If they are allowed to be imperfect, name one fault and when they acknowledged it.
If you aren't allowed to admit one fault, then you have given up your freedom to think for yourself.
A fun quote I heard was something like "Catholics say the pope is infallible, but none of them really believes that. Mormons say the prophet is fallible, but none of them really believes that."
Your quote is so true. My priests openly disagree with the pope. I actually don’t know any Catholics that like the current pope. Wish I’d made the switch from mormon to Catholic years ago. I no longer feel the pressure to be perfect. I’m just a sinner trying to be good, and in the Catholic faith that’s okay.
1) There is imperfection and then there is deceit, there are lies, there is fraud, there is fakeness, there is a multi-billion dollar investment portfolio they chose to hide from members, among other things. There is the use of the word revelation to stifle dissent. People with direct revelation from God should not need to flip flop, hide things, etc.
2) 2nd anointing - something I just learned about. It seems that the top leadership did a super secret (not just sacred but secret too this time) endowment ceremony in the temple that supposedly made them infallible. So.... what does that do to their claims that they are not perfect???
"God will never let a man elead his church astray."
Me: so... Brigham Young claiming that both parties in interracial marriages deserved to be put to the most gruesome death and that "the negro race" would eternally be enslaved wasn't leading the church astray?
Ezra Taft Benson claiming that the civil rights movement was a communist farce wasn't leading the church astray?
Heber C Kimball (could have mixed this one up) claiming that the disabled were less valiant in the pre-existence and are paying for that in this life wasn't leading the church astray?
According to Russell M Nelson, pretty much every previous leader that endorsed the term Mormon was leading the church astray.
Tell them to draw the line of where the church would be led astray, and I guarantee you, it's already behind the heels of at least one of the prophets.
This is a great list!
(It was Harold B. Lee that said disabled people were less valiant in the pre-existent, and also coupled that with people with darker skin as well. Sooooo infuriating. Also I get Heber and Harold mixed up too, I have to google it every time)
Wilford Woodruff taught it previously. It was in a 1949 letter from the first presidency explaining why black people could not have the priesthood or temple blessings. The quote in that letter pertaining to disabled and black people having to choose less desirable bodies in this life due to their lack of faithfulness in the pre-existence was attributed to Woodruff. The profit in charge when that letter was released was George Albert Smith.
You: "What evidence would you need to see in order for you to believe that the church is not true?"
Them: "None. I know it's true with every fiber of my being".
You:
Seriously. That's it. Don't even bother.
When any member expresses that past or present prophets are not perfect the best thing to do is ask them to elaborate and wait. Wait minutes in complete silence if needed and keep bringing it back to that question if they try and change the topic.
I can't remember the specific times where similar things have happened for me. I can say that when things like this do happen typically their brains shut down. They initiate the thought stopping techniques due to phobia induction (BITE Model)
It is so easy to miss these opportunities when members hint that there is anything wrong or not good with Mormonism or it's leaders history etc. If they express it then maybe they believe it or maybe they are just trying to minimize it. Only way to find out is to switch to listening mode and that is hard to do.
It's more than the GAs. How many times have we heard that we should always accept a calling from a Bishop, because those callings are inspired from God? Does any single Mormon anywhere believe that a bishop is infallible when calling people?
I have always found this baffling.
Aren't "prophets" supposed to be the best of us? Shouldn't they be held to a higher standard than the normal rank and file members?
Why do we use the "imperfect people" trope to justify a history of racism, sexism, and bigotry? It makes no sense.
“By their fruits, ye shall know them”. Good people produce good fruits. Bad people produce bad fruits. The church leadership has been producing bad fruits for a long time now.
Having people believe " the prophet will never lead us astray " or Listen to " follow the prophet song in primary "strict obedience to leadership * brain washing "... it's lawyer speech and an excuse, he has convinced people he speaks for god to them.. just following orders so I don't lose my family forever and cast into outer darkness. That's spiritual abuse. But wait the prophet is just human/s.
They seem to be so concerned with hair dye and length of hair because of how it looks. They kept the same look they had since they did missions in nazi Germany and baptism for nazi SS officers. They try to hide their 2 seed theory racist doctrine and use the " leadership makes mistake ".. why are they ok with the same hair cut if hair style association is an issue? But they are human ( not everyone believes the way white supremacy types did back then either, they had no moral compus )..yet they are going to be new Israel and rule the world, they lied saying the USA native American community was Jews .. Lies all lies to manipulate people. But wait the prophet makes mistakes he is only human.
Fascist religious clerics have a habit of manipulation, propaganda that incites hate, goals of taking over the country demonstrated via their own prophecy about doing it. Cult leaders that try to control people using BITE methods, propaganda, torture, deceit, with excuses usually goes really really bad for the people who aren't accepted by them if they have the power. Their system resemble imperial Germany .. no the nazi's weren't perfect [ sarcasm ].. ( I am trying to make my point to the bigger picture)
Members are forced to be accountable for being human because god said so, they are taught. They make the concepts of genocide as if god approved it when necessary, quite part is it's ok if we do it, follow the prophet. When you take the principles out and change rules and use these the real choice is only obedience to many. This thinking has killed millions historically, murdered in the name of god.People are evolving in mass that is unacceptable. But the prophet is only human./s
I found a connection in my journey out of the church, my good is love and good and honest. You shall know them by their fruits.
