YouTuber Alyssa Grenfell Has Cost The Church 2.4 Million Dollars

[I Have Questions]

Goose/Gander - The LDS claim is just that. A claim. Anyone has the right to make a claim. Nobody has to believe it.

Neutrality suggests to me that perhaps you just need to have been born FLDS in order to have the "correct" perspective. FLDS members are likely just as convinced of the validity of their claims, and their "fruits". Do you have any other way to distinguish LDS from FLDS claims? I don't believe so, but I'm open to your thoughts.

I agree, if he'd been raised FLDS he would be an FLDS believer. That's the scary part about beliefs like those mg expresses here.

At least a convert to Mormonism has got a separate point of reference with which to compare and make an informed choice. MG hasn’t had that opportunity because he’s been ingrained into it from birth. He’s therefore incapable of making a reasoned assessment, and so cannot give a credible argument. A convert would be able to talk through their decision making and their reasoning. MG’s is “I just believe”.

[Marcus]

I agree, if he'd been raised FLDS he would be an FLDS believer. That's the scary part about beliefs like those mg expresses here.

At least a convert to Mormonism has got a separate point of reference with which to compare and make an informed choice. MG hasn’t had that opportunity because he’s been ingrained into it from birth.

Yes. Although, to be fair, there are many here who were 'ingrained from birth' but still managed to logically and morally think through the situation and decide it was wrong.

[I Have Questions]

At least a convert to Mormonism has got a separate point of reference with which to compare and make an informed choice. MG hasn’t had that opportunity because he’s been ingrained into it from birth.

Yes. Although, to be fair, there are many here who were 'ingrained from birth' but still managed to logically and morally think through the situation and decide it was wrong.

Yes. You have to have the capacity to suspend logic, and moral thinking. Or even suspend the desire to look too deeply. Better to just believe and leave it there.

[MG 2.0]

That their claim is just that. A claim. Anyone has the right to make a claim. I don't have to believe it. No, I don't think I would be happy being FLDS at all. I don't think their fruits hold a candle to what fruits have come out of the SL church and the succession of President/Prophets.

Regards,
MG

Goose/Gander - The LDS claim is just that. A claim. Anyone has the right to make a claim. Nobody has to believe it.

Neutrality suggests to me that perhaps you just need to have been born FLDS in order to have the "correct" perspective. FLDS members are likely just as convinced of the validity of their claims, and their "fruits". Do you have any other way to distinguish LDS from FLDS claims? I don't believe so, but I'm open to your thoughts.

I haven't spent any time looking at FLDS claims. They are a small offshoot sect from Mormonism. They don't seem to fit the bill in what I would call a church that spreads its message throughout the whole earth before the Savior's Second Coming. I think you and I would agree that there is really no comparison in the outreach, including temples.

Regards,
MG

[malkie]

Goose/Gander - The LDS claim is just that. A claim. Anyone has the right to make a claim. Nobody has to believe it.

Neutrality suggests to me that perhaps you just need to have been born FLDS in order to have the "correct" perspective. FLDS members are likely just as convinced of the validity of their claims, and their "fruits". Do you have any other way to distinguish LDS from FLDS claims? I don't believe so, but I'm open to your thoughts.

I haven't spent any time looking at FLDS claims. They are a small offshoot sect from Mormonism. They don't seem to fit the bill in what I would call a church that spreads its message throughout the whole earth before the Savior's Second Coming. I think you and I would agree that there is really no comparison in the outreach, including temples.

Regards,
MG

Again, as pointed out by others, your perspective from inside the LDS organization about measures of success, and that of FLDS members, are different. Believers on both sides are convinced that they are correct. The criteria you choose are pre-justified - like drawing the bullseye after the arrow hits the target. And, by the way, they are not "a small offshoot sect from Mormonism". Rather, they are a fully-fledged member of "the Latter Day Saint movement of Restorationist Christianity" [Mormonism], just as are the CoC, the SLC LDS church, and many others.

Who are you (individually, and as the church) to tell another religious group that the criteria by which they judge their religion are wrong? Is it not a bit presumptuous for you - as an individual this time - to denigrate a Mormon sect, not having spent any time looking at their claims, or, presumably, their beliefs? How can you say that they "don't seem to fit the bill" when you admit that you know little about them? They could say the same about the LDS, with, from their perspective, equal justification.

