Favourite Current Apostles?

[Aprhys]

I swear if Bednar wins I will hang myself.

How come?

I spent a few years in military intelligence and had the opportunity to interrogate people. Nothing abusive or cruel. Just reading their mannerisms and I can tell you that Bednar is a psychopath. He has no empathy for his fellow man. Everything is black and white and if you are on the opposite side of him you are wrong. Watch his wife when she is around him. She looks as if she has been mentally abused by him. This is all just my opinion of course but heaven forbid he ever becomes the president of the church. Talk about wheat and tares. There will be a flood of people away from that serpent of a man.

[drtanner]

I swear if Bednar wins I will hang myself.

How come?

I spent a few years in military intelligence and had the opportunity to interrogate people. Nothing abusive or cruel. Just reading their mannerisms and I can tell you that Bednar is a psychopath. He has no empathy for his fellow man. Everything is black and white and if you are on the opposite side of him you are wrong. Watch his wife when she is around him. She looks as if she has been mentally abused by him. This is all just my opinion of course but heaven forbid he ever becomes the president of the church. Talk about wheat and tares. There will be a flood of people away from that serpent of a man.

Having spent a lot of time around the Bednars, this couldn’t be further from the truth.

[Aprhys]

I swear if Bednar wins I will hang myself.

How come?

I spent a few years in military intelligence and had the opportunity to interrogate people. Nothing abusive or cruel. Just reading their mannerisms and I can tell you that Bednar is a psychopath. He has no empathy for his fellow man. Everything is black and white and if you are on the opposite side of him you are wrong. Watch his wife when she is around him. She looks as if she has been mentally abused by him. This is all just my opinion of course but heaven forbid he ever becomes the president of the church. Talk about wheat and tares. There will be a flood of people away from that serpent of a man.

Having spent a lot of time around the Bednars, this couldn’t be further from the truth.

Like I said "In my opinion."

[drtanner]

How come?

I spent a few years in military intelligence and had the opportunity to interrogate people. Nothing abusive or cruel. Just reading their mannerisms and I can tell you that Bednar is a psychopath. He has no empathy for his fellow man. Everything is black and white and if you are on the opposite side of him you are wrong. Watch his wife when she is around him. She looks as if she has been mentally abused by him. This is all just my opinion of course but heaven forbid he ever becomes the president of the church. Talk about wheat and tares. There will be a flood of people away from that serpent of a man.

Having spent a lot of time around the Bednars, this couldn’t be further from the truth.

Like I said "In my opinion."

Calling an apostle a “psychopath” who you have never met is meant to slander, nothing more. I was clarifying for those reading, although I think most realize this comment is fueled by other motives.

[Zathura]

I spent a few years in military intelligence and had the opportunity to interrogate people. Nothing abusive or cruel. Just reading their mannerisms and I can tell you that Bednar is a psychopath. He has no empathy for his fellow man. Everything is black and white and if you are on the opposite side of him you are wrong. Watch his wife when she is around him. She looks as if she has been mentally abused by him. This is all just my opinion of course but heaven forbid he ever becomes the president of the church. Talk about wheat and tares. There will be a flood of people away from that serpent of a man.

Having spent a lot of time around the Bednars, this couldn’t be further from the truth.

Like I said "In my opinion."

Calling an apostle a “psychopath” who you have never met is meant to slander, nothing more. I was clarifying for those reading, although I think most realize this comment is fueled by other motives.

I wonder, have you ever called a politician you have never met by any name or used any adjective to describe them ?

I find it funny that you and Sarah and others who think church leaders are flawless use this argument but it only applies to general authorities, never to anyone else.

Sarah used this same poor argument, and yet she was in another thread criticizing Trump, his ideology, and yet she’s never met Trump. Yet there she was, claiming it was slander and bad to critique the doctrine of a General Authority I’ve never met. Claiming you shouldn’t talk about anybody in anyway unless you can talk to them personally.

Isn’t there a word for that?

Rules for theee but not for meeee

[drtanner]

Having spent a lot of time around the Bednars, this couldn’t be further from the truth.

Like I said "In my opinion."

