Church History And Faith Crisis Part 3

[RDA]

We don't know if he did or not. Change is slow. Perhaps one needs more than a week or two to find their way. Just saying

[GingerRed]

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 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 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:

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:

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 too 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 demeanors 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 and worse.

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:

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” is not only destructive to you but to others who would extol you more for your title than for your understanding of correct principals.

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 their 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 excellance found in 1 Corinthians 8 whole chapter. I don't know if you have talent in seeing beyond the story line to the prinicples 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 condeming 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.

Sam....Thank you for saying exactly what I was thinking but didn't know how to phrase it!

Sorry Reel, I'm not coming down on you. But this post seems to be right on, in what you seem to be going through.

I'm on of the posters on here that I believe I have a pretty unshakable testimony. I've been on this board for years now and no one has been able to wreck my faith. Not that I haven't had my own episodes of doubt....we all have those...just not over any of the reasons you speak of. And I feel like there's nothing I can say, that will be of any help to you when there's already been loads of wonderful advice given, like Samlam said, you seem to ignore. You really do keep posting over and over the same rhetoric that has even ME beginning to think like Sam!

Just what will it take to get through to you?....nothing WE say. If you don't already have that personal testimony that KNOWS you that all you need is to go the the Lord and talk to HIM about all these things...and get your OWN personal revelation on the matter...then your 'calling' you think you need to share, is not going to help anyone, least of all YOU! You're supposed to be the one who's on the 'pedestal' sort of speak, reaching down to help others up. Not sliding down the pole WITH them.

Red

[SamIam]

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.

You may be referencing my post, so I will hazard a brief comment. When Joseph Smith was organizing the Relief Society at, I believe, their first meeting in his comments he made one of the most profound statements I have ever heard. I believe it goes:

There is a time for decisions of character aside from sympathy.

When I first heard the quote I had to consider its implications for quite sometime before I realized the brilliance of the observation. However, keeping in mind that he is talking to the sisters who are organizing for the charitable relief of others, he is reminding them that sympathy and charity are not synonymous, and that the charitable thing to do may preclude the soft and gentle touch and require "a decision of character" that can address the greater need of stronger measures.

Prior to my post, there are 10 pages of some very sympathetic posts who are encouraging and supportive. There are multiple who challenge his continued lack of perception more strongly. I do not condemn either of these styles directly, although I favor the gentler touch. However, had it not been for the attack posters, RM, might have not stated certain conditions that require a bold but informed response. Perhaps he has stated it elsewhere, but as I mentioned I am not inclined to follow this kind of pandering material.

The point is RM, appears to not realize how close to the spiritual edge he is. I'm sure if you saw a little kid walking backwards towards the edge of a deep canyon, you would yell loudly to hope to divert him from a potential terrible tragedy. Once he justified his position as one who feels called to correct the course of the church and upon the pretense of his authority as a Bishop to do so he marches too closely to the concept of priest-craft to ignore the terrible risk he is exposing himself too.

So, I have raised a cautionary flag, in the same public forum wherein he conducts himself. For those of more sensitive ears, such as yourself, I apologize heartily. I am not casually inclined to caustic reproach - but there is a cliff looming ahead, and for all of the gentle encouragements I could offer the risk is too great to not make a little noise in hopes that somehow, someone will be louder that the interfering music of his own drummer coming from the ear buds firmly planted in his ears.

[RDA]

I don't think he was saying he was called to steady the ark but rather to help others who are struggling. I think you folks might ease up and give as much liency as possible. Perhaps bad choice of words but "called" can mean more then God given assignment as we use in the church.

[ERayR]

I don't think he was saying he was called to steady the ark but rather to help others who are struggling. I think you folks might ease up and give as much liency as possible. Perhaps bad choice of words but "called" can mean more then God given assignment as we use in the church.

Taking all his posts in this thread it is quite evident that he feels it his calling to change the direction of the church in this matter. Go back and look and if I have made a mistake in this assessment please come back and correct me.

[cwald]

If RM's honest discussions and posts about faith crisis are not welcome here, and members consider sites like NOM and staylds to be mostly apostate wolves in sheep clothing, then where should these discussions occur? Church?

[rodheadlee]

If RM's honest discussions and posts about faith crisis are not welcome here, and members consider sites like NOM and staylds to be mostly apostate wolves in sheep clothing, then where should these discussions occur? Church?

No one said his discussions are not welcome here. Several have said that he is ignoring the true answers, where to seek the truth and what to do with it. Post by Wengland, Lightbearer and Samlam give great advice as well as some others.

