DiscussMormonism.com

Posted: **Tue Apr 01, 2008 4:50 pm**

One of my "informants" recently brought this to my attention. It seems that our old pal Ray A is up to his old blogging shenanigans once more. This time around, however, he seems to have shifted his position slightly. I must say, I'm quite impressed. He seems as even-keeled and reasonable as ever. Take a look at this blog entry:

Ray A wrote:There is a battle going on to maintain faith, and retain members, but I don't see this as being very realistic if it involves whitewashing or denial. Members need to be exposed to the "meat", to historical facts and controversies, and to be advised even before joining the Church that there are controversial issues which are not settled. And they need to be advised early! The Book of Mormon should be presented to investigators of the Church as a religious claim, not a "historical fact". They should also be told that there is no solid evidence from archaeology which supports the Book of Mormon, and some of it is even contrary to Mormon claims, and that they are accepting the Book of Mormon purely on faith. The lack of archaeological evidence doesn't necessarily make the Book of Mormon untrue, but the investigator should have an honest picture of the real situation, which is that there is not a single non-Mormon archaeologist who accepts the Book of Mormon claims to being an ancient American record. They should also be exposed to Mormon apologists who claim otherwise, and then weigh the two opposing views. All this should be done before the person accepts Mormonism.

Wow! Quite a stark contrast to his earlier, insane suggestion that a Mormon holocaust was just over the horizon. I have to say, I applaud Ray for this return to reason and logic. It is good to see him writing in a healthy and clear-eyed way. Here's to you, Ray!

This, by the way, is the link to his blog:

http://spotlightonmormonism.blogspot.com/

Posted: **Tue Apr 01, 2008 5:59 pm**

I hope this is a permanent thing and not just "cycling."

Posted: **Tue Apr 01, 2008 6:09 pm**

I agree with Ray's words! There should be full disclosure so no one is upset or felt they were deceived by omission.

I think Ray is reasonable unless he feels under attack. I wish Ray would come back to posting here.

Just looked over his blog. I liked it!

Posted: **Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:05 pm**

Moniker wrote:I agree with Ray's words! There should be full disclosure so no one is upset or felt they were deceived by omission.

I think Ray is reasonable unless he feels under attack. I wish Ray would come back to posting here.

Just looked over his blog. I liked it!

I liked it, too. And, I'd like him to rejoin us here at MDB as well.

Posted: **Tue Apr 01, 2008 10:16 pm**

I have been enjoying Ray at LDS.net.

Posted: **Tue Apr 01, 2008 10:20 pm**

Ray has always been cool... or at least with me he has.

Posted: **Thu Apr 03, 2008 9:04 am**

Moniker wrote:I agree with Ray's words! There should be full disclosure so no one is upset or felt they were deceived by omission.

I think Ray is reasonable unless he feels under attack. I wish Ray would come back to posting here.

Just looked over his blog. I liked it!

What is full disclosure? How much should a person need to know? Can all be disclosed? And how to satisfy all the antis in what to disclose?

If religions had full disclosure, it would take at least a couple of years of discussion. How to handle all the hypotheticals? But it is a nice thought.

Posted: **Thu Apr 03, 2008 9:06 am**

Mister Scratch wrote:
Moniker wrote:I agree with Ray's words! There should be full disclosure so no one is upset or felt they were deceived by omission.

I think Ray is reasonable unless he feels under attack. I wish Ray would come back to posting here.

Just looked over his blog. I liked it!

I liked it, too. And, I'd like him to rejoin us here at MDB as well.

Of course you would like it. Full disclosure means endless debates and contention about what is being disclosed. It would take an endless amount of time and breed contention.

Posted: **Thu Apr 03, 2008 9:08 am**

Dr. Shades wrote:I hope this is a permanent thing and not just "cycling."

Yes, lets hope so. Full disclosure is a wonderful idea for endless debates, innuendos, confrontations, and bickering. And then of course, the LDS can elicit help from the major countermos out there for consultation about the nature of the disclosure and lesson plans.

Posted: **Thu Apr 03, 2008 12:27 pm**

why me wrote:
Dr. Shades wrote:I hope this is a permanent thing and not just "cycling."

Yes, lets hope so. Full disclosure is a wonderful idea for endless debates, innuendos, confrontations, and bickering. And then of course, the LDS can elicit help from the major countermos out there for consultation about the nature of the disclosure and lesson plans.

Full disclosure means just that: full disclosure. Open up the vaults and move all the stuff to the museum. Rewrite the investigator lessons. Retrain the missionaries. Don't do it for the anti's. Do it for the members!

So what if it takes a year of lessons before baptism? That's the way the Catholics do it, and they've got just as many things to hide as we do, but they put it all out there for anyone to see. If it's true, it will be true after a year of study. If it's not, then somebody's got some 'splainin' to do.

DiscussMormonism.com

A Kinder, Gentler Ray A Surfaces

A Kinder, Gentler Ray A Surfaces