Jump to content

why me

Contributor
  • Content Count

    8,040
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,787 Excellent

3 Followers

About why me

  • Rank
    Creates Beasts Of The Earth

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

3,039 profile views
  1. People leave their churches all the time. They also leave their mosques etc. People often go through transitions because of new experiences. Mormons seem to make a big deal of it. But then, maybe catholics do too. I haven't seen it there. My relatives are catholic. I don't see any of them making a serious matter of it that they no longer go to mass. But mormons need to go to help groups, find support on the internet, speak of a crisis etc. If one no longer believes in something that they used to believe in they should think that this is logical and normal. We change. We progress. And sometimes we regress. Maybe mormon testimonies are a problem. If one as a surety of belief based on personal testimonies and experiences, and then reads something 'shocking' about church history etc, that testimony takes a broadside and it begins to sink. I have come to never trust mormon testimonies because the next week that person may lose it. How to treat people who have left the church? As if they have never left it. It shouldn't matter. One goes to church and the other doesn't. For two hours one goes to church and prepares for callings if they have one. And the other doesn't. They are occupied with other things. But there is still time to share a pizza.
  2. But in a previous post, you more or less did. Or the way you spun it, made it seem so. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/saints-v1/44-a-lamb-to-the-slaughter?lang=eng
  3. As I explained in a previous post: Hyrum had the gun. It was smuggled in by an outsider. Both Hyrum and Joseph were fathers. Would you have said no to the gun when it was offered? Hyrum was shot dead almost immediately when the mob was rushing up the stairs. Joseph reacted by picking up the gun and firing it into the mob. It misfired. And the rest is history. Once Joseph was dead....the other people in the jail were left alone and they returned to their families.
  4. I think that you are right. Unfortunately, our friend will not accept it. The poster has their own interpretation of lds history that has been taken from the more negative side of interpretations.
  5. No one saw a manuscript. And emma account is quite compelling. Put your head in a hat and write a book with your friend writing what you say on paper. And see what happens. It is an interesting point about the pens and paper. Let me put it this way. Lets say Joesph goes to the general store and buys 100 pieces of paper and five pens. He begins to write. Rough drafts, crumpled paper etc. He goes back to the store for 50 pieces of paper and another pen etc. Suspicious? Suddenly a book comes out and Joesph claims divine origin. What does the store clerk do? Remain silent? And lets just say that the clerk or store owner knew Joseph. A great starter for a conversation would be a simple question: So, Joe, why all the paper and pens?
  6. Was Dan there? Emma did not like polygamy nor did she like Brigham. She also had friends who went west. She only had to say: It's all a fraud. And the church is history. She didn't. The gun was smuggled in. It was in the possession of Hyrum. He was shot in the head and Joseph picked up the gun and fired the pea shooter because he saw his brother die. See Rough Stone Rolling page 549
  7. I think that you are a little out of date Every organization wants to keep their membership. What would an organization be without a membership. And I don't see anyone closing down questions about the lds church. People are free to read what they wish to read.I see no book burnings from salt lake. Of course dues must be paid. Without dues an organization will not survive. Every organization need money to survive and to grow. No problem there. Many members read Leonard Arrington's book in the 70s abut church history. It was pretty open about history. And now there are the JSP with much detailed information about Joesph Smith. And we also have Rough Stone Rolling from 2005 written by Bushman. People have less critical thinking skills these days. In the past, members in the US had huge personal libraries full of church books. And they read them. Many had BYs Journal of Discourses among other books. And old timers knew much about church history. It didn't matter because many people had strong personal testimonies built upon by spiritual experiences. It had very little to do with follow the prophet than with strong spiritual experiences that could not be explained. I had two. And this has kept one of my feet in the church door. People have been listening to podcasts for years and some have fallen away. Others have grown stronger. Here is the foundation: there is a book of mormon. How did it come about? Who wrote it? where were the pens and paper bought? Much paper needed to be used by the writer, not to mention feathered pens. Why did 11 people have a 'groupthink' testimony written inside the book. And many of these men never denied their testimony. And emma? Why did she allow so many people to head west...some good friends of hers if she knew of the fraud? And JS went to his death with his brother. No cool aid was past out for the groupthink suicide. I think that you are barking up the wrong tree. https://www.amazon.com/Mormon-Experience-HISTORY-LATTER-DAY-SAINTS/dp/0252062361
  8. I don't see group think. I only see commonality. If people believe in the same organization, they have commonality. Not group think. If one is a member of the Lion's Club, there is commonality with the other members because of group membership. But what is group think? Sounds just like a negative word by someone who wishes to claim that people in all groups are zombies, without a mind of their own.
  9. I have no idea what you are talking about. Does the prophet have a daily radio program telling members what to do and not do? Even in conference, I am not hearing what I should do and not do from the president of the church. I just hear a nice talk. Likewise for the other GAs. So what does follow the prophet mean in real life? I know no one who follows the prophet like a zombie.
  10. The expression follow the brethren or follow the prophet can be problematic for the believing member because it is a sign of blind obedience, if said by an exmember about believing members. Such expressions if said in such a way by exmembers is said to imply that believing members have no brain to think for themselves.
  11. Christians have been waiting for the second coming since the time of Paul. If the Pauline Christians would have been told that in the year 2019, there still would not have been a second coming, they wouldn't believe it. Christianity is tied to the second coming. Let's say that the year is 5,219 and no second coming yet. Will Christianity survive? Will people be tired of waiting?
  12. Because this is no longer a gay issue or a lesbian issue but an issue of the groups in the initials, what should tolerance be? Should we be tolerant if a 14 years boy wants to shower with the girls because this boy feels like a girl? Or male sportsmen who become women but still have male hormones be allowed to take part in professional sports as women? So what does the gay pride flag mean today when we still have the initials LBTQ. And what would happen if a neighbor did not want to put the flag in the front sidewalk lawn? Would they be looked upon as homophobic?
  13. Well, this is an interesting issue. If one goes back to the 70s, the rights issue was gay or lesbian. Now, it seems that all are lumped together under one banner: LBGTQ and I do believe a couple more are added to the list. I am not sure if gay men are enjoying the fact that their movement has been hijacked by other groupings. Gay men do not request to use the women's shower at school. Nor do they wish to compete in female sports. I think that there are now too many issues being lumped under one roof. I do believe that the optimism in the video is not misplaced. Mormons seem to be caving in to societal pressure and I think that it will continue. How mormons accept such changes is quite another thing. But I can see a day when the same sex marriage will receive a temple marriage. However I do not see islam changing anytime soon. In Britain, muslim parents are protesting schools that are teaching that children can have two moms or two dads etc. And there is quite a backlash. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-birmingham-48480299 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-birmingham-48483734 Now if Mormons acted this way, there would be heck to pay from many members with many finding an excuse to leave the church. The media would have a field day with the news with being hyper critical of mormonism. But listening to british radio, the media seems to be doing a tiny tim as they tip tow through the tulips in calling out the muslims. What does it mean to be progressive? Are these muslims protesting progressive? What term should we give them?
  14. I think that the word idiot came from having to deal with Dehlin for many years. He has made it a point to make the church his life as far as critiquing it. And this has been going on for quite some time. And what does it mean to be Christlike? Being Christlike is pretty near impossible. Only Christ can be like Christ.
  15. I never found fault with the old policy. It just seemed to make sense. If there are same sex couples who are inactive but yet they want their children to be baptized and attend church, I saw a problem for them and the child. The confusion as the child learns about temple marriage between a man and a woman would create a problem in the home. What would the same sex couple say to the child? Would the child feel comfortable at church learning such a idea? So, I never quite got the problem. I saw it as protecting the child against harm and respecting the same sex relationship.
×
×
  • Create New...