If I had gone to Argentina then your story could have been mine, Ned. Thanks for sharing it.

I can remain loyal to the idea of Jesus because that does not require me to dump on vulnerable minorities. More generally, my children and I can be Christians and nobody preaches: “Do anything that I tell you.”

Jesus only requires faith. Mormonism requires knowledge. And the knowledge comes with power claims, . . .

. . . which are promptly abused.

I’m guessing that “little factories” is a reference to male reproductive organs…from BKP “To Young Men Only“

Ned, I agree that the same kinds of difficulties that arise in the Book of Mormon, particularly, and the Mormon tradition, more generally, also arise with respect to the Bible and Christianity. Anyone who’s ever worried about populations and distances in the Book of Mormon would love the 19th-century Biblical debate over the population of the children of Israel at the time of the Exodus. According to a few statements in the Bible, the number of Israelite men over 25 was about 600,000 — leading to a total Israelite population size of about 2.5 million. Since Israelites were required by Mosaic law to relieve themselves outside the boundaries of the camp of Israel, those living near the center of the camp of 2.5 million would have been forced to walk 6 miles each way to use the bathroom. By the time they returned, I suppose they would have had to instantly leave again.

These problems could be multiplied indefinitely. Just like the textual difficulties in the Book of Mormon.

But these intellectual issues don’t speak to the central reasons I’m religious. My desire for God and the divine doesn’t come from the Bible or the Book of Mormon. Indeed, that desire is entirely extra-rational.

I wonder from your post if you’ve perhaps never had that desire? Please understand that this question conveys no judgment; it’s hard for me to understand why I do desire a connection with God, so it’s impossible for me to hold anyone else responsible for not sharing that desire. Instead, I’m asking from a desire to more fully understand your experience.

Ned,

Thanks for opening up. I just wish to say that I was a sensitive senior companion to the ones who didn’t want to be there and wanted to go home. I even took one of my companions to the beach because he missed it so much. I figured if I didn’t get along with him, and he desired no serious sin, then I could cut him some slack for the sake of getting along and doing good work. So I hear your mission pain, man. I only wish you had more sensitive and loving companionships.

RT, brilliant as always. I have found in my spiritual journey that most people don’t bail Mormonism for intellectual reasons (most, not all). There’s usually some sort of something else going on. Depression? Porn? Parking tickets? Maybe it’s little factories. I don’t know.

Ned: I find great comfort in the gospel of Jesus Christ as it is recorded in the New Testament, though I suspect that it is just a nice story. It’s still a great and admirable way to live your life. I want my kids to know this and be like Jesus Christ, whether or not he was a real person.

Why?

Why do you find comfort in it? What is it inside you that whispers peace about it? Why would you want your little children to be like this person Jesus Christ?

Is that the tiny flicker of inspiration from God? Is there still some of that still small voice pointing you toward Truth?

Is the coffin on your faith in Christ (and his restored church) really permanently nailed shut? Is God dead for you?

It sounds to me like there is still something about Jesus Christ that still draws you… draws you enough to give some comfort… enough to want it for your precious children (to be).

Isn’t that a start for your personal relationship with God? Either he is real or he is not. Either he can tell you he exists or he cannot. If he cannot then what is that comfort you feel? What is that deep inner voice that tells you this would be something good for your own little ones?

Enochville, I’m married to a guy like that, and I think he’s really hot. (I bet he’s lurking. Hi, honey!)

I think in his case, it’s a matter of synthesizing all the more interesting stuff right along with seminary. If you learn the complexities of church history and origins all along, it’s not so dismaying.

I also think an ability to compartmentalize is helpful. There’s history, and then there’s the restoration, and while the restoration is a historical occurence, history restoration.

Ned, if hell doesn’t exist, I’m sure Mormons in the hereafter will help build it for you. They’ll send out a few chainsaw brigades, set up some sturdy barriers to keep the Saints from straying in, fire up some high-powered furnaces, and find you some hell-mates. Mormons are great with buildings and community. Remember, eternal punishment is simply God’s punishment; it isn’t really eternal. Once the thunderbolts are over and the dust settles, Mormon hell will be a pretty nice place.

Ned,
As always I appreciate your honesty and continued desire to be connected with discussions of faith.