The problem with StayLDS and NOM is this:

Rev 13:.

13He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

14

And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the ^afaithful and true witness, the ^bbeginning of the ^ccreation of God;

15 I know thy ^aworks, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.

16 So then because thou art ^alukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will ^bspue thee out of my mouth.

17 Because thou sayest, I am ^arich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:

18 I ^acounsel thee to buy of me ^bgold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.

19 As many as I love, I rebuke and ^achasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.

20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and ^aopen the door, I will ^bcome in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

21 To him that ^aovercometh will I grant to ^bsit with me in my ^cthrone, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

22 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches

Edited June 17, 2012 by rodheadlee

[RDA]

So in order to stay in the cool club, one has to take the position that the church is always in the right or at the least we can never say so if we feel that way. That it never errors or you at minimum can't point those out? In theory you will all say no to that but any flaw that is brought up you jump down their throat and label them, criticize them, and then tell them they should leave and are respecting their calling.

Sorry but RM seemed to imply that he handles very well his conduct off the Mormondialogue board appropriately and came here to have an outlet to share his views. He never once said he did anything off this board that compromised that.

I think you guys have got to be careful. Protect the church? absolutely but we as a faith have to be more tolerant of those who remain unsettled. It is not up to us to determine where the line of good mormon/ bad mormon is

I think many of you were too harsh. Just because RM doesn't acknowledge that he is adopting every piece of advice given doesn't mean he isn't reflecting on what is said. And while you point out who has given good advice not all of them crossed that line making it personal. RM is off base on some of his thoughts (according to you and me) but he has a right to disagree without being lectured on how awful he is and pointing out his lack of faith in multiple ways. I hope he finds the answers and peace as well.

[DBMormon]

Having taken 24 hours to ponder what was said, I would like to say a few things.

1.) As I have said - here is the only place where I voice my concerns or views that I see as controversial.

2.) I realize history is subjective and we each see things differently. I in reality am aware that my views are not absolute truth yet as we all together throw our ideas into the arena we each defend them strongly till better evidence or better ways of seeing things rises to the surface. While I push my view strongly I also expect others to push their view strongly. (Without the personal attack)

3.) Problem is people left the arena of conversation about the views of individuals and decided it was their perogative to discuss the people who hold them. that is off limits in the real world and on this board. so from here on out I will be reporting any individual who chooses to address my personal situation unless I ask. I am asking others to report them as well and while I like the opposing viewpoint we will simply have to be happy with a smaller audience.

4.) For the record of taking good advice and pointing out england as one who gave it, him and I went back and forth discussing a better framework till he got booted out of Faith Crisis part 1 thread. If someone is willing to be patient and ask questions, I will be happy to answer them.

5.) Samlam, I will neither thank you or criticize you as you have asked and only will say I read your post all of it.

6.) Now If i were to respond to a post similar to SAMLAM's I would say that I needed to read that. there was a point or two that will affect how I respond from here on out. I hope some of you will notice the difference as we go along. I will also say that a post like that appears again it will be reported as in several parts it broke board rules of challenging one personally on their faith.

7.) This is a discussion board - can we not have opposing views and different outlooks. I am not leaving the church. I have not lost my spiritual testimony. I am not a mormon in the exact same way your a mormon.... we will disagree. I can answer all the temple questions honestly and I get a recommend. I believe the 13 articles of faith. I love the church, God loves me. Beyond that this is a discussion board . Most everyone here has an alias so they can speak freely and have no reprucussions. Had I done that, much of what was said would be different. But everyone said I was trolling the board and so in order to show I was serious I layed it all out there. Now i pay the price for that. That's fine, i'm a big boy

8.) I get it. You see someone in an eccesiastical leadership position saying things that, one: differ drastically from your view of what is appropriate and two: that it crosses a line you can't hold back or resist from addressing. As much as you feel that, this is a discussion board where the premise is people have a right without being personally attacked to share their opinions. You have to restrain yourself. If you want to address me personally, there is a little envelope icon at the top where you can message me. If you ask me anything and as long as you are not ridiculing or mocking me I will answer anything you ask. Ask Log and Kevin christiansen, CWALD, Selek, and others. Each of them have had cival discussions with me privately on personal matters or answers to questions.

9.) For the record, and i mean this, I have forgiven all that has been said. I will try to find better ways to make my points without seeming like I work for the enemy in the eyes of some but will also likely never see the church exactly like many of you do. Your going to have to live with that. You can ignore me, resist looking at threads i start... you have choices. saying anymore personally about me is not one of them.

