Taylor Christensen "This is not an anti-mormon video"

[churchistrue]

Have you guys seen this video? It's going viral among the millennials. My kids all saw it in their feeds over the weekend. I personally understand a little of the criticism he's getting, but I think it's a great start to talk about it and look at new angles to the old problem.

He's basically saying "yeah a lot is messed up" and lists some of the standard, laundry list items, then he talks about it his own faith and why he is still committed to the restored gospel.

 

http://www.churchistrue.com/blog/taylor-christensen-anti-mormon-video/

Edited February 5, 2018 by churchistrue

[Tacenda]

Does the sound work for you? It didn't for me, luckily it had captions. If I ever need something to explain my disbelief or disillusionment I might share this video/blog to my family. They are still unaware of how far I've gone from the church. I can't say that I want them to come after me like a Shepherd. But would appreciate the part of having empathy. 

Thanks for sharing this churchistrue!

[SteveO]

I can’t find his exact phrasing, but Daniel Peterson once mentioned how it was said a prominent Saint was once believed to have walked the 100 miles to Paris after being executed with his head in his hands. He noted how if one believes the Saint walked at all after being executed, the rest is just a matter of details and unimportant.

I’m at that point anymore.  I read the Book of Mormon, and it’s a book that I just cannot believe is some 19th century fiction.  And that’s it.  That’s all that matters anymore.  I don’t have the answers, the “controversies” don’t bother me anymore.  I’ll keep paying my tithing, attending church, and doing my best...and it’s remarkably liberating.  

I’ll keep going until it ceases making me a better person.  

[hope_for_things]

1 hour ago, churchistrue said:

Have you guys seen this video? It's going viral among the millennials. My kids all saw it in their feeds over the weekend. I personally understand a little of the criticism he's getting, but I think it's a great start to talk about it and look at new angles to the old problem.

He's basically saying "yeah a lot is messed up" and lists some of the standard, laundry list items, then he talks about it his own faith and why he is still committed to the restored gospel.

 

http://www.churchistrue.com/blog/taylor-christensen-anti-mormon-video/

Seems like a pretty reasonable approach, trying to understand each other's different paths and respecting those paths.  I've thought that this is the way that the church needs to go for a while now.  I even wrote a letter about this to Elder Uchtdorf a couple years ago, but didn't get a response unfortunately.  There is too much judgment towards those who leave the church.  People can be good inside and outside of the church, and the tribalism that shuts down conversations and divides relationships is all unnecessary collateral damage.  We need messages of love and support and open conversations.  

[Storm Rider]

18 minutes ago, SteveO said:

I can’t find his exact phrasing, but Daniel Peterson once mentioned how it was said a prominent Saint was once believed to have walked the 100 miles to Paris after being executed with his head in his hands. He noted how if one believes the Saint walked at all after being executed, the rest is just a matter of details and unimportant.

I’m at that point anymore.  I read the Book of Mormon, and it’s a book that I just cannot believe is some 19th century fiction.  And that’s it.  That’s all that matters anymore.  I don’t have the answers, the “controversies” don’t bother me anymore.  I’ll keep paying my tithing, attending church, and doing my best...and it’s remarkably liberating.  

I’ll keep going until it ceases making me a better person.  

I think many LDS are in your position and others are just so tired of holding hands with the confused, listening to the complaints and concerns, explaining the gospel, giving answers that they come to a point where they say "You know, you have obviously found another path to be happy, go for it".  At that point they just seek for peace and quiet and refuse to enter the rat race anymore. 

There is no new information; there are no new problems. It is all a giant echo chamber and with each echo the critic becomes emboldened and continues yapping.  What happens?  Nothing but more echoes and more self-congratulatory pats on the back that they have found a new path.  It often does not include God, but it includes their continued patting on the back about how infinitely more intelligent they are because they see so much more clearly and know so much more than those silly, stupid Mormons that attend church, partake of the Sacrament, and strive to be disciples of Jesus Christ in the best way they can......all the while knowing they are failures while rejoicing that the sweet name of Jesus remains on their lips. 

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, churchistrue said:

Have you guys seen this video? It's going viral among the millennials. My kids all saw it in their feeds over the weekend. I personally understand a little of the criticism he's getting, but I think it's a great start to talk about it and look at new angles to the old problem.

He's basically saying "yeah a lot is messed up" and lists some of the standard, laundry list items, then he talks about it his own faith and why he is still committed to the restored gospel.

 

http://www.churchistrue.com/blog/taylor-christensen-anti-mormon-video/

I think he did well.   I agree he went on a little too in depth about polygamy since there still are some unanswered questions, but I think you have to take it all the way down at least mentally  before you can see the beauty.  Regardless of whether or not his historical analysis is "correct" I think you have to assume every possible error and abuse might have happened in order to see the history for what it is and the way Taylor sees it- as irrelevant to the spiritual truths of the revelations.  We do not look at the lives of philosophers when we evaluate the truths they have given us.

I have been saying that the history is totally irrelevant to the faith forever and Taylor says it well and in a way which will communicate to millennials and others as well.

I would not show the video to those who do not have a problem with the church but might if they were informed of the history.  They are in peace as they are, and since history is irrelevant to the real issues anyway, they are not in error to NOT examine the history.   It doesn't matter to them because they have not sought it out anyway.

But for those who are stuck in the hamper digging out dirty laundry, I say get your head out of the trash bin and look at the sky around you and know that Christ has made it all whole. 

See the flowers growing out of the dirt and see what dirt can become through Christ who organized it all and knows well how to turn suffering into unspeakable joy.  This is the fortunate fall which the church itself has replicated, the Fall of Adam and Eve beginning the path to a glorious resurrection for the stone cut without hands.

[Tacenda]

I often wonder if I'd seen something like this video from Taylor vs. John Dehlin's video on how to stay in the church, which way I could have gone.

I've told the story before many times of how I was sideswipped by info I hadn't learned of in my over 40 years in the church. It was when I was at the computer looking for something, I don't remember what and the website the "Wives of Joseph Smith" came up.

I had never known that Joseph had other wives besides Emma. And went outside and saw my neighbor across the street and asked her if she knew about it. I was oblivious. And she said it's anti Mormon, because her mother is an anti and told her all about it. So I said okay. And then right after that sat at my computer and something else popped up, maybe it brought up things about Mormonism connected to the link, and one of John Dehlin's first videos about the things in Mormonism that might make you want to leave the church, much like this Taylor's video, came up. At first John started out trying to help people stay in the church just like Taylor!

Well that video sent me into an abyss. Right after another I read things that I'd never known, including the Mountain Meadows Massacre, the LDStemple rites being like the Masons' rites and so on. And then reading on Fairmormon site many many things I'd never known and then emailing back and forth with Gregory L. Smith, at Fair. And I'm still in the middle.  

[churchistrue]

19 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

I think he did well.   I agree he went on a little too in depth about polygamy since there still are some unanswered questions, but I think you have to take it all the way down at least mentally  before you can see the beauty.  Regardless of whether or not his historical analysis is "correct" I think you have to assume every possible error and abuse might have happened in order to see the history for what it is and the way Taylor sees it- as irrelevant to the spiritual truths of the revelations.  We do not look at the lives of philosophers when we evaluate the truths they have given us.

I have been saying that the history is totally irrelevant to the faith forever and Taylor says it well and in a way which will communicate to millennials and others as well.

I would not show the video to those who do not have a problem with the church but might if they were informed of the history.  They are in peace as they are, and since history is irrelevant to the real issues anyway, they are not in error to NOT examine the history.   It doesn't matter to them because they have not sought it out anyway.

But for those who are stuck in the hamper digging out dirty laundry, I say get your head out of the trash bin and look at the sky around you and know that Christ has made it all whole. 

See the flowers growing out of the dirt and see what dirt can become through Christ who organized it all and knows well how to turn suffering into unspeakable joy.  This is the fortunate fall which the church itself has replicated, the Fall of Adam and Eve beginning the path to a glorious resurrection for the stone cut without hands.

Good post. I agree with everything you say here. 

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Does the sound work for you? It didn't for me, luckily it had captions. If I ever need something to explain my disbelief or disillusionment I might share this video/blog to my family. They are still unaware of how far I've gone from the church. I can't say that I want them to come after me like a Shepherd. But would appreciate the part of having empathy. 

Thanks for sharing this churchistrue!

 This works much better.

