Exit Or Not

[Scott Lloyd]

I for one have never made that implication. Not once. My position has always been that we simply have reached different conclusions. And frankly, it's dismaying that you would think that because some people make offensive statements, you and charity are entitled to do likewise.

Whoa Nellie! I was merely making comparisons, not taking license to give offense.

[Scott Lloyd]

As a non-member, I believe I have given up about trying to talk about Mormonism from an intellectual standpoint. My intellectual problems which start with JS and the BoM falls on deaf ears when discussing issues with members of the LDS church or my TBM wife. I simply give my testimony with following the Golden Rule of keeping God first in my life, following the examples of Christ, and showing my charity to others. We agree to disagree who is 'following the Spirit' and the 'true church' thing. Oh well.

So are you saying, then, that believing Latter-day Saints lack the capacity and/or will to view the faith intellectually? If so, it seems you are hastening to provide yourself as an example of the point I am making by placing yourself (in your own view) on a higher intellectual plane than "members of the LDS church" or your "TBM wife."

Further, I would submit there is a distinction to be drawn between an argument that "falls on deaf ears" and one that simply is unpersuasive.

[blueadept]

So are you saying, then, that believing Latter-day Saints lack the capacity and/or will to view the faith intellectually? If so, it seems you are hastening to provide yourself as an example of the point I am making.

Not!! I've asked for my wife's testimony consistently and she has provided it. I've sat through many SM, F&T meetings, Bible Study etc, and have listened to many heart felt testimonies.

I personally know that they believe what they are saying and nothing I say will ever change that. So I say nothing. Obviously I believe I have God and his spirit involved in my daily life. If there is only one true church, one of us is wrong.

A better approach for me in talking with LDS members is give my own testimony about Christ in my life. As Noggin has asked, have you ever honestly listened to a non LDS person's testimony of Christ in their life?

[Troubled]

So are you saying, then, that believing Latter-day Saints lack the capacity and/or will to view the faith intellectually? If so, it seems you are hastening to provide yourself as an example of the point I am making.

Further, I would submit there is a distinction to be drawn between an argument falling "on deaf ears" and merely lacking the capacity to persuade.

I can't speak for blueadept, but I think that it is true that most LDS lack the will to view the faith intellectually. Indeed, we are told that testimonies come from the Spirit and not from the intellect. There certainly are serious, thoughtful scholars who have given careful thought to the intellectual challenges. I have great respect for their contributions. But they are a small minority in the church. Relatively few members engage the church and its teachings intellectually. We certainly don't lose all of those who do, but a large number of those who do embark on the intellectual journey either lose their faith, or redefine in unorthodox ways. Don't get me wrong. Not all do by any means, but many do.

[Scott Lloyd]

Not!! I've asked for my wife's testimony consistently and she has provided it. I've sat through many SM, F&T meetings, Bible Study etc, and have listened to many heart felt testimonies.

Your initial statement was not about listening to testimonies. It was apparently about the unwillingness of Latter-day Saints with whom you associate to listen to your intellectual arguments -- hence the "on deaf ears" remark. If I have misperceived your statement, please clarify.

I personally know that they believe what they are saying and nothing I say will ever change that. So I say nothing. Obviously I believe I have God and his spirit involved in my daily life. If there is only one true church, one of us is wrong.

A better approach for me in talking with LDS members is give my own testimony about Christ in my life. As Noggin has asked, have you ever honestly listened to a non LDS person's testimony of Christ in their life?

Yes. But what does that have to do with the point of Mormons being viewed by antagonists as being intellectually unapproachable?

[Scott Lloyd]

I can't speak for blueadept, but I think that it is true that most LDS lack the will to view the faith intellectually. Indeed, we are told that testimonies come from the Spirit and not from the intellect. There certainly are serious, thoughtful scholars who have given careful thought to the intellectual challenges. I have great respect for their contributions. But they are a small minority in the church. Relatively few members engage the church and its teachings intellectually. We certainly don't lose all of those who do, but a large number of those who do embark on the intellectual journey either lose their faith, or redefine in unorthodox ways. Don't get me wrong. Not all do by any means, but many do.

OK, so we now have two self-provided examples of those who have rejected the LDS faith placing themselves on a higher intellectual plane than those who remain faithful to it.

Need I say more?

