Catholic World Report Asks: "Does Mormonism ruin faith?"

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Navidad said:

Amen brother! Preach it! I heartily agree with you!

Well thanks for the compliment, but we disagree in many many ways as well.

I don't think an embodied human God and figurative Bible, and modern prophets would go well with Mennonites.

I see Humanism in many ways, as theology: the perfection of Humanity.

Edited October 11, 2023 by mfbukowski

[3DOP]

5 hours ago, BlueDreams said:

Also equally anecdotal. I have 3 siblings who've left and a few cousins I'm also fairly close to. Only one switched religious affiliation. One... let's just say his whole personality doesn't aim religious. The others it was a mix of hard questions or hard life experiences meeting a religious faith  that wasn't fully formed or didn't meet the challenges they were experiencing. One would have led to a life of disonant practice for her IMHO.  Their friends also largely leaned less religious period.. So the voices and answers they'd hear most to questions around religion would have been non-religious to begin with. 

All of them were young when they left. I don't think any were older than mid to late-ish 20's. 

 

 

Personally I do think I'd have a hard time integrating into another Christian faith community. One of my Biggest stumbling blocks would be the Trinity, particularly since I've had several strong experiences with Heavenly Mother. I could maybe assume I was experiencing Mary?

The other big one is sussing out what I've spiritually experienced period. I've had several potent spiritual experiences in my life. Most have been LDS specific. But a number, including one entailing the Catholic Church recently on my trip in peru, aren't. So ironically if I dismantled my faith, it's not the exclusionary assumptions that would trip me up but some of the more universalist oriented claims that would be a problem. I would need to find a way to differentiate the two or at least have the one lead to the other. Because if one is in question there's not really a way to separate the two. For me. 

But I do like/value community experience and I do strongly believe in jesus, so I'd probably try to fill the void with something that doesn't insist I dismiss or excuse some of my spiritual experiences for others. 

 

With luv,

BD 

I am glad to see that you "do strongly believe in Jesus". Me too. I am Christian before I am Catholic, philosophically and chronologically.

3DOP

 

Edited October 11, 2023 by 3DOP

[Smiley McGee]

19 hours ago, SkyRock said:

At various times I have considered whether to stay in the church and I continue to do stay in the church,  but it is something I think about on occasion. 

If I ever left, i think I would start going to Orthodox services.   I enjoy reading Orthodox scholarship and find that there is a lot of insight in the gospel there. 

I don't find the same with Catholicism or most Protestants.  

I would not be an atheist or agnostic.

This comment hits home. The contemplative tradition of the Orthodox Church is very intriguing. I also enjoy attending Catholic Mass. I am, however, and perhaps, unsurprisingly, agnostic. I find beliefs and practices in various traditions to be useful (and find many not useful). I’m a pilgrim and stranger. 

[Pyreaux]

59 minutes ago, manol said:

Ironically it was my need for revelation, and my perception of a disturbing contrast in this area between the modern LDS Church and the days of Joseph Smith, that led to a significant widening of my search radius beginning thirty-something years ago.  

I believe a once converted LDS mind always hungers for truth, their path doesn't regard a salesmen's pitch or the lure of the crowd, only by arriving at enlightenment or disillusionment will they be either be a solid atheist or any solid theist. So, picking another Christian denomination isn't like changing your brand.

[Navidad]

17 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Well thanks for the compliment, but we disagree in many many ways as well.

I don't think an embodied human God and figurative Bible, and modern prophets would go well with Mennonites.

I see Humanism in many ways, as theology: the perfection of Humanity.

My guess is all humanity has both disagreements and agreements when we get right down to it! Mennonites are in no way a monolithic community - widely divergent beliefs. I have agreements and disagreements within my own group as well. As you do too! Isn't it great that we have the agency to both disagree and agree?

[mfbukowski]

33 minutes ago, Navidad said:

My guess is all humanity has both disagreements and agreements when we get right down to it! Mennonites are in no way a monolithic community - widely divergent beliefs. I have agreements and disagreements within my own group as well. As you do too! Isn't it great that we have the agency to both disagree and agree?

