Any Former Apostates Who Have Come Back Into Full Belief Here?

[Maestrophil]

Thanks, Why Me! That was a great read.

[mfbukowski]

I was an atheist, but I got better.

[why me]

Thanks, Why Me! That was a great read.

Glad that you liked Don's reconversion story. I know that when he returned there was much celebration among the internet lds saints who frequented the same boards that the did. He also wrote a great piece about the fanny alger episode that was published in a journal. That is also a great read.

[mfbukowski]

This is don's story. I don't want to link it because he gave it on a somewhat critic board.

Was that at the trailer park?

[DonBradley]

Thanks to WhyMe for posting the story of my loss of faith and later reconversion. I wrote this account of my leaving and return a little while before my rebaptism and in the context of a somewhat critical audience. With the passage of time and outside that context, which may have made me more defensive and understating than I otherwise would have been, I would relate some of that a bit differently.

My reconversion was both spiritual and intellectual.

After seeing much in my research that had troubled me, I made some major findings that---to my great surprise---were very favorable to the legitimacy of Joseph Smith as a prophet and of the Book of Mormon as scripture. These will trickle out in my publications over the next several years, starting with my book on the lost 116 pages of the Book of Mormon, which will be published later this year.

I also had spiritual experiences that both helped lead me back to the Church and, since then, have confirmed to me repeatedly the rightness of that choice. I know I am where God wants me to be, doing what he wants me to do, and that the faith that Joseph Smith brought forth on the earth is of Him. I have a firm testimony of Christ, of the Book of Mormon, and of the Church.

Even more important than the new experiences I have had since I began my return to the Church has been my acceptance and embrace of experiences I had previously had. My whole life testifies to the truthfulness of the Gospel, the Church, and, specifically, of the Restoration. I for some time was not willing to trust my own experience. Once I came to trust my own experience again, the truthfulness of the Church was no longer in doubt.

Since some of my intellectual reasons for reembracing my faith can't be understood without knowing what has come together in my research, I'm holding off for the time being on trying to describe those reasons. When I publish my various projects on the lost 116 pages, Book of Mormon translation, priesthood restoration, "esoteric" traditions in the Book of Mormon, the everlasting covenant, and the First Vision, I won't need to explain my reasons for believing. Others will be able to see those reasons clearly for themselves.

Don

[Pahoran]

Thanks to WhyMe for posting the story of my loss of faith and later reconversion. I wrote this account of my leaving and return a little while before my rebaptism and in the context of a somewhat critical audience. With the passage of time and outside that context, which may have made me more defensive and understating than I otherwise would have been, I would relate some of that a bit differently.

My reconversion was both spiritual and intellectual.

After seeing much in my research that had troubled me, I made some major findings that---to my great surprise---were very favorable to the legitimacy of Joseph Smith as a prophet and of the Book of Mormon as scripture. These will trickle out in my publications over the next several years, starting with my book on the lost 116 pages of the Book of Mormon, which will be published later this year.

I also had spiritual experiences that both helped lead me back to the Church and, since then, have confirmed to me repeatedly the rightness of that choice. I know I am where God wants me to be, doing what he wants me to do, and that the faith that Joseph Smith brought forth on the earth is of Him. I have a firm testimony of Christ, of the Book of Mormon, and of the Church.

Even more important than the new experiences I have had since I began my return to the Church has been my acceptance and embrace of experiences I had previously had. My whole life testifies to the truthfulness of the Gospel, the Church, and, specifically, of the Restoration. I for some time was not willing to trust my own experience. Once I came to trust my own experience again, the truthfulness of the Church was no longer in doubt.

Since some of my intellectual reasons for reembracing my faith can't be understood without knowing what has come together in my research, I'm holding off for the time being on trying to describe those reasons. When I publish my various projects on the lost 116 pages, Book of Mormon translation, priesthood restoration, "esoteric" traditions in the Book of Mormon, the everlasting covenant, and the First Vision, I won't need to explain my reasons for believing. Others will be able to see those reasons clearly for themselves.

Don

Don,

thank you for that. Since you are here in person (as much as anyone can be in Cyberspace) let me ask you the question I previously merely wondered about: would you consider submitting something to Mormon Scholars Testify if Dan would consider publishing it?

I'm not actually trying to "organise" anything, I'm merely wondering.

Thanks,

Pahoran

[DonBradley]

Well, Pahoran, great minds think alike.

I've made contact with Dan about this, and he's expressed great interest. I need to write up a testimony and submit it for formal consideration. I should spend some of my off-time doing just that. In fact, I'll work that into my day-to-day schedule, to gradually draft and revise what I'd like to submit.

Thanks for the nudge!

Don

[mfbukowski]

Thanks Don- great stuff!

[Libs]

Don, thank you for sharing your story. I really enjoyed reading that.

Do you mind if ask...did you consider other religions, at all, after you left the church? Because, it seems like (from what is written) that you went from LDS to atheist and then back to LDS again? How long were you out of the church?

You have a wonderful story and I could certainly relate to parts of it...especially, having experiences that cannot be very well explained, from an atheist perspective. Also, the goodness of the church and what it produces (for the most part)...the fruit.

Edited February 16, 2012 by Libs

[DonBradley]

Libs,

Yes, I did indeed look into other, non-LDS faiths while I was out of the LDS Church. I have always been attracted to Judaism, and considered conversion to a liberal form of Judaism. I was particularly attracted to Reconstructionist Judaism. My limited God beliefs, the difficulties of conversion, the heavy politics surrounding Judaism and the state of Israel, and my cultural Christianity (e.g., loving Christmas and Easter) all combined to make that not happen.

While an atheist I attended Unitarian-Universalist meetings for a while in Utah Valley and a few times in the Salt Lake Valley.

When I came to believe in God again about four years ago, I really wanted to find a religion that would tell me what God wanted me to do. I felt the door to my being Mormon again was closed--that I couldn't believe and didn't belong. So I searched. Not believing at the time that any of the existing faiths were literally divinely revealed, I decided to go with what seemed to me at the time the most beautiful and expansive religious vision I could find, which was the Baha'i faith. I actually became a Baha'i, officially as well as privately, and came to believe God had chosen and inspired its founder, Baha'u'llah. However, I had trouble with Baha'i theology, which has a purely mental afterlife--which was hard for me to comprehend--and a conception of God that is so transcendent that it made God seem very distant to me. Also, although they have an idea of eternal progression (and a number of other close similarities to Mormonism), they didn't hold to anything like a deification idea. It's impossible to have deification when God is so transcendent that there are no points of direct contact between God and man.

Deification is a big deal to me. Though I don't believe we become gods in the same sense that God is God (there is a difference of ontology and scope), I really can't see much of an ultimate meaning to our existence without deification. I mean, I would take any pleasant afterlife that was on offer, if the alternative was an unpleasant one or nonexistence; but most notions of our eternal destiny seem rather shallow and petty. If God is ultimate, then anything short of partaking of God's being within our own, of--to whatever extent this may be possible--becoming what God is, is a poor excuse for an ultimate meaning. If God isn't after our becoming divine, then we are merely God's playthings.

In short, I wasn't satisfied with Baha'i theology. I also had trouble with the Baha'i notion that the founding figures of the faith were infallible. I would think, "Isn't a prophet really only a prophet when he's acting at such?" I also had trouble with the legalism (there is a detailed code of laws). Evangelicals who think Mormonism is legalistic haven't experienced a faith with an actual law code. (And the Baha'i law is actually very light compared to that of Islam or, particularly, Orthodox Judaism.)

So, although a Baha'i, I was one in a rather Mormon-ish way.

Then, one of the most horrible calamities I could have imagined struck. My younger brother Charles--25 years old, with as much zest for life as anyone I knew, and so gentle, kind, and good--died.

His death, and particularly the viewing--seeing his body there and thinking it was for the very last time--turned my world upside down.

