Comments for About Mormonism http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com Investigating Mormonism from many different angles Sat, 28 Nov 2009 19:43:18 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 Comment on Borderline Mormons and Doubt by nebula0 http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com/2009/11/26/borderline-mormons-and-doubt/#comment-929 nebula0 Sat, 28 Nov 2009 19:43:18 +0000 http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com/?p=280#comment-929 Thank you for your reply Jay. Actually what you said is precisely what I intended in my post- those who have fundamental doubts about Mormonism likely stay Mormon because of social factors and in the process often (though obviously not in your case since you are perfectly aware) rationalize their staying by romanticizing their doubts. That is, the intellectual reasons they give betray the core issue which is usually family. If the family issue were gone, I would bet that many of these doubting intellectuals would be gone without much ado. I argue that's why we see so many of these celebrations of doubt as religiously significant in various ways, rather than entertained as real, persistent clues that perhaps the thing believed in isn't worth being believed in. THat isn't to say though it would be easy for everyone. I think you're right to point out that it isn't easy for everyone to face that something they cherished as true they just can't believe in anymore. Depending on how much you sacrificed for this belief system in terms of service, money, credibility, identity and so forth will probably determine the sting (which is also why some things are easy to let go of, like Santa, while many Christians become atheists talk about hwo difficult it was for them to decide that God doesn't exist after all). Thank you for your reply Jay. Actually what you said is precisely what I intended in my post- those who have fundamental doubts about Mormonism likely stay Mormon because of social factors and in the process often (though obviously not in your case since you are perfectly aware) rationalize their staying by romanticizing their doubts. That is, the intellectual reasons they give betray the core issue which is usually family. If the family issue were gone, I would bet that many of these doubting intellectuals would be gone without much ado. I argue that’s why we see so many of these celebrations of doubt as religiously significant in various ways, rather than entertained as real, persistent clues that perhaps the thing believed in isn’t worth being believed in.

THat isn’t to say though it would be easy for everyone. I think you’re right to point out that it isn’t easy for everyone to face that something they cherished as true they just can’t believe in anymore. Depending on how much you sacrificed for this belief system in terms of service, money, credibility, identity and so forth will probably determine the sting (which is also why some things are easy to let go of, like Santa, while many Christians become atheists talk about hwo difficult it was for them to decide that God doesn’t exist after all).

]]> Comment on Borderline Mormons and Doubt by Jay http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com/2009/11/26/borderline-mormons-and-doubt/#comment-928 Jay Fri, 27 Nov 2009 16:08:04 +0000 http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com/?p=280#comment-928 While I agree somewhat, as someone that has gone through the "dark night of the soul" I can say it has more to do with sadness of letting something you loved go than fear of family. Personally, family is the reason I stay Mormon, but our difference in belief was only a minor part of what filled me with sadness as I found out disturbing aspects of LDS Church history. While I agree somewhat, as someone that has gone through the “dark night of the soul” I can say it has more to do with sadness of letting something you loved go than fear of family. Personally, family is the reason I stay Mormon, but our difference in belief was only a minor part of what filled me with sadness as I found out disturbing aspects of LDS Church history.

]]> Comment on Heavenly Father and Theodicy by Anonymous http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com/2009/10/30/heavenly-father-and-theodicy/#comment-927 Anonymous Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:23:27 +0000 http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com/?p=276#comment-927 how so? I don't think so. You'd need to demonstrate an issue of contradiction inherent in the concept itself for it to be an issue of logic. how so? I don’t think so. You’d need to demonstrate an issue of contradiction inherent in the concept itself for it to be an issue of logic.

]]> Comment on Heavenly Father and Theodicy by Seth R. http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com/2009/10/30/heavenly-father-and-theodicy/#comment-926 Seth R. Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:16:09 +0000 http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com/?p=276#comment-926 Well, I'd argue that it's logical too. At least, I thought so... Well, I’d argue that it’s logical too. At least, I thought so…

]]> Comment on Heavenly Father and Theodicy by nebula0 http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com/2009/10/30/heavenly-father-and-theodicy/#comment-925 nebula0 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 05:52:29 +0000 http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com/?p=276#comment-925 Right-- you're making an empirical declaration, how things happen to be, rather than an assertion about logical necessity. That's all that I meant. Those are two very different issues. Right– you’re making an empirical declaration, how things happen to be, rather than an assertion about logical necessity. That’s all that I meant. Those are two very different issues.

