Uncorrelated Mormon

[Subversive Asset 2.0]

Congrats.

Again, you aren't accurately portraying what I was saying. I see that you are trying while acting that you didn't know the simple sunday school answer that for any kind of member would know and it looks like we are comparing oranges to apples with our different backgrounds and perspectives on why members leave the Lord's Church. We obviously disagree.

I am afraid we will just go around in circles and wonder what the heck something was just stated, at least I feel that way, sorry.

To clarify, "sympathizing with apostates" and affiliating with various apostate groups is part of the questions for a recommend. It would fall under the step that leads to losing a testimony; in addition so would "sipping on wine at a social event" and "shopping on Sunday".

Bottom line: The Lord and His Prophets have completely different views than post-members etc on why members leave the Lord's Church. There usually is a certain pattern and certain steps why this happens and I know that is debatable - just not for me a "TBM" who believes in the Lord and His Prophets.

And I tried to ask you questions to give you the chance to clarify your position, since you do believe I am not accurately portraying what you're saying. Because I believe there would be a difference between 1) my not portraying what you're saying accurately and 2) our simply disagreeing about the result of such portrayal. I'm OK with 2. But I'd rather not have 1.

I find that assuming, even basic things like simple Sunday School answers, leads to problems. Because people have more nuanced views usually, even when it comes down to the basics. So, I apologize if that comes off as "trying while acting that I didn't know the simple sunday school answers that any kind of member would know." I just think that in my experience, what "any kind of member would know" is a false concept -- because different members can believe radically different things, think that their own collection of beliefs is right and all others are not.

Case in point. I grew up being taught that the temple recommend question, " Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?" refers to polygamist groups. It wasn't until I started blogging that I heard different interpretations. Nevertheless, the interview question just doesn't say, "sympathizing with apostates".

Anyway, with that clarification, I'd point something out. So, you say that "sympathizing with apostates" means affiliating with various apostate groups. So, I can easily and clearly say that this doesn't apply to a lot of the people I know who struggle with their testimonies, or who lack them. They didn't start to have problems because they started affiliating with various apostate groups (whoever these might be?).

Anyway, to respond to the bottom line: I am aware that there are different views on why people leave the church. I just think that we should be able to look at these different views, assess the data of people's lives, and then discuss. In this case, you have a list of things that if people do, they should gain and grow a testimony. But from plenty of people's experiences, this is not the case. You have a list of things that if people do, their testimonies may be hindered. But one can *not* do these things and still lack a testimony. In fact, one could do these things and still *have* a testimony. It just seems that these lists of things are not really related to what really grows or reduces a testimony.

[bookofmormontruth]

I find that assuming, even basic things like simple Sunday School answers, leads to problems. Because people have more nuanced views usually, even when it comes down to the basics. So, I apologize if that comes off as "trying while acting that I didn't know the simple sunday school answers that any kind of member would know." I just think that in my experience, what "any kind of member would know" is a false concept -- because different members can believe radically different things, think that their own collection of beliefs is right and all others are not.

You are right, I shouldn't assume.

It was mainly based on your "should I just jump to the conclusion" wink-wink statement that showed to me that you really didn't care what the answer was for you already had the conclusion. The "gotcha" tactics are overdone and are very old, but I do appreciate that you don't have the "angry approach" to "Mormonism" - that you stated on your blog.

Case in point. I grew up being taught that the temple recommend question, " Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?" refers to polygamist groups. It wasn't until I started blogging that I heard different interpretations. Nevertheless, the interview question just doesn't say, "sympathizing with apostates".

There are plenty of groups and individuals that would fit in the same category that polygamists fit into.

Anyway, with that clarification, I'd point something out. So, you say that "sympathizing with apostates" means affiliating with various apostate groups. So, I can easily and clearly say that this doesn't apply to a lot of the people I know who struggle with their testimonies, or who lack them. They didn't start to have problems because they started affiliating with various apostate groups (whoever these might be?).

I know quite a few.

I actually had an individual email me that they are still struggling coming back into the Lord's Church because they still have the anti-Mormon regurgitation from apostate groups that still crept back into their thoughts. The recommend question is definitely relevant for those who "associate" and "affiliate" with these type of groups because ultimately it will decay a testimony.

