Latter-day Commentary

I’ve been reading the arguments on MormonThink.com off and on for several years now.  I have a lot of respect for the individuals behind the site, even though most of them choose to be anonymous.  I am confident that I have been visited by several of the contributors there or at least by those who read their site and others like it such as Ex Mormon and Post Mormon.

I am by no means a scholar or intellectual.  I think I’m pretty smart and that I’m pretty good with logic.  After all, I have made a living for thirty years demystifying computers for others.  But I know there are a lot of people out there who are smarter than I am and who have the academic credentials to prove it.  I like to think that I’m just a regular, average, typical Latter-day Saint.

I like smart, thinking people and especially people who present logical conclusions well, either in writing or verbally.  Critical thinking is a skill that I am constantly striving to improve.  I confess that I am impressed when someone can speak or write with confidence, especially when it comes to doctrines and practices of the church.  That’s why I continue to take college classes each year.

Choosing to believe

But I’d like to take exception with one of the common threads I find in the essays on sites like MormonThink.com.  It has to do with choosing to believe.  The concept of voluntary or involuntary belief has been discussed by philosophers for millennia.  But it’s such a basic part of how I deal with the sort of intellectual issues on Mormon Think that I want to share it with you.

I disagree with those who contend that beliefs are not voluntary acts of will.  There is no doubt in my mind that I am a voluntarist when it comes to my beliefs about the church and our history.  This is especially true in light of, or in spite of all the fascinating historical facts that I have read over the years that are just not taught to or even known by the majority of the Latter-day Saints.

Invariably I have found that those who label themselves atheists also claim to be involuntarists.  I am coming to the conclusion that those who embrace the title of Ex Mormon, Post Mormon or Former Mormon also see their position as involuntary.  “It was inevitable,” they say, “based on what I have learned, I had no other choice but to now disbelieve what I had formally believed.”

Encouraging Faith

Well, that’s where we differ.  I have spent many years studying the same material that has been so troubling and bothersome to so many of my fellow seekers of knowledge.  I can honestly say that my faith has been strengthened and my belief deepened that Joseph was who he claimed to be – a prophet of God – and that the Book of Mormon is what it claims to be – Holy Scripture.

I have no doubt that there are many in the church, who, if they studied the same material we have written about on our blogs and websites, would be absolutely freaked out and would soon leave the church.  They are either social Mormons only or are not strong in their desire to know more about the history of our church.  I don’t think these kinds of people are your typical Mormons.

What’s missing from sites like MormonThink.com, and what you’ll find in abundance on the official church web sites, is the role of faith, and especially encouraging faith.  There is way too much emphasis on the intellect and not enough focus on feelings.  The section on Testimony and Spiritual Witness relegates the role of feelings of faith as something to be dissected and derided.

Announcing new website

That’s reason why I decided to start my own website, LatterdayCommentary.com.  This blog is hosted on that domain, which I registered years ago.  It’s not much to look at today.  In fact, I almost consider it a prototype.  I’ve put together some commentary and links to my essays on some of the same subjects that you will find on MormonThink.com.  It will grow with time.

I know that I’m just one of thousands of LDS members who have a website where they share their beliefs and testimonies of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ.  I like to think that I’m not much different from your average Mormon.  I grew up as a member of the church but I come from a convert family.  And my viewpoint is definitely that of a laid-back California boy.

I’ve been happy as a member of the LDS Church all my life.  I loved my mission and I love going to the temple.  I love General Conference and I love serving in a local Bishopric.  I hope you’ll take a look at my website and then come back here and make some suggestions as to how I can make it better and more useful in promoting the doctrines of our LDS faith to the world.

In 1978, civil war broke out in Nicaragua, just after I left the country. My Mission President went from Costa Rica to Managua to help the missionaries get out of the country.  As he was literally leaving the chapel where he had told the missionaries to gather, the Sandinistas came running in from the other door and stopped them.

Demanding to know what side of the conflict they were on, President Muren responded with the phrase, “tonos de gris,” which means shades of grey.  He did not stop but kept going right out the door and was able to get that group of Elders out of the country.  Gratefully, all the missionaries eventually made it safely out.

Social or Cultural Mormons

Can a person be a member of the LDS faith and not believe some of the doctrine or accept the official story of the history?  Absolutely!  We call them social or cultural Mormons and there are countless numbers of them within the church.  Many of these kinds of members come from multi-generation pioneer LDS families.

If you survey an average congregation in the LDS faith, you will find that there are a surprising number who just don’t care about some of the doctrine and care even less about the history.  They are there because it is their family tradition and they derive satisfaction from the social interaction among good people that they know.

Looking for the middle ground

They feel uncomfortable when they hear statements from their leaders that the LDS church is either the kingdom of God or it is nothing.  When someone says that Joseph Smith was either God’s prophet or he was a great fraud, they feel unfairly pressured to have to put their view of the man in such black and white terms.

Isn’t there some middle ground where good people can participate in the Mormon faith without having to take sides about Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon, the idea of angels visiting Joseph and the concept of priesthood keys and authority?  There is so much good in the church.  Why does it have to be classified as true?

The American Mormon culture

There are many members of the LDS church who do not fit the stereotypical image of conservative, orthodox, Republican, white-collar, all-American family.  The church membership is actually quite diverse, especially as one travels outside the confines of the Intermountain West where the church flourished and is the strongest.

Culturally, as a church and a people, we seem to have become stagnated in the mindset of the 19th century view of Mormonism that still conflicts with the outside world.  The church is growing beyond the Mormon corridor but is experiencing a sort of consolidation in the traditional strongholds of the faith – the center of Zion.

The one true church

Many good people who recognize this cultural myopia and parochialism that exists within the LDS faith have expanded their views and horizons beyond the mores and restraints of the traditional, orthodox Mormon worldview.  There are so many good people out there that are doing great things to serve their local communities.

Because these progressive thinking people have expanded their views they have come in contact with different ways of thinking about the religious experience and about their own Mormon upbringing.  The idea of belonging to the one true church has come to be offensive and difficult, if not impossible to defend in their minds.

God’s chosen people

They see and are embarrassed by what appears to be a contest of right and wrong between our zeal as a missionary church and the good people who are not already a part of the elect kingdom of God.  Whereas previously they were uncomfortable with a perceived exclusivist approach, they now are adamant that we are wrong.

We are judgmental, they cry.  Why can’t we accept everybody else just the way they are?  Why are we trying to convert people when they are already happy and doing much good in their own faith?  The idea of rules for membership becomes chafing.  Why does the church have such high standards that drive people crazy?

Pointing out the flaws and faults

A large percentage of the LDS membership either does not know or does not care about some of the troubling issues of our early history and growth as a church.  It is frustrating to progressive thinkers that so many within the faith are not as well versed as they are on these issues and the supposed quandaries that they present.

So they become more vocal and strident in pointing out the flaws and faults of the church and its leaders, both historical and current.  Their frustration increases when their audience either shrugs its collective shoulders or ignores their efforts to educate them on the problems that they see in the church.  How can they not care?

Many faithful members do know

While there are many who don’t know and don’t care, there are just as many who are very knowledgeable in the issues and problems that are troublesome to our liberal minded members.  It’s just that we have found answers within our own hearts and minds many years ago that satisfy the potential cognitive dissonance.

We quietly go about our lives, secure and confident in the knowledge that we have found answers for the most important elements of our faith.  We invite others to taste of the peace that comes from knowing that there are answers and that there are many solid and bedrock truths upon which we can build our lives and our faith.

Raise a warning voice

For some reason, when we try to share our certainty about the truths we have found, we are sometimes misunderstood to be arrogant or presenting our faith as superior or more complete than theirs.  Yes, if you invite someone to share in your happiness then you are presenting what you have found to be of great worth.

This is a difficult task to perform.  We are commanded to raise our voices to let the world know of the events pertaining to the founding of our church.  We have been asked to be bold in declaring that God has called prophets in our day and that he has sent angels to ordain and teach truths that have long been lost from the world.

Some truths are not relative

And thus we arrive at the heart of the conflict between orthodox conservative Mormons and progressive liberal Mormons.  What is truth?  Can one say with any degree of certainty that they have found the best and most complete source of truth without excluding the many other sources of truth that are found in the world?

Truth is reality. Some kinds of truth can only be received through revelation. I have never seen God or Jesus. I was not there when Joseph received the First Vision. So for me to be able to know those facts, they have to be revealed to me by the Holy Ghost.  Some truths are either revealed of God or they remain unknown.

Truths received by revelation

The five pillars of the LDS testimony require revelation: God lives, Jesus is the Christ, the Savior called Joseph as a prophet, the Book of Mormon was brought forth by the gift and power of God and the church that Joseph established is authorized of God to administer the ordinances of salvation that God requires.

Without revelation from the Holy Ghost we can’t say that we know these things. It’s just not logical. I have studied the Book of Mormon and the Church that claims to be God’s only church authorized to administer the ordinances of salvation. With revelation from the Holy Ghost I can say I know they are what they claim to be.

Summary and conclusion

In some things in life, it is wise to take a position characterized by my Mission President’s response to the Sandinistas – shades of grey.  We do not always know all the facts of some situations and should withhold judgment until a later time.  However, in some critical matters, we must take a position and know for ourselves.

