DiscussMormonism.com

I was looking through some of the files I had from discussions at FAIR, and I thought I'd raise this issue again. The TBMs at FAIR were arguing that people do not leave the Church for intellectual reasons - ever. Sin is always involved. What shocked me was DCP's failure to condemn this kind of thinking. If anything he encouraged it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Beowulf - Feb 4 2005, 07:43 PM

One close friend told me that I would leave the church, just like he did, as soon as Bro. Benson became President. Why? Because Bro. Benson was too conservative for the both of us. (This was true, by the way) I patiently explained to him that when Bro. Benson became President, he would not say anything that would offend me. (And he did not)

But what about my friend? He had been dabbling in drugs since he was 15, was woefully depressed for years, never married, grew bitter, etc. etc. And yet his withdrawal from the Church was intellectually based?

Or how about my brother-in-law, who taunted my sister for believing in the silly BofAbr, as he drifted away from the church. After their (inevitable) divorce, he was later jailed for child pornography, and last I heard took his son (my nephew) to a rally in Washington DC in favor of legalizing marijuana. Is his withdrawal intellectual?

Or my sister (the same, who no longer believes), she has been put upon by two nasty husbands, and just become bitter about life.

Or my brother, who blames everybody but himself for his viscissitudes in life, and wanders from one New Age idea to the next. Is he withdrawn for intellectual reasons?

I could go on and on, but... so far, in my nearly 50 years of life, I do not personally know a single person who has left the church without SOMETHING gnawing at him or her. It is not the truth or untruth of Mormon history, or of the Bible, that dissuades any of these people. That is just the reason they put forth.

I am sorry, Kevin, but you have struck a nerve.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Daniel Peterson - Feb 4 2005, 07:54 PM

All of the following rests upon on the assumption that the Church is indeed God's true church, and that Mormonism is, in its essence, God's unique saving truth. (Without that assumption, the question seems somewhat pointless.)

From the perspective of eternity, there can be no legitimate reason for leaving the Church of God or for turning one's back upon God's revealed truth and will. Such a decision is simply and always wrong.

However, our knowledge here is limited, fragmentary, imperfect, and distorted. So it's possible that one can leave the Church for reasons that, given the flawed nature of our knowledge in mortality, genuinely appear to be good and sufficient. It's a matter of our perceptions.

But our perceptions are always colored by our own individual personal history, character, knowledge, ignorance, desires, mental and emotional health, ambitions, etc. So no decision to accept the gospel or to reject it is likely to be purely rational, uncolored by "personal" factors.

We can trust that God knows this and appreciates it far better than we do, and that, in his mercy, he will take such factors into account. Those who have sincerely done their best will, I believe, be blessed for it, even if they took mistaken detours. On the other hand, I wouldn't want to tempt God. And those who have lived carelessly, heedlessly, and cynically, are also living recklessly.

Having said all of this, I add for the record that my experience with friends, relatives, and acquaintances who have left the Church has been very similar to Beowulf's. I'm not sure if I know of a single case of purely intellectual apostasy.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Wade Englund – Feb 4 2005, 08:30 PM

At the risk of being thought "arrogant" by the ever humble and open-minded Kevin Graham. My observations from personal experiences with siblings, other family members, and close friends, echoes that of Beowulf and Dr. Peterson and Ray A..

One need but take a stroll down "Reovery" lane to hear all the intellectual reasons cited for their having left the Church (see MC's list for starters), and yet not help being struck by the non-coincedental evidence of more deep-seated factors that may have contributed as much if not more to their departure--not that all, or even most, who leave the Church will suffer from the kinds of disfunction and anit-social tendancies rampant there.

Even still, in cases where matters of faith are supposedly decided solely on an intellectual basis, that is suggestive of an absence of the Spirit in the process, which significant factor must be factored into the equation. In other words, leaving the faith can't just be for intellectual reasons. It unavoidably has to do with the lack of the Spirit as key component (i.e. the "head" working at the exclusion of the "heart" and "soul").

I suppose the same, in principle, can be said of those who leave the Church for purely emotional reasons.

I hope this helps. Thanks, -Wade Enlgund-

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Leeuniverse- Feb 4 2005, 09:12 PM

Legit..... Well, that word imply's "reliability". So, I would say NO. Because the Church is literally true, no reason can really be "legit".
However, do they "perceive" legit reasons? Sure, we ALL think we are right all the time, even if we are wrong.

So, they have a right to be dumb, just like we all do sometimes in our lives.
What's sad though, is when they REMAIN dumb, choosing to instead remain hard-headed and hard-hearted, rather than continuing to grow. I'm so glad I was wise enough to let go of my negative judgements, and instead have a more constructive focus. It's what lead me to finally find the truth, which seemed even impossible to ever find, given all the beliefs in the world one has to weed through.
But, as the Gospel teaches..... Faith, Humility, Meekness etc. will lead one there.

What's interesting about this is their willingness to completely discount the stories of exmormons they've communicated with online, sometimes for years.

Just tonight coggins declared that I had "never believed" in the first place. Yes, he's an extreme version of this phenomenon, but in the end, most of them are completely content to believe we simply lie about our own histories and stories.

beastie wrote:Just tonight coggins declared that I had "never believed" in the first place. Yes, he's an extreme version of this phenomenon, but in the end, most of them are completely content to believe we simply lie about our own histories and stories.

If you sacrificed then you believed. I know I did on my mission.

Sin is always involved.

It is too easy to sin in Mormonism. There are sins of commission. There are sins of omission. It is impossible to be "not" sinning every moment of your life. I have no idea why sin is brought up as a reason for someone leaving. Every believing member in the church is also sinning....every moment of every day.

It has to be more than just sinning that will cause a person to leave the church.

If you sacrificed then you believed. I know I did on my mission.

I believed with all my heart.

But when presented with sufficient contradictory evidence, I altered my beliefs. I was never a True Believer in the sense of the word as I understand it today - someone who is so enmeshed with his/her belief system that he/she will continue to believe no matter what contradictory evidence may arise.

I argued a while back that I think in many cases where sin precedes a person's exit from the church, loss of faith preceded sin. People's faith erodes, and therefore so does their sense of obligation. People's motives are complicated, and I doubt anyone has ever abandoned religion simply because they wanted to sin.

DCP wrote:However, our knowledge here is limited, fragmentary, imperfect, and distorted. So it's possible that one can leave the Church for reasons that, given the flawed nature of our knowledge in mortality, genuinely appear to be good and sufficient. It's a matter of our perceptions.

But our perceptions are always colored by our own individual personal history, character, knowledge, ignorance, desires, mental and emotional health, ambitions, etc. So no decision to accept the gospel or to reject it is likely to be purely rational, uncolored by "personal" factors.

I know this statement was made under the assumption that the LDS Church is true, but I am still amazed that he could write this without giving more credence to the notion that you suffer with the same limitations when you think you have gained a testimony as you do when you lose it. What makes testimony any more correct than a conviction that the whole thing is bogus, given the existence of these factors?

CaliforniaKid wrote:I argued a while back that I think in many cases where sin precedes a person's exit from the church, loss of faith preceded sin. People's faith erodes, and therefore so does their sense of obligation. People's motives are complicated, and I doubt anyone has ever abandoned religion simply because they wanted to sin.

Yes, of course, sin itself is a concept that arises from a certain belief anyway. What we are talking about, I suppose, is the imperfection in people's conviction to adhere strictly to a given set of beliefs and practices consistently throughout life. To those who remain in the Mormon paradigm, the sinning into apostacy narrative either self-affirming or persuades one back into line, while to those who leave, it becomes less and less compelling all of the time. Anyone who feels pangs of guilt for drinking coffee has simply failed to deconvert sufficiently not to care. This is not to say that all guilt is motivated by religion. It is not, but I would say that the theological framing of guilt as part of one's interaction with a particular religion is learned and not inherent.

Leeuniverse - now that is a blast from the past. He lived around Henderson, Nevada if I remember right. Wonder how he is doing?

Two things...

Who doesn't "sin?"

I am quite sure you could look at the lives of anyone who has released belief in the LDS church and find some imperfections, flaws, mistakes, or disobedience of some sort. Just as you could any believing member.

To suggest that people stop believing because of sin or, to engage in sin is just nonsense.

Secondly, from an "eternal perspective," of the Amish, Scientologists, Catholics, Muslims, FLDS, or any other of a number of religions, there is never a good reason to release belief. They too may hold to the idea that sin, or Satan, or temptation is the cause of disbelief.

I mean seriously this is such a silly argument/belief/teaching.


~dancer~