02-11-2006, 07:39 PM | #21 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Elk Grove, California
Posts: 211
|
I just scanned this thread ...
... and as I was on the first page of the thread the thought came to me that a great source to read for this is Lectures on Faith. Then on page two I saw that AA had referenced it partially. I think LoF does a great job explaining why God is God and why we need a savior and how our faith fits in the whole process. The LoF, BTW, used to be part of the D&C. The sections we have in the D&C were consedered the "Covenants" portion of the Doctrine and Covenants, whereas the LoF was considered the "doctrine" portion. Hence, the title"Doctrine & Covenants". But nearly 100 years ago the LoF was removed unceremonously. Yes, yes, I am familiar with the claims that it was never meant to be considered as cannonized scripture, but that is more of an apologetic hind-sight response to why it was actually removed. Prior to its removeal, the LoF was considered very authoritative.
__________________
Dan Temet Nosce - \"Know Thyself\" |
02-11-2006, 08:49 PM | #22 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,964
|
Quote:
I frequently see this dogmatic type of reasoning when I read religious arguments. I can accept that notion that people accept things on faith, but when I hear people declare things as though they are obvious, eternal truths, I get a little uneasy.
__________________
...You've been under attack for days, there's a soldier down, he's wounded, gangrene's setting in, 'Who's used all the penicillin?' 'Oh, Mark Paxson sir, he's got knob rot off of some tart.'" - Gareth Keenan |
|
02-11-2006, 09:17 PM | #23 | ||
Senior Member
|
Quote:
One of the great marvels of the nature of God is the fact that He is interdependent with His children and His creations. Each individual is a member of an incredibly complex and intricate system that God has implemented, and each perform a crucial task. Mortality, on the other hand, is designed to be a system of redundancy, such that the failure of one member will not ultimately affect the outcome of the rest of the system. This system of redundancy allows for errors to be made but also curtails our potential-- every time we hear a mortal speak in the name of God, we have to stop and verify what he says with what he think, how we feel, and how the Spirit directs that we ought to interpret it. Imagine how complex the situation would have been for Joseph Smith if he had to stop and ask himself if Moroni had any ulterior motives! (And yes, the devil imitates angelic visitations, but God provides one simple test to distinguish true messengers from false ones.) If any inclination towards imperfection existed in the celestial courts, a being possesing any such inclination would be utterly unable to perform any task given of him, by reason that any intelligence under his authority would be unable to have faith in God's commands when coming through that other being. The only thing he could do is be a corrupting influence; Thus by being unable to positively contribute to, but being able only to negatively influence the works of God, a sinner cannot dwell in the presence of God. For thus saith All-American.
__________________
εν αρχη ην ο λογος |
||
02-11-2006, 09:27 PM | #24 | ||
Charon
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In the heart of darkness (Provo)
Posts: 9,564
|
Quote:
This is discussed in more detail in the book "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintanence" (one of my favorites). Not the part about God, but the geometry example and how many of the things we promote as rock-hard science and logic are ultimately based on concepts that are accepted without proof since they simply "feel correct". |
||
02-11-2006, 09:43 PM | #25 |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
There must always be a starting point, something we take on faith. In all disciplines.
We have been told and believe no impurities can withstand the presence of God; why? We can only speculate. None of us are currently in a position to test this basic tenet. However, why is 2 plus 2, not 5? Why is the whole not greater than the sum of the parts? Why is hydrogen the smallest atom? Why is the number One the first whole number? What are thoughts? What are emotions? Eventually, human understanding fails us, and we must start from basic agreed or stipulated points, or stand there with our fingers up our noses.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
02-11-2006, 09:48 PM | #26 |
Senior Member
|
I typically don't respond to religious posts, simply because I often find myself at odds with the prevailing thoughts from those who claim to be deeper thinkers on what is posted and I don't want to detract from the topic nor start an argument, but I'll give a bit of my feelings on the topic.
It is my opinion that too many on here casually dismiss the real and legitimate power of faith, while simultaneously ripping into those, whether it be subtle or not, who try to use faith along with fervent prayer and study and then tell them that they aren't able to think for themselves, again whether subtle or not, because they go along or agree with what is being taught in the church. That is all. |
02-11-2006, 10:05 PM | #27 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
|
|
02-11-2006, 10:11 PM | #28 | ||
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Quote:
A basic tenet of our religion is that God is God because He adheres to these laws. Adherence to the laws makes Him God, not vice versa. That seems equally plausible than an arbitrary and capricious God who makes things up as we go along. Why is that version more acceptable to you? It seems less logical and rational to me.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
||
02-12-2006, 12:41 AM | #29 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,964
|
Quote:
__________________
...You've been under attack for days, there's a soldier down, he's wounded, gangrene's setting in, 'Who's used all the penicillin?' 'Oh, Mark Paxson sir, he's got knob rot off of some tart.'" - Gareth Keenan |
|
02-12-2006, 04:41 AM | #30 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
Faith can be exercized in respect to 1) what you should know, but don't know yet, or 2) what you should not know yet. We all exercize brand #2 in this life in things as essential as the atonement-- the nature of the suffering of the Savior will remain unknown for the most part, except to those who will go through the same suffering. As for brand 1), it is only sufficient for the moment, and as soon as one is capable of learning, he should. If you don't have a testimony of the book of mormon, for example, but you know your mother does, that may be good enough at first, but at some point, you need to learn it for yourself. Most of what we've been discussing in this thread is brand #2, though there's plenty that has been said by the leaders of the church that perhaps can be categorized as #1, in my opinion.
__________________
εν αρχη ην ο λογος |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|