The Blessing of Puzzling Doctrines

[Anonymous]

I was really taken by the quote below from CS Lewis, and have adopted this in my signature tag line:

Quote:

If our religion is something objective, then we must never avert our eyes from those elements in it which seem puzzling or repellant; for it will be precisely the puzzling or the repellant which conceals what we do not yet know and need to know … the truth we need most is hidden precisely in the doctrines you least like and least understand. – CS Lewis

It does seem to me the doctrines that I dislike the most, are ones that provide an opportunity for me to study ferociously to make sense of how I can like the other Mormon doctrines I live by, but wonder how the same God could teach these other doctrines that really bother me.

I remember being at BYU, and my Economics class was my most difficult. That semester, I studied harder for Economics than any other class, spent time with the TA, and even the professor to work through the concepts I couldn’t grasp. My final exam was an essay, testing my ability to solve a problem with the concepts in the class. I got a 97%, the 3rd highest score in the class for a professor who was known to give difficult grades. I learned so much by struggling through the material. The more I put into the class, the more I got out of it.

I think my church education is similar. I seek truth, and find often the things that are hardest for me to live, are the things that I NEED to figure out to stay close to God.

Months back, polygamy was at the top of my list. By studying so much church history and reading books on the subject, I have gained a greater testimony for the difficult struggle it must have been for some early saints to accept and live commandments properly, and deal with the change when the Manifesto was published. Regardless of the principle (which I still don’t understand), and whether or not polygamy is eternal or just a thing given from time to time, the STRUGGLE one goes through to understand it, decide to commit or reject the principle, and to finally live it (for those to whom it was given), I think is what religion is all about. In that process there is personal growth and development, very unique and personal journeys of development.

The doctrines that puzzle me or I least like can be very different than yours. I’d be interested to hear others who have had a specific doctrine they struggled to understand, and either by rejecting it or accepting it, what benefits did you get that you would feel comfortable sharing with the group?

[Anonymous]

God commanded killings. After a lot of study (and I could do more but it can be painful) I finally discovered that God doesn’t command killings.

The benefit for me was gaining better understanding of what God is and is not. I just think that is super duper important.

It has also been part of me changing the way I interpret sacred texts.

[Anonymous]

My brother died in a car accident a few years ago, leaving behind a badly injured wife, and two injured children (out of 4.) The Family Proclamation says, “Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother…”

My nephew and nieces will not be reared by their father. He was wearing a seatbelt, driving the speed limit, RM, married in the temple, etc. It’s still something I struggle with.

1 Cor 10:13 “There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.”

My niece ran away from home, started pulling out her hair, acting out, and it sure seems like a temptation above her 7 year old ability.

I really struggle with this–not to the point of blaming God, but I haven’t been able to reconcile these sorts of issues. I have no answers, and I’m not sure anyone has a satisfactory answer in this life. I think it’s something that will have to be explained to me in the next life, because I sure haven’t found any comforting answers so far.

I will say I feel close to my brother, and I think he is very aware of me and my struggles. However, I’d rather have him here, raising his family as the Proclamation says is supposed to happen. I don’t view this as a blessing, though I will say that I am glad he died rather than living like Terri Shiavo or some of these severely brain-injured people.

[Anonymous]

Wow, that’s tough mh.

Is the proclamation considered doctrine? I’m not trying to be an [jerk], I just don’t feel on any level that it’s doctrine. It’s more like an outdated Ensign article talking about the only role for women is in the home.

I actually think that the example you gave is one reason it’s not doctrine. In my mind anyways, doctrine should be eternal truth, in the scope of a theological paradigm or philosophical paradigm or mythological paradigm.

Describing what would be considered an ideal family life in 1950’s America, does not strike me as doctrine.

Again, I feel deeply for your loss and hope I didn’t hurt you in any way. That is not my intention. I’m torn whether to post this or not but just wanted to add that the proclamation was the first thing that came to my mind as well upon reading the OP, so when you brought it up, this is my response. Though I hadn’t thought of it in the terms you described.

[Anonymous]

The teaching that children who die before reaching the age of accountability are exalted puzzles me. Seems too Calvinistic and unfair to those who suffer tremendously in an extended life to me, and I think personally it was Joseph speaking from his heart to comfort grieving parents – and probably himself and Emma, seeing how many young children they lost.

I don’t know whether or not it’s “Truth” – but it’s comforting doctrine and better overall than any other alternative of which I’m aware, so I’m cool with it. I just remain open to things like a full mortal probation for all – something like reincarnation without the animal lives. I don’t know, and I think there are very important reasons why that couldn’t be taught as doctrine even if it were true, so I like the doctrine we currently have. It comforts those who stand in need of comfort, and often that is more important than worrying about absolute truth.

[Anonymous]

Hi Heber

This post really resonates with much of my experience with the “commandments” part of the church. It reminds me a little of the “God told me to push the rock” analogy. The one where after so much effort we get discouraged because we didn’t move the rock or think its stupid to waste time moving rocks that won’t move in the first place. And then God says,”I didn’t tell you to move the rock, only to push on it.” And then we realize that perhaps it was our muscles that he was trying to strengthen and perhaps had very little to do with the rock.

Challenges are interesting beasts as the pain of certain situations causes people to make interesting choices to avoid the pain. There is so much about obeying the commandments and performing those diligent strugglings or effectual strugglings that you are describing, that is more about the changes that God is trying to inspire in us and knowledge He is trying to write inside of our souls that can’t be obtained any other way. In this way the commandments seem like a very gracious gift as they provide parameters for safter strugglings.

It’s interesting how there are opposites in everything…..even inside the doctrines of the church or the commands vs. the reality of our circumstances. Maybe Eve understood it best when she taught Adam that we must know the bitter so that we can know the sweet. I don’t spose there is anyone in the world who understands the value of being raised with a father more than the people who don’t have one.

It’s hard and it isn’t my favorite part about earth life, but pain is probably the most effective teacher. What is the scripture about knowing the doctrine because you live it? Frankly, I don’t think we gain important knowledge (and I don’t just mean the kind that is wrote memory in someones head) any other way but in the trenches. There is no yellow brick road. At least I haven’t found one. There are only seasons along the way that show me and teach me about the opposites and everything in between.

Maybe its this process that helps us overcome spiritual blindness. And it really is about trust, obedience, faith and going the distance in diligence.

[Anonymous]

Thanks Heber — makes me think. As it applies in my life, I had the same experience in my education of the sciences. What was so hard for me to learn required increased time and energy, which gave me much more understanding of the subject. What I came to eventually learn had always been a true concept…I just didn’t get it in the beginning.

Certainly the same principle applies to things of the spirit. My most difficult lesson was when so many teachers in my life were showing me how (spiritual) truth came from so many other sources than my (admittedly isolated Utah) LDS upbringing. If “we” had the “one truth,” it should all be there! When I let that one go, I was flooded with new information that resonated perfectly.

There have always been parts of LDS history I have struggled with. The more I tried to understand them, the more they didn’t feel right, Polygamy, polyandry, especially with other married women and teenagers, the changing story of the Mountain Meadows Massacre. and today, the church’ position on gay marriage rights. To me, the church leaders are/were just wrong about these. They were, they are today, and I think if I try to make wrong, immoral things “right,” I am doing myself a disservice in my spiritual growth.

Perhaps the more important lesson for me is to allow them to be wrong without feeling the need to think they should be, and are, always right? Maybe the higher principle for me to learn is that “I” don’t need to justify their actions at all…that I can have my own inspiration into the matters, and can trust my own heart?

😮 😯

[Anonymous]

Quote:

The doctrines that puzzle me or I least like can be very different than yours. I’d be interested to hear others who have had a specific doctrine they struggled to understand, and either by rejecting it or accepting it, what benefits did you get that you would feel comfortable sharing with the group?

In my book, all of these are philosophical questions for the ages. I could spend my whole life just considering the ramifications of each.

God Commanded Killings. I partly accept, mostly reject this one. Personally, I think that it’s a perfect example of a caution against tribalism and territorialism masquerading as morality or God’s commands. There is something expedient in ancient people in violent times eradicating dangerous neighbors who were probably considering eradicating them because they were also dangerous. We call this war. It is seldom as justified as diplomacy. The extreme fear of inter-marriage with infidels seems likewise rife with its own self-justification rather than morality. However, I do think that there could be a reason for God to end one person’s trial period on earth prematurely because of the needs of far more people outweighing the needs of that one person. I conclude that Laban (if he’s a real person) might get a little extra slack at judgment day given the nature of his demise. Was it a rationalization, justifiable homocide, or God’s command? Tougher call.

Atonement. I don’t love the idea that one sinless person must (or even could) die to pay for the sins of others. That puts humanity in the role of big-time loser. Personally, I find it slightly more appealing in the Mormon context that we have to also behave or live a certain way to avail ourselves of it (not to earn it, just to accept it). But still, it seems a repulsive notion on some level, and it also doesn’t seem very logically binding on another.

Communism, I mean Consecration. When itinerant preachers with no steady job (JS and Jesus) propose we all pool our resources, color me skeptical. OTOH, it raises the question of whether or not it is fair that some people have more ability, intellect, resources, better family circumstances, live in a better country, have better luck, etc. And if it’s not fair, then what we should do about that. From a practical standpoint, I don’t see any way for communal living to not yield major problems on planet earth. I don’t even see it as ideal. IMO, capitalism is closer to ideal (to each according to his ability and effort, not just for showing up). But capitalism has casualties as well: the infirm, the mentally ill, the foolish. Of course, those aren’t really the ones we tend to seek out to pool our resources, right?

Polygamy. While I find it utterly repulsive and I have no personal ties to it, I have come to respect the willingness of those women who felt spiritually bound to the principle and who wouldn’t take the word of a man that they had to join, but instead relied on their own spiritual witness. Who am I to say they didn’t have a spiritual witness they should? I’m relieved enough to be no part of it that I’m willing to shelve it.

[Anonymous]

just me wrote:

God commanded killings.

…

The benefit for me was gaining better understanding of what God is and is not. I just think that is super duper important.

I think it is critically important to understanding what God is too, just me.

I wonder, if God does command killings…why aren’t some really evil people who hurt, torture, abuse, and kill children aren’t on that list? That’s an equally tough one to figure out, IMO.

Hawkgrrrl wrote:

I conclude that Laban (if he’s a real person) might get a little extra slack at judgment day given the nature of his demise. Was it a rationalization, justifiable homocide, or God’s command? Tougher call.

Definitely one that is used often when people use the scriptures to justify things like war, but I just think there is some lesson about obedience in that story, not about “well, Laban deserved it” – because you can’t use that example to justify current day situations. I mean, Laban was even passed out drunk…why not bind him until they escaped? Couldn’t God have come up with a better solution than murder for His prophet, Nephi? I go back to the lesson that needs to be learned…something about doing what God tells you to do even if you think it is wrong at the time.

Thanks for sharing.

[Anonymous]

mormonheretic wrote:

1 Cor 10:13 “There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.”

My niece ran away from home, started pulling out her hair, acting out, and it sure seems like a temptation above her 7 year old ability.

Thanks for sharing MH. That is a tough one to understand. Not only the untimely death of your brother, but to see the impact on the family, really makes me wonder how they and you are to live happy and full of faith when such tragedies aren’t just little tests…but completely life-altering situations.

When my dad died, I knew the gospel, I knew about the plan of salvation, I knew where he was and I’d see him again. It didn’t make me feel any less sad knowing that. I still am sad and hurt, regardless of the teachings.

I like the way Poppyseed put it:

Quote:

Challenges are interesting beasts as the pain of certain situations causes people to make interesting choices to avoid the pain. There is so much about obeying the commandments and performing those diligent strugglings or effectual strugglings that you are describing, that is more about the changes that God is trying to inspire in us and knowledge He is trying to write inside of our souls that can’t be obtained any other way. In this way the commandments seem like a very gracious gift as they provide parameters for safter strugglings.

Your brother was an RM, lived the gospel, had the temple blessings of a family, and still they and you have to suffer. I don’t know there are any reasons that make sense of life…only learnings that come out of life’s experiences: good or bad, just or unjust.

However, even the idea that life provides experience we need in the eternities is tough, as Ray points out:

Quote:

The teaching that children who die before reaching the age of accountability are exalted puzzles me. Seems too Calvinistic and unfair to those who suffer tremendously in an extended life to me, and I think personally it was Joseph speaking from his heart to comfort grieving parents – and probably himself and Emma, seeing how many young children they lost.

Because if it was all about experiences…it makes no sense some don’t get the experience, or they don’t need it because they’re already perfect? That doesn’t seem to make sense.

Is it possible life is all just random…and we just go around trying to make sense of it to ease our anxiety about our future, trying to trick our minds into thinking we can avoid the beasts of pain, when really we have no control of it?

