why me Posted February 10, 2014 Posted February 10, 2014 Thanks why me for posting this. I wonder why teachers don't include this? I doubt it's a matter of no time to discuss it as I think members would find it fascinating. I know I would have. I do know that I have not ever heard this discussed in a Gospel Doctrine class on church history (or in any other lesson). So the bigger question might be why? I was visiting my daughter in the UK last summer. And the sunday school lesson was on the martyrdom. It was being taught my two sister missionaries. I was sitting in my seat when suddenly they began to read about the martyrdom and read what I linked to. I was so shocked that I almost fell off the chair. I raised my hand after the reading and said: what is amazing about what you read is that the critics claim that the church is hiding this information. But as we can all see, it isn't hidden. This began a wonderful comment sessioin of other members about being mislead by the critics. Nothing like good ol' apologetics in sunday school.
ALarson Posted February 10, 2014 Author Posted February 10, 2014 I was visiting my daughter in the UK last summer. And the sunday school lesson was on the martyrdom. It was being taught my two sister missionaries. I was sitting in my seat when suddenly they began to read about the martyrdom and read what I linked to. I was so shocked that I almost fell off the chair. I raised my hand after the reading and said: what is amazing about what you read is that the critics claim that the church is hiding this information. But as we can all see, it isn't hidden. This began a wonderful comment sessioin of other members about being mislead by the critics. Nothing like good ol' apologetics in sunday school.Good for you! Are you a teacher at church? You should be as the church needs more like you.
Danzo Posted February 10, 2014 Posted February 10, 2014 (edited) Thanks why me for posting this. I wonder why teachers don't include this? I doubt it's a matter of no time to discuss it as I think members would find it fascinating. I know I would have. I do know that I have not ever heard this discussed in a Gospel Doctrine class on church history (or in any other lesson). So the bigger question might be why? If I were to teach this lesson (in Sunday school), I would probably omit the lengthy quotes. When the class ends up just reading long quotation, it tends to put people to sleep. I prefer having a discussion on how this would apply to people in their current lives, and how they feel about Joseph Smith. I have always been a curious one, one who likes to read all of the details about everything. Most of the details of church history (including the fact of the gun) are readily available to those who like to read. I have known about those details I least since I was a teenager. I don't feel like the church is hiding things because most facts are available in my preferred way of learning, Books. There are some people, who can't stand learning from a book, those that are more audio learners that like to learn from lectures more than books. I think that these are the type of people to run into more problems with the idea the the church is hiding things. We do not have professional teachers and the quality can be hit and miss. Also due to our desire to socialize, class time can be cut short. I think if you rely on Sunday school and priesthood to get your knowledge of church history (on any part of it, good or bad) you will be disappointed. I found institute to do a much better job at it though. Edited February 10, 2014 by Danzo
Avatar4321 Posted February 10, 2014 Posted February 10, 2014 When my parents joined in 1970, of course they didn't know this. They were taught the same history as I myself taught as a missionary 12 years later. And how is that revelent to the truthfulness of the Gospel?BTW it's in the D&C Primary manual. It's taught to children. Must be some Church conspiracy to cover it up.
why me Posted February 10, 2014 Posted February 10, 2014 Got it, I guess I just know from my stand point and many others. Could these ex Mormons that you speak of, have been treated so unfairly by the church or family/friends, that they are out for revenge? There has got to be a reason for it, possibly. Or not. I'll give you that Halcenero. I don't know. But I don't think that the church treated them unfairly. By the way, who is the church? If they were attacking the church, I am sure that the family would not like it. But really, they could have read RSR and other books that give a more faith interpretation of the events. Or they could have critical thought their way through the information. The point is quite simple: we have 11 witnesses to the book of mormon who never denied what they experienced. Now that says much. And much was in the ensign years ago. Maybe a fair criticism would be that church publications such as the ensign changed editorial direction. They should have kept to the old format of relating historical controversies.
why me Posted February 10, 2014 Posted February 10, 2014 Good for you! Are you a teacher at church? You should be as the church needs more like you.i put my two cents where necessary. All apologists should do the same. To turn back to the case: this case does not have a chance of succeeding. And I would think that the UK court is now in a sweat over it.
