The Definitive "Anti-Mormon" Thread

[Zathura]

Now that I look at it more it kinda seems like you and Elder Ashton are saying the same thing but with different words.

He says receiving the Holy Ghost to a greater degree further moves us along the path of being born again.

It seems as if you would call this gaining a greater portion of the Spirit of the Lord.

I see what you are saying , but I’m saying you have already been Born of God if you have received the Holy Ghost. You cannot have received the Holy Ghost without also being Born of God at that moment.

From what I see, He’s saying the Holy Ghost leads to you being born again some day down the road .


Those statements are not equivalent , correct?

[Zathura]

Now I'm not so sure many here are truly anti or apostate but I do find it odd that so many who claim to love Christ and to love people who love him and who claim to be his true disciples that after a conference that is completely centered on Christ, from every song, prayer and talk hardly any mention or appreciation for what was shared about Christ. Not hardly a comment? Rather an attempt to avoid or focus on something cynical or unimportant about the conference. Is that odd?

Also claims that people who enjoy hearing messages about Christ from these men are pharisaical, participating in hero worship, and blindly following man. Something doesn't smell right in Denmark.

I truly did appreciate the focus on Christ the conference. I can’t speak for others but I was personally waiting for the text version of the talks to show up so that I could quote them in a post I intended on making.

[Centerline]

To me it seems like he is saying you are born again upon receiving the Holy Ghost and you move further along the path as you receive the Holy Ghost to a greater degree, which you describe as gaining a greater portion of the Spirit of the Lord.

[endlessQuestions]

Does anyone know of any other message forums that don't have so many dissenting voices as this one? Not that I don't appreciate other perspectives but this forum seems to be tipping the scale on anti's on here. If anyone could give me a forum that would strengthen my faith I would greatly appreciate it.

Please.. one of these days can someone show me these “antis”?

Who?
Where?
What’d they say?

Nobody gives examples.

Boogeyman.

Maybe "hostiles" would be a better word for them. And no, I'm not going to name names because if you can't discern who they are there's no use telling you anyway.

Look
If you had
One shot
Or one opportunity
To seize everything you ever wanted
In one moment
Would you capture it
Or just let it slip?


Are Eminem references okay? I swear I haven’t listened to him since 2011

I apologize, I don't quite follow what you're getting at with Eminem.

In my opinion, somebody is hostile when they purposely phrase their posts in ways that are designed to engender doubt, fear, or other emotions that we know are not fruits of the spirit. I know he's not around to defend himself, but Dusty52 was the epitome of this style. Every. Single. Post. He made was designed to cause doubt.

I appreciate people who are willing to discuss the hard topics. On this site, I kind of avoid doing it, but in real life I'm the guy who brings this stuff up in priesthood. My point is that there are different ways of discussing things, and several people on this board, in my judgment, come at it the wrong way. That's just my opinion, though. Worth almost nothing.

[Jonesy]

I didn’t make the list!? I’m unworthy! I’m unworthy!

[Zathura]

I didn’t make the list!? I’m unworthy! I’m unworthy!

Gimme a bit I’ll find one

[Zathura]

I didn’t make the list!? I’m unworthy! I’m unworthy!

I can’t find any.. are you him? Are you the one??

[simpleton]

For those concerned that this forum has become anti-mormon or Apostate, here is your chance to voice your concerns and attack IDEAS . Tell us WHAT is apostate.

So, I ask you to answer these questions for me. No need to name names, just answer the questions.

Nobody ever answers my questions though. What is Anti? What is a dissident voice? What is apostate?

Maybe I can list some simple questions for you and those who are making the above statements can answer.

Is it Anti-Mormon or Dissident to suggest that a given subject has been taught incorrectly by a General Authority? Even if it can be objectively shown using scripture?

Is it Anti-Mormon or Dissident to suggest that a policy change was not revelation?

Is it Anti-Mormon or Dissident to suggest that it's been a long time since we've seen revelation in the Church(When compared to the revelations that came through Joseph Smith)?

Is it Anti-Mormon or Dissident to suggest that a General Authority might not actually be a "Prophet, Seer, and Revelator" until he has properly received such gifts directly from God INDEPENDENT and SEPARATE from his ordination at the hands of other General Authorities?

Is it Anti-Mormon or Dissident to discuss the Church having changed history and scripture(Like D&C 101) when citing sources that are literally the Church itself and journals from Church Authorities from the mid-late 1800's?

Is it Anti-Mormon or Dissident to suggest that polygamy is an abomination based on scriptures like :
24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.
OR by bringing up the fact that the folllowing once existed in D&C 101 and was later removed:
Inasmuch as this church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy: we declare that we believe, that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband, except in case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again

Is it Anti-Mormon or Dissident to question the Church support of City Creek?

