Wishing for answers

[rongo]

31 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

Did you send your list of questions in to the Church HQ?

I second this. Bill, you really ought to send these questions to Church HQ. Posting them in online forums doesn't get you anywhere as far as getting answers to them. If you get no response, or a terse non-answer from a secretary, you're no worse off.

It may be that getting authoritative answers to them isn't your primary reason for posting them in online forums . . .

[cdowis]

1 minute ago, DBMormon said:

One has to ask WWJD. 

An interesting question for a fighter pilot.  

[ERMD]

21 minutes ago, DBMormon said:

you misunderstand the purpose of my questions. For instance no amount of prayer and scripture study will tell me how much income a apostle gets.  Only they can answer that.  no amount of prayer and scripture study can tell me if they as a group comprehend the paradoxes and contradictions of what they teach or of our history and if they fully validate the repercussions of where those issues lead once you acknowledge them.  If they answered these questions, the entire way general membership framed "What is the Church"  What is my testimony" and " What is a prophet and what should I expect and not expect from him and other leaders" would have to shift dramatically.

And knowing the amount of a stipend provided to a general authority benefits you personally in what way?  Why does the Church exist?  Does any of this have anything to do with that?  Other than satisfying the demand, "I want to KNOW," is there any resultant action or real life advantage gained?

[california boy]

The brethren are not the ones you should be seeking your answers from. Church members rely way too much on the 15 to answer questions in there hearts. But when you go to God for those answers you also have to be prepared to accept that the brethren may be dead wrong as has been the case in the past. From your questions, I think you already know that. Christ promised you peace through Him, not His church. The church is temporary. He is eternal. He didn't set up His church to stand between you and God. Yet that is exactly what you allow to happen when you trust the church more than God. 

 

Do do you wast to know what issues the church has wrong?  It is easy to figure out. It is the ones that get brought up the most often on this board and the ones that have the most comments. Why?  Because the church's answers are not sitting well with the Spirit that resides in each of us. Something is troubling us. Even the defenders sense that and double down on their positions. Because what if they are wrong...

[Duncan]

24 minutes ago, Rivers said:

I don't see the 1896 revelation as a problem. The revelation states that the new and everlasting covenent won't be revoked. It hasn't. It is still in full force in temples today. The new and everlasting covenant is not polygamy.

1896 or 1886? I thought it was 1886

[Kevin Christensen]

As Kuhn observes, paradigm choice (and religion is clearly a paradigm choice) always involves deciding which paradigm is "better" which is a value-based choice, by definition, not solely based on evidence and logic, and always involves deciding "which problems are more significant to have solved."  And personal values always show up there as well.

So it seems to me that what is important is the perspective we use to decide "which problems are most significant to have solved?"  that is, which questions to spend our energy on. 

Nibley talked on "The Terrible Questions."

Quote

Last week I received two letters that introduce us very well to the “terrible questions.” One was from a gentleman in Colorado, a long, long, extremely indignant letter with ninety-eight questions. He labored very hard on the letter, copies of which he has sent to the First Presidency and all members of the Council of the Twelve, challenging them to answer him.

He places the questions in various categories. And if the Brethren don’t answer these, he writes, it shows that the Mormon Church has no quality at all. “Don’t you have any officials that answer these questions?”

He doesn’t realize that he has put his finger on one of the greatest strengths of the Church: We don’t have a professional clergy—a paid ministry that gives official interpretations of the scriptures—as we’ve always said we don’t. There’s no office in the Church that qualifies the holder to give the official interpretation of the Church. We’re to read the scriptures for ourselves, as guided by the Spirit. Joseph Smith himself often disagreed with various of his brethren on different points, yet he never cracked down on them, saying they’d better change this or that, or else. He disagreed with Parley P. Pratt on a number of things, and also with Brigham Young on various things. Brigham said that Joseph didn’t know a thing about business.

Joseph rebuked Parley P. Pratt for things said in the newspaper Parley was editing, but he didn’t remove him from the editorship. “The paper is not interesting enough. You’re not putting the right things in it.” Still he left it entirely up Parley what to do. This has always been the policy in the Church—a lot of degree of differences. It should not worry us.

In questions on epistomology our correspondent asks fifty-four questions. For example, “If God is a junior god in the universe, and there are more senior gods, why shouldn’t I put my faith in a senior god?”

Next are questions on ontology, the nature of being. For example, “How is Mormonism different metaphysically from ancient pagan concepts?” (We could write a long book on that question!) “What about autonomy of the human will, and free agency?”

Then come eighteen questions on ethics, or “ethica,” as he calls it. “How would you respond to Gordon Clark and his Religion, Reason, and Revelation, that such a thing as free will cannot save your God from being responsible?”

