Is there a "reconciliation" or middle ground?

[mountain_trails]

I have a few thoughts on these lines, perhaps you may find something useful here.

The first verse in the Book of Mormon has Nephi stating that he was "highly favored of the Lord". It would seem obvious that if there are some who are "highly favored" that there would also be some who are not. After all, if everyone is highly favored, no one is. Here may be where you see church leaders and others who profess to "know" God answers their prayers. While they may have had trials, God has come through for them, at least a number of times. So from their framework of reference, God answers prayers because that's what they feel and see. These would be the "highly favored".

Those that are not so highly favored probably won't stick around long enough to be called into any kind of leadership or general authority position.

Now, why the discrepancy in the way we (God's children) are treated? I believe at least part of the answer lies in the D&C: "For of him unto whom much is given much is required; and he who sins against the greater light shall receive the greater condemnation." Perhaps those of us who do not find answers to our prayers are being protected because we might be predisposed to "sin against the greater light". Example: it's possible I would find living the law of chastity difficult if I was even of average looks. However, since I'm plain ugly, opportunities to stray are non-existent. (thankfully) I don't know how I would handle being attractive, and I'm sure God knows this. This doesn't mean I don't struggle with what I see in the mirror everyday.

In other words, perhaps some of us are not given answers to prayers, inspiration, etc. for our own long term good. Even if it doesn't make a lot of sense to us.

BTW, looks isn't one of the main things I struggle with, just seemed like a handy example.

Hopefully this makes sense. I'm not very good at expressing thoughts in writing.

[Dark_Jedi]

I have a few thoughts on these lines, perhaps you may find something useful here.

The first verse in the Book of Mormon has Nephi stating that he was "highly favored of the Lord". It would seem obvious that if there are some who are "highly favored" that there would also be some who are not. After all, if everyone is highly favored, no one is. Here may be where you see church leaders and others who profess to "know" God answers their prayers. While they may have had trials, God has come through for them, at least a number of times. So from their framework of reference, God answers prayers because that's what they feel and see. These would be the "highly favored".

Those that are not so highly favored probably won't stick around long enough to be called into any kind of leadership or general authority position.

Your express yourself fine, I think I understand, and your point is well taken about the highly favored. I actually believe that, and I just realized I haven't clearly expressed that here. I do believe some people's prayers are answered and I do believe some people receive revelation, and that the presidents of the church and many other General Authorities are probably in the category of those that have experienced both. Likewise, I believe there are likely people within my own ward and stake who have had such experiences. At one point around 10 years ago, I, too, would have said I had experienced answers to prayers and personal revelation and I would have said so truly believing it to be so. (I can see the light of understanding burning above some of your heads right now, but that is not revelation.) I will not take away from their experiences - I believe it could very well have happened and whether or not it actually did, they believe it did. Their experiences are theirs and only theirs, mine are mine and only mine. So the problem I have with people who I refer to as not knowing what they are talking about is with those who preach, teach, and otherwise admonish that the same is true for everyone. That is clearly not so. My prayers are not answered, and any revelation I thought I received is so highly questionable as to make it unreliable. I know some of you find this offensive, but if Mountain_Trails is right (and I believe he is), when a General Authority (or the old biddy in your ward) stands before the world and preaches that he knows all prayers of everyone are answered, he doesn't know what he is talking about. There are those of us who know (yes, there are more of us out there, some LDS some not) that this is not true. Their experiences are theirs and theirs alone, mine are mine and mine alone. I do believe they are sincere in what they are saying and they believe they are correct and that they believe that what they are saying is true doctrine. But they don't always know what they're talking about because they have an entirely different point of view.

[FunkyTown]

No inspiration, despite my prayers, that there might need to be a change there - I actually had to ask after years of waiting. Do these leaders know or care that the new home teacher doesn't come? Have they never been inspired to follow up? Maybe they have and their human frailty keeps them from doing anything. I can actually forgive that, but I have heard many times the testimony of the HPGL and his personal inspiration and revelation in helping others - he actually once prevented a suicide because he was inspired to go right then to see a man, despite the fact he was going somewhere else important and in the other direction at the time (or so his testimony goes). I believe he was likely inspired then at least, is he no longer inspired or willing to follow that inspiration?

