A guest post by Mike Turnlund.
Being a non-Mormon and an outsider to the LDS faith has not kept me from studying the Latter-day Saint system of belief. I am not a seeker, as I already know Jesus Christ – the Jesus Christ of the Bible, not of the Book of Mormon. There is a difference. The reason I study (perhaps research is a better word) the Mormon religion and its scriptures is because I want to better understand their religious paradigm. As I work with many Mormons and live in an area that is heavily populated by them, it behooves me to “understand their world” if I am to reach them for the real Jesus.
So for the past couple years I’ve been trying to self-educate myself on all things Mormon. This includes perusing Internet sites of all persuasions (especially apologetics), reading the Mormon canon, reading extra-canonical Mormon writings, and visiting personally with Mormons. Here are my observations.
First, what I’ve discovered – and what surprised me – is that ultimately the LDS religion is not about truth; it’s about community. Mormons will, on occasion, engage me in discussions about their faith and how it contrasts with orthodox historical Christianity, but rarely at a meaningful level. They typically don’t seem to be interested in doing so. Not even their missionaries. Yes, the missionaries will discuss this or that, and even spar with me to a certain point, but none of this seems to be of the defining essence of their faith. Instead every conversation always seems to come back around to, or end in, an invitation to visit their stake house. I have been invited to countless Sunday services, potlucks, special meetings, and so forth. In a nutshell “come meet some really nice people and maybe you will want to become part of our family, because we really care about you” and that sort of thing.
And you know what? They do. They really do care. And perhaps this is what makes their religion so attractive to so many folks. Indeed I think that this is what makes the Mormon religion so attractive to Mormons. In a fashion, this ability to generate a genuine caring community of mutual support and concern legitimizes the faith in its members own eyes. It surely does in the larger community. I rarely hear people, especially those that would not know the difference between a Baptist and a Mormon, speak ill of Mormons. Instead I frequently hear things about how nice Mormons are, how they have such good families, and that they look out for one another. Mormons have undoubtedly been successful at selling their brand, in part because they have found that in a sense community sells. They are true believers in community – religious beliefs sometimes become secondary and, while proselytizing, are often not even part of the sales pitch.*
Second, I’ve learned that, at the end of the day, truth does matter. For many people, community, while important, will never trump truth. One can push it aside for a while, but inevitably truth will rear its head again and again and require attention. Subsequently I’ve observed that all is not well in the Church of Latter-day Saints. There is a quiet hush-hush dissention in the ranks and I would not be surprised if we are witnessing the early tremors of an existential earthquake.
It appears to me that the Mormon Church has painted itself into a rhetorical corner in regards to three doctrinal issues; issues that are logically and intellectually untenable and which no amount of “faith” will fix. These three are:
• The Book of Abraham
• The Book of Mormon as a historical record
• The Bible and its integrity as a sacred text
Perhaps there are more. But while it might not matter that I, as an outsider of the Mormon faith, struggle to get my mind around these doctrinal positions, it does matter that rank-and-file Mormons do. And they do, in apparently increasing numbers.
I will not list the recent examples of high-ranking life-long multigenerational Mormons that have lost faith in their church and left. Nor will I explore how church rolls greatly exaggerate membership, nor how young Mormons, especially men, are independently ascertaining facts about the church and voting with their feet. These are all well documented and a brief Internet search will quickly locate the pertinent information. But let’s see how these three doctrinal issues cannot be successfully resolved status quo ante. Indeed, the Church can now only rely on appeals to faith or to logical fallacies.
First issue: the Book of Abraham – even Mormon scholars admit that this canon text is nothing more than an Egyptian funeral text. Nothing sacred here! This fact is obvious to anyone who cares to examine the issue with sober honesty. Recognizing that they cannot defend against the obvious the Church will insist that it is Joseph Smith’s interpretation of the text that is divine, not the text itself. In other words, if a defense cannot be made in an appeal to reason, it will be made in an appeal to faith – a non-thinking, non-critical type of faith. Indeed, the Church’s published analysis on the historicity of the Book of Abraham is a fabulous effort in obfuscation!
Unfortunately for the LDS Church, the simple fact that the Book of Abraham exists in the Mormon canon is a significant reason many current Mormons begin to question their faith.
