What can you openly not believe in?

[2bizE]

As I transition in my faith journey, I find myself asking what can I open up to other ward members that I do not believe in, but still remain in good standing.
I think Satan is an ideology that I might be able to get away with not believe. There are not any temple recommend questions about believing or having faith in Satan.
What other gospel topics or characters can you think of that you might be able to openly disagree with?

[Give It Time]

Well, times have changed. There has been so much disaffection that I don't think people are as trusting about it, anymore.

Case in point. My ex didn't believe in the following doctrines:

Being healthy (I do consider that a doctrine and site the WofW as support).
Forgiveness
Love one another
The Golden Rule
Adam-Ondi-Ahmen
Large families
Family Home Evening (actually a good thing)
He was fine with abortion

Can't think of more, but that's most of them. No one batted an eye. My view on these things was that he just hadn't gained a testimony, yet. I think that's how a lot of people look at it.

In my own case with feminism, abuse and gender roles, I'm getting people trying to "help" thinking I just don't know the gospel or I don't have faith.

I think before all these disaffections, men were especially immune to sideways glances, because of the whole priesthood/men are more valuable thing. Post-disaffections, I'm not so sure.

On the reverse side, my ex used to think that anyone who went diving in deep doctrine was struggling with their testimony. His reasoning was that the simple things of the gospel weren't satisfying them and so they'd go spelunking for deeper meaning. I didn't agree with him, at the time, but I think he has a point.

Final note: like I said, I used to look at my ex's beliefs and say, "oh, he just hasn't gained a testimony" or "he just doesn't have a full understanding of it, yet". I've come to the conclusion that was incredibly arrogant and disrespectful of me. I should have believed him. I wouldn't have married him, but I kind of consider that beside the point. Though I was well intended, I was disrespectful and I regret that.

[FiveFingerMnemonic]

Polygamy is a pretty easy subject to discredit publicly because active members who don't know just think it's those bad southern Utahns doing that.

[Hagoth]

Young earth creationism. But I guess that's not really doctrine.

I'm not sure I agree about Satan. He is pretty central and important in the church and often gets more air time than Jesus.

[wtfluff]

After thinking for .5 milliseconds:

Faith is a virtue
Aliens with superpowers
Lichs
Ghosts
Angels (the magical religious type good or bad)
Prophets
Seers
Revelators
Magic Rocks
Magic Wands
Magic handshakes
Magic clothing
Humans with magic powers (I guess this one applies to all humans who don't have a corporate title of Prophet, Seer or Revelator)
Symbolic Canablism
Polygamy (Or any of the "Poly" words as "commanded" by some sort of god)
Patriarchy

OK... I need to stop. I could probably do this all day.

[Shawn]

I think the key is the way you express your disbelief. Rather than saying, "I don't believe polygamy was of God," you might say, "I have a hard time believing polygamy was inspired."

[redjay]

Openly: Nothing - not even bigfoot.

[redjay]

When I had a vasectomy, a well-meaning and otherwise lovely fellow at church asked me why I would mutilate myself like that (actually I had a surgeon do it - while I lay there pretending to play tough but they could tell by my wincing eyes and curling toes that more anaesthetic was needed)

Thew point to this story is that even something like a vasectomy can be frowned upon by the old guard

[moksha]

If you were to announce in the foyer that you do not believe in the divinity of Church Authorities, I suspect you would get called on the carpet for it and some punishment process would commence.

[FiveFingerMnemonic]

When I had a vasectomy, a well-meaning and otherwise lovely fellow at church asked me why I would mutilate myself like that (actually I had a surgeon do it - while I lay there pretending to play tough but they could tell by my wincing eyes and curling toes that more anaesthetic was needed)

Thew point to this story is that even something like a vasectomy can be frowned upon by the old guard

Even though you are in the UK I think we had the same doctor. He must have had a golf tee time to make so couldn't allow the numbing to take effect before diving right in.

[Brent]

I would offer that given statements that "The Book of Mormon isn't a historical document" there's an opening to simply place it in the pile with Noah, Jonah, and other "allegorical" stories there is a growing opening to let the Book of Mormon veracity slip. This is a slowly growing section of the active Church--the "There's no DNA evidence because, well, the DNA never got here BUT the story of faith and obedience is more important than the historicity.

Give it 10 years.

I''m serious.

[2bizE]

If you were to announce in the foyer that you do not believe in the divinity of Church Authorities, I suspect you would get called on the carpet for it and some punishment process would commence.

Usually the foyer is full of NOMs and lesser actives....maybe the foyer is a good place to start.

[Shawn]

If you were to announce in the foyer that you do not believe in the divinity of Church Authorities, I suspect you would get called on the carpet for it and some punishment process would commence.

Yep, that's worse than cursing God.

[redjay]

[/quote]

Even though you are in the UK I think we had the same doctor. He must have had a golf tee time to make so couldn't allow the numbing to take effect before diving right in.
[/quote]

It's a rite of passage for sure.

[redjay]

Give it 10 years.

I''m serious.

Agreed. The church will evolve or die. Unfortunately it will do so very very slowly.

[document]

The only thing that I was able to be open in my disbelief while Mormon was polygamy. Everyone seemed to agree with me except for a few very orthodox types.

[deacon blues]

I think if one were to say, "Brigham Young was totally wrong when he instituted the priesthood ban. Check the essays if you don't believe me." You could get a real good discussion going and still keep your recommend.

[2bizE]

I think if one were to say, "Brigham Young was totally wrong when he instituted the priesthood ban. Check the essays if you don't believe me." You could get a real good discussion going and still keep your recommend.

Yes that would work. Like poking a bear and then sitting back and watching what happens.
I had thought of saying "Brigham Young and other church leaders took the philosophies of men and mingled them with scripture and created the false doctrine of denying blacks the priesthood. Read the essays if you don't believe me."
Probably wouldn't go over as well as your suggestion.

[oliver_denom]

I knew a stake mission president, back when there was such a thing, who didn't believe in the resurrection. He was very open about it and I was shocked because that doctrine was so central to "the plan of salvation". But no one seemed to care very much. He did his calling and just didn't talk about that one doctrine with investigators.

What really baffles me now about this, is that I know the resurrection to be the very center of what makes one a Christian. In Paul's writings, the reality of Jesus rising after three days was the central belief, the very cornerstone of the faith. The fact that LDS people could brush this off as no big deal is very telling when attempting to identify the center of our own doctrines. Not believing in the resurrection was not considered ideal, but it was tolerable. Now, what if he didn't believe in the first vision, or Joseph Smith's ability to translate? That, I suspect, would have been a deal breaker.

[Korihor]

I'm it seems I can openly disbelieve in just about all of it. They just ignore me yet say they still love our family and want us there.
By openly disbelieving we are still wanted yet have become untouchables.