The Fragility of a Testimony

When Mormons use the word “testimony,” they mean it in the way that most Christians use the word “witness.” In the judicial court sense, a witness is someone who saw a crime take place, and a testimony is the account of what they saw and heard. By contrast, religions usually use those words differently to mean a telling of one’s religious beliefs. But for the purposes of this essay, we’ll use the religious definitions.

What is interesting to me is how often one will hear about how fragile testimonies can be. Statements in General Conference or Sacrament Meetings will often remark about a testimony needs to be constantly “nourished” through scripture reading, church attendance, and by bearing of the testimony (“witnessing” in traditional Christian parlance). A related analogy that I heard was that having a testimony was like swimming upstream in a river - we need to be constantly working because if we’re not doing anything we’ll go downstream.

Here’s the thing: if it’s a real “testimony,” why should it NEED strengthening? For example, I know I live in Ogden, UT. I can bear testimony to that (in the court sense). I don’t have to wake up every so often and recite it to an individual (or a congregation) to convince myself of that fact. Just like I don’t have to keep convincing myself that concrete is hard. Or that the Pythagorean Theorem works. In the court sense, a witness shouldn't need to wake up every morning and reaffirm that it was the blue car that ran the red light and caused the accident.

But an LDS testimony is different. Most of the statements consist of “I know” statements, about things that they believe are true. And it needs to be done (or alternatively, heard from someone else) every so often to reinforce belief. It’s not so different from the kinds of daily affirmations that people do in the mirror when trying to convince themselves of something. Several LDS general authorities have said that a testimony is found in the bearing of it. Imagine if a judge or attorney said that to a witness in a trial!

Allow me to illustrate how this looks to me with a little analogy. It seems like people trying to convince themselves that Santa is real (sorry, it’s just after Christmastime, and it was an easy target). For most of them, they have been told that Santa was real ever since they were little. And they were told to just keep convincing themselves and their friends of that fact, despite mounds of evidence to the contrary. To wit:

1. Nobody has ever seen the man in person (except at the mall, I know), flying reindeer, or elves.
2. The North Pole workshop doesn't appear on maps.
3. There are differing accounts on the personality and physical description of Santa depending on what culture one is from
4. The physics behind delivering so many toys to so many kids worldwide is impossible
5. Et cetera.

Despite statements like these, kids have been able to put them out of their minds and ignore evidence and keep their convictions that Santa is real. After all, believing in Santa just feels good. And let’s face it, for the most part, belief in Santa is pretty benign and can be fun. But we all know some people who go WAAAY too far with the whole Santa thing.

Ok, I think you get my point, so we’ll drop the Santa analogy. What I’m getting to is that rational people will drop the belief once they learn the real facts about how it was really their parents all along. That does, after all, make a lot more logical sense. But here’s where things get a little different in the real world. When confronted with facts that contradict belief, instead of changing beliefs, Mormons tend to dig in deeper (though this practice is not limited to Mormons). Instead of having faith that acts as a bridge between belief and fact, Mormons re-define faith as a shield against uncomfortable facts and history and choose to ignore them.

The traditional defense against science and logic used by Mormons is that they experienced the “burning bosom” of the Holy Ghost telling them that what they learned in church was true. Often, they add that they can’t deny what they felt, and that it trumps any facts that contradict what they felt.

But as it turns out, the LDS religion isn't the only one to make people have good feelings and emotions to swell (it’s also possible to duplicate the feeling using certain meditation techniques). In fact, just a little research from the web will confirm that there are many people around the world who feel the exact same feelings about their religions. Why are their accounts and “testimonies” not just as valid as any Latter-day Saint’s?

The problem is that they can’t all be true. It’s human nature to reject any information that doesn't fall within one’s preconceived notions and paradigms. So the knee-jerk reaction is to discount someone else’s beliefs and rationalize it away as the “deceptions of Satan,” or some other equally implausible explanation. What usually follows is an emotional reaction where people “dig their heels in” and become further entrenched in their own belief, and more strongly convinced that others have been led astray (and need saving).