I've said too much, my apologies.

You haven't said too much.

You have, however, pointed out that you had a home teacher come every month - Even though it was the last Sunday of every month - And that it didn't make a difference. You didn't feel as though he was helping.

Do you think, perhaps, that there might be more to your needs than a home teacher can provide? That, perhaps, getting help might be beyond what the Bishop could provide and one of the reasons he wasn't inspired to help you?

Perhaps you have depression, or social anxiety, or any one of a number of issues that you long to escape from. You're looking to members of the church to 'fix' you, and that's not something they can do.

Have you considered that there might be other things you need to work on and then you will be able to proceed spiritually?

[CalledToServe]

You illustrate the point very well. You believe God knows all likely based on what you are taught in church. I believe that if what is taught in church is correct, God does know all and likewise would, as a loving Father in Heaven, do what is necessary (and it is quite simple, actually) to bring back his child in response to the pleas of that child and other children. An alternative point of view is that God does know all, but chooses not to act (despite church teachings that he will/would). And yet another alternative is that God does, indeed, not know all and/or care about all things. Of course I could go on and on with alternative points of view.

So from your point of view, and please understand I am not attempting to be argumentative, God does know what it would take. Why, then, from your perspective, does he not do so? (And I must give a caveat to you - you must answer this from an understanding that said child actually is attending church, is temple worthy, holds a calling, etc. - because in the beginning that was the case).

I have skimmed this thread but not taken the time to read in depth. Still I would like to respond. I want to because I know God lives.

Saying that, I have to admit that I haven't seen Him. I don't know for certain that He is a human figure. I haven't seen the marks in the Savior's hands. I believe these things because others who I trust have testified that they are so, but I don't know and won't until I can see God for myself.

If you feel compelled to pursue this matter of whether or not you should go to church, I would suspect that it is because you desire happiness. Were you not taught by the church that happiness came from doing all that the church asked of you? I know I was. And so we are drawn to the things that we think will bring us happiness.

Whether or not attending church will make you happy, I do not know. What I do know is that learning to trust God is what truly makes us happy. The church was intended for this purpose and has the power to bring us happiness as it fulfills this obligation.

God does love us and He is involved in our lives, in every detail of them. At least I assume He is as involved in everyone's life as much as in mine. The difference is in whether or not we can recognize His involvement. We are given veils in this life that cloak our ability to see God's works. When we break through those veils, we grow in peace and joy because we know that even in the difficult times, our God is with us. We know that every struggle we go through is actually for our good.

More important than attending church is reading the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon testifies of Christ and it is necessary to partake of His sacrifice in order to rend the veil. The Book of Mormon is so simple that it can teach the weakest student and so complex that it can feed the most informed mind. If you want to find happiness, I suggest not worrying about whether or not you can find middle ground in the church and start seeking Christ.

[Dark_Jedi]

You haven't said too much.

You have, however, pointed out that you had a home teacher come every month - Even though it was the last Sunday of every month - And that it didn't make a difference. You didn't feel as though he was helping.

Do you think, perhaps, that there might be more to your needs than a home teacher can provide? That, perhaps, getting help might be beyond what the Bishop could provide and one of the reasons he wasn't inspired to help you?

Perhaps you have depression, or social anxiety, or any one of a number of issues that you long to escape from. You're looking to members of the church to 'fix' you, and that's not something they can do.

Have you considered that there might be other things you need to work on and then you will be able to proceed spiritually?

Admittedly at one point several years ago I was depressed and was treated for depression. I am no longer depressed, and I don't suffer from social anxiety, etc. Were I employed, my occupation deals with groups of people on a daily basis, and I am quite comfortable in groups large and small.

