My Blog has Moved!!

I am moving my blog to a new site over here!

Hope to see you there,

or for one dude's mormon studies, go here: http://onedudesms.wordpress.com


Mark

A Funny Comic on the issue with Blacks and the Priesthood.

"We take the Curse of Cain and slide it over to that little trash can, and that's that!"

HALL0W33N

Looking for something different to do this Halloween? Try checking out the After Dark Horrorfest (see video) . Looks interesting...

Also: You think Halloween has pagan roots? Guess again. Two new histories of America's second favorite holiday reveal the truth. (Read Article here).

Who Wrote the Bible?

Click to view Video

My Brother

My brother is a freakin stud. We had a really cool conversation yesterday. That is my post for today.

To All the Blogs I've Loved Before

Check it out bloggers: Google Reader makes it ten times easier to read all your regular blogs! Click here to check it out... (you'll be re-directed to my other blog)

One Dude's Atheist Studies

An Agnostic [1] [noun] [OW] embraces a worldview in which the existence of deity is unknown or unknowable. Derives from the Greek agnostos, a = without, gnostos = known or knowledge. "Agnostic[ism] [CE] was coined by Professor TH Huxley in 1869 to describe the mental attitude of one who regarded as futile all attempts to know the reality corresponding to our ultimate scientific, philosophic, and religious ideas." Agnosticism asserts no knowledge of gods and therefore concludes there are no reasons to believe in them or not to believe in them. An agnostic follows this credo and differs from the atheist who has developed an active belief that there are no gods. When it comes to the question of existence of deities, an agnostic will respond: I just don't know.

I see my blog as a compilation of articles and book reviews that I find relevant to my personal religious studies. In this post I will be including a post on atheism from a blogger named John Remy. Currently I view my self as an Agnostic-Mormon (if that's even possible). I don't believe in or against the idea of God. I may have a "hope" in God- almost a belief even, but I have no current belief in any actual religion (although I attend the LDS Church almost regularly). My brief reasons for being agnostic are the following:

1. I am a skeptic at heart and will be until I die (I was raised this way). As a skeptic it is hard to accept most paranormal beliefs (especially when many people make it their job to try and find truth in claims such as ghosts/spirits, demons, prayers, etc.)
2. Recently I have seen my childhood religion through new eyes- a blindfold has been taken off. I have found that my religion does not have any "monopoloy" on goodness; spiritual gifts/fruits; and have seen how similar all religions are when examining their doctrine; their claims; their group psychology (ie "we have the truth" and the role of cognitive dissonance) and sociology (their assimilation needs). There is nothing that one religion offers that trumps all others when honestly examining all the world religions together. Maybe God has his hand in many religions, but I can't believe that he endorses one with a higher stamp of approval. When all the cards are laid out in front of you and you strip yourself of biases, there is no Ace of Spades. That is the only honest answer.
3. I don't see God's hand in the confusion of world religions. I see many good things religions do, but I believe that is man's doing. I believe in "the flesh of the arm" and think it is unhealthy to put too much faith in faith, and not in your own hard work. Honestly- let's be honest, now, there is much evil done in the name of god.
4. I believe in Science and what it can do and teach us. I believe in the Scientific Method, I believe in Occam's Razor which states that the most obvious answer is probably the most correct answer. I don't believe that god would make this all so confusing and then ask us to accept the "non-obvious" answer (or in other words, "just have faith").
5. I don't believe in demons or evil spirits (which upon finding evidence of, would indicate that there is a God). I've briefly studied the history
   
6. I believe in synergy, the Wisdom of Crowds, and the marketplace of ideas. In the LDS Church leadership, there is not much debate and expression of contradictory ideas, which could be a healthy environment for progress and truth to emerge. Consider the following from Apostle Hugh B. Brown:

   "We are grateful in the Church and in this great university that the freedom, dignity and integrity of the individual is basic in Church doctrine as well as in democracy. Here we are free to think and express our opinions. Fear will not stifle thought, as is the case in some areas which have not yet emerged from the dark ages. God himself refuses to trammel man's free agency even though its exercise sometimes teaches painful lessons. Both creative science and revealed religion find their fullest and truest expression in the climate of freedom.

7. I hope that you will develop the questing spirit. Be unafraid of new ideas for they are the stepping stones of progress. You will of course respect the opinions of others but be unafraid to dissent - if you are informed.
   

8. Now I have mentioned freedom to express your thoughts, but I caution you that your thoughts and expressions must meet competition in the market place of thought, and in that competition truth will emerge triumphant. Only error needs to fear freedom of expression. Seek truth in all fields, and in that search you will need at least three virtues; courage, zest, and modesty. The ancients put that thought in the form of a prayer. They said, 'From the cowardice that shrinks from new truth, from the laziness that is content with half truth, from the arrogance that thinks it has all truth - O God of truth deliver us'."

   Hugh B Brown. Speech at BYU, March 29, 1958

9. I believe these words but since the fifties, the LDS Church appears to fear this type of democracy. In Sunday School, EQ meeting, etc. we won't have this type of dialouge, won't hear dissension, and those who don't agree with a GA statement must simply keep quiet or receive very weird looks from the others.
   

I think I'll wrap up my post now and maybe I'll add on to it later. To better understand Atheists, I highly recommend downloading and listening to these podcast episodes found here.

Here is the post on Atheism as found on MindonFire.com:

The Happy Atheist #1.

I have a series of posts planned in which I will advocate for the poor maligned and misunderstood atheist. Stay tuned!

Atheists are among the most mistrusted groups of people in the United States. In a Gallup poll that asked about America’s readiness for a president from a variety of backgrounds, only homosexuals fared worse than atheists (who fell just below the Mormons).

It’s difficult for me to reconcile this general antagonism with my experience with individual atheists. They are among the most ethical people I know. There’s a wide range, to be sure, but I know atheists who place such a high value on life that they are pacifists and vegans. One married unbelieving couple adopted two children, and are more devoted and caring than many Christian parents. Most nonbelievers I know care deeply about the earth and politics and devote money and time to help others.

One common value that many of my atheist friends share is integrity. We live in a overwhelmingly religious world. It takes tremendous courage for someone who is deeply embedded in a religious tradition to reject the security of their culture and the comfort of their community and to risk ostracism and vilification for the sake of the truth. Allow me to illustrate with my personal experience.

Integrity led me out of Mormonism. After a decade of concerted effort, I realized that I had stopped trying to believe and was merely pretending to believe. My religion was encouraging me to live a lie. There was tremendous social pressure–without professing orthodox belief (or pretending to do so), I couldn’t enter the temple or attend the marriages of friends and family members. I was encouraged to stay silent on matters of doctrine and church policy that troubled me and to value hagiography over more truthful academic biographies and histories.

