LifeOnaPlate Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 http://www.smpt.org/We're having our annual meeting in Claremont, California, in May.Aye, and I won't be there. I'll have to wait until we meet again in Utah.
mysteryman Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 So I am told. Did I mention that the quest lasted another decade or two?But whatever it takes to get the approved answer-right?Tarski, as others have stated, you didn't do it right. Even you yourself have admitted that you didn't do it until you found the right way to get a testimony. So, to anyone that wants a testimony, I have a 5 step process that I am certain will work. I must confess that I did not origninate this 5 steps, I heard it from someone else:1. Want to believe its true (this should be true of most people that have been indoctrinated from an early age to believe in Mormonism.)2. Pray that it is true. Don't accept the answer no, take after the many stories of missionaries who gained their testimonies at the MTC, the answer no is not even entering their mind, so don't let any doubt enter your brain.3. Wait hard and look for the spiritaul confirmation. It may come without you recognizing it, so look and strain the brain hard to feel it. If the powerful fuzzy doesn't come, then think about the possibilty that the Magic Spirit is telling you that you have always known its true and don't need the powerful heartburning feeling. Whatever you do, don't let any doubt that it is false enter mind because that can't happen since it is true.4. Read only Mormon books that help you strengthen your testimony. There are many many make me feel good fluff books about the gospel that many authors have written. Do not read anything that may challenge your testimony because that only opens the door for Satan to wheel his magical powers to decieve you. 5. Have faith. Just have faith. Don't think too hard, just have faith. I know that stories such as Sampson and his magical head of hair enabling him to tear lions apart may sound like mythology and really stupid when you spend 3 seconds thinking about it, but just have faith! I know the thought of a loving god having to offer his own son as a human pagan like sacrifice to somehow "pay" for the sins that entered the world when a magical talking snake talked out first parents into eating some magic fruit sounds really absurd, just have faith that it is true! I know you may wonder why you should take seriously the claims of someone who said he could put a rock in his hat and find buried treasure, but don't think about that stuff, just have faith!If you follow these steps, you can gain a testimony.
Daniel Peterson Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 "Take that, all you Mormons," says mysteryman. "You're self-deceived idiots."Like all critics of his particular kind, mysteryman has transcended the state in which he might be subject to self-deception or error.P.S. Magic Spirit was a nice touch, very expressive of the smug contempt that those who have transcended rightly feel for lesser beings. And subsequent repetition of the term magic was especially effective, rhetorically, emphasizing how deep the contempt of the Transcended is.
Greg Smith Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 Incidentally, Greg Smith's superb essay in the latest FARMS Review is directly relevant to one of the topics regarding which alienated former believers claim they were misled and on which they say that they were somehow prevented from reading:http://farms.byu.edu/publications/review/?...um=2&id=721Thanks for the plug, but I must warn readers that part of the RfM brain trust has seen through me, announcing that there is "Not one single fact in sight, just name-calling and insults and bearing testimonkey."I've seen other works subjected to the obsessive critics' rather strange hermeneutic, but its a bit surreal to have it happen to me.I must be an idiot savant--write something with a couple of hundred references and footnotes, and then be told there's not a single fact there. Surely a career in politics awaits.
dblagent007 Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 - The staggering amount of Sexual child abuse cases - bishops raping and burning children. LDS members attacking victimsOkay, I was trying my best to follow along, but bishops BURNING children??????? Boy, that is a new one.- being harrased by retarded horny girls invading my propertyWell, really, who hasn't had this happen? Its entirely too commonplace to even mention in your list.
