My relationship with the spirit.

[SteelBlue]

Originally Posted by creekster

ALso, and I will prbably regret doing this, you seem to reduce spiritual manifestations to some form of narcissistic personality masturbation.

LOL. They've got to add this one to the next DSM.

[MikeWaters]

Good point.

My God teaches me that I'm doing his will when I am in serving others.

Losing oneself is the opposite of narcissism.

I heard one person tell me that when he left the church, the hardest part was abandoing the inner city kids he had been called to help, but oh well, he had this personal journey to take. And the story turned into one strange trip after that.

[SoCalCoug]

ALso, and I will prbably regret doing this, you seem to reduce spiritual manifestations to some form of narcissistic personality masturbation.

That is seriously one of the coolest sentences I've ever seen. Bravo!

[Robin]

Originally Posted by creekster

Robin:

Just out of curiosity, how does your Pavlovian spiritual response feel when you are flinging ad hominems at Archaea?

Archaea doesn't exist. As far as I am concerned he is an internet farce that flings poo, and not a real person. As a collection of bits and bytes that seem programmed to seethe and spread a gospel of anti-gay hatred and personal insults, I feel no obligation to pull any punches in the defense of myself and people I care about.

Originally Posted by creekster

Also, and I will prbably regret doing this, you seem to reduce spiritual manifestations to some form of narcissistic personality masturbation. If indeed this is pavlovian, you have reduced the entire realm of spiritual experience to a learned response, a physical gratification, as oppsoed to a manifestation from a third party source. Bell rings, dog drools. RObin does what he thinks is good, he feels good. Very self-reinforcing, very self-centered and very meaningless. Since you seem to promote the idea of a scientific approach to your experiences, what evidecne can you muster, under your own criteria, that your manifestations come from God, as opposed to from some sort of self-created (or imagined) feeling of gratification. Indeed, you seem to present the ultimate in relative ethics: It feels good when I believe/do it, even if it is in fact a lie (e.g. Santa) and thus I should pursue anyting that feels good, becaseu that is a spiritual experience that a loving God would not deny me even, apparently, if it is a lie, and becasue this is entirely subjective, only I can ever decide what gives me that feeling. Not a bad racket. You should take it to TV, this might garner more than a few donations.

Well, personally, I don't think there is really anything wrong with masturbation of any sort. At some level, ALL of our interpretation of what is going on spiritually can be reduced to 'masturbation.' Consider a typical Mormon response to these questions:

Robin: Why do you believe that the church is true?
Mormon: Because I have reaceived a spiritual witness that it is true.
Robin: Why do you think you can trust that the spiritual witness is telling you the truth?
Mormon: Because it comes from God, and I know I can trust God.
Robin: How do you know you can trust God?
Mormon: That is where faith comes in. I put my faith and trust in God.
Robin: Why do you put your faith and trust in God?
Mormon: Because it feels like the right thing to do. It makes sense. It offers structure and meaning to my existence. It makes me happy, and promises me happiness in the life to come. And also, over a lifetime of practice, this faith and trust has yielded some great results.
Robin: Your faith is results based? It is a practical thing?
Mormon: By their fruits ye shall know them.
Robin: So are you saying that all groups that yield good results are 'true?'
Mormon: They are all true to an extent. But they don't have the fulness of the truth that can only be found the LDS church.
Robin: But how do you know that you have the 'fulness of the truth.'
Mormon: Because I have prayed about these things and received a spiritual witness of their truthfulness.
Robin: But that puts us at the top of this discussion, and we have come full circle. Lets not rehash that. You said that your faith is results based, in part. I can respect that from a pragmatic point of view. But unless you claim that Mormonism yields better results in the lives of the members, there has to be something more.
Mormon: Right. I have faith in the God that told me to participate in the Mormon church.
Robin: And other than the results, that faith is based on a feeling? The feeling that you can trust that this is all right?
Mormon: I trust my feelings. Particularly when I think they are coming from God.
Robin: So do I. God told me to leave the Mormon church. God told me that I wasn't progressing spiritually in the Mormon church, and that I would do better without it.
Mormon: That can't be. God would never tell you to do anything contrary to the teachings of the prophet of His church.
Robin: That is your belief, based in your faith, based in your feeling, shared by 10 million other mormons, half of whom are actually active, representing less than one tenth of one percent of the world's population.
Mormon: An appeal to the majority does not make it any less true. Minority opinions are often the correct ones.
Robin: I agree. But it all boils down to a feeling. You have a feeling that what you are doing is right. From that kernal, you derive a sense of purpose in life, and the confidence that you are following the will of God. I am doing the exact same thing. My own sense of the spirit seems to be a line to the divine from which I derive peace, happiness, contentment, and the desire to serve others and be a good person. It is the same.
Mormon: So?
Robin: So? So... well, so I'm not sure. The other day, someone told me that my entire view of spirituality seemed like an elaborate form of masturbation.
Mormon: Nananananananan... I can't HEAR you!
Robin. Ahhh... I forgot. The word that can't be said.

