Breaking Away

[_harmony]

Many that participate in other religions, less socially rigid than Mormonism, do not frown so much on their family, friends and neighbors that stop attending.

You've obviously never been a Baptist who converted to Mormonism.

[_Ceeboo]

Hi Honor,

I think people give Mormonism and Joseph Smith too much credit for this. I would credit human nature and basic facts of sociology.

I would agree to disagree (Doing a lot of that lately) :)

To leave a religion like Mormonism requires more than a change of building and learning a few new hymns. It requires an overhaul of one's worldview in most cases. My opinion - most people who leave Mormonism for critical reasons as adults approach other religions with the skeptism that Sock described by dint of the fact - they are adults. Don't blame the person that the alternative religions fail the smell test. It isn't Joseph Smith's fault that Catholism (for example) is just as bad a choice if one is approaching it from the perspective of an outsider. If one is concerned about social reasons for being in a religion, it's hard to justify why an ex-Mormon with family in the church would accept that as a choice over faking it in the LDS Church. And that sums up why a lot of Christians in the US are Christian - they are what they were born into.

Disagree (apples and oranges, to be sure)

people credit for not falling in the same pit twice.

Exactly the point I have been trying to offer.

It is, after all, a bit ironic to me that Ceeboo suggested that atheism should be looked at as a religion in order to explain the phenomena.

Ceeboo suggested that atheism should be looked at as a religion? (Where?)
In order to explain the phenomena? (Where?)

Are y'all reading the same threads as me tonight? LOL

Why not accept there are alternatives to religion that are not only valid, but do not need to be mislabeled as such just so religious types can feel that there must be some familar terrain along that path? It's an undiscovered country to accept one doesn't know if that is the honest truth.

I guess I must be the "religious type" that has "mislabeled", yes?

by the way: For the record, I do indeed accept that there are valid alternatives to religion.

Peace,
Ceeboo

[_LDSToronto]

Sock, I can't say I've become an atheist; agnostic is a better label because I really don't know if there is some prime creator or prime actor and if there is, I am not sure of this prime actors nature or influence on my life.

What makes Mormon conversion different than any other conversion is it's reliance on the claim that Joseph Smith Jr. saw God the Father and Jesus Christ, in the flesh, as two real, indisputable human-like beings. I was on the fence about god before I heard the JSJr account of meeting God and this tale basically won me over. I mean, here's a guy that *saw* and *spoke* with GOD!

If one stays wrapped in the warm arms of the church, there is all kinds of corroborating evidence that Joseph saw god. But, as soon as I found out that there were reasons to doubt what Joseph claimed, my world just fell apart. The only god I believed in was, most likely, a character in a work of fiction. Replacing that fictional character with another character with even less evidence just seemed preposterous. And so I'm left where I was before, comfortably doubting, sometimes hoping, but never, ever believing.

H.

[_Dad of a Mormon]

Ceeboo,

Maybe I missed it and you have already explained this, but why do you think that going from Mormonism to atheism/agnosticism is all too common and sad?

Just to make it clear, I'm asking as a Ceeboo fan.

Thanks,

Dad of a (Former) Mormon

[_sock puppet]

Sock, I can't say I've become an atheist; agnostic is a better label because I really don't know if there is some prime creator or prime actor and if there is, I am not sure of this prime actors nature or influence on my life.

What makes Mormon conversion different than any other conversion is it's reliance on the claim that Joseph Smith Jr. saw God the Father and Jesus Christ, in the flesh, as two real, indisputable human-like beings. I was on the fence about god before I heard the JSJr account of meeting God and this tale basically won me over. I mean, here's a guy that *saw* and *spoke* with GOD!

If one stays wrapped in the warm arms of the church, there is all kinds of corroborating evidence that Joseph saw god. But, as soon as I found out that there were reasons to doubt what Joseph claimed, my world just fell apart. The only god I believed in was, most likely, a character in a work of fiction. Replacing that fictional character with another character with even less evidence just seemed preposterous. And so I'm left where I was before, comfortably doubting, sometimes hoping, but never, ever believing.

