- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
There is quite a list of things that I disagree with in the church, but one of the things on the top of the list is the constant usage of “I Know”. I was born and raised in the church so I was numb to the phrase and I was a regular user as well, even before I had a “real” testimony. I was even one of those programmed kids who regurgitated the, “I know this church is true, I know the BoM is the word of God, I know J.S. was a prophet, I love my family…name of JC amen.”
I am a victim and perpetrator of this horrible phrase. It needs to stop. Of all the things in the church that I do hope that changes is that this one phrase is ceased and forever forgotten. It is an embarrassment on those that use it, it is an embarrassment to the church and it promotes unwarranted arrogance and superiority.
Here is a
clip with Helen WhitneyThis is a book that I own and love,
“On Being Certain”, by Robert Burton.If I can only change one or two active members in the church to stop being certain on things of faith and belief and stop them from using the dreaded phrase, “I Know”, I think I can may find just a little peace in this life.
Tom wrote:There is quite a list of things that I disagree with in the church, but one of the things on the top of the list is the constant usage of “I Know”.
I was born and raised in the church so I was numb to the phrase and I was a regular user as well, even before I had a “real” testimony. I was even one of those programmed kids who regurgitated the, “I know this church is true, I know the BoM is the word of God, I know J.S. was a prophet, I love my family…name of JC amen.”
Heh. Me too. Does it matter if I was sincere or not? What difference, do you think?
Tom wrote:I am a victim and perpetrator of this horrible phrase. It needs to stop. Of all the things in the church that I do hope that changes is that this one phrase is ceased and forever forgotten. It is an embarrassment on those that use it, it is an embarrassment to the church and it promotes unwarranted arrogance and superiority.
Sounds like you’re embarrassed enough for a whole bunch of people. I agree that it *can* promote arrogance & etc. But to so many, it is not expression of such negative things at all. For that group of LDS, it does not taint their purity of expression at all. Is mindlessness, even innocence, to be rightly equated with “arrogance and superiority”? I think not.
Tom wrote:Here is a
clip with Helen WhitneyYes, I remember that. I thought she took it pretty well.
Tom wrote:This is a book that I own and love,
“On Being Certain”, by Robert Burton.I have just placed a ‘hold’ on it with the Library. If the author carries the same conclusion as you seem too, I’ll be surprised. I don’t doubt that we humans ‘need’ to be certain. In fact, I’m certain of it. You seem to be of the opinion that we shouldn’t be the way we actually are. Interesting, if not very logical. Are you thinking along the same lines as Sam Harris does in his book “The End of Faith”?
Tom wrote:If I can only change one or two active members in the church to stop being certain on things of faith and belief and stop them from using the dreaded phrase, “I Know”, I think I can may find just a little peace in this life.
You must be very certain in all this, to be tilting at windmills…(BTW, just because I’m feeling guilty at being such a smart-aleck, I’ll post this, I’m certain it’s true, too:
“Living with ambiguity is a form of intellectual honesty, of
humility. It is only when we admit that we don’t know that we
are receptive to what lessons may be taught. In some strange
way, it also brings an inner peace since we are no longer
fighting reality to maintain our inner fantasies on how things
should be. While I am characterizing it as an intellectual
process, it also has spiritual implications, since only an open
mind is capable of hearing God.”
— Andy Piereder (on Eyring-L)
Best wishes,
HiJolly
HiJolly wrote:I don’t doubt that we humans ‘need’ to be certain. In fact, I’m certain of it. You seem to be of the opinion that we shouldn’t be the way we actually are. Interesting, if not very logical. Are you thinking along the same lines as Sam Harris does in his book “The End of Faith”?
Yes I am aligned with Harris in this thinking. I’m guess I am saying that we should go against what is appears to be natural for human behavior. There are many “natural” human behaviors that I think we should correct. Like the overwhelming fascination with sex for example.
Quote:You must be very certain in all this, to be tilting at windmills…
I guess I am certain that being certain isn’t the correct way of thinking. I guess that makes me a kind of hypocrite, but I think the first step towards a solution to the problem is just being aware of it. You can’t make any corrections if you aren’t aware of any missteps.
I appreciate your comments.
There is a post about this basic topic that has 26 comments. The focus is slightly different, but it would go well as a continuation of that discussion. Let’s continue this conversation on that thread, so everyone who reads and doesn’t comment can read it in one thread – and so the comments on that thread can be honored for the thought that was put into them.
“I’d like to bear my testimony, I know the Church is . . .”
http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=290 Thanks!
It especially bugs me when kids get up and say it. How do they know? Well, I don’t honestly think they do. What, are they Samuel the prophet? It has bothered me for years to hear adults say it. I used to sit down in the pews an ask with some anger and jealousy, “How do they know, and why don’t I? Haven’t I read and prayed too. Does God love them more. Do they have a speacial calling that I will never have that gives them this speacial knowlege?” It made me feel inferior and I knew that I wasn’t.
I have learned to not take them seriousley anymore. What do they really mean? Do they mean I just had a really good spiritual experience and am still high on confidence before the doubts start coming back in? Is it just an expression of faith?
In my personal expression, and I don’t like to say “I know” even though I have been more than blessed with knowlege from both sides of the veil. I know what I know, but I don’t know. I wasn’t there when the Book of Mormon was translated, but from proofs/evidences, especially those spiritual, I am pretty darned sure that the BofM is real and true. It has been a wonderful experience for me. Prayer is the same. I can’t see God, but sometimes when I am in prayer I feel like I am in a warm cucoon(?) and I have connected to a source of knowlege not inside of me. This experience is more than wonderful.
Anyway, if we live in a world and life where living in faith is really the main point, because there are few people who know much, then why do we put so much value on “knowing?” We don’t graduate to any higher status. There is no Know Club. It’s a Mormon culture thing. We are probably the only christian church that puts this much value on knowing if this church is true.
If my comment didn’t cement together very well I apoligize.
Ok Ray, Ya’ll follow me to that thread…
Hi, borninit. First of all, I want to say how much I related to everything you said in your post. I pretty much see this whole issue exactly like you do. borninit wrote:It especially bugs me when kids get up and say it. How do they know? Well, I don’t honestly think they do. What, are they Samuel the prophet?
I posted something to this effect in another thread, maybe it was even in my introductory thread. It bugs me, too. It bugs me now, it bugged me when I was a teenager, and it even bugged me when I was a kid myself. I am 60 years old and I have only once in my life stood and said, “I know the Church is true.” After I said it, I felt like a liar. It wasn’t a good feeling. When I was a little kid and my friends used to say it, I used to sit there and think, “No you don’t. All you know is that your parents say that and that it will make them happy to hear you say it. What makes you so sure that your know? Maybe Patty’s Church (Roman Catholicism) is true. How do you know it’s not? What do you even know about anybody’s Church but your own?” When I was in Seminary, we had testimony meetings at which there was a certain amount of pressure to stand up and bear your testimony. I can remember one day standing up and saying, “I believe the Church is true.” I hoped no one would notice what I’d said or, if they did, would think anything of it. After I got through, though, several more students got brave and also said, “I believe the Church is true.” I was just starting to think, “Well good for them!” when somebody said, “I know the Church is true and I
believethe Book of Mormon is true.” Then, several more students repeated that! At the end of the class, the teacher said what I’d been thinking, which was essentially, “Uh… boys and girls… It doesn’t work that way. The Church can’tbe true if the Book of Mormon is false!” Sometimes I just don’t think people give any thought at all to what they’re even saying. It drives me nuts! Quote:It has bothered me for years to hear adults say it. I used to sit down in the pews an ask with some anger and jealousy, “How do they know, and why don’t I? Haven’t I read and prayed too. Does God love them more. Do they have a speacial calling that I will never have that gives them this speacial knowlege?” It made me feel inferior and I knew that I wasn’t.
Again, that’s been exactly my experience. I had to give a lesson in Relief Society on gaining a testimony. If you don’t think that was a hard one for me! I hemmed and hawed, trying to get around bearing my own testimony, and wanting to make absolutely sure that I didn’t make someone else feel the way I’d felt all my life. I quoted from the D&C: “To some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that he was crucified for the sins of the world. To others it is given to believe on their words, that they also might have eternal life if they continue faithful.” I’ve always loved those verses because they stress that both knowledge and belief are gifts from God. Neither one is said to be superior, and who are we to question whether God’s gift to those of us who “believe” is less valuable than His gift to those who “know.” I felt reasonably good about my lesson. Then, a couple of days later, I received an unbelievably patronizing and condescending letter from one of the women in the class who told me how much Heavenly Father loves me and that He wanted me to “know,” not just “believe.” She went on to give me all kinds of advice on how I could become as spiritual as she was. *gag*
Quote:I have learned to not take them seriousley anymore. What do they really mean? Do they mean I just had a really good spiritual experience and am still high on confidence before the doubts start coming back in? Is it just an expression of faith?
