Complete Honesty Versus Protection Of Faith

[wenglund]

If a follower of Warren Jeffs began to question Smith marriages to 14 year old girlsand married women, would you offer the same vague advice?

Yes. Obviously.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[volgadon]

That is absurd, of course you can have it both ways when it comes to infinite beings with infinite capacities. Not only are you thinking in terms of mortal men with their limitations, but you are thinking of modern men who when they become adults most often take off and leave home.

Well, my son and his wife have taken turns living with us and her parents who are just a block away from us as well as having a home of their own, again practically within shouting distance. In other times, sons built their homes on the land of their fathers when it came time for them to start their own families. If they can manage it well enough here, I am certain when we become one with the Father and Son in mind and heart, in purpose and desire, then while other more limited beings might perceive a separation (and they might even not), there will not in any essential way be one.

The way Arab villages are designed in Israel, a house is built and the parents occupy the ground floor. Another storey is added for the eldest son and his family. The wealthier can find a place for the other sons. Otherwise, they build next door. Each neighbourhood, then, consists of extended family, and each home consists of parents and children. This allows people to live their own lives, but also to be there, supporting and protecting each other.

[wenglund]

Wade, other faiths keep it all centered on JC also. But in the hereafter is He going to dwell with us in heaven for an eternity as they believe or is He going to prod us to leave Him and the nest to start our own family (world)? You can't have it both ways. This may be why people struggle to know the truth also.

Those who have a correct understanding of the gospel and how the gospel works, won't be concerning themselves, for various reasons, with judging in the here-and-now how God will dwell with people of divergent beliefs in the eternities. Instead, they will be focused in the here-and-now on Christ and doing what needs to be done in the here-and-now to become more and more like Christ, as they are guided by the Spirit.

People who don't understand the gospel, will presume to know better what the Church needs to teach than Christ and his chosen leaders, and they will incessantly harp on tangents to the gospel and ask ineffectual, irrelevant, distracting, and spiritually unedifying questions (some based on false dichotomies), oft sadly at the expense of learning, thinking about, and doing the things of Christ, and then ironically wonder why they are struggling in or have lost faith in the gospel.

In other words, I am suggesting only one way, and that is the way of Christ. I invite you to leave your own way (the way of man and gospel irrelevancies), and follow him.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Memmo]

I would say that the ball is actually Christ, and the object of the "game" is for us to become like him. The Book of Mormon, the 11 witness, other works of scripture, and so forth, are simply the divinely established means for focusing us on the ball and enabling us to achiev that end.

Other than that, I enthusiastically agree with the remainder of your post.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

This is true, and definitely the needed focus if one is to live a life most in line with God's will. However, our church is unique in that we claim to be the only true church or Christ. We've staked our whole eternal salvation on this claim. The validity of that claim depends on whether or not Joseph Smith saw God and Jesus in the grove and whether he actually translated, through revelation, a book of scripture. When anything, even a small, outdated practice, throws doubt on those events and one's faith starts to spiral downward, not even a renewed focus on Christ can bring back what was lost. This is because our whole understanding of who Christ is and was comes from this church, and indirectly, from Joseph Smith and his prominent place in our beliefs.

[Memmo]

This is true. And yet, this is a very mormon thing. For example, not many lutherans leave the faith when they find out that luther made quite a few anti-jewish statements. Luther also made a positive statement about polygamy. No one to my knowledge leaves lutheranism because of it. But for the lds church, the testimony can crack under something not very serious. How to explain the psychology of it? And why?

This is a very interesting question. I do not know the answer. Our testimonies are uniquely tied to one person, and its disingenuous to say otherwise. Maybe the church is still too young. Perhaps in 300 years, the founding story will be less relevant and we will have moved on from some of the stuff that troubles the saints today.

[CV75]

It seems these days people are big on the tangible. They look for evidence which is tangible. The spirit is not tangible. But the witnesses are very tangible and people can relate to them and question why they never gave up a fraud if it were a fraud. This can be discussed and dissected. It is flesh and bone.

