Do Ex-LDS have issues believing the Bible?

[_krose]

What if a supernatural being appeared and told you to preach there is not God (a.k.a. a Korihor situation)?

That would be bizarre indeed. I would need a convincing explanation, since that being's very existence would be evidence of something magical, be it a god or something else.

What a strange character General Smith created in Korihor. Although he has some great lines, he turns into the caricature of an atheist that religious people often want to believe in, namely that he always knew the 'truth' in his heart but said those things because of the devil.

[_Mudcat]

Mudcat, it is not so much that I think you should have reservations but the opportunities for reservations are so plenteous that not having them is remarkable. Seeing the remarkable occasions draws the question, how is it this person is not laboring with reservations?

I am aware of several textual and translational criticisms of the text. I am aware of other issues(creation, flood, etc...) that science has been critical on as well. From my determination, textual and translational criticisms, are not significant enough to impact the doctrines of the text. As far as science goes....What do they know anyway....would I be better served putting my faith in a bunch of theories? and if so which ones? do any of them lead me closer to God?

Just taking your comment, brings you closer to Jesus, it may be straightforward how Luke does that. It would be somewhat less clear how Hebrews does that. It is considerable less clear how Genesis would do that. Genesis may be fairly easy compared to Joshua which even I might wonder how in the world that would brign you closer to Jesus (aside from the names being the same)

Many people observe a variety of stories in the Old Testament which appear to be longer on folk tale imagination than on sober fact. People then feel that uncertainity about facts becomes a barrier to hearing or experienceing closeness to Jesus, (or trust of Jesus)

Well, I regard the Old Testament, because Jesus did. He quoted it often in his ministry. Is it possible, some of the Old Testament is folklore, myth, and legend? Maybe, though I tend to think not.

As far as the New Testament is concerned, which is where the bulk of my belief is formed. I feel it is very accurate. I suppose people could look at the events that transpired within the text and believe God couldn't or wouldn't do that. I just don't happen to be one of those people. Why? Because I know Jesus. I am sure the logic sounds quite circular, but you must understand I also believe Christ brings people to him, through the Gospel. I can present my beliefs, its not really up to me if you believe them or not.

[_Phaedrus Ut]

When I first starting doubting the historicity of the Book of Mormon I put my doubts on the shelf and turned my interest to Historical Jesus, New Testament, and Early Christianity. My intention was to avoid issues causing doubts in the Book of Mormon and just focus on Jesus. What I ended up with was a realization that Jesus the man from Nazareth was quite a bit different that the post-easter, pseudo Johannine, 19th century, American Protestant Jesus that I learned in the LDS church.

I consider the Bible to be one of the great books of the world, an amazing religious history, but not to be taken as a literal history.


Phaedrus

[_AmazingDisgrace]

AmazingDisgrace wrote:

I lost my belief in God and in the Bible first, so the Mormonism-specific stuff was all secondary in my case.

Funny. I was speaking with a friend, a Mormon, and I told him that I felt like I lost my testimony in Christ and God long before I lost my testimony in Mormonism.

Mormonism is a powerful sucker, for sure.

Interesting, can you expand on that? That seems odd to me. If I lost my faith in Christ and God I believe I'd leave quickly. There just doesn't seem to be much left.

For me, at least, it's not that I concluded God doesn't exist but then continued believing that Mormonism was true - it's just the order in which I stopped believing the components of the church's claims. From the exmo stories I've read, it sounds like the most common pattern is the loss of belief in Joseph Smith, followed by the Book of Mormon, then the Bible, and then finally God.

There was a distinct moment when I seriously had the thought "God isn't real", but my desire to keep believing was strong enough that I spent a few years trying to unthink it, and to fast, pray, and scripture myself back into sincere theism. I realized from the beginning the obvious fact that if God doesn't exist, then Mormonism is false by implication, but out of fear for the family and social costs of disbelief, or maybe just a natural resistance to that kind of cognitive upheaval, it took a while to come to terms with the premise.

When I eventually encountered the arguments against the church's unique claims and the apologists' responses to them, I agreed with the critics that those issues were enough to disprove Mormonism on their own, but to me it was just adding weights to a scale that was already fully tipped.

[_huckelberry]

I am aware of several textual and translational criticisms of the text. I am aware of other issues(creation, flood, etc...) that science has been critical on as well. From my determination, textual and translational criticisms, are not significant enough to impact the doctrines of the text. As far as science goes....What do they know anyway....would I be better served putting my faith in a bunch of theories? and if so which ones? do any of them lead me closer to God?

