In addition to paying 10% of their annual increase as tithing, most faithful Latter-day Saints fast for two consecutive meals once a month and donate the savings (plus a generous addition in most cases) as "fast offerings" to help the poor.

Yes, Latter-day Saints actively teach those who are interested in learning more about the restored Church of Jesus Christ and His gospel. Those who decide to join the Church usually become happy, productive, industrious citizens of the country they live in, doing their best to sustain and uphold the laws of the land. Not a lot of "harm" done...

The Church does not make a profit but it does have controlling interest in some corporations that do. Surplus profits from those corporations are generally intended to help build meetinghouses and temples etc. in third world countries where tithing funds from the citizens are insufficient to provide the infrastructure necessary to operate religious programs.

By the way, free enterprise works, that's why there are jobs and an abundance of goods and services in America. The hope for profit is the motivation that moves American entrepreneurs and business leaders to creativity and industriousness. Nothing wrong with making an honest profit...

I am very aware of the lifestyle of LDS General Authorities. Most of them work so hard that there is very little if any time left for them to enjoy any wealth they might have earned prior to being called as full time volunteers for their Church. There is no paid Priesthood line in the LDS Church, though we do have a paid bureaucracy to take care of temporal affairs.

I appreciate your interest in learning more about the church I affiliate with.

You seem to know my mind better than I do, I actually was unaware that Democrats (I assume you are one) objected to their party being called by that name; I've heard it said on television probably quite a few times, and may have read it a time or two.

"Democrat" as an adjective is a slur made mainstream, as you indicate, by the right-wing media (90+% of all talk radio, most tv pundits, etc. are conservative). Practically speaking, there is no "left-wing" media when compared to the gigantic corporate-owned conservative media typified by FOX and Limbaugh. The myth of a vast "left wing media" in a huge lie.

That's how important diversity of ownership in media and the Fairness Doctrine are to a free press, and to an informed public, in America.

Extreme?

Forgive me, justamere10, ... but are you aware

1. That (thanks to the Bush Crime Family) it is a now a matter of law in America that it is legal for employees of our government to torture people, hold them indefinitely without due process, and until Bush's Military Commissions Act of 2006 was found (by a narrow 5-4 majority in the Supreme Court) to be unconstitutional, to deny Americans and others the right of habeas corpus, the founding democratic right upon which all others stand?

2. American military contractors have raped women and murdered civilians in cold blood in Iraq with absolute impunity?

3. Bush deliberately and knowingly lied to us and congress (a felony) to trick us into this war to steal oil for his oil buddies, and has continued to lie over and over again about matters of great importance to the American people (e.g. about his illegal warrantless wiretapping program, about how he wasn't going to sack Rumsfeld, etc.)?

4. That, under Bush/Cheney, darlings of the membership of the LDS community, the America that you say you love has, in eight short years, gone from being the most loved and respected nation in the world to being the most feared and hated ... and that we are now MUCH less safe than we were before the Bush cabal broke our military machine and threw our international reputation into the toilet?

5. That the malfeasance of the neoconservatives that LDS members and leaders overwhelmingly supported and helped put into power has so increased the number of enemies we have in the world and so compromised our military strength that we now don't even have the ability to respond militarily in Georgia, our ally, should we need to?

6. That, since 1981, under conservative leadership so enthusiastically supported by the vast majority of LDS members our country has gone from the largest creditor nation in the world to the largest debtor nation (despite LDS teachings that debt is akin to slavery)?

7. That according to the respected British medical journal The Lancet, more than one million innocent lives have been lost in Iraq since the utterly unprovoked American invasion and stupidly mismanaged occupation?

8. That former Mormon missionary Alyssa Peterson committed suicide in Iraq after being forced to engage in "enhanced interrogation" of Iraqi prisoners, so horrific and unChristian were the things she was being asked to do (and that our own military then lied to her family for years, like they did to Pat Tilman's family, about what really happened)?

9. That Dick Cheney, BYU commencement speaker, in his august role as president of the dignified U.S. Senate, told Senator Patrick Leahey to go "F... yourself" -- right on the floor of the senate, into the mic where all could clearly hear, and afterward vigorously defended his crude behavior?

I could go on and on.

Do you know any of these things?

My accusations are not "extreme," justamere10. They're factual, plain to see, true-life reality. This IS what Americ has become. Anyone who isn't sticking their head in the sand can see that, by now.

We ought all be ashamed and horrified what we as a nation have turned into, so very, very quickly ... especially who profess a love for America ... ESPECIALLY those of us who have, or should have, a functioning moral compass. Judging by the lack of outrage among all but a few (though there are a few) in the LDS community, it seems that either the church's compass is broken, or it's been put away for now.

The operative word there is "honest."

Under the neoconservative administration that LDS members overhwhelming have supported, the "free market" has become anything but, with huge corporate favors and subsidies (government help for the wealthy) given to the oil industry despite world record profits, monopolies allowed and encouraged to form (media industry, internet providers, etc.), freedom from prosecution for giant companies that break the law (ATT, just granted telecom immunity regarding the Bush illegal domestic spying program). Corporations can go still go bankrupt, and now can even jettison obligation to their workers, but ordinary citizens can't declare bankruptcy to get out from under crushing emergency medical debt burdens.