Unfortunately, feelings can’t always be trusted. I felt good feelings while hearing one of the stories behind Del Parson’s most famous painting. I loved that story . . . that is, until I heard it from Del Parson himself at a talk that it was completely false. I was confused and wasn't sure what to think about it (I was experiencing what is called cognitive dissonance). So I guess that’s why the Scientific Method was invented.

Finally, the last piece of caution given to LDS members is to not read or look at anything that might weaken their testimony. To me this sounds like the desperation of the Wizard of Oz - "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" The leaders are so worried about the general membership finding out about the ruse that they have to scare them away from even looking. Going back to the Santa thing, it's like when parents tell their children to not look in mommy's closet so they don't find the presents and shatter the illusion. Personally, if I were confident in a product I sold, I would challenge others to find the flaws instead of hiding them. Actually, that's what scientists and mathematicians do when they do research. Before it's published, it's sent to various peers to find flaws with the logic and methodology used. After taking what peers say into account, the research and peer review process is started over. It continues until nobody can find anything wrong with it.

I'll end this with three quotes from past General Authorities.

#1: If a faith will not bear to be investigated; if its preachers and professors are afraid to have it examined, their foundation must be very weak. (Journal of Discourses, Volume 14, Page 216)

      -  George Albert Smith, LDS Church President

#2: I admire men and women who have developed the questing spirit, who are unafraid of new ideas as stepping stones to progress. We should, of course, respect the opinions of others, but we should also be unafraid to dissent – if we are informed. Thoughts and expressions compete in the marketplace of thought, and in that competition truth emerges triumphant. Only error fears freedom of expression.”

            - LDS Apostle Hugh B. Brown, “A Final Testimony,” from An Abundant Life, 1999

#3: "If we have the truth, it cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not the truth, it ought to be harmed."
            -  J. Reuben Clark, LDS Presidency First Counselor

(authored by Joseph using Anne's blogger account)

Objection!

      So my youngest brother introduced me to a series of lawyer/courtroom video games called Phoenix Wright, in which you play a defense attorney. I thought it sounded like a lame concept for a video game at first, but it’s actually really fun. It’s based upon the Japanese Criminal Justice system, which, when a case goes to trial is almost like “guilty unless proven innocent.” The main method of proving your client’s innocence is by finding instances where the witnesses’ testimonies contradict the evidence. When you find one, you get to yell a very satisfying, “Objection!” (which can also accomplished by pressing a button)

Finding those kinds of inconsistencies is also how Anne and I found our way out of the LDS church. Here’s an example: if you go to mormonnewsroom.org, and look at their frequently asked questions page, it has all kinds of things that are commonly asked. Two that caught my eye are right next to each other. Here’s a screenshot that I've highlighted, but in case you want to check it out for yourself to see that I haven’t altered anything but the colors, here you go.

Those statements blatantly contradict things that I was taught multiple times throughout the years I went to church. The FAQ claims that these were just a misrepresentation, misunderstanding, or speculation, trying to paint the picture that it was the local members who perpetuate these rumors and not the leaders/scriptures.

May I present exhibits A through H:


Exhibit A:

“Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them.”

   -D&C 132:20


Exhibit B: 

“God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret.... It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the Character of God, and to know... that he was once a man like us.... Here, then, is eternal life – to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves... the same as all Gods have done before you...”

- Joseph Smith, Jr., “King Follett Discourse,” Journal of Discourses, v. 6, pp. 3-4,
also in Teachings of the Prophet of Joseph Smith, pp. 345-346.
Source: http://scriptures.byu.edu/tpjs/STPJS.pdf


Exhibit C:

“The Lord created you and me for the purpose of becoming Gods like himself.”

- Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, v. 3, p. 93.


Exhibit D:

“That exalted position was made manifest to me at a very early day. I had a direct revelation of this. It was most perfect and complete. If there ever was a thing revealed to man perfectly, clearly, so that there could be no doubt or dubiety, this was revealed to me, and it came in these words: “As man now is, God once was; as God now is, man may be.” This may appear to some minds as something very strange and remarkable, but it is in perfect harmony with the teachings of Jesus Christ and with His promises.”

