tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post1660706394667852117..comments2024-03-28T15:23:18.071-07:00Comments on Pure Mormonism: Preaching False Doctrine From The General Conference PulpitAlan Rock Watermanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04971243364867111868noreply@blogger.comBlogger72125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-22485661828933491882014-12-14T03:50:40.742-08:002014-12-14T03:50:40.742-08:00Julie,
The editors of the Liahona were unaware of ...Julie,<br />The editors of the Liahona were unaware of Kimball's reprimand, and Kimball didn't micromanage the Church magazines, so the teaching slipped through.<br /><br />As Corbin Velluz shows in both this incident, and the one involving the 1945 Ward Teacher's instruction that "When the prophet speaks, the thinking has been done," the unfortunate failure of both Kimball and George Albert Smith to make public corrections when they had the chance has gotten us to where we are today.<br /><br />http://rationalfaiths.com/fourteen-fundamentals-falsifying-prophet/Alan Rock Watermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04971243364867111868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-29250049224776276352014-12-14T02:40:30.776-08:002014-12-14T02:40:30.776-08:00Rock, would you care to comment on the fact that d...Rock, would you care to comment on the fact that despite the private reprimand, Elder Benson's talk got published in the Liahona a year later, while President Kimball was still in office?Juliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02538545701901320316noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-83409773216261890582013-01-01T11:37:03.676-08:002013-01-01T11:37:03.676-08:00Anonymous:I can just see it now. We get up to the ...Anonymous:<br><br>I can just see it now. We get up to the judgement bar of God and think we are going to heaven. God tells us that we didn't make it because we committed sins we didn't repent of. We ask "what sins?" God gives us a list. We read through them and say, "these are things the prophet asked us to do! Our leaders told us that even if the prophet asked us to do something wrong that we should do it and we would be blessed." God may ask them if they had read the second article of faith which says... "We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not Adam's transgression." <br><br>We may go on to say... "you told us in your scriptures to give head to the words of the apostles and prophets and we obeyed them just like you told us to!" God may ask us if we looked up the definition of the word heed (which does not mean obey but to give consideration or attention to) or read other scriptures which tell us to prove all things and ask him if they are right.<br><br>I don't think that we will have a leg to stand on if we blindly follow another person, even if they tell us to do something right, I do not think we will be blessed for it. We are individually responsible for our thoughts, beliefs and actions.<br><br>You also talked about the mainstream. The historian Will Durant made the following observation:<br><br>“The history of civilization is a river on whose waters soldiers and politicians are fighting and shedding ballots and blood; but on the banks of the river, people are raising children, building homes, making scientific inventions, puzzling about the universe, writing music and literature.”<br><br>He wisely understood that the mainstream was where the destructive activities occur, and it is on the banks of the river that constructive, life giving activities take place.<br>Gary Huntnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-7365310774871301782012-01-01T10:46:05.051-08:002012-01-01T10:46:05.051-08:00I do not believe that Joseph Smith ever really sai...I do not believe that Joseph Smith ever really said to 'follow the majority of the Apostles' & you will not go astray. For Joseph probably knew & history has proved, that almost all of Joseph's early Apostles fell into Apostasy, most by living & promoting polygamy & other false doctrines.<br><br>It has been proven over & over that Prophets & Presidents of the Church can & have led the Church astray, many times.<br><br>It has always been the test of this life to see who can gain the Holy Spirit & discern true Prophets from false Prophets in this Church. To think that there couldn't be or hasn't been any false prophets arise in the Church is complete blindness & ignorance of Church history & doctrine.<br><br>Satan loves for us to follow leaders blindly, especially when they tell us to do things that are wrong. He does not want us to do our own thinking, studying & praying about something. He wants us to think all is well in Zion & we can be assured that all the thinking & praying has already been done for us.