Why Mormons are Leaving the Church

[zeezrom]

Mudcat, I question whether someone "never" knew or just "forgot" they knew. I don't think I ever remember the gun not being mentioned. Truthfully I think a lot of people go to classes and either aren't really listening or just aren't interested enough at the time to let something they hear sink in.

Deb,

I keep hearing these kinds of comments. Those who are bothered by "new" information are only bothered due to their inept listening skills or laziness while TBM. That is not true. There might be some exceptions, but for the most part if you are an active mormon, you are doing a lot of work to study and learn the doctrine. The fact of the matter is we are strongly encouraged to study deeply into the "safe" zones of history and doctrine and everything else is simply not made available in the sources we are encouraged to search.

I find it amazing that you knew about Joseph shooting a gun from the beginning.

[zerinus]

And I think it is what also makes us human beings.

Let me give you a case-in-point, which happened to me shortly after joining the Church back in 1978. My brother, a devout Jehovah's Witness, being duly shocked that I would become a Mormon, brought home from the Kingdom Hall a pamphlet titled The Mormon File.

Among the many allegations were that the Book of Mormon had thousands of errors in it that had to be corrected, and that Brigham Young taught that Adam was our God.

I remember being extremely troubled over these "revelations" about Church history, which necessarily impact doctrine. The Book of Mormon had been presented to me as divinely inspired, and though the words "inerrant" were surely never spoken, that was the distinct impression with which I was left.

When the missionaries taught me about the Plan of Salvation, no room was left for the idea that Adam was God, or how one prophet of the Church could possibly have views so far out in left field from the current teachings.

These things rocked me to the core. It is hard to come up with words to describe the experience, though I expect many who read this will know exactly what I mean.

Now I would consider that a bit strange, because that is not how I personally would have reacted to that situation (as in fact I didn

[Deborah]

I keep hearing these kinds of comments. Those who are bothered by "new" information are only bothered due to their inept listening skills or laziness while TBM. That is not true.

That is not what was said. It is a simple fact that people do not always remember what they might have heard in a lesson and it only becomes important at some other time in their lives. This has been shown on various threads done here where people would say for example they never heard of the different account of the First Vision when we have shown that it was published in the Ensign, the official church magazine, and that several years ago. Just look at how ignorant people are in general about US history, and yet US history is a requirement in school curriculum. Can those who are ignorant claim they were never taught or was it a matter of they never paid attention. It's not a matter of being inept or lazy; it's a matter of what interests them at the time.

We only retain what we are interested in knowing about and most youth are not very interested in history, even in the church. In fact people in general aren't interested in history and don't really pay attention until something else is going on in their lives. I was never interested in the history of the church when I was young and most of my studies have been more recent but I can't claim I was never taught.

[Lamanite]

Mudcat, I question whether someone "never" knew or just "forgot" they knew.

This statement upsets me as being disingenuous and hurtful to not a few members and converts. At the beginning of my investigation of the Church I used both Tongan and English church approved material. I don't recall Joseph's use of a weapon being used. I don't remember the missionaries teaching me about this to any degree. It was absent!

Your "question[ing]" regarding whether someone knew about Joseph's gun is unnecessary. This because it is demonstrably true that this historical nugget was absent from my own studies in Church history during my investigation. I first heard about it from the Utah Lighthouse ministry. I then asked the missionaries about it and they stared at me with blank expressions. They had never heard of such a thing either. Imagine that.

And I speak and read in English. What about non-English speaking investigators and converts. Surely they've been sufficiently educated. Tell you what, I would be more than happy to conduct an informal poll at the South Jordan Tongan Branch this Sunday. I will talk to Tongan men and women who don't read or speak English and see if they know about the following historical facts (English speaking shouldn't be required to know basic elements of Church history should it?):

1. Joseph's possession and use of a firearm.

2. Joseph's polygamous/polyandrous marriages.

3. Post manifesto polygamy.

Just those three issues. Nothing else.

What do you think think this poll will show? I'll tell you what they will show; that an overwhelming majority will not know what the hell I'm talking about. Do you think the results will be similar in Ghana? How about in the Phillipines? How about right here in Utah? My wife's Mother is a descendant of Lorenzo Snow and an active believing member. She had no idea Joseph had polyandrous marriages. Moreover, she was also unaware that Emma was not kept in the loop about which young girl living under her roof was also in a relationship with her husband.

So do we let our critics dictate our history to our new converts? Apparently. Because it's obvious the institutional Church is not going to do it. Nor does it seem like it is of any importance to many of its members. But like it or not, we are losing members because of the dissonance that exists between our real history, and the history found in official Church publications.

And if you want to disparage the character of those who are struggling with these issues, please read or re-read post #102

Big UP!

Lamanite

Edit to remove my ridiculous ad hom attack leveled at Deborah. Sorry.

