“I know the Church is True Good”– A Skeptic’s Testimony
Cletus is the spouse of one of the fMh permabloggers and is honored to write this post for Manuary on fMh.
When I was serving as a full-time LDS missionary, one of my companions would initiate conversations with potential converts on the street by asking “Are you a religious person?” If the answer came in the affirmative, the conversation would continue and we would sometimes be invited into the person’s home to teach the missionary discussions. If the answer was negative or neutral, my companion would turn away with a simple “Thanks for your time.”
His approach bothered me because despite the fact that I had chosen to serve a two-year church mission and had attended church on a weekly basis throughout my life, I wasn’t sure that I would characterize myself as a “religious person” in a conventional sense. And I wouldn’t want my philosophical clone to be excluded from the missionary discussions and ultimately membership in the Church because he answered “no” to that initial question.
For as long as I can remember, I have been pretty skeptical about abstract theology, which I define as anything that could be considered supernatural. I don’t ever remember a time when somebody said, “I know that Joseph Smith was a Prophet” when my inner dialogue didn’t echo the line from Napoleon Dynamite, “Like anyone can even know that.” I appreciate lessons about loving our neighbor, the Word of Wisdom, or even emergency preparedness, but would rather not have to hear about what I consider pure conjecture like the Three Degrees of Glory. The only things I would say I know are things that I have experienced first-hand or that have been scientifically proven. That’s just the way my brain works.
Although I enjoy the practical teachings of the gospel and cherish my membership in the Church, my testimony is based mainly on the practical “fruits” of the gospel. It has little to do with the veracity of Joseph Smith’s “translations” or visions. Instead, it’s based on the fact that the Church has had a positive influence on me and my family. No, the Church isn’t perfect. There are some things in the Church that I wish were different, but I have a testimony that the Church is more good than bad. Yeah, that’s not exactly an inspiring statement, but it’s completely honest coming from an inherently non-religious person.
Here are a few of the practical “fruits” of the gospel that make the Church not necessarily true but definitely good in my experience:
It’s good to grow up giving prayers, memorizing talks, and learning songs in Primary.
It’s good to have to sit still in Sacrament Meeting for an hour every week as a kid.
It’s good to have the self-esteem and motivation that comes with considering yourself a Child of God.
It’s good to be reminded on a weekly (if not daily) basis to cultivate Christlike attitudes and behaviors toward others.
It’s good to meet and interact with other members of the Church with whom you wouldn’t otherwise interact in your secular life.
It’s good to be taught to be self-reliant, prepared for emergencies, and to live within your means.
It’s good to learn to part with a double-digit percentage of your income and a significant portion of your free time –it makes you a more generous person.
It’s good to not use tobacco or to abuse alcohol or other potentially addictive substances.
It’s good to treat your family members as if you’re going to be together forever.
It’s good to focus on self-improvement with an eye toward constant progression to a perfected, Godlike state.
Those are just a few off the top of my head. I’m pretty sure I could come up with dozens of additional practical things I love about the Church that make sense to my non-religious brain.
Anybody else out there in fMh-land who privately rejects the speculative and conjectural aspects of the Church (and other organized religions for that matter) but enjoys the practical aspects of membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? I think there are more of us out there than will admit it.
Since you mention PRIVATELY reject speculation, I’m keeping this anon. I grew up in another faith resenting the huge amount of hypocracy I saw there. When my children began to question me about God, I investigated and joined the Church. Over time, I have come to wonder/not quite believe all the tenets of the gospel BUT entirely believe everything you mention above, and add to that, “what does it hurt?” Who is hurt by our providing service to our neighbor? Who is hurt by tithing? The list goes on and on. My kids have learned many GREAT and IMPORTANT lessons and concepts from the church and I am so very grateful for that.
And I don’t think our religion is that much crazier than others. We try to be Christlike and do good, with a few unconventional beliefs thrown in, just to keep things interesting.
I’m glad for my membership in the church, but I’ll privately doubt the veracity of some teachings. VERY privately!
Comment by anon — January 20, 2009 @ 8:55 am
Anne Lamott says all religions are crazy. But Mormons are crazier than they need to be.
Comment by hero — January 20, 2009 @ 9:11 am
It is the same with me. I often think very analytically, and I’ve never been overtly religious even though I was raised in the church. But the shoe fits best here. I’m happy. So the real question is, do I stay for the “practical fruits” or because it’s comfortable and convenient? Probably both.
Comment by Lula O — January 20, 2009 @ 9:12 am
My inner Napoleon Dynamite is generally quite vocal during testimony meeting.
Comment by mpb — January 20, 2009 @ 9:39 am
The bad FAR outweighs the good for me.
Comment by Nonamenina — January 20, 2009 @ 10:03 am
I could have written this. You explained my thoughts exactly.
Comment by Maren — January 20, 2009 @ 10:07 am
Inwardly during church I cringe a lot. Especially during fast and testimony meeting. This year studying Joseph Smith in RS and D&C in gospel doctrine, I’m going to spend a lot of time cringing. The act of going to church doesn’t seem to be a powerhouse of the spirit for me.
However, when I’m studying on my own and spending time with my family, doing service and really trying to apply the gospel to my life, it gives me hope. I have hope. Hope that my family will be together forever. I have hope that Jesus is my Saviour. I have hope that storing a year’s supply of food will bring me peace in troubling times. I have hope that by helping my fellow man I can become a better person. I have hope that this life is not the end, put just a part of my exisistence. I feel an added measure of hope when I go to the temple. I have hope that the principles of the gospel will give my kids good lives.
The church is good, and I find joy in that. Faith isn’t something that comes easily for me. But, I can hope and I can bask in the joy that comes from living the gospel as fully as I can.
Some would say that I’m a skeptic because I can’t get up in front of the congregation and say that I know Joseph Smith was a prophet. But, I don’t know that I really am a skeptic. I, like you, have an overdeveloped sense of scientific knowledge and the scientist in me understands that absolute proof is hard to come by, even when feeling the spirit.
I’m okay with where I am. Eternity is just the right amount of time to get to the point that I desire to be at. It isn’t worth it to beat myself up, like I have in the past, that I’m not “there” yet. My hope keeps me working towards where I want to be.
Comment by cringinginchurch — January 20, 2009 @ 10:39 am
Thanks for the comments, all.
#5: For some people I’m sure the bad does outweigh the good.
Maybe it’s more precise to say that it’s not the Church itself that is either more good than bad or vice versa. It’s the complex interaction between the Church and an individual or a family that results in either a good or bad influence for that individual or family.
I’m very content with my relationship with the Church and am convinced that FOR ME it’s a good thing.
Comment by Cletus — January 20, 2009 @ 10:41 am
Amen, and amen.
Comment by John Dehlin — January 20, 2009 @ 10:42 am
Guest–I think we need to be honest in our communications. And you have been. In essence you “worship” the church because of the practical aspects. You also point out that you, “privately rejects the speculative and conjectural aspects”. I assume that includes everything “supernatural”, which includes all of Joseph Smith’s revelatory experiences, the first vision, Book of Mormon, D&C, Temple work, living prophets, and etc.
Don’t you think it odd that all of practical aspects of the church that you enjoy rest on a foundation lies? I assume “lies” is a fair word to use, if not, help me understand.
My experience is very different from yours. The Lord for whatever reason has given me many “supernatural” experiences; visions, dreams, visitations, and etc. So I am bewildered by your post. By this I mean, I know that the church is true and good, but not perfect.
I am genuinely puzzled by members like you. It’s difficult for me to understand how anyone who has been on a mission and associated with the church for a long as it appears you have, and have not experienced the ministering of angels, encounters with satan, dreams, visions, forgiveness of sins, and frequent manifestations of the Holy Ghost.
My spiritual energy is now focused on coming into the presence of the Son of God, the second comforter.
I wasn’t “raised” in the church”, but was brought back to it when the Lord left the 99 and came for me.