Is it Anti-Mormon or Dissident to question the number of Temples built throughout the world, or maybe just question the number of Temples built in Utah alone?

Is it Anti-Mormon or Dissident to question the amount of charity the Church has reported?

Is it Anti-Mormon or Dissident reject ANY statement made by General Authorities? Even if they contradict other General Authorities whether those other GA's are currently alive or past GA's who have been gone for decades?

Is it Anti-Mormon or Dissident to reject ANY statement made by General Authorities that seem to contradict the scriptures?(The main argument being that scriptures "trump" anything being taught from the pulpit)

Is it Anti-Mormon or Dissident to suggest that "Follow the Prophet" MAY turn into idolatry at some point if you do not guard yourself?

Is it Anti-Mormon or Dissident to suggest that the Church does not have the "Full Truth" or that some truths may come from outside the hierarchy of the Church(either though normal "average" church members or even non-members). I'm not referring to Revelation for the church, but spiritual truths.

Is it Anti-Mormon or Dissident to suggest that one may fully repent of grievous sins and be sanctified without every having talked to a Bishop or Stake President to confess?

Is it Anti-Mormon or Dissident to suggest that the Church is caving to social pressures and attempting to be "popular" in the world?



Now look, there have been obvious examples of "Apostasy" here. People who straight up say the Church is fallen, the Church was never true etc.

But the vast majority of situations where I'm seeing complains of "voicing dissent" and "Apostasy" and "Anti" comes from normal every-day members discussing the questions listed above(There are many more topics I could throw up there).

Please, if you are willing, answer these questions for us.

Probably yes to most of those questions by today's politically correct modern standard...

Let's ask Joseph how he would answer those questions, goodness, would Joseph even be allowed to answer them? I think Joseph would be run out on a rail in church today with his views which he claimed were Gods views. And so also would Brigham be run out on a rail, and probably John and Wilford on down the line. That, I think should be the standard or where you could base your answers. I think their all spinning in their graves at the continual compromises that we do on a continuous basis to please the masses and Babylon.
Jesus Himself was branded as an apostate that was worthy of death by the leaders of the church in His day and they ended up killing Him. What makes us think we are not capable of the same thing?
And I completely disagree with the idea that we are "advancing" in the gospel of Christ, that we are "growing more spiritually". I think we are declining at a rapid rate, and our fruits (literally) show it. Numbers do not mean anything. Constantine could show you numbers, the Pope's could show you numbers. They are irrelevant to gospel progression in this world. The whole purpose and intent of the gospel of Christ is to learn to become One. And not this fake oneness supposed today. But One like unto Enochs city. One, like unto the Nephites immediately after Christ's appearance for the first few hundred years. One, like unto those at the day of pentecost in the NT that caused the people to sell all their material goods and lay their money at the Apostles feet.

But hey, now we are becoming one with sodomites, with pedifiles, with murderers of innocent blood, one with Babylon and all its entrapments, one with " secret combinations".
We are now not much different than any other religion.
We are ashamed of Jesus Christ, and we are ashamed of Joseph and we are ashamed of Brigham and we are ashamed of the Fulness of the Gospel as revealed to Joseph. So wherein do we differ? All " christian" religions "draw near unto Christ with their lips", and so do we, but, our hearts are far from Him.....


But yet still, there are a few, and there will be a remnant, so says the prophets, that will repent and be true to the cause of Christ.....

[Centerline]

How could the Lord have let this happen? I mean, couldn’t he have provided some revelation to a prophet along the way to prevent the dire circumstances just described?

[Centerline]

What would Joseph do if he was alive today? Probably use those billions of dollars to finance his campaign for President of the United States of America!

[djinwa]

Ironically, I'm guessing many who accuse others of being apostate or anti-Mormon, fear the church is BS. So they want to avoid hearing anything contrary to what they want to believe.

Never did understand how you can brag about having the truth when you only considered one side. Thank goodness our courts and science don't work that way.

[eddie]

Ironically, I'm guessing many who accuse others of being apostate or anti-Mormon, fear the church is BS. So they want to avoid hearing anything contrary to what they want to believe.

Never did understand how you can brag about having the truth when you only considered one side. Thank goodness our courts and science don't work that way.

Exhibit B

[Zathura]

Ironically, I'm guessing many who accuse others of being apostate or anti-Mormon, fear the church is BS. So they want to avoid hearing anything contrary to what they want to believe.

Never did understand how you can brag about having the truth when you only considered one side. Thank goodness our courts and science don't work that way.

Exhibit B

The rest of the forum really should learn at your feet. Your feedback is fabulous .

[Hosh]

For those concerned that this forum has become anti-mormon or Apostate, here is your chance to voice your concerns and attack IDEAS . Tell us WHAT is apostate.

I've been here a long time. Longer than most. I agree with those who say that the tone of the forum has changed to one that is apostate. I've been considering removing it permanently from my list of information gathering locations. I enjoy places where debate can be done, but I'm finding fewer and fewer interesting ideas or attitudes here.

With the general opinion out of the way, lets move onto the specifics.

So, I ask you to answer these questions for me. No need to name names, just answer the questions.

Nobody ever answers my questions though. What is Anti? What is a dissident voice? What is apostate?

Maybe I can list some simple questions for you and those who are making the above statements can answer.

Is it Anti-Mormon or Dissident to suggest that a given subject has been taught incorrectly by a General Authority? Even if it can be objectively shown using scripture?

This approach is apostate. It is not always apostate to disagree with a general authority. But when you go out of our way to show how they are wrong and holding up your understanding as the correct one - you are in error and on the wrong path. Not because what you say might be false - it may or may not be - but because this isn't the right way to go about it. Publicly condemning teachings of the Lord's leadership.

In order to sustain a fallible mortal as an inspired, divinely appointed messenger we need to offer them grace for their failings. When you consistently point to their failings you are not doing this. You are creating an antagonistic relationship between yourself and them. You are an accuser and have not mercy in your heart.

This has been shown in quote after quote and after quote that fault finding the leadership is a dangerous road and is one of the first signs of apostasy. Yet thread after thread in this forum is increasingly shortcoming, fault, error after purported shortcoming, fault, or error. Is it really so difficult to see?

Look at the thread you created right after conference.

"Doctrine of Christ taught incorrectly in General Conference"

I generally sympathize with your position but you spend more time trying to "fix" his error than in a genuine attempt at uplifting others. You probably view them as the same, but the intents and approaches are entirely different and with different outcomes. If someone finds themselves doubting the location of the iron rod because of your attitudes and pointing out of errors. Irreparable long term harm can be done to that soul. They lose their grip on the iron rod and are lost onto forbidden or unknown paths even if you "win the point".

People here teach things like "I don't need the church" when confronted with such potential for damage. This is the "I don't care about them" attitude towards the church. This is another prevalent attitude here and is also clearly apostate. Men are not intended to be alone or to act alone. It does happen among the righteous in this fallen world, but as a people it is not intended to be so. Instead of fracturing into a million individuals we are told we should be one. And the best way to do that is through a common leader, and in a temporal world that is through the appointed temporal leadership.

That is the general sum of what is happening here. I believe you can find the various individual examples on your own.

Lastly, if you reject the servants then how can you truly know the Master? The Church of Jesus Christ has the keys of the kingdom or it doesn't. It's leaders hold those keys or they don't. You're in the boat or you're out. There will be no fence sitters. Time to make your decisions and go your way.

"Convince us of our errors of doctrine, if we have any, by reason, by logical arguments, or by the Word of God, and we will be ever grateful for the information, and you will ever have the pleasing reflection that you have been instruments in the hands of God of redeeming your fellow beings from the darkness which you may see enveloping their minds." - Orson Pratt

“I admire men and women who have developed the questioning spirit, who are unafraid of new ideas and stepping stones to progress. We should, of course, respect the opinions of others, but we should also be unafraid to dissent – if we are informed. Thoughts and expressions compete in the marketplace of thought, and in that competition truth emerges triumphant. Only error fears freedom of expression. This free exchange of ideas is not to be deplored as long as men and women remain humble and teachable. Neither fear of consequence nor any kind of coercion should ever be used to secure uniformity of thought in the church. People should express their problems and opinions and be unafraid to think without fear of ill consequences. We must preserve freedom of the mind in the church and resist all efforts to suppress it.” Hugh B. Brown, counselor in First Presidency, Speech at BYU, March 29, 1968.

"Many have noted the strong tendency of Latter-day Saints to avoid making waves. They seem strangely touchy on controversial issues. This begets an extreme lack of candor among the Saints, which in turn is supported by a new doctrine, according to which we have a Prophet at our head who relieves us of all responsibility for seeking knowledge beyond a certain point, making decisions, or taking action on our own.." (Temples of the Ancient World. 610)

The early church leaders begged members to show them the error of their ways if error existed. To say we cannot point out errors being taught, when these errors can and will be a stumbling block to salvation is not right. I am a pretty agreeable person by nature. I don't like arguing and I am generally a spectator on this forum. But I cannot sit back and watch people as they tell others that they should not stand up and have a voice against false doctrine.

