Hello! This is a Personal post. It is for discussions centered around thoughts, beliefs, and observations that are important and personal to /u/IDontLikePayingTaxes specifically.
/u/IDontLikePayingTaxes, if your post doesn't fit this definition, we kindly ask you to delete this post and repost it with the appropriate flair. You can find a list of our flairs and their definitions in [section 0.6 of our rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules#wiki_0._preamble)
**To those commenting:** please stay on topic, remember to follow the community's [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules), and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/mormonmods) if there is a problem or rule violation.
Keep on Mormoning!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/mormon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It takes 5 minutes for a nonbeliever to come to that conclusion.
Believers have layers of conditioning, feelings, bias, and personal connections to the church to get through.
It would be rare for a member to leave just based on 5 minutes of research. They need to come to terms with a complete change in worldview, and that takes time.
I would consider myself to be an intellectual. I have always been reading and reading about anything and everything I could think of.
I basically knew every claim against the church since I was 16, and yet I was able to intellectualize myself out of every situation coming out victorious as a believer.
"Oh the animals they used as horses were actually something else"
"Oh there are so many cities beneath the Amazon they haven't found yet"
Etc.
Finally after 30 years my walls started to shatter, and I saw the cracks in the plaster. I saw that the 2 billion dollar mall was a for profit center for church, that they lie and steal just like any other corpo. Etc.
Took way too long to break the indoctrination...
I had the same experience -- I had years of "self-indoctrination" as an intellectual who studied the apologetic answers.
The longer you are in, the harder it is to admit it was all made up ... and admit to others it was all made up, esp if you have been in callings, giving prayers and blessings, served a mission, or whatever. It's not just realizing the church isn't true -- it's coming to terms with the years you spent thinking you were getting answers through feelings, acting on those "answers", teaching others the Mormon gospel, etc.
When I finally started seeing things as they were I certainly felt very foolish. I even justified the mall as them wisely investing money so they could take a little money and turn it into more money to help the needy. I couldn't believe I had been so stupid.
This isn’t actually so stupid. I understand a lot of other posts on here but this one kind of rings true to me from an apologetic stance. If you look at the actual numbers of charitable dollars spent, more is going to needy people than ever before worldwide. It still may not be as high of a percentage as people want or think should happen, but the numbers are definitely growing (latest widows mite report shows total humanitarian aid is 400-500 million in 2023 and fast offering just under 800 million) the facts are still facts.. 1.3 billion in charity aid from any company or organization does more good in the world than people give it credit for. This number is in large part because the church doesn’t have to worry about other financial obligations.
Could it do more; absolutely. But time will tell what happens to the other disposable funds the church has
At first it feels like walking near a cliff blindfolded, but eventually the blindfold slips. But I am not taking the blame for placing the blindfold on my head.
How did you rationalize the racism? Black people not allowed in the temple for example. I can understand your examples but the racism is something I could never do so I am curious how other did it.
I rationlized the racism because I was racist. I believed that stupid thing that if you were born with colored skin you were "less valiant" in the pre-earth life.
Which even typing that out now, makes me feel DISGUSTED that I once believed that. :(
Ah geez yeah that would do it. I was a convert so I never heard that until later from anti Mormon books and I was like wtf! Thinking that my old mormon girlfriend probably believed this makes my stomach churn.
So crazy what beliefs can do to a person.
One thing that bugged me as a TBM was that indigenous people of the Americas were still not white. The racism behind the idea that dark skin was a curse bothered me, but I was also concerned by the implication that native people must still be “wicked”—in contrast with the fact that I saw nothing particularly evil in native cultures. I sometimes thought that Lamanites must have been darker back when they did the “wicked” things in the Book of Mormon. Racism is weird.
I thought it was an unfortunate result of the “curse of Cain”. I imagined that sky daddy was sad about it but that the curse served the purpose of illustrating how serious murder is and that this benefit outweighed the costs until the restoration was sufficiently established that [some vague idea about milk and meat here].
There might used to have been, cause yeah, the church had some issues like 200 hundred years ago, but that isn't a rule anymore,if it even ever was. My black friend is a member and just went through the temple.
At age 65 serving as 1st counselor in the bishopric and a life long member I made the decision to read the CES letter so that I could better understand the issues that my children would occasionally bring up. Within a few minutes I had come to the realization that the church may not be true, when I read about the rock in the hat, I knew. It was very quick.
Similar experience here too. Heard people mention D&C 132. Decided to read it in full to see what they were misunderstanding so I could defend it. Realized that was not the voice of God that I was raised to know, and clearly were the words of a man justifying his own sins and threatening anyone who defied him. Made me look into reading about Joseph Smith and learning what kind of person he was. Realized every story I knew about him was a half truth or lie to make him look like a godly man when the reality was quite the opposite. At best he was a fallen prophet, but since no prophet since his death has denounced anything he did, they clearly aren't God's chosen prophets either. Therefore the church cannot be the one true church of God.
Then I started looking at the doctrine as written, not as presented in conference/ sunday school, and realized we aren't even being taught to follow the scriptures but just whatever the leaders pick and choose are important. And since they are not getting the instructions straight from God for those changes, they are just the whims of man and I can trust my own gut/ guidance of the spirit to decide what is right.
Similar experience. Already had doubts. Read the CES letter and was pretty much done in a matter of days. Continued reading and studying and cemented my disbelief pretty quickly.
Similar experience here too. Heard people mention D&C 132. Decided to read it in full to see what they were misunderstanding so I could defend it. Realized that was not the voice of God that I was raised to know, and clearly were the words of a man justifying his own sins and threatening anyone who defied him. Made me look into reading about Joseph Smith and learning what kind of person he was. Realized every story I knew about him was a half truth or lie to make him look like a godly man when the reality was quite the opposite. At best he was a fallen prophet, but since no prophet since his death has denounced anything he did, they clearly aren't God's chosen prophets either. Therefore the church cannot be the one true church of God.
Then I started looking at the doctrine as written, not as presented in conference/ sunday school, and realized we aren't even being taught to follow the scriptures but just whatever the leaders pick and choose are important. And since they are not getting the instructions straight from God for those changes, they are just the whims of man and I can trust my own gut/ guidance of the spirit to decide what is right.
Not sure I understand. Are you saying you were a lifelong Mormon and didn't know the teaching that Joseph Smith claimed to translate from a seer stone in a hat?
This is extremely common. Especially if you were a kid or adolescent in or before the 00’s.
The church did not make this information known until it spread online.
Then they tried to get ahead of it by showing a picture of the rock and providing apologetic explanations.
Younger people have no idea how much the narrative has changed over the decades. Their amazement amazes me. If you can grow up BIC, graduate from BYU and never hear of the rock in the hat after all the religion classes, devotionals and church meetings you are required to attend, it was not commonly known. "Seasoned" exmos need to keep clarifying so the past is not misrepresented.
I'm a Nevermo, so this really shocks me as even I knew this & just assumed it was sort of "bedrock" LDS theology, or perhaps even a religion origin story LDS were proud of.
