501 replies to this topic

[DBMormon]

I am hoing that the replies to this post might be serious answers from your perspective on how you deal with several faith crises issues.

1.) How do you handle repeated major doctrinal mistakes taught by prophets and apostles from the pulpit or in their books.  
ex: evolution is one of the 7 deadly heresies - bruce R. McConkie, age of the earth - Joseph Fielding Smith, Blacks and the Priesthood - several leaders, all indians = lamanites, Indians getting lighter skin - Spencer W Kimball, ADAM GOD - Brigham Young, great and abominable church = Catholic Church = Bruce R. McConkie.

2.) The lack of sharing historical and theological issues with everyday members.
ex: not finding seer stones and treasure Hunting in any of the info we are taught from on sundays, no mention of polyandry anywhere.... try typing that in LDS.ORG's search engine, no effort in the material to correct any of these fasle teachings mentioned above.

3.) the effort to teach everyone that we should all follow the prophet, that he can not lead the church astray, that we will be blessed for following him regardless of what he asks and then on the other hand being told to know that these are men and they make mistakes and you are not obligated to follow them when they are wrong.  That you should have the spirit and it will direct you when one is acting as a prophet and when they are not.

4.) lastly, Now with the internet the church is forced to deal with much of the above issues but until their hand was forced they did all they could to let this stuff stay below the surface and went out of their way to dismiss having to deal with any of it. ex : prior to 1990 when did we hear of seer stones, evolution can be true, polyandry, treasure hunting, Mormon leaders were racist in their comments about afircan americans, ADAM GOD was taught by Brigham Young and was wrong.  Do you feel like things were kept from you?  and if so how do you reconcile that?

[DBMormon]

There was a 5th discussion point I forgot but will add now.  GRACE -
The church for almost forever had taught that salvation was weighed heavily on works.  Look at grace on your hardcopy LDS bibile dictionary....after expending our best efforts.  - Who here has expended their best efforts?  none of us.  Many of the talks from the pulpit were that we had to do this or had to do that.

Recently it has changed.  Elder Holland, Gene R Coook, Robert Millet, Brad Wilcox, Gerald Lund - each have begun pointing out that while are works are nessacary (to refine us and help us to become Christlike) they are nit suffcient.  That we are saved by and through only the merits mercy and grace of God.  I am thrilled to see this happen and the Book of Mormon taught this all along.  So why are your thoughts on this theological change from emphasis on Works to emphasis on grace.  Go back and listen to how many time the word grace was used in this most recnet conference and compare that to previous conferences.... not question there is a change occuring.... what do you make of it?  should we have touted grace all along? not Grace alone but not Grace through works either.

[Log]

Here are some answers.   If I had to rank them in importance, I would go 5, 3, 2, 4, 1.

• They could be right and you wrong.
  
• Research for yourself.
  
• If you have never received the Holy Ghost, then repent and cry mightily unto God that he might give it to you, and don't stop until you receive.
  
• Ask people who know more than you.
  
• The scriptures make clear salvation is by grace, after all we can do - which, by the way, is repent and cry mightily unto God for salvation until you receive.

Edited by Log, 12 April 2012 - 09:11 AM.

[Hamilton Porter]

reelmormon, on 12 April 2012 - 08:48 AM, said:

4.) lastly, Now with the internet the church is forced to deal with much of the above issues but until their hand was forced they did all they could to let this stuff stay below the surface and went out of their way to dismiss having to deal with any of it. ex : prior to 1990 when did we hear of seer stones, evolution can be true, polyandry, treasure hunting, Mormon leaders were racist in their comments about afircan americans, ADAM GOD was taught by Brigham Young and was wrong.  Do you feel like things were kept from you?  and if so how do you reconcile that?

google John Widstoe, BH Roberts, James Talmage, Henry Eyring + evolution

Or take a biology class at BYU.

[Log]

Yes, some people can reconcile evolution with the gospel by denying, or failing to understand, the inherent contradiction between "directed" and "undirected."