Anyway, to respond to the bottom line: I am aware that there are different views on why people leave the church. I just think that we should be able to look at these different views, assess the data of people's lives, and then discuss. In this case, you have a list of things that if people do, they should gain and grow a testimony. But from plenty of people's experiences, this is not the case. You have a list of things that if people do, their testimonies may be hindered. But one can *not* do these things and still lack a testimony. In fact, one could do these things and still *have* a testimony. It just seems that these lists of things are not really related to what really grows or reduces a testimony.

"seems" and "not really" shows that you don't know. In contrast, the Lord and His prophets do know.

[Subversive Asset 2.0]

You are right, I shouldn't assume.

It was mainly based on your "should I just jump to the conclusion" wink-wink statement that showed to me that you really didn't care what the answer was for you already had the conclusion. The "gotcha" tactics are overdone and are very old, but I do appreciate that you don't have the "angry approach" to "Mormonism" - that you stated on your blog.

Interesting. My wink-wink statement wasn't to convey that I don't really care what the answer was for I already had the conclusion. I'm not trying to use a "gotcha" tactic. My wink-wink statement was a way of showing my recognition that the question "Do you want me to start jumping to conclusions?" is ridiculous. (At least, it should be.) At worst, I was channeling some frustration that you wanted me to answer a question, but were avoiding answering my questions calling for questions -- so even though you thought I misinterpreted your words, it didn't see to me like you wanted to provide clarification (which was frustrating.)

There are plenty of groups and individuals that would fit in the same category that polygamists fit into.

Not disputing it (definitely not now). But I never made the connection growing up that that is what the question would refer to. (And even then, I had no idea of these groups' existence. I'm still not completely sure we are on the same track as to what an apostate group is.)

I know quite a few.

I actually had an individual email me that they are still struggling coming back into the Lord's Church because they still have the anti-Mormon regurgitation from apostate groups that still crept back into their thoughts. The recommend question is definitely relevant for those who "associate" and "affiliate" with these type of groups because ultimately it will decay a testimony.

My condolences to them. Nevertheless, I'm just saying that not everyone has the same experience.

"seems" and "not really" shows that you don't know. In contrast, the Lord and His prophets do know.

My intellectual humility and caution not to make universal statements about things for which I have no business making universal statements has been met with this kind of response before. It didn't amuse me then, and doesn't amuse me now. I will only go so far as to assert that statements like this grant me the opportunity to practice my charity and long-suffering.

[Brian 2.0]

bookofmormontruth,

Please let me know if I'm following you correctly by setting this example...

1) STRUGGLING MEMBER talks with TBM about his struggles and losing his testimony.

2) TBM quotes PROPHETs words about what it takes to keep a testimony and what leads to losing it (sunday school answers)

3) STRUGGLING MEMBER tells TBM that he is doing all the Sunday School answers, but he is still losing his testimony.

4) TBM has to choose between who to believe and chooses to believe PROPHET quote and either says STRUGGLING MEMBER is lying or STRUGGLING MEMBER is not being honest about following sunday school answers

Please correct me, because it seem that our Struggling Member in the scenario will find NO HELP in talking with this TBM

[Libs]

I respect that and I agree the Lord's Church will never become more "progressive" for it will be on an opposite path that the world is heading (thank goodness!). I hope you can trust in the Lord fully in your journey. You always have a family here for you.

Thank you. I appreciate that. I do know that I always have family in the LDS Church and I value that.

What I don't understand, is that members at one time "believed" before they "lived" the teachings - at least we all declared this when we had our baptismal interview. So it is hard to imagine that it is "easy" living the Gospel without a belief that was at least enough to qualify for baptism.

Maybe, because my lifestyle wasn't terribly different, before I joined the church. I was wondering what it was, about living the standards of the church, that you found difficult? I could understand, if someone came in with WoW problems, like smoking or addicted to coffee or even drugs or alcohol. But, I didn't have any of those problems, when I came in, so it just was not that difficult for me. Not saying I was perfect, either, because there are many "obedience" issues that are more subtle. I did have some problems with authority figures and patriarchal systems, so I guess I did struggle a bit with that. And, there were other small issues...none of us are perfect, as you said. I just meant I was okay on the big, major issues.

Now, I understand that a person can lose a belief, but I completely don't understand how it is "easy" to live the teachings fully and then lose the belief. I know all ex's will disagree, but if you are living the "easy" teachings, (reading, praying, weekly Church attendance, monthly Temple attendance, Word of Wisdom, service and list can go on) then it would be impossible to lose a belief for living the teachings only increases belief and builds a strong foundation. I recognize there could be exceptions (which I won't list), but they rare indeed, yet every ex and apostate I encounter claim they are that "rare" exception to the Sunday School lesson: "What leads to apostasy and losing a testimony".

Could just be that the Sunday School answer is incorrect. I don't really think I am an exception of any kind. I know a lot of ex-Mormons who were living and believing, until they came across information that stimulated doubt...and eventually unbelief.

Maybe a person who lost their belief truly believes it was "easy" and they lived all teachings and principles, but I highly doubt that is the case - unless of course the Lord and His Prophets are wrong. I am sure we could find an example (sympathizing with apostates, sip of wine at a social event, shopping on Sunday - it is human nature to forget we do these things, yet want to validate to the world or ourselves that we are "living" the Gospel and that it is "easy").

I am not fully living the LDS gospel, right now. I don't attend Sarcament Meeting, tithe or do VT, etc. I no longer wear garments. But, all of those things went (very slowly) as my doubt increased, until I finally left. But the "downhill slide" wasn't caused by my not living the gospel, but rather by my increasing unbelief. (I think, just the opposite of what you are saying?)

Even as a believer, I do not fully live every teaching and principle (like being a meanie to anti-Mormons and ex's) yet I know I am doing the things that will continually strengthen my testimony which does make living the Gospel "easier". I know, I know - you'll are a exception to the rule and it isn't as black and white as the Lord and His Prophets teach, yet I see nothing in the Gospel that the Lord wants us to live in "grey" areas or to live on the fence.

I'm really not an exception, as I said (and I don't think you are a "meanie" ). I just think the "formula" doesn't always work..or it's backwards. Belief/faith stimulates obedience and a desire to live the LDS gospel, making it relatively easy to live (because you believe it's true and you're benefiting from it). Once belief starts to wain (for whatever reason...new information, something that shakes your confidence in the prophets, etc), then obedience becomes more difficult (in some areas).

[bookofmormontruth]

My intellectual humility and caution not to make universal statements about things for which I have no business making universal statements has been met with this kind of response before. It didn't amuse me then, and doesn't amuse me now. I will only go so far as to assert that statements like this grant me the opportunity to practice my charity and long-suffering.

Fair enough, but I am not here to amuse or foster circular reasons for leaving the Lord's Church with those who are having an identity crisis.

It is sad you have these thoughts that as a child of God you are not entitled to universal knowledge. I understand it requires a testimony and I don't know your story why you never developed one, but you can still have your "intellectual humility" and "caution" and make it your "business". The Prophets are perfect examples of this.

If you feel very frustrated (self-admitted) with a bold testimony of someone's truth on yes, a "Mormon dialogue & discussion board" then you probably won't last long here.

I wish you well in your journey.

[bookofmormontruth]

bookofmormontruth,

Please let me know if I'm following you correctly by setting this example...

1) STRUGGLING MEMBER talks with TBM about his struggles and losing his testimony.

2) TBM quotes PROPHETs words about what it takes to keep a testimony and what leads to losing it (sunday school answers)

3) STRUGGLING MEMBER tells TBM that he is doing all the Sunday School answers, but he is still losing his testimony.

4) TBM has to choose between who to believe and chooses to believe PROPHET quote and either says STRUGGLING MEMBER is lying or STRUGGLING MEMBER is not being honest about following sunday school answers

Please correct me, because it seem that our Struggling Member in the scenario will find NO HELP in talking with this TBM

No you are not following me correctly for your list is too simplistic and not realistic.

I understand this isn't the best way in this forum to convey my personal examples with these kind of scenarios. It goes back to living the Gospel which can be hard at times, but part of that - isn't to use a "list" with someone "struggling". There is a lot more in this relationship including rapport, trust, friendship and non-judgement.

