Hard Questions Regarding The Church.

[Guest Yediyd]

I have prayed, and I have come to the conclusion that the mormons are wrong. God as burned in my heart telling me to not go back to the church.

If you truly believe this, then why are you here? This is primarily an LDS site, If you already have your answer, why come here in search of it?

There are many examples of G-d's men making foolish decisions, yet STILL being men of G-d. Baalim and his talking donkey, David and bathsheba, Jonah and the people of Ninivah, Elijah under the juniper tree, Peter denies Jesus, Noah gets drunk, Abraham lies about his wife/sister, Moses struck the rock twice in anger and it cost him the promised land, Sampson and delialah, Soloman gets drawn into idol worship because of his many wives and concubines...

You ever hear the old saying...Sampson was a he-man with a she-weakness, Peter was the man with the foot shaped mouth...

These were men of G-d with human falisees (yeah, I know...I su** at spelling)

Why do you supose that JS or any of the other prophets of this day were any less or more human than these men in the Bible?

[Guest Emma Hale Smith]

<div class='quotemain'>

...snip for brevity...

There are so many things that Joseph Smith taught, that were supposed to be "eternal and unchanging", however the church has changed a number of things/doctorines. This completely baffles me. If this was Gods one and only true church, why have things been changed? Wouldn't God have done things right in the beginning, he is perfect right? Wouldn't make mistakes right?

The temple ceremonies have changed, the curse of Cain has changed, the whole book of Abraham has been proven to be false.

I don't get it. Please help me. I've prayed and prayed and prayed, and nothing.......

Are we to assume that the examples you cite above are examples of those things you mention that are supposed to be "eternal and unchanging?" I find none of these things you mention to be "hard questions" and I must agree with someone here that this post is certainly suspect at best, however, for entertainment and the other readers I will respond.

The Temple Ceremonies. One of the favorite points of attack by the Antis. Why? Because they know the LDS will NOT go into detail in their efforts to show the Anti false, therefore, most false information put out is not shown in its corrected form. You never having received your endowments do not know from first hand personal experience what changes have been made and to what extent. You do not know if significance or meaning has changed and therefore must rely on the anti's for your information since your Bishop or any other member will not discuss these things with you.

For obvious reasons I will not go into specifics regarding the temple ceremonies, however, does change in presentation change the significance and meaning of the ceremonies? I could reinvent the wheel but I won't bother, as my time is limited. In reference to changes in the temple ceremonies I recommend the following article titled "Can Temple Ceremonies Change," by Michael R. Ash. http://www.fairlds.org/FAIR_Brochures/Can_...nies_Change.pdf

In the Anti's quest to prove the church false they attempt to prove the church racist based on this "curse of Cain," misleading others into believing this to be an LDS creation. Whether done in ignorance or intentional lies I do not know. It's probably a combination of both.

The curse of cain theory was not original, nor invented by the LDS. This was around much longer than the LDS faith and was widely believed by Christians worldwide. Does the change in this belief make the Baptists, Methodists, Evangelicals, Catholics, etc false as well? Or is it possibly a man made justification for slavery, discrimination, etc created by man that carried on through out generations by tradition? Here is a wonderful website dedicated to the Black members of the LDS church and it has an incredible detailed history of blacks in the LDS church as well as that of other religions. It's a must read for anyone truly interested. www.blacklds.org

Here is an interesting exert from the site:

Historical Ignorance, or Race-baiting?

Now let us look at McKeever and Johnson's stumbling attempt to pass off centuries of Christian belief in a "curse" as being a uniquely Mormon invention. They ask, "If the Mormon God has removed the curse that was once on the black race, why has he not also removed the mark?"22 Again, let me give McKeever and Johnson a quick spin around the widely available literature on the origins of this unfortunate concept:

This interpretation of Noah's curse was no southern invention; indeed, it had been in circulation long before the discovery of America. Even so, it proved especially useful to white masters of the South because they had been put on the defensive by the powerful emancipationist movement.23

