How many true churches are there?

[non sequitur]

Originally Posted by Robin

The problem with doubt is that it doesn't tackle and deplete a testimony all at once. If it did, people could avoid making choices that they might one day come to regret. The process is more akin to a tire with a slow leak. Or to mix metaphors, like a genie in a tire with a slow leak. In my own case I drove on that tire a lot farther than I should have, and once the genie was out of the tire (really bad mixed metaphors )there is no putting it back.

As for fus, I suggest he drive on that tire as long as it feels right. Who knows... there might be enough pressure to last a lifetime of driving. But if he finds himself stranded somewhere in the middle of Nevada with a flat, I would make this simple observation-- your life will be full of happiness no matter where your doubt lands you, so long as you strive to cultivate a kind heart and charity for all. Be honest with your wife, and let her know how you feel at all times. Your marriage is going to be a journey of sorts, and the person that you are at the end of that journey will not be the same person you see in the mirror today. As long as you communicate totally, the full extent of your ideas and feelings, you will be on the journey together. If you find that you grow apart, it will be in full light and understanding of who you both are. But if your experience is anything like my own, (and I think it would be) you will find that such open communication kindles a deeper love and respect.

And don't worry so much about things. If you believe what the church says, this lifetime is a blip in existence, with an eternity stretching out behind us and an eternity stretching out before us. Concentrate on what brings you and your wife happiness in this lifetime, and rest assured that if God is anything like what Mormons describe, if you cultivate a kind heart with charity for all, in the many eternities that stretch out before us, you will find yourself no more the poorer for entertaining some doubt in this lifetime.

On the other hand, if God is a crank who intends to hold your doubts against you for the eternities, then He doesn't deserve your worship.

Cheers,

R.

That was the first intelligent post in this thread. How in the world can peoople pile on somebody for doubting? The people that never doubt are the ones that scare me.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by non sequitur

That was the first intelligent post in this thread. How in the world can peoople pile on somebody for doubting? The people that never doubt are the ones that scare me.

Come on, you don't think the Archilochus quote is intelligent?

I hear what you're saying, but in fairness to my devout friends, fusnik's game is to play both sides of the fence, the objective being to tease, even arouse and bait. What I see them saying is that fusnik doesn't bear the indicia of someone who genuinely believes in Mormonism. Related to that, they say that he isn't treating what they see as sacred things with sufficient seriousness and respect, baiting as he is. I can't really argue with any of that. Personally, if fusnik really doesn't believe in it, I think he'd be happier just being genuine about it. Then he could be forthright in his critique and no one could attack him for his beliefs, so long as he didn't disrespect others'. But playing both sides of the fence you open yourself up to this kind of criticism.

[OhioBlue]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Come on, you don't think the Archilochus quote is intelligent?

I hear what you're saying, but in fairness to my devout friends, fusnik's game is to play both sides of the fence, the objective being to tease, even arouse and bait. What I see them saying is that fusnik doesn't bear the indicia of someone who genuinely believes in Mormonism. Related to that, they say that he isn't treating what they see as sacred things with sufficient seriousness and respect, baiting as he is. I can't really argue with any of that. Personally, if fusnik really doesn't believe in it, I think he'd be happier just being genuine about it. Then he could be forthright in his critique and no one could attack him for his beliefs, so long as he didn't disrespect others'. But playing both sides of the fence you open yourself up to this kind of criticism.

Well said.

[Colly Wolly]

Originally Posted by Robin

The problem with doubt is that it doesn't tackle and deplete a testimony all at once. If it did, people could avoid making choices that they might one day come to regret. The process is more akin to a tire with a slow leak. Or to mix metaphors, like a genie in a tire with a slow leak. In my own case I drove on that tire a lot farther than I should have, and once the genie was out of the tire (really bad mixed metaphors )there is no putting it back.