The old home teacher guy (and he is old) would come the last Sunday of the month after calling an hour before, usually without a companion, chat about absolutely nothing for an hour (the kids hated his visits), and he'd leave and we wouldn't hear from him again until the next month's last Sunday. This went on for years, and it was the same way when I was active as it was when I wasn't. He's a nice guy, lives a couple blocks away, and he actually told me once early on that the HPGL (different from the current one) had wanted to move me from his route and he asked him not to. I think he is well meaning, but I also think his primary objective was to be able to say he visited each month. He showed no caring for me or my family and still doesn't - he lives close enough that I see him more than most members. Seriously, would anyone expect any growth from that experience?

Finally, it doesn't really seem to matter what I do - get treated for depression or don't, go to church or don't, meet with the bishop or don't, get visited by home teachers or don't, pray or don't, read the scriptures or don't - things stay the same.

[mnn727]

Ok, I am reading that you're not getting what you need from the Bishop or the Home teachers.

I guess my question would be what are you giving to them?

I'm really not saying that to be mean or judgmental but after 10 years of your not going to Church, do you think they may feel that you've made your choice and there's a whole lot more people that do come to Church that need their help more than you?

Quoting the story of the 1 and the 99 is great but lets be realistic, these are humans with finite time and finite resources.

Finally, it doesn't really seem to matter what I do - get treated for depression or don't, go to church or don't, meet with the bishop or don't, get visited by home teachers or don't, pray or don't, read the scriptures or don't - things stay the same.

What is it you're looking for? Would you recognize it if it happened? and what are you willing to do to get it? Edited August 5, 2013 by mnn727

[Dark_Jedi]

Ok, I am reading that you're not getting what you need from the Bishop or the Home teachers.

I guess my question would be what are you giving to them?

I'm really not saying that to be mean or judgmental but after 10 years of your not going to Church, do you think they may feel that you've made your choice and there's a whole lot more people that do come to Church that need their help more than you?

Quoting the story of the 1 and the 99 is great but lets be realistic, these are humans with finite time and finite resources.

What is it you're looking for? Would you recognize it if it happened? and what are you willing to do to get it?

OK, I'll buy after 10 years they may have decided I'm truly a lost sheep. I don't buy that the first couple years or in the process when I was becoming less active (I didn't just 1 day not show up). And what led them to that conclusion? It wasn't meeting with me, was it inspiration? Does God think I'm a lost sheep? Is an occasional phone call, visit, email, or meeting too much of a tax on finite time or resources? What am I giving to them? Far more than you'll ever know and far more than they have given to me. Their expectation as stewards should not require anything.

I definitely know what I'm looking for (I'm not sharing that here), and yes, it will be obvious when it happens. I am willing t do whatever I need to do to get it, but whatever I have done has not gotten it - and I have done much. Let's not go with the come back to Church, accept a calling, etc. thing - that's been done in that this started when I was very active.

Edited August 5, 2013 by Dark_Jedi

[Roseslipper]

Thank you Loudmouth_Mormon, Roseslipper & Gretchen for your responses.

Please be aware, Roseslipper, that I do not mean to offend you or in anyway demean what you have said, but comments like yours are exactly why I don't go to church. You really have no idea what you're talking about. Your experiences are yours and yours alone, as mine are mine and mine alone. Mine have been very different from yours. I'm sure you are sincere in your belief that God loves everyone and knows them better than any human, including oneself, etc., but that's all it is - your beliefs (admittedly shared by many others). I believe differently, and I believe the church errs in teaching such things (although I am not actually sure they can be classified as doctrine, which could be part of another discussion e.g. what things that are taught in church are actually doctrine as opposed to "teachings of men").

So let's get back to the question, and in doing so address some of what Loudmouth said. Please help me clarify in my own thinking: It would be OK in at least some (perhaps most) wards/stakes for someone like me to attend Sacrament Meeting only, devoid of participating in other meetings and activities and not holding a calling and not being assigned home teaching? Even in a small eastern ward (as distinguished from a small Utah ward which is likely larger than a large eastern ward)? Even for many years? Because it has been over 10 years already, and these things are no closer to resolution then than they are now and going to Sacrament probably isn't going to change that positively from the point of view of the Church.

