Thank you everyone for your helpful comments. I responded with a few generic statements nothing offensive or disrespectful and a thanks for his concern and comments, then posted links to CES letter and mormonthink under my name.

In response I received this:

I hope the family and work are going well. You have been blessed with a good family. Thanks for taking time to engage in this discussion. Sorry I have a hard time being concise.

Thanks for the links. These helped me understand where you are coming from. Jeremy Runnells follows a pattern to discredit the church that has been used before. He builds an argument on his own unexplained speculation.
1. His blessing: Mr Runnells indicates: I think this is what was said and I expected this result and it didn't happen how I expected so the church is not true.
2. I heard of or saw something written that didn't agree with the teachings of the church and I asked some guy that works for the church who didn't respond so there must be a cover up going on and thus the church is not true.
3. Since I felt what I thought was the spirit saying that God was real and these things were true but now I've seen and heard things that I don't understand these things must not be true and my original feelings must have been imagined or the effects of a frenzied mind.

The thought that everything you've been taught and believed is a lie is sickening. I can understand being upset and feeling so offended that you don't even want to look into the truth for fear that there is none to find and it will just be more of a waist.
This is why I go back to the core foundation of what we know is real and eternal. Matter and energy are eternal. There is a power that organized heaven and earth. This power is our father in heaven who has a purpose for our whole existence. He cares about us.

Do you believe in Jeremy Runnells? Will you follow him? Will you teach his doctrine?
Is he whom you would pattern your life after.
Despite questions, Jesus Christ is our perfect example. He is our way to peace. He is the truth. As we seek to learn of him and be like him we will bless all around us and fulfill our eternal purpose.
If you have not lost all hope start a study of the scriptures and lay off the hearsay for a while. I promise greater understanding, answer's and more peace.

Thanks for considering
your friend

***

So, appearently the debate begins.

Total red herring and ad hominem attack. Ask your SP what of *substance* in the letter isn't true.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/20/2014 11:29AM by exodus.

"Do you believe in Jeremy Runnells? Will you follow him? Will you teach his doctrine?
Is he whom you would pattern your life after."

Ugh, it makes me feel ill remembering how sheep-like TBM's are! He can't imagine living an authentic life, believing in yourself, and making your own decisions based on what's best for you. He assumes you need a leader, someone to tell you how to live and what to think. It's kind of sickening!

i wonderrrr..... is it better to follow Runnells or Joseph Smith?

Precisely. Pattern your life after Joseph Smith and see where you will end up.

It's so sickening to hear it from an adult. Why the hell would anyone "follow" and "emulate" another one? It's so stupid I think I lost IQ points just reading it.

Jeremy Runnells has never suggested that anyone should do anything, except understand some details about the history of the Church.

It shows how people can't fathom quit "following" Tommy Monson without having another one to "follow".

So weak. Attack Jeremy and not give intelligent repsonse to any of the very strong bullet points of fact in Jeremy's letter.

I get so tired of the Mormon argument that modern critics follow "a pattern to discredit the church that has been used before". The reason why this is so, is that the original criticisms are as valid today as they were in 1830.

Consider the critics' position on the Book of Mormon: from the get go, their assessment has been that it's a 19th-century production. While the details have been, and continue to be debated as ongoing research uncovers additional information, that basic premise has remained unchanged.

Now consider the Mormon position: was it translated by the sheer power of God, with a single seer stone or with the Urim and Thummim? Does it cover the entire western hemisphere, or just North-America, or a limited area in Central America where north is really west and horses are tapirs?

Or consider the Book of Abraham. It's as bogus today as it was in 1835. Pointing that out today is not a matter of the critics rehashing the same old arguments over and over again, it's a matter of the truth not getting through the stupid Mormons' thick skulls for almost two centuries now.

Sjeesh...

He's right about one thing though: "The thought that everything you've been taught and believed is a lie is sickening".



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/20/2014 10:57AM by rt.

In his letter to the CES, Jeremy Runnells happened to capture many of the topics I had already investigated for myself. I'm sure that goes for many of you. As 'rt' posted above, "The thought that everything you've been taught and believed is a lie is sickening". That is the exact thought I had when the light switched on for me a couple years ago. However, my statement would read, ""The KNOWLEDGE that everything I'VE been taught and believed is a lie sickens me." I'm past that sickened stage having now resigned. The teachings of Jesus Christ as recorded in the New Testament, whether he actually lived or not, do not resemble anything close to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. IMHO, the leaders of TSCC resemble the Jewish leadership of Jesus' day. Perhaps they should be referred to as Latter-day Pharisees instead of general authorities.

Don't hit the ball back.

Once I realized that the ONLY reason any Mobot does ANYTHING is to build up his/her own God-points, it got real easy to stop responding. The Bish doesn't care what you think or what you do, he is simply "magnifying his calling" (scoring points) by exchanging e-mails with you.

If you do happen to "find your testimony" and start paying tithing again, he racks up more points for himself.

"This is why I go back to the core foundation of what we know is real and eternal. Matter and energy are eternal. There is a power that organized heaven and earth. This power is our father in heaven who has a purpose for our whole existence. He cares about us."

There's no logical link between any of these statements. I think he's beyond help and your time is better spent living life to the full rather than debating with this person.

Matter and energy are eternal.

Ergo...

God wanted Joe Smith to fornicate with underaged girls who were his wards.

And god wanted Joe Smith to commit adultery with the wives of the apostles among others.

Makes perfect sense.

He's clearly not read the ces letter. From his response, it's obvious he's just read the intro and fairs response because he's repeating it. I would email him back and tell him that and until he reads it and clarifies the points of the few letter that are untrue, then he is wasting your time. I would also add that he is intelligent enough to grasp metaphysical elements whilst ignoring simple, and very easy to prove historical facts. The man is a grandiose fool. His ego won't let him accept he's not as important as he thinks he is. The fall will be hard on this one.

Tell him thanks, its clear he hasn't read the full letter. You don't blame him - he is busy and it is long. But if he ever does start looking into these issues and has a cogent scientific response to the DNA issues raised by Jeremy and Simon Southerton, you would be interested due to his expertise. And no, the LDS.org essay doesn't count.

I agree with this response. It sounds like he hasn't read the whole thing.

I wouldn't bother to engage him anymore. He's not at a point where he wants to know or listen. He's so convinced he's right that nothing will get through to him.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/20/2014 12:20PM by twistedsister.

This stake president is a coward - let him know that. He's afraid to address any of your issues or the issues put forth in the CES Letter.

The only people who listen to reason are the people who already possess it.

***Nate Colby***



BTW, the above quoted individual is the smartest man I know.

As others have said, it's likely he hasn't actually read the CES letter.

I wouldn't reply but if you want to have some fun with him you could say something like:

"I don't understand #1 - could you give me an example from the CES letter?"

One can follow Jesus Christ without accepting the lies of Joseph Smith.

No ideas about matter and energy change the fact that Joseph Smith was a fraud.

Bye.

With the obviously visible and transparent approach to Jesus worship that mormons are currently doing, I've told them something similar: "Well, if it's Jesus that you want to worship, then I suggest you work directly with him instead of going through that high overhead, dubious history and doctrine religion of yours."

Here is how I would respond.

I see from your recent email that you are not truly interested in "where I am coming from," as you claim. If you were interested you may have actually read, tested, and proved that Mr. Runnells's letter contains falsehoods instead of simply looking for ways to besmirch his intelligence and character, presuming you know his TRUE motivations.

I see that you must find it impossible to look at evidence and facts with an open mind and also assume that other people are not willing to do that. You came to the information in Mr. Runnells's letter with a pre-determined conclusion that it must be motivated by bad intentions and flat out wrong. Instead of putting that aside and actually testing the information, you found the "evidence" for your desired conclusion and ran with it. The issue is not Mr. Runnells or his motivations, feelings, desires, or even the faulty logic you assign to him. The issue is the information contained in his exhaustively researched letter-the facts that remain undisputed.

I must take facts into consideration, especially when asked to commit myself to a all-consuming way of life. Feelings are important when making decisions, but facts are absolutely essential because what one feels can be affected by the information one has available. Sometimes we feel good or bad about something based on what we know or believe, but when exposed to new or different information, the feelings change.

It will not be productive to continue this conversation because facts are essential to me. I cannot have faith in something that all of the facts prove to be false.

I just remembered an example my mother told me as a child. I think it demonstrates how knowing the true facts can affect your feelings.

She said, imagine you are on a train and there is a man with 4-5 kids. The kids are being loud and running up and down the aisles. The father quietly tells them to sit down but it doesn't seem he's that interested in keeping them under control. He seems off in his own world. You are getting angry and thinking what a bad parent he is letting his kids cause all this commotion. You are mad. How would your feelings change if you knew the truth was that his wife and mother of his children had just died at the hospital, and he is facing how to tell the kids when they get home?

It is a good example of how facts can change feelings, that when you find out that what you believed was true is not true, your feelings change as well. I think it demonstrates that feelings are not reliable when searching for truth.

This is the one thing that drove me crazy in what he said:

"This is why I go back to the core foundation of what we know is real and eternal."

How does he know it's "real"? Because the church told him it was real. They take things that the church says and teachs as truths in this life. Like there is no debate on the matter. My DW does the same thing to me and it drives me nuts. They only think it's real or true because the church told them it was in the first place.

My father was a professor of logic and literature before he became a lawyer. I had lessons upon lessons on how to argue drilled into me since I could talk. I won't pretend to know how to formulate the best argument here, but I can join my voice to the others here who say that your SP's argument is a bad one.
My advice would be to attack his premises:
1. He assumed that you sent him the CES letter link because it was that letter that convinced you. Unless this is the case, you should disabuse him of that first: "it's just a convenient list of problems, not the founding doctrine of my new belief system. I don't care how he said it, I care whether the church is false."
2. Arguments that have been used before are of no merit. (This is only true if the previous cases have been disproven)
3. "He builds an argument on his unexplained speculation"
3.1 it is not okay to build an argument on speculation. Such an argument cannot possibly have any merit.
3.2 all speculation must be explained.
4. (Everything he says about Mr. Runnels is slanderously inaccurate, but don't defend Runnels, because:)
5. "Do you believe in Jeremy Runnels?" <---that right there is an enormous leap.
5.1 you must have an ideological leader.
5.2 your ideological leader is, in this case, Jeremy Runnels.
5.3 you should not believe Jeremy Runnels.
5.4 you are disaffected, or concerned, or offended because of what Jeremy Runnels said, and not because of any particular inconsistencies.

(As an aside, "I have a personal witness that Jeremy Runnels lives. You too can read his words, see his picture, and send him emails. I know that if you pray to him (via his gmail account), he will manifest himself to you." Pardon the obvious comical appeal to the audience---a practice I absolutely condemn---but I can't stand the phrasing of whether you "believe in Jeremy Runnels" I too hope for a loving Father, but I'll not condone bad rhetoric.)

(Edit: I forgot one: going back to a foundation is sufficient to repair problems. The first and second law do not prove anything, and even if you do believe there is a creator, you have the same 'foundation' as any other belief "...thou doest well. The devils also believe and tremble.")

6. All persons cited in a letter are role models. "Is he who you would pattern your life after?"
7. Jeremy Runnels is not a good role model. (How does he know?)
8. Your doubts mean that you do not accept Jesus as a good role model. (Maybe you don't, or maybe you do, but why assume that?
9. Your doubts mean you don't think there is, or could be, a God. ( you may have addressed this already with him)

Remember, though, that the inability to formulate a perfect argument is independent of the validity of the subject; just because we can shoot his argument to pieces doesn't make him wrong, it merely makes him a fallible orator. We still might be wrong in our doubts. I no longer hold out hope for it, but I'll gladly conform if somebody can explain the hell out of a ton of issues. I guess what I'm trying to say is: don't discount him because of his argument style, because that's what he did to Runnels unfairly.

Also, you'll want to make careful note that he quotes Korihor in the third article of his version of Runnels' letter. He (SP) believes you have been deceived by one or more antichrists. He probably believes that *we* are all antichrists. My BP sure does.

He is not ready to have a debate with you. He *knows* you're wrong. If you're going to speak to him at all, I advise that you only ask for his clarification on points if doctrine you think he can actually comment on.

Good luck. I hope my rant helps or at least entertains. I feel better now, anyway.

Just as I suspected. He wants a continuing debate - with no end in sight! He is setting a trap. He wants to entrap you with your words. He doesn't want to debate or discuss. He only wants to find fault, criticize, and put you down, using ad hominems and puff himself up.

Again you have some choices.
1. do not reply
2. reply with a short comment
3 reply to each of his points.

My advice is not to reply at all. Nothing. Zero. Refuse to engage.
Do not give him what he wants. Ignore him.

Wow! Again thank you all for your support. I am so glad to have a community like this to turn to for help. It is greatly appreciated.

IMO, this email from the SP is such a typical, irritating example of the attitude of superiority common to many mormons.

I wouldn't give him the time of day, much less the courtesy of a reply. He will simply smirk to himself and pat himself on the back for "putting you in your place.

Stake President writes: "I can understand being upset and feeling so offended that you don't even want to look into the truth..."

SP left off: "...and that is why I didn't read the CES Letter or attempt to understand any of the issues presented in the letter."

You gave this guy a chance, but he made no effort in return. Don't expect much going forward, except for possible excommunication for apostasy.

------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for the links. These helped me understand where you are coming from. Jeremy Runnells follows a pattern to discredit the church that has been used before.

-->He presents a list of his personal concerns about LDS history, doctrine, and administration. He seeks explanations of the topics of his concern.-->

He builds an argument on his own unexplained speculation.