- Lorenzo Snow, Unchangeable Love of God, September 18, 1898, emphasis added.


Exhibit E:

“Man is a god in embryo and has in him the seeds of godhood, and he can, if he will, rise to great heights.”

-Spencer W. Kimball, The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, ed. Edward L. Kimball (1982), 28.


Exhibit F: 

Here’s one from lds.org's Gospel Principles manual:
Like before, only the colors were changed to highlight.

Exhibit G:

The Father has promised us that through our faithfulness we shall be blessed with the fullness of his kingdom. In other words we will have the privilege of becoming like him. To become like him we must have all the powers of godhood; thus a man and his wife when glorified will have spirit children who eventually will go on an earth like this one we are on and pass through the same kind of experiences, being subject to mortal conditions, and if faithful, then they also will receive the fullness of exaltation and partake of the same blessings. There is no end to this development; it will go on forever. We will become gods and have jurisdiction over worlds, and these worlds will be peopled by our own offspring. We will have an endless eternity for this.

 -  Joseph Fielding Smith Jr., Doctrines of Salvation, Vol.2, p.48, emphasis added


Exhibit H:

And finally, when asked about it in 1997 by TIME magazine, here’s what Gordon Hinckley had to say about it:

“I don’t know that we teach it. I don’t know that we emphasize it. I haven’t heard it discussed for a long time in public discourse. I don’t know. I don’t know all the circumstances under which that statement was made. I understand the philosophical background behind it. But I don’t know a lot about it and I don’t know that others know a lot about it.”

- “Kingdom Come,” TIME Magazine (4 August 1997): 56
[this is the original quote presented in its entirety. TIME omitted some of it with an ellipsis]


So as you can see, if the local members got that idea, it’s because the leadership was promoting the idea since the beginning. Trying to characterize it as non-doctrinal rumors spread by the lay people is clearly a case of blaming the victim. And instead of saying, "Yes, we teach that," the FAQ tries to weasel its way around so that it doesn't make the church look as "weird" and more mainstream.


The prosecution rests, your honor.

(authored by Joseph using Anne's blogger account)

Running Scared

Many in the LDS faith don’t understand why I would call this post “Running Scared,” because many of them are either not aware of some of these issues or have chosen to bury their head in the sand. But an ex-mo, such as me, already knows of the multiple lies and attempted cover-ups that the LDS church has tried in the past. So when they try to play it off as if they have always made this information available it infuriates me. For those who have read 1984 by George Orwell, the phrase, “We have always been at war with Eastasia” comes to mind.

Those who choose to bury their head and to ignore the facts also ignore the press when a general authority (Marlin Jensen) confirms that members are leaving “in droves.” They continue to ignore the fact that Jensen was then given emeritus status after coming out and saying things that hurt the churches appearance. They don’t even bother to look into why other general authorities have also been given the same status or they aren’t even aware of the term emeritus status. I believe this is due to the fact that it is pounded into the heads of all members to look away when they hear something that goes against the church.

I think that the church is slowly coming to terms with the fact that so many are leaving. And that is the reason they are publishing essays on many of the disturbing issues in their history. However, the essays so far don’t actually share all the details; they just touch on the issue and then they play it off as if it has always been common knowledge taught in the church.

The first essay was about the multiple accounts of the first vision. But the church fails to go into the major differences in the different accounts. Why would they want to point out all the differences when it would just hurt them? Instead they just point out that various aspects were emphasized to different audiences but that the gist is the same. This statement is from the June 1957 Improvement Era magazine and points out a major difference.

“I cannot remember the time when I have not heard the story concerning the coming of the Father and the Son to the Prophet Joseph Smith.

“I am concerned however with one item which has recently been called to my attention on this matter. There appears to be going about our communities some writing to the effect that the Prophet Joseph Smith evolved his doctrine from what might have been a vision, in which he is supposed to have said that he saw an angel, instead of the Father and the Son. According to this theory, by the time he was inspired to write the occurrence in 1838, he had come to the conclusion that there were two beings.

