"Why They Leave" ~ A Practicing Mormon's Take on Why Many Resign From the LDS Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter xixxvmcm85
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
That was an excellent presentation. It goes to the heart of the matter – the Mormon Church will continue to have disillusioned people as long as they are not up front with its history. They have to quit avoiding issues that are problematic. And they have to treat those who leave with respect. The people in my local ward have treated me very well on the path that I have chosen.
 
You know, i was impressed with the members in the Philippines i knew. In many ways they were stronger then members here in the states. And the missions there are a lot stricter. Potential members worked really hard to make sure they repented of any sins and also understood the importance of baptism.

Considering i knew every member in the ward i was assigned. Many inactives really loved the church, they just had various obsticles for returning. About half of it was affording to attend the chapel.

And these were supposed to be the most inactive country in the world. I didn’t see it.
 
That was a good presentation.

From a non-Mormon perspective, two things jumped out at me in the last slide:
  • Forget “true”…consider “good” - What will bring you the most joy?
  • You CAN be a Mormon on your own terms - At the core everyone is.
These two points, if representative of any major strain of Mormon thinking, make me really wonder not why so many leave, but why so many stay. I guess I don’t understand because I left my old church because I was bothered by so many people who followed these two dictums and didn’t see any contradiction between them and their self-identification as Christians. 🤷
 
dzheremi said:
That was a good presentation.

From a non-Mormon perspective, two things jumped out at me in the last slide:
  • Forget “true”…consider “good” - What will bring you the most joy?
  • You CAN be a Mormon on your own terms - At the core everyone is.
These two points, if representative of any major strain of Mormon thinking, make me really wonder not why so many leave, but why so many stay. I guess I don’t understand because I left my old church because I was bothered by so many people who followed these two dictums and didn’t see any contradiction between them and their self-identification as Christians. 🤷
Click to expand...
I didn’t like that point, either. I don’t think people should expect to have every question answered and every problem solved. My experience is that if you keep the faith, put your doubts on the shelf for a while as you continue to learn, and dust them off to examine them again every once in a while, the number of doubts dwindles over time. I found that my doubts were often based more on my ignorance or naivete than anything else.
 
dzheremi said:
That was a good presentation.

From a non-Mormon perspective, two things jumped out at me in the last slide:
  • Forget “true”…consider “good” - What will bring you the most joy?
  • You CAN be a Mormon on your own terms - At the core everyone is.
These two points, if representative of any major strain of Mormon thinking, make me really wonder not why so many leave, but why so many stay. I guess I don’t understand because I left my old church because I was bothered by so many people who followed these two dictums and didn’t see any contradiction between them and their self-identification as Christians. 🤷
Click to expand...
That is a central point I hear from many Mormons, it makes me happy, so? Well, what about what is true… what about God? Besides, from the practical point of view, getting closer to the knowledge of truth will yield more authentic joy, happiness that is built with a house of cards is just that, liable to fall apart at any second. How it is that some of these theologically liberal Mormons manage to shelve innumerable doubts, just because, is impressive to say the least, but can’t be all that meaningful because they’ve imposed so many artificial boundaries around their intellect, trapping it, lest it disturb their ‘happiness’ through free investigation.
 
falisrm said:
You know, i was impressed with the members in the Philippines i knew. In many ways they were stronger then members here in the states. And the missions there are a lot stricter. Potential members worked really hard to make sure they repented of any sins and also understood the importance of baptism.

Considering i knew every member in the ward i was assigned. Many inactives really loved the church, they just had various obsticles for returning. About half of it was affording to attend the chapel.

And these were supposed to be the most inactive country in the world. I didn’t see it.
Click to expand...
So you were an LDS missionary in the Phillipines?

Totally off topic but when you write an abbreviation such as LDS or NCO do you use a or an? I’ve seen both "an NCO or LDS and a NCO or LDS. If you’re saying the whole thing you’d say a Latter Day Saint or a Non-Commissioned Officer. This is probably the least of my grammatical questions but I just used it in a post so it was at the top of my head.
 
BartBurk said:
That was an excellent presentation. It goes to the heart of the matter – the Mormon Church will continue to have disillusioned people as long as they are not up front with its history. They have to quit avoiding issues that are problematic. And they have to treat those who leave with respect. The people in my local ward have treated me very well on the path that I have chosen.
Click to expand...
Here is the problem: Mormon history is recent history. The lds church is not a very old church and much is known about its early beginnings and its leaders. But the history is recent.

Now if we go back to the past and into catholic history during the crusades and inquisition we can see some terrible things. But these mishaps are so far back in time, that they do not concern a great many people.

To explain the Inquisition now does not make such an impact in people’s lives. But back in its time, it did. The Reformation came about because of internal problems within the catholic church and people left and joined Luther and his friends.
 
RebeccaJ said:
Tell that to the RMs who have told me they went through obituaries and searched out the people who were named as living relatives.
Click to expand...
I doubt it. Such a process would be very time consuming and a waste of time. Maybe they were joshing with you. And why would they tell you such a story? It seems a very damaging story to tell, a former mormon catholic.

However, if true, their heart was in the right place. In mormon theology, families are together forever eternally. Not a bad message to share with a grieving person who has lost a relative.
 
dzheremi said:
That was a good presentation.

From a non-Mormon perspective, two things jumped out at me in the last slide:
  • Forget “true”…consider “good” - What will bring you the most joy?
  • You CAN be a Mormon on your own terms - At the core everyone is.
These two points, if representative of any major strain of Mormon thinking, make me really wonder not why so many leave, but why so many stay. I guess I don’t understand because I left my old church because I was bothered by so many people who followed these two dictums and didn’t see any contradiction between them and their self-identification as Christians. 🤷
Click to expand...
Yeah this point struck me as odd also. My experience of Mormonism placed a very strong emphasis on “truth” (or at least perceived truth) nonetheless this idea of “relative good” was frowned upon and often given as an example (in other churches) of the “apostasy”.

Another thing that struck me as odd was this:
  • The author admonished the LDS who use “bad apologetics” in trying to justify or diminish the “setbacks”
  • He then went on with his presentation without ever once offer any “good apologetics” for justification, leading me to believe that he believes those setbacks are irreconcilable.
Is this possibly why he makes an appeal to the proverbial fruits of the LDS church?
 
xixxvmcm85 said:
Yeah this point struck me as odd also. My experience of Mormonism placed a very strong emphasis on “truth” (or at least perceived truth) nonetheless this idea of “relative good” was frowned upon and often given as an example (in other churches) of the “apostasy”.

Another thing that struck me as odd was this:
  • The author admonished the LDS who use “bad apologetics” in trying to justify or diminish the “setbacks”
  • He then went on with his presentation without ever once offer any “good apologetics” for justification, leading me to believe that he believes those setbacks are irreconcilable.
Is this possibly why he makes an appeal to the proverbial fruits of the LDS church?
Click to expand...
Yep, nail on the head.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top