I don’t think it’s about “these days” only, but about human nature. In less plentiful times, the tangible requirement for proof of truthfulness was physical survival (food, shelter, protection). This is why the people followed Jesus after He fed them. Once these basic needs are met, truthfulness is determined by psychic survival, which is defined by external validation of whatever one wants to have the freedom to do, and this is why they left Him. Their proof of truthfulness changed from wanting bread to wanting to continue doing whatever they were doing contrary to the Beatitudes.

If one looks at history as a tangible means of determining the (intangible) truthfulness of the Church, they will be disappointed because a) they have set up a tangible standard for an intangible conclusion, and b) they are living in a tangible world where nothing of import comes easily, and so will inevitably find something tangible that doesn’t agree with them. Dissecting the tangible will never yield the intangible since reliance upon a tangible process is apples while the intangible objective is oranges. The discovery of the intangible will always be a subjective process.

It only takes a mustard seed of history to develop a conclusion of truthfulness. History is taken on faith anyway, especially religious or spiritual history, and even more so when meaning is interpreted from it.

[DBMormon]

God has a sense of humor and I can prove it. I get a call today from a member in tears.... her daughter (a member) is attending another church and one way or another has delved into a ton of anti material and wants to confront me with it. I go to the the Mothers house where her in tears and the daughter anger in her face. The husband and daughter's husband also sit in on the discussion. They start off asking standard anti material (treasure digging, seer stone, polyandry, polygamy, masonry, temple symbols, ect...) I answer each question calmly and with each she grows more and more frustrated.... then it happens...

She says "Why was I never told this" I told her I knew most of it before baptism and that other then a couple of issues I could find it on LDS.ORG or other church sources. She asked how many members knew what I did? I told her that of those who study things out I would guess most and shared that many members choose not to spend time researching peripheral information and issues and are then naive to those appendages of the church and it's history. She asked why she didn't know and how the church should of told her. She responded "The church should have told me".

I replied That "I knew that stuff and she didn't what was the difference"? If she failed to study and research was it her fault or the church's? she was speechless. Then she told me that as a Leader I was responsible someway somehow to make sure every member knew these issues.

I told her when I should cover that? She didn't know but said "as a Leader you would recieve inspiration on how to share all this stuff"

I told her my inspiration told me there was no way to cover this stuff without losing focus on "christ and the Doctrine of Christ", "That if I were to undertake that assignment and to be sure to cover all of it, I would need hours, days, weeks, to touch on most of it and in doing so would neglect what the members really need in terms of helping them come unto Christ by teaching the basics of the gospel"

She insisted I should still cover it, and I persisted in asking her when a good time was to cover material that is difficult to understand in it's context and doesn't teach the gospel?

She still persisted though her husband agreed she was asking an unfair request.

She was in tears and I could see that she was in the midst of a faith crisis and I understood her pain, and yet I saw no way to meet her need (full disclosure). While offering many sound answers to her questions, she could not budge from the hurt she felt.

Her husband and her father both while not believers, saw the answers as useful but they were not emotionally invested in the questions or answers. It really helped me see how emotion plays into how we shape our expectations. The Lord keeps teaching me, and while I still hope we can be more sensitive, The Lord gave me a opportune chance to see this problem from the other side.

Edited July 9, 2012 by DBMormon

[CV75]

We are not supposed to contact GA's or write them.

That shouldn't deter anyone from a sincere act of faith.

[ERayR]

God has a sense of humor and I can prove it. I get a call today from a member in tears.... her daughter (a member) is attending another church and one way or another has delved into a ton of anti material and wants to confront me with it. I go to the the Mothers house where her in tears and the daughter anger in her face. The husband and daughter's husband also sit in on the discussion. They start off asking standard anti material (treasure digging, seer stone, polyandry, polygamy, masonry, temple symbols, ect...) I answer each question calmly and with each she grows more and more frustrated.... then it happens...

