Does Leaving The Lds Church Mean Leaving God?

[Darren10]

From the article:

 

But unlike other mainline Christians, who, having been disappointed by an aspect of their church experience generally seek out a new church community – I’ve noticed that Mormon disaffiliation often results in a complete loss of faith and trust in God.

That may be what the author, Mike Cammock, experiences, and I can definitely relate as to people seeking other faiths when they conclude that their faith is false or unsatisfactory, but his notion that people outside the LDS faith generally seek other churches may not be correct.

John Gee on his own blog analyzes data as to where the LDS and those of other faiths go once they decide to leave their respective "native" faiths.

 

A B C

LDS 86% 72% 62%

No Religion 13 17 28

Conservative Protestant 1 3 4

Mainline Protestant 0 4 3

Black Protestant 0 3 3

Indeterminate 0 1 1

Roman Catholic 0 0 0

Jewish 0 0 0

Other Religions 0 0 0

According to his data, the overwhelming place people of faith go to when they abandon their own faith is to secularism. Gee also provides data analysis as to the frequency of people of faith leaving for secularism:

 

Percentage of youth lost to secularism:

Indeterminate 53%

Other Religions 52%

Jewish 46%

Mainline Protestant 33%

Roman Catholic 29%

LDS 28%

Black Protestant 26%

Conservative Protestant 23%

http://fornspollfira.blogspot.com/2014/12/where-are-they-going.html

Also about Commock's article, he seems to portray the LDS Church as tying the spiritual truth of the Book of Mormon with the truth of Joseph Smith being a prophet and the LDS Church being the only true Church on the earth. My upbringing in the Church was that of while, yes, there is that definite connection, one must get a spiritual witness of the truth all these things individually and not rely solely on the domino affect of one being true therefore all are true.

Addendum: Sorry about not being able to line up the data in the first blockquote. I've no idea as how to do that though I did try.

Edited December 27, 2014 by Darren10

[Darren10]

The Plains #8;

It seems like people are putting their hopes in the church they attend instead of Jesus Christ

for their salvation. Similar to what Paul mentioned in one of his epistles ... "Now this I say, that

every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ." I used

to go to a Roman Catholic church. At that time (it probably still does today), the church taught

it was the only true church in the world. But when I left, I still had my faith in Jesus Christ. In

fact, it actually increased when I started reading the Bible more.

I could never go back to that style (RC church, an LDS ward or a JW Kingdom Hall) where there

is less praising and theological teaching in the worship service. Some of you who have visited a

Pentecostal/Evangelical service would know what I mean.

I also used to me a member of a multilevel marketing/sales company called Market America.

Their motto was, "If you can't make it here, you can't make it anywhere". So it seems like if you

failed to succeed in their company, there was no point to make money in another MLM company

... which was like a trap meant to keep you from leaving.

Fortunately, my salvation does not depend on Joseph Smith, the Pope, or Charles Taze Russell.

Regards,

Jim

Dude, you need to come to my Gospel Doctrine class. Lots of praising and theological thought there.

That said I while I completely agree with you that even though one may leave the religion of one's upbringing, that does not mean you loose faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore faith in Jesus Christ is not necessarily connect or "fused" together with the truth of any one church. However, the disconnection between faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and a church is probably not as profound as you seem to portray it in your post. there is indeed a connection which one may and perhaps should affect the other.

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

(Romans 1:16)

It seems to me that the very purpose Jesus Christ called prophets and apostles, who clearly set forth evangelists, deacons, bishops, etc. was to spread forth Christ's *power* of salvation unto the world. While most definitely the power of salvation is in Christ, He seems to have administered it through the creation of His gospel or "church".

Edited December 27, 2014 by Darren10

[Brian 2.0]

 

I read this blog.  

 

Do some ex-mormons feel the same way in that if they felt deceived by the LDS Church, they

have also lost faith in Jesus Christ?  If yes, why?

