Will studying church history destroy your testimony?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 вер 2024
- In this episode, Dave talks about a framework originally outlined by Bruce and Marie Hafen that can help members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints formulate realistic expectations, and can help them approach tough questions in a productive way.
FOOTNOTES (sorry links aren't clickable yet. That feature is coming soon. In the meantime, copy/paste!)
“Faith is Not Blind,” by Bruce and Marie Hafen is available here (along with a free preview): amzn.to/3760Kg1
The Hafen’s have an entire UA-cam channel where they discuss the principles outlined in their book. Check it out!: bit.ly/3zHigUS
“Faith is Not Blind” BYU-Hawaii devotional: bit.ly/3i5BpZT
“Faith is Not Blind” website: bit.ly/3iVIr2x
“On Dealing with Uncertainty,” by Bruce Hafen (1979 BYU Devotional): bit.ly/3zNSz59
Notes:
- An excellent example of someone who has moved through these three stages is Latter-day Saint historian Don Bradley. In his interview on Saints Unscripted, he talked about how when he hit complexity (when he got into the nitty-gritty of Church history) he left the Church and actually became quite antagonistic. But he didn’t stop digging. And eventually, he discovered the simplicity beyond complexity and ended up joining the Church again. Check out his episode here: bit.ly/2UfGiGg
- “We need to look longer and harder at difficult questions and pat answers, but without lurching from extreme innocence to extreme skepticism. Today’s world is full of hard-core skeptics who love to ‘enlighten’ those who are stuck in idealistic simplicity, offering them the doubt and agnosticism of complexity as a seemingly brave new way of life” Bruce and Marie Hafen, “Faith Is Not Blind,” pg. 13.
- As I encounter complexity and attempt to manage my expectations of the Church, I also try to remember, as Dallin H. Oaks taught, “Revelations from God-the teachings and directions of the Spirit-are not constant. We believe in continuing revelation, not continuous revelation. We are often left to work out problems without the dictation or specific direction of the Spirit. That is part of the experience we must have in mortality.” Source: bit.ly/2SK0JuQ
- There are cons associated with staying permanently in Stage 1 or Stage 2. The Hafens teach in their book, “When we don’t see the gap [between the ideal and the real] or we focus only on the ideal while blocking out the real, our perspective lacks depth. If this is our paradigm, faith can be both blind and shallow, because it lacks awareness and careful thought. These limitations can keep us from extending our roots into the soil of real experience deeply enough to form the solid foundation needed to withstand the strong winds of adversity. Growing deep roots requires that we learn to work through uncomfortable realities” (pg. 12).
On the other side you’ve got the dangers of Stage Two: “...despite the value of becoming aware of complexity, one’s acceptance of the clouds of uncertainty can become so complete that the iron rod fades into the surrounding mists, and skepticism becomes not just a helpful tool but a guiding philosophy” (pg. 12-13).
Watch the original 'Faith & Beliefs' video on Saints Unscripted: tinyurl.com/37...
facebook: / keystonelds
insta: / keystonelds
tiktok: / keystonelds
website: www.keystoneld...
Apple podcast: tinyurl.com/3r...
Spotify podcast: tinyurl.com/33...
Amazon podcast: tinyurl.com/5c...
Studying church history actually strengthened my testimony. We as church members need to see the human side of history. We need to see that most religions have a controversial history, particularly in the early period.
Church history Is fascinating, Don Bradley has some great insights.
Even people that say they believe in science understand that science has given us many answers to many of our questions but it to is still in its infancy really in the grand scheme of things but we still have more questions there than we do of answers. Some say they believe in science and leave it at that and don’t pull on their hair because they have some of the answers but not all. They simply trust what science has answered and have faith that eventually science will answer all of their questions. Opposition in all things includes having both faith and doubt in us just as sure the sky is going to continue to have both the sun and moon in it.. There is no escaping it.
You can trust in the answers you have found in the gospel and have faith that eventually we will have all the answers but to expect to find a place that is all answers and no questions in this world at this time? Never seen such a place. I suppose we will discover that place just as soon as we discover the perfect people that existing out there
It actually strengthened my testimony tremendously after I finished a deep dive into church history. Some things that didn't make sense at first and would make one doubt became huge evidences of the truth after a change in perspective. I had an experience much like Don Bradley in noticing details and consistencies that seem to be impossible without some kind of divine guidance. I never disbelieved fully but was alarmed by some things until i took the time to deep dive and deeply ponder about them. Some of the most common anti-mormon evidences are actually hugely faith-promoting for me. The book of Abraham and the facsimiles are one huge example for me. I suggest to anyone who is thinking of leaving the church to do a deep study of the scriptures first using the footnotes. You will find consistencies and evidences that will blow your mind. I don't think it could be possible for me to disbelieve the book of Mormon now unless I were to lose my memory of the things I have learned.
How is the Book of Abraham and the facsimiles a huge example to you? Did you come to the conclusion they were a catalyist for Joseph even though he thought they were a translation? The only two conclusions I see as possible are that, or that he was a conman.
If we look specifically at some of the early church doctrine vs. today, we see some big changes. Brigham Young proclaiming Adam as God is a big one (God Adam theory). Trinity vs. 3 separate beings is also a big one, this wasn’t changed until a few years after the church started and then first vision accounts changed. But things like this are all history. It’s almost has the same non-effect for me as learning about the ancient Greeks. Which isn’t much of an effect at all.
