Sextortionist sent on a Mission by LDS Church Apostle

[_schreech]

mentalgymnast: In the above, you knowingly misquoted schreech and misrepresented his intent.

that's sort of his MO. He pretty much makes a habit of misquoting people in order to twist and shoehorn his way into a warped, incomprehensible approach to "belief" in the nonsense that is the Mormon church. Its a bastardized version of "building relationships of trust" sales technique that missionaries are taught in order to try to convince investigators that they are just like them and have common religious beliefs. It doesn't work as well in print as everyone can see what he is misrepresenting in his attempt to sound less nutty.

The bigger problem is that he doesn't seem to have a clean understanding of his own beliefs and he certainly doenst seem to understand or have any familiarity with what the Mormon church actually teaches. He believes in the church of mentalgymnast and calls it Mormonism because that is what he has been conditioned to do.

[_Morley]

mentalgymnast: In the above, you knowingly misquoted schreech and misrepresented his intent.

that's sort of his MO. He pretty much makes a habit of misquoting people in order to twist and shoehorn his way into a warped, incomprehensible approach to "belief" in the nonsense that is the Mormon church.

I think I'll try it. Maybe he'll like the results.

...Eyring really does believe the supernatural stuff...I think he's a head case, for sure, but I don't have a diagnosis at this time.

...I think I'd agree with you...he's somehow been duped into thinking that he's receiving revelation and not 'smart' enough to realize it...

Regards,
MG

[_Gadianton]

Listening to him at other times and in different venues, I think I'd agree with you. As far as being a head case, I'd question that. What evidence, besides the fact that you don't believe he could actually receive revelation (no God to give it), is there that makes you choose this option?

MG, without writing a thesis on why I discount revelation in general, one unique facet of Eyring's "revelations" I've already described. That was my very reason for the post. Did you miss that? Before I repeat myself, would you re-read my post, and give a shot at picking out from it what you think might be a reason that I would think his revelations could make even believers pause?

The OP has another good reason. (I'll let others debate that one with you though)

Are you saying that with all of his education and attainments and apparent sanity in other areas in his life, that he's somehow been duped into thinking that he's receiving revelation and not 'smart' enough to realize it?

Absolutely; though 'smart' isn't the right word. I think he's come to believe that certain kinds of flashes of insight he has are revelation, and sometimes it's specific, bold, supernatural claims, not just about mundane things like mission placement. With no critical feedback and people like yourself constantly in awe of his wondrous gift, and having a great love of being the center of attention and life of a party, he's significantly re-enforced.

Here's where I'm on the fence with Eyring. If I had the money, I'd love to pay Rick Ross to do an intervention. I'm pretty sure Rick would tell me that Eyring is out of scope, but suppose that weren't the case, and suppose he were willing to take the risk given Eyring's position, which would be near insanity itself. But just suppose. Ross has supreme self-confidence and very quick on his feet, and Eyring wouldn't be surrounded by supporters, and would have to confront the sheer absurdity of things that come out of his mouth. I almost want to say Eyring would get a good shaking to his faith, if nothing else. I don't know. It's a tough one; fun to think about.

[_schreech]

I think I'll try it. Maybe he'll like the results.

...I think I'd agree with you...he's somehow been duped into thinking that he's receiving revelation and not 'smart' enough to realize it...

Regards,
MG

MG did type those words, probably in that order so that must have been what he meant :)

[_moksha]

The spirit of discernment kept this young elder from being sent to the Silicon Valley North Mission.

[_mentalgymnast]

...Its...limited to markets that currently have opening and...Its a business process...believing members still like to believe there is some magical component to the whole thing.

This part of what you said I agree with, including the element of the metaphysical. And yes, moving the gospel throughout the world is, in a sense, a "business process". It couldn't happen without a corporate church.

Since you agree that there is no inspiration in these callings...

I don't agree with this. I do think that the missionaries are called/placed in areas where they are needed. I think that inspiration is part of that process.

...the leaders of the church claim inspiration when making every call but somehow missed the fact that this sexual predator was extorting young girls for nude pictures.

There are multiple instances where individuals have been called that were sinners. You can go clear back to John C. Bennett. The question, at least in my mind, is whether God steps in...in each and every case...to curtail the calling of sinners to positions/callings within the church. Personally, I don't see how that would even work/look. What I do see, however, are many instances where sinners/perps are caught and the consequences follow. Sometimes later rather than sooner, granted.

A parallel example might help. If God were to step in each and every time and curtail every sickness/disease...even when priesthood blessings are given...how would that evolve/look over time? Would there still be room for choosing between doubt and faith? What if God was to step in everytime and evil is about to be perpetrated? How would that evolve/look over time? Would there still be room for choosing between doubt and faith?

Does that matter?

Regards,
MG

[_mentalgymnast]

A couple of other times as the process moved along, Elder Eyring would turn to me and say, “Well, Brother Rasband, where do you feel this missionary should go?” I would name a particular mission, and Elder Eyring would look at me thoughtfully and say, “No, that’s not it!” He would then continue to assign the missionaries where he had felt prompted.

This is nuts. Within the last couple years I've been among those counseled by Eyring in an unofficial setting, and I swear this is part of a more general comedy routine he does. We're going along with something all-too-ordinary, and then bam! revelation intercedes with the unexpected. Revelation pertaining, of course, to something totally unfalsifiable. And then his audience giggles and smiles thinking, "oh, the irony, we thought one thing, but it looks like the Lord had something else in mind! ha ha ha, the spirit is just so marvelous!"

The backstory is important.

First, we knelt together in prayer. I remember Elder Eyring using very sincere words, asking the Lord to bless him to know "perfectly" where the missionaries should be assigned. The word "perfectly" said much about the faith that Elder Eyring exhibited that day.

and the rest of the story:

As we were nearing the completion of that assignment meeting, a picture of a certain missionary appeared on the screen. I had the strongest prompting, the strongest of the morning, that the missionary we had before us was to be assigned to Japan. I did not know that Elder Eyring was going to ask me on this one, but amazingly he did. I rather tentatively and humbly said to him, "Japan?" Elder Eyring responded immediately, "Yes, let's go there" And up on the computer screen the missions of Japan appeared. I instantly knew that the missionary was going to the Japan Sapporo Mission.

Elder Eyring did not ask me the exact name of the mission, but he did assign that missionary to the Japan Sapporo Mission.

Privately in my heart I was deeply touched and sincerely grateful to the Lord for allowing me to experience the prompting to know where that missionary should go.

I do agree with you with the "unfalsifiable" issue that you raise. We are left, again, with this thing called faith. Whether or not we can trust those that claim to hold the keys of authority to act in the name of God. Some do. Some don't.

Regards,
MG

[_Meadowchik]

MG has glossed over the fact that even if there is a God to give revelation, President Eyring has no verifiable or legitimate standing to proclaim it for people, and the standing he does claim is both non-historical (while claiming to be historical) and internally inconsistent.

[_Meadowchik]

I do agree with you with the "unfalsifiable" issue that you raise. We are left, again, with this thing called faith. Whether or not we can trust those that claim to hold the keys of authority to act in the name of God. Some do. Some don't.

Regards,
MG

We are left, again, with a world where men have long thrown God under the bus to claim the position as God's spokesmen. We are left with the choice to continue to follow such men. Some do. Some don't.

[_I have a question]

We are left, again, with a world where men have long thrown God under the bus to claim the position as God's spokesmen. We are left with the choice to continue to follow such men. Some do. Some don't.

I think the OP of the thread clearly shows that we can’t trust the claim of the Apostles, that they act in the name of God. If they did, a sextortionist wouldn’t have been sent on a mission. We are left with one of only two conclusions. Either God wanted a rabid sex pest preaching His Gospel, or the Apostles cannot be trusted to know what it is God does or doesn’t want. This incident is just further reinforcement of the latter, coming as it does on the back of Mr Nelson’s “November Policy” revelatory U-Turn. For one unknown reason or another, it is safe to say that God isn’t involved in the running and decision making of the institutional Mormon Church.

Those that call for faith in the face of insurmountable contrary objective evidence would do well to compare their reasoning with the examples of Bernie Madoff and David Koresh. Would the people calling for faith despite the evidence when it comes to Mormonism, advocate the “have faith” methodology for Madoff investors and Koresh followers? If not, why not? (For reference, the answer is so glaringly obvious to anyone over the age of 4, that my question is purely rhetorical).

I’ll give another example. The person the Apostles chose to produce a new set of sacred Temple Movies was a child sex abuser.

Van Wagenen pleaded guilty in April to aggravated sexual abuse of a child, a first-degree felony, after prosecutors said he abused the girl at his home in Woodland Hills, Utah County, between 2013 and 2015.

Days later, he admitted to an identical charge in a West Jordan courtroom. He had touched the same child inappropriately as she sat on his lap on a stairway to her family's basement in Salt Lake County at another point in the two-year time frame, when she was between 7 and 9 years old. Sentencing in that case is July 9.

In exchange for his guilty pleas, prosecutors in both counties agreed to seek the sentence of at least six years and up to life in prison to run concurrently, or at the same time. Van Wagenen originally faced 15 years to life for each count.

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900 ... ncing.html

Did God want a child sex abuser to produce His Temple movies? Or can we conclude that the people at the rudder of the battered dinghy are doing so without any spirit of discernment whatsoever? (Again, the question is rhetorical due to the blatantly obvious nature of the answer).