Even knowing the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon is acquired by spiritual not physical means. I can bear my testimony to you all day but about the only good it might do would be to motivate you to find out for yourself. And that finding out is a SPIRITUAL process. But when it comes, it comes as MUCH more real and valid than does arm of flesh learning. It is the Holy Spirit speaking directly to your soul Spirit to spirit. There's no confusion or doubting in those experiences, as there is in classrooms teaching science where arguments are inevitable, and encouraged.

Based on what you wrote it seems to me that you've been looking for a testimony in the wrong place and the wrong way. Testimony of God's truth will only come by repenting of your sins and humbly and sincerely asking your Heavenly Father what He wants you to do with the rest of your life.

You know more about Mormonism that I do. That's a fact and I do not dispute it. In that way you are a teacher.

You do not know any more about God or the afterlife or the lack thereof or the supposed immortality of my "soul" than i do. You just believe that you do. Nothing you have said about the unseen world, and life after death. and the future has ever been substantiated, no matter how true you think it is or how much you might feel it to be so. The mirror is dark. For both of us. Yet you present it to me as fact and express concern that I am so unenlightened that I don't see it as you but you hope that I'll come around.

Choices and consequences of choices are entirely yours. I'm only trying to help you have more things of eternal consequence to choose from among.

how funny, you have described out resident mormon here perfectly...

it is sad that people can be this gullible and ignorant, and that is what they are, no offense meant...

arguing with them is like arguing with a pretty painting on the wall...


i am still waiting for proof of a god, thank you

Knowing God in this mortal state is a personal experience. You'll have to uncover the proof for yourself. I've already told you that knowledge of God comes almost always by a SPIRITUAL experience, not by the tools of science.

I believe in God, but my conception of God is probably quite different from yours. And with due respect to Randys, you can't "prove" the existence of God, because everyone's vision of God is different. There's no scientific way to prove or disprove religion. For me, that's not what religion is for - I don't believe in God because doing so might explain anything about the natural world; I believe in God because it is spiritually satisfying for me to do so - because a universe with a God in it gives me something bigger than myself to connect with. In some ways, I kind of buy into a humanist conception of God - that perhaps God is the sum total of all of what's good and positive about humanity.

The God I believe in doesn't have a form, or any particular defining characteristics, other than those I choose to assign to God based on the traditions of Judaism. I don't claim that my idea of God is any better than anyone else's, because I believe that God is too big to be understood by anyone individually. As my Rabbi said, you can have a piece of the truth about God, but you can't have it all.

You see, to believe what you believe (and it isnt that much different from many christians, although I hear your religion has some really crazy stuff added to it but I am not an expert so I wont state that as a fact), you have to believe that billions, not millions, but billions of people who have lived and died and never heard of Jesus are all in hell...

you have to believe that only YOU know the truth and the billions of people who believe differently are all wrong and sinners

that amount of ego and hubris exceeds any known to human history


show me one piece of any kind of proof that your god exists...

just as i thought...

why do you think your religion requires that you not seek out alternate views, science like evolution and so on?

do you really think your church elders are right and the rest of the planet is wrong?

hey, so do I, because it has been ingrained in me to do so...but i dont believe in any organized religion or the crap that is being spread here

religion and god are the excuse for killing gays because they are gay, just as one example

fuck religion

but that can be used with most opinion.

The mirror is not dark for those who have attuned themselves by right living and an eye single to the glory of God to see through the illusion. There is a good reason why we have a veil of forgetting drawn over our mortal minds. Children hesitate to disobey when a parent is standing over them watching. The test of obedience comes when the parent is not perceived to be watching.

There is an element of faith involved in the process of thinning that veil and getting to know God and what's waiting for us beyond death's door. Not everyone chooses to excercise such faith to the point where they acquire knowledge.

But there's not much point in continuing this discussion when you fail to understand or acknowledge that man is a dual being, both physical and spirit. You're not going to be able to measure God with a ruler unless He happens to appear to you physically. He does do that sometimes, but those who see Him have no motivation to measure Him with scientific tools, they already KNOW Him.

most opinion doesnt go around condemning gays and anyone who doesnt agree with them

"Fuck Religion" - good song by Propaghandi, but not a great blanket statement.

Look, religions have been responsible for a lot of the world's ills. There is no doubt about that. And religion continues to be the driving force of a lot of the world's major conflicts. But you can't condemn all religion because the followers of some religions do bad things. That's like having a big bunch of bananas in a crate, and you can't see beyond the top layer of the bananas, and because you see a few rotten bananas, you dismiss the entire crate, even though there are good bananas down there somewhere. Actually, it's like you see one bad banana, and you say "all bananas are bad." That's the definition of a logical fallacy.

Religion has also been responsible for some of the great movements for social justice. Think about Habitat for Humanity, a program that empowers poor people toward home ownership - based on Christian values. Think about Mazon, a Jewish program that feeds the hungry. Think about liberation theology, a Christian movement that seeks to create an egalitarian society.

Sure, some religious charities also do bad things - the Salvation Army discriminates against gays and proselytizes, but once again, you can't dismiss the whole crate simply because of a few bad bananas.

So, yeah, religion is a "mixed crate" (to torture this metaphor to death).

agree, it is quite the hammer.

Very well stated, a breath of fresh air in a room gone stale, thank-you for sharing.

I would have agreed with you entirely before I heard and found out for myself it was true how God the Father and Jesus Christ appeared in the early 1800's and revealed once again after hundreds of years of silence that we are literally made in the image and likeness of God.

Shalom, enjoy the day.

Mormons believe that we will be judged by how well during our lifetimes we lived the laws that we are aware of. We also believe that all good people go to heaven.

God, in His loving kindness and concern for His children has provided a way for those who never had an opportunity to be taught the Gospel of Jesus Christ in their lifetime to be so taught in the spirit worlds where our spirits go after death. Those who accept the Gospel there will one day have the essential earth ordinances such as baptism done for them by proxy by caring people in their lifetimes.

What I really believe is that God lives and Jesus is the Christ. Once you really know that, even though you can't prove it to someone else with the tools of science, you have no need and no desire to mock Him by even trying to do so.

"Strait is the gate and narrow is the way, and few there be that find it." But some do, and when they do they wish to share it with others.

Right there is where I have a problem with Mormonism. How can you know that a dead person has posthumously accepted Jesus? Therefore, how can you know that the dead person wants to be posthumously baptized?

There has been a continuing controversy with the Mormon church posthumously baptizing Jews. From this Wikipedia article:



Can you explain your perspective on this situation?

Jews would believe the opposite of this. Jews believe that everyone has their own path to God, and as long as you follow a basically ethical life, you're fine.

I guess you're right. There is little point in continuing a conversation in which you expect me to take on faith that what you are saying is true since you have nothing in the way of supporting evidence for the existence of this particular duality, the existence of a spirit or facts regarding its nature. And that's leaving out the whole Mormon galaxy of peculiar assertions regarding golden tablets, Christ visiting America, and what's going to happen in the end times. Even where physical evidence is alleged to have existed it has all conveniently disappeared leaving us with. Faith. Sorry. No teacher has ever tried to pull something like this on me

On the other hand, you and others here have been very informative on the beliefs and practices of Mormonism and that's been good. Forewarned is forearmed. Thank you for that

I would prefer not to get into that in this medium because it opens up a huge can of worms that should be of no concern at all to those who consider the LDS Priesthood and temple ordinances to be invalid anyway.

But, in brief, we believe that everyone has the freedom to choose things that have eternal consequences, that is a gift from God. By baptizing deceased persons by proxy, Latter-day Saints believe that they are providing a choice for those who do accept the Gospel in the spirit worlds. We believe that IF they accept the Gospel, and their earthly ordinances are done, they can immediately move on and progress. Otherwise, even though they may have accepted the Gospel, they have to wait for those essential ordinances to be done on earth before they can go much further.

For those who choose not to accept the Gospel in the spirit worlds, it matters not a whit, the ordinance is invalid, just one of those 'crazy' things the Mormons do.

The policy of LDS Church leaders is that the Saints submit ONLY the names of their departed ancestors for temple proxy ordinances. But in an excess of zeal SOME members went beyond that, thinking that they were doing good for departed souls who were not in their direct ancestral line, allowing them to freely choose and make progress in the spirit worlds.

It's unfortunate that some of that zeal has resulted in some people who are not Latter-day Saints being offended. I understand that, and if I could effectively apologize to such people I would do that. But keep in mind that nobody on earth is further apart from each other than about 32nd cousin. So, a lot of Latter-day Saints have common ancestors whose living descendents are not LDS.

Hopefully all members of the Church will be more diligent in complying with Church policies. The Church is always concerned about how what it does affects other people. But proxy work in temples is a commandment of God to us, it's not going to stop.

I think now that a lot of attention has been drawn to the matter, that the Saints as a whole will stick more strictly to the rules of submitting names for temple ordinances. There are millions of names involved, and we're a church not a secular government with guns, so there are going to be some mistakes.

I for one will do my best to comply with General Church leaders and policies.

We have our disagreements obviously, but it sure is nice for me to 'converse' with someone who at least believes in an afterlife. (I assume by your words "you're fine" you mean that you will be "fine" in a postmortal existence.)

I don't necessarily believe in an afterlife. Judaism's perspective on life after death is complicated to say the least. Basically, there's very little consensus on it. We focus on making the best of the life we have in this world.

I wondered about that. I recently toured in Israel and my guide who was a Jew converted to the Latter-day Saints mentioned that for many Jews there is no belief in an afterlife. The New Testament presents two major beliefs among the Jews of that day, one believing in the resurrection, another not believing.

There's a saying that goes something like this: "The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection. That's why they were sad you see." :-)

Life is fun...

I enjoyed the discussion, thank-you to everyone who participated. I'll check back later.

no hard feelings, maybe if you live long enough and see enough you will understand the reason for my responding to you the way I do...peace out

and maybe i am completely full of shit, there is that too

It looks like you've had ample time to respond to a wide variety of questions and comments. 400 posts! Wow!
And you've given others impetus to start treads addressing other religions and philosophies.
I would add my own "Ask a Taoist" thread, but according to a famous koan:

Those who speak do not know.
Those who know do not speak.



All my questions have been answered in a most telling way on this thread. Thank you.
Peace

I once went to a taoist meet up. It was a very enjoyable tea party, the farthest discussion into philosophy and religion was the exchange of names and "oh I do enjoy the 24th. - yes thats one to think about. - ah yes it is. Very quiet get together. I did learn much of the use of neam bark dust in the garden. Someone also gave me some wonderful pale blue columbine seeds.

Can't remember when the last Taoist missionaries showed up at my door. Can you?

Double, double... toil and trouble... fire burn, and cauldron bubble.

Pestone - a Taoist thread would be wonderful here.

Would you start one please?

Wow! Have all the questions been asked then? :-)

Your comments are very encouraging, thank-you so much.

How many false prophecies must a person give before they are considered a "false prophet"?
Can a true prophet of God give a false prophecy and still be considered a true prophet?

If it's possible for a true prophet of God to give false prophecies, how do you know which are true and which are false?

What if prophecy itself is false?

Do you wash your special Mormon underwear in with your secular clothes, or do you have to bleach the holy hell out of them?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_garment

Neither actually, my wife is kind enough to do my laundry. I think she washes my undergarments with the other whites, possibly adds bleach.

You?

BLEACH!!

To get the Sin out!!!

2 + 2 = 3

Perhaps I should read the fine print on a bottle of bleach sometime. Is that what some religions sprinkle on people when they "baptize" them? Seems like a more useful liquid than I thought it was...

I noticed that someone else has responded to this question in his/her own thread in his/her own way. I'll take a stab at it in this thread where it was originally asked.

I think that it is important to understand just what constitutes a valid prophesy, what constitutes fulfillment of a prophecy, the time frame for fulfillment, and that prophecies are conditional upon the choices of God's children.

It is my understanding that God will sustain His true prophets on earth and will cause to be fulfilled His words that they speak or write accurately for Him, in His own timing, and in His own way.

