Why have many people left the Church after reading false things?


Eve1991
 Share

Recommended Posts

Because our church requires an active faith and an honesty with the self and God that is not normally celebrated in todays culture. The people I have personally dealt with who fell away were looking for that one excuse to not put the effort in any more. if it were a priority then they'd dig deeper but they already have a foot out the door when somethinv outlandish comes to their ears and it justifies the rebellion they've been entertainjng. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, a mustard seed said:

Because our church requires an active faith and an honesty with the self and God that is not normally celebrated in todays culture. The people I have personally dealt with who fell away were looking for that one excuse to not put the effort in any more. if it were a priority then they'd dig deeper but they already have a foot out the door when somethinv outlandish comes to their ears and it justifies the rebellion they've been entertainjng. 

So do you think the people who started reading the false doctrine didn't have a strong testimony? Why did people leave the Church over the children of gay parents> It says in the bible that homosexuality is a sin and that is God who says that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Eve1991 said:

Hi why do so many people leave the Church after reading false things on the internet? I don't know where they get information from that Joseph Smith married a 14 year old girl and had 30 wifes.

Eve, my experience is that many people build up the Church into their idea of what it should be; rather than recognizing it for what it is.  Then, when new information comes in, they can't reconcile it to the illusions they had previously created; so they simply throw it all away without pausing to consider whether there's a baby hiding in all that bath water.

For example:  many people think that a prophet must be monogamous; and/or that a sealing to a fourteen-year-old must involve deception and sex and pedophilia.  Rather than re-evaluate their own assumptions, many just prefer to reject Joseph as a false prophet.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Eve, my experience is that many people build up the Chirch into their idea of what it should be; rather than recognizing it for what it is.  Then, when new information comes in, they can't reconcile it to the illusions they had previously created; so they simply throw it all away without pausing to consider whether there's a baby hiding in all that bath water.

The people who have left the Church say Joseph Smith is a fraud, People resigned from the Church because of children who have gay parents can't be baptised until they are 18 but it says in the bible that homosexuality is a sin and that is God who says it. It makes me wander if all the people who have left the Church actually prayed and asked if the Church is true?

Edited by Eve1991
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Eve1991 said:

So do you think the people who started reading the false doctrine didn't have a strong testimony? Why did people leave the Church over the children of gay parents> It says in the bible that homosexuality is a sin and that is God who says that.

Yes a not strong testimony. I know and sustain all of the prophets of the church we have had as men called of God. By saying that means I trust their word to be direct from God. I trust that they lead us, choose our leaders carefully, and are inspired by the lord for doctrine and gospel teachings and decisions. If I have this testimony...how could I then doubt a rule given to us by them enough to leave the church over it, unless it wasn't strong enough to begin with? How could I deny the truth in it qnd yet still say I believe they are men of God? 

Edited by a mustard seed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone else noticed that almost everyone who leaves the Church leaves for atheism and/or secularism, and not because they are "trading up" to a different religion they have found to be more true?

This kind of blows my mind.  I would like to think that, in the extremely unlikely event that I were to lose my testimony and leave the Church, I would run, and not walk, to the nearest Southern Baptist Church and become an evangelical (or, let's be honest, maybe even the nearest mosque to say the Shahada!)  But, I am not seeing this very much among my friends who have left the Church.  They just drift away from God altogether.  

This suggests that maybe these friends have issues with God to begin with, and use the literature as an excuse and a way to justify their decision?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't uderstand why people were angry about the child of gay parents. It says in the bible homosexuality is a a sun and not to act upon it and that marriage is only between a man and woman. If Jesus comes back next week or next month or next year and he confirms the Church is true and that the Book Of Mormon is true and that J Joseph Smith did pray and ask which Church he should join and that he did write the book of Mormon and that he is not a fraud and that homosexuality is a sin and not to act upon it what do you think the people will think who have left the Church. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DoctorLemon said:

Has anyone else noticed that almost everyone who leaves the Church leaves for atheism and/or secularism, and not because they are "trading up" to a different religion they have found to be more true?