CS Eric-
“It’s been noted before, but not yet in this thread. Sometimes people leave because the church isn’t “home” anymore. So much of the Book of Mormon talks about the communities that believers establish, and when believers are excluded from that community it feels like a betrayal of that faith–by the church, maybe even by God himself.”

So true. Many times if feelings of exclusion are not the cause of one leaving, those feelings lead one to doubt the church’s claim of being God’s true church. (Exclusion, not in the sense of being offended by an individual or small group of members, but by institutional policy which singles out certain people to be looked down on.) Everyone has different reasons to begin or further question the church. For me, not feeling “home” anymore was the catalyst.

Thank you, Roasted Tomatoes, for inviting me and thank you, Ann, for inspiring this series. Also, thanks to everyone who has commented so far. I was a little concerned about offending people as I was more blunt in this essay than I’d usually be. However, I wanted to convey how the experience felt from my point of view, so I hope I didn’t offend anyone.

Watt– I agree that it can be a lot easier to see all the good things in life if we don’t have to see everything in a inspired-by-God, inspired-by-the-devil binary.

Hellmut– I like your distinction between faith and knowledge; certainty can often be dangerous. I also like your version of Christianity. We can be believers without giving up the power to regulate our own lives.

Ronan– Watt is correct (thanks, Watt). It is a reference to Boyd K. Packer’s talk, which I found, unfortunately, less than inspiring. However, it make a great euphemism, as in, “Wayne Rooney just drove his boot into Campbell’s Little Factories.”

Davis– I was in one of the Buenos Aires missions. I wish we could have visited you in Rosario.

RT– This is a great question. I suppose most of us have an “extra-rational” desire for the divine, and I am no different. I think the problem is that I rarely found anything divine or transcendent (for me) at Church. The Church never became a community or a support-system or a font of knowledge for me. The only claim it had on me were its truth-claims, and when these fizzled out, there was nothing left for me to hang on to.

(cont.)

Ann– I am surprised by how much my perspective has changed in a relatively short amount of time. I hope no one comes away with the idea that Internet helped move me out of the church. The Mormon blog community has been a great, safe place to work out all my issues, and I shudder to think of where I’d be spiritually without it.

Dave– I agree that Mormon Hell sounds pretty sweet (disregarding, for the moment, the concept of TK Smoothies). I am sure there would be celestial treats brought by each week by the Relief Society. The concept of oblivion after death still depresses me, though I think unexpected oblivion would be even worse. What if you live your whole life waiting for a reward that never comes? It’s almost too depressing to contemplate.

CS Eric and Riverstone– Great observations. I agree that not belonging in church is most often what leads people to start examining the difficult issues in church history and doctrines. I think it is a normal human impulse: if I am going to put up with x (insert your own issue with the church), then I better make sure that it is worth it. Should we concentrate on making more people feel welcome and at home at church, or dealing with the issues that ultimately help them leave?

RT said: “I hope that there’s a place in God’s heaven for people like Ned, and people like me.”

Thanks, RT. I hope you are right. In the meantime, this community has helped me be happier now, which is a sure thing. Thank you all for that

RT,
Without going into too much detail, my wife had a severe medical and emotional crisis. The branch reached out and helped more than we expected, but it got to the point that many of our friends decided we were too much work to continue being our friends, and the branch president decreed that the branch would not employ any more resources for us. That included home teaching and visiting teaching. We have since had several of the “ordinary” members tell us they regret their actions, but were caught up in the heat of the moment. Many of them turned against us because of the situation, and a few did because of who they are. Unfortunately, too many of the latter catgory were in positions of leadership.
We have since moved, and are trying to leave that in the past. But we can’t get away from the fact that the Church is the reason we moved–it was a small town, and we simply weren’t welcome there any more. Our ward in our new home town has welcomed and embraced us, but we are afraid to let people in, for fear we will seem too much a burden again, and once again lose the support that had kept us going. Better not to have it at all than to have it and then lose it.
Somebody once defined home as the place where, when you go there, they have to take you in. The church in that small town would not take us in any more, and so it was no longer home. As far as the Church is concerned, the Bloggernacle feels more like home to me than the physical building or the people in it. I still believe, but feel more like a visitor now than a member.

Left, I remember when I first read about the Zelph thing (on the internet) it struck me as just…Joseph BSing. Think the John Lovitz liar character on Saturday Night Live, weaving tales out of thin air. “It’s a…great warrior! A white Lamanite! Yeah, that’s the ticket!”

It also could be the context where I read it. I’ve never read anything about the story of Zelph without an eyeroll next to it.

I think maybe a lot of people don’t come across Zelph until they’re already in a “what the heck?” frame of mind anyway, and the story just contributes to that mindset.

RT-
I also really appreciate this forum you have created which feels so loving of individuals and so tolerant of different perspectives. Thank you, I think this is greatly needed in the church.

Since you asked, I will expound. I don’t mean to detract from the post which is about Ned’s experiences with the church. I have not felt at home at church for several years because I don’t feel like the church values or even tolerates my husband’s cultural choices which are all within the bounds of the God’s commandments. Here is a condensed version of our story.

The church accepted my husband, who had long dread locks for years before he joined, when he was baptized. He was accepted and loved, truly welcomed with open arms. In fact for many years he maintained his convert status and was treated with respect. I think many leaders thought that as he grew in the church he would change who he is to look and think like they do. When that didn’t happen and they wanted to extend him higher callings, they told him he should change his appearance because it is worldly and a bad example to the youth.(This is no exaggeration.) They told him this after he had organized fund raisers to send people to the temple, served and married in the temple himself, accepted many callings and bore fervent testimony of the Savior.

If this kind of thinking were isolated it would be one thing, but since then I have heard several talks, and read statements in official handbooks which basically equate not conforming to church standards of appearance with not honoring God. When you have a personal relationship with God and the Savior you don’t believe these statements, but you also don’t feel accepted or at home in a community which considers statements and policies such as these to be scripture. It is not just that these things are said, it is that so many members consider them to be from God, because they come from the church. In certain instances, I think the whole obedience to leaders pressure is a hinderance to people following their Christ-like instincts, as I think most people are naturally accepting and even intrigued by people different from themselves.

Ned,

I appreciate your taking time to write this.

I guess for me the thing that really got me to continue believing is Elie Wiesel. After surviving the holocaust, he continued to worship, declaring that he believed in God, but that did not mean he had to like God. His belief was based on the horror he had seen, and his hope that such horror cannot exist without a divine overseer, otherwise the world is utterly hopeless and depraved. It took him nearly forty years of struggle to come to a belief in a God that weeps with us, and is engaged with us instead of one that ignores those that believe.

I guess for me, I realized that I was wanted to be like Wiesel, placing my faith in God though I don’t understand why sometimes, because I want to believe and I want to hope, with the faith that someday, Like Wiesel, i will find the true meaning of the Divine in mt life. I find the greatest connection to that in the church, in spite of the above mentioned issues, because the theology of becoming divine myself rings more true and brings more hope to me than any other explanation of God’s plan for me does.

The Book of Abraham was the final nail in the coffin of my faith.

That is an interesting statement. A friend of mine had the exact opposite experience, as a result of the traveling King Tut exhibition and its demonstration of Egyptian burial practices as a ritual endowment, down to signs and hand grips and the like.

Did you ever think that perhaps God was answering your questions about the gospel by the testimony that others gained through you? I found your discussion of the convert family that visited you interesting, as that was something that you did not take away from the experience, but I think that you should have found valid.

Well, the police are through with us, I’m going back to bed (some kids drove down the street in the neighborhood, breaking out windows, we found out when the police knocked on our door to give us insurance information).

It is not easy to believe in god these days. I don’t think that it matters if a person is lds, catholic, protestant, etc. As the pope said the spirit of relativism is alive and well in the world today.

Of course one can be turned off by church history and some of the events that shape that history. But there is still the Book of Mormon and no matter how many people stomp on that book, it still survives the bruising. It just doesn’t go away. And the Book of Abraham is another factor. In sunday school today, there was a discussion about chapter 3. Now I must say that I am an inactive member only because I can’t do all those commandments and not because of church history but that Book of Abraham is something else.