What is going to lead to the Gentiles to be as "Salt that has lost its savor" in the last days (3Nephi 16:10-15)? Is it going to be because we refused to stand up for our leaders, even when they preached false doctrine? Or is it going to be because we sat and watched and did nothing as the pure doctrine of Christ became mingled with the commandments of men. Teaching for doctrine the commandments of men will always lead to apostasy. The church leadership is not exempt. Joseph knew it. Christ knew it. It seems all the ancient prophets knew it. What makes us so different and special from every other dispensation who was susceptible to apostasy?

We are the most prophecied-about dispensation that ever lived, and those prophecies do not paint a pretty picture for what is in store for the Gentiles. WE ARE THE GENTILES. It is my prayer that we start heeding the warnings that fill the Book of Mormon and begin humbling ourselves to the dust, counting our wisdom as foolishness before almighty God. How can we read 2Nephi 28 and not tremble! Can anyone read that chapter and argue that he is not speaking directly to us AND our leaders? If some of the language spoken on this forum is considered anti or apostate, then Nephi was one of the worst apostates of them all! How dare he say the Gods people in the last days shall fall away. Or even worse, How dare Christ our Lord say that we (THE SALT) shall lose its savor in the last days! THIS IS PROPHECY, not apostasy. This is Pro-Chirst, not anti-christ. If that means anti-church from time to time, then so be it. My testimony of God will forever be unshaken. My testimony of man/institutions... not so much.

[cab]

All I have to say is that scripture gives enough examples of called messengers of God who were not from the "approved channel" who were quickly condemned as apostate by those to whom they preached repentance to... Now this isn't to say that everyone preaching repentance is a called messenger of God....
But I am suggesting that we should think twice before casting someone out who we deem "apostate" for not sharing our same views, especially if they are calling us (or our traditions) to repentance... And if we happen to believe that we are somehow immune ourselves to apostasy - well, then perhaps that might suggest we may be closer to it than we've ever considered...

[Yahtzee]

(I'll apologise in advance for the rambling train of thought. I'm up late waiting for pain meds to kick in).
This is not directed at any one poster.
I think it really does boil down to fear though. I mean, we're talking about our souls, right? That is serious business!! We have so many scriptures warning us about apostasy and how easily people were led away by flattering words. I find it very understandable that people would be fearful of anything that reminded them of that.
I think everything should be questioned and prayed over. But if you're not sure what else to do, then the best thing is to follow the prophet. Not sure if you receive revelation? FTP! Yes, the acronym is often treated with disdain here, but its a pretty good backup plan when nothing else works for you.
I have personally benefited from Stahura's reminder that the brethren are not infallible and that a personal relationship with the Savior is the optimal choice. It's the main focus of my thoughts these days. I don't disagree. But then I read 2 Nephi 31 where he says if you do that and then deny him you are really screwed.
That scripture there is a stumbling block of fear for me because I lack diligence. Maybe I'm better off just following the prophet then? Not everyone is in a place where the ideal works for them.

This is my long way of saying different strokes for different folks. Maybe for some people FTP is a better option right now and they shouldn't be mocked for it. In reverse, it's not apostasy to get more from prayer and scriptures than from the GA's.

[Kingdom of ZION]

How could the Lord have let this happen? I mean, couldn’t he have provided some revelation to a prophet along the way to prevent the dire circumstances just described?

Agency is the the eternal principle. He has given up plenty of prophecies warning us!

The Church has hidden these revelations, lied about them and when they had to admit they existed because of the internet making is available to so many of the saints, they said those "Thus saith the Lord" revelations do not apply to us, because they were never submitted and voted upon in conference.

Funny thing, all those supposed revelations they have been having for the last 139 years, not one of them were a "Thus saith the Lord" revelations, and they have even been forgetting to vote on them in conference! When did you vote on the Gay policies, or the changes in the garments of the Holy Priesthood, the Endowment, even the deleting of a complete branch of Priesthood, the Seventies, and the list goes on and on!

In the latter days, if they will reject the truth, then the Messiah will send them strong delusions. He was not talking to the Catholic, who already have apostatized long ago, or the Jews who have rejected His fullness. Now you can add the Gentiles to that list. And the Father (Yah), as it says in 3 Nephi 16, shall have the Messiah take the Gospel away from them and give it back unto the House of Yisrael. After the Time of the Gentiles has come in. It has come in!!!

