Still waiting on God

[Mackman]

Yes I am still a member of the church but do consider myself a biblical Christian . I have as many of you know been waiting for.my wife to be led out of Mormonism by God !! It has been a long wait as many of you are experiencing but I pray that soon she will see the light and we can find a biblical based church together. I would like to know how many of you have been waiting for the same and for how long ? I have now been waiting 6 long years !! Thanks

[2bizE]

Does your wife know you are waiting for her?
Mine doesn’t , but I have been waiting since around 2015.

[jfro18]

I've been waiting since about 2007... so 14 years... but my wife didn't know I was waiting until 3 years ago.

I truly think that had I done the research 14 years ago she would have been more open to the info, but as of today I do not ever see it happening.

[Red Ryder]

Which God are you waiting for?



What if God leads her out of Christianity?

Could you live with a Buddhist?

[jfro18]

What if God leads her out of Christianity?

Could you live with a Buddhist?

Do Buddhists wear garments 24/7?

[wtfluff]

Which God are you waiting for?



What if God leads her out of Christianity?

Could you live with a Buddhist?

I started typing something like this, but stopped myself.

So, now that Red has brought it up: I've been waiting for a god to lead the entire human race to some sort of non-contradictory conclusion about god for my entire life. Humanity has been waiting since the dawn of time.

Still waiting. (Not really though. Already wasted more than half a lifetime waiting. Time to move on to more productive endeavours.)

[Palerider]

Yes I am still a member of the church but do consider myself a biblical Christian . I have as many of you know been waiting for.my wife to be led out of Mormonism by God !! It has been a long wait as many of you are experiencing but I pray that soon she will see the light and we can find a biblical based church together. I would like to know how many of you have been waiting for the same and for how long ? I have now been waiting 6 long years !! Thanks

Obviously God doesn't force people to go in a particular direction.

Have you considered that God is waiting for your wife to open herself to the discoveries and possibilities that you have already encountered?

We aren't the only ones who have to deal with confirmation bias. God has to respect your wife's decisions and conclusions even when they are completely wrong or maybe even half right.

The church has such a tight lock on it's members. Covey talks about the way to increase our ability to influence others by building up the "trust account" between us.

The church has built a huge trust account with members.

They see their Bishops, SP's, general authorities once a week, a few times a year, twice a year; dispensing all of this "wonderful" wisdom. They're on their best behavior in their nice suits and white shirts. They almost never make a public mistake and when they do it's forgiven because after all they are just men no matter how much members adore them. Wouldn't it be interesting to see what they're really like in real life? But then they'd be just like us.....

When you make something that is desirable scarce it becomes even more special and authoritative.

Oh that we husbands could be so lucky as to show up twice a year, looking good and spend three hours with our family giving them all a good pep talk and making them feel how special/privileged they are to have us at all. And a little guilty for not doing better.

I guess I would ask how can a spouse make the trust account between them and their husband/wife so big that it overcomes the church's position of prominence?

Tearing down the church only goes so far before it starts to cause pain in the spouse and the trust account begins to deteriorate.

Hmmm.......got to think about this.

[Red Ryder]

I guess I would ask how can a spouse make the trust account between them and their husband/wife so big that it overcomes the church's position of prominence?

Tearing down the church only goes so far before it starts to cause pain in the spouse and the trust account begins to deteriorate.

Hmmm.......got to think about this.

Nice post Palerider!

I’ve got to think more about this now too.

In many ways the church provides an emotional level I can’t compete with. Sure I provide all the essential things, but the spiritual dopamine doesn’t flow from anything I do in the relationship.

Which reminds me, I went to church yesterday to support the wife and the lady giving the opening prayer asked HF to bless the spiritually ill...

How do we compete with that?

[Stig]

Referring to "biblical Christianity" as if it was some settled, monolithic, belief system seems to be folly to me. I can probably find a 100 different churches in my metropolitan area which claim to teach "biblical Christianity" but which disagree on very significant details of what that actually entails. Good luck with that.

[Angel]

Wow. I was the first one out in my fam, and I did not keep my mouth shut about it. I had the hard conversations, put my foot down about what reality was - granted our leaving involved abuse and health of the kids - but wow...

Now we are all out, and marriage has never been better. Happy to have had those difficult convos.

[Palerider]

Referring to "biblical Christianity" as if it was some settled, monolithic, belief system seems to be folly to me. I can probably find a 100 different churches in my metropolitan area which claim to teach "biblical Christianity" but which disagree on very significant details of what that actually entails. Good luck with that.

I think he may be referring to "Biblical" as opposed to the Mormon brand and it's added scripture.

Obviously the "Christian" church is currently at odds with itself to varying degrees. No one would dispute that. But it is interesting that the Bible itself foreshadows just such a scenario. It was virtually anticipated.