2 hours ago, churchistrue said:

Have you guys seen this video? It's going viral among the millennials. My kids all saw it in their feeds over the weekend. I personally understand a little of the criticism he's getting, but I think it's a great start to talk about it and look at new angles to the old problem.

He's basically saying "yeah a lot is messed up" and lists some of the standard, laundry list items, then he talks about it his own faith and why he is still committed to the restored gospel.

http://www.churchistrue.com/blog/taylor-christensen-anti-mormon-video/

He is very well spoken and articulate, but is clearly only at the very beginning of a long journey.  He may take that journey seriously, perhaps obtaining a graduate degree in history, or he may curtail that journey because it is so long and hard.  Most do not take the journey.

Some of his statements are simply not true, others indicate confusion about the nature of history. Some are presentist (culture-bound to modernity).  His faith-evidence dichotomy does not bode well for his future.

Edited February 5, 2018 by Robert F. Smith

[HappyJackWagon]

2 hours ago, churchistrue said:

Have you guys seen this video? It's going viral among the millennials. My kids all saw it in their feeds over the weekend. I personally understand a little of the criticism he's getting, but I think it's a great start to talk about it and look at new angles to the old problem.

He's basically saying "yeah a lot is messed up" and lists some of the standard, laundry list items, then he talks about it his own faith and why he is still committed to the restored gospel.

 

http://www.churchistrue.com/blog/taylor-christensen-anti-mormon-video/

I tried watching but the shaky camera was distracting so I set my phone down and tried to listen. I got bored. There was nothing new or profound. It wasn't presented particularly well (read from a paper). Perhaps its sad, but it is true, the way in which a message is delivered is often as important as the message.

The message he was trying to share is a good one, I think (couldn't listen to the whole thing). I feel badly though that this guy is going to get creamed equally  from the prog-mo disaffected types as well as the TBM. Attempting the middle path usually ticks off everybody and I think he's going to feel the heat. Personally I am bias towards expecting more from the TBM types. I would hope they would have desire to engage and love the individual but they more often seem to become defensive and accusatory. Those kinds of reactions never impress me as I would expect more from people claiming to have greater light and spirit. But TBM's are just people like the prog-mos and I need to continually remind myself of that so I don't set unreasonable expectations for those claiming to be holy.

[Tacenda]

Thanks for posting the video Robert!

[churchistrue]

19 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I tried watching but the shaky camera was distracting so I set my phone down and tried to listen. I got bored. There was nothing new or profound. It wasn't presented particularly well (read from a paper). Perhaps its sad, but it is true, the way in which a message is delivered is often as important as the message.

The message he was trying to share is a good one, I think (couldn't listen to the whole thing). I feel badly though that this guy is going to get creamed equally  from the prog-mo disaffected types as well as the TBM. Attempting the middle path usually ticks off everybody and I think he's going to feel the heat. Personally I am bias towards expecting more from the TBM types. I would hope they would have desire to engage and love the individual but they more often seem to become defensive and accusatory. Those kinds of reactions never impress me as I would expect more from people claiming to have greater light and spirit. But TBM's are just people like the prog-mos and I need to continually remind myself of that so I don't set unreasonable expectations for those claiming to be holy.

I think what's particularly relevant about the video is that it had 40,000+ views in the first couple days of posting, and I am guessing most of those views were in the active LDS millennial category. My kids knew about it before I sent the link. 

[mfbukowski]

48 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I tried watching but the shaky camera was distracting so I set my phone down and tried to listen. I got bored. There was nothing new or profound. It wasn't presented particularly well (read from a paper). Perhaps its sad, but it is true, the way in which a message is delivered is often as important as the message.

The message he was trying to share is a good one, I think (couldn't listen to the whole thing). I feel badly though that this guy is going to get creamed equally  from the prog-mo disaffected types as well as the TBM. Attempting the middle path usually ticks off everybody and I think he's going to feel the heat. Personally I am bias towards expecting more from the TBM types. I would hope they would have desire to engage and love the individual but they more often seem to become defensive and accusatory. Those kinds of reactions never impress me as I would expect more from people claiming to have greater light and spirit. But TBM's are just people like the prog-mos and I need to continually remind myself of that so I don't set unreasonable expectations for those claiming to be holy.

No I think that was calculated to be "informal" and to appeal to young people who are used to T-shirts- and he wanted to make it clear that it was a written composition by a regular guy like them, possibly shot on a cell phone like they themselves might do.

