Another devotional aimed at keeping believers from looking behind the curtain - this time @ BYU

[jfro18]

As the "Church News" puts it: What to do with your questions, according to 1 General Authority who's an expert on anti-Church materials

A devotional from Elder Lawrence E. Corbridge today where he claims to have read every anti-Mormon claim ever made, and that you don't need to worry about those issues if you just focus on whether or not Joseph Smith was a prophet.

https://www.thechurchnews.com/leaders-a ... 5zkCfyG2JA

It's really incredibly how coordinated these talks are becoming to shore up the defenses against the information that is out there, and how desperate it feels. Of course at the same time it's angering how blatantly dishonest it is, but I guess that's nothing new.

[FiveFingerMnemonic]

The gloom that came while reading so much material antagonistic to the Church did not come as the result of belief bias or the thought that everything he once believed could be wrong. Rather, “the gloom I experienced as I listened to the dark choir of voices raised against the Prophet Joseph Smith and the Restoration of the Church of Jesus Christ … is the absence of the Spirit of God,” Elder Corbridge said.

Uh huh. Not cognitive dissonance.

[Palerider]

I'm just shocked that the church is even deigning to address any of this stuff. It's so beneath them. I'm sure they have much bigger issues to deal with and to spend their time on. Like how their stocks and bonds are doing in the market and where their next real estate investment should be. Every conference we hear how the church is growing astronomically and the work is rolling forth, unstoppable, indefatigable, inevitable....steady hands are on the tiller. Great miracles are following. Revelation has been (to quote Wendy) "unleashed"!!

The superior Mormon intellect has put to flight all of the baying hounds who would do the church harm. Nothing can seriously touch the man who has done more for the salvation of mankind than anyone except Jesus Christ himself....

So why sweat the little stuff?

I need to reach out to my old stake president and tell him he was right to deride my precognizant intuition that the "faith crisis" issue would be the biggest problem the church would face in the near future. He was right. The church had much bigger fish to fry.

Why waste the time of these BYU students on this stuff? Either Joseph was a prophet or he wasn't.

Simple.

[Palerider]

I've tried (successfully I think) to make the case that the church teaches some truth but also uses that truth to slip you the little lie that hooks a person into spiritual servitude to man and the organization rather than to God.

It's odd because the principle of Lucifer teaching us half truths is very established in the church as well. The irony is self-evident.

This BYU talk gives a prime example of evidence for my premise. To wit:

"Elder Corbridge explained there are primary and secondary questions when it comes to the Church. The primary questions must be answered first, as they are the most important. They include:

Is there a God who is our Father?
Is Jesus Christ the Son of God, the Savior of the world?
Was Joseph Smith a prophet?
Is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the kingdom of God on the earth?"

These first two primary questions have absolutely nothing to do with whether the church is true or not. They can be concluded by an individual without regard to whether Joseph Smith was a prophet or not. Millions of believers have answered these questions to their own satisfaction without any assistance from the church, the Book of Mormon or Joseph Smith.

I believe the reason they are included as primary questions about the veracity of the church is because leadership wants to link the affirmative belief in the church to your belief in God.

In other words, God and the church are inseparable. If one aspect is in question then so is the other. If you believe in God then you will believe that Joseph was a prophet and the church is true.

Millions of Christians would beg to disagree.

But for Mormons this linkage becomes an implied scare tactic. Failure to believe in the church and Joseph by implication means Atheism. And for TBMs that's a terrifying place to be.

However if the only PRIMARY questions one has to answer about the church are, is it true and was Joseph a prophet....? That becomes something that a TBM can live without if the answer turns out to be "NO".

As is evidenced on this site some disaffected members do drift towards agnosticism or atheism. But I'm betting that a goodly number also find other Christian options for their faith as well. It would be interesting to see the stats.

I also seem to recall some discussion either here or elsewhere regarding whether the church would be willing to recommend a disillusioned member find another venue/community to continue in their Godly belief and it appeared that the church would be loathe to do so.

So is leadership truly concerned with the eternal welfare of their members no matter where they go or are they only interested in you as long as there's a chance you' ll pay your tithing to Salt Lake...?

[nibbler]

I saw this article pop up in my social media feed.

I got the distinct impression that Corbridge conflates the Spirit with confirmation bias.

In the end, the article becomes another thing that feeds people's appeal to authority. Corbridge looked into it. Corbridge is spiritual and a GA. Corbridge's faith wasn't shook. Nothing to see here.

[blazerb]

The part where he described people who try to prove the church true by erasing all doubt bugged me. I was not trying to erase all doubt. I loaded my shelf confident that I did not need to answer all the questions. I had my faith. Then, there was the November policy. Then, there was the BYU rapes and Honor Code mess. I realized that I had looked away from some pretty awful behavior by the church. I am not a very good ally, but at least I could stop being an opponent to decency. I think my shelf could have handled a lot if the current church had just been good to people.