“This rather shocked me. I can see no reason why the Prophet, with his brilliant mind, would have failed to remember in sharp relief every detail of that eventful day. I can remember quite vividly that in 1915 I had a mere dream, and while the dream was prophetic in nature, it was not startling. It has been long since fulfilled, but I can remember every detail of it as sharply and clearly as though it had happened yesterday. How them could any man conceive that the Prophet, receiving such a vision as he received, would not remember it and would fail to write it clearly, distinctly, and accurately?" Improvement Era, June 1957, p 436 (emphasis added).

The second essay was about Race and the Priesthood. This essay cracked me up as I read it because I think what person could possibly read this and not see how ludicrous it sounds. Why does God allow man to rule His church? Why doesn’t he stand up for what is right and have His one and only true church stand up for what is correct? Don’t we teach the youth of the church today to stand up for what is right? Why couldn’t God do the same thing? 

“Those realities, though unfamiliar and disturbing today, influenced all aspects of people’s lives, including their religion.” (taken from LDS.org article on race and the priesthood)

The previous statement makes me think that Joseph Smith was influenced by the times and man more than he was by God. Then there is Brigham Young who apparently didn’t talk to the same God as the other prophets. What a joke! If I was still a believer this would bother me greatly  and my shelf would be collapsing  This article makes me wonder when God will change His mind about same sex marriage; He does seem to change His mind a lot.

Indoctrination

Since I have been out, I have observed many who indoctrinate their children without really knowing that that is what they are doing. Many have their children memorize the Articles of Faith or other scriptures. I believe this is a form of brainwashing. I don’t think it is done intentionally but it is what they have been taught a good parent does. Another example of brainwashing is testimony meeting.  I remember hearing in church about the importance of bearing one’s testimony and that by bearing it often we would get a stronger testimony. President Boyd K. Packer stated, “A testimony is to be found in the bearing of it.” Shouldn’t we know what we believe before we get up and testify of something? Plus they tell you what a testimony is to consist of. This tactic works with just about anything. If a person tells themselves something over and over, and if they hear it over and over again they begin to believe it. There are also those parents that take their children up and whisper in their ears what to say. These young children are not old enough to know what they believe and the only reason they repeat LDS doctrine is because they are taught the same concepts week after week. 

Now I’m not saying we shouldn’t teach our children to be good people, but that we should teach them to keep an open mind and to not be afraid to doubt their their beliefs and to double-check things (in other words, to not "doubt their doubts). We should teach them to always seek for knowledge and truth and not to just shut the door because we think the one way is the right way. Everything should be questioned in this world. No one person can ever stand up and say I know this, but we can believe and have faith in something. But even then we should continue to gain knowledge and be open to hearing others’ points of view.

 The following link is to a well done video that discusses this topic further.

Josh breaks down Mormon mind control

Sadness

The other day when I was driving I saw a former youth that I use to serve in the LDS faith. As I passed this young man I felt a tremendous amount of sadness for him and what he was facing in the next couple of years (a mission). This young man comes from a strong LDS family and I know that many look at them as a great example in our former ward. I can only imagine that he must be feeling an immense amount of pressure to live up to what is expected of him. For all I know he is excited but I have observed this boy over the years and know a few things about him that would cause me to think differently. So I feel sad for those that stay because of the pressure they feel from loved ones. I remember how I felt years ago coming out of the Temple for the first time thinking, that was it… how weird was that… I must not be very smart because I don’t get why the creation story, secret handshakes, and signs and tokens are so important. But I was too scared to say anything because I didn't want others to think that I wasn't spiritual enough or that I wasn't worthy enough. Then I felt guilty for not getting it and went weekly for several months hoping that if I pondered long enough in the celestial room it would all make sense.  I wish now that I would have had the guts to say that I don’t want to get married in such an uncomfortable place. I hope others can find the courage to get out sooner than I did. I hope more people still in the church find a way to not put so much pressure on the young kids. 