Again, the dishonesty of the so called "free market" (now a true oxymoron) under the Bush Administration (almost uniformly backed by all active Mormons in the U.S.) is legendary, and rightly so.

LDS general authorities do work remarkably hard. And, they fly first class.

And the same thing could, of course, just as well be of those who do not join the LDS church.

You don't think actively and overwhelmingly supporting a regime that has plowed our nation into the ground morally, economically, militarily, and socially can and should be characterized as doing "a lot of harm?"

Really! Even though the President himself was chided for it? And he talked about his "poor English" at a press conference as his apology.

Most executives would not think of first or business class as luxury, they would consider it a necessity. The Church frequently pays to fly about 50,000+ missionaries to and from foreign mission fields. My guess is that the accumulated points would provide first class tickets for a whole lot of busy executives who need to be rested up as best possible for extremely busy schedules waiting them as soon as they land. I've taken quite a few 12 hour flights in tourist class with my knees almost touching the seat in front of me. Not exactly ready to go to work when you step off the plane...

I fail to understand why you cling to your membership in the LDS Church when you have such a negative attitude about the faithful members of that church. There is a saying that you can leave the Church, but you can't leave it alone. You will never bring down the Church or change the direction the Lord leads it though a living Prophet and Apostles, as He did anciently. Don't you think you are kicking against the pricks by trying to politicize everything faithful members do and to place on them motives they don't have? We don't go around whining about the world we live in and thinking or talking about "regimes" and bitterness and how to blame everyone except ourselves if things aren't perfect. We go around trying to be good citizens and good Christians, to do unto others as we would have them do unto us, etc., you know, the things we read about in the Scriptures, the things Jesus taught.

do some more research and dont believe everything they tell you

for the record, your church isnt a church to me, as with most organized religion, it really is just a tax free con job...they rely on people with minimal maturity levels to buy their bullshit

i like this one
http://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon392.htm


sorry to seem to be attacking you, you see in my mind anyone who believes what you believe is an extremely immature and ignorant person*...ignorant meaning lack of information, you obviously lack a great deal of information otherwise you would not be part of a group that believes the ridiculous things your group believes...

the day will come when people dont have absurd religions (profit centers) that act to divide people, which your church does in a big way but they are not alone

*not meant as insult, but honest observation and i apologize if i hurt your feelings, i truly wouldnt want to do that...i realize by being this honest and correct, i will likely alienate you, but after reading your posts i am convinced that you are not capable of seeing reality and thus not much i can do...

peace

Another recent article about LDS humanitarian aid:

http://www.ldsmag.com/churchupdate/080815emergency.html

If you want to learn the truth about a church it is much more valid to learn from that church's official sources and active members in good standing instead of from apostates and enemies who have an ax to grind and/or profits to make.

At the foundation of most of the misinformation and outright lies spread on the internet about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a lucrative anti-Mormon publishing industry that cares not a whit for the truth, just for sales of their media and consequent cash flow into their tills and pockets. Writers, publishers, book sellers, creators of anti-Mormon media push and sell their wares on websites and in Christian bookstores. Pastors of some religious denominations buy into that and perhaps sincerely teach their congregants that in effect Mormons have horns and should be avoided, excluded, feared, or even hated. There's little wonder that members of the Church of Jesus Christ are misunderstood and opposed by so many of their fellow followers of Jesus Christ.

You link to one of those anti-Mormon websites that will never provide the truth about the Latter-day Saints but will for sure uphold your own extremely ignorant beliefs about the LDS Church and the religious beliefs and practices of its members.

Try the links in my signature line if you are interested in knowing what Mormons really believe to be true when it comes to religion and Jesus Christ.

Or if you have deep questions and concerns, try this unofficial site:

http://www.ldsfair.org

This, I think, is nonsense. You don't learn what the reality is about any organization by visiting the officially approved sites and talking to those who toe the party line. All you get is one usually highly flawed and biased version of what is actually going on. This is especially true when an organization is governed by a tiny oligarchy through whom God's word must be filtered before it reaches the faithful.

you, calling me ignorant



if you only knew how sad that was, how utterly funny and absurd...

I think the secret is to just close your eyes and keep repeating the official party version. To disagree or question is by itself enough to make you the enemy. Specific content is of secondary importance. Same in all totalitarian outfits.

You make my points exactly. Many people who have been indoctrinated and biased by learning from apostates and enemies who have axes to grind and/or profits to earn turn to cynicism and mockery. 13,000,000 people who know the truth about the Mormons because they live it every day would disagree with what apostates and enemies have to say about the LDS Church.

You may be an expert in some things but almost every sentence you write betrays to those who are well acquainted with it your ignornance about the LDS Church. Nobody expects a non-member to know much if anything about it, I fail to understand why you seem to want to publicly criticize and question what I have to say about the Mormons after having been a faithful Mormon and well acquainted with everything Mormons do for forty years. Do you honestly think you know more about the LDS faith than I do?

