Is this a "safe" place to send a persons with a faith crisis?

[jkwilliams]

2 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Maybe it's gotten better. But when I was reviewing their material regularly and participating in their discussion board the "proper context" was often very weak apologetics. That's part of why I struggled. I expected good answers to questions but quickly learned their "proper context" was weak sauce.

At the height of my antipathy for the church, I never had a problem sending people to FAIR because I figured they might as well hear what the apologists were saying. Not once did someone come back saying FAIR had resolved their concerns, but most of the time seeing FAIR's responses just validated their issues. And many times, FAIR exposed them to other problematic issues they weren't aware of. 

[Exiled]

43 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

At the height of my antipathy for the church, I never had a problem sending people to FAIR because I figured they might as well hear what the apologists were saying. Not once did someone come back saying FAIR had resolved their concerns, but most of the time seeing FAIR's responses just validated their issues. And many times, FAIR exposed them to other problematic issues they weren't aware of. 

I think fair is for someone who wants to cling onto some answer for validation on their decision to stay. It gives them something to point to and sometimes that is enough for one who really just wanted any plausible response to questions they had. For me, the answers found there didn't work but my guess is that they do for some.

[jkwilliams]

4 minutes ago, Exiled said:

I think fair is for someone who wants to cling onto some answer for validation on their decision to stay. It gives them something to point to and sometimes that is enough for one who really just wanted any plausible response to questions they had. For me, the answers found there didn't work but my guess is that they do for some.

I agree. The folks who came to me probably don't fit that description. It's entirely possible that, by the time they found me, they were already too far gone. 

[Tacenda]

11 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

At least FairMormon addresses the sensitive issues with proper context, something one is not guaranteed to find here or necessarily in other places. Just a guess, but for every individual who claims FairMormon instigated his faith crisis, there are multiple individuals who gained the perspective with the help of FairMormon to see them through to a resolution of their issues.

I too went to FairMormon and asked questions, my helper was the famous Greg Smith. But like others, I saw things on there that I'd never heard of before and it led me down the road to even more questioning/doubting. And what others have said about talking with someone. I tried that as well, with my visiting teachers and asked if they knew about JS's polygamy, one of the sisters said she didn't want to hear about it. Straight up said I don't want my testimony challenged, not in those words. Can't remember exactly how she put it, something to the affect that she didn't want to know anything bad about the church. And Greg at the time was so far over my head and didn't really have an answer I could understand.

I also told a bishopric 1st counselor when he asked me to teach primary right after my RS calling. I told him of my doubts and not being able to testify of Joseph Smith since learning how he lived polygamy, it was a Doctrine and Covenants year. He said that he also went through a faith crisis, but then it's changed since a temple experience. And told me to jump into church more, not less. 

So it was this board that I could let it all out of my system.

[clarkgoble]

1 hour ago, jkwilliams said:

Keep in mind that it's OK to say there aren't good answers for some things. Some issues are just problematic, period, and trying to force a satisfactory answer often does little more than validate the person's concern. "I don't know," or "I can't defend that" is better than "It's right, no matter what."

I think this is right. I can't speak for FAIR since I'm not associated with them. I find some of their pages good and other ones more problematic. However by and large, if people are going there hoping there's no polygamy, no seer stones, or hard evidence for the Book of Mormon they'll be disappointed. As I said, one needs a testimony first and FAIR just can't provide that. Most of what gets called faith crises is really more about testimonies being shaken. Ultimately that's about turning to God with personal revelation and having spiritual experiences. Inherently FAIR can't provide that. Honestly I see the value of FAIR more for those who have questions and some degree of a testimony to keep them in their testimony and not doubt it. But by the time someone is having a full faith crisis I'm not sure it can do much and may even be counterproductive if the people in question are ignorant of many of the issues. 

As to forums and message boards, all of them are disproportionately peopled by people with anger or conflict issues. It's just inherent to the media. Not just LDS oriented ones. People frequently go to them out of a need or desire for that kind of conflict. I'm not sure why as it can distract. That's why I think it's quite good that the Interpreter people aren't hanging out in such places. My guess (although that's all it is) is that a lot of the negative views of apologetics and FARMS in particular was due to interactions in such forums.

[stemelbow]

19 hours ago, Stargazer said:

The question in the title just about covers it.  

I'm asking because I have a particular individual in mind, but also generally.  

Sometimes I think the answer might be "yes", and sometimes "no", but your opinion is solicited.

And by "safe" I mean will participating here make things worse with respect to the faith crisis, or better.  I know that nothing is 100%, but overall, if all things are equal.  Feel free to answer, even if you're not an LDS believer.

