The Gospel is not as big as it use to be.

[CV75]

13 hours ago, Monster said:

There was a time when the gospel seemed to have an answer for everything. When I was young with little life experience it seemed natural to believe what those around me instructed me to believe. Most of it was sage and good advice. Even those in the church were looking out for me to the best of their knowledge. Problem is I got older. I studied so many other things. I got in involved in reading about the nature of the universe. So many things explained through the experimentation of great thinkers over time.

Now the gospel as explained by Mormonism seems so small. Such a linear line of reasoning. No divergence into other realms of thinking. Mostly a progression through a list of checkmarks to obtain a vague promise of some future glory. But nothing really tangible beyond hope and faith. Those are not bad qualities by any means, just not sufficient to spend a life on for me.

When you live in a world that constanly reinforces your belief structure that belief seems all encompassing. When you venture out you realize how little you actually know.

At least that is what happened to me.

 

It seems you still lack a great deal of experience and still rely on others' instructions on what to believe. You really won't know what to believe until you realize that the more you know, the more you realize you don't know, and that faith, hope and charity are what give anything you know or do any meaning.

Edited April 17, 2017 by CV75

[mfbukowski]

12 hours ago, sunstoned said:

Christianity, which includes Mormonism, attempts to explain the unexplainable.  These are things that cannot be explained by science or the reasoning of men.  Two thousand years ago most of physical experiences of the world could not be explained by science, so religion flourished.  The trouble is that in the last 2000 years religion has remained stagnate. It is tied to the writings of a iron age middle eastern superstitious tribe.   The reasoning of men (science) has not stood still.  But has flourished. We see the fruits of science in our daily lives.  Science has helped millions live a better, healthier, and longer life. 

As science progresses and gives us new light and knowledge, superstitions retreat into the shadows.  Religion continues to hold sway over small areas that science has not entered...yet.  This is called god of the gaps.  One quick example:  Twenty five years ago most LDS believe the Nephites/Lamanites were the sole residents of the new world, just like the BoM states.  Now, since advances in DNA and archaeology, the Nephites and Lamanites are now relegated to a small non-discrip group within the vast civilization of "others".  The BoM cover page has even been re-written to concede this fact.  Another example is the Book of Abraham...Well, lets not go there.  Suffice it to say the honest light of scientific scrutiny has not been kind to the BoA.

Spirituality has nothing to do with how things work but is about our attitudes. 

How could you not know that?

How does science help your attitude toward life besides giving you a pill?

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, Monster said:

Never said I had left the church. I find value in much of the community. I just find most of the doctrine limiting and without any real substance other than the opinions of many men who have pontificated on the subject. Men can say  things but it does not make it so.

 

The temple? Sure it bonds members to gather and gives them a narrative to bring some measure of meaning to their life. It is also a colossal waste of resources and time. Some what embarrassing in fact. From the life of Jesus who disdained such opulant trappings to modern Mormonism that literally worships the gaudy ornateness of the building inside and out. The temple as it exists today is in direct conflict with the message of the BofM

We literally worship "the gaudy ornateness of the temple inside and out"? What? Are you sure you want to use the word literally there?

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, Monster said:

Never said anyone who believes in the gospel is dumb. You may want to infer that from my post but it is not so. Many members I associate with are much smarter that me. They however have not had the same experience or asked the same questions as me. That does not make me smarter or more wise. But I am almost 60 and have had experiences that others have not. I just choose to embrace all knowledge and sort it out the best I can. Just because it conflicts with the church does not make it bad information. It is not a matter of what you know but what you are willing to accept that lets you progress.

So many are smarter then you but you (the bastion of greatness) embrace all knowledge and they do not? Specifically knowledge conflicting with the church (whatever that means). And the secret to progress is based on what you accept?

I am sure what any of this means. It sounds like it is basically a longer equivalent of an insufferable person going on about how open-minded they are and about as meaningful.

[clarkgoble]

34 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

How does science help your attitude toward life besides giving you a pill?

Well I think the broad sense of scientific method is extremely helpful in life. However few people actually use that in life.

 

[clarkgoble]

15 hours ago, Monster said:

There was a time when the gospel seemed to have an answer for everything. When I was young with little life experience it seemed natural to believe what those around me instructed me to believe. Most of it was sage and good advice. Even those in the church were looking out for me to the best of their knowledge. Problem is I got older. I studied so many other things. I got in involved in reading about the nature of the universe. So many things explained through the experimentation of great thinkers over time.

