Church History And Faith Crisis Part 3

[DBMormon]

My thread was abducted by Hieroglyphs....ahhhhhhh. Anyway. I just wanted to say to all of you here. no book of abraham back and forth... start a new thread.

Ok back to the OP - it really seems to be up to each individual to choose faith or not. Do you see it that way. Can one want to believe, decide to belive and still be forced out the church in their heart and conscience becasue things just never fit well enough. Or does one simply try to resolve the cognitive dissonace and leaving is the only way to completely do that?

[MitoticSlime]

Thanks for explaining your POV on those, RM. And Kevin, thank you for posting those resources. I've read some of them before, but not all.

As to your question, is faith a choice, I tend to look at it this way: there is a difference between faith and belief. I think faith can be a choice, as the scriptures tell us it can start with just the desire to believe. However, in my view, belief itself is more like an output of all the knowledge and experiences a person has, it's affected by all sorts of things and can be influenced by one's desires but not directly controlled by them. On the one hand, the human brain is quite adept at finding evidence for a belief or desire it already has, on the other hand, I could not just flip a switch in my head and decide to believe in Santa Claus again. So I don't view belief as a binary choice.

As for your other questions, I think it depends far too much on the individual in question, what they value and what they've experienced. I definitely think one can have the desire to believe and still come to a conclusion of unbelief, I've heard far too many stories of people suffering immensely for their loss of faith to think that it could be solved for them just by wanting to believe again. For some people leaving the church is the only thing that can bring peace to their mind. But I'm equally certain that for others (many of them here on this board), trying to think that the church is not true would cause just as much cognitive dissonance, even when faced with all the same issues.

[bcuzbcuz]

My thread was abducted by Hieroglyphs....ahhhhhhh. Anyway. I just wanted to say to all of you here. no book of abraham back and forth... start a new thread.

Ok back to the OP - it really seems to be up to each individual to choose faith or not. Do you see it that way. Can one want to believe, decide to belive and still be forced out the church in their heart and conscience becasue things just never fit well enough. Or does one simply try to resolve the cognitive dissonace and leaving is the only way to completely do that?

I agree. Book of Abrahamers can go find their own backyard to play in

[Storm Rider]

I wonder if Peter felt a cognitive dissonance after Jesus was arrested? Or if Paul experienced when faced with monotheism and acknowledging that Jesus was the Christ? I have long since grown tired of the phrase "cognitive dissonance"; that cherished phrase of those that have left the Church. Above all else they feel compelled to portray that they left because of their lofty intellect; that the Spirit is dead and too weak to overcome their towering genius.

Here is a clue; at times you will not understand the universe; you will not understand God; and you will not understand history. At night when you are all alone and you hear the question, "Whom say ye that I am?" If you remain convicted of the Spirit that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God then you are ready to be his disciple and to stand firm against your own lofty intelligence.

[DBMormon]

Storm Rider - You may not like the word but the feeling is real. There is a ton of angst when you feel stuck between the faith you want to hold onto and your mind telling you the evidence is mounting the otherway and your stuck trying to hold onto something you feel is slipping away. So give me a new word for it and I will be happy to use that.

I will say this that feeling doesn't have to stay. I can tell you that if one persist in choosing faith, at least in my instance, one can come to the conclusion the church is still true. For me all it took was to convince myself that the leaders can be seriously flawed. That idea alone takes care of 90% of my issues. now the other 10% are things that can be understood in many different ways

ex: kinderhook plates (perhpas joseph really tries to translate in a real way of understanding translation.... it has to seem odd that he didn't continue to translate them if he was a fraud. Too me it is more odd he only began them then the fact he did not complete them.

Now I will say many of the faithful give lip service to leaders can be flawed but as someone pointed out yesterday in another thread the moment you actually give an example people race to defend them. I think we need to be more apt to say yep Bro. so and so may have messed up. It's ok if that happens. It is the ideal in ones head that they don't that causes some of this to begin with.

an example and perhaps this touches more to what you deny they do rather then a flaw : Mr. Bitton the assistant Church Historian under Leonard Arrington said the following... keep in mind this is no intern. He is the next tier down from Bro. Arrington.

