Libs Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 Didn't mean to imply anything different.Oh good. I wasn't sure, because of your question, asking if ex-mormons=anti.
Libs Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 So robuchan, are you equally mad at L, Ron Hubbard? Sun Myung Moon? Buddha?Or is it only Joseph Smith because that is the one you bought into?That's not really a fair question, unless he has also been deeply involved with those religions.
happy Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 That's not really a fair question, unless he has also been deeply involved with those religions.I think it is. If we are going to be angry at the cons, lets attack them all. Isn't the point to block other potential LDS into converting or try to convince current LDS to leave to prevent them from being hurt by the con?
USU78 Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 I ask you for a million dollars for a charity. You give it to me, and find out I stole the money. You're angry.Your parents tell you pizza is of the devil. You finally realize at age 50 it's not, you try it, and it's delicious. You're angry.You grow up in a small town and the public schooling for K-12 all taught you the earth is flat and the sun revolves around the earth. You go off in the world and realize everything you believe about the world is false. You're angry.Anger to some degree in any of these hypo's would be understandable. Hopefully the person in each hypo would be able to make sense of things and not let the anger consume them, but certainly it would be understandable. I don't think it would be presumed that any of them have a psychological need to hate and join with others that hate.Why anger? Why not disillusionment followed by forgiveness? Why not wise headshaking at the foibles of the silly? Why anger? 1
yootaw Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 I think because of the depth of commitment involved with belief in the teachings of the church.
Somebodyz Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 Oh good. I wasn't sure, because of your question, asking if ex-mormons=anti.I was trying to understand what his point of view was.
why me Posted August 20, 2012 Author Posted August 20, 2012 But this thread seems to be more about condemning the anger rather than helping people move past it. That, I think is not very helpful in encouraging people to move past the anger.Not true. This is not about condemning the anger. Rather it is about lessening the anger. Why be angry at something that has not been proven? Has it been proven that Joseph Smith conned people with the book of mormon? That he conned 11 men who signed the testimonies in the book of mormon?
Tacenda Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 (edited) robucan, You wrote,1. An exmo used to believe certain things taught by the church. The exmo now no longer believes them. He feels deceived.2. The exmo believes he has suffered a loss due to his time investment and other sacrifices made due to former belief in church.3. The exmo may have ongoing damages, such as persecution from LDS, damaged relationships, damaged status in the community, employment or financial damages.I say what I'm about to say with respect: The time has come for you to move beyond this self-imposed emotional prison you've put yourself in and move on to a better place. Do you think you're the only person who's ever had "the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune" cast your way? You have freedom of choice so you can say anything you want to say, do anything you want to do, think anything you want to think, and work hard to try and be anything you want to be.I'm sure there are millions of people throughout the centuries who have overcome problems and issues in their lives much greater than the ones you're now dealing with. They moved on, workrd in their might, and made new lives of satisfaction and happiness for themselves. You are not unusual; welcome to the human race.Stop wallowing in self pity and be a man! Ask yourself this: "If I found myself in a the middle of a pictched battle against an evil enemy -- an enemy that wanted to destroy you and everyone you loved -- am I the type that would turntail and run?" "Or am I the kind of man who would stand and fight bravely to protect and preserve all I hold dear?" If you're like the latter, fight on and try in your might to win. If you're like the former, there's nothing to help you until you decide to change your attitude and turn the lemons you believe you're stuck with into delicious lemonade. It can be done! Others have overcome far worse challenges and difficulties than the ones you're now dealing with, and they came out triumphantly on top.Move on, good man, move on! Steel your resolve and get on with the business of life! There are no 'magic bullets' to find on this board that will finally slay your inner dragons. The only person you have any right to change is youself. So get on with it, and check back in five years when you can return here with joy and inner peace to let us know you succeeded in your quest to change and find healing, happiness and a new life of love. What you're doing on here is an exercise frustration -- and frustrated people are rarely happy people.I think it is even more complex than you're perceiving it to be, Teddyaware.Unless you've been there you'll never understand. Some exmo's as you call them, have changed their whole course in life because of the church or for their church, through many avenues such as missions vs. schooling right out of the gate (high school), or chosen mates based on the church (and then that blows up if they are disaffected, sometimes in divorce or