Why was the more spiritual and greater portion of the Book of Mormon kept from the Gentile Saints? The answer is in the Book of Mormon itself!

So how could the Messiah let this happen? It was foreseen from the beginning, how the Gentiles would reject the Fullness of the Gospel, they not being the Elect, they could not bear living such truths! It will be taken and given to those who are more worth of such divine light, and who will not reject it!

The Melchizedek Covenants, which IS the New and Everlasting Covenant, are the two covenants the you have made:

Law of Chastity (which included the Plurality of Wives)!
Law of Consecration (which is living the Order of Enoch)!

So how is the Latter-Day Saints and their Church doing in living the Fullness of the Gospel?

They have decided the G_d no longer desires us to keep our Covenants! Really??? Are they kidding? Where is that revelation? The First Manifesto was a sham for the government, and easily proven to not be a revelation. Just go and read the 1886 Revelation, the one the Church lied about for a century until they could no longer hid it. And Consecration, they have no revelation anywhere!

Oath breakers and Covenant breakers!!! Even all!

[cab]

How could the Lord have let this happen? I mean, couldn’t he have provided some revelation to a prophet along the way to prevent the dire circumstances just described?

Agency is the the eternal principle. He has given up plenty of prophecies warning us!

The Church has hidden these revelations, lied about them and when they had to admit they existed because of the internet making is available to so many of the saints, they said those "Thus saith the Lord" revelations do not apply to us, because they were never submitted and voted upon in conference.

Funny thing, all those supposed revelations they have been having for the last 139 years, not one of them were a "Thus saith the Lord" revelations, and they have even been forgetting to vote on them in conference! When did you vote on the Gay policies, or the changes in the garments of the Holy Priesthood, the Endowment, even the deleting of a complete branch of Priesthood, the Seventies, and the list goes on and on!

In the latter days, if they will reject the truth, then the Messiah will send them strong delusions. He was not talking to the Catholic, who already have apostatized long ago, or the Jews who have rejected His fullness. Now you can add the Gentiles to that list. And the Father (Yah), as it says in 3 Nephi 16, shall have the Messiah take the Gospel away from them and give it back unto the House of Yisrael. After the Time of the Gentiles has come in. It has come in!!!

Why was the more spiritual and greater portion of the Book of Mormon kept from the Gentile Saints? The answer is in the Book of Mormon itself!

So how could the Messiah let this happen? It was foreseen from the beginning, how the Gentiles would reject the Fullness of the Gospel, they not being the Elect, they could not bear living such truths! It will be taken and given to those who are more worth of such divine light, and who will not reject it!

The Melchizedek Covenants, which IS the New and Everlasting Covenant, are the two covenants the you have made:

Law of Chastity (which included the Plurality of Wives)!
Law of Consecration (which is living the Order of Enoch)!

So how is the Latter-Day Saints and their Church doing in living the Fullness of the Gospel?

They have decided the G_d no longer desires us to keep our Covenants! Really??? Are they kidding? Where is that revelation? The First Manifesto was a sham for the government, and easily proven to not be a revelation. Just go and read the 1886 Revelation, the one the Church lied about for a century until they could no longer hid it. And Consecration, they have no revelation anywhere!

Oath breakers and Covenant breakers!!! Even all!

Or was the law of chastity broken much earlier when we sought after the same thing that 3 different wicked people sought after in the Book of Mormon?
Jacob 1:12-16
Mosiah 11:1-4
Ether 10:2-5

[Thinker]

It seems many of the proclaimed inconvenient truths are dubious at best based on the fact witness testimony is the worst type of evidence.

...I would describe the approach some take on this forum as “critical”, but often entertaining from both sides. So keep up the good work!

I try to keep in mind and express different perspectives and that it’s not all-or-nothing. The real evil is all-or-nothing thinking. Still, I don’t always do this, so thanks for the reminder.

The church - at the local level - is an incredible sense of community which provides convenient opportunities to love and be loved - spirituality in action. Awesome! On the other hand, there is a major inconvenient truth that is undeniable - so serious that if we do deny it, Christ warns, we will be held accountable. TITHES are supposed to help those in need, but they don’t. Tithes belong to God - and as we care for the least, we care for God. And that is the greatest commandments - “which hang all the law and the prophets.”

Spoiler

Financial irresponsibility (which contribute to debt, bankruptcy, poverty and related suffering) is undeniable. Changing scripture from what it states (increase) to mean “income” to get more money, is not of Christ. The reason God commanded tithe be based on increase is shown in the following example:

• 2 men earn the exact same income amount.
  1 man is the sole provider of a family of 7 and after paying bills has no increase left.
  2nd man lives with his parents who pay all his bills, so all of his income is increase.
  Yet, the church demand$ the $ame amount from each man - thereby causing the 1st family to be poor. Christ was about alleviating poverty and suffering - not causing more.