On one occasion Leonard and I were advised to leave a chapter on polygamy out of our book. We listened to such reactions, tried to be sensitive to different audiences, and made the best judgment we could. Polygamy is a large and

important part of our history. Questions continue to be raised about it. Thinking that we could render service by producing a concise, low-key treatment of the subject, we proposed such a work to our superiors. They declined. Whether because of general press reaction or because of the presence of Fundamentalists still clinging to the practice, polygamy is such a sensitive subject that some General Authorities preferred to avoid mentioning it at all. Church magazines. were not supposed to mention the practice. Books produced by Deseret Book

studiously avoided it"

Now maybe with good reason, but that is censorship. That is hiding truth. That is not being forthright. That is not telling the whole truth. Too many of you will race on something like this to say, "the church doesn't hide anything." "They hide it right in the ensign" But your not honest with yourself. They do keep people in the church quiet about publishing troubling factual info. unless you want to call Mr. Bitton liar, one must come to terms with that.

Now, Me? It would have bothered me a few months back, because I see you folks defending and and arguing against any thought the church does that, and in doing so you set up a false standard for me and others. at the end of the day, it's ok. The are protecting faith. While I would expect the "untrue church" to do things like this and While I wish the true church wouldn't, I can see why they would and if in their shoes perhaps I might as well at times.

So lets be more honest in our defense of the church. It helps everyone

Edited June 14, 2012 by reelmormon

[DBMormon]

Kevin - I apreciated your words yesterday. Thank you for adding to the discussion. I was wondering when you might share some thoughts

[Kevin Christensen]

Kevin - I apreciated your words yesterday. Thank you for adding to the discussion. I was wondering when you might share some thoughts

You are welcome.

Best,

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[MitoticSlime]

I wonder if Peter felt a cognitive dissonance after Jesus was arrested? Or if Paul experienced when faced with monotheism and acknowledging that Jesus was the Christ? I have long since grown tired of the phrase "cognitive dissonance"; that cherished phrase of those that have left the Church. Above all else they feel compelled to portray that they left because of their lofty intellect; that the Spirit is dead and too weak to overcome their towering genius.

Here is a clue; at times you will not understand the universe; you will not understand God; and you will not understand history. At night when you are all alone and you hear the question, "Whom say ye that I am?" If you remain convicted of the Spirit that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God then you are ready to be his disciple and to stand firm against your own lofty intelligence.

Wow. I don't understand why the simple use of a phrase caused you to be so dismissive. Cognitive dissonance is just an uncomfortable feeling when gets when trying to simultaneously hold onto two conflicting beliefs. It's certainly isn't exclusive to religious beliefs, and it doesn't prove anything about which of the conflicting beliefs is the true one. It only says that the beliefs conflict and that our brains will work to resolve that conflict. To answer your questions, Peter and Paul both definitely experienced cognitive dissonance in those instances. They were faced with new information that completely contradicted their worldviews. That's what happens.

As for your second paragraph, I already admitted that my problem stems from not being convicted of the Spirit, or, more accurately, receiving contradicting witnesses from the Spirit. Even if I did dismiss my intellect, as it were, that doesn't resolve the issue that the Spirit is so far not providing conclusive answers.

[volgadon]

I agree. Book of Abrahamers can go find their own backyard to play in

We have.

[Anti-NOMunistJackMormon]

reelmormon., your post is something that many go through.

There are some on this thread saying they never had these feelings. Well more power to you and Godspeed. I would caution that even the strongest may at some point find themselves lost. I had a cousin that was and still acts like Osama Bin Mormon and has been knocked off her high horse more than once and probably will even harder someday with her attitude. I don't wish it upon those who do but even the mighty can and do fall.

As far as poisoned wells there is plenty of poison already there. Sometimes the antidote is from the people who surved the poison.

[Storm Rider]

Wow. I don't understand why the simple use of a phrase caused you to be so dismissive. Cognitive dissonance is just an uncomfortable feeling when gets when trying to simultaneously hold onto two conflicting beliefs. It's certainly isn't exclusive to religious beliefs, and it doesn't prove anything about which of the conflicting beliefs is the true one. It only says that the beliefs conflict and that our brains will work to resolve that conflict. To answer your questions, Peter and Paul both definitely experienced cognitive dissonance in those instances. They were faced with new information that completely contradicted their worldviews. That's what happens.

