This page is designed to be as printer friendly as possible, or you can print a nicely formatted pdf.

0.1 Introduction

Dear reader,

It indeed feels strange to be writing a letter to an unknown visitor. You probably live far away from me. Your life has probably been very different from mine. Nonetheless, I hope this reaches you well.

We may have both grown up religious. Your beliefs may have changed at some point in your life. Or perhaps we have nothing in common when it comes to religion. Nonetheless, if you’re reading this letter, you probably share my fascination for religion and philosophy.

You may be experiencing a faith crisis. I’ve been there. If you’re doing what you can do to research and make an informed decision, kudos. It takes guts to question long-held religious beliefs.

On Anonymity

As I write this, I am reminded of a common sentiment among many church members. Some may suggest that I intend to anonymously berate church members or degrade their faith. You may feel afraid to read anything that contradicts what you’ve spent your whole life learning. I understand that feeling, and I want to honor it.

This sentiment is clear to me in the things church leaders teach in general meetings:

When we consider thoughtfully, why would we listen to the faceless, cynical voices of those in the great and spacious buildings of our time and ignore the pleas of those who genuinely love us? These ever-present naysayers prefer to tear down rather than elevate and to ridicule rather than uplift. […] These anonymous individuals, if presented to us honestly, would never be given a moment of our time, but because they exploit social media, hidden from scrutiny, they receive undeserved credibility.¹

I fear my letter may be classified into this description and written off as the musings of an angry ex-mormon or interpreted as a bitter man shouting at the clouds. That couldn’t be farther from the truth. I spent the first 24 years of my life as a dedicated member of the church. I served a mission, gave talks on Sundays, paid tithing, taught primary classes, and fulfilled ministering assignments. I wanted the church to be true with all my heart.

I have no desire to remain anonymous. My name is Landon Taylor, and I have a profile on this website. I post about my other interests online as well. I’m a PhD student studying formal verification, including automated methods to reason about complicated logical problems. My wife has read this letter, as have other family members and close friends. I am grateful for their support and feedback as I’ve tried to address these topics.

The topics I discuss are sacred and sensitive to millions of people. I hope my tone reflects a deep respect for you and your beliefs. If you decide, after reading this letter, that you would like to be a faithful member of the church, I want to honor your decision in advance. These things are complicated and merit a nuanced conversation. I want to empower you as an intelligent being who can make informed decisions.

On Mental Wellness

Religion is a serious topic. If you are reading this as a faithful Latter-Day Saint, I understand how disorienting and confusing it might be. Please take your time. I want to cover a lot of ground in this letter. You don’t need to read the whole thing at once.

Letters like this one often receive criticism from faithful rebuttals that they throw too much information at a reader. FAIR, for example, often refers to this as an “abusive tactic [in which people] are trying to coerce you into a situation where they can bombard you with so many doubt-provoking questions that they can cause your resolve to collapse and your identity to fall apart”².

Because of this, I encourage you to take these issues one at a time. If you are skeptical, consider reading the next section, which makes my intentions clear.

Reading things in this letter will likely be triggering in one way or another. If a particular section is likely to be triggering, I have put a trigger warning at the top of the page. If a particular portion of a letter is likely to be triggering, I will put trigger warnings on collapsed text in documents, and they will look like this:

I hope it has become clear that I care about preserving your well-being as you read this letter. It’s frustrating and confusing to challenge your beliefs, and you deserve respect during this process.

Table of Contents

This letter is extensive. I must once again encourage you to take your time. If you can only spare a few minutes for one letter, I recommend you read 1.2 My Story, as long as you are feeling mentally well enough to handle triggering or difficult topics.

Epistle 0: Introduction

This epistle is what you are reading right now.

0.1 Introduction presents an introduction to this letter and its author. It is intended to give readers a preview of what this letter includes and the perspective of its author.

0.2 Your Identity affirms truths about you and your identity. A faith crisis is challenging, and it is helpful to retain key parts of your identity as you examine your faith.

Epistle 1: My Perspective

This epistle should be largely non-controversial. I introduce my letter and myself, and I present general information on logic and reasoning.

1.1 My Intentions clarifies my motivation for writing this letter. It gives readers an opportunity to determine for themselves if they believe I have conflicting interests.

1.2 My Story is my personal, vulnerable story of key moments in my relationship with the church, told from childhood through the early years of my marriage.

1.3 Why I Stayed discusses why I stayed in the church as long as I did.

1.4 Why I Left talks about the extremely challenging decision I made to leave the church.

1.5 What Has Changed shares how my life has changed after leaving the church.

Epistle 2: Truth, Logic, and Doctrine

This epistle makes the case for exploring multiple perspectives, and it shares critical points that, in my opinion, refute many of the church’s truth claims.

2.1 On Truth argues in favor of truth-seeking from many sources.

2.2 The Essays describes critical issues that arise in the church-published Gospel Topics Essays, including previous attempts to hide this information.

2.3 Reasoning and Fallacy shares a brief overview of tools for logical analysis on which I rely throughout the remainder of this letter.

2.4 Self-Contradictions lists self-contradicting statements within scriptures and talks from modern church leadership.

2.5 Inconsistency describes critical inconsistencies in key parts of the church’s doctrine, especially regarding the nature of God and His church throughout history.

2.6 Testable Claims discusses the results of testable claims made by church leaders.

2.7 The Book of Mormon presents critical barriers to the truth of the Book of Mormon.

2.8 Changing History argues that the church has attempted to control the narrative of its own history to make it appear more favorable and faith-promoting.

Epistle 3: Culture

This epistle condemns cultural elements present within and often promoted by the church. I believe this is the most controversial epistle, and I encourage you to carefully consider my claims against your own experiences and beliefs.

3.1 Testimony explains critical issues that undermine spiritual experiences, including pressure from others to affirm belief from a young age or despite a lack of belief.

3.2 Manipulation lists manipulative speech and actions that are used or encouraged by the church and its leaders.

3.3 The BITE Model describes the harmful effects the church can have on members.

3.4 You Are Fundamentally Flawed asserts that one of the church’s most powerful methods of controlling its members is community-enforced perfectionism.

3.5 The Other condemns the elitist culture promoted by the church.

3.6 Acquaintanceships makes the argument that the organization of the church produces relationships that harm individuals and communities.

3.7 Missions details the harm that the modern missionary program causes.

3.8 Sex and Sexuality describes the harmful effects the church can have on vulnerable people, including the LGBT+ community and survivors of abuse and assault.

3.9 We Miss You describes the church’s harmful attitude toward people who leave.

0.2 Your Identity

Being a Child of God

If you’re like many who grew up in the church, you’ve probably sung “I Am a Child of God”³ from a very young age. You may have even heard talks like “You Are a Child of God”, in which Gordon Hinckley emphasizes that you should obey commandments with exactness because of your identity as a child of God (even pointing out that blessings from a loving God are conditional upon obedience):

If you really know that you are a child of God, you will also know that He expects much of you, His child. He will expect you to follow His teachings and the teachings of His dear Son, Jesus. He will expect you to be generous and kind to others. He will be offended if you swear or use foul language. He will be offended if you are dishonest in any way, if you should cheat or steal in the slightest. He will be happy if you remember the less fortunate in your prayers to Him. He will watch over you and guide you and protect you. He will bless you in your schoolwork and in your Primary. He will bless you in your home, and you will be a better boy or girl, obedient to your parents, quarreling less with your brothers and sisters, helping about the home.⁴

It can be difficult to imagine anything else serving as such a fundamental part of your identity. For many, the comfort of understanding this identity is worth maintaining a belief system despite contrary evidence. I want to suggest, however, that changing my perspective on my identity has significantly improved my life. It has been one of the most challenging things I have ever done, but it has also been one of the most rewarding in a way I didn’t think was even possible. I’ll talk more about my own identity in 1.2 My Story, but I want to offer some reassurance early.

What Remains?

If this identity were taken away —if it were instantly refuted— who would you be? It would certainly be a shock. It was when my beliefs changed. But there are fundamental truths about your identity that you can hold onto and embrace.

Fundamental Truths

There are several beautiful truths you can always know about your identity.

• You are part of a long-lasting biological cycle. The atoms that make up your body have always existed and will always exist. Your atoms have made up many things before and will make up many things after your life.
• You are an intelligent being, even the universe dreaming of itself.
• You belong to a community of people to which you can contribute meaningfully.
• You can make life better for the people you love.
• You are capable of loving life, enjoying your interests, and creating interesting things.

If you are experiencing a faith crisis, I would encourage you to write down more fundamental parts of your identity that remain true, whether or not the church is true.

Your Personality

You have your own personality. It can change over time, but “personality” usually refers to the aspects of yourself that remain constant no matter the situation. While many publications attempt to measure personality empirically⁵, a subjective look at your personality can help you understand your unique identity.

Your Values

You might be surprised to find that changing your beliefs doesn’t necessarily mean changing your values. I still hold many of the same values I held before I left the church.

For example, I still value:

• Protecting autonomy and agency
• Using a surplus to provide for people who need it
• Protecting health by prioritizing good food and rejecting harmful substances
• Using speech to encourage and inspire
• Showing patience and tolerance when I don’t understand something
• Using privilege to help vulnerable people

If you are beginning to deconstruct your faith, it can be helpful to make a list of your values. If you’re like me, you’ll probably be surprised at how few of the things you value depend on the church.

What Changes?

If you decide to leave the church, you are also leaving behind a community identity. This can be intimidating, but in my experience, it can also be incredibly refreshing. The day we decided to leave the church, I remember telling my wife, “I finally feel like I’m allowed to be a good person.”

Leaving the church can mean you no longer have to defend your identity with an often-unpopular organization. You can be free to form your own opinions and identify with them. For example, I no longer feel like I have to balance belonging to a church that has historically (and to a large extent, currently) oppressed or ignored the LGBT+ community.

Trading Up

As I have worked on deconstructing my beliefs, a saying has resonated with me: Always trade up⁶. When you make a major faith or identity decision, ask if your decision leaves you better off than you were before you made it. And remember, you are an intelligent being. You get to decide what is better or worse for yourself.

1.1 My Intentions

Church Perceptions of My Intentions

You have probably heard the story of Lehi’s dream at the start of the Book of Mormon. You’re almost certainly familiar with this verse:

And great was the multitude that did enter into that strange building. And after they did enter into that building they did point the finger of scorn at me and those that were partaking of the fruit also; but we heeded them not. These are the words of my father: For as many as heeded them, had fallen away.⁷

I fear that because I have left the church, my thoughts will be disregarded as a “finger of scorn.” I must state as explicitly as possible that I intend no mockery of latter-day saints. I also want to remind and empower anyone who fears reading this may cause you to fall away: you are smarter than you give yourself credit for. You know how to identify and dismiss lies. Understanding others’ perspectives does not constitute giving them heed.

I Want to Empower You

I am reminded of a recent quote from Dieter Uchtdorf:

In other words, if you want to recognize spiritual truth, you have to use the right instruments. You can’t come to an understanding of spiritual truth with instruments that are unable to detect it.⁸

Thankfully, you have a number of gifts that allow you to discern truth:

• You can research and find evidence to support or refute a claim.
• You can use logical reasoning to determine what argument is most convincing.
• You can analyze your feelings and pray to know the truth.

The church teaches of a God who gave you stewardship over the earth, complete with intuition and the ability to know and understand. Listen to your thoughts and feelings.

Interests of Involved Parties

While they should not be the basis for your decision, it is important to keep in mind any potential conflicts of interest as you read documents like this, especially when one party makes significant claims against the other.

Please consider that I do not advertise on this website. I do not accept donations for this project. I do not want respect or fame (in fact, I understand this website is more likely to hurt my professional prospects than it is to help them). I’m sharing what I have found for two main reasons:

• My decision to leave the church has greatly improved my life in nearly every aspect, and I feel I owe my thoughts to a community I spent so much of my life with.
• Writing this document has greatly helped me process trauma I experienced throughout my experience in the church, and I hope it helps people who have had similar experiences to understand they are not alone.

In contrast, the church has a number of incentives to retain members, including by abusive or manipulative means:

• The church receives large volumes of tithing money from its members.
• Church leaders have a great deal of power over their members and can use that power to influence government policies and obtain other gains.
• The church, as an institution, protects powerful and privileged people, especially wealthy white men. It is understandable they may be afraid to lose this protection.

At this point, it is illogical to assume the church is dishonest or harmful simply because it is motivated to be, but it is important to consider these motives.

1.2 My Story

Trigger Warning: This section is the most personal, detailed, and sensitive of this letter. I describe human trafficking, abuse, assault, anxiety, and other potentially triggering topics. Reader discretion is advised.

If you had told me on October 1 that by Halloween I would leave the church, I would not have believed you. If you showed my September self a video of my November self drinking a mug of black tea, I would have been mortified. But in hindsight, my decision was obvious and inevitable.

I have spent years debating whether or not I should tell this story. This is especially It was extremely painful to write, and showing it to the entire internet leaves me more vulnerable than I have ever allowed myself to be. But I feel it needs telling. We’re all humans, after all, and maybe someone reading this story will be able to empathize with me and feel hopeful.

Please don’t villainize people.

I want to make one thing clear before you read this story. I love and respect my parents. They have always been amazing and supportive people. I humbly acknowledge that they did everything they possibly could to give me a happy, successful childhood. I was extremely privileged, and I owe much of my success in life to my parents’ sacrifices and hard work.

I also hold a great deal of respect for many of the honorable people who served in leadership or counseling roles as I grew up in the church. The problems I describe are systemic and cannot be used to condemn sincere, kind people who I genuinely believe wanted only the best for the people they served.

My purpose in telling this story is not to condemn these people, nor is it to encourage pity. I had a privileged childhood, and I’ve overall had a good life. I share these memories not to tear good people down but to encourage people to make course corrections in their own lives where appropriate. In this spirit, most people in this story remain anonymous, and I avoid giving specific dates and locations.

Peter Priesthood

I was very religious growing up. Until it had been determined to be an offensive term, I was occasionally called Molly Mormon or Peter Priesthood. Interestingly, the nickname went from innocent to offensive because of the word Mormon rather than the commentary on my personality, but that’s neither here nor there.

As I grew up, I did all the right things, as far as my young self could tell. All of my friends belonged to active families. I was baptized the day after my eighth birthday, and I started going to Cub Scouts that same week. I was encouraged to share my testimony in primary, and despite not understanding any of it, I recited the familiar lines: “I know the church is true, I know Heavenly Father loves me,” and so on. When I aged out of primary, this became second nature.

When I turned twelve, someone from the ward visited our home to explain that I was going to be a deacon. He gave me a laminated map of the chapel along with instructions on how to pass the sacrament. He described the process for collecting fast offerings and explained that I was expected to go from door to door collecting donations on the first Sunday of every month. I was ordained as a deacon and invited to pass the sacrament as early as possible after that.

I remember receiving praise from my family because I had made the decision to receive the priesthood. I enjoyed the praise, but I don’t remember making any decision. I turned twelve, and the church expected me to participate as such.

Several months later, we moved a few blocks away to a new ward. It was then that I learned that the priesthood I had received was the power to act in God’s name. I learned that when I passed the sacrament or collected fast offerings, it was just as if Jesus himself were doing it.

After that, I started feeling guilty about everything. Would Jesus have tripped and spilled some water out of the sacrament tray? Would he arrive at church a few minutes late after a rough morning? Would God Himself have laughed at an inappropriate joke?

Compounding the issue, I am autistic and introverted. I felt ashamed every time I was asked to speak in sacrament meetings, do missionary activities, go home teaching, or lead class discussions. I was teased by my peers and church leaders, who occasionally used scripture to insinuate that I was less-than because I was not outgoing. Leaders would regularly ask me how I would possibly serve a mission if I couldn’t talk to people. Despite the church teaching that everyone was welcome, it was becoming clear that I was only welcome if I could participate in the way they expected me to.

When I remember church in my early teenage years, the emotion that dominates my memories is fear. I was terrified of messing up, doing anything that wasn’t perfectly Christlike. I walked around middle school anxious that hearing one too many f-bombs or dirty jokes would make me evil. I didn’t dare let myself have a crush on someone, since my leaders’ loose interpretation of Matthew 5:28 combined with Alma 39:3-5 implied that being attracted to someone was as bad as murder, especially before you turn 16. It was not until my 20s that I learned that this nervous voice in my head was clinical anxiety telling me I wasn’t good enough, not the Holy Ghost keeping me safe from sin.

As I got older, I kept advancing in the priesthood. A birthday rolled around, and the church assumed I wanted to move on to the next office. Every time brought praise and support from family members and church leaders, so I didn’t give it a second thought. When I turned fourteen, I was to be a home teacher. This meant my dad and I spent a few minutes once a month sitting on someone’s couch, usually on a Sunday afternoon when they just wanted to relax. As you can imagine, a 14-year-old autistic kid probably doesn’t have much to talk about with 30-year-old parents of four, so I dreaded these visits. God himself commanded me to do it, though, so out of fear of disappointing God, my parents, or church leaders, I went.

It was also abundantly clear in every young men’s church meeting that God wanted me to be an Eagle Scout. I spent scout camps being a good sport despite relentless teasing from fellow scouts and leaders. I hated Scouts with all my heart. But I put a smile on my face and went anyway since it was what God wanted, and I was told I’d never find a worthy wife if I wasn’t an Eagle Scout. I even got second-degree sunburns spending a week at the huge Scout Encampment because it was what Thomas Monson said to do. You can imagine my confusion when, suddenly, the church stopped endorsing the scouting program.

Called to Serve

In the same way the church assumed I wanted to be baptized and receive the priesthood, they assumed I wanted to serve a mission. It was made clear to me since primary that I would disappoint my parents and likely be berated or shunned by members if I didn’t serve. I was told I wouldn’t find a wife if I didn’t serve a mission, and I knew the young women in the church were taught to only date returned (with honor) missionaries.

I attended mission preparation classes and went to the “mission prep” activities (where leaders taught us how to sew on a button or cook a grilled cheese sandwich), but I still felt unprepared. I had spent my whole life in the church, but I still felt that its doctrine was so convoluted that I couldn’t make sense of it. I had prayed about the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, and the truthfulness of the church. I never felt anything, but I figured God was holding off or I was not righteous enough to get a response. If everyone around me said the church was true, it must be. Certainly, I was the missing link.

At 17, I received a phone call from the ward secretary asking when I would like to meet to start mission papers. I was not given a chance to opt out of this meeting, and when I arrived, I learned my papers had already been started. I was given a list of tasks to complete along with a deadline, and I was told what to set as my availability date.

Sure enough, my mission call arrived by mail a short couple of weeks after I submitted my papers. My mom texted me while I was on a school trip; I’d have to wait a couple of days to open my call. I couldn’t eat for those couple of days. I brushed the feeling off as excitement or the spirit, but I was terrified. I had spent the last few years hearing that I was too shy to be a good missionary and that if I didn’t pick up some social skills, I’d get eaten alive on a mission. I had heard my dad talk about how stressful, exhausting, and abusive a mission can be. But still, I didn’t feel like I had another choice. If I wanted to marry a worthy woman, if I wanted any respect in the church, and if I wanted to be a decent father, I was to serve a mission.

When I finally got home from the school trip, I opened my call with my family. I was shaking so much that I couldn’t get the letter opener into the fold of the envelope. Even as I write this, my heart rate is elevated and I’m starting to sweat. This experience has been the center of many nightmares I’ve had since. In the moment, it was a happy, exciting day. It’s so saddening to me that it was so thoroughly soiled by trauma.

My mission call was the same template letter many of my friends received. I was to serve in the Honduras Tegucigalpa mission. After some research, I learned it was statistically one of the most dangerous places in the world. I found out that someone from my stake had recently come home from the same mission, so I reached out with questions.

Her email was friendly and helpful, but it was terrifying. She mentioned that the people in that mission are some of the kindest people in the world, which I can attest to. But she also gave me some terrifying advice. She hinted that they didn’t have enough money to get enough nutritionally complete food. She said missionary apartments are usually cheap and not very secure, so don’t take any valuables in case someone breaks in. And she mentioned the need to bring my own medications because the ones supplied in mission apartments are usually out-of-stock or expired.

Then, of course, came receiving my endowment. I was one of the first people endowed in the Idaho Falls temple after the renovation, so it was a disorganized, confusing experience to say the least. I received no explanation of what to expect, and it was traumatizing to be expected to make huge promises without any indication beforehand of what those promises would be. Either way, we had made a special trip out of going to the temple, and I didn’t want to upset or disappoint anyone, so I received the full endowment. Everything was disorienting, and all of my ordinances were performed “for and in behalf of Landon Taylor, who is dead.” It wasn’t until later that I learned they had a different script to read if it was a living ordinance, and I spent the rest of my time in the church wondering if my endowment was even valid. I became anxious that this was God’s punishment for some sin I hadn’t remembered to repent of, throwing away my shot at exaltation.

I don’t honestly remember much about getting ready to leave on my mission. I remember that I had to fit everything I’d need for two years into two 40-pound bags. We went to one of those stores that have pre-built packages for missionaries, where you pick the color of your suit and they give you everything else. I spent a few weeks looking at everything loaded into my suitcases and wondering how I was going to live out of those two bags. In hindsight, I am so grateful my mission helped me realize just how privileged I am and have always been. I am horrified that I thought my privilege came because I won God’s favor, as if people who are born with less are somehow inherently less worthy than me.

On the fourth of July, I left for the Guatemala MTC. I flew out of the Pocatello airport early in the morning, and I remember feeling awful because my whole family was bawling. I think I was in a partial state of shock since all of my memories of this day are hazy. When I got to the Salt Lake airport, I had an 11-hour layover before the flight to Los Angeles. I wandered the airport alone for about eight hours. I remember thinking I had just been set apart as a missionary, so I should be able to convert people.

I had heard often in church that the spirit would help me talk to people. My leaders would make a point to say that after teasing me about being too shy. So the whole time I was in the airport, I kept almost approaching people. Something (which I’ve since learned was simply respect for the airport’s “no soliciting” policy and others’ boundaries) kept me from talking to anyone, and before I even made it to the Missionary Training Center, I felt like I had failed as a missionary.

More missionaries arrived, and we made the red-eye flights to Guatemala City, where we arrived early the next morning. None of us had gotten any sleep since the previous night.

Missionary Training

When our bus arrived at the MTC, we were handed a folder with an itinerary stapled to it and told to take our bags to a classroom. We were ushered in a single-file line into a cafeteria, where we were served breakfast. As we stood in line, we met the MTC president, who informed us when he shook our hands that he could tell a lot about what kind of missionaries we were just from a handshake. He also let us know that we were expected to eat every bite of food we were served, even if we weren’t hungry.

My stomach was too upset to eat, but I hadn’t had anything since Salt Lake, and I didn’t want to disobey the MTC president, so I ate a few bites before running to a restroom to throw them up. When I got back, I found out that several other missionaries were in a similar predicament, so we hid the extra food under napkins and threw it away. As we did, we were confronted by the MTC president again, who said something I interpreted as a chastisement for ingratitude.

Photos of the inside of the MTC were strictly forbidden, but I did take one of the outside:

We were sent upstairs for worthiness interviews, which I thought was interesting given we had all recently been interviewed by our stake presidents. The MTC president and his counselors told us that the purpose was to assign us our companions. The counselor who interviewed me was friendly, and this was the first time I felt even remotely at ease. He told me about his son, who was on a mission and doing really well.

He didn’t seem confident enough speaking in English to conduct the interview, so he showed me a laminated page with a list of questions and asked if I had anything to talk about with any of them. I don’t remember many of them, but one question stood out. It asked if I had ever committed a serious sin, regardless of whether or not it had already been handled by church leaders. That struck me as strange, since I thought the atonement meant that repentance made it as if a sin was never committed in the first place, but I figured they had their reasons and didn’t think too much of it.

We were all ushered into the cafeteria, where the MTC president greeted us and introduced us to the MTC. He informed us that we were not to leave or we would lose God’s protection. He told us there was a guard at the gate who was instructed never to let a missionary leave. He further indicated that we could not move freely in the halls of the MTC and that there were cameras that could read our name badges. He listed a few other rules and stated that those who didn’t obey these rules would face serious disciplinary action. This was repeated at least weekly during the six weeks I stayed at the MTC.

At one point, a handful of mission presidents and their wives visited the MTC. The couple who visited my group were visibly upset, and when we asked about it, they shared that one of their sister missionaries had just died in a tragic accident. They shared that God protects missionaries, but that we still needed to be very careful.

All the talks and lessons during the MTC conveyed one message to me: if I was not an exactly obedient, perfect missionary, my safety was immediately in danger. If I failed to obey any of the mission rules or commandments, my parents were in danger of never seeing their son again.

On top of all of this, we were closely monitored as we wrote home. There were several staff members in the computer lab at all times while it was unlocked, and we were told that if we were struggling, we should not include that in our emails home. These staff members made it clear they read our emails over our shoulders. Everything was to be faith-promoting, and we were given half an hour per week to write home. This struck me as extremely strange: God trusted me to represent Him in a huge capacity, but He didn’t trust me to email my mom. Because of all of this, I didn’t dare write home about how awful I felt since I believed disobedience would put me in danger (or at best earn me some kind of punishment), and I didn’t need to stress out my worried family even further.

The Mission

At the end of our stay in the MTC, the secretary returned our passports, and a few of us left for Tegucigalpa. We did not have enough information to give customs when we arrived, but the agents were thankfully familiar with the mission office and helped us fill out our papers. When we passed through customs, we were greeted by two missionaries who introduced themselves as “the assistants”. I was still unfamiliar with the mission hierarchy, so I thought that was a strange way to introduce themselves.

The assistants greeted us with hugs, and then immediately asked for our passports. They let us know that if immigration officers asked to see them during our mission, they would have to call the mission office. The passports would stay in a locked safe in the mission office, to which only one secretary plus the mission president knew the combination.

We met the mission president and his wife, who were extremely friendly. They took us to the second floor of the airport to introduce themselves and show us what Tegucigalpa looked like. Then we all piled into their cars and left for the mission office. We were immediately interviewed again, and we took a photo with a map to send to our parents.

We spent the first night in the office home, which was a huge apartment where up to 30 missionaries slept during transfers. We were told to sleep in the only room in the apartment without air conditioning (to get used to the heat, supposedly) on bunk beds stacked three high with bare mattresses. The bathroom looked and smelled like it hadn’t been cleaned in months, and all of the beds were stained. The walls were covered in spots, each one representing a bug that was unlucky enough to be smashed there. I didn’t sleep a bit that night, and the missionaries who lived in the house told us they couldn’t afford to get us breakfast. But don’t worry, they told us. We’d get used to being hungry.

San Marcos de Colon

The following day, we were assigned companions and sent to our areas. I was assigned to one of the most remote areas in the mission, so we weren’t able to make it all the way there in one day. We spent the night with a few other missionaries in a house in Choluteca. I still had not received any money or had an opportunity to withdraw cash. My companion had run out of money traveling to transfers, so we shared a bag of chips and a couple of bags of water for dinner.

I learned we were opening the area (i.e., both of the previous missionaries were assigned to other areas and my companion hadn’t ever been there), and we were the only missionaries within a two-hour bus ride. A couple of missionaries who had visited the area took the bus with us, and we finally found an ATM. As soon as we withdrew money, we went to a restaurant for lunch. This whole time, I felt terrified, and it was most pronounced in the restaurant. I remembered reading a rule that indicated I shouldn’t eat out, and I felt too guilty to finish my lunch.

The missionaries showed us around the town, and we met a few of the church members there. We visited five or ten houses, and they let us know we had met all the members. They told us we were responsible for a group, and they showed us how to unlock the small apartment that was in use as a chapel. They told us we would be speaking in church and teaching all of the classes every week.

It took a while to get used to, as any new experience does, but I eventually adored this area. People were so kind to us, and we paid someone to make us lunch. Money was tight, but we made it work unless we had to travel to a zone conference (in which case we skipped a few breakfasts and dinners and called it a fast).

We occasionally had divisions, and our district leader would visit our area or we would visit his. One night, we slept at their apartment, and one of the missionaries was being (in my mind) absurdly disobedient. He was reading unapproved books and listening to unapproved music (I believe it was Nashville Tribute Band), and at one point, he went outside to wash some clothes without his companion. I was terrified. I genuinely believed that because this missionary was not being perfectly obedient to mission rules, we were immediately in danger. They laid out a couple of bare mattresses for us, and I didn’t sleep at all. Every little sound was someone breaking into the apartment, God punishing me for allowing a missionary to be disobedient. When I tried to say something, I was dismissed as flechon, or straight-as-an-arrow. I felt stuck between a rock and a hard place. I had less experience and no power over this missionary, but if I didn’t get him to stop, I could die.

