darth_ender said:
Mrebo said:
Ultimately, one does just gotta have faith when it comes to religion. The outstanding question for me is always: okay, well why should I have faith in this or that particular set of beliefs?
When it comes to something like the Garden of Eden being in America, such assertions will not make sense to the many of us who are not Mormons. But it is useful to recognize that every religion has such faith-bound elements that are not supported (and sometimes even contradicted by) known facts. I suspect such a critique of Mormonism might be more pronounced because it is a newer religion with an unusually America-centric slant that many construe as a corruption of Christianity, or as you say "weird."
My question is why have you chosen to put your faith into Mormonism?
I was indeed born into this Church. On my mission, however, I had a great challenge and had to decide if I was willing to believe what I'd been taught or if I was wasting my time. This was in large part where I gained much of my interest in Church history, the critiques of my church which were quite popular in Atlanta, GA, and the faith supporting research that was taking place. As you've said, all religions take a certain amount of faith in spite of what may not seem logical. As mortals, we often forget that our understanding is limited, and we are often surprised when what was once thought impossible is in fact inevitable. Sometimes you have to suspend what you don't understand at the present till an answer comes along later.
It often feels like there is a Catch-22 when it comes to discussing religion. When a person goes scratching below the surface from a logical but non-believing viewpoint, he may find all kinds of apparent problems. It's not that the religion can't offer an answer, but the answer is unsatisfying in the absence of faith. Or the non-believer can say, "but what about secular facts A, B, C, and D?" Maybe those facts aren't all relevant or maybe the religious person believes that they're not all facts. And then there is only argument (much of it stupid, tbh).
Alternatively, one might express an honest interest from a more or less academic viewpoint, wishing to understand another's beliefs and weigh them silently. If he ends up being persuaded, fine, but he isn't really engaging or trying to believe, as he may not be dissuaded accepting at least the possibility of certain secular facts. And then, is that person merely humoring the believer?