Gary Smith wrote:
> Most people don't understand well the doctrines of their church. That
> includes LDS members, though the active ones probably understand our
> basic tenets better than those of other churches. Most Trinitarians do
> not understand the Trinity well (most believe in modalism, a few even
> believe in the Godhead of separate beings).  
> Most people float around looking for a church that fits their social and
> cultural strata, not their spiritual understanding. 

You describe my sister-in-law perfectly.

But I hold one further belief, or hope.  And that is that people 
disbelieve the doctrines of their churches not JUST out of laziness 
(though I'll never discount laziness) but because, deep in their souls, 
they remember who they are and where they came from.  That's why (IMHO) 
the discussions were (at least to me) not so much LEARNING as BEING 
REMINDED.

> Of course that
> doesn't apply to us, as once you buy your house, you are pretty much
> stuck with one ward.

Until it splits.

All seriousness aside, I'm pretty grateful that the Church is adament 
about educating its members about good, solid doctrine.  No matter how 
amateurish or "hobby horse"-ish speakers at the pulpit may or may not 
be, the reading assignments for Gossip Doctrine, Relief Society, and 
Priesthood are "pound the basics into our heads."  Only by becoming 
dictatorial can we force good doctrine further down people's throats -- 
short of that, we're still gonna have weak teachers and weak students.  
Yesterday's GD class, with a sub teacher, became a silly "I 
wouldn't"/"They taught us at MTC to" argument.

> For many who enjoy family here, but are looking forward to playing harps
> and singing in choirs in the next life, I think they will be totally
> happy in the Terrestrial Kingdom. It will be far greater than anything
> they can imagine a heaven being. Will they miss their families? Perhaps.
> Or maybe they'll be happy seeing others in the same kingdom as friends,
> brothers and sisters.

Maybe.  But there's something about being a neutered angel which just 
disturbs me, and always did -- had a lot to do with me rejecting 
Christianity-as-everyone-else-taught-it in my know-it-all college days.  
Perhaps it's as Benjamin Franklin indicated, when he wrote how a steer 
would be flattered to be called a bull but would be happier having 
restored to him what was rightfully his in the first place.
> 
> If progression between kingdoms ends up being a possibility, perhaps it
> becomes an incentive for those who desire to grow to eventually become
> celestialized. I dunno. I think that it may be possible, just that it
> would take them "worlds without end" (DC 131) to achieve it, meanwhile
> those already in the kingdom would have advanced in kingdoms and
> dominions and glory far beyond what any Terrestrial person could ever
> imagine.

As hard as it is for me to imagine someone being satisfied with being 
familyless and neutered, I find it even more unbelievable that someone 
would learn of the truth and then prefer to give into social pressure.  
Is the natural man and woman stuck in this high school mode, fearing 
peer pressure more than a loss of being oneself?


*jeep!
  --Chet
"Start by doing what's necessary, then what's possible, and suddenly you 
are doing the impossible."

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html      ///
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

==^================================================================
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================

Reply via email to