One day, we were asked to visit someone who lived in a relatively remote part of the area. Instead of taking the normal route, we tried a shortcut. We came to a place where we had to climb a very steep part of a mountain. I had done plenty of hiking as a scout, so I wasn’t immediately worried. But as we got up the mountain, I started to remember some of the safety trainings from the MTC. They told us that we were never to try climbing anything and that if we were disobedient to that rule, we would lose God’s protection. I started crying and shaking when we were near the top of the steep trail, and my companion started laughing and taking photos of me. I panicked and felt like if I took one more step up the mountain, God would inflict some harm on us, but I couldn’t go back down and leave my companion. As I look back at mission photos, this one still makes me feel a little dizzy.

As I write this now, it almost sounds like it’s meant to be satire. I assure you, however, that these are the thoughts and feelings I genuinely experienced.

A few months into my mission, I was finally starting to feel comfortable speaking Spanish. All was going well when protests started breaking out. As we walked home one night, we passed what I thought was a parade. My companion said we had to get home as fast as possible, and we grabbed something quick for dinner and went home. One of the church members called and asked if we were okay right as the parade passed our apartment, and we learned it was a political protest. Thankfully, this one was mild, but we started to become afraid. My companion had heard stories like this before about missionaries ending up stuck in their apartments for days or even weeks on end.

The protest continued outside our window for a couple of hours, and we made an inventory of our food. We had two bags of spaghetti, one bag of instant oats, one bag of refried beans, one bag of coffee someone gave us as a joke, one hot plate (that didn’t heat up quite enough to boil water), one frying pan, and one spatula. We had about 3 gallons of water left in our jug, plus a couple of bags. If we were going to be stuck in our apartment, we were screwed. But it was after 8 pm, and we were strictly required to be home, so we figured God would take care of us.

Around 10 that night, we got a call from the mission office. We were not to leave our apartment until the mission president felt it was safe. That night and the whole next day, the power was out, and our phone’s battery was dying. In the morning, we couldn’t hear the protests anymore, but the mission president felt it was still too dangerous for us to leave. “I don’t want to have to call someone’s parents and explain that their child died because they didn’t listen to revelation,” we read in a text message from the mission office.

I am so grateful for my companion, who told me it might not be safe in some parts of the mission, but we wouldn’t be safe if we stayed home. So we got dressed and headed to the grocery store. We pooled all of our money, including some birthday and Christmas money, and stocked up at the grocery store. We didn’t have enough money to get a mototaxi home, so we walked back up the hill to our apartment with what felt like 50 pounds of groceries. We dropped everything off and made our way to a pulperia (small corner store) to buy some bags of water. I made it most of the way there before I started feeling dizzy. My heart was racing, and I was certain something horrible would happen to us because we were disobedient. I couldn’t keep standing, so I sat on the curb and started praying. Even though we were disobedient, I asked, please protect us. I’ll never do anything like this again, I said while I cried on the side of the road.

My companion pulled my arm and said to hurry. We picked up as much water as we could carry and went back home. I was completely certain something terrible would happen to me if I was disobedient again. God gave me a free pass, and I shouldn’t make a mockery of him, I thought. So when my companion got bored of reading scriptures and suggested we play Monopoly, I flipped out. I don’t remember what I said, but I remember shouting and going to bed. I remember lying in bed thinking about the horror stories we talked about in seminary about missionaries getting kidnapped or dying. I thought about the mission president having to call my parents to tell them I had died because I was disobedient.

These protests started around December. We were required to stay home for two weeks, and we ran almost completely out of food. We were told to ration our supplies for about a week, and thankfully, my companion had the good sense to guess it would take longer. Over the next few days, we got a text every morning telling us if we were allowed to leave or not. We had each received some Christmas money, and we didn’t use any transportation, so we kept as much cash available as we could, especially making sure we had enough to take a bus to the mission office if we needed it. We kept two weeks of food and water in our apartment, and we never went more than a couple of blocks. When someone wanted to learn about the church, we asked them to meet us at the chapel, which was right next door to our apartment.

We spent much of the week leading up to Christmas locked in our apartment. We did what we could to stay positive. We played some Christmas hymns, and I finally got bored enough to risk playing Monopoly. I even took a blurry picture of our setup to remember the experience. I figured if God put us in this mess, he would be understanding if we got bored.

A few days before Christmas, we were told we would be able to leave the apartment to call home. The internet in my area was not good enough to support a video call, so we took a bus to a church building in Choluteca, where a member lent us a laptop. I wasn’t able to talk much. I didn’t want to scare my family, so I didn’t tell them very much about what was happening. I let them know we had been stuck in our apartment but that we were staying safe. I told them we’d been eating well, and I made sure to point out the missionary successes we’d had despite it all.

Downtown Tegucigalpa

Later that week, I got a call saying I was being transferred to Tegucigalpa. I was going to be a district leader and train a new missionary right in the center of the city. When one of the members in my area heard this, he told me they would eat me alive there. He talked about how dangerous it was and that I’d better stay obedient or I’d be in danger.

When we went to the transfer meeting, I met my companion. We immediately hit it off, which was a relief. The missionaries who left the area showed us quickly how to get to the apartment. When we got to the building, which was a tall concrete tower with a door next to the sidewalk, the missionaries called the landlady. I thought this was interesting since they had a key, but I understood when they opened the door and we were greeted at the top of a narrow staircase by two huge dogs, each growling at us. The landlady was holding their collars and beating them with wooden dowels as we came up the stairs.

We went upstairs to our apartment, where we found out there were two mattresses on a concrete floor, a hot plate on a melted plastic table, and a five-gallon bucket of brown water. The previous missionaries had drawn on the walls, likely because they were stuck there during the protests. We talked with the landlady that night about when we expected to be coming and going, so she could plan for the dogs. She told us the last missionaries got bitten so badly they had to go to the hospital.

We immediately started looking for a new apartment. We finally found one, and it took over a month to convince the mission office to rent it because the new place cost 3700 Lempiras (then around $150) per month, but the old place only cost 2700 (about $100). They asked repeatedly why we couldn’t stay in the old apartment, and I repeatedly explained that it was unsafe. We finally moved after convincing the mission office that a hospital visit would cost more than the extra rent and that downtown Tegucigalpa was an expensive place to rent.

I justified all of this, though, because my mission president regularly told the story of his mom, who didn’t have much money but regularly donated to the missionary fund. “How are you using my mom’s money?” he would ask us. I didn’t realize yet that I was using less than half of the money my family was paying the church for my mission. I determined all of this was God punishing me for being disobedient in my previous area (by buying emergency food and playing Monopoly), so I stepped up my obedience. I was awake on time, home on time, and in bed on time. I had the best numbers of anyone. And I started having horrible stomach pain.

I was so stressed that I could not eat. This became extremely problematic when people would kindly and generously offer us food since it is rude to waste. I had to make a habit of calling people before a visit and explaining that I could only eat a bird’s portion. I brought a tupper with me to dinners so I could say I loved the food, but I didn’t have the appetite to finish. Eventually, I developed a reputation as the snobby gringo who wouldn’t eat people’s food. This, of course, only stressed me out further, and I could eat even less.

I figured this was just food poisoning or that people were giving us unreasonable portions. But one week during companionship review (where we were told to settle any differences and give a detailed report of anything our companion was doing wrong), my companion asked if he could tell me something. I said sure, and he told me that one of the members was very angry with me. She had approached him at church to tell him that she was done feeding an ungrateful missionary, and she told the bishop to stop organizing meals for us.

It became clear that, despite baptizing more people in two months than had been baptized in the past two years, I was not welcome in the ward. I started feeling depressed, and I didn’t feel like I could tell anyone. After all, I was training my companion, so I had to be uplifting and inspiring. Everything I wrote to my family was supposed to be faith-promoting, so I couldn’t write home about it. So I bought a cheap notebook and started writing about how I felt.

This notebook turned out to be a helpful outlet for me. At least I had a way to keep myself from bottling up the negative things that were going on. Then we went to a zone conference. In this conference, we were told that if we loved our companion, we would keep him from being disobedient. We were told that loving your companion meant occasionally going through his things and reading his letters home and his journal entries.

I panicked. I had a notebook full of thoughts I didn’t want anyone else to see, so I threw it away as soon as we got back to the apartment. My companion asked if everything was alright, and I said of course and made the required phone calls to get numbers from my district for the evening.

Over the next few weeks, things went relatively well. We were teaching good lessons and getting along great. I couldn’t eat, so we always had enough money for food. But something kept bothering me: I had been having pain in my toenail for a couple of months. I asked the mission nurse (who was a young sister missionary) about it a couple of times, and she told me to keep a strand of dental floss between my toenail and my foot until it went away.

Lo and behold, it did not go away. I decided to call the mission office about it, and they were able to get me into a doctor about a month later.

After the procedure, I was sent back to our area and expected to do 12 hours of missionary work a day again as soon as I could stand. Thankfully, we had a market in our area, so I bought some sandals that kept my feet drier and gave me more room for my bandage than my shoes did.

I showered with a bag over my foot to try and keep it as clean as I could, but it still didn’t seem to work. We had some cleaning products and tried to be generally hygienic, but there was only so much we could do with a missionary routine and budget. I couldn’t afford new bandages, so I doused my toe in rubbing alcohol (or sometimes just soap or floor cleaner) to keep it as clean as I could, and I filled my shoes with talcum powder to keep everything dry. While I was at the doctor, I was given a short course of antibiotics, which seemed to only upset my stomach.

My foot was in a lot of pain, so I walked with a slight limp for the next 16 months. We couldn’t afford to take much transit, so by my best guess (obtained by tracing a map after returning home), I walked anywhere between 10 and 20 miles every day. When I brought this concern up to mission leaders and asked for an extra dollar or two per day to spend on transit, I was quickly dismissed. I was told that it would be worth it when I returned home and got to tell stories about persevering during trials. I was invited to develop the faith to keep walking.

As I was recovering from foot problems, we were informed that Elder Cook would be visiting us along with the neighboring mission. Local missionaries were instructed to prepare a special musical number for him, and we were told repeatedly that it was a great honor to be able to sing for an apostle. I’ve never been great at singing, so I was hesitant to participate, but I was honestly relieved to spend a few hours rehearsing in an air-conditioned chapel rather than walking in the sun. I remember laughing along as I was teased for hobbling off the stand when we practiced returning to our seats.

Quentin Cook’s visit was a huge occasion. He was accompanied by his wife (who was only introduced as “Elder Cook’s Wife”) along with Gerrit Gong (right before he was called to be an apostle) and his wife. Leaders repeatedly told us how much of an honor it was to be in the same room as an apostle.

We were instructed to form an exceptionally long line (wrapped around the building outside) so that each of us could shake hands with the speakers. To this day, I laugh about the time I shook an apostle’s hand while limping and wearing knock-off Crocs. I remember feeling ashamed when I saw Quentin Cook because everyone around me said they could tell he was an incredible person, but I could not see any discernable difference between him and any other person.

I was confused when I saw him because he had a relatively large security detail with him. Local members told us about the efforts that were made to secure the building. The first floor of the building was reserved for him and his guests, and we were repeatedly told that we were not to use the restroom on the first floor because it was reserved for Elder Cook. I remember wondering how this man could sincerely tell missionaries they would have the spirit’s protection while on the Lord’s errand and then require strict security protocols for himself. When I mentioned this to other missionaries, we figured he was an authority figure and might be a bigger target for someone who wanted to harm the church.

We were taught that as missionaries, we were fulfilling an apostolic calling and were a direct extension of the apostles. To this day, I am deeply saddened that church leaders do significantly more to protect themselves when they speak to a crowd of loyal followers than they do to protect missionaries who live and proselyte in dangerous areas around people who do not understand or dislike the church. It was made clear to me that Quentin Cook had faith that the spirit would protect the missionary workforce but did not have faith that it would protect him.

During this special meeting, talks were generally uplifting, but nothing was new or incredible. Gerrit and Susan Gong gave very nice talks. I don’t remember anything specific they shared, but I remember they were uplifting and encouraging. I felt like they understood they were talking to a room of nervous missionaries, and I now understand that their talks can be described as “trauma-informed”. Mary Cook (I have since learned the name of “Elder Cook’s Wife”) gave another nice talk. I remember she included music heavily in her message, which was pleasant and unique.

Quentin Cook began his talk by telling us that it was nice to give us all a spiritual worthiness interview while we shook his hand. He mentioned enjoying looking into our souls as we walked along. He shared that his own mission president had recently passed away. He indicated that Jeffrey Holland was able to go to the funeral, but he sadly had to speak to us instead.

He then shared that when they wrote the missionary rule book, they felt they didn’t have to include anything about having fun or taking care of yourself since missionaries are really good at that. He said that there are so many rules because every time a missionary does something stupid, they have to add a new one. He gave some general counsel, including that it is unwise to make fun of local people and cultures. He shared a testimony, which I personally felt sounded stale and rehearsed. He mentioned that it was unwise to share spiritual experiences and then shared that he knew the voice and face of the Savior.

After the meeting, he left the room along with his guests, and we were sent back to our areas and expected to complete an afternoon and evening of missionary work. I remember teaching a lesson that evening. When I testified to someone that I knew the prophets and apostles received revelation on what to teach directly from Jesus Christ, I started feeling concerned. In a meeting with an apostle and three people with (apparently) much less spiritual authority, the people with less authority gave much more meaningful talks. I felt like Susan Gong’s talk was much more sensitive and aligned much better with the types of things missionaries were struggling with at the time than Quentin Cook’s.

But I was a missionary. These weren’t the types of doubts or worries a missionary should be thinking about, so I pushed the thought to the back of my head and moved on.

As a zone, we received permission to make a special trip to Las Golondrinas, a waterfall and scenic hike. We were excited, but I wasn’t sure how my foot would fare. After we started hiking, I found I had to either walk along slippery rocks on the bank of a river or walk in the river itself. So I trudged through the river with everyone else, my toe in exceptional pain. Normally, I would just stay back in town, but I felt like my foot problems had already inconvenienced my companion enough, and he deserved to enjoy the trip.

Valle de Angeles

After my short stay in Tegucigalpa, I received a call from my mission president. I was to serve as a zone leader about a half hour east of Tegucigalpa in Cerro Grande, a suburb of Valle de Angeles.

When I arrived, my companion was extremely direct with me, which I appreciated but had not yet experienced as a missionary. He told me the area was sprawling and there was never enough money for food and transport, so we had to walk everywhere and stretch our money to be able to eat until the next time our cards were reloaded.

I now understand that I am autistic, but I had no idea while on my mission. One of the first hints I wasn’t neurotypical was my companion regularly telling me I had mannerisms that were extremely confusing to him. Our relationship quickly turned abusive. I was certain God was punishing me somehow and that I just needed to work harder and be more obedient. This became nearly impossible since pushing for more work and stricter obedience meant my companion turned meaner. He knew it terrified me to be alone, so he walked as fast as he could on our way home at night. He knew my foot problem meant I couldn’t keep up, so I remember spending long walks alone in the pitch black or (if it was my day to have the cell phone) with just the light from a phone screen, occasionally hearing barking dogs, groups of swearing teenagers, or the growl of a mototaxi. Every time I walked home alone, I remember praying while my heart raced. I was scared out of my wits. I had to wash my clothes twice as often because of how nervous and sweaty I got. I am endlessly grateful that no harm befell me on these walks.

Eventually, we convinced the mission president to move us to Valle de Angeles, since Cerro Grande meant extremely long walking distances and people with very little interest in meeting with missionaries.

With time, our relationship only got worse. One P-day (6 to 8 hours dedicated to cleaning and writing home), my companion mentioned having to stop by a store on the way out of town. I didn’t think much of it, but when we arrived, I learned he had planned a trip to Las Golondrinas (which was located near our area) with several young women from our area. I was terrified the entire trip since I was not prepared to hike, I had a load of laundry to wash, and we were strictly forbidden from going on trips, especially with local members (and more especially with young women). As I expected, he walked much faster than I could and left me alone. When I finally made it to the waterfall, I found him swimming with the young women, which was absolutely not allowed.

I felt betrayed and furious, so when we finally got back to our area, I wrote a strongly-worded letter to the mission president. During the week, my companion received a phone call from the mission office asking him to visit with the mission president. We couldn’t afford the bus trip, so we skipped dinner the night before and asked the bus driver if he would accept a partial fare. When we arrived, my companion sat in a long meeting while I waited on a couch outside the office. I was mortified. He would know I tattled on him. Things would certainly get worse for us, but if I hadn’t told the mission president, I would be breaking a rule. I was damned if I did, damned if I didn’t.

When he came out of the meeting, we asked the mission office to cover our bus ride back to our area. They gave us exactly the bus fare and said we’d be fine since we would receive the usual deposit the next day. When we got back to our apartment, my companion knocked on the neighbors’ door and asked if they could spare something for dinner. I remember feeling so ashamed that I could not have saved more money, and now these people with limited means felt like they had to give us food. While we ate dinner, I learned that the ward members generally disliked me. My companion let me know that someone approached him to ask what was wrong with his companion.

We headed into town to withdraw some cash, and he immediately spent the entire sum on a volleyball. I was confused at first, but when I asked about his plan for food, he told me he guessed we’d have to split my money to eat and just take less transport. I agreed, but I said we’d have to spread it really thin. That meant no more breakfasts until we got more money, and we could only drink water from five-gallon jugs instead of buying bags to take with us.

He gave me the silent treatment for the next couple of days. We talked just enough to plan our day and teach lessons, but he didn’t respond to any attempt to start a conversation. I apologized a few times, but he continued to ignore me. When our weekly planning session came around, I felt like I had to say something. I don’t remember much of what he said, but he started crying and yelling at me. He threatened me a handful of times and told me never to snitch again.

In hindsight, I wish so badly that the church would give any sort of mental health training to missionaries. He mentioned issues he was having with his girlfriend who was waiting for him at home.

At this point, I had no clue what to do. So I called the mission office. They said they would talk to the mission president and indicated that I should keep an eye on him. He kept relatively private about his experience, but I became aware that a church-employed psychologist was calling for half an hour every six weeks to help manage his mental health. When he brought these concerns to an interview, he shared that the mission president’s advice was that Jeffrey Holland also struggled with mental health. The mission president shared a scripture from Moroni 10 that indicates that despair (roughly translated from the Spanish Book of Mormon as depression) comes from iniquity. He told my companion that his mental health was in bad shape because of sin.

Transfers came around, and my companion was moved to another area. I received a call on the area phone from the church psychologist, who told me that if I didn’t have my former companion’s area phone number she couldn’t keep providing therapy for him. I asked her to call the mission office, and she indicated that it was my former companion’s responsibility to keep her updated about transfers.

My next companion was due to return home at the end of the transfer. He had a reputation for being stubborn and disobedient. He made it clear early in the transfer that he wasn’t interested in acting like a missionary. He told me he was senior companion and he would be calling all the shots. I panicked, since in my mind everything bad that had already happened to me happened because of disobedience.

I felt trapped, so I negotiated. We had a baptism planned about a week into the transfer. If we could get that person baptized, I would let him dictate everything else. So for a week, we worked hard to baptize this person. Then he gave up. We left the house for a lunch appointment, an afternoon visit with some ward members, and then a dinner appointment. I spent four or more hours studying every morning since my body was accustomed to waking up at 6:00, but he wasn’t usually up until 10 or 11. I need to make clear that I now understand this was likely caused by poor mental health and trauma, and I wish I understood that at the time. Instead of being supportive in a way that would have helped him, I believed he was simply being a “Laman and Lemuel” and didn’t want to work.

When I started pushing to leave the house and teach people, our relationship also turned negative. I recall waking up in the middle of the night in an empty apartment. To this day, I have no clue where my companion was. While I should have called the mission office about it (I was worried about his safety), I felt I had already gotten myself abused because I was a snitch. So I stayed quiet and prayed that God would have mercy on me.

After that, we didn’t really talk to each other. I was so grateful when transfers finally came. I was going to be working with a former assistant who I met on the first day of my mission. He always seemed happy and friendly, and I was so excited to finally have a kind, hardworking companion. He was also due to return home after the transfer, but he seemed like he was dedicated to finishing strong.

As I’ve written this story, I have honestly been looking forward to writing this part. It was a huge relief from the negativity that looms over the rest of the story. We immediately hit it off. To this day, he is the only person I have stayed in touch with. We worked our tails off and started to see missionary success.

We were genuinely happy. We repaired a lot of hurt relationships with church members, and people started being much more interested in offering us meals. We started to have enough money to eat enough calories to make it home without feeling dizzy at night.

I don’t know if I have many interesting stories from this period, but it makes me laugh to remember a person we baptized. She was about 40 years old. She cleaned the house of someone else we had recently baptized, and she said she wanted to meet with us. It came to our attention over the next few weeks that she was very much in love with my companion. After my companion left, I learned that she was only baptized because she thought he would want to date her if she was a church member. She asked us if we thought she was crazy to think a 20-year-old missionary would want to date a 40-year-old married woman.

My next companion and I also got along very well. We worked hard and kept up the relationships we had built with church members and investigators. We did everything we could to inspire other missionaries as zone leaders. I remember around holidays, people would feed us at every appointment, and I developed the horrible skill of eating as much as I could during appointments, then immediately throwing up after we left. Overall, though, life seemed pretty good.

The Office

After five transfers in the area, I got a call from the mission president asking if I would be an assistant. I technically served in a couple of dedicated areas while I served as an assistant, but I still say I was assigned to the mission office area. During four of my final five transfers, we were to go on divisions (i.e., swap companions) with as many areas as possible to train missionaries and get a feel for the mission’s progress. We spent nearly every day in a different area, talking to different people, and forming no real relationships. I missed getting to know people in my area. I felt like I was mass-producing missionary training. Every day started feeling the same, and I started getting depressed.

While my time in the office was mostly either boring or traumatizing (and thus not engraved in my memory), there are a few noteworthy things I remember. I recall sitting in planning meetings with the mission president to assign companions. We were told to rely on inspiration, but while we planned, I remember the amount of work we had to do to plan companionships, and the results were often hard on missionaries. It felt like we were playing chess with these missionaries’ experiences.

I remember feeling disgusted when, in one of these meetings, the mission president said something to this effect: “These two elders are both disobedient. Let’s put them together and hope they can mess up big enough to send them both home.” I also remember being confused when our mission president would promote missionaries to leadership roles so they would feel more accomplished by the end of their missions.

I remember all of the calls I had to make at night. I remember the traumatizing stories we heard every time missionaries called to report being assaulted or robbed. I remember the call I got when someone was stuck in the bathroom while their apartment was broken into (they stayed safe, thank God). I remember being told to handle mental health crises since the mission president didn’t have time to deal with them. I remember the pressure I felt to talk missionaries down after fights with their companions. I remember the hours I spent reassuring missionaries who felt like they weren’t good enough while I dealt with the same feelings myself.

I remember laughing when I heard this story: A companionship in a dangerous area was robbed; someone stole their backpacks. They went to visit an elderly woman, and a heavily tattooed (a sign of gang membership in much of Honduras) man walked out of a room holding their backpacks. He asked if they were theirs, and they said yes. He gave their bags back, let them know he had killed the person who stole them, and said he would kill anyone who messed with them in the future.

As I served in the office, my stomach problems got worse and worse. I’ve since learned this can be attributed entirely to stress, but I thought I had a stomach bug or something more serious. I could hardly eat for months, which I considered a financial blessing. Because of our leadership position, we were reimbursed for our travel and transportation, so money stopped being a concern. We were as comfortable as we’d ever been.

I was ecstatic to return to Valle de Angeles one day on divisions. I showed the missionaries who replaced me some parts of the area they hadn’t been to yet, and we visited one of the most devout people I helped baptize. When we arrived at her house, she told me that she was leaving the church. Ward members had seriously hurt her, and she felt she was sinning to sit in church and judge them every week.

I was sad, but I pushed all of my emotions down (as mission leaders taught me to). When we got home, the sink was full of dishes. I don’t know what got into me, but I started feeling angry. I had a breakdown. I opened the window in front of the sink and started throwing dishes at the patio wall. I felt guilty being alone, but I felt like I couldn’t breathe with everyone staring at me, so I went to the storage room and sat on one of the dozen spare mattresses we kept there. I sobbed for a couple of hours and felt guilty when I went to bed late. I got a phone call from my mission president, who offered me some reassurance. He told me to keep working hard until it was time for me to return home.

Returning Home

The time eventually came for me to return home. I was an anxious mess. I didn’t eat hardly anything during the last week of my mission. When one of the kindest families I’ve ever met offered us dinner, I still feel so guilty for throwing it up on my way out of their house. I felt so dizzy on the bus ride to the airport, and I had to sit cross-legged in line to check into my flight to keep from fainting. I wondered if I had served an adequate mission. I felt guilty because I couldn’t work as hard as God wanted me to. I regretted all of the people I didn’t talk to in the street — all of the people I could have tried to baptize but didn’t.

When I made it back home, my stake president immediately interviewed and released me. I remember feeling lost as I took off my name badge on the walk home from the interview. I had no idea what to do. Every minute of my life had been planned, and now my only instruction was to remember to go to church every Sunday and start looking for a wife.

In a great act of defiance against everything the mission taught, I felt incredibly free when I took my laptop into my bedroom and sat by myself writing the talk I was to deliver on Sunday. I didn’t even become addicted to pornography, even thought I was using a computer without someone else watching my screen.

My mom had made me an appointment to see a doctor shortly after I got back. He could not believe the shape my foot was in, and he performed a minor procedure to correct it. He was disappointed to hear that the mission nurses had refused to offer me any treatment and stressed how important it is to take infections seriously. He indicated that I was one of the lucky ones because it was still relatively easy to treat.

Bachelor Life

As a recently returned missionary, I did not understand anything about trauma. I had no clue about mental health. So I did not recognize many of my quirks as trauma responses. I thought it was strange that when I went on dates (alone with young women), it was not normal to feel panicked the entire time. When I couldn’t carry on a conversation that wasn’t about the church, I thought I was just especially interested in religion. When I felt guilty about every single thing I did, I thought I was just adjusting back to life.

I attended the singles ward for just over a year before I got married. I never felt welcome in student wards, but I figured it was normal because I didn’t fit in when I was younger anyway. I became disappointed when I tried to make friends or date within my ward and stake. It was taboo to talk about a mission, but it seemed to be all I could think about. It was apparently only acceptable to be casually invested in the church. Too invested, and you were staunch or prudish; too uninterested, and you were a heathen.

Dating and Marriage

My wife and I met and started dating very quickly after our first semester began at Utah State University. By Christmas, we were “official”, and by the next summer, we were engaged. I still laugh when I think about how many family members told us we were rushing into things compared to how many told us we were dragging our heels. We were married about a year after we started dating.

Because we started dating just before COVID-19, we were married at the height of the pandemic. We were sealed in the Logan temple early in the morning, which was confusing and a bit traumatizing thanks to our lack of expectations. We were disappointed to learn that the only part we played in our own marriage ceremony was the word “yes”. The temple worker instructed us before the ceremony; he said he would ask us one question, and the answer was “yes” and not “I do”.

To respect my family’s privacy, I will share only a small amount of what followed.

I remember feeling betrayed every time a promise in a blessing was not fulfilled. I felt like I must have been unworthy to give the blessing, or perhaps I wasn’t listening to the spirit like I should have been. Gratefully, this person has since found a medication that worked, and as they decided to leave the church, they noticed a significant improvement in their overall health. This, in part, caused me to really start questioning my beliefs.

Falling Away

My wife and I had to decrease our church activity for a few reasons, including time constraints and health limitations. One of the most noteworthy, concerning, question-sparking parts of our experience was when we were serving as primary teachers but were unable to attend for a couple of weeks in a row. The primary presidency stopped by our apartment when we were both sick with a cold and asked to visit. We said they could stop in for a few minutes, and their first question was about what they could do to get us back in our calling.

We stayed polite, but this got us thinking about the intentions of the church as an organization. A great deal of factors impacted my decision to leave the church, and a great deal of other factors impacted my wife’s decision. These factors are discussed much more thoroughly throughout the rest of this document, but I will summarize my experience. As my wife has become a therapist and learned a great deal about trauma, we have each processed trauma caused by the church.

Eventually, everything that was stacked against the church added up. Everything I had put on my metaphorical shelf (where one keeps things that they don’t want to think about yet) had become too heavy, and the shelf broke. While on a work trip in Iowa, I determined I needed to seriously evaluate my church membership. I was done being uncomfortable with the church’s teachings and actions while still supporting them, and I needed to either be firmly in or firmly out. When I got home, I prayed my heart out and asked God if I should leave the church. I felt more peace and comfort than I ever did when I asked if the church was true.

I came to the conclusion that either God was a liar or these feelings were manufactured in my own mind. In either case, I was not going to continue to support an organization that caused me and millions of others incredible amounts of trauma. Since leaving, I have been happier than I have ever been. I enjoy the health benefits of tea, the low-calorie energy I get from coffee, and the extra money I have from not paying tithing. We have more opportunities to be generous and kind. Sunday mornings are finally enjoyable, and we don’t feel like we have to spend two hours in triggering church meetings. We have focused on trading up, and we are so grateful for the wonderful people who have helped us learn how to live without the church.

