Thoughts On Church History And Faith Crisis Part 2

[wenglund]

Yeah, viscous circle that. Considering that in the paradigm of Christianity, we are all sinners, I guess I'm in extremely good company, like, everyone. I guess I can live with that.

Me too.

The point, as I see it, in acknowledging sin, isn't for reasons of condemnation or self-flagellation so to speak, but rather as a healthy cause for assessment and reevaluation in determining what may be in one's best interest.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[CV75]

I understand Log, just making a point that people keep asking me to do things, to think about things, asking me my thought process while no one else was willing to jump in with me and tell their story. I know at some point someone who knows me will read this, and pass many judgements on where I am and where my testimony is. They will not ask me what this is about, they will simply pass judgements. As a Bishop, I am aware of other members in my ward who feel this way. Simply looking for ways to help as many as possible who live in this struggle. It is a risk I felt that was needed so that others who come after could see such a dialogue (no pun intended.... well maybe a little) and develop ways to build faith and nurture it. The reason I asked about the activity is members are made to feel guilty when turning callings down. We give talks on how callings should always be accepted. and yet I can absolutely see how one might be in a spiritual place so that turning a calling down might be the best thing at that time.

I would appreciate even hearing those who never had a major faith crisis to share the best they can recollect how they handle this information when their previous framework was much more basic and rigid?

As a bishop simply seeking to help others with the same struggle, discussion in ward council or with your stake president seems more appropriate than challenging posters to be “brave enough to go there.” Not everyone has to be a sufferer of a specific problem to be able to help one that does have it; the Spirit goes a long way, and faith in councils and priesthood leaders is a good way to access the Spirit.

Perhaps prayerfully bringing up the topic of discussion, “How can we help those who struggle with feeling that the Church is not up front with historical facts that they find objectionable?” A certain amount of preparation (study, fasting, prayer, etc.) going into this is required so that the Spirit can be present with each person involved in the discussion (whether between two or within a council).

[DBMormon]

As a bishop simply seeking to help others with the same struggle, discussion in ward council or with your stake president seems more appropriate than challenging posters to be “brave enough to go there.” Not everyone has to be a sufferer of a specific problem to be able to help one that does have it; the Spirit goes a long way, and faith in councils and priesthood leaders is a good way to access the Spirit.

How can anyone ever work though this if everyone is hesitant to share their experience. I am not asking for everyone to bear their deepest secrets, just how they worked through it. No one needs to tell their specific hangup, just the process. Also I wasn't looking for negative stories, I was asking more for those who never had this kind of hangup to describe how they handled it, saw it, worked with it, the methods they used that others who had a hangup perhaps didn't.

This isn't something I would ever do on a Ward level. I came here assuming that those on these boards have dealt with this stuff repeatedly, that it wouldn't be new to them, nor would it be troubling for them to share insight helpful to others. that essentially by coming here, I am learning without putting anyone else at risk.

Unfortunately, this is notanything I would bring up to my stake presidency as at least part of that group is very fundamental in their approach. I have no desire to hurt faith nor have anyone make assumptions at the local level. I came here.... for all the reasons stated above. I want nothing more then we better understand how these folks feel and why they feel as they do, discover what they need and what steps we take to remove this stumbling block.

My dream is that as a church and it's members, we remove this obstacle for the next generation as much as we can. There need be more empathy, concern, and Christlike one on one watch-care.

Again, the first post asked that any willing answer the following questions.... very few have tried, yet we are 3 pages in. If the thread is asking too much so be it....

1.) Why do the faithfull seem to discredit ever looking at the church truth in a Hisotrical manner. Not they they don't value history, just not as a mode of determining the possible validity of an event worth having faith in. In otherwords why can't faith ever be rooted at least in part in History. Ex: While one may have faith in Jesus or not, and though Historically we can never prove anything, it is a fact that Jesus was resurrected or he wasn't. While faith is a large part of it. That faith is based on a historical event. Is there value in trying to find out historically if things happened the way Jospeh Smith and others said, and if it becomes extremely obvious they are not factual or historical, is that reason to rethink one's testimony based on the historical opinion?

2.) Can the faithful share how when these issues (though perhaps not troubling to them) were encountered, how they approached each one.

- what you thought of it originally

- how you approached it

- what was of help

- what wasn't

-Whether you ever really get past it completely or just recognize that you can explain it enough to move on?

3.) For the former member - Why have you sought to give more presidence to your framework then the spiritual experiences you once had within the context of the church?

Edited May 4, 2012 by reelmormon

[DBMormon]

As a bishop simply seeking to help others with the same struggle, discussion in ward council or with your stake president seems more appropriate than challenging posters to be “brave enough to go there.” Not everyone has to be a sufferer of a specific problem to be able to help one that does have it; the Spirit goes a long way, and faith in councils and priesthood leaders is a good way to access the Spirit.

Also I have helped each of those I am aware of in this struggle. I have encouraged them. I have sat down with them and spent hours with them. Please know that while you may sense sarcasm at times and frustration, I seek answers and a productive discussion so that I and thousand of others who struggle might find some way to transition their thinking to better accomdate a paradigm of faith, good gospel soil where it can grow.

Edited May 4, 2012 by reelmormon

[wenglund]

Wenglund.... How did you handle these things when you first became aware that things were not as you were taught or what you believed?

