Need A Little Help

[stu4491]

I got into a discussion today with my still TBM wife about some of the problems with moism that I have discovered over the last few months via research and study of various internet sites. These are all the many problem areas that have been talked about and discussed concerning moism on this forum and many others and that most of you are quite familiar with. Tell me how you would answer her question to me when she asks the following: "There are many great and intelligent leaders in our church who know tons more about the gospel than I do and many if not all, have certainly heard and know off all these many different problems brought up on the anti-mormon sites you are visiting and yet they have come to understand answers to these questions as they all still have strong testimonies and have not left the church. So there must be a reasonable explanation for all these areas that are giving you concerns or else why do all of these great leaders continue to have no problems with their testimonies of the mormon church?" I am not able to come up with a satisfactory answer for her that makes sense to her. Can any of you here on this forum be able to help me with a good response for her? Thanks. Stewart

[darin]

I am not able to come up with a satisfactory answer for her that makes sense to her. Can any of you here on this forum be able to help me with a good response for her? Thanks. Stewart

My first reaction would be to say, ""There are many great and intelligent leaders in EVERY church who know tons more about their version of the gospel than many of us do; and many if not all, have certainly heard and know off all these many different problems brought up on the anti-[fill in the name of the religion in question] sites you are visiting and yet they have come to understand answers to these questions as they all still have strong testimonies and have not left their churches. So there must be a reasonable explanation for all these areas that are giving you concerns or else why do all of these great leaders continue to have no problems with their testimonies of the [fill in the blank] church?"

'Strength in numbers' doesn't make one correct, nor do 'charristmatic leaders' who promote any given system of belief. It's extremely naive to follow along just because "someone else surely must've already looked into that claim." Surrendering one's ability to confront difficult questions in favor of unflailing obedience might be comforting, but it's certainly not wise.

Having worked as a shepherd for a year in college, I find it entirely appropriate and rather ironic that "sheep" and "goats" were chosen as symbols of the opposing extremes demonstrating people's attitudes regarding blind obedience. Sheep unfailingly and willfully follow the head shepherd with nary a second thought, whereas goats are intensely inquisitive, and will often explore their environment and push the boundaries, finding their own way, and following only if they examine the situation for themselves and agree that it is the best path to take.

I'd rather be "a goat," any day.

[miss taken]

I got into a discussion today with my still TBM wife about some of the problems with moism that I have discovered over the last few months via research and study of various internet sites. These are all the many problem areas that have been talked about and discussed concerning moism on this forum and many others and that most of you are quite familiar with. Tell me how you would answer her question to me when she asks the following: "There are many great and intelligent leaders in our church who know tons more about the gospel than I do and many if not all, have certainly heard and know off all these many different problems brought up on the anti-mormon sites you are visiting and yet they have come to understand answers to these questions as they all still have strong testimonies and have not left the church. So there must be a reasonable explanation for all these areas that are giving you concerns or else why do all of these great leaders continue to have no problems with their testimonies of the mormon church?" I am not able to come up with a satisfactory answer for her that makes sense to her. Can any of you here on this forum be able to help me with a good response for her? Thanks. Stewart


Unless you can offer her anything better, I think you should let her be. I find that there are often no clear right and wrong answers in life, and you are unlikely to persuade her out, as she is to persuade you in.

You now find yourself with diametrically opposed viewpoints. Ouch.

Is it not possible for you to lend her a couple of books, and let her make her own decisions. (and if she doesn't want to read them, she doesn't want to read them)

I don't know what to say other than that because we all tend to see what we want to see.

