Conscientious Alternative to Mormonism

[_KevinSim]

Having conviction that you are living you life according to god's will is great, but the LDS methodology for verification of faith is no more sound than any other. In fact the LDS methodology is an exercise in circular reasoning.

First off, I'm not entirely sure that the methodology I used was The LDS Methodology. Let me just say that I don't see anything circular about the methodology I used to find out if God endorsed the LDS Church, after having been exposed to the LDS Church for 17 years.

Granted that my methodology rested on the assumption that God does actually exist, that God loves me, that God wants me to understand Her/His will, and that God is capable of answering prayer. But I maintain that there are good reasons to make those assumptions, completely separate from the methodology.

That being the case, I concluded that a deity that loved me like that would realize that if S/He didn't answer a question I asked, ready to base the whole rest of my life on whatever answer that deity provided, then I would never have any chance at all of ever knowing that deity's will. So I concluded that God would answer that question. I asked my question; I got my answer; that's why I'm a Latter-day Saint today. Where's the circularity in that?

[_KevinSim]

Kevin - I'm Mormon and I don't believe the LDS Church is "true". It is a man-made organization lead by men. Now, the gospel is "true". The statement that God exists is "true". But, I really don't understand the statement that the LDS Church is "true". What is so true about it and which version of the LDS Church is true? I'll give you a multiple choice to make this easy:
A) The restored Joseph Smith version of the 1830's-1840's?
B) The BY version that endorsed polygamy and barred blacks and women from their rightful role in the priesthood (oh and openly disfellowships and attack gays)?
C) The post polygamy version that barred blacks and women from their rightful role in the priesthood (oh and openly disfellowships and attack gays)?
D) The Church of today that finally gave blacks their rightful role in the priesthood but still denies women from their rightful role in the priesthood (oh and openly disfellowships and attack gays)?
or my favorite E) None of the above.

Tobin, I too have wondered what precisely it means to say, "The LDS Church is true." I hear other Latter-day Saints say they know it's true pretty regularly, and I've come to realize I really don't know what they mean. But the problem is not all them; when I asked God my foundational question back in 1976 the question was, is the LDS Church true? Since then I've concluded that the answer God gave me was that in 1976 He wanted me to treat Spencer Kimball (and by extension in 2012 to treat Thomas Monson) as His spokesman to the world. God designed the LDS Church to lead me to the truth, and it's currently serving its purpose. And it has been leading people to God's truth from the 1830s to the present day, whether it was the church that Joseph Smith restored, the BY version, the post polygamy version, or the church of today.

[_KevinSim]

You rebuffed his honest suggestions, often splitting hairs on the terminology he chose in order to do so (example: "I'm not interested in finding a congregation I like. I want to find the group of people God wants me to associate with"---so say you're visiting other churches until you find one that God wants you to associate with then!)

I looked up rebuff at "http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rebuff?s=t" where it effectively said that the word means to reject or refuse; I did neither, at least for his suggestion that I get "a modern Bible translation and start reading it." Instead I tried to find out why Aristotle wanted me to read a modern version of the Bible. I pointed out that according to Wikipedia there are five English translations of the Hindu holy book, the Rigveda. MsJack, have you read all five translations?

As I said to Aristotle, maybe you have; maybe you will surprise me and have read them all. In which case my argument won't work. But I kind of doubt you have. Please satisfy my curiosity and let me know whether you have or not.

But if it turns out that you have not read all five translations then, for the sake of argument, let's assume that you have read four of the five, say all but the Ravi Arya and K.L. Joshi version. If that were the case and someone were to come to you and tell you that Hinduism made more sense than Christianity, and that the way to find that out was to read the Arya and Joshi version, would you immediately go out and buy the Arya and Joshi version and start reading it? Or would you rather ask that someone why s/he thought there was something so special about the Arya and Joshi version?

As I pointed out, I have read the King James Version of the Bible from cover to cover at least three times. It is a very large book, requiring quite an investment of time to read it completely. Why should I think that there was something in a modern version of the Bible that would stand out to me that I didn't see one of the three times I'd previously read the KJV?

I'm not entirely innocent here. When Aristotle Smith recommended that I get "a modern Bible translation and start reading it," and added that that "will force you to see and think about things differently," I should have said, and therefore, what? What is it about a modern version forcing me to see and think about things differently, that would make it more likely that I would understand the will of God in my life?

