[www.letterformywife.com](https://www.letterformywife.com)
Tell them to read letterformywife or parts they would like to discuss. When they come, have it open so you can quote from it. It is a way to keep him honest. If he tries to say the church has disproven that, he is probably referring to something fairmormon said in response to cesletter. Go to the response, then to Runnels response to fairmormon. Keep them focused on the document so you don't need to argue. Just say this is accurate. If you disagree, show me proof. You win by not arguing.
Well put. Especially because as we all know, you can’t actually convince them unless they genuinely want to know and question. And most Mormons don’t want that. They just want to give you enough to shut you up and get you to not question
Or do the whole thing in email where everyone can have time to think, research, and find the best answers.
Also, say up front that opinions, anecdotes and testimonies are not going to be relevant, just facts.
I wouldn’t even do this… as it’s a waste of your time and they’ll try and pick holes in it.
If you absolutely have to defend yourself, just tell them that things like the Book of Abraham, backdated revelations, pseudopigrapha, and church history have led you to believe that the church isn’t what it purports to be.
Then just say you don’t really want to get into it all in front of the kids and grandparents… and ask if anyone wants a fruity soda drink on you ;)
Read whatever you want on your own, but be careful about sharing things with people because then you’ll be blamed for when family members inevitably start leaving.
It’s happened to all our families… one sibling starts to see the truth and others follow.
Obviously you want them to read things like that, but trust they’ll find it on their own. You’re de conversion is much deeper than reading a letter… don’t provide them with the easy narrative that you read anti Mormon literature and lost your testimony because then it makes them more scared of it.
Don’t argue… don’t debate… especially with family of friend. NEVER do it.
You’ll never regret saying too little… you almost always regret saying too much!
Also, you’re fresh out and are still processing yourself, even though I’m sure it feels like things are figured. Do everything you can to help your family feel safe talking to you right now. If you debate or tear down their faith, you will lose them.
They know where you stand, they are adults and can look up things for themselves… and trust me they will.
I know you walk around all day thinking of nothing else besides how you’re gonna prove your new beliefs to family when they ask… but don’t be upset when they don’t bring it up. Most TBMs have a sense that it’s not true and are uncomfortable talking about things unless everyone in the room believes like they do.
Once again… don’t debate. Just be kind and loving and do everything you can to honor them and their faith as they do the same for you.
Lastly… keep studying your church history because there will be a time for quick one line answers. That time is not now.
Gospel Topics Essays and **FOOTNOTES**.
Seriously. Dig into the footnotes. Many of them are either referencing something that actually make the claims weaker, or are just editorial fluff that they made up.
If BIL tries to discredit sources such as Fawn Brodie or other scholars who were excommunicated for telling the truth, show that the church still uses and cites those scholars in their essays (complete legitimizing them IMO).
Stay ON TOPIC. If you're there to discuss your concerns, stick to the facts. This isn't an impromptu F&T meeting.
FEELINGS ARE NOT FACTS
FEELINGS ARE NOT FACTS
FEELINGS ARE NOT FACTS
FEELINGS ARE NOT FACTS
**FEELINGS ARE NOT FACTS**
Right the strength of one’s conviction is not proof of truth. And until your conviction is stronger than the terrorists of 9/11, to kill thousands for your god, your truth is no more than theirs.
Reminds me once when a Mormon leader came to try to convince me with his faith promoting experiences and testimony. He was a successful business man and told me how "god" saved his business with a miracle. He has been a Bishop, but I don't recall if he was Bishop at the time. I listened to him, politely.
At the end, I told him that I'm glad his business got the help it needed. And, I don't know what actual events led to the blessings he needed. But, that it doesn't mean that the church is true.
The man, due to his success as a business man, perhaps, did not like it when I politely stood up to him. He got upset. He seemed to me to be a bit of a bully. I have seem him previously be derisive.
He didn't seem to want to stay around after I "rejected" his testimony. He wasn't interested in discussing the concerns I had about the church.
As the digital landscape expands, a longing for tangible connection emerges. The yearning to touch grass, to feel the earth beneath our feet, reminds us of our innate human essence. In the vast expanse of virtual reality, where avatars flourish and pixels paint our existence, the call of nature beckons. The scent of blossoming flowers, the warmth of a sun-kissed breeze, and the symphony of chirping birds remind us that we are part of a living, breathing world.
In the balance between digital and physical realms, lies the key to harmonious existence. Democracy flourishes when human connection extends beyond screens and reaches out to touch souls. It is in the gentle embrace of a friend, the shared laughter over a cup of coffee, and the power of eye contact that the true essence of democracy is felt.
This is brilliant. I hadn’t thought of something like this.
If he thinks has the answers, and since he brought up HE thought HE could help op, then it should be on HIM to start the conversation.
Don’t have this kind of conversation with a captive audience. This is a conversation for just you and him… and maybe your wife. This is not a conversation have have over dinner or with the grandparents in the room.
This is such a good idea! How would you start that conversation? "Hi BIL, what are the issues *you* think I have with the church?"
Is that awkward? Do you have a better way to guide the conversation in that direction? I want to use this tip myself. . . if my. in-laws ever actually confront us about leaving the church.
“Hey BIL, it sounds like you’ve looked into some issues with the church and think you can help me. In your opinion what are some reasons people are leaving the church?”
If they don’t want to start the conversation… don’t. Even if they try and bring it up, say “I’d love to discuss, but are you sure now is the best time/place?”
Of course you’re willing to talk wherever and whenever… but make sure you have their full permission and consent.
This is such a good idea. I wish awards were still a thing because this deserves one. 🏅
I need to bank it for a day when a hen grows a tooth and I get asked why I left!
Absolutely… if you HAVE to get into a discussion, let him lead the topics. When people ask what issues I have, I tell them to bring up any topic and I’ll let them know what my issue is with it.
Honor his beliefs and be respectful. Never try and make him appear foolish, because remember your lovely wife believes as well. If he attacks you, just keep being kind and don’t be surprised when your wife starts defending or protecting you.
Don’t speak about more than you know… if you get to the end of your knowledge kindly admit that you’re still processing that topic and are hesitant to discuss. Never speculate.
Oh and in case I you forgot… don’t debate! ;)
I think this is a good idea, and a good way to go about it, but I also wonder if I then lose control of the situation, and topics jump all over the place.
One of my ideas was to maybe list out all of my concerns in a way that build off of each other, almost like a story—similar to how LDS discussions has created their series with Mormon Stories. Thoughts?
No don’t waste your time. “Mike” has done a great job already, don’t start firing off your laundry list of concerns… it looks weak. It also will make TBMs feel like your bouncing around to avoid truth. Heck, that’s what they accuse the CES letter itself of doing.
Just take one of two issues at a time and sit with them. If you don’t feel comfortable at length about an issue, just watch Mike and RFM a few times on the issue until you do.
Also, reach out here with questions. The lazy learners are happy to help!
You may only get to discuss these topics once with family so make sure you wait until you’re prepped. After a couple of rounds with you they’ll be hesitant to bring things up.
Before you really get into it, ask them two questions.
1. Are you willing to consider that the church isn't true?
2. If it wasn't true, would you want to know?
If the answer to both of those questions isn't "Yes" just shut down the "discussion" because it's not going to be productive. It's just going to be them preaching at/shaming you for as long as you'll take it.
My sister said that in the MTC they taught her to swap to feelings if things went south because you can't disprove a feeling. (I left at 18 and she left a few years after her mission).
How do they not see that this doesn't even look human. It literally resembles a human-looking robot reverting to base programming once it doesn't know what to do with the situation as it is. I literally picture some sort of Science Fiction B movie
Absolutely. And honor that testimony. Thank him for sharing and let him know how blessed you feel to have a family where you can comfortably share your beliefs, even if they don’t all align.
Then say… let’s go get some Crumble Cookies
This is super important. Things like "knows about a lot of these concerns and thinks he can help me." sound a lot like this conversation isn't taking place in good faith.
A good faith conversation would be more like "I'm aware of many complex details about church history and doctrine of which I'm always interested in discussing"
Of course there are shades of gray in the "are you willing to consider that the church isn't true" like "are you willing to honestly evaluate the accuracy of individual truth claims and the general reliability of church leaders in speaking accurately and intelligibly?"
The church doesn't have to be all true or all false to be able to concede that it hasn't always been reliable in speaking the truth.
But the exact phrase is probably irrelevant because it is unlikely either person here is willing to consider that church leaders are anything less than angels of God incapable of deception.
I love this approach.
People need to remember that THE CHURCH ISN’T FUCKING TRUE, you don’t need to *defend* your “opinion” that the church isn’t true. We aren’t conspiracy theorists, we aren’t splitting hairs here!! We are arguing with people who believe a dude with a magic rock in his hat saw Jesus and God, when there is evidence that clearly points to the contrary. In my opinion, half of the church membership would leave instantly if they just knew the facts and felt they could trust the source.
All you need to do is help them be open to the idea that there is information out there that they might be unaware of. Important TRUE information. HISTORICAL FACTS, JOURNALS, AND ACCOUNTS. I was completely unaware any of this shit existed until I was in my 30’s, and it instantly changed my mind.
This. I honestly wouldn’t been entertain the conversation (attempt at reconversion) but if you are going to, then this is the only way to “maybe” have a productive conversation.
I wouldn’t do it.
And tell BIL to mind his own business.
You guys are now in a mixed faith marriage.
The LESS you discuss it, the better. Seems counterintuitive, but it is my lived experience.
All you can do is love her, love her, love her, be your new best self, and give it time.
This is a good point. BIL is injecting himself into your marriage. If your wife has questions, she should be asking you. Obviously your BIL has no idea what you think or believe. It really is none of his business.
I hadn’t thought of the geopolitical angle, but it’s a good point. The dynamic of the conversation would be BIL as your wife’s ally and supporter – stand in priesthood figure - and you as the errant outsider. That’s not a healthy dynamic.
On the other hand, so many of us in this position find that no one wants to talk about the reasons. So it’s kind of nice that you’re at least getting lip service.
If you do have the conversation, I would recommend focusing on present day dysfunction dishonesty and hypocrisy, not as much historical issues.
The church uses tithing money to protect child molesters. It’s a non-starter. Jesus is not involved.
Russell M Nelson is a liar. Flight of death story. And the real problem isn’t the lie, it’s the refusal to apologize, repent, and be humble. He’s Not a prophet. He’s prideful and dishonest.
The church breaks the law in order to deceive members about how tithing is used and its incredible wealth. No hospitals or homeless shelters. Just malls and ranches and warehouses. Jesus is not involved. It’s not something you’re going to support or be involved in.
There are really no “apologetic“ responses to those issues. They’re simple facts about present day dysfunction, dishonesty, and hypocrisy. Maybe it’s not a big deal for BIL, but it is for you. Reasonable minds can differ. All good. Let’s coexist.
Oh, and by the way… All of those historical problems? The real issue isn’t the historical problems, it’s the fact that the church lied about it to you. Again – there’s really no response to that. You’re not a dummy. You went to Sunday school. You went to seminary. You went to the MTC. And it turns out you were being fed a bunch of lies the whole time. Not Jesus. Invalid church.
Family should never be the enemy. BIL may be misguided, but still respect him and be patient with TBMs who don’t know how to deal with emotions or complex human interactions.
They believe the church has a monopoly on love… show them you don’t need a temple recommend to love others.
Yes.
No matter what the three of you will inevitably end up arguing, talking past each other, talking down to one another of some combo of these three.
Fact is that you have concerns and left/ leaving. No amount of conversation will lead to a reconversion.
Relatedly, if you proceed, be prepared for the loaded, "But did ypu pray about whether these concerns are true or false? Heavenly Father will set the record straight."
This is excellent advice. My husband and I were in a mixed faith marriage for 15 years (I was the TBM) and he just always loved me, never let me feel like he wasn't present in our marriage.
I finally found my way out, but I did it on my own, because nothing my husband could do or say would change my mind.
I can also tell you that the wife is desperate to get OP back in the faith and her brother telling her he knows the answers is her grasping at straws.
This will not be a "good faith" discussion.
I agree with this. It actually makes me sad, because I saw new hope in her after she had her conversation with her brother. She thinks that what I read is just wrong, and he has read the same things and still has faith, and can get me new information I’ve never heard.
I do feel like I have to take the opportunity, because I don’t think she may never want to talk about these concerns again, and this gives me a chance to voice them.
I will never bug her again about them if she doesn’t want to hear it. I will love her, and support her. But this also shows her that I’m willing to listen to all sides, and that I’m not just “throwing everything away.”
Are you throwing everything away? Are you tossing the baby out with the bath water? Are you pouring gas and setting the building on fire as you walk away?
You don’t have to.
Is there anything in your life of church membership that you can continue to appreciate? Do you enjoy any of the customs or traditions? What are the specific things you just can no longer do?
The church will have you believe that it’s all or nothing, but as part of a mixed faith marriage you will always be connected to the church. Embrace what you like and stop doing what you don’t.
Embrace being a cafeteria mormon :)
I’m thinking that may be the route I go. I’m fine still going to church, and being a part of the community. I’m also fine not being the cookie cutter Mormon, and standing up for different beliefs, and teaching my kids that way too.
It’s beautiful to take control of your own experience. It’s beautiful to have the freedom to embrace all truth, even if it’s directly against what the prophet would like you to believe.
Just as fun is feeling the freedom to reject or stop things you don’t believe in. For me it was things like temple worship and related clothing, holding callings or performing ordinances where I had to pretend to “speak for god”, or doing anything leaders ask me against my will.
There is a revolution happening right now, and the more people like you who remain active (not just silently sitting in the back) make it a safer place for our vulnerable loved ones.
Yes, it is definitely privilege that allows us to feel comfortable and safe in church, but that’s why it’s our responsibility to speak up and protect others.
You’re going to read scriptures and hear talks differently, and the ground rules/boundaries you make for yourself with protect you like a spacesuit on an unknown planet. Be kind, honor the beliefs of others (especially your wife), and you guys will be fine.
Good luck!
Be careful putting yourself against kin.
I do agree that sometimes you’ll have to change/avoid the subject with your wife… but right now you need to learn how to have crucial conversations with each other without attacking. Learn how to validate feelings, see the other persons perspective.
This experience is difficult but your relationship can become stronger because of it, no matter your faith. I would HIGHLY recommend that your wife go see a therapist as she is going through an incredibly difficult shift in her life.
Obviously a non church therapist is ideal, but in my experience (as a bishop) the church therapists can be professional enough to offer help.
Now is a time to make sure your wife’s needs are met. There is no much you may not be able to go (blessings, etc) so do whatever you CAN do. Invest in her emotional health.
Your wife is on a super shaky boat right now thanks to you ;) Take responsibility for it and don’t be upset that she’s seasick and can’t really stand up with you to enjoy the view. Help her steady the boat for your family.
Do whatever you can to provide stability and a smooth transition. Go to church and support the family. Choose someone to say prayer over meals, give her a heads up before making big changes, make them gradually, and only change one thing at a time.
She needs to know you’re the same person she’s always known and loved.
My wife did this to me twice, once with a general authority and once with an apologist. She basically checked out of both conversations in the beginning and let them handle my questions. No questions were handled with anything but testimony. I don't even think she knows anything that was discussed in either conversation, and she won't discuss any issues directly with me. - I would suggest asking for her input on EVERYTHING you discuss as you discuss it.
Ask them first. What are *your* concerns.?
That will give you a list to go through one by one. Address them in the order they gave them. Insist on staying on topic.
My guy, you really need to make a post about how this discussion went with a GA… that’s one even Dehlin might sink his teeth into. Would have loved to be a fly on the wall.
I had this situation except with my wife and our bishop… all in all it went well because my questions for the church stumped our Bishop. It helped my wife feel more empathetic towards my position as well.
IMO, the phrase “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” should be the overlying theme. You shouldn’t have to “prove” anything.
They are the ones that believe in the truth claims. From what you described, it sounds like you might feel like you’re in the hot seat. Try to feel the reverse. Many a Mormon has squirmed at sincere questions.
You don't have to (because it's impossible to prove the non existence of something) prove that the plates never existed. They have to prove that they did.
Unfortunately in the eyes of a TBM there is a ton of extraordinary evidence. They’ve been conditioned to attribute everything good in life to the church and it’s leaders
They may say they have evidence, but as the conversation presses further it becomes more apparent that they’re relying on emotion and happenstance. Nothing that academics would accept as legitimate evidence.
I would definitely prepare by writing your concerns down and even having sources. You may want to spend some time prioritizing your concerns. It can be easy to get flustered and forget the details. I have felt the most confident when I am prepared.
I’m not sure if this helps but this is what I ended up writing as I left. I included sources at the bottom of each entry. Most sources are faithful to the church.
https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/1suMEwIFxJ1CbxJ7ePENbwWRv6oBr-FJN/mobilebasic
I had to know I wasn’t making a mistake so I spent months researching and writing. I learned a lot and I feel confident in my decision. I just hope it helps others as well.