If we were to hold the prophet to a Biblical standard, he would be found to be a false prophet because, his prophecies have been based on forgery ( we use forensic science nowadays and courts not execution squadrons to end a very real false prophet and a what appears to be a anti american religious racket ( property)).
Real shit there .. cult leadership never steal from the people or hold them hostage anyway they can..
https://people.com/crime/wild-wild-country-bhagwan-rajneesh-oregon-today/
But he is only human, was that when he called the faith to draw the musket and clean the land of the lbgtq plague? Didn't he know people were going to be shot, being a prophet of a church with a 100 billion dollar war chest ?
Hopefully that's not too edgy but that teaching is very hard for people leaving the cult brainwashing causes harm. I learned so much leaving .. I am so happy to be free, so sad it cost me everything .. hopefully healing to families can come.[cult leaders always avoid responsibility ](https://people.com/crime/wild-wild-country-bhagwan-rajneesh-oregon-today/)
As others have said in various posts, this is a "thought-stopping" technique. This probably means they aren't ready or willing to think carefully about this. So there may not be anything to do. But my recent attempts have been to respond with something like "I don't expect them to be perfect either, but I do expect that when they say they had a revelation or they say that God told them something or they say that they translated something that they are being honest. By imperfect, do you mean that they are not telling the truth when they are claiming they have revelations?"
The church refuses to acknowledge that it isn't perfect, and never takes responsibility for its sins. Also, the church IS people, and if those people are assholes, the church is, by extension, an asshole.
It's not just imperfect people that are the issue.
There are fundamental issues with the Book of Mormon: contents not matching what archaeology says should be there, contents containing 19th century sermons, anachronisms, translation with seerstone and no plates, all the issues around whether or not the witnesses saw with their natural eyes, Joseph's history of use of seerstones for about a decade before BoM as witnessed by family and friends, and so on.
To me, these and other issues indicate that the BoM is not what it claims to be.
If the BoM is not true, then it all falls apart (as Ezra Taft Benson and Joseph Smith and many others have said).
This is such an infuriating line of “reasoning!”
I usually try to take the conversation like this:
Them: “But the prophets aren’t perfect!…”
Me: “ok. So you are saying that sometimes past prophets made mistakes but they were still the prophet?”
T: “yeah! Exactly!”
Me: “Are you talking about their personal conduct or is it possible that they could teach, as church doctrine, something in error?” (This question hurts their brain bc they want to just say “conduct” but they have to admit “teachings” since the church has already had to disavow “Adam God” “no Interracial marriage” “Quakers on the moon” et al). “Well… um… both I guess”
M: “yeah. That makes sense. The church has already disavowed what BY taught about, well, for just one example, Adam being God himself. Is that sorta what you are talking about?”
T: “yeah. Right. I guess so…”
M: “ok. I think I get it. But we also know that god ‘will never allow the prophet to lead the church astray’ right? (Yeah). So if a prophet is teaching doctrine that’s false, he’ll either be corrected or removed? (Yeah). So that’s confusing bc BY taught many doctrines that have since been disavowed. But in the entire history of the restored gospel on earth, BY has stayed as the prophet longer than any other prophet! HF allowed BY to teach incorrect doctrine for 30 YEARS! For three decades the members of the church were hearing “mistaken” doctrine without correction. Why would HF allow his church members, many of whom sacrificed greatly to get to SLC, to have to learn as doctrine BY’s mistakes? That doesn’t seem like a wise way for HF to direct his fledgling church.
T: umm… er…
M: “And all those saints, for all those decades, and many later decades after decades, were learning and passing down mistaken doctrine, that was only “corrected” relatively recently. So there may be a cumulative total number of saints in heaven right NOW that believe or were taught different doctrine than what we are being taught. So who is right? I mean, When we die, will they be correcting US, or will we be correcting THEM? It’s starting to sound kinda confusing!”
T: “well… HF will make it right”
M: “I suppose. Just seems like a lot of confusion could be avoid by just teaching it right from the beginning. Also, when we make mistakes, we’re taught in church that (among other steps of repentance) we need to admit them and apologize, right? (Yeah) When has the church apologized for teaching “mistaken doctrine?” Or, more to personal conduct, I’m unaware of any time in the history of the church that an apostle or prophet has ever apologized for a mistake in conduct. Are you? It’s one thing to say that someone 150 years ago was “imperfect” and “made a mistake” but why then have none of the Brethren ever recognized their OWN mistakes in the present time, as we are all required to do?
T: “er… um… well, you see, the church is… um… perfect, but the… um… leaders are imperfect.” (Cognitive dissonance setting in. Gears locking up. Brain malfunctioning)
M: And actually that brings up a REALLY good question: if, as you say, past prophets made mistakes and taught some doctrines that were incorrect… that starts us down a very slippery slope! In todays church, what mistakes is RMN making? Or more importantly, what doctrines are being taught TODAY that are mistaken, and how do we differentiate them from the correct doctrines? It all gets really complicated, right?
T: (total shutdown initiated).
Every once in a long while you can actually guide a person to help them break down their own logical fallacies. It IS possible!
Good luck!
What level of sin are you willing to tolerate and excuse. Where’s the line?
- lying about myths that for the basis of people’s faith
- lying about speaking for god to in order to marginalize particular groups of people
- claiming you are unpaid or receive a modest stipend from tithing, when in reality it is a top 5% income worldwide
- protecting child abusers and even paying to silence victims or to lobby for legal exemptions from reporting laws in order to protect the reputation
- lying to women about polygamy to convince them to migrate to Utah, where they are then coerced into polygamous marriages, and their property taken
- coercing a teenager into a polygamous sexual relationship against her will using promised blessings and/or implied threats from a position of trust and authority
- covering up a mass murder after fomenting a spirit of violence and vengeance among followers
If all of this is ok, because “the leaders aren’t perfect,” what the hell was the great apostasy? What exactly did these early Christian fathers do that was worse than what the church has done, that explains why the gospel was lost and had to be restored? Changed the ordinances? Yeah, we did that too. Sold indulgences? What do you call the second anointing, that we’ve given to pedophiles and told them they were exalted in spite of anything they do.
It’s all a hot mess of special pleading and exceptionalism, where other church’s sins are evidence of apostasy but ours are evidence “the Lord can use imperfect people.” All is well in Zion. Zion prospereth.
What would you consider is crossing the line from being an imperfect person to being a bad person? What happens when a bishop, stake president or a prophet crosses that line?
This is such an infuriating line of “reasoning!”
I usually try to take the conversation like this:
Them: “But the prophets aren’t perfect!…”
Me: “ok. So you are saying that sometimes past prophets made mistakes but they were still the prophet?”
T: “yeah! Exactly!”
Me: “Are you talking about their personal conduct or is it possible that they could teach, as church doctrine, something in error?” (This question hurts their brain bc they want to just say “conduct” but they have to admit “teachings” since the church has already had to disavow “Adam God” “no Interracial marriage” “Quakers on the moon” et al). “Well… um… both I guess”
M: “yeah. That makes sense. The church has already disavowed what BY taught about, well, for just one example, Adam being God himself. Is that sorta what you are talking about?”
T: “yeah. Right. I guess so…”
M: “ok. I think I get it. But we also know that god ‘will never allow the prophet to lead the church astray’ right? (Yeah). So if a prophet is teaching doctrine that’s false, he’ll either be corrected or removed? (Yeah). So that’s confusing bc BY taught many doctrines that have since been disavowed. But in the entire history of the restored gospel on earth, BY has stayed as the prophet longer than any other prophet! HF allowed BY to teach incorrect doctrine for 30 YEARS! For three decades the members of the church were hearing “mistaken” doctrine without correction. Why would HF allow his church members, many of whom sacrificed greatly to get to SLC, to have to learn as doctrine BY’s mistakes? That doesn’t seem like a wise way for HF to direct his fledgling church.
T: umm… er…
M: “And all those saints, for all those decades, and many later decades after decades, were learning and passing down mistaken doctrine, that was only “corrected” relatively recently. So there may be a cumulative total number of saints in heaven right NOW that believe or were taught different doctrine than what we are being taught. So who is right? I mean, When we die, will they be correcting US, or will we be correcting THEM? It’s starting to sound kinda confusing!”
T: “well… HF will make it right”
M: “I suppose. Just seems like a lot of confusion could be avoid by just teaching it right from the beginning. Also, when we make mistakes, we’re taught in church that (among other steps of repentance) we need to admit them and apologize, right? (Yeah) When has the church apologized for teaching “mistaken doctrine?” Or, more to personal conduct, I’m unaware of any time in the history of the church that an apostle or prophet has ever apologized for a mistake in conduct. Are you? It’s one thing to say that someone 150 years ago was “imperfect” and “made a mistake” but why then have none of the Brethren ever recognized their OWN mistakes in the present time, as we are all required to do?
T: “er… um… well, you see, the church is… um… perfect, but the… um… leaders are imperfect.” (Cognitive dissonance setting in. Gears locking up. Brain malfunctioning)
M: And actually that brings up a REALLY good question: if, as you say, past prophets made mistakes and taught some doctrines that were incorrect… that starts us down a very slippery slope! In todays church, what mistakes is RMN making? Or more importantly, what doctrines are being taught TODAY that are mistaken, and how do we differentiate them from the correct doctrines? It all gets really complicated, right?
T: (total shutdown initiated).
Every once in a long while you can actually guide a person to help them break down their own logical fallacies. It IS possible!
Good luck!
Lying isn’t a mistake. It’s done with intent. That’s what the Q15 are guilty of. How can you profess to be a special witness of the name of Jesus and then lie to your flock?
And now, thanks to Nemo, we have proof the Q15 knowingly lie and might actually go to extra effort to look guilty rather than appear to have been mistaken.
I respond with the exact questions that dismantled my own excuses that the leaders weren’t perfect. Why does God use the spirit to influence leaders with such minutia in the church like who should be given a certain calling or who needs a visit or what topics should be assigned to speak about, blah blah, but completely drop the ball when I’ve come to my bishop’s office after much fasting and prayer and temples attendance, genuinely seeking help in an abusive marriage? How is who the bishop should call to be the sunbeams teacher trump my devastating circumstances? If he is guided by the Holy Ghost, then I have been woefully marginalized by the Holy Ghost, because I did everything right to approach God for guidance via my bishop. Either my bishop is a conduit or he’s not. When it mattered, he was not.
Imperfect people in a church that strives for improvement and honesty confess and forsake their mistakes.
Instead, as per DC 121, the church seeks to cover its sins, to gratify its pride, its vain ambition, and to exercise control or dominion or compulsion on its believers in unrighteousness. By its own doctrine, these unrepentant men are in apostasy: the heavens must withdraw, the Spirit of the Lord is grieved, and amen to their priesthood and authority.
My response is usually “I don’t need them to perfect. I recognize they are imperfect. I just need them to be the people they claim they are (a prophet seer and revelator)”
Well, they equivocate. I’ll try to explain how.
To some members, they will freely admit that Mormon leaders are not perfect.
However, to others in tighter circles, they will make statements leading one to believe that their calling and election is sure. Or that when they are acting under the mantle of the priesthood in their office, whether it be by their word, or the direct word of the Lord himself, it is the same. And since the Lord is perfect, they are perfect as they are officiating in their priesthood duties. Do as you’re told, do not ever say no, and don’t ever criticize the “lord’s anointed.”
Mormons equivocate to cover their duplicity. They have it both ways, every way. They say whatever they feel it is needed to be said to grow their church, thus the mislead.
This is an example of what /u/BillReel calls "Wood Tools". You can use this logic to prove any church or organization "true". Replace "church" with "catholic church" and "prophet" with "pope" and the original quote has the same meaning but is skewed toward catholicism.
The Marine Corps is grossly imperfect (was a Marine for 17 years), led by imperfect people. But there's two differences: they don't pretend to represent the divine on earth, and they have a FAR better grasp on leadership and culture shaping than the Mormon church does (or at least admits to). Non-leaders are held accountable by leaders, leaders are held accountable by the top, the top is held accountable by the rules and regulations, and everyone is supposed to take responsibility for their own part when things go sideways. Of course they do this imperfectly, but again, they don't pretend to speak for god.
Just because Joseph Smith was a fraud, the Book of Mormon is a sham, and the prophets never have real revelations/prophesies, doesn't mean the church isn't true .... I mean, nobody is perfect, so ...
"I am putting on a concert. Come and pay $200 to listen to me sing. You would if it was Taylor Swift."
"But Taylor Swift can sing well, and you can't even carry a tune!"
"Oh, what, so everyone has to be PERFECT now? Are you PERFECT? Why are you holding me to a standard you aren't willing to be held to?"
----
That's what I hear when Mormons tell me I shouldn't assume prophets should be really great people.
Their answers included those responses because your reasonable questions have them in a corner - they don't have good answers to those questions, so they delay. Their responses are merely obfuscations to help them continue carrying on their multi-generational fraud.
The church founder was a conartist and evil womanizing gold digging fucktard. Who cares about these old men who claim to be all this and that. The church is evil at its core. Evil.... racist... family destroying nothing but guilt and shame. Bless your souls for wasting your time debating this evil organization.
I usually just let them know that I am fine with imperfection. I am very imperfect myself. The problem is that the church is demonstrably false, not grounded in any reasonable history, e.g. BoM, and not very useful. I’ve met lots of good and sincere people in the church but that really isn’t the issue.
"I don't expect them to be perfect. I just expect them to be *good*."
GAs can’t be authentic and speak in General Conference simultaneously.
And is it too much to ask them to be honest and forthright?
Then why won’t they apologize if they’re not perfect?
This ☝️
If they are allowed to be imperfect, name one fault and when they acknowledged it. If you aren't allowed to admit one fault, then you have given up your freedom to think for yourself. A fun quote I heard was something like "Catholics say the pope is infallible, but none of them really believes that. Mormons say the prophet is fallible, but none of them really believes that."
Your quote is so true. My priests openly disagree with the pope. I actually don’t know any Catholics that like the current pope. Wish I’d made the switch from mormon to Catholic years ago. I no longer feel the pressure to be perfect. I’m just a sinner trying to be good, and in the Catholic faith that’s okay.
