Comments on: New Order Mormons-A Path of Deception

By: liz

liz — Wed, 26 Dec 2012 02:39:16 +0000

So if I am to understand NOM have an issue with the “supernatural” experiences that are the foundation of the restoration. So out of curiosity are they also skeptics with regard to the plentiful “supernatural” in the Bible? And do they not believe in the second coming? Sounds more like atheist??

By: Jane

Jane — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 22:32:42 +0000

The Church’s “you’re in or you’re out” mentality is an unfortunate, undeniable fact. I don’t think this is fair or spiritually healthy. It’s not like that in most other religions, which have wider parameters for participation. Mormonism’s authoritarianism and restrictiveness force people to take sides: you’re either with us or against us. That’s absurd. That’s not how faith or religion works. It’s a continuum, a spectrum. Those of you who are worried about subversiveness from within, what do you think is going to happen? What has changed? Do you think questioners and skeptics are a new thing in the Church? Do you think spouses on the “down-low” or members who prefer to keep their private business private were just invented with the internet? The only thing that’s new is a website that has created a name and a message that people can relate to. “New Order Mormon” doesn’t really have an intrinsic meaning. It gives gives people strength and hope for where they are in their journey (something that’s often lacking within official channels in the Church). And Jared, that journey may or may not lead to a reconsideration of Gospel truths. But so what? They’re not doing any harm either. They’re there to SUPPORT and find good in the Church. The traditional brand of mormonism is not for everyone, and neither you nor anyone else has the right to define the “mormon” experience for anyone else. Your accusation that people stay merely for their “own personal gain” is inherently mean-spirited and judgemental. What do you mean by “gain”? Do you realize a lot of these people would much rather be doing something else? Most of them stay for their families and children. If that’s what you consider “personal gain,” you have a very distorted view of family and relationships. If NOM, in conjuction with the Church, gives people a home and a community and helps them be a better person, the world is that much of a better place.

By: Diane

Diane — Thu, 21 Jun 2012 20:28:04 +0000

Some one recommended this site to me today. I am no longer a member of the church, but, because I have been a member for well over 20 years, so now, I think of myself as more of a cultural Mormon. I still don’t drink, or smoke. I didn’t do those things prior to baptism either, so really, my leaving has nothing to do with those issues, rather it has more to do with those who consider themselves TBM’s and hold other members righteousness into question(Like mentioned in EX-NOM response) and then not try to walk in our shoes and have to deal with the pure hatred that was just displayed for not believing the same way.

I have issues with leadership and the truthfulness of leadership. I have issues with the intrusive nature of church and self righteousness of some of the people. I would rather like to view people who are trying to best person they are trying to be. And you know what there are many good people who are not LDS. (though many in the church won’t admit it) I don’t want to have to be the best LDS person. No such person exist, and the ones who have tried to do this, well have worked themselves into nervous exhaustion. I have issues with the way church treats members who are the least little bit different9(i.e) gay, not from two parent families. And then leaders and stalwart members call them Anti for expressing those concerns. Am I going to be welcomed here? I don’t know, only time will tell

By: Ex Nom

Ex Nom — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 21:58:03 +0000

I joined the NOM site thinking it would be a good place to find support for my non-traditional LDS beliefs. The site claims to be for people who do not believe much or all of the church doctrines. I don’t believe the infallible man or follow the prophet doctrines. Or that the church and the gospel are one in the same etc…

What I found there was a whole lot of angry people. I would say most are atheist which reminds me of the admonition to increase the light you have or risk losing it altogether. my theory is that most of these people started fault finding. Fault finding is a slippery slope fueled by pride. It never has a good ending. If we would focus more on our own shortcomings and failures we would have great treasure troves of knowledge opened to us and would not doubt the existence of God or even the truthfulness of the BoM.

Seeking to learn and expand our minds is very profitable and may in my opinion lead to one outgrowing the church. But only if done before the Lord in humility. Seeking truth by reading anti-Mormon material or finding weaknesses and faults in your bishop or fellow church members will only lead to darkness of mind.

As far as being dishonest to keep your family intact? Anyone who thinks it’s better to be a liar than a divorcee is pretty lost, and that kind of justification also leads to darkness. How would you like to find out when you’re old that your spouse had an ongoing affair for the duration of your marriage, but he/she kept it secret in order to “protect” the marriage? I, for one would be pi*#ed off! Just as I would if my husband told me he’d been lying about his beliefs our whole marriage.

By: Kelly

Kelly — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 18:49:24 +0000

Various leaders and speakers have admonished us to adopt an “all or nothing “approach to the church. They criticize, however gently, those members who they label as “cafeteria” Mormons that select what they choose to believe and live, and pass by the rest. However, in some respects the church chooses a “cafeteria history” when speaking about its past – the positive stories and statements that support current policy and thought are emphasized, while those that have the opposite effect are effectively ignored.

I suspect that if the Church were to present a more balanced version of its history (and by the way, this is very hard for any organization to do!) it would certainly create a faith crisis for some people. However, admitting that there are human failures and organizational lapses would prevent a worse type of faith crises – those who are faithful Saints that come across incontrovertible evidence that what they were told was not the entire truth and then feel deceived and walk away. By being candid that our history was as turbulent and paradoxical as the New Testament times, we allow for people to seek their own light and participate and believe at the level they can rather than feeling they are no longer welcome or are hypocrites. Everybody has questions and issues – why not make that OK?

By: M&M

M&M — Sun, 27 Nov 2011 08:27:17 +0000

With all that has been said, may I just add that understanding builds a bridge the fastest in the religious realm off the world. I Love this blog and it is very valuable to me 🙂 in all honesty I am not sure what I believe and so many blogs are covered with hateful and prideful undertones. But here it’s mostly just people pressing there points while trying their absolute best to understand the opposing party’s point of view. That’s how it should be in all religious conversations whether it be between a NOM and a faithful LDS or a Christian and an Atheist. Everyone was to be at peace with themselves. And both external and internal understanding is the best way to make it happen