just not seeing life together the way they'd planned) or the worst scenerio, as has been mentioned before, they don't go looking for another church, they just discontinue a belief in God or become agnostic.So it is something to make one angry, it is a life changing deal. It is something so disorienting that people that discontinue belief have to always be on guard around their mormon friends as to not offend or to feel accepted still. It almost feels as if you're in a Twilight Zone----a very strange feeling, like you know something that others don't and you can't tell a soul. It would have almost been easier to just have been inactive for all their years in the church, atleast they may have even been able to hold onto their belief in God..or even their belief in the church, I'm sure many believe in the church they just don't want to adhere to the rules or conditions...would it be better to you if they believe but aren't active what-so-ever?I think many who become disaffected were usually some of the most stalwart LDS out there. Edited August 20, 2012 by Tacenda
USU78 Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 I think it is even more complex than you're perceiving it to be, Teddyaware.Unless you've been there you'll never understand. Some exmo's as you call them, have changed their whole course in life because of the church or for their church, through many avenues such as missions vs. schooling right out of the gate (high school), or chosen mates based on the church (and then that blows up if they are disaffected, sometimes in divorce or just not seeing life together the way they'd planned) or the worst scenerio, as has been mentioned before, they don't go looking for another church, they just discontinue a belief in God or become agnostic.So it is something to make one angry, it is a life changing deal. It is something so disorienting that people that discontinue belief have to always be on guard around their mormon friends as to not offend or to feel accepted still. It almost feels as if you're in a Twilight Zone----a very strange feeling, like you know something that others don't and you can't tell a soul. It would have almost been easier to just have been inactive for all their years in the church, atleast they may have even been able to hold onto their belief in God....Still doesn't explain the unceasing anger.Where is the charity and forgiveness?Anger, in my experience, precludes such things.
Buzzard Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 Why anger? Why not disillusionment followed by forgiveness? Why not wise headshaking at the foibles of the silly? Why anger?Anger just FEELS so much better.
Closet Doubter Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 . . . . Also, have you ever noticed the human tendency to shout when either thier position is weak or they don't truly believe it themselves? There is a correlation between people saying things loudly or emphatically so as to avoid having to examine contrary evidence, to acknowledge the dearth of evidence, or to acknowledge contrary opinion. . . . Don't want to hear what your conscience is telling you? Just shout louder.I don't often agree with anything this poster says (this may be the first time I agree with part of his post) but what he says above may sometimes be true. For instance, on page one a poster posted:"In YOUR opinion- but the matter is by no means "settled"- let alone "proven". "I have always been taught that when you capitalize a word it is the same as raising your voice and if on top of it you bold or underline it is equivalent to shouting. The person that posted this must therefore be unsure or wants to avoid having to examine a contrary position.
Tacenda Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 (edited) Still doesn't explain the unceasing anger.Where is the charity and forgiveness?Anger, in my experience, precludes such things.The angry ones have continually been abused by situations that cut into their family lives, such as feeling alienated from family. It could be from not being allowed to see a family member marry in the temple, or feeling like you are the black sheep, not feeling part of the mormon conversations that so often happen at family gatherings, feeling like they can't be their true selves because of that blasted church! So many variables.But I agree, anger will get them nowhere fast. They need to show their friends and family that they're happy or it becomes a vicious cycle. The TBM's will see that the ex-mormon is angry or sad and they will strive even harder to get them back in the church. Edited August 20, 2012 by Tacenda 1
DH Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 (edited) One could flip the thread's question around and ask why some believing Mormons get so angry with people who stop believing. Not all of them, to be sure. I think many of them tend to be concerned about the disbeliever, not angry, but some of them get really angry. I could be wrong, but I get the impression that often it is family members of the former believer who get the angriest.A possible explanation is that because we are taught that the Church offers the opportunity to be together forever as a family, when a family member stops believing Church doctrine, other family members may feel that the family unit is threatened, and that as a result they will not be together in the next life. And so they get angry at the former believer for bringing about this situation.At least, that's one possibility, though undoubtedly there are other explanations.As to why exmos get angry, there are probably multiple reasons. One, they put a lot into the Church when they did believe, and they may feel cheated. Two, often the Church won't leave them alone after they leave. They tell people they do not want home teachers or visits from the bishopric or the missionaries, and yet representatives from the Church keep on coming. Another reason is sometimes their family members get mad at them, occasionally sometimes even requesting divorce. Who wouldn't be upset that their spouse puts "orthodox" belief before their marriage? Edited August 20, 2012 by DH 1
USU78 Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 The angry ones have continually been abused by situations that cut into their family lives, such as feeling alienated from family. It could be from not being allowed to see a family member marry in the temple, or feeling like you are the black sheep, not feeling apart of the mormon conversations that so often happen at family gatherings, feeling like they can't be their true selves because of that blasted church! So many variables.But I agree, anger will get them nowhere fast. They need to show their friends and family that they're happy or it becomes a vicious cycle. The TBM's will see that the ex-mormon is angry or sad and they will strive even harder to get them back in the church.That is gobbledygook. Nobody gets to remain a smart@r$$ed 16-year-old slacker blaming others for his own nastiness, unless others permit it. That doesn't cut it. We are responsible for our own responses to emotional triggers, etc. The strategy of calling everybody we grew up with liars and nursing grudges is childish and self-defeating. We need to be more aggressive and call people on their abusive nastiness, which is far more damaging to family relationships than being uncomfortable around the dark-mooded, nasty apostate who makes family gatherings unbearable for everybody, including himself. 1
robuchan Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 I think it is. If we are going to be angry at the cons, lets attack them all. Isn't the point to block other potential LDS into converting or try to convince current LDS to leave to prevent them from being hurt by the con?There is no point.
Tacenda Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 That is gobbledygook. Nobody gets to remain a smart@r$$ed 16-year-old slacker blaming others for his own nastiness, unless others permit it. That doesn't cut it. We are responsible for our own responses to emotional triggers, etc. The strategy of calling everybody we grew up with liars and nursing grudges is childish and self-defeating. We need to be more aggressive and call people on their abusive nastiness, which is far more damaging to family relationships than being uncomfortable around the dark-mooded, nasty apostate who makes family gatherings unbearable for everybody, including himself.I guess I'm not thinking of them as being angry outwardly as much as inwardly here. Not childish anger.
Closet Doubter Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 . . . . or that Joseph didn't really get the MP until June 1830. Now, this type of material has been around for ages in BYU studies and elsewhere but you average member of the Church sticks with correlated materials.I don't want to derail this thread but could someone start a thread on this or post a url of where I can find information on it? Thanks.
Damien the Leper Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 A guy that I met a couple years ago left the church while his wife and kids stayed. He doesn't attend and his wife never felt stressed over his reasons for leaving. He told me that his wife was not a member of the church because of her relationship with him nor his testimony or now lack there of. She married him because she loves him.When I talked to him about his feelings and former beliefs he simply stated "I was wrong." He wasn't seeking to deconvert anyone nor did he have any animosity. I didn't ask him what exactly made him feel the need to leave. That is none of my business.
why me Posted August 20, 2012 Author Posted August 20, 2012 The angry ones have continually been abused by situations that cut into their family lives, such as feeling alienated from family. It could be from not being allowed to see a family member marry in the temple, or feeling like you are the black sheep, not feeling part of the mormon conversations that so often happen at family gatherings, feeling like they can't be their true selves because of that blasted church! I think that this is more understandable anger because it is caused by family members. There is proof of alienation from other members who may not be so understanding and be judgemental. Both of which would be wrong. But feeling anger about something that is not definitive is the problem. And it is here that angry exmos go wrong. One cannot claim falsehood when no falsehood as been proven.
USU78 Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 I guess I'm not thinking of them as being angry outwardly as much as inwardly here. Not childish anger.Be thankful you're spared the sight of '40-, '50-, '60- and '70-somethings making Thanksgivings miserable for everybody . . . I've got an Aunt who died clutching No Man Know to her bosom like it was a fragment of the True Cross.In my experience, far more damage and abuse has come from the angry apostate than the bewildered remaindermen. 1
sethpayne Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 I don't want to derail this thread but could someone start a thread on this or post a url of where I can find information on it? Thanks.FV: https://byustudies.byu.edu/showtitle.aspx?title=4839MP: Rough Stone Rolling is the best source I know of and in it there is an account of JS receiving the MP after a trip to Colesville which would have placed it in 1830, not 1829.
