[Deepthinker]

Haven wrote:

I’m so happy you’re able to be open with her now. That is great news!

I’m thinking also about what she shared:

Quote:

She then said that it was only guilt that was keeping her going to church. That if she found out that it wasn’t true, it would relieve a huge burden on her.

“I’ve realized that the guilt I feel from church is what is causing all my other issues (referring to social anxiety and depression). I know it is the root cause of them.”

This is exactly what I feel as well and I hope she will be able to work through it and find a healthy way to stay in the church if that’s what she wants. I agree that a huge burden would be removed from me if the church is not God’s only true church. Fear that it might be true is the only reason I continue to try to find a way to stay. Otherwise I would probably find a religion that brings hope, joy and healing to me. Maybe someday that will be the LDS church.

Thanks, I’m hoping she will working through it as well. She does want to stay, and I will do all I can to help her find a healthy way to stay. Opening up to her is hopefully the first step towards that.

[Deepthinker]

Thanks everyone, it is because of the great advice I’ve received here that helped me be ready for the right opportunity. I’m very lucky, not only to have been given the perfect opportunity to open up to my wife, but even more lucky to have her in my life. She is being so understanding, more than I had ever imagined.

Over the weekend we talked for several hours (stayed up quite late Friday and Saturday night, as well as spent the entire afternoon together on Saturday). She is asking more questions and sincerely wants to understand and even help. I couldn’t possible share everything we talked about but wanted to give a summary of our discussions.

She started asking specifics about what I believe and what I hope and what I no longer believe. I told her I didn’t believe the BoM is historical, among other changed beliefs. I talked to her about the method of translation Joseph Smith used, his treasure-seeking, DNA and the American Indians. That I have had to redefine what a prophet is in order to still view Joseph Smith as a prophet and that I had to redefine other things in order for them to still “fit” for me. I explained further how difficult things had been for me (and still are to some degree), especially not being able to open up to her.

She thought I should talk to the Bishop and receive a blessing. I told her that I feel like I’m working through things still and that I’m doing OK, I had worked through a great deal with the Area Authority, and that I’m actually much better about things since opening up to her.

Church was much better for me yesterday, even F&T meeting. We talked after about how some people say they “know” and others would say “I have a testimony of __________”, etc. I told her that I was thinking of bearing my testimony as a way to help solidify what it is I still believe (such as in God, Christ, and the basics of the Gospel) and what I know (such as giving service makes me happy, and that living by Christ’s teachings make me a better person).

She said she was tempted to get up and bear her testimony of Joseph Smith, just for me. Her social anxiety was too great, but I could tell she sincerely wanted to help me.

I feel as though we have become closer and she has started to open up to me more about her anxiety and depression. I told her that I would not be the cause of any guilt for her, and that if I was the Bishop I would sign her temple recommend. I think I’ve shared before that she hasn’t renewed her recommend for a few years because she doesn’t feel worthy, that guilt is overwhelming her.

So far she understands that we do think differently about things (she knew I was an enginerd before she married me). I’m a technical, INTJ personality and she has a nurturing personality. None of the things I shared with her seemed to bother her, she said she just has to look past that and recognize what the church is today. I confirmed with her that I do see the church as an overall net positive for me.

Anyway, I’m still so relieved about how things have gone. Thanks again to everyone!

[Deepthinker]

eyedempotent wrote:

I definitely agree that’s helpful. Personally with the amount of science in favor of evolution, against a global flood, etc. I think that’s the only approach that makes sense. The problem I’m having is that nobody in the church talks about these things as even possibly being allegorical. It’s not only that all church discussions of these things involve literalistic interpretations, it’s that even putting forward the idea that it’s only allegorical is enough to get you branded unorthodox and potentially someone less desireable.

You will actually find that the majority if not all LDS apologists are considered very unorthodox. Not that I’m suggesting you become an apologist 🙂 , just saying there are many members that would be considered unorthodox in their beliefs.

Just look at the latest Book of Abraham essay on LDS.org, which now gives members a choice in how to view the translation, such as allowing members to subscribe to the catalyst theory and not requiring members to believe it was a literal translation. I think the church is changing gradually. It just may not be at a fast enough pace for many of us.

eyedempotent wrote:

I think that depends on your definition of God. The God of the scriptures I think science has an awful lot that it can say about. But if you’re talking about some vague higher power, then yes, it’s hard to disprove that.

Actually, most if not a majority of people consider God in the supernatural sense, so that is what I was referring to. Science only deals with the natural, so anything considered supernatural is outside of its realm to even address. Here is a good summary of some of the things science doesn’t do (the site is a little “cartoonish”, but it does provide a good explanation of the limits of science):

http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/0_0_0/whatisscience_12

Main points from the link:

Quote:

Science doesn’t make moral judgments.

Science doesn’t make aesthetic judgments.

Science doesn’t tell you how to use scientific knowledge.

Science doesn’t draw conclusions about supernatural explanations.

Many people forget that there are limits to science, perhaps even some scientists.

eyedempotent wrote:

I appreciate where you’re coming from though. These notions have helped me in the past. Seem to be helping less now, but they still do to some degree. I think I need to work on seeing the positive at church as well, and not focusing on the negative. Thanks.

Everyone has emotions, and I think they are overall a useful part of us for learning and growth.

Just a suggestion, but maybe try to view your involvement in the LDS church as a way to fill in some of the areas outside of science/logic, such as the support for a moral structure, support to be a good husband and father, and for some sort of emotional (even if you don’t view it as spiritual) growth, including to provide opportunities to serve others. Try to see those at church as needing the LDS church for these things, that it is their emotional/spiritual identity, culture, and/or heritage. It is what I try to focus on and helps me be more accepting of others at church who view things differently or believe different things than I do. Of course, I’m still working on it.

[Deepthinker]

eyedempotent wrote:

I just realized I never came back and said thanks and responded to the comments like I said I would. Hopefully it’s not too late, but here goes.

shoshin wrote:

eyedempotent,

I have presented myself as a believing member on this site but I also love science. I would be glad to discuss the gospel and science if you want to hear my views. I like thinking about this topic.

I appreciate that but I’m not sure it’s so helpful to me at the moment. For the longest time I took pride in being able to straddle that line, to love science and not shy away from it but in also having a strong testimony. Then I got (what I feel was, at least) better and better at critical thinking and started applying it to other areas, like feeling the spirit. Anyway, at the moment the only way to reconcile some of these things (Adam and Eve, flood, BoM historicity) is through some impressive mental gymnastics. It has the ring of really wanting to believe something and finding reasons to rationalize it, as opposed to simply going where the evidence leads. I’m not saying it’s not true, just that in some ways it doesn’t help, and maybe the members who keep the two separate have the right idea in how to stay faithful. There’s been a lot written by some very smart people on the topic and I’ve tried reading some of it, so far it hasn’t satisfied much. Parts of Reason for God were good and helpful though, parts of The Language of God were good, but overall it’s left me really lacking and wanting more full explanations.

Another way to reconcile what you’re talking about is just to consider the things you mentioned as allegorical or metaphorical (you’ve probably heard this before, though).

I just accept that there are some things science can disprove about a particular religious teaching/claim or historical event. For these things (Adam and Eve, the flood, etc.) I view them as allegories or metaphors (depending on the teaching/history) and accept that some of the fundamental teachings of religions, such as the existence of God, is still something science does not address and is not within science’s realm to address.

Regarding the history of the universe: yes, this is within science’s realm to address. The existence of God: No, that is outside of science’s realm.

Deciding what you want to hold onto and what to discard can be difficult. It often does come down to also separating critical thinking and feelings. There are reasons and appropriate times for critical thinking (an engineering problem), just as there are for feelings (expressing love to family); applying either one universally into every aspect of our life will likely lead to problems.

[Deepthinker]

Welcome!

Like many on this forum, your story is both familiar and different.

This forum has been a tremendous help to me (and still is) as I have transitioned my faith. Just knowing you are not alone is one of the biggest helps.

[Deepthinker]

Hi eyedempotent, I would describe myself similar to SilentDawning and Old-Timer.

