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

[Palerider]

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.

Joseph loved a good hero as long as it was in a book....

For the current GAs? Well, there's always the old fall back of "Contention is of the Devil!" So preaching to the choir is the safe bet.

[Thoughtful]

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.

This is such a tiny piece of critical thinking that would help SO MANY PEOPLE if they would only consider it. Your doubt is not the enemy of the church, the fact that the church is verifiably untrue is the enemy of the church. Doubt is just the catalyst for inquiry. The church can't defend itself against facts, but they can encourage people to not trust themselves.

A quote I really like:

When your views on the world and your intellect are being challenged and you begin to feel uncomfortable because of a contradiction you've detected that is threatening your current model of the world...pay attention. You are about to learn something.
WILLIAM H. DRURY, JR.

Discomfort and "darkness" is not a sign that the devil is taking over. It's a sign that some cognitive restructuring is needed for you to reconcile conflicting information with your paradigm.

[Hagoth]

I believe that ultimately it comes down to a problem of conflating of the concepts of "believe" and "know." How can you know God exists, or that the Book of Mormon is true? Read and pray. In reality, that is only a process for helping you to believe. But Mormonism insists that it is a recipe for actually knowing.

I just listened to a lecture by a Jewish Rabbi who said one concept of modern Judaism is that we can't know anything for sure. We can study it and discuss it but knowing is in the realm of science, not religion.

The problem that confounds Mormons, of course, is when you try to get them to explain why the "knowing" of Muslims and Evangelicals is inferior to the "knowing" of Mormons. The can only fall back on one of two things, either they are deceived or their "knowing" is really just "believing" and is of a lesser quality than what Mormons experience as actual "knowing," and you have to be a Mormon to have that because God will only give it in answers to questions about the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, and modern LDS leadership. Pretty sketchy when you lay it out in the sunlight.

[Hagoth]

Your doubt is not the enemy of the church, the fact that the church is verifiably untrue is the enemy of the church.

Best summary ever.

[Palerider]

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.

I think you're right in the larger picture. And perhaps I'm assuming that the GA here is taking it for granted that the majority of his audience are already at a minimum, believers in God. So he wants to frame the argument using that already existing belief as leverage for how he wants the audience to view the issue just as Advocate adroitly points out above.

To clarify, the question of the existence of God is much larger and generalized to numerous world religions, some not even Christian. If there is no God then Joseph's issue is moot as well as that of Moses and Mohammed. But an equation has to balance in both directions. And this, at least to me is what the church is attempting to imply. The linkage between God's existence and Joseph's prophetship.

They want it to look like this is the only way the equation can work.

God exists=Joseph true prophet

You have adeptly pointed out this linkage:

God non-existent=Joseph non-prophet

So it is a primary question on a larger scale. But what I want members to realize that the equation can also legitimately look like this:

God exists=Joseph still a non-prophet

I don't think the church wants that seen as a possibility.

[Corsair]

God exists=Joseph still a non-prophet

I don't think the church wants that seen as a possibility.

LDS leaders and believers definitely do not want to consider that possibility. It's hilarious that this is the nightmare scenario for the LDS church. But it is what 99% of Christianity happily and comfortably exists within. The LDS Gospel Doctrine class simply cannot consider anything better than condescension for any other church claims. Missionaries reliably don't consider this possibility because it destroys most reasons to possibly try and convert Christians to be baptized into the LDS church.

I think that the narrative of the "Great Apostasy" is the biggest issue that the LDS church has not tried to rationalize or explain away. The apostasy is still in the missionary lessons. Joseph Smith's Restoration is hardly necessary or compelling if authority or truth is still here.

[Linked]

I think you're right in the larger picture. And perhaps I'm assuming that the GA here is taking it for granted that the majority of his audience are already at a minimum, believers in God. So he wants to frame the argument using that already existing belief as leverage for how he wants the audience to view the issue just as Advocate adroitly points out above.

So it is a primary question on a larger scale. But what I want members to realize that the equation can also legitimately look like this:

God exists=Joseph still a non-prophet

I don't think the church wants that seen as a possibility.

I think that you are right about his assumptions about his audience; they typically believe in God and in Joseph Smith as a prophet. I also agree that the church tries to tie disbelief toward Joseph to disbelief toward God.

I think this GA is wrong about his audience though. I think that the times are changing with regard to people being willing to reconsider their views on God generally, especially among young people. More kids are less tied to their belief in God than in the past. The people in his audience are more likely than ever to lose faith in God at some point than typical BYU devotional audiences of the past. https://news.nationalgeographic.com/201 ... -religion/.

With that said, I suspect that the majority of those that hear or read his talk will stay faithful.

