We Ex-Mo's Were Assuredly "Lazy" When We Were Mo's

[_Cylon]

My point is IF you are Mormon, you should have a witness that God told you to be Mormon. There isn't much homework you need to do for that. Either that happens for you or it doesn't. If it doesn't, I certainly wouldn't be Mormon - that's stupid and you are just fooling yourself with absolutely no proof that any of it is true. Now, if God tells you to do something else, that is perfectly fine with me too. That is of little importance to me, so long as you are talking with God and doing what you believe God wants you to do.

OK. Fair enough.

[_Bob Loblaw]

I've yet to see a case of anti Mormonism which didn't suffer from Fortigurn's Lazy Research. You know, no proof, missing details, third hand accounts, yellow journalism, failure to note valid alternative explanations, ad hominem and other logical fallacies, desire to sin etc.

It's hard to see such things when you cover your eyes. Reasonable people on all sides acknowledge there are some very troubling aspects to Mormonism. Such people merit respect. Deniers and haters like you don't.

[_sock puppet]

Take a pix of god next time he appears to you, Tobin. Then post it so we can see it.

You'll just claim I photoshopped it. Talk to him youself and don't waste my time. If any of this stuff is true, you should be very capable of doing that.

Been there. Tried that. It isn't.
To paraphrase Droopy, applied to Mormonism's truth claims, 'nothing new here. Nothing to see. Move along.'

[_sock puppet]

You didn't grow up in the church, did you?

One thing no one can answer me is why God would make his true church look exactly like an obvious scam. Does he have a sick sense of humor like that song says?

What religious claims don't sound like a hoax and a fraud?

Indeed!

[_sock puppet]

We Ex-Mo's Were Assuredly "Lazy" When We Were Mo's

Haven't you all wondered whether the lives of Chapel Mormons are made peaceful simply by taking the watercourse way. Floating down stream without struggling against the current takes many burdens away.

The path of least resistance in the greater Utah area.

[_sock puppet]

What religious claims don't sound like a hoax and a fraud?

Okay, so according to you all religious claims sound like a hoax and a fraud. Mormonism like rest of them 'sounds like a fraud', but inspite of that God requires us to pray fervently to find out if it is true.
Your God sounds like a basket case.

It must seem presumptuous of me to believe in a God that can actually answer us and tell us what to believe instead of believing in a God that doesn't speak with us at all. I think people that believe in a God that doesn't exist and can't speak with us is more along the lines of being a basket case and a pretty worthless belief.

Not presumptuous, just fanciful thinking.

[_sock puppet]

I had prayed about the Book of Mormon and had a strong numinous experience that I interpreted to mean the Book of Mormon is "true". Yet, the next night, I prayed about Joseph Smith being a prophet and felt nothing. Zero. Zip. I immediately knew this was a problem. I immediately knew the Book of Mormon could be "true" without Joseph Smith being a true prophet. For example, maybe someone else wrote the book. Or maybe he did, but wasn't "called" to be a prophet in general and overreached. So when I expressed my concern to the missionaries and my sister, all they told me was "but if the Book of Mormon is true, then Joseph Smith MUST be a true prophet". And, just like that, I ignored my previous common sense.

I wanted it to be true, and so it was.

So it was with logic they hooked you on JSJr.

[_cwald]

Let me ask you educated folks a question...make this a real thread rather than a throw cwald under the bus....what pecentage of the LDS membership do you figure, of the actual active LDS members know the DETAILS of JOSEPH SMITH's poligamy. Let alone his polyandry?

ERayR wrote: I think I answered this before. My answer however is What difference does it make? It is totally irrelevant in today's church.

sweetpotahoh wrote: My mother told me about his polygamy when I was growing up. It was part if my education in the gospel that my mother felt was important enough to tech me and my sisters about. I grew up in Provo. The tbm capital of world. I find it hard to believe that one growing up in the church never studied all of the scriptures. We are asked to do so every general conference and must about every
Sunday. Was not family scripture study part of your routine. You have no one but yourself to blame. Rather then blame the church ta ke responsibility for the fact that you weren't all that strong in the church, demonstrated by your lack of study, and realize

You have no one to blame but yourself.

[_sock puppet]

For having once given Alma's faith experiment a genuine try, we are now excoriated as 'lazy' for having done just that, for not having doubted and researched every aspect of Mormon history, especially its early, founding history.

We took LDS Church and its 'company line' at face value, but somehow we do not have grounds to complain about the fact that they glossed right over key parts, leaving misleading impressions?

But I think that the reason the LDS apologists level the 'lazy-not-to-have-looked-yourself' charge against ex-Mos that complain about the LDS church having conveniently left so much out of its 19th Century history, leaving a bright, glistening veneer for an impression, has less to do with responding to us ex-Mos as it is directed to their apologetic minions.

Think about it. Would calling us ex-Mos lazy cause us to re-consider Mormonism? If they think that, it is a wildly off-target calculation. Offending someone by calling them lazy for having taken the LDS Church at face value is not going to cause that person to re-embrace the LDS Church. Rather, before their apologetic minions and wavering onlookers might come out as full-fledged apostates, hearing ex-Mos excoriated for being intellectually lazy keeps those minions and onlookers in check--right where they are, quiet tithe-payers. Why would one of them want to pipe up that he or she too accepted the milk before the meat and feels that the LDS Church was not candid or forthright, when all doing so would do is get them lumped into the 'lazy' ex-Mo category.

In this time of when BKP's mental viability is called into question, he seems to have a much wiser approach to dealing with members tempted to take a look at the historical record that is now commonly available on the internet than these apologists trying to scare the minions and onlookers back in line lest they be labeled lazy, or even Marlin K Jensen's Swedish Rescue approach.

"Leave it alone." Those that are willing to keep their head in the sand because the next-in-line to the LDS throne says so simply need to that. After all, those that are going to look are going to look. And unless they are beyond thinking for themselves, they will see the problems and realize the LDS truth claims are BS.

In the final analysis, only those that will 'leave it alone' and not look into the history (the approach that the LDS apologists label as 'lazy' despite BKP, a prophet, seer and revelator, admonishing that approach) will be 'saved' from the devastating affect on their testimonies from learning the facts about JSJr. Those that learn about them and yet spin for "the Church" are twisted souls for whom truth doesn't matter.

[_just me]

My point is IF you are Mormon, you should have a witness that God told you to be Mormon. There isn't much homework you need to do for that. Either that happens for you or it doesn't. If it doesn't, I certainly wouldn't be Mormon - that's stupid and you are just fooling yourself with absolutely no proof that any of it is true. Now, if God tells you to do something else, that is perfectly fine with me too. That is of little importance to me, so long as you are talking with God and doing what you believe God wants you to do.

Once I again I ask...You didn't grow up in the church, did you?