Calling an apostle a “psychopath” who you have never met is meant to slander, nothing more. I was clarifying for those reading, although I think most realize this comment is fueled by other motives.

I wonder, have you ever called a politician you have never met by any name or used any adjective to describe them ?

I find it funny that you and Sarah and others who think church leaders are flawless use this argument but it only applies to general authorities, never to anyone else.

Sarah used this same poor argument, and yet she was in another thread criticizing Trump, his ideology, and yet she’s never met Trump. Yet there she was, claiming it was slander and bad to critique the doctrine of a General Authority I’ve never met. Claiming you shouldn’t talk about anybody in anyway unless you can talk to them personally.

Isn’t there a word for that?

Rules for theee but not for meeee

To also clarify I have never once said church leaders were flawless, that is your dis-like for my support for them coming out in a label that is not true. What I have said is that I think one of the reasons the Lord communicates with them has to do with the fact that they are doing there best to know and do the Lord’s will.

[Zathura]

Like I said "In my opinion."

Calling an apostle a “psychopath” who you have never met is meant to slander, nothing more. I was clarifying for those reading, although I think most realize this comment is fueled by other motives.

I wonder, have you ever called a politician you have never met by any name or used any adjective to describe them ?

I find it funny that you and Sarah and others who think church leaders are flawless use this argument but it only applies to general authorities, never to anyone else.

Sarah used this same poor argument, and yet she was in another thread criticizing Trump, his ideology, and yet she’s never met Trump. Yet there she was, claiming it was slander and bad to critique the doctrine of a General Authority I’ve never met. Claiming you shouldn’t talk about anybody in anyway unless you can talk to them personally.

Isn’t there a word for that?

Rules for theee but not for meeee

To also clarify I have never once said church leaders were flawless, that is your dis-like for my support for them coming out in a label that is not true. What I have said is that I think one of the reasons the Lord communicates with them has to do with the fact that they are doing there best to know and do the Lord’s will.

You gonna address the fact that you and Sarah are guilty of the same thing you criticize others for doing or nah?

[drtanner]

Calling an apostle a “psychopath” who you have never met is meant to slander, nothing more. I was clarifying for those reading, although I think most realize this comment is fueled by other motives.

I wonder, have you ever called a politician you have never met by any name or used any adjective to describe them ?

I find it funny that you and Sarah and others who think church leaders are flawless use this argument but it only applies to general authorities, never to anyone else.

Sarah used this same poor argument, and yet she was in another thread criticizing Trump, his ideology, and yet she’s never met Trump. Yet there she was, claiming it was slander and bad to critique the doctrine of a General Authority I’ve never met. Claiming you shouldn’t talk about anybody in anyway unless you can talk to them personally.

Isn’t there a word for that?

Rules for theee but not for meeee

To also clarify I have never once said church leaders were flawless, that is your dis-like for my support for them coming out in a label that is not true. What I have said is that I think one of the reasons the Lord communicates with them has to do with the fact that they are doing there best to know and do the Lord’s will.

You gonna address the fact that you and Sarah are guilty of the same thing you criticize others for doing or nah?

Is that the goal of these exchanges? To catch me in something I am guilty of so you can attempt to discredit my position on the church and its leaders? Perhaps we should address the lack of charity in such an endeavor?

And I’m not sure what your referring to as far as me criticizing others. I’ve never said anything about a politician to my knowledge.

But in case anyone is wondering I’m a constitutionalist to the core, and therein lies my loyalty.

[Zathura]

I wonder, have you ever called a politician you have never met by any name or used any adjective to describe them ?

I find it funny that you and Sarah and others who think church leaders are flawless use this argument but it only applies to general authorities, never to anyone else.

Sarah used this same poor argument, and yet she was in another thread criticizing Trump, his ideology, and yet she’s never met Trump. Yet there she was, claiming it was slander and bad to critique the doctrine of a General Authority I’ve never met. Claiming you shouldn’t talk about anybody in anyway unless you can talk to them personally.

Isn’t there a word for that?