Damien the Leper Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 Worst case scenario, IMO, is when a person leaves for their own reasons but is upset by all the time, money, etc. put into their membership and a faithful members simply replys "Well you didn't have to." or " You joined the church so that's your fault." or anything to that effect because it is an inappropriate means to relieve the church of any responsibility.I will agree that it is each person's choice to join the church. I'm not disputing that. But when the members are threatened with loss of blessings or blessings withheld then a line has been crossed into spiritual and/or ecclesiastical abuse.An example that is outside this case would be someone who stops paying their tithe. Okay...the ecclesiastical leaders have a duty to keep the member from entering the temple based on their standards. Therefore, the member no longer pays to enter the temple. And so we call it good...no big deal. The person can still take communion because that sacrament is not based on whether or not someone is a full tithe payer.However, if a member begins to question and doubt certain claims then it is not appropriate to withhold a temple recommend or church sacraments because the member has done nothing wrong or out of harmony with the church's teachings.
Tacenda Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 (edited) Be thankful you're spared the sight of '40-, '50-, '60- and '70-somethings making Thanksgivings miserable for everybody . . . I've got an Aunt who died clutching No Man Know to her bosom like it was a fragment of the True Cross.In my experience, far more damage and abuse has come from the angry apostate than the bewildered remaindermen.Wow, I've never been through that. I have just observed ex-mormons for several years now on boards like this (and have read their stories) not the ex-mormon boards as much, but the other ones. I guess I shouldn't comment on ex-mormon's when my real life experience has been with inactives, mainly in my own family, unlike you with your interesting relatives at Thanksgiving time.I guess I'm also speaking for myself even though I'm still active and appear TBM (on the outside). But really I'm a disaffected LDS (on the inside) just from finding things out and not believing as I once have. Edited August 20, 2012 by Tacenda
ERayR Posted August 20, 2012 Posted August 20, 2012 (edited) Even anti-Mormons should be treated with kindness. Kindness is one of the "fruits of the spirit".Definitely but does that mean their assumptions can not be challenged? Edited August 20, 2012 by ERayR
why me Posted August 20, 2012 Author Posted August 20, 2012 I guess I'm also speaking for myself even though I'm still active and appear TBM (on the outside). But really I'm a disaffected LDS (on the inside) just from finding things out and not believing as I once have.What have you found out? Have you found out that Joseph Smith conned people with the book of mormon? Here is what I have found out. Oliver Cowdery on his deathbed and what he said:http://theearlyanthology.tripod.com/1829/id9.htmlI also testify to the world, that neither Oliver Cowdery or Martin Harris ever at any time denied their testimony. They both died reaffirming the truth of the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon. I was present at the death bed of Oliver Cowdery, and his last words were, 'Brother David, be true to your testimony to the Book of Mormon.' He died here in Richmond, Mo., on March 3d, 1850. Many witnesses yet live in Richmond, who will testify to the truth of these facts, as well as to the good character of Oliver Cowdery" David Whitmer, Address to All Believers in Christ (Richmond, Mo.: David Whitmer, 1887), p. 8."He...died at the age of forty-four with consumption in Richmond, Ray County, Missouri. And just before he breathed his last, he asked to be raised up in bed so he could talk to the family and friends, and he told them to live according to the teachings in the Book of Mormon, and they would meet him in heaven. Then he said, ‘Lay me down and let me fall asleep in the arms of Jesus.’ And he fell asleep without a struggle."Letter of Lucy Cowdery Young to historian Andrew Jenson, Mar. 7, 1887, LDS archives."Elder Phineas H. Young, who was present at the death of Oliver Cowdery, at Richmond, Missouri, March 3 1850, says, ‘His last moments were spent in bearing testimony of the truth of the gospel revealed through Joseph Smith, and the power of the holy priesthood which he had received through his administrations.’"Andrew Jenson, The Historical Record (Salt Lake City: Andrew Jenson, 1889), p. 202.What is interesting is that angry exmormons bring up Oliver's letter to his brother about a dirty, nasty affair but they tend to ignore the above. How can one explain Oliver on his deathbed? Why would he bear his testimony to his wife and daughter on his deathbed? And why can't this testimony lessen exmormon anger about a believing in a speculative con?
Recommended Posts