It takes work and determination to obtain knowledge about the five pillars of an LDS testimony.  But I, and millions of others over the years, can say with great certainty that God does reveal knowledge about himself and his prophets to those who diligently seek it.  This revealed knowledge does not come in shades of grey.

In the priesthood session of the April 2003 General Conference, President Hinckley delivered a landmark address on the subject of loyalty.   In his remarks he said, “Each of us has to face the truth of the matter—either the church is true, or it is a fraud.  There is no middle ground.  It is the Church and kingdom of God or it is nothing.”

An earlier prophet, Joseph Fielding Smith wrote something similar in the Doctrines of Salvation: “Mormonism, as it is called, must stand on the story of Joseph Smith.  He was either a prophet of God, divinely called, properly appointed and commissioned, or he was one of the biggest frauds this world has ever seen.  There is no middle ground.”

There can be no gray area

Referring to the historical events of the area around Palmyra, New York, President Hinckley said: “They either happened or they did not. There can be no gray area, no middle ground.”   In a similar manner, Apostle Joseph B. Wirthlin said, “Joseph Smith must be accepted either as a prophet of God or else as a charlatan of the first order.”

President Benson endorsed this all or nothing view.  He said, “Just as the arch crumbles if the keystone is removed, so does all the Church stand or fall with the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon…if it can be discredited, the Prophet Joseph Smith goes with it. So does our claim to priesthood keys, and revelation, and the restored Church.”

They were all wrong

Such black and white statements go all the way back to the beginnings of the LDS church.  When the prophet Joseph asked God which church he should join, he “was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong.”  If all the churches of Joseph’s day were wrong, what does that say about the numerous churches of our day?

The Lord later said to Joseph in Section one of the Doctrine and Covenants that the church Joseph organized was “the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth.”  If you look, you can find dozens of similar statements by prophets and apostles throughout the history of our church, all very bold in their declarations.

Divisive and exclusivist

Of course, statements like these are labeled divisive and exclusivist by many people outside our church, but also, increasingly by members on the fringe of the church, also known as the disaffected Mormon underground.  The DAMU is nothing new.  There have been cultural Mormons and Jack Mormons throughout the history of our church.

Of all the objections to the church that I have encountered over the past few years I have been blogging, this one seems to be the most common and the most offensive.  For some, it is an extremely difficult proposition to accept this black or white, all or nothing approach to truth in religion.  I have spent considerable time pondering why this is so.

Good and truth in all religions

Joseph Smith taught that we accept truth from whatever source it may come.  Joseph F. Smith said, “We are willing to receive all truth, from whatever source it may come; for truth will stand, truth will endure…”  Modern prophets have said that there is much good and truth in all churches and religions.  This statement doesn’t seem too limiting.

President Hinckley: “We recognize the good in all churches. We recognize the value of religion generally. We say to everyone: live the teachings which you have received from your church. We invite you to come and learn from us, to see if we can add to those teachings and enhance your life and your understanding of things sacred and divine.”

Something unique to add

What can the LDS faith add that is unique and will bless the lives of those who accept its teachings?  The most unique thing we offer can be found in the temples.  It is the sealing power that is exercised to unite families in an eternal bond that will remain in effect after this life is over.  That is an amazing claim that no other church can make.

We teach that the sealing power is a part of the priesthood authority that we claim was delivered to Joseph Smith via angelic messengers.  I don’t know of any other church that asserts that angels have come and ordained their leaders or conferred upon them keys and powers that will bind on earth and in heaven.  That is a fantastic declaration!

Our eternal nature

The older I get, the more important that claim becomes to me.  If I know nothing else, I know that there is a spiritual side of my existence.  I have had too many experiences of a spiritual nature that have helped me to understand this truth.  Others may claim that there is nothing more to man than skin, muscle and bones, but I believe differently.

Because of that very basic and core fundamental belief about myself, I am concerned about what my purpose is in life and what happens after death.  I am so grateful to be a part of a community of faith, a church that believes as I do that life is eternal and that what we do with our lives will have a significant impact on the quality of life hereafter.

Importance of the temples

That belief in life eternal is not unique, but the idea that we can do something to ensure that the relationships we enjoy here continue in the hereafter is very unique indeed.  I have had dialog with visitors to my blog who claim that God would never be so mean as to separate a loving couple who cherished and served each other all their mortal lives.

I’m not going to point you to any statements from church leaders that teach otherwise but I will say this: before you go making claims about how God should behave, you might want to be absolutely sure of what God has said on the subject.  I can’t think of anything about which I would want to be surer.  My eternal happiness depends on it.

Book of Mormon is still the key

Back to the point of the essay and why prophets have said that there can be no middle ground when it comes to things like authority and revelation and Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon.  My mother, who was a convert to the church, once said to me that as an investigator, she could accept everything about it except the Book of Mormon.

