Are LDS members in danger of losing their belief in Christ if they leave the church?

[hope_for_things]

22 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Is it true that 60 percent LDS members become Athiest? I wonder where he gets this number. Is this a problem, do members not get the relationship that they need, whether the church is true or not, that they would still cling to Him with or without the church?

This guy gives a hypothetical scenario...c/p from the link:  "I provided a hypothetical if their Prophet and apostles stated that "it was not the true church" would Mormons still be Christian? Would Christians be Christians if their Pastor denied Christ? Interesting hypothetical. Where is Your Identity? In Christ, or a man/church?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fkHWmmW2tw

 

This is a really good question, thanks for creating this post Tacenda.  

For me personally, I've questioned my beliefs in God in the past few years and there have been times where I've considered Atheism.  The way I previously experienced orthodox Mormonism was through a very supernatural lens, so when I lost belief in the supernatural, this has caused me to question the reality of so many things.  

Lately I've been trying to appreciate the things that I can't explain, the coincidences that show the beauty of creation, of connecting to people and of life.  And I don't like exclusively seeing these things as coincidences or random acts, that seems to discount the beauty at some level for me.  But since I don't believe in a supernatural intervening God anymore, I'm not sure what exactly I do believe.  I'm still working on my concepts about God, what God is and what I believe.  At the same time I don't discount science or feel like any natural explanations for how the universe works are an affront to my beliefs.  I'm willing to look at anything and consider all reasonable possibilities.  

I don't think this makes me an Atheist, or Agnostic.  Maybe a Deist, but not in the same vein as the old Deists.  Also, I'm not willing to rule out the possibility that some higher power does play a part in our daily lives.  I'm just not sure I'm willing to attribute all kinds of random events to this power.  As you can see, I'm not sure what I believe, but thats ok, I'm comfortable without the certainty.  

[Gray]

12 hours ago, smac97 said:

I wonder if Bro. Bushman is presenting something of a false dichotomy in asking "do we worship God or do we worship Mormonism."  The LDS paradigm interweaves Christ with His Church, His Priesthood, and His Servants, such that to utterly reject the latter is to reject the former.  Consider D&C 1:

I don't see how a Latter-day Saint can extricate/isolate belief in God from belief in and allegiance to His Church.  To the extent Bro. Bushman juxtaposes a connection with God against or otherwise not taking into account a connection with God's Church, I disagree with him.

But perhaps this is not what Bro. Bushman is saying.  Perhaps his intent is something like this: "To those who leave the LDS Church, we hope that you retain and take with you whatever truths and precepts you can accommodate in your heart and mind.  You can leave the Church but still retain a belief in God, in His love for us, in the Golden Rule, in the beauty of charity for and service to others.  You needn't throw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater."

Yeah, that seems more likely what he means.  Those who leave the Church would certainly be better off in repenting and returning.  Absent that, they would be better off retaining a belief in God than in rejecting Him altogether.  Absent that, they would be better adhering to the moral precepts and code of conduct generally central to the Gospel (Love Thy Neighbor) than not.

Thanks,

Smac

I believe what he was trying to say that if our only connection with God is through the filter of Mormonism, then we're likely to abandon God if we ever lose trust in the church. I think he's saying our connection with God should be stronger than our connection with the church, and the two should be a little bit more independent of each other.

I've noticed over the years that language members use to talk about the LDS church resembles the way that people of other faiths talk about God. I think that's probably unhealthy. 

Edited July 6, 2016 by Gray

[Robert F. Smith]

21 hours ago, bluebell said:

I think it's a symptom of the things that cause a person to lose their testimony of the church in the first place. 

Most of the arguments that can cause a person to lose faith in the church are just as capable of causing a person to lose faith in God as well. Historical issues, scriptural problems, skepticism, etc. 

I don't think it's because people have faith in the church first and God second. I think it's because once most people start to doubt the spiritual claims of the church, they quickly move on to doubting all spiritual claims. 

