dande48 wrote: ↑
01 Jan 2019, 10:43
I feel this sort of deception, these devilish half-truths and "technicalities", makes me trust them even less than if they had straight up lied to me.
Roy wrote: ↑
01 Jan 2019, 10:49
There is no single motive or right way to StayLDS. We each have managed some nominal success in navigating this "middle way". By sharing our stories we gain perspective and validation but not everyone else's approach to staying LDS will fit quite right for us. Ultimately we make the adjustments and decisions that we think necessary and carry on as best we can. May God bless each of us in the endeavor.
Thank you, Roy. I fully respect the way in which you choose to "stay LDS" and agree that it is not a black and white issue. We are all doing our best, I fully believe that.
mom3 wrote: ↑
01 Jan 2019, 15:21
This very point gets discussed again and again. The only part that is important to be aware of is that the Bishop and Stake President have no ability to change the outcome of the questions. Even if an entire ward boycotted the Temple Recommend experience.
The thing you want changed has to come from the top.
Isn't it true that in US and World politics as well as in LDS and other church politics, a lot of changes happen at the top because of grassroots efforts that started at the bottom? I disagree that the Bishop and Stake President have no power. Of course they do. There's a chain of leadership that goes all the way to Salt Lake. If issues work their way up lots and lots of those chains of leadership all over the world, Salt Lake is bound to do something. I'd be shocked if the temple endowment ceremony changes announced today were due solely to a revelation given to the leadership in Salt Lake. That all started because of people voicing concerns about the temple ceremony the way it was before.
Curt Sunshine wrote: ↑
01 Jan 2019, 16:22
Eliminating all but one specific meaning of a complex word is immodest (extreme), so what I am saying is that it is okay to be modest in how you view a testimony.
How is that for a Mormon answer?
I love it!!!
Though I still feel I ought to try to develop a shared understanding of what each interview question means, between myself and the leader conducting the interview. In my day-to-day spiritual life, I absolutely hold to a very modest (and liberal! lol) definition of testimony.
DarkJedi wrote: ↑
02 Jan 2019, 06:16
I wasn't going to comment on this thread any more because it's clear to me your mind is made up and probably was before you opened the thread.
No way, man. My thoughts about this were a muddle and I was flip flopping like a politician until you guys helped me figure out how I felt about this.
DarkJedi wrote: ↑
02 Jan 2019, 06:16
I am not in favor, as you seem to be, of just throwing open the temple doors.
We just disagree here. I hope that's okay. Buddhist, Daoist, and Hindu temples have their doors wide open, and they don't seem to lose sacredness because of that. We can still emphasize temple worthiness in a general sense in church, etc., just to encourage people to be spiritually prepared before entering. Honestly, I don't think too many people who are unworthy to enter the temple are going to have much interest in it. I mean, if your head and heart aren't in the right place, the temple stuff is just going to be weird and/or boring and you'll not get much out of it. It's even weird/boring sometimes when we've done everything to be worthy, in my experience! (I emphasize "sometimes" because I've had many beautiful, profound experiences and feelings in the temple.)
I think I view this issue of how to answer TR interview questions kind of like "draft dodgers" in the US during the Vietnam War. It kinda seems like they should
sacrifice their lives and put their families at risk for a bunch of South Vietnamese people whom they've never met, because Democracy and Freedom and all that, and yet, can anyone blame them for not being willing to do it? I can't. If I'd been in that situation, I would've been one of them. Should people be totally 100% black-and-white honest in answering the really rather oddly specific temple recommend interview questions regardless of whether that means it could harm their family relationships etc.? It kinda seems like they should, and yet, can I blame anyone who doesn't? Absolutely not. There are good and bad results regardless.
nibbler wrote: ↑
02 Jan 2019, 06:50
I don't know, I think top leadership makes their decisions based largely on what the bottom is or isn't doing.
nibbler wrote: ↑
02 Jan 2019, 07:13
There are far too many messages focused on works and obedience at church. So much so that I hear the pain veiled in what people say at church. Pain that could be mitigated.
This is perhaps the hardest remaining issue for me to tackle as it relates to the church. How we make calls pertaining to someone's worthiness, one way or the other, and all the measuring we do. The temple and temple worthiness are often at the center of it.
Yaaaassssssss!!!! I went inactive for several years largely because I just couldn't DO ALL THE THINGS, anymore, due to illness, and I was just a huge ball of guilt anytime I thought about church much less entered the building! I felt like a piece of trash. Can a loving Heavenly Father really judge people based on whether they DID ALL THE THINGS? I don't think so. But that's how it feels when we talk so much about these behavioral variables being essential criteria for exaltation.
Heber13 wrote: ↑
02 Jan 2019, 12:51
There are multiple approaches and you go with what feels right to you and your heart and your spirituality. And you don't go around ruining the santa clause for other families nor judging others (not that you did in any way...I'm just making the point) that approach the TR interviews very generally and not black and white, my answers mean something to me.
Thanks, Heber. I sure didn't mean to sound like I think others are handling TR interviews wrong if they don't see it the way I do. (For the record, I told my older kids about Santa from the time they were able to comprehend enough English to understand the explanation. With my youngest, I've developed a more nuanced thought process about the Santa issue, and realized that if I tell her as young as she is currently (barely turned 3), that I have no way of helping her understand that she should NOT spoil the myth for her peers, so I've got to wait until she understands, "Don't tell your friends, because their families might want them to believe in Santa for a while longer." As with TR interviews, we have to choose whose needs/feelings to take into consideration and how to weigh those needs/feelings, within our families, outside our families. Pretty tricky. I care more about other families, now, than I used to, evidently!) I will sure let you all know how it goes.