Rules for theee but not for meeee

To also clarify I have never once said church leaders were flawless, that is your dis-like for my support for them coming out in a label that is not true. What I have said is that I think one of the reasons the Lord communicates with them has to do with the fact that they are doing there best to know and do the Lord’s will.

You gonna address the fact that you and Sarah are guilty of the same thing you criticize others for doing or nah?

Is that the goal of these exchanges? To catch me in something I am guilty of so you can attempt to discredit my position on the church and its leaders? Perhaps we should address the lack of charity in such an endeavor?

And I’m not sure what your referring to as far as me criticizing others. I’ve never said anything about a politician to my knowledge.

But in case anyone is wondering I’m a constitutionalist to the core, and therein lies my loyalty.

It's just really convenient for you and Sarah and everyone else doing the same thing to attack others for doing something no doubt you both are guilty of. It's also really convenient that you can attack others for doing something you yourself do and then tell others they have no charity for calling you out on it .

Don't sit there are pretend like you've never used any kind of negative adjective to describe another person you don't know.

You apply different standards for the General Authorities than for others, you esteem them as being greater than the average person and to you are immune to the standards that everyone else is held to. You should be called out for that until you stop(fat chance of that happening).

[drtanner]

To also clarify I have never once said church leaders were flawless, that is your dis-like for my support for them coming out in a label that is not true. What I have said is that I think one of the reasons the Lord communicates with them has to do with the fact that they are doing there best to know and do the Lord’s will.

You gonna address the fact that you and Sarah are guilty of the same thing you criticize others for doing or nah?

Is that the goal of these exchanges? To catch me in something I am guilty of so you can attempt to discredit my position on the church and its leaders? Perhaps we should address the lack of charity in such an endeavor?

And I’m not sure what your referring to as far as me criticizing others. I’ve never said anything about a politician to my knowledge.

But in case anyone is wondering I’m a constitutionalist to the core, and therein lies my loyalty.

It's just really convenient for you and Sarah and everyone else doing the same thing to attack others for doing something no doubt you both are guilty of. It's also really convenient that you can attack others for doing something you yourself do and then tell others they have no charity for calling you out on it. I do my absolute best not to ever attack someone individually and have never called someone a psychopath, that is slander.I can't speak for Sarah or "everyone else"

Don't sit there are pretend like you've never used any kind of negative adjective to describe another person you don't know. Again I try my best to stay away from individual attacks.

You apply different standards for the General Authorities than for others, you esteem them as being greater than the average person and to you are immune to the standards that everyone else is held to. You should be called out for that until you stop(fat chance of that happening).

I've never said I esteem a general authority as being greater than the average person and saying I have is once again a dishonest attempt to label. We are all held to the same standards.

[Zathura]

You gonna address the fact that you and Sarah are guilty of the same thing you criticize others for doing or nah?

Is that the goal of these exchanges? To catch me in something I am guilty of so you can attempt to discredit my position on the church and its leaders? Perhaps we should address the lack of charity in such an endeavor?

And I’m not sure what your referring to as far as me criticizing others. I’ve never said anything about a politician to my knowledge.

But in case anyone is wondering I’m a constitutionalist to the core, and therein lies my loyalty.

It's just really convenient for you and Sarah and everyone else doing the same thing to attack others for doing something no doubt you both are guilty of. It's also really convenient that you can attack others for doing something you yourself do and then tell others they have no charity for calling you out on it. I do my absolute best not to ever attack someone individually and have never called someone a psychopath, that is slander.I can't speak for Sarah or "everyone else"

Don't sit there are pretend like you've never used any kind of negative adjective to describe another person you don't know. Again I try my best to stay away from individual attacks.

You apply different standards for the General Authorities than for others, you esteem them as being greater than the average person and to you are immune to the standards that everyone else is held to. You should be called out for that until you stop(fat chance of that happening).

I've never said I esteem a general authority as being greater than the average person and saying I have is once again a dishonest attempt to label. We are all held to the same standards.

You don’t have to say it.

You just do.

You excuse them from things you wouldn’t excuse others from.

You allow criticism of others that you don’t allow if it’s towards them.

Your actions show that you just do esteem them above your fellow neighbor.

Your actions say more than your words ever could.

