posted
Child of a Catholic and a Congregationalist.
Now, ostensibly a member of a Congregationalist church in the UCC (United Church of Christ). You know, the crazy, quite possibly heretical, lefty Christians
Macc, are you a member of an instrumental or non-instrumental church?
posted
Jacare, I served in the Campinas mission and trained in the SP MTC. I've been home almost 18 months now. I miss it, and I also sometimes miss being a missionary. There was some great benefits that came with that as I'm sure you are aware.
Eduardo, this is a neat and interesting thread. I love to learn stuff about my fellow jatraqueros. Posts: 6415 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Me too, Narnia (being new here, and all...).
Hey, let me ask something to you, Jacare and other who were missionaries: how was it like? You are appointed to do so, or you choose the path? What does a missionary do? Did you like it?
I'm too curious for my own good Posts: 1785 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
No that's totally cool!! Does anyone know where that missionary thread went? The one that described what LDS missionaries do?? I can't remember the name.
Anyway, in most cases, we choose to go on missions ourselves. We fill out some papers with medical info and personal stats and send them to church headquarters. Within a month or so, we find out to where we have been called. We believe that the call is inspired by God. Then usually after 3 months or so of getting prepared, we leave for the Missionary Training Center. I went to the one in Sao Paulo. There are other MTCs all over the world. We stay there for a few weeks, or two months if we have to learn another language. Then they ship us out to our separate missions! (We all pay for our own missions by the way, so it's not a free trip to somewhere cool. )
In the mission field as we call it, we work and live in pairs. Each pair of missionaries has a specific geographical area to work in. We knocked on doors, stopped people on the street, did service projects, taught English classes, helped other church members out when they needed it...lots of stuff. Our purpose is to teach the Gospel of Jesus Christ to anyone who wants to know more about it so that hopefully they will feel the truth of it for themselves and be baptized.
Throughout the time that we're there (18 months for the girls and 2 years for the guys) we switch areas and companions every few months or so. Each mission has a president over about 200 missionaries and he and his wife organize everything and keep things running smoothly. During a normal week or month though, we're pretty much on our own. We worked 9:30am to 9:30pm (but the members of the church provided almoco, so this was always a treat. )
For me, my mission was the hardest 19 months of my life, but it was so soul-changing and such an integral part of my spiritual and emotional growth. I met some fantastic and amazing people that I'm still in touch with today and had a sizzling tan for 2 years. My relationship with God and my family was strengthened tremendously and for the most part, I had a great time and was a happy camper.
This is just from and LDS missionary's perspective. I know others that have served missions for other denominations and I'd love to hear about what it was like for them. (We met a group of American Baptist missionaries in one of my areas and they were really cool. We were also on really good terms with a group of Jehovah's Witnesses in another area, so that was nice too.)
posted
Bok, I'm non-instrumental. To tell the truth, it seems like a rather picky detail sometimes, but on the other hand, worship is about God's preferences rather than ours, after all. If that's what he likes, that's what he gets from me.
Posts: 1041 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Jacare: Nice! There is a LDS Church only 5 minutes from my home. I know the street (although I do not remember the church). Well, maybe I will pay it a visit, hehehe (wow! One more!) - The services are spoken in english?
Actually the services are in Portuguese, though chances are good that there is at least one American missionary in any given church. I only mention that in case you want to practice your spoken English a bit. While I was in SP I ran into Brazilians from time to time who wanted to chat a bit in English just for the sake of practice.
At any rate, Narnia answered your question pretty well about what the missionaries do and how they get there. I'll just add a bit:
Mormon missionaries spend most of their time finding people to teach and teaching them a series of discussions on the basic beliefs of the curch. Eduardo- I think you might actually enjoy hearing a few of the discussions and contrasting them to your beliefs. For example, Mormons believe that we lived somewehere else before we were born and that we will live on one of several other worlds after we die.
Posts: 4548 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think they recently stopped having guidelines for discussions and told the missionaries to teach what they are inspired to teach at each meeting. Anyone else hear about this?
Posts: 331 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
My understanding of what "we" believe is that birth in a body is an enhancement over the spirits we were before birth, that prior to being a spirit we were an even more primitive form called an intelligence.
