President Uchtdorf On "choosing To Believe"

[Scott Lloyd]

An important address from President Dieter F. Uchtdorf at tonight’s priesthood session of general conference on “choosing to have faith.” Here are a few selected excerpts:

Satan, our adversary, wants us to fail. He spreads lies as part of his effort to destroy our belief. He slyly suggests that the doubter, the skeptic, the cynic is sophisticated and intelligent, while those who have faith in God and His miracles are naive, blind or brainwashed. He will advocate that it is cool to doubt spiritual gifts and the teachings of prophets.

            I wish I could help everyone to understand this one simple fact: we believe in God because of things we know with our heart and mind, not because of things we do not know. Our spiritual experiences are sometimes too sacred to explain in worldly terms, but that doesn’t mean they are not real.

Heavenly Father has prepared for His children a spiritual feast, offering every kind of exquisite food imaginable—and yet, instead of enjoying these spiritual gifts, the cynics content themselves with observing from a distance, sipping from their cups of skepticism, doubt, and disrespect.

 

... When you and I talk to people about faith and belief, don’t we often hear, “I wish I could believe the way you do.”

            Implied in such a statement is another of Satan’s deceptions: that belief is available to some people, but not to others. There is no magic to belief. But wanting to believe is the necessary first step!  God is no respecter of persons.  He is your Father. He wants to speak to you. However, it requires a little scientific curiosity—an experiment upon the word of God—and the exercise of a particle of faith.^[ii] It also takes a little humility. And it requires an open heart and an open mind. It requires seeking, in the full meaning of the word. And, perhaps hardest of all, it requires being patient and waiting upon the Lord.

If we make no effort to believe, we are like the man who unplugs a spotlight and then blames the spotlight for not giving any light.

 

... Recently I was surprised and saddened to hear of an Aaronic Priesthood bearer who seemed to take pride in the fact that he had distanced himself from God. He said, “If God reveals himself to me, then I will believe. Until then, I will find the truth relying on my own understanding and intellect to light the way before me.”

I don’t know this young man’s heart, but I couldn’t help but feel terribly sorry for him. How easily he rejected the gifts the Lord was offering him. This young man had unplugged the spotlight and then seemed self-satisfied in his clever observation that there was no light.

Unfortunately, this seems to be quite a popular attitude today. If we can put the burden of proof on God, we think we can excuse ourselves from taking God’s commandments seriously, and from taking responsibility for our relationship with our Heavenly Father.

 

            ... Brethren, let me be clear: there is nothing noble or impressive about being cynical. Skepticism is easy—anyone can do it. It is the faithful life that requires moral strength, dedication, and courage. Those who hold fast to faith are far more impressive than those who give in to doubt when mysterious questions or concerns arise.

 

... Brethren, I testify that even in the toughest of times, the Savior will say to you as He said to an anxious father on a crowded street in Galilee: “Be not afraid, only believe.”^[iii]

            We can choose to believe.

            For in belief, we discover the dawn of light.

            We will discover truth.^[iv]

We will find peace.^[v]

 

 

 

 

See Acts 10:34–35.

[ii] Alma 32:27

[iii] Mark 5:36.

[iv] See Moroni 10:3–5.

[v] See Isaiah 26:3.

 

 

 

In some circles, a prior talk by President Uchtdorf has been used to rationalize not just having doubts, but publicly proclaiming them, as though they were a badge of honor. Some would attempt to parlay an admission he made in that talk that mistakes have been made in the past into an excuse to undermine whatever current teachings from the Brethren they don't like, inspired or not. I believe that talk needs to be considered in tandem with this one to get a true reflection of President Uchtdorf’s sentiments.

 

A similar theme was in the priesthood session address by Elder Neil Andersen, which I will highlight in a separate thread.

 

Edited October 4, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Avatar4321]

They both articulated their points very well. I'm going to have to review the transcripts in depth.

[Storm Rider]

Great talk - I really enjoy listening to him.  People will always hear what they want IF it is used to excuse their current situation, lack of faith, disobedience, or whatever else will prevent them from being more valiant disciples of Christ. 

[Okrahomer]

I loved his analogy: Unplugging the spotlight and then complaining when it gives no light.

[VideoGameJunkie]

Uchtdorf's first talk this morning really helped me out of my funk when he said to just simplify and not get caught up in what you read on the internet. I felt like his morning talk was made specifically for me.

[Bobbieaware]

Uchtdorf's first talk this morning really helped me out of my funk when he said to just simplify and not get caught up in what you read on the internet. I felt like his morning talk was made specifically for me.

When I was listening to President Uchtdorf's address, I thought to myself, "I hope VideoGameJunkie is listening to this."

[Robert F. Smith]

When I was listening to President Uchtdorf's address, I thought to myself, "I hope VideoGameJunkie is listening to this."

I thought the same thing.

 

I also enjoyed hearing references to Alma 32 in several talks on this theme.  The Brethren must be reading this board . . .

 

Also, first thing out of the gate in the first session, the first two sermons noted once again that the Brethren are human and can make mistakes.  Some people need to be reminded.

Edited October 4, 2015 by Robert F. Smith

[Five Solas]

"We can choose to believe."

 

If faith is a gift of God (Romans 12:3--"each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned" ESV), then Uchtdorf plainly has it wrong.  We can no more choose to believe than the leopard can choose to change his spots (Jeremiah 13:23). 

 

It defies all my personal experience to think I could just will myself to believe in this, that or some other thing.  But it would be amazing powerful (and probably more than a little dangerous) if I could.  I'm confident it's for the best I don't possess such a power--whatever Uchtdorf might say in reply. 

 

--Erik

[Storm Rider]

If faith is a gift of God (Romans 12:3--"each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned" ESV), then Uchtdorf plainly has it wrong.  We can no more choose to believe than the leopard can choose to change his spots (Jeremiah 13:23). 

 

It defies all my personal experience to think I could just will myself to believe in this, that or some other thing.  But it would be amazing powerful (and probably more than a little dangerous) if I could.  I'm confident it's for the best I don't possess such a power--whatever Uchtdorf might say in reply. 

 

--Erik

 

Hello Erik,

 

I think you may be misunderstanding his talks.  Desire, hope, belief, faith are not end points, but a spectrum upon which we find ourselves as those who seek to follow the Savior.  It is almost impossible to to begin and end with no desire to follow the Savior.  I don't think that Elder U was speaking in absolutes or without an understanding of the full range of God's grace and an individual's responsibility to pursue faith in God.  

[Robert F. Smith]

If faith is a gift of God (Romans 12:3--"each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned" ESV), then Uchtdorf plainly has it wrong.  We can no more choose to believe than the leopard can choose to change his spots (Jeremiah 13:23). 

 

It defies all my personal experience to think I could just will myself to believe in this, that or some other thing.  But it would be amazing powerful (and probably more than a little dangerous) if I could.  I'm confident it's for the best I don't possess such a power--whatever Uchtdorf might say in reply. 

 

--Erik

Correct Calvinistic theology, even though it is both anti-logical and anti-biblical.  Instead, Mormons believe in free will.

[Bernard Gui]

If faith is a gift of God (Romans 12:3--"each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned" ESV), then Uchtdorf plainly has it wrong.  We can no more choose to believe than the leopard can choose to change his spots (Jeremiah 13:23). 

 

It defies all my personal experience to think I could just will myself to believe in this, that or some other thing.  But it would be amazing powerful (and probably more than a little dangerous) if I could.  I'm confident it's for the best I don't possess such a power--whatever Uchtdorf might say in reply. 

 

--Erik

Dangerous to choose to follow Jesus? 

 

Several years ago there was a rather aggressive Calvinist on this board. Some interesting discussions ensued.

Can't remember his name, but it was something.......ski.

Edited October 4, 2015 by Bernard Gui

[wtrdog]

I want to see the full talk. From the select quotes I honestly don't understand the point. It seems like one of those talks that is 1) too vague to be useful, and 2) if a leader from another church had said it we'd call it out. Who is a skeptic? This caricature of the kid who proudly won't believe in god unless he reveals himself is an absurdly silly straw man. Doubters in the church context, by and large, do want to believe.

[The Nehor]

I want to see the full talk. From the select quotes I honestly don't understand the point. It seems like one of those talks that is 1) too vague to be useful, and 2) if a leader from another church had said it we'd call it out. Who is a skeptic? This caricature of the kid who proudly won't believe in god unless he reveals himself is an absurdly silly straw man. Doubters in the church context, by and large, do want to believe.

 

For strawmen they are pretty lively. I have met several of them. None of them sang "If Only I had a Brain".

[Avatar4321]

I want to see the full talk. From the select quotes I honestly don't understand the point. It seems like one of those talks that is 1) too vague to be useful, and 2) if a leader from another church had said it we'd call it out. Who is a skeptic? This caricature of the kid who proudly won't believe in god unless he reveals himself is an absurdly silly straw man. Doubters in the church context, by and large, do want to believe.

Considering I've seen a number of people make the same argument, I don't see how it can possibly be a straw man

[lowroom]

First time posting, I found this board while working through my impressions about this talk.

I appreciated the sentiment of these remarks but I had to rewind this specific talk a couple times to work through why it concerned me. The statement is that we should be allowed to have faith and believe - regardless of any lack of knowledge or unanswered questions - that we should press forward in the faith because of what we have experienced. I agree with that but just like doubting your doubts creates an endless loop of doubt, the logic here cuts both ways.

There are hundreds of millions more people who are not of the LDS faith that have also had faith building experiences within their religions. If no one ever questions or doubts but presses forward in their faith, missionary work becomes much more difficult. If a Catholic cannot question the nature of god as their creed has stated it, if a Hindu cannot question their belief in reincarnation, if a Muslim cannot question legal aspects of the Sharia all because they have had faith building experiences while in their religion, you have hit an impasse.

Are my spiritual experiences any more real than theirs?

Is true faith really unable to hold up under questions and scrutiny?

The only final thought I have is about the impressiveness of holding fast to faith when questions or doubt arise. Humans are creatures of comfort and habit, large majorities do not like to buck the popular movement. I have met many people who doubt their religions but remain members in their congregations because their families or ancestors are firm believers. Often it can be easier to follow the path you are on than change course - the mindset of "only following orders". That is not always true - there are segments who will always question everything and others who will shut down and stop all action when reaching a question. The nature of the individual determines whether their ability to stay a course is impressive or just their way of coping with life.

Am I off base with my analysis? I personally choose to believe that the true Gospel of Jesus Christ can hold up under any doubts or questions the adversary throws at it.

[stemelbow]

First time posting, I found this board while working through my impressions about this talk.

I appreciated the sentiment of these remarks but I had to rewind this specific talk a couple times to work through why it concerned me. The statement is that we should be allowed to have faith and believe - regardless of any lack of knowledge or unanswered questions - that we should press forward in the faith because of what we have experienced. I agree with that but just like doubting your doubts creates an endless loop of doubt, the logic here cuts both ways.

There are hundreds of millions more people who are not of the LDS faith that have also had faith building experiences within their religions. If no one ever questions or doubts but presses forward in their faith, missionary work becomes much more difficult. If a Catholic cannot question the nature of god as their creed has stated it, if a Hindu cannot question their belief in reincarnation, if a Muslim cannot question legal aspects of the Sharia all because they have had faith building experiences while in their religion, you have hit an impasse.

Are my spiritual experiences any more real than theirs?

Is true faith really unable to hold up under questions and scrutiny?

The only final thought I have is about the impressiveness of holding fast to faith when questions or doubt arise. Humans are creatures of comfort and habit, large majorities do not like to buck the popular movement. I have met many people who doubt their religions but remain members in their congregations because their families or ancestors are firm believers. Often it can be easier to follow the path you are on than change course - the mindset of "only following orders". That is not always true - there are segments who will always question everything and others who will shut down and stop all action when reaching a question. The nature of the individual determines whether their ability to stay a course is impressive or just their way of coping with life.

Am I off base with my analysis? I personally choose to believe that the true Gospel of Jesus Christ can hold up under any doubts or questions the adversary throws at it.

You are far from being off base. You are spot on, at least in my way of thinking. Thanks for showing up. I think you may find others here who will agree with you, and perhaps more who will disagree. When I get on my computer I'll say more I think.

[janderich]

I appreciated the sentiment of these remarks but I had to rewind this specific talk a couple times to work through why it concerned me. The statement is that we should be allowed to have faith and believe - regardless of any lack of knowledge or unanswered questions - that we should press forward in the faith because of what we have experienced. I agree with that but just like doubting your doubts creates an endless loop of doubt, the logic here cuts both ways.

There are hundreds of millions more people who are not of the LDS faith that have also had faith building experiences within their religions. If no one ever questions or doubts but presses forward in their faith, missionary work becomes much more difficult. If a Catholic cannot question the nature of god as their creed has stated it, if a Hindu cannot question their belief in reincarnation, if a Muslim cannot question legal aspects of the Sharia all because they have had faith building experiences while in their religion, you have hit an impasse.

Are my spiritual experiences any more real than theirs?

Is true faith really unable to hold up under questions and scrutiny?

The only final thought I have is about the impressiveness of holding fast to faith when questions or doubt arise. Humans are creatures of comfort and habit, large majorities do not like to buck the popular movement. I have met many people who doubt their religions but remain members in their congregations because their families or ancestors are firm believers. Often it can be easier to follow the path you are on than change course - the mindset of "only following orders". That is not always true - there are segments who will always question everything and others who will shut down and stop all action when reaching a question. The nature of the individual determines whether their ability to stay a course is impressive or just their way of coping with life.

Am I off base with my analysis? I personally choose to believe that the true Gospel of Jesus Christ can hold up under any doubts or questions the adversary throws at it.

