I realize the prevailing narrative here is that the current leadership are all a bunch of racist, bigoted, homophobic, evil liars who know the church is a scam and still continue promoting the farce for personal gain and glory.

Got it. Maybe. Could be.

However, there are other possibilities.

What if the current leadership know it's all a farce and they keep it up because they have empathy for all the people whose lives are dependent on the religion?

I wonder how many people think the leadership should admit it's a fraud, but they support needle exchange.

I wonder how many people think the leadership should admit it's a fraud, but they support giving alternative drugs to addicts.

The current mormon church is as much like the old mormon church as methadone is like heroine. Not the same at all.

Why do we complain about that? Why do we complain on RfM when the leadership make good decisions, like discontinuing the masturbation interviews? Shouldn't we celebrate when that happens?

Sometimes I get the feeling posters on RfM wish the mormon church was as bad as it used to be, just so they could point at it and say, "see? i told you it was bad." But the bottom line is, it's not that bad anymore.

It continues to get diluted year after year. This is all happening from the inside, at the top. It strikes me as odd that the church leadership continues diluting the doctrine, and continues making membership easier on people, and then RfM complains about it.

It would be pretty easy for RfM to create a link on the main page of ALL the good changes that have occurred since RfM was created. It would also be pretty easy to create a matrix of the current church vs. the old church and show just how much better it is than it used to be.

You know, something to celebrate. And a way to give credit where it's due.

Notsobadanymore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What if the current leadership know it's all a
> farce and they keep it up because they have
> empathy for all the people whose lives are
> dependent on the religion?

Haha, that's so funny.
Oh, wait, you were serious?
Empathy? These guys?
Their actions over many, many years have shown pretty clearly they don't have empathy for the members.
I'm more than OK with dismissing that "what if" out of hand.

> Why do we complain about that? Why do we complain
> on RfM when the leadership make good decisions,
> like discontinuing the masturbation interviews?
> Shouldn't we celebrate when that happens?

What "good decisions?"
BTW, they *didn't* discontinue the masturbation interviews. They simply allowed a parent to be present.

> Sometimes I get the feeling posters on RfM wish
> the mormon church was as bad as it used to be,
> just so they could point at it and say, "see? i
> told you it was bad." But the bottom line is, it's
> not that bad anymore.

It's a destructive cult that takes peoples' money for promises of an eternal afterlife that doesn't exist; that divides families over belief/non-belief; that encourages racism and discrimination, that encourages ignorance and blind obedience. What's "not so bad anymore" about any of that?
What, after a very few very minor policy changes, has actually fundamentally changed about it?

> It continues to get diluted year after year. This
> is all happening from the inside, at the top. It
> strikes me as odd that the church leadership
> continues diluting the doctrine, and continues
> making membership easier on people, and then RfM
> complains about it.

The only dilution I've seen is an attempt (and most often a dishonest attempt) to downplay the public face of the most "weird" aspects of the cult, in an attempt to fit in better with more mainstream religions, and to try and attract more tithe-paying converts. I'm not seeing what you're seeing.

> It would be pretty easy for RfM to create a link
> on the main page of ALL the good changes that have
> occurred since RfM was created.

It would be easy. Here's the link:

(link to nothing)

There you go.
(I don't see any "good" changes)

> It would also be
> pretty easy to create a matrix of the current
> church vs. the old church and show just how much
> better it is than it used to be.

You're right, equally as easy:

[empty matrix]
(same reason)

> You know, something to celebrate. And a way to
> give credit where it's due.

The organization has billions of dollars it strong-armed out of followers. It doesn't need credit -- it has cash.

Here are some claims you made in your post I'd like you to back up with some evidence:

1. "takes peoples' money for promises of an eternal afterlife that doesn't exist" - What evidence can you provide to back up your claim that an afterlife doesn't exist. You've assumed the burden of proof here, when historically you've taken the default position.

2. "that encourages racism and discrimination" - What evidence can you provide that the current church leadership encourages racism and discrimination?

“What evidence can you provide that the current church leadership encourages racism and discrimination?”

For one thing, current leadership still encourages members to read the Book of Mormon, and the Book of Abraham is still scripture.

You say the LDS church isn’t as bad as it used to be. Well, thanks to improved treatment, stomach cancer isn’t as bad as it used to be. That doesn’t mean that it still isn’t horrible. I’d love to see both eradicated.

Notsobadanymore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Here are some claims you made in your post I'd
> like you to back up with some evidence:
>
> 1. "takes peoples' money for promises of an
> eternal afterlife that doesn't exist" - What
> evidence can you provide to back up your claim
> that an afterlife doesn't exist. You've assumed
> the burden of proof here, when historically you've
> taken the default position.

I didn't claim an afterlife doesn't exist. I said THEIR "eternal afterlife" doesn't exist.
Otherwise, your point is correct. I should have said "an eternal afterlife which no evidence shows exists." Mea culpa.

> 2. "that encourages racism and discrimination" -
> What evidence can you provide that the current
> church leadership encourages racism and
> discrimination?

You've got to be kidding. You get no quarter on this one -- church leaders have made hundreds of statements in the past few years demonstrating racism and discrimination. Google will help you find them, they're so easy to find there's no need for me to supply references.

"It's a destructive cult that takes peoples' money for promises of an eternal afterlife that doesn't exist; that divides families over belief/non-belief; that encourages racism and discrimination, that encourages ignorance and blind obedience."

It demands people pay a tithing over buying food.

It makes a non-believer a persona non-grata and believers attempting to soften it pariahs.

It makes God's curses a breeding program to prevent non-believers and believers from interbreeding (see The Book of Mormon.)

It places blind obedience to leadership as one of their highest standards.

It discourages honest inquiry when it tends to conclusions that the leadership/church teachings are incorrect.

Mormons: stab them and do they not bleat?

Oh yes, mormons bleat.

The fact that mormonism has made bold steps to subvert our laws to support their theology is just one of the many examples of mormonsism run amok.

Don't forget that Prop 8 actually PASSED and was made LAW thanks to mormonism. I get the feeling that equal rights don't mean that much to you or else you would not have made such a ridiculous assertion that mormons are due some sort of "credit".

I do agree with the OP that mormonism has softened over the years. I suspect that most cults do. Still...it is a cult. Perhaps in another century or two it will become more mainstream.

Yes and then after that we can look at the upside of Naziism.



Mormonism? Not as bad as it used to be?

Prop 8 wasn't that long ago and the hate is still at the core even if the Mormons have learned to put up a better front.

Kids of gays aren't allowed to join until they are 18 and renounce their parents.

Bishops are asking sexual questions to minors, alone, in a room with closed doors. Same old invasive, embarrassing guilt trip meant to destroy self esteem and make them malleable.

You still can't go to the CK unless you pay enough tithing to get a TR. Ergo you are buying your way into heaven. There is no installment plan. That is what the "afterlife insurance plan" refers to and it is still in effect.

There is an old saying, "The more things change--the more they stay the same." That is Mormonism. Using guilt and shame to control and manipulate but with a better PR department employed this time.

The one thing that has changed is the Mormon arrogance combined with ignorance skyrocketed to ridiculous heights.

No thanks, Pollyanna.

Ignorance and arrogance are sealed together for the eternities in Mormonism.

I could not agree with you more...and we've still just scratched the surface of how horrible mormonism is.

That said - yes, the prophets are no longer demanding sex with everyone else's wives; they just want your time and money.

Baby steps...

“But the bottom line is, it's not that bad anymore.”

I couldn’t disagree more. Their recent policy on children of same sex couples is just one example of how they are still seriously messed up.

The few small positive steps have been due to public pressure brought about by people who the leaders would still label as evil (like many who post here).

CrispingPin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The few small positive steps have been due to
> public pressure brought about by people who the
> leaders would still label as evil (like many who
> post here).


What are these "few small positive steps?"

That gay and Mormon site?

Sorry. I was trying to give the OP more credit than he/she probably deserves.

Maybe allowing a parent to be present at interviews is a tiny, tiny positive step?

CrispingPin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Maybe allowing a parent to be present at
> interviews is a tiny, tiny positive step?

Yes, so tiny only a tiny minority of teens would actually allow mom or dad in there with them.

What could possibly be worse than having some man ask you about your masturbation habits? Having mom or dad in the room.

+10000!

Oh, I know, I know! Pick me!

The Essays.


That no TBM reads....

"You know, something to celebrate. And a way to give credit where it's due."

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1996/04/news-of-the-church/general-authorities-to-leave-business-boards?lang=eng

I'll give them credit for stopping some of their graft activities. I doubt it is much of a stop and probably newer graft opportunities opened up so the PR disadvantage of a network of church leaders guiding lots of Utah business could go away.

