I've been a non believer for 4 years, wife still TBM. The SP is our former Bishop, actually a stand up guy. He invited me back to church and was happy to answer any questions/doubts I had. This was all through email, so I laid out my "concerns" about the changes in the BOM, the 9 or so versions of the first vision, and gave many examples of contradicting doctrine. I told him the evidence of all this leads me to believe that the church is false and I would like a straight answer about the changes in the BOM/9 first vision stories etc. He replied that I had valid points and after much fasting and prayer tried over and over to respond to my questions through email but couldn't figure out how to do it. He invited me to meet with him at his office but with work and life I never was able to get our schedules to meet. This was a year ago. I just got an email that he is hosting a member of the 70 this weekend at his home and invited me to meet with the 2 of them to address my concerns. I am 100% out (but haven't resigned) but I'm willing to do it to satisfy my wife. She knows my concerns and wants me to meet with them, she thinks it will change my mind. Has anyone had an experience like this? I'm wondering what I can expect. I'm thinking it will come down to them bearing their testimonies to me because they won't be able to answer my questions. Any thoughts?

Please meet with them and report back. Even better, tape the meeting.

Cr@ig P@xton met with a 70 ten years ago and posted about it. One of the best posts I ever read. Basically, there are no answers; only faith and trusting past spiritual feelings, and patience in waiting for future resolution...

but I can kind of understand your wife's feelings--just different circumstances. She thinks the higher up you go, surely someone will have the answers.

I went to the bishop hoping he had answers about my gay boyfriend. He didn't. Then I went to the SP. He didn't. So--a bishop friend told me to write Packer. No answers. I was just told he was too important to bother with me.

I'd be really interested to hear what happens.

It is, of course, a set-up. Be careful to not let them blindside you.

...yeah. They probably have your "Court of Love" invitation ready to go if you slip up and ask the "wrong" questions......be careful.

I'd actually prefer it if they set up a court of love, it would save me the trouble of resigning and would probably be easier on my wife.

I won't tape it, not comfortable enough to do that but I will report. When they do bear their testimony I'm going to call them out, mainly because I'm curious how it will go, but when they say the typical "I know" I'm going to challenge that and tell them they just lied to me. I'll use the argument that the only way they can know is if they have perfect knowledge which according to the church the only way you can know is if Jesus himself told you face to face. Then I'll point out that is a typical way the church lies to and manipulates it's members, getting them to believe that their faith has turned to knowledge. Anyway I'll let you all know how it goes.

You should at least keep notes, although it will make them nervous. But it will all be hard to hold in your head. (If they ask you why you are writing, tell them, "I'm just taking notes for the deposition.") It is, after all (according to them) your spiritual welfare and salvation that you're talking about. You certainly should be able to take notes if your salvation is hanging in danger.

Having said all that, you do realize that they'll have nothing. Nothing. But they won't say, "Hey, you're right--I got nothing." They'll turn it back around to you over and over, all the while avoiding issues. They will do their best to make the burden of proof be upon you. Don't fall for it.

Good idea, I'll have a note pad there, I'll make sure all my questions are written down before I go. I'm not worried about the SP, he's actually a good guy, and I can't see him being manipulative, I'm real interested in what the 70 has to say.

You don't need to surreptitiously record it, just go buy a cheap USB recorder, and ask if you can record what is said so you can review it, and mitigate possible misunderstandings. No truth loving person would be afraid of having their words recorded and repeated... right?

Most smartphones have a digital audio recording app. You could discreetly start it recording before the meeting, and slip it, microphone up, into your dress shirt pocket. That ought to do the trick.

Been there, done that. The 70 won't answer any questions. Period. I believe they have standing orders to bear testimony, dissemble, obfuscate and pretend they have experiences too sacred to discuss. You know, more sacred than Joseph talking to God.

This is an appeal to authority on their part as they've run out of rational options.

I suggest you call him by his first name throughout the meeting.

I agree with calling mo church leaders by their first name. Do not bow to their pretend authority. I have found that if you call their bluff they leave you alone, for the most part.

Just my two cents:

If I were meeting with a leader of another church, I would call that leader by whatever title people usually use to refer to that leader. I think this is a common sign of respect, and doesn't mean that I think that leader has authority from God.

When journalists interview religious leaders, they use the proper title. This doesn't mean the journalist believes in their church or authority.

Likewise, when I meet with LDS church authorities, I use the proper title. Doesn't mean I think they've been given authority by God, or that I'm being submissive to their presumed authority.

I think purposefully calling an LDS leader by their first name plays into their belief that ex-Mormons have lost the Spirit and won't show proper respect to fellow human beings.

I do it at every opportunity now with a smile on my face while shaking their hand. I treat it exactly like meeting someone at a business meeting for the first time. It totally disarms them if done properly. If they call me "Brother", I chide them with, "Please, call me Joe. We're friends here."

