angsty wrote: Oh. So, when you state your opinion as you see it, it's venting and letting off steam, but when people you disagree with at RfM state their opinions, it's "whinning". Hmmm.
The reason you weren't made welcome at RfM is because you did not understand the purpose of the board, read the board rules, or relate to those posters' experiences well enough to know that what you were posting was inappropriate.
I was trying to be funny. Thus, the smiling in my post when I wrote that sentence. Oh yes, I understand the purpose of the exer boards. Do not disagree with what the person in recovery is saying about the LDS church regardless if what they are saying is off the mark. Do not challenge any perceived misconceptions that the poster in recovery may have about the LDS church. Do not debate with any poster in recovery etc.
All people in recovery must believe what they now believe about the LDS church because they are in recovery.
Bottomline: no freedom to challenge or discuss or debate. Just give huggybugs to all.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
why me wrote: And eventually I was called a liar, a fake, a fraud etc.
café crema wrote:This seems to happen to you where ever you go, imagine that.
why me wrote:And that is because people tend to be intolerant. Taliban catholics can not accept my description as a mormon-catholic as I listed myself on the taliban catholic site. And former members and apostates do not like that I have been inactive for so many years and defend the LDS church. So, labeling in the negative becomes the rule.
Calling you on your fraud had little to do with how you "listed yourself" it was your postings that showed the fraud and in two instances blatant lies, one of which got you booted. The hypocrisy was rather tiresome too, you're showing some here with your whining about NOM, CAF and RfM while looking the other way when MD&D engages in the same behavior you complain about. Saw a lot of this "it's okay when LDS do xxx but not when others do the same thing" from you and other LDS.
why me wrote:Here is what would prove it false beyond a shadow of a doubt: a old manucript appears with the Book of Mormon text in sidney's writing complete with corrections etc. Or emma at some point in her life would have claimed that she was present when Joseph wrote the book and how he struggled over names for the main characters.
Or if 4 or 5 witnesses would have retracted their statements and said it was all a hoax. I don't think that the church would have lasted two years.
None of that would prove the church is false. Have you not read any apologetics? The apologists would have an answer for all of that. It might prove it false for you, but others would not let it shake their testimony, and they would see you as having weak faith.
Many people believe the Book of Abraham evidence is as strong as the hypothetical scenarios you suggest above.
"We have taken up arms in defense of our liberty, our property, our wives, and our children; we are determined to preserve them, or die." - Captain Moroni - 'Address to the Inhabitants of Canada' 1775
DarkHelmet wrote: LOL. I sometimes wonder if he has ever actually been a Mormon. To plan your own ring ceremony and leave your church leaders out of the loop would be unimaginable to a TBM, and unacceptable to their church leaders. I believe instructions for ring ceremonies are in the CHI, so it is not something members can do on their own. Whyme doesn't understand how much control the LDS church has over their members, which is one of the big complaints of critics and exmos. If he is a jack Mormon type that just ignores his leaders, maybe that is why he doesn't understand why people have such a problem with Mormonism.
Well, my friend the branch president wouldn't give a hoot. And I tend to believe him. Members can do anything they want once they have been married in the temple. If they wish to have a private ring ceremony for inlaws, mom or dad etc they can. They are already married so the ceremony is just a formality.
I see no control with the Mormons I know. They are just going about their life to the best of their ability. Now there are differences in mentalities but more or less there is a lot of tolerance.
Even the faithful, believing Mormons I know will freely acknowledge that your view of the ring ceremony is completely misinformed. Your BP must be quite the rebel.
angsty wrote: Oh. So, when you state your opinion as you see it, it's venting and letting off steam, but when people you disagree with at RfM state their opinions, it's "whinning". Hmmm.
The reason you weren't made welcome at RfM is because you did not understand the purpose of the board, read the board rules, or relate to those posters' experiences well enough to know that what you were posting was inappropriate.
I was trying to be funny. Thus, the smiling in my post when I wrote that sentence. Oh yes, I understand the purpose of the exer boards. Do not disagree with what the person in recovery is saying about the LDS church regardless if what they are saying is off the mark. Do not challenge any perceived misconceptions that the poster in recovery may have about the LDS church. Do not debate with any poster in recovery etc.
All people in recovery must believe what they now believe about the LDS church because they are in recovery.
Bottomline: no freedom to challenge or discuss or debate. Just give huggybugs to all.
Actually, there's plenty of discussion and debate that goes on at RfM. There are rather heated disagreements on a regular basis and there are a few posters there who are known for coming down on posters for misrepresenting Mormon beliefs. Additionally, in the time I have frequented that board, numerous fishy stories have been challenged when facts didn't add up or seemed exaggerated.
If you spent more time there, divested of your heavy bias, you might be able to see that for yourself. Just do yourself a favor and don't post anything.
angsty wrote:Just do yourself a favor and don't post anything.
I wonder what the reaction would be if I did. Maybe if I use a disguise. Would the name absman be too obvious?
My advice to Why Me, not to post, is based on the fact that, in addition to not being able to understand and relate to posters there, he seems constitutionally incapable of recognizing and abiding by board rules.
As long as you are abiding by the rules of the board, you might as well have some fun. absman probably would have worked if you hadn't announced it here first ;0)
Here are some suggestions for a ring ceremony from LDS.weddings.com.
As you can see, the whole thing is to be completely free-form and non-member friendly, and there is no intrusive harping on the Temple at all! Whyme's in-depth knowledge of LDS life and practice has meant that he has got it dead right, as usual!
Ring Ceremonies For couples with large groups of non-members attending, a ring ceremony is becoming the trend. You can make the exchange as personalized as you like, perhaps with speakers (possibly fathers or bishops) giving talks on temples or eternal marriage. You could have others read scriptures (a sample list is accessible in the resource section) that emphasize the true and eternal aspects of the temple marriage and love. Primary children or the family diva could sing "Families Can Be Together Forever", poems can be read, or the "The Family: A Proclamation to the World" can be read. Another option would be to have the couple bear their testimonies.
See? 'as personalised as you like'! You can even choose to bear your testimonies, and choose which members of your family read from the suggested list of scriptures!!
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Chap wrote: See? 'as personalised as you like'! You can even choose to bear your testimonies, and choose which members of your family read from the suggested list of scriptures!!
Okay, let me try this again. The couple have already been married in the temple. No reason to stress the temple since the marriage has already occured. The site gave suggestions. Should I follow them is my own concern. See my point? What does personalize mean for you?
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
angsty wrote: My advice to Why Me, not to post, is based on the fact that, in addition to not being able to understand and relate to posters there, he seems constitutionally incapable of recognizing and abiding by board rules.
And remember this about the LDS church too. If you follow the rules, you should have no problem.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith