The paradox of religion

[Anonymous]

Hi guys. Yes, I am still here. I don’t post very much anymore, but I still read the new posts/threads every week or so. It helps me to not feel so alone. I think you people are so awesome/patient/accepting.

Anyway, I have been pondering something a great deal lately, and am interested in hearing other points of view on the subject:

When I took a step back and looked at the “plan” as it is presented to us by the church, I can’t help feeling confused by some obvious contradictions. LDS doctrine teaches that we all lived before we came to Earth, and this is referred to as the “pre-existence”, and it was in the pre-existence that we learned HF’s plan and accepted it. When we came to Earth, our memory of our pre-existence life was erased/veiled/withheld (you get the idea). As an investigator and new member I remember being taught that the reason we had no memory of the pre-existence was so that this life could be a true test of our choices. Serving in Primary for over a decade, I have to say that this is also how it is being explained to the children: that we have no recollection of our pre-existence life so that this life could be a true test of how we choose to live.

So then WHY are we being taught and told to believe everything that HF made us forget??? If he want’s us to have knowledge of what happened before we came to Earth, than why make us forget? If it was so important for us not to know, then why is it so important for us to learn it now? From this point of view it almost seems like religion (not just LDS) is like a “cheat-sheet” for life. Wouldn’t it be a truer test of our characters if we were not taught the gospel and were evaluated on the choices that we made “on our own”?

My DH says that the difference is that even after we learn the gospel, we don’t really “know” it (although most LDS testimony meetings would seem to contradict that ) and that we must learn to accept things on faith. We need to nurture our faith and help it to grow.

So, is my DH right…is it all about faith then? I don’t understand that. Why is faith such a virtue anyway? What is so admirable about accepting something that cannot be proven, often defies logic and common sense, and creates such cognitive dissonance? I can certainly see the value in hope, and in believing in and seeking after goodness, but I cannot see the value of faith.

In my own life, I prayed daily for over ten years on every subject imaginable. Sometimes my prayers were mechanical, sometimes they were earnest and heartfelt. I NEVER felt like I EVER got an answer. Sometimes I felt emotional, but it was no different than other times I have felt emotional on non-spiritual matters. I don’t pray anymore, because I finally decided that if HF is actually out there, he is not going out of his way to show me that he exists. I figure that if he IS there, he made me forget about him for a reason, and wants to see how I do making decisions without him. Conversely, if it is so important for me to know of his existence, why did he make me forget about him, and why didn’t he give me some small inkling over the course of a decade of praying that he is there?

So… the paradox of religion. We were made to forget before we came here… so why are we being taught what we were made to forget?

A final thought: IMHO someone who lives a loving and admirable life without religion is arguably a better person since they are motivated to do good for goodness sake, instead of a heavenly reward.

I am VERY interested in hearing your thoughts on this.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

So, is my DH right…is it all about faith then? I don’t understand that. Why is faith such a virtue anyway? What is so admirable about accepting something that cannot be proven, often defies logic and common sense, and creates such cognitive dissonance? I can certainly see the value in hope, and in believing in and seeking after goodness, but I cannot see the value of faith.

That’s not my favorite explanation of it either. My own view is that if we “knew” everything from an outside source (memory in this case), then we wouldn’t know whether we were inherently good or just obedient. This is probably not the version you are going to hear from “obedience Nazis,” but IMO spiritual self-reliance is the point of a veil. Faith, sort of, but in your own ability to discern right from wrong and your ability to learn to rely on your internal moral compass.

Quote:

So… the paradox of religion. We were made to forget before we came here… so why are we being taught what we were made to forget?

Like I said, it makes sense to me only if you look at it as revealing what’s inside of you – the kind of person you are. It’s the ultimate test: are you a good person because you have all the advantages or even when you have none of the advantages (no scrutiny, no rulebook, no relying on heavenly parents)?

Quote:

A final thought: IMHO someone who lives a loving and admirable life without religion is arguably a better person since they are motivated to do good for goodness sake, instead of a heavenly reward.

I think that’s true as well – but whether in or out of religion is irrelevant. It’s just a little craven to be motivated by rewards or fear and better to simply do what’s right because it’s the kind of person you are. So within that hierarchy, I agree with you.

[Anonymous]

A way to approach this, that I like at least, is to look at the usefulness of stories more than the “truth” of them. In the case of the “plan of salvation” like you are asking, we have two basic, irrational (meaning beyond concrete comprehension, not wrong) senses within us: one is that we have always existed. The other is that we know we can’t remember things before we were born. How does one connect those dots?

Well one story that helps us contemplate this is that life is a test of obedience, and the only way to make it “fair” is to erase everyone’s conscious memory of the pre-existence. Yet somehow, pieces of that filter through like memories and feelings when we are on the right track.

That is a useful story. It works for a lot of people who want to make sense of the world. I don’t mean “story” in the sense of a silly and meaningless fable. This story has PROFOUND importance because it colors almost every moment of our life. It becomes a part of our concept of the ultimate reality (the meaning of life).

Is that a bad story? I say no. It is a very functional and useful story. Notice I am avoiding words like true and false.

I prefer a permutation of this story. I like to think of it very similar, but more in the frame of a journey or hero’s quest. If we could remember everything from our pre-existence, our past lives, or whatever you want to call it, the whole point and pain of the quest would be ruined. It would be like telling someone the end of the story before they read it. They would know the end, but it would have little meaning without actually living the beginning and the middle of the story. That makes a lot of sense to me, and I find this concept allows me to comfortably sit along side the “pop quiz” style brothers and sisters who are worried about failing. I am instead focusing on enjoying the story and looking forward to the surprise ending.

[Anonymous]

I love that Valoel pointed out the Hero Myth in this worldview. That’s exactly what it is. The hero answers the call to adventure. The hero encounters dangers and challenges. The hero sees things that others do not because his/her motives are better than the others who failed. The hero finally succeeds because the hero has a pure heart and is true. All the great myths and fairy tales follow this pattern.

[Anonymous]

and the hero always gets the crap kicked out of her and doubts her hero-tude at some point(s) in the epic.

We can’t circumvent that very important aspect, and the concept of a veil over our memories allows that butt-kicking to occur.

[Anonymous]

Valoel wrote:

A way to approach this, that I like at least, is to look at the usefulness of stories more than the “truth” of them.

But the church is always emphasizing truth! Truth, truth, truth. Aargh!

Probably my biggest issue over the past 16 years that I have been a member of the LDS church is how much it pushes the importance of testimony. Can anyone here argue that the status of your testimony (including growing it, bearing it, nurturing it, etc.) is central to the TBM’s life in the church? As a youth leader I stuck out like a sore thumb as the only one not constantly bearing my testimony (I never had one, and refused to pretend that I did) at pretty much every meeting/activity.

It seems to me that an awful lot of emphasis is being placed on whether or not we accept the gospel as “truth”. Why is this SO important? If it was so important for us to “know” all of this, then why would we have been made to forget it when we came here??? Is it because people will only follow good teachings if they believe they are “true”? What about following them because they are “good”? Would Jesus’ teachings hold no value if it turned out that he really wasn’t the son of God? The teachings would still be the same wouldn’t they?

Sorry, I am getting off on a bit of a tangent here, but I think it is all related in some way.

You have all done a good job explaining why we have no memory of the pre-existence, but I still do not understand the reason why we are being taught and told to accept as “truth” something that we were supposedly made to forget.

Why do we really have the church? Wouldn’t the truer test of our characters have been to send us down here without any guidance and see who chooses good over evil of their own accord? The church says we have agency, but as a member of the church you are pretty much coerced to “choose” to obey. I mean what kind of choice is it when you are told that if you follow these rules you will have eternal salvation and live happily ever after with your loved ones in utopia, whereas if you make the wrong choice you will die a spiritual death and be shut out of the celestial kingdom? Not much of a choice. The church has set up a whole bunch of rules and regulations and meetings and red tape etc, to micromanage our lives in order to make sure that we are always told what is the right choice to make, and then make sure we are held accountable for our choices by undergoing constant scrutiny (interviews, visits, etc). It kind of sounds more like Lucifer’s plan to me when you get right down to it.

Sorry for the rant. I sincerely do not mean to offend anyone here. Testimony meetings really get to me (“I know this church is true, I know Jesus is the Christ, I know JS was a prophet of God, blah, blah, blah”). I’ll be honest with you guys and admit that in asking these questions I am really playing devil’s advocate here as opposed to actually being spiritually tormented by this. I have faced the fact that I am basically an atheist (one who yearns to be an agnostic), and that my problem in the church is probably that I always have been, but as long as my DH is a TBM member of the church I need to make an effort to attend church out of respect for him. That doesn’t mean that I can’t still see the good that exists there. I really don’t have a belief that Jesus was the son of God, but that in no way affects my admiration of his teachings or my desire to follow them in my life. That doesn’t seem to be good enough in the LDS church where testimony, testimony, testimony is constantly being pushed.

I wonder what people would think if I got up one testimony meeting and said, “I know this church is… a church. I know this church teaches many good things. I know that Jesus as he is portrayed in the scriptures taught many wise and wonderful things. I know that I want to apply those teachings in my life. But… I don’t know if any of it is actually true.”

Does it really matter if it is true?

Again, I apologize if I have offended anyone. Now you can see why I post here less and less. I suppose my views are not terribly helpful on this forum. Sometimes the inconsistencies just seem so glaring that it drives me nuts, and I feel like it is better for me to let it out here instead of with my poor DH.

[Anonymous]

I believe it was Elder Eyring who bore testimony this past conference:

“I know this is the Church of Jesus Christ . . . of latter-day saints.”

Now that is a testimony I can believe in!

[Anonymous]

Please don’t feel you need to post less just because you’re struggling to figure stuff out. That describes all of us to some degree – even me, although I have absolutely no angst about the struggle anymore. I’ve embraced it and actually find great joy in it, but I’m still struggling to figure things out.

Quote:

Does it really matter if it is true?

I think it matters that each of us finds a way to look at our own belief structure as “true for us” or “true to us”. I was going to post something on this general topic, but I will leave it in a comment here for now – and maybe post it separately with more detail later:

In the third verse of the entire Book of Mormon, in introducing his record, Nephi says:

Quote:

“And I know that the record which I make is true; and I make it with mine own hand; and I make it according to my knowledge.”

Jacob follows that later in Jacob 7:26 with:

Quote:

“wherefore, I conclude this record, declaring that I have written according to the best of my knowledge”

In Mormon 9:32. Moroni says:

Quote:

“And now, behold, we have written this record according to our knowledge”

Finally, Mormon sums up his abridgment by describing it in Mormon 8:12 with the phrase:

Quote:

“the imperfections which are in it”

Every one of these verses relates “truth” directly to what each person “knows” individually. Iow, the “truth” is critical to each and every person, but it also is defined by each and every person according to “the best of (my) knowledge.” To say it differently, every one of these passages speaks of “knowledge” through the lens of personal experience – not as some academic, intellectually-defined, universal, “perfect” or absolute standard.

My take away is simple, in relation to your question, Asha.

Being absolutely certain that we know universal Truth isn’t critical for everyone, is destructive for many and important for others. So be it. I’m in the first category, but that doesn’t make me any better than someone in the last category who lives a good, sincere, love-centered life. (I also have no right to shatter someone’s certainty if that certainty is crucial to their peace of mind and well-being. That’s just selfish.)

However, finding something in which I as an individual can believe as truth “according to my own knowledge” is absolutely critical to my happiness, peace and well-being – and I think that’s true for every single person who lives on this earth. I can’t live my life “tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine”. I need to have something to which I can cling during the storms of my life – something that can provide the safety and security of a kite-string while I let my kite fly anywhere I want to explore. I might not be “absolutely certain” of much on a universal level, but it’s vital that there be some foundational things that I personally, for myself, independently can say I “know for myself” – that is “true” for me.

My own conviction is that there is PLENTY of room in the LDS Church for people whose “personal knowledge” varies radically, as long as there is a common desire to understand, progress, journey, grow, search, believe, etc. For me, it’s MUCH more about accepting on-going and personal revelation than it is about agreeing on every point of current doctrine. Coming to grips with that paradox (the need for an element of unity within a broad diversity of personal perspective) is what I see as the core definition of “Zion” – people who are very different in many ways overlooking those differences and uniting anyway. I’ve seen it happen at multiple levels, so “according to my knowledge” I can state it is possible.

[Anonymous]

asha wrote:

But the church is always emphasizing truth! Truth, truth, truth. Aargh!

