The Largest Repository Of Ex-Mormon Material In The World
Containing 3,346 Articles Spanning 205 Topics
Online Since January 1, 2005
THE MORMON CURTAIN
|
|
2008 Exmormon Foundation Conference Oct. 17 - 19, 2008
|
The time is flying! And time to remind everyone again about the Exmormon Foundation coming up October
17-19, 2008.
Please join us for our annual weekend of education, enlightenment, personal stories, and mingling with a group of interesting and brave people who are exploring life after Mormonism.
Embassy Suites Hotel, Salt Lake City, UT Click here for details: http://www.exmormonfoundation.org/200....
Amazing line up of activities and speakers for 2008, including Steven Hassan - mental health counselor and expert on cults!
|
|
PLEASE NOTE:
If you have reached this page from an outside source such as an
Internet Search or forum referral, please note that this page
(the one you just landed on)
is an archive containing articles on
"EX-MORMONISM SECTION 4".
This website,
The Mormon Curtain
- is a website that blogs the Ex-Mormon world. You can
read
The Mormon Curtain FAQ
to understand the purpose of this website.
→
CLICK HERE to visit the main page of The Mormon Curtain.
|
| |
EX-MORMONISM SECTION 4
Total Articles:
50
A very large selection of posts made by those in recovery from Mormonism. Culled from throughout the Ex-Mormon Communities.
|
|
The huge time requirements preclude time for much else. When I began adding it all up, I realized how massive the time drain was.
1. All day Sunday because it is the Sabbath and the only things allowed were church related. There goes 14% of a persons total time for the year right there. If that is viewed as free time for the average person it would be something more akin to 22% (4 hours of free awake time per weekday subtracting commuting, eating, etc. Eight hours a day on the weekend after subtracting shopping, errands, cleaning, etc. = 36 available hours of free time per week. I will compute based on 4-week months rather than 4.33 to factor in putting on the suit and tie, arranging babysitters, extra trips to the gas station, etc.).
2. Family home evening takes care of Monday night. (Down to 32 hours a week available).
3. Home teaching and visiting teaching at least one night a month. If your families need you at different times, this would go up. Then when the spouse HTs or VTs that takes out another night or two. (Averaged over the month minimally down to 31 hours available).
4. Daily scripture study both as a family and individually. (Even if only 15 minutes/day for each down to 27.5 hours a week of free time).
5. Daily journal writing. (15 minutes/day again 25.75)
6. Weekly preparation for lessons or other callings. (Another hour 24.75)
7. Temple attendance at least once a month. Where I lived, that took out an entire day. (Even if only four hours that drops the weekly average to 23.75)
8. Week night activities; scouts, mutual. (Another evening: 19.75)
9. Monthly scout campouts. (A Friday evening and all day Saturday average over the month: (16.75)
10. Then what of the time they expect you to devote to exercise (dressing out, showering etc. another hour shot at least 3 times a week: 13.75)
10. The weeklong scout camp or girls camp in the summer. That takes up a significant amount of vacation time.
11. General conference takes two Saturdays a year plus the two Sundays that were a total loss regardless.
12. Running kids to early morning seminary or teaching early morning seminary. Losing an hour of real class time for those in the corridor.
13. The two years lost for a mission when others may be volunteering for real causes during breaks from college.
The average Mormon is likely giving in excess of 50% of their free time to the church. In reality, many members are devoting much more time than this and are actually accruing a sleep deficit because the only thing that can give is sleep. The truth of the matter is, there is no time for Mormons to devote to service for other causes.
The Mormon Church is a leach sucking the members dry financially and temporally to shore up a failing dike of lies.
| Is Someone Really Lying If They Don't Know The Truth? I Have Wrestled With This Concept Since I Left Mormonism
Article Archived: Wednesday, Feb 22, 2006, at 07:47 AM
Stored Under Topic: EX-MORMONISM SECTION 4
Outside Link To Article: RIGHT CLICK - COPY LINK LOCATION
Original Author Of Article: SusieQ#1 | TOP | |
Is someone really lying if they don't know the truth? I have wrestled with this concept since I left Mormonism.
At what point does the Mormon church take responsibility for lying about the BOM and other claims? When do they admit their claims are metaphysical, supernatural, and not ever literal?
Somehow, they seem to think it is OK to claim they are spiritual and metaphysical? But, does that excuse the fraud, scam, lie?
It is clear, absolutely no doubt, that Joseph Smith lied about all his claims of old records and translations.
Those are total fabrications.
No golden plates, not from the ground, or from an angel.
But, because people have a right to believe anything by some kind of personal spiritual witness, are they still lying and to be held accountable for the betrayal?
If they really believe that their claim is the truth, can they still be held accountable for lying?
Or are TBM's in general so will programmed that they cannot even consider that what they claim is a lie from the get-go?
What boggles the mind is that there are Mormon apologists who continue to perpetrate the lie. They have to know that they are promoting something that is nothing more than fiction. In fact, if you read their comments carefully, it is clear that they are just playing around with a plethora of verbiage. I doubt that they even take themselves seriously. But, they still lambaste anything and anyone who challenges the information like it is some kind of game. Where or where is the integrity in that?
I suppose it is an ego thing for the apologists. They can look in the mirror and say: "Look how smart I am. I can convince thousands of people what I say is important and the members love me for it."
They are considered the "big guns"-the know-it-all so-called "intellectuals" with a degrees in obscure silliness. They are actually believed and respected and have a following of TBM's who are duped into believing that what these people say is actually credible. Unbelievable!
Each of their articles and comments needs to come with the following warning: Check your brain at the door before reading further!
Many times we wonder if the GA's, for instance, know it is all a sham, a fraud, and a fabrication from the beginning. I am sure that they do, but they do not care. The benefits outweigh upsetting the apple cart. They are so well ensconced in the Mormon bubble they do not see any reason to change anything. They must promote the testimony of faith with not one ounce of credible evidence. Nothing. Zero. Zip.
The most pathetic thing the TBM's do (GA's Apologists, etc)is promote the fiction as fact. I thought these people were trustworthy and were telling me the truth. We all did.
Oh well. That is at the core of almost all religiosity--faith in the imagination of others! Mormonism is just another organization with it's fingers in the political and economic pie and it makes no difference if it truthful or not!
Somehow, lying, false claims and betrayal gets a pass where religion is concerned. It is OK to claim the most ridiculous, impossible, bizarre nonsense in the name of Mormonism.
And, no they are not lying. They could not possibly be lying, or could they?
Maybe they just do not know any better and they deserve our pity.
No TBM or apologist will ever get my trust again. They are not worthy or trustworthy. Nice, maybe, but not trustworthy, not reliable, not credible.
What a relief to be out of that murky mess of goo!
I suppose the best that can be said, giving them the benefit of the doubt is that they are lying but they don't know they are lying. That is, in the case of the apologists. I am sure they know they are just playing a game!
| I discovered the RfM board in September of 2003 and it was a godsend. I'd heard some unsettling facts about JS's polygamy, the Mountain Meadow's Massacre and blood atonement in BY's time. Within 1-2 months of reading there and investigating a variety of sources, I became convinced that the church is not true.
I went through the gamut of emotions and RfM became a major sounding board for me. It was a rocky road but people at RfM supported me through my transition out of mormonism (special thanks to Cheryl and Jerry the Aspousetate).
Within one year, I sent in my resignation. It was the right time for me. I simply couldn't reconcile myself with knowing that I didn't believe all the while the church was counting me as a member.
You know, anything can happen in relationships in or out of the church. There is always the potential for people's attitudes and relations to change, but to me, imagined fears are worse than facing them. Even as an introvert, I would rather be up front and speak my mind to the best of my ability.
First fear: would my TBM wife divorce me? We're still together. Second fear: how would my immediate and extended family react? No major, discernible changes in parent/sibling/children relations. Third fear: would they excommunicate for apostasy? It was clearly threatened but ultimately the decision to leave was mine.
Final fear: would I become a bitter apostate? You won't find me out campaigning for people to leave the church and I don't spend near the amount of time on RfM as I did at my peak. I stop in from time to time, but I no longer feel a need to read every thread. I'm not driven to study mormon issues with my former intensity, but I read and participate as time permits.
Mormons like to say that ex-mormons can't leave the church alone. Easy for a believer to say! Try walking in the shoes of an open-minded thinker for a month, a week, or even a day and then we'll talk.
I know TBMs. Those blinders are so difficult to set aside. Their life doesn't need fixing. Tradition. Generations of Mormonism. I heard the same argument from non-members on my LDS mission. Do they really think that tradtion and emotional bonding make one church truer than another?
| This just occurred to me today, although the general thoughts have been stewing in my head for years.
I haven't been in the church for years, although family connections keep me from becoming totally free, but many of the mental habits I formed way back then still make me uncomfortable in my own skin. Genetics and parental influence probably account for a lot of this, but I still hold the church and its teachings responsible for the challenge I face every day in finding contentment.
I don't know of any other religion that puts so much stress on being perfect, and of assuming responsibility for the welfare of others. The goal of perfection is held out as a seemingly achievable goal, but no matter how much one does in the church, it can never be enough. The goal, as an endpoint destination, is never made fully real or comprehensible. The process of perfection, on the other hand, is discussed at great length and detail. But while it gets so much attention, it is nevertheless seen merely as a means to an end (nebulous though that may be), and the value inherent in the process and the potential to find satisfaction in the process is discounted. The result (for me) has been constant disappointment in myself for not being perfect, while deriving no satisfaction in the struggles and steps in ordinary life.
When I went on a mission, I didn't feel any different than I did before I put on the suit. I wanted to be a good missionary, but I really had no idea what that meant. I got told often, however, about how badly I and the other missionaries were performing, and how, because of my inadequacies, the eternal salvation of others was in jeopardy. I could work 14 hours a day and still feel (and be told) that I hadn't done enough. I racked my brain with questions. Was I praying correctly, or for the right things? Was I reading the scriptures with the right intent? Was I truly listening to the people I was teaching, or was I missing the promptings of the spirit? There was always an infinite number of ways to do things wrong, and no feedback if I was getting things right.
I noticed that I still feel like I need to be a junior jesus when I'm around other people. If they're not happy, or their lives aren't working out for them, I still feel responsible. When I meet a person, I still have the impulse that I should be an inspiration and a help, that somehow that person's future is dependent on me, and I feel inadequate when I can't make it better.
Now that I'm realizing that this isn't my job, I can relax and not worry about failing at it. Ironically, that might actually make it more likely for me to be successful at being a human being.
Funny how after years, things still leap out at you.
| I was just thinking the other day that one of the things I am glad I left behind with Mormonism, is the belief that Satan is behind everything that isn't "right" with the world.
As a Mo, it is easy to just to subscribe to the cultural norm of those around you and decide that you and those like you are doing God's will and therefore are superior. Those who do things you wouldn't, are being ruled by Satan, and are inferior. Therefore you don't have to respect their life choices, or beliefs.
If I have made up my mind to subscribe to a particular political party's position, that position, if it is "in harmony" with what the LDS church teaches is good. The other parties, are being controled by Satan, and I don't have to listen to, or consider their position.
I am glad that I am free from thinking of others as sinners, if I disagree with their ideas, or if I wouldn't necessarily live my life the way they choose to. They are just different. That's all.
R rated movies are not made because Satan wants to plant bad thought in our minds. Alcohol is not made so that Satan can make us do bad things. Unlike so many in the Gret Stet of EW-tah seem to think, the Democrats are not the tools of Satan, to enable sinners to reign supreme in the land.
etc. etc. etc.
I feel so much freer to love my fellow man (and woman) without the need to judge everything they do. Yay!!
| I could not accept for a long time the possibility that some Mormons would be less than honest about the church's history, doctrines and practices. I have always thought that if you believed something to be true you stood behind it, no matter what others may think or believe. As an investigator, a convert, a member for three (long) years, I never heard of the Mormon practice of "lying for the Lord". When I first read about it here a lot of things fell into place to make more sense of my experiences in Mormonism.
As I detest lying and consider it contemptible, except for notable exceptions when it isn't even in the same category as lying for devious reasons, I couldn't for a long time bring myself to conclude that Mormon leaders and missionaries and members choose to lie about some things and even now have trouble making such a bald statement. I'd have to be certain it was true and wouldn't throw around that accusation lightly.
But you know, with even a minimal amount of research (which I admit I should have done before consenting to be baptized) I can trip across instances where I can see that at the very least we investigators, converts, new members are treated in a less than forthright way. My only hesitation now in just going ahead and saying there were many deliberate lies is the possibility that many members don't know their church's history or doctrine either. If they denied a certain doctrine because they didn't know it was actually a church teaching that is not lying, it's just not knowing. Because, after all, most of this stuff isn't taught in church classes is it?
As a new member, I did witness a few times where missionaries deflected an investigator's questions and even once, to avoid last minute cancellation of a baptism, did actually state a deliberate lie (which I suspected at the time and confirmed later). As I knew so little real doctrine and had trouble getting any straight answers (I barely knew about the Net and didn't own a computer) it took a while for me to realize what was going on. I felt that I was sometimes a party to it in that I didn't jump in and say "that's not true", mostly because I always doubted myself ("I must have got it wrong", "I just don't understand yet" etc) and not the missionaries and certainly not the leaders.
The ward mission leader at the time was, to put it kindly, a bit flaky. He and his wife had a passel of young kids. She was impossibly busy as Super Mom and Primary Prez and was massively pregnant for like the sixth time (quite a lot here in Canada). Her husband was very busy with his calling in a big ward and 8 or 10 mishies, all of whom had quite good success in at least getting investigators to talk to. There were enough to have an evening class to get all the investigators together with the missionaries and we had some good talks and enjoyed each other's company. I was newly baptized (and newly "reactivated", having gone inactive the instant my nose came up out of the font but that's another story). The missionaries were also giving me the new member discussions, a condition I requested for beginning to attend church again.
On one memorable occasion, this zealous WML decided to tell the mishies he was taking over. He was going to teach me and he was going to conduct the investigator class. He promptly recounted to the gathering a recurring dream of his that he met Jesus at the 7-11 and he described a bizarre appearance of Jesus, including green hair. As if this wasn't freaky enough to us for one night, he then decided to go off topic from the prepared lesson and told a collection of investigators and new members that JS was more important that Jesus Christ and that you had to get permission from JS to enter heaven. This, he explained, is what made JS more important than Jesus - because you don't need the OK from Jesus to enter, only from JS.
As the missionaries slumped in their chairs, covering their faces, one even groaning, one investigator promptly arose and left without saying a word. Another investigator and me, the new member that was "helping" to get her baptized sat there speechless. I can't really describe how extremely out there this kind of statement is to non-Mormons and especially Christians, even only nominal ones. You just can't say that JS is above JC and hope to get a Christian to convert to your church.
Anyway, the mishies went to the bishop and begged him to release the guy from his calling as he single-handedly had just wiped out three investigators and delayed or nuked a baptism. One investigator, my friend who was planning her baptism, and me, a teetering new member, did show up for SM that week but we were still gobsmacked. We sat there looking at all these Mormons who suddenly seemed so very strange to us. Between the mishies urging us to "fake it til you make it" and this WML talking about Jesus with green hair bellying up for a Slurpee we weren't listening to the prayers but rather were trying to stem the cog-diss (we both had a severe case of the well-I-made-a-commitment-and-now-I'm-stuck-with-it blues so it didn't occur to us to _just_leave_). We whispered what we thought was a really dumb idea, "What if everybody here is just 'faking it'"? What if nobody believes anything and they all think that everybody else believes but them so they're just going along with it til they get a testimony? Then welaughed hysterically at such an absurd idea. (!)
I felt frozen with shock - remember that for me, who had been a pretty devoted churchgoer in the evangelical tradition, a statement like the WML had made about JS being greater than Jesus was the height of absolute blasphemy. The mishies had been hasty to assure us it wasn't true and that they didn't know what had got into the WML. (Turned out much later that they actually just wondered why he had blurted out the "deep doctrine" to investigators because you know, it wasn't necessary for our salvation or anything).
After the SM when I was out in the hall, one of the bishop's counsellors approached me and told me he knew what had happened and he was sorry I had been upset. He assured me in no uncertain terms that there was no such doctrine in the Mormon Church and the WML had just misspoken. Thinking that as the bishop's counsellor (and having said the bishop had asked him to speak to me and set the record straight) he would know church doctrine and not having any clue about the lying for the Lord thing, I believed him and we all settled down, keeping a good distance away from the WML, who was soon thereafter released from his calling.
Fast forward to my RfM years and I then finally see that indeed, this appears to be church doctrine (the WML wasn't so wacky after all?) I must say I am still not certain of what constitutes doctrine and what is just something some guy said that doesn't matter and isn't true, even if he happened to be the Mormon Prophet when he uttered it.
But apparently BY did believe this and say it and at least the WML in the ward I attended believed that when a prophet speaks, that is doctrine. I am still not sure if all these guys deliberately lied (does the rank and file Mormon know about this teaching?) and did they consider it "lying for the Lord" and therefore justified? Or is every member as mystified and/or in the dark about the teachings as I always was?
I don't really think so, as evidenced by all the savvy BIC posters here who seem to know a lot of history and doctrine as well as the source material to back up their statements about it.
Here's what BY had to say about JS in heaven.
(Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 289):
"... no man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith.... Every man and woman must have the certificate of Joseph Smith, junior, as a passport to their entrance into the mansion where God and Christ are ... I cannot go there without his consent.... He reigns there as supreme a being in his sphere, capacity, and calling, as God does in heaven."
If this is what the church teaches and therefore, you'd think, what leaders and members know and believe to be truth, why do they fail to teach it to newbies, indeed, deny it if backed into a corner?
Do they not know about it? Are they lying about it? Is it doctrine? If not, what was BY talking about?
Stuff like this reminds me of a *lot* of very strange goings on all the time I was trying to be a good member. It was like a comedy of errors. Except nobody was laughing. Especially not me.
| recently saw "Why We Fight", a BBC-sponsored documentary film about the U.S. military-industrial complex and the enormous influence it has developed in U.S. politics in the past 60 years. As I sat in the theatre, I wondered how many Americans have seen the film and had their illusions about their country knocked down, or at least shaken. As I was driving home, I reflected on the need to have our illusions destroyed in order for us to grow/evolve.
Last October, I sent my mother an e-mail in which I told her many hard truths about the LDS Church, Joseph Smith, early church history, my negative experience going through the temple for the first time in Aug./83 (complete with the simulated self-violence), having my mission president lie to me just to keep me in the field (I'd contracted a life-threatening disease 10 days after arriving in the country as a result of him assigning me to a filthy shantytown), and other aspects of Mormonism.
My mother couldn't tolerate the truth, even after I indicated that many of the hard facts come from church sources, which she could read, as well as the work of Mormons like Quinn and Palmer, who have spent much more time doing Mormon historical research than she has. Like a TBM, all my mother wanted was to reinforce her illusions about Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon, the early church, etc.
In a discussion with another Latter-Day Saint who was verbally regurgitating the Mormon idea that God blesses and protects the "faithful", I pointed out that a High Priest we both know had not received any "divine" protection when a semi-trailer truck coming in the opposite direction on the highway blew a tire. A large chunk of it flew through his windshield and hit him in the head, severing his ear and doing a lot of facial damage. He spent the next few months in a lot of pain, and died prematurely. From his body language, I could see that the Mormon did NOT want to hear this true story. I'd shaken his faith about a protective, loving "Heavenly Father" by communicating facts that didn't support his illusion.
As a 15-year old young man/Mormon, I had a big crush on a 16-year old girl at school. She was non-Mormon, in one of my classes, pretty, friendly, and always well-dressed. Marnie, my sister's non-Mormon girlfriend from high school, mentioned to me one day that she'd seen Sandra at the local make-out park, throwing used condoms out the window of her boyfriend's car. I was stunned/shocked. As a naοve, young Mormon, I'd been psychologically conditioned to associate friendly, nice, and well-dressed with virtuous. In a second, the illusion that I'd built-up in my mind about Sandra was shattered by Marnie's words.
Twenty-six years have passed since that experience, and all my illusions about my LDS mother and stepfather, younger Mormon sister and her family, older ex-Mo sister, humanity, Life, "God", "divine intervention", religion, leaders, the country in which I live, etc. are gone. Comparing what I used to believe to what I have come to know is true and real by experience, observation, study, and rational/critical thinking, I would have it no other way. There is enormous value in fully acknowledging things as they are, instead of trying to psychologically reinforce one's illusions. Perhaps more than anything, there is great freedom.
One of the strongest illusions is that true security comes from externals: our family, marital status, church and religion, society, the nation's military and police forces, our physical appearance, career or job, academic and professional achievements, home, possessions, money, investments, etc. In the final analysis, none of these things provides true security, as experience and history has proven time and again. As we stop looking to externals to make us feel secure, we cultivate our inner sense of security. As that sense increases, so too does our inner peace.
We no longer need other people to approve of us or like us. We no longer need to live according to what other people think we should be doing with our life. We act with integrity to our inner vision for ourself. No one else may understand us, but we don't need their understanding. We understand ourselves and we live in accordance with our sense of purpose. We harbour no illusions about life, ourselves, or other people, and we would have it no other way. What's left is an understanding that we can think, become more aware, make decisions, and act.
Many people unconsciously buy into an illusion that they are not personally powerful. They get stuck in a self-perception that they are victims. Dismantling that illusion in one's psyche is an important part of healing/recovering from Mormonism. Is there an aspect of your life in which you've been stuck in an illusion for some time? Whether it's an individual, a family, a community, a nation, or this world, surely we would all benefit from getting rid of our illusions.
| In a recent episode of Lost The character Sawyer, a con man, introduces the viewing audience to the concept of The Long Con A Confidence game that literally takes a long time for the ultimate pay off. The episode reminded me of the ultimate in religious confidence games, Mormonism. I have borrowed heavily from an online essay by Albert D. Warshauer, M.D for this RFM contribution. You can see his online essay at:
http://www.sullivan-county.com/nf0/nov_2000/rel_games.htm
Mormonism is the Ideal Confidence Game
For a confidence game to be ideal, it is essential that the victim not realize that he has been swindled. This can be accomplished by delaying the expected payoff until the mark (church member) can no longer return and complain. The promise of a posthumous payoff is nearly ideal since no deceased person has been known to come back and protest about anything. But suppose the victim wants help with an urgent problem. The con men (Church Leaders) can keep the details of the payoff vague and tell the mark in advance that he must have patience and hope (Obedience and Faith) for the payoff to occur.
How can the mark be persuaded to wait for a posthumous reward? A number of convincers can be used.
* First, the expected payoff, such as everlasting life in Heaven or Paradise, can be huge since there is no risk of later complaints.
*Second, an inerrant Sacred Book (The book of Mormon comes to mind) can guarantee the payoff.
*Third, many people (Converts) can play the game simultaneously. People tend to join the group; they want to share in the expected great bargain. The more they pay now, the more they anticipate a later wonderful reward.
Obviously, Mormonism has a big advantage over individual con men when it comes to having a sacred book and a congregation of members who fervently believe in this book.
Mormonism is the ideal religious con game because of the following attributes:
1. Mormonisms confidence game promises that in exchange for payments (contributions/tithing & unquestioning obedience) now, the member/believer is promised a huge payoff (eternal life) later.
2. Disbelievers who do not support the confidence game will not receive this reward and instead will be punished later.
3. Any details or information that would expose the confidence game are changed, doctored, avoided, not mentioned or instructed against critical investigation by the con man.
4. The victims (the members themselves) advertise the con game to attract other marks.
5. The victims freely provide testimonials to the value of the game.
6. The mark can rationalize that the activity, although highly tilted in his favor, is basically honest, since other people have an equal opportunity to join the game and win.
7. The mark is not bothered by a sense of guilt since, to the best of his knowledge, his own participation does not harm anyone.
8. The victims cooperate in their own fleecing and support the game again and again.
9. The victims never realize that they have been swindled and therefore lodge no complaints.
10. If an occasional victim does realize that his money and resources are lost with no likely return, he can rationalize by believing he contributed to a worthy cause.
11. The underlying confidence game blends in with other activities. It is hidden by various personal and social benefits.
12. The remainder of society thinks that the activity is entirely legitimate and respectable.
13. The victim can acquire self-esteem, a feeling of importance, by believing he has joined an admired group. The community may give him more recognition.
14. The people who run the Mormon confidence game are not necessarily well-paid, but they are respected in the community. Their control of the group of participants gives them power and influence in the society.
15. The confidence games can be valuable to the rich and powerful people in the society by helping maintain the status quo and their privileges. The political and religious leaders do not object to the confidence games and may even promote them.
Because of the fore mentioned attributes the Mormon Confidence game can be employed continuously and successfully for centuries. It will remain popular until educated thinking people (us) gradually realize that the promised huge rewards were only part of a confidence game.
Starting the religious confidence games
Ordinarily, the first task in any confidence game is to win the confidence of the participants. In religious confidence games, this means that the religious leaders must convince the prospects that they (leaders and present members) have a special relationship to a personal God. As proof, Mormons religious leaders claim:
(a) that Mormonism possesses a Sacred Book from God, and
(b) many members believe in this relationship.
From the standpoint of a scientist, the claims are flawed because, first, there are no sacred books, and, second, although many members do believe in this special relationship, beliefs alone do not make something true. (yeah think?)
Before Columbus sailed west and reached America, many people believed that the world was flat, but it was round nevertheless. Facts and evidence are more important than the number of believers. There are no reliable facts and evidence which support the claimed special relationship with God.
Religious confidence games
By persuading the members of the church that their leaders can personally communicate with a supernatural God, Mormonism has laid the foundation for a nearly ideal confidence game. An excellent method of persuading the members that past leaders have had this ability is by praising the Book of Mormon, which can be shown as convincing evidence of communication with God. Even better, the Book of Mormon itself can present the proposed benefits of the confidence game. The benefits can consist of miracles in the past and rewards after death.
Briefly, the doctrine of a personal God supports: (a) perfect (infallible) leaders, (b) perfect (inerrant) sacred books, (c) perfect (marvelous) miracles, and (d) perfect (eternal happiness) posthumous rewards.
The first two beliefs link God to Mormonism exclusively. God employs the leaders of the church to transmit the sacred writings to the religious group.
The last two beliefs show interventions by God on behalf of the members during life and posthumously. Together, the four beliefs can be called the "religious confidence quad."
From the standpoint of a scientist, the confidence quad resembles pure bunk.
Religious institutions which have Sacred Books can claim that their members will receive posthumous rewards in Heaven. The religious leaders preach to the members:
"Contribute money and resources to the religious institution now and you later will receive eternal happiness and joy. God commands us to give generously. Sinners who fail to contribute will burn in everlasting Hell!" (sound familiar?)
Non Faith Promoting Details can expose a con game.
Accordingly, Details of the Con that do not promote faith are discounted or even worse discouraged for study. The posthumous rewards are claimed to be wonderful, but no details are given which can be checked in the present.
Since the rewards are not promised until after the person dies, there is no risk that the person will return and say: "The religious leaders are rascals. I trusted them and they swindled me."
Of course, no deceased person later complains. Natural information is what makes a person alive and conscious. Natural information is not a conserved property and is lost when he dies. When the brain cells die, the information which was learned during the person's life is lost. When someone's natural information is lost, there no longer is a person but only a collection of lower level molecules.
Examination shows that the religious confidence game of posthumous rewards comes remarkably close to being an ideal confidence game. A major flaw is that this confidence game, if true, would violate the law of non-conservation of natural information.
Scientists who are familiar with thermodynamics, physics and chemistry are unlikely to give credence to the stories of resurrection of dead people and other miracles which violate established physicochemical laws. However, for children and adults unfamiliar with science, the posthumous reward game has had enduring success over many centuries, including the present era.
There are various religious confidence games, such as posthumous rewards and punishments, the answering of prayers, the members being chosen by God, and the religious leader's intercessions with God on behalf of the members. Once the members believe in a personal God, they may request the religious leaders to ask for God's help. Among their requests might be: forgiving sins, healing disease, providing a safe journey for a traveller, aiding victory in battle, jobs for the unemployed, food for the hungry, rest for the weary, rain in times of drought, and so on.
All of these games have shifted money and resources from the members to the religious institution, its leaders, and perhaps to some needy members. The members by and large do not suspect that some of their cherished beliefs are part of a confidence game. So long as there are many gullible people who are ignorant of science, we can expect that the supernatural confidence games will continue to flourish. The supernatural games are by far the most effective confidence games invented by people.
Examination of proposed benefits
Some proposed benefits from the Mormon confidence games border on the fantastic. The more one examines them, the less substance one finds.
1. Communication with God; supplying food and other needs
Mormon leaders claim they can intercede with God. God can do miracles and provide unlimited resources. But when a famine occurs and children are starving in Africa, Asia and other places, the religious leaders seem unable to call upon God and obtain food from Heaven to feed them. There is no manna, nor multiplication of loaves of bread and fish. Perhaps, the personal God was busy elsewhere, listening to the praise and prayers from the well-fed faithful.
The miracles seem confined to stories in the Bible or Book of Mormon and do not help the hungry, starving children with their bloated bellies, sunken faces, and pneumonia. Apparently, the miracles are more useful for promoting the faith and religious confidence games than in actually helping people.
2. Overcoming natural laws
The miracle of "people walking on the water" has been reported in the Bible. Let us analyze this report. A few insects (water striders, Gerris remigis) actually can walk on water. Water striders weigh much less than a little mouse. They are so light that they can be supported by the surface tension of water. A person is much heavier than these insects and cannot be supported by this surface tension. For a person to walk on water would require a violation of the law of gravity or Archimedes' principle or both. People can swim in water, but not on top of it.
The Bible suggests the walking on water was accomplished by "faith." But since that time, thousands of people have drowned. Not one instance has been reported where a person was saved from drowning by his or her walking on the water. No one, not even religious fundamentalists who claim to have "faith," has been able to demonstrate this miracle again when it was needed. It does not rescue drowning people.
This supposed miracle was presented in the Bible. The story can amaze children, but otherwise its value seems confined to promoting the faith and religious confidence games.
3. Creation of plant and animal species
Mormons and some other religious fundamentalists do not accept the theory of evolution. This theory claims that different species were produced by the natural variation of offspring and gradual selection of the fittest. Instead they claim that God created all of the species of plants and animals during a few days. God, if He so desired, could create a species, such as elephants and giraffes, almost at the snap of a person's finger.
The passenger pigeon and Carolina parakeet were abundant in the U.S.A. two centuries ago, but are now extinct. If the religious fundamentalists can communicate with God as some indicate, why do they not request God to recreate these species? Such a demonstration might provide a reason to include their religious ideas in school textbooks. In the absence of this demonstration, it would be helpful if the religious fundamentalists would stop interfering with the education of children in science.
Incidentally, the Mormon church which opposes the teaching of evolution is itself an examples of an evolving system.
4. Conquering death of people
Mormonisms religious leaders tell their members that people can live forever in Heaven. For some members, the prospect of eternal happiness can be an irresistible lure. They can be caught almost as easily as fish which has swallowed a baited fishhook.
Let us examine the subject of longevity. Studies by actuaries indicate that the odds are more than one billion to one against a person surviving to the age of 140 years. No human has been known to live to the age of two hundred years.
We sometimes can retard, but not stop the aging process. Our hair eventually turns white or is lost. In old age, our skin acquires wrinkles. Visual and auditory acuity are gradually diminished.
We can lessen the incidence and treat some forms of cancer, and we can sometimes slow the development of arteriosclerosis by anti-hypertensive drugs, but we cannot stop these processes. Nor can we stop endocrine deficiencies, such as diabetes mellitus, from becoming more common with advancing age.
Despite all the evidence to the contrary, Mormons religious leaders talk of everlasting life and eternal happiness in Heaven. The promise of eternal life is a swindle which no one comes back to debunk.
5. Heaven
Mormonisms leaders tell us that posthumous rewards are obtained in Heaven . Yet when we ask them for the location of this marvelous place, they tell is that it is near Kolob a make believe location somewhere in the sky. They do not know where Heaven is - is it inside the solar system or outside, inside the Milky Way or outside?
The members are supposed to believe that they posthumously are going to a place without a known location. If Mormons leaders can communicate with God, why don't they ask God for the location of Heaven so they can tell the curious members?
The advantage of the confidence games with posthumous promises, of course, is that no deceased person is going to return and ask why he did not receive his reward. No dead member is going to complain that death was not conquered, or he did not go to Heaven, or did not enter into a state of existence with God.
Details of Heaven:
The beauty of the Mormon Confidence game is found in its unprovable details. Joseph Smith was able to give answers to many of the religious questions of his day....yet still delay the supposed payoff until after death has occurred. Knowing that curiosity about the details could bring the whole idea of posthumous rewards into doubt. Joseph gave answers to such questions as: What happens after resurrection? Does a baby who goes to Heaven grow up, or remain an infant forever? Does a child in Heaven continue to progress? Do the "souls" continue to learn there?
Let us examine other questions. Do trees and birds go to Heaven? If present in Heaven, how did they get there? Do institutions go to Heaven? Why is there evidence of death prior to Adam? What about dinosaurs? any detail that conflicts with church doctrines are discounted and investigation or real answer seeking is discouraged as not supporting the confidence game. The more details we examine, the more problems arise and become NOT important to your salvation. This whole idea seems ridiculous.
The success of religious confidence games can depend on avoiding too much curiosity by the members. Mormonism can use its Sacred Books to support the existence of posthumous rewards and stop unwanted questioning by stating that those questions are not important or vital to your salvation.
6. The posthumous reward parlay
People at horse races sometimes wager on the combined outcome of several races. This type of bet is called a parlay. The odds against winning a parlay usually are much worse than picking the winner of a single race. For instance, if the odds against the selected horse in each of three races are 3 to 1, 20 to 1, and 8 to 1, the odds against all three horses winning is 480 to 1. Accordingly, the anticipated payoff must be much greater if the players are to be persuaded to bet on a parlay.
Suppose people are interested in receiving a posthumous reward. This reward depends on a several step parlay:
The restoration of a deceased person or the continuation of his "soul" (whatever that is).
God is presumed to have instilled a "soul" into the person. This "soul" has no known properties which can be tested by science. Since the natural information of a person is lost by dying, one wonders what information the "soul" has.
The "soul" goes to Heaven, a place without a known location.
The "soul" is transported to Heaven by unknown means.