Finally, just a side note to Loudmouth. I do appreciate that I would be welcome to hang out with you and your family, and we do have a couple friendly families in our ward who do likewise. I do have a home teacher, although he rarely comes and has never asked about my feelings (so I haven't told him). My HP group leader has asked and never returned - although he did seem to understand where I was coming from. Likewise, my bishop has never asked, I've met with him only once and frankly think he's a very poor excuse for a bishop (although he is a very nice person) and the epitome of an uninspired leader (as was his predecessor, although he was less of a nice person).

im not offended dj at all I gave examples to why most people stop going to church I do know that and of course our experiences are different and there is nothing wrong with that. I too have hardly had a home teacher visit me in all my yrs and the church and yes that has hurt me, but im over that. so again the answer to your question is Yes go to sacrament only Ive done that for a while, Ive seen others do that as well!!!!!! And if you dont want a calling thats fine too....

Edited August 5, 2013 by Roseslipper
wants to add

[Roseslipper]

Thank you Loudmouth_Mormon, Roseslipper & Gretchen for your responses.

Please be aware, Roseslipper, that I do not mean to offend you or in anyway demean what you have said, but comments like yours are exactly why I don't go to church. You really have no idea what you're talking about. Your experiences are yours and yours alone, as mine are mine and mine alone. Mine have been very different from yours. I'm sure you are sincere in your belief that God loves everyone and knows them better than any human, including oneself, etc., but that's all it is - your beliefs (admittedly shared by many others). I believe differently, and I believe the church errs in teaching such things (although I am not actually sure they can be classified as doctrine, which could be part of another discussion e.g. what things that are taught in church are actually doctrine as opposed to "teachings of men").

So let's get back to the question, and in doing so address some of what Loudmouth said. Please help me clarify in my own thinking: It would be OK in at least some (perhaps most) wards/stakes for someone like me to attend Sacrament Meeting only, devoid of participating in other meetings and activities and not holding a calling and not being assigned home teaching? Even in a small eastern ward (as distinguished from a small Utah ward which is likely larger than a large eastern ward)? Even for many years? Because it has been over 10 years already, and these things are no closer to resolution then than they are now and going to Sacrament probably isn't going to change that positively from the point of view of the Church.

Finally, just a side note to Loudmouth. I do appreciate that I would be welcome to hang out with you and your family, and we do have a couple friendly families in our ward who do likewise. I do have a home teacher, although he rarely comes and has never asked about my feelings (so I haven't told him). My HP group leader has asked and never returned - although he did seem to understand where I was coming from. Likewise, my bishop has never asked, I've met with him only once and frankly think he's a very poor excuse for a bishop (although he is a very nice person) and the epitome of an uninspired leader (as was his predecessor, although he was less of a nice person).

im not offended dj at all I gave examples to why most people stop going to church I do know that and of course our experiences are different and there is nothing wrong with that. I too have hardly had a home teacher visit me in all my yrs and the church and yes that has hurt me, but im over that. so again the answer to your question is Yes go to sacrament only Ive done that for a while, Ive seen others do that as well!!!!!! And if you dont want a calling thats fine too....

im not ususally on here much so if u want to you can email me on here. Ive forgiven my home teachers who didnt show up, and its not there fault that this situation hurt my self esteem I let the situation hurt me...what ever the excuse is it is...we are all busy and I have not been the perfect visiting teacher either.

[Praetorian_Brow]

You sound like my father, as he is inactive and married a Catholic. My father would talk of how he was wronged in some fashion by church members and ironically enough, gets offended when the missionaries or home teachers do not contact him. However, when they did contact him and spent time visiting, he would make light of their efforts to ingratiate themselves into his company.

It seems to me, that you want to benefit from the church and all that it offers, but are not yet willing to adapt your perspective to reach a middle ground within your mind. Best of luck, as I struggle with that notion myself sometimes.

[Dark_Jedi]

You sound like my father, as he is inactive and married a Catholic. My father would talk of how he was wronged in some fashion by church members and ironically enough, gets offended when the missionaries or home teachers do not contact him. However, when they did contact him and spent time visiting, he would make light of their efforts to ingratiate themselves into his company.

