“If you wanted any kind of dialogue with believers what might it look like? What would you want them to know about your experience?”

I try and refrain from much of a dialogue with believers because trotting out the facts of the case makes them feel defensive. I would love to have the conversation about where my quest for truth has taken me. I would love to discuss how hard the cognitive dissonance affected me in the church. I would love to explain why faith is not a positive emotion. I would love to teach them the meaning behind ecclesiastical abuse, cognitive dissonance, Occam’s razor, Pascal’s Wager, polyandry, and the specifics of the age differences in JS’s marriages, the newspaper fiasco and how I was lied to about the facts in church. Instead, I keep the peace by just acknowledging that even though I’m a seeker of truth, others just don’t want to know.

As for other religions, I’m done with mystical thinking. I have found that the world is a much less scary place when we put our hope and trust in rational thinking. I probably would have liked going to the RLDS church (I didn’t even know there was one in my city) but that would have just delayed my inevitable casting away of all superstition and wouldn’t have solved anything but the fear of finding a new group of friends.

When it comes to frictions surrounding events such as “temple weddings, what do we do Sunday afternoon at a family reunion, whether I attend church when I visit them while on vacation, or what to talk about”, I think I might have some advice.

Temple weddings: considering acknowledging that they are divisive. You belong to an exclusive club with high dues (monetary or otherwise) and your post-mormon friends/relatives are not invited to attend. This is hurtful, but admitting it might be a step in the right direction.

Reunion Sunday afternoons: I think there is no good solution here. My recommendation is those that want to go to church, go. Those that don’t, plan something else. It stinks that there isn’t a compromise that would make everyone happy. I think it would be nice, however, if everyone over the age of 8 gets to make their own decision on how they want to spend that particular sabbath.

On vacation: go visit them while you are on vacation — (this contradicts my last point) don’t leave early to go to church. You make a point of not missing church the rest of the year, this is a chance for real bonding with someone you know and care about and whom you don’t get to see that often. Perhaps it makes more sense to skip church for a reunion and not for a vacation, so I’ll just admit I am full of contradictions.

What to talk about: The world is full of interesting things to talk about. It doesn’t matter what your passion is, however, it’s easy to get caught up talking too much about one topic. If they are familiar with the church, no need to discuss it. Talk about your other interests. If you don’t have anything to talk about besides the church, you might want to pick up a new hobby. I recommend, just listen to the news and discuss. If all else fails, there’s always the weather.

If I were gay / queer, etc, I would keep my distance from Mormons. Not because most Mormons would do or say anything to offend but it’s just that you belong to an organization that is literally causing a huge amount of pain and suffering for gays and lesbians. Leaving the church is hard enough even if, as you left, it didn’t insult you with, “And take your [sinful?] kids with you”.

I appreciate you efforts and your civility. Regardless of who is right in the debate over belief or unbelief civility is more important.

I appreciate what you were able to articulate in a few short blog posts.

I have very dear people in my life who have disassociated themselves from church activity and belief and that alone creates some distances and frictions surrounding events such as temple weddings, what do we do Sunday afternoon at a family reunion, whether I attend church when I visit them while on vacation, or what to talk about.

I know people from the LGBTQ community who even though I treat them as respectfully as I know how, still it seems there are wedges based solely on something as simple as what I believe.

I appreciate your comments, not that my unbelieving friends are the same as you, but helps me be a little more understanding, open, and respectful.

Cheers

The idea that it “comes down to what kind of a story you want to paint with the historical evidence” is something which I must respectfully disagree. I think instead, for the believer, it comes down to what kind of story you want to believe despite the historical evidence. For example, there is no pleasant way to paint , ‘a dirty, nasty, filthy affair’ pleasantly, even if Emma did forgive him. The church tries to sidestep by saying, “Little is known about this marriage, and nothing is known about the conversations between Joseph and Emma regarding [it].” https://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo?lang=eng

I appreciate your reluctance to get into apologetics as there are other more appropriate forums for that type of back and forth. Instead I will follow your example and focus on building bridges instead of insisting you see things my way.

In answer to your question, yes, I was a believer. My current thoughts on the church are shaped by how I remember dealing with cognitive dissonance. I feel silly now, but when questioned on the church, I felt persecuted by what I believed was an ex-mormon agenda. I feel regret, anger, and disdain but also many other feelings. I think I especially feel disappointment, disillusionment, and embarrassment.

I’m not sure there is anything I wish I could have kept from my believing days. I made a decision to keep all of the good things and discard the rest. Ironically, I live a much more authentic life now and I’m happy with my decision.

I view current members as indoctrinated. I don’t want to sound condescending, I remember the criticism when I was a member, “Mormons are all brainwashed” and how frustrating it was to hear. I felt that if you don’t believe in the church, fine, now, go mind your own business. Now I see believers as stuck in a belief system that they’ve been inculcated to believe. Is stuck too harsh? I would’ve been offended by that word at the time.

My battery is about to die and I need to go to bed,

Wikipedia’s entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspension_of_disbelief sums up my feelings. “if a writer could infuse a ‘human interest and a semblance of truth’ into a fantastic tale, the reader would suspend judgement concerning the implausibility of the narrative”. The narrative, in this case, is very implausible.

Earlier you mentioned Alma 32: “[T]herefore if ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true.”

This scripture doesn’t account for things which are not true. It merely asks us to hope for things which are true. For the critical thinker, hoping isn’t enough. Tellingly, the church instructs us to file away concerns rather than think about them. (https://www.lds.org/youth/article/when-you-have-questions?lang=eng and many other examples if you desire). It’s unclear how long this “shelving of concerns” process is supposed to take or how it’s supposed to help.

Mormonism historically makes claims both spiritual and temporal. Any question that doesn’t fit the spiritual category by necessity must have an answer that either vindicates the church or condemns it. Categorizing the question of copied text from the bible in the Book of Mormon as spiritual manipulates the framework upon which one makes an informed conclusion about the truth claims of the Book of Mormon.

If your hypothesis were correct, however unlikely, that perhaps “the printer had the same bible and compared the printers manuscript with his bible”, then first off, it’s a pretty terrible printer to take things into his own hands and a pretty big deal for nobody to have noticed these changes. Secondly, there’s been plenty of time and opportunities to make corrections and set the record straight. Joseph’s seer stone is just sitting in a vault somewhere, waiting to be activated. But I do want to acknowledge that at least you’ve shown that you’re willing to consider the question and provide an answer, unlike the CES Director.

You ask about moving past these questions to see the many positive evidences — as a purveyor of truth, I don’t want to pick and choose between positive and negative evidence. The facts of the case are neutral; conclusions are positive or negative.

It’s important to put our time, energy, and expertise to track down all the available documents because the truth is worth it. The excuse that, “it is unknown what is lost in the mists of time” is what is known as cherry picking or the fallacy of incomplete evidence. That thinking, when broken down is saying, “the evidence that we have is no match for the evidence we don’t have.”

What allows some to believe while others don’t, I think, comes down to ones willingness to suspend disbelief for the benefit of a fantastic tale. I, however, am no longer willing to suspend disbelief when the truth is so much more healthy.

Please don’t get me wrong, I’m pleased to talk about these things and I think it’s helpful to have the discussion. I hope I don’t come off as insincere or unable to try and see your point of view. I want believers and past believers to get along. I also want those questioning to know that even though leaving the church is scary, difficult, and traumatizing, it gets better.

What really got me curious about your post was your statement “It was my inability to suspend my disbelief.”

It is interesting to me because I come from a multi-generational LDS family that is starting to go on diverging paths because of the disbelief of some and the belief of others.

I am curious what allows one to believe and other to not believe. Even the stalwarts among us have questions and even unresolved questions but believers seem to have the ability to suspend disbelief. You might say they are blind followers of charlatans but it is not that simple.

Despite the fact that the BOM may contain verbatim transcriptions from a 1769 KJV there are some sections of Isaiah that are unique and with improved readings. It is possible that the printer had the same bible and compared the printers manuscript with his bible? Perhaps is you put enough monkeys with typewriters together in a room they could eventually type out the Book of Mormon, i don’t know.

Believers seem to be able to suspend belief because they admit they don’t know or have all the facts or there are other facts or beliefs that carry more weight than the object of belief. Why can’t unbelievers like Jeremy Runnels move past these questions and see the many positive evidences that exist?

The other factor is inconsistencies don’t bother some because they have neither the time nor the energy nor the expertise to tract down all the available documents and even if they could it is unknown what is lost in the mists of time.

I am very curious what allows some to believe and other to not believe. I don’t have many answers but I appreciate the question.

I don’t think most (if any) of the questions in the CES letter are matters of faith. I think they focus on things that are hard for members to swallow and church leaders like a CES director or a Stake President should have answers or access to those that do. They promised they would get back to him with answers; instead they got back to him with excommunication.

For example, the first question he poses asks: What are 1769 King James Version edition errors doing in the Book of Mormon? An ancient text? Errors which are unique to the 1769 edition that Joseph Smith owned?

Perhaps you are suggesting that the overlapping errors between the 1769 KJV and the BoM are not suspicious and therefore we should take it on faith that Joseph Smith never copied huge swaths of text from his copy of the bible. If that is what you are suggesting, then yes, I agree: I don’t think Jeremy would find that answer very satisfying.

The other thing is that the CES Instructor and the Stake President might not have the same questions. To them the answers are abundantly clear so they can’t fully understand the concern. Most Stake Presidents are not historians or scholars and are not trained in the kind of evidence Jeremy Runnells is looking for.

One becomes a CES Instructor or a Stake President because most of your questions are resolved. From my point of view others can help but faith is really between us and God. That is what Joseph Smith’s story is all about. If you lack wisdom, ask God.

What I don’t know is… what do you do if God is silent?

The other thing is certainty isn’t the greatest virtue. The Phairisees were convinced they had the truth but they didn’t. They could have benefited from a little self doubt. There will be people who were absolutely convinced they know God, but ultimately won’t make it. Let’s hope there are some of us who aren’t so sure, who do make it.

I misread the post. I thought it was Kim who was posting he had stopped going to church :)

The restored church being restored. Oh, the irony. And, yes, perhaps.