Undercover atheists in LDS Church

[waitasec]

waging the dog

 

[andys]

I just think and how sad all their mormon brothers will feel when they know they were tricked..."
Joseph Smith is the real trickster.

 

[Shades-o-Blue]

No plans on getting it renewed. Answering the questions honestly might get me disfellowshipped

Or worse. Just wanted to be sure that you knew that too.

My point is, that I agee with the subject header of this thread, and I'm guessing you do as well.

 

[DeepShadow]

if there is nothing the LDS church is hiding then why be so bothered by what these 2 ppl did in the 1st place?

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?

This is exactly why it was wrong: it created the appearance of an agenda where there wasn't any. We don't hide anything from honest, open inquiry.

It's brilliant, too, because it's such an excellent tactic. Go to a college and try to walk in through a faculty only door. When someone questions you, pretend to be an adjunct. Then when they discover you, insist it was to find out what the college was hiding from students. You can do this with any business, and most residences, and create the illusion of a false face.

 

[DeepShadow]

why should i feel insecure if someone were to do a background check on me if there is nothing i am ashamed of?

A background check is not made public in snide tones. How would you feel if someone who did the check went public and tried to make it sound like you had something to hide? Maybe they used subtle hints to suggest your close relationship with your younger cousin as a teenager was hiding something more sinister? What if they only published every negative thing you ever said about your parents, or everything your exes said about you?

curious, do you know of any mormon couples that decided not to have children?

...plenty. What's so "curious"?

 

[DeepShadow]

why be ashamed of something that you claim to be proud of?
if one is secure in a position then there is no excuse for insecurity.

If you are close to your cousin, and someone suggests you were a little "too" close when you were younger, how would you react? Many people would be quite angry. Are we supposed to infer from this that you aren't proud of your actual relationship with your cousin? Nonsense.

 

[DeepShadow]

she has every right to feel offended, my question is about the why this is offensive....

First you said she shouldn't be offended because she was not the one who was lied to. Then you say that she has every right to be offended, but that the deed itself was not offensive.

This is called "moving the goalposts."

 

[DeepShadow]

the truth is they don't have all the answers....

True.

the truth is they would be the last to say so.

Insofar as they say so in the 9th Article of Faith, they are literally the first to say so.

the truth is they claim to be the true church

Yes.

the truth is they can't back up that claim.

It's a subjective claim. It's logically impossible to "back up" a subjective claim.

the dishonesty is the claim of being the true church.

Wait, so it's "dishonest" to make subjective claims? Claims like "I love my wife," and "I like pie," and "That building looks huge from over here," and "You're so much better than my other psych teacher," and "That a better shade of red for this job."?

You think THOSE claims are dishonest, but you have no problem with someone saying, "Yes, I'll keep the law of chastity," when the have absolutely no intention of doing so?! REALLY?

 

[waitasec]

Wait, so it's "dishonest" to make subjective claims? Claims like "I love my wife," and "I like pie," and "That building looks huge from over here," and "You're so much better than my other psych teacher," and "That a better shade of red for this job."?

You think THOSE claims are dishonest, but you have no problem with someone saying, "Yes, I'll keep the law of chastity," when the have absolutely no intention of doing so?! REALLY?

it's dishonest to claim to be the true church no matter how you look at it...
because other churches do the same.

you claim you love you wife, can she testify to that?
you claim you like apple pie, choosing an apple pie over other pies would testify to that claim
if a building looked huge from a certain perspective, the person who is witnessing the same as you, would they agree?

i am also sure that other students would attest to the fact this psych teacher is better than the other and the same goes with the shade of red.

you see there are other churches that make this claim...
it is a self defeating claim.

no one has the answers, and it's dishonest to say one does.

 

[DeepShadow]

Classic. You know I'm right. Marriages end when spouses disbelieve Mormonism. Family shun family when Mormonism is abandoned.

Sometimes, sometimes not.

 

[DeepShadow]

it's dishonest to claim to be the true church no matter how you look at it...
because other churches do the same.

What?! So if I have three brown-eyed students, and one with blue eyes, and all four claim to have blue eyes, they are all lying?

you claim you love you wife, can she testify to that?