[slavereeno]

The problem that confounds Mormons, of course, is when you try to get them to explain why the "knowing" of Muslims and Evangelicals is inferior to the "knowing" of Mormons. The can only fall back on one of two things, either they are deceived or their "knowing" is really just "believing" and is of a lesser quality than what Mormons experience as actual "knowing," and you have to be a Mormon to have that because God will only give it in answers to questions about the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, and modern LDS leadership. Pretty sketchy when you lay it out in the sunlight.

Not sure if you were alluding to this already in your statement above, but my TBM friends/family keep giving me this line when I present them with evidence of people in other churches having spiritual confirmations of the truthiness of different religions:

God confirms to them that the religion of their upbringing or culture is true in order to prepare them for Mormonism. If they believe in God or even Goodness that is a step in the right direction so he would help them to feel a spiritual confirmation as a stepping stone to accepting (Mormonism)

Now, IF I could show them a good quote of someone who was Mormon then got a spiritual confirmation about another church, in my mind, that would be helpful. But just like trying to nail jello to the wall they would point out people who left the church then came back and say that there will be a few who are deceived but by the vast majority follow the pattern outlined above.

There is no winning the logic game with TBMs, they crank out the logical fallacies faster than I can dispel them.

[Palerider]

With that said, I suspect that the majority of those that hear or read his talk will stay faithful.

You never know. There might be more closet doubters there than anyone would have imagined.

I probably would have assumed the same thing as the GA. But I'm of a more believing generation in general. I think you may be right. There may be a tidal shift that is happening without some of us older folks even being aware of it. Although I've come to believe that God doesn't intervene in our lives in a noticeable way as often as many members of the church believe, I still believe He is there for us in critical times. Even when things don't go the way we might have hoped and He allows "earth life" to play out as it will. Life seems more and more to me like an "experiential journey" built to give us an eternally informed perspective rather than a trial or "test".

If God is constantly intervening and mitigating.....one isn't getting the full effect.

[wtfluff]

God confirms to them that the religion of their upbringing or culture is true in order to prepare them for Mormonism. If they believe in God or even Goodness that is a step in the right direction so he would help them to feel a spiritual confirmation as a stepping stone to accepting (Mormonism)

There is no winning the logic game with TBMs, they crank out the logical fallacies faster than I can dispel them.

If you want to go there... Mention something about the spirit confirming to suicide bombers that they should follow through and kill a bunch of people. Is that a "stepping stone" to accepting mormonism?

If they think so, then yeah, they're completely lost. If not, then you have a bit of a contradiction. Essentially, if "the spirit" can "confirm" completely contradictory, mutually exclusive "truths" then it's useless for actually confirming the truth of anything.

But again, believers have to be able to entertain a tiny bit of logic for that to work for them. If they can't, then game off!


Edit: Jumping to suicide bombers is a bit like jumping to Godwin's Law, but for some believers, I think something shocking could get them to actually think (possibly apply some logic.) I'm sure there are some other smarter NOMies here who could come up with a better scenario...

[Reuben]

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?

I think you're reading him wrong. Weirdly enough, it seems like he's trying to reduce shame over looking at porn. Here's what he said next.

“When you act badly, you may think you are bad when in truth you are usually mistaken,” Elder Corbridge said. “The challenge is not as much closing the gap between our actions and our beliefs. The challenge, rather, is closing the gap between our beliefs and the truth.”

This downgrades porn from a horrible, filthy sin to a mistake based on false beliefs. This is a shame-free and frankly CBT way of understanding and modifying behavior, and I approve heartily.

His epistemology sucks because it doesn't have the power to falsify the claims we build our lives on, as has been pointed out. But IMO his explanation of porn use was a refreshing improvement.

[Not Buying It]

Well OK, Elder I've-read-all-the-anti-material-there-is-and-I-have-all-the-answers, then address one of the major questions that cause people to leave the Church in your devotional. Think of all the souls you could save if you could tell us all why it was OK for Joseph Smith to screw around with women, or why the bogus translations of the facsimiles in the Book of Abraham aren't a problem, etc. If you really have it all figured out, then why the hell aren't you sharing your answers to these thorny problems to help members who have "doubts"? Your supposed answers aren't really helping anyone if you keep them to yourself.

I'm tired of the Brethren making vague references to historical issues they claim they have answers to without ever explicating the issues, never mind providing the answers. Put up or shut up.

[jfro18]

I'm cross posting a bit here, but in the Renlund devotional his wife Ruth made a point of calling Dale a prophet, seer, and revelator as they went on about how people with doubts will turn into spiritually broke Steven who perpetually doubted.

So I would appreciate it if just one prophet, seer, and revelator had the balls to tell us that not even they can get answers from God - that the problems we all see have no answers and that no matter how much they study them, God is not revealing to them the answers that we are all promised through 'personal revelation.'

Study it out in your mind... then ask... and nothing. Every single time.

[Advocate]

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?
In contrast, the secondary questions are unending. They include questions about Church history, polygamy, blacks and the priesthood, women and the priesthood, how the Book of Mormon was translated, DNA and the Book of Mormon, gay marriage, different accounts of the First Vision and so on.

