just me wrote:I really don't understand why this thread turned into one about me.
Why me was trying to make it about you, just me. It quickly became about him and justly so. It's hard to understand just where why me is coming from. He claims to be Catholic, but he is one of the most strident Mormon apologists here. What does it all mean?
This, or any other post that I have made or will make in the future, is strictly my own opinion and consequently of little or no value.
"Faith is believing something you know ain't true" Twain.
why me wrote: Sometimes bishops leave the church. No big deal.
So why does the church want to silence him?
The church in salt lake wants to silence him? Maybe the new bishop in his former ward should give him a platform in church so he can address all the members during sacrament meeting. Or maybe he can give a fireside.
Maybe Joel Osteen can give one of his major critics the pulpit. And maybe the catholic church can give an excommunicated dissenter the homily during the sunday mass. Or maybe a luthern parish can give a catholic apologist the opportunity to address the luthern flock during its sunday service.
It is just the way it is. No big deal.
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
consiglieri wrote:So why does the church want to silence him?
And if it's no big deal, why does why me want to silence him?
I don't. But I don't think that he was brave in posting the letter a second time. I just see it as attention seeking. Nothing more.
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: The church in salt lake wants to silence him? Maybe the new bishop in his former ward should give him a platform in church so he can address all the members during sacrament meeting. Or maybe he can give a fireside.
You are trying to have it both ways, and not doing a particularly good job of it, either.
A bishop resigns and you say it is no big deal.
I ask why the church wants to silence him if it is no big deal.
You counter by setting up a strawman, suggesting if the church doesn't give him a public platform to air his grievances, the church isn't trying to silence him.
You are better than this.
You prove yourself of the devil and anti-mormon every word you utter, because only the devil perverts facts to make their case.--ldsfaqs (6-24-13)
Quasimodo wrote: Why me was trying to make it about you, just me. It quickly became about him and justly so. It's hard to understand just where why me is coming from. He claims to be Catholic, but he is one of the most strident Mormon apologists here. What does it all mean?
The former bishop and just me have something in common. Both have been quiet in meetings in voicing their ideas and opinions. But the bishop decided to voice his concerns in a letter to active ward members as he left the church, which is a little problematic too.
Why do I defend the LDS church? Because most of the arguments here are bogus.
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
consiglieri wrote: You counter by setting up a strawman, suggesting if the church doesn't give him a public platform to air his grievances, the church isn't trying to silence him.
You are better than this.
No, I am suggesting that it is not out of the ordinary to deny a dissenter a platform once the dissenter has left the flock. I gave some examples of other faiths where It would not happen either. No catholic church will allow a luthern apologist a platform to address the catholic faithful about why he left the catholic church during mass or any other time as a way to lead the flock away from the fold.
However as bishop, he could have made comments in class. He could have explored what the apologists have said. He could have read LDS blogs about his concerns. He also could have posted on MAD at that time but instead he fell in love with the mormonthink website. It seems that he wanted not to believe.
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: I don't. But I don't think that he was brave in posting the letter a second time. I just see it as attention seeking. Nothing more.
It's like the TBMs who share their conversion stories during F&T meeting. Attention seeking. Nothing more.
"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
why me wrote:No, I am suggesting that it is not out of the ordinary to deny a dissenter a platform once the dissenter has left the flock. I
He isn't asking the church for a platform. Nobody is claiming the church should give him a platform. He has his own platform. You are the one complaining that he is using his own platform to tell his de-conversion story.
"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