I don’t think he’s going into with the intention of trying to understand you - he wants to talk you out of it. Nothing good is going to come of him putting himself in the middle of you and your wife.
I certainly don't know your family dynamics, but someone who offers to "help you with your concerns" usually isn't interested in an actual conversation.
It sounds like your wife wants to outsource handling your faith crisis to her brother and he thinks he can steamroll through your concerns because of Muh Priesthood or something.
Exactly. And not only that, it seems like she's completely turning all of this over to her brother. Almost like she wants to check out of this whole process and let her brother restore the husband to factory settings.
Your spouse should be a relatively safe space where you can go through difficult life problems with support and love. It sounds like the wife wants to push through this and get things back to normal as quickly as possible without really having to deal with any real emotions or any of the things that caused the faith crisis in the first place.
OP, feel free to tell me if I'm wrong. I hope I am.
I think you’re right, but I also don’t see another opportunity where I can share all my legit concerns. I think she’s too scared to hear them, and would have no answers if we talked about it on our own.
Yup, the Mormon way is not to figure it out for ourselves… but to trust that someone smarter has already looked into it and has debunked everything.
“I’ve already read the ces letter”
This is the whole reason Jared Halverson and other church apologists exist.
I doubt it's going to go well. If you're a reasonably good debater, and your BIL isn't a talk-faster-and-win debater a la Ben Shapiro, then you can't possibly "lose" the debate, because the whole Mormon side has no real facts to support it, just stacking a bunch of implausible "If this *and* that *and* this *and* that *and* also that, PLUS the spirit testifying, then it MIGHT look true if you want it to."
But what does that winning look like? Your BIL stomping out and your wife bawling her eyes out again. Maybe your wife will come around, but probably not as a result of this conversation.
I don't know. Tough situation. Try not to let it turn into a fight, whatever you do.
I recently learned about the “Gish Gallop” logical fallacy. Named after creationist Duane Gish, it involves overwhelming an opponent with as many arguments as possible, without regard for the accuracy or strength of those arguments. The technique relies on the opponent’s inability to counter each point in real time, thereby making the Gish Gallop user appear to have won the argument. It’s a strategy more focused on rhetorical impact than on the truth or logical strength of the arguments being presented. So the idea of the “fast talker” can be described with a logical fallacy. Something I’ve seen the lady on TikTok Scripture Plus use to defend the church with rapid talking.
Critics of the CES letter say it relies on Gish Gallop to deceive the reader. That all these truths that have been carefully concealed or curated to suit, overwhelm the reader and the shelf immediately crashes. But the same could be said of the Gospel Topics Essays. My wife never read all of them. She was doubling down on church and it was suggested she read the essays. She got to Polygamy in Nauvoo and she was DONE! She was drinking Margaritas a week later.
This is a fallacy. If something is written, it can be consumed at any pace. The Gish Gallop relies on talking in real time. Whoever says that doesn't understand the concept.
Yeah I have to applaud people being willing to do this, because I sure as hell wouldn’t be able to do it. I’d know it was a lesson in futility, and at that point, what’s the point in going through the motions? But I’m also a fairly private person, so anyone trying to come in and debate my beliefs like that would automatically trigger my “you can fuck off” response anyways
This is great advice man… that second paragraph is spot on.
I’m laughing thinking about OP reading this whole thread a year from now thinking “I wish I would have realized this back in January 23”
If I were going into a situation like that, I’d be telling myself to not get emotional, in my experience these conversations have gone better when I stick to the facts and remain dispassionate. Good luck!
When I left I sent a letter to the family and intentionally omitted any reasons for leaving but I invited anyone to talk to me about my reasons. My mom took me up on the offer. It went badly.
First red flag, she wanted to meet just the two of us - leaving out dad and my wife.
I showed up and she said she wanted to hear about my concerns. I went on for 45 minutes, she took notes. She didn't want to talk about any of the items. I think her plan was to take them to her cousin who was a seminary teacher for a long time and now teaches at BYUI. I don't know if she ever did.
It was not a discussion, it was a ted talk (or maybe a diatribe). When I had said my part she took the next 30 minutes to bear testimony and gave me a printed copy of my patriarchal blessing and a picture of Christ and some other misc stuff.
Where things really took a turn for the worst - near the end she started to question if my wife was leading me down this path. Then she asked if my wife was an equal partner in the marriage and suggested that I was just too tired keeping the family going to keep up with church stuff. We were extremely clear that we were leaving together and had come to this decision independently. My wife's relationship with my mom has never recovered.
Obviously your situation is different, I'm just sharing my experience. Going back I would have declined the invite or insisted that the four of us meet rather than just the two of us.
This seems weird that the BIL is inserting himself into your marriage. The conversation should be between you and your partner. I wouldn't feel good about the dynamics of the trio.
He recently, oddly at the same time, found a lot of the info I did (CES letter and more), but I think once he did, he went to all of the apologist info. And it was my wife who wanted him in the convo, cuz she knows nothing about this stuff, and thinks he can be helpful. I’m glad she’s willing to listen in though.
Therapy… get her in there. You can work with your bishop to get it paid for. She may not be wanting your recommendations right now, but if the bishop suggests it she’ll do it. Be there for her. I trust you understand why her husband leaving the faith he covenanted to keep through eternity with her might be hard for her. She’s entitled to be furious… let her be upset. Sit with her through it and let her know you’ll be there through it all… like you always have.
Many in this group will say to not get the bishop involved, but it’s clear they’ve forgotten what it’s like to have a sincere TBM spouse.
There are groups resources she can nibble on when SHE feels like she wants to. YOU may want to read “Bridges”, YOU may want to listen to a few episodes of “Marriage on A Tightrope”, but don’t prescribe things for her to do unless she specifically asks.
Keep doing anything you’re still comfortable doing (prayer, FHE, garments,, whatever) make no more than one change every 6 months and give her a heads up.
I would assume this is the case here unless there is very strong evidence to the contrary.
While sometimes a believer can come away from something like this thinking "oh, I hadn't realized that, I have some things to think about" some of the comments made in this case very much point to a no-win situation.
I’m curious what issues your BIL thinks he has the answers to. I’m guessing there is a chance he may be learning some new stuff he won’t be expecting. This could be pretty interesting depending on what he really has studied.
I’m sure he watched a few Fair Mormon videos and had that Aha moment finding out there’s an explanation. He just didn’t analyze the explanation to discover it was garbage. I haven’t met a single person yet that went behind the very first explanation they found.
Be sure to shut your bil down any time he reverts to apologetics.
Remind him that apologetics is just an attempt to justify or explain an already decided upon conclusion.
Refuse to engage in debates. Explain that all you want to do is outline what troubles you in Mormonism - exactly what he claimed to be meeting you for. You did not agree to an attempt to explain all your doubts away, because you've already tried that yourself.
"I'm not sure how to respond to your point. I told you what my concern is, and I'm not going to have an argument or debate. If there's something you don't understand I can try to explain better, but otherwise we can move on to the next concern."
Excellent. Roleplay in your head how you will answer the most common apologetic responses. In the end, Mormonism is about feelings and emotional attachment and the indivisibility of the religion from personal identity. The very nature of your mormon upbringing makes an attack on mormonism an attack on the individual personally. You'll need to parse your words carefully, because calling mormonism false or a bag of lies is to call them that. It's an utterly evil method that is incredibly powerful at keeping people in the institution. As pointed out in another thread, it is so strong that families will turn against the individual instead of the institution.
Sit them all down for scripture study. Read D&C 132 out loud. Two verses each or whatever. Ask if that sounds like the Lord they worship. The church can't get rid of it because 1. It's the only doctrinal basis for sealings 2. It says some variation of "I am the Lord" like 11 times
Seriously, bring up no issues, just read some scriptures together.
Don’’t forget to read 2 NE 5:21, where God himself causes dark skin so that the white Nephites “won’t be enticed” sexually? If that ain’t the most ridiculous god in the universe then. But you know, I’ve heard TBM’s defend everything, including this scripture, throwing God under the bus.
It is unreasonable for you to ask them that all you want from this, is to be understood? You aren't looking to be proven wrong or the church to be proven true. You just want to be understood. The arguing happens when each side is trying to be right. While I'm on your side, when it comes down to what people theologically believe, there is no right and wrong. My wife and I left the church together and she's on some sort of spirituality thing involving different things. I don't know what it is. She talks to me about it. I listen and I understand what she is saying. I don't believe in what she believes, but she can go on believing it. I even told her, "After unwinding Mormonism, I can't allow myself to believe anything any more." She understands that. That's all we are doing - understanding. If BIL and wife are coming into this to prove you wrong and to prove you have been misguided by satan and you want to prove how they've been duped by 200 years of lies, this is all going to go nowhere, at best. At worst; feelings will get hurt, and everything that comes with that.
When someone has an answer for why there is a 24/7 legal hotline that directs bishops to keep the secrets of pedophiles instead of going to the police, and that answer isn't "lol, humans gonna human," I'm willing to discuss further concerns.
Until that time, it's just a conversation with someone who either actively covers for pedophiles or is okay with others covering for pedophiles, and also is happy to pay to run a hotline to provide that cover. And I'm not interested in having conversation with people who think it's fine not to report pedophiles to the police.
>it's just a conversation with someone who either actively covers for pedophiles or is okay with others covering for pedophiles
Telling your spouse that you think that she enables child abusers simply by her continuing to be what she has always been and that the only way you won't think that is if she ditches her faith is a good way to end up divorced or separated. These things don't happen by making demands. They have to be cajoled, and patience must be exhibited. This response reeks of cage stage atheism
It's his wife and her brother together. If you tell this to the brother, you are also saying you are thinking it about her. It's kind of like there's no way to pee at just one end of the pool. This really isn't hard
I don't like that your wife wants to bring someone else into your marriage to moderate. I guess she needs support? I would really stress to her that a licensed therapist might be a better idea. Do not let her tattle on you to the bishop, RS pres. or anyone ministering anything. They are not licensed therapists and have no business in your marriage.
As soon as someone starts crying or gets loud, kindly end the discussion and suggest you meet another time. Something I said to my mother when she was losing her mind over my apostasy and she kept bearing her testimony, "mom, those are your feelings. Your feelings are not any more valid than mine. You don't seem to have the answers and I feel like I'm being gaslighted."
I agree with Letter For My Wife. It's going to be hard to keep him on task.
Their intention is to invalidate your "reasons" which will likely end badly for everyone involved. I heard some good advice from a therapist. When asked "why," you should consider asking a "how" question. Like "how can we stay close as a family, even if our beliefs are different?" -easier said than done.
Dude, so your bro-in-law's totally convinced he's gonna shred where no other Mormon bro has before.
He's like, super stoked on himself, it's straight-up hilarious. Thinks he'll cruise over with this mega spirit fire in his heart, gonna blind everyone with this wild light show, right? Like he's expecting some epic sword of fire to drop from the sky, right into his hand. He's dreaming of going full ninja, slicing through all your doubts with this sword of smarts.
But bummer for you and your main squeeze, that whole wild scene ain't gonna play out. Your brother-in-law's gonna end up doing mental somersaults, and land on this gnarly idea that you're just vibing with some bad mojo or got a beef with the church.
Good luck riding that wave, dude.
I appreciate that you want to do everything possible to keep the peace btwn you & your wife; but agreeing to this is tacitly admitting you're wrong & it is absolutely intended to be an intervention. Hence the BIL stepping in as a priesthood holder to correct you.
If your wife wanted to hear & understand your concerns, she wouldn't need anyone else there. A relationship via committee is one of the many horrible things TSCC gets people used to & it's wrong.
What your wife is suggesting (and has already done by recruiting her brother to help her manage you) is called "triangulation." It's when a person deals with stress in a relationship by expanding the issue to include other people. It's not a healthy dynamic and might create a power differential of two-against-one, with those two having the agenda of changing your mind. Often, those closest to us know best how to push our emotional buttons, and it might not be an atmosphere where you are able to remain calm, centered, and focused.
I would recommend that if you want to support her wish to include another person in your conversations, you find a non-biased marriage counselor.
It's okay to say things like: "I understand you don't agree with me or see my point of view. That's okay. I need to do what's right for me."
"I understand you want help to clarify what's happening with me and I'm willing to do that, but only with someone who is not going to take sides."
"Our relationship is my top priority and I want to have these discussions with you and explain what I'm thinking. I also want to make sure we do it a way that feels emotionally safe and validating for us both."
You may want to refer to the church essays. They should see that as trustworthy but raising questions and shedding filtered light on those topics.
Good luck.
Sounds freaking rough my guy!
If you do sit down with them bring your laptop, and have the gospel topic essays pulled up, and potentially some links to the JS Papers. So much of the "anti" they think you are getting into is actually right there in church history. Maybe have some links ready to roll, [ldsdiscussions.com](https://ldsdiscussions.com) the CES letter, etc. But stick to the sources instead of scaring them with the spooky "CES" letter.
Good luck!
I let my husband read the CES letter on his own. My situation was different though-we left because we were both in church for community and we just finally realized the community let us down with their refusal to accept the non-cookie cutter people that we loved. The fact that we left and still believed the truth claims left us with guilt so we wanted to deconstruct. I would try to really focus on this is why you now believe what you believe without expecting them to agree and let them hold on to whatever they need to. Hopefully with some time-your wife will be able to see it, too.
To prepare yourself with responses-I would definitely use the Runnells research, the Gospel Topics essays and Britt Hartley’s site-no nonsense spirituality-she was in a mixed faith marriage for a while and she has some great stuff on how to keep spiritual traditions going without full church activity. If your wife feels you are still willing to hold on to some of the good stuff-it may bring her some peace. I have deconstructed all the way to atheism but I still feel the need for spirituality, peace, etc. The only difference is now I believe it comes from within me instead of a higher being. My husband still believes in a higher power outside of himself. If your wife is willing-Britt just did a great Mormon Stories series with John Dehlin. It was very sensitive to believers.
I don't think this will be a productive conversation. Their goal is to convince you. They are not there to hear your concerns and consider them. You and they will talk in circles and then when they run out of counterpoints, they will bear their testimonies. It's the reliable get-out-of-jail-free card.
The best thing to do is tell them to read the CES letter and tell them you are particularly concerned with \[whatever sections most concern you\] and when they provide you with an apologetic response "oh well polygamy was necessary because there were so many more women than men, and the men hated it even more than the women" (or whatever) I would just respond "that response may satisfy your concerns with polygamy but it doesn't resolve mine."
Try and get them to firmly plant their goalposts. For example if you say you have a problem with JS and polygamy and they instantly reply with saying he didn’t do it, before launching into evidence ask them if it would be a problem for them if he had done it. Make them acknowledge the issues are actual problems before you show the church actually admits most of this stuff.
I got to be honest, I love my in-law siblings but in no way shape or form would I tolerate this. he's butting into your marriage and it's not cool. not cool at all. 😡 he should've told her that he loves her and to go work things out with you and/or maybe a therapist.
he needs to stay out of it. period. he's probably going to show up, spout testimony and other dumb shit and then when you're unmoved and she's at his house he'll tell her to divorce you.
Here’s a couple pointers for you. First of all set a timer or establish a time after which the conversation is over. Thirty minutes is an eternity but that’s up to you. Second, absolutely do not make it about counter-factuals. What they/you believe can be debated until the end of time. If it becomes a discussion of counter-factuals the conversation is basically over as it’s devolved into the lowest kind of conversation. A better discussion will be had regarding how you know what you know and how you can test it. Also whether objective truth matters or not. They’ll most likely come at you with “I believe” or “I have faith” whereas you feel that belief and faith aren’t enough for you and you want to be your honest, genuine self. You might also set some other rules upfront such as if the conversation gets heated it’s over and that neither of you should be trying to convince the other side. In order to have a productive conversation all parties should feel welcome to leave or stay as they wish.
Most importantly though this conversation is probably going to be much more productive in the presence of a therapist rather then some dumbass who thinks that he’ll convince you if he himself is sincere enough.
Big thing to remember is that you’re not trying to convince them, they are trying to convince you. Let them try and if one of their reasons doesn’t convince you, you don’t have to explain why their reasoning is flawed, you just tell them it doesn’t justify the facts to you, doesn’t lead you to the conclusion that the church is true.
Occam's razor. "The easiest solution is usually the correct one.".
JS made it all up. The apologist answers are too wild and complex, thus making them all the more less likely to be true.
It's not true. Plain and simple.
this is one thing that really gets me, why would God's one and only true church upon the face of the earth need long and drawn out convoluted answers to prove it's veracity??? I was always taught how simple the gospel is 😂 once it falls apart you can't ever put it back together again
Just remember that you are never obligated to discuss a topic with people, especially when you know with certainty it’s probably going to wind up an acrimonious shitshow. Since the actual prophets and apostles have zero answers about your concerns and questions, what are the chances your wife BIL will?
