The Mormon church, like every church, has every right to make and enforce
whatever rules they want. And members are free to take it or leave it. But
it's difficult to see much if any association with Jesus of Nazareth in any
OKay, this makes no sense. The title of the article is, "LDS Church says
disciplinary claim is patnently false", but yet the article discusses the
fact that there is a pending disciplinary hearing on the 30th of Sept and that
excommunication is just one of the many options afforded to the council.So which is it?!? Either this guy is going to be disciplined or not?
The double speak in this one is strong Obi-Won
I notice that the paper chooses to offer a very one-sided story here, favoring
the Mormon faith. This can be seen by noticing there is no name given for the
blog, but FAIR is prominently featured along with its address. Seems getting our
own information, or understanding both sides is not encouraged here...
I found the blog on the Tribune. He is the managing editor of Mormonthink which
you can find by adding the standard COMmercial ending to the above. ;) Shae
There is a big difference between being disciplined by the church for being
anti-Mitt Romney or for being discplined for speaking publicly and clearly
against the church itself. It always puzzles me why folks that are
hostile to the church and speak openly and publicly against the church are so
dismayed if the church desires to release them from their membership and
baptismal covenants. All are welcome to attend worship services and activities.
But those that choose to work, speak and write against the church are invited to
leave their official status as believing, practicing members.
The Church got dragged into another story during the political "silly
season." Even though it is not about Romney, certain media outlets are
hyping it as such.In the end it is an issue between the Church and a
member. There is no political connection here.
Anything and everything in one way or another is political within the church
organization. Name one thing that is not.
Shelama,"The Mormon church, like every church, has every right
to make and enforce whatever rules they want. And members are free to take it or
leave it. But it's difficult to see much if any association with Jesus of
Nazareth in any of it."Perhaps you find it difficult to
associate Jesus with the Holy bible also?Mathew 21:11-13"And the multitude said, This is Jesus the prophet of Nazareth of
Galilee.And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them
that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the
moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves,And said unto
them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have
made it a den of thieves."
I wonder how many faithful LDS members have been disciplined for their comments
on Harry Reid, who is a faithful member of this church?
Sandee,That's is NOT the purpose of Church discipline at all.
They are not at any time "invited to leave their official status" as
members. That would be 100% counter to the mission of Jesus Christ. Church
discipline is a complicated process, very rarely discussed in the open (thus the
reason why many including yourself misspeak as to its purpose), that is geared
completely towards repentance. The Church does not excommunicate people and
effectively say, "good luck with whatever." Excommunication is a step
towards full repentance, necessary in only the most severe cases. It is the
intention of those administering the discipline that the individual will
continue to work with Church leaders to return to full fellowship.
To Economist: The Church said this individual was not being disciplined for anti
-Romney writings. That was the denial subject.shaedow: it's an LDS
publication. Funny how they can leave the church, but they can't
leave the church alone.If one is going to stir the sewage and put a spin
on everything for their own satisfaction, perhaps it is better to have them
released from membership and baptismal covenants. If you don't believe it,
leave it, but leave it alone because obviously if one is not doctrinally sound,
they have no business spouting off about it.Just my take on it.
Hay: Dixie Dan, If Harry Reid was a faithful member of the LDS church, he
wouldn't behave the way he does.
OK, Watcher, are you Sen. Reid's bishop or stake president? Otherwise,
what qualifies you to decide Brother Reid's faithfulness or lack thereof?
What specific behaviour are you referring to? Or are you one of those Mormons
who is convinced that the Republican Party is the only true party on the earth?
(A claim which I and many other more-left-wing Mormons would dispute
vociferously.) Seriously ... name specific behaviours that you think make Br.
Reid an unfaithful Saint?
While I agree that the LDS church can excommunicate any of its LDS members they
wish, I think it is a bad idea to excommunicate those that doubt the
authenticity of the church and post things that make the church look bad,
especially if those things he is posting are true. It only makes the church look
like they are hiding something. Additionally, if what he is posting is not
true, a better approach would be to explain in general conference or elswhere
what is false about what he is saying instead of excomunicating him and trying
to sweep it under the rug and effectively censoring him which many Americans
believe is vile . I believe, If this man is excommunicated for
saying things bad about the church that are in fact true, but make the church
look bad, It will end up increasing the number of LDS apostates who actually
believe truth is important. If he is posting lies that make the church look bad
and he is excommunicated with no explanation of what the lies were, the same
result will occur as the lies are left unrefuted and many will still believe he
was telling the truth.
