I do believe there are more than a few mormons on the board here, so I have a question about the religion. How does the mormon church view the concept of being "saved" or "born again"?
I ask because having been raised catholic, the whole concept kinda puzzles me and I'm not quite sure that I get it. I'm just curious as to how the mormon church views this concept, or if they have a doctrine similar to this?
As far as my thoughts, I am puzzled about the concept. What I always hear is that to be 'saved' you have to accept Jesus as your savior and accept that he died for our sins. But I think there must be more it than that, something people aren't explaining. As a catholic, that's part of the basic tenants of the religion. You kinda have to accept all that to be part of the religion, and that's kinda just something I've always believed. Yet I don't think I'm necessarily 'saved'.
The other part of being 'saved' always seems to involve religion curing some part of a person, helping with a vice or other problem a person had. They get 'saved' and then the problem is gone. It seems as though only people with drug or drinking or womanizing problems ever talk about getting 'saved'. Do people who are just normal and lead okay lives get 'saved'? Or is it just that people with bad pasts talk about that a lot more than normal people?
This isn't meant to upset or insult anyone. I just kinda wanted a different perspective of the whole concept. I would like to hear that perspective, or any other thoughts people have.
Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
I'm not LDS; I'm Catholic (former Protestant). I have heard other Catholics discuss what you can say if a Protestant asks you if you're born again.
But these aren't Protestant terms; they're from the Gospels, and other parts of the New Testament. Protestant perspective is that believing in Christ saves you (but then, that's also our perspective). Sometimes when people make this decision, the outcomes go along with visible changes in behavior. (But shouldn't all of us have improvements in our character -- whether it's spectacular or not?)
Bottom line: don't be intimidated. They're our terms too.
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
Well, for Mormons the idea of "Saved" is probably closer to the Catholic view as articulated by yourself; puzzling. There is in LDS theology the idea of a Coversion and Change of Heart, but that is not the same as saved. It is a change of path and not the destination.
Salvation, in LDS terms, is something that happens in the next life and not this one. True, the Atonement of Jesus Christ is always available to "wipe away" sins and help us Spiritually draw close to God in such a way that we can become worthy of salvation. However, the "Saved" concept is left to the final judgement when everyone's eternal "fate" will be decided. Otherwise, the only way toward true and final salvation is to endure this life in faith until the end.
edit: WillB, well said. A Mormon could have written that same thing. The difference is, however, that when a Protestant says it they mean once and for all saved. In other words, for many of them it is an end and not a means.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
stihl1, the phrase, in the way you're quoting it is used by some (not all) branches of evangelical Protestantism to refer to a conversion experience. It’s the equivalent (in other circles) to “becoming a Christian” or your “spiritual birthday.” Those who use it that way believe that even if you were raised in the faith, there is a point at which you come to believe for yourself, and that is when you are “saved,” “born again,” “become a Christian” or whatever language that particular group uses. This is generally different from denominations where children are raised in the faith and expected to go through preparatory classes and make their profession of faith at a certain age (through confirmation, if they were baptized as infants, or baptism, in those denominations that don’t baptize infants). Folks who had a dramatic conversion experience tend to have more memorable stories (instant recovery from alcoholism, drug use, prostitution, various splashy and spectacular sins) but you’ll also find many folks who lived quiet lives according to the tenets of their religion and then just one day “knew for themselves” that it was true, or similar experience. Maybe they don’t tell their stories as loudly, or maybe they just aren’t as memorable.
And to nuance what Occaisional said, a Calvinist would mean “once and for all saved.” But not all Protestants are Calvinist.
Posted by Liz B (Member # 8238) on :
It's a very emotional experience for some people. And for those who have an emotional conversion experience, the less emotional ones may be slightly suspect.
Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
I've been Baptist and Pentecostal, and neither group believed that only a marked or emotionally intense experience was valid.
But everyone enjoys a good story!
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
Look, Will, pick a religion and stick with it, why don't you?
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
dkw, what you describe fits almost exactly with what us LDS call "conversion." We often talk about what it means to be "truly converted" and that even those raised in the Church need to "become converted." We are also to seek continual conversion, to study and fast and pray and live our lives in such a way that we are "converted" over and over. We also talk of "coming unto Christ", which is sometimes similar and sometimes the same in meaning (depending on who's saying it and in what context.)
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
In Judaism, we don't have the "being saved" thing. We do have "teshuvah", which is repentance. Someone who led a non-observant life and decided to follow a more observant practice is called "baal teshuvah", but this is not usually a big dramatic thing, with attendant miracles. In fact, the change more typically comes on gradually, with the person taking on one commandment, then another (perhaps trying to eat only kosher food, then to observe the Sabbath, then to pray once a day, then three times a day...).
But there are plenty enough commandments that no one out there is perfect in their observance of all of them, so there is the opportunity for everyone to do teshuvah.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
For me, "practical" Catholicism is very similar to what Tante describes.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
The unfortunate experience I had in High School was that students would use "being saved" as a way to separate themselves from one another. A group of kids from one church would question kids from another church, and find out they hadn't been "saved", and proceed to tell them that their religious experiences and church life were invalid, because they were missing out on being "saved" by Jesus.
So in my mind, churches who insist on some sort of being saved are often trying to find a way to set themselves up as the REAL church.
Posted by Lupus (Member # 6516) on :
I just see it as a time when you accept Christianity for yourself. You might be an adult who never believed, but now you do...or you might be a teen who went to church because your parents said to, but now you really believe in Christ yourself. I grew up in the Church, so for me it was different from someone who suddenly realized that Christianity was for them. However, I can pinpoint a time when I realized that I didn't believe because my parents believed...but because I had my own faith.
It doesn't have to be some sort of big event (ie: when you are baptized, or with a preacher or something). For me, I was sitting alone thinking.
Posted by stihl1 (Member # 1562) on :
I just often feel that when I'm asked the 'saved' question, that I'm missing out somehow on what they are talking about. I was raised to believe in Jesus and what He did. I often wonder if maybe I'm missing out on that, is there something else there I'm supposed to know about or understand?
Primarily the kind of people I am talking about are evangelical types. It seems to me that these people are particularly more involved or wrapped up in their religion. To be honest, a bit too involved for my tastes. I guess being raised a catholic I just don't understand the evangelical faiths. Catholics are a bit more reserved, definitely not as boisterous, and more methodical about their faith.
I have an ex girlfriend who is very involved in her religion, some brand of evanglicalism, that spends a lot of time trying to talk to me and convert me into her religion. Talking to her and trying to understand her religion is very confusing. She is a great example of why I don't understand the 'saved' thing. When she talks about it, she talks about how her religion has changed her life. Basically Jesus has help to solve all of her personal problems and she is better off now because of that. Whereas that's probably a good thing for her in particular, because she certainly had a lot of problems, it confuses me. Everything she talks about now comes back to her religion. Every thought she has, everything she talks about, every thing goes back to her religion and God.