<br><br>Satan loves to teach such things as "the prophet can never lead us astray', 'the church is prospering', 'you can follow the majority of the Apostles or the mainstream of the Church & you'll be safe', 'you should follow the Prophet (or leaders) even if he (they) tells you to do something you believe is wrong', 'if your revelation is different than a Church leaders or what the Church is teaching than 'you' are receiving false revelation.'<br><br>To think we can do evil & get away with it, because even a Prophet told us to is to be completely deceived & prove we don't have the right Spirit, for the Holy Ghost will tell us that evil is always evil & wrong, no matter if the Prophet himself tells you to do it, & you will still be held accountable & receive the eternal consequences for it.<br><br>Now the leaders are telling us that if our revelation differs from theirs we must be receiving ours from Satan. That is the same thing abusive husbands tell their wives. That she should let him do the thinking for her & whatever he says is right & she should not follow her own judgement. For abusive men believe they can 'never be wrong'.<br><br>The leaders of the Church are also now teaching that divorce & abandonment of spouse & children is not adultery or even a sin anymore & they now support anyone doing it for any reason, as many times as they may want to abandon a spouse & look for a new one. Such abuse, abandonment & legalized spouse swapping are things that earlier leaders said were some of the worse of sins a person could commit in this life. <br><br>Leaders today are encouraging & rewarding the worst of evils & leading the Church to do such evil & everyone has fallen for it, except a rare few who have the Holy Spirit as their guide.<br><br>We must wake up quickly or we will be easily deceived today. For there are so many false doctrines being promoted & taught in the Church today, as always has been & it is so rare to find any member who is not deceived to support & do evil. <br><br>The latter day apostasy of the Church has occurred as was prophesied, & only a few can see what has & is happening.<br><br>As prophesied would happen, everyone today calls evil good & good evil, including the leaders of the Church.<br><br>As always, God expects & commands 'us' to discern & decide who is a true Prophet/Apostle or not in the Church. They must prove to us that they are a true prophet by their deeds & teachings of truth, before we ever have to prove our loyalty to their doctrines.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-54667218559961447012011-09-25T10:34:35.711-07:002011-09-25T10:34:35.711-07:00By "again and again," I mean the members...By "again and again," I mean the membership repeats the Heber Grant story as though it were doctrine among themselves all the time. The anectote it was in a home teaching message I remember, and it's made it into some of the manuals. It is a prominent part of our collective myth.Alan Rock Watermanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04971243364867111868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-33276473745210498222011-09-25T06:18:22.453-07:002011-09-25T06:18:22.453-07:00I guess if "again and again" means Carlo...I guess if "again and again" means Carlos Asay used it once in a conference talk that same year and it hasn't been quoted in Conference since, then I agree. One thing that might make a good footnote to the article would be a mention of how often they teach in conference about praying about what gets taught there which makes being "blindly obedient" our choice not our charge. Strangely, all these guys still insist on teaching about Christ every chance they get. I thought after reading this that they were trying to take over his job.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-21799469407590375552011-09-23T07:38:00.353-07:002011-09-23T07:38:00.353-07:00Perhaps so, Anonymous, but that story has been rep...Perhaps so, Anonymous, but that story has been repeated again and again to support the principle of blind obedience to the president of the Church.Alan Rock Watermanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04971243364867111868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-25259509024850476922011-09-22T13:47:37.176-07:002011-09-22T13:47:37.176-07:00The anecdotal piece about President Romney and Heb...The anecdotal piece about President Romney and Heber J Grant is a quite a bit less malicious than it was interpreted to be here, I think. 'Tongue-in-cheek' would probably be a little bit closer than 'heresy.'Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-7250471651634068132011-09-20T11:32:16.304-07:002011-09-20T11:32:16.304-07:00Oh, and last but definitely not least, it is now b...Oh, and last but definitely not least, it is now being 'falsely' taught by Prophets at the pulpit, that divorce is ok & not adultery anymore.