Episode 35: An Interview with Mike

John interviews TBM panelist Mike and gets a Sunday School less in the mix.

Episode 35

63 comments on “Episode 35: An Interview with Mike”

  1. Eric Comstock Reply

    Hi Mike. Welcome to Mormon Expression. I felt bad for you as you tried to explain what women’s role is in the gospel. I disagree however with your point of view and feel that women truly are 2nd class in the church. While the priesthood is allowed and expected to visit YW and RS you would never see a woman visiting HP or EQ. Also while men can choose whichever career they want, women in the church must conform to one only calling, motherhood. What if a woman wants to follow a career? Does that make her sinful? Of course not.

  2. Eric Comstock Reply

    Hi Mike. Welcome to Mormon Expression. I felt bad for you as you tried to explain what women’s role is in the gospel. I disagree however with your point of view and feel that women truly are 2nd class in the church. While the priesthood is allowed and expected to visit YW and RS you would never see a woman visiting HP or EQ. Also while men can choose whichever career they want, women in the church must conform to one only calling, motherhood. What if a woman wants to follow a career? Does that make her sinful? Of course not.

    • Eric Comstock Reply

      One more comment: I do sort of like your veiw of how you would like to see the church. I loved your comment that you thought the church was half a sleep. I think passion is a wonderful thing and we should have more of it in the church.

  3. Eric Comstock Reply

    One more comment: I do sort of like your veiw of how you would like to see the church. I loved your comment that you thought the church was half a sleep. I think passion is a wonderful thing and we should have more of it in the church.

  4. Gina Wolverton Reply

    Mike seems like a nice guy. I can’t relate to his view on the church and women. I know he is sincere in his belief. His approach isn’t academic. I suppose that’s how one holds onto a testimony.
    I love your interview style, John.

  5. Gina Wolverton Reply

    Mike seems like a nice guy. I can’t relate to his view on the church and women. I know he is sincere in his belief. His approach isn’t academic. I suppose that’s how one holds onto a testimony.
    I love your interview style, John.

  6. Wes Cauthers Reply

    I too noticed people half asleep growing up in Mormonism. Seems to be something that occurs universally regardless of ward location. Why do you think that is Mike?

  7. Wes Cauthers Reply

    I too noticed people half asleep growing up in Mormonism. Seems to be something that occurs universally regardless of ward location. Why do you think that is Mike?

  8. A barker Reply

    Excellent interview. It is fascinating to hear someone with so great eagerness to accept everything in the church. It seems naive to me (and we’ve all been there). I had a hard time with his attempt to explain women’s value in the church. As a woman attempting to salvage my sense of personal worth, I am realizing that the church informed me that my value was only in how I supported someone else, like husband or children. What is the value of a woman in the church who never marries or one who becomes widowed? Bake cookies for the Bishopric? I don’t have anything from my lifetime in mormonism to build my personal, non-attached to someone else, sense of self worth on. Wish you could have answered that.

  9. A barker Reply

    Excellent interview. It is fascinating to hear someone with so great eagerness to accept everything in the church. It seems naive to me (and we’ve all been there). I had a hard time with his attempt to explain women’s value in the church. As a woman attempting to salvage my sense of personal worth, I am realizing that the church informed me that my value was only in how I supported someone else, like husband or children. What is the value of a woman in the church who never marries or one who becomes widowed? Bake cookies for the Bishopric? I don’t have anything from my lifetime in mormonism to build my personal, non-attached to someone else, sense of self worth on. Wish you could have answered that.

  10. Nathan R Kennard Reply

    In the first few minutes of the interview (5:22), Mike use a term I think is diminutive and unhelpful. “I guess that’s why these anti-mormon things don’t bother me so much.” [referring to his mention of being on Dr. Shade’s board and having served a mission where Catholicism and Protestantism are at odds]

    Using the term anti-mormon is like referring to a man, not as ‘intact’, but as ‘uncircumcised’. Anti-mormon, if it were a well defined term, might have a legitimate use, but in this case as in most that I have heard, is ambiguous and its connotation comes across as negative.

    The interview was good. John contributed structure to the discussion. One question, however, remains in my mind. Mike indicated that as a result of an answer he got in response to his prayer, he evaluates questions relating to his faith based on the premise that a god heard and answered his prayer, and therefore exists and that in some way, this answer indicates that LDS Inc. is and was directed through prophets by this god. Borrowing words from the movie Princess Bride, “I do not think it means what you think it means.”

    I understand that a person would base decisions on an experience like that related, I did the same for many years. Perhaps, however, a different explanation than that given would be more accurate.

  11. Nathan R Kennard Reply

    In the first few minutes of the interview (5:22), Mike use a term I think is diminutive and unhelpful. “I guess that’s why these anti-mormon things don’t bother me so much.” [referring to his mention of being on Dr. Shade’s board and having served a mission where Catholicism and Protestantism are at odds]

    Using the term anti-mormon is like referring to a man, not as ‘intact’, but as ‘uncircumcised’. Anti-mormon, if it were a well defined term, might have a legitimate use, but in this case as in most that I have heard, is ambiguous and its connotation comes across as negative.

    The interview was good. John contributed structure to the discussion. One question, however, remains in my mind. Mike indicated that as a result of an answer he got in response to his prayer, he evaluates questions relating to his faith based on the premise that a god heard and answered his prayer, and therefore exists and that in some way, this answer indicates that LDS Inc. is and was directed through prophets by this god. Borrowing words from the movie Princess Bride, “I do not think it means what you think it means.”

    I understand that a person would base decisions on an experience like that related, I did the same for many years. Perhaps, however, a different explanation than that given would be more accurate.

  12. Nathan R Kennard Reply

    The question remaining in my mind, is why Mike has not apparently given serious consideration to alternative explanations for the experience on which he bases his life decisions. If alternative explanations have been considered and resolved, that is interesting but the account of the experience and the interpretation given do not make that clear.

  13. Nathan R Kennard Reply

    The question remaining in my mind, is why Mike has not apparently given serious consideration to alternative explanations for the experience on which he bases his life decisions. If alternative explanations have been considered and resolved, that is interesting but the account of the experience and the interpretation given do not make that clear.

  14. Mike Tannehill Reply

    Thanks for the comments.

    I think that women in the church need to stop delineating themselves in the church as second class. That is backwards from the way things are structured. They are intended to be, ultimately, a godess. No amount of work a man does is of any use if the enviorment that surrounds him is unfit for the Holy Ghost to dwell in. In nearly every case the enviorment of a home is structured by a wife and mother, from the decor to the food to the clothing on the children. It is a mother and a wife that sets a tone in a home with the father often away trying to be a provider. All sealing ordinances are of no use unless ratified by the Holy Ghost.

    As for my prayer, I know what the Holy Ghost testified of, and I know how the Holy Ghost feels and speaks. I flet him before that experience, and I have felt him since then. I have seen him change homosexual men to straight men, and I have seen him take silly men and make them great and mighty in the things of the Lord. I know the Holy Ghost, and it was he that testified to me that night. He testified of the truthfulness of this Church. He testified that Joseph Smith was a Prophet, and that we can know Christ by beign obedient to the covenants we make in this restored priesthood.

    Sorry to cut this short, but I have to go.

  15. Mike Tannehill Reply

    Thanks for the comments.

    I think that women in the church need to stop delineating themselves in the church as second class. That is backwards from the way things are structured. They are intended to be, ultimately, a godess. No amount of work a man does is of any use if the enviorment that surrounds him is unfit for the Holy Ghost to dwell in. In nearly every case the enviorment of a home is structured by a wife and mother, from the decor to the food to the clothing on the children. It is a mother and a wife that sets a tone in a home with the father often away trying to be a provider. All sealing ordinances are of no use unless ratified by the Holy Ghost.

    As for my prayer, I know what the Holy Ghost testified of, and I know how the Holy Ghost feels and speaks. I flet him before that experience, and I have felt him since then. I have seen him change homosexual men to straight men, and I have seen him take silly men and make them great and mighty in the things of the Lord. I know the Holy Ghost, and it was he that testified to me that night. He testified of the truthfulness of this Church. He testified that Joseph Smith was a Prophet, and that we can know Christ by beign obedient to the covenants we make in this restored priesthood.

    Sorry to cut this short, but I have to go.

  16. Peggy Reply

    I have loved these podcasts…until now. I listened first with nausea and then tears as Mike described the role of women.

    Mike said above, “…women in the church need to stop delineating themselves in the church as second class.” That statement, even more clearly than his interview, self-describes Mike as a person who does not see that he has been riding in the ruler’s seat on top of the elephant and cannot see its belly.

    Mike could take a lesson from Prince Siddhartha (the Buddha) who left his palace to walk in poverty and become enlightened about those who were not born to wealth. Mike, if it were possible for you to climb down from your birth-ride on the top of the elephant and walk “in the pink moccasins,” you might see the church from where women walk.

    Now I remember…deeply, intimately remember (after tolerating more than 55 years of activity and belief as a woman)…why I am no longer active. Thank you for that.

  17. Peggy Reply

    I have loved these podcasts…until now. I listened first with nausea and then tears as Mike described the role of women.

    Mike said above, “…women in the church need to stop delineating themselves in the church as second class.” That statement, even more clearly than his interview, self-describes Mike as a person who does not see that he has been riding in the ruler’s seat on top of the elephant and cannot see its belly.

    Mike could take a lesson from Prince Siddhartha (the Buddha) who left his palace to walk in poverty and become enlightened about those who were not born to wealth. Mike, if it were possible for you to climb down from your birth-ride on the top of the elephant and walk “in the pink moccasins,” you might see the church from where women walk.

    Now I remember…deeply, intimately remember (after tolerating more than 55 years of activity and belief as a woman)…why I am no longer active. Thank you for that.

  18. Swearing Elder Reply

    Nice interview, John. At the end you said you didn’t understand why people felt they had to stay pseudonymous on the boards and blogs. It’s not a fear of the church, it’s simply to avoid drama with the family. If I were single and didn’t have to worry about trying to negotiate a non-believer’s life with a true believing wife’s I’d use my real name and wouldn’t give two damns what the church thought of me or what I said.

  19. Swearing Elder Reply

    Nice interview, John. At the end you said you didn’t understand why people felt they had to stay pseudonymous on the boards and blogs. It’s not a fear of the church, it’s simply to avoid drama with the family. If I were single and didn’t have to worry about trying to negotiate a non-believer’s life with a true believing wife’s I’d use my real name and wouldn’t give two damns what the church thought of me or what I said.

  20. Jon Reply

    A barker said: “I don’t have anything from my lifetime in mormonism to build my personal, non-attached to someone else, sense of self worth on.”

    Good illustration of the co-dependency Mormonism instills in many members. A woman’s role, status, and success hinges upon how well she supports and uplifts her man. Her identity is wrapped up in his.

  21. Jon Reply

    A barker said: “I don’t have anything from my lifetime in mormonism to build my personal, non-attached to someone else, sense of self worth on.”

    Good illustration of the co-dependency Mormonism instills in many members. A woman’s role, status, and success hinges upon how well she supports and uplifts her man. Her identity is wrapped up in his.

  22. Paul Reply

    ” and wouldn’t give two damns what the church thought of me or what I said.”

    Believe me, the church doesn’t give two, three, four or any other number of ‘damns’ about you.

  23. Paul Reply

    ” and wouldn’t give two damns what the church thought of me or what I said.”

    Believe me, the church doesn’t give two, three, four or any other number of ‘damns’ about you.

  24. Steve Kimball Reply

    Nut job interview, brainwashed nonesense. Abramic covenant- love it! I lived with Muslims for a total of six years and trust me they place their women much higher than most Mormons. The interviewee ought to just go into a church meeting once and talk about a heavenly mother…he would be told once to shut the hell up and the second time excommunicated. Mormons unfortunately are taught they have the truth which in most cases translates to knowing it all. They believe wierd things daddy taught them that aren’t taught at church..the sad thing is that most of what daddy tuaght is accurate and has been changed by the church. Because you say you love your wife it doesn’t mean you love her…telling a women “what her role is” went out of popularity in the 60’s. The real discussion that should happen would be on when the church will change its stance on women like they did on blacks because the pressure and time is coming when we Mormons won’t be calling women our “helpers”. Let not forget what my Apostle and many of his buddies like JS and BY believed: “I think no more of taking a wife then buying another cow”. Keep it real people…we want to think and say we cherish women when in reality in Colorado City we can observe what our founders and the first six prophets lived and taught. Youngsters would do well to seek out all truth not just the currrent faithful doctrine which would have caused our past leaders to be excommunicated. The holy ghost by the way is you talking to yourself telling yourself what you want to here and you can read about the illness in any psychology book…what counts is what Jesus Christ said period not what you want to think and call “individual impressions or feelings”. What the hell if Charles Manson was a Mormon for heavens sake open your minds not your hearts. People who leave leave because they have smartened up but faithful like to “feel” otherwise. Find me a sword at the Hill Cumorah and I will buy all the bullshit again.

  25. Steve Kimball Reply

    Nut job interview, brainwashed nonesense. Abramic covenant- love it! I lived with Muslims for a total of six years and trust me they place their women much higher than most Mormons. The interviewee ought to just go into a church meeting once and talk about a heavenly mother…he would be told once to shut the hell up and the second time excommunicated. Mormons unfortunately are taught they have the truth which in most cases translates to knowing it all. They believe wierd things daddy taught them that aren’t taught at church..the sad thing is that most of what daddy tuaght is accurate and has been changed by the church. Because you say you love your wife it doesn’t mean you love her…telling a women “what her role is” went out of popularity in the 60’s. The real discussion that should happen would be on when the church will change its stance on women like they did on blacks because the pressure and time is coming when we Mormons won’t be calling women our “helpers”. Let not forget what my Apostle and many of his buddies like JS and BY believed: “I think no more of taking a wife then buying another cow”. Keep it real people…we want to think and say we cherish women when in reality in Colorado City we can observe what our founders and the first six prophets lived and taught. Youngsters would do well to seek out all truth not just the currrent faithful doctrine which would have caused our past leaders to be excommunicated. The holy ghost by the way is you talking to yourself telling yourself what you want to here and you can read about the illness in any psychology book…what counts is what Jesus Christ said period not what you want to think and call “individual impressions or feelings”. What the hell if Charles Manson was a Mormon for heavens sake open your minds not your hearts. People who leave leave because they have smartened up but faithful like to “feel” otherwise. Find me a sword at the Hill Cumorah and I will buy all the bullshit again.

  26. Steve Kimball Reply

    Man-up people and stand for something and attach your names…take responsibility for your words…you don’t because you fear your own church but remember fear your taught comes from Satan, Jesus’s little brother.

  27. Steve Kimball Reply

    Man-up people and stand for something and attach your names…take responsibility for your words…you don’t because you fear your own church but remember fear your taught comes from Satan, Jesus’s little brother.

  28. Walt Reply

    Steve, I totally agree with your first post, not so much the second one. I need to “Man Up” and hurt my parents and family by someone reading this? Maybe someone should “Man Up” and think of someone besides themselves here.

  29. Walt Reply

    Steve, I totally agree with your first post, not so much the second one. I need to “Man Up” and hurt my parents and family by someone reading this? Maybe someone should “Man Up” and think of someone besides themselves here.

  30. Kyle Reply

    Listening to this was nauseating, not because I disagree with most of what Mike says, but because he appeared not to have an original thought in his mind. He just proceeds to give the common mormon party line when it comes to every question he is asked. The majority of us are very familiar with those ideas. He even has a hard time acknowledging that someone could possibly be bothered by the role of women in the church. I give Mike credit for participating in the podcast, and it’s good to have that mormon point of view, but listening to that point of view for an hour was like being in church again. I would have liked to hear more of his own opinions.

  31. Kyle Reply

    Listening to this was nauseating, not because I disagree with most of what Mike says, but because he appeared not to have an original thought in his mind. He just proceeds to give the common mormon party line when it comes to every question he is asked. The majority of us are very familiar with those ideas. He even has a hard time acknowledging that someone could possibly be bothered by the role of women in the church. I give Mike credit for participating in the podcast, and it’s good to have that mormon point of view, but listening to that point of view for an hour was like being in church again. I would have liked to hear more of his own opinions.

  32. scott Reply

    mike,

    i’m sure you’re a great guy, man, but your approach is so whitewashed. it seems to me your role is to bring balance to the panel, not call people to “repentance” or be condescending, which you may be doing unintentionally and without malice… but you are that way, and it’s tough listening to you regurgitate sunday school answers. it’s insulting, really. you assume that we forgot the things we learned in primary and seminary or that we learned something different from you. brother, we have all heard your views, we are well-acquainted with them and that is the problem. i go to church every sunday and i tolerate the single-mindedness that i find there in most cases, but leave it there, man! my advice is to bring something fresh to the panel…

  33. scott Reply

    mike,

    i’m sure you’re a great guy, man, but your approach is so whitewashed. it seems to me your role is to bring balance to the panel, not call people to “repentance” or be condescending, which you may be doing unintentionally and without malice… but you are that way, and it’s tough listening to you regurgitate sunday school answers. it’s insulting, really. you assume that we forgot the things we learned in primary and seminary or that we learned something different from you. brother, we have all heard your views, we are well-acquainted with them and that is the problem. i go to church every sunday and i tolerate the single-mindedness that i find there in most cases, but leave it there, man! my advice is to bring something fresh to the panel…

  34. Randall Reply

    You have seen the Holy Ghost change gay men into straight men? You made it sound like plural. Like you have seen firsthand the power of the Holy Ghost change the sexual orientation of more than one man in your life. That is remarkable. But I doubt it. The church would trumpet these success stories if they were so prevalent as to show up more than once in your life.

    The reality is this way of thinking is sooooo dangerous. It has lead to much heartache and even suicides. Men (or women) who want so desperately to fit into the church, but are gay, pray so hard to be “cured” but find that changing their very nature is impossible. They are who they are and they didn’t choose this life.

    As for your epistemology; I’m sure you have and have had powerful emotional experiences involving your experiences with the church. Those emotions are just hard to trust when they are so ubiquitous and ambiguous. I have those emotions with things totally unrelated to God at all. Others, like radical Islamists have them when they consider the glory of killing many innocent infidels with a suicide bomb. Catholics have them when they see the Mother Mary in a tortilla. I’m sure you are certain you have a legitimate understanding of how to discern “true” feelings from God but many just don’t trust that anymore. It is actually a great manipulation tool to get people to have warm, fuzzy feelings and tell them what those feelings mean (the church is True, Joseph was a prophet, etc) like I did as a missionary. It is amazing how much we extrapolate from a simple warm feeling. So many grand cosmic truths…

  35. Randall Reply

    You have seen the Holy Ghost change gay men into straight men? You made it sound like plural. Like you have seen firsthand the power of the Holy Ghost change the sexual orientation of more than one man in your life. That is remarkable. But I doubt it. The church would trumpet these success stories if they were so prevalent as to show up more than once in your life.

    The reality is this way of thinking is sooooo dangerous. It has lead to much heartache and even suicides. Men (or women) who want so desperately to fit into the church, but are gay, pray so hard to be “cured” but find that changing their very nature is impossible. They are who they are and they didn’t choose this life.

    As for your epistemology; I’m sure you have and have had powerful emotional experiences involving your experiences with the church. Those emotions are just hard to trust when they are so ubiquitous and ambiguous. I have those emotions with things totally unrelated to God at all. Others, like radical Islamists have them when they consider the glory of killing many innocent infidels with a suicide bomb. Catholics have them when they see the Mother Mary in a tortilla. I’m sure you are certain you have a legitimate understanding of how to discern “true” feelings from God but many just don’t trust that anymore. It is actually a great manipulation tool to get people to have warm, fuzzy feelings and tell them what those feelings mean (the church is True, Joseph was a prophet, etc) like I did as a missionary. It is amazing how much we extrapolate from a simple warm feeling. So many grand cosmic truths…

