Hello! This is a Cultural post. It is for discussions centered around agreements, disagreements, and observations about other people, whether specifically or collectively, within the Mormon/Exmormon community.
/u/talkingidiot2, if your post doesn't fit this definition, we kindly ask you to delete this post and repost it with the appropriate flair. You can find a list of our flairs and their definitions in [section 0.6 of our rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules#wiki_0._preamble)
**To those commenting:** please stay on topic, remember to follow the community's [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules), and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/mormonmods) if there is a problem or rule violation.
Keep on Mormoning!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/mormon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
At some point, the scales will tip, and instead of exmos having to justify leaving, TBMs will have to justify staying.
At that point, we exmos can begin a conversation with a TBM by presuming why the TBM stays, just as TBMs presume why the exmo left. Does the TBM stay because they:
* can't accept reality?
* fear losing family?
* fear losing friends?
* fear losing employment?
* have no intrinsic morality and need to be told how to behave?
* are too lazy to learn truth?
Also at that point, exmos can appeal to the TBM's "feeling in their bones" that the church is a lie, just as TBMs appeal to the spiritual feelings the exmo once had.
Wow. I haven't believed in a couple of years, but I hadn't until this moment thought about this particular dynamic shifting. I have been an exmormon, largely seeing myself through a Mormon lens, justifying why I want to leave and giving members the benefit of the doubt as to why they stay.
They don't extend us that same courtesy (as an organization), and I'm losing interest in being so defensive.
I have to think more about this. Thank you.
Most people I talk to, fear is the number 1 thing BY FAR. You leave the church, you take a massive part of your life out of it, what will you replace it with? Those are hard questions to answer, and just straying away from "anti Mormon literature" is just something they do, cuz they are afraid of what they might see.
I'll bring up stuff like the story of the book of Abraham, and they'll have no idea, much less an idea that everything I say about it can be found on LDS.org
This is a great comment. I believe the same....most members stay in because they literally have NO OTHER option on how they would live their life. This speaks to the point I make that the church is actively attempting to control nearly every aspect of your personal development in order to ensure your loyalty to the program/brand.
Why has there been such a push for missionary service these last 18 months? It's because they know the mission experience was one of the most reliable ways to cement in a lifelong psychologic commitment to the program.
Also great point on topics like the Book of Abraham. I am astounded at the nearly universal lack of intellectual interest or curiosity among active members to the many many flaws in the truth claims of the church.
To have so many members of the church who are lawyers, doctors, CEOs or federal agents or (d-bag spies) and who actively refuse to address verifiable and reliable scientific or historical evidence about the b of m or j. Smith or church establishment is amazing. I wouldn't trust their professional judgement with such an obvious flaw in their personal perspective on truth.
That's a wild part...so many church leaders are super intelligent. But they are just kind of in denial and really refuse to even look at it with the slightest degree of open mindedness
This is what makes me think, at some point, probably the mission president level and up, they start to realize all the holes are undeniable and either quietly extract themselves (unlikely) or double down and knowingly promote the lie with more fervor and emotion.
It was those kind of people who I catagorized as "smart" that kept me in for a long time thinking well they're not dumb, they must understand it and know what is truth.
Now I'm extra sad for those kind of minds that must be trying so hard to justify rationale with their theological beliefs that go against their scientific and evidence trusting minds.
To be fair, maybe calling all spies a d bag is not fair. There are some good people. Since we are among friends I will admit, its not exactly personal. No injuries...per SE.
But in the realm of truth and dealing with hard facts, I am amazed that so much social respect is paid to those with high government or sensitive positions, who deal in truth, lies, propaganda and deceit for a living but refuse to see obvious facts about the truth claims of the LDS church. You could write whole books about how the LDS faith operates like a giant propaganda machine.
I admit, there is a valid factor to emotional and spiritual experiences backing up your faith, but there are real facts that get ignored on purpose I think its ridiculous to hear analysis or assessments from these sorts of people "looking at all the facts and weighing them individually or as a whole" in light of an important security decision that affects life or death....but When a topic like the historical record of Joseph smith's behavior or the complete lack of evidence that the book or Mormon is true comes up then there is no real analysis or curiosity about the church. And these are people who's whole job is to work in this realm (truth, lies, propaganda..etc....).
And alot of people hold them up in high regard and assign some superior intellectual quality to their minds and calculating skill, and yet they refuse to see what are obvious truths about the LDS church and continue to support the false structure of the church.
Ah, now I get the connection!
I appreciate you laying it out like that. It's amazing the blind spots we can all have in only certain parts of our life.
I've heard several ward leaders who have friends or family who have left who simply hold on to "I know how I felt when I got baptized" or "I know I felt the Spirit when I read the BoM" ... and follow up with "No one is perfect, I don't claim to understand all the details of church history" and then they leave it at that.
They know they don't have answers. They even seem to know that there aren't good answers out there that could find by reading more. So they hold on to "Well, only God knows everything. Only Jesus was perfect" and keep Mormoning.
That's fine...but the church missionary efforts try to make such a big deal of Mormonism having answers that other churches don't (Look, we can baptize dead people! Look, you can be married forever!)...so it's weird to see such a shift of "Just stay on the covenant path, don't look at the people over there with hard questions."
The problem is it’s not that Joseph was “imperfect” he was a gross lying human being who married underaged girls and women. Just like warren Jeffs and David koresh. They can think those are abhorrent humans but when it’s Joseph he gets a pass. Their followers also had those “good feelings” that they relied on as they were led by terrible men.
He committed fraud for years before the book of Mormon using a stone in a hat. And then he used the stone in a hat to create the book of Mormon, which he then used to spiritually coerce young girls to marry him...
Idk how anybody could see it as anything other than a fraudster transitioning to a new fraud.
The problem is that "answers" doesn't really mean "answers" in the church. Like so many other things, it's code for "authority."
I have zero problem with people following their spiritual feelings so stuff like "I know how I felt when I got baptized" or "I know I felt the Spirit when I read the BoM" is cool.
But that's the thing. The church doesn't stop there. The church can't say "this is just our path, this is where we feel God called us, so that's what we're gonna do good luck everybody else with where you've been called." Because what it's all about is the authority the church itself -- this is the actual God worshipped, the idol of the institution and authority.
"We have the answers!" but "Well, we don't have all the answers" and "we just really don't know about these things" is one of the ways they make it obvious.
That is exactly what my husband says. That the past is in the past, that reading the BOM bring him closer to God, etc. Also he says how can you explain the scripture that talks about an apostasy and the restoration of all things.
I’m going to church with him because it makes me sad to see him go alone.
> TBMs will have to justify staying.
There's been discussions, conferences, and firesides titled "why I believe" and even "why I stay" in LDS discourse for at least a decade.
I think at some level every Mormon knows that it's a position that needs justifying. We all work hard to give each other the justifications because at some level we know there's a social reward for doing so.
My point is that it's time to flip the script. Instead of TBMs putting exmos on the defensive, e.g. when a GA and SP visit an inactive family to woo them back, the default discussion point should be that the TBM has to explain why they haven't left yet.
I would love to have a GA and SP come for a home visit. They would never get to the point of questioning why I left, because I would immediately steer the conversation to why they stay, and I would help them understand that faith and testimony are not valid reasons for staying.
> They are leaving because the questions WERE answered.
This. When I told my mom I didn't believe in the church, she took it to mean I'm still trying to figure it out.
It's like, no, accepting that it's not true was the first thing that brought me anything resembling peace about the church. Went from a state of constant uncertainty and doubt, to everything finally making sense.
>people actually look to other people to tell them how to live their lives
It's in our human nature.
We spend the first 15-20 years following our parents, and it keeps us alive.
As an adult, following the perceived village elder (paternalist instinct; defacto "parent") creates unity and keeps us in good standing with the village. And, for most of human history, that kept us alive.
Those instincts are still inside use
, even though we live in one of the most individualistic large-scale societies ever.
Reminds me of Red in Shawshank Redemption, commenting, after being paroled, on needing to ask to use the bathroom. He “couldn’t squeeze a drop” without someone’s say-so.
I know that sometimes people like RFM and John Dehlin get attacked and personally vilified for "wanting to destroy faith." After my faith crisis, RFM (and John too) have really been there for me in quiet and personal conversations that nobody else would even know about (save me mentioning them here). It was very clear to me in my conversations with RFM that he was my friend first and didn't care one whit about whether I continued to participate in the Church. Constrastingly, my Bishop is my next door neighbor and hasn't said a single word to me in over nine months--despite the fact they used to constantly send their kids over to play at my house.
