Jump to content
HappyJackWagon

LDS Personal Faith Crisis- 2013 study

Recommended Posts

On 10/30/2018 at 11:59 AM, phaedrus ut said:

I just read through the reports and found them quite honest.  The details probably won't be a surprise to anyone here. 

There are 3 different reports.  The Faith Crisis Report prepared for Dieter Uchtdorf in 2013, The Faith Crisis Chronicles which are stories collected for the 2013 survey, and the Presentation at BYU-H. I found this list from the report extremely comprehensive.   

 

Phaedrus 

It appears this is the same as this, so it shouldn't surprise anyone given it has been known for quite sometime.

http://www.whymormonsquestion.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Survey-Results_Understanding-Mormon-Disbelief-Mar20121.pdf

This was Dehlin's stuff, right?  It has just been repackaged and other names attached.

Quote

Why Mormons Question is a service of Mormon Stories and the Open Stories Foundation. Mormon Stories explicitly seeks to align all operations with the Mormon Stories Shared Values Statement. Additionally, we endeavor to ensure that the projects we undertake 1) support individuals in Mormon-related faith crises, 2) save marriages, 3) heal families, and 4) celebrate, challenge, and advance Mormon culture in healthy ways.

The Why Mormons Question project is possibly the least understood of all of the Mormon Stories and Open Stories Foundation undertakings. Many argue that research intended to investigate the phenomenon of questioning and loss of belief in the Internet age necessarily seeks to destroy faith and families and therefore directly contradicts foundation objectives numbers two and three (above). To be clear, Mormon Stories and the Open Stories Foundation do not seek to destroy faith — and in fact, we have created the podcast “A Thoughtful Faith” with the explicit desire to support/promote thoughtful, well-informed faith.

Further, Mormon Stories and the Open Stories Foundation  believe that the Why Mormons Question project has the potential to save marriages and heal families. In many cases, miscommunications and conflict in familial relationships can be avoided when family members have access to information and resources that can help them understand and empathize with one another. The Why Mormons Question project seeks to make this information available as safely as possible to all who genuinely seek to understand what their loved ones are learning and are subsequently struggling with.

Again, the information on this site is not intended to draw individuals out of Mormonism. The information found on this website is simply intended to be information. We have done our best to present it with honesty and compassion for all who now or once loved Mormonism.  We understand that God, belief and family cultural traditions are often held close to the heart and that it can be challenging to encounter information that does not always place something one strongly identifies with in a positive light. Although many hearts have been broken by the information that is available on the Internet, we have accepted that the information will not disappear if we choose not to look at it. For better or for worse, we no longer have the luxury of living in a society that will allow us, our children, or our children’s children to protect themselves from information that, admittedly, can be painful when it is first encountered.

Last of all, we sincerely hope that the resources on this website will validate and support those who are suffering because of the information they have accessed online.

Some additional stuff was added possibly from 2013, but wondering if the names were just off Dehlin's list or they solicited new people.

Quote

• Interviews and strategic guidance from 20+ LDS subject-matter experts

• Qualitative narratives solicited from 1,500+ doubting and non- believing members collected in 2013

•In-depth interviews conducted between 2011 and 2013 with 40 members (active, less-active, believing, doubting, non-believing).

Ethnographic survey in 2011 of 3,388 doubting / non-believing members

• 18 months of review and refinement by LDS subject-matter experts and presentations to senior LDS leaders. 

 

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post

In regards to the survey, this is what the original stated:

Quote

The survey generated 3388 respondents. 302 respondents were removed due to incomplete data or because they answered “yes” to still believing that the Church was “the only true and living church.” A total of 3086 respondents were included in the final analysis. 

The one currently being discussed uses 3388 (see above).

They need to be more careful with details.  This is rather an important one, imo, since it impacts stats.

Share this post


Link to post

I have yet to find any info on who the 20+ experts are that they claim helped.  If you are going to claim backing of experts, you better provide their names, imo.  Otherwise it is pure inflation without foundation, imo.

Travis Stratford, named along with Prince and Dehlin, as major contributor is an advertising/marketing specialist.  Founded Case Agency and is on the board of Dialogue (which is where I found the info).

Of the 1500 narratives, they post in the first link 24, heavy on doctorates and light on "some college" if the numbers are close to survey demographics.

In the second link, there are around 85-90 (quick skim, 84 pages, most single story, saw a few doubled).  There is no description on why these were chosen though or if they are representative of the whole in some fashion.

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Has anyone seen or participated? I'm going to, but wondered why the church has to do these surveys.

