For those who stopped believing, how *sure* are you that the church is a lie and what makes you so sure?

[FiveFingerMnemonic]

Here's a good starting point:

In addition to these Book of Mormon teachings, other churches at the time—including ones with which many early Church members were familiar—taught about the priesthood. The Disciples of Christ, from which many early members of the Church converted, for example, had developed its own priesthood doctrines, influenced by Alexander Crawford, a Scottish minister living in Canada. In 1827, Crawford had delineated the existence of three distinct priesthoods: a patriarchal priesthood (which he also called a priesthood after the “order of Melchisedec”), an Aaronical priesthood (originally held by Aaron), and a priesthood held by Jesus Christ. Crawford regarded Melchizedek as a greater priest than Abraham, citing the fact that Abraham paid tithes to him; indeed, according to Crawford, Melchizedek was one of the key players in the order of the patriarchal priesthood. Crawford also considered the patriarchal priesthood and the Aaronical priesthood as branches of the Levitical priesthood. Alexander Campbell and the Disciples of Christ were influenced by Crawford’s ideas, although Campbell differed somewhat in his conception of the priesthood, arguing that God had given a “priesthood” to the tribe of Levi and a “high priesthood” to Aaron and his sons. [13] Regardless, as one historian has claimed, Campbell taught his understanding of priesthood “to many of his followers who [became] part of the Mormonite community and continued to believe the same doctrine.” [14]

https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/you-shall- ... priesthood

I have been reading as much as I can for 1.5 months now and never came across this... how is this not included in more of the CES Letter type materials or even mentioned on FAIR as a source of plagiarism/copying/whatever you want to call it?

I can't find other people who wrote up the priesthood that way, but maybe I'm just not searching right.

This is research by the Joseph Smith papers project researchers based on some fairly recent findings (last 10 years maybe?) by cultural anthropologist Mark Staker. He has a lot of interesting doctrinal comparisons to the teachings of the reformed baptists/cambellites in his book "Hearken o ye people" about the early Kirtland era. Daymon Smith's cultural history of the Book of Mormon also touches on a lot of these things as well. Pretty obscure niche subject that pretty well explains the evolution of our doctrines based on the religious environment of the time and the opportunistic way JS melded it all into his system.

[Archimedes]

I have to remind myself in discussions like this that there is no accounting for what other people believe or do not. Many smart people believe in Mormonism or some variant thereof. For me, the preponderance of evidence and my many negative life experiences related to the church lead me to *not* believe in Mormonism or any variant thereof. But it would never occur to me to try to convince OP one way or the other. People have to figure this stuff out for themselves.

[jfro18]

I have to remind myself in discussions like this that there is no accounting for what other people believe or do not. Many smart people believe in Mormonism or some variant thereof. For me, the preponderance of evidence and my many negative life experiences related to the church lead me to *not* believe in Mormonism or any variant thereof. But it would never occur to me to try to convince OP one way or the other. People have to figure this stuff out for themselves.

Yeah - that's the balance of it all. I was just curious where everyone is here and if there were specific things that made you sure of the decision to walk away.

Clearly in my case my wife has to find out on her own... I can tell her what I think and point her in a direction, but I can't make her read anything, listen to my reasons, or believe any of it is correct. That's a lesson I've learned the hard way these past few months, but it's still interesting to hear what other people have as their main reasons for leaving and their confidence that the reasons are concrete.

[Bremguy]

For me, it's not a question of true vs. false anymore. It's a question of authorship and creation.

Did Joseph Smith make it all up and essentially "create" Mormonism? I believe 100% he did. Is it true? Not relevant. Is it false? Not relevant! Does it entertain and make people happy? Sure, but not everyone and that's ok.
.....
Nothing in life is "true" with the exception of gravity and death. The most difficult fact we must accept is that we as living humans will die and are merely a spec in time in the great cosmos of the universe!

Based on the end result truth really doesn't matter!