As for fus, I suggest he drive on that tire as long as it feels right. Who knows... there might be enough pressure to last a lifetime of driving. But if he finds himself stranded somewhere in the middle of Nevada with a flat, I would make this simple observation-- your life will be full of happiness no matter where your doubt lands you, so long as you strive to cultivate a kind heart and charity for all. Be honest with your wife, and let her know how you feel at all times. Your marriage is going to be a journey of sorts, and the person that you are at the end of that journey will not be the same person you see in the mirror today. As long as you communicate totally, the full extent of your ideas and feelings, you will be on the journey together. If you find that you grow apart, it will be in full light and understanding of who you both are. But if your experience is anything like my own, (and I think it would be) you will find that such open communication kindles a deeper love and respect.

And don't worry so much about things. If you believe what the church says, this lifetime is a blip in existence, with an eternity stretching out behind us and an eternity stretching out before us. Concentrate on what brings you and your wife happiness in this lifetime, and rest assured that if God is anything like what Mormons describe, if you cultivate a kind heart with charity for all, in the many eternities that stretch out before us, you will find yourself no more the poorer for entertaining some doubt in this lifetime.

On the other hand, if God is a crank who intends to hold your doubts against you for the eternities, then He doesn't deserve your worship.

Cheers,

R.

Good post Robin.

[Robin]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Come on, you don't think the Archilochus quote is intelligent?

I hear what you're saying, but in fairness to my devout friends, fusnik's game is to play both sides of the fence, the objective being to tease, even arouse and bait. What I see them saying is that fusnik doesn't bear the indicia of someone who genuinely believes in Mormonism. Related to that, they say that he isn't treating what they see as sacred things with sufficient seriousness and respect, baiting as he is. I can't really argue with any of that. Personally, if fusnik really doesn't believe in it, I think he'd be happier just being genuine about it. Then he could be forthright in his critique and no one could attack him for his beliefs, so long as he didn't disrespect others'. But playing both sides of the fence you open yourself up to this kind of criticism.

At risk of getting taken for a fool, I am going to take Fusnik at his word. What he is doing seems very familiar, and it is something I saw a lot among the smart kids at Yale -- people value their testimony and they value church membership, so when something doesn't fit they try to make it fit in whatever way will salvage their testimony. I once compared my own testimony to something I preserved in a mason jar covered with a rubber sheet and a rubber band lid. On the top of that rubber sheet was the impression of the SLC temple. As my own doubts began to go after my testimony, the struggle would pull at the rim of the mason jar, deforming it. I would find that the rubber sheet would no longer cover the opening. No problem. I would simply stretch the rubber sheet to cover the deformed opening of the jar. This would keep happening, and I would keep stretching the rubber sheet to keep my in my testimony.

One day I showed up to church with my testimony and I noticed a new picture of the SLC temple had been framed and hung on the wall. I looked at the image and then looked down at the same image printed on my rubber sheet. Only I couldn't match one to the other for how different they now looked. I still had a testimony, but it was a testimony in a church of my own making.

This wasn't really a problem, except I always felt like a stranger in my own church. Whenever I wanted to discuss anything I thought my ideas would always be shut down and shut up.

Ironically, what you see in Fusnik is probably his attempt to SAVE his testimony, and not the process of losing it. I have known plenty of people that have salvaged a passing testimony through this process. I have known others who would look at the rubber sheet and look at the picture on the wall and say, "I don't belong here." Both paths can be filled with their own sorts of happiness and trials.

Also ironically, I thought that places like CG were supposed to be safe places to talk about our faith, where ever it might be. But many in this thread are starting to sound like the voices from my elders Q.'s past -- shut him up and shut him down.

What it comes down to is this -- do you trust Fusnik? His POV is either genuine, or he is a troll. What are the consequences of treating him like a troll when his beliefs and doubts are genuine? What are the consequences of treating his beliefs and doubts as sincere when he might in fact be a troll? If the latter, we are taken for fools, but no harm is done. But if Fusnik is sincere (and I believe he is) then the consequences of treating him like a troll will be to alienate him even more from a community where he felt that he could be open and free to talk about the current status of his testimony. And that does its own kind of damage.

Treat the man with respect. Not all of our testimonies are going to be so 'mature.' At the end of the day, a lot of those smart kids at Yale were able to salvage a testimony, and live a happy life in the church.

