How Many People Are Currently Leaving The Church Over Historical Issues?

[Oracle]

My thoughts also Ray. I know very few people who left the Church because of historical reasons, but I know many who left because they couldn't or didn't want to live the standards;

I lost belief in the church nearly a decade ago. After losing belief, I retained callings and was very active for a good five years after the loss of belief. Just prior to going inactive I was putting in 12-15 hours a week towards multiple callings on both stake and ward level. Both I, and my young family, grew tired of keeping up with that particular standard. I don't know that I would call that a bad thing. Ten years after losing belief, and I keep the word of wisdom better than most mormons do. I do not swear. I do not lie, I do not cheat. I spend five out seven evenings per week with my husband and children doing various activities together. I am a productive member of society. I give to the poor and needy. I help my neighbors.

I'm not sure what standard you think it is that most disbelievers do not want to live. I left the church because it was not what it purports to be. I am much more intellectually comfortable stating that I know the mormon church to be NOT true than I ever was stating that the mormon church WAS true, based on my studies of its foundations.

I am not an exception. I regularly meet with former members of the LDS church- ones who claim they left for doctrinal reasons. For all intensive purposes they could function as a ward social. They are family oriented. They don't drink, they don't smoke, they don't break the law, they don't torture small animals, they don't trip old people for entertainment purposes. They are good people who want to live a good life. They want a purpose driven life that resonates with them, and not dictated by what another person says is the true way, or what is demanded by the tradition of their fathers.

[Ray Agostini]

Who are these people who would prefer total annihilation to eternal paradise?

Total annihilation would be preferable to having to account for your actions in mortality. Therefore total annihilation is a pleasing thought. When we are dead, we is dead - nothing matters.

Do you realise how much time you spend trying to convince us that nothing eternal matters? Why? What's your "mission" MC? To convince us? Or yourself? I think the latter.

I still think you're a very highly entertaining addition to this board. You beat every Irish or blonde joke I've ever heard. You, MC, are just FUN. And, absolutely, completely, spiritually dead, and that's what makes your posts so entertaining.

[Calm]

Apparently you're not referencing Mormons who convert to Judaism, or Islam, or even Evangelical Christianity, since each of those religions are as strict if not stricter than Mormonism.

I personally know no LDS who have converted to Judaism or Islam so couldn't say about that....and those who have converted to EC were at the time I knew them living a less rigid lifestyle than the LDS are expected to. There is a large variety of EC congregations, some with stricter standards than LDS from what I've seen (no dancing, no TV, no Harry Potter, etc.) and some with less (drinking, living together without being married, etc). I do know the religious Jews also have several different sects (four major ones, IIRC) with varying degrees of strictness, I would assume that Islam has variations of strictness as well (as should be obvious just from the very public differences in restrictions on women).

As to leaving over historical issues...again, I personally know of no LDS who has left the Church over that stated reason so I expect that percentage is rather low. I have only encountered that percentage over the Internet.

I would not expect there to be only one reason for a person to leave the church, just as I would not expect there to be only one reason for a person to join or stay in the church. Religious life tends to be very multidimensional...at least in the LDS faith...with many interwoven experiences as much of life is like.

The second most common given reason (and the most frequent for longterm, nonexcommunicated members) in my experience (the first being a change in lifestyle or a change back to an older lifestyle) is a feeling that God has let them down--usually during some family crisis, but possibly after not having their life improve over a long term for reasons they feel they have no control over and that God should have protected or helped them. That can lead to multiple 'exit strategies' as in just giving up and 'going with the flow', outright rebellion against God (God must hate them so they'll prove they hate God back) and more often especially among the more educated a loss of belief in God which usually ends up with just leaving the faith, but can go further into a historical examination apparently with the idea (at least this is my guess from how they use any information they gain) of demolishing or discrediting the faith of others.

If a person sees historical issues as troubling, there is going to be some reason in their background why this is important to them (and I'm not talking about sin, but rather why they place so much important/value on historical knowledge as opposed to personal experience, doctrinal understanding or some other aspect of church and social experience).

