What to do with the crappy members?

[_why me]

It would be interesting to know to what extent the lesson manuals are reviewed by the First Presidency as opposed to being reviewed by a correlation committee composed of General Authorities like McConkie. I suspect McConkie's hand was overly present in some of these correlation meetings.

I think that his hand was present. But that being said, much was in the Ensign that were considered controversial as the magazine attempted to answer questions from church members. And this was during McConkie's time. However, in the 90's the ensign became watered down. But I do believe that things are changing. The Joseph Smith Papers are a case in point. And the website is attempting to handle Joseph Smith's polygamy etc. Changes are in the air.

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

Who cares what was "official" or not? If seminary kids couldn't trust the church for the truth to be taught them, then it's the fault of the people running the joint, not the kids.

I suppose that seminary should be a history class, a class where a teenager studies a 700 page book and is given a SAT exam about it. However seminary is about teaching doctrine and having LDS teenagers get together and enjoy wholesome activities. And learning how to live a god centered life.

Much better than what many teenagers are now experiencing.

I thought I was learning doctrine in seminary. Turns out, I was wrong.

[_DarkHelmet]

This is a favorite bedbug of antimormons, exmormons etc. No matter what the manuals contain, they would still find fault that something was overlooked or being taught the wrong way.

What they want is for members to study a 700 page hardcover book, written by a critic, constantly expanded by a critic so that members can learn what a critic wants them to learn. And for seminary, have a 700 page book written by a critic at a level that the teenager can understand.

As a young catholic, attending catechism, I was never learning in depth catholic history. I was learning those things that would make me a devout or good catholic.

This is your second post about a 700 page book. What are you talking about? My post was about the actual manuals the church writes and taches from. Not some strawman 700 page anti-mormon book.

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

This is a favorite bedbug of antimormons, exmormons etc. No matter what the manuals contain, they would still find fault that something was overlooked or being taught the wrong way.

What they want is for members to study a 700 page hardcover book, written by a critic, constantly expanded by a critic so that members can learn what a critic wants them to learn. And for seminary, have a 700 page book written by a critic at a level that the teenager can understand.

As a young catholic, attending catechism, I was never learning in depth catholic history. I was learning those things that would make me a devout or good catholic.

This is your second post about a 700 page book. What are you talking about? My post was about the actual manuals the church writes and taches from. Not some strawman 700 page anti-mormon book.

I noticed that too. Poor whyme, he can't respond to the issue directly, so he has to make up stuff and object to that instead.