 

Thanks,

Jim

 

 

As a recent non-believer who now considers himself agnostic/atheist I can answer this for myself (and a number of people close to me that have left share this sentiment).  Firstly though I would never say I was "deceived" by the church and I don't hold anger and resentment towards it.

 

For me it was a matter of losing faith in the spiritual method for gaining truth.  I now see the method in Alma 32 as an unreliable way to determine certain things... like if the events in the BOM actually happened, or if Jesus actually was resurrected, or even if God exists.

 

When taking spiritual witnesses off the scales when evaluating evidence, then often times you find the scales tipping the other way.  It's a huge paradigm shift, and one that affects your beliefs on a number of things both in and outside Mormonism.  

[rodheadlee]

 

I read this blog.  

 

Do some ex-mormons feel the same way in that if they felt deceived by the LDS Church, they

have also lost faith in Jesus Christ?  If yes, why?

 

Thanks,

Jim

 

Well here is what Jesus Christ has to say about it from D&C 84:

35 And also all they who receive this priesthood ^areceive me, saith the Lord;

  36 For he that receiveth my servants ^areceiveth me;

  37 And he that ^areceiveth me receiveth my Father;

  38 And he that receiveth my Father receiveth my Father’s ^akingdom; therefore ^ball that my Father hath shall be given unto him.

  39 And this is according to the ^aoath and covenant which belongeth to the priesthood.

  40 Therefore, all those who receive the ^apriesthood, receive this ^boath and covenant of my Father, which he cannot break, neither can it be moved.

  41 But whoso breaketh this ^acovenant after he hath received it, and altogether turneth therefrom, shall ^bnot have forgiveness of sins in this world nor in the world to come.

  42 And wo unto all those who come not unto this priesthood which ye have received, which I now confirm upon you who are present this day, by mine own voice out of the heavens; and even I have given the heavenly hosts and mine angels ^acharge concerning you.

 

I think many of us would do well to become intimately acquainted with the entire section 84.

[Duncan]

As a recent non-believer who now considers himself agnostic/atheist I can answer this for myself (and a number of people close to me that have left share this sentiment).  Firstly though I would never say I was "deceived" by the church and I don't hold anger and resentment towards it.

 

For me it was a matter of losing faith in the spiritual method for gaining truth.  I now see the method in Alma 32 as an unreliable way to determine certain things... like if the events in the BOM actually happened, or if Jesus actually was resurrected, or even if God exists.

 

When taking spiritual witnesses off the scales when evaluating evidence, then often times you find the scales tipping the other way.  It's a huge paradigm shift, and one that affects your beliefs on a number of things both in and outside Mormonism.  

 

 

what is the spiritual method in Alma 32?

[Brian 2.0]

what is the spiritual method in Alma 32?

That was more of a shorthand for both Alma 32 and Moroni's promise. Basically if someone says they know something to be true because they prayed about it and God told them it was true then I'm saying that is the spiritual method. I'm saying when one take "witnesses from God" off the table it can be easy for someone who is leaving the church to also disbelive in a divine Jesus or God.

[readstoomuch]

I was reading an article about why 20 somethings are leaving religion, she is an evangelical Christian. Her take on her tradition is that they have been marketed to more than any generation known to mankind. They feel marketed to and do not substance in many megachurchs. I don't know what I think of that. When our car is not so bumpy, I will write about my own kids

[Stone holm]

I know the author of the manuscript that the blog site published, the blog site heavily edited the memorandum that was submitted, and made it sound much more critical of the Church than it was.  The manuscript that I read was specifically talking about what the Church is attempting to do with some of the recent essays, namely to inoculate the members against embarrassing or awkward moments in Church History by giving the members the facts and information in a more friendly format before the members stumble onto it from some anti-Mormon site.  The author seemed to have misgivings about this approach and that perhaps it framed the fundamental issue incorrectly.  Namely, he took issue with the standard approach which used to be used by Missionaries, that followed the following logic -- get a testimony of the Book of Mormon, if the person believed the Book of Mormon was true, then it followed that Joseph Smith was a prophet, and if Joseph Smith was a prophet the Church was true.  What this approach assumed was that people already believed in Christ.  But, that is less likely to be true now -- so the logic can result in the investigator or young member gaining a testimony of the Church, but somehow not gaining a testimony of Christ.  If for some reason the testimony of the Church crashed and burned, the person is then left with nothing.   Personally, I agree that people who leave the Church are likely to leave religion and belief altogether, but I am of the old fashion belief that that is because the Church was the last best hope and if it isn't true, then the other Church's whose doctrine is pale in comparison just have no interest to the person.  But I have to agree, that the Universalists may wind up being the beneficiary of such a falling away, because of the active involvement in the community at large -- also because of Pope Francis, we may see people who fall away gravitating in that direction because he is addressing real time issues.

[Duncan]

That was more of a shorthand for both Alma 32 and Moroni's promise. Basically if someone says they know something to be true because they prayed about it and God told them it was true then I'm saying that is the spiritual method. I'm saying when one take "witnesses from God" off the table it can be easy for someone who is leaving the church to also disbelive in a divine Jesus or God.

 

yeah, if you don't have witnesses to something then how is one ever going to come to some kind of s conclusion on a matter. I think though that we need brain sweat come to a conclusion and then ask God if something is true 

[telnetd]

 

Well here is what Jesus Christ has to say about it from D&C 84:

35 And also all they who receive this priesthood ^areceive me, saith the Lord;

  36 For he that receiveth my servants ^areceiveth me;

  37 And he that ^areceiveth me receiveth my Father;

  38 And he that receiveth my Father receiveth my Father’s ^akingdom; therefore ^ball that my Father hath shall be given unto him.

  39 And this is according to the ^aoath and covenant which belongeth to the priesthood.

  40 Therefore, all those who receive the ^apriesthood, receive this ^boath and covenant of my Father, which he cannot break, neither can it be moved.

  41 But whoso breaketh this ^acovenant after he hath received it, and altogether turneth therefrom, shall ^bnot have forgiveness of sins in this world nor in the world to come.

  42 And wo unto all those who come not unto this priesthood which ye have received, which I now confirm upon you who are present this day, by mine own voice out of the heavens; and even I have given the heavenly hosts and mine angels ^acharge concerning you.

 

I think many of us would do well to become intimately acquainted with the entire section 84.

 

 

Some would say that these words were not spoken by Jesus but written as if they were.

So you could reject this testimony, leave the LDS Church, and still believe in Jesus (if

you believed his words are actually recorded in the Bible).

 

For example, Shakespeare or anyone could write a book, with a setting of Hawaii,

indicate that Jesus visited there, fill it with some Christ-sounding sentences, but

this would not mean He really went to Hawaii.

 

Gail

[Calm]

When our car is not so bumpy, I will write about my own kids

Hope you aren't driving….

[Darren10]

Hope you aren't driving….

Yes, I second that.

[rodheadlee]

Some would say that these words were not spoken by Jesus but written as if they were.

So you could reject this testimony, leave the LDS Church, and still believe in Jesus (if

you believed his words are actually recorded in the Bible).

 

For example, Shakespeare or anyone could write a book, with a setting of Hawaii,

indicate that Jesus visited there, fill it with some Christ-sounding sentences, but

this would not mean He really went to Hawaii.

 

Gail

Of course, that's the whole point. The only way to know is through a witness of the Holy Spirit, This is how we know the words in the Bible are true.  Just because you don't believe it doesn't mean it's not true and won't be held accountable for not believing Christ's own words. Anyone who was baptized into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints should have had a witness before they were baptized or why did they get baptized? Anyone who never had the witness in the first place is in a different place. The question in the OP was regarding anyone already in the Church.

