What I've learned from apologetics

[_Runtu]

Sometime around 1995-96, I stumbled across the old alt.religion.Mormon listserv boards. A few of the usual suspects were there: Russell C. McGregor, Charles Dowis, Randy Jordan, and others.

That was where I first realized that I wasn't alone in having rethought my beliefs in response to new information. A lot of the posters there were what Shades would call "Internet Mormons," people who rejected orthodox teachings because current evidence no longer supports the old views. Back then, I thought we were perilously close to heretical, but these days the views espoused on a.r.m. wouldn't even cause the major apologists to shrug in disinterest.

But the anger was always there. I don't think I'd ever met an angry apologist until I met Brother McGregor. Some of us tried to build bridges with secular and religious critics, but he and others of his stripe were having none of it. I could never figure out what made them so damned angry, but it was frustrating to me that they often destroyed whatever good will anyone else may have brought about.

I read my posts from back then, and I see a hopelessly naïve believer, someone who thought that, underneath it all, people were basically good. Then I started posting on the old FAIR board.

Back when I was posting as a believer on FAIR, my beliefs were pretty mainstream, at least to the group that posted there. Sure there were a few uber-orthodox fanatics, but most of us had adjusted our Mormon paradigm enough to make things work, and we were pretty much on the same page.

I had some good exchanges with ex-Mormons, some of whom, like Ray A and Polygamy Porter, became good friends. I learned that, even the "vilest" of ex-Mormon could still be a hell of a good guy.

Then I left the church. Suddenly, people who had once been friendly and respectful treated me as if I were the worst kind of degenerate. One poster sent emails around to mutual friends suggesting that I was a sexual predator and perhaps mentally ill. When I reached a suicidal point in my life, one FAIR poster told me I deserved to feel that way, that I really should want to kill myself.

It was then that I realized that most of what goes on in the boards has nothing to do with Mormonism or religion at all. It has to do with personality, with group think, and with an us vs. them mentality. A lot of the pettiness, the hate, the sneering, would have come about even if it had been a board about, say, the Simpsons or bird watching. That the boards are about Mormonism dictates the content of the discussion, but other than that, it's the same.

What is fascinating to me is not so much that ex-Mormons can be angry and bitter and nasty; I get that. I understand why people would be angry. But it's utterly amazing to see otherwise normal Mormons spew such rage and hatred (and then say, who me?). I've often said that the main difference between RfM and some of the LDS boards is not the level of hate, but rather the absence of overt profanity.

Several friends of mine from way back have likewise left the church. One of the founders of a.r.m. left several years ago; and one of my closest TBM friends from back in the FAIR days is now one of my closest exmo friends. Oddly enough, we're not really different, though our views have changed. We're still the same people, even though we're supposed to be wallowing in despair and alcoholism.

Anyway, what I'm trying to say in this longwinded post is that discussing Mormonism comes down to dealing with personalities. The wisest people I've met online don't take the religious discussion all that seriously but enjoy the exchange of perspectives and personalities.

So these days I'm glad I'm still here. I've met a lot of good people, and some not-so-good people. Thank you to everyone who has made my stay on these boards interesting.

[_CaliforniaKid]

An excellent post, Runtu. What you say is quite true: Mormon or non-Mormon, we're all human beings and subject to the various foibles thereof. Some people are just buttheads. Their religion doesn't make them that way, and they're not likely to change. So the best thing to do with these people is to ignore them, and to refuse to take anything they say too seriously or personally.

[_John Larsen]

Absolutely true.

[_selek]

A very insightful and interesting post, Runtu.

I've pretty much given up on discussion boards as a method to learn truth and visit them almost entirely for entertainment value now.

After I left the LDS religion, I struggled with whether or not I would remain Christian. I visited CARM for a while. What I noticed was that, as long as you are agreeing with them and hammering the Mormons who visit there, they were very "buddy-buddy" with you. The moment you politely point out logical or scientific flaws in the Bible or Christianity, they turn against you like a pack of wild dogs. Some of the long-time posters there even removed me from their "friends" list after I indicated that I was unsure about Christianity.

My experience has been that discussion boards about religion and politics are either a) an echo chamber, or b) a hotbed of tit-for tat argument with little substance. There might be occasional interesting posts and insight, but you have to wade through a lot of crap to find a gem. That doesn't mean they can't be fun to visit, however!

[_harmony]

My observation is it's never been about converting anyone or quieting any anxiety or answering questions. It's about scoring points, and that's all it's about.

These are the instructions:
Get in line, stay in line, keep your eyes on the back of the head of the guy in front of you, and don't try to see what's ahead. You don't need to see what's ahead. You just need to put your feet in the footprint of the guy ahead of you. Do not look to the side. Do not look behind. Do as you're told. Trust us. We will save you from horrors unimaginable. Your only task is to put your foot in the footprint of the guy ahead you.