Daniel Peterson Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 I've had to fight aggressive girls off most of my life. It's been my curse.As for burning children, though, I've only done it since being a bishop. In my ward, the third Sunday of the month is Burning Children Sunday. We kindle the pyre right after the three-hour block of meetings. Usually only one child, but, if the third Sunday falls within a week of either of the solstices or the equinoxes, we burn two. (I'm not sure how the economic downturn is going to affect us, though.)
dblagent007 Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 As for burning children, though, I've only done it since being a bishop. In my ward, the third Sunday of the month is Burning Children Sunday. We kindle the pyre right after the three-hour block of meetings. Usually only one child, but, if the third Sunday falls within a week of either of the solstices or the equinoxes, we burn two. (I'm not sure how the economic downturn is going to affect us, though.)Ah, the mystery is solved. The answer was hiding in plain view! I mean it only takes a few moments of thought to put two and two together. DCP is a bishop . . . and really the only depraved enough to rape and burn children. BINGO!
mateo Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 "Take that, all you Mormons," says mysteryman. "You're self-deceived idiots."Like all critics of his particular kind, mysteryman has transcended the state in which he might be subject to self-deception or error.P.S. Magic Spirit was a nice touch, very expressive of the smug contempt that those who have transcended rightly feel for lesser beings. And subsequent repetition of the term magic was especially effective, rhetorically, emphasizing how deep the contempt of the Transcended is.Don't trip over that black kettle in your kitchen.
beastie Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 I'm still waiting to hear how I, as a nineteen year old investigator in rural Virginia in 1976, was supposed to educate myself about topics I didn't even know existed.Or, for that matter, how is a poor investigator in a third-world-country supposed to do that today, either.
Scott Lloyd Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 I'm still waiting to hear how I, as a nineteen year old investigator in rural Virginia in 1976, was supposed to educate myself about topics I didn't even know existed.Umm, were you too rural to get an Ensign subscription?
Scott Lloyd Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 What I find most interesting about the First Vision is that no one in his family seems to recall hearing of it, and the persecution JS noted in his history seems not to have been remembered, either.I'm a sporadic journal keeper at best. My journal drops off without any record of the birth of our daughter and youngest child.I suppose future generations will conclude she was never born.
John Williams Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 I'm a sporadic journal keeper at best. My journal drops off without any record of the birth of our daughter and youngest child.I suppose future generations will conclude she was never born.Your point being? How does that relate to what I said? Your dripping sarcasm aside, the comparison is completely inapt.
Hermes Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 I sure feel deceived by all the pat answers I got before I joined the Church. The feeling of being deceived has to do with trust issues for me. If people I put my trust and faith in lie to me, I feel deceived. so many of the answers I got turned out to be false - either lies by omission or lies by commision. Some probably did not know the answers. When I studied my questions my main concerns were:- Polygamy and the lies and deception to cover it up- historical revisionism - moving sections of doctrines and covenants - the changes of BOM - The airbrushed protrayal of JS. - The Book of Abraham problems- racism, anti-feminism and the latest denial of civil rights to gays and Lesbians (LDS disrespectful forcing their values on others)- The staggering amount of Sexual child abuse cases - bishops raping and burning children. LDS members attacking victims- lost trust in the gift of discernment of Ecclesiastical leaders (Often non-existent9- the great discrepancies about what GAs and spokesman say and the Actions of LDS members- I did not knwo about the paranoia - the food storage and the 3 days survival backpack- The changes in the Endowment Ceremony (God is eternal the same yesterday - today and in the future - but changes his mind all the time)- Sunday School classes where I heard about JS bleowed Emma to Ad nauseum - thinking about his 32 other wives- experiencing no Christlike love for the poor, the sick and the dying (some disfellowshipped members)- meeting many very depressed and unhappy women staying in loveless marriages- pristhoodholders more busy with their callings than the needs of their families- The Church Spending billions on huge shoppings malls very close to Temple Square and very little on charity- meeting apologist that defend the chruch even when the Chruch and it
LifeOnaPlate Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 Umm, were you too rural to get an Ensign subscription?Come on, Scott, let's be serious. You really think a 19 year old in rural whatever is going to read stuff?Your point being? How does that relate to what I said? Your dripping sarcasm aside, the comparison is completely inapt.Actually, no, it isn't.
