https://youtu.be/092o_pYO7Sg It seems the Mormons are fairly civil with their apostates
Mormon apostate gives testimony in church
by barry 5 Replies latest jw friends
-
barry
-
DesirousOfChange
How long do you think a JW would have been allowed to go on in the Kingdumb Hell?
-
barry
I suspect about one minute and they wouldn't talk to him afterwards
-
slimboyfat
I think Mormons are more relaxed about dissent because their church has made a better effort at countering criticism and addressing difficult topics than Watchtower. So if someone stands up and complains, there is an attitude, “we’ve heard all that before, it’s old news”. Whereas if a JW speaks up about 607, Rutherford, UN, Malawi/Mexico, two witness rule, blood, and the rest, many JWs are going to be like, “say, what!?” And look in vain for official Watchtower responses.
Over the past few years the Mormon church has made efforts to produce official responses on controversial issues such as historical polygamy, racism, character of Joseph Smith, dubious Book of Mormon history and so on. Mormon missionaries are now generally at least aware of most controversial topics, so they don’t come as a complete surprise if confronted about them. Even if they can’t defend the points themselves, they are satisfied that the church has provided an answer to criticisms.
-
joe134cd
I agree with slim. I have spoken to various Mormon missionaries, and they are quite open and aware of the problems facing the church. I did however meet 2 who shut the conversation down pretty quickly and walked away.
-
careful
barry, thx for the post. I couldn't get the vid to play on the link here but did a search on Youtube and watched it that way.
The vid itself was enlightening on multiple fronts—just seeing what the inside of Mormon church looks like was educational. Pews and traditional organ music (unlike JWs); kids sitting with their families (like JWs) instead of herded off to Sunday schools; men in shirts and ties, some with jackets, also like JWs. While they are more civil to "apostates" than JWs are, SBF, isn't the result among the faithful the same when it comes to the official dealing with dissent? Sure, they are allowed in and called "brother," treated with more respect, not excommunicated, etc., and maybe a more "substantial" answer is offered by the church regarding specific criticisms, but when you say, "Even if they can’t defend the points themselves, they are satisfied that the church has provided an answer to criticisms," isn't that pretty much the same as R&F Witnesses? Please note that I am not talking about the means here, but just the result among the faithful.
A final striking difference I noted was how apologetic the speaker was afterward to the local church officials, doubtless at least partly due to how civilly he was treated.