Page 2 of 3

Re: Can you be "All in?"

Posted: 29 Sep 2018, 03:49
by FaithfulSkeptic
Curt Sunshine wrote:
28 Sep 2018, 16:03
I am all in - but I define those terms for myself and don't care if others define them differently.
Curt, I'd like to be all in on my own terms. Can you share what some of those terms are? PM me if that is more appropriate.

Re: Can you be "All in?"

Posted: 29 Sep 2018, 05:08
by FaithfulSkeptic
DoubtingTom wrote:
28 Sep 2018, 15:52
I realized I can’t be all in when at the most basic fundamental level I simply don’t believe. It felt too fake going every week and pretending to be orthodox.

However, when I was still attempting this, I found the following website to be very helpful.

Here is an unorthodox believer who seems to be all in. His nuanced approach works for him and I had high hopes that it would work for me. Ultimately I couldn’t make it work but I haven’t shut the door completely. If I were to be “all in” again, this is the approach I think I’d have to use.
Thanks for this. I think you and I are a lot alike. My belief is not binary, but I think it leans more toward non-belief (and skepticism) than belief.

I think the only way I could be "all in" is to have a very nuanced view of how the church is "true" like Richard Bushman, Adam Miller, Greg Prince, Patrick Mason, or the author of the churchistrue blog. I hope that I can have such a testimony someday, but right now, I don't.

Re: Can you be "All in?"

Posted: 29 Sep 2018, 05:31
by nibbler
FaithfulSkeptic wrote:
28 Sep 2018, 13:28
Because of your point above about cafeteria Mormonism, I think being "all in" to me is more about commitment. In spite of everything wrong with the Church or its doctrine or history, it's about sticking with it through good and bad. Maybe it's like a marriage relationship - "for better or for worse." Just as in marriage, you don't always have to agree with your spouse or never have arguments or have your own opinions or feelings. But you do have a commitment to love and support each other throughout your life (or through eternity).
I think healthy relationships have elements of give and take. You might go on a camping trip even if you don't enjoy camping but your spouse enjoys camping. You might watch Superbowl commercials even though you don't like football or commercials because your spouse enjoys them. Etc. And it's not just you doing things for others, it's also other people do things for you.

I'd say that as a more orthodox/traditional narratives believer my relationship was very out of balance. I tried to do everything to satisfy the demands of the church and my needs came in a distant second. The thought process was, "Of course I'll do it, it's what god wants me to do." As an orthodox believer I locked myself into the expectations of the church. After a faith crisis I allowed myself to find my balance.

That's easier said than done. Hypothetical: maybe my balance includes not speaking during sacrament meeting. Eventually the time will come where I'm called upon to speak, I'll have to enforce that boundary. The person making talk assignments may try to test that boundary. "Why won't you give a talk? Can't you be all-in?"

For what it's worth, I don't view that scenario as them being manipulative. When I project myself back to my more orthodox days I recognize that's how I would have viewed things. I've got to do everything I'm asked to do, otherwise I'm not "all-in." But that's letting someone else (I'll call it the culture) dictate what it means to be all-in, do everything that's asked, always. But when I define my "all" in, it is unique, it is mine, I own it.

I may not be able to go back to a time when things were out of balance in my relationship with the church, doing everything I'm asked to do, but I can engage where I've found a balance. Maybe that means attending SM once a month and that's it, maybe it means everything but the temple, it will be different for everyone, but no matter what it is there will likely be someone that views it as not being "all-in." I try to ignore that these days. As I said earlier, no one at church is truly all-in.

Relationships are give and take. Maybe attending SM and/or the temple is your camping trip that you don't enjoy but you do it because your spouse enjoys it. Bright side, it only takes up half the weekend, not the full weekend, and fewer bug bites.

Re: Can you be "All in?"

Posted: 29 Sep 2018, 05:55
by SamBee
No, you can't.

Partly because there are varying definitions.

Re: Can you be "All in?"