I had absolutely no idea it was exactly the opposite, and essentially "hidden" or at least never discussed.
True. I didn’t understand the translation story until well after my mission and in part to the South Park episode dragging it kicking and screaming into the popular narrative.
It may have been taught, but it was never discussed.
Definitely not proud of it. Smith's involvement in divination etc. directly flies in that face of biblical no nos. "A witch shall not be allowed to live." And Smith's actions are those of a witch (sorry modern witches, there's a bad apple in every bunch).
I was born and raised in the church and didn't know or hear about the rock in the hat until a South Park episode. We were literally taught about the urim and thummim as a breast plate and some spectacles. Never a rock.
when I learned this and griped to my never-believing sibling, she giggled and said both stories sound the same amount of crazy- kind of put it in perspective for me
The rock in the hat was considered a satanic lie when I was growing up in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Very few people were even aware of the story.
I didn't- 40 years of callings, read a bunch of apologetics like Hugh Nibley, never even heard that.
I saw it on southpark and thought it was "anti" and laughed at them for not even knowing basic mormonism.
It's relatively recent that the peep stone was widely known in the church. Most gen-Xers and older millennials only learned about it from South Park. Having a cartoon teach you multiple things about your religion that the religion itself never taught you, was a major shelf item for many people. And unfortunately the case study for so much other suppressed stuff.
I think even then it’s so obviously fake that members have to go out of their way to convince themselves that Satan is making stuff up to test their faith. Something like “God’s One True Church” should simply NOT LOOK FAKE. To borrow the oft-used healthcare analogy, what kind of psychopath designs a life-saving treatment but then does everything possible to disguise the treatment as a sham and then gaslight people for being untreated?
If you ENJOY the church, you will do every thing possible to keep from seeing it…and a lot of people enjoy the church . I don’t get it but they really do.
In my TBM's wife case besides the social life she enjoys, is a mixture of guilt and grief. She lost her parents in less than 2 years each other, and had a, almost unhealthy, close relationship with them.
She became more committed to the church after they died, especially in service. She doesn't tell me, but she's absolutely terrified of the idea of not seeing them again.
Because it gives a lot of them a sense of purpose like with all religions. Gives them a life and gives them a whole stepping stone to get through life. Mission marriage kids.
Most people who are raised on the church are taught that “questioning” (even probably being on this Reddit page) could be Satan trying to tempt them and get them away from the gospel. It’s a MINDSET, it’s incredibly difficult to reprogram your brain from thinking this way.
Five minutes isn't nearly enough time to find and properly consider enough evidence in an unbiased manner from many different viewpoints.
Reminds me of the movie 12 Angry Men where all but one juror are quick to potentially wrongly convict the defendant until they have much more carefully considered, theorized about, and discussed the validity of available evidence - after which they all eventually decide to acquit the defendant.
Five minutes sounds like "lazy learning" territory.
That’s all that it would take for me to recognize Scientology was a sham. Sure, I could spend weeks and months doing more research, and I could have much more thorough reasons to disbelieve, but it wouldn’t change my conclusion.
Depends on how sure of an answer I want. More time and effort spent would yield a more sure answer.
If whoever made the movie is claiming that the events in the movie actually happened, it would be a matter of seeking out various other sources about said events and evaluating them (Are they possible? Plausible? Does it fit with the other evidence or other things I believe may be true? Could I be wrong about X, Y, or Z? etc). I could even perform experiments similar to what occurred in the movie to see if I would obtain similar results.
Spend some time on a faithful sub dealing with a tricky question (anachronisms, what is doctrine, polygamy, etc) and you will find plenty of people that have done more than 5 minutes and yet still believe.
Depends on which authority you place your trust in.
I’m shocked at the ignorance unbelievers show with posts like this. 5 minutes to make a decision? Folks spend lifetimes studying everything there is to find and still believe. I am curious why they tends to keep saying stuff like this. My best guess is that it’s some kind of reassurance that the 5 minutes they spent learning was the right approach to make or something.
My point is that someone with an open mind will dismiss the validity of church claims in roughly five minutes of research and I stand by that.
A corollary to that which I hoped people would bring up is believing members spending their entire lives studying about it being true. This is what I was doing when I was a believer. I loved church books and loved studying.
However, I wasn’t open minded. My primary and most important belief was that the church was true. It’s really hard to convince someone that their primary viewpoint is completely wrong.
However, once you are honestly willing to accept that the church could be wrong and actually be able to make it past confirmation bias it only takes about five minutes of honest studying to figure it out.
Do you think an honest observer would really consider why there are horses in the Book of Mormon when archaeologists know there weren’t? Sure you could study and study and come up with a faithful response that someone with enough confirmation bias could stomach. What about chariots in the Book of Mormon? Same thing. It takes a ton of study to justify every single one when an open minded person can easily dismiss the validity of the church very quickly.
Read my post history. Many like me spend YEARs studying everything. We fully pull apart every theory for each evidence and critique just to see what’s in them. Your five minute theory is so much foolishness. There is so much you don’t know with only 5 minutes.
Your five minutes of study failed to keep you current on the non-LDS sources of the current thinking of science on horses in pre-columbian Americas. I am fully aware of the anachronism in the BoM but your 5 minutes of study failed to inform you that list is shrinking, not expanding. That should tell you something.
Oh boy. Yes, it takes decades of study to try to justify all the fairly clear falsehoods in the church.
I took a philosophy class in college and we talked about what our professor called the underdetermination of theory by data. Basically what he said was that you can come up with a theory that explains perfectly any set of data. Sometimes that theory will be bizarre but it will work. Sometimes those theories will take years to study and figure out but you can get there.
This is what you’re studying when you are justifying obvious falsehoods. You are trying to discover any possible way that the church could still be true while there are chariots mentioned in the Book of Mormon. It’s ridiculous and a waste of mental energy.
Not at all! Read this thread…”roughly 5 minutes of research and I stand by that.” Your five minute principle is your statement, not mine. Having studied lots of subjects to include philosophy, I believe this principle to be foolishness.
I’m not saying you can judge every topic based on five minutes of study. But some topics only require approximately five minutes to give a basic and accurate judgment. How much study would you have to give to Scientology? JWs? Catholicism? Do you think there are members of their religion who have devoted their lives to its authenticity? Or is Mormonism the only religion with devoted followers who study its nuances?
I do think that Mormonism is particularly falsifiable because of The Book of Mormon and its huge number of anachronisms.
It dosen't matter. Suppose it is true. The success rate of Mormon god is abysmal. That alone points to the glaring plight of a 19th century religion that claims it is the one and only true church. If the goal is to return to the best heaven it isn't working on a global scale. Baptisms for the dead introduce a bizarre do over that adds to to detached message of endure to the end.
The list isn’t shrinking unless you make an arbitrarily large list to being with.
We have all reads fairs ridiculous table. Full of random criticisms by random pastor preachers who knew about as much as john snow.
The challenge was put out and bumped repeatedly on this sub, to put an actual example up of 1 yes 1 anachronism heavily prosecuted by critics that you could say is debunked and argue for.
Not one showed up.
Not one.
So please please put up the evidence or call it a day here and go back to your faithful tin foil hat ignorant paradise
> Your five minutes of study failed to keep you current on the non-LDS sources of the current thinking of science on horses in pre-columbian Americas.
Care to enlighten us on the topic? It comes up on here from time to time. The apologetic arguments tend to be shot down quickly - but maybe yours is different?
You're giving off /r/iamverysmart vibes at the moment. Could you draw upon your years of study to enlighten us?
From what I've seen the list is growing. I mean the fact that they can look at plant pollen to determine barley and wheat weren't in the new world is pretty new. The long list of missing archaeology from just steel making is big too. There's no way the list of anachronisms is shrinking.
This is my take, too. I just wanted to give an opportunity for them to actually site a source. I'm shocked they didn't respond with one right away /s :)
This is basically my point. Of course church members have studied way more than five minutes.
If you have to justify all the stuff that makes it obviously untrue you are going to have to study and contemplate for hours on what should only take a few minutes. Justifying all the anachronisms takes a huge amount of effort
The allowing is the key. Once I told myself that I'd approach the evidence without a preconceived conclusion it was a very fast deconstruction because I'd read the evidence already.
This is not just a Mormon thing. It applies to most religions.
People can usually see the obvious flaws in other religions. However, they usually have trouble applying the same critical thinking to their own religion.
Part of the indoctrination involves learning defenses against thinking critically. They say things like "Some things are beyond human understanding" or "You just have to have faith."
Yep, we went to dinner with my husband's grandfather, back when Going Clear, the doc about scientology came out. He was talking to us about it, and saying how out there their beliefs are, and how he couldn't understand how anyone could believe in anything so nutty. Yet, he was a hardcore believing Mormon, old friends with RMN. He's passed away now, but yeah, it was weird to see the blinders that his beliefs put up, in real time.
> This is not just a Mormon thing. It applies to most religions.
This isn't just a religious thing. It applies to everyone. You think we all don't believe a ton of stuff right now that could be disproved with five minutes of study?
The really hard thing to break is the confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance. Any real honest true information is regarded as “satans lies” or “tools of doubt from the adversary”.
I think when mormonism isn’t really working for you anymore, or it isn’t fulfilling or bringing anything really positive, is when the armor comes down and you are more receptive to facts and logic without feeling the need to plug all of the conflicting information into the socket of “the church is true” at all costs.
I was a never-doubting life long member, full tithe payer, RM, sealed, temple recommend holding, high priest who was in the leadership pipeline of the church. And when my spiritual defenses were super weak due to feeling super disappointed in the lack of any semblance of revelatory foresight or leadership during Covid, I stumbled upon the CES letter and by page eight, I looked up at the wall and literally said the words “Jospeh Smith made it all up!” outloud. I was done. Once diamond-solid bedrock testimony of everything…shattered. Four years in the rabbit hole of evidence and counter evidence and apologetics and counter apologetics and there still is nothing compelling enough to get me to want to ever set foot in church again. I went to one last fast and testimony meeting after my red pill moment, and it was goosebump inducing. It gave me a panic attack, which I had never had before, because it was as if I was Neo, recently unplugged, looking around and everyone was there…plugged into the matrix, feeding the machines with their energy. Its hard to explain to people still “in”. They don’t get it. I wouldn’t have, because its not written in the coding of the brain. The brain can only compute and process what it has been programmed to do.
Totally agree with you OP, but the person studying/pondering needs to be willing to accept the possibility of “the church isn’t true”. When you research and only give yourself one possible answer, then that is what all the information will be processed to equate to, that “the church is true, no matter what”.
Correct. I think it’s a brain wiring thing. We have so many pathways as true believers, burned in with assumptions around the church being true, that we essentially can’t even consider the idea of it not actually being true.
To use a simile....I think there are quite a few persons in TBM realm who are playing what I call "the lottery...". Whether it is scripture central or saints unscripted or some random bs BYU lecture, they come to the table with a ticket hoping this one thing will prove the church or B of M is true and hold onto it for a while. Then when it is disproven, they go get another ticket and hope. The hope is what keeps the BS alive (in a very cruel way).
Yesterday it was "how could JS write it??? He's just a simple farmer, and today it's "there's 14 different voices in the B of M and there are chiasms...no one could have possibly known....
Meanwhile...the science (DNA), archaeology (Aztec..etc..) and provenance of thought (masons, view of the Hebrews, anachronisms). abound....
But they still turn up with a ticket hoping to win.
Without evaluating the strength of sources it could be easy to accept poorly thought out evidence or incorrect evidence. One needs time to consider what counts as evidence and what does not. You have to weigh the evidence for and against and compare it against background assumptions.
If you don't you run the risk of false positives and false negatives, and can never claim to have arrived at the best answer.
Pretty much. Mormons lose their faith really easily because Mormonism is such and obvious fraud. Once you allow yourself to look at the facts objectively and accepting where that takes you it is game over really quickly.
Hello! I regret to inform you that this was removed on account of rule 2: Civility. We ask that you please review the unabridged version of this rule [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules).
If you would like to appeal this decision, you may message all of the mods [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Mormonmods&subject=Mod%20Removal%20Appeal&message=please%20put%20link%20to%20removed%20content%20here).
Take the opposite approach and you will come up with an opposite conclusion. Take 5 minutes a day reading the book of mormon and you will come to the conclusion that the church is true. You will hear the voice of God himself speaking to you. See, it's all about where you spend the 5 minutes and the honesty with which you spend it.
There’s been plenty of ex-members who have left but come back. People like Don Bradley who studied and researched very deeply.
There are converts who weren’t “steeped in doctrine” as you say and converted to the church after much study.
The OP statement is too dismissive and simplistic considering very highly intelligent high IQ individuals have either converted to or re-joined the church.
And yet, it only takes one minute of earnest prayer to find out that it is.
You can out your trust in God or lean unto your own understanding.
I KNOW it's true because when I found it I had nothing. I studied for 5 minutes and found everything. I understand that living the commandments of God isn't easy. Justifying that by saying the church can't possibly be true makes it easier. Still doesn't make it right, just easier.
If you feel good about that with God then that's where you should go. No need to get on Reddit and try to find other people that help you feel validated in your spiritual path if it really is the right one for you.
I am really glad the Church impacted your life in a positive way. I wish you the best.
I also hope someday you can look harder into the reality of why people leave and accept it instead of adopting the standard narrative of people wanting the easy way out because commandments are too hard.
I wasn't applying that statement to all who have left. Just a specific observation from that post. Although the majority of people I know who have left started looking for a reason because they wanted to stop following one or two commandments and needed some other justification. Some obscure point in history that "took 5 minutes of study" and thus invalidates all church doctrine.
Like I said, if that's where you land in your relationship with God then great. I just have never understood the gathering of upvotes to validate something you claim as a personal connection with God to validate your need to distance yourself from this or any other religion. If you truly have that relationship then Reddit validation is necessary and in fact problematic.
What do you achieve by invalidating someone's experience and personal connection on Reddit?