Now, that is not necessarily a bad thing, I suppose. But it kinda scares me. Because although I do believe in Jesus and what He did, I don't run my life through God or religion. And this is often a theme I see with 'saved' people. Everything they talk about has God in there somewhere. So I assume that being 'saved' also has a lot to do with changing your way of thinking and acting and how you live your life. At least that's the way it comes off to me.
And although I am more than willing to bring more religion and belief into my life, I am certainly not willing to change everything I do and believe to conform to that kind of standard. I don't have vises that I'm looking to cure or personal problems I want Jesus to fix. I just want to more about religion and God. Although I'm not a perfect person, I am not looking for a change in my life. And I'm not necessarily sure there has to be a change like that to be a better person or closer to God.
I guess in my head, what I always invision, or the goal I always have in exploring my faith is a gradual increased understanding and gradually growing closer to God. It kinda spooks me out how people have these sudden conversions where they are now a different person and everything is all better, all their problems are solved. For me, it's about learning and becoming closer to God with growth of my faith. Not a sudden jump like that.
The other issue I have is that I am a very independent, individualistic kind of person. I really enjoy learing and undestanding, and I prefer to explore and find things out on my own. I value holding my own opinions and conclusions based on learning, etc. It seems to me that so many of these 'saved' people kinda give that all up and just accept things at face value. Frankly, it seems like so many of these people just become automitons that regurgitate what their religion tells them. That scares me, and doesn't interest me.
So I guess the bottom line is, I don't really know that I believe in the being 'saved' thing, and I am pretty sure I don't agree with the evangelical view of religion. I guess I have a different view based on my catholic upbringing. But I also don't agree with the catholic view either. I feel like I'm kinda in a limbo, looking for a religion that fits neither and I've got nowhere to turn.
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
When I was around nine or ten, a Baptist kid told me that Mormons weren't going to heaven because they hadn't been "saved." As a Mormon, I wasn't used to the terminology and asked exactly what he meant. He told me that I had to pray to Jesus and tell him that I accepted him in to my heart as my Lord and Savior. That sounded perfectly in line with my beliefs so I said I would do that. He looked confused, as though wrestling with contradictary teachings, and then said the he guessed I was a special Mormon.
That was about my only experience with "saving". I attended a liberal Methodist chuch for about a year and I don't remember ever hearing the term used in that way.
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
quote:It kinda spooks me out how people have these sudden conversions where they are now a different person and everything is all better, all their problems are solved.
I agree that this is not the best method of personal change. The idea of being a new person that is no longer fully responsible for the things they've done in the past is appealing. And I think that's far from limmited to "being saved." But I think it denotes a lack of appreciation for the learning power of mistakes. It seems to me that people who cling to new beginnings prefer to linger in guilt about the past instead of learn and grow from it. I find that disheartening.
Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
stihl, I'll suggest that you go with the "growing closer to God" rather than the "looking for a religion" -- at least, I suspect you'll find it more appealing -- I do, anyway. But however it is that you phrase it: what are you looking for?
[ January 28, 2007, 03:42 PM: Message edited by: Will B ]
Posted by stihl1 (Member # 1562) on :
quote:Originally posted by Will B: stihl, I'll suggest that you go with the "growing closer to God" rather than the "looking for a religion" -- at least, I suspect you'll find it more appealing -- I do, anyway. But however it is that you phrase it: what are you looking for?
That's kind of the stance I've been taking. However, I would like to find a church to join and a community to be a part of, to help in the exploring of religion.
I guess I always feel wrong or that I'm missing something in not jumping on the being 'saved' bandwagon. So many other people seem to be on there. Frankly, I think it's overrated and not what it seems.
Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
When you explore religion, what sort of answers do you want, or what sort of questions do you have? If you want to say.
I just think that the clearer you are about what you want, the better able you'll be to get it.
Posted by stihl1 (Member # 1562) on :
What I want to be able to do is learn about God and religion and be able to discuss and dialogue with people about it. Accepting things at face value and just toeing the company line isn't good enough for me. And I'm definitely not looking to change myself or become a different person or use God or religion as a crutch. So much of what I see in organized religions is based on those things. I just want to be able to learn, be a part of a church and community. I definitely don't want to be a part of the type of people like my ex is involved with.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
What is it about your current Catholic community that isn't working for you?
Also, I can't think of any religion, even ones that emphasize a more gradual growing closer to God, that isn't going to change you if you get serious about it. That's part of what "Growing closer to God" means, neh?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:Because although I do believe in Jesus and what He did, I don't run my life through God or religion.
If you do in fact believe, why don't you run your life "through God?"
Posted by stihl1 (Member # 1562) on :
quote:Originally posted by dkw: What is it about your current Catholic community that isn't working for you?
Also, I can't think of any religion, even ones that emphasize a more gradual growing closer to God, that isn't going to change you if you get serious about it. That's part of what "Growing closer to God" means, neh?
I don't have a catholic community because I gave up on that religion a long time ago.
Changing me a little bit is okay, becoming a different person entirely isn't what I'm looking for. I have this mental picture in my head of certain religious people. They remind me of the Star Trek episode where the flowers spit those spores out and turn everyone into brain washed happy people. I don't want to turn into a brain washed automiton, and I don't think you have to in order to be religious. And I don't think it's an overnight, sudden change if it does happen. I think it's something you gradually work on and become over time.
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:Because although I do believe in Jesus and what He did, I don't run my life through God or religion.
If you do in fact believe, why don't you run your life "through God?"
I don't think Jesus or God wants us to run our lives through them. I think they gave us individual souls and the ability to think and question and form opinions of our own for a reason. So we can be independent individuals. You can be an independent individual who thinks on your own and forms opinions while still following the message Jesus and God gave us. IMO.
Posted by 777 (Member # 9506) on :
To the original question: the LDS concept of Salvation.
First off, in the LDS perspective, everyone is saved from death already. That's not even an issue. Due to the fact that you are here on this Earth, you chose to not follow Satan and his followers, but to rather come here to Earth to be tested for your faith. I suppose that if you're going to understand Salvation, you'll have to understand the LDS concept of the Plan of Salvation.
The Plan of Salvation is composed of several different steps, ranging from the pre-existence to the Three Degrees of Glory.
The pre-existence is that point of existence where all beings were the spirit children of our Heavenly Parents--Heavenly Father being the foremost Parent. In a grand council, he laid before us the Plan of Salvation, indicating to us that we were only in the first stage. The entire Plan was focused on the idea of our following in our Father's footsteps to the process of deification (that is also an entirely different subject of the LDS faith).