The story of Noah's Curse was so ingrained into the orthodox Protestant mind that it was sometimes invoked far from the pulpit. Speaking before the Mississippi Democratic State Convention in 1859, none other than Jefferson Davis defended chattel slavery and the foreign slave trade by alluding to the "importation of the race of Ham" as a fulfillment of its destiny to be "servant of servants."24

Once again, the reader is left to decide whether McKeever and Johnson are completely ignorant of the history of race theory, anthropology, and the centuries-old Christian use of the Bible to justify slavery or if they are simply race-baiting. One is truly forced to ponder this as they selectively use quotes and remove portions that may reflect positively on Mormons. They turn to such sources as little-known "Mormon writers" instead of using authoritative sources that the LDS recognize as accurately representing their beliefs. They relentlessly refuse to deal with modern Church practice and teachings that are well attested to by living leaders, preferring instead to use dated and out-of-context quotes that obviously clash with our modern social sensibilities.

Thus, McKeever and Johnson's attempt to use Brigham Young's racist-sounding but unfortunately typical nineteenth-century verbiage as an indictment against the modern Church brings up the question of their intellectual integrity. We have learned from sad experience that when anti-Mormon writers use ellipses, it is most likely not because the information is irrelevant but because there is something which must be removed to keep the picture uniformly bleak and, well, titillating. Three examples of McKeever and Johnson's less than forthright methodology will suffice. The missing portions are reinstated in italics for the reader in the first example:

You may inquire of the intelligent of the world whether they can tell why the aborigines of this country are dark, loathsome, ignorant, and sunken into the depths of degradation; and they cannot tell. I can tell you in a few words: They are the seed of Joseph, and belong to the household of God; and he will afflict them in this world, and save every one of them hereafter, even though they previously go into hell. When the Lord has a people, he makes covenants with them and gives unto them promises: then, if they transgress his law, change his ordinances, and break the covenants he has made with them, he will put a mark upon them, as in the case of the Lamanites and other portions of the house of Israel; but by-and-by they will become a white and delightsome people.25

Why is this missing sentence so important that it had to be removed by McKeever and Johnson? This was said in an era in which there was active debate in the scientific and Christian community as to whether all races came from a common ancestor, an argument that was ultimately settled by Darwinism. This sentence leaps out as a declaration that Native Americans are not just descended from Adam and Eve--they are from the favored seed of Joseph.

The second example of the intellectual dishonesty of this book is demonstrated by the next variation of their "find the quote" shell game as they leave out a portion of a sermon that again stands out favorably from the Christian practice of the day. McKeever and Johnson give the following portion of one of Brigham's fiery sermons condemning politicians. They offer the reader no background from which they can understand the rhetoric from the leader of a persecuted group watching their security threatened one more time when they are put in the middle of pro-slavery supporters and abolitionists:

Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so.26

Here is the portion of the sermon that McKeever and Johnson neglect to show the reader, however:

If the Government of the United States, in Congress assembled, had the right to pass an anti-polygamy bill, they had also the right to pass a law that slaves should not be abused as they have been; they had also a right to make a law that negroes should be used like human beings, and not worse than dumb brutes. For their abuse of that race, the whites will be cursed, unless they repent.27

Compare this to the views of the founder of American evangelicalism, George Whitefield, who "urged kinder treatment of slaves, but noted that cruelty can have the positive effect of heightening 'the sense of their natural misery,' thereby increasing receptivity to the Christian message."28 Or the stories of "Christian slaveholders, including clergymen, 'brutalizing their slaves' which 'abound in the narratives of former slaves.'"29

A third egregious example of McKeever and Johnson's persistence in misrepresentation is a quote from Joseph Smith. They only tell the reader of this portion: "Had I anything to do with the negro, I would confine them by strict law to their own species and put them on a national equalization."30 Yet, Joseph Smith had preceded this remark by saying:

They came into the world slaves, mentally and physically. Change their situation with the whites, and they would be like them. They have souls, and are subjects of salvation. Go into Cincinnati or any city, and find an educated negro, who rides in his carriage, and you will see a man who has risen by the powers of his own mind to his exalted state of respectability. The slaves in Washington are more refined than many in high places, and the black boys will take the shine off many of those they brush and wait on.31