There was a time for me when listening to some things in church was quite irritating (don’t misunderstand, some things still do, I just try not to focus on them). It can be difficult to sort through the things that are said and focus on the ones you agree with and build around them.

I’m not sure if you’ve heard of Panpsychism (philosophy that consciousness/mind is fundamental to everything in the universe), but it might be a way to view the world that works for you. There is scientific basis for it. If you’ve read anything about quantum physics, scientists have discovered that an observer affects the observed reality, which hints that consciousness may be a fundamental component of everything in the universe. There is of course the counter to this, called Emergentism.

Here is a link to a summary of Panpsychism: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/panpsychism/

Here is an article about how observation affects reality. It is an older article, but it summarizes this concept well. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/02/980227055013.htm

I’m not trying to convince you to subscribe to Panpsychism (I find the philosophy very interesting), just sharing a perspective that may help you in how to view the world that may extend beyond the secular humanist view or just add to it.

[Deepthinker]

I think in-person meetings are a great idea. Anyone in Utah feel free to pm me.

[Deepthinker]

DarkJedi wrote:

I noticed you have been around in a bit DT, thanks for stopping by. I agree with the other two – let sleeping dogs lie.

We have been on some family vacations, attended some funerals and family reunions. A very busy summer so far.

[Deepthinker]

Yes, I just let the conversation go. I didn’t feel the need to go further into things. Right now I’m just letting her lead any discussions about my own faith transition.

[Deepthinker]

Leap,

I read through your introduction and can definitely relate to your situation. I would agree that you need to convey that your love for her has not changed.

The gradual way in which my doubts surfaced has really been the key for me to stay active in the church. So, please try take things slowly. That said, here are my answers to your questions.

1. Yes. When I first told my wife about some of the church history I had come across that troubled me, she told me to stop reading about the church history if it bothered me so much. She didn’t even think I should read church-friendly sources (I finished “Rough Stone Rolling” earlier this year). I would recommend that you NOT visit the main apologetic arm of the church, FAIR. The Mormon Interpreter site is another one I would not recommend. While there are some good things in both of these sources, many others will likely be the opposite of helpful. That’s just my experience, though. Obviously, sources that are not church-friendly can be just as biased as FAIR or the Mormon Interpreter. Just be careful about the sources you choose and let your wife know that you will be. That may give her the comfort she needs as a compromise. It doesn’t have to be just a church source, but can be a church-friendly source.

2. I have not told my wife the extent of my doubt, although I think she suspects that it goes deeper than what I’ve said in conversations with her. One thing that worked for me is that I told her about someone online that said he/she would continue to be active in the church even if it wasn’t “true”. We both agreed that we would to some degree as well, so there was a sense that I was doing what she would do if in my position. After a few other discussions about some issues that troubled me, she asked that I not discuss them with her anymore, mainly because she is worried about hurting her own testimony. I’m honoring her request and will wait for her to bring things up. This has given me a “pass” (not sure how else to put it) on opening up about everything to her, at least for now. While it has been difficult not to share everything with her, I’ve been able to open up here and with a local church leader.

[Deepthinker]

Just an update. I met with the Area Authority yesterday and it was a wonderful visit, although much shorter than the first one. I shared with him where I am, that I have given up looking for apologetic answers. I thanked him for his help and excellent advice (which I have been trying to follow) in bringing me to a better place with my faith.

I told him that I feel my faith can be stronger now. He used an analogy about a remodel on his home. One part of the home did not have a basement and that part began to settle. They dug out this area, fixed the settling problem and were able to increase the living space of their basement. He said that I now have more room for faith to grow.

He again shared some other personal experiences, which I will not share here. I offered to help anyone else he comes across that is going through a faith crisis. He appreciated that and was very interested in having me do that.

We exchanged more contact information to stay in touch and he said his door is always open for me if I ever need to talk again.

What a great person he is, he has really helped me get through a tough part of my faith crisis. Thanks to everyone here for the encouragement to meet with him.

[Deepthinker]

Perhaps eternity is just existing outside the dimension of time. That is the way I try to look at it.

[Deepthinker]

Kinglamoni,

You sound a lot like me. The issues with the BoA have been and still are the biggest source of my doubt.

Like you said, it is actual physical evidence. There is no imperfect description from people in history, no letter written out of anger. It is hard, physical evidence in which both “sides” agree that Joseph Smith mistranslated the Facsimiles.

I have researched the issues surrounding the BoA a great deal. I read the CES letter too, and FAIR’s response, as well as the author of the CES letter’s response to FAIR. I’ve posted on the FAIR support forum asking questions about the BoA.

What I’ve finally decided is the only way for me to get around the issues is to redefine how I view revelation. This podcast really helped me and describes what I’m talking about.

http://mormonmatters.org/2014/02/21/213-214-the-book-of-abraham-as-scripture/

This is a great discussion from some of the LDS apologists. It is a more honest view of the BoA. One of the apologists basically says we need to move beyond trying to prove a connection between Egyptian funerary text and Abraham and we just need to redefine how we view revelation.

Some apologists have and still try to stretch for any kind of parallel between the Egyptian Facsimiles and Abraham. I recommend not reading/watching any apologetics that tries to do this. It will likely only dishearten and frustrate you more. I know it did that to me.

I’m not sure this podcast will help you, but it is really the best thing I could find that addressed the issues with a refreshingly honest approach from apologists. I’m still struggling myself with redefining how I have always viewed revelation. It is difficult for me.

[Deepthinker]

eyedempotent wrote:

Thanks for your suggestions. Back when I was a firm believer I loved the apologetics stuff. I’d stop by FARMS and buy their latest issues, read a lot of FAIR-LDS, etc. But now I agree with you, I find that it’s not too helpful. I’m reading a book a non-LDS friend gave me called Godless, about an evangelical preacher who became an outspoken atheist. I bounce between reading that and Shaken Faith Syndrome (SFS). I find that within the first few chapters a lot of SFS has been insulting to me and my struggles and doesn’t make sense, although there are a few interesting points. Then when I read the other book just about everything makes total sense.

It’s interesting because people often say someone didn’t try hard enough because he stopped reading scriptures or didn’t do all he could to keep the testimony. I think in some sense that puts the cart before the horse though. I’ve started reading other material only after I started thinking about things that didn’t make sense. I don’t want to give too much away but I have a couple people in my ward who are very active in the apologetics movement. Sometimes I think I should talk to them about my doubts, but I just don’t see it helping to be honest. The thing that helped the most was talking to my friend a few years ago who also says “the only thing I can know is what I verify with my senses,” he has the same doubts as me. But he is happy staying in the church and gave me reasons that I related to. Such as: it’s a good place to give your kids moral teachings, tithing is an antidote to greed, temple is about strengthening your relationship with your spouse and family, etc. I can see those points. But again getting through a TR interview will be tough. I had another friend when going through this who just answered “I hope so” to the testimony questions. The bishop took it in stride and in the end just asked if he wanted to talk. The member of the stake presidency didn’t even do that, just signed off on it. I don’t have any sins or morality problems, just the doubts and an issue or two on the church stance on things.

Yes, I used to love the apologetics stuff as well and would refer to them often when discussing the LDS faith with others. My “faith crisis” was the result of discussing religion in online debate forums for several years. I was never antagonistic in my responses and most of the discussions were not started by me. I originally joined these forums to discuss politics, with no intent to “proselytize”. I did share with my wife what I was doing but she had no interest.

I don’t have any sins or morality problems either, at least not any more than most active LDS people. Same as you, just doubts and issues with some of the teachings and stances. What is sad is that I used to think the same thing about people who stopped believing or lost their testimony. That they were not trying hard enough or had some major sin issues.

eyedempotent wrote:

I did read that and thank you for posting. I’m fortunate that my bishop is a good man, he even left me in as Elder’s Quorum President when I had the doubts, he said he wanted the change to come from me and as long as I could love and serve the brethren in the quorum that’s what mattered. That was pretty progressive of him. When I shared my doubts with the member of the Stake Presidency is when I got a release, which I think was definitely the right thing to do.

Luckily my wife is also being about as good regarding this as can be expected. She lets me talk and she has said a few different times that she wants to hear my concerns and know what’s going on inside my head. I try to be gentle as I don’t want to destroy her belief. I won’t lie, it would be nice if we were going through the same things but she’s giving a very good reaction and says she just wants me to be happy. She says just not to cheat on her or beat her, or become an “angry” atheist. Don’t worry, that’s a very low bar and I believe we have a much better partnership than that. She’s starting to understand more where I’m coming from. I’m lucky that I’ve had a few friends and my wife I’ve been able to share the doubts with. Oddly enough I can be more open and honest with non-member friends than members, which is a little saddening but understandable.

I’m actually still serving as the Executive Secretary in our ward and nobody has any idea about my doubts. It is actually a great position for someone with doubt. I get to serve in a way that is helpful, but I’m not put on the spot to testify and teach like the Bishopric. I tend to keep quiet for the most part and just listen anyway.

I’m glad to hear you have such a good Bishop and that you’ve been able to talk with some good friends going through (or that have gone through) the same thing.

I’m assuming the biggest help is the way your wife has reacted positively. I really have tried to discuss it with my wife and I don’t want to keep the extent of my doubt a secret from her. I feel like I am lying to her. I just think she is not open to hear it, at least not right now. She has some other issues of her own that she is going through right now that I’m trying to help her with.

[Deepthinker]

Welcome! You and I are very much alike. You are not alone in this and I can really relate to many of the things you’ve described. I’m also a people pleaser and I’m afraid of the results if I were to open up to friends and family. I dont’ want to hurt them.

I’m a few years older than you, but I’m also an engineer and have always had what I thought was a strong testimony. My family always looks to me as the “strong one”. It’s been difficult over the last year to try to balance my intellectual integrity with my religious integrity. I understand the guilt you feel about baptizing your daughter. I have a son that will turn eight in less than a year and I’ve been concerned about it. I’ve tried to approach my wife gently about my doubt, but she has asked me not discuss any of the church issues with her and I’m respecting that. At times it feels very lonely, but I come here and receive much needed support.

There are some great threads on this site that discusses ways to handle the temple recommend interview. I would recommend you read them and see if it something that will work for you. Does anyone have the links for these?

I’ve tried to always recognize that science has its limitations. I still see the value in religion and that it has its own “realm of authority” just as science does (the natural and the supernatural). I just try to remove the religious teachings that can be disproven by science and maintain the ones that cannot. A few examples: Evolution does not disprove God, but it does show that the young-Earth creation teaching is false. LDS apologists that I’ve read already agree that the Theory of Evolution is valid, yet they maintain a belief in God. That there was probably not a literal flood does not disprove God either.

I like to think of the many stories in the scriptures with a metaphorical and/or allegorical lens. They can teach us important values and ways to live our life. I also like what DJ has said and I’ve always tried to separate my spiritual experiences from the church.

We are taught in church to read from the best books, words of wisdom. I like to read many “outside” sources and not limit my sources for knowledge (spiritual and otherwise) through only LDS sources.

I would suggest not reading too much of apologetic sources. I’ve read a significant amount and there is plenty that can do more damage to you than good. I read part of the “Shaken Faith Syndrome” and was not impressed with it. The title itself makes it sound like it is a disease. Faith was never meant to go through mental gymnastics that some apologetic explanations perform. The Book of Abraham was probably the worst for me because it was all right there, the Facsimiles, etc. I’ve had to try to redefine how I view revelation. An excellent podcast about this is here, if you’re interested (David Bokovoy is the one person from FAIR in this podcast that made the most sense to me, even though it still is a difficult position.): http://mormonmatters.org/2014/02/21/213-214-the-book-of-abraham-as-scripture/

I recently met for almost two hours with an Area Authority (we have both kept it confidential, my wife does not even know). He is the first person I have ever opened up to about my doubts in person, since I started on the journey a few years ago. He really cares and has given me some excellent advice. You can read the thread about it in the Support section.

Repeating DJ here, but the best advice is: go slow.

[Author]

Posts