For example, if you can't trust that it was the Holy Ghost telling you the BOM was true then how can you trust He's telling you the bible is true?  How can you trust any testimony you have?

The basic problem is twofold: (1) having faith in a church, any church, is a mistake, and (2) mistrusting the Holy Spirit pulls the rug out from under the believer.

The only faith worth having is in God the Father, in His Son Jesus Christ, and in the witness of the Holy Spirit.  These three.  A temporal church organization has as its only purpose to further the efforts of God and those who act under his authority.  The Word of God (Scripture and the words of the living prophets) only exists to serve that fundamental purpose, i.e., to act as a guide or Iron Rod on the path to salvation.  One has to have his priorities straight, without which he will stumble and fall.

Don Henley sings about the negative features of our "graceless age," and I agree.  We can so easily miss "the heart of the matter."  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Io-1nENaV18 .

[Robert F. Smith]

23 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Is it true that 60 percent LDS members become Athiest? I wonder where he gets this number. Is this a problem, do members not get the relationship that they need, whether the church is true or not, that they would still cling to Him with or without the church?

This guy gives a hypothetical scenario...c/p from the link:  "I provided a hypothetical if their Prophet and apostles stated that "it was not the true church" would Mormons still be Christian? Would Christians be Christians if their Pastor denied Christ? Interesting hypothetical. Where is Your Identity? In Christ, or a man/church?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fkHWmmW2tw 

Through falsifying the data and creating silly hypotheticals, of course this guy can create an invidious theoretical result.  That is no surprise, and it demonstrates the bankruptcy of ordinary evangelical arguments that they must create such an absurd scenario.  Their other arguments have been singularly unsuccessful.

[smac97]

9 minutes ago, Gray said:

I believe what he was trying to say that if our only connection with God is through the filter of Mormonism, then we're likely to abandon God if we ever lose trust in the church.

Perhaps so.  

Quote

I think he's saying our connection with God should be stronger than our connection with the church, and the two should be a little bit more independent of each other.

Such that if belief in the latter (the Church) ever falters, belief in the former need not necessarily likewise fail.

It sounds like our respective interpretations of Bro. Givens are largely similar.  We're just using differing wording.

Quote

I've noticed over the years that language members use to talk about the LDS church resembles the way that people of other faiths talk about God. I think that's probably unhealthy. 

In some ways, yes.  The members of the Church should not set themselves up for a fall by attributing perfection to the Church.  I believe the Church is headed and administered by good and decent men who hold the priesthood of God, who commune with God, but who themselves have flaws and weaknesses.  They are not perfect, nor do they perfectly administer the affairs of the Church.  I therefore sustain them, not because they are perfect, but because they are not, and therefore have need of the sustaining love and support of members of the Church.  Perfect leaders wouldn't really need sustaining.

But in other ways, I do not agree with you.  As I noted previously, the LDS paradigm interweaves Christ with His Church, His Priesthood, and His Servants, such that to utterly reject the latter is to reject the former.  To reject Christ's prophets and apostles is to reject a significant component of Christ.  He sent them, after all.  He speaks through them.  The saving ordinances are administered by them.  His Church - His Bride - is maintained and managed by them.  His Church is comprised of us.  

Is it possible to reject The Bride but not The Bridegroom?  Ultimately, no.  For we are part of The Bride.

Another metaphor used to describe The Church is "The Body of Christ."  As explained in The Encyclopedia of Mormonism:

Quote

"The Church of Jesus Christ" indicates that Jesus Christ stands at the head of the Church, and that his gospel, teachings, and divine authority constitute the fundamental basis of the Church. 

...

The President of the Church receives revelation from God that relates to the whole Church, but all leaders and members are entitled to divine inspiration within the scope of their responsibilities and regarding their personal lives. Such revelation helps bring unity and common purpose to the Church, making it like a living organism, the "body of Christ" (1 Cor. 12:12-28; Col. 1:18).

Is it possible to accept "the head" but reject "the body?"  Ultimately, no.