Unlike people on earth, the inhabitants of Heaven do not age and die.
Unlike the situation on earth where some people are hungry and ill, everyone in Heaven is happy and receives abundant food and drink.
The religious leaders think an omnipotent God so desires their praise and prayers that He favors their members over disbelievers.
Believers are eligible to enter Heaven whereas disbelievers may be denied entry or sent to Hell.
Members of the LDS Church think they are worth being eternally rewarded by God.
LDS leaders want the members to contribute time and money to the religious institution. So they encourage the members to bet on receiving a posthumous reward. However, the odds against winning a parlay with several improbable steps seems huge.
Can the odds be made to appear more favorable? One way of hiding the several steps of the parlay is by employing the single step of a Sacred Book. This substitution seems to reduce the odds of the several step parlay to that of a single step.
Once the members accept the divinity of the Book of Mormon, LDS leaders can use it to deflect the members' doubts and curiosity. The improbability of the several step parlay can be ignored. The religious leaders can claim that the Book of Mormon is more reliable than science. If the Book of Mormon says that members of the LDS church are favored over outsiders in receiving the marvelous posthumous reward of Heaven, it must be so. That ends the discussion.
LDS leaders have been remarkably successful in using the Book of Mormon to support the idea of posthumous rewards. Millions of people believe in the book of Mormon and its claimed posthumous rewards.
7. The religious confidence game parlay
Posthumous rewards are not the only religious confidence games. The other games likewise involve a several step parlay. A view of the early steps follows:
A personal God communicates with people. God has the supernatural ability to simultaneously listen to prayers and requests from thousands of people in many different places on the globe.
God favors humans over other species of plants and animals. If elephants or dolphins had invented the idea of God, their God might prefer elephants or dolphins over humans.
God favors Mormonism over other churches. The opposite, of course, would be a big surprise. Would it not be amazing if Mormonism claimed that God preferred other religions over its own? In the absence of force and torture of the members of persecuted religions, no such instance is known to have happened.
God wants members of the church to generously support the religious institution. General Authorities can claim that everything we have comes from God. In return for God's bountiful gifts, the members are asked to contribute money, time, talents and other and resources to the church. Interestingly enough, it is then up to the church authorities to decide how these funds are used.
God likes prayers and praise. Despite claims LDS standard works, there is no specific proof that God desires prayers and praise. (We ourselves, of course, might like praise from other people, but would we want to be exalted by grasshoppers, ants, or other animals on the other side of this world?)
God can suspend or violate physicochemical laws for the benefit of believers. God can and sometimes does fulfill one's prayers and requests.
Bottom line, Mormonism is a Long Con a confidence game started by a con man... sustained and maintained by con men. The proof is in the details.
| I read the home teaching message for February was "Refined in Our Trials" which, of course, deals with how we can grow from tragedy, especially the pioneer stories. I am all for learning and improving. However, I don't see how the god induced cold and snow, the ill planning of their priesthood leaders, and the subsequent pain were factors of loving father who really wants the best. I wish to address the topic of natural disaster in relation to te nature of faith.
In sunday school, they talked of the flood and how God needed to start over. I think I was the only person who sat horrified about the description of Noah. The sins of many adults made God angry. So, he tells Noah to pack his things and they get on a boat. God then proceeds to flood the earth.
Honestly, did anyone ever consider how many small children, babies, mentally handicapped, and elderly drowned panfully and slowly? Of course, my member friends protest that it less painful or painless and that the children sit on the right hand of God. I guess that makes it "better"?!?!?
How often does the LDS church ascribe natural disasters as sign of God's love - he desire to bolster waning faith. I remember sitting in on a December testimony meeting and how many people bore testimony of miracles and how much love God showed after the destruction. None of them wish to admit that God provided no means for the elderly to avoid drowning in bed, for children choking on water in their cribs, and the remnants of a wasted city. Worse yet, many saw the destruction as God's wrath for "sin" and that it was necessary to "make great things come to pass." So, God, in is anger, drowned kids because of, say, Mardi Gras?
I remember, back in that Sunday School class last week (I went purely to support a roomate), how disgusted I felt. People sitting around nodding and praising the actions of Abraham and how he was "courageous enough" to follow the commandments and rely on the spirit. When asked how I felt by the instructor, I said, point-blank, "I think my father was insane or under an influence and stop him." People laughed and merely saw it as a joke. It went further to describe that Abraham prepared that very morning (without much consideration apaarently).
Frankly, I can't laugh off something so disgusting, that a loving God would "call Abraham's bluff." If God suggested that we rape and individual and we arrive at that proverbial altar, do God and us not stand condemned for the terrible fear struck to our "Issacs"?
We need a strong dose of skepticism.
I often wonder what goes through the mind of a man who decides to walk into a bus in Palestine and detonate a bomb into families, inviduals, and animals. Does this man not pray? Doesn't he feel justified by the feelings he has and the years of religious indoctrination?
Isn't his faith tantamount to the faith of those people in sacrament who literally belief that what a prophet says -"while" acting as a prophet- in inerrant?
When the saints crossed the plains for cause we know to be false, the blame is shared by the leaders and to an extent by the members.
I feel such guilt for knowingly going into the mission as an atheist and feeding people the "gospel"? I feel as though I will bite my fist when I hear that these people died believing a lie that I knew was false. What is worse is that untold generations will spread this to families starving, who pay tithing at the expense of their children suffering or even dying. I stand accountable for so much suffering for not being vocal, for not telling the truth.
Naively, I thought maybe everything I knew was wrong and the church could somehow be true. I tried putting my mind to sleep and now I fear I permitted (or encouraged) irrationality, hostility, poverty, and human suffering.
I was wrong.
I couldn't "unlearn" it. I studied too hard and too deep and now regret the dishonesty of my position. I so desperatley want to correct myself and tell people that I was wrong, yet I hold back because I don't want to rain on their parade. It is dishonesty and a moral failing for me not to share the truth and yet I find myself so incapable of spreading it.
