For quite some time I’ve been hearing that there would be a major development in the Mormon story any day now, which some breathless apostates have dubbed the “October Surprise.” The source of the rumors has been Tom Phillips, an outspoken ex-Mormon from the UK, who in the past suggested something big was coming, only to back off.
Now we know what the “surprise” is:
Mormon Church Leader Thomas Monson Summoned To UK Court Over Claim Of Church ‘Fraud’
In other news, the Pope is to be arraigned for teaching that Jesus was resurrected.
Try as I may, I cannot summon the words to express just how ridiculous and pathetic this is. My eyes have been rolling so much that I fear they might become permanently stuck mid-eyeroll. I’m not going to bother with the “substance” of the charges, as many others have done so already, but I will simply say that the folks at MormonThink.com would do well to distance themselves from Mr. Phillips if they want to maintain any credibility.
I have appreciated MormonThink for its relative fairness in its treatment of the LDS church. Obviously, their website is critical of the church, but they at least provide readers with “faithful” responses to the issues they discuss. MormonThink is certainly fairer than FAIR or Utah Lighthouse Ministry, and they have always prided themselves on being as “objective” as a critical site can be. That’s why I am baffled as to why they would hitch their wagon to someone who seems interested in self-promotion and some weird kind of revenge against the church.
I’m pretty sure this case will go nowhere (the surprise for me is that it has gotten this far in the first place). You can’t prosecute religious leaders for preaching their religion’s doctrines, and that is basically what is happening. The real loser here is MormonThink, not Thomas S. Monson
Runtu's Rincón 
While I won’t speculate on the outcome of this criminal prosecution for violations of the UK Fraud act, it is becoming obvious that the foundation claims of the Mormon church must be revisited in a modern world of scientific ability to test evidence such as DNA and translation of Egyptian manuscripts. Most agree that the prosecution will not see a trial, I suspect that is true.
I agree that with Tom Phillips as the Managing Editor, Mormonthink has lost much of its credibility as a neutral place for LDS members to search for answers.
I see this more as an indicator that the LDS Church should have faced its problematic (and modern) narrative earlier in the Internet Age. Having waited too long it finds itself continually exposed in the media from this long shot matter to Marlen Jensen admitting publicly that many are leaving as a result of information on the internet.
Skep remarks:
“Mormonism has lost much of its credibility.”
and
“Having waited too long it finds itself continually exposed in the media”
Yea, a perfect example of credibility loss happens with a GOP Mormon nominee for President gets nearly a majority of the vote because of the media.
LOL. as for this topic, You can’t prove religion either way.
You better keep on looking for something big to happen, John. And Be skeptical always you guys. It’s a really good idea; I am but it’s not my name.However, Most folks know there are some things that are abiding, unchanging truths.
As per the topic:
How is it, right here, we had the assertion that the supernatural cannot be proven as fact but in the next breath claim in this article to be “duped” because you thought it was fact? what kind of thinking is that???
I certainly hope you can find a champion here.
Why would I be looking for something big to happen? I wasn’t looking before. Is there some reason I should look now? Please explain.
Because your illusional fence sitting nuanced statements in the first 7 lines of your lead topic statement. Phillips leads the anti-Mormon site….your sentimental favorite of ALL Fair-minded Mormon Internet sites. Quite a conflicted and disingenuous stance.
Mr. John K. Williams, how on the one hand can you not admire Phillips, given he is your favorite organization’s managing editor. He is the compass and conscience of that organization.
All I can conclude is that you deliberately misrepresent me and my position, and I am tired of it. I will not engage with someone who thinks I support evil, murder, and persecution.
Seriously, you must not have read my question 🙂 because I don’t see you answering it.
Again, I am finished responding to you. You can peddle your hatred elsewhere.
But, nevertheless, try to answer the question in 200 words or less. That way you can be more precise and authentic.
Blinders.
What do you call a frivolous lawsuit against the Prophet of God? Justice? or Evil?
You have systematically ignored, evaded, and failed to not understand my posts. And now you will not be responding under any event. OK. Suit yourself. “If you do not tell the truth about yourself, you cannot tell it about other people.” Virginia Woolf
I’ve put up the insults from the beginning, and I have not responded in kind, but I draw the line at being compared to a terrorist and to the people who violently attacked my own ancestors. And lumping me in with nutjob Ed Decker is a low blow. I’ve already said I don’t approve of what Tom Phillips is doing, but apparently if I don’t think he’s an evil terrorist, I must sympathize with him. If you cannot treat others with a minimum of civility, there’s no point in responding to you at all.
There are universal truths that always win out in the end. Two of these are tied to: balance and compassion. Hence, when any individual or enterprise looses site of these two perspectives (at least these two) then they will always shift toward a darker side of reason and action. Consequently, they garner no success in reaching those who are the more upright in their thinking and objectives.
Mormonthink and all those who are and have been associated with it have relegated themselves to the low level to the likes of Ed Decker (“The God Makers”) and his ilk. As stated in a Wikipedia entry:
Max Jennings, editor of the National Conference of Christians and Jews (NCCJ), attended a showing (of “The God Makers”) in Mesa, Arizona that was sponsored by a group known as Concerned Christians, whose purpose was “to reach out in love to those lost in Mormonism”. Jennings reported that “If what I saw Tuesday night is love, I must have had the wrong Sunday School lessons back in that dusty, west Texas Methodist Church of my childhood. I didn’t hear anyone reaching out in love Tuesday night. I heard people reaching out in hatred of another’s right to believe what he wants.”
Absolutely agree. I feel These anti-Mormons have been deliberately deceiving since the persecutions and murders of the first LDS.
However, history has recorded identical experiences to the first century Christians that all this viscousness has only increased the number of folks willing to listen to the truth from us.
30 years ago, one week prior to my scheduled baptism, a Baptist Minister showed GodMakers during his regular church service because, in good faith and open mind, I accepted his invitation to attend. He deliberately blindsided me. During the first 5 minutes of the film, I felt enraged with the lies that I saw, knowing the LDS men and women I had come to know could not have been so duplicitous themselves. Beginning with minute 6 of the film, I realized that the anger I was feeling toward this minister for his deep insult vaporized in knowing personally that that feeling was what the adversary wanted me to germinate. I openly laughed through the rest of it. After watching the movie, I purchased the book. I had a great prompting to redline it and learn more about the craftiness of Lucifer and those twisted by him.
When I remarked to my LDS friends at the time what I had done, they explained that whenever GodMakers is shown at nearby churches, there is a dramatic increase in investigators to the missionaries because the viewers found the film as I had…unreal.
The Church has saved my marriage of 43 years now, my single greatest lifetime achievement. We have moved throughout the US since baptism and have come to know great Mormons everywhere we have moved. Vermont, New York, New Jersey, PA., Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Alaska, Hawaii, and Idaho. Now in our 60s, we have been continually healed from the damage of this secular world we live in by the sacred power of the Priesthood, our covenants, and the love of Christ.
In a reflection, I don’t all things about the many phenomena of this natural world of science or psychology. Not knowing everything about this or that and not understanding it sometimes after explanation, I do not doubt that tomorrow will continue to be beautiful for my wife and me.
“For quite some time I’ve been hearing that there would be a major development in the Mormon story any day now, which some breathless apostates have dubbed the “October Surprise.””
I didn’t even expect you to distance yourself from MormonThink and your thinking of its supposed “RELATIVE fairness” to LDS Doctrine. the allusion of MormonThink is to Orwell’s DoubleThink (a part of NewSpeak) Doublethink is notable due to a lack of cognitive dissonance — thus the person is completely unaware of any conflict or contradiction in buying into conflicted opinions. That is the path into MormonSpeak.
I fear you will have trouble understanding, though. Nevertheless MormonSpeak shows its Orwellian intent more clearly with this pond scum.
Let me be clear: these guys are not “pond scum” but are good people who feel they have been hurt by the LDS church. I don’t minimize that pain, but I disagree with how they are dealing with it.
There is something very unhealthy about how they are “dealing” with it, but this unhealthy aspect is being cheered on by others in the ex-Mormon movement.