Deuteronomy 14:28-29 (conveniently ignored in lds curriculums) states that tithing collectors are to give at least 1/3 of TITHES to those in need. Christ asked those who can, to give much more.

While we are often pressured and shamed into giving “honest tithes,” church leaders keep money dark and secret, though Oaks did admit no tithes go to the poor. Funds intended for the poor go to the corporate empire of mormon leaders and we have no clue or say in how it’s spent. We do know the church had some elaborate malls built, and a list of greedy wordly companies using the name of Jesus Christ in vain. Meanwhile, about 1,000,000,000 of our brothers and sisters are starving.

Grand ribon-cutting opening for another mall (at least 2 now) built using the name of Jesus Christ...






Even if you designated fast offerings - the church leaders now say it’s their money and they can use it as they want...

Inconvenient facts make some FEEL uncomfortable so they ignore, deny or try to justify. But I believe our ability to handle truth is a major part of our spiritual progress. And to a large extent, this is why many are called but few are chosen...

[Col. Flagg]

I'll tell you what an apostate is not... someone who has been a member of the church their whole life who's devoted countless hours of service, time and 10% of their income who learns about many troubling and disturbing aspects about its founder and history thanks to the information age who begins sharing that information in an attempt to expose truth as that same church is penning essays about those same troubling aspects and acknowledging them as being true when once considered 'anti-Mormon literature'.

[BackBlast]

AWESOME. I appreciate the post.

Great, lets address this first then. I personally believe there are many instances where General Authorities can be objectively shown to have been in err, not leaning on anyone's personal understanding. In the grand scheme of things, lets suppose that the err of a General Authority causes some soul to believe something untrue. Is that not unbelief? While harboring unbelief, does this not effect your faith? Does your faith not effectuate your personal Salvation? With that line of reasoning, would it not be beneficial for that soul to be brought to the knowledge that they might shed that unbelief? It's been made clear that we are saved as fast as we acquire knowledge and cannot be saved in ignorance, so such a person won't get a simple pass because they were misguided. The blind leading the blind falls into the pit with the blind, Jesus made this clear in the New Testament. Both fall into the pit.
*DISCLAIMER: I'm not calling these GA's blind nor the members that sustain them(which includes myself), but you should get the meaning given the context

Whatever you intend, when you put your hand forward to publicly correct or steady you are on dangerous ground. If that is truly your goal then you should seek to privily correct what you see as error and preserve the edifice's structure rather than throw rocks at it. Thus the consequences of your procedure are not as you understand it. I, personally, have found that the Lord is quite good at teaching and correcting his own servants in their way, if they are following him. And He doesn't need you to question them publicly to accomplish removing unbelief in His people.

You have two choices. Give them the grace to perform their mission, any correction attempts should be private and to the individual in question rather than out in public. Or suggest and lay out the case that they are completely out of the way with the Lord and are in complete apostasy - in which case they should be actively fought rather than supported. In the boat or out.

It's not hard to see, but why do we have to assume that LITERALLY EVERY instance of "finding fault" is a sign of apostasy?
Bumps can be a sign of cancer, it can also be a cyst, or just swelling due to diet or from being struck.

When it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, don't be surprised when people call it a duck. This isn't a subtle thing that can be easily mis interpreted. You have the perspective of the eye of faith and belief or you do not.

The reason it is labeled so, is because it creates doubt about the divine calling of the leadership. You are creating unbelief, the very thing you claim to fight against. Worse, you create it around the very people intended to give us instructions and help about how to proceed today. That's an act with the end of destroying the church.

I used to indulge in it in what I thought was a very casual manner myself, and the Lord took me to task about it. He blatantly said that such behavior is killing his sheep. He had to tell me *multiple times* before it sunk into my brain as I didn't want to hear that I might be doing such a thing. It is a unpleasant realization.

And why do we have to call everything "finding fault"? If I see that you , BackBlast, taught something that seems to contradict what President Nelson or Nephi said and I approach you to discuss it(Assuming I do it without calling you names/blind/sheep and attacking you) , you would never say I was "Finding Fault" with you. In fact, you probably wouldn't put a label on it at all. Why does it suddenly become "Finding Fault" once it's a guy with a different calling than you?