Click my name above and I have shared my testimony–see Jared’s Testimony.
I appreciate your candid, and what appears to be, genuine testimony. I wish you the very best, but I am left wondering if you’re just spiritually lazy. Have you ever really plead with the Lord to know about things spiritual?
Comment by Jared — January 20, 2009 @ 10:46 am
PS It’s good to seek after Spiritual experiences so you can add a Spiritual Testimony to a practical testimony, thus having both.
Comment by Jared — January 20, 2009 @ 10:59 am
Oh yes, your writing is very close to my thoughts. It is always a puzzle to me when someone claims to “know”.
That said, I am a firm believer in not stepping on anyones toes about their beliefs, or lack of. I was once an active member of the church and have a great deal of respect for all that is “good” about it.
Comment by Numi — January 20, 2009 @ 11:04 am
Jared (#10)
You just barely missed stepping on my toes. Spiritually lazy? Not everyone who pleads comes of with the same answer that you did. Or maybe you didn’t plead as hard as I did. Tsk. Tsk.
Comment by Numi — January 20, 2009 @ 11:06 am
Well Jared darling,here I am 30 years a member and I haven’t seen what you’ve seen.Then again,I am humble.
Comment by lost in space — January 20, 2009 @ 11:27 am
Jared, read about the gifts of the spirit, (Moroni 10:8-17). Not all of us are blessed with Faith, despite “pleading with the Lord”. For some it is a trial, for others, they simply don’t need it. I’m glad that you have experienced these things.
Also, Laman and Lemuel have had more “spiritual administering of Angels” than I ever had and were not very good at living the gospel. It isn’t a measure of righteousness. It is a gift.
Comment by cringinginchurch — January 20, 2009 @ 11:32 am
What Cringing said. We don’t all have the gift to believe. I’ve tried for years to get some kind of spiritual confirmation, and I finally just gave up. I really identified with this post.
Me too. It works for me, it works for my kids. It would be very difficult NOT to be LDS in our area. I love the people. My friends are all there. I think the church teaches many positive things, like any other church.
My children are very young though. As they get older, I think I’m going to struggle a lot more with the messages they get from the church about women and gays.
Comment by Anon for this — January 20, 2009 @ 12:11 pm
In connection with spiritual laziness, there is also this bit in D & C 46:
So I don’t have to believe everything personally. I just have to believe enough.
And in connection with craziness, gold plates, visions of the heavens, sea gulls eating grasshoppers, etc., are small potatoes compared with the Big Craziness: the resurrection.
Although the way may be narrow, there are thousands of ways to dance along it.
Wise folks resist the temptation to judge another’s dance.
Comment by Jim Donaldson — January 20, 2009 @ 12:19 pm
The term is New Order Mormon.
Personally, I’m the exact opposite. I give credibility to the warm spiritual fuzzies but I’m skeptical of the organization.
Comment by OpaqueDream — January 20, 2009 @ 12:42 pm
Here is a post that I did on a related topic at BCC:
Thanks for bringing up this topic. I have wanted to bring it up on this forum, but alas, I am a bit too confused to be an author. Below are excerpts from a telephone conversation that I had with a member of the high council last week. I refer to this call as “my Mormon intervention.”
Call: after obligatory initial pleasantries.
HC: Sister SC, may I ask you a personal question?
SC: Certainly.
HC: Do you know that Joseph Smith personally saw God the father and his son Jesus Christ?
SC: Do I know it? Of course not, I wasn’t there. Am I willing to accept it? Sure
HC: Hmm. I see. Well do you know that President Monson obtains revelations directly from God?
SC: Do I know it, nope, they generally don’t let me in while they are doing that. But am I willing to accept it? Sure.
HC: Well if you do not KNOW that what he is saying is true, why do you follow the teachings?
SC: Good point sir, I follow the teachings, not because they are in a book somewhere, but because they are what are good for my soul. I do not drink, not because it is in a book somewhere, but because it is bad for my body. That is why I am not tempted to sin the way that others apparently are.
The intervention went on for some time until the HC gave up. I can totally relate to Cletus. I think there are more of us Spock Mormons out there that you realize.
Comment by StillConfused — January 20, 2009 @ 1:11 pm
I tried being a skeptical Mormon for a long time. It just didn’t work. EVERYTHING is so focused on the temple and Joseph Smith and prophets and revelations. I felt drained after meetings, trying to pretend those things were things I believed in. Your mileage may vary.
Comment by WendyP. — January 20, 2009 @ 1:20 pm
After reading the comments above–following are a few of my thoughts:
By wondering if Guest might be spiritually lazy was not an attempt to be unkind or condescending. All of us manage something lazy about ourselves.
For forty years I have been reticent to share my experiences with the Spirit, assuming everyone had the same experiences, but just kept it to themselves. So I followed the crowd. In recent years I’ve learned that it is important to appropriately testify—where much is given much is required. When I go before the Savior I will be responsible for what I have been given. Burying ones talent is not the definition of humility.
I agree that not all of us have the same gifts, but I firmly believe that all baptized members have the right and obligation to fulfill their baptism covenant and seek for the gift of the Holy Ghost. Those who are diligent will have manifestations of the Spirit. The Lord has made this promise. I also feel that we live in a day of unparalleled prosperity and the consequence is that we rely on the arm of flesh and “quench” the things of the Spirit as Amulek did (Alma 10:4-6).
The message to each and everyone one of us is to repent (D&C 19). I personally take this very seriously, and hope that I can endure to the end and be found acceptable to enter into the Lord’s presence.
Comment by Jared — January 20, 2009 @ 1:22 pm
I have many of the same feelings as you, in many ways I have maintained my membership for the more practical reasons. Although I do have moments, few and far between, where I feel the spirit in a strong way. But the thing that I wonder is, as my children get older (I just had my first a week ago), will they see through me? Will my lack of spiritual Mormonism become too obvious for them to ignore? And if it does, what will that mean for them?
I like that people have mentioned how we all have different spiritual gifts, that is actually quite comforting to think about. While my husband may have the gift of unwavering faith which I envy sometimes, I have other gifts like compassion and the ability to really connect with other’s suffering. I guess I’m rambling now, but I appreciate all your thoughts.
Comment by Roxanna — January 20, 2009 @ 1:33 pm
There have been things about the church that concern me, and that have made me wonder if I really believe, but ultimately, I do, and I can’t deny it, no matter how conflicted I feel about some issues.
There are some things about the “culture” of the church in Utah that I would prefer my kids not learn, but as has been said before, the good certainly outweighs the bad, and nothing in this life is going to fit me exactly, because I’m not perfect, and nothing in the world is perfect, not even the church. We’re all growing and progressing, and I can be content with that.
Comment by Alliegator — January 20, 2009 @ 1:41 pm
#19
I’m curious as to why he chose the word “know”. Don’t the temple recommend questions (a litmus test in my opinion)say, “do you have faith in and a testimony of…”. I think that those are vastly different questions. Here are some scriptures for thought:
I would have just answered that my faith is not dormant on that one yet. It’s all a progression.
Comment by cringinginchurch — January 20, 2009 @ 1:56 pm
Some things simply need to be appreciated. This post is one of them.
I respect those who feel to say, “I know.” There are certain things I feel strongly enough from my own experiences that I have no problem saying, “I know.” I don’t extrapolate that to mean that everyone, including myself, can know everything - since that is not consistent with the totality of our canonical scriptures. Anyone can take a verse or two in isolation and teach anything; the broad teaching is that many will have to rely on faith and/or on the knowledge of others. That’s fair and fine for me.
Finally, faith should be nurtured and encouraged - NEVER demeaned or criticized or belittled. We stress “knowing” so much that often we forget to acknowledge, seek for and even reverence pure faith. Often the greatest blessings come after the trial of our “faith” - not as a trial of our knowledge. That’s important.
The following is something I wrote about my parents’ mission call a few years ago. If they had relied on knowledge, they would have missed out on a wonderful experience. It was their faith that made them whole, so to speak.
Seeing the Hand of God (SC)
Comment by Ray — January 20, 2009 @ 2:09 pm
I really appreciated this viewpoint on the church, Cletus. Thank you for your thoughts.
I’m a convert and have always hated the phrase, “I know that [insert X, Y, or Z church doctrine] is true.” What does that MEAN exactly? What does is MEAN to be true? I think we sometimes scare away a lot of prospective Mormons with our strange language.
I liked what you had to say, because it shows a different perspective on one can base their testimony on - and it is still ok. I think it indicates our inherent “Christianity,” which is often lost amidst our “peculiarity”.
I have to ask, though - do you ever struggle with the Book of Mormon, and its “supernatural” origins? Does it bug you to think about Joesph Smith’s “visions”? Are you uncomfortable with the supernatural aspects of the church in general, or do you just take a sort of “agnostic” approach towards them - i.e., I wasn’t there, and therefore I can’t know for sure?
Comment by Katie — January 20, 2009 @ 2:13 pm
Jared, I think that you and I might be misunderstanding each other. I re-read your post and I guess I’m not understanding what this means:
Why are you puzzled? It seems perfectly reasonable to me that in a world with millions of members (or billions of people for that matter) with different and distinct personalities, that this would be something that they need to work through with the Lord. That in the act of wanting these things and not recieving them is where their growth comes from. Just as your growth comes from recieving these gifts and testifying of them.
I’m sure that there were many, many people before Joseph Smith that prayed fervently to know the truth, but were not visited by the Father and the Son and directed to open the last dispensation.
I think that is has direct relation to the doctrine about marriage. If we aren’t given the chance in this life to marry a worthy person in this life, it will come in the next, as long as we are faithful. I think the same thing goes for the mysteries of God and the manifestations of the Spirit. Some of us need to remain faithful (hopeful) and we will still be able to inherit all that God has for us.
Comment by cringinginchurch — January 20, 2009 @ 2:19 pm
Jared (#10):
To be blunt,
No, I’ve never had an encounter with Satan, never had a vision. I’ve certainly had times where I have felt great emotion in things connected with the Church and family.
But as far as something supernatural, that is, uttlerly inexplicable based on any natural process, nothing like that has ever happened and it never will for me. That’s just the way my brain works. Once I realized this fact (probably in my early teen years) I have been much more at peace with my religious journey and my faith.
As far as spiritual laziness as an explanation for my skepticism, I am simply incapable of truly in my heart believing in the supernatural. That spiritual gift somehow completely missed me. But I try not to denigrate the spiritual experiences of others. For example, I would never call you “intellectually lazy” for your belief that you have had visions and encounters with Satan.
Comment by Cletus — January 20, 2009 @ 2:19 pm
Oh, and I reject very little of what anyone has said since the beginning of the Restoration. I’ve found there is at least a smidgen of truth in almost everything anyone says, so I gnaw at it until I have found the good parts version. The rest I simply choose to keep in the “maybe” drawer, believing I’ll understand everything at some point. Why make final judgments on stuff I just can’t know for sure?
Comment by Ray — January 20, 2009 @ 2:30 pm
#22. It will be interesting to see how things pan out with your children. WIth mine, I was just upfront with them all along. They knew that sitting through 3 hours of meetings was torture for me. I didn’t try to hide it or be fake about it. My daugther will be getting married in June and it will be a temple ceremony. She and I had a very frank discussion about that yesterday. I let her know that if it was really important to her for me to be there that I would. SInce she has no other LDS family, I would totally understand if she wanted me there. I was also concerned for her what others may think if I were not there. She did not care in the slightest what others think. She knows that the temple is a freaky place for me and that being “active” is very difficult for me; but she also knows that she is my daughter and I will do everything to make her special day special. It really doesn’t matter so much to either of us what the end result will be, the important thing is that we know, understand, love and respect each other for who we are. I love that our relationship is that way.
Comment by StillConfused — January 20, 2009 @ 2:33 pm
I have a family wedding coming up, but I will not be attending. I am “worthy” of a temple recommend but I do not/cannot/will not believe the doctrines of the Church, nor do I choose to pretend that I do, so I will not have my recommend renewed.
I feel the Church bribes people into staying and being less than honest by forcing them to attend the temple (i.e. for weddings and family sealings, etc.) against their better judgement.
Comment by PrefersAnonymity — January 20, 2009 @ 3:02 pm
#22:
I don’t think you need to worry too much about your kids “seeing through” your lack of “Spiritual Mormonism.”
Just focus on the positive practical things you do believe in and set aside for now the abstract theology.
Comment by Cletus — January 20, 2009 @ 3:06 pm
Jared. You sound sooooo boring and arrogant.
Comment by ugh! — January 20, 2009 @ 3:21 pm
I’ve heard the term NOM and have ventured into the site and message boards. I’ve also been to Stay LDS
Both are good sites; I just don’t know that it’s worth it to pretend or writhe through more sacrament, SS, and RS meetings that serve only to irritate the hell out of me more than inspire. I’ve tried.
I consider myself an agnostic Mormon anymore. We’ll see how much further I go. I’ve worried in the past about my kids and thought I’d suck it up a bit more for them, but I think it’ll just get harder and itchier the older they get. Sucks. I’m still unsure as to what to do.
But yes, this church is a very good church. I question the “truth” of it all - an odd word choice indeed - but I’m grateful for all its done for me.
Comment by Anon — January 20, 2009 @ 3:35 pm
#33 - I think Jared is just trying to express himself and his personal feelings. I personally don’t roll that way at all but I can appreciate that he feels that way. I don’t think it is necessary to personalize his comments.
#34. The important thing is to just be true to yourself. I don’t really care what religion someone picks, if any at all, so long as they are true to themselves. For me that means I am kind of a southern-baptist-mormon-jew-spritualist. Sounds goofy, but that is just how I am. I accept that and my God accepts that. Those are the only two that really matter. If you and your God are happy with who you are then you get an A in my book.
Comment by StillConfused — January 20, 2009 @ 3:45 pm
#35 - I agree with you that I don’t personally care what religion anyone chooses, however… how do such viewpoints jive with the teaching that the LDS church is the ONLY true church. Do we believe as a church that others are damned if they do not choose our church?
Just throwing it out as devil’s advocate for discussion…
Comment by Katie — January 20, 2009 @ 3:55 pm
Too many things to say, no good way to say them. Thanks to everyone (even Jared) for posting here. I’ll just sit and read.
Comment by Holden Caulfield — January 20, 2009 @ 3:59 pm
(#35) Really? Asking someone if they are “spiritually lazy” isn’t personal and rude? Like I said…. Arrogant and hugely self-righteous. Even if it’s unintentional.
Comment by ugh! — January 20, 2009 @ 4:01 pm
First: the gift to believe/gift to believe on others’ testimony distinction is important, as Elder Oaks noted in a recent address. (“Testimony”, see section IV) For a while I’ve operated under the conclusion that I don’t have the gift of belief, but lately I’ve found myself doubting that, strangely enough.
Second: though I’m glad it leads you to continue your involvement with the church, is there not something inherently unsatisfying about the “it’s more good than bad” methodology? Surely there are many organizations with which to be involved that are “more good than bad.” Not confronting that unsatisfactory state of affairs is perhaps what Jared is talking about. I guess “complacency” might be a better word than “laziness.” Remember, though, that complacency is stasis, and “stasis is death.”
Third: I, as well, have a very skeptical mind. However, faith is ultimately a combination of gift of God and conscious choice — a choice to believe, even if it seems you are doing so in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. As much as I, as an anti-Chomsky linguist, am averse to rationalism, I cannot deny that my personal experience gives many compelling arguments for belief. Not just the accumulation of answered prayers and brilliant thoughts that seem to enter my mind from elsewhere, but the overall feeling and pattern of my feet being directed to paths far better than I could have charted for myself. Perhaps, if you can muster the faith (and I think you can — it’s shocking how little is needed), ask God to help you see his influence in your life and the life of your family. When you start to see his hand guiding events and changing you, it’s hard to deny that he is real and that he actually does love and care about you. And when you see the church playing an integral role in God’s interventions in your life, it’s hard to persist in believing that it’s just some organization that happens to be “more good than bad.”
Fourth: Bushman’s “My Belief” essay might give you some new ways of thinking about things. The typos are atrocious, but the ideas are worthwhile.
Finally: I’ve offered you my ideas, but I know they’re just my ideas, and that you must come to terms with things on your own. I do believe that God will help you in that pursuit. Thanks for giving your thoughts and being willing to be intellectually honest. For some of us, just plain believing — not necessarily believing everything that your random Sunday school teacher claims is part of the gospel, but believing the things that actually are part of it (Christ, the Restoration, revelation, living prophets) — is the “thorn in the flesh” we have to struggle with for essentially our entire lives. Embrace the struggle. God will give you grace to endure it well.
Comment by Josh — January 20, 2009 @ 4:13 pm
#36 - During my Mormon Intervention, I was specifically asked “Do you think that The Church Of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only true church?” My response was “If by that are you asking if good people who aren’t Mormon are going to hell, the answer is an absolute No. My God sees the good and beauty in all people irrespective of their religious preference.”
The HC also said, “I hope you don’t feel that I am being judgmental.” My response was, “Actually I do not. You are just asking questions. But even if you were, I wouldn’t care at all. Your opinion of me doesn’t matter. I love me and my God loves me and that is all that I care about on this matter.”
#38. I think the last sentence above explains why I don’t take offense to what Jared said. When someone asks me a question, I choose to just answer the question not to take offense by it. If someone were to ask me if I were spiritually lazy, I would probably say “no. I am spiritually retarded. Lazy implies that I have those abilities and choose not to use them.” I see so many folks who seem to get worked up over something someone says on here. It isn’t needed. We all come from different places and have different ways of expressing ourselves.
Comment by StillConfused — January 20, 2009 @ 4:20 pm
Thank you so much for this post. This is *exactly*, to a T, how I feel about the Mormon church. When I expressed as much, I was deemed to have “failed” the baptism interview. I keep being drawn back to it as the Christian church that has the best ratio of good to bad, and what draws me to it are the fruits that you spoke of- I like church, I like the service, I like the simplicity and the community and the absence of hell fire and damnation! I went every Sunday for a year, dragging my reluctant Mormon boyfriend. But do I feel a particular testimony that Joseph Smith was THE prophet that restored the True Church on earth? Nope. Not at all. I look at him as more of a Martin Luther or a George Fox. That being said I would have loved to have become a member, and I would have happily been one- despite my differences with some beliefs.
I wish I’d been older or you’d been younger- maybe you could have baptized me. As it is the now ex-boyfriend has kicked me to the curb after his mission, and I have to be content with being a dry Mormon. I wish it wasn’t so black and white with the Church- you’re either a perfect Molly Mormon who believes everything with every ounce, you know it’s true, or you’re a questioning doubter who might taint the others. Sigh. One of my friend’s has a father who is an admitted atheist- and faithfully tithes 10%, goes to Church every Sunday, welcomes V.T.’s, and prays before every meal. He thinks the Church makes good, hardworking, decent people, and he thinks the world needs more of them. It takes all kinds, but the Mormon church seems to only want the True Blues.
Comment by sophia*rising — January 20, 2009 @ 4:21 pm
The conclusion I’ve come to is that deciding that I know it’s NOT true is just as absurd as PRETENDING I know that it is, if not more so. It’s pride, a deep-set arrogance and a reliance on the arm of man; it’s putting faith in the words of scientists rather than prophets, believing in the infallibility of our own logic, and not accounting for the fact that the church is made up of humans, flawed, imperfect humans, from top to bottom, beginning to end.
Why can’t we definitively disprove the null hypothesis that there is no god, that Christ was not resurrected, that Joseph Smith did not see visions, restore God’s True Church, translate scriptures and speak God’s words? I don’t know. I can only assume it has something to do with why we’re here; something that we all have to learn and do no matter when we live or what degree (or version) of the gospel we’ve been taught.
The gospel, the church could totally be literally true, once we take the human error out of it. It could be actually, scientifically true, and whereever there are apparent conflicts, there are just misunderstandings, misrepresentations, or pieces missing from our knowledge, whether on the religious or scientific side.
So, apparently, I’m coming out in favor of agnostic rather than atheistic mormonism, if you can’t be an actually faithful member, because, when it comes down to it, we can’t KNOW anything of ourselves. We have no pure senses, only perceptions, so seeing, hearing, feeling something for yourself - even that isn’t enough to KNOW. Go ahead, believe in the conclusions of the scientific method - reliability and validity are related to truth, I’m sure, but just because something hasn’t been proved yet, or even seems to go against things that HAVE been proven (which list is really pretty limited, when you take out all the related theories and assumptions), that doesn’t necessarily make it not true, because there may always be unknown variables we haven’t controlled for yet.
I have faith where I can, and I hope or strive for hope where I can’t (yet). For the sake of my family, myself, and my God, I’ll walk blind where I don’t have light to see. Heck, I’ll even walk where I think I’m seeing something else entirely. Cling to the rod and all that, and I’ll trust that God is real, just and merciful, and that it’ll all work out in the end.
Comment by Anon — January 20, 2009 @ 4:38 pm
#42. Great post. I agree with that approach.
Comment by Cletus — January 20, 2009 @ 4:54 pm
I wish it wasn’t so black and white with the Church- you’re either a perfect Molly Mormon who believes everything with every ounce, you know it’s true, or you’re a questioning doubter who might taint the others.
I’ve felt that sometimes, and I really think that it’s something we tell each other, not something “the church” tells us.
When I was growing up I didn’t feel such a pressure to maintain appearances as I do now, and I wonder if it’s because people have changed, or my awareness has changed. Maybe a little of both?
As for being the only true church, I think that statement has been amended by President Hinckley. All churches have truth, but don’t have the fullness of the gospel. I don’t believe God is really into damning people. I think if we do our best to live the way we feel God wants us to live, then we’ll be just fine, and I’m not going to worry about what religion someone belongs to, Heavenly Father will work it all out.
Comment by Alliegator — January 20, 2009 @ 5:09 pm
I think there was a point in my life where I would have had the same reaction as Jared had in his first reply. But, as I’ve gotten older and matured, I begin to understand that the church is really more like Alliegator says #44. God isn’t into Damning people. I think he put the church on the earth to help his children learn the truth, the whole truth. He isn’t going to damn those who don’t have that truth. That shouldn’t stop us from bringing it to them.
Members of the church would do much better if they would begin to realize that not everyone can be (or at least appear as) a Molly Mormon. Some of the people in my ward who are the most jugmental, are also the most messed up. Probably one of the more humble people in our ward is a recently reactivated member who is a tattoo artist. He plans on attending some school soon to get certified or something like that.
I’m really afraid that someone is going to give him the third degree for his profession. I’m afraid we might lose a good member over something relatively harmless.
What i’m trying to say is, the church really takes all kinds. If we ostricised all long haired guys, who would play Jesus in the church videos?
Comment by Ian M. Cook — January 20, 2009 @ 6:04 pm
This has been a learning experience for me. I’ve enjoyed every comment. Many thoughtful people have contributed.
Some have taken issue with my selection of words. I can just say it is not my intention to offend.
As a young man I was a long way from the path of righteousness and on my a way to a war zone. I wasn’t afraid, but was was concerned about my future. I hadn’t been to church in many years, but one day I prayed and said that I wanted to know if all the stuff about Joseph Smith and Book of Mormon were true. If it was, I promised to change my ways, if not, then to hell with religion. I said I would read the Book of Mormon and find out by following up with prayer. I knew about Moroni 10:4. Soon thereafter I was visited by someone, a being from hell, who sought to do me harm, and would have. But when I prayed for help I was immediately delivered from his power. I watch has he walked off into, what I knew, was a very lonely and dark place.
This experience taught me that there are two powers in the universe and we can choose which we will associate with. It took me many months to get my act together, but I did, and the Lord has been my friend since.
I think we need to be honest with our feelings. If we have doubt, then tell the Lord and his servants. I wouldn’t mince words, I would be kind, but forthright. I believe this will open up the channels of communication with the things of the Spirit and the Lord will respond to us in His way and His time. He is our Father and will lead us if we will let Him.
The LDS church is the only true church because it has authority from God. Other churches have much to offer, but they don’t have the authority to seal on earth and in heaven.
Comment by Jared — January 20, 2009 @ 6:13 pm
Jared, many years ago as my father lay dying in his bed I sat alone next to him as he talked to spirits in his room. I wondered at the time if these “spirits” had come to guide him back home and it caused my agnostic brain much confusion.
Now I realize that his brain was severely deprived of oxygen and he was hallucinating. However, my mother and sister still take great comfort in their “knowledge” that his relatives came to escort him back to the other side. I would not ever want to take that away from them.
You believe that the LDS church is the only true church. My friend believes that the Catholic Church is the only way back to heaven. I believe that if there is a God he won’t judge me by whether or not I am an active member of the LDS Church but instead by if I leave the world a better place than how I found it.
Comment by Numi — January 20, 2009 @ 6:39 pm
Numi–I love it when people appeal to the deprived of oxygen explanation to cast off spiritual experiences and NDE. I can assure you my brain wasn’t deprived of oxygen, I was a young man. But if that allows you to stay in your selected place and ignore testimony then so be it.
My dad, whom I love, wouldn’t allow me to teach him the gospel. His explanation was surprising. He didn’t want to be responsible if he found out it was true. He was serious and died in that frame of mind.
The Lord loves us all and will give us what we really want, that’s why there are degrees of glory. Your agency will lead you where you desire. Remember, they are all degrees of glory and all fit into the great plan of happiness.
Comment by Jared — January 20, 2009 @ 7:17 pm
Hell, no. *grin*
Comment by Ray — January 20, 2009 @ 7:23 pm
I don’t know, the way some people talk about hell, it might be fun to go - Even the Heronomious Bosch (sp?) triptych doesn’t make it look all bad. (Except for the bagpipes. I’ll never forget my Art History teacher saying that the triptych confirmed what he’d long suspected, that bagpipes belong in hell.)
Comment by Quimby — January 20, 2009 @ 7:25 pm
Bagpipes played well are heavenly; being forced to listen to someone learn to play the bagpipes is inhumane torture. I know; we had bagpipes in our high school marching band.
Comment by Ray — January 20, 2009 @ 7:30 pm
Jared, I appreciate your posts.
I’ve long concluded that when church members say “I know XYZ to be true”, it’s church-speak for saying that they feel strongly about XYZ, that it resonates with them, that they’re overwhelmingly convinced of it’s goodness, and that they’re committed to it. “Receiving a witness” means they’ve felt enlightened, validated, and encouraged, possibly even to a “supernatural” extent.
Thus, in a scientific sense, nobody “knows” anything spiritually. Even if you were told by an angel, the angel could have been lying. How could you tell? In fact, science only allows “knowledge” within very specific boundaries. By Newtonian physics, we can “know” a lot of things in our day-to-day world, but once you enter the realm of quantum mechanics, the things we thought we “knew” break down.
I think some people simply aren’t spiritual. I don’t think they are bad, or even necessarily lazy — they simply in no way seem to share the “spiritual” yearnings and resonances that I feel. They simply aren’t wired that way. The church is good, therefore they attend and contribute. They only have faith in the sense that they’d decided to have faith, not that they could claim to have “received a witness”.
I don’t understand how these people can repent. Personally, I need spiritual experiences to motivate me to change. You gotta hand it to a person who will simply decide to have faith and live the gospel. I’d say that such a person demonstrates more faith than me.
Comment by Brian — January 20, 2009 @ 7:30 pm
If anyone is interested, I took apart and parsed JSH 1:19 phrase-by-phrase in the following post:
Common Scriptures in Review: JSH 1:19
It is not nearly as harsh as most people assume without looking at the actual words of the verse itself.
Comment by Ray — January 20, 2009 @ 7:42 pm
I also parsed D&C 1:20 (”true and living church”):
Common Scriptures in Review: The Only True and Living Church
Comment by Ray — January 20, 2009 @ 7:43 pm
Its interesting, the concept of spirituality. I remember that there was recently a scientific study done where they used MRI to identify specific regions of the brain that were activated in individuals when feeling a “spiritual” manifestation. I believe it was done in Pentecostals; however, I will need to look up and get the actual reference.
Anyway, I can see how if this is that case, some people could even be physically less spiritual than others. The question is whether those sorts of physical responses to spiritual promptings can be learned or acquired, or if they are strictly biological.
Comment by Katie — January 20, 2009 @ 7:52 pm
Just something to chew on:
We are taught that it is better to be humble without compulsion than to be compelled to be humble. (Alma 32) The author of this post is choosing to be humble, in a way, without any external motivation. I really admire that.
Comment by Ray — January 20, 2009 @ 7:52 pm
I have been reading this thread with great interest, as I have lot interest in saying, “I know” about religious things. There is so little I know in life, but a lot I feel and believe in. I believe and feel strongly that Heavenly Father exists and that he loves and knows each of us and that is enough to keep me happily in the church.
That being said, as the daughter of Numi, let me conclude with this: Knowing the Numi and her heart, I can say that I KNOW that any benevolent and loving higher being would definitely send her straight to heaven - the bestest and most fantastic part of heaven. So Jared, back off.
Comment by Eris — January 20, 2009 @ 8:04 pm
As I understand it, hell is a place that advances all who are required to go there. Punishments purpose is to increase not reduce, to reconcile not to divide. All that God does is designed to bless us–His children.
God is love in all of its perfection. The atonement is beyond mortals ability to comprehend. But what we can understand says that the very best out of all of God’s children, the Savior, followed the Father’s will and paid the ultimate price to redeem us.
Comment by Jared — January 20, 2009 @ 8:07 pm
Eris–what can I say when a wonderful daughter moves to protect her mother. I yield to your wish.
But be it known, Eris, if we were together having this discussion you wouldn’t feel a need to protect Mom because the increased communication that comes from being together, eye to eye, would make that clear.
Comment by Jared — January 20, 2009 @ 8:40 pm
Amen. It always strikes me as funny (and I do mean funny ha ha, not funny/strange) when people think the sin is in lacking faith. If I’ve tried hard to get it, and it simply won’t come - how can I be faulted for that? It is just not in me.
And all things considered, knowing that I DON’T have any kind of spiritual witness, and that I “decided to have faith” and tried my best to do what was right even without any spiritual confirmation at all - I would think that is something God would smile upon.
Comment by Anon for this — January 20, 2009 @ 8:56 pm
#55 Katie, I too have heard of studies done on spirituality. I didn’t bring it up because I couldn’t point to any. I have also heard people who suffered a stroke say that it was a deeply spiritual experience. Many people have claimed certain drugs gave them spiritual experiences. Maybe the feeling of being spiritual comes from something physical in the brain.
By the way, I don’t think this casts aspersions on “real” spirituality. Maybe the Holy Ghost just needs something to work with.
Comment by Brian — January 20, 2009 @ 9:04 pm
Thank you, Cletus. I went through a period of inactivity after my divorce. I eventually made my way back because I definitely found more good than bad aspects of the church. I realized that I could be just fine with plenty of maybes thrown in. In fact, I’m a lot happier acknowledging that simple truth.
