FAITH vs. REASON

I've noticed the "vanity cards" that Chuck Lorre has put at the end of his TV shows over the years, but I recently became fascinated by them (during the time when 2-1/2 Men was cancelled for the rest of the 2010-2011 season, and the multiple interviews with Charlie Sheen).  Reading an article about Chuck Lorre in which it was stated that on 2/28/2011, a vanity card appeared at the end of the Mike & Molly episode, addressing rather esoterically the drama surrounding the "situation" led me to actually go to his website (http://www.chucklorre.com/) and read many of these vanity cards.  There's some very interesting thoughts on there, going back to 1999 when he first began writing them during the production of Dharma & Greg.  Most are humorous to a certain degree, and many are filled with some very thought-provoking statements.

On 11/2/1999, the following vanity card (#42) appeared after that evening's episode of Dharma & Greg.  It talks about faith, and in reading it, I began to consider the topic of faith in a broader sense.  Here's the wording from that vanity card:

Thirty thousand feet in the air. Strapped into a seat that doubles as a flotation device. Thinking about faith. Faith in airplanes. In jet engines. In pilots. Faith that the sullen, unshaven guy across the aisle isn't the mindless pawn of a master terrorist with a deep hatred for America, the Great Satan. Then, assuming a safe landing, faith that the cabbie didn't have a fight with his adulterous wife who hides her deceit behind sly jokes about his unremarkable sexual prowess forcing him to soothe his anguish with that fifth of Jim Beam he keeps stashed beneath the seat. And, of course, faith that the doorknob leading out of the public bathroom isn't tainted with a flesh-eating bacteria that came to Earth imbedded in a small, flat meteorite that some unsuspecting child picked up to skip across the surface of a lake. Yes, faith is a wonderful thing. Without it, this world would surely be a fearful place. Once again, thanks for reading my vanity card. Have a nice day.

Faith is a fascinating subject.  At first when I read Chuck Lorre's vanity card, I thought that what he was talking about wasn't really faith.  But actually, the word faith has a much broader meaning than I realized.

Here below is the definition for FAITH from Dictionary.com:

FAITH
- noun
1.  Confidence or trust in a person or thing; faith in another's ability.
2.  Belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.
3.  Belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.
4.  Belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.; to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.
5.  A system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith.
6.  The obligation of loyalty or fidelity to a person, promise, engagement, etc.:  Failure to appear would be breaking faith.
7.  The observation of this obligation; fidelity to one's promise, oath, allegiance, etc.: He was the only one who proved his faith during our recent troubles.
8.  Christian Theology.  The trust in God and His promises as made through Christ and the Scriptures by which humans are justified or saved.

Interesting.  So in Chuck Lorre's vanity card, where he talks about having faith in airplanes, jet engines, and pilots, as well as his talk about cabbie's dispositions or issues related to terrorism, are all a form of faith.  The word faith actually has a much broader definition that I realized.

Of course, the reason for my confusion probably has to do with the fact that my main connection with the word FAITH always had to do with Mormonism.  But of course, Mormons are are essentially told to have "blind faith" since they are to follow everything without question -- suspending all reason in the process.  To me, having "blind faith" is not wise in any sense of the word.

I believe that when facts are shown to contradict what you are being told to believe, it is not faith anymore, but rather denial.  That is where I found myself in relation to Mormonism.  Once I discovered the truth about Mormonism, having faith in it anymore became an impossibility.

The following quote by Patrick Overton denotes a form of blind faith:

“When you have come to the edge of all light that you know and are about to drop off into the darkness of the unknown, faith is knowing one of two things will happen: There will be something solid to stand on or you will be taught to fly.”
 

That type of faith is baseless, having no foundation in any kind of reality.  To me, it is unreasonable to have faith in that form.

On the other hand, the following quote by Galileo Galilei makes a lot more sense to me: 

"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason and intellect has intended us to forego their use."

This is  exactly how I feel about Faith vs. Reason.  Why would God give us a brain if he didn't intend for us to use it?  It simply does not compute for me.  Why does the Mormon Church even have any educational institutions (like BYU) if they don't want people to learn to use their brains?  What a paradox.

The following is an excerpt from an article entitled "Is Blind Faith Immoral?  On Faith vs. Reason" by Robert Kaiser, which is contained on the Religious Tolerance website, http://www.religioustolerance.org/: 

Many people, like this author, require a firmer basis for their beliefs than a blind appeal to authority. In fact, one can go further, and point out that it may well be immoral to have beliefs without a logical basis. Theodore Schick, Jr. and Lewis Vaughn discuss why this is so:

'Everybody's entitled to their own opinion' goes the platitude, meaning that everybody has the right to believe whatever they want. But is that really true? Are there no limits on what is permissible to believe? Or, as in the case of actions, are some beliefs immoral? Surprisingly, perhaps, many have argued that just as we have a moral duty not to perform certain sorts of actions, so we have a moral duty not to have certain sorts of beliefs. No one has expressed this point of view more forcefully than the distinguished mathematician W. K. Clifford: 'It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone to believe anything on insufficient evidence.'

Others of similar stature have echoed this sentiment. Biologist Thomas Henry Huxley, for example, declared, 'It is wrong for a man to say that he is certain of the objective truth of any proposition unless he can produce evidence which logically justifies that certainty.' And Brand Blanshard has proclaimed that where great human goods and ills are involved, the distortion of belief from any sort of avoidable cause is immoral, and the more immoral the greater the stakes.

These men think it wrong for belief to outstrip the evidence because our actions are guided by our beliefs, and if our beliefs are mistaken, our actions may be misguided, As Blanshard indicated, the more important the decision, the greater our duty to align our beliefs with the evidence, and the greater the crime if we don't. Where not much hangs on the belief, it might be thought that what one believes has little importance. But Clifford claims that even in trivial matters we have a duty to proportion our belief to the evidence:

'Every time we let ourselves believe for unworthy reasons, we weaken our powers of self-control, of doubting, of judicially and fairly weighing evidence. We all suffer severely enough from the maintenance and support of false beliefs and the fatally wrong actions which they lead to.... But a greater and wider evil arises when the credulous character is maintained and supported, when a habit of believing for unworthy reasons is fostered and made permanent.'

According to Clifford, responsible believing is a skill that can be maintained only through constant practice. And since responsible believing is a prerequisite for responsible acting, we have a duty to foster this skill.

["How to Think About Weird Things: Critical Thinking for a New Age (second edition)", p.102, Theodore Schick, Jr. and Lewis Vaughn, Mayfield Publishing Co., 1999]

While this line of reasoning goes against what most religious people believe, I am firmly persuaded by the logic. Thus, we should not believe in God without reason. It seems, then, that we would be obligated to search for reasonable arguments to believe in God. Finding such reason we would be obliged to believe in God; lacking such reason we would be obliged to dismiss God's existence as a unproven hypothesis.

