009-12-27T13:57:23.400-08:00<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><strong>Intro to Book of Mormon summary --</strong></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Over the summer I re-read the Book of Mormon for the 17th time. Typically what I did for times 1 - 15 was to try to read the Book of Mormon over a longer period of time. Say, a year. At least one time was in Spanish, and one time was over a multi-year period as part of our family scripture study, which gives you a window into how regular our family scripture study was at the time.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The 16th time was as part of Gordon B Hinckley's "Book of Mormon Challenge" in 2005, which was extremely appropriate for me because I was beginning my real crisis of LDS faith.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">The last two times have probably been the best, because I think re-reading it in a shorter period of time allowed me a broader scope of it. I can still remember the beginning while reading the end, and the themes show up better.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">Periodically I wrote summaries of my thoughts at the time.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">I wanted to put these down for awhile in order to filter them through more perspective. (Of course involving no procrastination at all. No, not any) I have the time now at the end of the year, so this seemed like a good time to start to post them.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">My initial idea was to post one large writeup, but in re-reading my entries they become less positive over the course of the book. In retrospect I think it's better to post them as I wrote them, so my feelings about each section are a little less "processed". So, over the next few days I'll put them up, as I get time to do a little editing.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial;">As always, just my thoughts, worth what you paid for them. I don't include specific citations for much of what I claim. If that was useful I guess I could probably assemble that for the last entry, so as not to distract from the flow of the rest. Let me know if somehow that would be useful.</span>Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-80218906096594355012009-11-28T05:08:00.000-08:002009-11-28T05:11:25.662-08:00The Joseph Smith Manual and the Ellipses--<br /><br />This is just too good not to post.<br /><br />From p511 of the JS manual:<br /><br />“I … hold the keys of the last kingdom, in which is the dispensation of the fullness of all things spoken by the mouths of all the holy Prophets since the world began, under the sealing power of the Melchizedek Priesthood.”<br /><br />I was intrigued by those ellipses and decided to look up the actual quote from "History of the Church". Now, here's the actual quote in context:<br /><br />"Shall I, who have witnessed the visions of eternity, and beheld the glorious mansions of bliss, and the regions and the misery of the damned,--shall I turn to be a Judas? Shall I, who have heard the voice of God, and communed with angels, and spake as moved by the Holy Ghost for the renewal of the everlasting covenant, and for the gathering of Israel in the last days,--shall I worm myself into a political hypocrite? Shall I, who hold the keys of the last kingdom, in which is the dispensation of the fullness of all things spoken by the mouths of all the holy Prophets since the world began, under the sealing power of the Melchizedek Priesthood,--shall I stoop from the sublime authority of Almighty God, to be handled as a monkey's cat-paw, and pettify myself into a clown to act the farce of political demagoguery? No--verily no! The whole earth shall bear me witness that I, like the towering rock in the midst of the ocean, which has withstood the mighty surges of the warring waves for centuries, am impregnable, and am a faithful friend to virtue, and a fearless foe to vice,--no odds whether the former was sold as a pearl in Asia or hid as a gem in America, and the latter dazzles in palaces or glimmers among the tombs.<br /><br />"I combat the errors of ages; I meet the violence of mobs; I cope with illegal proceedings from executive authority; I cut the guardian knot of powers. and I solve mathematical problems of universities, with truth--diamond truth; and God is my 'right hand man.'"<br /><br />Now, the LDS church is to be commended for providing the citation, but can you imagine the full quote ever showing up in a talk or lesson? I don't know that it's totally different in the actual facts communicated than the original, but the tone is totally different.<br /><br />I love the phrase at the end: "God is my 'right hand man'". I believe JS needed to keep his ego in a little better check. I provided links to both originals for the curious.