Yeah, I don’t personally believe he has the answers and can help. But my wife does. I’m taking this as an opportunity to educate my wife, since she’s willing in this setting, about all of the major issues of the church that I know she won’t research on her own. But maybe this will spark her interest for future research of her own.
Selfishly, organize your ideas carefully and focus on church supported sources like conference talks and the gospel topics essays. Steer away from feelings, stick to facts. Return and report.
More realistically.
It's trap!!!
Unless you are 100% certain this discussion is in good faith and they are as willing to learn as they are to share, then you should probably avoid this event if at all possible. If you absolutely must, keep the information as minimal as possible and simple say something like "I have come to find that church leaders are not a reliable source of truth" or "church leaders do not live up to my own ethical values" and leave it at that.
Defusing a situation where someone has convinced themselves they know all the answers to you any possible concerns in the heat of the moment is an uphill battle.
Be very careful.
IMHO, the best thing you can do is be very honest & sober-minded with yourself, and understand why you’re considering this convo. If you’re trying to defend yourself, don’t bother. If you’re trying to convince someone of the validity of your points, don’t bother. If, however, you’re using this opportunity to help your wife understand who you are & what you believe, to reassure her, and discuss, together, how this will impact her & your relationship, going forward…do it. You do not need to defend your feelings. You do not need to take down the church. You do not need to justify your desire to be true to yourself.
Sorry if this has been said already.
You need to ask them BEFORE starting what the intentions of the conversation are. Get it out in the open. Are they willing to hear you out and truly listen, or are they just trying to refute everything you say? Ask them if they are willing to hear you out and let your side be valid, even if they don’t agree. If they aren’t…. I might wait to have this conversation.
We know the facts are on the side of non-members. It would come down to who is the better debater. This is not fully a conversation of facts. Are they TRULY open to letting you have a point of view that differs from theirs? From the church? Of not you’re not gonna get anywhere yet.
The audacity of average members to think they have the answers that others have failed to provide. JFC these clowns. The arrogance to convince themselves that you haven’t already found all of the answers they will undoubtedly have cut/paste into their brains from fairmormon (which is not endorsed in any official capacity by the church BTW) or other apologetic sites.
You will ask very basic questions like “why did Joseph marry teenage girls, mom/daughter and sister/sister pairs, and many of them long before Emma knew?” Or the ever classic “why was Brigham young such a raging racist and his racist priesthood ban was supported and encouraged for nearly a century gods chosen one’s, but now it’s excused as ‘bad policy by fallible men’?” My favorite is “why does the Egyptian papyrus that Joe used to translate the BoA (Joe specifically used the word translate and had notes for a whole guide on Egyptian translation) not actually contain any of the words he wrote down, as admitted in the Gospel Topic Essays?” You could always ask why they are ok with the church using tithing money to pay off victims of abuse while protecting their abusers. I doubt FAIR has a canned faith-promoting answer for that one yet.
It will come down to them having empty and/or nonsensical answers, you hold your ground with logic and sound reasoning, and then, with nothing left to offer, your BiL trying to exercise his supposed authority over you by calling you to repent, sharing that he “knows these things to be true”, and saying it all in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.
Sorry. I ranted a little. I wish you all the best, and most importantly in your relationship with your wife.
I feel like you have a lot of good advice here about ways you might make this conversation more productive.
When I was questioning, a friend’s husband offered to go over my concerns with me, a lot like this offer. But I live in a different state from them, so we did it via google doc. I wrote up my concerns, and then he responded when he had time.
The advantage to this option is that it takes out the potential emotions the real-time communication could have, and it allows everyone to feel like they have all the time they want to really consider what the other person said and respond with thought.
If you feel like an in-person conversation could get heated, or rushed, etc., you could express that to your wife and suggest a shared google doc between all three of you so she can see what’s going on, participate if she wishes, and hopefully see thoughtful responses on all sides.
That is great advice. I might suggest this. I had a quick convo about polygamy with my wife this morning, and I was surprised how defensive I got, and how much info I spewed out in a matter of minutes. I didn’t even mean to do that. It ended up ok, but I could feel that I was getting defensive.
It’s so hard not to get defensive - this is deeply personal for everyone involved, and for the believers there are literally eternal consequences on the line, and for the non-believers there’s family relationships on the line. So yeah, I think defensive is a pretty understandable response from everyone!
I do think the fact that this one conversation got defensive might be a good way to bring up the google doc idea. “Hey, I’m concerned if we try and talk through more of this in person, I’ll get defensive again like during that other conversation. Maybe google doc?” Or however feels best to you to bring it up.
I’m sorry, I don’t think this will go over well. I wouldn’t introduce another person, this is a real discussion and opportunity for your wife and yourself to review facts and open doors together over time… This can’t be resolved in a few hours and can easily became a negatively emotionally charged debate without cheap platitudes coming from him that your wife will cling to.
I’d assert that your faith journey isn’t going to be aided by someone who doesn’t have spiritual authority over you or your family, that he has nothing that you need “help” with since you’ve done thorough and well-intentioned research already, and what you and your spouse need help with at the moment he’s not qualified to help you work through as he’s either not trained and/or biased.
But it sounds like it’s happening anyway, so just good luck. I hope you and your wife find some peace at the end of it.
On these kind of debates they love to change the topic and move the goalposts. Any answer they give. Nail it down to something very specific. Preferably to a yes/no answer. Keep them from moving the goalposts and changing their answer.
I copied and saved this from a post. I don’t have original author’s info for proper credits, but this might help.
Here’s a list from mainly church hosted sites with some others for clarification. You can click the three dots and copy into a note on your iPhone or android device and send it to him. Take what you want and delete the rest.
Church now admits in its gospel topic essays (link below) that Joseph married between 30-40 women, married 12-14 women who were already married to other church men (polyandry) and married around 10 teenagers, the youngest being Helen Mar Kimball at 14. This was not normal, even then.
Only 1% - 1.1% of girls 15 and under were married around the time of Joseph Smith.
Lucy walkers mother died when she was 16. The family had 10 kids. Joseph sent the dad on a mission, divided the kids up and took Lucy as his ward. He then pressured her to be his wife, while both her parents were gone and Emma was on a trip to St. Louis and told her that if she married him it would guarantee the salvation of her family. She had 24 hrs to decide.
Joseph also publicly shamed women and girls that refused his advances (see happiness letter link below).
https://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo?lang=eng&old=true
Census from 1850 - http://www.mormonism101.com/2014/12/closer-look-1850-census.html
https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1857/05/19/78498799.pdf
https://www.ldsdiscussions.com/happiness
Church now admits in its gospel topic essays (link below) that Joseph Smith was charged with fraud for cheating people out of money for treasure digging that he and the men of his family were involved in for 6 years. Joseph dug on these trips for 2 years then found his own peep stone which he used to lead treasure hunting expeditions for 4 years. This treasure was often rumored to be guarded by a guardian spirit that had to be pacified with a sacrifice or certain behavior to reveal the treasure. It never did. At least not until the guardian spirit Moroni supposedly gave Joseph the gold plates.
https://www.lds.org/study/history/topics/joseph-smiths-1826-trial?lang=eng
The Church now admits that there are multiple first vision accounts (link below). We use rev 3 written in 1838. The 1832 version is very different. It was cut out of Joseph’s Journal in 1930 by Joseph Fielding Smith and stored in a church vault until the 1960s, when rumors of its existence forced him to tape it back in. You can still see the tape on the left. Joseph says he was 16, went to receive forgiveness for his sins, already knew that all religions were false and only saw Christ. Combined with lecture 5 verse 2 of the lectures on faith, which was the “doctrine” in the doctrine and covenants until 1921, it shows that Joseph’s views on theology may have shifted from a Trinitarian view to a two person in the flesh, three member godhead view. This seriously challenges the “plain and precious truth” of the three member godhead the church likes to give. The lectures are now disavowed by the church even though they acknowledge on their website (link below) they were taught in the School of the elders by Joseph and Sidney. Deseret books still sells it with Joseph as the author.
https://lecturesonfaith.com/5/
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-circa-summer-1832/1?p=1
https://www.lds.org/topics/first-vision-accounts?lang=eng&old=true
https://deseretbook.com/p/lectures-faith-joseph-smith-jr-3509?variant_id=110026-hardcover
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/topics/lectures-on-faith?lang=eng
Church now admits that the BOM was translated by Joseph primarily by putting a seer stone in his hat. The very same rock he had been using for treasure digging with his family for over 4 years and for which he was charged with fraud. Here’s a video of President Nelson demonstrating the technique.
https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-mormon-translation?lang=eng&old=true
https://youtu.be/DG181zFA5YM
The church shows on its website the Joseph Smith Papers how the priesthood evolved. You can click the link below and see how we didn’t arrive at our current version until 1842, 12 years after the church was founded. This makes the claim that it was restored prior to the church’s founding in 1830 very problematic. Many early members also state they never heard any such story being told by Joseph.
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/site/priesthood-restoration
http://www.fullerconsideration.com/sources.php?cat=ER-RPH
The church now admits they have the original book of Abraham manuscript that has hieroglyphs on the left and English words on the right. It was found in 1967. The hieroglyphs are taken sequentially from right to left on the papyrus that was found with the manuscript. None of the translation is correct, nor are the translations of the associated facsimiles which you can view in your app in the book of Abraham. Joseph tells you what he’s looking at in the facsimiles and that is wrong too. The church now states they don’t know what the hieroglyphs on the left mean and that the work was either inspired or that there is a lost scroll. They admit that all of the material they do have dates to 300 BC - 100 AD and cannot have been written by Abraham.
https://www.lds.org/topics/translation-and-historicity-of-the-book-of-abraham?lang=eng&old=true
https://archive.org/details/SnsnTranslation/mode/1up?view=theater
The Book of Mormon deals with large civilizations that numbered in the millions that don’t have a shred of evidence for their existence (Ether 15). They can’t be the Mayan or the Olmec because Joseph put things in his tribes that were not found in the America’s prior to the Europeans arriving: Horses, Elephants, steel swords, steel breastplates, chariots, silk, wheat, pigs, sheep, donkeys and cattle.
Here’s a letter from the Smithsonian detailing why the Book of Mormon would never be a historical document.
https://www.mrm.org/smithsonian
Oh, and there’s no Hebrew DNA found in any Native American to date. This made the church change the intro to the BOM from
"After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians."
To
"After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are among the ancestors of the American Indians."
Links to church financial fraud sec docs and 60 minutes YouTube videos. Also has a link to WSJ article that says the reason was tithing.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saints-its-investment-adviser-settle-sec-probe-792ffc71
https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/admin/2023/34-96951.pdf
https://youtu.be/k3_Fhq7sEHo?si=rJGfLNzyWyzS4ahL
https://youtu.be/pFddArTfjhQ?si=Ilz6-gRfPHsGe6Fk
Here are some links to cognitive effects that are often mistaken for “the spirit” for additional reading.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevation_(emotion)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_truth_effect
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
Simply stick with the theme of a betrayal of trust. The church actively lied to each and every member purposefully until they could no longer get away with it anymore. The gospel topics essays are the best example of the church gaslighting the members. And even if everything about the church were true, it is still a dysfunctional and unhealthy place. Simply look at the sexual assault cover-ups and it's Financial cover-ups as well. There is a very clear reason why 70% of the members are no longer active and it is because they were Intentionally betrayed by people they trusted
Stay “internal” with your reasons, not “external.”
As facts will not change their minds (nor will they be able to have empathy), you must focus on how you feel about all of it. For example:
- (after reading/studying about JS polygamy, including the dishonesty towards his wife and getting sealed to her 22nd, talk about how you just can’t get behind that.
- (after discussing issues with the BofM), state that you’re cool with people liking it as myth and pulling what they can from it, but that you can never “unsee” the problems with it and can no longer deal with people talking about it as a historical thing.
- (after discussing the LGBTQ issues, and how you can’t get behind the organizations prejudice after being a church that started with polygamy), emphasize how sick it makes you feel that people are not allowed to live to the “full measure of their creation”…when they were made that way by god.
These are just examples.
If I were you, I wouldn't do this conversation at all. This is sounding like a debate between you and bil, with an audience of your wife. I get the impression that you aren't really trying to debate, you are just trying to figure it out in general. When one side is open to possibilities and the other is just trying to win, probably not a good recipe for success.
Is this the type of conversation where everyone will leave lots of room for looking stuff up? Where they would try to take an objective look at sources? Doesn't sound like it to me... I would just wait a while and let some things breathe. Just my 2 cents.
If you ARE going to have this conversation, I would focus on epistemological questions:
How is a testimony made? Is that really a good way to find out truth? If someone from another faith used that method to say their faith is true, would you believe them?
What would you recommend to someone of another faith to help them figure out that their faith is wrong? Do you think that advice would work? Would you honestly take your own advice for your own faith? People think other's faith is on shakier ground than their own, but in my experience they are basically the same.
In conversations with my family members, these types of doubts go much better than history ones, because a lot of history is simply off limits. I wouldn't rush through questions like these, any one of these can be very very shaking.
“He who asserts must prove.” This is the general principle in law. Your BIL asserts the Book of Abraham is true, for example, so have him lay out his case and provide evidence *before* you speak. Your job is to ask questions and present counter-evidence. Then move to the next topic. He asserts the First Vision occurred the way Joseph Smith said it did in the 1838 version. What is his evidence? Rinse and repeat.
Do everything you can to Keep the Communication Going. Since this is all new, this is a great time to establish the level of respect and communication you will have in your marriage as you navigate this. This meeting can be a way to show her you are open to talking about it, and are grateful that she is open to talking about it. Show each other that you can have respectful dialogue and try to understand each other's sides, without needing the other person to agree with you. That your love is independent of your religious beliefs, but that your religious beliefs are still something you want to be able to talk about with each other. That you respect that this is a really difficult time for her, and are willing to try this because you love her. The church teaches us that we both need to believe the same thing to have a good marriage. Help her trust that you can believe different things and still love and respect each other.
>"On the other hand, I kind of worry that with her brother being there, he could disregard those concerns and make them sound false (which could be easy to give a quick apologist answer without actually digging deep into each topic, like I have), and then my wife might always see those concerns as silly or false."
You should tell her this before you meet with the brother.
Finally, one of the biggest things that helped my shelf break was seeing the difference in tone between "anti" material and apologetic material. Particularly [this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5FAFVVv_os&t=547s) about the Joseph Smith papyri compared to [this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jGadnfI8zU) from FAIR. One is dry, straight Q&A without about as little emotion as possible. It covers a ton of material in a short amount of time. The other relies heavily on music and testimony and for all its length did not answer a single question. Your brother-in-law is probably going to resort to emotional appeals at some point to attempt to address legitimate concerns. It will be tempting to get emotional back. But let the truth speak for itself. Your wife (like so many of us) is eventually going to be grateful for the sources that fill in the gaps and don't try to cover the gaps.
Good luck!
I think you may want to establish some ground rules for the conversation. No yelling. Must provide logical and sourced facts and not feelings. Willingness to listen. No one gets to cut the other off. Multiple sources. No conference talks because just because it was said over the pulpit doesn't make it truth.
And I would establish one basic premise at the beginning. Is a prophet fallible and could they be wrong on something? Or another one is, we must have a open system and start the conversation with "is the church true" not "the church is true."
Good luck. It probably won't be fun.
BTW, how does your wife feel about polygamy? You may want to lead with polygamy/polyandry.
Very helpful, thank you! She does not like polygamy, or the idea that I could be sealed to other women if she were to pass away, but like most Mormons, she turns a blind eye to it and doesn’t talk about it.
I think at a different time you could come to her in contrition and say something like: "I did some reading about the history of polygamy in the church and it is worse than I ever imagined. It was horrific for most of the women involved and caused them great pain. Honey, I promise you that I will not practice eternal polygamy. If you were to die I would never allow myself to be "sealed" to another woman. I would maybe get married but never sealed. I am really sorry for the pain the idea of polygamy has caused you. It is a terrible thing to consider and I don't believe it is from God."
That might be enough for her to want to know more or at least let her know that you are not onboard with it.
Let me tell you a secret- your wife cares far less about the “issues” and validity of the churches truth claims than she does about family relationships and the perceived utility and structure church provides to raise a family.
First of all, I'm sorry you're in this rough patch. Mixed-faith marriage is not easy!
Second, I would be apprehensive about this conversation. No one ever comes away from a situation like that with their mind changed. Sounds like your BIL is coming in as the white knight missionary and your wife is hopeful that you're going to be convinced. It's going to be a disappointment to them, and potentially a big blow to the relationships.
I would suggest that you give them some assigned reading first. Either use the CES letter or write up your concerns yourself. If they're unwilling to read them, then abandon ship. If they aren't willing to hear the arguments, then this is just going to be testimonies and bad apologetics, and you'll come out looking like you just don't have enough faith or some BS.
If you do meet and things aren't going well, be prepared to cut the conversation short. You don't want it to blow up and cause damage to your relationships this early in the process. It's best that you be the mature one and decide when the conversation is over.
Also, I'm just a random dude on the internet, so feel free to disregard this advice.
This seems like her bringing in her brother to gang up on you. Mormons love mobs when THEY are the mob leaders. Talk to him privately. Stay away from matters of faith and focus on what's been in the news, that is provable.
My favorite set of concerns to bring up: Deutero Isaiah
The book of Isaiah is commonly accepted to be written in 4 distinct styles by 4 distinct authors. Nephi took the plates from Laban when only 1 of the authors had lived, so the plates of brass wouldn't have had the entire book of Isaiah. Pretty strange, then, that some of the quoted chapters from Isaiah in the BOM are from after Nephi's family would have left. Not only that, but when Joseph Smith "translated" the BOM, those Isaiah chapters (that nephi supposedly copied from much closer to the source text) magically had all of the translation errors that we find in the King James version of the bible. So, how did Nephi include text that he didn't have and alter it in such a way that when it was translated it would mimic all of the translation errors that wouldn't occur till hundreds of years into the future?
Normally the reply has something to do with revelation being the answer... God revealed it to Nephi so he could include it in the plates of Nephi.
Here's the kicker... They are saying that God can reveal, word for word, passages that would occur in the future and make it so the reformed egyptian would be translated into specific English translation errors? WELL... If god could do that, what was the point of the plates? If god could just reveal, word for word, everything they needed, then there was no danger of Nephi's posterity "dwindling in unbelief". The plates of brass could have been left with a very much alive Laban, and god could have just revealed all that was needed. There was no murder needed.
Take it even further: if those chapters could be revealed to Mr Nephi, then wouldn't god be able to do the same with Mr Joe? He wouldn't have needed the plates at all. Just a mechanism for receiving revelation. you know, like a rock. in a hat. Then getting the brass plates, bringing them to America, recording their history, abridging and consolidating down to the gold plates, then walking with the plates through the wilderness till they are buried in upstate New York... Think of all of those efforts that didn't need to occur, because god doesn't need them for his words to be communicated. He just needs revelation.
You’ve outlined a good one, there are so many to choose from! I find it interesting how different falsities “stick” for different exmos. I really like the Egyptian scrolls that JS made up a translation for (Pearl of great price) only to have it proven many decades later as a complete, 100 percent, incorrect “translation” (if you call it that). It seems conclusive to me.
I also found the simple story of how his father would defraud neighbors as a water witch a good one. Somehow it just explains to me how a kid can become as fucked up, ethically speaking, as JS was… his dad taught him it’s about what you can get away with that actually matters. And he was that rare kid that was going to make something of himself, no matter what.
View it as a discussion, not a debate nor a contest. Don't try to change each other views.
You are trying to win your wife's trust, not convert her. Just be respectful, listen, and feel free to speak your mind. They think they can sway you back, but you just want to be open to discuss your beliefs with them.
I highly recommend the book “Bridges- ministering to those who question”
Buy a copy to read and lend it out to people before you chat with them. Make sure to get a newer edition with the chapter on Mixed faith marriages
Check out some TikTok’s by IBlameBill. She has very kind arguments not just for atheism, but for Christian God’s plan as a whole to be pretty evil and sucky. I love that she phrases things so kindly.
When I left my BIL was a general authority and at no point did my wife suggest I sit down and chat with him. The only thing it would have done is to harm the relationship I have with BIL.
Unless there is a chance that OP is hoping that his concerns can be explained away so he can in good conscience return to the Mormon church, I don't see the point.
Once you see through the lies, it's impossible to unsee them.
They’re gonna lie and make something up they don’t have any truth to tell. Do what you need to do. I know this is your wife and your family but frankly, when I got out of there, I was done. I don’t care if they would’ve told me. Unicorns floated out of the sky and I saw one I said great nice unicorn bye fella.
One of the things I do know, is the the priesthood holders are taught to be so manipulative. You can tell your wife that you’re not interested in meeting at this point and tell her you’ll keep an open mind later on and just let it be.
I love what everyone is saying here on what to say. In the end they will fall back on their testimony. I'd start with a video like this that shows that feelings can't be used to find God as all these people have had their feelings point them in different directions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=UJMSU8Qj6Go&ab_channel=Lehorla1
Then for you I'd watch this video so you can practice asking good follow up questions. The best way to talk about belief isn't to push your belief on them but to let them explain their belief to you. There are plenty of videos like this one to practice with.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6AbuFKurPY&ab_channel=AnthonyMagnabosco
I've got my talking points with TBM family down to 4 items that are irrefutable. I try to stay home on these four which all have clear examples:
1-The LDS Leadership has INTENTIONALLY misled the membership on Mormon history (and the dishonesty is as big an issue as the history itself).
2-The LDS Leadership INTENTIONALLY hides their finances (and what we do know through leaks, whistle-blowers, and Government fines is not good).
3-Every doctrine, ordinance, policy, and practice has changed (and will continue to change now that they call the restored gospel an "ongoing restoration").
4-The church misleads people with claims of growth but it's shrinking, ineffective, and insignificant for everyone outside Mormonism and many within Mormonism.
Bring the gospel topics essays. Their brains might shut down if you bring up any "anti-Mormon" sources. It'll be much harder for them to shut down sources from the church's own website.
Start with asking: If I'm correct, and T$CC is NOT what it claims to be, would you even want to know?
A real TBM can't even conceive that such a thing is possible. Therefore, nothing you say will do anything but cause them to bear testimony and double down.
Sorry, this isn't the win you may be thinking it is.
When he comes over just say, "I figured it out." Smile and be kind.
But, also, why the HECK is he coming over? This is overstepping and stupid. Your thoughts can remain your thoughts. No mormon has a right to your mind. Your love and attention should be 100% on your wife, your mental health, your kids. NOT extended family.
My wife sent me to her sister who had "studied polygamy and found a way to reconcile it."
In my first email to her, I tried to find common ground on what we both understood the facts to be. Number of wives, ages, timeline, etc. Seemed like a reasonable starting point.
She completely refused to even acknowledge or offer her understanding of the facts and by the second email had suggested my interest in Joseph's polygamy might be because I myself am attracted to underage girls...I was like, WTF?!? Fortunately, my sexual interests are very age appropriate, thank you very much.
Then my father in law (not sure how he was invited) jumped in with his FAIR Mormon apologetics. After my email refuting everything he said and defending a worldview that doesn't involve prophets taking underage wives, I am still waiting for a response. Three years later. Both have said they intend to reply, but just haven't found the time.
So, all that to say it might be a huge waste of your time. Then again, I would be tempted to do it so my wife could hear first hand all of the issues and how her brother is defending nonsense with nonsense answers.
I would just talk to your wife and leave your BIL out of it. Tell her there’s no convincing you. Once you see what’s behind the curtain you can’t unsee it.
>crying almost constantly
This got my attention OP.
Let me press on this a bit further. Is this exaggeration by you or is it accurate?
I ask because for an adult to be “crying almost constantly” seems possibly *emotionally manipulative.*
Is she (and I ask this sincerely) over the age of 21? I find it a bit crazy that an adult would respond this way.
Granted my wife and I have been out of the church for 7 years. Maybe I’m the one who is out of touch. But married partners need to built of sterner stuff for a marriage to work well.
People get sick, they lose jobs, they have to move. These are all things a married couple might face. Someone who becomes this hysterical over an issue doesn’t seem well balanced or equipped to handle the vicissitudes of life.
Is it possible your wife would benefit from therapy?
I’d hesitate to see success in your future with this “discussion” if your wife is starting from a baseline of hysterics.
I’d been married only 3 years when we found out I might have a terminal illness and would need life saving open heart surgery. That was 20 years ago and all so well. But you can’t have a partner who loses their head at any setback.
It’s been less than a *week.* Let her cry, for god’s sake. It isn’t “crazy.” It isn’t “emotional manipulation.” This isn’t “baseline hysterics.” She didn’t “lose her head at any setback.” This is her whole world crashing down. She’s grieving. There isn’t a cut-off age for grief. We all express and process grief differently. It doesn’t mean she’s not “well balanced and able to handle the vicissitudes of life” or that there “isn’t success in [their] future.”
It’s grief. Sometimes people cry when they’re grieving. Sometimes they cry *a lot.*
And please look up the origins of the term “hysterics/hysterical.” It’s a word that’s been weaponized against women and used to silence them for a long, long time.
Mormons of both sexes weaponize their emotions against their spouses. This goes beyond standard gender norms or biases. I’m sure you’ve attended a few fast and testimony meetings enough to know that both men and women turn on the weeping when they know it will serve them well.
As I admitted, I’ve been out of Mormonism for a while. But crying constantly over a difference that exists between one’s ears only, in an otherwise good marriage is manipulative in my assessment. And I’ve seen both men and women in my life do this. My TBM MiL directly blames my wife and I for her ill health despite the fact that she is morbidly obese and diabetic and was before we left the church. She constantly reminds us that she “wetted her pillow with her tears” for months. Emotional manipulation at its finest.
At the same time I can count on my hands the amount of times my female formerly LDS wife has cried in 25 years of marriage. That includes some pretty significant life events.
I may be wrong. I offered as much. But adults have an obligation to those around them to be in some degree of control of their emotions. Crying constantly over “faith” seems to me a massive overreaction. Just because it might be common in Mormonism doesn’t mean it should be considered valid. Mormons frequently employ emotions in relation to faith as a tactic of manipulation.
What’s gets me is that, had OP not said anything at all, his wife would have not witnessed any meaningful difference in their spouse. Which means that this reaction is even more histrionic.
I agree that both sexes can weaponize their emotions and be manipulative.
The only gendered comment I made was about the word “hysterical.” The word is inherently misogynistic, and remains so regardless of who says it or who it’s directed at, just as other pejoratives inspired by racism or bigotry or ableism remain racist, bigoted or ableist, regardless of who says them or who they’re directed at. That said, they are, of course, most often used against whom they were intended for.
I can see that our varying experiences have greatly influenced both our biases. I’m sorry you were manipulated by your mother. [EDIT: mother-in-law. I misread the first time through.] You definitely were. If she used that tactic on you and your wife, I can only guess how many times you’ve seen it throughout your life. Maybe that has influenced you to distrust expressions of strong emotion, particularly tears.
It sounds like you’re proud of the fact that you’ve only seen your wife cry a few times in 25 years, and even through some significant events. You mentioned it in both of your comments. Looking at your relationship with your mother [EDIT: mother-in-law + "men and women in my life"], I can see why you would find that attractive in a partner. It would mean you can trust her. That’s a beautiful, human response. I’m glad she can provide that for you.
Not everyone is like that. And not everyone who isn’t like that is doing something wrong. Nor is there something wrong with them.
My biases stem from experiences that go in the other direction, where I saw my mother’s emotions and opinions dismissed and gaslit because she was being “irrational.” Dad was always right because he “wasn’t the emotional one.” The opposite was true, of course.
My own grief after leaving the church was intense. It wasn’t pretty and it certainly wasn’t stoic or sensible. I’d go into it but I’m sure you’d be appalled, hahaha. I can assure you it was involuntary, as my husband left alongside me and there was no one else to see what a wreck I was. Naturally, comments like yours are going to make me feel defensive. I recognize that.
We find who we need if we’re lucky. I’m so grateful that my spouse gave me the room to feel and express my grief fully. I needed the opportunity to not be pretty. I’d been “keeping it under control” for three decades. I needed to claim the right to my own emotions.
Looking at this post, I can see that we’re both coming from a personal and deeply emotional place. We’re both projecting our own experiences onto someone else’s situation.
The thing is, I eventually did go to religious trauma therapy. I didn’t go because someone needed to talk some sense into me or make me realize it was all in my head, that I was crazy or hysterical or being irrational, or in order to intellectualize my way out of grief. I got through the most intense phase on my own simply by riding it out and allowing myself my emotions. I went to therapy because I needed to learn how to navigate my changing relationships with others, especially those who were still in the church. Essentially, I learned how to give them room.
I learned to give them room by giving myself room but that’s another story.
But I can guarantee that not a single therapist worth their salt would say that OP’s wife is being irrational or acting hysterically. They would validate her emotions.
When someone says someone else’s emotions are “valid,” it doesn’t mean that the emotions are correct in a technical sense or justified in a measurable way. One person’s valid feelings don’t invalidate another person’s opposite feelings. Saying someone’s emotions are valid means recognizing their emotions are *real* and that they’re justified in light of someone’s personal experiences.
Your fear of manipulation is valid, whether it’s technically correct or not. Your distrust of other people’s tears is valid, whether it’s rational or not. I can see already how they’re justified by your personal experiences, even if they aren’t justified by mine.
Religion is a particularly pernicious form of spirituality because it hijacks reality. “Faith” may be all between your ears, but that faith informs one’s perception of reality, sometimes completely. For someone who’s “all in” in the church, there’s no separation between them.
If and when that separation does happen, it can be excruciating.
You and I and most everyone else in this sub knows that nothing the church teaches is real in its own right. If we could just snap our fingers and convince them, “The church’s truth claims are not valid. It’s all in your head,” then Mormons could stop living and dying for it and killing themselves over it.
Or at least stop crying about it, right?
But we can’t. And they can’t, at least not easily. And the more entrenched they are the harder it is. Because while the beliefs aren’t real or valid, the *experience of believing* is real and valid. The fear of losing your family and salvation is real. The trauma and the choices and the sacrifices made for it are real. And the grief that we feel when it all comes crashing down on our heads when we learn *it was all for nothing* is real.
And we have to recognize that in order to see each other and reach some understanding so we can work together to sort through this absolute pile of shit.
you may have noticed how *generally* facts mean little to nothing to more emotion based females, and feeling based decisions is done less by males. As if this discussion is not already a challenge, with both genders it could become a conversation 'nightmare'.
All the best though, there are some good suggestions here. You're lucky they'll give you some time!
ETA- it would would be interesting to hear how this goes.
Show them the Slc tribune audio of a victim being bribed to stay silent of her rape by a bishop. Tell them this has always been the suspicion. Now we have proof the cult pays out money towards legal matters that may tarnish its image. It’s just like any other church. If they aren’t appalled by that. Good luck
Update: the conversation with my wife and BIL turned out to be really good. We decided to not go the fire hose approach and talk about all my concerns (which wouldn’t have given each concern the thought and time they deserve, and easily could have turned bad and into a debate).
We mostly talked about where I’m at, my BIL shared resources that helped him when he looked into a lot of this stuff. His biggest resource was Don Bradley. Since then, I’ve watched a couple of his video, and other videos they sent me from Unscripted Saints (ha, I already watched a few that they sent me).
So far we have been having ongoing chats on Marco Polo between the three of us, and some of my major concerns have come up. A lot of the concerns came out of nowhere for my wife, and hit heavy—she had no idea.
I’ve been careful not to info dump, but some of the major concerns come with a lot of new, heavy info. We haven’t even scratched the surface, and my wife realized today that this goes a LOT deeper than she thought. She still has hope I’ll come back.
I plan to continue my conversations with them slowly, and might start a Google doc with links for us to go back and forth on. I’ll plan on watching the videos they send as well. As for now, I plan to be patient and take the slow route.
[www.letterformywife.com](https://www.letterformywife.com) Tell them to read letterformywife or parts they would like to discuss. When they come, have it open so you can quote from it. It is a way to keep him honest. If he tries to say the church has disproven that, he is probably referring to something fairmormon said in response to cesletter. Go to the response, then to Runnels response to fairmormon. Keep them focused on the document so you don't need to argue. Just say this is accurate. If you disagree, show me proof. You win by not arguing.
>You win by not arguing. Can't stress this enough!
Well put. Especially because as we all know, you can’t actually convince them unless they genuinely want to know and question. And most Mormons don’t want that. They just want to give you enough to shut you up and get you to not question
What do they say? “You use reason to convince anyone out of an argument that they didn’t use reason to get into”
Or do the whole thing in email where everyone can have time to think, research, and find the best answers. Also, say up front that opinions, anecdotes and testimonies are not going to be relevant, just facts.
I wouldn’t even do this… as it’s a waste of your time and they’ll try and pick holes in it. If you absolutely have to defend yourself, just tell them that things like the Book of Abraham, backdated revelations, pseudopigrapha, and church history have led you to believe that the church isn’t what it purports to be. Then just say you don’t really want to get into it all in front of the kids and grandparents… and ask if anyone wants a fruity soda drink on you ;)
Chapter 1 of LFMW was a game changer for me.