John Williams Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 Come on, Scott, let's be serious. You really think a 19 year old in rural whatever is going to read stuff?Isn't it interesting how beastie is mocked for not reading at 19 and mocked now for reading about Mesoamerica? Weird, that.Actually, no, it isn't.Is too. Care to explain why the comparison works? I'm not seeing it.
Jeff K. Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 Your point being? How does that relate to what I said? Your dripping sarcasm aside, the comparison is completely inapt.Actually it is relevant. Consider that you don't have "all the writings", so your assumption that writings that say nothing are the equivalent of the denial of the event is illogical. I think the point was well made.
consiglieri Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 Would it be fair to say that there are both legitimate and illegitimate uses of the principle "Milk before Meat"?It is a principle that, like fire, can burn as well as warm.And once adopted, it is subject to all manner of abuse.All the Best!--Consiglieri
John Williams Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 Actually it is relevant. Consider that you don't have "all the writings", so your assumption that writings that say nothing are the equivalent of the denial of the event is illogical. I think the point was well made.And where did I say anything about having "writings" or that "writings that say nothing are the equivalent of the denial of the event"? That appears to be Scott's argument, but it is not mine.
Jeff K. Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 Again you make the cheap dodge of not acknowledging your attempt of guilt by implication.The off statement that it was funny how there were no writings of the period by family members that absolutely confirm the issue.
John Williams Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 Again you make the cheap dodge of not acknowledging your attempt of guilt by implication.The off statement that it was funny how there were no writings of the period by family members that absolutely confirm the issue.CFR
consiglieri Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 I think it hard to deny that Mormons have a history of hiding certain teachings and practices from outsiders.My experience has been that the overriding reason for doing so is because we view everybody who is not a Mormon as a potential member, and instead of simply stating what we believe and do, we are constantly spinning things in order to leave the impression best calculated to baptize.How many times have Mormons on this very board been asked a question by a non-member only to mentally filter the response and instead of just being frank with them and speaking like they would with another Mormon, excise controversial material and give them a response that would pass Primary muster?I mean, it's not like we don't have LDS professors advocating we "answer the question that should have been asked." All the Best!--Consiglieri
Deborah Posted March 17, 2009 Author Posted March 17, 2009 I'm still waiting to hear how I, as a nineteen year old investigator in rural Virginia in 1976, was supposed to educate myself about topics I didn't even know existed. The question is why did you join the church? Was it because the teachings had the ring of truth? If this is the case what did it matter about the other things? So later on you hear things that disturb you. And I guess this is where I have difficulty because I can't see why you would throw out the truths you learned because of what you've heard or read without first searching out the other side of the story from reliable sources. It is indeed throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
John Williams Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 The question is why did you join the church? Was it because the teachings had the ring of truth? If this is the case what did it matter about the other things? So later on you hear things that disturb you. And I guess this is where I have difficulty because I can't see why you would throw out the truths you learned because of what you've heard or read without first searching out the other side of the story from reliable sources. It is indeed throwing out the baby with the bathwater.Although I can't speak for beastie, why do you assume that those who leave haven't searched out "the other side of the story from reliable sources"?
Deborah Posted March 17, 2009 Author Posted March 17, 2009 If I were to tell my mother my true feelings about the church, all it accomplishes is to hurt her and destroy the spiritual communication we are able to enjoy now. I think think you bring up a valid point. Often we go through the motions of something in order not to hurt others. That is why so many young men have gone on missions when they didn't really want to; but at the same time many of them found their testimonies by doing so. Some of course ended up falling away once the got home and away from their parents. I think though you short-change your mother. Have you tried telling her your doubts? Maybe she has answers you don't know about. My daughter used to bring up all kinds of "How come" questions. It was an opportunity to discuss these things and sometimes even do research to find the answers and it brought us closer. I really believe you hurt her more by pretending to have a spiritual communication, which is impossible when one is not being honest.
Deborah Posted March 17, 2009 Author Posted March 17, 2009 Although I can't speak for beastie, why do you assume that those who leave haven't searched out "the other side of the story from reliable sources"? Well, because they pretty much quote or cut and past those sources.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.