Re: Hello
Posted: 31 Jul 2016, 19:56
Thank you for your welcome and many kind words. I hope to be able to contribute something more than just a lot of questions. I have navigated some challenges successfully, but still have some issues with things that are disturbing and hard to accept. I want to see what you think, but don't want to unload in one big blast - if I even could. Better I think to comment about some of the topics already posted, and then maybe do a post or two of my own.
@Minyan Man,
Until I received a testimony on my own, I had a very, rudimentary faith based on believing in those I trusted. So first it was based on what my parents told me, and what I learned from those they put their trust in. Even though they divorced, they both followed strongly in the church, so I was able to mostly find agreement in their words on the church, if not on their opinions about each other. I went with my mother physically, and also on who was to blame in the divorce, and I gave her primary credence when there seemed to be a difference in church opinions. This was unfortunate in some ways, because as I later found, my father was better grounded in the church, and was not guilty of many of the charges put on him by my mom, even if he was awfully strict!
But I got off topic. I grew up with what Nibley might call a very Primary version of the Gospel. So I believed things like all the native inhabitants of the Americas when Columbus arrived here were descendants of the nephites and lamanites, and other simplistic and just plain wrong explanations like that of scripture, history & biography. Many of these "Primary" versions have not held up to new inputs from both friends and foes of the church.
One of the biggest shocks was around "Mormon Doctrine" by Bruce R. McConkie. My households believed it to be solid church doctrine. We had a first edition, so we were pretty sure the Catholic Church was the Great and Abominable. So when I brought it up later in seminary, only to have it refuted, it shook me a bit when I could only find a later edition. Sure enough, whoops!, it didn't equate the Catholic Church with the Great and Abominable! Well, until I accepted my current belief, I still had it wrong - I believed it was still really so and that they just softened the language so the Catholics wouldn't feel so bad.
So, my life has been a series of these paradigm shifts. So far, I have been able to assimilate them, but I haven't even begun to tackle things like Joseph Smith and Polyandry? And when my son tells me how much of the Book of Mormon and Bible history he doesn't have to believe and still keep his testimony and is very persuasive, I see a deep hole coming up in front of me and wonder how much you can throw out without ditching the whole boat and then might as well become a Unitarian.
Seriously, I don't think I should ditch the boat, but you may get a sense of my unease from these few examples. I do look forward to discussing some of these and like subjects in the forum.
@Minyan Man,
Until I received a testimony on my own, I had a very, rudimentary faith based on believing in those I trusted. So first it was based on what my parents told me, and what I learned from those they put their trust in. Even though they divorced, they both followed strongly in the church, so I was able to mostly find agreement in their words on the church, if not on their opinions about each other. I went with my mother physically, and also on who was to blame in the divorce, and I gave her primary credence when there seemed to be a difference in church opinions. This was unfortunate in some ways, because as I later found, my father was better grounded in the church, and was not guilty of many of the charges put on him by my mom, even if he was awfully strict!
But I got off topic. I grew up with what Nibley might call a very Primary version of the Gospel. So I believed things like all the native inhabitants of the Americas when Columbus arrived here were descendants of the nephites and lamanites, and other simplistic and just plain wrong explanations like that of scripture, history & biography. Many of these "Primary" versions have not held up to new inputs from both friends and foes of the church.
One of the biggest shocks was around "Mormon Doctrine" by Bruce R. McConkie. My households believed it to be solid church doctrine. We had a first edition, so we were pretty sure the Catholic Church was the Great and Abominable. So when I brought it up later in seminary, only to have it refuted, it shook me a bit when I could only find a later edition. Sure enough, whoops!, it didn't equate the Catholic Church with the Great and Abominable! Well, until I accepted my current belief, I still had it wrong - I believed it was still really so and that they just softened the language so the Catholics wouldn't feel so bad.
So, my life has been a series of these paradigm shifts. So far, I have been able to assimilate them, but I haven't even begun to tackle things like Joseph Smith and Polyandry? And when my son tells me how much of the Book of Mormon and Bible history he doesn't have to believe and still keep his testimony and is very persuasive, I see a deep hole coming up in front of me and wonder how much you can throw out without ditching the whole boat and then might as well become a Unitarian.
Seriously, I don't think I should ditch the boat, but you may get a sense of my unease from these few examples. I do look forward to discussing some of these and like subjects in the forum.