WARNING : ANTI-LDS PRETENDING TO BE LDS - Is there ANYTHING to be done about deceivers?

[Katzpur]

Haven't paid my tithing in years and my financial situation has never been better. Personally, as a person who no longer believes in the LDS Church's teachings and doctrines your story doesn't mean much to me. In my opinion, it only shows that you weren't handling your money properly.

As a person who no longer believes in the LDS Church's teachings and doctrines, you have no business posting on this forum. The forum rules clearly state this. Furthermore, your financial situation is of absolutely no interest to anybody on this forum.

 

[madhatter85]

I keep wanting to frubal you katzpur but i can't yet

 

[Commoner]

As a person who no longer believes in the LDS Church's teachings and doctrines, you have no business posting on this forum. The forum rules clearly state this. Furthermore, your financial situation is of absolutely no interest to anybody on this forum.

Well, on the other hand this thread was created for the express purpose of discussing people outside your faith which is also not the purpose of this directory. So, while this thread is in you DIR, its subject matter is such that it pertains to everyone, not just mormons, especially once accusations start flying around.

My two cents. If a mod thinks my post should be deleted, I'm sure they'll make swift work of it anyway.

 

[England my lionheart]

Mod advisory,if you are not LDS you do not post in this thread except for respectful question.

10. Discuss Individual Religions Forums
The DIR forums are for the express use for discussion by that specific group. They are not to be used for debate by anyone. People of other groups or faiths may post respectful questions to increase their understanding. Questions of a rhetorical or argumentative nature or that counter the beliefs of that DIR are not permitted. Only posts that comply with the tenets or spirit of that DIR are permitted. DIR areas are not to be used as cover to bash others outside the faith. The DIR forums are strictly moderated and posts are subject to editing or removal.

 

[Katzpur]

Well, on the other hand this thread was created for the express purpose of discussing people outside your faith which is also not the purpose of this directory. So, while this thread is in you DIR, its subject matter is such that it pertains to everyone, not just mormons, especially once accusations start flying around.

Yes, the subject matter may pertain to everyone and I believe the problem does exist to some extent forum-wide. However, the author of the OP was clearly interested in the LDS response to the problem. Otherwise, he would have posted it on the General Religious Debates forum.

My two cents. If a mod thinks my post should be deleted, I'm sure they'll make swift work of it anyway.

I don't believe anyone is saying that only LDS posters may post on the LDS DIR. Your post did not break any forum rules and I don't believe it would have even occurred to any of us to report it. The posts I have reported were in violation of the rule that "Questions of [an]... argumentative nature or that counter the beliefs of that DIR are not permitted. Only posts that comply with the tenets or spirit of that DIR are permitted."

 

[Commoner]

I don't believe anyone is saying that only LDS posters may post on the LDS DIR.

At the risk of getting a virtual slap in the face, I think you just did that a couple of posts ago. That's what prompted my response in the first place.

I guess we had a misunderstanding then.

 

[Katzpur]

At the risk of getting a virtual slap in the face, I think you just did that a couple of posts ago. That's what prompted my response in the first place.

I guess we had a misunderstanding then.

I'm sorry if that was the case. I was specifically thinking of non-LDS individuals who were clearly expressing an anti-Mormon bias. I may not have expressed myself as clearly as I should have, though.

 

[Commoner]

I'm sorry if that was the case. I was specifically thinking of non-LDS individuals who were clearly expressing an anti-Mormon bias. I may not have expressed myself as clearly as I should have, though.

Ok, then we're good.

 

[Katzpur]

Excuse me?

As a former Latter-day Saint am I no longer allowed to share my experiences with anybody on this forum?

That's right. Duh!

For someone who claims to be open and accepting, it sure seems like you are not.