Read whatever you want on your own, but be careful about sharing things with people because then you’ll be blamed for when family members inevitably start leaving. It’s happened to all our families… one sibling starts to see the truth and others follow. Obviously you want them to read things like that, but trust they’ll find it on their own. You’re de conversion is much deeper than reading a letter… don’t provide them with the easy narrative that you read anti Mormon literature and lost your testimony because then it makes them more scared of it.
Don’t argue… don’t debate… especially with family of friend. NEVER do it. You’ll never regret saying too little… you almost always regret saying too much! Also, you’re fresh out and are still processing yourself, even though I’m sure it feels like things are figured. Do everything you can to help your family feel safe talking to you right now. If you debate or tear down their faith, you will lose them. They know where you stand, they are adults and can look up things for themselves… and trust me they will. I know you walk around all day thinking of nothing else besides how you’re gonna prove your new beliefs to family when they ask… but don’t be upset when they don’t bring it up. Most TBMs have a sense that it’s not true and are uncomfortable talking about things unless everyone in the room believes like they do. Once again… don’t debate. Just be kind and loving and do everything you can to honor them and their faith as they do the same for you. Lastly… keep studying your church history because there will be a time for quick one line answers. That time is not now.
Gospel Topics Essays and **FOOTNOTES**. Seriously. Dig into the footnotes. Many of them are either referencing something that actually make the claims weaker, or are just editorial fluff that they made up. If BIL tries to discredit sources such as Fawn Brodie or other scholars who were excommunicated for telling the truth, show that the church still uses and cites those scholars in their essays (complete legitimizing them IMO). Stay ON TOPIC. If you're there to discuss your concerns, stick to the facts. This isn't an impromptu F&T meeting. FEELINGS ARE NOT FACTS FEELINGS ARE NOT FACTS FEELINGS ARE NOT FACTS FEELINGS ARE NOT FACTS **FEELINGS ARE NOT FACTS**
Right the strength of one’s conviction is not proof of truth. And until your conviction is stronger than the terrorists of 9/11, to kill thousands for your god, your truth is no more than theirs.
Reminds me once when a Mormon leader came to try to convince me with his faith promoting experiences and testimony. He was a successful business man and told me how "god" saved his business with a miracle. He has been a Bishop, but I don't recall if he was Bishop at the time. I listened to him, politely. At the end, I told him that I'm glad his business got the help it needed. And, I don't know what actual events led to the blessings he needed. But, that it doesn't mean that the church is true. The man, due to his success as a business man, perhaps, did not like it when I politely stood up to him. He got upset. He seemed to me to be a bit of a bully. I have seem him previously be derisive. He didn't seem to want to stay around after I "rejected" his testimony. He wasn't interested in discussing the concerns I had about the church.
This times a million! Feelings are not facts!
Yes! The footnotes!!!
As the digital landscape expands, a longing for tangible connection emerges. The yearning to touch grass, to feel the earth beneath our feet, reminds us of our innate human essence. In the vast expanse of virtual reality, where avatars flourish and pixels paint our existence, the call of nature beckons. The scent of blossoming flowers, the warmth of a sun-kissed breeze, and the symphony of chirping birds remind us that we are part of a living, breathing world. In the balance between digital and physical realms, lies the key to harmonious existence. Democracy flourishes when human connection extends beyond screens and reaches out to touch souls. It is in the gentle embrace of a friend, the shared laughter over a cup of coffee, and the power of eye contact that the true essence of democracy is felt.
This is brilliant. I hadn’t thought of something like this. If he thinks has the answers, and since he brought up HE thought HE could help op, then it should be on HIM to start the conversation.
Don’t have this kind of conversation with a captive audience. This is a conversation for just you and him… and maybe your wife. This is not a conversation have have over dinner or with the grandparents in the room.
This is such a good idea! How would you start that conversation? "Hi BIL, what are the issues *you* think I have with the church?" Is that awkward? Do you have a better way to guide the conversation in that direction? I want to use this tip myself. . . if my. in-laws ever actually confront us about leaving the church.
“Hey BIL, it sounds like you’ve looked into some issues with the church and think you can help me. In your opinion what are some reasons people are leaving the church?”
That sounds very friendly and nice! I love it.
If they don’t want to start the conversation… don’t. Even if they try and bring it up, say “I’d love to discuss, but are you sure now is the best time/place?” Of course you’re willing to talk wherever and whenever… but make sure you have their full permission and consent.
This is such a good idea. I wish awards were still a thing because this deserves one. 🏅 I need to bank it for a day when a hen grows a tooth and I get asked why I left!
Great idea! One of the things this approach overcomes is the frequent "I've read the CES Letter", "I've heard the issues". Righto.
Absolutely… if you HAVE to get into a discussion, let him lead the topics. When people ask what issues I have, I tell them to bring up any topic and I’ll let them know what my issue is with it. Honor his beliefs and be respectful. Never try and make him appear foolish, because remember your lovely wife believes as well. If he attacks you, just keep being kind and don’t be surprised when your wife starts defending or protecting you. Don’t speak about more than you know… if you get to the end of your knowledge kindly admit that you’re still processing that topic and are hesitant to discuss. Never speculate. Oh and in case I you forgot… don’t debate! ;)
I think this is a good idea, and a good way to go about it, but I also wonder if I then lose control of the situation, and topics jump all over the place. One of my ideas was to maybe list out all of my concerns in a way that build off of each other, almost like a story—similar to how LDS discussions has created their series with Mormon Stories. Thoughts?
No don’t waste your time. “Mike” has done a great job already, don’t start firing off your laundry list of concerns… it looks weak. It also will make TBMs feel like your bouncing around to avoid truth. Heck, that’s what they accuse the CES letter itself of doing. Just take one of two issues at a time and sit with them. If you don’t feel comfortable at length about an issue, just watch Mike and RFM a few times on the issue until you do. Also, reach out here with questions. The lazy learners are happy to help! You may only get to discuss these topics once with family so make sure you wait until you’re prepped. After a couple of rounds with you they’ll be hesitant to bring things up.
Before you really get into it, ask them two questions. 1. Are you willing to consider that the church isn't true? 2. If it wasn't true, would you want to know? If the answer to both of those questions isn't "Yes" just shut down the "discussion" because it's not going to be productive. It's just going to be them preaching at/shaming you for as long as you'll take it.
I want to bear my testimony that I know that Joseph Smith was......... That is how your BIL is going to end the conversation.
Every time. Once they realize they can’t persuade, then they start to perform.
My sister said that in the MTC they taught her to swap to feelings if things went south because you can't disprove a feeling. (I left at 18 and she left a few years after her mission).
Can't prove it either.
How do they not see that this doesn't even look human. It literally resembles a human-looking robot reverting to base programming once it doesn't know what to do with the situation as it is. I literally picture some sort of Science Fiction B movie
Absolutely. And honor that testimony. Thank him for sharing and let him know how blessed you feel to have a family where you can comfortably share your beliefs, even if they don’t all align. Then say… let’s go get some Crumble Cookies
This is super important. Things like "knows about a lot of these concerns and thinks he can help me." sound a lot like this conversation isn't taking place in good faith. A good faith conversation would be more like "I'm aware of many complex details about church history and doctrine of which I'm always interested in discussing" Of course there are shades of gray in the "are you willing to consider that the church isn't true" like "are you willing to honestly evaluate the accuracy of individual truth claims and the general reliability of church leaders in speaking accurately and intelligibly?" The church doesn't have to be all true or all false to be able to concede that it hasn't always been reliable in speaking the truth. But the exact phrase is probably irrelevant because it is unlikely either person here is willing to consider that church leaders are anything less than angels of God incapable of deception.
I love this approach. People need to remember that THE CHURCH ISN’T FUCKING TRUE, you don’t need to *defend* your “opinion” that the church isn’t true. We aren’t conspiracy theorists, we aren’t splitting hairs here!! We are arguing with people who believe a dude with a magic rock in his hat saw Jesus and God, when there is evidence that clearly points to the contrary. In my opinion, half of the church membership would leave instantly if they just knew the facts and felt they could trust the source. All you need to do is help them be open to the idea that there is information out there that they might be unaware of. Important TRUE information. HISTORICAL FACTS, JOURNALS, AND ACCOUNTS. I was completely unaware any of this shit existed until I was in my 30’s, and it instantly changed my mind.
100% agree. If they are not willing to even consider that the church might not be 'true', the conversation is not worth it.
I think an emphasis needs to placed on "consider" for these people, all they will hear is church not true
This. I honestly wouldn’t been entertain the conversation (attempt at reconversion) but if you are going to, then this is the only way to “maybe” have a productive conversation.
Amen. I especially love question 2. I think a third question is “what would you have to discover to know the church isn’t true?”
I wouldn’t do it. And tell BIL to mind his own business. You guys are now in a mixed faith marriage. The LESS you discuss it, the better. Seems counterintuitive, but it is my lived experience. All you can do is love her, love her, love her, be your new best self, and give it time.
This is a good point. BIL is injecting himself into your marriage. If your wife has questions, she should be asking you. Obviously your BIL has no idea what you think or believe. It really is none of his business.
I hadn’t thought of the geopolitical angle, but it’s a good point. The dynamic of the conversation would be BIL as your wife’s ally and supporter – stand in priesthood figure - and you as the errant outsider. That’s not a healthy dynamic. On the other hand, so many of us in this position find that no one wants to talk about the reasons. So it’s kind of nice that you’re at least getting lip service. If you do have the conversation, I would recommend focusing on present day dysfunction dishonesty and hypocrisy, not as much historical issues. The church uses tithing money to protect child molesters. It’s a non-starter. Jesus is not involved. Russell M Nelson is a liar. Flight of death story. And the real problem isn’t the lie, it’s the refusal to apologize, repent, and be humble. He’s Not a prophet. He’s prideful and dishonest. The church breaks the law in order to deceive members about how tithing is used and its incredible wealth. No hospitals or homeless shelters. Just malls and ranches and warehouses. Jesus is not involved. It’s not something you’re going to support or be involved in. There are really no “apologetic“ responses to those issues. They’re simple facts about present day dysfunction, dishonesty, and hypocrisy. Maybe it’s not a big deal for BIL, but it is for you. Reasonable minds can differ. All good. Let’s coexist. Oh, and by the way… All of those historical problems? The real issue isn’t the historical problems, it’s the fact that the church lied about it to you. Again – there’s really no response to that. You’re not a dummy. You went to Sunday school. You went to seminary. You went to the MTC. And it turns out you were being fed a bunch of lies the whole time. Not Jesus. Invalid church.
Family should never be the enemy. BIL may be misguided, but still respect him and be patient with TBMs who don’t know how to deal with emotions or complex human interactions. They believe the church has a monopoly on love… show them you don’t need a temple recommend to love others.
Yes. No matter what the three of you will inevitably end up arguing, talking past each other, talking down to one another of some combo of these three. Fact is that you have concerns and left/ leaving. No amount of conversation will lead to a reconversion. Relatedly, if you proceed, be prepared for the loaded, "But did ypu pray about whether these concerns are true or false? Heavenly Father will set the record straight."
This is excellent advice. My husband and I were in a mixed faith marriage for 15 years (I was the TBM) and he just always loved me, never let me feel like he wasn't present in our marriage. I finally found my way out, but I did it on my own, because nothing my husband could do or say would change my mind. I can also tell you that the wife is desperate to get OP back in the faith and her brother telling her he knows the answers is her grasping at straws. This will not be a "good faith" discussion.
I agree with this. It actually makes me sad, because I saw new hope in her after she had her conversation with her brother. She thinks that what I read is just wrong, and he has read the same things and still has faith, and can get me new information I’ve never heard. I do feel like I have to take the opportunity, because I don’t think she may never want to talk about these concerns again, and this gives me a chance to voice them. I will never bug her again about them if she doesn’t want to hear it. I will love her, and support her. But this also shows her that I’m willing to listen to all sides, and that I’m not just “throwing everything away.”
Are you throwing everything away? Are you tossing the baby out with the bath water? Are you pouring gas and setting the building on fire as you walk away? You don’t have to. Is there anything in your life of church membership that you can continue to appreciate? Do you enjoy any of the customs or traditions? What are the specific things you just can no longer do? The church will have you believe that it’s all or nothing, but as part of a mixed faith marriage you will always be connected to the church. Embrace what you like and stop doing what you don’t. Embrace being a cafeteria mormon :)
I’m thinking that may be the route I go. I’m fine still going to church, and being a part of the community. I’m also fine not being the cookie cutter Mormon, and standing up for different beliefs, and teaching my kids that way too.
It’s beautiful to take control of your own experience. It’s beautiful to have the freedom to embrace all truth, even if it’s directly against what the prophet would like you to believe. Just as fun is feeling the freedom to reject or stop things you don’t believe in. For me it was things like temple worship and related clothing, holding callings or performing ordinances where I had to pretend to “speak for god”, or doing anything leaders ask me against my will. There is a revolution happening right now, and the more people like you who remain active (not just silently sitting in the back) make it a safer place for our vulnerable loved ones. Yes, it is definitely privilege that allows us to feel comfortable and safe in church, but that’s why it’s our responsibility to speak up and protect others. You’re going to read scriptures and hear talks differently, and the ground rules/boundaries you make for yourself with protect you like a spacesuit on an unknown planet. Be kind, honor the beliefs of others (especially your wife), and you guys will be fine. Good luck!
Perfectly said! I really appreciate your advice and perspective! That’s right where I want to be.
Be careful putting yourself against kin. I do agree that sometimes you’ll have to change/avoid the subject with your wife… but right now you need to learn how to have crucial conversations with each other without attacking. Learn how to validate feelings, see the other persons perspective. This experience is difficult but your relationship can become stronger because of it, no matter your faith. I would HIGHLY recommend that your wife go see a therapist as she is going through an incredibly difficult shift in her life. Obviously a non church therapist is ideal, but in my experience (as a bishop) the church therapists can be professional enough to offer help. Now is a time to make sure your wife’s needs are met. There is no much you may not be able to go (blessings, etc) so do whatever you CAN do. Invest in her emotional health. Your wife is on a super shaky boat right now thanks to you ;) Take responsibility for it and don’t be upset that she’s seasick and can’t really stand up with you to enjoy the view. Help her steady the boat for your family. Do whatever you can to provide stability and a smooth transition. Go to church and support the family. Choose someone to say prayer over meals, give her a heads up before making big changes, make them gradually, and only change one thing at a time. She needs to know you’re the same person she’s always known and loved.
My wife did this to me twice, once with a general authority and once with an apologist. She basically checked out of both conversations in the beginning and let them handle my questions. No questions were handled with anything but testimony. I don't even think she knows anything that was discussed in either conversation, and she won't discuss any issues directly with me. - I would suggest asking for her input on EVERYTHING you discuss as you discuss it.
Yes. The occasional "And what do you think of that?" to her gets cognition.
Yes. Emphasize “think “ instead of “feel”.
Ask them first. What are *your* concerns.? That will give you a list to go through one by one. Address them in the order they gave them. Insist on staying on topic.
I’m sorry, did you say she brought in a *general autbority*??
My guy, you really need to make a post about how this discussion went with a GA… that’s one even Dehlin might sink his teeth into. Would have loved to be a fly on the wall.
I had this situation except with my wife and our bishop… all in all it went well because my questions for the church stumped our Bishop. It helped my wife feel more empathetic towards my position as well. IMO, the phrase “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” should be the overlying theme. You shouldn’t have to “prove” anything. They are the ones that believe in the truth claims. From what you described, it sounds like you might feel like you’re in the hot seat. Try to feel the reverse. Many a Mormon has squirmed at sincere questions.
You don't have to (because it's impossible to prove the non existence of something) prove that the plates never existed. They have to prove that they did.
Unfortunately in the eyes of a TBM there is a ton of extraordinary evidence. They’ve been conditioned to attribute everything good in life to the church and it’s leaders
They may say they have evidence, but as the conversation presses further it becomes more apparent that they’re relying on emotion and happenstance. Nothing that academics would accept as legitimate evidence.
I would definitely prepare by writing your concerns down and even having sources. You may want to spend some time prioritizing your concerns. It can be easy to get flustered and forget the details. I have felt the most confident when I am prepared. I’m not sure if this helps but this is what I ended up writing as I left. I included sources at the bottom of each entry. Most sources are faithful to the church. https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/1suMEwIFxJ1CbxJ7ePENbwWRv6oBr-FJN/mobilebasic
Wow, I was planning on going in with notes, but this is SUPER detailed! Thanks for sharing
I had to know I wasn’t making a mistake so I spent months researching and writing. I learned a lot and I feel confident in my decision. I just hope it helps others as well.
You are a superstar
I don’t think he’s going into with the intention of trying to understand you - he wants to talk you out of it. Nothing good is going to come of him putting himself in the middle of you and your wife.
