Dumbo's Magic Feather

People on the inside (of religion) would look at me now and assume that I must be miserable, having given up an active belief in God.  Surely they would dismiss my claim to being happier now than I have been in years.

But I really am glad to be done with all the contrived guilt and nonsense.  When Mormons do things they are taught constitute "sin," whether by commission or omission, they experience guilt.  Even when no one has been harmed by the "sin," they will feel guilty.  Because after all, they've hurt Jesus, right?

Mormons are experts at contrived guilt.  Consider the guilt a Mormon might feel for not having been to the temple for awhile.  The temple is a place where Mormons perform vicarious ordinances for dead people, who allegedly need them to get into heaven.  Such guilt is utterly contrived, for no one has been harmed by that person's failure to do some "service" for the deceased.  Or consider the guilt of LDS parents who have some children that have strayed from the church. How they must agonize over what they did "wrong." Their children could be leading happy, productive lives, but they still feel guilt and anguish. For what? It's all entirely unnecessary.  Or how about the guilt a Mormon might feel after masturbating? Again, no one has been harmed by this private act, but the Mormon is taught that his/her sins hurt Jesus. He/she now thinks that he/she is "unworthy" of the priesthood and/or holy spirit. Therefore: guilt, fear, repentance. It's all in the mind, and it's very silly.

Guilt is proper when you've genuinely harmed another. That is the time and place to feel guilt, for that may prompt you to apologize, foster better relationships, and otherwise create goodwill. This kind of guilt may have productive effects. But contrived religious guilt is practically useless.

Not only is religious guilt useless, it can be highly counterproductive. Mormons who feel intense guilt over their "sins" may be much less effective at work, in their social interactions, relationships, school, etc. Compromised performance in those areas, at certain critical times, can have devastating effects. Mormons might feel that because of their sins, they are unworthy of the holy spirit (which they believe to be a constant guide, strength, and companion, when worthy of it) and thus God won't support them. They might entertain self-fulfilling thoughts of failure. It's just like when Dumbo lost his magic feather and then thought he could no longer fly. Fortunately his little rat friend made him realize that he was the one with the power; it had nothing to do with magic feathers (God). 

I personally find this reorientation of control to be an empowering perspective. For years my participation in the church was half-assed so I always felt unworthy and unable to reach my true potential (this because I was still a believer). Now that I've abandoned my belief in magic feathers, I feel like I've reclaimed a part of myself. That's why I consider myself happier now than I have been in years. 

I wish I could help some people see this.  They are the ones with positive energy, good attitudes, and inspiration.  They are the ones responsible for this, not God.  They don't give themselves enough credit.  Many Mormons will often say things like "I don't know where I'd be without the church."  They attribute everything they are to the church and/or God!  It's a classic example of externalizing one's locus of control.  Take it back, I say. 

God is Lazy

April 27, 2012 7:22 p.m.

I’ve been reading Richard Dawkins’ “The God Delusion” lately.  He makes an interesting point in one of the chapters (I forget which one).  Scientists will see something mysterious that they can’t immediately explain and will get very curious.  This curiosity impels them to action and investigation.  The religionist sees a mystery and stops his inquiry there: it’s a mystery--ascribe it to God.

I think this may illustrate a major difference between personality types of the religious and non-religious.  In short: God is lazy.  Godly thinking is lazy.  Cryptic declarations such as “Everything happens for a reason” or “God’s ways are not our ways” or “We will only understand that after we die” are highly unproductive.  They represent the end of inquiry, not the beginning.  End of discussion.  They are a cop out for real thinking.  It’s lazy to examine moral questions and quickly conclude that “God just said so.”  Claiming God endorses any particular course of action is a dangerous shortcut.  It is much easier to look at things in black and white and use hard and fast rules to decide what is right and what is wrong.  Good and evil.  Them vs. us.  In contrast, it takes energy and effort to painstakingly examine the moral implications or ramifications of any given act or category of acts.  Seeing the world in shades of gray is difficult.  The problem is that the wide spectrum of human experience doesn’t fit neatly into any religious worldview.  Mormonism clumsily tries to cope with the issues and problems of a modern world.  But much of the counsel in its scriptures is inadequate, at best.