Edited December 28, 2014 by rodheadlee

[rodheadlee]

Some would say that these words were not spoken by Jesus but written as if they were.

So you could reject this testimony, leave the LDS Church, and still believe in Jesus (if

you believed his words are actually recorded in the Bible).

 

For example, Shakespeare or anyone could write a book, with a setting of Hawaii,

indicate that Jesus visited there, fill it with some Christ-sounding sentences, but

this would not mean He really went to Hawaii.

 

Gail

 

 

 

 

 

Dupe

Edited December 28, 2014 by rodheadlee

[Maestrophil]

What Brian said rings true to me too - even though I have a testimony.  If I could exlusively embrace the very type of evidence-based only examination of spiritual and historical things that could cause me to lose my faith in Mormonism, that would also cause me to loose my faith in broader spiritual matters that require leaps of faith as well.

[Stone holm]

Of course, that's the whole point. The only way to know is through a witness of the Holy Spirit, This is how we know the words in the Bible are true.  Just because you don't believe it doesn't mean it's not true and won't be held accountable for not believing Christ's own words. Anyone who was baptized into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints should have had a witness before they were baptized or why did they get baptized? Anyone who never had the witness in the first place is in a different place. The question in the OP was regarding anyone already in the Church.

I would say it's very naive to believe that everyone who joins the Church through baptism has a testimony based on a solid understanding of the Church and its doctrines. There are too many 60 day wonders in the Church who are baptised and inactive within 60 days or less. If the Church required a solid testimony before baptism, they would have the Bishops do the investigator interviews, and probably move the age of accountability for young people up to like 18. I once had a brother from Utah comment that the reason Midwestern women tended to have stronger testimonies than Western women was that the boys got their testimonies while serving their missions, and back then the girls were discouraged from going on missions.

[Calm]

I once had a brother from Utah comment that the reason Midwestern women tended to have stronger testimonies than Western women was that the boys got their testimonies while serving their missions, and back then the girls were discouraged from going on missions.

So the women never got a testimony because they never went on a mission and thus had stronger testimonies?  Not understanding the reasoning here...

Edited December 28, 2014 by calmoriah

[rodheadlee]

I would say it's very naive to believe that everyone who joins the Church through baptism has a testimony based on a solid understanding of the Church and its doctrines. There are too many 60 day wonders in the Church who are baptised and inactive within 60 days or less. If the Church required a solid testimony before baptism, they would have the Bishops do the investigator interviews, and probably move the age of accountability for young people up to like 18. I once had a brother from Utah comment that the reason Midwestern women tended to have stronger testimonies than Western women was that the boys got their testimonies while serving their missions, and back then the girls were discouraged from going on missions.

It's the persons responsibility to get a testimony before being baptized, not the Churches. Good grief is there no personal responsibility anymore.

[readstoomuch]

Wife was driving. Very bumpy on snow.

I taught my kids the gospel and innoculated them much like the church had spoken about. Most of the essay materials plus a few others. Both were smart kids. The oldest one graduated from grad school just after she turned 23. The oldest boy got into philosophy and went on a mission. He got married and his wife got into Mormon Stories and stopped going to Church. They won't bless their baby in the Church. The oldest girl married, but received a revelation about ordaining women and is heavily involved in OW. Neither wears their garments though the girl seems to go to Church and participate. I don't know if she was one of those women punished for their involvement.

Mormons used to leave and often go to another Church. A few became atheists. Now they leave all together as it seems because of secular or social liberal issues. The Apostacy narrative may have been too strong. Our Church is the true (or as I say the most true) and others just don't have the truth. That seems to alienate kids from going to other churches and go the secular humanist route. This is one of those times that I would like to kick John Drhlin in the shins for what seems to be the strong exit narrative of leaving the Church in Mormon Stories. MS is an exmormon/Postmormon group that interviews every controversy old or new for a podcast. This is the part where my son and wife act like mormons, but drink coffee and don't answer the door when ward members come to their house.