Most of the posters on RF would disagree with you about that. The vast, vast majority of them have found that I am a pretty reasonable person and not at all difficult to get along with. I have excellent relationships with and a great deal of respect for many of the Baptist, Catholic, Muslim, Buddhist, pagan and atheist posters. I get along well with the entire GLBT community here and support their civil rights. I don't care whether people are black, white or green; if they obey the rules of the forum, I respect them. People on RF who have interacted with me to any extent at all figure out right away that I treat everyone with pretty much the same degree of respect and civility they are willing to extend to me. You came on this forum with a chip on your shoulder and an ax to grind with the LDS community. I asked you nicely to not post on the LDS DIR when your first two posts violated the forum rules and were subsequently deleted by the staff. I thanked you for voluntarily deleting another post when I pointed out to you that it was likely going to be deleted by the staff otherwise. But here you are again... and again... and again... Everywhere I look, there's this happy little hummingbird right in my face! Even now, 99% of your posts have been in direct response to LDS posts. One would think you have no interest other than bashing the LDS Church. How many posts have you made that have anything at all to do with issues that are not directly related to the LDS Church? You can count them on one hand. Almost smacks of trolling, wouldn't you say?

I was simply posting my opinion and how I felt about it. My opinion is not LDS doctrine or teaching. I never stated it was, and I've stated the my opinions are my opinions only.

Your opinions -- when they run counter to the "tenets and spirit of the LDS DIR" are not wanted and not permitted. It's not rocket science, honey. Either you're an exceptionally slow learner or you figure the rules aren't intended for you. Which is it?

Why such animosity?

I believe I just answered that.

 

[Clear]

Commoner :

Commoner said “.. this thread was created for the express purpose of discussing people outside your faith which is also not the purpose of this directory. “

It feels like you are taking too much license with my comments. I did NOT create this thread “for the express purpose of discussing people outside [our] faith but rather the context regards an aggressive doctrinal pestilence trying to invade our faith from outside of our faith (though I do believe this problem plagues other denominations).

I DO believe most religions and threads are subject to the clever ploy of posters who attempt to accentuate a connection to a religion they nonetheless do NOT believe in and which they then purposefully denigrate. Though this does not fool many knowledgeable adherents to a specific religion itself (at least they do not fool them long), it DOES damage to those who know relatively little or who have less experience and ability to recognize such deceptions.

The mormon may say something like “I was blessed by God for paying tithing” and the deceiver may counter “In my opinion, tithing is not a true principle, but you need to manage your money better.” While the wise understand very clearly the nature of the anti-mormon teaching and the doctrinal undermining that is going on, the newcomer may not be any the wiser and is left confused and unsure of what is a true principle and blessing from God. While there ARE some mormons having specific doubts, they do not represent the doctrine or actions of authentic mormonism. Jesus apostles expressed some doubts and had their own Judas, but neither the apostolic weaknesses nor the deceiver Judas, represented the doctrines Christ was attempting to teach.

I am speaking of the attempt to “fly undetected”, “under the radar” and fool the moderators and staff and yet cause damage to the principle of tithing, or the existence of God, or any other principle you choose. These individuals are "dry cisterns" that seek to tear down without having any salvational principle to offer instead (what IS offered, is simply negative to the belief) .

Though the forum staff seem to be quite knowledgeable in the main, they also do not have unlimited ability to police violators, nor to comb through issues in a fair manner to solve the problem of such deceptions. Since Happyhummingbird has admitted to not believing in nor being a mormon, I believe he obviously realizes it is improper for him to post contrary to LDS doctrines in LDS threads, but not all people are going to admit to being “non-mormons” as he has.

I actually agree with you that this thread has “subject matter is such that it pertains to everyone, not just mormons,” and if it is as important to you to debate this at all, then you need to start a thread on the subject elsewhere.

Commoner said : My two cents. If a mod thinks my post should be deleted, I'm sure they'll make swift work of it anyway.

I understand your sentiment, however, the forum depends to a certain degree on individuals willingly obeying rules that are relatively unenforceable to avoid causing others (including the moderators) extra work and headaches. I think LDS seem to enjoy respectful interactions and being helpful in explaining their beliefs. It is the disrespecting of their beliefs by outsiders claiming to want to “involve” themselves in mormonism that I am referring to.