Total simplicity with a good message even if it is flawed like of course it could not help but be.  I suggest going back and seeing it in that light.  Heck dude it's only what- 7 minutes?

[mfbukowski]

Check out how all of this is perfectly planned and shot.

Notice that it starts with a shaky view of just his face and then when he starts the text- the camera shows very clearly the paper- not a teleprompter or a computer outside the shot,   just below his view but pieces of paper in his hand- deliberately and frankly shown.

And then check out the music and the scoring- PRECISELY TIMED to the very second where the message takes off and gets "spiritually uplifting" at precisely minute 4:46 AFTER the words "we all fall" and start with "But Christ.... - no this is not sloppy camera work etc- every second of this deliberately SHORT video is precisely aimed perfectly at millennials.

For that purpose, it is perfect even if historically flawed.

Edited February 5, 2018 by mfbukowski

[stemelbow]

I say it was cute.  I think he's a long ways from understanding why people are leaving.  But I appreciate the points of contention he raises in that they are difficult issues people face when they first start feeling disillusionment, at least in my experience.  But I agree, we shouldn't fear thoughts, expression and exploration.  We should be quick to understand others, rather than quick to shut them down.  

[cinepro]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Some of his statements are simply not true, others indicate confusion about the nature of history. Some are presentist (culture-bound to modernity).  His faith-evidence dichotomy does not bode well for his future.

Which of his statements "are simply not true"?

 

I think his most unintentionally honest statement is the observation that "Where there is evidence, there is no room for faith.  But where there is no evidence, we rely on faith." (5:50)

It's like, dude, we all know that, but I thought we agreed to not actually say it.

Edited February 5, 2018 by cinepro

[Metis_LDS]

WOW I am floored by this historical obsession.  After joining the church I studied it's history and soon learned it was basically an He said They said kind of game.  We cannot fix the history we cannot change it and mostly we hardly understand it properly. It is like a married couple fighting

over the past it leads no where.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Personally I am bias towards expecting more from the TBM types. I would hope they would have desire to engage and love the individual but they more often seem to become defensive and accusatory. Those kinds of reactions never impress me as I would expect more from people claiming to have greater light and spirit. But TBM's are just people like the prog-mos and I need to continually remind myself of that so I don't set unreasonable expectations for those claiming to be holy.

From what I have seen the "prog-mos" are just as into claiming greater light and knowledge as the "TBMs".

[cinepro]

11 minutes ago, Metis_LDS said:

WOW I am floored by this historical obsession.  After joining the church I studied it's history and soon learned it was basically an He said They said kind of game.  We cannot fix the history we cannot change it and mostly we hardly understand it properly. It is like a married couple fighting

over the past it leads no where.

The root of the "historical obsession" is the emphasis the Church places on historical events. 

Imagine if someone shared some shocking information with you about George Albert Smith.  You might be shocked, but it probably wouldn't affect your faith very much because we never talk about George Albert Smith.  He's just not a part of the narrative for modern LDS.

But Joseph Smith and Brigham Young are much more prominently placed in the "story" of Mormonism.  For better or worse, the Church has gone all-in on Joseph Smith being a "prophet", so that makes them vulnerable to evidence that would show him acting in ways that go against what we might expect of a "prophet."  Sure, you can blame the expectations, but most LDS probably formed their expectations based on what the Church itself told them, so pointing fingers might not work in this case.

[Scott Lloyd]

20 minutes ago, Metis_LDS said:

WOW I am floored by this historical obsession.  After joining the church I studied it's history and soon learned it was basically an He said They said kind of game.  We cannot fix the history we cannot change it and mostly we hardly understand it properly. It is like a married couple fighting

over the past it leads no where.

On which topic, Daniel C. Peterson had some good insights in his Deseret News "Mormon Times" column of a couple of weeks ago:
 

Quote

 

I don’t deny the existence of questions, even possible reasons for doubt. These definitely exist, and, I believe, they exist by divine intention.

If God were to reveal himself fully and with unmistakable, irresistible clarity, that revelation would overwhelm and destroy our freedom. In his "Philosophical Fragments" (1844), the Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard uses a parable about a king and a maiden to make this point: How can the king reveal his love to a woman of humble parentage — given the huge disparity of rank, status and wealth between them — without coercing and crushing her?