[Lamanite]

In fact people in general aren't interested in history and don't really pay attention until something else is going on in their lives. I was never interested in the history of the church when I was young and most of my studies have been more recent but I can't claim I was never taught.

I can claim I was never taught some of the thornier aspects of Church history during my investigation or as a new convert. What was even more disturbing was that when I would show up with a list of items I wanted to discuss, more often than not my Priesthood leader had not heard of it or did "not know much about it", which is generally where I was encouraged to pray and go away.

Big UP!

Lamanite

[Deborah]

You are the poster child of willful ignorance. This statement upsets me as being disingenuous and hurtful to not a few members and converts.

Good grief! This was a general statement about how we don't always pay attention to what is taught. The gun wasn't the point. In any case it was never an issue for me whenever I heard about but I don't remember ever not knowing about it, probably because I didn't think it was a big deal. That is the point. If something bothers us it doesn't matter when we hear it. The exes like to give the argument that if only they'd known about it when----. However I had quite a long thread some months ago where ex-Mo's admitted it wouldn't have made a difference when they heard about it.

Those who are going to look at such little details with the big picture in mind, and making sure they have all the facts and not just the sound bites will not be disturbed by these little pieces of information. Those who take the gospel piecemeal will be upset at ever little piece that doesn't jive with their preconceived notions of the way things should be.

[Deborah]

What was even more disturbing was that when I would show up with a list of items I wanted to discuss, more often than not my Priesthood leader had not heard of it or did "not know much about it", which is generally where I was encouraged to pray and go away.

And that proves what? Only that they probably were never interested in it or didn't pay attention. I admit many people are ignorant about a lot of the history in the church. I certainly was for a long time, but only because I wasn't interested or just didn't care. I only care now because I get tired of the antis taking our history out of context and using it for their own destructive purposes. As a result I have done a lot of listening and study. I don't blame the church for not knowing more. I blame myself for my own lack of interest. Nor do I blame leaders for not pounding it into me because it wouldn't have mattered until I was willing to put in the time and effort to find out for myself from reputable sources.

[Lamanite]

Good grief! This was a general statement about how we don't always pay attention to what is taught. The gun wasn't the point. In any case it was never an issue for me whenever I heard about but I don't remember ever not knowing about it, probably because I didn't think it was a big deal. That is the point. If something bothers us it doesn't matter when we hear it. The exes like to give the argument that if only they'd known about it when----. However I had quite a long thread some months ago where ex-Mo's admitted it wouldn't have made a difference when they heard about it.

Those who are going to look at such little details with the big picture in mind, and making sure they have all the facts and not just the sound bites will not be disturbed by these little pieces of information. Those who take the gospel piecemeal will be upset at ever little piece that doesn't jive with their preconceived notions of the way things should be.

Point taken.

Also, I removed my ad hom attack. I was being overly sensitive.

Big UP!

Lamanite

[Deborah]

Also, I removed my ad hom attack. I was being overly sensitive.

Lamanite, I love you. I don't disagree that I would like more taught but really when would that be done? Missionaries have a program to discuss gospel principles related to the Atonement and getting people converted by the Spirit. Our 3 hour block doesn't allow for more scholarly pursuits. The real substance has to come from the family or classes or on one's own.

In any case if a true spiritual conversion has taken place, what does it matter what else one learns if he is willing to put in the proper perspective. And learning some of these "uncomfortable" tidbits, ie polygamy, is what has driven me to study. But I have never studied from anti-Mo material though I've read it and am familiar with their arguments. I've turned to LDS scholars and writings and fortunately with BYU channel and CD's with lectures, etc. this has become easier to do.

[Lamanite]

And that proves what? Only that they probably were never interested in it or didn't pay attention. I admit many people are ignorant about a lot of the history in the church. I certainly was for a long time, but only because I wasn't interested or just didn't care. I only care now because I get tired of the antis taking our history out of context and using it for their own destructive purposes. As a result I have done a lot of listening and study. I don't blame the church for not knowing more. I blame myself for my own lack of interest. Nor do I blame leaders for not pounding it into me because it wouldn't have mattered until I was willing to put in the time and effort to find out for myself from reputable sources.

I wanted to learn.

But to answer my questions I often had to read a bunch of anti crap and then go dig up source material. It was a pain the A$S. Trying to understand Masonic/Mormon/Endowment connections in 1995 was ridiculous. I was alone. I relied on some Mormon scholars and the Tanner's, Decker, that one guy who owned Scalliwags Books. I ended up spending months at the UofU library studying Hammer, Jones, and Knoop. Finally, in 1997 I felt prepared to receive my own endowment. Wouldn't it have been nice if the Church had a 50pg book entitled, "A brief history of the endowment." That would have saved me more than a year in research and I would have felt better about the Church. Lucky I spoke and read English otherwise I would have been screwed. Plus, I honestly did feel like the Church was hiding something when I didn't learn about certain historical facts during the missionary lessons.

