[blackout]

I’ve listened to a few people talk about this and have been astonished at the reactions… Especially reading people’s reactions on KSL. To me this is an administrative task… Not a revelation. It’s like saying we will have lunch at 11am instead of at noon. Lines will be shorter, we can spend more time dining, travel time will be less because of less traffic… Etc etc.

While I understand that this change can have an impact on people’s lives, I don’t see how this can be seen as much more than administrative housekeeping by the church. To have much more reaction than that seems bizarre to me. Anyone else?

[blackout]

Orson:

Thanks for the response- it is helpful. I am always interested in how others view these issues and make sense of the paradox as you mention it.

Mulling the details of your response- may write more later. Thanks again.

[blackout]

A lot of very open minded and seemingly honest approaches to the faith.

I can relate to many of the things he says. He never pinpoints it, but it seems he is saying that the “fruits” of living the gospel is the way he gained knowledge of its truth.

This section is the area I have trouble with:

Quote:

So you must understand: what I did upon reading that letter, was that I made a wager. I decided to bet my entire life that the gospel was true. I decided I would wager my life that the church is everything it claims it is and live out my life accordingly. So that is what I’ve done and what I continue to do.

Now, there’s more I need to tell you on the subject because of course, the story doesn’t just end there. The kicker is that in the course of serving and fulfilling priesthood duty, knowledge does in fact come. But for me it has come in ways that were unbidden. Knowledge for me has not arrived because it was beckoned, or because I said ‘give me a revelation.’ For me it has come in ways I can barely describe, and never on command, and I’m not even sure that they’re sensory or palpable. But I can tell you brethren and sisters that I somehow crossed a threshold into an area that I think we can call something more approaching knowledge. When I speak with conviction about our church it’s not merely with hope and with faith but with something that is approaching knowledge. That I can tell you. But it’s never come on my terms and never come to me on my timetable.

Is this not confirmation bias? I am not trying to be antagonistic, but to better understand my own situation in order to find the stronget position to continue my life from, and gain wisdom and truth. Listed below is the great and powerful Wikipedia definition of confirmation bias:

Quote:

Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses.[Note 1][1] People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. For example, in reading about gun control, people usually prefer sources that affirm their existing attitudes. They also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).

A series of experiments in the 1960s suggested that people are biased toward confirming their existing beliefs. Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives. In certain situations, this tendency can bias people’s conclusions. Explanations for the observed biases include wishful thinking and the limited human capacity to process information. Another explanation is that people show confirmation bias because they are weighing up the costs of being wrong, rather than investigating in a neutral, scientific way.

Confirmation biases contribute to overconfidence in personal beliefs and can maintain or strengthen beliefs in the face of contrary evidence. Poor decisions due to these biases have been found in military, political, and organizational contexts.

Could you not claim the same results from betting your life on any other belief system- not just mormonism? Is there something specifically unique in living Mormonism and excersizing faith without a spiritual witness that yields fruit that could lead you to conclude it is the only true and living church- ie Christs church on earth? If so- specifically what? The author does not say. Would appreciate any input.

[blackout]

Perhaps God was showing great wisdom in predicting the advent of Starbuck’s on every corner and the invention of the Frappuccino. The prohibitions has nothing to do with caffeine- it’s the irresistible tastiness of frozen dessert coffee- who could resist that??? I don’t know about you, but last time I looked around my ward house- we are not a thin and fit bunch. We can’t control ourselves with ice cream and jello- let alone highly caffeinated desserts. The aforementioned beverage would be our undoing.

I of course am only speaking from conjecture.

[blackout]

As I was thinking more about these comments – I keep coming back to the very difficult issue of being “ok” with disregarding what leaders or even scripture may say about a given subject. It’s tough not to look at this approach as heretical. At the same time it’s difficult not to completely label the leaders/church/scriptures as false when you can see aspects of what has been said as problematic- or just downright incorrect. Then the mental gymnastics start… do I adopt a non-literal view? Then which things do I accept or reject? This is not easy to find peace with.

