So, I let my family go on with their lives, whether it be in the LDS church or without.
I don't really totally understand why they follow that church, because there are reasons from experience and study that tell me the church isn't really cracked up to be anything worthwhile.
Like, in the LDS church, you are not allowed to say anything critical about your leaders, even if what you say is true.
So when my old stake president said God doesn't talk by voice, he's obviously contradicting known scripture (both LDS and regular) and my patriarchal blessing --- so what am I supposed to do?
You see, I have seen LDS people get upset at me for criticizing what the Stake Persident said. If what the stake president said is true, then there's absolutely no reality or truth to any christian church or religion. If what the stake president said was false, then why do I have to put up with these mormon-minded individuals who think it's such a crime for me to point out the error in the church leader's word?
Basically, Brigham Young said Adam was God. Either this is true or false. if it's true, then that radically changes the LDS church as it is today. If it's false, then I can only imagine how much you're not allowed to criticize what the leader said.
LDS church leaders criticize all kinds of things and behaviours, great and small. But when they say something especially stupid themselves, no critical comments allowed --- it is actually just hypocrisy.
So, Brigham Young said Adam was God.
My old Stake President said God doesn't actually speak by voice to man, contradicting scripture and my patriarchal blessing.
My old Bishop thought that Avril Lavigne can never be saved because of her musical and clothing styles, even before she released her 2nd album. This means that when "Jesus died that all mankind may be saved", the translators forgot to include the part of the verse that excludes Avril Lavigne from salvation.
Basically, when the church goes around saying Avril can't be saved just because she isn't already a mormon and she sings music and she wears clothes, I mean, what business does the church think it has being in my home, with their home teaching and missionary work when they can't let Avril be saved?
if Avril can't be saved -- then I can't be saved either, which means it is absolutely POINTLESS to have missionaries visit or home teachers.
yet - somehow the church thought that even though they rejected Avril, that they could come call me or visit me in my home whenever they felt like.
If Avril could have been saved (and myself likewise) --- then it's ridiculous how I have to put up with a controlling bishop who says very stupid things and then the church can't let me criticize anything the bishop has said even though the bishop himself is critical of all kinds of little things.
Basically, it just doesn't make sense for me to continue in the church.
Your bishop could sleep with your wife and you wouldn't be allowed to criticize it, right?
And if it was a criticizable offence -- then what makes any of the above offences any different?
Why is "bishop sleeping with your wife" so much more criticizable than "Stake president blaspheming holy ghost"?
If it is possible for a church leader to be criticized -- if there is anything a church leader can do that crosses the line, then I don't know why everyone has to be belligerent at me about how I saw my own church leaders cross the line.
And if you really can't criticize church leaders, then I guess your bishop might as well be sleeping with your wife and his own councillors, maybe they can have a foursome.
Anyway, yeah --- church leaders said things to me that blatantly contradict accepted doctrine and reason, and for some reason I wasn't allowed to say anything critical about it regardless of how these leaders like to criticize little things like masturbation.
Yup. There are all kinds of reasons I could go on about why I don't believe in the church. If there was any reality or truth to the church, it's all gone now for many numerous screw-ups they've committed.
And, I suppose I should be sorry that I keep going on about this. I've said my bit about all this stuff already --- but the church has engrained such psychological problems in my mind that I just feel a need or urge to talk about what I think, and this blog is the best place for me to go so I'm not spamming any individual personally.
Thank God for psychologists/psychiatrists.