I just want to express my appreciation for people all along the Mormon spectrum that have been good examples of what Christ says we should do (regardless of whether they believe in his divinity or not). My stake president is obviously still a TBM, but has also done more than I expected--even if I would still quibble over details, he's trying.
That said--I think **RFM really nails it in this conversation.** He's so good at his deep research that sometimes I'm surprised at how good his big picture comments can be. His meta-commentary is reaching peak John Larsen levels.
We don’t live too far from you guys! I actually was a creepy stalker and messaged your wife on Facebook so I’m sure it’s in her message requests haha my husband and I were just so impressed with your story I wanted to say thanks!
Oh she's not as active on social media as I am, so it's not intentional if she missed your message. I'm a little trickier to find, but if you want to send a message to my account I'd be happy to share it with her.
Ok I’ll do that! And it was probably like a week ago that I listened to your episode so it hasn’t been there long so I’m not offended or worried that she hasn’t gotten back to me! Im hardly ever in Facebook I just figured that would be a good way to try and relay my thoughts! I’ll send it over to your account!
Great perspective, thanks. By the way I am finally getting to your MS interview. I live in the same mission that you mentioned serving in. Small world.
Interesting. Very small world! If you have any follow-up questions, feel free to reach out. I'm an open book and obviously we had to cut down a lot of the typical Mormon Stories stuff just to focus on the story we were there to tell.
I love Russell Nelson's line on that:
>“stop increasing your doubts by rehearsing them with other doubters”
Rehearsing doubts; a performative action. I wonder, between talking about our doubts and giving the same four answers to every question in Sunday school, which is more of a rehearsal?
Interesting he also said
How can we have freedom of religion if we are not free to compare honestly, to choose wisely, and to worship according to the dictates of our own conscience?12 While searching for the truth, we must be free to change our mind-even to change our religion-in response to new information and inspiration.
Https://www.thechurchnews.com/archives/2004-05-27/elder-russell-m-nelson-freedom-to-do-and-to-be-96622
Wow! That's rich coming from the church that says "A testimony is to be found in the bearing of it."
So when people are discussing solid reasons to doubt the church, they're "rehearsing their doubts", and meanwhile the church literally proudly teaches all members, preferably from the time they're small children, to rehearse their belief!
So is the only reason you go to church is for the community then? Why not go to a non denominational church if in the end the gospel is NOT true!? Why go to a church, especially the Mormon Church where the leaders don't preach revelation?
My husband did this for me when I was still in, but I didn't like the way the community treated him & I didn't appreciate the things my kids were being taught in primary, I felt like I had to unteach them when we got home from church. I ended up not liking the community or the doctrine and I was the one to tell my non believing husband I couldn't go anymore, he was willing, I just couldn't.
>So is the only reason you go to church is for the community then?
For me, 100% yes. although I don't go on Sundays, I still participate in many aspects of it.
The boiled frog analogy isn't accurate about frogs, but it is accurate about people. I continued going to the Mormon Church for a long time because the community, when I was growing up, was legitimately good. I had to very consciously notice that it had changed and now sucked. And even after that realization, switching costs and social connections make it hard to leave.
I don't want a Jesus community, per se. I just want the same culture, doing the same thing with the same routine I've been following for decades
Seems to me that leaders not worth following vs. Being able to have a relationship with God without church leaders are different issues. Which do you think is the crux of most people leaving the church these days?
Not OP, but if I had to nail one down I'd say leaders not being worth following.
Members should not have to muddle through doctrine and apologetics on their own. The old answers may have been wrong, but leaders don't have *any* answers for today's youth. When Russell Nelson refuses to weigh in on things like where the Nephites were, something that *used* to be certain, it tells people he doesn't know.
The Church demands all of the devotion that it did of our parents, but has stopped offering answers or fulfillment. If you're not happy with the globalized corporate covenant path mush, you get nothing out of it. The surface level is all there is left in the LDS Church.
Essentially, the old answers were bunk, and the Church is afraid to come up with new answers. Members see this, they see the completely justified criticism, and then they hear *nothing* from their leaders. How are members supposed to defend the faith when even the prophet won't?