  36. scott Reply

    i want to second randall’s thoughts… but also, mike, i want you to know that i made my previous comment in the spirit of love. i think most people who make comments, be they positive or negative, want to contribute something constructive to the conversation, want their point of view to be understood. i think it’s as unlikely that they will change your mind about things as it is you will change theirs… but i think you really need to understand that rather than helping your cause, you tend to alienate people who are looking for an open-minded forum. i think when you do that you misrepresent yourself and the church. it would help people feel loved by you and the church – because you most strongly represent the church on the panel – if you would validate people in their experiences and feelings. people are complex, you can’t approach them with a panacea of one-word doctrinal solutions, it just isn’t an effective approach. i definitely want to give you credit for even joining the panel, but it is too easy to question your motivations…

  37. scott Reply

    i want to second randall’s thoughts… but also, mike, i want you to know that i made my previous comment in the spirit of love. i think most people who make comments, be they positive or negative, want to contribute something constructive to the conversation, want their point of view to be understood. i think it’s as unlikely that they will change your mind about things as it is you will change theirs… but i think you really need to understand that rather than helping your cause, you tend to alienate people who are looking for an open-minded forum. i think when you do that you misrepresent yourself and the church. it would help people feel loved by you and the church – because you most strongly represent the church on the panel – if you would validate people in their experiences and feelings. people are complex, you can’t approach them with a panacea of one-word doctrinal solutions, it just isn’t an effective approach. i definitely want to give you credit for even joining the panel, but it is too easy to question your motivations…

    • lifelongguy Reply

      Mike, thanks for being a part of the panel and adding perspective and balance. While I felt relatively unsatisfied with many of the answers and opinions you gave, I could relate with your “half-asleep” comments and felt your sincerity in your closing remarks about not focusing on all the problems when there is good in the Church that needs attention too.

  38. lifelongguy Reply

    Mike, thanks for being a part of the panel and adding perspective and balance. While I felt relatively unsatisfied with many of the answers and opinions you gave, I could relate with your “half-asleep” comments and felt your sincerity in your closing remarks about not focusing on all the problems when there is good in the Church that needs attention too.

  39. Dude Reply

    I was really dissapointed in this episode, mainly because I have come to expect really intelligent discussions from Mormon Expression and have enjoyed every episode up to this point. However, Mike is a great example of what is wrong with the church and why I have left it. It was very apparent that he doesn’t actually understand any of the arguments surronding the church – pros or cons. I couldn’t believe it when he said that we can’t pray to our Heavenly Mother because we don’t know her name. Are you serious Mike? That is the kind of argument you are going to bring to the podcast? That was terrible. I never knew Heavenly Father’s name until I was 19 but I never had a problem praying to him.

    I hope the quality of the episodes do not go down from this one because when I finished listening to this episode I seriously considered not listening to this podcast again.

    And Mike no one needs you calling them to repentance. Get off your high horse and start realizing that you are not one of the elected. Your ignorance will not save you.

  40. Dude Reply

    I was really dissapointed in this episode, mainly because I have come to expect really intelligent discussions from Mormon Expression and have enjoyed every episode up to this point. However, Mike is a great example of what is wrong with the church and why I have left it. It was very apparent that he doesn’t actually understand any of the arguments surronding the church – pros or cons. I couldn’t believe it when he said that we can’t pray to our Heavenly Mother because we don’t know her name. Are you serious Mike? That is the kind of argument you are going to bring to the podcast? That was terrible. I never knew Heavenly Father’s name until I was 19 but I never had a problem praying to him.

    I hope the quality of the episodes do not go down from this one because when I finished listening to this episode I seriously considered not listening to this podcast again.

    And Mike no one needs you calling them to repentance. Get off your high horse and start realizing that you are not one of the elected. Your ignorance will not save you.

  41. Swearing Elder Reply

    LOL @ Paul. They probably don’t care about me personally, but I’m fairly certain they miss my tithing and would gladly accept it again. 🙂

  42. Swearing Elder Reply

    LOL @ Paul. They probably don’t care about me personally, but I’m fairly certain they miss my tithing and would gladly accept it again. 🙂

  43. DuzTruthMatter Reply

    I have to agree with Dude on this podcast. There are numerous apologetic, mind-numb, blind-faith, rump-swab Mormon sites on the web where one can go to read and listen to the dribble that Mike spews forth. Those of us who tune in to Mormon Expression have heard what Mike has to say over and over, ad infinitum, growing up in the church. I realize that you want to be balanced, John, and commend you for the effort, but I feel that you could do a lot better than a self-righteous, holier-than-thou, call-to-repentance TBM like Mike. You already have Tom, who ably represents the Mormon spin without being obnoxious.

    Or maybe you just want someone on the podcasts who illustrates just how ridiculous some of the doctrines and arguments for the church are, an example for all to see. If that’s the case, way to go! Mission acccomplished.

    Love the podcasts, keep up the good work!

  44. DuzTruthMatter Reply

    I have to agree with Dude on this podcast. There are numerous apologetic, mind-numb, blind-faith, rump-swab Mormon sites on the web where one can go to read and listen to the dribble that Mike spews forth. Those of us who tune in to Mormon Expression have heard what Mike has to say over and over, ad infinitum, growing up in the church. I realize that you want to be balanced, John, and commend you for the effort, but I feel that you could do a lot better than a self-righteous, holier-than-thou, call-to-repentance TBM like Mike. You already have Tom, who ably represents the Mormon spin without being obnoxious.

    Or maybe you just want someone on the podcasts who illustrates just how ridiculous some of the doctrines and arguments for the church are, an example for all to see. If that’s the case, way to go! Mission acccomplished.

    Love the podcasts, keep up the good work!

  45. badseed Reply

    I give you credit, Mike, for going on the podcast. I did however find your calling to repentance all who are not your brand of Mormonism a bit laughable. While doing this may make you feel chosen and that you’re doing you’re duty it just makes you seem kinda arrogant.

    Anyhow thanks for again for sharing your views. I must admit that hearing these sorts of ideas (that I haven’t heard since I was active) makes me feel better about my decision to no longer attend. They are just so foreign to me now. Funny how I sometimes lose sight of how far apart my former LDS beliefs and my current views are.

  46. lump Reply

    Mike,

    I know you are representing the TBM side of things. But, your comparison of LDS women to Islamic women is just wrong. And your implication that LDS women are not treated as 2nd class citizens is also wrong. When was the last time you saw a RS President do ANYTHING without the approval of some man? That isn’t 2nd class to you?

    lump

  47. lump Reply

    Mike,

    I know you are representing the TBM side of things. But, your comparison of LDS women to Islamic women is just wrong. And your implication that LDS women are not treated as 2nd class citizens is also wrong. When was the last time you saw a RS President do ANYTHING without the approval of some man? That isn’t 2nd class to you?

    lump

  48. Vin Reply

    I think it’s not that I have a problem with people holding to very traditional values like Mike does; it’s that I have a problem when they haven’t ever really considered if the other guy has a valid argument.

    E.g., I don’t really care if anyone believes in a global flood, but I’d like them to at least be able to acknowledge that it’s reasonable to believe that it was local, or allegorical, even if they don’t agree with that.

  49. Vin Reply

    I think it’s not that I have a problem with people holding to very traditional values like Mike does; it’s that I have a problem when they haven’t ever really considered if the other guy has a valid argument.

    E.g., I don’t really care if anyone believes in a global flood, but I’d like them to at least be able to acknowledge that it’s reasonable to believe that it was local, or allegorical, even if they don’t agree with that.

  50. Mister IT Reply

    LOL! Well I have to mirror Mark’s comments from “Episode 21: Aaron Shafovaloff and Evangelizing Mormons”:

    “Wow the interview was nauseating.

    His arguments were conflated, hypocritical, illogical, and just outright dumb.”

    I especially enjoyed the ridiculous allusion to the Bible’s condemnation of Ashtoreth worship as a rationalization for why Mormons aren’t to pray to or worship Heavenly Mother.

