"Spiritual Infidelity"?????

[_harmony]

TD: Your answers are the same reasons others do not believe Joseph Smith saw a Caucasian, elderly advanced primate claiming to be God who gave the powers of the universe to him.

MG: but there is a large group consensus (many members of the LDS church...that are reasonable, thinking, intelligent primates...and not nutcases) that these things are true (advanced primate,huh? <g>)

And the whole world once thought the earth was flat... except for those few nutcases who thought it was round. Truth is not based on consensus. And prophets have been known to lie.

[snip]

MG: belief may become complex, yes. But rational choices can be made as a result of looking at and working along with and through the complexity.

What is rational about choosing to believe that women are inferior toys that are objects to be passed from man to man or used as rewards for acceptable behavior? that God is a white man? that thousands of people died in a single battle yet not one bone remains? that God was a carpenter, yet no carpenter is acceptable as a leader in his church today? that God wants to spend billions of his dollars on a shopping mall instead of helping his children live healthier longer?

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

To clarify, I think Gaz would have no problem with a convert divorcing a spouse who wouldn't come with him into the church, not that he would condone someone using the church for his own gain. The guy in the story is someone I've known for ten years or so, I was speechless to find out he'd left his wife, and even more speechless to find out he'd converted to Mormonism. I think he was wrong, wrong, wrong, and I'm on the ex-wife's side on all this, and at this point have a friendship with only the ex-wife ... still, I don't think that the main problem is that he is a low-life or using the church for his own purposes. He didn't really have to use the church, as far as I can see. I think the church made it easy and justified for him and his new Mormon wife to be together in order to gain a convert, and that the "church" nor its members can even see the situation for what it is. My TBM sister is a close friend to this woman and believes it all to be okay because they didn't commit adultery and maybe that's so (I'm a little skeptical), but what's the important thing, to keep a family together or resist sexual temptation? I hope they are happy because they've caused a lot of misery to a lot of people in the process. The TBM woman's first husband is still TBM so the children will remain sealed to him, their TBM children are angry that the sealing of their parents has been undone, and the inactive children are just angry for whatever. His children call him a "basket case" and will never be interested in the church. His ex-wife has recently found happiness with another man, but she's still suffering from something like PTS. The desertion of her first husband was horribly traumatic for her.

I am sorry but I am skeptical of your anecdote. In over 25 years of serving in almost every leadership capacity one can serve in on and LDS ward level, and a few on the stake level I have never, not once, seen a new member encouraged or prodded to leave a spouse that may have no interest on joining. Just the opposite in fact-pro-active counsel to stay with the spouse, love the spouse and not to shove religion down the uninterested spouses throat.

Same is true when both are members and one loses faith. Always, the counsel is to work through it and stay married.

Of course I know my experience is limited to the wards and stakes I have lived in so I do not see everything. If this really happened this way I believe it the exception rather then the rule.

I agree, this is not the way the church should operate, or would typically operate, in my experience either. Still, the way events played out (husband leaves wife without a word about leaving, the church, or being in love with "just friend" TBM woman, is baptized, and a year later marries divorced TBM woman in temple) ... there doesn't seem to be much room in there for the church to be advising any differently or putting up any obstacles. What his kids say he told them is that the local leaders encouraged him to leave their mother because she wouldn't have joined the church anyway, but obviously, if she had had any interest in joining (which she didn't) it would have thrown a monkey wrench into his monkey business with the TBM woman, so it just seems more convenient for all concerned that she was kept in the dark. The whole thing is crazy. It doesn't really even belong in this thread, it's just to say that the church seems to care more to get believers than to keep families together.

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

that's why I don't believe.

I know.

Bless your poor sweet heart.

[_truth dancer]

Hi MG...

Ahhhh I wrote this marvelous, brilliant, absolutely fantastic response and LOST IT! (growl)!

So... now I have to summarize ... :-)

My understanding is that we can't believe that which doesn't fit within our experience/reality of our existence. In other words, there is a neurology of belief that keeps us from believing that which doesn't fit into our world experience. I'm simplifying of course but our way of experiencing the world is hard wired (which can be altered under circumstances to some degree).

Much of the world believes in past lives... if we went by a consensus we would certainly embrace this belief. Or no one would believe there were really millions of warriors who died with metal swords in the America's two thousand years ago.

Our world view is based on numerous ideas, one of which is consensus but they include our sensory perceptions, our early experiences, etc. etc. etc.

It seems neurologically impossible to believe something that is in opposition to one's sense of reality.

There is research on doubt... my understanding is that (very simplistically again), if enough information comes into the brain to create significant uncertainty of what is hard wired, there can be alterations in the hard wiring. What I don't think anyone yets knows is how this happens, why some can form new beliefs and others can't, who is more willing to let go of beliefs etc. etc. etc. It is complex.

You may feel you can choose to belief what you wish, but my guess is you can't truly, honestly believe that which goes against your truth/existence/perception of reality.

Now if there is an unknown, that does not interfer with one's sense of reality, people can make up, pretend, guess, or embrace whatever they want.

But I think this is much different than just choosing to embrace whatever idea one wants.

Does that make sense?

As ALWAYS, nice to visit! :-)

~dancer~

[_mentalgymnast]

hi Harmony. It sounds like you are in a state of disharmony. you said: And the whole world once thought the earth was flat... except for those few nutcases who thought it was round.

MG: they weren't nutcases. A good place to start is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth

the examples that TD gave permit the possibility of nutcases being involved. Can you see the difference? <g>

Harmony: Truth is not based on consensus.

MG: if there are enough bright, intelligent, and thoughtful people who would be considered not to be nutcases, then their "truth" demands a look. But yes, truth in and of itself is not based on widespread consensus. Otherwise, everyone would be LDS, right? <g>

Harmony: And prophets have been known to lie.

MG: OK.

Harmony: What is rational about choosing to believe that women are inferior toys that are objects to be passed from man to man or used as rewards for acceptable behavior? that God is a white man? that thousands of people died in a single battle yet not one bone remains? that God was a carpenter, yet no carpenter is acceptable as a leader in his church today? that God wants to spend billions of his dollars on a shopping mall instead of helping his children live healthier longer?

MG: each one of these questions may involve elements of ambiguity and what some would consider to be irrational behavior. What IS rational is to observe that things appear and have appeared throughout recorded history to be, shall we say, a bit messy. Ambiguity and apparent irrational behavior seem to be part and parcel of the human experience on this planet. OTOH, to believe in a higher power and the works and methods of a higher power in the universe do not require one to relinquish one's humanity/imperfectness and/or cease to recognize the flaws of being human in others. We tend towards judging others at times (it happens ad nauseum on these religiously based boards), but our judgements do not entail or demand the necessity of judging or devaluing God's purposes or designs for his children. i.e., a restoration of divine truth and authority...line upon line, precept upon precept...mutation upon mutation. The trick of course is trying to get a firm handle on just what God's purposes and designs are for mankind behind all the "crap" that happens.

The LDS church does a pretty good job of outlining what those purposes and designs are...through a glass darkly.

Elements of evolutionary theory explains alot not only with lifeforms, but church formation also. Both tend towards mutation and messiness at times...but survival of the fittest in regards to the doctrines and policies which we see in the church today (on the whole) is the outcome of many lives endured with sweat and tears.

There are many that fail to realize this, in my opinion. Those that remain sceptics are prone to tunnel vision from my experience. Yes, I'll be told otherwise, and that it's the other way around, but I don't see it that way. Experience, knowledge, wisdom and patience can open up vistas that are unavailable to those that have closed their minds.

Harmony and TD, what ever has happened...happened. What ever is happening now...well, it happens too, duh! This fact/reality does not eradicate the potentiality of a God continuing to work with and trying to provide opportunities for all of his children in obtaining a degree of happiness to which they are capable, and also desirous of obtaining.

Back to the beginning for TD. Belief is a valid choice.

So is disbelief. So disbelieve if you choose.

Regards,
MG

[_mentalgymnast]

Hi TD: you encapsulate all else that you say within this sentence: "My understanding is that we can't believe that which doesn't fit within our experience/reality of our existence."

MG: exactly!!! But we create our own experience/reality as a result of choices that we make or don't make, and the openness we have to new/varied realities that we may not have even perceived/recognized before. Typically, patience and further light and knowledge tend towards changing our outlook and way of seeing "reality". If we run out of patience (because of emotional triggers typically) the result can be a decrease in light and knowledge that may have come if we had continued on and with an open mind and heart.

Basically this is the difference between educated believers and those that have become "died in the wool" disbelievers.

I've been at this process since around 1993. I think that I can speak with some degree and knowledge to the fact that this process is a fact of life. It's only been fairly recently that I've been able to feel a bit more comfortable within the church and providing for the possibility that it is actually a work/creative process of God. I live in a state of plausibility and hope as I've mentioned to you before. I see all the warts and problems, but I've come down (at least for now) on the side of support for the church and its mission and message...rather that climbing down the other side of the fence.

I truly think that I can see where you and others here are coming from...it's just that I've come to see that there are two sides to every coin and that our own experience and reality is limited and/or expanded by that which we choose to do, learn, and experience...with patience and understanding.

Jumping the good ship Mormon is not the only choice to be made when one is "enlightened".

Regards,
MG

[_truth dancer]

Hi MG...

The thing is... I think, in cases like yours (smile) the LDS church (in a sort of unusual way) fits within your preception of reality... you see belief as a choice because the doctrine/teachings/beliefs of the church are possibilities in your mind. It is one thing to pick one of several plausable possibilities, quite another to believe something that is contrary to one's experience of life.

But you (if I read you correctly) do not see the flying speghetti monster as a possibility because it doesn't fit in your experience of the world.

For example, I could choose to believe the dinosaurs became extinct for a variety of reasons because I don't really know and several theories seem equally plausable to me. But I can't make myself believe dinasours never existed on our earth but were part of some planet in another solar system which God used to create ours hence we have their bones.

Does that make sense?

If belief were truly a choice you could believe whatever you wanted to believe. But if you can't believe anything then there must be more than choice going on.

The difference in my opinion, regarding how and why we believe various things has to do more with how we preceive reality and existence, and the subsequent neurology of our brain than anything else.

~dancer~