I have hope that this is not heresy to exercise discernment. I have hope that seeing things this way is not “being deceived”. I have this hope because if not- I am not sure how to remain…

As it says in the D&C 8- we will be told in our mind AND heart- not just the one or the other. I’d like to think that perhaps one of the ways to judge is according to D&C 121- Is what we are disregarding/not buying, something that is covering our sins, gratifying our pride, or compelling others? I say this not so much because I am asking the question, but more in response to some who have said that it is “foolishness to not pay heed to the prophets”, or that “by mine own voice, or by the voice of my servants, it is the same…”

[blackout]

Brian:

Thanks for the very timely wisdom you shared. Much appreciated.

[blackout]

This is a really interesting thread.

Like Wayfarer, I have been thinking a lot about faith lately. Almost to the point of OCD… ha!

Faith being in something that is not true seems like delusion to me.

One of the difficulties for me comes in ascribing a meaning or source to an event. As an example, many people follow a 12 step program. As part of the program, one looks to a higher power in which to turn the problems over to. You can call this God, the universe, Karma, whatever… and for a number of people it works. I used to think that clearly this was the hand of God working in the lives of his children. Through this enlightening experience of re-evaluating faith- I question this assertion. It might be- but it also might be the power within the human being. Some might still call this God- but it’s not the God I thought it was. Using Alma’s seed test- you test this methodology and it works- to what do you owe the miracle?

Similarly- as Human beings- when we believe we cannot do something- then we cannot (the universe does not align, our perspective prevents us from taking the action that would make it happen, Karma, etc…). I see this with my kids all the time… when they believe they can- they do the little things that empower them to succeed in their tasks- they search for the lost item a little longer, they try a little harder, they don’t give up- whatever. To what do we owe these miracles?

Are the 2 examples different?

Lastly- to keep this all the more confusing- I was looking back at Moroni 10 based on Wayfarer’s comment about “truth of these things” quickly moving to “truth of all things”. I noticed something I had never noticed before in the scriptures. A little background first-

A few months back I read Grant Hardy’s “Understanding the Book of Mormon”. Fascinating book. One of the interesting things in it, is the author’s mention about the personality of Moroni. To paraphrase, he says that it is noteworthy that Mormon gets to the point in the history where they find the Jaredite plates and bring them to Mosiah, who translates them. Mormon says that a translation will be provided later- but never includes it before his death. The author surmises that this was not an issue of Mormon not having the time to do it- but HIS PERSONALITY AND WORLDVIEW COULD NOT RECONCILE WHAT WAS IN THE PLATES WITH WHAT HE HAD WRITTEN IN THE BOOK OF MORMON. Mormon was focused on “proving” prophecy was made and prophecy was fulfilled- that his people knew of the prophecies of Christ before his birth, and the prophecies were fulfilled with his visitation to Mormon’s people. If you look closely at the book of Ether,with the exception of the account of the brother of Jared- anytime Christ is mentioned- it is Moroni speaking- not the Jaredites. Hardy theorizes that personality is key to understanding why this would be. To Mormon,it mattered that events translated into evidence of spiritual things. Moroni saw the world very differently- the spirit testifies of truth- not events. To Moroni- it was not a problem that the Jaredites did not speak of Christ- because they had his prophets and interacted with God. For him it was not an issue to “retell” the Jaredite story through a Nephite lens.

Getting back to my original point- Moroni talks about knowing the truth of “these things”, then that by the Holy Ghost we may know the truth of “all things”… now here is the part I had never noticed before… verse 6 “And whatsoever thing is good is just and true“. It seems to me that he is qualifying his previous statement. In the church, we often treat Moroni’s promise (and the Holy Ghost) like our personal GPS- that it will dictate each right and left turn at the precise moment we need to make it in order to arrive at our destination in the most efficient way possible. Perhaps Moroni means what it seems he is saying, that which is true and just is “good”.

Anyway- I hope there is truth here. More often than not- lately my agnosticism prevails…

[blackout]

I was in ward council this past Sunday as the ward is getting ready for this dedication. The bishop asked the clerk for the list of adults that were endowed, but not currently holding TR. I am pretty sure I was the only one in the room fitting that list. I think a lot in that group would be surprised at that. Thankfully, the clerk didn’t have the list on hand- so the names weren’t discussed.