1. It will not matter in the long run - but because the church disciplinary
councils are strictly confidential, the other side can say anything publicaly to
justify themselves and put the church in a bad light - and they usualy do.2. It doesn't matter who you are or what you are - anyone of us who
accuses someone based on hearsay or rumor and then we broadcast, with no proof,
that what we heard is true - becomes a tale bearer and a false witness.
The LDS Church spokesman said: Church discipline becomes necessary only in
those rare occasions when an individual’s actions cannot be ignored while
they claim to be in good standing with the church. Since Mr. Mitt
Romney's factual misrepresentations about our President are so publically
visible and so oft repeated why has he not bee disciplined? Is there some
misunderstanding about the clarity of the Articles of Faith's doctrinal
stance on ethics and honesty. Mr. Romney is the face of the Church right now,
like it or not, and it would seem advisable for the Church to rebuke him in some
form for his dishonesty. I am not speaking of the political bending of the
facts that is unfortunately common place in politics today; but of known and
deliberate and repeated factual misrepresentations.
Utter lunacy to expect to retain Church membership in the face of all the
anti-LDS garbage on his blog. We don't need "cultural" members in
One of the interesting aspects of MormonThink is that much like Richard
Packham's Homepage, no one has really challenged the information contained
withing. It seems that folks should appreciate sources of information which
offer something other than what is put out by LDS. (org). We are indeed
fortunate to be living in the internet/information age where we no longer have
to rely on "pamphlets" or word of mouth to obtain information,
especially that which is critical. Thanks Mr. Twede!
He's not excommunicated yet, and we don't know whether he will be. So
commenters: stop talking about it as if he has been already.The vast
majority of MormonThink isn't about Romney, it's about the Church and
its teachings. And it's all intended to draw members away. When a person
who associates with such a group claims to be a Mormon for the purpose of
increasing the credibility of the group, it is more than natural for them to be
singled out for counselling and possible disciplinary action.@fkratz:The church has a long-standing policy of not directly addressing
sources of anti-Mormon literature. Mormon scholarly groups, however, actively
address and, yes, challenge such "information". In fact, FAIR itself
has an entire section of their webpage devoted to MormonThink specifically, not
to mention a vast analysis of critics comments in general. So to say that the
content of MormonThink goes unchallenged is ridiculous.
All claims about Twede vs Romney which favor twede are ludicrous, without
substance, and are most certainly false. I spent a few minutes on his blog to
see if there is anything directly opposing the church. I found that there most
certainly was.Consider the following claims:"Romney
is imperfect""Romney has lied""Romney has
sinned"All these COULD be true. Let's assume for a moment
that they are. Now consider the following:"We are all as
imperfect with sin"Does the church excommunicate those who sin?
No. Does it excommunicate members who turn to apostasy and try to lead other
members away from the church? Yes. Has Romney tried leading members away? No.
Are there fine disputes about doctrine that Jesus Christ commanded us not to
engage in? Yes! Claims against Romney's political philosophies have gone
directly against what we have been commanded. Are we being commanded to follow
Romney? No. To not dispute? Yes.Lastly, Twede's publications
argue quite the opposite, and do nothing to substantiate the church as the true
church of God. Rather, they only cast doubt and do the opposite. The truth is
very plainly testified by the spirit.Continued...
Some of Twede's false conclusions have been that the Word of Wisdom is
generally good, but was only a man made idea and not revealed doctrine- that the
church should stop spending money how the first presidency has been directing
and do what members want with the money instead- that Joseph Smith having
priesthood authority is not documented enough, even suggesting that the most
valid documentation of this is a fabrication.It is troubling that
members have complained and apostatized in ancient times and in Joseph
Smith's day over how the church spends money and continue to complain
today. Our prophet directs the church in revelation and in operation. To give to
doubting the authenticity and operations of the church is absolute foolishness.
It is never the prophets who go astray but the people. We are guaranteed that
our prophet will not lead us astray. We have no such guarantee regarding the
masses.All of Twede's claims are accomplished by ignoring
personal revelation. He does state at first that his intention is to
'objectively' answer concerns of church critics, but all his
conclusions only end in doubting, or 'being troubled' by the words of
Claudio,I agree that church discipline is geared completely toward
repentance and necessary in only the most severe cases. But in those cases part
of excommunication is releasing the member from their baptismal covenants and
membership in the church. (Note a small part of that is that they are not
allowed to hold callings, speak or pray in meetings or pay tithing). I believe
even this step is taken out of kindness to prevent the individual from incurring
more judgment since their choices are not currently in keeping with those
covenants. I don't agree that church discipline courts are
rarely spoken of in the open. They have come up several times in our regular
Sunday School and Relief Society lesson.