I have considered them, not in isolation, but within the rich context of my developing LDS epistemology, including orienting my examination of these new things to me in relation to the ultimate purpose of the Church/gospel, using the methods instituted by God, trusting in him.

I view such new things not so much a challenges to my faith, but rather as opportunities for growth. And, as usual, I am not disappointed. For me, it is about doing and concerning myself with what matters and what works and not fussing needlessly over the rest.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Benjamin McGuire]

Let me start with the second set of comments and then go back to the earlier ones:

Why do the faithfull seem to discredit ever looking at the church truth in a Hisotrical manner. Not they they don't value history, just not as a mode of determining the possible validity of an event worth having faith in. In otherwords why can't faith ever be rooted at least in part in History.

I tried to answer this issue for you. The faithful don't discourage this. But, I think we have some real differences in how we understand this. I quoted you a bit (from a scholar in the field of comparative religions) and I am going to provide that again, with a list of assertions that can either agree with or disagree with:

Christianity presented itslef as the result of a new act by God in human affairs, as a divine revelation. Its authority is not dependent on absolute originality in its teachings and practices. Many Christian believers in fact have minimized the originality in order to emphasize the divine preparation for Christianity. Christian claims rest on whether it is a revelation from God, not on its originality, and this is a claim not directly verifiable by historic examination. The decision for or against Christianity is a matter of faith, however much historical inquiry might support or discourage the decision.

What is my takeaway from this? History cannot tell us whether or not there was a divine revelation. In the notes above, we are told that the non-religious and the religious simply interpret history in different ways to support their own pre-existing views. This quote simply restates what you wrote in a different perspective. I am going to change this just a bit - since you ask about looking at "the church truth" when I see this as looking as the notion of divine revelation or the idea of the gospel. In doing this, I want to follow up on some of Kevin's comments very early on dealing with this topic. One of my pet peeves is people who get up and say that "The Church is true". The Church isn't true. The church can't be true any more than a rock can be true, or a tree can be true. (We might speak of a true tree and thus of a true church - but this isn't the kind of meaning that is intended). Things aren't true. Assertions can be true (or false). And when someone gets up in church, and says "I know the church is true" what that means is that they have a series of beliefs about the church which they hold to be true - and they could, perhaps, if given a moment even list them. Likewise, in Testimony meeting, someone hears that, and says Amen. And they too hold a series of assertions about the church to be true, and even though we have this common idea expressed, and an agreement made, the assertions the two hold can be very different from each other. So I want to separate out this idea of the church, since it is, to some extent, not terribly relevant in many ways.

So here are some of my assertions.

1: Historical investigation can only support or discourage believe in divine revelation. It cannot demonstrate its reality.

2: History isn't merely a set of facts, it is an entire narrative placing those facts into a context.

3: There seems to be some recognition in the church that a historical investigation doesn't lead to an understanding of divine revelation. And in fact, missionaries do not teach the idea that we can receive confirmation of truth through historical investigation. Nowhere does Moroni's promise speak of historical investigations as a source of truth.

4: At least the potential for divine revelation can be verified by receiving diving revelation for ourselves.

Where does this all go? In the earlier comments directly to me, you wrote this:

Ben Maguire..... I see you grasping at the cognitive method we each use but in a real sense how did you habdle this paradigm when first confronbted with it.

My first real confrontation with God occurred when I was sixteen years old. I was doing something of a youth mission (where I lived that meant spending two weeks one summer with two full time missionaries and another teenager in a town in the same mission as I lived by not in my home town). The entire event was deeply distressing to me - I hated every bit of it. I told God he had better come up with something pretty convincing for me, if he wanted me to go on a mission. I had an Enos moment (not my last). God was pretty convincing. My first crisis of faith had nothing to do with history. It had a lot to do with my coming to terms with my belief and disbelief. Since then, I have received personal revelation in a wide range of experiences over the course of my life. Some of them were almost trivial, some of them were deeply moving and powerful experiences that I will never forget. We aren't talking about a burning sensation.

That summer was also my first encounter with anti-Mormonism. My father subscribed to AOL, and started letting me use it. I found my way to the religion forums. It was eye opening. I actually participated on AOL off and on for a decade. What did I do? I read a lot. It was during that period of time that I became aware of something that fascinated me (and still does). I discovered that history was plyable. One of the most fascinating books I read was a history of the year 1772 written in the year 1773. It was written and published in England, and had some lengthy essays on the American Colonies. It provided a view so different from the history books I was familiar with that I was faced with this same sort of issue (only outside of a religious context) but yet it was an issue that I could see much of the discussion of LDS history in - my reading in historiography allowed me to frame these discussions of LDS history in a new way. So, you might say that I had developed some early insight into this notion of history and what history meant.

These two events put me in a position to look at these issues in a way I might not have if they had not occurred. So, getting back to your comments, faith can't be rooted in history because history isn't some sort of personally validated thing. It isn't experienced. It can only be presented within a context. Faith can be rooted in an interpretation history - but this creates a faith that doesn't really have much of a foundation. The church presents a history. It may or may not be accurate (which is different from whether or not the church is intentionally misleading people). Certainly the critics present history - but theirs too is a history which may or may not be accurate, and it is a history which may be aimed at intentionally misleading people. The problem occurs when we make a jump that is never justified in suggesting that the history itself is able to determine the reality of divine revelation.

If we want (as you suggest) to root faith at least partially in something other than historical investigation, what do you envision as the part that participates with that investigation?

Don't get me wrong, there are lots of LDS who believe this (or something like it). And there are lots of critics and anti-Mormons who also believe this. This idea isn't unique to the LDS Church either. Atheists believe it, as do most Christians in general. For those who believe this idea who are also religious believers, there is this attempt often to minimize the impact of history. To put it into its own box. Sometimes there is an attempt to rewrite the history so that it conforms with the believers point of view. The idea being that to keep the faith true, the history must also be in some way true. The critics take just the opposite tack right? They want to convince everyone that the history is not true. Why? Because they believe that in showing that the history is flawed, the only real conclusion is that the divine revelation that it encapsulates must also be flawed. I reject both sides of this argument.

Back to the rest of your first point:

Ex: While one may have faith in Jesus or not, and though Historically we can never prove anything, it is a fact that Jesus was resurrected or he wasn't. While faith is a large part of it. That faith is based on a historical event. Is there value in trying to find out historically if things happened the way Jospeh Smith and others said, and if it becomes extremely obvious they are not factual or historical, is that reason to rethink one's testimony based on the historical opinion?

This seems a bit confused to me, does it to you? If we are here to have a testimony of a particular historical narrative and a particular account of what happened, then I agree with you entirely. If we are talking about having a testimony of divine revelation, and of the gospel as we understand it, then I disagree with you entirely. The reality for most people is probably somewhere in between this. If you have read Wendy Ulrich, you may remember that one of her major themes is that people get into hot water with their faith because they believe far too much instead of far to little. And for the record, I tend to agree with the point you are making. If someone's faith is based entirely on a historical narrative, and they find evidence to challenge that narrative, then they should question that faith. If that leads them out of the church, I can see that as a very rational response. If it creates a crisis of faith for them that encourages them to turn to God, where they develop a faith in a different set of assertions because of an encounter with the divine, then I think that can be a better outcome and a very rational response too. If they simlpy ignore it, it will eventually come back.

You ask why faith can't be rooted at least in part in history? I think it can, but it won't be on someone else's history, but our own history and our own encounter with the divine. If it is someone else's history, it will always be subject to revision. It will never be a firm foundation. And there may always be competing interpretations that cannot be separated except by personal preference.

This is why I suggest that historical investigation isn't primary to the question of faith. It is at best secondary - and if you have evidence for the existence of God through personal experience, the question of competing historical narratives - even if they cannot be resolved in favor of one or the other - becomes less important. But, I think that many people have a different view, and have accepted the idea that the easiest way to prove or disprove faith is through an examination of the historical record. This isn't true just of LDS. We could probably discuss where this comes from for a long time.

If we can release the importance of the historical narratives, finding perfect people in those histories becomes less important. One of the fascinating things about the Old Testament is that each of its "heroes" is badly flawed. It presents the flaws in a way that is unabashed. We (as an LDS community) haven't necessarily reached the maturity that will allow us to present our "heroes" in such a way. But we will get there.

Ben M.

[Maidservant]

This is cherishable, and it was good of you to share your thoughts.

I wonder, though, if your struggles with Heavenly Father may be somewhat lessened were you to tweak your belief just a bit to say: I am a daughter of my Heavenly Father, and I am seeking earnestly to become like him." This gives your belief more than just significant meaning. It give it purpose, direction, and points that allow for viable measurement (where you wish to go, where you were yesterday, where you are now, and how far you traveled in-between). Perhaps in your travels to and from school or to wherever, you can use the time to contemplate your spiritual travel to see whether you are moving in the right direction in terms of increase in love, joy, fulfilling relationships, and understanding--though be merciful in your expectations about the speed at which you ought to be traveling and some possible side trips that may have distracted you. See if this doesn't lighten and somewhat resolve or render insignificant some of your current challenges.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Thank you, Wade .

I hold many beliefs that are stable and that grow from this one. But if things get shaken, I go back to that ground.

And for the record, it is usually my Father in heaven doing the shaking (or as I see it now) because he is not satisfied for my eyes to remain closed or for me to be comfortable with my pride ( = separation from Him).

Having a goal-oriented life has failed me, Wade. I do something a lot different now and it is better for me. I don't, admittedly, use the exact wording "seeking earnestly to become like him". But my vision is utterly clear about who I want to be and who I am and the world I intend to create; and every day I wake up to do begin again in that labor; and I am aware that my Father in heaven has created me and sent me here to this world and is continuing to create me, and I trust that . . . except when I don't, sigh.

[wenglund]

Thank you, Wade .

I hold many beliefs that are stable and that grow from this one. But if things get shaken, I go back to that ground.

And for the record, it is usually my Father in heaven doing the shaking (or as I see it now) because he is not satisfied for my eyes to remain closed or for me to be comfortable with my pride ( = separation from Him).

Having a goal-oriented life has failed me, Wade. I do something a lot different now and it is better for me. I don't, admittedly, use the exact wording "seeking earnestly to become like him". But my vision is utterly clear about who I want to be and who I am and the world I intend to create; and every day I wake up to do begin again in that labor; and I am aware that my Father in heaven has created me and sent me here to this world and is continuing to create me, and I trust that . . . except when I don't, sigh.

