THE SKEWED LOGIC OF MORMON APOLOGISTS

Mental Gymnastics.  The way we twist ideas and experiences to conform to our preconceived views of the world.  In my opinion, that's what Mormon Apologists engage in to arrive at the conclusions they derive.  Skewed logic.  These types of mind games are precisely why I cringe every time I read any types of comments from the LDS FAIR website (Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research) as well as the BYU FARMS (Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies) which is now under the auspices of the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship at BYU.

While looking at some blogs that I follow today, I came across a blog post on "Not Very Useful Truths" about Apologists, and in particular an Apologist named Michael Ash.  According to this blog post, Michael Ash had written a comment on the blog of a man named Stephen Bloor (a podiatrist) who resigned as a Bishop in a Mormon Ward in the UK earlier this year due to historical and doctrinal issues.  The blog contained the resignation letter that Dr. Bloor had written to his Stake President, resigning from the church.

In reading Michael Ash's comments, I was struck by the way in which he tries to diminish Steve Bloor's findings and opinions.  This is a common tactic for Apologists, apparently feeling that if they can discredit the questioning person's opinions, and make them feel small and stupid for their feelings, then the Apologist can somehow appear bigger, more important, more intelligent, and definitely more righteous.  This, of course, is a common tactic within Mormonism itself.  If a person doesn't understand something or doesn't believe it, then it is their own fault and not the fault of the Mormon Church itself.  They are missing something because they aren't righteous enough.  Very demeaning.

The letter to which Michael Ash was responding had apparently been posted by Steve Bloor on a blog, but unfortunately that post on Steve Bloor's blog is now "protected," and as such is not available to the general public on his blog.  However, his letter is still available in a thread on www.reddit.com at this link.  What he wrote in that letter is very poignant, and I can relate deeply and entirely to everything he says in it, mainly because all of what he wrote could have been written by me.

Here is the response by Michael Ash:  (Please note that I have added some of my own comments in bolded italics below).

I’m not one to publish frequently on blogs or message boards.  Quite frankly, life is too short, I have too many irons in the fire, and I have precious little time to work on projects that I feel are more worthwhile than arguing with others.  Having said this, however, I feel the need to comment on a few things discussed herein.  More worthwhile than arguing with others?  Why term it like that?  How about exchanging ideas with the purpose of arriving at a logical conclusion?  But then when a person believes he's always right regardless of any evidence to the contrary, there is usually no real exchange of ideas but rather an onslaught of overbearing rhetoric.

Steve, I honestly hope that you find happiness in your own personal spiritual quest.  In the end, each of us has to decide for ourselves what brings us true happiness.   Oh, so true.

I can imagine (with a touch of anecdotal recollection of my own) the emotional turmoil you must have gone through.  The phrase “cognitive dissonance” [CD] is thrown about loosely in discussions about LDS issues, but true CD is very hard on the emotions and mind, and can make you physically ill.  You cannot endure CD for long and your mind/body seeks a quick resolution.  Some people find resolution by brushing difficult issues aside, others by embracing the new difficulties and changing their paradigm.  Either way, the psychological tension is relieved.  This doesn’t automatically make one direction right and the other wrong, however.   Also true - people resolve cognitive dissonance in various ways.  For me, it was realizing that the Mormon Church is a pile of lies - and then leaving it behind.  At that point, I was way beyond the place where I could rationalize any of it out.

Common among those who leave the church are feelings of anger and betrayal, and those feelings can be so powerful that they can cloud any or all thoughts of accepting the claims made by the Church.  This comes from feelings of mistrust and are hard to overcome – and certainly influence a bias against arguments that support the Church.   Well, that says a lot.  And a bias against arguments that support the Church doesn't begin to describe it. 

Feelings of mistrust, as you note in your post, come most often from feeling that things have been “hidden.”  The simple truth, however, is that things are not nearly as “hidden” as some– who stumble upon such information [often painted in the worst possible light by critics]– would think.  There isn’t enough space in this blog to do this topic justice but I can refer you to information that demonstrates a) that most of the difficult issues have been discussed in Church-related publications for years, b) most people in general are blissfully unaware of significant historical/political etc., events.  In other words, it’s sad but true, that most people are simply ignorant of things they should know more about.  Yes, it is sad but true that most Mormons are ignorant of things they should know more about.  But why is that?  Could it be because the Mormon Church makes these things very difficult to find and highly discourages any sort of independent research?

When a believing member “discovers” such things, the Church is immediately held up as the culprit for “hiding” the information in a “cover-up” to control the minds of members.  This is simply not true.  Yes, Mr. Ash, it is true.  Lots of "cover-ups" going on.

Your post speaks of “solid, reliable, testable scientific data,” that supports your current religious views of Mormonism.  At the risk of sounding rude, I seriously doubt that you could produce such data.  Before you begin writing a list please keep in mind, that a large number of educated Latter-day Saints are fully aware of every single LDS-critical argument.  I, myself, have studied them for many decades.  There is absolutely no intellectual data that automatically compels an intelligent person to reject the Book of Mormon.  Of course there is no intellectual data that automatically compels an intelligent person to accept the Book of Mormon either.  In short, all the “scientific data” that is used to discredit the Church has an equally “solid, reliable,” and “testable” refutation (and, generally, vice-versa for pro-LDS claims).   Let's re-phrase portions of this letter.  "There is absolutely no intellectual data that TBMs and/or Mormon Apologists will admit automatically compels an intelligent person to reject the Book of Mormon."   "In short, all the “scientific data” that is used to discredit the Church has an equally “solid, reliable,” and “testable” refutation (and, generally, vice-versa for pro-LDS claims) - or so they would have you believe."  

The journey is yours, and yours alone.  No one can ride on the shirt tail of anyone else when it comes to matters of faith, so I have no dog in the race as to the outcome of your own decision on religious issues.  I merely wish to emphasize that you are not the only one to “discover” difficult issues.  Lots of intelligent people have examined them.  A number of these intelligent people are not only still believing members but recognize that there are rational and logical explanations that account for every criticism out there.  For me, this is probably the most offensive paragraph in Mr. Ash's comments.  To assert that "lots of intelligent people have examined" these issues and have been able to recognize that there are rational and logical explanations that account for every criticism out there" is basically telling Dr. Bloor that he is too stupid to arrive at the same conclusion as "lots of intelligent people."  How arrogant and self-righteous.

From what I have seen through years of reading exit stories is that the main factor which causes a person to leave is indeed “hurt feelings” and feeling “offended”– not offended by someone in the Church, but offended at the thought that they’ve been conned.  And the primary reason that such people feel they were conned is because they never really engaged “study and faith” in their gospel lives.  "Never really engaged 'study and faith' in their gospel lives."  Boy, Michael Ash just loves to generalize, doesn't he?  But then, that's the M.O. of most Mormon Apologists.  It was "study" that brought me to the conclusion that the Mormon Church is a pile of lies, and I refuse to believe anything on blind faith anymore. 

Like most people who fail to put their minds to full use as God intends, they often take a black-and-white approach to religious issues.  It’s either true or false. There either were horses in the New World, or the Book of Mormon is fictional. The Book of Abraham was either written by Abraham himself, or Joseph Smith created the text.  Such a fundamentalist attitude is anathema to a healthy paradigm of how God works through fallible humans.   Yes, Mr. Ash - it's either true or false.  Call it a "fundamentalist attitude" if you want, but truth is truth is truth is truth - and lies are lies are lies are lies. 

Good luck, and if you are ever open again to searching for answers, let me know.  Yeah, Michael... uh, if I were you, I wouldn't hold your breath.

Like I said...

In the post on Not Very Useful Truths, the blogger posts 5 items in addressing Michael Ash's comments.  Although similar to what I've inserted above, I found these items to be very insightful and thorough, and as such, I think his points bear repeating.

Dear Mr. Ash:

1.  Don't stereotype or lump or group-think your assumptions about anyones disaffection.  Your anecdotal "understanding" of why people leave is shallow and misguided.  I have read hundreds of exit stories as well, and listened to dozens more and NONE can mirror my own story.  No two disaffections are the same!  The reasons for leaving are complex, and emotional, and to have someone as grand as you try and cast this former bishop or anyone else into a neat little file shows your general lack of respect and insecurities regarding the matter.

2.  Don't throw something as superficial as "millions of others know these issues and believe" as some half-baked appeal to authority.  Millions of others know these issues and leave, too, Mike.  And if we are playing a numbers-count game, then we are all in the wrong religion.  

3.  Don't claim intellectual superiority as you talk down to those of us who simply could not live with the CD, (and thanks for clarifying cog-dis to begin with... wow... glad you helped me get beyond my misunderstanding of CD theory), and walked away. Oh, that we could all compartmentalize and truly understand at your levels. 

4.  The church has lied. Has lied about a number of things! Define "the church" however you want - a committee, a group of leaders, a prophet, a PR or legal department, a local ward leader... it doesn't matter much - the church has lied.  Period.  This, Mr. Ash, is a fact.  Well documented and indisputable in many cases - unless you really want to wade into the nuance of half-truths and what the meaning of "is" is.  To claim massive cover up and conspiracy may be harder/impossible to prove, but there are more than enough instances of lies and mistruths.  You claim the information is out there for those with intellectual integrity to find and study, but you also know that asking those tough questions, seeking details beyond the highly polished story line from the correlated manuals, and critical thinking is discouraged and even punished.  Tell both sides of the story, Mr. Ash. 

5.  If your arguments and comments in your reply to the bishop hold any water, why do apologetics exist in the first place?