Again, I suggest that your dismissal of the FLDS and others is due to the influences of the bubble you have inhabited for most if not all of your life. So, on that basis, no ,- cannot agree with what yo seem to be implying - that their beliefs and practices are not as good and acceptable as those of the sect you belong to.

[MG 2.0]

I haven't spent any time looking at FLDS claims. They are a small offshoot sect from Mormonism. They don't seem to fit the bill in what I would call a church that spreads its message throughout the whole earth before the Savior's Second Coming. I think you and I would agree that there is really no comparison in the outreach, including temples.

Regards,
MG

Again, as pointed out by others, your perspective from inside the LDS organization about measures of success, and that of FLDS members, are different. Believers on both sides are convinced that they are correct. The criteria you choose are pre-justified - like drawing the bullseye after the arrow hits the target. And, by the way, they are not "a small offshoot sect from Mormonism". Rather, they are a fully-fledged member of "the Latter Day Saint movement of Restorationist Christianity" [Mormonism], just as are the CoC, the SLC LDS church, and many others.

Who are you (individually, and as the church) to tell another religious group that the criteria by which they judge their religion are wrong? Is it not a bit presumptuous for you - as an individual this time - to denigrate a Mormon sect, not having spent any time looking at their claims, or, presumably, their beliefs? How can you say that they "don't seem to fit the bill" when you admit that you know little about them? They could say the same about the LDS, with, from their perspective, equal justification.

Again, I suggest that your dismissal of the FLDS and others is due to the influences of the bubble you have inhabited for most if not all of your life. So, on that basis, no ,- cannot agree with what yo seem to be implying - that their beliefs and practices are not as good and acceptable as those of the sect you belong to.

There are 1500 to 3500 members of the FLDS church. This doesn't seem to 'fit the bill' and match with what Joseph said as he addressed an assembly of church leaders in where he said that they could not comprehend the future destiny of the Church, saying, “It is only a little handful of priesthood you see here tonight, but this Church will fill North and South America—it will fill the world.”

Doctrine and Covenants 65:2 includes a revelation where the Lord told Joseph Smith: “The keys of the kingdom of God are committed unto man on the earth, and from thence shall the gospel roll forth unto the ends of the earth, as the stone which is cut out of the mountain without hands shall roll forth, until it has filled the whole earth”.

Brigham Young and other prophets have said pretty much the same.

Brigham taught that “the march forth of the Gospel will increase, spread, grow and prosper, until the nations of the earth will feel that Jesus has the right to rule King of nations as he does King of Saints”
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... 5?lang=eng

I suppose that he may have been talking about the rolling forth of Christianity as a whole, but I would not hazard a guess he was talking about the Latter-day Saints in particular.

I find it interesting that you seem intent on looking at FLDS and CofJCofLDS being on the same playing field. Although I can see WHY you might want to stick to that unequal comparison and say that it IS equal.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

I agree, if he'd been raised FLDS he would be an FLDS believer. That's the scary part about beliefs like those mg expresses here.

At least a convert to Mormonism has got a separate point of reference with which to compare and make an informed choice. MG hasn’t had that opportunity because he’s been ingrained into it from birth. He’s therefore incapable of making a reasoned assessment, and so cannot give a credible argument. A convert would be able to talk through their decision making and their reasoning. MG’s is “I just believe”.

I commented, I think, before you finished your edit. Your comment about a convert talking through their reasoning vs. "I just believe" is valid. Add in that even mg has stated he's comfortable sticking with something because all of his family is sticking with it, and it's easy to see how comfort outweighs honesty.

[I Have Questions]

Brigham taught that “the march forth of the Gospel will increase, spread, grow and prosper, until the nations of the earth will feel that Jesus has the right to rule King of nations as he does King of Saints”
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... 5?lang=eng

I suppose that he may have been talking about the rolling forth of Christianity as a whole, but I would not hazard a guess he was talking about the Latter-day Saints in particular.

Does a response get more intellectually dishonest than this?