It wasn’t until much later in life when she took an Institute class on the subject that she really began to understand just how important it is to our claims of divine origin.  I love the fact that we do not have the plates to “prove” the historicity of the book.  Prophets have taught that the Book of Mormon is a great sifter of those who are honest in heart.

The power of a divine witness

I know there are those who have said that they have tried and failed to obtain a witness of the veracity of the Book of Mormon.  I have had dialog with people both inside and outside the church who have struggled with this.  I confess that I cannot offer a perfect empathy because I received a witness of the truthfulness of the book many years ago.

Because of that divine manifestation to me, not just once but on several occasions, I have never doubted the Book of Mormon, or the claims of the prophet Joseph Smith. I understand why the prophets have said that the Book of Mormon is the keystone of our religion and why our claims of divinity rest upon the veracity of that book.  I also agree with the statement that the strength of this church is in the testimony of each member.

The promise of personal revelation

One of my evangelical visitors once called this security that I feel, the Mormon bubble.  He says it is not logical but it makes perfect sense to me.  You can throw out all kinds of arguments about the Book of Abraham, Polyandry, Post-manifesto plural marriage, the Kinderhook Plates or any one a few dozen other things that can be found on the Internet.

None of them bothered me when I first learned about them and none of them do now.  I have written essays on dozens of these objections and have come to the conclusion that they really aren’t the real problem with why people doubt or leave the church.  In my opinion, those who struggle with these doubts have not received personal revelation.

Summary and conclusion

I know that a testimony is a very sacred and personal subject.  I also know that making a generalization like I just did will bring all kinds of protests.  But I stand by it as truth.  If a man has received a witness from God that the Book of Mormon is true then God has a responsibility to help that man as he goes through the ensuing trials of that testimony.

I know that God will help the honest in heart keep their testimonies strong and vibrant.  If we study we are going to find out things that will test our witness.  We will then have the opportunity to strengthen and deepen it.  That’s what opposition is for.  We do not have to wallow in doubt.  But those who doubt are welcome while they work things out.

When I started blogging about LDS doctrine and issues a few years back I did not expect to get a lot of comments right away. After all, nobody knew about my blog yet. I was just another blog among millions. So I happily wrote all kinds of essays about things that had been on my mind for several years. Then I started promoting my blog and the number of comments picked up.

I enjoy reading the comments. Most of them are from my fellow LDS bloggers. We read each other’s material and provide feedback. It’s like a peer review system among bloggers. For the most part the comments are complimentary and encouraging. In other words, the writers of the comments either agree with my points of view or express understanding of what I have written.

A believing approach

Of course not everybody agrees with me. I am a very conservative, traditional Latter-day Saint, a typical Southern Californian with an easy-going, laid-back approach to life. I feel like I have always been blessed because of my faith and my participation in church. I tend to model my approach to life according to what I see and hear from church leaders, both local and general.

My faith in the restored gospel of Jesus Christ has served me well. It brings me happiness and satisfaction with the answers it provides to life’s challenges and the mysteries of eternity. For me, the counsel to constantly feed our testimonies has been sound. It works. Perhaps I have been blessed with the gift of not doubting, but I feel secure in my knowledge of the gospel.

Those who do not believe

When a reader disagrees with me, I like to initiate a dialog to determine if they perhaps did not understand my points. Sometimes that proves to be the case. Our differences are then resolved and we go merrily on our way. And then there are those who flat out tell me that I am wrong. They claim that my faith is false and that I am not really happy because I have been deceived.

Some of those who tell me I’m wrong are disaffected Mormons while others are evangelists for their Christian faith. Being a returned missionary I felt confident in my ability to deal with them. Usually after a few exchanges of comments we could come to at least acknowledge each other’s point of view. But how do you respond to someone who adamantly wants to prove you wrong?

And those who attack

I have in my library several books dedicated to dealing with those who fight against the truths of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ. I have listed them at the end of this essay. Just this week I finished reading a new one that has proven to be tremendously helpful to me. I know it has been out a while so I am not the first to mention it but I learned some things that I would like to share.

In case you didn’t know it, there are people out there who make it their practice to troll the blogs of faithful LDS members and leave disparaging comments. I suspect that they are becoming just a little bit dismayed by all the good we are doing. One of them wrote on his blog, “What’s up with Mormons and blogging? It’s as if their leaders told them to put out a good public image.”

Shaken Faith Syndrome

The book is called Shaken Faith Syndrome and it is published by FAIR. The author, Mike Ash, has been involved in LDS apologetics for many years. It is divided into two parts. The first 108 pages contain a series of essays addressing the whole idea of dealing with criticism and doubt. I especially liked chapter seven: Betrayal and Church “Cover-Up”. I have seen that firsthand here.