This kind of blows my mind.  I would like to think that, in the extremely unlikely event that I were to lose my testimony and leave the Church, I would run, and not walk, to the nearest Southern Baptist Church and become an evangelical (or, let's be honest, maybe even the nearest mosque to say the Shahada!)  But, I am not seeing this very much among my friends who have left the Church.  They just drift away from God altogether.  

This suggests that maybe these friends have issues with God to begin with, and use the literature as an excuse and a way to justify their decision?

If I ever leave the Church I wouldn't bad mouth it I would leave it alone and not tell people to leave. Plenty of people who leave the Church can't seem to leave it alone.

Edited by Eve1991
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Eve1991 said:

If I ever leave the Church I wouldn't bad mouth it I would leave it alone and not tell people to leave. Plenty of people who leave the Church can't seem to leave it alone.

Maybe. Maybe not. Consider:

https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-joseph-smith/chapter-27?lang=eng

“When the Prophet had ended telling how he had been treated, Brother Behunin remarked: ‘If I should leave this Church I would not do as those men have done: I would go to some remote place where Mormonism had never been heard of, settle down, and no one would ever learn that I knew anything about it.’

“The great Seer immediately replied: ‘Brother Behunin, you don’t know what you would do. No doubt these men once thought as you do. Before you joined this Church you stood on neutral ground. When the gospel was preached, good and evil were set before you. You could choose either or neither. There were two opposite masters inviting you to serve them. When you joined this Church you enlisted to serve God. When you did that you left the neutral ground, and you never can get back on to it. Should you forsake the Master you enlisted to serve, it will be by the instigation of the evil one, and you will follow his dictation and be his servant.’”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Eve1991 said:

....People resigned from the Church because of children who have gay parents can't be baptised until they are 18....

One of the LDS Church's articles of faith says:

2 We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.

And the Church also believes that baptism is a saving ordinance. Children have always been welcomed into the LDS Church, so when this policy happened many members were shocked that the LDS Church would deny children this saving ordinance because of their parents. I think a lot of people could not reconcile this new policy with what they had been taught about "suffer the little children" and baptism.

M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Maureen said:

One of the LDS Church's articles of faith says:

2 We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.

And the Church also believes that baptism is a saving ordinance. Children have always been welcomed into the LDS Church, so when this policy happened many members were shocked that the LDS Church would deny children this saving ordinance because of their parents.

They were misinformed, of course. And those who pursued in repeating this line of reasoning were repeating lies, and were themselves liars or dupes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Vort said:

They were misinformed, of course. And those who pursued in repeating this line of reasoning were repeating lies, and were themselves liars or dupes.

Misinformed about what? About how they felt regarding the new policy?

M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Maureen said:

Children have always been welcomed into the LDS Church, . . .

With all due respect, this just isn't true.  At least, not in the policy sense that you suggest.

Missionaries over the past couple of decades at least have traditionally been instructed not to baptize willing children--even with parental consent--unless it was clear that there would be a supportive home environment and an adult willing to oversee that child's spiritual progress.  On my mission, we declined to baptize several very desirous tweens and early teens for precisely this reason.  Without a doubt, those were some of the hardest conversations I had to have.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Maureen said:

Misinformed about what? About how they felt regarding the new policy?

Seriously? You think I said they were misinformed about how they felt? That's a whole new level of stupid.

Reread your post to which I was responding.

28 minutes ago, Maureen said:

Children have always been welcomed into the LDS Church, so when this policy happened many members were shocked that the LDS Church would deny children this saving ordinance because of their parents.

I have helpfully bolded the relevant parts.

Edited by Vort
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Maureen said:

My mistake, the LDS Church always gave the impression they were welcoming of children. Good to know the truth; that anyone who thinks @Vort's Church welcomes all children must be stupid. Thanks for clearing that up.

M.