[thesometimesaint]

1. A prophet is only a prophet when acting as such.

2. Lack of evidence isn't evidence of lack.

3. Suppose you lived in the time of Noah of the Bible. Would you follow the prophet onto the boat?

4. Those issues were addressed long before 1990. Some members of the Church just didn't pay attention..

Faith without works is dead was said in the Bible. I wouldn't call that recent.

Edited by thesometimesaint, 12 April 2012 - 09:25 AM.

[Hamilton Porter]

I've always felt that the treasure digging in Joseph Smith-History was interesting. We should tell primary children about the treasure hunting. Wait tiil they grow up, and they will be offended at the Church for not telling them.

[Evangeline]

reelmormon, on 12 April 2012 - 08:48 AM, said:

3.) the effort to teach everyone that we should all follow the prophet, that he can not lead the church astray, that we will be blessed for following him regardless of what he asks and then on the other hand being told to know that these are men and they make mistakes and you are not obligated to follow them when they are wrong.  That you should have the spirit and it will direct you when one is acting as a prophet and when they are not.

I don't know that I have ever been told to follow anyone 'regardless of what they ask.'  Either that, or maybe I wasn't listening.

For me, having the Spirit is key.  If I feel uncomfortable about doing something, I usually won't proceed.  I will pray about it if I feel that there's any possibility for me to be wrong.  I have to be willing to change my course if I get a different answer from God.  If I feel that God is telling me to change my course, I will do so.  If I'm still unsure, I'll take a step in that new course and determine how I feel from there.  Then I apply prayer again, and the cycle continues.  This has worked for me, and God has never let me down.

[Hamilton Porter]

Tal Bachmann (bitter anti-) said when he was LDS he'd strap himself to a bomb and blow himself up if the prophet told him to.

[thesometimesaint]

I joined as an adult. Treasure hunting was never an issue with me. Kinda expected of a poor young man in the early 19th Century in America.

[Kevin Christensen]

All I do is to give things time, keep my eyes open, and re-examine my assumptions now and then.  The alternative is to insist on final authoritative answers to every question now, to stop looking, and to presume that my expectations are flawless now and should be my eternal guides.

1. Regarding mistakes from leaders, I notice that D&C 1, not an estoreric text buried in the vaults and hidden from the eyes of the weak of faith, expressly declares that "inasmuch as they erred, it shall be made manifest."  The guarentee on prophet extends to "expedience."  In practice, that actually works quite well, and does away with the alternative requirement to turn men into sock puppets.

2.  I've read the scriptures and have not found a passage that says "Blessed are they who sit like lumps, for they shall be spoon fed, and never caught off guard, and never ever disappointed by anyone."  I have read passages that talk about "Seek and ye shall find," and "Seek out of the best books (not "only from offically approved manuals") words of wisdom.  In practice, I find the LDS scholarly community to be fantastically responsive and comminicative, eager to share everything and every opinion.  The reason for my general sense of exhilaration is that I do not expect to be spoon fed, and don't assume that anyone with a calling or an office is ominscient.

3.  I'm a fan of the Myers Briggs Type indicator, which helps me see differences in kinds of people, and to not blame those differences and tendencies on Mormonism.  I'm a fan of the Perry Scheme for Cognitive and Ethical Growth for the same reason.  People are at different stages of personal development.  I don't presume that had I not been a Mormon that I would not have had to go through necessary and inevitable stages of human development.  Perry was studing students coming to Harvard.

Plus, I have made mistakes when I meant well, and I've also had clear inspirations both personally, and through other imperfect people.   With those motes out of my own eyes, I don't freak out when I see human weakness elsewhere.

4. I don't suppose that everyone in the church knew and consciously suppressed anything troubling.  Most people don't know much.  So how could they suppress it?  However, prior to 1990, I knew all about all of the stuff that you seem to think was hidden.  As I said before, its a matter of keeping one's eyes open, and for me personally, I got serious in 1974.  There were such things as libraries, symposiums, journals like Dialogue, BYU Studies, Sunstone, FARMS, etetera.  I have never felt like things were being kept from me because I found that as soon as I got interested, I could find LDS people and LDS sources eager to share everything and anything.  I looked into back issues of journals, including the Improvement Era, and found all sorts of things, including full publication of the papryus.  I don't blame the church for my own inattention and laziness.

FWIW

Kevin  Christensen
Pittsburgh, PA

[thesometimesaint]

That would speak more to mister Bachmann far more than to anything the prophets have asked him to do.

Edited by thesometimesaint, 12 April 2012 - 09:28 AM.

[David T]

Log, on 12 April 2012 - 09:13 AM, said:

Yes, some people can reconcile evolution with the gospel by denying, or failing to understand, the inherent contradiction between "directed" and "undirected."

Not all who believe in the Gospel and Evolution feel that evolution need have been personally directed at all. I don't.

Edited by David T, 12 April 2012 - 09:25 AM.

[Evangeline]

Hamilton Porter, on 12 April 2012 - 09:20 AM, said:

Tal Bachmann (bitter anti-) said when he was LDS he'd strap himself to a bomb and blow himself up if the prophet told him to.

Extreme example of black-and-white thinking.

[Log]

Evangeline, on 12 April 2012 - 09:25 AM, said:

Extreme example of black-and-white thinking.

What shall one say of Abraham, commanded to sacrifice his only son?

[Buzzard]

You know what, I am aware of these things, but while they are of interest to me, they are not the source of any "faith crisis".  One, because if you look for perfection in any person or institution, you are setting yourself up for disapointment.
Second-and the most important-the church really stands or falls on the Book of Mormon.  It really is the keystone of our religion. And once you have become convinced of it's truth, all that other stuff is a bit of a sideshow.  And I am convinced. Totally, unambigously, no reservations at all.
Not saying this applies to you, but a lot of folks are looking for a reason not to believe.  If they really want to find one, no excuse is too small.  Heck,  a bishop with a sarcastic streak will do the job quite nicely.

[thesometimesaint]

Log:

Evolution does not address the issue of directed or undirected only the results. However I am aware of religionists and nonreligionist alike who want to make such  arguments.

[Log]

thesometimesaint, on 12 April 2012 - 09:34 AM, said:

Log:

Evolution does not address the issue of directed or undirected only the results.

TSS:

Evolution is defined as an undirected process.  Thanks for trying, though.

[DBMormon]

When I say 1990 i mean that at that point these discussions seem to be finding thier way into church magazines and sunday lessons.  Before that very rarely was anything along these lines spoken of in mainstream church material.  from 1990 an ensign article here or ensign artile there would discuss pronlem with book of abraham, kinderhook, seer stones...ect.

Also in regards to one reply that they had never been taught to follow the prophet at all costs President Benson taught in 14 fundamentals of following a prophet
Fourth: The prophet will never lead the Church astray.
President Wilford Woodruff stated:
“I say to Israel, the Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as president of the Church to lead you astray. It is not in the program. It is not in the mind of God.” (The Discourses of Wilford Woodruff, pp. 212–13.)
President Marion G. Romney tells of this incident which happened to him:
“I remember years ago when I was a bishop I had President Heber J. Grant talk to our ward. After the meeting I drove him home … Standing by me, he put his arm over my shoulder and said: ‘My boy, you always keep your eye on the President of the Church and if he ever tells you to do anything, and it is wrong, and you do it, the Lord will bless you for it.’ Then with a twinkle in his eye, he said, ‘But you don’t need to worry. The Lord will never let his mouthpiece lead the people astray.’” (Conference Report, October 1960, p. 78.)

If this is the case then either Brigham Young was not a prophet with Adam God Doctrine or those afterward who repudiated it were not.

[volgadon]

Log, on 12 April 2012 - 09:31 AM, said:

What shall one say of Abraham, commanded to sacrifice his only son?

Look at the plodding sequence of verbs in the text, hardly an Abraham rushing out eagerly to slay his son.