Evolving Views Since Joining Mormon Dialogue

[Devobah]

I’ve been passively watching this board for the past month or so. I haven’t spent too much time on any other board. This is the first one that I’ve actually signed up for. I’ve had doubts for the past few years, and oddly enough the constant back and forth of ideas and theories is really helping me. There’s a lot of things that make more sense now and I especially love following the CFRs so that I can get the whole story. I’m an English teacher in high school so I’m all about following sources to see the reliability of them. 
I probably won’t have much to say on the  board, because I’m only 28 but I’ll try and pop in when I can!

[Calm]

3 minutes ago, Devobah said:

I especially love following the CFRs so that I can get the whole story.

They are great, aren’t they?  Welcome to the board!  We have had teenagers contribute great things to the board, so don’t let your age stop you.

[Bernard Gui]

On 5/13/2024 at 11:51 AM, ZealouslyStriving said:

After seeing the discussions here, I am genuinely curious about the influence of the discussions here on people's religious views.

I have been around for a very long time. This has not changed my firm belief, but I am sad that this place has changed from almost exclusively defending the Church from outside criticism to defending it mostly from disgruntled current or former members.

[Devobah]

Thanks! I’ll try and bring my perspectives!

[MiserereNobis]

51 minutes ago, Devobah said:

I’m an English teacher in high school so I’m all about following sources to see the reliability of them. 

I'm a high school English teacher, too! Follow the sources all the way back to St. Peter and then you can cross the Tiber and become Catholic!

Seriously, though, welcome to the board. While I exult in my Catholic faith, I'm not here to proselytize (unless jokingly, which might not be jokingly, which then...)

[MiserereNobis]

41 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

I have been around for a very long time. This has not changed my firm belief, but I am sad that this place has changed from almost exclusively defending the Church from outside criticism to defending it mostly from disgruntled current or former members.

O Inquisitor,

Care to share thoughts on why this has happened? Is it lack of outside criticism posting here? Or has the outside criticism moved to other boards?

I didn't come here to criticize, though I have tossed a question or two in the fray over the years. I was originally here to observe and learn, since my master's thesis was partly based on American religious experience, but then I have stayed because I enjoy all of you and the way we interact (kudos to the mods).

[Damien the Leper]

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Ditto!

How long were you on Limited?

[sunstoned]

I have been on this board, and the one before it a long time.  I have enjoyed my time here and have been edified by the experience.  My views and beliefs have not really changed over time, but I have noticed a shifting of perspectives on this board.  I think it mirrors what is happening in society with regard to religion.

 

[Devobah]

41 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

I'm a high school English teacher, too! Follow the sources all the way back to St. Peter and then you can cross the Tiber and become Catholic!

Seriously, though, welcome to the board. While I exult in my Catholic faith, I'm not here to proselytize (unless jokingly, which might not be jokingly, which then...)

Hahaha I was wondering if the English teacher bait would bring anything out! I do find the Catholic and orthodox faiths fascinating, and I’m sure you could provide some very interesting perspectives to everything!

[Tacenda]

40 minutes ago, Damien the Leper said:

How long were you on Limited?

I've been banned twice and forgiven twice.  But can't remember the number of years, but several.

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Devobah said:

Thanks! I’ll try and bring my perspectives!

Looking forward to it, welcome!!

[MrShorty]

On 5/14/2024 at 7:51 AM, CV75 said:

their power hinges on our management of human fallibility. In contrast, I would say the most important “truth claims” are as Joseph Smith described (copied below);

I would agree. As I figure out how to manage human fallibility -- especially in light of the prophet's statement about the centrality of Christ and His atonement -- I find that one major strategy I am learning to use is a "cafeteria" approach to what the church teaches (in spite of all of those statements decrying "cafeteria Mormonism"). I sometimes wonder if I will go so far as to reject most of the "restoration unique" teachings and end up in a "generic Christian" space (who might just happen to choose to worship with Mormons -- as I've seen some describe it on the internet). So, I guess I agree, a key is managing fallibility by rejecting things that don't help me in my testimony of and attempts to follow Christ. I don't see that leading me back into "TBM" (or "all-in" or whatever term we like for the concept we are grasping at).

[Devobah]

14 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Looking forward to it, welcome!!

Thanks! When I was in my "observing" stage of the groups, I always enjoyed reading your questions and responses! I look forward to any interractions!