I feel like when it comes to analyzing the church or its teachings, it’s better to address the modern era. I take a look at all the sneaky and trickery that the church puts cities and citizens through to build new temples. I look at how the church handles abuse claims and their own repentance process. I look at what the laws of tithes and offerings now and how and what they are used for. I look at all the church investments. I look at the temple endowment, which has been changed and still is being changed significantly. Was the Book of Mormon the most perfect book in the world? Well, then why did they make changes in the text over the past 30 years? (Yes, in the English version)
The big pillar of the Mormon faith is to Ask God if ‘something’ is not true, especially when the facts don’t line up on paper or in your head. It’s always this, doubt your doubts before you doubt your faith. I think it needs to be, validate your doubts first, spend time in searching for the answers, and then doubt your faith if needed. After devoting my life to the church for 2 years as a missionary, and the 24 years in total I was an active member. I can tell you that it didn’t feel right when I got back and it doesn’t feel right even now. That’s not to say that there isn’t truth within it, it’s just has added a good amount junk into the mix. The church claiming that they are the 1 true church in the earth is utterly false.
If done sincerely and honestly then... yes
The cure for knowledge, is more knowledge.
Everyone these days get a little knowledge and think they know all. You need more knowledge to understand the big picture and cure your ailment of little knowledge.
Definitely not, at least not for me and my extensive deep dive.
Sometimes you gotta be willing to go beyond where other extensive deep divers stop and that includes turning to the One who sees the entire picture. His answers DO come accordingly to His timing, when we are prepared, humble and willing to listen. Some of my answers have come many years later when my vision is more clear and my heart more open. Some answers I assume won’t come till the next life, but I have assurance they are there, and sometimes that is the answer you are given. Life wouldn’t be a test of faith if everything was pandered to our brains making knowledge omnipotent.
Same. It's helped me remember the humanity of the people involved and increased my respect for them.
As you did your deep dive, how were you okay with the fact that the church made so many edits to the book of Mormon, or to church histories, or the false prophecies of Joseph Smith?
Does that not create concern for you? I know I don't understand it.
@@ltdannichols No because I’ve researched them and understand them beyond the accusatory fog people place in them.
@@ltdannichols it does not.
Link to music used plz if you want some second greatest commandment points
A very reductionist offering. Rejecting truth claims against which there is counter factual evidence has nothing to do with simplicity or complexity. And claiming people leave the church because they can’t handle complexity is an irresponsible generality.
Like with any relationship
When we studied D&C in 2021, I asked God for help with Joseph Smith. I needed to know if he is truly a prophet. I got my answer 9 months later, during a fast. Joseph Smith is truly a prophet of God.
He works in many different ways
He’s not.
He is: ua-cam.com/video/pYuOTM7YWxU/v-deo.htmlsi=XNRM2wE0_iDI1mhF
@MakeupPearls I have a question about your comment, if that's ok. Was the "true or false" question about Joseph Smith being a prophet the only question you asked? Forgive me for saying, but based on what you wrote it sounds like you just worked to strengthen your already-held opinion through confirmation bias. Were there any other possible alternate answers?
This sounds kind of like another version of the Dunning Kreuger Effect.
Been a while, but are you familiar with Don Bradley's story?
@@ProbeScout Yes.
Great video, David!
I had hard questions while in college in the 1990s, just before the internet was a thing, and had to use a southern US university library to research. There was definitely a bias against the Church in whoever managed the collection, but I found peace along with answers: the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is true and my testimony became stronger than ever.
My approach: I never doubted the Church (because I believed Jesus can establish a true church in my day). I was simply convinced I didn't have enough information yet. Once I did, the truth of the restored gospel was obvious. Prayer confirmed my findings.
My approach: I never doubted, then filled in the blanks with my bias. Great critical thinking. Maybe try again.
so you concluded the answer before doing any research? You found evidence gainst the church so you ignored it and looked for evidence that supported your conclusion. That's called confirmation bias.
@@MrLVCO replied, "so you concluded the answer before doing any research? You found evidence gainst the church so you ignored it and looked for evidence that supported your conclusion. That's called confirmation bias."
To whom- and of what are you talking about, Hobal Grajeda? If you are right, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will just disappear. If you are wrong...
38 And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought:
39 But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.
Psalm 73: "Those who trust in the Lord will be received up unto glory."
Garrit W Gong: "With our trust and faith in God, trials and afflictions can be consecrated for our good." All things for our good, April 2024 general conference
This channel is so important.
Keep up the great work!
😂😂😂😂😂😂
GREAT ADVICE!!!! Keep doing these, at 84 I’ve learned complexities are part of life, dealing with them so you can SEE the “BIG” picture takes adult reasoning, research, open mindedness and solutions! It’s like rejecting your American citizenship because historically there have been huge mistakes - but when you look at corrections, growth, adherence to progress with rational decisions, the overall value of being an American in this world is priceless!
@@lanakila40 being American is great for you. However it holds no value. You are no better than anyone else on the planet just because you’re American. We all have zero choice as to where we are born.
Knowledge is power; the truth sets us free. So…obtaining knowledge and understanding truth past, present, and future is beneficial. But we ought to pace ourselves and not “run faster than we’re able” or eat meat 🥩 when milk 🥛 is what we need 😊
Thanks for the great video!
It totally distroyed mine. L
No, it wasn't Church history that destroyed your testimony; the real Church history is like scripture, it builds faith.
@@livingtruth2374 When you only read what’s “approved” material sure it does.
@@jordanwebb5794 This is an old fake canard. There is no such thing as "approved" material. There is such a thing as "reliable" material - true of all history. And quite frankly the truth is that 90%+ of the so-called "facts" and conclusions arrived at from material quoted, distorted, and twisted by adversaries and critics of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, upon examination, is found to be totally unreliable. And we can break those things down line by line, item by item.
