Sunday, July 28, 2013

Church History And A Testimony

There has been much discussion about doubt and leaving of the church recently. I also was part of a discussion recently on Facebook. Sadly, it was filled with too many people that wanted to only banter rather than discuss. I had to take myself away from that discussion and future discussions because I found myself feeling of no worth. These people's negativity, though not convincing me otherwise of my knowledge, I had a sense of no worth, no respect for God, and no respect for the basics of the gospel growing within my heart. Though I am sure for a few of them, their motives were sincere and truly desiring answers, others were out there looking to bash on the church (members and non-members) in whatever venue they could. These are people who seem to be on a perpetual search to find what is wrong with the church.

Many seem to be disgruntled by a number of things but particularly the one I'd like to address is the "covered up" church's history. Many have lost or had their faith weakened due to things that they have learned over the internet, word of mouth, or through their own research in church history books. They have felt as though they were tricked, lied to, or deceived. They feel that this is so because the church leaders don't put certain details in the church manuals and have purposely avoided such topics to avoid a history that is not perfect.

I have two answers to this reasoning that I hope will be helpful to all members and individuals seeking answers from God if the restored church is truly here on earth:

1) If the church really didn't want you to know these things the leaders now and in the past would have erased it from its records. You can look it up freely (even before the internet was available), the church is not hiding anything. The church has always done things to address the issues in the past and present. One example is the Mountain Meadow Massacre. President Hinckley dedicated a monument there not too long ago to commemorate the lives lost. It was a hard topic to bring up and many mixed feelings about it was felt inside and out of the church, still are. But if the church wasn't wanting to deal with it, they could have erased it by ignoring it. Same with many other things that are of deep church history issues. They didn't do this because it is what it is. The church is still standing today not because of it's history but because of it's true claim to being the restored gospel of Jesus Christ.

2) The church will always focus on the basics of salvation. We hear church history stories all the time in our lessons at church, general conference talks mention incredible stories of early Saints' sacrifices and diligence to overcome difficult times. They do occasionally focus on those Saints that fell away because of pride. All of this to gain an important lesson that helps us to come closer to our Savior. Everything they teach us (leaders and manuals) is to lead us closer to Christ, and they only have so much time to do it. The address of negative, taboo, or extremely odd church history experiences may not be as important to hear as such of an experience of faith. This is why I believe we don't hear too much over the pulpit or in the manuals of difficult subjects with church history. We do hear it occasionally to which I've almost always heard a reasonable response.

Clearly the church isn't perfect. Joseph Smith did have several wives, Brigham Young probably was a racist, and weird things happened in the mountains. So what? How does this help you gain a testimony of the divinity of Christ and His infinite Atonement? Are we shallow enough to neglect that Christ's atonement works with you and others? Shallow to neglect that God is doing His work with imperfect people? I would remind anyone that church history issues are not of the greater importance. The greater importance is your personal witness that Jesus is the Christ, the Book of Mormon is the word of God,  that you are on the path to make and keep covenants, and the many other basic principles of the gospel that are taught on a weekly basis.

One thing that made me sad from the last Facebook conversation is that they assumed I had never doubted. I was not a worthy vessel to share how to help overcome doubt. I did in fact tell them that I have doubted and they shouldn't assume (if you are reading this and think I am the perfect Peter Priesthood-y type, just stop it). I have doubted. I have doubted a terrible amount. My first time truly doubting was in high school. I had numerous older friends as a freshman, they were all very inclusive and allowed me to be part of their circle. After a little while, I got bombarded by several of them with anti-Mormon literature (namely church history issues). I could reply to a few of their questions and comments but ultimately I was beaten, and badly. I questioned myself why such claims were being stated and how I couldn't answer them correctly. Wasn't I a member of the true and living church? Wasn't it perfect? Was the church not perfect? Was it all a big lie? I recall talking to my dad about a few of the questions. One after one, I gave him the concerns and comments my friends gave me and one after another he would give me a reasonable answer in response to it. I continued asking my father since it was working until finally he said something along the lines of, "How can they know the gospel isn't true when they themselves haven't given an honest sincere question to know for themselves? These attacks don't matter. What matters is your testimony."

