Does a chapel Mormon really know church history?

[_Dr. Shades]

Does a chapel Mormon really know church history?

Usually they do in my experience.

Do they know that 1/3 of Joseph Smith's wives were already married to other men?

[_Always Thinking]

You wouldn't go to a Ford dealer to find out about Chevy would you?

They don't all know church history, but they all know this analogy. It's perhaps the most popular analogy that Mormons have memorized. I swear they have an analogy pamphlet that is distributed in relief society or something. Another popular analogy that I've heard from multiple sources is used to describe the witness of the Holy Ghost. According to the analogy, it's like trying to describe color to someone who can only see black and white. That one has become really popular.

It's funny the difference between chapel Mormons and apologists. Chapel Mormons insist that we only get our information from official sources because you wouldn't go to a ford dealer to learn about a chevy. Meanwhile, the apologists tell us that it isn't up to the church to teach us about real church history. We should be finding this stuff out on our own, and if we don't know about the issues it's because we are lazy.

The funny thing is that in real life, when I'm researching a product, I certainly DO go to many sources to find information, then take into account where the information came from and then make my decisions accordingly. Would I completely trust the Ford company to give me ALL the information I want to hear about their product? No! I would definitely go to the Ford dealer, but then I would talk to competitors, talk to people who have driven Fords, etc.

Its a bad analogy all around.

[_Inconceivable]

We're never going to be able to say anything conclusive on this topic because all we have is anecdotal evidence. My experience (42 years and counting in the church) suggests that most members are not particularly aware of church history, let alone controversial items.

I am reminded of the seminary teacher who told me last year that Joseph Smith's practice of polygamy was limited to marriages "in name only" to support elderly widows. He flatly denied that Joseph had practiced any form of polyandry or had consummated any of his plural marriages.

Or I think of my bishop in Texas, a department chair at a major university, who looked at me blankly when I went to him for help in resolving some of my issues with the church. Book of Mormon anachronisms? Nope, never heard of them. Book of Abraham translation problems? Nah, don't know what you're talking about. He said to read my scriptures, pray, and attend the temple. Did that. Didn't work.

Probably the best evidence that the rank and file don't know much about these things is the utter shock expressed by some people when they learn of these things. Some of the apologists sneer at these people, but the shock is genuine. Most people aren't curious enough to go beyond the lesson manuals and the scriptures, but sometimes they stumble across stuff, and it troubles them deeply.

It is amazing how parallel our experiences have been (I mean many disaffected Mormons).

In my case it was the stake president rather than the bishop. There were so many things this intelligent and learned man had no clue about. Our last conversation disturbed him enough to do some research himself, well.. research statements by the brethren that he used for his talk in the upcoming stake conference - topic being: don't go researching on the internet and other anti places.

Most of the members don't have the foggiest concerning the basic true history.

A history (Truth Restored), a history, we need no more history..

[_guy sajer]

I would venture to guess that most know at most only what the Bretheren want them to know, although that might be changing a bit now, at least in North America among the educated classes but to a much lesser degree in the developing world.

Keep in mind that our experience is largely limited to middle & upper-middle class, educated North America. What do you think the status is outside this cultural bubble, particularly in the developing world?

[_Inconceivable]

She responded with "NO! LIES!! NO HE DIDN"T! You've been reading lies, and you need to go to the proper sources. You wouldn't go to a Ford dealer to find out about Chevy would you? No! I've read at least 4 books about Joseph Smith. Those are lies! Lies!! Do you read on the internet? You are naïve. You don't understand where to read..."

Yeah, the typical TBM really knows their church history.

I was just like your Aunt for many years. I want to prove a point here.

Here is the list of books I read from cover to cover as a TBM:

Book of Mormon (+22 times - paradigms written, lots memorized)
New Testament (6 times, some memorized)
Old Testament (not even one time through)
Pearl of Great Price (lots)
D&C (7 times)
Truth restored
Articles of Faith (by Peterson and Smith)
Faith Precedes a Miracle
Our Heritage
Mormon Doctrine (McKonkie)
Lectures on Faith
Gospel Principles
Marvelous Work and a Wonder (4 times)
The Great Apostacy
Jesus the Christ (twice)
Miracle of Forgiveness (not just once)
1981 and 1983 Missionary Discussions in English and Spanish (memorized ad nauseum)
The White Handbook
Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith
The Endowment Session (in the temple)
Witness and a Warning
Nearly every yearly priesthood Manual
Gospel Doctrine manuals from about 1980
The Ensign (If I didn't read it, I glanced at most of the topics for 20 years)
General Conference reports (in the ensign - I rarely missed GC for 20 years)
Diaries and Journals of Joseph Smith-Faulring
History of Joseph Smith - Lucy Smith
Another diary book of Joseph Smith
Journal of Discources (bits and pieces)
History of the Church Volumes 1-3 - BH Roberts
Other stuff I don't care to recall..
..and I prayed, taught and performed miracles etc.

Wow, Inc. that's a lot of books, you're a book nut (no, it took 24 years, and I read slow too).