@@jordanwebb5794 what have unapproved material have u read? lol
If you are going into studying church history thinking it won’t change you, then I would say you aren’t prepared with ears to hear or eyes to see. One of the important things McLaren shares about faith and belief in his book is that belief can be in anything and can sometimes be false or just wishful thinking. Faith, however, is the relentless pursuit of truth. Having authentic faith is shedding false belief as you go, not holding on to it for dear life. As such, depending on how your “faith” has been built up, studying church history could knock out those foundations-and that’s not a bad thing. Sometimes all the things that we’ve built up and call “testimony” are actually pretty fragile and need to be knocked down so that something better can take its place.
The very underpinnings of the question, “will studying church history destroy your testimony?” Is one based in fear in my opinion-fear that we are wrong. I think it is fear-based because of how we’ve been, frankly, indoctrinated to view the church above everything else-that losing it or leaving it has eternally damning consequences. One of the things I’ve noticed studying this topic and going through faith crisis is that I’ve had to change my thinking, my beliefs, and my faith-that I wasn’t right and that it was okay. I found that my faith was based on the church being true, a prophet-all human things. I found that when we say “testimony” in the church, we really mean certainty. If you want a good book on this topic I recommend Sin of Certainty by Pete Enns. When what you are trying to aim for is certainty, that’s not really faith, nor is it lasting. It doesn’t take long to realize that certainty can crumble really fast, that it doesn’t make a good foundation to build on.
I would, instead, suggest that you focus on God and figure that relationship out. Because, if that part isn’t there, nothing else really matters. I would also suggest that you don’t limit your study to just church history but widen it out to include God experiences in all traditions. In the end, it’s not the church that needs to be “true,” but God-for God exists wholly apart and separate from the church. He existed before and will exist after the church. He is not the church and we should be forever grateful for that as that means lots of people have access to him in ways that make sense to them, not just us. And sometimes people will find God in this church, but a lot of times, people will find God elsewhere and we should celebrate that.
This is great
No! I see us all as imperfect. The saints have never been perfect. We are mortals striving to become perfect. The only way we can become perfect is through Christ. I find it troubling for anyone to sit in judgement of others when we are imperfect ourselves. I have always believed that only Christ can judge the past, present, and future.
I’m glad that you mentioned divorce as an example.
Turning to right and original sources instead of the assumptions and twisted truths to fit a narrative from naysayers is what helped me. With history for example, I turn to the records made by those who lived it and how they experienced, felt, and their “whys” in their original context. People today will place their own context through presentism and pessimism. Involving God is VERY important as the Holy Ghost will bring understanding to things with no official answer. For me the key was continuing to seek these types of answers beyond where other people stop, beyond the accusatory fog, that takes people away from the iron rod. Stage 3 is a great place to be. Thank you for this video
@@LdsTiktokPreservation Simply studying articles currently on the church official website will send most people running for the hills. No need to look elsewhere.
David, this is lit 🔥
😂😂😂😂😂
I think you may have missed a great resource on your list; Revelations in Context. I was teaching Gospel Doctrine when that came out, and Church History specifically. That book raised some eyebrows for some who had assumed things in Church history, and completely dispelled some questions that were supposed to be answered. Highly recommend it for stage 3 .
I don’t accept that the answer to why the church and prophets did so many frightening things in the past is “don’t expect answers”.
What frightening things?
@@WestLight-l3u like Joseph Smith manipulating the parents of young girls to “marry” him in order for them to make sure they could go to heaven.
@@codysanders4590Source?
The true God was never a mortal being, but an immutable and triune person with no beginning and no end. It is very simple; Mormonism is not biblical. They have their own LDS Jesus, who cannot save. Psalm 90:2 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.
You may want to be more specific. What do you mean that "the true god was never a mortal being"? Do you believe that not only was He never, but He never will be, and why?
The church history matters podcast did a great series on how to be critical thinkers and navigate these complexities. They’d be awesome guests to have here!
I was fortunate to know that God lives and the LDS Missionaries were his servants before I knew anything about the Church, its doctrines or history. Right out of the blue, I had a full blown spiritual revelation as I was listening to the Missionaries. And so I don't have any answers to the criticisms and I don't really care that I don't have any answers. God didn't restore his Church to contend with the devil but to save the sincere. Whether they are fully aware or not, Missionaries really are in service to the living God. I know this as well as i know there is a sun in the sky and that I live. And that true life is in the living God who is the head of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. It may appear unbelievable that the mighty God would choose untried, untested, inexperienced youth to represent him. But he does.
Awesome testimony.
@@kristinrichmond8185 Thanks. It's the truth.
@@jeffwilson4693 you’re welcome. I have a similar testimony. I have had undeniable experiences with the spirit and I too don’t have all answers to questions. I don’t care, it doesn’t bother me. I can be patient and wait on the Lord. No one can tell me Christ isn’t Lord and that the Book of Mormon isn’t true because I know differently. Thank you for sharing.
Same experience
I Do Agree ... Same Sentiments and Experience, as i read your testimony - it is, as if it was my story too ... Thanks A Lot
I’ve always found my testimony strengthened in studying Church history…
I learned a lot about commitment when I asked by grandpa how he put up with my grandma who had a tendency to yell at him right in front of everyone even while they were preparing for their 50th wedding anniversary. He was not a member of the church just keep that in mind, when he said "when I took your grandma, I took her for better or for worst and I got worst, but I took her and that's all there is to it"
oh no, it actually strengthened my testimony. You see, I knew those that were called to lead ,then form the church were not perfect yet were given the responsibility to do that. So, things and choices were made that sometimes did not go how they were supposed to yet the church thrived, problems were solved and its growth was miraculous and we know why. Christ was in charge and that knowledge is so inspiring!!!
