Experiences in Mormonism

[christopher]

I've posted the below before and have periodically been asked to post it again of a brief history of mormonism's foundings and my thoughts of leaving it behind. I hope some of you can find it of some help.


Chris <><



Brief History of Mormonism-

Mormonism began when Joseph Smith, a young man in western New York, was spurred by a Christian revival where he lived in 1820 to pray to God for guidance as to which church was true. In answer to his prayers he says he was visited by God the Father and God the Son, two separate beings, who told him to join no church because all the churches at that time were false. This event is called "The First Vision."

In 1823 Joseph said he had another heavenly visitation, in which an angel named Moroni told him of a sacred history written by ancient Hebrews living in the Americas, engraved in an Egyptian dialect on tablets and buried in a nearby hill. Joseph was told it was the history of an ancient peoples of America, and that Joseph would be the instrument for bringing this record to the knowledge of the world. Joseph obtained these gold plates from the angel in 1827, and translated them into English by the spirit of God and the use of a sacred instrument accompanying the plates called the "Urim and Thummim." The translation was published in 1830 as The Book of Mormon.

The Book of Mormon is said to be a religious and secular history of some of the inhabitants of the Western Hemisphere from about 2200 BC to about 421 AD. It tells the reader that the American Indians are principaly descended from three groups of immigrants who were led by God from their original homes in the Near East to America. One group came from the Tower of Babel, and two other groups came from Jerusalem just before the Babylonian Captivity, about 600 BC. They were led by prophets of God who had the gospel of Jesus Christ, which is thus preserved in their history, the Book of Mormon. Believers and unbelievers fought many wars, the last of which left only degenerate unbelievers as survivors, who are the principle ancestors of the American Indians. The most important event during this long history was the actual visit of Jesus Christ to America, after his crucifixion, when he ministered to (and converted) all the inhabitants.

After publication of the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith said he was was directed by revelation from God to reestablish, or restore the true church, which he did in 1830. He said he was visited several times by heavenly messengers, including John the Baptist, and the biblical apostles Peter, James and John, who ordained him to the true priesthood. He said he continued to have revelations from God to guide the church and to give more knowledge of the Gospel. Many of these revelations are published in the Doctrine and Covenants.

Joseph Smith and his followers were continually persecuted for their religious beliefs and practices, and driven from New York State to Ohio, then to Missouri, then to Illinois, where Joseph Smith was murdered in 1844 by a mob. The main body of the church was then led by Brigham Young to Utah, where the Mormons settled successfully.

The LDS church is led today by the successors of Joseph Smith. The current President of the church is called a "prophet, seer and revealator" just as Joseph Smith was, and claims to guide the church and it's members through revelations from God.

[christopher]

SOME GENERAL NOTES AND THOUGHTS ABOUT MORMONISM


When researching LDS information/history, I would recommend to try to stay with first person sources whenever possible. Church records, journals, diaries, writings, etc., for the most part are pretty straight. There is an awful lot of junk out there among professional angry mormons and exmormons, and psuedo-intellectuals.

I am headed to the conclusion that there are really three facets to the LDS Church:
#1 the culture, #2 the doctrine and #3 the church history

#1.
Taken alone, very few can find much bad to say about the culture on the surface. A clean healthy lifestyle that is centered on the home, family service and church; the abstinence of tobacco and alcohol and moral purity is very much to be admired. Yes, some seem to stress the church more than Jesus, but I am hoping this is just human frailties. I do believe and have seen repeatedly that there is a lot of hidden hurt and problems underneath the presentation of the mormon ideal, but probably no more or no less than society in general.

#2.
The doctrine, as with any group of people, is always debatable but can at least be defended if all the scripture (Bible, Book of Mormon, D&C, Pearl of Great Price, Modern revelation) is accepted. The circular arguments about what is doctrine or canon and what is just opinion from latter-day prophets is disingenuous at best. Many things that Latter-Day Saint prophets taught as being from God are now ignored or even outright refuted by the church (Adam-God, blood atonement, etc). Of course, by having a living prophet with continued revelation, one can have any doctrine one currently chooses to have. Does one “follow the prophet” until he or God changes his mind, and then follow again and again no matter what?

