DiscussMormonism.com

Gazelam wrote:zzyzx,

Your a liar. The story you just told is so outrageously false on its fase I can't believe you actually got comments on it.

Peddle your nonsence elsewhere. Come back when you can be honest.

Gazelam

The account seems plausible to me, Gaz.

I don't question the thought that a man is going to ask questions in gospel doctrine class or a combined meeting. I do question the idea that a Bishop is going to tell those present to boycott the mans business and be backed up on that by members of the High Council.

that's a red flag to me that this story is bogus.

Gazelam wrote:I don't question the thought that a man is going to ask questions in gospel doctrine class or a combined meeting. I do question the idea that a Bishop is going to tell those present to boycott the mans business and be backed up on that by members of the High Council.

that's a red flag to me that this story is bogus.

The story is either bogus or......happened in the twilight zone known as Utah.

Gazelam wrote:I don't question the thought that a man is going to ask questions in gospel doctrine class or a combined meeting. I do question the idea that a Bishop is going to tell those present to boycott the mans business and be backed up on that by members of the High Council.

that's a red flag to me that this story is bogus.

That's the part that I thought was plausible.

Gazelam wrote:I don't question the thought that a man is going to ask questions in gospel doctrine class or a combined meeting. I do question the idea that a Bishop is going to tell those present to boycott the mans business and be backed up on that by members of the High Council.

that's a red flag to me that this story is bogus.

Yeah, I found that part really, really hard to believe. The guy hadn't even fully apostatized. He just asked some questions and walked out in a huff. Even in the nuttiest wards, I couldn't imagine a Bishop immediately telling the members to boycott his business and have a high councilor back it up.

Sorry, but I'm calling BS on this story too.

By the way, you realize that you are posting on a site run by people that are hostile to the Church, right? There is no way in he** that they will give your IP address to anyone associated with the Church. Isn't that right Shades?

Also, you could save yourself some trouble and use a proxy server to post. It should effectively hide any personal information.

My apologies. A misdirected PM.

This isn't the first time that zzyzx has just made stuff up. He appears to be a pathological liar.

Daniel

I've never seen nor heard of anything even remotely like this, and can't imagine it happening.

The story fails the smell test by many miles.

I accept that it fails your "smell test" by many miles, Daniel. I have reason to believe it's plausible.

I accept that we disagree.

Jersey Girl wrote:I accept that it fails your "smell test" by many miles, Daniel. I have reason to believe it's plausible.

Jersey Girl, how many times have you attended an LDS Church? Or interacted with an LDS Bishop, excluding Internet message boards? I'm just curious.

It is bogus for sure. A major lawsuit would come about from an outburst like that. And a major division with the members would ensue. And to have it accepted seems like a stretch for sure by the other leaders. Nope...this is a lie. Now of course, strange things do happen. And if it did happen, the person who made the comment in the meeting needs to get a lawyer or a doctor before the lawsuit is filed. Because after the lawsuit, he will not be able to afford a lawyer or a doctor.