Studying church history certainly challenged my faith, but it was an important step in its growth. It forced perspectives about faith, religion, and people that I've never considered before. It hurt, but as I mapped out what to trust, what to forgive, and what didn't actually matter, the growing pains did eventually subsided, and I found that the church was more true than ever.
Thanks for sharing but honestly it sounds like you just rejected your cognitive dissonance, then became much more nuanced in your faith to justify the problems. Have you read the CES letter?
@@Bigbluedome Do you think the Ces letter is the maximum you can dive into? 😂 For a good scholar, the ces letter is even capable of increasing the testimony.
But hey, enjoy being in a cult. It’s your choice after all. Have the best life you can despite that. In the ridiculous words of Alma despite equally ridiculous apologetics, Adieu.
@@Bigbluedome 0 arguments coming from a frustrated exmormon.
@@adamhyrumLDS oh god here we go. So here are just a few….
Don’t say I never did anything for you.
Joseph Smith’s character
Joseph Smith’s practice of folk magic and treasure digging was deeply problematic
Joseph Smith’s first vision has significant credibility problems
Kirtland Bank scandal
Joseph Smith silencing and maligning critics
Joseph Smith’s practice of Polygamy was deeply abusive and not of God
Joseph went crazy at the end (Militarism, King of the World, Nauvoo expositor)
Fraudulent Scripture
Old Testament is not historically credible, culturally problematic
New Testament is not historically credible, culturally problematic
The Book of Abraham was not a translation, as Joseph Smith claimed taught
The Book of Mormon is not a record of ancient Americans as Joseph Smith claimed, but instead is a 19th century work of fiction/plagiarism
Sources/plagiarism
Translation process (peep stone, hat, no use of plates)
Anachronisms
DNA
The Doctrine and Covenants has been altered repeatedly
Joseph Smith translation of New Testament is plagiarism of Biblical commentary
Kinderhook plates
Authority and truth claims
Mormon claims around the Melchizedek priesthood are deeply problematic
The Mormon church’s claims of exclusive authority are prideful, insulting, and damaging to many
Mormon epistemology (feelings = truth) is deeply problematic
Mormon prophets, seers, and revelators do not prophesy, see, or reveal
Care about stupid things. Ignore super important things
Always 30 years behind the progressive world in social justice
Doctrine has changed in major ways. Inconsistent.
Sexuality
Sex-negative vs. a sex-positive culture
The Mormon church’s teaching around modesty are damaging to girls, boys, women, and men
The Mormon church fosters destructive shame with its masturbation policies
The Mormon church allows adults to ask deeply inappropriate and sexually explicit questions alone to children and adults
The problems with prohibiting pre-marital sex
The Mormon Church has harmed generations of LGBTQ people
Teaching that being LGBTQ is an abomination. Depression/suicide epidemic.
Conversion therapy
Mixed-orientation marriages
Celibacy
November 2015 policy
Opposing same-sex, committed love
Gender
The Mormon church treats women like 2nd class citizens
The Mormon church treats trans-gender issues in harmful ways
Families
The Mormon church strains, divides, and breaks up families
Beliefs are prioritized over relationships
Keeping non-Mormons or unorthodox members out of temple, weddings
Dishonesty, Abuse
The Mormon church has been deeply dishonest about its historical belief and practices regarding polygamy
Originally denying the practice of polygamy
Post-Manifesto polygamy
Claiming now the polygamy is neither doctrinal nor practiced
The Mormon church has systematically hidden and obfuscated its problematic history for generations, and intentionally misled it members.
Examples of abuse/dishonesty
B.H. Roberts
Richard Lyman
Juanita Brooks
Fawn Brodie
Eugene England
Leonard Arrington
Paul Dunn
George P. Lee
Jerald/Sandra Tanner
Mark Hofmann scandal
Brent Metcalfe
Swedish Rescue
September 6
John Dehlin
Sam Young
Bill Reel
Kate Kelly/Ordain Women
Denver Snuffer
The Mormon church defends abusers at the expense of victims
The Mormon church silences, excommunicates, and shuns its critics
Mormon church behaves like a destructive cult in many ways (BITE model)
Leaders do not model Christlike love. No humility. No apologies.
Maligning and mischaracterizing those who leave
Finances
No financial transparency.
Supporting consumerism/materialism (vs. BOM and Christ’s teachings)
Inadequate support of charity
Rituals
The Mormon temple ceremony is a rip-off from Masonry
Mormon temple work for the dead is inefficient and disrespectful to those who have died.
Up to 80% of Mormon baptisms for the dead are repeats and thus a waste of time.
