What would it take to shake my faith?

[Moksha]

My own response to historical or other types of substantial evidence is to adjust those aspects of my

faith to accommodate a more accurate view of the truth. That has worked for me so far. Making a

leap of faith even in the absence of evidence, not against evidence, is a good thing.

:)

[Vort]

If God stood before me and said, "I do not exist", that might give me cause for pause.

[Traveler]

I stated previously that I would easely set aside what I believe for something better. It appears that statement was unnoticed.

Let me ask this question in another way that reflects my thinking.

What would you sacrifice or give up to know more truth (than what you currently possess or are a part of) about G-d and his kingdom that will come to earth when his Son returns?

It is my impression that many (most or all???) posters would go out of their way to prevent any such enlightment and nothing what-so-ever to pursue it.

The Traveler

[Guest Believer_1829]

Even an angelic visit would not disturb me much...

- "Though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a different gospel then what we have preached unto you..."

- An anti-Christ figure in the Book of Mormon claimed the reason that he fought against God is because an angel had told him they were all teaching wrong and that there was no God.

Edited August 14, 2009 by Believer_1829

[Danite]

Well my faith is so much a part of who I am and how I see the world and responed to it.That the idea of it being shaken scares me a great deal. I have never really doubted the turth I know. I have doubted my abilty to true to the faith I have. and I've had enough experiences in spirtual matters that not trusting in god is something I can't see my self doing.

[prisonchaplain]

PC, you wimp!

I really don't think if "they" conclusively confirmed that they found Jesus' body would I believe it. There are some things in this world that is known fact, but I'm not sure how it fits into God's Gospel plan--so I consider that "they" said it is fact, not necessarily God said it was fact. Perhaps that's naive and non-critical thinking, but it works for me.

Trust me, I thought of that. They could lie. But, yeah it would "shake" my faith. Ultimately, it would either prove that Christianity got Jesus wrong, or that we truly were in the End Times, and a Great Deception had come.

[Misshalfway]

I used to be the one that said "nothing can shake my faith." And then something did shake my faith to the very core. So, I don't say that anymore. I guard my faith now and treasure it more than I did before. Strangely, I trust it more than I did before. Ha! So perhaps there is value in having all that you think you know turned on its ear for a time.

I also wanted to say that having my faith shaken in the LDS way is one thing. Being converted by the experience to another church, now that is a horse of a different color. I think perhaps if God gave me more light and knowledge to direct me to another church, then I am not sure that would shake my faith, but rather bolster it. Albeit a test to see if I had the faith to follow and take the consequences of doing so.

[prisonchaplain]

I stated previously that I would easely set aside what I believe for something better. It appears that statement was unnoticed.

Let me ask this question in another way that reflects my thinking.

What would you sacrifice or give up to know more truth (than what you currently possess or are a part of) about G-d and his kingdom that will come to earth when his Son returns?

It is my impression that many (most or all???) posters would go out of their way to prevent any such enlightment and nothing what-so-ever to pursue it.

The Traveler

Here's an observation: Religion is mostly nuetral. Great people use religious teaching and passion for great good. Evil people can turn people towards evil, using the same teaching and passion. Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, and even LDS have done great good and evil in the name of their religion. (Don't read too much into that...I speak in generalities). So, if a religion produced an overall signficantly greater amount of godliness, holiness, and love in its people than mine, yeah, that would definitely cause me to pause. But, I'm not sure any religion can claim superiority, over the long-haul, in this area...not by objective measures.

[Guest]

I stated previously that I would easely set aside what I believe for something better. It appears that statement was unnoticed.

Let me ask this question in another way that reflects my thinking.

What would you sacrifice or give up to know more truth (than what you currently possess or are a part of) about G-d and his kingdom that will come to earth when his Son returns?

It is my impression that many (most or all???) posters would go out of their way to prevent any such enlightment and nothing what-so-ever to pursue it.

The Traveler

My becoming LDS is a good sample for this thread.