And so, I find church guilty of lying and dishonesty of the mind, a people ingrained in ignorance and hostility to truth, and me, a raison d'entre for a few to sacrifice their minds.
Does anyone else feel similarly? Did anyone goes as far, dishonestly living a double-life?
| "Each of us has to face the matter-either the Church is true, or it is a fraud. There is no middle ground. It is the Church and kingdom of God, or it is nothing." - President Gordon B. Hinckley. "Loyalty" April Conference, 2003.
Believers take the position that Mormonism is true and of God.
Former Mormons take the position that it is a fraud, not true, and is nothing.
As the statement says: "there is no middle ground."
It is so easy to debunk Mormonism, to show that Joseph Smith Jr was not honest or trustworthy, it is a wonder there are still so many believers in the fraud.
Just plain old common sense says that angels and visions do not hold up to scrutiny and validate a claim. Add DNA, archeology, and Mormonism and it's BOM is just more fiction about imaginary people.
Faith is all there is left. And that is not open to debate.
Faith only works if you have it.
If the believers want to rely on their faith in the claims, they are free to do that. Former Mormons are free not to do that also.
The great thing about being a former Mormonism is not that faith is lost, it is just placed in a different place; somewhere reliable and sufficient to hold up to scrutiny.
It really is too bad that the believers are so difficult to deal with.
It is apparent, by the hate mail, the intrusive phone calls, the visits that are unwanted, making complete pests of themselves that they don't even know their own religion nor can they live it!
I doubt you can find a dozen TBM's that can revite the 1st Amendment of their own 11th Article of Faith or have any idea what they own scriptures say, or what the leaders teach.
In an effort to inform and educate TBM's, here are a few things they need to remember before firing off that hate email, that nasty phone call, that intrusion into marriages, the threats, that spouse (generally a female) that threatens divorce:
FIRST AMENDMENT:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
Joseph Smith's 11th article of faith:
"We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may. "
| When I was a kid back in the late 70s, they started showing Leave It To Beaver reruns in the afternoon. The program was like a glimpse into a strange and forgotten world of smiling moms vacuuming in party dresses and pearls, pipe-smoking dads dispensing sage advice, and innocent kids whose worst transgression was smuggling a frog into the house.
But then there was Eddie Haskell. When adults were around, Eddie affected a deferent, almost obsequious front, acting the part of the perfect child. As soon as Ward and June left the room, Eddie was a scheming, dishonest, smug troublemaker, always looking for ways to get away with things. Little did Eddie know that everyone was on to him. They saw right through the phoniness.
That's the church for me. On the surface, it tries to project a hyper-wholesome family image, all Osmondesque grins and "Homefront" sentiment. But in private, it's a sterile corporation with one goal: growth. It seeks outside approval hungrily, but secretly craves the freedom to do what it pleases.
The funny thing is that most people see right through it. Nonmembers I talk to find the church's projected image to be more than a little creepy, as if Ward and June were made into animatronic figures and thrust into the 21st century.
Seems the only people who don't see through the facade are the believers themselves.
http://onlyaball.blogspot.com
| On the battle front between science and religion a soldiers view
Here I am on the battle front of a great war. No, not the battle between good and evil (although some may choose to characterize it as such), but the battle between science and religion, knowledge and faith, understanding and superstition.
I suspect that the battle has been waging since a primitive man looked at his dead wife or child and wondered what had happened. Why? Perhaps it began when a women looked into the stars and saw more than points of light. Whenever it began, it is still waging today and will be waging as long as there remain questions without answers.
In some Incan room, a father cried as his wife took their child to an altar for sacrifice. Blood must be spelt or their crops would fail. God could only provide maize if he became satisfied with the blood of such a child. Was their faith sufficient? Soon such sacrifices became unnecessary. An understanding of crop rotation, soil depletion and weather patterns overtook such faith. Knowledge pushed fear aside. Did the Incan father or mother suspect that there was more to crop failure than the blood of their child? Did the farmer in Europe begin to question his priest regarding the need to satisfy Romes directive in order to ensure a bountiful harvest?
One man looked into the sky and understood that the earth revolved around the sun. Others saw the same. At first, their voices were quiet and subversive. Over time their voices rose in a sonic crescendo and left the voices of superstition inaudible. A proper understanding ended a chariot ride through the sky. Men where imprisoned, threatened, but knowledge flooded a thirty people, slowly at first, followed by the flood waters of education.
Here I am, sitting on a very tiny part of a battle field largely ignored by the great generals fighting this Constant War. The battle surrounds three letters, DNA. No, it is not the battle regarding the evolution of mankind. It is the insignificant battle of the claims of a fourteen year-old boy who lived in rural New York. What an unlikely corporal in this war he would become. His troops see him as a General a term he used to describe himself, but in reality he is just a corporal, if that. But thousands, maybe millions, are affected by his struggle.
The outcome is already known, just the casualties remain uncounted. The corporals strategy was ruined without him even knowing or understanding his predetermined demise. The Generals battle (and reputation) was established in the telling of the origins of native Americans. In that same unknown world which required child sacrifice, a New York teenager voiced an answer, many answers, to lifes great unknowns. Soldiers fell behind the self-proclaimed General. And they marched, few noticed. And in the end, their great war became a small, almost unnoticed Civil War in that Constant Battle. One day the rising water of science will eradicate nearly every claim Corporal Joseph made. One day peace will come to this battlefield. Not soon enough for the dying, but eventually, needless sacrifice will end and truth will emerge victorious as it always has emerged.
The flood waters will be from the same source that eradicate the battle of all extremes and the voice of all fanatics. Education is the drum beat, Understanding the battle cry.
Will the war ever end? Not likely. As long as man fears death, religion will survive. Science will never disapprove a negative the bastion of hope. So in the end, religion will survive, but this small battle will be forgotten by all except its warriors. | |