MovieChat Forums > September Dawn (2007) Discussion > TRUE FACTS FROM AN EX-MEMBER HERE!

TRUE FACTS FROM AN EX-MEMBER HERE!

posted 17 years ago by gsmith83-1
280 replies | jump to latest

I was born and raised in the LDS faith, and only a few years ago "quit". I'm here to tell you that the following are FACTS based upon my own experiences.

1. I've never met a nicer person than my ex-bishop.
2. Tithing, or giving 10% of your income to the church, is optional. What religion doesn't accept donations?
3. My family was very poor for a while, and the church helped us financially.
4. Mormons DO NOT have horns surgically attached to their heads... I'm just tired of hearing about this one.
5. I quit the church out of personal beliefs, and I wasn't harassed or kidnapped or anything.
6. The LDS church is NOT a cult. Get a life, people.
7. The best representation of mormonism from an outside perspective would probably be from South Park. I know, it sounds dumb, but its true!

Anybody else have anything to add? I'm sure I'm gonna get some idiots saying some crazy things, but I can handle it! I'm a big boy.

[–] mtnebo2002 16 years ago

I agree to a point with some of what you said. I was also born into the religion and through experience and research, have a few things to offer against some of what you stated. One thing I should add is that different people experience different things because of the fanaticism of the people in their wards or stakes.

1. I have met some very nice people within the church. I have also met some who will be very friendly as long as you are a member of the church. I have even been a party to some conversations where they spoke very venomously against anything that is not Mormon. I would like to reiterate that I didn't say "Anti-Mormon" but non-Mormon.

2. Tithing is actually a requirement as much as being baptized is a requirement. You don't have to pay it. I have actually had bishops tell people in their congregation to pay their tithing and the church would help them with rent, groceries, etc.

3. The church is actually very generous but, again, that depends on the congregation you are associated with. My grandmother was very poor, divorced, raising 4 kids and very devout with the church but they wouldn't help her if they were forced at gunpoint. Other people I have talked to have received help but there were a lot of attachments. While some I can see, I think some were a bit overdone.

4. The horn thing really cracks me up. I don't think Mormons are the only one's through history to have this rumor spread about them.

5. You were lucky with the harassment. Again, goes to the area and type of people in the congregation.

6. As far as the cult thing goes, it actually is. I refused to believe it for a long time but it truly is. I have done a lot of research into the church and its teachings and it would actually qualify for cult status regardless of whether you believe it or not. What got me for a while is how someone could label an organization that is benevolent (for the most part) in its actions as a cult. If it were just a humanitarian organization, it would not be so but because they are a religion, they could and do qualify. Research enough and you will see that it is so.

7. I really don't like South Park but I did get that little skit through e-mail. I thought it was funny.

I do believe this movie is a bit on the fanatical side, but I think that there is enough research into the crux of what happened to get a good representation. Some is speculation, some is not. If you have read any of the Journal of Discourses to get an idea of Brigham Young or his style of speech, the way he was portrayed could be fairly accurate. He definitely was a bit on the fanatical side himself. (Actually, I think that he redefined the line of fanaticism.)

Anyway, my 2 cents.

[–] arutha10002 16 years ago

Nice post.

Just a question: Does any religion not qualify as a cult, based on your research? What qualifications for cult status have you found that the LDS church meets that say, Catholics or Buddhists don't meet?

[–] jordan_newland 16 years ago

Could a mormon please explain the deal with "reformed egyptian", the lack of archeological evidence, the inconsistancies in the different editions. Also the belief that mortal men can become gods, that Satan was Jesus' brother. These things have always bothered me. My source for these questions comes from The Kingdom of The Cults. I am opened minded so please explain them.

[–] jeffwcos 16 years ago

"Reformed Egyptian" was the name that the Nephites gave to their writings which were Egyptian in nature but had been modified over the 1,000 years that the civilization was isolated here in America. I believe they may also have started with one of the variants of Egyptian hieroglyphics which could have been why they called it "reformed". I have no answer for the absence of archeological evidence and I'm not sure what you mean by "inconsistancies in the different editions."

We believe that men can become AS gods. Meaning that we believe men & women can continue to produce spiritual offspring in the next life.

We believe that we (every soul that ever existed or will exist here on earth) are all spiritual sons & daughters of God. By that definition, we are all spiritual brothers and sisters. We believe that Satan is one of those spirits who rebelled and was cast out of the presence of God. But, that doesn't change the fact that Satan, you, me, and Christ are all still sons/daughters of God and are therefore considered brothers & sisters.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Mirage4 16 years ago

One of the creators of "South Park" is or was a Mormon.

[–] geode 16 years ago

One of the creators of "South Park" is or was a Mormon.

I think the closest connection with Mormonism to either Trey Parker or Matt Stone is that Trey once had a Mormon girlfriend.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] tgs333 16 years ago

Say what you want, but any man crazy enough to have 18 wives has to be 100% out of their mind. Can you imagine being a mormon husband and trying to watch a Sunday Afternoon football game? You'd have 18 different wives nagging at you to clean the garage or fix the sink, blah blah blah.

But now, if your 18 wives were all lesbian...that might not be such a bad thing. emmmk.

"I'm a vehemently anti-nuclear, paranoid mess, harbouring a strange obsession with radioactive sheep."

[–] stu274 16 years ago

All religion is evil in my view. All it does is to provide people with excuses & ways to serve themselves & start wars etc.
All religion should be illegal.
If there was anything such as a god surely he would have disowned us by now for the way we treat ourselves, others & our planet.
Ive never met the guy so fail to see why I should believe just because some book says blah blah blah.
Give me a pen & paper & lets see what crap I can make up.
Obviously at least some people will believe it they are so gullible.

I found this movie ok to a certain degree but it just shows how people use religion to serve themselves & try to justify being tremendously gutless cowards.

[–] TheBandito 16 years ago

This movie:

Terrible Directing
Even more terrible acting
Yet it was quite historically accurate which frightens me.

Maybe you mormon's can help me out here. I used to be mormon but I don't kno much about the rules and doctrines.

What do modern mormon's say about blood atonement?

In the movie, Brigham Young said something about putting a javeline through his wifes heart and doing it with clean hands. Here is the full quote from the journal of discourses volume 3:

"Suppose you found your brother in bed with your wife, and put a javelin through both of them, you would be justified, and they would atone for their sins, and be received into the kingdom of God. I would at once do so in such a case; and under such circumstances, I have no wife whom I love so well that I would not put a javelin through her heart, and I would do it with clean hands."

What a creeper.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] zen2878 16 years ago

Do you believe in capital punishment? If so please feel free to explain the difference in blood atonement belief and a capital punishment belief. Clearly Brigham Young felt some sins were soo grevious that shedding of blood was necessary. Yet Capital punishment, which was widely practiced and sanctioned by the many christians of the day, is okay? According to laws in the US, and laws of the lands, you could be hung, shot, or killed for raping, adultery, stealing horses, stealing period, and many other "sins". What is that if not openly practiced blood atonement by the United States at the same time period of Brigham Young?

It strikes me curious that because "blood atonement" or attached to idealogy or because it is a religious figure that promotes it the idea is suddenly abhorrent. By the way, Moses also openly taught blood atonement. Although he did not attach the name there were many laws that could cost you your life if broken. I suppose he also was a false prophet.

[–] TheBandito 16 years ago

First off, I never said capital punishment was okay so don't go putting words in my mouth.

Blood atonement was the shedding of blood for the forgiveness of sins.
Moses did not teach blood atonement. Yes you could be killed for certain crimes comitted back in Moses' day but he didn't teach that it purged your sins.

Brigham Young, however, is quoted many times in teaching that if someone sins you are doing them a favor by shedding their blood because that is the only thing that can keep them from going to hell.

There is quite a difference between capital punishment and blood atonement. I am not saying that capital punishment is okay. They are both rediculous.

[–] zen2878 16 years ago

No, you completely misunderstand the entire premiss of what Brigham Young is saying and further you misunderstand the blood atonement. The idea being that some sins are so grevious or terrible that simply saying sorry or repenting does not suffice in atoning for ones sins. Furthermore your lack of understanding the blood atonement also shows your lack of understanding of repentence within the LDS context. Also, your opinion of Moses and what he preached is in all ways exactly that, a blood atonement. IE, there were some sins so grevious that Moses dictated shedding of blood of that person.

Capital punishment is exactly this. That the crime committed is so heinous that it demands the necessity of shedding ones blood.

I am glad you are consistant in condemning capital punishment since you condemn blood atonement. One cannot be intellectually honest by condemning the one and not the other.

The only difference between blood atonement as preached, capital punishment and Moses laws is within the context of why they are done. For blood atonement it would be in order that that man may be saved. In the case for capital punishment it is to save society. In Moses case I would say it was like Brigham Young, in that he knew some sins must have mortal consequences.

Either way I appreciate the fact that you, at least, are again consistant in your beliefs. Kudos to you. I may completely disagree with your opinion, but at least I can respect you.

[–] TheBandito 16 years ago

I am still confused as to why you keep comparing Brigham Young to Moses.

Moses did not believe that shedding blood saved people from hell. Brigham Young did.

Another quote from Brigham Young on the issue of blood atonement. Journal of Discourses.

"Ther is not a man or a woman who violates the covenants with their God who will not be required to pay the debt. The blood of Christ will never wipe that out, your own blood must atone for it."

Stating that the shedding of thier blood wipes away their sin.
Moses did not teach that.

Another:

"This is loving our neighbour as ourselves; if he needs help, help him; and if he wants salvation and it is necessary to spill his blood on the earth in order that he may be saved, spill it. Any of you who understand the principles of eternity, if you have sinned a sin requiring the shedding of blood, except the sin unto death, would not be satisfied nor rest until your blood should be spilled, that you might gain that salvation you desire. That is the way to love mankind."

Another:

"All mankind love themselves, and let these principles be known by an individual, and he would be glad to have his blood shed. That would be loving themselves, even unto an eternal exaltation. Will you love your brothers or sisters likewise, when they have committed a sin that cannot be atoned for without the sheding of their blood? Will you love that man or woman well enough to shed their blood? That is what Jesus Christ meant."

Another:

"...suppose that he is overtaken in a gross fault, that he has committed a sin that he knows will deprive him of that exaltation which he desires, and that he cannot attain to it without the shedding of his blood, and also knows that by having his blood shed he will atone for that sin, and be saved and exalted with the Gods, is there a man or woman in this house but what would say, "shed my blood that I may be saved and exalted with the Gods?"

Should I continue?

[–] guox0032 15 years ago

I agree with most things the Original poster said, except, Mormon is not a cult.
It so sure is.

[–] geode 15 years ago

And your basis for cult status might be ?

Oh Lord, you gave them eyes but they cannot see...

[–] wayneadams2003 15 years ago

About time that we have an EXMORMON saying something honest and positive about the Church. I was fed up with bitter and miserable people who forever criticising the church after 20 years they had left the church. I am LDS, and I support your facts on here. Thank you for standing up for us. We will support you if you need it.

Work Hard To Avoid Hard Work

[–] aelphaba-1 14 years ago

Wait... no horns?

"The length of a film should be directly related to the endurance of the human bladder." Hitchcock

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]