Enos' Mighty Prayer and His Desire

In the Book of Mormon, there is a book by Enos called "The Book of Enos". It is a short book, only one chapter and in it, Enos tells the story of how he prayed mightily for a day and night. Because of his faith, his sins were forgiven. In fact, the lord himself tells Enos he will grant him one wish.

Enos 1:12

And it came to pass that after I had prayed and labored with all diligence, the Lord said unto me: I will grant unto thee according to thy desires, because of thy faith.

Enos is asked what he desires, and he responds:

Enos 1:13

And now behold, this was the desire which I desired of him—that if it should so be, that my people, the Nephites, should fall into transgression, and by any means be destroyed, and the Lamanites should not be destroyed, that the Lord God would preserve a record of my people, the Nephites; even if it so be by the power of his holy arm, that it might be brought forth at some future day unto the Lamanites, that, perhaps, they might be brought unto salvation—

This is what I find a little odd. Why isn't the desire of Enos that the people of the Nephites would not fall into transgression? Or why wasn't his desire that the Lamanites might be brought unto salvation today and they can live in peace and harmony with the Nephites? I understand that God can not take away the free agency of others, but that wasn't the question. The question was what was it that Enos desired, and his desire is 'just in case' the Nephites fall into transgression, and the Nephites happen to be wiped out by the Lamanites or by any other means, then preserve the record for the Lamanites in a future time. That is what he desires most? It sounds to me more like a postdiction, or just literary foreshadowing at best. I find it rather suspect that Enos' ultimate desire is a "what if" scenario.

The covenant that Enos makes with the lord is based on an "if, then" agreement. IF the Nephites fall into transgression, THEN the lord will preserve the record. So by strict letter of the covenant, if the Nephites ultimately did not fall into transgression, or were not destroyed by the Lamanites, then the lord would not have any contractual obligation to assist the preservation the record. The Nephites would be on their own. The covenant only works with the assumption that the Nephites will be wiped out at a later date. Maybe Enos didn't have much faith in his fellow Nephites and knew that inevitably they would be wiped out? But that doesn't explain why his ultimate desire wouldn't be for the lord to protect his people, but instead 'if' they happen to be destroyed, 'then' preserve the record for the descendants of the people that destroyed his people.

That would be like the lord asking me what I desire the most for my 2 year old, and my response is "what I desire most for my 2 year old is if she ever gets kidnapped, preserve her Sesame Street DVDs so that the future generations of her kidnappers can one day learn the importance of education".

Disillusioned Mormon Read more!

What Kind of Mormon Are You?

This is a one question quiz that is directed at members, ex-members or even investigators of the LDS community, not limited to members of the mainstream LDS church. Of course this is in no way scientific and is just for fun.

Which one most closely matches your belief?

1. Believe that the gospel truths as restored by Joseph Smith are eternal and can never change and ought to be taught the same way regardless of the church leadership.

2.Believe that the gospel is true and eternal, does not change, but the emphasis can change depending on church leadership. However, this change is not based on outside influence and comes from top down (i.e. direct revelation from God to the prophet), not from bottom up.

3.Believe that the gospel is true, but can evolve and be refined over time as we gain a better understanding. The changes in the church doctrine or practice like polygamy and the priesthood ban on blacks came from bottom up, not top down. Principals like polygamy and the priesthood ban on blacks were mistakes made by the church and is now trying to correct those mistakes. You believe that the church has many aspects it can improve on like treatment of women, or women being given the priesthood, or treatment of homosexuals, etc. These changes will come from bottom up, not top down in the church.

4.Believe that if the church is true, then the historicity of the Book of Mormon can and should be explained by a very scientific, secular and non-religious explanation. You believe that one day DNA and archeology will eventually 'vindicate' the claims made by the church and you are certain that scientists will accept the Book of Mormon as a historical document, even if they don't believe in the story of angels. The "burning in the bosom" is a nice spiritual confirmation, but not sufficient in today's scientific age.

5.Believe that the Book of Mormon is inspired fiction and Joseph Smith simply used a median he understood well (he was well known for being a good storyteller) to best communicate the message and principals that were revealed to him from God. Much like how Jesus taught in parables so that people could understand his teachings.

