Dear Gramps
I have fallen in love with a fantastic Mormon lady and she has fallen in love with me. We are both in our 30’s with a couple of long term failed relationships behind us and both feel that the other is what we have been searching for all of our lives. However, not only am I not a Mormon, I am for all intensive purposes a non believer. I would classify myself as an intelligent technical person and have always wanted tangible proof of things and religion just does not work like that. My lady friend does not currently see the complete difference of opinion regarding religion as a problem and indeed we have had some interesting debates on the subject. However I am concerned that my lack of religion will ultimately cause her a problem and will not allow her to experience things that are important to her in the church. Please could you advise us how the church views our relationship?
Colin, from the UK

Dear Colin,
A couple of points to consider. If your fiancee is a practicing Mormon, you are headed for trouble. The Mormon religion is not an individual thing but a family thing. Mormons believe that to qualify for residence in the highest heaven one must be married for both time and eternity in one of the Lord’s holy temple, and then, of course, abide fully and completely by the covenants that are associated with that sacred ordinance. The Mormons believe that those who achieve this goal actually become gods and goddesses, will inherit all knowledge and will possess all power. They will live in the presence of God the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ, and will participate in ruling the universe. If one marries another who doesn’t believe that doctrine, imagine what they would be giving up!!
Concerning your need for tangible proof before accepting things, I feel that I know where you are coming from since I also have a scientific background. However, in my opinion, science is only one approach to reality, and I have found it to be a very limited approach at that. The discipline of science is not equipped to interact with spiritual phenomena by the nature of its structure. But to believe that if something cannot be scientifically proven is does not exist is really an extremely shallow view of reality.
The fundamental difference between science and true religion (i.e. the Mormon Church philosophy) is that science demands proof before acceptance and religion demands acceptance before proof. That concept is the principle of faith.
I have found that indeed there is a God, who is the literal Father of the spirits that animate the bodies of men, and who is the creator of the worlds. I consider the Mormon religion to be a rational theology, both believable and provable. However, it is as necessary in religion as it is in science to accept the premises upon which the discipline is based. The relative and transitive nature of science is well documented in an important text by Thomas S. Kuhn, entitled, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, The University of Chicago Press, 1962. This book was considered by the Times Literary Supplement to be “one of the hundred most influential books since the Second World War.” Although it says nothing about religion it reveals what to me is the true nature of scientific knowledge. I highly recommend it.
Gramps