Close Topic Options

Meat of the Gospel

Are you a meat eater? Not as in steak, but eating the meat of the Gospel. What is the meat of the Gospel? Read the article to find out and then share your thoughts.

Gospel the Meat

I am trying to be.

Someone recently quoted Joseph Fielding Smith saying that we should "leave the mysteries alone." However, this seems to me to be the "meat" of the gospel.

I have read some of Bro. Skousen's works, and they are deep. They make you think.

I see the "meat" of the Gospel as being those principles that make you think, ponder, and discuss. They aren't comfortable. They are particularly uncomfortable to most people outside the Church, but many, even most members of the Church will find them uncomfortable, because they make us stretch outside of our comfort zones.

We have discussed some of these subject quite a bit on this forum, and will continue to do so.

An example that comes readily to mind is the discussion about plural marriage. Not because of the "right or wrong" aspects of it, but because of the fact that it makes us look at our own beliefs, at the practice throughout history, and what it means eternally.

Another meaty area is careful discussion of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, and Revelation. It is amazing to find that these four extremely complex books of last days prophecy are closely linked to each other.

Yes, the milk is good. The basics are vitally important, and frequent reiteration of them helps us to make corrections to the direction of our lives. But if we don't get into the meat, we have very little chance of entering the Celestial Kingdom.

NightHawk

Meat of the Gospel Studies Doctrine Mormon

Great article JB. I like the part where Br. Skoussen says:

"He said a key difference is that milk eaters of the gospel only ask "what" to do next, while meat eaters also ask "why."

It reminds me a lot about some of our members here in the forum who have lots of questions and always look for the meat of the Gospel. I think is great. It open our minds and hearts so much, it helps to have a different vision and provide us with new opportunities to learn. Everytime I learn something new about the Gospel is like I have more and more desire to learn and dig more...
I think most members who only look for the milk, are a little bit in the comforte zone or they may be afraid of the 'unknown', I don't know really but I think as representatives of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints we have a responsibility about knowing about our own history, doctrine and traditions.

Gospel the Meat

I think I waiver between milk and meat and I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing.    What I mean is sometimes it just comes down to obedience for me.  Now, if that is always how it is then I say that would definately be "milk."  

My only concern about "meat" is someone might confuse the "why" to be a justification for not following what our Church leaders tell us.  I think the "why" is fine if it's purpose is questioning the reason for the doctrine so as to more fully understand how to apply it in your life and so that you can dig even deeper in your gospel understandings.  I don't think though that it benefits me to ask the "why" if it is the kind of "why" my son used to ask me when I told him he couldn't do something or have something.  His "why" was asking me to justify my decision because he didn't like it.  In fact, he didn't really want me to justify it, he wanted me to change it.

So, I think as "meat" eaters we should always be looking for a deeper meaning in what we are taught to do, but sometimes it is o.k. to just drink the "milk" if it is a topic we struggle with and question.  I say this because we need to drink the "milk" before we can eat the "meat."  So, first if we obey a teaching we have trouble accepting, I think we may come to a point where we have a better understanding of it and can then move on to eating the "meat" of that doctrine.

Gospel the Meat

[quote] My only concern about "meat" is someone might confuse the "why" to be a justification for not following what our Church leaders tell us.  I think the "why" is fine if it's purpose is questioning the reason for the doctrine so as to more fully understand how to apply it in your life and so that you can dig even deeper in your gospel understandings.  I don't think though that it benefits me to ask the "why" if it is the kind of "why" my son used to ask me when I told him he couldn't do something or have something.  His "why" was asking me to justify my decision because he didn't like it.  In fact, he didn't really want me to justify it, he wanted me to change it. [/quote]

Excellent, excellent point Tena!!! Yes, the 'why' should be one of wanting more knowledge, to dig more about the doctrine or history but not a 'why' of pride, a 'why' of 'I don't agree with ya' or 'change it', great point. I think a lot of people who fall into apostasy and then become excommunicated from the Church may fall into this category. They ask 'why' but they're already have the answer for it and when the answer is given, they're not satisfy.

Meat of the Gospel

I completely agree, great points.  I had this situation recently with my becoming reactivated.  I was driving in my car, whining to myself about gospel issues.  Asking "why" and being rebellious and pouting.  And then I stopped at a red light and my mind was quiet for a few moments, and I heard a voice say "obedience."  And even a quieter voice said "sacrifice."  My hard little spark of rebellion winked out and I was humbled and realized sometimes I don't need to know the "why" of things, or I may not be *ready* to hear the "why" -- I need to be obedient and learn.  And when I'm ready to hear and know the "why," then I'll be shown that -- in the Lord's own time.

Roz

Meat the Gospel

I think that Bro. Skousen's concept of "why" has nothing to do with rebellion.  Although he is frequently viewed with a lot of suspicion by many, possibly even most, members, it is because he rejected the idea of "leaving the mysteries alone."  He searched for, and found, the mysteries.  Then he tried to teach them to a people who just don't want to know.

His writings are also a direct challenge to the overwhelmingly Babylonian political system in Utah.

Here are a few of his books:
The Book of Mormon and the Constitution
Isaiah Speaks to Modern Times
The Naked Capitalist
The Naked Communist
Prophecy and Modern Times
Days of the Living Christ (two volumes, excellent book!)
The Majesty of God's Law
Model Constitutions

The point is, his ideas of "meat" and "why" are obviously ones of obedience and seeking for knowing why doctrines are, why we are, and why the doctrines affect us.

NightHawk

Meat the Gospel Mormon Doctrine Studies

[quote] I think that Bro. Skousen's concept of "why" has nothing to do with rebellion.[/quote]

I agree with you. Personally I like to dig into the mysteries too . What we were trying to say is that there is two different kind of 'why's' one that wants to really know the answers of the mysteries of God and his Gospel and then the other one who may have the answer but is not satisfied and his why is one of rebellion only.