Richard Bushman'S Description Of Faith Crisis

[Glenn101]

Please don't misinterpret me and let me be clear. I see this change as revelation. But all revelation comes in answer to a question. The question - Heavenly Father, what would you have us do to help those in faith crisis who are struggling or leaving the church"?

I disagree that all revelation comes in answer to a question. Paul most certainly had no questions in mind on that fateful road to Damascus. He knew he was right, according to the laws he had been living under up to that time.

Pter had no question in mind when he received his vision of the unclean things that he was commanded to eat.

Alma the Younger had no questions in is mind when he was out persecuting members of the church and had his epiphany.

Former Prophet and President David O. McKay described one method that he used to receive revelation was to read the scriptures and meditate while opening himself up to receiving impressions.

And, of course, revelations do often come in response to questions.

And, in my own opinion, the home and visiting teaching programs could be the best resource for helping those struggling with a faith crisis. It seems to me that those programs are currently failing in the church, at least in the areas that I am familiar with. When done at all, it seems to be done rather perfuntorially. Maybe I am being judgemental in this. But I know that I have been two years almost without being visited by home teachers. My wife has not been deen by her visiting teachers for almost a year.

Devoted frienship, love, and prayers, not judgmental attitudes can strengthen and help those who are wavering.

I have a very firm belief in the efficacy of personal faith, scripture reading, and prayer in maintaining that faith, but all are not on the same page.

Glenn

[DBMormon]

I disagree that all revelation comes in answer to a question. Paul most certainly had no questions in mind on that fateful road to Damascus. He knew he was right, according to the laws he had been living under up to that time.

Pter had no question in mind when he received his vision of the unclean things that he was commanded to eat.

Alma the Younger had no questions in is mind when he was out persecuting members of the church and had his epiphany.

Former Prophet and President David O. McKay described one method that he used to receive revelation was to read the scriptures and meditate while opening himself up to receiving impressions.

And, of course, revelations do often come in response to questions.

And, in my own opinion, the home and visiting teaching programs could be the best resource for helping those struggling with a faith crisis. It seems to me that those programs are currently failing in the church, at least in the areas that I am familiar with. When done at all, it seems to be done rather perfuntorially. Maybe I am being judgemental in this. But I know that I have been two years almost without being visited by home teachers. My wife has not been deen by her visiting teachers for almost a year.

Devoted frienship, love, and prayers, not judgmental attitudes can strengthen and help those who are wavering.

I have a very firm belief in the efficacy of personal faith, scripture reading, and prayer in maintaining that faith, but all are not on the same page.

Glenn

I disagree Glenn with your assumed assumptions. God was working with all these individuals and just because the scriptures do not record them as having paused and reflected and questioned, It does not place it out of the question. There is more to Paul's story then the few pages of sacred writ that we have. We also know Alma's father prayed for him... Alma's father asked the question. Cornelius was asking the question when God blessed Peter. I do think 99% if not all revelation comes from someone asking a question.

[Freedom]

None of those other people or groups claimed to be the only true and living church.... people feel perfection is the expectation. I get it now, but this would have ticked me off a year ago. no offense meant just saying their is so much emotion in a faith crisis that for you to say I don't get it why people live their whole lives in the church learning sanitized history and speculative doctrine and then get upset when they find uncovered undiscussed history that the church decided not to emphasize that paints an entirely different picture and found doctrine wasn't as Elder McConkie and Elder Fielding Smith told you.... it hurts

I grew up in the same church and never felt compelled to worship according to any prescribed interpretation. These so-called teachings have never been adopted and always challenged. Nobody is raised learning a sanitized history and speculative doctrine. They just choose to be lazy and never read on their own and then when they are compelled to think for themselves they feel cheated as if they were entitled to scholarly instruction from their 22 year old bus driver sunday school teacher.

[DBMormon]

I grew up in the same church and never felt compelled to worship according to any prescribed interpretation. These so-called teachings have never been adopted and always challenged. Nobody is raised learning a sanitized history and speculative doctrine. They just choose to be lazy and never read on their own and then when they are compelled to think for themselves they feel cheated as if they were entitled to scholarly instruction from their 22 year old bus driver sunday school teacher.

sorry, But I was well read. I have read 100's of books on mormonism doctrine, theology, history...... still happened to me. Your experiences seem to not grasp that those who lose their testimonies to these issues are the more educated, more intellectual, two feet in members. Your grasp of why some are effected and others are not is inaccurate. Was Don Bradley not well read enough, how about Brian Whitney

http://mormondiscuss...an-whitney-pt1/

Marlin Jensen seems to indicate that it is the faithful leader who does not grasp the problem

often in the church, when someone comes with a bit of a prickly question, he'll be met with a bishop who number one, doesn't know the answer. Number two, he snaps and says, 'Get in line and don't question the prophet, and get back and do your home teaching.' And that isn't helpful in most cases. So, we need to educate our leaders better, I think, to be sympathetic and empathetic and to draw out of these people where they are coming from and what's brought them to the point they are at. What they have read, what they are thinking is, and try to understand them. Sometimes that alone is enough to help someone through a hard time. But beyond that, I think we really need to figure out a way to live a little bit with people who may never get completely settled."

Terryl Givens says the "church curriculum is deplorable"

Your dig your feet in approach, and blame the struggler, falls extremely short of what Bushman, Givens, Jensen have stated publically and it go against my private conversations with church leadership.

Edited February 4, 2013 by DBMormon

[Freedom]

Your dig your feet in approach, and blame the struggler, falls extremely short of what Bushman, Givens, Jensen have stated publically and it go against my private conversations with church leadership.

I am not digging in my feat at all. I reaffirm that these same people who are bothered by Joseph being flawed do not take issue with early church leaders of the bible being murders. I have spoken to many people who have shared these challenges and when I ask them what they feel about the biblical prophets they try to say this is apples and oranges. I ask them why they leave the church over Hinkley but they do not leave their family over their loony mother but they have no answer. They set an impossible standard for the church that has no basis on logic or reason.

[DBMormon]

I am not digging in my feat at all. I reaffirm that these same people who are bothered by Joseph being flawed do not take issue with early church leaders of the bible being murders. I have spoken to many people who have shared these challenges and when I ask them what they feel about the biblical prophets they try to say this is apples and oranges. I ask them why they leave the church over Hinkley but they do not leave their family over their loony mother but they have no answer. They set an impossible standard for the church that has no basis on logic or reason.

If you asked me that, I would say something different. That the church paints JS and it leaders as near perfect. We are afraid to mention treasure digger, but we bring the leg surgery out any chance we get. We talk about all the good he did but rarely reflect on his rebukes from God. Our leaders at times say they are not perfect but in a self depricating way. Follow the prophet, follow the prophet.... and yet it is the Holy Ghost we should follow, for that is the only way to know when a prophet is speaking as a prophet. It just never crossed my mind to consider the imperfections of the biblical leaders because the church set this dispensations leaders as near perfect...... And when someone screws up - Elder Dunn's dishonesty, Elder McConkie and Elder Fielding Smith's writing and teaching opinion as doctrine.... we never stand up and say... using a specific instance , sorry but they were wrong and should of have done that. The church in order to promote a naive black and white fairy tale view painted the story this way for me. They set up a church so perfect, I was destined to be disapppointed.

Don't sweat it, I put the pieces back together, but it almost cost me my soul

[volgadon]

Follow the prophet, follow the prophet.... and yet it is the Holy Ghost we should follow

Both, follow both, actually.

[rodheadlee]

I disagree Glenn with your assumed assumptions. God was working with all these individuals and just because the scriptures do not record them as having paused and reflected and questioned, It does not place it out of the question. There is more to Paul's story then the few pages of sacred writ that we have. We also know Alma's father prayed for him... Alma's father asked the question. Cornelius was asking the question when God blessed Peter. I do think 99% if not all revelation comes from someone asking a question.

I disagree. My most important revelations came to me out of the blue. I had been studying scripture and praying daily when I recieved them but I had asked no questions. Well, lets make it 2 to 1. My revelation on which church to join was in answer to a prayer.

