NOM

For a long time as a TBM I was bothered by the lack of confidence shown by our leadership. Our scriptures are filled with stories of prophets calling those in the world to repentance. From Noah to Elijah to Nephi (pick any of them) to Mormon, the scriptural prophets went to those in power to tell them that repentance is needed. However, our current prophets don't do that. They would never endanger their social standing to call the world to repentance. The only ones they call to repentance are those who are already members of the church. But this requires no courage. Telling people that are committed to being your followers that they had better improve or be damned is not risking anything. They will do whatever you say because they believe they need your approval for divine favor.

I am realizing that this is the way all charismatic leaders behave. They recruit members to their flock. It is only these members that feel the wrath of these people supposedly called by God to bring truth to the world. RMN cannot realistically threaten those who have left the church, but he can threaten the faithful with "sad heaven" if they don't get their children in line. Prophets can only exert power over those who give it to them. There's probably lots of research on this topic. It makes me sad that I never noticed this for all those years.

I spent a lot of time as a TBM sleepless in the middle of the night repenting and despairing that I wasn’t good enough. So much guilt and regret. One of the best parts for me of my faith crisis is how much kinder I am to myself and others. Learn from it and move on. This focus on confessing and self-flagellation and repetitive repentance led me to depression and anxiety. I do see it as a way the church controls the masses. If the leaders keep them focused on constantly earning their afterlife then they can’t really focus on the cracks in the doctrine.

RMN cannot realistically threaten those who have left the church, but he can threaten the faithful with "sad heaven" if they don't get their children in line. Prophets can only exert power over those who give it to them. There's probably lots of research on this topic. It makes me sad that I never noticed this for all those years.

Point very well taken; and also, I think you should give yourself a pat on the back for being astute enough to recognize the deception. You lifted the veil from your own eyes, and that takes tremendous work - and courage. We should all give ourselves a pat on the back and honor the good light in our own minds for having the clarity of thinking to be able to see through the charade. - Wndr.

To add: Imagine all the people sitting in conference, listening to Oaks' toxic talk, thinking to themselves, "Well, we must show exact obedience, because he is speaking the word of the Lord, so it is not our place to question", etc. Hundreds of thousands of TBM's still caught up in that scam of buying into that mind control. - Wndr.

The other major disconnect is that we obviously cannot call LDS leaders to repentance. There is no feedback mechanism back to Oaks or Nelson for anything they say. There is no base level expectation on what we should expect from someone who calls themself a prophet. Even apologists like Patrick Mason have noted that the LDS church entirely lacks an official doctrine of prophets. The rest of the Christian world automatically distrusts any modern person who announces that they are a prophet.

In general, I fear that LDS leadership has written off the apostates. They hope that believing family and friends might bring back an apostate. But Nelson, Oaks, and the other apostles rarely talk to apostates. This is another way that modern prophets differ from classic Old Testament prophets who went out in the street crying repentance. Lehi and Jeremiah had to face unrepentant crowds and this is something that modern prophets simply don't do. They rely on believers and young missionaries to face the public.

Corsair wrote: ↑Mon Oct 14, 2019 1:57 pm But Nelson, Oaks, and the other apostles rarely talk to apostates.

It's no fun talking to apostates. You have to hear things that you don't have answers for. You're actually held accountable for the illogical conundrums of LDS history, doctrine and policies. You're on the firing line instead of being comfortably ensconced in the COB's ivory tower or the SLC temple.
Worst of all, some of the people you speak with might not even respect you.

Singing to the choir is so much more satisfying....and easier too.

There are all kinds of stories in the scriptures about prophets calling kings and rulers to repentance for their whoredoms, adulteries, and abominations. These days we welcome them to Temple Square and President Eyring shakes their p***y-grabbing hand. And that is literally the headline of the Church News article: "Church Leaders Welcome President Trump to Welfare Square" (they left out the part about the p***y-grabbing hand, but it is true nonetheless).