[CV75]

1 hour ago, MrShorty said:

I would agree. As I figure out how to manage human fallibility -- especially in light of the prophet's statement about the centrality of Christ and His atonement -- I find that one major strategy I am learning to use is a "cafeteria" approach to what the church teaches (in spite of all of those statements decrying "cafeteria Mormonism"). I sometimes wonder if I will go so far as to reject most of the "restoration unique" teachings and end up in a "generic Christian" space (who might just happen to choose to worship with Mormons -- as I've seen some describe it on the internet). So, I guess I agree, a key is managing fallibility by rejecting things that don't help me in my testimony of and attempts to follow Christ. I don't see that leading me back into "TBM" (or "all-in" or whatever term we like for the concept we are grasping at).

Managing human fallibility might help address the least significant truth claims (the “appendages,” such as those you mentioned) by choosing and rejecting menu/cafeteria items.

I would say the most significant truth claims require managing divine potential. For example, the ascended Lord returning His keys to earth for our advancement, in as Joseph Smith put it, “the gift of the Holy Ghost, the power of faith, the enjoyment of the spiritual gifts according to the will of God, the restoration of the house of Israel.” These and similar truths (he lists "the final triumph of truth" as the last one) are not appendages, but are in connection with “these” – "these" referring to the “fundamental principles” of “the testimony” -- the atonement (death and burial), resurrection (rose the third day) and ascension of Christ “up into heaven.”

I can see how a method to distinguish and discern between appendages and fundamental principles would help manage human fallibility on one hand and divine potential on the other.

[Pyreaux]

I was here before 20 years ago when the Whyprophets.com forum closed and we migrated over here, I was True Blue Through and Through, today I call myself LDS+. I'm a little extra. I would likely debate myself over things I thought incompatible with the Church, but it's just tradition, a point of view. With a certain point of view, these heretical ideas I won't share from the pulpit, if accepted only renders the Church truer than ever, the only church that could ever accommodate such radical ideas. Truth in pagan religions, the true origins of things, the villains that tampered with history, the Bible and Quran. Doesn't make me believe it less but I believe it more, with a new sight, I see what these bookkeepers wanted to hide. Petty squabbles whether Joseph Smith translated verbatim from an Egyptian papyrus, whether Brigham Young was a tyrant, how the Church handles money or settles lawsuits, if it does or doesn't allow same sex sealings, all might be important to other more interested minds, but all mere trifles to me.

Edited May 15, 2024 by Pyreaux

[Kenngo1969]

I don't have [very many] "Big-List"-type questions (such as, "Evolution is a thing, but President So-and-so said ...")  At least, those aren't the kind of things that I have felt to have any kind of a faith crisis over.  My questions are more "personally existential," if that is a thing, if it can be styled thus, and if it makes sense to anyone else.  My questions are more along the lines of, "Lord, why hast Thou dealt with me thus?"

I thought, from a behavioral health perspective, that Clinical Depression was my biggest thing, and if and when I was asked to fill out any forms gauging my mental health, that's what I focused on: "In the past two weeks, have you felt ... ?" with the familiar 4=All of the time, 3=Most of the time, 2=A little of the time, 1=None of the time scale.  (Maybe "None of the time" actually was 0, and 1 was something else, but you get the point.)  I didn't pay much attention to similar questions about worry, because I didn't think worry was a thing for me.  ("What?  Me worry?  ") I'm not exactly sure when or how it happened, but I've realized, since, that, in reality, I used to worry about everything.  I used to get entirely caught up in "the thick of some very thin things."

Please let me hasten to add that I'm not trying to set myself up as any kind of a paragon here.  I could discourse at length about my faults, flaws, and foibles, and I have even done so from time to time here on the Board, if you're of a mind to search out those contributions. (Happy hunting! )  I'm not sure if it's simply the increased perspective (or increased possibility that I have developed [perhaps simply by default], as I careen rapidly through middle age and rapidly toward geezerhoood, an "I really don't give a crap" attitude*) that comes, often [one hopes], with advancing age, but ... for better or for worse ... no longer do I worry about anything transient, temporary, mortal, or ethereal.  (And frankly, while I'm not trying to downplay anyone else's entirely legitimate fears, the vast majority of aspects of this mortal life are transient, temporary, and ethereal.) 

I still do worry, somewhat, about what's going to happen to me in the long term [read, my day-to-day living situation: will I get the day-to-day help I might need, and, if so, how?  How do I continue to find meaning and purpose in a life that, in many ways, hasn't panned out as I hoped it would (and, frankly, probably won't)?  Will I be able to continue afford even my no-frills life?  And so on], but even these things are less of a worry than, collectively, they are a simply a question.  "The Lord can take care of even a minute little sparrow, Ken.  Why not you?"  See Matthew 10:29-31.

