What To Do When Your Friend Turns Anti-Mormon?

[Navidad]

2 hours ago, Ipod Touch said:

It sounds like your friend has been taken in by radical evangelicals.

Hi  - Tell me all you know about "radical evangelicals." How are they different from "regular Evangelicals?" Have you ever met a genuine Evangelical? Glad to meet you. I am one!

[GingerRed]

Hi IPod Touch  

Are you new? I havent seen your username before.   You say you are an ex mo yourself?  Are you still one?  its actually good to hear your point of view from the inside , sort of speak  

I have actually calmed down a lot since my opening post.  I just had to vent.  I still plan on giving her space and not being around her at this time.  I haven't heard from her at all since that FB 'announcement"

I would not be surprised at all if she is being told not hang around her LDS friends anymore anyway. God forbid, we might try to change her mind and get he back in our church!  That's what we awful LDS do, right? 

I checked her post yesterday, and she is now announcing she's going to move back to Connecticut where she used to live..  Probably this summer.  ( she's in Medical Assisting school right now)  That's a good idea...she has nothing holding her to Utah anymore!  Connecticut is where she recently found her new biological family last summer.. (she was adopted)  They all drink and smoke and stuff....so I think that was also something to do with her leaving the church....she wants desperately to fit in with her new found family.  Her LDS son was living with her here in Utah while going to school.  But when she dumped the LDS church, he got upset with her  and took off back to Connecticut where his dad and sister are.  (Jane and her hubby divorced a long time ago)  That's going to be awkward when Jane is reunited with her son. 

This is good news. She needs to be where she's happy and free and she ain't happy here!  

Edited January 12, 2022 by GingerRed

[Ipod Touch]

1 hour ago, Navidad said:

Have you ever met a genuine Evangelical?

Indeed I have.  Their children attend school and learn about evolution along with my grandchildren.

[Navidad]

7 minutes ago, Ipod Touch said:

Indeed I have.  Their children attend school and learn about evolution along with my grandchildren.

Are you sure you don't mean Fundamentalists? I have known some radical Fundamentalists, never met any radical Evangelicals. That is why the Evangelicals separated from the Fundamentalists in the 1940s and 1950s. Thanks and take care.

Edited January 12, 2022 by Navidad

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Navidad said:

Hi  - Tell me all you know about "radical evangelicals." How are they different from "regular Evangelicals?" Have you ever met a genuine Evangelical? Glad to meet you. I am one!

I know this isn't directed to me but if you don't mind me saying...I have a problem with Evangelicals that believe every word of the Bible is God breathed. And IMO, that can be a harmful thing.

I have a problem with Evangelicals that believe the former president is a saviour. 

But when I think of Evangelicals, you sure don't come to mind. I see you far more balanced and more Christlike. But I guess I'm really grouping all of them together. And need to listen/read more sermons.

[Ipod Touch]

1 hour ago, GingerRed said:

Are you new? I havent seen your username before.   You say you are an ex mo yourself?  Are you still one?  its actually good to hear your point of view from the inside , sort of speak  

I'm a lurker and occasional commenter.  I am an exmo.  Have been for quite some time. 

1 hour ago, GingerRed said:

I still plan on giving her space and not being around her at this time.  I haven't heard from her at all since that FB 'announcement"

Hopefully she'll have a chance to let things settle a bit. 

1 hour ago, GingerRed said:

I checked her post yesterday, and she is now announcing she's going to move back to Connecticut where she used to live..  Probably this summer.  ( she's in Medical Assisting school right now)  That's a good idea...she has nothing holding her to Utah anymore!  Connecticut is where she recently found her new biological family last summer.. (she was adopted)  They all drink and smoke and stuff....so I think that was also something to do with her leaving the church....she wants desperately to fit in with her new found family.

Smokin' and drinkin' families in Connecticut are the best families. 

It took me a long time to figure out that there is a difference between being kind and being nice.  Sometimes the kind thing to do is set your own boundaries.  But you don't have to be nice and docile when someone is attacking something you hold dear.

[Ipod Touch]

43 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Are you sure you don't mean Fundamentalists? I have known some radical Fundamentalists, never met any radical Evangelicals. That is why the Evangelicals separated from the Fundamentalists in the 1940s and 1950s. Thanks and take care.

