Stages Of Grief And Faith

[Mystery Meat]

A fairly common theme that I have seen on this board and from some who have gone through a faith transition is to use models proposed by others to describe their faith (more often than not it is used to show how much better they are than the rest of us trapped in unquestioning naivete. I have read the theories behind these progressions and I find that they are all very shallow and superficial. None of them provide much in the way of insight into my faith transition.

 

If I had to label my stages of faith it would look like this:

 

1. Blind Faith. This is characterized by an unquestioning confidence in not only God, but men also. Men are called of God due to exceeding personal righteousness. If I do A, then God will give me B. Prophets of God are darn near infallible. Obedience is the first law of heaven because what God says goes. I bore my testimony with, "I know..." not because I knew, but because it satisfied a cultural expectation and because it was reassuring to hear myself say it.

 

2. Wide Eyed Hope. This is characterized by the ending of blind faith which comes as the result of learning that men, even the best of us are very flawed. Calls into question what qualifies a man to be called at all. I have done A for so long, and God has given me nothing. Prophets are generally good, but not sure they are as inspired as I had previously believed. Obedience is hard; impossible. I didn't bear my testimony, but I hoped what I had previously "known" to be true was true.

 

3. Principled Faith. This is characterized by a commitment to faith which comes as the result of analyzing (1) my own life and the fruits faith and the gospel has brought and (2) the fruits of the lives of those who stand against the Church. Despite flaws and weaknesses, men are called of God; the reason for their call might have nothing to do with personal righteousness and everything to do with who God wants to serve. I will try my hardest to do what's right, even if it takes a while to see the results. Prophets of God are fallible, yet that does not diminish their calling and my responsibility to sustain and follow their counsel. Obedience is hard; so try your best. Based on my life experiences, I believed it was true.

 

4. Faith --> Knowledge. This is characterized by a movement of faith to knowledge, one principal at a time, as a result of striving with real intent. Men are imperfect, but that doesn't stop God from calling them; if it stops me from sustaining and following them, I am probably not ready for exaltation. Who the Lord calls he qualifies and gives them authority and power to do His work according to their individual talents, personalities and, in many cases, discretion. I will do what right with no expectation of anything. Prophets may be fallible and others may even be more "righteous" but others do not have the mantle. Obedience is the first law of heaven, because obedience is a true measure of our love. Based on my life experiences, I have come to know certain things are true and my belief in other true principals is developing into knowledge.

 

Faith transitions are what you make of them. The problem I have with most of the models I have seen is that they set up a false dichotomy.  

[Dgal]

MM,

 

I find myself putting my emotional responses, and thus hope, aside these days and looking for the fruits. I find it both scary and courageous. Not sure where I will end up. Realizing that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young  were very  flawed prophets has not sat well with me. I'm left with why should I believe and follow any teaching and instruction of any prophet if they can be that wrong.

 

I have no idea where this will lead.

[Mystery Meat]

MM,

 

I find myself putting my emotional responses, and thus hope, aside these days and looking for the fruits. I find it both scary and courageous. Not sure where I will end up. Realizing that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young  were very  flawed prophets has not sat well with me. I'm left with why should I believe and follow any teaching and instruction of any prophet if they can be that wrong.

 

I have no idea where this will lead.

 

Because God called them. If he trusts and sustains them we should too.

[Teancum]

Because God called them. If he trusts and sustains them we should too.

 

 

You have faith God called them. It is not a factual claim at all that he actually did, if in fact God is really there and in fact calls any prophets.

 

So many a priori dogmatic pre-suppositions in your posts on this thread.

[Tacenda]

Wow, I think this OP is directed to a post I made. I'm totally glad for it too. Balance is what this board is all about, thank goodness. I'm glad MM, also because this board keeps me from going off the deep end somewhat, I relate well to Dgal on the wait and see approach.

I recently had a reading done with my niece. I mentioned my faith crisis. Was hoping she'd give me some insight as to the church's truthfulness. She asked questions that surprised me, she's Catholic. She asked how I felt in church on Sunday. I mentioned I was only at church to help a special needs boy in Primary, other than that, I have been in turmoil over a faith crisis. But did tell her I felt the spirit being around this awesome boy. She then asked about serving others like taking meals in, helping those in need. She said, that is what is true, your feeling that way. So I take it to mean whichever church helps that feeling I guess. It's hard though when some doctrines over crowd the real gospel, that of Jesus resurrection and that we can live again. I guess I stumble when we are the Saviour's of the dead. I struggle with the temple, so this is a huge stumbling block.

[Mystery Meat]

You have faith God called them. It is not a factual claim at all that he actually did, if in fact God is really there and in fact calls any prophets.

 

So many a priori dogmatic pre-suppositions in your posts on this thread.

 

There are certain things I still have faith on, you are correct. There are some things that I know. Your attempts to tell me it is impossible to know remind me of Sherem in the Book of Mormon. I understand that that is not a nice comparison, but he too taught that it was impossible to know things you could not see with your eyes. It is just as false when you say it as it is when he did. 

 

I am sorry that you do not like what I shared. I never said it applied to everyone. I am just saying how it applied to me. I can also say without the slightest apprehension or doubt that there are things that I know: I know that there is a God (though I have never seen him), I know the Jesus is His son (I have never seen Him either), I know that the Holy Ghost is a real influence whose power is greater than any thing tangible I have ever experienced, I know that God knows who I am and loves me, and I know that God is in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and is behind its inception and continued maintenance and strengthening. There are a lot of other things I believe to be true. You can mock and try to diminish that all you want. That is your God-given right. But my knowledge is God-given. Mock it at your own risk.

[Teancum]

There are certain things I still have faith on, you are correct. There are some things that I know. Your attempts to tell me it is impossible to know remind me of Sherem in the Book of Mormon. I understand that that is not a nice comparison, but he too taught that it was impossible to know things you could not see with your eyes. It is just as false when you say it as it is when he did. 

 

I am sorry that you do not like what I shared. I never said it applied to everyone. I am just saying how it applied to me. I can also say without the slightest apprehension or doubt that there are things that I know: I know that there is a God (though I have never seen him), I know the Jesus is His son (I have never seen Him either), I know that the Holy Ghost is a real influence whose power is greater than any thing tangible I have ever experienced, I know that God knows who I am and loves me, and I know that God is in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and is behind its inception and continued maintenance and strengthening. There are a lot of other things I believe to be true. You can mock and try to diminish that all you want. That is your God-given right. But my knowledge is God-given. Mock it at your own risk.

Ahh the Sherem comparison. A great critical thinking and use of reason show stopper.

Ever wonder why alleged scripture contains such stories? Think about it.

As for know.....evidence, critical thinking and reason are how one knows. Your so called know as we have discussed ad nauseum works for you and only you. When you and others present it is fact....well... It is not factual. Take the current thread on th scientific method and discovery of religious and faith based claims. Beleivers want so badly to think the truth discovery methods of science is like religion and Mormons even more so. The simple fact is they are nothing like each other. Not at all. I don't have the energy to argue why that is so like the true believers here I will just make my a priori claim as factual and you can accept or reject it as you choose,

[Calm]

MM,

 

I find myself putting my emotional responses, and thus hope, aside these days and looking for the fruits. 

But how we feel about life and what goes on in it is a major fruit of our efforts.

 

Think of how we love our family...the love in our experience is one of the most important parts of the relationship.  Whether that feeling of love goes stronger or colder is a fruit of what we and others do.

[Mystery Meat]

Ahh the Sherem comparison. A great critical thinking and use of reason show stopper.

Ever wonder why alleged scripture contains such stories? Think about it.

As for know.....evidence, critical thinking and reason are how one knows. Your so called know as we have discussed ad nauseum works for you and only you. When you and others present it is fact....well... It is not factual. Take the current thread on th scientific method and discovery of religious and faith based claims. Beleivers want so badly to think the truth discovery methods of science is like religion and Mormons even more so. The simple fact is they are nothing like each other. Not at all. I don't have the energy to argue why that is so like the true believers here I will just make my a priori claim as factual and you can accept or reject it as you choose,

 

I find it funny how folks like you get so offended about being talked down to by TBM's yet you can't help yourself from doing it to me. I KNOW Teancum. I don't know everything, but what I do know, I KNOW. I have been where you are, so I understand how you feel. I have been at the bottom of a faith transition. You haven't been where I am (fully recovered from a faith crisis/transition), you cannot with any authority undermine the witness I have received. I am sure the very idea that someone can know and does know causes you a whole lot of cognitive dissonance, but it is true nonetheless. I KNOW. I don't think. I don't hope. I don't blindly believe. I KNOW. Wish I could tell you how, but I can't (and not because I am not capable).

 

As for your comparison to science...that is a well thought out strawman. I love science. Science and religion are two totally different things. Obtaining truth from science is undoubtedly easier than turning to faith and the Spirit to get wisdom and knowledge. But science does not get to set the requirements for how we obtain truth in realms outside of scientific study and inquiry. Yes, it is true, there are no physical tools like telescopes and Hadron Coliders for us to use to measure the presence of the Holy Ghost or location of God's throne, and there isn't even a way to outwardly quantify concepts like "faith" or "spirit", yet that does not mean we cannot tap into a whole different realm that transcends anything we can learn from staring through a microscope or igniting a bunson burner. So, if you want to try and impose the rules of scientific inquiry on religious adherence and faith, go right ahead. If you think what you call "critical thinking" is the way to find God...good luck. Keep looking down at those of us who not only claim to know what you believe are unknowable truths, but that actually do in fact and reality know them. Take the cowards way out and cling to the easily discoverable parcels of truth that science offers (they are, to be quite fair, rather awesome) and avoid the path to eternal knowledge; a path littered with heartache, uncertainty, anxiety, feeling, reaching, stretching, but ultimately light, knowledge, peace, and certainty. The barrier to entry is great and the price to be paid is almost unbearable, but there are other ways to learn truth that are more reliable than even the most powerful of instruments available to our puny little brains.

 

The fact is this: I know that God lives and that Jesus Christ is His son. You can call it my opinion all you want, but God is the arbiter of fact and He is the source of my KNOWLEDGE. Directly.

 

Take it up with Him.

Edited July 15, 2015 by Mystery Meat

[Tacenda]

I find it funny how folks like you get so offended about being talked down to by TBM's yet you can't help yourself from doing it to me. I KNOW Teancum. I don't know everything, but what I do know, I KNOW. I have been where you are, so I understand how you feel. I have been at the bottom of a faith transition. You haven't been where I am (fully recovered from a faith crisis/transition), you cannot with any authority undermine the witness I have received. I am sure the very idea that someone can know and does know causes you a whole lot of cognitive dissonance, but it is true nonetheless. I KNOW. I don't think. I don't hope. I don't blindly believe. I KNOW. Wish I could tell you how, but I can't (and not because I am not capable).

As for your comparison to science...that is a well thought out strawman. I love science. Science and religion are two totally different things. Obtaining truth from science is undoubtedly easier than turning to faith and the Spirit to get wisdom and knowledge. But science does not get to set the requirements for how we obtain truth in realms outside of scientific study and inquiry. Yes, it is true, there are no physical tools like telescopes and Hadron Coliders for us to use to measure the presence of the Holy Ghost or location of God's throne, and there isn't even a way to outwardly quantify concepts like "faith" or "spirit", yet that does not mean we cannot tap into a whole different realm that transcends anything we can learn from staring through a microscope or igniting a bunson burner. So, if you want to try and impose the rules of scientific inquiry on religious adherence and faith, go right ahead. If you think what you call "critical thinking" is the way to find God...good luck. Keep looking down at those of us who not only claim to know what you believe are unknowable truths, but that actually do in fact and reality know them. Take the cowards way out and cling to the easily discoverable parcels of truth that science offers (they are, to be quite fair, rather awesome) and avoid the path to eternal knowledge; a path littered with heartache, uncertainty, anxiety, feeling, reaching, stretching, but ultimately light, knowledge, peace, and certainty. The barrier to entry is great and the price to be paid is almost unbearable, but there are other ways to learn truth that are more reliable than even the most powerful of instruments available to our puny little brains.

The fact is this: I know that God lives and that Jesus Christ is His son. You can call it my opinion all you want, but God is the arbiter of fact and He is the source of my KNOWLEDGE. Directly.

Take it up with Him.

Maybe someday you will share the experience you alluded to.

[Bobbieaware]

Ahh the Sherem comparison. A great critical thinking and use of reason show stopper.

Ever wonder why alleged scripture contains such stories? Think about it.

As for know.....evidence, critical thinking and reason are how one knows. Your so called know as we have discussed ad nauseum works for you and only you. When you and others present it is fact....well... It is not factual. Take the current thread on th scientific method and discovery of religious and faith based claims. Beleivers want so badly to think the truth discovery methods of science is like religion and Mormons even more so. The simple fact is they are nothing like each other. Not at all. I don't have the energy to argue why that is so like the true believers here I will just make my a priori claim as factual and you can accept or reject it as you choose,

At the moment Christ gave up the ghost as he hung on Calvary's cross, for those enemies of the truth who had not even the faintest glimmer of a testimony of the Spirit residing within their hearts, it surely seemed as if all the negative declarations they had made about Jesus of Nazareth had been vindicated. They said Jesus had performed his miracles by the power of the devil's black arts, and now Jesus' obvious inability to save himself from the judgement of death they had passed upon him "proved" beyond all doubt that the God of Israel wasn't on the Nazarine's side. As he hung in agony, these enemies of Jesus confidently scolded him saying, "if you are truly the Messiah, come down from the cross and save yourself, and then we will truly believe in you and give you our hearts and full devotion." But he didn't come down from the cross, thereby "proving" they were right when they said he was a blasphemous imposture.

And just before Jesus died he was heard to cry out in agony, "my God, my God, why hast though forsaken me." Did not this frank admission of divine abandonment made by Jesus own mouth prove beyond all doubt that God found him unfit and unworthy of temporal rescue and spiritual salvation? And did not Jesus' enemies also know that, except for John, even his own closest disciples had either betrayed, denied or abandoned him in his greatest hour of need? If even his closest followers lost faith in him, why should anyone else believe in him?

Jesus' enemies had won a resounding total victory. And who could now reasonably deny that they had the inside scoop when it came to understanding what this false Christ was really all about all along?

Yet for those who did have the fire of true testimony coursing through their beings -- like the faithful Nephi in America -- they knew the greatest and most complete victory of righteousness over evil and sin had just been won. And they also knew the seemingly triumphant enemies of Christ in the Holy Land had only succeeded in assuring the that one day they would have to humbly bow the knee to him whom they reviled and murdered if the were to ever have any hope of escaping from the consequences of their most grievous sin.

And so it goes with all things that require a testimony of the Spirit before one is able to perceive the real truth, including the real truth regarding the restored gospel: Those who will not learn the lesson of Christ's contemporary enemies will be doomed to angrily kick against the pricks in total frustration, only to have to admit in the end that the Restored Church is verily true. Without the Spirit, the things of God will always seem to be nothing but foolishness, something some on this board are quite expert in demonstrating. But with input of the Spirit, those things that seem so foolish and impossible to reasonably believe suddenly stand out in bold relief as God's diamond truth.

Edited July 15, 2015 by Bobbieaware

[Teancum]

I find it funny how folks like you get so offended about being talked down to by TBM's yet you can't help yourself from doing it to me. I KNOW Teancum. I don't know everything, but what I do know, I KNOW. I have been where you are, so I understand how you feel. I have been at the bottom of a faith transition. You haven't been where I am (fully recovered from a faith crisis/transition), you cannot with any authority undermine the witness I have received. I am sure the very idea that someone can know and does know causes you a whole lot of cognitive dissonance, but it is true nonetheless. I KNOW. I don't think. I don't hope. I don't blindly believe. I KNOW. Wish I could tell you how, but I can't (and not because I am not capable).

As for your comparison to science...that is a well thought out strawman. I love science. Science and religion are two totally different things. Obtaining truth from science is undoubtedly easier than turning to faith and the Spirit to get wisdom and knowledge. But science does not get to set the requirements for how we obtain truth in realms outside of scientific study and inquiry. Yes, it is true, there are no physical tools like telescopes and Hadron Coliders for us to use to measure the presence of the Holy Ghost or location of God's throne, and there isn't even a way to outwardly quantify concepts like "faith" or "spirit", yet that does not mean we cannot tap into a whole different realm that transcends anything we can learn from staring through a microscope or igniting a bunson burner. So, if you want to try and impose the rules of scientific inquiry on religious adherence and faith, go right ahead. If you think what you call "critical thinking" is the way to find God...good luck. Keep looking down at those of us who not only claim to know what you believe are unknowable truths, but that actually do in fact and reality know them. Take the cowards way out and cling to the easily discoverable parcels of truth that science offers (they are, to be quite fair, rather awesome) and avoid the path to eternal knowledge; a path littered with heartache, uncertainty, anxiety, feeling, reaching, stretching, but ultimately light, knowledge, peace, and certainty. The barrier to entry is great and the price to be paid is almost unbearable, but there are other ways to learn truth that are more reliable than even the most powerful of instruments available to our puny little brains.

The fact is this: I know that God lives and that Jesus Christ is His son. You can call it my opinion all you want, but God is the arbiter of fact and He is the source of my KNOWLEDGE. Directly.

Take it up with Him.

I am not offended in the least. Rather I think you are offended when someone challenges the unverifiable means with which you and all other beleivers here insist that you have found the truth and KNOW it. Typically on this board it is the believer talking down to the skeptic as you are doing now and so often do and then you become more indignant when I as a skeptic point out that your method is only good for you as it is not verifiable by someone else. I have said over and over that I have no issue with someone beleiving God has spoken truth to them. But when they insist this truth is the truth for everyone else and make fact based assertions that are really faith based assertions I at times feel appropriate to challenge that.

That seems to offend you more than your approach does me. If you have noticed I have for a while strived to refrain from such discussions.

Oh and thank you for calling me a coward. To be strong back at ya....you are a fool if you think the path I am on is cowardly. No it would be much simpler to fall back into faith inspiite of so many things. This shaken up my whole life and world. So thank you again.

I had much more in my post but deleted it because this is just not worth it any more.

Apparently I am just an evil, weak, faithless cowardly apostate to many here anytime I bring this issue up. I will work hard to avoid it agian .

Edited July 15, 2015 by Teancum

[Dgal]

But how we feel about life and what goes on in it is a major fruit of our efforts.

 

Think of how we love our family...the love in our experience is one of the most important parts of the relationship.  Whether that feeling of love goes stronger or colder is a fruit of what we and others do.

That is weak to me since love is not unique to Mormonism, therefore it's a fruit of just being human.

 

I am talking about fruits that are unique to Mormonism and our leadership, that are separate from human emotion

As Mormons, we proclaim we have the fulness of the truth. We are the restored gospel. We are the truth. What fruits, aside from human emotions which all humans have, point that that and make our claims sound?

Edited July 15, 2015 by Dgal

[Dgal]

I am not offended in the least. Rather I think you are offended when someone challenges the unverifiable means with which you and all other beleivers here insist that you have found the truth and KNOW it. Typically on this board it is the believer talking down to the skeptic as you are doing now and so often do and then you become more indignant when I as a skeptic point out that your method is only good for you as it is not verifiable by someone else. I have said over and over that I have no issue with someone beleiving God has spoken truth to them. But when they insist this truth is the truth for everyone else and make fact based assertions that are really faith based assertions I at times feel appropriate to challenge that.

That seems to offend you more than your approach does me. If you have noticed I have for a while strived to refrain from such discussions.

Oh and thank you for calling me a coward. To be strong back at ya....you are a fool if you think the path I am on is cowardly. No it would be much simpler to fall back into faith inspiite of so many things. This shaken up my whole life and world. So thank you again.

I had much more in my post but deleted it because this is just not worth it any more.

Apparently I am just an evil, weak, faithless cowardly apostate to many here anytime I bring this issue up. I will work hard to avoid it agian .

It's unfortunate that you have been treated this way. We, as Mormons, should be treating those who have doubts better. With more love and kindness then name calling.

 

It's that emotional, knee jerk reaction we have when we are challenged, I know. I do it, too.

[Avatar4321]

I'd like to know why we should dismiss our own experiences with the Lord because they aren't verifiable to you.

My leg was healed by the Spirit of God. It was immediate, unexpected, and miraculous. One minute I was hobbling around barely able to walk and in tremendous pain, the next I wasn't.

And I'm supposed to ignore more that and countless other evidences I've seen because you say they can't be verified? I'm supposed to pretend that no one can know that God is real? I know God is real. And I will continue to put my trust in Him even if no one agrees with me.

But I know that will never happen because no matter how bad the world gets there will always be men and women who humbly seek Him and who will receive witnesses from the Holy Ghost.

[Meadowchik]

I like that model. 

 

Something similar to that, is the metaphor of a coin.  One side of the coin is faith, the other is knowledge. Your spiritual life inhabits the surface of the coin, and you move in straight lines when exercising faith, or knowledge, respectively.

 

So, suppose you're on the faith side.  You are exercising it actively, and so you're moving in a straight line.  Eventually, you're faith in that particular principle will come to fruition and it will become knowledge.  Voila, you're now on the knowledge side of the coin.  Continue, and explore the knowledge provided by that faith trial.  At some point, you'll come to unknown things again.  It is then that you'll be required to exercise faith.  Once you do, voila, you're back on the faith side of the coin.

 

I thought of this metaphor because there have been times in my life where I could clearly visualise my paradigm flipping over like a coin, from the fruition of faith to knowledge, from the exhaustion of knowledge back to faith.

[Teancum]

I'd like to know why we should dismiss our own experiences with the Lord because they aren't verifiable to you.

My leg was healed by the Spirit of God. It was immediate, unexpected, and miraculous. One minute I was hobbling around barely able to walk and in tremendous pain, the next I wasn't.

And I'm supposed to ignore more that and countless other evidences I've seen because you say they can't be verified? I'm supposed to pretend that no one can know that God is real? I know God is real. And I will continue to put my trust in Him even if no one agrees with me.

But I know that will never happen because no matter how bad the world gets there will always be men and women who humbly seek Him and who will receive witnesses from the Holy Ghost.

You shouldn't nor have I asked that. But Why do you and others resent it when I or another skeptic bring up reasonable oppisition to fantastic claims and assert such fantastic claims be accepted as fact? I simply pointed out to MMs claim that God has called the LDS leaders as prophets so they must be trusted as an a priori assumption based on faith not perfect knowledge. Nth at clai, was made to someone who said they struggled with following LDS leaders because of their perceived ( by that person )poor record.

What I got was the typical post about how MM absolutely KNOWS that various religious claims are true. When I pushed back I essentially got a tongue lashing, was called a coward, accused of being offended by MMs testimony, etc. I was a accused of talking down to MM but my response was in response to MM comparing to the BoM charecter Sherem. I noted that was a conversation stopper and explained why. Than the post where I was called a coward followed. So who is and was talking down to whom?

Mormons really hate to have their testimony and the method for obtaining it challenged.

So let me ask you....am I supposed to ignore the clear plain evidence that demonstrates certain truth claims are not true as well as the lack of evidence to support many others? Am I supposed to ignore the evidence that has personally causes me to reevaluate my own LDS testimony in and the experiences that led to it in a different way? It was not dissimilar to yours and many others. Can a skeptic on this board discuss these things or are they off limits? Can I point out that other believers of other faiths that have mutually exclusive truth claims from that of ypur LDS testimony? And they claim to have such faith based on some sort of mystical experience as well. Can I point out that this is why I find this method unreliable?

I don't ever recall telling a true believer here that because they rely on faith, their personal mystical experiences that they are cowardly, deluded, foolish, dumb, bad for choosing to rely on it, etc. But I often meet with much hostility as well as receive unfriendly labels if I try to discuss or challange why I think at least for me for now reason and critical thinking is the better method for seeking truth.

And the major difference in my approach is that I am open to being wrong. Are

Edited July 15, 2015 by Teancum

[Avatar4321]

Most people don't like being told they are lying about their.very real personal experiences. Especially when we are all invited to have our own from the Lord.

The Lord will reveal Himself to those that seek Him.

[Teancum]

Most people don't like being told they are lying about their.very real personal experiences. Especially when we are all invited to have our own from the Lord.

The Lord will reveal Himself to those that seek Him.

 

 

More and more I see that reasonable and rational  discussions on this point with many of the true believers here is impossible.   You have absolutely dealt with NOTHING I wrote and now are stooping to using a straw man argument... that I say you are lying about YOUR experiences.

 

Please show me where I have ever stated you or others are lying.  In fact I have done just the opposite and said that your experiences are likely very real.... for you.  And they are valid in deciding what you want to do with your life.... for you.

 

But when you insist that they are absolute factually true for someone else and that the other person who has a different answer either through their own spiritual quest or through other means such as evidence, reason and critical thinking then this is where I think it is worth challenging.   When you paint the other true seeker who has different answers as somehow flawed spiritually or in some other way such as a coward and like a character that represented the worse of the worst in the Book of Mormon, well sure, I have a problem with that approach.

 

The responses I get from you and MM at least are telling. 

[Mystery Meat]

You shouldn't nor have I asked that. But Why do you and others resent it when I or another skeptic bring up reasonable oppisition to fantastic claims and assert such fantastic claims be accepted as fact? I simply pointed out to MMs claim that God has called the LDS leaders as prophets so they must be trusted as an a priori assumption based on faith not perfect knowledge. Nth at clai, was made to someone who said they struggled with following LDS leaders because of their perceived ( by that person )poor record.

 

You are right T, my experiences are not binding on you. I have never implied that they are. Doubting my experiences is one thing; saying I lack critical thinking skills or actual evidence is another. It is not that you don't believe or trust me (you don't know me from Adam, so I don't blame you), its that you impose all sorts of limitations to my experiences so you don't have to take them seriously, including questioning my intellect and integrity. I know, not believe, that God lives. I know He inspired the creation and continues to guide the Church today. This is fact.

 

What I got was the typical post about how MM absolutely KNOWS that various religious claims are true. When I pushed back I essentially got a tongue lashing, was called a coward, accused of being offended by MMs testimony, etc. I was a accused of talking down to MM but my response was in response to MM comparing to the BoM charecter Sherem. I noted that was a conversation stopper and explained why. Than the post where I was called a coward followed. So who is and was talking down to whom?

 

The wicked taketh the truth to be hard (and we are all wicked).

 

Mormons really hate to have their testimony and the method for obtaining it challenged.

 

Disgruntled Mormons and those like them hate to have their perceptions about faith, knowledge, and obtaining a testimony challenged.

 

So let me ask you....am I supposed to ignore the clear plain evidence that demonstrates certain truth claims are not true as well as the lack of evidence to support many others?  (no) Am I supposed to ignore the evidence that has personally causes me to reevaluate my own LDS testimony in and the experiences that led to it in a different way?  (no) It was not dissimilar to yours and many others. Can a skeptic on this board discuss these things or are they off limits?  (I have never seen anyone say they can't) Can I point out that other believers of other faiths that have mutually exclusive truth claims from that of ypur LDS testimony? (I have not seen anyone try to stop you, but I sense a strawman coming) And they claim to have such faith based on some sort of mystical experience as well. (and what is your point?) Can I point out that this is why I find this method unreliable? (no one has ever said that you can't, just don't expect those of us who have actually had real interactions with the spirit and God to give such arguments much credence)

I don't ever recall telling a true believer here that because they rely on faith, their personal mystical experiences that they are cowardly, deluded, foolish, dumb, bad for choosing to rely on it, etc. (only heavily implied it) But I often meet with much hostility as well as receive unfriendly labels if I try to discuss or challange why I think at least for me for now reason and critical thinking is the better method for seeking truth. (here it is again. Do you not realize how condescending this is? Do you really think my testimony and knowledge does not involve a lot of reason and critical thinking? Do you think that my testimony is just based off of some random emotional experience or cultural connection? Could it be that my experiences are just as real and discernible as any experiment done in a laboratory, even if they are personal and cannot be conveyed quite as easily, or freely?)  

And the major difference in my approach is that I am open to being wrong. Are

 

(If nothing else, I think my OP shows that not only am I willing to admit I am wrong, but I have done so time and time again as I have matured in light and knowledge. I am very fallible. But God is not. When he reveals truth there is no going back. There is no being wrong on such points and being open to being wrong where God has revealed would be...foolish.)

Edited July 15, 2015 by Mystery Meat

[Mystery Meat]

Maybe someday you will share the experience you alluded to.

 

If we were ever to meet in person Tacenda I might. Conveying such things on a message board...probably not.

[Teancum]

Hmmm So now I am wicked as well as a coward.... since the wicked take the truth to be hard.

 

And pride goes before the fall as well.

 

By the way I have no problem having my approach challenged when it is done fairly and with rational dialogue rather than simple assertions of faith.   But then I think that is the weakness of your approach MM.  And you have stooped to name calling and labeling.  As I have noted I am willing to admit to being wrong.  I had to admit that, once again, at least for me and for my experience I concluded my Mormon testimony was wrong.  And I may be wrong about it being wrong.

 

Are you open to admitting that you are wrong?  I think not.  You KNOW what you KNOW and it is a FACT.   And in fact in my experience many/most of the true believers here are not open to being wrong about their testimony.  Yet you accuse me of having cognitive dissonance about seeking truth?   How silly of you.  I am open to seek truth wherever I can and as noted I still pray and ask for answers yet I do state to God that I need more than feelings that are interpreted as an answer to a prayer. What that would be I do not know.  That is not cognitive dissonance at play. 

 

What it is, is being open to having your world view challenged and shaken up and being willing to respond to that and not ignore it.  Cognitive dissonance is finding ways to make things fit into what we are, have been and are used to.  It is when one discovers that maybe the Church is not what it claims to be yet they will continue to find ways to make it fit, work and conform.  I did that for years.  That was cognitive dissonances.

 

Well I think that is enough for now.  Have a nice day.  I really need to exit this thread at least for now.

[Teancum]

One more post:

 

MM wrote:

 

You are right T, my experiences are not binding on you. I have never implied that they are. Doubting my experiences is one thing; saying I lack critical thinking skills or actual evidence is another. It is not that you don't believe or trust me (you don't know me from Adam, so I don't blame you), its that you impose all sorts of limitations to my experiences so you don't have to take them seriously, including questioning my intellect and integrity. I know, not believe, that God lives. I know He inspired the creation and continues to guide the Church today. This is fact.

 

T Responds:

 

I do not recall questioning your intellect nor saying you lack critical thinking.  If I did or that is how I come across I apologize.  And I have emphasized that I am happy to support you in using your experiences to make YOUR choices. What started this whole discussion is when I believe Dgal said they had trouble trusting the LDS leaders due to Dgal's view that they had made a number of errors. 

 

Your response was what I view as a very dogmatic assertion "God called them so just trust them."  See because you have a testimony of this others simply must trust them.  That is how it comes across. Rather it may be better to say "In my experiences I have a strong testimony that these men are called of God in spite of their flaws so I trust them.  I hope you can come to that point as well." 

