Ex-Mormon Missionaries

[_KimberlyAnn]

By giving only information with a negative spin you are as agenda driven as you think the missionaries are.

What makes you think she's giving out only information with a negative spin? I'll bet she's just giving out the undisputed historical facts.

"Undisputed historical facts" are non-existent.
Also, she said she has a packet prepared but won't post it here or provide it to us for our own reading. Why is that?

It's sacred, Plate. Like the CHI. Or the missionary discussions. Are those made available by the church to the public?

It's simply a few pages of material, very similar to Packhams, which basically details the differences between first vision accounts, gives information on Smith's polygamy and polyandry, the KFD, the Curse of Cain, the Book of Abraham and other historical facts.

And I agree with Shades. There are facts, LoAP, which are undisputed. There's no reason to "pray" over them. They're simply true, and no amount of praying will change that. If an investigator prays and believes Smith was a prophet, then they're free to disregard facts, or disbelieve them, or find such things as polyandry divinely inspired. Whatever suits them. At least they have the information and can make an informed decision.

I do not present the Mormon side of things. I don't need to. The Mormons do that themselves. Everyone I talk to has both sides of the story. I'm simply providing information the missionaries won't. The investigators can pray about whatever they choose and come to whatever conclusion they want.

KA

PS. I should add that all the blustering from Jason and Plate won't change a thing I do. I feel comfortable with what I'm doing and personally think other exmos should do it as well.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

It's sacred, Plate. Like the CHI. Or the missionary discussions. Are those made available by the church to the public?

I thought we were to compare your materials to what the missionaries provide.

It's simply a few pages of material, very similar to Packhams, which basically details the differences between first vision accounts, gives information on Smith's polygamy and polyandry, the KFD, the Curse of Cain, the Book of Abraham and other historical facts.

There's that "historical facts" thing again.

KA: would you be willing to send me your materials via email so I can look them over?

And I agree with Shades. There are facts, LoAP, which are undisputed.

There is not really any such thing as an undisputed "historical fact." You seem to be subscribing to a type of early 1900s enlightenment-influenced view of "objective history."

There's no reason to "pray" over them. They're simply true, and no amount of praying will change that. If an investigator prays and believes Smith was a prophet, then they're free to disregard facts, or disbelieve them, or find such things as polyandry divinely inspired. Whatever suits them. At least they have the information and can make an informed decision.

As someone who believes in God (I think?) I would think you'd be more interested in involving God in the process.

I do not present the Mormon side of things. I don't need to. The Mormons do that themselves. Everyone I talk to has both sides of the story. I'm simply providing information the missionaries won't. The investigators can pray about whatever they choose and come to whatever conclusion they want.

Can you provide that information to me?

PS. I should add that all the blustering from Jason and Plate won't change a thing I do. I feel comfortable with what I'm doing and personally think other exmos should do it as well.

Let me know if I can expect to see your materials, thanks. I doubt, since you believe you have the "undisputed historical facts" that you would have anything to fear.

[_KimberlyAnn]

I should also add that I'm not out dropping off information about Mormonism every day. It's not often that the missionaries get into anyone's home around here, frankly. They do tract my neighborhood regularly, though they always skip my house for some reason. They can be on my street, but pass right by my door.

I haven't seen anyone dusting off their feet in my front yard yet, so perhaps there's hope for me. ;)

KA

[_KimberlyAnn]

LoAP, when you send me the 2006 copy of the CHI, we'll talk.

KA

[_KimberlyAnn]

I thought we were to compare your materials to what the missionaries provide.

Who said you were to do anything?

I asked exmos if they feel an obligation to share what they know about Mormonism with others.

KA

[_LifeOnaPlate]

LoAP, when you send me the 2006 copy of the CHI, we'll talk.

KA

The biggest difference being that I don't have the 2006 CHI. Nor do I drop it off on neighbor's doorsteps.

I think this shows much regarding your confidence in the accuracy of your "materials" (if they even exist).

[_Jason Bourne]

PS. I should add that all the blustering from Jason and Plate won't change a thing I do. I feel comfortable with what I'm doing and personally think other exmos should do it as well.

You know it is too damn bad that when someone rationally challenges what you do you denigrate it to blustering. I did not bluster one bit. I asked what to left and if it was balanced. I tried to have a reasobable discussion about it.

I am not attempting to make you feel uncomfortable. I could care less how you feel about it really. I could care less if you do it. WasI trying to persuade you not to? However, it is nice that you are at least honest that you are agenda driven on this issue and have no interest in being fair and balanced. Thus you become exactly what you think the Mormon Church was about its information it gave to you. It you are comfortable with that stance more power to you.

See for me, if anyone asks me I am happy to provide both sides of the issue. I don't however pass out literature unsolicited. And I think the LDS Church ought to be more open about such issues with members and investigators.

I wonder if you provide similar critiques for someone joining the Methodist Church. Do you share with them the contreversies of historical Christianity, Bible conflicts, the arguments against the existence of God? Let me guess. No. See what the problem is KA it you do this because you hate the LDS Church. That is what drives you in this. But hey if it makes you happy more power to you.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

<---still waiting for KA to provide me with her treatise. I am genuinely interested.

[_KimberlyAnn]

PS. I should add that all the blustering from Jason and Plate won't change a thing I do. I feel comfortable with what I'm doing and personally think other exmos should do it as well.

You know it is too damn bad that when someone rationally challenges what you do you denigrate it to blustering. I did not bluster one bit. I asked what to left and if it was balanced. I tried to have a reasobable discussion about it.

I am not attempting to make you feel uncomfortable. I could care less how you feel about it really. I could care less if you do it. WasI trying to persuade you not to? However, it is nice that you are at least honest that you are agenda driven on this issue and have no interest in being fair and balanced. Thus you become exactly what you think the Mormon Church was about its information it gave to you. It you are comfortable with that stance more power to you.

See for me, if anyone asks me I am happy to provide both sides of the issue. I don't however pass out literature unsolicited. And I think the LDS Church ought to be more open about such issues with members and investigators.

I wonder if you provide similar critiques for someone joining the Methodist Church. Do you share with them the contreversies of historical Christianity, Bible conflicts, the arguments against the existence of God? Let me guess. No. See what the problem is KA it you do this because you hate the LDS Church. That is what drives you in this. But hey if it makes you happy more power to you.

Jason, I'm sorry, but you don't make any sense. I provide information to people who ALREADY have information from the Mormon church. If they didn't, I'd provide more information from both sides. I have, in fact, defended Mormons on other boards when I feel they're being misrepresented. As it is, I only give information to members who contact me or people who have had, as I said in my original post, several visits with missionaries. If the investigators want, they can show my materials to the missionaries, who can then provide further information from the Mormon perspective.

I have already said I believe NOT joining the Mormons is a positive, so yes, I believe Mormonism to be deleterious to people's wellbeing.

And I don't have to provide information about the controversies of historical Christianity to folks attending the Methodist church, because, Jason, they talk about those IN church! At least in my church, they do. Some people there don't think the Bible is literal, some do. Most believe in evolution, some don't. There are women ministers. There are Calvinists and Armenians who seem to argue non-stop in class, driving my husband nuts. They argue about the crusades, about Catholicism, about infant baptism, and then, at the end of the day, they agree to disagree and then go eat the potluck luncheon in the dining hall, where my chili is the best thing going.

KA

[_Mercury]

PS. I should add that all the blustering from Jason and Plate won't change a thing I do. I feel comfortable with what I'm doing and personally think other exmos should do it as well.

You know it is too damn bad that when someone rationally challenges what you do you denigrate it to blustering. I did not bluster one bit. I asked what to left and if it was balanced. I tried to have a reasobable discussion about it.

I am not attempting to make you feel uncomfortable. I could care less how you feel about it really. I could care less if you do it. WasI trying to persuade you not to? However, it is nice that you are at least honest that you are agenda driven on this issue and have no interest in being fair and balanced. Thus you become exactly what you think the Mormon Church was about its information it gave to you. It you are comfortable with that stance more power to you.

See for me, if anyone asks me I am happy to provide both sides of the issue. I don't however pass out literature unsolicited. And I think the LDS Church ought to be more open about such issues with members and investigators.

I wonder if you provide similar critiques for someone joining the Methodist Church. Do you share with them the contreversies of historical Christianity, Bible conflicts, the arguments against the existence of God? Let me guess. No. See what the problem is KA it you do this because you hate the LDS Church. That is what drives you in this. But hey if it makes you happy more power to you.

Jason, what is a more balanced opinion:

Someone who is currently Mormon or someone such as Kim and myself who have lived Mormonism everyday for years and has found a specific path out of it.