Trying to act defensive as a deflection doesn’t change that. Change the way you act instead, and people will stop saying what they’re saying, and you don’t have to feel defensive anymore.

[drtanner]

Is that the goal of these exchanges? To catch me in something I am guilty of so you can attempt to discredit my position on the church and its leaders? Perhaps we should address the lack of charity in such an endeavor?

And I’m not sure what your referring to as far as me criticizing others. I’ve never said anything about a politician to my knowledge.

But in case anyone is wondering I’m a constitutionalist to the core, and therein lies my loyalty.

It's just really convenient for you and Sarah and everyone else doing the same thing to attack others for doing something no doubt you both are guilty of. It's also really convenient that you can attack others for doing something you yourself do and then tell others they have no charity for calling you out on it. I do my absolute best not to ever attack someone individually and have never called someone a psychopath, that is slander.I can't speak for Sarah or "everyone else"

Don't sit there are pretend like you've never used any kind of negative adjective to describe another person you don't know. Again I try my best to stay away from individual attacks.

You apply different standards for the General Authorities than for others, you esteem them as being greater than the average person and to you are immune to the standards that everyone else is held to. You should be called out for that until you stop(fat chance of that happening).

I've never said I esteem a general authority as being greater than the average person and saying I have is once again a dishonest attempt to label. We are all held to the same standards.

You don’t have to say it.

You just do.

You excuse them from things you wouldn’t excuse others from.Example?

You allow criticism of others that you don’t allow if it’s towards them.There is a time and a place for criticism here is a great talk I highly recommend to better understand this principal https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... m?lang=eng

Your actions show that you just do esteem them above your fellow neighbor. What actions?

Your actions say more than your words ever could.What actions?

Trying to act defensive as a deflection doesn’t change that. Change the way you act instead, and people will stop saying what they’re saying, and you don’t have to feel defensive anymore. If me clarifying how I really think so others understand what my viewpoint really is comes off to you as me feeling defensive I would say your interpreting my feelings incorrectly

[JK4Woods]

By and large I find the current crop of Apostles a curious distance from me in regards to personal connections.

I really liked LeGrand Richards, and Richard G Scott.

These new guys... not much of a personal connection. Uchtdorf is great. And Eyring is great. He wears his emotions on his sleeve.

The middle pack are all graduates of the Seventy. Long old school members who fulfill their assignments. But with little inspiring impact.

Holland can thump the pulpit on occasion. As he did here once in our Stake center when talking directly to the youth. (Didn’t help much... still a whole bunch of unworthy missionaries went out, only to return early and peter out...).

Just saying... we need a bit more “Hell Fire & Damnation” and bearing down in pure testimony.
Enough of the reconciliation and appeasement!

(Unless all the hard line Apostles in the last century were wrong, and we really are supposed to be more loving and accepting).

[Aprhys]

I spent a few years in military intelligence and had the opportunity to interrogate people. Nothing abusive or cruel. Just reading their mannerisms and I can tell you that Bednar is a psychopath. He has no empathy for his fellow man. Everything is black and white and if you are on the opposite side of him you are wrong. Watch his wife when she is around him. She looks as if she has been mentally abused by him. This is all just my opinion of course but heaven forbid he ever becomes the president of the church. Talk about wheat and tares. There will be a flood of people away from that serpent of a man.

Having spent a lot of time around the Bednars, this couldn’t be further from the truth.

Like I said "In my opinion."

Calling an apostle a “psychopath” who you have never met is meant to slander, nothing more. I was clarifying for those reading, although I think most realize this comment is fueled by other motives.

Its my own personal judgement call as I made quite clear. I am sorry that you worship the guy and would probably gladly sacrifice your first born for him but I will stand by my own personal judgement of the guy. Why do you think that he is immune from criticism? Have you watched the video with him and the young boy asking about scripture reading. If someone, anyone had made physical contact like that with my son I would have put a quick end to it right then and there. Disgusting.

[BeNotDeceived]

By and large I find the current crop of Apostles a curious distance from me in regards to personal connections.

I really liked LeGrand Richards, and Richard G Scott.