Reeling, I began searching again, and soon reembraced Christ. I came to believe in the Resurrection and Christ's divinity. But what kind of Christian to be? I tried to be kind of a liberal Evangelical, sort of. I wanted to rely on the Bible alone, not tradition, but also couldn't believe that most of humankind was to be consigned by a "loving" God to eternal, infinite, flaming punishment. But in the process of practicing my daily Christian devotion--reading the New Testament, praying, going to various churches, loving and trying to serve Christ--I found that it all felt so familiar. It was like my former devout life, being an LDS Christian. I felt the same love, the same devotion, the same Spirit. So, I really couldn't doubt that I'd been a true Christian as a believing Latter-day Saint.

I remembered how nothing had drawn me so close to Christ and made me rely on him more and make him part of my life more than reading the Book of Mormon. So I did something crazy--I started reading it again. I still thought I "knew," intellectually, that it wasn't really scripture. But it was so obviously a good book--one that brought me to God. So I used it to help me in my spiritual, devotional life. This went wonderfully...until I got really, really confused. What was I doing reading devotionally as a non-Mormon Christian a book that claimed to be scripture but that I "knew" wasn't? And what did it mean that this "worked" in bringing me close to God?

Confused, and insanely busy with my first semester of grad school, I put religion up on the shelf. I was still drawn to Christ, and also still attracted to the Baha'i vision of human oneness. Second semester I began to attend campus Christian events, and also to get involved in local Baha'i meetings. (Baha'is accept Christ as what they call a "manifestation" of God, which is not a literal incarnation of divinity, but something mediating between God and human beings.) I wanted to achieve the beautiful this-worldy vision the Baha'is have for humankind, but I still wasn't theologically a Baha'i. I prayed in the name of Christ. I wanted to be close to Christ, but I was full of questions about what was true, theologically and historically, and uncertain what Christian community I could possibly be at home in.

Quietly, other things had been building in my life--such as an increased ability to accept LDS beliefs, many of which are held by Baha'is (e.g., progressive revelation and eternal marriage) and by other Christians (Christ's divinity and atonement, resurrection, and, for some Christians, deification). I also came to realize, as described in my return story copied into this thread, that the reason I had rejected my LDS faith was, at least greatly, because I had adopted the habit of thinking endlessly in a critical, academic way about matters of faith and even about my own spiritual experiences. It was not until the final days of the semester, when I culminated research I'd been doing on the First Vision and allowed myself to do some real soul-searching, that I realized, very suddenly, that I could truly reembrace Mormonism, that I already had a testimony--forged over a lifetime of experience, that God wanted me in the Church, that I was in my heart a Latter-day Saint, that I had put myself out of my true spiritual place in this world, and that it was time to go home.

A longer answer, I'm sure, than what you were expecting.

Don

[Libs]

I appreciate your long answer! That was very interesting.

Sounds like you really did a lot of exploring, while you were out. I don't know much about the Baha'i faith, but I know a lot of people (including me, actually) have trouble with relating to an impersonal God. Also, I think a conversion outside of Christianity is, as you said, often difficult for cultural Christians.

So very sorry to hear about your brother. That must have been devastating. I lost my sister, two years ago, so I do know what it's like to lose a sibling. But, your brother was so young....that's sad. Was it an accident? (You don't have to share, if you'd rather not)..

I'm always interested in how people came back into the church. I tried to go back a couple of years ago, but it didn't work for me. I wasn't ready (and now believe I probably never will be).. I am worshipping in a Hindu/Christian Church. It is, basically, Hindu theology, but Christian culturally (there is a focus on Christ and all of the Christian holidays are celebrated)...which I have found a good blend.

[why me]

Was that at the trailer park?

Could be. :=)

[why me]

Thanks to WhyMe for posting the story of my loss of faith and later reconversion. I wrote this account of my leaving and return a little while before my rebaptism and in the context of a somewhat critical audience. With the passage of time and outside that context, which may have made me more defensive and understating than I otherwise would have been, I would relate some of that a bit differently.

My reconversion was both spiritual and intellectual.

After seeing much in my research that had troubled me, I made some major findings that---to my great surprise---were very favorable to the legitimacy of Joseph Smith as a prophet and of the Book of Mormon as scripture. These will trickle out in my publications over the next several years, starting with my book on the lost 116 pages of the Book of Mormon, which will be published later this year.

