Not A Crisis Of Faith

[mfbukowski]

Mark, you might like this. I did, anyway.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/26/opinion/julia-baird-doubt-as-a-sign-of-faith.html?_r=0

Yep.  Straight John Dewey.  It only takes a hundred years or so for this stuff to sink into the culture

[jkwilliams]

Well you seem so darn young!  That's fascinating that you would edit talks such as Pres. Eyring's.  I still need to read your first book, but maybe you need to write a second. 

 

I wasn't editing it. He was giving a talk in the evening, and they realized no one had proofread the closed-captioning, so I stayed late to get it done in time. I wish I knew how to get a hold of that talk.

 

I have several ideas for my next book, but I've promised myself there won't be anything remotely Mormon in it. 

[mfbukowski]

No, I believe I'm much older, I'm 53.  It was about 10 years ago, not for sure on that.  Maybe Richard Bushman was concerned and let the leaders know.  I wonder if I had studied church history...would I have had the faith crisis. 

Yeah but it would be sitting there waiting to pounce!

 

You have grown now!

 

I also had a faith crisis learning long division in fourth grade writing with one rock against another   I got over it and eventually got to calculus. 

 

No crisis, no growth.  They motivate us to move on and grow.  That which does not kill us....   you know the rest! 

[mfbukowski]

Years ago I was assigned to proofread a talk Henry Eyring was giving to CES employees. In that talk, he said that a lot of students were coming to their seminary and institute teachers with difficult questions, and too many were being told not to question or doubt but just have faith. Elder Eyring said that the proper response was to recognize that these students had a desire for deeper knowledge and faith, that their questioning and doubt were good things, not bad. I wish I had saved a copy of that talk, as it remains one of the best talks I've ever heard or read.

He has said that elsewhere as well, it is kind of a theme with him

[jkwilliams]

Yeah but it would be sitting there waiting to pounce!

 

You have grown now!

 

I also had a faith crisis learning long division in fourth grade writing with one rock against another   I got over it and eventually got to calculus. 

 

No crisis, no growth.  They motivate us to move on and grow.  That which does not kill us....   you know the rest! 

 

And sometimes to grow you have to let go of your previous beliefs, even the ones you hold most dear.

[mfbukowski]

Oh, you can disagree with the "significance or sufficiency" of the evidence. But you want GC quotes, not only that, but in the last ten years?! Not even presidential actions change the course of the US economy in that time, in general. Why would a few GC talks do the same with LDS Culture in the same time?

 

Anyway, I made no promise of GC talks. I didn't even claim that they explicitly teach "fear doubts". One can instill fear of something without explicitly stating fear or the thing.  Nonetheless, I'll see if I can find you some examples from culture or teaching that strongly indicate doubt, perhaps among other related things, is to be avoided, even feared, actively.

 

Perhaps others here can give examples they remember. But just a quick few. We don't want to stray too far or too long from the OP. 

Still waiting for my CFR.  It's not doomsday yet

Edited August 13, 2015 by mfbukowski

[Tacenda]

He has said that elsewhere as well, it is kind of a theme with him

The scientist in him! 

[Joshua Valentine]

Still waiting for my CFR.  It's not doomsday yet

Working right now. Can only keep track of the thread. Jkwilliams has given some, a bit. I'll try to find some other examples I have in mind when I can. Possibly tonight, probably tomorrow night.

[jkwilliams]

Still waiting for my CFR.  It's not doomsday yet

 

FWIW, both talks I referred to equate doubt with fear. 

[Ahab]

FWIW, both talks I referred to equate doubt with fear.

People can say anything, so a talk by someone saying doubt is equated with fear is just somebody saying something. No reason to accept what they're saying.

Would it help you any if I found somebody to talk about how love casts out fear but a person who loves can still have doubts? Doubts are simply about being uncertain but you don't have to be afraid of being uncertain, or while being uncertain.

Maybe you could come up with some talks about how there is no need for a person to feel they are having a crisis when they learn something new.

[mfbukowski]

FWIW, both talks I referred to equate doubt with fear. 

I have already answered both those if you actually read what I wrote instead of ignoring it.  Address the issues as stated not just throwing out bumper sticker slogans.

 

Glad to see you are back to your old self.

 

The Monson alleged quote without a reference which I asked for already once and you did not supply other than "Monson" was clearly taken out of context and even so does not "equate" doubt with fear.  You need some logic classes.  You are saying that in Monsons use of words in that quote the word "fear" is logically equivalent to the word "doubt"?

