Interesting video clip

[_SatanWasSetUp]

I never went on a mission, so I am unaware of the type of training they get. This is an interesting video. Anyone who has listened to church leaders will instantly recognize the speech pattern.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMJvqBq_Qa8&mode=related&search=

[_Gazelam]

Robert Millet is one of the best teachers of the gospel there is, and hes absolutely right here.

You can't build a house without laying a foundation. Why give a man a roof when he hasnt got any walls?

[_Polygamy Porter]

I never went on a mission, so I am unaware of the type of training they get. This is an interesting video. Anyone who has listened to church leaders will instantly recognize the speech pattern.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMJvqBq_Qa8&mode=related&search=

This grade A prick is major deceiver. Teaching his little minions how to deceive.

[_dartagnan]

Robert Millet is one of the best teachers of the gospel there is, and he's absolutely right here.

You can't build a house without laying a foundation. Why give a man a roof when he hasnt got any walls?

This Milk/Meat nonsense is a cop-out excuse that ignores the obvious fact that the LDS Church doesn't want investigators privy to everything because they know the baptismal rates would plummet. The stunt Millet just pulled is a logical fallacy to say the least. DOn't answer their questions. Instead, answer a question they didn't ask (i.e. change the subject). Who is he to tell people what they "should" ask? What if they already know the story about the boy in the grove? He will repeat it just to get off the question at hand. And of course, everyone is considered an "attacker" by virtue of the fact that they ask questions he doesn't feel comfortable answering. Establishing firmly in the minds of his audience that they are already victims. Victims to inquiry.

Most missionaries don't feel comfortable answering them either, which is why so many people get baptized when they shouldn't, and that is evidence in the fact that so many of them end up leaving the faith the minute they come across a doctrine they never knew about beforehand.

[_Gazelam]

Most missionaries don't feel comfortable answering them either, which is why so many people get baptized when they shouldn't, and that is evidence in the fact that so many of them end up leaving the faith the minute they come across a doctrine they never knew about beforehand.

On my mission we answered every question asked us, and if we didn't know the answer, we were invited to pick up the phone and call the mission President. He happened to be Joseph Fielding McConkie, co-author of numerous books with Millet. And he always had an answer.

Also once a month we were invited to bring investigators to the mission home for a fireside discussion, which always consisted of an open forum that led into a discource. It got interesting sometimes.

This idea that the church hides its history and/or points of doctrine is ludicrous. Polygamy is in the Doctrine and Covenants for heavens sake. My mission taught me to teach whatever needed to be taught, and to back down from nothing. I don't know how other missions were, but mine taught me right and proper. Maybe I was lucky, I hear that I was.

[_dartagnan]

On my mission we answered every question asked us, and if we didn't know the answer, we were invited to pick up the phone and call the mission President. He happened to be Joseph Fielding McConkie, co-author of numerous books with Millet. And he always had an answer.

Sorry, that is too hard to believe. What you’re saying conflicts with the video I just saw and my experience as a missionary. You don’t offer them meat in the beginning; that is what Millet said and that is the same line we were suppose to give people who complained about not getting the full scoop. Now you’re trying to tell me meat was handed out like candy on your mission, so long as the investigators asked for it.

I am also a return missionary. I served in two missions and the bedrock principle that we learned at the MTC is never to debate with investigators because that makes the “spirit” leave. If investigators gave any indication they could possibly be setting traps for us, we were to leave the premises immediately – with a prayer of course. I served in ex-Mormon central, Anaheim California as well as Madrid Spain, by the way.

Most missionaries simply don’t have the answers and most missions have nobody to provide them anyway.

This idea that the church hides its history and/or points of doctrine is ludicrous.

No it isn’t. It is pretty much an established fact. Gordon B. Hinckley doesn’t even know what’s taught in the Church and he is the President. That is what he had to say to get around answering a straightforward question for which most LDS already knew the answer. Black people are baptized regularly without any background information about the priesthood ban, and missionaries pray the issue never comes up during the discussions. This is “missionary malpractice” as Kevin Barney once put it. It should be required to inform black investigators of this fact.

I sat there in my friend’s living room as a dozen or so members zoned out with raised eye-brows at Hinckley’s response on Larry King.

Try inviting some missionaries over to your house while pretending to be an interested non-LDS. Then hit them with some rudimentary anti-Mormon questions and see how they respond. I sometimes go on spilts with the missionaries here in Brazil so I keep one foot in the mission field just to observe what’s changed – not much unfortunately. The MTC doesn’t teach missionaries to debate the sticky issues. You know this. It never has. It gives them a crash course on six discussions and then sends them out to rehearse specific questions, responding with specific verses, using specific methods. Some missionaries simply don’t know what to do if a discussion derails from the skit we learned at the MTC. Nothing learned at the MTC involves debating. The only time missionaries are allowed to debate is when an investigator who has been progressing through the discussions and has committed to baptism, hits an anti-Mormon brick wall. Then the missionaries are usually allowed to do their best in salvaging whatever is left of their golden investigator. Otherwise, pre-second discussion investigators are generally left in the dust if they start bringing up anti-Mormon concerns. And this is because LDS know that the chances of conversion at that point are minute. They’d have a better chance knocking the neighbor’s door.

Polygamy is in the Doctrine and Covenants for heavens sake. My mission taught me to teach whatever needed to be taught, and to back down from nothing. I don't know how other missions were, but mine taught me right and proper. Maybe I was lucky, I hear that I was.

Which mission and which year? Sounds like a fluke at best.

[_Gazelam]

Sorry, that is too hard to believe. What you’re saying conflicts with the video I just saw and my experience as a missionary. You don’t offer them meat in the beginning; that is what Millet said and that is the same line we were suppose to give people who complained about not getting the full scoop. Now you’re trying to tell me meat was handed out like candy on your mission, so long as the investigators asked for it.

You give them the simplist explanation. The shortest answer, then you move the discussion to more basic principles. Kind of like showing them a picture of the finished house, then puting that away and getting back to building the house.

The MTC doesn’t teach missionaries to debate the sticky issues. You know this. It never has. It gives them a crash course on six discussions and then sends them out to rehearse specific questions, responding with specific verses, using specific methods. Some missionaries simply don’t know what to do if a discussion derails from the skit we learned at the MTC. Nothing learned at the MTC involves debating. The only time missionaries are allowed to debate is when an investigator who has been progressing through the discussions and has committed to baptism, hits an anti-Mormon brick wall. Then the missionaries are usually allowed to do their best in salvaging whatever is left of their golden investigator. Otherwise, pre-second discussion investigators are generally left in the dust if they start bringing up anti-Mormon concerns. And this is because LDS know that the chances of conversion at that point are minute. They’d have a better chance knocking the neighbor’s door

Your right in that we were not asked to debate, that the spirit leaves when you do so. The trick then is, as Millet stated, you turn the discusion to the root of the problem. You steer the discussion into the questions that should be asked. Question about polygamy? You give the brief answer regarding Gods views on marriage, then turn to the question of whether or not Joseph Smith was a prophet of God. If Joseph was a true prophet, then the doctrine of polygamy is a true one. I had to answer questions like this all the time.

Its not a matter most of the time of my ability to give the greatest arguement in the world, but rather a matter of teaching them how to get answers by way of the Holy Ghost. Do I give them a taste of what i got from the fountain? Or do I teach them how to reach the fountain themselves?

Which mission and which year? Sounds like a fluke at best.

Scotland Edinburgh mission, Dec. 91 to Dec. 92

[_richardMdBorn]

Most missionaries don't feel comfortable answering them either, which is why so many people get baptized when they shouldn't, and that is evidence in the fact that so many of them end up leaving the faith the minute they come across a doctrine they never knew about beforehand.

On my mission we answered every question asked us, and if we didn't know the answer, we were invited to pick up the phone and call the mission President. He happened to be Joseph Fielding McConkie, co-author of numerous books with Millet. And he always had an answer.

Also once a month we were invited to bring investigators to the mission home for a fireside discussion, which always consisted of an open forum that led into a discource. It got interesting sometimes.

This idea that the church hides its history and/or points of doctrine is ludicrous. Polygamy is in the Doctrine and Covenants for heavens sake. My mission taught me to teach whatever needed to be taught, and to back down from nothing. I don't know how other missions were, but mine taught me right and proper. Maybe I was lucky, I hear that I was.

I've written this before, but it was a while ago. I was living in Connecticut in 1986-7 and two LDS missionaries came knocking. I asked about Joseph Smith and polygamy and they had no idea that he had practiced it.

[_Gazelam]

I've written this before, but it was a while ago. I was living in Connecticut in 1986-7 and two LDS missionaries came knocking. I asked about Joseph Smith and polygamy and they had no idea that he had practiced it.

Section 132 must be like the Bermuda triangle of the scriptures, where when you read it your memory disappears.

[_Gazelam]

If you have ever read any of Joseph McConkies writings or talks then you might have a better understanding of why my mission was the way it was. We broke records in regards to baptisms and such. Most of the missionaries were of the "golden" variety.

Heres the wikipedia on him, at the bottom are links to talks and writings.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Fielding_McConkie