Lying for the faith is encouraged at the highest levels, as evinced by Elder Packer’s famous statement that “a testimony is to be found in the bearing of it.” Here’s the quote in context:

It is not unusual to have a missionary say, ‘How can I bear testimony until I get one? How can I testify that God lives, that Jesus is the Christ, and that the gospel is true? If I do not have such a testimony, would that not be dishonest?’ Oh, if I could teach you this one principle. A testimony is to be found in the bearing of it! … It is one thing to receive a witness from what you have read or what another has said; and that is a necessary beginning. It is quite another to have the Spirit confirm to you in your bosom that what you have testified is true. Can you not see that it will be supplied as you share it? As you give that which you have, there is a replacement, with increase!

I put Packer’s counsel to the test. When I lied and bore witness of things in which I did not believe, I felt incredible guilt for misrepresenting myself (Jana can tell you how much I struggled with this over the years, especially in church teaching positions). When I testified of the things that I did truly believe in, even when they ran counter to the Church’s teachings, I felt at peace with myself and even with those whom I troubled and angered with my words.

My experience is echoed by many others who have left or who are struggling to extricate themselves from their religions of origin. They often do so at incredible social and emotional cost. One of their primary motivators is integrity–the desire to be true to themselves and their conscience.

So to all my atheist friends out there, you have my empathy, my love and respect. Thank you for being candles in the dark.

Blogs of Apostasy?

A conversation going on over here is pretty interesting. The people leaving comments are discussing whether you can be opinionated in the Church or if dissension is a sign of apostasy.

Save Mormon Stories Podcast!!

[Click here to "Sustain" John's original post on this subject.]

For only $5-$10 monthly subscription we can save Mormon Stories. John Dehlin (creator) has already compiled many great podcasts and screencasts which are invaluable tools for:

• reaching out to disaffected Mormons
• Helping others understand what the disaffected go through and help to understand and empathize their situation.
• Learning more about LDS History, its issues, its strengths.
• Learning how to help build bridges between people of all beliefs, lifestyles, etc.

Please read what he would like to offer here. I hope we can all support John Dehlin in this endeavor. He really has found a niche that the LDS Church won't fill, but that he fills quite nicely. His work is to be applauded and should be encouraged to continue. He is also a great friend of mine.

To see the archive of past podcasts and screencasts (of which I have enjoyed and learned from immensely) click here. To see how we can help support MS, click here.

The Sub-Theories of Evolution

A nice summary of Intelligent Design and the current sub-theories of Evolution. Found in the Skeptic's Guide to the Universe Podcast, episode #49 (Timemark 2:40- 19:30). You can download by clicking here (you're welcome).

A History of Doubt

This is a great episode from the podcast Speaking of Faith. I highly recommend listening to it! Like the title, it talks about a/the history of doubt in religion. It highlights the lives of many of our history's great thinkers, philosophers, and doubters. This is part of my 'must-listen-to' podcast episodes found on the sidebar of my blog. Enjoy!!

» Download (mp3, 53:18) » Stream (RealAudio, 53:00)

DNA and the Book of Mormon

Today I listened to a past episode of the Skeptic's Guide to the Universe. Towards the end (time marker 58:22) they discuss DNA and the Book of Mormon, its effect on the LDS Church, and the effect of Science on religion in general. I recommend checking it out. You can download the episode here. The original LA Times article that they allude to can be found here.

Even more interesting is the 2006 Sunstone Symposium session on DNA and the BOM called, "The Indians Are Lamanites, but the Los Angeles Times Is Not: An Alternate Interpretation of DNA Results and Promises Made to the Chosen People of the Americas". You can download the episode for $4.00 by clicking here, then search for the session's title I listed above under the 2006 Salt Lake Symposium section. I thought this session was great and definitely worth listening to.

Got Doubts?

Here are two new Posts on religious doubts. [Posted as earlier posts as to keep chronological order as they happened. Note, my thoughts/feelings may be different now then they were at the time these were were written]

Letter to my Family about my Doubts...

Dealing with my Doubts

Why Darwin Matters

This post has been moved Please click here to be re-directed.

How Will the Church React When Polygamy Becomes Legal?

This post has been moved. Click here to go there.

Child Of Polygamists Receives Fourth Sex Talk

The Onion (a satirical news source) has kind of a funny post on polygamy this week. Check it out here.

An Agnostic in a Foxhole

Today I read a heart-felt article called An Agnostic in a Foxhole: The Story Behind "Heaven in My Hand", by Bob McCue. In it, McCue describes his feelings as his young son goes into the ICU. He developed a serious infection after simply taking his wisdom teeth out. You can feel the pain he is going through as he says:

I can feel my heart rate rising as a result of typing this. Our son is in serious trouble.

I really liked his logical thinking here (as he tries to compare his mental state in a crisis before , as a Mormon and post Mormon):

The major difference between my mental and emotional state in this case as compared to other similar situations involving serious health problems is that I am relatively calm. I am not attempting to exercise faith in anything. Reality is what it is. The laws of cause and effect will run their course. We have done, and will continue to do, all we can. I can do nothing to help my son by internally emoting – working myself into a frenzy by praying, fasting, etc. All I can do is be there for him; comfort him with my presence; express my love for him; and most importantly, provide access to the best medical care of which I am capable. If there is one thing that history makes clear it is that the quality of medical care we receive is far more directly related to surviving medical crises than positive energy of any kind.

He adds later:

That is not say that I am happy. I can feel raw fear differently than I have felt it before. It is not masked by my frantic efforts to contact God on behalf of my son and work out some kind of a deal for him, or to beg and plead on his behalf and then at the end say "but Thy will be done". I am not attempting to control reality. I am yielding to it. And this means yielding to the fear I feel - letting it wash over me.

Dialogue with a Prophet

Yesterday I read a wonderful article entitled Dialogue with a Prophet, by Bob McCue.

Excerpt:

His voice gradually faded as I walked away toward a beckoning, peaceful meadow where members of my family were playing Frisbee while waiting for me.

“Here he comes! Catch Dad!!”, one of the kids shouted, throwing a Frisbee in my direction. “That didn’t take as long as you said it might, Dad”, another said. “Boy, you look happy! Who was that guy anyway?”

“An old acquaintance who does not matter to you”, I said, smiling.

“Throw me a long one Dad”, yelled a third as she ran off through the grass with sunlight dancing in her hair. Time melted into laughter, color, sound and touch in my heaven – the only heaven I choose to know – into which I will pour all of my remaining life’s energy.

Another One Bites The Dust

I was looking around at blogs today, especially in search of progressive LDS blogs when I came across the Mormon Left. This is a blog of another individual going through the same spiritual journey I am currently going through as I study my Mormon religion. It is kind of funny, however, that I caught the blog on it's exit- and into post-Mormondom. John says:

This is going to be my last post on the Mormon Left. It is too bad it has to end this way. After a year of working through all the issues I have with mormonism, the disagreements have become to great and too deep. I started this blog in the hopes that some reconciliation was possible.

It appears that he started his blog with the same motivations and aspirations I've had in mind for my blog and many many others as well who go through this and find support via online communites. I can't say that "I don't hope I one day end up where he is at", because that is not what is important to me. I have hope/faith that the LDS Church can atleast be partly what it claims to be, but if in the end I find it is not, then I hope I can have the integrity, and strength to stand up for what is true and right. It takes a lot of courage for one to leave the Church and stand for their newfound values and truths. Hardly anyone procures this for fear of pain and sadness with beloved TBM believers.In the end, and after all of the studies, I think one will eventually have to choose their path to follow. I generally see three roads for the "well informed" Mormon person choosing their destiny:

1. Going back to being a "blind" TBM who thinks that after the prophet has spoken, the thinking is done. This to me shows a lack of honesty and integrity to the issues existent. I don't think it is possible for this to fully happen to a person if they have been fully presented the issues and has given them thoughtful (non-cog diss) consideration. I see many blogs like BCC and those on the Mormon Archipelago, but they still talk about the issues and consider them, to some extent. They don't necessarily bat a blind eye to the issues. They are now different Mormons. More thoughtful, probably then the average member who is ignorant to the issues. I personally would find it contradictory to my integrity if I were to teach a class in church and quote GA's as authoritative when I have seen so much contradiction and mere opinion on their part. Mormon Doctrine doesn't tangibly exist to me (McConkie's Mormon Doctrine is a whole 'nother discussion in itself) because it can't be nailed down- it whithers away, mutates, changes, evolves, and mostly assimilates to its surroundings. It will be interesting to see what will happen with the doctrine of Polygamy when it is legal again in the US.
2. The second road to travel would be to try and be a progressive Mormon, working to help the Church from the inside as only a member can. If we leave the Church because we cannot intellectually come to terms with the dogma, then who are we leaving it to? Who is going to make change in the church? It either won't happen, or it can take twenty years later then it should like in the case of the Blacks and the Priesthood. These second type of enlightened Mormons are doing a great deed for the Church, their family, and the dissafected in the Church. I owe a great deal to people like John Dehlin (holla!) and others I have met in communites online and Sunstone Symposiums. I owe a great deal to those who write articles in places like Sunstone. Recently someone very close told me they were irritated with my interest in Sunstone and I simply told them that I owe my continued membership in the church to the existence of people like these. It helps me deal with the issues in an honest way and has even given me a great sense of pride in being Mormon, at times.
3. The third road to travel after being enlightened on the true story of Mormonism would be to leave the church. This can either be by leaving quietly, or becoming an "activist". My main concern with this choice is what it can do to family relationships. This should be approached with caution, having the family's feelings put in first place. Love is maybe more important than integrity at times like these. If those around the person are supportive and think the same way, however, this can be an aleviating, even beautiful new road to follow (see almost any post-Mormon person's thoughts and feelings after coming to terms with themselves and their new world-view and it can be very inspiring. It is very inspiring and beautiful to have the blind-fold taken off and to see the world around you, whether you decide to leave the Church or not). Bob McCue (Post-Mormon activist) sees leaving the Church as necessary and although there are many hardships in leaving your social group and family religion, he is "taking the arrows so his children do not have to in the future". This is integrity. That is hard to do. Religion can definately impair one's ability to grow intellectually and he doesn't want that for his children. I have absoulutely loved everything I have read from McCue's website and recommend it to all, beleiver and non-beleiver alike.

In the end, I empathize with all who have chosen each of these three roads. Each has their pro's and con's that come with them. Each is a decision to be made that must be judged by noone else but the traveler. As for me, I will keep on trekking along my journey. Luckily, I haven't yet come to such a fork in the road that demands my immediate decision on where I will travel to next. In the end I will have to honor integrity and also choose to follow what makes me happy. More importantly, what makes my family happy and intellectually mature. It is a big choice to make but luckily neither of the three is a "road less traveled" so I'm sure to find friends and support wherever I may go.

Remains Linked to Massacre Found in Nephi

Remains Linked to Massacre Found in Nephi, UT. Seven American-Indians were unearthed from a grave. Their bodies were found riddled with bullets, at least one at point blank. "I don't see it as revising history," Rood said. "I see it as adding another chapter."

My First Sunstone Experience

This post has been moved! Click here.


(Picture: Me with John Dehlin and Armand Mauss)

Belief-O-Matic Quiz

Take this quiz here to see what religion suits you best based on your personal beliefs. My results were the following:

1.	Unitarian Universalism (100%)
2.	Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (91%)
3.	Liberal Quakers (85%)
4.	Secular Humanism (73%)
5.	Theravada Buddhism (68%)
6.	Bah�'� Faith (65%)
7.	Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (61%)
8.	Neo-Pagan (56%)
9.	Taoism (55%)
10.	Mahayana Buddhism (53%)
11.	New Thought (52%)
12.	Sikhism (51%)
13.	Reform Judaism (50%)
14.	Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (49%)
15.	New Age (48%)

Cognitive Dissonance

Quote:

What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way.

-Betrand Russell

Here is a collection of material that I have studied on the topic of Cognitive Dissonance. I will study more on the subject in the future and the material can be found by clicking the label "Cognitive Dissonance" on the side of my webpage.

• Easy reading: Dialogue With My Daughter: Part I - Cognitive Dissonance; Institutional v. Individual Interests; The Refiner's Fire
  
• Cognitive Dissonance at www.fairwiki.org (by Bob McCue)
  
• Multi-Level Marketing and Mormonism
• How Denial Works: Denial in General and Mormon Denial in Particular (see table of contents for cog diss)
• A Return to Plato's Cave

Cognitive dissonance is a state of opposition between cognitions. For the purpose of cognitive consistency theory, cognitions are defined as being an attitude, emotion, belief or value, or even a mixture of these. In brief, the theory of cognitive dissonance holds that contradicting cognitions serve as a driving force that compels the human mind to acquire or invent new thoughts or beliefs, or to modify existing beliefs, so as to minimize the amount of dissonance (conflict) between cognitions.

EditDelete

Brazilian Soccer and Asian Meditation

Today was the World Cup again. Brazil has already beaten a few other countries (we watched Brazil vs Ghana in the theatre room next door with two Brazilian families with us), and today they were to play France. My wife and I watched it at a friend's apt. in Branbury with some friends. It was a VERY stressful first half. We were all shouting, rooting and pleading for Brazil to make a goal and stop the other team from scoring. We could all see that France was playing better overall and it was killing us. I was really upset (as was everyone else) and when halftime came around with Brazil still having no goals, I went outside to get some air. I was way stressed.

This morning I had listened to a Sunstone podcast talking about meditation and how it can relieve stress. I laid in the grass in the shade and closed my eyes. I breathed in through my stomach instead of through my chest. I concentrated on my mantra. I tried to clear the clutter of thoughts in my head. It took at least ten minutes to have the ocean of my mind calm. When it did I felt as if I was about to sleep. I was still conscious, though My mind became clear and a physical feeling like that of the Spirit came over my body, starting in my mind. It felt very good. It was physical, mental, emotional and spiritual. The stress and ruckus from the game was now being replaced by this feeling of peace and calm. I was even able to turn off my phone while in this state and still continue Zen. This showed me that I was still conscious. The physical sensation that came over me was great. My lips went numb, though for some reason, and my mouth wanted to turn downwards, which kind of bothered/ worried me. I'm sure it was nothing though and I'll look into that later.

When I went back inside to watch the 2^nd half of the game, everyone could see that something had happened to me. They were all wondering what was wrong with me. I just said that I was fine and then watched the game in complete peace...(until Brazil lost, that is).

After Brazil lost, everyone was down. We went for some comfort-food in a Japanese restaurant called Asuka and had their All-You-Can-Eat Sushi. The sushi was amazing. We ordered so much Sushi that we had to take home boxes of Sushi. My wife was so bummed out by the game that she was moody the rest of the day. The stress was so bad that she even got nauseous! I think that she should try the relaxation and meditation techniques that worked for me today.

After lunch we went to a Churrasco (Brazilian-style BBQ) in a park in Provo. I couldnt eat, I was so stuffed but the meat was amazing, though. I played with my daughter (5) and her friend Rebecca (4). I pushed them on the swings and then when I was laying down in the grass I let them beat me up for twenty minutes straight (I wanted to see when they would get tired of hitting me). I played my father-in-law in tennis and lost miserably. The last time I had played I must have been twelve years old in Ohio visiting my grandparents. They had the perfect setup. Their backyard housed acres and acres of forest where I would find snakes, spiders and toads as a kid. The tennis court was right next to their own pond so when it got too hot I could quickly go for a swim and cool off. My dad even used to catch snapping turtles there when he was a kid. My grandpa was excellent at tennis. He would regularly play with Jeffrey Dahmer's dad, who lived in his neighborhood. He said that when they found the body parts in his home that the police sirens went right by his house to the Dahmers. He had met Jeffrey Dahmer several times as well. I would like to become good at tennis because I saw how it was a sport that my grandpa could play late in his life and still be active.

Letter to my Family about my Doubts...

[I wrote this letter to a dear family member after they found out I had doubts about the church]

Dear [****],

How are you? I wanted to first of all thank you for our conversation Sunday evening and for you lending an ear to me. That was so helpful! I have said it before and I will continue saying it: I am very grateful to have a person like you in my life. I have also told [your daughter] many times that I see you as one of the most genuine people on this Earth. The letter you wrote to me while I was on my mission is still one I treasure immensely. I enjoy having you at our house and listening to your take on things. I can tell from your thoughtful remarks that God has blessed you with a very bright mind indeed.

I must say that after our talk outside [where we talked about my doubts] I was worried that you would talk to my parents afterwards about my doubts and feelings towards the Church. I was happy when you told me that you hadn't said anything yet. I wouldn't feel comfortable having others talk about me by themselves in a group or trying to make me "a project". So thanks for respecting that. You might be surprised to find that I didn't follow your council in not talking to my mom about these things. Yesterday night she called to her house to have a one-on-one with her. Me being me, I was just completely honest with her about my current feelings. You know what, though? I still love the Church and its teachings and hopefully she saw that yesterday. The only thing I am doing is expressing my doubts and working them out. Yes that is generally not done inside the Church among its members because these topics can be seen as heretic or taboo but I am just being honest with myself and a few close to me. Most would recommend these types of conversation to be reserved between my patriarchal leaders at home and at Church, but what if they don't know the issues that trouble me? I highly doubt that my Bishop has studied these things, and my dad doesn't want to "meddle" for the time being so I'm left alone to work these things out.

I think we all of us are always working things out in our minds, making contradictions work, etc. This is how we figure out life- by contemplating the equations and conundrums surrounding us, and so it is with me in the Church right now. Some people, I believe, are born thinkers. What I mean by that is that some, by nature, are born to question everything and think "outside the box" if you will. I can see that you definitely are a thinker. My dad is too, although he now only allows his "orthodox" thoughts override his "unorthodox". For me, I could see myself having this trait even before I was baptised. On one occasion, seven years of age, I saw a woman in a swimsuit on a cover of a magazine. The thought came to my mind about sex (my parents had talked to me beforehand about the mechanics). The funny thing is, I looked at that woman and thought to myself of all the sins I could now commit, and not be held accountable because I still had not been baptised. I still remember thinking, I can go and have sex, or do "this or that", or steal, and still come out as "perfect" on the day of my baptism (and this being before my 'age of accountability').

Another example, also when I was around seven years old, was my problem with bearing testimony and the Spirit bearing witness of the truth. At this young age, I did not agree with how everyone would say they "knew" this and that from simply their feelings. At this young age I contemplated the idea that it could be their own minds or even (remember, I was a kid) feelings coming from a space ship from far away to fool the Earthlings. I thought "who's to say that couldn't be? Is it absoulutely impossible?" I still to this day, even after having very remarkable experiences with the Spirit, wonder if "feelings" should trump testable data and logic. Really, though, who is to say that my ideas as a kid are not worth considering? Once again, this is pretty "taboo" of me to be saying, but is it not something to consider? That is all I am doing is working out this masterpiece of what life is and trying to figure it all out. The mentality I have now I have had since I was an innocent little kid. The only difference is that I am now being open and honest about how I feel. That's all.

[I have come across a lot of information about the Church that begs to be considered contemplated]. There are people who know the same information I know and continue faithful in the Church, though their testimonies become more complicated. It's a tricky road to travel but others have done it. Heroes I look up to are Leonard Arrington (Church historian), Richard Bushman, Grant Palmer, Michael Quinn, Todd Compton, and others. There are even communities of people like me who know the issues and continue in the Church. They are good to look up to because they know what you are going through. A couple of good publications are Sunstone and Dialogue. Here, there are many members who can help each other deal with these issues and continue to live and focus on a Christ-centered life. You can get a free issue sent to your house by clicking here.

In closing, there is a presentation put together by a seminary teacher about members like me. Please check it out as to better understand your nephew. It is found here:

[****], thank you once again for being non-judgmental and so loving and sincere! I love you to death!

Yours,
[KF]

Dealing with My Doubts

[Note: this is a conversation between me and a couple of people on Mormon Stories.org. At this time, I had been dealing with some serious doubts about my faith and religion. Here are the responses, insights and support from some thoughtful individuals- ending with a great quote!]

Jordanandmeg said:

Daniel [another commenter talking about his experience in studying "New Mormon History"] said:

“It shook my faith but didn’t destroy it. I think that’s a healthy thing.”

Yes. Wonderfully said. It’s very healthy, I think, to let your faith be shaken. When it is shaken it can be deepened, corrected, reoriented, broadened. A stagnant testimony is like an embalmed flower. And even when faith is destroyed, time finds ways to put it back together with more beauty and precision than we had before, even if it takes years. And not just faith that a particular religion is true or false, but in God, goodness, truth, happiness.

Kid Fantastik said:

Wow, well said jordanandmeg! Kinda describes what I’m going through. Many don’t understand my “new” testimony I have now but luckily my wife is very understanding and open-minded herself. I’ve been involved in Mormon studies since I got back from my mission in ‘02. I now feel very content with my new way of thinking and have even prayed to God about my new “un-orthodox” way of thinking and felt extremely whole, happy and satisfied. I have a few questions for all you guys:

1) I haven’t been married in the temple yet and I currently don’t feel the need to do it either. Should I just get married in the temple to satisfy the parental pressures from my family and my wife’s family? (We occasionally hear the “I hope you don’t die and end up seperated for eternity” line). What about getting married “just in case it’s all true”? I’ve thought about that, too. Any thoughts?

2) How can I open up and be completely honest about how I feel spiritually to my parents? (I feel that a conversation between us cannot even start since they don’t have the “background” of information that I have).

3) I’m twenty-five and can’t get my friends to be more involved in Mormon studies. I’ve sent free issues of Sunstone to my friends. My wife doesn’t get involved either so I’m stuck reading all this interesting information and listening to all of the Mormon Stories Podcasts on my iPod and I end up with noone to share it with or chat about it. Does anybody know of a community of young open-minded individuals that meet in Utah County or anything?

4) Since I’ve become more open-minded about sources of information/ books/ philosophy (instead of just the church correlated), I have come across some cool books that I can now read and be inspired from. You guys come across any cool books that you wouldn’t have read beforehand but now you find thought-provoking? (A couple of my examples are “The Teachings of Don Juan”, and “The Singularity is Near”)

Some people’s very insightful responses to my inquiry:

Kempton said:

I’m an exmormon but I hope that doesn’t detour you from listening to my perspective, K.F. In regards to #1 above I am so glad I no longer have to make those kinds of decisions. But I understand where you are coming from. If you are already willing to live in an orthodox environment with unorthodox beliefs then why not extending it to going through the motions of a temple marriage with the funny hat, secret handshakes, and modified penal oaths?

In regards to #2, for any Progressive Sunstone Mormon, I highly recommend John Dehlin’s screencast at http://www.mormonstories.org/whytheyleave. If they do not have at least some basic common knowledge in regards to the problems with taking Mormonism literally they will likely not be receptive to what you have to say. Ask them if they want to understand your perspective? If they don’t then they won’t read any books or web pages you recommend. If they won’t read for themselves, it is like a PhD professor trying to explain algebra to a person who refuses to learn basic mathematics. In my experience I have received two distinct reactions from LDS family and friends when I tried to explain my perspective, first as a Sunstone Mormon and then as an exMormon.

1. Some of my friends would listen intently. They knew that I was a man of good character. They trusted me enough to know that there was something to what I was saying. After I gave them the basic reasons why I feel that Mormonism is not what it claims to be, they then decided to do their own research on the Internet or in books. They chose to read for themselves in more detail. After which, whether they decided to remain a devout Mormon or not, they had read for themselves everything I was saying, and so they never chose to accuse me of being the problem or making stuff up, as they had read it for themselves.

2. The second half of the people I opened up to would immediately attack my character before investigating what I told them. They’d just say they know it is true, and I must be the problem, not the church.

I have since learned that, unfortunately, people in category 2 never prove to be very good friends. But I don’t necessarily blame them. Although it is ultimately their choice to refuse to hear your side of things, they are also under a lot of socio-cultural pressure to avoid apostate Mormons and Sunstone Mormons. Below are ten examples of how much conditioning the LDS member goes through, in order to keep them from being able to see their religion as anything but the only true church let by direct revelation. Consider the following:

1. Just think about this: the LDS temple interview actually contains the following question that Latter day Saints must answer correctly to be considered a devout Mormon:

Do you affiliate with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or do you sympathize with the precepts of any such group or individual? Therefore Mormons vow not to sympathize or affiliate with apostate Mormons like me.

2. Mormons are strongly discouraged from reading literature about their religion that is not faith promoting and published by the church or Deseret books.

3. At least ten times a week they say or hear the phrase “I know the LDS church is true…” When the LDS member is surrounded by friends and family who reinforce this, I believe that over time it becomes a factual truth imbedded in their subconscious mind. Any emotions they get while thinking or talking about Mormonism becomes proof to the truth of the LDS church.

4. Mormons are taught that the natural man is an enemy to God and science and rational thinking are seen as man’s ways. Therefore, when anyone writes a book that opposes the claims of the Mormon Church, the LDS member will often presumptively discount any evidence disproving LDS claims as natural man’s distortion of the truth before even examing the evidence, all because it is against what he or she believes and “feels” is true.

5. Therefore, LDS tend to refuse to read anything that criticizes the Mormon Church. Anything that challenges the idea that Mormonism is the only true religion is deemed anti-Mormon. Mormons develop an aversion to anything that is critical of their religion. When they are constantly reinforced with faith promoting literature and refuse to read the opposing point of view, they inevitably develop a powerful bias and remain voluntary ignorant to all the problems in their religion.