6.Believe that the whole church is completely made up and fabricated by Joseph Smith, it was not inspired by God, but you still believe it is a good organization trying to make the world a better place and/or has a benefit to society. The LDS church is another man-made church, perhaps with a little more imagination.

7.Believe that the church is a fraud and has no benefit to society


Do you have your number? Scroll down to find out the answer






















Are you sure you have your number? If you don't, then you are #8, a cheating Mormon. Seriously, scroll back up and get your number first before seeing the answers.









































Answers

1. Fundamentalist Mormon-Your ideals are consistent with the teachings of Mormon Fundamentalists

2. Orthodox Mormon-This is the common understanding in the mainstream LDS church

3.Progressive Mormon/Liberal Mormon-While certainly not in the majority, there is a growing movement within the church towards a more liberal approach to the gospel.

4.Mormon Skeptic/Mormon Apologist- Skepticism is a method of obtaining knowledge through systematic doubt, continual testing and intellectual caution. Apologetics is simply a way to defend criticisms I believe the 2 go together. In order to be an apologist, you must practice intellectual caution. If you believe that the Book of Mormon can be proven through scientific explanations, that makes you a skeptic, because spiritual confirmation is not enough and falls short.

5.Unorthodox Mormon-Although your views are shared by many others, your view is in no way orthodox teachings or understanding.

6.Cultural Mormon/New Order Mormon-Perhaps you attend church so you don't hurt the feelings of family members. Or maybe you believe in the organization. I fall into this category.

7.Disaffected Mormon/Soon to be ex-Mormon/already ex-Mormon- Like you needed a quiz to tell you that.

Disillusioned Mormon
Read more!

Mormon Biologists and Human Evolution

There was an interesting article in the Salt Lake Tribune from Stephen L. Peck, associate professor in the Department of Biology at Brigham Young University. It is an editorial piece that gives the view of evolution from a faithful member of the church.

The article is more a slam on intelligent design, arguing that it is not science and therefore does not belong in the science classroom.

BYU has a number of faithful evolutionary biologists and evolutionary science is taught at Brigham Young University just as it is at any other accredited university. Intelligent Design has no place in BYU's science curriculum.
Let me be blunt. I find nothing of value in Intelligent Design for both scientific and religious reasons....

...My next complaint about the Intelligent Design fiasco is its pretence to science. Exactly what makes it a science is not clear. It offers no testable hypotheses. It has established no research program. The theory of evolution has offered testable hypotheses that have been confirmed again and again....

My last complaint about Intelligent Design is that it sets religion and science against each other. It puts forward a false dichotomy in students' minds that suggests that evolution and faith are incompatible

I find the subject of evolution absolutely fascinating. The idea that life evolves slowly over time and that we can see similarities between animals that share common ancestors is truly amazing.

A number of months ago, I wrote a blog about questioning why religious beliefs are so threatened by evolution. I feel that I now have a better understanding of why the stonewalling. However, I agree with the article in the tribune that intelligent design proponents are doing a dis-service by trying to pass it off as science and trying to force it into science class. First of all, it isn't science, it is religion, and second, it forces children to think that they have to choose between the two, which is also more harmful to religion, as there is much more evidence to support evolution, if one HAS to choose between the two.

I do not believe there is anything wrong with believing in the theory of intelligent design, but I believe that it does not belong in biology class as it is not science.

I have seen Ben Stein's movie Expelled:No Intelligence Allowed and was extremely disappointed. What I saw was amateur cinematography, sloppy editing, boring footage, next to nothing of any scientific value and over all about 10 minutes worth of interesting footage. The only parts that were interesting to me at all were when Stein interviewed the atheists.

Nova did a program on evolution vs. intelligent design, which is available online. I found this show to be much more informative, scientific and I feel that after watching it, I gained a much greater understanding.

I believe that people of all faiths will have to come to terms with evolution. It seems that every new scientific study further confirms this idea. For example, just a few days ago, Australian scientists released a report on the gene sequence of a platypus. We already knew that the platypus has a bill and webbed feet like a duck, fur like a beaver, it lays eggs and has venom like a reptile, is semi-aquatic, and yet is classified as a mammal because it produces milk. The platypus certainly is the oddest creature in nature I can think of. We have just recently learned that the platypus is genetically part bird, part reptile and part mammal. This is just one example of how evolution is a much better explanation of how the platypus came to be as opposed to idea that different animals are created separately and independently of each other.

Of course, there are religious implications of evolution. It makes one question what we consider scripture and how literal we are to interpret stories like Adam and Eve.

Disillusioned Mormon
Read more!

Writing Style of the Bible VS. Book of Mormon

The Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham

The Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham are both canonized scripture in the LDS church. Both are purported to be translated by Joseph Smith. Critics of Mormonism will point out that both books were written and not translated by Joseph Smith. If that were the case, you would see a similarity in writing style between the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham and this writing style would differ from the Bible.

Writing Style of the Old Testament

I am not a linguist or an expert by any stretch of the imagination on literary writing styles. However, as you read the books in the Bible it is clear that it is for the most part a narrative.

Genesis 1:1-7

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

Even though the first 5 books of the old testament are called "the 5 books of Moses" it is clear that the books of Moses are not direct translations from writings of Moses. Moses is referred to in 3rd person by the narrator.

Exodus 18:7

And Moses went out to meet his father in law, and did obeisance, and kissed him; and they asked each other of their welfare; and they came into the tent

And of course I am sure that Moses did not write his own funerary text after he died.

Deuteronomy 34:6-7

And Moses was an hundred and twenty years old when he died: his eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated. And the children of Israel wept for Moses in the plains of Moab thirty days: so the days of weeping and mourning for Moses were ended.

Now, THAT would certainly be an amazing feat if Moses was able to write the words "and Moses died". Obviously there was a narrator. This has led me to believe that the 5 books of Moses were probably not written by Moses himself, but the books were a recount written by someone else later on. At the very least, it is certainly not a literal translation of an original document penned by Moses. Either way, at some point there was a narrator.

Writing Style of the New Testament

The New Testament is the same. The writings from each book in the new testament refer to Matthew, Mark, Luke, John or Paul in third person.

Revelation 1:1

The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John

Even the epistles open with a third person reference before reading off the actual epistle.

1 Corinthians 1:1-2

Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother, Unto the church of God which is at Corinth...

This leads me to believe that the books in the Bible, both old and New Testament are not literal translations word for word of original writings from the original authors, but that whoever translated them injected narration. It does not say "I, Moses..."

Writing Style of the Book of Mormon

The writing style of the Book of Mormon is different than the Bible. Even though Mormon is a narrator, the actual books are written in 1st person. The book of Nephi is written in 1st person.

1 Nephi 1:1-3

I, Nephi, having been born of goodly parents, therefore I was taught somewhat in all the learning of my father; and having seen many afflictions in the course of my days, nevertheless, having been highly favored of the Lord in all my days; yea, having had a great knowledge of the goodness and the mysteries of God, therefore I make a record of my proceedings in my days. Yea, I make a record in the language of my father, which consists of the learning of the Jews and the language of the Egyptians. And I know that the record which I make is true; and I make it with mine own hand; and I make it according to my knowledge.

Writing style of the Book of Abraham

If the Book of Abraham and the Book of Mormon both came from Joseph Smith, we would see a writing style similar in nature. Like the Book of Mormon, the Book of Abraham is written in 1st person.

Book of Abraham 1:1-2,31

In the land of the Chaldeans, at the residence of my fathers, I, Abraham, saw that it was needful for me to obtain another place of residence; And, finding there was greater happiness and peace and rest for me, I sought for the blessings of the fathers, and the right whereunto I should be ordained to administer the same; having been myself a follower of righteousness, desiring also to be one who possessed great knowledge, and to be a greater follower of righteousness, and to possess a greater knowledge, and to be a father of many nations, a prince of peace, and desiring to receive instructions, and to keep the commandments of God, I became a rightful heir, a High Priest, holding the right belonging to the fathers... But the records of the fathers, even the patriarchs, concerning the right of Priesthood, the Lord my God preserved in mine own hands; therefore a knowledge of the beginning of the creation, and also of the planets, and of the stars, as they were made known unto the fathers, have I kept even unto this day, and I shall endeavor to write some of these things upon this record, for the benefit of my posterity that shall come after me.