[2bizE]

I read part of it, until I got nauseous.
He did mention at the beginning that he had received a specific assignment to read anti Mormon literature. I thought that was interesting.

[wtfluff]

The 1980's "Running Scared" movie was a comedy, right?

Because it's kind of funny watching these clowns try to hide the truth with all of these recent speeches about doubt.

It's been said before, but I'll type it again: Where would mormonism be if Joseph ignored his "doubts?"

[Hagoth]

Talks like this scream "we are really standing on shaky ground, folks! Run! Hide!"

[deacon blues]

Yet another talk where students are told to doubt themselves, their tangible experiences, and their rationality.

[Red Ryder]

Anyone want to do a word search on LDS.org?

Search and count the instances of:
Pornography
Doubts
Questions

I'm guessing porn has dropped off and questions and doubts is filling the void.

[Hagoth]

These first two primary questions have absolutely nothing to do with whether the church is true or not. They can be concluded by an individual without regard to whether Joseph Smith was a prophet or not. Millions of believers have answered these questions to their own satisfaction without any assistance from the church, the Book of Mormon or Joseph Smith.

And that is the piece of indoctrination on which the church has put the most effort and on which it absolutely depends.

"I found my keys - Joseph Smith was a prophet and the Book of Mormon is true!"

or here's one I heard in sacrament meeting. "Our grandchildren was almost hit by a car. If we hadn't been serving a mission at the time I'm certain they would have been killed. The church is true, brothers and sisters!"

[Hagoth]

Anyone want to do a word search on LDS.org?

Search and count the instances of:
Pornography
Doubts
Questions

I'm guessing porn has dropped off and questions and doubts is filling the void.

Speaking of which, this was a weird inclusion in the talk:

One cannot be better than what he or she knows. Most people act based on their beliefs. Sometimes, though, their beliefs are wrong.

For instance, someone may believe in God and that pornography is wrong, yet still clicks on a site wrongly believing he or she will be happier, cannot help but click, isn’t hurting anyone else or it’s not that bad. But this person is wrong.

What is he really trying to say here and why did he pick pornography as an example instead of something that actually relates to the topic, like maybe polyandry or the Book of Abraham? Is it that he knows that the kids in the audience he's talking to look at porn and feel horribly guilty about it, so he's trying to associate that guilt with looking for information outside of the correlated materials?

[Just This Guy]

On my mission, There was a talk on tape that I liked. The central premise was that doubt is not only good, but is essential to Mormonism. Doupt is what led JSj to pray in the grove of trees. Doubt led Enos to pray for himself Personal doubt can be addressed with Moroni's Promise. Doubt only becomes a problem when it is not acted upon and is allowed to fester and grow. So when you have doubt, let it drive you to seek answers.

So yeah, I don't think that Deseret Book is publishing that talk anymore. Doubt leads to action, action leads to research, research leads to faith crisis, faith Crisis leads people out of the church.

[Advocate]

Is there a God who is our Father?
Is Jesus Christ the Son of God, the Savior of the world?
Was Joseph Smith a prophet?
Is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the kingdom of God on the earth?"

These first two primary questions have absolutely nothing to do with whether the church is true or not. They can be concluded by an individual without regard to whether Joseph Smith was a prophet or not. Millions of believers have answered these questions to their own satisfaction without any assistance from the church, the Book of Mormon or Joseph Smith.

I believe the reason they are included as primary questions about the veracity of the church is because leadership wants to link the affirmative belief in the church to your belief in God.

I don't disagree with your reasoning and I hadn't thought about it that way. However, it could be a simple sales technique. The technique is that you get your potential customer to respond yes to several easy questions, and that conditions them to say yes to harder/more controversial questions. Here is an example:

1. Do you like coming to shop here?
2. Is it easy to find us?
3. Did this product catch your eye?
4. Are you ready to buy it now?
5. Will you want to take delivery next week?

This example is from http://changingminds.org/disciplines/sa ... _close.htm (no affiliation), and there are many other websites showing a similar technique.

A related technique often used by President Oaks is to offer a list of things wherein the first few are things that everyone agrees with, then the next ones are more questionable. The idea is that you get the person agreeing in their mind which conditions them to agree to things they might otherwise disagree with if taken on its own. An example is:

In the church we believe sins can be harmful. We know people are harmed when sins are committed like murder, adultery, dishonesty, and disregarding counsel from those you have agreed to sustain.

[Palerider]

I don't disagree with your reasoning and I hadn't thought about it that way. However, it could be a simple sales technique. The technique is that you get your potential customer to respond yes to several easy questions, and that conditions them to say yes to harder/more controversial questions.

Excellent observation.

I had similar feelings myself but wasn't familiar enough with the concept to bring it to fruition. Excellent example regarding Oaks. Such a sneaky devil...and a very lawyerly technique.