Except those who believe in predestination 

[Navidad]

Just now, mfbukowski said:

Except those who believe in predestination 

Predestination never made any sense to me! 😀

[Navidad]

1 hour ago, Pyreaux said:

So, picking another Christian denomination isn't like changing your brand.

Amen!

[Calm]

4 hours ago, manol said:

Ironically it was my need for revelation, and my perception of a disturbing contrast in this area between the modern LDS Church and the days of Joseph Smith, that led to a significant widening of my search radius beginning thirty-something years ago.  

You are not alone in this…which no doubt you know.

The Snufferites and other fringe groups seem to be primarily motivated at first by a desire for more revelation from what I can tell.  They look for it as both a personal revelation and then finding it in others.  Unfortunately there is a dark side with Chad Daybell and others having tapped into for personal gain that intense need of many to experience more meaningful revelation, which too often gets translated into novel or unusual revelation.  Daybell did this for attention and for profit by first providing a place to gather online that was private and then by becoming the visionary he saw were others defining themselves as, etc.

Edited October 11, 2023 by Calm

[Teancum]

On 10/9/2023 at 12:12 PM, bluebell said:

I think that most members who leave don't join another religion because most of the reasons that they lost their faith in the gospel as taught by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints apply equally to all other religions.  

I agree and would elaborate to say that at least for me, and many others I know, when we applied the same critical thinking skills to our own faith in Mormonism to other religious traditions, they did not hold up against the scrutiny either.  I had read this article a few days ago. I found most of it nonsense and agree with much of what @smac97said.  And I also felt like the author does not look hard at his own religion though I could be wrong. But I did agree that Mormonism does have an overtly heavy emphasis on the emotional experience and it being interpreted and a witness and testimony and personal revelation from God that Mormonism is what is claims.  Other faiths may as well but in my experience it is over the top in Mormonism and trumps about everything else.

[Smiley McGee]

8 minutes ago, Teancum said:

I did agree that Mormonism does have an overtly heavy emphasis on the emotional experience and it being interpreted and a witness and testimony and personal revelation from God that Mormonism is what is claims.  Other faiths may as well but in my experience it is over the top in Mormonism and trumps about everything else.

This quote from the article gave me chuckle:

Quote

The result, for any who have sought to debate Mormon missionaries arriving on your doorstep, is a fideist and anti-intellectual religion impervious to reasoned debate. Any critiques of LDS teaching on historical, theological, or logical grounds can be dismissed as Satanic deception. The critic of Mormonism simply hasn’t had that “burning in the bosom” experience like the LDS faithful. Personal testimony trumps all arguments and evidence, no matter how thorough or persuasive.

The author basically described every antagonistic encounter I had or witnessed on my mission :). Though I think that's about the best you can expect from a group of young people who, on average, have very little life experience and emotional maturity.

[Teancum]

On 10/9/2023 at 1:21 PM, Benjamin McGuire said:

I think that there are a lot of reasons, but, I'll put up my top 5 -

1: The emphasis on the notion of the "one true church." This is an oversimplification in some ways - but the use of the Joseph Smith first vision account with this comment:

The criticism of the creeds, and so on - all of these things create a context where Mormons don't have much that they can build from once they reject Mormonism. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Mormonism often presents its teachings in terms of difference (I'll come back to this in a minute). So we have our understanding of certain scriptural texts that often get compared to other understandings. Rejecting Mormonism doesn't mean that you simply reject everything connected with Mormonism. It is still hard for post-Mormons to accept theology and scriptural interpretation that they don't believe - and there isn't usually any sort of need for the post-Mormon to accept a different theology or a different interpretation. In other words - to connect these two issues together - a post-Mormon isn't likely to go from believing that all religions are wrong except Mormonism, to all religions are wrong except for X. They are instead more likely to believe that all religions are simply wrong (with no exceptions). My own anecdotal experience among those who leave is that for those who wish to build some sort of spirituality into their lives, they are more likely to move towards something that is radically different - like Buddhism rather than to pick up a different flavor of Judeo-Christian belief.

2: Mormonism has a number of core doctrinal beliefs that are to some extent, relatively unique. Within the broader groups of Christian sects, there is generally much more overlap (less that is unique) which makes moving from one religious group to another easy. With Mormonism, this doesn't happen so much. I want to note in passing that neither of these first two points apply much for those that have never been deeply invested in Mormonism. Recent converts who leave shortly after conversion don't seem to have these kinds of barriers. This is also part of the reason why Mormonism has spawned so many splinter groups - a way of keeping those unique doctrines while rejecting the Church structure and authority. This comes with certain kinds of departures - but they aren't common.

3: Mormonism is a liberal religion. It is also, in some ways, very much a post-modern religion. The ways that Mormons read scripture, their approach to interpretive authority, their acceptance of authoritative continuing revelation (and what this means for past revelation), and a whole host of other issues create a religious philosophy that is quite alien within other religious traditions. One way in particular that this shows up is in the way that it defines itself through difference (rather than similarity) - and a good example of this might be the issue of paid clergy, or the way we use the cross. When it does try to draw similarities, it is to the so-called "primitive Church." To the extent that we have these liberal views in the Church, it is much more difficult for former Mormons to move back towards a more modernist (or even a pre-modernist) type of religion.

4: Mormonism has a distinct absence of liturgy. There are liturgical elements, but they are minimal (sacrament, baptism and confirmation, temple ordinances). I don't mean minimal in terms of significance, but minimal in terms of the amount of time spent participating in these liturgical elements. Mormonism replaces liturgical experiences with other forms of engagement. Moving to Mormonism from other religions can be a difficult challenge. But it is just as difficult for a Mormon who is moving away from Mormonism - I know of few Mormons who routinely visit other religious services - and many Mormons find the liturgical experience of a Catholic funeral somewhat jarring.

5: I think that most Mormons who leave don't leave quickly, but gradually. They don't start attending another Church, they just stop attending the Mormon Church. Their departure is marked as much by a loss of religiosity as by any sort of disagreement over an important point of doctrine. In families where the partners don't engage with Mormonism in the same way, we tend to have far more inactive spouses than we have spouses who are participating in another non-LDS Church or religion.

Anyway, that's my brief take on it.

Interesting observations. I don't think most of these I would apply to myself.  Personally I explored Catholicism, a few mainstream Protestant denominations and conservatives evangelicals options such as Calvary Chapel.  Even now where I to align with a Christian denomination it would likely be Catholic or a more liberal Protestant sect.  But for me, based on drilling into the claims of Christianity, I don't think it holds up well at all. 

[manol]

4 hours ago, Calm said:

You are not alone in this…which no doubt you know.

The Snufferites and other fringe groups seem to be primarily motivated at first by a desire for more revelation from what I can tell.  They look for it as both a personal revelation and then finding it in others.  Unfortunately there is a dark side with Chad Daybell and others having tapped into for personal gain that intense need of many to experience more meaningful revelation, which too often gets translated into novel or unusual revelation.

Just to be clear, I DO NOT claim to be "part of the signal path" of revelation!   I'm a seeker, that's all, who attempts to apply Alma Chapter 32/Moroni Chapter 7 testing to whatever seems to me to be "virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy."

My personal experiences inform my paradigm, but that's as far as they go.  In fact, my current paradigm says that we are ALL progressing along our respective paths, so my role would include "live and let live" to the best of my discernment and ability.

(Edit:  Just noticed that this is my 666th post.  A personal, though perhaps dubious, milestone.)

Edited October 12, 2023 by manol

[Teancum]

On 10/9/2023 at 2:29 PM, Pyreaux said:

I don't think people leave over farfetched elements as much as a lack of feeling God. They'd willingly suspend disbelief in a Flat Earth, if God would just speak to them one time. With God all things are possible. If they never get a spiritual witness of neither the church nor God, it's not actually the church that's the problem but it simply takes all the responsibility. It's a convenient excuse, sure if there is no God then suddenly every departure from the reality you experienced seems foolish.

