Is Mormonism so bad?

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Yeah, it’s interesting to say the least, Lem. I suspect the BIL will calm down once he realizes he can’t pout his way into getting his way. I don’t really know what the problem is. It’s a totally catered affair, at a very cool venue, and no one has to do anything except to show up, eat some free gourmet food, and visit. It’ll be awesome. Way better than the soul sucking baby crap smelling drudgery inducing LDSXperience!TM.

- Doc

[Lem]

Yeah, it’s interesting to say the least, Lem. I suspect the BIL will calm down once he realizes he can’t pout his way into getting his way. I don’t really know what the problem is. It’s a totally catered affair, at a very cool venue, and no one has to do anything except to show up, eat some free gourmet food, and visit. It’ll be awesome. Way better than the soul sucking baby Crap smelling drudgery inducing LDSXperience!TM.

- Doc

Lol. This is my fear if I die first. My husband is a nice, pleasant Catholic guy, who will be completely overwhelmed if my nasty LDS family gets involved. next thing you know, I will have a green apron on, a Mormon bishop officiating, and a Mormon veil over my face in my casket. I asked him about this and he said, in all sincerity, "but you're catholic, why would your Mormon family interfere?" Lol. He is so happily naïve, and so completely unprepared for the Mormon onslaught.

My instructions to him are to immediately call my brother #4, and tell him, "LEM has passed away, and she doesn't want a Mormon burial to happen." Brother #4 and I have discussed this extensively. He is 14 years younger than me, and he will NOT let the Mormon sh*t happen.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Lol. This is my fear if I die first. My husband is a nice, pleasant Catholic guy, who will be completely overwhelmed if my nasty LDS family gets involved. next thing you know, I will have a green apron on, a Mormon bishop officiating, and a Mormon veil over my face in my casket. I asked him about this and he said, in all sincerity, "but you're catholic, why would your Mormon family interfere?" Lol. He is so happily naïve, and so completely unprepared for the Mormon onslaught.

My instructions to him are to immediately call my brother #4, and tell him, "LEM has passed away, and she doesn't want a Mormon burial to happen." Brother #4 and I have discussed this extensively. He is 14 years younger than me, and he will NOT let the Mormon sh*t happen.

You just described my SIL’s worst nightmare.

And between you and I, we’ve paid for everything so the Morms have nothing to bitch about. Their biggest Trump card is, “bUt iTs fReE aT tHe cHuRcH!” Guess what, idiots? It’s still free now, isn’t it?

- Doc

[Jersey Girl]

Update. Our niece’s father yelled at her today because her mother’s celebration of life isn’t a memorial service being held in a LDS chapel in the form of a church service.

BIL isn’t talking to my wife, and they were close before this.

That’s what Mormonism does to families.

- Doc

I read your story. Dear god. I am so sorry.

[Meadowchik]

Lol. This is my fear if I die first. My husband is a nice, pleasant Catholic guy, who will be completely overwhelmed if my nasty LDS family gets involved. next thing you know, I will have a green apron on, a Mormon bishop officiating, and a Mormon veil over my face in my casket. I asked him about this and he said, in all sincerity, "but you're catholic, why would your Mormon family interfere?" Lol. He is so happily naïve, and so completely unprepared for the Mormon onslaught.

My instructions to him are to immediately call my brother #4, and tell him, "LEM has passed away, and she doesn't want a Mormon burial to happen." Brother #4 and I have discussed this extensively. He is 14 years younger than me, and he will NOT let the Mormon sh*t happen.

You just described my SIL’s worst nightmare.

And between you and I, we’ve paid for everything so the Morms have nothing to bitch about. Their biggest Trump card is, “bUt iTs fReE aT tHe cHuRcH!” Guess what, idiots? It’s still free now, isn’t it?

- Doc

Reminds me of this, except the exmormon does not have to be troubled or dysfunctional to get similar treatment. They'll still be considered lost to some extent, and in need of saving after they're gone:

Grieving for The Invisibles Today (self.exmormon)


I find myself reeling from the death of a longtime acquaintance. She died prematurely, she was in a very large LDS family growing up in Mormon Central. Even way back twenty years ago, she was a black sheep of the family. I don't know all the details, to be clear, but she did things like not go to church and other Mormon-prohibited things that non-LDS people consider normal experience of healthy development. She eventually married and had children, but it was always within that Mormon paradigm of bouncing between worthiness and unworthiness. I know that we should not blame everything on the church, and I do not know how she died. Her family surely loved her, they grieve, and they express hope in eternal families.

But a part of me is so crushed for this woman. I could be way off on my analysis in her case, but I think that we can say there are cases like the one I describe, many times over: an individual does not fit into Mormonism for one reason or another, they retreat and rebel and are not consistently allowed a way to be a good, honorable person in the eyes of their community but also outside of the Mormon mindset dictating rigid rules and personal choices. So they suffer and struggle, not having a really safe place to heal and grow into a worldview that is healthier for them. And maybe they develop unhealthy coping mechanisms that serve to deteriorate their relationships and reinforce the black sheep stereotype, seen by others but most crucially themselves, that Mormonism teaches: be righteous and faithful and you will prosper, and if you struggle and dwindle, only repent and you will be happy.

I was not able to go to her funeral, but chances are the bishop or stake president preached the Plan of Salvation over her casket in the ward chapel. She will always be the one who "had her struggles." Dry heaves of tears and pain, guys, this is what I am feeling. It's for the invisible people who do not find a way to adapt within Mormonism but are also unable to thrive outside the safety of that group's full approval and support. Maybe this is one thing that drives us, this subreddit. Listening and speaking so that people can be seen, really seen, by others who understand. Helping each other find and create places where we can be in full honor and dignity in our own conscientious choices and journeys.

I grieve for those not seen in their full dignity.

If you're hurting, please reach out. Don't forget that what you do day in and day out can make a positive difference for yourself and others.

https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comme ... les_today/

[Kishkumen]

On Carrier, I don't feel obligated to defend him or his work. But I will acknowledge it doesn't appear to me anyone has taken him seriously. If we say he's being really ignorant and foolish to argue something like if the miraculous things said about Jesus likely didn't happen that means Jesus didn't live at all, then it appears the problem is with those who are misrepresenting his position and work. My biggest hang-up in defending his work is it's been a couple of years since I've looked into his position and in a lazy, accept the easily consumed product kind of way, I think he made some really interesting points and observations. My simplistic take is it doesn't matter at all if Jesus lived, actually--if history can uncover his life in a possible way. My concern would be is the story told about him in any sense true? It certainly doesn't look like much more than an amalgamation of many sources and considerations. If so, that really renders the magical narrative told about him as likely untrue.

The point here is, and I think Carrier readily acknowledges it, as I recall, there is little distinction between thinking there was likely a person who lived named Jesus who was perhaps a charismatic teacher who gained a following, but the magical stuff told about him didn't really happen, and thinking the myths developed about a Jesus, included a creation of a Jesus figure--meaning the guy never really lived anyway. The thing is, of course some guy lived and of course some guy named Jesus lived. But if the story told about him is nothing near what happened to anyone named Jesus, then who was he? Whose life are we discussing? That seems like a different issue than naming a number of other people who had their life stories enhanced and made-up. To me the question of whether there was an actual jewish teacher named Jesus and he is the one who was said to be a savior-god, doesn't really matter. Whose life would we need to verify in order to fulfill the burden of the claim? Some random Jewish guy named Jesus? Or some random Jewish guy named Jesus who had a mother named Mary, who was a virgin at the time of his birth, a guy who spit upon a deaf and blind person to heal them and was killed by crucifixion? A guy who taught others names Peter, James, John, Simon etc? It doesn't seem like any of those elements are verifiable. If so, what's the point? He might as well have been a made up person.

Um, no, Stem. Your problem here is you are coming from the position of someone who once believed it was incredibly important that Jesus lived because you also believed he made your resurrection and salvation from sin possible. Now that you are not sure that fairies exist, suddenly the rest of it appears to be negligibly important. I can tell you as a Roman historian that I take the gospels and other New Testament literature very seriously as historical documents, including both the authentic letters of Paul and the pseudepigraphic ones.

Jesus is, I have concluded, most likely a historical figure because he was executed by Pontius Pilate, a figure known to Philo and Josephus who also left behind at least one inscription in the reign of Tiberius. His treatment of Jesus in connection with events surrounding Passover is consistent with other problems he dealt with at other Passover celebrations. He was a miserable governor who provoked and murdered Jews. The fact that the Gospel accounts of Jesus, the Passover, and Pilate match so well accounts of Pilate interacting with local Jews in other works means the Gospels provide valuable supporting witnesses to our other historical accounts of Pilate. No, I do not think that the Gospels are about a made-up Jesus into whose fictional life a historically verified Pilate was thrown for verisimilitude. Pilate is not the kind of figure who would be thrown in for those purposes. The emperor, yes. A minor governor in a backwater province, probably not.

[Lem]

Um, no, Stem. Your problem here is you are coming from the position of someone who once believed it was incredibly important that Jesus lived because you also believed he made your resurrection and salvation from sin possible. Now that you are not sure that fairies exist, suddenly the rest of it appears to be negligibly important.

Huh. That really really does not describe the stem i have interacted with and whose posts i have assiduously read on this thread and many others like it, but i'll let stem step in for the definitive description of his position.

[honorentheos]

The point here is, and I think Carrier readily acknowledges it, as I recall, there is little distinction between thinking there was likely a person who lived named Jesus who was perhaps a charismatic teacher who gained a following, but the magical stuff told about him didn't really happen, and thinking the myths developed about a Jesus, included a creation of a Jesus figure--meaning the guy never really lived anyway. The thing is, of course some guy lived and of course some guy named Jesus lived. But if the story told about him is nothing near what happened to anyone named Jesus, then who was he? Whose life are we discussing? ...

Um, no, Stem. Your problem here is you are coming from the position of someone who once believed it was incredibly important that Jesus lived because you also believed he made your resurrection and salvation from sin possible. Now that you are not sure that fairies exist, suddenly the rest of it appears to be negligibly important. I can tell you as a Roman historian that I take the gospels and other New Testament literature very seriously as historical documents, including both the authentic letters of Paul and the pseudepigraphic ones.

Jesus is, I have concluded, most likely a historical figure because he was executed by Pontius Pilate, a figure known to Philo and Josephus who also left behind at least one inscription in the reign of Tiberius. His treatment of Jesus in connection with events surrounding Passover is consistent with other problems he dealt with at other Passover celebrations. He was a miserable governor who provoked and murdered Jews. The fact that the Gospel accounts of Jesus, the Passover, and Pilate match so well accounts of Pilate interacting with local Jews in other works means the Gospels provide valuable supporting witnesses to our other historical accounts of Pilate. No, I do not think that the Gospels are about a made-up Jesus into whose fictional life a historically verified Pilate was thrown for verisimilitude. Pilate is not the kind of figure who would be thrown in for those purposes. The emperor, yes. A minor governor in a backwater province, probably not.

Thanks for your specialized and critical perspective, Kishkumen. I think your post gets at why the theological concerns around Jesus of Nazareth may be all that matters to those to whom he is merely a religious figure. And if that is all one is concerned with, the question of whether or not Jesus deserves any attention is answered equally in the negative if he is a myth or the stories told about him so excessively mythologized as to have buried the historical man. But it also points out why there is more than just this binary religious concern.

Once one begins attacking the investigation of a historical person behind the stories to defend the mythologizing of Jesus, one has moved out of that binary religious concern. And inevitably it seems the mythicists who do so end up primarily attacking secular positions and historical methods like a blindfolded kid attacking a pinata who only seeks to feel satisfied thumps whether or not its the original target being struck. That exposes the truth here that the mythicists don't know the difference between myth and historical method. Otherwise, why attack it if they agree the belief Jesus was real but mythologized is sufficient to dismiss the theological Jesus the Christ? Why the need to set fire to the body and demand it be proven there is no historical person in there somewhere or the work is left unfinished? Doing damage in their zeal?

[Moksha]

I will have a green apron on, a Mormon bishop officiating, and a Mormon veil over my face in my casket.

I doubt I would be able to discern an apron, veil, or Hefty garbage bag. I would want my children to be comforted.

[IHAQ]

Yeah, it’s interesting to say the least, Lem. I suspect the BIL will calm down once he realizes he can’t pout his way into getting his way. I don’t really know what the problem is. It’s a totally catered affair, at a very cool venue, and no one has to do anything except to show up, eat some free gourmet food, and visit. It’ll be awesome. Way better than the soul sucking baby Crap smelling drudgery inducing LDSXperience!TM.

- Doc

The reality is BIL is unimportant in all this. He's simply one of the extended family and should attend whatever arrangements are made by the deceased's Spouse, parents (if still alive) and children. The BIL shouldn't be anywhere near the eulogy other than if he's invited to contribute anecdotes by the aforementioned direct family members. Mormon men think they control everything. That's Mormonism. Perhaps he fears for his own status if his stress death isn't used as a recruitment drive for missionaries...

I have found that when dealing with Mormon men like your BIL, it is usually less painful for everyone to be very direct and blunt with them. Trying to spare their feelings never works. You have to treat them like over indulged children. It's the only way they listen. Think about the example the 15 old blokes give. They don't listen to reason or gentle persuasion, you have to slap them in the face (with activism or legal proceedings) before they reconsider things. Mormon men will bully you if you let them, and what's the best way to deal with a bully?