On an early essay here at Latter-day Commentary I wrote that I had visited a few LDS discussion boards and was amazed at the number of people writing that they didn’t know about some piece of history. They expressed shock when they discovered it and then outrage when they decided that the church had somehow failed them because they didn’t know about this historical fact.

No church cover-up

The example provided was that Joseph Smith entered into polygamous relationships in his life. It still amazes me the number of people who don’t know or believe this. As I wrote in my earlier essay, I learned this in seminary and thought everybody else growing up in the church did too. It’s not just converts who go through this. Lifelong members have had the same experience.

So is the church to blame because we don’t know about Joseph’s plural wives? I have never felt that there was a cover-up of any kind. If there was, then it was unintentional. Sure, some of the early histories were written to only provide a faith-promoting view. What’s wrong with that? The shock and sense of betrayal are not what I would consider a faithful or believing response.

Unrealistic prophetic expectations

In other words, if we are serious about our gospel scholarship, it is inevitable that we are going to discover some not-so-pleasant things about our history. This fits perfectly with the idea that the Lord reveals things to us line upon line, precept upon precept. For some, learning difficult things about our history becomes a major test in their life. I sympathize and yet see this as immature.

I don’t mean that in a disparaging way. I simply mean that it is a normal process of growing up in the gospel to learn new truths and to change our beliefs accordingly. Prophets are not perfect. It is unrealistic to expect them to know everything, especially in those areas which they have not studied. Can a prophet express his opinion and it not be the way things actually are? Of course!

Amateur LDS apologetics

The rest of the book provides great responses to specific anti-Mormon claims. I wish I had this book when I was dealing with my own antagonistic visitor who wanted to contest my essay on the Book of Abraham. There is a real talent to apologetics and I applaud those who can do it well. I suspect that most new LDS bloggers like me could use a course to develop the skill.

Mike’s book is well written, thought-provoking and for me, a little bit eye-opening. No, reason alone cannot answer all life’s questions, but it would be better if LDS bloggers, and all members for that matter, were more prepared with reasonable answers to difficult questions from our readers who do not have the advantage of a secure witness borne of the spirit of gospel truths.

Summary and conclusion

My antagonistic visitor derided me and claimed that I always retreated into an unreasonable bubble of a testimony when I could not answer his challenges to his satisfaction. Not having experienced personal revelation himself, he could not relate to the idea that we can and should obtain knowledge of spiritual things through the ministrations of the Holy Ghost in prayer.

I normally don’t finish my essays with a testimony but in dealing with apostate attacks, there really is no other way. I know from personal revelatory experience that God can and does send his spirit to teach us things that we can learn in no other way. We can stand as witnesses to those things that are true even though we were not eyewitnesses at the time. The effect is the same.

For more information:

1. Shaken Faith Syndrome, Michael R. Ash, 2008, Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research
2. Take Heed That Ye Be Not Deceived, Richard I. Winwood, 1992, self-published but now available electronically on the FAIR website
3. Guess Who Wants to Have You for Lunch? Alan Denison & D.L. Barksdale, 1999, FAIR
4. One-Minute Answers to Anti-Mormon Questions, Stephen W. Gibson, 1995, Horizon Book Publishers, available online at LightPlanet
5. They Lie in Wait to Deceive, volumes 1-4, Robert L. & Rosemary Brown, 1981-86, Brownsworth Publishing Company, available at FAIR

Do you occasionally visit anti-Mormon websites? I do. Every few months I Google Mormon, Mormons, Mormonism, LDS, Latter-day Saints and Latter day saints. Note the slight variations in the search terms. You get different results with each one. I just love the new Google feature which brings up the most popular search terms as you type. That provides valuable information.

I am intensely interested in how the online community finds information on the church and our people. The searches have improved dramatically over the past year since I started blogging. After you Google Mormon, click on Video, News or Blogs to find a world of information that just didn’t exist a few years ago. It’s a miracle. Really, it is. But is it helping or hurting?

For example, in the news today under Mormon we find that the Reverend Robert Jeffress, pastor of the First Baptist Church of Dallas, once again called Mitt Romney a cult member. He must have gotten so much mileage out of that statement the last time he used it when Mitt was running that he decided to try it again. Doesn’t he realize that Mitt Romney is no longer the hot news topic?

Recovery from Mormonism

Today I paid another visit to one of the sites that continues to remain on the front page of any Google search for Mormon or Mormonism – the Recovery from Mormonism forum. In there I discovered that Flat Lander’s disciplinary council has been delayed until after the Nov election. Readers are having a field day with this one. It’s so sad to read some of the comments there.

If you have read any of the stories on the RfM site you may ask why I would go there or spend any amount of time there. Yes, many of the letters and comments are poorly constructed and filled with anger but in just a few minutes you can find common themes. I find it helpful to understand where ex-Mormons are coming from as many of them write comments on my blog.