 

In my mind the biggest problem with faith crises is the fear that the Church preaches and, I would say, uses to try and keep people from exploring their feelings and thoughts.  There are a ton of books that help people resolve the contradiction and difficulty.  But I doubt most of that ever really goes away with many people.  I don't know that sending them to a message board is best, but I also don't think sending them to their bishop is best.  And it'd be different for different people anyway.  I think this place is safe though.  Sure there are various opinions and the discussion, but any old faith crises sufferer can decide for him/herself on any given issue.  I really don't ascribe to the notion that someone's unable to decide for him/herself as opinions and ideas get expressed.  I'm confused why people eschew this place precisely because there are voices that differ from traditional Mormonism and speak as if there is something to fear in those voices.  Then again I'm one of those voices, I'm sure, so...I guess I can't see what the problem is.  

I'd agree with Cinepro though.  There doesnt' appear to be a way to just go back to where he/she was.  They have to go forward and find their way/themselves.  I don't think there's anything to fear.  People should be able to hear people's perspective and decide for themselves.  There's no not safe place.  And if, ultimately, a faith crises person decides to leave the faith not all is lost, he/she could come back.  It is his/her journey.  don't try to direct it--particularly don't try to steer them away from voices that you disagree with.  Let them decide.  

[jkwilliams]

24 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

I think this is right. I can't speak for FAIR since I'm not associated with them. I find some of their pages good and other ones more problematic. However by and large, if people are going there hoping there's no polygamy, no seer stones, or hard evidence for the Book of Mormon they'll be disappointed. As I said, one needs a testimony first and FAIR just can't provide that. Most of what gets called faith crises is really more about testimonies being shaken. Ultimately that's about turning to God with personal revelation and having spiritual experiences. Inherently FAIR can't provide that. Honestly I see the value of FAIR more for those who have questions and some degree of a testimony to keep them in their testimony and not doubt it. But by the time someone is having a full faith crisis I'm not sure it can do much and may even be counterproductive if the people in question are ignorant of many of the issues. 

As to forums and message boards, all of them are disproportionately peopled by people with anger or conflict issues. It's just inherent to the media. Not just LDS oriented ones. People frequently go to them out of a need or desire for that kind of conflict. I'm not sure why as it can distract. That's why I think it's quite good that the Interpreter people aren't hanging out in such places. My guess (although that's all it is) is that a lot of the negative views of apologetics and FARMS in particular was due to interactions in such forums.

Agreed, speaking as one who clearly has issues. There's probably some of this going on, as well. 

http://www.egmnow.com/articles/news/extensive-ea-research-finds-hardcore-star-wars-fans-are-insufferable/

[hope_for_things]

30 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

In my mind the biggest problem with faith crises is the fear that the Church preaches and, I would say, uses to try and keep people from exploring their feelings and thoughts.  There are a ton of books that help people resolve the contradiction and difficulty.  But I doubt most of that ever really goes away with many people.  I don't know that sending them to a message board is best, but I also don't think sending them to their bishop is best.  And it'd be different for different people anyway.  I think this place is safe though.  Sure there are various opinions and the discussion, but any old faith crises sufferer can decide for him/herself on any given issue.  I really don't ascribe to the notion that someone's unable to decide for him/herself as opinions and ideas get expressed.  I'm confused why people eschew this place precisely because there are voices that differ from traditional Mormonism and speak as if there is something to fear in those voices.  Then again I'm one of those voices, I'm sure, so...I guess I can't see what the problem is.  

I'd agree with Cinepro though.  There doesnt' appear to be a way to just go back to where he/she was.  They have to go forward and find their way/themselves.  I don't think there's anything to fear.  People should be able to hear people's perspective and decide for themselves.  There's no not safe place.  And if, ultimately, a faith crises person decides to leave the faith not all is lost, he/she could come back.  It is his/her journey.  don't try to direct it--particularly don't try to steer them away from voices that you disagree with.  Let them decide.  

I totally agree with you on this.  I think it’s been very helpful for me to listen to a variety of perspectives and to seek and find those ideas that resonate the most with me and what feels right and I find to be intellectually honest.  It’s both an experience of feeling and intellect for me.  

One thing I really appreciated back in the day as I was trying to explore questions on the old FairMormon support board, the one they discontinued because it was too controversial or something, was one of the leading apologists but also a very fair person, told me to not be afraid of reading works by scholars like Vogel. That Vogel was a very detailed scholar with a particular interpretation of the evidence and that I can evaluate the evidence for myself and come to my own conclusions.  Up to that point I had been avoiding anything I’d labeled as critical to the church.  