I think the better question would be---among those who have left the Church (or who would leave if some external factor in their lives was not 'interfering' like social pressure), how many rate "historical issues" as the most important influence on their initial decision and how much more significant was this influence than other issues in their lives? Since many have apparently from their own description delved into the history aspects only after being troubled by something else, I think the initial impact is the most important as the secondary impact may just be coloured by a desire to substantiated the decision to leave.

[Calm]

Total annihilation would be preferable to having to account for your actions in mortality. Therefore total annihilation is a pleasing thought. When we are dead, we is dead - nothing matters.

And for those whose life was not that great and perhaps included great suffering and little or no happiness, the thought of annihilation (no more feeling means to them no more pain) just may be preferred as they can't really imagine existence as anything but a burden. In essence, they've come to equate peace with nothingness.

[LifeOnaPlate]

For all intensive purposes they could function as a ward social.

Just a minor pet peeve: the phrase is "for all intents and purposes," I believe.

[Doctor Steuss]

I would like to know what is known about this because I don't trust Palmer, (the guy who was in CES for 35 years), about it being an outrageous number.

He usually only shows one side of the coin.

I would think the number is lower than those who leave simply because they become disinterested, or get caught up by "greener grass." Of the people I know that left the church, none left because of research into historical issues.

[jadams_4242]

I would like to know what is known about this because I don't trust Palmer, (the guy who was in CES for 35 years), about it being an outrageous number.

He usually only shows one side of the coin.

I know that roughly 50% of converts leave, but for what reason we do not know?

[Oracle]

Just a minor pet peeve: the phrase is "for all intents and purposes," I believe.

Take some fiber. You'll feel better.

[LifeOnaPlate]

Take some fiber. You'll feel better.

I'm just trying to help out, a simple "thanks" would have sufficed.

[katherine the great]

Does anybody know of someone who almost left the Church and then didn't? And why they didnt?

If they were having trouble getting an answer, hypothetically.

Yeah. Me. I was extremely upset when I learned about some aspects of church history and especially about the early days of polygamy and Joseph Smith. That was several years ago, and I've just had to educate myself and come to my own peace with my issues and realize that we really can't make sense out of everything. We have to decide where our personal happiness lies, and let some things go--or at least leave them on the back burner for awhile.

[California]

Just a minor pet peeve: the phrase is "for all intents and purposes," I believe.

credibility has suddenly become an issue...

[Luigi]

I would like to know what is known about this because I don't trust Palmer, (the guy who was in CES for 35 years), about it being an outrageous number.

He usually only shows one side of the coin.

In terms of people leaving the Church, I think it is more than in other periods but I don't think it is anywhere near the number some Exmo's estimate (I've heard up to as many as 100,000 a year). As far as their reasons for leaving that is as impossible to guess as it is to guess why members stay-it is impossible to be sure of one's motivation even if they tell you their alleged reasons for doing something. I think that the internet has really exposed people to information that otherwise they never would have seen and has obviously had some impact.

However, I don't think that the Church is to worried about it, the fact is that the members in poorer countries will likely never read such material and the vast majority of active LDS members in the developed countries won't leave whether or not they read such material-people rarely make changes that would distance themselves from their principal social groups.

[Church Mouse]

2) What comes first, the "historical issues", or the disenchantment with the Mormon lifestyle per se? Or just the plain inability, lack of desire, to live it?... After all, if one looks at Christianity "logically", it can be viewed as being quite absurd...So do "historical issues" turn Christians into unbelievers?

I was very active LDS and considered myself a Christian. I had recently been released after a long and productive run as Ward Mission Leader and had been called to bring my enthusiasm to Old Testament class for the teenagers. I really dug into my calling with lengthy scripture reading, prayer, and excited presentations every week about what I'd read in the Bible. Attendance went way up, and I received many compliments from parents that the kids were jazzed after coming home from church.

Reading all the parts left out of the manual really opened my eyes to what it was I was actually teaching.

The divinity of Jesus was the lynchpin of my disbelief. I didn't start researching Mormon historical sources until after I came to the startling realization that Christianity could be yet another pagan religion like many which came before and have come since. I'm not going to go into specific references on this because the number of works on the Hellenization of Christianity is overwhelming. I'd never seriously entertained the question "what if it's all just made up?", and doing so made so many previously intractable problems solvable.

