Facebook Discussion Group for Latter-day Commentary

LDCFacebookGroupAt the request of my bishop, I have created a new space for those who wish to discuss posts from this blog on a closed Facebook group rather than in the comments below. You can find it at this link: https://www.facebook.com/groups/latterdaycommentary/ I hesitated a long time before creating this group. I feel strongly such a move should not have been necessary. If you are LDS and are even halfway awake you should be interested in learning more about the mysteries of the kingdom and discussing them. But apparently the “tone” of my posts has upset too many people.

Best Vacation I’ve Ever Enjoyed

I just returned from two Denver Snuffer lectures in Las Vegas and St. George, then spent three days at the Salt Lake 2014 Sunstone Symposium. This was absolutely the best vacation I have ever enjoyed. I can’t remember the last time I was able to take two weeks off without having to put out some sort of IT fire at work every night from the hotel via Remote Desktop. Some people like to visit relatives on vacation, others go for culture – museums, art gallery, Broadway plays and the like. Put me in a room of intelligent, educated people discussing how the gospel and church affect their lives and I’m in dog heaven.

Upcoming Posts planned for Latter-day Commentary

I knew I had to get the page created and ready to go for the upcoming posts I have in mind: A review of Rock Waterman’s new book, What to Expect When You’re Excommunicated, a review of Denver Snuffer‘s Sunstone talk, Cutting Down the Tree of Life to Build a Wooden Bridge, as well as his lectures from Las Vegas and St George – A Broken Heart and a Contrite Spirit. I loved Spektator’s talk on The Latter-day Apostasy. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, it is a landmark paper that should open the eyes of the most blind of the LDS members among us because of the sound scriptural support contained in the paper.

Renewing the Temple Recommend

I am meeting with my Bishop this evening to get my Temple Recommend renewed. As I wrote previously, I have resolved my hesitation in answering the affiliation question correctly. I now know the correct answer and know the Lord approves because I asked him. I have discussed it with my wife and several blogging buddies and readers in private emails. But just to review, here’s the logic. 1) The handbook is clear the priesthood leader is not supposed to deviate from the questions as recorded in the front of the recommend book. 2) When asked the affiliation question, the answer is no. 3) If the priesthood leader probes, ask for a copy of the official notice from Salt Lake that one cannot hold a temple recommend if they read works from Denver Snuffer. There isn’t one and won’t be one.

Hearing the Voice of the Lord

In one of the many conversations I enjoyed while at Sunstone, one of my readers wanted to understand better how to hear the voice of the Lord and discern it from our own thoughts and those of the adversary. I shared many of the experiences I have shared on these pages in greater detail, especially my encounters with the adversary and the importance of the baptism of fire. One of the greatest and most important works we must accomplish in this life is to receive that baptism. It is absolutely essential. I am a witness it is real, it can be obtained, and it is a distinct event – not just a process. Imagine my surprise when a discussion of that very subject came up during the Q&A with Denver. His response: “I promise you the Lord can and will speak to you in complete sentences to your understanding.”

An Additional Witness Has Come Forward

Some have asked for copies of my correspondence with the individual who claimed to have met with the Savior and Heavenly Father at the young age of twenty before he was a baptized member of the LDS Church. I have received his long – 47 page – account and a follow-up 24-page account. I share this with you as evidence there are others beyond the five previously documented cases – I have their affidavits on file – but I have promised him I would not share it on my blog or in any public forum. He authorized the release to two individuals who asked for it, but only if I felt it appropriate. After reading his accounts, I feel the need to engage him in additional dialog before I can share it – but never online – as promised.

An Apostasy From Within the LDS Church

The second document he shared is timely and prophetic. In my opinion – and he noted the same in his written account – there are some things about to come to pass that will amaze and astound the members of the church. I know it’s not fair to tease you like this, but I’ll give you a clue. It involves the fulfillment of D&C 112:24–26. I was introduced to a new word which I’m sure has been debunked by many of my readers, but I’ll throw it out there anyway – Laneshine. For those who follow the link, consider the source. Consider also 2 Thessalonians chapter 2. Has anybody studied this chapter that can offer an inspired interpretation? I’m an open minded guy and thought I had heard all the weird stuff, but this takes the cake. Rob: I’m keeping this private as we agreed – just asking for assistance.

The Gentile Church Will Reject the Fullness

I know this is one of the favorite arguments of those who are opposed to how Denver has interpreted the Book of Mormon. When I was first introduced to his writings I had a hard time with this concept but believe I have now come to understand it. Carol and I discussed this concept, along with many others, during our windshield time on our way home from Utah yesterday. That’s one of the benefits of long car rides together. The idea that the LDS Church could be in apostasy is such a disturbing idea, Carol said even thinking about it made her feel physically sick to her stomach. Here’s a little advice for those who believe this doctrine. Find ways to share it gently, especially to those whose ancestors were converted back in the days of Joseph Smith or Brigham Young. It can be a tough thing to hear.

Open Invitation to Dialog

Many of you know I have agreed to a debate, or rather, a dialog with my long-time friend Bill Mason about the idea of the Lord sending messengers from outside the hierarchy of the LDS Church. I have written about this several times, especially in this post entitled, The Doctrine of Additional Prophets. I knew it hit a nerve by the number of “likes” it received but also by the number of private email messages sent to me with calls to repent, to please consider getting help in casting out whatever evil spirit was afflicting me and numerous requests to remove the post. I will never cease to be amazed why the open discussion of dissident ideas is so difficult for some people, especially those I admire, respect and have served with side by side in the priesthood for so many years. Can’t we just talk?

Comments Welcome on Any of These Ideas

Comments welcome below, on the new Facebook group, via private email, text or a phone call. Let me know how you feel about any of the ideas shared in this post. Help me learn how to present truth in a better way to unify the Saints. Thanks and God bless you my friends. And for the record, I want that temple recommend and believe I am worthy of obtaining it. I sustain the brethren, meaning I have voted for them to lead this church and am OK with following their direction when I know it’s pleasing to the Lord. I am not a “Follow the Prophet” kind of Mormon. I am a “Come unto Christ” kind of member. That’s my mantra. I will do as the Lord directs, and trust me, he does direct me. The heavens are not silent. I have heard his voice and have conversed with Him through the Veil. Cheers.

39 comments for “Facebook Discussion Group for Latter-day Commentary

  1. August 5, 2014 at 12:02 pm

    Tim,
    Will the same info be avail. on facebook and in the comments section of your blog? Not likely. Your Bishop is asking you to exclude those who are not able to get on facebook (there are reasons why some cannot). Your blog is valuable to many. The imposed (“requested”) restriction on where you post is a thinly veiled attempt to restrict your audience. If people do not like what is posted, there are many other blogs where their particular views are entertained. They should read there and stop visiting your blog. They should not impose their bias on others who wish to read and participate in the discussions on your blog.
    Yes, the Spirit has testified to me that D&C 112:24–26 is imminent.
    Yes, the Spirit has testified to me that 3 Nephi 16:10 refers to OUR day and OUR church. The Holy Church of God has become polluted (Mormon 9:38). Shall we continue to tap dance around the issue until the sword of justice falls?
    JR

  2. August 5, 2014 at 3:05 pm

    :( I genuinely cannot comprehend how and why people cannot choose to not read a blog if it bothers them. I have stopped visiting blogs, following fb pages, reading fb posts and the like from individuals with whom I know longer feel a connection or alignment in beliefs. Why cannot your bishop simply ask these good people to spend their time doing other things instead of creating stress and worry within themselves (and challenges for you, and drama for your bishop) by reading your blog? I have to agree with JR above. This effort to manipulate your online activity leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

    I’m glad that so many care about you, but for them to feel they have a right to complain to a priesthood leader about you and/or your writings? That kind of thinking has never crossed my mind. Still, I’m grateful for your humble example, Tim. And I’m so pleased you got to enjoy such a lovely vacation.

  3. mckilee
    August 5, 2014 at 3:42 pm

    Tim, would you please consider doing your private discussion group somewhere other than Facebook? There are other places to do private blogs. It would be greatly appreciated as I do not like using Facebook. I have been reading your blog for months and have been greatly benefited by it. Its an appreciated thing to hear of others’ spiritual experiences and their journey to the veil. I hope you will find another place to meet. Thank you for taking it into consideration.

  4. Dave Park
    August 5, 2014 at 3:53 pm

    We all have our agency. Thanks God for that gift. Please consider another location besides Face Book . Love ya man.
    Dave Park.

  5. August 5, 2014 at 5:37 pm

    As stated on the Facebook group page: A few administrative notes: Under expert advice – from Carol – the group status has been changed from Closed to Secret. Apparently that restricts it so nobody but members of the group can see who is in the group.

    Second, nothing has changed on the blog. It is still wide open, meaning if you are a subscriber you will continue to receive emails of new posts and nobody will know you are a subscriber.

    Third, you can retain you anonymity there. You do not need to comment using your Facebook account. You can still leave comments with just a name or pseudonym and an email address – real or fake.

    Fourth, you do not need to use Facebook or be a member of Facebook to participate in comments here. True, you won’t see the comments here, but then, neither will all my 900+ friends, some of whom let the Bishop know they were not happy with the discussion taking place on my wall.

    • Dave Park
      August 5, 2014 at 6:00 pm

      Thanks Tim.

  6. Mike Harris
    August 5, 2014 at 5:38 pm

    I am not currently LDS but consider myself an investigator who has no doubts on the veracity of the Book of Mormon, believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, and that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is God’s church on Earth.

    I’ve learned a tremendous amount from reading not only Tim but hundreds of comments left on this and other blogs. It’s patently obvious that Tim’s Bishop wants to move the commenting over to FB for one of two reasons (maybe both?). One, to stymie debate by requiring people who may not be active on FB to register and two, to attach a real name to a comment, in an attempt to identify what he obviously thinks are more “troublemakers.” It’s disgusting…this despicable need some seem to have to control what other people think, and where they are “allowed” to express their feelings, whether they be positive or negative.

    I’ve never commented on this blog before, but would follow Tim and those who frequent his comment section (or Facebook page!) not because they help me doubt what I already believe is true, but because they strengthen my faith and beliefs, and without knowing it, are some of the most remarkable teachers I’ve never met.

  7. johnD
    August 5, 2014 at 5:53 pm

    Tim,
    I don’t use face book and don’t plan to.
    Regarding D&C 112: 24–26, NOBODY IS LISTENING to Him! But we are His chosen, so He will give us another chance, another testimony, this time a testimony everyone will hear. And those who survive will have another opportunity to follow Him.
    I know you’re not much on the book Visions of Glory, but I think an earthquake that takes out the Wasatch front is a probability. About 6 years ago I was sitting in traffic just North of the Bountiful temple heading North on I-15 and all of sudden I saw the mountains come down all the way to the freeway and over it in places, for as far as I could see toward Ogden. It was so startling that it snapped me back to reality. Years later when I read visions of Glory and heard how so many of the brethren, and others, were killed it got me thinking of D&C 112. One possibility anyway. Oh and Spencer said he thought it happened in the fall, with a second earthquake along the West coast in the spring. And by the way, we have two blood moons coming, one this fall in October and the next one in the spring, in April :)

    • Rodney
      August 5, 2014 at 10:59 pm

      I have long believed 3 Nephi 16:10 was speaking of the church and that there would be a great divide in the church. I never knew what that would be though. I wonder now, with fierce conviction, that His ‘calling out’ those who will respond to His invitation to ‘come unto Me’, and receive His spirit to the point of being ‘born again’ is connected to this divide.

      I have read D&C 112 before but never focused on it that I can remember, but it is very sobering to say the least.

      Considering the normal people (non-prophet) prophecies by so many, I’ll not be taking up residence any time soon in the happy valley, or Yellowstone for that matter.

      I suppose there would be no reason for the “followers of the one-true-prophet” to be concerned though. To be clear, I say this in favor of “The One True God” and not DS as I do not ‘follow’ him.

      No matter how the discussion can be ‘sliced’ I embrace and reiterate the message to “Come Unto Christ and be Perfected in Him”.

      • August 22, 2014 at 7:00 am

        Help, I’ve been informed and I can’t become igotrann.

  8. MarkinPNW
    August 5, 2014 at 11:17 pm

    In reading your reference to D&C 112, going on to verses 27-29 for more context, I was especially impressed with verse 27 for what I need to do individually, and with verse 29, getting the thought that the baptism mentioned there may need to include the baptism of fire and the Holy Ghost to be complete and effectual.

    Along the lines of what Rodney says in his Aug. 5, 10:59 comment.

  9. lizzievalentina
    August 5, 2014 at 11:46 pm

    Ditto the distaste of having to move your comments to anywhere other than here, where they seem to belong so well.

  10. August 5, 2014 at 11:50 pm

    A general comment: When it comes to expressing thought, I am opposed to control, compulsion and coercion in any manner, shape or form. I believe in self-control and am confident the Lord will help us in our expressions if we humbly seek to listen to his voice. His sheep hear his voice. I do not claim to be a thought leader but I do claim to have been inspired in some of the thoughts I have shared over the years.

    My objective in all I do online and in real life is to Come unto Christ, to help others come unto Christ and to find a way to unite those who desire the same thing but see it from different sides of the spectrum. Carol suggested I call my discussion group, Tim in the Middle, but I rejected that because I want it to be clear I do take positions and know the Lord wants us to make choices as to where we stand.

    There is no middle ground on some issues, but we can reach the same conclusions or objectives by coming at it from different directions. A very simple example is found in the Facebook meme I posted today: 6+3=9 but so does 5+4. The way you do things is not always the only way to do them. Respect other people’s way of thinking. That’s why I attended Sunstone and why I had such an enjoyable experience.

    If I haven’t made it clear in why I added the private and now secret Facebook discussion group, it is because I simply want to keep a forum available for those who prefer to discuss my posts on Facebook. There were too many complaints to my priesthood leaders that my posts and the discussions that followed were confusing, distracting or “less than faith-promoting” to some who read them among my ward and stake.

    My declaration of Denver Snuffer as a prophet seems so logical and straight-forward that it continues to amaze me how this bothers so many people. I don’t know how many times I’ve shared the logic: The Testimony of Jesus Christ is the Spirit of Prophecy. Therefore, if one has the Testimony of Jesus Christ, which is to say they have been in His presence, have been ministered to by Him, then they are a prophet.

    It’s as simple as that. It does not mean they are a prophet in the LDS Church and it does not mean they are THE prophet, the man we sustain as Prophet, Seer and Revelator. It does not mean he is a prophet in the LDS Church at all. After all, the man is not even a member of the LDS Church. He was rejected by the leadership, both local and general, in spite of doing what the Lord asked him to do.

    Yet, some LDS leaders and members have a problem with my declaration. I do not fully understand why. The Lord asked me to study his words, the Lord asked me to pray about his messages and, once the Lord answered my prayers, he asked me to share my witness of the man, that he was acting under the direction of the Lord. I have heard and read every argument against it, but they change nothing.

    You are welcome to continue your assertions I have been deceived, or am under the influence of a false spirit or that I am an attention hound. I understand and appreciate your loving concern and that you are so very uncomfortable as I continue to reaffirm my assertion. My meeting with Denver coupled with the literally thousands of hours in studying his materials – the scriptures really – have only solidified my position.

    I am not a follower of Denver Snuffer. I am a follower of Jesus Christ. I do not know why I was asked to do this. I only know I cannot resist the promptings of the Lord when He answers my prayers. He shows me a kernel of an idea, just a spark and asks me to use my talents to flesh it out into a coherent statement. I look forward to the dialogue with my good friend Bill Mason on the subject of Denver being a prophet.

    Due to a family emergency with the bishop, I did not get my temple recommend tonight. We’ll try for another occasion. He may have decided to require additional discussion or actions of me in order to get that piece of paper that is so important in our Mormon culture. I will do all within my power to comply. I’ve been reading Rock’s book. I wish I had his abilities to express it, but we MUST do as the Lord inspires.

    After all, isn’t that the bottom line? What can a priesthood leader say in response to the affirmation we have chosen to follow the promptings of the spirit, or even more powerfully, have responded yes to a request from the Lord. He does ask things of us. I know this from many years of hearing His voice. If the response is, “that’s not the way we do things in this church,” then who wins? The voice of he Lord wins out every time.

    Just some thoughts that came to me this evening as I pondered where I’m at, why I’m doing what I’m doing and why I’m willing to wait patiently upon the Lord. After all, if spiritual manifestations came every day, we might not be so inclined to treasure them up and hold them sacred. I share only what will help us all to desire unity in our journey to the veil. He awaits us there. Of this I grow more certain each and every day.

    • Rodney
      August 6, 2014 at 3:46 am

      Tim… I am reminded of Proverbs 18:10 “The name of the LORD is a strong tower; the righteous run to it and are safe.”

      Desciples of Christ seek HIM and ‘encourage’ others with all means available. They don’t “tell” anyone what or how to think or use ‘peer pressure’ or ‘thinnly veiled threats’, as it were, to steer the course of others. The “Born” see this so clearly.

      We are all in different places and seeking as best we can and our journeys differ greatly at times… yet we are uplifted by communion with others. Many are blessed by the way you have made your search for Christ available… including me, because you facilitate “engagement”.

      Blog on Brother…

  11. lizzievalentina
    August 6, 2014 at 12:11 am

    Tim, I clicked on the Facebook link you provide but it says I cannot look at it. How do I get accepted there?

    • helorum
      August 6, 2014 at 11:47 am

      Same here.

    • August 7, 2014 at 11:37 am

      Just need to add you as a Facebook friend first, or you add me.

      • helorum
        August 8, 2014 at 3:46 pm

        I still get content currently not available . I am on yor friend list

        • August 8, 2014 at 4:13 pm

          Helorum: I’ve sent you an invitation via email. The process for adding people seems to have changed once the group went from “closed” to “secret”.

  12. mckilee
    August 6, 2014 at 12:29 am

    Hi Tim, again,
    I won’t use Facebook and there are several people who feel the same. Couldn’t you use another private, passworded site other than Facebook? Did you bishop specifically tell you it had to be Facebook that you use? I feel badly that I won’t be able to join your private discussions.

  13. August 6, 2014 at 8:34 am

    Tim,
    I respect your integrity and your love of the truth. If your bishop causes you to shut out a signif. part of your readership, who wins from that?
    I cannot and will not be on facebook. I DEEPLY resent ignorant people causing me to be blocked from discussions on your blog wh. will now be hidden from me and others who cannot access facebook.
    What you post on your personal blog is no more the business of people in your ward than what size temple garments your wear. IT IS NOT THEIR RIGHT, NOR IS IT YOUR BISHOP’S RIGHT, TO CONTROL YOU AND THE CONTENT OF PRIVATE DISCUSSIONS ON LINE.
    What ever happened to freedom of speech, part of the Constitution we give so much lip service to in the Church?
    I would recommend when you meet with bishop and sp, you tell them you follow Christ and no man, but you sustain the general authorities in their calling as leaders of the church.
    It worked for me in my TR interview last month.
    Thank you for all you do to serve the Lord.
    JR

    • August 7, 2014 at 12:16 pm

      Amen. See my response to Kathryn’s comments below.

  14. kathryn
    August 6, 2014 at 11:18 am

    I was approved for the facebook group and spent some time there last night. This “secret” business has a “We have something to hide” in our discussions there and it’s feeling that I’m not comfortable with.

    I agree with the gentleman above and others who are resenting the fact you cannot express your point of view on this blog for fear you are insulting some one. No person can injury another man’s faith or belief… unless they want to be offended and hurt. Why can’t folks take responsibility for themselves and their point of view. I’m so tired of the WAAA WAAA. If they don’t like what is being said… take responsibility and simply click off. It amazes me how much time folks spend worrying and involving themselves in someone else’s salvation uninvited.

