President Uchtdorf On "choosing To Believe"

[Tacenda]

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.

Very true, never thought of it like that, thanks! 

[SmileyMcGee]

It was a nice discourse on special pleading.

[ERayR]

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

 

One always has a choice whether to believe or not.  One may be a slave and find his/her physical actions circumscribed but what one believes, that which makes us what we are is a choice.

[Scott Lloyd]

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.

In one instance, a man requested a miracle from the Savior on behalf of his own suffering son. Jesus asked the man if he believed that Jesus could accomplish what was asked. The man replied, "Yea, Lord, I beleive; help thou mine unbelief."

 

This is a beautiful incident that simultaneously illustrates the man's own conscious choice to believe and his humble acknowledgement that his faith needed strengthening and his asking for that strength from the Master.

Edited October 4, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Rivers]

Great talk by Pres. Uchdorf Saturday night. For me the most inteteresting part was when he said that being a cynic is easy to do while believing takes courage.

[lowroom]

Great talk by Pres. Uchdorf Saturday night. For me the most inteteresting part was when he said that being a cynic is easy to do while believing takes courage.

This will depend on your point of reference. Members of the church might say Martin Luther dissenting from the core beliefs he was taught took courage. If all of your immediate family members are firm in the faith, if that was what you were taught from the time you could pray, if your closest friends are devout, if you served a mission, attended a church university, were married in the temple and your spouse has faith cynicism *might* take more courage and a larger toll on your life than believing.

I am not downplaying faith and belief. I meet a few of the check boxes I mentioned and my life would quickly become more complicated were I ever to decide to leave the faith. I do not intend to walk that path, just pointing out it would take more courage than my continuing to follow the faith.

[Five Solas]

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.

While that may have been your inference, there's no reason to think "belief is a choice" is somehow implicit in Mark 9:23.  Indeed, the father's utterance, "I believe; help my unbelief" in the following verse acknowledges God's necessary involvement in saving faith and is entirely consistent with Romans 12:3, cited previously.     

 

Imagine if Jesus had responded by admonishing the father to "doubt his doubts," "choose to believe" and/or otherwise exercise "free agency."  Would have been quite a different story than the one told in the Bible, wouldn't it? 

 

--Erik

[ERayR]

While that may have been your inference, there's no reason to think "belief is a choice" is somehow implicit in Mark 9:23.  Indeed, the father's utterance, "I believe; help my unbelief" in the following verse acknowledges God's necessary involvement in saving faith and is entirely consistent with Romans 12:3, cited previously.     

 

Imagine if Jesus had responded by admonishing the father to "doubt his doubts," "choose to believe" and/or otherwise exercise "free agency."  Would have been quite a different story than the one told in the Bible, wouldn't it? 

 

--Erik

 

This in no way invalidates belief is a choice.  It is more of a plea to bolster a choice already made.

[Five Solas]

This in no way invalidates belief is a choice.  It is more of a plea to bolster a choice already made.

Perhaps not, taken by itself.  But it certainly doesn't validate it either, as bluebell had argued. 

 

--Erik

[bluebell]

While that may have been your inference, there's no reason to think "belief is a choice" is somehow implicit in Mark 9:23. Indeed, the father's utterance, "I believe; help my unbelief" in the following verse acknowledges God's necessary involvement in saving faith and is entirely consistent with Romans 12:3, cited previously.

Imagine if Jesus had responded by admonishing the father to "doubt his doubts," "choose to believe" and/or otherwise exercise "free agency." Would have been quite a different story than the one told in the Bible, wouldn't it?

--Erik

Choosing to believe still realizes the necessity of depending on Christ for everything, even our ability to believe (as Scott has already said).

[bluebell]

Perhaps not, taken by itself. But it certainly doesn't validate it either, as bluebell had argued.

--Erik

It does validate it, because it shows that free will is a part of the equation. The man needed to choose belief before Christ could help him.

No one is arguing that free will is the whole equation by itself.

[Five Solas]

Choosing to believe still realizes the necessity of depending on Christ for everything, even our ability to believe (as Scott has already said).

Interesting.  If your very ability to believe depends upon the will of God, in what sense do you still have "free agency?" 

 

--Erik

[bluebell]

Interesting. If your very ability to believe depends upon the will of God, in what sense do you still have "free agency?"

--Erik

If I make a cake, set out plates and forks, invite my son to the table, and unvite him to eat it, does that mean he has no agency on whether or not he eats the cake?

Of course not. My providing everything and offering it to him does not negate his free agency. His very ability to eat the cake depends completely on me, but it's still his choice.

I have a two year old and a 13 month old and believe me, if they don't want to eat something I am powerless to force them to!

It's the same with us and our belief.

[Teancum]

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.

It's great to hear this from the top. It is a move in the right direction and away fro follow the brethren and they won't or can't lead you astray.

[Teancum]

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.