I wish I could get to that point, but I’m not there yet. It still bugs me to death! What I still wonder is how is it possible for me to “know” that the LDS Church is true when someone else “knows” the Catholic Church is true and when someone else “knows” that the Baptist Church is true? If I were to say I “know,” it would be implying that they don’t and that they’re either insincere, delusional, or lying. I can’t do that!
Quote:In my personal expression, and I don’t like to say “I know” even though I have been more than blessed with knowlege from both sides of the veil. I know what I know, but I don’t know. I wasn’t there when the Book of Mormon was translated, but from proofs/evidences, especially those spiritual, I am pretty darned sure that the BofM is real and true. It has been a wonderful experience for me. Prayer is the same. I can’t see God, but sometimes when I am in prayer I feel like I am in a warm cucoon(?) and I have connected to a source of knowlege not inside of me. This experience is more than wonderful.
I too feel quite comfortable with my testimony. I don’t expect that I will ever “know” the Church is true, but it would be extremely unlikely that I would ever turn my back on it. And that’s not just because I have a certain certain comfort level in the Church but because I have pretty much decided that if it’s not true, nothing else is either. I basically would have nowhere to go. I couldn’t possibly be a non-Christian, and I couldn’t conceivably find a way to believe in the “Trinity” of the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds. I would pretty much be like a person without a country.
Quote:Anyway, if we live in a world and life where living in faith is really the main point, because there are few people who know much, then why do we put so much value on “knowing?” We don’t graduate to any higher status. There is no Know Club. It’s a Mormon culture thing. We are probably the only christian church that puts this much value on knowing if this church is true.
If my comment didn’t cement together very well I apoligize.
You are absolutely right. Your comments cemented very well together, actually, and they made me realize that I’m not alone.
Katzpur wrote:I too feel quite comfortable with my testimony. I don’t expect that I will ever “know” the Church is true, but it would be extremely unlikely that I would ever turn my back on it. And that’s not just because I have a certain certain comfort level in the Church but because I have pretty much decided that if it’s not true, nothing else is either. I basically would have nowhere to go. I couldn’t possibly be a non-Christian, and I couldn’t conceivably find a way to believe in the “Trinity” of the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds. I would pretty much be like a person without a country.
That is a perfectly valid path to a reconciliation strategy from the perspective of our StayLDS community. In fact, it is not uncommon to see things that way.
I might be able to use other religious frameworks to advance my level of spirituality. In fact, I do bring in elements from other traditions to enhance my personal understanding and life journey. For better or worse, God created me and placed me here in a Mormon environment and context. I find myself LDS. Nothing else seems better to me. I do enjoy a lot about Mormonism, sooooooooo … I might as well make it work for me.
It kind of leads to a perspective of personal responsibility IMO. I have few expectations about the Church that I depend on to stay attached to the LDS world. It is simply there, something for me to use. The tool has worked for me. When I want something else more, I take responsibility for myself to go out and find what I need for supplementation.
Tom wrote:There is quite a list of things that I disagree with in the church, but one of the things on the top of the list is the constant usage of “I Know”.
It’s an interesting paradox, I think. The use of the phrase “I know,” and the constant emphasis on bearing testimony is a sort of sales tool used to convince oneself and others that the “product,” the LDS gospel, is absolutely the path to follow. So I see why it is used — even by innocent children. However, like Whitney said, it can be viewed by the educated observers to be, as Hugh Nibley said paradoxically, “zeal without knowledge.”
Think of going to a sales presentation and hearing that a particular product cures cancer, gives us energy, helps us lose weight…and of course will make us a million dollars in a year. The sellers have a vested interest in the product giving the results described, and must be viewed with skepticism by those looking for scientific and medical fact. But maybe that’s why there are so many MLMs in Utah?! There is a similar mindset as to how to learn “truth.”
So I would agree with Tom that if the church is to evolve to attract the educated convert, there must be some processes changed. But that all depends on what they want!
Quote:So I would agree with Tom that if the church is to evolve to attract the educated convert, there must be some processes changed.
Interestingly, though, we see that the higher the education level, the more committed people are to the church (which runs counter to all other denominations). However, to your point, the majority of converts have a lower education level than the majority of members. Does that mean that it’s harder to win educated converts? Maybe. But is that due to the message or due to the trend in other religions that the more educated you are, the less religious you are. It seems to me to be the latter.
Quote:Think of going to a sales presentation and hearing that a particular product cures cancer, gives us energy, helps us lose weight
I actually wonder about this. How much of faith is a placebo effect? I say that without any scorn. There are many studies that show the health benefits of believing that you are getting health benefits. There are also studies that show that if you pray for someone’s health, they get no benefit (statistically) unless they KNOW they are being prayed for, in which case they DO get the health benefit. That’s an interesting point. I do believe that if we feel positively about something, we are more likely to see the good in it. If we feel positively about another person, we are more likely to receive positive back from that person.
I know that to some, these sound like Jedi mind tricks, but in reality, I’m inclined to see religion and spirituality as a way to harness one’s psychological power.
hawkgrrrl wrote:Quote:So I would agree with Tom that if the church is to evolve to attract the educated convert, there must be some processes changed.
Interestingly, though, we see that the higher the education level, the more committed people are to the church (which runs counter to all other denominations). However, to your point, the majority of converts have a lower education level than the majority of members. Does that mean that it’s harder to win educated converts? Maybe. But is that due to the message or due to the trend in other religions that the more educated you are, the less religious you are. It seems to me to be the latter.
I agree this is interesting. But remember that BYU has a unique environment. If BYU were like unto other major universities, without official church involvement (there just happened to be a bunch of Mormons there) would we have the same result? The church encourages higher education and learning (for which I am grateful), but they are still at odds with intellectuals (although getting better). So it would seem that they encourage education as long as it fits in the parameters of unquestioning the authority and claims of the church. It’s sort of like giving an academic free pass in almost every area of secular study, but putting large caution tape around the church and its claims. This is further bolstered (at least at BYU) by the fact that the church runs the school. There is a major conflict of interest there.hawkgrrrl wrote:Quote:Think of going to a sales presentation and hearing that a particular product cures cancer, gives us energy, helps us lose weight
I actually wonder about this. How much of faith is a placebo effect? I say that without any scorn. There are many studies that show the health benefits of believing that you are getting health benefits. There are also studies that show that if you pray for someone’s health, they get no benefit (statistically) unless they KNOW they are being prayed for, in which case they DO get the health benefit. That’s an interesting point. I do believe that if we feel positively about something, we are more likely to see the good in it. If we feel positively about another person, we are more likely to receive positive back from that person.
The interesting things in these types of studies is that the type of faith doesn’t seem to really matter. Faith is faith is faith. This tends to dispel the notion that there is one brand that has more power when compared to the others.Also check out this story from npr
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=104351710 ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=104351710 Quote:If BYU were like unto other major universities, without official church involvement (there just happened to be a bunch of Mormons there) would we have the same result?
Probably not because many college age church members would find it nearly impossible to live the Mormon standards lifestyle in a secular university. If the social drinking didn’t get them, the casual hooking up would. They are only human, after all. But it seems to me that those who fail to live the standards but believing that it is their own failure (those who leave due to “sin”) are possibly better off for a future relationship with the church than those who have suffered a loss of belief, even if the non-believers continue to live the standards.
Rix wrote:Think of going to a sales presentation and hearing that a particular product cures cancer, gives us energy, helps us lose weight…and of course will make us a million dollars in a year. The sellers have a vested interest in the product giving the results described, and must be viewed with skepticism by those looking for scientific and medical fact. But maybe that’s why there are so many MLMs in Utah?! There is a similar mindset as to how to learn “truth.”
I think you are dead on Rix. This mindset of believing what is perceived as “absolute truth” can carry on into our financial endeavors as well. I have been invited and attended close to a dozen MLM meetings in the last 10 years and I know of the pressure to simply trust those who invited you in, especially if they are family/friends/ward members. You probably trust them with your lives so why not trust them with your money and time as well? I have personally seen many a family relationship destroyed over these kinds of business ventures.
What is really funny about most MLM/Pyramid schemes is that they always, always sound too good to be true. Which is always, always the case. Of all those MLM’s I investigated, I joined exactly none of them. I guess this life of skeptical inquiry that I now lead has been festering inside for a long time.
I have always felt uneasy about being “absolutely certain” about anything. I just found ways to push those doubts on a shelf and join the group-think. But now I attend church without the group-think control, which really is awesome.
I also posted thoughts on this on the thread: http://www.staylds.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=290&p=6844#p6844 ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://www.staylds.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=290&p=6844#p6844 I don’t have a problem with using the phrase without complete certainty, especially since the dictionary defines TO KNOW as:
Quote:be aware of the truth of something; have a belief or faith in something; regard as true beyond any doubt
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.