How Prevalent Are Serious Doubters In The Lds Church

[ERayR]

But you admit you are declaring one "better" than the other, right?  The three kingdoms of glory aren't often taught as "different strokes for different folks" and of equal value.  

 

I can't "follow my nature" and still end up in kingdom where I can be with my wife forever if "my nature" pushes me towards disbelief in Joseph Smith or God.

 

Then you have to decide which is better for you.  If you want a celestial life with your wife and family then you better choose that way.  You have until the judgement to make a final choice.

[Senator]

I'm wondering what there is unrighteously judgmental about the observation that degree or intensity of faith differs from individual to individual, in drawing a rather obvious contrast in that regard between a Hans Mattsson and a Bruce R.McConkie, and in applying lessons from Christ's parable of the sower to real life events and circumstances.

 

 

To state that someone's belief withered is one thing.  To say they withered easily, is another.  You qualified the withering based on a subjective determination and in so doing ascribed an unflattering characterization of the man. You can't possibly know how easy or hard the whole experience was for him.

[Buckeye]

I've been pondering this statement for a couple of days now.

 

It would be tragic indeed if we were to see a mass exodus of our youth from the Church because they could not abide the teachings of the Church on this topic. But are we in for a train wreck?

 

In my own youth I witnessed a great deal of societal foment with changing values regarding pre-marital or extra-marital sex. I wonder whether those who were born after the advent of the sexual revolution (beginning in the late '60s) can truly recognize or appreciate the contrast between then and now.

 

As for me, I clearly remember what it was like. Yes, there has long been rampant violation of the law of chastity, but until that time, it was not widely viewed as acceptable like it is today.

 

I suppose someone back then could have said the Church was facing a potential train wreck regarding its youth with the increasing tension between changing values of society and the Church's steadfastness. Forty years after the fact, I can say the train wreck never materialized. The laws and commandments of God remain what they are, and the faithful in the Church, young and old, continue to embrace them, regardless of what the world at large might say or do.

 

Scott, that's a valid question.  If you've been pondering this for a few days, I wonder if you could convey your experience with the youth and young adults in the church.  I can only share my experience.  Are you seeing a significant difference in the attitude of LDS youth vs. non-LDS on the issue of SSM that I am not?

 

As to whether it's a trainwreck, I hope you know I sincerely hope not.  But I am worried.  We can analogize this to the 60s free love culture (something I'm too young to comment on), but analogies could also be drawn to inter-racial marriage or other issues which the church, and its culture, changed to embrace.  What will actually happen will depend entirely on the rising generation's judgment as to whether SSM is good.  Our country and world have accepted SSM to a significant enough degree that we are all going to "taste of the fruit."  We will see what happens to these families - whether two men or two women really can create something as good as a man and a woman.  If the youth watch this happen and decide that SSM is not good, they - speaking collectively - will find a way to maintain the current church teachings.  But if the youth - again collectively - judge that SSM is good, then they church will have to adapt to bring that good within our theology. 

[Storm Rider]

Scott, that's a valid question.  If you've been pondering this for a few days, I wonder if you could convey your experience with the youth and young adults in the church.  I can only share my experience.  Are you seeing a significant difference in the attitude of LDS youth vs. non-LDS on the issue of SSM that I am not?

 

As to whether it's a trainwreck, I hope you know I sincerely hope not.  But I am worried.  We can analogize this to the 60s free love culture (something I'm too young to comment on), but analogies could also be drawn to inter-racial marriage or other issues which the church, and its culture, changed to embrace.  What will actually happen will depend entirely on the rising generation's judgment as to whether SSM is good.  Our country and world have accepted SSM to a significant enough degree that we are all going to "taste of the fruit."  We will see what happens to these families - whether two men or two women really can create something as good as a man and a woman.  If the youth watch this happen and decide that SSM is not good, they - speaking collectively - will find a way to maintain the current church teachings.  But if the youth - again collectively - judge that SSM is good, then they church will have to adapt to bring that good within our theology. 

 

Whether something functions well or not in mortality does not have a real impact in the eternal realms. We are seeking for holiness; holiness cannot exist when we abandon ourselves to our passions; particularly those that are against God's plan for humanity.

[stemelbow]

I agree.  And I think what happens next is where beleivers/doubters/apostates get in conflict.

 

If someone who is doubting continues to search/pray/study/etc and comes to the conclusion that they no longer believe... have they "dealt" with the doubt in the "wrong" way?

 

I think everyone agrees that "doubt happens" but if the doubter moves from doubt back to belief, he's seen as dealing with doubt the "right" way, and if he moves from doubt to disbelief, he's seen as dealing with doubt in the "wrong" way.  And the doubter doesn't like that accusation.  Is there no way to view both paths as valid or "right"?

 

is it wrong to think that God leads people out of the Church for His own purposes and designs?  I don't doubt it.  The Church is way too small, relatively speaking, to think it's what houses God's leading of men.  He uses all resources available to Him, I'd say.  The Church is not the end all.  It is merely one tool of many that God has at His disposal. 

 

With that thought, doubt suddenly because a useful tool.  It's also helpful for us who remain in the church so we aren't lead down paths unchecked.  There are too many mortal hands running things in the Church for blind faith to be consistent among all.

Edited August 30, 2013 by stemelbow

[stemelbow]

I have frequently expressed that anyone who has experienced what I have experienced would have to be either evil or mad to choose to leave the Church. No doubt a handful of apostates fall into one or both of those categories, but I don't think very many do. Consequently, I've been forced to conclude that most of those who actively apostatise must not have had the same experiences as I have had and continue to have. (Of a necessity one must continue having such experiences if one is to avoid earlier experiences fading into the dim fog of spiritual amnesia -- perhaps the most common route out of active participation though not necessarily into apostasy.)

 

On this point, I'm reminded of the words of the Prophet Joseph Smith himself: 'I don’t blame any one for not believing my history. If I had not experienced what I have, I would not have believed it myself'.

 

Of course, this conclusion merely pushes the question out one ring further: How is it possible for some to be active Church members yet never experience the things that should accompany their membership and participation? To which I have a tentative answer, though I fear that those who tragically choose to disassociate themselves over 'intellectual issues' wouldn't find it any less 'judgemental'.

 

Over the years, and I hate to have to admit this, the most judgmental people (and I mean this in a unfairly judgmental way), if general observations about groups works, are not LDS (although I'd say we are pretty up there near the top) but people who have left the Church.  In a very real way the people who I struggle with in Church the most seem to have the same type of attitude and personality as many people who have left.  I grow suspicious of certain people in Church quite often because of this.  I know it goes back to my own judgmental weakness so I try to forget it and give everyone the benefit of my doubt, but it's tough, to say the least. 

[Robert F. Smith]

Not an indicator of how many people, but I think it's fair to say that virtually everone has doubts about something, at some time or another, to some degree, even if only in themselves vis-a-vis what they know to be true. The exact same thing can be said for faith, which is really how things get done, and so pound for pound, is the more powerful of the two sentiments 9for lack of a better word).

 

We can approach doubts with the faith we have, or with more doubt. We can steady the feeble knees or we can exploit them. We can exaggerate so as to give doubt more power and influence than warranted to fulfill whatever agenda, or we can minimize and ignore it for the same reason.

 

Doubt is definitely not part of the Gospel and Doctrine of Christ.

Your final statement seems in direct opposition to the correct observations made immediately above it.  I would have expected you to say that "Doubt is definitely part of the Gospel."  Why?  Because life is messy, and we only learn our lessons through challenges in every aspect of our messy lives.  Doubt is normal and healthy, unless it paralyzes us into stasis.  Indeed,. the notion that doubt is not part of the Gospel could be termed the "steady state theory of the Gospel," in which we reassure each other that "all is well in Zion."  Or "What me worry?" [where is Alfred E. Neuman when we need him?]

 

Whether we consider the serious doubts of Moses, Jonah, Peter, and Thomas in Scripture, or the more recent doubts of Don Bradley and Maxine Hanks, it is clear that some powerful self-reflection is often called for -- and the cowardly need not apply.  I admire the honesty of those ardent LDS Church members and leaders who have shamefacedly admitted that they were wrong and have come back into the fold (Oliver Cowdery, William Wines Phelps,  Martin Harris, et al.), even though some never came back into the community of Saints (David Whitmer).

 

The Gospel of Jesus Christ is open and progressive, the Law of Opposition the very foundation of Free Agency.  As Mike Quinn has correctly observed:  "The unexamined faith is not worth having."

[Robert F. Smith]

Scott, that's a valid question.  If you've been pondering this for a few days, I wonder if you could convey your experience with the youth and young adults in the church.  I can only share my experience.  Are you seeing a significant difference in the attitude of LDS youth vs. non-LDS on the issue of SSM that I am not?

 

As to whether it's a trainwreck, I hope you know I sincerely hope not.  But I am worried.  We can analogize this to the 60s free love culture (something I'm too young to comment on), but analogies could also be drawn to inter-racial marriage or other issues which the church, and its culture, changed to embrace.  What will actually happen will depend entirely on the rising generation's judgment as to whether SSM is good.  Our country and world have accepted SSM to a significant enough degree that we are all going to "taste of the fruit."  We will see what happens to these families - whether two men or two women really can create something as good as a man and a woman.  If the youth watch this happen and decide that SSM is not good, they - speaking collectively - will find a way to maintain the current church teachings.  But if the youth - again collectively - judge that SSM is good, then they church will have to adapt to bring that good within our theology. 

In the midst of uncertainty about SSM, it might be well to reflect upon the time when all of America considered the polygynous Mormons to be barbaric and worthy of extermination.  Non-standard marriage may cause some people to gag and get apoplectic, but the fact is that ordinary heterosexual marriage is on the rocks -- a failure which may have implications as large as the Fall of the Roman Empire.  We need to ask whether marriage of any kind can survive, and, if so, how?  Having children out of wedlock has become chic is some circles, and we may be heading for an "anything goes" style of society.  What will that  mean?

[Robert F. Smith]

Doubt is not a new issue.  At least one study shows that 70% of raised Mormons become disengaged (inactive) for at least a year at some point in their life, and that a majority of Mormons (55%) become disengaged and disbelieving for at least a year.  Of those, a majority (60%) of the disbelieving and disengaged members return.  Stan L. Albrecht, Marie Cornwall, & Perry H. Cunningham, AReligious Leave-Taking: Disengagement and Disaffiliation Among Mormons.@ In Falling from the Faith, ed. David G. Bromley, pp. 62-80. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications 1988). 

 

All religions in the U.S. are currently experiencing higher rates of disengagement and disaffiliation than in the past.  I think ours is too.

 

But doubt is not a new serious problem.  And doubt is not incurable.  I suspect many people on the board who are currently believing participating members of the Church have been through periods of very serious doubt or of actual disbelief.  

Palerider seems unaware of this sort of research (including the work of Rodney Stark), and I appreciate your bringing it to our attention.  The Church itself is a huge number-crunching organization with a Presidency and Board of Directors which do everything they can to assure viability and corporate health.  And they have been doing so for many years.

[Robert F. Smith]

Why is sinning an illegitimate reason to leave?

Because it is a bad lifestyle choice, and wickedness never was happiness.

[DBMormon]

Cinepro - you used a quote from President Monson -

 “Faith precedes the miracle. It has ever been so and shall ever be. It was not raining when Noah was commanded to build an ark. There was no visible ram in the thicket when Abraham prepared to sacrifice his son Isaac. Two heavenly personages were not yet seen when Joseph knelt and prayed. First came the test of faith–and then the miracle. Remember that faith and doubt cannot exist in the same mind at the same time, for one will dispel the other. Cast out doubt. Cultivate faith.”

 

 

I just want to say that while I sustain president Monson, I absolutely, completely, unapologetically state that faith and doubt can and do exist at the same time.  Even Paul says as much when he says Faith is the Substance of Things hoped for, the evidence of which not seen.

 

I have doubts and I lead with faith.  I have both.

[stemelbow]

Because it is a bad lifestyle choice, and wickedness never was happiness.

 

Well you're sinning whether you stay in the church or leave anyway. 

[stemelbow]

Cinepro - you used a quote from President Monson -

 

I just want to say that while I sustain president Monson, I absolutely, completely, unapologetically state that faith and doubt can and do exist at the same time.  Even Paul says as much when he says Faith is the Substance of Things hoped for, the evidence of which not seen.

 

I have doubts and I lead with faith.  I have both.

 

So are you saying you can both doubt Joseph saw God the Father and Jesus and have faith he did?  Or are you saying you can doubt Joseph's practice of polygamy was sanctioned by God but have faith he faithfully brought us the BoM?  Is it apples and oranges?

[DBMormon]

So are you saying you can both doubt Joseph saw God the Father and Jesus and have faith he did?  Or are you saying you can doubt Joseph's practice of polygamy was sanctioned by God but have faith he faithfully brought us the BoM?  Is it apples and oranges?

I am saying that i have doubts that the Church is true, but that I also have faith and I lead with my faith, but my doubts are still present. they coexist with the Faith taking lead most of the time.

[Tacenda]

I am saying that i have doubts that the Church is true, but that I also have faith and I lead with my faith, but my doubts are still present. they coexist with the Faith taking lead most of the time.

I've so appreciated your honesty DB!

[DBMormon]

I've so appreciated your honesty DB!

Sooner or later it will cost me dearly, I am hoping for later

[stemelbow]

I am saying that i have doubts that the Church is true, but that I also have faith and I lead with my faith, but my doubts are still present. they coexist with the Faith taking lead most of the time.

 

Yeah.  I'm about the same.  Just checking what you meant.

[The Nehor]

Because it is a bad lifestyle choice, and wickedness never was happiness.

I meant why is it less legitimate then leaving over historical and philosophical doubts.

In the midst of uncertainty about SSM, it might be well to reflect upon the time when all of America considered the polygynous Mormons to be barbaric and worthy of extermination.  Non-standard marriage may cause some people to gag and get apoplectic, but the fact is that ordinary heterosexual marriage is on the rocks -- a failure which may have implications as large as the Fall of the Roman Empire.  We need to ask whether marriage of any kind can survive, and, if so, how?  Having children out of wedlock has become chic is some circles, and we may be heading for an "anything goes" style of society.  What will that  mean?

It means we fall under the old curse and will live in interesting times.

The United States in particular is poised for some shocks. The disintegration of the family, the largest gap between rich and poor in history (historically has always led to revolt), people tired of the economic and political costs of maintaining superpower status, and the stress of continuing to live on an economic cliff are taking their toll.

[Senator]

Because it is a bad lifestyle choice, and wickedness never was happiness.

Well, he didn't say it was a good reason, just a legitimate one.

 

If it is legitimate to boot someone from the church due to sin, it is legitimate to remove one's self from the church due to sin.

[daz2]

So are you saying you can both doubt Joseph saw God the Father and Jesus and have faith he did? 

 

 

I think we are talking semantics here.  We are told that faith is not the equivalent of "knowledge."  For some people, though, "faith" might mean "certainty".  If that is so, and if "doubt" means "disbelief", then a person cannot both doubt and have faith that Joseph had the vision he described.  

 

I have a hard time distinguishing between certainty and knowledge.

 

To me, having faith means acting and hoping that a condition is true, while acknowledging that one is not certain, or does not have all the data.

 

Thus, faith is a combination of affirming in thought or behavior without the full data and therefore without absolute certainty.   If doubt is define as the lack of certainty, acknowledging that one's hope could be wrong, then yes, faith and doubt can coexist, and they are two sides of the same coin.

 

One can believe and disbelieve at the same time.  "Lord, I believe, help though my unbelief."

[canard78]

I've been pondering this statement for a couple of days now.

It would be tragic indeed if we were to see a mass exodus of our youth from the Church because they could not abide the teachings of the Church on this topic. But are we in for a train wreck?

In my own youth I witnessed a great deal of societal foment with changing values regarding pre-marital or extra-marital sex. I wonder whether those who were born after the advent of the sexual revolution (beginning in the late '60s) can truly recognize or appreciate the contrast between then and now.

As for me, I clearly remember what it was like. Yes, there has long been rampant violation of the law of chastity, but until that time, it was not widely viewed as acceptable like it is today.

I suppose someone back then could have said the Church was facing a potential train wreck regarding its youth with the increasing tension between changing values of society and the Church's steadfastness. Forty years after the fact, I can say the train wreck never materialized. The laws and commandments of God remain what they are, and the faithful in the Church, young and old, continue to embrace them, regardless of what the world at large might say or do.

I think this is an interesting comparison. Another I'd draw is to alcohol. In my community growing drinking alcohol was a natural and accepted thing for teens (15-16). On my friend's 18th birthday everyone (except me) bought him a pint of beer at the party at the pub. Several added a double vodka for good measure. His parents were at the party and watched approvingly. It was considered an appropriate right of passage. I had no issues with the WoW. It was simply a personal choice which some mocked me for, but my true friends respected.

