[Euhemerus]

Great to have you here. I’m glad people can appreciate what we’re trying to do here, and recognize the significance. I’m positive that you will be an even better bishop with your newly discovered worldview.

[Euhemerus]

Well, I’ll preface this by saying that I’m a computer geek. No, I wouldn’t have an online journal. It’s not that I don’t trust the third party providing the service (after all, they’re a business trying to make a profit so they have incentives to keep your info private). It’s the ability for others to hack the service that troubles me. For the free services, I would be even more nervous about it. They really have no incentive to keep you as a customer. If you use a free service, be sure to thoroughly investigate their security scheme.

::begin computer rant::

BTW, most people don’t take computer security seriously (or rather they think that anti-virus protection is all they need (which they don’t need anyway IMHO)). Computer security when using the internet is grossly overlooked in our society. For example, on this forum, all your posts are online for everyone to see. Furthermore, we don’t use SSL encryption for passwords, so whatever password you chose for this forum is broadcast in plain text (un-encrypted) for anyone with a network sniffer to see (and there are millions of people network sniffing all the time). If you use the same password as you use for any of your more “sensitive” accounts, you advertise that globally every time you login. It’s sad, and most people have to learn about internet security the hard way by having their stuff lost or stolen, or worse having their identity stolen.

::end computer rant::

Personally, I keep my own journal on my own computers. But I have quite an elaborate backup scheme. I store my journal entries on a home server I setup, and then I backup the server to another internal hard drive within the server. I can access the journal entries and write them from anywhere in the world (since my server is online) but I’m responsible for the security. I’m a big proponent of good backups since I’ve seen so many lose important information. Personally, I would keep your journals on your own computer and back it up regularly. Every operating system I’m aware of (Linux, Mac, Windows) has a built-in backup utility. Mac’s is by far the easiest to setup and use (Time Machine). But the one built into Windows (Windows Backup) was redone in Windows Vista (and Windows 7) is okay too (but not stellar). If you’re going for maximum flexibility, you’ll want to setup a home server where you can secure it yourself, but potentially still get to it from anywhere. Then backup the server. Microsoft has a “Windows Home Server” that is pretty dang good and easy to use. If you’re really concerned over someone in your family reading your innermost feelings, you can encrypt each of your journal entries so that no one can read them. There is free software on every platform to encrypt a file, or even an entire folder.

Again, if you want the least amount of hassle, you can’t go wrong with a Mac. You have to play within their defined sandbox, but if you can, it works flawlessly most of the time.

[Euhemerus]

Welcome R. Harper. Grateful to have you here with us. The best reason to be active in the LDS church is if it helps you become a better person. I know that when I went through my faith crisis I definitely changed my definition of “messing up” and making “mistakes.” Many times I consider mistakes to be great learning experiences. I hope you find what you’re looking for.

[Euhemerus]

To go along with Hawkgrrrl, I think DoubleThink is an exaggerated form of cog dis. DoubleThink, as written, is a bit too much as Hawkgrrrl explains, but then again, so is 1984 altogether. But that’s not the point. It’s a dystopia, it’s meant to embellish something to paint a picture. If DoubleThink is really an exagerrated view of cog dis, it’s plain to see that we all engage in it at some level, especially anyone who belongs, whole-heartedly, to any group.

[Euhemerus]

Oh man, Heber, you have touched on so many critical things in this one post. The beauty of your post though, IMHO, is that you recognize and apply this to your own situation and can at least see the parallels. In my experience, that seems to be the thing that most people can’t do. It’s an adaptation of the beam and mote analogy that Jesus taught only taken to a group setting.

This is why, personally, I think it’s imperative that we evaluate how others perceive us. Otherwise how do we know whether or not we’re completely off our rocker? But juxtapose this with the injunction in the church to not fall victim to the standards of the world, and to enjoy being a peculiar people. How peculiar must a group be before they pull their head out of the sand? I think it’s critical to do some comparative analysis as we go through life, especially since many of our morals are so closely tied to culture. It’s most definitely a balancing act!

[Euhemerus]

Brilliant book! A must read for every human being IMHO. I’ve also read Atlas Shrugged, and Animal Farm. All of them were wonderful. My next dystopia is “Brave New World” which is sort of the opposite of 1984.

My conclusion is that virtually all religions/groups/organizations have elements of totalitarian regimes and cult-like mind control mechanisms (because they are proven in unifying the group). In fact, sports teams, when analyzed from a cult perspective, are notoriously manipulative and authoritarian. I believe, however, that the differences lie in the degree to which these techniques are employed.

Clearly there is a difference between the USSR and the U.S. today, despite the fact that some elements of our economy are nearly socialized. Likewise, there is a difference between David Koresh’s clan and the LDS church. Where the situation gets particularly sticky is when we only accept the in-group reasoning for our chosen tribe. That is, I think most of us look at Scientology with a healthy amount of suspicion. But we ignore or otherwise justify similar aspects in our own group. There are many who view Mormonism and Scientology in the same manipulative vein.

[Euhemerus]

SilentDawning wrote:

Euhemerus wrote:

I relate quite a bit to what you say and feel. I have a tendency to take things personally as well. It’s the good news and bad news. The good news is that you are very open-minded to criticism.

I’d like to share a kind of “funny” experience about taking things personally, since I feel you understand the mindset.

I have a story that is less funny, but from which I learned a great deal. I went out on my mission with a certain mindset in mind. Most missionaries didn’t really like my trainer and it quickly became apparent to me why that was. One day he just laid it all out there for me. He ripped me apart and told me all the things wrong with me. It hurt so bad! After thinking on it for quite some time I thought there might be some things he was right about. That experience, coupled with my next companion, changed the course of my mission for the better. I think it might be that it took a thorough scolding like that to get me to see the light.

SilentDawning wrote:

The point is that these things get better “by degrees”. Because I’ve struggled with this off and on since my early twenties, I question whether I’ll ever be completely ‘out of bondage”, just better able to cope, or “in bondage” for shorter periods of time and with less angst.

Yep, I think you’re right on. My personal experience is that we will always be in “bondage” to the tendencies we have. But I think we can learn to curb our tendencies and at least make ourselves available for the Lord to help us in our struggle.

SilentDawning wrote:

What kind of organization offered the training you described? I think a course like this would be very helpful to me. I like the idea of $7 a class, too. I’m going to check out the links you sent, in case the answer is there.

Well, it was through my health insurance at the time, Kaiser Permanente in CA. But if you’re going to be in school, most schools have a counselling center of sorts and there may be an opportunity that they know about. It’s not something you need a “prescription” for or anything, I’m pretty sure anyone can just decide they’d like to have a CBT course.

[Euhemerus]

SamBee wrote:

A lot of agnostics do think they’re atheist in my experience though. They’re actually quite different. I’ve been agnostic for long periods of my life, but never atheist. Both atheists, and theists encourage the confusion maybe.

Yeah, I think some people (the most orthodox of Mormons) would likely view me as an agnostic. In the colloquial definition of atheism, I couldn’t embrace a disbelief in God, though I could certainly entertain a lack of belief in god.

SamBee wrote:

I always wanted to set up a Militant Agnostic Movement, kind of like the Skeptics thing. Imagine the chants…

“What do we want?”

“We don’t know!”

“When do we want it?”

“We’re not sure!”

😆 😆

I love it!

[Euhemerus]

Some thoughts on your thoughts:

I took a CBT course a while back but I was not depressed. I took it because I thought I might learn something. I think it’s unfortunate that a collection of such great information is only recognized as a mechanism for helping people who are allegedly depressed. If I could re-brand it as a type of Stephen Covey habits course I would do so.

I relate quite a bit to what you say and feel. I have a tendency to take things personally as well. It’s the good news and bad news. The good news is that you are very open-minded to criticism. That means you accept feedback and try to learn from it. Many people are entirely incapable of admitting they might be wrong. The trick is to learn to constructively use that for improvement rather than perpetuating a cycle of shame and depression. I have learned to properly handle such situations, and much of my technique is what I described. But it is a constant effort. Recently I allowed myself to get pushed back into allowing someone else to have power over me – and it put me into a depressed state for a few days. But with each incident, as I practice good CBT techniques, the length of time gets shorter, and I learn from the situations rather than getting depressed over them.

SilentDawning wrote:

Now, the next thing. There is going to be time and money involved in taking these steps. Currently I’m working full time, going to school part time and about to start a demanding post graduate program. I also have young children.

I’m in the same boat. Again, I think CBT skills are far more universal than simply for depressed individuals. They are life skills, and it would likely serve you well to have a good treatment. The one I did was just a group class, and it was dirt cheap (like $7 a class or something). I suppose you could learn the material online, but part of the experience is being able to talk about it in a group setting. This has a very “12 Step”-ish feel and is quite beneficial. Plus, when you hear about the problems of others, suddenly your problems don’t seem quite so bad . CBT typically employs the Socratic method, and part of the technique is to learn how to use the Socratic method on yourself (challenging false beliefs).

Here is a pretty good site.

Also here is the Mayo Clinic article which is pretty good.

[Euhemerus]

SamBee wrote:

Quote:

I can totally understand not believing in God. And, in fact, I might boldly state that I DO NOT KNOW if there is a God. Literally, I don’t know. I can’t prove it, I can’t convince anyone of it, even myself.

Doesn’t that make you agnostic rather than atheist?

I didn’t think I ever said I was atheist, did I? I just mentioned I’ve been there before. In any case, as I’ve read what atheists themselves define as atheism I’m left thinking the line is pretty dang fuzzy between the two (see here for example).

In any case, you gotta finish the quote

Euhemerus wrote:

And, in fact, I might boldly state that I DO NOT KNOW if there is a God. Literally, I don’t know. I can’t prove it, I can’t convince anyone of it, even myself. All I do know is that like hawkgrrrl, I hope there is some sort of energy or intelligence in the universe and it seems I connect to it every once in a while. I’ll call that thing God, and claim I believe.

[Euhemerus]

Quote:

God allowed these people to suffer so that we could have a legacy of faith.

:: sigh :: Incidentally, our EQ meeting this last week was all about the LDS church being the one and only true church (which we get a lot of in my ward). One individual said that we have ALL the truth (literally, those were his words). It was the first time I remember anyone saying that expressly (as opposed to “fulness” or something). My first thought was “crap, I came to the wrong church this week. I thought my church believed in continuing revelation and progression. What am I doing here?”

I just had one thought. I think Brian hit on it already a bit.

I try to view it as creating our own mythology. People tell stories, and in Mormonism, we use stories for the express purpose of building faith. I bet you have no problem with comic books, or hollywood movies that try to teach a lesson, or moral through a story. Since you know, and accept that they’re not factual, you don’t allow that detail to get in the way of your learning the lesson being conveyed. I try to apply the same idea to church. It all may be factual, or it may not, in any case, it’s likely aggrandized. But it makes no difference, I just try to not allow that detail to get in the way of me learning the lesson being portrayed.

If you were Catholic and had the idea of transubstantiation preached to you, you might feel the same way. But you’d be missing some very cool symbolism and associated spiritual benefit.

[Euhemerus]

I have some thoughts on this. Let me share a bit of a story.

My mother is wonderful. She works hard to help people. She would do anything for anyone. She is meek, sensitive, loving, and depressed. She lays it all out for everyone all the time. She gives people the benefit of the doubt. But she also allows people to take advantage of her, which hurts her deeply.

I have found that people like this are badly misunderstood, taken advantage of, and poorly treated. But it is a vicious cycle. You want to serve, and want to help because you love so much and want to do what is right. But it is this very thing that leaves you vulnerable to hurt and the callousness of others. Unfortunately, the solution cannot be a function of everyone else or nothing will ever change. As long as we continue to discuss how people treat you we are only feeding the problem. The discussion really has to begin with you.

I actually think I suffer from a similar problem, but to a different degree. For me, the way out is to take control of the only thing over which you have rightful control – yourself. There is empowerment in the concept, and I suggest allowing yourself to believe it. That is to say, you get to decide the terms on which you participate, serve, love, and help others.

My best advice would be to seek a CBT course. CBT (Cognitive Behavioural Therapy) is a psychotherapy technique for helping people with depression and has proven much more effective than drugs particularly because it provides you with the tools to handle problems in the future (you don’t have to be depressed to take such a course). My opinion is that CBT should be required for every human being. They should teach it in a life skills course in public schools. It’s very helpful.

The gist of CBT is what I’m conveying to you – that you get to take control of your life, your feelings, your actions. When you are in control of you, you can challenge false beliefs (negative thoughts), make plans to handle situations differently in the future, and give yourself permission to let go of unwanted feelings.

A good example of you doing just this, was your demand that your bishop arrange to have a meeting to air out the dirty laundry. I suggest taking this same concept and applying it on a more personal level. That is, you resolve that next time will be different and make goals that emphasize you doing what you feel is important, while not allowing yourself to get into a compromising situation. You might also demand that you allow yourself to forgive the woman involved, while creating boundaries with her that will not be crossed. Forgiving is important, but it does not include allowing yourself to be vulnerable to hurt and abuse from her in the future. If that means avoiding her, then fine (though I suspect that will fade away as you start to feel empowered with control over yourself).

[Euhemerus]

brynngal wrote:

I am in my 20’s so not very old. I can see why now people are atheists, it seems easier to make peace with no one being there, and figure what happens after death happens, and make peace that you have no idea what that means. I think that if religion wasn’t so entangled in my life I would probably just head that direction.

I hope there’s room for one more piece of advice. I’m also in my 20’s, and been at atheism. Here’s my advice. Stop being scared of atheism. Atheism might work for you, and it might help you for a time. You also might realize it doesn’t work for you. But I find it better to experience this for yourself than to speculate on what it might mean for you. It’s not like you’ll go to hell if you admit that you don’t think God exists, or that you’re even uncertain.

There is more than one person on this site (even amongst the admins) who have been atheists at one point in their lives. It doesn’t have to be a final destination. It might be nothing more than a stop along the way. Moreover, I find myself agreeing with many atheists about their views. I can totally understand not believing in God. And, in fact, I might boldly state that I DO NOT KNOW if there is a God. Literally, I don’t know. I can’t prove it, I can’t convince anyone of it, even myself. All I do know is that like hawkgrrrl, I hope there is some sort of energy or intelligence in the universe and it seems I connect to it every once in a while. I’ll call that thing God, and claim I believe.

Also, while I think reading the scriptures is good, I honestly would recommend branching out in your young age. Learn what is out there. Read lots of different books. You might find a world full of people who actually make sense, whose beliefs are reasonable even though they conflict with what you’ve been taught. This builds an appreciation for those around you. I don’t want to belittle the BoM, but despite what our church says, it might be you find more spirituality in the NT, or the Koran, or the Baghavad Gita. Even if you do, you don’t have to convert to any other religion.

Finally, if you don’t want to pray, don’t. Seriously, it’s just not worth feeling bad or guilty about. You don’t have to feel rebellious for not wanting to pray. This is your culture making your feel shame for not doing what you have been led to believe is expected of you.

[Euhemerus]

:: golf clap ::

Brilliant Ray. The whole thing, absolutely perfect! The beauty of this explanation is that although I might fall on a different side of the coin when interpreting the meaning of my spiritual experiences, I can completely agree with everything Ray said and afford him the opportunity to decide where he falls on interpreting his spiritual experiences. There is both validation of the views and choices of others, while allowing freedom to make that choice without condemnation.

Very well said!

I would add to this that we ought to give the same kind of validation for those who express their “emotionalism” in the form of anger and/or resentment at the church. Just as with tears we may not accept that this is a necessary condition for spirituality, but we can examine the lesson learned through the experience. In that light, we might view anger as another “spiritual” opportunity for learning. Of course to most LDS that would not jive with our understanding of the manifestations of the Spirit. But I still think it’s valid.

[Euhemerus]

Orson wrote:

I agree Eu and Ray, great discussion! Regarding the idea of peer review and tests to check spiritual ideas — that doesn’t really fit with my personal paradigm of spirituality, it’s kind of like — how are you going to critique peace, or how are you going to judge the effectiveness of a personal example? To me spiritual manifestations can be contradictory because people are living different lives with different needs, and what is right for one person may be wrong for someone else. No, I don’t think people always read their spiritual “cues” perfectly – obviously, humans are notorious for making mistakes. Often BIG mistakes.

Absolutely. I agree completely. I was referring to those who use their spiritual manifestations as evidence for claiming more objective absolute truths. This is exactly why I prefer that spirituality be a personal adventure. Well said!

[Author]

Posts