- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I noticed a website the other day that at first glance looks like a positive attempt to prepare Elders for their mission but, on closer inspection, is a very subtle bit of faith demoting content. It has some ‘realistic mission’ stories and a list of ‘investigator FAQs’ which are written up to look like they support the church but in a way that gives just enough to see seeds of doubt and start a search. It only links to Wikipedia (the pages which ha a chief editor who’s anti-Mormon and therefore puts a negative spin on that part of the history. It also has some links burried in the content to some more overtly critical websites. I’ve found 0 links to farms or fair.
Most of it will probably not be news to you, but for anyone who’s just starting out in the journey, I’ll warn you that it subtlety misrepresents the things that are sticky info even in the best light. It also puts a very 21st C spin on events that were in a different culture and time.
For example, it asks if polygamists married children and answers ‘yes’ (14 & 15 yo) but doesn’t mention 14 was an acceptable marrying age in 1800s. (It’s still weird, but they weren’t marrying ‘children’ by 1800s standards and cultural attitudes).
It also ha stuff that is just wrong and makes us look silly, like:
Quote:
How old is the Earth?Like most Christians, we reject modern science and the belief that Earth is millions of years old. Though we can’t pin down a specific age, it’s thousands, not billions of years old.
Uur, James E. Talmage anyone?
Anyway, here’s the link. You’ve been warned…
Thanks, mackay11. I deactivated the link but left the url intact if anyone wants to check it out.
Several links to MormonThink – Not definitively anti but definitely leaning that way. 1 link to FAIR blog – but not to a particularly useful article. The linked article claims that girls hit puberty at an earlier age back then. As has been mentioned here, not all apologetics are created equal. If you strategically link to the bad ones you could give the impression that we are all nutjobs.
I was surprised at the “No investigators, No dinner” portion. In my mission we were not allowed to eat with members without investigators present (same rule that this website points out), but we also had room and board covered by the church so this rule never meant that we went without meals. In the area we currently live there is a sign up sheet for feeding the missionaries – so this rule doesn’t appear to be in effect in my area. So…How many missions could actually have a “no investigators, no dinner” policy and how long would this policy continue before the church got wind of it and made it stop?
I do not believe that the modern church would support any program that deprived the missionaries of proper nourishment. I remember that even fasting more than once a month was discouraged.
Old-Timer wrote:Thanks, mackay11.
I deactivated the link but left the url intact if anyone wants to check it out.
Thanks Ray. I was hesitant to post it at all as I don’t want to fuel any fires. I recognise how fragile we all are to certain things.
Would be happy to delete the post entirely if you prefer.
Equally, I know most of the regulars are ‘old hands’ but if this raises any questions for anyone, feel free to ask.
Roy wrote:Several links to MormonThink – Not definitively anti but definitely leaning that way.
1 link to FAIR blog – but not to a particularly useful article. The linked article claims that girls hit puberty at an earlier age back then. As has been mentioned here, not all apologetics are created equal. If you strategically link to the bad ones you could give the impression that we are all nutjobs.
I was surprised at the “No investigators, No dinner” portion. In my mission we were not allowed to eat with members without investigators present (same rule that this website points out), but we also had room and board covered by the church so this rule never meant that we went without meals. In the area we currently live there is a sign up sheet for feeding the missionaries – so this rule doesn’t appear to be in effect in my area. So…How many missions could actually have a “no investigators, no dinner” policy and how long would this policy continue before the church got wind of it and made it stop?
I do not believe that the modern church would support any program that deprived the missionaries of proper nourishment. I remember that even fasting more than once a month was discouraged.
Mormonthink is one of the most sophisticated anti websites there is. Their pretence to be objective lulled me into a false sense of security initially. I realised later that they have one agenda, get people to leave. If you read the personal blogs or forum posts of the editors it’s pretty obvious. I wouldn’t be surprised if the two websites have some ‘back room’ connection. The new MT editor is a Brit and they futuremissionary website was (I think registered in UK).
Poe married 13yr old Clem. Or what about Jerry Lee Lewis.
mackay11 wrote:
Mormonthink is one of the most sophisticated anti websites there is. Their pretence to be objective lulled me into a false sense of security initially. I realised later that they have one agenda, get people to leave. If you read the personal blogs or forum posts of the editors it’s pretty obvious. I wouldn’t be surprised if the two websites have some ‘back room’ connection. The new MT editor is a Brit and they futuremissionary website was (I think registered in UK).For the record…I found MT at the beginning of my faith crisis. I corresponded, told my them where i was at and they referred me to STAYLDS.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2
Is it bad that even with the misinformation about the church and hidden agenda on that site that I think it’s a more accurate description of a mission than the church itself would teach prospective missionaries? cwald wrote:mackay11 wrote:
Mormonthink is one of the most sophisticated anti websites there is. Their pretence to be objective lulled me into a false sense of security initially. I realised later that they have one agenda, get people to leave. If you read the personal blogs or forum posts of the editors it’s pretty obvious. I wouldn’t be surprised if the two websites have some ‘back room’ connection. The new MT editor is a Brit and they futuremissionary website was (I think registered in UK).For the record…I found MT at the beginning of my faith crisis. I corresponded, told my them where i was at and they referred me to STAYLDS.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2
I think they may have started out with good intentions. The last 2 editors though have been very single minded. The current editor has one objective and he’s openly stated it on other forums as show it’s a fraud (he’s the ex-stake pres mud-slinging at Elder Holland).
wuwei wrote:Is it bad that even with the misinformation about the church and hidden agenda on that site that I think it’s a more accurate description of a mission than the church itself would teach prospective missionaries?
No I think you’re right, I guess that’s one of my concerns. At first glance it’s the kind of thing I might share with an 18yo to say ‘brace yourself.’
I arrived at the MTC convinced missionaries floated 2 feet above the ground… Shock!
Maybe I’m being too quick to judge but for me, the website has been written with a sneer.
I found that website this week when googling for something, I don’t remember what it was now. They must have good search optimization. I didn’t look at it closely though, thanks for the info.
Although the more I read it the more I realize I had mission companions that could have written that site. Although absurd to many of us here, I think most of these things are still taught on some level. I had companions that believed in a 7000 year old earth, black people as the seed of Cain, polygamy so we could get all the spirits out of pre-mortal life and speed up the second coming, etc. etc. etc. 
I get the sense it’s written by someone who believed all of the above and had quite the faith crisis following their mission. Just my feeling though.
It’s hard because I will be eternally grateful I served my mission even if it was the hardest 2 years I could imagine. But if I would have known the truth about what my mission would be before I left then I probably would have never gone. It’s a conundrum…
I looked over this site and I thought it was pretty decent in it’s discription. What they offer seem pretty valid to me. It appears that some RMs that maybe didn’t enjoy their missions got together and came up with this. Like wuei said, it seem a little more honest then what you get on orientation day at the MTC. I wouldn’t be afraid to shares this with my son before his mission but I would also say that this is some RM experience and ideas and here are mine. Right now I’m all for hearing lots of ideas and points of view. Interesting feedback from you all. Makes me realise that different perspectives abound here. Maybe I’ve been too quick to judge it. My view is that it intends to pull down in a subtle way. Introduce niggly uncertainties and contradictions but not address them properly. Link through to websites that are overtly critical.
I agree that this has more ‘real’ historical information that most of lds.org, but I’d imagine a lot of us are reading the website have already worked through the difficult stuff.
It’s the links that concern me the most.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.