#3.
The historical evolution of the church is an area with problems. If shown false, then the doctrine supported by scripture unique to Mormonism falls away too. There seems to be a problem as a church with whitewashing, or even lying about the past. The changes are a process of not stressing some point, then later re-writing the current faith promoting, correlated version no matter what the evidences show. Yes, a lot of ugly things were done in New York and throughout the migration west, but instead of just saying it happened and that people do bad things, there is a presentation of this glorious story of constant virtue in the eye of oppression. That didn’t happen and that would have been fine with me, but let's just say it.


Within my studies and research, one of the biggest disappointements was in the professional mormon apologetic works. LDS church members who look into this to get answers usually begin and end with Dr. Hugh Nibley and/or the group at FARMS (The Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies) which is tied into BYU. To most mormons, they can see that Nibley or FARMS has looked at an issue, and came away with an indepth paper/book, so their testimony is still in tact. The problems come in when you look into the work that Nibley or FARMS did. My research into it found that it is so poorly done that it doesn't hold up to scrutiny outside of the mormon community. Not only is the work not published outside of the church, the "scholarly" work isn't even peer reviewed outside of the LDS community. I directly contacted some national professional organizations regarding a few issues that I questioned, and that FARMS or Nibley had addressed in papers. The response I got back wasn't very flattering toward the group or their scholarship. I, and many others (including still the church's general authorities) just simply relied on the bright folks with the advanced degrees to answer any questions that might come up. My faith carried over to them without questioning or serious study. Through discussions with others, both faithful and doubting, who want to look into an issue, FARMS and others like them, are doing more harm for the church than help. I would recommend a study of their work, and their methodology, as well as doing a full study on earlier LDS work by Thomas Ferguson and the New World Archaeological Foundation .

The origin of the Book of Abraham is a problem. We now have some of the original papyrus and facsimiles and it’s not working out. They have repeatedly and consistantly been translated as common Egyptian funeral texts even by those commissioned by the church. Though not talked about much (most members honestly have never looked into this but just accepted with faith), any current LDS research into the Book of Abraham gives one of two answers; 1. All of the scrolls that Joseph Smith used were not recovered or, 2. Joseph Smith didn’t do a literal translation but and “inspired” one. As I have dug a little deeper, answer #1 falls with the fact that facsimiles shown in the Book of Abraham also appear in the scrolls the church has in its possession and these same drawings appear repeatedly in standard Egyptian funeral texts which are now easily translated. They have nothing to do with Abraham and are way off for the time period. Answer #2 waivers a bit if you read Joseph Smith’s diaries and personal writings. He says he translated them directly as they are written. A good study is on Joseph Smith’s Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar. I think the Book of Abraham will cause more trouble for the church in the future than the Book of Mormon.

The Kinderhook plate episode has no plausible rebuttal from the church. You can read about this in History of the Church. Joseph Smith was given some plates with figures, he said they were a record of a descendant of Ham and could translate them. Before he could do the translation, he was killed. The people who gave them to him later confessed that they made them and copied the characters from Chinese tea boxes. Small compared to the Book of Abraham problems because Joseph had not “translated” yet and canonized, but still a major problem of credibility.

Upon research and study, the “First Vision” can take quite a beating. At least five different places that I have found are early recordings by Joseph Smith of the first vision, but in a major changing form. In one it was a dream, in one a spirit appeared to him, in one, only one person appeared to him. The remembrance of a direct visit from God that keeps changing seems problematic. These various first visions were taught/published so far as I have found up to and including Heber J. Grant. The current two personages in a grove is not the original or earliest recorded.

The LDS temple endowment ceremony is an almost exact copy of one of the Masonic ceremonies. Interestingly enough, I never felt weird making the signs and tokens in the temple as I felt I was helping others to be able to be in the presence of God, or as I was taught, being a “savior in Zion”. I don’t believe these things are “demonic” or “occultic” (I personally think that people are closer to doing Satan’s work while backbiting or gossiping than making “signs and tokens”.) The LDS version of Joseph Smith receiving and correcting the masonic rituals to their original form at the time of Adam isn’t logical because these Masonic ceremonies seem to have originated in the 1200’s or so. If one counters that the rituals were from the Jewish temples restored, again, not possible, because women were not in the Jewish temples and all records of their use were for sacrificing and teaching the Torah. The LDS temple changes over the years are bothersome. Why would God change His perfect way? In 1990 the changes included removing the protestant preacher as Satan’s minion who works for money, and the simulated death oaths among other things.

Often when asked about the church and my struggles, inevitably, someone will say "What about the Book of Mormon"? From study, it has become apparent to me that the Book of Mormon was written by Joseph Smith as a compilation of his religious experiences and general religious and historical views held during the early 1800's in the United States (particularly the New England area). Sidney Rigdon may have been involved, but I'm not currently convinced either way. Ethan Smith's (no relation) "View of the Hebrews" novel which was published several years before the BOM, and which Joseph had access to, contains way too many similarities to be a co-incindence. Early LDS leader BH Roberts wrote much on this and the parallels, and his work is worth reviewing. Biographies, journals and other writings that I have found of Joseph Smith's early life and family (especially his mother and father) draw more of a picture of the possible sources Smith used to write the BOM. Of particular interest were his father's dreams which matched stories later found in the BOM and his mother's seeming need for the "spectacular". The complete lack of any real archeological evidence for the BOM is also problematic. Something, somewhere, should have turned up from such a large and advanced civilization.


I recently read an article by one of the current general authorities commenting on his happiness that the church has never had racism problems. This position is simply not true. Though not emphasized now, the church taught that black people are black because they were less valiant in the pre-existence. Early church teaching talked about the curse of the flat nose and dark skin and even to the point of blacks being the “devil’s representative on the earth”. It was taught that blacks are an “inferior race” and are receiving the rewards they merit. The church very plainly taught that black people were the children of Cain and even taught that God made man after his own image which was white. These teachings/writings can be found up to the 1970’s. Journal of Discourses is a very good reference of church history for this and other teachings. I have been amazed over the past couple of years how quickly the church is trying to either deny or distance themselves from early racist teachings instead of just acknowledging it and moving forward in a corrected manner.

Along with the racist teachings, another area in which the LDS church is moving fairly quickly to change teachings, and deny a century and one-half of prophetic utterances, is in the nature and geography of the Book of Mormon. Anyone who grew up mormon was taught that the Book of Mormon characters were the principle ancestors of the American Indians and these Indians were decendents of Hebrews. We were taught that there were millions upon millions of them and they migrated throughout the American continent and particularly they finally had a great battle in what is now upstate New York at the Hill Cumorah near Palmyra.

If one listens to some current LDS teaching, you would think that the above was not taught repeatedly and consistantly. What is heard now is either silence from the church office, or from the apologists, a denial of the understanding of DNA and the pushing of what they call the Limited Geography Theory (LGT). In a nutshell, the LGT says that the BOM events all took place in a small isolated, as yet to be discovered location. Is there any proof for the LGT? The answer is no. Why is it being pushed? Because evidences are showing that the hemispheric ideas the church has always claimed are not in any way plausible, and it is all that they have left if someone actually takes the time to look into this. The progress in archaeology and genetics doesn't leave many options other than "we haven't found 'em yet". I was curious about some of this talk I hear now saying "we don't know that Cumorah was definatively in NY at Palmyra". This is just not what I was taught, so I did some digging and found quote after quote from LDS prophets, including in general conference, stating specifics about BOM geography and the exact location of Cumorah, which do not allow for the limited geography theory.



End Part 1

[christopher]

Part 2

Besides the Book of Mormon, most people when asked, the only thing they know about mormons is that they practiced polygamy. Even as a believing member, this issue was never a problem for me as I found it practiced in the Bible, and felt cultural and demographic changes are inevidable. My struggles are with the church's revisionist history with this matter and Joseph Smith's deceptions with it. There are still those in the church who say (as I was taught) that Smith didn't practice plural marriage, but it that started with Brigham Young. Very little research, and the church's own database, show this isn't correct. We also have the issue where it has been shown that Smith not only married some girls as young as 14, but also married other men' wives. I have seen testimonies and court documents which give evidence that these women were more than just "sealed" to Smith, but were his wives in every way and gave birth to his children while still being married to other men. Oliver Cowdery's discovery of this is what caused him to leave the church. From research, it is my belief that all this mess with polygamy was started by an affair Joseph had with a Fanny Alger who had come to live with Joseph and Emma. I would also recommend a study of Zina Huntington Jacobs and her husband Henry. An interesting side note to the polygamy issue is how the church handled it with the newest rotating priesthood manual on the life and teachings of Brigham Young. Instead of either not mentioning it or discussing the issue in context with D&C 132, the church went to the trouble of actually changing attributed quotes to remove any plurality spoken of by early church leaders (wives to wife, etc). This kind of conscious historic revising is problematic to more and more, as people become aware of it.

The "Adam is God" theory has been an eye opener for me. As a believing mormon when I first heard mention of it, and questioned it, I was told "it didn't happen". Then when I read something from Brigham Young about it and asked, I was told "it was taken out of context." Then when I found more and more sermons about it, I was told, "it was never taught, but just a theory by Brigham Young".

More recently, I found a transcript of an early LDS temple/endowment ceremony. Included in there was a talk which was given at the veil in the temple detailing the "Adam-God" notion. I was surprised this was ever taught in the temple given the current LDS attitudes toward this notion. Looking for cooboration, I later found an interview with LDS Apostle Neal Maxwell where he said Adam-God was taught for a short time in the temple ceremony, but was done so in error. When asked why this kind of error would be in the temple, he made the comment that Brigham Young could have used some good counselors. One can see quite a progression from :

"No" to "taken out of context" to "just a theory" to "taught in the temple (God's House) but was wrong". The further you dig to get to the source, the answer has to keep changing.

Related to this, is the idea, that we can be Gods, and God the father was once a man like us. Growing up in mormonism, we were always taught this, that “As man is, God was, and as God is, man may be”. Recently, President Hinkley was asked if the church teaches that we can become gods or if god was a man. He was very evasive, said he didn't really know a lot about it or the teaching and it was just a “couplet”. Again, this kind of revisionist teaching is where many struggle. It seems that if it isn't mainstream or approved by the PR department, the church will ignore or even deny teachings. What was taught that President Hinkley “didn't know much about” is as follows:

"That exalted position was made manifest to me at a very early day. I had a direct revelation of this. It was most perfect and complete. If there ever was a thing revealed to man perfectly, clearly, so that there could be no doubt or dubiety, this was revealed to me, and it came in these words: "As man now is, God once was; as God now is, man may be." This may appear to some minds as something very strange and remarkable, but it is in perfect harmony with the teachings of Jesus Christ and with His promises."
- Lorenzo R. Snow



This is not a “couplet” but a revelation which I found was taught very plainly and expounded upon over and over in general conferences even recently,but is now skirted about because it doesn't fit mainstream Christianity.

One of the interesting/sad aspects of studying and looking for answers is coming across other people who have left the church (this as opposed to general inactivity). Contrary to what is taught by the church, most of these people we have run across have not either committed some large sin or been offended by someone at church. Most have had the same questions and struggles on the same issues as we have. What has changed recently is access to information on these issues. Whereas before, out of print books, old lectures or sermons, and church historical documents were either very difficult or impossible to see or review. Now, information is a keystroke away from whomever wants it and has the ability to sort though the good and the bad. Investigation into the church doesn't have to go through the latest approved church sources for the "pro", or the poor work of groups like Decker's "Godmakers" junk for the "con".

