When there is a debate, and what is truth is the debate, and there are two opposing sides, what should we make of the side that never concedes, never says "good point", never acknowledges facts that are indisputable? What should we say about the side who does this?
How can you (the reader of this forum) expect to ever arrive at truth if you don't humbly concede facts which may seem to oppose your belief? This self-reflecting question applies to me, you, and everybody.
As an investigator to the claims of Joseph Smith 30 years ago to this very month(!), I had to concede some things:
1) The Mormon Church might have a true message that came from God. That destroyed my belief that such truth existed on earth.
2) That there was a true American prophet named Joseph Smith. Such an idea was fantastic, it was out in left field.
3) That I needed to repent and be baptized by immersion in water to show my willingness to follow God. I didn't believe this.
4) And a host of other things that challenged my long-held belief system.
Instead of railing against and mocking ideas that opposed my beliefs, I had to give them a chance, I had to have an open mind. The doctrine of Christ's 5th tenet (3 Nephi 11) is to "become as a little child". THAT is what I was required to do. And that I did.
I humbled myself to the dust. The result was great outpourings of the Spirit (Truth) into my soul, which led to me KNOWING God lived, and that the BoM was true.
In my many debates with folks here, I'm not sure I can think of an example of a TBM who has done this; in other words, who has conceded ANYTHING.
I could give dozens of examples where an obvious and forthright concession is appropriate, but here is a small sampling:
1) TCOJCOLDS is a corporation. It's subject to the federal gov't. Meaning, it's MASTER is the gov't. If the owners of the corporation (which is remarkably just one man, the president) wish to keep the corporate charter, it must not upset its master. This clearly is a conflict of interest with the Lord. Do you concede there is a conflict of interest? Which of you TBM's will concede this point? When the gov't requires something that conflicts with the Lord, might the leaders of the corporation (the apostles) bow to the creator of the corporation instead of bowing to the will of God?
2) The top leaders (let's just say the apostles, though there are lots and lots of paid ministers incl mission presidents and seventies, etc.) are paid with a salary and perks. Conflict of interest with the Lord? Could what their corporate boss thinks about the employee's actions or speeches have any influence on what the employee says or does? Perhaps there's a conflict of interest? Concession here?
3) There were some Wilford Woodruff speech excerpts from 1890 added to OD1 in 1981 without an announcement or vote. The famous "The Lord won't permit me to lead you astray" false teaching was canonized. Again, with ZERO announcement nor vote. Do YOU concede this was 100% out of line procedurally?
4) Do you concede neither OD 1 nor OD2 are "revelations"? Keep in mind they are actually called "Declarations", as in Official DECLARATION, and they are not part of the "SECTIONS" of the D&C. Do you concede the content are not "revelations"?
5) Do you concede that if the 1981-added part that the "Lord won't permit me to lead you astray" is nonsense, and even anti Christ, in that it teaches the principle that God will violate free agency of the president, and that it encourages members to place their faith in the president rather than the Lord? Do you concede ANY of these points? Or do you want to justify the secret addition in 1981?
6) Polygamy. Do you concede Joseph and Emma may have been telling the truth and that he was having sex with only his wife, Emma, whom he said was his ONLY wife, and that he condemned having more than one wife? I am asking if you will concede this MIGHT be true?
7) Do you concede that if the BoM is true (and it is, I testify in the name of Christ), that does NOT equate to presidents AFTER Joseph Smith being true prophets, like Joseph was? In other words, it's a total logical fallacy for the Church leaders to prop up by incessant repetition that just because the BoM is true, that EVERYTHING current Church leaders say is the gospel truth. Do you concede this idea?
I could go on and on with more examples where an impartial person would have to make OBVIOUS concessions.
And yet, this forum seems to be bereft of TBM's who make ANY such concessions. Does an unwillingness to concede even these examples I give above say anything about the sincere willingness of that non-conceding person to accept truth?
Even now, in this thread, how many of the TBM's here are courageous enough to say, "Topcat, I concede every one of the examples you list above"? I do say it takes courage to make concessions. It takes humility.
Are none of you willing to humble yourself and concede the obvious? Are you afraid you'll be viewed by your peers as "apostate", or as doubting, etc.? Are you worried more about what your TBM peers will think of you then what God thinks of you? Are you concerned in the least bit about arriving at truth? Or do you just want to defend your belief system, as a rule, that you refuse to acknowledge the obvious facts that would cause you intense cognitive dissonance?
There are so many scriptures that teach us how we should be humble and easy to be entreated. I love Alma 32's message, which directly applies to the investigator of truth. Note that the so-called religious people (those who owned the synagogues) were literally casting out or denying the poor to enter their buildings! They were casting out the humble. Do you concede that was wrong of the Zoramites to do that? The JST of Matthew 6:25 says:
Just because the corporate owners of the synagogues of our day may hate you and persecute you for making these obvious concessions, will you allow them to dictate what you think? Will you allow your thought to be controlled by those who will withdraw their love from you for making such concessions? Is their love and support of you more important than God's?“And again I say unto you, Go into the world and do not care for the world, for the world will hate you and will persecute you and will turn you out of their synagogues.
So here's your chance. If you're a TBM and you wish to courageously and humbly make a concession of facts that may strike at the foundation of your belief system / tradition, then please demonstrate it here. I'm hopeful that some of you are up to the challenge. Or will you close ranks and stick to never conceding obvious facts?