Now the gospel as explained by Mormonism seems so small. Such a linear line of reasoning. No divergence into other realms of thinking. Mostly a progression through a list of checkmarks to obtain a vague promise of some future glory. But nothing really tangible beyond hope and faith. Those are not bad qualities by any means, just not sufficient to spend a life on for me.

I'm not sure I'd agree with that. It depends upon what you mean by Mormonism of course. If you mean the kind of superficial stereotypical CES model then perhaps you have a point. But as others noted Mormonism embraces all truth and has a strong sense that we should be seeking out knowledge everywhere. As such the wonder of the universe to me is inherently Mormon. 

Not sure what you mean by "linear reasoning" but I don't see that myself. And to see Mormonism as "a list of checkmarks" for "future glory" to me misses the soul of Mormonism. That is while we acknowledge the future world our fundamental goal is here and now not deferring until the eternities. It's all about changing things now and not waiting for others. Joseph's quip about if Mormons were sent to hell we'd turn it into heaven to me captures the fundamental attitude towards life. Contrary to so much of Christianity it's about fixing things now.

[stemelbow]

23 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

So many are smarter then you but you (the bastion of greatness) embrace all knowledge and they do not? Specifically knowledge conflicting with the church (whatever that means). And the secret to progress is based on what you accept?

I am sure what any of this means. It sounds like it is basically a longer equivalent of an insufferable person going on about how open-minded they are and about as meaningful.

I think you're being pretty uncharitable in terms of what he's saying and what you think he's implying by what he's saying.  Just a thought.  I don't think it helpful to read his words and assume he's saying anything near "the secret to progress is based on what you accept"? He obviously struggles with the very insular, anti-academic atmosphere of Church.  He's not alone. 

Yesterday, I noticed my 18 year was not to be found when priesthood Opening exercises started up.  He has been leaving after Sunday School for a few weeks, and we've talked some about it.  So I texted him.  "Hey, what's up?  Where'd you go?" 

"home"

"huh...What's wrong with sitting at Church?  Don't like young men's in particks?"

"No.  I like the young men, but the teachers are lame.  I dont' really like Church much at all.  We don't get to talk about anything important.  The same thing every week for years for me.  I hate sitting there.  I do not wanna just sit there.  I don't know how I feel about certain things and it's hard for me." 

I headed to EQ and the lesson started in on "Nurturing the Eternal Partnership of Marriage"

"alright.  I've been through this about 100 times.  I need to go have a chat with my son."

So I did and it went swimmingly. He went on and on, but some sippets:

"I like to worship God and Jesus.  I like that.  But I don't like having things repeated to me over and over by grownups who don't like what I say and think.  There's really no room for discussion or thought, critical thinking", he says, "at Church.  I sit there and when they ask me things I say what I think, and they don't really explain anything or try to help because the things I say are different, I guess.  They just want to shut me up and move on, it feels like.

I don't know.  I get taught science and real stuff.  And they don't want to hear any applications or thoughts about what I'm learning and how ti applies to religion.  They just want to skip it and tell me things like evolution is theoretical and science changes.  It feels like they know less than me.  When I ask things they can't even address the question.  They skip around and try everything to just start repeating what they've told me for years. "

Anyway, a chip off the old block, as they say.  It feels similar to what Monster is saying. 

Edited April 17, 2017 by stemelbow

[Tacenda]

26 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I think you're being pretty uncharitable in terms of what he's saying and what you think he's implying by what he's saying.  Just a thought.  I don't think it helpful to read his words and assume he's saying anything near "the secret to progress is based on what you accept"? He obviously struggles with the very insular, anti-academic atmosphere of Church.  He's not alone. 

Yesterday, I noticed my 18 year was not to be found when priesthood Opening exercises started up.  He has been leaving after Sunday School for a few weeks, and we've talked some about it.  So I texted him.  "Hey, what's up?  Where'd you go?" 

"home"

"huh...What's wrong with sitting at Church?  Don't like young men's in particks?"

"No.  I like the young men, but the teachers are lame.  I dont' really like Church much at all.  We don't get to talk about anything important.  The same thing every week for years for me.  I hate sitting there.  I do not wanna just sit there.  I don't know how I feel about certain things and it's hard for me." 

I headed to EQ and the lesson started in on "Nurturing the Eternal Partnership of Marriage"

"alright.  I've been through this about 100 times.  I need to go have a chat with my son."

So I did and it went swimmingly. He went on and on, but some sippets:

"I like to worship God and Jesus.  I like that.  But I don't like having things repeated to me over and over by grownups who don't like what I say and think.  There's really no room for discussion or thought, critical thinking", he says, "at Church.  I sit there and when they ask me things I say what I think, and they don't really explain anything or try to help because the things I say are different, I guess.  They just want to shut me up and move on, it feels like.