A case in point is Steve Benson, a grandson of past LDS President Ezra Taft Benson. I remember hearing about him in the early nineties when he left the church. I ran across a dialog he put together from a meeting he had with two of the apostles regarding questions he had about the church. His grandfather was very ill at this time, but a meeting was arranged for him and his wife with Elders Oaks and Maxwell. (I wish I could get that kind of meeting!) I contacted Steve Benson directly to confirm the dialog and ask a couple of questions. He responded to the affirmative. Though I don’t agree with all his views, the questions and answers are available if interested, and a good read and insight into current church views and hierarchy from someone with unique access.

Though many people are officially leaving the church, this is just a drop in the bucket compared to those who just go inactive. It is not uncommon in many places of the world to have less than 10% activity levels in a ward. Missionary practices of the past few decades (particularly in South America and Asia) were an abominable failure with mass baptisms and zero retention. It became nothing more than a program of numbers, corporate marketshare and goals. Suprisingly, even recorded growth rate is not only not very good, it is declining. Unlike what is being told and repeated, I found that the LDS church is nowhere near the "fastest growing church". Evangelical Christianity, and even The Seventh-Day Adventist and the Jehovah's Witnesses are growing far faster in total numbers and growth rate than the LDS church is. Again, this doesn't even factor in the huge numbers going inactive almost immediately and are just sitting on the rolls padding the overall member numbers. What is saddest is that the church corporate structure won't hardly acknowledge the membership problem which is saddeled on local leaders.

There is no one particular thing I can say convinced me that Mormonism is untrue. Each problem taken by itself could perhaps be set aside to understand later. But when the church is looked at as a whole, it does not add up with what is being taught. I don’t pretend to guess why Joseph Smith did what he did, although I hope he just got carried away trying to do a good thing. There is some good reading about his mother’s influence and perhaps this is a source of his thinking. I honestly don’t believe that the current church leadership is maliciously conniving to keep all believing a lie. I hope they are sincere in their efforts, but I think they don’t have any different of a relationship with God than we do.

The idea of having one correct church makes sense if there is a need for one church with a lot of rules and doctrines and laws. To me this now sounds like the Pharisees. I don’t think Jesus said to start a church or even a religion. He said accept and follow Him. Pretty simple, yet most of us cannot even do this. People aren’t perfect and will fail you if try to deify them. He gave His word and the Holy Ghost to help and guide you. Letting go of man-made religion and finding a relationship with our Savior is what I now believe will allow you to be in the presence of our loving God and father in heaven. I can’t live up to men’s standards and interestingly enough, most can’t live up to mine, but I can look up to the Lord’s standards and know He will take me as His. All that I have to do is ask.


As I have stripped away teachings of my life and religion and tried to find out what I really believe in regards to doctrine or dogma, what I am currently left with is very small and simple: Accept Jesus as your savior, love God with all your heart, and love your fellow man. That's it. Nothing else. I cannot find any other absolutes and currently think everything else is up for discussion. Maybe the rest of it really isn't that important to God.

I love God, and I am grateful to Him for providing us a savior and perfect example in His son, Jesus. While I can’t say this process has been easy, I feel peace and happiness inside of me and I feel close to Heavenly Father. We are prayerfully and honestly seeking to find truth, and the fruits I see from these efforts have all been good (other than hurting family members feelings).

Some Christians and people who have left Mormonism honestly believe Mormons worship a “different” Jesus and so conclude mormons are “unsaved” and won’t live with God again someday. I disagree. I think many (not all) Mormons have their hearts in the right place and love the Lord and have a personal relationship with the savior Jesus Christ. Their understanding of the trinity is very different from orthodox christianity, but then I am rather skeptical of anyone who claims a complete and total understanding of the nature of God and the trinity. I do happen to think these Mormons will live with our Heavenly Father someday (but not because of Mormonism the religion). Their personal relationship with Jesus will get them there.

It is very difficult to consciously leave Mormonism. Separating Jesus from the church is hard. Following the prophet and obedience to church leaders is taught as necessary for a fullness of exaltation so that we can be with God again. Fear of being deceived or of not having all the answers can be a big part of this pain. I wish the church were "true" as the saying goes, but I have come to the conclusion that it is not. It was a painful process at times, and still ongoing, but this is my opinion from study and prayer and others are always welcome to their own.



Chris <><

[watching4him]

I watched a special the other night on one of local PBS stations on the Mormons, what they where saying was right down creepy. We have neighbors that are Mormons last year at Halloween they invited my two girls to trunk or treat & a chili dinner at their "church", I, later told my DH that the "church" had a feeling that I had felt only one other time. That was when I worked with kids in a group home, and the kids where doing things that opened the door to Satan & his demons. These people are so loss, and they don't even know it. They believe that they are the one true "church' according to the special.

[LUVSLLAMAS]

Try to find an older movie called "The God Makers". It shows in detail what was explained above, but with interviews and animation, etc. I was able to get a copy from the pastor at my church.

The way I see all the cults is this.....there is only ONE way to God and because Satan knows this, he continues to create more and more false paths which lead to destruction.

It's really interesting how God has allowed a Mormon to run for the presidency of the U.S. It is bringing about an awareness of a cult which the world views as "Christian". Glenn Beck on CNN Headline News will be the one to watch these next few years as he debates with true believers. I love the way God uses the media to spread His Word.

[christopher]

Try to find an older movie called "The God Makers".



I would recommend staying away from the God Makers books and movies. They take a little bit of truth, and stretch and twist what is really taught in mormonism. Decker does more damage to the "ex-mormon" cause than he helps. There is much better out there to keep people away or help people out.



Glenn Beck on CNN Headline News will be the one to watch these next few years as he debates with true believers.


I don't think any of us know if Glenn is a true believer or not. I came to Christ while I was still LDS so perhaps he can/has too.



Chris <><

[BeenReady]

Glenn Beck, as you say, may be a christian even though he's LDS, but then you can say that about buddhists or hindus. So everyone might be a christian if they profess faith in a cult.

It's dangerous to put politics before God.

[Zebbani]

I would recommend staying away from the God Makers books and movies. They take a little bit of truth, and stretch and twist what is really taught in mormonism. Decker does more damage to the "ex-mormon" cause than he helps. There is much better out there to keep people away or help people out.


The God Makers books (on which the movies are based) are meticulously researched. I would strongly recommend them. Decker's book, "Decker's Complete Handbook on Mormonism" available on the Saints Alive in Jesus website, documents the facts presented in the God Makers books.

[christopher]

The God Makers books (on which the movies are based) are meticulously researched. I would strongly recommend them.


I wouldn't recommend them at all, and I was a temple active mormon most of my life who served in multiple bishoprics. The research is sensationalistic garbage. I know because I read them and I lived it. The best comparison is like when someone tells a Catholic they are cannibals because of the how they view taking communion. God Makers 2 was even more silly than #1.

There is so much wrong with Mormonism, that is documented elsewhere, that Christians don't need to stoop to the exaggerations and hyperbole of Decker's tripe.

Try Utah Lighthouse Ministries. or IRR or many others which actually say it like it is. Decker and Saints Alive are not the way to preach to mormons.

Chris <><

[BlessedinHim]

My dad was a Mormon, and he believed a lot of the stuff that is in a cartoon on you tube.

That Jesus and Satan were brothers.
That when you get married you are married for all eternity.
After you and your spouse dies, then you are together again and you get to go to your own planet and make spirit babies through celestial sex.
They take Joseph Smith's word over the Holy bible.
Each "prophet" since has newer knowledge, and they will put that over the Holy bible.
Only their bishops or deacons or elders, can baptize "believers"
You can get baptized for someone else.
There is a place where people go in between hell and heaven.

My dad believed this stuff, he was an elder in the Mormon Church. He tried hard to get us to convert to Mormonism very much. And even with all the scripture to show him that the mormon way was false, he wouldnt listen to me or anyone else in the family.