The Latest From Grant Palmer

[juliann]

Forgive my ignorance, Jullian.

What is the reptilian story?

This has popped up several times over the years http://www.reptilianagenda.com/exp/e062700a.shtml I don't doubt that there could be a rogue GA or two at any given time. It is the conspiracy stuff that is absurd.....and ripe for satire.

http://truthaboutmormonz.wordpress.com/

[why me]

LIstening to President Uchtdorf in conference, it's really ludicrous to think that he's been "broken" of anything.

And got a million dollar payoff to keep it all going.

[Garden Girl]

This has popped up several times over the years http://www.reptilian.../e062700a.shtml I don't doubt that there could be a rogue GA or two at any given time. It is the conspiracy stuff that is absurd.....and ripe for satire.

http://truthaboutmor....wordpress.com/

I had never read that, Juliann... it is too absurd. so much so that it boggles the mind that anyone could take it seriously.

GG

[ALarson]

And that is the point. He is crediting himself and his book for casting doubt in their minds.

To be fair, that is not what Palmer is claiming. He states that the 70 already had doubts, visited MormonThink "often" and then read his book:

"The GA often went to the MormonThink.com website for information and there discovered my book."

[Scott Lloyd]

To be fair, that is not what Palmer is claiming. He states that the 70 already had doubts, visited MormonThink "often" and then read his book:

"The GA often went to the MormonThink.com website for information and there discovered my book."

That's not how I read it:

He clarified that they had read my book, An Insider’s View of Mormon Origins, and had concluded that the LDS Church was not true; was not what it claimed to be. The GA often went to the MormonThink.com website for information and there discovered my book.

[ALarson]

That's not how I read it:

I'm not sure how you can misunderstand this statement unless the 70 wasn't going to MormonThink.com because of doubts:

"The GA often went to the MormonThink.com website for information and there discovered my book."

Why Me stated this: "He is crediting himself and his book for casting doubt in their minds."

Now, I agree that he is giving himself and his book credit for sealing the deal:

"He clarified that they had read my book, An Insider’s View of Mormon Origins, and had concluded that the LDS Church was not true; was not what it claimed to be."

But, I read what Palmer stated as saying that this 70 had doubts first, started reading & visiting MormonThink where he found Palmer's book, read it and then concluded the church was not true.

I do wonder what caused him to start doubting in the first place enough to end up on that website (which is pretty controversial).

[Robert F. Smith]

In my opinion, if this alleged Seventy has truly gifted Palmer's book to other people, I would say that is virtually impossible that this story could have remained secret with no one leaking it. Additionally, since this mystery person admits that he has never heard an apostle deny the truth claims of the Church, how can he possibly know, with such detail, that none of the twelve actually believe, including the alleged fact that Elder Uchtdorf took longer to break. How would he know these things? And, why would he know and no one else?

Right on, brother!

[Scott Lloyd]

I'm not sure how you can misunderstand this statement unless the 70 wasn't going to MormonThink.com because of doubts:

"The GA often went to the MormonThink.com website for information and there discovered my book."

Why Me stated this: "He is crediting himself and his book for casting doubt in their minds."

Now, I agree that he is giving himself and his book credit for sealing the deal:

"He clarified that they had read my book, An Insider’s View of Mormon Origins, and had concluded that the LDS Church was not true; was not what it claimed to be."

But, I read what Palmer stated as saying that this 70 had doubts first, started reading & visiting MormonThink where he found Palmer's book, read it and then concluded the church was not true.

I do wonder what caused him to start doubting in the first place enough to end up on that website (which is pretty controversial).

The statement said they went to the MormonThink website for information, not that it was the website that brought on their doubts.

It's possible, I suppose, that's what Palmer meant to imply. But it's not the clear and unequivocal message from the wording.

On the other hand, it is clear he meant to say that they concluded the Church was not true after reading his book, a cause-and-effect relationship.

[why me]

To be fair, that is not what Palmer is claiming. He states that the 70 already had doubts, visited MormonThink "often" and then read his book:

"The GA often went to the MormonThink.com website for information and there discovered my book."

Lets be fair. Palmer also has an interest in MormonThink. He mainly credits his book for the work and not MormonThink.

However, this brings up another issue. The people at MormonThink claim that it is not an antimormon site and that it exists not to cast doubt but to educate. Obviously, this is not working very well if a GA and a MP were influenced negatively about the lds church from that site. Maybe the MormonThink people can rectify this problem.

[canard78]

What is suspicious is that Grant credits his book for the doubting GA and the MP. They both read his book and determined the church to be untrue. How can a GA or an MP who have experienced countless spiritual experiences begin to doubt based on a reading of Palmer's book. I find this account suspicious and unbelievable. Now Grant claims that he is the point man for the two...having meetings with them on a somewhat regular basis. Quite amazing that the GA and the MP would find a new prophet in Grant.

