Conflicted Mormon

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tweedle_Dee
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dear TD,

Kudos to you for following where The Lord is leading you. As someone posted earlier, it may not be an easy journey, but it is important. It is good that you are here, on a Catholic forum, to seek guidance. There are many good Catholics here who will help you on your journey. I believe you will discern who they are.

This may be another place to look for answers. This is a new Catholic forum out of Utah that is just starting. You may find some relevant answers there as well.

forums.catholic-questions.org/group.php?groupid=276

All the best to you in your search. Be giuded by the Truth.
Peace be with you,
TK :knight1:
 
I’ve been conflicted for a very long time and I feel I need to figure this out. I’ve gradually drifted away from Mormonism (although I go to church with my wife every Sunday) but not sure where the truth lies. I see a lot of problems with Mormonism, but one of the biggest is that the “great apostacy” doesn’t make sense to me. Why Christ would establish his church and then have it fall away so quickly only to be restored nearly 2000 years later seems illogical.

~Dee
Common sense and logic. Two things the Mormon church can stand. Common sense and logic is the light of the candle that overcame the darkness.

Jesus established His Church 2,000 years ago. It is to last till the end of the world to teach mankind the Truth.
 
Hey all i just wanted to say to you TD that i know what you are going through i was mormon for 10 years it they got me when i was 16. The lies upon lies that they teach i love learning history i just knew i could not belive the things i learned You get just plan lied to what is sad the people teaching belive it to. I was tought how he had one wife Emma, blacks , woman are mans vessel to have lots of babys for my world creating to come etc i made a list one day with all the conflicting problems i had they all turned on me like a pack wolfs the the things they say i relised how self rightous i had become. I have no hate or anger towards them only because of God but not me lol. But go have a look at the real history it is very un settling to say the least ! No God fearing man can honesty say J.Smith did Gods he fails on so many accounts as a good man it is God that showed me what i was a fool. I know the church does alot of good in the world alot of its members are fine people but if you asked yourself and God from your heart you will find the truth it shocked me to my core but i asked i could could not say no to God i shared that with them i felt it was the right thing to do Wow did that move them hehe :).

Peace to you brother.
 
It appears to me that the entire Smith family was obsessed with get rich quick schemes. No real surprise that they followed Joseph Jr.
Yea, they certainly got rich. His mom lost two sons to murder. And I don’t think that she had much when she died. Not to mention all the persecution involved in this get rich scheme and how they had to abandon property several times along the way. Sorry. There were easier ways to get rich.
 
Interestingly, L. Ron Hubbard claimed that the fastest way to get rich is to start a religion. Now, whether or not that is true, that’s what he did. Scientology has millions of followers, and dozens of multi-million dollar buildings, and is currently expanding even further.

There have been many people claiming to be prophets of large religions since Christ, with Muhammad being one of the first (or one of the more well known of the first), and more recently with Joseph Smith of Mormonism, Ellen G. White of the Seventh Day Adventist Church, and L. Ron Hubbard of the Church of Scientology (not really a prophet or Christian, but similar situation).
 
the prophet and “Messiah” of the Lord Our Righteousness Church is currently in jail. He still professes to be prophet and Messiah, and his followers still believe that he is such. He also had/has three Witnesses to the fact that he is the Messiah, who have not publically recanted their testimony, even if he is in jail. I really don’t see any uniqueness in the claims of the Mormon Church when we see other Churches claiming similar things.
 
Here is some information on the witnesses of the BOM from a non-Mormon perspective (and one from an ex-Mormon):

mormonthink.com/witnessesweb.htm
Reading the summary about the 11 witnesses from Mormonthink makes me a a little suspicious of this site. For the believers viewpoint it gives a couple of sentences to each witness. But the critic viewpoint, the paragraph or paragraphs are much longer in explanation. A slight imbalance there. You will need to scroll down until you get to the believers and critics response section:

mormonthink.com/witnessesweb.htm#sumof11

And the exmormon is not that credible. Even many critics of mormonism find the site too extreme.
 
Hi Tweedle Dee,

I am a Catholic who doesn’t believe that Joseph knew it was all fake. He had been reportedly fiddling around in the occult. If the Catholic faith is true, it is consistent with our view of Satan’s field of operations that such an one be culpably deluded, and that he really saw some extra human phenomenon as was reported by him and the witnesses. If there is one true church, there can be no more important satanic priority than in deflecting people away from that one true church. The devil doesn’t make all of his victims into boozers, thieves, and whoremongers. Satan’s greatest victories can consist in taking people of good will and helping them to develop good character or strong families in the natural order while depriving them of the supernatural life of the Holy Sacraments.
 
Reading the summary about the 11 witnesses from Mormonthink makes me a a little suspicious of this site. For the believers viewpoint it gives a couple of sentences to each witness. But the critic viewpoint, the paragraph or paragraphs are much longer in explanation. A slight imbalance there. You will need to scroll down until you get to the believers and critics response section:

mormonthink.com/witnessesweb.htm#sumof11

And the exmormon is not that credible. Even many critics of mormonism find the site too extreme.
That’s fine. The OP has been given sites that support the Mormon view, and now we have given sites that do not. He can make a decision based on the totality of the information, whether Mormons do not like a site or not. I find much on the ex-Mormon site to be credible, especially quotes from various Journals, newspapers, early editions of the BOM, etc.

Also, the Mormon Think website is great. For Mormons that have already heard the pro-Mormon arguments, they can see the other side there. If they have not, they can go to other websites if they need long extensive explanations, as have already been given on this thread. Mormon Think not only looks at doctrinal issues using journal excerpts and analyzing the changes and progression in doctrines, but also the logical inconsistencies in a number of arguments.

So, as he is now critiquing Mormonism, he can look at it from both sides.
 
That’s fine. The OP has been given sites that support the Mormon view, and now we have given sites that do not. He can make a decision based on the totality of the information, whether Mormons do not like a site or not. I find much on the ex-Mormon site to be credible, especially quotes from various Journals, newspapers, early editions of the BOM, etc.

Also, the Mormon Think website is great. For Mormons that have already heard the pro-Mormon arguments, they can see the other side there. If they have not, they can go to other websites if they need long extensive explanations, as have already been given on this thread. Mormon Think not only looks at doctrinal issues using journal excerpts and analyzing the changes and progression in doctrines, but also the logical inconsistencies in a number of arguments.

So, as he is now critiquing Mormonism, he can look at it from both sides.
Everything has two sides. I don’t mind giving the sites but the mormonthink site is dubious since they claim that many are still active in the mormon church. Now if the site is just dedicated to giving the two sides without bias, that is fine. But f I detect bias on the side of critics than they would need to change their mission statement.

The problem with all such sites is that they do have an agenda. If I would click on a site called Catholicthink with the same mission statement as mormonthink, the position would be clear.

Critical sites against something whether it be about the mormon, catholic, JWs etc all have agendas that would not be that faith promoting.
 
Everything has two sides. I don’t mind giving the sites but the mormonthink site is dubious since they claim that many are still active in the mormon church. Now if the site is just dedicated to giving the two sides without bias, that is fine. But f I detect bias on the side of critics than they would need to change their mission statement.

The problem with all such sites is that they do have an agenda. If I would click on a site called Catholicthink with the same mission statement as mormonthink, the position would be clear.

Critical sites against something whether it be about the mormon, catholic, JWs etc all have agendas that would** not be that faith promoting**.
Why is he supposed to stick with “faith promoting” sites?
 
I know, you’re right. But I was curious on how Catholics would explain Joseph Smith’s motivation for doing what he did knowing it was all fake. I’m not asking Catholics whether I should stay in the church. I’m also looking for persuasive arguments on why one should think that the Catholic church has the fullness of truth over other religions.
I can think of a few possible reasons.

First he may have had the mind-set of a conman. A pastor I knew who had been prison chaplain for a while commented that he wondered if there was salvation for con-men. His argument was that they told so many lies that he wondered after a while if they knew what the truth was themselves.

If a person can no longer even tell what the truth is himself, how can he possibly repent? The pastor said he could sit at his office in the prison, with one of these blokes sitting on the other side, and they’d just about sell him his shoes off his own feet. And he was hard to fool.

I’m afraid I tend to favour the conman theory, backed up with a lot of religious hype, With all due respect the USA has always been a religious country, with all types of religious groups around. Think of Jim Jones in Guyana, or Waco, or Heaven’s Gate.

Second he may have been demonically deceived. That’s another option.

Third he may have been schizophrenic. But I think that’s out, as he seemed to be too cold-bloodedly calculating for that.

Personally I don’t give the so-called Mormon miracles and so on one bit of credibility. I think they’re false from start to finish. That’s not to say that Mormons are not sincere, or that they are not good people. I’m sure they are. But I think their religion is based on false premises.
 
Dee,
I suggest you read some of the older Mormon-themed threads on this forum. They are packed full of debate and cites to sources about LDS history, doctrines, and the teachings of former prophets and apostles that seem to be hidden from today’s LDS, as well as the contrasting Catholic teachings and viewpoints.

Paul (a former Mormon, now Catholic)
 
Everything has two sides. I don’t mind giving the sites but the mormonthink site is dubious since they claim that many are still active in the mormon church. Now if the site is just dedicated to giving the two sides without bias, that is fine. But f I detect bias on the side of critics than they would need to change their mission statement.

The problem with all such sites is that they do have an agenda. If I would click on a site called Catholicthink with the same mission statement as mormonthink, the position would be clear.

Critical sites against something whether it be about the mormon, catholic, JWs etc all have agendas that would not be that faith promoting.
ALL sites have agendas, whether they are pro or con/anti. It is irrelevant whether a site is faith promoting or not, if we’re trying to look at the other side. Clearly, if a site is critical of a religion, it is not faith promoting. That is the whole point at looking at the religion from the other side. He is welcome to look at anti-Catholic websites if he wants to. The point is that, whether or not the creators of Mormon Think claim to be active Mormons, that is irrelevant to the point of the articles, as they present the other side, with information taken directly from journals, newspapers, and other articles, as well as views based on logical arguments.

And anyway, the OP is wondering about the Catholic opinion on Mormonism, which is inherently not faith promoting (why would we promote that Joseph Smith is a prophet, or that there was a Great Apostasy). Therefore, your whole argument is false, since from the very nature of the OP, we’re not going to post articles from FAIR, since we don’t believe those.

You can post your own Mormon articles, we’ll post our own.
 
Dee, here are a few other sites I find may help you:

postmormon.org/exp_e/
utlm.org/navonlinebooks.htm
mormonchallenge.com/dnavs.html
mormonchallenge.com/liftingtheveil.html
youtube.com/watch?v=G1mFdO1wB08
bookofabraham.info/

Here are a few articles from this website as well:

catholic.com/library/Distinctive_Beliefs_of_Mormon.asp
catholic.com/library/Mormonism_Baptism_for_the_Dead.asp
catholic.com/library/Gods_of_the_Mormon_Church.asp

Now, of course FAIR has answers to many of these critiques, as Catholics have answers to our own critics as well. These will help you see the “other side”, as you so asked for, and you can make a decision.

Let us know if you need any more help with Catholic beliefs and practices!
 
Hi,

Since you asked what we thought, I’ll give you my long story in a nut shell.

I’m a Catholic–born and raised (although my parents are not very devout). I fell in love with a Mormon guy, his family, his values, and even started to fall in love with his religion. Looking back, I think his family did not see our relationship progressing far since he was on his way to BYU, so they never encouraged my interest in their fatih. So I did the research on my own.

The whole apostacy thing bothered me at the beginning. We expect captains to go down with their ship, but God jumped ship so soon? But it didn’t bother me too much, I put that concern on the back burner and continued to research.

I went to church with this Mormon boyfriend and his family, but truthfully, the boyfriend wasn’t that into it. I was more interested than he was. I think his parents wish they had taken my interest seriously back then when I was more impressionable.

The lovey-dovey wonderfulness of being “in love” kind of wore off. I saw that I do, in fact, love the BF and his family, but I really needed to investigate the Mormon faith, not just rely on “warm fuzzies”.

