"Mormon Reformation" Group To Post "95 Theses" On Lds Buildings On 2/16

[Avatar4321]

It's strange how many people who claim to have the truth are so scared of a few facts - and yes, they are facts if any of you bothered to check for yourself.

Now instead of acting like brats and tearing up someone else's hard work, why don't you address the issues raised and stop the ad hominem attacks and silly nit picking. Calling people "cowardly" and quibbling over the number of theses, as if that's what really matters. Grow up. Do you want them to stand at the chapel door with a stack of copies handing them out? Of course not. You'll call the police or something. How do you want them to get these facts addressed by the church? How do you suggest those who have studied church history using Church documents (not so-called anti Mormon material) get their concerns looked at by the leadership? If you actually researched the church using its own documents you would see how many untruths are taught over the pulpit each Sunday and in church publications. Do you actually want to keep teaching and learning a false history of your faith that the church's OWN DOCUMENTS show is a lie? What type of organization are you protecting?

Dismissing the issues and "anti Mormon" is a technique used by those who don't want to research and understand the issues in question. If the truth is "anti Mormon", what does that make Mormonism????? What kind of people are you? Step back and take a long look at your behavior.

You might also not be so selfish to try to stop others from thinking about the issues raised. If the church is true it should be able to stand up against the FACTS hidden from the general membership for so long without people scurrying around trying to hide them. The cat's outta the bag folks. The internet age means ordinary people can search for the truth. It's just like when the Bible was finally published in English. The church (Catholic) couldn't stop people questioning what they had bee telling them was fact any more. They could read it for themselves. Just think for a minute about the type of people who try to prevent others from learning. Historically they have always been on the wrong side of an argument, which is why they have to play dirty. When this gets to the media, and it will, there will be part of the story showing torn up pages or closed minded members refusing to even read the paper. All that does is confirm to all that LDS members are unable to think for themselves, and are willing to believe anything their leaders tell them even if Mormon documents actually show the complete opposite was true. It won't look good.

Finally, for those who claim these issues have been addressed by the church, I ask WHERE? If FAIR or FARMS came up with some attempt at answers, that's not good enough. The Corporation of the President of the COJCOLDS has never stood behind any of the so-called answers given by apologists. There are disclaimers on apologist websites stating as much. If these "answers" were what the official church wishes to be known, they would say so. Instead the Church tries to ignore the issues raised, hoping they will go away. They won't, especially as more people worldwide are now able to read early LDS documents online and compare the facts to what the modern church teaches.

Keep dismissing people like these 260. Keep ignoring the issues. Keep combining wards and reducing temple operating hours.

We call this flaming. You have already been removed from one thread today so you might want to reconsider your approach.

Is there a reason we need to keep answering issues that were addressed decades ago? Why do we need to reinvent the wheel when the internet is available for anyone who wants to do a search, the scriptures are open for anyone who wants to learn, and the Spirit of the Lord will teach any one who is honestly and sincerely searching for the truth.

[Avatar4321]

If they were out on the sidewalk handing stuff out, I'd go talk to them just like I do when any nonLDS missionaries come to the door or any friends or family has question. Them sneaking around putting up on a door one sign that is going to get pulled down by the first person to read it so they can read it just because it will be easier to read that way isn't going to accomplish anything.

The whole scheme sounds like a poorly planned high school stunt.

They aren't going to succeed even if they plan wisely. This is the work of the Lord.

[mrmandias]

I too am against the church's practice of selling indulgences and of simony. Count me in, Mormon Reformation!

[Avatar4321]

Read the whole thing. Unfortunately there wasn't one new item that would have given me some fun researching.

I browsed the list. Lost interest by the time I saw the View of the Hebrews mentioned. It's not like we cant read it for ourselves and see that it has absolutely nothing to do with the Book of Mormon.

[Avatar4321]

It's hard to believe that any active, temple attending member with a testimony of the church would support this group. Since they are going under the courageous cover of 'anonymous', i don't believe they are being at all truthful when they imply that such people are working with them.

Eh. if they are willing to do this, I don't think it would be a stretch for someone who wants to do this to lie in order to get a recommend. I hope they havent done that. But i wouldnt be surprised.

[Avatar4321]

I first saw this on FB. Nothing new in these and I'm amazed at the ignorance of those posting them that they don't know these have all been answered.

Tell me about it. They are actually trying to still claim there is no archeaological evidence for the Book of Mormon. They might not find it particularly credible, but to claim there is no evidence is an outright lie and has been so for a very long time.

[Avatar4321]

I too am against the church's practice of selling indulgences and of simony. Count me in, Mormon Reformation!

where can i buy one?

[mrmandias]

where can i buy one?

I usually don't like to sell any of my vast treasury of merit, but for you I'll make an exception. Contact me and we'll discuss payment.

[Hamba Tuhan]

I think anti Mormonism is going to have to come up with something new, because this stuff just isn't news anymore, and it doesn't faze anyone.