I tend to agree with Red Ryder. If the Church makes someone happy and gives them a sense of belonging what actual harm has been done ?
I would say none, you didn't break some guys nose in forcing them to attend, you didn't force your Bishop to be a Bishop.

I think of the Church as a good social club mostly. That is all that matters to me. I have done no harm.

[moksha]

The movie Plan 10 from Outer Space made the following postulate:

Just because something is made up does not make it untrue.

Let's consider another such postulate:

Just cause something is made up it can still have value. Mythology is a joy of Humanity's desire.

[IT_Veteran]

Here's a good starting point:

In addition to these Book of Mormon teachings, other churches at the time—including ones with which many early Church members were familiar—taught about the priesthood. The Disciples of Christ, from which many early members of the Church converted, for example, had developed its own priesthood doctrines, influenced by Alexander Crawford, a Scottish minister living in Canada. In 1827, Crawford had delineated the existence of three distinct priesthoods: a patriarchal priesthood (which he also called a priesthood after the “order of Melchisedec”), an Aaronical priesthood (originally held by Aaron), and a priesthood held by Jesus Christ. Crawford regarded Melchizedek as a greater priest than Abraham, citing the fact that Abraham paid tithes to him; indeed, according to Crawford, Melchizedek was one of the key players in the order of the patriarchal priesthood. Crawford also considered the patriarchal priesthood and the Aaronical priesthood as branches of the Levitical priesthood. Alexander Campbell and the Disciples of Christ were influenced by Crawford’s ideas, although Campbell differed somewhat in his conception of the priesthood, arguing that God had given a “priesthood” to the tribe of Levi and a “high priesthood” to Aaron and his sons. [13] Regardless, as one historian has claimed, Campbell taught his understanding of priesthood “to many of his followers who [became] part of the Mormonite community and continued to believe the same doctrine.” [14]

https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/you-shall- ... priesthood

I have been reading as much as I can for 1.5 months now and never came across this... how is this not included in more of the CES Letter type materials or even mentioned on FAIR as a source of plagiarism/copying/whatever you want to call it?

I can't find other people who wrote up the priesthood that way, but maybe I'm just not searching right.

Same here - I had no idea about this. Every day I am shocked by something I read here or on Reddit. Every. Single. Day. This kind of blows me away though.

[Linked]

I'm not 100% sure. I'm only as sure about the LDS church as I am about FLDS, Scientology, Jehovah's Witnesses, and the Santa Claus.

I like this.

How sure are you that a small sect of Islam is a lie and what makes you so sure? Or Shinrikyo? Or that we are in a simulation (that one is far more likely than that Mormon God is real)?

If we were not indoctrinated into the brighamite branch of the mormon church this question would seem silly to us. But we were so we have to process through this question. The thinking above helps to sidestep the question and move on.

Only a sith deals in absolutes.

[Just This Guy]

I don't necessarily see the church as a lie. Logically it does not work that way. It is up to the person making the claim to prove themselves right, not for the skeptic to prove them wrong. And extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

I look at it this way: What proof does the church offer that it is what they say it is?

What proof's they have offered are easily falsifiable.
Witness of the Spirit? Many other religions claim the exact same thing and there is no differentiation between them and LDS. Unreliable evidence.
Book of Mormon? No evidence exists for it to be a historical document.
Translation of other ancient texts? They have been shown to be wrong.
Gifts of the Spirit including healings, prophecy, seer, revelation, etc. Please provide examples that are verifiable. They don't exist. From there you can look at Radio Free Mormons episodes of the dumbing down of revelation.
There are dozens more examples out there.

The church is unable to prove their own claims.

[Reuben]

Only a sith deals in absolutes.

That sounds like an absolute, friend.

Checkmate. Back to church with you!

[Not Buying It]

For me, it's not a question of true vs. false anymore. It's a question of authorship and creation.