Kenngo1969 Posted February 10, 2014 Posted February 10, 2014 (edited) You know Kenngo, that really isn't very nice to post. I know of many inactives who would never want to destroy the church but only want the truth to come out. If members still choose to believe in the church and attend, that is fine with them. I know that I was there for a few years before I came back and I never wanted destruction of the church. No one can accurately paint the exMormons with a broad brush anymore than one can use that same brush to paint TBMs. I'm sorry I don't work and play well enough with others for you ALarson. I didn't indict all of those who are less active or disaffected, as my full post makes clear. I did, however, indict Tom Phillips' motives; the motives of others involved in this criminal complaint and potential prosecution (people really need to stop calling it a lawsuit [a mistake that, to be fair, I, myself made early on after hearing about it; I had difficulty believing that anyone would charge President Monson criminally]); and I did indict the motives of many over at Mormon"Think." And I did indict the naivete of anyone who thinks that the motives of this crowd are in any way noble or benign. They're not, and I refuse to say that they are. Edited February 10, 2014 by Kenngo1969 2
halconero Posted February 10, 2014 Posted February 10, 2014 Got it, I guess I just know from my stand point and many others. Could these ex Mormons that you speak of, have been treated so unfairly by the church or family/friends, that they are out for revenge? There has got to be a reason for it, possibly. Or not. I'll give you that Halcenero. Some, but not all. I'm sure some feel or have been hurt. Some are just evil. We can probably agree on the fact that ex-mormons are not a homogenous group with the same ideals, motivations, experiences, or histories. 2
ALarson Posted February 10, 2014 Author Posted February 10, 2014 Some, but not all. I'm sure some feel or have been hurt. Some are just evil. Evil? I never met any that were "evil". That is a very strong word and I found that many were confused, angry and hurt....but never "evil". Maybe we just haven't been exposed to the same ones?
halconero Posted February 10, 2014 Posted February 10, 2014 Thanks why me for posting this. I wonder why teachers don't include this? I doubt it's a matter of no time to discuss it as I think members would find it fascinating. I know I would have. I do know that I have not ever heard this discussed in a Gospel Doctrine class on church history (or in any other lesson). So the bigger question might be why? My guess would be the lack of teaching skills, which stems from the fact we don't have professional church teachers at the ward level (not a criticism, I think being called to teach w/o prior skills can be a huge benefit to the teacher). 2
Buzzard Posted February 10, 2014 Posted February 10, 2014 You know Kenngo, that really isn't very nice to post. I know of many inactives who would never want to destroy the church but only want the truth to come out. If members still choose to believe in the church and attend, that is fine with them. I know that I was there for a few years before I came back and I never wanted destruction of the church. No one can accurately paint the exMormons with a broad brush anymore than one can use that same brush to paint TBMs. What the yewt does that mean? They want the truth? Do you mean they want a mea culpa from the church, admitting that the critics have been correct all along about a myriad of controversies? Do they want No Man Knows my History used as a Sunday School manual? How about this-the church has bigger fish to fry than responding point by point by point to people who will never be satisfied with the answers. The missions of the church Proclaim the Gospel, Perfect the Saints, Redeem the Dead, and Help the Needy-take precedence over respond to every wheedling critic who says he wants honesty, but secretly fantasizes about the FP and 12 being led out of the Church office building in handcuffs. 3
ALarson Posted February 10, 2014 Author Posted February 10, 2014 (edited) I'm sorry I don't work and play well enough with others for you ALarson. I didn't indict all of those who are less active or disaffected, as my full post makes clear. I did, however, indict Tom Phillips' motives; the motives of others involved in this criminal complaint and potential prosecution (people really need to stop calling it a lawsuit [a mistake that, to be fair, I, myself made early on after hearing about it; I had difficulty believing that anyone would charge President Monson criminally]); and I did indict the motives of many over at Mormon"Think." And I did indict the naivete of anyone who thinks that the motives of this crowd are in any way noble or benign. They're not, and I refuse to say that they are.No that's fine...but I don't really like seeing the laughing at others or personal attacks. But, to each his own and I do get the anger over all of this. It's pretty ridiculous and has potential to cause pain and damage. I think it'll go no where fast. Edited February 10, 2014 by ALarson
ALarson Posted February 10, 2014 Author Posted February 10, 2014 What the yewt does that mean? They want the truth? Do you mean they want a mea culpa from the church, admitting that the critics have been correct all along about a myriad of controversies? Do they want No Man Knows my History used as a Sunday School manual? How about this-the church has bigger fish to fry than responding point by point by point to people who will never be satisfied with the answers. The missions of the church Proclaim the Gospel, Perfect the Saints, Redeem the Dead, and Help the Needy-take precedence over respond to every wheedling critic who says he wants honesty, but secretly fantasizes about the FP and 12 being led out of the Church office building in handcuffs.Hey Buzzard, there is just a lot of pain on both sides of this issue. I absolutely do not agree with Tom Phillips here and I think it's a ridiculous charge. But, a lot of inactives just simply want their family members and others to know the true history (taught faithfully is fine). I think that "why me" has the right attitude about teaching it. I can only speak from my own personal experiences here as I have no idea what other's motives are but I tend to believe they vary greatly.