<br><br>Now everyone is taught, by leader's words & actions, that they dump & abandon their spouse & kids & problems & break sacred temple covenants for no reason at all & go off & find some fresh new romance & be sealed in the temple forever & it's not adultery anymore, like Christ & Prophets said it was up until just recently. <br><br>Who led or is leading us astray, Christ or todays Prophets?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-72058304912275469282011-09-20T11:20:01.158-07:002011-09-20T11:20:01.158-07:00As far as a Prophet 'never being able to lead ...As far as a Prophet 'never being able to lead the Church astray', that is easily proved false if one will just do a little study in church history.<br><br>The Church admits that Joseph spent his whole life trying to convince the members that polygamy was a most vile evil & to never fall for it. While Brigham Young taught just the opposite.<br><br>Even if Joseph was lying, which I do not believe he was, one still must admit he lead the Church astray, for many, if not most, would not later follow Brigham Young nor live polygamy, because of Joseph's strong teachings against it.<br><br>So, either Joseph led the Church astray or Brigham did. Even the Church has to admit that & thus it is quite ridiculous to say the Prophet can never lead us astray, for it's admitted by the Church that at least one has.<br><br>All the Leaders of the Church surely understand this basic Ch. history truth, so I don't understand why they keep saying 'Prophets can't lead astray' nowadays that is so easily proven false, unless they believe that most all members will never look far enough in Church history to find the truth. <br><br>Which is true, most will not & will just blindly follow.<br><br>Not to mention the fact that there have been 'many other things' preached by past Presidents of the Church which more modern Presidents of the Church have called false or incorrect or had to set right again. Which is additional proof that Prophets can teach false doctrine & lead the Church to believe in errors.<br><br>Things like the Adam God theory, Blood Atonement theory, Polygamy, Slavery, Blacks receiving the Priesthood (Joseph allowed it BY didn't), women told they must submit to men & husbands & men don't have to submit to women & they being told women are subordinate to men in marriage & church (now we know they are totally equal Co-presidents & co-presiders). That men receive the power & authority of God & women don't. (We now know women do too, even in the pre-existence before even men). Etc. etc. etc.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-34868119414064785982011-09-20T10:55:39.371-07:002011-09-20T10:55:39.371-07:00I also have heard that the 1st Pres. does not revi...I also have heard that the 1st Pres. does not review or approve what goes into the Church magazines, other than the Conference editions.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-29966826277503548222011-09-12T22:42:18.925-07:002011-09-12T22:42:18.925-07:00Rock,It seems that some of the monthly messages ar...Rock,<br><br>It seems that some of the monthly messages are written specifically for use as a "First Presidency" message, and have not been previously published in conference or anywhere else. I had always thought that those were actually written by a member of the 1st presidency (but maybe they are not). So, I was still holding onto the idea that when a 'recycled' message was used, a member of the 1st presidency atleast gave the message a cursory review and approval. However, I'm not at all surprised by the idea that they probably never even look at the message. <br><br><br>I guess that maybe it should be called the "Editor's Message" instead<br>:)<br><br>anonymous_99Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-39219834978902344372011-09-12T11:16:45.026-07:002011-09-12T11:16:45.026-07:00Annonymous_99,It is puzzling alright. Dave P. also...Annonymous_99,<br>It is puzzling alright. Dave P. also brought this oddity to my attention.<br><br>I can only surmise that the editor of the Liahona felt the message was valid and went ahead and published it as The First Presidency Message. It isn't likely that anyone in the First Presidency actually has anything to do with selecting their messages each month. That's likely left to the magazine to select something spoken at conference and just going with it.<br><br>Recall that the rebuke Benson was given was private. No one else in the beehive that is the Church Office Building was notified that what he had delivered in conference was not doctrinal.<br><br>Even within the 12, the right hand often does not know what the left hand is doing. Like every corporate board, there's lots of political wrangling and subterfuge going on.Alan Rock Watermanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04971243364867111868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-59827311415022315192011-09-12T08:49:35.864-07:002011-09-12T08:49:35.864-07:00This was a very interesting and informative post.I...This was a very interesting and informative post.