• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Mormon/Ex-Mormon Thread of 3 hour blocks and salvation flowcharts

ronito

Member
But they sailed East when they left the Middle East...

Dude, I know. I think he had them going east then down and west or something. He was completely convinced. I thought he was insane until I was like "Well really saying that the nephite's got in ships in 600 BC that they made by themselves and then sailed across the Ocean without modern navigation and ended up in modern New York state/Canada." isn't inherently any less plausible than saying they ended up in the meso/latin america.

The only thing that he didn't have a satisfactory answer for was winter. I told him if the Nephites really did go from the middle east to New York/Canada they'd freeze and die within a year, at the very least they'd discuss something about winter and the hardships. His answer to that was that it wasn't "spiritually pertinent" so it wasn't in the BoM. Oh well. All apologists are crazy according to others. I suppose it does make the hill cumorah thing a bit more feasible, if not less romantic. I always thought "My god it's so cool that Moroni walked all that way for all those years." With placing them in Canada it's like walking to the next county. More realistic but certainly less romantic.

Also, I'm a fan of Zach Anner and he just did a video about the mormons.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzW1bCVUSx4&list=PLzvRx_johoA80G6wsT1KkOE8x7YbwXwNa

Really not Zach at his best. It just feels uncomfortable and forced and the questions are pretty softball. I know the church most likely didn't pay for it but they probably should actually. Getting stuff like this out there is much better than the pre-canned, corporate feeling "I'm a mormon" series.
 

ronito

Member
LOL church reacting hastily to the "Ordain Women" thing. A new "Women's Session" pre-conference?

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/57084218-78/women-general-release-church.html.csp
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has announced that a semiannual general women’s meeting — one that will include all females age 8 and older — will replace the general Relief Society and general Young Women meetings, which have been held every year for 20 years.


The switch begins next year, according to a news release. Relief Society and Young Women general meetings have been held in September and March, respectively, since 1993, the release added.

"The general women’s meeting will be held the Saturday before each General Conference and will be conducted by the general presidencies of the Relief Society, Young Women and Primary organizations," according to the release.

All women and girls 8 years and older will be allowed to attend.

"As the women of the church gather together — sisters, mothers and daughters — they, their families, and the church will be strengthened and blessed," the faith’s governing First Presidency states in the release.

The news release states that the First Presidency announcement came Friday, though the release was posted to the church website Monday.

I think they're going to push the "separate but equal" thing. Personally I don't know why they're doing this instead of the meetings they have in place. I guess this includes non Relief society/YW aged women which really they weren't clamoring for a meeting to begin with. I'll have to see what the wife thinks.
 

Jeff-DSA

Member
Dude, I know. I think he had them going east then down and west or something. He was completely convinced. I thought he was insane until I was like "Well really saying that the nephite's got in ships in 600 BC that they made by themselves and then sailed across the Ocean without modern navigation and ended up in modern New York state/Canada." isn't inherently any less plausible than saying they ended up in the meso/latin america.

The only thing that he didn't have a satisfactory answer for was winter. I told him if the Nephites really did go from the middle east to New York/Canada they'd freeze and die within a year, at the very least they'd discuss something about winter and the hardships. His answer to that was that it wasn't "spiritually pertinent" so it wasn't in the BoM. Oh well. All apologists are crazy according to others. I suppose it does make the hill cumorah thing a bit more feasible, if not less romantic. I always thought "My god it's so cool that Moroni walked all that way for all those years." With placing them in Canada it's like walking to the next county. More realistic but certainly less romantic.

Also, I'm a fan of Zach Anner and he just did a video about the mormons.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzW1bCVUSx4&list=PLzvRx_johoA80G6wsT1KkOE8x7YbwXwNa

Really not Zach at his best. It just feels uncomfortable and forced and the questions are pretty softball. I know the church most likely didn't pay for it but they probably should actually. Getting stuff like this out there is much better than the pre-canned, corporate feeling "I'm a mormon" series.

Pretty sure that the landing spot was what is now Valparaiso, Chile. Anyway, I think that people take things way too literally in the Book of Mormon where it talks about their populations covering the lands. I think that's just a flowery way of saying, "there were tons of people." My feeling always was that the BoM populations were fairly concentrated in Central America and they didn't cover all of North and South America at any point. Maybe a few million Nephites at the highest amount, but probably less.
 