It seems to me, that you want to benefit from the church and all that it offers, but are not yet willing to adapt your perspective to reach a middle ground within your mind. Best of luck, as I struggle with that notion myself sometimes.

You could not be farther from the truth.

[mnn727]

I definitely know what I'm looking for (I'm not sharing that here), and yes, it will be obvious when it happens. I am willing t do whatever I need to do to get it, but whatever I have done has not gotten it - and I have done much. Let's not go with the come back to Church, accept a calling, etc. thing - that's been done in that this started when I was very active.

One last thing and I'll bow out, its something attributed to Brigham Young: "Many people are willing to die for the gospel, but how many of you are really willing to live it?"

It sounds to me (from the VERY little you have given us) that you want "whatever it is" but are not willing to follow the gospel (including going to Church, honoring your Priesthood, etc etc etc) to gain it, or you want it on your terms and time frame and not Gods. Don't know what it is you're looking for so further discussion would be just speculation, so I'll leave it at that. If you really want some specific applicable advise you'll need to be more open with us.

I really do wish you well.

Edited August 6, 2013 by mnn727

[mrmarklin]

Without reading the whole thread, I can state that it is perfectly acceptable to do as you propose: ie. attend only sacrament meeting.:)

[FunkyTown]

Finally, it doesn't really seem to matter what I do - get treated for depression or don't, go to church or don't, meet with the bishop or don't, get visited by home teachers or don't, pray or don't, read the scriptures or don't - things stay the same.

You aren't going to like this answer, but it's important and something you have to consider.

Your Bishop and you talk or you don't, you go to church or you don't, you get visited by home teachers or don't, you read the scriptures or you don't, things stay the same.

The single unifying thread in that is you:

You are the only recurring person there.

This suggests that the issue is you. You can't change anybody else. That might seem harsh, but I want you to think about a few things:

1) What do you want?

2) What have you, personally, been doing to achieve what you want?

3) What is preventing you from achieving what you want?

[Dark_Jedi]

You aren't going to like this answer, but it's important and something you have to consider.

Your Bishop and you talk or you don't, you go to church or you don't, you get visited by home teachers or don't, you read the scriptures or you don't, things stay the same.

The single unifying thread in that is you:

You are the only recurring person there.

This suggests that the issue is you. You can't change anybody else. That might seem harsh, but I want you to think about a few things:

1) What do you want?

2) What have you, personally, been doing to achieve what you want?

3) What is preventing you from achieving what you want?

This has already been covered.

[FunkyTown]

This has already been covered.

You might think it has, but it really hasn't. From what I can see, you have a yearning for 'something', but you're not sure what. You want home teachers who are active, but the one you sent wasn't good enough. You want a bishop who cares, but it didn't seem to make a difference when you had one. Activity, didn't matter. Scripture study, didn't matter.

This is a sign of someone who is inherently self-centered: An issue with many people in western civilization. You think your needs and wants are obvious, but I can tell you they are not.

Consider what they are, then express them explicitly. You might be surprised.

[Dark_Jedi]

You might think it has, but it really hasn't. From what I can see, you have a yearning for 'something', but you're not sure what. You want home teachers who are active, but the one you sent wasn't good enough. You want a bishop who cares, but it didn't seem to make a difference when you had one. Activity, didn't matter. Scripture study, didn't matter.

This is a sign of someone who is inherently self-centered: An issue with many people in western civilization. You think your needs and wants are obvious, but I can tell you they are not.

Consider what they are, then express them explicitly. You might be surprised.

Wow, not meaning to be rude, but you have made some huge jumps in psychoanalysis on very little basis.

Seeking a home teacher my family and I can relate to (and let it be known the current home teacher could be that guy) that actually comes and cares about our needs is not too much to ask. The home teacher isn't really the issue - the issue is that either God or his appointed leaders are the ones who really don't care - I honestly don't know which or if it's both. I will also remind you that when this began I was very active. I think some of you have somehow gotten the idea this is about people. It's not and never was. People are not really the reason I don't go to church, and I'm sorry if I have given that impression - I know my expressions of thought about people who don't know what they're talking about being an irritant could give that idea, but that is not why I don't go to church.