To know happens when someone is baptised into the LDS Church, read the Book of
Mormon, starting in Mosiah 18:8. No one who makes that kind of
covenant, and is honest to that covenant, would try to persuade other people to
break their covenant to follow Christ and to keep Christ's commandments.When someone won't honor their covenants, they are released from
that obligation by being excommunicated. Being excommunicated means that they
will not be held accountable for not keeping a covenant that is too hard for
them to keep. The covenant is dissolved, a covenant that they broke with their
First of all, the people being baptized into the LDS Church do not make any
covenants at baptism. The baptism ordinance does not require the candidate to
make a sound, much less to swear any oaths or make any promises whatsoever.Second, this person spoke correctly, saying he was being disciplined. I
can find nowhere where he is saying he is being excommunicated. As such, the
statement by the Church denying that this person is being called in for
discipline is at best inaccurate, and at worst, misleading.
" We are guaranteed that our prophet will not lead us astray"By whom?Oh, yeah...by those who claim to be "prophets".A bit of a conflict of interest there. Is that reasonable?Moreover, nowhere in official, canonized scripture (the Standard Works) does
it guarantee Mormons will not be led astray by their leaders.
So now begins the new age of the Mormon inquisition, the world is flat.
Hawkeye 76, I would like to know what you consider "misrepresenting
Obama's accomplishments or lack there of"? I have been following the
election closely and have not heard anything that Romney has said that was not
truthful. So if I am missing something, please enlighten me. As for this
artical, the disiplinary council in the church is used only when a serious
transgression has taken place. Teaching doctrine to try and lead people away
from the church (or false doctrine) is considered to be a very serious
transgression. If a member of the church is teaching false or missleading
doctrine knowingly they can be excommuticated if that individual is not willing
to stop teaching that type of doctrine or particular practice. But
excommunication is used only as a last resort. The church trys to ensure that
the teaching of Christ are taught through out the church and part of that is
making sure members teach the gospel of Jesus Christ and not their own opions
@A Scientist - If the person being baptized weren't presenting
himself/herself for the ordinance, I might agree that there is no covenant. But
when I baptized my children as they each turned 8, I asked them if they wanted
to do this and enter into this covenant. They each said yes. I made sure they
understood what was happening, and they consented.The bishop of each
ward is responsible for doing the same thing with everyone who is baptized in
his ward. No one walks into a chapel, is grabbed, tossed into a font and dunked
without consent.The person being baptized doesn't say anything
during the ordinance, other than "amen" at the end of the prayer, but
has said "yes" several times before stepping foot into the water. Seems
to me that fills your definition of a covenant.
Can't we all just get along..
To "A Scientist" and others who think the Church is lying about
"disciplinary claim is 'patently false'"Read it
more carefully. The Church never said there isn't a disciplinary hearing.
They said it's not for expressing political views but said they aren't
able to say what it is for due to confidentiality. Even if the article's
title may be a little unclear, reading the article makes it very clear. I'm
surprised people put so much weight into an articles title (that is made by the
news organization and not the subject of the article) and fails to read the
details in the actual article. I really hope "A Scientist" reads other
material more closely or there won't be much credibility to the
There is such an incredible double standard. Missionaries are continually going
out and having to prove to Catholics, Baptists, etc., how their church is a
fallen church (although they couch it in very wishy washy, nice terms). If
someone has a 'stumbling block' in that they still think their church
is true (like a Catholic) the missionaries bring up bad things about the faith
to prove there was an apostasy (resolving concerns). They think of of this as
spreading the truth on earth. If someone has an issue with the
Mormon faith, and airs that concern, they are considered an
'anti-mormon.' Quite the double standard. When a missionary leaves
home to do it they dub him a hero, when someone else does it they say
they're 'anti.' Mormons seemingly don't care much about
action, only if you believe right (because they are doing the same thing, they
just have different conclusions). Any member of the church should be
able to air any problems openly. No matter what they are saying.
"If we have the truth, it cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not
the truth, it ought to be harmed." - J. Reuben Clark
"The Church never said there isn't a disciplinary hearing. They said
it's not for expressing political views but said they aren't able to
say what it is for due to confidentiality."How convenient.