The answer hasn't been anything specific, just an assurance that, "Ken, you may not be able to understand how, but I'll take care of you.  Lean on My Ample Arm."  "Okay.  It's you and me, Lord."   With regard to many of those issues, I have no more information about them than I ever have (read, "next to none, if not entirely none").  Still, they are as opaque as they ever have been as I "see through a glass, darkly"  and yet I have grown even more sure that, eventually, in time, ("Ay, there's the rub!"  ) these things will be resolved ... to everyone's satisfaction, including mine ... and I drive a hard bargain!    

Any questions and lingering uncertainties notwithstanding, I've tried to take Paul's approach: "We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed.  Perplexed, but not in despair.  Persecuted, but not forsaken.  Cast down, but not destroyed." 1 Corinthians 4:8-9.  And I'm not talking about a "cheap faith," here: Trust me ... it has been (and likely will continue to be) hard won.  But I do have faith in Paul's assurance of the eventual fate of the faithful: "Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither hath entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love Him."  1 Corinthians 2:9.  Likewise, I do have faith in Ether's assurance that, "Wherefore, whoso believeth in God might with surety hope for a better world, yea, even a place at the right hand of God, which hope cometh of faith, maketh an anchor to the souls of men, which would make them sure and steadfast, always abounding in good works, being led to glorify God.”  Ether 12:4.

In some ways, I have had a mirror-image change in my perspective.  While I used to have an, "In time?  Eventually?  Wow, that's cold comfort if ever I have felt it!"  perspective, and a, "Wow!  This life really sucks!  However bad the next one might be, it's gotta be better than this one, even if I hasten my entry into it!" perspective.  I have made a more concerted effort in recent months to spend more time in the Temple, and, while that has been a big part of my change in perspective, I'm hard-pressed to say exactly how it has contributed, but ... it has.  In fact, not only has it contributed, it's been integral.  Elder John H. Groberg once said that, often, we talk about leaving the Temple to go back out into "the real world," but we've got it exactly backward: The Temple is "the real world," because it, its focus, and what happens there is eternal, while everything else is temporary.

*That may not seem as though it's a good thing, but, honestly, it beats the other extreme ... the one I probably was at ... all to smithereens!   

My $0.02, actual value, as always, much less.  

Edited May 16, 2024 by Kenngo1969

[Bernard Gui]

On 5/14/2024 at 10:37 PM, MiserereNobis said:

O Inquisitor,

Care to share thoughts on why this has happened? Is it lack of outside criticism posting here? Or has the outside criticism moved to other boards?

I didn't come here to criticize, though I have tossed a question or two in the fray over the years. I was originally here to observe and learn, since my master's thesis was partly based on American religious experience, but then I have stayed because I enjoy all of you and the way we interact (kudos to the mods).

Hey, Mnobis…

1.  I would say that most of the opposition from non-LDS critics has been answered or beaten to death. Those great apologists from the past who used to hold forth here have moved on to other things. 
2.  Zealous non-LDS critics used to come here to test out their stuff, sometimes in preparation for book publication. There were many from mostly the Protestant camp who came to sharpen their teeth.  Richard Abanes (“One Nation Under Gods”) comes to mind.
3.  Former and disgruntled members eventually filled the void by bringing up some old apologetic issues and introducing internal doctrinal, procedural, and cultural beefs that cause intermittent but often repeated heartburn.  I don’t like pitting brothers and sisters in the gospel against one another. IMO, that is contrary to the Savior’s desires for His Church. 

Best wishes, friend. 

[Bernard Gui]

On 5/14/2024 at 3:25 PM, Calm said:

Completely forgot about that one…

Then there was Bernard’s Heber S. Young stories (is that the right name, there is nothing coming up on Google and I am pretty sure there were some on this board too, but perhaps they were lost when Nemesis had to prune the board) ….I had saved them all on my computer and my husband promised to back it up before it got sold….yeah, should have done it myself.  

S . Heber Young. I saved some and consider writing some more now and then. 

[Kenngo1969]

6 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

S . Heber Young. I saved some and consider writing some more now and then. 

Give ol' Heber my regards!  

[3DOP]

On 5/14/2024 at 1:16 PM, Damien the Leper said:

I was never part of ZLMB. I wish I had been. I remember back to when I first started posting here 15 years ago. I was always up and down, angry, frustrated. I was not of the right emotional state to be posting on this board. It took several years for me to just let go. I realized that Mormonism wasn't a one size fits all. However, I have found a love for Mormonism from the outside because it is far more nuanced than I previously gave it credit for. Sometimes I miss some of the hardliners who used to post here such as ERayR, Russell C. McGregor (aka Pahoran), Selek, and Wade Englund. In the end, I wish them well. 