If McKeever and Johnson are seeking to truly inform and educate the reader concerning Mormonism, why would they not want to disclose this part of Joseph's thinking? In fact, why would they not want to elaborate on Joseph's revolutionary solution for abolishing slavery? Instead of commenting on the revulsion of Mormon leaders towards the widely accepted standard of abuse and cruelty, they choose only to make known the rather common thinking of the day that demanded races remain separate.

http://blacklds.org/mormon/priesthood.html

As for the "whole Book of Abraham thing being proven false" I anxiously await your factual evidence of this, for to my knowledge this is not the case. Though a strong circumstantial case can be made - there is no factual supporting evidence.

When making posts such as yours it is in your best interest, and the interest of the readers for you to cite your reasoning for these claims beginning with where you get the idea that these are supposed to be "eternal and unchanging" and moving on from there.

Oh, my. Is this what MY know-it-all posts look like? I can't get my eyes un-crossed.

Emma

[the Ogre]

I have prayed, and I have come to the conclusion that the mormons are wrong. God [h]as burned [it] in my heart telling me to not go back to the church.

Blue,

If you have recieved a witness of the truth, then I recommend you act on it. It is not very smart to base one's faith or testimony on the faith of any person other then G-d. If you have heard from H-m the church is a mistake, then maybe you should act on such advise.

Personally, I have never relied on the the testimony of others regarding the truthfulness of the gospel with the possible exception of my father.

As far as things changing; wouldn't life and eternity be a drag if we were stuck in a state of stasis or entropy?

Anyway, I am gald for your witness. Listen to it and follow it.

Aaron the Ogre

[Guest Emma Hale Smith]

May I please open my big mouth for a moment here.

Cmblueeyes" was here in June of 2006, so she's long gone.

However, I did read through the thread, and I was really taken aback at how she was treated.

I am well aware of anti-Mormon trolls, and realize it takes a few posts to recognize one--but it does take a few posts.

I also know the fear of your testimony dissolving before your eyes, and wanting to cling to anything, anybody who will help. I heard that fear in Cmblueeyes post. And I've seen this time after time after time, where a believing member can't understand it because they haven't experienced it. Thus, they don't believe it's real. Instead, they believe the person is a troll wanting to stir up trouble. Sometimes that's the case. But other times it's not, and, knowing how strongly you believe in your church, is that how you want your crumbling members to be treated?

The majority of people were confrontive, preaching AT her. The only LDS who was kind without lecturing her was Ben. Someone actually said something to the effect that if you do what I tell you to do you will know you are wrong. That ain't gonna keep 'em in the churchouse.

I know it's not your job to salvage a teetering Mormon who's come into your playground, and I know my being an ex-Mormon lowers my credibility for many of you.

This really hurts me, because I've seen it so often. If you get anything out of this, know that people do lose their testimony and are terrified, because they really don't want to. I believe cmmbbleyes was at this point, perhaps a little further. I know she was desperate, and she came here, and she was scolded like she was a bad girl for it.

I just think that's very sad, because I'm up to 400 posts now, so I know a few of the people and I don't believe they would knowingly run her off if they understood her pain was real and that she needed kindness and patience, not patronizing and lectures.

Thanks for listening,

Emma

[the Ogre]

The majority of people were confrontive, preaching AT her. The only LDS who was kind without lecturing her was Ben. Someone actually said something to the effect that if you do what I tell you to do you will know you are wrong. That ain't gonna keep 'em in the churchouse.

I know it's not your job to salvage a teetering Mormon who's come into your playground, and I know my being an ex-Mormon lowers my credibility for many of you.

This really hurts me, because I've seen it so often. If you get anything out of this, know that people do lose their testimony and are terrified, because they really don't want to. I believe cmmbbleyes was at this point, perhaps a little further. I know she was desperate, and she came here, and she was scolded like she was a bad girl for it.