Yoritomo

Member
Pretty sure that the landing spot was what is now Valparaiso, Chile. Anyway, I think that people take things way too literally in the Book of Mormon where it talks about their populations covering the lands. I think that's just a flowery way of saying, "there were tons of people." My feeling always was that the BoM populations were fairly concentrated in Central America and they didn't cover all of North and South America at any point. Maybe a few million Nephites at the highest amount, but probably less.

Which is why they changed the title page from Principal ancestors to among the ancestors.

For a significant period of time the title page claimed they were the principal ancestors. Whoever wrote the title page was just speaking as a man of course...
 

ronito

Member
Pretty sure that the landing spot was what is now Valparaiso, Chile. Anyway, I think that people take things way too literally in the Book of Mormon where it talks about their populations covering the lands. I think that's just a flowery way of saying, "there were tons of people." My feeling always was that the BoM populations were fairly concentrated in Central America and they didn't cover all of North and South America at any point. Maybe a few million Nephites at the highest amount, but probably less.

I remember at BYU I did a paper on the nephite/lamanite population (I was trying to minor in Religion at the time) and I think I remember coming up with around 400k nephites as the lowest possible number. That's essentially the population of ancient athens. Personally I never bought the argument that they were just swathes. If I was writing a book that I knew god was going to give to future generations, if I said there were 250k soldiers, I'd be damn sure that I was at least close to it. I always took a very literal approach to the BoM when I was a mormon, much more so than I ever did with the Bible. I was always taught, there was a lot of "wiggle room" in the bible. But not the BoM

edit: why Valparaiso?
 

Jeff-DSA

Member
Orson Pratt believed (stated as his supposition, not revelation) that Valparaiso, Chile was the likely landing spot and that the Nephites migrated north while the Lamanites kept the lands south.

Looking at an ocean current map, if they sailed east out of the Middle East and hopped islands to get to South America, the currents look to put them right into the middle of Chile, right near where Valparaiso is. I always thought that it made the most sense of the theories for a landing area.

qBKEqsF.jpg
 

Fathead

Member
LOL church reacting hastily to the "Ordain Women" thing. A new "Women's Session" pre-conference?

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/57084218-78/women-general-release-church.html.csp


I think they're going to push the "separate but equal" thing. Personally I don't know why they're doing this instead of the meetings they have in place. I guess this includes non Relief society/YW aged women which really they weren't clamoring for a meeting to begin with. I'll have to see what the wife thinks.

Having a womens meeting 2 times a year right before each conference instead of 1 time for RS and 1 time for YW makes having priesthood 2 times a year less "unfair".
 

ronito

Member
Having a womens meeting 2 times a year right before each conference instead of 1 time for RS and 1 time for YW makes having priesthood 2 times a year less "unfair".
I dunno, trying to appease me by giving me more meetings seems a bad way to go about it
 
My uncle actually wrote a book about Nephi/Lehi's journey, it mainly deals with the trip up to the point of getting on the boats though. More of a tourists guide to, rather than anything compelling or acedemic.
 

ronito

Member
The church's for profit real-estate arm just bought $565 million worth of land in Florida and the church will own 2% of Florida

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/os-mormon-deseret-huge-land-deal-20131107,0,697936.story

The Mormon church stands to own nearly 2 percent of Florida by completing a deal to buy most of the real estate of the St. Joe Co. for more than a half-billion dollars.

The megapurchase was announced jointly Thursday by a corporate representative of church, which owns the nearly 295,000-acre Deseret Ranches in Central Florida, and by the real-estate and timber business, which has built several communities along the Panhandle coast.

According to the announcement, a church entity, AgReserves Inc., will buy 382,834 acres – the majority of St. Joe's timberlands – in Bay, Calhoun, Franklin, Gadsden, Gulf, Jefferson, Leon, Liberty and Wakulla counties for $565 million.

Completion of the deal will leave the Utah-based church with 678,000 acres, an area larger than any other private holding in Florida, according to widely shared but unconfirmed rankings of top landowners.

AgReserves Inc., a taxpaying company of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, will maintain timber and agricultural uses of the Panhandle acreage, according to the announcement.