Elder Berry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'll give them credit for stopping some of their
> graft activities. I doubt it is much of a stop and
> probably newer graft opportunities opened up so
> the PR disadvantage of a network of church leaders
> guiding lots of Utah business could go away.

I won't.
Essentially, all that action did was remove the publicly-disclosed money laundering. When the GAs were officially on the boards, their salaries for being board members were public, and everyone knew which companies they were "guiding."

Now that's gone. Instead, they still "guide" the companies, using their GA status. They still profit from them, usually by owning stock in the companies. But since those don't have to be made public like board memberships and salaries, we have no details. Rather than a move that merits credit, it was yet another move to hide the flow of money to/from the church corporations.

It WAS a good PR move. It wasn't anything to celebrate.

The poster of this thread makes the statement that "It (the LDS Church) continues to get diluted year after year", but offers but one example to prove his point. A statement like this needs proof, facts, to substantiate the point being made.

I choose not to engage in this argument until the poster has something worthwhile to say.

It's all about the Benjamin's.

Why are current missionaries of the church still teaching investigators that JS translated THE GOLDEN PLATES (as directed by President Nelson) if the church has recently admitted that JS used a peepstone?

Oh that's right!

What kind of crazy person is going to believe a story about a guy reading a rock inside of a hat?

And “an angel showed me where some gold book was buried, but then took it back to heaven after I translated it.” is EASIER to believe??

The reality of the church as a pious fraud, supposing that for now, could be sinking in at the top. That’s a lousy position to be in. I’m willing to believe that Joseph Smith needed to be a con man to create belief out of thin air. Belief itself was the hope-producing novelty. It had a cost, but less than the cost of the historical period. But all that has shifted. The world is slowly waking up from its nightmare. The insane Mormon costs are still there. TSCC’s management structure will always keep it behind the curve. You can rest assured that they will never catch up to the secular world.

babyloncansuckit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The reality of the church as a pious fraud,
> supposing that for now, could be sinking in at the
> top.

The more time that passes without angels visiting the prophet, the more and more the reality of the church as a pious fraud is just lip sticking a pig.


One hundred years ago it was lip sticking a polyg.

babyloncansuckit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You can rest assured that they will never catch up
> to the secular world.

I've believed this my whole life. I never can/could foresee a day where Mormonism seems like Methodist-ism or some other denom.


I don't think this meme can evolve that much and not be reduced to a very rich enclave of no relevance like The Community of Christ.


Edit: I don't think CoC is rich just irrelevant.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/06/2018 02:57PM by Elder Berry.

1. "What if the current leadership know it's all a farce and they keep it up because they have empathy for all the people whose lives are dependent on the religion?"

Like Nelson and the Gang going to Africa and demanding that they pay tithing to lift themselves out of poverty? That kind of empathy?

2. "It would be pretty easy for RfM to create a link on the main page of ALL the good changes that have occurred since RfM was created. It would also be pretty easy to create a matrix of the current church vs. the old church and show just how much better it is than it used to be."

If it's that easy, why don't YOU do it? Show us all. Put us in our place. Right, because you can't.

Nice try, mormon apologist. You need to up your game.

logged out, nli Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If it's that easy, why don't YOU do it? Show us
> all. Put us in our place.

I would like to see a list produced by OP of the positives.

Just when you think maybe they aren’t so bad. Either very bad or very stupid. Maybe those are the new virtues. They can keep them.

Why do you think I'm a mormon apologist? What game is it you think I'm playing, and what would upping it look like?

This is no game mister.


You might be kicked out of Kolob forever for coming here.

If kolob exists (I doubt it) I won't be going there because I don't want to. I'm an exmormon by choice. I just think it's odd that there isn't more celebration here on RfM when the mormon church moves away from things that are harmful to their membership.

It's like people here get mad because it's harder to justify their hatred of the church when the church becomes less harmful.

I think it's a good thing when the church becomes less harmful.

Notsobadanymore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I think it's a good thing when the church becomes
> less harmful.

I and others would like examples of how the church has become so good. Show me the goodness.

Being transparent with all their financial transactions?

Not allowing children of gays to be baptized?

Allowing every church-attending member to enter the temple?

You responded to my point with a strawman argument. I never said the church was "so good." I said it's "less harmful."

Then you gave me three examples of why you think the church is bad.

Are you aware of the dishonesty in your reply? Do you see what you did there?

Sounds an awful lot like “new and improved”

Mopologists have been known to show up here and try to convince us that "Oh, the church isn't so bad, look at the good things it does!" When asked for details, they dodge and deflect, like what you're doing. You haven't given us any "positive steps," merely attempted to shift the burden of proof back onto us.

And since I have to explain the concept of "upping your game," it means that you have to do a better job of demonstrating your original thesis, i.e., that the church is "not so bad anymore." We've provided a number of counter-examples that you haven't addressed at all.

Still waiting on that matrix. Should be "pretty easy," right? (your words)

This is just some stuff off the top of my head. Again, super easy. Not sure why we don't see these changes as positive here on RfM.

Old Church: Required polygamy
New Church: Polygamy grounds for excommunication

Old Church: Blacks couldn't hold the priesthood
New Church: All men can hold the priesthood

Old Church: Taught Adam-God doctrine
New Church: Adam-God grounds for excommunication

Old Church: Taught people can become gods
New Church: Can't find that doctrine anywhere

Old Church: Blood oaths, 5 points of fellowship, etc.
New Church: No blood oaths, 5 points of fellowship, etc.

Old Church: Promoted communism (united order)
New Church: Embraced capitalism

Old Church: Contraception is evil
New Church: Contraception is a-ok

Old Church: Taught all native americans were descendants of evil lamanites
New Church: Teaches only some native americans are descendants of evil lamanites

Old Church: Taught all black people were descendants of evil Cain
New Church: Can't find this being taught anywhere

Old Church: No racial diversity in leadership
New Church: More racial diversity in leadership

Old Church: Women not allowed to do any speaking
New Church: Women do plenty of speaking

Interesting list. Some of this didn't even apply to my life much as it is so dated.

Notsobadanymore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Old Church: Required polygamy
> New Church: Polygamy grounds for excommunication

RfM was started in the 1990s and not the 1890s.

> Old Church: Blacks couldn't hold the priesthood
> New Church: All men can hold the priesthood

Good and bad. Now even more people can be screwed up with temple rites. IT was more political than softening.

> Old Church: Taught Adam-God doctrine
> New Church: Adam-God grounds for excommunication

Too dated for any RfM-relevant list.

> Old Church: Taught people can become gods
> New Church: Can't find that doctrine anywhere

Can't find the doctrine? Is it really softening? Some would counter this is a step towards more totalitarianism.

> Old Church: Blood oaths, 5 points of fellowship,
> etc.
> New Church: No blood oaths, 5 points of
> fellowship, etc.

I was endowed January of 1991. I didn't have them.

> Old Church: Promoted communism (united order)
> New Church: Embraced capitalism

From my perspective step back.

> Old Church: Contraception is evil
> New Church: Contraception is a-ok

My mother harped on us about it and we all ignored her. We were never told it was evil but that it was selfish. I asked other people and no one said that they were ever taught it was evil. My mother is from The Greatest Generation. I guess she was taught it wasn't good. And like much of this list too dated for any RfM-relevant list.

> Old Church: Taught all native americans were
> descendants of evil lamanites
> New Church: Teaches only some native americans are
> descendants of evil lamanites

Softening. Methinks it was forced upon them but I'll give it to you. No more Lamanite shiz.

> Old Church: Taught all black people were
> descendants of evil Cain
> New Church: Can't find this being taught anywhere

From my lifetime softening. I'll give it to you.

> Old Church: No racial diversity in leadership
> New Church: More racial diversity in leadership

Still token in my opinion but I'll give it to you.

> Old Church: Women not allowed to do any speaking
> New Church: Women do plenty of speaking

Never in my lifetime were they not allowed. Too dated for any RfM-relevant list.

I don't get why you are extolling Mormon duplicity? These examples given serve to illustrate Mormon hypocrisy.

Mormons have been forced by a kinder more inclusive society to slowly but surely attempt to appear to have softened. They didn't do this on their own. They just couldn't get away with dragging their heels any longer on the Black issue. They have thrown their own prophets under the bust to accomplish this. There is no integrity to the softening. Also see BYU and Football. Another place they were FORCED to change.

They got their asses handed to them on gay rights and yet they still cling to their homophobia.

What choice did they have but to change white to pure in the BoM? It wasn't out of a change of heart, but a desperate attempt to save face.

Mormons are still hurting too many people for anything at all about them to mean anything at all of value. I don't give kudos to someone for what they did with a gun to their head.