The author of the ninety-eight questions concludes with: “And I will be looking for the ‘official’ response to these questions.” I won’t read my responses, though I do tell him in answer to his book-length letter that I’ve already treated many of these questions in things I’ve published, which I recommend to him. “There is much more,” I concluded, “for as certain primitive Christians remark during the preliminaries of the glorious Nicene Council, it’s a question of which is more miraculous, to make a stone speak or a theologian shut up?”¹

Theologians can talk about these things until the cows come home. It is inexhaustible; they keep themselves in work forever talking about these things. If you visit a divinity school, that’s what you hear.

The other letter is equally profound. It comes from a worried inmate at the Point of the Mountain (the Utah State Penitentiary), who has been having some talks with Mark Hoffman in the exercise yard of the prison. Hoffman is out to demolish this man’s testimony. You’d think the smart Mark Hoffman, with all his resources and his know-how, would be able to come up with something better than three questions which “absolutely demolish Joseph Smith”: the Kinderhook Plates, no horse bones found in South America, and Adam-God—the old anti-Mormon chestnuts. I’m sending the inmate some things on these topics.

You do see how feeble the approaches of these attacks are, how irrelevant. What does any of this have to do with the eternities, with eternal life? What does any of this have to do with anything that interests me at all? There is only one question, the sole question for religion, the only reason for religion existing at all.  Religion alone is supposed to answer it, and if religion can’t, then religion can’t do anything—let us forget religion. I don’t worry about tomorrow’s football scores; I don’t worry about all these questions concerning the nature of God. We have at Brigham Young University literally thousands of volumes of theological discussions on these questions down through the centuries.

If these questions were the right ones, it would take but two minutes to answer them. Why the thousands of volumes? Why can’t they come up with answers?  Are they evading the question? Yes, they are. They only talk all around it.

There is only one justification for religion, one sole question, so let us not talk about the endless, abstract problems (for example, the nature of God) that obsessed the church Fathers, who always come out the same door wherein they entered.² It’s presumptuous, even wicked, to investigate the nature of God; he is so totally different from us, you can’t discuss him at all. So they write hundreds of volumes on the subject. Chrysostom is a good example: he wrote seventeen volumes on the nature of God, after saying it was a crime even to mention the subject.

In the hereafter, what difference will these questions make? The real question, of course, is, Is this all there is? This is what everybody wants to know, the only question that bothers us. If you can answer that definitely, then our troubles are over; there is nothing left to worry about. The person who leads a happy life approaches that question, and it’s a question being asked today, in a poignant manner. “Must life end so soon?” the happy person asks. “I’ve barely started with life. With all this ability, are we going to just cut life off? Why does it have to stop here?” And if you’ve led a miserable life, you have the same question: “I’ve not even had a chance yet, and you’re going to cut it off here? Don’t I get a break? Can’t I have a year more or so?” Of course that’s the theme of much drama—of Faust, of The Devil and Daniel Webster: Give me a chance, an extension.

It’s the answer to that question that satisfies us, and everything else we can forget about. Who cares about how politics turn out? Or the economy? Or even the military threat? We’re going to die anyway, what difference do any of these things make? Religion exists to answer that question, none others. Of course there are side issues—for example, the study of God. But why study him? He is the only one who has the knowledge and power to guarantee that we will go on. But if we exist only to drop into a sea of Nirvana, a sea of nothing—if we are to vanish entirely, we don’t care whether there’s one god or thousands; whether he’s fierce and ferocious, or kind and loving. It makes no difference to you at all; you won’t be there. You won’t be anything. Yet this is what people commonly believe.

Brigham Young puts it this way: “The greatest gift that God can bestow upon the children of men [you have to admit] is the gift of eternal life; that is, to give mankind power to preserve their identity—to preserve themselves before the Lord.”³ That is what it is.

http://publications.mi.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1123&index=11

FWIW

Kevin Christensen, who quite likes the answers he has to the Terrible Questions.

Canonsburg, PA

[consiglieri]

33 minutes ago, cdowis said:

This assertion requires a CFR,  

 

You ask for a CFR to my statement that Church leaders could answer these questions if they chose?

Well, let's take the question about the existence and purpose of the Strengthening Church Members Committee, for starters.

The very existence of this committee was inadvertently leaked several decades ago in a memo.

Until then, nobody on the outside knew anything about it.

When Church authorities were questioned about it a few years back by a reporter from the BBC, the initial response was to pretend they didn't know it existed.

But when pressed, they admitted that they did know of its existence.

That alone is suggestive.  Why pretend you don't know something exists if you are being transparent?

Further, when asked the purpose of the SCMC, answers became vague.

Elder Holland demurred in saying that he is not on that committee so he doesn't know anything more than that one of the purposes is protecting saints against the predatory practices of polygamists.

But as to the other purposes, he presented as having no idea.

I was less than convinced by his response.

It seemed like he was hiding something . . .

[Atheist Mormon]

Just now, DBMormon said:

One has to ask WWJD.  I don't think he would avoid such discussions if raised but that is only my assumption of WWJD.

Look, I don't want to discourage you but John Dehlin took exactly the same path you did......                                                                                                              

 

 

[consiglieri]

31 minutes ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Church is a private institution and does not make decisions with the guidance of it's members, (they are answerable only to God).