I don't know.  I get taught science and real stuff.  And they don't want to hear any applications or thoughts about what I'm learning and how ti applies to religion.  They just want to skip it and tell me things like evolution is theoretical and science changes.  It feels like they know less than me.  When I ask things they can't even address the question.  They skip around and try everything to just start repeating what they've told me for years. "

Anyway, a chip off the old block, as they say.  It feels similar to what Monster is saying. 

Glad your intuition told you to go speak with your son, how great that is! Instead of making him come back or getting angry.

My kids use to say the same thing, and now my husband says it about the repetition of the lessons or talks in conference etc. He has taught the 11-12 group in Primary for several years and knows all the lessons so well, but tries to make them a little different each time. He goes all out and has so much fun with them! Like a class flag that they draw messages on etc.

A funny story, when the lesson was on the translation method this year, he wasn't even going to bring up the hat and seerstone method, and one of the students brought it up. Her dad who rarely comes to church had told her. And she went on and on how weird that method was. My husband just let her talk and then moved on. His co-teacher he said, acted like he didn't know anything about it. 

Maybe the kids and even some adults need the church taught like it was in the beginning stripped of the white wash CES started, come what may.

 

 

Edited April 17, 2017 by Tacenda

[Kenngo1969]

3 hours ago, Monster said:

Never said I had left the church. I find value in much of the community. I just find most of the doctrine limiting and without any real substance other than the opinions of many men who have pontificated on the subject. Men can say  things but it does not make it so.

The temple? Sure it bonds members to gather and gives them a narrative to bring some measure of meaning to their life. It is also a colossal waste of resources and time. Some what embarrassing in fact. From the life of Jesus who disdained such opulant trappings to modern Mormonism that literally worships the gaudy ornateness of the building inside and out. The temple as it exists today is in direct conflict with the message of the BofM

I suppose we'll simply have to disagree on the supposed/alleged limiting nature of the doctrine of the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ.  I think you are grossly underestimating the significance of temples and of what goes on there, because it is in those rituals, ordinances, and covenants where much of the very richness and depth you claim does not exist in the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ can be found. As for richness and depth (or lack of it) elsewhere in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, you are right that if I depend on any other human to provide me with such richness and depth (living on borrowed light, essentially) rather than taking the Holy Spirit as my own guide and searching it out and finding it for myself, I'm apt to be disappointed.  

As for how temples should be constructed, while you excoriate so-called modern Mormonism for its alleged hyperfocus on opulence, on outward beauty, and on material things, it should be remembered that the reconstructed Nauvoo Temple is (but for a nod to such modern conveniences as elevators), as I understand it, an exact replica of the one originally designed by Joseph Smith, so your proposed dichotomy between supposed "Modern Mormonism" and its Restoration-era counterpart seems to fail.  While it is true that one can worship God in virtually any place, at any time, and in any circumstance, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is far from alone in its aim to provide holy places, set apart from the world, where one can lay aside the cares, the troubles, and the evils of this world and can "seek for the things of a better" (Doctrine and Covenants 25:10).  And the church is far from alone in seeing to it that those edifices are appointed differently than regular houses of worship.

While it is true, to an extent, that we can fulfill the command of Doctrine and Covenants 25:10 in church buildings, and while I certainly have felt a profound peace meeting with my fellow Saints in such edifices, the peace I have felt in the temple is beyond compare.  On occasions when leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ have felt to make the opportunity to participate in temple dedications available to a greater number of Saints and have broadcast dedication services outside the temple being dedicated, the feeling I have felt in chapels is more akin to what I feel in the temple than it is to what I feel on a weekly basis in worship services. And with due respect, I trust those who have the keys more than I trust you to know how, how many, and where temples should be constructed and how they should be used, as well as to determine whether such actions "direct[ly] conflict" with the message of the Book of Mormon. 

Edited April 17, 2017 by Kenngo1969

[thesometimesaint]

 

 

3 hours ago, Monster said:

Never said anyone who believes in the gospel is dumb. You may want to infer that from my post but it is not so. Many members I associate with are much smarter that me. They however have not had the same experience or asked the same questions as me. That does not make me smarter or more wise. But I am almost 60 and have had experiences that others have not. I just choose to embrace all knowledge and sort it out the best I can. Just because it conflicts with the church does not make it bad information. It is not a matter of what you know but what you are willing to accept that lets you progress.

I have no problem with God or Science.

[pogi]

1 hour ago, Monster said:

I just find most of the doctrine limiting...

When properly understood and applied, they are liberating.  

 

[juliann]

5 hours ago, Monster said:

Never said anyone who believes in the gospel is dumb. You may want to infer that from my post but it is not so. Many members I associate with are much smarter that me. They however have not had the same experience or asked the same questions as me. That does not make me smarter or more wise. But I am almost 60 and have had experiences that others have not. I just choose to embrace all knowledge and sort it out the best I can. Just because it conflicts with the church does not make it bad information. It is not a matter of what you know but what you are willing to accept that lets you progress.

Are you only getting information from Sunday School? Have you gone to a university to study religion? I'm kind of stymied as to why you think what the church puts out is in the end all be all of knowledge or should be. You are supposed to go get your own.  

[rongo]

4 hours ago, stemelbow said:

I think you're being pretty uncharitable in terms of what he's saying and what you think he's implying by what he's saying.  Just a thought.  I don't think it helpful to read his words and assume he's saying anything near "the secret to progress is based on what you accept"? He obviously struggles with the very insular, anti-academic atmosphere of Church.  He's not alone. 

Yesterday, I noticed my 18 year was not to be found when priesthood Opening exercises started up.  He has been leaving after Sunday School for a few weeks, and we've talked some about it.  So I texted him.  "Hey, what's up?  Where'd you go?" 

"home"

"huh...What's wrong with sitting at Church?  Don't like young men's in particks?"

"No.  I like the young men, but the teachers are lame.  I dont' really like Church much at all.  We don't get to talk about anything important.  The same thing every week for years for me.  I hate sitting there.  I do not wanna just sit there.  I don't know how I feel about certain things and it's hard for me." 

I headed to EQ and the lesson started in on "Nurturing the Eternal Partnership of Marriage"

"alright.  I've been through this about 100 times.  I need to go have a chat with my son."

So I did and it went swimmingly. He went on and on, but some sippets:

"I like to worship God and Jesus.  I like that.  But I don't like having things repeated to me over and over by grownups who don't like what I say and think.  There's really no room for discussion or thought, critical thinking", he says, "at Church.  I sit there and when they ask me things I say what I think, and they don't really explain anything or try to help because the things I say are different, I guess.  They just want to shut me up and move on, it feels like.

I don't know.  I get taught science and real stuff.  And they don't want to hear any applications or thoughts about what I'm learning and how ti applies to religion.  They just want to skip it and tell me things like evolution is theoretical and science changes.  It feels like they know less than me.  When I ask things they can't even address the question.  They skip around and try everything to just start repeating what they've told me for years. "

Anyway, a chip off the old block, as they say.  It feels similar to what Monster is saying. 

I'm picturing your son being in with my priests quorum in my ward --- one of whom is my son, who will be our valedictorian and will get a full-ride scholarship somewhere. He's very knowledge about and loves science. Your son wouldn't be shut down in applying science or wanting discuss applications of the gospel with "real life." I know, because I'm in there with them, and we discuss all sorts of things within the context of the lesson. We especially stop everything and discuss concerns or criticisms, if/when the boys have them. 

And granted that "Come Follow Me" is mind-numbingly boring, year after year, unless leaders and teachers are very careful. 

My questions are:

1) Does your son want to serve a mission? Aside from and separate from his boredom and marginalization issues at Church? I'm assuming he graduates in a month or so.

2) How does he do with his personal scripture study and prayer? Seminary?

3) Does he generally share your outlook on certain Church policies, doctrines, and culture?

4) Does his quorum have the boys teach lessons? 

Based on experience with other older boys who start to lose their interest in church and church classes/lessons, I'm not sure that addressing his critique would actually prevent him from leaving church because he's bored and wants to be somewhere else and do other things. And, while anything is possible and we should always hope, it's not a good sign that he's having these struggles at 18. They are very hard to get back on track when they're almost graduated and are struggling or wavering on the cusp of mission age. 

I feel for him, and you. I think you handled it well, talking it out with him rather than insisting that he tough it out and attend, anyway. That's good, as far as it goes, but if people don't feel it, they won't attend for long. 

Edited April 17, 2017 by rongo

[stemelbow]

25 minutes ago, rongo said:

I'm picturing your son being in with my priests quorum in my ward --- one of whom is my son, who will be our valedictorian and will get a full-ride scholarship somewhere. He's very knowledge about and loves science. Your son wouldn't be shut down in applying science or wanting discuss applications of the gospel with "real life." I know, because I'm in there with them, and we discuss all sorts of things within the context of the lesson. We especially stop everything and discuss concerns or criticisms, if/when the boys have them. 

What are you rubbing it in my face here?  Your son reminds me though.  I had a good friend who was Vale-D in our graduation.  he spoke out graduation for seminary too.  He went on a mission and crashed, as per Church.  Went the route of atheism while on his mission came home early, and never looked back at Church. 

Quote

And granted that "Come Follow Me" is mind-numbingly boring, year after year, unless leaders and teachers are very careful. 

My questions are:

1) Does your son want to serve a mission? Aside from and separate from his boredom and marginalization issues at Church? I'm assuming he graduates in a month or so.

He has some desire.  We have tons of great conversations, he, wife and I, and sometimes others, but when it comes to Church he definitely feels there is a void there.  All through seminary his teachers were terrible at addressing difficulties in his mind--often coming off as blaming him for his questions and concerns.  All through young men's (I was in the YMP back when he was 12 but got a new calling soon afterward) the same. 
I did teach his youth Sunday School class for a while and he always told me he loved it, as we would never shy away from difficulties.  then the lady who taught opposite me, I guess, made a scene about me being too open with the kids and I got ousted. 

As Per a mission.  I dobut he'll end up going.  He has some desire but he's also less concerned about putting his foot in people's doors and far more concerned about helping to get clean water to people, or something like that.  He's gotten some info from friends who have gone and is not impressed.  Wife and I both served missions and we frankly tell him the benefits he can expect, along with some of the difficulties.  So he has info to consider. 

Quote

2) How does he do with his personal scripture study and prayer? Seminary?

Fine.  Imean he's had some terrible experiences with Seminary teachers.  I mean horrible, in my view, as it relates to some issues he's had to fight through and think through. 

Quote

3) Does he generally share your sour outlook on certain Church policies, doctrines, and culture?

Yes.  I'm not shy about telling him my own feelings and thoughts.  I know my wife and I have been a big influence on him.  We see things different from the norm in Church, as you know.  We'll definitely helped influence the way he frames his issues and questions and I think it's not easy for Church members to address.  We get that.  But can't do much about it. 

Quote

4) Does his quorum have the boys teach lessons? 

He's taught tons of 'em, yes.  Before last year our ward was pretty small.  We merged two wards basically into one (a small portion of a third joined us too), which has given us tons of young men in comparison.  But back in the pre-merge ward, he taught once a month in YMs and probably once a month in SS.  It got less and less though.  I dont' think the new YMs regime has the young men teach at all, but their pretty new, as in within 2 months so we'll see.   He doesn't know the YMs pres and his councilors.  I asked him yesterday and he said that none of them have talked to him or asked him anything.  So he wonders if he should just go to adult classes and EQ instead. 

Quote

Based on experience with other older boys who start to lose their interest in church and church classes/lessons, I'm not sure that addressing his critique would actually prevent him from leaving church because he's bored and wants to be somewhere else and do other things. And, while anything is possible and we should always hope, it's not a good sign that he's having these struggles at 18. They are very hard to get back on track when they're almost graduated and are struggling or wavering on the cusp of mission age. 

I feel for him, and you. I think you handled it well, talking it out with him rather than insisting that he tough it out and attend, anyway. That's good, as far as it goes, but if people don't feel it, they won't attend for long. 

I agree.  I'm not sure age has much to do with it, as you suggest.  Most people no matter their age, when they get into it and struggle end up realizing or feeling it's not for them.  The Church, I've realized, is not even close to being for everyone.  Most people are way better off outside of it and that's why by and large so many people leave and so many people ignore it.  But it certainly works really well for some. 

I still hold out hope that the Church changes and becomes useful to more people. 

Edited April 17, 2017 by stemelbow

[rongo]

6 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

What are you rubbing it in my face here? 

I wasn't rubbing anything in your face, and hope it didn't come across that way.

Your son reminds me though.  I had a good friend who was Vale-D in our graduation.  he spoke out graduation for seminary too.  He went on a mission and crashed, as per Church.  Went the route of atheism while on his mission came home early, and never looked back at Church.

Well, never say never, and we would still love him even if he crashed as to the Church. But, I really don't think that will happen. He has his own testimony, and a love of the gospel and of the Church he's developed on his own. I mentioned my son only to illustrate the climate that we have in our quorum. We talk about science or criticisms of the Church when they come up in a faithful climate, without any boys feeling like they got the brush-off. It's all our boys have known, though (they've known each other through their YM years, and we haven't had any move-ins from among the older boys), so they don't know what other quorums are like by comparison (other than being a visitor themselves on vacation, etc.). 

He has some desire.  We have tons of great conversations, he, wife and I, and sometimes others, but when it comes to Church he definitely feels there is a void there.  All through seminary his teachers were terrible at addressing difficulties in his mind--often coming off as blaming him for his questions and concerns.  All through young men's (I was in the YMP back when he was 12 but got a new calling soon afterward) the same. 

I did teach his youth Sunday School class for a while and he always told me he loved it, as we would never shy away from difficulties.  then the lady who taught opposite me, I guess, made a scene about me being too open with the kids and I got ousted.

Does he know what he wants to study or do occupation-wise? My son doesn't yet know, but his patriarchal blessing promises him that he will know what he wants to do when the time comes, so that is a comfort to him. 

One thing that's helped my kids in church classes is that we raised them so that their church instruction and background comes from us, their parents. Everything else (seminary, Sunday School, primary, etc.) was icing on the cake, and when and where they've had bad teachers, they weren't deficient because we don't think it's the Church's responsibility to teach them what they need to know, anyway. It's supplemental to what they learn in the family. So, when they have boring or inadequate teachers, we taught them to be a ray of sunshine to them and help them out. A lot of our youth seem to be completely out to sea if their teachers are boring, and I think that stems from the home. 

It sounds like in your son's case, it's more a matter of chafing at not wanting to discuss or get into things of interest to him with a bearing on the content (i.e., meat, difficult topics, etc.). He'll have to learn to come to terms with that (and maybe he's voting with his feet, to some extent) in this church, with teacher/leader roulette. I hope he's able to make his peace.

As Per a mission.  I doubt he'll end up going.  He has some desire but he's also less concerned about putting his foot in people's doors and far more concerned about helping to get clean water to people, or something like that.  He's gotten some info from friends who have gone and is not impressed.  Wife and I both served missions and we frankly tell him the benefits he can expect, along with some of the difficulties.  So he has info to consider.

It doesn't sound from this like he really wants to go, or that he would stay if he did. He'll chafe at mission rules, what they're teaching/not teaching, what his purpose is, etc. 

I'm not shy about telling him my own feelings and thoughts.  I know my wife and I have been a big influence on him.  We see things different from the norm in Church, as you know.  We'll definitely helped influence the way he frames his issues and questions and I think it's not easy for Church members to address.  We get that.  But can't do much about it.

Not at this point.  I think that, given your tone and stance towards many Church policy, doctrinal, and cultural matters (and you've said that your wife would have left the Church long ago if you had supported it), it should come as no surprise that your son has the struggles with Church policy, doctrine, and culture that he does. Or that he no longer wants to sit through class. 

He's taught tons of 'em, yes.  Before last year our ward was pretty small.  We merged two wards basically into one (a small portion of a third joined us too), which has given us tons of young men in comparison.  But back in the pre-merge ward, he taught once a month in YMs and probably once a month in SS.  It got less and less though.  I dont' think the new YMs regime has the young men teach at all, but their pretty new, as in within 2 months so we'll see.   He doesn't know the YMs pres and his councilors.  I asked him yesterday and he said that none of them have talked to him or asked him anything.

Kids teaching isn't a panacea, and it can be overused. But, if he had turns coming around, then he gets a big say on what is taught and discussed.

 

So he wonders if he should just go to adult classes and EQ instead.

Be careful what you wish for . . .  I don't think adult SS or EQ is going to be any more stimulating to him.  

 

[stemelbow]

3 minutes ago, rongo said:

I wasn't rubbing anything in your face, and hope it didn't come across that way.

 

 

Well, never say never, and we would still love him even if he crashed as to the Church. But, I really don't think that will happen. He has his own testimony, and a love of the gospel and of the Church he's developed on his own. I mentioned my son only to illustrate the climate that we have in our quorum. We talk about science or criticisms of the Church when they come up in a faithful climate, without any boys feeling like they got the brush-off. It's all our boys have known, though (they've known each other through their YM years, and we haven't had any move-ins from among the older boys), so they don't know what other quorums are like by comparison (other than being a visitor themselves on vacation, etc.). 

Well perspective matters.  I might suggest you consider that my son might feel the same if he were in your ward.  It might not be so much that you are willing to address science, it might be that whatever address you give it remains unsatisfactory for some.  But, with that said, it is nice to hear the climate you mention.  I hope it spreads around the Church as a whole. 

3 minutes ago, rongo said:

 

 

Does he know what he wants to study or do occupation-wise?

He wants to teach. 

3 minutes ago, rongo said:

My son doesn't yet know, but his patriarchal blessing promises him that he will know what he wants to do when the time comes, so that is a comfort to him. 