Second Anointing
Spirituality
The Mormon church worships Joseph Smith more than Jesus
The Mormon church does not encourage real/true spiritual development and maturity
Racism
The core narrative of the Book of Mormon is racist
Mormon leaders have taught egregiously racist teachings since its inception
Indian Placement program
Mormon leadership is excessively white, Utah/Idaho-based, and non-representative of its cultural membership worldwide
Cultural colonialism/genocide in modern church experience
Doctrine
Doctrine of polygamy devalues women, encourages abuse, causes sadness/anxiety
Culture
Devaluing/denouncing science
History of violence (Council of 50, Mountain Meadows)
Mormon Word of Wisdom is outdated, silly in parts, inconsistently applied
Excessively conservative/Republican in harmful ways
Inappropriate political involvement
Prop 8
Boring/irrelevant
Children are brainwashed, baptized too early
Difficult for single people
Difficult for divorcees
Mission culture
Cultlike missionary culture
Missionaries needlessly put in harm’s way
Corrupt baptisms
BYU students punished if earnestly lose faith
Doctrine encourages focus on next life, but neglect of this one
Culture of perfectionism can lead to anxiety, depression, suicidality
Mormon apologetics are cowardly, deceptive, unchristlike
A history of devaluing valuable mental health resources, therapists
Culture of pyramid schemes, superstition, fraud
I like your emphasis on the point that we may be wrong sometimes. We should apply that to EVERYTHING, including our testimony. If you get scared thinking that your core beliefs are incorrect, that may be the Holy Ghost telling you to shift your mindset. Don't harden your heart. Be open to moving in whichever direction the Lord calls you.
Yes. Horrifically. My shelf shattered.
If that's true it's not because you read Church history, because my deep study of Church history over many years has only strengthened my faith that this really is the restored Church of Jesus Christ. Most people who get their "shelf" shattered get in that condition because they read the writings of doubters and antagonists, and their "spin" on the faith.
@@livingtruth2374 I mean I just felt betrayed when I learned that the stuff the church “hid” from me was actually true. Like the stone in the hat, the polyandry, book of Abraham etc. I mean it’s not like the church broadcasts that stuff. It’s dishonest. I also thought the church apologetics were rough also. Not very honest in my opinion.
@@Bigbluedome We don't know as an actual fact that a separate seer stone was used in the translation of the Book of Mormon - it's highly debated. There were two stones used that were part of the Urim and Thummim, we know that. And a hat - an everyday article of men's clothing at the time - may have been used to shield light and the stones shined.
How in the world could that miracle possibly shake somebody's faith?
The Book of Abraham is the word of God, and the critics haven't laid a glove on it.
And Joseph never practiced "Polyandry" by its true definition. We was sealed to some women for the next life only.
These issues are not principal ones and are easy to get over if one simply opens their mind in an attitude of belief.
@@livingtruth2374 the gospel topics essays alone say that we do though for the stone. There are church pictures of the stone used that the church put out. Also it’s the exact same process used when Joseph did his very dishonest and con artist treasure digging. Church approved sources, not to mention other sources.
“Have not laid a glove on it”? The Book of Abraham is COMPLETELY indefensible in my opinion. The gospel topics essays again on the churches website do not even really refute this. Joseph said he translated the papyrus and was later proven to be completely false.
@@livingtruth2374 we also have documents showing Joseph married and had sex with at least 2 of those polyamorous wives. Again the gospel topics essays confirm polyandry. They try to dress it up but even the church cannot deny it. Honestly the gospel topics essays themselves are quite damming.
I think our current world has trained us to abandon things when we run into complexity.
So true
Agreed - we live in a world of 40-character statements and social media posts - vs prayerful research and analysis
In 2nd hour today hear a lot of stories of people they know who have left. One young couple talked about how all of their friends have left so that now they want to have a non-temple wedding. We are in China just getting fed information about the outside world. I want to believe that people are coming into contact with the complexity, getting it, and remaining faithful.
Church history strengthens my testimony.
Study Church history and if you are academically honest, you will become Catholic.
Great video. Thank you. I like your intelligent approach.
The usual questions about church history aren't the ones I'm concerned with. Rather, I am curious about the socio-political developments in the church. From that way, the church has certainly changed. Doesn't shake my faith, but it has altered the way I understand things.
Studying destroyed my Testimony. :(. Satan isn't sequestered enough.
You can apply this to almost anything
I'll have to check out Faith is not Blind book. Based on this video I prefer the way it is presented as 4 stages of faith in Brian McLAREN's book, Faith after doubt. It as much more relatable and it breaks the stages into Simplicity, Complexity, Perplexity, and Harmony.
It seems to me that part of the challenge the church is working through is that for many decades, the church only taught material at a "phase 1" level - omitting much of the complexity.... or positioning complex topics as "anti-Mormon". As an active member who grew up in the 70's and 80's, I can say that many items in the gospel topics essays were considered "anti" in my youth.... The church was much more confident that it "had the answers" - which you can see from church history books/seminary manuals/books like "Mormon Doctrine" - from those years. When I grew up, we were taught the 'hemispheric model" for the Book of Mormon as if it was fact.
As we all know, the internet, ongoing research and access to new content has forced a change. I think the reactive vs proactive nature of the church's approach has been a frustration for some - but understand their focus on preserving belief. I am grateful for podcasts like this one that focus on these 3 phases and approach difficult challenges with humility, faith and honesty!!
I went through the same period and never once felt the Church was hiding or ignoring things, or not being straight up. It's an old, tired meme that doesn't stand up to the real history of that time.
@@livingtruth2374 Hmmm - interesting response - 4 points to consider (sorry for the novel):
1. Thanks for sharing your experience of growing up in the 70's and 80's. However, to conclude that everyone must have had your experience - or that if anyone had a different experience, they must be throwing out tired memes seems shortsighted.
2. Just one example - the church has had the seer stone in its possession since the late 1800's. I have on my shelf paper copies of "Church History in the Fulness of Times" Institute manuals published in 1989. No mention of a seer stone or a hat when explaining how the Book of Mormon was translated - confidently communicating that the Urim and Thummim was the tool. Significantly different than President Nelson's broadcast with the hat.