Church leaders are answerable to the members.

Which is why we have sustaining votes at General Conference in addition to local conferences.

The whole idea that Church leaders are not answerable to the members has turned topsy-turvy Christ's teaching that the greatest among you shall be the least, and the leader shall be the servant of all.

What ever happened to that idea, anyway?

[Kevin Christensen]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

SNIP

Do do you wast to know what issues the church has wrong?  It is easy to figure out. It is the ones that get brought up the most often on this board and the ones that have the most comments. Why?  Because the church's answers are not sitting well with the Spirit that resides in each of us. Something is troubling us. Even the defenders sense that and double down on their positions. Because what if they are wrong...

I've mentioned that I spent considerable time coming up with a long list of the arguments that Biblical peoples gave against Biblical prophets.  I had about 70 different arguments, and the first shock was that they were all still being used.  Eventually, I realized that they all boiled down to people saying, "It's not what I think," and/or "It's not what I desire."  Fear and desire, exactly the temptations that faced Prince Siddhartha under the Bo tree, exactly the guardians at the entrances of ancient temples, Fear and Desire, the guardians we must pass to enter the Real.

We can know for sure that the prophets are wrong and have no authority on The Terrible Questions because we disagree with them about this and that and want different things.  That epistemology is completely trustworthy.  Yup.  Darn tootin, sure as shootin.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

Edited April 8, 2016 by Kevin Christensen
words missed in the rush

[strappinglad]

Surely you could find an IRS agent who is about to retire that will search the files of all the GAs and release the info to the public so you could have an answer to #4. Of course, then the debate would still rage about whether or not the amounts were outlandish or just excessive.

As for the tithing question, if you don't want to pay tithing, don't pay it and have the integrity to not go to the temple. If you only want to pay on surplus income, then do so. Good luck coming up with a definition of ' surplus income ' that is any clearer than ' increase ' .

If you got an affirmative answer to # 13 that yes they have all seen Christ and are well aware of His mind and will, would that go a long way to answering many of your other questions or just raise many more questions that begin with  " then what about..." ?

Personally, I have enough trouble making progress with the 2 greatest commandments. Striving to be Christ-like? If only I could be more George Albert Smith - like , or for that matter, as good a man as my own father.

 

[consiglieri]

30 minutes ago, rongo said:

I second this. Bill, you really ought to send these questions to Church HQ. Posting them in online forums doesn't get you anywhere as far as getting answers to them. If you get no response, or a terse non-answer from a secretary, you're no worse off.

It may be that getting authoritative answers to them isn't your primary reason for posting them in online forums . . .

Posting these questions online will get more response than by sending them into Church HQ.

That I can guarantee you.

But why the need to question DB's motives in posting them here?

[Rivers]

24 minutes ago, Duncan said:

1896 or 1886? I thought it was 1886

Yes. Thanks for the correction.

[juliann]

Quote

3.) Do you concede church stances on issues have likely contributed to youth suicide especially the Church stances on LGBT issues?

Your questions would be more effective without the accusatory tone. Just sayin'.  I think the reason they may not ever get answered to your satisfaction is embedded in this particular one. My first reaction was, do you concede that there are multiple studies, not even LDS based, that repeatedly affirm high religiosity is linked to less suicides in youth? In other words, those most at risk are those who are not committed church members? (Statistically, of course.)

I was very surprised when I went to a suicide help  link that was prominently posted on blogs and FB pages. When I opened the page about how media should handle this, the advice was to stop "advertising" suicides. In other words, romanticizing it and creating more suicides. Here on the very site that was being promoted was a stern warning to stop doing that!

Until everybody can stop playing the "I care more than you!" card instead of analyzing every bit of information before speaking,  I don't see much hope on the horizon. Meanwhile, there have been some recent statements from church leaders condemning those who shun or turn away gay children....including parents. I am not a fan of the new policy. If I were to make a list of my issues with the church, that would be at the top. 

But I do think part of having questions answered includes the willingness to see and respect the other side. I have seen more change in the church's approach to issues just  last month than I have in years. That doesn't negate what still needs to happen and I also wish that there was more "tell it like it is" but I am willing to acknowledge there are probably good reasons why they are approaching it very cautiously.

[Storm Rider]

1 hour ago, DBMormon said:

I appreciate your kindness.  I feel I have the answer to many of these for myself.  My issue is the Brethren like to stand back and say "Gone are the days when we brush people off and give simple answers" and yet that is exactly what they do.  My questions are sincere.  I would appreciate the Brethren willingness to acknowledge these questions and give answers even if those answers hurt people faith in false things or even if the answer was "we don't know".  For me to be healed, I need to see that the Church has matured enough to be willing to come face to face with its own paradoxes and contradictions rather than perpetuate the simple stories around them.  Again thanks.

I respect your position and I understand it.  I am not speaking from a position of one that has not questioned or does not question, but rather one that strives to live a life of faith.  Our healing comes between us and our Savior - it is not between us, the Lord, and the Church - or anyone else that we think has wronged us.  Their repentance is between them and God just as it is for us.

I think we would all appreciate if everyone else lived a better, more enlightened life.  Particularly if individuals that are in leadership positions would not only own up to the errors of the past, but life in a way that they demonstrated they were fully aware of all our pains.  The problem with this kind of expectation, as you know, is that we have no control over other individuals and/or organizations.  We are not in their shoes and we don't have a full picture of what they do or do not understand or the motivations or reasons for their choices.  Everyone else, including leaders of religious organizations, is and will be responsible for their own shortcomings and choices.  

We are in control of our own lives and our own choices.  If we are going to judge others let us begin by accusing them of being human.  Pray for them to be forgiven as much as we ourselves seek forgiveness for our own shortcomings and repeatedly falling short or failing to be obedient.  

I believe strongly that we each need to learn to be a source of peace in the world.  Agitators are good to a point - the Savior was an agitator and yet he was filled with love, a knowledge of the commandments and the meaning of obedience, and mercy.  Let us demonstrate through both word and action our mercy toward everyone else, including our leaders.  Live the life we would want others to live.

[juliann]

12 minutes ago, consiglieri said:

Posting these questions online will get more response than by sending them into Church HQ.

That I can guarantee you.

But why the need to question DB's motives in posting them here?

If I were to take a guess, it is probably because DB has not, to my knowledge, accepted many responses to the questions he repeatedly asks. That does tend to promote skepticism after awhile. But I do think being angry is part of the process of straightening things out. It is just that perpetual anger wears out the audience. I tend towards that  myself but as I age, I am more interested in my peace of mind than what others are saying or telling me. I just do and think what I want to ;-)

[CV75]

9 hours ago, DBMormon said:

Your welcome to answer them but I wish the Brethren would answer these directly.

Have you (or anyone else) had any experience asking these questions in the Q&A sessions that are often held by visiting General Authorities?

Some principles that I find helpful:

“Whatsoever ye ask the Father [or His servants or anyone to whom you look for answers] in my name it shall be given unto you, that is expedient for you (D&C 88:64).” I think it is important to allow the Spirit to help us discern that which is expedient for us to know. I think D&C 8:10 relates to this as well: “Remember …ask in faith. Trifle not with these things [the work(s) of God, v. 8]; do not ask for that which you ought not.”

I suppose expediency is also an assessment the Church leaders have to make in carrying out their sacred responsibility to answer other people’s questions. There’s an article in this month’s Ensign: https://www.lds.org/ensign/2016/04/watchmen-on-the-tower?lang=eng which says, “The Lord’s Apostles are duty bound to watch, warn, and reach out to help those seeking answers to life’s questions (Elder M. Russell Ballard of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, “God Is at the Helm,” Ensign, Nov. 2015, 25).”

They can strive to answer what the Lord sees expedient for them to answer, and with the portion of Spirit and power which is given them as He wills: “Behold, thus saith the Lord unto you my servants Joseph Smith, Jun., and Sidney Rigdon, that the time has verily come that it is necessary and expedient in me that you should open your mouths in proclaiming my gospel, the things of the kingdom, expounding the mysteries thereof out of the scriptures, according to that portion of Spirit and power which shall be given unto you, even as I will.” (D&C 71:1).

I just received an e-mail from the Church with the subject line “Answers to Personal Questions” with a link to: https://www.lds.org/general-conference/answers-to-personal-questions?lang=eng&cid=email-IM_April_04062016_N-E_CTA2 I think these are good examples of “expedient” questions.

[Jeanne]

I love the questions so much.  Those of us who have already left the church but who care so much would have the deepest respect if they would answer these questions.  I believe in this day and age, the church's biggest asset would be to gain respect.  My hope is that you get the answers..and ask them directly to the leadership.  If you don't get the answers from them, it will be your answer.  That is, they will remain in those shadows.  Wouldn't it be a wonderful thing to get them and publicize them and give pertinent info in conferences for better understanding.  In any case, may we all find some sort of peace in our desire for truths.

Jeanne

PS...don't know why the quote came up...my little pinky has a mind of her own.

Quote

 

 

Edited April 8, 2016 by Jeanne

[thesometimesaint]

9 hours ago, DBMormon said:

Your welcome to answer them but I wish the Brethren would answer these directly.

"God’s kingdom, where questions are honored" - Elder Oaks

HERE ARE MY 21 SINCERE QUESTIONS I HOPE THE BRETHREN WOULD HONOR BY ANSWERING EACH OF THEM AS THEY ARE.

These are sincere questions I have that would go a long way to resolve my doubt and even more my frustration.  It doesn't even matter what the answers are, only that my leaders be vulnerable enough to answer them without changing the questions or avoiding them.  I realize that it may seem as though some questions are duplicated but I assure you they are different to me.  Please honor that.  Brethren, I need you to answer these, please.  Gone are the days where you can change my question or deflect it to apologists or scholars, or avoid them altogether.  Even an "I don't know" would go really far to help me.