These new guys... not much of a personal connection. Uchtdorf is great. And Eyring is great. He wears his emotions on his sleeve.

The middle pack are all graduates of the Seventy. Long old school members who fulfill their assignments. But with little inspiring impact.

Holland can thump the pulpit on occasion. As he did here once in our Stake center when talking directly to the youth. (Didn’t help much... still a whole bunch of unworthy missionaries went out, only to return early and peter out...).

Just saying... we need a bit more “Hell Fire & Damnation” and bearing down in pure testimony.
Enough of the reconciliation and appeasement!

(Unless all the hard line Apostles in the last century were wrong, and we really are supposed to be more loving and accepting).

Through the eighties, 3.__AX() and 8.__AX() set CH together apart, representative of March 8th. 20.__AX()
Now 40 years later, it’s represented by a Swift Integer extension, cutting X apart as the 24th letter of the Alphabet.

[drtanner]

Having spent a lot of time around the Bednars, this couldn’t be further from the truth.

Like I said "In my opinion."

Calling an apostle a “psychopath” who you have never met is meant to slander, nothing more. I was clarifying for those reading, although I think most realize this comment is fueled by other motives.

Its my own personal judgement call as I made quite clear. I am sorry that you worship the guy and would probably gladly sacrifice your first born for him but I will stand by my own personal judgement of the guy. Why do you think that he is immune from criticism? Have you watched the video with him and the young boy asking about scripture reading. If someone, anyone had made physical contact like that with my son I would have put a quick end to it right then and there. Disgusting.

Sorry you think I worship the guy. Speaking of Criticism here is a good read on the relationship between criticism and church leaders. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... m?lang=eng

[Aprhys]

Like I said "In my opinion."

Calling an apostle a “psychopath” who you have never met is meant to slander, nothing more. I was clarifying for those reading, although I think most realize this comment is fueled by other motives.

Its my own personal judgement call as I made quite clear. I am sorry that you worship the guy and would probably gladly sacrifice your first born for him but I will stand by my own personal judgement of the guy. Why do you think that he is immune from criticism? Have you watched the video with him and the young boy asking about scripture reading. If someone, anyone had made physical contact like that with my son I would have put a quick end to it right then and there. Disgusting.

Sorry you think I worship the guy. Speaking of Criticism here is a good read on the relationship between criticism and church leaders. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... m?lang=eng

What else would one expect from a leader of any group. The more that you can condemn anyo e questioning you or your motives the more you get them to be blind followers. If I were to run a church, business, cult etc. the first thing I would teach my followers would be 1) I am super special and therefore it is a sin to talk bad about me and 2) Since I am super special you dont have to, wait, you should NEVER question anything I say or do. Remember, I am special and therefore better than you. Nonsense. Pray tell what any of these guys have done other than give talks. Have any of them performed any miracles? Raised the dead? Caused mountains to move or storms to cease? I can give a talk. A pretty inspiring talk. Especially if I have someone write it for me. However, I cannot raise the dead but then again neither can any of these men. So what exempts them from criticism other than a title?

[drtanner]

Calling an apostle a “psychopath” who you have never met is meant to slander, nothing more. I was clarifying for those reading, although I think most realize this comment is fueled by other motives.

Its my own personal judgement call as I made quite clear. I am sorry that you worship the guy and would probably gladly sacrifice your first born for him but I will stand by my own personal judgement of the guy. Why do you think that he is immune from criticism? Have you watched the video with him and the young boy asking about scripture reading. If someone, anyone had made physical contact like that with my son I would have put a quick end to it right then and there. Disgusting.

Sorry you think I worship the guy. Speaking of Criticism here is a good read on the relationship between criticism and church leaders. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... m?lang=eng

What else would one expect from a leader of any group. The more that you can condemn anyo e questioning you or your motives the more you get them to be blind followers. If I were to run a church, business, cult etc. the first thing I would teach my followers would be 1) I am super special and therefore it is a sin to talk bad about me and 2) Since I am super special you dont have to, wait, you should NEVER question anything I say or do. Remember, I am special and therefore better than you. Nonsense. Pray tell what any of these guys have done other than give talks. Have any of them performed any miracles? Raised the dead? Caused mountains to move or storms to cease? I can give a talk. A pretty inspiring talk. Especially if I have someone write it for me. However, I cannot raise the dead but then again neither can any of these men. So what exempts them from criticism other than a title?

