I think it's easy to believe whatever you want to believe. I've been reading lately about how contravening evidence can actually increase faith. When it's in your interest to believe something, you can believe it. I think it is easier for some people than others - like it's easy for some people to be hypnotized and impossible for others.

I think most GAs probably have doubts in the backs of their minds. But I think that's true of every Mormon. GAs aren't special, and the illusion that the Church is what it claims to be is probably maintained even at the highest levels regardless of doubts.

As former believers, I think it's tempting for us to believe that the simple truth will make the scales fall from the eyes of the Mormons. But beliefs can be impervious to the sharpest intellect and the greatest weight of knowledge. Look at D. Michael Quinn, for example, who, I've read, still believes.

I think GAs, and other Mormons, say to themselves, "That doesn't seem right, but I know the Church is true because of my spiritual experiences." And then they consciously dismiss their doubts. That's what I did until I was 23 and back from my mission.

I also think that many GAs are simply not educated in Church history and apologetics and leave that stuff to FARMS. That was certainly my impression from a recent post that included a link to a recorded conversation with an apostle.

I also think GAs are very canny and do things in a way that most members of the Church would find shocking. Like many patriarchs, they probably do ordinances and blessings by rote. They probably make very calculated decisions about things that are supposed to be inspired, such as where to send missionaries. But instead of causing them to doubt whether they are really God's chosen, they assume that that's how God works - through their thoughts and actions. (edited to add last paragraph)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/09/2010 08:25PM by orsonsplatt.

William Law apparently was asked how Smith kept the secret from getting out. (http://waynesimister.mysite.com/lawint.htm ) Law said the following:

"...This was simply the result of a very smart system adopted by the prophet and his intimate friends like Brigham Young, Kimball and others. They first tried a man to see whether they could make a criminal tool out of him. When they felt that he would not be the stuff to make a criminal of, they kept him outside the inner circle and used him to show him up as an example of their religion, as a good, virtuous, universally respected brother."

One imagines that if he was the "stuff to make a criminal" he was good for the inside job. Like some point out, the top brass in a MLM are good at building trusted inner circles.

If this is true (and BY's tenure sure adds fuel), then one would bet it continued with each passing first presidency. Once a collusion, it's hard to see them stop it.

We see many recent examples of purposeful cover-ups.

1978 OD1 denying that they ever were blatantly racist. Worse, right after the "blacks-n-p-hood" revelation,changing the BoM verses of "white and delightsome" with little to no explanation.

1980s all the Hofmann dealings, coverups and spin. It was sickening when I learned about it.

1990s Temple endowment changes. Intensifying the secrets of their corporate holdings and their tithing income while hyping membership numbers.

2005 BoM introduction change to downplay losing the lamanites

2010 Blatantly, in full view, editing words days after in order to get out of the immediate hot water they found themselves in.

Add these thoughts to the knowledge the 15 sit on the board of many many billion dollar corporations and land holdings of which many are claimed as tax exempt and not required to report earnings, well, it's not hard to imagine that they engage in some corporate shenanigans. Honest men acting as gods' spokesmen and corporate executive officers? Yeah, right.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/09/2010 09:00PM by Jesus Smith.

what 2010 editing are referring to? Thanks!

wonderer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> what 2010 editing are referring to? Thanks!


The blatant editing of Packer's talk. There have been other examples of this in the past:

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2600407/posts


Cover up is often evidence of collusion.

(195 members of Six Quorums) they all do their jobs and preach/teach/live/maintain the Party Line. These are jobs, paid jobs with a decent employee package.

I presume some believe every single bit of the LDS claims literally. Some probably do not.
But does any of that matter? No. Of course not.

It's a "true church", a Restoration Church with prophets, ordinances, and a savior, but as with most, the initial claims are about visions, prophets, spiritual witnesses, etc.

Does the BOM have to be factually correct and true? No, of course not. Neither does the Bible.

That is how God Myths work. Always have. They are about beliefs by faith. Factual evidences are never necessary. In fact, they are contrary to faith.

The best way to understand the LDS Church, in my experience and observation of over four decades, is as a generational, cultural,societal, American God Myth with it's unique,specific traditions and teachings, not unlike most religions. Leaving it is best described as leaving your tribe, in my view.

These men sit there, on their "thrones," and allow members to sustain them as "prophets, seers and revelators" and special witnesses of Christ. They'd remember whether or not they ever talked to Jesus. They know they're not any of those things.

What TSCC calls the Quorum of the Twelve is, in reality, a Board of Directors for a major-league for-profit corporation masquerading as a church. They understand the financial holdings of the Corporation of the President and the Corporation of the Presiding Bishop.

Common rank-and-file members may be duped, but there's plenty of evidence that they know exactly what they're doing.

I have to agree with Unindoctrinated. At the level of being a general authority, these guys HAVE to know that it is a bunch of nonsense. They probably believed in modern day revelation, prophets, etc. before they got where they are. I don't think it would take very long or many GA meetings for these guys to realize that no one is talking to God. At that point, they are of course too invested in it to get out or to say anything contrary.

On the one hand, it seems like it is no big deal that these guys want to continue with the ruse. On the other, it's a shame that so many gullible ignorant people are spiritually and morally damaged by these con-men. I don't know how they can live with themselves.

Wow. Changing the words of the BofM. That's over the top. "White" and delightsome was meant literally. SWK at times observed Native American members and commented their skin was getting whiter.

How can anyone believe this has anything to do with God?

It's easy for someone who no longer believes to assume that the evidence is so overwhelming that no one in their right mind could believe that Mormonism is what it claims to be.

The problem with that line of thinking is that this is not about factual evidence for these guys. Their belief is completely grounded in their "spritual experiences" - everything else is secondary.

Each of us, when finding there was evidence that would call into question the validity of our own spritual experiences, were open to stepping back and re-evaluating our thinking. That eventually led us to realize that Mormonism is fradulant and our belief was lost.

Don't assume that this is a collection of men who will follow the same process. I've met with several GAs, including a personal meeting with an apostle and I have come away with one firm conclusion: THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT THE EVIDENCE. They rely entirely on their perceived "spiritual experiences" as the foundation for belief - and if reality contradicts that position, then it's the reality that's wrong, not them.

Make no mistake about it, these men are thoroughly and completely convinced that they are modern day spiritual leaders engaged in a battle for the souls of mankind.

I'll freely admit that this might not be the case for all of them, but my personal experience is that they have bought into the story hook, line, and sinker.

xtbm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's easy for someone who no longer believes to
> assume that the evidence is so overwhelming that
> no one in their right mind could believe that
> Mormonism is what it claims to be.
>
> The problem with that line of thinking is that
> this is not about factual evidence for these guys.
> Their belief is completely grounded in their
> "spritual experiences" - everything else is
> secondary.
>
> Each of us, when finding there was evidence that
> would call into question the validity of our own
> spritual experiences, were open to stepping back
> and re-evaluating our thinking. That eventually
> led us to realize that Mormonism is fradulant and
> our belief was lost.
>
> Don't assume that this is a collection of men who
> will follow the same process. I've met with
> several GAs, including a personal meeting with an
> apostle and I have come away with one firm
> conclusion: THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT THE EVIDENCE.
> They rely entirely on their perceived "spiritual
> experiences" as the foundation for belief - and if
> reality contradicts that position, then it's the
> reality that's wrong, not them.
>
> Make no mistake about it, these men are thoroughly
> and completely convinced that they are modern day
> spiritual leaders engaged in a battle for the
> souls of mankind.
>
> I'll freely admit that this might not be the case
> for all of them, but my personal experience is
> that they have bought into the story hook, line,
> and sinker.


I agree with your comments. These men are devoted believers. I don't know any of the current ones, personally, but have and talked to many in the past, and they were total believers.

I keep coming back to the power of that "spiritual witness" that I experience with friends and relatives, that you mentioned also. It's solid. It's just as solid as any other beleiver in any other religion.
Make no mistake, they are 100% convinced of their beliefs and won't change their mind over some challenges.

My advice? Never assume that just because you changed your mind, another believer will do the same. I found that out the hard way! Challenge people's religious beliefs, and they are just as likely to dig in and become stronger in them.

As a convert, I don't see any difference in their level of belief from what I have witnessed in friends and relatives of mine. I come from a long line of Christian ministers. They go to their grave believers. Nothing changes their mind. They are as sure of their beliefs as the leaders in the LDS Church.
I'm quite convinced that these leaders will go to their graves totally believers in the claims of the LDS Church, Joseph Smith Jr, and the Plan of Salvation.

They are not playing games, forging some kind of silly ruse either. Talk to them, get to know them. It's clear they are believers through and through.

I am appalled at the hateful speach by some former LDS folks directed at these believers. I don't think we would want that done to us or our loved ones. It's inexcusable, in my view.

a friend or loved one complaining about me with unusual vitriol anonymously on the net. It's not hurting me, and may be a healthy release for them.

Yes, most members, including many at the top, are very strongly deluded believers. Most of us understand what that is like, as we came from that ourselves. But what are we deluded about?

Our primary delusion was that: We trust that the Q12 and 1st-pres are in actual contact with god on some level so as to receive guiding revelation for the church and even world.

The difference, then, between the Q12/1st-pres and the rest of the membership (including the Q70) is that they KNOW that they are not in direct unanimous contact with god. They know that it is at best feelings of being inspired and that major disagreements do erupt (like with Packer's talk).

In the book --The Mormon Hierarchy : Origins of Power-- by M.D. Quinn it talks a bit about the notes from previous 1st pres and Q12 where they disagreed vehemently over very important matters / doctrines and that prayer / revelation did not work it out. They went with majority votes and the others suffered quietly. Why? Why would they suffer quietly? Perhaps because they had it good in all other ways and to give it up would be to lose it and their credibility in general. They'd go back to nothing as an apostate outsider, after investing decades as a church leader.

Now, just perhaps they believe and are deluded. Perhaps they think that this is how god works. Perhaps they cannot see that to sit as CEOs and trustees and board members and corporate financial officers while claiming to the membership to be unified in the work of god, as "special witnesses" is complete B.S.

Perhaps, but somehow I doubt it.

When I read that quote by William Law, I do think that at least early on, it was collusion at the level of the 1st presidency and perhaps Q12. I still think the way the prophets (hincker and monson) act shows they also know they have to cover things up. Cover up is evidence of a collusion.

That's the thing - these guys (again - the ones I've known) believe 100% that they are receiving "revelations" through the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. People who say the GAs know it's a fraud are basing that on a way of thinking that isn't how these men operate.

Disagreements? I believe you're analyzing this in a way that I doubt they are. I don't think they would see differing points of view as a lack of inspiration as much as the frailty of human nature - think of how many free passes are given to Joseph Smith under the guise of "personal weakness"!

Personally, I think they do believe the way the Church operates is reflective of "how God works". My sample size is very small compared to the overall number of GAs, but I haven't seen anything to suggest that they aren't completely indoctrinated themselves.