Yet another metaphor is "The Kingdom of God.  Again from the EoM:

Quote

The kingdom of God on earth exists wherever the priesthood of God is (TPJS, pp. 271-74). At present it is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The Church was established by divine authority to prepare its members to live forever in the Celestial Kingdom or kingdom of God in heaven. Its nature is ecclesiastical and nonpolitical. It "asserts no claim to temporal rule over nations; its scepter of power is that of the Holy Priesthood, to be used in the preaching of the gospel and in administering its ordinances for the salvation of mankind living and dead" (JC, p. 788).

The kingdom of God on the earth is the stone, spoken of by Daniel, that in the latter days would roll forth to fill the earth and never be destroyed (Dan. 2:34-45). It is the kingdom that the Savior prayed would come (Matt. 6:10), and he taught us to pray in like manner. In the meridian of time Jesus set up the kingdom of God on earth, called and ordained apostles and prophets, bestowed the necessary priesthood authority (Matt. 16:19; John 15:16), and charged them with the responsibilities of the Church. After an apostasy removed that priesthood from earth, the authority to reestablish the kingdom of God on the earth was given to the Prophet Joseph Smith by heavenly messengers (see Restoration of the Gospel of Jesus Christ). Through Joseph Smith the Lord said: The keys of the kingdom of God are committed unto man on the earth, and from thence shall the gospel roll forth unto the ends of the earth, as the stone which is cut out of the mountain without hands shall roll forth, until it has filled the whole earth…. Call upon the Lord, that his kingdom may go forth upon the earth, that the inhabitants thereof may receive it, and be prepared for the days to come, in the which the Son of Man shall come down in heaven, clothed in the brightness of his glory, to meet the kingdom of God which is set up on the earth. Wherefore, may the kingdom of God go forth, that the kingdom of heaven may come [D&C 65:2, 5-6]. 

Is it possible to reject Christ's Kingdom but not Christ?  Ultimately, no.

Note that in all of these things I am saying "ultimately."  I think it's quite possible for a person to intermittently or for a time "accept" Christ in some sense while "rejecting" Christ's Church/Bride/Body/Kingdom and all that goes with it (prophets and apostles, continuing revelation, saving ordinances, etc.).

In other words, we go back to Bro. Givens proposing something other than an all-or-nothing approach to the Gospel.  Perhaps he is advocating that Saints who reject the Church/Bride/Body/Kingdom may only be doing so for a time, and during that time they can and should take with them whatever aspects of faith they can.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Kenngo1969]

Any "limitations" the doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints places on God are simply because of our limited ability to understand God as conceived by the Church of Jesus Christ, and as taught by mortal teachers and leaders, on the one hand, and as understood by mortal learners, on the other hand.  The most important things I've learned about God aren't reducible to words anyway.  

Edited July 6, 2016 by Kenngo1969

[Calm]

5 hours ago, busybee said:

What if it's not? Follow your feelings and see how you feel. Perhaps you should challenge your doubts by deciding to go 'all in'.. Return to full activity, determine to desire to have faith, become worthy to attend, and attend the temple again, study the BoM etc etc. If after doing this faithfully for 6 months you still feel like the issues causing your doubt are still insurmountable, call it quits. That way you can say you've given everything you've got and can walk away with that knowledge. Go on. I dare you 

Tacenda, the above may be exactly what you need.  From the way you write you have not been happy with your situation for years.  Perhaps it is something neurological given your anxiety issues (I know how that can affect everything in life myself and it should be something considered in your appraisal of life).

But perhaps it has been your long sojurn in no man's land and if this, doesn't it sound desirable to get out of there? Even if it doesn't remove the difficulty, there is hope and satisfaction and at times even peace in making a choice and living with it.  

Making a decision to act one way or the other now and acting on it...don't you think it would be better than continuing to flail about?

[JLHPROF]

3 hours ago, Atheist Mormon said:

It's not that we look for reason, usually the reason finds us in the form of evidence or lack thereof.

Wanting proof/evidence where faith is required is never going to work out well.
 

[Gray]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

Perhaps so.  

Such that if belief in the latter (the Church) ever falters, belief in the former need not necessarily likewise fail.

It sounds like our respective interpretations of Bro. Givens are largely similar.  We're just using differing wording.

I think so, although I was quoting Bushman, not Givens

Quote

In some ways, yes.  The members of the Church should not set themselves up for a fall by attributing perfection to the Church.  I believe the Church is headed and administered by good and decent men who hold the priesthood of God, who commune with God, but who themselves have flaws and weaknesses.  They are not perfect, nor do they perfectly administer the affairs of the Church.  I therefore sustain them, not because they are perfect, but because they are not, and therefore have need of the sustaining love and support of members of the Church.  Perfect leaders wouldn't really need sustaining.

But in other ways, I do not agree with you.  As I noted previously, the LDS paradigm interweaves Christ with His Church, His Priesthood, and His Servants, such that to utterly reject the latter is to reject the former.  To reject Christ's prophets and apostles is to reject a significant component of Christ.  He sent them, after all.  He speaks through them.  The saving ordinances are administered by them.  His Church - His Bride - is maintained and managed by them.  His Church is comprised of us.  

Perhaps the problem comes when the church is held in nearly equal esteem with God.

Quote

Is it possible to reject The Bride but not The Bridegroom?  Ultimately, no.  For we are part of The Bride.

It's possible to accept different paradigms about who the bride is without rejecting the bridegroom. What you say may be true according to your own beliefs. But there are other views about God that should be available to someone who loses their faith in Mormonism. The problem comes when people are unable to extricate God from Mormonism. 

Quote

Another metaphor used to describe The Church is "The Body of Christ."  As explained in The Encyclopedia of Mormonism:

Is it possible to accept "the head" but reject "the body?"  Ultimately, no.

Yet another metaphor is "The Kingdom of God.  Again from the EoM:

Is it possible to reject Christ's Kingdom but not Christ?  Ultimately, no.

Note that in all of these things I am saying "ultimately."  I think it's quite possible for a person to intermittently or for a time "accept" Christ in some sense while "rejecting" Christ's Church/Bride/Body/Kingdom and all that goes with it (prophets and apostles, continuing revelation, saving ordinances, etc.).

In other words, we go back to Bro. Givens proposing something other than an all-or-nothing approach to the Gospel.  Perhaps he is advocating that Saints who reject the Church/Bride/Body/Kingdom may only be doing so for a time, and during that time they can and should take with them whatever aspects of faith they can.

Thanks,

-Smac

I think Bushman believes that there is value with sticking with the church, but if you can't stick with the church, you should at least stick with God. Billions of people managed to maintain a relationship with God without any ties to the LDS church, after all. The LDS church is one very tiny portion of the family of God. 

Edited July 6, 2016 by Gray

[JLHPROF]

11 hours ago, sunstoned said:

My experience has been just the opposite.  Most of the people I know who have left the church (really left, not just gone inactive) have left over historical issues.

No.

They have left because they are unable to reconcile their faith with the feelings they have concerning the historical "issues".

"Joseph Smith had a 14 year old girl and an already married woman sealed to him.  That's just so wrong.  I can no longer believe the revelations he received despite my previous spiritual witnesses.  I am too troubled by these historical events to continue."
vs
"Joseph Smith was a prophet of God and was commanded to live plural marriage by the Lord in revelation.  Some of the women he was inspired to be sealed to already had civil marriages not by God's authority or would not be considered old enough to get married by today's laws.  This doesn't bother me."

The history stays the same.  It's the emotional responses that are different.
So some stay, some leave.  It's not the history, it's the person's response in reconciling their testimony and their emotions.
If it were not so then EVERYONE familiar with the "issues" of Church history would leave the Church.  Only a very small portion make that choice.