That was a very freeing interaction for me and on reflection backwards reminds me how taboos are created by tribes of all flavors to police behaviors, and just how fearful people can be of breaking these taboos.  

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

In my mind the biggest problem with faith crises is the fear that the Church preaches and, I would say, uses to try and keep people from exploring their feelings and thoughts.  There are a ton of books that help people resolve the contradiction and difficulty.  But I doubt most of that ever really goes away with many people.  I don't know that sending them to a message board is best, but I also don't think sending them to their bishop is best.  And it'd be different for different people anyway.  I think this place is safe though.  Sure there are various opinions and the discussion, but any old faith crises sufferer can decide for him/herself on any given issue.  I really don't ascribe to the notion that someone's unable to decide for him/herself as opinions and ideas get expressed.  I'm confused why people eschew this place precisely because there are voices that differ from traditional Mormonism and speak as if there is something to fear in those voices.  Then again I'm one of those voices, I'm sure, so...I guess I can't see what the problem is.  

I'd agree with Cinepro though.  There doesnt' appear to be a way to just go back to where he/she was.  They have to go forward and find their way/themselves.  I don't think there's anything to fear.  People should be able to hear people's perspective and decide for themselves.  There's no not safe place.  And if, ultimately, a faith crises person decides to leave the faith not all is lost, he/she could come back.  It is his/her journey.  don't try to direct it--particularly don't try to steer them away from voices that you disagree with.  Let them decide.  

While I appreciate that fear-mongering is not usually a good thing I find this “fear” is not something the Church imposes. A faith crisis IS dangerous and scary and fear while experiencing one is perfectly normal and even healthy. It should keep the person careful.

In my own life I have had a few spiritual crises. Mine were a kind of faith crisis I suppose but were a little different. I never really doubted the existence of God (God closed that door for me for good or ill) but I have wondered if the whole thing is worth it or doubted God’s goodness at times. I suspect God throws me into these situations for a good reason. Definitely not suggesting one should seek out a crisis or seek reasons to doubt but I suspect for some they are an opportunity for spiritual growth and not a burden to be ashamed of.

Then again I also know people who seem to have spiritual crises on a monthly basis and I suspect (possibly uncharitably) that they are just being tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine. They just seem faithless and tend to jump between being hyper religious and hyper skeptical. Worst of all they will not shut up about it.

 

 

Sorry for the rambling. Just some random thoughts on the process.

 

[Scott Lloyd]

3 hours ago, jkwilliams said:

Keep in mind that it's OK to say there aren't good answers for some things. Some issues are just problematic, period, and trying to force a satisfactory answer often does little more than validate the person's concern. "I don't know," or "I can't defend that" is better than "It's right, no matter what."

I agree with this in principle. 

However, saying “I can’t defend that” regarding matters for which reasonable defenses have been offered smells too much to me like capitulation. Better to search out defenses if one doesn’t have them at the ready, then show them to the one in crisis and let that person determine for him- or herself whether a defense is valid. 

Edited August 15, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I agree with this in principle. 

However, saying “I can’t defend that” regarding matters for which reasonable defenses have been offered smells too much to me like capitulation. Better to search out defenses if one doesn’t have them at the ready, then show them to the one in crisis and let that person determine for him- or herself whether a defense is valid. 

I suppose it depends on whether you think the defense is valid. I wouldn't share something with someone if I didn't think it was valid. Would you? 

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

I too went to FairMormon and asked questions, my helper was the famous Greg Smith. But like others, I saw things on there that I'd never heard of before and it led me down the road to even more questioning/doubting. And what others have said about talking with someone. I tried that as well, with my visiting teachers and asked if they knew about JS's polygamy, one of the sisters said she didn't want to hear about it. Straight up said I don't want my testimony challenged, not in those words. Can't remember exactly how she put it, something to the affect that she didn't want to know anything bad about the church. And Greg at the time was so far over my head and didn't really have an answer I could understand.

I also told a bishopric 1st counselor when he asked me to teach primary right after my RS calling. I told him of my doubts and not being able to testify of Joseph Smith since learning how he lived polygamy, it was a Doctrine and Covenants year. He said that he also went through a faith crisis, but then it's changed since a temple experience. And told me to jump into church more, not less. 

So it was this board that I could let it all out of my system.

If you were so prone to be rattled by things you saw on the FairMormon site, I dare say that would have happened to you anyway when you encountered those things elsewhere and that FairMormon is not to be blamed for how you reacted to your exposure to them. 