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/chu ... e?lang=eng
Whatever your political persuasion, pick any random prophet from the scriptures and they would have been calling this guy to repentance for his sexual immoralities instead of shaking his hand. Even if you support his politics, it is undeniable that Trump is guilty of the same adulteries King Ahab, King Noah, and all of those bad guys from the scriptures were called out by prophets for when they were gettin' it on with the lady folk. But I guess that's not how prophets roll these days.

This is an awesome thread.

What I would most like to see (and also the least likely thing I will ever see): the First Presidency live on BYU tv doing weekly debates with all comers: atheists, evangelicals, apostates, actual theologians, RFM, parents of transgender children, doctors with questions about cancer cures, Mike Norton, Gregory Prince on biological explanations of sexual preference and gender, high school kids who have read the CES letter... They would crumble before the least of these.

Long story short: they got nuthin'

Hagoth wrote: ↑Tue Oct 15, 2019 10:45 am This is an awesome thread.

What I would most like to see (and also the least likely thing I will ever see): the First Presidency live on BYU tv doing weekly debates with all comers: atheists, evangelicals, apostates, actual theologians, RFM, parents of transgender children, doctors with questions about cancer cures, Mike Norton, Gregory Prince on biological explanations of sexual preference and gender, high school kids who have read the CES letter... They would crumble before the least of these.

Long story short: they got nuthin'

Yeah - Alma and Amulek went toe-to-toe with Zeezrom right out in public in front of everybody (luckily somebody had the presence of mind to write it all down verbatim so we’d have a record of the exact wording of their debate - yeah right). Elder Holland has one lousy BBC reporter hit him with some unexpectedly-not-softball questions and he falls to pieces blabbering about having read some books and not being a dodo, then the next day the Church has a courier hand deliver a complaint to the BBC that their reporter “ambushed” Elder Holland when apparently he didn’t have the Holy Ghost ready so he could “speak the thoughts that I shall put into your hearts, and you shall not be confounded before men; For it shall be given you in the very hour, yea, in the very moment, what ye shall say.” per D&C 100. Elder Holland looked confounded to me. Pretty lousy prophet, seer, and revelatory if you ask me, Zeezrom would have mopped Elder Holland up like turkey gravy.

You all have it wrong.

Mormonism is the light of Christ for the rest of the world to see shining brightly across the wicked world leading the way back to God. The leaders of the church need only to continue and shine that light.

Not actually create it, explain it, or defend it.

That’s the problem though with religion in general. All the old ones have existed for a long time and the people figure out they don’t need it while all the newly created ones are seen as the creation of a lunatic.

What would the world look like if all the religions disappeared? Would the inherent good in humanity become that light?

Not Buying It wrote: ↑Tue Oct 15, 2019 12:43 pm Yeah - Alma and Amulek went toe-to-toe with Zeezrom right out in public in front of everybody (luckily somebody had the presence of mind to write it all down verbatim so we’d have a record of the exact wording of their debate - yeah right). Elder Holland has one lousy BBC reporter hit him with some unexpectedly-not-softball questions and he falls to pieces blabbering about having read some books and not being a dodo, then the next day the Church has a courier hand deliver a complaint to the BBC that their reporter “ambushed” Elder Holland when apparently he didn’t have the Holy Ghost ready so he could “speak the thoughts that I shall put into your hearts, and you shall not be confounded before men; For it shall be given you in the very hour, yea, in the very moment, what ye shall say.” per D&C 100. Elder Holland looked confounded to me. Pretty lousy prophet, seer, and revelatory if you ask me, Zeezrom would have mopped Elder Holland up like turkey gravy.

I knew someone who worked in church public affairs about 25 years ago. Back then, someone set up an interview for RMN on a radio program. Apparently, the host had someone knowledgeable along on the show to ask questions. RMN was ticked off even though I don't think it was that confrontational. These guys do not have the courage to face questions in anything but the most controlled situations.

If the scriptures were true, I would agree that Zeezrom would have crushed any of the Q15. It would be tragic, too, since he would not have had the opportunity to repent. If the church were true, can you imagine how many people have wandered in sin because the leaders don't want to risk their social status by confronting wickedness, especially of our highest political leaders.