3.I think the podcast nicely summarizes that in "phase 3" people get to the point where they can see nuances and complexities in history - and even mistakes by leaders - and not have those facts negatively impact their faith. One of the recurring themes in scripture is God working through imperfect leaders (Moses could not go into the Promised land, Jonah went inactive when he got his mission call, Peter denied Christ, early apostles missed that the widows were not being ministered to, etc.) - does not mean they were not prophets seers and revelators
4. It does seem that we have more difficulty talking about specific examples of errors with any leader after the restoration. Based on my experience (may be different for others) when people in "phase 1" - who are operating on the wonderful, inspiring, simplified "Primary" version of church history - run into facts that are different/more nuanced than their current understanding, their response falls into one of 4 broad areas (more of a continuum than discrete buckets): 1. they are shaken and leave the church, 2. they ignore the information, 3. they respond with cliche's to dismiss the information vs real engagement. 4 They begin the journey through phase 2 - hopefully arriving in phase 3 eventually. Hopefully they do not take option one. Everyone is in a different place in their journey
Good stuff 👍🏻
Its actually been comforting for me in ways to deep dive into history. I feel like Im more teetering towards the simplicity in complexity. Its been nice to have you as a helpful provider of good sources as well! Really helped me hold on
Studying church history can be like finding out your wife cheated on you when you were engaged. You just found out years later and you're very hurt and betrayed. Then everyone tells you "nobody's perfect" "dont bring up ancient history". And worst of all, your wife won't even acknowledge that what she did was wrong. She says "if you gonna say negative things about me, you can leave." You say complexity should be dealt with on our own, without the partner in the relationship that bears the responsibility of the complexity, that is more toxic than my divorced parents marriage. BTW I'm still an active member, and whether or not the church is true, it is cruel the way church treats those in faith crisis
and that wife is still cheating
I haven't seen any cruelty for questioner. I've seen a huge effort for transparency, a huge increase in research based content, and dozens of social media full of encouraging comments.
@lizh7777 I understand what you're saying, it is not a direct cruelty, such as mocking or attacking. But like my analogy above states, the situation that the questioner is put in is cruel. It's great that church leaders are being more transparent now than before, but that doesn't absolve them of the responsibility of hiding everything in the first place
@@thomasam000 What did they hide?
Maybe God just expects effort and not everything to be spoon fed to you
Please help me with D & C section 132. This one is a hard one justify. Any thoughts or insights are appreciated.
Dang, that is pretty brutal.
The section pertaining to "and if she (current wife) not obey (give assent to more wives) she shall be destroyed...."
Not a direct quotation but a pretty good summery.
I wonder why the Apostles despite having the "Keys" Did not have multiple wives... They seemed awfully busy spreading the Gospel rather than lining up 10 virgins for marriage.
What specifically about it do you find hard to justify?
Some questions you might ask yourself. If these trigger you, and the Church (as is) is a force for good in your life and prompts you to do good unto others, don’t study Church history.
Am I willing to see things differently given new information?
Do I start with the conclusion and manipulate supporting evidence to fit?
Am I willing to allow past leaders to make mistakes, even if those mistakes don’t seem to have been addressed properly?
How might I react to inconsistencies from one prophet to another, or even one prophet’s words at different times?
What does the statement “I know the Church is true,” actually mean?
How dependent is my faith on the Church’s truth claims as traditionally presented? Are the building blocks of my faith set up like dominos?
Do I arrive at my own conclusions and inspiration while reading scripture, or do I use scripture as merely an authoritative source to bolster a set of specific beliefs that were given to me?
Another option that I have found, be humble enough to realize your ideal is not as ideal as you think it is.
The church itself is policing the gap between the ‘ideal’ and the ‘real.’
I have a testimony of the doctrine of exaltation. Church history isn’t anywhere near as important as church future.
Excellent video! As I’ve become more and more converted the easier it is for me to face new complexity.
I used to immediately jump to “oh no, the ex-mos know something I don’t” but now I think “they might know something I don’t, but they also probably have a VERY different perspective on that information than I will once I learn about it myself.” Which is true 100% of the time in my experience.
The problem for me is faith couldn’t depend on ideals.facts are facts, regardless of what ideals I wanted. I didn’t want it but I lost my faith to research, to allowing myself to let the cognitive dissonance and overwhelming burden of , holding it together and taking it on faith(gullibility), to fall. Since counter arguments are anti and evil, (something rational people should do by the way is hear the counter point to any political, parental, business, and insert important life decision), I didn’t ever look to out of church resources. Still was destined to leave, reading scripture often did more damage than good to my ‘faith’
Well, once you see through the poor BYU apologetics, then yes. 🤔
Haha yeah.
When are you guys going to come up with something original besides stereotyping? Your broad-brush phoniness in attacking those at BYU who defend the faith is so fake, so tired, so shopworn. These BYU defenders of the Church leave the antagonists and doubters in the dust, and the arguments of these doubters easily crumble to the earth.
@@livingtruth2374 I studied the word print discussions and found that the BYU side is phony and fake. Similarly, BYU apologists often use persuasion instead of sound arguments, and often their arguments contain a dozen caveats and mistakes once you actually follow the foot marks and dive into the original research. BYU apologists usually create the illusion of a sound arguments as long as you put blind faith in them and don't read the references. For example, the three source model of Book of Mormon voices completely debunks claims that word print studies would "prove" multiple authors.