H.

It sure beats being 'comfortably numb' as a Chapel Mormon.

[_Dad of a Mormon]

If one stays wrapped in the warm arms of the church, there is all kinds of corroborating evidence that Joseph saw god. But, as soon as I found out that there were reasons to doubt what Joseph claimed, my world just fell apart. The only god I believed in was, most likely, a character in a work of fiction. Replacing that fictional character with another character with even less evidence just seemed preposterous. And so I'm left where I was before, comfortably doubting, sometimes hoping, but never, ever believing.

If I may be so bold in asking, what caused you to research Joseph outside of the "warm arms of the church"?

[Guest]

Hi Ceeboo-

My short answer to your post (for any who care and who hate long posts and reposts) -

As Sock and other's have said in this thread, I think people leave the LDS faith skeptical, but also they leave looking for something to hold onto. And I contend it's the fault of the religious views available that the substance sought is lacking, not the person's doing the searching.

Long boring repost with responses-

I think people give Mormonism and Joseph Smith too much credit for this. I would credit human nature and basic facts of sociology.

I would agree to disagree (Doing a lot of that lately) :)

I don't know if agreeing to disagree about something as fundemental as the effect of Mormonism on a person's beliefs is reasonable. This was, at one point, a Mormon discussion board after all. Unless you want to discuss masturbation? or DCP? or Will Schyver? ;) If so, I suppose we can agree to disagree.

To leave a religion like Mormonism requires more than a change of building and learning a few new hymns. It requires an overhaul of one's worldview in most cases. My opinion - most people who leave Mormonism for critical reasons as adults approach other religions with the skeptism that Sock described by dint of the fact - they are adults. Don't blame the person that the alternative religions fail the smell test. It isn't Joseph Smith's fault that Catholism (for example) is just as bad a choice if one is approaching it from the perspective of an outsider. If one is concerned about social reasons for being in a religion, it's hard to justify why an ex-Mormon with family in the church would accept that as a choice over faking it in the LDS Church. And that sums up why a lot of Christians in the US are Christian - they are what they were born into.

Disagree (apples and oranges, to be sure)

Ok. But why?

Ceeboo suggested that atheism should be looked at as a religion? (Where?)
In order to explain the phenomena? (Where?)

I noticed that Sock's quote came from Rambo's masturbation thread. I forget why it was part of that discussion, to be honest. To recap, I believe this is the quote -

"Among an enormous list of things that you might find some value in, I have found value in the fascinating perspective that you can get while taking a glimpse into the human minds/thoughts of people who once KNEW that the LDS Church was true and now KNOW that there is no God/Creator at all."

Perhaps you and I read something different into the comment about knowing. It seems it is meant to demonstrate how a characteristic of many people's beliefs within the LDS religion translated into an atheistic view with similar traits.

I would contend that a person who does as you suggest above has, indeed, simply traded one religion for another.

I further contend that it doesn't accurate reflect how most people I know came to settle on agnostism or atheism from Mormonism. It seems reasonable to me that someone approaching the evidence for various religious beliefs with fresh eyes can come to the conclusion that no one knows the truth about God and therefore forms beliefs either atheistic or agnostic to the concept of God. I know we disagree here over why, but at this point I would not credit Joseph Smith or the LDS faith for more than any other environmental factor adds to the process. I simply suggest it is the manner in which we engaged the evidence and in my opinion it has more to do with age and life-experience than religious upbringing.

In this sense, I feel your quote attempts to make atheism or agnotism comparable to religions by suggesting all options are equally valid but Mormonism tends to push people into extremes with no room to settle in a preferred middle. I do not think it is accurate to suggest this. Frankly, I personally feel that to compare Mormonism to atheism (and I mean anyone who does so, not just you) is exercising an aesthetic preference rather than making a point demonstratable with evidence. I again point out that someone who fit your characterization (trading "I know "X"" for "I Know "-X"") probably is just trading one extreme view for the other. But again, I feel this does not characterize most people I know who have left the LDS church as adults. Most I know, including myself, spent a good deal of time looking deeply into Christianity and other religions. My loss of belief in God took a couple of years following my loss of belief in the LDS church. As noted in your atheism thread multiple times over, I think agnostism is the default best choice by which to self-identify for believers as well as non-believers with whatever tones of belief or disbelief one may lean towards thrown in for flavor. We don't know. Personally, I don't see why, given the information available that contradicts basic religious premises, it is seen to be an extreme view to reject them and be atheistic towards specific beliefs on top of that agnostism.

by the way: For the record, I do indeed accept that there are valid alternatives to religion.