[DBMormon]

Both, follow both, actually.

actually not. I follow the Holy Ghost Always. I follow the prophet when he is acting as a prophet when the Holy Ghost confirms he is acting as a prophet. I do not follow the prophet always but rather the Holy Ghost always when he is working through the prophet.

[volgadon]

actually not. I follow the Holy Ghost Always. I follow the prophet when he is acting as a prophet when the Holy Ghost confirms he is acting as a prophet. I do not follow the prophet always but rather the Holy Ghost always when he is working through the prophet.

This approach is to reduce a prophet to nothing. I am not saying to follow prophets blindly or against the whisperings of the Holy Ghost, but prophets do have keys, even when you personally haven't had a confirmation from the Holy Ghost on that particular matter.

[DBMormon]

This approach is to reduce a prophet to nothing. I am not saying to follow prophets blindly or against the whisperings of the Holy Ghost, but prophets do have keys, even when you personally haven't had a confirmation from the Holy Ghost on that particular matter.

Then what is the difference between what you propose and following them blindly? How would one know when not to follow them blindly?

[volgadon]

Then what is the difference between what you propose and following them blindly? How would one know when not to follow them blindly?

It means that unless I have a good reason not to follow, I should follow, even if I don't always like it.

[bdouglas]

I am one of six brothers. Our father was a mission prez, a stake prez, and a close confidant and friend of a recent church prez. Of my six brothers, only me and one other still remain in the church. Of the four who are out of the church, two left specifically because of inability to reconcile the JS they know today from the one they feel they were taught all during their youth, their missions, and since by the church. As for me, I started reading church history when I was in my 20's, five years or so after returning from my mission. I knew all about polygamy, I knew all about polyandry the minute the Todd Compton book came out, and none of these or other recent revelations or books that have out come out has shaken me. To me, it makes the man (JS) and what he knew all the more interesting. "Truth is stranger than fiction," the saying goes, "but not so tidy." If our church history were tidy and orderly--well, then I might doubt it. Real history is never "tidy" nor "orderly". Today I still believe in the founding narrative of the church, although I have become somewhat disillusioned with correlation and the "dumbing down" another poster mentioned. But for the most part I am okay, I am active in the church, and I think I always will be.

But my brothers--you know the saying "perception is reality". My two brothers, as Bushman noted in his essay, feel the church has "deceived" them, and no amount of talking on my part will convince them otherwise. One of these brothers came onto a forum like this with his questions (in fact it may have been this forum) in the early days of his disillusionment, and was told something like, "Brother, you have failed the faith test"--and it just did no good, in fact it just added to the beefs he already had.

And by the way, I should note that both of these brothers had been bishops, both were assistants as missionaries, and both have children and wives who are today still active.

It is interesting that when I was at BYU years ago there was nobody in the religion dept. whom you could ask about polygamy or some of these thorny church history issues. It was always, "These questions are not essential for your salvation" or something like that. It is too late for people like my brothers, but I would hope that today when a student there has a question about polygamy/polyandry, not only at BYU but any seminary or institute, that he can get something other than correlated answers. I think if my brothers had been brought up with the knowledge of these issues, if their questions had been dealt with early on and by somebody faithful and in the church who knew what he/she was talking about--well, things would be different for them today. But as it is, they both learned about what to them is the "real Joseph Smith" by people I would consider anti-Mormon, or enemies.

Edited February 4, 2013 by bdouglas

[Freedom]

If you asked me that, I would say something different. That the church paints JS and it leaders as near perfect. We are afraid to mention treasure digger, but we bring the leg surgery out any chance we get. We talk about all the good he did but rarely reflect on his rebukes from God. Our leaders at times say they are not perfect but in a self depricating way. Follow the prophet, follow the prophet.... and yet it is the Holy Ghost we should follow, for that is the only way to know when a prophet is speaking as a prophet. It just never crossed my mind to consider the imperfections of the biblical leaders because the church set this dispensations leaders as near perfect...... And when someone screws up - Elder Dunn's dishonesty, Elder McConkie and Elder Fielding Smith's writing and teaching opinion as doctrine.... we never stand up and say... using a specific instance , sorry but they were wrong and should of have done that. The church in order to promote a naive black and white fairy tale view painted the story this way for me. They set up a church so perfect, I was destined to be disapppointed.