]]> Comment on Heavenly Father and Theodicy by Seth R. http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com/2009/10/30/heavenly-father-and-theodicy/#comment-924 Seth R. Wed, 18 Nov 2009 05:30:06 +0000 http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com/?p=276#comment-924 Mormonism never states that God CAN'T control us like puppets. It merely says he does not - since doing so would mean you didn't have a loving relationship anymore. In fact, you wouldn't even have a relationship at all anymore. Mormonism never states that God CAN’T control us like puppets.

It merely says he does not – since doing so would mean you didn’t have a loving relationship anymore.

In fact, you wouldn’t even have a relationship at all anymore.

]]> Comment on Heavenly Father and Theodicy by nebula0 http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com/2009/10/30/heavenly-father-and-theodicy/#comment-923 nebula0 Tue, 17 Nov 2009 21:48:31 +0000 http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com/?p=276#comment-923 that's interesting seth... because I'm not talking about logical limits but rather empirical ones. That Heavenly Father is relatively infinite rather than absolutely so is not a matter of logical constraint but rather an empirical claim. If it were an issue of logic, you would have to argue that absolute infinitude is an inherently absurd concept. It is within our ability to think of God controlling us like puppets- that is not a logical absurdity as demanding that God create a square circle is. that’s interesting seth… because I’m not talking about logical limits but rather empirical ones. That Heavenly Father is relatively infinite rather than absolutely so is not a matter of logical constraint but rather an empirical claim. If it were an issue of logic, you would have to argue that absolute infinitude is an inherently absurd concept. It is within our ability to think of God controlling us like puppets- that is not a logical absurdity as demanding that God create a square circle is.

]]> Comment on Heavenly Father and Theodicy by Seth R. http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com/2009/10/30/heavenly-father-and-theodicy/#comment-922 Seth R. Mon, 16 Nov 2009 04:19:19 +0000 http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com/?p=276#comment-922 For me, the limits are not really a problem Jack. In fact, they aren't even really limits. They're just reality. God cannot make a rock so big he can't lift it. And God cannot have truly loving relationships with beings who are not free to reject him. That's just the way things are. It doesn't imply any sort of "limit" on God. Unless you consider logic to be a limit. For me, the limits are not really a problem Jack.

In fact, they aren’t even really limits. They’re just reality.

God cannot make a rock so big he can’t lift it.

And God cannot have truly loving relationships with beings who are not free to reject him.

That’s just the way things are. It doesn’t imply any sort of “limit” on God. Unless you consider logic to be a limit.

]]> Comment on Models for Conversation by Seth R. http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com/2009/11/01/models-for-conversation/#comment-921 Seth R. Fri, 13 Nov 2009 07:09:37 +0000 http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com/?p=278#comment-921 I've struggled with this notion a lot. I wrote down some of my conclusions here: http://www.patheos.com/Resources/Additional-Resources/Interfaith-Dialogue-as-a-Struggle-for-Identity.html I’ve struggled with this notion a lot. I wrote down some of my conclusions here:

http://www.patheos.com/Resources/Additional-Resources/Interfaith-Dialogue-as-a-Struggle-for-Identity.html

]]> Comment on Some Recent Thoughts about Mormonism by shematwater http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com/2009/10/28/some-recent-thoughts-about-mormonism/#comment-920 shematwater Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:10:51 +0000 http://investigatemormonism.wordpress.com/?p=269#comment-920 I know what you mean. I have been in some discussions where me and the other person were actually saying the same thing, so they altered their belief so as to be in disagreement, as they just couldn't agree with a Mormon. Of course I was also in a discussion once on the meaning of a verse in the Bible. I actually scared some of the Non-Mormons with my ability to objectively analyse the passage and show the actual meaning without siding with either the LDS or the rest of Christians. In general I do not enter these discussions to convert or even to persuade, but to have fun. Frequently I feel the need to correct people when they give false information about the church, but I am also willing to be corrected if I am wrong. I know what you mean. I have been in some discussions where me and the other person were actually saying the same thing, so they altered their belief so as to be in disagreement, as they just couldn’t agree with a Mormon.

Of course I was also in a discussion once on the meaning of a verse in the Bible. I actually scared some of the Non-Mormons with my ability to objectively analyse the passage and show the actual meaning without siding with either the LDS or the rest of Christians.

In general I do not enter these discussions to convert or even to persuade, but to have fun. Frequently I feel the need to correct people when they give false information about the church, but I am also willing to be corrected if I am wrong.

]]>