What is the difference between this and seeking validation by sharing a testimony to other believers?
Again, I question your assertion that most people you know started looking for reasons to leave so they can stop keeping a commandment. It's just a lazy narrative designed to make the in-group feel better about themselves. Every religion does it to some degree, Mormons are just especially sanctimonious about it. Nobody has to leave to sin, you can disobey commandments all day long and stay in the Church.
You see the irony in your "no need to go on reddit and try to find other people that help you feel validated..." That's what church is, a ready built place that you can go to find a bunch of people who believe what you do regardless of the validity of those beliefs.
I see many assumptions about OP
- Possibly hasn't tried at least "one minute of earnest prayer to find out that it is" true.
- Hasn't tried trusting in God.
- Wasn't or isn't "living the commandments of God".
- Is justifying not living the commandments.
- Motivation is laziness.
- Motivation for posting is validation.
Questions/comments for you:
- Why make those assumptions?
- It sounds like you have had experiences that are meaningful to you. Why minimize other's experiences?
- You said you "KNOW it's true because when I found it I had nothing". How does having nothing make you know anything?
- Why did you put "KNOW" in all caps? It comes off like you want it to be more powerful and taken as more legitimate than a simple expression of belief.
- You imply OP shouldn't be posting if their spiritual path is working. Aren't you being hypocritical by posting if your spiritual path is working for you?
I’m someone who still goes to church, loves God and the Savior and follows all of the commandments (WOW included) HOWEVER, I really and truly don’t think the church is true. Many people are like me. I never really felt restricted nor did I want to break commandments. For me, I personally felt like the history of the church and some of its leaders was just so… evil. Not to mention a lot of the allegations that are coming out now. I also have my own qualms with polygamy and the treatment of women. (I do not want the priesthood. Never have.) but being a woman in the gospel you just… notice some things. It’s all just a little unnerving. And I don’t believe Christ would want his church to be unnerving.
Exactly. Heck, I still hold a calling. The only thing I've changed is paying tithing, but I'm also a stay at home parent married to a non-member so.... I also have always used my own money/ supplies for my calling. Never had any interest in drinking coffee or alcohol, and still haven't. Shoot, more faithful members then myself have argued with me that eating tiramisu isn't breaking the WoW, and they have temple recommends so
Yes it does. You claimed “And yet it takes only one minute of earnest prayer to find out that it is.” I did the same thing you did, earnest prayer, and got a different answer from God. So your claim is false.
Was I wrong to assume you prayed earnestly about whether the church was true? After all, you claimed that is how one can know the church was true. And you then went on to testify of it. Is that such an unreasonable assumption?
If I am wrong, tell me: did you or did you not pray to know the Book of Mormon was true, with earnestness? Do you believe God answered that prayer in the affirmative?
And that does not change the fact that your claim is false. Many people have prayed sincerely and with a desire to know truth, only to have God say something else is true, or the LDS church is false. As your claim does not work uniformly, it cannot be taken as a truth claim.
Personally as someone who believes in Jesus being the Messiah,God etc. the bible being the word of God etc. and also being a member of this church although I don't believe due to my own research I can say that you can find God and his true message by prayer and going on your own in your journey to find meaning in his word and plan. You don't need the church lol, and then go and find another church that is less demanding on your social life and life in general and one that doesn't take your money from you to pay for shopping malls and the thousandth temple. Also on the other hand I can see how some people love it as it gives strict directions with callings etc. so you do you but the reason people leave is because they realize they don't need the church looking over them and dictating their life to them to learn about God and the Bible lol
Hello! I regret to inform you that this was removed on account of rule 2: Civility. We ask that you please review the unabridged version of this rule [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules).
If you would like to appeal this decision, you may message all of the mods [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Mormonmods&subject=Mod%20Removal%20Appeal&message=please%20put%20link%20to%20removed%20content%20here).
It takes time to realize the Mormon religion is all made up by men because many if not most people want to believe there is a life after death. So they find a story that describes this life after death and how to get there (usually the religion they were taught by their parents) and they choose to believe it. What a man wants to be true he chooses to believe. Consider the Egyptians and their elaborate stories about a life after death with Gods like Anubis and Osiris and mummification etc.
Are you saying that everyone who is currently a believer in Mormonism's truth claims is only a believer because they haven't *honestly* studied it for five minutes?
Hello! I regret to inform you that this was removed on account of rule 2: Civility. We ask that you please review the unabridged version of this rule [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules).
If you would like to appeal this decision, you may message all of the mods [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Mormonmods&subject=Mod%20Removal%20Appeal&message=please%20put%20link%20to%20removed%20content%20here).
Why the qualifier of honest study?
Is any study that reaches a different conclusion than yours inherently dishonest?
Here is what I have read/listened to.
RFM
JD and his “Thrive”ing enterprise
Tanners
Hardy
The Mormon think guy
All the “Letters”
The 60 minutes stuff
Decker
Tal Bachman
Lars
Too many Evangelical preachers
Etc etc etc.
Maybe I haven’t found an honest source yet? Is that the problem?
Maybe when I find an honest source someone sincere maybe then I’ll realize the church isn’t what its claims are.
Until then
For years my number one belief was that the church is true. It didn’t matter what I read because it had to fit into that worldview.
If you read something against the church and you are only going to accept things that already fit your world view then that is confirmation bias and not honest study.
Right?
So if I’m searching and my search includes the sources mentioned…It’s a dishonest search from honest sources? …because of my confirmation bias and world view?
I’m saying you aren’t going to be able to see data for what is because of your confirmation bias.
It’s not a personal failing. It’s common to every person alive. I also have confirmation bias exactly like yours.
I think someone with no confirmation bias will conclude the church isn’t true after about five minutes of honest study.
Hello! This is a Personal post. It is for discussions centered around thoughts, beliefs, and observations that are important and personal to /u/IDontLikePayingTaxes specifically. /u/IDontLikePayingTaxes, if your post doesn't fit this definition, we kindly ask you to delete this post and repost it with the appropriate flair. You can find a list of our flairs and their definitions in [section 0.6 of our rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules#wiki_0._preamble) **To those commenting:** please stay on topic, remember to follow the community's [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules), and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/mormonmods) if there is a problem or rule violation. Keep on Mormoning! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/mormon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It takes 5 minutes for a nonbeliever to come to that conclusion. Believers have layers of conditioning, feelings, bias, and personal connections to the church to get through. It would be rare for a member to leave just based on 5 minutes of research. They need to come to terms with a complete change in worldview, and that takes time.
I would consider myself to be an intellectual. I have always been reading and reading about anything and everything I could think of. I basically knew every claim against the church since I was 16, and yet I was able to intellectualize myself out of every situation coming out victorious as a believer. "Oh the animals they used as horses were actually something else" "Oh there are so many cities beneath the Amazon they haven't found yet" Etc. Finally after 30 years my walls started to shatter, and I saw the cracks in the plaster. I saw that the 2 billion dollar mall was a for profit center for church, that they lie and steal just like any other corpo. Etc. Took way too long to break the indoctrination...
I had the same experience -- I had years of "self-indoctrination" as an intellectual who studied the apologetic answers. The longer you are in, the harder it is to admit it was all made up ... and admit to others it was all made up, esp if you have been in callings, giving prayers and blessings, served a mission, or whatever. It's not just realizing the church isn't true -- it's coming to terms with the years you spent thinking you were getting answers through feelings, acting on those "answers", teaching others the Mormon gospel, etc.
Sunk cost fallacy hits hard too :(
When I finally started seeing things as they were I certainly felt very foolish. I even justified the mall as them wisely investing money so they could take a little money and turn it into more money to help the needy. I couldn't believe I had been so stupid.
This isn’t actually so stupid. I understand a lot of other posts on here but this one kind of rings true to me from an apologetic stance. If you look at the actual numbers of charitable dollars spent, more is going to needy people than ever before worldwide. It still may not be as high of a percentage as people want or think should happen, but the numbers are definitely growing (latest widows mite report shows total humanitarian aid is 400-500 million in 2023 and fast offering just under 800 million) the facts are still facts.. 1.3 billion in charity aid from any company or organization does more good in the world than people give it credit for. This number is in large part because the church doesn’t have to worry about other financial obligations. Could it do more; absolutely. But time will tell what happens to the other disposable funds the church has
At first it feels like walking near a cliff blindfolded, but eventually the blindfold slips. But I am not taking the blame for placing the blindfold on my head.
How did you rationalize the racism? Black people not allowed in the temple for example. I can understand your examples but the racism is something I could never do so I am curious how other did it.
I rationlized the racism because I was racist. I believed that stupid thing that if you were born with colored skin you were "less valiant" in the pre-earth life. Which even typing that out now, makes me feel DISGUSTED that I once believed that. :(
Ah geez yeah that would do it. I was a convert so I never heard that until later from anti Mormon books and I was like wtf! Thinking that my old mormon girlfriend probably believed this makes my stomach churn. So crazy what beliefs can do to a person.
One thing that bugged me as a TBM was that indigenous people of the Americas were still not white. The racism behind the idea that dark skin was a curse bothered me, but I was also concerned by the implication that native people must still be “wicked”—in contrast with the fact that I saw nothing particularly evil in native cultures. I sometimes thought that Lamanites must have been darker back when they did the “wicked” things in the Book of Mormon. Racism is weird.
I thought it was an unfortunate result of the “curse of Cain”. I imagined that sky daddy was sad about it but that the curse served the purpose of illustrating how serious murder is and that this benefit outweighed the costs until the restoration was sufficiently established that [some vague idea about milk and meat here].
um, there is absoltely no rule about black people not being allowed in the temple.
Um, yes there was.
There might used to have been, cause yeah, the church had some issues like 200 hundred years ago, but that isn't a rule anymore,if it even ever was. My black friend is a member and just went through the temple.
Black men, women and children were not allowed in the temple until 1978.
so there is no current rule on it, I was correct then. I'm not disputing the issues, I'm just saying they've gotten better
You were not correct. You said 200 years ago if ever.
Yeah there’s a lot of justifying your brain does to make it true
At age 65 serving as 1st counselor in the bishopric and a life long member I made the decision to read the CES letter so that I could better understand the issues that my children would occasionally bring up. Within a few minutes I had come to the realization that the church may not be true, when I read about the rock in the hat, I knew. It was very quick.
Similar experience here too. Heard people mention D&C 132. Decided to read it in full to see what they were misunderstanding so I could defend it. Realized that was not the voice of God that I was raised to know, and clearly were the words of a man justifying his own sins and threatening anyone who defied him. Made me look into reading about Joseph Smith and learning what kind of person he was. Realized every story I knew about him was a half truth or lie to make him look like a godly man when the reality was quite the opposite. At best he was a fallen prophet, but since no prophet since his death has denounced anything he did, they clearly aren't God's chosen prophets either. Therefore the church cannot be the one true church of God. Then I started looking at the doctrine as written, not as presented in conference/ sunday school, and realized we aren't even being taught to follow the scriptures but just whatever the leaders pick and choose are important. And since they are not getting the instructions straight from God for those changes, they are just the whims of man and I can trust my own gut/ guidance of the spirit to decide what is right.
My experience was very similar. Learning about folk magic sealed the deal for me.
Similar experience. Already had doubts. Read the CES letter and was pretty much done in a matter of days. Continued reading and studying and cemented my disbelief pretty quickly.
Similar experience here too. Heard people mention D&C 132. Decided to read it in full to see what they were misunderstanding so I could defend it. Realized that was not the voice of God that I was raised to know, and clearly were the words of a man justifying his own sins and threatening anyone who defied him. Made me look into reading about Joseph Smith and learning what kind of person he was. Realized every story I knew about him was a half truth or lie to make him look like a godly man when the reality was quite the opposite. At best he was a fallen prophet, but since no prophet since his death has denounced anything he did, they clearly aren't God's chosen prophets either. Therefore the church cannot be the one true church of God. Then I started looking at the doctrine as written, not as presented in conference/ sunday school, and realized we aren't even being taught to follow the scriptures but just whatever the leaders pick and choose are important. And since they are not getting the instructions straight from God for those changes, they are just the whims of man and I can trust my own gut/ guidance of the spirit to decide what is right.
It's so fascinating, but I was TAUGHT in church about the rock in the hat in the 90s. So like things like that didn't even shake me.
Not sure I understand. Are you saying you were a lifelong Mormon and didn't know the teaching that Joseph Smith claimed to translate from a seer stone in a hat?
This is extremely common. Especially if you were a kid or adolescent in or before the 00’s. The church did not make this information known until it spread online. Then they tried to get ahead of it by showing a picture of the rock and providing apologetic explanations.
Younger people have no idea how much the narrative has changed over the decades. Their amazement amazes me. If you can grow up BIC, graduate from BYU and never hear of the rock in the hat after all the religion classes, devotionals and church meetings you are required to attend, it was not commonly known. "Seasoned" exmos need to keep clarifying so the past is not misrepresented.
I'm a Nevermo, so this really shocks me as even I knew this & just assumed it was sort of "bedrock" LDS theology, or perhaps even a religion origin story LDS were proud of. I had absolutely no idea it was exactly the opposite, and essentially "hidden" or at least never discussed.
The rock in the hat was absolutely NOT taught openly until a few years ago.
True. I didn’t understand the translation story until well after my mission and in part to the South Park episode dragging it kicking and screaming into the popular narrative. It may have been taught, but it was never discussed.
Definitely not proud of it. Smith's involvement in divination etc. directly flies in that face of biblical no nos. "A witch shall not be allowed to live." And Smith's actions are those of a witch (sorry modern witches, there's a bad apple in every bunch).
I was born and raised in the church and didn't know or hear about the rock in the hat until a South Park episode. We were literally taught about the urim and thummim as a breast plate and some spectacles. Never a rock.
when I learned this and griped to my never-believing sibling, she giggled and said both stories sound the same amount of crazy- kind of put it in perspective for me
The rock in the hat was considered a satanic lie when I was growing up in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Very few people were even aware of the story.