But most of all, I feel like I’m finally allowed to be a good person. I can support causes I truly believe in. I can help people directly rather than hoping a church uses my money to benefit “the poor and needy”. My relationships have improved so much. Friendships are more meaningful, and I finally feel free from the anxiety and guilt I felt as a church member.

In short, my life got so much better after I left the church. As I grew up in the church, I was taught that if someone tries to refute beliefs with facts, a personal experience cannot be refuted. I encourage you, then, to consider my experience. And if you are affiliated with the church, I would encourage you to consider your own experience. Perhaps we have more in common than you suspect, and perhaps you will also find that leaving the church behind is the best decision you ever make.

Disclaimer: I have made every effort to portray events as honestly as possible. I consulted journals, asked people who also remember events, and completed multiple edit passes to avoid sensationalizing. This is my experience as I remember it. But even so, human memory is notoriously fallible. I once again request that you do not use this story to villainize anyone.

1.3 Why I Stayed

When I let a fellow exmormon coworker know I’d left the church, his response echoed a thought I’d had myself for a very long time. We are both logicians. We spend our careers formally analyzing systems. So why, he asked, did I stay in the church so long despite seeing its obvious flaws?

During the last couple of years, I have wondered the same thing myself. I’ve compiled a few reasons I stayed in the church as long as I did, and perhaps you can relate to them.

Blinders

The church was all I knew. Everything I thought I knew about the world and my place in it came from the church. I wanted so badly for it to be true that my mind did all the gymnastics it could to keep me faithful. I learned how to compartmentalize and label anything that went against what I believed as “anti-mormon lies”. I invented possible ways that scientific discoveries might be compatible with church teachings. As many church members do, I got very good at justifying anything that felt wrong. I simply refused to think that if something smelled fishy, it was probably fish.

Thought-Terminating Statements

People often talk of thought-terminating statements in terms of cult indoctrination. I don’t know that I want to go as far as making that argument in this section, but I do want to point out a few key thoughts – mantras if you will – that kept me from really questioning what I was taught to believe my whole life:

• I am surrounded by smart people who all claim that the church is true, so I must just be missing something
• “Doubt your doubts before you doubt your faith”
• People who leave the church “fall away” or “go inactive” because they are lazy and unintelligent, or they want to sin
• God hasn’t revealed everything yet, maybe this is just a trial of my faith
• I’ve already invested so much into the church, it would be a shame to abandon it
• “Where will you go?”
• Bear your testimony until you believe it
• If you only want to believe…
• Have the faith not to get an answer
• Pray for a testimony

A Support Network

I have, throughout my life, met most of my friends at church. The church felt like a safety net and support system. This started to degrade when, while we were dealing with a significant personal crisis, ward members only talked to us in the context of church. When we couldn’t make it to church for several weeks due to medical issues, we received a visit from the primary presidency, who let us know they missed us in primary and shared a scripture about the importance of serving in the church.

But despite this, I felt like if things ever got desperate, I would have a support network.

There’s a Lot of Good

I regularly told myself, especially when something didn’t seem quite right at church, that despite its shortcomings, there’s a lot of good in the church. It does a good job keeping kids off of drugs. It kept me safe from STIs and harmful behavior as a teenager. By leaving the church, I felt I would be throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Especially if we ever adopted kids, how would we keep them healthy and safe without the church?

Fear of Letting People Down

If I left the church, I felt I would let down people I cared about. My parents had invested enormous amounts of time and money raising me in the church, and it felt like a shame to throw that away. I felt like leaving the church, whether or not it was the right choice for me, would disappoint my parents, my former and current church leaders, and (most importantly) my wife.

Fear of Losing Blessings

I have overall lived a privileged life. I attributed much of that to my obedience in the church, and I was scared that if I left the church, my finances, health, and the rest of my life would go to shambles because I lost God’s blessings.

Mission Trauma

While on my mission, I had completely equated my personal safety with obedience. Any disobedience was triggering to me, and it seemed easiest to stay in the church rather than risk my life being disobedient.

What if I’m Wrong?

Leaving the church means betting against all of its truth claims. By leaving, I was gambling away my chance at exaltation. Even if the church wasn’t true, I could have sat in 2 hours of church every week and lived an acceptable life. Staying in the church felt like a more strategic move for my afterlife.

1.4 Why I Left

As I listed the reasons I stayed in the church, I realized I was mainly motivated by fear. I talked with my wife about it, and she had a similar experience.

My Shelf

It is common among exmormons to talk about a “shelf”. Essentially, when something doesn’t feel right, we put it on a metaphorical shelf to deal with it later. Maybe we don’t have all the answers or God hasn’t revealed everything yet, we say.

Like many latter-day saints, I had quite a few items on my shelf.

Mission Trauma

I spent the last summer working on processing my mission trauma. As I recounted the horrible things the church and its leaders do to missionaries, I would think, “This doesn’t sound like something God would do.” I won’t repeat all of my mission trauma here, but I would encourage a read through 1.2 My Story if you are curious and haven’t yet read it.

I talked with other returned missionaries and learned that it is very common to return traumatized from a mission. Friends recounted nightmares they’d had about getting another mission call, and we laughed about having the same nightmares.

But I figured there was some divinely appointed purpose for me going through that trauma. Maybe I was supposed to learn something from it or use the experience to help someone when I served in a future leadership role. So on the shelf it went.

Gender Equality and Family Dynamics

I was theoretically equal to my wife. But I was also taught in the temple that she could only be resurrected through me. I had learned that I was the patriarch of my home and that I presided. I grew up hearing in church meetings that God’s approved way of living was a husband who worked and a wife who had kids and stayed home with them. This didn’t sit right, since in many ways, my wife and I reverse traditional gender roles. I was taught that women could exercise the priesthood in their callings, but I saw that every significant decision still had to be approved by a man. Despite being taught that men and women were equal, it was disappointing to see statements like “Elder Ballard and his wife”. I realized how absurd this was when someone mentioned “Susan Ballard and her husband” and it took me a while to figure out who they were talking about.

The most important factor, though, was learning we likely cannot have children. We had been taught for years that our main purpose in life was to have kids and raise them in the church. My wife had learned in young women’s classes that her main job as a wife was to give me children and raise them. We wrestled with God for months to figure out why He would not allow us to fulfill the single greatest purpose in life — her single greatest purpose in life.

I set this on my shelf, though, for several reasons. We were dealing with a lot of traumatic events, and it was easier not to think about this. I am a man, so I didn’t usually see how the church’s teachings about gender affected women. Adam and Eve had distinct roles, so maybe gender roles are meant to be symbolic of our origins. And it would all sort itself out in eternity, I figured.

Testimony

After hearing the testimonies of people about the value and truthfulness of their own religions (including Islam, Buddhism, and even atheism), I realized I felt what I identified as the Spirit when I heard all of them. I set this on my shelf, though, thinking the Spirit was testifying about the portion of truth that these religions had, but remembering that I had the whole truth.

Good People

I frequently wondered why so many good people did good things despite knowing nothing about the church. My PhD advisor is one of the kindest, most generous people I’ve met, and he was raised outside the context of religion. My childhood best friend is gay, and he and his husband are amazing people. The only mission companion I stayed in contact with left the church and talked about how much better his life got after leaving.

By itself, this didn’t make too much of an impact, but then I remembered all of the abusive or “phony” people I had met within the church. Of course, there will be good and bad people in any organization, but I was disappointed to see that the church, if it made any difference, seemed to negatively affect people’s character. Nonetheless, I chalked this up to agency and set it on the ol’ shelf.

Culture and Mental Health

I talk quite a lot more about this in later sections, but it was always distressing to see how the church’s teachings would harm people I cared about. By their fruits I shall know them, I thought, so why do so many people in the church live with mental health challenges that are often provoked by people using the church’s teachings to propagate abuse? Once again, I chalked it up to individuals’ agency and put it on the shelf.

Historical and Doctrinal Issues

The church does not have a pleasant history, and its doctrine has changed a great amount over time. I won’t go into too much detail here, since Epistles 2 and 3 tackle the issues that are most important to me. But I didn’t have the time to study any of these issues, so I figured they were mostly “anti-mormon” materials blown out of proportion and set them on my shelf.

Building Maintenance

This was a minor issue for me, but our church building was in horrible shape. We were told to spend our Saturdays cleaning, and the building got so dusty that when they turned on the heat for the winter, I had to leave because it sent me into a horrible coughing fit. It was confusing that I paid 10% of my income in tithing and somehow God’s only true church would not maintain a building well enough to let me worship in it. But it was unfair to judge the truth of a church on its building maintenance, so I brushed it off and set it on my shelf.

Breaking the Shelf

Eventually, my shelf filled with too many things and broke. While I can’t identify a single straw that broke the camel’s back, I came to the conclusion that it was time to figure out what was true.

So, I prayed to have the spirit with me and started studying. On my left monitor, I pulled up the church’s website, along with several apologetic sources. On the right monitor, I pulled up antagonistic and secular/historical sources. I took an entire day off of work and studied.

My wife is a clinical social worker, so I have been able to learn a lot from her about manipulation and abuse. I have been especially interested in learning about abusive and manipulative language patterns. So it was shocking to me to see so many of these patterns in the general conference talks I studied. When I read “anti-mormon” sources, I felt like I was given permission to think and reason for myself. This aligned with what I believed about God; that He had given me the ability to discern for myself and make my own informed decisions. When I read faithful and apologetic sources, I felt what I can only describe as “icky”. I felt that my agency was by and large not being respected, as none of these sources would so much as provide links to the “anti-mormon literature” they described. Much of the faithful content I read did everything it could to destroy “anti-mormon"s’ reputations and cast doubt on their claims.

My shelf was beginning to break, and I felt like I was starting to understand that I had been lied to and manipulated. I felt betrayed. I wanted so badly for the church to be true. I had been told my whole life that if you lack wisdom, you should pray about it. I had heard that God will always answer a sincere prayer.

My Prayer

So I prayed my heart out. I had always been taught that the spirit will confirm the truth. For all my life, I had asked for a confirmation that the church was true. I don’t know that I ever got a real, solid answer, but I would occasionally feel peaceful and understand that to mean the spirit was confirming that what I was asking was true.

So I decided to experiment. I understood God to be logically consistent, meaning that to God, a statement is either true or false. Nothing to God could be both true and untrue at the same time. This is a critical part of logical reasoning. I determined that if it was important to God that I stayed in His church, He would do what he could.

In my prayer, I said, “I am considering leaving the church. Please confirm to me that the church is not true. I will understand a feeling from the spirit as a confirmation that I should leave the church.” I felt a spiritual confirmation equivalent to anything I had felt within the church.

I couldn’t believe it, so I waited a few hours and prayed again. This time, I asked directly, “Should I leave the church?” Instantly, I felt the same peace I felt when I asked if I should serve a mission, if I should attend Utah State University, and if I should marry my wife.

So it was settled. This left me with two options: either the church was not true and God was confirming that to me, or my spiritual confirmations have always been fabricated within my own mind. In either case, I was certain beyond a shadow of a doubt that the church was not true. I had felt the spirit confirm it to me. My testimony against the church is more sure than any testimony I had within the church.

Leaving

In a miraculous turn of events, my wife and I came to the conclusion we wanted to leave the church around the same time, but for very different reasons. Her story is hers to tell (and she eventually intends to share it on this website), so I will say only that it has been amazing to share this spiritual journey. On the day we both resolved to leave the church, we both felt amazing. We felt happy and free, and we were finally hopeful about the rest of our lives. We realized how much the church was costing us, especially in terms of mental and emotional energy, and it felt so good to let go of all of that and start fresh.

The only negative experience we have had since leaving the church involved the hurt feelings and anger of
people who felt betrayed by our decision. It is an emotional decision for a lot of people, and we are so grateful for the friends (in and out of the church) who have supported us while we made this decision.

At midnight on New Year’s Day, we both clicked “send” on the resignation emails we had both drafted. Ten days later, we received confirmation letters from the church indicating our membership had been terminated, and we both felt great. We celebrated over drinks, and life has been good since. We’ve since experienced what we would have identified as blessings from God for our faithfulness.

This letter has become more meaningful to me than any other document the church has given me. I am so grateful for the people who helped me get to this point, and I hope you find some encouragement if you are considering leaving the church: life gets better.

1.5 What Has Changed

I am happier than I have ever been. I honestly couldn’t believe it. When I made the decision to leave the church, I was prepared for the worst. Part of me was still afraid God would smite me for leaving, but it was so empowering to make a decision without caring what the church would think.

Soon after leaving, I remember saying to my wife and later to some friends, “I feel like I’m finally allowed to be a good person.” It felt so freeing.

Relationships

I have no more cognitive dissonance about my LGBT+ friends. They are amazing people and I finally feel like I can support them without having some other agenda. There’s no more skirting around “I still love you, but you’re living in sin”. I can finally be an honest, genuine friend, especially to people of non-mormon faiths. There’s no more secret missionary agenda; I can just be their friend.

My relationship with my wife has also greatly improved now that I don’t feel like I have to balance traditional gender roles with empowering her decisions.

While some relationships have suffered when people became angry we left, it has been a great filter. We have realized who really cares about us, and we’ve learned we’re better without some relationships. Our relationships with most of the people who are close to us have only been strengthened by this experience.

Word of Wisdom

I have learned that sipping tea is incredibly beneficial when I am having an especially autistic day. It helps with sensory overload and boosts my mood, and I’m not even addicted to it. I put wine in stew and espresso powder in brownies, and I can go to the liquor store (which I did as a faithful church member to make vanilla) without worrying who will see and judge me. I feel more energized, happier, and healthier, especially since processing much of the mission trauma that caused me some negative health effects.

Time and Money

I have more free time than I ever have, and Sundays are finally delightful. We can catch up on chores before our work week without feeling guilty about breaking the Sabbath.

We were disgusted with how the church was spending tithing money (i.e., the mall in Salt Lake and huge plots of land in Nebraska), so we have been able to use the money we otherwise donated as tithing to do real good. With a fraction of the money we would have otherwise donated, we were able to provide a new bed to a family member with a serious disability, contribute to a number of nonprofit open-source software foundations, and contribute in other meaningful ways to our community. We realized that with the fast offerings we donated in a month, we could pay for a whole cart full of groceries for a family in need, and they wouldn’t have to go through the potentially demeaning process of discussing and justifying their finances with church leaders. I say this not to toot my own horn; I simply wish to demonstrate how much good donations could do if they were used to benefit people.

Hope and Meaning

It is so freeing to not worry about God constantly watching and judging us. We are no longer afraid of making a wrong choice and ending up damned for it. We don’t have to think about every single thing we do in the context of “good, better, best,” and we are working on letting go of the perfectionism that accompanied our faith. Life has become precious and meaningful to us, and we are much better able to savor it.

Testimony

Since leaving, I have developed a solid testimony that the church is not what it claims to be. I have not found one shred of evidence that my life would improve if I went back. I believe with all of my heart that the church is harmful, and I have received what I would have identified as a spiritual confirmation that leaving the church was the right choice.

2.1 On Truth

It was a normal day in seminary class when someone started asking complicated questions about the racial priesthood ban, plural marriage, and other uncomfortable church history topics.

Our teacher let us know he didn’t have all the answers. In a few days, he told us he found a church-approved resource that covered some of these topics: the Gospel Topics Essays.

These essays puzzled me for a long time, since they covered topics in a way no other church handbook or resource seemed to. For a while, I thought it was refreshing that the church was trying to be more transparent.

But I slowly began to realize these essays are damning to many of the church’s most significant truth claims. This was deeply troubling to me, since I had always thought that anything church-approved was automatically going to be inspiring and faith-promoting.

A note about the phrase “church-approved”. Apologetics often criticize antagonistic documents for describing resources as “church-approved”. Take, for example, this quote from FAIR’s response to Letter For My Wife:

Once more, we have the very common refrain of “Church-approved resources.” There is no such thing as a Church-approved source. […] “Church-approved sources” is a phrase that pops up over and over again in anti-LDS online communities today. It’s meant to insinuate that we’re brainwashed, that we can’t think for ourselves, and that we’re shielded from accessing “the truth” by our church-leader overlords.⁹

I completely rebut this argument with the introduction to the Gospel Topics Essays:

Recognizing that today so much information about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints can be obtained from questionable and often inaccurate sources, officials of the Church began in 2013 to publish straightforward, in-depth essays on a number of topics. The purpose of these essays, which have been approved by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, has been to gather accurate information from many different sources and publications and place it in the Gospel Topics section of ChurchofJesusChrist.org, where the material can more easily be accessed and studied by Church members and other interested parties.¹⁰

The Gospel-Topics essays are indeed an officially-produced, church-approved resource. Of course, I have made it clear that I believe you can think for yourself. As I have written this letter, I have sought to empower you to learn truth and use intelligence and wisdom to determine what you believe. But I also remember that as I started to leave the church, I felt I shouldn’t turn to any non-approved resource. Further, this mistake on FAIR’s part has led me to believe apologetic sources are fallible and often do not consider important resources as they prepare their arguments.

Book of Mormon and DNA Studies

The current version of the Book of Mormon includes the following paragraph:

The book was written by many ancient prophets by the spirit of prophecy and revelation. Their words, written on gold plates, were quoted and abridged by a prophet-historian named Mormon. The record gives an account of two great civilizations. One came from Jerusalem in 600 B.C. and afterward separated into two nations, known as the Nephites and the Lamanites. The other came much earlier when the Lord confounded the tongues at the Tower of Babel. This group is known as the Jaredites. After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are among the ancestors of the American Indians.¹¹

Older church members will perhaps remember this paragraph ending differently. The previous final sentence read, “After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians.”¹² It is concerning to me that the Introduction to the Book of Mormon, which I have long heard is considered scripture and was written by a prophet of God, changed one of its fundamental truth claims long after the Book of Mormon was written.

Thus, the church clearly conceded that its doctrine on the origin of Native Americans was at least partially flawed. This is also clear in the essay:

The evidence assembled to date suggests that the majority of Native Americans carry largely Asian DNA. Scientists theorize that in an era that predated Book of Mormon accounts, a relatively small group of people migrated from northeast Asia to the Americas by way of a land bridge that connected Siberia to Alaska. These people, scientists say, spread rapidly to fill North and South America and were likely the primary ancestors of modern American Indians.¹³

While I won’t discuss them in-depth here, I would encourage a read through the footnotes of this paragraph (footnotes 3, 4, and 5 in the essay). I would like to address some critical issues regarding the essay’s approach to these sources, though.

I am an academic researcher. I’ve spent the last several years writing and publishing papers, and I have seen firsthand that a peer review process creates immense pressure to produce reliable, trustworthy results. I am thus inclined to believe that the claims made in the peer-reviewed documents cited by the essays are correct. The fact that these documents are cited in a church-approved essay makes it all the more appealing.

Let us examine a couple of these citations, then.

This analysis revealed the presence of four haplotype groups (haplogroups A, B, C, and D) in the Amerind, but only one haplogroup (A) in the Na-Dene, and confirmed the independent origins of the Amerinds and the Na-Dene. Further, each haplogroup appeared to have been founded by a single mtDNA haplotype, a result which is consistent with a hypothesized founder effect. Most of the variation within haplogroups was tribal specific, that is, it occurred as tribal private polymorphisms. These observations suggest that the process of tribalization began early in the history of the Amerinds, with relatively little intertribal genetic exchange occurring subsequently. The sequencing of 341 nucleotides in the mtDNA D-loop revealed that the D-loop sequence variation correlated strongly with the four haplogroups defined by restriction analysis, and it indicated that the D-loop variation, like the haplotype variation, arose predominantly after the migration of the ancestral Amerinds across the Bering land bridge.¹⁴

This paper alone, cited by 175 additional peer-reviewed publications at the time I write this document¹⁵, provides damning evidence against the Book of Mormon’s claims regarding Native American ancestry. The essay presents two similar papers, both of which also refute the Book of Mormon’s claims regarding Native American ancestry¹⁶-¹⁷.

It becomes challenging to believe the church’s self-published essay (which does not indicate any authors) rather than peer-reviewed, well-conducted scientific research. This is especially problematic when one reads the conclusion to the essay:

Much as critics and defenders of the Book of Mormon would like to use DNA studies to support their views, the evidence is simply inconclusive. Nothing is known about the DNA of Book of Mormon peoples. Even if such information were known, processes such as population bottleneck, genetic drift, and post-Columbian immigration from West Eurasia make it unlikely that their DNA could be detected today. As Elder Dallin H. Oaks of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles observed, “It is our position that secular evidence can neither prove nor disprove the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.”

Book of Mormon record keepers were primarily concerned with conveying religious truths and preserving the spiritual heritage of their people. They prayed that, in spite of the prophesied destruction of most of their people, their record would be preserved and one day help restore a knowledge of the fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Their promise to all who study the book “with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ,” is that God “will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.” For countless individuals who have applied this test of the book’s authenticity, the Book of Mormon stands as a volume of sacred scripture with the power to bring them closer to Jesus Christ.

By my interpretation, I understand the premise of the essay as the following: All the scientific evidence we have suggests the Book of Mormon was impossible, but maybe science got it wrong. This essay suggests a number of ideas that could potentially refute DNA studies, but I opine that their argument against DNA studies is ineffective and backed by insufficient evidence. Further, the lack of authors on the essay indicates to me that the authors of the essay, if they were academic, did not want to attach their name to the document. Overall, this essay did more to harm my opinion of the church than it did to reassure me of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon.

Read “Book of Mormon and DNA Studies”

Book of Mormon Translation

This essay is interesting to me because it does not make a clear or consistent argument about the translation of the Book of Mormon. It was made clear to me throughout my experience that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon using only a Urim and Thumim, and that he dictated the book exactly as it was supposed to be¹⁸. In this essay, the Church admits that is not exactly true and provides no justification for the discrepancy.

Any person who is reasonably familiar with the English language understands how vital punctuation is. So you can imagine my confusion to read the following:

Because Joseph Smith did not call for punctuation, such as periods, commas, or question marks, as he dictated, such marks are not in the original manuscript. The typesetter later inserted punctuation marks when he prepared the text for the printer. With the exceptions of punctuation, formatting, other elements of typesetting, and minor adjustments required to correct copying and scribal errors, the dictation copy became the text of the first printed edition of the book.¹⁹

I would encourage further exploration of the Book of Mormon without Punctuation²⁰. If it was so important to God that the Book of Mormon were translated perfectly, why did God not indicate punctuation that would disambiguate the text in the supposed most correct book in the world? And more importantly, why would the task of proofreading and adding punctuation be delegated to a typesetter rather than a prophet of God?

Overall, I find this essay as dissatisfying as the rest. A supposedly scholarly work indicates that there are many contradictory records of Joseph’s translation process, then suggests that a reader pray to know the truth rather than provide any real evidence.

Read “Book of Mormon Translation”

Joseph Smith’s Teachings about Priesthood, Temple, and Women

I have no argument to provide here, as any conscientious reader will easily find a number of key flaws by reading this essay and its footnotes by themself.

Read “Joseph Smith’s Teachings about Priesthood, Temple, and Women”

Peace and Violence among 19th-Century Latter-day Saints

Similarly, this essay and the sources it cites are damning evidence that early church leaders were not inspired by God, as their behavior and teachings are largely inconsistent with God’s other teachings. I encourage a careful read through this essay, especially watching for contradictory statements and blatant lies.

Read “Peace and Violence among 19th-Century Latter-day Saints”

Plural Marriage in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Polygamy (both polygyny and polyandry) within the church have been beaten to death, so I will address only one portion of this essay that, to me, serves as a condemnation on the early church:

Plural marriage was among the most challenging aspects of the Restoration. For many who practiced it, plural marriage was a trial of faith. It violated both cultural and legal norms, leading to persecution and revilement. Despite these hardships, plural marriage benefited the Church in innumerable ways.²¹

The church advocates following the law of the land, and apparently that has always been important to God. So I cannot understand why early church leaders “violated both cultural and legal norms” by instituting polygamy. It is also interesting that the essay rebuts this by stating that “plural marriage benefited the Church in innumerable ways.”

There are many well-written documents discussing polygamy and polyandry in the early church, and I would encourage a read through several of them, in conjunction with the essay and its footnotes.

• Joseph Smith’s Polyandrous Plural Marriages (Semi-academic source)
• Sealings to Legally Married Women (Semi-academic source)
• Polyandry: Women married to more than one husband (Apologetic rebuttal)

I would like to point out, in defense of my argument against the church, that I am providing a number of church-published or apologetic sources. It is my opinion that the arguments presented in these sources are disappointingly weak, and I believe the astute reader will agree. But I reiterate: you are an intelligent being and can choose what to believe.

I would definitely encourage a read through this and the related essays.

Read “Plural Marriage in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints”

Race and the Priesthood

Rarely have I felt so gaslit as I did upon reading the introduction to this essay:

In theology and practice, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints embraces the universal human family. Latter-day Saint scripture and teachings affirm that God loves all of His children and makes salvation available to all. God created the many diverse races and ethnicities and esteems them all equally. As the Book of Mormon puts it, “all are alike unto God.”²²

I propose that this is a blatant lie. Saints are taught that God and his doctrine are unchanging and eternal. They are also taught that the Book of Mormon, at the time of its translation, was the most correct of any book. It is confusing, then, why God would classify dark-skinned people as undesirable in 2 Nephi 5.

This essay, in and of itself, is damning. It discredits the inspiration of early church leaders and justifies racist decisions throughout the church’s history. This topic has also been beaten to death in other venues, so I would encourage you to explore and research for yourself.

Read “Race and the Priesthood”

Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham

This essay appears to be grasping at straws to defend the Book of Abraham despite all evidence suggesting Joseph’s translation was a fraud. I would encourage reading the essay and its footnotes.

Read “Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham”

Conclusion

It is my personal experience that the Gospel Topics Essays provide damning evidence against the truthfulness of the church’s truth claims. They are an important church-approved resource that describe the church’s long history of deception and failure.

I would encourage any questioning saint to thoroughly read these essays and the referenced sources. If after scrutinizing these materials you find yourself questioning what you have been taught, know that what you are feeling is normal. Take a break if you need.

A Note

As I prepared this section, it appears the church has started to work on discontinuing the essays. This is not surprising to me, but in the case that they take them down for good, they can still be accessed via the Internet Archive.

2.2 The Essays

It was a normal day in seminary class when someone started asking complicated questions about the racial priesthood ban, plural marriage, and other uncomfortable church history topics.

Our teacher let us know he didn’t have all the answers. In a few days, he told us he found a church-approved resource that covered some of these topics: the Gospel Topics Essays.

These essays puzzled me for a long time, since they covered topics in a way no other church handbook or resource seemed to. For a while, I thought it was refreshing that the church was trying to be more transparent.

But I slowly began to realize these essays are damning to many of the church’s most significant truth claims. This was deeply troubling to me, since I had always thought that anything church-approved was automatically going to be inspiring and faith-promoting.

A note about the phrase “church-approved”. Apologetics often criticize antagonistic documents for describing resources as “church-approved”. Take, for example, this quote from FAIR’s response to Letter For My Wife:

Once more, we have the very common refrain of “Church-approved resources.” There is no such thing as a Church-approved source. […] “Church-approved sources” is a phrase that pops up over and over again in anti-LDS online communities today. It’s meant to insinuate that we’re brainwashed, that we can’t think for ourselves, and that we’re shielded from accessing “the truth” by our church-leader overlords.⁹

I completely rebut this argument with the introduction to the Gospel Topics Essays:

Recognizing that today so much information about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints can be obtained from questionable and often inaccurate sources, officials of the Church began in 2013 to publish straightforward, in-depth essays on a number of topics. The purpose of these essays, which have been approved by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, has been to gather accurate information from many different sources and publications and place it in the Gospel Topics section of ChurchofJesusChrist.org, where the material can more easily be accessed and studied by Church members and other interested parties.¹⁰

The Gospel-Topics essays are indeed an officially-produced, church-approved resource. Of course, I have made it clear that I believe you can think for yourself. As I have written this letter, I have sought to empower you to learn truth and use intelligence and wisdom to determine what you believe. But I also remember that as I started to leave the church, I felt I shouldn’t turn to any non-approved resource. Further, this mistake on FAIR’s part has led me to believe apologetic sources are fallible and often do not consider important resources as they prepare their arguments.

Book of Mormon and DNA Studies

The current version of the Book of Mormon includes the following paragraph:

The book was written by many ancient prophets by the spirit of prophecy and revelation. Their words, written on gold plates, were quoted and abridged by a prophet-historian named Mormon. The record gives an account of two great civilizations. One came from Jerusalem in 600 B.C. and afterward separated into two nations, known as the Nephites and the Lamanites. The other came much earlier when the Lord confounded the tongues at the Tower of Babel. This group is known as the Jaredites. After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are among the ancestors of the American Indians.¹¹

Older church members will perhaps remember this paragraph ending differently. The previous final sentence read, “After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians.”¹² It is concerning to me that the Introduction to the Book of Mormon, which I have long heard is considered scripture and was written by a prophet of God, changed one of its fundamental truth claims long after the Book of Mormon was written.