Did Joseph Smith make it all up and essentially "create" Mormonism? I believe 100% he did. Is it true? Not relevant. Is it false? Not relevant! Does it entertain and make people happy? Sure, but not everyone and that's ok.
.....
Nothing in life is "true" with the exception of gravity and death. The most difficult fact we must accept is that we as living humans will die and are merely a spec in time in the great cosmos of the universe!

Based on the end result truth really doesn't matter!

I tend to agree with Red Ryder. If the Church makes someone happy and gives them a sense of belonging what actual harm has been done ?
I would say none, you didn't break some guys nose in forcing them to attend, you didn't force your Bishop to be a Bishop.

I think of the Church as a good social club mostly. That is all that matters to me. I have done no harm.

It does all kinds of harm to members who think that the Church makes them happy. Some of them have family members who were excluded from weddings, and rather than being able to rejoice at having all of their family at a wedding ceremony they mourn at the “wickedness” that kept a family member out. Some of them miss years of their grandchildren’s lives because the Church has convinced them that serving a senior mission would use make them happier. My wife has been happy to pay tithing these years while I see the family vacations we didn’t take and the college tuitions we didn’t pay for. How many friendships never formed because people were uncomfortable making friends outside the Church? How many moments of closeness to God never happened because people were stuck in boring, repetitious, uninspired three hour block meetings every Sunday? How many leaders missed key moments with spouse and children because the Church had them sitting in stupid leadership meetings for hours every week? How many members mourn because a child has left the Church and there will be an empty chair at their celestial table? How many young girls never reached their full potential in life because the Church convinced them they were nothing but baby-making machines that would raise the next generation of faithful Mormons? How many men lived a lifetime of shame and guilt for natural impulses the Church taught them were evil? How many gay and lesbian members spent a lifetime in lonely misery because of the Church’s institutionalized homophobia? How many marriages have been unnecessarily strained - and even ended - because one spouse stops believing and the Church has given the other spouse no way to reconcile that with the Church’s expectations? How many teens have been damaged by inappropriate questions in worthiness interviews? I could go on all day.

The Church isn’t some benign social club. It exacts a heavy price in missed opportunities, lost chances, unnecessary sadness and guilt, wasted time and money, misdirected service, and unfulfilled potential - all in the name of a made-up hokey religion that is fairly easily falsified. I don’t care if some members think the Church makes them happy - a happy slave is still a slave.

[Not Buying It]

Sorry about the double post, I got a little wound up and wasn’t paying attention to what I was doing.

[RubinHighlander]

The Church isn’t some benign social club. It exacts a heavy price in missed opportunities, lost chances, unnecessary sadness and guilt, wasted time and money, misdirected service, and unfulfilled potential - all in the name of a made-up hokey religion that is fairly easily falsified. I don’t care if some members think the Church makes them happy - a happy slave is still a slave.

A-freakn-men-and-women to that!

Religions like the LDS church purpetuate non-critical thinking, stupidity and ignorance to real facts, backward social values, masogamy, tribalism, etc., etc. Maybe some folks enjoy being treated like children, driven by fear and guilt all the time; maybe it's easier for them not to have to think for themselves, but that's not helping humanity!

Any organization with this narrative is not good for our planet: "We are more super special than anyone else which justifies our non-altruistic behaviors and practices and allows us to control people's lives."

Watch the Hulu original Handmaid's Tale and tell me there's no parallels to early and current Mormonism. Thanks to the feds and social pressures for forcing the COB to shutdown or at least hide some of it's crappy practices. Can you imagine if Smith had managed to run for president and take over the feds? And even though COB is more socially responsible than it used to be, becoming a semi-mainstream religious corporation, that hasn't stop the hundreds of break off fundamentalists groups that abuse people to a higher degree, under the banner of heaven. All thanks to the Smith's and all their reformation Christian based cronies.

So, yes, I disagree that the LDS church is just a harmless social club. Maybe in the perspective of the universe humans can be labeled "Mostly Harmless", but not on our own little blue speck.