The most common theme is deception. Many who write there report that they just didn’t know certain things about church history and were shocked when they discovered them. That to me is clear evidence of a need to teach our history better. Our youth and new converts need a friend who can help them deal with the warts that they will discover. We all know that they exist.

Post-Mormon

Compared to the Recovery from Mormonism site, Post-Mormon is a relatively new site, but is gaining in popularity. With 569 posts, you can also see that Flat Lander is not the “High Priest in good standing” that he claims to be. I’m not saying that participating in Post-Mormon makes you an apostate, but it’s clear that his problems with the church began long before Prop 8.

If you live in the Intermountain West you may have seen their billboards. I noticed some on a recent trip to Utah and looked them up when I got to a computer. The site is professionally done and seems to be well run. I’m sure many of you know a lot more about those who run this site. It is registered to Jeff Ricks out of Logan, Utah. You can read more about him in the Deseret News.

The tenor of letters and comments on Post-Mormon is mostly a step up from what you’ll find on RfM, but not much. There are still many that write for shock value, and seek sympathy for their particular case. Each exit story is unique, but again, all seem to have a common theme of loss. The result is a loss of faith through a perceived deception or some offense, real or imagined.

Anti-Mormons

Labels in general are not good because they are never accurate or precise enough or even fair. However, the term anti-Mormon has been around a long time so I’m going to stick with it. For the most part, I find anti-Mormon sites to be run by Christian ministries, as opposed to former Mormons. This is not always true, but most of them focus on bringing Mormons to Christ.

I like that. We all need to focus more on Christ. I love the comments I receive from those who are working hard to remind me that true religion, at least the Christian religion, is centered on the gospel of Jesus Christ. When I engage in dialog with someone from one of these sites, I am almost always delighted to conclude the dialog with a new-found friend as we talk of Christ.

Two of the most popular online ministries to the Mormons are CARM and MRM. I have written about CARM previously and have enjoyed my dialogs with Matt Paulson, who seems to be the most active in reaching out to people like me. Take a look at the Mormonism Research Ministry, especially this: “Aren’t you just a bunch of biased and hateful bigots who persecute Mormons?“

New Order Mormons

I’ve written about New Order Mormons previously, but wanted to mention them again. One might be tempted to categorize them in with the Ex-Mormons and Post-Mormons, but I keep them separate because they do not advocate leaving the Mormon Church. Their focus is on helping those who no longer believe the doctrine to remain a part of the LDS community.

Another unique thing I like about the NOMs is that they introduced me to an idea that was just totally foreign to my way of thinking growing up in the Mormon Church – that it’s OK to doubt. Now don’t go thinking I’ve lost my testimony because I haven’t. It’s just that I never imagined that you could be a Mormon and not believe the doctrine. They call it being a cultural Mormon.

If you survey your own ward, I am confident that you will find several regular members who are cultural Mormons. They come to church regularly or semi-regularly but just aren’t interested in the doctrine. They come because they were raised in the church or their spouse participates and it contributes to a happier marriage. They probably don’t even know that they are NOMs.

Summary and Conclusion

Some may be offended that I have written about these sites that provide an alternative voice to the official LDS church point of view. It is not my attention to offend. Alternative views are a fact of life, especially in today’s Internet society. Our kids and grand kids know all about these sites and it should not be a shock that they exist. We can’t hide our heads in the sand.

You may feel that this is doing the Church a disservice by bringing light to these sites. I disagree. I have always felt that opposing viewpoints are good and that we can learn from everyone, no matter how much we may feel they are wrong. It has been my experience that those who create and write on these sites really just want to be understood and accepted.

The gospel is being spread through the Internet in a big way these days. Almost everyone turns to the Internet after being first introduced to the church by a friend or by the missionaries. It behooves us to know what they will find and be prepared to answer their questions. Besides, you might learn something that will strengthen your faith in what you will find. I know I have.

—————————————————————–

Note: Post-Mormon billboard courtesy of Jeff Ricks, but without specific permission

You may be familiar with the hilarious 5 Kinds of Mormons from Robert Kirby, illustrated by Pat Bagley. But not as many people remember the next essay in their 1995 classic, Sunday of the Living Dead. It is, of course, the 5 Kinds of non-Mormons. Kirby mentions it in his essay in Dialogue, Confessions of a Modern Day Mobber. However, he doesn’t share them there and I can find them nowhere on the Internet.

I happen to have the book and it is one of my favorites. I will quote from but not share the essay in detail. I believe a man should be paid for his work. For many LDS, Kirby is the only reason they ever visit the Salt Lake Tribune website. The five kinds of non-Mormons are Ignorant Nons, Tolerant Nons, Irked Nons, Furious Nons and Rabid Nons. Ig-nons know utterly zip about Mormons and aren’t interested in knowing more.