She says "Why was I never told this" I told her I knew most of it before baptism and that other then a couple of issues I could find it on LDS.ORG or other church sources. She asked how many members knew what I did? I told her that of those who study things out I would guess most and shared that many members choose not to spend time researching peripheral information and issues and are then naive to those appendages of the church and it's history. She asked why she didn't know and how the church should of told her. She responded "The church should have told me".

I replied That "I knew that stuff and she didn't what was the difference"? If she failed to study and research was it her fault or the church's? she was speechless. Then she told me that as a Leader I was responsible someway somehow to make sure every member knew these issues.

I told her when I should cover that? She didn't know but said "as a Leader you would recieve inspiration on how to share all this stuff"

I told her my inspiration told me there was no way to cover this stuff without losing focus on "christ and the Doctrine of Christ", "That if I were to undertake that assignment and to be sure to cover all of it, I would need hours, days, weeks, to touch on most of it and in doing so would neglect what the members really need in terms of helping them come unto Christ by teaching the basics of the gospel"

She insisted I should still cover it, and I persisted in asking her when a good time was to cover material that is difficult to understand in it's context and doesn't teach the gospel?

She still persisted though her husband agreed she was asking an unfair request.

She was in tears and I could see that she was in the midst of a faith crisis and I understood her pain, and yet I saw no way to meet her need (full disclosure). While offering many sound answers to her questions, she could not budge from the hurt she felt.

Her husband and her father both while not believers, saw the answers as useful but they were not emotionally invested in the questions or answers. It really helped me see how emotion plays into how we shape our expectations. The Lord keeps teaching me, and while I still hope we can be more sensitive, The Lord gave me a opportune chance to see this problem from the other side.

The reason the emotion is so strong is that the presentation of that material by critics and anti-Mormons is designed to shock the modern sensibilities and emotions.

[Calm]

It really helped me see how emotion plays into how we shape our expectations.

It is the number one factor in my opinion.

[CV75]

God has a sense of humor and I can prove it.

Interesting story. Here are some factors that indicate a lack of experieince with and a need to rely upon the Spirit:

anger in her face. -- this is not of the Spirit

more and more frustrated -- not of the Spirit

She says "Why was I never told this" -- not accepting responsibility

She asked how many members knew what I did -- comparison with others (pride)

"The church should have told me" -- blaming something outside her immedate scope of influence (family, friends, ward members, the Spirit)

make sure every member knew these issues -- expectation that faith cam be poured into people, even coersed

"as a Leader you would recieve inspiration on how to share all this stuff" -- false understanding (accusation) of what leaders should do

She insisted -- pride

She still persisted -- presumably an increase in anger and frustration; perhaps a spirit of contention

She was in tears ...hurt she felt -- presumably a reflection of her anger and frustration

emotion plays into how we shape our expectations -- in her case, her emotionality seems to be a symptom of her unmet expectations, not a factor in shaping them. What did shape her unmet expectations are the things in italics.

[Calm]

expectation that faith [and knowledge and understanding] cam be poured into people, even coersed

"as a Leader you would recieve inspiration on how to share all this stuff" ....attitude of inerrancy in leaders

Both dangerous ideas....

[ERayR]

expectation that faith [and knowledge and understanding] cam be poured into people, even coersed

"as a Leader you would recieve inspiration on how to share all this stuff" ....attitude of inerrancy in leaders

Both dangerous ideas....

Yes indeed. The question she should be asking is where can I get answers logical answers to these accusations.

[tyler90az]

and 20/20 tapings are not a good forum for discussing such things in depth (i.e., when editing will take place). I've done radio interviews of an LDS apologetic nature, and it's a very fine line between being in-depth and thorough and being effective within the time and format constraints. I think that those who criticize Church representatives in interviews have never done anything like it ---- it is not as easy as some might think, no matter how "with it" and sharp the interviewee is.

Let me add a second witness to the above.

I did a TV Interview for the Occupy Movement and thought I killed it. However, a few parts they completely edited out what I was trying to say. The bottom line is, they can edit to make the meaning something completely different then what is intended. The number one way they do this is by omitting huge parts of what you say.