There are some things I know, some I believe, some I suspect, some I reject. Thankfully, one of the things I know is that my Heavenly Father gives me the room to be a work in progress.
Comment by Kimberly — January 20, 2009 @ 9:13 pm
I guess I’m confused. Are you saying that you only remain in the Church because of its “practical” effects on you and your family? Because there are plenty of organizations and groups that can give you those same results without the supernatural elements that you, in that case, are rejecting. Try Humanism, for one. There are versions of Humanism that are similar to a religion and can in fact be classified, legally, as a religion; however, they reject anything not based on scientifically provable fact (including God, angels, spiritual manifestations, etc.). I’m not trying to drive you out of the Church or say that you don’t belong there - please don’t think I’m saying that - I’m just wondering why someone would stay in the Church if they really had no spiritual ties to it.
Or are you saying, as some others in the comment thread seem to be saying, that you an only “desire to believe”, like it says in Alma 32? That you’ve never gotten beyond deciding you’d like to believe because of your inability to trust/recognize/process/receive any purely spiritual experience? I’m really not trying to be condescending or judgmental here, though it may come across that way; I just figured that the Holy Ghost and Spiritually-based experiences were pretty central to the Gospel. And some kind of belief (even just acceptance or a desire to believe) in the Atonement, the Resurrection, Joseph Smith’s vision(s), the veracity of the Book of Mormon, and the validity of continuing revelation actually is central to a real testimony of the Gospel, or at least I always thought so.
Someone help me here, please. I’ve encountered this kind of feeling before, and I didn’t understand it then either. Are you saying that you fully participate in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints despite the fact that you don’t actually believe in Jesus Christ in any way, shape, or form? I’m not talking about infrequent spiritual experiences followed by long periods of doubt, because my opinion is that that’s the norm for most people and that’s just a part of what real faith is all about. I don’t think only having the ability to believe other people’s testimonies is invalid, wrong, or even rare either. I’m talking about having no kind of belief or experience on any level at any time. Besides the fact that I have a hard time fathoming that (and I am not one to dream dreams or have visitations by any means; I’m just someone who feels the Spirit and identifies the feeling as such on a regular enough basis that I’d feel disingenuous denying it), I don’t really understand why you’d stay in the Church in that case.
Comment by OhMissJulie — January 20, 2009 @ 9:13 pm
#61, #55: Studies like that never really prove or disprove the validity of spiritual experiences to me. I mean, everything we experience and perceive in this life corresponds somewhere in the brain; that’s where we ultimately process things. So it doesn’t surprise me that a spiritual experience would correspond with brain activity.
Comment by OhMissJulie — January 20, 2009 @ 9:20 pm
“I know are things that I have experienced first-hand or that have been scientifically proven.”
ah you science folks. dont you see that this constitutes a belief, based on faith, in itself? faith in the idea (it is an idea, not a proven fact) that only first hand sensory experience or modern “science” constitutes truth? this belief is rooted in the 18th century European historical context and while it remains dominant it nonetheless is a cultural belief in itself, and not an adherence to “actuality.”
this is by no means meant to be an attack on you. i also dont like when people claim to “know” things, although my reasons are because that claim would be based on a pretension to scientific truth (the only truth our society acknowledges) and I believe there is no shame in faith. the word of wisdom is not good only because it is healthy, and it gets under my skin when people try to justify all gospel truths that way (because it doesnt work as you’ve noticed).
i wish all scientific minded people could see that their “truths” are also founded on a system of beliefs, one that reduces truth to sensory experience and the scientific method (as created by newton).
Comment by nobodyputsbabyinacorner — January 20, 2009 @ 9:56 pm
I am a scientifically-minded person; I have a PhD in engineering and work in science. However, I also believe I have a significant amount of faith in the Gospel, based on spiritual feelings. Maybe you could say that I believe the spirit works as a sort of 6th sense for me. I actively partake of the admonition to “experiment upon the word” when I have a question as to Gospel truth, and the answers I look for are from that spiritual sense.
I don’t think that science and religion are necessarily separate and impossible to reconcile. I think that sort of notion is foolish; God works by natural laws, it just that we don’t know all the laws yet.
And I agree that “neurotheological” studies never really prove anything - you aren’t going to gain faith from those sorts of answers, nor would they serve to hurt my faith. I just find them fascinating tie-ins between science and religion.
Comment by Katie — January 20, 2009 @ 10:16 pm
Jared:
Thanks for the response. I appreciate the civility and agree that offense would probably not be taken by your comments (as I understand none was intended) if we were in person. I guess part of my problem with your debate with Numi is that you call people “spiritually lazy” or accuse them of “staying in their selected place and ignoring the testimony” and then claim you meant no harm and blame in on the internet.
Maybe you should just avoid such blanket statements and judgment all-together since I doubt you would make such claims if we were all sitting face-to-face.
Comment by Eris — January 20, 2009 @ 10:20 pm
Perhaps the only thing I “know” right now is that I need to respond to this thread, though I don’t know where to start, or end, for that matter. I have become very agnostic over the years on most church doctrine, and outright atheist on others. I still go, but I can only wonder how much longer I can hold out. I guess I’m responding mainly because I definitely want some support in this area, and find it comforting that I’m not the only one dealing with this.
Much of this change in me has followed my evolving political and sociological views. I am a humanist through and through, and very liberal. But I haven’t always seen myself this way. I grew up in Orange County, CA in the 70s and 80s. My family, like every other family I knew in that area, member or no, were conservative Republicans. I just went along with the crowd, although I could argue the talking points rather well. I was also a faithful and active member, read the scriptures daily, and possessed a spiritual and scriptural intellect that was atypical for someone my age during that time. I’m not bragging that point - just mentioning it to show that in many ways I was the last person one might expect to come to see things the way I do now.
I have had many of what I would call spiritual experiences in my lifetime. I have felt, and continue to feel led by a loving supreme presence, whatever it is. What has changed for me, however, is that I no longer believe in spiritual or ecclesiastical authority, although that still doesn’t capture it completely. I no longer see literal truth in any ancient scriptural text, although I do believe in “mythological” truth, as it were. And I’m no longer afraid to appear blasphemous in saying that I seriously question the need for a savior. I no longer put automatic faith in what another experiences as revelation or inspiration for anyone apart from the experiencer. The posts from Jared are a perfect example. The fact that many, if not most people do not have such vivid sensual experiences is, in my mind, anything but a testimony of a supernatural ’spiritual’ world, to which only a few gifted individuals are allowed to contact in a tangible manner. Not to diminish Jared’s experience in any way. But I should point out that as a psychologist I readily come in contact with people who have seen Jesus and/or Satan, who also happen to be inpatients in psychiatric facilities.
So what changed for me? Ironically, my own mental illness and my mission. Fortunately or unfortunately for me, depending on how you view it, I had an emotional breakdown in the MTC, and had to delay entering the mission field for a few months in order to heal adequately. I had been living for years with severe clinical depression, but didn’t get any help until I finally broke. Now, my mission was a huge goal for me, and something I did not take lightly. My sense of commitment multiplied after some healing, as I felt I had already given my all to get there. When I was able to return I served faithfully. It was, and continues to be, a source of healing and growth. But having gone through what I had made me see things in different ways. I questioned old assumptions about religious and political traditions. I studied the scriptures dutifully and was known as one who could apply scriptural intellect in novel ways. I could ‘liken’ scriptures to just about anything - so much, that years later I eventually started to question their usefulness. One day it just dawned on me that anyone could rationalize any given belief with any particular scripture - for good or evil.
Granted, much of this realization occurred along my training as a counselor, and then psychologist. What some may consider a ‘liberal bias’ in psychology, I would call an agnostic culture - and not just toward religion, but everything. The more that I listened to individuals with a compassionate and nonjudgmental ear, the more I became disgusted with institutional and cultural attempts to control individuals’ inner lives. But I chose my career for a number of reasons, including a sense of purpose beyond my own aspirations. In other ways, I feel led to it.