It is interesting that both the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham are written in 1st person. The first verse in the Book of Mormon commences with the phrase "I, Nephi" and the first verse in the Book of Abraham starts with "I, Abraham". The bible refers to Moses, or Paul, or John in 3rd person. The first verse of the Book of Mormon and The Book of Abraham sound almost identical. And of course we have the little problem that the residence of Abraham's father, or the land of Chaldeans did not exist until hundreds of years after Abraham himself died. Oops. Add that to another list of anachronisms.

When I compared the opening verses between the Book of Abraham and the Book of Mormon, it is apparent to me that they are both of the same author.

Disillusioned Mormon

Read more!

Why do people believe in strange things?

LDS Beliefs Are Very Strange

As I take a step back, many of the things taught in the LDS church are very strange, especially to someone that has not been raised in the church. As a member all my life, many of the stories of Joseph Smith, the angel Moroni, gold plates, and the Book of Mormon were normal to me, because it was the reality that I surrounded myself with.

However, we all grew up with some very strange beliefs that might seem normal to us if we grew up with these beliefs, since they are the reality in which we surround ourselves.

Many Other Beliefs Are Very Strange

Imagine if I told you to try to communicate telepathically with a floating zombie only after symbolically eating his flesh and drinking his blood. To people that have never grown up with Christianity, that is exactly how strange and twisted it sounds to them. The story of Jesus dying on the cross and coming back to life 3 days later, praying to God or taking part of the sacrament seems very normal when one is brought up in that kind of environment, because that is the reality we grow up in.

People look at the story of Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon, and they see a story about a white Jewish Native American that wrote something down on some gold tablets thousands of years ago and buried them in upstate, NY to give Joseph to translate only to take back possession of the plates after translation and magically float away forever along with the gold tablets. Many people that I have spoken with find this story to be utterly ridiculous and wonder how normal 'sane' people can believe in such nonsense. However, many of these same people have no problem with Jesus rising from the dead after 3 days and ascending into heaven.

Everyone Has Strange Beliefs

How is the story of Joseph Smith and Gold plates any less rational than magic trees, talking snakes, global floods, a man surviving inside a whale for 3 days, plants being created on earth before the sun existed or destroying fortified walls with trumpets?

Point is that let's face it, all these beliefs are very strange. I am not saying they are invalid, I am saying that if you try to explain these things to someone that has never heard of them before, they sound very strange if one has not been brought up with these beliefs.

This has led me to understand that we all have things we believe in that are very strange to other people. This is not intended to diminish one's faith, just accept that many of the beliefs are strange to other people. This will help you understand why other people believe in things like the Book of Mormon that might seem strange to you.

Disillusioned Mormon. Read more!

Is Polygamy Still Part of Mormon Doctrine?

Is Polygamy Part of Mormon Doctrine?

Absolutely. Polygamy is even officiated in LDS temples, and it is still part of the core doctrine, if we are to believe what we read in what the church considers scripture.

Now, let me be clear. The LDS church does not currently practice polygamy on this earth, but it is still part of the core doctrine that polygamy must be accepted in the celestial kingdom, or the highest degree of heaven. So if one is to ask the question "Do members of the LDS church practice polygamy on this earth?" then the answer is a definitive "no". However, that is not the question I am answering today.

Polygamy in the earthly practice was a fundamental core doctrine of early Mormonism and was taught by many early church leaders that the only people that will get into the highest degree of heaven were those that entered into polygamy. To say that polygamy was only practiced to protect seed due to a shortage of men is incorrect factually. The census data tells us that there were more men in Utah than women during this time period. This idea is a made up excuse and completely inaccurate. Polygamy was an important doctrinal principal that was practiced and promoted as vital to becoming Gods.

