When I was a teenager in Seminary on 'release time' I was put into a special class they made for problem children. I was in the class with Mormon kids who wanted nothing to do with Mormonism but were there because they had to be. And it was a class of all boys.

I wondered at the time why I had been put in this class. Probably inspiration for The Lord God Almighty I'm sure.

Now, I wasn't a troublemaker. I wasn't shy either. When the teacher, whom I liked, asserted something I asked questions. The irony was I really liked the guy and he probably put me in the troublemaker class.

This was in the mid 80s. I wonder if they would do that today? I was a 9th grader and trying to find myself in the big wide world. I'm exceptionally curious and I wanted good reason to hang a burgeoning testimony upon for my future adult years. This as a pivotal time in my life.

So, when I realized I was in the rowdy class and I wasn't a rowdy I justifiably felt slighted. To this day I can't say definitively if my questioning landed me in that class but it is all I have to go on. And at the time I felt and I still feel that assertion is true. I was annoying a teacher with my questions and so I was singled out with the other boys who were causing the other teachers headaches.

It wasn't going to be an isolated incident for me. I continued to question Mormonism looking for good reasons for the things to be the way they were. And in my later years of high school before dropping out completely I had the Seminary Principle call me an anti-Christ - merely for asking questions. And they weren't like Zeezrom offering money to have people deny Jesus Christ. They were like, "Why were the temples in The Book of Mormon meeting places for large groups of people but not today?" They were simple questions that I thought a believe needed answered to bolster my faith. I mean look at the "Ask Gramps" website and you can find lots of questions like the ones I was asking.

But in Orem, Utah in the 80s asking questions was punished. It was looked down upon but never quite admitted as sinful though it was treated as such. Like I was a "sign seeker." And I guess I was. I was looking for one.

But now with The Internet I wonder if this kind of poor Mormon behavior is so rampant as it was back then?

Great question, and back[Seminaria]story - youth, questioning LdsBS-leaders-doctrine/"truths"/ practices/ ways. Basically seeking wisdom, being curious, inquisitive or investigative.

Yes! "Questioners" are Always Isolated! - [Mormon M.O = fear (vs. LOVE)] - It's treated as a disease!

I'm glad I caught it (actually I've always had it, since childhood came along anyway, and got bombarded by morbidism)! I'm contagious too. Truth is contagious. It can get you in trouble early on and presumably save you from it later on.

Questioners are sometimes given the dunce cap but it's ultimately just one more hat to wear (especially when you already wear many hats). It can even get you a ticket out of the class. Oh how I tried. It was impossible to get out of Seminary until that great day that I had enough age on them.

Questioning can lead to apostasy... except in the case of Mormonism [which is in apostasy since its inception, according to doctrine, practice and preaching] (or 'Joseph Smithism'), where it leads away from it, and back towards the light.

M@t

I find my brother and my friend exmos took until their middle age to start the questioning.

I had it from when I was little. The wonders of Mormonism fascinated me and I read The Book of Mormon many times before I was into my adolescence.

Mormonism has 0 ability to answer questions about itself. It claims to answer all sorts of questions about other things but when questioned directly and scrutinized for consistency it breaks down.

Is there a religion where the known is consistent? It doesn't even have to have much consistency with the ever growing canon of constantly redefined truths of secular knowledge.

I get that religion is a form of speculations deified but when consistency with self is thrown out there is nothing left but culturally enforced expectation based upon speculation.

Take "work for the dead." How is that consistent with anything else in Mormonism? Take The Holy Trinity in Christianity. Yous can't play with maths like that and not have it fall into incomprehensible non-knowledge.

If humans even did a serious study of their natures and based their beliefs in going against them for a Star Trek like belief system at least it would marry knowledge and ethics better than those two things have ever been in a religion.

It seems the canon is always pointed at you.

There should be a road sign at all border crossings coming into Utah that read "Welcome to Utah, asking questions is strictly prohibited and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Great snow however."

Anyone else?

Is questioning Mormonism still seen as akin to seeking signs like the fictional chief judges of the fantasy land where Alma and Amulek were taunted in jail?

Can a Mormon actually pose a question, show signs of possible waiving belief, or even just question a leader's decision to "extend a calling" without serious social repercussions nowadays?

I know my wife has had years now with little to now callings (I'm grateful) for saying no several times to some ridiculous ones from her current bishop. She only accepts the ones she wants and I think a lot of people have not appreciated her sense of independence at church but I don't know. We've had lots of social repercussions for her because of my "inactivity."

An indicator that, yes, it's still a sin even to ask, let alone question, is what is currently playing out with criticisms against "an influential anti-Mormon," who is being vilified by LDS members, likely through the control of the LDS church. The "influential anti-Mormon" is neither truly influential or anti-Mormon. It is Jeremy Runnels, a really nice guy who was eventually brought to a so-called "court of love" because he had asked and questioned. Remember that when he asked, someone said that he knew just the guy who could answer all of that, a friend who was a Church Education System employee. Jeremy wrote up the questions and gave them to the CES employee, who never did get back, but mysteriously disappeared. Other people began to read Jeremy's questions and to ask themselves the same questions. This simmered on the church's back burner a couple of years until they couldn't take it anymore, and then tried to excommunicate Jeremy for asking the questions in the first place. (Runnels turned the table and excommunicated them, instead.)

So now, instead of identifying Runnels, which might prompt people to look him up and to read his dangerous "CES letter," they refer to him as "an influential anti-Mormon." This makes him sound less like Jeremy Runnels and more like an evil bogeyman who leads us astray with well-crafted words, someone we fear, and someone whose writings we'd never, ever read.

Yes, questioning or even asking for answers is "sinful," behaviour (using the church's favourite passive voice phrase) "to be avoided." "Pray about it," they will insist, "then do what we say." Then they will pull the church court card.

Mormons separate questioning into "good questioning" and "bad
questioning." In "good questioning" you ask a question and the
leader (seminary teacher, priesthood leader, ward leader etc.)
answers it and then you smile, nod your head and say, "yes, that
clears it up completely."

In "bad questioning" you get the same answer but you don't smile
and bow your head, you point out that the answer has problems.
At this point you are off-script as a "good Mormon" and have
outed yourself as an anti in sheep's clothing.

I'm sure they would prefer people didn't question or study outside information, and no doubt they still teach to study faith promoting material and follow the prophet. The failsafe is that you are supposed to pray until you get a fuzzy that agrees with the church's views (or you did something wrong).

However, I'm sure they realize at this point that somehow they need to do what other religions do and allow differences and dissenting voices. Even dissenting voices enable and legitimize the religion if people stay in, plus it keeps the religion powerful by number of followers.