Could it be that religion self-selects for less rigorous minds?  That isn’t to say that there are no truly intelligent and religious people--at best my theory might just shift the bell curve to the left a bit.  Perhaps the vast majority of people remain under the “fog” of the limited thinking and relative superstition of their day until the particularly scientific/curious outliers pave the way for more progressive thinking and greater open-mindedness.

But it seems that religion provides a simplified alternative to viewing the world.  A very religious person doesn’t have to dwell on the implications of obliteration.  Their minds are safely insulated from that scary proposition.  

The lazy cognition that pervades religion also manifests itself in lazy outward actions.  Religions stress repetitive rituals which can be done almost mindlessly.  Mormonism has one ceremony where people change their clothes around and watch a movie for a couple hours (and do some weird handshakes with each other), and they call it “service” for dead people.  It really doesn’t get much lazier than that.

Science, on the other hand, requires meticulous attention to detail and results.  It cannot be done mindlessly.  You cannot “go through the motions” in a scientific endeavor and expect meaningful results.  It, too, can be repetitive, but for different reasons: to achieve reliable and consistent data that can better explain whatever phenomenon they are studying.  

Mormonism touts the principle that God helps us “after all we can do.”  So wouldn’t it make more sense to only look for God’s hand in our lives after we’ve eliminated every plausible alternative explanation?  Science looks for solutions.  Religion looks for reaffirmation of what it already believes.

Dreadless

April 15, 2012 12:04 a.m.

One of the best things about leaving Mormonism behind was relief from a lurking sense of “dread” in my life.  During my inactive but believing days, I would often stress out about getting my life “back in order” and repenting and getting myself temple worthy again.  I would experience poignant feelings of dread and distress at the prospect of going through all that.  What an unnecessary source of stress.  It feels really good to leave all that behind.  I no longer worry about being off track or not going down my life’s “true” path.  I no longer stress about getting married and starting a family.  If it happens, great.  If not, no big deal.  I’m trying to live my life honestly, responsibly, and enjoyably.  I understand that having kids is both a source of happiness and stress.  Not having kids would probably have similar trade-offs in the opposite ways.

The other day I told my cousin that I was agnostic.  It didn’t come as a surprise to him--he had already suspected as much, and he said that his dad did, as well.  I imagine others in the family probably do, too.  It’s fine.  We talked a little bit about some of the issues I have with the church.  It’s apparent that he is at least basically familiar with most troubling church issues.  But he seems to be taking an apologetic stance.  He also expressed some pretty outlandish views on what this life is all about (something about this life being an imperfect projection/translation of something more perfect).  He admitted that he’s kind of a hippy in this respect.  My opinion is that while he has become superficially familiar with the problematic issues, he hasn’t really critically thought through them, or considered their real implications.  With the BofM and BofA, for example, he said something about how his background in translation helps him understand how those issues can be explained.  Again, it smacks of ridiculous apologetic rationalizations, but he didn’t elaborate enough for me to call him out on it.  Toward the end of our conversation (this was on gchat), it seemed like he was trying to understand “all” my issues, just to make sure he had heard of them all.  I guess he has compartmentalized these issues off to the side and marked them “resolved” in his mind.  I think he’ll eventually make his way out of Mormonism.  He’s too much of a free thinker to maintain the kind of narrow-minded orthodoxy the church requires.  He may still retain a lot of his spiritual views, though (which is fine).

Lurking Disbelievers in Our Midst...

April 6, 2012 11:15 p.m.

I recently disclosed to both of my non-believing siblings (both are sisters) my current state of belief (or lack thereof).  They were both overjoyed at this news.  Neither of them have believed in the church for several years now, so they were happy to have the older brother on their side.  We somewhat jokingly speculated on strategies to “free” the rest of our siblings.  I don’t know if it will happen.  One sister seems pretty entrenched; she’s even a temple worker from what I hear.  Another sister is terrified of her boys becoming corrupted, so I doubt she’s going anywhere.  And my brother...well...he might just need the community, or he’d have no social circle whatsoever.  Maybe sometime in the future when their circumstances have changed.  No need to precipitate a crisis of faith for anyone.

Today I found out that a friend of mine, an old coworker at UPS, also no longer believes.  Apparently he and his wife found out a lot of the negative things about Joseph Smith and that did it for them.  That’s really all it takes.  I think if all church members became aware of the really deplorable things he did, most would disaffect.  It’s a religious faith maintained by ignorance.  But then, what religious faith isn’t?

In contrast, the other day I had a talk with a girl I dated about a year and a half ago.  She is LDS, but almost completely inactive.  In the course of our conversation, I let slip that I no longer believed in the church.  That didn’t go over well at all.  She blasted me for lacking faith and taking the “easy way out.”  I tried to share some of the issues that caused me to lose my belief, but she basically dismissed them as lies or otherwise rationalized them.  It’s interesting how even inactive members will cling to a belief system about which they know so little.  She is tragically ignorant of her own faith, but doesn’t realize it.  

It’s interesting.  Back during my faithful believing days, particularly on my mission, I would get these flashes of gospel “insights,” which I would record in a journal.  These, I thought, were personal revelations from the Holy Ghost.  Now that I’m an infidel, I still get these flashes of insight, but as to subjects that are either unrelated, or run contrary, to the doctrines and teachings of the church.  This tells me that it wasn’t the spirit at all, but just my own mind.  My own mind comes up with “insights” that are compatible with my current belief system and thought processes.

Today I became very curious to know how many more of my friends might be closeted apostates.  Maybe someday I’ll do a thing on facebook and ask all of my mormon friends who no longer believe to message me privately, just so I can get a sense of the numbers.  I know they’re out there.

An update as to my own beliefs: I no longer put much stock in Christianity.  I read a book or two on how the original NT gospels came into existence, and the significance of the discrepancies between them, and the house of cards crumbles even further.  Beyond that, though, is mainstream Christianity’s views on those who are never given the chance to “accept” Jesus.  If such are automatically consigned to hell (or punished in any measure), then Christianity fails on that ground alone.  I’ve settled into agnosticism.  Hopeful agnosticism, perhaps.  I hope there is some kind of afterlife or continuation of existence after death, but I personally have no evidence for it, and thus cannot claim any knowledge on the subject.

Why People Stay

January 19, 2012 6:38 p.m.

What makes someone like me different from someone who remains in the church?  I’ve come to think that most (if not all) rational-minded people, when confronted with all the evidence of what the church really is and how it came to be, will leave.  If, after being confronted with all the issues, they still stay, I think it has more to do with other pressures.  Maybe they are afraid their family will fall apart or they’ll be ostracized if they leave.  Maybe they need the financial support.  Maybe their job depends on their church membership.  Maybe their social life is so tied up in the church that to leave would mean they would lose their entire community.

For myself, none of these factors were an issue.  When I lost my faith, I was all alone in California.  My family is hundreds of miles away, so there is no real need to keep up appearances (and I probably wouldn’t, even if I still lived in Utah).  There aren’t tons of Mormons around here so I didn’t need to stay passably Mormon to stay socialized.  Heck, I’m not even very social, so I didn’t even have much of a community to lose.  I just stopped going to the ward I had been frequenting (of which I wasn’t even a member and kept a low profile).  I’m not dating anyone that would want me to be an active member, so that also wasn’t an issue.

On that last point, however, I wonder if I could bring myself back into church activity for the right girl.  Could I do it?  Would the pressure be too great? I think that I could probably do it. I certainly wouldn't be orthodox or anything, but I could go back and participate meaningfully in a local congregation. It does provide a worthwhile community at times.

Anyway, as for an “historical” update.  I went home for Christmas and had a good time with the family.  I think I am starting to drop clues to my family that I’m no longer active.  They must have noticed by now that I don’t wear garments, so that’s a big one.  Also, on the night before I left to go back home, my mom suggested we have a family prayer, and asked that I say it.  I said a prayer, directing it to “Heavenly Father,” not asking for anything (only expressing gratitude in a general way), and ending it with a simple “amen.”  Not ending in the name of Jesus Christ is clearly unorthodox in Mormonism, so that was another clue to them.  This came a few days after my mom asked me directly how I was doing “spiritually.”  I told her “fine” in an attempt to assuage her, but the whole prayer thing kind of blew it.  I’m presently not entirely sure what spiritual means anymore.

As for my beliefs, my view of the church as being man-made has pretty much solidified.  My journey down the rabbit hole may result in a rejection of Christianity and religion altogether.  I don’t know if I’ll slide all the way into atheism.  I think at most I might become agnostic.  Currently I think of myself as a deist: I think there is some sort of supreme being/prime mover, but I can’t say that I know much about it.  I’ve all but abandoned the Mormon methodology for determining spiritual truth: reliance on one’s feelings.  The journey continues...

"Wanting" to Believe

December 3, 2011 8:46 p.m.

During the year leading up to my mission (1999), the internet was just starting to catch on (at least, as far as I was concerned).  At that time of my life, I was highly focused on gaining knowledge of the church’s teachings (the gospel) so that I would be an effective missionary.  Also during that time period, I started participating in LDS chat rooms and discussion boards.  Often I would engage in “debates” with those I termed “anti-mormons” at the time.  Typically they were current or former church members who had lost their belief in the church for one reason or another.  I became a bit of an amateur apologist during that time period.  Possessing only a high school education, the apologist explanations for many of the problems I encountered with the church were sufficient for me.  (Not coincidentally, I also very much wanted to believe that the church was true; and I operated on a presumption of its truthfulness in everything I heard or read.)

Sometimes I would correspond via email with some of the people I met on these boards.  There was one man I spoke to who insisted that God had led him out of the church.  He appeared very sincere in recounting his spiritual journey.  I took his story seriously, and it bothered me.  I recall wondering if God would really lead someone out of his true church for some reason.  I speculated that perhaps God might do that to allow someone to gain some necessary perspective, but then eventually lead them right back into his fold.  I see now how powerfully I was dominated by presumptions in favor of the church’s truth claims.  During that time, I could hardly fathom someone having a genuinely spiritual experience that actually led them away from the “truth.”

Now, of course, I see things differently.  I acknowledge that people of all cultures and religions have experiences which they perceive to be spiritual, the same way that Mormons do.  Because such experiences are inherently personal and subjective, there is no way to independently determine their validity with any level of confidence.  If there is a God, I have no doubt he would grant spiritual experiences to all his children if they seek him honestly.  This explanation makes sense.  Before and during my mission, I had to do exhausting mental gymnastics to explain away the spiritual experiences of people not in compliance with the church’s teachings.  Now I don’t have to.

Mormon for a Reason?

October 10, 2011 11:21 pm

I just read something on a message board that I found very interesting.  One of the participants remarked that he thinks he may have been born a Mormon because God meant for him to be a Mormon, or at least strongly consider it.  He also believes that there are many paths leading to God.  He cited the story of David O. McKay who, during his mission, saw inscribed on a stone the following: “Where e’er thou art, do well thy part.”  He applies this to himself in that he is in Mormonism, and he will act well his part.

Could it be that most people in the world are born into a particular belief system that may best be suited to their individual needs?  It may not be a universal principle, since people can go through so many paradigm shifts within their lifetime, but it’s something to think about.  I know I don’t feel comfortable out in the world.  Even if I abandoned Mormonism altogether, I know that I don’t have a compatible personality with many worldly ideas, principles, or practices.  This is a very fascinating way to look at my practicing a religion.  If adopted, it may assist me in living the “passably” Mormon life that I can easily imagine for myself.