In order to follow in His path, we had to obtain bodies, which we of course did not possess at the time. We had to master our bodies and our reactions to them. In short, we were sent to Earth to gain these bodies and prove ourselves worthy of them, in spite of all temptation.
The terrible War in Heaven was battled over the concept of how to live out our Earthly experience. Heavenly Father decided to grant us the gift of Agency in our experience here on Earth, despite all of its vices. We would be free to choose our path in life; God would not choose it for us.
One of the foremost of our brethren (for we were all children of Heavenly Father) suggested a different path. Instead of giving us our free will, he would ensure that no one strayed from the path--by removing the freedom to choose from our lives. Such a plan would ensure that everyone would pass through Earth untainted. This spirit was known then as Lucifer, Son of the Morning.
In reality, Lucifer planned to Lord over all of us, placing himself above the Father in glory. He would take all of the glory for himself, rather than use it to empower his brethren and sisters. The plan that he presented was a false plan, and it was the debate between the two plans that formed the core of the War in Heaven.
Those who chose to follow Lucifer were cast out of Heaven into outer darkness, removed from Heaven. They have no opportunity for repentence or progression; they are the damned. Those who chose to follow Heavenly Father were chosen to go to Earth to prove themselves. As such, they would be saved from death in the end.
-------
I need to go now. I'll be back later to finish up this explanation.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:You can be an independent individual who thinks on your own and forms opinions while still following the message Jesus and God gave us. IMO.
As long as your opinions do not directly contradict the "stated" opinions of Jesus and God, right?
Posted by Survivor (Member # 233) on :
Well, as long as you freely choose to follow their program for your life rather than whatever other plans you have to choose from. I don't know what's up with the "stated" opinions business.
As far as I know, neither God nor Jesus are into "stating" opinions.
Posted by docmagik (Member # 1131) on :
Here's a talk by Dallin Oaks, a church leader, that answers this question, for the benifit of both Mormons and non-mormons reading and posting in this thread.
Posted by 777 (Member # 9506) on :
Looks like I don't need to finish my explanation. That talk by Elder Oaks just summed it up.
Posted by stihl1 (Member # 1562) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:You can be an independent individual who thinks on your own and forms opinions while still following the message Jesus and God gave us. IMO.
As long as your opinions do not directly contradict the "stated" opinions of Jesus and God, right?
That's where the "while still following the message of Jesus and God gave us" part comes in.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
quote:Originally posted by stihl1: I just often feel that when I'm asked the 'saved' question, that I'm missing out somehow on what they are talking about. I was raised to believe in Jesus and what He did. I often wonder if maybe I'm missing out on that, is there something else there I'm supposed to know about or understand?
I think the big issue there is whether or not you actually believe it's true or it's just sort of your default mindset because you were raised in that faith. I don't know if that makes any sense.
-pH
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:That's where the "while still following the message of Jesus and God gave us" part comes in.
To be honest, then, I don't see the distinction between this and letting God run your life. I'll be briefly sarcastic to demonstrate the point; please forgive me. Is the big difference between the two philosophies that God doesn't always make His orange juice preferences clear, and thus the latter believes it's not necessary to check with Him before you buy? What major, life-altering moral decisions are not covered by the message of Jesus?
Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
I don't know stihl's distinction, but I see one. Between "I will do what I want within God's established limits" and "I will conform myself to God so much that what I want is whatever He wants." One gives God part of life, the other gives Him all.
Doesn't help much with the OJ decision, though!
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:I will conform myself to God so much that what I want is whatever He wants.
Wouldn't most religious people agree that this is in fact the ideal? That in a situation in which what God wants is known, that wanting what God wants -- or at least conforming to what God wants -- is the best of the available options? I know that many people believe it's not possible or realistic to necessarily live your life this way in all ways, but wouldn't they believe that it'd be, by definition, "better" to do so?
The flipside: in which situations is it better to want and do things that God does not want you to want or do?
Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
I'm not sure they would (agree that this is the way to do it). You did say "religious people," not "Christian." It's pretty clear in Christianity, but I don't think it is in some other religions. And Christians don't always pursue it either -- although we'll probably agree that it's ideal, and thank you for the reminder.
Not sure what stihl will say. ?
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
Unfortunately, the whole conforming to God thing is often used to justify a miserable existence. That makes me really sad.
-pH
Posted by Survivor (Member # 233) on :
Eh, once you realize it's the only way to justify any existence, it isn't so bad. What's the matter with having a justification for existing? Okay, you might not want me to have a justification for existing, I can see that. But in a more hypothetical sense, what's wrong with letting people exist even if you think they shouldn't?
Huh, that sorta answers itself, doesn't it?
Okay, why do you feel that those who conform to God's will shouldn't exist? That's really the question I was trying to ask.
Posted by Eduardo St. Elmo (Member # 9566) on :
"Here's your vehicle of salvation my brothers, --praise the lord-- Go buy a gun. --praise the lord-- Go give your gun to Jesus and say: Jesus, you go kill the disciples of Satan and you kill the nazi's Jesus. --give me a hallelujah-- Have you been healed? Have you been saved? Has it happened to you my brother? Feel the pain of sweet Jesus. --praise the lord-- We gotta kill the noise, we gotta kill the pollution of Satan, my brother. --give me an amen-- I love Jesus. We gotta kill the pollution. Pollution!"
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
"I don't have a catholic community because I gave up on that religion a long time ago."
Ooops, let me rehrase my question -- what it is about Catholicism that made you give up on it?
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
stihl1
I don't think that God wants you to become a different person. I think that God wants you (all of us) to become who we are. To be more ourselves.
Think of it like a beautiful stained glass window that, over time, has become dull from the accumulation of dirt and time. Cleaning that window doesn't make it a different window; it allows what it is to come forth. And, by its beauty, it also allows more light to shine through.
So what parts of ourselves do we ask God to help us "clean"? Is an addiction, for example, an integral part of who someone is or is it something that is keeping that person from being fully himself?
God doesn't want zombies or clones. We are created with intelligence and personality and unique gifts for a reason. Why would blunting any of that be God's plan?
Posted by SenojRetep (Member # 8614) on :
quote:Christ says, ‘Give me All. I don’t want so much of your time and so much of your money and so much of your work: I want You. I have not come to torment your natural self, but to kill it. No half-measures are any good. I don’t want to cut off a branch here and a branch there, I want to have the whole tree down. … Hand over the whole natural self, all the desires which you think innocent as well as the ones you think wicked—the whole outfit. I will give you a new self instead. In fact, I will give you Myself: my own will shall become yours.’
-Mere Christianity, New York: Collier Books, 1960, p. 167.
I believe there is room for individuality in eternity. I like what Kim said about God giving us unique personalities and gifts (and talents) for a reason. However, I also believe that Christ wants us to sacrifice a lot of what we typically think of as "our selfs."