What Mr. Kaiser states here makes a lot of sense to me.  Finding a basis for belief through the use of such means as thought, research and analysis is a very reasonable approach for any person in arriving at a conclusion.  Simply believing because you are told to believe something is not reasonable to me.  It defies all logic. 

_________________________________

Naturally, in the end, my mind always turns to humor -- my defense mechanism, I suppose.  Can't be totally serious for too long.  So in a humorous vein, I also have to share these other great quotes about faith:

"Faith is what you have in things that don't exist."  Homer Simpson

"It ain't supposed to make sense; it's faith.  Faith is something that you believe that nobody in his right mind would believe."  Archie Bunker

BUT THAT'S UNAUTHORIZED!!!

Unauthorized questions.
Unauthorized curiosity.
Unauthorized thinking.
Unauthorized reasoning. 
Unauthorized research.
Unauthorized analysis. 
Unauthorized interpretation.

When our leaders speak,
the thinking has been done.

When the prophet speaks,
the debate is over.  Period.

It is so incredibly bizarre to me that all of the above is actually the Mormon mindset.  Of course, what is more bizarre is that I went along with it for so many years.  Looking back, though, I realize that I was struggling for a very long time, not content to simply accept what I was told.  After all, I have a brain, and I like to use it.  It's very useful is figuring out what to do in any given situation.  Except Mormonism.  Being a Mormon doesn't require a brain.

The following is an article written by N. Eldon Tanner entitled “The Debate Is Over” from the Ensign, August 1979 (as the First Presidency Message that month).

Recently, at the Churchwide fireside meeting held for the women of the Church, Young Women President Elaine Cannon made the following statement:  "When the Prophet speaks, … the debate is over" (Ensign, Nov. 1978, p. 108).

I was impressed by that simple statement, which carries such deep spiritual meaning for all of us. Wherever I go, my message to the people is: Follow the prophet. Why else has the Lord placed prophets on the earth throughout the dispensations of time? In his infinite wisdom, and as part of the plan of life and salvation for his children, God has given us the blueprint to follow, the leadership to direct us and keep us on course, and the Church organization to help us lay the foundation and develop the skills, or make the preparation necessary, to lead us back to our eternal home.

It is foolish to suppose that men can be left to their own devices and accomplish what God intended for them. That is just as unreasonable as it would be to leave a newborn babe on its own and expect it to learn to walk and talk and feed and clothe itself without assistance from those responsible for its care and training. A child so neglected and left alone would soon perish.

So it is with us. Without a knowledge and understanding of the gospel, or God’s plan for his children, we cannot live according to the law which is necessary for our salvation; and therefore, those who neglect their spiritual training or fail to heed the warning voice of the prophets will suffer a spiritual death.

It is difficult to understand why there are so many people who fight against the counsel of the prophet and for the preservation of the very things that will bring them misery and even death. As one example, let us consider the Word of Wisdom. Soon after the restoration of the gospel and organization of the Church, the Lord gave a revelation to the Prophet Joseph Smith which we call the Word of Wisdom. It warned that tea, coffee, alcohol, and tobacco, among other things, were not good for man, and should not be used by the Saints.

Now this was quite revolutionary at that time, for the use of these things was not considered detrimental to health. For many years after the revelation was given, people thought the Mormons peculiar because they abstained from these seemingly harmless substances. Then scientists began to discover many harmful effects of tobacco, and today we are made increasingly aware of the health hazards caused by the use of tobacco, tea, coffee, and alcohol, with additional warnings about the risks involved for the unborn children of pregnant women.

Latter-day Saints should be able to accept the words of the prophets without having to wait for science to prove the validity of their words. We are most fortunate to have a living prophet at the head of the Church to guide us, and all who heed his counsel will be partakers of the promised blessings which will not be enjoyed by those who fail to accept his messages.

Today there are many issues under debate as controversies rage all around us. It should be evident to all that we need divine direction, as men and women who argue their causes seem to be unable to come to workable or peaceable solutions. It is sad indeed that the world does not know or accept the fact that in our midst is a prophet through whom God can direct the solution of world problems.

True Latter-day Saints have no such dilemma. They know that the messages of the prophet have come from the Lord and have the concurrence of all the General Authorities, who are men of vision and integrity, and who themselves try to keep in tune with deity. They are not, as some would suggest, following blindly and acting without their own agency to speak and think for themselves. Through prayer to our Heavenly Father each of us can have the assurance that the course we choose has his divine approval.

Why should there be any debate over the moral issues which are confounding the world today? From the beginning God has made his position very clear in regard to marriage, divorce, family life and love of children, immorality, chastity, virtue, and the high and holy role of women. Through his prophet today he reiterates the Old and New Testament teachings which are clear on these matters.

History and experience have proven that whenever and wherever there is departure from following the word of the Lord, calamity occurs. Civilizations have fallen; there has been general and individual destruction; there have been weeping and wailing and great sorrow; there have been famine and pestilence. Only Satan and his cohorts have been left to rejoice. He is the author of the debates on moral issues. He has sworn to thwart the purposes of God. He it is who deceives and lays in wait to promote his cunning schemes, promising the riches of this world as a reward to those who follow him.

To gain these riches many engage in the debates on moral issues. The alcohol and tobacco industries and dealers in pornography are accumulating great wealth at the expense of the people and to the detriment of their health. With all the evidence of child pornography, it is deplorable that any parent would allow any child to be so exploited. Some children are being neglected and abused because their mothers are seeking worldly pleasures and careers outside the home. Many fathers are more concerned with their financial success than with the welfare of their wives and children.

We must turn all this about. We cannot serve God and mammon. Whose side are we on? When the prophet speaks, the debate is over.

________________________________

Really?  When I read that article, it absolutely blew my mind that I ever bought into such narrow-minded, dogmatic drivel.  Not thinking, but rather just accepting everything that is said by a supposed Propet of God of a religion that is built on lies, deception, cover-ups and contradictions.  Not me.  Not now.  Not ever.

"SOME THINGS THAT ARE TRUE ARE NOT USEFUL"

This picture really says a lot to me.  On the left, of course, is a man who has uncovered the truth... but on the right is another man (presumably a "leadership" type ala Mormonism) quickly trying to shovel dirt back over the truth, saying "Some things that are true are not useful."  From what I have been able to find, this is a quote by Boyd K. Packer from a talk entitled "Do Not Spread Disease Germs!" (Brigham Young University Studies, Summer 1981).  In this talk, Boyd K. Packer went on to say, "I have come to believe that it is the tendency for many members of the Church who spend a great deal of time in academic research to begin to judge the Church, its doctrine, organization, and leadership, present and past, by the principles of their own profession.... In my mind it ought to be the other way around...."  Also, in that talk, he continued by saying, "Your objective should be that they will see the hand of the Lord in every hour and every moment of the Church from its beginning till now....there is no such thing as an accurate or objective history of the Church which ignores the Spirit.... Church history can be so interesting and so inspiring as to be a very powerful tool indeed for building faith. If not properly written or properly taught, it may be a faith destroyer..."