[Scott Lloyd]

It occurs to me that Church members being unwilling to debate family members or friends who have fallen away from the faith may have more to do with their desire to preserve good relations, insofar as possible, than with being unwilling to confront intellectual arguments. This is especially likely, it seems to me, when the circumstances involve one spouse who has become disaffected from the faith while the other remains faithful to it. The very survival of the marriage may depend upon avoiding such contention.

[cksalmon]

As a never-Mo, I don't have anything constructive to add to this thread. So, I won't try.

But, I do want to say that the dialogue has been most enlightening. I appreciate Scott's starting of this thread.

And I bow out, now.

Best to all.

CKS

[blueadept]

OK, so we now have two self-provided examples of those who have rejected the LDS faith placing themselves on a higher intellectual plane than those who remain faithful to it.

Need I say more?

So I've placed myself on a higher intellectual plane. WOW. If you think this is what I've done, it is not the intention.

I've listened to my wife's testimony and others about the LDS church and appreciate their sincerity even if the spirit has not conveyed that to me. Hmmm.

You are making it sound like sharing my personal testimony with LDS members of Christ in my life is not a civil approach when we already disagree with the intellectual approach in coming to different conclusions. Hmmm.

Oh well.

Peace

[Deborah]

As Noggin has asked, have you ever honestly listened to a non LDS person's testimony of Christ in their life?

Yes! And they are very sincere and I don't doubt for a minute that they truly believe. However, there is a limit to their testimony because there is a limit to their knowledge. No one here is questioning the sincerity of another's faith. We just believe that we have more knowledge and the correct knowledge. Now you can disagree with that all you want but the fact is we believe it just as the fact is that others believe what they believe. I don't understand why this is an issue. If you don't agree with the LDS view that is your perogative. The thing is we accept the sincerity of other faiths; why can't they accept the sincerity of ours without throwing out disparaging remarks about brainwashing or lack of intellectual honesty or other such perjorative remarks.

[Deborah]

It occurs to me that Church members being unwilling to debate family members or friends who have fallen away from the faith may have more to do with their desire to preserve good relations, insofar as possible, than with being unwilling to confront intellectual arguments.

I agree with this. Plus we know there is no point to a debate, especially with those we care about. You are either converted by the spirit or you are not and no amount of intellectual reasoning will make a difference.

[Not quite me]

Yes! And they are very sincere and I don't doubt for a minute that they truly believe. However, there is a limit to their testimony because there is a limit to their knowledge. No one here is questioning the sincerity of another's faith. We just believe that we have more knowledge and the correct knowledge. Now you can disagree with that all you want but the fact is we believe it just as the fact is that others believe what they believe. I don't understand why this is an issue. If you don't agree with the LDS view that is your perogative. The thing is we accept the sincerity of other faiths; why can't they accept the sincerity of ours without throwing out disparaging remarks about brainwashing or lack of intellectual honesty or other such perjorative remarks.

Ah, the irony of this post. It's wonderful to talk about how we should all have respect for each other's beliefs, but it's too bad that such a statement comes in a thread where those who no longer believe in Mormonism were told that their "reasons" were just excuses for a decision they'd already made. That's showing a lot of respect, don't you think?

[Deborah]

Ah, the irony of this post. It's wonderful to talk about how we should all have respect for each other's beliefs, but it's too bad that such a statement comes in a thread where those who no longer believe in Mormonism were told that their "reasons" were just excuses for a decision they'd already made. That's showing a lot of respect, don't you think?

This was in regards to other people's beliefs, not to those who have denied their beliefs. It is not the same thing. There is also a difference between believing something and choosing to believe something else and those who denounce everything they previously believed and then seek to denounce those who still believe.

[Not quite me]

This was in regards to other people's beliefs, not to those who have denied their beliefs. It is not the same thing.

I get it. Tolerance for everyone but former members of the church.

There is also a difference between believing something and choosing to believe something else and those who denounce everything they previously believed and then seek to denounce those who still believe.

I hope you're not suggesting I've denounced any believers.

[juliann]

Noggin: You know, perhaps it is self-evident, but if it is self-evident, shouldn't there be a rankling question rattling around in the back of everyone's mind? Who then knows what is Truth? And how do they know that? And is their method of knowing this Truth any more obviously bullet proof than the rest? If the Truth of these other religions is so obvious to them but not to you... therein lies the problem. Don't you ask why? Why are they just as convinced they are right about the things of god? They look at their "proofs" that "prove" their religion is true, feel really great when they attend, attribute that feeling to god smiling upon them, pray about their religious endeavors and feel god guiding them... just like Mormons. Feelings. Feelings prove nothing.

