A recent article entitled, “Native Americans Morally Disqualified Themselves From the Land” shocked many people with the open display of racism and hatred.

http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/ict_sbc/radio-evangelist-preaches-an-ugly-message/

But the very same theme is the moral teachings of the BofM. The public do not know.

Alma 36:30 is just one example. Here is what the current Institute Manual teaches:

http://institute.lds.org/content/languages/english/Institute%20of%20Religion%20Materials/Student%20Manuals/Religion%20121-122,%20Book%20of%20Mormon%20Student%20Manual~eng.pdf

page 234

"Alma referred to a recurring theme in the Book of Mormon of prospering in the land."

"Therefore, those who prosper in the land are those who are successful in obtaining the spiritual blessings of being close to the Lord."

In other words, the "wicked" American indigenous people don't prosper because they have not accepted the gospel of Jesus. A controversial evangelist says this and rational people are rightly offended, but LDS teachings are the very same thing.

Talk about a double bind - you have everything taken from you and then told it's because you weren't being "close to the Lord."

Why does that sound so familiar...you aren't prospering because you don't have enough faith...etc.

Just one of various twists in the same old bullshit.

I need some assistance about talking with a Mormon blogger.

First off, I'm not a Mormon, nor have I ever been a Mormon. In fact, I knew very little about what Mormons believed until I "met" this person on a local blog (not my blog, by the way). when she posted her basic tenets of belief, I began a dialog (if you can call it that) with her to find out more. She was and is very difficult to have a real conversation with, because all she seems to be able to do is 'cut and paste' stuff from "approved LDS sites."

Anyway, through our "conversation" and my own digging, I actually learned quite a bit, but in the end, she has become very closed to me because I rejected her beliefs as Christian (as based on my understanding of the Bible).

One of the things I ran across was this site of exmormons. I find personal testimonies very eye opening and moving. I also got to thinking that maybe an exmormon might make more headway with this lady, because you've 'been there, done that, and got the T-shirt'.

I actually feel sorry for this lady and anyone else stuck in this Mormon system, but I don't think I can do much more to try to open her eyes.

Like I've told her before, I don't hate Mormons. I would probably love to have them as a neighbor, and I probably share alot of the same conservative type beliefs, but their idea on how to be saved, I completely disagree.

Anyway....if any of you exmormons would like to help try to open this womans eyes (and I'm not looking for people to just badger or mock her) then here is the site:
http://lacrossechat.madmooseforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=1268

Thank you for any assistance you can give!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/19/2011 07:41PM by fr0ggy.

Hi fr0ggy

I just read the conversation you tried to have with her.

I saw how she called Simon Southerton an anti-mormon that sided with Satan. People like her don't accept reality. Truth does not matter to her.

I don't think its possible to open her eyes.

You are probably right. It's just frustrating and sad.

I know that I can be a bit 'rough' or sarcastic and that can turn people off of what I'm trying to say, but I had never run into someone so closed to actually discussing what THEY believed, not what their church said.

Sometimes I get like a stubborn dog with a bone and wont let go. I actually backed away from talking with her for about a year, but I guess her constant pro-Mormon, cut and paste threads reminded me of her lostness. She's like a robot who only repeats what her programers told her and I hate to see people that way (controlled by others).

Anyway, thanks for taking the time to check it out and respond.

Good luck. I have to be extremely careful with what I say to my own parents and some of my siblings. I don't hate them, but their treatment of me is conditional on if I agree with them or not.

Yeah, first one must be capable of thought. You might copy and post for her the Tal Bachman thread posted today at RFM by D. Lamb. I'm thinking though particularly of the repost by foundoubt. One can only try. And I urge you to try this.

I'll look it up and post it.

Thanks.