MormonThink events

[_Bob Loblaw]

Poor Pat.

Poor Pat, who now knows the truth. What a shame.

[_why me]

Poor Pat.

Poor Pat, who now knows the truth. What a shame.

here is the point: the blogster atempted to lead both Pat and the woman out of the church by presenting his own truth as fact. No church can tolerate a mole among its midst. This is why he is being disciplined and not because of Mitt.

[_why me]

Poor Pat.

Poor Pat, who now knows the truth. What a shame.

Poor Pat probably went to the stake president or to the bishop with his concerns or the woman did. The blogger was too eager to lead them out of the church. It seems that he just can't stand people coming back to the fold or a faithful member without trying to poison the well. Now this is just my take on it. Everything is just speculation.

[_Mary]

Poor Pat probably went to the stake president or to the bishop with his concerns or the woman did. The blogger was too eager to lead them out of the church. It seems that he just can't stand people coming back to the fold or a faithful member without trying to poison the well. Now this is just my take on it. Everything is just speculation.

My bold.



Rubbish. Everyone responds to church history differently. The time is fast approaching if it hasn't already arrived when it is simply unfair on members to be ignorant of the complexities of their own history. Online they will go like lambs to the slaughter. The church needs to prepare people by being open and honest with them about its history Why me. It's just not fair not to in this internet day and age in my opinion. The church is losing members in bucket loads. (I know this just from the groups I am a part of in the UK) It is losing good members. Intelligent members. Thinking members. Really, really sad. The only reason Pat is talking to David is because the church has kept the information from him.

An active member phoned me the other day (a lifelong member) and asked me about the 2nd annointing and blood atonement. They had never heard of it.
Anecdotal, but not unusual in my experience with my active friends.

[_Fence Sitter]

Rubbish. Everyone responds to church history differently. The time is fast approaching if it hasn't already arrived when it is simply unfair on members to be ignorant of the complexities of their own history. Online they will go like lambs to the slaughter. The church needs to prepare people by being open and honest with them about its history Why me. It's just not fair not to in this internet day and age in my opinion. The church is losing members in bucket loads. (I know this just from the groups I am a part of in the UK) It is losing good members. Intelligent members. Thinking members. Really, really sad. The only reason Pat is talking to David is because the church has kept the information from him.

An active member phoned me the other day (a lifelong member) and asked me about the 2nd annointing and blood atonement. They had never heard of it.
Anecdotal, but not unusual in my experience with my active friends.

I think the majority of members today would be surprised to hear that the 2nd anointing is still being done.

[_why me]

Poor Pat probably went to the stake president or to the bishop with his concerns or the woman did. The blogger was too eager to lead them out of the church. It seems that he just can't stand people coming back to the fold or a faithful member without trying to poison the well. Now this is just my take on it. Everything is just speculation.

My bold.



Rubbish.

Mary! You and I have known each other for a long time and you write Rubbish to me. I can't believe it. It must be raining where you are. By the way, my daughter is in your area. She is having a wonderful time with her new LDS friends. The YSAer's have been so friendly to her and she has only been there a week so far. I appreciate the church for its beautiful and kind people. She has been playing volleyball, gone to the movies with them, and is off to the temple tomorrow.

She loves your area and the young adults.

[_Bob Loblaw]

Poor Pat probably went to the stake president or to the bishop with his concerns or the woman did. The blogger was too eager to lead them out of the church. It seems that he just can't stand people coming back to the fold or a faithful member without trying to poison the well. Now this is just my take on it. Everything is just speculation.

If some guy came up to me at church and offered to help me resolve my issues about the Book of Abraham, I'd probably send him what I know. There's nothing wrong with that. So, Pat gets upset because he's learned something he didn't know, and David is being punished for daring to share what he knows with someone.

I sometimes think you guys have no idea how clueless and Orwellian you sound.

[_why me]

Everyone responds to church history differently. The time is fast approaching if it hasn't already arrived when it is simply unfair on members to be ignorant of the complexities of their own history.

Now Mary lets get serious here for a moment. Why is it only Mormons who need to be experts on their church's history. How many anglicans know their history? How many catholics are learning their history? Or Calvinists? Not many. But the Mormons need to be taught their history 24/7. Have you ever thought about it? Should the church have yearly exams on LDS history written by your critic friends. Should history be taught to the LDS every year, every sunday? Really Mary think about it. Should all new potential members take a O level exam on church history? Lets be realistic.

[_Nomomo]

Is there any way to know who is the current own of the site?

If a blogger opts not to share their Profile and also otherwise does not provide their name anywhere on the blog's site then it's pretty tough, nearly impossible to discover their identity.

[_Bob Loblaw]

Now Mary lets get serious here for a moment. Why is it only Mormons who need to be experts on their church's history. How many anglicans know their history? How many catholics are learning their history? Or Calvinists? Not many. But the Mormons need to be taught their history 24/7. Have you ever thought about it? Should the church have yearly exams on LDS history written by your critic friends. Should history be taught to the LDS every year, every sunday? Really Mary think about it. Should all new potential members take a O level exam on church history? Lets be realistic.

I've thought about it. Anglicans know where their church and scriptures came from. Most Mormons do not. When you're presented a slanted, false history all your life, you don't need to be an expert to figure things out.

People shouldn't have to study things that in depth, but they shouldn't have the truth hidden from them.