halconero Posted February 10, 2014 Posted February 10, 2014 Evil? I never met any that were "evil". That is a very strong word and I found that many were confused, angry and hurt....but never "evil". Maybe we just haven't been exposed to the same ones? That would be my guess. Evil is definitely not a word I ascribe to anyone lightly either, but I've met, interacted with, and have seen more than a few who would not hesitate to exterminate, burn, rape, and kill the believing Latter-day Saint. 1
Duncan Posted February 10, 2014 Posted February 10, 2014 https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-and-church-history-gospel-doctrine-teachers-manual/lesson-32-to-seal-the-testimony?lang=eng “From the holes in his [clothing], it appears evident that a ball must have been thrown from without, through the window, which entered his back on the right side, and passing through, lodged against his watch. … At the same instant the ball from the door entered his nose.“As he struck the floor he exclaimed emphatically, ‘I am a dead man.’ Joseph looked towards him and responded, ‘Oh, dear brother Hyrum!’ and opening the door two or three inches with his left hand, discharged one barrel of a six shooter (pistol) at random in the entry. … A ball [from the musket of one of the mob] grazed Hyrum’s breast, and entering his throat passed into his head, while other muskets were aimed at him and some balls hit him.“Joseph continued snapping his revolver round the casing of the door into the space as before … , while Mr. Taylor with a walking stick stood by his side and knocked down the bayonets and muskets which were constantly discharging through the doorway. …“When the revolver failed, we had no more firearms, and expected an immediate rush of the mob, and the doorway full of muskets, half way in the room, and no hope but instant death from within. Maybe I am now a little crazy from defending the church for ten years but I really just don't get the problem with critics. It is like a contagious sickness: Members read what the critics say, believe them hook line and sinker and complain about not knowing this or that. And yet, it is in the manual. The problem is very simple: no time to teach all that is in the manual. And it is the teachers choice. And yet, there is my dear friend, Abu saying that it is not in the manual and it is hidden. I wonder if critics have a problem with Peter cutting off the ear of Malchus when Jesus got arrested 3
ALarson Posted February 10, 2014 Author Posted February 10, 2014 How about this-the church has bigger fish to fry than responding point by point by point to people who will never be satisfied with the answers. But they are now doing exactly this with their new essays. I think this is great too. This has to be in direct response to how many members are leaving or struggling with learning things they previously were unaware of (church history, etc.). This is a great step in the right direction in helping these members return or work through their faith crisis. 1
ALarson Posted February 10, 2014 Author Posted February 10, 2014 That would be my guess. Evil is definitely not a word I ascribe to anyone lightly either, but I've met, interacted with, and have seen more than a few who would not hesitate to exterminate, burn, rape, and kill the believing Latter-day Saint.You can't be serious We definitely have not known the same inactives then. Most I know are hurting and are searching for help and answers. Some are angry, yes. But not to the extent you describe above. Wow. 1
Kenngo1969 Posted February 10, 2014 Posted February 10, 2014 Buzzard, you can huff and puff all you want, you can throw stones at those 'gnashers of teeth' (yes I do get the nasty swipe you made there), but there are people that feel like important information was withheld from them. Let's separate this from long time, multi-generational members, perhaps from Utah and a British Convert. Yeah, Buzzard, quit bein' so doggone mean, whydon'tcha?!