We totally understand the frustration Asha. I know what you mean. For me though, it helps me to coexist in an uplifting way with people who focus on that aspect by seeing their position as just that — a view point. From a Fowler perspective, we should expect most of the adult members (and even leaders) of any western church to be more Stage 3 (with some elements of remaining Stage 2) types of people. They will experience symbolic religion from that perspective, from the perspective of a personal relationship of the divine and their community. They can feel a good feeling inside, and that translates to epistemological “truth.” The absolute “truth” of their community’s symbols generally work for them, which reinforces this feeling.

You have stepped out of the current of that river, and are now standing on the shore looking at all those people in the river talking to each other about how wet the water is, and how they know it is wet. To them, that is correct. It takes patience and love to let them be there, and let them just enjoy their experience. The experience of being “True” is very important to Mormonism. It’s just the way it is.

As a reconciliation strategy, I personally replace the word “true” in my head when someone says that with “makes me feel good” or “makes me feel good about myself.” I don’t have to do that all the time, but I used to do that a lot. When someone is bearing their testimony on the first Sunday, they might say “I know the Church is true.” That turns into “I know the Church makes me have a good feeling inside.” This really works for a lot of people, especially those that are expressing that emotion-based epistemology common in Mormonism (and many other churches/religions actually). That makes it “true” to them, and it is good. I have no problem with that. I am happy for them.

asha wrote:

It seems to me that an awful lot of emphasis is being placed on whether or not we accept the gospel as “truth”. Why is this SO important? If it was so important for us to “know” all of this, then why would we have been made to forget it when we came here??? Is it because people will only follow good teachings if they believe they are “true”? What about following them because they are “good”? Would Jesus’ teachings hold no value if it turned out that he really wasn’t the son of God? The teachings would still be the same wouldn’t they?

You have all done a good job explaining why we have no memory of the pre-existence, but I still do not understand the reason why we are being taught and told to accept as “truth” something that we were supposedly made to forget.

I don’t know Asha *shrug*. All stories break when they are stretched far enough in a specific direction. If it doesn’t make sense … it might just be that it doesn’t make sense. By that, I mean it is a story that approximates and mediates a transcendent concept. It works … but only to a point. I think the story of the Plan of Salvation as you are describing it (common to many members) has a good logical system of causation and effect, as long as one stays focused on life being a big test of obedience. That works. But as soon as we start to look too closely at that concept of obedience and a test, we have to make all kinds of other stories to reconcile other issues. The act of asking all those logical questions breaks down the story … to the point that someone ends up here on the internet asking why the Church focuses on that

[Anonymous]

Thanks Valoel and Ray.

Valoel wrote:

All stories break when they are stretched far enough in a specific direction. If it doesn’t make sense … it might just be that it doesn’t make sense

This is actually quite helpful. I hate to admit that I think a lot of my frustration comes from my having viewed the church in such an absolutist sort of way for so many years. Like either it is all true or all false. I know many TBM members view it that way, and I seem to remember Pres Hinckley saying something to that effect once (to my horror). I was never able to find that confirmation of truth, so I feel so compelled to pick pick pick it apart. Sigh.

Is it possible for a person to spend the rest of their life in stage 4? That is how I am feeling now. I equate entering stage 5 with finding some peace, and all I feel towards the church is frustration and resentment. Of course some weeks are better than others, but I am so torn between trying to keep my DH happy by attending and yet being terrified by what the future hold for my kids (i.e. I don’t want any of them married in the temple, I really don’t want my son to go on a mission one day).

I feel like I am stuck between a rock and a hard place.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

Is it possible for a person to spend the rest of their life in stage 4?

Yes, but it is the very definition of misery.

Now that you know you no longer see the world the way you used to see it, the power is in you to create a different world-view that will work for you. Some people do that by returning to their former perspective; some do it by adopting a new extreme perspective that is the exact opposite of their former one. What works for someone is what works for someone, and I can’t demand they reach the conclusions I’ve reached. However, others do so by returning to their former community but construct their own, individual, personally-fashioned outlook – and since it’s their own, unique creation, they are suddenly freed to tinker with it eternally as they try to bring it closer to being complete, whole and fully developed.

One of the first signs of moving into Stage 5 is when you find that you care deeply about others and are willing to accept silly stuff to maintain peace and harmony and unity – but you just don’t care ultimately anymore about if they understand and agree with you on everything, even “important” things.

I’ve said this before to others, but please take a look at the posts under “Resolutions” on my personal blog. If I could suggest one thing only to help you begin to reconcile with Mormonism as your own “faith community” it would be to focus on developing the characteristics of godliness mentioned in our scriptures, especially the Sermon on the Mount and other places in the New Testament. I believe becoming more humble, meek, merciful, etc. will open doors to healing and peace that simply can’t happen any other way.

[Anonymous]

Hi Asha,

Thanks for your post and such honesty. It is so refreshing. I am having a really bad day today. I feel so empty inside and so relate to what you have said. I have been ill for so long now and getting weary of all the pain I have been in. Then I cut my finger real bad just now while fixing dinner and I just kind of lost it. Bawling my head off, wondering where the heck God or Jesus is. So many times, I just don’t feel comforted when He says he will comfort you. I just don’t know what to believe in anymore. Sorry, for the pity party. I just find the paradox of religion disconcerting my self at times. “Come all ye that are heavy laden and I will give you comfort and peace.” Why don’t we always feel that? I hate feeling so unsure of everything I believe in all my life. I had such a loving Father who I could talk to all the time, but I don’t feel my Heavenly Father loving me all the time. Only on rare ocassions. Anyway, at least we can vent on bad days here.

[Anonymous]

asha wrote:

I hate to admit that I think a lot of my frustration comes from my having viewed the church in such an absolutist sort of way for so many years. Like either it is all true or all false.

I know it’s frustrating. Ideally, the Church should be all true. That would be wonderful. Wouldn’t it be so simple and easy? I am not being sarcastic (it’s hard to express tone online). It really would be nice. One less thing to deal with and figure out. You could just listen to a prophet or read the Bible, and everything would be laid out crystal clear and easy with no ambiguity.

Life is messy. It just doesn’t work like that. I don’t know why really, but it is what it is. It makes things very interesting and adventurous if you can approach things with a positive attitude. Easier said than done … I know.

asha wrote:

I know many TBM members view it that way, and I seem to remember Pres Hinckley saying something to that effect once (to my horror).

You know this is the way it is. I know this is just the way it is. Many people we love in our lives have this view. Many more people we don’t even know have this view. The peace comes when you fully internalize the fact that you are just as good at figuring things out as all of them, even Church leaders. It is OK for others to not see what you see. As monolithic as the group seems, they are not really all marching in perfect lock step either. They just don’t notice. They just think they believe what everyone believes … that is the quintessential essence of Stage 3 belief structure. They don’t examine the system as a system of parts. We are most often watching a conversation within the Church of Stage 3 people talking with Stage 3 people. You just have to see what is going on and understand. You are just plain NOT one of those people anymore. This doesn’t mean you no longer belong. You just aren’t one of those types of people. God wants us around too in the world. He needs us. I assume this because we exist. We exist; therefore, we have a purpose to make meaning. We are part of the great and beautiful symphony of meaning makers: “Homo Poeta.”

In fact, it seems to me that God wants us to try and figure it out. If he didn’t … well He sure could have made things a lot more clear. So I am forced to assume that we all have to approach meaning as best we are able. You are someone who has to move forward and see the system. It is just the way you are. We know and understand because people that come here to this forum are those kinds of people.

[Anonymous]

Wow, lots of good things have been said here. Ray, Valoel, Hawk, very good words of wisdom, and I agree completely. Let me offer my unique twist on the already wonderful advice.

To me, religion’s primary purpose is to help me be happier. To do this, in the past, various story mechanisms have been used and indeed the sages used the best knowledge available to them at the time (just like we do now). We now know a lot about nature vs. nurture, genetics, neuroscience, and psychological phenomena that put the words of the sages into perspective and give them a nice bit of validation. When I hear “Truth” being preached at church I look for ways to apply what is being said to my own life. It may or may not be true but that’s not really my purpose. I’m trying to hear what I can apply to myself, not a expose on absolute truth.

Stage 4 faith is no place to be. People spend years there sometimes. I’m grateful that my time there was relatively short (6-9 months) and I moved on. That’s generally my nature – to work through problems quickly. My recommendation follows along Ray’s counsel to focus on you. Turn inward, not outward. Stop making Mormonism the object of your worries, and worry about you. Decide that you will take responsibility for your own spirituality. Recognize that the only thing in life you get to control is you – and rightfully so. Use that power to dictate your future spirituality and stop being controlled by other influences. Use the power found in personal responsibility to elevate yourself by loving others. Recognize that people make choices and get to control themselves just like you get to control you. These two attitudes allow you to build a healthy understanding of dealing with people. You understand why people do what they do (you have compassion for them and give them the benefit of the doubt) but you also reserve your right to act in response to their actions in the way you see fit. You try to create the perfect balance of love and compassion with resolute understanding of your right to control yourself.

You are then at a place where you get to decide what you believe and what you won’t believe. But you have also learned (since you’ve been there before) that you better not believe everything you think. You know you need to learn from other people, cultures, ideas, science, religion, etc. Otherwise you will revert to the same mindset you previously had (although with a different set of ideas). You see that you’re not that interested in hanging out with people who simply verify what you already believe because there is no growth for you there (and that’s exactly what your old tradition gave you in your former self). You have now fully realized that the object of your disaffection was not your old tradition, but your old mindset and attitude.

You are now prepared to look to your old tradition, and, when you do you find that it isn’t so bad when viewed from your new perspective – and besides you feel at home there in some sense. You are largely aloof of all the truth claims (they may or may not be true, it doesn’t really matter that much), culture, and doctrinal problems but you enjoy associating with good people and you see everyone as “good people.” You occasionally feel like an “alien” because while you feel comfortable around your old tradition, you realize that you are on your own personal journey grabbing bits of truth here and bits of truth there and so you no longer feel like part of the “collective.” You understand your purpose in the organization You look at people in your old tradition and see them on their own journey, believing what they want, all while recognizing you can learn from them even if you don’t necessarily believe what they say. You see most truth as relative for each person, yet admit that existence and nature are the ultimate objective truth and reality. You have arrived at a healthy balanced view of the world. But as soon as you feel you have “arrived” the next life event makes its way into your attention span and you are back to work through the challenges trying each time anew to maintain the proper balance you developed before. But you know that with each cycle it gets better and better (becoming like God).

You are now in the strange Stage 5 faith paradox, feeling comfortably uncomfortable.

[Anonymous]

I also wanted to say this but my last comment was already way way too long.

So far people in this thread have focused on getting something out of the plan of salvation in the “story” sense. I prefer this approach as well. This is because I view religion as one of my tools to help me become what I consider to be a better happier person. And, as it turns out, modern psychology seems to be confirming (at various levels) what many religious sages have taught throughout the millenia either through parable, metaphor, story, or example. It could very well be that the Mormon view of this life, preexistence, life after death, etc. is all 100% correct. But I find that I don’t feel like I can know that with any degree of certainty. Hence, like the sages of old, I use the best knowledge available to me (which, arguably is better than it ever has been in the history of the world thanks to modern science and technology) and try to make sense of the world.

Here is an alternate literal explanation that will do absolutely nothing to help you resolve your conflicts but will at least give you a bone of literalness. Many view religion as an evolutionary tool that humans developed to help us become more social. That is, up until religion was invented, people simply acted in their own self-interest, in very small groups. This can only get people so far. What is to prevent me from killing my neighbor and stealing all his stuff? Nothing, if my only concept is to follow my self-interest. But the downside to this behavior is that your neighbor just may have had the talent of creating what you wanted. You have what he created, but you still don’t know how to create it. Enter trade. I’ll respect your property by trading my goods and services for your goods and services and we will agree to not kill each other or steal from each other. Now we have the basis for ethics, and religion. Now add a few million years of evolution and now it is built into us that killing/stealing is wrong (the light of Christ). Note that in this theory, the basis for morality is not in some grandiose absolute truth from God, but in practicality.

Now consider the plan of salvation in this context. Admittedly humans have a desire to be immortal (although probably not literally if most of us thought about it), and we like to consider ourselves as important. Like Valoel said, we can’t remember what life was like before we were born. We also don’t know what happens when we die. But it feels vitally important to us to know and we already are convinced we’re immortal (or would like to be). Hence, if you look at religious history you’ll find just about every possible concoction of theories, ideas, and hypotheses to answer these questions. The one in Mormonism happens to build on the stuff some guy named Jesus taught, coupled with a dose of protestantism, and sprinkled with eastern philosophy.

But alas, as I’ve said, this won’t actually help you resolve your problem because it is just a theory with many unknowns and contradictions just like the plan of salvation (though it has more scientific evidence backing it).

[Author]

Posts