Why should people never doubt? If people had not doubted we would still be in the dark ages.

[Teancum]

Great talk by Pres. Uchdorf Saturday night. For me the most inteteresting part was when he said that being a cynic is easy to do while believing takes courage.

Ugh really? Not so. Try having everything you have done for all your adult life tied the the LDS church and then see what happens when you have doubts. For me and many others just staying the course would have been much easier than following our personal integrity.

[Teancum]

This in no way invalidates belief is a choice.  It is more of a plea to bolster a choice already made.

If you think belief is simply a choice then do you give this choice the same credence to scientologists or flat earth believers?

[wtrdog]

Ugh really? Not so. Try having everything you have done for all your adult life tied the the LDS church and then see what happens when you have doubts. For me and many others just staying the course would have been much easier than following our personal integrity.

This.

[SteveO]

Ugh really? Not so. Try having everything you have done for all your adult life tied the the LDS church and then see what happens when you have doubts. For me and many others just staying the course would have been much easier than following our personal integrity.

I think "staying the course" amidst unresolved questions, and taking them on faith--that one day they will be resolved...is far more difficult than you seem to want to believe. But I "chose" to swallow the blue pill, what do I know?

[Tacenda]

Ugh really? Not so. Try having everything you have done for all your adult life tied the the LDS church and then see what happens when you have doubts. For me and many others just staying the course would have been much easier than following our personal integrity.

To the point of lives being changed such as losing close relationships, jobs, reputations etc. Yes, staying the course is probably alot easier. Edited October 5, 2015 by Tacenda

[Storm Rider]

Let me get this straight, you have personal integrity, but everyone else that chooses to have hope, believe, and follow a path of faith is....what exactly?  Something that does not reflect "personal integrity"?  This is called smug self-righteousness.  You do get that, right?  It is certainly not the position of someone with personal integrity; it is the position of someone who chooses a path other than faith.

[janderich]

Why should people never doubt? If people had not doubted we would still be in the dark ages.

The soil of doubt did not bring about positive changes in the reformation. Rather, belief in truth, and the desire to spread it, did. Doubt is not noble, it never has been. It does not build up, but tears down. 

 

Where has doubt brought you in your own life? If you really want to move forward and understand the things of God then begin not with doubt but belief. Ask yourself what you believe to be true in the gospel. This is the foundation. Then using that foundation of belief, ask the Lord a question. If you are sincere, keep a positive frame of mind, and wait on the Lord for the answer, over time you will receive it. This is how faith grows.

[jkwilliams]

Let me get this straight, you have personal integrity, but everyone else that chooses to have hope, believe, and follow a path of faith is....what exactly?  Something that does not reflect "personal integrity"?  This is called smug self-righteousness.  You do get that, right?  It is certainly not the position of someone with personal integrity; it is the position of someone who chooses a path other than faith.

This is why I really dislike these kinds of talks and threads. On the one hand, you have people insisting that those who leave took the easy, cynical way out, that pressing forward with faith would have been much harder. Of course, this means that those who have left did something wrong and had some kind of moral or spiritual failing, especially when you insist that belief is merely a choice. When someone points out that it actually isn't easy to leave but is painful and heart-wrenching and requires a lot of personal integrity, it's easy to interpret that as being smug and self-righteous.

The bottom line is that following what you believe to be right and true is hard. No one has a monopoly on integrity or self-righteousness.

Edited October 5, 2015 by jkwilliams

[TheSkepticChristian]

Skepticism is easy—anyone can do it.

 

Real skepticism is not easy or cool. Not being sure that there is life after death is hard and paintful.

 

"Skepticism doesn’t start with the viewpoints and claims of others, and being skeptical about those does not make you a skeptic. Being a skeptic starts with examining your own viewpoints, the positions you hold, and the claims you make." -  Collin Maessen

 

 

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

 

I heard many Christians (including LDS) say that atheism is silly, stupid, and irrational.

Edited October 5, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[Storm Rider]

This is why I really dislike these kinds of talks and threads. On the one hand, you have people insisting that those who leave took the easy, cynical way out, that pressing forward with faith would have been much harder. Of course, this means that those who have left did something wrong and had some kind of moral or spiritual failing, especially when you insist that belief is merely a choice. When someone points out that it actually isn't easy to leave but is painful and heart-wrenching and required a lot of personal integrity, it's easy to interpret that as saying they smug and self-righteous.

The bottom line is that following what you believe to be right and true is hard. No one has a monopoly on integrity or self-righteousness.

 

This is a more honest perspective - neither side has a monopoly on "integrity" or taking the harder path.  We each make choices and all choices have consequences, full stop.  There is no need to dress up our own choices as being morally superior, more righteous, more noble, or possessing more integrity.  Choices were made.

 

Having said that I believe there is value in discussing that choices have meaning or value.  Disciples of Christ should eventually converge on similar choices even though there will be periods of growth where we each regress and others where we progress.