However... There's a big social difference to my choice of chastity and teetotalism as a teen. In those cases I was considered quirky but holding personal morals affecting only me. At no point did I tell my friends that their drinking should be illegal or banned, nor did I belong to a church who had recently campaigned for alcohol prohibition.

For a youth today, the Mormon stance on SSM is not simply a personal choice of morals but, from the perspective of some of their friends, an expression of bigotry and inequality. For some it is as bad as being a racist.

If the church had, in the last 10 years, publicly campaigned for the limitations of rights to an ethnic minority group, I would feel incredibly uncomfortable about it. The prop 8 events and ongoing vocal opposition to SSM by the church will put some people, especially some youth in certain areas of the world in just as awkward a situation as my hypothetical racist one mentioned above.

Will this lead to a train wreck? Who knows, maybe not, but it's a tougher challenge than for those who grew up in an environment of sexual liberation or teenage alcohol consumption.

Being considered a prude is far less painful than being considered a bigot.

[Buckeye]

For a youth today, the Mormon stance on SSM is not simply a personal choice of morals but, from the perspective of some of their friends, an expression of bigotry and inequality. For some it is as bad as being a racist.

If the church had, in the last 10 years, publicly campaigned for the limitations of rights to an ethnic minority group, I would feel incredibly uncomfortable about it. The prop 8 events and ongoing vocal opposition to SSM by the church will put some people, especially some youth in certain areas of the world in just as awkward a situation as my hypothetical racist one mentioned above.

Will this lead to a train wreck? Who knows, maybe not, but it's a tougher challenge than for those who grew up in an environment of sexual liberation or teenage alcohol consumption.

Being considered a prude is far less painful than being considered a bigot.

 

Excellent points.  Prop 8 has defined the church for the rising generation (at least in the US where I live).  Back in my day, if a friend in high school learned I was mormon the first thing they would think was polygamy.  I might get razzed about having more than one mom, but I could explain that was in the past and we'd move on.  For kids today, gay issues are the thing.  It's not something that can brushed aside has being in the distant past.  It's not something, like the WOW, that friends can understand even if they don't follow it themselves.  For a large, and growing, number, it is bigotry. 

[cursor]

I have a difficult time understanding how pornography (or "porn") is such a recurring theme in a thread that is entitled, How Prevalent Are Serious Doubters In The LDS Church. I don't believe I saw anything in the referenced article that indicated that pornography was seen as a significant problem for those that that "deal with doubt." I personally feel that it is seriously unfair to suggest (by frequency of mention in the thread) that pornography is a serious contributor to there being doubters in the LDS Church.

 

Edit:
Fortunately, I see that the flow of discussion has shifted. 

Edited August 30, 2013 by cursor

[canard78]

I have a difficult time understanding how pornography (or "porn") is such a recurring theme in a thread that is entitled, How Prevalent Are Serious Doubters In The LDS Church. I don't believe I saw anything in the referenced article that indicated that pornography was seen as a significant problem for those that that "deal with doubt." I personally feel that it is seriously unfair to suggest (by frequency of mention in the thread) that pornography is a serious contributor to there being doubters in the LDS Church.

I completely agree. I feel it's unhelpful to insinuate that those that doubt have a deeper (sometimes hidden) sin like a porn issue that leads to doubt.

A person can have an issue with porn and no doubts.

A person can have doubts and no porn issue.

Or a person can have neither or both.

They are two unconnected issues and need a completely different response.

[The Nehor]

I have a difficult time understanding how pornography (or "porn") is such a recurring theme in a thread that is entitled, How Prevalent Are Serious Doubters In The LDS Church. I don't believe I saw anything in the referenced article that indicated that pornography was seen as a significant problem for those that that "deal with doubt." I personally feel that it is seriously unfair to suggest (by frequency of mention in the thread) that pornography is a serious contributor to there being doubters in the LDS Church.

I suspect the two are connected. I am told about half of the men in the church have a problem with porn and about a quarter of women (though they tend to use the more socially acceptable written erotica). When you are torn in two over sin or an addiction you cannot seem to control then reasons to doubt the power behind the law you are breaking grow more attractive.

Not all doubters are in this position but I would venture to say they are a sizeable minority if not a majority.