Nelson: “Don’t pollute [your testimony] with the false philosophies of unbelieving men and women…”

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 1812
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 2:16 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Nelson: “Don’t pollute [your testimony] with the false philosophies of unbelieving men and women…”

Post by Dr Moore »

Kishkumen wrote:
Thu Aug 04, 2022 11:25 am
And yet there often is something going on in a person’s life that prompts them to reconsider their faith. Often that does not come into the conversation that person has with others about the problems with the LDS Church.
Often, but not always, right? Maybe not a majority of the time. Nelson is asking believers to avoid listening to all of them. For many, such as myself, the reconsideration of faith had nothing to do with other circumstances. It was entirely about things I learned regarding the faith. Yet here is Nelson, suggesting to his believing audience, that there must be something else wrong, hidden, perhaps even sordid, about me and my life, that explains -- even negates the intrinsic value of -- my doubts.

He also is trying to have it both ways. How often to people join the church because of some life trauma that makes them vulnerable and in need of community, love and confident answers? Should their experiences not also be doubted, if not preemptively invalidated?
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Nelson: “Don’t pollute [your testimony] with the false philosophies of unbelieving men and women…”

Post by Kishkumen »

Dr Moore wrote:
Thu Aug 04, 2022 4:44 pm
Often, but not always, right? Maybe not a majority of the time. Nelson is asking believers to avoid listening to all of them. For many, such as myself, the reconsideration of faith had nothing to do with other circumstances. It was entirely about things I learned regarding the faith. Yet here is Nelson, suggesting to his believing audience, that there must be something else wrong, hidden, perhaps even sordid, about me and my life, that explains -- even negates the intrinsic value of -- my doubts.

He also is trying to have it both ways. How often to people join the church because of some life trauma that makes them vulnerable and in need of community, love and confident answers? Should their experiences not also be doubted, if not preemptively invalidated?
On the one hand, I understand and agree that it sucks to have people assume that something is wrong with you if you decide one day that the LDS Church is not true, whatever that means. The whole religion thing is so baffling from the get go that it is difficult to understand how we get entangled in it all. Of course, people spend their time doing all kinds of diverting and odd things, so perhaps I should not be astounded by the bizarreness of it all.

So, from my point of view, I have to wonder about what needs validating or invalidating on either end of the deal. People get sucked into a religion, philosophy, hobby, or what have you, and then one day they may wake up and decide it isn't for them anymore. Their friends and family whom they used to vote Republican with, or attend LA Raiders games with, cannot understand what in the hell happened to change their mind.

The stakes are, of course, believed to be much higher with religion, especially a religion like Mormonism.

But let's say you buy into Mormonism totally, then what is your thought process going to be when a dear one suddenly abandons the faith? Something bad must have happened. Just like the mystery of falling out of love, I guess. What could have possibly precipitated the move from happily coupled to moving on to someone else or choosing being single? Something must be amiss. At least, in the minds of those closely connected to the event.

Well, that just happens. OK. Yeah. Or maybe not. Maybe something bad did happen.

I'm of the mind that all of these things are complicated to the point that it is almost impossible to untangle what actually takes a person from the place of conviction and commitment to disillusionment and departure. Each story is probably a little different from others. Each process something of its own mystery. President Nelson can't account for it, and neither can critics of the LDS Church.

Both have their stories for what must have happened, and, in my view, they are just stories. Myths of their own kind. Each side is really invested in the rightness of its own myth, and it is almost impossible to exchange the one for the other, or bridge the gap between them, because seeing from the other point of view is tantamount to having that point of view, and that simply cannot be.

So maybe it is inevitable that people in the LDS Church are going to think that something must have gone wrong with those who left. It is part of the logic of the whole system, isn't it? It really can't be a neutral event, and to think it is neutral is almost like saying that being LDS does not matter. How can faith be sustained when accepting that point of view?

It does kind of blow chunks and much worse when people who used apparently to love you, be close to you, be your people, etc., think you have gone off the map and maybe succumbed to the devil or some such. It is not like I do not share that experience, and it is not like it doesn't burn a bit. Not that I accept their judgment, but it hurts to have people see you in that negative light. I just don't know how they can be completely neutral about the loss of faith, when they hold having faith to be such a necessary and crucial part of their lives.
Last edited by Kishkumen on Thu Aug 04, 2022 7:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
Marcus
God
Posts: 5034
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm

Re: Nelson: “Don’t pollute [your testimony] with the false philosophies of unbelieving men and women…”

Post by Marcus »

I know I am risking great wrath, but this has gone on long enough. someone needs to speak straightforwardly to you.

kishkumen, your recent defenses of the lds church are utter BS.

you seem to have some contrarian streak that makes you argue against every comment, which is fine, but recently you have been veering into completely illogical territory. My fellow professor, you are spouting BS. unhealthy, thoughtless, hurtful BS.


eta: because of your recent lack of logic, you are on ignore, so feel free to attack me all you want. that's your style, and it always has been. reading your older posts here has been an eye opener.
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Nelson: “Don’t pollute [your testimony] with the false philosophies of unbelieving men and women…”

Post by Kishkumen »

Thanks, Marcus. I appreciate your candor. That is probably the most honest and heartfelt post you have written in opposition to my writing. Frankly, my mind is blown, and I could not be more grateful to read such blunt outrage directed at me. It is too bad that you have chosen not to read my response, and that you imagine my response will be one of tearing into you. I regret that we have developed this kind of dysfunctional relationship.

In any case, I don't really feel the need to defend my choice to try to understand President Nelson. Maybe I failed. I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt, especially since I regard him to be perhaps the worst LDS president since Ezra Taft Benson, and he might be worse than Benson, which is saying a lot. I can't help but think that President Nelson is a narcissist, who is mostly about puffing himself up and having his wife Wendy puff him up, too. The way he casts himself as a special person, even in this talk, is completely grotesque to me.

Maybe I am trying to understand what it must be to be in the shoes of people who really believe when others cease to believe. We want to be treated better by them than we are, and I think there have been positive moves in that direction, but I sincerely wonder how that works for them, if they adhere to the logic of their own belief system. How can the loss of faith be neutral in their eyes? How could that possibly be consistent with their avowed beliefs?

I am not saying their beliefs are logical in the bigger picture, and I am not defending their beliefs. I am wondering how we can expect them to act contrary to their beliefs by treating the loss of faith as a neutral, "no biggie" kind of thing.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 1812
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 2:16 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Nelson: “Don’t pollute [your testimony] with the false philosophies of unbelieving men and women…”

Post by Dr Moore »

Kishkumen wrote:
Thu Aug 04, 2022 6:34 pm
I'm of the mind that all of these things are complicated to the point that it is almost impossible to untangle what actually takes a person from the place of conviction and commitment to disillusionment and departure. Each story is probably a little different from others. Each process something of its own mystery. President Nelson can't account for it, and neither can critics of the LDS Church.
Of course, every case is unique. However, what niggles at me about Nelson's advice here is precisely what's wrong with both my family, and my wife's family. Church counsel creates a toxic block between current and former members, be they family, friends or ward members.

Love, but don't listen.
Care, but don't empathize.
Hug them, just don't ask them for their truth.

Toxic messaging, even if the toxicity is subtle. Death to relationships is slow, tortuous. But sure as anything, this message drives wedges further between people who actually NEED to be shown the way to talk with one another. Nelson, and indeed the historical Mormon way, is to tell one side of the narrative so current believers are afraid to ask, listen or empathize. I stand firmly against it.
Aristotle Smith, Jr.
Nursery
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2022 7:14 pm

Re: Nelson: “Don’t pollute [your testimony] with the false philosophies of unbelieving men and women…”

Post by Aristotle Smith, Jr. »

Marcus wrote:
Thu Aug 04, 2022 6:48 pm
I know I am risking great wrath, but this has gone on long enough. someone needs to speak straightforwardly to you.

kishkumen, your recent defenses of the lds church are utter B.S..

you seem to have some contrarian streak that makes you argue against every comment, which is fine, but recently you have been veering into completely illogical territory. My fellow professor, you are spouting B.S.. unhealthy, thoughtless, hurtful B.S..


eta: because of your recent lack of logic, you are on ignore, so feel free to attack me all you want. that's your style, and it always has been. reading your older posts here has been an eye opener.
Ha.

I rarely come here and stopped commenting years ago. I couldn't login as my old account, hence the new one which I will promptly forget about.

I stopped posting/visiting here 100% because of Kishkumen's behavior. And imagine my complete lack of surprise to visit here on one of those rare occasions only to see him still doing it. This is what Kishkumen does. This is HIS place and he will take a dump wherever the hell he feels like. I have no idea why this place is so important to him, the number of his posts here is truly stunning, and he does play the contrarian with basically no rhyme or reason. I guess it makes him feel better.

But I would like to thank Kishy for being a jerk to me. You really have saved me a lot of time posting here. So THANK YOU for all of those hours of my life back. I probably would still be inordinately concerned about Mormonism if he acted better. However, he is living proof that anything attached to Mormonism, either for, against, or the bizarro contrarian sort-of-in-but-sort-of-out he seems to relish is just not worth it.
User avatar
Everybody Wang Chung
God
Posts: 1623
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:52 am

Re: Nelson: “Don’t pollute [your testimony] with the false philosophies of unbelieving men and women…”

Post by Everybody Wang Chung »

Aristotle Smith, Jr. wrote:
Thu Aug 04, 2022 7:26 pm
Marcus wrote:
Thu Aug 04, 2022 6:48 pm
I know I am risking great wrath, but this has gone on long enough. someone needs to speak straightforwardly to you.

kishkumen, your recent defenses of the lds church are utter B.S..

you seem to have some contrarian streak that makes you argue against every comment, which is fine, but recently you have been veering into completely illogical territory. My fellow professor, you are spouting B.S.. unhealthy, thoughtless, hurtful B.S..


eta: because of your recent lack of logic, you are on ignore, so feel free to attack me all you want. that's your style, and it always has been. reading your older posts here has been an eye opener.
Ha.

I rarely come here and stopped commenting years ago. I couldn't login as my old account, hence the new one which I will promptly forget about.

I stopped posting/visiting here 100% because of Kishkumen's behavior. And imagine my complete lack of surprise to visit here on one of those rare occasions only to see him still doing it. This is what Kishkumen does. This is HIS place and he will take a dump wherever the hell he feels like. I have no idea why this place is so important to him, the number of his posts here is truly stunning, and he does play the contrarian with basically no rhyme or reason. I guess it makes him feel better.

But I would like to thank Kishy for being a jerk to me. You really have saved me a lot of time posting here. So THANK YOU for all of those hours of my life back. I probably would still be inordinately concerned about Mormonism if he acted better. However, he is living proof that anything attached to Mormonism, either for, against, or the bizarro contrarian sort-of-in-but-sort-of-out he seems to relish is just not worth it.

Image
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."

Daniel C. Peterson, 2014
Marcus
God
Posts: 5034
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm

Re: Nelson: “Don’t pollute [your testimony] with the false philosophies of unbelieving men and women…”

Post by Marcus »

Aristotle Smith, Jr. wrote:
Thu Aug 04, 2022 7:26 pm

But I would like to thank Kishy for being a jerk to me. You really have saved me a lot of time posting here. So THANK YOU for all of those hours of my life back. I probably would still be inordinately concerned about Mormonism if he acted better. However, he is living proof that anything attached to Mormonism, either for, against, or the bizarro contrarian sort-of-in-but-sort-of-out he seems to relish is just not worth it.
the bizarro contrarian sort-of-in-but-sort-of-out he seems to relish

he's been doing this for a very long time, then!! :D
User avatar
Gadianton
God
Posts: 3842
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2020 11:56 pm
Location: Elsewhere

Re: Nelson: “Don’t pollute [your testimony] with the false philosophies of unbelieving men and women…”

Post by Gadianton »

Dr. Moore wrote:Of course, every case is unique. However, what niggles at me about Nelson's advice here is precisely what's wrong with both my family, and my wife's family. Church counsel creates a toxic block between current and former members, be they family, friends or ward members.
It's an added insult that Nelson is so into himself and obnoxious. The thing is, there is no good solution. Even if Nelson were normal, I have no idea how a church which claims to be the only true Church on the face of the earth is supposed to deal with unbelievers, particularly when the unbelievers have a huge evidential advantage. What do you do? Forgive the analogy, but it reminds me of listening to Zeihan on Putin. According to Zeihan, and also his former strategist allies in Texas, there are 10 gaps, entryways into Russia and when combined with a slew of other factors, Putin has one chance to secure his borders and this is it. He's behaving rationally. Sure, he's evil and all that, but not mad. One of his former colleagues, can't recall the name, goes as far to say if he were Putin, he'd do the same thing. In that same spirit, I have to say, I'd do the same thing as Nelson and all the others in terms of driving a wedge between the faithful and apostates, family or otherwise, if I were leading the Church.

I don't see how the Church can be much more tolerant and nice towards unbelievers without also liberalizing, and negotiating on its truth claims. At some point, it might come to a head where the financial prospects of a diverse church clearly outweigh its narrow perspective, but until then, until a consultant in good faith can show the money, I don't think any church leader, no matter how nice is going to work on the problem with TBMs alienating their families.

Sometimes there just isn't a solution. Liberal, democratic society isn't compatible with the outlooks of fundamentalist religions, but liberal, democratic society must be tolerant toward fundamentalist religion. For me, that translates to me listening to family, whereas they don't have to listen to me, and if I want a relationship with them, I have to take them on their terms.
Marcus
God
Posts: 5034
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm

Re: Nelson: “Don’t pollute [your testimony] with the false philosophies of unbelieving men and women…”

Post by Marcus »

Gadianton wrote:
Thu Aug 04, 2022 8:05 pm

...Sometimes there just isn't a solution. Liberal, democratic society isn't compatible with the outlooks of fundamentalist religions, but liberal, democratic society must be tolerant toward fundamentalist religion. For me, that translates to me listening to family, whereas they don't have to listen to me, and if I want a relationship with them, I have to take them on their terms.
exactly the same in my family. (are we related? what are the odds? :D )
Post Reply