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=59f8b00367c45110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=198bf4b13819d110VgnVCM1000003a94610aRCRD" target="_blank">http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=59f8b00367c45110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=198bf4b13819d110VgnVCM1000003a94610aRCRD</a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.kristus.dk/jkk/text.php?id=90253" target="_blank">http://www.kristus.dk/jkk/text.php?id=90253</a>Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-52699790392519524502009-11-23T10:00:00.000-08:002009-11-23T10:07:37.365-08:00Toxicity --<br /><br />There are some combinations of scriptures and correlated LDS materials that are unpredictably toxic for me, like mixing ammonia and chlorine bleach. Unfortunately I happened to hit one this morning.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%206:25-40&version=NIV">http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%206:25-40&version=NIV</a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=3ce8b00367c45110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=198bf4b13819d110VgnVCM1000003a94610aRCRD">http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=3ce8b00367c45110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=198bf4b13819d110VgnVCM1000003a94610aRCRD</a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=59f8b00367c45110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=198bf4b13819d110VgnVCM1000003a94610aRCRD">http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=59f8b00367c45110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=198bf4b13819d110VgnVCM1000003a94610aRCRD</a><br /><br /><br />This is I believe the key sequence of verses in the John passage:<br /><br />Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?" Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent." . . . Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty. . . . . For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day."<br /><br />This whole section in John should fill anyone who has come to faith in Christ with an exuberant hope. The law is dead, along with the hundreds of commandments required to be reconciled to God. What remains is faith in Christ and throwing ourselves on his mercy for salvation. Not just eternal life at the end of our earth lives, but some measure of relief from our burdens in this life as well, as we come to Christ and seek to lay our cares at his feet, as we trade our imperfections for his perfection and our brokenness for his grace.<br /><br />Then I had to go and read two sections in the Joseph Smith lesson manual back to back. Big mistake.<br /><br />The first is a paean to Joseph Smith. This statement naturally caught my attention:<br />“[The Prophet was] incomparably the most God-like man I ever saw. … I know that by nature he was incapable of lying and deceitfulness, possessing the greatest kindness and nobility of character.”<br /><br />Of course we know that the entire “restoration” was steeped in deceit about polygamy and many other things such as the reprisals the Saints executed in Far West, the existence of the Council of Fifty, and other things too numerous to mention.<br /><br />The second was a paean to the entire “restoration” that brought back so many memories of what I used to believe about the LDS church.<br /><br />For about six years my mother was the smartest person I knew, and the one I relied on for guidance. I thought she was perfect. I wondered how I could ever live my life without her wisdom and guiding hand. That feeling passed in my teenage years. She died in 2002, and I went through those horrible experiences in nursing homes, and finally in an ICU with her head shaved and without her being able to recognize me or anyone else.<br /><br />I went through that experience once.<br /><br />By contrast I loved the vision of the LDS church I had for over twenty years, during the formative days of young adulthood. I likewise thought it was perfect and wondered how I could ever live without it. That feeling passed when I used google to refresh my memory on the temple recommend questions and began to learn the truth that had been kept from me for so long. My grief from the death of my innocence about the LDS church was much worse than my grief over my mother. She was old, and it was time to go. By contrast the LDS church was almost my second bride. At times maybe my first, as I knew it would never fail me or desert me. I never cried over my mother. I cried repeatedly over the LDS church.<br /><br />And often when I read things out of the correlated lessons or the Ensign, that grief comes back. Those visions of a shining city on a hill, those memories of those people dressed in white in the temple that I knew would look just like that in the Celestial Kingdom. It all comes back. Over and over again.<br /><br />Today was a two Starbucks morning. I needed that much of a caffeine jolt to snap out of the pit of depression I was thrown into.<br /><br />That, and the lyrics to the following songs from the “Glory Revealed II” album. They were a reminder to me that the true gospel turns us toward Christ and His Father and not towards fallible men and their equally fallible institutions. Placing our faith in Joseph Smith and the deceptions we are told about him now will always cause the world to come crashing down at our feet at some point or another. Only by placing our complete trust in Christ can we have any hope of real peace in this life or in the world to come.