FLDS VS. LDS

The FLDS church is a splinter group that broke off the mainstream LDS church when the church stopped practicing polygamy. The FLDS are also called "Mormon Fundamentalists" and the reason is because they practice the fundamental teachings of Mormonism, particularly regarding the earthly practice of polygamy. The FLDS has scripture on their side.

Doctrine and Covenants Section 132

D&C section 132, which is part of canonized scripture, outlines the basis for plural marriage.The Doctrine and Covenants section 132 contains a revelation given to Joseph Smith from the Lord.

The introduction to D&C 132 states: "Although the revelation was recorded in 1843, it is evident from the historical records that the doctrines and principles involved in this revelation had been known by the Prophet since 1831". This is in reference to Joseph Smith's first plural wife Fannie Alger, who was 16 when she married Joseph Smith and she was a housekeeper at the Smith home. Joseph Smith was 27 or 28 years old when he married the 16 year old Fannie Alger and this was without Emma Smith's knowledge or consent.

In the D&C 132, we learn that you must accept polygamy or you will be damned.
verses 1-4

Verily, thus saith the Lord...as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines...Therefore, prepare thy heart to receive and obey the instructions which I am about to give unto you; for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same. For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory.

Then, mid-revelation, the Lord sees fit to inject an admonition directly for Emma Smith, Joseph's principal and first wife. Keep in mind that Joseph Smith has already been practicing polygamy for many years at this point as noted in the introduction to the chapter:

Verses 52-56

And let mine handmaid, Emma Smith, receive all those that have been given unto my servant Joseph, and who are virtuous and pure before me; and those who are not pure, and have said they were pure, shall be destroyed, saith the Lord God. For I am the Lord thy God, and ye shall obey my voice; and I give unto my servant Joseph that he shall be made ruler over many things; for he hath been faithful over a few things, and from henceforth I will strengthen him.

And I command mine handmaid, Emma Smith, to abide and cleave unto my servant Joseph, and to none else. But if she will not abide this commandment she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord; for I am the Lord thy God, and will destroy her if she abide not in my law. But if she will not abide this commandment, then shall my servant Joseph do all things for her, even as he hath said; and I will bless him and multiply him and give unto him an hundredfold in this world, of fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, wives and children, and crowns of eternal lives in the eternal worlds. And again, verily I say, let mine handmaid forgive my servant Joseph his trespasses; and then shall she be forgiven her trespasses, wherein she has trespassed against me; and I, the Lord thy God, will bless her, and multiply her, and make her heart to rejoice.

Then, the lord finishes up with these words of warning:
Verses 60-64

Let no one, therefore, set on my servant Joseph; for I will justify him; for he shall do the sacrifice which I require at his hands for his transgressions, saith the Lord your God. And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood—if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else. And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified. But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be destroyed; for they are given unto him to multiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be glorified.

Even if this was a real revelation from God, Joseph Smith did not follow the instructions given to him.

Joseph Smith and Polygamy

This information can be found by the church's own genealogical record of Joseph Smith. None of his plural wives changed their names, and there are no recorded children from Joseph Smith with any of his wives other than through Emma.

According to various sources, Joseph Smith may have had 34 wives, 7 of which were under 18 and 11 of which were already married to living men at the time. One of the more disturbing marriages is when Joseph Smith calls Orson Hyde to be an apostle and sends him off on a 3 year mission, then a few months after he leaves, Joseph marries his wife Marinda Hyde while Orson is gone.

Polygamy Currently Officiated in LDS Temples

Polygamy is very much a part of Mormon doctrine in principal, but the current policy disallows the practice on this earth. However, Temple practices demonstrate that polygamy is expected to be practiced in heaven.

A widower may re-marry in an LDS temple where he can be sealed to both women, but a widow may not get sealed to multiple men. Current apostle Dallin H. Oaks is sealed to two wives, one of which has died. He has referred to both of them as his "eternal companion".

Polygamy is very much a fundamental teaching of Mormon doctrine. Even if it is not currently practiced on this earth, members of the church are expected to accept the practice of polygamy in the early days of the church and accept the practice in the next life. It is still considered a holy and sacred practice.

Skeptical Mormon

Read more!