Don't sweat it, I put the pieces back together, but it almost cost me my soul

I don't disagree with you, but I never found the church presenting a fairy tail. I found the church teaching faith promoting stories. The lessons were always about faith, and pulling in charming stories to support the principle of faith. I never found in any instance the church teaching church history. I do not dispute the honesty or validity of peoples faith challenges, I just have a difficult time relating to it. I feel the same way about people who hate MLMs, republicans, Canada's socialized medicine, or vaccines. they often deal in absolutes, and selective absolutes at that. I never learned history in high school either, just the sanitized version approved by the board of education but this never lead me to conclude that Canada isn't a true country.

But I must confess, when these people come out with their questions and I embrace their questions and validate their concerns, they show great relief because clearly, many other members of the church believe that what when they are taught faith promoting stories, they confuse this with history. I find this opposite position equally puzzling.

[Glenn101]

I disagree Glenn with your assumed assumptions. God was working with all these individuals and just because the scriptures do not record them as having paused and reflected and questioned, It does not place it out of the question. There is more to Paul's story then the few pages of sacred writ that we have. We also know Alma's father prayed for him... Alma's father asked the question. Cornelius was asking the question when God blessed Peter. I do think 99% if not all revelation comes from someone asking a question.

So, what question was Cornelius asking? And to what God was he praying? The Bible merely states that he was a devout, God fearing man. Had he already converted to Judaism?

I would imagine that Alma's father and Mosiah were praying for their children who had strayed from the gospel for help, much as I pray for my children.

As for Paul, my assumptions are pretty well founded. We have received no further revelations about Paul and anyone who might have been praying for relief from him.

Of course I am assuming that Abraham was not asking the Lord about sacrifices when the Lord commanded him to offer his son Isaac as a burnt offering.

Was Nathan the prophet asking questions of the Lord about David and Uriah when he received his orders to confront David?

Were Adam and Eve seeking revelation when the angel appeared to them asking why they were offering their sacrifices?

Glenn

[bdouglas]

This may be a little off topic but I'm going to say it anyway, since it does, indirectly, relate to OP--

A while back there was a feature in the church news, a little story. A mother is preparing for a lesson she is going to teach in church on Sunday and she has all of her books and the scriptures laid out on the table. And she says, speaking to her daughter,

"How am I to make sense of all this?"

And her daughter replies, "Why worry about it? An inspired church writing committee has already done all of the work for you. All you have to do is follow the manual. It's all right there," and she points to the church lesson manual which is among the books and things on the table.

I'm paraphrasing, but that was the gist of the story. And it just made me cringe. Our church leaders challenge us to live the Gospel, to keep the commandments--as they should. But I wonder why we are not challenged to study the scriptures more, to delve into things, to learn; to read our real church history side-by-side with the "faithful history" we are taught in stories from conference or church lesson manuals (and I am a big believer in the "faithful history", the kind we find in the BOM, for example, the kind Moroni gives to us). When we went to college, and when our kids go to college now, we/they are challenged to "ask questions", "look into things!" Why doesn't the church challenge us to do the same when it comes to our religion, especially since the signal act/happening/event of the last 2000 years--i.e., the First Vision--came about because of a question: Joseph Smith, kneeling in a grove of trees, to ask a question of God. Or was that the last question that ever needed to be asked, since through that question God delivered the answer book to Joseph Smith and now questions are not necessary ever again?

[Glenn101]

I don't disagree with you, but I never found the church presenting a fairy tail. I found the church teaching faith promoting stories. The lessons were always about faith, and pulling in charming stories to support the principle of faith. I never found in any instance the church teaching church history. I do not dispute the honesty or validity of peoples faith challenges, I just have a difficult time relating to it. I feel the same way about people who hate MLMs, republicans, Canada's socialized medicine, or vaccines. they often deal in absolutes, and selective absolutes at that. I never learned history in high school either, just the sanitized version approved by the board of education but this never lead me to conclude that Canada isn't a true country.

But I must confess, when these people come out with their questions and I embrace their questions and validate their concerns, they show great relief because clearly, many other members of the church believe that what when they are taught faith promoting stories, they confuse this with history. I find this opposite position equally puzzling.

