This is in response to a question posed by Cheryl in another thread "Did Any of You Keep Believing AFTER Reading Critical Books on Mormonism?" which actually raises a good question.

Cheryl,

You asked,

"As a believer, why did you read that book?

Typically, it's doubters who are motivated to read those
books and believers avoid them like poison."

I guess I can turn that question around and ask "why do TBM's avoid them like poison?"

My thinking was, if the church is true what do I have to fear? I should easily be able to see through the "lies" and "twisting of the truth" that the antis write. I did NOT have any doubts and THAT is why I wasn't afraid to read the anti stuff.

If I had a REAL testimony FROM GOD then there is nothing I read in books critical of his church that should should effect my testimony. And if my testimony wasn't strong then God should eventually strengthen it if I remain faithful to him.

For some reason I never had the fear or aversion to studying what the "other side" has to say. I thought they must either be misinformed about what we believe or they are just lying about things. I never assumed I would read things that were actually TRUE that would damage my testimony. I was also just curious what they had to say. I never understood why other Mormons just aren't curious what the critics have to say. Sorry, but if you tell me NOT to look into something, then my curiosity is only even MORE aroused.

I was super TBM yet I didn't understand why OTHER Mormons were so opposed to and afraid to reading anti-Mormon books. To be honest, I think I had a STRONGER faith in the religion than most other Mormons, for their fear of anti-Mormon literature must mean that they were afraid that their testimony isn't as strong as they want it to be and that they DON'T KNOW the church is true.

I always felt it was healthy practice to know all sides of an issue. To not do is so is like sticking your head in the sand and to be ignorant.

What initially started me on my path to reading "anti-Mormon" books was on my mission in my attempt to refute the anti stuff that investigators and ex-Mormons had read. Most of these people were good people but I thought they were just misinformed, and therefore felt obligated to help answer their questions. It also really bothered me when other missionaries would quickly give up on people as a lost cause because they were so convinced by what they read in their anti-Mormon books. So I wanted to be informed myself of what the critics had to say about the church and so I could answer questions that people pose to us. I was a studious type and hated being ignorant of my own religion. It seemed hypocritical of me that I couldn't answer people's questions and defend my own religion when I was trying to get other people to join it. Of course that was the beginning of the end for me and Mormonism.

So I personally don't understand the absolute aversion Mormons have to reading things critical of Mormonism. It never made any sense to me, even when I was a Mormon.

I read the stuff out of curiosity although most of what I read as a TBM was pretty bad and easily refuted. However, I was never afraid to read the stuff. I just didn't come upon the good stuff until after I had stopped attending.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/06/2010 02:06PM by bona dea.

That's right. If mormons are so sure they're in the one true church, they needn't be afraid of reading anything written about it.

Because the people in Cache Valley treated my children so badly when they thought they were distributing anti-Mormon literature. I just had to see what would make an adult spit on a 5 year old.

The vehemence of their denunciation of anti material stimulates curiousity on those with any individuality left. Side Note- saw a special on North Korean gymnasts last night and one little girl cheerfully looked into the camera and said (via her translator): "Synchronized exercise helps to eliminate individuality and creates stronger bonds as a group."

Ritual does the same thing. Individuality a vice? Wow...where have we seen that before?

That's terrible! Your poor little kiddie! : (

The other incident about the gymnist is also very telling. It gave me a chill up my spine.

I think many mormons fear anti stuff either because they believe in the devil more than in god and/or because they instinctively know that their "testimony" is a farce, in other words they are not very honest with themselves. Atleast that were my reasons for fearing anti-stuff once upon a time, and I don't think most other mormons are so very different from me here.

Then there are a few that actually genuinely and honestly believe in what they claim to believe, people who are not surpressing doubts and guarding against invisible monsters. In a sense we 'self-deluders' envy you for all the mental gymnastics you never had to endure, admire you for your intellectual integrity but at the same time, no offense intended, you get a bit naive about human nature. Fear and self-deciet are powerful things that will make anyone under it's influence to act in peculiar ways.

Thanks for the post.

I guess I just couldn't buy into the idea that what someone writes in a BOOK can somehow possess you by the devil. I thought if somehow my testimony started to weaken, then I would try to be worthy of the spirit and pray to God to have him strengthen it. However, that stopped working. God didn't answer prayers after I started doubting (when I REALLY needed his help). When I had no reason to believe anything was wrong with Mormonism, I seemed to have the warm fuzzies all the time, but when I started to have reasons to doubt Mormonism, I could no longer get the warm fuzzies about God's true church. Funny how that works.

And don't get me wrong, I had to do a TON of mental gymnastics for all the reading I did. I read too much mopologist crap to try and rationalize and justify the things I learned and desperately tried to find evidence supporting the claims of Mormonism (FARMS, etc) I actually feel quite stupid now for how long I stuck with Mormonism and how long I tried to suppress my doubts. I have seen many other TBM's quit the church far faster and with far less info than it took me.

Mormons claim that anything which detracts from the glory of the church is anti-mormon. When we bring up things like the stone in a hat, it used to be decried as "anti-mormon" although it was highly revered in the early church.

When we talk about Blood Atonement it is called antimormon, yet it was published by the church in days gone by.

When we talk about the curse of Cain and the verses in the BoM we are called Antimormons.

When we talk about blood oaths in the temple, or about Polyandry, or multiple First Vision accounts, or just about anything at all that detracts from the perception that the church is perfect and holy and true, it is called Anti-Mormon.


Yet truly, the most effective "antimormon" literature out there was written by the church. And that has always been my argument. 'Cuz I didn't lose my test monkey on account of the Godmakers or books like Cults in America, or the numerous antimormon BornAgainst websites.

I lost mine by simply trying to keep the church true by reading only verifiable church sources. No haters required.

It is true that some of my books are written by people like Abanes and Tucker and Howe, but they would not be credible if it wasn't for the verifiable church sources that they used.