Welcome to New Nauvoo


Author Topic: Name of the Church  (Read 1288 times)

dyany

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 832
  • Thanked: 702 times
  • Country: us
    • View Profile
    • My blog
Re: Name of the Church
« Reply #30 on: October 09, 2018, 11:09:13 am »
Nottoc (welcome back, BTW!), I agree except for one thing: it wasn't just the previous prophet's efforts.  It was the efforts of the entire church system, organized and planned by the full 15.  As we are consistently taught, the decisions made by the 12 and the 1st presidency are discussed until they are all in agreement, and seeing as he was part of the 12 when that campaign came out, either he is admitting to being part of the mistake, or else everything we've been taught about them all coming to full agreement is a lie.

I was thinking about this a lot last night.  I feel like there may be a generational thing, but it could possibly be a fear that admitting any mistakes were made might dilute the doctrine or discredit the church in some way.  But I actually feel the opposite is true.  For instance, the earliest implementation of polygamy was near nightmarish.  If we believe every little action done by Joseph Smith on the matter was 100% inspired, then it calls some basic tenets of faith into question.  But if, instead, we believe that Joseph Smith had a broad command (implement polygamy for the present time) with little to no direction on exactly HOW it needed to be implemented, and that he then fumbled and floundered (i.e., made mistakes) in early efforts to implement it, I have a much easier time.  Because it reminds me of a few important things: 1) What some of us may consider huge mistakes, God doesn't always consider to be big enough mistakes to stop, because he knows what is ultimately most important and what isn't. 2) " it is not meet that I should command in all things; for he that is compelled in all things, the same is a slothful and not a wise servant."  God will command where he needs to, but we are supposed to be growing and learning and becoming, and that often requires figuring things out ourselves and making poor decisions. 3) Mistakes and some suffering are necessary for learning and growth.  That is exactly why the plan was set up the way that it was.  This is why God doesn't micromanage his church, though sometimes we wish that he would.  This is why even the church itself is allowed to make a few missteps over the years in policy and procedure (not in doctrine). 

But I really, REALLY wish that we could get admittance of the missteps in implementation.  Because sometimes I think God had a purpose for doing things the way he did it before, even if we, in our anachronistic vision, cannot see it, in which in those cases it was right, but sometimes we just didn't have enough light and knowledge yet or we flat out made mistakes, and it is, to me, a sign of strength and helpful to testimonies to hear, "you're right, we didn't do that as well as was needed, or maybe even as well as we could have.  The doctrine doesn't change.  God doesn't change.  We are doing our best to implement his commands, but sometimes we make mistakes in the implementation."

Does that make sense?  My testimony is not faltering.  I feel that even this irritation is most likely a result of the weakness of man trying his best, and not a capricious God.  God just doesn't micromanage.  It undermines the plan.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2018, 11:07:49 am by dyany »
 
The following users thanked this post: LMAshton, Roper, Sparky, Nottoc, Taalcon

pnr

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 351
  • Thanked: 293 times
  • Country: us
    • View Profile
Re: Name of the Church
« Reply #31 on: October 09, 2018, 12:36:06 pm »
President Nelson himself had to have signed on to the I am a Mormon campaign, since we know all those decisions are made by consensus.   

I heard what he said as saying that if we continue doing that at this point, so that the people we are supposed to be finding believe we worship Mormon rather than Jesus Christ, THEN we will be in trouble.   

Nauvoo 1270, Feb 2005
 
The following users thanked this post: AndrewR, Roper, Sparky, Palmon, Nottoc, Firefly

Sparky

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 66
  • Thanked: 48 times
    • View Profile
Re: Name of the Church
« Reply #32 on: October 11, 2018, 06:06:51 am »
Dyany, thank you so much for your comments. I needed to read them. They were very helpful.
 
The following users thanked this post: LMAshton, dyany

Iggy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 409
  • Thanked: 126 times
  • Country: us
    • View Profile
Re: Name of the Church
« Reply #33 on: October 11, 2018, 01:44:48 pm »
everything you said but to save space and double reading, just putting this instead

When I heard President Nelson tell us that we were to STOP using Mormon Church, Mormon pretty much anything other than Book of Mormon I pumped my right fist in the air and say Yes Yes Yes Finally we have been told to Go Back to the name that Jesus Christ told us to name HIS church.

