Nearly every teenager feels misunderstood at times. As parents, we sometimes like to point out that we have been teenagers once too, so we understand more than they think we do. On the other hand, they have not yet been parents. Consequently, our world view includes a memory of something like theirs, but transcends it because of all our subsequent experiences.
Similarly, I was once a sincere believer that Mormonism is the one and only religion that has the entire truth and the sole authority to perform ordinances that are acceptable to God. I no longer hold those views, but I still remember what it was like to be a sincere believer. I also remember nearly everything I was taught as a Mormon. I am still learning about Mormonism from my new perspective. I do not believe that my current views have anything at all to do with misunderstanding Mormonism.
Once, when I was participating in a father-son camp-out with my sons, the bishopric held a trivia contest with prizes. My sons knew about my disbelief, but no one else at the camp-out knew except the bishop. The contest asked questions about Mormon history, doctrine, and scriptures. I was the only one at the camp-out who could answer every question correctly. My sons and I won a couple of prizes for questions no one else could answer, and then we let others answer and win some of the other prizes. It came somewhat as a surprise to my sons that I was a non-believer, and yet I knew the answers better than all of the believers present.
Before we met, my wife was visited by a well-meaning member of her stake presidency, a meeting that her son set up just before he left on his mission. The stake presidency member outlined the Mormon plan of salvation, a lesson more appropriate for a child or an investigator than a life-long, well-informed member. He labored under the misconception that anyone who disbelieves must not understand. My wife also had an experience similar to my camp-out experience with a trivia contest at a ward Christmas party. She answered every question correctly, or at least whispered the answer to her daughter. Her daughter finally asked her, "Mom, how do you know all this." She replied, "I left the church. I did not turn stupid."
Believing Mormons can sometimes be by puzzled by how someone who once believed can later come to disbelieve. Common beliefs include that the person wanted to sin without accountability or that they were offended. A perusal of exit stories from sites such as exmormon.org and this research spearheaded by Mormon Stories founder John Dehlin reveals that this is seldom the case. A typical active Mormon might be aware that there are attacks against the church on the internet, but they may not know much about the specific criticisms, nor do they know that the basic facts are not in dispute. Apologists acknowledge the basic accuracy of most of the points that critics make. What they argue is not that the criticisms are untrue, but that they do not matter.
A good example of this is the Book of Abraham. Apologists acknowledge that the papyrus was discovered in the 60s, and that the actual translation has nothing to do with the Book of Abraham. What they will argue is that these facts do not matter because maybe Joseph Smith received the text by revelation, or maybe we have the wrong papyrus (even though a careful examination of the facsimiles indicates that we do have the right one). Another example is DNA and the Book of Mormon. There is no dispute that DNA analysis of Native Americans does not support the Book of Mormon story of a 600 BC migration from Jerusalem to America. Apologists instead argue that these facts do not matter because maybe the Lehite group was so small that their DNA was overwhelmed by that of other people who were already here.
It is not my intent in this post to argue these points. They have been argued extensively elsewhere. My point here is that there are legitimate reasons for someone to reject LDS claims that have to do with examining the available evidence rather than having anything to do with sin, being offended, or ignorance of Mormon teachings.
When I expressed my doubts to my ex-wife, her response was "who are you to think that you are smarter than the smart people at BYU who know about these issues and still believe?" She said this without knowing that the basics facts are not in dispute, but only their interpretation. She herself denies the basic facts that the apologists acknowledge, considering them "anti-Mormon lies." In other words, if she were more informed, she would have discovered that she disagrees with those "smart people" who she believes have all the answers. This phenomenon has been labeled "Internet vs. Chapel Mormons" and is described here and many other places.
When I expressed my doubts to my former bishop, he suggested that I read the Book of Mormon and pray. I told him that I have been doing that for years, but it does not provide answers to the evidence that disputes the church's claims. I told him that I have read the Book of Mormon over 30 times, but I would try once more to see if the next time might make the difference. It didn't.
The issues I have been discussing here are issues of belief, not issues of active participation. Many people no longer believe, but choose to continue participation for various reasons. Some are open about their disbelief, and some keep it a secret. In my case, I continued to participate for more than 6 years. For 5 years, no one knew about my disbelief. My reasons for leaving have less to do with my doubts than with how some people responded to my doubts, but that is a subject for another post.
I remember very well what it was like to be a believer. I can still talk the talk if I choose. I can empathize with believers. I don't think they are stupid, and I don't think they are bad people. That part of me is still there. I have friends and family still in the church. If it makes their lives better, I am happy for that. It just does not work for me any more.