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Then you (and Lewis) and I disagree. There is a lot in Mere Christianity that I agree with, but there is a lot that I don't.
(I think you mean me - I'm Kate.)
Posted by SenojRetep (Member # 8614) on :
Sorry Kate.
I always want to kall you Kim 'kause of the "kmb" in kmbboots (makes me think of 'Kimberly').
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
quote:Originally posted by pH: Unfortunately, the whole conforming to God thing is often used to justify a miserable existence. That makes me really sad.
pH, can you explain what you mean by that? Most people I know who are honestly trying to conform their lives to God are quite happy with their decision to do so.
Or are you talking about hypocrisy, when people say that they're doing things God's way and everyone else should too, but they are really not living what they claim to believe?
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by SenojRetep: Sorry Kate.
I always want to kall you Kim 'kause of the "kmb" in kmbboots (makes me think of 'Kimberly').
No problem.
Posted by stihl1 (Member # 1562) on :
quote:Originally posted by pH: Unfortunately, the whole conforming to God thing is often used to justify a miserable existence. That makes me really sad.
-pH
I kind of agree. It seems to me that a lot of people who do that have a pretty miserable life to begin with, and aren't really good with living their life on their own. Which is sad, but in the end if it makes things better for them, then it's good. I think.
Thing is, I like who I am. I'm not a great person, I'm not the worst person. But I like being an individual and becoming a Christian zombie doesn't appeal to me. I want to think for myself, form my own opinions. I don't want to be someone who judges people or dislikes gay people because that's what my religion says. I don't want my decisions made for me and not be able to think for myself. I don't need a God makeover. I want to dialogue and discuss with God, not be a puppet.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
quote:Originally posted by Uprooted:
quote:Originally posted by pH: Unfortunately, the whole conforming to God thing is often used to justify a miserable existence. That makes me really sad.
pH, can you explain what you mean by that? Most people I know who are honestly trying to conform their lives to God are quite happy with their decision to do so.
Or are you talking about hypocrisy, when people say that they're doing things God's way and everyone else should too, but they are really not living what they claim to believe?
I'm not talking about hypocrisy. I'm talking about people making choices that cause them to be miserable, thinking that this is a worthy sacrifice that God would want. There are the wives who stay married to abusive husbands because they feel it's their duty. There are people who love their perfectly legitimate, moral careers, who give up those lives because they think that's what God wants...even if it's not what THEY want. Of course, I also think that what humans want and what God wants probably coincide more than we give ourselves credit for.
There's way more to this, but it will probably end up as a rant.
-pH
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
Sorry for the double post!
quote:Originally posted by stihl1:
quote:Originally posted by pH: Unfortunately, the whole conforming to God thing is often used to justify a miserable existence. That makes me really sad.
-pH
I kind of agree. It seems to me that a lot of people who do that have a pretty miserable life to begin with, and aren't really good with living their life on their own. Which is sad, but in the end if it makes things better for them, then it's good. I think.
Thing is, I like who I am. I'm not a great person, I'm not the worst person. But I like being an individual and becoming a Christian zombie doesn't appeal to me. I want to think for myself, form my own opinions. I don't want to be someone who judges people or dislikes gay people because that's what my religion says. I don't want my decisions made for me and not be able to think for myself. I don't need a God makeover. I want to dialogue and discuss with God, not be a puppet.
I don't think Christianity should be about mindless zombie-ness. And I don't think, at its core, that it's about that at all. Being a Christian doesn't mean becoming a puppet.
-pH
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
Thanks, pH, I get what you mean now.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by stihl1:
quote:Originally posted by pH: Unfortunately, the whole conforming to God thing is often used to justify a miserable existence. That makes me really sad.
-pH
I kind of agree. It seems to me that a lot of people who do that have a pretty miserable life to begin with, and aren't really good with living their life on their own. Which is sad, but in the end if it makes things better for them, then it's good. I think.
Thing is, I like who I am. I'm not a great person, I'm not the worst person. But I like being an individual and becoming a Christian zombie doesn't appeal to me. I want to think for myself, form my own opinions. I don't want to be someone who judges people or dislikes gay people because that's what my religion says. I don't want my decisions made for me and not be able to think for myself. I don't need a God makeover. I want to dialogue and discuss with God, not be a puppet.
I'm sorry that you have the idea that Christianity has to be like that. It really doesn't. Of course you are supposed to form your own opinions. I believe that you're supposed to form your own opinions. (An example: I certainly don't feel that Christianity requires us to judge or dislike anyone. Quite the contrary.) Did you read what I said regarding "being madeover"?
Posted by stihl1 (Member # 1562) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots:
quote:Originally posted by stihl1:
quote:Originally posted by pH: Unfortunately, the whole conforming to God thing is often used to justify a miserable existence. That makes me really sad.
-pH
I kind of agree. It seems to me that a lot of people who do that have a pretty miserable life to begin with, and aren't really good with living their life on their own. Which is sad, but in the end if it makes things better for them, then it's good. I think.
Thing is, I like who I am. I'm not a great person, I'm not the worst person. But I like being an individual and becoming a Christian zombie doesn't appeal to me. I want to think for myself, form my own opinions. I don't want to be someone who judges people or dislikes gay people because that's what my religion says. I don't want my decisions made for me and not be able to think for myself. I don't need a God makeover. I want to dialogue and discuss with God, not be a puppet.
I'm sorry that you have the idea that Christianity has to be like that. It really doesn't. Of course you are supposed to form your own opinions. I believe that you're supposed to form your own opinions. (An example: I certainly don't feel that Christianity requires us to judge or dislike anyone. Quite the contrary.) Did you read what I said regarding "being madeover"?
Yes, I did read that and I agree. I don't believe that Christianity has to be like that, but that's the message I get from so many so-called evangelicals and people who claim to be 'saved'. It's very frustrating.
And frankly, I've come to the opinion that evangelicalism and being 'saved' isn't for me. I think that it is for some people, certain people. I think that brand of christianity genuinely helps people and does some good. I think some people NEED that from God, need to be taken over and made into a zombie. But frankly, it's not for me. And I don't believe that just because I disagree with that, I am wrong or can't find a religion. Despite what I am being told from certain evangelicals.
There's a reason why there are so many religions, so many brands of Christianity. We're all looking for something different from God, and we all tailor our beliefs based on that. My problem is I'm not sure what I'm looking for, only that I'm looking for it.
Sorry to dredge this old thread up, but reading the Jesus Camp stuff made me think of this.
Frankly, evangelicals scare me. Any religion or belief that requires you to give up so much of yourself to conform is dangerous. And reminds me of a cult.
Posted by Earendil18 (Member # 3180) on :
It's interesting hearing about this evangelical message through your experiences, as opposed to mine. It helps to clarify, and I firmly agree with your ideas of "conversing with God" etc.