Tol-nons think Mormons are quaint but nice and relatively harmless. They don’t care what Mormons do with them after they are dead so long as they leave them alone while they’re alive. Like Ig-nons, Irk-nons know relatively zip about Mormons. The difference being that Irk-nons think they know everything. Fur-nons are not interested in live-and-let-live with Mormons.

To the Fur-nons, Mormons are wrong, wrong, wrong. If you’ve got sixty seconds, and even if you don’t, Fur-nons will tell you all about Adam/God, polygamy, Danites, Mountain Meadows and whatever the latest hot anti-Mormon issue happens to be. Rab-nons cry that anything even remotely connected with Mormonism is out-and-out evil. Most ex-Mormons are found in the Fur-non and Rab-non categories.

Opposition in all things

Those familiar with the Book of Mormon recognize this line from Father Lehi’s teachings to his son Jacob. I confess that even after a relatively full life, I still struggle with the logic behind this one. Lehi teaches that righteousness could not be brought to pass if there were no opposition. I guess without opposition, we would not have a real choice in the most important things in life.

For example, if we did not have the choice to believe that nothing is real unless you can prove it with empirical evidence then how could we ever learn to exercise faith? What is faith if it is not believing in things that are not seen but are nevertheless true? We have a choice to accept that there are simply some things that we cannot prove, because we do not know enough about them.

Lehi teaches us in that an angel of God fell from heaven and became a devil, “having sought that which is evil before God. And because he had fallen from heaven, and had become miserable forever, he sought also the misery of all mankind.” He seeks our misery by opposing all the good things our Heavenly Father wants for us. He presents tantalizing and appealing choices.

We should not be surprised that the devil would be opposed to everything that the LDS Church stands for. The Lord has established His Kingdom and has asked us to help build it up in these latter days. Our involvement in furthering His work is opposed by the adversary and he will do everything he can to prevent us from participating in that process of building and strengthening.

Post Mormons, Ex-Mormons and Anti-Mormons

I can’t imagine anybody who knows anything about the church not being aware that there are those who oppose it. Just as the church is taking advantage of the miracle of the Internet and the Web, those opposed to the church have found a medium that facilitates and lengthens the reach of their message. The anti-Mormon sites far outnumber those that are pro-Mormon.

We know that the adversary makes his work appealing, else why would we desire it or find it attractive? The idea of a website where you can discuss negative things about the church at first seems exciting. Wow! There is a place where you can complain about all the things about being a member of the church that bug you. The other people in the forums are so sympathetic.

Soon the novelty wears off and you go from simply complaining to actively seeking to spread doubt and discontent. You look for new ways to spin the old lies that have been around for as long as the Church has been established. The websites are so appealing and exciting. The spin on most of these sites is that it is good to vent your frustrations and explore your feelings.

Like pornography, these websites that claim they are only there to help you ease your transition out of Mormonism are very addictive. It is so easy to move from a “Post Mormon” experience to an Ex-Mormon point of view and finally to an anti-Mormon stance. For those who thrive on the feedback from peers, the large and spacious building just took on a whole new meaning.

Safely navigating the waters

Some people first start to visit the anti-Mormon sites out of curiosity. Perhaps they are naive and have been sheltered in a faithful LDS home all their lives but are now on their own away at college. Others are converts that have recently discovered that there is another side to what they were taught by the missionaries when they were baptized. Why didn’t they know about these things first? They feel deceived and wonder what else they weren’t told earlier.

Let’s face it, you’re not going to read some things about the controversial subjects in LDS doctrine, practice and history from the official sources. You won’t find blood atonement referenced on lds.org except as it pertains to the blood of the Savior. The Adam-God theory is not discussed there, nor is Mother in Heaven or any works from Grant Palmer or D. Michael Quinn. Signature books is not a favorite among the Brethren. I’m sure you can imagine why.

Visiting some of these sites can be dangerous for those who do not have a sure and solid foundation in the gospel of Jesus Christ. The points being made by those recently disenchanted with the church can be so interesting. How was Mark Hoffman able to fool the leaders of the church into believing that his forgeries were real? The answer to that question deserves a future post. DNA evidence of the American Indians sure was a shocker to some, wasn’t it?

Yes, there must be opposition in all things and you can find it in abundance on the Internet without looking too long or hard. Will seeking out, reading these opposing viewpoints and then discussing them with others strengthen or weaken your testimony? Will your commitment to the gospel increase or decrease as you ponder the words of those who have left the church or have been excommunicated? You want to know about these things but can you handle them?