Mary

[silverfox]

I got into a discussion today with my still TBM wife about some of the problems with moism that I have discovered over the last few months via research and study of various internet sites. These are all the many problem areas that have been talked about and discussed concerning moism on this forum and many others and that most of you are quite familiar with. Tell me how you would answer her question to me when she asks the following: "There are many great and intelligent leaders in our church who know tons more about the gospel than I do and many if not all, have certainly heard and know off all these many different problems brought up on the anti-mormon sites you are visiting and yet they have come to understand answers to these questions as they all still have strong testimonies and have not left the church. So there must be a reasonable explanation for all these areas that are giving you concerns or else why do all of these great leaders continue to have no problems with their testimonies of the mormon church?" I am not able to come up with a satisfactory answer for her that makes sense to her. Can any of you here on this forum be able to help me with a good response for her? Thanks. Stewart

If they have such a clear understanding of the "gospel" and have all the answers why aren't they sharing them? We can't even ask our leaders questions regarding the discrepancies. Where ARE the reasonable explanations? I've never received one. There are many members who have gone to their leaders and have asked them for direction, asked for reasonable answers only to be told to "pray, pay, obey" or it's not for you to know right now. Yeah, whatever. The problem is TBMs will find those answers reasonable. The rest of us are here.

IMO,to protect their members, to prepare their missionaries, to promote church growth, if they had the answers they would be sharing them.

Ask your wife why they didn't excommunicate Thomas Murphy who's DNA research caused quite the stir? They had a court of luv scheduled but at the last minute decided against it. Why? I dunno but I feel strongly that it is because they can't prove him wrong. They can't fight with DNA. They will let their apologists try to fight it.

They've held courts and have excommunicated and disfellowshipped many a member for being verbal about their questions and their research. Why? What are they afraid of?

[silverfox]

Unless you can offer her anything better, I think you should let her be. I find that there are often no clear right and wrong answers in life, and you are unlikely to persuade her out, as she is to persuade you in.

You now find yourself with diametrically opposed viewpoints. Ouch.

Is it not possible for you to lend her a couple of books, and let her make her own decisions. (and if she doesn't want to read them, she doesn't want to read them)

I don't know what to say other than that because we all tend to see what we want to see.

Mary

Mary makes a very good point. With my hubby I had to pick and choose the topics I would "debate" over. With a TBM spouse sometimes the harder you try to make them understand your feelings/beliefs the tighter they cling to their beliefs. They may feel they are on a "mission" to be strong, to hold tight regardless of any evidence. They NEED to be TBM, it's their life.

[darin]

OK--Mary AND Silverfox make good points--just want to clarify that my smart-ass comment should NOT be used with your wife, but was more a general expression of :rolleyes: , rather. If others find value in the gospel, I try to be very careful not to tear it down, as such can be destructive.

[silverfox]

OK--Mary AND Silverfox make good points--just want to clarify that my smart-ass comment should NOT be used with your wife, but was more a general expression of :rolleyes: , rather. If others find value in the gospel, I try to be very careful not to tear it down, as such can be destructive.

Regardless if you were being a smart ass or not, you make a very valid point in your original post.

Stu - you will know when to use your best judgement. No one knows your wife better than you and what she is capable of handling.

[miss taken]

Regardless if you were being a smart ass or not, you make a very valid point in your original post.

Stu - you will know when to use your best judgement. No one knows your wife better than you and what she is capable of handling.

Ditto what Silverfox says Darin. I think there are probably a heck of a lot of goats on this board!!!! ;)
Mary

[peter_mary]

This is a good question, in that it doesn't have an easy answer. Here are some thoughts from out here in left field.

First, as the recent exchange between Jeff and Wes on the "Hinkley Quote" thread demonstrates, two intelligent people looking at the same information can come to very different conclusions depending on the way in which they CHOOSE to look at the data. The same can be said for the intelligent and educated people who CHOOSE to see the information as supportive of their testimony, and other equally intelligent and educated people who CHOOSE to see it as condemning of their old world view.

The bottom line is that when it comes to things pertaining to the Church's origins, the motives that Joseph, Brigham and everyone else exercised in creating this church are UNKNOWABLE. Period. FARMS doesn't know anything more than I do...they just CHOOSE to interpret it in a manner consistent with what they already want. (They are aware of a good deal more of their own work and anaylisis than I am, but their "Knowledge" is as non-existent as mine...they guess, they speculate, they assure each other based on their various degrees of confidence, but they "know" nothing. Me neither.) Never will anyone ever produce a document that accurately reflects the motive and thoughts and beliefs of the hidden mind of Joseph Smith. Or of me, or anyone else. All we can do is look back through the mists of time, piece together what bits of information we have available, and apply our reason and faith in such a way that it makes sense...to us. What is key here, is that we are guided in that process by our EXISTING PARADIGMS. We interpret new and challenging information not from a place of openness or of all knowing, but rather from a limited place of our own limited experience. So our conclusions are subjective projections of our own internal desires, not objective statements of historical fact. And it can't be anything BUT that.

So the intelligent people of the Church, and they are numerous, CHOOSE to evaluate the data in such a way as to support the conclusion that they have already settled upon, or are already comfortable with, namely that the Gospel is true and was restored by Joseph Smith.

Here's the horrid conundrum for Church intellectuals. In order to make a reasonably objective stab at analyzing the information regarding the history of the Church and the difficult issues that have since arrisen, you have to begin the quest completely open to wherever that quest might lead. If you can't agree with yourself psychologically to explore open and honestly and let the chips fall where they may, then you have pre-determined the outcome of your investigation...it will naturally lead to the conclusion that you began with. Those who have looked at the information and stayed were also the ones for whom their belief was so strong when they encountered the tough questions, that it was never a matter of whether or not this might have happened, but rather, "how do I make sense out of this in light of the fact that the gospel is true?" See, in this way of thinking, you do not allow yourself to come to any other conclusion.

But there is an equally impressive and large body of people who DID approach the questions of Church origins and difficult issues from an open position...and most of them were lead right out of the Church.

Which adds to the difficulty of informed, intellectuals in the Church. If you observe that open questioning leads others away from the Church, and you presently believe that the gospel is true and the only means of eternal salvation and of keeping your family together forever, you CAN NOT in good conscience openly question just to see where the results lead. You CAN'T DO IT. It's too psychologically threatening. So you rationalize, you discredit those who came to other conclusions, and you rally behind other unknowables.

What it ultimately comes down to is faith. Those who stay have enough confidence in their faith that they choose not to evaluate the data objectively. "It will all make sense in the hereafter." Those who left the Church because of this information placed a higher degree of importance on their reason than on their faith.

Who's right?

Who knows?

It is an ancient battle between faith and reason, and at the end of the day, they both have their virtues.

Paul

[Born Free]

I got into a discussion today with my still TBM wife about some of the problems with moism that I have discovered over the last few months via research and study of various internet sites. These are all the many problem areas that have been talked about and discussed concerning moism on this forum and many others and that most of you are quite familiar with. Tell me how you would answer her question to me when she asks the following: "There are many great and intelligent leaders in our church who know tons more about the gospel than I do and many if not all, have certainly heard and know off all these many different problems brought up on the anti-mormon sites you are visiting and yet they have come to understand answers to these questions as they all still have strong testimonies and have not left the church. So there must be a reasonable explanation for all these areas that are giving you concerns or else why do all of these great leaders continue to have no problems with their testimonies of the mormon church?" I am not able to come up with a satisfactory answer for her that makes sense to her. Can any of you here on this forum be able to help me with a good response for her? Thanks. Stewart
stu4491,

Resident at the very centre of your wifes argument lies the assumption that someone else can be trusted to have her deepest interests at heart. Even IF that were true, it folllows that it is dangerous to switch off our brain and assume that someone else knows more. If we use that line of thinking, we could be following anyone from Hitler to Jim Jones and be none the wiser. Many people were so convinced in the trustworthiness of both men that they were willing to die.

As I read your material I recall reading the experience of the grandson of one of the Prophets and his wife (sorry, can't find the bookmark at present, but I am sure others can help). If my memory is in half reasonable shape, I think it was the Bensons. Read their well documented experience, and see if that offers any help.

Daryl

[free thinker]

I always like Paul's analysis! I enjoy reading his posts. Why? Because I perceive him as fair minded. Thanks Paul.

Now here is the way I see it!! Under what set of circumstances, as a prophet of God, is it necessarry to marry the wives of other men. What precedent is there in theological history?