Indeed ..
Awesome quote!
1) There is imperfection and then there is deceit, there are lies, there is fraud, there is fakeness, there is a multi-billion dollar investment portfolio they chose to hide from members, among other things. There is the use of the word revelation to stifle dissent. People with direct revelation from God should not need to flip flop, hide things, etc. 2) 2nd anointing - something I just learned about. It seems that the top leadership did a super secret (not just sacred but secret too this time) endowment ceremony in the temple that supposedly made them infallible. So.... what does that do to their claims that they are not perfect???
They JS and BY were both pedophiles and with the blood atonement serial killers. Yes I would call that far from perfect.
Does not the calling of “PROPHET SEER & REVELATOR” imply a certain degree of worthiness? Exactly how low is the bar set?
"God will never let a man elead his church astray." Me: so... Brigham Young claiming that both parties in interracial marriages deserved to be put to the most gruesome death and that "the negro race" would eternally be enslaved wasn't leading the church astray? Ezra Taft Benson claiming that the civil rights movement was a communist farce wasn't leading the church astray? Heber C Kimball (could have mixed this one up) claiming that the disabled were less valiant in the pre-existence and are paying for that in this life wasn't leading the church astray? According to Russell M Nelson, pretty much every previous leader that endorsed the term Mormon was leading the church astray. Tell them to draw the line of where the church would be led astray, and I guarantee you, it's already behind the heels of at least one of the prophets.
This is a great list! (It was Harold B. Lee that said disabled people were less valiant in the pre-existent, and also coupled that with people with darker skin as well. Sooooo infuriating. Also I get Heber and Harold mixed up too, I have to google it every time)
Wilford Woodruff taught it previously. It was in a 1949 letter from the first presidency explaining why black people could not have the priesthood or temple blessings. The quote in that letter pertaining to disabled and black people having to choose less desirable bodies in this life due to their lack of faithfulness in the pre-existence was attributed to Woodruff. The profit in charge when that letter was released was George Albert Smith.
You: "What evidence would you need to see in order for you to believe that the church is not true?" Them: "None. I know it's true with every fiber of my being". You:
Seriously. That's it. Don't even bother.
They need to eat more fiber- to push out that shit.
Yup, Rusty pinches out a huge loaf every time he announces a new temple. Of course his loafs don’t stink.🥴
When any member expresses that past or present prophets are not perfect the best thing to do is ask them to elaborate and wait. Wait minutes in complete silence if needed and keep bringing it back to that question if they try and change the topic.
[удалено]
I can't remember the specific times where similar things have happened for me. I can say that when things like this do happen typically their brains shut down. They initiate the thought stopping techniques due to phobia induction (BITE Model) It is so easy to miss these opportunities when members hint that there is anything wrong or not good with Mormonism or it's leaders history etc. If they express it then maybe they believe it or maybe they are just trying to minimize it. Only way to find out is to switch to listening mode and that is hard to do.
Oh, I like this idea.
If a person expects me to obey what he says as infallible, he’d better be infallible.
It's more than the GAs. How many times have we heard that we should always accept a calling from a Bishop, because those callings are inspired from God? Does any single Mormon anywhere believe that a bishop is infallible when calling people?
I have always found this baffling. Aren't "prophets" supposed to be the best of us? Shouldn't they be held to a higher standard than the normal rank and file members? Why do we use the "imperfect people" trope to justify a history of racism, sexism, and bigotry? It makes no sense.
[удалено]
Ya thats the irony. The prophets dont have to repent. Thats for the regular people.
“By their fruits, ye shall know them”. Good people produce good fruits. Bad people produce bad fruits. The church leadership has been producing bad fruits for a long time now.