But wondrously, you live in a marvellous country where your opinions are tolerated and can be freely expressed. That does not make your opinions true or make you an infallible authority about anything except yourself though...

It was not my intention to label you an ignorant person. My intention was to let you know that in my opinion based on reading what you write in this thread you are extremely ignorant about the mainstream religious beliefs of faithful members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

i knew that is what you meant, and I will admit ignorance to one thing, the details of your faith...however, I have educated myself with the major points, they are, like most religions, hysterically funny, or would be if it werent for all the killing and hatred that result from organized religion




if your indoctrination into your church has left any part of you able to discern reality from fiction, ask yourself why are all wars and killing directly related to religion...

Really, justamere10?

Are you saying that one should simply trust people to tell the truth about themselves? That one should not seek any outside, independent, corroborating information? Does that seem the best way, to you, to determine what is actually true -- to just naively believe the word of someone who has an obvious conflict of interest? To just trust what the salesman says about his own product, and not seek any other additional information about it? That doesn't seem at all logical or prudent. Frankly, it seems stupid to me.

Come on, justamere10 ... this can't be the way you yourself buy insurance, decide which computer to get, or evaluate opinions or news you hear. Don't you think it's a good idea to do at least minimal fact checking or get some kind of independent review when making important decisions? If you were sending your child to college, would you just believe whatever the official brochure states, or would you check out independent college rankings and reviews by neutral organizations and individuals?

Readers: please note that this is, unfortunately, typical of orthodox Mormons. Their advice is normally to avoid ANY source of information about the LDS church except the LDS church itself. "Don't read anti-Mormon literature. For information about church history or culture, don't visit any web sites other than official church web sites. Doing so could be hazardous to your faith." The trouble with this advice is that faith is based on honesty, and it is dishonest and unethical (I would even say immoral) to resist or try to impede objective examination of any important question; but, apparently, justamere10 disagrees with me, here.

I, for one, believe that the truth has nothing to fear from close and probing examination ... that faith and confidence in things that are true is not weakened by questioning and critically examining them, but, on the contrary, is in fact greatly strengthened by testing. The truth will withstand testing, falsehood will not; the truth will not resist examination, falsehood will.

But it seems that justamere10, like many (if not most) in the Mormon orthodoxy (and other fundamentalist religions) would have us return to the time before the scientific method was put to wide use, when religious authorities were simply to be trusted and obeyed and blindly followed and never questioned, when the sun revolved around a flat Earth and The Inquisition was the way in which those who dared to question the prevailing religious orthodoxy were dealt with.

It should be noted that this kind of blind faith in LDS church leadership lead an entire group of devout Mormons to commit the Mountain Meadows massacre (certainly one of the most -- if not THE most -- dastardly examples of religious persecution ever committed in U.S. history), in which more than 120 unarmed men, women, and children were horribly and brutally murdered (throat cutting, etc.) by obedient, unquestioning Mormons who were blindly following their leaders (i.e. "just following orders") and listening to no other sources of counsel but that of the official LDS church leadership (including, apparently, their own consciences) ... just as justamere10 is suggesting we should do.

(Note: there's a very close association between closed fundamentalist religious systems and terrible cruelty and violence ... whether the system in question is Islamic fascism currently responsible for so mahem in the world, or Christian/Mormon fascism which brought us The Inquisition, the Mountain Meadows atrocity, the massacres of early Mormons committed by Christian fundamentalists of the time, etc. How interesting that each fundamentalist sect will blame all the others for their violence, but yet excuse their own ... as today conservative orthodox Mormons and fundamentalist Christians and Catholics will rant on and on about the evils of "the Islamic threat" while totally ignoring their own equally dark penchant for and history of cruelty and brutality.)

Unfortunately, the Mormon church is extremely secretive (to the point of paranoia, in my view) and has at times knowingly covered-up (in true Bush/Cheney fashion) pertinent but embarrassing information about church history, for instance. Orthodox Mormonism is a closed system (though this may be starting to change, finally necessitated in the past 10 years by the internet and the wide availability of information about just about anything, including the Mormon church, making truly closed systems almost impossible to maintain). The trouble with closed systems is that they tend to breed corruption, given the many conflicts of interest that necessarily exist within them.

Apparently justamere10 and other orthodox Mormons disagree with me in my assertion that the truth has nothing to fear from scrutiny, that independent investigation and confirmation of claims (whether made by a religion, a salesman, a computer company, or a poster on a message board) is a good thing, and that responsible individuals have an obligation to do such necessary fact checking whenever important decisions (such as joining a church) are involved.

Such fear of objectivity, I think, is, or ought to be, a big red flag to anyone considering joining any church or other organization.

Justamere, talking with you is very much like talking to some doctrinaire old member of the Communist Party faithful (there are still a few left) once the revolution has ceased to be revolutionary and has ossified into plain old garden variety totalitarianism.

You share the same dogged insistence that the description of realty (not to be confused with party orthodoxy on the issues) handed down to the masses by the party elite must be correct no matter what the actual situation or evidence to the contrary.

And you know, I get the feeling, and it is just a feeling, that you view tolerance as a highly overrated virtue but one that you tolerate because at the moment you don't have much choice. It is, as you point out, a marvelous country. Still.