Finally I don't think I could make this clearer. I do have a yearning. My yearning is for the God that the Church teaches about. I have been the full gambit over these past 12-14 years, there are no surprises.

[Dark_Jedi]

Yes.

No. Believing the prophet/president doesn't know what he is talking about; believing the General Authorities are uninspired, believing people who have experienced life differently than you are naive (they know very little but are sincere) are not compatible doctrines/beliefs that would be able to coexist together They are opposites and one will always rule out the other.

Are you able to have these beliefs while attending Church? Yes. Are you able to have questions, deep questions which cause a cognitive dissonance and still attend Church? Yes.

I had to ponder this one for awhile. Upfront, I freely and wholly admit that I am not temple worthy and that simply attending sacrament meeting will not make me temple worthy. Most importantly of all, I do not consider myself temple worthy (and am very far from it).

That said, "Believing the prophet/president doesn't know what he is talking about; believing the General Authorities are uninspired" does not in and of itself appear to make one not worthy of the temple. The question is, If I recall it correctly (and paraphrased) if I sustain the president of the Church as prophet, seer, and revelator and the only person authorized to exercise all priesthood keys; the first presidency and quorum of the twelve as prophets, seers, and revelators; and if I sustain other general authorities and local authorities of the church. Simply disagreeing with what they say (privately, I must add), does not call into question their roles as prophets, seers and revelators, or exercise of keys. Sustaining other general and local authorities is more vague (and I do not believe I do necessarily), but again, simply disagreeing with something they have said does not automatically mean I do not sustain them. I don't think I'm spilling any beans or letting any cats of of bags, but not every word that comes out of President Monson's mouth is scripture or inspired. He is as human as the rest of us and is not infallible. And just a final disclaimer here, I keep these thoughts to myself, only share them if asked, and then only if I think the asker needs to know.

[FunkyTown]

Wow, not meaning to be rude, but you have made some huge jumps in psychoanalysis on very little basis.

That's fine, because I didn't think it was rude at all.

Finally I don't think I could make this clearer. I do have a yearning. My yearning is for the God that the Church teaches about. I have been the full gambit over these past 12-14 years, there are no surprises.

Okay, let's go with this: What qualities do you think the 'God that the church teaches about' has that you haven't seen?

[estradling75]

Dark Jedi,

I can respect your desire to not share to much personal information, but it means any advice we might give is a shot in the dark.

So I apologies in advance if I am completely off the mark.

Many people (both in an out of the church) embrace a Gospel of Prosperity. This Gospel is based on certain scriptures that they take to mean that as long as they have faith and do the right things that they will always prosper. And that if they are not prospering then it must be because they don't have enough faith or that they have sinned.

While there is a certain amount of truth to that, but it is a very incomplete picture. This leads to distortions and misunderstanding. The biggest missing piece is that the whole point of this life is to be tested. That no matter how faithful and true we are, that life is designed to give us a good swift kick in the teeth every once in a while. Under the 'Gospel of Prosperity' there is no room for that. It only answer must be that you didn't have enough faith to have God protect you from it. That really unhelpful when a person truly does have faith and has to struggle anyways. Such could lead a person to doubt the existence of God, because they were expecting him to act and he did not.

Do note that under this mindset the life of Jesus Christ is also a failure. Christ ministered but gained no worldly wealth. And when he pleaded with God in the garden that God would remove the pain and suffering of the atonement, he did not get the relief it was not removed and he had to endure. Did Christ lack enough faith? Did Christ sin? Of course not. Yet to fulfill the plan and his purpose for coming here he had to suffer and die.

In this life we will also suffer and die. Now some of this suffering we bring upon ourselves by our foolishness. But other times it is simply because it is part of our test in this life. This suffering is not because there is no God or that God doesn't care, it is because God is trying to mold us into all that we can be.