Our bishop I think wants to meet with each person that meets the criteria I mentioned above. Not really looking forward to that conversation. It is frequently brought up in WC about the offended or those not living in harmony with the gospel. I feel like any discussion deviating from these 2 talk tracks will fall on skeptical ears.

I am personally not excited about the dedication- while I do have deep respect for my friends in the faith who are.

[blackout]

Here is a novel idea-

Don’t talk about a SINGLE negative aspect of sexuality. Find a way to not say one word about the don’t and the shouldn’ts of sex. Take the 1.5 hours you have planned and focus on the good. How does the saying go… “as a man thinketh…”? If you focus on the negative- that’s what you will get from people. If you find a way to build people- you’d be surprised what they do when taught correct principles.

My guess is everyone in that meeting has been bombarded with the what not to’s- and thou should nots… It is astounding how few adults know how to have positive discussions with their children about sex. It is even more shocking how few know how to have good discussions with their spouse. Maybe start there- building strength in people instead of guarding against weakness.

[blackout]

DBMormon,

Thanks for the call invitation- I can feel your sincerity and I appreciate it. Truthfully though, writing back and forth is a better method for me personally. I have had many discussions with some very close trusted friends about my religious concerns- some good and some not so good. I tend to think through the points made, and it is more useful for me to take the time to digest a well crafted idea or argument and then respond. This may be a way to help others on the board with perspective as well. In some of the face to face conversations I have had I feel that even with close friends, the discussion has devolved to “see, it’s that simple- why don’t you just do that”… in other words seeking to convince instead of understand and learn. It’s kind of like that old skit with Bob Newhart as a therapist- whose council to people with problems is “just stop it!” (You can insert Pres.Uchtdorf here if you want ).

I have read a ton the past few years, both books and online. I have read many of the books by the folks you listed- Givens, Bushman, and Gardner. Lot’s of good information- but what I was really looking for in them was some info from the authors about how they reconcile some of the things I mentioned and how they make that work. In the online community, there is a LOT of negativity- and while I can understand where it comes from- there has to be a point where people start being constructive in their own lives. There are also a lot of people who are bearing what I assume is a heartfelt testimony- but in many cases it seems to be coming from either a shallow understanding of the issues or a complete misunderstanding. It’s one thing to say “I make it work by understanding a functional translation model of the BOM as opposed to a literal- regardless of what conference talks have said- and that’s what works for me” compared to “I just know beyond a shadow of a doubt that it’s true- because I just know”. I am not making light of what different people believe, but understanding HOW they come to the conclusions and what their frame of reference is- can be very important in understanding how useful their approach really is.

I don’t want to hijack the thread from the OP- for my benefit and for the original thread, it may be of value to those around here to hear just how those who feel they are making it work are doing that in a pragmatic real world sense. For example- in listening to the MoSto podcast with Bushman, one huge distillation I gleaned was that for Bushman, he makes it work by choosing to believe and live in a world where God would talk to man- and specifically to a rural farm boy asking questions. The beauty and poetry of that response is not lost on me. To me this is a very different response than an assertion of literality.

[blackout]

DBMormon:

Thanks for your input. It feels like you are working to help people find a way to make it work and trying to reach out with options to make that possible. After all- this is “Stay LDS”- right?

I would be interested to hear your experience and perspective on a few things. When you say:

“Also by true, and hopefully I can say this once and not have to re-explain myself a lot but obviously not all will see this post, I mean real metal plates, a real Lehi and descendants writing on those plates, a real angel delivering them to Joseph, and real authority given by God to extend the ordinances of the gospel to both the living and the dead, and in some way the current President being the one on earth God will send a revelation to the world.”

I am hopefully not asking you to re-explain, but from your experience, given that you seem to be aware of the issues of historicity, DNA, anachronisms, etc, how do YOU PERSONALLY reconcile these things? Are you relying on a spiritual witness to know the truthfulness and reality of them? Is it sufficient that these are the mysteries of God and we can’t know all His ways? Are you basing this on the idea that there is enough ambiguity on each side of the argument that it is equally probable either way?

This is a sincere request, I would like to find a way to be able to be reconciled of things that appear to have direct negative evidence. I can’t put it back on the shelf. It is very difficult to find meaningful value in transubstantiating literal to non-literal with the same level of relevance.

Thanks in advance.

[Author]

Posts