I joined the Catholic faith 4 years ago. Time has flown. I've learned so much from @MiserereNobis, @3DOP, and @Saint Bonaventure. Reading their posts always remind me of the absolute joy I've found in our shared faith.

On another note, I still believe that @Calm is @Nemesis.

Hey you aging Leper! 

First, after liking your post, Calm is Nemesis? Heh. Good joke. ERayR...Pahoran...tough Aussie. Wade Englund was strong too. I liked their Mormonism as a Catholic. I am not remembering Selek. There was this gal that was a convert to Catholicism from Salt Lake Mormon. Not Selek. I think it started with an S though. But I am sorry that I fear that I made Salt Lake gal commit to leave the board. And she did. I may have defended the LDS position to a fault. What I mean is that I thought she had the wrong reasons for not being LDS. May God bless her, and may she forgive my trespasses. I think I have moved closer to her position, not with regards to Salt Lake, but to Rome, over the years. The main reason I am not LDS, is that I am Catholic. I don't guess I should expect many Catholics to see it that way. Most non-LDS I talk to think LDS is crazy. I think successful errors always have intellectual appeal, not absurdities. From my perspective, LDS isn't crazy, it just isn't Catholic. 

Leper...Have great confidence in prayer. Great faith. Pray. Pray. Pray...for joy, and peace, and trust, and eternal happiness. In all times and places thanking God for the grace. If we pray, it is God who prompts us. Thank Him. Praise Him. We try to do good things without Him. Apart from prayer? No, we cannot. Even though we think we believe Him when he says, "without me, you can do nothing." We still think we can do it alone. And then we fail, irritated by our neighbour, we feel bad, no wonder. We sense our own malice. Our peace is disturbed. Because we know from our Gospel, the Good News, that we must love our neighbour, who is every soul with a human nature, the same nature as Jesus Christ, ascended to the right hand of the Father! Any good thing we do, is from our good God.  Oh please let's see each other on the other side, Damien. God's love is demonstrable. He loved us first. It is a fairy tale too beautiful to think it came from our feeble minds. Oh it is true. God is good, and Almighty. This gives us love, because He is good,  and hope because He is almighty. May we have great confidence in Him. The Father sent His Son, who willingly came, and on this next Sunday, Pentecost, comes the Third Person, sent by the Son and the Father! Glory be...Our Father...

Happy, happy Sunday and Feast Day, my Catholic brother.

3DOP

Edited May 17, 2024 by 3DOP

[Calm]

Saemo?

[gopher]

On 5/14/2024 at 9:52 PM, Bernard Gui said:

I have been around for a very long time. This has not changed my firm belief, but I am sad that this place has changed from almost exclusively defending the Church from outside criticism to defending it mostly from disgruntled current or former members.

I think you make a good point.  This place was much more entertaining back when evangelicals would stop in to confidently tell believers what the church really believes.  It's much sadder when you are defending the church against former believers, especially those that have also abandoned their belief in God and faith in Jesus Christ.  Those are two things most believers hold on to even when they don't fully understand and can't explain all the issues in church history, doctrines, scriptures, etc.  I realize they aren't looking for sympathy, but it's still sad to see anyone abandon something so fundamental to your own happiness in life.  It's just not as fun to spar with them about important gospel topics.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

1 hour ago, gopher said:

This place was much more entertaining back when evangelicals would stop in to confidently tell believers what the church really believes.

I would further venture that apologetic arguments address criticisms from other faiths very very well. Secular criticisms are less well defended and rely on appeals to faith and testimony. When a Bible believer attacks racist church doctrine, a Latter-day Saint can point to tribalism and other shortcomings present in the Bible. When a secular critic says God shouldn’t be racist, there isn’t as easy of a response. 

[3DOP]

19 hours ago, Calm said:

Saemo?

That's her, Calm. By the way, I think it was probably unclear why I would call her "Salt Lake gal". I am thinking she was a Catholic from Salt Lake City.

 

[sunstoned]

On 5/14/2024 at 7:39 PM, Devobah said:

I’ve been passively watching this board for the past month or so. I haven’t spent too much time on any other board. This is the first one that I’ve actually signed up for. I’ve had doubts for the past few years, and oddly enough the constant back and forth of ideas and theories is really helping me. There’s a lot of things that make more sense now and I especially love following the CFRs so that I can get the whole story. I’m an English teacher in high school so I’m all about following sources to see the reliability of them. 
I probably won’t have much to say on the  board, because I’m only 28 but I’ll try and pop in when I can!

Welcome to the forum Devobah!