"Not to reveal oneself,” he writes, “is the death of love, to reveal oneself is the death of the beloved." The only real choice open to the king is to court his beloved indirectly, by descending to her station, by taking on the character of a servant. So he disguises himself.

God, Kierkegaard says, wants us to love him freely because we come to know him as lovable, not because he's powerful, terrifying or overwhelming. And we have abundant reason to do that.

In a similar way, though he wants us to develop faith or trust in him, he doesn’t seek a compelled belief. He doesn’t desire an assent that has been forced upon us because we had no rational alternative or escape.

Accordingly, for those with eyes to see and ears to hear, there are hints and clues. (Cosmic fine-tuning, for example, seems to suggest that a vastly powerful intelligence desired to foster life, but it doesn’t absolutely require that conclusion.) There are evidences and personal spiritual experiences, but no undeniable public proofs.

 

Those who dearly desire to find reasons to disbelieve will be able to do so. But there have never been any conclusive ones -- and never will be. It's going to boil down to a matter of faith either way.

 

[Metis_LDS]

2 minutes ago, cinepro said:

The root of the "historical obsession" is the emphasis the Church places on historical events. 

Imagine if someone shared some shocking information with you about George Albert Smith.  You might be shocked, but it probably wouldn't affect your faith very much because we never talk about George Albert Smith.  He's just not a part of the narrative for modern LDS.

But Joseph Smith and Brigham Young are much more prominently placed in the "story" of Mormonism.  For better or worse, the Church has gone all-in on Joseph Smith being a "prophet", so that makes them vulnerable to evidence that would show him acting in ways that go against what we might expect of a "prophet."  Sure, you can blame the expectations, but most LDS probably formed their expectations based on what the Church itself told them, so pointing fingers might not work in this case.

 Your argument is good but my premise is something like when President Jimmy Carter and his wife started writing a book together and found they did not agree about the facts even having lived them together.  I have experienced this phenomenon and it shakes the earth beneath my feet.  SO what will settle this historical malaise a retraction by the church, an apology  or will grind on until a new generation?

[Robert F. Smith]

7 minutes ago, cinepro said:

Which of his statements "are simply not true"?

It is a very short video, and I should have thought that you would apprehend them immediately.

1.  Anti-Mormon videos are mostly correct.

2.  J. Smith could have had easy access to 1800s literary features found in Book of Mormon.

3.  J. Smith made false claims about some of his translations.

4.  Many doctrines, policies, and scriptures have been changed or removed from the church over time.

5.  Truth about polygamy?  Whose version of it?

6.  Church continues practice of polygamy even after claim they had stopped.  Yet some general authorities were exed for that.

7.  Call to perfection fallacy (re Joseph and Book of Mormon)

8.  So much evidence against the Church, but very little for it.

9.  false faith-evidence dichotomy.

7 minutes ago, cinepro said:

I think his most unintentionally honest statement is the observation that "Where there is evidence, there is no room for faith.  But where there is no evidence, we rely on faith." (5:50)

It's like, dude, we all know that, but I thought we agreed to not actually say it.

I hear that notion all the time.  In fact, that is the normal way in which believers comport themselves in many religious traditions.

[Calm]

Where is it showing over 40,000 views?  I see almost 500 only.

[SteveO]

44 minutes ago, Metis_LDS said:

WOW I am floored by this historical obsession.  After joining the church I studied it's history and soon learned it was basically an He said They said kind of game.  We cannot fix the history we cannot change it and mostly we hardly understand it properly. It is like a married couple fighting

over the past it leads no where.

We’re coming up on the 200th anniversary of many church events, most notably the first vision in 2020.  

200 years is a long time ago to judge accurately the deeds and events with the bias of 21st century lenses. 

Read up on the Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings controversy, and you’ll see how subjective history really is.  It’s constantly evolving, and perceptions and understandings are as well.  I don’t understand why people are hedging their eternal perspective on the history.  It’s about the shakiest foundation to build.

[churchistrue]

2 minutes ago, Calm said:

Where is it showing over 40,000 views?  I see almost 500 only.

If you go to Taylor Christensen's fb page (I think it's linked in my blog article if not just look up his name--it's public), it shows 60K+ views now. And almost 600 facebook shares.