I would have a hard time believing that Joseph Smith or some other mere mortal wrote that book. That goes for the whole of the pearl of great price. But I suppose that someone could do it…but Joseph Smith? I don’t know what to think of it all.

Not a bad analogy, Ann, but the problem (for me) is this: if Mozart’s genius only exhibited itself in one or two pieces of music (the rest of the time he simply plonked at the piano) you would conclude that either he was utterly inspired beyond his genius or that someone else wrote those pieces.

The stuff I have read from Joseph’s early life (when he was off “writing” the BoM) is not symphonic material; he simply was not the literary genius that many suggest he was. So either someone else wrote the BoM, or there was some miraculous mojo going on. I am not sure of that many things, but I do not believe Joseph wrote the Book of Mormon. That’s not because my testimony demands otherwise; it’s the logical conclusion I have come to as a scholar. It doesn’t mean there were angels or goldplates either, but the BoM is not the product of a ragged frontiersman (which I believe Joseph was in the late 1820s). Something else was going on, divine or not.

HL,
Yeah, but everything else Joseph wrote sucked rocks. I’m not saying an uneducated farm-boy cannot produce works of genius, it’s just that beyond the BoM, Joseph showed no similar talent in his early years.

Grant Palmer has demonstrated that there was a lot of material that Joseph Smith could draw from.

I was very much surprised to learn last year that Hyrum Smith had been a school teacher, which suggests that Joe’s education might have been somewhat more solid than people had suggested.

I would have to look at the data closely. One would have to define the baseline of works that establish the writer’s expected ability.

With respect to theological meaning, I can think about a New Testament parable for days. The Book of Mormon just does not do that for me. The Book of Mormon seems to be rather formulaic. People are poor and humble and turn to God. They prosper and become arrogant and need to be punished to remember their God.

Some of the Sermons are interesting: King Benjamin, Alma, or Abinadi. But none of that contains much that you would not expect from a revival preacher.

I do find the Book of Mormon original in one respect though: Alma 32 and Moroni 10. I think these passages reflect Smith’s experience of how he started to believe into himself. Together with D&C 9, these passages are the key to Smith’s biography.

Anyways, I have exhausted my quota. If you are interested to pursue this, please, shoot me an e-mail.

From Rusty’s blog: Apologist: “That’s how God does things.” “We don’t know everything about Mayan history yet.” “The Spirit.” etc.

Rusty, the problem is that assigning to god is the more complicated explanantion…and obvioulsy the most difficult to prove.

This puts the onus back on the apologist.

Ned: You are the best (if only) virtual hometeacher I’ve ever had.

The problem for you is you can’t ditch me by pretending you’re not home this way…

However, I think we can recognize the greatness of many of Jesus’ teachings without necessarily relying on an extra-natural witness.

Ahh, but the greatness of Jesus is not what we were talking about. We were talking about your previous statements: “I find great comfort in the gospel of Jesus Christ… I want my kids to know this and be like Jesus Christ…”

The word “comfort” describes something you have felt. And apparently you have felt it so deeply that you want it for your unborn children.

What I am prescribing for you is a game of spiritual “Red Light, Green Light”. It is the most basic way to receive revelation from God. Your comments have already revealed that something about Jesus Christ and his gospel has reached somewhere deep in your soul and whispered “this is good… this gives me comfort… this feels right…”

That is what we call a spiritual Green Light.

The game is to seek more green lights. To investigate whatever it was that gave you comfort. To see what happens when you learn about and ponder on other parts of scriptural teachings; To see if you can find other spiritual green lights; To see if you can feel more truth. That is how you hear from God. You have heard his voice already because you are one of his sheep. His sheep hear his voice.

But you are also free to choose. If you want to ignore the Shepherd you are free to do so. (I recommend against ignoring the Shepherd, BTW.)

Don’t worry about whether Mormonism is true or not at first. Just play spiritual Red Light, Green Light. Start with the question of the existence of God. After a while I believe you’ll get enough green lights to be certain God is actually there. (He is there after all…) At some point you might get more green lights about the role of Jesus Christ…

If you can get good at the game of spiritual Red Light, Green Light then I’ll be the a very happy virtual home teacher. Everything else witll work itself out from there.

Look — either God exists or he doesn’t. Either he loves us or he doesn’t. Either he can talk to us personally or he can’t. Why waste your time on any other superfluous religious trivia until you answer this, the MOST important question?

BTW – Alma also recommended this game here.)

Cool, Enochville. I’ll check it out.

GeoffJ: Although I am currently an active member holding a leadership calling, I have a lot of sympathy for Ned’s position. The problem I have with your suggestion is that seems to work only for some people. God seems to talk to some people and not to others. I keep playing the red light green light game, and variations thereof. In desperation, I took up the Hinckley challenge and put Moroni’s promise to the test once again. It isn’t working. In fact, in recent months as I have read the Book of Mormon and pleaded with God for answers, I have felt powerful negative impressions. I don’t really know what to do about that. But at some point, don’t I have to yield to those impressions?

I am sorry to hear that, Steve. That must be troubling.

Not as much as it would have. Since it doesn’t affect me financially, and the glass guys are coming out today to fix the car, I’m amazed at how little random crime bothers me any more.

My daughter felt sorry for the poor police officer going down the block waking people up …

But, no one died, no one lost a job, no one even will miss lunch over this. Just took me a little bit of reading to relax and go to sleep.

Anyway, interesting to read here, I think we sell God short and man long sometimes.

RT: I want to quickly point out that the experience of God as comfort isn’t universal — nor do the Mormon scriptures regard it as such.

That’s alright because I didn’t claim it was. Rather I pointed out what Ned said about his own feelings.

garf: The problem I have with your suggestion is that seems to work only for some people. God seems to talk to some people and not to others.

Well since I can’t tell if you are a fictitious character or not, I’ll act like you are real…

It works for every person on the earth if they do it right. See here and here..

garf: In fact, in recent months as I have read the Book of Mormon and pleaded with God for answers, I have felt powerful negative impressions. I don’t really know what to do about that. But at some point, don’t I have to yield to those impressions?

Yup. But you haven’t yet. Why?

Hehe.

This is rich. Ok… so now I’m to believe you are a real live currently-serving bishop. Forgive me “Bishop garf”, but I don’t believe you. I think you are a real person playing a fictitious character to serve a personal agenda (we’ve seen a little bit of role playing in these parts before). But since there is an outside chance you are not trying to deceive us — and even if you are this makes for an interesting thought experiment — I’ll respond.

First, you should immediately talk with your stake president about your problem. Proper Bishopping (*new cool word of the day*) requires constant revelation and inspiration from God. If the heavens truly are sealed for you as you claim then you may not able to properly magnify your calling. You stake president will almost surely not have trouble hearing back from God on what to do about your case.

Second, let me point you to a post of mine from last year called Personal Revelation: Where To Start. That ought to give you some food for thought.

Last, ask yourself why you have not become a full fledged atheist yet. What is holding you back other than social pressure? When you find the source of what is holding back from th inside rather than from the outside, seize hold of it and explore it. I mean, what more-important things do you have to ponder in life?

Well garf, if you are indeed being sincere then I hope you will forgive my skepticism and brusqueness.

This subject of hearing God has been a major theme of mine for some time… I think I have published more than 20 posts on the subject already. I agree that not hearing God is not necessarily an issue of trying hard enough. I think much of it has to do with spiritual ear training actually… I specifically posted on that here.

Best of luck to you in your spiritual ear training. It ain’t easy to discern the difference between a C-7 chord and a C-7 flat 9 chord… but some people with properly trained ears can easily tell the difference. So it is with discerning what God it saying to us – with proper “spiritual ear training” the subtleties are no longer hard to discern. They don’t call God’s voice still and small fer nothin’ ya know.

I don’t get it. Is it the fact that Elder Packer analogized the male reproductive system to a factory that added to your desire to leave the church, or is it the fact that he told young men they shouldn’t masturbate?

AndyW– It isn’t really the subject of my post, but, to give you an answer, there are a lot of things I don’t like about that BKP talk.

In general, I think we place way too much pressure on our youth to not be normal pubescent human beings, to the extent that we even crimalize their normal thoughts. I think this is madness and very unhealthy.

Great story, Ned. Thanks for writing about it.

Buon luogo, congratulazioni, il mio amico!

Come chat with sexy cam girls…

…