As for your second paragraph, I already admitted that my problem stems from not being convicted of the Spirit, or, more accurately, receiving contradicting witnesses from the Spirit. Even if I did dismiss my intellect, as it were, that doesn't resolve the issue that the Spirit is so far not providing conclusive answers.

It is a knee-jerk response to the common use of the phrase "cognitive dissonance". It is used adnauseum by a select group of former LDS and it is often used by those who seek to appear intellectual. It is best to understand the term. It does not exist within the Spirit or spirit. It exists solely within the intellect of man; I perceive a conflict between these things and therefore one is wrong. It demands that man knows or can know something completely without any possible exceptions. It is similar to believing that because science states something today, it is gospel truth. Yet, it fails to grasp that science is limited to today's understanding and is a constant state of understanding and learning. Tomorrow's science may, and probably will, contradict some our understanding of today.

You are not in a bad place, but a human place. You are seeking to understanding; the mere fact that you are seeking is a sign of humility. This is a position that the Spirit can work with and guide you. As you continue to study things out, contemplate, and learn more you will undoubtedly come to a deeper understanding of God and his teachings. Our mortal perception is often the captain of our ship. What we must strive for is the recognition that we must have the Spirit guide when our mortal understanding fails.

[DBMormon]

antinoministJackMormon - Thank you for your words. I know I come off as an apostate at times. But I am not, of course all apostates likely say that. I will do all I can to see that we address the issues at hand so that we as a church are better equipped to prevent this struggles in the next generation. I feel called to do that. I could sit back and shut up and tow the line, but don't feel inclined to do so

[DBMormon]

and for those who assume I am a trouble maker. This is the only board I participate in. This is the only forum in the real world or virtual world where I debate these issues. I do not have members to my home and bring all this up. This is the place, and an appropriate one I think, where one can let his guard down a bit and share tough things and get feedback on how well that feeling, concern, belief, fits into the larger truth. It has helped me rid myself of several concerns and it has reinforced that some are valid (to me). If not here then where? if I didn't participate here I would be in much worse spiritual shape. So please take what I say in that context.

[MitoticSlime]

It is a knee-jerk response to the common use of the phrase "cognitive dissonance". It is used adnauseum by a select group of former LDS and it is often used by those who seek to appear intellectual. It is best to understand the term. It does not exist within the Spirit or spirit. It exists solely within the intellect of man; I perceive a conflict between these things and therefore one is wrong. It demands that man knows or can know something completely without any possible exceptions. It is similar to believing that because science states something today, it is gospel truth. Yet, it fails to grasp that science is limited to today's understanding and is a constant state of understanding and learning. Tomorrow's science may, and probably will, contradict some our understanding of today.

I think you're reading more into the term than is warranted. As I said before, cognitive dissonance says nothing about the actual truth of the beliefs in question, 1 of them could be true, both could be false, or both could be true. It only deals with our perception of the beliefs. It does not demand that man know anything. It only describes what our brain does when faced with a perceived contradiction.

I don't doubt that people have used the term as a bludgeon to dismiss spirituality, but I don't see that as a valid reason to disqualify the term from being used in a discussion.

You are not in a bad place, but a human place. You are seeking to understanding; the mere fact that you are seeking is a sign of humility. This is a position that the Spirit can work with and guide you. As you continue to study things out, contemplate, and learn more you will undoubtedly come to a deeper understanding of God and his teachings. Our mortal perception is often the captain of our ship. What we must strive for is the recognition that we must have the Spirit guide when our mortal understanding fails.

Thank you for your kind words. I'm glad you're giving me the benefit of the doubt regarding my sincerity.

[why me]

Wow. I don't understand why the simple use of a phrase caused you to be so dismissive. Cognitive dissonance is just an uncomfortable feeling when gets when trying to simultaneously hold onto two conflicting beliefs. It's certainly isn't exclusive to religious beliefs, and it doesn't prove anything about which of the conflicting beliefs is the true one.

Cognitive dissonance is a favorite expression among exmormons to describe the process that mormons are now experiencing when they believe in their religion. And because of this, it is a word that basically means that mormons are stupid while the exmormons are enlightened.

[why me]

It has helped me rid myself of several concerns and it has reinforced that some are valid (to me). If not here then where? if I didn't participate here I would be in much worse spiritual shape. So please take what I say in that context.

