For those of you who have experienced major doubts...
 

which issue with Joseph Smith or Church history was/is the hardest for you to resolve?

The most difficult for me has been the differences between JS's 1832 and 1838 accounts of the First Vision. I first learned about this while reading Rough Stone Rolling. I think most of us here know the differences, but for those who don't -- after a very quick glance this Wikipedia piece seems to spell it out fairly well:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_V...been_presented

NOTE: This thread isn't about defending or attacking the different versions of the FV, rather it's about the #1 issue (if any) that's caused you to doubt/question, so try not hijack.

Dealing with this being the Lord's church run by men. I finally have come to peace with this, but some don't like how I have.

I agree. Dealing with mullahs and fundies. Mostly I'm at peace and as Mike has stated he's invested in his fellow ward members. I need to do the same, but right now I'm not there.

Thanks for the great thread.

I don't see the need to resolve anything. Doubting and questioning can be very good, and are certainly preferable to closed-minded certainty. It's what you do with doubt and questioning that makes all the difference.

You should feel grateful for the little fever you've gotten from your RSR innoculation.


P.S.: Old Marvin Hill did a nice article on the First Vision stuff.

Polygamy is my No. 1. I am not at peace with it and doubt I ever will be. There are other historical and modern day things that irk me, but polygamy always floats to the top.

I agree with this. I detest polygamy, and I've always been uncomfortable with how it was introduced and perpetuated.

Masons and the temple.

Maybe these books will help those with doubts. Anyone ever read them?

http://deseretbook.com/store/search?...ecord+straight

Me, too.

I was brought up to believe that all religion is a little crazy, and that Mormonism is the best thing around (but still crazy). In reality, it was the only thing around in my hometown, but I'm still partial to it.

So, when I see something historical in Mormonism that doesn't add up, it doesn't affect my relationship with the modern Church. The only thing that affects my relationship with the modern Church is what the Church does today. I guess that's because I'm not preoccupied with historical authenticity of anything in Mormonism. To me, it's an inspired religious philosophy (if you subtract out cultural stuff), and that's all that matters.

As awful as polygamy is/was, it's difficult for me to picture exactly what Mormon polygamy was like 150 years ago. Did it resemble the FLDS? I'm pretty sure it did not. My own great-grandparents were polygamists, and they sounded like pretty normal folks, other than the multiple wives thing. For me, issues like polygamy are curiosities, and they only affect my relationship with the Church when I see remnants of polygamist philosophy in modern Mormonism.