Reader comments
Challenging issues and keeping the faith: Part 9
45 comments | Read story
"The best prevention against an intellectually-damaged testimony is to understand the complexities and potential pitfalls in our ideology before we encounter them."
LDS doctrine teaches that we learn truth BOTH with the mind and the heart, not just the heart (see D&C 8:2).
We must have the Holy Ghost teach us truth, but we MUST study deeper the gospel and church history.
We cannot be afraid of church history. In fact, I love it and embrace it. A fantastic book is "Joseph Smith Rough Stone Rolling" by Richard Bushman. You can find it at Deseret Book.
Please be prepared (and embrace) that church history is not as black and white and as simple as is normally thought by the average member. But that is the truth that is so wonderful - the fact that God is more flexible and mysterious than we realize, and that is just awesome to me.
To : A man's perspective - I have read and enjoyed rough stone rolling but I perceived it as a book that tried to give enough information to be considered accurate while at the same time withholding some of the more devastating facts. I don't find it any more credible than many of the anti-mormon publications (also very slanted) that are out there. It is tough to find credible info from either side of the argument
I agree with you completely. Both sides of the argument seem to have an agenda that includes leaving out the other side's strongest points and evidences.
I gave up on that route and took my studies to the source. The Book of Mormon, Volumes of the History of the church, the Journal of Discourses, the Ensign, The Millennial Star, The Evening and Morning Star, and other original church publications, writings and journals.
There's plenty there for anyone to draw their own conclusions.
Is that code for censor all comments???
A book that includes "everything" - every nook and cranny is hardly credible either. I am not a historian, but I would think that many issues (especially the more-sensational and "devastating") would be more questionable as to their reliability as historical facts. Joseph Smith had many enemies, and it is reasonable to assume that many things were said about him that were not true or do not pass historical credibility.
That said, Rough Stone Rolling does indeed include many things that people have left the church over. I have a hard time not accepting Rough Stone Rolling as credible. Bushman has a Harvard Ph.D and taught there also - while that doesn't make him the final authority on historical facts, it is plenty good enough for me to accept his writings as credible.
But this is slightly off topic, so I won't say more.
Apparently comments do get posted irrespective of whether you believe in the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or not.
Yes, it is tough to find credible info about historical matters and details. People naturally have different perceptions and recollections about everything. Man doesn't even understand man, and yet he tries to rationalize who God is by consulting man.
I don't think God can be understood by logic alone. No wonder the first poster's head hurts. But the article is simply directing people to ask God in faith.
Don't rely on my post, on this article, on other Church affiliated persons, OR on persons who argue the opposite. If your belief is based on what someone else said or did, than it is more a replica of someone else's belief than it is your own.
"If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him." (James 1:5)
The article concludes that a person is less likely to deny their own spiritual experience; it only advocates one side--God's.
What if my spiritual experience does not lead me to Mormonism? Does that make it less valid? I think Mr. Ash would say that it does. My problem with religion in general (and Mormonism in particular) is that it advocates individual spirituality only if it leads you to agree with the ideals of the group.
What if my personal revelation told me that Mormonism was not true? Would I be told I was answered by a false spirit?
That's mormon doctrine, that every man honestly pursue a spiritual relationship with God first, then enter into sacred covenants with God, and try your best to stay true to them.
If you can't bring yourself to enter covenants, then do the best you can. God will look upon all men by the faith they exhibit and the truth they embrace.
Only good can come from the truth. Truth is light and knowledge.
It's been a source of pain to me over the years that when I was struggling with some of these issues, and asking these questions with faith and prayer, the answers I got get me called an apostate.
I may be asking for the impossible here, but it would be nice to have it considered that, just as many of you can best pursue your spiritual growth within the church, and received spiritual confirmation of this truth, I can best pursue my spiritual growth outside of the church, and that the spiritual confirmation I received was just as valid. Insisting that I have been misled by a false spirit seems to me to be a pretty glib way of dismissing anyone whose spiritual experiences don't fit a mold with which you are comfortable (apart from being somewhat personally insulting.)
If I were somehow convinced Mormonism were false, I'd have to be an agnostic. No other religion teaches a God who metes out perfect justice and mercy. That triune god isn't very fair.
If you pray and ask God, with sincerity and real intent, having studied it out in your mind and in your heart, you would not recieve revelation from God that Jesus of the Bible is not true and that Jesus is not the Christ, your Lord and your Savior. But If you did receive personal revelation that the Bible is not true, then who am I to say that your personal revelation is less valid or of a false spirit. The same goes for the Book of Mormon. Put it to the test.
If God reveals to you that Mormonism is not true, so be it. Your experience is for you to figure out, not for me to question.
But if God reveals to you, like he has to me, both the Bible and the Book of Mormon to be true then you have found His Church. Whereas, those who only find the Bible to be true, still have some narrowing down of truths to do (many churches believe in the Bible). But just as you may not believe my experience I reserve the right to not have to base my beliefs on whatever your experience.
Two words: "Cognitive Dissonance"
Amos 3:7 (Secrets) better translation=plan
I was suspicious when I was told KJV only,not a comple list,and if I use Greek I could be censored.
In response to your latest:
Considering your clarification, maybe I didn't answer that which you are wondering. I don't know that I have the answer, either, b/c I don't presume to know what answers God gives to your prayers, and how he directs your path.
However, I do know, if you seek after righteousness and live accordingly, God will guide that path to one place--His presence in His Heavenly home. Whatever God directs you to do in this life, is for your happiness, but ultimately it is in hopes of leading you eventually to become one with His plan and Him.
Still, if God has established His church on the Earth, then it would be hard for anyone to understand how God would better lead your life away from His church, rather than within.
Sure, if Christ's ways, teachings, and church were not readily available, it makes sense, but where in scripture has anyone known of God's church, his Earthly home, but been led not to be a part of it?
Maybe your path is different, but ultimately God has one church to be a part of in Heaven.
I think that we all engage in cognitive dissonance in matters of marriage, religion, career, etc. Does that make us phoney or just human.
If I do leave the Church over historical misdeeds, then I hope people accuse me of not thinking logically.
But I didn't leave the faith I was raised in over its historical misdeeds (of which there were plenty), and I won't leave the LDS Church for that reason either.
One of the biggest cases of Cognitive Dissonance that I have ever seen. Wow!
To Bent Twig:You are way off base.
To Fred: I did not ask for a sign.
You have a case of delirium worse than cognitive dissonance if you think we should listen to you, after you have told us not to listen to imperfect people like you.
In fact, no shortcoming of the prophets is any greater than the errors of their detractors. I think I'll follow the preaching of people chosen by a perfect being over the rambling arguments of persons whose credibility is no match for such company.
There is a big difference between being chosen by a perfect being and saying you were chosen by a perfect being. Of course, there is also a similarity - neither claim can be proven or disproven.
I am not perfect and I don't expect perfection in my leaders, my friends, or anyone else I deal with.
I think you must have a different view of "perfection" than most people. Oppression, racial or against women is not "perfection".
The wages of sin is death,we all have sinned and fallen short. We all deserve death,but God will have mercy on who he will have mercy.
Lord have mercy.
"If 'cognitive dissonance' means not believing in guilt by association or not holding institutions responsible for the wrongdoings of individuals, then yes, I have cognitive dissonance."
I agree. That is why we both must agree that "The Great Apostasy" is a myth, because holding the entire Christian tradition "guilty" of apostasy because of their mere association with a few bad Popes is absurd! And Holding the institution of the Catholic Church, as well as all the other Christian and non-Christian Churches responsible for the wrongdoings of a few individual Catholics, Methodists, Presbyterians, etc. is wrong-headed!
So we agree that there was NO GREAT APOSTASY. And if no Great Apostasy occurred, then there was never any need for a Restoration.
Glad we could agree on so much!
I was raised Catholic. I didn't leave the Catholic Church based on the Inquisition, Crusades, or any bad thing any Pope ever did. That would be ridiculous. I left because there are official teachings of the Catholic Church with which I do not agree. The Great Apostasy has to do with beliefs and teachings and not actions of religious leaders.
The same holds today. I don't hold the Catholic Church responsible for the priest scandal. That is the fault of the individual priests and not the church as an institution, it does not prove the Catholic Church is false. and the scandal is not a reason to leave the institution. In the gospel plan, only individuals can/must repent.
Misrepresentation of LDS teachings – and Mormons are all too often guilty of it ourselves – is a big reason why this series of articles is needed. And other religions would do well to clarify their on beliefs, too.
"Mr. Ash makes his living as an apologist for the LDS Church. I don't think his opinion can be trusted as Neutral."
I don't work for the Church and I don't make my living as an apologist. In fact, I've never yet received a dime for anything I've done that relates to LDS apologetics. Even if, however, I were to receive monetary compensation for writing apologetic material, your argument has no bearing on the veracity of my claims. You argument is what they refer to as ad hominem.
To: Who's on the Lord's side
What if my spiritual experience does not lead me to Mormonism? Does that make it less valid? I think Mr. Ash would say that it does. My problem with religion in general (and Mormonism in particular) is that it advocates individual spirituality only if it leads you to agree with the ideals of the group.
What if my personal revelation told me that Mormonism was not true? Would I be told I was answered by a false spirit?"
Faith is a personal journey. Each of us is required to put in our own spiritual and intellectual homework and come to our own conclusions.
to re: The Truth Shall Set You Free | 3:19 p.m. July 2, 2009,
One of the biggest cases of Cognitive Dissonance that I have ever seen. Wow!"
Apparently you misread my issue on Cog. Dis. It's universal-- equally applied by believers & non-beleivers.