I also had spiritual experiences that both helped lead me back to the Church and, since then, have confirmed to me repeatedly the rightness of that choice. I know I am where God wants me to be, doing what he wants me to do, and that the faith that Joseph Smith brought forth on the earth is of Him. I have a firm testimony of Christ, of the Book of Mormon, and of the Church.

Even more important than the new experiences I have had since I began my return to the Church has been my acceptance and embrace of experiences I had previously had. My whole life testifies to the truthfulness of the Gospel, the Church, and, specifically, of the Restoration. I for some time was not willing to trust my own experience. Once I came to trust my own experience again, the truthfulness of the Church was no longer in doubt.

Since some of my intellectual reasons for reembracing my faith can't be understood without knowing what has come together in my research, I'm holding off for the time being on trying to describe those reasons. When I publish my various projects on the lost 116 pages, Book of Mormon translation, priesthood restoration, "esoteric" traditions in the Book of Mormon, the everlasting covenant, and the First Vision, I won't need to explain my reasons for believing. Others will be able to see those reasons clearly for themselves.

Don

I was a little shy about posting it because I did not have your permission but I also knew that it would help a lot of people. As I have said to you many times, you need to do some firesides with your reconversion story. You would be a great help to many people. And what is wonderful about your reconversion is that it is a mixture of the spirtual and the intellect. I have said quite often that church history can be very faith promoting once good research is done. And you are certainly doing it. Also, the notion of spiritual experience is important. The truthfulness of the lds church is more than just an emotion, it is an experience, a spiritual experience. It is also wonderful to have you post on this thread.

[why me]

Well, Pahoran, great minds think alike.

I've made contact with Dan about this, and he's expressed great interest. I need to write up a testimony and submit it for formal consideration. I should spend some of my off-time doing just that. In fact, I'll work that into my day-to-day schedule, to gradually draft and revise what I'd like to submit.

Thanks for the nudge!

Don

You may get lost among all the other scholars who testified. I would hope that your testimony would not just become a post on a page and quickly be forgotten among all the others. Or not even be found among the others because it becomes one of the bunch of other tesimonies. I think that it needs to stand out so people will be able to read it without it just being by chance.

[DonBradley]

Thanks, WhyMe. I'm planning to also do the FAIR podcast and then maybe a couple others. So, yes, I'll make sure my story is out there for others to, hopefully, benefit from.

Thanks for the encouragement!

Don

[dougtheavenger]

Yes. I am a former apostate. Now I am a member in good standing. I never was excommunicated. I just became inactive and harbored apostate beliefs such as the following.

1. Evil is an illusion.

2. Polygamy was always wrong.

3. Free will does not exist.

4. Brigham Young was not the legitimate successor to Joseph Smith.

I have now repudiated all of these beliefs.

Edited February 17, 2012 by dougtheavenger

[Kenngo1969]

[sTART THREADJACK]After seeing much in my research that had troubled me, I made some major findings that---to my great surprise---were very favorable to the legitimacy of Joseph Smith as a prophet and of the Book of Mormon as scripture. These will trickle out in my publications over the next several years, starting with my book on the lost 116 pages of the Book of Mormon, which will be published later this year. ...

This is, I admit (as shown by my "THEADJACK" tag, above), totally off-topic, but I wonder how much easier it would be to place the Book of Mormon in a 600 BCE millieu if we had the Book of Lehi. (Not, of course, that most of the critics will ever be convinced, but still ... )[/END THREADJACK]

Edited February 17, 2012 by Kenngo1969

[why me]

This is, I admit (as shown by my "THEADJACK" tag, above), totally off-topic, but I wonder how much easier it would be to place the Book of Mormon in a 600 BCE millieu if we had the Book of Lehi. (Not, of course, that most of the critics will ever be convinced, but still ... )[/END THREADJACK]

I think that as don will prove, lds history can be very faith promoting. And once people look into the history and critically assess the critic interpretation and put it against a good apolgetic approach, I think that the apologetic approach will win every time. I hope that the lds church can use Dons research when it finally comes out with its own interpretation of lds history when it embraces the controversies as it did in the 1970s and earlier.