1.) Can one pay tithing in the present on surplus income and still be a temple worthy and faithful Latter-day Saint? especially in light of the historical and theological evidence that this was the way it was intended/understood?  My question here is based on what I percieve is your discomfort in giving people this option in your public discourse while seemingly approving the 10% of Gross definition in spite that history, scripture, and revelation seem to give more validity to Surplus or something like it.  

2.) Have all 15 prophets seers and revelators at any one time been united on doctrine only to be shown to be wrong? in light of the Race and Priesthood essay. While you seem to hint at this, you seem to steer clear of ever acknowledging it publicly.  It seems you like you are willing to acknowledge this on some surface level and history bears it out but you seem determined to not say this to general membership.

3.) Do you concede church stances on issues have likely contributed to youth suicide especially the Church stances on LGBT issues?

4.) How much money do Full time Seventies get paid.... what about Apostles?

5.) Did you sign a non-disclosure form when joining the seventy... What about the 12?

6.) Was the priesthood ban an error rooted in racism? Again you seem happy to have your words be ambiguous so both sides fight over their meaning... could you just tell us what the essay is saying?

7.) Did John Taylor receive a revelation from God in 1896 that we turn a blind eye to.... Why?  you agree it seems to be Christ speaking and that polygamy will never end and that it was the new and everlasting covenant?  As a followup - You do see how our fundamentalist Brothers and Sisters in the break off groups can validate their schism from this revelation right?

8.) Is it true that Brigham young taught that he believed his Adam God ideas were revelation from God and if he did, why do we now say he was wrong?  The quotes are there, it is just important to hear you acknowledge it due to the repercussion of disavowing an idea once taught by a prophet as revelation revealed from God.

9.) Is it true that while leaders claim to be scripture, that scripture can be wrong?

10.) Is it true that no explanation for the book of Abraham is without deep problems?

11.) Is it true that the strengthen members committee keeps records on dissenting members to assist or encourage local leaders to weed them out?  Do they have a file on me? Can I see it?

12.) Is it true that while Church Public Affairs insists that all discipline matters are handles locally that certain discipline cases have been encouraged by members of the 12 and seventy with pressure to go after certain individuals?

13.) To the top 15 men, have you seen Jesus face to face individually and collectively or one or the other?  If you have not seen him collectively How can you know when you are getting revelation from him and not your own biased prejudiced views like leaders in the past

14.) Why do you continue to pose hope as less than knowing when Alma 32 seems to value both as gifts to be honored by God?

15.) Did the brethren approve/ know / authorize shock treatment to the genitals to "cure" gays at BYU?  Because we can no longer debate if this was done.  It was.  You know that right?

16.) Why do you tell us we can trust you as having attained the mind and will of God when all 15 of you are united when that has seemingly failed in the past and present leaders among you admit as much in the Race essay that approved by the 1st presidency on LDS.ORG

17) Can you help us understand how the top 15 under George Albert Smith were unitedly wrong about Doctrine that is today disavowed theories but in the next breath assure us that the current top 15 are absolutely right on the doctrine of LGBT members?

18.) Why on one hand do we declare that Joseph Smith said, “I never told you I was perfect; but there is no error in the revelations" as if that shows the revelation of today's leaders can be trusted and on the other hand we have set aside several revelations from prophets as being understood today as not true? (Adam God, John Taylor 1886 revelation, and others)

19.) Why do you insist on our not trusting the internet for answers to our questions when you either change our questions or avoid answering them altogether?  In other words why say gone are the days teachers can avoid the tough questions of students but that is exactly what you do?

20.) Why do you not speak up in General Conference and tell our gay youth not to hurt themselves?

21.) How are we to trust our experiences with the spirit when those of other faiths have the same kind of experiences giving them testimony of their beliefs which contradict ours?  Can you validate that others seem to have the exact same experiences about contradicting beliefs?  Can you validate that others outside our faith seemingly feel the holy ghost as strong as those in our faith who have "The Gift of the Holy Ghost"

22.) Was it true that Joseph's treasure digging and mystical practices go much deeper than he let on?  can you truly grasp why stuff like this disturbs peoples faith?

23.) Was there ever a revelation from Christ to cease the participation of the sisters in blessings? If so where can I find it?

 
Honestly acknowledge your questions and your concerns - Elder Holland
 
 
In this Church that honors personal agency so strongly, that was restored by a young man who asked questions and sought answers, we respect those who honestly search for truth. - Elder Uchtdorf
 
We openly acknowledge that in nearly 200 years of Church history—along with an uninterrupted line of inspired, honorable, and divine events—there have been some things said and done that could cause people to question. - Elder Uchtdorf
 
It’s natural to have questions—the acorn of honest inquiry has often sprouted and matured into a great oak of understanding. There are few members of the Church who, at one time or another, have not wrestled with serious or sensitive questions. - Elder Uchtdorf
 

“Gone are the days when a student asked an honest question and a teacher responded, ‘Don’t worry about it!’ Gone are the days when a student raised a sincere concern and a teacher bore his or her testimony as a response intended to avoid the issue. ” - Elder Ballard

What questions do you have that you wish would be honored?