Would you consider Ray Comfort and evangelical or a fundamentalist?  Kent Hovind?  Ken Hamm?  In my mind, those are some radical EVs

[Teancum]

16 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

Apples and oranges .  Yes we do teach these was an apostasy and all that.  Ignoring that does not explain why the church exists.  However we do not focus any significant time one teaching members why other churches are wrong.  We don’t target pastors or preachers and all the mistakes they have made.  We do not produce and distribute material attacking any church.  We do not protest any churches.  

So what?  A small loud minority of EV Christians target the LDS Church amd protest our church.  THe LDS CHurch teaches all are wrong, lack authority, creeds that are an abomination.  This includes Catholics, which some LDS leaders used to teach is the great and abominable church ,the whore it the earth. We have seen other early LDS leaders brand all of apostate Christianity as such.  We send 60K missionaries out and the premise they teach primarily to other Christians is that they lack the truth, their church is wrong, their baptism worthless, that they do not have the Holy Ghost  and so on.

16 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

 

 

 

The whole premise of preaching the gospel is proclaiming things to people that they do not know.  It may involve telling people there current views are not correct.  Telling a person they have to believe in Jesus to be saved is my be called an “attack” against billions of people living today.  So if you want to say the the church does “attack” other churches in your statement fine but there is vast scale of difference between what you posted and the attacks against us.  If you can’t recognize the difference,  you see everything to be the same.  A man throwing rock in this neighbors window is the same as him burning his neighbors house down.

You look rather foolish to hold to this position.  It is not tenable based on the FV account and what that Church teaches from there.  You are simply wrong.

Edited January 12, 2022 by Teancum

[HappyJackWagon]

15 hours ago, Calm said:

This is about her as well as her friend, the relationship is both of them. Both need to adjust for it to work again, not just one.  

The reason I commented the way I did is because the tone seemed to suggest "how could she do this to me"; ruining all of their future plans etc and it was focused completely on herself and the ancillary effects she is enduring after her friend has gone through a massive faith crisis and shift in belief. This is the kind of situation many couples find themselves mired in when one faces a faith crisis. Could the person with the crisis behave better? Sure. But if we remember that they are facing a major loss to their faith and even identity then giving them space to grieve and be angry is a very reasonable expectation. If it all becomes about blaming the individual in crisis (which the OP was doing) and acting as if the person's faith crisis is a personal betrayal, then there's not going to be much hope for the relationship. IF on the other hand there is some genuine friendship and love shown, and an attempt made to understand what the individual is facing, the relationship may survive.

Obviously the OP and her friend are not the same thing as a married couple, but I think the same principles apply. If the friendship isn't worth salvaging, they can both move on. But I stand behind what I said previously. Her friend's faith crisis is not about her and frankly it's a bit selfish to pretend like it is. Her friend is going through much more turmoil and a friend would try to help and express love, not accuse them of lying or blaming them.

[GingerRed]

36 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

The reason I commented the way I did is because the tone seemed to suggest "how could she do this to me"; ruining all of their future plans etc and it was focused completely on herself and the ancillary effects she is enduring after her friend has gone through a massive faith crisis and shift in belief. This is the kind of situation many couples find themselves mired in when one faces a faith crisis. Could the person with the crisis behave better? Sure. But if we remember that they are facing a major loss to their faith and even identity then giving them space to grieve and be angry is a very reasonable expectation. If it all becomes about blaming the individual in crisis (which the OP was doing) and acting as if the person's faith crisis is a personal betrayal, then there's not going to be much hope for the relationship. IF on the other hand there is some genuine friendship and love shown, and an attempt made to understand what the individual is facing, the relationship may survive.

Obviously the OP and her friend are not the same thing as a married couple, but I think the same principles apply. If the friendship isn't worth salvaging, they can both move on. But I stand behind what I said previously. Her friend's faith crisis is not about her and frankly it's a bit selfish to pretend like it is. Her friend is going through much more turmoil and a friend would try to help and express love, not accuse them of lying or blaming them.

Another poster who hasn't read a SINGLE other comment I posted.....*sigh* 😡 Stop judging me on my opening statement alone!

I repeat!!...I'm feeling much better about the whole situation. I just needed to vent.

And now that my friend is going to be moving out of state back home.... this makes all this kinda moot now.  We most likely will never see her again. I'm sad to see her go but she needs to be where she's happy and UT nor her LDS friends can do that for her anymore.

Edited January 12, 2022 by GingerRed

[HappyJackWagon]

1 hour ago, GingerRed said:

Another poster who hasn't read a SINGLE other comment I posted.....*sigh* 😡 Stop judging me on my opening statement alone!