When the resurrected Christ appeared to His other sheep in the Americas after His resurrection, He inquired of His American prophets why they had not recorded that many of the dead had risen a few days after the signs of His death had been given. The prophets had simply neglected to do so. But it was in fulfillment of prophesy that those events happen, so the Lord saw that it was recorded. So, recording in the records of man the fulfillment of prophesy is important to God.

Prophets are human beings who are not constantly speaking for God. Some critics of the LDS Church (even some members sometimes) like to take words from the uncanonized voluminous writings of people who were close to the early LDS Church leaders and do "gotchas" when those things don't turn out to be prophesy. They sling mud, accusing the prophets of being false.

As a general rule, I don't think anything a true prophet of God speaks should be considered valid prophesy from God unless it is recorded in canonized scripture. For the Latter-day Saints that would be the Bible, Book of Mormon Another Testament of Jesus Christ, Doctrine and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price, and any additions that have been added to those books that have been accepted by the First Presidency and the Quorum of Twelve Apostles and voted on by the members. (i.e. canonized.)

Fulfillment of a prophesy is closely tied in with timing. How do you know for sure that a valid prophesy has not been fulfilled if there is still time for it to happen sometime in the future? There may also be different ways for a prophesy to be fulfilled, some of them not necessarily recognizable at the time the event/s occured.

Prophesies are sometimes conditional upon the choices of God's children on earth. For example, Jonah was sent to prophesy destruction upon the people of Ninevah. But the people repented in sackcloth and ashes and the destruction was stayed. That does not mean that Jonah was a false prophet.

God's prophets are not just about predicting the future, in fact that is just a very minor role for them. They are invariably responsible Priesthood holders who administer and lead in many other things.

I hope that helps a bit.

As I hope I made clear early on when I started this thread, I do not speak for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I speak only for myself. But having been an active member of the LDS Church for more than 40 years, I do believe that what I write represents quite closely the beliefs of the majority of mainstream Mormons. There are of course among our members people who tend to follow their own counsel and criticize Church leaders, believing in and sometimes teaching a contrary 'social gospel'. Their motivation perhaps is to become popular with the ever wavering teachings and ways of the world. It is difficult to be in the world and not of it...

"Their motivation perhaps is to become popular with the ever wavering teachings and ways of the world" ... or ... to bring their (LDS) church more in line with the actual teachings of Jesus, who taught a markedly "social gospel" that had as one of it's central strictures a deliberate transfer of wealth and power from the rich and privileged in society to the poor and powerless, and those of the early Mormon prophets and leaders, who, in a great many ways, were radical, liberal socialists, entirely opposed to the very same pro-corporate social and economic structures that for some reason the vast majority of mainstream mormons enthusiastically support today as conservative Republicans:

Proclamation of the Economy, 1875

Hello "shoeshoe".

You have made my point exactly. You criticize the leaders of the Church, think you and others are going to somehow change the direction the Lord is leading His Church through His anointed leaders, and for references quote things that are not in the LDS canon. There is nothing wrong with that as long as you are not trying to deceive others into believing that your views and opinions are those of most Latter-day Saints including Church leaders; they are not.

But you are certainly entitled to write your own opinions on anything that is within this board's rules. With respect, it seems that you have an objective in mind that is contrary to my own, which is to teach the TRUTH about LDS beliefs to anyone who is sincerely interested in finding out.

Enjoy the day.

My objective is to encourage actual truth telling, to better facilitate discovery of the actual truth ... the whole truth, not just the nice parts.

In my mind, along with acknowledging all the wonderful and abundant good fruit on the LDS tree (see my other thread, "About 'Ask a Mormon'") that means also exposing and objecting to a great deal of inconsistency and institutionalized hypocrisy within LDS culture, pointing out and seeking remedy for the differences that (in my experience) exist between central teachings of Christ and of LDS leaders themselves and the actual practice of LDS leaders and members.

I am far less concerned with the particular beliefs that comprise any particular religious belief system (such as orthodox LDS beliefs) as I am with the virtues taught by all great religions, chief among them being honesty, integrity, charity for the poor and powerless, and love for man and God ... i.e the fruit of those beliefs and belief systems (because it is certainly true that "actions speak louder than words"). In my opinion, the LDS church has a lot to learn about the first two of these, at least something to learn about the third, and can teach the world a great deal about the fourth.

