I can remember in the past (I could be wrong on this) that on this board, a large number of questions would be about the issues facing the church, for example "I found out about the BOA, I just don't know what to believe anymore". It was like people would find out the truth about the church and take a really long time to sort all the stuff out in there head, but now with there been so much really good information on the web and with things like the CSE letter, it's like the flood of truth gets people out so fast, and they don't really come here seeking answers to historical questions any more, but come more for the support of the group.


What ya think? Long term board members


Do people google and quit a lot faster now?
Do peoples shelf collapse under the weight of truth a lot faster then in the past.
Do we get less questions from people on the tipping point of Doubting there faith , and come across them already with there minds made up

Although it's cyclical, in general I agree that there is less focus on history now.

Eh, it ebbs and flows.

I feel like it's more out there now. The information is more organised and accessible, and really, well known and credible because of where it's discussed and who it's discussed by.

When I first found this board, mormonthink was in it's beginning stages, and it was right before the S hit the fan with Tom Phillips, before there was any story in the NY Times, etc. Plus, the church has essentially owned up to it now by coming out with these essays and there are books out there like Shaken Faith Syndrome. It's just all really out there and discussed like crazy on the internet now, versus when I first started questioning and the information wasn't as 'available'.

When I first found the board, the 'issues' were much more discussed, and it seems that now it's more about people's social, curltural and emotional issues surrounding the church, mormons and dealing with it all.

It does seem like the 'newbies' on here now already have their minds made up because I'll see introductions like 'I know the church isn't true, etc', versus coming on here tentatively with questions.

You really hit the nail on the head :)

Which isn't a bad thing.

The thinking has been done, so to speak. . :o)

When RFM speaks the thinking has been done... just kidding :)

I've noticed that trend as well.

First, when I started reading this board in the mid-2000's, there had been some major issues with respect to those topics (history, DNA, BOA) going on that were creating lot's of buzz. Simon Southerton, and Grant Palmer were summoned to disciplinary councils. BYU fired some professors, who were giving them fits on these things.

Perhaps its weariness, but to run down every apologetic argument becomes tiresome. Not because, the arguments coming from Maxwell House are so wonderful, but because one has better things to do.

Now the LDS hierarchy are just going after people who are tiredly, almost inexplicably, hanging on hoping to save the LDS Church from itself--like John Dehlin and Kate Kelly. There's not as much sympathy or hope for that among those of us who left for that agenda. I believe that the world will get on fine without it. It would be nice to preserve the historical and cultural artifacts (temple square etc), and maybe keep the Tabernacle Choir going--but otherwise it could shut down tomorrow and that would be ok.

Perhaps it's more important to discuss what the life after Mormonism is like, and how to recover and move on to some extent.

I don't care what the mormon church morphs itself into. I could care less what they change in the future. I'm DONE with them, and so is my family. There isn't anything they could do that would convince me to go back

I will speak as a not long time member. I found out a few issues last November (yep almost been a year now)

My first two issues were... JS marrying already married women and 14 yr olds. And Rock in the Hat.

I saw those, stumbled across them really and was like, "Nah, that's not true."

Went to LDS.org and family.search.org and BAM. It was true. And then with in a day I was like "This church isn't true..."

I didn't really start coming on to this site until a few months later. But it was and is still a great site to talk out things. And just feel like I am not all alone.

I have tried a couple of times to find the record of Joseph Smith's wives on familysearch.org and have been unsuccessful and I also tried lds.org, but didn't have luck finding information on them there either.

I'd appreciate help with that if anyone could assist.

I let slip a comment to my mother (who believes polygamy was practiced only because there weren't enough men to go around and the women needed to be cared for), and I might have to back up what I said in the near future (I couldn't keep my mouth shut about polyandry, though I couldn't bring myself to tell her that it was the MAN himself who practiced it).

Some other lds-approved source would be fine too because that's the only way she'll believe it.

I know Todd Compton's book is well thought of, but it's a $30 book and not in our library.

I found a talk where church historian answered members questions in Sweden with a yes about polyandry and gave example of
Orson Hyde's wife, Nancy Marinda Johnson Hyde.

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1409964

http://en.fairmormon.org/Firesides/28_November_2010_-_Sweden/2

And thread with example of manual for youth
http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1404314,1404916#msg-1404916
"
Searching www.familysearch.org/

http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org

http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Plural_wives/Zina_Diantha_Huntington_Jacobs

I still can't see how to navigate familysearch to display all of JS's wives. It only shows Emma in the part where I'm looking.

But you've given me several other sources - thanks!

It actually makes me sad to see only Emma acknowledged, as if the others were nobodies.

Hey Seekyr

I am not sure why you aren't finding it. I just did a search today and it popped right up.

https://familysearch.org/tree/#view=ancestor&person=KWJY-BPD


how I searched was for Joseph Smith Male, Father Joseph Smith and Mother Lucy Mack

All the wives are popping up. Including the married ones and Helen the 14 yr old.

Well at LAST! Thank you.

I think maybe I just didn't scroll down far enough before. I wasn't expecting other wives to be listed beneath his children.

Oh but now remember that Helen wasn't 14. She was just several months less than 15. That's different . . . somehow.

Thanks again!

Probably because other resources cover that better than a message board could.

Here it is more about recovery than research. People that need the help with the research will get a ton of links if asked for, but that usually isn't necessary anymore.

If you're here you've already hit the motherload, so to speak. This place is more for after the shelf falls.

But don't get me wrong, historical theories are still debated, new information does come up once in a while, but Mormonism is mortally wounded with the Internet. It is indefensible to the point even the mopologists stick to their little corner of the Internet and rage about how unfair the world is. Even THEY no longer have the courage of their convictions.

Mormonism is crying out "Is there no help for a widow's son!" and falling out the window. No one can rescue it from itself. It isn't dying, it's dead. It'll just take a while before the corpse decays.

Guess I can only speak for myself: History of the church didn't break my shelf. The church's current internal inconsistencies did. I imagine I'm not alone. The history is damning, but the current church problems are enough to make people fidget, and maybe even wake up.

I've noticed that, too.

I agree.

I've been here since the early 2000s. I had to gather a lot of information on my own, but I also had a lot of discussions and gathered information here. Now, a lot of that information has been compiled, documented, and is readily available, often from multiple sources.

The need for information has been largely fulfilled.

I found this board about Sept 2012 when I was researching tithing on Google. I thought 10% of gross greedy and wanted to know the biblical and historical basis. That was about the time of the big swirl about the building of the City Creek Mall and the source of the funding. At the time there was a lot of discussion about rock in hat, BOA, polyandry, polygamy and other new issues to me which opened my eyes. My shelf filled and broke on this board and I will forever be grateful. I think more discussion ensues with controversial issues which can bring a lot more newbies to the board at one time needing to find out and discuss the historical issues.

my input: the Current issues of the disconnect between LDS claims & reality are sufficient to disprove any hints of accuracy of what they're telling the rank-and-file, I've seen them Up-Front & VERY PERSONAL; IOW, they don't follow their own advice, Case Closed.

My take on the DNA issue is as others noted above. The peculiar ramifications to mormonism have been thoroughly worked out and are readily available in detail elsewhere. The science is indisputable and the historicity of the BoM is utterly demolished. Those few for whom that mattered have done whatever they thought expedient. The vast majority simply don't care, even if they understand the science. It quite literally has no ability to impinge upon their consciousness. We humans are superbly wired to do such things. It must have a great procreative fitness reward to offset its extensive costs.

Well for me, RfM has provided a fantastic jumping off point for learning about all those topics this past month since I discovered you. You may have talked about it more than you realize.

I've jumped from RfM threads to webpages,to ebooks to videos, to related articles and blogs and etc for SO MANY hours this month it's getting to sort of glom together.

But you all have directed me to a lot a really interesting history I never saw before. Some I kind of knew, but had never seen any authoritative writing on it. So it's been quite fascinating really.

I'm very glad so many of you have stayed with it long enough for me to enjoy your commentary and accumulate so many excellent sources.

I never regretted leaving the church, but I have to say that I feel so much more . . . RIGHT? about my decision. I feel more empowered.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/24/2014 12:49AM by seekyr.

(lifted) "Fear Divides, Love Unites"

When (if) Mormons learn this, their world will be different, and the non-mo family members also; I'm not counting on much change until/before then.

Yes I noticed too. :)

I just thought maybe we've all got so used to it all now and the initial shock-horror has gone.

I'll never forget my discovery of the hat and rock! It took a month or two after my first stumble on it, I actually thought it was an antimormon joke at first and ignored it! lol

.......... and then Polygamy with little young girls and other mens wives. As if polygamy in it's own right isn't disturbing enough anyway.

Then Blacks less valiant, Book of Abraham farce that I initially discovered by myself just browsing my LDS Quad pictures in the BofA and then Googled to see if anyone else had noticed a problem in Smiths facsimile No3 description!!! lol

It was all like a giant Tidal Wave that I couldn't hold back from Google. I never expected all that.


PS edit ... I was quite broken hearted actually as I enjoyed my LDS experience and the people and even more thinking my future would somehow be with it together with a temple marriage to my sister missionary age 36 at the time. Boy was I deluded big time! lol



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/24/2014 10:07AM by zeezrom.