pogi wrote:Maksutov wrote:Call it whatever you want, it's your religion. You have to live with it. We get to comment on it. You may experience some discomfort.
Correction, I get to live with it
Comment away! I enjoy the dialogue, but it would just be nice if critics stopped making false accusations. If you are going to let us define our own religion, at least respect that right and accept it when we tell you that we don't worship our leaders (at least in the way that some imply). Thanks!
Good for you, don't worship them. Just trust them. A wise man once said "Trust but verify." You should verify them, too. There is plenty of reason not to trust them. If you want to trust them, it may be that you just don't trust yourself. And you may have reasons for that. It's all within your rights as an American, if you are one. You can believe absolutely anything you want. And you may have noticed that people do.
We critics probably make false accusations and true accusations. Just like Mormons do. (I would love to see you define "Mormonism", for sure.)
You see, pogi, it comes down to the magic rock. Con men use magic rocks. That was always true and always will be. If he could lie about magic rocks, polygamy and translating Egyptian, he could certainly lie about visions and meetings with personages. He could even get witnesses to sign their names to things that didn't happen--it's totally possible and far more likely than some backwoods theophany. The 19th century was all about people seeing angels and spooks that somehow haven't persisted into our present day. No, we live in the age of excuses and denial. The prophets have no discernment, can't use the magic rock and outsource their duties to administrators, BYU researchers and attorneys.