My First Doubt- The Book of Mormon and the Bible

Search, Ponder and Pray

Growing up in the church, I was always taught to read the scriptures every day and study them. Ironically, it was studying the scriptures that casted the first doubts about the validity of the Book of Mormon.

I remember reading in the Book of Mormon certain chapters in 3 Nephi that were very similar to verses I had read in the New Testament. My initial reaction was that it was a testament of how both the Bible and the Book of Mormon are inspired works that Jesus would teach the same thing on the American continent that he did in Palestine.

Beginning of the End

However, when I cross referenced the chapters, I realized that the chapters were not just similar, they were exact word-for-word replicas. For example, 3 Nephi chapters 12-14 are word-for-word copies of the King James version of Matthew chapters 5-7.

As I read and compared the 2 books, I found it quite disturbing, as we are led to believe in the church that the Book of Mormon is a direct translation with the divine help from God from the Gold plates. In the LDS church, we are also led to believe that the Bible has all kinds of translation errors and the the Book of Mormon is there to clarify plain and precious things that have been removed from the scriptures as stated in 1 Nephi 13:28.

However, it was evident to me that Joseph Smith used sections of the King James version of the Bible and inserted them into the Book of Mormon. He didn't even try to hide this apparent plagiarism as the verses were pretty much all identical.

Joseph Smith Translation

According to the LDS church regarding the Joseph Smith Translation:

The Lord inspired the Prophet Joseph Smith to restore truths to the Bible text that had become lost or changed since the original words were written. These restored truths clarified doctrine and improved scriptural understanding.

Joseph Smith felt it necessary to re-translate parts of the Bible. The term 'translate' is used loosely by the church and can have various meanings, but keep in mind that this transpired years after the the Book of Mormon was published. The Joseph Smith translation is not canonized in the LDS church, but is footnoted in LDS published versions of the King James Bible. The Joseph Smith Translation is also known as the "Inspired Version" of the Bible and is canonized as scripture by the Community of Christ, formerly known as the RLDS.

Matthew 6:13

One example of these "re-translations" is found in Matthew 6:13, where the King James Version reads:

"And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil..."

The Joseph Smith translation reads:

"And suffer us not to be led into tempation..."

It is also footnoted in the LDS bible that the Syriac translation reads

"Do not let us enter into temptation."

This is a very important doctrinal change, as explained by the JST contents that the Lord does not lead us into temptation and therefore the King James version had a translation error.

Book of Mormon Equivalent

However, 3 Nephi 13:12 reads the same as the KJ version:
"And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil"

Book of Mormon: The Most Correct Book?

Now how is it that we are to believe that the Book of Mormon is the most correct book and that the Bible is flawed with translation errors, when parts of the Book of Mormon are exact copies, even including the translation errors from the King James version of the Bible. Then, after that, Joseph Smith is able to further clarify biblical passages by re-translating the verses to conform with the teachings, meanwhile, the Book of Mormon, which was supposed to be the most correct book still contains the exact same errors.

Discovering this shocked me and scared me and I stopped cross-referencing the scriptures from that moment on. I made myself believe that if I just kept reading the scriptures, praying and feeling the "confirmation from the spirit" that it was a much better way for me to know the truthfulness to the scriptures. I guess that I was simply following the first 2 of 6 ways that people deal with cognitive dissonance, as I talked about in a previous post.

Looking back, this discovery did not stop me from going on my mission, but it was the first Jenga piece as described in a previous post that ultimately led to my disillusionment.

Disillusioned Mormon Read more!

Main reasons for my disillusionment

I have taken a break from blogging because of time constraints, but I am back from a half-year hiatus. I thought I would break back into this blog by talking about the main reasons that led to my disillusionment.
LDS Perception on why people leave the church

A common mis-conception in the church is that the only reasons people leave the church or stop believing in the church is because:

a. Some kind of grave sin that they committed and feel too guilty
b. A member offended them, maybe told them their orange Jello was over-cooked
c. They are lazy or are weak and have no faith
d. They haven't received enough baked goods from the fellowshipping members

I can't speak for everyone and I believe that some people do leave the church for the above mentioned reasons. However, many people also leave the church or stop believing purely for doctrinal reasons. I fall into that category.