Would you rather they not ask?

I did something similar eons ago to help design a part of lds.org (info on historic buildings, etc).

Share this post


Link to post
28 minutes ago, Calm said:

Would you rather they not ask?

I did something similar eons ago to help design a part of lds.org (info on historic buildings, etc).

I guess I'm very intrigued by it all. I guess they do care enough to see what's going on with the members, so that's a good thing. But I wonder what good can come from it, just a guage to see how faithful people in the church are? I signed up, so if I get a call, I guess I'm going to have to show up at a meeting next week. My husband is getting his hip operated on next week, but I signed up for a couple of time slots in the evening, but if I go, it'll be on my own, not too excited about that though. But that's how intrigued I am. 

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I guess I'm very intrigued by it all. I guess they do care enough to see what's going on with the members, so that's a good thing. But I wonder what good can come from it, just a guage to see how faithful people in the church are? I signed up, so if I get a call, I guess I'm going to have to show up at a meeting next week. My husband is getting his hip operated on next week, but I signed up for a couple of time slots in the evening, but if I go, it'll be on my own, not too excited about that though. But that's how intrigued I am. 

I signed up too. It will be interesting if I hear from them.

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/30/2018 at 10:16 PM, blueglass said:

With the issues related to polygamy/polyandry many of the faithful believing scholars also express frustration with the problems.  

Richard Bushman (Rough Stone Rolling):  "Nothing confuses the picture of JS's character more than these plural marriages.  What lay behind this egregious transgression of conventional morality?  What drove him to a practice that put his life and his work in jeopardy, not to mention his relationship with Emma? "

Terryl Givens:  NPR interview responding to "A heavenly being visited the founder of the Mormon church commanding him to take multiple wives, - twice he refused, but on the angel's third visit that angel came wielding a  sword and so Joseph eventually relented."  Terryl givens - do you swallow it?  "I don't know as an historian we don't have real good confirmatory evidence.  Doctrinally or theologically I find some problems with it, it doesn't sound like a very meek, gentle and persuasive angel, it sounds like a different kind of influence that is being exercised there. it seems inconsistent with the kind of God, and the kind of influence that generally is exercised in any righteous context that the Lord approves of."  

Sam Brown (In Heaven as It Is on Earth, and husband of Kate Holbrook who appeared on Quentin Cook Nauvoo Face to face recently with Matt Grow)

Interview w/ Russell Stevenson:  "You also show how death culture might have influenced Joseph's views of polygamy.  Obviously this plays into the idea of collective salvation.  Can we really draw a serious connection between polygamy and Joseph Smith's fear of death?"   Sam Brown:  "Polygamy is a mess.  I don't mean to by feeling like I've got an account of where it comes from theologically - I don't mean to smooth over the fact that people's hearts broke, and even now, people's hearts break about polygamy."
 
Laura Hales (responding to new seminary/institute courses which utilize polygamy essay information):
"Students will not be taught God commanded Joseph to marry teenagers, which is good because there is no evidence that he was ever commanded to marry teen aged brides, even though he did."

Andrea Radke Moss (interview on radiowest 2014):  When speaking about her frustrations with the Nauvoo polygamy essay said  that we should seek a “middle ground in how we see this” and concede that at least in 30% of the marriages Joseph had “sexual motivations for him exploring this very radical institution/revelation” i.e. we’re dealing with a “complex Joseph”.

Jana Riess (NPR interview):  Jana Riess what did you think when you heard this  "I have problems with it and . . . it's very convenient, I believe a lot of things, but this was hard to swallow."  

 

I imagine you're related to Samuel Rosskelley, as am I? Nice to know we're in good company. :)

Thank you for the quotes you provided.

In all honesty I've never really understood the problem w/ polygamy.

Didn't Old Testament kings, prophets, and other leaders who practiced polygamy, include at least: Lamech, Abraham, Jacob, Esau, Moses, Gideon, Saul, David, Solomon, Rehoboam, Elkanah, Ashur, Abijah, Jehoiada, Ahab, Ahasuerus, Ashur, Belshazzar, Benhadad, Caleb, Eliphaz, Ezra, Jehoiachin, Jehoram, Jerahmeel, Joash, Machir, Manasseh, Mered, Nahor, Shaharaim, Simeon, and Zedekiah?

To say nothing of the practice of polygamy in Islam, 600 AD to present?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, nuclearfuels said:

I imagine you're related to Samuel Rosskelley, as am I? Nice to know we're in good company. :)

Thank you for the quotes you provided.