To me, these statements from BKP's talk speak volumes about Mormon Church history.  For him to admit that studying Mormon Church history "may be a faith destroyer" is very telling.  Of course, he prefaces that statement by saying that if the history is "not properly written or properly taught, it may be a faith destroyer," but of course the use of the word "properly" is subjective.  The standards by which he is defining the study of history are Mormon in nature.  Of course, human nature is to question things, to be curious, but Mormonism attempts to stifle those innate tendencies completely - and is very successful in doing so as far as many, many people are concerned.

On a blog entitled Not Very Useful Truth, I found the following statement:  "That I am totally enamored with the church now that my perspective has changed feels to many as if I am simply raging, but the reality is that the church is far more fascinating now that the sanitized and dogmatic presentation is transparent and the ugly warts are exposed.  The history is absorbing and feels so alive - there is so much more appeal in the complicated mess as opposed to the faith promoting spin the church sells.  It boggles my mind when I am told to put aside my interest in the real history and focus only on the positive when the "positive" is so often distilled to remove the impurities.  As I have said before, the real history is not a secret and becoming ever harder to hide for the curious and thoughtful member, but that history will feel like a slap in the face when stumbled upon in Google after being told something entirely different for years and years."

This statement brings up so much of what I have felt over the years since discovering the real history of the Mormon Church.  Finding out that I had been fed a white-washed and sanitized version of its history over the years definitely felt like a slap in the face.  My journey away from Mormonism began in 2001, and even though I was able to find certain things, I was still reticent to explore too far on the internet because of the programming and brainwashing imposed on me since childhood.  Was I looking at anti-Mormon propaganda?  Was I falling into a trap?  Was I believing information that wasn't true?  Was I looking at it all from the wrong perspective?  All of those questions, as well as many others, riddled my mind for a very long time.  That is why it took me over 3 years to finally disassociate myself from the Mormon Church completely.  I kept thinking that I must be misunderstanding it all - that I must be wrong because no one would lie like that.  Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately), I came to the conclusion that what I was discovering was indeed the truth, and what I had believed since childhood was just a web of lies.

In fact, after being away from the church for over 3 years, I suddenly discovered Polyandry.  I had researched a lot about the truth behind Polygamy and was very distressed by its realities.  The fact that Joseph Smith had 33 wives (when I didn't even realize that he had been involved in Polygamy, instead believing what I had been told about Brigham Young starting polygamy to help widows and orphans on the Trek West).  Fanny Alger, who was Joseph Smith's second wife and first polygamous wife (and the fact that Oliver Cowdery called Joseph Smith's liaison with her not Polygamy but a "dirty, filty, nasty affair").  Teenage brides (10 of them), including Helen Mar Kimball (14 years old) who was obviously coerced into marrying Joseph Smith by him telling her that if she married him, she would assure the eternal salvation of herself and her entire family (and was given 24 hours to give him her answer).  The stories of the Partridge sisters and the Lawrence sisters.  And on and on and on, ad nauseum.

So when I discovered the very disturbing fact that Joseph Smith had married 11 women who were already married to living husbands, I was dumbfounded.  It still upsets me that I spent 52 years in the Mormon Church and had never heard about polyandry.  But there was the evidence - right on the Mormon Church's own genealogy website, http://www.familysearch.org/.  Names like Lucinda Morgan Harris, Zina Huntington Jacobs, Prescendia Huntington Buell, Sylvia Sessions Lyon, Mary Rollins Lightner and others jumped out at me, and when I looked at their pedigree charts, I was blown away to discover that they had married Joseph Smith even though they were already married to other men - men who were living, who they had neither buried nor divorced.  How was this acceptable?  This was adultery, plain and simple.  Religiously condoned adultery.  Of course, it went against D&C 132 in its entirety, but it is obvious that Joseph Smith became so egotistical and comfortable in his position as a "Prophet of God," that he felt he could get away with anything.  And this practice of Polyandry is a prime example.

Of course, there were people who tried to go against Joseph Smith about Polygamy and Polyandry - including Oliver Cowdery and William Law, but they were promptly excommunicated for going against Joseph Smith as a "Prophet of God."  In fact, Joseph Smith's death was undeniably linked to Polygamy and Polyandry since it was after William Law had published the Nauvoo Expositor, exposing Joseph Smith's practice of Polygamy and Polyandry, and Joseph Smith ordering the destruction of the printing press and the burning of the building in which it was housed, that he was arrested and placed in Carthage Jail.  So although I had grown up and spent my entire life believing what I had been told about Joseph Smith being a religious martyr, the truth is that he was simply a criminal - and that is why he was in Carthage Jail when the mob stormed the jail and killed both Joseph Smith and his brother, Hyrum.  Interestingly, I recently discovered that Joseph Smith actually had a gun during that shoot-out (that gun having been smuggled into the jail by Cyrus H. Wheelock who handed it to Joseph).  In all my years in the church, I had never heard that story.  But then, so much of what is told about the early days of the Mormon Church is mythical - just the "going like a lamb to the slaughter" line that is attributed to Joseph Smith as he was being taken to Carthage Jail, which is obviously completely untrue.

These are the types of things that the Mormon Church apparently sees as being "not useful truths."  They expect their members to simply accept their version of things and not question anything.  And if they do question, when they are given "the answer," they are supposed to accept it and not question anymore.  While I in essence did exactly that for a very long time, I finally got the point where I could no longer simply accept what I was being told.  I wish I had reached that point earlier in my life, but I'm very glad I finally reached it at all.  Sadly, there are many people in the Mormon Church who will never reach that point, who will blindly go along their entire lives, accepting everything they are told.  And that is very sad, indeed.

LEAVING? HOW CAN ANYONE STAY WHEN...

I was on Facebook earlier this week and saw a link to a website called http://www.dovesandserpents.org/, and in particular to a post entitled "Leaving."  After reading it, I couldn't help but think about why I left the Mormon Church, and in doing so, of course, I felt compelled to post a comment.

This was the comment I posted:

Yes, making the decision to leave is hard because Mormonism becomes so engrained in your psyche due to the brainwashing and programming that goes on. I was born and raised Mormon by two very TBM parents. I went through Primary, Young Women and 4 years of Seminary. I went to BYU for two years. I was married in the temple. I was active and believing for many, many years.