Abuses of power can always invoke "confidentiality" to avoid being held
accountable, right?In the absence of the "real" reason for
the disciplinary action, then, we would be justified in inferring it to be for
the reasons stated by the person being disciplined.Honestly, we
don't worry about how much credibility science has among religious
This is a very incomplete and one sided view of this story. I would encourage
the Des News to write a more objective article that respects the intelligence of
it's readership. Your readers are (on the whole) smart, sensitive and able
to hear the truth in it's entirety and to handle those truths accordingly.
I cannot fathom why people belong to a religion they clearly do not believe in,
then claim they are victims when they are unhappy attending. If you have one
foot on each side of the fence, you have no credibility to complain about a
picket up your posterior. Be an adult and get off the fence and stop whining
(and annoying everyone else with your phony complaints of oppression, which are
nothing more than the natural results of your own decisions)If this
man was an adult HE would be making the choice - not forcing others to make it
for him (merely so he can claim passive/aggressive power derived from feigned
If you look at the website that he is writing for, it is obviously anti-Mormon
and the sole purpose is to lead people away from the Mormon church. If a
contributor wants to purport to be an active member of the LDS church for the
purpose of appearing more genuine and trustworthy, then it is certainly within
the church's bounds to excommunicate such a person.Would anyone
owning a business keep an employee on board whose sole purpose was to steal
company information and give them to a competing company. Would anyone keep a
self-described foreign spy in a sensitive area of the military. Why would the
LDS church embrace someone whose sole purpose in coming to church is to bring
down the church and appear "credible" while he does so. The least that
can happen is his credibility as a practicing Mormon can be taken away from him.
This really may help him to be less of a hypocrite anyway and may add more
Everyone except most mormons believe Mitt Romney has very poor ethics. What
exactly would it take for Romney to be questioned by most in the Church? I
can't get away with telling lies all over the country.
@Screwdriver: Do you speak for the "everyone" to which you refer?You express your opinions as though they were facts.... Isn't that
what you are accusing Romney of doing?
In all sencerity, I have visited the blog site Mormon Think and I have read
interesting material, most of which is material that has been available for
years from many different soources, but I have not found anything on the site
that appears bladantly untrue or false toward the Mormon church. There is much
information that appears unfavorable towards the church, but if true then like
all things of truth they are part of the light of christ and good for the
learning of man. The best thing the church can do is to acknowledge their
problems, repent and change. The answer is not to keep members in the dark, that
is the devil's territory.
@2close2call,It's not about the public eye, it's about
this man breaking covenants he's made before God, then making a mockery of
those covenants. "You cannot serve God and mammon." In the end this man
will be left to face God and the Church of Jesus Christ is simply helping him
recognize what he's doing and then he will have to choose which master he
If we don't allow differing opinions and investigation in the Church, we
risk becoming too narrow-minded to accept that God will "yet reveal many
great and important things pertaining to [His kingdom]. On the other hand, those
with dissenting views need to submit them with tact and humility.
This is just a test to see if I could again post a comment on your site.
Yesterday I tried to comment on this article three times and couldn't
Re: A Scientist Provo, UT" "We are guaranteed that our prophet
will not lead us astray" By whom?"His sheep know the Good
Shepherd and recognize His voice. For those who are deaf and don't believe
why waste the time arguing with them?
@A Scientist: "First of all, the people being baptized into the
LDS Church do not make any covenants at baptism."Read Mosiah
18:8 - 10 & 13. Sure sounds like a covenant to me. I certainly believe
that I am under a covenant with the Lord because of my decision to be baptised.
I even renew this every week when I take the sacrament.Not sure
where you got the idea that baptism is not a covenant....
reported to have been in apostasy, which the Sentinel describes as an offense
in which a member attempts to lead people away from church teachings.Could pointing out facts be considered an attempt to lead people away?
@A Scientist:"First of all, the people being baptized into the LDS
Church do not make any covenants at baptism."Absolutely they do,
that's why I had my name removed from the LDS church lists rather than just
staying inactive, because I didn't feel like it was proper to stay a member
when I didn't believe in many of the main ideas that make up said baptismal
Those who have a tesimony of their faith, have a deep conviction in their
beliefs, and will not be swayed.
As an active member who has written many articles critical of Mitt Romney, and
who very publicly supports the re-election of President Obama, I can say without
reservation that the Church has no interest in how I vote. I write nothing
critical of the Church; just of Mr. Romney.
