BELIEF STRUCTURES

In another post that appears earlier in this blog, I wrote an entry based on a quote by Gerry Spence:  "I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief." 

Or as depicted in this picture,
BELIEF SET IN STONE.


Since writing that previous post, I have thought even more about belief structures and how detrimental they can be to a person's perceptions.  For instance, in Mormonism, people often become so wrapped up in the belief structure that they seem to feel personally attacked if anyone questions their beliefs.  And when that occurs, it often leads to the person launching a direct personal attack against the other person, who they tend to look at as the opponent.  This recently happened between me and a very good friend with whom I grew up.  Of course, since when someone actually begins to think differently, and decides to leave Mormonism, it is seen as not just an attack against the religion itself but also against its members, it wasn't a big surprise to me.  But even so, the fact that so much animosity seems to develop between members and what they term as "apostates," even to the point of family members turning against the "apostate," is almost a given, I still find it not only very sad but also extremely unChristian-like.

Personal attacks like this are called "ad hominem attacks."  These types of attacks usually involve insulting or belittling one's opponent in order to invalidate his argument, but can also involve pointing out supposed character flaws or actions which are irrelevant to the opponent's argument.  Of course, this tactic is not based in reality because insults and even true negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions.

Examples:

• "You can't believe Jack when he says the proposed policy would help the economy. He doesn't even have a job."
• "Candidate Jane's proposal about zoning is ridiculous. She was caught cheating on her taxes in 2003."

Of course, these types of attacks are very common in regard to Ex-Mormons.  Like being told that we cannot know anything since we no longer have the "spirit" because we have obviously lost the "Holy Ghost."  Or the connotation that there must be something wrong with us because we can't understand the importance or significance of certain doctrines.  Or the insinuation that the fact that we even began to question is evidence of how lack of faith and inability to process things that are truly spiritual.  And on and on and on, ad nauseum.

In the movie Dogma, there's a great quote about belief structures:

Rufus: He still digs humanity, but it bothers Him to see the shit that gets carried out in His name - wars, bigotry, televangelism. But especially the factioning of all the religions. He said humanity took a good idea and, like always, built a belief structure on it.

Bethany: Having beliefs isn't good?

Rufus: I think it's better to have ideas. You can change an idea. Changing a belief is trickier. Life should be malleable and progressive; working from idea to idea permits that. Beliefs anchor you to certain points and limit growth; new ideas can't generate. Life becomes stagnant.

So in essence, people become blinded by belief, so much so that they can't accept or even listen to any opposing views.  Their minds are closed by belief.  Being open to new ideas and the possiblity that a person's view is skewed is important to living an intellectually curious life.  One of my biggest regrets in life is that I went along with Mormonism for so long and didn't even question so many things that are clearly preposterous to me now.  I was not intellectually curious, but rather buried my head in the sand like so many Mormons tend to do.  Blindly going along.  Not really questioning, but rather allowing others to do the thinking for them.  It is no wonder to me that most Mormons actually believe that "When the prophet speaks, the debate is over," although most don't even get to the debating stage.  They accept what they are told, that "there are things we can't understand in this life."

When I discovered the truth about Mormonism and the fact that it is based on a stack of lies, I was dumbfounded.  For a long time, I tried to blame my upbringing for my lack of interest in finding out the truth earlier.  Brainwashing.  Programming.  But although all that is true to a certain extent, I really only had myself to blame.  I should have examined it more closely when I was growing up.  I should have looked at the history of the Church sooner and in more depth.  The fact that I didn't but rather waited until I was 50 years old to really research and study about it all upsets me to this day.

Obviously, blind belief is not confined to Mormonism.  I'm sure it exists in every religion.  My experience has been with Mormonism, and so I tend to focus on its idiosyncrasies.  But in the end, what it all boils down to is that people in general are told to believe in a certain religion simply because.  Because someone said they should believe a certain way.  Or because they were brought up to believe these things.  Or because (as the below Non Sequitur cartoon points out), "Because, ummmm.... God said so, that's why."