[Rob4Hope]

For me, its not the doctrinal falsehood of the church that drove me out--its the lack of accountability and the conduct of the current and not so distant leadership.

Bruce McConkie was a bully and spoke the WILL OF GOD with a thunderous voice! He was so right!...and then he was wrong.

Joseph Fielding Smith and Harold B. Lee were MEN OF GOD...and then they were just men who made some big mistakes, while throwing God under the bus over it.

Dallin Oaks is a man of God, and speaking for God he said the church would never apologize. Hunh?

This drove me out. I can't be in an organization where people teach one thing and then live another. That is like...ummm...let me see,....hypocrisy? Didn't this weird guy name Jesus say something about that?...WOW,..I kindof think he did!

Later I encountered doctrinal problems and inconsistencies that were irreconcilable. And Gordon Hinckley himself was the one who said its either true or the greatest fraud of all time. That IS ON HIM!

[deacon blues]

My Dad (rest his soul) used to say, "Have you you ever been sure of something, and been wrong?" I would think to myself, "Yup." My own experience with my mistakes tells me I can't trust my judgement 100%. But I am more sure of some things than others. So here is how I see some of the possibilities: There are approximately 7 billion humans on Earth- 99 true%. All 7 billion of us are descended from Adam and Eve- %.001 true. All Native Americans are descended from Israel- .001%. A guy named Lehi and his family came from Jerusalem @ 600 B.C. and settled somewhere in America- .1% Joseph Smith found actual gold plates- .1% Joseph Smith made props that appeared like plates- 50%. Joseph Smith conned witnesses into believing they had seen gold plates- 90%. Witnesses saw prop plates- 40% Witnesses succumbed to Joseph's power of suggestion- 40% (yeah, I know it doesn't all add up to 100%. ) Joseph Smith and the witnesses were out to deliberately deceive people- 1%. All the witnesses lied about seeing the gold plates- 1% Sidney Rigdon helped write the BOM- 5%. I could go on but you get the idea.

I also like Hagoth's comments about Ken Hamm and Bill Nye. I tell my TBM wife I would change my beliefs if there was better evidence of church claims, but she says she doesn't believe me. I ask her to tell me if she hears of any evidence, but so far she hasn't responded. She never asks me to tell her if I learn of any new evidence that the church claims aren't true.

The foibles of human nature are the best explanation for the unusual aspects of Church History and doctrine.

PS heckuva good thread.

[Rob4Hope]

Any organization with this narrative is not good for our planet: "We are more super special than anyone else which justifies our non-altruistic behaviors and practices and allows us to control people's lives."

This resonates and, IMHO, is sadly accurate.

For years I have wondered at men like Boyd Packer who would justify teaching lies (see his CES instructions) to promote faith. This is a total oxymoronic perspective--teaching lies to create faith? HUNH!?

I think BKP and others justified their immoral position by appealing to some kind of super-morality. Because he was a "chosen vessel" of God and had someone wash his feet in a made-up ceremony, BKP felt "justified" in being a liar.

News for you BKP....my father once told me a lesson, and I think you need to hear it. "Two wrongs don't make a right".....

[ulmite]

Then for the church to be true you have to multiply all of these probabilities (because that is how probabilities work)

No, probability only works that way if the events you are considering are independent.
Example : prob(Cameron is a man)=0.5, prob(Cameron is bald)=0.1, but prob(Cameron is a bald man)=0.1, because women are not bald (ignoring gender issues and chemotherapy).


The odds of Mormonism being the One True Church are about as good as the odds of God creating the Earth with consistent fossil records and archaeological evidence supporting the presence of life, especially humans, before Adam, just to confound the infidels, from a purely scientific perspective.
Given the awful way the Church treats female and LGBT members, the odds of the leadership being truly inspired directly by God are about as good as the odds that the Mormon God exists and is really quite a jerk.

