For those who felt deceived

[ERayR]

Am I the only one who felt a whole slew of hope when told God was once a man? The idea that God the Eternal Father went through the same trials and tribulations found in the mortal realm and overcame all of them is a huge comfort and relief to my poor little mind.

No. Once it sunk in thats about the way it affected me.

[ttribe]

Am I the only one who felt a whole slew of hope when told God was once a man? The idea that God the Eternal Father went through the same trials and tribulations found in the mortal realm and overcame all of them is a huge comfort and relief to my poor little mind.

I was a kid when I learned this doctrine...thought it sounded pretty cool. Now that I am grown, the idea is sublime and a source of inspiration.

[Scott Lloyd]

Your point being? How does that relate to what I said? Your dripping sarcasm aside, the comparison is completely inapt.

I'm more inclined to call it reductio ad absurdum than sarcasm. And whether it drips is in the eye of the beholder, I guess. Jeff K and LOAP both seem to have gotten the point, so I suppose I'll have to be content with a 66 percent success ratio.

At any rate, I endorse Dr. Peterson's recommendation that you explore John Welch's compilation Opening the Heavens and Milton Backman's book on the First Vision. Both are very good.

[Jeff K.]

CFR

Honest discussion is so hard to come by these days, sigh....

Lets see what you said:

What I find most interesting about the First Vision is that no one in his family seems to recall hearing of it, and the persecution JS noted in his history seems not to have been remembered, either.

Why was it interesting? Other than the implication that it did not occur? It belies your claim of innocense which is blatently false. The responses answered the implication of the charge, therefore you were left with little more than a cheap dodge.

[LifeOnaPlate]

John: Apparently the way you communicated your thoughts gave all of us the same impression which you then sought to disown. Perhaps the problem isn't just with the receivers but also with the sender of the message.

[Abulafia]

Don't know if I can add anything of worth to this thread.

I did ask around at church about certain issues I had (they had a library) but was told by the librarian (I was a teenager) to not worry about things like that.

So I went to the local library, which actually did have some works on Mormonism, which were not particularly friendly to the church. I can remember feeling a little disturbed, but put it down to anti-mormon rhetoric and carried on with my life. It wasn't till Van Wagoner's Mormon Polygamy that I was really confronted by a member writing stuff about Joseph Smith that seemed so foreign to my understanding of him. I had hoped (Daniel mentioned this) that Joseph was a 'good' 'sincere' man.

I think for me to return to church and possibly not to have left in the first place, I should have been given information say in institute, in a friendly situation, of the more controversial aspects of church history, and given the opportunity to discuss and work through it. I should also have been taught much more to accept that a prophet doesn't always have to be good, in fact on occasion he can be darn right bad, but that doesn't preclude him from being a prophet.

I'm not sure that would have helped because I think I had fixed in my mind the limits of who I could except as a prophet, and Joseph in marrying other men's wives (or so I am led to believe) probably went beyond those limits.

Maybe had I been taught that the church was bigger than Joseph, bigger than all the very imperfect early members I might have stayed..??

Maybe I was taught that, and the significance didn't hit home at the time.

Anyhow, I don't know that I could accept an LDS view of God or the afterlife, but in some ways its a lot more preferable to what a lot of other churches teach..

I don't know...sigh....

[consiglieri]

Consig, what do you think of this door approach:"Hi, we're from the Mormon church and we'd like to tell you how God is a man and we can become gods of planets all over the endless galaxies."

Well, at least it would have the advantage of getting people's attention.

[Mortal Man]

I think it hard to deny that Mormons have a history of hiding certain teachings and practices from outsiders.

My experience has been that the overriding reason for doing so is because we view everybody who is not a Mormon as a potential member, and instead of simply stating what we believe and do, we are constantly spinning things in order to leave the impression best calculated to baptize.

How many times have Mormons on this very board been asked a question by a non-member only to mentally filter the response and instead of just being frank with them and speaking like they would with another Mormon, excise controversial material and give them a response that would pass Primary muster?

I mean, it's not like we don't have LDS professors advocating we "answer the question that should have been asked."

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

I had an investigator on my mission who got hold of some anti-Mormon material shortly before his scheduled baptism. He said straight to my face, "You never told me that Joseph Smith was a polygamist." My companion then exclaimed that it was all a bunch of lies, JS was never a polygamist and that people were just out to smear him. I then began to explain that JS was in fact a polygamist, which caused my companion a great deal of shock, such that he kept saying, "Wow! Really? I didn't know that. Are you sure? Wow! Really? I didn't know that..." I gave him and our investigator the whole spill about it being purely a platonic affair, instituted in order to take care of all the poor widows etc. and practiced by less that 3% of the leaders. That seemed to satisfy them both and our investigator was baptized.

[Mortal Man]

Am I the only Mormon here who felt shock and indignation upon being told some time after my baptism that God was once a man?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

God does not exist in time the same way we do; hence, speaking of his past makes no sense.

[LifeOnaPlate]

Well, at least it would have the advantage of getting people's attention.

So does going without pants, but what can be said for it?!

[LifeOnaPlate]

God does not exist in time the same way we do; hence, speaking of his past makes no sense.

I probably disagree with your point here.

[MAsh]

BYU Studies was doing wonderful things in Mormon history at the time. I wasn't Superman, but I subscribed.

The Ensign and, before that, the Improvement Era published relevant materials. I read them.

I bought and read various books. The first edition of Milton Backman's important book on the First Vision, for example, was published by Bookcraft in 1971, and was widely available in LDS bookstores. It includes the full texts of all of the various accounts.

I've just skimmed this thread but wanted to add my 1.86 cents.

I graduated HS in 1979 & took an interest in LDS studies a few years later. So in my early twenties, in the early 1980s (long before Google or the Internet) I began reading books such as Backman's. I also found quite an assortment of LDS-related books at a local college library (I was, at the time, living in Colorado Springs). The LDS institute also had a number of great books and periodicals. I would sit and read at the Institute for hours. The collection included a ton of back issues of the Improvement Era, Ensign, Dialogue, and Sunstone (yes, that's right, Sunstone issues were in the Institute's library).

My parents moved to Utah (I was married in 1982) and when I visited them I discovered Sam Weller's bookstore and his assortment of used books. I subscribed to BYU and FARMS and would purchase Dialogue, Sunstone, and other periodicals as I could afford them.

The small LDS bookstore in Colorado Springs even carried Quinn's first edition of Magic World View (I think in about 87). I already knew the primary magic arguments in his book before I bought a copy. I had learned about it from reading the LDS-related articles earlier.

So while I wasn't as young as Dan when I discovered those things which critics claim are hidden by the church, I was in my early twenties and found many of the issues in Church publications, or in publications housed in the Church's Institute building. That was over twenty years ago. If the Church was hiding this stuff, they sure weren't doing a good job.

Mike

[MAsh]

I had an investigator on my mission who got hold of some anti-Mormon material shortly before his scheduled baptism. He said straight to my face, "You never told me that Joseph Smith was a polygamist." My companion then exclaimed that it was all a bunch of lies, JS was never a polygamist and that people were just out to smear him. I then began to explain that JS was in fact a polygamist, which caused my companion a great deal of shock, such that he kept saying, "Wow! Really? I didn't know that. Are you sure? Wow! Really? I didn't know that..." I gave him and our investigator the whole spill about it being purely a platonic affair, instituted in order to take care of all the poor widows etc. and practiced by less that 3% of the leaders. That seemed to satisfy them both and our investigator was baptized.

While I should be suprised that some members don't know that JS practiced polygamy, I'm not.

Anyone who has ever seen Jay Leno's "Jay Walking" shouldn't be surprised. I watched Jay the other night & they had the finals of a "Jay Walking" competition. If I remember correctly, all three contestants were college graduates. They didn't know some embarrasingly simple things about US & world history.

Because some members don't know that JS had multiple wives doesn't mean that the Church was hiding the info. It typically means that too many Mormons-- like too many US citizens-- are just simply unaware of issues for which they should be aware.

Mike

[Luigi]

I'm curious to know how many really cared enough in the teen years to have wanted to know more. I know in looking back, a lot of you are saying you felt you didn't want to question because of fear of losing testimony; but I wonder if that is just hindsight. When I was that age, most of us were concerned more about if so-and-so cute boy or girl would be at Mutual and who would be at the church dance on Saturday, etc. Even though I had been exposed to a lot of anti stuff when I was still in high school it wasn't until I got to college and had access to books that I really started looking into the history, and then I became a voracious reader. Fortunately all the stuff I read didn't upset me as it appears to have done others. I suppose because I never expected anyone, including prophets to be perfect given my reading of the OT.

Of course no one can be sure of what they might have done in the past under different circumstances but as I mentioned for me it wasn't simply a matter of having more information available but in feeling that I could explore those alternatives without fear. If you instill a fear of losing one's testimony by insisting that to do so will forever imperil one's happiness and add social pressures it will matter relatively little how much information is or isn't available since people will shield themselves from the information. I can think of two instances as an 18 year old boy, for example, where I came across information that was negative of the Church or it's history and stopped reading it because I was afraid it would weaken my testimony.

[Mortal Man]

I think that for a lot of people, the acquisition of "forbidden knowledge" is much like Neo taking the red pill. You wake up in an exceedingly dreary reality with no way back. You can try to explain it to your friends in the church but they can't understand you because they are still in the Matrix. You may wonder, "What if I had chopped up the red pill and taken it bit by bit over a long period of time?" You might decide that those in the Matrix are better off than you are. You may wish to rejoin them, but that is simply impossible. You observe the church's efforts to deal with the problem by establishing the Foundation for Apologetic Response and Matrix Studies, which reviles anyone handing out red pills. You marvel at people like DP, who claim to have taken all of the red pills when they were 17 and who offer you an entire pharmacy of blue pills. You look around at others who have taken the red pill and see that they are merely fending for themselves, with no cohesive belief system or organization in place. You wonder what to do...

[Deborah]

Because some members don't know that JS had multiple wives doesn't mean that the Church was hiding the info. It typically means that too many Mormons-- like too many US citizens-- are just simply unaware of issues for which they should be aware.

