Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hello. I'm a doubting Mormon. I doubt many of the core beliefs, doctrines, and teachings of the Church. I don't know how else to express these doubts except to write them on an anonymous blog. If I'm utterly in error, I hope someone will help me understand my errors. I desire truth, nothing more, nothing less.

Thanks.

Link to comment

I looked at your blog. It is a little off-putting when the first thing I read was how dangerous it was to question anything in the Church.  I suspect that I am decades older than you and I have questioned church doctrines and actions my entire life.  I remain a skeptic at heart; it is my natural inclination.  Your experience and my experience of questioning are diametrically opposed.  

 

If you are looking for a soap box, then put one up in the backyard and have at it.  If you are looking to convince others of the superiority of your position, I am really not interested.  If you are trying to tell me how to live a better life, one more filled with happiness and joy, then please share it.  If you are looking to share the pain of a life lived with little faith, then share it.  We will listen and understand.  

Link to comment

Hello. I'm a doubting Mormon. I doubt many of the core beliefs, doctrines, and teachings of the Church. I don't know how else to express these doubts except to write them on an anonymous blog. If I'm utterly in error, I hope someone will help me understand my errors. I desire truth, nothing more, nothing less.

Thanks.

The truth from whose point of view?

Edited by Nemesis
Link to comment

I looked at your blog. It is a little off-putting when the first thing I read was how dangerous it was to question anything in the Church.  I suspect that I am decades older than you and I have questioned church doctrines and actions my entire life.  I remain a skeptic at heart; it is my natural inclination.  Your experience and my experience of questioning are diametrically opposed.  

 

If you are looking for a soap box, then put one up in the backyard and have at it.  If you are looking to convince others of the superiority of your position, I am really not interested.  If you are trying to tell me how to live a better life, one more filled with happiness and joy, then please share it.  If you are looking to share the pain of a life lived with little faith, then share it.  We will listen and understand.

Well, maybe she is worried about the Danites.

Link to comment

Counterpoint?  https://greatgourdini.wordpress.com/2012/10/17/of-doubt-faith-questions-and-choices/

 

I wish you well in your search for Truth. :)

Link to comment

Hello Doubting...

I have not read your blog... I tried to send you a personal Message but you cannot receive them as yet.  I wanted to share some thoughts with you... it will have to wait until you have reached 25 posts if I'm not mistaken.

Of course I encourage you to read and study from LDS sources with an open mind and a prayer in your heart.  If you have questions and seek answers, people here will be willing and glad to help you.  There are answers.

I spent many years (30+) as an inactive member... not because I didn't believe but I had married outside the Church and as often happens eventually slipped into inactivity at age 20.  All through the years I would feel the pull to return to Church... until finally I told my husband I really felt the need to do so... and he encouraged me... So I started all over at square one and finally reactivated when I was 55 years old and I've never looked back... and here I am today at 74... True Blue Mormon, stronger than ever... widowed, no children... but loving life and the gospel... and sealed to my husband for the eternities... I've been widowed for 17 years... and I imagine him waiting for me, perhaps a little impatiently...  

I encourage you, Doubting, to  ask questions here... when you ask sincere questions, people here will be happy to help you find answers.

 

from the beautiful central Oregon coast... GG

Link to comment

If being active in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not bear the good fruit in your life that you seek (although I believe that such adherence and participation is the best way to get the most bounteous harvest of good fruit), find something else that does bear good fruit in your life.

 

Best wishes in your journey. :)

Link to comment

Based on what I read of your blog, you are not even Mormon in thought anymore, even if you technically still are LDS. You are beyond doubting. You disbelieve.

 

Agree with what Dgal said.  It seems, acccording to your attitude in your blogs,  there will be no satisfactory answers to your quesions that will aleviate your doubts.  Through my personal study of many of the issues you bring up, I have been able to satisfy any doubts that I have had about things, without the need to talk to church leaders or others about them. I have the faith and patience to know that God will eventually reveal the truth for any unresolved issues.  

Answers to your question are already out there in the form of books, websites, church resources, etc.. While some church members and leaders might appear to give an attitude of something being "taboo", these other resources go into these issues in detail if you are willing to read and consider them with an open mind and faith in God what is given.  If you don't like the answers, then I'm not sure what else can be done for you. At any rate there are too many subjects in your blog to answer in this one post. You can perform a search on this website first and then bring up any issues you don't find addressed one at a time for discussion.  

Link to comment

Hello. I'm a doubting Mormon. I doubt many of the core beliefs, doctrines, and teachings of the Church. I don't know how else to express these doubts except to write them on an anonymous blog. If I'm utterly in error, I hope someone will help me understand my errors. I desire truth, nothing more, nothing less.

Thanks.

Why an anonymous blog? Do you not have the courage of your convictions?
Link to comment

If being active in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not bear the good fruit in your life that you seek (although I believe that such adherence and participation is the best way to get the most bounteous harvest of good fruit), find something else that does bear good fruit in your life.

 

Best wishes in your journey. :)

I agree with you, Kenngo.

If Mormonism doesn't work for Doubting Mormon, they should move on and find what will. :)

Link to comment

Hello. I'm a doubting Mormon. I doubt many of the core beliefs, doctrines, and teachings of the Church. I don't know how else to express these doubts except to write them on an anonymous blog. If I'm utterly in error, I hope someone will help me understand my errors. I desire truth, nothing more, nothing less.

Thanks.

Why would you expect God would allow there to be visible archaeological evidence in support of the historicity of the Book of Mormon when, if there were such evidence, it would totally undermine his design in creating a people of unconquerable faith who trust in the voice of his Spirit (revelation from heaven) and not in the arm of flesh (physical evidence designed to convince sign-seekers)? There is not a single passage in the entire Book of Mormon that indicates the Gentiles of the latter-days are supposed to come to a knowledge of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon by tangible physical evidence.

Have you been a member of t,he Church for so long yet not come to realize Lord is testing the faith of his latter-day followers to see if they can first come to recognize and then fully trust the voice of his Spirit (gain a testimony) through the power of the Holy Ghost? Physical evidence of the Book of Mormon's historicity would totally undermine the Lord's grand design in creating a people of indominatable faith and weaken the saints to the point that Church could not endure. Real proof, of the kind which you seek (such as the Second Comforter), does not come until much further along in the process of each member's test of faith. Just as there is no evidence at all, other than the testimony of prophets of God, that Christ is the Son of God and that he atoned for our sins and rose from the dead, there will be no confirmatory physical evidence of the Book of Mormon's divine authenticity and historicity until the latter-day test of faith has been completed. It seems you've spent a great deal of time barking up the wrong tree.

Edited by Nemesis
Link to comment

Just as a side note, there was no sealing between plural wives.

I believe even the wording was the same as for monogamous couples, at least for those living as a couple in mortality (some sealings were for eternity only).

It means a man had multiple marriages sealings that consisted of him being sealed to one woman. A plural marriage wife had one sealing to one man just as a mongamous wife had.

Link to comment

Hello. I'm a doubting Mormon. I doubt many of the core beliefs, doctrines, and teachings of the Church. I don't know how else to express these doubts except to write them on an anonymous blog. If I'm utterly in error, I hope someone will help me understand my errors. I desire truth, nothing more, nothing less.

Thanks.

I have read through several of the comments you make on your blog on a variety of topics, but I find that regardless of topic (U. S. Constitution, Book of Mormon historicity, etc.), you seem to make much of a very narrow range of discussion in some blogs and books, and completely ignore the broader range of available information and opinion.

You are clearly as confused about Constitutional law and history as you are about epistemological issues (how do we know what we know, and what part does forensic evidence have in such discussions?). Jurists, academic theoreticians, and historians of the law have a far more complex understanding of constitutionalism than you do, and don't tend to use isolated "facts" to beat particular "dead horses" in the midst of partisan rants.* So too, archeologists and anthropologists tend to go about their lab and field work without much animus for the ignorant views of members of the vast anti-intellectual crowd of yokels out there -- people with complete sets of apriori views, who have never come to grips with basic research, and who have no idea what value it might have.

Perhaps like Doubting Thomas you insist on only hard, "conclusive evidence" (which you falsely claim is the same as "overwhelming preponderance of evidence"), and perhaps you believe that this is really the only form of useful evidence. Yet, nearly everyone of us is left without the immediate option of feeling the Savior's wounds or seeing him walk through walls -- and, even if we did, it would be dismissed as an hallucination anyhow. The consequence of playing fast and loose with such issues (as you do) leaves us with the very same problems with the Bible as we have with the Book of Mormon -- even without considering the extreme views of my friend Bill Hamblin, with whom I disagree.

* Note: I recall many years ago in law school listening to a lecture on the Soviet Constitution delivered by the former Leningrad State Controller. He stated correctly that the Soviet Constitution was a good one, but that it simply was not enforced by either the judicial or state security apparatus. Even today, it is precisely the special interests (oligarchs and Putin, the former KGB colonel) who do pretty much whatever they want, regardless of the law. No constitution can survive such complete impunity.

Link to comment

Why would you expect God would allow there to be visible archaeological evidence in support of the historicity of the Book of Mormon when, if there were such evidence, it would totally undermine his design in creating a people of unconquerable faith who trust in the voice of his Spirit (revelation from heaven) and not in the arm of flesh (physical evidence designed to convince sign-seekers)? There is not a single passage in the entire Book of Mormon that indicates the Gentiles of the latter-days are supposed to come to a knowledge of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon by tangible physical evidence.

Despite your nom de plume, Bobbie, you seem completely unaware of what part forensic evidence plays in historical & archeological discussion of such issues -- aside from the fact that you are buying into the same failed assumptions made by both Doubting Mormon and his claimed opponents, Hamblin, et al.  You also seem unaware of what has actually been found and why it constitutes good evidence.

 

Have you been a member of t,he Church for so long yet not come to realize Lord is testing the faith of his latter-day followers to see if they can first come to recognize and then fully trust the voice of his Spirit (gain a testimony) through the power of the Holy Ghost? Physical evidence of the Book of Mormon's historicity would totally undermine the Lord's grand design in creating a people of indominatable faith and weaken the saints to the point that Church could not endure. Real proof, of the kind which you seek (such as the Second Comforter), does not come until much further along in the process of each member's test of faith. Just as there is no evidence at all, other than the testimony of prophets of God, that Christ is the Son of God and that he atoned for our sins and rose from the dead, there will be no confirmatory physical evidence of the Book of Mormon's divine authenticity and historicity until the latter-day test of faith has been completed. It seems you've spent a great deal of time barking up the wrong tree.

I should have thought that you have been a member of the LDS Church long enough to know that high intellectual achievement has always been honored within the Church and that members are called upon to exercise both faith and logic in pursuit of knowledge of the Gospel and of all other aspects of God's creation (D&C 88:118-119 and 109:7,14).  Simply spending time on MDDB (this board) ought to have taught you that.

 

Joseph Smith himself set a good example for all of us in his effort to attain technical skill and competence in a variety of areas, including the formal study of Biblical Hebrew.  Many of our current Church leaders are very well educated men, such as Elder Russell M. Nelson, a noted heart surgeon (MD & PhD); Elder Dallin H. Oaks, JD Univ. of Chicago, a former professor of law and supreme court justice; Elder Jeffrey Holland, PhD Yale Univ.; Elder David A. Bednar, PhD Purdue; Elder D. Todd Christofferson, JD Duke Univ.; Elder Neil L. Andersen, MBA Harvard; Elder Robert D. Hales, MBA Harvard; Elder Quentin L. Cook, JD Stanford; etc.

Edited by Robert F. Smith
Link to comment

Despite your nom de plume, Bobbie, you seem completely unaware of what part forensic evidence plays in historical & archeological discussion of such issues -- aside from the fact that you are buying into the same failed assumptions made by both Doubting Mormon and his claimed opponents, Hamblin, et al. You also seem unaware of what has actually been found and why it constitutes good evidence.

I should have thought that you have been a member of the LDS Church long enough to know that high intellectual achievement has always been honored within the Church and that members are called upon to exercise both faith and logic in pursuit of knowledge of the Gospel and of all other aspects of God's creation (D&C 88:118-119 and 109:7,14). Simply spending time on MDDB (this board) ought to have taught you that.

Joseph Smith himself set a good example for all of us in his effort to attain technical skill and competence in a variety of areas, including the formal study of Biblical Hebrew. Many of our current Church leaders are very well educated men, such as Elder Russell M. Nelson, a noted heart surgeon (MD & PhD); Elder Dallin H. Oaks, JD Univ. of Chicago, a former professor of law and supreme court justice; Elder Jeffrey Holland, PhD Yale Univ.; Elder David A. Bednar, PhD Purdue; Elder D. Todd Christofferson, JD Duke Univ.; Elder Neil L. Andersen, MBA Harvard; Elder Robert D. Hales, MBA Harvard; Elder Quentin L. Cook, JD Stanford; etc.

I'm trying to understand where in my post you got the idea I think it's unimporatant or unnecessary for the disciples of Christ to pursue learning and higher education? I believe you're reading something into my post that isn't there, Please highlight for me the passages where you think I'm indicating education is unimportant or unnecessary.for the furtherance of the kingdom?

Aside from the above request for clarification, am I to understand you believe the possession of degrees in higher education will help to persuade sign-seekers -- who will accept nothing less than hard empirical evidence -- that the Book of Mormon is true?

Edited by Bobbieaware
Link to comment

I'm trying to understand where in my post you got the idea I think it's unimporatant or unnecessary for the disciples of Christ to pursue learning and higher education? I believe you're reading something into my post that isn't there, Please highlight for me the passages where you think I'm indicating education is unimportant or unnecessary.for the furtherance of the kingdom?

I went back and bolded your own words for you in my post #18.  Did you really mean those words, or have you now taken them back?  Or is it that you cannot understand my reply?  I thought I was fairly clear, but maybe not . . .

 

Aside from the above request for clarification, am I to understand you believe the possession of degrees in higher education will help to persuade sign-seekers -- who will accept nothing less than hard empirical evidence -- that the Book of Mormon is true?

I suppose one might wonder why you are ashamed of leaders with advanced degrees and vast experience in complex, intellectual fields.  I had thought that God gave us brains so that we might use them, rather than showing contempt for them.  The sort of "wicked and adulterous generation which seeketh after a sign" could as likely set up yokelism as the sign they seek as to have their object the showing of advanced degrees.  One does not seek signs in such things, but uses them for the very practical value which hard work in such technical areas provides for the advancement of the Kingdom of God.  I see no difference in offering hard physical labor or hard intellectual labor for the Lord.  You, on the other hand, seem to have contempt for intellectual attainment on behalf of the Kingdom -- or do I misunderstand you?

Link to comment

I went back and bolded your own words for you in my post #18. Did you really mean those words, or have you now taken them back? Or is it that you cannot understand my reply? I thought I was fairly clear, but maybe not . . .

I suppose one might wonder why you are ashamed of leaders with advanced degrees and vast experience in complex, intellectual fields. I had thought that God gave us brains so that we might use them, rather than showing contempt for them. The sort of "wicked and adulterous generation which seeketh after a sign" could as likely set up yokelism as the sign they seek as to have their object the showing of advanced degrees. One does not seek signs in such things, but uses them for the very practical value which hard work in such technical areas provides for the advancement of the Kingdom of God. I see no difference in offering hard physical labor or hard intellectual labor for the Lord. You, on the other hand, seem to have contempt for intellectual attainment on behalf of the Kingdom -- or do I misunderstand you?

Yes, you misunderstand. Where in the world did you get the idea from my last post that I am ASHAMED of Church leaders with advanced degrees. Could you not see my intent was to say that having an advanced educational degree after one's name is not going to convince any sign-seeker who wants only hard archaeological evidence before he will even begin to believe the Book of Mormon is true? The world of Christian leaders and scholars is awash with advanced degrees of every kind, the Latter-day Saints have no monopoly on such advanced educational degrees. Should I abandon the LDS doctrine on the Godhead because there are more Catholic leaders and scholars than Latter-day Saints with advanced degrees who advocate for the Trinity of the Nicene and Athanasiam Creeds? Should I seek out the religion with the most learned doctors as a surefire way for finding the one true church?

As for the portions of my post you placed in bold: My point is that there is no empirical scientific evidence that, apart from a spiritual witness, proves the Book of Mormon is true. Therefore, considering the absence of any hard evidence, the only way to know for certain that the Book of Mormon is true is by applying Moroni's challenge and gaining a testimony of its divine authenticity through revelation from the Holy Ghost.

If you believe there is unchallengeable hard evidence that proves the Book of Mormon is divinely authentic and historical, in your next post will you please provide me with a list of that hard evidence so I can forward the list to the General Authorities? Hopefully, they can be persuaded to include that hard evidence in revised missionary discussions with a new empirical evidence based approach to helping investigators gain a testimony of the Book of Mormon. The Church should grow by leaps and bounds now that we can use science to prove the restored gospel is true.

Edited by Bobbieaware
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...