As far as Aristotle's recommendation that I visit "several churches of different types" goes, perhaps I rebuffed that. But I just now did a bit of research on denominations and faith groups available for visiting in Utah County, where I live, or close by in Salt Lake County, which is a bit more densely populated. My sources are "http://www.city-data.com/county/religion/Salt-Lake-County-UT.html", "http://www.city-data.com/county/religion/Utah-County-UT.html", "http://www.mavensearch.com/synagogues/C3341", "http://www.yellowbook.com/yellow-pages/?what=churches+jehovahs+witnesses&where=utah", "http://www.utah-faiths.org/usc/default.htm", "http://wiccan.meetup.com/cities/us/ut/salt_lake_city", and "http://www.examiner.com/religious-diversity-in-salt-lake-city/buddhist-and-hindu-temples-salt-lake-city-area".

I put together a list, that was pretty long, long enough that I decided not to include it in this post, but I think I'll post it separately to this forum. That list will have the name of one denomination/group on each line, preceded by two numbers; the first column is the number of congregations in Utah County while the second column is the number of congregations in Salt Lake County.

There were 18 denominations/groups represented in Utah County; each of those denominations were also represented in Salt Lake County, and in addition 33 other denominations were represented. In all there were 29 congregations in Utah County and 167 in Salt Lake County, making 196 altogether.

MsJack, to follow Aristotle Smith's recommendation, would it be enough to visit one congregation per each denomination/group, or would I need to visit all 196 congregations?

I noticed too that there are no Zoroastrian congregations in Utah at all. To be complete should I locate the nearest Zoroastrian congregation and drive to it out of state?

My sincerity is on trial here so I'll tell the complete truth. My wife and I are extremely good matches for each other in many ways; theology is not one of them. I'm very much interested in reasoning things out theologically; she is not interested in that kind of reasoning at all. This is not to say she doesn't have a theology; she very definitely has her beliefs; it's just that she thinks stating her beliefs should be enough, and everybody in the family should just align with her, pretty much because she's the mom, and thinks arguing about faith matters is unproductive.

Before I married her I used to visit other churches a lot. In order to maintain peace with my wife I have cut that down considerably. After we moved to Utah I started up a friendship with a local Baptist pastor. There were a few Wednesdays that my wife was up in Provo that I managed to slip away and visit my friend's Wednesday night services. Does that sound like someone who is insincere about investigating other faiths?

Let me point out, too, that after posting the above-mentioned response to Aristotle Smith's post, I never got a response from him. So why is it that the person who wants to carry on the discussion is branded insincere, and the person who ignored the attempts to carry it on is said to be on the moral high ground?

MsJack and/or Aristotle Smith, are you planning on responding to this?

[_lulu]

My conscience demands that I work towards permanent good, good that isn't going to go away when I die, good that's going to have lasting effect. Does this clear things up a little?

Do you see how self-centered that is?

Self-centered?! Lulu, how can you say self-centered?

I'm convinced that there are many things in a solitary life that can be called good, but when I think of good I typically think of something done by one (or more) person for the service of another person. Or even for the service of animals, perhaps. It might even be determined that it's a good thing to take good care of the planet, to go green! So how can you call the demands of my conscience that I do good self-centered? Doing good has the potential for being pretty much as little self-centered as possible.

So why is it that the person who wants to carry on the discussion is branded insincere, and the person who ignored the attempts to carry it on is said to be on the moral high ground?

I'll assume you mean "why" do I "call" or "say" that.

To begin to answer that question let's start with the # of times you say "I" and "my" in your post.

Kevin, are you planning on responding to this?

[_Themis]

Where's the circularity in that?

Where did you get the idea that the church or Book of Mormon might be true? Where did you get the idea that you could ask God these questions? Where did you get the idea that God can answer these questions? Where did you get the idea of how he will answer these questions?

[_KevinSim]

I'll assume you mean "why" do I "call" or "say" that.

To begin to answer that question let's start with the # of times you say "I" and "my" in your post.

Kevin, are you planning on responding to this?

Yes, actually, I am. Lulu, thanks for pointing this out to me. I don't know how this post slipped past my notice. I'll try to post a response to it tomorrow.

[_Aristotle Smith]

I looked up rebuff at "http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rebuff?s=t" where it effectively said that the word means to reject or refuse; I did neither, at least for his suggestion that I get "a modern Bible translation and start reading it." Instead I tried to find out why Aristotle wanted me to read a modern version of the Bible. I pointed out that according to Wikipedia there are five English translations of the Hindu holy book, the Rigveda. MsJack, have you read all five translations?