Does this not demonstrate that there is a certain unhealthy nature of this movement?
It’s obviously a critical site. That said, I can’t think of any site that deals with apologetics or criticism that is fairer than they are. FAIR isn’t. UTLM isn’t. It’s not perfect, but they were at least presenting both sides.
Movement? You speak of people like me as being part of some monolithic movement. That is not the case, obviously, or you wouldn’t see anyone criticizing Phillips from the exmo side. You act as if I’m in some kind of organization bent on destroying the LDS church. I’m embarrassed for these guys because what they’ve done is embarrassing for them, not because they represent me at all.
Not monolithic, but certainly a movement.
There is a Green movement, and the members are all over the place, but it is certainly a movement. It is a movement based on being Green and advocating environmental causes. Sometimes there are aggressive, even violent arguments within the Green movement, but it is still a movement.
The ex-Mormon movement is also a movement. It is a bunch of people uniting behind very aggressive negativity towards the LDS Church. Disagreements likely will be held, but the glue is an overwhelming negativity.
Then tell me, what are the aims of the movement? It’s bizarre to say that any ex-Mormon who says anything negative about the church is part of a movement.
The aims are simple…negativity. Be as negative as possible. That is the point.
I don’t have that aim. My one (hopefully) lasting contribution to the discussion of Mormonism has been my book, and I am proud that my book discussed everything, good, bad, spiritual, and everything in between. If I had that aim, my actions and writings would be quite different than they have been. But you choose to treat me as an enemy, as some sort of foot soldier in a cause dedicated to destroying what you hold sacred. I can’t help how you perceive me, but it does sadden me.
I am confused. I do not treat you as an enemy, but as someone who is disproportionately interested in the negative aspects of Mormonism. Despite the fact that you think Tom has been stupid in how he approached his lawsuit, you agree that Mormonism is a fraud, correct?
I compare that to myself, Shipps, Esposito, or Merton. I do not agree that Islam is the religion of God, but I do not think it is a fraud. I see God in Islam, in Judaism, in Catholicism, and in Buddhism. I think none of them are frauds, but incomplete. I think Mormonism is more complete, but possibly not as complete as it could be. But I consider none of them frauds in the sense you would consider Mormonism.
I have never, ever used the term “fraud” to describe the LDS church. I believe that its truth-claims do not stand up to scrutiny, but that doesn’t mean it’s a fraud.
That is splitting hairs.
Consider, I do not believe the Koran to be directly from God, but I can celebrate the poetry, the beauty, the message, and the revelation (LOVE Ramadan). I would say I do not believe in the faith, but I can celebrate it without focusing on the negativity (even though I see negativity in some aspects).
Your focus is on the negative.
Just as an exercise, what is the last post on your blog that you would consider unabashedly positive?
That would be like asking you about your last unabashedly positive post regarding conservative Republicans. I don’t write things to be “positive” or “negative.” Was I being positive when I defended the LDS against charges it was not Christian? I don’t know. I don’t think in those terms. Apparently you do.
My analysis of politics (my professional expertise) is based on shifting political dynamics. This would be no different to discussing why a particular species is failing to thrive in a changed environment. This is not negativity, it is political science.
There is a clear difference. I don’t have any personal animosity towards Republicans, they are just a dying political party because of their inability to adjust to a changed electorate, which is certainly interesting.
This is one of the things that I dislike most about discussing things Mormon: this us vs. them attitude, as if we’re opponents or enemies. I don’t get it.
If they are obviously critical, how can they be fair?
Jan Shipps is neither positive or critical, and yet is fair. Why can’t they be like Jan Shipps? Or Esposito for Muslims? Or Merton for Buddhists, or so many others?
When you base your association on a subject entirely on negativity…it says something.
Jan Shipps isn’t interested in the validity of Mormon truth claims. And I didn’t say they were fair, but relatively so, compared to what else is out there. I would love to see a collaborative effort between believers and critics making their best case and policing each other to ensure honesty and fairness. That’s not going to happen.
Certainly she is. It would be impossible for her NOT to be interested in their validity, as they are inherently part of the makeup of her subject matter. I have studied Islam extensively, practiced with them, and love that faith, which I do not claim or want to be a member of, but I was certainly interested in the validity of the claims. That I did not believe does not mean I was not very, very, VERY interested.