<br><br>I wonder how long it was after Elder Benson gave this address at BYU, before he was reprimanded and required to apologize? I would expect that the reprimand would have happened within a few weeks, if not a few months at most....<br><br>If we conclude that he was reprimanded shortly after the original talk was given, then it makes the next bit of information that I'm about to share all the more surprising/disconcerting/illogical/etc.<br><br>Roughly 18 months after the original talk was given at BYU, the "Fourteen Fundamentals" talk was published as the "First Presidency Message" in the June 1981 issue of the Liahona, which as nearly everyone on this blog probably already knows, is an official publication of the church, and is "basically" the international version of the Ensign magazine....<br><br>You can find it here:<br>http://lds.org/liahona/1981/06/fourteen-fundamentals-in-following-the-prophet?lang=eng<br><br>Considering that Elder Benson had been reprimanded by President Kimball and had been required to apologize to the entire First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve just a little more than a year before this time for delivering this address, it seems nearly unbelievable that the First Presidency approved this address to be used as their "First Presidency Message"...<br><br>Another side note on this- It has been somewhat common at times, for the "First Presidency Message" to be a reprint of an address given by a member of the First Presidency at some previous conference or other meeting, but in this case it is quite interesting that the First Presidency would choose to publish as their message, an address that was not written or given by a member of the First Presidency. <br><br>Also, there are some slight differences between the original "14 Fundamentals" talk that was given at BYU, and the one that was later published in the Liahona, but nearly all of the changes are simply "polishing" and are immaterial to the message and tone of the talk. The "Tenth" fundamental was reworded slightly for relatively obvious reasons, but that's about the only change that's even slightly significant.<br><br>I'm not really sure what to think of all of this......<br><br><br>One other side note - The First Presidency Message in the Ensign for the same month was a different topic, but that was common at that time. In the 1980's the First Presidency Message in the Ensign was almost never the same as the First Presidency Message in the Liahona of the same month. At some later time, the messages in both magazines were coordinated to be the same message for the same month, but that is not how things were done in the 1980's.<br><br>anonymous_99<br><br><br>P.S. - There is an interesting story about how I discovered this particular First Presidency Message in the 1981 Liahona, but that is a story for another time.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-55184379906677739242011-07-11T14:02:16.690-07:002011-07-11T14:02:16.690-07:00There's opinion, and then there's opinion ...There's opinion, and then there's opinion backed by hearsay. As a Mormon, you can hardly say anything at all without being told that you are going against the prophet, when you are not going against the prophet, but against perceived hearsay.<br><br>For example, I told a fellow Mormon that I'm convinced that the righteous who are prepared to meet the Lord are immediately received into celestial glory, and without any delay receive their full inheritance, including their celestial body. He asked me where I got that. I said I had been seeking an answer to this question from the Lord. His reaction? My fellow Mormon got in a huff and told me I was going against everything the prophet said.<br><br>What prophet? Where? If you read what the Book of Mormon says on resurrection, Alma hints that those who are prepared to meet God do not have to wait centuries for the resurrection of their body with their spirit. (Alma 40:4-5)<br><br>At any rate, at no time has a prophet indicated that our temple ordinances are of no value and no effect in the matter of resurrection. To the contrary. Those who are prepared are issued immediately into the presence of the Lord. Is the Lord going to withhold from them their promised reward? No. They are prepared for it. That is why Peter and Paul both wanted to go directly to heaven. It was not so that they could be spirits waiting for centuries to be resurrected, but it was so they could immediately inherit all that the Lord had promised them, including their perfected bodies.<br><br>But never mind that the scriptures actually support what I got directly from the Lord. Never mind that it agrees with what we learn in the temple ceremony. To the Mormon I spoke with, I had to be going against "the prophet" — without the need to say which one, where, when, or even how. Any prophet. Just so long as it made me wrong.<br><br>When I asked him which prophet, he could not produce a name. <br><br>So I have sought an answer from the Lord and received one that agrees with what the Lord has already said, but a fellow Mormon insists this is heretical because of a "prophet" he can't even name.<br><br>You get a lot of that in the church.Unknownhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08262692590216934594noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-9184899708254514292011-05-17T15:26:08.349-07:002011-05-17T15:26:08.349-07:00Don't ever get up in fast and testimony meetin...Don't ever get up in fast and testimony meeting and say that the word of the Lord is true and everything else is false. Don't use evolution as an example of falsehood. And don't say Mormons are without excuse for not using the gift of the Holy Spirit and knowing the truth, which is that the word of the Lord is accurate and men are full of lies. You'll be given the cold shoulder. That's because so many Mormons are basking in the glory of opinion and speculation.whitehuskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10462985530221490302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-88558314185779396862011-05-10T14:47:03.028-07:002011-05-10T14:47:03.028-07:00If you ask me, the worship of the family borders ...If you ask me, the worship of the family borders on self-idolatry in the church. Mother's Day in my ward was a huge affair while Easter was a piddling nothing. Maybe we should honor mothers on Mother's Day, but does the whole service have to be about us-us-us instead of about the Lord God Omnipotent, Jesus Christ?doyle_meganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14670666670201894017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-73242754992251772162011-05-10T14:03:00.289-07:002011-05-10T14:03:00.289-07:00There have been many times that I wanted to cringe...There have been many times that I wanted to cringe and hide under the pew because what was being said over the pulpit was so bad. If I have to hear one more person get up and extol his or her family instead of praising the goodness of the Lord, I think I'm going to have to get up and go outside for a breath of fresh air.whitehuskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10462985530221490302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-16411718525361784552011-04-25T06:09:18.183-07:002011-04-25T06:09:18.183-07:00My dad thinks the handbook is the greatest thing s...My dad thinks the handbook is the greatest thing since sliced bread but worries about the day when "The leadership might stop doing what the handbook says." I wonder if he's ever stopped to think if the handbook itself is even in harmony with the celestial principles of the gospel, because Jesus Christ fulfilled and did away with the letter of the law approach. But because people don't want to have to rely on themselves, they're always content with needing to be told what to do in every point of their lives.Dave P.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-31848134051646815292011-04-24T22:00:44.014-07:002011-04-24T22:00:44.014-07:00What a breath of fresh air. I have often wondered ...What a breath of fresh air. I have often wondered when someone is "called" to lead and is relegated to following a handbook of "do this" "do that". It seems to me righteousness is nothing more than blindly following whatever they tell you to do without question or debate by men who now have decided they are just as infallible and human as the rest of us. Where is the leadership or inspiration when all you're doing is "following orders". There was another group of people in history who claimed to be doing the same thing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-3795115878974676112011-04-04T07:09:18.416-07:002011-04-04T07:09:18.416-07:00I barely paid attention to the most recent confere...I barely paid attention to the most recent conference this weekend but I did pick up a few gems of blatant false doctrine while having it on in the background:<br><br>* The welfare program being a divinely inspired. Why the need to institute a program that does something the Lord had been commanding from the beginning? Good PR, of course. Seriously, all the talks about the welfare program seemed to glorify the church and not God.<br>* Sorry, President Uchdorf, but I can testify to you that the church is NOT "on course" other than being on the course to destruction because of the follies and abominations warned of Section 124 that the church has not repented of.<br>* No, President Monson, temple ordinances are NOT necessary for salvation. The Savior Himself said that repentance and baptism are all He asks of us and that anything more or less than that comes from evil.<br><br>I raised my hand in opposition against sustaining the first presidency and quorum of the twelve and abstained from voting for the remaining GAs. When I did that I felt a great burden lifted from my shoulders and that I'd crossed over the line in the sand drawn by the Lord at the start of this transition time between the 6th and 7th seals.<br><br>My final thoughts on this conference - Boring, uninspired, rehashed whitewash of "milk" doctrine that glorifies the church and not God despite Elder Holland's claims during his talk.Dave P.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-57257973195525688412011-03-17T13:04:54.200-07:002011-03-17T13:04:54.200-07:00Interesting article but if it is to be taken serio...Interesting article but if it is to be taken seriously then all assertions of fact should have references, not just simple observations. In truth this article is no better or worse than the issues it deals with due to lack of documentation.PositiveAffirmationshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03457968979182756652noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-73630193418305141572011-03-10T15:29:43.173-08:002011-03-10T15:29:43.173-08:00Mindlessness leads to wickedness. I couldn't a...Mindlessness leads to wickedness. I couldn't agree with you more when you say that the gift of the Holy Ghost is meant for us to use. Too often in the church you find people throwing off the influence of the Holy Spirit so they can embrace traditions that border on heresy. Where on earth the saying that Jesus is a spirit child came from I have no idea, but the fact is, he is the Lord God Almighty, not an angel. Any honest church member would admit it. I can't believe someone didn't put a stop to this blasphemy. The Holy Spirit testifies that Jesus Christ is the Great I AM [D&C 29:1]; the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; the Father of Israel. [Mormon 9:11-12] <br><br>Where from all this can you get the heretical notion that Jesus Christ *became* God?whitehuskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10462985530221490302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-35917801394601006122011-02-26T12:00:24.277-08:002011-02-26T12:00:24.277-08:00These ALL tend to prove (at least support) One Poi...These ALL tend to prove (at least support) One Point: the Distractions & Detours of Mormonism (subjects other than the basics of Christian practice-observance) have taken over.<br>What a SAD DAY for ppl who want to follow Christ...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-25587673396170650062011-01-28T10:00:11.406-08:002011-01-28T10:00:11.406-08:00(continued…)So, I felt a little unsatisfied by tho...(continued…)<br>So, I felt a little unsatisfied by those words. First of all, maybe following the majority or mainstream is a good idea in some cases, but Jesus said in Matt. 7:14 "Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it."<br><br>I know I've heard that the gate is baptism... but what if it isn't or has more than one meaning. I can't believe the majority of LDS members will make it to the celestial kingdom. In fact, I thought I'd taught lessons before where prophets said the majority wouldn't make it.<br><br>At any rate, if the majority of the apostles won't lead us astray, doesn't that also mean that the minority of the apostles might lead us astray?<br><br>The Ezra Clark quote said the majority of the members wouldn't be led away or deceived by imposters... what if they are led away by some of our apostles? Who decides if our apostles are imposters?<br><br>And, what does it mean to be led astray? Does it mean that we will be lost and forlorn, terrified and unhappy? Or could it mean that we might adopt beliefs that are unloving, not true (or important), or unChristlike… because we are taught them?<br><br>If you happen to read the Bitter Fruits of Apostasy lesson, you probably won't be surprised by the quotes and language used to keep us in line, keep us from questioning our leaders, and to keep us terrified of apostasy. I believed it all my whole life. The lesson talks about the Spirit departing from apostates and how they live in darkness and evil. I cannot believe I swallowed it all just 2 years ago.<br><br>I can tell you that after 6 months of inactivity and probable permanent church disaffection, that I have felt the Spirit as strongly as ever or even more so. I am awakened to truly think for myself, but not without God's help. I never thought I would apostatize, as I have been conditioned to fear it very well. <br><br>I like the church in a lot of ways and would be delighted if you are right about everything, Rock. I will keep checking in on your blog and keep an open mind. Maybe I will stay away from church, but maybe I won't need to. If it is possible that mistakes are being made by imperfect leaders... then that could open a lot of leeway in going back.Susannoreply@blogger.com