I was reading that crazy ldsfreedomforum and one poster said this.

"A friend of mine told me today a story about what went on in his dad's ward. They put together a plan during priesthood meeting on how to handle when the situation arrives that some one who is using testimony meeting to bash the church. I believe that the Bishop would stand up and Elders would then escort the individual out. This has not happened yet in this ward, but has in either their sake or the neighboring stake. My friend said it should be going church wide since this was becoming a problem all over. Has anyone here heard of similar measures being taken, or problems like the one described? It was non-members and/or ex-members or inactives causing the problems."

And anotehr said this.

"Elder Packers April 2010 talk gave me the impression that I could expect our meetings to be disrupted by people who don't agree with us.

And it suprises me that there have not been more disturbances yet. This generation only knows how to picket, protest, interupt, and antogonize."

It seems to me Packer knows more people are finding out the truth and want to tell other members.

What do you all think? Is the truth getting out to people faster now than at any other time?

If the rate of elders playing Sudoko on their iPhones is any measure, people in my ward are losing interest in the milk of the restored gospel.... (e.g., Gospel Principles in EQ? WTF?)

BUT then again, there are the vocal, hard core, Mormon Taliban, who are (willfully?) ignorant. Nice guys, but clueless.

BTW -- I was reflecting the other day in EQ "I need to stay in the fold -- if only to influence (recruit) people to see things my way." You know, convince people that the official line is BS, but teach them to love one another and just be all around good human beings. Kind of NOM-lite? I think this is a good (borderline organized apostate group resulting in excommunication) policy.

What do you all think?

I thought of this when I was still going to church and didn't believe. Bring up church history or doctrinal problems in church but still pretending to believe. I was thinking this might be a good way to create doubts in other members. Then I thought this would take to much time and I really started hated going to church. Sounds like you are forced to go and I am sorry to hear about that.

you nailed it rambo. I'm "forced" to go in order to keep the peace with TBM DW. This is a compromise that became official a few days ago and is already reaping benefits -- TBM wife is apparently not totally 100% TBM. I guess by "convince people", I also mean convincing DW out.

It's complicated ;)

I say go for it! Apostates are the church's worst enemies. Especially if they are still in the fold. You can't dismiss them as easily. I actually wish I would have done this when I was in the closet doubter. Unfortunately I just quietly slipped out of the church. I'm more confident now and wish I would have stayed a little longer and took a few more people with me and opened more eyes to the truth. Oh well.

Good luck!

thanks! reminds me of why William Law was such a problem for JS. He stuck around. JS was forced to show his hand.

I tried that for a number of years...NOM. But there are very few people who want to leave their shell of willful ignorance who will let you have any influence on them.

It eventually became too hard on my integrity meter. I had to quit going to church altogether to keep my sanity.

Good luck trying to be in the church but not of the church.

Are more people finding out about the discrepancies in the Morg? I'm sure they are and the best thing is that they can do it via the internet on their computer in the privacy of their home without fear of recrimination. What they do with that information is another matter. Unquestionably, some people use that information as a springboard to leaving the church. A good thing, indeed. On the other hand, there are some who see all that negativity as Satan's attack on the one true church. It only makes them more determined than ever to remain faithful. I think this dicotomy will always be the case.

My other answer is regarding those who use testimony meeting to attack the church or, at least, to testify as to its falseness. I really don't agree with that tactic and fail to see it as a method to influence others to leave the church. It might make the ranter feel better to get a burden off his/her shoulders but others in the meeting will likely feel very uncomfortable, embarrassed and unmoved in their testimony. It seems to me a counter-productive assault that might even backfire.

I can only hope that more people are finding out. Would love for the church to "die from a million cuts."

When I was leaving the church, I felt alone. I finally found information on the internet and saw that other people were going thru what I was. It was enlightening. It is so easy now to find out about Mormonism and its shady past on the internet that more and more reasonable people will be leaving the church.