I knew his words rang true. You see, as a 9 year old boy I was challenged by the full-time missionaries to pray and know if the Book of Mormon was true, if Joseph Smith was a true prophet at which I did accept that challenge. That very night I went to my bed (I remember the setting well as we had just moved into our new house) and knelt down in prayer. The question was simple but my answer was profound. I knew then that the Book of Mormon was true because of a simple sincere prayer. My father taught me a great lesson. Rely on faith, not quarrels.

That freshman year in high school wasn't the only time that I had encountered major doubts. For pe
rsonal reasons I will not describe the whole story but rather just the end. I found myself in the office of a minister. This minister was the leader of a very popular church in my hometown. I would later term this church similar to those on my mission in Seattle as "Mega Churches." It was almost the popular thing to do, go to this church's 20 minute sermon and feel the love of God. So why was I in the minister's office? Because I was questioning my membership in the Mormon Church. Now looking back, the minister was a very wise man, a good wise man. After a series of questions, which his tone seemed to be of questioning my motives, he finally asked, "are you willing to deny the Book of Mormon?" I paused for a while, looking down. Pondering. Then without a hesitation, smiling, I looked back up and said, "no, I cannot deny the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon." Oddly enough, he smiled back and led me to the door of his office.

Do you get what I'm trying to say, yet? Encounter all you will about the church's history or even flat out lies about the doctrine (and occasional church history event) and you can still know that it is true because of a spiritual witness of the divinity of Jesus Christ and His work. To this day, my spiritual witness has helped me get through the thick darkness, the "earthquakes of doubt." The church is not perfect. The people in the church is not perfect but my Savior is. My Heavenly Father sent His Son, to die and suffer the sins and pains of the world. The pains of the world include doubt. Yours and mine.

If you are truly struggling to know if the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only true and living church on the earth, I advise you follow Elder Scott's directions, "If you seek His help, be sure your life is clean, your motives are worthy, and you’re willing to do what He asks—for He will answer your prayers. He is your loving Father; you are His beloved child. He loves you perfectly and wants to help you."

Three things, 1) seek His help, 2) motives are pure, and 3) praying with real intent, willing to act upon the answer you receive.  Those things have helped me and they will help your or anyone else's struggles in gospel matters. The Book of Mormon and modern day prophets will lead you closer to your Savior. 






5 comments:

  1. Regarding point #1,

    Suppose the church isn't true. It can't very well just erase things willy nilly from its archives, because in this day and age, everyone is watching. Given this predicament, what are the closest alternatives? Doubters point to the following to support the claim that the church is whitewashing history:

    * The September Six.
    * De-emphasis of deprecated doctrines, e.g. Hinckley's response, "I don't know that we teach it" regarding "As man now is, God once was."
    * They quite literally did re-record at least one conference talk when they put it into the archives: http://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2010/02/best-conference-talk-you-never-read_13.html

    There's more than one way to rewrite history, so stating that the church does not use the most extreme technique (except when it does) does not explain away these other behaviors.

    Regarding point #2,

    * Church: 3 hours a week, every week
    * Conference: 8 to 10 hours, twice a year, every year
    * Seminary: 1 hour a day, 5 days a week for 4 years
    * Mission: 2 hours a day, every day for 2 years
    * Personal and family scripture study: up to 1 hour a day, every day

    This adds up to a lot of time, and spending so much time in a church learning environment, one tends to believe that they are fairly knowledgeable on matters of church doctrine and history. Shall I add up how many hours of church instruction I went through before I stumbled across the "stone-in-hat" method of translating the Book of Mormon on Wikipedia? I think it's irritating that when I ask for a pointer to when I could have learned this, I am pointed to a conference talk given way back when I was about 5... I was probably coloring or sleeping at the time.

