This is an argument Nick and I have had over a long period of time. To be sure, Nick considers many parts of the Book of Mormon’s teachings to be “LDS-ism” and not part of the religion of Joseph Smith and thus not part of “Mormonism”. I would assume most people would disagree with this analysis or at least find it very arbitrary.

Many ex-Mormons have a narrative where Joseph Smith started out as a pretty standard Christian and then eventually radically changed into something unique and discarded past teachings. I can appreciate this narrative, but it’s ultimately it’s an unbelieving narrative.

On the other side of this is that if you are a believing Mormon you really have no choice but to build a narrative where all that Joseph Smith taught is fit into a worldview, presumably based on a line-upon-line concept of more being explained over time with previous teachings being approximations until ready for more. Even Joseph had to do this, of course, lest he undermined his own authority.

My disagreement with Nick, then, is that Joseph Smith never was a believer in “the religion of Joseph Smith” as Nick defines it. Indeed, such a belief in the existence of such a religion is only possible to an ex-Mormon willing to build the unbelieving narrative already mentioned. Thus, as Nick defines “Mormonism” it never existed at all and no one ever believed in it.

I understand there’s been a more scientific study done about it, but I don’t have a link…wikipedia has referenced it, so I guess if somehow you can find that study and see if it has the information you seek, power to you!

Albrecht, S.L. & Bahr, H.M. (1983). Patterns of Religious Disaffiliation: A Study of Lifelong Mormons, Mormon Converts & Former Mormons. Journal of Scientific Study of Religion 22 D. pp. 366-379.

Actually, ProfXM talked about this study a bit in a comment on Main Street Plaza:

In that article they note that: 42% of former Mormons were drop-outs (meaning they left religion altogether); 58% were switchers (joined a different religion). Of those, 38% of the switchers became Catholics. The rest of the switchers ended up in an array of Protestant denominations.

He notes, however, that the study is a little dated. Our culture has changed rapidly enough that people’s paths and reasons for leaving Mormonism today may be very different from those of the people who left thirty years ago.

I always feel awkward advocating for more people-centric, service-centric, and fellowshipping-centric church activities because I know that all of that stuff would not pull me in. I’ve already got *one* family and I try to get away from them for semesters at a time .

which probably explains it, Andrew. **huge, friendly grin**

I guess I’m just throwing more anecdotal experience that doesn’t really mean much in here, but I can also say that as far as genuine care, I’ve not gotten that. I’ve gotten people who want to come to my house so they can see my house (but mine’s always more spotless than theirs, so I guess they feel bad afterward).

I know that some people have camaraderie in the same ward…because whenever those people need to move stuff around, they can get a full suite of members ready to volunteer. I’ve never had so much luck.

But PERSONALLY, this is really devil’s advocacy, because I really don’t mind if people leave me alone. If I can slip in and out unnoticed, that really is ideal.

I’ve never been in a ward or branch where that is true, and I am sure it isn’t an accurate description of the vast majority of wards and branches in the world. There might be all kinds of issues involved, but “don’t a real darn about you” just isn’t reality in most units of the Church.”

I’ve never been in an American ward where that wasn’t essentially the case for me and my family. I have mostly experienced ward members “giving a darn” about us only in the more or less abstract sense that people “give a darn” about anyone. But being loved by “the ward members” as individual human beings? That’s pretty much outside our experience.

I knew you’d fill in the details and simply couldn’t resist teasing you a bit.

Nice list of cartoonish stereotypes you have there. One would think that as often as I hear LDS lament that people stereotype their beliefs, they would try to avoid doing it to others. For the record, Catholcs aren’t “Mary-worshippers” any more than the LDS are “Joseph Smith-worshippers.”

In that vein, it might be wise to consider that members of other faiths claiming descent from the teachings of Joseph Smith do participate here. If our language implicitly defines “Mormonism” as the religion currently taught by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we exclude these friends in a rather disrespectful manner. It’s quite similar to the obsession some LDS members have with being called “christian.” If LDS members object to being classified outside of “christianity,” they should at least be sensitive to the feelings of other Restorationist churches, who feel equally entitled to the terms, “Mormon” and “Mormonism.”

How’s that, Nick, for a concise summary?

When my friends invite me to come to their church for short visits, I have no problem visiting. But to change my allegiance to anything else, I just couldn’t imagine.

Obviously, that is not the case. I am sorry for reading it the way I did – and I am doubly sorry that somehow my comments have brought you pain and led you to places you don’t want to go. They certainly weren’t meant to do so.

Bingo! LDS-ism places an enormous amount of emphasis on having “THE TRUTH,” and I believe this fundamentally impacts anyone who’s been LDS for any significant period of time. By the time I determined that LDS-ism doesn’t live up to it’s advertising as “the one and only true church on the face of the earth,” I had long since ruled out other versions of christianity as unacceptable fictions, due to the fundamental problems I saw in their reasoning and beliefs. Ergo, I certainly wasn’t going to go chasing after a church that I’d long determined was less “true” than the LDS church.

If you left the Church because you scrutinized Mormon history and found room for serious doubts, you may have difficult joining another Christian denomination if you apply that same eye of scrutiny toward the Bible and the Christian creeds because there is definitely room to doubt there as well.

Exactly! The historical claims of christianity at large are at least as questionable as any issues in Mormon history. At least we know a person by the name of Joseph Smith Jr. definitely existed!

Thus, non-Christian religions like Buddhism may initially seem more attractive.

Actually, Buddhism is not a religion. Buddhism is a philosophy, and is technically atheistic (at least in the sense of any individual, personified deity). That said, I agree that Buddhism is a very attractive alternative. I know it’s the closest thing I’ve found to a truly useful “spiritual” discipline at this point.

Just because you precede a comment with as you said, “disclaimers to try to show that I was not condemning or judging you”, doesn’t make the judging less effective. I honestly believe you are a good, loving, caring person, but your comments often lead me in a direction I don’t want to go…

Shawn your deductions are false. I’m tired of having words put in my mouth.

I’m done for now.

I am sorry that you experienced this to the degree that you walked away from the LDS faith, I really am. I have had to come to accept that for me it is all about the Savior and as I have had to let go of what others think and say, it has actually made me a much stronger person. I only care about what the Lord thinks now and I like it. I try to always give others the benefit of the doubt and although I am far from perfect, I try to emulate the love that the Savior has for all of us.

We each, individually, have to decide what Christ means to us and how we will express that in our lives. For me when it comes down to the nitty gritty, the most important aspect of coming unto to Christ is seeking to have the heart and mind of Christ. He is merciful, kind and loving. Hopefully, knowing this will help all of us to rise above our differences and accept one another from where we are at.

This is not personally directed against you. It is discussion of your statements about faith versus works. Your post in #49 lamblasted the “religiosity” of Latter-day Saint works (home teaching, visiting teaching, Temple work, etc.). You stated that you came unto Christ only be dropping those things and concentrating solely on worshipping the Lord and studying His gospel.

We deduce from your post that you believe works are useless and that building the Kingdom of God is not part of the gospel. Therefore, we are asking you to reconcile that with what the Saviour taught us in the Scriptures and through His example while on the earth.

We have said nothing about your personal works or sacrifices. We are keeping at the level of your claims that we do not need to worry about works or about building the Kingdom.

Why are you taking this personally?