In all honesty I've never really understood the problem w/ polygamy.

Didn't Old Testament kings, prophets, and other leaders who practiced polygamy, include at least: Lamech, Abraham, Jacob, Esau, Moses, Gideon, Saul, David, Solomon, Rehoboam, Elkanah, Ashur, Abijah, Jehoiada, Ahab, Ahasuerus, Ashur, Belshazzar, Benhadad, Caleb, Eliphaz, Ezra, Jehoiachin, Jehoram, Jerahmeel, Joash, Machir, Manasseh, Mered, Nahor, Shaharaim, Simeon, and Zedekiah?

To say nothing of the practice of polygamy in Islam, 600 AD to present?

The issues for most arise when learning the details of how Joseph (and other early church leaders) lived polygamy.  I think most know he lived polygamy and accepted that he did....but many are just now learning the details (him marrying teens who were Emma's young housemaids who she loved as daughters., etc.) and how much was done behind Emma's back and the lies and deceit involved.

And even if members can get to the point of being ok with all of that, then they learn about the polyandry and how Joseph married other men's legal wives.  Where was that ever commanded by God for other Prophets to live?

Edited by ALarson
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:

I imagine you're related to Samuel Rosskelley, as am I? Nice to know we're in good company. :)

Thank you for the quotes you provided.

In all honesty I've never really understood the problem w/ polygamy.

Didn't Old Testament kings, prophets, and other leaders who practiced polygamy, include at least: Lamech, Abraham, Jacob, Esau, Moses, Gideon, Saul, David, Solomon, Rehoboam, Elkanah, Ashur, Abijah, Jehoiada, Ahab, Ahasuerus, Ashur, Belshazzar, Benhadad, Caleb, Eliphaz, Ezra, Jehoiachin, Jehoram, Jerahmeel, Joash, Machir, Manasseh, Mered, Nahor, Shaharaim, Simeon, and Zedekiah?

To say nothing of the practice of polygamy in Islam, 600 AD to present?

Good company indeed!  Yes many kings, prophets, and others in the bible practiced traditional marriage i.e. classical polygamy.  See if you recognize a few defenses here from a great Islamic apologetic site defending Muhammad's practice of polygamy.

Quran An-Nisa 4:3 says " marry those that please you of [other] women, two or three or four. "

Muhammad did not form these marriages out of lust or a desire for sex. Rather, the marriages were due to:
(1) the desire to form alliances with diverse clans due to the swift expansion of Islam, thereby bringing peace with enemies by marrying their daughters; (2) the need to emancipate conquered clans by linking them to Muslim family clans; and (3) Muhammad’s desire to render benevolent assistance and care to widows (especially widows of men killed in battle), or to a displaced slave or captive (e.g., Pickthall, n.d., pp. 300-301).
Osama Abdallah says, "people loved Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him so much, that they would literally do anything for him. Certainly fathers would  have given him their young virgin daughters if he wanted to.   Many people offered him their young virgin bosomed daughters to raise their families’ honor.  Restriction of number of marriages to one for some men would most certainly encourage society to embark on adultery and prostitution.   The modern world where such restrictions have been legally imposed is full of evidence to such evils."  

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/9/2018 at 2:02 PM, ALarson said:

The issues for most arise when learning the details of how Joseph (and other early church leaders) lived polygamy.  I think most know he lived polygamy and accepted that he did....but many are just now learning the details (him marrying teens who were Emma's young housemaids who she loved as daughters., etc.) and how much was done behind Emma's back and the lies and deceit involved.

And even if members can get to the point of being ok with all of that, then they learn about the polyandry and how Joseph married other men's legal wives.  Where was that ever commanded by God for other Prophets to live?

 

On 11/9/2018 at 4:15 PM, blueglass said:

Good company indeed!  Yes many kings, prophets, and others in the bible practiced traditional marriage i.e. classical polygamy.  See if you recognize a few defenses here from a great Islamic apologetic site defending Muhammad's practice of polygamy.

Quran An-Nisa 4:3 says " marry those that please you of [other] women, two or three or four. "

Muhammad did not form these marriages out of lust or a desire for sex. Rather, the marriages were due to:
(1) the desire to form alliances with diverse clans due to the swift expansion of Islam, thereby bringing peace with enemies by marrying their daughters; (2) the need to emancipate conquered clans by linking them to Muslim family clans; and (3) Muhammad’s desire to render benevolent assistance and care to widows (especially widows of men killed in battle), or to a displaced slave or captive (e.g., Pickthall, n.d., pp. 300-301).
Osama Abdallah says, "people loved Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him so much, that they would literally do anything for him. Certainly fathers would  have given him their young virgin daughters if he wanted to.   Many people offered him their young virgin bosomed daughters to raise their families’ honor.  Restriction of number of marriages to one for some men would most certainly encourage society to embark on adultery and prostitution.   The modern world where such restrictions have been legally imposed is full of evidence to such evils."  