Great thread. Hi Tante! Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tante Shvester: In Judaism, we don't have the "being saved" thing. We do have "teshuvah", which is repentance. Someone who led a non-observant life and decided to follow a more observant practice is called "baal teshuvah", but this is not usually a big dramatic thing, with attendant miracles. In fact, the change more typically comes on gradually, with the person taking on one commandment, then another (perhaps trying to eat only kosher food, then to observe the Sabbath, then to pray once a day, then three times a day...).
But there are plenty enough commandments that no one out there is perfect in their observance of all of them, so there is the opportunity for everyone to do teshuvah.
<nod> It took me about 4 years from when I decided that I was going to be Orthodox until I was really observant without making exceptions. And I still screw up from time to time.
Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
They told me that I'd fall away unless I followed what they say who needs the Bible anyway? I want to be a clone
Their language it was new to me but Christianese got through to me now I can speak it fluently I want to be a clone http://www.sockheaven.net/music/albums/clone/02.html Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
quote:Originally posted by Earendil18: Hi Tante!
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by stihl1: Frankly, evangelicals scare me. Any religion or belief that requires you to give up so much of yourself to conform is dangerous. And reminds me of a cult.
I might note that the line between religion and cult is very thin. There's a good summary at wiki.
However, the bottom line really is that a cult in common usage is just a religion that other religions (or society as a whole) consider too "weird" to be accepted as a religion. If you only examined one cult and had no knowledge of any other religions, there is no objective criteria for determining what is a cult and what is not.
The reason I bring this up, is that in light of this, the phrase "Any religion or belief that requires [X] ... reminds me of a cult" is in some sense vacuous. Its almost like saying, "This New York place, its so American it reminds me of being in the United States."
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote: Any religion or belief that requires you to give up so much of yourself to conform is dangerous.
Oh, it gets worse. Here's a quote from CS Lewis:
quote:Christ says ‘Give me all. I don’t want so much of your time and so much of your money and so much of your work: I want You. I have not come to torment your natural self, but to kill it. No half-measures are any good. I don’t want to cut off a branch here and a branch there, I want to have the whole tree down…Hand over the natural self, all the desires which you think innocent as well as the ones you think wicked—the whole outfit. I will give you a new self instead. In fact, I will give you Myself: my own will shall become yours.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
quote:Christ says ‘Give me all. I don’t want so much of your time and so much of your money and so much of your work: I want You. I have not come to torment your natural self, but to kill it. No half-measures are any good. I don’t want to cut off a branch here and a branch there, I want to have the whole tree down…Hand over the natural self, all the desires which you think innocent as well as the ones you think wicked—the whole outfit. I will give you a new self instead. In fact, I will give you Myself: my own will shall become yours.
So does every fascist/authoritarian movement ever.
Maybe you're okay with Christ on this one, but doing this with a human organization seems to me to be a recipe for evil and disaster. Or to put it another way, a large chunk of the history of Christianity.
Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
I wouldn't want to trust anybody with that much power, unless that somebody was perfect.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
It's always a bit of a relief to see Christians who truly don't want people to be mindless zombies. I've had a lot of bad experiences with the ones who think we should all be the same and who think we all need the same things from God. It's actually to the point where if the first thing someone tells me about themselves is, "I'm a Christian" I kind of back away slowly. It shouldn't feel that way to me, I know. All I can say is things are better. A little over a year ago I started making a new friend who is a Christian. She's a neighbor and we started walking together 2-3 times a week (until the weather got bad). I always avoided the subject of religious but finally one day I decided that if she were really going to be my friend then it wouldn't matter if I told her the truth about my beliefs...and she was ok with it. We had an open discussion about religion (the first I've had with anyone aside from my husband, a devout Catholic) and so my measure of the statement "I'm a Christian" has improved.
I've always thought that God had to be as multi-faceted as the people he created and that if he created me the way that I am, then he can be who I need him to me and now who other people tell me he is. And no, that doesn't come from the Bible...a book that is a topic for another time. Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:I've always thought that God had to be as multi-faceted as the people he created and that if he created me the way that I am, then he can be who I need him to me and now who other people tell me he is.
What do you mean by multi-faceted?
I always hear the 'Christians-as-Zombies' argument put up in discussions of this type. I'm thankful that I don't know ANY Christians that believe the way that some people think they believe.
Posted by Flaming Toad on a Stick (Member # 9302) on :
*eats Scott's brains*
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R:
quote:I've always thought that God had to be as multi-faceted as the people he created and that if he created me the way that I am, then he can be who I need him to me and now who other people tell me he is.
What do you mean by multi-faceted?
I always hear the 'Christians-as-Zombies' argument put up in discussions of this type. I'm thankful that I don't know ANY Christians that believe the way that some people think they believe.
I wish I didn't know any Christians who believed the way some people think they believe!
As for the multi-faceted bit, well, now you're going to make me get into it, aren't you? I should probably start by saying that you probably wouldn't consider me Christian. I was raised Catholic and spent a couple of years in high school exploring (leading me to an evangelical church where I got caught up in the whole "saved" and "saving people" business for a while). I am not an atheist or even an agnostic. I believe in God and consider myself to be a very spiritual person.
It is the specific nature of God that can get me into trouble if I open my mouth in public. To some, God is nature. To others, he is a person who created people in his own image. And still to others, he has been more than one god. Even within Christianity, God behaves differently in the old and new testaments. Perhaps the people of each age needed something different from Him?
So when I say God is multi-faceted, I mean that I believe he can be all these things to all these different people. I don't believe there is conflict. I also don't believe the details matter. (This is all just personal opinion, of course.)
Where I come into difficulty is in deciding who He is for me. It is for this reason that I choose to pray alone whenever I have a choice. (And when other people are praying in a group I bow my head respectfully and listen.)
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote: I mean that I believe he can be all these things to all these different people. I don't believe there is conflict.
Aha.
For the record, I do think there's conflict, and everyone who disagrees with me is wrong.
But I'm not going to eat your brains over it.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Christine, you and I are pretty much in agreement.
Posted by stihl1 (Member # 1562) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus:
quote:Originally posted by stihl1: Frankly, evangelicals scare me. Any religion or belief that requires you to give up so much of yourself to conform is dangerous. And reminds me of a cult.
I might note that the line between religion and cult is very thin. There's a good summary at wiki.
However, the bottom line really is that a cult in common usage is just a religion that other religions (or society as a whole) consider too "weird" to be accepted as a religion. If you only examined one cult and had no knowledge of any other religions, there is no objective criteria for determining what is a cult and what is not.
The reason I bring this up, is that in light of this, the phrase "Any religion or belief that requires [X] ... reminds me of a cult" is in some sense vacuous. Its almost like saying, "This New York place, its so American it reminds me of being in the United States."