At death the spirit and the body are for a time separated (though we believe Moses and I think Elijah, among others, skipped death) but will be reunited in a permanent arrangement generally referred to as resurrection. We believe all people will be resurrected regardless of the kind of life they lived. And most will have an opportunity to continue improving. The only sin we cannot turn back from is denying the Holy Ghost. The scriptures teach that it is much easier to overcome addictions, lusts, and other kinds of carnal impediments in this life.
So the body is carnal and an enemy to God, but also essential to our progress toward becoming more like our Heavenly Parents. We don't believe a spirit lives more than one life on Earth. But we also don't necessarily believe that we go straight from death to a final assignment of station lasting for eternity.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm a former Baptist (general convention) daughter of a southern Baptist mother and an Assemblies of God preacher father. I'm a member (by choice!) of the churches of Christ --the same and very NOT the same as those of Macc. Fellow heretic of Lissande. Tzadik should know he's inching nearer the flames.
I'm very low church/non-charismatic in preference and practice. I'm working toward my M.Div in Old Testament (though currently my 'maybe-mentor' is trying to draw me off to New Testament) and bide my time as a part-time heretic.
However, if in the end I can wind up half as cool and collected as dkw, I'll consider myself pretty well enlightened.
posted
I will sure read the mormon threads between classes, tomorrow. After all, that's why I started the thread. I'm very curious Posts: 1785 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm a liberal fundamentalist Christian. The church I go to is not part of any denomination, but is reformed and evangelical. I'm always tempted to tell people I'm reformed, but I'm not sure what it means, and I haven't gotten anyone at church to explain it to me yet. I have a feeling that eventually I'm going to end up in one of those small churches that mainstream Christianity can't decide whether or not is actually Christian. I'm leaning towards Seventh Day Adventists, but all of the information I can find on them is really old and impossible to understand without a theology major. If anyone knows where I can get some good Seventh Day Adventist literature I would really appreciate it.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why on EARTH would you lean towards the Seventh-Day Adventists? Do they have really good potluck at that particular church, or is somebody there really, really cute?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Mormon family on the paternal side Roman Catholic on the maternal . . .
the LDS side won out over the who gets to take the grandkids to church until I was in my teens . . .
add in a murky ten years and somehow I ended up in an ELCA Lutheran church (for the last 10) while looking for an HIV/AIDS community fundraiser sing-a-long to Mozart's Requiem.
Go figure.
My pastor says I am an eclectic Christian since I borrow from Celtic pagan practices, Native American practices and put together multiple Christian proactices as I see fit. He hasn't kicked me out of the congregation yet, so it must be okay. Posts: 5609 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
For me, what I would like to know about LDS are their point of views on everyday life things, like contraception, homosexuality...
Posts: 3526 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm puzzled too, Tzadik. Q seems to be implying that I'm the one who'd consider her and Lissa heretical, and you close to it, but I know nothing of your beliefs beyond what you posted earlier. I didn't even know there was another of us here. For that matter, I don't even know much about their positions, only that they differ from me on something.
Posts: 1041 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
Yep, as a matter of fact, there's another one of us here I know, haven't posted a lot - try to do better job. As it is, I know almost nothing about where you stand as well. Didn't have a chance to read many of the posts yet.
What is heretical, after all? So, what do you want to know about me? Ask freely Posts: 102 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Raised Catholic, had a lot of questions without finding sufficient answers, flirted with various ideas, and now mostly believe in some sort of reincarnative process wherein -- like Bill Murray in Groundhog Day -- we relive the same life over and over and over again. I'm not sure whether this is punishment (by whom? for what?), a chance to better ourselves (again, by whom and for what?), or purely random expansion and contraction of matter/energy.
Regardless, I'm pretty sure I've done this many times before. I think sometimes I make different choices, but that's only going by gut feel. My rational mind is agnostic with a heavy flavoring of atheism.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh heck, Macc, I haven't even scratched the surface. I have, however, had a terrifying brush with orthodoxy lately; I think I may be permanently scarred. ^_~
Tzadik, we promote a harmless brand of heresy. I use the phrase tongue-in-cheek; we're not Marcionites or anything. Remember: Ultra-liberal/heretical c's of C are ultra-conservative anything else.
