Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I can’t say for sure, and I love what I get from both symbolic and literal interpretations of Christ. I think I’m fine with either option ending up true. I think I get self-conscious in this belief, especially because the LDS Church tends to teach such a literal interpretation, but when I truly think about it, I have no idea. I’m okay with that. I love the implications of physics and reality if it’s true; I love the hope and “at-one-ment” people can create if it’s not.
Amen to AmyJ and afterall. AmyJ, your addition regarding charity provides another layer to consider. I love that charity helps to gain clarity about reality to help both you and the other person interact (or not, whatever the case may be) in the future. Charity is not some far-off ideal, but takes place in real-time.
afterall, I have also found your perspective to echo mine, especially as of late. Through my line of work in the healthcare industry, I have observed that some people really do not have some capabilities and will most likely not attain them while they are living. I have also learned that it is far better for me to set specific boundaries and enforce them so that our interactions don’t devolve into trying to control each other or resentment. Asking the question “Would I help if they needed it?” sounds like a good litmus test to see how much hurt we’re holding onto for the sake of making ourselves feel better or superior.
I’m confused at your term “purely intellectual”. In dealing with people, I have no such experiences with any human that is purely intellectual, even on a single issue, despite how intelligent they are. Humans are designed to have and run on emotions. Even intellectual humans. Insinuate to any “intellectual” person that they might not be as intellectual as they think they are, plus throw in a bit of evidence for a good time, and watch the emotions flow. I would know because “intellectual” is one of the identities I claim. Beefster wrote:
The “neo-apologists” like the Givens, Bushman, Prince, Mason, the churchistrue guy, etc… know all the big controversial issues and have perhaps been to the edge and have probably experienced a full-blown faith crisis, but ultimately were not emotionally impacted to a degree sufficient to push them over the edge. Some people have a longer edge due to family relations and such. Some people are eventually pushed over the edge. Not everyone who has a faith crisis should leave the church, but not everyone can stay either.I think it’s helpful to remember that “the edge” is not something that everyone experiences, both inside and out of the church. Some people are better equipped to cope with human frailties and misdeeds. Indeed, I would say that people who tend largely towards the intellectual side of the spectrum are less adept at this. That tendency makes dealing with things like a belief crisis even more difficult.
At the end of the day, I think people stay where they are or venture to new pastures because of what they believe in. For whatever logical/illogical reasons, they feel certain emotional attachments to what they find meaning in. It’s what we all do as humans. It’s us exercising our agency. In Mormonspeak, learning to become wielders of our agency, learning to deal with consequences, and discovering how relational our world really is is one of the biggest aspects of the PoS.
I think this thread goes along nicely with the concurrent threat we have: Kirby and Misplaced Faith
http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=8894 ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=8894 The first question I want to ask after my trust has been broken or lost is “Do I want to put my trust in X again, and why?” There are lots of potential answers:
-This was a mistake on their/both our parts, and overall the relationship is good so I want to do the work necessary to gain back trust.
-I put too much trust in X, but we can continue to have a relationship if I lower my expectations.
-I just have to stick it out for X amount of time (school, job, relocation) because I know it’ll be over. I don’t have to trust, but I do have to deal.
-I misplaced my trust in the first place through ignorance, naivete, etc. and I need to learn to place my trust in different ways or in different entities/relationships.
And on and on.
What’s most difficult for me lately is dealing with the fact that I misplaced my faith and trust, and even though that is what my family/friends/community was doing, it didn’t make it right and still doesn’t today. I believe that everyone does the best they think they’re capable of, so I can’t blame anyone and that includes myself. I believe I know differently so I will now act differently.
Additionally, organizations act like organisms (probably because they’re run by organisms, namely humans) – they’re wired for survival. Especially in our litigation-happy society, I can’t blame the Church for wanting to survive while not doing certain actions that would be simultaneously cathartic for some people yet open the flood gates for litigation. I don’t care how many times lay members or GAs say that this church is single-handedly driven by Christ; humans are the ones carrying out the work so a human organization is what we get. I’m the fool if I expect anything different.
Or, if Jesus really is driving the Church, perhaps sometimes this happens:
[img]http://i.imgur.com/GrhYIi4.jpg [/img] LDS_Scoutmaster wrote:
it’s difficult to see her struggle when I’ve found a way to cope and the same way won’t work for her.
This sounds like the crux of the issue for you, in my mind. We wish that we could solve other’s problems and take away their hurt, and when we can’t, we become hurt. But it sounds like she always has and always will be a different person than you, and regardless of how you cope with things and make sense of your decisions, she will have her own ways as well. The good news is that by asking this forum for help, you’re already troubleshooting ways to support her and your marriage through your differences. Specifically, if I were you I’d ask her how she wants support for these specific desires. Also come up with ideas that you can implement, even before asking her. Approaching it like the married team you are and have been, with the purpose of togetherness (albeit not sameness), goes a long way in managing your differences.