Clear

 

[Katzpur]

I did not realize that ex-Mormons, or people who are still on the roles of the LDS Church were not allowed to post their opinion and feelings in the LDS DIR section of the forums.

Well, then you obviously didn't read the rules very carefully.

 

[Commoner]

@Clear: seriously, how am I supposed to adequately answer your comment without breaking the rules? I'll just say that perhaps this thread does not actually belong in the DIR forum. If you accuse someone of being a deceiver then you can't expect them and others not to respond to it. By default that would make them break the rules or prevent them from addressing your posts directly in the original thread where they should be addressed.

You see what I mean?

 

[Katzpur]

I think the problem is basically that a lot of people don't understand what the purpose of the DIR forums is. RF is a huge forum and newcomers are typically overwhelmed by the number of sub-forums alone. I would venture a guess that fewer than 1% of the posters here actually read the forum rules before they jump in with both feet. If they have a negative bias towards any religion, and spot a forum called, "Discuss [such and such religion]," they assume that that's as good a place as any to state their piece. While the forum rules state that "people of other groups or faiths may post respectful questions to increase their understanding," they go on to explain that "only posts that comply with the tenets or spirit of that DIR are permitted." That statement seems to me to make it pretty darned clear that individuals who do not personally identify as a member of the faith in question are not permitted to state an opposing point of view. To me, the neatest thing about RF is that there are plenty of forums in which such individuals are free to express their opinions without censor. People who are sincere in wanting information from practicing members of a religious group need to know that when they ask a question on a DIR forum, they can expect to get responses from people who share the same theology and not from people who may have been raised in the faith but who left it as soon as they waved goodbye to their parents and headed off to college. Such people are inevitably going to present a point of view that does not comply with the tenets or spirit of that DIR.

Here's where I believe Clear's OP comes into the equation (although I hope he'll correct me if I'm wrong): When people who currently identify as LDS (for the sake of this particular discussion) start to question their beliefs, their posts are going to reflect their change of heart. Unfortunately, their new viewpoints do not comply with the tenets and spirit of the DIR any more than are those of former members of the Church. The problem is that they still self-identify as LDS. Since none of the moderators are LDS, they can't possibly know for sure which self-identifying LDS members' posts are in line with LDS doctrine and which ones aren't. (I used to be a moderator myself. It's days like this when I could kick myself for having resigned.) I personally wish that the LDS members who have serious issues with LDS doctrine would use the Same Faith Debates forum to debate their positions, instead of the DIR forum, but until that starts happening, the problem we're seeing on the LDS DIR lately is not going to go away. And then, even on the Same Faith Debates forum, you're always going to get the occasional jerk who just has to make his opinion known, regardless of whether he's a member of the Church or not.

The DIR forums are such great places for people to learn about religious traditions other than their own. It's just too bad that they can't be moderated as carefully as they need to be. (Obviously some need a whole lot more moderating than others. I mean I really can't imagine this kind of situation ever occuring on the Zoroastrian DIR, for example.)

 

[dallas1125]

Wow, I left for a moment and his thread got interesting.

Katzpur, wouldnt me and fire of the covenant not be allowed in this then?

 

[Watchmen]

I read them VERY carefully, but as I saw other people who were not Mormon posting, I figured I had every right to as well. I was informed I was not and I'm currently understanding the moderators positions. People need to stop assuming what they do not know.

The rule is, basically, as follows: Anyone can post in a DIR forum so long as what is posted is not "debate" or contrary to the beliefs of that particular religions DIR forum.

 

[Clear]

Commoner asked : "... how am I supposed to adequately answer your comment without breaking the rules? I'll just say that perhaps this thread does not actually belong in the DIR forum. "

Hi Commoner:

If this issue is important to you, and if you cannot comment without breaking the forum rules, then you are allowed to start a thread in another forum where it fits, such as in a debate forum. I would be very interested to see what sort of responses your thread gets if your thread presents the problem from a similar and accurate context. I might even join in IF the thread has sufficient value to it when it is placed into an uncontrolled debate environment that it has here in a controlled environment of the LDS DIR.


However, The Catholics and Jehovah Witnesses and Jews and Muslims and Mormons and other such groups have areas designated where they may have some degree of personal discussion regarding their faiths without their discussions being molested by inappropriate debate and inappropriate malicious claims that undermine the discussion of the faithful. It is this sort of discussion among believers that cannot take place if anti-religionists OR those posing as current believers disrupt or introduce malicious diatribe.

Whether a deceiver had or yet have their names still on the roles of a particular church, is of no consequence. It is NOT simply a matter of having one's name "on a role". If so, then Hitlers name appearing on some early church roles as a youth qualified him as a believing and active member while he engineered and conducted the holocaust. Such claims as "my name is still on the roles of the church" are usually yet another deception with the aim of gaining some semblance of credibility. The claim may be a "self-deception", but it is still a deception.

For example, EVEN IF, Hitler claimed to have been a church member at some time in his youth and he may have had his name on a role to prove it. This did NOT entitle him to honestly claim to be still be a "good believing church member" while murdering the innocent. Having a paper say you were on the roles (or are still on the roles) of a church as a member" is no better for the anti-mormon. If one decides and commits to "non-belief", or is anti-mormon, then one is "anti-mormon regardless of paperwork or having "been a missionary" or a "good mormon" in years past. (this is different that the believer working through doubts or difficulties) The mature and discerning members understand this distinction, even if a deceiver himself no longer understands.

I might point out that the believers AND disbelievers are under the SAME constraints. I CANNOT introduce malicious diatribe that is against the spirit of the forum without breaking the rules. Whether member or not, I, even as a member cannot introduce viewpoints that do not comply with the tenets and spirit of the DIR. It is mainly those WANTING to introduce anti-mormon tenets that are against such a fair rule that was laid down with the intent of obtaining and keeping order and peace. There ARE places on the forum where it is more of a "free for all", but THIS DIR IS NOT IT.



Clear
seeifuww

 

[Pegg]

Look at previous posts. I promise they will be enlightening.

ok yeah i got it... family issues, work

carry on.

 

[Katzpur]

Wow, I left for a moment and his thread got interesting.

Serves you right.

Katzpur, wouldnt me and fire of the covenant not be allowed in this then?

Technically, you'd be allowed. I'm not sure I'm really comfortable with that, but as long as you identify as LDS, nobody's going to stop you from posting here. Do your posts "comply with the tenets and spirit of the DIR"? You know the answer to that question as well as I do. Let's just say that if I hadn't known FireOfTheCovenant for several years now and he were to be a new member with a user name that didn't imply any connection whatsoever to the LDS Church and no declared connection to the Church, and if he were to post in the LDS DIR forum the things he's been posting recently, I'd have probably assumed he was a non-Mormon, and one who was pretty antagonistic towards the Church. Let's just say that if you were to read his posts from a couple of years back, you wouldn't know it was the same person.

 

[Commoner]

Hi Commoner:

If this issue is important to you, and if you cannot comment without breaking the forum rules, then I think you are allowed to start a similar thread in another forum where it fits, such as in a debate forum. I would be very interested to see what sort of responses your thread gets if your thread presents the problem from a similar and accurate context.

Clear

I think you've misunderstood what my concearn was.

 

[dallas1125]

Serves you right.

I know!

Technically, you'd be allowed. I'm not sure I'm really comfortable with that, but as long as you identify as LDS, nobody's going to stop you from posting here.

I have been thinking about a lot that has been said here. I have told you guys more about my personal feelings than anyone else. Why? I dont know what got into me. As for now, Ill try to stay out of here to help you guys feel more comfortable.