I did not even have a clue that Joseph Smith lied to his wife, committed adultery with married women and teenagers, gave 3 first visions, had no knowledge of hirogliphics - the papyra found in 1966, Emma remarried, number of Joseph's surviving children and what they didn't do, DNA, the fraud of the Great White God. Big list.

BECAUSE NONE OF THIS IS IN THERE.

I was also under the impression that SUNSTONE etc. was a think tank of academics that simply were looking beyond the mark. I paid those people no mind.

During my true discovery stage, I read from these church owned/published books/records/publications:

Joseph Smith, Personal Geneological Record (on line)
Times and Seasons
More of the Journal of Discourses
BF Johnson Biography
Excerpts from diaries from Mormons surrounding Smith
Believing History (Bushman)
Farms Reviews (The most faith destroying material I ran across)

Now the Anti Stuff (the Chevy dealer stuff)


Joseph Smith Fought Poligamy (RLDS)
In Behalf of Joseph (RLDS)
Nauvoo After the Exodus (RLDS - Joseph Smith III)
Research on Mormonism (RLDS)
Joseph Smith Who Was He (RLDS - Williard Smith)
Joseph Smith and His Progenitors (RLDS - Lucy Smith)
By his own hand - Larson
Emma Smith - Mormon Enigma
Various Excerpts from In Sacred Loneliness, and others
THE NAUVOO EXPOSITOR
MMM books
Web sights with accumulated quotes from various last dispensation GA's
NOM board (for about 5 days)
and now registered with Mormon Discussions and others

Am I really much different than many of you all here?

[_Nephi]

I think the thoughts of a chapel Mormon is summed up rather well on South Park:

Look, maybe us Mormons do believe in crazy stories that make absolutely no sense, and maybe Joseph Smith did make it all up, but I have a great life and a great family, and I have the Book of Mormon to thank for that. The truth is, I don't care if Joseph Smith made it all up, because what the church teaches now is loving your family, being nice and helping people.

Really, even though the episode is rather a farce, this is the real answer in a nutshell, and when called to defend their beliefs, they try their best, and come up with some outlandish things, however on the inside, they really don't care, because how they measure it all is what benefits they get from it currently.

[_Inconceivable]

I think the thoughts of a chapel Mormon is summed up rather well on South Park:

Look, maybe us Mormons do believe in crazy stories that make absolutely no sense, and maybe Joseph Smith did make it all up, but I have a great life and a great family, and I have the Book of Mormon to thank for that. The truth is, I don't care if Joseph Smith made it all up, because what the church teaches now is loving your family, being nice and helping people.

Really, even though the episode is rather a farce, this is the real answer in a nutshell, and when called to defend their beliefs, they try their best, and come up with some outlandish things, however on the inside, they really don't care, because how they measure it all is what benefits they get from it currently.

I have run into several that do not want to know. As if what I'm about to say is either an infection that literally destroys truth or is simply a pin to burst a bubble they recocnize to be exceptionally fragile.

[_dartagnan]

I would say most do not. Most certainly do not know about the difficult issues.

I'll never forget the fireside I held at my home several years ago. The Stake President's son gave a talk about the martyrdom of Joseph Smith. He didn't mention the fact that Joseph Smith was armed at the time and actually shot back, wounding two men. After the talk we were all sitting around talking, and someone brought up the "fact" that Joseph Smith was unarmed.

Only at that time did it dawn on me that the speaker neglected to tell this part of the story. So I kindly informed her that she was actually wrong. Joseph Smith was not an unarmed victim. He had a pistol smuggled into the cell and he was more than willing to take the lives as many as he could in the process.

Well, the look on her face was like "You're kidding right"? And then she asked me why the speaker didn't mention it, expressing doubt that I knew what I was talking about. I was TBM at the time so I rationalized that it probably wasn't pertinent to the message. But the longer we talked the more other people got involved. Eventually the chatter spread to about eight different people, none of whom knew Joseph Smith was armed.

So are members generally ignorant of LDS history? You betcha.

[_richardMdBorn]

Based on this thread about a MAD discussion

http://www.mormondiscussions.com/discus ... ght=#79499

I'd say that internet Mormons don't know much about US history.

[_beastie]

While there may be certain wards that have more educated (in terms of church history) members than others (particularly in university wards), in my experience, overall most members only know the whitewashed church history presented to them in church material or meetings.

MADdites would proclaim these members "lazy" and declare that if they become panicked and stressed when finally learning about the history, they have only themselves to blame. It's not the church's job to teach these things, they have nothing to do with the "plan of salvation".

Sure, they're lazy. They're only donating many hours of service every week, on top of trying to manage an often larger than normal family, on top of trying to meet all the private commandments (scripture reading, FHE, etc) that are time consuming. Really, how much time do most people have to thoroughly study church history?

And, more importantly, if you believe that church leaders will not mislead you, why would you even suspect that a "different" church history exists in the first place?

When I was losing faith, I tried to talk to many different members about it. Most had no idea what I was talking about. There were a few who were familiar with some of the issues.