Apex
Somewhere Around Nothing
Unless I am remembering wrong, they did not answer truthfully to the questions like being willing to practice the word of wisdom, chastity, etc. And do you deny that it was deception?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Undercover atheists in LDS Church
- Thread starter Apex
- Start date
Katzpur
Not your average Mormon
You know, that's kind of an interesting way of putting it. I remember hearing a talk (i.e. "sermon") in church once about honesty. The speaker raised questions about what constituted lying. Do "white lies" count as "lies"? What about when you tell the truth, but maybe not "the whole truth" or "nothing but the truth"? There are all kinds of gray areas. At any rate, his bottom line is that you are being dishonest when your intent is to deceive. So if they had to be "careful not to explicitly lie," that shows me what their intentions were. Someone whose intentions were honorable wouldn't have to take such precautions. They wouldn't be walking so close to the edge as to even have to worry.
Last edited:
Katzpur
Not your average Mormon
Dumb people. They could have just called you and saved themselves five whole months of work. I personally think people should be required to read the entire Journal of Discourses and the History of the Church before being baptized.
Last edited:
Katzpur
Not your average Mormon
You know it blows my mind how many people simply think they're somehow entitled to be privy to every religion's sacred rituals. What on earth do they think gives them that right?
Oneatatime
Huh?
I think it's perfectly acceptable to go undercover in order to find out what a wierd religious organisation is trying to hide.
Breathe
Hostis humani generis
And the things that this "weird religious organisation" as you call it is trying to hide would have never been revealed by ex-followers?
Oneatatime
Huh?
No doubt they speak of their experiences but the more sources the better
Breathe
Hostis humani generis
You speak as if there are only one or two ex-Mormons who would speak of such a thing.
This isn't infiltrating North Korea.
Oneatatime
Huh?
I didn't say it was
Breathe
Hostis humani generis
You're acting like it is, though.
For religion in general, it's not too strange. For instance, the Buddhist idea that one can be re-born into a "Deva" of god-realm, or even re-born into a state of formlessness (e.g. re-born as a "god" with no corporeal form).
For Christianity, it's would seem to be well outside what other denominations believe. The main concern here, from a Christian perspective is one of theology. If God the Father, or "Elohim" once had a human body on some distant planet, then Elohim must have had a creator as well.
Oneatatime
Huh?
I'm afraid you made that part up yourself. I said that it's good to have new sources of information. I didn't say that there were a limited number of sources on the goings on within the mormon church.
It's poor form to put words in other peoples mouths and then expect them to defend them. Best stick with what has been said or ask for clarification if you're not sure what was meant.
Breathe
Hostis humani generis
You said "the more sources the better", and called them a 'weird religious organisation' and claimed they were hiding things.
Neither did I say you claimed there were a limited number of people with information, only that such things were unnecessary because there are plenty of ex-Mormons out there. It's not as though we are lacking information on Mormonism's rituals.
Having some nobodies come in, be deceitful about their beliefs, get baptised, and then leave and document their experiences is ignorant and unnecessary - and it's not even a decent source, as is evident from their Sikhism podcast, they don't exactly learn about the religion in detail before they start judging it.
So no, I didn't make it up - that is the impression you gave.
Maybe it is, but that was not what I did as I have pointed out for you.
It is, however, in poor taste to claim religions are hiding things from non-practitioners and think because of this that it is fine to have atheists to go in there and lie and then expose personal and important rituals.
Splarnst
Active Member
"Pathetic attempt at paraphrasing"? You mean where I said the same thing as the quotes, adding in the word "planet"? Is that not correct? If not, why not?
So if I say exactly the same thing without using any offensive words at all, and it still upsets you, then you have issues.
Last edited:
waitasec
Veteran Member
waitasec
Veteran Member
i think that's weird when it's dealing with religion, but thats just me.
Breathe
Hostis humani generis
I can kind of understand it.
Look at the massive amount of attention Mormon underwear get, for example. Non-followers make big deals out of things that followers don't really care about, because they aren't that big of a deal.
Apex
Somewhere Around Nothing
Ok, for all of you that are claiming we have some kind of "secret beliefs" and that it was ok for these two to put on a deception to find out what they are, how about you put up or shut up? Show exactly where these two atheists discovered some kind of "secret" thanks to their deception. Better yet, show where they learned anything at all that could not have just as easily been learned by simply asking the elders or Church members.
waitasec
Veteran Member
if there is nothing the LDS church is hiding then why be so bothered by what these 2 ppl did in the 1st place?
as i think about this situation it's more about the actual experience of the matter than the unveiling of some secret. lets not forget it's about human interaction and it could be a look or a tone that one picks up on which could indicated something that is an underlying understanding within that particular community. for example
listening to the 1st part in regards to the women. they were separated from the men while they were off in some priestly meeting, were pictured as having a belief that being married and having children was their most important job, which i personally find demeaning. it came off as a pity party...for those who were not even in a relationship. no council was spoken of to edify her "spirit" but rather let them moan about it...
the question was asked, if there were any women who chose not to have a family...and they couldn't think of anyone who did.
horizon_mj1
Well-Known Member
If you find it necessary to hide your true beliefs from they who may be curious, yes this IMO is ethical; what is it you feel the need to hide? The God you claim to worship is not hidden to anyone who searches; what is it about your beliefs that should be more special than the Almighty?
To me it is hypocrisy of any religion to not freely divulge information to those who seek for the purpose of learning, not make it like some kind of special little club you have to be initiated to join Being human (as a dominate species) allows for extreme possibilities, it is a shame that we waste such time on needless superficial beliefs in which we feel need to be "hidden". It is not for us to choose who or what is Sacred, and what is found Sacred does not need anything from Humanity, less alone to try and "hide the Truth"; the Truth needs no warriors being a warrior of and unto itself, the same being said for the Divine, He will choose if you should be kept "hidden", it is not a choice you should make yourself IMO:no::angel2: