In need of convincing LDS Scholarship

[Calm]

http://www.religious...rg/ldsleave.htm

From your link:

Accurate measurements of why Mormons leave the LDS Church are in short supply. There are some opinion pieces on the topic. There are also informal, Internet-based surveys dealing with this subject. However, all of the latter involved self-selected subjects of unknown motivation.

I am not saying that this poll is not accurate, I am saying one cannot tell because of the lack of statistical methods to remove error.

[Calm]

Well, I have learned one thing from this thread, as well. Despite the claims of some on this site that the LDS church is really a big tent, with very few hard and fast doctrines that all LDS must believe, quite a few of you seem to believe that your interpretation of scripture is THE one to which all LDS must adhere, else be considered not true mormons.

In addition, any LDS that might be a bit disturbed about brethren not seeking revelation from God to address issues that may potentially affect the faith of many, is, apparently not a real mormon.

I hope you are not including me in this description. I will leave it to others to say whether this is an accurate portrayal of their thoughts or not.

[mercyngrace]

Beastie,

I'm also happy to let readers of the thread decide if I am writing Mormon doctrine or if I am pointing them in the direction of the LDS standard works (Moroni 10 and D&C 9 for the umpteenth time).

Glad your snow is cleared and your liberty restored. Go forth and enjoy ;-)

Cal,

The poll is informal, non-scientific and conducted among people who self-identify as ex-mormon on the internet. It's findings are more than suspect.

[Calm]

Cal,

The poll is informal, non-scientific and conducted among people who self-identify as ex-mormon on the internet. It's findings are more than suspect.

Totally agree. It is not one I would ever have used in my psychological studes save as a beginning point for formulating possible questions or areas of interest.

[rodheadlee]

Hey beastie, don't be a stranger, I enjoy your posts too.

[beastie]

First, Rod, thank you. I do appreciate your kindness. But, for various reasons, I have to limit the amount of time I spend posting or reading here. I

[Zakuska]

Theres a problem in what you bolded:

There's no way that negative evidence on that hurts the Book of Mormon whatsoever once you believe in a limited geography. If you believe in a global geography, you're basically done, toasted, game over.

What Mormons have ever beleived in a "Global Geopgraphy"? Hemispherical possibly yes.

A "Global Model" you would be toasted I agree.

[Scott Lloyd]

I supposed I could say

[Scott Lloyd]

Well, I have learned one thing from this thread, as well. Despite the claims of some on this site that the LDS church is really a big tent, with very few hard and fast doctrines that all LDS must believe, quite a few of you seem to believe that your interpretation of scripture is THE one to which all LDS must adhere, else be considered not true mormons.

I have repeatedly sustained the position of the Church on specific Book of Mormon geography -- which essentially is to take no position. Ergo, nobody is required to bind himself to one theory or another. This falsifies the exclusionary mentality you clam above.

Unless, of course, you didn't have me in mind when you made the claim.

In addition, any LDS that might be a bit disturbed about brethren not seeking revelation from God to address issues that may potentially affect the faith of many, is, apparently not a real mormon. I always had my suspicions about BH Roberts, anyway.

If you are alluding to any of the posts calmoriah has made on this subject, I think you are grossly misstating her position.

I

[Zakuska]

So when beastie chooses to depart a thread, all the thinking has been done.

What thinking?

[Scott Lloyd]

What thinking?

[gtaggart]

Note the words I bolded: There's no way that negative evidence on that hurts the Book of Mormon whatsoever once you believe in a limited geography. If you believe in a global geography, you're basically done, toasted, game over.

That is a radical shift. It is radical to say that if you continue to believe in the traditional understanding of the BoM, you

[Scott Lloyd]

The church has traditionally presented the Book of Mormon as a reason TO believe in the church. Today, due to the encroaches of archaeology and science, it is often

[Zakuska]

What is so fricken' radical about a belief that some/many/most members have held or been open to since the founding of the church?

What's an "encroach"?

The Book of Mormon has always been--for some--a reason to NOT believe in the church, long before the "encroaches" of archaeology and science. It will be a reason long after archaeology and science have done whatever damage critics imagine they can do to the book. By the way, did you read/hear about the recent discovery that "woolly mammoths, horses and other large beasts in North America may not have gone extinct as long ago as previously thought"? Yeah, I know that this does nothing to prove that horses were running about Mesoamerica during Book of Mormon times. But it does show that as science marches on, it often tramples over the top of previous scientific theories rather than religious beliefs. How long before they discover evidence of horses, metallurgy, and the like in Mesoamerica?

Did some one say Wooley Mammoths?

