Infymus wrote:Indeed, I think you completely nailed it there. What I find interesting is that Internet Mormons castigate Ex-Mormons for not understanding, then tell them it was their fault for believing the radical notions taught to them whilst members. The blame is never placed back on the Cult - it always stays with the Ex-Mormon.
This is the type of thing that happens on the MAD board all the time. Woe be to someone who genuinely does not understand something. A friend of mine, annalasaunt, who posted on the MAD board for a while, came under fire by quite a few posters there. She honestly had not heard about Joseph Smith's polyandry, and was astonished to find out about it. Instead of helping explain things to her, most of the members there accused her of either being a troll or not having the ability to read. She explained that she grew up in a small town, had a very limited library, and hadn't really had the Internet that long.
Eventually, people warmed up to her and realized that she was telling the truth, but she received a lot of verbal abuse that she really shouldn't have had to deal with. I'm not sure if she still posts there or not. I lost touch with her after I was banned from MAD.
Infymus wrote:Indeed, I think you completely nailed it there.
Thanks!
What I find interesting is that Internet Mormons castigate Ex-Mormons for not understanding, then tell them it was their fault for believing the radical notions taught to them whilst members.
Although I used the term "radical notions" to describe what Internet Mormons believe, you used the term to describe what Internet Mormons claim that Chapel Mormons believe. Which is okay, since things like Kolob are truly radical to any objective observer.
ANYHOW, using your definition for it, what's truly mind-boggling is the fact that Internet Mormons completely fail to recognize the glaringly obvious: That these so-called "radical notions" are taught by the prophets, the apostles, and the scriptures!
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
Infymus wrote:Indeed, I think you completely nailed it there. What I find interesting is that Internet Mormons castigate Ex-Mormons for not understanding, then tell them it was their fault for believing the radical notions taught to them whilst members. The blame is never placed back on the Cult - it always stays with the Ex-Mormon.
This is the type of thing that happens on the MAD board all the time. Woe be to someone who genuinely does not understand something. A friend of mine, annalasaunt, who posted on the MAD board for a while, came under fire by quite a few posters there. She honestly had not heard about Joseph Smith's polyandry, and was astonished to find out about it. Instead of helping explain things to her, most of the members there accused her of either being a troll or not having the ability to read. She explained that she grew up in a small town, had a very limited library, and hadn't really had the Internet that long.
Eventually, people warmed up to her and realized that she was telling the truth, but she received a lot of verbal abuse that she really shouldn't have had to deal with. I'm not sure if she still posts there or not. I lost touch with her after I was banned from MAD.
There is very little room for real questions over on the MAD boards. I love the fact that MAD comes down so hard on real truth seekers within their own Cult. It sends more of them to us where we are not afraid to show them the information they are looking for. We don't verbally abuse them for asking what we consider very serious questions.
Like I wrote above - Internet Mormons bash people for asking questions and then state it was the member's fault for not knowing. At the same time, the Mormon teaching manuals purposefully omit anything that would be incriminating. Remember, some things that are true are not very useful because the mantel is far far greater than the intellect.
I hear you Liz that you do not necessarily fit into the category of "Internet Mormon" with the likes of say Nehor, Coggins or Bourne. While you continue to be a member, you have issues - and as long as you do not act upon those issues with other members, the Cult will leave you alone. When you can no longer stomach what the Cult is doing and begin to stand up, you will be cut off and subject to persecution by Internet Mormons. It is up to you to take the next step or keep it to yourself and watch it happen on a weekly basis.
Imwashingmypirate wrote:You are steriotyping people. That is wrong. If you were to describe all the types of Mormon you'd be there forever because everyone is different.
Imwashingmypirate wrote:You are steriotyping people. That is wrong. If you were to describe all the types of Mormon you'd be there forever because everyone is different.
You mean everything isn't in black and white?
Why would it be? Nothing is as simple. Surely you ought to know that. Or are you being sarcastic?
Might be time for an eye-test, Shades. You made two mistakes in one week, and now this is the third. (It was nice knowing you.) It's sometimes as easy to write 3864 instead of 3564, as it is to write it's, instead of its. But I'll forgive you, as you've overlooked this in my posts. (Sorry to detract from the war, I mean, thread, just following the example of the grammar Nazi ) (PS: we need more emoticons. Humans have a wider range of emotions than six)