If you do it defiantly, they shut down and the meeting is over. Do it cordially and the look on their face is priceless...sitting there wondering how they lost control, but can't figure it out.

My SP would not acknowledge anything and just said if he has issues, he puts them on his shelf. No attempt at any explanations.

I would still be prepared and know one or two issues pretty well to discuss. I suggest Book of Abraham, Book of Mormon anachronisms, polyandry or temple & masonry.

Please Return & Report

I had similar experiences - also at the request of my TBM wife. I wasn't as far along as you are in my lack of belief and the Biggest Priesthood was just a Stake President.

Rather than drag me back into the cult, the meeting with the SP-Former Bishop only confirmed my findings. Sitting on that guys couch and watching his fancy, elaborate dance around the Book of Abraham was pure entertainment gold! He's also a life long CES employee so he'd alternate his pseudo scientific pontifications with a huge load of Heartsell(tm) tears and desperately whispered pleadings. Maybe that crap works on high school aged seminary students but it didn't work on me. I lost all respect I had for that guy. He's nothing but a paid shill and I think he knows it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/22/2013 11:12AM by koriwhoremonger.

I don't think I could stand a bunch of, "I implore you. I challenge you," etc.

He has no real answers because the church is not what it claims to be.

However, attend if it will help your marriage.

IMO the only questions you should ask are:

Will church leaders support my marriage and not try to drive a wedge between us OR will church leaders undermine it by encouraging my wife to consider me broken and a "less than" husband?

Will church leaders support my position as father OR will they undermine me by refusing to respect my request that I approve their activities and not make my children feel that they are inferior or insist that I be silent about my beliefs to my own children?

Will church leaders respect my right to hold different beliefs and encourage ward members to do the same OR will I be discussed in meetings as broken or dangerous - to be avoided or approached with caution and only with the goal of "saving" me?

That's an interesting prospective, caedmon. Since my whole family left the church, we didn't have the divisive persuading they like to wedge between couples.

Our questions were mostly about the historicity claims (see my comments below) with my wife and I both being on the same page.

Those would certainly be points I'd bring up, after validating the reasons you left.

Go to the meeting BUT, make sure your wife comes too. Record it then RETURN AND REPORT.

When my family left, my wife and I were able to meet with Marlin K. Jensen (church historian). It was an incredible meeting. But, I wish I would've had more time, specifically written questions with supporting evidence of what really took place, and I wish I would've recorded it.

Marlin was very upfront and admitted there weren't clear answers (ie, why did JS enter into polyandrious relationships). But, we bounced around a lot and he was able to get away with muddled answers because I didn't have the clear evidence to the contrary (ie, the Book of Abraham-he believes in the "catalyst theory" but I didn't have my ducks in a row to point out where the "scripture" text directly references the hieroglyphics and then all the journal/published statements about Joe translating the actual papyri he had).

Get your questions and supporting evidence, bring your wife, and stay on topic!!

I made my ultra-TBM brother come with us. He just sat there and drooled like a school boy with his first crush, that he was meeting with Marlin. I don't think he even paid attention to all the problems my wife and I were presenting. At the end of the meeting, my wife and I were soooooo freaking happy that all our concerns were validated and the church has NO answers.

My brother wanted us just to go inactive for a while and then get back to our senses, ie-FEELINGS. My wife and I walked out of that meeting high-fiving each other for actually allowing ourselves to ask questions and finding the "devastating" truth. We couldn't get our resignation letters mailed soon enough!

Maybe, when really presented with the evidence, your SP or the 70's will be like Hans Mattsson and come to a realization that there are some REAL problems the church needs to face up to with its members.

And, hopefully, your wife will have a better understanding of your position and it'll get her thinking more also.

YES! Take your wife with you to the meeting. That way, she can see for herself that there is no substance to their so-called 'church' - it's all smoke and mirrors used to get money out of you. That's all!

Exactly what I was going to post.

Take along your wife and tell her you are willing to bet it gets down to them reciting that they "know it's true."

And be well prepared yourself. Have a list of issues, and force them to get to the "I choose to believe" and "I know the church is true" phase.

You might also want to consider laying out ground rules at the outset. "Now I can't accept just your saying 'I know the church is true.' I am hear to address issues with facts. I accept that some aspects of our faith [and yes, I would say "our" as you are still a member, and it will make them want to be cooperative], but faith is NOT accepting something proven false."

Please let us know how it goes.

I resigned my membership in January of this year. We had stake conference the next month, and I attended with my family. A member of the First Quorum of the 70 was presiding. Just before the main Sunday session, a member of the stake presidency approached me and said that the visiting authority would like to meet with me directly after the session.

In our meeting, the GA was overall very loving, understanding, and respectful. He asked me about my background, and I gave him a brief summary of my upbringing in the Church and my spiritual journey that led me out of the Church. I said there were a lot of issues that led to my conclusion that the Church was not true, but that the most important issue was the historicity of the Book of Mormon. He replied that he was confident that he could resolve 90% of my concerns regarding Book of Mormon authenticity.

He asked me my feelings about the Savior. I said that after I came to the conclusion that the Church was not true, I went through a period of atheism bordering on nihilism. I eventually came around to a belief in God, but I did not make the leap to Christianity. He was glad that I believed in God, and asked whether I believed in the Holy Ghost. I replied that I no longer believed that it was the infallible method to know the truth.

He bore his testimony to me several times. He stated that he no longer had faith in the Savior and His church, but that it was a sure knowledge. He was confident that I would find my way back to Christianity and, eventually, Mormonism. He said he was glad I had a questioning spirit, and that there was nothing wrong with seeking the truth. He said that a few decades ago, Church leaders would have dealt with apostates quite harshly, but that times had changed, and here we were having a respectful, loving conversation.

He concluded our meeting saying that he would like the stake president to start meeting with me regularly. He wanted me to bring up my issues with the Church one by one, and if the stake president couldn’t resolve the issues, he should email them to the GA, and he would respond. He asked me if I wanted to bring up one issue with him then, but I said that I would just wait until I met with the stake president.

I was looking forward to these meetings with the stake president. I was interested to see how he would respond, and I was interested to see how the 70 would respond, since I figured most of my concerns would be forwarded to him. Unfortunately, those meetings never happened. Apparently, the stake president decided that I was a lost cause and he didn’t want to waste his time talking with someone who would never change his mind. I now wish I would have brought up an issue when the GA offered to address one. I’d love to hear a GA try to explain why Joseph sent men on missions and then married their wives, or any of a number of other issues for which there is no reasonable faithful explanation.

Why waste your time? The SP & 70 have no secret knowledge to share. They most likely know less than you do because they drank the kool aide have never questioned the lies. Your not going to convince them to consider what is true. They have their feelings and their power and people adore them. Perhaps you will get lucky and your wife will see the lies and join you in rejecting TSCC.

I've thought the same thing, the only reason is to satisfy my wife. In her eyes if I go high enough up the ladder as I can and they still can't answer my questions it will be a lot easier on her when I do resign/get exed. It will be interesting if it turns into a court of love, I've convinced people the church wasn't true including members and investigators, associate with apostates, don't keep the WOW, don't sustain the prophet, etc. etc.

You might take a letter of resignation with you. If it turns out to be a court of love, hand them the letter and walk out. If it really is a meeting to try and answer your questions, you can do that and not turn the letter in unless you feel like it anyways.

Bring along a few copies of this... http://mormonthink.com/personalstories/A_Letter_to_a_CES_Director.pdf

... I had a very similar experience and I had a very good relationship with my BP who was a lawyer. Initially my BP proposed that we treat it as court case and go through the evidence for and against ... our first encounter with those rules (and the BP was very confident in his stance) proved my lawyer BP's undoing ... and he never met with me privately again after that moment.

I did go "up" the ranks ("up" as in chunks in a septic tank) having "sessions with my SP and finally with a general authority (Vaughn Featherstone) ... the higher you get the bigger the pieces of S*&^#@ you encounter.

That's my thoughts.

All I care about is if this meeting produces some more content than the Swedish Rescue did. I'm interested in if these lower level important Mormons have better answers than those week-@ssed ones to the Swedes.

BVD: My advice is to be SURE you are really up to speed on the specific issues you bring up. KNOW both sides of the argument. Prepare yourself with quotes, references, and practice it repeatedly in your mind. Be an expert at your top 4 or 5 issues!

Personally, I would emphasize that you do NOT believe in the finite Mormon God - - -who has a literal body, wives, parents, grandparents, and who was born a man and advanced & progressed to BECOME a God. Tell them you don't accept that God, but the Bible speaks of a God who has ALWAYS been God, never a man. He is truly incomparable, and is "unsearchable, without measure".

Its beneath dignity to lead them on or tease them. Just decline. Declining an audience with his imminence the 70 is a WAY better play than looking desperate by showing up with weeksworth of research.

This could be fun!

I would go and take the essay & commentary by Rollo Tomasi as a guide. He covers the four issues actually addressed acknowledged/admitted to by Marvin Jensen & Richard Turley during the Swedish Fireside. It's quite fascinating and it would be interesting to see how this particular 70 addresses those same questions/answers as compared to Marvin Jensen & Turley.

You can find it here... http://www.roadkilldelight.com/NOM/SFMJRT.htm



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/22/2013 01:29PM by Bite Me.