Great! I wish you the very best with that, and it sounds as though you have managed quite well already. Whatever works. It is just that learning of your struggles tugged at my heart strings, which triggered my inclination is to help, though I suppose it shouldn't because struggles can often be a good thing, if we let them.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited May 4, 2012 by wenglund

[CV75]

How can anyone ever work though this if everyone is hesitant to share their experience. I am not asking for everyone to bear their deepest secrets, just how they worked through it. No one needs to tell their specific hangup, just the process. Also I wasn't looking for negative stories, I was asking more for those who never had this kind of hangup to describe how they handled it, saw it, worked with it, the methods they used that others who had a hangup perhaps didn't.

This isn't something I would ever do on a Ward level. I came here assuming that those on these boards have dealt with this stuff repeatedly, that it wouldn't be new to them, nor would it be troubling for them to share insight helpful to others. that essentially by coming here, I am learning without putting anyone else at risk.

Unfortunately, this is notanything I would bring up to my stake presidency as at least part of that group is very fundamental in their approach. I have no desire to hurt faith nor have anyone make assumptions at the local level. I came here.... for all the reasons stated above. I want nothing more then we better understand how these folks feel and why they feel as they do, discover what they need and what steps we take to remove this stumbling block.

My dream is that as a church and it's members, we remove this obstacle for the next generation as much as we can. There need be more empathy, concern, and Christlike one on one watch-care.

Again, the first post asked that any willing answer the following questions.... very few have tried, yet we are 3 pages in. If the thread is asking too much so be it....

I’m sorry, but my post has nothing to do with “anyone” and “everyone” or negative story-sharing (naturally this shouldn’t occur in the ward council), just method – it has to do with a bishop trying to help those in his flock with a particular issue that he himself struggles with though the method of councils (ward or other) and counseling (with the stake president). The Church isn’t about any member having to struggle alone; that is reserved for those hopefully once-in-a-lifetime “Gethsemanes,” which by design and definition often fall outside the normal scope of “Church” organization and process.

If this issue happens to be your Gethsemane, there is plenty of inspired counsel on how to face such matters and it ends up being a very private and personal process (but well worth it). If it is a lesser form of suffering, I would think the council and counsel methods would address it.

Fearing judgment is not a tool of the Spirit. At the same time, I don’t think anyone would argue against “more empathy, concern, and Christlike one on one watch-care.”

How I handled my own personal dark moments was posted very early in this thread.

[CV75]

Also I have helped each of those I am aware of in this struggle. I have encouraged them. I have sat down with them and spent hours with them. Please know that while you may sense sarcasm at times and frustration, I seek answers and a productive discussion so that I and thousand of others who struggle might find some way to transition their thinking to better accomdate a paradigm of faith, good gospel soil where it can grow.

I haven't either sensed or responded to sarcasm or frustration, so please accept my posts as an effort for productive discussion.

Another plug for councils and one-on-one counselig with the stake president as a means to harness faith as a means to transition thinking. The devil isn't always in the details!

[Log]

One of the reasons I would refrain from giving my experiences on this board in public is 1. it might be used against me, or, worse, 2. someone might develop a more effective approach using that data to "assist" some to "transition" out of the Church.

FWIW

[CV75]

I think the best solution to feelings of betrayal in all its forms is forgiveness. If forgiveness is the counsel for victims of rape, adultery, incest, torture, violence, robbery, false imprisonment, injury, dismemberment, enslavement, disenfranchisement, pimping, parental addictions, dysfunctions and abuses, lying, cheating, medical/legal/professional negligence and malpractice, etc., anyone suffering such and having overcome associated feelings of betrayal might very, very judiciously share their experience. But since they truly forgave, they would simply advise you to “Forgive” and let it go. And you would know that they meant it and also know that it applies to feelings of betrayal whatever the source or cause. That is what the Lord counsels (commands) us to do, and He suffered and overcame all things and knows what He is talking about. It applies to the issue in the OP. I can’t think of a more liberating solution for a bishop and his flock.

I'm sure anyone who forgave "the Church" for perceived offenses would say the same thing.

[CV75]

Especially once their mind was clear of unforgiving feelings.

[GingerRed]

I don't know if what I say will help you, reelmormon....but you asked to share how others handle it. (Personally I think you already got a lot of great advice!)

I didn't join the church til I was 21. That was back in 1978 (soon after the priesthood revelation) I must admit I didn't know hardly much of the history of the church back then. It was even less talked about. it took me 4 months of praying fasting and investigating before I joined. I immersed myself with the other young adults in the ward, learning and participating in as much as I could. I joined because I got my own witness that this was where I belonged and the gospel was true. It wasn't a big huge bolt of lightening or anything....just more of quiet knowledge.