I was devout Catholic before becoming LDS. Very. Devout. Faith very strong. I was so confident in my faith that I married an LDS guy with a sure knowledge that he will become Catholic.

To me, the Roman Catholic church has been the church headed by Peter.. etc. etc... therefore, any other church is just a "spin off" and has left the truth and authority behind. I see the misdeeds of the Catholic church as misdeeds by members of the Church and not the Church itself. And so on and so on..

My parents were very upset when I decided to marry my husband. So upset we had to elope. I remembered my last confrontation with my mother before I got the silent treatment... I told her, I am Catholic, I was born Catholic, I will die Catholic. That was how firm my faith was in the Catholic church.

So, what shook that faith?

Well, of course, the biggest discord between Catholics and LDS is the apostasy. If apostasy never happened, then the Catholic church is true. If apostasy happened then LDS church is true. There can only be 2 possibilities for the authority to be handed down - unless you do not believe in authority being necessary which, I do not accept (sorry PC, hope you don't take this as insolent). Heavenly beings showing themselves to JS was not a problem for me. I mean, what's the difference between that and the Virgin Mary appearing to the children of Fatima?

Anyway, somebody gave me the book The Great Apostasy. I read the first paragraph, put it down. Couldn't read any more. A few more times, I tried it again, couldn't read past the first page. A few years pass by, same thing... first page and then no more. Finally one summer Saturday, because of some other incidences along the way, I fasted, prayed, and read the book on the beach (my favorite spot in the universe). Would you believe that I read the book from cover to cover on that beach non-stop! I can only say that the spirit must have had a hand in it. And the answer was loud in my ears. The apostasy is true. Things from my past - my Catholic teachings, my country's history, things from experience - they all started popping out in my head to support the truth.

Was that a pivotal moment? Not yet. My faith was still in the Catholic church.

It wasn't until the following spring, when I was attending the Good Friday Catholic service that was the pivotal point. I was in line to kiss the feet of the wooden statue of Jesus nailed to the cross. I have done this every year since I can remember. It is a Catholic tradition. I was filled with the spirit of the Lenten season. I reached the cross that the priest was holding for everybody to kiss and I couldn't bring myself to kiss it. My mind was loud in my ears saying, This is not right. This is not true. I was holding up the line. I couldn't move away, yet I couldn't kiss the cross either. The priest nudged me and I fled out of the church. The LDS church was right next-door - just across the parking space. My husband was there attending an Easter Cantata. I ran crying to my husband and I sat right next to him listening to the Ward choir singing easter songs. And would you believe it, I felt so at peace.

But even then, I still didn't gain faith in LDS. Although I couldn't bring myself to attend a Catholic service for a long time. I was, at that moment, lost. It took me until June (it's another long story of how this came about) to finally say - just blurted out of the blue to a missionary - I want to be baptized. Unplanned, unthought-out... just spontaneous. I got baptized 2 weeks later. And here I am.

So, after reading this little novella... what is my answer to PC's question... what did it take to shake my faith in Catholicism? I have to say, my eyes being opened. Because the truth has always been there. In my life, all along. I just needed to open my eyes to see it.

I am grateful to the Catholic church. I am grateful for my parents teachings. I am grateful for the foundation it gave me. I love Catholics. I love the Catholic church. It was a big part of my journey. And I am grateful to Joseph Smith - for the restoration. I am grateful to the missionaries. I am grateful to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I am especially grateful to my husband for giving me room to grow - to step back and let me find the path on my own. I know I still have much to learn.

And this is my testimony - although not complete as it would take an entire book to write all of it - and I say these things in the name of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior.

[Gatorman]

Hmmm, I am not sure I can answer the question. I believed in the church before I knew it existed. I believed in the answers before I had the questions. I was LDS before I knew what that meant. It appears to me that my faith is in fact a part of me.

[Traveler]

My becoming LDS is a good sample for this thread.

