The MADB Body Count

[_Buffalo]

Being a critic is easy because sowing doubt in today's world is not at all difficult.

You bet. Coming to terms with my entire belief structure, concept of my identity and place in the universe, and my hopes and dreams all being based on falsehoods and mythology was easy as pie. A total walk in the park.

Apologetics is a tough business.

You mean trying to make the LDS Church's truth claims appear plausible to anyone who is not already a fervent believer in the LDS Church? Yes, that is a tough business indeed.

Agreed. Coming to terms with the fact that my entire world view was false was incredibly difficult, and remains difficult. What's easy is just going along with all the other believers. The church is true, click your heels together three times.

[_Jason Bourne]

How many of here would consider themselves to have been struggling members whose experience with MADB and/or apologists was a catalyst in the loss of their faith in the LDS Church?

I started getting into FAIR/FARMS/Maxwell Institute writings at about the same time I turned to MADB looking to discuss some of my questions with my fellow Latter-day Saints. I don't know that I can really quantify how much of the catalyst for me was apologetics in general and how much was MADB, but it is accurate to count me among MADB's body count.

For many years FARMS, FAIR and MADB were a life line for me. They also inspired me to try my hand as an apologist. But it became untenable for me. I could not make the arguments for defense of so much work anymore for me let alone make them.

So yes, they had a part in the unraveling of my testimony.

[_Runtu]

For many years FARMS, FAIR and MADB were a life line for me. They also inspired me to try my hand as an apologist. But it became untenable for me. I could not make the arguments for defense of so much work anymore for me let alone make them.

So yes, they had a part in the unraveling of my testimony.

I watched things unravel for you. What I found interesting was that, as long as you held to the party line, you were respected and treated well. Then you made the mistake of talking about things you struggled with or were troubled by. That's when the long knives came out, and some people who had previously treated you well suddenly questioned your sincerity, your integrity, and whether you actually had been a bishop.

When consiglieri went from the bullseye man to proto-apostate, it was much the same process.

[_Jason Bourne]

So you admit that sin was a contributing factor......

Like General Authorities being indistinguishable from televangelists.......

Or the LDS Church spending on humanitarian efforts, over the course of a couple of decades, a fraction of what it is spending on a mall in Salt Lake City........

Or Latter-day Saints mocking and sitting in judgment over those who are struggling with their faith and looking for help........

Or "sin" invariably being defined as something to do with sex, something to do with alcohol or cigarettes, or failing to support anything and everything church leaders say or do without question.......

Or plagiarizing Masonic handshakes and telling people this is how you get into God's secret club, and telling people that underwear with magic Masonic symbols on it will protect them from evil.....

Or campaigning about "traditional marriage" when one is in a religion founded by a man who secretly practiced polygamy and polyandry, and which religion continued to practice polygamy until it lied about stopping it in the 1890's so Utah could become a state, and then stopped it again nearly a decade and a half later......

Or a grown man sitting alone in a closed office talking to a 12 year-old about masturbation......

Or telling people that there was a vast pre-Columbian Hebrew civilization in the Americas somewhere that practiced New Testament Christianity and even knew New Testament verses centuries before the New Testament was written......

Or telling people that Egyptian funerary documents were the record of Abraham teaching Mormonism to an unnamed pharaoh who could not have the priesthood himself because he was a negro.....

Yes, I will admit that sin was a contributing factor.

All I can say is Holy Smoking guns! You have a way of cutting to the chase man!

Another point. Now that the scales have fallen from my eyes I can say the behavior of some apologists (some of whom post here) convince me I never want to be the way they are again, nor to see the world the way they do. I will let you guess who you are.

[Guest]

Enlighten us all.

I misspoke. My apologies.

[_Jason Bourne]

I watched things unravel for you. What I found interesting was that, as long as you held to the party line, you were respected and treated well. Then you made the mistake of talking about things you struggled with or were troubled by. That's when the long knives came out, and some people who had previously treated you well suddenly questioned your sincerity, your integrity, and whether you actually had been a bishop.

When consiglieri went from the bullseye man to proto-apostate, it was much the same process.

An accurate summation.

[_Jason Bourne]

Enlighten us all.

I misspoke. My apologies.

Hoops

You can sure be a funny fellow at times. I appreciate that.

[_brade]

What are you beliefs now Brade? Where exactly do you stand (if you know)?

With respect to most orthodox LDS truth-claims I'm simply agnostic, and, though not for want of trying, I don't find the Mormon epistemological method compelling (I've actually never found it compelling). I've had what I consider mystical-type experiences, but, at least in my case, I've never had one that is self-authenticating in the sense that the experience comes packaged with propositional content (e.g. 'The Book of Mormon is an authentic account of real people') and through the experience itself I'm able to know that the propositional content is true. In every case of my own mystical-type experiences there are other variables that can account for the experience, or it's impossible to determine whether, if the experiences are genuinely from God, they're not just validating perfectly ordinary principles like 'be nice to people' and 'service is good'. In every case of my own mystical-type experiences, in addition to often being associated with specifically Mormon things, there are always perfectly good principles that I can image God endorsing. I just can't find a way to go from my experiences to, say, knowledge that Joseph Smith saw God and Jesus when he was 14, and I've tried very hard and sincerely to do so. The history of Mormonism is troubled enough that without that sort of certainty from some putative mystical experience, it's difficult to justify belief in many Mormon teachings and accounts of history. There are some religious, and I suppose even Mormon, teachings that I hope are true, but that's about as positive a view I can muster.

Here's something sort of funny. Today I tried to change my LDS.org password and this is the captcha I ended up getting. Fitting. I guess God does have a sense of humor.

[_Hoops]

Brade:

I'm not one for pressing spiritual significance upon coincidental events. But yours is one where I might be able to get on board. :)

[_Hoops]

Hoops

You can sure be a funny fellow at times. I appreciate that.

Not bad for the "house evie", eh?