Incontestable II

[redjay]

If you were given one hour to sit with your TBM/NOM spouse and explain why the church is demonstrably false, what would your big hitters be? What are the points that you would make that could be considered more or less kryptonite to the truth claims of the church?

I know there's CES letter, Letter to my Wife, Mormon Think and the Mormon Stories recent articles - I'm not looking for sources as such.

I can see me getting one hour pretty soon, and I want to be ready.

I throw myself on the mercy of the forum.

[FiveFingerMnemonic]

I wouldn't necessarily use history rather I think observed phenomenon and personal experience would be my go to. Primarily the failure of exclusive priesthood to heal and lack of other miracles in modern times vs those myths we read in the scriptures.

Second would be my discomfort with the "one true church" narrative vs my observations of the rest of humanity being just as prosperous as I am without all the religious burden.

Only if those 2 concepts were expended or discounted would I delve into the minutia of how our religion developed and evolved naturally just as any other religion has.

[alas]

Personally, I would not go with any one else’s argument but craft one that is personalized to me. Or rather personalized for the person I am presenting my case to. So...Which things are on your wife’s shelf?

Now, many women, the number 1 thing on their shelf is polygamy, so if that bothers your wife, start with how polygamy treats women like cows and that no God who loves his daughters would ever have such a plan for them. Is she sympathetic to LGBT? start there. Do the racial issues bother her? Women tend to care more about the current social issues and less about the historical issues, but your wife may have the kind of logical mind that says you cannot build truth out of lies. If that is the case, go with the history and how it just doesn’t fit.

[Corsair]

There is one primary issue that I have not seen especially addressed. How does an LDS believer reconcile the testimony of someone who feels that the spirit is leading them somewhere else? In short, "Is the Pope Catholic?" Does Pope Francis have a testimony that Roman Catholicism is the One, True Church? If a Jew felt the need to convert to Christianity, suppose he heard the testimony of Pope Francis and Russell Nelson. How would this honest seeker tell which testimony was more "correct"?

If you, as a person raised in the LDS church, earnestly pray for a witness and get the impression that you should attend another church, how would an orthodox believer convince you that you were wrong? In many ways, this is the base problem. With plural marriage, the Book of Mormon, Book of Abraham, priesthood blessings, temple rites, and every other challenge, there is one central conviction: LDS believers have a testimony that these things are and were correct with God despite all the difficulties.

If you feel the spiritual conviction that a non-LDS path following Jesus, Buddha, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster is the best path for you, how can an LDS testimony somehow show that you are wrong? These two videos are excellent examples of the problem:

People from different religions feel the spiritual truth of their religion

Testimonies of holy books: The Urantia Book, Dianetics, Quran, Book of Mormon, The Great Controversy

[redjay]

Thanks for the replies so far. I'm really looking for logic and facts.

We've already discussed, the implausibility of COJCLDS being the one true church given the minuscule global membership, the injustice of LBGT, the role of women in the church etc. and those things weigh heavily on a very creaking shelf.

She has shown interest in the history and truth claims, and has looked at CES letter (under her own steam), and then ended up over at farms getting confused with the spin.

At the moment she is extremely conflicted. I want to help show in simple logical terms that the conflict (excluding family and social dynamics) is unnecessary.

I hope that helps.

[RubinHighlander]

Well Red, there's obviously no easy answer here, so many things can factor in. My last experience with this was a couple of months ago with a couple of ministers from the ward stopped by and I took an hour to try and explain to them why we left, because of the assumption they had that we were offended.

With my spouse there were a couple of key things that helped her gain the catalyst she needed to jump off the boat with me. Over time I doubled down on being a good husband and father; made sure she knew she was the priority in my life. I also sincerely expressed my sadness and pain over the codis I was experiencing over my faith crisis. I wasn't just angry and bitter, but I tried to stay happy but made it clear how truly painful the experience was to find out the truth about church history and how betrayed I felt about the church keeping the truth from me.