Seek out the positive blogs and sites

This is my 100th essay since I started writing about the Church six months ago. A day hasn’t gone by in which I haven’t thought and prayed about what I am going to write next. I’m the kind of learner that needs to be able to explain things for myself. Like many of you, I have spent many hours visiting the websites of those who oppose the work of the Lord. As I have written before, I have yet to find anything that hasn’t already been addressed and answered.

I started this blog to help motivate me to regularly study the gospel. I think I took my inspiration from Elder Bednar when he described the different methods that can be employed to study the scriptures. I have been a chronological reader for far too long. I had made many attempts over the years to gather my resources by topic. I have several file cabinets full of material that served me well as a seminary teacher and high council speaker over the years.

I love the gospel of Jesus Christ as taught in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It is rich and deep. There is so much that can be learned from the official sources of the Church. But because we know there is opposition in all things and because we know the purpose of that opposition, I am convinced that we can also learn from opposing viewpoints. I hope you don’t think me a heretic, but it strengthens my testimony to answer some of this anti-Mormon stuff.

I have long been torn between two approaches to dealing with critics of our faith. I’m not sure if it is a good idea to answer their allegations or to simply ignore them. I guess it depends on how much their charges bother us. The official response of the Church seems to have changed over the years in direct proportion to the number of articles published in the media that are false or misleading.

At one time we were much quieter and less responsive. Things that I thought were outrageous and slanderous were met with not a peep. Other things that I thought were obvious and petty elicited responses that seemed over-reactive and condemning. Today, things are more even, measured and, in a word, professional. I am no authority on the subject but I like the image Public Affairs presents to the world today.

There are many great websites out there that are doing an excellent job of answering the critics. In reality, you can’t provide answers that will satisfy those who don’t believe there are answers. We can only offer responses and correct information in an attempt to provide honest seekers of truth with facts that they can evaluate for themselves. Elder Ballard has asked for more faithful members of the Church to share the truth about the gospel on the Internet and the new media.

The best websites for LDS answers

Of course the best site is lds.org. It offers a tremendous resource of excellent material including conference talks, magazine articles, official curriculum, complete online scriptures, and links to hundreds of other official LDS sites. In my opinion the best resource for answers to difficult questions can be found in the LDS Newsroom which I have used extensively in my recent posts.

Don’t discount Mormon.org. While the focus is on providing support material for the missionary discussions and therefore lacks depth, you can’t go wrong in using the answers found there. The church web team went to a lot of work to present the wonderful content and videos. You will also want to be sure to visit JesusChrist.lds.org for excellent articles and videos on the Savior.

I can only mention a few others here. I have compiled a more complete list on the sidebar of this blog that I use extensively in my research. The MoreGood foundation is always worth visiting as are FAIR and Shields. Even though there are so many others, I must mention the extensive work that Jeff Lindsay has done over the years on his LDS FAQ. It has always been extremely helpful. I gave up my work in this area long ago because Jeff was doing such an awesome job.

Answers to some basic allegations

In the past week I have responded to six common criticisms of those who are opposed to the work of the church. They were conveniently presented as a comment to my Easter post, “Are Mormons Christian?” The objections were offered by an anonymous reader so I imagine there was no real desire for a response. An intelligent dialog requires that the participants at least identify themselves. A respectful exchange invites understanding for each other’s viewpoints.

1. God is a glorified being of flesh and bones
2. The doctrine of spiritual brotherhood
3. The Book of Mormon brings us closer to Christ
4. Authority to act in the name of God
5. Why can’t I attend a Mormon wedding?
6. The practice of plural marriage

In my experience there are two kinds of critics that we cannot help. There are those who are convinced that their zeal in attacking us is providing a service to God and others who they want to impress. Then there are the apostates and ex-Mormons who want only to justify their actions. They will go to any length to make sure that everyone knows how hurt they have been by some real or imagined offense. I wish there was something we could do to ease their pain.

Dealing with anti-Morman literature

I often reflect upon the words of Elder Bruce R. McConkie as he spoke about anti-Mormon literature. He said he would sometimes read it for entertainment value and nothing more. I suspect that he may have read it on occasion more for intellectual stimulation. I used to have an extensive collection of books that were not flattering to the LDS faith. I would refer to them in an effort to understand what our critics were saying and how they saw things.

For some reason the fact that I had such a collection came up in an interview with a good Stake President. He counseled me to dispose of it. I did so long ago and have not missed it especially since so much of the same material can be found today on the Internet with a simple search. You do not have to go far to discover that there is still much animosity and false interpretations of our history and doctrine available to the public in thousands of anti-Mormon websites.

We do not shy away from the difficult questions if the seeker is legitimately wanting to know the answers. For some questions there are no answers. For others, the answer depends on the maturity of the individual asking the question or repeating the allegation that they have read elsewhere. If you are sincere in wanting to understand something about our faith or doctrine I am more than happy to point you to some answers that have helped me over the years.