This is not true. There are very defining critiria that define a cult. I did a huge paper about cults when I was in college, and the whole thing fascinated me. It's my opinion that a religion shows some sign of those criteria, (there are six of them, I believe), but a cult takes each one of those criteria to the highest level. I don't remember all of them offhand, but it involves controlling the member's invironment, the information they get, the people they know, etc so as to limit a person's ability to think beyond that cult.
I have an ex girlfriend that's trying to save my soul and get me on her path to salvation. She's someone who needs a lot of help to make it through life, basically. She's got a lot of mental issues, and had bad things that have happened to her in life. She claims that her religion has turned everything around for her and she seems better off. The problem is, she has disappeared. Everything she talks about, everything she does, everything about her is God this and Jesus that. To the point where she answers simple questions with regurgitated religious propaganda. If there's a question she can't answer, it gets answered with something about going to Hell because I'm not saved. She has taken the stance of her church or religion on many subjects, from bashing homosexuals to evolution to simple things like the earth is only 6000 years old. And this was a smart girl, an honor student with serious potential when we were teens. She used to be a huge liberal in her views, and fought for women's equality. Now she doesn't think for herself, has become a lacky for her church's propaganda, and basically wants to be seen as a zealot or religious wacko.
That scares the hell outta me. I don't want anything to do with that. Yet the way these people talk they make it seem so necessary to become saved. Some of them even make it seem attractive to be part of that. But besides the fact I don't understand the whole 'saved' thing, I don't want to be an automiton or zealot. I don't need to be changed in that way, nor do I want to be changed in that way.
I believe what she's gotten in to is seriously borderline cult. And that Jesus Camp video scares me too, it's got cult written all over it.
I did manage to send her into a tizzy though when I told her I was going to go back to being a Catholic. She said I was going to be stuck in hell with the rest of the papists for all eternity. NICE.
Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
Mmmm....brains.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Well it has always been a tough paradox for me on the one hand,
"21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."
---
So just because somebody proclaims Jesus is the Lord they could still easily get sent to hell because they did a rotten job representing him to His other children.
But on the otherhand,
"I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world."
So on the one hand if you really did a good job emulating Jesus, people would be drawn to you, but people would also despise you.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
It annoys me to no end when people believe that following a religion is a weakness. It's like saying you want people to be more open-minded and then proceeding to bash them for not being open-minded the way you want them to be.
-pH
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Well put, pH.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I got saved (I was posting using a different name until Hurricane Katrina). I don't know how it fits in with sanctification or the mighty change of heart.
One hymn puts the effect "We feel it a pleasure to serve thee, and love to obey thy command."
Posted by stihl1 (Member # 1562) on :
quote:Originally posted by pH: It annoys me to no end when people believe that following a religion is a weakness. It's like saying you want people to be more open-minded and then proceeding to bash them for not being open-minded the way you want them to be.
-pH
Kinda like preaching to people to follow a God that spoke of loving and accepting and tolerance and then telling them they're going to hell if they don't follow your brand of religion.
I wouldn't say people who follow a religion are weak. I think people who can be dedicated to their religion are admirable. I do however believe that some people need religion because they have weaknesses and use that religion to fill in those weaknesses. Which in reality, isn't bad if it makes things better off for them and creates a better life for them.
That's not why I'm looking for a religion or a fath, though. And I don't agree with people who try to fit their needs for religion into me.
Posted by stihl1 (Member # 1562) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tante Shvester: In Judaism, we don't have the "being saved" thing. We do have "teshuvah", which is repentance. Someone who led a non-observant life and decided to follow a more observant practice is called "baal teshuvah", but this is not usually a big dramatic thing, with attendant miracles. In fact, the change more typically comes on gradually, with the person taking on one commandment, then another (perhaps trying to eat only kosher food, then to observe the Sabbath, then to pray once a day, then three times a day...).
But there are plenty enough commandments that no one out there is perfect in their observance of all of them, so there is the opportunity for everyone to do teshuvah.
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: For me, "practical" Catholicism is very similar to what Tante describes.
These two posts were very helpful for me. Not an immediate impact, but something that stayed with me and made me think. These posts kinda resonated with me. First, because I totally understood what Tante said about it being a gradual thing, that you work on, you grow into, and become. Second, because what km said. It made me think seriously about my catholic upbringing, and how that was playing into what I was looking for. My understanding of what catholicism is, at least, is a lifelong religion that you grown into and with and takes you on a journey. That's pretty much what I've been looking for. Not an overnight change, or a convenient restart button, or something to cure me of my vices.
So it got me to thinking more and more about my upbringing as a catholic and why I didn't want to stay with the church. I am now seriously considering resuming that faith. While I don't necessarily agree with everything that catholicism stands for, it is at least a starting point and touchstone for me to continue my faith and to grow with. I was raised with it, and a great deal of my morals and value system is based in that religion, it's how I learned right and wrong and personal/family values. And frankly, going back there and at least being a part of a religion and getting closer to God is better than sitting in limbo not understanding what's going on or where to turn.
The other thing I have considered favorably about catholics is that the religion never gives me the willys like some of the more zealous religions do. Some religions make themselves seem really attractive, and you wonder if maybe you're not missing something. There members are really good at trying to convince you to go with their religion. And while I am pulled by that at times, it always throws up a red flag with me.
For the most part, catholics don't recruit. Or at least I don't get that feeling from them. When I was a catholic I never felt pressured to recruit anyone. If anything, they have the opposite attitude, kinda like an exclusive club you've got to qualify to join. Somehow it's reassuring to me that they aren't trying to "sell" you all the time. That always bothers me about the 'saved' people who try to talk to you and convince you to join up.
So I'm considering it seriously. My sister in law is catholic and they attend a church here in town that I might give a try. I'd like to sit down and talk with a priest before I start going again. With lent beginning next week and ash wednesday, what better time than to get back in it?
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
stihl1,
I'm glad that you are giving it a try. While you are right about the fact that we don't recruit, we do have classes for people who want to convert to Catholicism or to be confirmed. I mentor those classes in our parish and would be more than pleased to discuss any issues you might have. There are a lot of issues that a lot of people have, so questions are good and I have a lot of resources that might be useful to you.
My email is the same as my user name at hotmail.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
stihl1: It sounds like you're coming to the same conclusion about the Catholic faith that I did a few years back. (I, too, was raised Catholic and wandered off.) After doing my exploring I found that I had more respect for the Catholic church and more in common with those teachings than with others. I don't agree with it all. When I go, I do not receive communion because I do not believe in transubstantiation and feel that taking communion would be disrespectful. But I like the openness and the lack of pushiness.
