- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I am thankful for this forum because frankly I am tired of all the pro vs. anti sites that get one nowhere. Mormons need to take seriously those of us who are finding problems with the history, etc. We’re not being duped or letting Satan enter our hearts or whatever. We’ve got honest grievances and we’re distraught. At any rate, I began learning about the untold history of the church in the early 1990s. I was deeply affected by this. It is so impossible for me to believe any longer in Joseph Smith’s prophethood, for instance. One does not forget that he/she had a visitation from both God and Jesus as two separate beings at 14 years of age! Impossible. That the 1832 version does not mention this means it is made up or, at least, parts of it are, which makes the whole thing suspect. Simple fact. All the apologies aside cannot dissuade me from this belief, lest I throw away all logic that is within me. And if I am supposed to accept that over time his understanding of the vision changed, well, okay, but one would expect that before 1832! And certainly between 1832 and 1838 is in no way an answer, especially given what Smith was doing at that time!
How about the “translation” of the Book of Mormon through the use of a seer stone placed in a hat? If this had been the standard story from day one, and not the mumbo-jumbo about the Urim and Thummim, then there never would have been a religion called Mormonism because no one would have supported it! Can you just imagine the temple pageant in Manti, which I attended many times as a boy, depicting Smith using a seer stone and putting it in his hat, the plates not even of necessary presence. Ha! It would have looked foolish beyond belief. So they don’t depict it that way even though this is the truth.
Also, Joseph, uneducated, young, naive, just a farm boy, after all, could not possibly have written the Book of Mormon. Why it is too sophisticated. Plus, there existed no sources from which he could have plagiarized or borrowed his ideas. Thus the Book of Mormon, if it is of Joseph’s creation, had to spring wholly from his mind and that is impossible. Balderdash! Not only did he have possible sources available, even if he didn’t have the actual sources, it was common knowledge in the area in which he lived that the Indians were descendants of the Lost Ten Tribes, meaning they were of Hebrew origin. Etc. etc.
The setting for the Book of Mormon. Clearly, Smith and Cowdery, among others, believed it took place in the Finger Lakes region of New York state. Certainly, I grew up believing as much, as was common knowledge in the church. Now, because the geography doesn’t fit, all sorts of answers are put forth to try and save the book. Limited geography, Central America, and, one of the newest (which deals with the DNA problem), the “New World was immensely populated” theory. You know, if God is making it this complicated to try and believe then he/she must be a very cynical God or one with a wicked sense of humor. How many hoops do I have to jump through to believe? I believe God may try our faith from time to time but this is becoming absurd on its face.
I could go on, but I think the point has been made. I feel had. I feel trampled upon.
I am angry and hurt.
Thanks for listening. That’s all I am really asking for. Curt
Hi Curt, It is ok to feel upset, angry, shocked and disillusioned. Those emotions are part of the journey of life and the journey of faith. Like you said, you have “honest grievances” to sort out. Until the Church has an official and better way to deal with this, it’s just us banding together to help each other out. As far as being angry, that is cool with me. It is normal and necessary. You have to decide how long you want/need to feel that. There is more though, and some say there is a light at the other end of the tunnel.
You mentioned a few times that a lot of things are impossible now, that you can never believe again without throwing away logic and giving up something deep within yourself. I agree that there is no going backwards. You aren’t going to return to that prior state of “testimony” you probably had, when you were so sure and certain that you knew many stories were “true.” A problem with the process of disillusionment is walking right back into being so sure of the negative. The whole all-or-nothing paradigm has to be abandoned before we find peace. I personally have found a lot of peace in the quest for unconditional love and acceptance, both of myself in the past (when I was a true believer) and of others in our history. The bubble burst, but that doesn’t mean I have to be left with nothing. That’s just me though.
curt wrote:Thanks for listening. That’s all I am really asking for. CurtWe can listen. You aren’t going to shock us with these problems (saying that with kindness and understanding, not as a boast). We know the deal. The thing you have to ask yourself though, is where will you go from where you are at? If you’ve been at this since the 1990’s, it has been a while. It isn’t a recent crisis. Have you decided what you are going to do? Have you taken ownership of your faith and your beliefs? There are many paths to take through disillusion and out the other side.
We aren’t going to freak out about the issues you brought up, but StayLDS isn’t really a rant forum. There are those support groups out there. They are great resources. They are important places to let out anger, vent and get a lot of encouragement for it in the process. StayLDS is a community of people that are mostly done with that part of our journey. It doesn’t mean we don’t have our days
I’d love to know if you are still active in Church? Do you have faith in anything? Believe in God or Jesus? Anything? Some people decide to give it all up. That is understandable.
In any case, thanks for posting an introduction. Feel free to continue hanging out, and jump in to comment if you have something to contribute to our community effort of rebuilding faith.
So are you interested in staying LDS? I wonder about takingthe Sterling McMurrin route and staying LDS because it is my church and it is as good as any other religion. At other times, I wonder about walking away from organized religion altogether. The day/hour I determined that the LDS church is not what it claims to be, I decided I wouldn’t join any other organized religion. If I was going to stay with organized religion, it would the the LDS church. I’m here because I’m trying to figure out if I want to stay LDS, and perhaps just as important, do I want my kids to be influenced to stay LDS.
Like you, I am troubled that there is no place at church to talk about issues. If you raise uncomfortable questions, you are quieted or ignored, or asked to leave. I would be happy if there were places where difficult questions could be asked and discussed openly without all of the mopolgetic mumbo jumbo. The forum doesn’t exist.
I understand not turning this site into a place to rant. I got what I needed to out so now I will just keep to myself. I am still LDS at the moment so we’ll just see what happens.
curt wrote:I understand not turning this site into a place to rant. I got what I needed
It’s cool Curt. I hope it helped.
Curt – I am curious to how you have dealt with these issues for such a long period of time. I have discovered many of these things out in the last year or so. I personally cannot attend Gospel Doctrine class any longer. Some of the comments are so misleading (I am not blaming most members – I’m sure I said many of the same things in my TBM days) that I personally cannot handle it. I don’t mind Priesthood, most of the Elders/High Priests could really care less it seems to me. The real dogmatic ones want to dominate the conversation, but that’s O.K. Sacrament meeting is usually good for me. I can really relate to the felling of deception. I believe the brethren are aware of these issues, but choose to ignore them for the time being. I’m sure it comes down to a cost/benefit analysis. People like me are expendible. So what if a few of the members find out about some of the thornier issues. Most of them will not leave the church, the social structure is very difficult to leave and all the family issues are even more problematic.
For those of us who do know about the many issues involved with church history and doctrine and decide to stay, this seems to be a good forum for that. The dogmatic people at chruch think they run the joint (in many ways they probably do), but that doesn’t mean there is not a place for us. There is much good that can come from the church, and I can decide to be a part of that good. I’m just not sure if the good really does outwiegh the bad. That is the question I have yet to decide. Sounds like your similiar, except you have known these things for much longer than I have.
Quote:The dogmatic people at chruch think they run the joint (in many ways they probably do)
The dogmatic folks are vocal and run every joint they belong to, and many they don’t! So, I think this is a key point – most people are not the vocal dogmatic individuals. They are folks just like you and me, trying to live a decent life, trying to deal with the incomprehensible, and trying to raise kids who won’t set fires, torture cats, or come home pregnant.
Elder Wirthlin said we shouldn’t value just the piccolos in our orchestra. Something to consider: 1) Piccolos are the most easily heard instrument in almost any orchestra, since they are pitched so high. (I view piccolos as mutant flutes – designed specifically to be heard above the other instruments.) So, we shouldn’t value only those who are heard the most or the most easily. (e.g., Just because I talk a lot, doesn’t mean anything I say is more valuable than something a more reticent commenter says.)
Many of the most profound things I have heard in church have come from the quiet members whose experiences make what they do share incredibly touching. There are many members from whom I would LOVE to hear more than I do, but when to comment is up to them individually. That’s one reason why I enjoy Sacrament Meeting, even with the duds. The format gives me a chance to hear from those who normally don’t contribute in an open discussion setting. I generally learn more from them than from an hour long class.
Hi, curt. It has been five years for me since the moment I first felt “not LDS” and had to struggle through the question of whether and how to stay and serve. If I could distill a single slogan from my participation at this forum, it would be, “It’s my church too.” I am here; I don’t see myself leaving; I am dealing with it; and it is going to have to deal with me.
I believe strongly in the ideals Valoel shared of acceptance, unconditional love, and understanding. Those are great challenges to take on, and give deep purpose to our choice to be in the church.
KM
The dogmatic types run the Church and pretty much all other community organizations, like Hawkgrrrl said. I agree. They pretty much have to be the ones to do that. Once that clicked in my head, I became a lot more comfortable with it. I mean think about it. If people like me ran the Church, or other people that thought too much about it, it might never accomplish anything and would likely fall apart in a short span of time. The people that question a lot, which is how a lot of us are wired, are the ones that are the check to dogmatism in the balance of the equation. The key buried in that statement is of course that we have to be IN the group in order to provide the balance that is part of our nature.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.