[Robin]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Good point.

My God teaches me that I'm doing his will when I am in serving others.

Losing oneself is the opposite of narcissism.

I heard one person tell me that when he left the church, the hardest part was abandoing the inner city kids he had been called to help, but oh well, he had this personal journey to take. And the story turned into one strange trip after that.

Nice. Mike is talking about me here. Before I stopped going to church, I was the young men's president for the inner city branch in South Central. I was struggling to be honest with the kids, and not teach them anything that I believed to be patently false. One week, a bunch of members of the stake presidency had come to observe my teaching. During the lesson, the subject of missions came up. I don't remember the specific circumstances, but at one point I made the point that 'Missions can be a good opportunity to serve, but that they certainly aren't for everyone." Jaws dropped to the floor.

After the lesson, I was taken out to the woodshed, where it was explained to me, "Your calling is to prepare all of these boys to serve missions. You can't let your own personal doubts and issues become their personal doubts and issues. They are young and impressionable."

In other words, 'losing myself' in the service of these kids meant not being honest with them. It meant telling them things I felt were untrue. If the false dichotomy you present is 'narcisism' or 'become a cog in a giant machine with a purpose that I do not believe in' then I guess I choose narcissism. But I don't think that dichotomy is an accurate description of the choice.

[Colly Wolly]

Originally Posted by Robin

Nice. Mike is talking about me here. Before I stopped going to church, I was the young men's president for the inner city branch in South Central. I was struggling to be honest with the kids, and not teach them anything that I believed to be patently false. One week, a bunch of members of the stake presidency had come to observe my teaching. During the lesson, the subject of missions came up. I don't remember the specific circumstances, but at one point I made the point that 'Missions can be a good opportunity to serve, but that they certainly aren't for everyone." Jaws dropped to the floor.

After the lesson, I was taken out to the woodshed, where it was explained to me, "Your calling is to prepare all of these boys to serve missions. You can't let your own personal doubts and issues become their personal doubts and issues. They are young and impressionable."

In other words, 'losing myself' in the service of these kids meant not being honest with them. It meant telling them things I felt were untrue. If the false dichotomy you present is 'narcisism' or 'become a cog in a giant machine with a purpose that I do not believe in' then I guess I choose narcissism. But I don't think that dichotomy is an accurate description of the choice.

What is the status of your membership in the Church? Name removed from records, excommunicated, disfellowshipped?

[Robin]

My current status:

I wrote a letter saying that I would no longer be active in the church. The stake president invited me to come and meet with him, and I declined.

So, my name is in the books, but as far as I am concerned, I no longer consider myself a member. Whether a church that I don't beleive in considers my status any different is of no concern to me.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Robin

So, my name is in the books, but as far as I am concerned, I no longer consider myself a member. Whether a church that I don't beleive in considers my status any different is of no concern to me.

You are a member and you are choosing to be a member. If you can't admit that to yourself, then you aren't being honest with yourself.

[Robin]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

You are a member and you are choosing to be a member. If you can't admit that to yourself, then you aren't being honest with yourself.

And what are the implications of that? Sure. I am a 'member.' A member without any benefits, and a member without any sacrifice.

If I thought that 'membership' was ever going to be a burden, I would leave officially. Until that day the church can call me whatever it wants.

[Colly Wolly]

Originally Posted by Robin

And what are the implications of that? Sure. I am a 'member.' A member without any benefits, and a member without any sacrifice.

If I thought that 'membership' was ever going to be a burden, I would leave officially. Until that day the church can call me whatever it wants.

You're still a member, neener neener neener! :wink: