Mormons I have seen don't need to know anything that they don't already know. They have reached a point where they have all the knowledge they consider necessary in order to obtain their goal of being God's special chosen ones who will get all the rewards in the end, and, you will get none. So there! That is the goal isn't it?

There was a smug quality to Mormonism that I notice is being replaced by cloaked panic and concealed desperation as one by one their gems of Knowledge are plucked away---Already having bit the dust are ; no Jewish DNA at all in the Americas, no chariot load of evidence for the BoM to be found anywhere, no fullness of the gospel in the BoM since there is no tithing mentioned nor temple ceremony,no mention of the CK and no indication of how much a G.A. should be paid for their services. and thus, thus, the Mormons are now being forced to ditch the very treasured word Mormon as they are getting less respect than even Rodney Dangerfield and find it expedient to Re-Brand.

Will the BoM soon be the "Book of Joseph Smith?" Just another chapter in their canons like say Exodus is in the Bible--- wherein Smith's stories of wars in the millions, chopped off arms and curses with black skins are the equivalent to Bible stories with staffs into snakes, millions of animals in arks, killing all the firstborns, and my personal favorite--plagues of frogs.


What I wish my own TBM family would read is this statement I read a short time ago in an article about the importance of the lost art of listening--which is really the lost art of learning for many, especially Mormons, cuz when you allow yourself to learn, you leave the one true church of Joseph Smith.


"We are, each of us, the sum of what we attend to in life. And to listen poorly, selectively, or not al all limits your understanding of the world and prevents you from becoming the best you can be." Kate Murphy

I have always claimed Mormons keep the blinders on, but I must admit that their ear plugs may be the real problem. When you already know, you have already lost.

Well, let's say may daughter doesn't KNOW the religion as she wasn't in it from ages 7 to 20. She has her own view. She wants security.

I was like that. I had my own set of beliefs and I didn't really have a testimony of JS or the BofM. I believed in Jesus and God, and I wanted a guarantee. I thought looking elsewhere was sinful and would drag me down into a sinful life and I'd be a drunk, drug addict in the gutter, and my kids would be lost and when i died I'd never see them. So I didn't look further, no matter what things bothered me and THEY DID. I was going inactive at the time I met my husband, though. Then him being gay really messed with my head in both ways. I lost all my beliefs when that happened. I didn't know the answers to my situation, so I kept going to church.

It had to be life experience for me. Like you said on another thread--unless it happens to you.

It took me SO LONG to figure it all out, but I had a lot going on in the meantime. Logic. They refuse to think logically. There was no other way to explain my situation than LOGIC.

What I was going to say is my therapist says that my daughter has a virtual reality helmet on and if some truth seeps in, she has to hurry and do something like go to the temple to suppress that truth.

Thankfully, if she ever decides to leave the church, her husband will follow. I'm sure of it. His family is actually good people and aren't judgmental. They think we're all great just as we are.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/15/2020 03:10PM by cl2.

" . . . and if some truth seeps in, she has to hurry and do something like go to the temple . . ."

I love that line. Says in one sentence what I was trying to say.

The temple is where they will tell you what you want to hear, finally safe to take out your earplugs.

I worked with some really brilliant men and they still go to church.

I have said that one of them told me, when I asked him why should I still go to church, he said, "I really have no answers for you except I believe it is the right thing to do." He then told me when my cousin died of cancer at age 37 that life is a crap shoot. He said the leaders wouldn't agree with him. He was a bishop at the time. He is something in the temple, not just a "worker." I can't remember what it is, but he told me. I really don't understand. He told me the I have no answers for you 25 years or so ago.

Most members of the church are members because they were born into it. Because the church is part of the family heritage you are tied to the church through family. It's not so easy to leave for that reason. There are a lot of people in the church who just do the church thing because that's what you do. They don't want to rock the boat by leaving. As we all know, leaving isn't that easy. We just chose to pay the price of leaving and sometimes the price isn't as high as we perceived it to be. Nobody in my family disowned me and more of my family has left the church.

My dad wasn't too active. I had 3 siblings leave the church by age 20. One of my brothers has been disabled since birth and he still goes. He is 54. My older sister still goes, but she doesn't believe MOST of it. Her husband likes her to go. She was inactive for a while. I was the most devout of all my siblings and my parents were SHOCKED when I left, as were my siblings. My youngest brother asked me for several years, 'You really don't believe anymore?" He and I are really close. He left the church in his teens, but he also thought he was going to hell.

All my 1 niece and nephews are not active mormon. Some have not been baptized. My daughter is the ONE AND ONLY active mormon of the grandkids and great grandkids.

I kept going because I was going to do it right as I didn't want to lose my family. I started fearing losing my family at age 5 when I'd stare at the bottle of coffee in the cupboard that was my dad's. My dad drank coffee most of my life and he drank alcohol and chewed tobacco (my grandfather chewed tobacco, a habit he picked up in WWI).

I was going to be the perfect child, the perfect mormon, but, yes, I was born into it. My mother's family is over the top mormon. My dad's family is not. My mother's parents were not over the top mormon. They were more like we were. They were both deaf and their other kids lived out of state. Their families are disgustingly mormon. (I posted my mother's sister's e-mail about my daughter's wedding a year ago.) My mother was not like that. She was much more active than my dad, but she accepted me leaving the church long before my dad did.

Oh, I found out not so long ago that my dad talked to my daughter just after my mother died (he died 2 months after my mother). He told my daughter to keep going to church. Hey, dad, thanks for that!!! ha ha ha He was mourning and concerned about ever seeing my mother again. But now my daughter holds onto that. She is the good grandchild.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/15/2020 03:38PM by cl2.

I have to laugh when I hear Mormons say, "I learn something new every time I go to the temple." Luckily for them they don't have to tell you what they learned since it is too sacred to talk about.

I like it when they end this declaration with, "I say these things in Jesus' name..."

If there were a Jesus who operated in the fashion the mormon church imagines, he's be one dumb ass ghawd.

“She wants security.”

Yeah, Church security. Their bowl of lentils for your undying devotion. They even rub your face in it: Jacob did it to Esau and watch us do the same damn thing to you.

Once I thought the truth was going to set me free
But now I feel the chains of its responsibility

https://www.metrolyrics.com/ordinary-man-lyrics-triumph.html

Thank you. New to me.

I love the line, "Look in the mirror, tell me what you see." Means a lot to me because when I am struggling with a painting and just can't get it right I hold it to a mirror and suddenly all the proportions and lines are different and I see the flaws.

Same paint, same canvas, same vase of flowers, but, the mirror makes me see that what my eyes became used to and thus accepted, was stopping me from seeing what really was there.

Works on me too. Sometimes I stare in the mirror to do my most introspective thinking.

Finding our comfort levels is often the worst thing for us.

Their blatant anti-intellectualism is unacceptable to me.

Intellectuals can be wrong. Mormon leaders can't. Of course they hate them.

Done & Done Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------


I read a short time ago in an article
> about the importance of the lost art of
> listening--which is really the lost art of
> learning for many,


The sad part for deaf people is that they don't learn by *overhearing.* They don't overhear the news while they are washing the dishes and they don't overhear the smoke alarm.

Many Mormons chose to not overhear, and must have something put right in front of their eyes to learn; yet, still the don’t.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/15/2020 06:16PM by kathleen.

I really believed "The Glory of God is Intelligence" and " O Say what is Truth? " and even BYU's "The world is our campus".
Then along came "Some things that are true are not useful" and "The spirit is far greater than the intellect". Most of all, "Follow the Prophet,fOLLOW THE PROPHET!"

No thank you.

Ha!

According to Mormons one is a spirit of God (like a fire is burning.)

A Mormon posted that!!! hahahah ahhhhhaaaahahahahahaha to infinity.

Someone should respond to that Mormon Facebook post with Mark Twain's quote about the Book of Mormon being Chloroform in print while he wondered how ole Joe stayed awake to even write it.

Hahahaha.

She knows all about our situation and is still nice to all of us, but I thought that same thing you did about the bofm.

I'm surprised at the things my mormon fb friends post.

How much of this is due to natural inclination, an inborn personality type, if you will?

I know plenty of non-mormons who, for example, do not want to hear pertinent things about their government or their career or their finances or etc. “What I don’t know doesn’t hurt”, “ignorance is bliss”, “let sleeping dogs lie”. Isn’t this true:

Yet ah! why should they know their fate?
Since sorrow never comes too late,
And happiness too swiftly flies.
Thought would destroy their paradise.
No more; where ignorance is bliss,
'Tis folly to be wise.

—Thomas Gray—
— Ode on a Distant Prospect of Eton College—

(Of course, that presupposes that the ‘deaf’ mormon is happy.)

True or not, wise or not, there are also those of us who are inclined (and in some, hell-bent) to know. We simply MUST know!

For a long time I felt variations of derision towards the ignorance is bliss crowd. I’m ashamed of those feelings. I did come to feel, eventually, and deeply, that it takes all kinds to make a world.

And by the way, when it comes to us pursuers of reality as reality is:

"Love is a striking example of how little reality means to us."

—Marcel Proust—
—In Search of Lost Time—

I love this. Go Marcel!

Wow. That is really good.

Thank you, Human.

Thanks for that Human.


Not really listening is natural inclination world wide I would say. I see it constantly among "gentiles" everywhere. The article I referred to was not about Mormons, of course. I just can't help seeing the tie in because the problem goes double for them.

What the article did refer to heavily is the very human trait of which I can be extremely guilty, that we tend to not listen, but be already forming our own rebuttal, response, story, etc while someone talks. When I see this happen I do accept the terms I normally cannot stand as being accurate: "My truth" and "Your truth," which, of course, actually mean "slanted opinion--yours or mine."

And so as I read the article I saw the not listening problem compounded by the already knowing problem and therefore not needing to know any more and because of this, Mormons and their ilk get the double whammy.

So, like, General Conference is nice for Mormons. They don't have to mentally be coming up with a rebuttal as the GAs drone on. They are hooked up to the cow's teat for those hours and it feels so good.

No doubt about it, teats feel good!

Oh, wait...that might not be universal, eh?

Cheers, D &D!

Human Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No doubt about it, teats feel good!

I don't know. Maybe people just like to cow-er before a great and powerful charade.

Aren’t bows on vines pretty, though?

Don't confuse them with facts, their minds are made up.

The punchline of the joke is that we used to be them.

"Mormons I have seen don't need to know anything that they don't already know. They have reached a point where they have all the knowledge they consider necessary in order to obtain their goal of being God's special chosen ones who will get all the rewards in the end, and, you will get none. So there! That is the goal isn't it?"

COMMENT: Consider the following, which is also a part of much of my own experience:

"Atheists I have seen don't need to know anything that they don't already know. They have reached a point where they have all the knowledge they consider necessary in order to obtain their goal of being free from religious thought and influence. That [freedom from religion] is its own reward in the end, and you [the religious] will get none. So there! That is the goal isn't it."

Of course, not all Mormons or all atheists have the attitude expressed above. The point is that closed-mindedness, however it is defined, is not an exclusive property of Mormonism, or the religious; not by a long shot.
_________________________________________

"What I wish my own TBM family would read is this statement I read a short time ago in an article about the importance of the lost art of listening--which is really the lost art of learning for many, especially Mormons, cuz when you allow yourself to learn, you leave the one true church of Joseph Smith."