These days, I look at myself as an Agnostic.  In my years since leaving Mormonism, I have come to realize that it is impossible to know one way or the other whether God really exists.  I do know one thing, though, and that is that the Mormon Church is not "the one and only true church on the face of the earth" (as they like to claim - another sign of a cult). 
 
In my contact with other ExMormons, I have noted that while some people who leave the Mormon Church join other Christian churches after their departure (including Unitarian type churches to a great extent), a great many become Agnostics.  And while some stay in the Agnostic mindset (like me), others tend to work their way toward being Atheists.   It seems to me that this progression is a result of being "burnt out" on organized religion and its "all or nothing" stance.

One of the things that puzzles me now is that there are a lot of very intelligent people ensconced in the Mormon Church, perfectly happy to live what I consider to be "the lie."  Their beliefs do not make sense, and although many of those beliefs have been proven to be false, that doesn't seem to matter to them.  Some of these "true believers" include lawyers, who are taught to be critical thinkers in law school, but for some reason, they do not apply that critical thinking to their religion.  That is very puzzling to me.

But whether or not the belief is based on truth or lies seems to be immaterial to the "true believer."  For instance, there is a huge example of this in the Book of Abraham, which was purportedly "translated" by Joseph Smith from Egyptian Papyri.  But even though modern Egyptologists have declared the "translation" by Joseph Smith to be completely inaccurate and not based in any measure in reality, members of the Mormon Church continue to cling to their belief that the Book of Abraham is the Word of God translated by a modern-day prophet.  To me, however, when something is proven to be false, then it is false.  If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is a duck (as pointed out by Steven Kazan, an expert on cults, when referring to Mormonism - which in his opinion, as in mine, is very definitely a cult).

For me, one of the biggest lessons I have learned in my journey away from Mormonism is developing a true belief in Freedom of Religion (not what I consider to be the pretend one behind the 11th Article of Faith ala Mormonism).  People should be able to believe what they truly want to believe in actuality, and no one should tell them they should believe one way or another.  The phrase "Live and let live" has taken on new meaning for me, as has the scripture "Judge not that ye be not judged."

In other words...

Whatever floats your boat.

Whatever rocks your socks.

Whatever melts your  butter.

WHATEVER WORKS FOR YOU.

MY RANT FOR THE DAY

I posted something on the discussion board on PostMormon.org today that I still feel like ranting about. 

This was my post:

It's NOT as though there are only two or three things... or even three or four... there is a mountain of evidence against TSCC being "the one and only true church."  If there was just a couple areas of concern, perhaps it could be accepted as "true," but when there so many fraudulent areas, it stands to reason that it's actually false.  It is simply not possible to put aside the fact that there are differing versions of the First Vision; that polygamy was obviously put into play by Joseph Smith to cover-up his philandering; that the Prophet of the Restoration committed adultery with teenager girls and married women; that he was actually a criminal and not a religious martyr; that he created and/or plagiarized the BoM and the BoA; that he paved the way for 150 years of blatant racism to exist in the Mormon Church; that he bent everything to his goal of being "all-powerful" in everyone's eyes so they would do whatever he said they should; and so much more.
 
I was thinking about this earlier, and I couldn't help but ask myself how anyone who knows the truth behind so many of the doctrines and so much of the history of TSCC can remain associated with it.  It just doesn't make sense.  Accepting everything blindly and by faith is somewhat possible when you don't actually think about things, but it requires so much rationalization, so much overlooking evidence, so much burying your head in the sand that it boggles my mind how anyone can not think that it is simply a fraud and a scam.
 
It reminds me of being married to my second husband.  If I could have overlooked the fact that he was abusive to me, I still had to deal with the fact that he was mean and abusive to my daughter, and saw how that was affecting her.  For a while, I overlooked both of those facts and tried to focus on the positive aspects.  But as time went on, I realized that whatever "positive" aspects there were, the negative ones were so overwhelming that they over-shadowed whatever benefits I may have derived from being married to that man.  Once I realized that, remaining in a situation that was clearly destroying both of us was a no-brainer for me.  In the same respect, it became a no-brainer for me to finally realize that TSCC is not what it professes to be, and to see what being a member of that church was doing to me as an individual and as a woman. 
 
In essence, every member of TSCC is in an abusive relationship with their church.  They take what TSCC dishes out, and they bury their heads in the sand, in essence pretending that TSCC truly is "the one and only true church on the face of the earth," and that they are deriving good benefits from their membership.  But in reality, TSCC is killing each and every one of them... it is killing their spirits, their individuality, and their zest for life.

Ok, rant over for now...

I got a few really interesting responses:

OldSoul posted this response:

The deconversion process for any religion follows a similar pattern.  Belief isn't rooted in a single doctrine or idea.  It's more of host of ideas connected by a supportive web.  Counter any one idea or belief and the entire belief structure still survives.  Most people encounter one or two things that will challenge their beliefs. It takes a person willing to examine many points of belief to have a chance of deconverting.  One by one you must put these ideas to the test.  Are they real?  logical?  is there evidence?  Not many people are able to do this.   
 
I'd think most people having gone through a full deconversion would feel like there were 100s of problems with their previous belief system.  You feel this way because you've put your belief structure to the test and point by point it failed.  I can't think of many religions that would really stand up to this kind of analysis.  It's pretty much all a bunch of hooey.

And LDS Truthseeker posted this response:

Yeah, if it was just a matter of having no evidence to support the Church's claims, then that would be one thing.  We would just need a certain amount of faith to accept the Church's claims.  However it is not the lack of evidence but rather the contradictory evidence that makes the claims of the Church so hard to believe.
 
If it was just a couple irreconcilable items that needed an extra measure of faith, then that would be a hurdle most of us would be willing to shelve until the next life.  But the sheer accumulation of significant issues that contradict what we've been taught makes it seem inconceivable that all of these things somehow have some sort of extraordinary explanation.
 
Maybe none of the individual items is in itself an absolute deal-breaker.  But the sheer volume of significant issues makes it inconceivable that the Church is really what it claims to be.
 
Maybe there really are fantastic explanations to explain all these things like God changed the American Indian's DNA from Jewish to Asian, Egyptologists don't really understand Egyptian, archaeologists just haven't found the steel swords, horses, and elephants mentioned in the BOM, Joseph didn't really know where the Hill Cumorah from the BOM was, the scribes were responsible for all the errors and misquotings of the prophets, blacks really are cursed from God through Cain, Joseph's brothers sleeping in Joseph's own bed with him just slept while Moroni visited him all night, evil men really did steal the lost 116 pages but just decided to destroy this valuable document, the Masons really did have the original temple ceremony from Solomon's time, God brought all the dinosaur bones from other planets to the Earth, etc.
 
If these and many, many more fantastic explanations for all the numerous problems were really true, then that would be even more amazing and unbelievable than the story of the restoration itself as taught by the Church!  What are the chances that ALL of the damning evidence against the Church will suddenly reverse itself?
 
I think that anyone that knows the complete, true, historic details of all of these events, and many others not listed here, and is then asked to still believe in them as taught by the Church, is asking for more sheer faith than anyone should be asked to have.

And then howdidimissthat posted this response:

I could have excused a handful of historic omissions but when EVERY "fact" I thought I knew ended up being a lie everything changed, I had no more respect for their dishonest system.  Some "facts" were omitted from history, others were distorted and rewritten.  The intent was dishonest when it happened and it is dishonest to continue lying.  The leaders will never step up and do the right thing.  They will never tell the truth as the truth not as an excuse or an apologetic explanation.  The big 15 have too much to lose if they present the true facts and apologize for years of lying, they don't give a rat's ass about the members.  They are cowards. 

Very interesting discussion.  My rant for the day culminated in me writing a poem... which I posted in the Poetry section of this blog...