Terryl Givens Letter To A Doubter

[Lamanite]

I'm an idiot once again. I jump to way too many conclusions. Sorry Nevo.

Edited October 18, 2012 by Lamanite

[Nevo]

Actually, I was only noting that TG got some basic things wrong about these stories. Abraham's wife's name was Sarai/Sarah, not Sariah. Sariah was Lehi's wife. And Isaac didn't deceive Esau and steal his blessing. Jacob deceived Isaac and stole Esau's blessing.

/end thread derail

[KevinG]

Would I be insulting anyone's spiritual maturity by saying leaning on the word of God is a great way to find out His will for us? Or that our local priesthood authority is called to counsel us and no matter the intelligence and insights of a favorite author they are not going to help us as much as a good heart to heart with the Bishop or Stake President.

Of course not all doubt is caused by sin, but doubt can become an addiction of its own if we do not go to the source of our blessings often enough or if we are not willing to receive counsel from God that we find uncomfortable or frightening.

[yootaw]

Would I be insulting anyone's spiritual maturity by saying leaning on the word of God is a great way to find out His will for us? Or that our local priesthood authority is called to counsel us and no matter the intelligence and insights of a favorite author they are not going to help us as much as a good heart to heart with the Bishop or Stake President.

Of course not all doubt is caused by sin, but doubt can become an addiction of its own if we do not go to the source of our blessings often enough or if we are not willing to receive counsel from God that we find uncomfortable or frightening.

Have you ever had such a heart to heart conversation with a priesthood leader? I have no doubt that it could go well, but the outcome is far from certain.

[TAO]

Have you ever had such a heart to heart conversation with a priesthood leader? I have no doubt that it could go well, but the outcome is far from certain.

Yep, I have =). Priesthood Leaders tend to be really good at these sorta things... or at least mine have been =D.

[volgadon]

I wonder if this sentiment will carry over to this board:

The glib responses are of special concern to me. I won't name names.

Big UP!

Lamanite

That is exactly what I worried about. Bolding that portion makes it sound like Givens is against the above-named practices. I just don't get quite the same vibe from reading the letter in full. He was giving advice going beyond that, but if people neglect to do what is in the bolded portion, none of Givens' advice will really work either.

[mfbukowski]

To DB, you forgot a partridge in a pear tree.

To mfb, I did an analysis of the grades of my high school students some years ago. I compared the marks in math from the very first major exam to the final grade. Interestingly, about 40% of the students had marks which didn't change by more than 5% . Over 60% had marks which did not vary by more than 10 %. I checked this result over several years. It tells me something about people in general. It probably says something about my teaching also.

Frankly I doubt that it says that much about your teaching, but I am not surprised by the results.

More and more I just think that some people "get it" and others don't. I wish it would be otherwise, but I think it is not. I still cannot decide if I am among those who get it or those who do not.

As I get older and learn more, I find that I know less. How can that be? I used to know everything!

[MiserereNobis]

As I get older and learn more, I find that I know less. How can that be? I used to know everything!

Socrates: True knowledge is knowing you know nothing.

Bill and Ted: Whoa, that's us, dude!

By the way, mfb, today I am discussing the "Allegory of the Cave" with my students. I'll be sure to think of you as we talk about the realities behind the appearances... I'll also mention that some whacked out people I know think such realities can't be true

[volgadon]

Frankly I doubt that it says that much about your teaching, but I am not surprised by the results.

More and more I just think that some people "get it" and others don't. I wish it would be otherwise, but I think it is not. I still cannot decide if I am among those who get it or those who do not.

As I get older and learn more, I find that I know less. How can that be? I used to know everything!

You were so much older then...

[mfbukowski]

Socrates: True knowledge is knowing you know nothing.

Bill and Ted: Whoa, that's us, dude!

By the way, mfb, today I am discussing the "Allegory of the Cave" with my students. I'll be sure to think of you as we talk about the realities behind the appearances... I'll also mention that some whacked out people I know think such realities can't be true

You just keep looking for those and let me know when you see them! Your inoculations will do no good, and they will be assimilated!

Seriously though, you realize that that view implies that all science studies is illusions, right?

And that Our Lady of Fatima- as an apparition- also doesn't "exist"?

Edited October 19, 2012 by mfbukowski

[TAO]

By the way, mfb, today I am discussing the "Allegory of the Cave" with my students. I'll be sure to think of you as we talk about the realities behind the appearances... I'll also mention that some whacked out people I know think such realities can't be true

Actually, the cave analogy has one problem, I think; the shadows. Technically, we can't assume there is shadows in comparison.

Edited October 19, 2012 by TAO

[DBMormon]

What about those who argue that the mere list of difficult issues is too overwhelming to even lend chance to the possibility that the church is what it claims? I am not merely speaking of the list of bad anti material. But rather the formidable list that do pose some level of challenge to explain? BOA, Polyandry, Kinderhook plates, Racism and statements about Africans prior to 78', Mark Hoffman deception, ect... Do they have more then enough reason to discount the church's claims?