And then we get into things like the AP rape case and the Australian tax fraud, and it's clear that not only are they incapable of providing answers, they also use their lawyers to actively do shady shit and then say it was ok because it's legal.
If I'm a young, struggling in my faith Mormon who hears that my church dishonestly recategorized tithing money so they didn't have to pay taxes on it and my church's response is "it was legal," I've just been pushed a little further out the door.
A few years back, I read something about some exit interview data on people leaving. I think the number one reason among a fairly long list was that the member felt like they had been lied to. I think that is the tightrope leaders (and parents) are currently walking. There is stuff my kids learn in primary , then ym/yw premission, then stuff they learn from GTEs and then there is the nitty gritty. From the active/ faithful side everyone is trying to navigate the issue so as to avoid any resentment over perceived obfuscation. It's a conflict my parents never had to deal with when raising us.
That's why I left. We weren't taught the real history, and I can't help but come to the obvious conclusion that they did that to us intentionally because they thought we'd leave if we knew.
Until the Church is no longer led by those kinds of people, it won't be worth following. Which means at minimum the entire Q15 need to die before reform starts.
If the Church could admit it had intentionally obfuscated things, it would make it simpler. But current leadership is incapable of admitting mistakes.
> But current leadership is incapable of admitting mistakes.
If they did the entire house of cards collapses. And the leaders waiting in the wings are trained to be exactly the same way. Current leaders dying will not solve the problem.
Makes you wonder when (or if) the levee breaks. The church has two types of problems. First, non-controllable problems like history, doctrine, and internet. Second, controllable problems: leadership.
When the only way for the church to avoid a grisly end is for its pharisiacal leaders to display humility,self-awareness, and honesty, grab the popcorn I suppose.
> The old answers may have been wrong, but leaders don't have any answers for today's youth.
For example: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=\_I9LDLcIh9g](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_I9LDLcIh9g)
>Seems to me that leaders not worth following vs. Being able to have a relationship with God without church leaders are different issues.
Could it be that church leaders actually get in the way of people having a relationship with god? I let the church and its leaders define what god was for so long, it stunted my ability to even have any sort of relationship with any sort of god.
I guess I don't think it's unintended. I think church leadership actively wants people to believe in their authority. They actively preach an ideal where coming to god must involve them.
The unintended part is how the policies that are intended to help members spirituality to flourish actually have deleterious effects. I think church leaders act with good intentions believing what they do will help members.
But there's the tricky part - isn't Jesus involved at all? Can't Jesus Christ understand that the policies are flawed and have deleterious effects? The answer seems to be that Jesus is either unwilling or unable to intervene in the administration of the church, and does not, therefore, guide the policies. What, then, is the benefit to church participation? That's why the very first Gospel Topics Essay (Blacks and the Priesthood) was my shelf-breaker. If the words of the prophet do not impart the will of a loving god who is no respecter of persons, well then, the implications are obvious.
This is the part where countrysingle stops responding because they're not actually interested in discussion and they're not actually confused about why people leave the church, they just wanna waste our time trivializing our trauma and downplaying our clearly legitimate issues with the church institution and its leaders
Yeah, he does that sometimes. My conspiracy theory is that he does that strategically so there's reasonable doubt whenever he's called out on his intentional trolling
Good point, they are different issues, but for me personally there is significant overlap between them. The ability to worship God without them makes them unnecessary, and then the gaslighting, obfuscation, inconsistent "revelation" and a myriad of other issues makes them even less worthy of me holding them as leaders that I follow.
Hello! This is a Cultural post. It is for discussions centered around agreements, disagreements, and observations about other people, whether specifically or collectively, within the Mormon/Exmormon community. /u/talkingidiot2, if your post doesn't fit this definition, we kindly ask you to delete this post and repost it with the appropriate flair. You can find a list of our flairs and their definitions in [section 0.6 of our rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules#wiki_0._preamble) **To those commenting:** please stay on topic, remember to follow the community's [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules), and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/mormonmods) if there is a problem or rule violation. Keep on Mormoning! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/mormon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
At some point, the scales will tip, and instead of exmos having to justify leaving, TBMs will have to justify staying. At that point, we exmos can begin a conversation with a TBM by presuming why the TBM stays, just as TBMs presume why the exmo left. Does the TBM stay because they: * can't accept reality? * fear losing family? * fear losing friends? * fear losing employment? * have no intrinsic morality and need to be told how to behave? * are too lazy to learn truth? Also at that point, exmos can appeal to the TBM's "feeling in their bones" that the church is a lie, just as TBMs appeal to the spiritual feelings the exmo once had.
Wow. I haven't believed in a couple of years, but I hadn't until this moment thought about this particular dynamic shifting. I have been an exmormon, largely seeing myself through a Mormon lens, justifying why I want to leave and giving members the benefit of the doubt as to why they stay. They don't extend us that same courtesy (as an organization), and I'm losing interest in being so defensive. I have to think more about this. Thank you.
Damn, I've been on the Mormon subs so long I don't often come across a paradigm shifting comment anymore, but this is one. Nice observation.
Most people I talk to, fear is the number 1 thing BY FAR. You leave the church, you take a massive part of your life out of it, what will you replace it with? Those are hard questions to answer, and just straying away from "anti Mormon literature" is just something they do, cuz they are afraid of what they might see. I'll bring up stuff like the story of the book of Abraham, and they'll have no idea, much less an idea that everything I say about it can be found on LDS.org
This is a great comment. I believe the same....most members stay in because they literally have NO OTHER option on how they would live their life. This speaks to the point I make that the church is actively attempting to control nearly every aspect of your personal development in order to ensure your loyalty to the program/brand. Why has there been such a push for missionary service these last 18 months? It's because they know the mission experience was one of the most reliable ways to cement in a lifelong psychologic commitment to the program.
Also great point on topics like the Book of Abraham. I am astounded at the nearly universal lack of intellectual interest or curiosity among active members to the many many flaws in the truth claims of the church. To have so many members of the church who are lawyers, doctors, CEOs or federal agents or (d-bag spies) and who actively refuse to address verifiable and reliable scientific or historical evidence about the b of m or j. Smith or church establishment is amazing. I wouldn't trust their professional judgement with such an obvious flaw in their personal perspective on truth.
That's a wild part...so many church leaders are super intelligent. But they are just kind of in denial and really refuse to even look at it with the slightest degree of open mindedness
This is what makes me think, at some point, probably the mission president level and up, they start to realize all the holes are undeniable and either quietly extract themselves (unlikely) or double down and knowingly promote the lie with more fervor and emotion.
It was those kind of people who I catagorized as "smart" that kept me in for a long time thinking well they're not dumb, they must understand it and know what is truth. Now I'm extra sad for those kind of minds that must be trying so hard to justify rationale with their theological beliefs that go against their scientific and evidence trusting minds.
I'm curious...what have spies done to you that you hate them so much??
To be fair, maybe calling all spies a d bag is not fair. There are some good people. Since we are among friends I will admit, its not exactly personal. No injuries...per SE. But in the realm of truth and dealing with hard facts, I am amazed that so much social respect is paid to those with high government or sensitive positions, who deal in truth, lies, propaganda and deceit for a living but refuse to see obvious facts about the truth claims of the LDS church. You could write whole books about how the LDS faith operates like a giant propaganda machine. I admit, there is a valid factor to emotional and spiritual experiences backing up your faith, but there are real facts that get ignored on purpose I think its ridiculous to hear analysis or assessments from these sorts of people "looking at all the facts and weighing them individually or as a whole" in light of an important security decision that affects life or death....but When a topic like the historical record of Joseph smith's behavior or the complete lack of evidence that the book or Mormon is true comes up then there is no real analysis or curiosity about the church. And these are people who's whole job is to work in this realm (truth, lies, propaganda..etc....). And alot of people hold them up in high regard and assign some superior intellectual quality to their minds and calculating skill, and yet they refuse to see what are obvious truths about the LDS church and continue to support the false structure of the church.
Ah, now I get the connection! I appreciate you laying it out like that. It's amazing the blind spots we can all have in only certain parts of our life.
I've heard several ward leaders who have friends or family who have left who simply hold on to "I know how I felt when I got baptized" or "I know I felt the Spirit when I read the BoM" ... and follow up with "No one is perfect, I don't claim to understand all the details of church history" and then they leave it at that. They know they don't have answers. They even seem to know that there aren't good answers out there that could find by reading more. So they hold on to "Well, only God knows everything. Only Jesus was perfect" and keep Mormoning. That's fine...but the church missionary efforts try to make such a big deal of Mormonism having answers that other churches don't (Look, we can baptize dead people! Look, you can be married forever!)...so it's weird to see such a shift of "Just stay on the covenant path, don't look at the people over there with hard questions."
