rockpond Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 (edited) So, you never went online and "verified" and compared, etc., never read an anti-mormon book?The "middle" and "end" is just as important as the beginning.Many have seen the same things you did, but kept studying, and they learned the truth contrary to anti-mormon claims. Also, where do you think anti-mormon claims come from? They come from people reading things they don't understand or doesn't seem right to them, they latch onto them, and then can't see anything else which would bring them to the actual truth. You're not the first to encounter something from church sources that didn't make sense. The question is what did you do next, and next, and next. What was your "focus", what did you study from, how strong was your actual faith, it clearly was fairly easily challenged, that you didn't give the Church the benefit of the doubt. So, try again. BTW, I'm a convert and have been an anti-mormon after being in the church, so I know what happens and the thought processes and actions people take that get them to where they end up. I didn't study any anti-mormon materials. You don't know me and you've jumped to all sorts of incorrect conclusions. I'm not even sure where to start with my response. My faith was strong and is stronger now but had to be rebuilt. Edited June 7, 2014 by rockpond
jkwilliams Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 I resent your insinuation that I don't care about someone who has chosen to take offense and finds themselves in a crisis of faith. You make it sound as if I am a heartless b******. I have spent many many hours with members discussing these points. My observation is that the quicker they understand they have a choice as to what to believe the quicker we can seriously discus these issues. Do you believe that a crisis of faith is always preceded by a choice to take offense?
rockpond Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 I resent your insinuation that I don't care about someone who has chosen to take offense and finds themselves in a crisis of faith. You make it sound as if I am a heartless b******. I have spent many many hours with members discussing these points. My observation is that the quicker they understand they have a choice as to what to believe the quicker we can seriously discus these issues. I have made no such insinuation. I'm sorry if it seemed like I did. I don't think you are heartless and I don't see a need for cursing on this board.
ERayR Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 With all due respect, you are not me, and you do not know "exactly how people become anti-Mormon." If you have resolved the issues to your satisfaction, good for you. I have simply reached different conclusions, and I'm quite happy with them. Unlike you, I don't feel the need to judge your character or intellect or faith. I am quite content to respect your right to the conclusions you have chosen. I do not have any idea about your character so make no judgements. I only ask that you be honest enough to admit your current path is because of your choices.
jkwilliams Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 I am quite content to respect your right to the conclusions you have chosen. I do not have any idea about your character so make no judgements. I only ask that you be honest enough to admit your current path is because of your choices. I wasn't talking to you, but fair enough. For me it was a matter of conscience, and I chose what I believed was the right thing to do and was following a direct answer to prayer. I still believe it was the right thing to do to walk away from the church.
ERayR Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 (edited) Do you believe that a crisis of faith is always preceded by a choice to take offense? At some point it becomes a choice of which interpretation of the data that gives them problems to believe. Confession time. I have had one or two times where some information has given me problems. I chose to table the issue for further research or to believe the least innocuous eplanation. I still have things oon the warehouse shelves that I am researching. What helped me is I have had and continue to receive affirmation and peace through the still small voice of the truthfulness of the gospel and the church is the only vehicle to receive the gospel. Edited June 7, 2014 by ERayR 2
jkwilliams Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 At some point it becomes a choice of which interpretation of the data that gives them problems to believe. But that doesn't have anything to do with taking offense.
Kenngo1969 Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 It's more effective as a professional anti-Mormon to pretend not to take umbrage.Ah, I see. Thank you for cluing me in on the tactics of The Enemy .
Calm Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 I'm not advocating a victimization attitude. I'm saying that as a church we look at what is causing faith crises and instead of only blaming the individual, we look internally at what we could do better to prevent the crises in the first place.I think blame is a useless activity. I think the individual should accept responsibility for what he knows or doesn't and the Church should accept responsibility for teaching the best they can figure out and both get on with the work they think is worthwhile.
rockpond Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 I think blame is a useless activity. I think the individual should accept responsibility for what he knows or doesn't and the Church should accept responsibility for teaching the best they can figure out and both get on with the work they think is worthwhile. I agree. And since we are the church, I'm just advocating for a certain piece of that work that I believe would be worthwhile.
jkwilliams Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 At some point it becomes a choice of which interpretation of the data that gives them problems to believe. Confession time. I have had one or two times where some information has given me problems. I chose to table the issue for further research or to believe the least innocuous eplanation. I still have things oon the warehouse shelves that I am researching. What helped me is I have had and continue to receive affirmation and peace through the still small voice of the truthfulness of the gospel and the church is the only vehicle to receive the gospel. That accurately describes me for a lot of years.
Calm Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 (edited) rockpond, Eray and others know exactly what it is that you are asking, they just seem to refuse to answer, or twist the question around, in their effort to defend the church at any cost, even when the church is wrong; instead, they try to label all who take issue with the church's tactics as having some type of "victim" mentality (which I find comically ironic considering the long history of "persecution complex" within the church).Why is it so hard for some members to admit that the church might benefit from altering some of it's teaching tactics?.I don't see ERayR, myself or CV ever stating it would not benefit the Church to change its methods of teachings, especially when they have been demonstrated ineffective or confusing. Edited June 7, 2014 by calmoriah 1
Calm Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 Do you believe that a crisis of faith is always preceded by a choice to take offense?It would depend on how one using "take offence". In the sense of pride being injured...no. In the sense of being troubled by something, yes.
ERayR Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 But that doesn't have anything to do with taking offense. It is taking offense at the church because of information one chooses to accept. If there was no offense there would not be such a severe reaction.
jkwilliams Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 It would depend on how one using "take offence". In the sense of pride being injured...no. In the sense of being troubled by something, yes. I've never thought "taking offense" and "finding something troubling" were remotely equivalent.
Calm Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 I have on a few occasions heard it used in the sense of finding something to be a stumbling block. It may be a less common usage or an inaccurate one. I will go and check the dictionary to see which it is.
ERayR Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 I don't see ERayR, myself or CV ever stating it would not benefit the Church to change its methods of teachings, especially when they have been demonstrated ineffective or confusing. My concern is that there is a desire to blame the Church for personal choices. Like trying to cover the "what if I am wrong" possibility by shifting the blame to shortcomings of the Church and Church leaders.
jkwilliams Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 My concern is that there is a desire to blame the Church for personal choices. Like trying to cover the "what if I am wrong" possibility by shifting the blame to shortcomings of the Church and Church leaders. Or it could just be a recognition that the church isn't always a positive influence in our lives.
ERayR Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 I've never thought "taking offense" and "finding something troubling" were remotely equivalent. Different perspectives To me leaving the church is a pretty strong reaction to merely finding something troubling.
jkwilliams Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 Different perspectives To me leaving the church is a pretty strong reaction to merely finding something troubling. I don't know anyone who left the church because they found something troubling.
ERayR Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 Or it could just be a recognition that the church isn't always a positive influence in our lives. I have had a brief bout with that one too. My self examination led me to conclude it was from my choices of how I interacted with certain ward members. Once I decided to accept that it was my interactions with certain people I developed a different outlook at the Church.
jkwilliams Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 I have had a brief bout with that one too. My self examination led me to conclude it was from my choices of how I interacted with certain ward members. Once I decided to accept that it was my interactions with certain people I developed a different outlook at the Church. It wasn't until after I left that I realized how unhappy I'd been in the church. Acknowledging that isn't blaming the church or absolving myself of blame, just recognizing that it wasn't all good.
Tacenda Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 rockpond, Eray and others know exactly what it is that you are asking, they just seem to refuse to answer, or twist the question around, in their effort to defend the church at any cost, even when the church is wrong; instead, they try to label all who take issue with the church's tactics as having some type of "victim" mentality (which I find comically ironic considering the long history of "persecution complex" within the church).Why is it so hard for some members to admit that the church might benefit from altering some of it's teaching tactics? Of course, the church doesn't have to do anything, particularly at the request of us "apostates," but they then should not be surprised that people are still arriving at some type of faith crisis when they uncover unknown and sometimes troubling aspects of church history.Just keep doing what you are doing LDS church, but don't then wonder why there continues to be this ongoing theme of faith crisis' within the church as a result of murky history or half-told historical truths. One or two or a few dozen people losing their faith over church history might point to individual flaws in faith; a large contingency of people leaving the faith over historical issues, or a continued mantra of church history deceit by disaffected members, might point more to an institutional flaw, IMO.I'm starting to see the walking wounded around me, people I'd never believe it could happen to. The only reason, I believe, the church isn't getting on it quicker is because many members remain on the books and don't resign.
Storm Rider Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 To me I see in so many of these posts the appearance of conflict, but in reality I find that it is most probable all are right and all are wrong in some degree. Most are just focusing on different things resulting in talking past one another. This is a complex topic with many layers. Each of us is responsible for our own choices; I think we all agree with that. We are responsible for how we respond to the challenges in our life as well as those choices of first action. The Church is also responsible for its history. I tend to think that the history of the church is anything but hidden or secret; however, I also understand that someone with an inquisitive mind will read and study for more than one without. Learning prepares one to understand things at a deeper level and lends to empowering one to overcome some things more easily. Regardless, it is about the weakest among us that the gospel of Christ teaches us to value and strengthen. We as individuals need to recognize and remember that we each will have weaknesses and needs. We need to minister to one another and search for those that are feeling their burdens becoming too overwhelming. In regards to this specific challenge of those with a faith crisis, loving and ministering to them is not demanding they stay true to the church today. We don't know the mind of the God and what he has in store for individuals. It is always my thought that the fullness of the gospel is found here in the the restored church; however, some of us need to back up and learn or focus on some other truths for a while and that will take us to other places of worship. These people need our love and acceptance; we need to have faith that God is leading them every bit as much as God is leading us. Thankfully, he never forgets one of us and I have faith in that teaching. The administration of the Church is an evolving process and it will continue to evolve. It is clear that the Church leaders recognize a problem and they are trying to respond to those challenges. Many of us may wish they moved more quickly to change certain things. What gets me through the day is knowing with every fiber of my being that I would not want to be in their shoes for anything in the world. I pity them for the burden they carry and for the degree of judgement and responsibility they bear to our Father in Heaven. Take our degree of responsibility for our own children and then multiply that by billions. They are not only responsible for the members of the Church, but for every individual that lives and has lived upon this earth. I think of this weight often and it helps me even when I am challenged to pray for them and their welfare. Just as we have wronged others and repented the Church has wronged others and she repents also. That repentance process is in the hands of God and does not need any input from me or anyone else.
Kenngo1969 Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 I'm starting to see the walking wounded around me, people I'd never believe it could happen to. The only reason, I believe, the church isn't getting on it quicker is because many members remain on the books and don't resign.Ah, I see! So: (1) there are tens (if not hundreds) of thousands of people who resign from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints every year. It is literally Hemorrhaging members. And: (2) There are millions more who want to resign, they simply haven't gotten around to it. That is a tragic state of affairs, indeed. It's a wonder that the Brethren are so blind to it. Perhaps you should write the First Presidency. 1
Recommended Posts