I am still amazed by the fact that so many people seem to have been raised in the church and never heard about polygamy. My mother knew about it. My first wife knew about it. She was converted from Catholicism. She was informed by some frinds while taking the discussions as a teen. My current wife knew about it. She was informed also by some friends when she was taking the discussions as a teen. Yet, she continued to pray about it and received her answer. She was a faithful member up to her death.

That scared her off, but she converted herself by reading "faith promoting books" about Joseph and the restoration. She received a revelation that the church was divinely restored and that Joseph was a prophet, despite the polygamy question.

I was taught in church about polygamy and the end thereof way before the internet.

I am not disputing that many people have not heard about it. I am just wondering about the cultural and family dynamics that have prevented so many people from learning of those facets earlier. Or is it mostly the "polyandry" question that is most disturbing to people?

Glenn

Heck, I read about the Mountain Measows Massacre before I was a teen, in the True West Magazine.

[Glenn101]

This may be a little off topic but I'm going to say it anyway, since it does, indirectly, relate to OP--

A while back there was a feature in the church news, a little story. A mother is preparing for a lesson she is going to teach in church on Sunday and she has all of her books and the scriptures laid out on the table. And she says, speaking to her daughter,

"How am I to make sense of all this?"

And her daughter replies, "Why worry about it? An inspired church writing committee has already done all of the work for you. All you have to do is follow the manual. It's all right there," and she points to the church lesson manual which is among the books and things on the table.

I'm paraphrasing, but that was the gist of the story. And it just made me cringe. Our church leaders challenge us to live the Gospel, to keep the commandments--as they should. But I wonder why we are not challenged to study the scriptures more, to delve into things, to learn; to read our real church history side-by-side with the "faithful history" we are taught in stories from conference or church lesson manuals (and I am a big believer in the "faithful history", the kind we find in the BOM, for example, the kind Moroni gives to us). When we went to college, and when our kids go to college now, we/they are challenged to "ask questions", "look into things!" Why doesn't the church challenge us to do the same when it comes to our religion, especially since the signal act/happening/event of the last 2000 years--i.e., the First Vision--came about because of a question: Joseph Smith, kneeling in a grove of trees, to ask a question of God. Or was that the last question that ever needed to be asked, since through that question God delivered the answer book to Joseph Smith and now questions are not necessary ever again?

We are and have been admonished over and over to ask questions. And to ask in the same way that Joseph asked. To ask the same person that Joseph asked.

Glenn

[Freedom]

I'm paraphrasing, but that was the gist of the story. And it just made me cringe. ?

You are confusing 'studying the gospel and religious history' with 'teaching children the gospel'. the two are not related

[Freedom]

I am still amazed by the fact that so many people seem to have been raised in the church and never heard about polygamy.

I am amazed by how many people are raised in British Columbia and never heard of the Japanese internment and a host of other historical dirt. Perhaps this type of information requires a degree of abstraction that most people are not capable of or do not want to exert themselves to comprehend. I hear on the radio all the time the expression 'this country is going to hell in a hand basket'. Really? Hell? have you been to Mexico, Libya, Cuba, Turkey, Poland...?

I was trying to explain to a group of adults the difference between, among other investment vehicles, common stocks, mutual funds, and bonds. They put up their hands and said - 'we'll just invest at our bank, this is too confusing'. Of course, by going to the bank, they are selecting mutual funds which invest in stocks, or bonds. They did not want to put in the effort to understand basic investment strategies. Most people what to keep it simple and when the complexity of life hits them in the face they either run (leave the church) or put their head in the sand (polygamy never happened).

[Storm Rider]

....

If you feel comfortable, would you elaborate here? I couldn't understand what you were referring to and it seemed to me some important thing you were sharing--withholding blessings of the temple from countless individuals?

What I was referring to is the period where Blacks were not able to enjoy the blessings of the temple simply because of the color of their skin. No revelation was used to reveal this was the Lord’s desire. Just one day they couldn't whereas the day before they could.