Emma,

You make a good point here (and the ex stuff does not lower your credibility, you have mentioned belonging to the culture surrounding the church pro and con). No one needs to flayed for their feelings (even if that very flaying embodies the actual sport and ritual of the internet) and you are wrong about the "job" bit, but sometimes internet habits die hard.

I know the presipice and teeter-totering, but I made a different choice than did she. I wonder what she did base her testimony on. I know what I decided to not base my testimony on.

Thanks for the point you make and the method of delivery.

Aaron the Ogre

[Snow]

The temple ceremonies have changed, the curse of Cain has changed, the whole book of Abraham has been proven to be false.

I don't get it. Please help me. I've prayed and prayed and prayed, and nothing.......

1. Why, exactly, are you under the impression that men/women, including Church authorities can learn and grow in their understanding of God?

Do you know God perfectly with no room left for increased understanding?

2. Why can't temple ceremonies change?

3. You don't know what you are talking about re. The Book of Abraham.

[Guest Emma Hale Smith]

<div class='quotemain'>

The temple ceremonies have changed, the curse of Cain has changed, the whole book of Abraham has been proven to be false.

I don't get it. Please help me. I've prayed and prayed and prayed, and nothing.......

1. Why, exactly, are you under the impression that men/women, including Church authorities can learn and grow in their understanding of God?

Do you know God perfectly with no room left for increased understanding?

2. Why can't temple ceremonies change?

3. You don't know what you are talking about re. The Book of Abraham.

Case and Point.

Emma

[CrimsonKairos]

Yes, Snow does have a point.

[the Ogre]

Yes, Snow does have a point.

Yep, but so does Emma.

Snow has the right to ask those questions, but loosing one's testimony might be more important.

[CrimsonKairos]

Whaaa?

[the Ogre]

Whaaa?

Sorry,

I can't be more complete then what I said above. I sit with Snow regarding his questions, but with Emma regarding how people are treated when they are questioning their testimonies. Complicated or maybe just indecisive, that is just how I feel.

I don't like it when the inactive or apostatizing are attacked by people (not the nice people I have met on this board in the last two weeks), but I also do not like it when they attack those who are working to build their faith or testimonies (like that goofy thread about dinosaurs and the descendants of Cain).

Blue has the right to be angry at the church if she wants to be, but I also agree with Emma that she most likely is an angry-person trolling for zealots to fume about or quote on her blog or something. I dislike the attitudes of most people with an axe to grind with the church, but I cannot deny them the opportunity to grind away.

Aaron the Ogre

[Guest Emma Hale Smith]

, , , but I also agree with Emma that she most likely is an angry-person trolling for zealots to fume about or quote on her blog or something.

Aaron the Ogre

Aaron, I need to make a clarification. I didn't say what you wrote abuot her at all. I believe that she was in a spiritual crises and was a bit frantic, madly looking anywhere for help

Just wanted to keep the story straight.

Regards,

Emma

[Gabelma]

I agree with Ben and Emma on this one - I know its an old thread but I do believe its better to show love towards a person than preach. Anyone who is LDS all there life knows all the usual Sunday School answers they obviously aren't feeling them. If being LDS isn't helping you reach your full potential or bring you closer to God at that time its failing and maybe isn't the right place at that time

A hug and a plate of cakes can often have more spirit in it than a lecture

Charley

[the Ogre]

Aaron, I need to make a clarification. I didn't say what you wrote abuot her at all. I believe that she was in a spiritual crises and was a bit frantic, madly looking anywhere for help

Just wanted to keep the story straight.

Regards,

Emma

Undrestood.

Aaron the Ogre

[cchrissys1]

I am feeling pretty stressed out, and I am hoping that someone can help me.

I have grown up in the church, but never was able to take out my endowments. I fell away from the church from the time I was about 15 until about a year ago. I started going back to church, and reading, and praying and doing everything that I should be, however something is not sitting right with me. I have had the Missionaries over a number of times, as well as my home teachers and visiting teachers and they have been unable or unwilling to answer my questions, so I thought I would pose some of them here.

