DiscussMormonism.com

I had a brother-in-law email a warning about the movie "The Golden Compass" last night, and it sparked a minor debate when I responded unfavorably to the email.

One thing I emailed my brother, sisters, dad, and brother-in-law (these were the people on the email list) in response I thought I'd share with you guys. This is all familiar stuff. There's nothing new here. But I thought I'd point it out again and see if perhaps one of the TBMs on this list wants to respond.

Is our own particular belief system really that weak and unconvincing, that it can only survive if a person is indoctrinated in it, to the exclusion of almost anything contradictory, from the day the child is born until they leave our homes in their late teens? Really?

This is one of the many criticisms I have of the Mormon concept of testimony. It's at once the sure and certain knowledge of things as they really are in this universe we live in, and at the same time it's so fragile that it must constantly be reinforced through the repetition of various mantras, immersion in and focus on its teachings and the exclusion of competing ideas and such irrelevancies as, say, physical evidence and so forth.

Is our own particular belief system really that weak and unconvincing, that it can only survive if a person is indoctrinated in it, to the exclusion of almost anything contradictory, from the day the child is born until they leave our homes in their late teens? Really?

Kids can't get around meeting other kids with parents who disbelieve what their parents do. I remember how strange it was for me when I learned that my best friend (in Utah) was Catholic and that there were adults who didn't believe in the Book or Mormon and who didn't think my baptism there was a great thing.

This is one of the many criticisms I have of the Mormon concept of testimony. It's at once the sure and certain knowledge of things as they really are in this universe we live in, and at the same time it's so fragile that it must constantly be reinforced through the repetition of various mantras, immersion in and focus on its teachings and the exclusion of competing ideas and such irrelevancies as, say, physical evidence and so forth.

My parents didn't forbid me from going to the library. I had pleanty of chances to read stuff there--not that I read much contradictory information other than some new-age stuff. For a time I believed that over Mormonism. And yet, in the end I chose Mormonism over the new-age stuff.

Anyhow, religion isn't the only thing we indoctrinate kids about. We brainwash kids about how eating certain things is gross. Insects are a delicacy in some places. The Donnor Dinner party is seen as disguisting. Eating someone's dog or horse just seems wrong to us, but eating a cow is ok. We brainwash kids about sex. We tell them that sex with animals is wrong (even though killing an animal for food or clothing or reasearch is ok) as is incest (even when the kids are old enough to consent).

Sethbag wrote:I had a brother-in-law email a warning about the movie "The Golden Compass" last night, and it sparked a minor debate when I responded unfavorably to the email.

One thing I emailed my brother, sisters, dad, and brother-in-law (these were the people on the email list) in response I thought I'd share with you guys. This is all familiar stuff. There's nothing new here. But I thought I'd point it out again and see if perhaps one of the TBMs on this list wants to respond.

Is our own particular belief system really that weak and unconvincing, that it can only survive if a person is indoctrinated in it, to the exclusion of almost anything contradictory, from the day the child is born until they leave our homes in their late teens? Really?

This is one of the many criticisms I have of the Mormon concept of testimony. It's at once the sure and certain knowledge of things as they really are in this universe we live in, and at the same time it's so fragile that it must constantly be reinforced through the repetition of various mantras, immersion in and focus on its teachings and the exclusion of competing ideas and such irrelevancies as, say, physical evidence and so forth.

This is a very good observation. If one must be isolated from "the world" in order to protect ones faith then that faith is itself a cage. learning new ways of looking at the world is what human progress is about. Shying away from new information is how one nurtures ignorance and psychosis.

Sethbag wrote:I had a brother-in-law email a warning about the movie "The Golden Compass" last night, and it sparked a minor debate when I responded unfavorably to the email.

One thing I emailed my brother, sisters, dad, and brother-in-law (these were the people on the email list) in response I thought I'd share with you guys. This is all familiar stuff. There's nothing new here. But I thought I'd point it out again and see if perhaps one of the TBMs on this list wants to respond.

Is our own particular belief system really that weak and unconvincing, that it can only survive if a person is indoctrinated in it, to the exclusion of almost anything contradictory, from the day the child is born until they leave our homes in their late teens? Really?

This is one of the many criticisms I have of the Mormon concept of testimony. It's at once the sure and certain knowledge of things as they really are in this universe we live in, and at the same time it's so fragile that it must constantly be reinforced through the repetition of various mantras, immersion in and focus on its teachings and the exclusion of competing ideas and such irrelevancies as, say, physical evidence and so forth.

I fully understand what you are saying. I will try to answer as candidly as I know how.

First, I think the umbrella term "testimony" covers a mutlitude of states of knowledge. The testimony a young person has it is not the same testimony that a person who is more mature in the Gospel would have. We gain testimony through experience. Age and experience don't always equate with wisdom and knowledge, but they often do.

Second, testimony doesn't just come without effort, and it can't be maintained without effort. Alma uses the analogy of planting a seed, nurturing it, watching it grow. So a testimony can be in the seed stage, a seedling, a young plant, a mature tree. The different maturity level of the plant requires different levels of care. And the plant is stronger as it matures. You can rip an oak tree seedling out of the ground in the first couple of years of growth, but you can't bring down a mature oak with your bare hands. For many people, in the seedling stage, yes, they are fragile. But when the testimony becomes stronger, it is not as vulnerable.

Third, we LDS accept the reality of Satan, and his absolute goal and purpose to destroy the testimony of the faithful in order to thwart the purposes of God. To go back to the horticultural analogy: if we were to be planting seeds in a Garden of Eden atmosphere where all things grew spontaneously it would be a different matter. But we are out in the dreary world where nature goes against the garden ideal. Entropy increases. Weeds can shade out small plants. Young plants can be trampled and destroyed. Droughts wither and kill even strong plants.

Fourth, not all Saints practice their religion as they should. We should never teach or encourage children to say things by way of bearing testimony that they do not themselves understand. We should never, ourselves, say we know something to be true if we don't.

Fifth, the fact that something is fragile does not mean it isn't precious and doesn't deserve to be protected.

I would appreciate continuing this discussion with you.

asbestosman wrote:Anyhow, religion isn't the only thing we indoctrinate kids about. We brainwash kids about how eating certain things is gross. Insects are a delicacy in some places. The Donnor Dinner party is seen as disguisting. Eating someone's dog or horse just seems wrong to us, but eating a cow is ok. We brainwash kids about sex. We tell them that sex with animals is wrong (even though killing an animal for food or clothing or reasearch is ok) as is incest (even when the kids are old enough to consent).

Indeed. Tonight for atheist family home evening we are going to cover all of these subjects. It's been over three weeks since we last spoke about beastiality, cannibalism, and incest -- I think the kids need to hear my testimony again. They might be wavering, hungering and lusting after each other's flesh as young children often do. Not to mention we have a cat. After my lesson I'll pressure them into bearing their own testimony about the rightness of eating beef and the wrongness of eating horse.

Ha ha, I'm just trying to imagine covering these topics with the same intensity and regularity that LDS families use to indoctrinate their children with religious themes. If only it were the same. That would be funny.

The Dude wrote:Ha ha, I'm just trying to imagine covering these topics with the same intensity and regularity that LDS families use to indoctrinate their children with religious themes. If only it were the same. That would be funny.

Amazingly enough I'm laughing at the thought too. I mean, you do have a point. It is rather odd that religion needs so much more effort than say the ability to do calculus. Religion is more like training for a sport where too much time off can really hurt your performance. I know of no mental activity besides religious faith that is like that.

Anyhow, did my parents brainwash me to do my homework? They drilled it into my head about as much as with FHE, 3hr block time, etc. I spent more time in school than I did on religion. Maybe my parents tried too hard to brainwash me in "sciegion".

I'm trying to think of what I drill into my kids head. I do the "Stop hitting" "Pick up after yourself" "Help your brother, help your sister" "Be kind to one another" "Knock it off" "Eat your veggies" "Lights off ... and in bed by" "Do your homework" "Study" "Close your eyes - there's boobs on t.v." "Do your chores"

Wow, I suck at being a Mom. Ack. I think I need to do some indoctrination.

Sethbag wrote:I had a brother-in-law email a warning about the movie "The Golden Compass" last night, and it sparked a minor debate when I responded unfavorably to the email.

One thing I emailed my brother, sisters, dad, and brother-in-law (these were the people on the email list) in response I thought I'd share with you guys. This is all familiar stuff. There's nothing new here. But I thought I'd point it out again and see if perhaps one of the TBMs on this list wants to respond.

Is our own particular belief system really that weak and unconvincing, that it can only survive if a person is indoctrinated in it, to the exclusion of almost anything contradictory, from the day the child is born until they leave our homes in their late teens? Really?

This is one of the many criticisms I have of the Mormon concept of testimony. It's at once the sure and certain knowledge of things as they really are in this universe we live in, and at the same time it's so fragile that it must constantly be reinforced through the repetition of various mantras, immersion in and focus on its teachings and the exclusion of competing ideas and such irrelevancies as, say, physical evidence and so forth.

I don't understand how some things apparently are on the LDS radar and other things just slip right by. I remember my step-son couldn't watch King Kong (???!!!) when we saw it in the theatre. Too violent? Yet, he was allowed to watch That 70's Show on t.v. It just all seems so random!

charity wrote:Second, testimony doesn't just come without effort, and it can't be maintained without effort. Alma uses the analogy of planting a seed, nurturing it, watching it grow. So a testimony can be in the seed stage, a seedling, a young plant, a mature tree. The different maturity level of the plant requires different levels of care. And the plant is stronger as it matures. You can rip an oak tree seedling out of the ground in the first couple of years of growth, but you can't bring down a mature oak with your bare hands. For many people, in the seedling stage, yes, they are fragile. But when the testimony becomes stronger, it is not as vulnerable.

Unfortunately, Alma's seed experiment is not a method for determining the truth of anything. It's just a way to convince yourself of the truth of a belief, regardless of whether it's actually true. There is no place in Alma's analogy where he acknowledges the possibility that someone might apply his experiment to a false proposition. If the seed doesn't grow, then you must have cast it out by your unbelief. Essentially, If you're not convinced that you're convinced, keep trying until you are, but don't worry, it's not the seed that's the problem. This is why it's fragile, even when a believer is sure he has an unshakable testimony. When he figures out that his "sure knowledge" is ultimately dependent on special pleading, then it collapses.

We should never teach or encourage children to say things by way of bearing testimony that they do not themselves understand. We should never, ourselves, say we know something to be true if we don't.

You might want to take that up with Elder Packer:

"It is not unusual to have a missionary say, "How can I bear testimony until I get one? How can I testify that God lives, that Jesus is the Christ, and that the gospel is true? If I do not have such a testimony, would that not be dishonest?"

Oh, if I could teach you this one principle. A testimony is to be found in the bearing of it! Somewhere in your quest for spiritual knowledge, there is that "leap of faith," as the philosophers call it. It is the moment when you have gone to the edge of the light and stepped into the darkness to discover that the way is lighted ahead for just a footstep or two. "The spirit of man," is as the scripture says, indeed the candle of the Lord." (Prov. 20:27.)

It is one thing to receive a witness from what you have read or what another has said; and that is a necessary beginning. It is quite another to have the Spirit confirm to you in your bosom that what you have testified is true. Can you not see that it will be supplied as you share it? As you give that which you have, there is a replacement, with increase!"