If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Dehlin just posted a copy of the fireside talk Terryl Givens gave to the singles ward in Palo Alto three days ago. It's addressed to those in the Church who have serious doubts--the talk won't dispel them, but it may bring a measure of peace and understanding amidst the struggles. The talk is excellent; I wish I had written it.
Dehlin just posted a copy of the fireside talk Terryl Givens gave to the singles ward in Palo Alto three days ago. It's addressed to those in the Church who have serious doubts--the talk won't dispel them, but it may bring a measure of peace and understanding amidst the struggles. The talk is excellent; I wish I had written it.
That was good. I like the idea that LDS people shouldn't feel like they have to defend (either externally or internally) the faith too broadly and the example of BH Roberts being confounded by Native American language diversity is a good one. And this was a strong finish:
The call to faith, in this light, is not some test of a coy god, waiting to see if we “get it right.” It is the only summons, issued under the only conditions, which can allow us fully to reveal who we are, what we most love, and what we most devoutly desire. Without constraint, without any form of mental compulsion, the act of belief becomes the freest possible projection of what resides in our hearts. Like the poet’s image of a church bell that only reveals its latent music when struck, or a dragonfly that only flames forth its beauty in flight, so does the content of a human heart lie buried until action calls it forth. The greatest act of self-revelation occurs when we choose what we will believe, in that space of freedom that exists between knowing that a thing is, and knowing that a thing is not.
This is the realm where faith operates, and when faith is a freely chosen gesture, it expresses something essential about the self.
Modern revelation, speaking of spiritual gifts, notes that while to some it is given to know the core truth of Christ and His mission, to others is given the means to persevere in the absence of certainty. The New Testament makes the point that those mortals who operate in the grey area between conviction and incredulity are in a position to choose most meaningfully, and with most meaningful consequences.
Dehlin just posted a copy of the fireside talk Terryl Givens gave to the singles ward in Palo Alto three days ago. It's addressed to those in the Church who have serious doubts--the talk won't dispel them, but it may bring a measure of peace and understanding amidst the struggles. The talk is excellent; I wish I had written it.
That was good. I like the idea that LDS people shouldn't feel like they have to defend (either externally or internally) the faith too broadly and the example of BH Roberts being confounded by Native American language diversity is a good one. And this was a strong finish:
I used to sort of think the same thing. I'm curious to know, for those of you for whom this resonated, why in your view is it noble to make a choice to believe without good evidence? I'm focused here strictly on the choice to believe, not on the choice to do good which is a different matter. What exactly does it say about you?
I used to sort of think the same thing. I'm curious to know, for those of you for whom this resonated, why in your view is it noble to make a choice to believe without good evidence? I'm focused here strictly on the choice to believe, not on the choice to do good which is a different matter. What exactly does it say about you?
For me, the choice to believe is essentially the same thing as the choice to do good, because my belief is the impetus behind much of my desire to do good.
I think this is where I differ from so many of the good people on this board. You don't need religion to propel you to do good, but I do. If not for religion, I would be even more selfish than I currently am - and that is saying something. My religion, my belief in God and Jesus, makes me a better person.
For me, the choice to believe is essentially the same thing as the choice to do good, because my belief is the impetus behind much of my desire to do good.
I think this is where I differ from so many of the good people on this board. You don't need religion to propel you to do good, but I do. If not for religion, I would be even more selfish than I currently am - and that is saying something. My religion, my belief in God and Jesus, makes me a better person.
For me, the choice to believe is essentially the same thing as the choice to do good, because my belief is the impetus behind much of my desire to do good.
I think this is where I differ from so many of the good people on this board. You don't need religion to propel you to do good, but I do. If not for religion, I would be even more selfish than I currently am - and that is saying something. My religion, my belief in God and Jesus, makes me a better person.
I thought someone would probably say this, that it is not desirable, or maybe even difficult, to separate the two, at least for them. I imagine you are probably selling yourself short, but it is undeniable religion has the ability to focus human impulses in unique ways. For good and bad (in this case good).
Comment