[wenglund]

This is true, and definitely the needed focus if one is to live a life most in line with God's will. However, our church is unique in that we claim to be the only true church or Christ. We've staked our whole eternal salvation on this claim. The validity of that claim depends on whether or not Joseph Smith saw God and Jesus in the grove and whether he actually translated, through revelation, a book of scripture. When anything, even a small, outdated practice, throws doubt on those events and one's faith starts to spiral downward, not even a renewed focus on Christ can bring back what was lost. This is because our whole understanding of who Christ is and was comes from this church, and indirectly, from Joseph Smith and his prominent place in our beliefs.

I get what you are saying, and in a way I can see how people might view it this way.

However, I see it differently. To me, we have staked our salvation and exaltation on Jesus Christ, which salvation and exaltation consist of becoming like him.

The Church, along with its leaders and scriptures and so forth, as well as the Spirit, are but a means to bringing us to Christ and enabling us to become like him, and not the end, itself. The means is important, but not as important as the end that is Christ.

Also, the validity of the restored gospel and the Church of Jesus Christ, rest with God's confirmation through his Spirit (Moroni 10), and through the increased realization of our becoming like Christ through abiding the precepts of the gospel/Church (Alma 32), This is how the gospel of Christ is designed to work.

Whereas, it is by following a different gospel, in that the wisdom of man is supplanted over God, and where historical matters relatively impertinent to salvation and exaltation are given priority over gospel precepts and practices, and where issues such as polygamy become the focus instead of Christ and becoming like him, this is what actually throws doubt and causes faith to go into a downward spiral. In other words, loss of faith in Christ and his gospel/Church doesn't come by living the restored gospel as it is designed, but by following another gospel--one's own gospel.

And, while you are correct that as long as people are intent on following their own gospel they have little hope of regaining faith in the gospel of Christ, nevertheless they still need to be told of the gospel of Christ if they wish to regain their faith. Reminding them to re-focus on Christ, and reminding them about what the gospel of Christ is really all about and how it is designed to work, is the first important step in that regaining process. The next important step is their's to make, and that is to live the gospel as it is intended and designed.

In short, people have lost faith because they, unwittingly or otherwise, abandon the gospel of Christ for some other gospel of their own (call it the gospel of historical irrelevancies, etc.). It is important that they are made aware of this so that they can stop wrongly blaming the gospel of Christ or the Church for their loss of faith, and chance living that "true" gospel and regain their faith.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[tyler90az]

This is true. And yet, this is a very mormon thing. For example, not many lutherans leave the faith when they find out that luther made quite a few anti-jewish statements. Luther also made a positive statement about polygamy. No one to my knowledge leaves lutheranism because of it. But for the lds church, the testimony can crack under something not very serious. How to explain the psychology of it? And why?

That is because in America it is more beneficial to not be Mormon. Being a Mormon hurts you socially and many other ways. that is why it is so easy to just leave The Church, in a lot of peoples eyes it is not beneficial. The only way it is beneficial in most peoples eyes is the spiritual aspect. Once that crumbles, even in the slightest, they hit the road.

With Luteranism it is considered mainstream. It is not as much of a hindrance as being a Mormon. Therefore, they will not fall out when one little thing rocks their testimony.

[DBMormon]

Yes indeed. The question she should be asking is where can I get answers logical answers to these accusations.

I offered a ton of answers both there and by email so they could ponder on those things.. ... I realized while I am frustrated in the same way as this lady at times, As a Leader I can't talk to myself the member and resolve the issue. As long as it is emotional, one (myself) is unable to fix it. I can not have my emotional feeling of betrayal removed without putting myself in the church's shoes or the leader's shoes, which is very difficult until one is put in that spot to speak on behalf of the church and resolve the issue for someone else... man was this a lesson that was amazing, and right at the time I needed it.

His arm is always extended

[Calm]

Our LDS rep did a good job but left out some importatant stuff about our religion. Where the others were basically the same type of heaven. Why didn't the rep from our church do a better job of explaining our thoughts of being Gods etc.?