One thing that's helped my kids in church classes is that we raised them so that their church instruction and background comes from us, their parents. Everything else (seminary, Sunday School, primary, etc.) was icing on the cake, and when and where they've had bad teachers, they weren't deficient because we don't think it's the Church's responsibility to teach them what they need to know, anyway. It's supplemental to what they learn in the family. So, when they have boring or inadequate teachers, we taught them to be a ray of sunshine to them and help them out. A lot of our youth seem to be completely out to sea if their teachers are boring, and I think that stems from the home. 

yes.  it's us that is the problem in his mind. 

3 minutes ago, rongo said:

It sounds like in your son's case, it's more a matter of chafing at not wanting to discuss or get into things of interest to him with a bearing on the content (i.e., meat, difficult topics, etc.). He'll have to learn to come to terms with that (and maybe he's voting with his feet, to some extent) in this church, with teacher/leader roulette. I hope he's able to make his peace.

I'd say it's far less likely that he'll be able to have a say in Church going forward, only because I know where I am and I know how little say I have.  I'm ok with it to some extent, and have been for years.  But he might not be. 

3 minutes ago, rongo said:

 

 

It doesn't sound from this like he really wants to go, or that he would stay if he did. He'll chafe at mission rules, what they're teaching/not teaching, what his purpose is, etc. 

I certainly see things differently and hope someday the Church does too.  A mission should not be so much about rules. Many of us on our missions felt that was the case and it really worked. 

3 minutes ago, rongo said:

 

 

Not at this point.  I think that, given your tone and stance towards many Church policy, doctrinal, and cultural matters (and you've said that your wife would have left the Church long ago if you had supported it), it should come as no surprise that your son has the struggles with Church policy, doctrine, and culture that he does. Or that he no longer wants to sit through class. 

Sure.  he definitely is not a fan of the pharisaic mindset at Church, for instance, mostly because neither are we.  We've certainly developed a completely different direction in our home and it works well. 

3 minutes ago, rongo said:

 

 

Kids teaching isn't a panacea, and it can be overused. But, if he had turns coming around, then he gets a big say on what is taught and discussed.

Not too much.  The material is still lacking, even with the move to "Come Follow Me".  It still limits teachers.  I'd say his turns at teaching stopped more than a year ago or so.  So he hasn't had much chance after that.  I thought it was overdoing it when they kept asking him back then too.  He loves teaching, though, so he did it. 

3 minutes ago, rongo said:

 

 

Be careful what you wish for . . .  I don't think adult SS or EQ is going to be any more stimulating to him.  

 

I've already told him so.  But he has intent to make things work for him.  He wants to feel some level of excitement and hopes to achieve some levels of engagement. 

[Nevo]

21 hours ago, Monster said:

Now the gospel as explained by Mormonism seems so small.

This reminded me of one of my favorite blog posts from a former poster here:

http://www.timesandseasons.org/harchive/2004/01/it-still-seems-so-big/

[Hamba Tuhan]

3 hours ago, Nevo said:

This reminded me of one of my favorite blog posts from a former poster here:

http://www.timesandseasons.org/harchive/2004/01/it-still-seems-so-big/

I love the concept of an 'anti-Holocaust'!

[Monster]

The church either works for  you or it doesn't. It is either all it claims to be or it is not. I reserve the right to make that call for myself and allow others to decide for themselves also. When people protest so much about a differing viewpoint, I ask who is the  one with the rigid mind.

[juliann]

21 minutes ago, Monster said:

The church either works for  you or it doesn't. It is either all it claims to be or it is not. I reserve the right to make that call for myself and allow others to decide for themselves also. When people protest so much about a differing viewpoint, I ask who is the  one with the rigid mind.

I think what a lot of people are trying to tell you is that they make it work for them, not the other way around. I'll bet everybody can sit here and list the stuff we wish would change. And there is a huge distance between all or not. I think finding a place in that distance is what allows us to make it work. But if it's not for you, it's not for you. If you don't like differing viewpoints, this might not be an agreeable place.

[Hamba Tuhan]

41 minutes ago, Monster said:

I reserve the right to make that call for myself and allow others to decide for themselves also. When people protest so much about a differing viewpoint, I ask who is the  one with the rigid mind.

You do realise that when you posted your musings here, in a discussion forum, you were inviting comment, right?

When I was a full-time missionary, I met a man one Sunday who had been dragged to church by a work colleague who was a recent convert. (He had struck a deal with her that he would attend once if she'd promise to leave him alone after that.) He was an investment banker, and he ended up agreeing to the missionary lessons when I bet him that he would find increased happiness in his life if he would give us six nights of his life and do all that we asked him to do for six weeks. Six months later, he still hadn't been baptised.

