Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

The Latest Anti-Mormon Deception: "Futuremissionary.Com"

futuremissionary.com anti-Mormonism critical websites

  • Please log in to reply
327 replies to this topic

#121 bcuzbcuz

bcuzbcuz

    Separates Water & Dry Land

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,105 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 01:11 AM

1965....is there any evidence this goes on nowadays?


None that I know of and that's why I was specific. The MP was manipulative in his rules and control. He had district and zone leaders spy on missionaries, along with policies that encouraged dishonesty. When he was replaced by a kinder, more understanding MP, there followed a period of chaos, not unlike the ensuing chaos after the fall of the USSR. The new MP was not lenient, it was just that some missionaries did not know how to respond once the restrictive rules were lifted.

Edited by bcuzbcuz, 13 June 2013 - 01:13 AM.

  • 0
On a hot summer night, would you offer your throat to the wolf with red roses?

#122 Kenngo1969

Kenngo1969

    God's Favorite Groveling Sycophant

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,707 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 09:05 AM

For a balanced but realistic perspective on serving a mission, this article is worth reading:

http://www.realclear...th_busting.html

You're absolutely right. That is worth reading ... very much. Although I can never think of the film God's Army without lamenting its creator's exit from the faith, reading that article called to mind the feeling I had when I first saw that movie: [I]Finally! Here's somebody who 'gets it'!" If missions aren't all "sweetness-and-light," neither are they all "dullness-and-drudgery": they're some mixture of the two (and various points in between), so that the things on the undesirable end of the spectrum make missionaries appreciate, all the more, the things on the highly-desirable end of the spectrum. Thanks for passing that along. :)
  • 1

Watch out for Stan!

"Read your Scriptures, strap on a bomb: It's all the same to us!"

—Kenngo1969, re Tal "The Talibachman" Bachman's comment to The Mormons documentarian Helen Whitney

 


#123 alien236

alien236

    Newbie: Without form, and void

  • New Member
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 12:00 PM

Not that we need any more evidence of this guy's dishonesty, but until I called him out on it he was presenting a Joseph Fielding Smith anti-evolution quote as an excerpt from a First Presidency statement. Even if the quote in question hadn't contained the phrase "I say most emphatically", which would be ridiculous in a statement coming from three people, there's no way that kind of thing was an honest mistake. He also said that Bruce R. McConkie's "Mormon Doctrine" is an official church publication because David O. McKay authorized its reprinting. (Never mind that it isn't even published anymore.) Of course when I messaged him and pointed out his deceit and hypocrisy, he had the audacity to keep defending himself and playing "Mr. Innocent". Don Bradley's use of the term "anti-Mormon" (which I try to avoid as well) is more than appropriate in this instance.
  • 0
"A fool uttereth all his mind: but a wise man keepeth it in till afterwards." - Proverbs 29:11

#124 futuremissionary

futuremissionary

    Newbie: Without form, and void

  • New Member
  • Pip
  • 17 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 12:28 PM

Not that we need any more evidence of this guy's dishonesty, but until I called him out on it he was presenting a Joseph Fielding Smith anti-evolution quote as an excerpt from a First Presidency statement. Even if the quote in question hadn't contained the phrase "I say most emphatically", which would be ridiculous in a statement coming from three people, there's no way that kind of thing was an honest mistake. He also said that Bruce R. McConkie's "Mormon Doctrine" is an official church publication because David O. McKay authorized its reprinting. (Never mind that it isn't even published anymore.) Of course when I messaged him and pointed out his deceit and hypocrisy, he had the audacity to keep defending himself and playing "Mr. Innocent". Don Bradley's use of the term "anti-Mormon" (which I try to avoid as well) is more than appropriate in this instance.


Yes, back when the site was still in beta I had some mistakes in there. Thanks again for pointing that one out. I removed it long before we went out of beta.
  • 0
FutureMissionary - Helping young men and women prepare for an LDS mission

#125 futuremissionary

futuremissionary

    Newbie: Without form, and void

  • New Member
  • Pip
  • 17 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 12:31 PM

Actually, it was still worded funny. Nooow it's fixed. :) Thanks again for your feedback.
  • 0
FutureMissionary - Helping young men and women prepare for an LDS mission

#126 Ahab

Ahab

    Places Sun, Moon & Stars In The Sky

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,045 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 12:41 PM

Actually, it was still worded funny. Nooow it's fixed. :) Thanks again for your feedback.