"AgReserves has demonstrated its commitment to wise land stewardship and prudent resource management during more than 60 years of ranching and agricultural operations in east central Florida," said Paul Genho, chairman of AgReserves. "We will apply that same commitment and expertise to managing the property we are acquiring in Florida's panhandle."

Owned by the church for nearly 60 years, Deseret Ranches sprawls across Orange, Osceola and Brevard counties and is increasingly seen as critical to the Orlando region's water supply, road and rail network and future development.

Commissioner of Agriculture Adam Putnam praised the announced deal as long-term investment in the state's timber and cattle business.

"This transaction between two of Florida's largest and most committed land stewards is a meaningful reminder of the economic and ecological value of agriculture in our state," Putnam said.

Charles Pattison, president of the smart-planning group 1000 Friends of Florida, said there has been little pressure for development of the St. Joe timberlands, which are well away from the Panhandle coast.

But Pattison said no other metropolitan area in the state borders such a huge and potentially developable piece of property as Deseret Ranches, which covers a largely roadless and unpopulated area southeast of Orlando.

Last week, Gov. Rick Scott signed an executive order that created the East Central Florida Corridor Task Force to plan for roads, development and environmental protection in an area dominated by Deseret Ranches.

"It is more important than ever that we work together to plan our future," said ranch manager Erik Jacobsen in response to the task force formation. "We look forward to collaborating with leaders from the state and Brevard, Orange and Osceola counties."

With 44,000 head of cattle, the ranch property also is one of the nation's largest producers of calves and manages thousands of acres of citrus groves, vegetable farms and timberlands.

Orlando, Orange County and state water authorities have been planning for years to accommodate growing populations by pumping water from Taylor Creek Reservoir within ranch boundaries.

A St. Joe Co. official said the sale will help the company, to be left with 184,000 acres after the sale, focus on its real-estate development.

That's a ton of money and a ton of land. I wonder what they're going to do with it.
 

ronitoswife

Neo Member
Uh, this sounds far more like and education problem than a religious one. I'm a male, but by the time I was 12 I could have told you the difference between the two purely on what I had learned in sex education..

Sorry, I've been meaning to get back to this for a while. Life has a way of getting in the way.

I can see why you'd say that, but this acquaintance of mine came from a very wealthy and educated family. This wasn't a matter of failing an anatomy test. Because she had never masturbated/explored herself she had not yet learned to feel where it was. There is a difference between knowing where something is in the books and being able to feel and find it on your own. Also, using mirrors to familiarize women with their bodies isn't uncommon. Many therapists recommend/prescribe propping up a mirror so women can see and explore themselves. And she, by far, wasn't the only girl I knew like this.

I know you argue that the church can't be blamed for everything. I'll give you that some people do need to take responsibility for their own actions. But when your religion teaches you that sexual sin (inclusive of masturbation) is next to murder at the fervor and frequency that the church does it's a little silly to say that you can't blame the church.
 

Fathead

Member
Sorry, I've been meaning to get back to this for a while. Life has a way of getting in the way.

I can see why you'd say that, but this acquaintance of mine came from a very wealthy and educated family. This wasn't a matter of failing an anatomy test. Because she had never masturbated/explored herself she had not yet learned to feel where it was. There is a difference between knowing where something is in the books and being able to feel and find it on your own. Also, using mirrors to familiarize women with their bodies isn't uncommon. Many therapists recommend/prescribe propping up a mirror so women can see and explore themselves. And she, by far, wasn't the only girl I knew like this.

I know you argue that the church can't be blamed for everything. I'll give you that some people do need to take responsibility for their own actions. But when your religion teaches you that sexual sin (inclusive of masturbation) is next to murder at the fervor and frequency that the church does it's a little silly to say that you can't blame the church.


Thats a failing of some idiot parents not knowing the difference between knowledge and morality. Its not the churchs job to teach anatomy. Whether you agree with their idea of morality or not, they exist toteach morality. My 6 year old knows where her vagina is, because my wife and I are competent parents.
 

ronito

Member
Thats a failing of some idiot parents not knowing the difference between knowledge and morality. Its not the churchs job to teach anatomy. Whether you agree with their idea of morality or not, they exist toteach morality. My 6 year old knows where her vagina is, because my wife and I are competent parents.

Oh come now, you're just being difficult. I don't find it difficult to make the connection that if a church teaches that sex is abhorrent that some parents will treat it as such. I've met far too many women that had such severe sexual dysfunction that they couldn't even touch themselves down there unless there was a strict medical reason. Hell, I've met tons of women that wouldn't even say the word "vagina" or "pussy".
 

Fathead

Member
Oh come now, you're just being difficult. I don't find it difficult to make the connection that if a church teaches that sex is abhorrent that some parents will treat it as such. I've met far too many women that had such severe sexual dysfunction that they couldn't even touch themselves down there unless there was a strict medical reason. Hell, I've met tons of women that wouldn't even say the word "vagina" or "pussy".


Once again, thats not the churchs job. The church also teaches to take good care of the body, but doesn't teach grooming 101 in Sunday School. Thats once again, on the parents (and there are plenty of people in the church that could do with info on that topic). The church doesn't teach "don't even learn where your vagina is." Thats idiot parents either too dumb or too afraid to teach their kids deciding to avoid the topic.


This is exactly why My wife and I are taking responsibility for teaching my kids about sex. Church may teach the morality part, public school may teach the anatomy part, but we are going to teach both in a rational matter so our kids can make informed decisions.
 

Hitokage

Setec Astronomer
How many mormons know the difference between a White Zinfandel and a Merlot on name alone? You don't brand a subject as verboten then absolve yourself of responsibility when your followers become deficient in it. Like elections, doctrine has consequences.
 

ronito

Member
Once again, thats not the churchs job. The church also teaches to take good care of the body, but doesn't teach grooming 101 in Sunday School. Thats once again, on the parents (and there are plenty of people in the church that could do with info on that topic). The church doesn't teach "don't even learn where your vagina is." Thats idiot parents either too dumb or too afraid to teach their kids deciding to avoid the topic.


This is exactly why My wife and I are taking responsibility for teaching my kids about sex. Church may teach the morality part, public school may teach the anatomy part, but we are going to teach both in a rational matter so our kids can make informed decisions.

True, but again the church does not operate in an echo chamber. If you're taught that sex is abhorrent it is not surprising that many will view the things that deal with sex as things not to be mentioned. You'd have me believe that the church is able to teach that being gay is a sin and that the people that disown their kids because they're gay, well that's not the church's fault. It's a similar scenario. Yeah a good parent will love their kid anyway, just like a liberal parent will teach their kids everything about their genitals. However, there are plenty of parents that will say "Being gay is abominiation therefore you are too." same thing here, some parents are just going to pretend that area doesn't exist. Is the church responsible? Not really. Are they a factor? You bet.
 

ronito

Member
Here's another example of what I'm talking about

http://np.reddit.com/r/latterdaysai...ife_was_called_into_the_bishops_office_today/
Earlier this year, we went to Hawaii for a week, she posted family pictures on the beach in a bikini and again in a tank top at a luau. Other ward members saw them, I guess, and freaked out (she's endowed). Then, a couple times after the gym, she ran the kids to and from soccer practice in her gym clothes, and these same people saw her 'without her garments on.'

Today, the Bishop called her into his office to talk about it. He said some ward members saw pictures of her on Facebook in a bikini, and that she didn't wear her garments periodically in Hawaii. He said they also noticed her in her gym clothes at soccer practice. He then advised her that, since she has facebook friends who are in young women, it would be a good idea to remove the Facebook picture of her paddle boarding with family a bikini. He finished the discussion by telling her that, if she finds herself needing to do things after the gym, she needs to leave time to shower and put on garments and modest clothing before leaving.

She was very polite and didn't cause a fuss. However she said she was very uncomfortable and felt bad. She didn't mean anything by the photos or her dress. She took the picture off Facebook but said she felt sad to have to remove it. More than anything, she feels more alone and isolated from other women in the ward after this. She will read all comments here and is appreciative of your insight in advance.

TL:DR: women in the ward complained about wife's bikini picture and non garment garb. Bishop pulled her in for a talk, and she's very sad and alienated about it.

EDIT: I would just like to thank everyone for your kind and heartfelt responses. My wife has and will continue to read them all. She/I can't respond to them all, but we will try. Thanks in advance for what is yet to be posted.
Now the thread's full of people calling out how wrong this is. Great. However, again when the church keeps saying stuff about being modest and how modesty is an absolute necessity is is surprising that this happens? Nope.
 