 

[Calm]

3 hours ago, snowflake said:

 

When individuals discover that they have been mislead, lied to and that all of the above statements are untrue, people completely turn from God. I can't blame them, they are taught that basically without the LDS church there is no truth, which is a lie, but they believe it. It is terrible to leave God, but I personally believe that our LDS friends find their identity in the church before Jesus...

For someone who believes misleading and lies can have such a horrible impact, I would think you would be more careful in presenting actual truth about the LDS faith.  There are sufficient doctrinal differences you can disagree with, there is no need to resort to untruths, full or partial.

If you wish to convert people to Christ, showing you care enough to actually understand and not are too lazy or too fearful or whatever leads you to do this is the first step.

[JLHPROF]

12 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Tonight I went to the movie "Saturday's Warrior", I talked my husband into going and for two dollars no biggie if it wasn't good. I didn't think it would be that great going in, but was surprised at the emotions it brought out. You could say I felt the spirit, and it was strong.

But do I throw out all the facts, and go back, go back to the temple, go all in? Believe me, there was a moment that I wanted to. But is that deceiving? All the good feelings etc. I've been moved by other movies, with different faith paradigms. But tonight it brought back so many memories and good feelings. It's the part of Mormonism I can't bare to leave.

Do you think God would test me on this, see if I'll go back to belief with only good feelings and skipping the historical problems? Since in the Bible says not to trust feelings. It's so confusing to me, all of it. I'm definitely not looking for a reason to leave, or am not at the point that I'm making excuses up to finally be through with it.

You know Tacenda, I've felt for some time that your testimony is much stronger and your faith much more secure than you realize it is.
I see how you are troubled by "the facts" but open enough to the spirit that you cannot bring yourself to walk away.

I really do hope you find a way to reconcile the historical events that trouble you with the strong spiritual testimony that is keeping you anchored.
I truly believe they can be reconciled.

[Tacenda]

Fence sitter here. But thanks for the confidence JL!!

[The Nehor]

7 hours ago, Teancum said:

And your decision about religion is not fueled by such things?

Of course it is but that decision is also fueled predominantly by spiritual experiences.

Instinct does not like the church. It dislikes having to strive for charity. My libido hates the law of chastity. My reason believes the gospel plausible. My emotions are mercurial. After a late Saturday night they are anti-early church. When I am basking in the love of God imparted to my spirit they chime in in support. I do not have much trust in the correctness of my emotions about anything. It makes particularly poor choices when it falls in love.

[phaedrus ut]

Studies have shown that people who leave high commitment, fundamentalist, religions requiring a high degree of conformity, or authoritarian religions tend to avoid similar organizations in the future.  From my personal observation I would guess that 60-70% of long term adult believers who leave the LDS church become non-religious.  However, short term converts seem to be different in my experience.  Many are religious shoppers and easily join another group or return to their previous religious practice.  

For me personally the logical tools I built leaving my former faith worked equally well in examining the next batch supernatural or religious claims that came my way.  

 

Phaedrus 

Edited July 6, 2016 by phaedrus ut

[Jeanne]

I feel like I am perhaps unique in a way..neither good or bad kind of unique..but I have managed after mormonism to find God again..but without religion.  I can't see myself doing that again.  What would you call me? 

[UtahTexan]

I didn't.  I never lost faith in God when I left the LDS Church.....

[Jeanne]

2 minutes ago, CountryBoy said:

I didn't.  I never lost faith in God when I left the LDS Church.....

Forgive me if you have mentioned this before...or if it is too personal, I understand.  What was your main reason for leaving the church in the first place?  And though you say you never lost faith in God, was there any kind of difference in the way that you saw him?

[UtahTexan]

6 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

Forgive me if you have mentioned this before...or if it is too personal, I understand.  What was your main reason for leaving the church in the first place?  And though you say you never lost faith in God, was there any kind of difference in the way that you saw him?

I lost my testimony of Joseph Smith.  I felt I had been deceived.  I did not see God differently because I did not blame God for any of it.  I have believed in God my whole life.....I have seen too much evidence of His existence.   