David Twede wrote in detail about the temple ordinances in his article. That is
why he's being disciplined. He omitted those from his blog after he found
out he was to go before the disciplinary counsel. We are all in this
together as members of the church. It's one thing to criticize Mitt
Romney's positions on policy, but another to criticize him personally. My mother told me , "If you don't have anything nice to say about
someone, then don't say anything at all."I grieves me that so
many members are leaving the church because a Mormon is running for
president.When articles like this come up, I remember the Saviors words in
3rd Nephi, "Let there be no disputations among you." The spirit of
contention is of Satan and many members are indulging in this.Go ahead and
criticize Romney, or whatever tenets of the Church you want. "As for me and
my house, we will serve the Lord."
It is always amusing to me that in such rare instances as this where LDS church
discipline comes into the public eye a lot of people stand up and argue about it
and try to sway the vote, as it were. Being a member of the LDS
church is not a mandatory thing in this country or any other. So why is it that
people are so concerned about who the LDS church wishes or does not wish to have
on it's membership roles? Over twenty years ago a pseudo celebrity by the
name of Sonya Johnson also brought here conflict with the church into the lime
light. I suspect there was even more controversy over her issues than seem to
be the case here. For a time it was front page news and now, I'll bet most
don't even remember it or her. The LDS church has just continued on and I
have no doubts that it will do so again and again.
All religions have their share of apostates who have forsaken the beliefs of
their various churches. It is nothing new. They push to explore the limits
that they can go and act surprised when they get excommunicated.The
thing I don't understand is why a nonbeliever would care one way ..... or
@atl134 "that's why I had my name removed from the LDS
church lists rather than just staying inactive, because I didn't feel like
it was proper to stay a member when I didn't believe in many of the main
ideas that make up said baptismal covenant."That is behavior I
So what does Scott Gordon and "FAIR" have to do with this?
What is patently false is that this person is being brought up to a Church
disciplinary council because of statements about politics or Mitt Romney.It appears the main concern is that this person is using being an active
member of the Church as a front to give more credence to his attacks on the
Church. I can see how this is a very disturbing set of actions. It has nothing
to do with his political stance. Articles across the country have attempted to
claim the council in some way cares about what he has said about Romney which is
Rifleman, you state: The thing I don't understand is why a nonbeliever
would care one way ..... or the other.There are good legitimate
reasons for nonbelievers to care about what is transpiring with their
neighborhoods, politics, education, religion and society, because all citizens
are swimming in the same waters, i.e.,: when people no longer care things get
real bad very fast. Good government and democracy only works when people care
and get involved. What the LDS church HQ does in Utah has an impact and affects
others in many states.
No one questions the right of a church to determine membership status for its
adherents but what kind of an argument is that in an enlightened age? Is there
no allowance for dissent in the one church that is touted as America’s
distinctive contribution to world Christianity? The irony is so thick I could
cut it with a knife.I’m not familiar with Twede’s
particular circumstances but apostasy is such an arbitrary and subjective
determination to make. Let’s keep in mind that Galileo and Copernicus were
both excommunicated from the Catholic Church for postulating the heretical
proposition that the earth revolves around the sun.
What is an irony is that this gentleman will probably suffer some type of Church
discipline for what is on his sight refering to the Church. That is the
apostasy. Craig Clark and others who are wondering about dissent in the Church
need to read the definition of apostasy and see where it stands with this
individual. Also, Craig Clark if you are an endowed member, you are held to a
higher standing than an individual that is not. Therefore, the disciplinary
action is quite harsher for an endowed member than it would be for one who is
not endowed. The reason is because then the temple covenants come into play.The problem is that this individual will after the discipline is handed
down say he was disciplined for his actions based on his feelings for Mitt
Romney. Both are inheritently false and the only premise for coming public is
to try and sway the electorate against Mitt Romney and the Faith he holds. He
will be disciplined for his actions as a member of the LDS Church not for his
feelings right or wrong on Mitt Romney.
OK, I've read enough of these to ask the question...to all left-leaning
Mormons, how do you reach the conclusion that you are living your faith if you
profess leftist political views? Do you live your life through the filter of
your faith or not? I apply the Scriptures, revelation, and my own testimony to
every political question I have and find that I do not agree with anything left
leaning. I find I am more "Right_leaning Libertarian" (with
reservations) who votes Republican due to mathematical restrictions. Since truth isn't subjective, how do you reach such differing
conclusions? I'm not accusing or judging. I'd just like to know.