Fathead

Member
Individuals are stupid and don't seem to understand the don't judge bit. Thats not a church problem, thats a human beings are stupid problem. And I'm sorry, but the church teaching that something is wrong doesn't give license to blame them when people act like idiots.

I am all about blaming the church for what it actively does wrong. But the church doesn't teach people to be ignorant about sex. It doesn't teach people to abandon their children (thats something that happened to me btw, although not for being gay). When it does those things I will be one of the first to speak up.
 

mik

mik is unbeatable
I got a pretty great phone call at 9:00 Saturday morning. Apparently our ward has a new bishop and he called to invite me and my family to stake conference. I politely declined, at which point he asked what it would take to reactivate me, because it was his personal goal to reactivate as many ward members as possible.

I didn't want to talk too much about it, so again I just politely declined. He then offered this: "I just don't get it. You look so good on paper--married in the temple, former seminary president. Why are you refusing to live up to your covenants?"

I thought that was an interesting, direct approach to the question. Didn't do him any favors, though.
 

Jeff-DSA

Member
On Thursday a missionary from our ward returned home from the Philippines. His twin brother is still there, set to return next month, but he's yet to check in. Not good.
 
On Thursday a missionary from our ward returned home from the Philippines. His twin brother is still there, set to return next month, but he's yet to check in. Not good.

I have thought that the mission would have evacuated all the missionaries to safer ground/sturdier buildings.

My only experience with "disasters" in the mission were the man made ones. There were a few days where we were out on house arrest after 9/11, I thought that was a little paranoid.
 

ronito

Member
I got a pretty great phone call at 9:00 Saturday morning. Apparently our ward has a new bishop and he called to invite me and my family to stake conference. I politely declined, at which point he asked what it would take to reactivate me, because it was his personal goal to reactivate as many ward members as possible.

I didn't want to talk too much about it, so again I just politely declined. He then offered this: "I just don't get it. You look so good on paper--married in the temple, former seminary president. Why are you refusing to live up to your covenants?"

I thought that was an interesting, direct approach to the question. Didn't do him any favors, though.
LOL again that's such a Masonic thing to do.

What I find funny is how much Mormons agonize about getting inactives to church activities and how important it is and how difficult it is. But, at least in my case, if you'll ask me, chances are I'll come. It's always funny when I go to a church activity or something and I get pulled aside and asked "So what did so and so do to get you here?" and all I say is "He asked me to come."
 

Jeff-DSA

Member
I have thought that the mission would have evacuated all the missionaries to safer ground/sturdier buildings.

My only experience with "disasters" in the mission were the man made ones. There were a few days where we were out on house arrest after 9/11, I thought that was a little paranoid.

He's now been accounted for. From what I understand all the missionaries have been found and have all survived.

I had to stay in all day on 9/11 as well. I remember being down at a corner market buying something when the report of the first tower being hit came on the news. It was a bad reception TV, and the reports were extremely scattered and unreliable. When the second plane hit, I knew that I should check in with the mission home. When I did, they told me to call everyone in the zone and have them go home, because the local news was reporting that the United States was under attack and that citizens abroad were possible targets.

It was nuts.

To make it more crazy, one of the sister missionaries had family that was supposed to be flying on one of those planes that went down, but on the way to the airport, the dad felt strongly that they should extend their stay one more day, so they turned back around and returned to the hotel.

We were allowed to go out the next day, however.
 
Well, I'm getting set apart as a missionary at 7:45 PM tonight, then leaving for the Provo MTC tomorrow.

Serving in the Riverside California mission, English-speaking.

I'm going to miss GAF, having lurked here for all of High School, finally becoming a member last year and spending a disproportionate amount of time on this forum. Looking forward to coming back on in 2 years!
 

ronito

Member
Well, I'm getting set apart as a missionary at 7:45 PM tonight, then leaving for the Provo MTC tomorrow.

Serving in the Riverside California mission, English-speaking.

I'm going to miss GAF, having lurked here for all of High School, finally becoming a member last year and spending a disproportionate amount of time on this forum. Looking forward to coming back on in 2 years!

congrats dude! I might not be a practicing mormon but I realize this is a huge step for you. I hope you get everything you want out of it.
 