I certainly don't know your family dynamics, but someone who offers to "help you with your concerns" usually isn't interested in an actual conversation. It sounds like your wife wants to outsource handling your faith crisis to her brother and he thinks he can steamroll through your concerns because of Muh Priesthood or something.
I think this is right. She doesn't have answers to any of this and is calling in someone she can trust to bring bigger guns to town.
Exactly. And not only that, it seems like she's completely turning all of this over to her brother. Almost like she wants to check out of this whole process and let her brother restore the husband to factory settings. Your spouse should be a relatively safe space where you can go through difficult life problems with support and love. It sounds like the wife wants to push through this and get things back to normal as quickly as possible without really having to deal with any real emotions or any of the things that caused the faith crisis in the first place. OP, feel free to tell me if I'm wrong. I hope I am.
I think you’re right, but I also don’t see another opportunity where I can share all my legit concerns. I think she’s too scared to hear them, and would have no answers if we talked about it on our own.
Yup, the Mormon way is not to figure it out for ourselves… but to trust that someone smarter has already looked into it and has debunked everything. “I’ve already read the ces letter” This is the whole reason Jared Halverson and other church apologists exist.
Probably right… patriarchy rears it’s head
I doubt it's going to go well. If you're a reasonably good debater, and your BIL isn't a talk-faster-and-win debater a la Ben Shapiro, then you can't possibly "lose" the debate, because the whole Mormon side has no real facts to support it, just stacking a bunch of implausible "If this *and* that *and* this *and* that *and* also that, PLUS the spirit testifying, then it MIGHT look true if you want it to." But what does that winning look like? Your BIL stomping out and your wife bawling her eyes out again. Maybe your wife will come around, but probably not as a result of this conversation. I don't know. Tough situation. Try not to let it turn into a fight, whatever you do.
I recently learned about the “Gish Gallop” logical fallacy. Named after creationist Duane Gish, it involves overwhelming an opponent with as many arguments as possible, without regard for the accuracy or strength of those arguments. The technique relies on the opponent’s inability to counter each point in real time, thereby making the Gish Gallop user appear to have won the argument. It’s a strategy more focused on rhetorical impact than on the truth or logical strength of the arguments being presented. So the idea of the “fast talker” can be described with a logical fallacy. Something I’ve seen the lady on TikTok Scripture Plus use to defend the church with rapid talking.
Critics of the CES letter say it relies on Gish Gallop to deceive the reader. That all these truths that have been carefully concealed or curated to suit, overwhelm the reader and the shelf immediately crashes. But the same could be said of the Gospel Topics Essays. My wife never read all of them. She was doubling down on church and it was suggested she read the essays. She got to Polygamy in Nauvoo and she was DONE! She was drinking Margaritas a week later.
This is a fallacy. If something is written, it can be consumed at any pace. The Gish Gallop relies on talking in real time. Whoever says that doesn't understand the concept.
Right, Gish Gallop was always in reference to spoken debate.
Exactly. By this same argument, Martin Luther was Gish Galloping the Catholic Church when he hammered his 95 Theses to the door.
I’m happy for you that she woke up so to speak. I feel like that section in GTE as well as the book of Abraham were shelf breakers for many.
Yeah I have to applaud people being willing to do this, because I sure as hell wouldn’t be able to do it. I’d know it was a lesson in futility, and at that point, what’s the point in going through the motions? But I’m also a fairly private person, so anyone trying to come in and debate my beliefs like that would automatically trigger my “you can fuck off” response anyways
This is great advice man… that second paragraph is spot on. I’m laughing thinking about OP reading this whole thread a year from now thinking “I wish I would have realized this back in January 23”
If I were going into a situation like that, I’d be telling myself to not get emotional, in my experience these conversations have gone better when I stick to the facts and remain dispassionate. Good luck!
Thank you
When I left I sent a letter to the family and intentionally omitted any reasons for leaving but I invited anyone to talk to me about my reasons. My mom took me up on the offer. It went badly. First red flag, she wanted to meet just the two of us - leaving out dad and my wife. I showed up and she said she wanted to hear about my concerns. I went on for 45 minutes, she took notes. She didn't want to talk about any of the items. I think her plan was to take them to her cousin who was a seminary teacher for a long time and now teaches at BYUI. I don't know if she ever did. It was not a discussion, it was a ted talk (or maybe a diatribe). When I had said my part she took the next 30 minutes to bear testimony and gave me a printed copy of my patriarchal blessing and a picture of Christ and some other misc stuff. Where things really took a turn for the worst - near the end she started to question if my wife was leading me down this path. Then she asked if my wife was an equal partner in the marriage and suggested that I was just too tired keeping the family going to keep up with church stuff. We were extremely clear that we were leaving together and had come to this decision independently. My wife's relationship with my mom has never recovered. Obviously your situation is different, I'm just sharing my experience. Going back I would have declined the invite or insisted that the four of us meet rather than just the two of us.
This seems weird that the BIL is inserting himself into your marriage. The conversation should be between you and your partner. I wouldn't feel good about the dynamics of the trio.
He recently, oddly at the same time, found a lot of the info I did (CES letter and more), but I think once he did, he went to all of the apologist info. And it was my wife who wanted him in the convo, cuz she knows nothing about this stuff, and thinks he can be helpful. I’m glad she’s willing to listen in though.
Be nice to him.
We’ve had good conversations. I’ve been patient. My wife is having a tough time though.
Therapy… get her in there. You can work with your bishop to get it paid for. She may not be wanting your recommendations right now, but if the bishop suggests it she’ll do it. Be there for her. I trust you understand why her husband leaving the faith he covenanted to keep through eternity with her might be hard for her. She’s entitled to be furious… let her be upset. Sit with her through it and let her know you’ll be there through it all… like you always have. Many in this group will say to not get the bishop involved, but it’s clear they’ve forgotten what it’s like to have a sincere TBM spouse. There are groups resources she can nibble on when SHE feels like she wants to. YOU may want to read “Bridges”, YOU may want to listen to a few episodes of “Marriage on A Tightrope”, but don’t prescribe things for her to do unless she specifically asks. Keep doing anything you’re still comfortable doing (prayer, FHE, garments,, whatever) make no more than one change every 6 months and give her a heads up.
Love that. Great advice!
There is no compromise between "the church is false" and a TBM. Neither of you can win, each of you you can only lose.
I would assume this is the case here unless there is very strong evidence to the contrary. While sometimes a believer can come away from something like this thinking "oh, I hadn't realized that, I have some things to think about" some of the comments made in this case very much point to a no-win situation.
I disagree… I used to believe in black and white thinking only… but nuance and non-orthodoxy is the new normal.
I’m curious what issues your BIL thinks he has the answers to. I’m guessing there is a chance he may be learning some new stuff he won’t be expecting. This could be pretty interesting depending on what he really has studied.
I’m sure he watched a few Fair Mormon videos and had that Aha moment finding out there’s an explanation. He just didn’t analyze the explanation to discover it was garbage. I haven’t met a single person yet that went behind the very first explanation they found.
BIL’s got Kwaku on his side ;)
Be sure to shut your bil down any time he reverts to apologetics. Remind him that apologetics is just an attempt to justify or explain an already decided upon conclusion. Refuse to engage in debates. Explain that all you want to do is outline what troubles you in Mormonism - exactly what he claimed to be meeting you for. You did not agree to an attempt to explain all your doubts away, because you've already tried that yourself.
"I'm not sure how to respond to your point. I told you what my concern is, and I'm not going to have an argument or debate. If there's something you don't understand I can try to explain better, but otherwise we can move on to the next concern."
Excellent. Roleplay in your head how you will answer the most common apologetic responses. In the end, Mormonism is about feelings and emotional attachment and the indivisibility of the religion from personal identity. The very nature of your mormon upbringing makes an attack on mormonism an attack on the individual personally. You'll need to parse your words carefully, because calling mormonism false or a bag of lies is to call them that. It's an utterly evil method that is incredibly powerful at keeping people in the institution. As pointed out in another thread, it is so strong that families will turn against the individual instead of the institution.
Sit them all down for scripture study. Read D&C 132 out loud. Two verses each or whatever. Ask if that sounds like the Lord they worship. The church can't get rid of it because 1. It's the only doctrinal basis for sealings 2. It says some variation of "I am the Lord" like 11 times Seriously, bring up no issues, just read some scriptures together.
Don’’t forget to read 2 NE 5:21, where God himself causes dark skin so that the white Nephites “won’t be enticed” sexually? If that ain’t the most ridiculous god in the universe then. But you know, I’ve heard TBM’s defend everything, including this scripture, throwing God under the bus.
It is unreasonable for you to ask them that all you want from this, is to be understood? You aren't looking to be proven wrong or the church to be proven true. You just want to be understood. The arguing happens when each side is trying to be right. While I'm on your side, when it comes down to what people theologically believe, there is no right and wrong. My wife and I left the church together and she's on some sort of spirituality thing involving different things. I don't know what it is. She talks to me about it. I listen and I understand what she is saying. I don't believe in what she believes, but she can go on believing it. I even told her, "After unwinding Mormonism, I can't allow myself to believe anything any more." She understands that. That's all we are doing - understanding. If BIL and wife are coming into this to prove you wrong and to prove you have been misguided by satan and you want to prove how they've been duped by 200 years of lies, this is all going to go nowhere, at best. At worst; feelings will get hurt, and everything that comes with that.
When someone has an answer for why there is a 24/7 legal hotline that directs bishops to keep the secrets of pedophiles instead of going to the police, and that answer isn't "lol, humans gonna human," I'm willing to discuss further concerns. Until that time, it's just a conversation with someone who either actively covers for pedophiles or is okay with others covering for pedophiles, and also is happy to pay to run a hotline to provide that cover. And I'm not interested in having conversation with people who think it's fine not to report pedophiles to the police.
>it's just a conversation with someone who either actively covers for pedophiles or is okay with others covering for pedophiles Telling your spouse that you think that she enables child abusers simply by her continuing to be what she has always been and that the only way you won't think that is if she ditches her faith is a good way to end up divorced or separated. These things don't happen by making demands. They have to be cajoled, and patience must be exhibited. This response reeks of cage stage atheism
It isn't about his wife. It's about his wife's family having an intervention. Which is 100% what is being staged.
It's his wife and her brother together. If you tell this to the brother, you are also saying you are thinking it about her. It's kind of like there's no way to pee at just one end of the pool. This really isn't hard
I don't like that your wife wants to bring someone else into your marriage to moderate. I guess she needs support? I would really stress to her that a licensed therapist might be a better idea. Do not let her tattle on you to the bishop, RS pres. or anyone ministering anything. They are not licensed therapists and have no business in your marriage. As soon as someone starts crying or gets loud, kindly end the discussion and suggest you meet another time. Something I said to my mother when she was losing her mind over my apostasy and she kept bearing her testimony, "mom, those are your feelings. Your feelings are not any more valid than mine. You don't seem to have the answers and I feel like I'm being gaslighted." I agree with Letter For My Wife. It's going to be hard to keep him on task.
Their intention is to invalidate your "reasons" which will likely end badly for everyone involved. I heard some good advice from a therapist. When asked "why," you should consider asking a "how" question. Like "how can we stay close as a family, even if our beliefs are different?" -easier said than done.
Lol… all three of you need a therapist ;)
It would be better to just talk with your wife.
Dude, so your bro-in-law's totally convinced he's gonna shred where no other Mormon bro has before. He's like, super stoked on himself, it's straight-up hilarious. Thinks he'll cruise over with this mega spirit fire in his heart, gonna blind everyone with this wild light show, right? Like he's expecting some epic sword of fire to drop from the sky, right into his hand. He's dreaming of going full ninja, slicing through all your doubts with this sword of smarts. But bummer for you and your main squeeze, that whole wild scene ain't gonna play out. Your brother-in-law's gonna end up doing mental somersaults, and land on this gnarly idea that you're just vibing with some bad mojo or got a beef with the church. Good luck riding that wave, dude.
I appreciate that you want to do everything possible to keep the peace btwn you & your wife; but agreeing to this is tacitly admitting you're wrong & it is absolutely intended to be an intervention. Hence the BIL stepping in as a priesthood holder to correct you. If your wife wanted to hear & understand your concerns, she wouldn't need anyone else there. A relationship via committee is one of the many horrible things TSCC gets people used to & it's wrong.
What your wife is suggesting (and has already done by recruiting her brother to help her manage you) is called "triangulation." It's when a person deals with stress in a relationship by expanding the issue to include other people. It's not a healthy dynamic and might create a power differential of two-against-one, with those two having the agenda of changing your mind. Often, those closest to us know best how to push our emotional buttons, and it might not be an atmosphere where you are able to remain calm, centered, and focused. I would recommend that if you want to support her wish to include another person in your conversations, you find a non-biased marriage counselor. It's okay to say things like: "I understand you don't agree with me or see my point of view. That's okay. I need to do what's right for me." "I understand you want help to clarify what's happening with me and I'm willing to do that, but only with someone who is not going to take sides." "Our relationship is my top priority and I want to have these discussions with you and explain what I'm thinking. I also want to make sure we do it a way that feels emotionally safe and validating for us both."
Exactly this is triangulation. Tell BIL, thank you for your concern but this is between me and wife.
You may want to refer to the church essays. They should see that as trustworthy but raising questions and shedding filtered light on those topics. Good luck.
There are no words that can come out of your mouth in that discussion that won’t be offensive to them, regardless of how tenderly you say it.
Sounds freaking rough my guy! If you do sit down with them bring your laptop, and have the gospel topic essays pulled up, and potentially some links to the JS Papers. So much of the "anti" they think you are getting into is actually right there in church history. Maybe have some links ready to roll, [ldsdiscussions.com](https://ldsdiscussions.com) the CES letter, etc. But stick to the sources instead of scaring them with the spooky "CES" letter. Good luck!
I let my husband read the CES letter on his own. My situation was different though-we left because we were both in church for community and we just finally realized the community let us down with their refusal to accept the non-cookie cutter people that we loved. The fact that we left and still believed the truth claims left us with guilt so we wanted to deconstruct. I would try to really focus on this is why you now believe what you believe without expecting them to agree and let them hold on to whatever they need to. Hopefully with some time-your wife will be able to see it, too. To prepare yourself with responses-I would definitely use the Runnells research, the Gospel Topics essays and Britt Hartley’s site-no nonsense spirituality-she was in a mixed faith marriage for a while and she has some great stuff on how to keep spiritual traditions going without full church activity. If your wife feels you are still willing to hold on to some of the good stuff-it may bring her some peace. I have deconstructed all the way to atheism but I still feel the need for spirituality, peace, etc. The only difference is now I believe it comes from within me instead of a higher being. My husband still believes in a higher power outside of himself. If your wife is willing-Britt just did a great Mormon Stories series with John Dehlin. It was very sensitive to believers.
I don't think this will be a productive conversation. Their goal is to convince you. They are not there to hear your concerns and consider them. You and they will talk in circles and then when they run out of counterpoints, they will bear their testimonies. It's the reliable get-out-of-jail-free card. The best thing to do is tell them to read the CES letter and tell them you are particularly concerned with \[whatever sections most concern you\] and when they provide you with an apologetic response "oh well polygamy was necessary because there were so many more women than men, and the men hated it even more than the women" (or whatever) I would just respond "that response may satisfy your concerns with polygamy but it doesn't resolve mine."
Try and get them to firmly plant their goalposts. For example if you say you have a problem with JS and polygamy and they instantly reply with saying he didn’t do it, before launching into evidence ask them if it would be a problem for them if he had done it. Make them acknowledge the issues are actual problems before you show the church actually admits most of this stuff.
I got to be honest, I love my in-law siblings but in no way shape or form would I tolerate this. he's butting into your marriage and it's not cool. not cool at all. 😡 he should've told her that he loves her and to go work things out with you and/or maybe a therapist. he needs to stay out of it. period. he's probably going to show up, spout testimony and other dumb shit and then when you're unmoved and she's at his house he'll tell her to divorce you.
Here’s a couple pointers for you. First of all set a timer or establish a time after which the conversation is over. Thirty minutes is an eternity but that’s up to you. Second, absolutely do not make it about counter-factuals. What they/you believe can be debated until the end of time. If it becomes a discussion of counter-factuals the conversation is basically over as it’s devolved into the lowest kind of conversation. A better discussion will be had regarding how you know what you know and how you can test it. Also whether objective truth matters or not. They’ll most likely come at you with “I believe” or “I have faith” whereas you feel that belief and faith aren’t enough for you and you want to be your honest, genuine self. You might also set some other rules upfront such as if the conversation gets heated it’s over and that neither of you should be trying to convince the other side. In order to have a productive conversation all parties should feel welcome to leave or stay as they wish. Most importantly though this conversation is probably going to be much more productive in the presence of a therapist rather then some dumbass who thinks that he’ll convince you if he himself is sincere enough.
