Ten Questions - Interview with the Stake Presidency

Post by **_Gazelam** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:48 am

John Larsen wrote:
Pokatator wrote:
Maybe the ScareCrow is a closet doubter.

I think it is a preemptive strike to avoid a calling.

LOL !

Post by **_Gazelam** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:57 am

Will,

I don’t anticipate that they will even give me any answers. Why? Frankly, I don’t think they will have ever even heard of the kinds of things the questions will entail. Therefore I only anticipate being able to relate to anyone what their reaction will be to the questions.

This is true. Most members don't bother to look these things up, and have bever even come across these questions. Have some? Sure, but most just go about their normal lives, and the biggest questions they get are the ones posed in the Ensign.

But no doubt there will be a memebr, probably in increasing numbers as the years go on, who will come forward with a question like the ones posed here. It woudl be a good thing for the memebrs of the presidency to be spiritual educators as well as spiritual cheerleaders.

Post by **_beastie** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 5:03 am

Will,

Why don't you tell us a bedtime story about how you tried to solicit exmormons' statements on video? What was the name you were using at the time? I no longer remember.

Post by **_guy sajer** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 5:17 am

William Schryver wrote:guy sajer:

Jason, I suspect that William was testing a hypothesis, of sorts, that our 10 questions would fall into the category of something like "that's the best you can do, we've already dealth with all this stuff, but you're still harping on it?" He hoped to use this as ammunition to go back to the MAD board and say mean and nasty things about us about how we're all hung up on such trivial stuff.

But, I'm just making a wild guess.

An interesting “wild guess” which I suspect tells us more about you than it does anything else.

Interesting inference, which I suspect tells us more about you than it does anything else.

Post by **_Inconceivable** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 5:31 am

truth dancer wrote:10. God must work with imperfect men, they are not perfect, they make mistakes, they are fallible, they share their opinions.
~dancer~

The above statement has been quoted by many within this wrong church. It is an indictment (albeit vague) of some very influential men recognized for their righteous acts and worthyness to be called as the Lord's only true legal administrators - representatives of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Which gives me cause for one of the most thought provoking of questions:

11. Please qualify the above statement by explaining specifically what behavior made them not perfect, which notable mistakes they made, examples of fallibility and the difference between their opinions and revelations.

Not sure, are you?

I would point out that all of the questions I have suggested will work for any member of this wrong (Mormon) church.

Will,

I double dog dare you ask each one of these questions I've posted.

Personally, I think most of the questions posited in this thread are merely rhetorical and would serve little purpose whether answered or not.

Post by **_William Schryver** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 5:35 am

beastie wrote:Will,

Why don't you tell us a bedtime story about how you tried to solicit exmormons' statements on video? What was the name you were using at the time? I no longer remember.

I'm more than happy to oblige you. I believe you are making reference to my having asked Dan Vogel if he was interested in being interviewed for such a project. Now, as to why you can "no longer remember" what name I used when I e-mailed Dan, that would most likely be because you had no way of knowing in the first place, seeing as how the e-mails were exchanged only between Dan and myself. However, as Dan will gladly confirm, I contacted him using the mysterious name of .................... William Schryver. Strangely enough, this is the same name that appears on my birth certificate.

Creepy, huh?

Post by **_Runtu** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 6:06 am

I can only think of one thing I might ask my stake president (I don't even know who mine is here in Utah):

"If you have to choose between conscience and testimony, which do you choose?"

I doubt very much that a stake president would be much more helpful than my bishop, who was entirely unfamiliar with any of the issues I dealt with.

Post by **_William Schryver** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 6:31 am

Runtu wrote:I can only think of one thing I might ask my stake president (I don't even know who mine is here in Utah):

"If you have to choose between conscience and testimony, which do you choose?"

I doubt very much that a stake president would be much more helpful than my bishop, who was entirely unfamiliar with any of the issues I dealt with.

I'm a little apprehensive about springing these things on the new stake presidency here. But I've convinced myself that I'll be doing them a favor -- better to hear it from me than from some hard-core apostate like you who will get an appointment with them, under false pretenses, with the express purpose of subjecting them to a classic anti-Mormon fusillade.

I'm almost certain that none of them will have ever heard about any of the things I will include on my list. I'll be touching upon what I consider the most common things: Book of Abraham, seer stone in the hat, polygamy/polyandry, etc. I don't want to get into any esoteric issues, just the main things you'd be able to find in a few minutes on the internet.

Post by **_Runtu** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 6:34 am

William Schryver wrote:I'm a little apprehensive about springing these things on the new stake presidency here. But I've convinced myself that I'll be doing them a favor -- better to hear it from me than from some hard-core apostate like you who will get an appointment with them, under false pretenses, with the express purpose of subjecting them to a classic anti-Mormon fusillade.

Heh. That would be something, wouldn't it? When I met with my bishop, it took everything I had just to tell him what I was struggling with. After a lot of tears, he just kind of stared at me and told me to keep praying and reading my scriptures.

Post by **_William Schryver** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 6:46 am

Runtu wrote:
William Schryver wrote:I'm a little apprehensive about springing these things on the new stake presidency here. But I've convinced myself that I'll be doing them a favor -- better to hear it from me than from some hard-core apostate like you who will get an appointment with them, under false pretenses, with the express purpose of subjecting them to a classic anti-Mormon fusillade.

Heh. That would be something, wouldn't it? When I met with my bishop, it took everything I had just to tell him what I was struggling with. After a lot of tears, he just kind of stared at me and told me to keep praying and reading my scriptures.

Yes, I'm afraid that's probably going to be the standard answer when one is not familiar with the issues.

Not that there's anything wrong, per se, with praying and reading scriptures. It's just that when you've got blood squirting from a clipped artery, a prescription for two aspirin and a good night's sleep isn't always indicated.

By the way, what kind of places in Provo sound good for lunch? Any favorites?