Reformed Mormon

Right, it is a recipe for disaster to give good-hearted, well-meaning people the illusion that they have and should use qith confidence the-emporers-new-qualifications to provide advice and direction to people on nearly any given topic.

I know Steven pretty well, and have found him to be a very good dude. I don't see him as the problem here, but rather that he is a perfect example of how faith can lead very good people to very bad conclusions.

Nothing more quickly dissolves the faithful Mormon critiques of exmomrons than spending time listening to ex members of other faiths endure the exact same useless talking points. “Where will you go?” Is not an inspired banger…it’s an worn out trope used by those who wish to control you

If you want some insight into the subconscious culture Mormonism has built around the role of women...just watch Wendy Nelson who has spent the last 7+ yrs being a pretty big deal (speaking assignments, interviews, etc), fade into obscurity now that her husband is not around to make her valuable.

Oaks: we all knew Nelson was being ridiculous and probably just trying to give himself a legacy by announcing an unending string of temple to be built for which there was no demand…however, he was the prophet so we just had to let him do it, but now he’s dead so we’re gonna stop immediately

Mormons are (correctly) mad that, in the wake of a horrific, unwarranted, & violent attack, many evangelicals are trying to suggest that this happened b/c Mormonism is a demonic/un-Christian faith that God is calling to repent (gross take). I just want to note that this take is a THEME in the BoM.

Articulate and thoughtful as always

Here’s another fun one for 2 reasons:
1) so scholarly consensus on what is/isn’t “scripture” is reliable…do you hold that position about the long ending of mark/deutero Isaiah…or just in this case that lets you own trinitarians
2) the JST catching a stray here for not weeding this out is hilarious

Here’s an example…like so the Apocalypse of Abraham is a reliable source of truth now, we should read it as scripture and use it in gospel teaching…or are you just cherry picking this particular concept b/c it reinforces your position and the rest of it is still not reliable?

I have noticed a recent trend in online Mormon apologetics where they are starting to cite apocryphal sources as support/evidence for Mormon claims...so the apocrypha is reliable now? Mormons accept those docs as true? Or just the minute sprinkles that support Mormonism and the rest is flawed?

I forgot about that...but I am pretty sure you are right.

At a farewell today…I have never witnessed a farewell talk w/ more obvious and palpable real-time cognitive dissonance than his talk. It was like he was debating himself/taking himself into this whole thing live from the pulpit.

I would never…but man I’m tempted to just give him that extra nudge.

Guys I take it back, God lives and the on-going restoration is real. Mormonism is the true and living church. The heavens are open, and God is continually revealing further light and knowledge. Truly we are witnessing “the greatest manifestations of the Savior's power” as promised by Pres Nelson!

We should all be so lucky

Red-pill Mormon thought leader and self styled logic lord/masterdebater…saying with all the smug certainty he can muster: “you have to accept my claims that have been proven false b/c you also believe stuff that has been proven false.”

Seems like some Grade A epistemology. Perfect, no notes

If podcasts existed 50-100 years ago I can GUARANTEE there would be clips like this of people saying things like “is interracial marriage entering into the Church, and is it a threat?”

Mormons are like living time capsules. 50 years behind the curve…every damn time. #prophetsseearoundcorners

This makes VEEP look like it was a documentary

Mormons insist that JS couldn't write the BoM b/c he was just a 14yo farm boy...however, he was actually 24yo when he started "translating" the book...which is only 3 years before he VERY eloquently hand-wrote his original 1st vision account, which is nearly stylometrically identical to the BoM

To be fair I am not sure I’m aware that any culture is free of passive aggressiveness and religions in particular are prone to it for sure: That said, it does seem Mormonism does seem especially adept at it.

It’s wild that as humans we’ve developed language for when a seemingly impossible thing happens that we have no explanation for. We call it illusions or lies. Suggesting/allowing for the reality of a very natural explanation that we just don’t understand…and we still accept miracles as a real thing

Yeah! Dumb parents! It’s all their fault b/c they aren’t preparing their children for the temple by teaching them the details that they specifically promised to NEVER (under penalty of death or dismemberment) reveal to anyone outside of the temple. Totally not the a church problem just lazy parents!

7) The bottom line problem here is clearly at least one but probably multiple prophets of God lied and/or presented personal opinions as definative truth and/or divine prophetic reveltation... and if you pull on that tread there is no way to know if the same thing is or is not happening today.

6) And we still are not done...In the 2020 release of the "Saints" book series the revelation is mentioned as a "purported revelation"...certainly a softening from "false revelation" but still very much at arms length

5) But it does not end there...as recently as 1974 Q15 level leadersip continued to deny the revelations elgitimacy. Aplostle and general scumbag Mark E Peterson said that bad faith actors "They concocted a false revelation, allegedly given to President John Taylor in 1886"

4) How do we know it was a lie? Well, for one, this document WAS found in the church archives. In addition, we know that Joseph Fielding Smith (the same dude who ripped out and hid conflicting 1st vision accounts) himself copied the manuscript from handwritten to typewritten in 1909

3) In 1933 the 1st pres issued a formal statement:
"This pretended revelation...the archives of the Church contain no such revelation; the archives contain no record of any such revelation, nor any evidence justifying a belief that any such revelation was ever given."...which is now an obvious lie

2) People will try to use this apologetic despite this stuff being written by the prophet and president of the church at the time AND including the words "thus saith the Lord" as a preface to the revelation. If this isn't a legitimate revelation, it's indistinguishable from a legitimate revelation

John Taylor 1886 Revelation thoughts:
1) Title of the document on the LDS website is "Revelation about the new and everlasting covenant as written by John Taylor" which almost for sure is careful wording that allows an apologetic that this is not "as revealed by God" it is just "as written by JT"

Credit where credit is due. Mike Lee did what I did not think could be done. He made me, an atheist, hope and pray for an afterlife…so I can watch his dad Rex Lee beat the shit out of him in the next life for ruining their good name so he could be the deznat meme lord. Fuck that guy forever