Scott Lloyd Posted February 10, 2014 Posted February 10, 2014 (edited) But they are now doing exactly this with their new essays. I think this is great too. This has to be in direct response to how many members are leaving or struggling with learning things they previously were unaware of (church history, etc.). This is a great step in the right direction in helping these members return or work through their faith crisis.Emphasis mine for reference. When I see phrases like "step in the right direction" used in this context I, like Buzzard, am left to wonder how many and what kind of "steps" it's going to take before carping critics are satisfied. Edited February 10, 2014 by Scott Lloyd 2
ALarson Posted February 10, 2014 Author Posted February 10, 2014 Emphasis mine for reference. When I see phrases like "step in the right direction" used in this context I, like Buzzard am left to wonder how many "steps" it's going to take before carping critics are satisfied.I think it varies depending on the struggling member. I have even read that reading the essays have caused some to leave who were teetering. I don't get that, but no one can predict the affect these essays will have. However, it's also true that no one can say the church isn't trying to address the questions and issues that members are having either. 2
Abulafia Posted February 10, 2014 Posted February 10, 2014 https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-and-church-history-gospel-doctrine-teachers-manual/lesson-32-to-seal-the-testimony?lang=eng “From the holes in his [clothing], it appears evident that a ball must have been thrown from without, through the window, which entered his back on the right side, and passing through, lodged against his watch. … At the same instant the ball from the door entered his nose.“As he struck the floor he exclaimed emphatically, ‘I am a dead man.’ Joseph looked towards him and responded, ‘Oh, dear brother Hyrum!’ and opening the door two or three inches with his left hand, discharged one barrel of a six shooter (pistol) at random in the entry. … A ball [from the musket of one of the mob] grazed Hyrum’s breast, and entering his throat passed into his head, while other muskets were aimed at him and some balls hit him.“Joseph continued snapping his revolver round the casing of the door into the space as before … , while Mr. Taylor with a walking stick stood by his side and knocked down the bayonets and muskets which were constantly discharging through the doorway. …“When the revolver failed, we had no more firearms, and expected an immediate rush of the mob, and the doorway full of muskets, half way in the room, and no hope but instant death from within. Maybe I am now a little crazy from defending the church for ten years but I really just don't get the problem with critics. It is like a contagious sickness: Members read what the critics say, believe them hook line and sinker and complain about not knowing this or that. And yet, it is in the manual. The problem is very simple: no time to teach all that is in the manual. And it is the teachers choice. And yet, there is my dear friend, Abu saying that it is not in the manual and it is hidden.Whyme, why do you do that? Check my response to MRSR, I even included the date my parents were baptized, 1970. I served a mission in 1982.
changed Posted February 10, 2014 Posted February 10, 2014 I think everyone goes through a "faith crisis", it's called gaining a testimony - we all start out not knowing anything, we all have to go through the process of faith, repentance, study, praying, fasting, being willing to change etc. etc. befiore finally feeling the spirit. I know we have VTers, HTers, bishops, etc. etc., but are there any LDS resources specifically labeled as a faith crisis resource to support those who have not yet had the spiritual experiences they need to gain a testimony? 1
halconero Posted February 10, 2014 Posted February 10, 2014 You can't be serious We definitely have not known the same inactives then. Most I know are hurting and are searching for help and answers. Some are angry, yes. But not to the extent you describe above. Wow.100% serious. I could share so anecdotes, but they would be just that.I won't pretend that they're significant in number, so I'll repeat what I said before: exmormons, like any group, are not homogenous in their motivations, ideals, and histories. Many are as you describe them.
thesometimesaint Posted February 10, 2014 Posted February 10, 2014 I think it varies depending on the struggling member. I have even read that reading the essays have caused some to leave who were teetering. I don't get that, but no one can predict the affect these essays will have. However, it's also true that no one can say the church isn't trying to address the questions and issues that members are having either. The trouble is that most, if not all of the, critics will not even accept that an answer has been given, let alone accept that answer. 3
ALarson Posted February 10, 2014 Author Posted February 10, 2014 The trouble is that most, if not all of the, critics will not even accept that an answer has been given, let alone accept that answer.I disagree regarding "if not all of the critics". I've had discussions with members of my ward over most of these essays (we have an ongoing conversation happening with the essays). My Bishop even has joined in at times. These essays have helped many in this group (but they have also caused one member to stop attending).
Recommended Posts