It's the thing Christian Anti-Mormons never understood, your kind is not the default religion. If you make fun of a man's spiritual witness, you'll get a man to doubt not only the witness, but the God that gave it to him. These are highs stake games we are playing when trying to "convert" us. We are all spoiled by the promises, we are beyond the husks of the world, we need the meat from the Father's table, and you have no substitute for our need for revelation. Mormonism sufficiently ruins our faith in lesser faiths. It's the true church or nothing. 

Yea no not for me. As a believing Latter-day Saint I believed I felt the witness of the spirit. I bore a fervent a testimony as anyone did or has.  It is just when I discovered the witness was to distortion, a mythical narrative and lies I came to understand this witness in a different way. As I have read more about such experience by people all across the religious spectrum I have had the way I understand  this now reinforced.

[Teancum]

On 10/9/2023 at 3:09 PM, teddyaware said:

After abandoning the God of true love and infinite mercy, who saves all his earthly children except for those few who steadfastly refuse to be saved, why would former Latter-Day Saints want to embrace any religion that believes in a hard-hearted God who rashly condemns the vast majority of the human family to an endless hell of unimaginable pain and suffering?

You sure do live in a small narrow minded little world.  Actually there is much richness and wonderful spiritual thing that can be found in many other religions.  As much if not more than Mormonism.  Alas, though, they are all likely as false as Mormonism is.

[mfbukowski]

15 minutes ago, manol said:

(Edit:  Just noticed that this is my 666th post.  A personal, though perhaps dubious, milestone.)

Great, now you get the Definitely Hooked award!!

[smac97]

56 minutes ago, Teancum said:

I agree and would elaborate to say that at least for me, and many others I know, when we applied the same critical thinking skills to our own faith in Mormonism to other religious traditions, they did not hold up against the scrutiny either.  I had read this article a few days ago. I found most of it nonsense and agree with much of what @smac97said.  And I also felt like the author does not look hard at his own religion though I could be wrong. But I did agree that Mormonism does have an overtly heavy emphasis on the emotional experience and it being interpreted and a witness and testimony and personal revelation from God that Mormonism is what is claims.  Other faiths may as well but in my experience it is over the top in Mormonism and trumps about everything else.

One of the interesting issues here is what you describe as an "emotional experience," which Latter-day Saints believe can be spiritual experiences.

Nevertheless, I concede that people can and do confuse and conflate spiritual and emotional experiences.  Pres. Hunter put it this way: "I get concerned when it appears that strong emotion or free-flowing tears are equated with the presence of the Spirit. Certainly the Spirit of the Lord can bring strong emotional feelings, including tears, but that outward manifestation ought not to be confused with the presence of the Spirit itself."

See also this FAIR article:

Quote

It is a fundamental misunderstanding or misstatement to say that the LDS revelatory experience is exclusively or primarily “emotional.” The united witness of mind and heart is key in LDS doctrine. Even the body is involved in many instances, hence the use of language exactly like “burning in the bosom.” The LDS concept of human experience is not one where we are carved up into separate, rigid compartments labeled emotional, intellectual, and physical. The LDS approach to human experience is holistic and involves all of our faculties operating simultaneously and inextricably. According to LDS scripture, “the spirit and the body are the soul of man.” D&C 88:15 We are greater than the mere sum of our inner and outer parts. Ordinarily, it’s not possible, nor is it desirable, to reject and shut down any one of our faculties. All of them combine to provide useful and valid ways of coming to know ourselves, the world, and God. All are involved in true spiritual experience.

 

Accordingly, an LDS “spiritual” experience has intellectual content as well as emotional elements of peace or joy. In the early days of the Church, Oliver Cowdery received the following revelation through Joseph Smith:

 

Verily, verily, I say unto you, if you desire a further witness, cast your mind upon the night that you cried unto me in your heart, that you might know concerning the truth of these things.