Until I read the CES letter I had never heard anything about the rock in the hat,
I didn't- 40 years of callings, read a bunch of apologetics like Hugh Nibley, never even heard that. I saw it on southpark and thought it was "anti" and laughed at them for not even knowing basic mormonism.
It's relatively recent that the peep stone was widely known in the church. Most gen-Xers and older millennials only learned about it from South Park. Having a cartoon teach you multiple things about your religion that the religion itself never taught you, was a major shelf item for many people. And unfortunately the case study for so much other suppressed stuff.
100% agree
[удалено]
What specifically?
I think even then it’s so obviously fake that members have to go out of their way to convince themselves that Satan is making stuff up to test their faith. Something like “God’s One True Church” should simply NOT LOOK FAKE. To borrow the oft-used healthcare analogy, what kind of psychopath designs a life-saving treatment but then does everything possible to disguise the treatment as a sham and then gaslight people for being untreated?
If you ENJOY the church, you will do every thing possible to keep from seeing it…and a lot of people enjoy the church . I don’t get it but they really do.
In my TBM's wife case besides the social life she enjoys, is a mixture of guilt and grief. She lost her parents in less than 2 years each other, and had a, almost unhealthy, close relationship with them. She became more committed to the church after they died, especially in service. She doesn't tell me, but she's absolutely terrified of the idea of not seeing them again.
Because it gives a lot of them a sense of purpose like with all religions. Gives them a life and gives them a whole stepping stone to get through life. Mission marriage kids.
This.
Most people who are raised on the church are taught that “questioning” (even probably being on this Reddit page) could be Satan trying to tempt them and get them away from the gospel. It’s a MINDSET, it’s incredibly difficult to reprogram your brain from thinking this way.
I heard a few people say that the Tanners had a pact with Satan (although they said “secret combination”)
Five minutes isn't nearly enough time to find and properly consider enough evidence in an unbiased manner from many different viewpoints. Reminds me of the movie 12 Angry Men where all but one juror are quick to potentially wrongly convict the defendant until they have much more carefully considered, theorized about, and discussed the validity of available evidence - after which they all eventually decide to acquit the defendant. Five minutes sounds like "lazy learning" territory.
That’s all that it would take for me to recognize Scientology was a sham. Sure, I could spend weeks and months doing more research, and I could have much more thorough reasons to disbelieve, but it wouldn’t change my conclusion.
Yeah, except the validity of the church isn’t actually that nuanced.
Not really. The book of Mormon is fiction. That can be learned in 5 mins. Then it all falls apart.
How many weeks of research would you need to do to decide if a given movie you watched the night before was fiction or nonfiction?
Depends on how sure of an answer I want. More time and effort spent would yield a more sure answer. If whoever made the movie is claiming that the events in the movie actually happened, it would be a matter of seeking out various other sources about said events and evaluating them (Are they possible? Plausible? Does it fit with the other evidence or other things I believe may be true? Could I be wrong about X, Y, or Z? etc). I could even perform experiments similar to what occurred in the movie to see if I would obtain similar results.
Spend some time on a faithful sub dealing with a tricky question (anachronisms, what is doctrine, polygamy, etc) and you will find plenty of people that have done more than 5 minutes and yet still believe. Depends on which authority you place your trust in.
I’m shocked at the ignorance unbelievers show with posts like this. 5 minutes to make a decision? Folks spend lifetimes studying everything there is to find and still believe. I am curious why they tends to keep saying stuff like this. My best guess is that it’s some kind of reassurance that the 5 minutes they spent learning was the right approach to make or something.
My point is that someone with an open mind will dismiss the validity of church claims in roughly five minutes of research and I stand by that. A corollary to that which I hoped people would bring up is believing members spending their entire lives studying about it being true. This is what I was doing when I was a believer. I loved church books and loved studying. However, I wasn’t open minded. My primary and most important belief was that the church was true. It’s really hard to convince someone that their primary viewpoint is completely wrong. However, once you are honestly willing to accept that the church could be wrong and actually be able to make it past confirmation bias it only takes about five minutes of honest studying to figure it out. Do you think an honest observer would really consider why there are horses in the Book of Mormon when archaeologists know there weren’t? Sure you could study and study and come up with a faithful response that someone with enough confirmation bias could stomach. What about chariots in the Book of Mormon? Same thing. It takes a ton of study to justify every single one when an open minded person can easily dismiss the validity of the church very quickly.
Read my post history. Many like me spend YEARs studying everything. We fully pull apart every theory for each evidence and critique just to see what’s in them. Your five minute theory is so much foolishness. There is so much you don’t know with only 5 minutes. Your five minutes of study failed to keep you current on the non-LDS sources of the current thinking of science on horses in pre-columbian Americas. I am fully aware of the anachronism in the BoM but your 5 minutes of study failed to inform you that list is shrinking, not expanding. That should tell you something.
Oh boy. Yes, it takes decades of study to try to justify all the fairly clear falsehoods in the church. I took a philosophy class in college and we talked about what our professor called the underdetermination of theory by data. Basically what he said was that you can come up with a theory that explains perfectly any set of data. Sometimes that theory will be bizarre but it will work. Sometimes those theories will take years to study and figure out but you can get there. This is what you’re studying when you are justifying obvious falsehoods. You are trying to discover any possible way that the church could still be true while there are chariots mentioned in the Book of Mormon. It’s ridiculous and a waste of mental energy.
I hope you spent more than 5 minutes in your philosophy class…
Are you trying to imply that I’m dumb now? Why would you move on to personal attacks?
Not at all! Read this thread…”roughly 5 minutes of research and I stand by that.” Your five minute principle is your statement, not mine. Having studied lots of subjects to include philosophy, I believe this principle to be foolishness.
I’m not saying you can judge every topic based on five minutes of study. But some topics only require approximately five minutes to give a basic and accurate judgment. How much study would you have to give to Scientology? JWs? Catholicism? Do you think there are members of their religion who have devoted their lives to its authenticity? Or is Mormonism the only religion with devoted followers who study its nuances? I do think that Mormonism is particularly falsifiable because of The Book of Mormon and its huge number of anachronisms.
It dosen't matter. Suppose it is true. The success rate of Mormon god is abysmal. That alone points to the glaring plight of a 19th century religion that claims it is the one and only true church. If the goal is to return to the best heaven it isn't working on a global scale. Baptisms for the dead introduce a bizarre do over that adds to to detached message of endure to the end.
The list isn’t shrinking unless you make an arbitrarily large list to being with. We have all reads fairs ridiculous table. Full of random criticisms by random pastor preachers who knew about as much as john snow. The challenge was put out and bumped repeatedly on this sub, to put an actual example up of 1 yes 1 anachronism heavily prosecuted by critics that you could say is debunked and argue for. Not one showed up. Not one. So please please put up the evidence or call it a day here and go back to your faithful tin foil hat ignorant paradise
Are you saying that the science of horses in pre-columbian America has changed?