You existence is dependent on "feelings". Without your senses you wouldn't have much of a life. I don't have your issues I suppose...I don't create a big lump of TRUTH. I don't deny others their understanding or interpretation of it...as long as they aren't on my back about what I think. If they are seeking truth they will be good people because all truth comes from God. We just don't get it all yet.

I suppose you are deflecting so that you don't have to directly respond to my assertions....and then, basically, I get mocked by you as if I write laughable full-of-holes anecdotes hardly worth responding to.

No...I'm chuckling because you seem a tad perplexed that you get a "battle" reaction when you tell other people their religion is "bogus". Just how many religions do you spread the good word to?

As in Juliann & company are smart enough to see past the obvious holes in the other religion's exclusivity claims but I am not? There is that tone again. The tone that has the flavor of "You are a fool to have left Mormonism".

Here is the difference, Noggin. I don't tell other religions about their "holes" unless they are trying to poke a few in mine. I certainly don't roam the internet looking for people who have "bogus" beliefs and then express bewilderment that everybody is fighting with me. I am laughing because you can't see the contradictions in your own statements.

The tone that has the flavor of "You are a fool to have left Mormonism".

You are barking up the wrong bogus tree. I don't tell people they are fools to leave anything. I am much more likely to tell you you made a good decision if life is better for you. Mormonism isn't for everyone.

[blueadept]

Yes! And they are very sincere and I don't doubt for a minute that they truly believe. However, there is a limit to their testimony because there is a limit to their knowledge. No one here is questioning the sincerity of another's faith. We just believe that we have more knowledge and the correct knowledge. Now you can disagree with that all you want but the fact is we believe it just as the fact is that others believe what they believe. I don't understand why this is an issue. If you don't agree with the LDS view that is your perogative. The thing is we accept the sincerity of other faiths; why can't they accept the sincerity of ours without throwing out disparaging remarks about brainwashing or lack of intellectual honesty or other such perjorative remarks.

Thus the rub I consistently run into of how LDS have more knowledge and the correct knowledge.

For myself, this comes across as condescending and not very Christ-like and all I did was share my testimony knowing that the intellectual approach to JS and the BoM we already would agree to disagree. I don't believe I've made any remarks about 'brainwashing' or lack of intellectual honesty.

The purpose I have in being here is to appreciate my wife's view of her faith. Talking about it honestly in the home is usually not the best approach since both sides seem to be defensive.

[Not quite me]

Thus the rub I consistently run into of how LDS have more knowledge and the correct knowledge.

For myself, this comes across as condescending and not very Christ-like and all I did was share my testimony knowing that the intellectual approach to JS and the BoM we already would agree to disagree. I don't believe I've made any remarks about 'brainwashing' or lack of intellectual honesty.

The purpose I have in being here is to appreciate my wife's view of her faith. Talking about it honestly in the home is usually not the best approach since both sides seem to be defensive.

I've appreciated your respectful tone here. I'm not sure why anyone has come down on you like that.

[Deborah]

Thus the rub I consistently run into of how LDS have more knowledge and the correct knowledge.

For myself, this comes across as condescending and not very Christ-like and all I did was share my testimony knowing that the intellectual approach to JS and the BoM we already would agree to disagree.

So you expect those of us who believe in the restored gospel and modern day revelation to deny what we know we have so we don't hurt your feelings? All I did was share my testimony. The irony of this is that you can't even discuss this with your wife because you both become defensive. Gee, I wonder why.

[Deborah]

I get it. Tolerance for everyone but former members of the church.

I hope you're not suggesting I've denounced any believers.

You are the one who is assuming I was talking about ex-members of the church. I guess if the shoe fits.... However, my comments were directed at anyone who apostatizes from previously held beliefs without replacing them with a new belief system. There is a void when that happens that needs to be filled and if there is only a negative, or non-belief, that void is usually filled with anger against the prior belief system. Whether this applies to you is for you to decide.

[Not quite me]

You are the one who is assuming I was talking about ex-members of the church. I guess if the shoe fits.... However, my comments were directed at anyone who apostatizes from previously held beliefs without replacing them with a new belief system. There is a void when that happens that needs to be filled and if there is only a negative, or non-belief, that void is usually filled with anger against the prior belief system. Whether this applies to you is for you to decide.

