Prior thread is here: http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1566870,1566870#msg-1566870

So, my plan – presuming the sisters follow through on their commitment to call me on Monday and set up a time and place for the next meeting – is starting to come together, thanks to you gals/guys. Thank you so much for your contributions.

Of course, I’ll return and report. If you (or new posters) have more to say, just tack it onto this continuation thread.

Some of you are encouraging me to be forceful while others say to be gentle. Having met with these young ladies once already I can already say that the gentle approach is the only viable one: these are very delicate flowers. Well, one of them is anyway, and that’s all it takes. We’ve already had some tears.

One sister (the crier) is much more open and relaxed and expressed appreciation for my obvious candor. The other is task-driven, moving down the track toward read, pray, feel, dunk.

When leading them in closing prayer (as requested) I asked God to protect them in their travels, and I actually meant it. Wouldn’t have thought to do that if not for the threads on this board about missionary mishaps. So thanks go also to those who contributed to those discussions.

- - - - - Acknowledgements - - - - -

All you gals/guys have been GREAT! But I wanted to call a few of you out by name, and give you some specific responses. Here they are.

Greyfort: “It’s also in an old Ensign article by Russell M. Nelson.” - - Thanks for that link. Already printed out; will highlight it when I get the time to read carefully. Hey, you’re my MVP! Thanks again!!

Elderolddog: “This will forever give you a reference point … like that time you were totally wrong?” - - I would NEVER have thought of this. Very valuable. Thank you. MVP runner-up.

randyj: Thanks for the IRR link. Got that printed out, but not sure how I’ll use it as I don’t have their permission to take them to “anti-Mormon” material, and I don’t want to trip that wire. Still, it’s helpful for my own understanding, and that’s always a plus. History of the Church I know, but Doctrines of Salvation? Is that a set of book volumes? Are HotC and DoS available through LDS.ORG?

left4good: Thanks also for confirming the DoS reference.

Lilburne: “throw them off your ex-mo scent.” - - Oops. I forgot to re-introduce myself on this thread as never-mo. But I do have Mormon relatives, hence the name. Thanks for the idea, but I always tell it like it is with the missionaries, and they seem to actually prefer candor, even when it’s a bit rough. Wouldn't have caught my oops if you hadn't spoken up. Thank you.

Daledobach: “Ask them why no GA has testified to the truthfulness [of] the BofM {in GC} since April 2007?” - - I had forgotten all about that little tidbit of info. Maybe the real answer has to do with legal liability. Who knows? But that’s a good one for me to have in my back pocket. Thank you much for the reminder.

Ex-CultMember: “you don’t have your ducks in a row” - - You got that right. They showed up unannounced and caught me off guard. So I was scrambling. Won’t let that happen again, thanks to the awkward experience, and your encouragement.

istandallamazed: “get … honest with yourself” and “with love and kindness” - - Always good advice. Just to put your mind at ease, I am very clear about my purpose which is to help them lovingly because I care. While I take the process as a personal challenge, it’s not much about ego; I jettisoned most of that ugly part of my life decades ago. They’ve already commented on what a swell guy I am. (Ha!)

Cheryl: “Pretending that missionaries are not rude and judgmental is lying to them.” - - Oooooh. So true, but such a dilemma. How to help them see themselves more clearly without losing the conversation and therefore putting the main objective at risk? Tough one.

Jiminycricket: Wow. What a plan! Are you sure you can’t just stand in for me on the next round? Ha, ha. We’ve already discussed the artwork, and one sister came up with something I had not thought of. After agreeing that JS dictated to others, she noted that the pictures show him with quill in hand. We’ll likely pursue that a little further if opportunity presents. I think I’ll try to let the MP off the hook as I don’t want to attract too much attention. Probably better to lead them toward presuming the MP is unaware versus lying. I have a current copy of Gospel Principles and will review the Honesty chapter for next time. Come to think of it, I’ll likely be folding a lot of your ideas into the next few sessions.

TheNavidsonRecord: “Lots of great TV shows out there to watch.” - - Point taken that I should always keep perspective. But reality is so much more fascinating than fiction! I’m hopeless!!

Wanderinggeek: “we can NEVER win.” - - Yes, it will be very interesting to see what kind of response I get to exposing the rock-in-hat reality. Acceptance or dissembling?

OldGuy: “the [polygamy] experience is heartbreaking” - - Amen. I’m hopeful that I’ll be able to move to a discussion of polygamy at some point. But I think to do that now would push them right over the edge and out of my sphere of influence. You’ve given me some good ideas to use if I can get us there.

- - - - -

And thanks for your general encouragements, contributions and confirmations:

nonsequiter, superman4691, seekyr, Book of Mordor, cokeisoknowdrinker, leftfield, jpt, somnambulist, and Scully1

Just because I can't think of a specific comment for you doesn't mean you haven't helped.

JAR

"randyj: Thanks for the IRR link. Got that printed out, but not sure how I’ll use it as I don’t have their permission to take them to “anti-Mormon” material, and I don’t want to trip that wire."

You don't have to point them to IRR. You can simply copy the actual quotes from Emma Smith, David Whitmer, Joseph Knight, etc., include the original reference source, and give it to the missionaries. I don't see how quoting those three eyewitnesses to the events qualifies as "anti-Mormon material."

In case you missed the point of my post in your other thread, the church's new essay on the BOM translation process admitted to the "stone in the hat" method as well. Here it is again:

https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-mormon-translation

Highlight these passages:

"the scribes and others who observed the translation left numerous accounts that give insight into the process. Some accounts indicate that Joseph studied the characters on the plates. Most of the accounts speak of Joseph’s use of the Urim and Thummim (either the interpreters or the seer stone), and many accounts refer to his use of a single stone. According to these accounts, Joseph placed either the interpreters or the seer stone in a hat, pressed his face into the hat to block out extraneous light, and read aloud the English words that appeared on the instrument...Joseph’s wife Emma explained that she “frequently wrote day after day” at a small table in their house in Harmony, Pennsylvania. She described Joseph “sitting with his face buried in his hat, with the stone in it, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us.”

So you don't have to send the girls to IRR to get the info. I merely gave you the IRR link because it includes all the relevant quotes in one place.

"History of the Church I know, but Doctrines of Salvation? Is that a set of book volumes?"

DOS is a three-volume set written by Joseph Fielding Smith. It's still sold by Deseret Book:

https://deseretbook.com/p/doctrines-salvation-vols-1-3-sermons-writings-joseph-fielding-smith-3501

randyj,

Doh! Yes, I wasn't getting the full benefit of your prior posting the first time around. I see it, now that you've (in a good sort of way) clubbed me over the head with it. Sometimes that's what it takes with me.

And thanks for leading me to the highlighting. That saves me some time figuring that out for myself.

JAR

Be very careful citing things. Always use the ORIGINAL source. Dont cite a source (like irr.org) citing another source (original mormon document) otherwise they will jump to the conclusion that you are just citing unreliable "anti-mormon" websites.

I suggest printing off a ton of quotes but remove any reference to the website or book. Then you only have the origins citations. Then find maybe a dozen or so of these quotes that you CAN confirm through a "faithful" LDS source such as LDS.org or FAIR.

So when the mishies naturally question your sources or quotes you can show them on the pro lds website that your material us indeed reliable. THEN you are free to unload the rest of your "research" on them and they cant cry "it's just anti lies."

Be careful how you talk to them though. Get the info out but don't make them defensive. Use reverse psychology on them. And Don't claim anything is doctrine cause they can easily worm out of that by saying it isn't official.

Good luck!