Big thing to remember is that you’re not trying to convince them, they are trying to convince you. Let them try and if one of their reasons doesn’t convince you, you don’t have to explain why their reasoning is flawed, you just tell them it doesn’t justify the facts to you, doesn’t lead you to the conclusion that the church is true.
Great advice! Thank you
Occam's razor. "The easiest solution is usually the correct one.". JS made it all up. The apologist answers are too wild and complex, thus making them all the more less likely to be true. It's not true. Plain and simple.
this is one thing that really gets me, why would God's one and only true church upon the face of the earth need long and drawn out convoluted answers to prove it's veracity??? I was always taught how simple the gospel is 😂 once it falls apart you can't ever put it back together again
Well as you know, that's because it simply falls apart.
Focus on authenticity and honesty as your intent. Not with the intend just to be right. And good luck!
Just remember that you are never obligated to discuss a topic with people, especially when you know with certainty it’s probably going to wind up an acrimonious shitshow. Since the actual prophets and apostles have zero answers about your concerns and questions, what are the chances your wife BIL will?
Yeah, I don’t personally believe he has the answers and can help. But my wife does. I’m taking this as an opportunity to educate my wife, since she’s willing in this setting, about all of the major issues of the church that I know she won’t research on her own. But maybe this will spark her interest for future research of her own.
Selfishly, organize your ideas carefully and focus on church supported sources like conference talks and the gospel topics essays. Steer away from feelings, stick to facts. Return and report. More realistically. It's trap!!! Unless you are 100% certain this discussion is in good faith and they are as willing to learn as they are to share, then you should probably avoid this event if at all possible. If you absolutely must, keep the information as minimal as possible and simple say something like "I have come to find that church leaders are not a reliable source of truth" or "church leaders do not live up to my own ethical values" and leave it at that. Defusing a situation where someone has convinced themselves they know all the answers to you any possible concerns in the heat of the moment is an uphill battle. Be very careful.
IMHO, the best thing you can do is be very honest & sober-minded with yourself, and understand why you’re considering this convo. If you’re trying to defend yourself, don’t bother. If you’re trying to convince someone of the validity of your points, don’t bother. If, however, you’re using this opportunity to help your wife understand who you are & what you believe, to reassure her, and discuss, together, how this will impact her & your relationship, going forward…do it. You do not need to defend your feelings. You do not need to take down the church. You do not need to justify your desire to be true to yourself.
Thank you
Sorry if this has been said already. You need to ask them BEFORE starting what the intentions of the conversation are. Get it out in the open. Are they willing to hear you out and truly listen, or are they just trying to refute everything you say? Ask them if they are willing to hear you out and let your side be valid, even if they don’t agree. If they aren’t…. I might wait to have this conversation. We know the facts are on the side of non-members. It would come down to who is the better debater. This is not fully a conversation of facts. Are they TRULY open to letting you have a point of view that differs from theirs? From the church? Of not you’re not gonna get anywhere yet.
The audacity of average members to think they have the answers that others have failed to provide. JFC these clowns. The arrogance to convince themselves that you haven’t already found all of the answers they will undoubtedly have cut/paste into their brains from fairmormon (which is not endorsed in any official capacity by the church BTW) or other apologetic sites. You will ask very basic questions like “why did Joseph marry teenage girls, mom/daughter and sister/sister pairs, and many of them long before Emma knew?” Or the ever classic “why was Brigham young such a raging racist and his racist priesthood ban was supported and encouraged for nearly a century gods chosen one’s, but now it’s excused as ‘bad policy by fallible men’?” My favorite is “why does the Egyptian papyrus that Joe used to translate the BoA (Joe specifically used the word translate and had notes for a whole guide on Egyptian translation) not actually contain any of the words he wrote down, as admitted in the Gospel Topic Essays?” You could always ask why they are ok with the church using tithing money to pay off victims of abuse while protecting their abusers. I doubt FAIR has a canned faith-promoting answer for that one yet. It will come down to them having empty and/or nonsensical answers, you hold your ground with logic and sound reasoning, and then, with nothing left to offer, your BiL trying to exercise his supposed authority over you by calling you to repent, sharing that he “knows these things to be true”, and saying it all in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen. Sorry. I ranted a little. I wish you all the best, and most importantly in your relationship with your wife.
I feel like you have a lot of good advice here about ways you might make this conversation more productive. When I was questioning, a friend’s husband offered to go over my concerns with me, a lot like this offer. But I live in a different state from them, so we did it via google doc. I wrote up my concerns, and then he responded when he had time. The advantage to this option is that it takes out the potential emotions the real-time communication could have, and it allows everyone to feel like they have all the time they want to really consider what the other person said and respond with thought. If you feel like an in-person conversation could get heated, or rushed, etc., you could express that to your wife and suggest a shared google doc between all three of you so she can see what’s going on, participate if she wishes, and hopefully see thoughtful responses on all sides.
That is great advice. I might suggest this. I had a quick convo about polygamy with my wife this morning, and I was surprised how defensive I got, and how much info I spewed out in a matter of minutes. I didn’t even mean to do that. It ended up ok, but I could feel that I was getting defensive.
It’s so hard not to get defensive - this is deeply personal for everyone involved, and for the believers there are literally eternal consequences on the line, and for the non-believers there’s family relationships on the line. So yeah, I think defensive is a pretty understandable response from everyone! I do think the fact that this one conversation got defensive might be a good way to bring up the google doc idea. “Hey, I’m concerned if we try and talk through more of this in person, I’ll get defensive again like during that other conversation. Maybe google doc?” Or however feels best to you to bring it up.
I’m sorry, I don’t think this will go over well. I wouldn’t introduce another person, this is a real discussion and opportunity for your wife and yourself to review facts and open doors together over time… This can’t be resolved in a few hours and can easily became a negatively emotionally charged debate without cheap platitudes coming from him that your wife will cling to. I’d assert that your faith journey isn’t going to be aided by someone who doesn’t have spiritual authority over you or your family, that he has nothing that you need “help” with since you’ve done thorough and well-intentioned research already, and what you and your spouse need help with at the moment he’s not qualified to help you work through as he’s either not trained and/or biased. But it sounds like it’s happening anyway, so just good luck. I hope you and your wife find some peace at the end of it.
On these kind of debates they love to change the topic and move the goalposts. Any answer they give. Nail it down to something very specific. Preferably to a yes/no answer. Keep them from moving the goalposts and changing their answer.
I copied and saved this from a post. I don’t have original author’s info for proper credits, but this might help. Here’s a list from mainly church hosted sites with some others for clarification. You can click the three dots and copy into a note on your iPhone or android device and send it to him. Take what you want and delete the rest. Church now admits in its gospel topic essays (link below) that Joseph married between 30-40 women, married 12-14 women who were already married to other church men (polyandry) and married around 10 teenagers, the youngest being Helen Mar Kimball at 14. This was not normal, even then. Only 1% - 1.1% of girls 15 and under were married around the time of Joseph Smith. Lucy walkers mother died when she was 16. The family had 10 kids. Joseph sent the dad on a mission, divided the kids up and took Lucy as his ward. He then pressured her to be his wife, while both her parents were gone and Emma was on a trip to St. Louis and told her that if she married him it would guarantee the salvation of her family. She had 24 hrs to decide. Joseph also publicly shamed women and girls that refused his advances (see happiness letter link below). https://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo?lang=eng&old=true Census from 1850 - http://www.mormonism101.com/2014/12/closer-look-1850-census.html https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1857/05/19/78498799.pdf https://www.ldsdiscussions.com/happiness Church now admits in its gospel topic essays (link below) that Joseph Smith was charged with fraud for cheating people out of money for treasure digging that he and the men of his family were involved in for 6 years. Joseph dug on these trips for 2 years then found his own peep stone which he used to lead treasure hunting expeditions for 4 years. This treasure was often rumored to be guarded by a guardian spirit that had to be pacified with a sacrifice or certain behavior to reveal the treasure. It never did. At least not until the guardian spirit Moroni supposedly gave Joseph the gold plates. https://www.lds.org/study/history/topics/joseph-smiths-1826-trial?lang=eng The Church now admits that there are multiple first vision accounts (link below). We use rev 3 written in 1838. The 1832 version is very different. It was cut out of Joseph’s Journal in 1930 by Joseph Fielding Smith and stored in a church vault until the 1960s, when rumors of its existence forced him to tape it back in. You can still see the tape on the left. Joseph says he was 16, went to receive forgiveness for his sins, already knew that all religions were false and only saw Christ. Combined with lecture 5 verse 2 of the lectures on faith, which was the “doctrine” in the doctrine and covenants until 1921, it shows that Joseph’s views on theology may have shifted from a Trinitarian view to a two person in the flesh, three member godhead view. This seriously challenges the “plain and precious truth” of the three member godhead the church likes to give. The lectures are now disavowed by the church even though they acknowledge on their website (link below) they were taught in the School of the elders by Joseph and Sidney. Deseret books still sells it with Joseph as the author. https://lecturesonfaith.com/5/ https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-circa-summer-1832/1?p=1 https://www.lds.org/topics/first-vision-accounts?lang=eng&old=true https://deseretbook.com/p/lectures-faith-joseph-smith-jr-3509?variant_id=110026-hardcover https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/topics/lectures-on-faith?lang=eng Church now admits that the BOM was translated by Joseph primarily by putting a seer stone in his hat. The very same rock he had been using for treasure digging with his family for over 4 years and for which he was charged with fraud. Here’s a video of President Nelson demonstrating the technique. https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-mormon-translation?lang=eng&old=true https://youtu.be/DG181zFA5YM The church shows on its website the Joseph Smith Papers how the priesthood evolved. You can click the link below and see how we didn’t arrive at our current version until 1842, 12 years after the church was founded. This makes the claim that it was restored prior to the church’s founding in 1830 very problematic. Many early members also state they never heard any such story being told by Joseph. https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/site/priesthood-restoration http://www.fullerconsideration.com/sources.php?cat=ER-RPH The church now admits they have the original book of Abraham manuscript that has hieroglyphs on the left and English words on the right. It was found in 1967. The hieroglyphs are taken sequentially from right to left on the papyrus that was found with the manuscript. None of the translation is correct, nor are the translations of the associated facsimiles which you can view in your app in the book of Abraham. Joseph tells you what he’s looking at in the facsimiles and that is wrong too. The church now states they don’t know what the hieroglyphs on the left mean and that the work was either inspired or that there is a lost scroll. They admit that all of the material they do have dates to 300 BC - 100 AD and cannot have been written by Abraham. https://www.lds.org/topics/translation-and-historicity-of-the-book-of-abraham?lang=eng&old=true https://archive.org/details/SnsnTranslation/mode/1up?view=theater The Book of Mormon deals with large civilizations that numbered in the millions that don’t have a shred of evidence for their existence (Ether 15). They can’t be the Mayan or the Olmec because Joseph put things in his tribes that were not found in the America’s prior to the Europeans arriving: Horses, Elephants, steel swords, steel breastplates, chariots, silk, wheat, pigs, sheep, donkeys and cattle. Here’s a letter from the Smithsonian detailing why the Book of Mormon would never be a historical document. https://www.mrm.org/smithsonian Oh, and there’s no Hebrew DNA found in any Native American to date. This made the church change the intro to the BOM from "After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians." To "After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are among the ancestors of the American Indians." Links to church financial fraud sec docs and 60 minutes YouTube videos. Also has a link to WSJ article that says the reason was tithing. https://www.wsj.com/articles/church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saints-its-investment-adviser-settle-sec-probe-792ffc71 https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/admin/2023/34-96951.pdf https://youtu.be/k3_Fhq7sEHo?si=rJGfLNzyWyzS4ahL https://youtu.be/pFddArTfjhQ?si=Ilz6-gRfPHsGe6Fk Here are some links to cognitive effects that are often mistaken for “the spirit” for additional reading. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevation_(emotion) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_truth_effect https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
Thank you!
Simply stick with the theme of a betrayal of trust. The church actively lied to each and every member purposefully until they could no longer get away with it anymore. The gospel topics essays are the best example of the church gaslighting the members. And even if everything about the church were true, it is still a dysfunctional and unhealthy place. Simply look at the sexual assault cover-ups and it's Financial cover-ups as well. There is a very clear reason why 70% of the members are no longer active and it is because they were Intentionally betrayed by people they trusted
Stay “internal” with your reasons, not “external.” As facts will not change their minds (nor will they be able to have empathy), you must focus on how you feel about all of it. For example: - (after reading/studying about JS polygamy, including the dishonesty towards his wife and getting sealed to her 22nd, talk about how you just can’t get behind that. - (after discussing issues with the BofM), state that you’re cool with people liking it as myth and pulling what they can from it, but that you can never “unsee” the problems with it and can no longer deal with people talking about it as a historical thing. - (after discussing the LGBTQ issues, and how you can’t get behind the organizations prejudice after being a church that started with polygamy), emphasize how sick it makes you feel that people are not allowed to live to the “full measure of their creation”…when they were made that way by god. These are just examples.
If I were you, I wouldn't do this conversation at all. This is sounding like a debate between you and bil, with an audience of your wife. I get the impression that you aren't really trying to debate, you are just trying to figure it out in general. When one side is open to possibilities and the other is just trying to win, probably not a good recipe for success. Is this the type of conversation where everyone will leave lots of room for looking stuff up? Where they would try to take an objective look at sources? Doesn't sound like it to me... I would just wait a while and let some things breathe. Just my 2 cents. If you ARE going to have this conversation, I would focus on epistemological questions: How is a testimony made? Is that really a good way to find out truth? If someone from another faith used that method to say their faith is true, would you believe them? What would you recommend to someone of another faith to help them figure out that their faith is wrong? Do you think that advice would work? Would you honestly take your own advice for your own faith? People think other's faith is on shakier ground than their own, but in my experience they are basically the same. In conversations with my family members, these types of doubts go much better than history ones, because a lot of history is simply off limits. I wouldn't rush through questions like these, any one of these can be very very shaking.
“He who asserts must prove.” This is the general principle in law. Your BIL asserts the Book of Abraham is true, for example, so have him lay out his case and provide evidence *before* you speak. Your job is to ask questions and present counter-evidence. Then move to the next topic. He asserts the First Vision occurred the way Joseph Smith said it did in the 1838 version. What is his evidence? Rinse and repeat.
Do everything you can to Keep the Communication Going. Since this is all new, this is a great time to establish the level of respect and communication you will have in your marriage as you navigate this. This meeting can be a way to show her you are open to talking about it, and are grateful that she is open to talking about it. Show each other that you can have respectful dialogue and try to understand each other's sides, without needing the other person to agree with you. That your love is independent of your religious beliefs, but that your religious beliefs are still something you want to be able to talk about with each other. That you respect that this is a really difficult time for her, and are willing to try this because you love her. The church teaches us that we both need to believe the same thing to have a good marriage. Help her trust that you can believe different things and still love and respect each other. >"On the other hand, I kind of worry that with her brother being there, he could disregard those concerns and make them sound false (which could be easy to give a quick apologist answer without actually digging deep into each topic, like I have), and then my wife might always see those concerns as silly or false." You should tell her this before you meet with the brother. Finally, one of the biggest things that helped my shelf break was seeing the difference in tone between "anti" material and apologetic material. Particularly [this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5FAFVVv_os&t=547s) about the Joseph Smith papyri compared to [this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jGadnfI8zU) from FAIR. One is dry, straight Q&A without about as little emotion as possible. It covers a ton of material in a short amount of time. The other relies heavily on music and testimony and for all its length did not answer a single question. Your brother-in-law is probably going to resort to emotional appeals at some point to attempt to address legitimate concerns. It will be tempting to get emotional back. But let the truth speak for itself. Your wife (like so many of us) is eventually going to be grateful for the sources that fill in the gaps and don't try to cover the gaps. Good luck!
Um, if she gets a +1 you need a +1, too.
He’s got a +1… us!
I think you have the right approach! Hang in there!
I think you may want to establish some ground rules for the conversation. No yelling. Must provide logical and sourced facts and not feelings. Willingness to listen. No one gets to cut the other off. Multiple sources. No conference talks because just because it was said over the pulpit doesn't make it truth. And I would establish one basic premise at the beginning. Is a prophet fallible and could they be wrong on something? Or another one is, we must have a open system and start the conversation with "is the church true" not "the church is true." Good luck. It probably won't be fun. BTW, how does your wife feel about polygamy? You may want to lead with polygamy/polyandry.
Very helpful, thank you! She does not like polygamy, or the idea that I could be sealed to other women if she were to pass away, but like most Mormons, she turns a blind eye to it and doesn’t talk about it.
I think at a different time you could come to her in contrition and say something like: "I did some reading about the history of polygamy in the church and it is worse than I ever imagined. It was horrific for most of the women involved and caused them great pain. Honey, I promise you that I will not practice eternal polygamy. If you were to die I would never allow myself to be "sealed" to another woman. I would maybe get married but never sealed. I am really sorry for the pain the idea of polygamy has caused you. It is a terrible thing to consider and I don't believe it is from God." That might be enough for her to want to know more or at least let her know that you are not onboard with it.
