Imagine if You Find a Map

The Map
by Jessica DeGraw
3-20-12

Imagine if
You are a child.
You find a map;
A pirate's treasure map.
You search.

Everyone searches.
For their keys,
For their shoes,
For their dreams.
They search.

When you are searching,
What are you searching for?
Something nonessential?
Something worthwhile?
Searching for change?

And how do you search?
Do you agonize over it?
Are you annoyed by it?
Do you feel anxious about it?
Are you diligent?

When do you find it?
After an hour?
After twenty-four?
After one-hundred and sixty-eight?
After you've given up?

What if you never find it?
What if you never stop searching?
What if the map is infinite?
What if that's the point?
Imagine if.

-

This follow up cartoon is worth it.

The Terrible Questions

Hugh Nibley:

Last week I received two letters that introduce us very well to the "terrible questions." One was from a gentleman in Colorado, a long, long, extremely indignant letter with ninety-eight questions… 

In questions on epistomology our correspondent asks fifty-four questions. For example, "If God is a junior god in the universe, and there are more senior gods, why shouldn't I put my faith in a senior god? 

Next are questions on ontology, the nature of being. For example, "How is Mormonism different metaphysically from ancient pagan concepts?" (We could write a long book on that question!) "What about autonomy of the human will, and free agency?"  

Then come eighteen questions on ethics, or "ethica," as he calls it… 

In the hereafter, what difference will these questions make? The real question, of course, is, Is this all there is? This is what everybody wants to know, the only question that bothers us. If you can answer that definitely, then our troubles are over; there is nothing left to worry about.

To expand on that question, he tells the story of Clement and his questions:
-"I wondered…if I didn't exist before I was born."
-"When was this world made, or what was there before it was made, or did it always exist?"
-"Whether there would be a life for me after death or whether I wouldn't be anything at all afterward."

These remind me of when my son asked who created God? He was never satisfied. For weeks and even months off and on again these kind of questions would come up. To be honest I have never been satisfied by the answers I have gotten except for the question I got as an answer. "What difference does it make if I know exactly what the origin of God is?"

The more pertinent question are:
- "Is there really a God?"
- "Is He really all powerful, all knowing and perfect in every way?"
- "He really loves me knowing perfectly who I am in my deepest, darkest place?"
- "Is my life acceptable to Him?"

These really are the three things that are necessary for salvation.

Let us here observe, that three things are necessary, in order that any rational and intelligent being may exercise faith in God, unto life and salvation: 

First, the idea that he actually exists.
Second, a correct idea of his character, perfections and attributes.
Third, an actual knowledge that the course of life which he is pursuing, is according to his will. (Lectures on Faith 3:2-5)

Other Ways of Knowing

We believe that doubt can have a powerful and tremendously useful and productive function in one's faith journey, but its something that we aspire to move through and beyond; not to wallow in endlessly. And then the idea "a crucible refines us", the scriptural imagery of a refiner's fire. There is something to be said for the way in which a crucible tries you but ultimately can strengthen you. (Terryl Givens, "Reflections on the Quest For Faith by Terryl and Fiona Givens", Fair Mormon Interview, YouTube 7:21)

It is a great interview of both Terryl and his wife Fiona about their book, The Crucible of Doubt. Questions are what started the Reformation and the Restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

I love the way he describes other ways of knowing besides rationality.

We are great admirers of science. I am personally. Our culture is today and we should be. Science has pioneered incredible new frontiers. It's been the spearhead of technological innovation and enhanced standard of living. The problem is when we come to think that science or rationality are the only, or the necessarily superior avenues to ultimate truth and knowledge. A little bit of reflection indicates that in our actual, lived experience, that's never the case.

We don't rely upon logic or rationalism or science for those decisions of greatest importance and moments in our own lives. We don't shape our moral responses on the basis of reason. We don't say for example that rape or child abuse is wrong because of some calculus of cost benefits. We intuitively, instinctively respond on the basis of moral intuition to those realities, as well we should. So our point is: Why in religion should we not also credit other ways of knowing. 

Art is another means that we give some examples of. Art can be much more powerful and effective in revealing and conveying truth, than any cold analysis of facts. Perhaps the greatest scientist of all time, Einstein, once said, "The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift." (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Albert_Einstein ) All we are trying to do is help in this work of rehabilitating the gift of intuition and spiritual discernment along side of science and rationalism.
(Terryl Givens, 19:52)

I had never thought of the Savior as an example of asking questions. Fiona explains,

The Savior is the model here. When we look at the garden of Gethsemane treatment by Luke, Christ looks at what's in front of him and he realizes the horror that it entails and he doesn't want to go there. So he asks God to please make a way for his escape. But God can't do that. He can't take the cup. There are billions of people, whose salvations rely on this particular event by this particular man who cannot be replaced.

What Christ does then is that, famous, "not my will, but thine, be done". We tend to breeze over that. What Christ is actually saying there is, "I understand that you may not be able to take this away but please give me a way to be able to endure it". He gives God room to answer his question in another way. And God is able to do that. God then sends an angel who comforts and supports the Savior through his agony.

I think that is the risk that we have to take. We have to open ourselves out to the myriad ways God may actually respond to our question. He may not be able to take that cancer away. That may be something He is not able to do so in our questing there is this trust element that God will somehow answer our question in another way. Help us be able to go through this.

That shows great risk. But I think it also shows that God is trying to talk to us in numerous voices. He is trying to help us see His hand print in various parts of our lives. So by not requiring God to answer us in the way we expect him to answer, we are more likely to receive answers to our questions in beautiful, miraculous and God-touched ways. (Fiona Givens, 34:20)

-

Questioning

“It’s important that we understand that questioning the things we do, believe, or accept is normal and part of the process that leads from youth to maturity, as well as from maturity to wisdom.” —(Michael R. Ash, "Questioning Is Part of Gaining Maturity and Wisdom", Church News, By R. Scott Lloyd, 14 Aug 2013)

I also like this quote from the article

“Critics may unconsciously or consciously take advantage of the natural inclination that most people, most of the time, will rely on the quick and easy answers,” he said. “The problem is that, more often than not, the issues are not simple. They are frequently complex, especially when we have to compare or understand the issues in context of time, circumstance, or culture. A lot more ink is required to respond to an accusation than to make an accusation.”

Questions make life meaningful. I heard someone say that to make scripture study meaningful. Come to it with a question or two. Questions are what started the LDS church.

It will be important to my growth to have some questions in mind as I continue my growth.

On Teaching Children to Question without Losing Faith

A complete quote from Papa D

For me and my kids, the most important thing isn't the questioning; it's the attitude behind the questioning. I question to learn, and I try to teach my children to question to learn.  

I draw a distinction between "doubt" and "uncertainty" specifically because I want my children to embrace the idea that it's ok to be uncertain - but I don't want them to have a "doubting spirit". In other words, I want them to be open to changes in their understanding - of everything - as they learn more, but I don't want their primary orientation to be one of disbelief. I want them to be willing to explore anything and come to believe whatever makes sense to them - but that is different than not being willing to explore some things because their primary orientation is negative and unbelieving.  

I'm not sure if that makes sense, but I think the biggest dis-service parents do for their kids in this regard (based on my years of observing parents who preach questioning and "debate" to their kids) is that they do so in a way that encourages their kids to disbelieve - rather than encouraging them to believe. 

I try to teach my children to question with the intent of discovering what they can believe (what they can accept as "true" at that time), not with the intent of discovering what they can't believe. It's the focus that matters most - the "direction of the objective", if you will.  

Let me use a specific example:  

I know someone who was raised to question everything - but it was done in a spirit of debate in which arguing and trying to convince others was the focus. This friend became very good at debating things - seeing both sides of something and making a particular argument well enough to win. He became a lawyer and was very successful - but, in the meantime, he lost his ability to really believe anything in particular. Whichever position could be argued most effectively was the position that was "right" or "true" for him. Hence, he ended up with an orientation geared toward justification, which led to all kinds of destructive beahvior, divorce and other complications in his current life. Right now, he can't shut down his "justification orientation" - and he does whatever he wants to do, since, subconsciously at best or automatically at worst, he can justify whatever he chooses to do in some way. He also can argue about it until anyone who questions him gives up and walks away, further re-inforcing in his own mind that he hasn't done anything wrong.  

His problem, as I see it, isn't that he started out with a disbelieving, justifying orientation (although that might be correct); rather, it's that he was tuaght that orientation and it was re-inforced throughout his childhood in the name of objectivity and rationality and open-mindedness. It wasn't a questioning orientation; it was something much more hard to quantify and name - perhaps a "win-at-all-costs" or "pride" or "purely intellectual" orientation. 

It's a fine distinction, I know - but it's a very important distinction to me.

-