In the Age of Information not making information "readily available" is a good excuse for organizations who really don't care what you believe as long as whatever it is benefits them.

Talk about tackling "tough issues" LDS style.

This letter is a substantial and entirely reasonable challenge to the truthfulness of Mormonism and the church's blatant revisionism.

Church authorities will dismiss these concerns, but their apologetics are wearing thin. How much longer can they stand the heat? The elephant in the room is making things very uncomfortable.

I wouldn't hold my breath for a reply.

Wait a minute! Even the first paragraph is flawed. It says, "Unfortunately, some choose to dwell on half-truths or inaccurate information regarding the Church, its history, or its leaders, which often results in a crisis of faith and testimony."

Really? Is that what we've done? How about they tell the truth in the letter? Why not say, "Unfortunately, some are finding carefully hidden, negative information and lies perpetuated by the church, which nearly always results in a crisis of faith and testimony."

You know why they don't say that, it's because anyone reading the letter would wonder what hidden information and lies they hav been missing out on. That's why!

I would rather dwell on a half-truth than swill the outright lies the Corporation shills as gospel.

I had the same thought when I read that.

I resigned because I found out the church has hunting reserves. The Jesus mall would have pissed me off even more if I was still a member. I'm sure you can find members that would deny their existence. My bishop said the hunting reserve story was completely false even though it appeared the the Deseret News.

Every religion has its ugly and often bloody history. The question is do you view the religion through history or do you say everything is god's will and you shouldn't question anything?

Did god really tell mormon prophets blacks couldn't have the priesthood until 1978? Or did BY have a problem with blacks, and the prophets after him didn't change the policy until forced to do so?

Good point on the black/priesthood thing. It was all caused by BY's racism, and probably some of the prophets who followed him. Then it became socially unacceptable, but how to change it when BY was a "prophet" presented a problem. The church finally had to cave for many reasons.

I've been disbelieved on many issues, including being called a fool last week for believing JS was a polygamist. The person won't believe it unless it's on lds.org, and we all know the church doesn't want his polygamy on there, easily found.

This is the reply I posted on your other thread asking me about the Chris Ralph letters :-

I don't know the Ralph family and am not surprised they have not received a reply.

I know the new Area President Jose Teixeira and his 1st counsellor Patrick Kearon. If anyone thinks it will help, I am willing to write to them on behalf of Chris.

However, as Chris states he knows Elder Kearon, I would suggest he writes to him personally and copies his bishop and stake president. That way he should be able to hold them to account as, in their instructions to priesthood leaders, they tell them to provide the best avilable answers to members' questions.

If that fails I would go to the British press with the story.

Tom