The concept that makes the difference is that regardless of the seeming contradictions between denominations, there is sufficient information in the Bible to access salvation through Christ and the gift of his Spirit.

The determining factor isn't the adherence to the "proper" form of worship as much as it is the intent and quality of the heart. If a person loves God, treats his neighbor as he would be treated and has faith in Christ's atonement, I don't think God is going to fuss about the details.

This is why I actually think some if not many Mormons will be saved. They are good people. But I think leadership will be held to a different standard. They know there's no there, there. But they just keep feeding their members crap and taking their money.

ETA: Sorry, didn't mean to derail.

[moksha]

Do Buddhists wear garments 24/7?

Not while visiting the beaches of the Riviera.

[Stig]

Referring to "biblical Christianity" as if it was some settled, monolithic, belief system seems to be folly to me. I can probably find a 100 different churches in my metropolitan area which claim to teach "biblical Christianity" but which disagree on very significant details of what that actually entails. Good luck with that.

I think he may be referring to "Biblical" as opposed to the Mormon brand and it's added scripture.

Obviously the "Christian" church is currently at odds with itself to varying degrees. No one would dispute that. But it is interesting that the Bible itself foreshadows just such a scenario. It was virtually anticipated.

The concept that makes the difference is that regardless of the seeming contradictions between denominations, there is sufficient information in the Bible to access salvation through Christ and the gift of his Spirit.

The determining factor isn't the adherence to the "proper" form of worship as much as it is the intent and quality of the heart. If a person loves God, treats his neighbor as he would be treated and has faith in Christ's atonement, I don't think God is going to fuss about the details.

This is why I actually think some if not many Mormons will be saved. They are good people. But I think leadership will be held to a different standard. They know there's no there, there. But they just keep feeding their members crap and taking their money.

ETA: Sorry, didn't mean to derail.

Although I am now a total non-believer, in the LDS church or in anything divine, I still take exception to the boundary maintenance exercise of referring to one group of Christians as "biblical" and excluding Mormonism from that. The interpretation of the Bible that Mormonism follows may be in the minority in Christianity, but it is no less "biblical." The LDS Church has woven together quite the tapestry of support from the Bible for its beliefs. In fact, every sect claiming the Bible as a scripture is "biblical;" it's simply how it is interpreted at that point. In drawing the distinction you referred to, you are saying that there is a "right" and a "wrong" interpretation of the Bible, at least on the issue you have chosen. That is...well...to put it bluntly, bullshit.

[Corsair]

The determining factor isn't the adherence to the "proper" form of worship as much as it is the intent and quality of the heart. If a person loves God, treats his neighbor as he would be treated and has faith in Christ's atonement, I don't think God is going to fuss about the details.

This is why I actually think some if not many Mormons will be saved. They are good people. But I think leadership will be held to a different standard. They know there's no there, there. But they just keep feeding their members crap and taking their money.

ETA: Sorry, didn't mean to derail.

I think your ideas are fairly close to the heart of this matter. The pain that Mackman is feeling with regards to his wife is certainly real. I think the atheists, agnostics, and believers on this board would all at least agree that the LDS church generates far too much strife in mixed-faith marriages. I don't pretend to know what either salvation or existence or oblivion looks like after I take my last breath. Author Michael Shermer put it well when we said that he while doubted life after death, he was certainly in favor of life after death.

The big concern that weighs on all of us is the life we are having before death. The peaceful detente between my TBM wife and me has been good, but I simply am not waiting for her to change beliefs. She has a religious devotion that is roughly as expensive and time consuming as a golf membership at a nice course. I am no longer practicing getting better at LDS golf and she is rarely interested at me offering suggestions on her putting game on LDS courses.

I'll push this metaphor way too far and hope that the owner of all of the golf courses let's her know that she does not need to exclusively attend this one course. We are all hoping for that with our spouses and extended families. But I can't push her and I doubt that Mackman can push his wife in that direction either. Believers have to come to that realization on their own, unfortunately. We can only be patient and make the best of mortality while showing LDS believers that there are other good ways to spend our lives.

[Palerider]

Although I am now a total non-believer, in the LDS church or in anything divine, I still take exception to the boundary maintenance exercise of referring to one group of Christians as "biblical" and excluding Mormonism from that. The interpretation of the Bible that Mormonism follows may be in the minority in Christianity, but it is no less "biblical." The LDS Church has woven together quite the tapestry of support from the Bible for its beliefs. In fact, every sect claiming the Bible as a scripture is "biblical;" it's simply how it is interpreted at that point. In drawing the distinction you referred to, you are saying that there is a "right" and a "wrong" interpretation of the Bible, at least on the issue you have chosen. That is...well...to put it bluntly, bullshit.

I think you've misunderstood what I was trying to say. But then I'm not always the most precise writer so I wouldn't blame you entirely.

But nowhere did I say that there is "a "right" and a "wrong" interpretation of the Bible.." on some particular issue.