@@livingtruth2374 not when I have looked at them. They seem pathetic to my eyes and honestly disingenuous. Going from the mindset it’s all true and filling in the gaps from there? I was floored when I heard a BYU apologist say that. (Can’t remember his name, there is a recording of him talking to his colleagues giving a speech.) or the book of Abraham. Like the long scroll theory or the catalyst theory? Not credible at all in my mind.
@@Bigbluedome That's your mind. But it's not the truth. Like most people who learn the gospel of Jesus Christ, He got his answers about its truthfulness from direct revelation with God. So he knows that no history, culture, anthropology, or anything else in this world, God's world, who gives us all that secular knowledge, is going to then be found to contradict the truthfulness of the gospel of Christ and that revelation - in fact, they sustain and enhance it. That's not bias - it's fact.
But it's amazing how lame, how lacking in logic, how blind, how feeble, are the arguments of those who preach against the faith. They are easy, so easy to refute.
My "crisis" wasn't my testimony of the Restoration, but which organization was carrying on the truths restored through Joseph Smith Jr. faithfully. After 20 years of being "tossed to and fro" with every wind of succession claims, I found my way back home.
What home was that you found
@@ProbeScout The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Those show notes are gold! Read them!
I think it’s interesting how every outside critic of church history tried to bring it down through imperfection from Saints. That’s exactly what life is all about.
Pull all the doctrine and religious aspects out and you still have a wonderful organization that has given so much to the world.
Exactly. The Lord works with imperfect people because that's all He has to work with.
Hey I have some questions about the church's Native American placement program from the 50's to the 70's, I would love a video on it! I'm in step 2 right now but I've been in step 3 before. I have a testimony but would love some help with that gap!
Update, I found this article that really helped! Also would still love to see a video about it!
James B. Allen, The Rise and Decline of the LDS Indian Student Placement Program, 1947-1996,
The issue is that people claiming to be in stage 3 stop engaging with the difficulties. They say "the church is right, and that's good enough for me," and they deflect or fallaciously ignore the problems and pretend they didn't happen instead of saying that they accept the church warts and all. They say the church has no warts. They aren't actually in stage three; they are stage 1 in denial.
Love it, a good summary of “Faith is not Blind”. Practically for me this 3 stage model makes a lot of sense and it works for me in real life.
Context is key. Was Brigham Young prejudiced towards blacks? I have no idea but possibly. Is there contextual precedence for prejudice in the Lords Church. Peter and Paul provide an historical example, “But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation. But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?” Apparently Peter was so prejudiced towards Gentiles he was embarrassed to be seen eating with them. Peter was the Chief Apostle and President of the Church and was not perfect. Only Christ was perfect.
You have no idea if BY was prejudiced towards blacks but possibly? Just read a few of his quotes and you will know.
@@jonny6man The real issue is whether or not a Prophet, chosen by God can be prejudiced, mistaken and otherwise flawed. The Savior asked Peter three times, “Lovest thou me?” and then commanded him, “Feed my sheep”. Christ knew Peter was so prejudiced towards Gentiles that he would not share the gospel with them and subsequently Christ had to call Paul to do the job. Based on Peter’s attitude towards non-Jews the answer is yes, a Prophet of God, even the President of the Church can be prejudiced and imperfect.
@UVJ_Scott I get what you are saying. However, are you able to determine if BY was prejudiced towards blacks just like you can determine Peter was prejudiced against gentiles?
Also, I wanted to comment to your point about prophets making horrible mistakes in the new testament but were still called of God. Human history has many instances of ethnocentricity even where the population thought it came from God. Brigham Young is a good example especially how isolated the saints were at the time. Many cultures think this way and still do. Another example is the ancient Israelites in the old testament who thought God wanted them to slaughter and kill all the Amalekites. Was this God doing that or do you think they were following imperfect prophets?
@@jonny6man Peter would have been raised to believe Gentiles were unclean and that they were unworthy of salvation, maybe similar to the way Brigham was taught to see Blacks. We know Peter was embarrassed to be seen associating with Gentiles. And that he was so resistant to taking the gospel to the Gentiles that God had to call Paul to do the job. In Acts chapter 10 Peter was shown a vision and told to eat things considered to be unclean by the Law of Moses. Three times he had to be told “what God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.”
9 On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour:
10 And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,
11 And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:
12 Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.
14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.
15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.
16 This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.
17 Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made inquiry for Simon’s house, and stood before the gate,
18 And called, and asked whether Simon, which was surnamed Peter, were lodged there.
19 While Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit said unto him, Behold, three men seek thee.
20 Arise therefore, and get thee down, and go with them, doubting nothing: for I have sent them.
21 Then Peter went down to the men which were sent unto him from Cornelius; and said, Behold, I am he whom ye seek: what is the cause wherefore ye are come?
22 And they said, Cornelius the centurion, a just man, and one that feareth God, and of good report among all the nation of the Jews, was warned from God by an holy angel to send for thee into his house, and to hear words of thee.
23 Then called he them in, and lodged them. And on the morrow Peter went away with them, and certain brethren from Joppa accompanied him.
24 And the morrow after they entered into Cæsarea. And Cornelius waited for them, and had called together his kinsmen and near friends.
25 And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him.
26 But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man.
27 And as he talked with him, he went in, and found many that were come together.
28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.
29 Therefore came I unto you without gainsaying, as soon as I was sent for: I ask therefore for what intent ye have sent for me?
30 And Cornelius said, Four days ago I was fasting until this hour; and at the ninth hour I prayed in my house, and, behold, a man stood before me in bright clothing,
31 And said, Cornelius, thy prayer is heard, and thine alms are had in remembrance in the sight of God.
32 Send therefore to Joppa, and call hither Simon, whose surname is Peter; he is lodged in the house of one Simon a tanner by the sea side: who, when he cometh, shall speak unto thee.
