Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by bluebell

  1. Other people who are struggling might though. Our neighboring stake is have a huge problem right now with YW looking at P. And we have a guy in our ward who was addicted to P. and ended up on a site with underage kids and now is considered a child predator. Sadly, he’s not unique. P. is a hard fight for a lot of people, but most of them really do seem to want to fight it. I’m glad the church has resources for those who are trying to survive the battleground.
  2. Maybe it helps to understand Alter’s point when you realize that she was responding to cherryz, who posted about how upset her relative got when they couldn’t attend a niece’s temple marriage after leaving the church and how angry they were about baptisms and mission call parties.
  3. A drug test prior to hiring, and random drug tests after, are a part of most blue collar work places.
  4. I think that most things that we think make us unique are probably shared by thousands of other members and aren’t unique at all.
  5. We have family friends who used it to help their daughter with cerebral palsy with muscle spasms. It used to work wonderfully but sadly it doesn’t help at all anymore. Ive heard similar things from people who have used it for depression and/or anxiety.
  6. I’ve always assumed it meant “if the family isn’t bringing the missionary to the MTC and he needs to fly in.”
  7. Is viewing the other belief system (for lack of a better term) as wrong the same as viewing it as inferior? That's different though than saying that the reason she wanted her husband to still believe was so she wouldn't be embarrassed.
  8. Two questions. Why assume that someone wants their family with them at church out of embarrassment? That's a very uncharitable assumption and I'm wondering why that is the perspective you immediately go to. And, do you really believe that my beliefs (such as that someone can only gain a fullness of joy by accepting and following the gospel of Christ as taught by the church), are just as valid as your's? I ask because, from reading your posts on here, I would be incredibly surprised if you actually believed that. That is not the vibe that your posts give off.
  9. If one person (or both) is determined to be upset when the other acts on their personal beliefs, then yes, I think a cordial break up is probably the only way. Some people are able to allow others to follow their beliefs without taking it personally though so for those, I think that remaining in the relationship, and having the relationship be healthy, is very possible.
  10. I agree with you in that our beliefs (as members of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) are part of the problem. But, those are our sincere beliefs so not behaving as if we believe those things is not an option. Wanting members to behave as if we don't believe those things causes a lot of problems too. Whatever the solution is, it can never be 'stop doing what you sincerely believe is right' regardless of what side it's coming from. It's not reasonable.
  11. I do believe that most of these lists are initially created with the intent to deceive or mislead. I don't believe that people who pass them on without checking what's on them (like Tacenda did) have the intent to deceive but I do believe that a lot of the list makers know they are playing a bit fast and loose with the truth. I think they do that (and this is just my opinion) because they honestly believe the church is a bad place and that it's a good thing to get people to leave or question its teachings. Maybe I'm assuming that people should behave in a more responsible and mature manner than they usually do, but if someone creates a list accusing the church of lying, then I expect that they themselves have studied each thing that they put on the list. I don't think my expectation is at all unreasonable. They don't need to write an essay on each item to do that, they just need to leave those items off the list that they discover aren't accurate. Not necessarily. As I said in my first post on this topic, not being told something is not always the same as being lied to. Context matters. Does the church have a responsibility to make sure that members know that JS attended a Methodist bible class for three days in 1828 with his in-laws family? Is the church lying for not making sure every member knows that? No, I don't believe that's a valid assumption. If something is inaccurate it is by definition, untrue, right? That's not harsh, that's English. Do you know of any churches where if you attend a bible study class for three days you have 'joined' that church? There's 'fluid' and then there is false. I find it interesting that correcting falsehoods on a list is characterized by some as 'defensiveness and willingness to pile on the person.' I do understand what you are saying. We shouldn't respond with anger (and as far as I have seen, no one on this thread has), but those who have left should not require that those who have stayed should quietly support every accusation they make against the church. And also, we've been seeing lists like this for years. Years. At what point are we allowed to stop quietly listening and respond back? I have nothing against with responding like that. But if they throw a list at me on a message board, that they haven't even looked into, of 25 different things that the church has lied about, then, in my experience, they aren't interested in 'hearing my understanding.'
  12. To address the original post: Maybe it helps to rethink our idea of what a fallible prophet actually looks like. (Not saying it will definitely help, just maybe). Some quotes on fallibility, the church's teachings on the fallibility of prophets, and/or examples of when leaders were wrong to consider ( compiled by Fair Mormon):
  13. To the OP: I think if a family member leaves the church, then you should try to keep showing them love and including them in everything you can so they know that you value them regardless of their beliefs. If a family member is vocally hostile towards the church then that could be a hard thing to do, especially if we are talking about a spouse. I think in those situations the person should rely on a lot of prayer, study, and fasting to know how best to respond. I can't speak from experience though as I don't have any family members who have left the church over issues like this. I have family members who have gone inactive and it's never been a problem, they are still treated the same and we still hang out and interact the same amount as we did before. They frequently do or say things that my husband and I wouldn't do but that doesn't stop us from hanging out with them or having our children spend time with them. It's good for kids to see that a person can swear, or drink, or have a partner they live with but aren't married to, and still be a good person that we love very much. But these people didn't leave because they feel angry or hostile towards the church so that probably makes a difference. They treat the church with respect and we treat their beliefs with respect so it all works out. I have a couple of friends that have left the church because 'the church lied'. One unfriended me facebook and I interact with the other one on facebook all the time.
  14. Annotations connected to past sins? No, I think that Dan is right and that those are only visible to a few (like the bishop or stake president). I'm not positive on that though.
  15. It's the person's membership record. You can ask to get a copy of your's at any time, but if you have LDS Tools on your phone then you can see everything that's on it by clicking on your name. It generally has stuff like address and ordinance dates on it.
  16. That's the one that drew my attention and the only one I attempted to answer. It took me 20 minutes to double check and put together the information that I had on it and there is no reason for me personally to spend more time on the topic than that. Normally, it would be the person who is passing the list around, and presenting it as accurate, who should have the responsibility to check to see if the things on the list are accurate or not. Or at least the responsibility of the person believing everything on the list is true, to check to see if it actually is. If those people don't believe vetting the list is worth their time, why does it then become my problem to take care of? You bring up a great question though, if this issue really is as minor as you say, why was it included in the 'the church lied!' list to begin with? I assume it's included on the list because it makes it look more impressive than it actually is. Basically, it pads the list. It's misleading and of almost no importance whatsoever (which you admit) but it serves the list-maker's purpose so it was included. So you admit that the poster was definitely being misleading? That does not seem like a big one. When you read other quotes from Pres. Snow, you see that the shortened quote teaches about tithing what the prophet believed. The prophet said this about paying tithing: The word of the Lord to you is not anything new; it is simply this: THE TIME HAS NOW COME FOR EVERY LATTER-DAY SAINT, WHO CALCULATES TO BE PREPARED FOR THE FUTURE AND TO HOLD HIS FEET STRONG UPON A PROPER FOUNDATION, TO DO THE WILL OF THE LORD AND TO PAY HIS TITHING IN FULL. That is the word of the Lord to you, and it will be the word of the Lord to every settlement throughout the land of Zion. After I leave you and you get to thinking about this, you will see yourselves that the time has come when every man should stand up and pay his tithing in full. The Lord has blessed us and has had mercy upon us in the past; but there are times coming when the Lord requires us to stand up and do that which He has commanded and not leave it any longer. What I say to you in this Stake of Zion I will say to every Stake of Zion that has been organized. There is no man or woman that now hears what I am saying who will feel satisfied if he or she fails to pay a full tithing.” We don't know what the prophet meant by 'who has means' but we do know that he taught that everyone should pay a full tithe because that was the will of the Lord. There is no conspiracy in the differences in those quotes. I've spent some time looking into the 'problems' from the original sources, and that's probably the reason that I personally take these things so calmly. Most of the time, the problems are not what these lists pretend they are. The lists were created to serve a purpose, and presenting accurate information is not usually it.
  17. There seems to be a very obvious difference between putting up positive stories that harm no one's reputation and don't put anyone in danger of false accusations without vetting those stories, and putting up negative stories that can harm someone's reputation and put them in danger of false accusations and the involvement of law enforcement without vetting those stories. While vetting all stories would be a good thing, the fallout from a heart-whelming story not being completely true, and the fallout from an accusation of sexual molestation and rape not being completely true, are pretty different. It doesn't make sense to act as if both situations are essentially the same.
  18. I read through that list and I think one thing that might need to be understood is that not being taught something in a church setting is not the same thing as being lied to. I think it's the conflating of 'not being told' and 'being lied to' that causes problems with communication between active members and those struggling or who have left. Sometimes not being told something is a lie, but not every time. I also have problems with lists like this because they themselves are not very truthful, but there is enough in them that few people want to take the time to point out the errors, which the creators of the lists realize and take advantage of. For example, JS never joined the Methodist church. He attended a religious class led by a Methodist minister and the minister was the one who wrote his name down as a member of the class. One of the other class members found out who he was (this member designated himself as an official member, of which JS wasn't) and told him he could not attend the class unless he confessed and repented of everything he had been teaching and claiming. JS refused and voluntarily removed his name from the role. His name was on the role for three days. It also makes sense that he would attend methodist services at that point in his life as Emma's family were methodist (had methodist ministers in the family) and she and Joseph were living with her family at the time. Plus, he had no church home of his own to attend as the church had not been organized yet. Also, the Smith's first born child had recently died, so it makes sense that Joseph would seek to attend religious services with family during such a difficult time. So, knowing all of that, is it truthful to say that JS tried to join the Methodist church? No, that's not a truthful statement. It's intentionally misleading.
  19. Isn't making fun of the church for putting up an example of a fallible prophet for the children to learn from contradictory to your earlier point that the church doesn't acknowledge the imperfections of prophets? When you put up the rest of the lyrics for that verse, it shows that absolutely yes, 'they' did think that one through. Jonah was a prophet, tried to run away, But he later learned to listen and obey. When we really try, the Lord won’t let us fail: That’s what Jonah learned deep down inside the whale.
  20. Our explanations of what other people believe (whether it's some version of 'they are relying on the arm of flesh' or 'their anger is blinding them and leading them astray', etc.) is rarely how those people actually view their beliefs. We are usually confused by the beliefs of others because we are looking at them from our very fallible perspective without acknowledging that fallibility.
  21. No doubt. We're all hypocrites sometimes. I only really take issue with it when someone is trying to highlight the hypocrisy of others while pretending they have none.
  22. What if the person is in agreement with the church on things? That would seem to mean that in your eyes, either the person has to pretend to disagree with the church, or they are a sheeple. Am I understanding that right?
  • Create New...