[consiglieri]

20 minutes ago, CountryBoy said:

I didn't.  I never lost faith in God when I left the LDS Church.....

I am continuing to lose faith in the LDS Church given the following:

You know the new Doctrinal Mastery program in seminary everybody is so excited about?

 

Guess what already made it into the manual?

 

https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrinal-mastery-new-testament-teacher-material/prophets-and-revelation?lang=eng

 

 

If you guessed President Nelson's proclamation that the November anti-gay marriage policy is revelation, you would be correct.

 
 

Quote

 

“This prophetic process was followed in 2012 with the change in minimum age for missionaries and again with the recent additions to the Church’s handbook, consequent to the legalization of same-sex marriage in some countries. Filled with compassion for all, and especially for the children, we wrestled at length to understand the Lord’s will in this matter. Ever mindful of God’s plan of salvation and of His hope for eternal life for each of His children, we considered countless permutations and combinations of possible scenarios that could arise. We met repeatedly in the temple in fasting and prayer and sought further direction and inspiration. And then, when the Lord inspired His prophet, President Thomas S. Monson, to declare the mind of the Lord and the will of the Lord, each of us during that sacred moment felt a spiritual confirmation. It was our privilege as Apostles to sustain what had been revealed to President Monson. Revelation from the Lord to His servants is a sacred process, and so is your privilege of receiving personal revelation” (“Becoming True Millennials” [Worldwide Devotional for Young Adults, Jan. 10, 2016], broadcasts.lds.org).

 

 

Just when I thought it couldn't get any worse.

[Jeanne]

8 minutes ago, CountryBoy said:

I lost my testimony of Joseph Smith.  I felt I had been deceived.  I did not see God differently because I did not blame God for any of it.  I have believed in God my whole life.....I have seen too much evidence of His existence.   

Thank you for your honest reply.  I was fortunate I think.  I held on to that part of my faith.  I needed to.  It would have been so easy to toss the baby out with the bahwater..but I need to have Him in my life and I still do.  Good for you. I know you are a happy man..those decisions belong to you.  Wishing you happiness always.

[Johnnie Cake]

While I can't speak to the 60% statistic...as someone who has lost belief in both Mormonism's and Christianity's truth claims...and can only say that the same method of deconstructing belief in Mormonism is the same method for deconstructing Christianity.  Once one raises the bar on truth claims and becomes skeptical of claims dependent on  super natural powers and is willing to subject these claims to scrutiny and examination...its like toppling a long line of domino...knocking one down begins a process of knocking them all down until all one has left is the after math of ones former belief structure laying in pieces on the ground. 

[Tacenda]

39 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

I feel like I am perhaps unique in a way..neither good or bad kind of unique..but I have managed after mormonism to find God again..but without religion.  I can't see myself doing that again.  What would you call me? 

A believer!!

[Jeanne]

2 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

A believer!!

Thanks Tacenda.  That I am..and have to be.  I have had moments in the past week that if God came to visit..I would shake him and say...Why????  And then I would lean in for Him to hold me.

 

[Tacenda]

9 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

While I can't speak to the 60% statistic...as someone who has lost belief in both Mormonism's and Christianity's truth claims...and can only say that the same method of deconstructing belief in Mormonism is the same method for deconstructing Christianity.  Once one raises the bar on truth claims and becomes skeptical of claims dependent on  super natural powers and is willing to subject these claims to scrutiny and examination...its like toppling a long line of domino...knocking one down begins a process of knocking them all down until all one has left is the after math of ones former belief structure laying in pieces on the ground. 

Well at least you can walk on the ground Jesus walked, see the places he visited, because they exist. I find it very plausible that Jesus was real, not very plausible that anyone in the BoM existed since we have no gold plates, just some mens' testimony signed by one person, not themselves.

And we have the Dead Sea Scrolls which tells me there is significant proof of Jesus, since he's mentioned in them.  

But to each their own Johnnie, I appreciate your input!