I'd been transferred twice already, but he got my number from the Elders currently serving where he was and rang me up one Sunday night. He had a strategy, he said, and he thought it was a good one, but the Elders there had warned him that he was toying with being led astray. He'd rung me to ask for a 'second opinion'. At the time, he was fully active: he studied the Book of Mormon, had personal prayers, and journalled every single day; he attended Church, Institute, family home evening, and elders quorum basketball each week; he regularly fasted and paid a generous fast offering; and he never passed up a service opportunity with the ward, of which there were many. But he still didn't know if he should be baptised, so he proposed a two-week strike from everything I've just listed. He said he thought it would clarify for him if he should proceed or not.

I told him I thought it was a fantastic idea! Didn't I think he was running any risk? he asked. I told him that I was pretty certain that, at the end of the two weeks, he'd be back begging for baptism. But what if it didn't work that way, he asked. 'Well, at least you'll know', I said. 'And it's important that at some point you do'.

He only made it one week. The Sunday after that, I baptised him.

I have no idea what will happen to you if you walk away, but I wish you the best. If you discover that being without the things that I love above all else 'works for you', then all good. If at some point -- literally, any point! -- you discover you're wrong, please don't be like Lyman Johnson, who for some reason just couldn't make the choice to return despite himself. As Lyman reportedly said to Brigham Young on one of his visits to Nauvoo:

Quote

If I could believe ‘Mormonism’ as I did when I traveled with you and preached, if I possessed the world I would give it. I would give anything, I would suffer my right hand to be cut off, if I could believe it again. Then I was full of joy and gladness. My dreams were pleasant. When I awoke in the morning my spirit was cheerful. I was happy by day and by night, full of peace and joy and thanksgiving. But now it is darkness, pain, sorrow, misery in the extreme. I have never since seen a happy moment. (Journal of Discourses, 19:41)

When I was studying for my master's degree in America, I had an LDS flatmate who was also like this. One spring break, he tagged along with me and a mutual friend (recently returned to the Church) on a road trip to a temple in another state. All he could do the entire drive there (seven hours!) was whinge about how much he missed the peace and blessings of the temple. I finally snapped, turned to him in the back seat and said, 'If I missed the temple as much as you think you do, I'd be moving earth and hell to get myself a temple recommend again, so either repent or shut up!'

Like Lyman Johnson, he never came back. I sincerely hope he's happy. I hope you will be too. But if you're not, for hell's sake, please have the good sense to come back.

 

Edited April 18, 2017 by Hamba Tuhan

[Kenngo1969]

1 hour ago, Monster said:

The church either works for  you or it doesn't. It is either all it claims to be or it is not. I reserve the right to make that call for myself and allow others to decide for themselves also. When people protest so much about a differing viewpoint, I ask who is the  one with the rigid mind.

Simply expressing a viewpoint which is at odds with the viewpoint expressed in the opening post is not "protesting."  It's called discussion, and that's what's supposed to occur on [Drum roll, please!] ... a discussion board.  And your original premise wasn't, "If the Restored Gospel and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints works for you, fine and good, but it doesn't work for me."  Rather, your original premise was, "I just find most of the doctrine limiting and without any real substance other than the opinions of many men who have pontificated on the subject. Men can say  things but it does not make it so."  In response, most of us have questioned the difference between what you see, on the one hand, and what is (or at least what may be) when what you have dismissed as simplistic and largely substance-free is viewed from a different perspective.

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, Monster said:

The church either works for  you or it doesn't. It is either all it claims to be or it is not. I reserve the right to make that call for myself and allow others to decide for themselves also. When people protest so much about a differing viewpoint, I ask who is the  one with the rigid mind.

That is probably the first time I've agreed with you.

But none of this changes that the gospel is either true or it's not.  No viewpoint, church administration, or open mind changes false to true or true to false.
So in the end, we all do our best to find the most truth we can.  Not our individual truths, but as close to an absolute truth as we are able to locate.
And why wouldn't we?  Who wants to walk around believing something false?

[Hamba Tuhan]

9 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

No viewpoint, church administration, or open mind changes false to true or true to false.

But just because something is true doesn't automatically make it desirable in all cases to all people. Even in those cases, we can still walk, or we can seek to have our hearts changed by the Saviour so that we actually love what we know we should. At least that's how it's been for me.

[sunstoned]

13 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Spirituality has nothing to do with how things work but is about our attitudes. 

How could you not know that?

How does science help your attitude toward life besides giving you a pill?

Science expands the frontiers of knowledge.  Knowledge replaces superstition. It helps us make sense of the world around us. With knowledge we can make informed choices, which in my opinion greatly affect attitude towards life.