Then in the late 1920's or very early 1930's it was decided you needed to obey the Word of Wisdom; it became a commandment if one chose to enter the temple. No revelation, just a man dictating his new opinion, but it had direct repercussions on the lives of countless individuals from that time to now. Disobedience was an affront to the Lord when in reality it was an affront to a man’s opinion that was then followed by each succeeding man that was President of the Church of Jesus Christ. How is this not following the foolish traditions of our forefathers?

In my life I have always obeyed the WofW, but that obedience has grown hollow and meaningless. I do believe we gain something spiritual from forms of self-discipline, but this is not a sufficient reason to prevent entry into the temple for decades. The blessings of the temple are too great for a man’s opinion to play such a grand role.

What about the time frames set up in the USA between a secular marriage and a temple marriage? How many non-member parents and family members have been shut out of one of the happiest days they should of enjoyed in the life of the child? This is policy and it has nothing to do with salvation, revelation or anything else. It is simply some fellow in Happy Valley making up policies that harm rather than help and that poisons rather than heals. I have talked to countless individuals who harbor such bitter feelings over a silly policy developed by humans that has nothing to do with the Gospel of Christ.

What continues to go through my mind is the Doctrine & Covenants 121. In leadership trainings for years this section has been used to teach how we should and need to act. Of course, for those who abuse the priesthood, the refrain “amen to the priesthood of that man” is always heard. This is a damning refrain that those who create policy to compel the followers of Christ should fear; it terrifies me. How much I pray mercy on my miserable soul; I can only do the same for those who have served and continue to serve, but the condemnation is strong.

[Freedom]

What I was referring to is the period where Blacks were not able to enjoy the blessings of the temple simply because of the color of their skin. No revelation was used to reveal this was the Lord’s desire. Just one day they couldn't whereas the day before they could.

Then in the late 1920's or very early 1930's it was decided you needed to obey the Word of Wisdom; it became a commandment if one chose to enter the temple. No revelation, just a man dictating his new opinion, but it had direct repercussions on the lives of countless individuals from that time to now.

Revelation to the prophet is not enacted through official proclamations or additions to canon. It this were the case we would have football stadiums full of new scriptures. Each time the church makes a polity change it is done after receiving revelation from God. There have been numerous changes in policy and practice over the years. These are not one mans opinion, this is the mind and will of the Lord.

[Brian 2.0]

I am just wondering about the cultural and family dynamics that have prevented so many people from learning of those facets earlier. Or is it mostly the "polyandry" question that is most disturbing to people?

I heard about it growing up as well. I actually don't remember learning it for the first time. But the explanations for it and the details of it were the things that didn't jive once I learned the historical details. Reading something like Compton's book was very eye-opening. Things happened a lot differently than the ways I as taught. (I.e. "he was always marrying widows" etc."

[Calm]

We talk about all the good he did but rarely reflect on his rebukes from God.

And yet almost everyone would know exactly what we were talking about if we were to say "116 pages" in my experience.

Even the children get taught this:

http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?locale=0&sourceId=9bbb0f9856c20110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=e36d5f74db46c010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD

[Calm]

Follow the prophet, follow the prophet....

http://www.lds.org/m...d-pray?lang=eng

http://www.lds.org/m...-voice?lang=eng

http://www.lds.org/m...-round?lang=eng

http://www.lds.org/m...-ghost?lang=eng

I won't even go into the songs about prayer, from a quick look the category of Prayer (and Prayer Songs) is one of the biggest in the book.

There are basically three songs I can quickly find using the "Prophets" topic that talk about following the prophets....Follow the Prophets http://www.lds.org/m...rophet?lang=eng , Keep the Commandments http://www.lds.org/m...nts?lang=engand Seek the Lord Early which talks about searching the scriptures and praying before it talks about listening to the prophets teaching God's word http://www.lds.org/m...-early?lang=eng

Anyone who thinks that the main occupation of Primary is teaching children to follow the prophets as opposed to seeking the Lord or the Holy Ghost or praying has spent very little time in Primary.

It seems to me that many criticisms of the Church are couched in such a way that if one looks deeper into the subject, one finds out they are not that accurate....which seems rather interesting considering how the Church is being accused of treating subjects shallowly (which I don't necessarily disagree with in a historical sense).

Edited February 4, 2013 by calmoriah