Also I would love the opinions of those here on this question - (And please don't just say what sounds right and appeases but rather your heartfelt opinion)

while considering Terryl Givens comments that indicates that this church that prophets and other leaders have severe flaws... He also implies major revelation comes only so often while church leaders left to their own make mistakes at time while seeking the Lord's will. That said how much more inspired are the LDS leaders over say the Jehovah Witness Church leadership?

How much more led are we over the unaffiliated church down the street, or the muslim mosque two blocks over?

Edited October 19, 2012 by DBMormon

[volgadon]

I've been in love with things Russians (and Slavic) for many, many years now, so just had to look this up. The Dostoevsky quote comes from his letter to Natalia Fonvizina. I can see why the quote stopped short, as Dostoevsky's solution really is very irrational (though not necessarily a bad thing) and of dubious help to the kind of doubters Givens is trying to reach.

"And not only is there nothing, but I tell myself with jealous love that there cannot be anything. Even more, if someone proved to me that Christ is outside the truth and that in reality the truth were outside of Christ, then I should prefer to remain with Christ rather than with the truth."

[Tacenda]

I've been in love with things Russians (and Slavic) for many, many years now, so just had to look this up. The Dostoevsky quote comes from his letter to Natalia Fonvizina. I can see why the quote stopped short, as Dostoevsky's solution really is very irrational (though not necessarily a bad thing) and of dubious help to the kind of doubters Givens is trying to reach.

"And not only is there nothing, but I tell myself with jealous love that there cannot be anything. Even more, if someone proved to me that Christ is outside the truth and that in reality the truth were outside of Christ, then I should prefer to remain with Christ rather than with the truth."

That's deep stuff!

[changed]

while considering Terryl Givens comments that indicates that this church that prophets and other leaders have severe flaws... He also implies major revelation comes only so often while church leaders left to their own make mistakes at time while seeking the Lord's will. That said how much more inspired are the LDS leaders over say the Jehovah Witness Church leadership?

How much more led are we over the unaffiliated church down the street, or the muslim mosque two blocks over?

Everyone has severe flaws - I think the more honest/humble/teachable a person is, the more of their flaws everyone sees. That said, I'm a convert to the LDS church, because this is where I had, and continue to have, spiritual experiences. I have no doubt, that for me personally, this is the tribe I'm supposed to be in. Are there other tribes out there? of coarse there are.

(Book of Mormon | 2 Nephi 29:7 - 13)

7 Know ye not that there are more nations than one?

...

12 For behold, I shall speak unto the Jews and they shall write it; and I shall also speak unto the Nephites and they shall write it; and I shall also speak unto the other tribes of the house of Israel, which I have led away, and they shall write it; and I shall also speak unto dall nations of the earth and they shall write it.

13 And it shall come to pass that the Jews shall have the words of the Nephites, and the Nephites shall have the words of the Jews; and the Nephites and the Jews shall have the words of the lost tribes of Israel; and the lost tribes of Israel shall have the words of the Nephites and the Jews.

Who are all the other lost tribes? What words have they written? Why aren't more people asking about the other sheep out there?... we're like the Jewish people who never asked Jesus about the Nephites.

[MiserereNobis]

Seriously though, you realize that that view implies that all science studies is illusions, right?

Yup. I believe, as the primordial tradition holds, that being comes in gradations. Matter has the least amount of being, for many of the reasons that Plato argues.

By the way, have you read Paul Feyerbend's "How to Defend Society against Science"? It's a hilarious and fun read that makes some important points about modernism's obsession with all things scientific. I think the skeptic in you might enjoy it.

I also think we've made a golden calf out of science and give it worship it does not deserve. Not that science is inherently bad or inherently wrong, but that some people ascribe more to science than science can ascribe to itself (scientism).

And that Our Lady of Fatima- as an apparition- also doesn't "exist"?

As an apparition, She is more real than the matter that surrounded Her.

Hey, are you and I getting on philosophic ferris wheel again? Round and round we go!

[MiserereNobis]

Who are all the other lost tribes?

Don't you know they are out there with Lord Adama and Battlestar Gallactica trying to get back to Earth?

[mfbukowski]

You were so much older then...

Indeed. I am younger than that now.

[mfbukowski]

What about those who argue that the mere list of difficult issues is too overwhelming to even lend chance to the possibility that the church is what it claims?

They don't understand what the church is, and is not.

[mfbukowski]

I've been in love with things Russians (and Slavic) for many, many years now, so just had to look this up. The Dostoevsky quote comes from his letter to Natalia Fonvizina. I can see why the quote stopped short, as Dostoevsky's solution really is very irrational (though not necessarily a bad thing) and of dubious help to the kind of doubters Givens is trying to reach.

"And not only is there nothing, but I tell myself with jealous love that there cannot be anything. Even more, if someone proved to me that Christ is outside the truth and that in reality the truth were outside of Christ, then I should prefer to remain with Christ rather than with the truth."

He needs a little Rorty- that's all.

The problem is that he was still looking for a "truth" outside somewhere, when it's all really in here, with Christ also. He's in us and we are in him- there is nothing outside. We are all just sharing our inter-subjective views of the world thinking there really is something "out there" which has never been seen.

There ain't!

Christ is subjective but so is everything else. Inter-subjective to be sure at least the scientific stuff- but subjective nevertheless.