I repeat!!...I'm feeling much better about the whole situation. I just needed to vent.

And now that my friend is going to be moving out of state back home.... this makes all this kinda moot now.  We most likely will never see her again. I'm sad to see her go but she needs to be where she's happy and UT nor her LDS friends can do that for her anymore.

If you don't want people to discuss your Original Post you probably shouldn't start a thread to post about how your friend's faith crisis isn't fair to you  

Also, I think I've answered your question about What to do when your friend turns anti-Mormon. You may not like my take on it, but...

Edited January 12, 2022 by HappyJackWagon

[GingerRed]

12 hours ago, Ipod Touch said:

I'm a lurker and occasional commenter.  I am an exmo.  Have been for quite some time. 

Hopefully she'll have a chance to let things settle a bit. 

Smokin' and drinkin' families in Connecticut are the best families. 

 

LOLOL!  

you are too funny... wanna hear something crazy? I like you. 👍 

And if that is really your photo on your profile?...I think you are very good looking, if that's okay to say. 

[GingerRed]

3 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

If you don't want people to discuss your Original Post you probably shouldn't start a thread to post about how your friend's faith crisis isn't fair to you  

And I STILL say you need to read my other comments. 

I came here cause I know there are other posters who can give understanding and advice which they have.  And I never once said anything about my friend's situation being "unfair to me".  I don't feel that way at all. I apologize if my wording made it seem so to you. This has nothing to do with fairness to me or my friends.  

[bluebell]

49 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

The reason I commented the way I did is because the tone seemed to suggest "how could she do this to me"; ruining all of their future plans etc and it was focused completely on herself and the ancillary effects she is enduring after her friend has gone through a massive faith crisis and shift in belief. This is the kind of situation many couples find themselves mired in when one faces a faith crisis. Could the person with the crisis behave better? Sure. But if we remember that they are facing a major loss to their faith and even identity then giving them space to grieve and be angry is a very reasonable expectation. If it all becomes about blaming the individual in crisis (which the OP was doing) and acting as if the person's faith crisis is a personal betrayal, then there's not going to be much hope for the relationship. IF on the other hand there is some genuine friendship and love shown, and an attempt made to understand what the individual is facing, the relationship may survive.

Obviously the OP and her friend are not the same thing as a married couple, but I think the same principles apply. If the friendship isn't worth salvaging, they can both move on. But I stand behind what I said previously. Her friend's faith crisis is not about her and frankly it's a bit selfish to pretend like it is. Her friend is going through much more turmoil and a friend would try to help and express love, not accuse them of lying or blaming them.

Why does only one person deserve space to grieve and be angry though?  Both people in the scenario are hurting and experiencing trauma.  Why does one person's count more than the others?  Why is it reasonable for one to blame another for the pain they are experiencing in crisis but it is not reasonable for the other to do the same?  It seems like a double standard.

Also, if what you are saying is true then isn't it also reasonable for us on this board to provide space for GingerRed to grieve and be angry?  

[HappyJackWagon]

1 minute ago, bluebell said:

Why does only one person deserve space to grieve and be angry though?  Both people in the scenario are hurting and experiencing trauma.  Why does one person's count more than the others?  Why is it reasonable for one to blame another for the pain they are experiencing in crisis but it is not reasonable for the other to do the same?  It seems like a double standard.

Also, if what you are saying is true then isn't it also reasonable for us on this board to provide space for GingerRed to grieve and be angry?  

IMO there is a vast disparity between a person's loss of faith and identity versus that person's friend's loss of reading scriptures together or reading social media posts that are critical. So yes, I feel that one loss is greater than the other and that the person complaining about their loss should take into account the greater loss.

I'm not sure what double standard you are talking about. Did GingerRed's friend blame her like she was blaming the friend? Did her friend call her a liar? Maybe. I don't know.

GingerRed can grieve and be angry. No one is stopping her. Sure, space can be provided but this is an online forum. We're not friends. We don't even know each other. So expecting everyone to uniformly rally behind her loss whilst she blames her friend, doesn't seem all that reasonable to me. When we post things here we can all expect agreement from some and disagreement from others. 

In fact, I hope some of what I say (even if it has been a little harsh) will stick with her so that the next time she faces a friend or loved one leaving the church, she might respond differently.

[Ipod Touch]

20 minutes ago, GingerRed said:

And if that is really your photo on your profile?...I think you are very good looking, if that's okay to say. 

My profile photo is meant to obscure the fact I'm an old.  When courting my spouse, I finally convinced her to look past my outward appearance and marry me by saying: "We all get ugly eventually, I just have a head start." 

[Ipod Touch]

5 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

So yes, I feel that one loss is greater than the other and that the person complaining about their loss should take into account the greater loss.

Are you serious?

Believing members of the Church cherish their membership and beliefs.  To have a former co-religionist openly attack or mock your deeply held faith is profoundly hurtful you have the right to mourn both the attack on your faith and the loss of faith by your friend. 

But thanks for confirming, once again, that the pain experienced by Latter-day Saints doesn't matter.  The only thing that matters are the feelings of ex or marginal Mormons amirite?  Regardless of their language or behavior.

Edited January 12, 2022 by Ipod Touch

[Ipod Touch]

6 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

In fact, I hope some of what I say (even if it has been a little harsh) will stick with her so that the next time she faces a friend or loved one leaving the church, she might respond differently.

Thank you for the grace, wisdom, and light you shine forth on this board.  Get out of here with your condescending elitist BS.

This reminds me of a story in Alma.  Something about a place people could stand and tell others how much better they are than others.

[HappyJackWagon]

1 minute ago, Ipod Touch said:

Thank you for the grace, wisdom, and light you shine forth on this board. 

You are very welcome.

It's nice to be recognized  

[bluebell]

13 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

IMO there is a vast disparity between a person's loss of faith and identity versus that person's friend's loss of reading scriptures together or reading social media posts that are critical. So yes, I feel that one loss is greater than the other and that the person complaining about their loss should take into account the greater loss.

I'm not sure what double standard you are talking about. Did GingerRed's friend blame her like she was blaming the friend? Did her friend call her a liar? Maybe. I don't know.

GingerRed can grieve and be angry. No one is stopping her. Sure, space can be provided but this is an online forum. We're not friends. We don't even know each other. So expecting everyone to uniformly rally behind her loss whilst she blames her friend, doesn't seem all that reasonable to me. When we post things here we can all expect agreement from some and disagreement from others. 

In fact, I hope some of what I say (even if it has been a little harsh) will stick with her so that the next time she faces a friend or loved one leaving the church, she might respond differently.

These kinds of changes have the ability to completely change a friendship, and could easily result in the loss of that friend completely.  It seems extremely callous to say that all that is at stake is 'loss of reading scriptures together".  It seems the same level of callous that I hear some members express towards those who say they have reasons to be angry and upset over their loss of the faith, just expressed in a different direction.

That you seem to be fine--even supportive--of one kind of callous while not supportive of the other is the double standard that I was referring to.

Also, what of my last question?  If what you are saying is true then isn't it also reasonable for us on this board to provide space for GingerRed to grieve and be angry?  

Edited January 12, 2022 by bluebell

[Ipod Touch]

6 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

You are very welcome.

It's nice to be recognized  

Well played.

/tips fedora

[HappyJackWagon]

3 minutes ago, bluebell said:

These kinds of changes have the ability to completely change a friendship, and could easily result in the loss of that friend completely.  It seems extremely callous to say that all that is at stake is 'loss of reading scriptures together".  It seems the same level of callous that I hear some members express towards those who say they have reasons to be angry and upset over their loss of the faith, just expressed in a different direction.

That you seem to be fine--even supportive--of one kind of callous while not supportive of the other is the double standard that I was referring to.

Also, what of my last question?  If what you are saying is true then isn't it also reasonable for us on this board to provide space for GingerRed to grieve and be angry?  

That was her example, not mine.

I answered that question already in my previous post.

[CA Steve]

12 minutes ago, bluebell said:

 If what you are saying is true then isn't it also reasonable for us on this board to provide space for GingerRed to grieve and be angry?  

This is a discussion board bluebell. So I am not sure to whom you are referring with "us" but if she was just looking for moral support she chose the wrong venue.