So the order was backwards for me: I rejected Christianity as ridiculous, and my LDS belief followed a year later. You could say I left for "historical reasons", but not specifically LDS history. I have a full-time job, so my continued reading on this topic is restricted to the book or two I can finish per month... and last month Harry Potter 7 won

Christian friends have suggested that I try to research what the "Historical Jesus" was really like, maintaining that I rejected the "Mormon Jesus" first. Been there, done that, didn't find it any more compelling. I occasionally participate in some of these ersatz communities out of interest and occasionally an ability to help someone.

[Corky Wallace]

This is not an easy lifestyle to live, it's very demanding, but as I understand it those who "remain" do so because they've had a witness, but even those who've had a witness sometimes find it very difficult.

"Where much is given, much is expected".

This applies to institutions & their claims - as well as more loosely held cultural ideological beliefs & "expectations".

The lifestyle & commitment are demanding, and when fairly convincing / legitimate evidence appears that contradicts the previously ironclad beliefs & (perceived) truth claims of the Church, this can lead to more investigation, and if the culmination of these evidences leads one to really question their entire upbringing, their own worldview, it can lead to an angry sense of alienation & disillusionment. (Sound like the RFM board?)

For some the realization they were fed (sometimes wildly) inaccurate opinions as though it was ironclad truth - such as from a seminary teacher - leads to no more than a shrugoff, while to others it leads to questioning.

"How could I have felt so strongly influenced by the spirit if 'Brother Jones' was so clearly wrong about what he was saying?"

[California]

Where is the concrete evidence for the very existence of Jesus?

I think that is an excellent rhetorical question. I have recently read some articles about how Christ is a myth and most likely He paid someone to take the fall for him, and then it looked as if there was a miraculous resurection that took place after 3 days. So in this article, they outline the "scam".

There is NO evidence that supports Jesus being the Christ. None. And yet, I know He is.

Why does the above statement sound fine and is accepted so easily by so many, and the same statement in reference to the BOM wouldn't be?

how is THAT for a rhetorical question.

[auteur55]

I think the only way we can measure is to look at our own experiences and our individual wards. If we are active latter day saints, know the members in our area pretty well and have held leadership positions then we should be able to gage pretty well.

I personally haven't noticed a mass exodus out of the ward. The same core of active people remain. Those semi-active continue to improve while converts fall away soon after their baptism. This is the pattern I have seen all over. Good members who faithfully serve tend to be faithfully serving ten years later. Occasionally a great convert comes along and becomes a tremendous member whereas the majority of converts fall away. I don't know of one that stopped coming because of historical issues.

Now my group of LDS friends I grew up with (about 4 in total) have all left the church. They say it is because of historical issues, mainly Joseph Smith and polygamy problems. Yet after debating Joseph Smith a while and probing other problems they may have I almost always find a deeper issue that seems to hold more relevance for their departure; namely that they felt unhappy in the church and now appreciate the freedom to live how they want.

So in reality their exodus has nothing to do with history or the church's truth claims but with their own desires and wishes. The church's history problems, like Polygamy, just serve as a convenient seal of approval to start the argument with.

[William Schryver]

As one who has held several ward and stake leadership positions, I think I can state with much confidence that, out of 3500 members in my stake, I would estimate that less than 1% are even aware of the controversial "historical issues" which are blamed by some as the cause of their alienation from the church. Of those who are alienated from the church in this stake, I have yet to meet any who left the church on account of controversial historical issues.

[Kevin Christensen]

It's all a matter of where you plant the seed, and how you nourish it. The one time I ran across anything that rattled me, within a few days triggered my Dialogue essay. I had a friend in California who left after reading the Tanner's books. He asked me, "How can you know what you know, and believe what you believe?"

I plant the seeds in different soil, and I nourish it differently. As a direct consequence, I get a different harvest. Periodically someone will tell me, "well I planted the seed and I got nothing."

The differences show up. I notice that I'm willing to give things time. When I run across something I did not expect, I re-examine my assumptions, and I always find that enlightening, rather than disillusioning. When I look back over the past 18 years or so (a dozen FARMS articles published since then) and consider all that I have learned and done that would have completely missed had I bailed when I had been rattled, I thank God.

