New Pew research shows LDS retention rate worsening for those raised LDS

[Everybody Wang Chung]

Blake Ostler is an intellectual.

[Marcus]

...Although I would say, that the church sees itself as a vehicle to lead its members to Christ. They may see open discussion which might produce doubt/questions to be counterproductive to that endeavor.

...I appreciate your candor regarding the lack of resources for intellectuals in the LDS Church. I understand that the LDS Church sees itself as a vehicle to lead its members to Christ. I tend to think that they would not have to sacrifice that mission by remembering the poor folks who like to think more than the average person.

I would tend to think so too. Why would coming to Christ require turning control of your mind over to another human?

[Limnor]

I’ve mostly abandoned organized religion for the same reasons you’re describing. What I haven’t abandoned is the idea that Christ can actually be present in a person. That “Christ in you” is more than a religious affiliation. That’s really the part I still believe.

Can you expand on that a little? I’m interested in understanding what you think that means, in practice, and also how you see Christ historically.

Sure but this is just how I view it and don’t consider myself an authoritative spokesperson, it’s just where I’ve landed. The image that comes closest to what I mean is Jesus’ vine and branches analogy in John 15. The branch doesn’t produces its own fruit. It remains connected to the vine, and the life of the vine produces fruit through it. So when I say “Christ in you,” I think I mean something like that.

Practically, I think it works something like this: God loves and forgives you, and believing that love and forgiveness changes you. You then extend that same love and forgiveness to others. That, to me, is the fruit, the life of Christ working itself outward through you.

Historically, I believe Jesus was a real first-century Jewish man who was crucified and resurrected.

[I Have Questions]

Can you expand on that a little? I’m interested in understanding what you think that means, in practice, and also how you see Christ historically.

Sure but this is just how I view it and don’t consider myself an authoritative spokesperson, it’s just where I’ve landed. The image that comes closest to what I mean is Jesus’ vine and branches analogy in John 15. The branch doesn’t produces its own fruit. It remains connected to the vine, and the life of the vine produces fruit through it. So when I say “Christ in you,” I think I mean something like that.

Practically, I think it works something like this: God loves and forgives you, and believing that love and forgiveness changes you. You then extend that same love and forgiveness to others. That, to me, is the fruit, the life of Christ working itself outward through you.

Historically, I believe Jesus was a real first-century Jewish man who was crucified and resurrected.

Thanks for explaining. I think you’re applying “God” like Texas Sharpshooter draws a target. If an atheist shows love and forgiveness to others, simply because they know that’s the right thing to do psychologically for them, and they feel improved as a result, it doesn’t automatically equate to a God’s influence. Unless you have pre determined that you want it to. You could equally say, with the same legitimacy, that it was Apollo or Nature or Thetans behind it. Have you “found” God in your adult years in some way, or was God imprinted on you from an early age?

I’m not trying to be offensively provocative. But you know me well enough now to know that my default setting is to ask challenging questions as a means of getting to the real foundation of any discussion.

In terms of Jesus. I also think he was a historical figure. There seems to be sufficient objective evidence that a person like that in that time and place existed. But I’m not buying the walking on water etc and I think it is far more likely that he survived a crucifixion than actually died and came back to life - although he may well have portrayed himself as coming back to life to take advantage of that situation. Even people today are pronounced dead who then seemingly come back to life. Of course, they were never actually dead in the first place.

[Limnor]

Thanks for explaining. I think you’re applying “God” like Texas Sharpshooter draws a target. If an atheist shows love and forgiveness to others, simply because they know that’s the right thing to do psychologically for them, and they feel improved as a result, it doesn’t automatically equate to a God’s influence. Unless you have pre determined that you want it to. You could equally say, with the same legitimacy, that it was Apollo or Nature or Thetans behind it. Have you “found” God in your adult years in some way, or was God imprinted on you from an early age?

I’m not trying to be offensively provocative. But you know me well enough now to know that my default setting is to ask challenging questions as a means of getting to the real foundation of any discussion.

In terms of Jesus. I also think he was a historical figure. There seems to be sufficient objective evidence that a person like that in that time and place existed. But I’m not buying the walking on water etc and I think it is far more likely that he survived a crucifixion than actually died and came back to life - although he may well have portrayed himself as coming back to life to take advantage of that situation. Even people today are pronounced dead who then seemingly come back to life. Of course, they were never actually dead in the first place.

I don’t take your questions as offensive at all. I think they’re fair. I’m really just describing how I understand my own relationship with God, rather than trying to offer proof of his existence. I acknowledge that if I’d grown up in Saudi Arabia, or in Utah, I might believe something completely different. And sure, I can recognize the Texas sharpshooter fallacy as a possible criticism if I were looking for evidence to justify a belief I’d already settled on. I can even see that playing out in looking for Old Testament prophecies fulfilled in Jesus. It’s just that I don’t attend church, pay tithes, or have much invested in defending a particular religious system. That doesn’t mean I’m immune to bias, of course. I think where I’ve landed is simply the result of an honest examination of myself and what I believe.

I don’t think Christians have a monopoly on love, forgiveness, or goodness. And I wouldn’t suggest that an atheist who demonstrates those things is secretly practicing Christianity. There may be other systems out there that speak to the human condition but I agree with the idea that the world has “fallen” and is in need of redemption.

As for whether God was imprinted on me from childhood, my experience was different from what I understand to be typical in LDS families. My family wasn’t particularly religious, although I was baptized Catholic as an infant. My parents divorced when I was nine, and I remember my mother taking solace in the church at that time. I also remember looking at the large crucifix behind the altar and feeling horrified and afraid.

I had something of a “found” moment when I was about 24. At the time I probably would have described it as having “caught fire.” I went around knocking on doors and probably mostly just irritated people.

I’ve explained elsewhere on the board that I’ve had experiences that brought me face to face with death, having even delivered it, and those experiences led me to critically examine myself and who it is I claim to be. I’ve landed at the understanding of Christ that I described upthread.

On the resurrection, sure, there are alternative explanations. Maybe it was fabricated, or Jesus survived the crucifixion, or someone else was substituted for him, as suggested by some Muslim thought. I acknowledge the whole thing falls apart if there was no resurrection.