Posted by Survivor (Member # 233) on :
I guess what it comes down to is that people who don't feel the need to be saved are claiming that they are already perfect. Or at least that there's nothing wrong with them the way they are. I'm not sure I understand the difference.
Posted by stihl1 (Member # 1562) on :
In no way did I infer I was perfect. Nor did I decide I didn't "need to be saved". What I did decide was that being saved wasn't for me, it doesn't go along with the understanding I have of what it means to have a relationship with God and what faith is. That doesn't mean I am implying it's bad, just not for me.
Neither did I say there's nothing wrong with me. What I have noticed is that a lot of the so-called 'saved' people seem to have in common some kind of personal issue, or past problem, or vise that they seem to have solved with their faith. I think that these kind of people are attracted to the 'saved' or evangelical religions because it helps to 'reset' or take over their lives and allow them to succeed in life. I'm not looking for a reset, I've got problems just like everyone else. But I don't want to eliminate those problems with religion, that's why I'm not looking for a faith. I'm looking to grow closer and understand God/faith/religion/spirituality a little more.
I don't think you can say either way is bad as long as it works for you. For me, the evangelical thing is a little scary, I don't like the 'zombie-ism' effect I have seen first hand. I am sure there are moderate evangelicals just as there are fanatics. Either way, it's just not for me.
Posted by stihl1 (Member # 1562) on :
quote:Originally posted by Christine: stihl1: It sounds like you're coming to the same conclusion about the Catholic faith that I did a few years back. (I, too, was raised Catholic and wandered off.) After doing my exploring I found that I had more respect for the Catholic church and more in common with those teachings than with others. I don't agree with it all. When I go, I do not receive communion because I do not believe in transubstantiation and feel that taking communion would be disrespectful. But I like the openness and the lack of pushiness.
What drove me away was a lot of the rituals. And the usual complaints about the church. And a little bit of rebellion and a need to shrug off years of forced sunday mornings in mass. I really never put together the realization I had above until just recently. Maybe it came with maturity, I dunno.
The one thing I do miss is the kind of 'brotherhood' of the church. The overall church experience and that catholics have. Even when I wasn't in the church, I still felt some of that shared experience whenever people talked about being catholic.
Posted by Survivor (Member # 233) on :
I wasn't using "saved" in some kind of specialized or extreme sense, just the sense of needing something you can't give yourself.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
I think that more evangelical churches tend to use the term "saved" to refer to a singular, intense, revelatory moment. "Bam! Now you're saved." Catholics tend to think of it as a continuing journey towards a deeper relationship. God is constantly reaching out to us and we get better at reaching back.
Posted by stihl1 (Member # 1562) on :
quote:Originally posted by Survivor: I wasn't using "saved" in some kind of specialized or extreme sense, just the sense of needing something you can't give yourself.
I don't think people who believe in it see it as that. From my view that's how it sometimes seems. I think people who have a need for a higher power taking over their lives fit this mode of religion. I don't think, nor did I mean to imply, that people who don't go for the saved version of religion think they are perfect or don't have problems.
Posted by stihl1 (Member # 1562) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: I think that more evangelical churches tend to use the term "saved" to refer to a singular, intense, revelatory moment. "Bam! Now you're saved." Catholics tend to think of it as a continuing journey towards a deeper relationship. God is constantly reaching out to us and we get better at reaching back.
See, this is what I never understood. The 'saved' people seem to look upon the idea of what Jesus did and belief in him as some kind of relevatory moment. But to me, that's what I was taught from the beginning. To them it always seemed like a 'light bulb moment', for me it's the foundation of belief. And I always felt like I was missing something because I didn't see it in the same way.
The other problem I had with certain evangelicals, in conversing with them, was that everything came back to going to Hell, God being vengeful, and damnation. I had a very long discussion with a certain evangelical person who had a very fearful, angry message. My main question was, why lead off with the going to hell and damnation stuff? It was my contention she'd catch a lot more people's attentions by stressing the goodness of God and the loving part. People don't want to hear how they are damned and to be judged by someone that doesn't know them. That message is very negative, and a lot of people don't respond to negativity. How many times have you heard from someone that was trying to testify or preach to you about how you've got to do this or that or go to Hell? What kind of introduction is that to God and/or religion?
Which brings me back to another opinion or view I have. I think that a large portion of people want to be afraid. And usually it's a fear of something they can't control or see. Fearing God, hearing that message of fear, is included. A lot of people want to be afraid of God and use that as motivation to be a better person. And a lot of people respond to a religion that tries to put fear in you.
Personally, I don't like to be pushed like that, and I don't respond to that kind of fear. Whether it's conspiracy theories, or aliens from space, or a angry God that's going to damn you for not believing in a certain religion. I don't respond to that. And a lot of what I hear from evangels is that fear message. I don't like that. It seems so phoney, and makes their message sound like something to do just to go to heaven.
When I think of the things that really inspire me to love God and want to know more about Him and understand that relationship better, it's the good things, the love, the positive messages. The fact that Jesus spoke of love and understanding is what makes Christianity believable to me. ANY religion can preach fear of damnation and being bad and an angry God. I think that most primitive people come up with those kind of myths more often than not. Even today people want to make a God in that fearful image. It seems a lot less possible to me that primitive man, who understood little about his world, that lived in a tough hard world, would make up this God that loved his people and preached that love and understanding and forgiveness and peace. Those are concepts that we still don't understand today, as humans, and for men to make that up 2000+ years ago, in a perfect message and perfect way seems improbable. The Christian God and Jesus preach a message that still seems far out today, eons ago.
And for the most part, from what I can remember, Catholicism doesn't try to stress the fear or penalties or punishment or a vengeful God. It preaches a forgiving God that loves and understands and wants peace and love for us. That's what I'm looking for.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
quote:I think people who can be dedicated to their religion are admirable. I do however believe that some people need religion because they have weaknesses and use that religion to fill in those weaknesses.
So are there people who don't need religion because they don't have weaknesses?
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
pooka, that isn't what we are saying.
Everyone has weaknesses. Everyone has strengths. God has infinite capacity for addressing both - all aspects of us.
But some religions do tend to focus on our unworthiness, others on forgivness, others on praise, others on good works, others on our beloved-ness, some on snakes, for heaven's sake! There is truth in all of that. Most have a little of everything (except for the snakes). We seek out faith that "fits" us best, the part of an infinite God that call to us. In my church I very seldom hear that I am a sinner (though that is acknowledged) compared to how often I am told that I am loved.
Different sides of the an infinitely-sided coin.
Posted by Survivor (Member # 233) on :
Humans don't want to be afraid. But they are.
Some religions don't focus on unworthiness because they assume people already know they're not worthy. Some do because they think that you can just tell people about their unworthyness and somehow that'll make them listen.
Being saved...I could take it or leave it, but there is one thing that I must have, and therefore I'll accept it gladly.
