NOM

Well, I thought I was flying below the radar pretty well. I visited my parents this weekend and when I was alone with my dad at one point he says he's worried about me, and my DW is as well. It really caught me off guard and I HATE discussing this stuff when I'm not prepared. I don't want to tear down someone's closely held beliefs unless they make the choice to want to know. On the other hand, if someone pushes me about what I believe I'll push back. If I'm not prepared it can come out pretty harsh.

It continues to amaze me how much longtime members of the church DON'T know about the history of the church even though now all of this information is easily available on the internet, and how they just suck in anything the leaders say without any scrutiny. At one point in the discussion, he conceded that polygamy (my biggest issue) did bother him at one time. He made what I thought was a reference to JS's polyandry, but he was actually talking about JS's "test" of Heber C. Kimball in asking Heber to give him Vilate. I made an offhand comment about all of the men's wives he married and he was like, "huh??" "Yeah Dad, he married a bunch of other men's wives for real, not as a test. Well, except for Vilate, with that one he just married her fourteen year old daughter instead." "That's terrible," he says. "Yes!! That's my problem!" He then said I needed to stick to church approved sources like he does. I replied, "Is lds.org 'approved' enough for you?" Then some other family came in and it ended on that.

One good thing that came of it was the discussion with DW later. She swears she didn't put him up to it so I let it go. I then vented to her about the whole thing. I talked about how much I resented the implication that I am betraying the church, or that I want to sin or something. "Does he really think I am enjoying this!! I hate this, and it would be so much easier to just go along with it. But I cannot say that something is true that is not any more than I can look at that wall and say it is blue when I know it is white." I can tell DW has been stressed about my FC, and has implied many of the same things my dad did. By venting about him, it wasn't like I was attacking her but I was able to say stuff that needed to be addressed without her feeling threatened. Since this conversation, she doesn't seem nearly as worried or stressed about the whole FC.

Of course, Dad has a history of "helping" a little too much, so I am bracing for what comes next.

I'm still waiting for this to happen. I'm sure it will be relatively soon, and perhaps I may facilitate the discussion so it can be on my own terms.

But I dread it. My dad is very well read, knows and uses much of the apologetics in regards to the church, so I already know there won't be much point in bringing up or discussing historical issues. I think I will have to keep it high level and personal to me.

Good luck on the next steps with DW and your dad.

I welcome these conversations, even if caught off guard. I'm nice but I don't pull punches. Make them defend themselves instead of being on the offensive. They quickly learn to be prepared and/or leave it alone.

I have zero problem with the little social sayings such as "we are blessed, etc" that's their culture and I respect it. I want them to be comfortable on my home, and that means letting them do what they do.

But if it gets preachy....

I'm so sorry you had to go through that. I hate these conversations. I think that it was good for your DW to hear you vent about your dad though and see the experience with new eyes. Hope nothing more comes of it as far as the "help" you mentioned your dad likes to give.

You seem to have handled it all pretty well considering the ambush. It he does come back with his 2nd wave hit him with the essays. This might be a good start for discussion since he is so stuck on "approved" literature. Please return and report.

I know it's stressful, but as a Resigned Observer, I am impressed at how you handled it and that some important information surfaced. It sounds like your dad was inoculated somewhere to believe the Heber thing was to 'test his faith,' but nothing happened. I hope your dad was gut-punched with the new information about the 14-year-old victim (and all the others he may learn about) - and I hope he reads the essays on the church site - some people still think they're fake and not of the church.

Have you considered sending him a link to the Nauvoo essay? We all know they're hard to find, and even when you find them, the church has hidden that one below additional clicks.

SeeNoEvil wrote:You seem to have handled it all pretty well considering the ambush. It he does come back with his 2nd wave hit him with the essays. This might be a good start for discussion since he is so stuck on "approved" literature. Please return and report.

Exactly. I would say, "dad, if you want to have this discussion I suggest you go to lds.org and read ALL the essays first. The parts the church admits to will be a good starting point".

My dad is very well read, knows and uses much of the apologetics in regards to the church, so I already know there won't be much point in bringing up or discussing historical issues.

The only thing more incomprehensible than people that don't know and don't want to know, are those that do know and insist on rationalizing and excusing it all. Makes me want to say something like "Dad, it is what it is and it isn't what it isn't. Put on your big boy pants and deal with it!!"

I talked about how much I resented the implication that I am betraying the church

This still bothers me to this day. When you leave or you find information that is unflattering to the church, people assume that by learning it or having an issue with you are betraying the church.

document wrote:

I talked about how much I resented the implication that I am betraying the church

This still bothers me to this day. When you leave or you find information that is unflattering to the church, people assume that by learning it or having an issue with you are betraying the church.

This was mentioned elsewhere on some website I might frequent:

It's not my responsibility to protect the church's "secrets".

If anyone has been betrayed, it's members (and former members) who dedicate(d) their lives to the lies and half truth's that the church sells.

SunbeltRed wrote:I'm still waiting for this to happen. I'm sure it will be relatively soon, and perhaps I may facilitate the discussion so it can be on my own terms.

But I dread it. My dad is very well read, knows and uses much of the apologetics in regards to the church, so I already know there won't be much point in bringing up or discussing historical issues. I think I will have to keep it high level and personal to me.

If and when your Dad wants to talk, my advice is to take one topic at a time (rather than a shotgun approach regarding historical issues). Unless you don't want to do that or even want to discuss issues with him. I'd say, "Ok, let's look at the issue of polygamy and polyandry." and discuss that before you move onto the numerous first vision issues, for example. Come here for help and post any questions you have in the "Doctrinal Discussion" forum as there are many here who are very familiar with all of the standard apologetic tactics and justifications for what took place. Believe me there are responses for each one of them and details that are always left out of their arguments.

And, Culper, Jr., I think you handled the situation really well. Having something like that just sprung on you is pretty difficult and you held your own. It's also great that you were able to talk to your wife like you did about it. If your Dad brings it up again, I'd suggest doing what I wrote above to SunbeltRed (take one topic at a time and come here for help if you need it ).

Culper Jr. wrote: He then said I needed to stick to church approved sources like he does.

That sentiment amuses and frustrates me these days. It's something that only fails to raise alarm bells to someone who is a "true believer" of whatever organization or philosophy that is involved. If you insisted he needed to only read Storm Front approved sources about the Holocaust he'd likely scoff (at least I hope he would). To be fair only turning to sources that confirm their biases and beliefs is something that people do subconsciously on many topics, but when stated out-loud as the ideal, as the proper course of action, the absurdity and danger of it all is made baldly apparent.

Another thing that gets thrown around in the church is that you don't go to a Chevy dealer to learn about Fords, a cliche that only gets tossed around when it implies you should go to the church for information. You rarely see it tossed around to recommend you ask exmormons/NOMs/Inactives what they believe and why they left/stepped back. The Chevy dealer that is the church has plenty to say about the motivations of exmormons/NOMs/Inactivesand it's a rare TBM, in my experience, that will ask an exmormon why they left and take them at their word rather than imputing the motivations taught them by the church.

The Ford, Chevy analogy never gets taken to it's logical conclusion, which is that you don't just go to a Ford dealer to learn about Fords either. You read Consumer Reports and talk to former Ford owners, especially the ones who had a bad experience.

Hagoth wrote:The Ford, Chevy analogy never gets taken to it's logical conclusion, which is that you don't just go to a Ford dealer to learn about Fords either. You read Consumer Reports and talk to former Ford owners, especially the ones who had a bad experience.

Oh wow...yes. That is so true. The last person I'd trust would be a car salesman talking about the exact car he's trying to sell

AllieOop wrote:

Hagoth wrote:The Ford, Chevy analogy never gets taken to it's logical conclusion, which is that you don't just go to a Ford dealer to learn about Fords either. You read Consumer Reports and talk to former Ford owners, especially the ones who had a bad experience.

Oh wow...yes. That is so true. The last person I'd trust would be a car salesman talking about the exact car he's trying to sell

I often wonder how this analogy is allowed to stand! Before you buy anything these days you go online and read the reviews both good and bad (well, I do & most people I know).

Fifi de la Vergne wrote:

AllieOop wrote:

Hagoth wrote:The Ford, Chevy analogy never gets taken to it's logical conclusion, which is that you don't just go to a Ford dealer to learn about Fords either. You read Consumer Reports and talk to former Ford owners, especially the ones who had a bad experience.

Oh wow...yes. That is so true. The last person I'd trust would be a car salesman talking about the exact car he's trying to sell

I often wonder how this analogy is allowed to stand! Before you buy anything these days you go online and read the reviews both good and bad (well, I do & most people I know).

Yes...curse that darn Google

AllieOop wrote:

Hagoth wrote:The Ford, Chevy analogy never gets taken to it's logical conclusion, which is that you don't just go to a Ford dealer to learn about Fords either. You read Consumer Reports and talk to former Ford owners, especially the ones who had a bad experience.

Oh wow...yes. That is so true. The last person I'd trust would be a car salesman talking about the exact car he's trying to sell

lol, that reminds me of a commercial. this is not actually the one I was thinking of, but it's similar. "of course I don't believe you, we're used car salesmen"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxDP1A80vEA

If someone was to confront me about Fort Collins, I might reply "Go Rams!" if I thought they were a Colorado State fan. Otherwise, what is meant by FC?

moksha wrote:If someone was to confront me about Fort Collins, I might reply "Go Rams!" if I thought they were a Colorado State fan. Otherwise, what is meant by FC?

Could be Faith Crisis. Could be Funky Chicken.

It sounds like you did pretty well for yourself even without a lack of preparation. Nice job.

Hagoth wrote:f someone was to confront me about Fort Collins, I might reply "Go Rams!" if I thought they were a Colorado State fan. Otherwise, what is meant by FC?

Could be Faith Crisis. Could be Funky Chicken.

lol, sorry.. FC= faith crisis. Funky Chicken would be more something a bishop would confront a person with.