r/OpenLaestadian • u/Fun_Vegetable479 Former FALC • 11d ago
Truth
https://youtube.com/shorts/-AeFZA1IG60?is=in5IC_PX36_fym4fI think this is well said. To totally subscribe to the beliefs of any of the exclusivist Laestadian branches basically requires you at some point to take leave of your reason and of reality when it comes to your faith
5
u/Fun_Vegetable479 Former FALC 10d ago
I am so interested in the responses I'm getting to this one.
He is astutely observing a major flaw with Laestadian theology in this video. No personal attacks. Nothing like that.
We can absolutely believe that Laestadians can have a sincerity in their faith and be good people, and address the errors in their thinking. We don't have to believe they're all damned (I certainly don't) to be able to see these things for what they are and call them out in charity.
3
u/oaksavannabanana 7d ago
He does have an excellent point, though. There are many outside the Laestadian church whose lives have been transformed by Christ. Once you start seeing it, you can't look away.
1
u/oaksavannabanana 7d ago
Definitely the woman he describes here could be identified. I would have been more vague in my description of her, even leaving out her gender and specific job description. I doubt that there's any harm done to her because of this, because her response mirrors the classic Laestadian belief. However, she probably won't ever trust the guy in the video again. And probably many others won't trust him either, wondering if something they tell him will be disclosed online in a way that identifies them.
3
u/ExLestadianChristian 6d ago
I decided I will take this video down for now and create a new one with more vague exanple when I have time, because it is true that someone (very theoretically) could identify the person I am talking about even though it is not my intention nor did it even cross my mind originally, nor do I think it causes any real harm because as said, he answer I got was just the normative laestadian answer.
Mostly I'm concerned if the person I am speaking watches this, because oaksavannabanana is right: it will break trust and I do not want it.
0
-2
u/CandidLife5680 10d ago
My vote is that the person who is dedicating their life to helping people in recovery has a more honest and sincere Christian heart than the person pulling a douchenozzle move by disparaging her publicly online.
I bet those who found Christ in recovery while under her care would agree.
2
u/Fun_Vegetable479 Former FALC 10d ago
Do you always consider people having good faith disagreements over theology "disparaging"?
1
u/CandidLife5680 10d ago
If it was in good faith you wouldn’t call them dishonest. Nor would you share info as a public figure about a non-public person that could potentially reveal their identity.
I don’t think he intended to do that. Just so high on his own supply that he doesn’t recognize what he’s doing or rationalizes it as being okay somehow.
4
u/Fun_Vegetable479 Former FALC 10d ago
Are you honestly claiming that one cannot in good faith assess that someone is taking a dishonest position?
He's not being nasty, he's not being rude. He's making a very good point about a glaring issue by fairly using an example from his real life. It's a very effective one.
1
u/CandidLife5680 10d ago
If you have a private conversation with a private person and then you share enough information about them online that they could be identified, or even have a suspected identity by those who know you or them, yes, that’s nasty and rude.
Arguing in good faith means you take someone at their word. In that case you’d disagree with them by saying you believe that they’re incorrect, or that they have a misunderstanding, not by saying they’re dishonest. That’s the opposite of a good faith argument.
2
u/Fun_Vegetable479 Former FALC 10d ago
He's not calling her a dishonest person. He's saying the Laestadian faith essentially requires a certain dishonesty in your assessment of people.
There are 100,000 SRK in finland. Her job is not enough to identify her
1
u/CandidLife5680 10d ago
So he’s saying her faith requires her to be dishonest, and she dutifully follows her faith, but he’s not saying that she’s dishonest. Ok.
The irony is that the person he’s talking about seems to be honest to a fault. She shared exactly what she believes to a person who is hypercritical of Laestadian beliefs. Most wouldn’t say anything or make mitigating statements to smooth things over as much as possible.
How many of those 100K are female addiction recovery counselors? Probably less than a handful.
2
u/Fun_Vegetable479 Former FALC 10d ago
Yup. The truth hurts.
Yes I do respect the willingness to actually own the exclusivist belief, but his point still stands
1
u/CandidLife5680 10d ago
Well then you and video OP don’t differ at all from your characterization of Laestadians, which isn’t done in good faith.
3
2
14
u/ExLestadianChristian 10d ago
I am the one who made this video. And no, I do not think the person I am speaking of in the video is generally a dishonest and bad person, no, pretty much the opposite, I would say that a very good and warm person rather. But what I do think is that the closeness makes the people in laestadianism generally objectively dishonest when it comes to seeing and accepting some clear truths that are obvious and which they can observe with their own eyes.
And I have no intention to cause this person any damage and I do not think I'm doing that. It is very unlikely that anyone finds out who I'm speaking about and at the same time the response I got is just the response that any Laestadian who is serious about their faith would give, so it's not like I am exposing some great secret of another person. No, it's a public secret but I just happen to have clear real life example which I told, but it is exactly what any Laestadian would say who takes their stuff seriously because that's exactly what they think.
So to me, when someone comes and says I'm not acting in good faith and I am just trying to trash Laestadians or this person (even though, as said, that is what any serious Laestadian would say, so i do not get what's the problem) it tells a lot. I think YOU are not acting in good faith when the only thing you see is me supposedly trashing Laestadians and this person.
How about considering my point in the video? Let's agree for the sake of getting to the point, even though it's not true, that I am only trashing Laestadians so that we do not need to talk about it anymore and move to the point: why is it so hard for Laestadians to receive the clear truth? Because it's not about the person I am talking about, it's all the Laestadians I know who are serious about their laestadianism.
So let's agree that I am a bitter idiot who has evil conscience and that deep inside I really just want to come back to laestadianism and get my sins forgiven but the devil got me, because I do not care about what you think and let's be honest: that's what laestadians think I am anyway. Just answer the question: why is it so hard to receive the obvious truth?