 

He is clearly talking about apparent conflict between the scriptures and science causing stress and fear and doubt.  Of course that happens and he provides a solution for it.  Nothing there to dispute.  He is not "fear mongering" about doubt in any way whatsoever.  Besides, without the reference who knows what the context was.

 

The and assertion was that one should fear doubt.  Nowhere does that appear there at all.

 

Same for the other.

 

Clearly you are as usual bending context and altering meanings.  Good old John.

[jkwilliams]

People can say anything, so a talk by someone saying doubt is equated with fear is just somebody saying something. No reason to accept what they're saying.

Would it help you any if I found somebody to talk about how love casts out fear but a person who loves can still have doubts? Doubts are simply about being uncertain but you don't have to be afraid of being uncertain, or while being uncertain.

Maybe you could come up with some talks about how there is no need for a person to feel they are having a crisis when they learn something new.

 

I've already explained that Pres. Eyring gave a talk I quite liked that explicitly rejected the notion that doubt is antithetical to faith. My comment was that some other church leaders seem to believe that. I like uncertainty for the reasons Brother Bukowski has mentioned: it keeps you growing and prevents you from being complacent. 

 

As for what is and is a crisis, that is entirely up to the person experiencing it. When someone's hair is on fire, you can tell them it's not necessarily a crisis, or you can help put out the fire.

[mfbukowski]

FWIW, both talks I referred to equate doubt with fear. 

"For what it's worth" with a one-liner stating an "obvious truth" which is the opposite of what is actually said.

 

They lie in wait to deceive.   Classic.  This could become now another epic conversation of you twisting and me calling you out on it good for 12 pages.   I will not be drawn into it.

[jkwilliams]

"For what it's worth" with a one-liner stating an "obvious truth" which is the opposite of what is actually said.

 

They lie in wait to deceive.   Classic.  This could become now another epic conversation of you twisting and me calling you out on it good for 12 pages.   I will not be drawn into it.

 

I thought you were talking about fearing doubt, and I mentioned that both talks I cited equate doubt with fear. It's not quite the same thing, but it's certainly related. 

 

As for twisting and lying in wait to deceive, well, I honestly have no idea what you're talking about. I've been agreeing with you, for the most part, on this thread. 

[mfbukowski]

Well you seem so darn young!  That's fascinating that you would edit talks such as Pres. Eyring's.  I still need to read your first book, but maybe you need to write a second. 

Write your own!   This is the internet age!

[mfbukowski]

I thought you were talking about fearing doubt, and I mentioned that both talks I cited equate doubt with fear. It's not quite the same thing, but it's certainly related. 

 

As for twisting and lying in wait to deceive, well, I honestly have no idea what you're talking about. I've been agreeing with you, for the most part, on this thread. 

I agree and retract that.  I was not being present and going off of previous experience.  But after all, that is what this thread is about!  I was going on previous bad experiences.

[Ahab]

I've already explained that Pres. Eyring gave a talk I quite liked that explicitly rejected the notion that doubt is antithetical to faith. My comment was that some other church leaders seem to believe that. I like uncertainty for the reasons Brother Bukowski has mentioned: it keeps you growing and prevents you from being complacent.

There is a point where growth is perfected on a point and the whole point of learning is to learn ALL there is to be learned on each particular point with no more to be learned, though. You just need some way to be certain when you you have reached that point on each point of doctrine.

As for what is and is a crisis, that is entirely up to the person experiencing it. When someone's hair is on fire, you can tell them it's not necessarily a crisis, or you can help put out the fire.

My point is that there is no need or good reason for any person to think they are having a crisis (with its negative connotations) just because they have learned something new. Even if you learn you are going to die there is no good reason to think it is a crisis. Just look forward to all that you still have to experience.

[jkwilliams]

I agree and retract that.  I was not being present and going off of previous experience.  But after all, that is what this thread is about!  I was going on previous bad experiences.

 

My take on it has always been that we've just misunderstood each other and things have gone south from there. I don't think either one of us has any real animus or hostility toward each other, but we obviously don't read each other very well. I'll get out of the thread. 

Edited August 13, 2015 by jkwilliams

[mfbukowski]

My take on it has always been that we've just misunderstood each other and things have gone south from there. I don't think either one of us has any real animus or hostility toward each other, but we obviously don't read each other very well. I'll get out of the thread.

Dang you beat me to it

I just wanted to call out Joshua. Textbook anti stuff complete with references only from Gospel Principles with no understanding of what we really believe.

[Tacenda]

http://mormonstories.org/first-unitarian-church-sermon/  Latest podcast.  John speaking at a UU service.  He mentions his doubt after finding out something about the BoA.  He also shares what happened on his mission.  Also mentions something about the church filling in for his parents when his parents divorced. 

 

Lastly, want to share a quote I read today on NOM.  Or a bumper sticker!    It describes many of the NOM's feelings.   

 

"To me truth is truth and it doesn't change. When you completely change the story I have the right to completely change my belief."

[jkwilliams]

http://mormonstories.org/first-unitarian-church-sermon/  Latest podcast.  John speaking at a UU service.  He mentions his doubt after finding out something about the BoA.  He also shares what happened on his mission.  Also mentions something about the church filling in for his parents when his parents divorced. 

 

Lastly, want to share a quote I read today on NOM.  Or a bumper sticker!    It describes many of the NOM's feelings.   

 

"To me truth is truth and it doesn't change. When you completely change the story I have the right to completely change my belief."

 

Not long ago, I reconnected with a guy I grew up with (his father was our bishop and later our stake president). I was talking about my "crisis of faith," and he said, "I didn't have a faith crisis, The church had a truth crisis." I thought that captured pretty well how a lot of people feel.

 

ETA: Whoops, I said I was getting off this thread. Carry on.

Edited August 13, 2015 by jkwilliams

[mfbukowski]

Not long ago, I reconnected with a guy I grew up with (his father was our bishop and later our stake president). I was talking about my "crisis of faith," and he said, "I didn't have a faith crisis, The church had a truth crisis." I thought that captured pretty well how a lot of people feel.

 

ETA: Whoops, I said I was getting off this thread. Carry on.

Yeah, me neither, so this is your non-existent answer to your non existent question.

 

This goes WAY back to our postmodernism discussions and shows the two problems that postmodernism fixes.  One is that the truth doesn't change.   I taught my kids from day 1 that the truth changes and they got it- no problems.  And no, that did not make them liars because they understood the principle and not the slogan.  I could see that one coming.

 

Alma 32 is what it is about.  If it works in our lives, it is "true".  Period, end of story.  And no that doesn't mean "if it feels good do it"- I hope everyone here would understand that Alma 32 does not teach that.  I saw that one coming too.

So it works on an individual basis.

 

Secondly it works for the church as a whole.  Yes an open canon means that doctrine itself changes.  There should be no surprises there but then people have not yet learned it on a personal basis that personal growth means you get to change the way you perceive the world.  And yes, if that means that God genuinely calls you away from the church because that is what you need to get it, so be it.   I personally would have had my atheist years if I had been born a member or not.  I had to doubt my doubts and act on them to learn fully about atheism.  I could not do it from outside- I had to feel it in my gut before I could figure out that it didn't work.

 

Understand the nature of "truth" and the problem goes away.  No, not everyone understands it yet.  There are only so many hours in the day.    I'm trying- I'm trying! 

[mfbukowski]

And yes, the church is getting it too, as evidenced by recent talks.

[mfbukowski]

It describes many of the NOM's feelings.   

 

"To me truth is truth and it doesn't change. When you completely change the story I have the right to completely change my belief."

I find that so troublesome.  They left the church because they think that TRVTH doesn't change but still apparently have not changed that all important belief.  http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/65602-on-the-deflationary-theory/

 

But of course since I am not here, I wonder who posted that?

 

Bye really.

Edited August 14, 2015 by mfbukowski

[jkwilliams]

Yeah, me neither, so this is your non-existent answer to your non existent question.

 

This goes WAY back to our postmodernism discussions and shows the two problems that postmodernism fixes.  One is that the truth doesn't change.   I taught my kids from day 1 that the truth changes and they got it- no problems.  And no, that did not make them liars because they understood the principle and not the slogan.  I could see that one coming.

 

Alma 32 is what it is about.  If it works in our lives, it is "true".  Period, end of story.  And no that doesn't mean "if it feels good do it"- I hope everyone here would understand that Alma 32 does not teach that.  I saw that one coming too.

So it works on an individual basis.

 

Secondly it works for the church as a whole.  Yes an open canon means that doctrine itself changes.  There should be no surprises there but then people have not yet learned it on a personal basis that personal growth means you get to change the way you perceive the world.  And yes, if that means that God genuinely calls you away from the church because that is what you need to get it, so be it.   I personally would have had my atheist years if I had been born a member or not.  I had to doubt my doubts and act on them to learn fully about atheism.  I could not do it from outside- I had to feel it in my gut before I could figure out that it didn't work.

 

Understand the nature of "truth" and the problem goes away.  No, not everyone understands it yet.  There are only so many hours in the day.    I'm trying- I'm trying! 

 

Never mind. I have no interest in rehashing old arguments.

Edited August 14, 2015 by jkwilliams