From the Church News article, emphasis added.

Compare Elder Corbridge's approach with that advocated by the Savior:

15 ¶ Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

Matthew 7:15-17.

The Savior advocates for us to look at the fruits as a way to determine if someone is a false prophet. So, according to that logic, I should look at how Joseph Smith practiced polygamy, at the differences in his first vision account, whether he really translated a book he says he did (Abraham) and determine if those are good fruits or evil fruits. If I determine they are evil fruits, then I know Joseph Smith was a false prophet. Or conversely, if they are good fruits then I know Joseph Smith is a prophet.

Elder Corbridge's approach turns this on its head. First, we are to determine if Joseph Smith was a prophet. Once that is known (presumably the answer he wants one to find is yes), then you can look at Joseph's fruits to decide if they are good or evil. Of course, logic here will determine your answer for you. If Joseph is a prophet, then his fruits are good.

I'm kind of shocked that Elder Corbridge would advocate an approach which is contrary to what the Savior taught.

[Reuben]

I'm tired of the Brethren making vague references to historical issues they claim they have answers to without ever explicating the issues, never mind providing the answers. Put up or shut up.

So I would appreciate it if just one prophet, seer, and revelator had the balls to tell us that not even they can get answers from God - that the problems we all see have no answers and that no matter how much they study them, God is not revealing to them the answers that we are all promised through 'personal revelation.'

I think it's pretty clear that Elder Corbridge's answer is, "It doesn't matter."

I think it's equally clear that the Renlunds' answer is, "If you think it matters, there's something wrong with you."

From their perspective, whatever answers you find are fine as long as you resolve your doubts in favor of believing the church's claims.

[blazerb]

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.

I learned way back in an institute class that the Q15 feel required to collect as many books considered anti-Mormon as possible.They buy two copies of every book that they can identify. There is something that is referred to in the D&C as the "List of Enemies" that is maintained. Now, it all sounds very Nixonian to me.

[Anon70]

I'm tired of the Brethren making vague references to historical issues they claim they have answers to without ever explicating the issues, never mind providing the answers. Put up or shut up.

I think it's pretty clear that Elder Corbridge's answer is, "It doesn't matter."

I think it's equally clear that the Renlunds' answer is, "If you think it matters, there's something wrong with you."

From their perspective, whatever answers you find are fine as long as you resolve your doubts in favor of believing the church's claims.
[/quote]

This is what I see the problem has been since I learned about the Swedish rescue. I’ve got all the proof in my briefcase but...I’m not going to share it.

If they have all the answers, wouldn’t the smartest thing to do during an exodus like they’re seeing be to share them?

[Palerider]

I'm tired of the Brethren making vague references to historical issues they claim they have answers to without ever explicating the issues, never mind providing the answers. Put up or shut up.

And this is where they want to CONTROL the narrative. Oh, they'll try to answer your questions alright, but they really want to do it on their terms.

1. Come down to the office of the SP and have a little chat with us there...on our territory where we're in charge.

2. "Bro. Brown, would you mind if we start with a word of prayer to invite the Holy Spirit into our discussion? I'll offer it." (Set the mood, I'm your priesthood leader and I'm accessing God right now).

3. After superficial examination of one or two issues. "I want you to know Bro. Brown that I understand how you feel about some of these things we've discussed, but PERHAPS (key word to help you let all this crap slide), perhaps the Lord doesn't tell us everything we want to know on our time schedule. We need to go according to His will and His time schedule. What we as his children need to do is continue to be faithful and not lose hope until the Lord sees fit to give us the confirmation that we seek. Do you feel like you've been doing that Bro. Brown? Have you been giving the Lord the benefit of your doubts? (Huge turning point in the conversation here) Have you been keeping all of the covenants you made to your Heavenly Father in the temple?" (Is your lack of obedience the reason you're doubting?)

And so it goes....

Church leadership can't have this conversation in public. They can't afford to actually go through the issues and expose their lack of answers. It terrifies them.

They want to do it in private, on their terms, on their territory where you have become conditioned to be in awe of their authority. They are stacking the deck against you. And if it backfires? The damage is contained within that office. The rest of the ward isn't exposed to the disease you're carrying and the doctors' lack of ability to cure it.

If it ends badly, hopefully you will just fade away without making a fuss and leadership can get back to fleecing the sheep that remain.

[RubinHighlander]

Oh the good ship Zion! Reminds me of this clip from Galaxy Quest: "It's all real!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nF_6OfgbF7c

[RubinHighlander]

Oh the good ship Zion! Reminds me of this clip from Galaxy Quest: "It's all real!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nF_6OfgbF7c

Like a talk about doubt your doubts or a book called Saints can put the genie back in the bottle and just make it all better and all go away.