If women had the priesthood

I have seen some buzz lately surrounding the idea of women being able to hold the priesthood. My initial reaction is that they should be able to hold the priesthood, and be able to hold any calling men do in the church. However, after I think about it for a while I come to realize that it actually may not be such a good idea.

The reasons I can think that it might not be such a good idea to give women the priesthood is because it would likely result in some pretty major changes in the church. For one thing, if girls got the priesthood at 12 years old, as the boys do,  then boys and girls would be passing the sacrament together. This would encourage more interaction between boys and girls and would only result in more teen pregnancy. I also think it would lead to girls feeling equal to boys and, since girls are superior to boys intellectually and emotionally, boys would quickly feel inferior to their superior priesthood holding counterparts. This feeling of inferiority would only serve to denigrate those boys that may already have low self-esteem to begin with.

Also, since holding the priesthood requires wearing dress slacks, white shirts and ties, and girls would look kind of silly in white shirts and ties (not to mention they are not allowed to wear pants), this would just not work.

If women held the priesthood then that would mean they could give priesthood blessings. I don't know how women would be able to come up with the same kinds of things that men are able to receive from the spirit when it comes to giving blessings. Again, all of their blessings pronounced would probably be far superior to what men have been able to muster up so this would only lead to further feelings of inferiority by men.

I'm trying to imagine if women were also able to hold the high and responsible callings in the church like bishop and stake president. I can't even begin to imagine what that might be like. Women conducting meetings?! I'm not sure they would be able to handle such a great responsibility. They would probably want to make drastic changes to the way the meetings are held and the current meetings would just end up wholly unrecognizable in comparison. This would obviously result in more women giving talks and prayers and such and, well, this would just make more men feel left out.

There might also be very big changes to current programs such as home and visiting teaching. The good news is, men would be able to phone their families and have it count as a home teaching visit, the bad news is meals and/or treats would likely be mandatory as part of the message to the families when they were visited. There might also be more prayers uttered to Heavenly Mother and her sacred name and position would just become common and ordinary and not special and completely sacred as it is now.

Then there are the changes that would likely occur if women were to eventually be called to the high and holy callings in the church as apostles or prophets. This would just simply not do. How could women be expected, or even able, to devote the time needed to such callings? With all their housework, cooking, cleaning and taking care of children and grandchildren, they simply would not have time to engage fully in such callings. This would ultimately lead to a downfall in the quality of the revelations received and the whole church would likely suffer as a result. The members might actually decide to leave the church in greater numbers than they already are and the church may not actually survive such a change.

Of course, all of the reasons listed above do not take into account the effect such a change would have on the membership of the church almost immediately should such a change be instituted. When the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (now Community of Christ) made the change to allow women to hold to the priesthood they lost nearly 60-70% of their membership almost overnight. The modern LDS church would likely not be able to survive such a loss to their membership numbers.

For all of the reasons listed I don't think allowing women to hold the priesthood would really be such a good idea. Of course, I am writing all of this tongue in cheek. Women should hold the priesthood simply because it is right for such a thing to happen. Yes changes would occur, but all of them would only be good.

What do you think? Should women be able to hold priesthood callings and, if they were, what sorts of changes do you think would be the result?

A Letter to Believers

In the course of losing my faith, there were, it seems, some who wanted to continue to correspond with me to try and convince me otherwise. I have pretty much lost interest in attempting to communicate with these people much anymore. However, I do understand the need to have information shared by others in a similar situation when one is going through this enormous paradigm shift. Sometimes it can seem like you are all alone, especially when surrounded mostly by those who seek to maintain their faith at all costs – even to the destroying of the individual who is questioning their faith.

In this spirit, I present a response to a true believer that I came up with when I was more inclined to do so. I had gone over much with this person and this was the latest round of attempts to reason with this person that I sought to share;

So, if the church is completely true as I understand it, then the church claims to have the answers to the question, "What is the purpose of life?" Correct?

The Sunday school answers I was given to this question is that our purpose is two-fold. One purpose was to come to earth to receive a physical body. As far as why this is important, we are told it is because we need a physical body to be able to become like God who has a body of flesh and bone. The other purpose of our mortal existence, we are told, is to see if we will do all things whatsoever the Lord has commanded us. In other words, we are being tested on our faithfulness and diligence in keeping the commandments of God.

So my question is, if a purpose of our existence is to be tried and tested, then we should be able to assume we will all receive a grade of some sort depending on our individual performance in these tests administered while in mortality? Is that a fair assumption? Otherwise, why say we are being “tried and tested”? Both of these have meaning to us here. To be tried implies that there may be some sort of trial to determine guilt or innocence. If guilty, then a punishment is affixed. If innocent, than freedom and advancement are presumed to be the consequence. Tests are also something we are very familiar with from school. Tests imply being asked questions, we give our answers to see if we have retained the knowledge previously given in lectures or readings. If that is true, then is it also safe to assume that some people will fare better in these tests/trials than others?

If that is true, can we also assume that the significance of these tests is pretty heavy as far as it relates to our standing in the eternities and that our performance here on earth may have eternal (and possibly unchangeable) consequences as far as our reward (or punishment) in the eternities is concerned? Now, I admit, this may be a pretty big assumption, but the alternative is that this life is actually pretty unimportant in the grand scheme of things, which seems to go contrary to everything leaders of the church have to share when discussing such things. The message seems to be that this life is of paramount importance.

This is my understanding and a reason that I used to believe that I had to do everything in my power to make sure I was passing the tests (keeping all the commandments possible, including all of my church duties and assignments and callings, etc.) so that I could assure a standing in the eternities that would allow me to have the greatest opportunities afforded me in the eternal hereafter. I really believed that if I wasn't doing everything in my power to try and achieve obedience (and thus pass the tests) that I could fail and end up in eternal misery and damnation (i.e. being cut off from eternal progression, stuck forever as an angel or ministering servant in heaven). I certainly did not want to end up in eternal misery. That would suck.

So if all this is true (at least as far as I understand it), then there is a very real chance that people will end up separated from each other in the eternities due to their performance in this life. Is that a correct understanding? Is there anywhere that I am off so far?

If it is true that people will end up in different "kingdoms" due to their performance in this life, is it not also possible that people from the same families will end up in different places? Including being in kingdoms where one family member will be prohibited from going and seeing other family members (in higher kingdoms) because they are stuck in a lower kingdom? If that is true, then how can the church preach the significance of being with your family for eternity when that will not be the case for everyone?

When I asked one person this sort of question, the response was that we do not know how everyone will be judged. Their feeling was that we cannot say with any degree of certainty where someone will end up in the hereafter, because none of us is entitled to judge anyone else. However, if the church is true as I understand it, should I not be concerned about what I have been taught that I WILL be judged on? The fact remains that I WILL be judged at some point. Just because you can’t say how I will be judged, I HAVE TO make sure that I perform in the areas that I am surely going to be judged on (as does, according to what the church teaches, everyone else who has the same understanding). I think that is a fair assumption. So even though this person, nor anyone else, will condemn me (or, at least, they are told not to) and sentence me to eternal misery (except The Lord, of course, and possibly my Bishop), I WILL be held accountable for what I have been taught (and decided to ignore or deny or whatever) and the consequences for which WILL BE very real to me.

I am of the feeling that as it pertains to me individually and my overall accountability for my behavior and ultimate judgment, I have come to the conclusion that any judgment of my behavior or belief (or lack thereof) would not be suitable based on the limited amount of knowledge I have been given thus far in my life (as far as the certainty of, or ability to know for certain in the secular sense of obtaining knowledge) as to whether or not what the church teaches contains all the answers I need to be be adequately judged in the hereafter. Therefore personally, I can rest soundly at night knowing that if I die, and if it is true that I will be judged based on my behavior, that I will be able to confidently say that since I was placed in a world where I was introduced to tangible matter and concrete logic and reasoning, with no memory of any former existence, that I did the best I could with the information that I was able to obtain within the realm of reality that I knew existed for certain. I will also be able to confidently say that if I chose not to follow the dictates of a religion, it was because evidence for its truthfulness was not able to be obtained according to a sufficient measure of truthfulness within the sphere of reality I was familiar with in the circumstances I knew to be real (and verifiable) in mortality.

The problem with this, of course, is that even though I can rest at night (even if I choose to ignore what the church teaches and not go and not concern myself with all of it) members of my family and loved ones are not so fortunate. They continually are kept up at night worrying (even though it may not manifest itself in everyday communication, the reality of it is certainly extant) about me and whether or not I will be allowed to be with them in the eternities. According to the church, if I maintain my present course and beliefs (or lack of) than I will be sentenced to eternal misery in a lower kingdom and they will have to figure out how to go on without me around. How does this worry allow people to get on with life and enjoy all that life has to offer? I don’t think it is possible for family members to be sufficiently assuaged in their grief over my possible eternal circumstances. That’s why mothers of wayward children say they feel like a failure. That’s why believing spouses and children look on apostates with sadness and sorrow when they don’t accompany them to church and I think this is the ultimate reason that many, many couples that marry in the church (or temple mostly) who experience a spouse that questions, and ultimately leaves the church, end in divorce. The value of endeavoring to maintain a lasting relationship with the person that is loved becomes irrelevant and meaningless when one’s eternal prospect for a lasting relationship is possibly in jeopardy. Some believing spouses cling to the hope that what Paul said in 1 Corinthians (7:10-16) is really true that the non-believing spouse is sanctified by the believing spouse and that they will somehow be able to give their spouse a hall pass (because of their faithfulness and performance in the mortal tests and church adherence) to be able to enter their kingdom of reward with their spouse. However, it seems to me that this as a source of hope can tend to wane in the face of all the other things being said by church leaders. The ramifications of non-belief are extremely hard to ignore. Those that can choose to ignore them ought to be highly regarded, but the non-believing spouse may have a hard time believing that the eternal consequences of their behavior actually can be ignored by the believer.

Sometimes the non-believing spouse can’t help but wonder what will happen when the believing spouse decides to stop ignoring the possible ramifications? What about the children of such relationships? I know people that love me will never really give up on me, but the thought has to occur to people at some point, “What if Facsimilogos never changes his ways and never decides that the church is where it’s at?” People who face this sort of question find discomfort in it and tend to largely ignore it. But the question remains, nevertheless. What answer can the believing spouse come up with?

I think most believers simply choose not to answer this question. Instead choosing to say “I don’t know” or “who can really say what will happen in the hereafter?”. But, if pressed, how should people really answer this question? I think it is just too painful to think that someone you care about will not be around in the hereafter. Which is funny to me because the church is supposed to provide so much comfort through answers to life’s difficult questions. Unfortunately, however, where it is supposed to provide the ultimate comfort, it falls flat on its face. I think that’s why you get general authorities saying over the pulpit that wayward children WILL come back into the fold at some point (if not in this life, then most assuredly in the hereafter). My question is, what is their scriptural basis for that teaching?

I guess D&C 76: 110 could be used to justify that because it says that everyone who only achieved a telestial reward, after they have suffered eternal torment, will all bow their knee and confess that Jesus is for real. Isn’t that special? After your loved one has suffered for what seems like an eternity (or possibly for all eternity...not sure which one), they will eventually decide that the suffering just isn’t worth it anymore and then decide to come around. It seems to me that our eternal reward is just that, eternal.