I taught a lesson in RS yesterday similar to this topic, based off the talk from October 2016 GC: Turn to the Lord. The central question, for me, was: “How do we respond when events, often out of our control, alter the life we had planned or hoped for?” One woman’s comments were along the lines of: “God never asks us to have faith in anything other than in Him; not in events, not in people, not in life paths, not in careers, nothing. Nothing except Him.” Which is what Kirby is saying, as I interpret it. There is a large extent that I agree with both of them. It has been a difficult pill for me to swallow that other people, even my parents, taught me what they know, but it taught and fostered me to put my faith in things besides God. And WHEN those things failed, my faith took a beating. Which is understandable because I never knew how to manage such deep disappointment or how to more responsible for my beliefs. Partly because of being young, inexperienced and partly because of immaturity.
On the other hand, agreeing with Nibbler, it’s difficult to fully do this especially in a church that claims to be organizationally perfect and the only imperfect things are the humans. I still don’t understand how an organization run by humans can be anything but human. “The Church is headed by Christ” is a great example of why it’s difficult to not misplace our faith. We are encouraged to do so nearly every Sunday, and in every manual. Additionally, I find it paradoxical to try and trust God when I sometimes (oftentimes?) don’t know how to trust my interpretation of God or when He speaks to me.
What another woman commented helps with the above conundrum: “We’re not on a path TO God, we’re on a path WITH God.” Perhaps having faith in God is simply believing that at the end of the day and at the end of our lives, we will not be left to our own devices or by ourselves; that there is always more if we believe and try to find it.
Wow. Just wow. This is exciting to hear! I gain a lot of hope from his appointment! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think Roy makes valid points. My biggest regret in “coming out” to my parents was my focus was transparency in my feelings as opposed to mutual understanding and respect between us. They handled it as best they could, but I wish I had been more clear on my purpose for it. Someone said it on here recently, and it’s been repeating in my head since, but authenticity is not equivalent to transparency. Since I’ve been going to church this past while some of that tension has eased between us, but I mostly attribute it to my parents feeling better about my choices. The lack of communication and true understanding and respect for each other’s thoughts and beliefs is still there because that was a skill and habit my family has always lacked, regardless of church attendance. The similarity of life decisions was able to hide it well for so many years, though. I would echo Roy’s suggestion as to getting more clear on what you expect this to accomplish and what your next steps are; realizing that your spirituality is your own and your decisions are fully up to you. As I’ve said before, I simply stopped attending church and didn’t have any reveals or fallouts with church leadership, but know that it can happen. Also working in my favor is how much I tend to move, so neither the leadership or membership was ever an issue for me. Your experience may be different.
Essentially I echo Roy and DJ: I support you as you do what you decide, even though I would choose differently/wish I had chosen differently.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How’d you get such a wild imagination, Roy?? I’ve never heard of such musings! [emoji56] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah, Jacob sounds like a jerk. In Hebrew, Jacob means “he grasps the heel” or “supplanter”. A quick Google search reminded me of the story of Jacob and Esau’s birth, how Jacob grabbed Esau’s heel in an attempt to be the firstborn.
Google also told me that Jacob and Esau were the fathers of two nations, so it makes sense to me that the folklore surrounding Jacob, and by association the abilities of his nation, puts him in place as outsmarting others through deception. On Wikipedia’s page about Jacob and Esau – “Daniel J. Elazar suggests that the Bible indicates that a bright, calculating person who, at times, is less than honest, is preferable as a founder over a bluff, impulsive one who cannot make discriminating choices.”
It’s very possible that this story may have some sort of historical background, but it’s also very likely that this was used to help establish Israel’s identity as a nation. Everyone has to establish their authority somehow, even though I disagree about the authority. I think someone mentioned on here recently, though, that it helps to imagine the circumstances of a people when they choose values that we wouldn’t. Trying to understand why people would NEED to believe in a figurehead who deceives other people to get power and autonomy can remind us of the conditions they were working with.
The intensity differs for all of us, but I think that most of us need to process things on our own, especially deeply personal things. Some people are much more expressive and social in how they process. I am a person that needs to process a certain amount on my own. I will talk with trusted people after that point, but the initial part needs to be done by myself. It sounds like you may be along those lines as well. In my experience, in Utah, I faded away with zero problems. Considering that my records were in my old ward where I was mostly active and someone reached out to have them moved and I was *still* not contacted by the new ward OR the ward after that, I was surprised and happy to be left alone. However, I was also prepared to politely tell any inquirers that I was not interested in church at the moment. Your mileage may vary, but it’s not rude to have a polite way to deflect requests on hand.