33 Immediately therefore I sent to thee; and thou hast well done that thou art come. Now therefore are we all here present before God, to hear all things that are commanded thee of God.
34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.
Although Peter and Paul had their differences I’m sure Peter was glad that Paul was called to preach to the Gentiles so he didn’t have to do it.
46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.
47 For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.
48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.
David this is a really important video and very well organized and presented! So excited for this channel, congrats on your new endeavor!
This video should be titled “how to do mental gymnastics and stay in the Church after learning you have been lied to”
They've got some great mental gymnastics instructors over on the exmo reddit too. I'm sure you're familiar
@@_Lachoneus wouldn’t know never been on Elmo Reddit
@jordanwebb5794 I'm sure you'll love it there then. You'll have a more receptive audience too. Bye 👋
Also I'm assuming you don't mean sesame street
@@_Lachoneus I dont simply follow crowds, but stand for honesty and truth. I’d recommend you do the same. Read the Gospel topic essays and look into the foot notes. Start there. Sadly there’s a whole lot more that doesn’t support what I was taught 30 plus years in the church. It sad that the Church didn’t start to be more transparent with its history till 2013.
@jordanwebb5794 keep reading, my friend. There's a way through the faith crisis that doesn't require mental gymnastics--just an attitude of faith instead of cynicism.
It reinforces my Evangelical testimony of Authentic Christianity!!!
If you study church history and you start to question your testimony, it is a sign that your testimony is built upon faulty, man made pillars.
Kneel down and ask God to help you see where your testimony is faulty, and how to fix it.
Some help that I realized when I had to go through this process.
The most important pillar is a knowledge and belief in a loving God.
Second, and very close behind, Jesus Christ is your savior and redeemer, and that he is the only way to God.
Third, the book of Mormon is the word of God.
Those are the only pillars you need, everything else is an appendage of that.
People who question their testimony find their pillars are something like this.
The church is absolutely right.
Our leaders are perfect and have to be perfect.
We are saved by our obedience to rules, and how well we serve in our calling.
We will be judged based on what others think of us, so I have to put on a facade and present myself as the perfect little Mormon.
How do you even know that God is real? Cause of a feeling? What about the thousands of other churches and religions getting that same feeling saying their church/religion is true? There are other sects of Mormonism who believe in the BoM. They got that same witness that Warren Jeffs was the prophet. Thoughts?
No, it will not destroy our testimonies, because God lives, so His Gospel lives and grows. The Gospel is not stay in past. Thank you for your videos
Serving in the church has really helped my understanding because I am extremely far from perfect and I've made mistakes but I'm doing my best. This gives me a little bit of patience and sympathy with leaders who lived in different times and eras
One time on my mission I remember I gave a risky opinion about a gospel principle that still haunts me today
I had the best of intentions but I should not have gone out on a limb and given a subjective opinion. I hope the new member at the time is still active
Stud
5 years of graduate level Biblical and BoM studies are what took me out of the church against my will. When I “reached out” in meetings with my SP and others they asked to discontinue the meetings as they were too uncomfortable. It is undeniable that the BoM is a 19th century document, the church will change the BoM from being a “translation” to a “revelation” over the next 20 years because of this.
Genuinely curious, what specifically caused you to form that conclusion about 19th century origin?
5 years of graduate study is typically the reason most people have no understanding of reality.
Not surprising there, also the undeniability you purport is a magnificent claim considering over 200 anachronisms have been cleared as archeologists have discovered new information over the last 100 years. Plus There is actual cutting edge research that gives credence to the fact that the BoM was written by many unique authors. Rather than one guy.
And the KJV is obviously a 17th century document, all translations reflect the culture and era of the translation as much or more than the original authors.
Wow... Just so accurate comparison for me.. marriage and being member of the church!! ❤
Hmmm that’s ten minutes of talking but still not much was said
Study God's Word, the Bible. Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God.
We study that as well, chad
Tens of thousands study church history all the time and grow their testimony. No problem. The apostates I know that lead with the church history cliche usually led with that to cover up other baggage.
Yeah when following “faithful sources” and carefully worded apologetics. In other words. Stay in the lines of “study” very credible. Take a real gander into church history. Then say that again.
If you are able to critically analyze facts from history, value truth and you are willing to follow the evidence where it leads, then yes, studying actual church history will inevitably destroy your testimony.
Only if paired with the cynicism of wanting a way out
@@_Lachoneus your exmormon straw man doesn't work here. I didn't want a way out, I just wanted answers to my questions and the evidence shows that what is described in the BoM didn't happen. Once you are out of the cult, you realize that Joseph Smith was nothing but a con man.
@MrLVCO your mormon perjoratives don't work here. Unfortunately for your simplistic world-view, a rigorous epistemology is not as simple as you want to make it seem. Sometimes objective truth defies common consensus. And in matters of *spiritual* truth, simply "following the evidence" without considering the possibility of God/miracles is bound to fall short.
@@_Lachoneus I'm open to the possibility of god/miracles. I just don't see what's wrong in asking for sufficient evidence before believing something.
"A Wise man proportions his belief to the evidence." -David Hume
@MrLVCO to an extent I agree about wanting sufficient evidence before belief, but perhaps there IS sufficient evidence. Plenty of people already seem to think so.
Perhaps you should read the BoM without putting your own expectations on it and see if the spiritual truths inside it can be evidence for you.
STUD
🎉🎉🎉