I have asked several General Authorities, over the years, about their special spiritual experiences, leading them to a firm testimony of Mormonism.

Every single answer is almost exactly the same. So, last week, I asked another one, and, yep, it essentially was the same as all the others.

"I've had experiences too sacred to share. Now, mind you, I didn't hear a voice or see a vision, but, I didn't need that. It was more powerful than that. And, I now KNOW, without a doubt, that the LDS Church is true."

In other words, it is sacred because I say so and it means the church is true because I say so, and it's because of a strong feeling; end of thinking.

They all say the same things. Like robots. Well, Morgbots.

And, I now KNOW, without a doubt, that their experiences are too sacred to share because those experiences will prove nothing to anyone. Therefore, it's not too sacred, it's just too personal. So personal, in fact, that it really proves nothing universal. Yet, the secretive, solemn, and sacred nature of HOW they talk about it makes them FEEL that it is concrete proof that the church is true. I can't believe I used to 'feel the spirit' when GA's would say things like this. I now realize I was feeling something about nothing.

When the ward high priests were set upon the task of saving me, each one had a very similar story to tell.

Nobody from the HP's has tried to "save" my apostate a$$ since I resigned and told them to leave me alone....thankfully.

Ron Burr

Yep, same here.

In fact, I told one of those HPs that I am having personal conversations with a General Authority about my disaffection. His response, and I quote verbatim:

"Well, I don't need any General Authority to prove it to me. I've had so many sacred experiences, in the temple, that even if they haven't had them, I can bear sure witness that the church is true. I know things, revealed in the temple, that many of the Apostles probably haven't had revealed to them yet."

They all say the same thing. Sacred feelings about experiences that are based on feelings that they interpret to mean what they want them to mean, but mean nothing at all.

thewhyalumnus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> " I've had so many sacred experiences, in
> the temple,...."

He was probably referring to a good dump after days of constipation.

^^^ Truly sacred experiences especially when it's been a few days!

Oneupmanship! Humble little dufus ain't he?

Too sacred to share = The dog ate my homework.

I know it's NOT true because of many, many experiences of finally finding answers to my questions. And I'm willing to share even though they are sacred experiences.

JS proclaimed to the world that he saw god with his own eyes. Yet a modern called man of god can't say I have been called but have not had the privilege yet to see god or any of his servants. Instead they only say I can't talk about it as if they are ashamed or have something to hide.

Joe the Coxman said he saw God and Jesus. Later he saw Jesus, Elijah and Elias. He saw Peter, James and John and for all I know, the Three Nephites and Peter, Paul and Mary singing Puff, the magic Dragon.

And these numnuts think their cheezy 'spiritual experience' is too sacred to share?

Are they afraid of getting caught in a lie like Joey boy did?

WillieBoy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Joe the Coxman said he saw God and Jesus. Later he
> saw Jesus, Elijah and Elias. He saw Peter, James
> and John and for all I know, the Three Nephites
> and Peter, Paul and Mary singing Puff, the magic
> Dragon.
>
> And these numnuts think their cheezy 'spiritual
> experience' is too sacred to share?
>
> Are they afraid of getting caught in a lie like
> Joey boy did?

I agree with you. But, they, of course, have an answer. They say that Joseph Smith was the Prophet of the Restoration and so people must gain a testimony of his experiences. But, our experiences are personal and not for the public.

It's circular logic. So, if someone like me, questions the church, they tell me that I shouldn't because they have had sacred experiences telling them the church is true, so I am wrong. But, they can't share those experiences because they are personal and too sacred. Mind-numbing mental gymnastics.

With every "I know" their obtuse ignorance and arrogance is on full display. Humility, honesty and reason are a complete anethema to these assholes in bad suits.

General Authority? Authority over what? Willfull ignorance, deception and blatant Assholianism that's what.

With every fiber of my being, I know that the sacred testimonies of our sacred leaders are TRUE!

I'm glad you weren't remiss and took the opportunity to tell us this today.

General Authorities get the Second Anointing. They don't want you to know about it. It's a secret combination. So they will give you the too sacred line to throw you off the curiosity scent. Heck they'll even say something as mentioned in the OP, "I've had experiences too sacred to share. Now, mind you, I didn't hear a voice or see a vision, but, I didn't need that. It was more powerful than that. And, I now KNOW, without a doubt, that the LDS Church is true."

So what did they get in the SA?

Read Tom Phillip's story: http://www.mormonthink.com/files/tom-phillips-second-anointing.pdf

Good point. Yes it probably is the SA specifically that they are referencing when talking about sacred personal experiences. If you genuinely believed in TSCC and you went to the temple, hands laid on your head by an Apostle and as a couple you were promised exaltation 'from God', it would appear to be pretty special indeed. And you're not supposed to tell anyone, even your kids, so it's definitely super secret.