I am admittedly more "harsh" in these scenarios while in this kind of forum because:

a) I don't fully know you

b) These gotcha questions are not sincere for you have already made your conclusions and decisions so really no need to come here to verify them continually

c) I am not here to foster weak reasons for leaving the Lord's Church for it was a very bad decision that will be regretted

[bookofmormontruth]

Thank you. I appreciate that. I do know that I always have family in the LDS Church and I value that.

I enjoy you on here. I would have loved to be your home teacher or in the least associated with you more.

]Maybe, because my lifestyle wasn't terribly different, before I joined the church. I was wondering what it was, about living the standards of the church, that you found difficult? I could understand, if someone came in with WoW problems, like smoking or addicted to coffee or even drugs or alcohol. But, I didn't have any of those problems, when I came in, so it just was not that difficult for me. Not saying I was perfect, either, because there are many "obedience" issues that are more subtle. I did have some problems with authority figures and patriarchal systems, so I guess I did struggle a bit with that. And, there were other small issues...none of us are perfect, as you said. I just meant I was okay on the big, major issues.

Thanks for sharing. The "difficult" things will remain personal, but one struggle is to love my neighbors. I absolutely loved every person I came in contact with on my mission - such an amazing feeling that I have always longed for since.

Could just be that the Sunday School answer is incorrect. I don't really think I am an exception of any kind. I know a lot of ex-Mormons who were living and believing, until they came across information that stimulated doubt...and eventually unbelief.

If the Sunday School answer is incorrect then the teachings of Lord's Prophets are incorrect, just doesn't work for me. IMO, if we explored that ex-Mormon - why would he start to have doubts if he was doing those Sunday School answers? Doubts and fear only come from satan, not the Lord who espouses faith.

I am not fully living the LDS gospel, right now. I don't attend Sarcament Meeting, tithe or do VT, etc. I no longer wear garments. But, all of those things went (very slowly) as my doubt increased, until I finally left. But the "downhill slide" wasn't caused by my not living the gospel, but rather by my increasing unbelief. (I think, just the opposite of what you are saying?)

But that is exactly the point I am making. Why does a person have "increasing unbelief"? Did it start from neglecting meetings and personal prayers?

I'm really not an exception, as I said (and I don't think you are a "meanie" ). I just think the "formula" doesn't always work..or it's backwards. Belief/faith stimulates obedience and a desire to live the LDS gospel, making it relatively easy to live (because you believe it's true and you're benefiting from it). Once belief starts to wain (for whatever reason...new information, something that shakes your confidence in the prophets, etc), then obedience becomes more difficult (in some areas).

I understand that and respect your view. I personally just don't agree with it. That "whatever reason" is the key why someone starts to lose their testimony and I believe can be found in every case by members who leave.

[BCSpace]

I try to be more concerned about what the Lord would be more concerned about. "It is better that one man should perish than a whole nation should dwindle in unbelief......."

Are you citing Nephi's rationale for slaying Laban or Caiphas' rationale for slaying Jesus?

I'm quite sure you know which.

[DH]

In my experience, "Uncorrelated Mormon" basically means something like this:

"When you blindly following sheeple get to be as smart as us, you'll chuckle knowingly at everything the leaders of the Church say, too!"

That's quite the caricature there. Guess my experience has been different than yours.

[thesometimesaint]

Subversive Asset 2.0:

There is never a guarantee that if you love someone they must love you back. That is just as true outside of the Church, as well as inside.

That is the chance we all take in coming to this world.

[DH]

Not quite accurate.

For example, from the NT Gospel Doctrine Teacher's Manual section on "Helps for the Teacher" it includes "6. Share insights, feelings, and experiences that relate to the lesson."

Nothing here that says those "insights" can only come from the manuals.

"Insights, feelings, and experiences" are not sources in the normal sense of the word. Imagine writing a scholarly paper and backing it up with "insights, feelings, and experiences."

Also:

"Should not be necessary" is not the same thing as "never use outside sources".

Fair enough. Though they don't actually forbid using outside sources. But I do think a large number of people would read that and decide they'd better not use outside sources, just to be on the safe side!