You're still not showing that you know the difference in appearing as an anti-Mormon and appearing as someone who has faith in what the Lord has told us is true about Mormonism, though. Minor details are piddly when you stil haven't changed the overall tone of your message.
  • 0
I desire to show you who I am by showing you who I follow.
He is my Lord. He is my Life. He is all I desire to be.

Speaking against the NATURE of sin: To the last I grapple with thee,
From Hell's Heart I stab thee; For Hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee...

#127 njpomeroy

njpomeroy

    Newbie: Without form, and void

  • New Member
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 05:19 PM

I served in Brazil. I never ate dinner. It wasn't because of any "No investigators, No Dinner", it was because dinner didn't exist (at least in my area of Brazil). You ate a quick breakfast, a massive lunch, tried to stay awake with a full stomach and a hot day, and then went home, had a small drink/meal (I guess you could call that dinner) and went to sleep. The idea of having an hour or two set aside for dinner is foreign to me.


I think this is sort of a silly side-show to the main point about the usefulness/accuracy/real intent of the highly problematic site,...
BUT...
I happen to know a little about this side-show too, so I'll chime in.
I went to the Recife Brasil mission 1995-1997, under Presidents Clark and Gollaher (real people, look em up. somewhere). In the Recife mission, there wasn't a planned dinner time in the missionary schedule because PEOPLE DIDNT EAT "DINNER" as a meal. Lunch was the daily meal. "Dinner" was possibly corn meal or hard roll and a cup of coffee (or cevada/coffee substitute for members), just to keep your belly from talking or to have something to visit around. Likewise "dinner" among working but poor men could also be sitting around eaten appetizers and drinking cane-alcohol for recreation while playing dominoes.

So as missionaries, we had a big lunch, and worked until we went back to the apt where we'd shower and eat a piece of french bread roll and fall into bed. No dinner. ever. Not a rule; we weren't even trying to have dinner; it was just the way the culture was. If we were hanging out in a social context with people with food/drink in the evening, there better be (potential) investigators there, or you're just sloughing off. So yeah, if we were to insist on "dinner" it'd be in that context and therefore we'd need to be working.

When I was a greeny and not used to that meal system, I'd eat too little at lunch and my senior companions were nice enough to me to let me grab some bread and juice during the "dinner hour" while we were out. Once I got used to the system, that went away on its own.

OK, side-show over.
  • 1

#128 Tacenda

Tacenda

    “Earth laughs in flowers”

  • Limited
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,684 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 06:44 PM

I think this is sort of a silly side-show to the main point about the usefulness/accuracy/real intent of the highly problematic site,...
BUT...
I happen to know a little about this side-show too, so I'll chime in.
I went to the Recife Brasil mission 1995-1997, under Presidents Clark and Gollaher (real people, look em up. somewhere). In the Recife mission, there wasn't a planned dinner time in the missionary schedule because PEOPLE DIDNT EAT "DINNER" as a meal. Lunch was the daily meal. "Dinner" was possibly corn meal or hard roll and a cup of coffee (or cevada/coffee substitute for members), just to keep your belly from talking or to have something to visit around. Likewise "dinner" among working but poor men could also be sitting around eaten appetizers and drinking cane-alcohol for recreation while playing dominoes.

So as missionaries, we had a big lunch, and worked until we went back to the apt where we'd shower and eat a piece of french bread roll and fall into bed. No dinner. ever. Not a rule; we weren't even trying to have dinner; it was just the way the culture was. If we were hanging out in a social context with people with food/drink in the evening, there better be (potential) investigators there, or you're just sloughing off. So yeah, if we were to insist on "dinner" it'd be in that context and therefore we'd need to be working.

When I was a greeny and not used to that meal system, I'd eat too little at lunch and my senior companions were nice enough to me to let me grab some bread and juice during the "dinner hour" while we were out. Once I got used to the system, that went away on its own.

OK, side-show over.

It's clear to me FM was not lying then. He probably had roommate or roommates that were there longer and just passed on how they don't eat dinner, and maybe gave him a piece of bread to hold him over, sounds reasonable that he'd get the idea it was a rule.
  • 0
middlewayer

#129 DonBradley

DonBradley

    Individualist in the service of a community

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,418 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 07:10 PM

FutureMissionary,

In place of making minor adjustments to make the site appear not to be intended as an anti-Mormon site, I would encourage you to make the change that would really make your site honest: simply admit that it is presenting a case against Mormonism, from your critical vantage point. Might this decrease your site traffic? Sure. But it would keep you from the mistake of thinking that two lies make a truth. As it stands right now your site is premised on the idea that if (as you see it) Joseph Smith lied, then you need to lie in order to set things right. But you can't win a real victory for truth that way. As Gandhi said, as the means, so the ends. In other words, if you use falsehood as a means, you're going to end up having increased the world's falsehood, not its truth.