I think that the point reel is that no board can compensate for faith or lack of faith. I came here for help also many years ago when the discussion board belonged to FAIR. But my mind needed to be open to what people were saying and I needed to come to an understanding of what my own belief is. So, I looked at the big picture that is mormonism and i looked at Joseph and the witnesses and the beliefs and ethics of the lds church. And quite frankly, I just can't see Joseph writing the book of mormon or sidney writing the book and taking a back seat to Joseph. Sidney would have to be an idiot to do that.

And I think that that is not a bad way to look at it all. The rest is just fluff...My motto is: keep it simple.

Edited June 15, 2012 by why me

[why me]

I will do all I can to see that we address the issues at hand so that we as a church are better equipped to prevent this struggles in the next generation. I feel called to do that.

The question of faith is always a struggle. Why? Because faith is not based on evidence...in fact, just the opposite. And as such, people struggle with faith. The gospel is simple and the mormon story is simple. It goes like this: either Joseph was a prophet or he was a fraud. And we have a book called the book of mormon. If the witnesses are correct and they experienced what they experienced about the book and if joseph did find the plates with the help of an angel, well..all the rest is just fluff.

Very few exmormons can wash away the book of mormon or the witnesses. It has been like this for years and years. And when it comes to polyandry, should I be the one to deny the spiritual experiences of the women involved? Or with the polygamy of Joseph Smith and the spiritual experiences of these women when they were contemplating the principle? I don't think so.

[why me]

Also in regards to polyandry - your right it can be a whole lot more complicated then that.

.

What is amazing is that certain people just blow over these women involved. it is as if these women were weak and fragile and manipulated. Far from it. These women were frontier women and certainly no pushovers. They had a strong will and made their own decisions. But exmormons treat them as jellyfish without voices flowing with the waves.

The wives of Joseph Smith were certainly no weaklings. Many went west and made great sacrifices after Joseph was murdered and no plural wives of Joseph ever said a negative word about him. And that speaks volumes. Now reel, if you married 33 women just for lust, I would venture to say, that one or two would come forward and throw you under a bus. That would be human nature if you were just a lusty guy looking for a good time.

[SamIam]

I do not use kid gloves once a poster has decided to make assumptions about me rather then ask. No kid gloves when someone says I wouldn't last 5 minutes as a LDS bishop when I have magnified my calling for 3 1/2 years. I joined the church at age 17. I was called to be a bishop at 29. Imagine that. Only member on my side of the family. I don't live out west, I live in ohio. Never went to primary, never went to seminary, YM's for less then 6 months. Then imagine having a faith crisis and still turning to the Lord when others sought your help and receiving answers and knowing what to say and having people tell you the good you've done when you are in a dark place yourself. God called me right? then some of you question that! Please take two steps back and ponder that. would you wear kid gloves? That is like spitting in my face. So no, none of you get kid gloves when you proclaim your the faithful and i am the troll. no sorry. is that fair. Maybe not but remember your the one saying I am not faithful and proclaiming from the rooftops you are (one poster criticizes me and then tells me he keeps all the commandments). so now ask yourself after you take your own personal emotion out of it, would you wear kid gloves? I need some of you to see the approach you use doesn't work.

I think when you stand on the faithful side. You are obligated especially if you judge another of not being the kind of Saint God is happy with, you are obligated to represent Christ and leave the 99 and go after the one and come back with twice as much love after reproof.

I will venture a commentary only upon the observations that you make above. I seldom comment on your “crisis” post’s for entirely different reasons than most. I have wondered about why you continue such types of posts and have never bothered to question simply making the assumption that you were inexperienced in the church. As one who in the past responded to your posts with the same kid gloves you seem to prefer. I take mine off as well and speak candidly . For the commonality of our experience, as I was in the same age bracket as you, when, I served in the same position. I also was in the mission field (Oregon) however, I did have a bit more experience with primary (Kentucky) and seminary (Oregon). Nonetheless, I didn’t serve my mission until I was 24 due to a few years of casual drifting away. That established…