 

See the difference? 

 

Sorry for all the red. Not sure how to turn it off when I cut an paste. 

[Tacenda]

If we were ever to meet in person Tacenda I might. Conveying such things on a message board...probably not.

I kind of cringe that I even hinted that I wanted you to share.  That is very personal, so feel bad I did that.  Also, I believe you had that experience.  I think some people it's easier, that they have more light or more belief.  

 

Recently, as I mentioned before either on this thread or another, my niece did a reading for me.  Both my parents have passed on, I've been struggling that they don't leave signs or I questioned if they were even still around on the other side.  Well, my niece who is amazing and has the gift, told me that I'm in blackness, at first I was taken aback, feeling kind of sad that she'd say that.  I have two sisters that feel like they know my parents are together and happy.  And I and my other sister, my niece's mom struggle.  She said imagine a blackness in a box.  She said my other two sisters boxes had light and that's why they were able to communicate better or see that my parents were okay.  Her mom and I just need to fully believe and open up the communication.  She also asked if I talk to my mom.  I do on occasion, but mostly just in my head.  She said I need to talk more out loud.  That makes so much sense, since the ones on the other side can't really read our minds, or are so busy up there, they need to be able to hear our call outs.  

 

My niece said so much that she wouldn't have known about a health issue etc.  My mom was talking through her and said words that I remember her saying.  It was incredible!  My mom suffered with Alzheimer's at an early age and I told my niece I was so angry that we were robbed of so many years with her.  Well, my mom spoke up and told my niece, Michelle, that she had two choices before she came to this earth and she chose it for her life.  She wanted me and my family to be proactive, what ever that means.  Still unsure about what she was getting at.  But Michelle is Catholic, do they believe in a pre existence?  So I thought that was interesting.         

 

This is one of the reasons I believe you.  I just need more light, so I can have experiences like that.  I need to open the box to let the light in.  I know that sounds cheesy.  

Edited July 15, 2015 by Tacenda

[Mystery Meat]

Hmmm So now I am wicked as well as a coward.... since the wicked take the truth to be hard.

 

Aren't we all?

 

And pride goes before the fall as well.

 

Never claimed to be humble.

 

By the way I have no problem having my approach challenged when it is done fairly and with rational dialogue rather than simple assertions of faith.   But then I think that is the weakness of your approach MM.  And you have stooped to name calling and labeling.  As I have noted I am willing to admit to being wrong.  I had to admit that, once again, at least for me and for my experience I concluded my Mormon testimony was wrong.  And I may be wrong about it being wrong.

 

So basically you want to set the terms of the discussion? You want to have a discussion about faith without assertions of faith. That seems completely absurd. There is no way to obtain eternal knowledge without faith. Your unwillingness to accept this is what prevents this conversation from moving forward. And that is the weakness of your approach. I have never said you have to take my word for it. But don't expect me to play by your arbitrary rules. It would be like me saying lets talk about black holes, but math or physics have no place in the discussion. Faith is to understanding God/Religion what math and physics are to understanding Black Holes.

 

Are you open to admitting that you are wrong?  I think not.  You KNOW what you KNOW and it is a FACT.   And in fact in my experience many/most of the true believers here are not open to being wrong about their testimony.  Yet you accuse me of having cognitive dissonance about seeking truth?   How silly of you.  I am open to seek truth wherever I can and as noted I still pray and ask for answers yet I do state to God that I need more than feelings that are interpreted as an answer to a prayer. What that would be I do not know.  That is not cognitive dissonance at play. 

 

I am not open to admitting I am wrong, because God is not wrong. I don't know everything and so the things that God has revealed to me as absolutely true are not on the table for being wrong. But, for example, I believe the BoA and the BoM are actual histories. I could be wrong on those issues. Also, it seems to me that you have done the same thing to God that you have done to our conversation here. "God, I am open to an answer, but it has to be on my terms, and faith is not on my terms." Remember, "a wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign." You have limited the answer you will accept, and therefore, I am afraid, you will not get one at all. But that doesn't mean the answers aren't there to be had.

 

What it is, is being open to having your world view challenged and shaken up and being willing to respond to that and not ignore it.  Cognitive dissonance is finding ways to make things fit into what we are, have been and are used to.  It is when one discovers that maybe the Church is not what it claims to be yet they will continue to find ways to make it fit, work and conform.  I did that for years.  That was cognitive dissonances.

 

Well I think that is enough for now.  Have a nice day.  I really need to exit this thread at least for now.

Edited July 15, 2015 by Mystery Meat