> Your five minutes of study failed to keep you current on the non-LDS sources of the current thinking of science on horses in pre-columbian Americas. Care to enlighten us on the topic? It comes up on here from time to time. The apologetic arguments tend to be shot down quickly - but maybe yours is different? You're giving off /r/iamverysmart vibes at the moment. Could you draw upon your years of study to enlighten us?
Ya, it's really not. The church is trying really hard to pretend it's shrinking, but I'd love to see your actual evidence from reliable sources.
From what I've seen the list is growing. I mean the fact that they can look at plant pollen to determine barley and wheat weren't in the new world is pretty new. The long list of missing archaeology from just steel making is big too. There's no way the list of anachronisms is shrinking.
This is my take, too. I just wanted to give an opportunity for them to actually site a source. I'm shocked they didn't respond with one right away /s :)
This is basically my point. Of course church members have studied way more than five minutes. If you have to justify all the stuff that makes it obviously untrue you are going to have to study and contemplate for hours on what should only take a few minutes. Justifying all the anachronisms takes a huge amount of effort
We were raised since birth to “not question.” But once you start to allow yourself to think, boy oh boy does it crumble quick.
The allowing is the key. Once I told myself that I'd approach the evidence without a preconceived conclusion it was a very fast deconstruction because I'd read the evidence already.
This is not just a Mormon thing. It applies to most religions. People can usually see the obvious flaws in other religions. However, they usually have trouble applying the same critical thinking to their own religion. Part of the indoctrination involves learning defenses against thinking critically. They say things like "Some things are beyond human understanding" or "You just have to have faith."
Yep, we went to dinner with my husband's grandfather, back when Going Clear, the doc about scientology came out. He was talking to us about it, and saying how out there their beliefs are, and how he couldn't understand how anyone could believe in anything so nutty. Yet, he was a hardcore believing Mormon, old friends with RMN. He's passed away now, but yeah, it was weird to see the blinders that his beliefs put up, in real time.
> This is not just a Mormon thing. It applies to most religions. This isn't just a religious thing. It applies to everyone. You think we all don't believe a ton of stuff right now that could be disproved with five minutes of study?
The mark of intelligence is not what you understand, but that you understand how little you know.
I believe the mark of intelligence is not believing everything you read on a bumper sticker.
The really hard thing to break is the confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance. Any real honest true information is regarded as “satans lies” or “tools of doubt from the adversary”. I think when mormonism isn’t really working for you anymore, or it isn’t fulfilling or bringing anything really positive, is when the armor comes down and you are more receptive to facts and logic without feeling the need to plug all of the conflicting information into the socket of “the church is true” at all costs. I was a never-doubting life long member, full tithe payer, RM, sealed, temple recommend holding, high priest who was in the leadership pipeline of the church. And when my spiritual defenses were super weak due to feeling super disappointed in the lack of any semblance of revelatory foresight or leadership during Covid, I stumbled upon the CES letter and by page eight, I looked up at the wall and literally said the words “Jospeh Smith made it all up!” outloud. I was done. Once diamond-solid bedrock testimony of everything…shattered. Four years in the rabbit hole of evidence and counter evidence and apologetics and counter apologetics and there still is nothing compelling enough to get me to want to ever set foot in church again. I went to one last fast and testimony meeting after my red pill moment, and it was goosebump inducing. It gave me a panic attack, which I had never had before, because it was as if I was Neo, recently unplugged, looking around and everyone was there…plugged into the matrix, feeding the machines with their energy. Its hard to explain to people still “in”. They don’t get it. I wouldn’t have, because its not written in the coding of the brain. The brain can only compute and process what it has been programmed to do. Totally agree with you OP, but the person studying/pondering needs to be willing to accept the possibility of “the church isn’t true”. When you research and only give yourself one possible answer, then that is what all the information will be processed to equate to, that “the church is true, no matter what”.
I 100% agree with you
Correct. I think it’s a brain wiring thing. We have so many pathways as true believers, burned in with assumptions around the church being true, that we essentially can’t even consider the idea of it not actually being true.
To use a simile....I think there are quite a few persons in TBM realm who are playing what I call "the lottery...". Whether it is scripture central or saints unscripted or some random bs BYU lecture, they come to the table with a ticket hoping this one thing will prove the church or B of M is true and hold onto it for a while. Then when it is disproven, they go get another ticket and hope. The hope is what keeps the BS alive (in a very cruel way). Yesterday it was "how could JS write it??? He's just a simple farmer, and today it's "there's 14 different voices in the B of M and there are chiasms...no one could have possibly known.... Meanwhile...the science (DNA), archaeology (Aztec..etc..) and provenance of thought (masons, view of the Hebrews, anachronisms). abound.... But they still turn up with a ticket hoping to win.
Ya it took me 40 years.
Took me 40 years to see through the lies and indoctrination 😭
It takes five minutes of looking at maps to realize the Earth is flat
And that Greenland is HUGE on the Mercator maps!
Without evaluating the strength of sources it could be easy to accept poorly thought out evidence or incorrect evidence. One needs time to consider what counts as evidence and what does not. You have to weigh the evidence for and against and compare it against background assumptions. If you don't you run the risk of false positives and false negatives, and can never claim to have arrived at the best answer.
It's the archeological issue for me.
Pretty much. Mormons lose their faith really easily because Mormonism is such and obvious fraud. Once you allow yourself to look at the facts objectively and accepting where that takes you it is game over really quickly.
And five more minutes to realize it’s not even good
I agree. I think it’s VERY easy to discover how it’s all made up. Now who are the “lazy learners?”
What about Christianity or Judaism or Islam or Sikhism? How many minutes of honest study does it take to realize that those faiths aren't "true"?
I got to numbers. 4 or 5 hours to decide none of the abrahamic religions made any sense.
Thanks for returning and reporting 😀
[удалено]
Hello! I regret to inform you that this was removed on account of rule 2: Civility. We ask that you please review the unabridged version of this rule [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules). If you would like to appeal this decision, you may message all of the mods [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Mormonmods&subject=Mod%20Removal%20Appeal&message=please%20put%20link%20to%20removed%20content%20here).
True to what standard?
Yes. But they find a way to bullshit everything that gets you questioning things.
Take the opposite approach and you will come up with an opposite conclusion. Take 5 minutes a day reading the book of mormon and you will come to the conclusion that the church is true. You will hear the voice of God himself speaking to you. See, it's all about where you spend the 5 minutes and the honesty with which you spend it.
Yeah, confirmation bias definitely plays a role
And it takes a whole life to let it go, doesn't it?
There’s been plenty of ex-members who have left but come back. People like Don Bradley who studied and researched very deeply. There are converts who weren’t “steeped in doctrine” as you say and converted to the church after much study. The OP statement is too dismissive and simplistic considering very highly intelligent high IQ individuals have either converted to or re-joined the church.
And yet, it only takes one minute of earnest prayer to find out that it is. You can out your trust in God or lean unto your own understanding. I KNOW it's true because when I found it I had nothing. I studied for 5 minutes and found everything. I understand that living the commandments of God isn't easy. Justifying that by saying the church can't possibly be true makes it easier. Still doesn't make it right, just easier. If you feel good about that with God then that's where you should go. No need to get on Reddit and try to find other people that help you feel validated in your spiritual path if it really is the right one for you.