And Macc, the religious heritages I listed are only the last generation. My paternal granddad was a Methodist minister and his father was Lutheran clergy. Before that, they were Amish. Maternally, they get pentecostal/charismatic, but are generally some flavor of Baptist, usually Southern or Missionary.
quote: For me, what I would like to know about LDS are their point of views on everyday life things, like contraception, homosexuality...
OK- contraception: there is no doctrine about it one way or the other. We think that having a family is one of the most important growth experiences one can have and that families can be the source of much happiness in this life. Some Mormons use no contraception, some do.
posted
CT, that's fascinating. I also believe that reincarnation occurs, although I've thought about it in different terms than you have. It's occurred to me that if sequential time is just a matter of perception, there is no reason why multiple incarnations of a person couldn't exist in what we perceive as the same time. In fact, we could all be one being, in much the same way that a ball of yarn appears to be composed of discrete loops of yarn, but is actually just one long length of yarn looped around itself.
I'm not saying that that's how it is, but it's occurred to me.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pssht. I'd suggest the main place Q and I part ways with Maccabeus is over his willingness to make absolute, definitive and/or blanket statements about things on which there is no absolute, definitive and/or blanket doctrine or scriptural evidence to be had.
posted
Jacare, are you kidding ? Maybe because I'm used to catholicism, at last the way people live it here, I'm surprised by a religion who does not try to control every point of the life of the people who believe... Sounds great. Maybe with such a religion I could pass through my prejugees against congregations.
Posts: 3526 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Now I'm really curious about this instrumental / non-instrumental thing. Maccabeus, would you mind elaborating on it? Particularly why you believe God prefers non? (Assuming that I interpreted your post correctly and that really is what you believe. Otherwise, please correct me.)
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Heheh. Now is the time for all good c of C'ers to adopt a true Hatrack attitude and ask if we're gonna discuss this for the umpteenth million time. . . ^_~
j/k. I'll let Macc give the instrumental/non-instrumental a stab and hold my mocking tongue. It's gonna make it awfully hard to talk today. . .
posted
So this thing has been discussed before? I don't want to go resurrecting an undead thread, as they're called in some other places.
And Lissa, I couldn't catch you before to apologize, but I'm really not so quick to make blanket statements most of the time. I really was just trying to sum things up and was going to go into more detail only if the people I was talking to seemed interested. I'm sorry I got you riled.
Posts: 1041 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Aww, Macc - I was just being a smart-aleck. The instrumental thing is to c of C discussion like homosexuality or who'll play Ender is to hatrack. ^_~
Posts: 499 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would love to hear about the instramental/non-instramental distinction. Please post.
Mrs. M: I have a question, if you don't mind my asking. If you don't want to put it here, e-mail is fine.
How is it possible to be Orthodox Jew and agnostic at the same time? I mean, to practice Orthodox Judaism and be agnostic. Is it more than a system of beliefs, then? I'm thinking it would have to be, in order to still have meaning in the absense of belief. *thinks*
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, Q. I was afraid that some people had had it out here and made nuisances of themselves.
Since Katharina and dkw have asked so nicely, I'll try to put down as balanced a view of the controversy as I can.
Historically the churches of Christ grew out of several movements to "restore" the church as it was in the first century; for different reasons, several different groups, mostly in America, came to believe that the traditional churches had become corrupt. However, their approaches were different from those of the LDS/Mormon church. These groups were trying to reconstruct the early church's practices out of evidence from the New Testament.
As it turns out, a good bit of the New Testament talks about corporate worship, and it was this corporate worship that seemed to have diverged the most from early church practices. So the Restorationist groups did their best to piece together what early Christian worship was like, allowing only what the Bible specifically referenced. (Unlike morality, which you can work out the broad strokes of from consequences, worship is presumably about God's aesthetic "likes and dislikes"; there are some symbolic elements that appeal to one human need or another, but no obvious common thread. And of course the various groups had other reasons--notably trying to get at a common background that everyone could agree on, which excluded a lot of sect-specific details.) On top of this, many of the first few churches were poor and didn't have the money for lots of ornamentation.
