Changing ordinances

[creekster]

I can handle the performance of ordinances being changed, but when an unchanging God is discussed openly in SS and no one mentions how many changes we have been trhough in only 190 years it saddens me. The discussion would be so much richer if we could discuss the changes instead of inventing rationalizations for why the new method is no different than the old method.

SO now you are saying it isnt the change in ordinance that bothers you, but the fact that they ahve changed while we assert that God is unchanging? This is, of course, a very different issue from the one posed in your initial post. If you were in SS for this 'open' discussion and no one mentioned it then you have only yourself to blame for the thin and superficial discussion. As to your final point, who invented such rationalizations? No one in this thread on your original topic.

[ERCougar]

SO now you are saying it isnt the change in ordinance that bothers you, but the fact that they ahve changed while we assert that God is unchanging? This is, of course, a very different issue from the one posed in your initial post. If you were in SS for this 'open' discussion and no one mentioned it then you have only yourself to blame for the thin and superficial discussion. As to your final point, who invented such rationalizations? No one in this thread on your original topic.

If the SS teacher made some point out how great it is to be in the "pure" church of Christ, you wouldn't let it slide? I'm probably more antagonistic than most, but I can think of all kinds of scenarios where I wouldn't say a thing, because the point likely isn't germane to his lesson. Deep and interesting is not the goal of SS; staying in everyone's comfort zone is. And that's probably a good thing.

[creekster]

If the SS teacher made some point out how great it is to be in the "pure" church of Christ, you wouldn't let it slide? I'm probably more antagonistic than most, but I can think of all kinds of scenarios where I wouldn't say a thing, because the point likely isn't germane to his lesson. Deep and interesting is not the goal of SS; staying in everyone's comfort zone is. And that's probably a good thing.

It's not my point, it's EJ's point. He begins by asking what is the difference between sets of changed ordinances and then says he real problem is it makes him sad when people mention the unchanging God without mentioning the changes. He says HE thinks it would make for a richer discussion. My point is if this makes him sad and if wants this richer discussion, then he should pipe up or not complain. This has nothing to do with how I would handle a similar discussion. I am not bothered by this. Perhaps you should roll your eyes elsewhere.

[ERCougar]

It's not my point, it's EJ's point. He begins by asking what is the difference between sets of changed ordinances and then says he real problem is it makes him sad when people mention the unchanging God without mentioning the changes. He says HE thinks it would make for a richer discussion. My point is if this makes him sad and if wants this richer discussion, then he should pipe up or not complain. This has nothing to do with how I would handle a similar discussion. I am not bothered by this. Perhaps you should roll your eyes elsewhere.

He IS piping up. Here. Sure, he said the discussion would be richer if we could discuss these things on a different level, but that's a big "if". If "rich" isn't the goal of SS (I don't really think it is, or our manuals are seriously effed up), then he's distracting from the common goal to entertain his specific idea of richness. So appropriately, he comes here to vent.

Where he is told to take it somewhere else or shut up.

[SeattleUte]

He IS piping up. Here. Sure, he said the discussion would be richer if we could discuss these things on a different level, but that's a big "if". If "rich" isn't the goal of SS (I don't really think it is, or our manuals are seriously effed up), then he's distracting from the common goal to entertain his specific idea of richness. So appropriately, he comes here to vent.

Where he is told to take it somewhere else or shut up.

That's a real sage your quoting in your sig, sport. Behold ER and the gall of bitterness! Yikes.

[creekster]

He IS piping up. Here. Sure, he said the discussion would be richer if we could discuss these things on a different level, but that's a big "if". If "rich" isn't the goal of SS (I don't really think it is, or our manuals are seriously effed up), then he's distracting from the common goal to entertain his specific idea of richness. So appropriately, he comes here to vent.

Where he is told to take it somewhere else or shut up.

You are not reading very closely today. He said "when an unchanging God is discussed openly in SS and no one mentions how many changes we have been trhough in only 190 years it saddens me."

