I remember when you posted this and was pretty disgusted with how the church lies to try to get believers. It is sickening.
With the Internet, and information so readily available these days, I think this sort of obvious deception will diminish.
But then again, maybe not.
I think this is a real benefit for the Church. If they pay attention to what their critics are focusing on, and fix it up, they will get much better feed back and be more equipped to deal with the world at large than by a large sustaining vote from the membership.
The Dude wrote:If this board had a healthier mix of critics and apologists, I bet one of the apologists would have pointed out that what we have here is a case of continuing inspiration from God, and not a change made because of listening to outside critics. Just the same as ending the practice of polygamy and discriminatory priesthood policy towards Africans, changes to LDS owned websites occur under the Lord's guidance. John Larsen may as well say this is evidence that God listens, even though it contradicts his atheist faith.
The Dude wrote:If this board had a healthier mix of critics and apologists, I bet one of the apologists would have pointed out that what we have here is a case of continuing inspiration from God, and not a change made because of listening to outside critics. Just the same as ending the practice of polygamy and discriminatory priesthood policy towards Africans, changes to LDS owned websites occur under the Lord's guidance. John Larsen may as well say this is evidence that God listens, even though it contradicts his atheist faith.
The Dude is my new favorite Apologist! LOL
If we don't have any apologist who can represent their view, maybe we should divide up in teams and take turns. My guess is that it would be the highest caliber of discussion on the topic to ever hit the internet.
John Larsen wrote:I think this is a real benefit for the Church. If they pay attention to what their critics are focusing on, and fix it up, they will get much better feed back and be more equipped to deal with the world at large than by a large sustaining vote from the membership.
I think we so-called "critics" perform an invaluable service for the Church. They do listen. This is just one example. Another that comes to mind is changing the Introduction to the Book of Mormon (i.e., replacing McConkie's "principal" to the current "among"). The Church is becoming more open about its history, in my opinion, and folks like us (among many others, particularly on the Internet) have played a role.
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
I hate to break up all the back-slapping, but the church doesn't listen to critics that much. The website was changed because Allen Wyatt knew the right person in the church and suggested that it should be changed. See the link I posted above.
dblagent007 wrote:I hate to break up all the back-slapping, but the church doesn't listen to critics that much. The website was changed because Allen Wyatt knew the right person in the church and suggested that it should be changed. See the link I posted above.
Yes, but Allen didn't make that suggestion until after John's suggestion. So, in essence, It was Allen doing what John told him to do that made the change happen.
Had it been Allen's doing alone, he would have done it prior to John's posts.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
dblagent007 wrote:I hate to break up all the back-slapping, but the church doesn't listen to critics that much. The website was changed because Allen Wyatt knew the right person in the church and suggested that it should be changed. See the link I posted above.
I hate to break it to you but if it were not for critics, the Church would still be practicing polygamy and still banning blacks.
God has the right to create and to destroy, to make like and to kill. He can delegate this authority if he wishes to. I know that can be scary. Deal with it. Nehor.. Nov 08, 2010
