I suppose I still have an official assignment, because my companion I was with when I discovered the truth about mormonism two years ago still doesn't appear to have another companion. I guess, since I still go to sacrament meeting, I'm still active enough to have an assignment, even though I don't pay tithing or accept callings or say amen after most of the prayers. The bishop has shied away from me like the plague ever since I explained to him my reasons for disbelieving two years ago (where he demonstrated a complete lack of awareness of any of the problems of mormonism, much less apologetic approaches to them). I have been happy to have been left alone in this manner, although I am always open for dialogue. Whether it is with the bishop or Thomas S. Monson himself, I am always willing to discuss anything and give everyone's opinion fair weight. I am comfortable in my beliefs, and have no fear of changing them in light of better information or reasoning. It has been the lack of better information and reasoning from all my mormon acquaintances and mormon scholars I have investigated online that has brought me to my current level of conviction that the LDS church is a total fraud. If someone can show me otherwise, please do so that I can correct myself. Just know that if your arguments don't match up I'll tell you exactly why. If you can't handle that and start crying persecution, that's not likely to influence my opinions.

So anyway, we arrive at this past Sunday. I got a phone call early in the afternoon from my old home-teaching companion. Now just by way of background, he's actually a pretty cool mormon. He's not afraid to use phrases like "mormons are full of shit" in church hallways. He's in his late-40's (I'm 30), and has a very relaxed attitude towards life. He doesn't answer the phone when the bishop calls because he'd rather not stress-up his life by giving a talk. He is also aware of many if not most of the problems with mormonism.

As soon as I said "hi" he started talking about how this lady he (we) home teaches wanted me to come over. He said that she was very cool and accepting of ex-mormons, that she had gone through periods of innactivity and recently been reactivated, etc... I could tell he was trying to butter me up so I'd be willing to enter what he thought would be an uncomfortable situation for me. Of course he didn't need to. Like I said, I'm always up for dialogue. I don't care how hostile the circumstances, I'm comfortable in my own beliefs and willingness to change them after scrutiny of arguments.

So I accepted. About an hour later he came by to pick me up and we went to her house. I dressed business-casual, including khaki pants and a nice colored button-up shirt. It had been a long time since I'd been home-teaching and I was looking forward to it.

When we sat down at her table she and my companion started talking about issues and oddities regarding Adam and Eve. With almost tongue-in-cheek humor she began discussing how Eve originally had 3 boobs, and Adam was created from the useless third boob. It was definitely not your typical mormon environment. By the way, the lady was probably in her late-50's, if not 60, so I was the young pup in the group. After some half-serious banter like this my companion turned to me and said "you see, I told you she was cool." She was definitely interesting anyway.

So at one point she turned to me and said "so, I hear you don't agree with our beliefs anymore. Tell me about it."

Ah hah! So it was their plan to set me up after all? It didn't matter, I would have come anyway, but it was interesting to see that they thought they were setting up some sort of trap. She said something like "I know I'm putting him on the grill, but he's in my house - walked in voluntarily of his own accord - so he has to put up with it."

Undaunted I proceeded to "cut to the heart of the issue" by discussing the spirit. I explained my three interpretations of the spirit I'd had throughout my life, which led to a great deal of discussion between the three of us. Basically, when I was younger I thought the spirit was felt through "warm fuzzies" and such. However, the clear problems with this philosophy led me to abandon that simplistic view and look more for "good fruits" of the spirit that came from it. Of course this was also illogical, so I ultimately and for many years defined the spirit as pure intelligence as a result from direct communication between my spirit and the holy ghost. They understood this evolution I was presenting, and agreed essentially with all of it, especially as my home-teaching companion by his own description admitted to being in what was stage 3 for me.

I then began to pose the problems with stage 3 by postulating the question of how we can know if this "spirit" is a reliable source of truth. The lady asked me "do you believe the spirit is a reliable source of truth?". I said "no, I don't, and here are the reasons."

I then went on to analyze the spirit from every angle, pointing out the circular reasoning that most mormons accept as foundational, and how illogical it was to not give the spirit the same tests of reliability that you give any other form of evidence. I broke down how the spirit was essentially just another form of evidence, and began to go into experiments and arguments that poke major holes in its credibility (using the stage 3 definition).

They both were taking a massively defensive stance by this point, but never actually disagreed with any of my arguments. They tried explaining how life without doubt was a life of never moving forward, which I easily shot down using the example of the old creed that the world was flat. They told me several stories of answers to prayers and spiritual experiences they had had, which I easily shot down with simple reasoning and counter-examples of my own. They really were floundering pretty badly.

Ultimately I told them that I felt I had to give alternate explanations of the spirit equal consideration as I did the church's explanation. That doesn't mean I have to believe one more than the other - I just have to give them both a fair chance. I then began to discuss hypnosis as a possible explanation for the stage 3 spirit. In essense, hypnosis provides a completely thorough and valid explanation for the exact definition my hometeaching companion had given of the spirit just half an hour or so before.

To my benefit, the lady was well-informed with regards to hypnosis, having practiced it herself many times both as hypnotist and patient. My companion gave several skeptical rebuttals as I began, but I only had to sit back and watch as the lady set him straight on every particular. I watched as she described hypnosis to him, unaware at first that she was making my arguments very nicely.

At one point she stopped very abruptly and said "I need to go lay down." We got up and left, leaving her to mull over our visit.

This was nothing like any hometeaching I had ever done before, and I don't think the bishop would have approved of it, but I was sure to tell my companion to feel free to invite me to come with him again any time. He didn't give me a reponse, only the general "have a good afternoon."

And you never had to even bring out the big guns like Book of Abraham, BOM anachronisms, Masonry & the Temple, etc.

It was clear that those things, and those types of things were not important to them. Nothing else mattered if they "knew" the church was true. So I cut to the heart of the matter by assessing the nature of this knowledge. All it takes is a little doubt with regards to the spirit to create the framework to bring the whole building down. That was how it was with me, anyway, and I was honest and forthright about it.

Kimball, you rock! Good job on that one.

As soon as I started reading this I smelled a setup from the bishop to get your companion to bring you to this house to have someone who has "been in your shoes" to put you in your place. Should have asked a little nicer for the spirit to be with them I guess. Those ignorant to fact will never master logic.

you are actually spot-on with regards to my companion anyway. When I discussed my doubts with my bishop he immediately started building up the guy as someone who had been "in my shoes." Shortly afterwards he became my companion, and I think this was our first time actually going out together (after two years, heh). I'm still waiting to be put in my place.

Will their next move be to rat you out to the bish as a pushy apostate that ruined a sacred HT visit with your demonic proselytizing?

Time for a court of love?

Why didn't I ever have a HT like you? I always had the pedantic ensign-reader. It sounds like a great discussion. I could never seem to find the "real" people at church. I'm sure they existed, but... I may have stayed in had I been able to have straightforward and unthreatening deep conversations like that.

What? An open and free discussion of Mormonism from all angles?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

I got dragged/guilted into being a HT back when my kids were very young.....after about 6 months of visiting semi-inactive families who I could tell, would rather we didn't come back, I told the other guy I was out of it.....had some very uncomfortable moments during those months when people allowed us into their homes out of courtesy only....

My SIL was a VT and she was instructed to keep knocking on doors of people who never answered. She said at one house someone would peek out the window to see who it was but not answer the door, and they were still instructed to knock every month.

BTW Kimball, well done! Good for you for being prepared, and being able to express your stance so well.

It has been a week since that fateful home teaching visit, and I toughed my way through the hardest of sacrament meetings - fast and testimony meeting. One of the lowlights was that very lady that I home-taught last week. In fact, she bore her testimony for about 15 minutes.

She went on and on about her reactivation and special experiences she has had in the past three weeks, including a friend of hers who she thought would never touch the Book of Mormon, but who has started reading it. Faith-promoting tripe is pretty hard to listen to when you're not pre-conditioned to accept it all anymore, but I listened intently anyway because I wanted to catch even the slightest mention of my visit last week.

Nothing. Not even a hint. Of all the special experiences she has had in the past 3 weeks, aparently an afternoon of listening to reason didn't make the cut of stuff-worth-remembering. Not faith-promoting enough, I suppose, to be included in her 15 minute tirade. Oh the humanity!

You should keep hounding your HT companion to go teaching again. Tell him you had such a great time and have some more ideas for topics of discussion. See how excited he gets about inviting you along again. Serves them right for not respecting you and hoping to make you out as a fool. You did a terrific job!