Did I not speak peace to your mind concerning the matter? What greater witness can you have than from God? (D&C 6:22–23).

 

Notice the information is spoken to the “mind,” and the feeling of peace accompanies the intellectual gift. Further, the solution for later doubts or concerns is not reliance on “a feeling” alone but an admonition to recall specific information communicated earlier.

 

This matches the revelatory pattern later explained to Cowdery.

 

Behold, you have not understood; you have supposed that I would give it unto you, when you took no thought save it was to ask me.

But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right.

But if it be not right you shall have no such feelings, but you shall have a stupor of thought that shall cause you to forget the thing which is wrong… (D&C 9:7–9).

 

Again, the united witness of intellect and heart are essential. If either does not agree, then revelation has not yet confirmed the matter under consideration. Anyone who relies exclusively on any one faculty – either feeling or reasoning or physical sensation – does not properly understand the LDS approach to spiritual witnesses.

 

To be sure, many Church members will talk about how they “felt” when they prayed or had other experiences with God. However, it is to fundamentally misunderstand these experiences to assume (as critics often do) that talk of “feeling” means simply—or only, or primarily— experiencing an “emotion.” What's lacking from these descriptions is vocabulary. The problem with them is more semantic than it is substantial. The LDS member is stymied, in a sense, because there is no good, available word for what happens during a spiritual experience. These experiences are ineffable. By definition, they defy description. Since few of us have the poetic and metaphorical powers of prophets like Isaiah and John, we are left to try our best to convey what we've experienced in words laden with secular connotations which critics can misinterpret if they so choose.

 

LDS scholar, Hugh Nibley, hazarded a guess at what this process of willful misinterpretation might look like:

 

He cannot conceive how anyone could possibly acquire knowledge by any method other than his. He cannot believe that any man has experienced anything which he has not experienced. . . . ‘I have never seen a vision,' says the [skeptic], ‘therefore, Joseph Smith never had one. I have seen dreams [or had emotionally moving experiences], therefore, I will allow him that.'”[1]

 

Early Christians experience similar feelings to a "burning in the bosom". Justin Martyr wrote in his book Dialogue with Trypho, of his conversion that he was a philosopher until he met an old man who introduced him to the Hebrew Prophets when “a flame enkindled his heart” and he found “this philosophy (Christianity) alone to be sure and profitable.” [2]

 

The Shepard of Hermas, which was once considered scripture, reads “There are two angels with a man-one of righteousness, and the other of iniquity...The angel of righteousness is gentle and modest, meek and peaceful. When he ascends into your heart, he speaks to you of righteousness, purity, chastity, contentment, and every other righteous deed and glorious virtue. When all of these things come into your heart, know that the angel of righteousness is with you” [3]

___

 

[1]  Hugh W. Nibley, The World and the Prophets, 3rd edition, (Vol. 3 of Collected Works of Hugh Nibley), edited by John W. Welch, Gary P. Gillum, and Don E. Norton, (Salt Lake City, Utah : Deseret Book Company ; Provo, Utah : Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1987), 31. ISBN 087579078X.

[2] Dialogue with Trypho 8, Ante-Nicene Fathers 1:198

[3] Shepard of Hermas, Ante-Nicene Fathers 2:24

Finally, other examples are other Mormon-affiliated groups – the Community of Christ and FLDS church. Both of these churches encourage their members to follow Moroni’s promise and find out for themselves the truth of their church. And the spirit confirms to them that their church is the one true church. It seem to me that praying for truth doesn’t seem to be too uncommon. When people recognize that there is a higher being(s) they ask that higher being(s) for guidance to, and confirmation of, the truth.

This article by Latter-day Saint Jeff Lindsay also has some good points on this issue.  A few highlights (emphases added):

Quote

Some people are puzzled by our use of the term "testimony," but I feel we use it as it is used in the Bible. For example, Revelation 19:10 says that "the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy" - suggesting to me that revelation - the spirit of prophecy - is needed to have a sure witness of Christ (and that those with a sure witness of Christ can have spiritual gifts such as prophecy). Rev. 19:10, by the way, echoes 1 Cor. 12:3: "no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost." No one can truly testify of Christ - or truly "bear testimony" of Him, unless that testimony is based on personal revelation through the power of the Holy Ghost. Other related references to the use of the word "testimony" can be found in 1 Cor. 1:6; 1 Cor. 2:1; 2 Tim. 1:8; Rev. 6:9; and Rev. 12:11.

 

Faith based on the physical senses and human logic alone is much more fallible than "the sure word of prophecy" (2 Peter 1:19) wherein God reveals pure truth to a soul - an experience which is difficult to describe but is real and available to those earnestly seeking to commune with God in prayer.

 

The concept of humans receiving a witness of the truth through the power of God - rather than human logic alone - is entirely Biblical. See Matthew 16:15-19; John 14:26 and 15:26, and others. I think that the best discourse on this topic is found in chapters 1 and 2 of First Corinthians. Paul refers to the testimony of Christ (1 Cor. 1:6) and warns against the divisions among the believers that have occurred because of false doctrines and the learning of men. Whereas the Greeks love human wisdom and logic and sophistry, Paul stresses that all this is foolishness before God (1 Cor. 1:17-21).

...

LDS testimonies are based upon the idea that God can reveal truth to us and give us an understanding that the Gospel is true, that Jesus is the Christ, and that He leads His Church through modern prophets and apostles, even when we don't yet have all the understanding needed to answer the many objections that critics throw our way. Once God has revealed it to our heart and mind, human logic cannot easily overthrow that witness. This concept, contrary to what our critics asset, is entirely Biblical. Paul, for example, spoke of this in 1 Corinthians 12:3, saying "Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost." We cannot truly know that Jesus is the Lord unless it is revealed to us by the Holy Ghost. Revelation is the basis of testimony - and our critics wrest the scriptures when they revile against the thought.

 

So how do Mormons obtain this revelation and develop their faith about the truthfulness of the Gospel? Prayer is essential, and pondering and thinking about the word of God (which includes the Book of Mormon). Prayer, study, and pondering opens up the channels of revelation. Further, we must experiment with the word and put the Gospel into practice. For example, John 7:17 tells us that we can know of the truthfulness of Christ's word by doing it - by doing the will of God. In John 8:31, the Savior teaches that we will come to know the truth if we continue in His word, becoming true disciples. Both of these passages agree with Alma 32 in the Book of Mormon (the "seed" chapter you read): our knowledge of the truth grows as we put it into practice, just as scientific knowledge grows as we apply and experiment with valid scientific hypotheses. Alma 32 talks about much more than an emotional experience - which is not the basis of testimony for faithful Latter-day Saints (though it is for some who have not diligently sought to know and nurture the word). Emotional experiences can occur in any religion and are not a reasonable basis for faith.

In my own experience, I have had several experiences which, in my view, were plainly "spiritual" and not emotional.

Experience #1: Right after high school I joined the Army (National Guard) and spent 12 months studying Russian at the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, CA.  At the end of my training, I submitted my mission papers and was called to serve in Taiwan, where I spent the next two years learning Mandarin.  By the end of my mission my Russian had become rusty.  When I returned home my sister recommended that I sign up with ILP ("International Language Program"), an outfit that specialized in sending Americans overseas to teach English.  She had taught English in China and had a wonderful experience, and she said they would definitely find me useful because of my past training in Russian.  She gave me the sign-up papers and told me that I was a shoo-in.

I was pretty excited at this prospect, as I liked the idea of polishing up my Russian for 4-6 months, then returning and studying Chinese at BYU.  I would graduate with pretty decent training in two pretty useful languages.  Despite my enthusiasm, I never went.  I never even filled out the application.  I kept intending to do so, but then I would forget.  I prayed about the matter, and eventually I concluded that I had likely been experiencing the "stupor of thought" described in D&C 9:9.  I decided to put the application aside and proceed with enrolling at BYU, to start in the 1996 Winter semester.  On the first day of classes, I went to my Biology Class and there met a girl.  We became friends, then we started dating, then we started talking about marriage.  We got married, and I have been very happy to be her husband ever since.