Has Jan Shipps ever published anything about her beliefs regarding Mormon truth claims? I can’t recall ever seeing anything like that.
It is not about her beliefs. It is about the subject matter. When I have taught about Muslims I always thought I had done a good job when I was asked if I was Muslim. Then I knew I had been fair.
That’s how I feel about my book: believing Mormons think I still believe, and exmos think I don’t, and others simply don’t know. If I’d had an agenda, I think it would have shown through. Readers aren’t stupid.
Except you spend your time in forums that cater exclusively to anti-Mormon sentiment?
I check in on MDB mostly because I have friends there, and there is often something interesting to learn. I rarely post anything on any anti-Mormon boards. I went back to MD&D (a pro-LDS site if there ever were one) but was told by several people that I wasn’t welcome, so I stopped posting there.
I’m aware of both, I was reading on MDB today because I thought the insanity after Tom Philips would be interesting (it has been), but I cannot think of the last time I was ever on an anti-Muslim, anti-Catholic, anti-Buddhist, or anti-Jewish website….ever that I can think of.
The only “anti-Mormon” board I have ever posted on is RfM, and that’s mostly to reassure the shell-shocked that they’re going to be OK. I don’t bash the church.
Yet you call your decision to leave the LDS Church “The Great Escape”?
No, I didn’t. That’s not my story, nor is it my title. But it’s a great story, IMO, regardless of where you stand on the church.
It may have been someone else. I remembered seeing it.
I posted it because I thought it was a great, surreal story. It is.
Have you posted any great surreal stories about people joining the LDS Church?
In my book, yes. And since my book is largely derived from posts on this blog, yes, I have.
Just out of curiosity, do you know where on this blog they are?
Yep. I wrote them over a 5-week period around May or June of 2008, so go back to that date, and you’ll find them. In them I recount a few conversions that I still consider to be providential, if not miraculous. I believe God wanted those people in the LDS church, and I would never undercut those stories because of a supposed need to be “negative.”
Sorry, different time zone, I had to go to bed. So you believe in God and believe God may want people in the LDS Church?
Yes and yes.
Do you think God wants your family to be in the LDS Church?
If he does, he hasn’t told me. I know he doesn’t want me personally to be in the LDS church.
Well I would not argue with your personal views, but have you encouraged your family to leave?
No, I have not. In fact, I’ve never encouraged anyone to leave the LDS church. If people are happy in the church, that’s where they should be.
I explained why I posted that, btw: it was my friend’s birthday, which reminded me of that story. I reread it and thought it was worthy of posting. So, I asked him if he minded. He didn’t. You have to admit it’s a great story, no matter whether it had been Mormon or any other organization or business. You have this guy who is self-destructing (I know what that’s like), and he literally has to escape in the dead of night to get out of the situation he’s in.
“these guys are not “pond scum” but are good people who feel they have been hurt by the LDS church.”, Yet you assert they are even handed also. quite the PC for the “movement”.
The leaders of this fractous movement are driven by religious hatred. Those who hate are by definition live twisted lives of retribution defying fairness. These folks need help and their behavior should not be enabled through political correctness or treating these terrorists as victims.
But I’ll give you this, if not pond scum, acid rain.
When you label critics of a religion “terrorists,” you have a serious lack of perspective, and you insult people who have been victims of actual terrorism.
That takes quirky dissociative delusion. Seriously, did you read what I wrote?
They do violence against the LDS culture. They perpetuate the terror against the then innocent of 19th and 20th century peace-loving LDS. They justify violence against us in their writings today,…
So you think Thomas Monson is guilty of fraud? Tell us more about how MORMONTHINK is just a neutral site for faithful LDS who want to critically evaluate both sides of the issue fairly and then let the reader decide.