Please address specifically the following:Gay Marriage, Socialism
(economic), Abortion, Big Government. regarding all other issues I
can fathom a difference of opinion; these are a few I see as pretty stark and
wonder where the paths diverge. Thanks in advance for your civil replies.
@ A voice of Reason "We are guaranteed that our prophet will not lead us
astray" I think many Mormons believe that the FLDS have been
led astray as they still practice polygamy. If that is the case it sounds to me
like the early Mormon prophets like Brigham Young led those people astray by
making statements that polygamy was necessary to practice in order to get into
the celestial kingdom. I don't think that we should listen to
any man blindly whether they are a considered a prophet or not. I think we need
to make our own mind up. That is what the man in this article did. He made his
mind up that the church is not true and he tells people why. I think it is
unwise to simply follow a prophet or follow David's belief's for that
matter without determining in their own mind what is right and wrong
Jared H asked : “how do you reach the conclusion that you are living your
faith if you profess leftist political views?”Here are just a few
examples:Luke 9:2: “heal the sick.” The GOP wants to deprive
millions of people of health care. Mr. Romney candidate has vowed to do so on
day one of his administration.Jacob 2: 19: “…feed the hungry,
and to liberate the captive….” Romney has proposed cutting the Food
Stamp and related programs, thus depriving hungry people, including innocent
children, of food. He has said that Guantanamo, the U.S.’s Cuba-based
torture chamber, should not be closed, but that its population should be
doubled. Matthew 22: 21: “Render therefore unto Caesar the
things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are
God’s.” In Canada, same-sex marriage is legal. No church is mandated
to perform same-sex marriages. The things which are ‘Caesar’s’
(pertaining to government and not religious society), have their place; the
things which are God’s (religious-oriented), have theirs. Religion does
not mandate what government should do, or vice-versa.
Interesting how an article like this will generate such and enormous amount of
Re: BobF2012 of Kitchener, ON Sorry, Mr. BobF, but you didn't
answer even one of the issues raised by Jared H. And in the answers you did
give, you quote biblical advice to individuals, which are fully endorsed by good
conservatives. None of the biblical advice is directed toward the government,
which has no money or resources of its own until after they plunder it from the
individual. Your second concept, that government need not act morally
because government issues are "Caesar's," and that things which are
"God's" should be strictly separated from government just
doesn't wash for those who believe in government of the people, by the
people, and for the people, because the people need to inject morality into
"their" government. You reference Canada as a good example.
Well, right now we are living in Ontario, Canada, and Canada is a perfect
example of all that is wrong with socialism, with socialized medicine and health
care, and all that is wrong with the welfare state. Also, Canadians have given
up their right to bear arms, so they'll never have better than what they
2 close to call basically states that President Young and many of the early
Presidents (prophets) of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints lead it
astray because of their teachings of polgamy and the celestial kingdom. How so
is my question? They were teachings of which only 5% of all membership actually
entered into. Yes, there were some problems but for the most part no. That
practice would still possibly be ineffect today if revelation had not been
received removing the practice. However, we as a membership do not know that
for sure. Although I'm sure some of our critics will state that Elder
McConkie stated that someday it would be instituted again and definitely
practiced during the second coming of the Lord, Jesus Christ.These
men are mouthpieces of the Lord. They receive revelation and inspiration from
our Heavenly Father and his son, Jesus Christ. That is pure doctrine of our
religion. Revelation is received quite often depending on circumstances. Each
temple as to where it is to be built and its structure is revelation. The
Proclamation to the World, the Family can be said to be revelation. It is the
will of the Father.
Article quote: "The Sentinel reported that Twede, who identifies himself as
“agnostic, a doubter,......"Whoa! Hold it right there!This guy ADMITS he's an agnostic, "agnostic", meaning a
person who is not sure if God is even real or not (not as hard core as an
athiest who patently says "There is no God." but still someone who does
not have much, if any, faith in God) and yet he (the offended member) is
claiming that this is all political and nothing more than retributional?Give me a break!If being a self-admitted agnostic is not out
of harmony with the teachings and beliefs of the LDS church then what is???How long, Lord, how long?.....
And lastly, to be in full fellowship in the LDS Church, in other words, have a
Temple recommend, one needs to answer several very pointed questions. One of
them involves whether or not you are affiliated with any organization that in
any way goes against the teachings of the Church. This guy seems to have been.
Either he quits and repents, or he has disciplinary action. I hope the Church
will always hold a tough standard for it's members. If peoples beliefs,
politics or otherwise don't allow them to conform, then they should leave,
not try to change Church doctrine.