I gather from D&C 76 (verse 33 for sons of perdition and verse 105 for the not so valiant or ignorant) about the assignment of kingdoms that there WILL NOT be any upgrades. No matter what the situation, no matter how much weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth occurs, you will not be eligible for eternal bliss if that is not what you are entitled to based on the grade you get for your performance on the tests administered during mortality. I wonder why those who believe sometimes don’t seem to take things more seriously? It really is that serious, isn’t it? If so, this is what continues to keep me from being able to believe in it.

Anyway, I look forward to your thoughts. Thanks for your ongoing concern and consideration for me and my situation. You have been very kind where others have not and I do sincerely appreciate your kindness and efforts to keep lines of communication open. You certainly deserve to be commended for that.

Sincerely,
Facsimilogos

Missionary work

Missionary WORK! The work of bringing souls to the corporate entity known as the Intellectual Reserve. I was brought up to think that missionary work was the most noble and worthwhile pursuit. Now I think of it as a nuisance. The reason I now think of it this way is because I now realize what it really is! It is door to door salesmanship. But it is not just any ordinary product being pushed (nay heartily wedged) through my door, rather it is acceptance that your life must suck since you are not as happy as those two clean cut, 1960's era, IBM reps standing at your door. Since you don't enjoy their level of happiness, they are more than willing to share with you what will bring you up to their level. They have a message of joy, hope and peace that will change you forever!

It will change you all right...it will make you a self righteous, ethnocentric prick who is willing to forsake friends and family in order to lay up a mansion for your self in heaven. A heaven where a man can have multiple wives and spend eternity making babies to populate his own world and start the cycle of life on a new planet all over again. Who needs close friends and relatives to be by your side, when you can just make more of those affiliates through procreation! Procreation is apparently the key to eternal happiness. As long as it isn't enjoyed too much, and only really used for making babies, then it is OK anyway.

Here's what I don't understand; so members of the LDS church are quick to point out that if a person leaves the church, that they can't seem to leave the church alone. Gee, I wonder why that could be? So let me get this straight. Members of the church work themselves into a frenzy over the idea of spreading the gospel to all those ungodly heathens that apparently would accept the truth (that they perceive themselves to have) if they just knew about it, but then whine and complain when former members attempt to share a message with them about how screwed up their beliefs are?! Life's a bitch ain't it. The thing I want to say to members of the church when they say that I can't just leave their precious beliefs alone is that I'll stop when they stop. I'll leave you alone as soon as you stop knocking on my door with your smug and certain passive aggressive insults designed to make you feel better, but designed to make me feel bad until I agree with you. You can't have it both ways folks. I guess now I understand why it seems that churches attempt to inoculate their members by telling them how ridiculous and weird the LDS church is in their beliefs. They are fighting fire with fire.

It never really occurred to me as I was out for two years going door to door attempting to convert others that, while the people who let me in their door were just being nice or genuinely wanting to hear the nice message that I was advertising, that what I was really doing was telling them that their beliefs were wrong and that I had what they needed. How pretentious and arrogant of me to think that! I had no idea what kinds of things these people had been through in their spiritual quest. Nor did I care. My only goal was to get them to associate any good feelings they may have had in their life up to that point, with what I was trying to sell them on. I manipulated those people for my own selfish purposes. I'll say, once the idea of you having the ONE AND ONLY TRUE CHURCH ON THE FACE OF THE WHOLE EARTH is abandoned, I have begun to see how selfish and arrogant this whole attitude I was sportin' really is.

And, of course, I wasn't anti-anything. I was only anti-everybody outside of Mormonism. And, while I didn't usually resort to ad hominem attacks of all the other religions, I did essentially tell people that they were wrong for believing what they did. And, I had all the reasons laid out for why they were wrong. Here's the short list;

- They didn't have a mouthpiece for God that they believed was on the earth today to receive God's precious counsel for them - aka profit (spelling intentional). (No they just believed that God would communicate with them directly if He had something to say...silly rabbit)

- They didn't have a cool story about how Joseph Smith got an answer to his prayer, which included Godly and angelic visitations and the restoration of God's REAL church on the earth. (No, they don't buy Joseph's story when they learn that it all came from a known con-man, whose story changed over the years, and whose motives were power and lots of sex)

- They didn't have a true understanding of who God is and who God wants us to be. (No, they had their understanding which, truth be told, is equally valid and perhaps even more valid than my naive concept interpreted through rigid orthodoxy)

- They didn't have additional scripture. The Book of Mormon, D&C and Pearl of Great Price represent proof that God must love Mormons more than everybody else. (No, they don't accept additional scripture...especially when that scripture is mostly a plagiarism of the Bible and the rest a fantasy about the early 19th century version of explaining where the American Indians came from)

- They didn't have legitimate priesthood authority to exercise God's power. (No, they don't need some permission slip to believe that they can see God working in their lives)

- They didn't have temples where eternally required ordinances can be performed for everyone living and dead. (No, they just have their plain old houses of worship where no one is excluded from coming and partaking because they haven't paid enough to the church. Again, the perception and teachings of the church are what form the need for these edifices to be only for the privileged [aka "worthy"] and the work that goes on in them. In fact, many find what goes on in the temple to be offensive when they find out that their dead relatives are being posthumously converted to Mormonism and the living are being pressured to go along with something that they aren't even allowed to know until after they make the commitment to proceed)

No, outsiders to the Mormon faith don't have any of these things, so their beliefs must be fallen and in the dark. Too bad all those poor souls that have hopes and fears just like all of us can't be respected enough to be listened to for what they have to offer. Instead they are continually put down and criticized as inferior to the further light and knowledge contained in the teachings of the LDS church.

Mormons really love missionary work alright...as long as that work isn't being performed on them. If that is the case they feel it OK to ostracize, censor and label you as someone who is an "Anti". Hmmm, this kind of makes all the other religions that put up with the antics of the LDS in their missionary efforts look very charitable, kind and forgiving of those who leave their faith for the lies of the Mormon church. How Christian of them.

Letter to my LDS family and friends

To my LDS family and friends,

I am writing this letter to get a few things off my chest. First of all, yes, I am a doubter. I have encountered some things that do not make sense to me that I grew up being taught as fact from a very young age. You see, I believed that when I was taught that the LDS church represented the “true” church of God on the earth, that it was ACTUALLY the “TRUE” church of God on the earth. I believed that this statement had EVERYTHING backing it up. However, I don't even want to talk about that here. I want to talk about something else. I want to talk about you.

You see, I believed the people that I grew up around, and looked up to very much, in the church were sincerely striving, albeit imperfectly, to live their lives according to the way Jesus taught people to live. I believed they would love and show empathy for those who had struggles in their lives. I believed that they would be the first ones to extend a hand of fellowship and show love and concern for the downtrodden, the poor and, yes, even the wicked that cursed and fought against them. I believed this because this is what Jesus taught. I read the bible and tried to better understand how Jesus would want me to live. I read the part where he said to love those that hate you and spitefully use you. I read those words and I believed them. I believed that those kinds of teachings of love and patience and kindness were, in fact, the most rewarding teachings that I could hope to cultivate in myself.

However, I also had to reconcile this with the other things I was taught in the church. Things like people who are not members of the church are missing out on so much in life or that people who leave the church only do so because they are in Satan's grasp and only want to sin. That or they were just offended and they are the ones that need to just get over themselves. 

I think these teachings taught me to look at others in their differences of opinion as wrong. I had the truth, I thought, so the truth I had could cure all of their troubles. I could show these people love and concern and empathy and, as long as I didn’t listen to them in their wicked and Satan influenced manipulations, I could show that love to them and my testimony and belief structure would survive. However, fully trying to live with this knowledge meant that I sometimes had to ignore the really outspoken among this group of people that were critical of the church and sometimes even remove all communication with them if they seemed to push the issue...but, I felt justified in this. I believed this was what God would want me to do. God would want me to remain pure and un-defiled so that I could remain a worthy vessel for His works to be manifest. 

I believed that God’s love would somehow show through my attempts to limit communication with these people and my attempts to show love and compassion would ultimately be borne out in what I was doing by cutting off all communication with these people. I believed that eventually God would show them the error of their ways and hopefully they would eventually come to see God’s truth. And, if I could be just a small instrument in bringing that to pass, then all the better. Then I could justify what I had done and even feel good about it. I used this way of thinking to simply abandon a lot of good people and their influence and I am here to tell you that I regret this.

Of course I have always had to temper this way of thinking with the desire to spread the good news of the gospel with all those that would listen. This desire caused me to feel bad about all the doors that were slammed in my face while I served my mission but, what I have only recently come to realize is, perhaps that response to me and my message of “love” for them was deserved in their opinion. Maybe they felt I deserved to be treated that way (slam the door in my face) because I felt OK about treating others that way (or telling them that I had the truth and they did not – no matter how much they thought differently than I did). Maybe all the supposed “hatred” that I perceived to be coming from all those outside my faith was merely a reflection of the hatred I was already showing to those that did not agree with me.

I am here to tell you that this is not just an imagined thought that I have had, it is very real. I have now seen it firsthand. I have now been on the receiving end of some very mean and spiteful communication (not to mention effectual disowning, abandonment and disregard) from people that I dearly love and respect very much (even very close family and friends) because I dared to publicly express my doubt about my faith and seek answers to some very troubling questions. Unfortunately, it seems that the church I was brought up in, and trusted as an absolutely reliable source of divine information, is unable to effectively promote anything other than a stance that does nothing but continue to encourage this kind of thinking. Family members and close friends are still being disenfranchised, disowned and abandoned because they dared to question the beliefs they have always been taught are true and unquestionable.

This needs to stop.

I think this was the message that Dieter F. Uchtdorf was attempting to convey at the last LDS General Conference.

Unfortunately, there are many who will hear that message (and many more messages like them) and still cling to old ways of thinking. While I cannot do anything but express my sincere love for these people, I just hope that you are not one of them. It is profoundly unfortunate in my mind that there are many who will not even get a chance to read this letter because they have already put me out of their minds and lives forever. This makes me so sad.

All I can say now is that I still want to be your friend. I still want to be regarded in the same warm and loving manner that you regard your most loved family members. I hope that eventually forgiveness for the perceived wrongs I have done in your mind will come. I have already forgiven you for shunning me and believe I can honestly say that I hold no ill will towards any of you.

All that I ask is that you accept me for who I am and not who you believe I should be. I don’t know if this is too much to ask, but I hope that my request will be considered. I am open to having conversation. I want to know so much and I am sorry if my questions are perceived as “anti” or not in accordance with church teachings or standards. I am a human being and I am trying to think on my own and make sure I am not being led astray. 

Just like you, I imagine that feeling loved and accepted are of the utmost desire to you. I am no different. Granted, I like attempting to explore difficult issues and express difficult questions, but I am human nonetheless. I care about what you think and I care about what you think of me.

I hope we can be friends again.

For you who have not abandoned me, or cut me off, because of my doubting heart, Thank You! You have shown true Christ-like love and compassion and I appreciate it. I think those that have continued dialogue with me, in spite of my questions and doubts, have realized that my questions are not really born out of a desire to just be critical, but of genuine concern and desire to know how things all fit together in the world. I have learned that my criticism can be very pointy and sharp at times, but it is not because I am possessed by the devil, it is because I have so much concern and sometimes feel disappointment over not being able to find better explanations to my questions. I also have the personal issue of not liking the idea of agreeing to disagree, but am coming to realize that sometimes that is the only way friendships can be maintained. I also think that those who have put up with me and my questions have learned to recognize the need for agreeing to disagree in spite of my dislike for it.

Unfortunately, I do not believe my words here will have much effect on those who have already chosen to cut me off and effectively disown me or un-friend me on FaceBook or block my posts. My message here is geared primarily towards those who have seen some of my recent posts and may have the idea that they should un-friend me. I only hope my words here can do something to cause you to reconsider. I just hope you will consider that actions taken to un-friend me are seen as shunning and are hurtful.

If you are going to un-friend me, at least have the wherewithal to let me know what you disagree with me about or what I have posted that has been perceived as attacking you or your faith. Then I can work on being more considerate of those feelings in the future. Again, I have no idea what impact my words may have here, but I suspect they will have very little, if any, impact at all. I can only hope that my attempt to express how I feel here may cause you to reconsider how you treat others. I hope I can make some difference in making the world a more tolerant, loving and accepting place for all of us. I hope this letter can be seen as a small step in that direction.

Thank you for your love, patience and kindness.

Sincerely,

Facsimilogos

I've found a new church!

I found a new church! I am so excited to tell you about it! It turns out to be the original church God established even before Adam and Eve. Here are the core tenets of my new church;

We believe that we have the one true path of happiness in this life and the life to come after death.

We believe that all other churches have lost things along the way of history and that only we have all the truths necessary (as revealed directly by God herself) to be able to get back and be able to dwell in God's presence again.

We believe that the name of God is extremely important, but it is a knowledge that not everyone can actually handle with the appropriate amount of respect and care, so the actual name is reserved only for a very few on the earth.

We believe that this life is a bag of tricks that makes absolutely no sense until we leave this life and can see the label on the outside of the bag.

We believe that everyone can know the true sacred name of God, and that God will tell Her very elect Name to those who truly desire to receive it, which is the way to know the truth of the sacred name of God. The teachings of Ma'at say that all those who receive the sacred name of God will know Her name and therefore know the truth of Her church and teachings.

We believe that everyone can make it to get back to Aarula (the proper name of forever life with the sacred name of God - abbreviated to SNOG - in the afterlife), however, there are a few conditions. These conditions include; 1. You must be a certified member of the society of the sacred name of God (SNOG) 2. You must have entered into the sacred hall of Ma'at to receive all the secret rituals of Aarula (they are secret because they need to be...if they fall into the hands of Seth - the most evil of all the enemies of God) then all would be lost. All cannot be lost! 3. You will be rewarded according to your level of devotion and faithfulness to the principles of Ma'at. The more devoted you are, the more reward you will receive in Aarula. 4. All others who do not choose to follow the path to Aarula will not receive happiness in this life or in the world to come. 5. You must pay 9% of your income to the brotherhood of Ma'at. 6. You must submit to the will of the sacred name of God as interpreted, and given to us, by the sisterhood of Ma'at. We believe that some* (*likely many, actually, since the SNOG church only has a few members worldwide, but it is growing very rapidly for being the only true church on the face of the whole earth) will be cast off forever and never enjoy the happiness to be found in Aarula, but it must be this way because that is the will of the sacred name of God.

We believe that goodness and benevolence are the true characteristics of the sacred name of God and we should constantly strive to obtain them both.

We believe that all will have the opportunity, at some point, to learn the sacred name of God, however if they reject it they will be forever caught in a large black hole, where not even light can escape their fate. I do hope that my family members will eventually see the light of Aarula and choose to join me in the hall of Ma'at someday. Sometimes I get sad when I think that there will be many who I will not get to spend forever in Aarula with, but I know that the sacred name of God will make it all worthwhile. I will likely be given a replacement family in Aarula that I will come to love just as much as my family here on earth...in time anyway. I will be so much happier than I am now, having to associate with so many unbelievers now. If you have been called up and had revealed to you the sacred name of God, I would invite you to join me at the church of SNOG. I invite all to come and partake of the goodness that is found there. We meet once a week in the SNOG building downtown at 10am. I hope to see you there!

Letter to my parents

Here is a copy of a letter that I found that I wrote to my parents back in May 2009. I never sent it to them because I had a discussion with them shortly after that pretty much went over most of the things in the letter. For your reading enjoyment here is my letter:

Dear Mom & Dad,

I wanted to let you know what has been going on with me over the past year. 3-4 years ago my co-worker (who is LDS) and I got into some lengthy conversations about the church. He basically told me that he didn’t believe in the church anymore and I tried to give him every response I could muster to respond to his concerns. I thought I did pretty well and I remained satisfied with the answers I had come up with to his questions and we ultimately decided to agree to disagree. Well, about a year ago things started to bubble up a little bit for me. On my own, I began formulating questions to things that had been nagging me for some time. Of course, I had become very good at ignoring or putting on the shelf things that were uncomfortable or that did not add up for me. Until one Sunday I was pondering the pictures that had been taken from the Egyptian papyri discovered and printed in the Book of Abraham.

I really sat and pondered those pictures and began to have doubts that they were really representative of the life of Abraham as Joseph Smith had represented. I began to wonder if they might actually have a different meaning. I wondered if there was any other interpretation of the facsimiles and the hieroglyphs contained in them that might go against what Joseph Smith had taught or if he was accurate in his translation. Well, looking through the illustrated book of Egyptian archeology we got for Christmas a few years back (I think from you, actually) the same elements of the pictures in the Book of Abraham have been found in other places in artifacts and what not. I also learned that scholars are now able to read Egyptian with ease thanks to all the historical work done, artifacts unearthed and the discovery of the Rosetta stone back in 1799. What I found was that there was very little accuracy to the translation that Joseph Smith presented in the Book of Abraham of the facsimiles. This discovery, of course, led to questioning the authenticity of the text of the Book of Abraham and to Joseph’s ability to translate altogether. The shadow cast in my mind was very dark and very deep.

Needless to say, this question led me on a quest to find out everything I could to formulate a better understanding of who Joseph Smith really was and whether or not all of the foundational events in church history could be called into question. Well, about a year later, I have ultimately arrived at my answer.

I want to point out that, as you know, I do suffer from an acute case of foot in mouth disease and I certainly do have a tendency to be deliberate and hurtful with my words (as Mrs. Facsimilogos well knows) so I want to mention that even though I would love to convince you of everything I have discovered and try to spell it all out here that I will refrain from doing so. I will refrain because such a work would require volumes to relay my findings, notes, etc. (Not to mention addressing any specific questions or perspectives that would come up as I went along). Instead I want to share with you my feelings and hope that you will begin to understand where I am coming from and that you will not think of me any differently because of a change in my beliefs.

As you can imagine, my new understanding and perspective places me in a very big bind. I am not sure what the future holds, but I know that I am 100% dedicated to my children and to doing whatever it takes to make their lives productive, comfortable and peaceful. I certainly could not see myself out of their lives, nor do I wish to be.

Mrs. Facsimilogos and I do not agree on much of what I believe as she is still very much a strong believer in the church. In fact, it was a conversation with her that has led me to write this letter. You see, she got so fed up with me and my questions one night a few days ago that she called her parents to tell them what I was going through and to ask them for advice. I figured it wasn’t fair that her parents should know where I am at and you not know.

Anyway, my new beliefs cause me to be confronted with tough decisions and to be torn in many directions. With our son’s baptism, he wants me to do it…and I probably will do it, but I now find praying to be an empty, rhetorical experience. I think my mind has been very powerful at helping me to believe what I wanted to believe in the past, but now that I really want some objective experience to latch onto, there is nothing but dead air. I will probably have a hard time hiding my true feelings and will probably not be able to do the expected “special” confirmation blessing, although in thinking about it, I could probably say some nice things that would hopefully be helpful to my son, but they probably wouldn’t fit in with the church’s party line. I may go ahead and ask Mrs. Facsimilogos’ father to be voice for his confirmation, we’ll see. (I ended up confirming my son, but was painfully told later that it was not the blessing my son was "entitled" to)

I now struggle with the thought of whether or not to continue to enforce the belief structure as laid out by the church (even though I don’t believe it is 100% healthy) because it is a good moral foundation for the kids or do I begin to introduce ideas of independent thought that would move them towards non-reliance on the church for their identity. This is a tough call…Hey, where is my parenting manual anyway? Of course, this question is only for me to speculate on in my mind, since Mrs. Facsimilogos continues to insist on bringing the kids up active in the church and I must continue to support that.

Getting to where I am at was not easy and will continue to present challenges; HOWEVER, I can honestly say that I am at peace and feel renewed and refreshed in my conscience. The feeling is so exhilarating, yet also troubling when confronted with the reality of what family and friends think because of where it is that I have come from and was brought up with. This is probably the most difficult part; however, most people in the church take solace in just figuring it is a phase I am going through and that I will come back eventually. I don’t see this as being the case, but I guess anything could happen. On the other hand, I think it is unfortunate that this idea of the lost sheep eventually coming back into the fold has been taught over the pulpit. The arrogance of the leaders of the church and their viewpoint surrounding the choices of others does not cease to astound me. In my opinion, people should be encouraged to do what they feel is right for them (even if it is something outside of the church) and not have to be condemned at every turn for deciding  their own happiness.

This is where I am at; I go to sacrament meeting to be with the family, but that is about it. I didn’t go for a while, but it was too much for me to handle. I skip out of Sunday school and priesthood because I can’t stand it (that and it is so boring and nobody wants to hear what I now think). I won’t accept a calling (because I can’t in good conscience) and I don’t pay tithing. Of course, it goes without saying that I don’t have a temple recommend. I have been in to talk with the bishop so he knows where I am at, but as far as helping me, he tried for a little bit, but then sort of gave up on me telling me how he had a good friend who left the church to go be a polygamous fundamentalist. He said the church is still good because of what it does to keep kids from doing bad stuff later in life and that is essentially why he still supports it. However, from what I have seen from our family, church activity is no guarantee that kids will never do anything bad. In my opinion, kids are going to do what they want to do and all I can do as a parent is teach them right from wrong as best I can and trust that they will do the right thing…that and continue to love them unconditionally, right? As far as requesting to have my name removed from the church, I don’t see any point. I don’t care if people from church contact me and I think it would probably be the final nail in the coffin for my marriage if I did make that request. I also continue to wear garments because it helps give Mrs. Facsimilogos something to hang onto. Of course they are pretty worn out, so I am going to need to do something about that one of these days.

You may think that my confession here means that I don’t want to talk about the church any further; however, nothing could be further from the truth. My mind is more open now than it ever has been in the past. I am just drawing conclusions based on my life’s experience and what I think I know. I am open for discourse and would welcome any and all rebuttals to my points. Of course, you should remember that I can be quite belligerent and always think I am right so there’s that to deal with. I hope we can talk about things going forward and I welcome any thoughts or questions you may have.

I hope this isn’t going to rock you to your core(s). I hope it does not make you want to give up all hope in me and my ability to do the right things. I am still that person, I just have an expanded view of the world and I am taking it all in. I am still forming my viewpoints and learning new things all the time. Unfortunately, it is true that the more I reject the teachings of the church the more I see error and fallibility in the things that are taught. Don’t get me wrong, the church is filled with really good people that I really admire, I just wish so much that more people could open their eyes and see what I now see. I will openly condemn any organization that teaches obedience to a hierarchy over independent thought and individual accountability. Boyd K. Packer taught in an infamous address that there are things from the church’s history that, while they may be true, are not very useful. I reject the notion that my exposure to events from church history necessitates being screened and edited until they become faith promoting and useful. The result is lies that are intended to deceive and increase the power and influence of the church. As Gordon B. Hinckley said, it is either all true or all false, there is no middle ground. I accept that and have pretty much concluded it is all based on the ideas of men…granted they may be considered by many to be some pretty good ideas, but they are the ideas of men nevertheless.

I’ll close by telling you that I am sorry to be telling you all of this, but I think it is better to get it out in the open instead of continuing to allude to it all the time when we get together. Please forgive me and don’t hesitate to talk to me. I am still very open to seeing the error of my ways. Thanks in advance for your patience and any advice you can offer. I would really value your feedback.

I hope things find you well. Thanks for your love.

Most Sincerely,

Facsimilogos

Is religion a pernicious evil?

Sometimes people marvel at my current view of religion. They think I am too hard on it. That it deserves to be protected and people deserve to have their right to worship how they choose be protected at all costs. They feel I don't have any right to express my general disdain for the whole idea of belief in God, let alone the absurdity of it. Unfortunately, religious folks can't get on me too hard because they quickly realize that the same protection afforded in the United States that allows them freedom of religion simultaneously allows me to express my criticism of that same religion. But what continually amazes me is that, rather than engage in a courteous discourse over the merits of their beliefs over mine, or vice-verse, they quickly become offended by what I am saying and they take their ball and go home. They just would rather not talk about it apparently.

So what is it about religion that causes such angst among its followers, that they don't even want to talk about so much of it (or have it challenged in any way - especially ways that rely on evidence and science rather than faith) without taking offense? It is as if I slap them in the face when I say I don't think God exists. It is like this big deal that people take so personally...so much so that they would rather sever relationships (even family or close personal friendships) than talk about the issues in any kind of meaningful way. If you don't believe that this is true, try finding a well populated group of religious people (in person or on the internet - Facebook groups are a phenomenal place to witness this) and then announce that you think they are nuts, and then tell them why. (I tried this on a Facebook group that was all about reading the Book of Mormon again. I wasn't even too in your face rude, I just mentioned that the actual intent behind Joseph Smith's letter containing the quote about happiness being the object and design of our existence - that it was written to Nancy Rigdon to convince her to become another of Joseph's plural wives - was an attempt more to coerce and seduce and not so much to actually instruct on the topic of happiness and obedience. My comment was deleted from the page in very short order). Some few respondents may actually attempt to convert you into their way of thinking, or tolerate your comments for a bit, but what will generally happen is you will either be censored pretty quickly and shut out of the group or essentially told to go away (and some will not be very nice about it, either).

Apparently many religious people are convinced that there is a real entity known as the devil who is attempting to persuade them at every turn and they must be vigilant to avoid his enticements at all costs. And, as I am presumed to be one of the devils' followers, they feel more than justified telling me to get behind them, or censor me, at every opportunity. However, some have a more softened view towards others not of their faith tradition and they allow them to have their differing beliefs - and even maintain close relationships - even if they maintain their disagreement over their faith preferences.

This leads me to my question; is religion the source of such obstinate behavior in people and, if it is, does it deserve to be protected or, at the very least, derided and thrown down at every opportunity?

This is a difficult question. The first part is not that difficult. I don't think it is too big a stretch to say that religious teachings are, in fact, the source of the behavior that inclines people to censor, ignore, belittle or attack those who express beliefs that differ from their own. Of course, they feel justified in this behavior because they feel they are being attacked themselves. Which is interesting, because what religious people can't seem to grasp is that an attack on the merits of an ideology or philosophy or way of viewing the world is not an attack on them personally. However, they tend to take it very personally. It is like if I go around believing that it is OK to drink bleach, as long as I do so in very limited quantities, and someone comes along and says they have evidence that says that everyone who does drink bleach, even in limited quantities, ended up dying as a result of that behavior. If I didn't have a very good reason for drinking bleach in the first place, I might be inclined to listen and consider what they were saying. If it were possible that what I was doing was life threatening, I would think that I would even stop doing it until I could do further research into the merits of drinking versus not drinking bleach.

Of course, if my reason for drinking bleach were not that compelling (let's just say, I accidentally tasted some one time and later I felt better and I attributed feeling better to having tasted the bleach). The evidence for the effectiveness of drinking bleach on my overall health and well being is purely, and weakly, circumstantial. If I find much overwhelming evidence to indicate that drinking bleach is not a good idea at all, I would very likely cease the practice and abandon the idea.

But, here is where the question becomes more difficult; what is my response if a religious leader (who claimed to be acting and speaking under God's unquestionable authority at the time) says that God says I need to drink bleach, in very small quantities, at least once a week? Then what is my response, when someone says they don't think it is such a good idea? I tell them they don't have enough faith, that they are the devil sent to tempt me and that the authority figure I believe told me that evil designing persons would come to me and try to get me to question, or even abandon, my faith. In short, I am much less inclined to consider what that person is saying if I feel they are actively questioning, or attempting to dissuade me from, my closely held religious beliefs. Why is this? Why is it that one who claims, or is presumed, to have some authority (which person may actually be nuts, by the way), and happens to have some followers, is trusted above all others that happen to disagree with said leader? Why are we so gullible that way? Even when there is a very good mountain of evidence to disprove said beliefs?

So this leads to the next part of my question; should we actively fight against those who stand in support of religious institutions, even if maintaining that belief does not do bodily harm to those involved? If it can be shown that absolutely no harm is being done to individuals who maintain belief in some religion, then, sure, I think it is OK to leave them be and let them have their belief. However, I really don't think it is possible to have religion and NOT have some harm be done at some point. Now, it may not be bodily harm (not everybody gets slapped in the face like I was for expressing my contrarian views. I was slapped twice by women very close to me for daring to question the tenets of the LDS church), but it is most definitely psychological or emotional harm. Of course, since religious people have stopped reading my blog a long time ago I can outline here the emotional and psychological harm that I think was done to me as a result of believing and attempting to closely adhere to the LDS faith (the reason I preface this comment by saying that religious people have stopped reading my blog is because I worry that religious people will claim that I was damaged even before I believed, or that I am making it all up or some such nonsense).

I think I was harmed because I was taught to continually judge my behavior as being in line or not in line with the teachings of the church. Of course, judging my own behavior is fine if it could just stay there, but it did not. I followed the natural course of looking at others and the behaviors they engaged in. If I saw that they were not engaging in the same behavior I was taught to judge in myself as in line or not in line with the teachings of the church, I looked down on them. I may have felt pity for them or some level of remorse or sadness, but I did feel something. It is hard for believers, that I talk to anyway, to acknowledge that this does in fact happen, but I know it does, it can't help but not happen because we are human and must interact with others in the course of living out our lives. And, if you are absolutely convinced that you have the answers to how to live your life in happiness, you cannot help but see others, who do not live according to your same standard, as being deficient in some way. This deficiency in others is borne out in different ways by different people. I know I avoided approaching or talking to people who I perceived to have different standards than me. And I quickly learned that even people in my same faith sometimes engaged in behavior that was not in line with what I was taught. I felt really sorry for these people because they had the "truth" and still chose to ignore it to some degree. I was inclined to believe that they would suffer a punishment in the hereafter (or even to some extent in the here and now) that was greater than those who never had the truth to begin with. So, basically, my emotional and psychological abilities to interact with others in a genuine, and non judgmental way, was essentially stunted because of my religious upbringing.

If we consider all the affects of my judgmentalism towards others, the harm done to them increases. For example, what if I, as a believer, encounter that my child no longer believes as I do? While I will see them as less in my eyes (and may even decide to treat them differently because of this difference of beliefs) this will certainly have an affect on the child. They will be told repeatedly by me that they do not have the ability to make such a determination. However, if they get older and maintain their view, I may decide to attempt to make them feel guilty for their beliefs. If I see behavior that is not in line with my beliefs, I may decide to treat them differently than I would another child who believes...even though they may engage in the same behavior! I will tell the child that believes as I do that such behavior is not becoming a person who believes as we do, while I might tell the child that does not believe as I do that there is no hope for them.

Now, just imagine how the circumstances and impact can dramatically change if differences such as sexual preference and gender become the issue for the child. In the LDS church sexual preference is considered to be absolutely heterosexual, and God-given, and if you deviate from that in any of your behavior, you are sinning and are not worthy of God's blessings. Even though science has made a study of the question of innate homosexuality and determined that it is not able to be changed, just potentially ignored if the will of the person is strong enough. But this does not lead to happiness for the individual...it leads to pain and difficulty.

The other question is of gender. If I have a daughter who says that she doesn't think her goal should be to become a wife and mother (to as many children as she is financially or emotionally able to support), what should my response be? To most people, not of religious upbringing, the answer is pretty obvious, you should support her in her goals and dreams regardless of your disagreement with them. However, in the church, gender roles and identity are very inflexible. Men have the priesthood (and therefore the authority to preside and have the final say in making decisions) where the women in the church are taught, in no uncertain terms, to subjugate themselves to priesthood holders and recognize their authority. Women are taught that their worth is very closely tied to their chastity and obedience to priesthood leaders. So what kind of damage does this cause? I don't really know since I was always a male and got to be the one exercising authority over the females. But I have heard it is very difficult for some. Some women do not appreciate being placed in a box of expected behavior or sense of worth, from my understanding, and I believe them.

These things, I believe, cause emotional and psychological harm to others that are under the care of religious people and so I think the answer to the last part of my question is, yes, since religious belief does in fact cause emotional and psychological harm it should be brought down in its influence. This is the answer that some of us contrarians have arrived at and this is why we continue to make efforts to challenge religious people in their beliefs or engage in discourse. It is not, as the persecution complex laden religious would have you believe, a matter of those that leave the church not being able to leave it alone. It is because we see harm being done and we don't think it's right.

One thing I saw recently that I really like was a continuum for cults. It was a graphic as follows:

The LDS church falls about where the finger is pointing. This is why people want to challenge LDS in their beliefs...because they are not just weird and not at all harmful or dangerous, they are in the yellow zone where people are hurt and get damaged emotionally and psychologically. This is real harm that many find difficult to continue to support. Not only that, but they feel a real impact from the way they are treated by those within the church. We cannot ignore these feelings. We cannot just censor them. Their thoughts and feelings are real and someday those that promote such things will hopefully come to realize what affect their behavior truly has on others. I hope it comes soon.