I think the first thing I ever heard of anything anti was I somehow found the Godmakers thing. I can't even recall where. I remember it making me feel weird and surprised by the things they said. But...it did little to shake my faith, thank goodness. Through the much later years I heard about MMM, the priesthood ban, the polygamy etc. Then when I joined this board years ago... I learned more about the history I hadn't heard before. I've always been interested in the background of things. All these things about peep stones, the papyrus, prophets with faults yadda yadda.....I find it interesting, maybe a little puzzling at times but not faith shaking. I don't know why. It just doesn't bother me. I've always been taught that this is a church of learning line upon line, milk before meat, new revelation to replace the old, prophets of our own time. I guess that's why it doesn't shock me very much cause I look at it as, well I didn't know about this before, but okay so that's just more to the story and now I know. I've always been one to adapt to change really well because of the crazy life I've had. I've never ever felt that I had been deceived, betrayed, lied to or that the church was holding anything back from me. I look at it as there's just more details to the story, that's all. Sometimes I even think its kinda fascinating. History was one of my better subjects at school, but even so, I was never really interested in all that church history stuff. It just never had anything to do with my own personal salvation.

I'm kinda in the same boat with maidservant....I am a Daughter Of God! A daughter of God!! like wow, ya know? Like maidservant I try to keep that in mind too! No history, no past ...nothing will ever change that! I have been blessed more than I deserve...I have had miracles...I have experiences I wouldn't have had....people in my life ...that would have never happened had I not been a part of HIS church! And these are the things...if I can stay worthy...that I will take with me and have with me in the next life. Look at the big picture, dude!! WHY does all that history stuff matter??

Reelmormon...I'm not meaning to put your down for your feelings as I know they are real to you. I certainly have had my own faith shaking moments, but not over anything with the church's past, its all been just personal stuff. I do have hard time understanding why it bothers people so much, I guess since I've never been there, its hard to empathize. I just trust the Lord to work these things out. Let Him worry about it! I have enough to worry about in my own life, to add things like that to my plate.

I think you are stressing yourself needlessly. Now I know you are not a woman so you can't go and yak to your girlfriends, vent to your female coworkers or just eat some ice cream and chill! LOL. Men tend to harbor their feelings more. Work themselves into an ulcer.

Know how I think you should handle all this? I think you should take a break. Take one month off of all this history stuff, don't look at it, don't think about it, don't read about it. Instead go and do some service. Go pray, fast, immerse yourself in goodly things. Hang onto your testimony and share it often. Remind yourself of all those wonderful spiritual things that happened to you. Read your journals, read your patriarchal blessing. Watch and listen to uplifting music and videos. Love your family, love your neighbors. Go out and do fun things. Relax! Recharge and get a new perspective. Ask yourself what REALLY matters, what's the gospel really about? Remember it takes two to tango....you have to take responsibility as well. You are in control of your feelings no one else. You can let this drag you down or you don't.

This is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints....not the Church of Joseph Smith...not the Church of Peep Stones, Polygamy or History or anything else!

Okay I hope I haven't said too much or bored you! LOL....thats just my two cents.

Red

[mentalgymnast]

Hello reelmormon,

I haven't posted much on this board but over the years I have been active on other online venues such as ZLMB, mormon-l, and the Shady Corner (Mormon Discussion). My general path has been parallel in some respects to yours. I have been on this path for several years, now approaching a couple of decades. I did have a period of time that I would describe as a crisis of faith in which everything came to a head. Without listing all the books that I've read, let me simply say I've read A LOT. Pro and con. Faithful and not. Science and religion, Christian and other world religions history, etc. My crisis point came to a head while serving on a Stake HC years ago. I asked to be released after having had three chats with my file leader the SP. At that point in time he wished me well and encouraged me to hang in there and that was it. No judgement, discipline or anything close to it. He was very understanding.

Anyway, here it is many years later and I am somewhat in a similar boat as yours, although no two flotation devices may be designed and built exactly the same.

Now, on to your thread and what you are trying to extract/gain from the experiences of others.

First of all, I've very much enjoyed the comments on this thread. I suppose that the reason I'm taking the time to write my thoughts is because I think I understand at least to some extent your dilemma and by association those frustrations expressed by many others in the church. I have personal friends and family that have struggled and in some cases left the church either physically, or "in their mind and/or heart".

Second, to be clear, I'm not in a place where I would say that I'm running on all cylinders when it comes to being in that "sweet spot" where many on this thread are at in being able to fully accept the doctrines, teachings and practices of the church wholeheartedly and without reservation or doubt. But, at the same time, I have during my faith journey remained active in the church and participated in callings and by all outward indicators shown full faith and fellowship in my ward although, let it be said, I have, here and there, found individuals that I could "let it all hang out" with and have productive and very interesting discussions. I continue to study the BofM and other scriptures, read articles in the Ensign,pray and obey do my HT'ing, etc.

Long ago I came to see that there does seem to be two sides to every coin in reference to things mormon and things connected with faith in general. Almost without exception I came to find that with every issue or point of controversy whether it be associated with LDS and/or Christian history, science and religion, philosophical conundrums, or what have you, there appeared to be at least two or more ways of "flipping the coin" and either end up coming down on the side of, "OK,I can move forward in faith in the LDS story and LDS'ism", or " Occam's razor seems to demonstrate that faith in the restoration story and/or Christian belief is built upon a house built out of cards".

And that's the way it's been ever since. I've tried to remain balanced from the time I first encountered new mormon history at trying to look at both sides of every issue or controversy I've come up against. I've seen that it is possible to flip coins and come down on either side. Heads or tails. And depending on the given day, more heads than tails and vice versa. And you are correct, when trying to listen to "the Spirit" it becomes somewhat disconcerting to realize that other people not of our faith are just as sure through their own spiritual inclinations and/or experiences that the LDS church is false. Or that some other system of belief is just as valid as we claim ours to be. Yada, yada, yada.