I also notice that I've never gotted mired in what I call "spiritual masochism," the path of deciding to prove one's intelluctual integrity by facing problems publically. It's an act of pride, and tends to generate pride blindness. It ties "facing problems" to a concept of personal integrity. The bigger the problem facd, the greater the integrity displayed. And therefore, solutions are counter-productive. Those who deal in solutions become mere "apologists."

I like Nibley's comment. "I have a testimony. I may be ignorant, but I am not lost."

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[auteur55]

I would estimate that less than 1% are even aware of the controversial "historical issues"

This couldn't be more true. I have yet to speak with anyone in my ward or the revolving door of missionaries that even know Joseph Smith had over 40 wives. Even less know about the MMM.

Though I can certainly understand life long members not knowing the intricacies of Smith's polygamy I am dumbfounded as to how men and women in leadership positions don't know that Smith had more than say 3 or 4 wives.

Though I don't believe the church is being deceptive with history, unless a member reads material other than Ensign, standard works, etc they could go their whole life never coming across some of these historical issues.

I learned everything while on my mission because I was anti'ed at every turn. I don't see how more missionaries don't go home a little more educated.

[Luigi]

As one who has held several ward and stake leadership positions, I think I can state with much confidence that, out of 3500 members in my stake, I would estimate that less than 1% are even aware of the controversial "historical issues" which are blamed by some as the cause of their alienation from the church. Of those who are alienated from the church in this stake, I have yet to meet any who left the church on account of controversial historical issues.

I would guess that you live in Utah-I could be wrong though-not that there is anything wrong with Utah-I live in Utah myself. Most of the people that I have heard of leaving over historical issues are outside of Utah-which makes sense since there are fewer social pressures to be LDS.

[William Schryver]

It's all a matter of where you plant the seed, and how you nourish it. The one time I ran across anything that rattled me, within a few days triggered my Dialogue essay. I had a friend in California who left after reading the Tanner's books. He asked me, "How can you know what you know, and believe what you believe?"

I plant the seeds in different soil, and I nourish it differently. As a direct consequence, I get a different harvest. Periodically someone will tell me, "well I planted the seed and I got nothing."

The differences show up. I notice that I'm willing to give things time. When I run across something I did not expect, I re-examine my assumptions, and I always find that enlightening, rather than disillusioning. When I look back over the past 18 years or so (a dozen FARMS articles published since then) and consider all that I have learned and done that would have completely missed had I bailed when I had been rattled, I thank God.

I also notice that I've never gotted mired in what I call "spiritual masochism," the path of deciding to prove one's intelluctual integrity by facing problems publically. It's an act of pride, and tends to generate pride blindness. It ties "facing problems" to a concept of personal integrity. The bigger the problem facd, the greater the integrity displayed. And therefore, solutions are counter-productive. Those who deal in solutions become mere "apologists."

I like Nibley's comment. "I have a testimony. I may be ignorant, but I am not lost."

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

Well said, Kevin. My sentiments exactly.

I have become increasingly tolerant of my ignorance; increasingly willing to walk away from the crossword puzzle even when there are empty boxes remaining.

[William Schryver]

This couldn't be more true. I have yet to speak with anyone in my ward or the revolving door of missionaries that even know Joseph Smith had over 40 wives. Even less know about the MMM.

Though I can certainly understand life long members not knowing the intricacies of Smith's polygamy I am dumbfounded as to how men and women in leadership positions don't know that Smith had more than say 3 or 4 wives.

Though I don't believe the church is being deceptive with history, unless a member reads material other than Ensign, standard works, etc they could go their whole life never coming across some of these historical issues.

I learned everything while on my mission because I was anti'ed at every turn. I don't see how more missionaries don't go home a little more educated.

As to whether or not the church is "hiding" its history, I think that 99% of the "difficult" aspects of church history are referenced to one degree or another in the church-published Documentary History of the Church and the Ensign. Of course, that explains why so few people know about these things.

It's tragic, if you ask me.