[fusnik11]

Glad the cougarboard bastards show their colors, loved the comments, 'offended you go the the temple,' 'hope the lady knows what she is getting into,' 'grow some guts like SU and NS,' fortunately for me, I really enjoy your internet company, so I let the comments slide off my back, no offense, spare me the apologies.



As for my testimony, if anyone cares here goes....

I firmly believe in the restoration, I believe the temples are places where pagan signs, pagan tokens, and 'apostate' keywords are given to demonstrate to us who we truly are now, and what the Lord wants us to be.

How's that?

I believe priesthood and it's power is as simple as genuine love and charity. Is it that far fetched to believe that priesthood, or the power to act in God's behalf is as simple as treating people with genuine love and charity? Isn't that the true manifestation of God's love? True and unabrided charity?

I believe that every church serves as a prepatory period for further light and knowledge. How can any rational, or spiritual man/woman, honestly believe that a loving God who has ruled for eternities and will rule for eternities will allow this blink in time known as life, serve as the judgement point for our eternal destinations? Cannot all life experience, regardless of creed, serve as a preparing ground for continued progression?

The temple, IMO, makes hypocrites of us all. Unfortunately we don't see it, we don't see that we maintain with us certain rites that are damning our spiritual souls. Do I see it? Not even close, but I strive, I labor, and I try my best. The temple was for a long time, the only reason I went to church and stayed active. It's one of the main reasons I stay active today, and it will be a reason why I always stay active. Hopefully one day, I graduate from temple class, and can strip off of me the 'natural skins' of this probation and become one with God and Jesus.

Hopefully I didn't offend too many.

[livecoug]

Originally Posted by non sequitur

That was the first intelligent post in this thread. How in the world can peoople pile on somebody for doubting? The people that never doubt are the ones that scare me.

that was Robin's best post ever..

as for piling on??? Not at all... read seattle utes post (best seattle post ever too)

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Robin

At risk of getting taken for a fool, I am going to take Fusnik at his word. What he is doing seems very familiar, and it is something I saw a lot among the smart kids at Yale -- people value their testimony and they value church membership, so when something doesn't fit they try to make it fit in whatever way will salvage their testimony. I once compared my own testimony to something I preserved in a mason jar covered with a rubber sheet and a rubber band lid. On the top of that rubber sheet was the impression of the SLC temple. As my own doubts began to go after my testimony, the struggle would pull at the rim of the mason jar, deforming it. I would find that the rubber sheet would no longer cover the opening. No problem. I would simply stretch the rubber sheet to cover the deformed opening of the jar. This would keep happening, and I would keep stretching the rubber sheet to keep my in my testimony.

One day I showed up to church with my testimony and I noticed a new picture of the SLC temple had been framed and hung on the wall. I looked at the image and then looked down at the same image printed on my rubber sheet. Only I couldn't match one to the other for how different they now looked. I still had a testimony, but it was a testimony in a church of my own making.

This wasn't really a problem, except I always felt like a stranger in my own church. Whenever I wanted to discuss anything I thought my ideas would always be shut down and shut up.

Ironically, what you see in Fusnik is probably his attempt to SAVE his testimony, and not the process of losing it. I have known plenty of people that have salvaged a passing testimony through this process. I have known others who would look at the rubber sheet and look at the picture on the wall and say, "I don't belong here." Both paths can be filled with their own sorts of happiness and trials.

Also ironically, I thought that places like CG were supposed to be safe places to talk about our faith, where ever it might be. But many in this thread are starting to sound like the voices from my elders Q.'s past -- shut him up and shut him down.

What it comes down to is this -- do you trust Fusnik? His POV is either genuine, or he is a troll. What are the consequences of treating him like a troll when his beliefs and doubts are genuine? What are the consequences of treating his beliefs and doubts as sincere when he might in fact be a troll? If the latter, we are taken for fools, but no harm is done. But if Fusnik is sincere (and I believe he is) then the consequences of treating him like a troll will be to alienate him even more from a community where he felt that he could be open and free to talk about the current status of his testimony. And that does its own kind of damage.