I think most denominations, when speaking of the difference between themselves and Mormonism, make the mistake of referring to themselves as "Biblical" (sounding as if Mormons are not Biblical) when in reality what those denominations are is "Bible exclusive".

Of course Mormons have the Bible as a part of their Canon. Everyone here already knows that. And they are free to interpret it in whatever manner makes them happy. They are "Christian" just as many others claim to be Christian all over the spectrum, whether you're talking about Jehovah's Witnesses or David Koresh.

The only distinction I think Mackman was drawing is that of being "Bible exclusive" as opposed to having the added pseudo-scripture that Mormonism carries. I think most people here would understand that, without him or anyone else having to spell it out for them. To make an issue of it seems to be making a "man an offender for a word."

[Stig]

Although I am now a total non-believer, in the LDS church or in anything divine, I still take exception to the boundary maintenance exercise of referring to one group of Christians as "biblical" and excluding Mormonism from that. The interpretation of the Bible that Mormonism follows may be in the minority in Christianity, but it is no less "biblical." The LDS Church has woven together quite the tapestry of support from the Bible for its beliefs. In fact, every sect claiming the Bible as a scripture is "biblical;" it's simply how it is interpreted at that point. In drawing the distinction you referred to, you are saying that there is a "right" and a "wrong" interpretation of the Bible, at least on the issue you have chosen. That is...well...to put it bluntly, bullshit.

I think you've misunderstood what I was trying to say. But then I'm not always the most precise writer so I wouldn't blame you entirely.

But nowhere did I say that there is "a "right" and a "wrong" interpretation of the Bible.." on some particular issue.

I think most denominations, when speaking of the difference between themselves and Mormonism, make the mistake of referring to themselves as "Biblical" (sounding as if Mormons are not Biblical) when in reality what those denominations are is "Bible exclusive".

Of course Mormons have the Bible as a part of their Canon. Everyone here already knows that. And they are free to interpret it in whatever manner makes them happy. They are "Christian" just as many others claim to be Christian all over the spectrum, whether you're talking about Jehovah's Witnesses or David Koresh.

The only distinction I think Mackman was drawing is that of being "Bible exclusive" as opposed to having the added pseudo-scripture that Mormonism carries. I think most people here would understand that, without him or anyone else having to spell it out for them. To make an issue of it seems to be making a "man an offender for a word."

That's fair and I appreciate the clarification. Perhaps I am also a little sensitive to the term having had it launched at me repeatedly for 2 years in TN and KY while on my mission.

[Palerider]

That's fair and I appreciate the clarification. Perhaps I am also a little sensitive to the term having had it launched at me repeatedly for 2 years in TN and KY while on my mission.

This is interesting.

Having been in the Bible belt, did you get the impression that most of the denominations were using the term "Biblical" or "Bible based" to infer that they have the corner on what the true interpretation of scripture is? Or were they using it to imply that Mormonism was not Biblically based when they were talking to you specifically?

It seems to me that (with the exception of Mormonism) for a Christian church to say they are "Bible based" is kind of oddly redundant. I mean what else could they be based on if not that? One could say the Christian church would not exist today without the Bible. Are there Christian churches out there that are not based on the Bible?

[Palerider]

Currently I'm living in California for a short term and I listen occasionally to a Christian radio network. Everyone says, "We have Bible based teaching!" And yet I'm amused at how differently many of them interpret scripture.

Joseph Smith got that right but when you think about it, it's not much of a big discovery.

[Stig]

That's fair and I appreciate the clarification. Perhaps I am also a little sensitive to the term having had it launched at me repeatedly for 2 years in TN and KY while on my mission.

This is interesting.

Having been in the Bible belt, did you get the impression that most of the denominations were using the term "Biblical" or "Bible based" to infer that they have the corner on what the true interpretation of scripture is? Or were they using it to imply that Mormonism was not Biblically based when they were talking to you specifically?

It seems to me that (with the exception of Mormonism) for a Christian church to say they are "Bible based" is kind of oddly redundant. I mean what else could they be based on if not that? One could say the Christian church would not exist today without the Bible. Are there Christian churches out there that are not based on the Bible?

As to your first set of questions - I got the impression their use of "Biblical" or "Bible Based" was used in both ways. They certainly touted their adherence to "Biblical Christianity" to the general public as a selling point; as if there was some other kind of Christianity. In one-on-one interactions with us, it was definitely a boundary maintenance exercise.

Your second paragraph and related question is exactly on point with what I was saying earlier - Why use that term? It's redundant and often intended to be exclusionary.

[Mackman]

Very much like saying we are the one true church on the face of the earth!!!! Anymore I just laugh at that statement internally as many religions claim to be the one true church.I see where you guys make a good point about stop waiting for her and just be the best version of myself. I see also the term biblical is a silly one at best as many churches claim that term. Peace out Nomies !!!