Posted: 29 Sep 2018, 10:00
by LookingHard
Good to hear from you FaithfulSkeptic. I was just thinking about you the other day as my wife actually traveled to where you are. I wish things were going better for you.

I have found that I look at "doubt your doubt before you doubt your faith" as more like, "don't make a rash decision". I do think that makes sense as I find it a bit odd those that are TBM all their life and one Monday they read the CES letter and then they resign before church the next week.

Re: Can you be "All in?"

Posted: 29 Sep 2018, 20:00
by Curt Sunshine
"All in" for me means doing all I can do and retain a healthy balance in my life.

I attend the meetings I can attend and don't worry about ones I have to miss for other good reasons.

I wear a colored shirt off and on, and a white shirt more often than not, and a polo shirt to some events where it isn't blatantly obnoxious (and once regularly to Stake Leadership meetings when I had to go straight from work), and twice jeans to the temple when I had to be there at a certain time and couldn't change first from what I was doing - etc.

I pay tithing on net income, because I think paying it on gross is silly.

I shave enough to stay relatively clean shaven, but I hate it and attend meetings fairly regularly with stubble.

I shop on Sundays sometimes when I forget to do it on Saturday.

and stuff like that

I also love to teach, so I am a volunteer Gospel Doctrine teacher on short notice - like tonight learning I will be teaching tomorrow.

I am leading the 5th Sunday lesson tomorrow in the 3rd hour - about not shaming ourselves and others but accepting who we all are and trying to be the best "us" possible, without shame or guilt for not being perfect.

and stuff like that

Re: Can you be "All in?"

Posted: 30 Sep 2018, 13:46
by Roy
I do not feel that I can be "All in" in the way that most TBM would describe it.

In talking to my bishop I would be exceptionally vague and hopeful. I have said that I find the Gospel to be so overwhelmingly beautiful that I hope that it is true. What is meant by "Gospel"? What is meant by "True"? What I mean and what the bishop hears are likely different things.

I believe it helps that my crisis was one of grief over losing a child in death (most people can have a decent level of empathy). The problem was that I had expectations of God's intervention and protection that went unfulfilled. My bishop is able to sympathize that yes, many members say things about God's protection that may give us a false sense of security. When I point out that a recent church publication says that tithing payment brings tangible blessings, he pushes back - saying, "That tangible blessings from tithing payment could happen."

My bishop is able to understand that members can say things that are not true and lead to unrealistic expectations - but he cannot follow the bread crumbs that maybe the church could do the same ... at least once or twice … in some church publication not written or directly overseen by anyone holding the title of Prophet. That helps me to understand the limits of how far my bishop can go in understanding me.

So I accept outwardly the basic premise that the problem is me. That my faith is weak and struggling. That I owe God and the church 10% of my income and I am somewhat remiss in my responsibilities by not paying it. I have had a bad experience that damaged my faith. I still want to believe and I am willing to work on growing my faith. I find the Gospel to be so overwhelmingly beautiful that I hope that it is true. I am willing to support my family in this path of faith.

My purpose is to continue in my relationship with the church and to do everything that I can to convince my local leaders that 1) I am not a threat to anybody and 2) that I may just need time and personal space to work through my issues with dignity.

Re: Can you be "All in?"

Posted: 30 Sep 2018, 13:57
by DarkJedi
I came across this in the Trib today: ... l-mormons/

Good stuff relevant to this conversation.

Re: Can you be "All in?"

Posted: 30 Sep 2018, 19:02
by VioletFire
DarkJedi wrote:
30 Sep 2018, 13:57
I came across this in the Trib today: ... l-mormons/

Good stuff relevant to this conversation.
Wow this is a really great article. Thanks so much for posting this. It's nice to hear I'm not alone sometimes. There are dozens of us! :lol:

Re: Can you be "All in?"

Posted: 30 Sep 2018, 20:29
by Curt Sunshine
Fwiw, it is almost impossible truly to be all in. That, essentially, would be the Law of Consecration, in its ultimate form - and very few people even have a desire to go there. Those who think they are generally aren't.

All of us choose how all in we can be, even the most gung-ho committed of us.