Comments on: Commenting Policy

By: Kim Siever

Kim Siever — Thu, 28 Jun 2007 03:08:34 +0000

Oh, the irony.

By: Jeff Milner

Jeff Milner — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 05:17:05 +0000

“My only problem with the word “spies” is that, [...], it suggests that the Church has something to hide or that, [...] the LDS fear that something will impede their progress. Which, of course, isn’t true.”

I think you missed something. The church believes it has a legitimate concern to watch for apostates and does so. Did you really not know this?

By: George

George — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 04:50:57 +0000

Sam, I was not under the impression you were attacking anybody. Did you write something that was removed from the thread?

Spies is most likely not the word you meant to use. KGB is perhaps a better word with closer meaning.

A sane person would have to ask themselves why a religion that changes it beliefs often worry if a few people speculate on its doctrine and meaning unless the religion is based upon stories and the leaders know it and are afraid the truth might be told. KGB.

I would be interesting hearing why the true church of god would worry what a few smart people say if the leaders were telling the truth to start with.

By: Sam

Sam — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 02:50:46 +0000

George, what gives you the impression that I was “attacking” anybody? If I gave you that impression, I apologize.

By: Sam

Sam — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 02:34:57 +0000

My only problem with the word “spies” is that, I guess, to me, it suggests that the Church has something to hide or that, as George implied, that the LDS fear that something will impede their progress. Which, of course, isn’t true.

By: Sam

Sam — Thu, 08 Feb 2007 02:29:44 +0000

My comment was meant facetiously. Don’t take it too seriously.

By: Jeff Milner

Jeff Milner — Wed, 07 Feb 2007 09:11:01 +0000

The word “spy” doesn’t necessarily connote paranoia to me. Just because you fear someone is observing you doesn’t mean you are wrong.

Oh, and I wanted to correct something I said earlier:
“I don’t think this observance by HQ particularly bothers the Sunstone people.”

Actually I bet it does bother them. Most of the people that attend symposia are very smart and at the same time are interested in frank discussion of their religion. I would think they would see the people keeping tabs on them as demeaning. Wouldn’t you?

By: George

George — Wed, 07 Feb 2007 05:44:34 +0000

When a so called prophet is not sure what his own Church teaches, it only makes sense there would be those who worry the lies and mistruths will be discovered and they would lose their power and perks. Thus you see them attacking those who are brave enough to ask questions.

For a religion that claims to support freedom of religion, it seems ironic they would try to suppress speach and thought of its members.

Perhaps so called prophets should listen to those brave enough to ask questions so they would know what their church really teaches.

By: Sam

Sam — Wed, 07 Feb 2007 02:51:35 +0000

Well, it was the “spy” part that sounded paranoid, not watching for apostasy.

By: Jeff Milner

Jeff Milner — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:59:40 +0000

The word paranoid denotes extreme and irrational fear.

The Church is concerned for it’s standing in the world, and for its members, and I think that’s reasonable.

Therefore, I wouldn’t say that it is irrational or extreme to watch for apostasy.