Posted by stihl1 (Member # 1562) on :
quote:Originally posted by pooka:
quote:I think people who can be dedicated to their religion are admirable. I do however believe that some people need religion because they have weaknesses and use that religion to fill in those weaknesses.
So are there people who don't need religion because they don't have weaknesses?
No, not at all. Everyone has weaknesses. People deal with it in different ways. Some people have major problems they can't conquer, and it ruins their lives. Some of them find a strong religion and it turns their lives around. Some people don't find a religion at all and conquer those problems in different ways. Some people are just fine and find religion for other reasons. I know a lot of people who have problems that could use a could dose of religion to set them straight. And some of the most together people I know are very spiritual.
I'm not looking to fill weaknesses or holes. I was raised with a belief in God, and never left that. But I do miss having an organized community and/or religion to explore my beliefs and extend my relationship with God. Without all the hype.
quote:Originally posted by Survivor: Humans don't want to be afraid. But they are.
I strongly disagree. People like to be afraid. People want to be afraid for some reason. I think it's some kind of primitive behavior. I see/hear people all the time creating fears and worries for themselves for no reason. Maybe it's motivation, maybe it's got something to do with people needing to feel like they don't have control. But many people do want to be afraid of soemthing. Me, being afraid of going to hell shouldn't be a reason to be good or believe in God. Being afraid of fire and brimstone and the devil shouldn't be the motivation for being a Christian. Wanting to experience more of God's love and being in that presence and understanding IS.
Coincidentally, I have had many people disagree with me on the fear thing, many people agree. All of the 'saved' or evangelical people that I've shared that opinion with have agressively disagreed with me. They talk about how I could go to Hell for not accepting God, that God is vengeful, that I could burn in hell if I don't get 'saved', don't want to talk about God's love, but then turn around and deny people want to be afraid. These people seem to be the most fearful I've encountered. Why fear death and dying if you believe in God and are sure you're going to heaven for that belief? Is it denial? Why fear death if you believe that it brings you to God's presence, and a better place?
I think I should clarify a bit, too. Being 'saved' in the strict sense of the word isn't what I'm disagreeing with. Strictly, it means accepting Jesus and that he died for our sins and accepting him into your heart. I don't disagree with that, it's the basis for everything I was taught about God and religion. What I don't agree with personally, what I don't think is for me is the evangelical connotation that comes with that being 'saved'. If you believe in God and Jesus being 'saved' should be for you. What you do with your organized religious beliefs are up to you, as long as they make you happy.
Posted by Survivor (Member # 233) on :
Well, I think that humans like to be able to isolate and idenfity their fears. But humans are afraid whether or not they can pin their fear down to a specific thing they can then control. And that relatively formless fear is very difficult for them to endure. It's basically impossible to control.
It is easy to mistake the desire to pick a particular, limited object of fear as a desire to be afraid. But the point isn't to feel fear, it's to force that fear into a form that can be controlled. A "saved" (rather than saved) person might choose to force fear onto a concept (burning in hell) which is already rendered null (by virtue of being "saved"). This isn't an effort to feel more fear, it's an effort to push that fear away into a catagory of "things I can overcome" or "things I don't have to worry about."
To some extent, this kind of mental exercise can be useful, since it can help humans deal with their fear. Frequently, it rises to the point of total self-deception and results in self-defeating behaviors. Probably a lot of people on the "saved" thing you describe fall into that catagory. Since, in point of fact, many of them aren't really saved at all.
But that isn't your judgement to make. It's not even mine Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
quote:In my church I very seldom hear that I am a sinner (though that is acknowledged) compared to how often I am told that I am loved.
That the fall of man is integral to salvation is one of the unique doctrines of Mormonism. Yet so few are willing to embrace it. Look up "fall" in the Book of Mormon index. Not the topical guide, the index.
quote:Ether 12:27 27 And if men come unto me I will show unto them their weakness. I give unto men weakness that they may be humble; and my grace is sufficient for all men that humble themselves before me; for if they humble themselves before me, and have faith in me, then will I make weak things become strong unto them.
When we come unto Christ, we will know of our weakness.
His grace is sufficient. We are not. "All we can do" to lay hold on his grace is humility and faith. It seems to me people often think Nephi's "all we can do" is being as holy as we can and only then asking for his grace.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
and you and I have different faiths. Which is fine.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Survivor: Some religions don't focus on unworthiness because they assume people already know they're not worthy. Some do because they think that you can just tell people about their unworthyness and somehow that'll make them listen.
Judaism doesn't focus on unworthiness because we don't believe people are unworthy. In fact, we see overcoming temptation as much more praiseworthy than not being tempted in the first place. The rabbis say, "In the place where a penitant stands, a perfectly righteous person cannot stand."
Everyone finds temptation. Everyone falls short from time to time. The majesty of human beings is our ability to choose right over wrong, and to leave the wrong for the right even after we've messed up.
Even the angels don't have that ability to serve God. They serve Him because that's what they are. Only human beings can serve God by choice. And ultimately, that's all that He wants.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:The rabbis say, "In the place where a penitant stands, a perfectly righteous person cannot stand."
Well, duh. That's just basic mechanics.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Not necessarily. How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
While remaining perfectly righteous? I'm sure at some point they'd have to be violating at least one kosher law. Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
We like to be afraid when it isn't real. I love stories with alien monsters that eat people, but I wouldn't like to really meet one.
Posted by Survivor (Member # 233) on :
In a sense, that's what I mean. Focusing on a fearful object or concept that you don't have to fear is a way of asserting control over your fear. You get to say, "look how scary it is, but I'm not scared at all."
All angels can dance on the head of a pin. I don't know why they couldn't do it at the same time, though if it were the same pin things might be complicated. I think that the complications are what would make it fun, though.
[quote]Judaism doesn't focus on unworthiness because we don't believe people are unworthy.
Everyone falls short from time to time.[quote]
There is an apparent discrepancy between these two statements. Perhaps you are taking "unworthy" as synonymous with "worthless" rather than meaning something that does not meet a requirement or standard. In this sense, I would have to point out that "worthless" is an entirely subjective quality, even if many people identify the same things as being of no worth, it really is a matter of opinion. In other words, if you feel that something is worth nothing and I feel it is worth something, we have no reason to argue. But if we have different ideas about whether something is worthy, then we can argue.
If (and this is a very hypothetical situation) we were living together, and you thought that something should be thrown out and I wanted to keep it, the problem would be one of whether it was worthy (of being kept), not whether it was worth anything at all. I think that very few people use the term "unworthy" in the sense of having no worth at all. It is usually meant in just the sense of not being good enough.
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
We also talk of "coming unto Christ", which is sometimes similar and sometimes the same in meaning (depending on who's saying it and in what context.)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)