-->His argument is that he has a lot of serious concerns about the LDS Church, based on available historical documents, scripture, statements made by GAs, and other LDS materials.-->


1. His blessing: Mr Runnells indicates: I think this is what was said and I expected this result and it didn't happen how I expected so the church is not true.

-->What is he talking about here? I don't remember anything about a blessing in the CES Letter. What Runnells writes is that his understanding of Mormonism, based on a lifetime of membership, did not agree the verifiable truths he was able to discover through exhaustive research.-->


2. I heard of or saw something written that didn't agree with the teachings of the church and I asked some guy that works for the church who didn't respond so there must be a cover up going on and thus the church is not true.

-->No, the lack of an answer from the CES Director does not falsify the LDS Church, but it does indicate that the LDS Church has no rational explanation of the issues raised in the CES Letter. Absent any rational explanation, the evidence suggests the LDS Church is not true or truthful.-->


3. Since I felt what I thought was the spirit saying that God was real and these things were true but now I've seen and heard things that I don't understand these things must not be true and my original feelings must have been imagined or the effects of a frenzied mind.

-->No, insanity (a frenzied mind) has nothing to do with it. Rather, emotions are not a reliable means of discerning truth. "The Spirit" is an emotional thing.-->



The thought that everything you've been taught and believed is a lie is sickening. I can understand being upset and feeling so offended that you don't even want to look into the truth for fear that there is none to find and it will just be more of a waist.

-->Is irony the right word to describe this statement? The Stake President is the one refusing to address your concerns while he bears generic and crazy-physics testimony. Also, all apostates are offended, right? Obviously you are willing to look into the truth or you wouldn't be talking to the SP, but the SP is presenting nothing new.-->


This is why I go back to the core foundation of what we know is real and eternal. Matter and energy are eternal. There is a power that organized heaven and earth. This power is our father in heaven who has a purpose for our whole existence. He cares about us.

-->Seriously? The Universe exists, therefor Mormonism is true? Every religious movement, including Verdukianism, could make the same claim.-->


Do you believe in Jeremy Runnells?

-->He is allegedly a human currently living on Earth. I have seen a man claiming to be Jeremy Runnells in photos and videos.-->


Will you follow him?

-->He is not the leader of any group. He's just a guy who published a list of concerns. Nothing to follow.-->


Will you teach his doctrine?

-->He teaches no doctrine. He presents facts and seeks explanation. No doctrine to teach.-->


Is he whom you would pattern your life after.

-->He is just a guy who publish a list of concerns about the LDS Church, not a Messiah or prophet. Ethics/morals guide life, not flawed individuals.-->


Despite questions, Jesus Christ is our perfect example. He is our way to peace. He is the truth. As we seek to learn of him and be like him we will bless all around us and fulfill our eternal purpose.

-->That's your opinion Stake President.-->


If you have not lost all hope start a study of the scriptures and lay off the hearsay for a while. I promise greater understanding, answer's and more peace.

-->What hearsay? Is the lds.org website hearsay? Please be specific.-->

Your SP does not want to engage in any debate. He does not want
to discuss and weigh evidence. Any fact-based discussion with
him will be quickly derailed by him into thinly-veiled attacks
on your character mixed with him bearing his testimony.

I, Baura, do prophesy that this is how it will play out if you continue the discussion.

baura
-------------------------------------------------------
Raising my hand to the square and saying: YES! :-)

That will do.

People believe what they believe because they WANT to believe it. No other reason is necessary or appreciated. Once a people decides what he/she WANTS to believe, then the cognition information filter kicks in and only confirmation data is allowed to penetrate the filter. When pressed to comment on non-confirmation data, the only options are to discredit the messenger or bury the information under a pile of illogical, rhetorical, straw man attacks, ad hominem crap, etc.

The LAST thing any TBM wants to talk about is Reality. TBMs live in an imaginary cartoon world where anything Joseph Smith happened to imagine and write down up gets validated over and over ... week after month after year after decade after century as if it were Real.

It's a waste of time trying to talk a TBM into suspecting his/her entire belief system is a cartoon. People need and want to believe in cartoons for their own reasons. Leave them alone. They will wake up if and when they figure out that believing in cartoons is not the best use of their time and energy.

He has made up his little mind and won't read anything that might break his shelf.

In such cases, a few good words might be useful and impossible for him to miss. Such as:

After reading your response my thoughts are (bullets are nice):
Tunnel Vision
Cognitive Dissonance
Cultural Conditioning
Fear of knowledge
Fear of questioning authority
Drinking the Koolaid
etc.

He may as well responded with TL;DR. Debate him if you want but it looks like it's going to be a waste of time/energy better spent elsewhere.