- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I found this forum because I have recently come to the conclusion that I no longer believe in the church. My doubts actually started as I read the Book of Mormon and other lds scripture. It seemed every time I read, I would only see issues with the way it was written ( use of New Testament, 19th century doctrines,etc.) Anyway, the more I searched for answers, my answer has been that I no longer believe in the restoration. It’s a sad and scary place to be. We live in Utah Valley, my wife and I are returned missionaries, have many kids and the church Has been huge in our lives. I am not bitter or mad, just sad. We don’t want to leave the church and i’ve read many good ideas on how to stay active even when I don’t believe. I can’t keep paying tithing to the extent I have been and I don’t think I can continue with garments. I would feel too much that I was faking it. I want to continue as a member and raise my kids in the church but explain to them ( when appropriate ) what I believe but let them have choices. I plan to baptize my children who haven’t been yet. I figure if I am wrong and the church is true, I still have authority to baptize them and if it isn’t, well, I have as much authority to baptize as anyone else in the church. I want to be a follower of Christ and baptism is a great symbol and commitment.
I need people to talk to but I don’t want to cause any family to loose their beliefs. It’s hard not to be able to discuss it and my wife can only take so much discussing it. She prefers to move forward slowly and it makes her sad to discuss it too much although she is very supportive. Does anyone have opinions or feedback on being active while not believing. My main concern is my kids. I could live without the church at this point in my life, but it made me who I am and I’m afraid my kids will suffer without the church and church community. I’m worried that raising them with one foot in and one foot out, they will use it as a excuse to not follow the church teachings that are good. I’m hoping that as long as I live those standards, they will also want to even if they know I don’t believe in church origins.
I don’t have enough time right now, but welcome! I am glad you found us. My main advice right now is pretty simple: Read our archive posts. There literally are thousands of answers to your central question that can give you insight beyond whatever people provide in this thread.
The “Useful Quote of the Day” thread might be particularly helpful.
Welcome – We have tons of resources for your needs. Spend time reading from the forum. Feel free to bring them back up if they resonate. We can always use fresh looks on them. Welcome, I’m glad you found us. The beauty of this forum is that it is an open and safe place to discuss things we can’t normally discuss face to face with live people. I think your question is a little vague, but I see where you’re coming from. I do believe that following the good teachings of the church is important if you are trying to set the example for your children and that children learn from the good moral examples of their parents and other respected adults. If your children are over 5 your work in that respect is likely already done – their core beliefs (and moral compasses) are already set. Please don’t be a stranger and come back and ask more specific questions if there is something more specific you are struggling with. Welcome to StayLDS. Rich70 wrote:
My main concern is my kids. I could live without the church at this point in my life, but it made me who I am and I’m afraid my kids will suffer without the church and church community. I’m worried that raising them with one foot in and one foot out, they will use it as a excuse to not follow the church teachings that are good. I’m hoping that as long as I live those standards, they will also want to even if they know I don’t believe in church origins.
Wrong or right, my attitude of having one foot in and one foot out is that I’m teaching my children that not every single thing at church is good by default (or bad by default), there are good things and a few bad things. They have to learn and decide for themselves what is good and bad, learn to avoid the bad in a healthy manner, and learn to not make accommodations for the bad just because an entire culture insists that it is something they should be doing. Stated more simply, help them learn boundaries. I wished I had learned that from the beginning.
Welcome, I completely understand that struggle even though I made the decision to not remain a member. Rich70 wrote:
I could live without the church at this point in my life, but it made me who I am and I’m afraid my kids will suffer without the church and church community. I’m worried that raising them with one foot in and one foot out, they will use it as a excuse to not follow the church teachings that are good. I’m hoping that as long as I live those standards, they will also want to even if they know I don’t believe in church origins.
I think most organizations are a beautiful mix of good and bad. Same with most people. I hope my kids, more than anything, develop the ability to pick up on the good and reject the bad, wherever it is found. From the Endowment, it is said that we are here to learn from our own experience the good from the evil, not to take another’s word for it. In my opinion, one foot in, one foot out is the way to be; committed as far as it does good, while remaining open to goodness from the outside.
Goodness does not equal truth. Truth does not equal beauty. Beauty does not equal goodness.
Thank you everyone for your responses! I realize my post was vague. I just needed to talk to someone so I started a post. Here are some more specific questions I am trying to figure out. I personally do not believe that Joseph was a prophet. I personally think he may have had some real issues. My youngest child is 3 and my oldest is 13. I’d love some opinions on how to discuss and at what age to discuss my beliefs with them, basically that I don’t believe Joseph was a prophet and that polygamy was never from God and God would never change someone’s skin to black etc. I have two African American children by the way . I feel like the church has evolved into a good organization, but I feel it has backed intself into a corner by holding to Joseph as a prophet. Since I have let go of that belief, I feel like I don’t have to make up reasons and doctrine to explain the history. But, i’m just at the beginning of this and hope to get insight from others who have had some experience teaching a balanced approach to their kids. My thoughts are that younger children benefit from simple rules with less ambiguity but as they start to think more and have questions, I want them to understand enough church history so they can form their own beliefs based on a much more complete picture. Rich70, welcome. I think there is a journey we go through as we open our eyes to the obvious changing perceptions we have of our world, and so whatever the topics are, it requires a process of going through stages of emotion and mental exercises to reframe things we saw one way in the past to a new paradigm based on learned new insights. Some call it enlightenment, some just call it growth.