I have. Three times. I also have memorized the originals.

But if it turns out that you have not read all five translations then, for the sake of argument, let's assume that you have read four of the five, say all but the Ravi Arya and K.L. Joshi version. If that were the case and someone were to come to you and tell you that Hinduism made more sense than Christianity, and that the way to find that out was to read the Arya and Joshi version, would you immediately go out and buy the Arya and Joshi version and start reading it? Or would you rather ask that someone why s/he thought there was something so special about the Arya and Joshi version?

Why would I? I have read all of them. Three times.

As I pointed out, I have read the King James Version of the Bible from cover to cover at least three times. It is a very large book, requiring quite an investment of time to read it completely. Why should I think that there was something in a modern version of the Bible that would stand out to me that I didn't see one of the three times I'd previously read the KJV?

Because when you read a modern translation, pixies dance on your taste buds and produce the sensation of eating crispy bacon. By the way, this is the answer to your first questions about how to know what God wants you to do: It's simple when it tastes like bacon you know you are doing God's will.

As far as Aristotle's recommendation that I visit "several churches of different types" goes, perhaps I rebuffed that. But I just now did a bit of research on denominations and faith groups available for visiting in Utah County, where I live, or close by in Salt Lake County, which is a bit more densely populated. My sources are "http://www.city-data.com/county/religion/Salt-Lake-County-UT.html", "http://www.city-data.com/county/religion/Utah-County-UT.html", "http://www.mavensearch.com/synagogues/C3341", "http://www.yellowbook.com/yellow-pages/?what=churches+jehovahs+witnesses&where=utah", "http://www.utah-faiths.org/usc/default.htm", "http://wiccan.meetup.com/cities/us/ut/salt_lake_city", and "http://www.examiner.com/religious-diversity-in-salt-lake-city/buddhist-and-hindu-temples-salt-lake-city-area".

I put together a list, that was pretty long, long enough that I decided not to include it in this post, but I think I'll post it separately to this forum. That list will have the name of one denomination/group on each line, preceded by two numbers; the first column is the number of congregations in Utah County while the second column is the number of congregations in Salt Lake County.

There were 18 denominations/groups represented in Utah County; each of those denominations were also represented in Salt Lake County, and in addition 33 other denominations were represented. In all there were 29 congregations in Utah County and 167 in Salt Lake County, making 196 altogether.

MsJack, to follow Aristotle Smith's recommendation, would it be enough to visit one congregation per each denomination/group, or would I need to visit all 196 congregations?

I figure there's probably around 32,000 or so Christian denominations worldwide. You need to visit them all. Three times. I did. You will need to get yourself a combination teleportation device/time travel machine.

I noticed too that there are no Zoroastrian congregations in Utah at all. To be complete should I locate the nearest Zoroastrian congregation and drive to it out of state?

No, use the teleportation device I recommended earlier. Then visit it three times.

My sincerity is on trial here so I'll tell the complete truth. My wife and I are extremely good matches for each other in many ways; theology is not one of them. I'm very much interested in reasoning things out theologically; she is not interested in that kind of reasoning at all. This is not to say she doesn't have a theology; she very definitely has her beliefs; it's just that she thinks stating her beliefs should be enough, and everybody in the family should just align with her, pretty much because she's the mom, and thinks arguing about faith matters is unproductive.

Before I married her I used to visit other churches a lot. In order to maintain peace with my wife I have cut that down considerably. After we moved to Utah I started up a friendship with a local Baptist pastor. There were a few Wednesdays that my wife was up in Provo that I managed to slip away and visit my friend's Wednesday night services. Does that sound like someone who is insincere about investigating other faiths?

Let me point out, too, that after posting the above-mentioned response to Aristotle Smith's post, I never got a response from him. So why is it that the person who wants to carry on the discussion is branded insincere, and the person who ignored the attempts to carry it on is said to be on the moral high ground?

The moral high ground is always occupied by the person who uses italics and bold italics the least. Therefore, I win.

But, I see that you appear to have finally been straight with everyone with the last three paragraphs, so I'll try re-engaging again. If you had lead with this, we could have cut to the chase.