Apparently there was 30 minutes of taping edited down to 5 minutes....you don't know what ended up on the editing floor.

[Calm]

I offered a ton of answers both there and by email so they could ponder on those things.. ... I realized while I am frustrated in the same way as this lady at times, As a Leader I can't talk to myself the member and resolve the issue. As long as it is emotional, one (myself) is unable to fix it. I can not have my emotional feeling of betrayal removed without putting myself in the church's shoes or the leader's shoes, which is very difficult until one is put in that spot to speak on behalf of the church and resolve the issue for someone else... man was this a lesson that was amazing, and right at the time I needed it.

His arm is always extended

Greg Smith's paper on polygamy is an excellent collection of observations and conclusions about how history or rather the study of history or often lack of it plays into doubts, etc.

It is my contention that the discovery and dissemination of historical materials at variance with the standard or “folk” understanding of polygamy common in the twentieth and twenty-first century Church is no threat to a faithful ap- preciation of polygamy as a divinely mandated practice during the formative years of the Church. Indeed, I do not think that it is the “additional information” that causes problems for faithful Latter-day Saints who are sincerely troubled by what the historical record tells us. Rather, it is the persistent—and often unmet—need for still more information and context, which some authors have been unable or unwilling to provide. The sole “danger” which historical information poses to members or sincere inves- tigators occurs only if they stop their research too soon. Church critics are quite happy to lead their marks part of the way, only to abandon them when the story is just get- ting good.

http://www.fairlds.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/smith-Polygamy_Prophets_and_Prevarication.pdf

I would highly recommend for anyone concerned with the 'history issue' even if they aren't interested in polygamy itself.

[Evangeline]

DBMormon, it seems like God has been refining you, preparing you to be more effective in your calling. Whatever choices these people make will be their responsibility ultimately, but I think you handled the situation very well.

[wenglund]

...man was this a lesson that was amazing, and right at the time I needed it. His arm is always extended

As I see it, this, in part, is where the gospel tire meets the road. I am very happy for you. :thumbs up:

The contrast between your experience and the person you were trying to help, is instructive. She appealed to criticisms of the Church and became critical herself, and was emotionally distraught. You were acting charitably and trying to help and appealed to God and was edified. Like the Savior said, "as we sow, so shall we reap."

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[DBMormon]

Timeout.... you guys too often connect my frustration being expressed in an extreme on this board and want to correlate that to how I handle my real world experiences...... not anywhere near true. Outside of the discussion board I conduct myself absolutely based on my spiritual testimony... On the discussion board I allow my logical understanding and frustrations to play out a little hoping to find better answers on things I can't exactly wrap my head around... The miracle wasn't in how I acted... In that there was never any doubt, the miracle was in Heavenly Father sending someone who as they shared their struggle, anger, frustration; I looked in the mirror and saw myself and he allowed me to perceive that and made it clear the understanding of how I feel at times and How the church must respond to those issues...... It is a work in progress and some of this conflict will continue to play out on my discussion board playground but .... my therapist says I am making progress

As I see it, this, in part, is where the gospel tire meets the road. I am very happy for you. :thumbs up:

[DBMormon]

So the question becomes....

What are the best solutions for helping one be able to emotionally back off and see the problem in it's real context?

[CV75]

So the question becomes....

What are the best solutions for helping one be able to emotionally back off and see the problem in it's real context?

Each leader still has to grapple with how to minister to his sheep, but some guidance for people whose negative emotions entangle their faith might be gained from the following principles:

D&C 6:22, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, if you desire a further witness, cast your mind upon the night that you cried unto me in your heart, that you might know concerning the truth of these things.”

Alma 32 about planting the seed.

Testimony, priesthood blessings, and other basics (“a friend, a responsibility and nurturing by the good word of God”).

And of course leaders have leaders to whom they can turn.

[Tacenda]

I know of someone personally, who is all set to leave the church, who has written her resignation letter, whom I've told to come on this board and read, and she did, and still is going forth with it solely on the character of Joseph Smith. What do you say to someone like that? I'm sure it happens often on that one concept.