I have noted that several of the more mature stronger testimony members of this group have given you some positive council. I have noted that you tend to ignore the polite dulcet pleasantness of the True Blues and I have noted your sympathetic responses to those less strong who like to keep one foot in Babylon and one foot in the Gospel. I have noted that you are not listening to the best council given, but prefer to hang with your own already clear to everyone else direction and that you move gracefully amongst those who question and equivocate. You claim to be seeking advice from those who “know” all the while preferring the company of those wandering as much as you are. So, while I always try to maintain a pleasant tone, it is obvious no one is getting your attention of the group that you claim to be seeking insight from – people who know. You would like these who have chastised you to use a more Christ like approach. To that ends, I am going to attempt, though it may be weak at best, but I am going to attempt to embrace the nature of how Christ often approached those who were in a position to lead the people and failed in their stewardship. Between two fence posts, we can cover the range of this style of correction. The 2 x 4 between the eyes of those he loved as devoted servants such as Peter when he needed a bit of guidance or the boldly direct chastisements of the Pharisees and Sadducees.

Your posts trouble me on several points:

1.) Satisfied with a secondary support when you should be going to the primary source.

I have several posts that I thought to send on several of yours. I have spent hours developing them and then decide I am not going to send them out. I have contented myself with your apparent ignorance as another wandering sheep that may get there in time. If I had know you were a Bishop but no one else was aware, I probably still could have let it slide but now that you are no longer an anonymous poster but have taken the very polarizing neon light position of “MORMON BISHOP” I am compelled to say something. Bottom line it is because it is apparent you do not understand the venues for knowledge or the risks associated with the wrong venue. To that ends I quote Boyd K. Packer)

My experience has taught me that revelation comes from above, not from the side. However more experienced or older or however more spiritual someone to the side may appear to be, it is better to go up through proper channels.

(The Unwritten Order of Things, Elder Boyd K. Packer, Marriott Center, 15 October 1996,

http://www.zionsbest.../unwritten.html

)

My point is this venue is not the venue that is capable of providing the answers to your questions. You have accepted a false paradigm that has become the bane of intellectuals of the church. They forget the process and presume upon themselves that they can gather, amass, and pour through reams of information and then, upon the strength of their own mental prowess, discern truth independent of the rules of acquiring a true spiritual understanding. Then they lament “the Lord maketh no such thing known unto us.” As I recently communicated to another, “These types [those that reason on their own] eventually find the incongruities of scripture as condemning to the person of God, Abraham practicing deceit, Israel exterminating whole populations of peoples, Adam and Eve first flesh and first death, and 6000 years of earthly existence, Uzzah getting torched for his good intentions, Jericho’s walls falling because of a bunch of noisy protesters, and marriage as a sacred institution between a husband and a wife, all these and hundreds more [scriptural principles] fall prey to the outside” influences that are more easily heard. You have already insinuated these mistakes in judgment multiple times over in your posts in the nature of how you speak and ask your questions. Samples of your questions and statements, notice the underlying feel you project:

Things you have written as examples of my point:

While I wish the true church wouldn't, I can see why they would and if in their shoes perhaps I might as well at times.

My hope here is that we can discuss - if truth is hidden by the church on purpose? - is that justified? and why? - If yes to #2 how far can one go down that slippery slope before it is innapropriate? - Other

definitive examples of this occuring? - Do we defend the church on this point when we really don't have to or are wrong in doing so because they do in fact do it?, Because I walk a fine line, how long before

the strengthening members committee has a file on me?

Do you still believe in keys? in temple ordinances? Priesthood? If yes to any of these how did we get them by iniating a fraudulent book? How do you fit Joseph smith and his motives into this framework?

With what we know from the gospel and assuming that man did evolve from a lower species (though not nessacarily ADAM and his kind) (original spelling retained)

You express nothing so clearly as that you are floundering, suffering, doubting, and wallowing in a mire of negative feelings about the church, and not just the church but God as well in His scriptures, most probably from researching apostates or intellectuals and sympathetic posters with sophistic tendencies. I realize that when one lives in a world of constant questioning, this just seems the norm and you can’t see the other side because you have never been there. You don't see the nature of your mindset as anything but normal but it is the mindset stuck in the audacity of a 17 year old who knows it all and questions the authority and wisdom of every person who could help you see more clearly. Ostensibly you imply that is why you are here to hear from those who know. However, as I stated before, You are not listening and are only enabling those who wander to bask in the comfort of association with another wanderer. Except now, you have strengthened their sense of questioning and debating church administration and history etc with the bonus association of a man of “standing.”