Piece of advice #1: Do what you need to do to not look in the mirror and see someone you are ashamed of. I don't know what that is. For me it was joining another church while maintaining nominal LDS involvement to keep the peace. It worked for me, I don't know what will work for you. Be honest with yourself and you'll probably make the right decision.

Piece of advice #2: Cut a deal with your wife. I don't know who your wife is nor how she reacts to things. I know enough not trust one person's view of things, and I only have your view here. If you want to go to other churches, cut a deal to make it happen. If you are happy to make it as NOM, then cut a deal to make that happen. For the most part do what it takes to make your family work, provided you don't have to violate piece of advice #1. You can probably make this happen.

Piece of advice #3: Faith is about making courageous decisions. Make one.

[_KevinSim]

I got in a position to respond to this quicker than I thought I would.

I'll assume you mean "why" do I "call" or "say" that.

To begin to answer that question let's start with the # of times you say "I" and "my" in your post.

Okay, I took a look at the post you responded to, took all the references to people, and got:

LDSToronto, I, someone, me, I, someone, someone, those around, someone, I'm, God, my, me, I, those around, me, I, Monson, I, God, I'm, Monson, preserver, I'm, human race, my, me, I'm, I'm, my children, grandchildren, great grandchildren, me, my, I, I, I, I'm, I, anyone

There are forty references to people altogether, and if I count the instances of "I", "I'm", "my", and "me" I get 23. That's 57.5%.

On the other hand if I do the same thing to your post I get:

I'll, you, I, let's, you, your

That's six words and they're evenly split; three refer to I (Lulu) or us (Lulu and others), and three refer to you (Kevin). That's 50%.

Do you really think that a difference of 7.5% is enough to make me self-centered and you not?

[_KevinSim]

But, I see that you appear to have finally been straight with everyone with the last three paragraphs, so I'll try re-engaging again. If you had lead with this, we could have cut to the chase.

Piece of advice #1: Do what you need to do to not look in the mirror and see someone you are ashamed of. I don't know what that is. For me it was joining another church while maintaining nominal LDS involvement to keep the peace. It worked for me, I don't know what will work for you. Be honest with yourself and you'll probably make the right decision.

I know what it's like to be ashamed of myself. I once thought blacks as a race were less valiant in the pre-existence; the memory of that belief shamed me immensely for a time. But I repented of that attitude a long time ago, and haven't been ashamed of myself for at least three decades now.

Piece of advice #2: Cut a deal with your wife. I don't know who your wife is nor how she reacts to things. I know enough not trust one person's view of things, and I only have your view here. If you want to go to other churches, cut a deal to make it happen. If you are happy to make it as NOM, then cut a deal to make that happen. For the most part do what it takes to make your family work, provided you don't have to violate piece of advice #1. You can probably make this happen.

My position on this is the same as it has been from the beginning. I have no problem whatsoever finding a way to visit a faith group if there is reason to believe that faith group might be endorsed by God. But Aristotle, I don't have the mentioned teleportation device / time travel machine. Trying to visit all the faith groups would be futile, whether the number is the 32,000 you mentioned or the 196 I mentioned. Trying to find a God-endorsed group by just visiting them all one by one makes no sense at all. Without some reason to believe that God may have endorsed one faith group, that group becomes just one of a large number that very probably can never be fully investigated.

The thing that gets me here is that if a Biblical Christian were to ask me how s/he could know that God endorsed the LDS Church, I could give that Christian an answer. That was the whole reason I started the Case for Christ thread, to see if there was a Biblical Christian equivalent, some way to explain to me how I can know that God endorsed Biblical Christianity. What I got in response was, if I wanted to learn about Biblical Christianity I needed to investigate Biblical Christian groups. All 32,000 of them. Three times each.

Piece of advice #3: Faith is about making courageous decisions. Make one.

I made a decision a long time ago; whether it was courageous or not, maybe you can tell me. My decision was to stay a devout Latter-day Saint until I came to the knowledge that God didn't want me to be a Latter-day Saint, or until I came to the knowledge that God wanted me to be something else.

[_Tobin]

I made a decision a long time ago; whether it was courageous or not, maybe you can tell me. My decision was to stay a devout Latter-day Saint until I came to the knowledge that God didn't want me to be a Latter-day Saint, or until I came to the knowledge that God wanted me to be something else.

Exactly. The point of Mormonism is to find out what God wants you to do. If that is being part of the LDS Church or not, it doesn't matter. Seeking, speaking with, and doing as God asks is what is important.