The gospel (and by implication the church) is either true or it is not. If not, it is the most detestable con in the world. But if it's true, it is the single most important work to be a part of.

That's what I was taught. How can there be an in between?

Liberal Mormonism seems silly to me. I can't take it seriously. A liberal Mormon is someone who knows it's all a crock of shit, but won't say those words outloud in such certain terms for fear of family and other social repercussions.

I understand the necessity of calling yourself a liberal Mormon, but I don't understand it as a sincere religious conviction.

How someone can not be a Mormon literalist and also stand the church's egotistical attitudes towards everyone and its presumptive positions on everything? How could you not hate the church every second and constantly dare yourself to leave?

Yes, and Gordon B. Hinckley and Jeffrey R. Holland said as much in their 'sudden death challenge' the church was either true or a fraud.

So, if the BoM is not true, it is a fraud. From my viewpoint it is a fraud, ample evidence.

Well, if you allow overwhelming scientific, archaeological, linguistic and historical evidence to override a warm fuzzy feeling, sure.

But then, where would we be without neuroticism, judgment and self delusion?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/11/2017 10:35AM by bradley.

This!!!!

In math, a single contradiction means the entire premise is false. It's very easy to construct a false hypothesis by including partial truths and pasting the false parts on.

People who don't understand logic, aren't well versed in mathematics, or are unwilling to do the work, don't realize that for something to be true, every single individual piece must be true, every piece both individually and as a whole must pass every question/test thrown at it. If any part doesn't pass => false.

There are two ways to prove something: 1. start from the assumption that the hypothesis(H) is true and a: work through proving every single part true until you demonstrate that H is equivalent to something that is already proven true. b: then reverse it and go through each piece and demonstrate that each piece is essential to making H and that all of those pieces together, and no others, comprise the entirety of H.

Or, 2. start from the assumption that H is false and demonstrate a contradiction. Any piece can be responsible for the contradiction.

In cults and hostile environments, people are unwilling/unable to use method 2. So, to deal with the dissonance, they cut out or ignore the false parts in order to come up w/ H.

I did this myself, for years. I studied and studied to find evidence of the entire taught belief system was true, running into contradictions all the time. So, I'd push them out of my mind, trying to ignore the pain and wrongness that created. The pieces just didn't fit.

It wasn't until I gave myself permission to start from the assumption that the Morg was false that everything cascaded, like a dam breaking. For the first time in my life, all the pieces fit, and there was documented external evidence supporting all the pieces I'd had to cut out in order to maintain the illusion that the entire religion was true.

This is why I can't understand 'Cafeteria Mormons' who pick and choose which of the GA pronouncements and written teachings they are going to believe and support. They are being intellectually dishonest.

elfling_notloggedin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If any part
> doesn't pass => false.

Nice post.
One thing I'd take exception with, though, is the above.

If any part doesn't pass, the premise is not true.
Which is not the same as false.
"Proving" false is the same as "proving" true -- each part must be shown false.

In binary (computer) terms, !true (not true) = false.
In non-binary logic, that's not the case. not true simply means not true, it doesn't mean false.

That doesn't, of course, detract from your excellent point:

That it's not true :)

Many mormons, sadly, use the converse of the logic error above on a regular basis -- saying that if you can't prove the church is false, it's true. Which, as above, isn't the case. Not proven false simply means not proven false -- it doesn't mean "True."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/11/2017 11:07AM by ificouldhietokolob.

elfling_notloggedin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> In math, a single contradiction means the entire
> premise is false. It's very easy to construct a
> false hypothesis by including partial truths and
> pasting the false parts on.
>
> People who don't understand logic, aren't well
> versed in mathematics, or are unwilling to do the
> work, don't realize that for something to be true,
> every single individual piece must be true, every
> piece both individually and as a whole must pass
> every question/test thrown at it. If any part
> doesn't pass => false.

As a child, my primary and secondary schools had the official motto (in another language) "a chain is only as strong as its weakest link". The idea was to teach us about solidarity and teamwork, but it also applies here. It summarizes your point neatly.

A liberal mormon is one who wears plaid pants.

N O T!

Oh how blessed we are in the 21st century to be able to so quickly and effectively discern whether the Church is indeed true. Being true means its the most honest, truthful, and transparent organization ever as if it was anything less than this then it would be a "less than true" Church. You don't have to take my word for it. What you can do is:

1. Come up with a list of questions on the most difficult concerns you are having.
2. Go to https://www.mormon.org, click on "Chat with Representatives", share your list of concerns, and watch the miracle of "continuing revelation" unfold.
3. Pray to Heavenly Father something like below.

"Dear Lord I did my part in reading/pondering thy Word and I come to you in prayer with strong evidence that this Church's official representatives, along with their chain of command up to the FP/12, strongly magnified their callings with hard work and due diligence to get me completely truthful and honest answers on everything to the best of their ability. They totally make good sense and show how thy Doctrines are eternal and unchanging; and how the Church has always been continuously lead by prophets who would never lead us astray or tolerate any amount of dishonesty".

Another thought I have on this is that people sometimes get mixed up about what "continuing revelation" means. I'll use the stock market as an analogy. Some market services will provide "delayed quote" data. Others provide "real time quote" data for an extra fee because of the extra value. I guess all those tithes & other forms of assimilation costs are part of the bargain we make to get "real time" continuing revelation in the Church. I believe that all the references in the D&C and other places in the scriptures & instructions of Church leaders about missionaries/members needing to hasten the work makes it pretty clear that there is no time for delay in being as completely honest and transparent as we can be. Delays are of the Devil and we can't have honest faith or set good examples to the world unless we all try ASAP to be as honest/truthful as possible in "real time" mode :)

It would be completely unthinkable & my credibility shot to smithereens if you went to https://www.mormon.org, click on "Chat with Representatives", and got anything but outstanding respect for any of your sincere questions with unambiguous consistent official responses with the complete truth. Don't take my word for this. Give it a try. If I'm right you have the answers :) If they fail (which is an unthinkable outcome & one which I could never seriously consider as that's a grevious sin called a "Doubt" that'll get me fried at Judgment Day) to handle it right then the burden is not on you & you should just move forward past Mormonism.

