Polygamy justification?

[Jarid in Cedar]

What bothers me is the disproportionate importance that is too often placed on these areas of dissonance. For me, the purpose of the Gospel is utilitarian and getting caught up in deutero-Isaiah, mitochondrial DNA or polygamy or what have you are just distracting tangents that even if resolved won't provide any additional utility. They won't help me love my wife and children, they won't help me serve my fellow man, they won't help me forgive or repent, they won't make me strive to be a better man.

I don't have to resolve those areas of dissonance in order to experiment upon the word to find out for myself if it bears good fruit. I don't have to resolve those areas of dissonance in order to act upon the spiritual promptings I receive from time to time to know that I am led by God inasmuch as I am willing to follow Him. The sum of these personal experiences over the course of an increasingly long life provide me a sufficiently reinforced independent witness of the truthfulness of the Gospel.

I'm not saying that there is no value in striving to reconcile the tension between the spiritual and intellectual, but I think for some they allow that struggle to needlessly overwhelm them. What are the core values and purposes of the Gospel? Do these issues materially affect my day to day life and how I attempt to integrate those core values? If we aren't constantly asking these questions and seeking to re-evaluate, we can lose sight of ultimate goal.

Faith is the first principle of the gospel. It is the principle that effectively states that sometimes, the spiritual simply has to win out over the intellectual if we are to progress. Rather than trying to buck that notion, there is a great deal of peace with intellectually accepting the fact that resolution is not always going to happen and then get about the business of trying to become more like the Savior.

Fire away.

The reason that the areas of dissonance receive the importance that they do is that many times they are the primary division between many of the Christian faiths. The majority of all religions teach the importance of family, service, striving to be a better man, and faith, and all of the Christian faiths preach the importance of repentance. So to me the dissonance does not distract from those things, and likely do not distract the majority of people from these things.

The real questions asked deal with faith and belief in a specific religion, and in this case, the LDS church. The dissonance for me occurs with specific tenents, practices, and dogma that conflict with my faith and belief of God's purpose for us, and how he would wish us to treat our fellow man/woman. The real dissonance for me occurs from the tension between the spiritual relationship with Jesus( the promptings I receive, the feelings that alter or support actions) and the religious relationship with Jesus(How he is worshipped). Intellectually, I have never been able to resolve that dissonance. As you so well put it(not sarcastic so please don't take it that way) "a great deal of peace with intellectually accepting the fact that resolution is not always going to happen and then get about the business of trying to become more like the Savior". I stopped trying to resolve that conflict, accepted the fact that I was not a believer in the LDS church, and more specifically a believer in Joseph Smith, and have been at peace because of this. I have been able to move beyond the struggle of whether to believe in a specific religion, and move towards being more Christ-like in my life.

I agree with much of what you are saying, I simply see it from a different angle.

[LA Ute]

What bothers me is the disproportionate importance that is too often placed on these areas of dissonance. For me, the purpose of the Gospel is utilitarian and getting caught up in deutero-Isaiah, mitochondrial DNA or polygamy or what have you are just distracting tangents that even if resolved won't provide any additional utility. They won't help me love my wife and children, they won't help me serve my fellow man, they won't help me forgive or repent, they won't make me strive to be a better man.

I don't have to resolve those areas of dissonance in order to experiment upon the word to find out for myself if it bears good fruit. I don't have to resolve those areas of dissonance in order to act upon the spiritual promptings I receive from time to time to know that I am led by God inasmuch as I am willing to follow Him. The sum of these personal experiences over the course of an increasingly long life provide me a sufficiently reinforced independent witness of the truthfulness of the Gospel.

I'm not saying that there is no value in striving to reconcile the tension between the spiritual and intellectual, but I think for some they allow that struggle to needlessly overwhelm them. What are the core values and purposes of the Gospel? Do these issues materially affect my day to day life and how I attempt to integrate those core values? If we aren't constantly asking these questions and seeking to re-evaluate, we can lose sight of ultimate goal.

Faith is the first principle of the gospel. It is the principle that effectively states that sometimes, the spiritual simply has to win out over the intellectual if we are to progress. Rather than trying to buck that notion, there is a great deal of peace with intellectually accepting the fact that resolution is not always going to happen and then get about the business of trying to become more like the Savior.

Fire away.

I am not sure how many people here will admit it, but this is an excellent summary of the more orthodox way of approaching one's faith. It is well thought out, eminently defensible, sensible, and accepted by millions of Mormons. (I also happen to agree with it 100%.)

An experience comes to mind: My co-blogger and I were invited to speak to the Sunstone symposium in Salt Lake, fall 2007. He is a Presbyterian, a divinity school product, and an Evangelical. He knew nothing about Sunstone. As we were waiting for our panel to begin, he and I stood in the back of a room where John Dehlin and others were addressing a bunch of Sunstone insiders and talking about why they became involved in Sunstone. (It sounded eerily like a type of testimony meeting.) At one point my buddy and co-blogger stepped over to me and said, "Do these people realize they sound just like skeptics in any faith?"

It was an interesting moment and a totally unexpected comment. I've thought about it many times since. We al tend to thikn that we are a special kind of skeptic - or a special kind of believer - because of the subject matter (Mormonism). But being a skeptic or a believer is not special. What is special - to a believer - is what he or she believes. I guess to many skeptics, what they are skeptical about is also special. It sure seems that way here.

[SeattleUte]

An experience comes to mind: My co-blogger and I were invited to speak to the Sunstone symposium in Salt Lake, fall 2007. He is a Presbyterian, a divinity school product, and an Evangelical. He knew nothing about Sunstone. As we were waiting for our panel to begin, he and I stood in the back of a room where John Dehlin and others were addressing a bunch of Sunstone insiders and talking about why they became involved in Sunstone. (It sounded eerily like a type of testimony meeting.) At one point my buddy and co-blogger stepped over to me and said, "Do these people realize they sound just like skeptics in any faith?"

It was an interesting moment and a totally unexpected comment. I've thought about it many times since. We al tend to thikn that we are a special kind of skeptic - or a special kind of believer - because of the subject matter (Mormonism). But being a skeptic or a believer is not special. What is special - to a believer - is what he or she believes. I guess to many skeptics, what they are skeptical about is also special. It sure seems that way here.

I think your co-blogger is correct only from a historical perspective. Sunstone-type skeptics are a near dead art, in my opinion. There are no longer any philosophers in the sense that Kant or Nietzsche was a philosopher. All those great questions have been answered. The Judeo-Christian God is a myth. That is the supposition among the learned today. Intellectuals don't grant religion the consideration of skepticism. Religion is a historical fact and artifact, and a social phenomenon.

Mormonism, on the other hand, represents an intensity of faith and a corresponding quality of skepticism that confines itself to addressing Mormonism's claims and granting them the consideration of being a worthy subject for study and analysis. However, to the greater intellectual or scholarly world Sunstone gets as much interest or respect as FARMS. I think Sunstone itself represents a limited perspective, personally (you notice I don't spend time on minutia like rationalizations for polygamy or absence of wheels in meso-America). But I see Sunstone vs. Orthodoxy as like living in a time capsule. I'd be surprised if there's a similar tension in Evangelism, which is just flat out intellectually arid (check your brain at the door; no one is there trying to figure out what to do about dissonance).

[tooblue]

You were making a good point right up until you questioned my sincerity and inquisitiveness.

I don't need to be coached. In my mind (IMO) that is why your question went unanswered. It's a fair an honest assessment.

[Jeff Lebowski]

What bothers me is the disproportionate importance that is too often placed on these areas of dissonance. For me, the purpose of the Gospel is utilitarian and getting caught up in deutero-Isaiah, mitochondrial DNA or polygamy or what have you are just distracting tangents that even if resolved won't provide any additional utility. They won't help me love my wife and children, they won't help me serve my fellow man, they won't help me forgive or repent, they won't make me strive to be a better man.

I don't have to resolve those areas of dissonance in order to experiment upon the word to find out for myself if it bears good fruit. I don't have to resolve those areas of dissonance in order to act upon the spiritual promptings I receive from time to time to know that I am led by God inasmuch as I am willing to follow Him. The sum of these personal experiences over the course of an increasingly long life provide me a sufficiently reinforced independent witness of the truthfulness of the Gospel.

I'm not saying that there is no value in striving to reconcile the tension between the spiritual and intellectual, but I think for some they allow that struggle to needlessly overwhelm them. What are the core values and purposes of the Gospel? Do these issues materially affect my day to day life and how I attempt to integrate those core values? If we aren't constantly asking these questions and seeking to re-evaluate, we can lose sight of ultimate goal.

Faith is the first principle of the gospel. It is the principle that effectively states that sometimes, the spiritual simply has to win out over the intellectual if we are to progress. Rather than trying to buck that notion, there is a great deal of peace with intellectually accepting the fact that resolution is not always going to happen and then get about the business of trying to become more like the Savior.

Fire away.

That's a perfectly reasonable approach, Indy.

[Rosebud]

500+ pound gorillas... and growing

This was one thing that absolutely drove me crazy. Too many members and leaders refuse to acknowledge the 500 lb gorillas and "wish them away". It's an attitude of "if we don't talk/acknowledge these things, they don't exist and they will go away".

Hi all

Thanks for sharing your stories. The 500 lb gorillas are problematic for me because, in my experience, both members and leaders tend to ignore them out of fear. Fear because they are ugly, creepy, or immoral... or just fear that if their existence is acknowledged testimonies will be lost. I'm concerned that as we, as a people, focus only on those aspects of our religion/doctrine/culture that are uplifting, we make it difficult for ourselves to resolve any of the issues that are associated with our gorillas. Our fear, then, slows problem solving and leaves us with gorillas that continue to grow.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Hi all

Thanks for sharing your stories. The 500 lb gorillas are problematic for me because, in my experience, both members and leaders tend to ignore them out of fear. Fear because they are ugly, creepy, or immoral... or just fear that if their existence is acknowledged testimonies will be lost. I'm concerned that as we, as a people, focus only on those aspects of our religion/doctrine/culture that are uplifting, we make it difficult for ourselves to resolve any of the issues that are associated with our gorillas. Our fear, then, slows problem solving and leaves us with gorillas that continue to grow.

It's great to see you migrate out of that punography thread. I look forward to reading more of your posts.

[I.J. Reilly]

It's great to see you migrate out of that punography thread. I look forward to reading more of your posts.

Maybe she heard the "Death to punography!" chants coming out of the Iranian election thread and she saw the writing on the wall

[wuapinmon]

I'd be surprised if there's a similar tension in Evangelism, which is just flat out intellectually arid (check your brain at the door; no one is there trying to figure out what to do about dissonance).

Come now, let's avoid sweeping generalizations. I know several evangelicals who are skeptics and struggle with their faith's dogmatism. Just as people here and/or Sunstone folks might represent a tiny minority of Mormonism, I assure you, sir, that there are similar groups of thinkers in Evangelical circles.

[LA Ute]

I'd be surprised if there's a similar tension in Evangelism, which is just flat out intellectually arid (check your brain at the door; no one is there trying to figure out what to do about dissonance).

Wuap's right. I know from personal experience that this statement is flat-out, embarrassingly wrong. Do you even know any Evangelicals very well at all?

[Rosebud]

Maybe she heard the "Death to punography!" chants coming out of the Iranian election thread and she saw the writing on the wall

LAUGHING... no, I missed that... I'll have to go over and check it out when I have a second. At least I don't have to worry about you guys pandering to me. And unfortunately, I still have more to say on the Punography thread... so you can't start cheering at its death just yet. Besides, it's still getting hits....

[I.J. Reilly]

LAUGHING... no, I missed that... I'll have to go over and check it out when I have a second. At least I don't have to worry about you guys pandering to me. And unfortunately, I still have more to say on the Punography thread... so you can't start cheering at its death just yet. Besides, it's still getting hits....

Nah, there aren't really any such chants in there. I was just making a joke using a cross thread reference. But do check out the Iranian election thread if you have some time. We have a member here who is Iranian and in Iran at the moment and there are some interesting things in there.

[Jarid in Cedar]

Hi all

Fear because they are ugly, creepy, or immoral... or just fear that if their existence is acknowledged testimonies will be lost. .

This was the conclusion that I came to. I can't explain it otherwise. But to ignore/deny things that are well documented, comes across as disgenuine.

[UtahDan]

I don't need to be coached. In my mind (IMO) that is why your question went unanswered. It's a fair an honest assessment.

Huh. That must be some other tooblue who recently...nevermind.

[Indy Coug]

Hi all

Thanks for sharing your stories. The 500 lb gorillas are problematic for me because, in my experience, both members and leaders tend to ignore them out of fear. Fear because they are ugly, creepy, or immoral... or just fear that if their existence is acknowledged testimonies will be lost. I'm concerned that as we, as a people, focus only on those aspects of our religion/doctrine/culture that are uplifting, we make it difficult for ourselves to resolve any of the issues that are associated with our gorillas. Our fear, then, slows problem solving and leaves us with gorillas that continue to grow.

That's my whole point: the 500 pound gorillas are really 25 pound baby chimps in a funhouse mirror.