[DonBradley]

This is, I admit (as shown by my "THEADJACK" tag, above), totally off-topic, but I wonder how much easier it would be to place the Book of Mormon in a 600 BCE millieu if we had the Book of Lehi. (Not, of course, that most of the critics will ever be convinced, but still ... )[/END THREADJACK]

Great question, Kenngo! =)

While I don't "have the Book of Lehi," I think its knowable contents will factor greatly into Book of Mormon historicity discussions.

Don

[DonBradley]

I think that as don will prove, lds history can be very faith promoting. And once people look into the history and critically assess the critic interpretation and put it against a good apolgetic approach, I think that the apologetic approach will win every time. I hope that the lds church can use Dons research when it finally comes out with its own interpretation of lds history when it embraces the controversies as it did in the 1970s and earlier.

WhyMe,

I think (and certainly hope) that my research will prove very useful to scholars and to the Church.

My overall approach, fwiw, is not what I would call "apologetic," since that implies an intention make a case from the data to defend a belief. My intention is to piece together the data to see what they say. Doing that has, however, led me to find a great deal that I think will be very interesting to those discussing the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon, and particularly to those defending it.

Cheers,

Don

[Stargazer]

This is, I admit (as shown by my "THEADJACK" tag, above), totally off-topic, but I wonder how much easier it would be to place the Book of Mormon in a 600 BCE millieu if we had the Book of Lehi. (Not, of course, that most of the critics will ever be convinced, but still ... )[/END THREADJACK]

Much as I shouldn't contribute towards the jacking of the thread, I have seen the Book of Lehi.

It doesn't help.

Of course, it is also fraudulent, but...

[peacefulleeman]

Yes. I am a former apostate, and many years now and forever a faithful believer. I know for certain the Church is true. I never was excommunicated. I just became inactive and harbored apostate beliefs such as the following.

1. Joseph Smith was a pedophile and con artist.

2. Polygamy was evil and a form of lust and perversion.

3. The Priesthood Ban was racist.

4. Women not holding the Priesthood was sexist.

I have long since repudiated all of these beliefs with the actual and full truth.

I did so by putting away my judgment of religion and the religious, and when I was ready kept learning.

That is when the answers to my questions and issues came.

[why me]

Yes. I am a former apostate, and many years now and forever a faithful believer. I know for certain the Church is true. I never was excommunicated. I just became inactive and harbored apostate beliefs such as the following.

1. Joseph Smith was a pedophile and con artist.

2. Polygamy was evil and a form of lust and perversion.

3. The Priesthood Ban was racist.

4. Women not holding the Priesthood was sexist.

I have long since repudiated all of these beliefs with the actual and full truth.

I did so by putting away my judgment of religion and the religious, and when I was ready kept learning.

That is when the answers to my questions and issues came.

Thank you for your post. I think that once the lds church begins to address your former concerns in an active way, many will come back to the church. Most interpretations by the critics when it comes to Joseph Smith and lds history can be addressed by lds historians by putting events in context and interweaving a different interpretation. This is what Don Bradley is attempting to do. And he has been quite successful with the fanny alger story.

[Pahoran]

I think (and certainly hope) that my research will prove very useful to scholars and to the Church.

My overall approach, fwiw, is not what I would call "apologetic," since that implies an intention make a case from the data to defend a belief. My intention is to piece together the data to see what they say. Doing that has, however, led me to find a great deal that I think will be very interesting to those discussing the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon, and particularly to those defending it.

I'm very much looking forward to seeing it.

But now I have a question:

Why do you have a picture of Simon Cowell as your avatar?

(Ducks and runs...)

Regards,

Pahoran

[mfbukowski]

Don thanks for your story.

You have achieved somewhat legendary status here and on the "other board" and now I can see that I was mistaken about some of what I believed your positions to be, and I'm glad I was mistaken, because the reality is much more satisfying. I really should know better by now, but I can't believe how distorted a picture of your re-conversion I had before.

What you have said here is very powerful, and thanks again.