<br /><br /><br />Praise the Lord<br />============<br />Praise the Lord, oh my soul<br />I will praise the Lord as long as I live<br />I will sing praises to my God<br />Even with my dying breath<br /><br />He is the One who made Heaven and Earth<br />The sea and everything in it<br />He is the One who keeps every promise forever<br />He gives justice to the oppressed<br />And sets the prisoner free<br /><br />He is the One who feeds the hungry<br />And opens the eyes of the blind<br />He lifts up the burdens of those beneath heavy loads<br />The stranger, He protects<br /><br />And the righteous one He loves<br />The Lord will reign forever<br />Our God is King to all generations<br />The Lord will reign forever Our God<br /><br />We will praise the Lord, oh my soul<br />We will praise the Lord as long as we live<br />We will sing praises to our God<br />Even with our dying breath<br /><br />And this one:<br /><br />To You Be The Glory<br />================<br />Who could hold the wealth of god?<br />Such treasure found in him<br />Who could comprehend his heart and mind?<br />His wisdom has no end<br />For from him, through him, to him are all things<br />From him, through him, to him are all things<br /><br />Chorus:<br />To you be the glory, forever<br />To you be the glory, lord, amen<br />To you be the glory, forever<br />To you be the glory, lord, amen<br /><br />Verse 2:<br />Who has known the mind of god?<br />Who has counseled him?<br />Who has given gifts to god<br />That he might be repaid?<br />For from him, through him, to him are all things<br />From him, through him, to him are all things<br /><br />Chorus:<br />To you be the glory, forever<br />To you be the glory, lord, amen<br />To you be the glory, forever<br />To you be the glory, lord, amen<br /><br />Bridge:<br />In dark and light, in death and life<br />When hard times enter in<br />In all things we will worship you<br />With you there is no end<br /><br />Chorus:<br />To you be the glory, forever<br />To you be the glory, lord, amen<br />To you be the glory, forever<br />To you be the glory, lord, amen<br />For from him, through him, to him are all things<br />From him, through him, to him are all thingsBob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-6958168815869325642009-11-03T04:19:00.000-08:002009-11-03T04:34:14.478-08:00More of the same --<br /><br /><a href="http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=10a8b00367c45110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=198bf4b13819d110VgnVCM1000003a94610aRCRD">http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=10a8b00367c45110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=198bf4b13819d110VgnVCM1000003a94610aRCRD</a><br /><br />Lesson 38 in the Joseph Smith manual reprints the Wentworth letter.<br /><br />There were some good things about this lesson.<br /><br />As near as I can figure they reprint the letter in its entirety and include familiar (yet unfamiliar, if people really consider the words) stories about Book of Mormon translation methods and other things. The footnotes point out that there are multiple versions of the first vision, and that this is not the canonical one found in the Pearl of Great Price.<br /><br />The unfortunate thing that struck me about it, though, was Joseph Smith's description of the Missouri persecutions. Again he gives the impression that they were peaceful people just trying to live in harmony with their neighbors, who rose up against them out of misunderstandings. All the persecutions are made out to be one-sided, when the historical reality is quite different.<br /><br />This article IMHO is quite a good summary, based on information I have read before:<br /><br /><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_War_(1838">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_War_(1838</a>)<br /><br />I don't believe that every church class, lesson, or handbook has to present absolutely all the historical details, but I do believe that they should reflect the general tone of what took place. Positioning the mobbings that took place in Missouri and other places as unprovoked persecution is simply not true. It's deceptive, and harmful to people's testimonies when they discover that the LDS church has not been honest with them about its orgins, and that its leaders have not told the complete truth.<br /><br />As in my previous post I have to ask the question, "why must Mormonism be shrouded in such deception?"Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-70187872388517010152009-11-01T16:07:00.001-08:002009-11-01T16:22:51.333-08:00Why Must Mormonism Be Steeped in Such Deception? --<br /><br />I was just not going to do this. I was having a relaxed Sunday today and was trying to enjoy a positive Sabbath devoted to the things I believe in, rather than some kind of death spiral with the issues that depress me and make me angry.<br /><br />I was reading what seemed like such a positive article about evangelical dialogue with Mormons in Christianity Today:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/november/11.23.html">http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/november/11.23.html</a><br /><br /> And then I just had to come across this statement:<br /><br />"The LDS scriptures teach a plurality of gods (in the Book of Abraham, though Mormons reject the label polytheistic) and the millennial prospect that human saints will be "made equal with" God.<br /><br />Smith asserted other radical beliefs in an 1844 discourse shortly before he was assassinated while running for U.S. President. He revealed "the great secret" that God the Father "was once as we are now, and is an exalted Man," and that humans will progress to "become Gods … the same as all Gods have done before you." His discourse was transcribed by four aides, published by the church, later included in its compilation of his teachings, and officially reaffirmed thereafter.<br /><br />Mouw believes such thinking "has no functioning place in present-day Mormon doctrine," based on statements from Millet and church leaders. He also noted that in How Wide the Divide?, Robinson said these controversial beliefs are not official doctrine and were never incorporated into Mormon scriptures. But LDS officialdom has never repudiated Smith's tenets."<br /><br />Now, Richard Mouw is president of Fuller Theological Seminary, and I have no reason to believe that he's either an idiot or has a hearing problem, so I have to take this statement at face value and assume that it's an accurate reflection of what Robert Millet and other "church leaders" have probably told him.<br /><br />Now, anybody who has read the latest Joseph Smith manual and keeps up on General Conference talks and reads the Ensign knows that the idea that we have abandoned either the doctrine of exaltation or of God having once been a man is pure fantasy. This is doctrine that we may dissemble about in public ("I don't know that we teach that anymore"), but both are central elements of LDS theology, as much as many might wish that they would go away.<br /><br />I just have to think about Elder Ballard's commencement address at BYU suggesting we don't practice polygamy and that the question should just go away (we do practice it and it won't go away), and it makes me wonder why Mormonism must always be steeped in such deception about its doctrines, history, and practices. This deception just seems so endemic to everything we communicate, whether it's Joseph Smith and his wives, General Authorities and their "living allowances" (i.e. their salaries as paid ministers), polygamy, the First Vision, Thomas B Marsh and the cream strippings myth, and I could just go on and on. The LDS church was deceptive about polygamy from the very beginning, until the 1850s, and is still deceptive about the extent of post-manifesto polygamy, which continued into the mid 20th century.<br /><br />Why can't we just tell the truth? Why is it invariably those who are closest to us that are the most deceived? If God is truly behind this work, what is it we are so afraid of?Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26195116.post-9856604093098639572009-10-21T04:09:00.000-07:002009-10-21T04:12:48.708-07:00Redemption for the Dead, Part II<br /><br />Tied to the previous lesson from the Joseph Smith manual, which I blogged about before, is lesson 36, “Receiving the Ordinances and Blessings of the Temple”:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=b788b00367c45110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=198bf4b13819d110VgnVCM1000003a94610aRCRD">http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=b788b00367c45110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=198bf4b13819d110VgnVCM1000003a94610aRCRD</a><br /><br />Spending most of my time around biblical Christians these days there are some nuances on this subject that are not necessarily that meaningful to most Latter-day Saints. In some ways I was looking for specific things to be offended about and didn’t necessarily find those things, mostly because the lesson wasn’t that specific about them. It tends to refer to “ordinances of salvation” with sort of a broad brush, without being specific about what ordinances might be involved in specific aspects of salvation.<br /><br />For me, even when I was a believing Latter-day Saint, there were nuances to this subject because of all the various kingdoms involved. From the LDS view “salvation” could be a range of things from just being in “Heaven” to becoming a king and priest unto the most high God to achieving “exaltation”, i.e. godhood. My viewpoint was always that salvation was sort of a graded event with a number of different possible outcomes, depending on worthiness, ordinances, and ultimately what kind of place your faith would lead you to want to spend time and all eternity.<br /><br />Well, the lesson doesn’t really get into that and just isn’t very specific in that way. Probably representative statements are these:<br /><br />““The question is frequently asked, ‘Can we not be saved without going through with all those ordinances, etc.?’ I would answer, No, not the fullness of salvation. Jesus said, ‘There are many mansions in my Father’s house, and I will go and prepare a place for you.’ [See <a href="http://scriptures.lds.org/john/14/2#2" target="contentWindow">John 14:2</a>.] House here named should have been translated kingdom; and any person who is exalted to the highest mansion has to abide a celestial law, and the whole law too.”<a href="http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=b788b00367c45110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=198bf4b13819d110VgnVCM1000003a94610aRCRD#footnote15#footnote15">15</a><br /><a name="30"></a><a name="31"></a><br />“All men who become heirs of God and joint-heirs with Jesus Christ will have to receive the fulness of the ordinances of his kingdom; and those who will not receive all the ordinances will come short of the fulness of that glory.”<a href="http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=b788b00367c45110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=198bf4b13819d110VgnVCM1000003a94610aRCRD#footnote16#footnote16">16</a><br /><br />So clearly to receive the fullness of salvation all the ordinances must be received, which I think we can reasonably assume to mean temple marriage.<br /><br />So I think any cathartic goal I might have had to rip this lesson to shreds in that way is just going to be frustrated.<br /><br />I will comment on a few things I found just plain wrong about this lesson, possibly more because of misleading impressions it might give than what it might actually say.<br /><br />This statement would be my poster child:<br /><br />“In March 1844, the Prophet met with the Twelve and the Nauvoo Temple committee to discuss how to allocate the Church’s meager resources. In this meeting, the Prophet said: “We need the temple more than anything else.” "<br /><br />You can probably twist this statement different ways, but fundamentally what it says is not true.<br /><br />We do not need the temple more than anything else. We need the blessings of the atonement more than anything else.<br /><br />You might say that the temple is the place we go to get the fullness of those blessings, but this obsessive focus on the temple itself encourages an unhealthy idolatry. It causes us to think about the mechanics. The building, the hoops you have to jump through to get a temple recommend, your personal “worthiness”, the authority of the person who signs the recommend who functionally stands between you and eternal life if you can’t convince them you’re worthy, etc.<br /><br />To the extent that temple ordinances have any actual impact on our eternal life, the miracle and power behind those ordinances is what Jesus did in the garden of Gethsemane and on the cross, and there is simply no other responsible way to present this subject.<br /><br />There was one quote from the lesson I thought verged on the bizarre:<br /><br />“If a man gets a fulness of the priesthood of God, he has to get it in the same way that Jesus Christ obtained it, and that was by keeping all the commandments and obeying all the ordinances of the house of the Lord. … “<br /><br />I find any number of things to be offensive about this statement. It’s odd in general to think of the great God who created heaven and earth, who spoke and brought the known universes into existence, having to be evaluated by some kind of scorecard, just like we are, and having to receive ordinances, I assume directly from the hand of God the Father, as there was nobody else to administer them. I’m somehow imagining God the Father dressed in a white polyester suit standing behind an altar and pushing buttons to roll the film, while Jesus Christ has a little slip of paper pinned to his robe with his name on it. Then I start to think about having to stand in the prayer circle, I assume with Heavenly Mother, and it goes downhill from there.<br /><br />Probably the thing that is most offensive is that this idea, conceptually similar to the King Follett sermon, brings Christ down to our level. He has to follow the same rules and system we do, which at the same time diminishes the glory and authority of Christ and exalts the scorecard, the ordinances, and the “rules” we have to follow for eternal progression.<br /><br />I reject both ideas.<br /><br />Christ is incomparably holy. He defines holiness and perfection. And the “system” we have established for salvation in the LDS church in the latter days is a fraud. Man is created as an imperfect being for reasons we don’t totally understand, and we achieve eternal life through faith and the merits of the Christ and not primarily through our own efforts or ordinances administered by fallible human beings. The New Testament and Book of Mormon are crystal-clear on this. I don’t understand why the LDS church has chosen to twist the foundational scriptures in this way.<br /><br />In general the problem with lessons like this is not the underlying doctrine or practice, with some obvious exceptions. I think it would be totally possible to present this subject in a balanced way that gave glory to God, reinforced the principles of salvation by faith through the merits of Christ, and helped people to appreciate the power of Joseph Smith’s words and the beauty of the ordinances. Instead the brains behind this lesson choose to reinforce the authority of LDS church leaders and to twist this doctrine and these practices into some kind of weird para-Christian cult, and I find this perpetually disappointing.Bob Dixonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01011901559691393063noreply@blogger.com3