For those with confirmations

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by BlueHair

What if the spiritual confirmations are the reason for the apostasy?

That one is pretty easy to conclude it wasn't a spiritual confirmation.

The one that is tough is when someone gets a confirmation their loved one is going to live and then the loved one dies.

Answers are either, you really didn't get a spiritual confirmation or you misinterpreted the confirmation. The confirmation was that the loved one will live on in the spirit world.

Of course no one would tell the person that before the relative died.

[Flystripper]

Originally Posted by BYU71

That one is pretty easy to conclude it wasn't a spiritual confirmation.

The one that is tough is when someone gets a confirmation their loved one is going to live and then the loved one dies.

Answers are either, you really didn't get a spiritual confirmation or you misinterpreted the confirmation. The confirmation was that the loved one will live on in the spirit world.

Of course no one would tell the person that before the relative died.

BYU71 our very own Jack Handy

[BlueHair]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Is that what you've had? Would you care to share your experience(s)?

I've had many moments when I came to realize I couldn't make a certain doctrine or story fit into my belief system. When I stopped trying to do the "mental gymnastics" (as I've heard other people call it) and accepted that I couldn't believe something, I've had moments of extreme mental clarity and peaceful feelings. Kind of like a haze being lifted. The very feelings I always wished for when I would pray for confirmation of the truthfulness. I have no way of knowing for sure whether those feelings were just a sense of relief because I was able to be honest with myself about my beliefs, or if it was an actual confirmation. Much of my family believes like BYU71. If the answer confirms their faith, it is true. If it goes against their faith, they got the answer wrong. Which begs the question, why even ask?

When asked what religion I am, I always answer that I am LDS. In reality, my belief system most closely resembles Deism. My wife recently told me that she would like us to start going to church again. If she really wants to, I will probably attend with her (when the Steelers aren't on). I let her know that I won't take a calling that would require me to profess a belief that I don't have. She seems fine with that. I haven't decided yet if I am going to avoid callings by acting too busy, or if I will just tell the bishop I am there to make my wife happy.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by BlueHair

I let her know that I won't take a calling that would require me to profess a belief that I don't have. She seems fine with that.

BOys, I would like you to meet Bluehair, your new scoutmaster.

[BlueHair]

Originally Posted by creekster

BOys, I would like you to meet Bluehair, your new scoutmaster.

Hell no! The most responsibility I would accept is shooting guard for the basketball team.

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by BlueHair

I've had many moments when I came to realize I couldn't make a certain doctrine or story fit into my belief system. When I stopped trying to do the "mental gymnastics" (as I've heard other people call it) and accepted that I couldn't believe something, I've had moments of extreme mental clarity and peaceful feelings. Kind of like a haze being lifted. The very feelings I always wished for when I would pray for confirmation of the truthfulness. I have no way of knowing for sure whether those feelings were just a sense of relief because I was able to be honest with myself about my beliefs, or if it was an actual confirmation. Much of my family believes like BYU71. If the answer confirms their faith, it is true. If it goes against their faith, they got the answer wrong. Which begs the question, why even ask?

When asked what religion I am, I always answer that I am LDS. In reality, my belief system most closely resembles Deism. My wife recently told me that she would like us to start going to church again. If she really wants to, I will probably attend with her (when the Steelers aren't on). I let her know that I won't take a calling that would require me to profess a belief that I don't have. She seems fine with that. I haven't decided yet if I am going to avoid callings by acting too busy, or if I will just tell the bishop I am there to make my wife happy.

I think there are a lot of people, especially men, who are at church for their spouses and children. There is nothing wrong with that. As a matter of fact, I think there is something right with that. I think for the most part, families that go to church, any church, have a leg up on others in raising children.

Can good people come from families that don't attend church, sure. I just think by attending you enhance your odds.

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by YOhio

I look at Moroni 10:3-5 as the LDS version of the scientific method*: define the question; gather information; form hypothesis; perform experiment; analyze data; interpret data and draw conclusions; etc. As Moroni puts it: receive the word; ponder in our hearts; consider the mercy of God throughout history (context); ask God if these things are not true; and the HG will witness to it's truthfulness.

After following the steps outlined in Moroni's promise, I received a spiritual witness that the Book of Mormon was of divine origin. This witness was different than any other feeling I had felt before or since. The conclusion of this test was profound in my life and has been somewhat of a lodestar. No matter what doubts I may have, I can look through the haze and find guidance.

*Granted, this is a very loose interpretation of the scientific method, but it works for me.

Very close to my own experience. Add to that similar, yet not as profound, experiences during my life that confirm the initial encounter.

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by BlueHair

I've had many moments when I came to realize I couldn't make a certain doctrine or story fit into my belief system. When I stopped trying to do the "mental gymnastics" (as I've heard other people call it) and accepted that I couldn't believe something, I've had moments of extreme mental clarity and peaceful feelings. Kind of like a haze being lifted. The very feelings I always wished for when I would pray for confirmation of the truthfulness. I have no way of knowing for sure whether those feelings were just a sense of relief because I was able to be honest with myself about my beliefs, or if it was an actual confirmation.

If you accept those feelings as divine, then what you describe is transcendentalist. Otherwise, Deism, as you say, might be an apt description of your approach.

Transcendentalism can be compatible with less denominationally exclusive approaches to Mormonism.

Anyone who is interested, please feel free to Boardmail me.

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by BlueHair

I've had many moments when I came to realize I couldn't make a certain doctrine or story fit into my belief system. When I stopped trying to do the "mental gymnastics" (as I've heard other people call it) and accepted that I couldn't believe something, I've had moments of extreme mental clarity and peaceful feelings. Kind of like a haze being lifted. The very feelings I always wished for when I would pray for confirmation of the truthfulness. I have no way of knowing for sure whether those feelings were just a sense of relief because I was able to be honest with myself about my beliefs, or if it was an actual confirmation. Much of my family believes like BYU71. If the answer confirms their faith, it is true. If it goes against their faith, they got the answer wrong. Which begs the question, why even ask?

When asked what religion I am, I always answer that I am LDS. In reality, my belief system most closely resembles Deism. My wife recently told me that she would like us to start going to church again. If she really wants to, I will probably attend with her (when the Steelers aren't on). I let her know that I won't take a calling that would require me to profess a belief that I don't have. She seems fine with that. I haven't decided yet if I am going to avoid callings by acting too busy, or if I will just tell the bishop I am there to make my wife happy.

Just be honest with us all and admit that your 'feelings' came in conjunction with one of more of the following: watching porn, drinking coffee, smoking cigarettes, or reading anti-mormon literature.

[ERCougar]

Interesting thought I just came across in The Screwtape Letters that reminded me of this thread (not argumentative, just illuminating):

"You will notice that we have got them completely fogged about the meaning of the word 'real'. They tell each other, of some great spiritual experience, 'All that really happened was that you heard some music in a lighted building'; here 'real' means the bare physical facts, separated from the other elements in the experience they actually had. On the other hand, they will also say, 'It's all very well discussing that high dive as you sit here in an armchair, but wait till you get up there and see what it's really like': here 'real' is being used in the opposite sense to mean, not the physical facts (which they know already while discussing the matter in armchairs), but the emotional effect whose facts will have on a human consciousness. Either application of the word could be defended; but our business is to keep the two going at once so that the emotional value of the word 'real' can be placed now on one side of the account, now on the other, as it happens to suit us. The general rule which we have now pretty well established among them is that in all experiencs which can make them happier or better only the physical facts are 'real', while the spiritual elements are 'subjective'; in all experiences which can discourage or corrupt them the spiritual elements are the main reality, and to ignore them is to be an escapist. Thus in birth the blood and pain are 'real', the rejoicing a mere subjective point of view; in death, the terror and ugliness reveal what death 'really means'. The hatefulness of a hated person is 'real'--in hatred you see men as they are, you are disillusioned; but the loveliness of a loved person is merely a subjective haze concealing a 'real' core of sexual appetite or economic association. Wars and poverty are 'really' horrible; peace and plenty are mere physical facts about which men happen to have certain sentiments. The creatures are always accusing one another of wanting 'to eat the cake and have it'; but thanks to our labours they are more often in the predicament of paying for the cake and not eating it. Your patient, properly handled, will have no difficulty in regarding his emotion at the sight of human entrails as a revelation of reality and his emotion at the sight of happy children or fair weather as mere sentiment."