As I said before, at least FairMormon is not using these things as a basis for attack but on the contrary is endeavoring to provide a soft landing by giving context and perspective. And as I mentioned, that has benefited me on many occasions by keeping the playing field level or, to use another of my favorite metaphors, keeping the ground clear of noxious weeds so that my faith has space to flourish. 

I have to believe there are many others like me. 

By the way, I don’t think visiting teachers typically are good resources for responding to attacks on the faith and the Saints. They ordinarily are ill-equipped to do so, as they have not seen a personal need to delve into apologetics. I wouldn’t be inclined to blame them for not having ready answers to your questions, although I wish more of our rank and file would be acquainted with such essentials as the Gospel Topics essays. 

Edited August 15, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

19 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I suppose it depends on whether you think the defense is valid. I wouldn't share something with someone if I didn't think it was valid. Would you? 

I would at least make the effort in the first place to find something. It sounds as though you are advocating throwing up one’s hands immediately and saying “I can’t defend that” without ever lifting a finger to search out what has been written or said in the past. 

And you’ll notice I used the modifier “reasonable” in my response. 

Edited August 15, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[clarkgoble]

24 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I never really doubted the existence of God (God closed that door for me for good or ill) but I have wondered if the whole thing is worth it or doubted God’s goodness at times. I suspect God throws me into these situations for a good reason.

I think this is more common than many realize. That is often a faith crisis is less about doubting doctrine than just about being mad about circumstance. That can then turn into doubts about doctrine either due to anger or due to just being away from fellowship and the spirit. Of course many who traverse such experiences can end up with stronger testimonies because of it. Like you, I'm not sure experiencing these things is a bad thing.

 

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I would at least make the effort in the first place to find something. It sounds as though you are advocating throwing up one’s hands immediately and saying “I can’t defend that” without ever lifting a finger to search out what has been written or said in the past. 

I said nothing like that at all. 

[The Nehor]

3 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

I think this is more common than many realize. That is often a faith crisis is less about doubting doctrine than just about being mad about circumstance. That can then turn into doubts about doctrine either due to anger or due to just being away from fellowship and the spirit. Of course many who traverse such experiences can end up with stronger testimonies because of it. Like you, I'm not sure experiencing these things is a bad thing.

 

I would make one correction in regards to me. Mine tend to be less a form of anger and more a kind of tired resignation. I prefer anger. As an active emotion that tires you out it is hard to maintain for long.

[Tacenda]

22 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

If you were so prone to be rattled by things you saw on the FairMormon site, I dare say that would have happened to you anyway when you encountered those things elsewhere and that FairMormon is not to be blamed for how you reacted to your exposure to them. 

As I said before, at least FairMormon is not using these things as a basis for attack but on the contrary is endeavoring to provide a soft landing by giving context and perspective. And as I mentioned, that has benefited me on many occasions by keeping the playing field level or, to use another of my favorite metaphors, keeping the ground clear of noxious weeds so that my faith has space to flourish. 

I have to believe there are many others like me. 

By the way, I don’t think visiting teachers typically are good resources for responding to attacks on the faith and the Saints. They ordinarily are ill-equipped to do so, as they have not seen a personal need to delve into apologetics. I wouldn’t be inclined to blame them for not having ready answers to your questions, although I wish more of our rank and file would be acquainted with such essentials as the Gospel Topics essays. 

It was the beginning of my FC. I thought others knew and I just didn't know enough, I was a poor reader of church history. And that's why I brought it up to my VT'rs. thinking they knew possibly. So I wasn't suppose to express my dilemma? No, I'm not blaming them, I'm blaming the church. And I will always blame the church. Sorry, but that's where it belongs. The church failed, and you can see the fallout everywhere. Not just over polygamy, but about the BoM translation process, unknown to a majority of members, and the essay on blacks and the PH. I'm listening to a former bishop right now on a live broadcast that expressed that was his moment of dissonance after reading the essay. So I'll put the essays as a possible testimony breaker as well, I've heard/seen this many times on the bloggernacle.

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Tacenda said:

It was the beginning of my FC. I thought others knew and I just didn't know enough, I was a poor reader of church history. And that's why I brought it up to my VT'rs. thinking they knew possibly. So I wasn't suppose to express my dilemma? No, I'm not blaming them, I'm blaming the church. And I will always blame the church. Sorry, but that's where it belongs. The church failed, and you can see the fallout everywhere. Not just over polygamy, but about the BoM translation process, unknown to a majority of members, and the essay on blacks and the PH. I'm listening to a former bishop right now on a live broadcast that expressed that was his moment of dissonance after reading the essay. So I'll put the essays as a possible testimony breaker as well, I've heard/seen this many times on the bloggernacle.

Nah, you were just prone to be rattled.

Too often a crisis of faith is depicted as moral or intellectual defect, but it's entirely appropriate to be shocked when the religion you have been taught your entire life turns out not to be what you were taught. Does that necessarily mean it's not "true"? No, but it is still a shock to the system. 

[Scott Lloyd]

17 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Nah, you were just prone to be rattled.

Too often a crisis of faith is depicted as moral or intellectual defect, but it's entirely appropriate to be shocked when the religion you have been taught your entire life turns out not to be what you were taught. Does that necessarily mean it's not "true"? No, but it is still a shock to the system. 

That’s not what I said in my response to Tacenda, and I resent your insinuation that it is. 

[jkwilliams]

4 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

That’s not what I said in my response to Tacenda, and I resent your insinuation that it is. 

I didn't say you did. You said she was "prone to be rattled." I wasn't referring to you in the second part of my post. 

[Scott Lloyd]

40 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

It was the beginning of my FC. I thought others knew and I just didn't know enough, I was a poor reader of church history. And that's why I brought it up to my VT'rs. thinking they knew possibly. So I wasn't suppose to express my dilemma? No, I'm not blaming them, I'm blaming the church. And I will always blame the church. Sorry, but that's where it belongs. The church failed, and you can see the fallout everywhere. Not just over polygamy, but about the BoM translation process, unknown to a majority of members, and the essay on blacks and the PH. I'm listening to a former bishop right now on a live broadcast that expressed that was his moment of dissonance after reading the essay. So I'll put the essays as a possible testimony breaker as well, I've heard/seen this many times on the bloggernacle.

I didn’t say you shouldn’t have brought your concerns up to your visiting teachers. I’m just saying that you ought not blame them (or, by extension, the Church) for their not being immediately equipped to answer your questions. 

I get ill at ease when people use anecdotes or personal accounts as the basis for argument or criticism, as it puts me at an immediate disadvantage, not being well acquainted with the circumstances being presented or, as in this, case not even knowing the person doing the complaining 

I will only say as a general matter that I think the Church is doing better than ever these days at addressing this problem with resources such as the essays (and yes, I do believe that like FairMormon, they are by and large beneficial and my intuition is that they help many more people than they are alleged to have harmed). 

Furthermore, with the speech by Elder Pearson at the recent FairMormon Conference earnestly commending FairMormon, Interpreter Foundation and Book of Mormon Central, I am more confident than ever before about having people referred to these resources, and I wish more local-level Church leaders would be aware of and use them. 

Edited August 15, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

14 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I didn't say you did. You said she was "prone to be rattled." I wasn't referring to you in the second part of my post. 

You said it with a dismissive and ridiculing tone, which is not fair. 

And in the context of what you said immediately thereafter, I think it understandable that I would perceive the whole thing as referring to me. 

Edited August 15, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said:

You said it with a dismissive and ridiculing tone, which is not fair. 

I was teasing her, not you. Sorry for offending you. 

[Storm Rider]

It seems to me that there are definitely topics with no real answers at this time. Yet, for the vast majority of things, I think there are very good answers. However, as the old saying goes, "You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink." At times, it does not matter what answer is given or how good it is, the individual is simply not going to see the truth of the matter. 

For me, the issue of polygamy has always been a non-issue. If I believed the OT then I don't see how it could have been a problem during the early years of the Church. It does grate on me how others continue to find fault when many teachings are not unique or novel but have always been around. Evidently, I am not very patient. I think a lot of topics are like this for me.

I have never referred anyone to this site or FAIR's site.  I have used FAIR only rarely and don't have an opinion, but this site is just not for the typical LDS who has questions. I suppose I could meet someone that would make me think to propose this site to them but I have not met anyone like that yet. I know they must be there because I am here.

Religion is important to me. I have always studied it and the many variations that exist in the world. I have yet to find another church or religion that has as clear an answer to the question, "Why I am here". The response from Atheists has always bored me; it just seems quite shallow and lazy. None of the other religions have as good an answer - some of them are okay, but none of them are as good as what was restored through Joseph Smith. As a result, I am LDS. At times, I don't feel like I belong. Leaders often tend to less effective in speaking to me; I am often not inspired by them. However, when I read the scriptures, when I pray, I am always inspired. 

Edited August 16, 2018 by Storm Rider

[LoudmouthMormon]

Send such folks to mormonhub.com.  After all, they send folks to mormondialogue.org whenever someone shows up there and wants to argue and voice criticism about the church and whatnot.