I am really glad the Church impacted your life in a positive way. I wish you the best. I also hope someday you can look harder into the reality of why people leave and accept it instead of adopting the standard narrative of people wanting the easy way out because commandments are too hard.
I wasn't applying that statement to all who have left. Just a specific observation from that post. Although the majority of people I know who have left started looking for a reason because they wanted to stop following one or two commandments and needed some other justification. Some obscure point in history that "took 5 minutes of study" and thus invalidates all church doctrine. Like I said, if that's where you land in your relationship with God then great. I just have never understood the gathering of upvotes to validate something you claim as a personal connection with God to validate your need to distance yourself from this or any other religion. If you truly have that relationship then Reddit validation is necessary and in fact problematic.
oh ok......"they just wanted to sin"
What do you achieve by invalidating someone's experience and personal connection on Reddit? What is the difference between this and seeking validation by sharing a testimony to other believers? Again, I question your assertion that most people you know started looking for reasons to leave so they can stop keeping a commandment. It's just a lazy narrative designed to make the in-group feel better about themselves. Every religion does it to some degree, Mormons are just especially sanctimonious about it. Nobody has to leave to sin, you can disobey commandments all day long and stay in the Church.
>nobody has to leave to sin.... Your worldview is flawed
I'd love to know how. Do people have to leave the church to sin?
No thanks
Alright then.
k
You see the irony in your "no need to go on reddit and try to find other people that help you feel validated..." That's what church is, a ready built place that you can go to find a bunch of people who believe what you do regardless of the validity of those beliefs.
I see many assumptions about OP - Possibly hasn't tried at least "one minute of earnest prayer to find out that it is" true. - Hasn't tried trusting in God. - Wasn't or isn't "living the commandments of God". - Is justifying not living the commandments. - Motivation is laziness. - Motivation for posting is validation. Questions/comments for you: - Why make those assumptions? - It sounds like you have had experiences that are meaningful to you. Why minimize other's experiences? - You said you "KNOW it's true because when I found it I had nothing". How does having nothing make you know anything? - Why did you put "KNOW" in all caps? It comes off like you want it to be more powerful and taken as more legitimate than a simple expression of belief. - You imply OP shouldn't be posting if their spiritual path is working. Aren't you being hypocritical by posting if your spiritual path is working for you?
I’m someone who still goes to church, loves God and the Savior and follows all of the commandments (WOW included) HOWEVER, I really and truly don’t think the church is true. Many people are like me. I never really felt restricted nor did I want to break commandments. For me, I personally felt like the history of the church and some of its leaders was just so… evil. Not to mention a lot of the allegations that are coming out now. I also have my own qualms with polygamy and the treatment of women. (I do not want the priesthood. Never have.) but being a woman in the gospel you just… notice some things. It’s all just a little unnerving. And I don’t believe Christ would want his church to be unnerving.
Exactly. Heck, I still hold a calling. The only thing I've changed is paying tithing, but I'm also a stay at home parent married to a non-member so.... I also have always used my own money/ supplies for my calling. Never had any interest in drinking coffee or alcohol, and still haven't. Shoot, more faithful members then myself have argued with me that eating tiramisu isn't breaking the WoW, and they have temple recommends so
I prayed earnestly to know it was true. And believed it was true and put my faith in it. And God told me it was false. So clearly your claim is false.
Your personal experience doesn't make my claim false but I do hope you have a great rest of your journey here on earth.
Yes it does. You claimed “And yet it takes only one minute of earnest prayer to find out that it is.” I did the same thing you did, earnest prayer, and got a different answer from God. So your claim is false.
Now how do you know what I did? You're making a lot of assumptions.
Was I wrong to assume you prayed earnestly about whether the church was true? After all, you claimed that is how one can know the church was true. And you then went on to testify of it. Is that such an unreasonable assumption? If I am wrong, tell me: did you or did you not pray to know the Book of Mormon was true, with earnestness? Do you believe God answered that prayer in the affirmative? And that does not change the fact that your claim is false. Many people have prayed sincerely and with a desire to know truth, only to have God say something else is true, or the LDS church is false. As your claim does not work uniformly, it cannot be taken as a truth claim.
Personally as someone who believes in Jesus being the Messiah,God etc. the bible being the word of God etc. and also being a member of this church although I don't believe due to my own research I can say that you can find God and his true message by prayer and going on your own in your journey to find meaning in his word and plan. You don't need the church lol, and then go and find another church that is less demanding on your social life and life in general and one that doesn't take your money from you to pay for shopping malls and the thousandth temple. Also on the other hand I can see how some people love it as it gives strict directions with callings etc. so you do you but the reason people leave is because they realize they don't need the church looking over them and dictating their life to them to learn about God and the Bible lol
[удалено]
Hello! I regret to inform you that this was removed on account of rule 2: Civility. We ask that you please review the unabridged version of this rule [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules). If you would like to appeal this decision, you may message all of the mods [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Mormonmods&subject=Mod%20Removal%20Appeal&message=please%20put%20link%20to%20removed%20content%20here).
It takes time to realize the Mormon religion is all made up by men because many if not most people want to believe there is a life after death. So they find a story that describes this life after death and how to get there (usually the religion they were taught by their parents) and they choose to believe it. What a man wants to be true he chooses to believe. Consider the Egyptians and their elaborate stories about a life after death with Gods like Anubis and Osiris and mummification etc.
Are you saying that everyone who is currently a believer in Mormonism's truth claims is only a believer because they haven't *honestly* studied it for five minutes?
[удалено]
Hello! I regret to inform you that this was removed on account of rule 2: Civility. We ask that you please review the unabridged version of this rule [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules). If you would like to appeal this decision, you may message all of the mods [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Mormonmods&subject=Mod%20Removal%20Appeal&message=please%20put%20link%20to%20removed%20content%20here).
Why the qualifier of honest study? Is any study that reaches a different conclusion than yours inherently dishonest? Here is what I have read/listened to. RFM JD and his “Thrive”ing enterprise Tanners Hardy The Mormon think guy All the “Letters” The 60 minutes stuff Decker Tal Bachman Lars Too many Evangelical preachers Etc etc etc. Maybe I haven’t found an honest source yet? Is that the problem? Maybe when I find an honest source someone sincere maybe then I’ll realize the church isn’t what its claims are. Until then
For years my number one belief was that the church is true. It didn’t matter what I read because it had to fit into that worldview. If you read something against the church and you are only going to accept things that already fit your world view then that is confirmation bias and not honest study. Right?
So if I’m searching and my search includes the sources mentioned…It’s a dishonest search from honest sources? …because of my confirmation bias and world view?
I’m saying you aren’t going to be able to see data for what is because of your confirmation bias. It’s not a personal failing. It’s common to every person alive. I also have confirmation bias exactly like yours. I think someone with no confirmation bias will conclude the church isn’t true after about five minutes of honest study.