9.) May you all have an awesome Sabbath Day

Edited June 17, 2012 by reelmormon

[DBMormon]

Now let me say as several have asked what is my responsibility to all of this and why haven't I taken advice of others

My resposibility

1.) When I joined the church I researched it to the nth degree. I wasn't involved with symposium or dialogue or any other source for mormon thoughts or concepts, in other words I never knew of any out of the box thinking. I knew anti-material because I encountered it while investigating the church and shortly before joining i knew FAIR, FARMS, SHIELDS, Jeff Lindsay (awesome resource) and BOM answerman.

2.) Somehow in finding answers to my questions I found answers that sounded good but weren't accurate

ex: masonry = temple of solomon, ethnic comments related to fence sitting in the pre-existance, ect... just bad apoligetics that I ate up as fast as I could. To this day i have a file cabinet of about 10 reams of printed out apoligetic material from my first year in the church. In college in my free time i spent all of it on FAIR, FARMS, SHIELDS, Jeff Lindsay and BOM answerman. I wanted to know every in and out of mormonism

3.) Somewhere along the way I bought that apostles and prophets speak directly to Christ. Special witness = can testify of the actual reality of Christ with a pure knowledge (actually meeting him face to face) and that anything they say from the pulpit is revelation from God to man.

4.) Read "Mormon Doctrine" cover to cover and acepted that as the gospel truth

5.) The issues never concerned me... i keep saying that and yet people keep responding like they do. seer stones don't bother me. I could care less if he used a lucky rabbit's foot. Polygamy not an issue, book of Abraham is over my head when you get down to details so I don't care. I am the guy who read everything I could find on the internet or from multi library loan system. I read everything from before i got baptised to current.

6.) Somehow it wasn't until the last 5 years or so that it hit me like a ton of bricks that all the false standards I set for myself or learned from others had serious issues and flaws. It became impossible to hold those views and faith. I choose faith and therefore changed the views. about a 9 months ago I became angry over how did I, the one who reads everything, the guy the missionaries bring their investigators tough questions to, the guy others in the ward come and ask difficult questions about history and doctrine. How Did i have this false standard for so long. Then it hit me... and don't take this wrong but

It seemed to me like the church allowed members with stage one faith systems to stay there. If you believed the false paradigm they went out of there way not to be the ones who made you think at a higher level. If you run into a problem they are happy to provide faithful answers but the problem itself is kept out of your view by the church directly as long as possible. Right wrong or indifferent that seemed dishonest at the time ( i am telling you truthfully how I felt so don't criticize). And on some level still does a little. I know i have to get past it and hope to do so. You may see my methods as in the other direction, But I have to get all this off my chest, i have to spin this every possible direction so that everything is on the table and I can pick up what works, what allows me to be honest with myself, and what allows me to hold onto faith. Keep in mind this is all about how my mind handles logical information and decides what is reasonable. Emotionally, spiritually - I know God lives. I know Christ is real, and I know the answers I have received regarding the BOM and church. We are all different and My learning by study (logic and knowledge) and also by faith (spiritual testimony) at times contradicted

now advice of others

1.) my conversation with Wade Englund was of value - he helped me see that just throwing out the 100% history as we know it for the sake of simply doing so would be problematic. It can be done but has to be in bits and pieces and scattered along the way as to ensure faith is protected. i get that.

2.) Log had a personal coversation where on a bad couple of days he walked me away from the edge. Becasue of his taking a couple hours one night to connect with me and really concern himself with helping me. He is probably the only one here who could rip me apart and I would let it slide and try to find value in it. I know log said to give myself space. ignore the church for a bit and focus on god and the spiritual connection. I am making a plan that includes that and have begun that in my personal reading. I like this board though and will have to find ways to participate and still keep my blood pressure sown while taking his advice

3.) Kevin christansen offered some great advice in faith Crisis part one that when I initially read - was offended a little but went back and read it again and saw the Christlike meekness his post seem to always have. He has my respect. I know he doesn't agree with me but he has always said so kindly. I am still pondering his advice http://www.mormondia... +faith +crisis

#11

Give it time. You may not know it from reading my posts but his advice of give it time is already seeing fruition. many of the battles i had when I registered here are non-issues.

anyway i am tired, but there are a few. have a great night

Edited June 17, 2012 by reelmormon

[why me]

I think many of you were too harsh. Just because RM doesn't acknowledge that he is adopting every piece of advice given doesn't mean he isn't reflecting on what is said. And while you point out who has given good advice not all of them crossed that line making it personal. RM is off base on some of his thoughts (according to you and me) but he has a right to disagree without being lectured on how awful he is and pointing out his lack of faith in multiple ways. I hope he finds the answers and peace as well.