Out of this mix came the view that worship and places of worship should be simple--not necessarily austere, but not devoted to pleasing the eyes and ears of mere humans, either. And since the New Testament mentioned only the simple practice of singing, a lot of people concluded that God really didn't care for fancy instruments.
But eventually some of the churches began to get rich. And some of the old differences between the movements started to crop up as well. Some people began to suggest that a loose construction of the New Testament was better than a strict construction. How loose? Well, that depended on who was talking. One of the big debates was over whether or not instruments were really so bad. Another was about church organization. Some issues were small, but there were also people who went much farther, along the lines a lot of liberal Protestantism was going. Eventually we strict constructionists got riled and started backing away from the loose constructionists and saying they were dangerous. One of the biggest groups of loose constructionists very nearly turned their back on the restorationist ideal completely to pursue ecumenical unity and became known as the Disciples of Christ (one of the names the whole movement had gone by). Seeing where they were going, the smaller group of strict constructionists decided that they represented the danger of interpreting the Bible broadly. These became known as the Churches of Christ. While instrumental music might not seem all that important itself, it was a sort of symbolic issue that illustrated the troubles of loose constructionism, so it got a lot of emphasis.
Over the time, a lot of us in the churches of Christ got a bit ingrown, even paranoid. And we didn't all agree about what details of the Scripture were important, so there was a fair amount of infighting. But eventually we started to become respected by evangelicals, who were kind of like us but with a different emphasis, for our detailed knowledge of the Bible and our dedication. We made common cause with them on some public issues like, oh, abortion and such. Some of us started to admire the way they did things and wanted to be more like them. And some of us--including some really paranoid folks, but also some people who just didn't think all of the changes were a good idea--got worried again.
A fairly large number of churches of Christ nowadays think instruments are no big deal, just like evangelicals. And maybe--well, we conservative folks could be wrong. (The paranoid right wing won't even admit that.) But to us, instrumental music has become an example of a dangerous attitude toward the Bible, so we have been standing our ground.
There's my historical overview, gleaned from my reading of church history. It's kind of long, so thanks for reading if you got this far. This is just my understanding of the matter, so please don't take it as authoritative. (And I'm sure Lissande and Q have a different perspective on things, so listen to them too.) From my perspective, worship in a capella song has its benefits--like increased participation--that might be God's rationale, or it might just be a test of our willingness to obey. Or it might be a misinterpretation, but why take chances, even on the little things?
posted
Anna- it's true that the LDS church has no proscriptions on birth control. And not even an absolute proscription on abortion. It's a medical issue and people should make their choices based on medical science and seeking guidance from the Spirit. But saying only medically indicated abortions are recommended as opposed to whenever one chooses is pretty much a pro-life stance.
It is common for LDS members to think of homosexuality as worse than most other kinds of sexual sin, but I don't know how valid such a distinction is. It feels that way due to the political activism of the gay community. But the church has clarified a doctrine of gender being an immutable spiritual property, and so same sex attraction is viewed as a trial of mortality that should be overcome as much as possible. My personal view is that it is a lot like alcoholism.
posted
To add to Macc's: The argument from scriptural silence, however, has never been a particularly good one in my opinion. Historically, one can make a better case of non-instrumental worship, but I'll probably defer to Lissa on that end of things.
The "why take a chance" argument is what got the Pharisees in trouble, Macc. . . we really ought to be careful there.
It's a nitpick, though, if you ask me. Particularly since the NT doesn't say we should have pews, a pulpit, or even a church building for that matter. All of these (including the oh-so-hallowed baptistry) are just as much an "innovation."
quote:--that might be God's rationale, or it might just be a test of our willingness to obey
Okay - this bugs me. For one, you can't say that God said it. . .and therefore the whole bit about its being a test of our willingness to obey assumes a heck of a lot. See? THIS, to me, is a dangerous attitude toward the Bible. Binding on others those things that just aren't.
posted
Wow, I was surprised that it was actually about musical instruments. In most LDS congregations you need to get special permission to use anything besides a piano or an organ, though I have seen guitars and brass trios in LDS meetings. A lot of policy of that sort is kind of made up on the local level.