COMMENT: It is naïve to think that adherence to Mormonism is simply a problem with "the art of listening." (or learning) Many, many, Mormons *do* listen, and *do* understand the problems you mention. Notwithstanding, their psychological ties and commitments to Mormonism run much deeper than the problematic doctrines and historical facts you mention. Ignorance is to be avoided, whether one is a Mormon or an atheist. But once knowledge of "facts" sets in, one's psychological response to such knowledge can be extremely complicated.

I was once asked if I would return to Church *if* it was determined scientifically and unequivocally that the Book of Mormon was an authentic historic record. Hard as it was to place myself in such an unlikely hypothetical, I realized that the answer was a profound NO! The reason is that my rejection of Mormonism (at least at this point) runs much deeper than what may or may not be "true" about the faith's history and doctrines. I find it personally repugnant, regardless of such details. Similarly, a committed Mormon's acceptance runs much deeper than the falsification of any one or more of its doctrines or historical claims. In both cases, the psychology of beliefs and attitudes are informed by a host of values, both metaphysical and practical, as well as personal experiences, some of which are deemed "spiritual."
_________________________________________

"We are, each of us, the sum of what we attend to in life. And to listen poorly, selectively, or not al all limits your understanding of the world and prevents you from becoming the best you can be." Kate Murphy

COMMENT: Read this quote in consideration of my comments above. I consider myself a very open and attentive listener with regard to almost all theories and worldviews. But I am still in some sense "the sum of what [I] have chosen to attend to in life," and to that extent "closed-minded," notwithstanding my commitment to "openness."
_____________________________________

"I have always claimed Mormons keep the blinders on, but I must admit that their ear plugs may be the real problem. When you already know, you have already lost."

COMMENT: Well, you and I "already know" that Mormonism is false. And frankly, I for one am not much interested in taking out my "ear plugs" when the missionaries or some other TBM drops by. Don't we have to allow Mormons the same option when, notwithstanding the facts, they "already know" it is true?

For me, the moral of this whole story is that human beings are conscious agents having genuine free will with respect to their chosen attention (or not attention) to facts, and their response to such facts. This includes, in my view, an ability to "transcend" their psychology. But once the "facts" are presented, there is not much more we can say--except to sit back and hope. Assigning blame, ignorance, stupidity, and/or failure to listen as an explanation may in some cases be part of the equation, and feel good as a vent of our frustration, but it is almost never the sole explanation.

Henry Bemis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This includes, in my view, an ability
> to "transcend" their psychology. But once the
> "facts" are presented, there is not much more we
> can say--except to sit back and hope. Assigning
> blame, ignorance, stupidity, and/or failure to
> listen as an explanation may in some cases be part
> of the equation, and feel good as a vent of our
> frustration, but it is almost never the sole
> explanation.

But can they "transcend" their physiology? We as living creatures assign much to much weight to what we think in light of where that thinking comes from. We are no "blank slates" in my opinion but freewill and much folk psychology has it as a unspoken basic tenant.

it’s a good question.

I agree with Henry that we have Will enough that we can, but I think it is much harder to do than might be thought. Having Will is one thing, exercising it is another.

Where there is a will your physiology will find a way physiology-free?

Things that look good on paper, sound good in a meme, often don't make for a successful application.

That is why I specifically muse on this in terms of Mormonism as I would say it is a given that all humans share many of the same traits whether they belong to a cult or not. Those traits can be what gives a cult its advantage or we can take the advantage back if we understand our basic natures.

"All the other kids are doing it too," or being called naive by Henry, is not a proper answer to an in depth discussion of why we behave certain ways and the extreme value of listening which is the point here.

Materialism never was happiness. ;)

"But can they "transcend" their physiology? We as living creatures assign much to much weight to what we think in light of where that thinking comes from. We are no "blank slates" in my opinion but freewill and much folk psychology has it as a unspoken basic tenant."

COMMENT: Briefly, the idea of a "blank slate" (i.e. that human psychology is mostly about nurture) was popular in the 70s and 80s when sociobiology was challenging the idea of freewill and moral agency, and when liberal, humanist thinking over-reacted, insisting that nurture was everything. Today, after Chomsky, Pinker and Fodor, and cognitive science generally, the idea of the psychological blank slate is pretty much been dismissed.

