Ludd wrote:What is liz talking about in terms of recent meetings? Is there a post where bcspace reported what was said?
On one of these threads...can't remember which one...BC mentioned that he had been present at Regional and Stake Leadership meetings where NOMs could not "hide without consequence".
I have asked several times for him to expand on the details of this meeting, but he has refused.
Ludd wrote:What is liz talking about in terms of recent meetings? Is there a post where bcspace reported what was said?
On one of these threads...can't remember which one...BC mentioned that he had been present at Regional and Stake Leadership meetings where NOMs could not "hide without consequence".
I have asked several times for him to expand on the details of this meeting, but he has refused.
Maybe BC Space was the guy who said it, and everyone else in the room rolled their eyes.
"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
Drifting wrote:It would seem that the Church makes an allowance for NOM's to be considered proper members and therefore not in need of 'keeping an eye on' nor 'sanctioning'.
“Members of the Church vary in their levels of participation or belief. Latter-day Saints who have seriously contravened or ignored cardinal Church teachings (publicly or privately) are considered apostates, whether or not they have officially left the Church or affiliated with another religion” (Encyclopedia of Mormonism [1992], 1:59).
Quoted from LDS.org 'Apostate'
It is little wonder that bcspace no longer holds a leadership position that requires decision making about members.
Thus saith Gilbert W. Scharffs.
So mote it be.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
According to BC in my thread here, viewtopic.php?f=1&t=25441&start=42
there are stake and regional meetings being held concerning NOMs and how they can no longer "hide without consequence
Here's what I said in context:
I can guarantee you a one Sunday a monther is not going to get a TR or priesthood advancement (Aaronic to Melchizedek) unless they have better than a BS excuse. For example, we have a truck driver who is gone but a few days a month. However, we are fairly certain he's telling the truth when he says he attends meetings whenever he can wherever he is at because he's been seen there.
It's useless for a NOM to think he or she can hide without consequence. We've actually had Regional and Stake leadership meetings on this issue.
According to BC in my thread here, viewtopic.php?f=1&t=25441&start=42
there are stake and regional meetings being held concerning NOMs and how they can no longer "hide without consequence
Here's what I said in context:
I can guarantee you a one Sunday a monther is not going to get a TR or priesthood advancement (Aaronic to Melchizedek) unless they have better than a BS excuse. For example, we have a truck driver who is gone but a few days a month. However, we are fairly certain he's telling the truth when he says he attends meetings whenever he can wherever he is at because he's been seen there.
It's useless for a NOM to think he or she can hide without consequence. We've actually had Regional and Stake leadership meetings on this issue.
Notice the difference?
As long as you're asking questions bcspace, how can you tell if members are paying attention in church meetings so that you can give them temple reccommends and priesthood ordinations?
"And the human knew the source of life, the woman of him, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, 'I have procreated a man with Yahweh.'" Gen. 4:1, interior quote translated by D. Bokovoy.
According to BC in my thread here, viewtopic.php?f=1&t=25441&start=42
there are stake and regional meetings being held concerning NOMs and how they can no longer "hide without consequence
Here's what I said in context:
I can guarantee you a one Sunday a monther is not going to get a TR or priesthood advancement (Aaronic to Melchizedek) unless they have better than a BS excuse. For example, we have a truck driver who is gone but a few days a month. However, we are fairly certain he's telling the truth when he says he attends meetings whenever he can wherever he is at because he's been seen there.
It's useless for a NOM to think he or she can hide without consequence. We've actually had Regional and Stake leadership meetings on this issue.
Notice the difference?
So what are the consequences? What specifically has been discussed? What are the methods of determining who is, and who is not a NOM member? What is the bar of determination? Certainly these are all open and known, but since I have never heard of such meetings, why don't you enlighten us? Don't tell us that you can't, because there are no secrets when it comes to this stuff. Otherwise this just sounds like some kind of secret combination type bull.