Peace,
Ceeboo

Nameste.

ETA: correct typo, soften the tone

[_honorentheos]

Sock, I can't say I've become an atheist; agnostic is a better label because I really don't know if there is some prime creator or prime actor and if there is, I am not sure of this prime actors nature or influence on my life.

What makes Mormon conversion different than any other conversion is it's reliance on the claim that Joseph Smith Jr. saw God the Father and Jesus Christ, in the flesh, as two real, indisputable human-like beings. I was on the fence about god before I heard the JSJr account of meeting God and this tale basically won me over. I mean, here's a guy that *saw* and *spoke* with GOD!

If one stays wrapped in the warm arms of the church, there is all kinds of corroborating evidence that Joseph saw god. But, as soon as I found out that there were reasons to doubt what Joseph claimed, my world just fell apart. The only god I believed in was, most likely, a character in a work of fiction. Replacing that fictional character with another character with even less evidence just seemed preposterous. And so I'm left where I was before, comfortably doubting, sometimes hoping, but never, ever believing.

H.

Great post, LDST. Thank you for sharing it.

[_sock puppet]

Sock, I can't say I've become an atheist; agnostic is a better label because I really don't know if there is some prime creator or prime actor and if there is, I am not sure of this prime actors nature or influence on my life.

LDST, these questions are asked respectfully:

1-do you know if there is in fact a Santa Claus?

2-do you know if there is in fact an Easter Bunny?

What makes the question of the existence of diety any different? There is no credible evidence of any of the three.

[_Nightlion]

Part of it, at least for me being a life long member, was we have such a unique perspective of God's nature and what man can become that anything else seems inadequate. Either he exists the way we have been taught or not at all. If you have grown up believing that one day you might become a God switching to another religion is a bit of a let down.

For members who have converted then left it might be a different perspective.

Where to begin to show how the LDS have the WRONG concept of their own God unique to LDS scripture. Hypocrites do not get insights.......not ever. They only get darker and darker until they lost all light.

Man does not ever become God. Men (women) get to become a multiplier and replenisher as was Adam and Eve.
God is NOT the father of you spirit body.
God did not have sex with Mary to get her pregnant.
Adam is not God.
Adam IS the father of our spirit bodies.
God the Father, Jesus the Only Begotten, and the Holy Ghost are together the Very Eternal Father whom in concert called our uncreated and eternal intelligence out of the Light of Truth into independent existence by the word of their power which is how we came to exist, receiving the gift of the knowledge of our respective sphere of existence. (D&C 93) That is how Christ is called the Very Eternal Father in the Book of Mormon.
The organization of intelligence is a completely separate epoch of eternity from the creation of our world, given to Adam and Eve, where all the hosts were multiplied and replenished BEFORE there was any flesh upon the earth.....so scripture is saying that Adam and Eve were our parents in heaven. That is what Joseph Smith taught in a vision he gave to two friends who witnessed it using his arms for pillows while they gazed into heaven.
God the Father did not sit upon his throne from all eternity as Joseph said. He did take his turn at being a Christ. But just as Christ was the Very Eternal Father before he came into this world, so was the Father, as their course is one eternal round. That means where they tread is repeated....that is good logic it tastes good, as Joseph used to say. I can teach you more in thirty minutes than you have yet learned in your entire life as LDS.

Oh, I guess I already did. Your welcome.

Mormons are wrong about a lot of things. That does not sink the God of Joseph Smith. IT just means a bunch of stupid greedy Gentiles could not value the Restoration properly. Pride is now preventing repentance.