Of course, from my own perspective, Michael Ash's response is filled with rationalizations as well as attempts to minimize Steve Bloor's findings, feelings and opinions.  In particular, the next to the last paragraph in his response is simply ridiculous.  "Like most people who fail to put their minds to full use as god intends, they often take a black-and-white approach to religious issues."  Clearly, I am one of those people who believes that the Mormon church is either true or false.  To me, there is no middle ground where rationalization can overcome the fallacies so obviously apparent to one who actually puts their mind to full use, using the brain with which they have been equipped.

Truly, the kind of mind games engaged in by most Mormon Apologists makes my brain melt...

And in closing, here's a few applicable quotes:

To treat your facts with imagination is one thing, but to imagine your facts is another.  ~John Burroughs

How many legs does a dig have if you call the tail a leg?  Four.
Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.  ~Abraham Lincoln

It is a far, far better thing to have a firm anchor in nonsense than to put out on the troubled seas of thought.  ~John Kenneth Galbraith

All the mind's activity is easy if it is not subjected to reality.
~Marcel Proust, Remembrance of Things Past: Cities of the Plain

"APOSTATES" and "ANTI-MORMON PROPAGANDA"

The term "apostate" is a label with very negative connotations, like the term "anti" (as in "anti-Mormon propaganda").  In my opinion, using that label is one of the ways that the higher-ups try to control the masses.  Terming something "anti" makes all Mormons cringe, and they usually immediately condemn the person "spouting the anti-Mormon propaganda" as they begin to defend their religion.  Defending one's beliefs is fine as long as those beliefs are defendable, but in the case of most Mormons, they simply repeat what they are told to believe, not beliefs that they have formed through any independent study.

Since it is independent study from "unauthorized sources" that eventually led me away from Mormonism, I question even more than I would have previously as to why those sources are termed "unauthorized" when they do not tell lies, but rather the truth.  But then, since the Mormon Church tends to play very fast and loose with the truth, relying on its version of things is not wise.  Looking at that "directive" not to do "research from unauthorized sources" also brings up the very strong possibility that the Mormon Church is actually a cult since that is one of the characteristics of cultism.  If an organization is above board in their doctrines and teachings then research from "unauthorized sources" shouldn't make any difference.  But if that organization directs its members to only research and study from materials they authorize, red flags should go up immediately.

So many Mormons truly believe that looking at "unauthorized" information leads to APOSTASY, and since they are told that apostasy is the most abhorrent sin, they steer clear of any materials considered to be "anti," including information that would shed light on the reality behind it all.  But if indeed "the Glory of God is intelligence," then true believing Mormons are also denying the validity of that statement.

Sadly, most Mormons will never be able to look beyond the "anti" label to get to the core of the lies perpetuated by the LDS Church.  The internet contains links to a plethora of information that shows without any doubt that the Mormon Church is not true, but most Mormons will never even read or consider this information because of the "anti" label given to it.  Truth is but a click away -- and to paraphrase a popular Mormon scripture, "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of Google."

But while Mormonism is obviously built on an elaborate web of lies, so many people continue to go along with it, defending its deceptions and contradictions, claiming to believe in it all "by faith."  I simply don't understand their logic, because when the facts contradict what a person is told to believe by faith, it is not faith anymore, but rather denial.

I am so glad that I finally saw the light and realized that the Mormon Church is not only untrue, but that its teachings and doctrines are detrimental to my mental health and well-being.  Blindly following things that you are told to believe is not healthy.  Doing your own research and deciding on your own is the best course of action for any person.  Rationalizing out the lies, deceptions, cover-ups and contradictions only leads to accepting things that eat away at your ability to think for yourself and formulate your own opinions. 

Making a 180 and turning away from Mormonism was the best thing I ever did.  I do not regret for one second being an "apostate" despite its negative connotations in religious circles.  I only wish I had apostatized much earlier in my life.  Hanging on to thoughts and ideas simply because I was told to do so was killing me inside.  That type of conformity creates a mind-numbing existence that is very difficult to reverse. 

Being born and raised Mormon, I was programmed from a very early age to not question, to have faith, to just believe.  Once I reached my teenage years, though, I began to question not only the doctrine but also the way in which women are treated as second-class citizens.  But being the good little Mormon clone that I was back then, I shelved all those thoughts and tried to continue to go along with the program for many more years.

So when you get right down to it, I guess I was a "future apostate" for many years before becoming one in reality.  And as shown in this picture, it isn't very hard to spot the "future apostate" since they are the ones who tend to look in the other direction from the masses, looking for answers to complex questions, instead of just going along (like the "sheeple" tend to do).  But although I probably was a "future apostate" for many years, I wish that I had begun to question more deeply earlier in my life.  Woulda, Shoulda, Coulda, I suppose...

But even so, I'm just glad I finally recognized the truth when I did instead of simply going along with all the lies all my entire life.

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...