Thus, the church clearly conceded that its doctrine on the origin of Native Americans was at least partially flawed. This is also clear in the essay:

The evidence assembled to date suggests that the majority of Native Americans carry largely Asian DNA. Scientists theorize that in an era that predated Book of Mormon accounts, a relatively small group of people migrated from northeast Asia to the Americas by way of a land bridge that connected Siberia to Alaska. These people, scientists say, spread rapidly to fill North and South America and were likely the primary ancestors of modern American Indians.¹³

While I won’t discuss them in-depth here, I would encourage a read through the footnotes of this paragraph (footnotes 3, 4, and 5 in the essay). I would like to address some critical issues regarding the essay’s approach to these sources, though.

I am an academic researcher. I’ve spent the last several years writing and publishing papers, and I have seen firsthand that a peer review process creates immense pressure to produce reliable, trustworthy results. I am thus inclined to believe that the claims made in the peer-reviewed documents cited by the essays are correct. The fact that these documents are cited in a church-approved essay makes it all the more appealing.

Let us examine a couple of these citations, then. Shall we begin

This analysis revealed the presence of four haplotype groups (haplogroups A, B, C, and D) in the Amerind, but only one haplogroup (A) in the Na-Dene, and confirmed the independent origins of the Amerinds and the Na-Dene. Further, each haplogroup appeared to have been founded by a single mtDNA haplotype, a result which is consistent with a hypothesized founder effect. Most of the variation within haplogroups was tribal specific, that is, it occurred as tribal private polymorphisms. These observations suggest that the process of tribalization began early in the history of the Amerinds, with relatively little intertribal genetic exchange occurring subsequently. The sequencing of 341 nucleotides in the mtDNA D-loop revealed that the D-loop sequence variation correlated strongly with the four haplogroups defined by restriction analysis, and it indicated that the D-loop variation, like the haplotype variation, arose predominantly after the migration of the ancestral Amerinds across the Bering land bridge.¹⁴

This paper alone, cited by 175 additional peer-reviewed publications at the time I write this document¹⁵, provides damning evidence against the Book of Mormon’s claims regarding Native American ancestry. The essay presents two similar papers, both of which also refute the Book of Mormon’s claims regarding Native American ancestry¹⁶-¹⁷.

It becomes challenging to believe the church’s self-published essay (which does not indicate any authors) rather than peer-reviewed, well-conducted scientific research. This is especially problematic when one reads the conclusion to the essay:

Much as critics and defenders of the Book of Mormon would like to use DNA studies to support their views, the evidence is simply inconclusive. Nothing is known about the DNA of Book of Mormon peoples. Even if such information were known, processes such as population bottleneck, genetic drift, and post-Columbian immigration from West Eurasia make it unlikely that their DNA could be detected today. As Elder Dallin H. Oaks of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles observed, “It is our position that secular evidence can neither prove nor disprove the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.”

Book of Mormon record keepers were primarily concerned with conveying religious truths and preserving the spiritual heritage of their people. They prayed that, in spite of the prophesied destruction of most of their people, their record would be preserved and one day help restore a knowledge of the fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Their promise to all who study the book “with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ,” is that God “will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.” For countless individuals who have applied this test of the book’s authenticity, the Book of Mormon stands as a volume of sacred scripture with the power to bring them closer to Jesus Christ.

By my interpretation, I understand the premise of the essay as the following: All the scientific evidence we have suggests the Book of Mormon was impossible, but maybe science got it wrong. This essay suggests a number of ideas that could potentially refute DNA studies, but I opine that their argument against DNA studies is ineffective and backed by insufficient evidence. Further, the lack of authors on the essay indicates to me that the authors of the essay, if they were academic, did not want to attach their name to the document. Overall, this essay did more to harm my opinion of the church than it did to reassure me of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon.

Read “Book of Mormon and DNA Studies”

Book of Mormon Translation

This essay is interesting to me because it does not make a clear or consistent argument about the translation of the Book of Mormon. It was made clear to me throughout my experience that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon using only a Urim and Thumim, and that he dictated the book exactly as it was supposed to be¹⁸. In this essay, the Church admits that is not exactly true and provides no justification for the discrepancy.

Any person who is reasonably familiar with the English language understands how vital punctuation is. So you can imagine my confusion to read the following:

Because Joseph Smith did not call for punctuation, such as periods, commas, or question marks, as he dictated, such marks are not in the original manuscript. The typesetter later inserted punctuation marks when he prepared the text for the printer. With the exceptions of punctuation, formatting, other elements of typesetting, and minor adjustments required to correct copying and scribal errors, the dictation copy became the text of the first printed edition of the book.¹⁹

I would encourage further exploration of the Book of Mormon without Punctuation²⁰. If it was so important to God that the Book of Mormon were translated perfectly, why did God not indicate punctuation that would disambiguate the text in the supposed most correct book in the world. And more importantly, why would the task of proofreading and adding punctuation be delegated to a typesetter rather than a prophet of God?

Overall, I find this essay as dissatisfying as the rest. A supposedly scholarly work indicates that there are many contradictory records of Joseph’s translation process, then suggests that a reader pray to know the truth rather than provide any real evidence.

Read “Book of Mormon Translation”

Joseph Smith’s Teachings about Priesthood, Temple, and Women

I have no argument to provide here, as the conscientious reader will easily find a number of key flaws by reading this essay and its footnotes by themself.

Read “Joseph Smith’s Teachings about Priesthood, Temple, and Women”

Peace and Violence among 19th-Century Latter-day Saints

Similarly, this essay and the sources it cites are damning evidence that early church leaders were not inspired by God, as their behavior and teachings are largely inconsistent with God’s other teachings. I encourage a careful read through this essay, especially watching for contradictory statements and blatant lies.

Read “Peace and Violence among 19th-Century Latter-day Saints”

Plural Marriage in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Polygamy (both polygyny and polyandry) within the church have been beaten to death, so I will address only one portion of this essay that, to me, serves as a condemnation on the early church:

Plural marriage was among the most challenging aspects of the Restoration. For many who practiced it, plural marriage was a trial of faith. It violated both cultural and legal norms, leading to persecution and revilement. Despite these hardships, plural marriage benefited the Church in innumerable ways.²¹

The church advocates following the law of the land, and apparently that has always been important to God. So I cannot understand why early church leaders “violated both cultural and legal norms” by instituting polygamy. It is also interesting that the essay rebuts this by stating that “plural marriage benefited the Church in innumerable ways.”

There are many well-written documents discussing polygamy and polyandry in the early church, and I would encourage a read through several of them, in conjunction with the essay and its footnotes.

• Joseph Smith’s Polyandrous Plural Marriages (Semi-academic source)
• Sealings to Legally Married Women (Semi-academic source)
• Polyandry: Women married to more than one husband (Apologetic rebuttal)

I would like to point out, in defense of my argument against the church, that I am providing a number of church-published or apologetic sources. It is my opinion that the arguments presented in these sources are disappointingly weak, and I believe the astute reader will agree. But I reiterate: you are an intelligent being and can choose what to believe.

I would definitely encourage a read through this and the related essays.

Read “Plural Marriage in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints”

Race and the Priesthood

Rarely have I felt so gaslit as I did upon reading the introduction to this essay:

In theology and practice, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints embraces the universal human family. Latter-day Saint scripture and teachings affirm that God loves all of His children and makes salvation available to all. God created the many diverse races and ethnicities and esteems them all equally. As the Book of Mormon puts it, “all are alike unto God.”²²

I propose that this is a blatant lie. Saints are taught that God and his doctrine are unchanging and eternal. They are also taught that the Book of Mormon, at the time of its translation, was the most correct of any book. It is confusing, then, why God would classify dark-skinned people as undesirable in 2 Nephi 5.

This essay, in and of itself, is damning. It discredits the inspiration of early church leaders and justifies racist decisions throughout the church’s history. This topic has also been beaten to death in other venues, so I would encourage you to explore and research for yourself.

Read “Race and the Priesthood”

Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham

This essay appears to be grasping at straws to defend the Book of Abraham despite all evidence suggesting Joseph’s translation was a fraud. I would encourage reading the essay and its footnotes.

Read “Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham”

Conclusion

It is my personal experience that the Gospel Topics Essays provide damning evidence against the truthfulness of the church’s truth claims. They are an important church-approved resource that describe the church’s long history of deception and failure.

I would encourage any questioning saint to thoroughly read these essays and the referenced sources. If after scrutinizing these materials you find yourself questioning what you have been taught, know that what you are feeling is normal. Take a break if you need.

A Note

As I prepared this section, it appears the church has started to work on discontinuing the essays. This is not surprising to me, but in the case that they take them down for good, they can still be accessed via the Internet Archive.

2.3 Reasoning and Fallacy

You are capable of reasoning. You’ve been reasoning about everything since you were born. You reason when you decide what to buy, who to befriend, and how to live your life.

I will not attempt to make a comprehensive guide on reasoning or critical thinking here. That’s not the purpose of this website. But I do want to point out some critical processes that helped me make sense of my faith crisis.

Religion and Reasoning

It is natural to set logical reasoning aside when handling religious matters. The church teaches that people should consider everything spiritually rather than with their natural mind. To this, I suggest that God has given you the ability to reason. He would surely be offended if this gift were wasted, as the parable of the talents makes abundantly clear. So if the church’s claims are true, they will stand up to logical reasoning.

In fact, church members are encouraged to try to find flaws in reasoning:

If [Joseph Smith’s] claims and declarations were built upon fraud and deceit, there would appear many errors and contradictions, which would be easy to detect.²³

With this in mind, let us reason about a number of key logical principles that apply to the church. Please consider my reasoning and email me if you find any critical flaws.

Burden of Proof

While the church encourages you to “doubt your doubts”, you are not obligated to prove the church is not true. I was taught that God cares deeply about His children. As such, he wants everyone to have the ability to see that the church is true.

In my opinion, this places the burden of proof of the church’s claims on the church itself. A perfect God ought to make a good argument, albeit through imperfect human servants. Remember we are talking about the same God who, throughout the Bible and Book of Mormon, encouraged prophets and missionaries to make compelling arguments and convince people of the truth. It is not, in my opinion, in God’s character to require faith based on a poorly-constructed argument.

Self-Contradictions

Self-contradictions are perhaps the most obvious way to tell someone is lying. Take, for example the following lines from a police interview:

• Alice: “Sam didn’t rob the bank.”
• Bob: “Sam robbed the bank.”

Are Alice and Bob simultaneously correct? Of course not. One of their statements must be false. Your brain figured this out by following a pattern of reasoning:

• Alice’s and Bob’s statements are logically contradictory
• Two logically contradictory statements cannot both be true.
• Either Alice’s or Bob’s statement is not true.

Thus, after the interviews, you know that either Alice or Bob must be lying. We have to be careful, since it doesn’t necessarily follow that the liar is malicious. We can only know from this process that one of the statements is false; we cannot determine their motives. Perhaps Alice thought Sam was on vacation, or perhaps Bob thought he saw Sam through the bank window.

In the same way, self-contradictions (i.e., one person gives contradictory statements) must contain at least one falsehood. Otherwise, a system is logically inconsistent. Of course, there is a lot to study about logical inconsistency and completeness (take Godel’s work, for example²⁴), but this gives a very basic overview.

Important Implications of Self-Contradictions

The church teaches of a perfect (i.e., at least logically consistent) God. We are taught that God cannot lie²⁵. If God contradicts Himself, a paradox is created in which a being that cannot lie has produced contradictory statements that must simultaneously be true.

Relevant Fallacies

It is incredibly easy to construct an argument with fallacies. These arguments can be compelling. If you want to learn more about common fallacies, I would encourage you to explore related books and websites and see what fallacies you can spot in popular media.

I will list a few common fallacies here, but I would also encourage research from other high-quality resources:

• RationalWiki is a wiki-based site with general information
• YourLogicalFallacyIs.com gives simple definitions of common fallacies

Lying

Lying outright is a common and simple fallacy that often gets overlooked. If a statement is a lie, it is false.

Straw Man

Straw Man reasoning seeks to attack a weaker argument than is presented. For example:

• John: Using less fossil fuel will help stave off the effects of climate change.
• Kim: You want to put thousands of Americans out of work by destroying the oil fields!

This argument has the potential to pop up in a number of church-related discussions, which can be extremely dangerous. For example:

• Mindy: The church should use a portion of tithing money to maintain its buildings.
• Nancy: God wants people to show faith by serving in the church.

This becomes especially problematic with thought-terminating statements. These statements are often catchy one-liners that aren’t necessarily false, but they stop an argument in its tracks by arguing against a different point. For example:

• Mark: Why are there so many anachronisms in the Book of Mormon?
• Nina: Doubt your doubts before you doubt your faith.

Watch out for Straw Man reasoning in apologetic work. Make sure arguments actually supports their claims.

Ad Hominem

Ad Hominem reasoning attacks someone’s character rather than providing a meaningful counter to their argument. People often learn this technique as children in playground arguments, and it remains popular into adulthood. For example:

• Andy: Hey, you stole our ball!
• Billy: Shut up, stinky face!

Or, more seriously:

• Art: We should paint the bookshelf yellow.
• Becky: Why should I listen to you? You have horrible taste.

This is especially problematic in the context of the church, since it can easily lead to an us-vs-them attitude. For example:

• Sam: I don’t understand why Joseph Smith was sealed to married women.
• Thomas: You would say that; you’re so anti-mormon.

Or, more popularly:

• Sandy: I don’t understand why Joseph Smith was sealed to married women.
• Trina: Sandy made this statement shortly after leaving the church. She was probably feeling bitter and resentful, and it would make sense that she would fabricate statements about Joseph Smith to cast a bad image on the church.

Watch out for Ad Hominem in apologetic responses to antagonistic work. This is often (but not always) someone’s last resort when they cannot come up with a counter. If in doubt, ask, “does this argument focus on the topic or the speaker?”

Tu Quoque

Tu Quoque is the ugly stepcousin of Ad Hominem. This fallacy avoids criticism by turning it back on the accuser. For example:

• Xavier: Swearing to your coworkers is inappropriate and needs to stop.
• Yolanda: Then why did I hear you cussing like a sailor at Dave the other day?

This fallacy is also common in apologetic work:

• George: The church’s truth claims are full of fallacies and don’t stand up to scrutiny.
• Henry: George’s argument is invalid because his essay about polygamy contains a logical fallacy.

If in doubt, ask if the original argument is actually less valid because of the counterargument.

Appeal to Emotion

This is an extremely common fallacy. While emotional appeals have their place, they should not be considered logical arguments. These appeals are incredibly common in the church:

• Aaron: The Book of Mormon is logically inconsistent.
• Blake: But how exciting is it to have a real-life record of ancient Americans!?

Or, when something feels more personal:

• Andy: I don’t believe the church’s truth claims.
• Bert: How do you think Jesus would feel hearing that?

And one more, for good measure:

• Alex: (does something unrighteous)
• Brandon: Every time you do something wrong, you are adding more to Jesus’ suffering.

While emotional appeals have their place, they are not a substitute for a logical argument.

Special Pleading

This fallacy moves the goalposts or makes an exception to a claim when the claim was shown to be false. For example:

• Cindy: Joseph Smith didn’t practice polygamy.
• Don: There are a dozen church-approved documents that state otherwise.
• Cindy: He only practiced polygamy because God commanded him to.

Or perhaps the following:

• Quinn: The Book of Mormon was only translated with the Urim and Thumim.
• Rachel: The church has published contradictory information about that.
• Quinn: The Book of Mormon was also translated with a seer stone.

The Texas Sharpshooter

This fallacy is often associated with confirmation bias. It involves cherry-picking data to fit an argument. Watch out for this fallacy particularly when people testify of blessings received after a promise.

Relevant Biases

It is also easy to construct a biased argument. These arguments can be compelling. If you want to learn more about common biases, I would encourage you to learn more and see what biases you can spot in popular media.

I will list a few common biases here, but I would also encourage research from other high-quality resources:

• RationalWiki is a wiki-based site with general information
• YourBias.is talks about common cognitive biases

Confirmation Bias

You favor something if it confirms your beliefs. For example, imagine which statement a vacuum salesman will be more likely to believe without considering other evidence:

• People who vacuum their house twice per week are generally happier.
• People who vacuum their house twice per generally have health problems.

This bias is especially common in religious settings. For example, imagine which statement will be better received in a church meeting:

• I paid tithing and received financial blessings.
• I paid tithing and had to file for bankruptcy.

Sunk Cost

You favor something you have already invested in. Whether or not the church is true, if you have invested your entire life in it, it can be hard to justify that investment if you leave.

Group Think

You let a group’s social dynamics determine truth. This is especially problematic in religious settings where you are expected to believe exactly the same things as everyone in your group, and when anyone who believes differently is an “other”.

The Barnum Effect

You fill in gaps in a vague statement to see personal details. This can be particularly problematic when analyzing something like a patriarchal blessing, as vague statements in a blessing are usually interpreted to meet someone’s specific circumstances.

Conclusion

You are armed with the ability to discern; that is, to determine what is true or false. You have logical reasoning at your disposal, and you are encouraged to use your reasoning skills to determine the truth of the church’s claims.

2.4 Self-Contradictions

As the previous section pointed out, self-contradictions would be damning evidence against the church. In this section, I detail a series of self-contradictions throughout the teachings of the church. These contradictions, in my opinion, demonstrate that the church’s teachings are fabricated by humans and not inspired by God.

Apologetic Responses

It is important to understand how apologists often respond to these contradictions. In my opinion, none of these arguments hold much weight against these statements, but I encourage you to consider them for yourself and come to your own conclusion.

• One or both statements should not be taken literally
• The statements only appear contradictory. Using linguistic ambiguity, prophetic interpretation, or “reading with spiritual eyes”, the contradiction disappears
• The better-sounding statement is preferred because of its author or context
• One of the statements is a mistranslation or misunderstanding (which would be especially problematic if the contradiction appeared in the allegedly perfectly-translated Book of Mormon)
• God hasn’t yet revealed the truth
• The church leader was speaking as a man and not as a prophet when the contradiction was penned

As you consider these contradictions, determine for yourself whether or not you believe the apologetic responses.

Contradictions in Modern Scripture

The Bible can contain contradictions, apparently, because it was not translated correctly. Joseph Smith himself found a few of these contradictions. For example, the Bible indicates that no man ever saw God and lived, but it also indicates that God talked with Moses face-to-face. If the Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants contain contradictions, however, the church finds itself in logical trouble. Either modern prophets were not truly inspired by God or God inspired logically inconsistent work, and either statement renders the church untrue.

Let us, then, explore what I consider to be the most damning contradictions the church has to offer.

On Polygamy

Note that these scriptures reflect God’s (supposedly eternal) opinion on polygamy and do not reflect permission at one point or another to practice polygamy.

Consider Jacob 2:24 (in the Book of Mormon):

Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.

Then, consider Doctrine and Covenants 132:38-39:

David also received many wives and concubines, and also Solomon and Moses my servants, as also many others of my servants, from the beginning of creation until this time; and in nothing did they sin save in those things which they received not of me. David’s wives and concubines were given unto him of me, by the hand of Nathan, my servant, and others of the prophets who had the keys of this power; and in none of these things did he sin against me save in the case of Uriah and his wife; and, therefore he hath fallen from his exaltation, and received his portion; and he shall not inherit them out of the world, for I gave them unto another, saith the Lord.

Consider also the Bible’s take on this in 2 Samuel 12:7-8 (KJV):

And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man. Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul; And I gave thee thy master’s house, and thy master’s wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.

So, either the Book of Mormon is incorrect, or the Doctrine and Covenants and Bible are wrong together.

Appearance of Deity

The Book of Ether is alleged to take place around 2000 BC²⁶. So we should believe it when the most correct of any book (in Ether 3:15) quotes God:

And never have I showed myself unto man whom I have created, for never has man believed in me as thou hast. Seest thou that ye are created after mine own image? Yea, even all men were created in the beginning after mine own image.

It is interesting, then, that Doctrine and Covenants 107:53-55 reveals something different:

Three years previous to the death of Adam, he called Seth, Enos, Cainan, Mahalaleel, Jared, Enoch, and Methuselah, who were all high priests, with the residue of his posterity who were righteous, into the valley of Adam-ondi-Ahman, and there bestowed upon them his last blessing. And the Lord appeared unto them, and they rose up and blessed Adam, and called him Michael, the prince, the archangel. And the Lord administered comfort unto Adam, and said unto him: I have set thee to be at the head; a multitude of nations shall come of thee, and thou art a prince over them forever.

So either the Book of Mormon or the Doctrine and Covenants is wrong about the timeline of God’s first appearance to humankind. In either case, I would suggest that a prophet of God should be able to either translate the Book of Mormon or receive revelation for the Doctrine and Covenants without contradiction. And even if Joseph Smith got either wrong, I would propose that any of the several prophets since Joseph Smith should have received a revelation correcting such a glaring error.

Compounding the issue, the Bible and Pearl of Great Price have their own timelines. Consider Moses 6:3:

And God revealed himself unto Seth, and he rebelled not, but offered an acceptable sacrifice, like unto his brother Abel. And to him also was born a son, and he called his name Enos.

Then, consider Moses 7:4:

And I [Enoch] saw the Lord; and he stood before my face, and he talked with me, even as a man talketh one with another, face to face; and he said unto me: Look, and I will show unto thee the world for the space of many generations.

Finally, consider Genesis 4, in which the Lord (Jehovah) converses with Cain, presumably face-to-face. Once again, it is hard for me to believe these contradictions were introduced by God Himself, and I do not understand why generations of prophets have not resolved them.

The Lord Dwelling in the Heart

Consider Alma 34:36:

And this I know, because the Lord hath said he dwelleth not in unholy temples, but in the hearts of the righteous doth he dwell; yea, and he has also said that the righteous shall sit down in his kingdom, to go no more out; but their garments should be made white through the blood of the Lamb.

Why, then, would the Lord reveal Doctrine and Covenants 130:3?

John 14:23 – The appearing of the Father and the Son, in that verse, is a personal appearance; and the idea that the Father and the Son dwell in a man’s heart is an old sectarian notion, and is false.

God and Lying

Ether 3:12 makes it clear that God cannot lie:

And he answered: Yea, Lord, I know that thou speakest the truth, for thou art a God of truth, and canst not lie.

And 2 Nephi 9:34 makes God’s opinion on lying abundantly clear:

Wo unto the liar, for he shall be thrust down to hell.

Why, then, would God command Abraham to lie in Abraham 2:22-24?

And it came to pass when I was come near to enter into Egypt, the Lord said unto me: Behold, Sarai, thy wife, is a very fair woman to look upon; Therefore it shall come to pass, when the Egyptians shall see her, they will say—She is his wife; and they will kill you, but they will save her alive; therefore see that ye do on this wise: Let her say unto the Egyptians, she is thy sister, and thy soul shall live.

Nature of Hell

Doctrine and Covenants 76 makes the nature of the afterlife clear: all of God’s children, including those who are not valiant, receive one of the three kingdoms of glory. There is also a hell-like place designated for certain people. Take, for instance, Doctrine and Covenants 76:31-34, in which the conditions for entering hell are clearly established:

Thus saith the Lord concerning all those who know my power, and have been made partakers thereof, and suffered themselves through the power of the devil to be overcome, and to deny the truth and defy my power – They are they who are the sons of perdition, of whom I say that it had been better for them never to have been born; For they are vessels of wrath, doomed to suffer the wrath of God, with the devil and his angels in eternity; Concerning whom I have said there is no forgiveness in this world nor in the world to come

It is clear in these verses and other modern revelation that denying the Holy Ghost is the only unpardonable sin. It is concerning, then, that the following scriptures all give additional ways for someone to enter hell, which I can only understand as “the wrath of God, with the devil and his angels in eternity”.

Take 2 Nephi 9:34 once again:

Wo unto the liar, for he shall be thrust down to hell.

Take 2 Nephi 28:15, which is even more liberal with the number of people who go to hell:

O the wise, and the learned, and the rich, that are puffed up in the pride of their hearts, and all those who preach false doctrines, and all those who commit whoredoms, and pervert the right way of the Lord, wo, wo, wo be unto them, saith the Lord God Almighty, for they shall be thrust down to hell!

Also consider 3 Nephi 27:11:

But if it be not built upon my gospel, and is built upon the works of men, or upon the works of the devil, verily I say unto you they have joy in their works for a season, and by and by the end cometh, and they are hewn down and cast into the fire, from whence there is no return.

And finally, consider Moroni 8:20-21:

And he that saith that little children need baptism denieth the mercies of Christ, and setteth at naught the atonement of him and the power of his redemption. Wo unto such, for they are in danger of death, hell, and an endless torment. I speak it boldly; God hath commanded me. Listen unto them and give heed, or they stand against you at the judgment-seat of Christ.

So to enter hell, you must deny the Holy Ghost. But if you believe little children should be baptized, you also burn in hell for eternity (i.e., endless torment). I have heard Moroni 8:20-21 interpreted as “those who teach infant baptism spend a short time in spirit prison and can repent”, but I can only understand “endless torment” in one way.

Further confusing the issue, Mosiah 16:11 appears to teach of a binary heaven and hell, which in my opinion contradicts the three-kingdom narrative:

If they be good, to the resurrection of endless life and happiness; and if they be evil, to the resurrection of endless damnation, being delivered up to the devil, who hath subjected them, which is damnation

Repentance after Death

The Book of Mormon is abundantly clear: death seals your fate for eternity. Take, for instance, Mosiah 2:36-39:

And now, I say unto you, my brethren, that after ye have known and have been taught all these things, if ye should transgress and go contrary to that which has been spoken, that ye do withdraw yourselves from the Spirit of the Lord, that it may have no place in you to guide you in wisdom’s paths that ye may be blessed, prospered, and preserved – I say unto you, that the man that doeth this, the same cometh out in open rebellion against God; therefore he listeth to obey the evil spirit, and becometh an enemy to all righteousness; therefore, the Lord has no place in him, for he dwelleth not in unholy temples. Therefore if that man repenteth not, and remaineth and dieth an enemy to God, the demands of divine justice do awaken his immortal soul to a lively sense of his own guilt, which doth cause him to shrink from the presence of the Lord, and doth fill his breast with guilt, and pain, and anguish, which is like an unquenchable fire, whose flame ascendeth up forever and ever.

I previously understood that this verse was talking about a temporary spirit prison rather than eternal damnation. But it is abundantly clear: if you die an enemy to God, you burn forever (i.e., for eternity).

Alma 34:32-35 teaches something similar:

For behold, this life is the time for men to prepare to meet God; yea, behold the day of this life is the day for men to perform their labors. And now, as I said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore, I beseech of you that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end; for after this day of life, which is given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness wherein there can be no labor performed. Ye cannot say, when ye are brought to that awful crisis, that I will repent, that I will return to my God. Nay, ye cannot say this; for that same spirit which doth possess your bodies at the time that ye go out of this life, that same spirit will have power to possess your body in that eternal world. For behold, if ye have procrastinated the day of your repentance even until death, behold, ye have become subjected to the spirit of the devil, and he doth seal you his; therefore, the Spirit of the Lord hath withdrawn from you, and hath no place in you, and the devil hath all power over you; and this is the final state of the wicked.

I do not understand, then, how this is consistent with Doctrine and Covenants 128:5,17-18:

You may think this order of things to be very particular; but let me tell you that it is only to answer the will of God, by conforming to the ordinance and preparation that the Lord ordained and prepared before the foundation of the world, for the salvation of the dead who should die without a knowledge of the gospel. […] And again, in connection with this quotation I will give you a quotation from one of the prophets, who had his eye fixed on the restoration of the priesthood, the glories to be revealed in the last days, and in an especial manner this most glorious of all subjects belonging to the everlasting gospel, namely, the baptism for the dead; for Malachi says, last chapter, verses 5th and 6th: Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse. I might have rendered a plainer translation to this, but it is sufficiently plain to suit my purpose as it stands. It is sufficient to know, in this case, that the earth will be smitten with a curse unless there is a welding link of some kind or other between the fathers and the children, upon some subject or other—and behold what is that subject? It is the baptism for the dead. For we without them cannot be made perfect; neither can they without us be made perfect. Neither can they nor we be made perfect without those who have died in the gospel also; for it is necessary in the ushering in of the dispensation of the fulness of times, which dispensation is now beginning to usher in, that a whole and complete and perfect union, and welding together of dispensations, and keys, and powers, and glories should take place, and be revealed from the days of Adam even to the present time. And not only this, but those things which never have been revealed from the foundation of the world, but have been kept hid from the wise and prudent, shall be revealed unto babes and sucklings in this, the dispensation of the fulness of times.

Baptism for the Dead

The Book of Mormon makes it clear that it is possible to be saved without baptism. Consider Moroni 8:22-23:

For behold that all little children are alive in Christ, and also all they that are without the law. For the power of redemption cometh on all them that have no law; wherefore, he that is not condemned, or he that is under no condemnation, cannot repent; and unto such baptism availeth nothing But it is mockery before God, denying the mercies of Christ, and the power of his Holy Spirit, and putting trust in dead works.

2 Nephi 9:25-26 boosts this perspective:

Wherefore, he has given a law; and where there is no law given there is no punishment; and where there is no punishment there is no condemnation; and where there is no condemnation the mercies of the Holy One of Israel have claim upon them, because of the atonement; for they are delivered by the power of him. For the atonement satisfieth the demands of his justice upon all those who have not the law given to them, that they are delivered from that awful monster, death and hell, and the devil, and the lake of fire and brimstone, which is endless torment; and they are restored to that God who gave them breath, which is the Holy One of Israel.

And Mosiah 15:24-25 supplements this by making resurrection (the first resurrection, taught in Doctrine and Covenants 76 to mean resurrection of the righteous) unconditional for the ignorant:

And these are those who have part in the first resurrection; and these are they that have died before Christ came, in their ignorance, not having salvation declared unto them. And thus the Lord bringeth about the restoration of these; and they have a part in the first resurrection, or have eternal life, being redeemed by the Lord. And little children also have eternal life.

It is unclear, then, why Doctrine and Covenants 128:5,17-18 indicates that the dead should be baptized:

You may think this order of things to be very particular; but let me tell you that it is only to answer the will of God, by conforming to the ordinance and preparation that the Lord ordained and prepared before the foundation of the world, for the salvation of the dead who should die without a knowledge of the gospel. […] And again, in connection with this quotation I will give you a quotation from one of the prophets, who had his eye fixed on the restoration of the priesthood, the glories to be revealed in the last days, and in an especial manner this most glorious of all subjects belonging to the everlasting gospel, namely, the baptism for the dead; for Malachi says, last chapter, verses 5th and 6th: Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse. I might have rendered a plainer translation to this, but it is sufficiently plain to suit my purpose as it stands. It is sufficient to know, in this case, that the earth will be smitten with a curse unless there is a welding link of some kind or other between the fathers and the children, upon some subject or other—and behold what is that subject? It is the baptism for the dead. For we without them cannot be made perfect; neither can they without us be made perfect. Neither can they nor we be made perfect without those who have died in the gospel also; for it is necessary in the ushering in of the dispensation of the fulness of times, which dispensation is now beginning to usher in, that a whole and complete and perfect union, and welding together of dispensations, and keys, and powers, and glories should take place, and be revealed from the days of Adam even to the present time. And not only this, but those things which never have been revealed from the foundation of the world, but have been kept hid from the wise and prudent, shall be revealed unto babes and sucklings in this, the dispensation of the fulness of times.

Forgiveness for Murder

The Book of Mormon teaches in plain terms that murder can be forgiven in 3 Nephi 30:2:

Turn, all ye Gentiles, from your wicked ways; and repent of your evil doings, of your lyings and deceivings, and of your whoredoms, and of your secret abominations, and your idolatries, and of your murders, and your priestcrafts, and your envyings, and your strifes, and from all your wickedness and abominations, and come unto me, and be baptized in my name, that ye may receive a remission of your sins, and be filled with the Holy Ghost, that ye may be numbered with my people who are of the house of Israel.

It is curious, then, that Joseph Smith received conflicting revelation in Doctrine and Covenants 42:18:

And now, behold, I speak unto the church. Thou shalt not kill; and he that kills shall not have forgiveness in this world, nor in the world to come.

Adam’s Location

Moses 3:8-15 makes it clear that Adam resided in the Old World:

And I, the Lord God, planted a garden eastward in Eden, and there I put the man whom I had formed. And out of the ground made I, the Lord God, to grow every tree, naturally, that is pleasant to the sight of man; and man could behold it. And it became also a living soul. For it was spiritual in the day that I created it; for it remaineth in the sphere in which I, God, created it, yea, even all things which I prepared for the use of man; and man saw that it was good for food. And I, the Lord God, planted the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and also the tree of knowledge of good and evil. And I, the Lord God, caused a river to go out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads. And I, the Lord God, called the name of the first Pison, and it compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where I, the Lord God, created much gold; And the gold of that land was good, and there was bdellium and the onyx stone. And the name of the second river was called Gihon; the same that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia. And the name of the third river was Hiddekel; that which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river was the Euphrates. And I, the Lord God, took the man, and put him into the Garden of Eden, to dress it, and to keep it.

Doctrine and Covenants 107:53 teaches contradictorily that Adam resided in America:

Three years previous to the death of Adam, he called Seth, Enos, Cainan, Mahalaleel, Jared, Enoch, and Methuselah, who were all high priests, with the residue of his posterity who were righteous, into the valley of Adam-ondi-Ahman, and there bestowed upon them his last blessing.

This view is bolstered by Doctrine and Covenants 116:1:

Spring Hill is named by the Lord Adam-ondi-Ahman, because, said he, it is the place where Adam shall come to visit his people, or the Ancient of Days shall sit, as spoken of by Daniel the prophet.

And Doctrine and Covenants 117:8:

Is there not room enough on the mountains of Adam-ondi-Ahman, and on the plains of Olaha Shinehah, or the land where Adam dwelt, that you should covet that which is but the drop, and neglect the more weighty matters?

Nature of the Godhead

The standard teaching in the church is that the Godhead is comprised of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, who are three separate personages. It is generally understood that when scriptures say they are one being, they mean that the Godhead is perfectly united.

This was convincing to me until reading in the 1830 version of the Book of Mormon, Ether 3:14:

Behold, I am Jesus Christ. I am the Father and the Son.

The following passages have been changed since the 1830 version, which is confusing on its own, but originally read as follows.

1 Nephi 11:21:

And the angel said unto me, behold the Lamb of God, yea, even the Eternal Father!

1 Nephi 13:40:

And the angel spake unto me, saying: These last records which thou hast seen among the Gentiles, shall establish the truth of the first, which is of the twelve apostles of the Lamb, and shall make known the plain and precious things which have been taken away from them; and shall make known to all kindreds, tongues, and people, that the Lamb of God is the Eternal Father and the Saviour of the world;

In the modern editions of these verses, the words “the Son of” have been inserted to make these scriptures appear consistent with the other teachings of the church.

Nephi’s Building Materials

2 Nephi 5:15 indicates Nephi had abundant supplies to build a temple:

And I did teach my people to build buildings, and to work in all manner of wood, and of iron, and of copper, and of brass, and of steel, and of gold, and of silver, and of precious ores, which were in great abundance.

But 2 Nephi 5:16 (just one verse later) says there were no such precious things on the land:

And I, Nephi, did build a temple; and I did construct it after the manner of the temple of Solomon save it were not built of so many precious things; for they were not to be found upon the land, wherefore, it could not be built like unto Solomon’s temple. But the manner of the construction was like unto the temple of Solomon; and the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine.

I do not understand how Nephi could teach his people to work with all kinds of fine building materials without having access to these materials.

Paid Ministry

Doctrine and Covenants 42:71-73 indicates that church leadership should be compensated:

And the elders or high priests who are appointed to assist the bishop as counselors in all things, are to have their families supported out of the property which is consecrated to the bishop, for the good of the poor, and for other purposes, as before mentioned; Or they are to receive a just remuneration for all their services, either a stewardship or otherwise, as may be thought best or decided by the counselors and bishop And the bishop, also, shall receive his support, or a just remuneration for all his services in the church.

Because it’s not a common word anymore, let’s consult Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary, which is generally understood to be the closest dictionary to the language Joseph Smith was familiar with:

REMU’NERATE, verb transitive [Latin remunero; re and munero, from munus, a gift.]

to reward; to recompense; to requite; in a good sense; to pay an equivalent to for any service, loss, expense or other sacrifice; as, to remunerate the troops of an army for their services and sufferings; to remunerate men for labor. the pious usfferer in this life will be remunerated in the life to come.

I have no other way to interpret this verse: clergy in the church ought to be compensated. However, the Book of Mormon has quite a different opinion. Take 2 Nephi 26:31, for example:

But the laborer in Zion shall labor for Zion; for if they labor for money they shall perish.

That may be ambiguous, so take Mosiah 27:5:

Yea, and all their priests and teachers should labor with their own hands for their support, in all cases save it were in sickness, or in much want; and doing these things, they did abound in the grace of God.

And Mosiah 18:24:

And he also commanded them that the priests whom he had ordained should labor with their own hands for their support.

Consider also Alma 1:2-3,20:

And it came to pass that in the first year of the reign of Alma in the judgment-seat, there was a man brought before him to be judged, a man who was large, and was noted for his much strength. And he had gone about among the people, preaching to them that which he termed to be the word of God, bearing down against the church; declaring unto the people that every priest and teacher ought to become popular; and they ought not to labor with their hands, but that they ought to be supported by the people. […] Yea, they did persecute them, and afflict them with all manner of words, and this because of their humility; because they were not proud in their own eyes, and because they did impart the word of God, one with another, without money and without price.

In the current church, only a few general authorities are compensated as clergy. It seems impossible to determine if this practice is correct, as scriptures give contradictory information.

Baptismal Prayer

It is clearly important to the church that the baptismal prayer be spoken word-for-word.

Consider 3 Nephi 11:24-25, in which Jesus Himself gives instruction:

And now behold, these are the words which ye shall say, calling them by name, saying: Having authority given me of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

This is significantly different from the baptismal prayer Alma offered in Mosiah 18:12-14:

And now it came to pass that Alma took Helam, he being one of the first, and went and stood forth in the water, and cried, saying: O Lord, pour out thy Spirit upon thy servant, that he may do this work with holiness of heart. And when he had said these words, the Spirit of the Lord was upon him, and he said: Helam, I baptize thee, having authority from the Almighty God, as a testimony that ye have entered into a covenant to serve him until you are dead as to the mortal body; and may the Spirit of the Lord be poured out upon you; and may he grant unto you eternal life, through the redemption of Christ, whom he has prepared from the foundation of the world. And after Alma had said these words, both Alma and Helam were buried in the water; and they arose and came forth out of the water rejoicing, being filled with the Spirit.

Still different instructions appear in Doctrine and Covenants 20:73:

The person who is called of God and has authority from Jesus Christ to baptize, shall go down into the water with the person who has presented himself or herself for baptism, and shall say, calling him or her by name: Having been commissioned of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

I do not understand why these three scriptures give unique prayers, yet the church requires the prayer in Doctrine and Covenants to be repeated verbatim.

Completeness of the Book of Mormon

1 Nephi 10:14, 13:24, and 15:13 seem to indicate that the Book of Mormon provides the whole Gospel:

And after the house of Israel should be scattered they should be gathered together again; or, in fine, after the Gentiles had received the fulness of the Gospel, the natural branches of the olive tree, or the remnants of the house of Israel, should be grafted in, or come to the knowledge of the true Messiah, their Lord and their Redeemer. […] And the angel of the Lord said unto me: Thou hast beheld that the book proceeded forth from the mouth of a Jew; and when it proceeded forth from the mouth of a Jew it contained the fulness of the gospel of the Lord, of whom the twelve apostles bear record; and they bear record according to the truth which is in the Lamb of God. […] And now, the thing which our father meaneth concerning the grafting in of the natural branches through the fulness of the Gentiles, is, that in the latter days, when our seed shall have dwindled in unbelief, yea, for the space of many years, and many generations after the Messiah shall be manifested in body unto the children of men, then shall the fulness of the gospel of the Messiah come unto the Gentiles, and from the Gentiles unto the remnant of our seed

Doctrine and Covenants 20:9 indicates the Book of Mormon contains the fulness:

Which contains a record of a fallen people, and the fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles and to the Jews also;

Confusingly, Doctrine and Covenants 10:67-68 indicates that the gospel should not be considered more than repentance:

Behold, this is my doctrine—whosoever repenteth and cometh unto me, the same is my church. Whosoever declareth more or less than this, the same is not of me, but is against me; therefore he is not of my church.

Mosiah 18:18-20 indicates nothing but faith and repentance should be taught:

And it came to pass that Alma, having authority from God, ordained priests; even one priest to every fifty of their number did he ordain to preach unto them, and to teach them concerning the things pertaining to the kingdom of God. And he commanded them that they should teach nothing save it were the things which he had taught, and which had been spoken by the mouth of the holy prophets. Yea, even he commanded them that they should preach nothing save it were repentance and faith on the Lord, who had redeemed his people.

But in 3 Nephi 11:31-40, Jesus Himself teaches that the Gospel (or rather, the Doctrine of Christ) is made of more than that:

Behold, verily, verily, I say unto you, I will declare unto you my doctrine. And this is my doctrine, and it is the doctrine which the Father hath given unto me; and I bear record of the Father, and the Father beareth record of me, and the Holy Ghost beareth record of the Father and me; and I bear record that the Father commandeth all men, everywhere, to repent and believe in me. And whoso believeth in me, and is baptized, the same shall be saved; and they are they who shall inherit the kingdom of God. And whoso believeth not in me, and is not baptized, shall be damned. Verily, verily, I say unto you, that this is my doctrine, and I bear record of it from the Father; and whoso believeth in me believeth in the Father also; and unto him will the Father bear record of me, for he will visit him with fire and with the Holy Ghost. And thus will the Father bear record of me, and the Holy Ghost will bear record unto him of the Father and me; for the Father, and I, and the Holy Ghost are one. And again I say unto you, ye must repent, and become as a little child, and be baptized in my name, or ye can in nowise receive these things. And again I say unto you, ye must repent, and be baptized in my name, and become as a little child, or ye can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God. Verily, verily, I say unto you, that this is my doctrine, and whoso buildeth upon this buildeth upon my rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against them. And whoso shall declare more or less than this, and establish it for my doctrine, the same cometh of evil, and is not built upon my rock; but he buildeth upon a sandy foundation, and the gates of hell stand open to receive such when the floods come and the winds beat upon them.

It is also made clear in 3 Nephi 26:9 that there are many doctrines to come:

And when they shall have received this, which is expedient that they should have first, to try their faith, and if it shall so be that they shall believe these things then shall the greater things be made manifest unto them.

However, we know that many important doctrines (i.e., the existence of many gods and the potential to become like God, eternal marriage, the priesthood as it currently exists, baptisms for the dead, and so on) are not found in the Book of Mormon. Consistent with Jesus’ teachings, I am led to believe the church “cometh of evil, and is not built upon my rock”.

Modern Prophets and Changed Doctrine

In some cases, revelation from modern prophets contradicts the scriptures in problematic ways. In other cases, the church and its leaders have changed scriptures and doctrines, apparently to make them more consistent.

Conditionality of God’s Love

Historically, prophets have taught that God loves everyone unconditionally:

Christ’s perfect love repels fear. John reminds us that there is no fear in love, for perfect love casts out fear. To love completely with a wholeness even as Christ loved, to manifest a mature and unconditional love in all human relations, would minimize many fears.²⁷

Apostle Marvin Ashton also taught:

The greatest example of love available to all of us is, of course, found in the scripture from John: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son.” (John 3:16.) By the greatest of all acts of love and by this supreme sacrifice, God set the pattern. He demonstrated to us that His love was unconditional and sufficient to encircle every person. ²⁸

It is interesting to me that Russell Nelson wrote as an apostle:

While divine love can be called perfect, infinite, enduring, and universal, it cannot correctly be characterized as unconditional. The word does not appear in the scriptures. On the other hand, many verses affirm that the higher levels of love the Father and the Son feel for each of us—and certain divine blessings stemming from that love—are conditional. Before citing examples, it is well to recognize various forms of conditional expression in the scriptures. […] Why is divine love conditional? Because God loves us and wants us to be happy. […] Understanding that divine love and blessings are not truly “unconditional” can defend us against common fallacies such as these: “Since God’s love is unconditional, He will love me regardless …”; or “Since ‘God is love,’ He will love me unconditionally, regardless …” ²⁹

And Doctrine and Covenants 95:12 confirms this opinion:

If you keep not my commandments, the love of the Father shall not continue with you, therefore you shall walk in darkness.

It is disorienting and disappointing that church members are not sure whether or not God loves them due to these contradictory teachings.

A Changing God

Moroni 8:18 indicates that God has never changed:

For I know that God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity.

And Mormon 9:9 helps make the point:

For do we not read that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, and in him there is no variableness neither shadow of changing?

Doctrine and Covenants 20:17 confirms this:

By these things we know that there is a God in heaven, who is infinite and eternal, from everlasting to everlasting the same unchangeable God, the framer of heaven and earth, and all things which are in them;

It is concerning that early church leaders taught differently. Consider an oft-referenced quote from Joseph Smith, still published and taught as doctrine by the church:

God Himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret. If the veil were rent today, and the great God who holds this world in its orbit, and who upholds all worlds and all things by His power, was to make Himself visible,—I say, if you were to see Him today, you would see Him like a man in form—like yourselves in all the person, image, and very form as a man; for Adam was created in the very fashion, image and likeness of God, and received instruction from, and walked, talked and conversed with Him, as one man talks and communes with another.³⁰

It is interesting to me that the person who supposedly translated and revealed the Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants would teach that God has, in fact, undergone a significant change at one point or another during His eternities.

Relationship with Christ

Bruce McConkie teaches that we should absolutely not strive for a personal relationship with Jesus:

Now, it is no secret that many false and vain and foolish things are being taught in the sectarian world and even among us about our need to gain a special relationship with the Lord Jesus. I shall summarize the true doctrine in this field and invite erring teachers and beguiled students to repent and believe the accepted gospel verities as I shall set them forth.³¹

However, modern church teachings propose the opposite:

A covenant is not only about a contract, although that is important. It’s about a relationship. President Russell M. Nelson taught, “The covenant path is all about our relationship with God.” Consider a marriage covenant. The wedding date is important, but equally important is the relationship forged through the life lived together afterward. The same is true with a covenant relationship with God. ³²

I believe with all of my heart that this is the fundamental message: that in the Master strength can come, that in him men and women can become all that they were potentially created to become—that is, very gods. But it’s through a personal relationship with the Savior that that’s accomplished. ³³

It is thus confusing to me whether or not I should focus on developing a relationship with the Savior or not. Interestingly, there is no way to clarify this issue. As Joseph Smith said (see 2.5 Inconsistency), new revelation cannot contradict old revelation.

Seeing the Face of God without Priesthood

Doctrine and Covenants 84:19-22, revealed in September 1832, indicate that it is impossible to see the face of God without priesthood ordinances:

And this greater priesthood administereth the gospel and holdeth the key of the mysteries of the kingdom, even the key of the knowledge of God. Therefore, in the ordinances thereof, the power of godliness is manifest. And without the ordinances thereof, and the authority of the priesthood, the power of godliness is not manifest unto men in the flesh; For without this no man can see the face of God, even the Father, and live.

It is concerning, then, that Joseph Smith claims to have seen the face of God and lived in 1820, at least 9 years before the priesthood and its ordinances were restored. Joseph Smith – History 117-:

It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him! My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.

I do not understand why Joseph Smith claimed he could see the face of God well before he was eligible by God’s eternal requirements to do so.

Adam and Michael

Doctrine and Covenants 27:11 (and the temple ceremony) indicate that Michael and Adam are the same being:

And also with Michael, or Adam, the father of all, the prince of all, the ancient of days;

But when Joseph Smith recorded a vision in his diary, he wrote the following, which was modified before its inclusion in Doctrine and Covenants 137:

I saw father Adam, and Abraham and Michael and my father and mother, my brother Alvin³⁴

It is disorienting to me that Joseph Smith claimed to see Adam and Michael as separate beings. Further complicating this issue, the footnote at Joseph Smith Papers gives what I consider to be damning evidence Joseph was mistaken:

Although Adam and Michael, the archangel, are designated here as separate persons, the previous year JS approved publication of the Doctrine and Covenants, which described them as the same person: “Michael, or Adam, the father of all, the prince of all, the ancient of days.” Likewise, in a 1 January 1834 letter to John Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery wrote that he had “been informed from a proper source that the Angel Michael is no less than our father Adam.”³⁴

This entry, in my opinion, casts doubt on the reliability of Joseph’s visions. If he wrote that Adam and Michael appeared as separate personages, I do not understand why the church would later obscure this information in the Doctrine and Covenants.

Conception of Jesus

The Book of Mormon is clear. Consider Alma 7:10:

And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God.

And 1 Nephi 11:15-20:

And I said unto him: A virgin, most beautiful and fair above all other virgins. And he said unto me: Knowest thou the condescension of God? And I said unto him: I know that he loveth his children; nevertheless, I do not know the meaning of all things. And he said unto me: Behold, the virgin whom thou seest is the mother of the Son of God, after the manner of the flesh. And it came to pass that I beheld that she was carried away in the Spirit; and after she had been carried away in the Spirit for the space of a time the angel spake unto me, saying: Look! And I looked and beheld the virgin again, bearing a child in her arms.

I do not understand, then, why a number of prophets later taught contradictory information:

When Adam and Eve had eaten of the forbidden fruit, their bodies became mortal from its effects, and therefore their offspring were mortal. When the Virgin Mary conceived the child Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness. He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost. And who is the Father? He is the first of the human family; and when he took a tabernacle, it was begotten by his Father in heaven, after the same manner as the tabernacles of Cain, Abel, and the rest of the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve; from the fruits of the earth, the first earthly tabernacles were originated by the Father, and so on in succession. I could tell you much more about this; but were I to tell you the whole truth, blasphemy would be nothing to it, in the estimation of the superstitious and overrighteous of mankind.

Not only do Brigham Young’s teachings contradict the Book of Mormon; they indicate that Jesus’ father was “the first of the human family”, which I understand to mean Jesus was begotten by Adam, and that perhaps Young intended to teach that Adam and God are one in the same.

Without discussing much further, I would encourage a read through Journal of Discourses for more information on inconsistent teachings of Brigham Young. There are far too many to list on this page.

Consequence of Teaching False Doctrine

The Book of Mormon makes the consequence of teaching false doctrine clear. Take 2 Nephi 28:15, for example:

O the wise, and the learned, and the rich, that are puffed up in the pride of their hearts, and all those who preach false doctrines, and all those who commit whoredoms, and pervert the right way of the Lord, wo, wo, wo be unto them, saith the Lord God Almighty, for they shall be thrust down to hell!

In Doctrines of Salvation, Joseph Fielding Smith taught:

There is no greater crime in all the world than to teach false doctrines²³

However, Bruce McConkie indicated in a letter that despite teaching false doctrine, Brigham Young was bound for the celestial kingdom:

He [Brigham Young] was guided by the Holy Spirit in his teachings in general. He was a mighty prophet. He led Israel the way the Lord wanted his people led. He built on the foundation laid by the Prophet Joseph. He completed his work and has come on to eternal exaltation. Nonetheless, as Joseph Smith so pointedly taught, a prophet is not always a prophet, only when he is acting as such. Prophets are men and they make mistakes. Sometimes they err in doctrine. […] Yes, President Young did teach that Adam was the father of our spirits, and all the related things that the cultists ascribe to him. This, however, is not true. He expressed views that are out of harmony with the gospel. But, be it known, Brigham Young also taught accurately and correctly, the status and position of Adam in the eternal scheme of things.³⁵

It is disappointing to see that a prophet’s words are only to be considered doctrine if they are correct. When saints are taught to unquestioningly sustain and follow the prophet, this teaching becomes extremely problematic. This is extremely problematic in the context of Official Declaration 1, canonized as scripture:

The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty.

This creates a deplorable pattern of reasoning in which a prophet cannot possibly lead you astray, but only if he is not leading you astray. Otherwise, he is not speaking as a prophet. This cyclical pattern of reasoning is perhaps the most damning cyclical logic I have explored within the church.

Missionaries in Pairs

Doctrine and Covenants 42:6 (from 1831) indicates that missionaries should go two-by-two:

And ye shall go forth in the power of my Spirit, preaching my gospel, two by two, in my name, lifting up your voices as with the sound of a trump, declaring my word like unto angels of God.

It is interesting, then, that in 1836 Joseph Smith taught:

While waiting, I made the following remarks: that the time that we were required to tarry in Kirtland to be endowed, would be fulfilled in a few days, and then the Elders would go forth, and each must stand for himself, as it was not necessary for them to be sent out, two by two, as in former times, but to go in all meekness, in sobriety, and preach Jesus Christ and Him crucified; not to contend with others on account of their faith, or systems of religion, but pursue a steady course.³⁶

This would be less problematic without the following additional information about the significance of changing revelations.

Which Angel Appeared?

It is common knowledge in the church that Moroni appeared to Joseph Smith:

While I was thus in the act of calling upon God, I discovered a light appearing in my room, which continued to increase until the room was lighter than at noonday, when immediately a personage appeared at my bedside, standing in the air, for his feet did not touch the floor. […] He called me by name, and said unto me that he was a messenger sent from the presence of God to me, and that his name was Moroni¹⁸

It is curious, then, that other publications contradict this. The angel’s name is Nephi in Volume 3 of The Millenial Star and Volume 3 of Times and Seasons, which Joseph Smith edited himself.

Revelations Changing

Consider the following quote from Joseph Smith:

Many true things were spoken by this personage, and many things that were false. How, it may be asked, was this known to be a bad angel? By the color of his hair; that is one of the signs that he can be known by, and by his contradicting a former revelation.³⁷

It is thus abundantly clear that a revelation that contradicts an earlier revelation is false, or is from a bad angel. However, Ezra Taft Benson later said the following:

The Living Prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet… Beware of those who would pit the dead prophets against the living prophets, for the living prophets always take precedence.³⁸

I do not know who to believe, then.

2.5 Inconsistency

Trigger Warning: This section (particularly the first portion of this section) speaks generally about abuse, including sexual abuse.

It came to my attention as I taught and studied the gospel as a missionary that the church and its teachings are largely inconsistent. Of course, many church members are bothered by hypocrisy, both in local units and in the church as a whole. While off-putting, this hypocrisy is sometimes challenging to identify in general terms.

In this section, then, I address critical issues in which the church itself does not practice what is taught in its own canon.

Attitudes about Abuse

Many are familiar with a recent legal battle involving the church in Arizona. Church members are taught that God despises abuse and that the church wants to do everything it can to protect survivors. Many heard Russell Nelson say the following:

Abuse constitutes the influence of the adversary. It is a grievous sin. As President of the Church, I affirm the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ on this issue. Let me be perfectly clear: any kind of abuse of women, children, or anyone is an abomination to the Lord. He grieves and I grieve whenever anyone is harmed. He mourns and we all mourn for each person who has fallen victim to abuse of any kind. Those who perpetrate these hideous acts are not only accountable to the laws of man but will also face the wrath of Almighty God. For decades now, the Church has taken extensive measures to protect—in particular—children from abuse. There are many aids on the Church website. I invite you to study them. These guidelines are in place to protect the innocent. I urge each of us to be alert to anyone who might be in danger of being abused and to act promptly to protect them. The Savior will not tolerate abuse, and as His disciples, neither can we.[^nelsontruth]

It is generally understood that mandatory reporting is an effective way to prevent abuse and protect survivors³⁹. It is discouraging, then, to see that the church is not doing everything it can to protect people from abuse, as it actively fights against mandatory reporting laws.

It was discouraging, then, to see the church spend tithing money in a legal battle defending the right of clergy members to withhold information about abuse. It was more discouraging to read the church’s reaction in Deseret News:

Bill Maledon, the church’s attorney who handled the case, said in a statement to the Deseret News, “We are pleased with the Arizona Superior Court’s decision granting summary judgment for the Church and its clergy and dismissing the plantiffs’ claims.⁴⁰

This quote was extremely concerning to me, as the president of the church recently gave the opposite impression: certainly, a man who grieves whenever anyone is harmed would not be pleased at the result of a grueling lawsuit involving recovering survivors and their families.

I am further concerned by the church’s lackluster efforts to protect children and youth. When I was called as a primary teacher, I was asked to complete a very short online training. This training asked me to avoid being alone with children and listed a few specific rules I was expected to follow. I did not undergo a background check. I had no background working with children; I didn’t even have children of my own.

It is even more concerning that with absolutely no training, bishops can isolate young people behind a closed door to talk about their sexuality. When I was 12 years old, my bishop called us one-by-one out of our Sunday School classes to conduct our annual worthiness interviews. In this meeting, a middle-aged man I had never formally met talked to me about puberty, taught me what masturbation and pornography were, and told me to suppress any romantic feelings I started to experience.

It’s no wonder, although it is discouraging and depressing, that there are so many allegations and convictions of sexual crimes within the church. I didn’t believe this myself, but floodlit.org has compiled a significant volume of data about recent abuse within the church. I was shocked to see so many bishops and other prominent church figures listed.

The church clearly does not care about abuse, at least not as much as it cares about preserving its own reputation. By itself, I believe the church’s damnable nonchalance about abuse is sufficient reason to leave the church and never look back. But in case it isn’t, I continue my condemnation of the church’s inconsistency.

Changing of Temple Ordinances

Joseph Smith taught that the temple ordinances cannot change:

The order of the house of God has been, and ever will be, the same, even after Christ comes; and after the termination of the thousand years it will be the same; and we shall finally enter into the celestial Kingdom of God, and enjoy it forever.”⁴¹

Ordinances instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world, in the priesthood, for the salvation of men, are not to be altered or changed. All must be saved on the same principles.⁴¹

The power, glory and blessings of the Priesthood could not continue with those who received ordination only as their righteousness continued; for Cain also being authorized to offer sacrifice, but not offering it in righteousness, was cursed. It signifies, then, that the ordinances must be kept in the very way God has appointed; otherwise their Priesthood will prove a cursing instead of a blessing.⁴¹

It is confusing and concerning, then, that ordinances within the church change. Those who have been in the church for several years have probably observed recent changes, but temple ordinances have changed greatly since their institution:

• Around 1912, the Oath of Vengeance was removed from the ordinance.
• In the 1930s, the wording of penalties was softened.
• In the 1960s, the garment pattern worn in the temple changed.
• In the 1990s, a number of significant changes took place:
  • Penalties were removed entirely from the endowment ordinance.
  • The second sign of the melchizedek priesthood changed.
  • The five points of fellowship were removed.
  • The law of obedience for women was changed.
• In 2005, washing and anointing was changed to be performed symbolically, and temple patrons were no longer touched by ordinance workers wearing nothing but a large poncho.
• In recent years, the temple ceremony and its wording changed greatly to appeal more to women, expedite the ordinance, and accommodate COVID-19 restrictions.

Revelations Changing

I addressed this in a previous section, but consider again the following quote from Joseph Smith:

Many true things were spoken by this personage, and many things that were false. How, it may be asked, was this known to be a bad angel? By the color of his hair; that is one of the signs that he can be known by, and by his contradicting a former revelation.³⁷

It is thus abundantly clear that a revelation that contradicts an earlier revelation is false, or is from a bad angel. I do not know, then, why there are so many contradictory revelations within the church, even within my own lifetime:

• Reversal of a number of church policies
  • Ban on the baptism of gay couples’ children
  • Severity of homosexuality as a sin
  • Creation story: symbolic or true?
  • Polygamy is no longer new and everlasting covenant
  • United Order was not everlasting
  • Adam is God (Young)
  • Blood atonement
  • Book of Abraham
  • Primary ancestors
  • Racial issues
  • Word of Wisdom
  • Civil war won’t free slaves

More at http://packham.n4m.org/byoung.htm#ADAMGOD

Obedience to Civil Law

Articles of Faith 1:12 reads:

We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

Similarly, Doctrine and Covenants 58:21 teaches:

Let no man break the laws of the land, for he that keepeth the laws of God hath no need to break the laws of the land.

It is confusing, then, that the church’s history is full of disobedience to the laws of the land:

• Joseph Smith performed marriages without civil authority to do so
• Early church members, including Joseph Smith, entered into illegal (polygamous and polyandrous) marriages
• Joseph Smith established an illegal bank in Ohio
• Joseph Smith was imprisoned for destroying his critics’ printing press
• The church asserted (including in Official Declaration 1) that it was willing to disobey the law of the land to continue polygamy

Worship of Jesus

The scriptures clearly teach that we should worship Jesus. Take Exodus 20:3 (KJV), spoken by Jehovah of the Old Testament, believed to be Jesus of the New Testament:

Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

Jesus’ followers also worshipped him throughout the New Testament with no sign of correction from Jesus. Matthew 28:16-17 (KJV) reads:

Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted. And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

While this could be up for interpretations, the Book of Mormon also commands us to worship Jesus in 3 Nephi 17:10:

And they did all, both they who had been healed and they who were whole, bow down at his feet, and did worship him; and as many as could come for the multitude did kiss his feet, insomuch that they did bathe his feet with their tears.

However, Bruce McConkie made it clear we are not to worship Jesus, and this is generally taught to church members today:

We do not worship the Son, and we do not worship the Holy Ghost. I know perfectly well what the scriptures say about worshipping Christ and Jehovah, but they are speaking in an entirely different sense—the sense of standing in awe and being reverentially grateful to him who has redeemed us. Worship in the true and saving sense is reserved for God the first, the Creator.³¹

However, the church recently seems to have changed its message again. I was presented with this ad the other day.

This leaves me uncertain about the church’s teachings, as the scriptures teach us the importance of worshipping Jesus, but modern church leaders indicate it is a sin (i.e., modern church leaders have commanded against worshipping Jesus and acting differently is a sin). However, the church is currently advertising that church members worship Jesus in their meetings and with missionaries.

Sex and Sexuality

The church has, especially since coming under fire for prejudice against the LGBT+ community combined with a great volume of abuse scandals, apparently changed its stance on a number of critical issues.

First, many members are familiar with recent policy changes and reversal of those changes regarding children of gay couples. These changes are concerning to me, as such a fast policy change after a PR disaster seems fishy, perhaps as if God didn’t actually inspire at least one of the changes.

Second, anyone over 20 who grew up in the church was likely presented, at one point or another, with the conference talk (converted into a pamphlet) titled “To Young Men Only”. When I was 12 years old, my bishop used this packet to teach me what masturbation was. This was produced and supported by a long line of prophets and apostles. It now seems to be absent from the church’s website, and I can find no mention of it. Thankfully, it has been uploaded to Internet Archive. I will discuss this pamphlet in more depth in Epistle 3, but for now, I will simply indicate that I find it bizarre that the church seems to be hiding what was considered a crucial, sacred text only a few years ago.

Third, many are familiar with the church-published book The Miracle of Forgiveness. This book can be borrowed from Internet Archive if you are curious about its contents. I do not feel the need to discuss its contents in much depth, but it is interesting to me that many of the core principles taught by the book. In the preface, Spencer Kimball absolves the church from errors in the book’s contents, but the church nonetheless published, printed, distributed, and continued to use the book for decades. The book and its contents are now largely taboo discussion points in the church.

Finally, the church’s policy on chastity has changed greatly over time. It is concerning to me that historical church figures are well-known to have married multiple people, including already-married women. It is disappointing to see the church cover up a great volume of abuse scandals while causing young people to feel unreasonably guilty over natural feelings and experiences.

Mormon?

Throughout church history, members and leaders alike have embraced the term “mormon” to describe the church and its members. The church poured incredible amounts of money into recent campaigns like mormon.org and Meet the Mormons. Members were taught through official communication from church leaders to create an “I’m a Mormon” profile on the church’s missionary website. So the following recent quote has long been deeply concerning to me:

What’s in a name or, in this case, a nickname? When it comes to nicknames of the Church, such as the “LDS Church,” the “Mormon Church,” or the “Church of the Latter-day Saints,” the most important thing in those names is the absence of the Savior’s name. To remove the Lord’s name from the Lord’s Church is a major victory for Satan. When we discard the Savior’s name, we are subtly disregarding all that Jesus Christ did for us—even His Atonement. ⁴²

So, I ask, who was wrong? Were generations of prophets misled by Satan? Certainly not, or it is impossible to tell where else the church may have strayed from being God’s one true church. But if former prophets were not misled by Satan, then this statement from Russell Nelson is not accurate, and God’s supposed prophet has lied. In either case, based on this single counterexample, I believe there is sufficient damning evidence that the church is not what it claims to be.

Conclusion

I expect God’s one true church to hold itself to its own standards. It was disappointing to learn that despite claiming to have a direct connection to God, prophets often make mistakes as they guide the church, and these mistakes genuinely hurt people.

I am further confused by the argument that prophets only speak for God when they are speaking “as a prophet”. Not only does this statement feel like a disgusting weasel out of any responsibility or accountability; it cannot be used to defend inconsistencies like these. I believe it is reasonable to assume that church leaders are indeed speaking as prophets and apostles when they address the entire church, establish curricula, and approve advertizing materials. If one cannot make this assumption, then it would be impossible to know when to trust a prophet. In this case, I find these inconsistencies much more damning. The church’s inconsistency convinces me that the church is not truly directed by a perfect, all-knowing God.

2.6 Testable Claims

While it has done so less and less, the church has produced a number of testable claims, many of which have fallen apart as time has passed. In my opinion, the church’s failure to pass their own tests is convincing evidence it is a man-made organization and not inspired of God.

Kinderhook Plates

Fewer topics are more detrimental to the truth claims of the church than the Kinderhook Plates. Consider this oft-quoted line from Rough Stone Rolling:

Church historians continued to insist on the authenticity of the Kinderhook Plates until 1980 when an examination conducted by the Chicago Historical Society, possessor of one plate, proved it was a nineteenth-century creation.⁴³

The plates, if you are unfamiliar with them, were a set of bell-shaped brass plates, pictured below.

Joseph Smith insisted he translated a portion of the plates. He taught they contained the history of the person they were buried with, who was a descendant of Ham. Unfortunately for Joseph, the plates were a forgery.

I am stumped by Joseph’s inability to discern the forgery. I do not understand how he was able to translate (apparently using his translation gift from God) these plates that contained no meaningful information.

The church itself appears to be grasping at straws to find an explanation for this. I propose a simple explanation: Joseph failed to demonstrate any prophetic or divine translation ability and was not truly a prophet of God.

The Book of Abraham

Joseph Smith insisted that he produced the Book of Abraham by translating a text that was penned directly by Abraham. It is disgusting, then, that the church insists on propagating the belief that the Book of Abraham is inspired text translated directly by Joseph Smith while the original transcripts have been clearly demonstrated by Egyptologists to be funerary texts⁴⁴.

The academic, peer-reviewed article I reference is paywalled, so I include the conclusion as follows:

In the preceding I have argued that (1) Joseph Smith’s interpretations of the facsimiles in the Book of Abraham are not in agreement with the meanings which these figures had in their original, funerary, context; (2) anachronisms in the text of the book make it impossible that it was translated from a text written by Abraham himself; and (3) what we know about the relationship between Egypt and Asia renders the account of the attempted sacrifice of Abraham extremely implausible. If one accepts that Joseph Smith was using the facsimiles in a fashion which was not consonant with their original purpose, 78 it does not make sense to then insist that “the Prophet’s explanations of each of the facsimiles accord with present understanding of Egyptian religious practices.” I see no evidence that Joseph Smith had a correct conception of “Egyptian religious practices” or that a knowledge of such was essential to the production of the Book of Abraham⁴⁴.

This is a popularly debated topic, but the apologetic response is so weak that I believe it also serves as damning evidence against the testable claim that Joseph Smith had a gift of translation:

The official position of the Church is that the Book of Abraham is “an inspired translation of the writings of Abraham. Joseph Smith began the translation in 1835 after obtaining some Egyptian papyri.” Anything beyond this is speculation, and does not constitute official Church doctrine relative to the Book of Abraham’s origins. Nevertheless, it’s clear from the historical evidence that Joseph Smith was not attempting a scholarly translation of the Book of Abraham à la Jean-François Champollion or other Egyptologists, but rather produced a revelatory translation (see Richard Turley’s comments below). The exact nature of this revelatory translation is uncertain, with various theories having been offered over the years.⁴⁵

It is thus clear to me that the church’s official stance on the Book of Abraham is that it is “an inspired translation”. It is my opinion that an inspired translation would not mislead millions of people by being a fabricated document derived from Egyptian funerary text.

Prophetic Revelation

God has, throughout the scriptures, revealed many major, destructive events through prophets. Destruction of cities, wars, famines, droughts, and plagues all make the list.

It is confusing to me, then, why the church seemed surprised by a great number of similar events:

• The church, despite many of its buildings existing in Idaho, Utah, Arizona, and other desert locations, often puts large lawns in its buildings and appears not to be careful about water usage. I am surprised church members have not been counseled to limit water usage and conserve where possible to prevent a worsening drought.
• While some efforts were being made to rely slightly less on church meetings, the church seemed overall surprised by COVID-19. Despite temple ceremonies, baptisms, and the sacrament allegedly being absolutely critical to one’s exaltation, the church was not prepared in advance to accommodate COVID-19 restrictions. Adjustments had to be made to temple ceremonies, church meeting procedures, and other church activities retroactively.
• The church does little to prepare members for crises ahead of time, apart from encouraging members with the means to do so to stockpile food, water, and other basic needs at all times. This practice seems largely out-of-character when reading about the God described throughout the scriptures.
• Wars and protests disrupt or destroy the lives of many latter-day saints throughout the world with apparently no warning or counsel from God.
• A prophet allegedly revealed that the Book of Mormon was a record of the primary ancestors of indigenous peoples, but the text had to be changed retroactively at the advent of genetic research.

Further, despite generations of prophets teaching that professional opportunities and other blessings are derived directly from tithing, a disclaimer in Footnote 20 of Russell Nelson’s recent General Conference talk was confusing to me:

This is not to imply a cause-and-effect relationship. Some who never pay tithing attain professional opportunities, while some who pay tithing do not. The promise is that the windows of heaven will be opened to the tithe payer. The nature of the blessings will vary.⁴⁶

I have seen no convincing evidence to support the notion that Russell Nelson or any prophet throughout the history of the church has any more prophetic ability than anyone else who is reasonably good at research. I have been more impressed by scientifically-based forecasts in recent years than I have ever been at the accuracy of a prophesy.

Patriarchal Blessings

I would encourage a look through Patriarchal Blessing Revelator produced by Fuller Consideration. It is incredible to see promises that definitely did not come to pass:

• Many people, including many born well over 110 years ago, were promised they would be alive for the Second Coming. Read More
• Most people, including many still-single or never-married people, were promised marriage. Read More
• A great number of people are promised financial stability and other temporal blessings that never came to pass. Read More

Of course, patriarchal blessings are often riddled with “weasel words” and contingencies for every promised blessing. As I have re-read my own blessing, I have realized that the promises contained within it are general enough to apply to any church member I could think of. Any counsel it contained was general counsel given to every church member (such as instruction to devote all of my time to preparing to serve in the church). I could see no difference between the general statements in my patriarchal blessing and the general statements one may hear when paying a fortune teller at a carnival.

Word of Wisdom

In my opinion, the Word of Wisdom is damning evidence against Joseph Smith’s abilities as a revelator. Certainly, God has a better understanding of the human body than generic 1800s advice. So it is confusing to me why the modern interpretation of the Word of Wisdom indicates:

• It is bad to consume coffee and tea, which have significant health benefits^{47 48}.
• It is acceptable to consume sugar and artificial sweeteners, which have both been shown to cause significant health problems^{49 50}.
• Beer should not be consumed, despite the original text indicating that it was acceptable⁵¹.
• Water need not be filtered or boiled, which advice would have likely prevented sickness and death among early saints.

Further, the text of the Word of Wisdom indicates:

And all saints who remember to keep and do these sayings, walking in obedience to the commandments, shall receive health in their navel and marrow to their bones; And shall find wisdom and great treasures of knowledge, even hidden treasures; And shall run and not be weary, and shall walk and not faint.⁵²

It is curious to me that the text indicates all saints will have these specific blessings if they obey the commandments. Just like other logical claims, a single counterexample to this universal quantifier renders the statement false.

So, I present a counterexample: many saints, including several of my family members, live with chronic conditions despite obeying the Word of Wisdom and every other commandment to the best of their ability. Many of these faithful people cannot run without being weary. Many saints suffer from bone disease, including cancers. Missionaries, who are often strictly obedient to commandments, often have horrible health complications.

I thus argue that the Word of Wisdom was not inspired of God. I further suggest that because many members do not experience the blessings promised for obedience, God had no hand in the production of the commandment or its promised blessings.

Conclusion

While it would easy to list a great number of additional failed claims from the church, I propose that these simple examples are sufficient to demonstrate that the church’s testable claims do not withstand scrutiny. Certainly, I argue, an omniscient, omnipotent God would fulfil the promises His prophets make, and certainly He would inspire leaders as accurately and helpfully as possible.

2.7 The Book of Mormon

One of the factors that kept me in the church was the notion that Joseph Smith, an allegedly uneducated farm boy, could not possibly produce the Book of Mormon by himself. While I have already discussed a number of key issues with the Book of Mormon in 2.2 Essays and 2.4 Contradictions, I propose in this section that it is indeed possible the Book of Mormon was fabricated.

Education of Joseph Smith

The church would have people believe that Joseph Smith was an uneducated idiot when he translated the Book of Mormon. I do not believe this claim. Both of his parents were educators, and many of his family members were highly educated. He grew up in a time and place where it was common to discuss religion and philosophy.

I suggest that the poor writing in the Book of Mormon, especially in early versions of the Book of Mormon, appropriately matches Joseph Smith’s generally-understood education level. I would encourage you to read through a few pages of the book imagining that a high school student wrote it, and it will likely be obvious to you that the education level of the author matches the text. The book is not a literary masterpiece; it is hardly even considered alongside other religious texts in academia. The book is not a philosophical masterpiece. It is full of logical inconsistency and other critical issues that a keen author (especially God Himself) would be able to spot and correct.

Sources of Inspiration

A number of excellent sources have been produced indicating potential sources of inspiration for the Book of Mormon. I do not want to duplicate or plagiarize their work here, so I encourage consideration of the following resources:

• Mormon Stories’ article on Book of Mormon Sources of Inspiration
• Institute for Religious Research’s “Sources and Composition of the Book of Mormon”
• The Wikipedia Article “Origin of the Book of Mormon”
• WordTree’s Comparison of The Book of Mormon and The Late War Between the United States and Great Britain

It is revealing to examine a large number of sources that Joseph had access to and likely drew from to produce the Book of Mormon.

Anachronisms and Archaeology

The Book of Mormon is replete with anachronisms. Objects, technologies, and animals that existed in Joseph’s life were non-existent in the Americas while Book of Mormon stories take place. Apologists often defer to a number of defenses for anachronisms, but none are particularly convincing to me:

• We just haven’t found evidence yet
• God hid the evidence to require people to have faith
• We haven’t found the geographical sites of the stories yet
• The words are roughly translated and may mean something different (i.e., horse vs. tapir)

I will not detail all of the anachronisms in the Book of Mormon here. I feel it would be a waste of time to try and write yet another argument about horses, chariots, elephants, war strategy, Isaiah, King James translation errors, or the countless other uniquely-1800s technologies, philosophies, and animals that made their way into the book.

One piece of evidence is, in my opinion, sufficiently damning. Consider Ether 15:2:

He saw that there had been slain by the sword already nearly two millions of his people, and he began to sorrow in his heart; yea, there had been slain two millions of mighty men, and also their wives and their children.

Two million men plus their wives and children is absurd. In this picture, you can see what it looks like when 200,000 people gather⁵³.

Now imagine ten of these gatherings in a single battle, plus all of their wives and children. Then imagine the quantity of people it would have taken to kill these millions of people. This quantity is absurd. Consider, just to put this in perspective, roughly the population of any of the following places:

• Chicago, IL (roughly 2.7 million)
• Houston, TX (roughly 2.3 million)
• Phoenix, AZ plus Philadelphia, PA (roughly 3.2 million)
• Utah, Iowa, Puerto Rico, or Nevada (each roughly 3.2 million)
• Kansas or Mississippi (each roughly 3 million)
• New Mexico Nebraska, or Idaho (each roughly 2 million)

Imagine, further, what these locations might look like in a few thousand years. Would any of these civilizations be able to disappear without any trace? If these entire places’ populations were to die in a battle, might there be some evidence, especially because Ether 14 indicates the two million warriors had access to trumpets and other metal instruments, swords, written language, permanent structures, and all the other features common to 1800s warfare? In all of these locations, archaeologists are finding artifacts from thousands of years ago. I have yet to find any evidence among these artifacts to suggest such a massive battle took place.

I cannot justify a belief this battle truly happened without leaving a single trace behind. Were the Book of Mormon proposed as a symbolic story book, it would perhaps be meaningful. But the Book of Mormon is advertized as the most correct book of any, a true account of ancient peoples.

Reformed Egyptian

The Book of Mormon is alleged to have been translated from “Reformed Egyptian”. This language simply is not real. The characters appear to be mutilated Latin characters contrived by Joseph Smith⁵⁴.

Shields’ peer-reviewed journal article⁵⁴ is damning evidence, and I will not insult your intelligence by writing more about this.

The Plates

Joseph allegedly translated the Book of Mormon from plates. The church has published text and images to support this view for decades. Consider the following picture, which supports the church’s claims that people witnessed the plates.

According to apologetic sources, nobody actually claimed to witness plates, however, except with “spiritual eyes”, or through a dream or vision. The testimonies of the witnesses as included in the Book of Mormon do not convince me of the existence of the plates, as there are no personal testimonies or signatures present. The testimonies are given in aggregate, and many of the individuals who are included on those pages left the church. Further, these plates are alleged to have been hidden in then restored to the Hill Cumorah. At this place, where the plates were supposedly buried, the Book of Mormon alleges that significant battles took place.

Not only is there no archaeological evidence to support this, but this image of the hill appears to be a poor spot to hide, construct a space large enough to fit several objects, then completely bury artifacts before approaching enemies find you.

I cannot possibly understand Moroni’s reasoning for hiding the plates in this barren hill, and I must instead believe that the book was fabricated.

Prayer and Testimony

I will discuss in 3.1 Testimony more about the nature of testimony, but I will state the following here. I read the Book of Mormon and prayed for years without receiving a testimony of its truth. I have heard a number of people bearing testimonies about things that were absolutely not true, meaning testimony and revelation are fallible.

When you are unsure whether or not you can trust the spirit, your next best alternative is factual evidence. And factual evidence against the Book of Mormon is insurmountable by apologetic responses.

Conclusion

The Book of Mormon was fabricated. Joseph Smith had at his disposal a number of sources from which he could draw inspiration for the book. His education level, in my opinion, matches the book’s writing quality. The book presents unreasonable claims that have no archaeological backing. And testimonies of the book are fallible and unreliable ways to gauge the book’s truthfulness.

2.8 Changing History

In this section, I present a few simple examples that demonstrate that the church is not completely honest about its history.

Selective History

Church leaders themselves encourage people to only focus on parts of history that are flattering. Take this quote from a church historian and general authority, as published in the New Era:

Like anything, you have to approach Church history with balance. The true Church has always been a minority, and it seems like we’ve always had a target on our back. We’ll always face adversity, and we might as well get used to that. The best way to deal with it is to make sure we’re personally worthy and that our testimony is strong. If you’re spending time on websites that criticize the Church and its history but aren’t spending time in the scriptures, you’re going to be out of balance, and those negative things may have an unduly strong effect on you. If you were in proper balance, they wouldn’t.⁵⁵

As an aside, this article is also extremely manipulative:

I may be a simple guy in many respects, but I’m smart enough to know that my Heavenly Father loves me.⁵⁵

I argue that a selective approach to history is extremely dangerous. I do not understand why the church would pour enormous amounts of resources into controlling the dialogue around their own history, since throughout history, God seems comfortable subjecting his people’s history to scrutiny.

Book of Mormon Translation

Throughout the church’s history, it has taught a variety of different things regarding the translation process for the Book of Mormon. I discuss this more in 2.2 Gospel Topics Essays, so I will not say much more here to avoid redundancy

Polygamy

The church teaches a great variety of details about early church leaders and their polygamous (both polygynous and polyandrous) practices. Church members often come away confused, and apologetic responses often offer little more than a shrug about the nature of these practices. Consider just a few church-published and apologetic resources, especially noting contradictions between them:

• Official Declaration 1
• FAIR’s Plural Marriage Overview
• “Plural Marriage in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints”
• “Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo”
• “Plural Marriage and Families in Early Utah”
• “Polygamy: Latter-day Saints and the Practice of Plural Marriage”
• “The Manifesto and the End of Plural Marriage”
• “Lesson 20: Plural Marriage”
• “Polygamy: What Latter-day Saints Really Believe”
• “Lesson 22 Class Preparation Material: Plural Marriage”
• “Joseph Smith and Plural Marriage”
• “Plural Marriage after the Manifesto”

This topic has been beaten to death, so I am not going to address it more. In my opinion, there are many more significant arguments against the church than controversial marriage practices.

Saints

When Saints was published, it was surprising to many church members, including myself. I learned things about church history I had never been taught, even in seminary and institute classes. When I’ve read other literature, including Rough Stone Rolling, No Man Knows My History, and other historical literature, I have been shocked to see how much the church has disguised and hidden over the years.

Milk Before Meat

As a missionary, I was taught never to talk about church history, especially nothing more than was included in the first missionary lesson. I was given an abridged quote about the first vision to memorize, and I was not to try to answer any contradictory questions about Joseph Smith or church history.

I was not permitted to read anything that was not church-produced, and even then, my choices were limited to scriptures and a select couple of books. I was not to read Saints as it was published, despite the church telling us to encourage members to purchase a copy or read it online.

This was all done under the guise of helping people focus on what’s most important. We gave people milk before meat, we said. I personally believe this was a deliberate attempt from the church to hide negative portions of its history until well after people had committed to church membership.

Conclusion

It has been my experience that the church strictly controls its own narrative. I am disgusted to see how much effort goes into carefully protecting members from “anti-mormon” church history, and it is my opinion that the church hides its unpleasant history because they are confident it is enough to dissuade the astute reader from joining or remaining faithful.

3.1 Testimony

At less than five years old, I was instructed to stand in front of my primary class and say that I knew the church was true. This experience was repeated for years. Sometimes I wonder if I really knew what I was talking about. I wondered if kids were closer to the veil and had some kind of spiritual gift that helped them know the truth.

But one memory affirms that I did not actually understand what I was asked to testify of. When I was six, my family moved. I remember sitting in primary feeling distraught and confused. My old primary teachers always used to say, “I know that this church is true.” So when we went to a new building (a new church, as I remember understanding it), I was distraught to hear my new primary teacher say, “I know that this church is true.” We were going to a new church, I thought, and both cannot possibly be true.

I told this story at a youth activity once and got a few laughs. It’s always felt like a cute story about a confused kid. But I’ve realized its significance: when I was asked to “bury” my testimony in primary, I was given a script to repeat. I was taught to say what I believed until I finally actually believed it. The church’s claims were my ground truth for years.

As a teenager, I was still conflicted. My friends in seminary would talk about having amazing spiritual experiences. People shared how they felt like God was speaking to them when they read the Book of Mormon. I never had these experiences, but I felt like I had to share them to fit in. So when a seminary teacher asked us to share our experience with the Book of Mormon with a neighbor, I made one up. When I was asked to speak in church, I concluded my talk with a template that I still have saved on an old hard drive:

I know with all my heart that the church is true. I know Joseph Smith was a prophet of God and that he translated the Book of Mormon by the power of God. I know the church is led by a prophet today. I know the scriptures are true. In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

It was made clear to me that to be accepted in the church, you had to have a testimony, and you had to repeat it often. I remember hearing the parable of the ten virgins and being chastised in Sunday School because I wouldn’t stand up in testimony meetings. I was told that when Jesus came, I had better have enough testimony (or oil in my extended-metaphorical lamp).

When I was a missionary, I was told to testify regularly. Even if I was doubting something, I must have repeated thousands of times the same testimony over and over. In the MTC, I practiced using tone and inflection to sound sincere when I bore a testimony. I spent hours practicing “Yo se que la iglesia es la unica iglesia verdadera” (I know that the church is the only true church). Throughout my mission, I learned from mission companions and the mission president that changing my voice’s tone made a testimony sound more convincing. I practically mastered the whispery “testimony voice” so many of us are familiar with.

I prayed several times a day on my mission to feel that the church was true. I prayed for some sort of confirmation that the Book of Mormon was true or that Joseph Smith was a prophet. I occasionally felt peaceful, and I thought that might be good enough. I thought that if so many other people had impactful, significant spiritual experiences and could testify of truth, so could I. I lied through my teeth and it worked. People could not tell I was lying, or they at least never called me out for it. Mission companions would say they felt the spirit when I testified about the church. I am now deeply remorseful that many people were (at least partially) converted and baptized on the basis of my phony testimony.

Eventually, I could not tell what I believed and did not believe anymore. Memorizing and repeating my testimony dozens of times every day for two years eroded at any sense I had of what I really believed. When I got back from my mission, I knew all the right lines to say. I was congratulated for giving an impressive, eloquent talk (which was a translation of a talk I gave in the last week of my mission). Even though it felt gimmicky and repetitious to me, people said they felt the spirit when I shared my testimony in Spanish at the close of the talk.

I realized later that I was still ashamed of this testimony when a coworker recently asked how the church decided where to send missionaries. I switched into missionary mode and started talking about how we believe they receive inspiration from God, and my brain grinded to a halt. I didn’t believe a word I was saying. I wrapped up the conversation and changed the topic so I didn’t have to think about it, and I spent the next few weeks thinking about this experience.

Eventually, I was asked to give a talk in sacrament meeting themed “Why I believe”. I started writing the talk by scribbling “What do I believe” on the top of a ledger notebook. I was stumped. I wanted to say I believed the church was true, but I’d never really received a spiritual confirmation of it. So after spending several hours trying to piece together any scraps of testimony I actually had into a talk, I ended up talking about believing that it is valuable to believe in a chance to correct mistakes. I talked about how the Jesus story was useful, and how we should love all of God’s children. I somehow managed to squeeze out a 10-minute talk.

I started seriously researching the church’s truth claims. For the first time in my life, I let myself read “anti-mormon” literature, like the CES Letter and Letter for My Wife. I spent a good deal of time on the Mormon Stories website. Finally, I was starting to read logically consistent arguments. It was terribly unfortunate that these arguments contradicted everything I’d been taught to believe, but they finally worked in my mind.

Over the next few weeks, I read antagonistic work followed by apologist rebuttals (usually from FAIR). The apologist arguments were, in my opinion, incredibly weak and involved a great amount of speculation, while antagonistic work was usually evidence-based and logically sound. I wanted so badly for the church to be true, so I prayed over the course of several days. Eventually, I told God I had no testimony and experienced a lot of abuse from the church, and unless I received a spiritual confirmation the church was true, I was going to leave. I told Him I respected Him and wanted to follow His will, but that He had not yet given me enough information to believe that meant staying in the church.

I felt very little. So I prayed again. “Dear Heavenly Father, should I leave the church?” I asked. I immediately felt more peace and calm than I had ever felt. My mind felt clear. I felt everything church leaders had identified to me as signs of the spirit. I couldn’t believe it. “I’m interpreting this feeling as a sign that I should leave the church,” I confirmed. I still felt what I identified as the spirit, so later that day, I let my wife know I was leaving.

I can now say with more assurance than I ever had as a member of the church that the church is not true. I know with all of my heart that if there is a God, it is not through Russell Nelson or any other rich white man in a suit that He directs His work. I know Joseph Smith was not a prophet. He deceived, abused, and manipulated swaths of innocent people. Above all else, I know that leaving the church has made me happier, healthier, kinder, more hopeful, more generous, more tolerant, more understanding, and overall better than staying possibly could.

I learned in the church that while people can refute facts, they cannot refute spiritual experiences. So I humbly and vulnerably share this in hopes that it might help someone avoid the abuse thousands of church members have survived and continue to experience every day. The church is not true; it is not what it claims to be.

3.2 Manipulation

Trigger Warning: This section discusses emotional abuse and manipulation, including specific examples, as well as human trafficking

When I made the decision to leave the church, I felt I had been betrayed and lied to. For several weeks, I had lingering doubts about my decision. But as I have researched more, I have learned that what I experienced is very common among people who leave high-demand religions, and it bears many similarities with the experience of leaving an abusive or manipulative relationship.

For years, I refused to believe the church was manipulative. If God’s way of addressing His children bore similarities to manipulation, I thought, then manipulative people must be inspired by Satan and are just a close approximation of God.

While I was investigating my belief in the church, I was shocked at some of the manipulative comments I heard from church leaders. These comments were deeply troubling, and I realized much of my experience in the church on the whole was based on manipulation.

Think Celestial

It doesn’t take long to find manipulative language in General Conference addresses. Consider quotes from (at the time I write this) the most recent General Conference. From Russell Nelson:

Thus, if we unwisely choose to live telestial laws now, we are choosing to be resurrected with a telestial body. We are choosing not to live with our families forever.

Those who have participated in or watched an endowment ceremony might relate when I say this sounds much closer to Satan’s threat (something akin to “if these people do not live up to every covenant they make, they will be in my power”) than God’s comforting, patient language. It strikes fear into parents who believe they are sealed to their children forever. It uses threatening language, and I believe this manipulative statement alone is damning evidence that Nelson’s address does not match the tone or nature of God.

Consider a later paragraph in his address:

When you are confronted with a dilemma, think celestial! When tested by temptation, think celestial! When life or loved ones let you down, think celestial! When someone dies prematurely, think celestial. When someone lingers with a devastating illness, think celestial. When the pressures of life crowd in upon you, think celestial! As you recover from an accident or injury, as I am doing now, think celestial! As you focus on thinking celestial, expect to encounter opposition. Decades ago, a professional colleague criticized me for having “too much temple” in me, and more than one supervisor penalized me because of my faith. I am convinced, however, that thinking celestial enhanced my career.⁴⁶

While they appear innocent, catchphrases like “think celestial” are common thought-stopping strategies. Consider this: if “think celestial” were your mantra, and you were confronted with something that made you doubt, would it be more appealing to “think celestial” or use your God-given gift of discernment to figure out the truth? This sentiment reminds me of language common among manipulative parents I’ve met, who will convince their child to do something by asking “what would Jesus do?”

Of course, mantras can be helpful. By itself, I don’t believe this quote is particularly damning. My wife and I often repeat to each other, “handle it now,” which keeps us from letting dishes or laundry build up. But I suggest that when someone else tells you what your mantra should be, it is worth scrutinizing their intentions.

He goes on:

As you think celestial, you will find yourself avoiding anything that robs you of your agency. Any addiction—be it gaming, gambling, debt, drugs, alcohol, anger, pornography, sex, or even food—offends God. Why? Because your obsession becomes your god. You look to it rather than to Him for solace. If you struggle with an addiction, seek the spiritual and professional help you need. Please do not let an obsession rob you of your freedom to follow God’s fabulous plan.

When I first heard this talk, this quote struck me as particularly icky. It uses something that is familiar to many church members (the concept of addiction) and expands its scope to include anything someone turns to rather than God for solace. While it is wise to seek help if something is controlling your life, this paragraph appears to be designed to tear down people who are struggling, rather than lifting them up. I cannot speak for Jesus, but the stories I’ve read throughout the scriptures do not indicate that he was offended by addicts. I can only imagine Jesus having more compassion and empathy than I could comprehend. Not to mention, addiction is globally categorized as a disorder that often requires treatment rather than something that can be prayed away.

It is impossible for me to know Nelson’s exact motive when he penned this paragraph. But I will suggest that I would only say something like this if I wanted my audience to feel guilty. In my experience, guilt and shame are great tools to keep people engaged in the church (see Epistle 3.4). Everyone I’ve ever met has “struggled” with something in his list during a hard time. Students play video games to relax after a long day of classes and work. People go into debt in emergencies or even to feed their families. Anger is a normal emotion and is healthy when expressed appropriately, and on a personal note, I cannot imagine a perfect, merciful God being offended that I bake a batch of cookies after a long day at work (even if the practice is not the healthiest).

Consider one final quote from this talk:

As you think celestial, you will view trials and opposition in a new light. When someone you love attacks truth, think celestial, and don’t question your testimony. The Apostle Paul prophesied that “in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.”

Considering this quote in light of a thought-terminating catchphrase, I do not understand how this could possibly be God speaking through Nelson. I suggest that this line is carefully crafted to cast doubt on anyone who thinks differently or does not believe. The word “attacks” conjures warlike and violent imagery, and listeners are encouraged to see anyone expressing contrary or alternative ideas as the enemy. This is a painfully divisive way of speaking, in which not only are alternative opinions the enemy, but if you start to think differently, you are “giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils”.

I would encourage you to read the rest of Nelson’s talk. It is full of fallacy: rather than truly rebut any “anti-mormon” arguments or even mention them specifically, he shamelessly casts his opposition away with Ad Hominem. Because I oppose his ideas, I have been seduced by a devil and should not be trusted.

I would like to point out: I link primarily to church-produced resources, including General Conference talks. I propose that there are specific problems with the teachings of the church, and I argue against those problems. While I disagree with many of the points Nelson makes, I make no attempt to degrade him or use his character to negate his arguments.

Feeling Trapped

Trigger Warning: This section describes human trafficking.

I was recently (before I decided to leave the church) in the Denver airport on my way back from a work trip. The sign in the restroom made me honestly reflect on my experience in the church. While I cannot remember its exact wording, it went something like this: “If you feel you cannot leave, you may be a victim of human trafficking.”

This sparked some serious thought. I spent much of my summer working on processing my mission trauma. While I washed my in Denver, it hit me like a ton of bricks: Not once did I ever feel like I could leave my mission. And even if I felt like I could, the church had my passport in its possession, and it was made clear that if a missionary was sent home, he was to endure a humiliating phone call with his parents (see Epistle 1.2). While I don’t intend to directly accuse the church of human trafficking (I felt this document could benefit many more people than a settlement and NDA with Kirton-McConkie ever would), I got to thinking about how trapped I have felt in the church.

I made this list while I was contemplating whether or not I would stay in the church:

• I never felt I could turn down a calling (they did come from God, after all)
• I felt guilty that family health issues pulled me away from church meetings, since I wasn’t doing enough for God
• I didn’t feel like I could tell a leader they made a mistake or hurt someone
• I was convinced I would fall into financial disrepair if I didn’t pay tithing
• I advanced in priesthood offices and served a mission because “that’s what you do”
• I bore a dishonest testimony for fear of disappointing God and those around me
• I always wore conservative clothes and hairstyles out of fear of being immodest
• I went to boring, unwelcoming activities as a teenager to keep people happy
• I voted to sustain church leaders despite knowing nothing of their character
• I attended the temple frequently, even thought it was traumatizing and triggering, especially after I returned from my mission
• I sat in worthiness interviews despite understanding my worth to God was great
• I prayed and spoke in meetings despite being unprepared or uninterested
• I never set boundaries, even when I was hurt or uncomfortable
• I was unkind and judgmental to people who didn’t fit the church’s mold despite knowing Jesus taught that we should love everyone
• I justified hateful, bigoted, and otherwise inappropriate actions under the guise that I had to sustain church leaders and doctrine

My list went on, but I feel this suffices. I never felt I could set boundaries within the church. I felt that God wanted me to give and give, often without any evidence that what I was giving was used to benefit people. I constantly felt trapped and would fall into a cycle:

• I started to wonder if I was doing too much
• I reassured myself it was God’s will
• I felt guilty about doing less (or even wanting to do less)
• I re-doubled my efforts and started doing more, and the cycle repeated

This might not be your experience, but if it is, know that these are all signs of being in an abusive and manipulative relationship. I reassured myself, thinking that abusive people are inspired by Satan, who can closely mimic God’s behavior, but it still didn’t sit right. Since leaving the church, I feel free to be who I want to be and do what I want to do. I believe I am living an honorable life and doing as much good as I can, and it has been so freeing to lose the fear and guilt that come with a relationship with the church.

Encouraging Manipulation

While I wish I could provide a solid, logical argument here, the church is clearly very careful not to publish or document the ways they encourage manipulative behavior. Thus, I speak anecdotally about a number of experiences that convince me the church encourages manipulation, especially from its leaders.

In Parents

Parents in the church hear that if their kids fall away from the church, they will spend eternity without them. So parents often require strict adherence to the church while kids are growing up. While I am grateful my parents now allow me to make my own decisions, it took months to gather the courage to tell them I’d left. I frequently hear and read about people who left the church and now have horrible relationships with their families who stay, and it breaks my heart to think a church (which supposedly encourages people to exercise free will) could encourage such tragic consequences.

Many who grew up in the church faced discipline if they refused to go to church or any other church activity. Kids are shamed or guilt-tripped for their unrighteousness if their friends aren’t all church members, or if they learn or talk about anything that contradicts the church. Many compare the experience of telling parents they’re out of the church to coming out as gay to religious parents.

In Missionaries

Missionaries are trained to be expert manipulators. It’s not uncommon to hear people mention “love-bombing” in the context of missionaries. Former missionaries will recognize the tactic: find someone who is struggling (i.e., going through a divorce, lost a job, homeless, new parent, etc.) and convince them you’re their friend. Regularly make it clear you love this person, even though you don’t really even know them. Convince other church members to join in supporting them. Pray with them and read reassuring scriptures. All the while, convince them that the way to solve their problem is joining the church. Eventually, of course, this love bomb goes away as missionaries leave or get busy converting someone else, and the person is left in the church.

In Leadership

I deeply regret that I served in a number of leadership roles on my mission. I am confident I received these roles in part because of my ability to manipulate, though I did not realize that was what I was doing. As I’ve talked with other missionaries, I’ve felt a similar sentiment. When I would help the mission president assign companionships, it was clear that missionaries who gained favor with the mission president were much more likely to serve as leaders. I am confident a major contributor to my “promotion” to an assistant role was the fact my mission president and I share a hometown and would occasionally reminisce about it together.

After my mission, when it was time to call new leaders when I was singles’ ward clerk, I was asked to print a summary of the highest-donating members in the ward. Further, I am confident I was called to the position of clerk because I did everything I could to convince the bishop I could fill that role. I prefer office work to other church responsibilities, so I frequently talked with the bishop about how my engineering degree was going and how much I enjoyed math. Leadership roles and callings are often assigned because “if we give them a nice calling, they’ll feel important and want to come back”. Leadership meetings were strategy sessions, and I always felt like we were playing a sick game of chess with people’s salvation.

Conclusion

While abuse and manipulation can be subjective, I have experienced the church as being extremely manipulative. I am appalled and ashamed that I not only was manipulated, but was convinced I had to participate fully in manipulative behavior. If you are considering your own relationship with the church, I would encourage doing what I did: make a list of things you don’t feel like you have any choice about. You might surprise yourself.

3.3 The BITE Model

Trigger warning: This section describes authoritarian control, including human trafficking, imprisonment, abuse, and manipulation.

It has long been debated whether or not the church is a cult. I am going to make no claims regarding this, as the topic is loaded with emotion and it does no good.

I will, however, examine the church in the context of authoritarian control. Whether or not the church is a cult, it does use methods and techniques that cults also use to gain authoritarian control over members.

What is the BITE Model?

Steven Hassan developed the BITE Model to describe cults’ specific methods to recruit and maintain control over people. “BITE” stands for Behavior, Information, Thought, and Emotional control. The BITE model should be used within the Influence Continuum Model to help determine authoritarian control. Not every group or relationship uses every one of these. Some are universal such as deception (Information control), indoctrinating people to distrust critics and former members, or installing phobias to make people afraid of questioning or leaving.⁵⁶

While many apologetic sources have attempted to argue that the BITE model is not a reliable way to identify authoritarian control, a quick search on Google Scholar shows that the model is frequently cited, especially in the context of identifying cults and mitigating the harm they cause. It is also convenient and tempting to suggest that because the church doesn’t meet every condition in the list, the church is not a cult.

I want to make this clear: I am not suggesting the church is a cult. I am simply using this model to show the amount of authoritarian control that is present in the church. I am writing from my own experience; please consider your own experience in the church in the context of this model to decide for yourself.

In each category, numbered points are sourced from Hassan’s BITE Model, while bullets are my commentary and justification.

Behavior Control

“The church doesn’t control my behavior; it teaches that we all have agency,” I thought before examining my life experience.

Let us consider the BITE model’s list of methods of behavior control and find evidence within the church’s teachings that the church matches this model:

1. Regulate individual’s physical reality
   • The Sabbath day is to be strictly observed
   • The Word of Wisdom dictates what to eat and drink
   • The church promotes physical reminders they belong to the group:
     • Garments are to be worn at the risk of forfeiting God’s protection (“We are at war! […] This garment, worn day and night, serves three important purposes; it is […] a protective covering for the body”⁵⁷)
     • CTR rings / Emblems of belonging are given to young children
     • Young Women’s medallions are seen as a symbol of righteousness
     • Members are encouraged to always carry a temple recommend
2. Dictate where, how, and with whom the member lives and associates or isolates
   • Early saints were instructed to move to Zion
   • Children and youth are taught to make righteous friends⁵⁸
   • Dating couples are not to live together
   • Missionaries have almost no say over schedules and living arrangements
3. When, how and with whom the member has sex
   • The law of chastity and local leaders’ interpretations thereof dictate exactly how and with whom people ought to have sex
4. Control types of clothing and hairstyles
   • Especially for young women, modesty is strictly enforced
5. Regulate diet – food and drink, hunger and/or fasting
   • Members are instructed on when to fast and what to eat and drink
6. Manipulation and deprivation of sleep
   • This is a common experience among missionaries and local leaders
7. Financial exploitation, manipulation or dependence
   • Members are required to pay tithing and are instructed that God’s blessings depend on their willingness to pay tithing before taking care of their own basic needs
   • If someone fails to pay tithing, they cannot get married or be there for significant family events, including their kids’ weddings
8. Restrict leisure, entertainment, vacation time
   • Strict Sabbath day observance restricts time people have off of work
   • Church activities often take up evenings and weekends
9. Major time spent with group indoctrination and rituals and/or self indoctrination including the Internet
   • Members are required to attend church classes and encouraged to enroll in seminary and institute, in addition to extra activities
   • Personal scripture study is viewed as a commandment
   • Members are instructed never to take counsel from an outsider
10. Permission required for major decisions
    • The church encourages prayer and fasting before many decisions
    • Marriage and church milestones require leader permission (via a recommend)
11. Rewards and punishments used to modify behaviors, both positive and negative
    • Church discipline and shame for disobedient members keep behavior in check
    • Righteous members are given leadership roles and are praised by church leaders
    • Families often reward and punish their children based on church policies
    • Youth are awarded for completing religious milestones
12. Discourage individualism, encourage group-think
    • People are asked to leave if they share controversial ideas in church meetings
    • Members are taught there is one right way to think and act
13. Impose rigid rules and regulations
    • Church rules and policies are to be strictly and exactly obeyed
14. Threaten harm to family and friends
    • Missionaries are often promised that their families will only be protected if the missionary is obedient
15. Instill dependency and obedience
    • Many church members feel they depend on and must be exactly obedient to the church
16. Separation of Families
    • Parents are taught they will never see their unrighteous children after they die unless they repent
17. Imprisonment
    • Many missionaries have been imprisoned in MTCs (see 1.2 My Story )
18. Punish disobedience by beating, torture, burning, cutting, rape, or tattooing/branding
19. Force individual to rape or be raped
20. Encourage and engage in corporal punishment
21. Kidnapping
22. Beating
23. Torture
24. Rape
25. Murder
    • Thankfully, points 18-25 do not seem to take place in the church at large, though they certainly do within some member families

Information Control

1. Deception
   1. Deliberately withhold information
      • Remember the talk “To Young Men Only”? When I was a young man, we regularly discussed it in Sunday school. Try to find it on the church’s website.
      • There is no public report of the church’s finances (except what arises through a lawsuit)
      • Church history is thoroughly sanitized before it is taught to general church membership
   2. Distort information to make it more acceptable
      • See the Gospel Topics Essays compared to other academic writing
      • As a missionary, I was told to minimize the commitments a person would make to the church to convince them to convert
   3. Systematically lie to the cult member
      • I was promised a happy mission; I was miserable for two years
      • Members often feel deceived when they are not offered welfare assistance after years of paying tithing and fast offerings
      • The church covers up abuse while teaching that it does everything it can to protect families
2. Minimize or discourage access to non-cult sources of information, including:
   1. Internet, TV, radio, books, articles, newspapers, magazines, media
      • Members have long been taught to avoid seeking truth from the internet or media
      • Missionaries have long been prohibited from reading anything other than designated church-produced literature
   2. Critical information
      • I felt so uncomfortable researching “anti” material
      • Members are taught not to take counsel from anyone who doesn’t believe
   3. Former members
      • Members who have left are not welcome to participate in most church meetings
      • The church has a long history of attempting to discredit “inactives” or “ex-mormons”
   4. Keep members busy so they don’t have time to think and investigate
      • There’s no question the church does everything it can to keep people busy
   5. Control through cell phone with texting, calls, internet tracking
      • This is most common among missionaries. It is sometimes proposed that the church uses standard corporate tracking software on missionary phones. However, I would suggest that employees of other institutions are allowed to have personal devices in addition to work phones. Further, corporations do not intercept and inspect mail that is sent to their employees, but many missions periodically do.
3. Compartmentalize information into Outsider vs. Insider doctrines
   1. Ensure that information is not freely accessible
      • The church tightly controls the information that is available on its website and other resources
   2. Control information at different levels and missions within group
      • Most members are not allowed to browse the full church history library, for example
   3. Allow only leadership to decide who needs to know what and when
      • This has become more challenging since the advent of the internet, but members often only had access to materials approved by church leadership
4. Encourage spying on other members
   1. Impose a buddy system to monitor and control member
      • Missionaries are encouraged to monitor their companions and report anything disobedient to the mission president
   2. Report deviant thoughts, feelings and actions to leadership
      • Members are required to confess and are often asked about these thoughts, feelings, and actions
   3. Ensure that individual behavior is monitored by group
      • Members often police each other’s behavior, especially if they see a church leader disobeying a commandment in public
5. Extensive use of cult-generated information and propaganda, including:
   • Newsletters, magazines, journals, audiotapes, videotapes, YouTube, movies and other media
     • The church produces all of these media
   • Misquoting statements or using them out of context from non-cult sources
     • See the Gospel Topics Essays
6. Unethical use of confession
   1. Information about sins used to disrupt and/or dissolve identity boundaries
      • At 12 years old, my bishop pulled me out of Sunday School and told me I was expected to serve a mission, told me I needed to obey the law of chastity, and taught me what masturbation was
      • Members are taught that their primary purpose is to have a family, and bishops and other leaders frequently degrade individuals whose lives follow a different course
      • Church leaders have often degraded or behaved inappropriately toward LGBT+ members, teaching they aren’t really gay and that they are listening to Satan
   2. Withholding forgiveness or absolution
      • Bishops set the terms for a person to obtain forgiveness, sometimes including being disallowed to participate in church meetings, take the sacrament, or wear garments
   3. Manipulation of memory, possible false memories
      • Members seeking help with abusive relationships are often gaslit, and abuse is systematically covered up

Thought Control

1. Require members to internalize the group’s doctrine as truth
   1. Adopting the group’s ‘map of reality’ as reality
      • Starting around 3 years old, children are taught the Plan of Salvation and are told to recite that they know the church is true
      • Participation in church ceremonies requires kids as young as 12 to indicate they have faith in the godhead, Joseph Smith, and modern church leaders
   2. Instill black and white thinking
      • Members are taught they cannot serve both God and mammon
      • The church teaches that everyone is naturally an enemy to God and that only the church’s teachings are good
   3. Decide between good vs. evil
      • From primary, people are taught to choose the right
      • Members are pressured into thinking about “good, better, best” choices
   4. Organize people into us vs. them (insiders vs. outsiders)
      • Members are encouraged never to take counsel from someone who doesn’t believe (i.e., is an outsider)
      • Non-members and exmormons are considered dangerous to someone’s testimony
2. Change person’s name and identity
   • People receive a new name in the temple
   • The church focuses on someone’s identity as a child of God
   • Primary children sing “I belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints”
3. Use of loaded language and clichés which constrict knowledge, stop critical thoughts and reduce complexities into platitudinous buzz words
   • “Think Celestial”
   • “Doubt your doubts”
   • “God hasn’t revealed everything yet”
   • “Lazy learners”
   • “Wheat and tares”
4. Encourage only ‘good and proper’ thoughts - “Your mind is like a stage in a theater” - Members are taught to sing a hymn to cast out bad thoughts
5. Hypnotic techniques are used to alter mental states, undermine critical thinking and even to age regress the member
   • I do not have the academic background to address this point adequately
6. Memories are manipulated and false memories are created
   • Many people experiencing a faith crisis report feeling gaslit, including myself
7. Teaching thought-stopping techniques which shut down reality testing by stopping negative thoughts and allowing only positive thoughts, including denial, rationalization, justification, wishful thinking, chanting, meditating, praying, speaking in tongues, singing or humming
   • I was taught all of these techniques as a method to deal with “anti-mormon” teachings
8. Rejection of rational analysis, critical thinking, constructive criticism
   • I was always taught never to criticize a church leader
   • “Doubt your doubts before you doubt your faith”
9. Forbid critical questions about leader, doctrine, or policy allowed
   • Leaders speak from God and should not be questioned
   • Those who vote “opposed” are not welcome in church meetings, especially general conferences
10. Labeling alternative belief systems as illegitimate, evil, or not useful
    • “Other churches have some truth, but we have the whole thing”
    • Members are encouraged to include in their testimonies some variation on the following: “I know this church is the only true church on the face of the earth”
11. Instill new “map of reality”
    • Members are taught what reality looks like and are discouraged from considering any other options

Emotional Control

1. Manipulate and narrow the range of feelings – some emotions and/or needs are deemed as evil, wrong or selfish
   • I was taught that feeling anything but the spirit was inappropriate
   • Members are taught to carefully control their feelings to create a loving atmosphere
2. Teach emotion-stopping techniques to block feelings of homesickness, anger, doubt
   • Homesick missionaries are told to work harder
   • Members are taught to sing a hymn if they are upset or angry
   • The church teaches that studying church-produced resources is the antidote for fear and doubt
3. Make the person feel that problems are always their own fault, never the leader’s or the group’s fault
   • Church leaders have frequently taught that problems come from unrighteousness or are just a trial to pass through
   • Moroni 10 teaches that despair comes from iniquity
4. Promote feelings of guilt or unworthiness, such as:
   1. Identity guilt
      • “Would a representative of Jesus Christ do _____?”
   2. You are not living up to your potential
      • See “Your Potential, Your Privilege”
   3. Your family is deficient
      • No family will live up to the church’s expectations
   4. Your past is suspect
      • Members are regularly subjected to “worthiness interviews” in which their past is questioned
      • Baptismal interviews include questions about a person’s past (including a history of abortions or homosexual relationships), even though baptism supposedly clears up someone’s past
   5. Your affiliations are unwise
      • Members are discouraged from affiliating with “outsiders”
   6. Your thoughts, feelings, actions are irrelevant or selfish
      • Members are taught to sacrifice everything for God
   7. Social guilt
      • “We missed you in church this Sunday”
   8. Historical guilt
      • Members are expected to defend a church’s troubling past
5. Instill fear, such as fear of:
   1. Thinking independently
      • Members are taught that following their own wisdom leads to damnation
   2. The outside world
      • “Be in the world but not of the world”
   3. Enemies
      • The church often mentions that “there are some people who want to tear down your faith”
   4. Losing one’s salvation
      • Even in spite of repentance, “repeat offenders” are warned that God will not be mocked
   5. Leaving or being shunned by the group
      • I have been terrified to tell people I left
   6. Others’ disapproval
      • The church encourages people in testimony meetings and other venues to seek approval from other members
6. Extremes of emotional highs and lows – love bombing and praise one moment and then declaring you are horrible sinner
   • I became very good at love bombing then convincing people they were sinners as a missionary
7. Ritualistic and sometimes public confession of sins
   • Many members feel the need to talk about their flaws during church meetings
8. Phobia indoctrination: inculcating irrational fears about leaving the group or questioning the leader’s authority
   1. No happiness or fulfillment possible outside of the group
      • This is fundamental to the church’s teachings
   2. Terrible consequences if you leave: hell, demon possession, incurable diseases, accidents, suicide, insanity, 10,000 reincarnations, etc.
      • Members are taught they will never see their loved ones after death if they are not sealed and faithful
   3. Shunning of those who leave; fear of being rejected by friends and family
      • Many people who leave the church experience this
   4. Never a legitimate reason to leave; those who leave are weak, undisciplined, unspiritual, worldly, brainwashed by family or counselor, or seduced by money, sex, or rock and roll
      • I was always taught that people “fell away” from the church because they didn’t try hard enough to be righteous
      • Those who leave are often regarded as lazy and sinful
   5. Threats of harm to ex-member and family
      • Thankfully, all threats are spiritual, but they include damnation and the lack of any opportunity to see loved ones after death
      • Loss of God’s protection

This model, in my opinion, neatly condemns the behavior of the church as authoritarian. It is my personal opinion that a perfect, merciful God would not run His church in this way. Whether or not it shows the church is a cult, I propose that the sheer amount of conditions the church satisfies should at least encourage scrutiny.

3.4 You Are Fundamentally Flawed

Trigger Warning: This section discusses emotional abuse and manipulation, including specific examples. It briefly mentions LGBT+ issues.

There’s something wrong with you. In fact, you’re naturally God’s greatest enemy and you’re a horrible sinner and you always have been. Wait, this message might be off-putting. Perhaps one of these one-liners will make it sound more innocent:

• “Of course nobody’s perfect, so…”
• “We all need to repent”
• “Repentance isn’t a bad thing”
• “We all sin”
• “God wants us to repent so we can be happy”
• “In order to receive (insert blessing) you have to repent”

In my experience in the church, there was always something deeply wrong with me. I was naturally evil and corrupt. I propose that this is a powerful way the church controls its members, and I personally believe it’s what makes the church’s message so compelling.

It’s normal to feel like something is wrong with you. Parents, friends, bullies, teachers, and many of the people we interact with in society point out our flaws and try to convince us they have the solution. Many who have written a compelling essay for English class know the format: here’s a problem, here’s why it’s a problem, here’s the solution. Humans are natural problem-solvers, and it seems to be deeply ingrained in our nature to try and find problems with ourselves to solve.

An Appeal to Imperfection

I suggest the church teaches, in a reductive way:

• You are fundamentally flawed by nature (i.e., you aren’t perfect)
• Imperfection bars you from seeing your family after you die
• You can’t get perfect on your own
• We (and only we) can make you perfect (i.e., exclusive access to the Atonement)
• You won’t realize you’re getting perfect until after you die
• If you don’t try to be perfect until you die, you can’t access our solution

Perhaps you disagree, but this sounds a lot like a snake oil sales pitch to me. Perhaps you’ve felt this pattern in an even more harmful way in your church community:

• You are fundamentally flawed by nature (i.e., you aren’t perfect)
• Imperfection bars you from seeing your family after you die
• You can’t get perfect on your own
• We (and only we) can make you perfect (i.e., exclusive access to the Atonement)
• If you don’t act perfectly now, you’re not welcome in our group
• If you don’t try to be perfect until you die, you can’t access our solution

Of course, the church does not publish anything directly supporting this attitude. But I would suggest that many (including myself) who have participated in the church have felt the immense pressure to be perfect. If you aren’t, you can’t access the temple or its ordinances, you can’t worthily hold the priesthood, you aren’t worthy of an eternal companion, and so on.

Danger

I propose that this attitude and way of teaching is incredibly harmful in numerous ways. You’ve probably seen this or similar attitudes hurt yourself or people you care about. Many have tried to break the cycle of these attitudes, but it is extremely difficult to both support the church’s doctrine regarding our imperfection and simultaneously love and support people who do not meet God’s standards.

Us Versus Them

People have long condemned the “us versus them” attitude that prevails in many congregations. I am pleased to see that many local units are attempting to be more open-minded and supportive, but there is still immense pressure to not only love and support people who don’t belong, but to be a missionary to them. I do not feel welcome at church activities, for example, because I will inevitably be told (often indirectly) that the way I am living is not up-to-par with God’s standard and I should return to church. While I sat next to my best friend (who came out as gay several years later) in young men’s classes, our leaders taught that it was an abominable sin to be gay. One leader became angry talking about the recently-passed law allowing gay marriage throughout the US, and he told us we needed to keep our kids safe from “those people”.

Keeping Up Appearances

The church teaches that it will keep you happy, healthy, and wealthy. At least that’s the impression I had. So not only was there pressure to follow all of the commandments; I had to be a missionary by showing everyone how happy, healthy, and wealthy the church made me. I wasn’t allowed to have a bad day (and if I had one anyway, it had to be a trial I was actively learning something from). When we made homemade vanilla, I was afraid not of sinning, but of being seen buying bourbon. I have always felt I had to keep up appearances, and leaving the church has confirmed to me that the primary cause of this feeling was pressure from the church.

Perfectionism

As much as church leaders condemn perfectionism, many (including myself) find that worrying about perfectionism just gives them one more thing to do to live up to what church leaders teach. How am I supposed to balance going to school, being a perfect husband, thinking celestial, earning enough money to support ourselves while paying tithing, fulfilling ministering requirements, knowing everyone in the ward, giving talks, teaching classes, loving everyone, and also not looking like a perfectionist?

Counteracting Perfectionism

After leaving the church, I have found that a number of affirmations have helped me understand that I am okay, even if I’m not perfect:

• Perfection looks different for everyone
• I deserve love and respect
• I care, and I am trying, and that is enough
• I am good enough

These simple statements have given me more comfort than anything the church had to offer. If you’re feeling the need to be perfect, perhaps writing your own affirmations could be helpful.

Conclusion

The church would have you believe there is something deeply wrong with you so they can sell you the solution. I disagree: you matter deeply and deserve love and respect.

When I first showed this section to my wife, she wrote something beautiful in the margins:

All humans are inherently of worth just because they are human. No deity — and certainly no organization claiming to speak on behalf of deity — is needed to grant or uphold that worth.

3.5 The Other

Trigger Warning: This section discusses how the church impacts minority groups and discusses abuse, childlessness, LGBT+ issues, and gender roles.

I am inspired by the lyrics to “I’ll Walk With You” in the Children’s Songbook:

If you don’t walk as most people do,

Some people walk away from you,

But I won’t! I won’t!

If you don’t talk as most people do,

Some people talk and laugh at you,

But I won’t! I won’t!

I’ll walk with you. I’ll talk with you.

That’s how I’ll show my love for you.

Jesus walked away from none.

He gave his love to ev’ryone.

So I will! I will!

Jesus blessed all he could see,

Then turned and said, “Come, follow me.”

And I will! I will!

I will! I will!

I’ll walk with you. I’ll talk with you.

That’s how I’ll show my love for you.

View Full Song

It is disgusting to me, then, that the church would ever feel unwelcoming to anyone. Of course, the church is often welcoming to wealthy or middle-class white men. I often feel that part of the reason I was able to stay in the church so long was that I (as a middle-class white man) was allowed to be comfortable. I was eligible for any calling I could possibly want. The church had made it clear to me for decades that I was born into my comfortable status because I had won God’s favor (perhaps even before I was born).

As much as I thought I could understand others’ experiences, I simply didn’t see the harm the church can cause to anyone who doesn’t fit the mold (which was, conveniently, the mold you were to fit in around the time the church was established). I am ashamed to have been unaware of the suffering or struggle of minorities in the church, and I sincerely hope that my research and experience can help me write this section as sensitively as possible.

Who Is “The Other”?

Perhaps you’ve been “the other” before. I remember how it felt to be picked last in gym class, how painful it was to be teased because I didn’t have social skills, and how it felt to be a relatively-disliked racial and religious minority. While these experiences are obviously not exact parallels to everyone, I hope that I can draw on them as a way to empathize.

If you have spent much time in the church, you’ve probably already got a good idea of who “the other” might be. I know everyone’s lives are unique and this list is in no way comprehensive, but perhaps “the other” includes some of these groups:

• Women
• Introverts
• Single adults over 22
• Racial minorities (i.e., anyone who isn’t white)
• The LGBT+ community
• Parents, children, and other family members of people in the LGBT+ community
• Members of other faiths
• Part-member families
• Inactive members
• Ex-mormons
• Non-mormons
• Unmarried couples who live together
• People with disabilities and chronic illnesses
• Neurodiverse people
• People experiencing poverty or homelessness
• Non-conservative voters (in some areas)
• People with tattoos
• People who drink tea, coffee, or alcohol
• People who disagree with church leaders
• Nuanced members
• Activists
• Missionaries who return early
• Survivors of abuse and domestic violence
• People with non-conservative hair or clothes
• People who don’t take the sacrament
• People who swear
• Readers of non-church-produced media
• Teachers who take on controversial topics in Sunday School
• Disobedient missionaries
• Middle-aged men without significant callings
• People who turn down callings
• Couples who don’t want or can’t have children
• Adults without a college education

This list could go on for quite a while, but I believe I have made my point. I suggest that fewer people are made to feel welcome in the church than are not. Because I cannot possibly do all of these groups justice due to my lack of experience, I would like to discuss in greater depth how just a few of these “others” are impacted.

Women

I had a terrible time knowing even where to start with this one. Women are not equal to men in the church. They simply are not. Because I, occasionally to my demise, have a Y-chromosome and do not have the understanding this topic deserves, I would like to quote two women who have been extremely supportive as I have deconstructed my faith.

Note that throughout this letter, I refer to my wife as “my wife” rather than by her name. After much discussion, she determined it was in her best professional interests to make it hard for search engines to index this document using her name. If the day comes that she would like her name to appear on this website, I will wholeheartedly support her and update it, but for now, know I omit her name by her own request.

First, a quote from my wife. I recorded this thought shortly after we learned we likely couldn’t have kids, and we were working on processing the trauma that came with that.

Growing up, I was taught I was nothing more than a baby-making, housekeeping sex toy, an object for my husband’s use and enjoyment. Beginning in primary — before I had even started puberty — I was overtly taught that the greatest role I could ever fill is that of a righteous homemaker, a wife, and a mother. I was a second-class citizen in the church from my conception, and I was expected to be treated as such for time and all eternity as my husband’s wife.

While the news was challenging for both of us, my wife seemed especially devastated. She felt like because God won’t let her have kids, her worth was gone. Nevermind her academic and professional success and her amazing skills in so many areas of life; her job was to be a mom and now she couldn’t have that. We talked about how she could still be a nurturing, motherly figure, but her role as a mother was so deeply ingrained in her beliefs about herself.

Second, I roughly quote one of our good friends who has been extremely helpful as we have deconstructed our beliefs:

It feels like the playground bully is holding equality over women’s heads. It feels so “gaslighty”. They say women are equal and toss us a little tiny bit: young women passing the sacrament to women in mothers’ rooms, relief society presidents helping more with church welfare. But it’s not equality. I’m still a helpmeet to my husband, I’m still first and foremost a mom, I’m still a second-class citizen who needs a man to make my decisions for me.

When we first started talking about gender dynamics in the church, I learned that there was a whole world I had never even noticed. I didn’t have any clue that my wife felt less-than when she learned in the temple that I was required for her to be exalted. I didn’t know how painful it is for women to feel like they don’t have a voice at church. I am ashamed to have benefitted greatly from imbalanced gender roles without even realizing it. My wife has mentioned that she didn’t even realize it, but she was conditioned to expect to be less-than, even in her own home.

Since leaving the church, we have made it a priority to have truly equal roles in our marriage. I still have a lot to learn, and I am so grateful for my wife’s patience as I have learned about the subtle ways I was conditioned to oppress her in our own home. We are becoming happier than ever, and our relationship is healthier and more balanced than it ever was.

Racial Minorities

This topic has been discussed to no end in both support and opposition of the church. While I condemn the racist teachings and practices in the church (many of which still exist today), I do not feel especially qualified to thoroughly address racism in this setting.

I will simply say that I am disgusted that the church and its leaders would teach for decades that racial minorities are inferior, were less righteous before this life, or should not participate fully in the church. It is, in my opinion, horrifying and reflective of low moral character to insist that the church is not (and has never been) racist. It is disappointing to see racist church leaders from generations ago hailed as prophets and revelators without acknowledging that many of their fundamental teachings were inherently racist and directly contradictory to God’s nature as “no respector of persons”.

The LGBT+ Community and Their Families

LGBT+ issues are a hot-button topic, especially as they pertain to the church. It is likely you know many people in the LGBT+ community, and it is likely that (if you are a faithful church member), you experience a great deal of cognitive dissonance about them. Chances are, most or all of them are wonderful people who live happy and peaceful lives. It is confusing, then, why church leaders emphasize that they are inherently sinful.

I do not feel I can give a fair perspective on LGBT+ issues in the church, as I still have a lot to learn. But I would like to share a few thoughts that, in my opinion, serve as a thorough indictment of the church.

It has become common to talk about micro-aggressions in the context of inclusion. Essentially, there are a number of things people say, potentially meaning well, that work to give someone the impression they are less-than, or that they are not truly a member of the community. They have the potential to create a powerful us-vs-them attitude. I have personally heard more micro-aggressions in the context of LGBT+ issues in the church than in any other context.

Perhaps you’ve heard or even said similar sentiments. I am deeply saddened to know that I likely hurt a great number of people by propagating these sentiments. When we left the church, I told my wife, “I feel like I’m finally free to just plain love and support people. I don’t have to worry about balancing God’s commandments with loving my neighbor.”

I am deeply discouraged when I hear many church members and leaders treat LBGT+ individuals as less-than. I am ashamed to have once believed that “same-sex attraction” was just a temptation from God. While his story is his to tell, when my high school best friend came out as gay (in his 20s), I started to really consider how I was treating and thinking about LGBT+ issues in the church. I recently sat uncomfortably through a meeting while a stake president mentioned that we shouldn’t care or even acknowledge that someone is gay. He taught that all of our identities boil down to being a child of God, and that we should look past anything else.

I bit my tongue, but I wanted to ask: if the only part of our identity that matters is being a child of God, why would The Family: A Proclamation to the World indicate that gender is a vital part of our identities? And why, if we only care about being children of God, can women and men not have the same responsibilities within the church?

I have tried throughout these epistles to avoid throwing unanswered questions at a reader, so I propose my own answer to the above questions: The church’s leaders benefit greatly by putting themselves above others, especially when someone’s identity can be dismissed as sinful.

Further complicating the issue, parents of people in the LGBT+ community are often stuck between a rock and a hard place; damned if they support the church, damned if they support their child. I regret remaining silent in a Sunday School class sitting next to the parents of my gay best friend while the teacher taught that “if you raise a kid up in the way they should go, they won’t depart from it”. The lesson condemned parents who didn’t do enough to keep their kids “on the strait and narrow”. My friend’s mom decided to prioritize loving and supporting her son over defending the church; his dad chose to prioritize the church. Neither was able to balance the church’s teachings: his mom was condemned by staunch church members for letting her morals slide, and his dad was condemned by others for letting his child down.

An aside (slash angry rant) on deadnaming. I am still appalled when some church members expect someone to remember and recite “Member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints” and become genuinely upset about the use of the word “Mormon” while deadnaming people (i.e., using someone’s former name or pronouns after an identity transition) or refuse to use any of the several appropriate ways to refer to the LGBT+ community (e.g., LGBT, LGBT+, LGBTQ, LGBTQIA+, etc.). I cringed in church meetings when someone talked about “alphabet people”, “LBTQ”, or any other combination of letters. The LGBT+ community is huge and there are 4-7 letters to learn.

Less-Common Church Membership Status

While it seems to be becoming more acceptable, church members have long-condemned nuanced, less-active or inactive church members, calling them “lazy learners” or “fence-walkers”. I remember feeling morally superior as they sent young men to recruit our less-active friends to come to activities. It was made clear to me that people were to be exactly obedient to the church, and that meant giving it 100%. We talked in classes and meetings about people who were “falling away” or “giving in to the influence of the adversary”. Especially if someone sins visibly (i.e., swearing, drinking coffee, tea, or alcohol), the church has members believe they have been deceived by Satan’s lies and should be preached to.

Neurodiversity and Introversion

I am autistic and introverted. Church meetings and ordinances were a living hell. It was exhausting to act like a door-to-door salesman during two years of missionary work. It was painful to be baptized over and over for the dead or have water and oil dripped onto my head during initiatory ceremonies. It was humiliating to be expected to give equivalent talks and testimonies to everyone else. And I was one of the lucky ones: I have relatively low support needs and can “mask” well enough to fit in during church meetings.

A family member with ADHD has also shared her experience being judged and criticized for playing games, drawing, reading, or working on crafts during church meetings. Because it was painful to sit still and focus on the speakers in church, she always felt like a lower-class citizen among church members.

The church’s message is clear: if you are not an extroverted neurotypical person, you’re not welcome.

Early-returning Missionaries

Thankfully, the church seems to be trying to correct this issue, but so many missionaries who return early deal with shame, fear, and all the negative emotions that come from feeling like a failure.

Conclusion

It is, in my opinion, a damnable tragedy that the church, which claims to be the one and only church endorsed by Jesus Christ, causes so many people to feel unwelcome. This is especially sad when the New Testament tells stories of Jesus focusing on “the other”, from the woman taken in adultery to lepers and people with mental health challenges.

3.6 Acquaintanceships

This section is based entirely on anecdotal evidence, but I decided to include it anyway because I believe you might relate.

The church fosters communities based on shallow relationships in which there is a sense of obligation to one another but no real sense of community.

Poor Boundaries

Growing up in the church, I was expected to agree to everything. I remember being chastised by my parents and church leaders when I skipped a young men’s meeting because I didn’t feel well. I was never supposed to turn down a calling, since it was a divinely inspired “opportunity to serve”.

When someone, especially a generally-respected community member in a position of power, asked me for something, I was to say yes. While I imagine I would have been happy to help given the option, I never had a choice. In my opinion, it cheapened the experience of service by removing any voluntary aspect.

On my mission, I was to agree with my companion. This put me in dangerous situations and caused me to endure abuse and assault.

I was taught to never set boundaries. To this day, if I talk about boundaries with parents or church leaders, they often seem surprised or disappointed. Ward leaders made it clear they did not appreciate it when we resigned from teaching primary, even after we explained how painful it was given we recently learned we couldn’t have kids.

Soon after we stopped attending church meetings, I received the following email:

Hello Brother Taylor,

This is Brother ***.

I would like to set up a meeting for you and your wife with Bishop ***.

When would you be available?

thanks Sent from my iPad

I would like to point out that when I was a member of the church, it was natural to send and receive messages that assumed I was willing to meet with the bishop and simply asked when, not if I was available. I would also like to point out that my wife did not have a say; this email was sent to me, and my wife was simply expected to attend with me.

I responded with the following:

Thanks for reaching out. We’re not interested in meeting with the bishop.

Cheers,

Landon Taylor

I could not believe how good it felt to set a boundary. It was a small one; I had simply said no to a meeting. But as I thought back, I could not believe I had never felt like I could do that before.

As I have participated in the exmormon Reddit community, the thing I read most about is boundaries. The church clearly encourages poor boundaries, and leaving the church finally enables so many people to set and hold firm boundaries to protect themselves and their loved ones.

Marketing Opportunities

I have never encountered so much guerilla advertizing outside the church as I did within the church. Ward members would regularly talk to my wife about essential oils, Amway businesses, and other multi-level marketing schemes. Neighbors would use their status in the church to commit affinity fraud.

In my experience, when people are expected to act as a community but lack the connection that many communities foster (as is the case in every ward I’ve lived in), people start to find ways to exploit their community members for their own gain.

Transactional Relationships

Before we left, we thought we had several great friends in the ward. But since leaving, everything has been about the church. In response to the above message, the ward secretary (who I thought we were relatively good friends with) let us know they would miss us. Since then, the only communication we have received from him has consisted of invitations to church events.

The church fosters relationships based solely around the church. If a friend “falls away”, relationships dissolve and a person is effectively shunned, since the church teaches people to focus on converting people and bringing them back to the fold.

Conclusion

Since leaving the church, we have found that relationships with close friends (many of whom are nuanced members or ex-mormons) have significantly improved. There is no hidden agenda to convert someone, and we genuinely care about each other. We are so grateful for the supportive relationships we’ve had with close friends as we have left the church, and their unconditional love and support has made a world of difference for us. I don’t think I ever had a relationship like that within the church.

3.7 Missions

Trigger Warning: This section describes human trafficking and abuse.

I hope 1.2 My Story makes the harmful nature of missions abundantly clear. I would, however, like to briefly list a few specific ways missions hurt everyone, including missionaries, church members, and the general public.

Mental Health

I do not know where to start with this one. Missions are bad for mental health. Every single returned missionary I’ve talked with has reported having nightmares about getting another mission call. Missionaries frequently experience serious mental health issues, and the church offers them virtually no support.

While I have heard things are slowly improving, isolation from family, condemnation of self-care practices, and a lack of privacy or dignity slowly degrade a missionary’s sense of self. From personal experience, I cannot justify a loving God doing any of this to His children.

Opportunities for Abuse

I was abused and assaulted by more than one mission companion. I had no choice but to endure this abusive behavior until the mission president felt I needed a different companion. Throughout the world, missionaries endure horrifying abuse from companions, leaders, and occasionally community members, and the church does not lift a finger to protect them.

People sharing their experiences on Reddit confirm the widespread occurrence of abuse:

• “Mormon Mission PTSD
• “So I have heard that Missonaries are facing PTSD from their missions and it is being compared to military service?”
• “Why are some persons so traumatized by their missions?”

Human Trafficking

I am not suggesting that every missionary endures human trafficking. But I do suggest that my experience aligns with its generally understood definition:

• I did not believe I had a choice; there was no opportunity for informed consent before I signed up for a mission
• I did not purchase my flights or have any opportunity to select or modify them
• My passport was removed from my possession at every possible opportunity
• I was given a strict schedule to work 12- to 16-hour shifts seven days per week
• All of my decisions, especially major decisions, were made for me
• I had to defer to a church representative and could not move freely within the mission
• I was told I would lose God’s protection if I dared disobey a strict set of rules
• I was not provided adequate food or medical attention
• I could not go home of my own volition, and if I asked to be sent home, I was to be subjected to a degrading phone call between myself, the mission president, and my parents, despite being a legal adult
• My communication was limited to official, church-provided channels, and it was made clear that all of my communication was monitored
• I was told I would face serious disciplinary action if I did not perfectly comply with rules and the mission work schedule
• My productivity was closely monitored, and lapses in productivity were met with disciplinary action
• Mission companions were encouraged to invade privacy, including by searching others’ belongings and confiscating any unapproved material
• I was not permitted to read, watch, or listen to anything that wasn’t on an official, church-produced list

The list could go on, but I feel these points are sufficiently damning. Even before I left the church, I determined that I would never encourage my own children to serve a mission. I could not stand the idea of putting them through anything like my experience.

Westernization and Colonization

While I am not an expert in the effects missionaries have on populations around the world, it was clear to me that missions promoted Western cultures and beliefs throughout the world. In Honduras, it was made clear to us that we were to convert Lamanites to the church to help them fix their ancestors’ mistakes. Around the world, missionaries teach people of many races and cultures that the one true way to live aligns perfectly with a white, Christian, conservative lifestyle that was prominent around the early 1800s in the US.

The church glorifies the US and continues to propagate the idea that it is superior in culture, policy, and any other significant way to the rest of the world. I am deeply ashamed that I contributed to this effect, and I suggest that the church is taking advantage of poor and developing areas to build its membership base.

Conclusion

I can think of no better way to say this: missions are horrifying. I will spend the rest of my life recovering from my own mission trauma, and the church continues to traffic, abuse, and neglect its missionaries. I do not believe this work is inspired by God, and I believe it alone could serve as damning evidence the church is not true.

3.8 Sex and Sexuality

Trigger Warning: This section describes many aspects of sexuality, including sexual assault.

My wife has worked as a sexual assault therapist for several years, so I have deferred to her for advice on this section. While she is very respectful of clients’ privacy and never shares any identifying details, her experiences have helped her guide our understanding of sexuality, and it has become clear to us that the church does not care about its members’ well-being, especially their sexual health.

Sexualization

Everything is sexualized in the church. At least that’s how it felt as a young male teenager. I was always confused by the strict modesty standards given to young women (i.e., covered shoulders, stomachs, and knees) when the young men were never taught about modesty. In one priests’ quorum lesson, we discussed the importance of only dating modest women and teaching our future daughters to dress modestly. Girls as young as 2 or 3 were taught that it was evil to wear anything remotely revealing, while young men were shamed for wanting to wear a shirt during swimming activities.

I was criticized during this lesson for asking why God would have different standards for men and women. I was taught that because Eve tempted Adam, God made a woman’s body tempting to men. Thus, women had to cover their bodies to keep men from thinking inappropriate thoughts. I briefly wondered why we weren’t taught not to sexualize women.

This never sat right with me, but I brushed it off. After all, my Y-chromosome prevented me from experiencing much of the shame and guilt that comes with being born into a female body as a member of the church.

Sex is Bad (until it isn’t)

The church encourages people to develop hard-wired neural networks defining sex as an evil sin. Teenagers are warned over and over of the evil of sex. For decades, the church promoted The Miracle of Forgiveness and To Young Men Only, both of which condemn any sort of exploration of sexuality.

Because sex is evil, parents do not teach their children about sex. I learned about masturbation from a bishop at 12 years old. I learned about the mechanics of sex on the bus to a marching band competition at 15. I learned at 17 that birth control existed when a high school biology teacher went around school policy by talking about animal reproduction. I remember wondering what was so funny to my classmates when she mentioned that “in case we weren’t aware such technology existed, if a lady horse wasn’t ready to have a child, she could go to a horse convenience store and pick up a horse condom, or she could talk to the horse doctor to take a pill or get an implant. I learned about the concept of consent at 20 years old when I returned from my mission and had to take a sexual respect training as part of university onboarding. I learned about the importance of being equal partners in sexual interactions during a frantic web search the week before my wedding. Sex was such a shameful topic in the church that people seemed afraid to teach me about it.

Further, when people are not educated about sex, they make mistakes. I am infuriated to hear about people who experienced sexual assault not because of malice, but because their spouse never learned how to get consent. It is distressing to know that so many men are taught in the church that they own and are to dominate their spouses, including and especially in sexual relationships.

After potentially decades of shame and guilt alongside a deeply-ingrained perspective that sex is evil, as soon as someone is married, they are encouraged to start having kids. My heart goes out to countless church members who have experienced anything from disinterest to rape because of conditioning within the church. Because people are hard-wired to think sex is evil, many of our friends (especially women) have mentioned how traumatic it is to go from complete abstinence to an intense sexual relationship overnight.

Children and Youth

From an extremely young age, children and youth are shamed in the church for having healthy sexual feelings and experiences. It is heartbreaking to think about the trauma, fear, and shame that come from the church’s approach to sexuality. It is much more heartbreaking to see how little the church cares about protecting people from sexual violence. The church creates an environment in which abuse thrives, and it is unacceptable that church leaders continue to show nonchalance about these critical issues.

LGBT+ Issues

I have brought this up throughout this document, so I will try to avoid repeating myself. Simply put, people are shamed for experiencing “same-sex attraction” or feeling like they were meant to be a different gender than they were born. It has been painful to watch friends and family members suffer because of the church’s policies, and the church seems to have made its position clear. Church leaders do not care about the LGBT+ community any more than they have to to save face.

Conclusion

The church’s attitude toward sex and sexuality is unhealthy and extremely traumatizing. I cannot believe in a God who promotes such unhealthy attitudes, and I cannot support an organization that appears so aloof to the suffering of innocent individuals. Like every other section in this epistle, I believe the church’s attitude toward sexuality alone is enough to justify that the church is not true.

3.9 We Miss You

Leaving the church was the best decision I’ve ever made.

Falling Away

The church does everything it can to control the narrative surrounding why people leave. Perhaps you’ve heard or even believed one of the following rationales:

• They are a “lazy learner” and didn’t put in the work to stay
• They left because they wanted to sin
• They “fell away” because they were distracted by the world
• They gave in to Satan’s influence
• They got caught up in anti-mormon nonsense
• They were offended at people in the ward

It is interesting, then, to see self-reported statistics on why people leave. Data at Exmormon Stats (retrieved on 30 December 2023) indicates the following are the real reasons people leave. Out of 1026 respondents:

• 409 left due to “Historical Reasons”, “Experience-Based Reasons”, or “Science”
• 288 left due to “Ethical/Moral Reasons”, “Policy Reasons”, “Cultural Reasons”, or “Socially Progressive Reasons”
• 257 left due to “Doctrinal Reasons”, “Theological Reasons”, “Foundational Scriptures”, “Spiritual Reasons”, or “Epistemological Reasons”
• 72 left due to “Family/Social Reasons”, “Leadership”, “Were Never Converted”, or “Other Reasons”

I propose, then, that most people who leave the church likely miss the community. They likely wanted to believe with all their hearts, but the facts meant their belief system didn’t work.

This same survey is encouraging in another way: of 106 people who answered the question, only 4 are less happy after leaving the church; 102 people are at least as happy as they used to be, while 85 of those people are happier than when they were members.

Shunning

Church members are not officially taught to shun those who leave. But within families and local communities, there is a significant stigma associated with leaving the church. Language like “falling away” leads people to view people who leave as less-than, as if they were weak and were deceived by Satan.

While communities within the church dissolved when we left, we have been able to make new friends and significantly improve many of our existing relationships. So if you are considering leaving but are worried about the social life, there are so many good people outside the church. You will find a loving, welcoming community among ex-mormons or any other (wholesome) group you decide to associate with.

Manipulation

Anyone who has served on a ward council or participated in missionary work understands how hard the church works to get people back. People will say they missed you at church functions despite not giving you the time of day while you were attending. Missionaries regularly make efforts to contact “inactives” to bring them and their heathen friends back to the church.

After leaving, I am much better able to see just how manipulative the church trains its members to be. In our resignation letters, my wife and I both decided to mention that we want no contact from the church, as we have already experienced manipulative efforts to get us back.

If you have lived in the church and are feeling conflicted, know this: they do not care about you and they will not miss you. You are a drop in their pond, and if you return, their only joy is an improved reactivation statistic. Just like it did when I left, and just like it has done when millions of others have left, the church will hardly notice your absence.

In contrast, I would like to remark about a new experience I have had. It is incredible, fulfilling, and joyous to have friends who truly care. Friends who really worry about you, friends who love you because of who you are, not in spite of who you are. Friends who don’t have any kind of hidden judgmental or missionary agenda.

I See the Light

You know that scene in Tangled when Rapunzel finally feels free from Mother Gothel? When she sings “at last I see the light”? That’s how I’ve felt since my resignation. I feel like my eyes have been opened and I finally understand how horrible the church was to me. I can see so much more of the beauty and wonder life has to offer. I have been able to recover from much of my trauma. It truly is like the fog has lifted, and it’s warm and real and bright.

Like I have said a number of times, my life is so much better now that I have left. I have never felt this happy and joyful. I have never felt so much peace. My relationships (especially between my wife and me) are more meaningful than ever. I finally feel like I can be a kind, generous, gracious, honest, good person.

So take a deep breath. You’ve read a lot. Over 50,000 words by my last count. I know a lot of it has been negative. But there is a light at the end of the tunnel. Make your own decision. Be your own person. Use the agency you’ve been taught God blessed you with to decide for yourself what you believe.

My Advice

If you’re a lifelong member of the church, I understand you’ve been taught not to accept counsel from non-believers. But if you’re feeling betrayed, manipulated, or confused, know that these are normal feelings. You may be experiencing what people have long called “the dark night of the soul”. Know that you are completely in control here. You are not alone; many have gone before you and many will follow.

To you, I pass on the advice that saved my life: get the hell out and don’t look back.