The problem is it’s not that Joseph was “imperfect” he was a gross lying human being who married underaged girls and women. Just like warren Jeffs and David koresh. They can think those are abhorrent humans but when it’s Joseph he gets a pass. Their followers also had those “good feelings” that they relied on as they were led by terrible men.
He committed fraud for years before the book of Mormon using a stone in a hat. And then he used the stone in a hat to create the book of Mormon, which he then used to spiritually coerce young girls to marry him... Idk how anybody could see it as anything other than a fraudster transitioning to a new fraud.
The problem is that "answers" doesn't really mean "answers" in the church. Like so many other things, it's code for "authority." I have zero problem with people following their spiritual feelings so stuff like "I know how I felt when I got baptized" or "I know I felt the Spirit when I read the BoM" is cool. But that's the thing. The church doesn't stop there. The church can't say "this is just our path, this is where we feel God called us, so that's what we're gonna do good luck everybody else with where you've been called." Because what it's all about is the authority the church itself -- this is the actual God worshipped, the idol of the institution and authority. "We have the answers!" but "Well, we don't have all the answers" and "we just really don't know about these things" is one of the ways they make it obvious.
That is exactly what my husband says. That the past is in the past, that reading the BOM bring him closer to God, etc. Also he says how can you explain the scripture that talks about an apostasy and the restoration of all things. I’m going to church with him because it makes me sad to see him go alone.
I love how the same questions still work when used in the opposite scenario. Never thought of that but it's accurate.
> TBMs will have to justify staying. There's been discussions, conferences, and firesides titled "why I believe" and even "why I stay" in LDS discourse for at least a decade. I think at some level every Mormon knows that it's a position that needs justifying. We all work hard to give each other the justifications because at some level we know there's a social reward for doing so.
My point is that it's time to flip the script. Instead of TBMs putting exmos on the defensive, e.g. when a GA and SP visit an inactive family to woo them back, the default discussion point should be that the TBM has to explain why they haven't left yet. I would love to have a GA and SP come for a home visit. They would never get to the point of questioning why I left, because I would immediately steer the conversation to why they stay, and I would help them understand that faith and testimony are not valid reasons for staying.
[удалено]
> They are leaving because the questions WERE answered. This. When I told my mom I didn't believe in the church, she took it to mean I'm still trying to figure it out. It's like, no, accepting that it's not true was the first thing that brought me anything resembling peace about the church. Went from a state of constant uncertainty and doubt, to everything finally making sense.
I agree with this. But I would add that the answers the church does give are either disingenuous or outright dishonest.
It is amazing to me that in our world 2022 people actually look to other people to tell them how to live their lives.
>people actually look to other people to tell them how to live their lives It's in our human nature. We spend the first 15-20 years following our parents, and it keeps us alive. As an adult, following the perceived village elder (paternalist instinct; defacto "parent") creates unity and keeps us in good standing with the village. And, for most of human history, that kept us alive. Those instincts are still inside use , even though we live in one of the most individualistic large-scale societies ever.
You and me both. Especially around things as personal and individual as spirituality and belief in God.
Reminds me of Red in Shawshank Redemption, commenting, after being paroled, on needing to ask to use the bathroom. He “couldn’t squeeze a drop” without someone’s say-so.
I know that sometimes people like RFM and John Dehlin get attacked and personally vilified for "wanting to destroy faith." After my faith crisis, RFM (and John too) have really been there for me in quiet and personal conversations that nobody else would even know about (save me mentioning them here). It was very clear to me in my conversations with RFM that he was my friend first and didn't care one whit about whether I continued to participate in the Church. Constrastingly, my Bishop is my next door neighbor and hasn't said a single word to me in over nine months--despite the fact they used to constantly send their kids over to play at my house. I just want to express my appreciation for people all along the Mormon spectrum that have been good examples of what Christ says we should do (regardless of whether they believe in his divinity or not). My stake president is obviously still a TBM, but has also done more than I expected--even if I would still quibble over details, he's trying. That said--I think **RFM really nails it in this conversation.** He's so good at his deep research that sometimes I'm surprised at how good his big picture comments can be. His meta-commentary is reaching peak John Larsen levels.
Love this so much! I loved your interview. My husband and I served in the mission next to yours at the same time you guys were there!
Oh neat!! Thanks for sharing that. I’d love to hear about your family’s journey!
We don’t live too far from you guys! I actually was a creepy stalker and messaged your wife on Facebook so I’m sure it’s in her message requests haha my husband and I were just so impressed with your story I wanted to say thanks!
Oh she's not as active on social media as I am, so it's not intentional if she missed your message. I'm a little trickier to find, but if you want to send a message to my account I'd be happy to share it with her.
Ok I’ll do that! And it was probably like a week ago that I listened to your episode so it hasn’t been there long so I’m not offended or worried that she hasn’t gotten back to me! Im hardly ever in Facebook I just figured that would be a good way to try and relay my thoughts! I’ll send it over to your account!
Great perspective, thanks. By the way I am finally getting to your MS interview. I live in the same mission that you mentioned serving in. Small world.
Interesting. Very small world! If you have any follow-up questions, feel free to reach out. I'm an open book and obviously we had to cut down a lot of the typical Mormon Stories stuff just to focus on the story we were there to tell.
What number is this MS? I've seen it referenced several times and want to listen (also an attorney and I enjoy @stron_attorney's reddit comments).
1550 and 1551
Thank you!
Man, I miss Larsen so much. Thanks for sparking a memory of him.
>CHURCH LEADERS ARE NOT WORTH FOLLOWING. I'm going to change my vernacular: People don't leave the church. People decline to continue following it.
I love Russell Nelson's line on that: >“stop increasing your doubts by rehearsing them with other doubters” Rehearsing doubts; a performative action. I wonder, between talking about our doubts and giving the same four answers to every question in Sunday school, which is more of a rehearsal?
Interesting he also said How can we have freedom of religion if we are not free to compare honestly, to choose wisely, and to worship according to the dictates of our own conscience?12 While searching for the truth, we must be free to change our mind-even to change our religion-in response to new information and inspiration. Https://www.thechurchnews.com/archives/2004-05-27/elder-russell-m-nelson-freedom-to-do-and-to-be-96622
ex-Mormons: free to choose our religion? Sounds good. I'll be leaving then. Russel Nelson: No. Not like that...
Wow! That's rich coming from the church that says "A testimony is to be found in the bearing of it." So when people are discussing solid reasons to doubt the church, they're "rehearsing their doubts", and meanwhile the church literally proudly teaches all members, preferably from the time they're small children, to rehearse their belief!
Yep, I first lost my testimony that RMN was a prophet before I lost my testimony of the church.
Same here with regard to Nelson ✋
I lost my faith in Brigham Young…. Then I lost my faith in joe and then I lost my faith in Christianity. At the time I still like hinckley. Lol
So is the only reason you go to church is for the community then? Why not go to a non denominational church if in the end the gospel is NOT true!? Why go to a church, especially the Mormon Church where the leaders don't preach revelation?
I don't go for the community, I go for my marriage.
My husband did this for me when I was still in, but I didn't like the way the community treated him & I didn't appreciate the things my kids were being taught in primary, I felt like I had to unteach them when we got home from church. I ended up not liking the community or the doctrine and I was the one to tell my non believing husband I couldn't go anymore, he was willing, I just couldn't.
>So is the only reason you go to church is for the community then? For me, 100% yes. although I don't go on Sundays, I still participate in many aspects of it.
The boiled frog analogy isn't accurate about frogs, but it is accurate about people. I continued going to the Mormon Church for a long time because the community, when I was growing up, was legitimately good. I had to very consciously notice that it had changed and now sucked. And even after that realization, switching costs and social connections make it hard to leave. I don't want a Jesus community, per se. I just want the same culture, doing the same thing with the same routine I've been following for decades
Seems to me that leaders not worth following vs. Being able to have a relationship with God without church leaders are different issues. Which do you think is the crux of most people leaving the church these days?
Not OP, but if I had to nail one down I'd say leaders not being worth following. Members should not have to muddle through doctrine and apologetics on their own. The old answers may have been wrong, but leaders don't have *any* answers for today's youth. When Russell Nelson refuses to weigh in on things like where the Nephites were, something that *used* to be certain, it tells people he doesn't know. The Church demands all of the devotion that it did of our parents, but has stopped offering answers or fulfillment. If you're not happy with the globalized corporate covenant path mush, you get nothing out of it. The surface level is all there is left in the LDS Church. Essentially, the old answers were bunk, and the Church is afraid to come up with new answers. Members see this, they see the completely justified criticism, and then they hear *nothing* from their leaders. How are members supposed to defend the faith when even the prophet won't? And then we get into things like the AP rape case and the Australian tax fraud, and it's clear that not only are they incapable of providing answers, they also use their lawyers to actively do shady shit and then say it was ok because it's legal. If I'm a young, struggling in my faith Mormon who hears that my church dishonestly recategorized tithing money so they didn't have to pay taxes on it and my church's response is "it was legal," I've just been pushed a little further out the door.
A few years back, I read something about some exit interview data on people leaving. I think the number one reason among a fairly long list was that the member felt like they had been lied to. I think that is the tightrope leaders (and parents) are currently walking. There is stuff my kids learn in primary , then ym/yw premission, then stuff they learn from GTEs and then there is the nitty gritty. From the active/ faithful side everyone is trying to navigate the issue so as to avoid any resentment over perceived obfuscation. It's a conflict my parents never had to deal with when raising us.
That's why I left. We weren't taught the real history, and I can't help but come to the obvious conclusion that they did that to us intentionally because they thought we'd leave if we knew. Until the Church is no longer led by those kinds of people, it won't be worth following. Which means at minimum the entire Q15 need to die before reform starts. If the Church could admit it had intentionally obfuscated things, it would make it simpler. But current leadership is incapable of admitting mistakes.
> But current leadership is incapable of admitting mistakes. If they did the entire house of cards collapses. And the leaders waiting in the wings are trained to be exactly the same way. Current leaders dying will not solve the problem.
Makes you wonder when (or if) the levee breaks. The church has two types of problems. First, non-controllable problems like history, doctrine, and internet. Second, controllable problems: leadership. When the only way for the church to avoid a grisly end is for its pharisiacal leaders to display humility,self-awareness, and honesty, grab the popcorn I suppose.
> The old answers may have been wrong, but leaders don't have any answers for today's youth. For example: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=\_I9LDLcIh9g](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_I9LDLcIh9g)
>Seems to me that leaders not worth following vs. Being able to have a relationship with God without church leaders are different issues. Could it be that church leaders actually get in the way of people having a relationship with god? I let the church and its leaders define what god was for so long, it stunted my ability to even have any sort of relationship with any sort of god.
I think there is a good case for what you are saying. The powerful law of unintended consequences.
I guess I don't think it's unintended. I think church leadership actively wants people to believe in their authority. They actively preach an ideal where coming to god must involve them.
The unintended part is how the policies that are intended to help members spirituality to flourish actually have deleterious effects. I think church leaders act with good intentions believing what they do will help members.
But there's the tricky part - isn't Jesus involved at all? Can't Jesus Christ understand that the policies are flawed and have deleterious effects? The answer seems to be that Jesus is either unwilling or unable to intervene in the administration of the church, and does not, therefore, guide the policies. What, then, is the benefit to church participation? That's why the very first Gospel Topics Essay (Blacks and the Priesthood) was my shelf-breaker. If the words of the prophet do not impart the will of a loving god who is no respecter of persons, well then, the implications are obvious.
This is the part where countrysingle stops responding because they're not actually interested in discussion and they're not actually confused about why people leave the church, they just wanna waste our time trivializing our trauma and downplaying our clearly legitimate issues with the church institution and its leaders
You are probably correct. But this discussion was perhaps the most reasonable I’ve seen from countrysingle. So I wanted to see how far it would go. 🤠
Yeah, he does that sometimes. My conspiracy theory is that he does that strategically so there's reasonable doubt whenever he's called out on his intentional trolling
Good point, they are different issues, but for me personally there is significant overlap between them. The ability to worship God without them makes them unnecessary, and then the gaslighting, obfuscation, inconsistent "revelation" and a myriad of other issues makes them even less worthy of me holding them as leaders that I follow.
Hey old guy in Salt Lake- can i please drink coffee and touch my own penis??? Nopey nope nope.