[Anddenex]

I had to ponder this one for awhile. Upfront, I freely and wholly admit that I am not temple worthy and that simply attending sacrament meeting will not make me temple worthy. Most importantly of all, I do not consider myself temple worthy (and am very far from it).

I applaud your honesty.

That said, "Believing the prophet/president doesn't know what he is talking about; believing the General Authorities are uninspired" does not in and of itself appear to make one not worthy of the temple. The question is, If I recall it correctly (and paraphrased) if I sustain the president of the Church as prophet, seer, and revelator and the only person authorized to exercise all priesthood keys; the first presidency and quorum of the twelve as prophets, seers, and revelators; and if I sustain other general authorities and local authorities of the church. Simply disagreeing with what they say (privately, I must add), does not call into question their roles as prophets, seers and revelators, or exercise of keys. Sustaining other general and local authorities is more vague (and I do not believe I do necessarily), but again, simply disagreeing with something they have said does not automatically mean I do not sustain them. I don't think I'm spilling any beans or letting any cats of of bags, but not every word that comes out of President Monson's mouth is scripture or inspired. He is as human as the rest of us and is not infallible. And just a final disclaimer here, I keep these thoughts to myself, only share them if asked, and then only if I think the asker needs to know.

This is my question, would it be possible to "sustain" the prophet and general authorities if you think they are uninspired, or don't know what they are talking about?

Since we believe in a living church, a church that accepts our prophets receive inspiration from God regarding specific elements of the Church. We also sustain the prophets and general authorities in areas that are not necessarily "inspired" but policies. I think it would be very hard to sustain any person that an individual feels is uninspired.

The act of sustaining our local leaders and those located in Salt Lake City (the earthly head of the church) are pretty much the same, although I will admit I put more emphasis on following the prophet than local leaders because the prophet is the only person on this earth that we have promise who will not lead us astray and if he seeks to he will be uprooted, or removed, from his office.

[Dark_Jedi]

Dark Jedi,

I can respect your desire to not share to much personal information, but it means any advice we might give is a shot in the dark.

So I apologies in advance if I am completely off the mark.

Many people (both in an out of the church) embrace a Gospel of Prosperity. This Gospel is based on certain scriptures that they take to mean that as long as they have faith and do the right things that they will always prosper. And that if they are not prospering then it must be because they don't have enough faith or that they have sinned.

While there is a certain amount of truth to that, but it is a very incomplete picture. This leads to distortions and misunderstanding. The biggest missing piece is that the whole point of this life is to be tested. That no matter how faithful and true we are, that life is designed to give us a good swift kick in the teeth every once in a while. Under the 'Gospel of Prosperity' there is no room for that. It only answer must be that you didn't have enough faith to have God protect you from it. That really unhelpful when a person truly does have faith and has to struggle anyways. Such could lead a person to doubt the existence of God, because they were expecting him to act and he did not.

Do note that under this mindset the life of Jesus Christ is also a failure. Christ ministered but gained no worldly wealth. And when he pleaded with God in the garden that God would remove the pain and suffering of the atonement, he did not get the relief it was not removed and he had to endure. Did Christ lack enough faith? Did Christ sin? Of course not. Yet to fulfill the plan and his purpose for coming here he had to suffer and die.

In this life we will also suffer and die. Now some of this suffering we bring upon ourselves by our foolishness. But other times it is simply because it is part of our test in this life. This suffering is not because there is no God or that God doesn't care, it is because God is trying to mold us into all that we can be.

I am guilty to an extent of having followed the gospel of prosperity at one point. As I matured in thought and as that thought process as evolved, I, as you point out, have come to understand that this is not actually part of the gospel.

And, in the beginning, I did see this all as a test (apparently a very long test). Nevertheless, a test I have obviously failed. Put the "F" on the paper, it is obvious at this point that I do not have enough faith. At this point I might actually believe that God is finding some perverse pleasure in seeing me and my family suffer (in truth, I don't believe God cares). Spare the comparisons to Job, he was different than me, he did have enough faith and ultimately passed the test. For me, there is no light at the end of the tunnel, there is little hope. I am clearly and admittedly not a better person because of this experience (family and friends will attest to this as well), so whatever molding is going on has not been successful.

My apologies if I am about to offend you, but you don't know what you're talking about. I have no doubt that your sincerely believe what you have said, but you are really doing nothing more than parroting that which you have been taught and in fact have no more idea or knowledge of what God actually does and does not do than I do. You do clearly have faith and that is admirable.

[estradling75]

My apologies if I am about to offend you, but you don't know what you're talking about. I have no doubt that your sincerely believe what you have said, but you are really doing nothing more than parroting that which you have been taught and in fact have no more idea or knowledge of what God actually does and does not do than I do. You do clearly have faith and that is admirable.

I fully confessed that I do not know your situation and how it might apply to you in your circumstance... Because you have made that choice not to share.

So I can accept that I was not helpful... However to accuse me of parroting and to not know is a judgment against me designed to make you feel better about yourself. You are shooting in the dark in this matter, as much as you accuse me and the others of doing. I reject your accusation. I know God lives, I know he as worked in my life, I know he has answered my prayers. I don't claim to know all of God's plan, but I know enough to know that he is not a distant or uncaring God.

[Dark_Jedi]

@FunkyTown "Okay, let's go with this: What qualities do you think the 'God that the church teaches about' has that you haven't seen?"

I think we covered this, too, but here it is again perhaps with a bit more explanation and clarity. From the original post (which could have been more detailed in retrospect): "I do not believe most prayers are answered (almost none, actually), I do not believe in personal revelation, I believe most local Church leaders are wholly uninspired...."

A later post: "Following what Mormons are taught, it would be presumed that God knows what would bring me back to activity and would through some means bring about the "miracle" or whatever to make that happen. Whether God knows them or not, I know them, and they're not happening." Again, keeping at least some privacy, that which I seek is not a miracle at all, does not necessarily require God to influence the thoughts and/or actions of anyone, is not actually physical, and is something the vast majority of you have. I could draw an analogy (and this is not it because it is physical) to having a home or simply a place to live. It really is that simple. More importantly, it rights a wrong that I believe God was directly involved in (perhaps as part of a test which I failed, see the post above).

From a still later post: "I believe that if what is taught in church is correct, God does know all and likewise would, as a loving Father in Heaven, do what is necessary...to bring back his child in response to the pleas of that child and other children.... (If) God does know what it would take...Why, then, ... does he not do so?"

And saving the best for last (and besides it was later): "...it is regularly taught and testified of in LDS churches that God loves each of us, that he is intricately involved in our daily lives...that he hears and answers all prayers...that God has a specific plan for each individual, that he desires our happiness and success and is just waiting for us to ask him for whatever we need or want, and whatever is righteous and properly prayed for we will receive. Likewise...it is taught that God does allow bad things to happen to good people for whatever purpose he has or simply allowing evil people and/or Satan their agency. And of course, God always allows each individual to choose - but there are consequences to each choice, most of which are not readily apparent. So the expectations I have is that God is the God that people in the Church say he is." In direct answer to your question, I am not feeling the love and have not for a very long time (or he has a very strange way of showing love); I do not believe most prayers are answered (as stated originally) - at least mine aren't and most of what I see people testify of as answers to their prayers happen to people that don't pray as well; I don't believe God is intricately involved in our lives (again, not feeling the love) and if he has a plan I don't know what it is I am supposed to do to make that happen because this can't be it (but I doubt he has a plan); and I think the other stuff is covered in what I have already said.

I can't be any more specific than that. I don't feel the love, my prayers (and the prayers relating to this by family and friends) have not been answered despite doing everything properly, if God were intricately involved with my life he would see how I have suffered, and this is clearly not the plan of a loving God as described above.

[Dravin]

I can't be any more specific than that. I don't feel the love, my prayers (and the prayers relating to this by family and friends) have not been answered despite doing everything properly, if God were intricately involved with my life he would see how I have suffered, and this is clearly not the plan of a loving God as described above.

So it sounds like at it's heart it is the age old theological problem of evil.