Much of the problem as I see it is rooted in the LDS requirement to "follow the prophet." LDS leadership is either infallible and therefore divine, or it isn't. I go with the latter. I offer as evidence by the Mountain Meadows atrocity and subsequent 150 year cover up of facts surrounding the massacre, the choice of a war criminal and unAmerican anticonstitutionalist as BYU commencement speaker in 2007, the terribly lopsided political make-up of the current leadership and membership of the LDS church, etc., etc.. Direction from prophets and leaders should always be considered, but never blindly followed. Such admonition toward unquestioning loyalty repudiates the church's own essential doctrine of personal responsibility and agency, and has been throughout history, as it is today, the stuff of much awful despotic mayhem ("But, I was just following orders ..."). Loyalty to conscience should be primary, over that to any human being. Period.

In my mind, it's a great shame that the mission and purpose of the LDS church to do good in the world and bring man closer to God should be so hampered by its refusal as an institution to practice what it preaches in so many ways. I see my team dropping the ball, and my conscience requires me to speak out about it.

I do so in the hope that the LDS church (and all the rest of us, too) will find greater courage to honestly and truly repent of wrongdoings committed, and as a result be more able to know and manifest the beautiful and powerful "image of God" that is in all of us, waiting to be expressed, once we're willing to tell the WHOLE truth (the good AND the bad) and really own up to it.

It appears to me that you have lost the testimony that you must once have had if in fact you are or were ever a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If you are still a member, I suggest that you speak to your bishop about the thoughts and feelings that lead you to publicly criticize the Lord's anointed and His teachings. Those feelings did not come from the Lord. You are definetly not on the same "team" that I am on, I see no difference between your writings and the writings of others on this board who make no claim to be Latter-day Saints.

It is my hope that you will spend some time renewing your acquaintance with the Book of Mormon and the Joseph Smith story. And that you try humbly and sincerely praying for direction from your Heavenly Father. Without a change in the direction you are headed you will only get further and further away from grasping hold of the magnificent blessings God would have bestowed upon you and your wife and children if you had only remained faithful. The stuff you proclaim and defend is just a mess of pottage, you could have had the real thing.

I wish you and your family the very best whatever choices you make. Enjoy the weekend with your family.

Spoken like a true fundamentalist, justamere10.

---

... the thoughts and feelings that lead you to publicly criticize the Lord's anointed and His teachings. Those feelings did not come from the Lord. You are definetly not on the same "team" that I am on ...

I definitely AM on the same team you're on, justamere10. I assure you I am not lying about my being a member of the LDS church.

I was baptized a member of the LDS church in 1996 along with my wife, served on our ward missionary team (was asked to be first assistant, but declined), was an elders' quorum teacher, and served various other callings, and held a temple recommend until I decided I could not in good conscience renew it. I am still a member (in fact, I just received a phone call yesterday from a rep in the singles ward asking to speak at a fireside they're having), though no longer an active one.

Note to readers: notice how justamere10 throws me off his "team" for the sin of questioning and criticizing my own LDS church authorities, for holding them up against the standards of my own conscience and pointing out what I perceive to be clear problems and wrongs within the church that should be addressed (even though I've also given our church honest, heartfelt, glowing praise on more than one occasion in this forum). That, sadly, is expressly forbidden in Mormonism. LDS members may be excommunicated for criticizing LDS leaders, doctrine, or practice too sharply. Private disagreement is fine ... as long one doesn't go public! (This kind of rank authoritarianism within the LDS church is typically defended by the same group of patriotic orthodox Mormon conservatives, like justamere10, who call the U.S. Constitution a sacred document and the rights it guarantees holy, which is official LDS doctrine.)

My feelings, thoughts, and actions come from myself, justamere10. The Lord is responsible for none of my feelings, my thoughts, or actions. Neither is anyone else.

---

I suggest that you speak to your bishop about the thoughts and feelings that lead you to publicly criticize the Lord's anointed and His teachings.