Furyous

Member
I'm having issues and almost came to blows with another elder.

Earlier in this thread I mentioned getting into a three day argument wifh an elder over extreme sensitivity over the Trayvon verdict. He defriended me after called him unchristlike, questioned his upbringing, and challenged him to better himself. He came back to the ward only to see me and change wards. We saw each other a few times and I glared at him and gave him an invitation to step outside like grown men.

Oh and every time I sit down for sacrament everyone around me parts like the red sea.

I've enjoyed my time in the church for the most part but there is an age limit for single's wards. It's easy to stay within the set guideline of church conduct when I live in small town without much going on but.. let me receive a job offer in a diverse area with stuff to do. At some point, I'll have to leave the church because this entire situation is getting on my nerves and I'm not getting any younger.
 
Well, I'm getting set apart as a missionary at 7:45 PM tonight, then leaving for the Provo MTC tomorrow.

Serving in the Riverside California mission, English-speaking.

I'm going to miss GAF, having lurked here for all of High School, finally becoming a member last year and spending a disproportionate amount of time on this forum. Looking forward to coming back on in 2 years!

Good Luck! Just remember to not get yourself down and always be positive about yourself. The mission will sort its self out as long as you take care of you first.

I'm having issues and almost came to blows with another elder.

Geez dude. You want a hug? Serious, it's church, if you're not enjoying being there take some time off or ward hop for a while to meet new people.
 

Doodis

Member
So a dude comitted suicide in the Las vegas temple apparently. Anyone heard the same?

I thought they took that neck slashing thing out of the temple ceremony?
(I'm sorry, this was terrible, but I had to.)

On a serious note, it's so sad that the burdens some people feel can lead to this.
 

ronito

Member
wow it looks like it was Jay Bybee's son!

http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Man-26-commits-suicide-at-Vegas-Mormon-temple-4995916.php

LAS VEGAS (AP) — A 26-year-old man who authorities say killed himself in the courtyard of a Mormon temple in Las Vegas was identified Wednesday as the son of a federal appeals court judge.

Scott Greer Bybee of Henderson died in the shooting just before 6:30 p.m. Tuesday while services were being conducted at the temple, police and the Clark County coroner said.

He was the son of Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Jay Bybee.

No one else was hurt, Las Vegas police Officer Bill Cassell said.

In a statement circulated by a Ninth Circuit colleague, Judge Bybee and his wife Dianna Bybee said their son suffered from depression for many years, and they did all they could as parents to help him, including seeking professional advice and treatment.

"While Jay and Dianna mourn for Scott, and grieve for their own loss, they are grateful that he is finally released from his sufferings," said the statement circulated by Judge Milan D. Smith Jr. of El Segundo, Calif. "They have faith that he is in a better place."

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints spokeswoman Kristen Howey issued a statement calling the incident tragic and saying the thoughts and prayers of church members were with those involved.

Jay Bybee, 60, was nominated to the San Francisco-based Ninth Circuit court by President George W. Bush and confirmed by the U.S. Senate in 2003.

He has been criticized for authoring documents in August 2002, later dubbed torture memos, that gave interrogators wide latitude to use techniques including waterboarding during questioning of terrorism detainees at the U.S. detention camp at Guantanamo Bay and at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

His statement on the death of his son said no decision had been made concerning a memorial service.

Mormons believe suicide is wrong, but they don't hold the person responsible, said Matthew Bowman, an author and assistant professor of religion at Hampden-Sydney College in Virginia.

Families are told that only God can judge the deceased, Bowman said.
 
Probably a young gay man who just couldn't handle how much the church loves him.

Eh, I've seen a lot of similar comments online, blaming the church in one way or another. I think that's pretty disingenuous, at least until there is more information. I'm not discounting that the church may have had a role in it, but I'm not a fan of people automatically assuming that it was primarily because of the church.

(Not discounting the fact that the church has led a lot of people -- including myself -- to depression.)
 

ronito

Member
Eh, I've seen a lot of similar comments online, blaming the church in one way or another. I think that's pretty disingenuous, at least until there is more information. I'm not discounting that the church may have had a role in it, but I'm not a fan of people automatically assuming that it was primarily because of the church.