Second issue: the Book of Mormon as a historical record. Again, this one does not need any elaboration – this is thoroughly documented. Even average Mormons recognize the inconsistencies between what the Book of Mormon teaches as historical fact and the historical realities. For the simple fact that even Mormon researchers have practically thrown in the towel trying to find any archaeological evidence of the ancient empires, let alone the cattle, sheep, horses, goats, elephants, pigs, steel and bronze tools, and wheat that the Book of Mormon attests as existing in pre-Columbian North America. Add to this the problem of the lack of genetic or linguistic evidence that connect existing Native Americans populations with the ancient Jews, their alleged forebears. Again, these discrepancies have proven to be enduring stumbling blocks to an increasing number of Mormons, young and old. Backed into a corner, Mormon apologists appeal to either ludicrous evidence as proof of the historicity of the Book of Mormon or, typically, appeal to faith.
Third issue: the integrity of the Bible as God’s word. The Bible seems to be a conundrum for the LDS Church. This is demonstrated in the oxymoronic eighth Article of Faith: “We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly.” It is God’s word, but it requires the lens of the Church to understand it. It is not safe on its own. After all, other LDS scriptures complain that “many plain and precious things” have been removed from the Bible. And church prophets have uttered their own criticisms of the Bible. Unfortunately, the LDS Church doesn’t know what, when, where, or why anything has been either added or removed. They just know it.
While this last issue may not drive Mormons from the faith, as do the two other issues described above, it definitely undermines Mormon confidence in the Bible. Typically Mormons are trained to distrust the Bible, as well as Bible-believing Christians, so that if and when they do leave the Mormon faith they tend to not cross-shop Christian churches. Atheism or agnosticism is the more probable post-Mormon outcome.
In the end I am encouraged and discouraged at the same time. It appears to me that truth is finally winning the battle with Mormons who wrestle with the incongruities of their faith. In this information age we live in, there are few hiding places. Even the deepest secrets of the Mormon Church are seeing the light of day. This is good. Truth is liberating Mormons from the bondage of false teachings. On the other hand, too often when Mormons abandon the Jesus of their LDS faith, they also abandon the chance to come to know the authentic Jesus. And it is this true Jesus that will truly set them free (John 8:31-32).
* Perhaps this foremost concern with community (and inclusion into that community) can explain why many Mormons responded with such energy toward their church with its newly clarified position on homosexual families. The recent ruling to even exclude the children of gay couples from church baptism and membership is a last straw for many otherwise conforming Mormons. This step is too exclusionary. It keeps others from enjoying and embracing that essential character of Mormonism: community. If the religion is first about community and only second about truth, this fits my argument above.
Visit Mike’s blog, A Post-National Christian, or reach him at [email protected].
Mike
You did a really first rate job with this article. Now allow me to rip it apart! 🙂 That’s a joke….sort of.
You wrote about the LDS community:
“They really do care. And perhaps this is what makes their religion so attractive to so many folks. Indeed I think that this is what makes the Mormon religion so attractive to Mormons. In a fashion, this ability to generate a genuine caring community of mutual support and concern legitimizes the faith in its members own eyes.”
First of all they really do care, until a member leaves the church. Then this kind, caring, inclusive community brings out the long knives. The whole purpose of John Dehlin’s “Mormon Stories” I think, was to bring about some reconciliation with those who do leave and to get this community to lighten up. It was to point out that the reason many, most perhaps all of the folks who leave don’t do so because they were offended or want to party down.
This gets me to my next point. The “community” has a way of “love bombing” seekers to draw them in. This is cult tactic 101. The prospect is made to be the center of attention. But what happens when the prospect doesn’t join-up? It’s the cold shoulder. The freeze out.
Lastly, there are deep sociological problems within this caring and loving community. It’s the type of community that requires that everything look good on the outside. It’s big on the “no talk” rule. People stuff their personal problems because everything has to be seen as happy and perfect within the one true church. I’m sure you are aware of the little blue pill syndrome with women that is rampant in the LDS community. This community does not lack for all variety of social problems.
Anyway, over all I think you’ve done an excellent job with your article. It’s very insightful and provides a very good summary of some of the issues within the LDS church.
Staying with my theme.
Andy Watson saw a flyer for an open house on a Saturday at an LDS ward. So he goes in and in the gym are all sorts of tables set up with displays of all of the ward’s activities. So Andy starts cruising around scoping out the various clubs, associations and service organizations for the ward. Well he decided to start asking some questions at one of the booths and the person behind the table signaled to have the boy missionaries come over and answer Andy’s question. Now it should be pointed out, Andy wasn’t asking about the requirements to become a tender foot scout. He was asking about specific aspects of Mormon doctrine. It wasn’t long before Andy had the boy missionaries tied in a knot so the alarm goes off and the bishop hustles into the gym to confront Andy. Andy, as it turned out, was the skunk at this LDS garden party.
The idea behind the open house was quite obvious. It wasn’t to talk about the LDS faith and present it to “seekers”. It was to blow a bunch of blue smoke around the room and try to lasso some folks who really had no idea what Mormonism is all about.
Isn’t it funny how Mormons have worked into their narrative the “milk before meat” concept to justify lying to people by omission?
The fact is that while LDS may appear to be monolithic, there are different “types” within the group. The group that grabs my attention are the “chapel” Mormons as opposed to the “internet” Mormons.
“A spectrum of belief is probably common in most religious traditions, but within the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints a different dynamic is at work: Both Internet Mormonism and Chapel Mormonism have each taken on independent lives of their own. The most interesting aspect of this dichotomy is that each group claims that its views are the “true” Mormonism. For example, exmormons (who were almost invariably Chapel Mormons before they left the church) are routinely castigated by Internet Mormons as having never understood their religion in the first place, while Chapel Mormons often tell apologists that they were never taught such radical notions in their ward or branch.”
That’s what I find to be an interesting facet of Mormonism. While there are some articulated doctrines, so much of Mormonism is a blank canvas upon which individual Mormons paint. So when, for example, an LDS begins to learn about the Book of Abraham the type of Mormon the person is will influence what they do with the information. Some of the more simple souls will just accept what they are told, out of hand. I call it the “all better now blankie” because the explanation is warm, cozy and brings comfort to the believer.
There’s no doubt that the LDS church is having a crisis of members leaving.
Mike,
I appreciate your comments. Obviously, being a “Gentile,” how Mormons treat each other when one walks away from the faith is outside of my personal experiences. I can only imagine. But that has been a consistent theme in the websites I visit where many current, but disbelieving, Mormons are too afraid to leave the community because of the horrors you describe. I suppose it is a form of control, as you allude to. But I am also reminded of Luke 14:26, “”If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters–yes, even their own life–such a person cannot be my disciple.”But, of course, that doesn’t mean its easy.
That being said this behavior suggests how fragile the faith of many Mormons really is. The courage of one to leave the flock only generates disdain or resentment from those lacking the courage. Sheeple. Undoubtedly it can be a cult tactic, as you suggest, though it also might suggest a low-intensity siege mentality.
Thanks for the nice words.
Oops, the above comment was meant for Falcon! A long day…
mturn
I don’t underestimate the cost that many LDS perceive leaving will accrue to them. First of all they have to get past the fantasy that they will become gods, have a forever family, have their own planetary system to rule and on-and-on. Then there is the notion that the Mormon god will bring vegence and all sorts of nasty things upon them for breaking their covenants which they swore a blood oath to in the faux temple.
Once they come to the conclusion that those promises are a total fabrication and a farce and that the curse that will fall upon them isn’t real, then they have to count the cost of losing friends and family. On top of all of that is going through the emotional stages, the process, of leaving what many of us would consider an aberrant religious sect if not a cult.
I ran into a guy yesterday, as solid of Christian as you can find, that had a very bad religious experience about a year ago. The church he had been a very active member had been pastored by a very clever sociopath. The damage this guy caused will take years to repair. Anyway I could still see the wounds in my friend and he and his wife are trying to put themselves back together emotionally. His faith in God hasn’t been shaken, which is good.
It’s not that easy to get over spiritual abuse, mental manipulation and the conclusion you have been deceived. As Christians, especially those who live in areas where there are a lot of LDS, we can help by providing some sort of support for those who are leaving.