I have to give a nod to Darth in respect to there are some sorts of philosophical or cosmological kinds of things that are just plain hard to wrap my mind around. Many, many things that just "don't make sense". But then again, we have those good ol' scriptures that say that the ways of God are not the ways of man and that God's ways are not ours, the carnal man doesn't understand and thinks the ways of God are foolish, etc. as a fall back/fail safe for pushing things that don't make sense onto a shelf. That shelf can become rather large and heavy. After listening to all of Dehlin's podcasts, John Larsen's podcasts,Van Hale's discussions, and what have you, dealing with many of these sorts of non-nonsensical sorts of things that lie beneath the surface as one peals away the outer or superficial layers adds to the mix.

A number of people on this thread have mentioned that faith in the LDS restoration story ultimately becomes a matter of making a choice to believe. This belief can be based upon rational thought and experience as well as "spiritual anchors" that become part of a person's reason to believe rather than doubt. I have had some of these same spiritual anchor experiences too, although I can't say for sure that they have caused me to believe uniquely in mormonism, per se, but have acted as an impetus to keep the door open to something beyond the veil of human experience.

It is possible to move forward in faith, so to speak, by keeping an open mind and heart, knowing, as others have said, that the messiness of the world as it is and always has been, also find application to some degree with what we see/observe as we look through the lens (often distorted or biased) of history and scholarship.

Besides "flipping the coin" and looking at both sides on many issues and concerns, the one other thing that has kept me in the pews is taking a default position of plausible belief in a creator God that has an interest (and all that this would entail) in the well being and progress/happiness of His creations. I have often thought to myself that if there is a God and at the same time the CofJCofLDS is NOT essentially what it claims to be then we are really in a screwed up world where a church, which now numbers in the millions, could make the extremely "one and only" truth claims that it does and God would let it get away with it without somehow bringing it all to an ignominious end. Yes, I know, some would say that this argument could be applied to Scientology or any one of many other so-called "true" religions or belief systems, but I look at the truth claims of the LDS church as being rather unique and one of a kind.

So, anyways, you've asked us how we've dealt with initial and ongoing faith crises. These two default positions have been what I've lived with for a number of years now. But as you've said, on a given day, everything literally can go to hell in a handbasket. But then Sunday rolls around, you're with the Saints, you feel the warm fuzzies associated with hearing the "good news" of the Gospel and you're good to go...sort of.

Good luck to you in your own personal faith journey, for it personal. The folks such as Ben M., Wade,(on this board),Bushman, Ostler, Armund Mauss and many others that are faithful apologists can only add to the discussion. Same with John Dehlin, John and Zilpha Larsen and all of their guests. I don't think we should discount also, that over time we may receive line upon line and precept upon precept, spiritually, as we seek for this referential "Spirit" or Holy Ghost that many LDS folks claim to have had personal experience with. Albeit, some more than others. Many that make reference to having received a testimony through what we refer to as the Holy Ghost are people that seem for all intents and purposes to be people of character and intelligence. They have to be reckoned with. The witness from GA's at the pulpit, for example.

I could say much more, for there are many, many cumulative months and now even years that have passed as I've personally traveled this path of exploration in regards to those things which we would consider to be of great importance and of purportedly eternal significance. It's a hard road, as you've mentioned. But at times, it's a challenge to mind and heart in both positive and not so positive ways.

Maybe it's supposed to be that way...who knows?

Best wishes,

MG

[altersteve]

I don't know if what I say will help you, reelmormon....but you asked to share how others handle it. (Personally I think you already got a lot of great advice!)

I didn't join the church til I was 21. That was back in 1978 (soon after the priesthood revelation) I must admit I didn't know hardly much of the history of the church back then. It was even less talked about. it took me 4 months of praying fasting and investigating before I joined. I immersed myself with the other young adults in the ward, learning and participating in as much as I could. I joined because I got my own witness that this was where I belonged and the gospel was true. It wasn't a big huge bolt of lightening or anything....just more of quiet knowledge.

I think the first thing I ever heard of anything anti was I somehow found the Godmakers thing. I can't even recall where. I remember it making me feel weird and surprised by the things they said. But...it did little to shake my faith, thank goodness. Through the much later years I heard about MMM, the priesthood ban, the polygamy etc. Then when I joined this board years ago... I learned more about the history I hadn't heard before. I've always been interested in the background of things. All these things about peep stones, the papyrus, prophets with faults yadda yadda.....I find it interesting, maybe a little puzzling at times but not faith shaking. I don't know why. It just doesn't bother me. I've always been taught that this is a church of learning line upon line, milk before meat, new revelation to replace the old, prophets of our own time. I guess that's why it doesn't shock me very much cause I look at it as, well I didn't know about this before, but okay so that's just more to the story and now I know. I've always been one to adapt to change really well because of the crazy life I've had. I've never ever felt that I had been deceived, betrayed, lied to or that the church was holding anything back from me. I look at it as there's just more details to the story, that's all. Sometimes I even think its kinda fascinating. History was one of my better subjects at school, but even so, I was never really interested in all that church history stuff. It just never had anything to do with my own personal salvation.