Reasons for my disillusionment

As I talk to people inside and outside of the church, I have learned that what might be a big deal to some people are trivial issues to others.

Here are the weighted reasons that led to my disillusionment:







Book of Abraham

The reason I put the Book of Abraham on the top of the list is because I have studied extensively the topic and have read all the criticisms and all the defenses for the Book of Abraham, and I have not found a satisfactory response. I will go into further detail at a later time, but the book of Abraham is something that I undeniably consider to be a fraud and therefore discredits Joseph Smith as a translator. For a good video on the subject, I have embedded a video on a previous post. The video is a little over-sensationalized at certain parts, but it is 100% factual.

DNA and Native Americans

DNA has demonstrated that Native Americans are not Lamanites. This is most troubling since every prophet from Joseph Smith to Gordon B. Hinckley has taught that Native Americans are Lamanites. The church has recently started to back-pedal from that position, even changing the wording in the introduction of the Book of Mormon, as mentioned in a previous post.

Hill Cumorah Paradox

The Hill Cumorah paradox is troubling because the only way to defend the Book of Mormon is to dispute what Joseph Smith and every prophet up to Gordon B. Hinckley taught about the location of the Hill Cumorah, at least all the way up to 1990 about the Hill Cumorah in Upstate, NY being the same one as mentioned in the Book of Mormon.

Lack of Archaeology

The Lack of any single artifact or physical evidence for the Book of Mormon is tricky, because a lack of evidence doesn't prove that the Book of Mormon lands never existed. You can't prove a negative, and therefore it isn't as high on my list. How can you prove something didn't exist? Can you prove to me that Santa Claus doesn't exist? However, the LDS church has been looking for a long time and hasn't found anything. Not a single Book of Mormon artifact. None, nada, zip. The most likely solution is that the Book of Mormon lands never existed in the physical world.

Church History

Church history doesn't effect me as much as some people. The reason is because I know that people aren't perfect, and certainly obscure statements made by church leaders 150 years ago have little relevance for the church today. However, it does carry some weight as we are led to believe that these men were called by God.

-isms

I find the racism, sexism and homophobia in the church and the history of the church disturbing. Although the institutional racism banning blacks from the priesthood is over, there are many areas that big improvements can be made, especially with sexism in the church.

Other Criticisms

Other criticisms of the church have very little bearing because there are many things that are highly speculative and many times there are plausible explanations. For example, the idea that Joseph Smith copied his father's dream and inserted it into the Book of Mormon as Lehi's dream I find interesting, but not conclusive because the only account is from Joseph Smith's mother and she talked about it years after the publication of the Book of Mormon. We also have no evidence that Joseph Smith's father told Joseph Smith about the dream he had, so there is nothing concrete, but it does add to the overall mix of things.

I do not believe that I am any smarter than any member of the church, I just think that there is a difference in how one should obtain truth. I suppose that if one ignores information that is critical of the church and only reads and exposes themselves to church approved literature and prays that they will come to know in their hearts that the church is true. However, this is not how I believe one should obtain truth. I believe that people should look at all the information and use critical thinking and reason and logic to come to a solution that is the most reasonable and most likely.

How to obtain truth

I do not believe that the way to obtain truth is to read the Book of Mormon and pray about it, and if you feel good, then that makes it true. That is why God invented a brain. Muslims make the same claim and have the same conviction about the Qur'an You can have the same spiritual awakening with Dianetics, or other reading material for Buddhism, Hinduism or Wika. After doing brief research, I have found that these religious texts have the same criticisms as the Book of Mormon.

Another common thread in my learning about various belief systems is that it is much more effective when you surround yourself with other people with similar belief systems. This leads me to believe that perhaps religion is more about a social experience than the doctrine. Otherwise, we would have more "do-it-yourself" religions. Perhaps that is a discussion for another time.

LDS Apologists

When faced with criticisms of the church, what I have found most troubling is that the defense often times contradicts scripture, contradicts prophets, or contradicts themselves. There is a saying that goes like this: "Nobody disputes Mormon prophets like LDS apologists."