    If they read Denver… they would know that they have plenty to do in securing their own salvation without meddling and tattling on others.

    Why in didn’t your bishop just tell the whiners to go somewhere else to get their information?

    You said anyone can join the facebook page. How does that eliminate the grumblers… the ones that go to your bishop?

    • August 7, 2014 at 12:09 pm

      Kathryn,

      The thing about Facebook is that most people use their real identities there. So far, nobody from my ward or even stake has asked to join the group. If you know how Facebook works, when I post something on my wall, even if it’s simply a link to a post here on WordPress, that link also appears on the wall of all 1,000 of my friends there.

      That will no longer happen. For example, unless one of my Facebook friends is also a subscriber to my WordPress feed, they will know nothing about the post I wrote last night. Only those of my Facebook friends who are members of the group would see the link. So far, there are NO comments on the link there, which is fine with me.

      I admit I am a little taken aback by the number of readers here expressing dismay at the idea I have moved the link announcing a new WordPress post from my Facebook profile to my closed Facebook group. Forget about Facebook. It was not my intent to get people to move there to comment on posts here. That has not changed.

      What has changed is that I will no longer get members of my stake running to my Bishop asking him, “Do you know what Tim has written now?” I feel sorry for my poor Bishop. This has been a headache for him. So many people have expressed their concerns to him that he asked me to help him in this way. I am happy to comply.

      I have simply communicated poorly the purpose of what I was doing, why I did it and how it would affect readers / commenters here. It won’t. Not at all. You don’t have to use Facebook to continue in the dialog here. It just happened that some of my Facebook friends were having their own conversations about my posts when I announced them there.

      Now, have I properly confused everybody? Forget Facebook. Nothing has changed. I shouldn’t have said anything about it. It just so happens there is now a Facebook group called “Latter-day Commentary by Tim Malone,” with about 120 members so far. There is some overlap of the 2,500+ subscribers here, but nobody is required to use Facebook.

      You won’t miss anything except those who prefer to comment there. And yes, it’s going to be comparable to the Hub in that I will need to moderate it a little more. The bottom line is that it gets the dialog off my Facebook wall where members of my stake were reading things that were not to their liking and it helps eliminate a problem for my Bishop.

      Kathryn, I agree with you. If someone doesn’t like the dialog here or there then don’t read it, unsubscribe, defriend me on Facebook, or remove yourself from the Facebook group. Yes, there’s going to be some baser dialog there, That’s the nature of Facebook. Whatever dialog there should in no way affect what is discussed here.

      One final point: I know of dozens of bloggers in the Mormon community who link to my posts and then have discussions of them on their blogs. It’s the same for several forums, especially the LDS Freedom Forum. Even the Hub links here from time to time. I don’t join the conversations there because it’s almost more than I can handle to read the comments here. As it is, I can only respond to a few now and then.

      I apologize for the confusion. I’m sorry it upset a few people. Trying to help resolve one issue there – on Facebook – seems to have caused some hurt feelings here. The difficulty with Facebook is that you have everybody and their dog on there with so many different levels of gospel knowledge, and so many with no understanding of technology.

      I’m with you. If they don’t like what they are seeing on my wall, why didn’t they just defriend me instead of asking the Bishop to control me. Imagine how my poor Bishop must feel. He doesn’t want to control me. We have talked about this for hours. He has taken great pains to keep from telling me what to do. He simply asked for help with a problem and I saw a way to help by moving announcements of new posts to a private / closed group there instead of blasting it to 1,000+ TBM friends.

      There, I’m done. That’s all I’m going to say about it. You don’t have to join Facebook and you don’t have to join the private group there. OK?

