Just finished "Sunset Limited" with Tommy Lee Jones and Samuel L. Jackson.

"The Professor" (Jones) says to Jackson's character right before he leaves their conversation that he hates what he considers nothing or something to that affect.

I got that he hated humanity's adherence to non-truth and had a problem with hating something that he doesn't just doubt exists but "believes" is non-existent.

It struck me because my family thinks that I'm merely a doubter and NOT an unbeliever. No matter how hard I try, I'm never going to convince believers that I'm an unbeliever. At least Jackson's character understood that "The Professor" was an unbeliever.

I think this is not too fine a point in recovering from Mormonism. You have arrived at a definitive point in your post-Mormon existence when the people around you and related too you understand you and the difference between what they may indulge in rarely (doubts) and your absence of doubts. In other words I have an anti-testimony just as strong and perhaps stronger than their testimony of the truth of their beliefs.

The problem for me is I can never convince them of this (for me) fact.

You don't need to convince them of anything. Just as they are done convincing you of what they believe. You know what reality is, and that is that.

And I believe that is true. Psychologically, I cannot deal with their convictions that I still believe.

archaeologymatters Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You don't need to convince them of anything. Just
> as they are done convincing you of what they
> believe. You know what reality is, and that is
> that.

They aren't done. They and most Mormons I know thinks what I was before can be reclaimed. I have a few Mormon friends who understand the distinction between their doubts and my disbeliefs.

Tell them that your anti-testimony improves your relationship with the Human race. So it performs the same function as their testimony.

For example, I doubted mormonism because, among other things, I couldn't make myself believe BoM and Genesis to be actual history. It was doubt and not non-belief because I still tried to believe. When I finally realized that it was all a sham, when I no longer tried to believe the doubts I had were no longer doubts, because these doubts fitted perfectly into my new understanding of the world. The context of these thoughts had changed.

Doubts by definition are ideas that doesn't fit with what we think about the world, when the same suspicion of something being untrue fits with our understanding of the world it's no longer doubt but disbelief.

brefots Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Doubts by definition are ideas that doesn't fit
> with what we think about the world, when the same
> suspicion of something being untrue fits with our
> understanding of the world it's no longer doubt
> but disbelief.

Well said. Like in Sunset Limited, the concept of God, Jesus or anything beyond life that was even remotely like life was something The Professor could not entertain within his understanding of the world.

It is interesting that while we live in the world we entertain notions of it that may be so far from truth as to appear delusional. The Jackson character agreed with The Professor with thinking hearing Jesus would be delusional in a crazy context.

Doubts come for many reasons, real or imagined.
Contrary factual/verifiable information should lead to non-belief.

This was where I realized that I had a stronger testimony of the truth. It really is easier to tell the true story of mormonism with a straight face, than it was to hem and haw when trying to explain your church-approved beliefs. So for me, I just sent out scans of mormon leaders' words from books mormons know are church produced, and undeniable evidence. Now they know where I was coming from, and they can choose for themselves what to do.

Sometimes though, ya just gotta let people believe whatever they want. Nonmembers don't want to hear about Josephs Visions, and neither do members.