I don't have a "new belief system," so I guess the shoe fits. Only I'm not filled with anger.

[blueadept]

So you expect those of us who believe in the restored gospel and modern day revelation to deny what we know we have so we don't hurt your feelings? All I did was share my testimony. The irony of this is that you can't even discuss this with your wife because you both become defensive. Gee, I wonder why.

I'm thick-skinned, otherwise why bother with coming to a pro-LDS board. Trust me, I had a few LDS apologists go to other boards where they were clearly outnumbered who I learned a lot from. I'm thankful for mormonfool in particular. In coming to this board, I believe I'm putting my wife's faith to the best test. It's a little hard to discuss difficult issues in the home or at a sacrament meeting. This is the best place to get a positive spin of the LDS faith whether I believe it or not.

IMO, the best approach is sharing each other's testimony of Christ and how we both try to live up to that. I believe it is possible to do this without being condenscending about each others testimony. I've come to the conclusion that trying to be intellectual about JS and the BoM is a lost cause with family and friends. We have different conclusions, oh well. Talking about the intellectual stuff on fairlds is a good thing.

[sunstoned]

Let me add the persepective of one is currently wholly immersed in the LDS church but whose faith is almost gone. I maintain hope, but very little conviction is left. All of my children, siblings, nieces, nephews and parents are active, faithful members. I have served in a lot of church callings including a High Council, EQ President, YM presidency and three Bishoprics including Bishop. I continue to spend 15-20 hours a week in church service. But in my heart, I do not believe. I do not actively disbelieve, and I am not angry or bitter, but I lack belief. What has changed? It is hard to answer that question because it is hard to be objective about oneself and to analyze one's own thought processes.

For me, I think it is a combination of two sets of issues. The first are the intellectual challenges. No need to rehearse them in detail. I am finding it difficult to accept at face value the foundational narrative of the Church and the historicity of the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham. But far more important than all of that is that God does not speak to me. Moroni's promise does not work, at least it has not worked for me. I just don't get answers to prayers. Last year I accepted President Hinckley's challenge to reread the Book of Mormon. I prayed many times about it. I pleaded for faith and a testimony. It never came. In fact, I had several experiences when I prayed and then while studying I had strong negative impressions about the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon. I don't attribute those to the Spirit, but who knows. All I know is that I seen no sign that God answers my prayers. And I don't mean for the last few months. I mean ever.

I don't really know how to explain why I see things so differently from the way I used to. But I do, and I am finding it very difficult to go back. The Church just does not make sense to me. It clashes with the reality that I perceive every day. From the Adam and Eve story to the LDS worldview today, I just can't make sense of it.

You are not alone. Our stories are very similar. God does not talk to me, no matter how hard I try.

[Troubled]

OK, so we now have two self-provided examples of those who have rejected the LDS faith placing themselves on a higher intellectual plane than those who remain faithful to it.

Need I say more?

Yes. you need to say quite a bit more. You could start by justifying your astonishing misstatement of what I actually said. I have not rejected the LDS faith and I said nothing to suggest I consider myself to be on a higher intellectual plane than others. I did say that the Church teaches that faith is not, and is not intended to be acquired through an intellectual process. I know very few members who claim that they have acquired their faith intellectually and who make any attempt to justify it intellectually. That is hardly surprising, since we teach (quite rightly, in my opinion), that faith is a spiritual and not an intellectual matter. This assertion is not even remotely close to your characterization of my remarks.

Why do you insist that those who see things differently, or whose spiritual experiences differ from your own, believe that they are intellectually superior?

[Scott Gordon]

I appreciate some of the great comments here. I appreciate the openness. It always helps to have more understanding for each other.

Scott

[Dale]

I think many people leave because they are upset with various hard subjects. Even if you presented them with a solid answer they might not like the area of church history, doctrine, or practice, scripture any better. Lot's of times you can find no good answers, or answers you don't like for whatever reason.

On every subject you can find lots of competing views. And once you lean towards a strong view that departs far from your religion it's hard to turn back. You find you don't feel about your religion like you used to.

You have to be rooted in items related to your religion to stay if LDS. You have to like enough about your religion to remain a member. I did not like aspects of the church activity that always left me feeling like an outsider. I liked the Book of Mormon fine, so kept my belief in the book and became Community of Christ/ RLDS.

If you stay tou have to feel like part of the crowd sooner, or later among other members.