I agree with this.

It should also be noted that the leadership of the LDS church are often men in their late 70's, 80's, and even 90's, robust individuals with amazing dedication to duty and in most cases (I believe) thorough conviction that they are doing the right thing (I happen to think sometimes they are correct about this, and that sometimes they are most definitely not correct about this).

Another remarkable thing about the Mormon church, unique among Christian churches (I think justamere10 already mentioned this), is that no one is paid (except at the most senior levels). All local leadership and congregational positions are unpaid, volunteer callings that members fulfill out of their dedication to and love for and devotion to God, the LDS church, its teachings, and its members. As often as I've mentioned before what I consider to be "red flags" that would or should cause one to shy away from the LDS church, to me, this and other things are clear "green flag" that would or should do quite the opposite.

Imagine: no minister in the LDS church is paid. No one is paid to clean the church buildings. No one is paid to organize local congregational activities. No one is paid to operate the Bishop's Store Houses that make food available to LDS members in need. All this work is done by members (regularly rotated) for free; all this time is simply donated, on a regular basis, week after week, month after month, year after year. Certainly this stands out as the way a church truly committed to God would ideally be operated here on Earth by its adherents: without pay, as a gift, simply out of love for "the work." This, to me, rings very true.

Monthly visits are paid to active members every month (or are supposed to be; in actual fact, most months it doesn't happen). The Relief Society, or church women's organization, is famously well organized, much better than the men, actually (who nevertheless lead the church ... women are not allowed to hold church leadership positions outside the Relief Society).

No church that I'm aware of even comes close to doing as good a job of taking care of its own members as does the LDS church. Only a short acquaintance with the history of terrible persecution that LDS members suffered in the early decades of church history easily explains this well organized and executed effort to be independent and "take care of our own," since certainly no one else was jumping to the saints' defense during its early history (quite the contrary; many, including the U.S. government, was more than hoping those pesky Mormons would just "go away," and it was even legal in Missouri from 1838 -- UNTIL 1976!! -- to murder mormons!! [See Mormon Extermination Order.]).

justamere10 mentioned the relief work the LDS church does. As far as I know, no one knows just how much work that actually is, nor how much money the church actually spends on the poor, for emergency aid, charity works, etc. -- since the church's financial records are a deep, dark secret, and we're not allowed to know that.

So, whereas Catholics have hospitals, Seventh Day Adventists have schools, it's impossible to know or quantify really just how much charity the LDS church really does. Again, we just have to trust the orthodoxy that it's ... "a lot" (whatever that means).

The Mormon church is a real mixed bag, in my opinion. As I've said before, I see good fruit and bad fruit on the LDS tree in roughly equal proportion. My complaint is that, it seems to me, for the "one and only true church on Earth" this ratio should be significantly higher than 1:1. The fact that, in my experience, it is not, is the main reason I doubt the full veracity of the LDS church.

What he said.

justamere10, apparently, you're not listening to what I'm saying.

I've in numerous posts stated my deep respect for and agreement with many aspects of LDS culture and theology, praising church leaders and members in glowing terms.

As a rather typical fundamentalist, however, you seem to have branded me an "infidel" because I don't subscribe hook, line, and sinker to your own view, and so now you've essentially just stopped listening to anything I have to say, since "infidels" like me aren't worth the time or effort to really listen to.

I'm a sincere LDS member who's making a real effort to find out what's real about God and my relationship to Him. I think it's instructive that justamere10 and the orthodoxy he represents is so willing to so easily and quickly throw me under the bus, and suggest that I leave the church ... that I, and members like me, just "shut up and go away." Doesn't to me seem like a true Christian response. Another red flag, IMO.


First justamere10 suggests I go away, then he want's me to leave the church alone.

Readers: please notice justamere10's intolerance for, and almost allergic reaction to, real dissent or independent thinking ... to actual, rigorous investigation. Does that, in your experience, tend to indicate trustworthiness, or lack of same?

In my experience, it's the latter.


Now you really are being paranoid, justamere10. And again, you seem to be ignoring what I've written in my posts in this thread.

More than once, as I recall, I've acknowledged that I could be wrong about my doubts about the LDS church ... that, in fact, you could be 100% correct in your fundamentalist view of religion [although the mathematical odds of this are at most less than one tenth of one percent (the same probability of any fundamentalist belief system actually being the one and only true and complete explanation about God and man's relationship to Him ... assuming only 1000 such fundamentalist belief systems, religions, and cults have ever existed throughout human history), and I placed my own estimate at perhaps 15% (a much higher number, given my experience to date as an LDS member)].

I am NOT trying to "bring down the Church ..."! Your presumption that I am, however, speaks volumes about your own paranoia, and that of the Mormon orthodoxy.

My number one goal in life is to do right by God, live an honorable life, and come to know and embrace what's actually so about who I am and about my relationship to and with God. I would be just as glad to realize that you are completely and totally correct about what you believe to be the only real way to come to know Him. But I will not be happy simply accepting a belief system that does not ring true to my own senses and conscience, just because I'm told to do so, or that I should do so.


And now you're getting overemotional.