Praise God that I was truly converted and born again. Praise God that I continued to nourish my faith with the Gospel fundamentals. But were it not for that conversion I would have left..... as many do today.

Big UP!

Lamanite

[Deborah]

Praise God that I was truly converted and born again. Praise God that I continued to nourish my faith with the Gospel fundamentals. But were it not for that conversion I would have left..... as many do today.

Same here. When I first joined the church I didn't have access to the BYU library as I did later and to the many other media sources we have available now. But I knew what I knew and couldn't throw that out for something I really didn't know much about. Polygamy was a real dilemma. I thought "Did I join the right church?" Fortunately there was no doubt of that so I tabled it until I could get in and do some reading, when I got to BYU and spent hours in the church section of the library. I realize not everyone is so fortunate to have access to good material, but the key is and will always be the Spirit and not losing sight of what we do know and realizing that if all this other good stuff is true then there must be something I'm missing in looking at the other stuff.

[Lamanite]

what does it matter what else one learns

I desperately want people to know that it did matter to me. And so I'm sure it matters to others. During my investigative period I did feel let down and concerned about certain things. I only had a small handful of people that I could talk to. It can be very isolating as a new convert. To be sure, it was a wonderful time in my life, it was also very challenging. Therefore, it is not surprising that some people don't make it. And maybe of the 100 converts that leave for one reason or another, we could save 2 or 3 just by providing a more robust version of our history and doctrines and being their to answer questions and fellowship.

I have lots of viable solutions for lots of varying scenario's. I'm just not in a position to effectuate change within the Church.

Big UP!

Lamanite

[SilverKnight]

I wanted to learn.

But to answer my questions I often had to read a bunch of anti crap and then go dig up source material. It was a pain the A$S. Trying to understand Masonic/Mormon/Endowment connections in 1995 was ridiculous. I was alone. I relied on some Mormon scholars and the Tanner's, Decker, that one guy who owned Scalliwags Books. I ended up spending months at the UofU library studying Hammer, Jones, and Knoop. Finally, in 1997 I felt prepared to receive my own endowment. Wouldn't it have been nice if the Church had a 50pg book entitled, "A brief history of the endowment." That would have saved me more than a year in research and I would have felt better about the Church. Lucky I spoke and read English otherwise I would have been screwed. Plus, I honestly did feel like the Church was hiding something when I didn't learn about certain historical facts during the missionary lessons.

Praise God that I was truly converted and born again. Praise God that I continued to nourish my faith with the Gospel fundamentals. But were it not for that conversion I would have left..... as many do today.

Big UP!

Lamanite

My story nearly mirrors Lamanites - but from a lifelong mormon perspective.

I had absolutely no idea about the problematic issues in LDS history, save for a few bad-apologetic answers when I timidly asked family members and priesthood leaders about a questionable things ("oh the persecutions of the saints resulted in a surplus of women, so men had no choice to marry these women so they could care for them). The internet was like opening a floodgate of betrayal from the church I belonged to. It seemed like the further I went up the mormon hierarchical food chain, the less people knew. It was quite harrowing to learn at the root of every anti-mormon "lie" is a horrendous truth.

After years of painful study with zero help from LDS sources I now count myself as an active, believing (sort of) mormon who finds myself in an ironic position: being a agnostic-leaning, barely-believing mormon whom my ward, family and priesthood leaders helplessly turn to in hopeless ignorance to defend the church from the surging tide of criticism they sometimes encounter. Most of the time the apologetic response I supply leaves them more stunned and upset than the criticism itself did. The faithful members and even priesthood leaders in my circle are so utterly ignorant to the stark realities of church history it's a joke.

[wenglund]

When the missionaries taught me about the Plan of Salvation, no room was left for the idea that Adam was God, or how one prophet of the Church could possibly have views so far out in left field from the current teachings.

These things rocked me to the core. It is hard to come up with words to describe the experience, though I expect many who read this will know exactly what I mean.

I did not want to "sin." I did not want to leave the Church, but I came awfully close.

I appreciate you sharing this with us and I would be interested to learn what it was that kept you in the Church.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Lamanite]

I appreciate you sharing this with us and I would be interested to learn what it was that kept you in the Church.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

He's afraid of his mother in law

Big UP!

Lamanite

[HiJolly]

My story nearly mirrors Lamanites - but from a lifelong mormon perspective.

Same here - lifelong LDS with experiences like Lamanite & Deborah where I know God is real but had to find out the hard way about the amazing history of the Church.

HiJolly

[consiglieri]

Lamanite, I love you. I don't disagree that I would like more taught but really when would that be done? Missionaries have a program to discuss gospel principles related to the Atonement and getting people converted by the Spirit. Our 3 hour block doesn't allow for more scholarly pursuits.

Deborah,

I love you, too. But you are not the first to suggest that three freaking hours every freaking Sunday is somehow not enough time to get beyond the basics at Church.

Is there any other Church that exacts as great a time commitment from its members?

I mean, three hours a week is how much you have to attend a standard college course; and that's just for one semester.

Imagine taking the same college course for your whole life and never learning anything new after your first year or two.

One of the way the Church ensures that nothing will be treated in depth is to first divide the 3-hours up into three different meetings at which the exact same lessons are taught, only in different venues; then to make sure that nobody speaks for more than 15-20 minutes in sacrament meeting.

If the Church doesn't have this planned, I am at a loss to conceive a more effective way of teaching the basics eternally. Wait a second. I suppose I could have a central authority write manuals for use in class and then dictate to the teachers that they must not stray from the manual. That might be more effective.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[SilverKnight]

Deborah,

I love you, too. But you are not the first to suggest that three freaking hours every freaking Sunday is somehow not enough time to get beyond the basics at Church.

Is there any other Church that exacts as great a time commitment from its members?

Yeah there are, but most are outside the US.

I will share two things which might be counted as a baby-steps in the right direction:

1. Some Christian group had released a shotgun anti-DVD "Jesus Christ vs. Joseph Smith", found out where members lived, and was leaving on doorsteps. The Stake Presidency heard about it and announced, in priesthood meeting, for anyone who had questions about it to go to, you guessed it, the FAIR website.

2. A LOT of members are reading Rough Stone Rolling. Much of the leadership and more bookish members of my ward have read it and are 'adjusting' their worldviews accordingly.

[jwhitlock]

If the Church doesn't have this planned, I am at a loss to conceive a more effective way of teaching the basics eternally. Wait a second. I suppose I could have a central authority write manuals for use in class and then dictate to the teachers that they must not stray from the manual. That might be more effective.

I'd be interested in hearing how you would structure things if you were in charge.

With all the grousing that goes on about the Church not teaching "everything", it occurs to me that I've never heard anyone propose the "way it should be".

So - how would you have it done, specifically?

[SilverKnight]

Same here - lifelong LDS with experiences like Lamanite & Deborah where I know God is real but had to find out the hard way about the amazing history of the Church.

HiJolly

Are you still a believer?

[cinepro]

This thread does bring to light one practical matter (and probably something that should be noted):

There are so many different potential issues, it probably wouldn't be possible to include them in any kind of regular rotation. Even if the Church went out of its way to hit the "big" ones, it would miss dozens of others.

And that's only for the stuff we know about. I can't imagine what would happen if someone with good access to the Church archives was asked to go and find the most potentially faith-damaging stuff in there so it could be shared with Church members.

[zeezrom]

As a Sunstone friend of mine said, "If the church is true, we should not be afraid to get all the information out there."

Let's get those council of 50 meeting notes and Book of the Law of the Lord out of archives!

[cinepro]

As a Sunstone friend of mine said, "If the church is true, we should not be afraid to get all the information out there."

Let's get those council of 50 meeting notes and Book of the Law of the Lord out of archives!

[HiJolly]

Are you still a believer?

A believer in what? (rofl)

I know that God is real because I experience him/her/it.

I believe that God may be my own mind infused with a 'power' or influence beyond any mortal's ken. Or perhaps something more specific, but what that is I haven't experienced, yet. There is something 'special' about certain specific moments of my life, both physically and emotionally/spiritually.

I believe that God wanted Joseph to know he was free of sin, and eventually that he should restore God's church, or a reasonable facsimile thereof . To ensure success, God took an active role in both Joseph's and other people's lives.

I know that membership in the Church today does not usually prevent members from experiencing God, one-on-one, for themselves. And that it does much good in a tangible way for many, members or not.

After examining other traditions, I love being a Mormon. I choose to believe. I take Joy in the day.

HiJolly

[SilverKnight]

This thread does bring to light one practical matter (and probably something that should be noted):

There are so many different potential issues, it probably wouldn't be possible to include them in any kind of regular rotation. Even if the Church went out of its way to hit the "big" ones, it would miss dozens of others.

And that's only for the stuff we know about. I can't imagine what would happen if someone with good access to the Church archives was asked to go and find the most potentially faith-damaging stuff in there so it could be shared with Church members.

I agree, and it's not just a problem unique to mormonism.

The more a person learns about the history of their religion, but the history of everything, not to mention biology, anthropology, psychology, etc., the harder it gets to believe in religion.

Everything is faith-damaging.

A church can't possibly address every issue that could possibly lead to someone questioning.

I'll tell you what though, polygamy is a good place to start - I think of all the issues in mormonism, it has the most casualties.