I completely agree. My question is, what happens when after a frank discussion of some of these issues, the youth in question are left not just intellectually but spiritually dissatisfied with the answers that they receive?"
Actually, I believe that a frank discussion strengthens one's intellectual and spiritual testimony.
"It's been a source of pain to me over the years that when I was struggling with some of these issues, and asking these questions with faith and prayer, the answers I got get me called an apostate."
I've investigated the same issues and have never been called an apostate.
Thank you for actually taking the time to respond to some of the comments. I have pursued a spiritual journey and believe that leaving Mormonism is the correct path.
I wish that the LDS church could accept that decision without calling it apostasy or explaining it away as a lack of faith, desire to sin, testimony built on false foundation etc, etc.
Mormonism didn't work for me for a number of reasons, but the most compelling reason is that many of the doctrines did not coincide with my own sense of right or wrong. Is that apostasy? I don't think so, but you might disagree.
Anyway, thank you again for taking the time to answer your critics. I respect that.
"Apostasy" comes from the Greek "apostasia" which means to revolt (and has been used in a politcal sense). In religion it means to forsake or reject one's religion. So "apostasy" and "apostate" are accurate descriptions.
As I note in my series (and in greater depth in my book) there are complex reasons for belief, unbelief, and apostasy. Some leave because of sins, lack of faith, an attraction to a different faith, social pressure, or what appear to be intellectual reasons, etc.
My book (and much of this series) engages the supposed intellectual reasons for leaving-- which I find weak. There are solid intellectual rebuttals to critical arguments and strong intellectual reasons to support belief. In my opinion the intellectual scale titls in favor for belief.
In the end, however, it comes down to faith and spiritual experience. Some critics claim that believers who can't see the evidences are self-deluded, blind, or dishonest. I demonstrate that this is a false argument and that many apostates leave because they (like many members) have naive and fundamentalist assumptions about the nature of prophets and scripture.
So am I to understand that you have not made more than $0.10 from the sale of your book "Shaken Faith Syndrome"? Since articles like this one would contribute to publicity of that work, can you please clarify?
Mr. Ash, you stated that you don't make a dime off this work.
So am I to understand that you have not made more than $0.10 from the sale of your book "Shaken Faith Syndrome"? Since articles like this one would contribute to publicity of that work, can you please clarify?"
Not only haven't I made .10 on Shaken Faith Syndrome but (although I didn't self-publish) I've shelled out a lot of my own money to give away copies, make flyers, etc. It's possible that someday I may make some money from the book but any profits I might see are low on the list of priorities for the income on this book. I should note that I don't have a problem making money from the book (and hope to at some point) but that the primary purpose for writing it was to help those who are struggling with their testimonies.
To claim that I make my "living as an apologist for the LDS Chruch" is demonstrably false and an ad hominem distraction.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
- Mammogram guidelines spark debate 12:57 p.m.
- Man dies after SUV backs over him 12:39 p.m.
- At 6-5, hard time arguing firing Weis 12:24 p.m.
- $27M transfer for state Route 193 12:20 p.m.
- 'Christmas With King Family' DVD 12:16 p.m.
- Youn men help fill food-pantry needs 12:15 p.m.
- Who is Oprah's heir apparent? 11:39 a.m.
- Florida No. 1, TCU 4 in AP Top 25 11:34 a.m.
- Fed under fire, public anger mounts 11:28 a.m.
- No quagga mussels at Bear Lake 11:27 a.m.
- Glenn Beck to enter politics?
- BYU records with win
- Jazz outlast Pistons in overtime
- Police link alcohol to murder
- Cougars turn focus to dreaded rivals
- Utah Utes whip SDSU
- Former BYU professor remembered
- Cougars put the fun back in football
- Kirilenko heating up for the Jazz
- Y. coach Hill up for Portland State job
- Buttars wants to limit gay rights laws
194 - Palin plans tour stop in Utah
173 - Glenn Beck to enter politics?
166 - Palin's book shows she's unqualified
122 - BYU records with win
116 - Officer cleared in Cardall Taser case
103 - BYU cuts Women's Research Inst.
100 - Jazz finally win in San Antonio
98 - Utes knock off rival Aggies
93 - Huntsman pleased with Obama
87
Reading the letter, I am not sure that it is eating that is the sin, but...
The media that Sarah criticizes so much is the same force that is providing...
We'll be back next year. I know it, and I hope that all of our coaches and...
This year TCU has proven to the world how weak the MWC is (MWC=WAC). BYU and...
I have no problem with religious people voting their conscience. I do,...
I have to agree that the comment about "the pesky seniors" is uncalled...
I was in my Latin class in High School in California. Our teacher hadn't...
Glenn Beck is Oprah's heir apparent since he has a larger following and can...
of atheism just as morally equal to spreading the Gospel of Christianity. To...
Yes, 40% of doctors polled said they will definitely or seriously consider...