[Mormorrisey]

These first two primary questions have absolutely nothing to do with whether the church is true or not. They can be concluded by an individual without regard to whether Joseph Smith was a prophet or not. Millions of believers have answered these questions to their own satisfaction without any assistance from the church, the Book of Mormon or Joseph Smith.

And that is the piece of indoctrination on which the church has put the most effort and on which it absolutely depends.

"I found my keys - Joseph Smith was a prophet and the Book of Mormon is true!"

or here's one I heard in sacrament meeting. "Our grandchildren was almost hit by a car. If we hadn't been serving a mission at the time I'm certain they would have been killed. The church is true, brothers and sisters!"

And you are absolutely correct, Hagoth, the church is heavily invested into thinking this, hence, the changes made to Poelman's excellent talk in 1984, where the original hit the nail on the head:

https://youtu.be/1XJp2NdSUUI

But of course, we are REQUIRED to think that the gospel and the church are one and the same. Trying to separate the two for the typical TBM mind is an exercise in futility. I've literally given up trying to have this conversation with the missus. It doesn't lead anywhere.

As to Corbridge's talk, that was an assault on both logic and critical thinking. I remember once having a student come to me with an essay topic, with the conclusion that the Canadian government was completely justified in putting Japanese families in internment camps during WWII. I told this student that only one historian I knew of argued this point, and the vast majority of the evidence illustrated that it was an overreaction, and caused incredible hardship. This student persisted that her argument was correct, so I let her do the paper. She received a D+ on the assignment, because of course the evidence proved otherwise, and her paper was an exercise in apologetics, rather than fact. Starting out with the answer before the brain kicks in is a recipe for disaster. God help me, I spent over 30 years of my life this way.

[Palerider]

Anyone want to do a word search on LDS.org?

Search and count the instances of:
Pornography
Doubts
Questions

I'm guessing porn has dropped off and questions and doubts is filling the void.

Yep!

Ten years ago this is what my SP told me was the great problem in the church....Porn.

The anti-Mormon stuff was just a blip on the radar....

They couldn't see the runaway train heading straight down the tracks for them. No prophetic revelation here.

[Corsair]

Things that are real will stay real even if you deeply investigate all the questions.
Things that are true will stay true even when you examine all of the contrary evidence.

Sticking with "Primary Questions" allows anyone to stay faithful to any religion they want attend. It allows any pseudo-science and fraudulent health claim to persist. It could rationalize an extra-marital affair by allowing a wayward spouse to ask, "Do I still love my wife even after I bang this hooker?"

In light of Corbridge's talk as well as Renlund, Eyring, and every other deeply biased injunction to stay faithful, I have a meta-question that I do want to examine. Every time that one more of these talks come out, it gets quickly desconstructed with minimal effort. But notice that these are always presented in a forum where feedback and cross-examination are not allowed. Are there any recent cases where church leaders are subject to public and skeptical inquiry?

After Holland's famous "Dodo" speech to BBC questions about temple penalties in 2012, I have not seen any. It was not common before 2012, but Hinckley showing up with Larry King and on "60 Minutes" with Mike Wallace seemed like solid efforts. Joseph Fielding Smith published "Answers to Gospel Questions" and McConkie's "Mormon Doctrine" were big in their time. Our Prophets, Seers, and Revelators don't seem to like following the example of Samuel the Lamanite and stand on the wall preaching to unfriendly crowds.

[Linked]

This BYU talk gives a prime example of evidence for my premise. To wit:

"Elder Corbridge explained there are primary and secondary questions when it comes to the Church. The primary questions must be answered first, as they are the most important. They include:

Is there a God who is our Father?
Is Jesus Christ the Son of God, the Savior of the world?
Was Joseph Smith a prophet?
Is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the kingdom of God on the earth?"

These first two primary questions have absolutely nothing to do with whether the church is true or not. (bold added) They can be concluded by an individual without regard to whether Joseph Smith was a prophet or not. Millions of believers have answered these questions to their own satisfaction without any assistance from the church, the Book of Mormon or Joseph Smith.

I believe the reason they are included as primary questions about the veracity of the church is because leadership wants to link the affirmative belief in the church to your belief in God.

In other words, God and the church are inseparable. If one aspect is in question then so is the other. If you believe in God then you will believe that Joseph was a prophet and the church is true.

I agree that the church tries very hard to get people to think of the church and god as essentially the same thing. They are pretty successful too.

One comment you made stuck out to me though, the part about the questions about god and Jesus not having to do with whether or not the mormon church is true. My faith crisis started with god, I realized that I felt like an intervening god is unlikely, and everything started to unravel. So I would say that having God the Father definitely has to do with whether the church is true or not, and is actually a more fundamentally important question than whether or not Joseph Smith was a prophet.

If Joseph Smith was not a prophet that does not disprove an intervening god, but if there is no God the Father then that does disprove that Joseph Smith was a prophet.