I never had an exit plan when I stopped going to church. It became too difficult and painful for me to continue so I just stopped. I also toyed around with the idea of removing my name, but never found myself up to the process. I think there’s more peace in letting things go just from my side sometimes. The only other thing I would repeat is this site’s unofficial mantra: Go slow. Adding: Slow can have many meanings: weeks, months, years, a lifetime. Breaks can be useful, but remember to trade up. The idea is to recuperate.
I second Roy’s request for an update from Heber, but I also do have something to share that has helped me in regards to the topic. I think the main things that have helped me with this perspective is time and experience, lackluster as they may seem. Once, after a breakup, a friend told me that I’d look back one day and not feel any sadness for this moment. At the time I was horrified. It was still so fresh, and not the result I wanted, so I was hurting. However, through time and filling my life with other things, I came to see that she was correct, and though I didn’t appreciate it at the time, she was supporting my overall happiness.
When we learn to change our values or perspectives, it’s often very jostling, confusing, and (at least for me) anxiety-ridden. One of my favorite bloggers and authors is Mark Manson, who has this to say on the matter (edited for curse words, he loves profanity):
Quote:It’s not easy because you’re going to feel like a loser, a fraud…at first. You’re going to be nervous. You’re going to freak out. You may get pissed off at your wife or your friends or your father in the process. These are all side effects of changing your values….But they are inevitable.
It’s simple but really, really hard.
Let’s look at some of these side effects. You’re going to feel uncertain; I guarantee it. “Should I really give this up? Is this the right thing to do?”
Giving up a value you’ve depended on for years is going to feel disorienting, as if you don’t really know right from wrong anymore. This is hard,
but it’s normal.
Next, you’ll feel like a failure. You’ve spent half your life measuring yourself by that old value, so when you change your priorities, change your metrics, and stop behaving in the same way, you’ll fail to meet that old, trusted metric and thus immediately feel like some sort of fraud or nobody. This is also normal and also uncomfortable.
What I appreciate so much about his words is the validation of how uncertainty is uncomfortable. I think it’s easy and understandable to want a way out when we don’t feel good, or when we feel pain, but I think that sustaining the pain in these situations is worth it because of what we believe and hope is on the other side. Certainly we’ve already felt the pain of our current situation for long enough, so even if this new direction doesn’t work out we’ll have more information and experience than when we started. Personally, in the long run, I’d prefer to have a string of “failures” and accompanying experiences than a never ending stream of “What if…what if…?”
I think what makes this venture particularly difficult in the Mormon community is that there is often the folklore/doctrine of what Satan tries to get us to do and cleverly disguises as intellectual pursuits, experimentation, or tolerance. I think that there’s a self-righteousness of sorts that can occur when people reactivate, a “We told you so”. I think the fear of not wanting to appear stupid, prideful, or even simply against the grain inhibits people from being a little less certain about their values. In short, I think Mormons are acting like humans, but have embellished some of their behavior in religious morals which makes things more complex, but not so different from most other religions.
There are a multitude of ways to define harm. For example, Roy wrote:
Let me give an example. One example of a personal standard is to not help attractive members of the opposite sex by giving them a job. This in itself is not a problem but it could lead to “proximity” which could lead eventually to compromising situations.…..
Another example might be the personal standard to abstain from alcohol or not eat alone with members of the opposite sex or carpool alone with members of the opposite sex.
They in themselves might not be a problem at all and if someone is stranded and needs a ride home or you are sick and need some Nyquil then to make an exception is ok. But the point of the guardrail is that even in making an exception you will feel uneasy – thus ideally preventing you from the slippery slope of disastrous consequences.
Especially the ones in the middle about not physically being alone with members of the opposite sex. I have no control over whether someone else finds me attractive, regardless of their age or marital status. However, if that person is my supervisor or potential employer and has these “guardrails”, then my career options become limited simply due to my state as a woman. That is sexism in action. Attractive members of the same sex would not get this treatment. Therefore, this supposedly moral action is actually immoral because it harms my opportunities due to my sex. I think this is what subversiveasset meant when he referenced learning what
otherpeople’s vision of harm is so that we can actually prevent it. Now that I live in a city that has a lot of diversity, I hear different people’s takes on language – there are quite a few people who frequently speak like DJ mentioned, sometimes using the names Jesus and Christ. But I find their language usage to be much more expressive than mine/what I’m used to in Mormonism, so I chalked it up to just another difference. However, I had noticed that Christianity is the main religion whose deity is also used as an expletive, and I agree with Curt that it’s a difference. I wonder if it has anything to do with the separation of religion and government in the western world, as opposed to religious governance. I could just be making that up, though.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I had no idea there was a history to it as well. Cool finds! I find the phrase “oh my god” to be learned at a young age, so I don’t find it to be disrespectful. To me, it’s become such a common expression that it’s mostly lost its expressive power. I used to take a lot of offense at it, but now I hardly mind it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