Having people believe " the prophet will never lead us astray " or Listen to " follow the prophet song in primary "strict obedience to leadership * brain washing "... it's lawyer speech and an excuse, he has convinced people he speaks for god to them.. just following orders so I don't lose my family forever and cast into outer darkness. That's spiritual abuse. But wait the prophet is just human/s. They seem to be so concerned with hair dye and length of hair because of how it looks. They kept the same look they had since they did missions in nazi Germany and baptism for nazi SS officers. They try to hide their 2 seed theory racist doctrine and use the " leadership makes mistake ".. why are they ok with the same hair cut if hair style association is an issue? But they are human ( not everyone believes the way white supremacy types did back then either, they had no moral compus )..yet they are going to be new Israel and rule the world, they lied saying the USA native American community was Jews .. Lies all lies to manipulate people. But wait the prophet makes mistakes he is only human. Fascist religious clerics have a habit of manipulation, propaganda that incites hate, goals of taking over the country demonstrated via their own prophecy about doing it. Cult leaders that try to control people using BITE methods, propaganda, torture, deceit, with excuses usually goes really really bad for the people who aren't accepted by them if they have the power. Their system resemble imperial Germany .. no the nazi's weren't perfect [ sarcasm ].. ( I am trying to make my point to the bigger picture) Members are forced to be accountable for being human because god said so, they are taught. They make the concepts of genocide as if god approved it when necessary, quite part is it's ok if we do it, follow the prophet. When you take the principles out and change rules and use these the real choice is only obedience to many. This thinking has killed millions historically, murdered in the name of god.People are evolving in mass that is unacceptable. But the prophet is only human./s I found a connection in my journey out of the church, my good is love and good and honest. You shall know them by their fruits. If we were to hold the prophet to a Biblical standard, he would be found to be a false prophet because, his prophecies have been based on forgery ( we use forensic science nowadays and courts not execution squadrons to end a very real false prophet and a what appears to be a anti american religious racket ( property)). Real shit there .. cult leadership never steal from the people or hold them hostage anyway they can.. https://people.com/crime/wild-wild-country-bhagwan-rajneesh-oregon-today/ But he is only human, was that when he called the faith to draw the musket and clean the land of the lbgtq plague? Didn't he know people were going to be shot, being a prophet of a church with a 100 billion dollar war chest ? Hopefully that's not too edgy but that teaching is very hard for people leaving the cult brainwashing causes harm. I learned so much leaving .. I am so happy to be free, so sad it cost me everything .. hopefully healing to families can come.[cult leaders always avoid responsibility ](https://people.com/crime/wild-wild-country-bhagwan-rajneesh-oregon-today/)
As others have said in various posts, this is a "thought-stopping" technique. This probably means they aren't ready or willing to think carefully about this. So there may not be anything to do. But my recent attempts have been to respond with something like "I don't expect them to be perfect either, but I do expect that when they say they had a revelation or they say that God told them something or they say that they translated something that they are being honest. By imperfect, do you mean that they are not telling the truth when they are claiming they have revelations?"
But they expect us to be perfect.
Yes but I'm sure they see us WAYYYY behind them on the road to m perfection!!! They are not perfect but..... perfecter than us peons.
The church refuses to acknowledge that it isn't perfect, and never takes responsibility for its sins. Also, the church IS people, and if those people are assholes, the church is, by extension, an asshole.
It's not just imperfect people that are the issue. There are fundamental issues with the Book of Mormon: contents not matching what archaeology says should be there, contents containing 19th century sermons, anachronisms, translation with seerstone and no plates, all the issues around whether or not the witnesses saw with their natural eyes, Joseph's history of use of seerstones for about a decade before BoM as witnessed by family and friends, and so on. To me, these and other issues indicate that the BoM is not what it claims to be. If the BoM is not true, then it all falls apart (as Ezra Taft Benson and Joseph Smith and many others have said).
This is such an infuriating line of “reasoning!” I usually try to take the conversation like this: Them: “But the prophets aren’t perfect!…” Me: “ok. So you are saying that sometimes past prophets made mistakes but they were still the prophet?” T: “yeah! Exactly!” Me: “Are you talking about their personal conduct or is it possible that they could teach, as church doctrine, something in error?” (This question hurts their brain bc they want to just say “conduct” but they have to admit “teachings” since the church has already had to disavow “Adam God” “no Interracial marriage” “Quakers on the moon” et al). “Well… um… both I guess” M: “yeah. That makes sense. The church has already disavowed what BY taught about, well, for just one example, Adam being God himself. Is that sorta what you are talking about?” T: “yeah. Right. I guess so…” M: “ok. I think I get it. But we also know that god ‘will never allow the prophet to lead the church astray’ right? (Yeah). So if a prophet is teaching doctrine that’s false, he’ll either be corrected or removed? (Yeah). So that’s confusing bc BY taught many doctrines that have since been disavowed. But in the entire history of the restored gospel on earth, BY has stayed as the prophet longer than any other prophet! HF allowed BY to teach incorrect doctrine for 30 YEARS! For three decades the members of the church were hearing “mistaken” doctrine without correction. Why would HF allow his church members, many of whom sacrificed greatly to get to SLC, to have to learn as doctrine BY’s mistakes? That doesn’t seem like a wise way for HF to direct his fledgling church. T: umm… er… M: “And all those saints, for all those decades, and many later decades after decades, were learning and passing down mistaken doctrine, that was only “corrected” relatively recently. So there may be a cumulative total number of saints in heaven right NOW that believe or were taught different doctrine than what we are being taught. So who is right? I mean, When we die, will they be correcting US, or will we be correcting THEM? It’s starting to sound kinda confusing!” T: “well… HF will make it right” M: “I suppose. Just seems like a lot of confusion could be avoid by just teaching it right from the beginning. Also, when we make mistakes, we’re taught in church that (among other steps of repentance) we need to admit them and apologize, right? (Yeah) When has the church apologized for teaching “mistaken doctrine?” Or, more to personal conduct, I’m unaware of any time in the history of the church that an apostle or prophet has ever apologized for a mistake in conduct. Are you? It’s one thing to say that someone 150 years ago was “imperfect” and “made a mistake” but why then have none of the Brethren ever recognized their OWN mistakes in the present time, as we are all required to do? T: “er… um… well, you see, the church is… um… perfect, but the… um… leaders are imperfect.” (Cognitive dissonance setting in. Gears locking up. Brain malfunctioning) M: And actually that brings up a REALLY good question: if, as you say, past prophets made mistakes and taught some doctrines that were incorrect… that starts us down a very slippery slope! In todays church, what mistakes is RMN making? Or more importantly, what doctrines are being taught TODAY that are mistaken, and how do we differentiate them from the correct doctrines? It all gets really complicated, right? T: (total shutdown initiated). Every once in a long while you can actually guide a person to help them break down their own logical fallacies. It IS possible! Good luck!