If I was married to a TBM now, I would present him or her with a copy of Todd Compton's " In Sacred Loneliness". When I presented it to them I would simply state. " It is hard for me to beleive that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy for any other reason than sexual gratification."

I don't care what else Joseph Smith did. In my mind he was a sexual manipulator, and I don't think a man like that would ever be called of God!!! I have not heard yet one plausible reason for Joseph Smith marrying other mens wives. Not One!!

Free Thinker

[stu4491]

[QUOTE=paul]This is a good question, in that it doesn't have an easy answer. Here are some thoughts from out here in left field.

Paul, I thank you much for your post as it does really help me understand a bit better why these very intelligent leaders stay with their testimony regardless of what evidence is presented to them. It seems to me that their minds are made up and not really open to change and thus will always find that the church is still true unless beyond a shadow of any doubt whatsoever it could not be true with the given evidence against it. To show that kind of evidence in the case of spiritual and religious matters is almost impossible to do. One needs to be open at least to the possibility that the church might not be true before you could ever come to that conclusion. Most of these leaders have testified that they "know beyond a shadow of any doubt that the church is true", and thus are not even open to the chance that it may not be. Stewart

[peter_mary]

One needs to be open at least to the possibility that the church might not be true before you could ever come to that conclusion. Most of these leaders have testified that they "know beyond a shadow of any doubt that the church is true", and thus are not even open to the chance that it may not be. Stewart

Yeah, that was exactly my point.

I was the same way. I testified for years that I didn't simply "believe, I knew," and I pointed to a couple of emotional experiences that were "good enough" to satisfy my yearning and convince me that this was true.

Ironically, I was questioning Christianity before I began questioning Mormonism, which is a bit of a mind bender if you think about it. But the reality was, I was not in a good position to ask myself, "What if the Church isn't true?" I knew it would be costly to me in terms of my marriage, and because I was in a good one, I didn't want to rock the boat. Plus I was serving in a Bishopric. I stepped up to the edge, but I was unwilling to ask that final question, "Is it possible that it isn't true?" So for a while I kept backing away from that precipice.

When my wife began to question, too, ONLY then did I feel like I had the psychological breathing room necessary to finally ask that question and pursue it to it's NATURAL conclusion, rather than it's foregone conclusion that I would have arrived at years previous. It was then I launched over the edge and never looked back.

THE hardest obstacle to overcome is the willingness to shelve your preconceived beliefs about it being true, and ask yourself the question, what if it is not?

Paul

[Born Free]

Yeah, that was exactly my point.

I was the same way. I testified for years that I didn't simply "believe, I knew," and I pointed to a couple of emotional experiences that were "good enough" to satisfy my yearning and convince me that this was true.

Ironically, I was questioning Christianity before I began questioning Mormonism, which is a bit of a mind bender if you think about it. But the reality was, I was not in a good position to ask myself, "What if the Church isn't true?" I knew it would be costly to me in terms of my marriage, and because I was in a good one, I didn't want to rock the boat. Plus I was serving in a Bishopric. I stepped up to the edge, but I was unwilling to ask that final question, "Is it possible that it isn't true?" So for a while I kept backing away from that precipice.

When my wife began to question, too, ONLY then did I feel like I had the psychological breathing room necessary to finally ask that question and pursue it to it's NATURAL conclusion, rather than it's foregone conclusion that I would have arrived at years previous. It was then I launched over the edge and never looked back.

THE hardest obstacle to overcome is the willingness to shelve your preconceived beliefs about it being true, and ask yourself the question, what if it is not?

Paul

When contemplating having discussions with people around issues like this, I believe one can save a lot of time by asking "IF you (the person you are dialogueing with) came in the course of the discssion to seriously doubt a key element of Mormonism, would they be prepared to leave?"

If they cannot answer "Yes", don't waste the time pretending to have an open and honest discussion, because they are acknowledging in effect that they start with a major and heavy filter inplace to maintain their security, and they are not, repeat NOT prepared to go where the pursuit of truth leads them.

They are saying "I love truth, as long as it supports my existing belief structure. If it does not, then I will default to security, no matter how incongruous my path there."

Daryl