Then in July 2001, I went on a Mormon Church History Tour. Beforehand, I decided to do some research about church history so I would know more about the details when I visited the key places. Being born and raised Mormon, I had just gone along for so many years, believing what I was taught. But at the point, I felt like I needed to know about church history on my own in order to get as much as I could out of the trip. As it turned out, that was the beginning of the end for me as I began to discover all the lies, deceptions, cover-ups and contradictions behind Mormonism. In the process of my research, it became increasingly crystal clear to me that Joseph Smith made the whole thing up — and because of his charisma and con-artist background, he was able to get a lot of people to believe and go along. How can anything good come from something that is built on lies? And so many lies. The differing versions of the First Vision and the fact that the “official” version wasn’t even written down until 1838, which was 18 years after the vision supposedly took place, and at a time when the church was losing many members due to the excommunications of Oliver Cowdery and the Whitmer brothers for opposing Joseph Smith on his practice of polygamy (so the First Vision was “beefed up” to say that Joseph Smith saw Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ whereas previously he had only said that he had seen “heavenly personages”)… the truth behind polygamy, the name Fanny Alger, and the fact that Joseph Smith had 33 wives including 11 teenage brides, in many cases behind Emma’s back and without her knowledge and/or consent (which goes against what D&C 132 outlines)… the truth behind the supposed “martyrdom of Joseph Smith” and why he was really in Carthage Jail since in reality he was not a martyr but simply a criminal having ordered the destruction of the Nauvoo Expositor (and the burning of the building in which it was housed) after William Law and some others published a story exposing Joseph Smith’s practice of polygamy… the fact that Joseph Smith had a gun in Carthage and fired shots defending himself… the truth behind the Kirtland Bank, the financial fiasco including charges of counterfeiting, etc, etc…

Discovering all of this really shook my faith, so much so that when I got home from the trip, I decided to continue my research. That is when I discovered the truth behind the Book of Abraham and the fact that the papyri were simply Egyptian funeral scrolls and Joseph Smith’s “translation” of them was bogus… the truth behind the Book of Mormon, the anachronisms, and the strong possibility that the entire book was plagiarized, most likely from writings of Solomon Spaulding… the truth behind Blacks and the Priesthood, and the very real possibility that when the Blacks were given the Priesthood in 1978, it was because the Mormon Church was being threatened with getting their tax-exempt status taken away (as was the case with Bob Jones University, which did indeed get their tax-exempt status taken away in 1980 due to their discriminatory dating policy).

Because of all this, I finally came to the conclusion that I had to disassociate myself from the Mormon Church. At that point, I couldn’t fathom staying in a religion that plays so fast and loose with the truth.

Interestingly, it wasn’t until after I had already left that I discovered the practice of polyandry and the fact that Joseph Smith married 10 women who were already married to living husbands. This is in essence religiously-condoned adultery, and even went against D&C 132 in its entirety. What gave Joseph Smith the right to marry other men’s wives? What gave him the right to commit adultery in the first place? It all boils down to the fact that he was out of control and thought he could get away with anything. 

I have never regretted my decision to leave the Mormon Church – and I have a very hard time understanding how anyone who knows these things could possibly stay.
_______________________________

So that was my post.  It's all so clear to me.  As far as I am concerned, the bottom line is THE TRUTH.  And it really pisses me off when people lie to me. 

ROOTS OF MORMONISM - ANOTHER POEM

Every once in a while, I have poems basically POP into my head... and that is the case with this one...

ROOTS OF MORMONISM

Con artist, shyster, manipulator,
Charlatan, swindler, compulsive liar.
Making things up, deceiving the masses,
Creating doctrine through many ruses.
Proclaiming to be a Prophet of God,
But in reality, an enormous fraud.
Pretending to translate ancient language,
But plagiarizing nearly every passage.

And what Joseph didn’t plagiarize,
He just made up, there is no disguise
For what he did, very clear to see
If you look at it all objectively
Without the Mormon rose-colored glasses
That shade everything, making the dogmas
Seem logical when they make no sense,
Gobbledygook for which there’s no defense.

Marrying women already married
To living husbands, not ones they buried
Or even divorced, just adultery,
Not adhering to any moral boundary.
Coercing teenage girls into marriage,
Using them, clearly taking advantage
Of their innocence and need to believe,
Knowing they were pliable and naïve.

Carrying many things to the extreme
As part of his diabolical scheme
To dupe the people who listened to him,
Not afraid to go way out on a limb
And profess to translate some golden plates
Into the Book of Mormon, which relates
To the Lamanites, they boldly insist,
But DNA shows they didn’t exist.

And the list goes on, his plan was complete,
With scriptural references replete.
Inventing the Doctrine & Covenants,
Revelations from God, spiritual moments,
Captured on paper for all to absorb,
Modern day communication with the Lord.
And so many bought it, right down the line,
Joseph Smith, the Prophet and Seer divine.

Being born and raised in Mormonism,
I used to believe, but now a schism
Has formed in my mind and I’ve seen the light,
So obvious this simply isn’t right.
On so many levels, it’s just a scam,
A gigantic hoax, swindle and flimflam
Created by a crook named Joseph Smith
With others perpetuating the myth.

One day, I pray the truth will be clear
To Mormons who to the fraud adhere,
Believing in a religion that’s bogus,
Relying on the Mormon compass
To guide their every move and every thought,
Not even realizing they are caught
In a web of lies where deceptions abound,
Wanting them to feel the peace I have found.

As the scriptures say, the truth shall make you free,
And that’s what I hope for them eventually.

© Diane Tingen, 2/1/2011

LIVING AN AUTHENTIC LIFE

There's a lot to be said for knowing who you are and living your life accordingly.  It seems to me that too many times, people try to conform to what they feel is "expected" of them.  I know I used to do that.  Being born and raised Mormon by extremely TBM parents, I tried so hard for so many years to be the perfect Mormon.  To do what was expected of me.  To follow the prophet without question.  To be a faithful member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Saints.  Not really thinking for myself, but rather simply accepting what I was taught.  After all, they wouldn't lie to me, would they?  No, the prophet knows best... right?? 

I guess that's what upset me so much when I finally started researching church history (at the age of 50).  Discovering that I had devoted my life to a religion that is a total fabrication was a real shocker, and it hit me like a thunderbolt.  When I realized that Joseph Smith was simply a shyster and a con artist who "invented" Mormonism as a way to gain power and money, I became nauseous - literally.  I mean, I had stood up so many times over the years in Fast & Testimony meeting and said "I know the church is true, and I know that Joseph Smith is a Prophet of God" - thinking that I really knew those things.  So when I discovered that everything taught by the Mormon Church is based on a stack of lies, it really pulled the rug out from under me. 

Of course, I had always heard that everyone needs to "gain a personal testimony" of the gospel - so having been born and raised in the church, I attempted to do that many times.  And many times, I thought I had gained that "personal testimony."  But in reality, I was simply adhering to the programming that had been so deeply imbedded inside me.  After all, I had fasted and prayed, following what Moroni had promised in Moroni 10:4, to wit:  "And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost."

But even though I thought I had received that "burning in the bosom" that is talked about so often in the Mormon Church, once I realized just how many lies there are laced throughout Mormonism, I also realized that my "burning in the bosom" was simply part of the programming.  After all, the "warm fuzzies" are not a reliable source of "confirmation" of anything.  And besides, if I had admitted to myself that I had not actually received such a "confirmation," then I would have also had to admit that I must not have asked with a sincere enough heart, lacked real intent, or didn't have enough faith in Christ.  In reality, isn't that what the church wants everyone to think?  Don't they want people to talk themselves into believing that they really did receive that "burning in the bosom"?  Because to believe otherwise would mean that there is something wrong with the Book of Mormon or that Moroni's promise is lacking.  No, neither of those options were even possible.  So even if the "confirmation" wasn't really received, good little Mormons profess that they did receive it.  An outgrowth of the old "It's me, not them" philosophy.