Thank you Blueglass and ALarson for replying to my post.

I think the dynamic of disagreement between us is hellpful and beneficial for working toward a greater understanding.

To reply to both of your posts:

I am not sure the first and second claims of Pickthall for Mohammad's polygamy apply to Joseph, Brigham, et al.  THe thrid reason does and, just in my opinion only, this statement rings true today for members of all religions and those nor of any faith: "Restriction of number of marriages to one for some men would most certainly encourage society to embark on adultery and prostitution.   The modern world where such restrictions have been legally imposed is full of evidence to such evils."  The same is claimed in the non (emphasis on NON) canonical Journal of Discourses.

If the claim you are making is that "the manner in which Joseph et al. practiced polygamy indicates they were false prophets," I must ask - in all seriousness (I'm not being sarcastic), what of Solomon's wives (700) and concubines (300)?  I imagine many/most of those relationship were not physical. Either way, did Solomon not build a Temple or does his later straying from God remove/dilute the Temple he built and it's reception?

David was married to Ahinoam, Abigail, Maacha, Haggith, Abital, and Eglah during the 7-1/2 years he reigned in Hebron as king of Judah. After David moved his capital to Jerusalem, he married Bathsheba. Does his straying w/ Bathsheba and Urijah remove/dilute the good he did earlier in his life (Goliath, etc.)? 

Moses' inter-racial polygamy ( Numbers 12:1 ) remove/dilute what he accomplished, through God's power?

Jacob/Israel's two wives, Leah and Rachel, and by their handmaidens Bilhah and Zilpa - some would claim if Jacob were a true prophet, he woudl have made them all equal; since he didn't (as far as we know), does that diminish his other accomplishments?

Does Noah's excessive drinking dilute what he accomplished?

Just for me, personally, I would have a hard time saying yes to any of those questions. 

If the claims I'm responding to suggest that polygamy/polyandry suggest false prophets, I am not sure how Judaism, Christianity (all of it), and Islam are not part of this same claim.

If I shared with you that at a hospital I volunteered at as a missionary (very rural Florida), a non-LDS volunteer told me she was married at 13 (this was around 2003 and she was over 60 then), would I be in the wrong for not shaming her (which I didn't)?  My wife's maternal grandmother was married-off by her parents at 15 (since she was "out of control"). They weren't LDS. I don't judge them accordingly to what is considered current popular opinion.

I am not trying to upset anyone; just trying to reason together with everyone.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

Inoculate current membership and future generations by closing the gap between our historical narrative and factual history.

Is this an admission that the historical narrative is not factual?

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, Thinking said:

Is this an admission that the historical narrative is not factual?

I don't think so.  I think one can have a true historical narrative but that narrative is not presented with a whole bunch of trivia or detailed facts.  Since it does not have a lot of details, it can cause problems as one can pick here and there at the details in an attempt to undercut the overall narrative.  I don't think the church has been guilty of purposely hiding or burying history.  I think it has been guilty of being lazy when it presents the history.  It has not be interested at spending time on the details.  That is a problem because eventually people get tired of hearing the short story and want to hear more of the details.  The details will eventually get out by someone.  Either the Church can present it or those outside the Church will present it.  The Church apparently decided it was not worth the effort and those outside the Church thought it was.  So we are where we are and are having to play catch up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think the whole history thing is over blown. What you do right now is tomorrow's history. Oh yeah from whose point of view? Hope for Things ?, Calm? Me? I love that Chinese proverb - History is a handmaiden, you can dress her up any way you like.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On November 21, 2018 at 2:38 AM, Thinking said:

Is this an admission that the historical narrative is not factual?

I take it more as an observation that there is a gap. Facts cannot speak for themselves nor draw conclusions; they can also be limited, misinterpreted or abused to undermine a correct narrative. Narratives likewise: they are the result of prioritizing and synthesizing facts. The gaps are bound to arise when the capacity to process facts and information (both technologically and critically) with actual experience (fruits, fulfilled prophecy, etc.) increases over time. This is to be expected, and the Church has been working accordingly for over two decades now.

Edited by CV75
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×