A possible life outside mormonism

[Robert F. Smith]

13 hours ago, 3DOP said:

Sure calm...I misunderstood him perhaps. Mike meant a "bottomless pit" in a good way? Anyway, you got me...discovery is good...I am not sure I could think that this is what Mike meant.

Robert, it is whatever Mike meant. And Mike, whatever you say. I understood you to mean something impossible to find, where the next discovery leads you to feel more hopeless than before.  

Exactly.

[AtlanticMike]

3 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I was there, where you are, and I lost some valuable time with my youngest son. He still had a great childhood, and probably could care less that I hang out with him, he had plenty of neighbor kids to play with, but I feel like we lost a bonding. He and my other children saw me on the internet constantly. I worry that's what they'll say they remember about me most, how embarrassing that I let the church and it's history or the blogs or the forums and the several podcasts consume me like that. I have a sickness and I wish I could joke about it. I can't get off the proverbial fence. I wish I could jump down on either side and take hold of it. I know members on this board and even church leaders would like a member to make a choice and move on. I can't do it, as much as I'd like to. So what I started out to say is, that I hope you don't lose precious time with your kids/wife, by studying out the issues with the church, now I regret and almost feel angry that I allowed that to happen.

 

When are they taking you off limited? I want to give you cool little colorful circles for your post.

[AtlanticMike]

25 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Is the rabbit hole paying dividends?

But, on the other hand Robert, I raise actual rabbits and sold $400 of rabbits in the past month😁

Does that count?

Edited April 19, 2021 by AtlanticMike

[poptart]

39 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Is the rabbit hole paying dividends?

Come on man don't knock the rabbit hole, once you're past that the tea parties are fun.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=Tzqs1aRyCkw

 

 

 

Edited April 19, 2021 by poptart

[Meadowchik]

26 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Mormonism as a theological belief system is to be differentiated from the political nonsense believed by most Mormons.  In that sense, Mormonism as a religion cannot be reconciled with certain political beliefs -- which are actually anti-Mormon.

The secondary question is, Was the LDS Church at any time in its history a theocracy?  For example, could we describe the United Firm or the United Order as theocracies in any true sense?  Thus, should we describe the Israeli kibbutz as a theocracy?  How about Amish communities., Mennonites, the Hutterite Brethren, the Basque Mondragon, or other communal societies?  Was ZCMI a theocracy?  Can we really describe voluntary cooperative societies as "theocratic"?  People and groups who vociferously opposed Brigham Young flourished in 19th century SLC.  How would that be possible in a theocracy?

In any case, Mormonism has a long history of mixing politics and religion. So, right or not, earnest students of both can understandably conflate the two. 

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, 2BizE said:

I think living in Mormonism is like living in a small bubble.  You only have a tiny view.  Those that leave often speak about finding a whole new and fascinating world that they would have never known if not for leaving.  They face new struggles as well.  I think it is naive to think by leaving you won’t have challenges. You will, but you will also find new happiness.  Church leaders often teach that true happiness can only be found in the church. This is completely false.  There is much joy outside the church.  As far as political views, many people who leave find their political views changing at the same time.  They find the importance of shared happiness over individual capitalism.  

Living life is like living in a small bubble. There is always a lot of the world you are missing.

[Robert F. Smith]

40 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

In any case, Mormonism has a long history of mixing politics and religion. So, right or not, earnest students of both can understandably conflate the two. 

All theological systems mix politics and religion.  They cannot be separated.  You did not, however, address the crucial question as to whether the Mormon religion (the theological system) can be reconciled with the political beliefs of Mormons.  Since the answer is no, it creates difficulties for those who think that it is unusual or inappropriate for religion and politics to be mixed.  Of course they are, all the time.  This is not unique to Mormonism, and has never been.

All religions can be analyzed for their deep involvement in politics, from Judaism to Roman Catholicism, from Islam to Hinduism.  Most religions have had very deep involvement, up to and including open warfare with full-scale armies, to burnings at the stake.  Scholars understand very well that a group of people may have political beliefs which are at variance with their theological beliefs, and that voluntary systems are not actually theocratic.  Since the LDS Church takes the officially enlightened view that free agency is paramount, it is impossible now and in the past for it to have been theocratic.  One can in fact point to real theocracies in effect today in America and in various parts of the world, but the LDS faith is not among them, and never has been.