[BlueDreams]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

So what?  A small loud minority of EV Christians target the LDS Church amd protest our church.  THe LDS CHurch teaches all are wrong, lack authority, creeds that are an abomination.  This includes Catholics, which some LDS leaders used to teach is the great and abominable church ,the whore it the earth. We have seen other early LDS leaders brand all of apostate Christianity as such.  We send 60K missionaries out and the premise they teach primarily to other Christians is that they lack the truth, their church is wrong, their baptism worthless, that they do not have the Holy Ghost  and so on.

when I was a teenager down in TX (reminder I’m fairly young on this board…so this all took place in the early 2000’s) there were large specials on “the mormons” at churches or at least enough discussions about us en masse that whenever there was one I’d know based on a sudden uptick in really weird questions from those who apparently wanted verification of the crazy things we believed (note they were definitely wrong…some so off that I laughed out loud at them). I listened to one said special on the regional Christian radio station and a few other flippant commentaries that often had us as the butt of jokes or worthy of derision. Due to this environment, bullying of my lds friends via taunting and teasing were super common. I usually missed it because I didn’t fit people’s expectations of a mormon…so they’d forget or didn’t know exactly what to do with it and uncomfortably move around it bringing it up only when there was a concern. I’ve grown up and I know that is not necessarily all people who profess an evangelical, fundamentalist, or some variation of conservative Christianity. But it’s also by no means a small minority found in the most adament protesting at temples or pageants…that’s like saying the pro-life movement is only really happening in those who picket abortion clinics and tell women they’re killing their babies.
This wasn’t limited to TX…I would similarly see a familiar strain out east as a missionary in certain regions. They were Kinder because these were adults, but no less patronizing and frustrating (sitting kindly as someone’s living example of why the mormons are wrong in front of your pre-teen and being told he can’t wish you god’s speed when you leave cuz you’re not doing the lord’s work is a fun memory that comes to mind). My bro’s conversion wasn’t a bother just because he “left the true church” it was the ways and means that his girlfriend’s family nudged the conversion that really pissed me off (somethings were I pray unintentionally manipulative). My bias wasn’t from anything I heard at church, it was from the negative direct experiences I had to work through. 

i don’t bring this up to say there are or were no problems in the LDS community. There are, there were. Though I find it funny that your best examples hale from about 60-70 years ago when they reached peak popularity as a theory…a theory that ironically likely came from some old Protestant assumptions that continued when members converted and read it into the BOM as well. I literally know no one my age/younger who believes that bs. Some other examples I read earlier would be more in line with indirect bias…as in hyperfocusing on one’s own community benefit and then de facto assuming it’s missing in another experience.

either way I don’t think it bodes well to downplay one variation while up-playing another to create a false equivalency. As a missionary we were constantly admonished not to Bible-bash or to diss other religions. How we were to talk about the apostasy was also balanced by a ton of discussion about building on the truths they already believed and grow on that. Every once and a while a missionary would go rogue and go on a bash usually in some form or another of frustration. But it wasn’t really a direct outlet of a teaching and moreso from a personal experience gone wrong. It was not held up as a positive. In my experience we send 60k missionaries out because we believe we have something good to share to the world that adds to other’s spiritual development. At no point on my mission did I believe or had it presented that we held THE truth and others were completely without. It was moreso that we had important truths to add to those seeking more. At no point on my mission was I told or would have said something like your “baptism is worthless” or you “lack the truth” ..missing certain truths  or not having proper authority is by no means the same thing. 
 

To me there is a big difference between the potential to believe hardline interpretation of something and when hardline antagonistic views are regularly taught in a faith community. 

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

YOu look rather foolish to hold to this position.  If it not tenable based on the FV and what that Church teaches from there.  You are simply wrong.

I disagree. 
 

with luv, 

BD 

[Teancum]

2 hours ago, BlueDreams said:

I disagree. 

Feel free.  Sure there are a lot of EVs who bash the church.  But worldwide I believe these are a small number.  Catholics typically do not do this nor do main stream Protestant denominations.  Any church is going to be adamant about their truth position.  But the LDS Church is unique in many of its claims.  I think there is mouch more ecumincal feelings among other Christian faiths and none except and LDS baptism as valid for and LDS person who leaves and becomes say Catholic or Methodist.  Nro as we know does the LDS Church recognize and ordinance of any other Christian faith or any other faith for that matter.  Remember the premise of the LDS Church is that all the others are wrong, their creeds an abomination in the site of God, their professors who are all corrupt.  

I certainly had my share of anti cultists EVs as a missionary and for many years as an LDS Hobby apologist so I don't have a good taste in my mouth about them either.  But to accuse them of foul play and nastiness and to downplay the LDS Church premises about other faiths is silly.  I guess we will have to disagree on this.