I'm kinda in the same boat with maidservant....I am a Daughter Of God! A daughter of God!! like wow, ya know? Like maidservant I try to keep that in mind too! No history, no past ...nothing will ever change that! I have been blessed more than I deserve...I have had miracles...I have experiences I wouldn't have had....people in my life ...that would have never happened had I not been a part of HIS church! And these are the things...if I can stay worthy...that I will take with me and have with me in the next life. Look at the big picture, dude!! WHY does all that history stuff matter??

Reelmormon...I'm not meaning to put your down for your feelings as I know they are real to you. I certainly have had my own faith shaking moments, but not over anything with the church's past, its all been just personal stuff. I do have hard time understanding why it bothers people so much, I guess since I've never been there, its hard to empathize. I just trust the Lord to work these things out. Let Him worry about it! I have enough to worry about in my own life, to add things like that to my plate.

I think you are stressing yourself needlessly. Now I know you are not a woman so you can't go and yak to your girlfriends, vent to your female coworkers or just eat some ice cream and chill! LOL. Men tend to harbor their feelings more. Work themselves into an ulcer.

Know how I think you should handle all this? I think you should take a break. Take one month off of all this history stuff, don't look at it, don't think about it, don't read about it. Instead go and do some service. Go pray, fast, immerse yourself in goodly things. Hang onto your testimony and share it often. Remind yourself of all those wonderful spiritual things that happened to you. Read your journals, read your patriarchal blessing. Watch and listen to uplifting music and videos. Love your family, love your neighbors. Go out and do fun things. Relax! Recharge and get a new perspective. Ask yourself what REALLY matters, what's the gospel really about? Remember it takes two to tango....you have to take responsibility as well. You are in control of your feelings no one else. You can let this drag you down or you don't.

This is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints....not the Church of Joseph Smith...not the Church of Peep Stones, Polygamy or History or anything else!

Okay I hope I haven't said too much or bored you! LOL....thats just my two cents.

Red

Very well said. I agree 10000%.

[Calm]

I just want to say I very much enjoyed the comments of GingerRed and mentalgymnast, you both should post more.

[bu11fr0g]

The difficulty for me with this approach has been threefold.

1. When I go to Church I spend too much time off on tangential non spitual thoughts similar to what happens on the board here.

2. I find a lot of the service and sacrifices of the Church seem to be self harmful. (ie the bisop whose family falls apart as he spends too much time for the ward)

3. Some of the members are toxic and being at church requires contact with them

I really need help with these issues.

3.

[GingerRed]

I just want to say I very much enjoyed the comments of GingerRed and mentalgymnast, you both should post more.

Thank you altersteve and calmoriah! yes I guess I should post more...I lurk and read a LOT! And sometimes a do want to say something but don't. In this case, I felt the inspiration to say something to reelmormon, hopefully to make him feel better...or at least think!

Everyone has doubts and different trials. No one is 'safe'...lol.....we ALL have our own 'Gethsemane's' ! That's how God works! He says... here's yours....go figure it out! Then you come to me when you got the answer and I'll tell you if you are right or wrong! Meantime, I will love you all along the way! ( remember the Footprints poem? )

He also gave us each other....to help be our sounding boards and give us reasons to serve.

[Kevin Christensen]

The difficulty for me with this approach has been threefold.

1. When I go to Church I spend too much time off on tangential non spitual thoughts similar to what happens on the board here.

The simple solution would be to focus on Christ (really think during the sacrament song and service, think about the words carefully, and what they mean), fellowship, and service. Everytime I go, I try to contribute something, whether talking with people who needs it, or positive comments in Priesthood and Sunday school, or singing in the choir, or moving chairs around. I don't go in expecting to be served, and so I am regularly given pleasant surprises.

2. I find a lot of the service and sacrifices of the Church seem to be self harmful. (ie the bisop whose family falls apart as he spends too much time for the ward)

How do you select your examples of self-harm from church service? Is this the typical experience of a bishop? From my admittedly limited survey involving dozens of wards spread across the US, England and Canada, I can't think of one like it. It's possible, of course, but is it typical? There is always a danger in making generalizations from limited samples.

3. Some of the members are toxic and being at church requires contact with them

I really need help with these issues.

See Eugene England's essay, "Why the Church is as True as the Gospel."

http://eugeneengland.org/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/1999_e_004.pdf

Best,

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

[mentalgymnast]

I just want to say I very much enjoyed the comments of GingerRed and mentalgymnast, you both should post more.

Thank you for the kind words. Posting on these boards is time consuming as I found out when I was a regular over at the trailer park. I'm a bit more hesitant nowadays to get too entrenched in what for all intents and purposes is just a war/sparring of words. My side, your side. Kind of like politics. Reelmormon's dilemma hit a cord with me as I've been where he's at and continue to deal with an ongoing "cross to bear" of trying to dovetail faith with what seems or at least appears to be reality and common sense. My experience in talking with those that have become dissaffected with the church and become somewhat dogmatic in their stance towards things mormon is that they jumped ship before really giving things a chance. I've stayed on board rather than jumping ship up to this point, giving the church/gospel and the mormon story the benefit of the doubt. I have family and friends that are TBM and I live in the mormon corridor. It is to my advantage to graze within the pasture of the church rather than looking for greener pastures. So I exercise faith. And what a work out... I ought to really be in shape at this point!

My heart goes out to reelmormon and others that are struggling to make sense of the official (whatever that may consist of from one decade to the next) mormon story and all that it entails. It is a hard road to travel. Maybe some people have a genetic and/or spiritual predispostion towards faith and "just believing" despite all the concerns and issues that are out there. That's a gift, I suppose.

[William Schryver]

I just want to say I very much enjoyed the comments of GingerRed and mentalgymnast, you both should post more.

I agree with calmoriah. I very much enjoyed both GingerRed's and mentalgymnast's posts.

I haven't read every post on this thread, but I've read several of them. I always like Ben McGuire's and Kevin Christensen's posts.

My experience has been that I have never been challenged by historical issues as they pertain to the origins of Mormonism. Mentalgymnast wrote, in his last post:

Maybe some people have a genetic and/or spiritual predispostion towards faith and "just believing" despite all the concerns and issues that are out there. That's a gift, I suppose.

I guess I have that gift--a predisposition towards faith. But I don't ignore concerns and issues. I guess I simply have the gift of coming to see things as they really were. I see answers where others seem to only perceive problems.

Take the origins of the Book of Abraham for example. I approached my study of those things with a rooted faith in the divine origins of the Book of Abraham--I recognized the voice of God speaking in it. However, the more I have examined the source materials, the more I have been able to see where the critics have been grossly mistaken when it comes to their conclusions and arguments about these things. In other words, there are very good answers to what appear, on the surface, to be serious problems.

So, I don't discourage people from investigating historical issues. Quite to the contrary. That said, I am convinced that it is personal revelation that is the key to obtaining and retaining faith in the restored gospel. One must forge and maintain a revelatory relationship with God, without which no faith can long endure.

[DBMormon]

I very much enjoyed reading page 5...... just got back from a Father/Son Priesthood Commeration Campout.

Good time... lots of work.... I am glad many of you have enjoyed this thread. I'll check back later

buenos dias

Edited May 5, 2012 by reelmormon

[Darth_Bill]

Maybe some people have a genetic and/or spiritual predispostion towards faith and "just believing" despite all the concerns and issues that are out there. That's a gift, I suppose.

That may be. There are probably other issues, such as not having time to investigate other religions and find that they have the same elements as the LDS church (Hinduism has some real bizarre ideas and it made me evaluate what bizarre ideas I believed in.) Some are cultural and comfort. If this is what you grew up with and are happy with it, why change or upset the apple cart? While I don't think it is perfect, Fowler's stages of faith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fowler%27s_stages_of_faith_development) were instructive, as I found it somewhat descriptive of what I have gone through. Some just don't grasp what the issues really are and some remain ignorant by choice. My wife falls into that last part, and I do not push it. Her mind simply doesn't work the way mine does, and it isn't a character flaw on either side. Much of my delay in coming to my conclusions are relationship generated. I didn't want my marriage to suffer if I really took things to MY logical conclusion.

I must also say that I am not angry or bitter. The church has played a big part in my life, but I am sure any organization that has people trying to help other people would do the same. I might not think the church is what it claims it is any longer, but it has some wonderful people, and I don't think it is purposefully trying to deceive people. I love the people, they are my tribe, my friends, family and loved ones. I just view it differently than I used to.

[Grundelwalken]

How can anyone ever work though this if everyone is hesitant to share their experience. I am not asking for everyone to bear their deepest secrets, just how they worked through it. No one needs to tell their specific hangup, just the process. Also I wasn't looking for negative stories, I was asking more for those who never had this kind of hangup to describe how they handled it, saw it, worked with it, the methods they used that others who had a hangup perhaps didn't.

RM, I'm not reluctant to share but I'm not sure what I have to say is really relevant to anyone but me. As I have learned about some of the "troubling" things others have found in history, doctrine, etc. pertaining to the gospel, I have had one thought. Since we are all mortal and we each have weaknesses, isn't it possible that those who 'perpetrated' the problematic events might also have had weakness and made mistakes?

Was polyandry a cover-up for Joseph and his insatiable desires? I don't believe so but if I am wrong it does not reduce my love for the Book of Mormon and the principles of truth therein. Did Brigham create the priesthood ban because he was worried about intermarriage with blacks? Maybe so (though I strongly feel that is not so) but haven't I also done some things because of prejudice and lack of understanding.

In my own life I have offered counsel to others in different leadership and teaching positions. Over time some of the things I have taught have proven to be incorrect and I have felt great despair because I may have led someone astray. Yet, I still try to provide good guidance to those I serve and will simply adjust my offerings to them based on new knowledge.

I WILL NOT hold others responsible for what I believe, simply because I find out they were incorrect in some of their understandings. My testimony is based on my personal experience with the things of God and is not based on stories or experiences of other people. And I hope that others will not use my own failings as a reason to leave the fold of God and wander off into the world without Him.

What Joseph Smith did only has sway on my salvation to the degree I agree and am guided by the Spirit to follow his work. Some things I don't understand but I have faith that I will and am waiting for the answer. In the meantime, there is work to be done and lives (especially my own) to be changed. No time for me to give up and abandon the only thing that has ever given me a hope for eternal joy.

That's how I do it. MW