6. Mormon culture functions on the basis of conformity. Members don’t go to church to think but to have their beliefs reinforced. People who do not believe in Mormonism are not expected to show up, as that would challenge the faith of those in attendance. Therefore, since Mormons usually associate with only Mormons when discussing their religion, they slowly develop religious tunnel vision as their relationships are built around the emotion-based premise that Mormonism is true. Anyone who questions this premise is seen as someone causing trouble. Mormonism is a feel-good religion, based on emotional security and social conformity. If someone brings up something that doesn’t make the church member feel good they will not be welcomed.

7. Since the Mormon’s identity is wrapped around Mormon dogma anyone who questions things like the historicity of the Book of Mormon will be seen as someone who is attacking the member’s very identity. Just like taking a toy away from a two-year-old, most LDS members are unable to look at their religion objectively, because their ego has become attached to the dogma.

8. Then they are taught to believe that subjective feelings are the way to know objective truth. Talking with an exmormon usually will not make the true believing Mormon feel good, since they had no idea Smith put a seer stone in a hat or that he had sex with teenagers.

9. If the Mormon really thinks an old white man in Utah is the only person on the planet who speaks for God they will begin to distrust any scientific expert that does not conform to the words of their leader. They believe obeying the words of their leader is what’s most important.

10. The LDS member has been trained to handle the former LDS believer and Sunstone Mormon with disdain. They are told to bear testimony: appeal to emotions rather than have an open discussion based on logic and reason. They are told to refuse to read what the former Mormon offers as evidence because it’s all considered anti-Mormon lies. The Mormon has been taught to assume that anyone who leaves the church is an evil sinner that is spiritually sick, and must be either reconverted to the true fold or rejected lest they drag you down to the pit of hell with them. Dramatic language aside that is unfortunately what you’re dealing with.

For some suggestions for having a friendly dialogue with an LDS member see: http://www.geocities.com/exmormon2000/friendlydialogue.htm

Kid Fantastik said:

Thank you!! I sincerely thank you for your thoughts, experiences and links posted. I didn’t even know about the slideshow put together by John Dehlin! I’ve already started to bring up some sort of dialogue with my dad and already he told me he was worried I would become an “apostate”. I know that he is scared to look into the things I’ve been looking into for the last year.

Everyone around me tends to say, “I don’t wanna hear about it”, or even, “why are you poking around in manure”. Well the reason why is because, like Mr. Dehlin, I was SOOOO into LDS apologetics and Church history. I studied everything on the FAIR website, SHIELDS, Jay Lindsay and ate it all up- I loved it, but I wanted more and delved deeper. Like John I went from LDS Church manuals to Arrington, to Bushman, to Quinn, Compton and other Signature books. Did we do something bad to have come to the place we are?? No, we arrived here from our thirst for knowledge of our church and its history. People who have come to where we are arrived here because they value integrity, too. I think most of us on this blog are studious, care about truth and integrity.

I would probably consider myself a NOM (New Order Mormon) for now, and the path to where I am now started with an LDS mission, then to apologetics, and then to fair and balanced Mormon literature. John Dehlin’s studies started when he wanted to be a better Seminary teacher. He cares very much about integrity and truth, I can tell. Grant Palmer sounds very much the same in his interview on Mormon Stories and elsewhere. You sound like a great guy too, Bill, and I am sure none of us are going to be judged negatively for simply studying our church and honoring truth.

Thanks again!

Jordanandmeg said:

Kid Fantastik.

I think the road to deeper faith is an inherently lonely one. It is essentially between oneself and God. You learn to judge things as they come and slowly become more patient with yourself, other people, your religion, and life’s ambiguities.

I wouldn’t expect anyone to understand or join you. I wouldn’t expect family or church to take part in this. And rightly so. Deep faith is deeply personal. And I wouldn’t expect to change the world - that’s part of learning patience with reality.

Deepening faith is like running the gauntlet: there’s nothing more lonely, painful, dire, urgent. But once it nears its end - what satisfaction, what accomplishment! And every once and a while, you come across someone who’s ran the same race, and you can enjoy a knowing exchange.

Through it all, I have come to love the church. I think I’m beginning to see it for what it really is.

It’ll be exciting to see what kind of conclusions you come to.

Kempton said:

Hey KF,

I’m afraid that the “I don’t want to hear about it” retort is quite common in Mormondom. I once presented an LDS friend with David Whitmer’s pamphlet An Address to All Believers in Christ where he states that God told him to leave the LDS church. My friend just said, “I don’t care what David Whitmer said!” Imagine that, he doesn’t care what a BoM witness said, LOL. Most of my family has seen the light but my father is still afraid to look into things and we agree to disagree about religion. I spent about two years trying to get him to read or listen to things and finally I decided that you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink, you can’t teach a dog new tricks, and I accept my father the way he is. You know the saying, “would you rather be right or be happy?” You are so right, KF, when you wrote that “most of us on this blog are studious, care about truth and integrity.” Jordanandmeg is right too, the road to truth and integrity is often a lonely one, but once the smoke clears you’re true friends remain and no one can put a price on truth. In the long run the truth comes out. Be glad you found out now rather than later.

- Bill
www.geocities.com/exmormon2000

FreeAtLast said:

I heard a great quote today from Patrick Henry, the 18th-century American Revolutionary leader and orator. It’s SO applicable to many Latter-Day Saints in respect to their fear of finding out faith-shaking facts about Joseph Smith, The Book of Mormon, early church history, and other aspects of Mormonism. Henry said,

We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth…Is this the part of wise men…Are we disposed to be of the number of those, who having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not…? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it might cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; [and] to know it – now.

My Mormon Studies So Far

I noticed today that I have listened to approximately 75 hours of Podcasts talking on Mormon Studies. The most interesting one I am listening to is called Mormon Stories. John Dehlin interviews Mormons of ALL types and backgrounds including ex-Mormons and anti-Mormons. The reason he does the Podcast is because he ran into a lot of Church History problems and things about the church that were difficult to accept as he prepared to be a Seminary teacher for the Church. The things he found shattered his faith. He wanted to leave the Church until he found support in communities of open-minded members of the church. He found people could know about these issues and deal with them without having to leave the church behind. He then wanted to interview people and get their stories for us all to empathize with and get a better understanding of our church and its members.