I haven't tried to politicize "everything" so-called faithful members do, just those particular things so MANY of them do that I find egregiously unChristian, unAmerican, and repugnant to moral sensibilities ... like supporting or excusing civil leaders who are habitual and unrepentant liars, thieves, crooks, torturers, murderers, and effective, virulent enemies of the sacred U.S. Constitution and of democracy in America and throughout the world (i.e. Bush, Cheney, Rove, et al).

I'm not "whining about the world," justamere10, I'm expressing my sincere thoughts, beliefs, opnions, and experience ... just like you are.

About blaming others instead of one's self ... I think my posts in this thread will show that I am not unable nor unwilling to blame myself as well as others for what I see going wrong in the world.


Yes, I'm sure you and they do, as do the vast majority of people.

I'm pointing out where I think you and they are dropping the ball, and though unfortunately my emotions sometimes do get in the way, and if/when they do I've made a mistake and I apologize for that, my goal is to do so sincerely and effectively, realizing that in fact it may be MYSELF all the while who is wrong and who is simply missing some information or not seeing things clearly.

My goal here is truth, justamere10 ... my truth, your truth, or some entirely different truth. I really don't care. I'm not attached to anything but a desire (need?) to find out what's truly real, and then live accordingly. If that's orthodox Mormonism, so be it. If that's liberal Mormonism, so be it. If it's Kashmir Shaivism, so be it. It it's agnosticism or atheism, so be it (though I really have a hard time with that last one). In fact, if it's Bozo the Clown and ice cream on Sundays, so be it. I don't care. I don't really have a horse in the race. I just want to know, for real, for myself, more and more about what's most important ... and then to act consistently with that light and knowledge ... continually seeking more and more of it. My intention is to express myself and what I see as being right and correct, as truthfully as possible, to call it like I see it, regardless of whose feathers get ruffled or smoothed out. I hope to have the courage to always say out loud what I think is right and what I think is wrong, when it really counts, no matter what the consequences, as my heros have done.

I think you do care which belief system is correct. I think you do have a horse in the race. You've already made up your mind, before the experiement, what your conclusion will be. You do care whose feathers get ruffled, and which get smoothed out (the feather thing is especially important to you, I think). Which is fine, for you (but not for everyone).

To me, with all due respect, calling the pitch before the ball gets near the strike zone is dishonest, and a big mistake.

Totalitarians are all the same. Doesn't matter whether they claim to be acting in the name of a supernatural god or an earthly one no body must be left uncontrolled or spirit unbroken.

No ... Tyo's point was that it's best (common sense, really) to get both sides (or, preferably, multiple sides) of an issue before making any important decision about it.

Your point was that this is not necessary or even a good idea ... rather, that it's a bad idea, and that the best way to judge an issue is to listen only to one side that has an enormous stake in the outcome (i.e. a huge conflict of interest) and to get no other input or listen to any other opinions or information about the issue at all.


I think you better make that 12,999,999.5 people, at most. I'm a member, and I agree somewhat with the LDS church and somewhat with its "apostates and enemies" (i.e. those who hold a view that differs from the officially approved view of church doctrine, history, culture, etc.).

This same thing is just as true about you, justamere10.

Once again your message is so filled with errors of fact that it is difficult for me to believe that you ever were an active member of the LDS Church other than perhaps having taken the basic missionary discussions and maybe a few gospel principles lessons in Sunday School.

What is your objective for writing about the LDS Church as if you were knowledgeable when surely you are fully aware that you are not?

Ok, reading further I think you have already responded to my question about your agenda, my guess is that those who are reading understand quite clearly by now as well.

I'll keep watching now and then for a sincere question about what faithful members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints really believe. And I'll leave it up to each reader to decide for themselves who to believe when information about the Latter-day Saints is presented in this thread.

Enjoy the weekend all.

Precisely where I strive to remain.

Well said 'shoeshoe'...

I indeed have had very powerful spiritual experiences that do not include Christianity in any of its forms.

Ok, I'll vote for Shoeshoe, Randys,Tyo, Myoho etc.

1.A. What errors, jusatmere10? I challenge you to name them.

I don't believe I've made any errors of fact at all, but if I have, please correct me.

1.B. I've been a member for 12 years, 9 of them actively, and have held the following callings requiring an excellent reputation within my ward and stake, more than a small amount of trust and confidence on the part of the various Bishops I've served under, and much greater understanding, sacrifice, and commitment than that normally resulting from merely taking "the basic missionary discussions and maybe a few gospel principles lessons in Sunday School:"

- ward (i.e. stake) missionary
- ward mission team first assistant (taking over on numerous occasions for the ward missionary team leader)
- elders quorum teacher
- Gospel Essentials substitute teacher
- assistant building (chapel) supervisor
- baptismal speaker
- emergency communications coordinator for my area of the ward, and for several years helped develop, direct, implement, and maintain our wards emergency prep plans,
- both my wife and I have been chosen to travel to a far flung branch to speak, and, as I said earlier, our reputation within our stake is such that we have just been asked to speak at a single's ward Fireside meeting coming in a month or so, in addition to numerous talks I've been asked to give in our own ward on various subjects over the years

2. Apparently, since justamere10 can't offer evidence to refute what I've said, he's now resorting to that last desperate refuge of dishonest debaters, the ad hominem attack ... trying to discredit and distract attention from the message by discrediting the messenger.