Of course, but that's still subjective. I have only offered her the same objective evidence that could be offered by a cunning sociopath. After all, it's possible that I could listen to her when she's upset, and take care of the kids when she goes out, and get her little gifts for no reason, and all the other things I do...and still not actually love her. She has circumstantial evidence, but not objective proof.

you claim you like apple pie, choosing an apple pie over other pies would testify to that claim

It could also testify that I want you to think I like apple pie. Again, nothing objective.

if a building looked huge from a certain perspective, the person who is witnessing the same as you, would they agree?

If they don't think the word "huge" describes it--they say it's "large" but not "huge--what does that mean? Does that invalidate my statement? Does it make me dishonest?

i am also sure that other students would attest to the fact this psych teacher is better than the other and the same goes with the shade of red.

Some do, and some completely disagree. People disagree about things like this all the time.

you see there are other churches that make this claim...
it is a self defeating claim.

How it it self-defeating? If two or more sources make a claim that could only apply to one of them, there are two options: a) one is telling the truth, and the rest are lying; or b) they are all lying.

no one has the answers, and it's dishonest to say one does.

And now you've moved the goalposts AGAIN. Before, you said we can't have ALL the answers. That's true, and we say so up front--9th Article of Faith. Now you're saying no one has the answers, which is different. What an extraordinary claim...got any proof?

 

[Mr Spinkles]

I agree with you DeepShadow. Incidentally ... and I'm almost afraid to ask ... who "were not yet to receive the priesthood" in the quote in your signature, and why do you exclude that part of the quote?

 

[Gaura Priya]

I really don't find their visit to the Sikh gurdwara a surprise. Everyone visits the Sikh gurdwara... hell, even our school system allows field trips to religious places of worship, especially since Sikhism is a big religion in Canada.

But actually getting baptised? I dunno... it just seems so mean that they would get baptised and end up being part of a spiritual family, and basically become connected with a culture, and then making it for an investigation.

 

[waitasec]

And now you've moved the goalposts AGAIN. Before, you said we can't have ALL the answers. That's true, and we say so up front--9th Article of Faith. Now you're saying no one has the answers, which is different. What an extraordinary claim...got any proof?

We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal,...

tell us then...since there have been people born with both sexes all this time...what is gods purpose for them then, to remain celibate?

oh yeah you're still waiting for that to be revealed
so in the meantime your church will side with ignorance and deny those who are born with both sex organs equality based on ... no revelation ...

 

[waitasec]

seems to me that if a church were to claim to be the true church...they should have all the answers that are pertinent to everyone not just for the "normal".

 

[DeepShadow]

tell us then...since there have been people born with both sexes all this time...what is gods purpose for them then, to remain celibate?

Not at all. They are supposed to pray and consult with a priesthood leader, and find out God's purpose for them.

oh yeah you're still waiting for that to be revealed

Nice straw man. Actually, it has been revealed already.

so in the meantime your church will side with ignorance and deny those who are born with both sex organs equality based on ... no revelation ...

And the straw men continue. Are you going to answer any of my points, or just sit there beating up your own hand puppet?

 

[DeepShadow]

seems to me that if a church were to claim to be the true church...they should have all the answers that are pertinent to everyone not just for the "normal".

We help people get their own answers, rather than spoon-feed the answers to them, thanks.

Good luck searching for the magic escalator to heaven, though.:angel2:

 

[waitasec]

We help people get their own answers, rather than spoon-feed the answers to them, thanks.

Good luck searching for the magic escalator to heaven, though.:angel2:

thats wishful thinking on your part.

 

[waitasec]

Not at all. They are supposed to pray and consult with a priesthood leader, and find out God's purpose for them.

so relying on ones inner truth is pretty much subjected to someone who has absolutely no idea what it's like...
excellent

Nice straw man. Actually, it has been revealed already.

and one wonders why you don't elaborate

And the straw men continue. Are you going to answer any of my points, or just sit there beating up your own hand puppet?

the mormon church did side with prop 8 in california...
fact is fact and your church pretty much said to people who are born with both sex organs they don't count.
excellent

 

[waitasec]

We help people get their own answers, rather than spoon-feed the answers to them, thanks.

so the bible and the book of mormon aren't spoon feeding people with dogma?
pleeeezzzz