I've already prayed and thought a great deal about this, and have spoken with two bishops (and numerous other members) about what I see as serious ethical and moral shortcomings within LDS church culture and leadership. My former bishop disagreed with my particular criticisms, though he supported my dedication to conscience and encouraged me to always remain faithful to it. My current bishop agreed with me about the terrible problem of political imbalance that strongly (though unofficially) favors one party (the Republicans) and political philosophy (neoconservatism) over the other and others (like liberalism). He also told me that he agrees with me that the there's way too much secrecy in the church, and that this is wrong and needs to change. His feeling was that these important changes would probably take considerable time to come about.

Without a change in the direction you are headed you will only get further and further away from grasping hold of the magnificent blessings God would have bestowed upon you and your wife and children if you had only remained faithful.

Note to readers: again please notice how any deviance from or questioning or or criticism toward orthodoxy is considered "going astray," no matter what the motive or content of the deviance, questioning, or criticism. NO such refusal to blindly obey and follow, even if doing so requires abandoning one's commitment to one's own sense of what's right and wrong, is to be tolerated, and any such behavior, even when done to remain true to own's conscience, is heresy and somehow invalidates God's blessings upon the individual. "The church is infallible, period, and that means the church and its leaders CANNOT be wrong, ever (no matter WHAT the evidence of serious human error and even evil wrongdoing). We MUST NOT allow that thought (if we do, everything falls apart)." Typical of fundamentalist attitudes, unfortunately. Luckily, history is replete with examples proving that heresy against religious fundamentalism is often a very, very good thing.

The truth has nothing to fear from criticism. Hence, any entrenched fear or prohibition of criticism is to me the first sign that all is not true, here. A big red flag.

In my experience, God only requires that I remain true to my own conscience, to the light and truth that He has enabled me to see thus far. That's the best a human being can do, and therefore, all that can be required of one.

---

The stuff you proclaim and defend is just a mess of pottage, you could have had the real thing.

Let's see what I have chosen to proclaim and defend in these posts, justamere10:

Honesty, integrity, charity for the poor and powerless, love for man and God, primary allegiance to conscience, intellectual consistency, practicing what one preaches, actually treating the U.S. Constitution as if it's a holy document (instead of "just a damn piece of paper," as George W. Bush put it), endeavoring to seek and tell the WHOLE truth instead of just the nice, easy, un-embarrassing parts, etc.

If that's "a mess of pottage" that I'd have to give up for "the real thing" as you put it ... then frankly, I'll take the pottage over the "real thing" any day, thanks.

I have to say I'm very much enjoying this.

7556 thread views! Good cop bad cop sells a lot of newspapers. :-)

As long as shoeshoe and I go to our Maker each satisfied that we have kept God's commandments and our covenants with Him to the best of our ability, then I guess that's within the bounds human nature has set for each individual.

Meanwhile, those who sincerely want to learn what Mormons REALLY believe to be true are invited to anonymously browse at http://www.mormon.org

But you won't find contention there, just a very fine Spirit that can perhaps touch yours and give you a better knowledge of God and why you are here on earth having this sometimes tumultuous experience.

Glad you're enjoying this thread Seeker...

I'm enjoying it too. It's interesting to witness a debate between someone who is laying down the official line regarding what Mormons are to believe, and someone who is attempting to describe what Mormons or at least a large segment of them actually do believe. I think that both are useful, I think that the latter is more relevant.

I agree completely.

Frankly, justamere10, I resent your discounting of my beliefs and those of other liberal Mormons as you've done, saying that "what Mormons REALLY believe" is what you and the Mormon orthodoxy believe ... as if we liberal Mormons don't exist, that we aren't Mormons at all, or that un-orthodox views of Mormonism are not sincerely held by a significant number of LDS members. This exclusionism and commitment to squash alternative voices out of existence seems to me to be typical of the fundamentalist ethos, mindset, and the entrenched need of fundamentalists (e.g. orthodox Mormons) for control and domination (based, I think, on fear -- out of a real, perceived, or paranoiac sense that their survival is threatened in some way).

The wide availability of the the vast amount of information now easily obtained online is making this and other repressive behavior hard to continue, however (the internet has the potential to be by far the greatest democratizing force in history, in my opinion), and I and others predict the LDS church will (out of necessity, if nothing else) become much more accepting of independent voices in coming years.

Contrary to what justamere10 would have you think, "what Mormons REALLY believe" is a actually a rather wide range of things (and getting wider all the time), from orthodox to liberal and everywhere in between, as clearly evidenced from the interaction justamere10 and I are having in our threads on this forum. The link he provides is to the official LDS church web site, a site built and maintained only by those who happen to share justamere10's orthodox view of Mormonism. It is, in fact, a good place to get information on what orthodox Mormons believe, but not on "what [ALL] Mormons REALLY believe."

Not all Mormons believe exactly the same thing any more than all Muslims believe the same thing or all Catholics believe the same thing. justamere10, as is typical of orthodox Mormons, unfortunately, seems to want to marginalize me and those who don't hold to the official conservative Mormon "party line," and would have you believe that all Mormons share his orthodox beliefs fully and exclusively, which is simply not true.

Sunstone Magazine is a good example of the liberal movement in Mormonism, but by no means the only one:

http://www.sunstonemagazine.com/

Here's the wikipedia article on Sunstone:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunstone_Magazine

For more examples, just google "liberal Mormon," and you'll get almost 2,000,000 hits.

For those who would like to find out about the active silencing of alternative views of Mormon history, doctrine, and theology by church orthodoxy, read here about the "September Six:"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_Six

I think you misunderstand Tyo.

The "official line" regarding what the members of any church are encouraged or expected to believe is usually contained in their canon. In non-restorationist Christian churches canon is usually restricted to the Holy Bible, though Catholics add their catechism, tradition, magisterium etc. as I understand it to the things their members are encouraged to believe, or to at least accept as doctrine. Restorationist Christian churches usually add the Book of Mormon. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints adds to their canon several other books of scripture as well, as I mentioned previously.

As it is in any church, among the Latter-day Saints there are many individual opinions, understandings, and beliefs about many things, including of course politics. (There are leaders in both political parties who are active members in good standing of the LDS Church, for example Mitt Romney and Harry Reid.) We do worldwide study a common lesson manual each Sunday, a new one each year covering one of our books of canon.

But that which is most alive in most of the Latter-day Saints is the personal testimonies of eternal truths that they gained from individual prayer, fasting, scripture study, and keeping the commandments. Those things that God has revealed to the Saints individually are not contradicted by Church leaders, and that is perhaps why only a very few active Mormons criticize the Lord's living Apostles. Those who do that have lost or never gained the same Spirit that motivated the prophets who wrote the books of scripture, the Spirit known to His living apostles and prophets in our day as well.

Many of those who do criticize eventually physically exclude themselves so they can rub shoulders with others with similar beliefs. Some of them actively attack the Church and the beliefs of its faithful members. It is a time of sifting right now, a time when the Lord is separating the wheat from the tares, the sheep from the goats...

I see nothing wrong in having a diversity of individual beliefs, but there are certain behaviors that are expected of the Saints before they are considered worthy to enter the temples and there make sacred covenants with God.

For example, we are expected to refrain from consuming tobacco products, alcohol, black tea, and coffee. We are expected to tithe 10% of our annual increase in temporal goods. We are expected to keep certain standards of morality, including refraining from adultery and fornication. We are expected to be honest in our dealings with our fellow man and to obey the laws of the land. It's a tough discipline, being a Mormon is not for everyone, though there are no doubt some who are satisfied with just the social and temporal benefits of being a member and have little desire to work towards the wondrous eternal blessings that God has conditionally made available to His children on earth in these the Fulness of Times.

So, in that sense yes there is an "official line" a certain standard of behavior that is expected of all Latter-day Saints before they are considered worthy of a temple recommend. But that too is the personal choice of each individual. It takes some pretty serious contrary behavior before anyone is excommunicated from the Church, but it does happen. And each time it happens there is a lot of concern and love expressed for the person excommunicated, and an invitation to sincerley repent of the wrong doing (e.g. give up adultery) and apply for membership again a year or so after repentance is demonstrated to be sincere.

I appreciate this opportunity to try to explain a bit more about the Latter-day Saints, thanks for your interest Tyo.

Thanks shoeshoe for expressing your opinions in this thread, you have brought it back to life. :-)