I sat down with my Bishop about a week ago and he was unable to help me either. He instructed me to pray and ponder and read the scriptures which I have been doing faithfully every day.

The biggest thing I am struggling with is this;

There are so many things that Joseph Smith taught, that were supposed to be "eternal and unchanging", however the church has changed a number of things/doctorines. This completely baffles me. If this was Gods one and only true church, why have things been changed? Wouldn't God have done things right in the beginning, he is perfect right? Wouldn't make mistakes right?

The temple ceremonies have changed, the curse of Cain has changed, the whole book of Abraham has been proven to be false.

I don't get it. Please help me. I've prayed and prayed and prayed, and nothing.......

if your looking for excuses not to believe, satan will help you find them. If your looking for reasons to beleive and pray about it the lord will help you find it. UNless once you found out the truth and became accountable you would NOT follow the gospel on a serious level. or the spirit is witnessing and you don't listen , that could become a problem. the cain thing. well obviously they met what ever condition needed to be met. but didn't at first. God is unchanging so are his laws BUT we are always changing and need to be delt with differently at different times. he is not making mistakes. naturaly. but just like caffine. it used to be unlawfull. then a lady had health issues that actually called for caffine. the rules changed for her even though God new ahead of time she would need it. well if we all are about our fathers buisness we will understand that caffine is basicaly bad but there are exceptions to the rule and to be grownups and understand. a lesson we would not have known otherwise. big truths are revealed to the heavy hitters. have faith in God on the big stuff and gain a testimony of the basic stuff that's all i can say.

[Dale]

I am feeling pretty stressed out, and I am hoping that someone can help me.

The biggest thing I am struggling with is this;

There are so many things that Joseph Smith taught, that were supposed to be "eternal and unchanging", however the church has changed a number of things/doctorines. This completely baffles me. If this was Gods one and only true church, why have things been changed? Wouldn't God have done things right in the beginning, he is perfect right? Wouldn't make mistakes right?

The temple ceremonies have changed, the curse of Cain has changed, the whole book of Abraham has been proven to be false.

I don't get it. Please help me. I've prayed and prayed and prayed, and nothing.......

The OT Aaronic priesthood was supposed to be everalsting, but most other churches feel it no longer needed.

LDS have not changed their views on the priesthood ban. They have lightened up on the curse of Cain idea though. FAIR's FairWiki has treatments of the curse of Cain subject. http://www.fairlds.org (Main page to link for FairWiki.

Nothing in any version of the Temple ceremony ever had an instruction not to add, or take from them material. The ceremonies were designed to be changeable.

The Book of Abraham has certain important way's in which Egyptology parallels Joseph Smith's explanations. Old Abrahamic lore seem's to support the main text. The Book of Abraham may not be a literal translation of the papyrus, but it's not without possible evidence.

No religion I have ever studied is without questions that follow it, or change. The New Testament could not exist without a change to religion.

[consult]

I don't get it. Please help me. I've prayed and prayed and prayed, and nothing.......

This topic started over a year ago and last post was yesterday. I don't think cmblueeyes is still around since he hasn't posted in a while in this thread.

But if you were I would say.........

If you have serious questions and you don't feel like you are getting a real answer, please spend some time reading these websites. They have very detailed explainations of MANY difficult topics in the church. In these pages you will see that you have many misconceptions about what the Church "tells it members." You will find it fascinating.

http://www.jefflindsay.com/myturn.shtml

http://www.fairlds.org/

http://www.shields-research.org/

Two things I find interesting (actually, I find many things interesting, but will stick with two for now) is that 1. some on this post have questioned the 'burning in the bossom' Christ talks about in the bible about how one can know when he is hearing/experiencing the truth. 2. A very common theme to people that have stories about leaving the church is that when they found the doctrine (like JS ordaining a black man and then BY not letting him exercise his priesthood) that shocked them, they describe how THEY felt in this moment. They were confused, hurt, dissappointed, sad, disoriented, etc. Or in other words, they felt like someone had kicked them in the gut. This doesn't sound like God confirming the truth to me.