But I’m not ready to leave the Church, if only for the ‘good’ reasons listed by Cletus. I also feel enormous pressure to stay, given my family history - we go waaaaaayyy back. And I have felt blessed and led in so many ways - which I can only attribute to trying to stay faithful. But in doing so, I have come to the point that I am now. Could it be possible for a loving supreme creator and/or savior to eventually lead me away from the Church?
Comment by Husband of Miles — January 20, 2009 @ 10:58 pm
#63:
I like the Church. It’s where I feel comfortable and I don’t really feel conflicted. There’s nothing the Church asks me to do that makes me a worse person. Other people who are more religious than me receive a lot of benefit and comfort from the aspects of the Gospel that I don’t really appreciate, and that makes me feel good about my participation. I can help other people in their spiritual journey and all of our spiritual journeys are unique.
I do have “some kind of belief” in Jesus Christ, Joseph Smith, and The Book of Mormon. I believe that if there is a loving God, He would probably want us to live like Jesus taught and to develop Christlike attributes. God would probably want us to repent of our sins and feel like we could be forgiven.
I think Joseph Smith taught some inspired principles about families and service. He did some pretty bad things, too. And certain supposedly inspired contributions of Joseph Smith like the facsimiles in the D&C are clearly not what Joseph claimed they were. There is some pretty definitive evidence in that regard, I believe.
I think the Book of Mormon seems like it is unlikely to be an actual ancient historical account, but there are some great passages that inspire me on an almost daily basis — things like King Benjamin’s address and parts of Ether and Moroni are my favorite parts. If there is a God, then these passages seem as likely as anything else I have read to be inspired by Him.
I think what many members identify as “spiritual experiences” or “spiritual confirmation” are more likely to be just strongly emotional experiences with a natural biological explanation. That’s just my opinion and I’m sure we’ll have to agree to disagree on that. Obviously I can only speak for the emotions that I have experienced, not for what others have experienced.
Comment by Cletus — January 20, 2009 @ 10:59 pm
My social psychology class ruined religion for me. Now every time I feel the spirit I wonder, “Am I really feeling it, or do just think I’m feeling it.” The mind is a powerful thing. I used to declare that I knew everything in the church was true. As I got older those convictions have faded. Now I just question if there is even a God or if we just made it all up.
However as I sit through church and I watch people get emotional and explain their supernatural experiences as they bear their testimonies I think, maybe there is more to this life. Maybe there is a supreme being after all.
I appreciate your post. Thanks for reminding me that even if I don’t believe it is all true- there are good things about this church. I am starting to realize that if God is out there he would probably appreciate my genuine feelings rather than having me try to force myself to believe.
Comment by Shannon — January 20, 2009 @ 11:04 pm
Eris–I would prefer that you weren’t offended, but apparently you are.
In my business dealings I am required to be straight forward and honest. That is what I get paid for. Maybe this style of communication needs to be left at the office. I’ll try to do better.
Comment by Jared — January 20, 2009 @ 11:11 pm
#68: You sound almost exactly like my little brother prior to his more or less leaving the Church. He hasn’t turned against the church in any way and he feels perfectly comfortable attending, which he sometimes does on a more or less regular basis, and at other times he won’t. He’s still friends with all of his “more Mormon” friends. He just has a more, uh, universal belief I guess, similar to what you were describing. He’s also an extraordinarily open-minded, nonjudgemental person. I’ll bet the two of you would get along really, really well. I don’t know why I share this with you except to say you’re not alone, I guess. Come to think of it, I’d even put the two of you in contact with each other if you want. I know he’d be all for it. As for me, I certainly don’t judge you and I appreciate your input.
#69:
Thank you for your response. That really does help clarify things for me. And I’m sorry for asking you such personal questions, by the way, now that I realize it, but I’m really glad that you’re so open and honest about all of this. I know that can be really difficult to do. And while yes, we will agree to disagree about spiritual vs emotional experiences, I know it’s not an argument either of us would be capable of winning even if we did (for some unimaginable reason) decide to have it. I do feel that at a certain point you just have to decide to believe that what you felt was spiritual; there’s never going to be proof. That’s what makes it faith. That doesn’t jive with the way you fundamentally understand the world, and I completely respect that. Now that I think about it, religious faith seems to have a very heavy right-brain bias. It is, ultimately, a very irrational thing, and that can make it seriously difficult for a lot of people to accept - people who think and/or are built the way you are, for example.
Comment by OhMissJulie — January 21, 2009 @ 2:00 am
Regarding the idea that faith is a “choice,” is it possible for a conscientious, sane person to choose to believe things he is completely persuaded are not true?
For example, can any of us honestly choose to believe that Barack Obama is really a duck? That the earth is flat? That the Sensen papyrus is an Egyptian funerary text?
The term “science” covers many disciplines, some of which are more capable of producing certainty than others. On the other hand, it’s not as unreliable as some here would have it. It’s not just some cultural artifact of 18th-century Europe (ooh! Dead white male alert!). Practiced properly, it works. You can use it to build buildings that don’t fall down, heal the sick, blow things up, find oil, and get an airplane off the ground. If a scientific theory is sound, anyone can follow its precepts and get the exact same result.
Some would say that Moroni 10:4 is just as sound, and that everybody *does* get the same result who sincerely puts it into practice; it’s just that some people are too spiritually lazy or cowardly to accept the result. But unlike in real science — where an external observer can go over an experiment that didn’t replicate the predicted results and figure out what went wrong — you can’t do the same thing with a Moroni 10:4 failure. You can only speculate why one person didn’t have the same experience as another.
And of course the convinced do exactly that — usually by presuming that the other person is some sort of lesser character, lazy, cowardly, defiant, dishonest, or the like.
I choose to believe (there being no convincing proof one way or the other) that there is a loving God in heaven, and that to seek understanding of Him is worth the effort. I choose to believe that Mormonism is an acceptable framework within which to seek the Lord; it has unique advantages to a person of my mindset and circumstances, while its weaknesses are mostly those of religion generally. But I decline to be satisfied with declaring that I know things that I am fairly convinced I do not, lest I train myself to view religion as pretense. I am seeking the living God, and will accept no substitutes.
Comment by Didymus — January 22, 2009 @ 2:17 pm
correction to last sentence of second paragraph of #73 — add “not” before “an Egyptian funerary text.”
Comment by Didymus — January 22, 2009 @ 2:20 pm
For those of you who chose to believe despite the evidence….. why do you choose this church? Why not Islam? Why not Shintoism? Why not the Jehovah’s Witnesses?
I was like this for a ling time, thinking that even though I had my doubts, I still wanted to put my faith in the prophets, and not in the wisdom of the world. Then it hit me…. why those prophets? Why not any of the other spiritual men and women, or spiritual traditions?
For me the realization was that I only really chose this church because it was chosen for me, by my parents. The prophets I grew up listening to sounded true because that was what I was brought up with. The church’s programs felt right, because that was my tradition. All that in itself was not valid evidence for the church being true.
So simply choosing to believe this church is true based on no concrete evidence became the lazy path for me, the path of comfort and least resistance. If I was honest to myself, I had to recognize that there is no good reason that this church is true versus any other. That was when my shelf fell apart, and my false testimony crashed.
For those who have had spiritual experiences that you feel are strong evidence, congratulations. I am glad you have found what you seek, and are happy where you are. For those of you who are just choosing to believe despite the evidence, ask yourself honestly why you choose to believe THIS tradition. It may still be the right thing, but at least look at things with open eyes.
Comment by MQ — January 22, 2009 @ 4:24 pm
#75 these are questions I have asked myself readily over the last couple of years. I truthfully think I stand to lose more by leaving than staying. I don’t mean anything about salvation or whatever. I’m talking about my family relationships. Like I said, my family goes way back in the Church on both sides. And although I have a decent relationship with my siblings, there is much about our relationships that are fragmented enough, due to age differences, geography, and differences of world views and opinions. I am not ready for the amount of rejection I and my spouse and children would experience. My family usually have their hearts in the right place, but I’ve seen what type of hostility they are capable of. Of course, they would deny it, but…. Being the youngest, my kids have already missed out on the “cousins” thing, and now only have one grandparent on both sides. I’m not ready to jeopardize that anymore than I have to.
I also mentioned that I do have ‘evidence’ in the form of spiritual experiences. I look at them now in terms of reminders that I am following what’s best for me. It’s less about testimony in the classic sense, and more about confirmation. Whether or not I would have the same experience in association with any other religion does not concern me much at this point. If I were to leave the Church, it would be a long time before I start seeking out other institutional spiritual outlets, if at all. Until recently it seems to have worked well for me in many ways, despite the struggles I have had. Call me lazy, I guess.
That’s where I am now. Maybe it will change when my sibs are dead and gone? :0
Comment by Husband of Miles — January 22, 2009 @ 6:17 pm
I think that the LDS church is a difficult church to come to some sort of rationalization about. If a person claims that they stay in the church because it is good, I would tell them that there are many other churches out there that are good and require less time to be a member of. For example, the catholic church is a good church because of its work with the poor in the community. Not to mention the time and care that priests and nuns give their parish. I have quite a few good nuns and priests as acquaintances. The UU church is good also because of its work in social justice and open dialogue with other religious groups. And so, there are good churches out there.
What separates the lds church from many others is its truth claim. It is either true or it isn’t. Gordon B. Hinckley said as much. If it isn’t true, then it is a fraud, as he said a few years ago. And that being said, regardless of its goodness, it would still be a fraud if it were not true because it was founded on lies.
But yes, the lds church is a good church. It teaches wonderful principles that if followed can lead to a wonderful and healthy life. And I have not come across anything in the lds church that would lead to misery and pain in its teachings. But it is either true or it isn’t, and claiming to be a member because of its goodness might just be unfortunate if it was founded on lies. But if founded on truth and if a person is not sure of its truth claims, I would say, good to be in.
Comment by why me — January 23, 2009 @ 1:37 am
#73:
I would say no, if they’re completely persuaded. And that’s not really what I, at least, was saying when I called faith a choice. My testimony is based in personal spiritual experiences. Might those have just been very strong emotional experiences? It’s possible I guess, but I don’t think so. I think I can feel a distinction. However, there’s no way for me to know for sure. So I weigh things out and decide to really believe that those were spiritual experiences motivated by a heavenly being rather than emotional experiences created in my own body and brain. I really think they were, they felt different from what I recognize as pure emotion, and I’ve decided to trust that part of my judgment. Can I prove it? No. I can’t even prove it to myself, not conclusively. But I believe it all the same. I might doubt it sometimes, but that’s natural. Doubting is different from being completely convinced that it’s not true.
As I implied in my earlier comment, I also happen to have the benefit of being a very right-brained, intuitive person, so I naturally privilege inexplicable, abstract certainty over concrete, external evidence. You could say that I’m better equipped to be a “believer” than a science-minded person such as the OP and several other posters. Not that I don’t love and appreciate science and provable fact; I just have no problem resolving apparent contradictions using my intuition, or “feeling” my way through a decision-making process. My brain’s setup lends itself to spiritual thinking.
I also think there’s validity in following something that just kind of seems true, even if you haven’t had any major spiritual experiences. This is where my spirituality usually lives: the Church just kind of feels generally true. It’s something some part of me always points toward or returns to, despite whatever doubts I might have. I think for a lot of people who don’t have “burnings in the bosom” but choose to stay in the Church anyway, there’s where their faith (or at least their persistence) is ultimately rooted. You’ve got nothing in particular to convince you that it’s true; you just kind of think that it is. Does that make sense, or at least ring true for anybody who can articulate it better than I can?
Comment by OhMissJulie — January 23, 2009 @ 2:15 am
I really identify with the poster….My wife and I left the church (and Utah) shortly after we were married in the temple and have really never looked back….We now have a beautiful 2 year old daughter, and I have started to think of all my happy childhood memories in the church and wonder if my daughter will miss out on these experiences by our choice to not be active…(althougth my wife who didn’t grow up in the church suspiciously claims to have also had a happy childhood)
However I think the guiding force for me is that I want to be honest with my daughter as she grows up…I don’t want to pretend to believe in Joseph Smith etc…just so that she can have the mormon experience growing up…I think that part of the reason I had such good memories growing up in the church is that my parents truly had strong testimonies…I simply don’t and don’t want to live with that conflict with my kids.
Comment by the Dude — January 23, 2009 @ 12:28 pm
I think those good things you listed are great, but maybe not quite encouraged in the LDS church the way we might hope. It’s nice to make generalities, but wouldn’t there be a way to live this lifestyle without the LDS church specifically. Because the doctrine is there, and you can’t just ignore it while you continue to give tithing money.
Comment by Whitney — January 24, 2009 @ 1:35 pm
In other words, I agree with poster 77 except I would claim that the church can do a lot of harm. It has done a lot of harm. To beat a dead horse: look at California.
Comment by Whitney — January 24, 2009 @ 1:38 pm
A very interesting topic as a kind of side ways examination I offer this quote from James P. Hogan
Hogan is an engineer and science fiction author and Recently wrote a book on Dogmas In the scientific community called Kicking the Sacred Cow
From The Prolouge:
Whether you accept his arguments or not I recommend his book as an examination of how we come to believe what we believe.
Comment by SteelBlaidd — January 24, 2009 @ 10:51 pm
I have been a member all my and stumbled upon this site, trolling. I’ve seen lots of different things happen to people in the church that could have affected my testimony, if I’d let it. I have come to realize that no one is responsible for mu testimony but me. And it is not about the “church”. It is all about JC and if Joseph Smith saw what he saw. It is not real complicated. Everyone has to do it on their own. That is what I have told all my children. They will be on their own at a certain point in their life and I will not be able to help them. I have also come to see that some people do not want to be held accountable, which is also a choice. So it that is your choice, at least admit that. Some you are really whiny. Take charge of your spiritual life.
We are in the last days folks. Get serious.
Comment by debbie — January 27, 2009 @ 1:29 am
[…] Eventually, I got to this point where I would put aside all the stuff I didn’t believe about the church (which just so happened to be the religious and spiritual stuff), and focus on the stuff I could believe in (the practical and pragmatic teachings). And so, when I read accounts of members who raise similar concerns, I smile inside. Cletus, a spouse of one of the permabloggers at Feminist Mormon Housewives, writes such an account. […]
Pingback by A cool secular testimony « Irresistible (Dis)Grace — January 31, 2009 @ 12:52 pm
I don’t have time to read all the comments so don’t know if Jared #21 has been responded to.
“For forty years I have been reticent to share my experiences with the Spirit, assuming everyone had the same experiences, but just kept it to themselves. So I followed the crowd. In recent years I’ve learned that it is important to appropriately testify—where much is given much is required. When I go before the Savior I will be responsible for what I have been given. Burying ones talent is not the definition of humility.”
Jared, how do you explain that when asked if they have seen Christ. members of the Q12 never answer that question and ALWAYS said that, if they have, it is “too sacred” to be shared.
Marion G. Romney:
I don’t know just how to answer people when they ask the question, “Have you seen the Lord?” I think that the witness that I have and the witness that each of us has, and the details of how it came, are too sacred to tell. I have never told anybody some of the experiences I have had, not even my wife. I know that God lives. I not only know that he lives, but I know him.”
Comment by Marite — February 2, 2009 @ 12:00 pm
#85 Marite–I have no way of answering your question. I’ve never seen the Savior, but I will, if I continue faithful–maybe even in this life.
Comment by Jared — February 3, 2009 @ 9:58 pm