You are on this path and I just want to tell you it is a good thing. Don’t fight it or feel bad, even if you feel sad you are losing something.
When I read Joseph Campbell’s “the Power of Myth” book/interview transcript…something clicked for me and I could see that it is good to have faith and hope in things not of this world, and let go of wanting nice neat clean little answers to all things in life…but accept paradox and perceptions shape how we tell stories of our experiences in life.
Go slow and don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater. Maintain your prior spiritual experiences as truth and they were what you needed in the past. They just don’t sustain you now because you have moved to a new place…and I think God wants that from us…or he would have just kept us in heaven safe and sound with sure knowledge (even if no experience). No..God wants us to have experiences to gain wisdom.
Open your mind and view it as a good thing, not focusing on he past and what you wanted it to be.
Joseph Smith is a classic tragic figure, good and bad and started something that brought you and his group together. Rough Stone Rolling by Bushman is a good resource on the history. There are many resources to go to, but just approach it as your journey forward that will open your mind to new truths and new peace and happiness and experiences you couldn’t have other ways.
I’m glad you joined our group. I look forward to learning from your posts.
One approach I’ve seen people take is redefining what it means to be a prophet. In a way the culture has deified prophets and other historic church figures, we’ve made legends out of them. We expect prophets to be more righteous than most (for lack of a better way to state it) because that’s often what we teach and believe, that we need to be more obedient to obtain blessings/the spirit/revelation, and if that’s the case then someone called as prophet must have been more obedient or somehow more worthy than others.
In paving over Joseph Smith’s …I won’t even say warts, I’ll say lesions… I think we’ve created that mindset, that one needs to be special to communicate with god, to be a prophet. I believe we’ve done ourselves a disservice in this. What if the narrative was, here is a seriously, seriously flawed and troubled man that was still able to commune with god, and if such a troubled person could commune with god then anyone should be able to do the same. Yeah, it’s the flip side of the coin, still relying on our tendency to compare ourselves to others and earn an audience with god, but why not leverage that weakness? The flaws teach us lessons too.
Flowers can grow in bull fertilizer. That’s Joseph Smith, and that’s all of us to some degree. That said, I know how annoying it can be to be singing Praise to the Man during a sacrament meeting of all things.
One angle is to consider everyone a prophet, or having the potential to display prophetic qualities. That probably waters down what it means to be prophet too much for people, but it’s an angle to work. That JS is capable of doing something that inspires people to be closer to god irrespective of the title he held or his character flaws. And we could extend that to anyone, that anyone can briefly step into the role of a “prophet” to bless our lives even though they will never hold the official title of prophet.
It can be another opportunity. Just because someone is held up as a prophet doesn’t mean they are always right about everything. It can be a life lesson on not letting popularity or a title influence what you feel to be right and wrong.
nibbler wrote:
JS is capable of doing something that inspires people to be closer to god irrespective of the title he held or his character flaws. And we could extend that to anyone, that anyone can briefly step into the role of a “prophet” to bless our lives even though they will never hold the official title of prophet.It can be another opportunity. Just because someone is held up as a prophet doesn’t mean they are always right about everything. It can be a life lesson on not letting popularity or a title influence what you feel to be right and wrong.
Well said, nibbler.
:thumbup: I apologize if this analogy is offensive for some or a bad analogy but I kind of view JS as an abusive father who’s kids and family turned out to be very good people. We, the members of the church, are all the kids. Most of the kids still think dad is great but many of us don’t. I have to be tolerant and respectful of others who still view “dad” in a good light. He started a great family and it’s full of great resources for raising a family. Also, it happens to be my family so even if I don’t like “dad” , to distance myself would remove me from my family and heritage. It’s still hard for me to see Joseph as a a good man with flaws. Perhaps he truely believed what he taught and wasn’t out to defraud. That’s the problem with history, it’s never absolute. IT_Veteran wrote:
Welcome, I completely understand that struggle even though I made the decision to not remain a member.
For some people that’s definitely the correct approach. For many it’s just not that simple, even if they think it might be the best option.
Rich70 wrote:
I apologize if this analogy is offensive for some or a bad analogy but I kind of view JS as an abusive father who’s kids and family turned out to be very good people. We, the members of the church, are all the kids. Most of the kids still think dad is great but many of us don’t. I have to be tolerant and respectful of others who still view “dad” in a good light. He started a great family and it’s full of great resources for raising a family. Also, it happens to be my family so even if I don’t like “dad” , to distance myself would remove me from my family and heritage. It’s still hard for me to see Joseph as a a good man with flaws. Perhaps he truely believed what he taught and wasn’t out to defraud. That’s the problem with history, it’s never absolute.
Great point about history. It relies heavily on point of view and is written by the winners. Those of us who have been around even just 40 or 50 years can see what happens over time when we read about something that happened in our lifetime and think to ourselves “Wait, what? That’s not what happened! That’s not the way it was!” It’s a matter of perspective and who is dong the writing (and often why they are writing).
I’m squarely in the camp of JS being a flawed individual. I’m flawed too, but my history hasn’t been whitewashed and hidden and I’m not on a pedestal for most people (probably not anyone’s). I don’t think JS was purposely abusive (I do think BY was), but again, he had his faults. But as Nibbler pointed out, what limited information we have about all the Bible prophets point out they were also flawed – we just tend to gloss over those flaws because of all the “good” they did. I can’t pretend to have received any great revelations, but I can’t say I have never received a revelation either. I don’t think my flaws are a grievous as JS’s, but I also believe that grading of sins (murder is worse than adultery, adultery is worse than stealing, etc.) is man made and not God made. That is, I believe God cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance, that we are all equal before God, and that we will
allbe forgiven of our sins. Because I know of at least some of Joseph’s flaws, I have hope for me. If God can work through someone as flawed as he was, God can certainly work with me. And nobody is without flaws and fault, period (Mother Teresa, Gandhi, et al, included). More directly to your question, I don’t think we have to have a testimony of Joseph Smith. The TR questions and the AoF do not mention his name. One could infer that question 3 about the restoration refers to JS, but one could infer that it does not refer specifically to him especially now when we are being taught that the restoration is a work in progress as opposed to an event. My kids are now young adults, and my faith crisis (and lengthy inactive period) was during their later childhood and teen years. They know I don’t believe everything and as adults they know some of what I don’t believe. I actually think kids handle it pretty well because they have questions too and they can see that it’s OK and they can see I haven’t been struck by lightning (at least yet). Mostly I just talked (and do talk) about what I do believe as opposed to what I don’t believe.
Welcome! I can give you what I have done. It is a work in progress and your mileage may vary.
Quote:I can’t keep paying tithing to the extent I have been and I don’t think I can continue with garments. I would feel too much that I was faking it.
I seek for sustainability in my church participation. For me personally 10% of gross is not sustainable for my new relationship with the church. Garments for me is easier – I am used to them and they help me to communicate solidarity with my wife. I think of it as similar to a wedding ring. (FYI, when I went to the distribution center to buy more G’s I told them I did not hold a TR and they had no problem with my purchase)
Quote:I want to continue as a member and raise my kids in the church but explain to them ( when appropriate ) what I believe but let them have choices.
For me, this has taken the form of exposing my kids to people and groups that may have different beliefs but are still good. When they ask me questions about heaven and such I tend to respond that “Our church” teaches XYZ and others believe YZX or ZYX. My favorite moment was when my daughter said, “I believe X is what happens” and it wasn’t among any of the options that I listed. I told her that sounded like a wonderful belief. When the kids were younger we participated pretty heavily in other area Christian churches. We now do this much less now as my children are moving into YM and YW and that takes up more of our time
Quote:I plan to baptize my children who haven’t been yet. I figure if I am wrong and the church is true, I still have authority to baptize them and if it isn’t, well, I have as much authority to baptize as anyone else in the church. I want to be a follower of Christ and baptism is a great symbol and commitment.
I have been fortunate to baptize my children without holding a TR and without paying tithing. Part of this comes from how you manage your faith transition with the ward and the bishop and part of it comes down to “leadership roulette”. The handbook says that a priesthood holder may perform the ordinance and not be “temple worthy” but ultimately it is up to the bishop’s discretion.
Quote:I’m worried that raising them with one foot in and one foot out, they will use it as a excuse to not follow the church teachings that are good. I’m hoping that as long as I live those standards, they will also want to even if they know I don’t believe in church origins.
There are no guarantees. If you hold your children too close they may rebel. If you give them too much freedom they may get into trouble. For me and my house, I try to emphasize practical and moral reasoning for doing things. My hope is that if they ever stop believing in God or Sin or the Ten Commandments then they will still have lots of reasons for living in a moral and responsible way.
Rich70 wrote:
My thoughts are that younger children benefit from simple rules with less ambiguity but as they start to think more and have questions, I want them to understand enough church history so they can form their own beliefs based on a much more complete picture.
My approach has been to answer questions to the best of my ability being open and honest that I do not have all the answers. My children know that this is our church, our tradition and our heritage and that we believe that there is value in having a church, a tradition, and a heritage. I do not (as a general rule) answer questions that have not been asked or introduce troubling aspects of church history, culture, or practice unsolicited.
DW and I served missions. My children are saving towards college and/or missions. We are presenting church missionary service every bit as optional for my son as it is for my daughter. It helps that DW and I do not view continued participation in the LDS church as a requirement for eternal families. That helps to remove much of the anxiety and fear associated with the kids not checking all the church boxes as they grow up but being otherwise good people.
I hope that helps.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.