Given that, and to your point, there is no question that both nature and nurture (of which we have no control) play substantial roles as to the make-up of our psychology. However, I would argue two points: First, within that context, freewill (our free choices) also plays a substantial role; and second, that however acute our psychological endowment from nature or nurture, our will can overcome it, absent physical constraints to our actions. This, in my view, is a necessary condition for a humanist mindset, and precludes a materialist mindset, where nature and nurture are essentially all the factors involved, which together solely determine our actions.

If knowledge is your foe, you'll be friends with woe.

If knowledge is all you know, your friends will never show.

Ka-ching! What a line.

I've never really bought into the whole ignorance is bliss thing.

Ignorance is hit or miss. There are something I would rather not know. For instance, that my father molested his adopted daughters. I realize it is good that it got known. The pain and struggle with it wasn't.

I feel you. So many of us have knowledge we wish we didn't. There are a couple of things I would love to un-know.

Ignorance is not true bliss but may be a false bliss or bubble--which can be a lot of work as you build walls around yourself.

However, knowledge is not bliss either. And can be painful. Being human isn't always that much fun.

Knowledge does offer tools to build to grow to explore. I guess we have to each determine the value of that.

That is how I look at it for now anyway. I don't really know. I just like to consider it all.


I don't know how you find peace and respite from painful knowledge. I wish I did.

On another thread about evolution being a faith, Dagny quoted an unknown source with,

"Religion is to ignorance as fuel is to fire."

I want to leave that here as that is the point of the thread said in one sentence. When you "know" you often cease to listen and the religious always "KNOW."

For those who want to discount that by saying it is true beyond religion, I will only say, "I know." :)

I will post this here as well as in the other post:

"Religion is to ignorance as fuel is to fire.

COMMENT: First, religion is fundamentally an attempt to acquire knowledge, understanding, and meaning; not to avoid it. It is an attempt to understand what the nature of ultimate reality is, and how human beings fit into that reality. The fact that religion is often extravagant, dogmatic, and mistaken in its claims, is not based upon a commitment to ignorance; quite the contrary, it is an over-enthusiastic commitment to avoid it!

Second, when religion clashes with science it is often because science over-reaches its natural domain to encompass the non-overlapping "magisteria" of religious reality (Gould), or takes an established general principle, like biological evolution, and expands it into domains where it's application is questionable at best, e.g. evolutionary psychology.

Finally, keep in mind that both Ronald Fisher (1890–1962) and Theodosius Dobzhansky (1900–1975), the architects of the modern evolutionary synthesis, were Christians. Dobzhansky wrote the famous essay, "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution," which was intended, by the use of the word "light," to support the idea of evolutionary creationism:

"I am a creationist and an evolutionist. Evolution is God's, or Nature's, method of creation. Creation is not an event that happened in 4004 BC; it is a process that began some 10 billion years ago and is still under way... Does the evolutionary doctrine clash with religious faith? It does not. It is a blunder to mistake the Holy Scriptures for elementary textbooks of astronomy, geology, biology, and anthropology. Only if symbols are construed to mean what they are not intended to mean can there arise imaginary, insoluble conflicts... the blunder leads to blasphemy: the Creator is accused of systematic deceitfulness."

Not surprisingly, people like Richard Dawkins have misused this quote to suggest the false inference, "Since biology is everything, *nothing* makes sense except in the light of evolution."

Finally, when we cynically characterize and deride the "ignorance" of others, and pigeonhole such "ignorance" as applicable to our broad disfavored categories (religion), it might be well to first assess our own ignorance; particularly when it applies to some theory we claim to understand and hold dear.

I will post this here as well as in another post:

YAWN. This is just a game to you.

Always throwing out a word like "cynical" or "naive" as a way to discredit. You only discredit yourself with such a transparent tactic.