I have listened to thirty of his one-hour programs so far and I can tell that he has been on quite a journey as have I in my own Mormon studies. It has been good to have some sort of a support group through all of this. I call it a journey or even a never-ending journey because I dont really see a final conclusion anywhere near. For anyone that has left the church I see it like this: if they think they know all the answers about Joseph Smith or some other topic of Mormonism that is difficult to accept, they simply have not looked at other sources for information. That's it in a nutshell. If you ever come to a conclusion about something, all you have done is stopped looking for other views on the issue. That last bit of information, or that last source that won you over can either leave you TBM (true believing Mormon) or Anti-Mormon. In the end, I dont think anyone ever really knows anything. We are all made up of what's been presented to us in our lives and we usually end up accepting whatever argument made sense or was presented to us by our culture or family. The Spirit can confirm to us that some things are good for us like reading the Book of Mormon or talking about doing good to others. The Spirit doesnt seem to enlighten on broader topics, however, such as determining if a doctrine is sound or not. There are too many contradictions and mistakes on the Brethrens behalf to say that the Spirit will effectively enlighten the darkness in man's mind. Take the racism in the Church's past, for example. Other churches who didnt have the gift of the Holy Ghost elevated their black members from second-class status 15-20 years earlier than the churchs revelation said to do likewise in 1978. To me that was something that easily could have been rectified through a revelation that would have allowed so many black brothers and sisters receive blessings that were denied of them.

Once again, though, I have hardly come to any conclusions. My feelings and beliefs could change tomorrow or in ten years according to my personal prayers, experiences, studies and meditations. Its when you back out at one point of this journey that you sell yourself short. Im sure that my search for truth will continue throughout my lifetime. In the meantime, though, by having an open mind I am now able to find light in the darkest caves and truth in foreign places. The world can become really exciting once you open your eyes. Where I used to see black and white, I now see color. And where I would see strangers, I can now see my brothers.

Testimony and Peer Pressure

I found this comment on "testimony and peer pressure" on this blog. It rang true to me. The writer is talking about cognitive dissonance. I know this subject has been written about very much by many people but I thought I'd include this excerpt here today. To learn more about cognitive dissonance, many studies have been done in the academic world (it not only pertains to Mormonism, but to all religions, dogmas, political parties, science, anything people can believe in). The excerpt is as follows:

I was thinking today that a Mormon testimony is sort of a weird form of peer pressure. Here you have an entire community, millions strong, who gather weekly to tell each other that they know certain things are true. Those who don't know wonder what's wrong with them, and they try desperately to have the same knowledge the others do. I met someone not long ago who said it took her 35 years of prayer, fasting, and study before she had a testimony. Think about that: it took 35 years for her to convince herself of the truth of Mormonism. I suppose if I wanted to believe something that badly, I might be able to do that, too.

When people like Boyd Packer say that a testimony is gained in the bearing of it, you're toast. You started out with tremendous pressure to have a testimony, and then you were told that you'd get one once you told everyone you had one. So, you get up, nervously, and announce to the world that you know. And everyone says how much they could feel the spirit when you testified, so you feel validated. You have a testimony. That's how it happened with me, and when I told my bishop my story, he recounted an experience almost exactly like mine. So, maybe a testimony is a social construct more than anything, and not personal or subjective at all.

To learn more about cognitive dissonance, please click the "cognitive dissonance" label on the side of this page to see the on-going collection of material I have on this subject.

True Mormon Believer (TBM) Discourse with Former Believer

Interesting conversation between a striving apologist and a former believer.

My “Blacks and the Priesthood” Experience

The following is a letter I wrote to Darron Smith, author of Black And Mormon after he appeared on this podcast on Mormon Stories (mormonstories.com) which is hosted by John Dehlin:

Darron,

Great job on the recent Podcast with John Dehlin! I have enjoyed most all of his Podcasts including this last one and I just wanted to let you know that I think you did a great job in portraying that certain knowledge that needs to be spread amongst the Church. I am very much with you in that there are many things that we should teach or be taught in the Church. The folklore about the Blacks and the Priesthood is definitely a topic that needs to be more openly discussed. Sure, President Hinckley confounded racism in the Priesthood session of General Conference, but he overlooked the root of where LDS racism may lurk. As you know, these same racist ideas, folklore and literature are still taught amidst the members in a "hush-hush" tone, or for the missionaries it is even called "deep doctrine"! Like as if they are part of the "mysteries of the Gospel". My brother, on an LDS mission in Kentucky, told me he was once in the home of the supposedly "most knowledgeable" older man in the Stake on Church doctrine, and he taught these same racist ideas to my brother. So yes, even some of the "most informed" are misinforming others 'till today.

My personal experience with the topic of Blacks and the Priesthood goes like this, for me personally: I was raised in Provo next to three Black families during my whole childhood and up to High School. One family was Dominican and I did not have very much contact with them but the other two have been a part of my life until today. The first family is an African-American family that moved into my neighborhood from Michigan. The boys my age quickly became my best friends for years. We passed the Sacrament together for a few years, too. Today, none of them are active in the Church although still abiding by the Word of Wisdom and generally being good in all areas. I will get back to them in a minute.

So throughout my childhood I was raised with Black friends. The questions came when the second Black family moved into my neighborhood from Zaire (now Congo), Africa. My new friend was (in my mind) overly-dedicated to the Church, and to being righteous. He would not take part in any of our childish pranks or filthy jokes or movies. Like I said he was that 110% obedient guy. The first time I really thought about the Priesthood Ban, however, was when my African friend asked me to inquire of my Seminary teachers about why there was a ban until 1978. I remember simply not ever caring about it before (you might call that my subconscious racism as a White, maybe), but it simply was not an issue for me until my Black friend was having trouble understanding it. I remember when asking my Seminary teachers about it and no one had an answer or a talk for me to read (they might have given a very general talk but it was not memorable, nor did it satisfy my friend's question). So I went back to my friend empty-handed and we left it at that. What else could I do as a High School student? My parents didn't know, nor did they ever teach me any of the folkloric reasoning- I remember them just saying they knew it would happen one day and that they were very happy when it did happen.

So my African friend went on a mission and came back two years later. Now more righteous and obedient than ever (with that RM mentality). I later went on my mission, prayed and sought knowledge (like you did on your mission) in order to be an instrument in God's hands. Baptisms, like you said, would come as a result. I loved to read what I thought was "deep doctrine" on my mission and made quite a collection of interesting articles and things. From one companion I got a re-print from a Mission President in the Orient somewhere who talked about the Pre-Existence, Pre-Ordination, and faithfulness in our past life. He even included Asians and other races in his teaching that the Whites were the most valiant of all.

I found this very interesting (not because I'm White- I could care less about feeling superior to other races since my whole life I was raised with other races) but because it was what I thought was the answer to my friend's question. I wrote my friend saying I may have found the answer to his question and later, when I returned from my mission I showed him the material. I held these ideas to be true (the Church needs to teach that not everything the Church leaders say is true). After researching on apologetic sites and other internet resources, I made a packet of other material like genealogy and explanations of why the Blacks should not have received the Priesthood tracing them back to Cain and included statements from several Church leaders saying both racist and non-racist remarks. My intentions were good, I thought I had come across pertinent information and was ready to share it with my Black friends of the Church. Needless to say, it didn't do much for the first family I talked about, nor for my African friend.

My views had stayed the same on the subject until summer 2005 when I started to read several articles from Sunstone and dialogue on the subject. Since then I feel I have a more profound love for all of God’s children. Thank you for your testimony you shared about the Church and its prophets. It was humbling and refreshing. Thank you for the work you are doing to bring greater love and acceptance to all our brothers and sisters.

Much love,

[me]

For me, the Blacks and the Priesthood issue is one of my stronger problems to deal with as far as the "issues" go. It was the first issue that burrowed its way past the cognitive dissonance going on in my mind and struck a chord/nerve. After reading a couple of articles from Armand Mauss and a couple of other authors on the subject (one even dating back to 1968), I was amazed at how a prophet could be decieved or possibly lead his people astray. After this issue made its way into my mind, it was all I could think about or talk about with others for the next months. It was the catalyst to start my whole Mormon Studies.

My top three recommended sources for further study on Blacks and the Priesthood:

1. Dispelling the curse of Cain: or, How to Explain the Old Priesthood Ban Without Looking Ridiculous, by Armand Mauss
2. Videocast of “Blacks and the LDS Priesthood” by Darius Gray and Margaret Young (Please wait 20 seconds for presentation to start)
   
3. Mormon Stories # 022, 023, and 024: Black and Mormon — The Darron Smith Story

Philosphy and "Right or Wrong"

Sunday's lesson in Elder's Quorum was prepared and delivered by Bro. *****. The lesson was #22 "Agency and Responsibility" from the David O. McKay manual (teachings of the living prophets).

***** opened his lesson stating the following:

a wise man told him that there are two things one must do in life; repent and change. In order for that to happen we have been given what is referred to as the greatest gift from God agency. In terms of making choices we are all professionals we all have a plethora of experience. Why do we make the choices we make? Because we want to or in other words based on our risk / reward analysis of the perceived consequences (good or bad), we make a choice. Of course, this can happen in milliseconds or it can be drawn out over weeks and months. Unfortunately the combination of agency and the "natural man" generates poor or wrong choices. Fortunately there is hope for change through the gift of repentance". ***** ended on "seek the grace of God for improvement in our lives". We can all choose to come back to our Heavenly Father through the gift of repentance and change in our hearts.

What was interesting to me was a comment by one of the brothers who said that someone did a study and interviewed several inmates in prison. When asked if they would do their crime again knowing what consequences would result, they all said they would not. They said they believed that what they were doing would better their situation (IE rob a bank, etc.). Saying we all make our choices and mentally accept the "entire basket" of outcomes that come with the choice concluded the thought. The teacher said he did not want to get into any philosophy on the subject but I could not help but entertain thoughts on such a philosophy. I felt it would be rather taboo to discuss this in class but here is my thought:

This is why people make choices- according to what they perceive as "the whole basket", they feel the choice is in their favor for betterment. This basket they accept includes any positive reward, as well as the risk of punishment here on Earth AND in the hereafter and ACCORDING TO THEIR BEST KNOWLEDGE AND PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, they make a choice after weighing the circumstances.

The people in prison said they would not have done the crime if they would have known the outcome. Maybe personal experience had shown someone from a ghetto that several of his friends/ cousins had been rewarded for such crimes and this person based his choice on said knowledge. Maybe what he had been taught to believe was that you should not respect law and government since they do not respect you. His basket may have different contents than yours or mine do now. His basket now may be different now than the basket he had before making the choice. If he had our baskets he would probably not rob a bank or liquor store.

So then, can we go to the extreme and say that everyone who ever makes a mistake is hardly ever really making a concious mistake unless intentionally meaning to harm/hurt another and EVEN THEN their basket of pro's and con's makes sense for them to act (could be a mixture of chemicals in the brain, adrenaline, "perceived" reward/outcome.

Maybe the reason you and I make mostly "right" choices is only because of our upbringing, education, what we have read and what we understand about ethics. Maybe you and I have never really done what we believe to be truly a "wrong" choice. If I go back and think about something "stupid" I did, do I think about how I wished I had acted different? No, because I know that if I were presented the same time frame, situation and understanding of the choice presented to me, I would have acted the same. I act from what I see in the basket, and may learn from the results later, but there is no way for me to transmit what I know now to back then. So maybe nobody ever really does anything really bad, after all. That cannot be true because we always have a choice of being lazy or pro-active. Maybe the greatest sin of all then lies in laziness or being too lazy to think choices through thoroughly, or being ill prepared but once again it is our basket of everything-ness that brought us to that situation in the first place.

Crazy, huh.

Part two:

So maybe while you're reading this you think to yourself, "wait a minute- if I wanted to, I could be pretty much be perfect for the next two weeks". Well, maybe you can, only after you have read this, though. You see- with your previous basket you would not have changed. You would need something to spark that change like reading the Scriptures, praying or meditating, because without it you wouldn't do it or in other words your basket has already changed after reading these words.

I just want to explain, now, what I mean by the last two sentences. While on my mission and post-mission, I had eyes only for the Church. That means that if ever there was ever a discovery, thought, idea or teaching I thought interesting or important, I would first do a quick check in my head to see if it contradicted any of the Prophet's teachings and if it did, I wouldnt even consider the new idea. Now that I know of many times that even the prophets and apostles have been wrong (ie: men on the moon, Adam-God, Polygamy requirement for Celestial status, Blacks as inferior brothers/ sisters, etc.), I can now accept truths in non-Mormon sources. I can find truths in true Psychology. I can find truths in true Science. I can find truths in true teachings found in other religions around the world! I can find truths in a progressive world.

I can find beauty in things I once thought as unnecessary or uninspired (art, music, philosophy). I can accept more wholly my brothers and sisters around the world or around the city to the same degree as accepting a member of the Church- regardless of who they are, what they believe or what they do with their lives. I don't see them as a lesser breed anymore and I dont see myself as of a higher class. I dont secretly see myself as better than someone else just because I dont smoke or drink. I judge people less and understand everyone comes from different backgrounds and upbringings. Ignorance begets hatred. I think there should be a law of empathy. Maybe Ill write more on that another day but to sum it up would be like this: If someone does something wrong, always try to empathize them. Equate two things:

1) What was their complete understanding of the situation at that time?

2) What was their understanding that the result of their action would be?

Usually they did not do it to meaningly harm the other person. People are not wicked. They may just lack understanding or education about something. Always try to put yourself in the other persons shoes, culture, upbringing and chemical makeup.