The first misconception I want to address is about questions and doubts. I do not need to doubt in order to have a question. If that were true I could never move forward in my faith because every time I questioned, doubt would be forced to rear its ugly head. No, instead I ask questions in faith. This means I ask the question but hold on to what I know, have confidence that answer will come, and content myself to wait on the Lord for his timing.

 

Now then how do we move forward if faith, getting questions answered? Here's how: A new idea enters our minds, perhaps from what we have read, perhaps from what we have seen, or perhaps just as we are contemplating. We do not immediately cast it out but consider it in light of what we already know. Let it sit in our heart and mind for a time. If the idea has value it will begin to "taste" good. You will feel it adding light to what you already know. It brings a sort of enjoyment. If it is a bad seed it will create confusion, and not "fit" into place. (I know these terms are imprecise but experiences of the spirit often cannot be described well in words).

 

In this manner we work by faith, not doubt. When someone doubts they crush the idea before it even has place in their hearts. They dump almost all of what they have learned by faith, cut themselves off from the light of truth, and then ask spiritual questions without truly wanting an answer. 

[churchistrue]

Related blog post I wrote this morning.  http://www.churchistrue.com/blog/belief-is-a-choice-fathers-and-sons-and-rainbows/

[lowroom]

The first misconception I want to address is about questions and doubts. I do not need to doubt in order to have a question. If that were true I could never move forward in my faith because every time I questioned, doubt would be forced to rear its ugly head. No, instead I ask questions in faith. This means I ask the question but hold on to what I know, have confidence that answer will come, and content myself to wait on the Lord for his timing.

[lowroom]

Sorry, it does not appear that my phone is cooperating with deleting the previous quote.

I appreciate the clarification of question and doubt but your response is still couched in a one-sided arguement. Do you support these statements if they are provided by the Pope? Should a Catholic never doubt their faith because they have had spiritual experiences at different points in their life?

[janderich]

I appreciate the clarification of question and doubt but your response is still couched in a one-sided arguement. Do you support these statements if they are provided by the Pope? Should a Catholic never doubt their faith because they have had spiritual experiences at different points in their life?

A Catholic should never doubt the truth they have received from the Lord through the spirit. Just as a Mormon should never doubt the witness they have received. The confusion arises when a person cannot distinguish truth from error and chooses to accept error. For instance a Catholic may hear about the love of God and receive a spiritual witness that indeed God does love them. This is indeed true. But it does not follow that everything the Catholic's teach is true. The same goes, in LDS circles. Sometimes a person may teach something untrue, in such a case we must not accept it as truth but must experiment on the word. At the end of the day we all must receive a witness for ourselves of truth. 

[bluebell]

If faith is a gift of God (Romans 12:3--"each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned" ESV), then Uchtdorf plainly has it wrong.  We can no more choose to believe than the leopard can choose to change his spots (Jeremiah 13:23). 

 

It defies all my personal experience to think I could just will myself to believe in this, that or some other thing.  But it would be amazing powerful (and probably more than a little dangerous) if I could.  I'm confident it's for the best I don't possess such a power--whatever Uchtdorf might say in reply. 

 

--Erik

 

In at least one verse of scripture in the NT, Jesus implies that belief is a choice.  (Mark 9:23)  Many other times, He commands people to believe.  It is odd that He would give people a command that they aren't capable of choosing to obey.

[Tacenda]

http://mormonmatters.org/2015/10/01/299-300-being-wrong-in-a-church-and-culture-that-emphasizes-being-right/

This is a great podcast to go along with some of these comments. Or maybe this is a subject for a different topic?

For example, thinking the world was flat then being wrong. Or in 50 years, will they be laughing at what we thought was right. And so on.

[ERayR]

Or in 50 years, will they be laughing at what we thought was right. And so on.

 

It may well have been right for the times in which it was taught.  He who mocks that of which he has no understanding is himself the fool.

[Ahab]

Sorry, it does not appear that my phone is cooperating with deleting the previous quote.

I appreciate the clarification of question and doubt but your response is still couched in a one-sided arguement. Do you support these statements if they are provided by the Pope? Should a Catholic never doubt their faith because they have had spiritual experiences at different points in their life?

The faith we should seek and hold on to is the faith that is given by God. The faith that Paul referred to in Hebrews chapter 11.

The word faith as defined in a dictionary refers to an assurance and can come from anybody, even one's own self. Faith is the state of being sure about something, and anyone who can help you to feel sure about something can be said to be giving you faith. But the faith you should seek is an assurance from God as he helps you to feel sure about something. And you should be willing to believe whatever he tells you, with you already having an assurance/faith that what God will tell you is both true and good.

So while people commonly refer to faith as whatever they feel sure about, whatever they believe, when we refer to faith we are usually referring to faith we believe and feel sure is from God.