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, 2BizE said:

I think living in Mormonism is like living in a small bubble.  You only have a tiny view.  Those that leave often speak about finding a whole new and fascinating world that they would have never known if not for leaving.  They face new struggles as well.  I think it is naive to think by leaving you won’t have challenges. You will, but you will also find new happiness.  Church leaders often teach that true happiness can only be found in the church. This is completely false.

I have never heard any LDS leaders claim that "true happiness can only be found in the church."  That is not only a ridiculous and false claim by you, but it misses the ultimate teaching of the LDS Church, which is that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the true path to happiness.

LDS leaders do not even claim that other paths to happiness are necessarily wrong, because many of them contain true principles.  Indeed, Joseph Smith himself and many of the Brethren have frequently lauded the correct principles which are found in many cultural and religious traditions.

2 hours ago, 2BizE said:

 There is much joy outside the church.  As far as political views, many people who leave find their political views changing at the same time.  They find the importance of shared happiness over individual capitalism.  

Yes, of course there is much happiness outside the LDS Church.  Only an idiot would think otherwise, and LDS leaders have never said otherwise.  Your version of the LDS faith is very odd indeed, as is the abandonment of that for the blessings of Mammon. 

[teddyaware]

3 hours ago, 2BizE said:

I think living in Mormonism is like living in a small bubble.  You only have a tiny view.  Those that leave often speak about finding a whole new and fascinating world that they would have never known if not for leaving.  They face new struggles as well.  I think it is naive to think by leaving you won’t have challenges. You will, but you will also find new happiness.  Church leaders often teach that true happiness can only be found in the church. This is completely false.  There is much joy outside the church.  As far as political views, many people who leave find their political views changing at the same time.  They find the importance of shared happiness over individual capitalism.  

Don’t you mean shared enslavement, shared impoverishment and equalized human misery for all except for the godless oligarchical “elite” who lve in debauchery and vainglorious opulence (like living idolatrous gods who demand to be treated as if they dwell on Mount Olympus) while the rest of their ‘subjects’ are relegated to the status of caged farm animals? Is it possible that for many of those who give up on the Restored Gospel, and the glorious concept of a divinely inspired Construction, that it’s an expected natural process for them to abandon title of liberty in favor of blithely going over to the side of the deceitful modern-day ‘king men?’

I imagine this giving up on personal liberty for a life of false security is due to the fact that those who give up on the immortality of the soul,  and the testimony of the Holy Ghost that the only way to obtain true happiness is through Jesus Christ, quite naturally morph into a fatalistic “eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die” outlook. After all, who wants to work hard toward self improvement and a life of rendering service to others when, in the end, we’re all going to become extinct and waste away into a void of endless nonexistence?

Edited April 19, 2021 by teddyaware

[Meadowchik]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

All theological systems mix politics and religion.  They cannot be separated.  You did not, however, address the crucial question as to whether the Mormon religion (the theological system) can be reconciled with the political beliefs of Mormons.  Since the answer is no, it creates difficulties for those who think that it is unusual or inappropriate for religion and politics to be mixed.  Of course they are, all the time.  This is not unique to Mormonism, and has never been.

I did not say it was unique to Mormonism to mix politics with religion.

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

All religions can be analyzed for their deep involvement in politics, from Judaism to Roman Catholicism, from Islam to Hinduism.  Most religions have had very deep involvement, up to and including open warfare with full-scale armies, to burnings at the stake.  Scholars understand very well that a group of people may have political beliefs which are at variance with their theological beliefs, and that voluntary systems are not actually theocratic.  Since the LDS Church takes the officially enlightened view that free agency is paramount, it is impossible now and in the past for it to have been theocratic.  One can in fact point to real theocracies in effect today in America and in various parts of the world, but the LDS faith is not among them, and never has been.

I'll go ahead and disagree agree with you Robert.