At last, something concrete. Others have addressed your list, but here's my take (since you were replying to me):

Polygamy: They abandoned it only when faced with an existential crisis. They were willing to die on Polygamy Hill until they figured out that they were actually going to die as an institution and that their god wasn't sending any angels to save them. Hard to give them credit for that one.

Priesthood: They sure did… in 1978, a good 10-20 years into the civil rights movement. Not exactly leading the way there. They caved only when they realized their brand spanking new Brazil temple might sit empty indefinitely because of all the historical intermarriage in that country. Potential embarrassment averted!

Adam-God: So what? That was a Brigham Young pet doctrine. It was abandoned not long after he died, like the Deseret Alphabet, still in the Old Church era.

Eternal Progression: They still teach it, just not publicly. And they lie about teaching it. I don't see that as an improvement.

Blood Oaths: OK, the temple isn't quite as bizarre. But now they won't admit they ever had those, and younger mormons won't believe you when you try to tell them about it. Holland tried to lie his way out of a BBC question about them before being cornered. Again, is official church lying to be considered progress?

Communism vs. Capitalism: The United Order was always doomed to fail. Mormonism has replaced it with an extreme fever-swamp form of capitalism, an alpha-predator version of the prosperity gospel where MLM schemes and financial frauds run wild and free. You may be fine with that, but I'd rather not have the spectacle of average cash-strapped members being used as shark chum.

Contraception: I wouldn't say it’s "A-OK." Sure, the church pays lip service to the wishes of the parents, but when have you ever heard a talk or GC address extolling the virtues of small families? The culture still encourages lots of kids and does its best to achieve that through the usual shame and guilt tactics. Ever been to a Mother's Day sac meeting? Mothers with lots of children are praised and recognized. Meanwhile, women with few or no children are pitied.

Lamanites: Again, not something the church did out of the goodness of their hearts, but because they were forced to do by the mounting multi-disciplinary evidence against the BOM.

Cain: The church continues to lie about this. Their race essay maintains that the priesthood & temple exclusion, and Cain heritage, were merely "theories" although these were in fact referred to at the time as Actual Doctrines Direct From God. As for whether it's taught any more, let me refer you to the *current* BYU Old Testament student manual: "Therefore, although Ham himself had the right to the priesthood, Canaan, his son, did not. Ham had married Egyptus, a descendant of Cain (Abraham 1:21–24), and so his sons were denied the priesthood."

https://www.lds.org/manual/old-testament-student-manual-genesis-2-samuel/genesis-4-11-the-patriarchs?lang=eng

Diversity: Oh goody, a church-broke South American and a church-broke Asian are in the Q12 now. Color me unimpressed.

Women: I'll give you that. Men will now allow women to speak in situations where they couldn't speak before. But the men still won't listen.


Can you now please address some of the issues raised here that make the New Church as bad or worse than the Old Church?

– The November 2015 exclusion policy
– Every Member a Janitor (despite a $32 billion stock portfolio)
– Obsession with "modesty" and forcing women to be responsible for men’s thoughts
– The masturbation interviews (as has been pointed out to you, they have not been discontinued, and even now the church is preparing to excomm the man who set the "Protect LDS Children" wheels in motion).
– Protecting an MTC president who had a rape room at the MTC, keeping him as a member in good standing, and throwing his rape victim out of the building when she attempted to speak at his ward's F&T meeting

So much empathy!

Bravo. My hat is off to you. ( Had to buy one just to be able to do that.) Also some clapping going on.

There's nothing to address on your list, other than to say while those things are obviously shitty, they don't make the church as bad or worse at it used to be. Not by a long road.

Again, I never claimes the mormon church was "so good." I simply pointed out that we on RfM should not get so upset as the church continues to dilute its doctrine and become less harmful.

Is that really such a controversial stance?

I don't see your stance as controversial. I see your stance as without merit.

The Mormon church, unlike their god, is "the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow." The only thing that has changed is they have upped their P.R. game. New spins on the same old same old.

The bigotry is still there. Perhaps with a new hat with a bigger brim to hide more of the face. But it is still there. It still stings. It still hurts. The gay kids are suffering, even unto suicide.

You are whitewashing. There is nothing controversial about it.

The Mormon church is more insidious than ever, worse than ever, because it has become better at deception. It has learned how to appear to be better and you are buying it.

Wow logged out, nli:

Nice response. I fully agree that the corporation does not deserve credit for 'being less bad'. That concept makes no sense to me. The corporation ruins people's lives. The fact that it changed a few things, due to public pressure, is not worthy of any sort of praise.

-----

To the original poster:
As you have already observed, you are not going to find much support for that sentimentality here. Being less bad does not make one good.

Notsobadanymore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is just some stuff off the top of my head.
> Again, super easy. Not sure why we don't see these
> changes as positive here on RfM.
>
> Old Church: Required polygamy
> New Church: Polygamy grounds for excommunication
>


But it's okay on polygamy in death?

But it's okay for the men who were exxed by the "old church" for polygamy to be sealed to their polygamous wives in death...by the "new church"?

That's not real.

Actual polygamy is dangerous to children.

Dead people don't get married. They're dead. Who cares if people "pretend" dead are married?

The 15 old guys like about this and that and the other..

How can you possibly respect that?

They are trying to treat me like a second class citizen. They are the pompous, rich, controllers of information (lies) and I HAVE to believe whatever they say.

They make up unnecessary rules that they've pulled out of their butts. They've ruined the whole dating, attraction, relationships, sex, part of our lives to being a sin, so tbms are so very messed up sexually. To be brainwashed to only date and marry a Mormon is seriously messed up. What right did they have to control me like that?

So much control, so many lies, so much weirdness, so much money taken to support lies.

They have gotten better over the years when forced to do so. But they're still really bad, as people here have pointed out. In the 1800's the Church was much closer to some of the FLDS polygamist groups that the modern Church wants to distance itself from, and while that was a step forward, the current Church continues to teach that polygamy will exist in the afterlife and polygamy continues to be a part of the way marriage sealings work, etc.

The modern Church remains very sexist, anti-gay (upping the ante in recent years with their ban on children of gay couples), continues to teach racist doctrines (if often downplaying them in the media) in the Book of Mormon and Book of Abraham, continues to make it a requirement that tithing be paid in order to see a loved one married in the temple (basically extorting money of people who just want to be there for their son or daughter or loved one).

The fact that the Church leaders know they're running a scam but still continue with policies that extort money from people for promises of "eternal salvation" or seeing a loved one married makes the leaders all the worse in my view.

As others have pointed out the Church leaders clearly care more about "keeping the business going" than they do the welfare of their members, and that is particularly clear when one looks at their teachings on tithing, even in recent years, in which they too often spout teachings that one should give to the Church before even feeding one's family, or the lauding of very poor members who gave gold out of their teeth for tithing or to pay for a trip to the temple (talk about putting undue pressure on gullible and susceptible people).

Thank you for a thoughtful response.

Your list of 11 steps the church has taken to better some of its policies from the past to the present is a list of steps the church has been forced to take. The forces have varied, such as the U.S. Government withholding statehood because of polygamy, failure to thrive, as with the United Order, the Government threatening the tax exempt status, pressure from the Christian Community, and pressure or outright refusal to follow the rules from the members.

I would willingly give credit to the church as you claim is due if I felt like they deserved credit for changing policies out of morality, out of doing what is right.....but they do not and have not. It is only when they are backed into a corner do they make changes and then they always have cover stories (lies) as to why they have done so.

Don't care about the church at this point. If it deludes until there is nothing left then so be it, I still will wake up tomorrow reguardless. I will smile a little bit when a few more are in the ground though.

I have a riddle for you Adam.


I never was.
Am always to be.
No one ever saw me, nor ever will.
And yet I am the confidence of all who live and breathe.
What am I?

Jesus Christ?

No but I will tell you tomorrow.

Aaaaaalrighty then, is that the answer or are you really going to tell me tomorrow. The golden plates was my first thought or answer.

Is the answer 'tomorrow'?

Bow your head and say, "yes."

I always thought Mormons would become more like Catholics (among others): ignoring the past, doing what they want to do, making improvements (laughably late).

But why is the church or Church changing anything? Because they HAVE to if they want to adapt to survive. It's not like they are being benevolent.

Thank places like this that vocally expose the things they have to change.

Funny how God seems to succumb to public opinion.

I'm sure profits are doing well. One thing that never changes: God needs your money.

dagny Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> God needs your money.


That God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow.

My story was of the First Order of GAs refusing my pleas to not enable a lying (written documents) & hatred + Greedily destroying a family...

No Interest, No comments from the very top of the tribe.

He / leaders just didn't care.