Your readers deserve better than that. And, since I believe you are basically a well-intentioned person, you deserve better than that, better than having to compromise your integrity and having to hide your true intentions. Just be straight up as a critic of Mormonism. Frame your site honestly.

Don
  • 6
"I’ve known Don a long time and have critiqued his previous work and have to say that he does much better as a believer than a critic." - Dan Vogel, August 8, 2011

"This is it folks, the high point of apologetics for the year. The church pumps millions into FARMS and its PR dept for this." - "Heresy," on a nameless board, August 11, 2011 - after reading the Deseret News piece about my Kinderhook plates presentation

#130 Hamba Tuhan

Hamba Tuhan

    Brings Forth Plants

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,120 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 07:27 PM

It's clear to me FM was not lying then. He probably had roommate or roommates that were there longer and just passed on how they don't eat dinner, and maybe gave him a piece of bread to hold him over, sounds reasonable that he'd get the idea it was a rule.


And then of course it was just an innocent mistake that he would frame this piece of information in such a way to suggest that the Church has complete disregard for the health and wellbeing of its missionaries ...
  • 3

#131 Hamba Tuhan

Hamba Tuhan

    Brings Forth Plants

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,120 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 09:52 PM

By the way, this ancient strategem has a name: synchoresis-- 'a type of concession made to create an impression of fairness and impartiality'.

'In his book The Prince, Machiavelli wrote about how to conquer and preserve authority. The impression of being fair and honest may, if the preservation of the authority requires it, be followed by tricks, lies and violence' (Bengt Carlsson and Paul Davidsson, 'A biological view of information infosystems'. Intelligent Agent Technology: research and development, ed. Ning Zhong et al. World Scientific, 2001).

Edited by Hamba Tuhan, 13 June 2013 - 09:52 PM.

  • 4

#132 Judd

Judd

    Seasoned Member: Separates Light & Dark

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 428 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 10:08 PM

How this is even debatable of whether or not there are ulterior motives is beyond me.
  • 0

#133 why me

why me

    Creates Man & Woman

  • Limited
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,109 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 10:25 PM

It's clear to me FM was not lying then. He probably had roommate or roommates that were there longer and just passed on how they don't eat dinner, and maybe gave him a piece of bread to hold him over, sounds reasonable that he'd get the idea it was a rule.


FM exploited the 'facts' and made it seem more than it actually was. He could have mentioned the various cultural norms that one can experience on the mission. I don't think that he did that at all. And his tone could have been faith promoting. So, he is misleading with his text.
  • 0
Joseph Smith Quotes
... I love that man better who swears a stream as long as my arm, and administering to the poor and dividing his substance, than the long smooth faced hypocrites. I don't want you to think I am very righteous, for I am not very righteous. God judgeth men according to the light he gives them.
Words of Joseph Smith, p.204 (18 May 1843)


http://www.lds.org/e...tation?lang=eng

#134 BlueDreams

BlueDreams

    If only there was blue cocoa too

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,695 posts

Posted 14 June 2013 - 08:36 AM

It's clear to me FM was not lying then. He probably had roommate or roommates that were there longer and just passed on how they don't eat dinner, and maybe gave him a piece of bread to hold him over, sounds reasonable that he'd get the idea it was a rule.


It's not necessarily about whether or not he was lying about the rule of no dinner....but the context that he set it up: Ie. missionaries were starving or losing weight from it. I also didn't have set dinners....because our mission combined our dinner and lunch hour into a big 2 hr block. For our lunch. I am one of those people who needs food consistently to feel ok. And I was perfectly ok. In fact sometimes I preferred not to have dinner appointments just so that we could work more....they could be time consuming.

Overall, I made my initial critique to your site here. And a lot of those concerns remain. Other notes:

There is no way to fully "prep" someone for a mission. It's just not feasible. I'm one of those cautious people who asked everybody and their dog about a mission, read the white handbook pre-mission, etc....and it was still a surprise...I still felt like I was entering into another world when I left. For most it wasn't a shocker though. Asking anyone pre-mish, the answer was the same: It was great, I loved it, and it was a ton of hard work. As long as they're not like one of my companions who thought it was supposed to be kinda like an extended EFY trip, I think they'll be just fine for a bit of surprise. Your site is excessively negative and frankly to me states more about your current position and probably how you were as a missionary than anything else.

Your 10 things have things that are true, certainly: You're mostly not alone, not everyone goes for the right reasons, carnal desires don't magically go away. Those I'd basically completely agree with.
Things I wouldn't: Some do wait (or are at least available when you get back), it's rare...but it happens. I really don't remember a whole lot of "faith promoting rumors"...I never heard of your example. Why would I need them anyways when I saw and heard plenty of real miracles and faith-promoting events??? Though there's a chance you'll have a gay companion, the statistical probability doesn't lend itself for that. 1 in 10 might are likely to experiment but on only 2-5% (depending the stats used) actually identify with said orientation. A person can have at most 12-16 companions (assuming they never had 2 transfers together with any of their companions). Most likely, you'll have far less. Statistically that's just not enough people for it to be probable. Possible, yes, but not probable. I agree they need more sensitivity in language, dialogue, and thought. But having them wonder which of their companions is gay is probably not going to help. Bible bashing isn't effective, but honestly some of your site is set up in such a manner that you're encouraging some sort of fighting on the mish. And though not everyone goes for the right reasons, there is no reason why they cannot finish for the right ones. Missions change you, your purpose changes,...or at least it should. Oh and I most certainly do remember it being one of the best times of my life on my mission. There were points that were excruciating, but they also gave me the greatest growth and some of my most profound spiritual experiences. By the second half, I remember being at complete and total peace for the first time in my life. That feeling is indescribable. I felt whole and not alone and I loved and thrived on the gospel. I was so amazingly happy. It was definitely the best 18 months of my life up to that point. And though not every day was some "spiritual high," "Truly spiritual experiences" were not far and few in-between at all.

This would not be my top 10 things you'd need to know at all. Not if I wanted greater and stronger missionaries.

One last thing. I'm half black and I'm not uber racially sensitive...but your "black mormons" page is insulting! It's beyond ridiculous. I frankly don't know where to start...the only two I don't have too much problems with are the first two points. The interracial marriage as sin, blacks go to the CK, and why were black born black, are without any cultural/historical context, have no relevant or present perspective, and looks like it was cherry picked from some anti-mormon website. To all of the questions - all of them - the easier answer would have simply been: they were just about as racist as anyone else in their time period. And: these beliefs did not survive their era; they are entirely false and contradicted by current revelation and scripture. The history 70-150 years in the past are given excessive prominence, while the actual state of things are left with whimpy descriptions that make the current policies seem more speculative than the more likely folk doctrine thought 100 years past. I feel that page would do more to harm race relations and understanding in the church than it would do good. Want proof: You've got some random racist troll in your comments section just below.

Very last comment: If someone wants to understand the mormons who've gone less active that they are now currently teaching, there's not much of a need to look at John Dehlin. Frankly, the ones who've left for reasoning similar to Dehlin aren't very likely to sit down with missionaries that they most likely perceive as naive and a poor source for alleviating their problems. Frankly, Dehlin himself probably would have been too proud to sit down and talk with the missionaries....it's too low on the totem pole. To understand the less actives you'll meet on the mission the formula is quite simply: talk to them, listen to their concerns and their problems, teach to their needs, serve and love them, then go from there.


With luv,
BD
  • 5
We do not see things as they are, we see them as we are.

UMW is a way of life.

#135 Wiki Wonka

Wiki Wonka

    FairMormon Wiki wrangler

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 929 posts

Posted 14 June 2013 - 08:50 AM

One last thing. I'm half black and I'm not uber racially sensitive...but your "black mormons" page is insulting! It's beyond ridiculous. I frankly don't know where to start...the only two I don't have too much problems with are the first two points. The interracial marriage as sin, blacks go to the CK, and why were black born black, are without any cultural/historical context, have no relevant or present perspective, and looks like it was cherry picked from some anti-mormon website. To all of the questions - all of them - the easier answer would have simply been: they were just about as racist as anyone else in their time period. And: these beliefs did not survive their era; they are entirely false and contradicted by current revelation and scripture. The history 70-150 years in the past are given excessive prominence, while the actual state of things are left with whimpy descriptions that make the current policies seem more speculative than the more likely folk doctrine thought 100 years past. I feel that page would do more to harm race relations and understanding in the church than it would do good. Want proof: You've got some random racist troll in your comments section just below.