Finally, the last resort when there is no answer is to say that it must be one of those things that we will not understand, but that in due time either in this life or next life we will have a complete understanding. This is not satisfactory for me.

I do not endorse any religious organization at this time and I look forward to your comments.


Disillusioned Mormon Read more!

Elder Ballard Encourages Members to Create Blogs

http://www.sltrib.com/faith/ci_7743894


" A prominent LDS Church official has urged young people to blog, create Web sites and take advantage of social networks online to help improve people's perceptions of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
"May I ask that you join the conversation by participating on the Internet. . .to share the gospel and explain in simple, clear terms the message of the restoration," M. Russell Ballard told graduates at weekend commencement exercises at Brigham Young University-Hawaii."

Individual members are encouraged to self-publish blogs and websites about the church. This certainly is a change in direction for the church, as it has recently banned individual wards from publishing independent websites.

I think it is ultimately a good idea and will lead to forums where members and non-members alike can more openly engage in dialogue regarding Mormon topics outside of the structured Sunday School classes. I think already has begun, but this move will open the floodgates further.

When LDS members have tough questions, the internet is a great forum where even believing members can communicate. I think this will break people away from the standard recycled Sunday School lessons and I look forward to seeing more LDS blogs and websites.

I believe that everyone has a right to express themselves freely and worship they way they choose.

Disillusioned Mormon
Read more!

Is the Historicity of the Book of Mormon Relevant?

The Book of Mormon is supposed to be a historical document of religious texts of people that lived in Ancient America. In my previous post, I talked about how there is a change in the way the Mormon leadership views Native Americans.

Traditionally, it was widely believed, taught and accepted that Native Americans were all decedents of the Lamanites. Now, it seems that the church is starting to back off on that assumption and take the position that it is unclear who are the decedents of the Lamanites. However, it is clear the the church still stands by the Book of Mormon as being a historically accurate document of Native Americans and their religious practices.

Let's assume for a minute that the Book of Mormon is a historical record. My question is this: Why stop there? If the LDS church accepts religious texts of ancient America as scripture, why do they stop at just the Book of Mormon?

Other Religious Texts Of Ancient America

We have the Books of Chilam Balam, written in Yucatec Maya and consisting of historical chronicles mixed with myth, divination, and prophecy. Unlike the Book of Mormon lands and people, we know that the Mayas existed and that the Books of Chilam Balam are historicaly accurate.

The Aztecs had sacred texts like The Hymn of Huitzilopochtli. The great thing is that we know that the people that wrote this hymn existed. We can translate the texts from Nahuatl, which language actually exists, because people still speak Nahuatl in Mexico. I know this first hand, because I saw villages that still speak Nahuatl and even picked up a few words on my mission in Mexico.

Among ancient Aztec writings are prophesies concerning the years we are living in today. Why does the LDS church dismiss these writings, yet we know they are historical documents written by people that lived in Ancient America.

How Is The Book Of Mormon Different?

So my question is this: If the Book of Mormon is a historical religious document of civilizations of Ancient America, why do we accept it as being scripture if we don't accept the Books of Chilam Balam, or the Hymn of Huizilopochtli, which are also historical religious documents of civilizations of Ancient America?

I don't think the Book of Mormon is intended to be a historical document. If it were, the angel Moroni would have given it to the Smithsonian institute or maybe a wondering sheepherder like the dead sea scrolls. We could also ask the opposite, why didn't a Mormon prophet discover the dead sea scrolls?

So why does the LDS church try to prove the historicity of the Book of Mormon? If the historicity of ancient texts qualifies as scripture, then by that measure, the Book of Mormon shouldn't hold as much weight as the Books of Chilam Balam, or the The Hymn of Huitzilopochtli. Compared to those documents, the Book of Mormon should take a backseat, since we can all agree that they are historical documents from real people that we know existed, and we can actually point on a map of the real world where they lived.

What It Comes Down To

My point is that it has nothing to do with the historicity of the Book of Mormon as an ancient text. It has everything to do with the story of an Angel and the translation of a mysterious language on gold plates. The Book of Mormon is nothing more than a device to claim divine authority.

Disillusioned Mormon Read more!