[Anonymous]

Rix wrote:

Perhaps the more important lesson for me is to allow them to be wrong without feeling the need to think they should be, and are, always right? Maybe the higher principle for me to learn is that “I” don’t need to justify their actions at all…that I can have my own inspiration into the matters, and can trust my own heart?

Yes! This is the lesson I think I am being taught now as well…and I’m trying to figure out how to accept this and not be bitter or prideful at the same time. Allow the church to be wrong at times, and trust in my ability to settle my heart on important matters, but not become prideful I think I know more than God. I’m not sure I can figure it out…there are too many paradoxes, I think. And so I will just keep trying to push the rock, even though I feel I’m not moving it at all.

Thanks, Rix.

[Anonymous]

swimordie wrote:

Is the proclamation considered doctrine? I’m not trying to be an [jerk], I just don’t feel on any level that it’s doctrine. It’s more like an outdated Ensign article talking about the only role for women is in the home.

I tend to think they were establishing doctrine…but like you swim, it is hard for me to accept it isn’t more than just 50’s “american dream” hopes and aspirations. Be the Brady bunch family with values and you’ll be happy…however behind the scenes the people acting out the Brady bunch have their real-life issues and problems just like the rest of us.

I don’t know, swim…does thinking about that doctrine provide any blessing to you or do you just discard it and move on?

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

I don’t know, swim…does thinking about that doctrine provide any blessing to you or do you just discard it and move on?

I just re-read it in hopes of finding something positive.

http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?locale=0&sourceId=1aba862384d20110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=e1fa5f74db46c010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD

It just reeks of political theocracy/tyranny. I’m sorry to be so emotional but there are some basic ideas that keep getting repeated that are indefensible. There’s at least two families in my ward where the wife works and the husband stays home with the kids. While I see them living the “spirit” of the law, what is the emotional impact on the kids when they memorize the proclamation for primary graduation?

And the overwhelming repetition of the nature of gender and gender roles, seems borderline archaic. Gender identity is a spectrum, not an either/or. As is sexuality. As is intersex/hermaphroditism. Yes, one can easily say, “this is an ideal not doctrine”, but this has taken on a life of it’s own. I understand that I’m obsessing about the exceptions. But, I think there is a way to be all inclusive and still satisfy the dogma.

So, then the question is, “Why not search out the inclusivity?” That’s another thread.

End thread-jack*

btw, unbelievable posts on this thread. You guys are all so insightful! Really loved these:

Rix wrote:

Maybe the higher principle for me to learn is that “I” don’t need to justify their actions at all…that I can have my own inspiration into the matters, and can trust my own heart?

Poppyseed wrote:

There are only seasons along the way that show me and teach me about the opposites and everything in between.

Heber13 wrote:

Is it possible life is all just random…and we just go around trying to make sense of it to ease our anxiety about our future, trying to trick our minds into thinking we can avoid the beasts of pain, when really we have no control of it?

[Anonymous]

The struggle to understand puzzling doctrines can take years. I am reminded that Joseph’s brother Alvan died in 1823. I believe it was in the Kirtland Temple about 1836 when he appeared to Joseph. That’s 13 years for Joseph to have learned something, and I believe sometimes it can take a lifetime to learn. As Poppyseed talked about the rock, it can seem so pointless at times, and I guess I feel like I’m pushing a rock with no discernible progress. Perhaps in another decade or two, I’ll figure something out–perhaps I won’t too. But I do think these struggles make us better, provided we have the maturity. I feel like Rix has summed up this spiritual maturity very well, and his perspective is something I am striving for. I am trying to be ok with the idea that I don’t need to know all the answers to these puzzling questions.

Not everyone has that maturity, such as my niece. I hope she is able to find peace soon. I worry about her a lot, and feel pretty powerless in helping her. (I guess the good news is her mom has remarried, and her step-dad is providing a stable home life. He seems like a great guy.)

I do think that life is random, and that is part of God’s plan. I recall listening to a Christian radio station in Colorado a few years ago, which dealt with death. They said that everybody who was alive 100-150 years ago is now dead. Death is a natural part of life, and we shouldn’t think that we’re the only ones who experience it. It gave me an interesting perspective.

[Anonymous]

I will do a separate post on this, but I just have to say that the Proclamation does NOT command the wife to stay home while the husband works. In fact, it explicitly places the decision in the hands of the individual couple and sets NO hardcore restrictions on how a couple provides financially for their family. NONE.

[Author]

Posts