Many people observe a variety of stories in the Old Testament which appear to be longer on folk tale imagination than on sober fact. People then feel that uncertainity about facts becomes a barrier to hearing or experienceing closeness to Jesus, (or trust of Jesus)

Well, I regard the Old Testament, because Jesus did. He quoted it often in his ministry. Is it possible, some of the Old Testament is folklore, myth, and legend? Maybe, though I tend to think not.

As far as the New Testament is concerned, which is where the bulk of my belief is formed. I feel it is very accurate. I suppose people could look at the events that transpired within the text and believe God couldn't or wouldn't do that. I just don't happen to be one of those people. Why? Because I know Jesus. I am sure the logic sounds quite circular, but you must understand I also believe Christ brings people to him, through the Gospel. I can present my beliefs, its not really up to me if you believe them or not.

Mudcat, I was looking about for an angle to draw out a bit of conversation from you, not proposing you should question this or that about the Bible. To illustrate consider circular arguments. Just because an argument is circular does not mean it is ether true or false. Instead such an argument doesnot open up to discussion. Further you point out you present your views and it is not your responsibility what others beleive. Ok but.. You did not present your views. In fact I do not know what your view are beyond perhaps assuming they are what som other EV believes. Instead you asked a question of exLDS about how they view the Bible.

So about your views. Do you believe in the God who created the world science studies and tries to understand? Is your disrespect of science a disrespect of God? I would hope you intend no such thing. Though you did not explain I would jump to the assumption than you are willing to believe that when science discovers how to prevent destructive disease that our use of such science in medicine is an act honoring God.

[_Mudcat]

Mudcat, I was looking about for an angle to draw out a bit of conversation from you, not proposing you should question this or that about the Bible. To illustrate consider circular arguments. Just because an argument is circular does not mean it is ether true or false. Instead such an argument doesnot open up to discussion. Further you point out you present your views and it is not your responsibility what others beleive. Ok but.. You did not present your views. In fact I do not know what your view are beyond perhaps assuming they are what som other EV believes. Instead you asked a question of exLDS about how they view the Bible.

Hi Huckelberry,

Sorry if I was a little terse. I should have put more thought into the response, I was rushed that day and should have delayed until I could be a little more thoughtful. Bold mine, the purpose of the thread was for a better understanding what exLDS thought of the Bible. It was not my intention to create a platform of my view points, it was more of a fact finding mission.
However, I'll do my best to give you some of my views. If you have questions, or there are points you would like to make feel free to ask, and I will try to do a better job of responding. It seems we may have gotten of on some bad footing, my apologies.

Do you believe in the God who created the world science studies and tries to understand?

I do believe God created the world. I actually believe God is the originator of all life, matter, etc..
I believe Jesus is his son, was killed, resurrected, etc....
I believe those who follow him will go to heaven. Those who don't won't.
I believe those who never heard about him, will get a chance to make up their mind before judgment.
I believe I have chosen to follow Christ.
I believe man can loose his salvation...which is also a slightly aberrant evangelical view.
My beliefs on the Trinity are somewhat variant from mainstream views. I believe in a slight looser affiliation of the Godhead than most are comfortable with.
I believe in an afterlife, where we are free from sin, but continue to learn and grow.
I believe the Bible is God's word.

Regarding science
I believe there is a small portion of the scientific community that tries to understand God, from my understanding there is a handful of 'intelligent design' promoters. Though I am sure there credibility is somewhat hampered among their peers for the stance. I feel the bulk of the scientific community is trying their best to come up with a way that all creation could have happened without God.

Is your disrespect of science a disrespect of God?

Actually, I don't disrespect science. Though I am sure you could've drawn that conclusion from my PP. However, the point I was trying to make was that despite the many theories of origins, that the scientific community has come up with, they are simply theories based upon observations. These theories change, as new information is discovered and are at most, only as reliable as the information received. An old example would be the theories on cosmology when 'the world was flat' vs. current thought. I think it is admirable that people look into these sorts of things, and obviously there are many benefits the scientific community has brought to man kind. In many respects... advanced printing techniques, the internet, tv, etc.. science had significantly aided in the spread of the Gospel.

However, in order to maintain a 'controlled' environment God seems to be well excluded from the majority of contemporary scientific thought. I see the value that view has, for the purpose of study. However, I do think it has had a negative impact on people trying to more deeply understand their Creator. And no doubt has led some people into atheism.

Respectfully,

Mudcat