DiscussMormonism.com

It's been a long time since I corresponded with you, but when you were running the LDS Point/ Counterpoint Website and had done a site to look like Recovery From Mormonism, I was the disaffected RFM person who sent you a post about a spiritual experience that I had had. I told you how I went to the Board and mentioned it to them and they told me to go see a psychologist, while another guy who had a spiritual experience at a massage parlor was praised. So I got offended.

I actually went TBM again for quite a while. Being active and all that stuff. So I am happily being the good guy when Hinckley goes on Larry King and gets asked a basic gospel question. Do we become Gods, to which he responded...'I don't know that we teach that'

Needless to say I was quite pissed at Hinckley, and again started thinking through stuff again. I can't put my trust in a man who is so flighty that he doesn't stand up for the Church he is supposed to represent. I guess now I am a Christian, New Order Mormon. I still go. Even teach sometimes, but really think it's just another man made church like any other.

I have been reading your comments to Tal, and I see that you are no longer an active apologist. Though you are about the most honest and straight forward one I have come across.

Well probably be posting in the future.

Hi Primus,

Yes, I do remember you. It has been a while, and I am grateful for your kind words.

I trust that, aside from the spiritual rollercoaster that you seem to be on, that all else in your life is going well.

And, while I respect your present view of the Church and course in life, I do wonder if it may be wise from you to also seriously consider why your testimony keeps getting whip-lashed back and forth so often, and why it is that you would let your entire testimony of the restored gospel of Christ be controlled by a single, off-hand comment made by the prophet in a live interview?

If you would like some assistance in your introspecting on these things, please let me know. Either way, I look forward to your participation here.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Primus wrote: I actually went TBM again for quite a while. Being active and all that stuff. So I am happily being the good guy when Hinckley goes on Larry King and gets asked a basic gospel question. Do we become Gods, to which he responded...'I don't know that we teach that'

Needless to say I was quite pissed at Hinckley, and again started thinking through stuff again. I can't put my trust in a man who is so flighty that he doesn't stand up for the Church he is supposed to represent.

The message I have come away with, after some reflection, is that President Hinckley wanted to deemphasize and dissociate the Church from some previously controversial pronouncements. I can see the wisdom in his thinking that the Church would be better off without these doctrines.

moksha wrote:The message I have come away with, after some reflection, is that President Hinckley wanted to deemphasize and dissociate the Church from some previously controversial pronouncements.

Isn't it a prophet's calling to be controversial? What would Abinadi say?

I can see the wisdom in his thinking that the Church would be better off without these doctrines.

Does God think the church would be better off without these doctrines?

Is this Shades defending the faith?

Gaz

Actually, I think it's Shades wondering what happened to real prophets.

Wade "The tool" Englund is, im sure, still an ignorant little man.

His empty exhortations in which he proclaims to be the savior of homosexuals, his twisted view of reality and his inability to determine what is truly real qualify him to have no respect. I find his actions to be comical, literally. I see his actions as a comedy and not the sick sad reality that they are.

Runtu wrote:Actually, I think it's Shades wondering what happened to real prophets.

Exactly.

I for one think President Hinckley was being honest (well, except for the "I don't know if we teach that" phrase).

I think he truly doesn't know if God was a man, and I think he doesn't see Jesus face to face, in the Holy of Holies as is rumored, evidenced by his clear statement that revelation comes to him as the still small voice.

He put an end to those rumors, or at least he tried. There are still those who don't believe him and claim Jesus speaks with him personally.

My guess... in another decade of so, the "God was a man/man can be God" idea will go the way of the Adam/God theory! (You know, just because it was in manuals, and taught by prophets doesn't mean it was doctrine... prophets just speak their opinion, etc.).

:-)

~dancer~