This also leads me to reinvestigate my own faith. What a wonderful spiritual walk I had. What did I choose? Catholicism. (Oh yeah, that bf is now my adorable, technically still Mormon, but Mass-attending husband).

I really had to understand the history before I could make the decision. The Mormon church presented their theology to me as brilliant and new (or restored) insights into God, religion, American history–all eminating from God via Smith, the prophet. Then I found out many of the “revelations” were actually human theories that recently preceded Joseph Smith. (lots of info out there if you are interested, but I’ll let you do your own reading–I’m not here to convince you one way or the other) So, although I love many things about the LDS faith, I just found I couldn’t believe in it.

So why do I think Smith did it? I’ve thought many different theories: maybe he was some sort of a fallen prophet, maybe he was a con man, maybe he had a disorder that made him an ego maniac, maybe he was genuinely trying to a lead a flock towards God. I tend to think he was so troubled with doubts about which religion to join, listened to so many revival preachers, spent so much time trying to piece together the answers that he started to believe his own thoughts were divinely inspired. Once you go down that path and bring your family with you, it’s hard to step back, self-realize your mistake & say, “Hmmm, I think maybe I was just dreaming/hypothesizing that. Forget what I said/wrote.”

Why put his family through all the turmoil? That’s an easy one for me. People do this all the time–think of terrible hazing rituals of fraternities. The more pain you experience, the more your brain desires to make it “worth it.” So, if you say, “I heard God talking to me in a grove,” and your friends laugh, you have 2 choices: 1. you think, “That was embarrassing, I must’ve been wrong.” or 2. you think, “They don’t know what they are talking about. Now I’m really convinced it was God and this ridicule is a test of my faith.” The next time your friends don’t laugh, they kick you out of town–now you are more strongly convinced that you are being righteously persecuted, and so on. . .

And about the statue burying–strikes me as wrong, too. But I’ve heard enough Mormon stories about Garments protecting people from fires, missionaries scared of swimming because of some sort of spirits (my in-laws refuse to associate with bodies of water on Sundays???), that I think all religions have to be mindful not to fall into the trap of superstition.

Good luck on your journey. Don’t be discouraged by what you find about either religion. Keeping seeking Him and you’ll come out of this journey better for it.

Peace,
SJ
 
Would you suggest to a searching catholic to visit excatholic sites or quasi catholic sites? I don’t think so. 🙂
that’s not analogous. The analogous situation is if a searching Catholic asked on a Mormon site what were the Mormon answers (or even just non-Catholic) to specific Catholic claims.
 
Thanks everyone. I’ve read a lot of different “anti” material in the past. This is not a new journey for me, I just feel like I NEED to get off the fence and figure some things out. What’s more important in this life than finding the truth, right?

I spent some time reading about the witnesses last night and found (like usual) it very frustrating because both sides put forward such different explanations of the same event that it feels impossible to ever really find out what happened. I suppose what I need to do is concentrate on the foundational questions such as “Was there really a complete apostacy?”, “Is the Book of Mormon an inspired work from God?”, etc.

I tend to think that the Book of Mormon is fiction, due in part to lack of archeological evidence and DNA evidence. Was there a complete apostacy? I don’t know. My wife thinks so. Anytime I mention it she brings up some different evil Popes she heard about during the middle ages as proof to the Catholic church losing it’s authority.

Thanks for the links, it’ll give me some more material to look at.
~Dee
 
Hi,

The lovey-dovey wonderfulness of being “in love” kind of wore off. I saw that I do, in fact, love the BF and his family, but I really needed to investigate the Mormon faith, not just rely on “warm fuzzies”.

Peace,
SJ
The warm fuzzy comment makes me just a little suspicious. Warm fuzzy is a term that is used mainly by exmormons to down play what they felt during mormon meetings. For mormons the feeling of comfort comes from the holy spirit and is not a warm fuzzy. What is a warm fuzzy anyway if you think about it?

And so, to equate what a mormon thinks is the holy ghost to a warm fuzzy might seem just a little offensive to them.

Also if I am attending Mass and I feel the holy spirit during Mass, should I also claim that it is a warm fuzzy?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top