If I were to recommend an approach for you, I like the Bill Reel disciplinary counsel and how that unfolded, but obviously a different audience there. Still, they way Bill and his wife handled it, the way they expressed themselves in laying out their journey, it went as well as it could have. Bill really painted those leaders into a corner, knowing they would be forced to X him based on HQ directive, the local leaders ended up with lots of cogdis because they knew Bill was not being kicked out for his lack of integrity or for any sin.

It's not unlike how I laid it out for my local ministers; I emphasized my sincere and ardent journey to find the truth and therefore my conscious was clear as far as any possibility in meeting a God on the other side.

As far as facts, there's so many to choose from. The recent interviews with Dan V. on mormondiscussions are good because he comes across as so objective and factual, throwing out all the angsty anti-mormon non-facts and sticking to the data. Also the pod casts on the book of Abraham with RFM and Bill. I think You could pull a lot of very good facts out of those interviews and reference them in books, etc.

[wtfluff]

Personally, I would focus on honesty.

I would read this snippet from Gospel Principles Chapter 31: Honesty

When we speak untruths, we are guilty of lying. We can also intentionally deceive others by a gesture or a look, by silence, or by telling only part of the truth. Whenever we lead people in any way to believe something that is not true, we are not being honest.

Then I would turn to the essays. Probably Book of Mormon Translation, after reading it I would ask how many times LDS-Inc. has portrayed the real translation process in all of their media for almost 200 years.

If not the Translation essay, then Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo, focusing on statements such as: "several months before her 15th birthday" and pointing out how dishonest such statements are, judging by their own standards in Gospel Principles.

After "proving" how dishonest current leadership is, I would point out that "the church" has been dishonest since the beginning, and there is no reason to follow the teachings of liars.

[Red Ryder]

Patterns of institutional behaviors that go against obvious behaviors expected of members.

ie. sexual abuse cover up, honesty, transparency, etc.

Patterns of institutional dishonesty that protect and enrich the leaders of the institution.

ie. carefully written denials and the creation of plausible deniability. Lack of financial transparency.

Patterns of institutional spending that conflict with the spiritual nature of the institution.

ie. shopping malls and real estate projects.

Patterns of evolving doctrine and doctrines of convenience dressed as Modern Day Revelation

ie. word of wisdom, temple ordinance changes, and anything coming out of the mouth of the current modern day prophet.

Patterns of evidence or more appropriately the lack of.

ie. Book of Mormon artifacts, etc.

Simply stated. The church isn't what it claims to be.

[jfro18]

If you really have an hour or so... it just depends on if you want to show the pattern across a number of issues or if you want to focus on just a few.

Then you have to decide if you want to work from historical issues or current issues.

You'll really need to think about what bothers your wife and then research those topics. We can recommend so many resources once you know what direction you want to go in.

If I could do it over when talking to my wife about the church problems for the first time, I would certainly do it completely differently... so be careful and think it all out ahead of time I guess.

ETA: One thing I think is effective is to note that almost everything Joseph Smith came up with was done using materials he had. You can do this quickly and it really helps to paint the pattern that he was just riffing off other people's works to do this. I'm not talking View of the Hebrews/Late War, but some of the things that have been discussed here recently:

-The priesthood titles/two levels of priesthood from the Campbellites (Rigdon)
-The multiple tiers of heaven from Emanuel Swedenborg
-Temple ceremony from the Masons
-Word of Wisdom from the Temperance movement
-First Vision from Solomon Chamberlain
-Book of Abraham from Jasher, Josephus, Philosophy of a Future State (1830) and The Six Books of Proclus on the Theology of Plato (1816)
-JST heavily borrows from Adam Clarke's commentaries
-Book of Mormon takes tons from the Bible - some of which was not written until after Lehi left so it shouldn't be in there

My other favorite is to point out how often Joseph misunderstood Biblical things and completely shot himself in the foot -- case in point is seeing Elijah and Elias in the temple even though they're the same and then claiming polygmay was cool with God because he commanded Abraham even though God never commanded Abraham to do it... case in point:

[Red Ryder]

I'll add one more thing. We are all wrong with our suggestions above. Those are secondary in nature.