    And the thing that baffled/baffles me most? I don't see any reason for the church to "hide" this like it does. Why are there no depictions of it in church materials (esp. the film that was shown at temple square)? Why isn't Joseph's seer stone on display, rather than being locked away in the church vaults? I just see no explanation other than that the church wants to distance itself from teaching that this was a method of translation. How am I supposed to believe my own testimony about Joseph's translation of the BoM if it was based on a misconstrued mental image? Why isn't this issue mentioned at all in missionary training material, or included in the first discussion, or mentioned in the new members sunday school manual?

    Hopefully that illustrates why some of us feel betrayed. I just don't buy into the "limited time" counterargument at all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey Dan! Thanks for your thought out comment. I don't see any reason why not to believe what you've said to be true. And I hope I didn't offend you with my post.

      I do feel that there were points missed though. Yes, I have no doubt that it was re-recorded but so are current general conference talks edited before they enter the Ensign magazine. Yes, I guess if you really want to make the time to address such issues you can but it distracts from the main principles of the gospel. Let's focus on the things that matter most. If people take offense, then maybe we should all listen to the great offense talks that weren't re-recorded in just the last decade at general conference. Or just focus on the basics :)

      Delete
    2. While I found parts of your post to be unconvincing, I found none of it to be offensive. :) I applaud you for touching on this topic. I think that people on all sides of the conversation should try to understand each other a little better, and I think your post is a good faith effort to help others understand your opinion.

      I really do love the basics of the church: charity, good works, kindness, love, free agency, the desirability of knowledge and education, the nobility of the quest for truth, and the intrinsic, immutable, and immeasurable value of every person.

      It is when "the other" basics come into play that the church become problematic for me: faith, obedience, exclusive authority from God, miracles, mandatory ordinances, a monopoly on the *whole* truth, and taking the standard works' fantastical claims quite literally. It is these "other basics" that lead to strange beliefs and unethical behaviors. It is these "other basics" that lead critics to use the term "cult."

      So while on one hand I can agree with the value of "focusing on the basics," on the other hand, I feel like "I've had plenty of milk... I was promised meat." But then when the hard questions are asked, instead of getting a meaty answer, it can be frustrating to hear, "That meat is really tough, and it's not even that good. Milk goes down much easier, let's have some more milk instead." Or alternatively, "YOU WANT THE MEAT? YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE MEAT!" Or sometimes it feels like you're seeing "the meat is a lie" written on the wall by someone who came and left the dinner before you.

      It is generally the liar, not the truth teller, that deflects the hard questions. This is why I find the church's "deflecting" behavior to be cause for concern.

      Delete
    3. As the son of a prominent Church historian, I've been immersed in Church history all my life. I grew up studying voraciously studying anti-Mormon material. I was, and still am, appalled at the gross negativity associated with the anti-Mormon crowd. It didn't take me long to realize that even if the so-called "problems" of Church history were fleshed out and answered to everyone's satisfaction, they would continue to find fault with the Church in other ways.

      It always intrigued me why he and so many other scholars and intelligentsia of the Church were and are not bothered by the so-called "problems" of Church history.

      A talk by Church historian, Davis Bitton, helped me a lot. The title "I Do NOT Have a Testimony of Church History" says it all. And this is from an actual, dyed-in-the-wool historian.

      The gist of the matter is this: our testimonies need to be based totally and squarely upon the Savior if we are to survive spiritually in these very troubled times.

      Finally, with all due respect to the honorable gentleman, Mr. Burton, I would say that it is not up to us to decide when we're ready for the "meat" of the Gospel. My experience and observation is that we have a terrible time in handling the "milk" of the Gospel, let alone the "meat."

      The truly hard questions revolve around whether we are ministering to the relief of the poor, sick, and afflicted. The truly hard questions have nothing to do with whether there were horses in ancient America or how Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon.

      The testimony of the Spirit is abundant and readily awaits the sincere truth seeker.

      Delete