[mfbukowski]

Hey, are you and I getting on philosophic ferris wheel again? Round and round we go!

And where it stops, nobody knows!

It will stop as soon as you acknowledge that I am obviously right!

[Duncan]

What about those who argue that the mere list of difficult issues is too overwhelming to even lend chance to the possibility that the church is what it claims? I am not merely speaking of the list of bad anti material. But rather the formidable list that do pose some level of challenge to explain? BOA, Polyandry, Kinderhook plates, Racism and statements about Africans prior to 78', Mark Hoffman deception, ect... Do they have more then enough reason to discount the church's claims?

Also I would love the opinions of those here on this question - (And please don't just say what sounds right and appeases but rather your heartfelt opinion)

while considering Terryl Givens comments that indicates that this church that prophets and other leaders have severe flaws... He also implies major revelation comes only so often while church leaders left to their own make mistakes at time while seeking the Lord's will. That said how much more inspired are the LDS leaders over say the Jehovah Witness Church leadership?

How much more led are we over the unaffiliated church down the street, or the muslim mosque two blocks over?

my question as well, is and if so to what extent is God involved i.e directing other churches

[Tacenda]

DB and Duncan, with all of the issues on the table that do not look good about the church there are those that can't deny the spirit they feel in our church and that keeps them firmly grounded. As well that might be the same for others in other faiths and their leaders getting guidance also. Could it be possible for there to be one belief in God and many institutions that God and his angels speak to?

Edited October 19, 2012 by Tacenda

[KevinG]

“She had once been a Catholic, but discovering that priests were infinitely more attentive when she was in process of losing or regaining faith in Mother Church, she maintained an enchantingly wavering attitude.” from This Side of Paradise, F. Scott Fitzgerald

[BlueDreams]

What about those who argue that the mere list of difficult issues is too overwhelming to even lend chance to the possibility that the church is what it claims? I am not merely speaking of the list of bad anti material. But rather the formidable list that do pose some level of challenge to explain? BOA, Polyandry, Kinderhook plates, Racism and statements about Africans prior to 78', Mark Hoffman deception, ect... Do they have more then enough reason to discount the church's claims?

Also I would love the opinions of those here on this question - (And please don't just say what sounds right and appeases but rather your heartfelt opinion)

My somewhat humble opinion: I only have a cursory understanding of most of those issues you noted off. I never had a major interest in most of them, but I’ve been around various boards for around 10 years and am of the generation of google (ie. Young….when I first started I’m pretty sure I was one of the youngest on board. I learned not to mention that people were often debating with a young teen ), so sooner or later you pick up a thing or two .

The only exception would be that of blacks and the priesthood….so my op is based heavily on my experience with that. I have studied that topic out ad naseum. Researched it, looked up the context to the various quotes one at a time, weighed other similar comments from the same people, checked out varying opinions, theories, and breakdowns of said historical policy/beliefs/quotes, and studied the context in which those quotes originated from (at one point I remember distinctly looking up articles from the 19^th century about mulattoes and the idea of lineage, race and the bible). So I’m sure there’s a quote or five that I haven’t looked up, but I felt like I was pretty thorough. And in all of that, did it strengthen my faith? Develop me into a better person? Changed my view of the gospel? Nope…nada…almost nothing changed. What I got was a strong contentment of living in the 21^st century, a sense of the fluidity/stridency of thought and doctrine and how they may or may not correlate, and my own personal understanding of the issue that works for me, but may not work for the next person. That’s about it. The knowledge I got was very specific and largely circular…in that I mean it went basically nowhere.

My heartfelt opinion is that I will never receive some amazing testimony and faith from some old dusty quote from BY. My most amazing growth of faith, understanding God/Christ, and understanding myself came when I was severely limited in my resources. My gospel library entailed 5-6 church books, my scriptures, ensigns, and a strong edict to serve others and spread the gospel. That’s where I was changed exponentially, that’s where I developed certainty in my beliefs, where I learned most about humanity, and how God works. I couldn’t understand how anyone could want more. Each time I opened up I learned something new, my gospel understanding deepened, my capacity for love increased. In 9 months I was further in understanding of the Lord than 5+ yrs of random studying of random controversial points in the church.

So anyone can study whatever the heck they want. If they want it, it’s all their’s. As for me I have my priorities. In 9 months I experienced a profound sense of peace that cannot be described aptly in human terms except to describe it as the most healing and freeing experience of my life. Free from my own personal dark cage. In 5-7 years I understood that that there have been shifting views about race and practices in the church for years that often paralleled the society that the people were found. It was just a fact. The other was an invaluable experience. The gospel knowledge is experiential…there’s no other way. Any other means will leave someone wanting.

How much more led are we over the unaffiliated church down the street, or the muslim mosque two blocks over?

IMHO: He’s God, Father of all humanity. He leads all, as much as they’re willing to have him. I believe there is a difference, I’ve had a variety of experiences to tell me that much. But I’m not certain enough to fully described it….if I had to take a guess in wording it about stability and purpose. Sorry for the vagueness.

With luv,

BD

Edited October 19, 2012 by BlueDreams