Treat the man with respect. Not all of our testimonies are going to be so 'mature.' At the end of the day, a lot of those smart kids at Yale were able to salvage a testimony, and live a happy life in the church.

What is not stated is the counter viewpoint, which is that people can actually have spiritual experiences that strengthen their testimonies.

I have a friend who has left the church. If you ask him about the real nitty gritty spiritual stuff--the Holy Ghost stuff--he says, "I don't have an answer for that." IOTW, he does not deny his experience, and hasn't reconciled those experiences with his current path.

Versus my brother who says "I made all that stuff up, it came from within. There was no heavenly source."

I don't think my brother is lying. He believes what he is saying. But at some level it must nag at him.

I had a conversation with Robin a long time ago, where we argued over the basis of belief. I was a proponent of the heart, that is, of spiritual feelings. He was a proponent of the mind, of rationality, of "clear thought." I believed we had fundamentally different ways of approaching belief in the church. I believed then and I believe now, if your foundation does not rest upon the Holy Ghost, your house will be washed away.

I know Robin will have a response to this, that I have mischaracterized his beliefs, and that the Holy Spirit has led him in a different direction, etc.

At the end of the day, you either walk away or you don't. You either cross the line in the sand or you don't.

There are men that I would go to battle with. Men that I truly respect. They weren't perfect. But a common thread is that they were men of faith.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Robin

At risk of getting taken for a fool, I am going to take Fusnik at his word. What he is doing seems very familiar, and it is something I saw a lot among the smart kids at Yale -- people value their testimony and they value church membership, so when something doesn't fit they try to make it fit in whatever way will salvage their testimony. I once compared my own testimony to something I preserved in a mason jar covered with a rubber sheet and a rubber band lid. On the top of that rubber sheet was the impression of the SLC temple. As my own doubts began to go after my testimony, the struggle would pull at the rim of the mason jar, deforming it. I would find that the rubber sheet would no longer cover the opening. No problem. I would simply stretch the rubber sheet to cover the deformed opening of the jar. This would keep happening, and I would keep stretching the rubber sheet to keep my in my testimony.

One day I showed up to church with my testimony and I noticed a new picture of the SLC temple had been framed and hung on the wall. I looked at the image and then looked down at the same image printed on my rubber sheet. Only I couldn't match one to the other for how different they now looked. I still had a testimony, but it was a testimony in a church of my own making.

This wasn't really a problem, except I always felt like a stranger in my own church. Whenever I wanted to discuss anything I thought my ideas would always be shut down and shut up.

Ironically, what you see in Fusnik is probably his attempt to SAVE his testimony, and not the process of losing it. I have known plenty of people that have salvaged a passing testimony through this process. I have known others who would look at the rubber sheet and look at the picture on the wall and say, "I don't belong here." Both paths can be filled with their own sorts of happiness and trials.

Also ironically, I thought that places like CG were supposed to be safe places to talk about our faith, where ever it might be. But many in this thread are starting to sound like the voices from my elders Q.'s past -- shut him up and shut him down.

What it comes down to is this -- do you trust Fusnik? His POV is either genuine, or he is a troll. What are the consequences of treating him like a troll when his beliefs and doubts are genuine? What are the consequences of treating his beliefs and doubts as sincere when he might in fact be a troll? If the latter, we are taken for fools, but no harm is done. But if Fusnik is sincere (and I believe he is) then the consequences of treating him like a troll will be to alienate him even more from a community where he felt that he could be open and free to talk about the current status of his testimony. And that does its own kind of damage.

Treat the man with respect. Not all of our testimonies are going to be so 'mature.' At the end of the day, a lot of those smart kids at Yale were able to salvage a testimony, and live a happy life in the church.

So Yale led you to apostacy. The U of U is very good at that, and I imagine Yale must be devastating.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

So Yale led you to apostacy. The U of U is very good at that, and I imagine Yale must be devastating.

Yale also led him to financial ruin. They are good at that too.