Looking back....

[deacon blues]

Looking back, I recognize how the Church emphasized the 'covenants that I was required to agree to from age 8 on. It just occurred to me that the Church/Mormon Jesus gave me no input into those 'priceless' covenants that I had to agree to. They are presented in a "Take it or leave it fashion." I suppose this is OK, but something about it just doesn't quite feel right.
Another objection-- it seems wrong to make eternal covenants when one of the parties cannot remember their own eternal existence.
Just a couple of thoughts about the 'plan of happiness.'

[Hagoth]

They are presented in a "Take it or leave it fashion." I suppose this is OK, but something about it just doesn't quite feel right.

It's OK unless it's all just made up. If it really did come from a real and loving personal God, I would expect that there would be a foolproof way of knowing. And I don't mean just praying and feeling warm tinglies, like anyone can feel about any belief system.

Another objection-- it seems wrong to make eternal covenants when one of the parties cannot remember their own eternal existence.

Funny how every belief system can offer you amazing returns AFTER you're dead, in return for very real money and labor in this life. See, there's one way that God could give you a reason to make those commitments. How about a ceremony or sacrament that parts the veil briefly so you actually can remember?

Mormonism, when you think of it, is an extension of money digging. What happens when your clients start seeing through you because you never actually deliver any treasure? You move the treasure into a place they can only retrieve it after they die. Be extra careful not to do some minor infraction that breaks the spell while you're on your deathbed or the Celestial Kingdom might slip away just when you were about to get your hands on it.

[deacon blues]

Right Hagoth. God could give us a memory of eternity.
Hagoth said: "See, there's one way that God could give you a reason to make those commitments. How about a ceremony or sacrament that parts the veil briefly so you actually can remember?"

A TBM might say, "The Spirit told me it's all true. That's as good as remembering being with God."
BUT-
D&C acknowledges not everyone will get this "witness."
D&C 46:13 To some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that he was crucified for the sins of the world.
14 To others it is given to believe on their words, that they also might have eternal life if they continue faithful.

So, in the best case scenario, some get the witness, and the others just have to trust them. It plays into the "Emperor has no Clothes" situation.
Worst case scenario, which also explains the Church need to shield members from non-believers, is also the "Emperor has no clothes" situation. In other words: It's all made up.

[moksha]

See, there's one way that God could give you a reason to make those commitments. How about a ceremony or sacrament that parts the veil briefly so you actually can remember?

Are you talking about the Flying Spaghetti Monster holding a brief demonstration at the IKEA food court? Gotta love those Swedish meatballs. Imagine seeing Joseph, Xenu, and Manitou all together in their ethereal glory!

[Hagoth]

So, in the best case scenario, some get the witness, and the others just have to trust them.

Exactly like every other religion. Might as well start paying tithing to some of them too, just in case.

[Mayan_Elephant]

So, in the best case scenario, some get the witness, and the others just have to trust them.

Exactly like every other religion. Might as well start paying tithing to some of them too, just in case.

Also country clubs and gym memberships.

[Ghost]

A TBM might say, "The Spirit told me it's all true. That's as good as remembering being with God."

Interesting how this can be a way to give added weight to a spiritual witness. For example, saying that a spiritual witness is better than a vision because it can't be explained away, or that seeing God in the afterlife won't increase one's faith because it's already at the maximum level.

Of course, this is an attractive thing to cling to if it's all you have, or think you might have, or hope you might have. It's also a sign of favor with God.

Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

[Mayan_Elephant]

A TBM might say, "The Spirit told me it's all true. That's as good as remembering being with God."

Interesting how this can be a way to give added weight to a spiritual witness. For example, saying that a spiritual witness is better than a vision because it can't be explained away, or that seeing God in the afterlife won't increase one's faith because it's already at the maximum level.

Of course, this is an attractive thing to cling to if it's all you have, or think you might have, or hope you might have. It's also a sign of favor with God.

Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

This coincides or overlays perfectly with Alas' conversation about communication.

The spiritual witness and testimony nonsense, when taken into parts, becomes dangerously comical. The general elements of these testimonies of a spiritual witness is this: I am accepting this loosie goosy bullshit as fact and if we are going to communicate or have a relationship so are you - these are my conditions. Is there any wonder why these conditions lead to a breakdown?

If one of these conditions for having a relationship with a guy named Simon was that you sat next to him in church for 2 hours a week that seems fine on the surface. But if Simon expected you to be fine with him not bathing except on February 29th, you may have a problem continuing this friendship. Believing in ghosts and portable gold narratives is about as sensible as not bathing but once every 1,461 days. Having a friendship where conditions like that are in play is tough!

[Linked]

Looking back, I recognize how the Church emphasized the 'covenants that I was required to agree to from age 8 on. It just occurred to me that the Church/Mormon Jesus gave me no input into those 'priceless' covenants that I had to agree to. They are presented in a "Take it or leave it fashion." I suppose this is OK, but something about it just doesn't quite feel right.
Another objection-- it seems wrong to make eternal covenants when one of the parties cannot remember their own eternal existence.
Just a couple of thoughts about the 'plan of happiness.'

I think we Mormons have the Catholics beat on problematic baptism. If you are baptized as a baby then you don't remember and can wave it off fairly easily. When you are baptized as an 8 year old you remember committing to it which has some staying power, even though the commitment was made as a young child under questionable circumstances. It's insidious.

[deacon blues]

Excellent point. Our society recognizes it is unfair for 8 year olds to make an adult decision, but the Church baptizes them and then Bednar tells them they are obligated for eternity. It is so manipulative.

[alas]

Excellent point. Our society recognizes it is unfair for 8 year olds to make an adult decision, but the Church baptizes them and then Bednar tells them they are obligated for eternity. It is so manipulative.

And the covenants we make as adults, or late teens, we are not told what they are ahead of time, and by the time we know what those promises will be, it is too late to say no. Especially if it is preliminary to a wedding.

[deacon blues]

If covenants are compared to contracts, and I've heard LDS teachers use that illustration, we don't get the blessing/Celestial kingdom until we die. This is like saying you don't get the car/house/whatever until you make the final payment.

[alas]

Baptism didn’t bother me until they made it absolutely mandatory and that was Catholic twisting what Jesus actually taught. It should be symbolic of washing away the old person and rebirthing a new person who takes the name of Christ and lives a life following his example. It should never be used as a ticket into heaven, and if your baby dies before they can sprinkle it that baby goes to hell. That is not what Christ taught.

And although Mormons tried to get away from that, all they did was up the age by a few years and allow for baptism after death. They made it about washing away sin, not the old you. And 8 year old kids don’t have sin, so they missed the whole point.

And now they are tacking on responsibilities for life that have nothing to do with taking Christs name upon yourself. And those responsibilities are not taught or discussed as part of baptism, but just tacked on later as guilt.

And Jesus said that faith and being like him was all you needed. So, how does the church add those other covenants? Baptism, faith, repentance, and following Christ are no longer good enough. You need all this other stuff, even though Christ said anything more than baptism, faith, repentance, and following him was not of him and we should reject it.