Our Story of Why We Decided to Leave Mormonism

To begin, I would like to post our story and why we decided to leave Mormonism. I hope this blog is helpful for those currently leaving the Mormon faith. I also hope it helps those in the Mormon faith understand their friends and family who have left. 

The year before we made the decision to finally leave the church I was struggling with my own testimony and life in general. But as a Young Women Presidency we decided to have a Book of Mormon Night and to challenge each of the young women to read the Book of Mormon straight through. I took this challenge very seriously and studied the Book of Mormon with all my heart like I had never done before and never received any sort of answer. I was saddened to not receive the answer I was hoping for. I tell you all this so that you may know that I really did try to stay with the LDS faith.

This decision was something that was not made quickly or in haste but was one that was made with lots of thought and prayer. Joseph and I have both vented various frustrations to each other over the years, often after church on Sundays. While I loved being in Young Women for almost 5 years and I loved those girls with all my heart, I did struggle some Sundays with the lessons that were given because of the content of the material. The teachers were all wonderful and did an awesome job teaching, it was just the content in the manuals that would bother me.

Then last September or so I stumbled upon a modesty blog that a friend had posted on Facebook. It was a very well written article and it expressed a lot about how I feel. This is what got Joseph and me officially into looking at other concerns about the LDS church. Then in October Joseph showed me a few other things he had found out about the church and I was in shock as I began reading. It wasn’t long after that, maybe 2 weeks that we decided that we would be leaving the church. I first asked to be released as Young Women President in December and then we began phasing the church out by only attending once in a while until mid February when we attended our last meeting. It was very difficult sitting through church meetings listening to lies.

The reaction from our Bishop and Stake President was one of shock sadness [EDIT: SP came to visit and corrected this part] when we told them that we would no longer be attending church and that we no longer believed the church to be the one and only. We had been prominent members of the ward and had both served in leadership callings. A few of our friends were also shocked has the news spread because we didn’t seem like the kind of family that would just up and leave. But Joseph and I reached a point where we just couldn’t pretend anymore.

Please read our concerns with caution because some of what I write may cause you to question your own faith. 

Temple

·         The Endowment was copied mainly from a mason ritual

·         The Endowment has changed considerably since its introduction, most recently in 1990, when it dropped the penalties, 5 points of fellowship, and a significant part played by a Christian minister. This was brought about by a survey given to temple attendees.

·         Initiatory was changed in 2005 to what Mormons accuse Catholics of doing with baptism (sprinkling).

·         Garments have been slowly changing over the years to accommodate fashion changes.

·         The endowment’s order of the creation conflicts with the BoA and Genesis

Book of Mormon

·         The Book of Mormon was translated by a seer stone put into a hat, not the “Nephite interpreters,” and the plates weren’t in the room most of the time.  Why aren’t we taught this in church? Documentation for this can be found on lds.org

·         The BoM cites references to things not found in the new world until Columbus’ time, such as: horses, cattle, oxen, donkeys, goats, wheels, chariots, barley, wheat, and steel.

·         There are a lot of population logistics that don’t work out. For example, the time it takes to go from a group of about 20 to millions of people is shown to be in a few hundred years’ time.

·         Some of the English mistranslations from the KJV of the Bible are in the BoM, including the name Lucifer.

·         Some of the parts are copied from the Bible (like the Sermon on the Mount), and are supposed to be a more pure and plain source because it hasn’t gone through the many translations that the Bible was subjected to. But then they were corrected in the JST. Which version is right?

·         Other parts are taken from other sources, most prominently “A View of the Hebrews,” by Ethan Smith (no relation to Joseph).

·         The text of the BoM has changed over the years. While it is true that many of the changes are punctuation and grammatical in nature, there have been some pretty significant changes in the doctrine as well. In fact Joseph confirmed this with an Original Copy replica he bought just after he got home from my mission.

·         DNA studies on Native Americans show they are of Asiatic descent, not Hebrew.

·         There hasn’t been a single Nephite artifact ever recovered, nor any other archeological evidence that there was any kind of civilization resembling what is described in the BoM.

·         A map of the New York/Great Lakes area has place names and locations that match up pretty well with a map of the BoM’s cities/lands.