I guess you didn’t read the talk?

[MMbelieve]

Having spent a lot of time around the Bednars, this couldn’t be further from the truth.

Like I said "In my opinion."

Calling an apostle a “psychopath” who you have never met is meant to slander, nothing more. I was clarifying for those reading, although I think most realize this comment is fueled by other motives.

Its my own personal judgement call as I made quite clear. I am sorry that you worship the guy and would probably gladly sacrifice your first born for him...

Maybe your original “personal judgement call” is projecting? Seeing what you want to see? Your comment above is pretty harsh of a personal attack involving ones child.

I will agree that Bednar poses himself pretty stiffly which may appear as emotionless and non-empathetic but it doesn’t have to mean that.
My parents were able to attend a special meeting with Bednar in the Temple while they were workers and they had nothing but good things regarding his demeanor and character though they were told not to share the content of his message, they were nothing less than impressed.

There is a video that goes along with his Act in Doctrine book, have you watched it? He seems to care a lot about people and understands the student learning approach as the best way to help others.

I do not see him eliciting psychopathic traits.

[Great8]

Bednar made the kid cry (youtube it). Worst talk ever-choose to be offended. if the CK is full of Bednars, I guess I will go somewhere else.
Eyring rings of divine nepotism (his son is incompetent)
Dieter is good but overly confident in himself. Has a nice log cabin from the mall deal too.
Nelson-lets celebrate me on my birthday.
Holland is good but sure he has flaws.
don't know much about the newer ones and quite frankly don't care.

[sandman45]

My favorites are same as always - Peter James and John. Presumably they are still apostles.

They still were in May 1829...

For a brief moment. John so far as we know still is

[Silas]

How come?

I spent a few years in military intelligence and had the opportunity to interrogate people. Nothing abusive or cruel. Just reading their mannerisms and I can tell you that Bednar is a psychopath. He has no empathy for his fellow man. Everything is black and white and if you are on the opposite side of him you are wrong. Watch his wife when she is around him. She looks as if she has been mentally abused by him. This is all just my opinion of course but heaven forbid he ever becomes the president of the church. Talk about wheat and tares. There will be a flood of people away from that serpent of a man.

Having spent a lot of time around the Bednars, this couldn’t be further from the truth.

Like I said "In my opinion."

Can you provide any reason your opinion should matter?

Please spare me the accusations of worshipping church leaders or believing they are perfect. I don’t worship them. I don’t think they are perfect. And if you made the same claim about say a politician or celebrity I would come up with the same push back/ questioning.

Diagnosing a person as a psychopath incapable of empathy who is mentally abusing his spouse based on his “mannerisms” and the way his wife “looks” seems kinda ridiculous. You do get that you are just a random person on the internet? You may as well tell us that you read it in tea leaves. It just sounds kind of bogus. And yes I would say that if you swapped out his name with any other random person even if I disliked them. You aren’t basing this on anything real.

I’ve seen him and his wife give devotionals together. She appears to be a well spoken confident woman. Of course it is possible that he is secretly abusing her, but you really need to give us more to go on than she looks like it. That’s just super vague and doesn’t really mean anything.

I know someone who has had a one on one interview with him the nature of which demonstrated that he is in fact capable of exercising empathy. Am I to disregard their first hand account in favor of your judgment of his mannerisms? Was that a one time fluke? Is he especially trained to fake empathy? Or are you talking about something that you don’t actually know anything about?

I’m not saying that it is impossible for someone like that to be made an apostle. I’m just saying that your diagnosis just sounds like you don’t like the way he looks.

[Silas]

Having spent a lot of time around the Bednars, this couldn’t be further from the truth.

Like I said "In my opinion."

Calling an apostle a “psychopath” who you have never met is meant to slander, nothing more. I was clarifying for those reading, although I think most realize this comment is fueled by other motives.

I wonder, have you ever called a politician you have never met by any name or used any adjective to describe them ?

I find it funny that you and Sarah and others who think church leaders are flawless use this argument but it only applies to general authorities, never to anyone else.

Sarah used this same poor argument, and yet she was in another thread criticizing Trump, his ideology, and yet she’s never met Trump. Yet there she was, claiming it was slander and bad to critique the doctrine of a General Authority I’ve never met. Claiming you shouldn’t talk about anybody in anyway unless you can talk to them personally.

Isn’t there a word for that?

Rules for theee but not for meeee

See I find this interesting because on another thread you were saying that anyone who likes Brigham Young must hate/oppose more modern church leaders... do you see the irony? No? Well never mind then.

[Zathura]

Like I said "In my opinion."

Calling an apostle a “psychopath” who you have never met is meant to slander, nothing more. I was clarifying for those reading, although I think most realize this comment is fueled by other motives.

I wonder, have you ever called a politician you have never met by any name or used any adjective to describe them ?

I find it funny that you and Sarah and others who think church leaders are flawless use this argument but it only applies to general authorities, never to anyone else.

Sarah used this same poor argument, and yet she was in another thread criticizing Trump, his ideology, and yet she’s never met Trump. Yet there she was, claiming it was slander and bad to critique the doctrine of a General Authority I’ve never met. Claiming you shouldn’t talk about anybody in anyway unless you can talk to them personally.

Isn’t there a word for that?

Rules for theee but not for meeee

See I find this interesting because on another thread you were saying that anyone who likes Brigham Young must hate/oppose more modern church leaders... do you see the irony? No? Well never mind then.

That isn’t anything CLOSE to what I have ever said in my life , I’ve never said such a thing or even slightly inferred such a thing. I don’t believe that nonsense, never have, never will. You can feel free fabricate anything you want though. Others have lied about me and anyone who paid attention saw the lies for what they were. No skin off my bones.

The only thing I ever said that even BRUSHES that topic is that it’s weird that the people that think modern church leaders can be fallen and preach false doctrine somehow think it’d be impossible and world breaking for Brigham Young to have taught false doctrine and be fallen, my point being that there is no difference between those men and the men of today. Some broken logic convinced them that Brigham can’t have been a false prophet because then the Restoration was false but somehow the Restoration isn’t false if Nelson is a false prophet. Feel free to prove your nonsense or withdraw your false statement anytime.

[MMbelieve]

Calling an apostle a “psychopath” who you have never met is meant to slander, nothing more. I was clarifying for those reading, although I think most realize this comment is fueled by other motives.

I wonder, have you ever called a politician you have never met by any name or used any adjective to describe them ?

I find it funny that you and Sarah and others who think church leaders are flawless use this argument but it only applies to general authorities, never to anyone else.

Sarah used this same poor argument, and yet she was in another thread criticizing Trump, his ideology, and yet she’s never met Trump. Yet there she was, claiming it was slander and bad to critique the doctrine of a General Authority I’ve never met. Claiming you shouldn’t talk about anybody in anyway unless you can talk to them personally.

Isn’t there a word for that?

Rules for theee but not for meeee

See I find this interesting because on another thread you were saying that anyone who likes Brigham Young must hate/oppose more modern church leaders... do you see the irony? No? Well never mind then.

That isn’t anything CLOSE to what I have ever said in my life , I’ve never said such a thing or even slightly inferred such a thing. I don’t believe that nonsense, never have, never will. You can feel free fabricate anything you want though. Others have lied about me and anyone who paid attention saw the lies for what they were. No skin off my bones.

The only thing I ever said that even BRUSHES that topic is that it’s weird that the people that think modern church leaders can be fallen and preach false doctrine somehow think it’d be impossible and world breaking for Brigham Young to have taught false doctrine and be fallen, my point being that there is no difference between those men and the men of today. Some broken logic convinced them that Brigham can’t have been a false prophet because then the Restoration was false but somehow the Restoration isn’t false if Nelson is a false prophet. Feel free to prove your nonsense or withdraw your false statement anytime.

I think that’s a valid observation to point out to those it may apply to.