[Subversive Asset 2.0]

Subversive Asset 2.0:

There is never a guarantee that if you love someone they must love you back. That is just as true outside of the Church, as well as inside.

That is the chance we all take in coming to this world.

Right. It's just that in general, we do not expect our relationships to be contingent upon membership/orthodoxy to the Church whereas, in several cases, relationships in the Church are *just* like that.

I am in a way sympathetic to the believing spouse. In a sense, for their companion not to believe the same things they do is a bit of a "breach of contract," since when they married, they did so under the assumption that they were marrying someone faithful...so for these terms to change, they are in essence not getting what they bargained for anymore.

It's a rough situation for everyone involved.

I guess my question would be: would you rather have someone lie so they can keep their family together, or tell the truth even if they lose what's near and dear to them?

[Mars]

I guess my question would be: would you rather have someone lie so they can keep their family together, or tell the truth even if they lose what's near and dear to them?

Kobayashi Maru. And I'm Kirk.

[thesometimesaint]

Subversive Asset 2.0:

I've never found that telling the people we love lies is a good means of maintaining a loving relationship. The truth will come out sooner or later. So you might as well tell the truth to begin with.

Tell me the truth no matter how bad. That is much easier for me to deal with, than lies told to me just to make me temporarily feel good.

[Subversive Asset 2.0]

Subversive Asset 2.0:

I've never found that telling the people we love lies is a good means of maintaining a loving relationship. The truth will come out sooner or later. So you might as well tell the truth to begin with.

Tell me the truth no matter how bad. That is much easier for me to deal with, than lies told to me just to make me temporarily feel good.

And that has certainly been my philosophy. I just haven't had to potential deal with the loss of my wife/husband/kids/friends/mom/dad over it.

[ELF1024]

And that has certainly been my philosophy. I just haven't had to potential deal with the loss of my wife/husband/kids/friends/mom/dad over it.

I was an excommunicated Mormon for a long time. I just recently got my membership back.

I didn't lose my wife until I got interested in the church again. Luckily I was able to get custody of my kids in the divorce.

Additional:

My current wife lost her parents when she joined the Church. They then united with her ex-husband and attempted to take her son away from her. Luckily they failed to accomplish their goal.

[thesometimesaint]

Subversive Asset 2.0:

It is never an easy road to true discipleship, but Christ himself said that we should be willing to lose family, and friends, if necessary to follow in his footsteps.

Ultimately we will be judged on our own actions, and beliefs, not on what anyone else did to us or what they believed.

[LeSellers]

I was almost thinking that I was an "uncorrelated Mormon [sic]" because I recognize that the Church's program of instruction (which is what correlation is all about, it is not the whole Gospel) is based on building the faith of indiviual members and investiators.

It does not attempt to present (nor, in reality, does it present itself as being) "the whole story". Correlation is the method by which the Church maintains control of her own doctrines and practices.

Because there are now more converts among the Saints than BIC members, it is important for the Brethren to have that control, lest we end up as did the Church under Peter: in apostasy. The false doctrine and, far more importantly, the rejection of legitimate Priesthood authority that crept into the I and II church led to the necessity of the Reformation and, later, the Restoration. With modern means of communications and transportation, this is not going to appen this time. The Dispensatoin of the Fulness of Times is the last dispensation, and we must be prepared to usher in the Millennial kingdom.

For me, an "uncorrelated Mormon [sic]" is one who uses the correlated (and by necessity, truncated) version of the Gospel as a starting point for his own study of the Gospel. The church exists for one purpose: to get families and individuals to the Temple and have them sealed. Once any of us has done this, the Church is not responsible for any further spiritual growth, that must come from the person's own efforts. If he makes no effort, or if the effort is slapdash or lacadaisical, there will be no growth. In the Gospel of Jesus Christ, no progression is retrogression. (For, to whom much is given, much is required.)

By this definition, I am an uncorrelated Mormon [sic]. I study well beyond the manuals (which I study as well—they keep me grounded in the fundamentals), I formulate theories on "mysteries", and attempt to get them validated from the Source. I look beyond the Yellow Journalism headlines of the Mountain Meadows Massacre, for example, and see what failed, knowing that it was not God, nor His Church.

The one thing that makes this all possible is Moses 1:39. "For behold, this is my work and my glory—to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man." Knowing that Father (and Mother) want me to succeed, want my family ot succeed, want each of us to succeed makes putting the pieces together a neary trivial task. That does not mean following the commandments is easy, but understanding why we do so is not problematic.

Lehi

[Brian 2.0]

b) These gotcha questions are not sincere for you have already made your conclusions and decisions so really no need to come here to verify them continually

I am by no means trying to form "gotcha" questions, nor have I formed my conclusions and are just looking for verify them.

I am actually fully active and in mid-struggle and joined this group not to "verify" my decision, but to actually discuss with people that aren't afraid to talk beyond what is normally talked about in Sunday School. I don't think a lot of these discussions are appropriate for regular church meetings, but I need a forum to be able to discuss them with people who will discuss, because a lot of people I have tried to talk to simply throw back the Sunday School answers and are scared or afraid to talk any further about it.

I am not saying the GAs are insincere or incorrect when they give the Sunday School answers in a talk about gaining and keeping a testimony. But I will say that General Authorities give General Counsel and they would be the first to admit that application to specific personal experiences will vary and advice might be different on a case by case basis. Given that fact, it's hard when a struggle comes up that isn't applicable to the general counsel from the general authorities, and you can't find anyone that will get into anything beyond the Sunday School answers.

I am glad people like you are on here, because I don't want to join some forum full of ex-mormons. I'm trying to talk with honest people who don't mind hard questions.

[Lightbearer]

"Uncorrelated Mormon" = Apostate Mormon... at least by very definition. One could argue in terms of degrees, but if one does not follow the counsel of the living Prophet and Apostles one is in a state of apostasy....

[Brian 2.0]

"Uncorrelated Mormon" = Apostate Mormon... at least by very definition. One could argue in terms of degrees, but if one does not follow the counsel of the living Prophet and Apostles one is in a state of apostasy....

All give you that, but then you need to admit that all members of the church are in a state of apostasy to some degree then.

[bookofmormontruth]

I am by no means trying to form "gotcha" questions, nor have I formed my conclusions and are just looking for verify them.

I am actually fully active and in mid-struggle and joined this group not to "verify" my decision, but to actually discuss with people that aren't afraid to talk beyond what is normally talked about in Sunday School. I don't think a lot of these discussions are appropriate for regular church meetings, but I need a forum to be able to discuss them with people who will discuss, because a lot of people I have tried to talk to simply throw back the Sunday School answers and are scared or afraid to talk any further about it.

I am not saying the GAs are insincere or incorrect when they give the Sunday School answers in a talk about gaining and keeping a testimony. But I will say that General Authorities give General Counsel and they would be the first to admit that application to specific personal experiences will vary and advice might be different on a case by case basis. Given that fact, it's hard when a struggle comes up that isn't applicable to the general counsel from the general authorities, and you can't find anyone that will get into anything beyond the Sunday School answers.

I am glad people like you are on here, because I don't want to join some forum full of ex-mormons. I'm trying to talk with honest people who don't mind hard questions.

I respect that and I am glad you are here on this forum.

Around these parts, I am just cautious and I admit I do question motivations because of my experiences in these kind of forums.

With that said, anything is fair game with me in regards to questions, but I would rather talk to you in person and develop a relationship first. It is that important to me. Unfortunately, that isn't the reality.

I will do my best on here, but know there are a lot of amazing members on this forum that will answer in a more loving and profound way than anything I can attain to. You will find that too if you decide to stick around.

[bookofmormontruth]

All give you that, but then you need to admit that all members of the church are in a state of apostasy to some degree then.

I see what you are saying, but who would want to remain in this state?

By definition we are all anti-Christs when we go against Him in any way.

[bookofmormontruth]

Subversive Asset 2.0:

It is never an easy road to true discipleship, but Christ himself said that we should be willing to lose family, and friends, if necessary to follow in his footsteps.

Ultimately we will be judged on our own actions, and beliefs, not on what anyone else did to us or what they believed.

I think you just described the heart-wrenching post made by ELF1024.