+100.

The "Black Mormons" page on FutureMissionary.com is sophomoric, and the way it is set up is the biggest indicator of the true, critical nature of the website.

WW
  • 0

In our zeal we sometimes confuse sin with sinner, and we condemn too quickly, and with too little compassion. We know from modern revelation that the worth of souls is great in the sight of God. We cannot gauge the worth of another soul any more than we can measure the span of the universe. Every person we meet is a VIP to our Heavenly Father. Once we understand that, we can begin to understand how we should treat our fellow man.
President Dieter Uchtdorf, April 4, 2010


The FairMormon Answers Wiki


#136 cdowis

cdowis

    Creates Man & Woman

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,553 posts

Posted 14 June 2013 - 10:03 AM

By the way, this ancient strategem has a name: synchoresis-- 'a type of concession made to create an impression of fairness and impartiality'.

'In his book The Prince, Machiavelli wrote about how to conquer and preserve authority. The impression of being fair and honest may, if the preservation of the authority requires it, be followed by tricks, lies and violence' (Bengt Carlsson and Paul Davidsson, 'A biological view of information infosystems'. Intelligent Agent Technology: research and development, ed. Ning Zhong et al. World Scientific, 2001).


I remember watching a short documentary on how to identify a psychotic. They make a careful study of normal human behaviour and are able to fake caring and loving behaviour.
  • 0

"Reasoning with cats?  When you want your kitty to do your bidding, it's 
best to skip the small talk and bring out the bribes." Cat Talk

 


#137 Judd

Judd

    Seasoned Member: Separates Light & Dark

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 428 posts

Posted 14 June 2013 - 10:56 AM

I remember watching a short documentary on how to identify a psychotic. They make a careful study of normal human behaviour and are able to fake caring and loving behaviour.


*psychopath. But yes, which makes me curious why so many are playing along with his 'ignorant and stupid but totally looking for all suggestions and won't argue with anyone' routine.

Agree above with BlueDreams. Interesting comments on Dehlin hypothetically sitting down with missionaries. I remember him stating that for resolving his concerns that reading the scriptures just doesn't work for him.
  • 0

#138 BCSpace

BCSpace

    Right Divider of Systematic LDS Theology

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,226 posts

Posted 14 June 2013 - 11:05 AM

I noticed there is a FAQ question "How Do I Handle Tough Questions?" but it links to nothing and there is no such subject in the master list.
  • 0

BYU Combined Choirs perform "Come Thou Fount Of Every Blessing"
LDS doctrine defined. The first bullet point is the key.
Capitalism from the Lord: Law of Consecration.
Evolution Primer Evolution does not conflict with LDS doctrine in any way.

Your Best Resource On Joseph Smith's Polygamy


#139 alien236

alien236

    Newbie: Without form, and void

  • New Member
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 14 June 2013 - 05:14 PM

I love apologetics and freedom to discuss sensitive issues, but there's a time and a place for everything and a mission is not it. Missionaries are supposed to keep it simple and focus on the essentials of the gospel. If (or, more likely, when) someone on my mission asks me about LDS racial issues, I'm not going to recite everything I know on the subject (which is a lot more than the cherry-picked crud on this website); I'll just say "Mormons have historically been no more or less racist than their peers, and for a time blacks were banned from the priesthood for unknown reasons but they haven't been since we received a revelation over thirty years ago." Bam. That's all they need to know and if they want to know more they can consult a scholar, not a missionary.
  • 0
"A fool uttereth all his mind: but a wise man keepeth it in till afterwards." - Proverbs 29:11

#140 Wiki Wonka

Wiki Wonka

    FairMormon Wiki wrangler

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 929 posts

Posted 14 June 2013 - 08:06 PM

So the ex-Mormons from the ex-Mormon subreddit trolled the comment section of the FutureMissionary site on the "Black Mormons" page. They dumped a bunch of comments about how "we" Latter-day Saints need to heed the words of "our" leaders from the 1950's....
  • 0

In our zeal we sometimes confuse sin with sinner, and we condemn too quickly, and with too little compassion. We know from modern revelation that the worth of souls is great in the sight of God. We cannot gauge the worth of another soul any more than we can measure the span of the universe. Every person we meet is a VIP to our Heavenly Father. Once we understand that, we can begin to understand how we should treat our fellow man.
President Dieter Uchtdorf, April 4, 2010


The FairMormon Answers Wiki



0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users