Fortunately we know it's just made up boys-treehouse gang stuff. But I could see that devoted church broke leaders would lap it up. It's a very smart way to reinforce.

Next time we should call their bluff:

GA: I've had experiences that are too sacred and personal to share
Sherlock: yes but apart from the second anointing which you're not supposed to reveal, what other things have you experienced?

SA is in my opinion is a just a way to bind the weathy elite to the church. Lock them in by giving them a get to heaven free card. It is basically a papal indulgence of sorts. Lock them and their money in.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/30/2014 04:09AM by darkshadow.

I really don't know how you manage to listen to all their delusional and wilfully ignorant s*** and not go freaking nuts. I would have run away and disowned them a long time ago.

You've got far more patience than I will ever have. I don't pretend to understand it, but I sure admire you for it.

Book of Mordor Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I really don't know how you manage to listen to
> all their delusional and wilfully ignorant s***
> and not go freaking nuts. I would have run away
> and disowned them a long time ago.
>
> You've got far more patience than I will ever
> have. I don't pretend to understand it, but I sure
> admire you for it.


I'm surrounded by TBMs and their royal GA families. I am THE project to them. It's exhausting though and I no longer start any of these conversations. This GA approaches me unsolicited.

I don't think Mormons and especially a GA should be let off the hook so quickly with an answer like that.

Let's assume for a minute that the church is actually true. Mormons believe that the main purpose of the church is to preach the gospel and bring people to Christ. What if the experience that is "too sacred to share" is the one thing someone needs to hear to join the church? If everything works as it should, the person hearing the "too sacred" experience will be touched by the spirit and it could be a true missionary moment. I think Christ would be pretty disappointed that a Mormon declined an opportunity to share a "sacred" experience in order to get someone to join the church or strengthen another member's testimony.

I've decided that from now on when I hear a "too sacred to share" response I'm going to say something like, "And what do you think Christ would say to that? Here you have an opportunity to share something that could bring others to Christ and you choose not to."



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/29/2014 09:06PM by want2bx.

Maybe they got a BJ and Felt the Spirit™, but since they've had the Second Anointing, nooooo problem, (but, you know, too sacred to share!).

You can counter fire with fire and I think that undermines the strength of their testimony.

Two years ago I prayed for wisdom and guidance in historic matters. I asked God to guide me and put the truth before me as evidence in my path so that I'd draw the right conclusions. I'm a theist so consider such a request genuine and reasonable. The result is I am here. My witness in this matter is that seeking the truth with a genuine open mind led me out of the church.

Is my testimony of how this happened any less real or sincere than their experiences?

My expectation is that he would then attempt to argue that his spiritual experiences align with scripture, but I too can argue the same. Further, it is illogical to use scripture as proof of the spirit when you must use the spirit as proof of the scripture. Two such items cannot stand upon each other as their foundation.

Therefore my spiritual experience neutralises his and my I term relation of the history does the same. Although by neutralising claims to the metaphysical we are left only with an appraisal of the actual evidence in its historic context. At present such evidence concludes the church a fraud.

For some reason the logic of this evades them. They are trapped in a confirmation bias. The weakness of their position is now evident and will ultimately lead to the extinction of the TBM. This makes the dodo analogy very apt as the views of Jeff Holland, like the dodo face extinction.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/30/2014 04:58AM by lilburne.

Then this means that Joseph Smith's First Vision experience wasn't sacred enough.

I was told to say, if asked whether I had seen Jesus, "The Brethren have counselled us not to discuss such sacred experiences".

I replied that if I were to say that it would be inferred I had seen Jesus. Silence from the GA. I said I refused to lie or mislead people.

Always their easy cop-out.

anointedone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I was told to say, if asked whether I had seen
> Jesus, "The Brethren have counselled us not to
> discuss such sacred experiences".
>
> I replied that if I were to say that it would be
> inferred I had seen Jesus. Silence from the GA. I
> said I refused to lie or mislead people.


You confirmed my suspicion that this is their trained response. What's even more sad is that this most recent GA conversation last week concluded with him telling me that since I left the church, he would never feel comfortable sharing his sacred experiences with me. Yet, he is actively trying to bring me back to TSCC. It's such a joke!

please send money.

Simply remind them of Paul. He shared his experience.

How can something be more powerful than actually hearing a voice or seeing a vision or actual personage?

What a load of horse5hit.

Some things never change.

Horny Joe said so . . . . end of story.

dum dum dum dum dum



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/30/2014 12:01PM by Shummy.