[Zakuska]

I know. That was Ad Hominem at its worst. But I couldn't resist. "Captian Zinger" and all.

[mercyngrace]

Now I know that some Mormons believe that exmormons lost faith solely due to personal weaknesses. They wanted to sin, they were lazy, their feelings were hurt, they have some psychological disturbance, etc. I

[Scott Lloyd]

I know Beastie has left the thread but given her anecdotal defense of the poll she cited, I think it only fair to offer a rebuttal. The actual poll is found here.

The poll had a mere 92 participants and includes such thoughtful and insightful questions as:

and

.

What these questions reveal about attrition due to BOM historicity remains a mystery. Both questions deal with the behavior of the respondents rather than the location, for example, of the hill Cumorah. It is curious that the poll's author, presumably an ex-mormon, considers questions of sexuality and exposure to anti-mormon ideas and literature significant enough to warrant specific queries while the poll contains no question singularly addressing the 'problematic' history of either the BOM, BOA, or Joseph Smith.

Other poll questions reveal the pollster's intent to garner the attention of a specific audience of embittered anti-mormons by its use of loaded language:

The phrase "blissfully ignorant" promoting, of course, the misleading notion that one cannot be both blissful and knowledgeable within Mormonism.

Other similarly revealing phrases signify either the poll author's personal disdain for Mormonism or his recognition of such disdain among fellow former members. Consider, for example, some of the available responses to the question "Which, if anything, would open the door for you to return to Mormonism?"

Interestingly, a multiple choice question listing possible reasons for leaving Mormonism found that more of the respondents left because they found peace elsewhere than over Book of Mormon archaelogy.

My point is simply that this is an informal and biased poll and cannot be used for any reliable general information about the ex-mormon community. Anecdotal information from an active church critic would likely prove similarly biased and unreliable. (As would anecdotal data from an apologist.)

LDS are often accused of describing ex-mormons in unflattering terms based on a perceived tendency to "leave the church but not leave the church alone". One might be curious as to how these former mormons describe themselves. Primarily, the poll participants see themselves as "wiser". Of the remaining 13 choices, the second and third self-descriptives chosen were "angry" and "abused or violated".

The things that make you go hmmm.

As opinion polls go, this one probably warrants a failing grade.

Which goes to show you: When anti-Mormons make flat assertions like "Book of Mormon historicity is a leading cause of people leaving the Church," best to challenge them on their sources.

[Calm]

LDS are often accused of describing ex-mormons in unflattering terms based on a perceived tendency to "leave the church but not leave the church alone". One might be curious as to how these former mormons describe themselves. Primarily, the poll participants see themselves as "wiser". Of the remaining 13 choices, the second and third self-descriptives chosen were "angry" and "abused or violated".

Also 75% of the respondents describe themselves as spending 6 or more hours a week dealing with their issues, 50% over ten hours. That is a significant amount of time, more than some--many for the ten hours-- active, believing LDS do Church-related activities.

[beastie]

I just had to pop back in this morning to share a quote that someone on the Board that Shall Not be Named provided:

James Talmage

Articles of Faith

On the occasion of his first visit to Joseph Smith, Moroni told of the existence of the record, which, he said, was engraved on plates of gold, at that time lying buried in the side of a hill near Joseph's home. The hill, which was known by one division of the ancient peoples as Cumorah, by another as Ramah, is situated near Palmyra in the State of New York."

Articles of Faith, Ch. 14, Pg. 255-256.

In google book, this quote is on pages 261-252

"The final struggles between Nephites and Lamanites were waged in the vicinity of the Hill Cumorah, in what is now the State of New York, resulting in the destruction of the Nephites as a nation, about 400 A.D. The last Nephite representative was Moroni, who, wandering for safety from place to place, daily expecting death from the victorious Lamanites, wrote the concluding parts of the Book of Mormon, and hid the record in Cumorah. It was the same Moroni who as a resurrected being, gave the records into the hands of Joseph Smith in the present dispensation."

Articles of Faith, Ch 14, Pg. 260.

In google book, this quote is on pages 266

http://www.bookofmormonlands.com/link%20three.htm

http://books.google.com/books?id=JecQAAAAIAAJ&dq=James+Talmage+%2B+%22Articles+of+Faith%22&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=E1H9A2EjbU&sig=ci-yru5N3Fg7JbBCitvuaPHzh3c&hl=en&ei=TW47S4uMDZC8lAfLw6SXBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CA0Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Here

[Uncle Dale]

...accusing exmormons of offering problematic sources on a thread that has been discussing

the problematic sources of LDS apologists.

...

Talmadge is a problematic source, now cited by ex-LDS and anti-LDS.

I'm sure that my friend bcspace will agree.

UD

[Calm]

You all denying that the BoM is one of the primary causes of loss of faith makes as little sense as denying that the history of Joseph Smith is one of the primary causes of loss of faith.

I am perfectly willing to accept that the BoM is one of the primary causes of loss of faith for an individual if they tell me so. I don't doubt that those who marked that response on the online poll had that experience.

I just wouldn't accept the poll as any evidence for it being as widespread as is claimed. It may well be, but the poll is ineffective for showing that due to its methodological problems. Therefore at this time I am reluctant to accept a statement that the BoM is one of the primary causes of faith for a significant portion of exmormons though I am happy to accept that it was for at least the small portion of exmormons who have stated that claim for themselves.

[mfbukowski]

And the Eucharist as the Real Presence, the body blood soul and divinity of the savior in a piece of bread may be the major reason people leave the Catholic church.

Your point?

And again you miss the point that what anybody has said about the traditional view of Cumorah is irrelevant. There are points of view which can take all possible statements and harmonize them, and I have shown a few.

To those who not believe in personal revelation, there can be no answer. For those who do, there can be no question. And besides that, continuing revelation- that means changes- can be verified by testimony as well. Even your beloved all-knowing scientific method admits that paradigm changes can happen, not that there is particularly a need for one on this question.

You have said it yourself. No one is convincing anyone on either side. It is a waste of time.

[Uncle Dale]

...

No one is convincing anyone on either side. It is a waste of time.

Oh, I think that the jist of this thread WILL INDEED affect many people, eventually.

Not a publication of the exact sentiments and arguments presented here, but the greater

issues -- such as how much we can trust authorities like Apostle Talmage, and others

who have been ordained as prophets, seers, revelators and translators in a church

reportedly overseen by Jesus Christ's personal guidance.

If Talmadge was wrong about the location of the Book of Mormon's Hill Cumorah,

then WHAT ELSE might he have been wrong about? And why did Jesus Christ allow him

to be wrong about so important a point as the House of Joseph in ancient America?

In 1830, by Divine revelation, four missionaries were sent out to preach to

the Lamanites -- to scout out the location for the Temple of the Lord, in the

midst of those Lamanites (or according to the changed text, upon their borders).

If Dr. Talmadge and others have been wrong in telling us where the descendants

of Lehi were located (and where they might have been preached to in 1830), then many

LDS members, and potential converts, will ask WHAT CAN WE TRUST as doctrine and

counsel from The Lord's Anointed?

This is not the sort of controversy that extends the stakes of Zion and increases

her membership. It is the sort of controversy that destroyed the Reorganized LDS.

If "It is a waste of time," to discuss such things, then Bro. Meldrum,

Phyllis Olive, Delbert Curtis and others of the same sort will continue to

make a substantial impact upon the general membership -- precisely by quoting

the apostolic counsel of Authorities such as Apostle Talmadge.

Ignore this shift in the latter day winds at your own peril.

UD

.

[Ceeboo]

And the Eucharist as the Real Presence, the body blood soul and divinity of the savior in a piece of bread may be the major reason people leave the Catholic church.

ANOTHER GREAT contibution on the boards from the Bishop !!!!!!!

If I didn't know you better mfb , I would have thought that was another " off topic ", disrespectful post intended at mocking what many of us hold as very precious indeed.

Peace,

Ceeboo

[Kevin Christensen]

Those listing primary causes of loss of faith should not neglect the inextricable relationship between one's expectations and the perception of anomaly. Since the Book of Mormon, for example, is the bedrock of faith for many people, the different expectations of the text, and how that influences our perceptions of what is most significant and telling about that text, can make all the difference. Personally, I've found all I need to to whenever I run across anything that bothers is keep my eyes open, gives things time, and re-examine my own assumptions now and then. The alternative, of course, is to stop looking, to insist on final answers now, and to refuse to re-examine one's own assumptions. The consequences of that alternative are not at all mysterious. It's the brittle that tend to shatter.

I've seen another good example of the difference my approach makes in reading John Welch's new book on Legal Cases in the Book of Mormon. After considering the cases of Sherem, Nehor, and Korihor, he responds to the B. H. Roberts complaint that the three cases are stereotyped, simplistic, and immature. After reading Welch's work, it should be evident that the problem was Roberts' simplistic and immature reading. And it won't do to wave around Roberts credentials or status as an Authority as an excuse to stop inquiry and thought in 1922. (See D&C 1:24-28, which calls into question critical assumptions that are frequently implicit and necessary supports for many skeptical approaches.)

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA