Are Doubters Welcome

Mars · January 20, 2015

Why the skepticism? Take what he's asking at face value; these things do happen.

There are plenty of fully believing "trouble makers"; make no mistake.

I apologize if I haven't been sincere or earnest in understanding you - or HappyJackWagon - or anyone. I did try to take the question at face value and answer. I had the second post in the thread, after all. I don't think I demonstrated any bad faith or skepticism in that post.

As background information, when I answer a question, I rely on feedback to know that my answer was considered and thought through. I try to reciprocate, and demonstrate to the other person that I am thinking about what they have to say, considering it, etc... Even stating what I agree with and what I disagree with.

When I get asked several questions, and I offer answers, and instead of language that communicates to me a desire to better understand, I instead get a sense that there was a question behind the question, I confess I get skeptical.

Mars · January 21, 2015

I fear I may have done damage - not my intention. I'm going to back off from participating in this thread.

My apologies for offending anyone.

Kenngo1969 · January 21, 2015

I like this definition better than the others above. But now we are into motives which are impossible to judge

I suspect you'll disagree (Viva la difference!) but sometimes (relatively often, in fact) it is relatively easy to ascertain motives from actions and declarations. For example, one may protest that s/he is simply a sincere seeker of truth who's prone to question, but perhaps the tenor of the question, combined with his or her actions, may reasonably lead one to believe, to suspect, or to conclude, otherwise.

Edited January 21, 2015 by Kenngo1969

Hamba Tuhan · January 21, 2015

I suspect you'll disagree (Viva la difference!) but sometimes (relatively often, in fact) it is relatively easy to ascertain motives from actions ...

Edited January 21, 2015 by Hamba Tuhan

Avatar4321 · January 21, 2015

Everyone is welcome, but I recommend faith over doubting

January 21, 2015

I just read this article on Wheat and Tares addressing the issue of whether or not Doubters are welcome in the church.

http://www.wheatandtares.org/15843/are-doubters-welcome/

What do you think? Are doubters really welcome at church or are they merely tolerated when necessary?

Of,course, but not if the goal of attending is to increase their ranks. Members who are their to build their faith should be subject to those who might only be there to instill doubt...this applies to any faith.

Kenngo1969 · January 21, 2015

... I think it's okay when a teacher or member in a class setting says something that you disagree with to *very tactfully* express that you understand that issue in a different way, and I do think that can be important to do now and then so that the urban legend and "cultural doctrine" kind of stuff doesn't keep getting perpetuated forever. But even then, I would be wary of correcting something that could lead specifically to *doubt,* in a time and setting that is meant for worship.

Perhaps, but ultimately, the Bishop is responsible for the accuracy and quality of teaching that occurs in his ward. Immediate attempts to correct may result in contention, confusion, or other bad feelings, which may lead to the Spirit (which can and does work upon hearers to enable them to discern when something incorrect is taught) being lost from the meeting, Conversely, the Bishop holds the keys for teaching in his ward, and it is under his direction and inspiration that the person teaching was called and set apart to do so. If something incorrect is taught, it should probably be brought to the Bishop's attention outside the meeting, where appropriate corrective action then can take place. One may ask if it isn't worth it to risk contention, confusion, or other bad feelings to avoid something incorrect being taught, but the Lord, in the Doctrine and Covenants, didn't say, "If ye are not correct, ye are not mine," He said, "(I)f ye are not one, ye are not mine" (Doctrine and Covenants 38:27). My $0.02. Your mileage may vary.

Teancum · January 21, 2015

doubters welcome. Trouble makers not so much.

So doubters are welcome as long as they shut the hell up and smile.

Kenngo1969 · January 21, 2015

Everyone is welcome, but I recommend faith over doubting

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/04/lord-i-believe?lang=eng

Nofear · January 21, 2015

Most of the problem about "doubters" is that sometimes Church is filled with things not entirely appropriate to Church on Sunday (see Doctrinal Mormons vs. Traditional Mormons thread). If we stick to the core doctrines of the Church (a core much smaller than most of us assume) then there will be far fewer people expressing doubts.

Calm · January 21, 2015

Otoh, there may be more expressing boredom.

I don't have that issue myself as I see endless variety in people's experience in seeking God so if they would just relax more and trust in their own way of expressing the Spirit, how can I be bored?

Duncan · January 21, 2015

So doubters are welcome as long as they shut the hell up and smile.

I don't think anyone is saying they need to permanently keep their yap shut but like in church, work, school, keep it to a minimum, please....for the children

Kenngo1969 · January 21, 2015

So doubters are welcome as long as they shut the hell up and smile.

Doubt is one thing, contention is quite another. (See 3 Nephi 11:29.) So, frankly (as much as I know you'll hate hearing this), if a doubter's motivation for coming to Sunday School is to sow doubt and contention, if I were the teacher, he might well find himself escorted from my class by two of its burlier Priesthood-holding members. In my book, a similar thing often happens in Cyber space: If someone comes here and says, "I have a question about [x]," I'll do my best to help him and to contribute positively to the discussion; if, on the other hand, he comes here and says, "Website X [which is antipathetic to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints] says [y] about [z]," I'll still do my best to help him (as will many here) and answer his questions, but if he then says, "Well, Website X also says [a] about ," or it "also says [c] about [z]," then I start to suspect that it's less about a sincere search for truth and more about attempting to get defenders of the faith to chase their tails for his amusement, perhaps so he can crow about his success in doing so on some other site.

Sincere questions are always welcome; one trying to persuade another to attempt to (in the immortal words of Elder Holland) "stuff a turkey through the beak" is another thing entirely. https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/04/lord-i-believe?lang=eng

Nofear · January 21, 2015

Sincere questions are always welcome; one trying to persuade another to attempt to (in the immortal words of Elder Holland) "stuff a turkey through the beak" is another thing entirely. https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/04/lord-i-believe?lang=eng

But we have to be careful about too quickly judging between expressions of doubt being deliberate attempts at sowing contention vs. sincere expressions of hope to learn more. If we stick with the core doctrines, we can answer the expressions of doubt -- irrespective of motivation -- in the same manner: with true faith and love unfeigned.

Kenngo1969 · January 21, 2015

But we have to be careful about too quickly judging between expressions of doubt being deliberate attempts at sowing contention vs. sincere expressions of hope to learn more. If we stick with the core doctrines, we can answer the expressions of doubt -- irrespective of motivation -- in the same manner: with true faith and love unfeigned.

I don't disagree.

The Nehor · January 21, 2015

So doubters are welcome as long as they shut the hell up and smile.

If you come to mitigate your doubts please come.

If you come to validate them not so much.

DBMormon · January 21, 2015

I didn't mean to come across that way.

In your own spiritual journey, you can exercise your faith in spite of your doubt, i.e - Lord, I believe - help thou mine unbelief. You can keep going even though not everything is 100% squared away to your own personal satisfaction. In that respect, I completely agree with you. Elder Ballard implies later on in that quote - as he himself quotes a statement by the Quorum of the 12 - that doubts shouldn't make you stop seeking greater understanding in earnest.

It's not such a black and white issue as I think I led on. In general, doubt and faith fight against each other, imo. The battle probably won't be won in a day, and during that prolonged engagement it's probably wise to not cast aside everything that's brought you to where you are today - which is what I think was the message Elder Ballard had in mind. (Even the title of his talk and his anecdote at the beginning conjure up the idea that it's gonna be a long and bumpy ride, but well worth it if you hold on.)

So insomuch as one requires to have faith to participate in certain Priesthood ordinances - I think there is space to say that it's wise to refrain from exercising the Priesthood. Not every ordinance or instance requires the utter faith and nothing wavering of the participants, so I think going to the Temple - as an example - while carrying your doubts would be a fantastic place to think things through and 'work out your fear and salvation before the Lord,' as it were.

* * * * * *

I also think that on a separate note, the connotations implied by 'doubt' have are very different from you to me, as shaped by our experiences. Human beings, myself included, have layered emotions and thinking that we don't always meta-think out. In other words, sometimes I'm pissed at my wife when in reality my ego's bruised and I'm just taking it out on her. In the moment, though, I'll be damned if I admit she was right. I think this human reaction has its echoes in other areas of our lives. If you'll forgive the long-winded personal story, maybe the following will help clarify why I may be reluctant to admit with open arms all forms of doubt:

When I was in seminary, I had a strong suspicion that the Book of Mormon was a fabrication. My questions I asked of the seminary teacher were always with the air of "what's behind the curtain?!" I wanted to know about horses, about how Lamanite populations swelled faster than Nephite, about geography, and so forth. Bless her heart, she had to put up with my very pointed and thinly veiled questions. These weren't private questions, either. I would interrupt her and very brusquely and probably rudely ask, point blank. Not only was I wasn't sure it was true, I was kinda sure it wasn't. Still, though, there was a part of me that really very sincerely wanted to know, and I kept asking questions, reading, and praying. Eventually, I began to relax. Spiritually and emotionally. I stopped looking for ways that Joseph Smith had duped me, or that the Book of Mormon was a fabrication. I let go of my suspicions. And I was greatly supported by the Holy Ghost. An experience that made it so that for the last 20 years, I've been shaped and fed by my faith and trust that the Book of Mormon is authentic, from God, and that Joseph Smith translated. I'm lucky that she exercised patience with me.

Yes - doubters do indeed need a place to come, and be accepted. I don't think it's fair to expect everyone to have perfect love and patience. If I had gotten to the point in my seminary years where I was past the point of wanting to know, if I had lost that earnest desire, and was only asking questions as a matter of wanting to prove a point by asking a question that I didn't intend to hear or entertain the answer for, then I think she might have been right to ask me to please table the questions so that I didn't interrupt her lessons or try to sow discord.

I am not as patient a person as I ought, and unless I have secured the confidence that the doubter is coming from a place of difficulty, pain, and earnest desire to resolve the doubts and replace them with faith, I make judgements and assumptions about their motivations and while I won't crusade - at all - to have them cast out, and I still can be earnest in seeking their friendship, I probably won't want to spend time discussing what I find sacred just to have them try and convince me it's all a sham. Does that make sense?

I appreciate the quote by Elder Ballard - I would do well to remember that.

thanks for this, I appreciate your willingness to hear me out and to discuss things civilly. I am grateful for your participation here.

DBMormon · January 21, 2015

I fear I may have done damage - not my intention. I'm going to back off from participating in this thread.
My apologies for offending anyone.

Mars, Please don't your kindness and sincerity are needed here. Please continue.

DBMormon · January 21, 2015

I suspect you'll disagree (Viva la difference!) but sometimes (relatively often, in fact) it is relatively easy to ascertain motives from actions and declarations. For example, one may protest that s/he is simply a sincere seeker of truth who's prone to question, but perhaps the tenor of the question, combined with his or her actions, may reasonably lead one to believe, to suspect, or to conclude, otherwise.

sometimes we see what we want to see. Also... no emoticon? your losing it!

DBMormon · January 21, 2015

Most of the problem about "doubters" is that sometimes Church is filled with things not entirely appropriate to Church on Sunday (see Doctrinal Mormons vs. Traditional Mormons thread). If we stick to the core doctrines of the Church (a core much smaller than most of us assume) then there will be far fewer people expressing doubts.

I am amazed how often on Sunday something outside the known gospel is said. this past Sunday one member said "we all know Judas was evil" which is one viable option but not an absolute given. The fringe concepts often do the damage

It seems to be more comfortable for the ward to deal with the guy who shares non-threatening nonsense then the member who interjects uncomfortable facts. I see this often.

Edited January 21, 2015 by DBMormon

DBMormon · January 21, 2015

Doubt is one thing, contention is quite another. (See 3 Nephi 11:29.) So, frankly (as much as I know you'll hate hearing this), if a doubter's motivation for coming to Sunday School is to sow doubt and contention, if I were the teacher, he might well find himself escorted from my class by two of its burlier Priesthood-holding members. In my book, a similar thing often happens in Cyber space: If someone comes here and says, "I have a question about [x]," I'll do my best to help him and to contribute positively to the discussion; if, on the other hand, he comes here and says, "Website X [which is antipathetic to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints] says [y] about [z]," I'll still do my best to help him (as will many here) and answer his questions, but if he then says, "Well, Website X also says [a] about ," or it "also says [c] about [z]," then I start to suspect that it's less about a sincere search for truth and more about attempting to get defenders of the faith to chase their tails for his amusement, perhaps so he can crow about his success in doing so on some other site.

Sincere questions are always welcome; one trying to persuade another to attempt to (in the immortal words of Elder Holland) "stuff a turkey through the beak" is another thing entirely. https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/04/lord-i-believe?lang=eng

Kennigo, you may want to sit down for this...... are you sitting?...... I agree with you. If we raise facts to hurt another's faith I say shame on you. That said I have been there and understand the feeling you have. You feel like the Church lied to you and you are just giving it back by telling the truth.... but in the end this is a selfish thing to do.

Edited January 21, 2015 by DBMormon

Pahoran · January 21, 2015

I just read this article on Wheat and Tares addressing the issue of whether or not Doubters are welcome in the church.

http://www.wheatandtares.org/15843/are-doubters-welcome/

What do you think? Are doubters really welcome at church or are they merely tolerated when necessary?

The difference between genuine doubters and actively proselytizing anti-Mormons of the Dehlin ilk is as vast as the Grand Canyon.

Those in the latter group do those in the former -- and everyone else, for that matter -- a grave disservice when they try to pretend to merely be "doubters."

Regards,

Pahoran

Edited January 21, 2015 by Pahoran

HappyJackWagon · January 21, 2015

I fear I may have done damage - not my intention. I'm going to back off from participating in this thread.
My apologies for offending anyone.

Mars, no need to back out. You seemed a bit defensive/paranoid but not offensive.

I asked the question about the priesthood holder being welcomed to participate in an ordinance for which he is worthy because the comments I was reading all focused on allowing the person to come, sit, and be quiet. That feels much more like toleration than welcoming. So I wondered about other ways people are able to participate in church and whether or not someone with doubts becomes unwelcome in participating in some of these things. It's no trap. But these are real situations people face.

It sounds to me like most people agree that doubters are welcome to participate in a limited way at church but not if they are 1- raising facts that are challenging to faith (out of real curiousity) because it may damage someone elses testimony or 2- if they are purposely trying to be a trouble maker.

But what about the myriad of other ways someone might be welcomed? Should they be able to participate in priesthood ordinances, teach classes, serve in leadership callings, attend the temple? I ask this because I think much improvement could be made in truly being welcoming of people who believe differently or doubt the core truth claims of the church.

bluebell · January 21, 2015

Mars, no need to back out. You seemed a bit defensive/paranoid but not offensive.

I asked the question about the priesthood holder being welcomed to participate in an ordinance for which he is worthy

Can someone be worthy to exercise the priesthood if he doesn't believe in Christ and therefore cannot exercise faith in Him or the priesthood?

I think the answer to that probably depends on a lot of different factors and is best answered on a case by case basis by people who actual know the situation and are in a position to make such judgements. I bring it up only because we sometimes forget that being 'worthy' to participate in ordinances of the gospel isn't just decided by whether or not we are keeping the WOW, going to church, or not wearing short shorts.

There is a reason that faith in Christ is the first principle of the Gospel.

HappyJackWagon · January 21, 2015

Can someone be worthy to exercise the priesthood if he doesn't believe in Christ and therefore cannot exercise faith in Him or the priesthood?

I think the answer to that probably depends on a lot of different factors and is best answered on a case by case basis by people who actual know the situation and are in a position to make such judgements. I bring it up only because we sometimes forget that being 'worthy' to participate in ordinances of the gospel isn't just decided by whether or not we are keeping the WOW, going to church, or not wearing short shorts.

There is a reason that faith in Christ is the first principle of the Gospel.

So you're saying that doubts make someone unworthy because it means they don't have faith in Christ? I think many will agree with you but I would challenge this and the mere fact that there is diversity of opinion will mean there is diversity in practice. But could we agree that it would feel very unwelcoming to be worthy (orthoprax) yet not be permitted to fully participate? I would argue that one can be fully faithful to Christ while still having sincere doubts. In fact it may show greater strength to be faithful in the face of serious doubts than it would be to be faithful with a "knowledge" or firm belief in Christ and the truth claims of the church.

Are Doubters Welcome

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Guest

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Recently Browsing 0 members

Similar Content