He was talking about in SS, not here. So read it again. My point is that if he is 'saddened' by this turn of events in SS, then he should fully assume the mantle of the noblesse oblige and alert the rest of the class to the happy truths he holds.

Surely you don't think anyone is telling him to shut up here, do you? Your assumption that this is true seems based on a mis- or non-reading of both his and my posts. Moreover (and assuming but not conceding your reading is correct), if he can come here to vent then why can't I vent about his venting? Trying to suppress reactions on either side would be equally inappropriate, wouldn't it?

Perhaps this time I can merit three rolling eyes? or, if you dont read closely maybe even four? They will be very persuasive.

[LA Ute]

That's a real sage your quoting in your sig, sport. Behold ER and the gall of bitterness! Yikes.

Berry Tramel, a lifelong Oklahoman, sports fan and newspaper reader, joined The Oklahoman in 1991 and has served as beat writer, assistant sports editor, sports editor and columnist.

Tramel grew up reading four daily newspapers — The Oklahoman, the Oklahoma City Times, the Norman Transcript and the Oklahoma Journal — and entered the newspaper business at the age of 17, with the Transcript in 1978. His first game assignment was the Lexington-Elmore City high school football game, and he has enjoyed the journey ever since, from high school wrestling duals and regional track meets to Orange Bowls and the NBA playoffs.

Tramel, who was born and raised in Norman, is a 1997 University of Oklahoma graduate.

I think Berry has a certain perspective on the college sports world.

[LA Ute]

EJ, I am wondering about your issues with the "unchanging God" issue. What do you hear in SS that bugs you? I think everyone who has any basic knowledge of the scriptures and church teachings knows that although God is "the same yesterday, today, and forever," his commandments do change over time. Otherwise we'd all be keeping the kosher dietary laws that Orthodox Jews follow, and we'd be offering animal sacrifices in our temples, to name a couple. I don't think principles change, but I admit I haven't thought much about that lately.

[Moliere]

It's not my point, it's EJ's point. He begins by asking what is the difference between sets of changed ordinances and then says he real problem is it makes him sad when people mention the unchanging God without mentioning the changes. He says HE thinks it would make for a richer discussion. My point is if this makes him sad and if wants this richer discussion, then he should pipe up or not complain. This has nothing to do with how I would handle a similar discussion. I am not bothered by this. Perhaps you should roll your eyes elsewhere.

I'm trying to figure out what my point is exactly, which isn't an easy thing. I was raised very orthodox and have never been inactive in my life. I was taught very orthodox teachings (this is the same church as in Christs time, it is structured exactly the same, Daniel refused meat and wine because it was against the WoW, the temple ordinances we have today were performed in Solomon's temple, etc.) and those teachings are still banging around in my head while at the same time I'm grappling with the realization that most of those orthodox teachings are bunk. So yes on one hand it bugs me that we are changing ordinances and then on the other hand it bugs me that people in the church say we don't change ordinances when in fact we do and all of this is going on the same time that I'm getting more comfortable with the fact that the church doctrine and ordinances do change.

When I first came to CUF I thought it was funny that those who had unorthodox opinions would express themselves here instead of in SS or PH. What were they afraid of? Well recently I've gone tangential to some orthodox teachings both in SS and in smaller meetings and the results were not great. Mind you these are more tangential things, not completely unorthodox. For instance I would propose that Noah's flood was a regional flood and not a flood that covered the entire earth (which is not my belief as I see the story allegorically). That was met with quotes from prophets that said the earth had to be baptized so the flood was obviously entirely covered with water. I restated my case but was shot down by several others including the teacher since the other doctrine came from prophets. I've also had run ins on some social networks where I've defended some unorthodox teachings and that has worked against me as well.

I now understand why people vent here instead of piping up in GD or PH class. Unorthodox teachings are not always met with understanding or contemplation but are generally either "corrected" or quickly forgotten.

My favorite post in this thread so far is the one where All-American (who is probably more orthodox than me) mentioned that he also has to hold his tongue at times. That post helped a lot....at least in helping me to break out of my younger life orthodox teachings and feel more comfortable with some the recent actions of the church in regards to changing the performance of ordinances.

[Moliere]

EJ, I am wondering about your issues with the "unchanging God" issue. What do you hear in SS that bugs you? I think everyone who has any basic knowledge of the scriptures and church teachings knows that although God is "the same yesterday, today, and forever," his commandments do change over time. Otherwise we'd all be keeping the kosher dietary laws that Orthodox Jews follow, and we'd be offering animal sacrifices in our temples, to name a couple. I don't think principles change, but I admit I haven't thought much about that lately.

This is not a good example since it is in our scriptures that Christ fulfilled that law and thus it is not applicable to us today.

However, providing a specific example might not help since examples are usually scrutinized to the point that the discussion loses all meaning. I think I said somewhat well what is bugging me in teh post I made just before this one (which obviously was after your post).

Ultimately I think I might be onto phase 2 of my shedding of the TBM label. Phase 1 was coming to grips with the fact that the church's history is much different than what I learned as a youth and that church leaders are men that are sometimes inspired but are trying the best they can. Phase 2 is realizing that some people either don't know or don't care about either of those things I learned in Phase 1 and I just need to let it slide and find a forum that lets me vent from time to time (thanks CUF!). And in reality, I think my Phase 2 is where a lot of people go one way or the other. Thankfully my Phase 2 is working out well so far anyway.

[LA Ute]

My favorite post in this thread so far is the one where All-American (who is probably more orthodox than me) mentioned that he also has to hold his tongue at times. That post helped a lot....at least in helping me to break out of my younger life orthodox teachings and feel more comfortable with some the recent actions of the church in regards to changing the performance of ordinances.

I do too. Does that help?

I used to get up and discreetly walk out when nonsense was being taught in Sacrament meeting or Sunday School. In my old(er) age, I've mellowed somewhat. I've tried (with varying degrees of success) to take to heart a Chesterton adage (from Orthodoxy) that I've referred to elsewhere here:

Love is not blind; that is the last thing that it is. Love is bound; and the more it is bound the less it is blind.

I love that. I try not to be blind to the faults and foibles of church members and leaders, but still to love them and be bound to them as fellow would-be disciples. It isn't easy and I fail regularly, but to the extent I succeed, that approach helps me to make sense of things and to feel like I am not making the problem worse, either by taking the ostrich approach, on the one extreme, or creating contention, on the other.

[Pheidippides]

EJ, you and I need to meet up once a week and have our own study session, given that we live so close. I'm struggling with the same sort of thing you are - raised TBM with all the trappings, but am realizing that most of what I was taught was complete bunk. And so I'm having to reconstruct my relationship with the Church from scratch.

[Green Monstah]

EJ, you and I need to meet up once a week and have our own study session, given that we live so close. I'm struggling with the same sort of thing you are - raised TBM with all the trappings, but am realizing that most of what I was taught was complete bunk. And so I'm having to reconstruct my relationship with the Church from scratch.

I had to go through this while I was at BYU (a pretty difficult place to go through a spiritual crisis), but it's doable. In fact, in a weird way I appreciate that the Church more because it is flawed, even if the collective body doesn't recognize or chooses to ignore the flaws.

[ERCougar]

Surely you don't think anyone is telling him to shut up here, do you? Your assumption that this is true seems based on a mis- or non-reading of both his and my posts.

I obviously badly misread this:

My point is if this makes him sad and if wants this richer discussion, then he should pipe up or not complain.

Apologies.

[ERCougar]

That's a real sage your quoting in your sig, sport. Behold ER and the gall of bitterness! Yikes.

Still stings, huh? How long has it been up, a month? Sorry, I forgot about it.