I have only one sincere question of you DB. Would you believe them if they did answer your sincere questions?

[CV75]

1 hour ago, DBMormon said:

For me to be healed, I need to see that the Church has matured enough to be willing to come face to face with its own paradoxes and contradictions rather than perpetuate the simple stories around them.

That is not a very good approach (method, attitude, perspective, etc.) for spiritual healing to take place.

[smac97]

9 hours ago, DBMormon said:

Your welcome to answer them but I wish the Brethren would answer these directly.

"God’s kingdom, where questions are honored" - Elder Oaks

HERE ARE MY 21 SINCERE QUESTIONS I HOPE THE BRETHREN WOULD HONOR BY ANSWERING EACH OF THEM AS THEY ARE.

These are sincere questions I have that would go a long way to resolve my doubt and even more my frustration.  It doesn't even matter what the answers are, only that my leaders be vulnerable enough to answer them without changing the questions or avoiding them.  I realize that it may seem as though some questions are duplicated but I assure you they are different to me.  Please honor that.  Brethren, I need you to answer these, please.  Gone are the days where you can change my question or deflect it to apologists or scholars, or avoid them altogether.  Even an "I don't know" would go really far to help me.

1.) Can one pay tithing in the present on surplus income and still be a temple worthy and faithful Latter-day Saint? especially in light of the historical and theological evidence that this was the way it was intended/understood?  My question here is based on what I percieve is your discomfort in giving people this option in your public discourse while seemingly approving the 10% of Gross definition in spite that history, scripture, and revelation seem to give more validity to Surplus or something like it.  

2.) Have all 15 prophets seers and revelators at any one time been united on doctrine only to be shown to be wrong? in light of the Race and Priesthood essay. While you seem to hint at this, you seem to steer clear of ever acknowledging it publicly.  It seems you like you are willing to acknowledge this on some surface level and history bears it out but you seem determined to not say this to general membership.

3.) Do you concede church stances on issues have likely contributed to youth suicide especially the Church stances on LGBT issues?

4.) How much money do Full time Seventies get paid.... what about Apostles?

5.) Did you sign a non-disclosure form when joining the seventy... What about the 12?

6.) Was the priesthood ban an error rooted in racism? Again you seem happy to have your words be ambiguous so both sides fight over their meaning... could you just tell us what the essay is saying?

7.) Did John Taylor receive a revelation from God in 1896 that we turn a blind eye to.... Why?  you agree it seems to be Christ speaking and that polygamy will never end and that it was the new and everlasting covenant?  As a followup - You do see how our fundamentalist Brothers and Sisters in the break off groups can validate their schism from this revelation right?

8.) Is it true that Brigham young taught that he believed his Adam God ideas were revelation from God and if he did, why do we now say he was wrong?  The quotes are there, it is just important to hear you acknowledge it due to the repercussion of disavowing an idea once taught by a prophet as revelation revealed from God.

9.) Is it true that while leaders claim to be scripture, that scripture can be wrong?

10.) Is it true that no explanation for the book of Abraham is without deep problems?

11.) Is it true that the strengthen members committee keeps records on dissenting members to assist or encourage local leaders to weed them out?  Do they have a file on me? Can I see it?

12.) Is it true that while Church Public Affairs insists that all discipline matters are handles locally that certain discipline cases have been encouraged by members of the 12 and seventy with pressure to go after certain individuals?

13.) To the top 15 men, have you seen Jesus face to face individually and collectively or one or the other?  If you have not seen him collectively How can you know when you are getting revelation from him and not your own biased prejudiced views like leaders in the past

14.) Why do you continue to pose hope as less than knowing when Alma 32 seems to value both as gifts to be honored by God?

15.) Did the brethren approve/ know / authorize shock treatment to the genitals to "cure" gays at BYU?  Because we can no longer debate if this was done.  It was.  You know that right?

16.) Why do you tell us we can trust you as having attained the mind and will of God when all 15 of you are united when that has seemingly failed in the past and present leaders among you admit as much in the Race essay that approved by the 1st presidency on LDS.ORG

17) Can you help us understand how the top 15 under George Albert Smith were unitedly wrong about Doctrine that is today disavowed theories but in the next breath assure us that the current top 15 are absolutely right on the doctrine of LGBT members?

18.) Why on one hand do we declare that Joseph Smith said, “I never told you I was perfect; but there is no error in the revelations" as if that shows the revelation of today's leaders can be trusted and on the other hand we have set aside several revelations from prophets as being understood today as not true? (Adam God, John Taylor 1886 revelation, and others)

19.) Why do you insist on our not trusting the internet for answers to our questions when you either change our questions or avoid answering them altogether?  In other words why say gone are the days teachers can avoid the tough questions of students but that is exactly what you do?