About four years ago, the missionaries taught a woman in my home. After she had made the decision to be baptised, I asked her one evening after the discussion had concluded if she'd done much reading of critical material. She is a very bright person -- university educated and at the time working in the Office of the Prime Minister -- so I assumed she'd have done some research, and she had but not much, it seemed. I encouraged her to take a more thorough look online and then let us know if she had any concerns that we could address. She said she would. The next time she came 'round, I asked her about it, and she listed off a number of web sites and criticisms, so apparently she'd done her homework. I asked her if she had any concerns, and she shrugged her shoulders. None of it, she said, had any impact on what she'd been experiencing as she'd come to church, read the Book of Mormon, prayed, talked to the missionaries and other members, etc. She's since moved away, but we're Facebook friends, and she's an active, flourishing member of the Church, endowed and happy.

At the same time, a man who was the bishop of my ward back in the 80s or early 90s very publicly apostatised along with his wife and two of his sons a couple of years ago, claiming that they'd discovered the 'real truth' behind Joseph Smith and the supposed Restoration. I know from personal experience that he now targets members whom he thinks are struggling, invites them 'round for 'social visits', and then plies them with both alcohol and doubt. Go figure. Clearly there's another variable at play here more than mere exposure to certain 'historical' criticisms.

Assuming that these lists actually get posted and read by members, I'm afraid that those doing the posting are going to be overwhelmingly disappointed in the results.

Edited February 13, 2013 by Hamba Tuhan

[Bernard Gui]

About four years ago, the missionaries taught a woman in my home. After she had made the decision to be baptised, I asked her one evening after the discussion had concluded if she'd done much reading of critical material. She is a very bright person -- university educated and at the time working in the Office of the Prime Minister -- so I assumed she'd have done some research, and she had but not much, it seemed. I encouraged her to take a more thorough look online and then let us know if she had any concerns that we could address. She said she would. The next time she came 'round, I asked her about it, and she listed off a number of web sites and criticisms, so apparently she'd done her homework. I asked her if she had any concerns, and she shrugged her shoulders. None of it, she said, had any impact on what she'd been experiencing as she'd come to church, read the Book of Mormon, prayed, talked to the missionaries and other members, etc. She's since moved away, but we're Facebook friends, and she's an active, flourishing member of the Church, endowed and happy.

And this, brothers and sisters, is the difference between social conversion and conversion through the Holy Spirit.

[Libs]

Social conversion?

[TwirlnWhirl]

Is the second anointing ordinance the mormon version of an "indulgence" concept? Since only mormon roalty, or the very rich are recieving this special ordinance.

food for thought...

Don't derail the thread.

[Calm]

Since only mormon roalty, or the very rich are recieving this special ordinance.

And you know this how?

i prefer food with more substance and flavour and nutrition....just saying....

Edited February 14, 2013 by calmoriah

[TwirlnWhirl]

I used Google.

I found a Stake President from England give a podcast interview with John Dehlin on this topic

This was my google search (tom phillips second anointing podcast). I find it interesting that so many faithful members never get the oportunity or even know about this special temple ordinance.

[ksfisher]

I used Google.

I found a Stake President from England give a podcast interview with John Dehlin on this topic

This was my google search (tom phillips second anointing podcast). I find it interesting that so many faithful members never get the oportunity or even know about this special temple ordinance.

How do you know how many receive this ordinance? My understanding is that faithful members who receive it don't talk about it.

[Calm]

I found a Stake President from England give a podcast interview with John Dehlin on this topic

And did Tom Phillip supply you and everyone else with a list of those who have received it? Edited February 14, 2013 by calmoriah

[mfbukowski]

I too am against the church's practice of selling indulgences and of simony. Count me in, Mormon Reformation!

Burn this man at the stake! (center)

[BCSpace]

I too am against the church's practice of selling indulgences and of simony. Count me in, Mormon Reformation!

We don't sell indulgences. We just feed the missionaries and all is well.

[wenglund]

1. The use of pseudonym ("Luther-day Saint"), together with a claimed-but-unsubstantiated-and-unidentified number of "260" participants, does not inspire confidence in the intentions of these people (assuming that there are multiple people involved - this announcement has a whiff of hoax about it).

2. The timing of the distribution of the flyers (at night, just before church meetings) and the means of distribution (apparently involving trespassing on church property) also does not inspire confidence.

3. A secretive group using pseudonyms, posting anonymous and unsigned anti-mormon literature on LDS Church buildings, in the middle of the night, by trespassing, and all the while complaining about lack of disclosure and honesty by the Church is ... ironic.

Thoughts? -Smac

Busy-bodies and Ark-steadiers have a knack for incredibility and unwitting irony because they are too intent on criticizing others to notice their own glaring flaws. Perhaps they, as a collective, inspired the Saviors parable about motes and beams. Whatever the case, I am anxious for this un-intended self-parody to unfold. The only way it could be improved is were the postings to take place at chapels left vacant that weekend because of Stake Conference (as is the case wqith my Stake)--which puts me in mind of the time Ed Decker staged a protest at the Bellevue, WA Temple on Sunday. LOL

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited February 14, 2013 by wenglund

[wanpaku]

PR Release:

Here is a PDF of the document to be posted.

Here is the group's blog.

A few thoughts:

1. The use of pseudonym ("Luther-day Saint"), together with a claimed-but-unsubstantiated-and-unidentified number of "260" participants, does not inspire confidence in the intentions of these people (assuming that there are multiple people involved - this announcement has a whiff of hoax about it).

2. The timing of the distribution of the flyers (at night, just before church meetings) and the means of distribution (apparently involving trespassing on church property) also does not inspire confidence.

3. A secretive group using pseudonyms, posting anonymous and unsigned anti-mormon literature on LDS Church buildings, in the middle of the night, by trespassing, and all the while complaining about lack of disclosure and honesty by the Church is ... ironic.

Thoughts?

-Smac

1. Perhaps this Luther guy is still in the church and doesn't want to jeopardize his current family and social situation. Also the "unsubstantiated-and-unidentified" participants are actually substantiated and identified... look for yourself on the Facebook event page (now over 300 participants, btw). My guess is that there are probably a lot more who will participate without publicly attaching their name to the event.

2. Is there anything an individual or group could do protest in a "confidence inspiring" way. Seems that anything that is not faith promoting is automatically branded as "anti" and shady. I, for one, think that this idea is pretty creative.

3. Sounds a lot more innocent than the Danites or the Strengthening Membership Committee... those were/are anonymous groups that did/do much shadier things than tape a paper to a door. If taping a paper to a few hundred doors on one occasion is wrong, what about tens of thousands of missionaries leaving hundreds of thousands of tracts on private property on a DAILY BASIS?

Have you even read the theses? Can you find one that cannot be backed by empirical evidence? Or do your warm fuzzies overide your sense of judgement. I think that a lot of his points are actually pretty solid. I think people can disagree on interpretations of facts. You can still believe Joseph was a prophet knowing that he married other men's wives or translated the BOM out of a hat. Interpret how you will, but I think it is a little childish to dismiss facts as "anti".

I don't think that Luther is going about this completely the right way, but I think we should at least try to understand what his issues are, even if we don't agree.

I don't mean to troll, and I don't intend to start a huge back and forth. But I just wanted to give my two cents.

The mockery isn't a good beginning.

[mrmandias]

Burn this man at the stake! (center)

Just when I got a fabulous new body on the diet of worms, you're gonna burn it! Truly you Mormons are in need of reformation.

I am increasing my demands. Besides getting rid of indulgences and simony, you must also conduct services in the vernacular.

[smac97]

1. Perhaps this Luther guy is still in the church and doesn't want to jeopardize his current family and social situation.

Right. Why look at what he's actually doing (planning nighttime trespasses) when we can speculate without a scintilla of evidence?

Also the "unsubstantiated-and-unidentified" participants are actually substantiated and identified... look for yourself on the Facebook event page (now over 300 participants, btw).

Names are given? Really?

My guess is that there are probably a lot more who will participate without publicly attaching their name to the event.

We'll see.

2. Is there anything an individual or group could do protest in a "confidence inspiring" way. Seems that anything that is not faith promoting is automatically branded as "anti" and shady. I, for one, think that this idea is pretty creative.

There was no "automatic" branding here. The document is, by reading it, plainly an anti-Mormon one.

3. Sounds a lot more innocent than the Danites or the Strengthening Membership Committee...

Yes, those two groups go so well together.

Thanks for playing. I have no interest in discussion with a person who can utter such absurdities. No good faith discussion is possible.

Thanks,

Smac

[Freedom]

I used Google.

I found a Stake President from England give a podcast interview with John Dehlin on this topic

This was my google search (tom phillips second anointing podcast). I find it interesting that so many faithful members never get the oportunity or even know about this special temple ordinance.

What you have is a guy who claims to be a stake president and who claims to know what he is talking about. If you believe what you hear on youtube your problems are too great to be addressed here.

[Calm]

What you have is a guy who claims to be a stake president and who claims to know what he is talking about. If you believe what you hear on youtube your problems are too great to be addressed here.

He is who he says he is, but whether he is accurate in his other claims I don't know. Don't know his claims either as in whether it was him or the poster who made the claim that only the rich and royal get their 2nd anointing (How would he know, is a list of all others who have received it handed out to participants? Somehow I highly doubt it.)

[wenglund]

Names are given? Really?

On the facebook page there is a list of people who have been invited, some Maybe's, and over 300 Accepts, and if you click the relevant link, it will also show a list of those who declined the invitation.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-