This is a very important principle: Based on your age of 30 ish and a young Bishop and seemingly inexperienced in acquiring personal revelation and juxtapose that against the fact that you are an adult with a family, doing adult things, treated like an adult, probable college education you have a personal conflict. You think you are an adult and in the requirements of the world you are, however based on the patterns you are exhibiting, spiritually you are a child. (We all are to some degree) You must realize that you understand neither God nor his church at this time. That of course is perfectly okay but if you are really interested in fixing this issue you must do it His way - and this ain't it baby. Whether you realize it or not, your current pattern seems that you are heading for the exit sign from the long dark hallway. Also based on this and upon a paradigm that subjects scripture to the sciences, instead of the sciences to scripture, you are lining up on the wrong side of the debate.

Nothing of course that a little Elder Packer can’t clarify most concisely:

Talk to the All-Church Coordinating Council By Elder Boyd K. Packer May 18, 1993

Thirty-eight years ago I came from Brigham City to the office I now occupy in the Administration Building to see Elder Harold B. Lee, who, next to President Joseph Fielding Smith, was the senior member of the Quorum of the Twelve. I had just been appointed the supervisor of Seminaries and Institutes of Religion. I knew there were serious problems in the system and I wondered why they had not appointed someone with more experience.

Elder Lee had agreed to give me counsel and some direction. He didn't say much, nothing really in detail, but what he told me has saved me time and time again. "You must decide now which way you face," he said. "Either you represent the teachers and students and champion their causes or you represent the Brethren who appointed you. You need to decide now which way you face." Then he added, "Some of your predecessors faced the wrong way." It took some hard and painful lessons before I understood his counsel. In time, I did understand, and my resolve to face the right way became irreversible.

Especially, in your current position, you must be willing to suffer through the hard and painful lessons. However, you should read through the entire talk and note that he applied the council several times of standing by the brethren BEFORE he understood. As well he addresses several issues that you seem to be mixed up on. It is as if he wrote the talk just for you in fact. However the point is you are spinning like a top, seemingly without a clue as to which way you need to face.

I propose a test - If you find yourself not able to face towards his council then who should amend their approach? - You to his direction or should he shift to yours?

Reasoning is good, but when you have taken the time to ponder then ask, and ask in the right manner and according to the defined pattern for how to ascertain the will of heaven. Then after you have asked, have the faith to wait, and wait. I have received answers in the past year that I have awaited 30 years to comprehend. When I had been prepared, I received the answer. .. and I continue to wait for more.

In a nut shell, the underlying issues I have with your posts are that you have confused the sacred right to ask questions of the Lord with questioning the Lord and his servants.

2.) Impatience – I mentioned it above but want to reiterate. You must be willing to wait upon the Lord for the answers you seek. This “shortcut” method of tossing your insecurities out in a public venue will never be satisfactory. In the slew of misguided LDS that pander to Babylon, which you seem sympathetic to, is a false direction. The ones that might give good advice, do not have your ear as you believe you are being thoughtful by entertaining all comers. Now that you have presumed upon your status as a Bishop to validate your right to exercise the use of this venue, you have unwittingly illustrated you do not understand your role. How many people that come here are going to say to themselves – “See, even a Mormon Bishop doesn’t believe this stuff” Pretty soon they will be quoting you all over the net – you’ll be famous…

I understand the incredible burden of having questions and NEEDING answers. It weighs like a chain upon you growing heavier with each moment. Perhaps you might have found a couple of trusted people on this board, or even in your local area, members of the high council or stake leadership that are safe. Perhaps there is someone with which you can establish some one on one exchanges. Several on this list would most likely be willing. Sometimes these can hear and be a sounding board to help you converse about some of your questions. However, still they are only sounding boards; no man will ever give you what the Lord can give you in an inspired moment. Because no matter how right their council is, until you own the knowledge by the spirit giving it to you, you lack the stabilizing singularity of that witness of the Holy Ghost.