I think this is a separate issue. Could a person lose their testimony after countless spiritual experiences? Certainly. Look at the members at the time of Kirtland who saw angels at the temple or people close to the prophet. Cowdery, Rigdon, Emma all considered the Utah church to be in apostasy. Almost none of the 1830 founders made it to Utah. And some went on record saying they did not believe Young to be a prophet.

[omni]

Here's my two cents on the subject...I don't think this is as black and white as some here are saying, I think there's a lot of gray in this unfolding story. First off, do I think all of the twelve know the church isn't true and that they were paid off with a million dollar bonus? Absolutely not. Even as someone who has lost his faith I still continue to believe the apostles and prophets are good even great men of integrity doing their best to serve God.

Oddly enough when I was going through my faith crisis I had more of a testimony in our current prophets than I did in Joseph Smith or Brigham Young. As many have said it just doesn't make sense that a conspiracy of this level could have remained secret for so long without one of them coming clean and the whole million dollar thing sounds too Austin Powersish for me.

That being said I also believe Grant Palmer to be a man of integrity and while I don't know him personally I see no reason he would just make this up out of thin air. Remember this isn't just some crazy anti-Mormon yelling at people on a street corner, this is someone who worked in this CES for decades and the author of one of the most influential anti-Mormon books of the last few decades. Not only is it out of character, but he would have very little to gain and almost everything to lose. I do believe he is in contact with a GA and an MP (possibly two according to the latest reports) who have lost their faith, however this is where it gets grey.

Maybe the GA has seen or heard members of the twelve say or do things that he has interpreted (wrongly or rightly) as them no longer believing. Maybe the GA has seen financial statements or payments to the twelve that he thought were excessively large and this turned into the million dollar pay off. There could be non-faith promoting rumors at the COB of varying levels of truth that the GA heard and mixed in with what he had seen caused him to really believe everything he said. This is all conjecture on my part, but I think it's certainly possible.

Edited April 11, 2013 by omni

[Pandorian]

This has popped up several times over the years http://www.reptilian.../e062700a.shtml I don't doubt that there could be a rogue GA or two at any given time. It is the conspiracy stuff that is absurd.....and ripe for satire.

http://truthaboutmor....wordpress.com/

ROFLMBO! That was one of the best pieces of humor literature I have read. Oh wait...the person was being serious?

[why me]

That being said I also believe Grant Palmer to be a man of integrity and while I don't know him personally I see no reason he would just make this up out of thin air. Remember this isn't just some crazy anti-Mormon yelling at people on a street corner, this is someone who worked in this CES for decades and the author of one of the most influential anti-Mormon books of the last few decades. Not only is it out of character, but he would have very little to gain and almost everything to lose. I do believe he is in contact with a GA and an MP (possibly two according to the latest reports) who have lost their faith, however this is where it gets grey.

Perhaps he is a man of integrity. But when one wants to be still center stage, one can play a card and hope that it scores a big win. Is Grant playing his hand...hoping to get a big win and become the main player in exmormonland again? If so, it seems to be backfiring among many exmormons. Unless he names names and the others come out of the closet people will question his mental state. Now he may still have a big card to play in the future. Maybe the GA and the MP will come out of the closet and post their story on MormonThink. They may give their lack of faith to Grant and his book, putting Grant on the Antimormon walk of fame.

Edited April 11, 2013 by why me

[why me]

I think that we need to listen to him at the exmormon conference. I had the impression that he believes himself the pivotal person in causing people to question the truth claims of the lds church. In other words, he is the principal in having not just rank and file members but also the leadership to have doubts. His book is the catalyst. I think that this plays out in his mind.

If I were in his shoes, looking back on my life, I would see my sole reason for fame is a book that is causing people to doubt their faith based on my interpretation of events. And every now and then, I am rolled out for an exmormon shindig to give my opinions. This is how I perceived Grant at the exmormon conference. He didn't look like a happy camper.

His book was written years ago and exmormons are still bringing it up for any member to read. However, when a person writes a book and it becomes popular and there is no follow up book of equal importance, one can feel a little inadequate. And so, one way to bring oneself back into importance is to relate such a story as Grant as done.by stressing the impact of the book and how he is now meeting with a GA on a regular basis who has read his book and now is a doubting member. Certainly, Grant is now back on top of the game as exmormons and us are discussing his claims. He is again the main man, the pivotal person and again his book is in the middle, like a monkey or an elephant.

His game has worked well. Before this, he was fading a little. Such is my take on it.

Edited April 11, 2013 by why me

[CASteinman]

I listened briefly to some of Grant Palmers xmo talk. He seems to be rejoicing that some GA's / Stake Presidents / Temple Presidents have left the Church. (It looks like he missed one GA though).

And I do know that one of those GA's is indeed in contact with him. So maybe he does have a couple more he is dealing with.

An interesting thing that I have noticed in spending time in the depressing, scornful blatherings of some exmormon sites -- is that a great many of them are so very upset that the GA's have so much money. There seems to a sort of chorus about it -- as though they are living lavish, ungodly lifestyles of the rich and famous or something. I don't completely get the problem, but whatever...

I thought I'd take a look and researched and found some of the homes of the Apostles to see what they looked like. Only one of them seemed particularly grand -- Dieter Uchtdorf. The rest seem to be fairly modest, though Packer has a pretty big piece of property.

The most modest homes to my eye were Dallin Oaks, Russell Nelson and Henry Eyring.

Here is Henry Eyring's home:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_EtiWSiFkM3A/TRJGyk8ixRI/AAAAAAAAAAQ/Ke_MIQYS87s/s1600/DSC_0005.JPG

And here is the most mansion-like.. Uchtdorf's home:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_EtiWSiFkM3A/TRKhOYTFgOI/AAAAAAAAABk/3Senzfi7BTA/s1600/DSC_0023.JPG

Even that one is not ridiculous. But it is pretty big and nice.

President Monson's house is pretty modest:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_EtiWSiFkM3A/TRKqpSRmk-I/AAAAAAAAACI/xXdiFD9BtuI/s1600/DSC_0039.JPG

[Robert F. Smith]

And that the Church will eventually implode and will have to turn to "scholars" such as him to rescue it.

Delusions of grandeur, anyone?

Palmer barely managed to get his masters at BYU. A close friend of mine had to talk him through it. He never had a clue as to what real scholarship might be. Even when he was circulating drafts of his apostate book back in the 80s (under the pseudonym "Paul Pry"), it was clear that he still did not know what scholarship was. I read a couple of chapters, and so did some of my colleagues, and I responded to his ideas in some of my own writings at that time.

[rodheadlee]

Grant Palmer wrote:

We have at this writing met three times. We first met on Tuesday, October 23, 2012 and again February 14, 2013 at my house. On March 26, 2013 we convened at the GAs house. Upon entering my home for the first meeting the GA said, “We are here to learn.” I recognized him. He has been a member of the First Quorum of the Seventy for a number of years. He has served in several high profile assignments during this period. The following are the more important statements made by the GA during our first three meetings. We now meet monthly.

He said that each new member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles is given one million dollars to take care of any financial obligations they have. This money gift allows them to fully focus on the ministry. He said that the overriding consideration of who is chosen is whether they are “church broke,” meaning, will they do whatever they are told. He said the senior six apostles make the agenda and do most of the talking. The junior six are told to observe, listen and learn and really only comment if they are asked. He said that it takes about two to three years before the new apostle discovers that the church is not true. He said it took Dieter F. Uchtdorf a little longer because he was an outsider. He said they privately talk among themselves and know the foundational claims of the restoration are not true, but continue on boldly “because the people need it,” meaning the people need the church. When the Mission President voiced skepticism and named ___ as one who surely did believe, The GA said: “No, he doesn’t.” The one million dollar gift, plus their totally obedient attitude makes it easy for them to go along when they find out the church is not true. For these reasons and others, he doesn’t expect any apostle to ever expose the truth about the foundational claims.

http://journeyofloya...m/2013/04/06/6/

This is just a part of what he is now claiming. The writing seems to have been verified as being from Grant Palmer. If so, I found his take on it quite unbelievable. I think that he needs to name names if he is posting such 'information'.

Bwaaaaaaaahhahahahahaha ! Yeah right, I have a bridge for sale too. Some people need to get a life.

[Duncan]

I listened briefly to some of Grant Palmers xmo talk. He seems to be rejoicing that some GA's / Stake Presidents / Temple Presidents have left the Church. (It looks like he missed one GA though).

And I do know that one of those GA's is indeed in contact with him. So maybe he does have a couple more he is dealing with.

An interesting thing that I have noticed in spending time in the depressing, scornful blatherings of some exmormon sites -- is that a great many of them are so very upset that the GA's have so much money. There seems to a sort of chorus about it -- as though they are living lavish, ungodly lifestyles of the rich and famous or something. I don't completely get the problem, but whatever...

I thought I'd take a look and researched and found some of the homes of the Apostles to see what they looked like. Only one of them seemed particularly grand -- Dieter Uchtdorf. The rest seem to be fairly modest, though Packer has a pretty big piece of property.

The most modest homes to my eye were Dallin Oaks, Russell Nelson and Henry Eyring.

Here is Henry Eyring's home:

http://2.bp.blogspot...00/DSC_0005.JPG

And here is the most mansion-like.. Uchtdorf's home:

http://4.bp.blogspot...00/DSC_0023.JPG

Even that one is not ridiculous. But it is pretty big and nice.

President Monson's house is pretty modest:

http://2.bp.blogspot...00/DSC_0039.JPG

okay, spill the beans, how do you know that a GA is in contact with Palmer? Can you give us a clue as to who it might be?

[Robert F. Smith]

Perhaps he is a man of integrity. But when one wants to be still center stage, one can play a card and hope that it scores a big win. Is Grant playing his hand...hoping to get a big win and become the main player in exmormonland again? If so, it seems to be backfiring among many exmormons. Unless he names names and the others come out of the closet people will question his mental state. Now he may still have a big card to play in the future. Maybe the GA and the MP will come out of the closet and post their story on MormonThink. They may give their lack of faith to Grant and his book, putting Grant on the Antimormon walk of fame.

The same sort of thing happened when Martha Nibley began making statements which even the anti-Mormons knew couldn't be true. She embarrassed herself. We haven't heard much from her since.

[Robert F. Smith]

Bwaaaaaaaahhahahahahaha ! Yeah right, I have a bridge for sale too. Some people need to get a life.

Is that the one in Brooklyn? I'll buy it from you cheap.

[rodheadlee]

Is that the one in Brooklyn? I'll buy it from you cheap.

London Bridge at Lake Havasu. I can have it moved to your house in a week.

[Stargazer]

Mark, it is not against the law for them to excommunicate. It is against the law for the church not to release a person from membership if they request. Once the church receives the email or letter, the church has no control over the person anymore. If they hold proceedings for excommunication they could be sued.

You've seen the policy in the handbook, then?

I've known at least one person who was excommunicated, who had sent in a resignation letter. The letter was received at about the time the court was being held to excommunicate.

Since when is it part of the law of the land that a church can't kick someone out who is a member, if it wants? In fact, the Church has no control over the person even if they are a member. I've been a member since 1966, and at no time has the Church EVER controlled me. I've always done what I wanted to do. If the Church kicked me out, I cannot believe for one instant that I would have a cause of action I could take to court. I can picture the judge looking at the court filing and laughing his face off.

[Stargazer]

Not to familiar with federal laws, or if there is a law or statue regarding the issue. I can tell you it would probably fall under freedom of religion. Once I request to be removed from a religion a church can not infringe upon my rights.

Just looked it up looks like it is n the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. http://www.un.org/en...dhr/index.shtml Article 18 . It is probably based off that also.

Oh, yes, the UDHR!!! How could I have forgotten?!?!

Criminy, that made want to laugh so hard I'd break my ribs. You've GOT to be kidding. The so-called Universal Declaration of Human Rights is one of the most ridiculous documents ever written, second only to the Consititution of the Soviet Union in its uselessness. May I clue you in on the fact that it is not law? It isn't even a persuasive argument in any court in the United States (or anywhere else, for that matter).

[why me]

And I do know that one of those GA's is indeed in contact with him. So maybe he does have a couple more he is dealing with.

Is this GA in contact with him because of doubts or because of friendship and fellowship? Are you saying that a GA is coming to Grant because of his doubts and wants Grant to confirm his doubts?

[Stargazer]

That would be the first amendment.

In Guinn v. Church of Christ of Collinsville, the Oklahoma Supreme Court stated:

I went and read the decision.

Aside from applying only to Oklahoma, nevertheless the conduct of the leaders of the Church was in fact tortuous. This was not a matter of the principle of separation of Church and State or the First Amendment keeping Congress out of an establishment of religion aside. The church leaders violated the plaintiffs rights of privacy and thus defamed her by revealing to everyone at church that she had been involved in a non-marital sexual relationship. That's what they were sued about, not about her being excommunicated when in fact she resigned.

If I commit an act of apostasy, and I try to beat a disciplinary council by sending in a resignation letter, there is no way that letter could short-circuit the disciplinary council. In fact, the disciplinary council would easily be seen to be a response to the request for termination of membership, and that termination was the result. In short, the church gave me exactly what I wanted. And what is one well-known characteristic of LDS disciplinary councils? Confidentially! In fact, the only way the public could find out what a person was excommunicated for is for the person to reveal it themselves. And even then, the Church will not confirm or deny it, so the person has to be taken at his or her own word with no corroboration.

There is no law that prohibits the Church from excommunicating someone who has requested name removal.

Church policy might impose certain requirements that prevents a disciplinary council from being convened, but not secular law.