[RS Teacher]

I spent the first 40+ years of my life TRYING to believe the church was true. I knew that it didn't feel true. It didn't make sense. In this Mormon world, God was a racist and a misogynist who doled out punishment for imperfection and never thought I was good enough. Yet I was told that all this was true and that this was happiness, and I did mental contortions of all sorts to try to believe it. It was exhausting. I constantly heard things in church and conference that didn't make sense, yet I'd struggle and try to make myself believe them and find a way to make them sound true.

Finally, within the past 5 years or so, after finding discussion boards like this one where I learned I wasn't the ONLY person who saw problems of all kinds with the church, only then was I able to admit to myself that, in my heart, I didn't believe. I've never believed. I spent most of my life trying to, but I never did. And what a relief it has been to finally be honest with myself.

How sure am I? The relief and pure joy I now feel tell me I'm 100% sure. And frankly, if evidence appeared to convince me the church really is true, I would have to go to hell because I would never follow the LDS God who hates women (yes, I've been to the temple; I know that he sees women as chattel) and hates LGBT people, and teaches all manner of craziness. The version of God that I see there is so out of line with what I see as moral and good that I would never be able to accept it.

[Red Ryder]

The Church isn’t some benign social club. It exacts a heavy price in missed opportunities, lost chances, unnecessary sadness and guilt, wasted time and money, misdirected service, and unfulfilled potential - all in the name of a made-up hokey religion that is fairly easily falsified. I don’t care if some members think the Church makes them happy - a happy slave is still a slave.

A-freakn-men-and-women to that!

Religions like the LDS church purpetuate non-critical thinking, stupidity and ignorance to real facts, backward social values, masogamy, tribalism, etc., etc. Maybe some folks enjoy being treated like children, driven by fear and guilt all the time; maybe it's easier for them not to have to think for themselves, but that's not helping humanity!

Any organization with this narrative is not good for our planet: "We are more super special than anyone else which justifies our non-altruistic behaviors and practices and allows us to control people's lives."

....(Snip)

So, yes, I disagree that the LDS church is just a harmless social club. Maybe in the perspective of the universe humans can be labeled "Mostly Harmless", but not on our own little blue speck.

NBI, I 100% agree with your rant! Love it when you push back with reality and a touch of anger.

The intent of my post wasn't to suggest the church is harmless. I don't believe that for a second. The intent of my post was to point out that "truth claims" and "the church is true" dichotomy no longer matters to me. Mormonism can't be proven true. It can easily be proven it's not what it claims to be!

Lately I've become focused on reclaiming the headspace Mormonism has occupied in my head over the last 10 years since my awakening. Part of that process means to let go of certain things we NOM/Exmos cling to. We love to shout The church is not true! I just don't care anymore to think through why it isn't. I believe it isn't and people can believe whatever they want. "I don't care" is my new belief system.

I highly recommend reading/listening to the book:

[jfro18]

The Church isn’t some benign social club. It exacts a heavy price in missed opportunities, lost chances, unnecessary sadness and guilt, wasted time and money, misdirected service, and unfulfilled potential - all in the name of a made-up hokey religion that is fairly easily falsified. I don’t care if some members think the Church makes them happy - a happy slave is still a slave.

This rant is so good I want to print it off and frame it here. My wife often asks why I even care if she goes... and I told her once that if I didn't care about her it would be so much easier to ignore. But watching someone get conned for their entire life while the overwhelming evidence is available to prove that it's all a con job is just amazing to me.

Thanks for that rant - it is exactly how I've been feeling about this whole thing.

[Vlad the Emailer]

I too am 99.99 sure that it never was anything but a lie.

I haven't read "One Lawyers Case Against the Mormon Church" but I would love to see the claims of church put on trial.

Almost happened in England when Tom Phillips tried it, but regardless, my issue is that there are just so very many issues.

Almost every conceivable aspect of Mormonism is either completely falsifiable or highly suspect.

This is the reason our TBM spouses and family don't want to discuss it. Most of these people actually know there is information out there that they would find to be very credible and very damaging to their testimonies.