First Vision

·         The First Vision was not taught in church until 22 years after it happened.What we now call Moroni’s visit was referred to as his first vision during the early years of the church.

·         There are 4 “official” versions of it, all of which differ in the details. The accounts contradict each other on certain points. Many other unofficial versions exist.

·         In The Messenger and the Advocate, a church newspaper, Joseph Smith wrote that in 1823 he was praying to find out if a supreme being existed. One would think that after seeing two supreme beings one wouldn’t have to ask again.

·          

Joseph Smith

·         He was convicted of “glass looking” in a New York court of law. There is enough evidence that it appears he was a clever con man.

·         His own mother described him as being able to fabricate intricate stories about the former inhabitants of this land and have an excellent memory for reciting books.

·         Wilbur Fugate claimed to have found buried plates that he gave to Joseph to translate. Joseph said they were written by a Jaredite descendent of Ham, but then later Wilbur admitted they were a hoax and made by him. Modern testing confirms this.

·         A similar incident happened when someone gave him a Greek Hymnbook (called a Psalter) and he declared it to be a dictionary of Egyptian.

·         The reason he was in Carthage Jail was for destroying a printing press because it was about to expose some of the hidden details of his polygamous marriages that he didn’t want out in the public. Even Dallin Oaks (a lawyer) admits he was breaking the law when he did this.

·         He wasn’t killed for his beliefs or for claiming revelation. Rather, he was killed by a group who was angry at his practice of polygamy and polyandry and for taking their wives while they were out on missions.

·         He didn’t go “like a lamb to the slaughter,” unless lambs are armed with pistols. Joseph fired off at least 3 shots into the mob (some accounts say 4 with 2 misfires).

Others

·         Polyandry – familysearch.org proves JS married other men’s wives while they were out on missions, which goes against the “rules” for polygamy set forth in D&C 132, which, by the way, go against what it says in the BoM and Bible.

·         Polygamy continued well after the 1890 Manifesto, and it was never legal in Illinois as some have claimed. Also, many of the recent church manuals make it seem as if Brigham Young and Joseph Smith were monogamous by omitting certain things.

·         One of Joseph Smith’s wives was 14 years old! He was like Warren Jeffs in that way.

·         The church spent $5Billion dollars on a mall and helped finance it by making members clean their own buildings instead of paying a full-time janitor or letting bishops give out the job in exchange for welfare. It has only spent a total of 1.2 billion on humanitarian aid since 1980.

·         Mark Hoffman was able to scam the church and convince them to buy fake documents, which the church tried to suppress. Even Jerald and Sandra Tanner (prominent enemies of the church) figured out that they were fake documents before these “prophets and seers” did.

·         Gordon B. Hinckley lied to press (Larry King, Time, etc.), and Jeffrey R. Holland lied to BBC. When asked if we teach that man can become like God; Hinckley said, “I don’t know that we teach that.” A simple Google search will show this. Why lie? Holland also gets caught in a few lies in a BBC interview done during the election last year.

·         The papyrus for the Book of Abraham was found in 1967, and it’s just a common funeral text, found to be dated about 100 BC, not 2000 BC. This is pretty clear that he was never able to translate Egyptian, and that he pretty much just made it up.

·         The church seems more like a well run business than a church to us. The Great and Spacious Mall is a great example of this.

·         The church recently changed some of the introductions to the scriptures. This is part whitewashes some of the “ugly” history, such as denying the priesthood to blacks, and obscuring the fact that it was taught from the pulpit that Native Americans are Lamanites.

Just like in court cases, it’s best to hear both sides of the story, not just the defense. Most of this can be verified through LDS-friendly websites (lds.org, familysearch.org, etc.), but the best site is http://www.mormonthink.com because it treats each issue like a court case and offers both sides of the story to the reader and lets you decide.  There is also you tube video that is really well done that tells the Top 5 Myths about why people leave http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EP3GJeYIN3s&safe=active

The preceding examples are just a few of our concerns. We do feel that the church does teach good family values and good standards and we will continue to teach our children those things.