OMG!!!


I know all about the math problem, a page long, like calculus, and getting the + or - wrong in front of a number and the WHOLE thing is wrong. But, getting it correct is of utmost importance, due to the consequences of an amount not being right. Could be life or death.

Like me talking about TSCC. Are the danites gonna get me? I cannot get past the undignified fact that I, a reasonable, logical person, was deluded for so long? I really want my money back. That is the very least TSCC could do for me to restore my dignity. All the time I put in for free. Some strange person called me from church today, I don't know, wanting food pantry info. I simply texted her the info and said nothing else about church. My number, I've had over 10 years, is still available for food pantry, clothing, and homeless shelter info. at TSCC. They still call.....
Poor sheeple.

When I saw and read the other books JS COPIED almost verbatim, I wanted to die myself. I wasn't gonna kill my dam self. I wanted to puke, die, scream to someone, ...WTF??? Being a teacher in the past, I should have known, unless JS truly translated SOMETHING??? His 3rd grade education would shine forth somehow. Copying someone else's work does the trick. Lack the brains-copy. Remix everything you see, and add in some ideas of your own. I blindly believed and never questioned anything for 40 years of my life. Then, in June, 2017, I was hit with a flood of irrefutable evidence it, TSCC, was all wrong!!!!

When my world as I knew it, until recently, suddenly crashed as a big, fat, greasy LIE!,--I wanted to die, literally.
Who was I?
If ALL I have lived for everyday of my last 40 years has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be a sham...This is where I am now. Who the Sam Hell am I and what else can I do on Sunday's now?

I really think we should unite as athiests, agnostics, and ex-mos, to make a stand on one thing to believe in?
Not necessarily gawd or JC, but something?????

cutekitty Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I really think we should unite as athiests,
> agnostics, and ex-mos, to make a stand on one
> thing to believe in?
> Not necessarily gawd or JC, but something?????

How about each other?
That's about all the "belief" I can muster...:)

If we believe in each other, it is the same old thing. I can't see you and I couldn't see gawd either.
I need something I can see, feel and touch to believe in now. My sheeple blinders were removed in June.
No faith anymore to believe in things hoped for, things not seen... Done with that philosophy. :)

You're welcome to come visit :)
Unlike "gawd" things, I'm real.
And I can prove it!

IF.. you are so sweet.

Sooner or later, the church is going to ask the youth to put their iphones in a basket during sunday school or priesthood.

Too many questions with very nuanced answers or statements that can be fact checked instantly cause a problem for the instructor to have a harmonious lesson.

Fire can burn you or it cannot...

This post reminds me of my resignation letter which I delivered in person to the Bishop of my Ward some years ago. In the body of the letter I included the following statement:

"Some may acknowledge that though the historical foundation of the LDS Church does not stand up under critical historical scrutiny, nevertheless the institution helps good people become better and, therefore, is worthy of participation and support for this reason alone. In this regard, I tend to agree with President Hinckley when he stated:

'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."

I like the context (in your letter of resignation) where you used the Hinckley quote.

Nicely done.

It's either a good metaphor or it's not.

Here's another for your logical pleasure.

"Jeffrey R. Holland is either male or he is not. If not, he is the most feminine, estrogen-laden whore imaginable. But if he is, he's the single most masculine, athletic and desirable husband on the planet."

Silly? Yes. But just as (in)valid as the original.

ROFLOL!!!! You nailed it with the first option. Holy Hell.

Estrogen laden whore it is.

Take that Holland you mick taffy pulling son of a bitch.

Edit: does anyone else now connote "taffy pulling" with beating off?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/12/2017 02:23AM by midwestanon.

They have painted themselves into a corner by stating there is no middle ground. Such bold statements don't serve them well but go a long way to exposing the strength of the indoctrination that keeps their church afloat even as each bold statement is proven wrong and banishes the storied middle ground further into the distance.

No Jewish DNA and most Mormons really didn't care. No horses, steel, or etc in the Americas and most Mormons didn't care. The seer stone used for the BoM "translation" is the same as the seer stone used as a con in the buried treasure scam and court conviction. And most Mormons just don't care as each of their claims bites the dust. Indoctrination. Brain washing. They work.

It doesn't matter that it's "true or it's not" to Mormons. All that matters is that they want it to be true. Indoctrination. Peer pressure. Family pressure. Faith held up as the ultimate accessory more prized than fact and only necessary because inconvenient fact IS present.

Under what other circumstance would a phrase like "Doubt your doubts" even be seen as necessary?

I think it's because Mormonism has come close to achieving the "gold standard" of religion: That is, it's members think of it as an ethnicity rather than simply a religion. People like this find it hard to shake; it's genetic to them.

We need to remind them that there is no Mormon gene. They are not born this way--It's a choice. Mormonism is a challenge and it can be overcome if they resist the temptation to act on it.

The fact that Mormons don't know is what makes them Mormon.

19th Century: Revelation directly from God. Restoration of The Everlasting Gospel.

21st Century: Only speaking as a man. A product of the times.

Correct. Joseph really didn't mean what he said.

Either it's nuanced or it's not.

LDS apologists: Double speak at it's best. It all gives me a low grade headache.

If you want to understand why some mormons believe in a non-literal interpretation of scripture, read about christians who don't believe in a literal bible.