(Not discounting the fact that the church has led a lot of people -- including myself -- to depression.)

Well obviously to him the church had something to do with it. The question is just what?
 
Well obviously to him the church had something to do with it. The question is just what?

This is probably true, I just don't feel it's right to place all the blame on the church without knowing the rest of the story. Doing so feels somewhat like an active member blaming the suicide of an ex-Mormon on the fact that he left the church.

Of course, however, the fact that it was in a temple obviously has significance.

Regardless, this is really sad for all those involved.
 

Yoritomo

Member
Eh, I've seen a lot of similar comments online, blaming the church in one way or another. I think that's pretty disingenuous, at least until there is more information. I'm not discounting that the church may have had a role in it, but I'm not a fan of people automatically assuming that it was primarily because of the church.

(Not discounting the fact that the church has led a lot of people -- including myself -- to depression.)

If it was just a random mormon kid I wouldn't have made the comment. However he did this on temple grounds.
 

Hitokage

Setec Astronomer
At some point, I'll have to leave the church because this entire situation is getting on my nerves and I'm not getting any younger.
You can be in the normal ward, you know.

Whatever you do, I can only implore that you do so for the right reasons and after fully thinking it out. People who make changes for the wrong reasons usually find their way back to their own starting point.
 
D

Deleted member 1159

Unconfirmed Member
So Tom Philips, editor in chief of MormonThink.com, former recipient of the Second Anointing and keeper of the supposed "October surprise", is doing an AMA on Reddit here:

http://np.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comments/1rajft/ama_i_have_been_asked_to_do_an_ama_on_november/

I've given him a hard enough time on the October surprise but still it's a bit entertaining, especially the TBMs asking him if he's neurologically ok.

I find Philips really interesting. I think he really had some hard lessons to learn about how he handled his disaffection, and then more recently how he's handled this whole situation. It's like he doesn't realize how internet communities work, or how Mormon families handle apostates. It sounds like he regrets letting the hype train leave the station too early on this announcement, but then continues to stoke the fire now and then...

I feel some empathy for the man because I think he's doing his best but bumbles it a bit. I'm content to sit back and enjoy the show.
 

ronito

Member
He's at Doritos and Mtn. dew levels of credibility.

Yeah.
Like I've said, if anyone was going get the dirt on the church he'd be the one to get it. But he's ruined his credibility thoroughly. If it's not his "surprise" he should've said nothing. You know its bad when even Ex-Mormons are like "Oh, yeah, right."

That being said I'm sorta surprised that so many TBMs take issues with him being really anti-church. I'm not surprised at all. You saw how he threw himself so completely into his belief, is it really that surprising that he threw himself so completely into his disbelief? If anything I'd say it's completely expected. He was a "golden" mormon, so its no surprise to me that he's a "golden" exmormon.
 
D

Deleted member 1159

Unconfirmed Member
I don't think the ExMo community is one to allow him to spew nonsense without being called out on it. I mean, the reaction to this latest saga has been decidedly mixed. You have to understand that, after being through a dissolution of testimony, most of us are firmly in the "put up or shut up" camp.

So, whatever bumbling has happened here, I do believe the man must have something, it just would be unfathomable to me that he is just blowing smoke, he's got other people at mormonthink that would most assuredly reel him in. But I just can't imagine what it would be. It was interesting seeing him get trolled...
 

Doodis

Member
From the AMA:
It will be front page MT. It will also be on TV and national newspaper. And on as many boards as we can get to.
Don't worry, you'll hear.


Whatever it is, he's pretty confident it will be big. The only thing I can think of is perhaps it involves the use of tithing funds. Wasn't he a big financial guy for the church in the UK? Seems like that might be something he'd have inside info on, but who knows.
 

ronito

Member
From the AMA:
It will be front page MT. It will also be on TV and national newspaper. And on as many boards as we can get to.
Don't worry, you'll hear.


Whatever it is, he's pretty confident it will be big. The only thing I can think of is perhaps it involves the use of tithing funds. Wasn't he a big financial guy for the church in the UK? Seems like that might be something he'd have inside info on, but who knows.

I don't think he's got anything. Given the fact that it's not in his control I bet it's someone either was pulling his leg and couldn't deliver because there really wasn't something. Or it's just someone from the higher ups leaving the church.
 
Top Bottom