In hindsight, I don't think I would have crossed paths with her except in that particular Biology Class.  It was the last of her GE requirements, and she was majoring in Elementary Education.  Meanwhile, I was just starting my GEs and was majoring in Chinese.  I was living off-campus, she was in the dorms.  I was from Utah, she was from Washington State.  We had no friends or acquaintances or family in common.  The likelihood of me singling her out, or she singling me out, on a campus with 32,000 students seems . . . remote.  So yeah, I suspect my only chance at meeting her required me to be at BYU in Provo, rather than teaching English in Russia, in January 1996.

I had a host of good reasons to go to Russia, and I wanted to go, and I had the means and opportunity to go.  My "emotions" would have had me going to Russia.  The "Spirit," though, had me stay where I was and, in short order, meet my wife.

Experience #2: A few years ago I had the opportunity to purchase what may well be the last piece of property in Utah that is adjacent to the Provo River (at the end of my back yard).  I currently own a house on a separate parcel that also backs to the river, but Provo City has spent years hinting that they want to widen the road, and thus condemn and take my house and its beautiful back yard (including the river).  The owner of this other parcel (the adult daughter of the former owner, now deceased) did not want to market the property, so she asked me and the only other interested party - a couple I did not know - to submit competing bids.  I was very interested in buying it, as it A) was a bigger lot than my current one, B) would allow me to build a new house (my current one is nearly 60 years old), C) the price was very reasonable, D) I had the money, and so on.  So I submitted an initial bid, then a second (counter) bid, then a third.  I went to submit a fourth, and at that point . . . I had to stop.  I remember feeling very frustrated, to be constrained in this way.  I tried to complete the email, and the impression came again, even stronger.  I needed to stop.  I needed to not buy this property.  So I didn't.  I spoke with my wife, then we withdrew from the bidding, and the other bidding couple won (I now know this couple, as they are in my ward, and we are very good friends).  

I don't know why this happened.  I had every reason to buy it.  My "emotions" would have had me continuing to bid (and, frankly, I think I would have won).  Instead, the "Spirit" had me - in grumpy and begrudging fashion - withdraw from the process.

I have had other spiritual experiences as well.  And emotional ones.  And I think there have been times where I have conflated the two.  Differentiating them can be an important skill set.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited October 11, 2023 by smac97

[mfbukowski]

On 10/9/2023 at 9:00 AM, smac97 said:

I have my own surmises as to why former Latter-day Saints often jettison "religion" altogether, but I'd like to hear some other thoughts first.

Aren't there somewhere some prohibitions regarding seeking "testimonies from Satan"?

An interesting quandary.

[Teancum]

On 10/9/2023 at 4:43 PM, Thinking said:

Anyway, the Church does a good job of showing why all the other religions can't be the true church.

Can you elaborate?  Looking back on it I think the church does a horrible job at this. Even as a full believing member I always thought it odd that Jesus would come to earth, teach in a very limited geographic area, start a church (it actually appears Jesus really did not start a church) just to let it die off a few decades after his death.  It just never made sense.

[Teancum]

On 10/9/2023 at 5:16 PM, smac97 said:

I've wondered about this.

For former Latter-day Saints who had an overall pleasant experience participating in the community of the Saints, I wonder if they - having become disaffected from that community - feel like other religious groups likely cannot improve upon it (or that the obligations associated with participating in such communities are not worthwhile).

No not for me.

On 10/9/2023 at 5:16 PM, smac97 said:

For former Latter-day Saints who had an overall unpleasant experience participating in the community of the Saints, I wonder if they -  having become disaffected from that community - feel like other religious groups would likely be "more of the same."

This is just me thinking out loud, tho.  I can't speak intelligently on this.

Thanks,

-Smac

No not for me.