Have an honest conversation with her that you understand the emotional pain this all causes and simply suggest you'll love her regardless of her conclusions.

Simply allow her to see that she can think for herself and that she has to allow herself permission to believe something different if she desires.

None of the laundry list of items broke my shelf until I gave my self permission to believe differently. Then it crashed.

[Palerider]

Trust is the foundation of all healthy relationships whether between individuals or between individuals and institutions. If real trust doesn't exist, the relationship will never be balanced and healthy. One party will always be at a disadvantage.

Most church members trust the Biblical scriptures more than they realize. The church has long stated (at least until recent years) that every doctrine Joseph came up with is supported at least in some small way by the Bible. Think of baptism for the dead.

But there is absolutely zero Biblical support for polyandry. Joseph's marriage to other mens' wives while those men were still alive and in good standing in the church is insupportable in any way and can only be termed as adultery. And that is true whether he had sex with those wives or not (which he most likely did).

When Joseph makes the public statement that in essence says he is not practicing plural marriage, it is not a "carefully worded denial". It is a bald faced lie. (See fluffs honesty definition above).

If polyandry is a true and virtuous doctrine of God that the church is proud of, then why would the church hide it and lie about it? Ask yourself how you first learned about Joseph's polyandry. Was it from the church?

Can you trust that the church is really telling you the truth if they repress the truth at the same time?? Then ask yourself if you can really trust what Joseph said about the BofM and everything else if he would openly lie about plural marriage?

Joseph lied about a number of things. He had to lie to Emma to cover his affairs (marriages?). Emma had other women who she trusted keep an eye on Joseph. Why would she have to have spies keeping track of him??? Because she didn't trust him!

He lied about the women who refused his advances and made every effort to ruin their reputations in the community. What sort of man does that? Joseph is the foundation of the church.

How can God's church be founded on a mortal man? In most Christian minds you can take away Martin Luther; you can take away Wesley and Calvin, but Christ will still stand independently.

But take away Joseph Smith and The church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints crumbles. How can that be?

One last thing I would recommend:

Before you have your talk with your dw, ask her to read the book, Emma Smith, Mormon Enigma by Linda King Newell and Valeen Tippetts Avery.

You may find your wife is suddenly on your side.

[Red Ryder]

Before you have your talk with your dw, ask her to read the book, Emma Smith, Mormon Enigma by Linda King Newell and Valeen Tippetts Avery.

I have this book sitting on the shelf in the open and the wife hasn't ever wanted to read it. I don't believe she thinks it's anti-mormon, she's just not interested in church history or doctrine.

She's only interested in the "feelz goodz" the church provides. Sigh....

Maybe I need to ask her to read it?

[Hagoth]

I can only tell what has worked for me, and it agrees with a lot of what has been said above. Of course, this happened over years, not in one hour:

1) She saw what a toll my faith crisis had on me and how hard I tried to make it work. She contrasts that with how much better my mental health is now. I filled in the blanks about all of the long nights-o'-the-soul and desperate prayers she didn't know about. I helped her understand that me moving away from the organization of the church did not mean that I had any intention of moving away from her, and that I respect and support her in her faith.

2) I showed her maps of global and national distributions of religions and we talked about how it is that we just happened to be in the only true church. I really stressed that I believe that life is a classroom, not a test. Just waiting to die untarnished by life is wasting your life.

3) I really stressed how hard I have tried to believe in Mormonism, but in the end, I can't make myself believe what I just can't believe. Is that what she really wants? To live with someone whose just going along with things they don't believe rather than following their own moral compass and developing their path? LGBT issues had a big role here.

4) I explained how I faded away from passion in so many things I love (mostly science related) because I kept bumping up against things that caused me cognitive dissonance. Once I took church expectations out of the picture I loved learning again and I found a new joy in nature and science.

5) I told her my doctrine/history concerns at a very high one-liner level, but didn't go into details. She can research those if she wants to follow up. I stressed that these are MY issues and I don't expect her to be those. Things like:
-Joseph said he translated the BoA from a scroll written by Abraham. They found the scroll and translated it. It's a common Egyptian funerary text.
-Polygamy/polyandry
-Why were the prophet's seers and revelators fooled so easily by Mark Hoffman?
-Temple/Masonic similarities
-Why do apostles visit people in the hospital and leave alone? Why do they give talks about having the faith to NOT be healed? Who doesn't have that faith?
-BKP "the truth is not useful"

4) We have talked a lot about church interference in state law, blaming sexual abuse victims while protecting perpetrators, etc.

5) We read the D&C together (her idea) and I filled in some of the history. We quit after only a dozen or so sections (her idea).

Good luck, Redjay!!

[Palerider]

She's only interested in the "feelz goodz" the church provides. Sigh....

Maybe I need to ask her to read it?

I don't know how to endow people with emotional strength and depth of character. I guess it's understandable why kids always want the sweet tasting stuff. But here you're dealing with an adult. And that's not taking anything away from her. I'm sure she is a great person with great qualities.

But sometimes, time and life experience have to produce growth in the individual, rather than us trying to persuade someone who just isn't prepared to face unpleasant realities.

You're the only one who knows how far she can be nudged. We can't force a flower to bloom by physically opening it's petals. That's the sun's job.

I'm reminded of a young couple in my old ward where I was in the Bishopric. They were living the fairytale life. Rich parents. Good moneymaking job. Nice house. Nice cars. Nice toys. Nice vacations.

She was living the dream. Good girl but maybe just a tad shallow? Had first baby, a little boy. Everything was wonderful.

Then something went really wrong and they lost this infant in a tragic set of circumstances. Not their fault. Just tragic.

What a hellacious ordeal she went through. Tons of self doubt. Self recrimination, even though she wasn't to blame. Just horrifically sad.

Life forced a pain upon them that could not be escaped. No where to run. Her entire world and her worldview changed. But with time things slowly, agonizingly, got better. Nothing but time can heal some wounds. Eventually (took a couple of years) I saw her begin to smile again. We either grow or we wither and die.

But she would never be the same woman she was before. That light hearted girl was gone forever. But she has a great deal more character for having gone through what she did.

Changing life paradigms is much more like planting seeds, adding water and nutrients, and hoping they grow. Being a sincere and loving nurturer is key.

The more they love you, the more they trust you and your judgement.

Did I really just do that?? Go down that preaching road!?!?

Sorry.....

[Reuben]

Did I really just do that?? Go down that preaching road!?!?

Sorry.....

Speaking for myself, I thought it was a damn good sermon.

[Red Ryder]

Did I really just do that?? Go down that preaching road!?!?

Sorry.....

Speaking for myself, I thought it was a damn good sermon.

Me too! Thanks for the healthy dose of reality.

[redjay]

Thanks for all the feedback. If you are interested to see how things panned out please head over to the mixed relationships section and see a post 'slowly; slowly catchy monkey'...

RJ

[Red Ryder]

Thanks for all the feedback. If you are interested to see how things panned out please head over to the mixed relationships section and see a post 'slowly; slowly catchy monkey'...

RJ

Well I’m confused. So you didn’t have an hour discussion since this post?

She’s out though?

[redjay]

Deleted post (double)

[redjay]

Thanks for all the feedback. If you are interested to see how things panned out please head over to the mixed relationships section and see a post 'slowly; slowly catchy monkey'...

RJ

Well I’m confused. So you didn’t have an hour discussion since this post?

She’s out though?

No, I didn't have the hour discussion. I got the text letting me know the shelf had crashed (coffee drank) after asking for ideas here, but before I had spoke about anything discussed here. I'm out of town and planned to have the discussion when I got home.

Hope that clears things up a bit.