Once I finally realized that the whole thing is a scam and a fraud, though, I felt as though an enormous burden had been lifted from my shoulders.  For so many years, I felt as though the weight of the world was practically suffocating me - and in some respects, I didn't understand why.  Many times, I blamed situational circumstances in my life, even thinking that perhaps I was simply a flawed individual who couldn't appreciate happiness.  I spent so many years looking for peace of mind, but found that it eluded me constantly.

But once I came to terms with the fact that Mormonism is nothing but an enormous fraud, I also realized that the reason I had felt so discombobulated over the years was due to cognitive dissonance.  Trying to rationalize out so many conflicting ideas had really done a number on me - and when I shed myself of the many years of programming, it felt as though a huge cloud lifted and the sun shone in on me for the first time.

And now, I am living an authentic life.  My beliefs correspond with my thoughts and vice versa.  Things that make no sense have been assigned to their proper place - not in my belief system, but rather in oblivion.  The one thing that remains, though, is an occasional "return to anger," not only at the Mormon Church itself, but also at myself for allowing myself to be majorly duped for so many years.  I still struggle with being angry at myself for not realizing sooner that it is simply a pile of rubbish, and that part still irks me to this very day.

But even my sporadic bouts of anger at my former "Mormonness" can't diminish the sense of peace and tranquility that has pervaded my soul.  Yes, living an authentic life is quite simply a reward all its own.

IS THERE AN AFTERLIFE?

After realizing that Mormonism is a sham, I began wondering about an "Afterlife."  Not believing that those types of beliefs are exclusively Mormon anymore (as I was programmed to believe), I have sometimes wondered whether Christian beliefs are even plausible.  I've gone back and forth, sometimes calling myself Agnostic because I have not been sure whether God really exists, and if there is a God, I am uncertain as to what his/her form really is - and simply calling myself Spiritual but not Religious since I am very much against organized religion now because I believe it's all about money and power. 

My questions about an Afterlife came to a head the night before my father passed away in May 2006.  He was 92 years old, but had been in relatively good health up until a month before his death when he had a stroke and began to decline.  In mid-May, after hearing how he was deteriorating, my brother Jim, his wife Daisy, and I decided to go to Utah to see him.  I had just moved from California to Georgia that January (to live near my brother, his wife and several of their children and grandchildren) so I was living relatively close to them at the time.  My father had remarried a year or so after my mother passed away in 1977, and he had lived with his new wife Bonnie in American Fork, Utah since 1978.

When we arrived in Utah, we went to the hospital to see him - and I was immediately struck by how frail he looked.  He was paralyzed on his left side and his speech was so bad that it was very difficult to understand what he would say.  Of course, his wife Bonnie was there and was very distressed by the situation.  While Jim, Daisy and I were at the hospital, my father's doctor asked if he could speak with us.  He proceeded to tell us that our father's condition was very tentative, that his prognosis was not good, and that there was very little they could do for him.  It was at that point that the doctor recommended that my father be taken home and that hospice care should be instituted.  At first, hearing the doctor talk about hospice care was difficult for me, probably because I realized that meant the end was very near for him.  But then, I knew that if my father was relegated to living the way he was right then, and was indeed permanently paralyzed on his left side and unable to speak well enough to make himself understood, it would be tortuous for him.  He had always been a very active, vital man.  He had golfed from the age of 55 until 82 when he was forced to stop because of problems with his knees.  Laying in bed day-after-day, unable to take care of himself or even make himself understood did not seem to me to be a life my father would want to continue to live.  So after discussing the realities of the situation, we all decided that taking him home and beginning hospice care was best under the circumstances.  When we told him that we were going to take him home, he was very happy.

On Saturday afternoon, my father was transported to his home in American Fork.  But once he was home, it began to seem that he was improving.  His demeanor became much more upbeat, and although he still wasn't easily understood, he just seemed better.  Not long after he arrived at his house, his Mormon Bishop and some other men from his Mormon Ward came to the house.  After going in to his room and visiting with him for a while, the Bishop took me aside and began talking to me about how much better my father seemed and that it was obvious he was improving - and then he proceeded to tell me that we should not be doing hospice care on him but rather life-sustaining measures should be taken to keep him alive.  I remember looking at this Bishop and thinking that he was spouting the Mormon rhetoric as well as the official Mormon position, but he wasn't taking into account the reality of the situation or the quality of life that my father would be subjected to if "life-sustaining measures" were taken. 

At the time, I had not been to a Mormon Church for over a year and a half, so I had not had to deal with the rhetoric typically spouted by Bishops and other Mormon leaders.  After leaving the church, I had stopped being intimidated by these men and so decided to tell him my opinion - which was that quality of life was extremely important, and that if my father was forced to live the remainder of his life in a semi-paralyzed state and unable to speak coherently that it would be tantamount to holding him prisoner.  Naturally, the Bishop didn't respond well, and told me that it was obviously the Lord's will that my father live, so whatever I had to say on the subject really didn't matter.  Shut me down quick.  Of course, I felt like asking him why he was even talking to me about this since he didn't really want to hear what I had to say, but I decided to end the conversation rather than take it into those avenues.

Finally, the bishop and his entourage left, and just family was left in the house.  A short time later, two of my nephews arrived and visited with their grandfather.  One of my nephews, Todd, was visibly shaken up by how frail his grandfather seemed, and I was very touched when I saw him in the hallway crying.  Not long after that, Jim and Daisy decided to leave to go stay at one of their son's houses for the night, and my two nephews left as well.  But I decided that I wanted to stay there with my father and Bonnie, so I asked Bonnie if I could spend the night on their couch, and of course, she said yes.  Because of what happened later that night, I am very glad I stayed.

The first event of the night was the arrival of my step-mother's son, Jay Paul.  He's a very nice man, and I like him very much.  My father had always spoken highly of Jay Paul, and I knew that they had become very close over the years.  After arriving, Jay Paul immediately went into my father's room to visit with him, and Bonnie accompanied him.  I stayed in the living room while they were in there because I wanted to give them some privacy.  They were in there for quite a while, and after they came out, they both seemed very distressed.  They sat down on the couch and began discussing whether the right decision had been made, questioning if hospice was the right route.  Of course, my step-mother sounded just like the Bishop, almost quoting him verbatim, so I knew that he had confronted her with his opinion as well and made her feel that hospice care was not the right route.  I could feel their distress, and I empathized with them totally.  After all, this was not an easy decision.

Deciding to stay out of the discussion at that point, I decided to go back into my father's room and sit with him again.  I tried carrying on a conversation with him, but it was very difficult since he couldn't communicate very well.  So I just sat there, talking to him, nodding my head a lot, and holding his hand for quite a while.  Finally, I told him that I needed to go to the bathroom, and I left the room for a few minutes.