I certainly make no claim at all to being a expert on LDS history, and I've never claimed to be. Having studied about the LDS church both from the inside and the outside, and having been fairly heavily involved (much more so than the average member) during the nine years I was active, together with the reading and researching I've done since then, and judging by the conversations I've had with other orthodox Mormons similar to the one I'm having with you (and the respect I've received from them), I believe that by now I do know as much about church history and culture as the average active member, and quite a bit more than the average LDS member (given the rather large percentage of inactive and rather disinterested Mormons, compared to the total number baptized LDS members), if my experience as a ward missionary is any indication of the trend church-wide).

So, you're wrong, justamere10. I do consider myself fairly knowledgeable (though not an expert), on Mormon doctrine, history, and culture. Just because I don't have a PhD in Mormon Studies from BYU (do you?) doesn't mean I can't express my opinions about the church and cite what I believe to be facts about it, which is what I've done and will continue to do. Again, please, if I've said anything factually incorrect, please be specific, and I'll cite my evidence for those assertions or else admit that I'm wrong. If I'm wrong, I want to know. My goal is education and actual knowledge, not self-righteous self gratification (though, to be sure, try as I may not to, I'm afraid I do entirely too often slip into the trap of arrogantly making others wrong, which is regrettable).

Frankly, until and unless you can cite evidence showing that my posts are "filled with errors of fact," as you claim, I think it's pretty clear that what's really true is that you wish I didn't know much about the church, because right now the knowledge I do have about it is proving embarrassing to you.

Sorry about that ... but if you'd only come down off that high horse you're on you wouldn't have to suffer so much discomfort.

Finally, as far as my objective for writing what I've written in this thread, I think I fully addressed that question in post #526.

Seems to me there have been quite a few "sincere questions" lately about what "faithful" LDS members believe (maybe not the kind of softball questions you wanted or expected, but sincere ones nonetheless). It seems to me you just don't want to answer them, since honest answers might not fit into the orthodox box you're attached to. (Notice also that justamere10 considers me to me an "unfaithful" member simply because I have the gall to think independently and objectively about the church, and because I believe the whole truth is more important and valuable than a subset containing just the good, happy parts).

I do hope, justamere10, this doesn't mean you won't be taking up my challenge to cite specifically the "errors of fact" you claimed my posts are so filled with. Failing to respond with evidence to such a serious charge would surely be unkind, at best, and at worst a violation of the board rules (Rule 2: "If you disagree with another member's facts, focus on the fact not the person who posted it."), though that's up to the mods, and I don't really care that much.

In my mind, accusing someone in a public forum of being careless with facts and then simply refusing to cite evidence justifying the charge is indictment enough of the accuser ... and, unfortunately, would only further prove my point about the lack of integrity of many orthodox Mormons.



Excellent idea.

I don't really know what you're saying in that last part ... but I'd like to go on record to say that I believe justamere10 is genuinely sincere in his efforts here, and though I do think he's got his own blind spots that obscure his vision sometimes (don't we all?), I do not doubt that his deepest motivation is to share with us and with the world something he has found to be immensely valuable and important to him ... and for this, personally, I thank him very much.

I think it's unfortunate that we human beings have such great difficulty simply giving to others. Either because it's so difficult or scary to reach out, or because when we do, something goes wrong and it comes out in a big, weird misunderstanding.

Still, I believe that if we keep on bumbling along, trying and failing and trying again and succeeding and trying and failing again, etc., etc. -- each of us doing our best to express what our Highest Truth is -- despite the fact that from time to time it's all going to get totally screwed up -- eventually, if we keep in focus our original goal of giving to others, for their benefit, not ours, the actual truth will eventually rise up out of the cacophony and all will be edified, enriched, and bettered for the effort. Maybe it will turn out that I'm right, or you're right, or someone else is right, or none of us are right and the truth turns out to be completely different and unexpected ... whatever.

A cylinder can be seen as rectangle, or from another angle, as a circle, but neither is really true nor false; each is true and false. Such are the foibles of human perception and understanding -- even to the extent that terrible acts of violence and even full scale religious wars are wrought over which is the "correct" or "true" perception: the rectangle, or the circle.

The main thing, I think, is to remember that it's okay to trust the Truth. There's nothing to defend against. As long as we all truly want to learn, and are more committed to that than we are to being right, we'll all move inevitably toward God (i.e. our Highest Truth). And as we all move closer to God, we move closer to each other, too (icing on the cake!).

I'm sorry if I've offended you in any way, justamere10, as I'm sure I have. Please excuse me. I know you're only trying to do what's right and charitable in your eyes, and that's a truly laudable and generous thing, and I respect you for it. I happen to think you're mistaken on a number of points, but in all likelihood that's really just me saying "I see a rectangle," while you seem to be saying, "I see a circle." I could certainly be mistaken in my particular views, or overall point of view. Have been many times before, will many times more, I'm sure.