1) "The political theory that critics saw as dangerously “un-American” was called “theodemocracy” by Mormons. Proclaiming their allegiance to God in all human affairs while also maintaining a sincere faith in American republicanism, early Mormons, under the direction of founding prophet Joseph Smith, sought to create a sociopolitical order that combined the virtues of government by God and by the people. Rather than seeing theocracy and democracy as being inherently incompatible, Smith and his followers viewed them as complementary; indeed, many argued that they were inseparable and one could not be fully enacted without the other, that theos and demos were in fact part of an organic system of government that permeated not only earthly but also heavenly realms. To this end, inasmuch as Mormons contributed something resembling a distinctive political theory, particularly in the period from their settlement in Nauvoo, Illinois, until the abandonment of plural marriage in 1890, it was most succinctly captured in Joseph Smith’s 1844 presidential campaign platform: “I go emphatically, virtuously, and humanely, for a theodemocracy, where God and the people hold the power to conduct the affairs of men in righteousness.” Patrick Q. Mason, "The Mormon Menace: Violence and Anti-Mormonism in the Postbellum South" 2011

2) See Forgotten Kingdom: The Mormon Theocracy in the American West, 1847–1896, by David L. Bigler.

3) There's RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE AS A FACTOR OF STABILITY OF POLITICAL SYSTEMS. A STUDY OF TWO NORTH AMERICAN THEOCRACIES, by Maciej Potz:

"The article theorizes theocracy – political power based on religious legitimation – in terms of the theory of social exchange, as arising out of unequal access to and control over religious goods. It then identifies the factors of stability of a system as the actions the rulers must take to successfully counter various attempts by the ruled to neutralize unequal conditions of exchange in which the power relation is grounded. Two empirical examples are offered of the use of religious doctrines to protect the stability thus conceived. The idea of covenant was used by the authorities of 17thcentury Massachusetts to justify the persecution of dissenters as a means of maintaining the purity and unity of the community, and thereby the necessary condition of fulfilling the society’s contract with God. The doctrine of continues revelation, on the other hand, gave Mormon leadership throughout 19th century, and especially during the crisis over polygamy, the much needed flexibility to adapt to external pressure without compromising the legitimacy of their God-granted power and the stability of the system."

4) Also see "NATIONAL CULTURE, PERSONALITY, AND THEOCRACY IN THE EARLY MORMON CULTURE OF VIOLENCE" by D. Michael Quinn.

5) And "In the nineteenth century, Mormons used the bee and beehive symbols to represent the Kingdom of God on the earth in the form of the Mormon theocracy in territorial Utah. This study focuses on interpreting the bee and beehive symbols in nineteenth-century Mormon culture through a study of Mormon sermons, hymns, and folk art. This study of these symbols opens a window on the ideological differences between a democratic culture and a theocratic subculture." From The Mormon hive: A study of the bee and beehive symbols in nineteenth-century Mormon culture by J. Michael Hunter.

...

[jkwilliams]

I was taught happiness comes only from making and keeping covenants. I’m not sure how that’s possible outside the church. 

[Stargazer]

On 4/18/2021 at 9:10 PM, JLHPROF said:

I find this prioritization interesting.  You'd consider a life outside the Church but you wouldn't want to change your political views?

Personally I'd be the opposite.  I'd be happy to consider shifting on the political spectrum, but I hold my religious beliefs far more tightly in my life.

Maybe it's just me but politics are temporal, the gospel eternal.  I know where I'm open to change.

I've held pretty much the same political views since before I joined the church. Leaving the church wouldn't affect my politics. I've known a number of others who have left but remain conservative politically. And some who were liberal and remain liberal.

Though my own politics would be best described as libertarian.

[Stargazer]

17 hours ago, rodheadlee said:

 

If I wasn't Mormon, I'd be Catholic.

If I wasn't Mormon, I'd be a Messianic Jew!

[Stargazer]

1 hour ago, jkwilliams said:

I was taught happiness comes only from making and keeping covenants. I’m not sure how that’s possible outside the church. 

I think that refers to ultimate happiness, i.e. in the eternities. And if the Church is true (and its teachings correct), it isn't possible outside the Church.

On the other hand, will not those in the Telestial kingdom be happy, though sans covenants? There must then be degrees of happiness. 