When I returned to my father's room, it was as if I was walking into an entirely different world.  My father was looking at an area just above his bed, was holding his right arm out as if he was touching people, and was speaking (albeit incoherently) to what seemed to be spirits hovering above his bed.  When I entered the room, I went over and sat down in the chair by his bed again, although he seemed to be unaware of my reappearance in the room.  As I sat there watching this for quite a while, I was convinced that there really were spirits visiting him.  As he spoke to these spirits, he would smile and laugh - his signature very robust laugh that I remember so well growing up.  He seemed so much like his old self again, and it was very endearing.

After sitting there observing this for what seemed like a very long time, I got up and went to find Bonnie.  Jay Paul had left, so now it was just me, Bonnie and my father in the house.  I told Bonnie what I had been observing and asked her to go to my father's room with me.  So we both walked back there, sat down and watched what my father was doing.  After 10-15 minutes, I reached out and touched my father on the arm, startling him.  In fact, he was so startled that he seemed perturbed with me that I had interrupted something so important.  Then Bonnie spoke to him, asking him what was happening - and he just stared at the two of us for a minute or so.  It was very evident to me that we had brought him back from another place, perhaps from the threshold of the spirit world. 

Finally, Bonnie began asking my father to whom he had been talking.  Of course, since it was very hard to understand him, we couldn't make out what he was saying.  So Bonnie asked him whether he had seen my brother Bobby (who had passed away in 1961 when he was 14 years old) - and he nodded yes.  Then she asked him if he had seen my mother - and he nodded No, looking a little bewildered.  Then Bonnie asked him whether he had seen Bonnie's mother (who had passed away a few years earlier), and he again nodded yes. 

After that, Bonnie and I walked out into the hallway and talked for a little bit.  We were both awestruck by what was happening and didn't quite know what to make of it.  I told her that it was obvious to me that my father was at the brink of the spirit world, and that people he knew who had passed away were coming to visit with him, possibly as a precursor to his passing away.  Of course, she didn't want to believe that he was being drawn that close to the spirit world because that would seem to mean that his death was imminent.  At 92 years of age, though, and particularly after a month of struggling physically following a severe stroke, it was apparent to me that his death was most likely very close.  Bonnie is a very dear person, and she was a wonderful wife to my father, always taking care of him very well, but she is also 20 years younger than him, so there was always the possibility that he was going to pass away long before her life is over.  But she always seemed unwilling to accept that fact.

After we finished talking in the hallway, I walked back into my father's room and sat down beside him again.  As I sat back down, it became more and more apparent to me that he was disappearing further and further into this other world, seeming not to even notice my presence again.  But regardless of that, I spent the next two hours sitting there, watching what was going on.  It was 1:30 am before he finally wound down and fell asleep.  And he never woke up.  The following afternoon, he passed away.

When I relayed this experience to my brother and his wife, I found their reaction to be very interesting.  They immediately started telling me that this experience was confirmation that Mormonism was true and that I needed to go back to church.  Basically, they asked me how I could continue to turn my back on the Mormon Church when I had witnessed such a miraculous event.  Of course, this is a typical Mormon response since according to "them," any type of spiritual experience is inherently Mormon in nature.
 
At first, my Mormon programming began to kick in.  Hearing them talk about this experience that way made me almost begin to believe them, and I began to ask myself the same questions they had posed.  But then, almost like an epiphany, it struck me that this experience doesn't mean that Mormonism is true - it simply means that after this life, we will go to another place, whether you want to call it an Afterlife... or the Spirit World... or Heaven... or whatever... and a person doesn't have to be Mormon to either recognize those facts or go there.

Looking back at this experience now, I am still struck by the feeling that there is indeed an Afterlife of some sort.  Of course, since I know that Mormonism is not true, the Mormon view of an Afterlife or Spirit World or Heaven cannot be accurate - and perhaps Christian views in general aren't accurate either.  After all, those who die aren't coming back to talk about it (even though some people would disagree with me on that, believing in mediums and seances).  Also, people do occasionally speak of Near-Death Experiences and seeing a bright light that they feel drawn to walk toward.  While I do not claim to understand what exactly it is they have seen, I do find the details of these types of experiences to be very interesting. 

But regardless of what Mormons, Catholics, Episcopalians, Buddhists, Muslims or any other type of religion may teach, and putting all "religion" aside, I still believe that our spirits continue to live after we leave our mortal states even though I cannot claim to know the form or nature of that Afterlife.  Atheists, of course, disagree with me on this -- and claim that this life is IT.  Nothing more.  When we die, we go into the ground, and cease to exist.  I guess that conclusion is simply too sad for me.  It seems to me that the implications of that conclusion are that our lives here have no purpose, no meaning, no reason for being.  So futile and moot.  Not a mindset in which I feel comfortable. 

For me, it all boils down to watching my father the night before he died.  And since I don't believe that he was hallucinating, I have to believe that he was indeed conversing with people on the other side.  That experience answered a lot of questions for me.  And no, it did not make me realize that Mormonism is true. 

Death is one of two things. Either it is annihilation, and the dead have no consciousness of anything; or, as we are told, it is really a change: a migration of the soul from one place to another. ~Socrates

I believe that when death closes our eyes we shall awaken to a light, of which our sunlight is but the shadow. ~Arthur Schopenhauer

Death is not extinguishing the light; it is putting out the lamp because dawn has come. ~Rabindranath Tagore

ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE INFORMED MIND

I have often thought about how incredibly wonderful it would be if Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind was real, meaning the ability to have a procedure to remove from my brain the memories of certain people and events in my life.  Of course, the procedure turned out to create many more problems in the movie rather than solving them, proving not to be the great process that it was originally purported to be.  But isn't that the way it is with most things in life?  The grass is greener syndrome.

But still, at first glance, removing certain memories from my mind seems like a good idea.  Ones that have gotten caught in my consciousness and won't "let go."  Like my three ex-husbands.  Boy, would I like to forget them and what they put me through.  But of course, since my marriages to them permeated my life during my daughter's growing-up years, removing memories of them would also alter memories of those years in general, and I don't ever want to forget the wonderment surrounding her and being her mother.

And then, there are my many mind-numbing years as a Mormon.  What a can of worms that is.

But in reality, since what a person goes through becomes part of who they are, taking away any type of memories would alter the woman I am today - and I wouldn't want to do that either.  I am very proud of the woman who I have become, especially since I consider myself to be a very strong, competent woman who can take care of herself.  Without the experiences through which I have gone, though, I often wonder if I would have ever arrived where I am today.  Probably not.