After Christ was crucified, His disciples/ prophets were told to STOP animal sacrifices. I am sure there were many who balked at this and continued to offer up burnt sacrifices.

This General Conference each time our Prophet spoke - to me he was prophesying to us. I gave up taking notes - just couldn't keep up, so I wrote: READ the Ensign, and underline prophecy - in my notes.

 
The following users thanked this post: AndrewR, Palmon

cook

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 360
  • Thanked: 283 times
  • Country: fi
    • View Profile
Re: Name of the Church
« Reply #34 on: October 21, 2018, 04:41:07 am »
I'm a bit torn on this issue. I totally understand the point the prophet has made. I have heard it by prophets/ apostles before. At the same time I'm a bit of the opinion that since people know us as Mormons, it is an important missionary tool. If I talk aquick to say bout something with someone and somehow the church comes up, it is quick to say I'm a Mormon and they pretty much make a connection to something. If I start saying the whole name of the church, they have left by the time I get to the end of the name  (Myöhempien Aikojen Pyhien Jeesuksen Kristuksen Kirkko). The problem with the Finnish name of the church also is that the church is the last word and it start with "Of the Latter Day Saints. That said, I actually do always say the full name of the church in those situations, but often add "the mormon church" in the end, because that is what people know.

I don't feel for one bit that the Prophet would be saying that what has been done in the past has been wrong. Just as I don't feel that the prophet is saying that it was wrong before that family home evening was supposed to be on Mondays, and now it doesn't matter when people have it. I believe that the prophet is just saying that now is the time to emphasize this. For reasons we might not quite understand. I feel it is part of this whole direction we are going into: more individual/ family responsibility, more division between those who actually follow Christ and those who just hang around the church, and all of this because now it really is the time of gathering the Israel.

I've had some "funny experiences" this past summer, before I heard prophet speak about the gathering of Israel. Those point me to things that I would not have thought about and that for me scream the gathering of Israel. I don't quite understand, the practicalities, nor my role in it, but I do know I am expected to do things and it is about gathering of the Israel. I feel this focusing on the name and all the other things are about that too. I don't know nor understand, but I feel strongly about it.
 

pnr

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 351
  • Thanked: 293 times
  • Country: us
    • View Profile
Re: Name of the Church
« Reply #35 on: October 21, 2018, 11:46:23 am »
Cook, isn't that though the prophet's point:  we should proclaim the church of jesus christ (and can you use that in finnish words or restored church of jesus christ, then add, we used to use "mormons" because that was easier, but we now realize people need to know that our church is our Savior's, not Mormon")   Maybe you think of the words in your language that would convey it better and suggest those to church headquarters.
Nauvoo 1270, Feb 2005
 

cook

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 360
  • Thanked: 283 times
  • Country: fi
    • View Profile
Re: Name of the Church
« Reply #36 on: October 21, 2018, 12:36:48 pm »
Sure, those can be used. But I wasn't talking about that. There are around "churches of Jesus Christ" some of which are so far away from us that I rather would not use anything to mix us with those. Of course after saying the name of the church first properly it can be used, just like the prophet said. The word for restored in Finnish doesn't work much better either, because it is the same word as returned -and though the meaning is similar, it just doesn't work the same way as in English. The name of the church --- it cannot be said in another way as it is now, unless it will be different form the original name of the church. Like I said, I always use the whole name of the church in my conversations, always have, because of what prophets in the past have spoken about it, but the technicality of it makes it less "easy" than as it the issue is presented.
 

 

* Top Posters

Curelom
1405 Posts
Roper Roper
1162 Posts
dyany dyany
832 Posts
LMAshton LMAshton
703 Posts
N3uroTypical N3uroTypical
425 Posts

* Board Statistics

  • stats Total Members: 109
  • stats Total Posts: 10820
  • stats Total Topics: 700
  • stats Total Categories: 6
  • stats Total Boards: 26
  • stats Most Online: 65

  • averages Average Posts: 10
  • averages Average Topics: 1
  • averages Average Members: 0
  • averages Average Online: 18

* Forum Staff

AndrewR_admin admin AndrewR_admin
Administrator
dyany admin dyany
Administrator
LMAshton admin LMAshton
Administrator

* Calendar

December 2018
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31

No calendar events were found.