Likewise, I hope you also know that my deepest intention here is to bring myself, and perhaps others too, closer to God. It would be nice if my technique was more refined and effective, but hopefully (probably) with practice I'll get better at it.

Although you and I will no doubt continue to butt heads here, I hope we and others too can do it as a team with the same ultimate goal ... which I propose is not to be right or dominant, but rather to learn something of actual value that we didn't already know, about God or ourselves or whatever we as individuals most need to understand.

The more we remember this, I think, even as we argue and dispute, the more we'll have served a purpose worth serving.

Am I schizophrenic? Despite what this post may seem to indicate, I've never been diagnosed as such. Really.

Why am I not surprised? :-)

It was not my intention to fall into your trap of getting two "Mormons" arguing with each other so readers could eagerly break out the popcorn as one Mormon trashes the other's religious beliefs to the delight of a gleeful already scornful audience. But I'll think a bit more about engaging in your errors in fact challenge and perhaps find some time to point out a few because you are misleading readers about what the LDS Church and its members are all about.

Had you stuck to politics in my opinion you would have been in good company here and fit right in, a very popular fellow, but you are trying to politicize the Saints when most are not even interested in politics. Your claim to be or have been LDS adds more credence to your stories and contrary opinions. Had you not made that claim your ideas would have been on a par with the other critics who write in this thread, mere opinions and weighed as such, nobody expects them to know much about the Church, just to put it down because that's a popular thing to do.

In my opinion a faithful Latter-day Saint is one who worthily holds a temple recommend and regularly attends the temples. You are in fact an unfaithful Latter-day Saint because members who consistently fail to attend the three hour block of meetings each Sunday are considered "inactive" and not eligible for a temple recommend. I think you wrote somewhere that you have been inactive for three years?? There are other reasons why, as evidenced by your writings, you would not be eligible for a temple recommend. You are not among the faithful Latter-day Saints as I define such, you have chosen to exclude yourself from our company.

There is a way back through sincere repentance but my guess is that you are not interested in that at all, it's much more popular to stand in today's tall places and point mocking fingers at former brothers and sisters perhaps in an attempt to rationalize the reasons for your own departure from their company.

I wasn't looking for it, but last night I came across a reference in an unofficial document regarding what I mentioned earlier about those who have lost their testimonies (as you have) not being able to leave the Church alone. I'll quote a few sentences:

"The feelings that accompany and follow deconversion vary according to the individual. Some ex-members struggle through the pain of cognitive dissonance but eventually feel peace with their decision to leave the Church. Others harbor bitter feelings for months, years, or all of their post-Mormon lives. Some in this second group become obesessed with their former faith - actually, obsessed with denouncing their former faith - and rarely miss opportunities to condemn all things Mormon (such as your opportunistic mention of the Mountain Meadows incident.)

As Elder Neal Maxwell once noted, such critcs:

...lecture the rest of us about Church doctrines in which they no longer believe. They criticize the use of Church resources to which they no longer contribute. They condescendingly seek to counsel the Brethren whom they no longer sustain. ...they leave the Church, but they cannot leave the Church alone."

I assure you shoeshoe that you have not offended me personally, even with this in my opinion highly condescending post in which you attempt to take some kind of high ground with your magnanimous generalizations. But you got me communicating directly with you, which admittedly I was reluctant to do for the reason I stated in my immediately previous post.

Ok, I'll go after the errors in fact thing a bit but in almost every case it will be just my word as a faithful Latter-day Saint for forty years against yours as a currently inactive member for a much shorter time. The reason for that is because I simply do not have the time nor the inclination to do a scholarly reference check. Readers as usual will need to draw their own conclusions.

As usual I do not expect to influence those who write in opposition to me in this thread, in almost every case it is probable that they have long ago made up their minds not to seek the truth about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its beliefs and teachings from active knowledgeable Saints themselves, from our canon, and from official LDS websites, each of which are logically sources most likely to know the truth about their own organization.

It looks like that all caps within quotes format is not going to work. I'm not going to have time for this so shoeshoe I guess you've 'won' by default, enjoy your victory, and the weekend...

Ok, maybe I'll point out a few errors in fact from this one message before I go about doing what I planned to do with the day.

1. Shoeshoe writes: "no one is paid (except at the most senior levels)."

There is no paid ministry in the LDS Church at any level, including "senior levels". But we do have thousands of people who work for the church taking care of temporal affairs all over the world. Those jobs are outside of the Priesthood line of authority. General Authorities are not paid in money for their voluntary service to the Church and its members, neither are bishops, stake presidents, missionaries, or other local leaders.

2. Shoeshoe writes: "No one is paid to clean the church buildings."

The church has a physical facilities department that takes care of maintaining and cleaning all church buildings. People who work in that department are paid for the temporal work they do. They do the heavy cleaning but recently local volunteers do much of the once a week surface cleaning of chapels, classrooms etc.