      • August 7, 2014 at 1:03 pm

        I understand where you are coming from Tim, I know you can not please everyone. I realize we all have our perceptions, points of view, and paradigms. I am sorry that people feel they have to tattle-tale to your Bishop. I know that I will be ignoring at least two posters and I empathize with Julie and those that just aren’t FB fans. I also empathize with you and I am fine with how you want to handle things. I like the Red Green show and as Red likes to say…” We are all in this together- keep your stick on the ice.” lol Peace to you and yours. :)

      • kathryn
        August 9, 2014 at 8:35 am

        Thank you for your clarification. I understand. I have joined the facebook group but found that many of the conversations are generated by others, which I have found many lacking in substance. I have not commented. I will continue to post my comments here where the subject matter is managed better and the dialoge, for the most part, stays on the subject.

  15. Bryan
    August 6, 2014 at 2:36 pm

    I found Avraham Gileadi’s Apocalyptic Commentary helpful for Isaiah 28. It speaks of the “drunkards of Ephraim” that “water down his word until it is ineffectual”. There is another side to this; those who seek the greater portion of His word.

  16. August 6, 2014 at 4:23 pm

    May I add my voice to the rest? I absolutely hate Facebook and anything to do with it. I wish we could meet elsewhere.

    I have only starting exploring the work of Avraham Gileadi recently. His interpretation of Isaiah is absolutely fascinating. I have sent for his book: “Isaiah Decoded” and am getting excited for it to show on my doorstep!

  17. Toni
    August 6, 2014 at 5:49 pm

    I cast my vote against facebook, also.

    • Boo
      August 6, 2014 at 10:38 pm

      Me too. while I do agree that we should pray about and fully consider the requests and recommendations of our leaders in this case to do as requested seriously restricts an important part of what your blog is all about. You should do what the Spirit tells you but I hope the facebook option is rejected

    • Julie
      August 7, 2014 at 10:27 am

      Tim, I am a member of the FB group, and I am already disenchanted with the quality of the conversation. Somehow, a directed discussion on your blog in response to a specific post is far superior to a FB open format, where any group member can pursue any agenda he/she likes. I understand your bishop’s concerns. Is there a way to block all comments on specific FB posts, so no discussion takes place there when you post a link to this blog?

      I suppose you need a place for your conversation with Bill Mason, but I’m sure there is a better place for that online than FB, where you can make the debate visible to the public, but not have to manually delete intruder comments. I’ve been a member of LDS themed discussion groups in the past, and every single time, I’ve had to remove myself because the spirit of the discussion deteriorated into irrelevance and/or intolerance.

      I’d really like to follow your debate. Isn’t there an online forum besides FB that you could use?

      • August 7, 2014 at 11:07 am

        I am in agreement with Julie.

      • August 7, 2014 at 12:14 pm

        Hi Julie. See my response to Kathryn’s comments above. Thanks.

  18. Chris Chandler
    August 13, 2014 at 6:28 pm

    Tim – I have tried multiple times to access the latterdaycommentary group on FB (using the link your posted at the top of this post) and have been unable to get in or join.

    This is what I’ve pasted in my google chrome browser: https://www.facebook.com/groups/latterdaycommentary/

    It says this content is currently unavailable.

    What should I do?

    Chris

    • August 13, 2014 at 7:50 pm

      Hi Chris. The group was in open enrollment for about a week before I changed it to a secret group. Previously, anyone on Facebook could request to join the group and, as the owner and sole administrator of the group it was a simple matter of approving or denying. Once it was changed to a secret group, the rules have changed. You must first be my Facebook friend and then I must add you to the group. I see you are my Facebook friend so I just added you. You are in. Try it again.

  19. August 13, 2014 at 7:54 pm

    By the way, I removed Bill Mason from the group – my longtime friend from my Young Adult days. We had some marvelous times singing in the YA Choir all over Southern California, but Bill is fairly set in his ways as far as being open to the stuff we are discussing on the FB Group – yes, it’s a little different there. For example, I have decided to post my review of Rock’s book there instead of here and hope to have that up this weekend. If you want to have access to the group, just send me a friend request on Facebook and tell me you want to join.

  20. mmmmm1234
    August 14, 2014 at 3:52 am

    Tim, can you list or provide more details on “the five previously documented cases?” I’m aware of a few, but would love to know what is included in your documented cases. Thank you! -Matthew

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Current ye@r *