[The Nehor]

5 hours ago, teddyaware said:

Don’t you mean shared enslavement, shared impoverishment and equalized human misery for all except for the godless oligarchical “elite” who lve in debauchery and vainglorious opulence (like living idolatrous gods who demand to be treated as if they dwell on Mount Olympus) while the rest of their ‘subjects’ are relegated to the status of caged farm animals? Is it possible that for many of those who give up on the Restored Gospel, and the glorious concept of a divinely inspired Construction, that it’s an expected natural process for them to abandon title of liberty in favor of blithely going over to the side of the deceitful modern-day ‘king men?’

I imagine this giving up on personal liberty for a life of false security is due to the fact that those who give up on the immortality of the soul,  and the testimony of the Holy Ghost that the only way to obtain true happiness is through Jesus Christ, quite naturally morph into a fatalistic “eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die” outlook. After all, who wants to work hard toward self improvement and a life of rendering service to others when, in the end, we’re all going to become extinct and waste away into a void of endless nonexistence?

Ummmm......no.

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, jkwilliams said:

I was taught happiness comes only from making and keeping covenants. I’m not sure how that’s possible outside the church. 

Yes, of course, someone can be taught that personal integrity is key to happiness, and that is possible in any culture or society which puts a high value on personal integrity.  That has never been limited to any particular ideology or religion.  Mormon culture is merely one expression of that virtue.  Anthropology has an endless list of such cultural expression in both ancient and modern times.

[Robert F. Smith]

5 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

I did not say it was unique to Mormonism to mix politics with religion.

I'll go ahead and disagree agree with you Robert.

1) "The political theory that critics saw as dangerously “un-American” was called “theodemocracy” by Mormons. Proclaiming their allegiance to God in all human affairs while also maintaining a sincere faith in American republicanism, early Mormons, under the direction of founding prophet Joseph Smith, sought to create a sociopolitical order that combined the virtues of government by God and by the people. Rather than seeing theocracy and democracy as being inherently incompatible, Smith and his followers viewed them as complementary; indeed, many argued that they were inseparable and one could not be fully enacted without the other, that theos and demos were in fact part of an organic system of government that permeated not only earthly but also heavenly realms. To this end, inasmuch as Mormons contributed something resembling a distinctive political theory, particularly in the period from their settlement in Nauvoo, Illinois, until the abandonment of plural marriage in 1890, it was most succinctly captured in Joseph Smith’s 1844 presidential campaign platform: “I go emphatically, virtuously, and humanely, for a theodemocracy, where God and the people hold the power to conduct the affairs of men in righteousness.” Patrick Q. Mason, "The Mormon Menace: Violence and Anti-Mormonism in the Postbellum South" 2011

2) See Forgotten Kingdom: The Mormon Theocracy in the American West, 1847–1896, by David L. Bigler.

3) There's RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE AS A FACTOR OF STABILITY OF POLITICAL SYSTEMS. A STUDY OF TWO NORTH AMERICAN THEOCRACIES, by Maciej Potz:.......................

The word "theodemocracy" really says it all:  Precisely because it was not a totalitarian system, the Mormon version could not simply be termed a theocracy.  Patrick Mason is a fine scholar and understands and explains that distinction.  Anti-Mormon writers have not been so careful, suggesting instead that the "Mormon menace" was real.  How odd that 19th century apostates felt free to leave and to speak out against this culture, which you portray as a theocracy.  How odd, as I have already said, that anti-Mormon apostates thrived in Salt Lake City -- despite the fictional nonsense that Brother Brigham was some sort of totalitarian dictator.  Potz makes the LDS Church out to be some sort of economic imperial body, which was never true.  Being able to adapt to the attacks from the Feds was a method of accommodation to Realpolitik.  It enabled the hapless Mormons to survive a govt determined to destroy it.

5 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

4) Also see "NATIONAL CULTURE, PERSONALITY, AND THEOCRACY IN THE EARLY MORMON CULTURE OF VIOLENCE" by D. Michael Quinn.

5) And "In the nineteenth century, Mormons used the bee and beehive symbols to represent the Kingdom of God on the earth in the form of the Mormon theocracy in territorial Utah. This study focuses on interpreting the bee and beehive symbols in nineteenth-century Mormon culture through a study of Mormon sermons, hymns, and folk art. This study of these symbols opens a window on the ideological differences between a democratic culture and a theocratic subculture." From The Mormon hive: A study of the bee and beehive symbols in nineteenth-century Mormon culture by J. Michael Hunter....