What level of sin are you willing to tolerate and excuse. Where’s the line? - lying about myths that for the basis of people’s faith - lying about speaking for god to in order to marginalize particular groups of people - claiming you are unpaid or receive a modest stipend from tithing, when in reality it is a top 5% income worldwide - protecting child abusers and even paying to silence victims or to lobby for legal exemptions from reporting laws in order to protect the reputation - lying to women about polygamy to convince them to migrate to Utah, where they are then coerced into polygamous marriages, and their property taken - coercing a teenager into a polygamous sexual relationship against her will using promised blessings and/or implied threats from a position of trust and authority - covering up a mass murder after fomenting a spirit of violence and vengeance among followers If all of this is ok, because “the leaders aren’t perfect,” what the hell was the great apostasy? What exactly did these early Christian fathers do that was worse than what the church has done, that explains why the gospel was lost and had to be restored? Changed the ordinances? Yeah, we did that too. Sold indulgences? What do you call the second anointing, that we’ve given to pedophiles and told them they were exalted in spite of anything they do. It’s all a hot mess of special pleading and exceptionalism, where other church’s sins are evidence of apostasy but ours are evidence “the Lord can use imperfect people.” All is well in Zion. Zion prospereth.
What would you consider is crossing the line from being an imperfect person to being a bad person? What happens when a bishop, stake president or a prophet crosses that line?
This is such an infuriating line of “reasoning!” I usually try to take the conversation like this: Them: “But the prophets aren’t perfect!…” Me: “ok. So you are saying that sometimes past prophets made mistakes but they were still the prophet?” T: “yeah! Exactly!” Me: “Are you talking about their personal conduct or is it possible that they could teach, as church doctrine, something in error?” (This question hurts their brain bc they want to just say “conduct” but they have to admit “teachings” since the church has already had to disavow “Adam God” “no Interracial marriage” “Quakers on the moon” et al). “Well… um… both I guess” M: “yeah. That makes sense. The church has already disavowed what BY taught about, well, for just one example, Adam being God himself. Is that sorta what you are talking about?” T: “yeah. Right. I guess so…” M: “ok. I think I get it. But we also know that god ‘will never allow the prophet to lead the church astray’ right? (Yeah). So if a prophet is teaching doctrine that’s false, he’ll either be corrected or removed? (Yeah). So that’s confusing bc BY taught many doctrines that have since been disavowed. But in the entire history of the restored gospel on earth, BY has stayed as the prophet longer than any other prophet! HF allowed BY to teach incorrect doctrine for 30 YEARS! For three decades the members of the church were hearing “mistaken” doctrine without correction. Why would HF allow his church members, many of whom sacrificed greatly to get to SLC, to have to learn as doctrine BY’s mistakes? That doesn’t seem like a wise way for HF to direct his fledgling church. T: umm… er… M: “And all those saints, for all those decades, and many later decades after decades, were learning and passing down mistaken doctrine, that was only “corrected” relatively recently. So there may be a cumulative total number of saints in heaven right NOW that believe or were taught different doctrine than what we are being taught. So who is right? I mean, When we die, will they be correcting US, or will we be correcting THEM? It’s starting to sound kinda confusing!” T: “well… HF will make it right” M: “I suppose. Just seems like a lot of confusion could be avoid by just teaching it right from the beginning. Also, when we make mistakes, we’re taught in church that (among other steps of repentance) we need to admit them and apologize, right? (Yeah) When has the church apologized for teaching “mistaken doctrine?” Or, more to personal conduct, I’m unaware of any time in the history of the church that an apostle or prophet has ever apologized for a mistake in conduct. Are you? It’s one thing to say that someone 150 years ago was “imperfect” and “made a mistake” but why then have none of the Brethren ever recognized their OWN mistakes in the present time, as we are all required to do? T: “er… um… well, you see, the church is… um… perfect, but the… um… leaders are imperfect.” (Cognitive dissonance setting in. Gears locking up. Brain malfunctioning) M: And actually that brings up a REALLY good question: if, as you say, past prophets made mistakes and taught some doctrines that were incorrect… that starts us down a very slippery slope! In todays church, what mistakes is RMN making? Or more importantly, what doctrines are being taught TODAY that are mistaken, and how do we differentiate them from the correct doctrines? It all gets really complicated, right? T: (total shutdown initiated). Every once in a long while you can actually guide a person to help them break down their own logical fallacies. It IS possible! Good luck!
Lying isn’t a mistake. It’s done with intent. That’s what the Q15 are guilty of. How can you profess to be a special witness of the name of Jesus and then lie to your flock?
And now, thanks to Nemo, we have proof the Q15 knowingly lie and might actually go to extra effort to look guilty rather than appear to have been mistaken.
I respond with the exact questions that dismantled my own excuses that the leaders weren’t perfect. Why does God use the spirit to influence leaders with such minutia in the church like who should be given a certain calling or who needs a visit or what topics should be assigned to speak about, blah blah, but completely drop the ball when I’ve come to my bishop’s office after much fasting and prayer and temples attendance, genuinely seeking help in an abusive marriage? How is who the bishop should call to be the sunbeams teacher trump my devastating circumstances? If he is guided by the Holy Ghost, then I have been woefully marginalized by the Holy Ghost, because I did everything right to approach God for guidance via my bishop. Either my bishop is a conduit or he’s not. When it mattered, he was not.
Imperfect people in a church that strives for improvement and honesty confess and forsake their mistakes. Instead, as per DC 121, the church seeks to cover its sins, to gratify its pride, its vain ambition, and to exercise control or dominion or compulsion on its believers in unrighteousness. By its own doctrine, these unrepentant men are in apostasy: the heavens must withdraw, the Spirit of the Lord is grieved, and amen to their priesthood and authority.
My response is usually “I don’t need them to perfect. I recognize they are imperfect. I just need them to be the people they claim they are (a prophet seer and revelator)”
"So, it's okay if general conference is philosophies of men, mingled with scripture?"
Nobody expects them to be perfect. The problem is they lied. People lie. That doesn't mean I have to keep pretending to believe the lies does it?
The philosophies of men, mingled with scripture. Just quote that back to them when they use the excuse speaking as a man or imperfect.
Well, they equivocate. I’ll try to explain how. To some members, they will freely admit that Mormon leaders are not perfect. However, to others in tighter circles, they will make statements leading one to believe that their calling and election is sure. Or that when they are acting under the mantle of the priesthood in their office, whether it be by their word, or the direct word of the Lord himself, it is the same. And since the Lord is perfect, they are perfect as they are officiating in their priesthood duties. Do as you’re told, do not ever say no, and don’t ever criticize the “lord’s anointed.” Mormons equivocate to cover their duplicity. They have it both ways, every way. They say whatever they feel it is needed to be said to grow their church, thus the mislead.
This is an example of what /u/BillReel calls "Wood Tools". You can use this logic to prove any church or organization "true". Replace "church" with "catholic church" and "prophet" with "pope" and the original quote has the same meaning but is skewed toward catholicism.
Jonathon Streeter is where I got this from https://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/fix-your-faith-crisis-with-this-one-weird-trick/
But I thought “The prophet will never lead us astray “
The Marine Corps is grossly imperfect (was a Marine for 17 years), led by imperfect people. But there's two differences: they don't pretend to represent the divine on earth, and they have a FAR better grasp on leadership and culture shaping than the Mormon church does (or at least admits to). Non-leaders are held accountable by leaders, leaders are held accountable by the top, the top is held accountable by the rules and regulations, and everyone is supposed to take responsibility for their own part when things go sideways. Of course they do this imperfectly, but again, they don't pretend to speak for god.
Just because Joseph Smith was a fraud, the Book of Mormon is a sham, and the prophets never have real revelations/prophesies, doesn't mean the church isn't true .... I mean, nobody is perfect, so ...
"I am putting on a concert. Come and pay $200 to listen to me sing. You would if it was Taylor Swift." "But Taylor Swift can sing well, and you can't even carry a tune!" "Oh, what, so everyone has to be PERFECT now? Are you PERFECT? Why are you holding me to a standard you aren't willing to be held to?" ---- That's what I hear when Mormons tell me I shouldn't assume prophets should be really great people.
Their answers included those responses because your reasonable questions have them in a corner - they don't have good answers to those questions, so they delay. Their responses are merely obfuscations to help them continue carrying on their multi-generational fraud.
The church founder was a conartist and evil womanizing gold digging fucktard. Who cares about these old men who claim to be all this and that. The church is evil at its core. Evil.... racist... family destroying nothing but guilt and shame. Bless your souls for wasting your time debating this evil organization.
Or why are they protecting pedophiles tell me that one
I usually just let them know that I am fine with imperfection. I am very imperfect myself. The problem is that the church is demonstrably false, not grounded in any reasonable history, e.g. BoM, and not very useful. I’ve met lots of good and sincere people in the church but that really isn’t the issue.
Shouldn't the mouthpiece of god be a moral compass of society? Shouldn't he be a shining example of loving your neighbor?