I was devout Catholic before becoming LDS. Very. Devout. Faith very strong. I was so confident in my faith that I married an LDS guy with a sure knowledge that he will become Catholic.

To me, the Roman Catholic church has been the church headed by Peter.. etc. etc... therefore, any other church is just a "spin off" and has left the truth and authority behind. I see the misdeeds of the Catholic church as misdeeds by members of the Church and not the Church itself. And so on and so on..

My parents were very upset when I decided to marry my husband. So upset we had to elope. I remembered my last confrontation with my mother before I got the silent treatment... I told her, I am Catholic, I was born Catholic, I will die Catholic. That was how firm my faith was in the Catholic church.

So, what shook that faith?

Well, of course, the biggest discord between Catholics and LDS is the apostasy. If apostasy never happened, then the Catholic church is true. If apostasy happened then LDS church is true. There can only be 2 possibilities for the authority to be handed down - unless you do not believe in authority being necessary which, I do not accept (sorry PC, hope you don't take this as insolent). Heavenly beings showing themselves to JS was not a problem for me. I mean, what's the difference between that and the Virgin Mary appearing to the children of Fatima?

Anyway, somebody gave me the book The Great Apostasy. I read the first paragraph, put it down. Couldn't read any more. A few more times, I tried it again, couldn't read past the first page. A few years pass by, same thing... first page and then no more. Finally one summer Saturday, because of some other incidences along the way, I fasted, prayed, and read the book on the beach (my favorite spot in the universe). Would you believe that I read the book from cover to cover on that beach non-stop! I can only say that the spirit must have had a hand in it. And the answer was loud in my ears. The apostasy is true. Things from my past - my Catholic teachings, my country's history, things from experience - they all started popping out in my head to support the truth.

Was that a pivotal moment? Not yet. My faith was still in the Catholic church.

It wasn't until the following spring, when I was attending the Good Friday Catholic service that was the pivotal point. I was in line to kiss the feet of the wooden statue of Jesus nailed to the cross. I have done this every year since I can remember. It is a Catholic tradition. I was filled with the spirit of the Lenten season. I reached the cross that the priest was holding for everybody to kiss and I couldn't bring myself to kiss it. My mind was loud in my ears saying, This is not right. This is not true. I was holding up the line. I couldn't move away, yet I couldn't kiss the cross either. The priest nudged me and I fled out of the church. The LDS church was right next-door - just across the parking space. My husband was there attending an Easter Cantata. I ran crying to my husband and I sat right next to him listening to the Ward choir singing easter songs. And would you believe it, I felt so at peace.

But even then, I still didn't gain faith in LDS. Although I couldn't bring myself to attend a Catholic service for a long time. I was, at that moment, lost. It took me until June (it's another long story of how this came about) to finally say - just blurted out of the blue to a missionary - I want to be baptized. Unplanned, unthought-out... just spontaneous. I got baptized 2 weeks later. And here I am.

So, after reading this little novella... what is my answer to PC's question... what did it take to shake my faith in Catholicism? I have to say, my eyes being opened. Because the truth has always been there. In my life, all along. I just needed to open my eyes to see it.

I am grateful to the Catholic church. I am grateful for my parents teachings. I am grateful for the foundation it gave me. I love Catholics. I love the Catholic church. It was a big part of my journey. And I am grateful to Joseph Smith - for the restoration. I am grateful to the missionaries. I am grateful to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I am especially grateful to my husband for giving me room to grow - to step back and let me find the path on my own. I know I still have much to learn.

And this is my testimony - although not complete as it would take an entire book to write all of it - and I say these things in the name of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior.

Anatess: You and I may have tangled in discussing points of doctrine and we may likely tangle again but I want you to know that what you have done makes you my hero. I believe that only those that are willing to sacrifice EVERYTHING (Jesus said that if someone love something more than him they are not worthy of him) in the quest (journey) for truth shall find it.