This is a scary thought but as I said before many people are just going their merry way totally unconcerned with any history or controversy or anything beyond their immediate little circle.

I also wonder why all those who blame the church for hiding information aren't blaming their parents for not teaching them; it is after all the parents' primary responsiblity to teach their children, not SS and not Primary; those are just there as supplements. But even more to the point, did they even bother asking their parents when they were kids about any of the issues that were bothering them. Or did the questions not bother them until later in life? I also think one problem is that we tend to revise our memories of the past depending on what is going on in our lives at the present, which is why journals are so valuable.

[Tarski]

If the Church was hiding this stuff, they sure weren't doing a good job.

They (meaning we) have been implicitly using the tactic that certain information that we discuss here is anti-mormon lies.

Oh yes, I did hear about money digging, secret polygamy, and so forth but was told repeatedly that these were lies (I ask who I had access to).

By the way, all Scientology's secrets have been out for a long time too but somehow the members either don't know or claim they are lies.

Here is what should be and should have been the case:

Investigators should have always been told right up front about everything from the BoA "debate" to polygamy to seer stones to the rough outlines of the temple ceremony and it's relation to masonry. In short, anything that could likely later cause someone to say the words "I wish someone had told me that.."

We know what the short list is so let's not pretend it's an unreasonable task.

The missionaries should know at least what I know about church history and critical concerns. They are the messengers and should have been honestly trained with facts.

When they come to my house and talk, it is a spectacle to behold.

A salesman only gives one side--that's expected (buyer beware). But are missionaries salesman? Unfortunately, I think so.

[Mormon Questioner]

I didn't leave the church because it was hiding the history.

However, it does bother me that the church is willing to be less than truthful in pursuit of what it considers a higher goal.

For this issue it is all encapsulated in the statement by Elder Packer, not everything that is true is useful. His talk "The Mantle is far greater than the Intellect" is exactly why this is a problem. He specifically talks about letting true history disappear and be forgotten if it is not faith promoting.

To many, including myself, this is less than honest, and that bothers me.

[Deborah]

You can try to explain it to your friends in the church but they can't understand you because they are still in the Matrix. You may wonder, "What if I had chopped up the red pill and taken it bit by bit over a long period of time?"

That's interesting because the first thing I thought on seeing the movie was that those who accept the church with all it's responsibliities and realities and consequences are the ones who took the red pill and those who haven't seen the light are still in the matrix.

[Jeff K.]

The missionaries should know at least what I know about church history and critical concerns. They are the messengers and should have been honestly trained with facts.When they come to my house and talk, it is a spectacle to behold.A salesman only gives one side--that's expected (buyer beware). But are missionaries salesman? Unfortunately, I think so.

Chortle. ... They are supposed to know your bitterness and unreasonable and unreasoned opinion? Why would they want to know that? Again with the self congratulatory "look what I did".... Freud had you in mind when he discussed certain envys.

I didn't leave the church because it was hiding the history. However, it does bother me that the church is willing to be less than truthful in pursuit of what it considers a higher goal. For this issue it is all encapsulated in the statement by Elder Packer, not everything that is true is useful. His talk "The Mantle is far greater than the Intellect" is exactly why this is a problem. He specifically talks about letting true history disappear and be forgotten if it is not faith promoting. To many, including myself, this is less than honest, and that bothers me.

That is an opinion you hold. But I disagree with the tenor, though if you look for stains in any talk you will always find something to criticize.

[Tarski]

That's interesting because the first thing I thought on seeing the movie was that those who accept the church with all it's responsibliities and realities and consequences are the ones who took the red pill and those who haven't seen the light are still in the matrix.

LOL

Look, keeping in line with church standards is no a big deal. Like the blue pill, belief offers comfort and a set of pat answers about death and personal purpose.

With an eternity of celestial glory waiting, who wouldn't think that living temple worthy would be worth it and a trivial task (look how many do it).

[Tarski]

Chortle. ... They are supposed to know your bitterness and unreasonable and unreasoned opinion?

I didn't say anything like that. Once again you prove you can't even read.

Oh and "unreasoned"? LOL. That's about as rich as it gets Jeff Kolob.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I probably disagree with your point here.

LOAP,

THis is a funny way of disagreeing. What would make you disagree completely? Just curious. I should say not completely but surely disagree?

[Mortal Man]

Here is what should be and should have been the case:

Investigators should have always been told right up front about everything from the BoA "debate" to polygamy to seer stones to the rough outlines of the temple ceremony and it's relation to masonry. In short, anything that could likely later cause someone to say the words "I wish someone had told me that.."

We know what the short list is so let's not pretend it's an unreasonable task.

Furthermore, all 3 year olds should be sat down and instructed on the Santa Claus Conspiracy, Easter Bunny Boondoggle and Tooth Fairy Fraud.

[Tarski]

Furthermore, all 3 year olds should be sat down and instructed on the Santa Claus Conspiracy, Easter Bunny Boondoggle and Tooth Fairy Fraud.

Translation: Investigators are like children.

But I do appreciate that you admit that truth isn't the central issue when deciding what to tell children and adults alike.