How quaint and sad that Mormon pioneers must be faulted for using communal methods of cooperation.  Like the other communal societies which I listed for you, that has always been voluntary.  Which is why Prof Mason termed it a theodemocracy.  He realized full well that actual theocracy was not present.  If you really want to understand Mormon culture, I suggest the book by non-Mormon sociologist Thomas F. O'Dea, The Mormons (Univ of Chicago, 1957).

[sunstoned]

On 4/18/2021 at 7:39 AM, jkwilliams said:

That's pretty much it: it's a grieving process. How long it takes and how it goes depends on the person, but most people get to that acceptance place, and it just isn't a big deal anymore. At least it isn't for me. 

Agreed.  I believe the folks on exmormon reddit and other forums are in a transitioning phase.  And yes, anger is part of that phase, and many of the posts reflect this.  But, my experience and observations confirm what John has said.  Most people move through the transition and move on.

[Meadowchik]

3 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The word "theodemocracy" really says it all:  Precisely because it was not a totalitarian system, the Mormon version could not simply be termed a theocracy.  Patrick Mason is a fine scholar and understands and explains that distinction.  Anti-Mormon writers have not been so careful, suggesting instead that the "Mormon menace" was real.  How odd that 19th century apostates felt free to leave and to speak out against this culture, which you portray as a theocracy.  How odd, as I have already said, that anti-Mormon apostates thrived in Salt Lake City -- despite the fictional nonsense that Brother Brigham was some sort of totalitarian dictator.  Potz makes the LDS Church out to be some sort of economic imperial body, which was never true.  Being able to adapt to the attacks from the Feds was a method of accommodation to Realpolitik.  It enabled the hapless Mormons to survive a govt determined to destroy it.

How quaint and sad that Mormon pioneers must be faulted for using communal methods of cooperation.  Like the other communal societies which I listed for you, that has always been voluntary.  Which is why Prof Mason termed it a theodemocracy.  He realized full well that actual theocracy was not present.  If you really want to understand Mormon culture, I suggest the book by non-Mormon sociologist Thomas F. O'Dea, The Mormons (Univ of Chicago, 1957).

Still disagreeing with with you, specifically with your narrow take of the term theocracy. Against the backdrop of earnest Mormon political thought, aspiration, and organisation, it is a valid characterisation.

Of course Mormonism shapes people's politics and of course the church gets political and has done so unapologetically up until the present time. And that is no surprise, given its history. To tell people they're doing the gospel wrong by conflating religion and politics, neglects the context.

Edited April 20, 2021 by Meadowchik

[EXistential]

Hi AtlanticMike,

I noticed the same trend on exmormon. As an "exMormon" myself, I thought I'd go tell my Mormon story on that sub. I have a lot of things I'd like to share openly that I've shared with very few people. However, I still remain a very conservative Christian and it is clear I would not be welcome there. I've had my story typed out about 5 different times over the past few years but never commit to sharing it.

My experience is very different as I married someone who's entire family was LDS though she wasn't and I was an atheist. I converted shortly after marriage as she suddenly become a believer. Me leaving the church also meant I lost my wife. And I lost my children, but in a very different way than most do when going through divorce.

I'm assuming you're married (though I've read no replies, so maybe you've shared more) so my advice to you is: if your wife and children are not on board, be prepared.

I never imagined how terrible my life would become after the divorce. Coparenting as a Christian and with an LDS faithful, with children, and both remarried has been... I wouldn't say the worst experience of my life because it is my life and has been since that happened. So it's now just a "worst life".

During my time in the LDS church and all I did with it, I never actually learned much about the church, or church history. In fact, I never met any other members that had either. It just never came up. So to answer your last question about continuing to research information... well again, my situation is very different as my children are LDS and it causes a lot of conflict for my "new" family - so I do spend considerable amount of time on the church. Right now I own more books and literature on LDS than anything else. I just think of all the time I spent in the church, how it shaped and altered my marriage, how it has influenced my children and my relationship with them and I can't help but keep studying about the topic. 

It has been a very hard time for me since leaving and I did lose quite a bit and continue to lose more over a decade later. But it was my decision and I'm sticking with it.

[Nemesis]

We dont allow exitmonies nor testimonies.  Thread closed.