I was born LDS – and I also found it even though I did not go astray to do so. My journey is not to find a religion or even a so called faith. I would serve with the best and brightest and to date the best and brightest I have found is the example of the man Jesus the Christ who is also the Son of G-d. My quest is not a doctrine to follow but an example. I also thank the many LDS I have met traveling the world for being an example of the power of the restoration. Not as individuals or comparing individuals against individuals but as a community and a covenant people of the house hold of G-d.

A side note – one of the best and brightest includes a young man I met on my mission that at the time was so unworthy of things in my mind – I did not want to teach him or help him. He struggled with such vile things I thought he had lost what it meant to be a child of G-d. Others were more acceptable to the spirit than I shepherded him and I saw a miracle take place as this young man turned from clutches of an addiction to a saint of great example. And so I learned that my eyes do not always see the best and brightest – that I must rely on eyes other than my own.

I am not content – I have a sincere desire to do better. Not for my profit but for the “better good”.

The Traveler

[Vort]

When I read a post like anatess', I am ashamed and embarrassed for the times I was impatient with or overly critical of others. I wish I could remember that every time I post (or say) anything.

[Guest missingsomething]

The stronger you are on the progression of faith in the gospel.... the more it will take to shake your faith.

We should not cast stones at those whos faith is shaken by being offended... their faith and testimony just has not matured as ours has. And in truth, its attitudes and ideas like that which take a tender testimony that is growing (like a new seedling) and poisons it instead of feeding it and being gentle to nurture it.

I always worry about the person who says their faith is strong enough not to be shaken by this or that. To me, that is an open invitation to satan. I know I weak and must work to keep my testimony fed and growing....so when that circumstance happens - I am prepared to shake it off and not let it shake me lose.

[Snow]

If we are talking about LDS faith, then I think I've seen people lose faith over insults by other members. Granted, some are grave indeed (molestation, swindling, etc), but ultimately it is the actions of a human that made them question the veracity of LDS doctrine.

I don't think so. Think about it a moment. That would mean that someone's "fatih" is built upon the foundation of not being insulted. Take away the foundation (not being insulted) and the faith crumbles.

Of course, that is not faith. That would more appropriately be that the person is socially converted and take away the social community and their social conversion crumbles. That's unfortunate perhaps but it's not a matter of faith.

I have thought of this many times, I really think for me to question the LDS faith, it would have to be something on the level that Snow proposed. Even then, it would have to be something so heinous (not the exact situation Snow provides, but more along the lines of abuse of individuals). I honestly don't care if the BoM is proven to be "false." I have received a witness and I cannot deny that it was from the Spirit. But if the whole 1st Pres and Quorum of the 12 begin to promote molestation of children, then I would be shaken indeed.

Think about that too. We hold that the BoM foundational to our faith. We also hold that righteous leader who do not lead us astray are foundational to our faith. If those things were "PROVED" to not be what we trusted were true, then any witness we have received to the contrary must logically have been false.

We are, however, so convinced that we are not wrong, that we cannot truly grasp being proved wrong, but logically, it could be possible.

[Snow]

given the time that has elapsed since the major events of Christianity, I have a hard time imagining a scenario where evidence could be produced that was so convincing that I'd give up my faith. It's a bit of a cop out, but it was so long ago it could be extremely difficult to disprove. On the other hand, it was so long ago it's also nigh impossible to prove.

There are millions of scenarios, however, that I do know of that could shake my faith. For instance, getting to casual in my language and letting vulgarities creep in. And then perhaps the occasional profanity. Soon I find myself having to guard my tongue in church, which makes me uncomfortable there. Rather than give up my habit I avoid the situations where I have to watch my mouth...boom, I've given up my faith.

Just as it was doing such a small thing that healed King Namaan, it's going to be the small things that destroy us.

Ah-hah - now you bring up a fascinating point. The reputed historical aspects of Christianity (virgin birth, miracles, resurrection, etc) are so lost in the mists of history that at this point, Christianity - generally - cannot be proved. It remains a matter of faith.

However, because of the unique claims of the LDS Church, there is the potential for substantial proof of validity. If the historicity of the BoM or the BoA could be substantially proved, that would substantially substantiate that the Church's claims were true or at least that some of the claims were true.

[beefche]

I don't think so. Think about it a moment. That would mean that someone's "fatih" is built upon the foundation of not being insulted. Take away the foundation (not being insulted) and the faith crumbles.

Of course, that is not faith. That would more appropriately be that the person is socially converted and take away the social community and their social conversion crumbles. That's unfortunate perhaps but it's not a matter of faith.

I agree with you, Snow, on this point. Whatever belief they had in any doctrine was overshadowed by a faith in the social aspect.

Think about that too. We hold that the BoM foundational to our faith. We also hold that righteous leader who do not lead us astray are foundational to our faith. If those things were "PROVED" to not be what we trusted were true, then any witness we have received to the contrary must logically have been false.

We are, however, so convinced that we are not wrong, that we cannot truly grasp being proved wrong, but logically, it could be possible.

On this, I don't agree. I wasn't a member and too young to pay attention, but the whole Mark Hofman events show that there are some fantastically talented people out there that can fool experts. Furthermore, can any real "proof" be had or not regarding the BoM since the original plates no longer exist (at least not in this realm). Even if there was evidence documenting that JS made the story up, how would we know it is conclusive evidence? Perhaps, the evidence merely shows that JS was writing a novel simultaneously with translating the BoM.

Gee whiz, Snow. Stop with making me try to think like a scientist or even a real thinker.

[beefche]

Ah-hah - now you bring up a fascinating point. The reputed historical aspects of Christianity (virgin birth, miracles, resurrection, etc) are so lost in the mists of history that at this point, Christianity - generally - cannot be proved. It remains a matter of faith.

However, because of the unique claims of the LDS Church, there is the potential for substantial proof of validity. If the historicity of the BoM or the BoA could be substantially proved, that would substantially substantiate that the Church's claims were true or at least that some of the claims were true.

Then what would be the point of faith? If things could be proven then Heavenly Father would be a liar. Afterall, He sent us here to learn by faith and if we know something, then we no longer have faith.

[Snow]

I agree with you, Snow, on this point. Whatever belief they had in any doctrine was overshadowed by a faith in the social aspect.

On this, I don't agree. I wasn't a member and too young to pay attention, but the whole Mark Hofman events show that there are some fantastically talented people out there that can fool experts. Furthermore, can any real "proof" be had or not regarding the BoM since the original plates no longer exist (at least not in this realm). Even if there was evidence documenting that JS made the story up, how would we know it is conclusive evidence? Perhaps, the evidence merely shows that JS was writing a novel simultaneously with translating the BoM.

Gee whiz, Snow. Stop with making me try to think like a scientist or even a real thinker.

Mark Hoffman was not our prophet of member of the 12 so that's a separate issue.

I'm not arguing if there was merely a suggestion that fraud (fraud in the authorship of the BoM) was committed or a suggesting that the Brethren were deliberately covering it up and leading the saints astray... the question revolves around proof of such - hypothetically of course.

[Snow]

Then what would be the point of faith? If things could be proven then Heavenly Father would be a liar. Afterall, He sent us here to learn by faith and if we know something, then we no longer have faith.

Sure - I agree but we have lots of people here on this forum who claim that they don't merely have faith (a belief) but rather they have absolute and certain knowledge. What's the point of faith for those people if they have pure knowledge?

Possible answers:

1. They don't really have pure knowledge. They merely have faith and are really really convinced, or

2. They had to exercise faith first before they arrived at pure knowledge.

I discount the 2nd option for the vast majority of people. Some may actually and truly "know" but if so, not many... if at all.

[beefche]

Mark Hoffman was not our prophet of member of the 12 so that's a separate issue.

I'm not arguing if there was merely a suggestion that fraud (fraud in the authorship of the BoM) was committed or a suggesting that the Brethren were deliberately covering it up and leading the saints astray... the question revolves around proof of such - hypothetically of course.

No, I know Mark wasn't a GA or anything. My point was that he fooled a lot of people with his "proof." Including GAs. So, what kind of proof are you talking about?

[Snow]

No, I know Mark wasn't a GA or anything. My point was that he fooled a lot of people with his "proof." Including GAs. So, what kind of proof are you talking about?

It's a theoretical issue. I don't think at this point, any proof could be produced. There is very little new under the Mormon history sun anymore.

What's the last bombshell we had? Polyandry?

[beefche]

Sure - I agree but we have lots of people here on this forum who claim that they don't merely have faith (a belief) but rather they have absolute and certain knowledge. What's the point of faith for those people if they have pure knowledge?

Possible answers:

1. They don't really have pure knowledge. They merely have faith and are really really convinced, or

2. They had to exercise faith first before they arrived at pure knowledge.

I discount the 2nd option for the vast majority of people. Some may actually and truly "know" but if so, not many... if at all.

You know, you bring up a good point. I know you have issues with people who use the word "know" and mean "belief." I'm one of those people. I've had spiritual experiences that have completely and utterly convinced me of the truth of the BoM, JS, and the LDS church. These experiences are so powerful that I truly believe I know (ironic, isn't it?). So, typically when I testify of these truths, I use the word "know."

Of course, I think of the great lesson on faith by Alma. In Alma 32 we read:

19 And now, how much more cursed is he that knoweth the will of God and doeth it not, than he that only believeth, or only hath cause to believe, and falleth into transgression?

How does this help us who believe or know? If I believe in the will of God, then I'm only transgressing...which is lesser than sinning. Yet if I know, then I'm more cursed. Does this mean that none of us (except those who actually do know) actually sin?

And continuing, Alma teaches about faith vs. knowledge (he compares the word of God to a seed and nurturing that seed):

34 And now, behold, is your knowledge perfect? Yea, your knowledge is perfect in that thing, and your faith is dormant; and this because you know, for ye know that the word hath swelled your souls, and ye also know that it hath sprouted up, that your understanding doth begin to be enlightened, and your mind doth begin to expand.

35 O then, is not this real? I say unto you, Yea, because it is light; and whatsoever is light, is good, because it is discernible, therefore ye must know that it is good; and now behold, after ye have tasted this light is your knowledge perfect?

Here, Alma clearly teaches that when you nourish the word of God and see the goodness and the understanding it brings to you that you will know it. It may not be a perfect knowledge, but it is knowledge. But that can only be gained by work on our part, faith on our part, and the Spirit on God's part.

I don't think most people "know" but rather "believe" as you pointed out. But, unlike you, I do believe that one can have knowledge without seeing--i.e. I can know Jesus is real although I've not personally seen Him.

[Snow]

I don't think most people "know" but rather "believe" as you pointed out. But, unlike you, I do believe that one can have knowledge without seeing--i.e. I can know Jesus is real although I've not personally seen Him.

I wouldn't have any knowledge of whether or not that was accurate (though I respect your view) but I'd point out that there are likely a billion Muslims that also know that think the Allah of the Koran is a matter of knowledge, not faith.

Can you say why your view is any more valid than theirs?

[beefche]

I wouldn't have any knowledge of whether or not that was accurate (though I respect your view) but I'd point out that there are likely a billion Muslims that also know that think the Allah of the Koran is a matter of knowledge, not faith.

Can you say why your view is any more valid than theirs?

Nope.

[MarginOfError]

Ah-hah - now you bring up a fascinating point. The reputed historical aspects of Christianity (virgin birth, miracles, resurrection, etc) are so lost in the mists of history that at this point, Christianity - generally - cannot be proved. It remains a matter of faith.

However, because of the unique claims of the LDS Church, there is the potential for substantial proof of validity. If the historicity of the BoM or the BoA could be substantially proved, that would substantially substantiate that the Church's claims were true or at least that some of the claims were true.

What does Bank of America have to do with any of this?