Please note that I specifically distinguished going privily to the individual and talking loudly to a group of third parties about the error. You can't use one to justify the other. What would the effect on a family be if you pointed out all of a father's mistakes to his wife and children? One might say the effect could be positive, if unpleasant, if the father is an unrepentant cretin. If he is genuinely trying and doing his best, then the effect is so, so terrible as you undermine his position within his family. Doing it repeatedly and often would be even worse. Consider how would you feel if, based upon your input of objective truth as you see it, the wife then divorced her husband who was humble and doing his best.

[Zathura]

And why do we have to call everything "finding fault"? If I see that you , BackBlast, taught something that seems to contradict what President Nelson or Nephi said and I approach you to discuss it(Assuming I do it without calling you names/blind/sheep and attacking you) , you would never say I was "Finding Fault" with you. In fact, you probably wouldn't put a label on it at all. Why does it suddenly become "Finding Fault" once it's a guy with a different calling than you?

Please note that I specifically distinguished going privily to the individual and talking loudly to a group of third parties about the error. You can't use one to justify the other. What would the effect on a family be if you pointed out all of a father's mistakes to his wife and children? One might say the effect could be positive, if unpleasant, if the father is an unrepentant cretin. If he is genuinely trying and doing his best, then the effect is so, so terrible as you undermine his position within his family. Doing it repeatedly and often would be even worse. Consider how would you feel if, based upon your input of objective truth as you see it, the wife then divorced her husband who was humble and doing his best.

You make a really good analogy here, but this puts these leaders in a VERY convenient position. They are nearly completely inaccessible by the average member to the point that the people who should desire to speak with them about things they teach will never be able to speak with them, therefore ensuring that decades and generations pass where the average member cannot discuss Doctrine with the leaders. I don't care that they go and visit a Concepcion Chile stake randomly and talk to some random sister who is likely never going to bring up any doctrinal concerns. She doesn't have the concern I, and many others have. Since they cannot ever discuss this with their leaders they have 2 options. Simply ignore the fact that something untrue is being taught to millions of members, or try to share with others that a talk just contradicted the scriptures.

You might not think it's a big deal. "Who cares? It's just one talk right? One small piece of Doctrine?"
It's not just one small piece of doctrine, it is THE DOCTRINE. One talk turns into 2 which turns into 4 which turns into decades which turns into a whole generation of talks here and there that can never be discussed or corrected without punishment or the threat of punishment. This is how false traditions and philosophies are created. They didn't intend to, they had good intent, they were trying to tend to their flock with love.

I don't think the Church Leaders purposely did this, but you're describing a place where you CAN ask questions but ONLY the questions the leaders wants you to ask, you cannot question the leaders unless it's what they want you to ask , if the leaders are wrong the people should not know it, you will be expelled or threatened with expulsion by some leaders and their followers if you question them or something they say.

This doesn't sound like God's church, it sounds like the old Catholic church or an Authoritarian Government. Again, I don't think that our General Authorities conspired and intended to create this type of dynamic. I think members created this over the course of the last 150 years with this tendency that humans have to want to follow some strong leader combined with group-think. Again , I think it was the members. If I'm speaking evil of anyone(I'm not) , it's the members of the church that I'm speaking of. It's not evil speaking to point out an error in a discourse.

It's one thing to say Such and such is a fallen prophet, none of them have authority, they all engage in priestcraft blah blah. It's an entirely different thing to say they got something wrong in a single conference talk on a specific day while still sustaining them and sharing his other talks, and talks by other GA's. I'm not creating a blog, I'm not creating a following, I'm not telling people to go on a hunger strike, to leave the church. I'm literally just saying, hey yeah he got that wrong today and it'd be a good idea to make sure you correctly understand this most important doctrine

As was shared in this thread by someone else, previous leaders literally asked the body of the church to show them the error in their ways if there were any. They'd literally correct each other from the pulpit.

[kittycat51]

I'll tell you what an apostate is not... someone who has been a member of the church their whole life who's devoted countless hours of service, time and 10% of their income who learns about many troubling and disturbing aspects about its founder and history thanks to the information age who begins sharing that information in an attempt to expose truth as that same church is penning essays about those same troubling aspects and acknowledging them as being true when once considered 'anti-Mormon literature'.

Honest question: Have you left? Are you leaving? Why are you staying?

[Zathura]

AWESOME. I appreciate the post.

Great, lets address this first then. I personally believe there are many instances where General Authorities can be objectively shown to have been in err, not leaning on anyone's personal understanding. In the grand scheme of things, lets suppose that the err of a General Authority causes some soul to believe something untrue. Is that not unbelief? While harboring unbelief, does this not effect your faith? Does your faith not effectuate your personal Salvation? With that line of reasoning, would it not be beneficial for that soul to be brought to the knowledge that they might shed that unbelief? It's been made clear that we are saved as fast as we acquire knowledge and cannot be saved in ignorance, so such a person won't get a simple pass because they were misguided. The blind leading the blind falls into the pit with the blind, Jesus made this clear in the New Testament. Both fall into the pit.
*DISCLAIMER: I'm not calling these GA's blind nor the members that sustain them(which includes myself), but you should get the meaning given the context

Whatever you intend, when you put your hand forward to publicly correct or steady you are on dangerous ground. If that is truly your goal then you should seek to privily correct what you see as error and preserve the edifice's structure rather than throw rocks at it. Thus the consequences of your procedure are not as you understand it. I, personally, have found that the Lord is quite good at teaching and correcting his own servants in their way, if they are following him. And He doesn't need you to question them publicly to accomplish removing unbelief in His people.

You have two choices. Give them the grace to perform their mission, any correction attempts should be private and to the individual in question rather than out in public. Or suggest and lay out the case that they are completely out of the way with the Lord and are in complete apostasy - in which case they should be actively fought rather than supported. In the boat or out.

It's not hard to see, but why do we have to assume that LITERALLY EVERY instance of "finding fault" is a sign of apostasy?
Bumps can be a sign of cancer, it can also be a cyst, or just swelling due to diet or from being struck.

When it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, don't be surprised when people call it a duck. This isn't a subtle thing that can be easily mis interpreted. You have the perspective of the eye of faith and belief or you do not.

The reason it is labeled so, is because it creates doubt about the divine calling of the leadership. You are creating unbelief, the very thing you claim to fight against. Worse, you create it around the very people intended to give us instructions and help about how to proceed today. That's an act with the end of destroying the church.

I used to indulge in it in what I thought was a very casual manner myself, and the Lord took me to task about it. He blatantly said that such behavior is killing his sheep. He had to tell me *multiple times* before it sunk into my brain as I didn't want to hear that I might be doing such a thing. It is a unpleasant realization.

And why do we have to call everything "finding fault"? If I see that you , BackBlast, taught something that seems to contradict what President Nelson or Nephi said and I approach you to discuss it(Assuming I do it without calling you names/blind/sheep and attacking you) , you would never say I was "Finding Fault" with you. In fact, you probably wouldn't put a label on it at all. Why does it suddenly become "Finding Fault" once it's a guy with a different calling than you?

Please note that I specifically distinguished going privily to the individual and talking loudly to a group of third parties about the error. You can't use one to justify the other. What would the effect on a family be if you pointed out all of a father's mistakes to his wife and children? One might say the effect could be positive, if unpleasant, if the father is an unrepentant cretin. If he is genuinely trying and doing his best, then the effect is so, so terrible as you undermine his position within his family. Doing it repeatedly and often would be even worse. Consider how would you feel if, based upon your input of objective truth as you see it, the wife then divorced her husband who was humble and doing his best.

And hey, to keep with the theme of the thread you can tell me if my previous post is considered by you to have an anti or apostate approach.

[drtanner]

I think President Erying's counsel was timely and needed:

1. Have I thought or spoken of human weakness in the people I have pledged to sustain?

2. Have I looked for evidence that the Lord is leading them?

3. Have I conscientiously and loyally followed their leadership?

4. Have I spoken about the evidence I can see that they are God’s servants?

5. Do I pray for them regularly by name and with feelings of love?

Those questions for most of us will lead to some uneasiness and a need to repent.

Unfortunately you will have some people that say, "I have done or I do all of those things for my leaders but still can't quite overcome their favorite little nag."

Other Notable quotes from his talk:

"There are, however, improvements we could and must make. We could rise higher in our power to sustain each other. It will take faith and effort."

"In the priesthood quorum and in the family, increased faith to sustain each other is the way we build the Zion the Lord wants us to create."

Notice he includes the family

"You make a promise with God, whose servants these are, that you will sustain (the servants of God)."

Pray for leaders as they share their inspired messages. Listen for messages from their talks that will come as to personal prayers for help. "When the answers come, and I promise you they will, we will grow in our faith to sustain all the Lord's servants."

President George Q. Cannon passed on a warning that I pass on to you as my own:

“God has chosen His servants. He claims it as His prerogative to condemn them, if they need condemnation. He has not given it to us individually to censure them. No man, however strong he may be in the faith, however high in the Priesthood, can speak evil of the Lord’s anointed and find fault with God’s authority on the earth without incurring His displeasure. The Holy Spirit will withdraw itself from such a man, and he will go into darkness. This being the case, do you not see how important it is that we should be careful?"