[urroner]

I lost belief in the church nearly a decade ago. After losing belief, I retained callings and was very active for a good five years after the loss of belief. Just prior to going inactive I was putting in 12-15 hours a week towards multiple callings on both stake and ward level. Both I, and my young family, grew tired of keeping up with that particular standard. I don't know that I would call that a bad thing. Ten years after losing belief, and I keep the word of wisdom better than most mormons do. I do not swear. I do not lie, I do not cheat. I spend five out seven evenings per week with my husband and children doing various activities together. I am a productive member of society. I give to the poor and needy. I help my neighbors.

I'm not sure what standard you think it is that most disbelievers do not want to live. I left the church because it was not what it purports to be. I am much more intellectually comfortable stating that I know the mormon church to be NOT true than I ever was stating that the mormon church WAS true, based on my studies of its foundations.

I am not an exception. I regularly meet with former members of the LDS church- ones who claim they left for doctrinal reasons. For all intensive purposes they could function as a ward social. They are family oriented. They don't drink, they don't smoke, they don't break the law, they don't torture small animals, they don't trip old people for entertainment purposes. They are good people who want to live a good life. They want a purpose driven life that resonates with them, and not dictated by what another person says is the true way, or what is demanded by the tradition of their fathers.

I am glad to see that you were able to see though what I said and realize that I believe that those who leave the Church are vile people, people who kill puppy dogs and tear wings off of flies for pleasure.

I never said in my post nor do I believe that just because one leaves the Church, one is automatiically evil or even bound for Hell.

Nor did I say that all people who left the Church couldn't or wouldn't abide its standards or that they had no standards.

But, like I said, MOST people I know who left the Church couldn't or wouldn't abide its standards. I have heard many, many, many times that when one left the Church, ones wages went up ten percent, that one could eat on Fast Sunday, and that one could do more recreational things on Sunday with their families. There were even those who said that home teaching was a waste of their valuable time and even reading scriptures, while they taught great lessons, weren't necessary, that there were plenty of other good books to read.

If any of you could please show me where I stated that those who left the Church had no standards or that their standards were inferior to the standards of those who remain in the Church, I'd really appreciate it and I'll apologize for any misunderstanding and I'll go back and correct it, but I'm just going to assume one of two things, either you will realize your mistake and you won't say anything OR you won't even care about finding out the truth, but either way, I don't expect any response.

[EVOLVING]

As one who has held several ward and stake leadership positions, I think I can state with much confidence that, out of 3500 members in my stake, I would estimate that less than 1% are even aware of the controversial "historical issues" which are blamed by some as the cause of their alienation from the church. Of those who are alienated from the church in this stake, I have yet to meet any who left the church on account of controversial historical issues.

I believe the more telling question here is. If the 3153 unsuspecting members of your stake were all of a sudden exposed to these "historical issues" - how many would continue to hold thier belief in Mormonisim the same way after a year. I believe this information for many of the people in your stake, would grow into issues. at the very least, knowing all of the issues requires a believing mormon to intensify faith, and accept many more unknowns than the standard run of the mill chapel mormon. If you are a believing mormon, imagine explaining Helen Mar, or Fanny Alger to your 14 yr old daughter. or the LGT to a group of 16 yr. old priests, or detailing the Nauvoo expositor to your local Relief Society group. imagine your SP starting a conference with a testimony about celestial polygamy..

~evolving

[Luigi]

But, like I said, MOST people I know who left the Church couldn't or wouldn't abide its standards. I have heard many, many, many times that when one left the Church, ones wages went up ten percent, that one could eat on Fast Sunday, and that one could do more recreational things on Sunday with their families. There were even those who said that home teaching was a waste of their valuable time and even reading scriptures, while they taught great lessons, weren't necessary, that there were plenty of other good books to read.

Interestingly enough I came to the conclusion while a member that if people weren't obeying the Church they clearly didn't believe it was true. Think about it, who would risk an eternity of happiness with one's family simply because they didn't want to home teach, pay tithing or obey some other 'commandment'. Since I saw few members, even among the active, who were willing to always do their home teaching, magnify their callings, or give up other minor 'indescretions' I concluded painfully that most members didn't even really believe the Church was true. I figured if the threat of hell and loosing one's exaltation were as real to someone as a man standing in front of them threatening their life would anyone really choose to disobey?