3. A third error in fact in this one message alone. (Not that it matters, I'm just going along with shoeshoe's challenge and accusations, possibly because as I stated earlier 'good cop, bad cop' sells a lot of newspapers and shoeshoe has been responsible for at least 1,000 thread views that other wise would not have happened. It is my hope that among the lukers are some sincere people who will actually search for the truth by clicking the links in my signature line and anonymously browsing those official LDS websites.) Yes, there are many volunteers and a few missionaries who work in canneries to produce some of the food that is given away to people in need regardless of religious denomination. There are also paid temporal affairs employees supervising and doing other work in the canneries and storehouses.

4. Shoeshoe writes: "women are not allowed to hold church leadership positions outside the Relief Society)" which is another error in fact.

Serving in many other positions even at the general level, are the women who preside over the Young Women's organization of the Church. Women are hugely active in leadership roles in the LDS Church at all levels.

5. Shoeshoe writes: "the church's financial records are a deep, dark secret, and we're not allowed to know that."

Church finances are audited by arms length professionals who report to the entire membership of the Church at every annual general conference of the Church. There is nothing deep or dark about church finances whatsoever. But I suppose such a false assertion serves the agenda of those whose desire and intent is to condemn all things Mormon even while condescendingly mentioning that there are a few gems amongst us and within our organization and doings.

6. Shoeshoe writes: "So, whereas Catholics have hospitals, Seventh Day Adventists have schools, it's impossible to know or quantify really just how much charity the LDS church really does. Again, we just have to trust the orthodoxy"

I suppose the implication is that Mormons do not have hospitals or schools. The truth is that we do, or are closely affiliated as Church members with such. And the truth is that everything the church does is done openly and above board.

But you'd have to go to an official ("orthodox) LDS website or source to find out such information, and that seems to be against the rules of those who choose to put down the Lord's Church and its members.

I take great issue with shoeshoe's allegation that "the Mormon church is extremely secretive (to the point of paranoia..." and his inference that Latter-day Saints are comparable to Islamic fascism. Nothing could be further from the truth.

With regard to the Mountain Meadows massacre which took place in the heat of the Utah War, the Church recently issued an official apology to descendents of the victims:

"Critics have long charged that church leaders in both the 19th and 20th centuries covered up evidence surrounding LDS culpability in the massacre. In September, (2007?) then-Elder Henry B. Eyring ��" now a member of the faith's First Presidency ��" read a public statement at Mountain Meadows acknowledging that local LDS leaders in Cedar City planned and carried out the murders, then tried to blame local Indians. The statement, delivered during the 150th anniversary commemoration of the massacre by descendants of the victims, expressed "profound regret" for the murders."

Evidence points to local church and civic leaders being instrumental in planning and carrying out the atrocity which will remain a stain on the LDS Church for generations. There is no excuse for that and it does reflect on the Church as a whole because of the involvement of local Church leaders at nearby Cedar City, Utah.

Some people think that the act was done as vengeance for the murder earlier that year of a well known Church leader in Arkansas, where the wagon train came from. But that still provides no excuse, the Church is just going to have to live with that one. But it does not mean that the Saints blindly follow their leaders, in fact they are encouraged to find out things that might have eternal consequences for themselves individually.

A comprehensive very well researched book about Mountain Meadows was released this year. For those who are interested in knowing more, below is a link to a review of and comments about the book:

http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2008/06/ ... n-meadows/

This link to the book review might work:

http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2008/06/rev...untain-meadows/

Once again, a Mormon source.

For a bit more objectivity, try: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_Meadows_massacre

I don't have time to catch un everything said in this thread. All I can do is recommend a book: Reasoning from the Scriptures with the Mormons by Ron Rhodes. I'm sure it will be hard for any Mormon to read as it challenges your beliefs. However, as a Christian, I try to read thiings that challenge my faith. The idea is to find truth. As someone who has completed degrees in Biochemistry and Molecular Bio, I haven't had anything scientifically challenge my faith. I do still read both to try to understand where truth may lie. (no pun intended.) Thinking socratically, you constantly challenge what you know as true. If you come with the understanding that you're already correct, then you never know if you're living a lie. (that goes for religious, agnostic and athiest alike.)

Yes, a Mormon source about a Mormon event; logically much more likely to be accurate than Wicki where anyone with any opinions or axes to grind can and do contribute to the information. But of course if you buy into conspiracy theories that only enemies of the people actually involved in something are qualified to speak the truth about what happened, I guess you'd logically refrain from finding out what the principles have to say about a matter because that might contradict your preconceived one-sided notions.

I wrote the above as a generalization and not about the Mountain Meadows matter in particular. Very well qualified scholars have researched Mountain Meadows for many decades. They are vastly better qualified to speak on a historical event than is anyone writing on this board I'm sure. That's why I provided a link to a recent publication that reports on the work of several historians researching for several years.

QUOTE (justamere10 @ Aug 16 2008, 08:16 PM)

Yes, a Mormon source about a Mormon event; logically much more likely to be accurate than Wicki where anyone with any opinions or axes to grind can and do contribute to the information. But of course if you buy into conspiracy theories that only enemies of the people actually involved in something are qualified to speak the truth about what happened, I guess you'd logically refrain from finding out what the principles have to say about a matter because that might contradict your preconceived one-sided notions.

I wrote the above as a generalization and not about the Mountain Meadows matter in particular. Very well quali