I agree with Nebularry. FTM is not the place to air your views. Those meetings are for believers to strengthen and validate other believers. Exmos or others on their way out have no place speaking in that kind of forum. People believe what they want to believe, and they won't listen to what anybody else tells them. If my nevermo brother tried to convince me while I was TBM that the church was false, I wouldn't have listened to him. Someone on here once said that the church is like one of those posters that were popular in the early 90's, where all you see is colors and patterns, until you change your focus, then you see the picture behind it. Someone else can't show you what the picture is, you have to adjust your own eyes to see it for yourself.

Reminds me of the bishopric counselor who recently said at the opening of FTM -- "now we open up the time for you to share your FAITH PROMOTING thoughts and testimonies"

As oppossed to FAITH DESTROYING?

Now I'm wondering if this is guidance coming down from "on high" as more and more internet-savy members bare "non-standard" testimonies. (e.g., "I have a testimony that Joseph Smith married a 14 year old girl in order to build up the kingdom of Gawd.")

How many of us would like someone to come into our "home" and tell us we were doing everything wrong?

Don't get me wrong. I think Mormonism is bollocks but I try and follow the golden rule. If you want to evangelize against Mormonism do it one on one. In an open air of discussion.

How about getting up and bearing your testimony about how you struggled when you found out JS was marrying other mens' wives and marrying 14 yo and kept changing his account of the first vision. Say how you really felt your testimony crumbling, but then miraculously you had the spirit testify that Joseph Smith was so wonderful and spiritual that he had every right to have sex w/as many women (married or not) that he wanted to.

I guarantee this tactic will work better than outright attacking their beliefs. I have actually thought of doing this in a ward that I don't know anyone (everyone here knows I am an apostate).

HAHAHHA I could see someone doing this. How funny.

The only time that I personally saw anyone escorted out of a meeting after being at the pulpit happened many (many, many) years ago.

A man, who in retrospect looked homeless, wandered up to the pulpit in FT meeting, and just started to speak about how great mormons were. Within seconds, we all knew that this man was drunker than a skunk. My guess is that the bishopric had all been napping, as the looks on all of their faces were priceless.

As no one in the bishopric seemed to know what to do, a member, who was a policeman and very large, wandered up to the pulpit and stood next to our friendly speaker. The member (did I say that he was large?) just stood next to the speaker and let him say his piece. Then, quietly but firmly, he escorted the drunk out the the nearest door.

I remember hoping that the policeman/member had slipped the speaker a few bucks as he sent him on his way.

There are ways to do it.

"Hey look at this old BofM! It still says white and delightsome!"

"Hey look at this old BofM! It still says Lamanites are the principle whatevers!"

Lead a lesson on early church history. Holy Order, Sucession Crisis, anything that happened in Nauvoo. Don't draw any conclusions that might reveal your own bias, just close with "We have a rich history to study"

Its a little scrap of meat for the class and leaves them wanting more.

Being authentic is a good example to others. Expressing your history of how your desire for answers lead you to some surprising conclusions (if that's the case). My point is, SOMEONE has to stand up and be real as an example. Who else is going to demonstrate critical thinking, as in,

"It seemed to me unlikely that a God who clearly respected free choice would threaten to kill Emma if she didn't accept polygamy...or whatever issue you choose."

WHen you frame it as personal doubt, no one can argue with "it seemed to me..." This is in such great contrast to the bombastic "I know, I know, I know..." that it would literally wake people up to hear someone applying critical thinking skills to the JS story.

A woman got up and gave an anti Testimony in Relief Society meeting one day. The women, all being passive, just looked at each other. There was complete silence after she left and, yes, embarrassment, but let me tell you, the ladies discussed every single element of the woman's speech for WEEKS. In fact, here it is decades later and I still remember parts of it, like, "Isn't it obvious Emma didn't believe it? If you found out your husband was unfaithful and lying to you, would you believe he was a prophet--or a philanderer? THINK, ladies, THINK!"

If you are going to be an advocate, if you are going to help people, you have to be willing to ripple the water.


Anagrammy

Does anyone think it is helpful to leave educational printouts in the library, on the foyer tables, or in the seminary room?