Tuesday, 9 March 2010

things i always thought were strange about the lds church

i grew up a member of the lds church and after a recent intense period of reading, researching and rethinking, im finally seeing it for what it is: a very wealthy church, who, for the most part are trying to teach people to do good. but it is not everything it claims to be.

here are some things ive always thought were strange (this will be an ongoing list):
* claiming how special and unique the book of mormon was and how many members there have become over the years. i always compared this claim to the koran and islam. the koran is larger and there are *way* more muslims than mormons.

* healing and prophecy. i believe these things exist. i dont think the church has the monopoly though. i was recently discussing these things with an lds friend who expressed that he believed that non-lds (or men who do not have the priesthood) who healed people were doing it by the power of the devil. i remember being taught this several times as a missionary. i always thought this was bogus. it is bogus and i think i was able to convince my friend how silly that notion is, simply by recalling the lds pioneer story about the woman who healed an ox that was wounded. the lds church doesnt teach its priesthood holders to heal animals (i think you would get called in for a meeting with the bishop if anybody heard you had done something like that) and only priesthood holders (men) give blessings (heal people). concerning prophecy, there are tons of people in and out of the church who have this gift. and what have been the real huge prophecies in my lifetime in the church? somebody asked me once and i seriously didnt have an answer. it was embarassing =)

* greatly varying opinions on sexual matters like oral sex, masturbation and birth control.
oral sex: the bottom line is noone in the church has the right to tell you what you and your wife/husband can and cant do in your bedroom. i had bishops who have said oral sex is a sin while others said that the church has no policy. my mother told me that her bishop even asked her once (or several times?) if she performed oral sex on her husband. she told him it was none of his business.
masturbation: there is literally no scripture in *any* of the lds standard works about masturbation, yet it is unanimously accepted as being a sin. but again, bishops always had a difference of opinion about its sinful severity. (i guess youre asking to yourself and giggling "how does he know?" yes. i have masturbated. masturbation is actually a great tool/help especially in relationships where the level of sexual desire of partners is very unbalanced.) i am currently reading an interesting book called masturbation: the history of a great terror. i suggest every religious person read it.

* how everyone in general conference puts on some fake voice/way of speaking while praying or giving a talk.

* why church needed to be so long?!

* why people would get their children to bear their testimony and use words like "i know". along the same lines: i could never imagine 8 year olds really being eligible to be deemed sinners and how in the world they could choose and know what they are doing when they get baptized.

* how my mission president taught how vital it was to take the sacrament, that if you died after doing something wrong and werent able to take the sacrament before you died, that somehow your repentance wasnt complete. i always thought that was ridiculous.

* how much more relaxed and open about everything in general i was compared to everyone else in the church

* how sunday never seemed to be a day of rest, especially after starting my own family. it was almost always a day of stress. thats "rest" with 2 extra s's.

* why did it matter how people dressed to come to church?

* why most of the church leaders always seemed to be rich and/or businessmen.

* why the church was never open about issues like polygamy. i never remember any lesson ever addressing this topic specifically. it was like the church was ashamed of it and tried to just keep it in the past, while it was a major part of the early church history.

* why talks and articles and even the scripture footnotes often refer to "history of the church" volumes, but these have never been available online.

to be continued...

No comments:

Post a Comment