20.) Why do you not speak up in General Conference and tell our gay youth not to hurt themselves?

21.) How are we to trust our experiences with the spirit when those of other faiths have the same kind of experiences giving them testimony of their beliefs which contradict ours?  Can you validate that others seem to have the exact same experiences about contradicting beliefs?  Can you validate that others outside our faith seemingly feel the holy ghost as strong as those in our faith who have "The Gift of the Holy Ghost"

22.) Was it true that Joseph's treasure digging and mystical practices go much deeper than he let on?  can you truly grasp why stuff like this disturbs peoples faith?

23.) Was there ever a revelation from Christ to cease the participation of the sisters in blessings? If so where can I find it?

 
Honestly acknowledge your questions and your concerns - Elder Holland
 
 
In this Church that honors personal agency so strongly, that was restored by a young man who asked questions and sought answers, we respect those who honestly search for truth. - Elder Uchtdorf
 
We openly acknowledge that in nearly 200 years of Church history—along with an uninterrupted line of inspired, honorable, and divine events—there have been some things said and done that could cause people to question. - Elder Uchtdorf
 
It’s natural to have questions—the acorn of honest inquiry has often sprouted and matured into a great oak of understanding. There are few members of the Church who, at one time or another, have not wrestled with serious or sensitive questions. - Elder Uchtdorf
 

“Gone are the days when a student asked an honest question and a teacher responded, ‘Don’t worry about it!’ Gone are the days when a student raised a sincere concern and a teacher bore his or her testimony as a response intended to avoid the issue. ” - Elder Ballard

What questions do you have that you wish would be honored?

As I read through this list of loaded / compound / vague / previously-answered / laundry-list-of-complaints-and-criticisms-dressed-up-as-"questions" / predicated-on-unproven-assumptions / unfair / inaccurate / lacking-in-good-faith-and-good-will / hostile-to-the-Church-and-agenda-driven-rather-than-truth-seeking questions, a few scriptures came to mind (more than "a few," I guess):

• "And there shall also be many which shall say: Eat, drink, and be merry; nevertheless, fear God—he will justify in committing a little sin; yea, lie a little, take the advantage of one because of his words, dig a pit for thy neighbor; there is no harm in this..." (2 Nephi 28:8)
• "And in that day shall the deaf hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity, and out of darkness ... For the terrible one is brought to nought, and the scorner is consumed, and all that watch for iniquity are cut off ... That make a man an offender for a word, and lay a snare for him that reproveth in the gate, and turn aside the just for a thing of nought."  (Isaiah 29:18, 20-21)
• "Teach me, and I will hold my tongue: and cause me to understand wherein I have erred.  How forcible are right words! but what doth your arguing reprove?  Do ye imagine to reprove words, and the speeches of one that is desperate, which are as wind?  Yea, ye overwhelm the fatherless, and ye dig a pit for your friend."  (Job 6:24-27)
• "And they send unto him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, to catch him in his words. ... And when they were come, they say unto him, Master, we know that thou art true, and carest for no man: for thou regardest not the person of men, but teachest the way of God in truth: Is it lawful to give tribute to Cæsar, or not? ... Shall we give, or shall we not give? But he, knowing their hypocrisy, said unto them, Why tempt ye me? bring me a penny, that I may see it..."  (Mark 12:13-15)
• "When went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk.  And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men.  Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Cæsar, or not?  But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?"  (Matt. 22:15-18)
• "And the chief priests and the scribes ... watched him, and sent forth spies, which should feign themselves just men, that they might take hold of his words, that so they might deliver him unto the power and authority of the governor.  And they asked him, saying, Master, we know that thou sayest and teachest rightly, neither acceptest thou the person of any, but teachest the way of God truly: Is it lawful for us to give tribute unto Cæsar, or no?  But he perceived their craftiness, and said unto them, Why tempt ye me?"  (Luke 20:19-23)
• "Draw me not away with the wicked, and with the workers of iniquity, which speak peace to their neighbours, but mischief is in their hearts.  Give them according to their deeds, and according to the wickedness of their endeavours: give them after the work of their hands; render to them their desert.  Because they regard not the works of the Lord, nor the operation of his hands..."  (Psalms 28:3-5)
• "Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile."  (Psalms 32:2)
• "Beware of false prophets, which come to you insheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves."  (Matthew 7:15)
• "For behold, God hath said a man being evil cannot do that which is good; for if he offereth a gift, or prayeth unto God, except he shall do it with real intent it profiteth him nothing."  (Moroni 7:6)
• "{I}t was seen that the seemingly good feelings of both the priests and the converts were more pretended than real; for a scene of great confusion and bad feeling ensued—priest contending against priest, and convert against convert; so that all their good feelings one for another, if they ever had any, were entirely lost in a strife of words and a contest about opinions."  (JS-H 1:6)
• "Wherefore, beware lest ye are deceived; and that ye may not be deceived seek ye earnestly the best gifts, always remembering for what they are given."  (D&C 46:8)
• "And this shall be a law unto you, that ye receive not the teachings of any that shall come before you as revelations or commandments; And this I give unto you that you may not be deceived, that you may know they are not of me.  For verily I say unto you, that he that is ordained of me shall come in at the gate and be ordained as I have told you before, to teach those revelations which you have received and shall receive through him whom I have appointed."  (D&C 43:5-7)
• "And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of theknowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive."  (Eph. 4:11-14)
• "Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not; But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God.  But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost."  (2 Cor. 1-3)

I generally try hard to grant an assumption of sincerity and good faith to questions asked on this board.  Sadly, I cannot do that for the laundry list in the OP.  

I am quite open to addressing challenging questions about the Gospel, but not when they are loaded in such a way as to impute guilt or wrongdoing, or where they are based on highly questionable assumptions (of the "have you stopped beating your wife yet" variety).

I think we should ask and investigate difficult questions.  But not in a spirit of acrimony and accusation, but in the spirit of seeking truth and the Spirit.

I think questions and concerns should be fairly posed, not presented in a "death by a thousand paper cuts"-type of compendium such as we see in the OP.

I think honest inquiry about the Gospel is useful and productive.  But short, facile ("appearing neat and comprehensive only by ignoring the true complexities of an issue; superficial") questions designed to elicit long, complex answers are often neither useful nor productive, particularly when they are asked with the intent to ensnare rather than to elicit information.

I find it an intellectually dishonest exercise to cobble together complaints and criticisms from people hostile to the Restored Gospel, and then present them as "questions."  There is no rhyme or reason to the list in the OP.  There is no evidence of organic, systematic study which has resulted in the "questions" posed above.  There is no evidence of a good faith effort to "study it out" and pray and ponder about these "questions" as we are commanded in D&C 9, or of a good faith effort to "seek ye diligently and teach one another words of wisdom; yea, seek ye out of the best books words of wisdom, seek learning even by study and also by faith."  (D&C 109:7).  Instead, the list appears to be yet another "Letter to a CES Director"-type effort (which itself was derivative).  It is intellectually dishonest because these are not "questions," but accusations.  Because they are not the result of sincere study and effort, in either the formation of these questions or in the attempt to answer them.

This is a toxic and unhealthy approach to the Restored Gospel.  No set of religious beliefs could be fairly analyzed through a lens so distorted by hostile assumptions, by the dishonesty in characterizing accusations as sincere questions, by the apparent refusal to engage in meaningful research and study information that is already readily available, by the rank dishonesty of disregarding such resources, of pretending they don't exist, of pretending that they do not provide real and meaningful insights into the "questions" posed, and instead re-asking the same questions over and over and over.

Again, I think we should study the Restored Gospel and, as part of that study, address questions and concerns.  But good intent and motives matter.  Sincerity matters.  Good faith and good will matter.  Willingness to study matters.  Willingness to engage and evaluate reasoning and evidence from "the best books" matters.  Willingness to seek guidance from the Spirit matters.  Willingness to have faith, even a seed of faith, even when we "do not know the meaning of all things," matters.  Willing to be patient and persevere in our study and understanding and application of the Restored Gospel matters.  Willingness to listen to prophets and apostles, even when their counsel goes against what the World is saying, matters.  

With respect, I do not think such elements exist in grievances-dressed-up-as-"questions" laundry lists like we see in the OP.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited April 8, 2016 by smac97

[DBMormon]

39 minutes ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Look, I don't want to discourage you but John Dehlin took exactly the same path you did......                                                                                                              

 

 

except he lost hope in the church being true.  I still hope and still encourage people to stay.

[Jeanne]

3 minutes ago, CV75 said:

That is not a very good approach (method, attitude, perspective, etc.) for spiritual healing to take place.

Why???

[Boanerges]

42 minutes ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Look, I don't want to discourage you but John Dehlin took exactly the same path you did......                                                                                                              

 

 

I had this thought as well. The difference is, at least to my knowledge, DB has not made a public statement that he does not believe the truth claims of the church nor has he been asked to stop.

[HappyJackWagon]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

I second this. Bill, you really ought to send these questions to Church HQ. Posting them in online forums doesn't get you anywhere as far as getting answers to them. If you get no response, or a terse non-answer from a secretary, you're no worse off.

It may be that getting authoritative answers to them isn't your primary reason for posting them in online forums . . .

I've sent politely worded questions like this to church HQ before. With the questions I pleaded for help in understanding. I was sinking and raised my hand out of the water grasping for help. Any guesses about the response I got?

That's right. No response of any kind. None. Zip. Nada.

Often (though not in my case that I'm aware of) these questions are referred back to local leaders who don't have authority to answer these questions which kind of defeats the purpose.