You know the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS) church probably would have been named "Church of Christ" except you all beat us to the punch? I believe the church of the people in the Book of Mormon has that title.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: (though we believe Moses and I think Elijah, among others, skipped death)
Pooka, if you don't mind my asking about this? Elijah, yes, was taken directly to Heaven. Moses, however, from what I have been taught as a non-LDS, died before entering the Promised Land because of his transgressions, although he was allowed to look on the land from its border.
Is there a different teaching in Mormon doctrine?
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's interesting. Deut. 34:7 says that Moses died at 120 years of age. Is there a separate LDS doctrine on that?
Posts: 499 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
After ten years of struggling to figure out exactly what the truth is, Agnosticism was really the only choice. Some people tell me I'm being "too rational," and that Agnosticism is a "way out" of aruguing, thinking, or feeling. My religious beliefs are emotional, strong, and have a huge impact on my life.
Posts: 45 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hmm. Q has pointed something out--the argument from silence. The classic "conservative viewpoint" has been that worship is about "thou shalts", not "thou shalt nots", and you don't do what you don't have a "thou shalt" for. If God doesn't talk about it at all, you don't do it.
For my own part, I never saw the relation between an instrument (on which you actually do something) and a pew or a songbook (which is just there). But a lot of people consider them the same thing and wonder why historically we've made a distinction. I don't understand that viewpoint very well myself. Oh, and I don't know that anyone has ever made a big deal out of a baptistry, Quiara.
Q also mentions the Pharisees, at which point I think I am traditionally supposed to bring up Nadab and Abihu, or maybe Uzzah, but I think I will skip that part. No point rehashing old worn-out arguments in front of other folks.
Pooka, we have been known to get into all kinds of strange arguments, despite all policy being in some sense formed at the local level. As for your name, hey, we have no particular objections to your using the name "Church of Christ". From some perspectives, we might even encourage it. (Some people have claimed it is "the Scriptural name". It isn't, though it is a Scriptural name.) Might cause confusion, though.
[Addit]For the record, unless it turns out that I have been fired (long story), I will go to bed when I get back from getting my paycheck and not get up till time for work. Then I'll sleep again when I get home, and I have family to visit tomorrow (it's my granny's birthday) and maybe a Halloween party if I can squeeze it in. So it may be a while before I can respond again.
quote: Behold, this we know, that he was a righteous man; and the saying went abroad in the church that he was taken up by the Spirit, or buried by the hand of the Lord, even as Moses. But behold, the scriptures saith the Lord took Moses unto himself; and we suppose that he has also received Alma in the spirit, unto himself; therefore, for this cause we know nothing concerning his death and burial.
So basically the author is comparing the unconfirmed death of a prophet in his day to that of Moses.
Here is what Deuteronomy says:
quote: So Moses the servant of the LORD died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the LORD.
6 And he buried him in a valley in the land of Moab, over against Beth-peor: but no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day.
The "he" in verse 6 refers to the Lord, I think. So the author states that Moses died and was buried by God. The passage cited from the Book of Mormon was likely written from information the author had from a Jewish lineage record which included the books of Moses, so perhaps there was further information there than in modern Deuteronomy.
Posts: 4548 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: 50 There on the mountain that you have climbed you will die and be gathered to your people, just as your brother Aaron died on Mount Hor and was gathered to his people. 51 This is because both of you broke faith with me in the presence of the Israelites at the waters of Meribah Kadesh in the Desert of Zin and because you did not uphold my holiness among the Israelites. NIV
Seems to say it pretty plainly.
Deuteronomy 34:5-7
quote: 5 And Moses the servant of the Lord died there in Moab, as the Lord had said. 6 He buried him (footnote or he was buried ) in Moab, in the valley opposite Beth Peor, but to this day no one knows where his grave is. 7 Moses was a hundred and twenty years old when he died, yet his eyes were not weak nor his strength gone.
I think I'll stick with Deuteronomy on this one. Doesn't seem to leave much room for interpretation. In the Old Testament, when they died, they died.
But why say Moses didn't die?
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
I miss it, and I also sometimes miss being a missionary. There was some great benefits that came with that as I'm sure you are aware. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
My relationship with God and my family was strengthened tremendously and for the most part, I had a great time and was a happy camper.![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
Q, ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
know nothing, what are you talking about??? ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