Once you look to the side, or see ahead, or step out of line, or walk to a different beat, you are damned, and as one of the damned, we, as LDS apologists, will stone you, beat you, hammer you, ridicule you, laugh at you, pity you, ignore you, and/or report you to your bishop so you are officially ostracized from your family and friends.

[_Jersey Girl]

My observation is it's never been about converting anyone or quieting any anxiety or answering questions. It's about scoring points, and that's all it's about.

Scoring points how and with whom? I'm just curious how you see that dynamic.

These are the instructions:
Get in line, stay in line, keep your eyes on the back of the head of the guy in front of you, and don't try to see what's ahead. You don't need to see what's ahead. You just need to put your feet in the footprint of the guy ahead of you. Do not look to the side. Do not look behind. Do as you're told. Trust us. We will save you from horrors unimaginable. Your only task is to put your foot in the footprint of the guy ahead you.

Once you look to the side, or see ahead, or step out of line, or walk to a different beat, you are damned, and as one of the damned, we, as LDS apologists, will stone you, beat you, hammer you, ridicule you, laugh at you, pity you, ignore you, and/or report you to your bishop so you are officially ostracized from your family and friends.

But why, harm? Why are you damned, stoned, beaten, hammered, ridiculed, laughed at, pitied, ignored or reported with the possible end goal of isolating you from your family?

Why?

Why bother with apostates at all?

[_harmony]

My observation is it's never been about converting anyone or quieting any anxiety or answering questions. It's about scoring points, and that's all it's about.

Scoring points how and with whom? I'm just curious how you see that dynamic.

Scoring points against those who have rejected them. That's what it feels like... like they have been personally rejected. And it stings. Makes them think they've been found lacking.

But why, harm? Why are you damned, stoned, beaten, hammered, ridiculed, laughed at, pitied, ignored or reported with the possible end goal of isolating you from your family?

Why?

Why bother with apostates at all?

Because the apostates have the unmitigated gall to walk away from them. To turn their back on what they believe is truth. To dust their feet against them. And no one gets to do that, except the apologists.

Inactives aren't a threat. They don't care enough to make it official. Apostates on the other hand have figuretively given the church, and the apologists by extrapolation, the finger.

It's all about pride. If it wasn't about pride, there would be a whole different approach by the apologists. The anger, the ridicule, the rest... it's all fueled by pride. It's the same as it was in the bad old days, when the church was just getting started. A person couldn't just reject the prophet and walk away unscathed. No, they had to be vilified, called a whore, their earlier pristine reputation sullied. It's the same now. The words are different, but the same pride drives the anger. Rejection is hard to take, especially when something is as ingrained and as totally encompassing as the church is.

[_Jersey Girl]

Scoring points against those who have rejected them. That's what it feels like... like they have been personally rejected. And it stings. Makes them think they've been found lacking.

Well...maybe they HAVE been found lacking or at least their arguments have and maybe attempting to "score points" against those who have rejected them instead of improving their arguments, makes them look like insecure and petty fools.

I dunno, whatcha think?

[_harmony]

Well...maybe they HAVE been found lacking or at least their arguments have and maybe attempting to "score points" against those who have rejected them instead of improving their arguments, makes them look like insecure and petty fools.

I dunno, whatcha think?

It's not what you or I or the rest of the world thinks that's important. What's important is how the other apologists view them, how the regular member views them, how the leaders view them... and scoring points against the opposition is how one moves up the ranks.

Never get the idea that they care how the rest of the world views them; they don't. They only care about moving up the leadership ladder... Pride, remember. It's all about pride.

[_Jersey Girl]

It's all about pride. If it wasn't about pride, there would be a whole different approach by the apologists. The anger, the ridicule, the rest... it's all fueled by pride. It's the same as it was in the bad old days, when the church was just getting started. A person couldn't just reject the prophet and walk away unscathed. No, they had to be vilified, called a whore, their earlier pristine reputation sullied. It's the same now. The words are different, but the same pride drives the anger. Rejection is hard to take, especially when something is as ingrained and as totally encompassing as the church is.

An LDS friend once told me when discussing the church, "That's easy for you to say, I'm on the inside."

They were right. I'm not on the "inside", I'm on the outside looking in and I'm telling you, harm, I have observed the exact dynamic you refer to above on boards like these and in real life. I never went looking for it. I never knew it existed. I never knew about church early history with regards to the events you write about above.

After so many years of interacting with LDS online and in real life, I observed the pattern over and over and over again, and it was only much later (perhaps the last 4 years?) that I decided that it was a cultural thing that had been transmitted generationally over the years.

I think your post above confirms that for me.

Maybe, just maybe, folks who are active or apologists, need to get a life and stop trying to interfere with the lives of others, be they blood relatives, extended family or friends.

Get a life, stay out of it and if people believe in the power of Heavenly Father as they claim they do, how about trusting Him to do the work of saving souls or isn't His work good enough for them?