I was an utterly convinced, kool-aid snorting TBM for a time. Probably some of the things that convinced me the most solidly (besides my belief the holy ghast had confirmed to me by chest-swelling convulsions) were little bits of info that were supposedly evidence of the BoM.

For example, chiasmus. Another was a verse in Moroni 9:8 about the women being fed the flesh of their husbands. Well, there is a vase in Tikal, which I saw as a missionary there, that depicted a bound "fair skinned" woman being offered something red in the hand of a tanned man of Mayan royalty. Supposedly it dated to the era in question. I believe it was absolute proof of that verse.

Another weird one was the article written by an astronomer that appeared in the 1985 June/July Ensign relating astronomy dates to the crucifixion, resurrection and the "restoration" of penishood to Joseph Smith. The author showed that by using the BoM calendar dates in 3 Ne, NT factoids, and the april 3 1836 date for restoration of sealing keys, he could link the dates to exactly 100 lunar eclipse periods (18.03 years I believe). It was an amazing square coincidence, which hit fit into the round hole of LDS theology. It was a miracle and proof again.

These kind of silly coincidences and factoids kept me a TBM far longer than I should have. I almost got out at 18 when I came into contact with my first anti-mo pamphlet (I think produced by the Tanners).

What interesting "facts" kept you in longer than you shoulda?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2012 07:54AM by Jesus Smith.

I was very impressed with the idea that the family here on earth was merely a representation of the one in Heaven. It made sense to me, at the time, that we have a father, a mother and children as a family unit. Then in Heaven, it was the same. It felt like a continuation and made sense to me.

I also liked eternal progression, where even though we'd all be like God is someday, by that point He'd have progressed farther along as well, so that He'd never cease to be God. He'd always be that much more ahread of us. Although it was hard to imagine what progression He could get to next.

Then, as you said, there were always little snippets of information which would be convincing. I remember being in the Royal Ontario Museum years ago, where they had a model of a city being excavated. The name of the city was Lamani. My friend and I looked at each other in astonishment and then we had these knowing smiles on our faces. In our eyes, it was proof.

I remember reading Betty Eadie's book about her near-death experience and it seemed to confirm everything about Mormonism to me. Years later I found out that she was a Mormon. That was disappointing. In the book, she only talked about being Catholic, so it seemed as though a Catholic was learning about all of this Mormon stuff for the first time. It was very misleading. That book had at one time given me back my testimony when it has been failing a bit. Now it makes me mad because of the deception. Well that's typically Mormon, isn't it?

Then the Church would put out faith-promoting stuff, like showing you pictures of something which was supposed to be a baptismal font.

When you want to believe, you will grab anything you can to reinforce those beliefs. You actually search for those little proofs everywhere.

I clung desperately to the Chiasmus as a testimony saver too, after I struggled with "anti" information.

I think others may be the "witnesses" to the Book of Mormon and the "difficulty" of composing the Book of Mormon.

Eternal progression was the one thing that kept me on that short tether.

It gave a purpose to life big enough to explain being on a planet in the middle of nowhere.

With out that, the world just seemed like more of an ant farm. Live, do you duty--or not, be forgiven, die, go to heaven. From very young I felt there was no substance to that. There was no good reason in my mind why God would need that kind of set-up.

The idea of taking and building on everything that you learn in this existence made sense, gave appeal, and seemed noble enough to actually be from a so called God.

I spent a lot of years in the Kirtland area. I felt like I knew a lot about church history. Actually I did. I knew everything the church put out there about its own history.

The stories they put together at the historical sites are all of the very faith promoting stories. They are very emotionally charged. Being a good mormon you think it's the HG telling you it's all true.

It was quite a shock to find out what a bunch of liars they are.

The missionaries told me there was nothing weird in Mormonism. I asked pointblank if it was just another Protestant religion, and if not, what was different about it.

"We believe in Jesus Christ"

which I would later learn DOES NOT mean worshipping Jesus Christ. Many people do not understand that Mormons have the Jehovah Witness orientation that they DO NOT worship Jesus Christ believing that he is God as long as you let them define God as a job description rather than an omniscient creator. He's a member of a team which received the architectural contract for creating Earth, which he then stayed on as Property Manager.

It appealed to me when the missionaries asked if God would be the author of something chaotic or disorganized. Look at the human body, is it disorganized? So his church would be a church of order, right?

"Our Church is the exact model of how Christ set things up in early Christianity and which the Catholic Church screwed up"

As a former Catholic, that appealed to me.

I think the LDS presentation of life as a treasure hunt with us being blindfolded (having our memories wiped clean) appeals to competitive, narcissistic people who don't laugh when told they are a god.

No wonder they don't teach that anymore.

Anagrammy

I had only one thing and it was from the story of my mother's conversion, a kind of miracoulus event, that I found very compelling. And even after I had decided the church was false, this story haunted me. Other than that I cannot say that anything in the mormon church seemed convincing at all. (Never bought the chiasmus argument, it just seemed silly).

Sure I tried to believe, and some concepts were easier to accept than other's, but in the end of the day I was always a doubter. I'm one of those the mormons are right about, I never had a real testimony to begin with. But I see it as a strenght, not a weakness, to have a sceptical brain.

I was always somewhat aware that the church was the entity telling me I have a problem and offering the solution, although I couldn't have put it in so many words when I was young. As much as they beat me over the head with my sinful, natural state, I knew it was outside forces telling me I had the problem and offering to fix me for the price of my soul.

But getting our own worlds eventually DID appeal to me. And then I was scorned for imagining I would be in on the creative process at all, and reminded of my exclusively soul creating status.
I figured either I'd find a husband who would appreciate my creative assistance, or I'd settle for a lesser kingdom. I know my destiny is not in the kitchen making sammiches and babies.