My daughter struggled to go to Church while wearing pants sometimes and is the boss in her house. Mormon Feminist Housewives are her people and she actively supports that group and Orfdain Wormen. She cried for weeks after Kate Kelly was excommunicated. She changed in her heart and interactions with my wife were tough. Strong personalities acting together in the realm of who should have the priesthood. Lately we just love them and carry out family traditions and show love. We hope that will work and they do participate in our home. We don't discuss controversial things and just have our famy and grandchildren in our home. My oldest kids are those struggling people in many wards. Please show them love while not stuffing the Church down their throats. Pray for then. I do. Hope that gives a personal side to this topic.

Edited December 28, 2014 by readstoomuch

[Calm]

"Lately we just love them and carry out family traditions and show love. We hope that will work and they do participate in our home. We don't discuss controversial things and just have our famy and grandchildren in our home. My oldest kids are those struggling people in many wards. Please show them love while not stuffing the Church down their throats. Pray for then. I do. Hope that gives a personal side to this topic."

 

Nicely said….and good choice on how to respond, imo.

[Thinking]

After I stopped believing in the truth claims of the LDS Church, I began to reexamine my belief in God. The LDS concept of a corporeal God was now in question. Also, years of LDS indoctrination had rendered the other concepts of God ridiculous. I had to start over.

 

The organization of the universe along with being self aware suggests to me that there is some power that is contributing to my state of existence. Is that power self aware like me? Does that power have rules? Am I mortal just once or does my being find another mortal body after death? Does my existence have purpose?

 

Being a parent has helped me to shape some of my thoughts. I have two children. My wife and I set rules for the conduct of our children. I cannot imagine ever getting to the point where I would give up on my children and not give them another chance, and this is with a finite amount of time. It doesn't make sense to me that one finite time period would be the one determining factor for the rest of my existence with no chance for course correction.

 

The nature of God (corporeal or otherwise) has been a subject of debate for millennia. If God does exist, I don't think He/She/It has to be corporeal. Even LDS doctrine claims that Jehovah and Michael created this earth as non-corporeal beings before being born as Jesus and Adam. Perhaps having a body may not be a requisite for real power.

 

I do believe in morality. What is right is more important than who is right.

 

I could go on, but I'll stop here. I haven't slept well tonight, I think I may have the flu or something. I'm getting tired again.

[JLHPROF]

The nature of God (corporeal or otherwise) has been a subject of debate for millennia. If God does exist, I don't think He/She/It has to be corporeal. Even LDS doctrine claims that Jehovah and Michael created this earth as non-corporeal beings before being born as Jesus and Adam. Perhaps having a body may not be a requisite for real power.

 

Brigham Young (and I) would disagree with this completely.

For an interesting discussion of this try this one from Sunstone.

Edited December 28, 2014 by JLHPROF

[Jeanne]

As an ex-mormon, I am still searching.  That being said, I can't believe an all knowling and loving God would require secret names, signs, and passwords to get into His Kingdom.  I am a child of God not a member of a secret club...I give Him more credit than tha

[Tacenda]

As an ex-mormon, I am still searching.  That being said, I can't believe an all knowling and loving God would require secret names, signs, and passwords to get into His Kingdom.  I am a child of God not a member of a secret club...I give Him more credit than tha

I wish the temple was more a communion with God, but maybe it is for others, just not for everyone.

[JLHPROF]

As an ex-mormon, I am still searching.  That being said, I can't believe an all knowling and loving God would require secret names, signs, and passwords to get into His Kingdom.  I am a child of God not a member of a secret club...I give Him more credit than tha

 

Such items are found ALL through scripture.  The temple is scriptural and there are many similarities found in early Christianity as established by the Apostles too.  Either God tells the truth or not.

 

Luke 24:49

Revelation 2:17

Isaiah 62:2