One of the events that I have thought about including on my list for "Memory Expulsion" is my "Court of Love" which took place on April 11, 2002 and culminated in my excommunication from the Mormon Church.  But then again, even though it was an extremely humiliating experience, it did serve its purpose (and actually, it served several purposes).  At the time, I was going through a "crisis of faith," and I stupidly thought that perhaps if I "put myself right with the Lord" that I would also be able to come through that "crisis of faith" with my Mormonism intact.  At that time, I continued to hold on to what I had been told about "sinners" and their inability to have the "Holy Ghost" dwell with them.  You know... the prevalent Mormon theory that if there's something wrong, then it's YOU, not THEM or MORMONISM.  No, I bought the premise that all of the problems lie with ME, and that if I submitted myself to the process, and showed that I was ready to completely repent and do whatever was necessary to "make it right," then I would also be able to sort through what I had begun to discover about the history and certain doctrines of the Mormon Church. 

Some backbround.  In July 2001, I went on a Mormon Church History Tour with my then-husband.  His mother is a travel agent, and at the time, she was an annual organizer of these types of tours, having put together many during the preceding summers.  Since I had never been on one of these Church History tours, and didn't know very much about actual Mormon Church History, I decided that prior to going on this trek, I would do some reading and research so I would be more well-versed about certain historical events when we visited the key places.  What I began to discover, though, really "shook my faith," and I started to realize that I had been born and raised in a church with a very sordid history.  Of course, the more I discovered, the more I was also mad at myself for not doing reading and research about Mormon Church History prior to that time.  I had been a Mormon for 50 years at that point, so I began to feel very negligent in the way I had simply accepted everything about Mormonism from birth without actually researching on my own.

During this research period in 2001, not only did I discover the truth behind the many versions of the First Vision, but I also discovered that Joseph Smith wasn't really a religious martyr as I had been told over the years.  No, he was actually a criminal - and the reason he had been arrested and placed in Carthage Jail was because he had ordered the destruction of the Nauvoo Expositor printing press (and the burning of the building in which it was housed) after William Law and several other disaffected former Mormons had printed a story exposing the truth behind Joseph Smith's practice of polygamy.  When I discovered these facts, I began to realize that if I had been lied to about these events, then there was the very strong possibility that there were other very disturbing facts being hidden as well.  And boy, was I right.

So for several months before my "Court of Love," I struggled with what I had discovered about actual Mormon Church history.  In the same time frame, my then-husband (#3) and I were doing some things that were very questionable from a moral standpoint as far as the Mormon Church is concerned.  So while I was going through my "crisis of faith" because of what I had begun to discover about church history, I decided to "confess" certain things to my Bishop with my then-husband in tow.  In the process, he "confessed" as well, and naturally, the Bishop told everything we had said to the Stake President.  Before long, we were in the Stake President's office - and not long after that, we were told that we would need to have "Courts of Love."

As I stated above, the actual "Court of Love" was an extremely humiliating experience.  There I was, in the High Council Room in the Stake Center with 17 men - including the Stake President, his two counselors, 12 High Councilmen, my Bishop and my then-husband.  And when I say that I decided to "submit myself to the process," I mean that I told them my entire story, no facts withheld, from my first marriage (at 22 to a TBM RM who turned out to be a porn addict and who later was the cause of my daughter being exposed to porn at a very young age) to my second marriage (to a non-Mormon man who turned out to be verbally, physically and psychologically abusive... and who "converted" to Mormonism after 4 years of marriage when I was on the verge of leaving him) to my third marriage (to another porn addict... only now we're talking internet porn... as well as a sex addict and an alcoholic... and also a licensed Marriage and Family Therapist who worked with teenage boys who were incarcerated for drug and alcohol problems... and with whom I ended up doing things that led to our being summoned there that day for the "Court of Love").  The things I told them that day made their eyes practically pop out of their heads because, believe me, I went in there with a "no holds barred" attitude.  I figured that if they wanted me to go through the "Court of Love," then I was going to give them their money's worth in addition to showing that I was, indeed, "submitting myself entirely to the process."  But more than anything, I remember the feeling I had during the time when I was in the High Council room with those 17 men.  Looking at them watching me, and listening to my rather sordid story, I couldn't help but think that they were actually simply "dirty old men" who were enjoying the details of my story and were somehow "getting off" on hearing what I had to say. 

After I finished telling my very sordid story, we took a short break before my then-husband's "Court of Love" was to begin.  When everyone returned and was walking back into the High Council Room, I began to walk back in there, too.  But then my then-husband turned to me and said that he didn't want me in his "Court of Love."  Of course, I was shocked because I had allowed him to attend mine - but when I told him that, he said that was my choice, but that his choice was to not have me in there for his.  I have often thought that he had things to tell these "gentlemen" that I didn't even know about - and that has always bothered me.  I mean, he knew everything about everything I had gone through, so to be told that I couldn't be there for his Court was very disconcerting to me.  To this day, I don't know what he said in that room, but I remain convinced that there was much, much more to his "story" than I know.

Of course, after the "Courts of Love" and the 15 men had met to consider our stories, we were told by the Stake President that we were both to be excommunicated.  At first, I was devastated - mainly because I had been Mormon my entire life and knew what typical Mormons think of people who have been ex'd.  I went through a very rough period for several months, and even separated from my then-husband for 6 months or so, but then I went back to my "Mormon place" and began to work on getting re-baptized.  That mindset lasted for a little over two years during which time the things we had done together continued to plague us to varying degrees, and because of that, the process was delayed over and over again.  Finally in 2004-2005, I started to face up to the fact that I had discovered deal-breaking information about the Mormon Church starting back in 2001 - and that's when I began to realize that my excommunication was actually a blessing.  So that's when my Mormon-ness began to shut down entirely, and I decided to leave well-enough alone and not seek to be re-baptized.  Best decision I ever made.

Looking back at my "Court of Love," I realize that it helped to cement my opinion that the Mormon Church is a male-dominated, male-oriented organization that deals in blatant double standards and tries to control people through guilt.  Making people feel like "sinners," and in particular making them think that they need to confess certain things to their Bishop and possibly their Stake President, and that depending on what is confessed, they may end up in a "Court of Love" is simply wrong.  In my opinion, this mindset shows a lack of boundaries, and is a total invasion of privacy.  I know that the reason I ended up in my "Court of Love" was because of the way in which I had been brainwashed over the years.  And it really pissed me off that I had succumb to the programming.

But regardless of that, here I am, 6 years later... and very happy with my decision to disassociate myself from Mormonism.  Of course, during the past 6 years, I have done even more research and have discovered even more about my religion since birth.  My catharsis has been aided by my writing 3 books - (1) one about my exit from the Mormon Church and my mountain of issues with it, and which is contained on this blog; (2) another one about my life in general, with obvious Mormon themes running through it; and (3) a third one containing poetry I have written over the years, including 6 "story poems" about various events in my life.  And it has further been aided by going on discussion boards at both PostMormon.org and the RFM board (at ExMormon.org), as well as attending the ExMormon Conference in SLC in October 2010.  Indeed, I am not alone.

And now, I'm blogging... in Outer Blogness where so many other ExMormons share their thoughts and experiences.  Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind may not be a possibility (and may not even be advisable), but I do know that Eternal Sunshine of the Informed Mind is a very powerful thing.  Discovering and uncovering what I have about Mormonism, and then ridding my life of its influence, has given me a new lease on life.  And talking about it all has provided me with the closest avenue to obtaining the peace and serenity that is alluded to in that process.

Yes, I'll take Eternal Sunshine of the Informed Mind every day... over blind submission to a religion that takes away actual thinking and all individuality.  As Oscar Wilde said, "A man who does not think for himself does not think at all."

A MIND CLOSED BY BELIEF

"I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief."  Gerry Spence ("How to Argue and Win Every Time")

What a great quote.  Very thought provoking.  Of course, as an ExMormon, it brings up a slew of thoughts about the many ridiculous things I was told to believe "by faith" over my 52 years as a Mormon.  "Just believe."  In fact, that is what my very TBM father always told me when I was growing up and would ask him questions about certain doctrines taught by the Mormon Church - like Blacks being denied the Priesthood, differing versions of the First Vision, why polygamy and polyandry were okay, and other questionable Mormon teachings and doctrines.  When I questioned certain things about what the church teaches, if I didn't instantly accept what he would tell me, he would say, "Well, you better believe it because it's true."  Case closed. 

My father was very good at shutting me down - like when I would tell him I felt a certain way, and he would tell me, "Well, don't feel that way."  Very helpful.  As I got older, and I continued to question things, he told me that my "liberal thinking was going to get me into trouble one day."  I guess he was right - at least as far as TBMs are concerned.  Lucky for him, I didn't discover the real truth behind polygamy, or the fact that polyandry was also practiced by both Joseph Smith and Brigham Young as well as some others, until after my father passed away.  But then, because he was so pious and dogmatic about the whole thing, I never told him that I had left the church in 2004-2005, which was 2 years before he passed away at the age of 92.  And of course, I never told him that I had been excommunicated in 2002 because I knew what he would say (like I was going to HELL).  Since he passed away, I have thought about several conversations I wish I had undertaken with him before he was gone - but then again, as I said, he was very pious and dogmatic about Mormonism, so it probably wouldn't have done any good, and may have actually driven a wedge between us.   

To my detriment, when I was younger I never carried my questioning far enough.  In the end, I always buckled under and tried to accept it all by faith.  I believed what "they" said, believing that the problem was me - that if I prayed more, studied the scriptures more, and was a better person, it would all become clear.  Yes, the problem was ME and not the ridiculous doctrines and teachings.  It amazes me now that I was able to "accept" it all for so long.  But then, I was truly a Mormon Slave, which is very typical of so many Mormons - and unfortunately, it was true of me as well for a very, very long time.

In the long run, though, I continued to question the advisability of simply accepting things by faith.  Was I really supposed to do that?  Even things that have been proven false?  No, to me, when all the facts contradict what you are being told to believe by faith, it's not faith anymore but rather denial.  People whose minds are "closed by belief" are prone to simply accept what they are told - without questioning and without thinking.  In my opinion, that is very dangerous because it closes a person's mind off to the possibility that what they're clinging to is actually false. 

I'm so glad I finally realized that very important concept - and continued my questioning by actually starting to think, research, and analyze what I discovered.  Otherwise, I would probably still be grasping at straws and burying my head in the sand, like so many Mormons do so well.  And being a Mormon Slave.

In this day and age of the internet, though, things have become much more accessible.  So to paraphase a popular "Mormon" scripture, "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of Google."

TRUTH DEFINED

When I think of the word “truth,” it reminds me of a great line from the movie “A Few Good Men” as spoken by Jack Nicholson’s character.  When put on the witness stand and told (by Tom Cruise’s character) that he wants the truth, he exclaimed, “You can’t handle the truth.”  To me, that is a profound statement – and when examined in a broader sense, it seems that many people can’t handle the actual truth, preferring to live in fantasy worlds, created to protect their own version of truth and reality.

Of course, part of my fascination with "the truth" these days has to do with my discovery of so many lies perpetuated by the Mormon Church over the years.  For a religious organization that professes to highly value truth, honesty and integrity, it amazes me how fast and loose they play with actual truth.  The fact is that the Mormon Church not only lies about its history, teachings and doctrine, but it also lies through the omission of facts, distorting the total picture to suit their purposes.  After discovering this, I decided that I could not continue to associate myself with such an organization - one that professes to believe in Christ, calling itself a Christian religion, and yet lying and covering up certain things on a constant basis to protect its image.

I guess some people are not bothered by lies and deception.  After all, some active members of the Mormon Church have told me that they know "the real truth" behind the history of the Mormon Church, including its obvious problems, and also the many contradictions within its doctrine.  To me, discovering the lies and deception was a deal-breaker.  To me, that is not Christianity, but rather insanity.  Perhaps the inability to overlook lies in order to continue to believe in a religion is a character flaw of mine?  No, expecting that a religious organization will tell me the truth is a fundamental principle.  Otherwise, how can they profess to value the very principles they are very obviously mocking through deceit?

“The Truth, the Whole Truth, and Nothing but the Truth, so help me God."  This is the oath made in court before a witness is due to testify or give evidence, and it is usually sworn on a Bible with the right arm raised to a square.  Very ominous stuff.  The idea is that, once the witness has taken this oath, they must tell the truth or be charged with perjury (and there is also, of course, the underlying threat that the person will be struck down by the wrath of God if he/she does not speak “the truth”).  Looking at the phrase, a question was raised in my mind as to why the wording of the phrase is so long.  One would think that by saying "the truth," the additional of "the whole truth" and "nothing but the truth" is essentially redundant.  But in fact, after doing a little research, I've realized that there are probably several reasons for including the additional verbiage.

For one, the repetitive wording is most likely for emphasis, to convey the importance of the matter.  Rather than simply saying “I swear to tell the truth,” the witness has to say that they will tell “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.” – and in that way, the repetition adds more weight and credence to the oath in the eyes of those testifying. 

Also, in actuality, the phrases “the truth,” “the whole truth” and “nothing but the truth” refer to different aspects of the truth, which means that they are not redundant and not just for show or emphasis.  Clearly, "the truth" is very simply the correct information as far as a person is aware.  However, "the whole truth" is different to this because although “the correct information” is still being elicited, adding the word "whole" means that nothing must be omitted.

Finally, "nothing but the truth" refers to opinion based on truth (which may not be well-informed enough) and assumption based on truth (which may not be correct).  Assuming that something happened based on limited information is not fact.  Hearsay falls into this category – and although someone may tell a person that something happened, since that person did not see it happen, they cannot state it as fact.  Regardless of whether the assumption is accurate or not, it is simply not fact.

Yes, I want THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, no matter what the consequences may be.  To me, anything less than absolute truth is an insult to my intelligence.  As I've heard said, "Don't sugarcoat it... give it to me straight."  Bottom line -- don't hedge, bob and weave... don't do a soft-shoe for me... just tell me the truth.