What I find more interesting here how it is being treated within the ex-Mormon movement. There is a spectrum from cheering to jeering, but there is intensity involved with this. I am highly interested in Catholicism, I read up on it, I study it, I attend services, I am friends with priests, etc…
But, I never invested nearly the amount of time on priest abuse scandals, because one…
1. I find it incredibly sad and have no wish to dwell on something so horrific.
2. My interest is in what good I see in the movement, a movement that I disagree with enough to not become a member or see as something that is NOT a legitimate continuation of Christ’s Church.
Most people are interested in things the want to be interested for positive reasons. All that is here is pure negativity. That is a problem.
Another thing I really do not get, I have been Mormon for almost 40 years. I know of no member in the history of my associations with members on…five continents (never been to Australia, but did know a Mormon in Antarctica, so not sure how to count him), NONE has believed that the Earth was only 6000 years old. That is a very odd claim by Tom, in my bewildered opinion.
I know a few people who believe that, but not many. I think most Mormons believe that the earth’s “temporal existence” has so far been some 6000 years, though what that means is ripe for debate.
As I said in my initial post, you might as well prosecute the Pope for teaching the resurrection. Pointless.
The source for that is D. & C. 77:6-7.
I think You miss the point. These people aren’t lighting their hair on fire to win law suits. They are people stuck dissonant / dissonant to their own complete culpability in becoming something useful, not knowing they are simply mosquitos at a family picnic or splatted windshield fodder for all their lasting significance. A special mosquito though: they aim for the windshield. Curious lot.
My mind is still trying to square an earlier exchange that you denied the LDS Church was “fraud” (you never wrote it); rather, you said the LDS claims “do not stand up to scrutiny” while rejecting other expert sources out of hand. ……….Are you running for office?
Why do MormonThink expert sources scrutinize correctly by your judgement (they being so “balanced and fair”) yet have reached consensus that Thomas Monson is guilty of fraud? When this lawsuit is dismissed, would it be fair to say that MormonThink expert views fundamentally “do not stand up to scrutiny”?
Tell us more about how MORMONTHINK is just a neutral site for faithful LDS who want to critically evaluate both sides of the issue fairly and then let the reader decide.
Wow, you really are intent on twisting my words. I never said MT or anyone else scrutinize the church correctly (I don’t even know what that would mean). I said I thought they were fair relative to other such sites. UTLM doesn’t give both sides, FAIR doesn’t, and LDS.org doesn’t, but MormonThink does. That was my sole reason for believing they were fairer, but as I said in my blog post, I have had to rethink that belief, and I no longer believe that their purpose was to be fair at all. In short, I probably trust people more than I should.
No, I don’t think Mormon claims stand up to scrutiny, but that does not equal fraud. And I don’t reject any experts out of hand and never have. Where are you getting this from? Not from me.
I get it from what you attest to, what you have written demonstrated by your above statements. Here I spell it out.
You give high merit to organizations that somehow give value to “Both sides.” Embracing both sides in an absolute is an act of irrational thought i.e.. fallacious. There is no “balance” except fabricated in fallacy. Your meaning is that truth is found in embracing doublethink (Orwell;t he act of ordinary people simultaneously accepting two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct). Such thinking requires a world view that there are no absolutes, which denies Christ.
Of course those reputable organizations you identify do not hold to doublethink (the hallmark of MormonThiink).
Case in point, you can offer no logical justification for admiring MormonThink as superior to all others mentioned and symultaneously embrace its anti-Mormon lawsuit with its incessant negative drumbeat. There is no middle ground in a direct contradiction. One needs to be mentally ill to believe that middle ground.
So, after all this, you don’t have any evidence that I think Mormonism is a fraud or that I reject experts out of hand. As for embracing both sides, that would make no sense. I believe fair people ought to give equal time to both sides of an argument; that has nothing to do with embracing both sides. The only Orwellian thinking around here is with you trying to ascribe certain thoughts and positions to me, such as my alleged embracing of both sides.
And your assertion that I embrace Tom Phillips’ lawsuit is a silly lie, especially strange since you are responding to a post wherein I expressed my opposition to the lawsuit (it’s actually a criminal complaint, but who’s quibbling?).
this isn’t to say you are mentally ill….The anti-Mormon “movement” that has been enthusiastically endorsed by others is a fractious mob. the mob is mentally ill by definition.