3.) Perhaps I am dead wrong but your source material seems, as I mentioned, apostate resources - LDS or otherwise. Again, we all seem to know certain things that we just flat refuse to acknowledge. However, I’m sure you intellectually realize that if you are going to pursue and immerse yourself in a negative environment for which you obviously are not prepared, you are only feasting in Babylon’s café and subject to the lingering effects of ill prepared fare. Still, while you most likely realize it, you continue going back for lunch, even though it is making you sicker and sicker with each passing moment. You may think it’s okay to dine here because you are not drinking the coffee, however it’s the kool-aid that will kill you. (allusion to Jim Jones, in case you don’t remember)

4.) These venues are woefully inadequate for developing testimony. Just watch your current participation. You think that in innocence you have posited questions that you hope for mature counsel. Instead you find yourself embroiled in a contentious debate. If you are not involved in one then there are always a couple more just happening around you. Think about it…You need a safe place where you do not have to sort through all the detractors. Even the good ones struggle here with maintaining proper interactive demeanor because it is a difficult venue that is discouraging at times to the spirit but encouraging to weakness.

You are in danger here – you seem to think you are “rock solid” but you do not sound like you are rock solid. All of your questions and observations are made in a judgmental tone with negative innuendo. How long do you think you will be able to play the game and not have one side or the other win out? I feel as if I am observing a slow death and certainly no healing is taking place because this is not a spiritual hospital. It is more like a ghetto with a few relief workers trying to stem the tide of the soft doctrine pushers.

As to rock solid, just reading through your post’s you have established a subtle pattern of asking questions that pertain to you and then wrapping them around several other similar or alternate states in an effort to disguise what part you really are asking. However if you read enough of your posts it seems to become evident, you’re the one that is wondering and back sliding and being overcome with doubt and full of all sorts of brethren steadying council. Here is one set of questions you ask at the start of the is post:

1.) Many of you have gone through this. Why helped you come out the other side?

2.) For those who lost faith and didn't recover, what would have helped, what would have benefited you to regain faith?

3.) What advice do you give someone who is trying to find it again and seems to losing it within the grasp of their hands each day?

4.) How would you change the advice for someone who is going through this who holds a major calling? One who has no calling at all? One who is burdened by other responsibilities of the world and has little alone time to work these things out?

5.)If you had the person one on one, face to face, what would you say to them?

Zerinus gave you a simple illustration of what it was to poison the well. He nailed in the head – and sadly you appear to have ignored it entirely. Some of what you seek is bought with the price of experience and upon no other principle. In fact I am sure the Lord is in process of answering your questions even now as he prepares you and gives you experience but your impetuous efforts at “running faster than you are able” are not only destructive to you but to others who would extol you more for your title than for your understanding of correct principals.

4.) How would you change the advice for someone who is going through this who holds a major calling? One who has no calling at all? One who is burdened by other responsibilities of the world and has little alone time to work these things out?

I am going to posit a straight forward response to this one question as if it was you that was asking and based upon the observations of your posts over the past many weeks.

1.) Leave. This is not the venue for you. You should be the one holding your brightly lit lamp high not the one looking for a few drops of oil to sustain a flickering flame. Come back when you have completed the process of conversion and can effectively perform the duties to which you were called – as a leader of men and women.

2.) Quit. Quit searching in darkness for principles of light. For some reason your posts indicate that you think you are doing an okay thing, setting a positive example. But already you question how long you are going to get away with this before the church finds out and begins tracking your efforts. Please, don’t try to snow-job any one. You know what you are doing is questionable. You know your whole line of reasoning is inappropriate for the nature of what you claim to be.

3.) Stop. Stop ignoring the process that God has instituted for gaining spiritual insight and maturity. He marks the passage of a child’s transition to adulthood with the Gift of the Holy Ghost. Under appreciated, underutilized, so many take for granted the power of this gift. However, it is a gift of expectations. He gives it and expects that you will not dishonor the gift by failing its use. You have a half way thing going here it seems - Sometimes getting inspiration in your calling for the saints and mean while looking through all of the wisdom of men for personal enlightenment as if the two somehow compare. You are in perhaps one of the best venues to exponentially expand in how the gift of the Holy Ghost operates in your life and you are wasting precious time looking under every bushel you can find hoping to find a light. Stop looking there Matthew says they don’t put light under bushels but in higher places. I suggest you look there.

4.) Start. Start looking for a better control group to bounce your legitimate questions off of. I know it is a heavy, heavy burden to have questions and it does help to talk some things out in our moments of weakness. If you pay attention though, you will note a predominance of stories where a new general authority is seeking a way out of their insecurity in their new duties and so they ask a senior member’s council of what to do. Invariably the council is weak on the face of an actual outline of instruction, a few sentences at best. However, it is always powerfully instructive in referring them to the source of where they should be seeking for knowledge – ask God.

Frankly , I realize you are not mature enough for that council so find a few friends who will nurture you along until you can comprehend it. It is not that you need to bear this burden alone - not my point at all, but that there is a proper way to bear it with dignity and good bearing that does not sacrifice the saints in the process. There is a pattern and analogy of excellence found in 1 Corinthians 8 whole chapter. I don't know if you have talent in seeing beyond the story line to the principles it embraces but if you do you will read this and risk no more the path you are on.

A suggestion: Please don't even presume to answer this post with a note thanking or condemning me or whatever you first feel. THINK about it, ponder it - go a little further than tomorrow morning when you repeat the same performance with this weekends hot topic post. Again, you need to be a light - take the time to do it right.

Enough said, too much said perhaps. But would you please pay attention and stop ignoring the best council you are receiving from several venues. You have responsibility to be a lamp of illumination and not one who casts shadows and dispersions upon the Church of Jesus Christ or upon his chosen leaders.

Edited June 16, 2012 by SamIam

[ERayR]

antinoministJackMormon - Thank you for your words. I know I come off as an apostate at times. But I am not, of course all apostates likely say that. I will do all I can to see that we address the issues at hand so that we as a church are better equipped to prevent this struggles in the next generation. I feel called to do that. I could sit back and shut up and tow the line, but don't feel inclined to do so

Having served in church positions you should know that you don't just feel called. You receive your calling through the proper channels. You get your callings from one holding the authority to make that callin and by the laying on of hands. I feel called to do something is not in the Mormon lexicon. You receive your callings as as outlined above.

[Log]

I feel called to do something is not in the Mormon lexicon.

I feel that the section you bolded in red is somewhat alarming as well. Lavina Fielding Anderson said something similar, and was ex'd for executing her "calling."

[Anti-NOMunistJackMormon]

I get that some people here don't like or agree with some of what reel posts. I would say however that when people are weak spiritually it may help to hear from someone who was there and found ways to find strength. Those who say they are un-shakable or never had doubts are either lucky or untested in some cases. I don't deny thier conviction. However for some it is not easy to have such blind or assured faith and for others it may be the pride before the fall. I've seen this many times. It's not exclusively laziness nor desire to sin. Everyone's trials are different as we are all different. That's the way we were created.

I would rather someone struggling to read posts and responses from someone like reel here rather than them be shunned by lack of understanding from the like of some other site leading them to a total destruction of faith and scorched-earth of total disbelief and forsaking God.

[ERayR]

I get that some people here don't like or agree with some of what reel posts. I would say however that when people are weak spiritually it may help to hear from someone who was there and found ways to find strength. Those who say they are un-shakable or never had doubts are either lucky or untested in some cases. I don't deny thier conviction. However for some it is not easy to have such blind or assured faith and for others it may be the pride before the fall. I've seen this many times. It's not exclusively laziness nor desire to sin. Everyone's trials are different as we are all different. That's the way we were created.

I would rather someone struggling to read posts and responses from someone like reel here rather than them be shunned by lack of understanding from the like of some other site leading them to a total destruction of faith and scorched-earth of total disbelief and forsaking God.

The problem is there are some who will not even consider the possibility of their own error and ignore any communication that suggest an error on their part.

[RDA]

The problem is there are some who will not even consider the possibility of their own error and ignore any communication that suggest an error on their part.

I think several times RM has shared that the way he learned the gospel was part of the problem. Not sure where he avoided fault. That said I agree if one is in a calling of authority, that he might better handle this privately. though I will add that many see this board as an outlet a private place to talk and bounce things off others.

[ERayR]

I think several times RM has shared that the way he learned the gospel was part of the problem. Not sure where he avoided fault. That said I agree if one is in a calling of authority, that he might better handle this privately. though I will add that many see this board as an outlet a private place to talk and bounce things off others.

A place to "bounce things off others" is fine but it is an exercise in futility if you are going to discount and ignore the feedback.