At times conversations can seem one sided. The question comes down to: what is a dialogue? RM has been given a lot of answers and many members of this forum have spent much time responding to him. But sometimes it can seem as if the posters are going around in circles with him. And I think that this may be the problem. A person can find answers if they can begin to accept the answers that have been given to them.

[why me]

anyway i am tired, but there are a few. have a great night

However, reel, the big question is: Have you changed your mind or do you still old the same old views you had before you came here. In other words, if this were a new forum for you, would you still ask the same questions looking for answers that posters have already given you from a similiar forum such as this?

I have the feeling that you would still rehash the questions that you have been posting here.

[why me]

And on some level still does a little. I know i have to get past it and hope to do so. You may see my methods as in the other direction, But I have to get all this off my chest, i have to spin this every possible direction so that everything is on the table and I can pick up what works, what allows me to be honest with myself, and what allows me to hold onto faith. Keep in mind this is all about how my mind handles logical information and decides what is reasonable.

So basically, all the time that posters have spent trying to help you have been of very little help because basically you are still at the same place before you came here. Is your mind already made up and as it been already made up before you came here? Is your mind open for change? I think that these are good questions for you. Perhaps others can speak about my next statement but it seems that posters may believe that the conversations are going around in circles because you have a difficult time in accepting their answers or their answers have not been good enough for you.

[why me]

Emotionally, spiritually - I know God lives. I know Christ is real, and I know the answers I have received regarding the BOM and church. We are all different and My learning by study (logic and knowledge) and also by faith (spiritual testimony) at times contradicted

Learned knowledge and faith can come as a contradiction. And the bible warns us about being too learned when such learning leads us from faith. If you have received spiritual witnesses to the book of mormon and the church I would stick with that and learn based on such faith when looking into church history. It can be a wonderful growing and learning experience when faith is strong because it is based on testimony. Instead of knowledge casting doubt, it actually deepens faith.

[cwald]

So in order to stay in the cool club, one has to take the position that the church is always in the right or at the least we can never say so if we feel that way. That it never errors or you at minimum can't point those out? In theory you will all say no to that but any flaw that is brought up you jump down their throat and label them, criticize them, and then tell them they should leave...

Unfortunately, that is pretty well the message I've heard on the few threads I've been involved in.

[cwald]

No one said his discussions are not welcome here. Several have said that he is ignoring the true answers, where to seek the truth and what to do with it. Post by Wengland, Lightbearer and Samlam give great advice as well as some others.

The problem with StayLDS and NOM is this:

Rev 13:.

13He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

14

And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the ^afaithful and true witness, the ^bbeginning of the ^ccreation of God;

15 I know thy ^aworks, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.

16 So then because thou art ^alukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will ^bspue thee out of my mouth.

17 Because thou sayest, I am ^arich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:

18 I ^acounsel thee to buy of me ^bgold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.

19 As many as I love, I rebuke and ^achasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.

20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and ^aopen the door, I will ^bcome in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

21 To him that ^aovercometh will I grant to ^bsit with me in my ^cthrone, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

22 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches

Wow.

[ERayR]

Unfortunately, that is pretty well the message I've heard on the few threads I've been involved in.

I'm sorry but that is not the way I heard it. There is a great danger in assuming the church position is wrong on every area where one disagrees with it.

[why me]

Unfortunately, that is pretty well the message I've heard on the few threads I've been involved in.

We also need to understand that this site does defend the lds church. It comes with the history of the site when it belonged to FAIR. But I also think that many posters take a middle of the road position. But you will not find many active people here who would side with the idea that the lds church is usually wrong. They would definitely side with the church is often right.

And I don't see a cool club. The more vocal defenders may seem like a club but the mild types such as me, can also see some posters who are also mild in tone. But I see no club. At least I am not a member of any board club.

[DBMormon]

why me - change takes time. It isn't a matter of getting good advice and things change overnight. I am pondering each issue. The frustration is this, I understand your answer to RDA and CWALD but

1.) I am not disputing the basic ideas of the gospel (First vision, BOM, Authority) and I also see all of you saying the church is made up of good men who are not perfect.

2.) Yet when anyone implies that yes they are not perfect and at this point a mistake may have been made, everyone balks at that. I realize it is out of an effort to not speak evil of the lord's annointed and to either "face the brethren" or not, but when we say they are not perfect but defend every problem it certainly looks bad to those who are struggling and simply need to understand in real terms that no-one expects the church to be perfect. I am asking nicely - Do we see that, do we understand how others see our defending every single thing?

I guess I defend my feelings so adamently because I want us more apt to admit wrongs so people don't get the impression they either have to feel the church is perfect or it can't be true. I see too many problematic things that many of the doubters get stuck on and a defense of those issues across the board makes it harder for them to find room for faith.

[why me]

I guess I defend my feelings so adamently because I want us more apt to admit wrongs so people don't get the impression they either have to feel the church is perfect or it can't be true.

I will comment more about your post later. But it has often been said that the church is perfect but the members aren't. And this is true. I think that the GAs are attempting to mention this in their talks when they say that they are not perfect and we should not expect them to be. And Joseph was certainly not perfect if we read the D&C and the scolding he was getting in his revelations. And if you notice my sig line, he even claimed that he wasn't righteous. And he said this because many members expected him to be perfect.

[ERayR]

why me - change takes time. It isn't a matter of getting good advice and things change overnight. I am pondering each issue. The frustration is this, I understand your answer to RDA and CWALD but

1.) I am not disputing the basic ideas of the gospel (First vision, BOM, Authority) and I also see all of you saying the church is made up of good men who are not perfect.

2.) Yet when anyone implies that yes they are not perfect and at this point a mistake may have been made, everyone balks at that. I realize it is out of an effort to not speak evil of the lord's annointed and to either "face the brethren" or not, but when we say they are not perfect but defend every problem it certainly looks bad to those who are struggling and simply need to understand in real terms that no-one expects the church to be perfect. I am asking nicely - Do we see that, do we understand how others see our defending every single thing?

I guess I defend my feelings so adamently because I want us more apt to admit wrongs so people don't get the impression they either have to feel the church is perfect or it can't be true. I see too many problematic things that many of the doubters get stuck on and a defense of those issues across the board makes it harder for them to find room for faith.

I am not disputing there have been errors in the past and there will be errors in the future.I just don't see these errors as the catastrophe that you apparently do and don't agree that the approach you seem to be advocating is the way to go. I think God's dealing with Saul and his rebuke of David is instructive in circumstances like this. Note that even though Saul was chasing David with the intent to kill him that when David sneaked into Saul's camp and cut off the hem of Saul's robe God told David to touch not mine anointed. Until God actually hands over the authority to change policy it is not wise to usurp that authority.

If I misunderstood your "calling" statement and I apologize.

[cwald]

I am not disputing there have been errors in the past and there will be errors in the future.I just don't see these errors as the catastrophe that you apparently do and don't agree that the approach you seem to be advocating is the way to go. I think God's dealing with Saul and his rebuke of David is instructive in circumstances like this. Note that even though Saul was chasing David with the intent to kill him that when David sneaked into Saul's camp and cut off the hem of Saul's robe God told David to touch not mine anointed. Until God actually hands over the authority to change policy it is not wise to usurp that authority.

That is dangerous talk. It's the same kind of teachings that get used in many organizations. I'm sure it's the same kind of teaching that Warren Jeffs uses to get people to follow him...the whole the prophet will never lead you astray and when the prophet speaks the discussion is over....that is scary stuff to me.

Sure, you folks have faith in Monson, but Jeffs' followers also have faith that he the true prophet.

The church is pretty benign today, for the most part...but it hasn't always been and it might not always be. Perhaps the church should tell the folks to judge for themselves and listen the spirit, rather than just accepting the prophets words for it.

If anyone in the church is wrong and/or if the organization is wrong, we should not follow and listen to that advice. And no, I disagree...the CHURCH IS NOT PERFECT. That is silliness.

[cwald]

I generally have found the LDS people to be pretty darn good folk. Perhaps we should change the saying to say something like... "the mormon people are good and Christ-like, and striving to be perfect even if the church is not.

[why me]

I generally have found the LDS people to be pretty darn good folk. Perhaps we should change the saying to say something like... "the mormon people are good and Christ-like, and striving to be perfect even if the church is not.

The church is its people. Now the organization can be perfect but the people are not. That is more accurate.

[DBMormon]

Until God actually hands over the authority to change policy it is not wise to usurp that authority.

Is it possible we can ever get to a point where we can openly admit mistakes without losing faith in the calling and authority of that leader.? And i agree with Why Me, we are seeing more of this though never specifics just general. Leaders are human, Doctrine is not every statement made by a leader.

If I misunderstood your "calling" statement and I apologize.

you did and I accept. I also, knowing how we LDS interpret thet word, could have chosen my words more wisely