Honest stupidity can be remedied. There is no cure for intentional obtuseness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Eve1991 said:

Hi why do so many people leave the Church after reading false things on the internet? I don't know where they get information from that Joseph Smith married a 14 year old girl and had 30 wifes.

the best lie is one sandwiched between 2 truths.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Maureen said:

My mistake, the LDS Church always gave the impression they were welcoming of children. Good to know the truth; that anyone who thinks @Vort's Church welcomes all children must be stupid. Thanks for clearing that up.

M.

I think there's a perception that in discussions like this, talking about the Church's policy in terms of whether or not it "welcomes children (as Jesus did!!!)", is more than a little loaded.

I think that beneath their posturing, critics of the policy know quite well what would happen if little Mormon children were routinely coming home and saying "Daddy and Daddy, my primary teacher says we can never be an eternal family and you are both going to Hell unless you repent and divorce."  In fact, I dare say they were counting on such exchanges.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I think there's a perception that in discussions like this, talking about the Church's policy in terms of whether or not it "welcomes children (as Jesus did!!!)", is more than a little loaded.

I think that beneath their posturing, critics of the policy know quite well what would happen if little Mormon children were routinely coming home and saying "Daddy and Daddy, my primary teacher says we can never be an eternal family and you are both going to Hell unless you repent and divorce."  In fact, I dare say they were counting on such exchanges.

Situations like this already exist in the LDS Church. Not exactly the same but partial member families and non-active parents already have their children wondering if they will ever be eternal families. The only difference is the children of these families are usually welcomed to become baptized members of the Church.

M.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Maureen said:

Situations like this already exist in the LDS Church. Not exactly the same but partial member families and non-active parents already have their children wondering if they will ever be eternal families. The only difference is the children of these families are usually welcomed to become baptized members of the Church.

M.

 

I have never understood this criticism of the Church which seems to pop up periodically.  Situations like this exist throughout all of Christianity, but are greatly mitigated in the Church.

If you are Evangelical, for example, and your child decides they don't believe in God anymore, you are likely scared to death that child will not go to heaven and you will never again see that child after death.  I have observed this in my own family, owing my mother's conversion to the Church, and various Evangelical family members fearing for her soul.  (I am not saying all Evangelicals (or Catholics, or Sunni Muslims, etc.) believe like this, but I speak from my own experience and what I have personally observed, and it seems that many do.)

Meanwhile, in the LDS Church, if your child decides they don't believe in God anymore, you can count on having a relationship with that child throughout eternity and ministering to them, regardless of where they end up.  See Doctrine & Covenants 33.  You can also count on the child not being basically tortured throughout eternity simply for having a different religious point of view.

It seems that being LDS would be one of the least anxiety-inducing religions to be if you are in a mixed-religion family and are wondering if you will be able to associate with nonbelieving family members in the next life...

Edited by DoctorLemon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, DoctorLemon said:

I have never understood this criticism of the Church which seems to pop up periodically.  Situations like this exist throughout all of Christianity, but are greatly mitigated in the Church.

If you are Evangelical, for example, and your child decides they don't believe in God anymore, you are likely scared to death that child will not go to heaven and you will never again see that child after death.  I have observed this in my own family, owing my mother's conversion to the Church, and various Evangelical family members fearing for her soul.  (I am not saying all Evangelicals (or Catholics, or Sunni Muslims, etc.) believe like this, but I speak from my own experience and what I have personally observed, and it seems that many do.)

Meanwhile, in the LDS Church, if your child decides they don't believe in God anymore, you can count on having a relationship with that child throughout eternity and ministering to them, regardless of where they end up.  See Doctrine & Covenants 33.  You can also count on the child not being basically tortured throughout eternity simply for having a different religious point of view.

It seems that being LDS would be one of the least anxiety-inducing religions to be if you are in a mixed-religion family and are wondering if you will be able to associate with nonbelieving family members in the next life...

You're missing the point, Doc, which is that the LDS Church is bad, and/or its doctrine is horribly divisive, and/or it's just plain fun to badmouth that Salt Lake Corporate Entity® and all those darned Old White Males that run it. Come on, get with the program. Your best primer is the Salt Lake Tribune; they'll show you how it's done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share