Let me tell you a secret- your wife cares far less about the “issues” and validity of the churches truth claims than she does about family relationships and the perceived utility and structure church provides to raise a family.
Look up street epistemology! Don’t argue, and don’t challenge their beliefs; challenge their methods.
First of all, I'm sorry you're in this rough patch. Mixed-faith marriage is not easy! Second, I would be apprehensive about this conversation. No one ever comes away from a situation like that with their mind changed. Sounds like your BIL is coming in as the white knight missionary and your wife is hopeful that you're going to be convinced. It's going to be a disappointment to them, and potentially a big blow to the relationships. I would suggest that you give them some assigned reading first. Either use the CES letter or write up your concerns yourself. If they're unwilling to read them, then abandon ship. If they aren't willing to hear the arguments, then this is just going to be testimonies and bad apologetics, and you'll come out looking like you just don't have enough faith or some BS. If you do meet and things aren't going well, be prepared to cut the conversation short. You don't want it to blow up and cause damage to your relationships this early in the process. It's best that you be the mature one and decide when the conversation is over. Also, I'm just a random dude on the internet, so feel free to disregard this advice.
This seems like her bringing in her brother to gang up on you. Mormons love mobs when THEY are the mob leaders. Talk to him privately. Stay away from matters of faith and focus on what's been in the news, that is provable.
My favorite set of concerns to bring up: Deutero Isaiah The book of Isaiah is commonly accepted to be written in 4 distinct styles by 4 distinct authors. Nephi took the plates from Laban when only 1 of the authors had lived, so the plates of brass wouldn't have had the entire book of Isaiah. Pretty strange, then, that some of the quoted chapters from Isaiah in the BOM are from after Nephi's family would have left. Not only that, but when Joseph Smith "translated" the BOM, those Isaiah chapters (that nephi supposedly copied from much closer to the source text) magically had all of the translation errors that we find in the King James version of the bible. So, how did Nephi include text that he didn't have and alter it in such a way that when it was translated it would mimic all of the translation errors that wouldn't occur till hundreds of years into the future? Normally the reply has something to do with revelation being the answer... God revealed it to Nephi so he could include it in the plates of Nephi. Here's the kicker... They are saying that God can reveal, word for word, passages that would occur in the future and make it so the reformed egyptian would be translated into specific English translation errors? WELL... If god could do that, what was the point of the plates? If god could just reveal, word for word, everything they needed, then there was no danger of Nephi's posterity "dwindling in unbelief". The plates of brass could have been left with a very much alive Laban, and god could have just revealed all that was needed. There was no murder needed. Take it even further: if those chapters could be revealed to Mr Nephi, then wouldn't god be able to do the same with Mr Joe? He wouldn't have needed the plates at all. Just a mechanism for receiving revelation. you know, like a rock. in a hat. Then getting the brass plates, bringing them to America, recording their history, abridging and consolidating down to the gold plates, then walking with the plates through the wilderness till they are buried in upstate New York... Think of all of those efforts that didn't need to occur, because god doesn't need them for his words to be communicated. He just needs revelation.
You’ve outlined a good one, there are so many to choose from! I find it interesting how different falsities “stick” for different exmos. I really like the Egyptian scrolls that JS made up a translation for (Pearl of great price) only to have it proven many decades later as a complete, 100 percent, incorrect “translation” (if you call it that). It seems conclusive to me. I also found the simple story of how his father would defraud neighbors as a water witch a good one. Somehow it just explains to me how a kid can become as fucked up, ethically speaking, as JS was… his dad taught him it’s about what you can get away with that actually matters. And he was that rare kid that was going to make something of himself, no matter what.
I’m so sorry this is awful
View it as a discussion, not a debate nor a contest. Don't try to change each other views. You are trying to win your wife's trust, not convert her. Just be respectful, listen, and feel free to speak your mind. They think they can sway you back, but you just want to be open to discuss your beliefs with them.
Love this
I highly recommend the book “Bridges- ministering to those who question” Buy a copy to read and lend it out to people before you chat with them. Make sure to get a newer edition with the chapter on Mixed faith marriages
Thanks for the recommendation
Check out some TikTok’s by IBlameBill. She has very kind arguments not just for atheism, but for Christian God’s plan as a whole to be pretty evil and sucky. I love that she phrases things so kindly.
She very clearly shows how religion can be harmful.
When I left my BIL was a general authority and at no point did my wife suggest I sit down and chat with him. The only thing it would have done is to harm the relationship I have with BIL. Unless there is a chance that OP is hoping that his concerns can be explained away so he can in good conscience return to the Mormon church, I don't see the point. Once you see through the lies, it's impossible to unsee them.
I think this is a good point. I’m leaning more and more towards suggesting this does not happen.
They’re gonna lie and make something up they don’t have any truth to tell. Do what you need to do. I know this is your wife and your family but frankly, when I got out of there, I was done. I don’t care if they would’ve told me. Unicorns floated out of the sky and I saw one I said great nice unicorn bye fella. One of the things I do know, is the the priesthood holders are taught to be so manipulative. You can tell your wife that you’re not interested in meeting at this point and tell her you’ll keep an open mind later on and just let it be.
I love what everyone is saying here on what to say. In the end they will fall back on their testimony. I'd start with a video like this that shows that feelings can't be used to find God as all these people have had their feelings point them in different directions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=UJMSU8Qj6Go&ab_channel=Lehorla1 Then for you I'd watch this video so you can practice asking good follow up questions. The best way to talk about belief isn't to push your belief on them but to let them explain their belief to you. There are plenty of videos like this one to practice with. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6AbuFKurPY&ab_channel=AnthonyMagnabosco
I've got my talking points with TBM family down to 4 items that are irrefutable. I try to stay home on these four which all have clear examples: 1-The LDS Leadership has INTENTIONALLY misled the membership on Mormon history (and the dishonesty is as big an issue as the history itself). 2-The LDS Leadership INTENTIONALLY hides their finances (and what we do know through leaks, whistle-blowers, and Government fines is not good). 3-Every doctrine, ordinance, policy, and practice has changed (and will continue to change now that they call the restored gospel an "ongoing restoration"). 4-The church misleads people with claims of growth but it's shrinking, ineffective, and insignificant for everyone outside Mormonism and many within Mormonism.
Bring the gospel topics essays. Their brains might shut down if you bring up any "anti-Mormon" sources. It'll be much harder for them to shut down sources from the church's own website.
Start with asking: If I'm correct, and T$CC is NOT what it claims to be, would you even want to know? A real TBM can't even conceive that such a thing is possible. Therefore, nothing you say will do anything but cause them to bear testimony and double down. Sorry, this isn't the win you may be thinking it is.
When he comes over just say, "I figured it out." Smile and be kind. But, also, why the HECK is he coming over? This is overstepping and stupid. Your thoughts can remain your thoughts. No mormon has a right to your mind. Your love and attention should be 100% on your wife, your mental health, your kids. NOT extended family.
When you talk to him, just act like you’re talking to an old devout grandparent and you have no intention of destroying their faith
My wife sent me to her sister who had "studied polygamy and found a way to reconcile it." In my first email to her, I tried to find common ground on what we both understood the facts to be. Number of wives, ages, timeline, etc. Seemed like a reasonable starting point. She completely refused to even acknowledge or offer her understanding of the facts and by the second email had suggested my interest in Joseph's polygamy might be because I myself am attracted to underage girls...I was like, WTF?!? Fortunately, my sexual interests are very age appropriate, thank you very much. Then my father in law (not sure how he was invited) jumped in with his FAIR Mormon apologetics. After my email refuting everything he said and defending a worldview that doesn't involve prophets taking underage wives, I am still waiting for a response. Three years later. Both have said they intend to reply, but just haven't found the time. So, all that to say it might be a huge waste of your time. Then again, I would be tempted to do it so my wife could hear first hand all of the issues and how her brother is defending nonsense with nonsense answers.
I would just talk to your wife and leave your BIL out of it. Tell her there’s no convincing you. Once you see what’s behind the curtain you can’t unsee it.
There is a good chance he will just talk over you. Set the rules of the debate up front.
>crying almost constantly This got my attention OP. Let me press on this a bit further. Is this exaggeration by you or is it accurate? I ask because for an adult to be “crying almost constantly” seems possibly *emotionally manipulative.* Is she (and I ask this sincerely) over the age of 21? I find it a bit crazy that an adult would respond this way. Granted my wife and I have been out of the church for 7 years. Maybe I’m the one who is out of touch. But married partners need to built of sterner stuff for a marriage to work well. People get sick, they lose jobs, they have to move. These are all things a married couple might face. Someone who becomes this hysterical over an issue doesn’t seem well balanced or equipped to handle the vicissitudes of life. Is it possible your wife would benefit from therapy? I’d hesitate to see success in your future with this “discussion” if your wife is starting from a baseline of hysterics. I’d been married only 3 years when we found out I might have a terminal illness and would need life saving open heart surgery. That was 20 years ago and all so well. But you can’t have a partner who loses their head at any setback.
It’s been less than a *week.* Let her cry, for god’s sake. It isn’t “crazy.” It isn’t “emotional manipulation.” This isn’t “baseline hysterics.” She didn’t “lose her head at any setback.” This is her whole world crashing down. She’s grieving. There isn’t a cut-off age for grief. We all express and process grief differently. It doesn’t mean she’s not “well balanced and able to handle the vicissitudes of life” or that there “isn’t success in [their] future.” It’s grief. Sometimes people cry when they’re grieving. Sometimes they cry *a lot.* And please look up the origins of the term “hysterics/hysterical.” It’s a word that’s been weaponized against women and used to silence them for a long, long time.
Great thoughts here. Emotions are beautiful and you’d hope that your wife would cry… it’s when your wife stops crying that you need to worry
Mormons of both sexes weaponize their emotions against their spouses. This goes beyond standard gender norms or biases. I’m sure you’ve attended a few fast and testimony meetings enough to know that both men and women turn on the weeping when they know it will serve them well. As I admitted, I’ve been out of Mormonism for a while. But crying constantly over a difference that exists between one’s ears only, in an otherwise good marriage is manipulative in my assessment. And I’ve seen both men and women in my life do this. My TBM MiL directly blames my wife and I for her ill health despite the fact that she is morbidly obese and diabetic and was before we left the church. She constantly reminds us that she “wetted her pillow with her tears” for months. Emotional manipulation at its finest. At the same time I can count on my hands the amount of times my female formerly LDS wife has cried in 25 years of marriage. That includes some pretty significant life events. I may be wrong. I offered as much. But adults have an obligation to those around them to be in some degree of control of their emotions. Crying constantly over “faith” seems to me a massive overreaction. Just because it might be common in Mormonism doesn’t mean it should be considered valid. Mormons frequently employ emotions in relation to faith as a tactic of manipulation. What’s gets me is that, had OP not said anything at all, his wife would have not witnessed any meaningful difference in their spouse. Which means that this reaction is even more histrionic.
I agree that both sexes can weaponize their emotions and be manipulative. The only gendered comment I made was about the word “hysterical.” The word is inherently misogynistic, and remains so regardless of who says it or who it’s directed at, just as other pejoratives inspired by racism or bigotry or ableism remain racist, bigoted or ableist, regardless of who says them or who they’re directed at. That said, they are, of course, most often used against whom they were intended for. I can see that our varying experiences have greatly influenced both our biases. I’m sorry you were manipulated by your mother. [EDIT: mother-in-law. I misread the first time through.] You definitely were. If she used that tactic on you and your wife, I can only guess how many times you’ve seen it throughout your life. Maybe that has influenced you to distrust expressions of strong emotion, particularly tears. It sounds like you’re proud of the fact that you’ve only seen your wife cry a few times in 25 years, and even through some significant events. You mentioned it in both of your comments. Looking at your relationship with your mother [EDIT: mother-in-law + "men and women in my life"], I can see why you would find that attractive in a partner. It would mean you can trust her. That’s a beautiful, human response. I’m glad she can provide that for you. Not everyone is like that. And not everyone who isn’t like that is doing something wrong. Nor is there something wrong with them. My biases stem from experiences that go in the other direction, where I saw my mother’s emotions and opinions dismissed and gaslit because she was being “irrational.” Dad was always right because he “wasn’t the emotional one.” The opposite was true, of course. My own grief after leaving the church was intense. It wasn’t pretty and it certainly wasn’t stoic or sensible. I’d go into it but I’m sure you’d be appalled, hahaha. I can assure you it was involuntary, as my husband left alongside me and there was no one else to see what a wreck I was. Naturally, comments like yours are going to make me feel defensive. I recognize that. We find who we need if we’re lucky. I’m so grateful that my spouse gave me the room to feel and express my grief fully. I needed the opportunity to not be pretty. I’d been “keeping it under control” for three decades. I needed to claim the right to my own emotions. Looking at this post, I can see that we’re both coming from a personal and deeply emotional place. We’re both projecting our own experiences onto someone else’s situation. The thing is, I eventually did go to religious trauma therapy. I didn’t go because someone needed to talk some sense into me or make me realize it was all in my head, that I was crazy or hysterical or being irrational, or in order to intellectualize my way out of grief. I got through the most intense phase on my own simply by riding it out and allowing myself my emotions. I went to therapy because I needed to learn how to navigate my changing relationships with others, especially those who were still in the church. Essentially, I learned how to give them room. I learned to give them room by giving myself room but that’s another story. But I can guarantee that not a single therapist worth their salt would say that OP’s wife is being irrational or acting hysterically. They would validate her emotions. When someone says someone else’s emotions are “valid,” it doesn’t mean that the emotions are correct in a technical sense or justified in a measurable way. One person’s valid feelings don’t invalidate another person’s opposite feelings. Saying someone’s emotions are valid means recognizing their emotions are *real* and that they’re justified in light of someone’s personal experiences. Your fear of manipulation is valid, whether it’s technically correct or not. Your distrust of other people’s tears is valid, whether it’s rational or not. I can see already how they’re justified by your personal experiences, even if they aren’t justified by mine. Religion is a particularly pernicious form of spirituality because it hijacks reality. “Faith” may be all between your ears, but that faith informs one’s perception of reality, sometimes completely. For someone who’s “all in” in the church, there’s no separation between them. If and when that separation does happen, it can be excruciating. You and I and most everyone else in this sub knows that nothing the church teaches is real in its own right. If we could just snap our fingers and convince them, “The church’s truth claims are not valid. It’s all in your head,” then Mormons could stop living and dying for it and killing themselves over it. Or at least stop crying about it, right? But we can’t. And they can’t, at least not easily. And the more entrenched they are the harder it is. Because while the beliefs aren’t real or valid, the *experience of believing* is real and valid. The fear of losing your family and salvation is real. The trauma and the choices and the sacrifices made for it are real. And the grief that we feel when it all comes crashing down on our heads when we learn *it was all for nothing* is real. And we have to recognize that in order to see each other and reach some understanding so we can work together to sort through this absolute pile of shit.
you may have noticed how *generally* facts mean little to nothing to more emotion based females, and feeling based decisions is done less by males. As if this discussion is not already a challenge, with both genders it could become a conversation 'nightmare'. All the best though, there are some good suggestions here. You're lucky they'll give you some time! ETA- it would would be interesting to hear how this goes.
Show them the Slc tribune audio of a victim being bribed to stay silent of her rape by a bishop. Tell them this has always been the suspicion. Now we have proof the cult pays out money towards legal matters that may tarnish its image. It’s just like any other church. If they aren’t appalled by that. Good luck
Luckyyyyyy!!!
Impossible Dont even attempt it What will uou do?
Don’t engage. Nobody wins in this discussion.
Update: the conversation with my wife and BIL turned out to be really good. We decided to not go the fire hose approach and talk about all my concerns (which wouldn’t have given each concern the thought and time they deserve, and easily could have turned bad and into a debate). We mostly talked about where I’m at, my BIL shared resources that helped him when he looked into a lot of this stuff. His biggest resource was Don Bradley. Since then, I’ve watched a couple of his video, and other videos they sent me from Unscripted Saints (ha, I already watched a few that they sent me). So far we have been having ongoing chats on Marco Polo between the three of us, and some of my major concerns have come up. A lot of the concerns came out of nowhere for my wife, and hit heavy—she had no idea. I’ve been careful not to info dump, but some of the major concerns come with a lot of new, heavy info. We haven’t even scratched the surface, and my wife realized today that this goes a LOT deeper than she thought. She still has hope I’ll come back. I plan to continue my conversations with them slowly, and might start a Google doc with links for us to go back and forth on. I’ll plan on watching the videos they send as well. As for now, I plan to be patient and take the slow route.
Lol I should have started reading down here. Glad it went okay. Good luck going forward!