[Teancum]

On 10/9/2023 at 6:35 PM, pogi said:

I think the teachings of the apostasy in the early church tend to stick as one of the things that disillusioned members don't question or have trouble accepting.  When they become disillusioned in the church, they find that because of teachings of the apostasy, there is no one else to turn to.   I am reminded of a talk by Elder Ballard who emphasizes this notion

I can only speak for me but this was not the case. Also it has not been the case for most I know who have left. When we rejected Mormonism we also rejected what then became a nonsensical claim of the apostasy as Mormonism defined it. I was quite open to other Christian traditions and I looked at a number. And am still open to some should my journey take me there.  I also find Elder Ballard's trite and simple comments of where will you go just silly.  There are plenty of rich religious traditions equal to or better than Mormonism is when trying to find a spiritual path.

[Teancum]

On 10/9/2023 at 6:48 PM, Calm said:

I think you are saying the opposite of what jk said…his “don’t” and “unlikely” cancel each other out to go to ‘I do find it likely they have the same or better’ whereas yours is “likely cannot improve”.

You are correct.

[Teancum]

On 10/9/2023 at 7:16 PM, SeekingUnderstanding said:

I’d say “forget” is the wrong word. I’d say reinterpret. It’s a paradigm shift. Once unlocked it’s hard to see it the same way.*
 

*Speaking only of my personal experiences - by their very nature spiritual experiences are internal and subjective and can’t really be shared or understood by anyone else. 

Right. I don't forget them at all. Honestly it seem the believers here are spinning things to meet their own paradigm.  Given that they have not experienced what you or I have I pay their conclusions little heed.

[Teancum]

On 10/10/2023 at 12:10 AM, bsjkki said:

I will speak anecdotally. My two children that have completely left the faith are atheists. My Catholic sister-in-law made the comment that her and my brother (a non-member) noticed that those who have left the church, don't seem to replace it with another faith. Again, speaking anecdotally of my friends and family who have left the church...this is very true. I can't think of one who has replaced the church with another church. 

Why that is? For of those I know who have left, it was traumatic for them. Religion now is associated with painful memories/experiences. 

It was traumatic.  But I remained very open for a long time to another option.

[pogi]

On 10/9/2023 at 5:16 PM, SeekingUnderstanding said:

I’d say “forget” is the wrong word. I’d say reinterpret. It’s a paradigm shift. Once unlocked it’s hard to see it the same way.*
 

*Speaking only of my personal experiences - by their very nature spiritual experiences are internal and subjective and can’t really be shared or understood by anyone else. 

In terms of forgetting, I was speaking only of personal experience.  I have learned from keeping a daily prayer journal after practicing meditative prayer that not only do I forget about entire experiences, but I also forget the general sense of the spirit when I am not practicing meditative prayer.  It is not quite the same as brain memories, but rather spiritual memory.   Feelings can be like that in general.  It is easy to forget how things feel the further time gets from those experiences without re-experiencing it.  There might be a brain memory of positive feelings surrounding an event, but it can be hard to remember the depth and clarity of what that actually felt like.    

There have been times when I am not practicing meditative prayer and have questioned my faith and the existence of God at all.  While I remember having spiritual experiences in general, I started questioning what it was that I actually experienced and wondered if I misinterpreted things.  When I get back into the practice, I am always surprised at how I could ever question.  But then sometimes I do...again.    I think there is definitely re-framing as you say, but there is also forgetting.  At least that has been my experience and it seems to be a common experience among believers.  Jesus used the word "remember" a lot.  He initiated spiritual practice to keep us in remembrance.  There is definitely a difference. 

19 hours ago, Teancum said:

Right. I don't forget them at all. Honestly it seem the believers here are spinning things to meet their own paradigm.  Given that they have not experienced what you or I have I pay their conclusions little heed.

How can you be sure that you haven't forgotten what you can't remember?   

I have experienced doubt and have questioned everything.  I have forgotten and remembered and forgotten again... 

Edited October 12, 2023 by pogi