    The fallacy here, of course, is that Ashtoreth’s “husband” was Baal not the Jewish God YaHWeH:

    “Throughout the Old Testament, as noted below Judges 2:13, “And they forsook the Lord, and served Baal and Ashtaroth.” in the Scofield Reference Bible, instances of Ashtaroth, plural of Ashtoreth, occur, including 1 Kings 11:5, Judges 10:6, 1 Samuel 7:3-4, 12:10, 31:10, 1 Kings 11:5, 11:33, 2 Kings 23:13. Scofield suggests that Jeremiah 44:18-19 refers to Ashtoreth (obliquely) as the “queen of heaven”.”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astarte#Astarte_in_Judea

    Which, of course, is why Ashtoreth is most often mentioned in party with Baal in the Biblical narrative (see http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=Ashtaroth&searchtype=all&version1=9&bookset=1).

    So if True Believing Mormons really want to extend their Mormon apologetic to include a pagan female deity worship of whom the Bible specifically condemns as a proof for the Mormon Mother-in-Heaven doctrine . . . . WOW!

    I guess the only thing I can say to that is, “be my guest!”

    And if his reasoning is this “good” going forward I think that we can expect some VERY interesting podcasts from this point onward.

  51. Mister IT Reply

    LOL! Well I have to mirror Mark’s comments from “Episode 21: Aaron Shafovaloff and Evangelizing Mormons”:

    “Wow the interview was nauseating.

    His arguments were conflated, hypocritical, illogical, and just outright dumb.”

    I especially enjoyed the ridiculous allusion to the Bible’s condemnation of Ashtoreth worship as a rationalization for why Mormons aren’t to pray to or worship Heavenly Mother.

    The fallacy here, of course, is that Ashtoreth’s “husband” was Baal not the Jewish God YaHWeH:

    “Throughout the Old Testament, as noted below Judges 2:13, “And they forsook the Lord, and served Baal and Ashtaroth.” in the Scofield Reference Bible, instances of Ashtaroth, plural of Ashtoreth, occur, including 1 Kings 11:5, Judges 10:6, 1 Samuel 7:3-4, 12:10, 31:10, 1 Kings 11:5, 11:33, 2 Kings 23:13. Scofield suggests that Jeremiah 44:18-19 refers to Ashtoreth (obliquely) as the “queen of heaven”.”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astarte#Astarte_in_Judea

    Which, of course, is why Ashtoreth is most often mentioned in party with Baal in the Biblical narrative (see http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=Ashtaroth&searchtype=all&version1=9&bookset=1).

    So if True Believing Mormons really want to extend their Mormon apologetic to include a pagan female deity worship of whom the Bible specifically condemns as a proof for the Mormon Mother-in-Heaven doctrine . . . . WOW!

    I guess the only thing I can say to that is, “be my guest!”

    And if his reasoning is this “good” going forward I think that we can expect some VERY interesting podcasts from this point onward.

  52. Tartar Reply

    Actually Ashoreth was originally the husband of El, who was father of Yahweh, Baal and the other 70 sons. Yahweh was originally a minor deity, but the Hebrews, since he was their god, decided to merge him with El and started to diminish the other gods importance. By the time of the Christians they other gods disappeared altogether.

  53. Keri Reply

    This is probably the most offensive podcast that I have heard do far and if Mike is truly speaking as a knowledgeable mormon, then I am confirmed in my understanding of the b.s. that the church feeds us concerning Women.  Ahgggg!!!

  54. Christopher Hardie Reply

    Being a former missionary of the France Paris Mission I enjoyed hearing the stories Michael had to share about France. Judging by the years he gave and the story of the mission president’s wife’s death in a car accident, it sounds like he served at the same time as Mitt Romney. If Heather had known this, it would have been interesting to hear if he ever interacted with Mitt and what that experience was like.

    • Heather_ME Reply

      Hmmm. I thought he said he arrived just as Mitt left. But maybe that was in the discussion before the show. Sorry I didn’t note it. 🙂

  55. Pingback: Mormon Expression | Mormonlady & Friends

  56. Hammerheart Reply

    I’ve been fascinated with Mike T & his interaction & effects with & on the other panel members, commenters etc since I began listening. Here, I find fascinating that at ep 35, people are saying ‘I’ve heard all this before at Sunday school etc,’ but by ep 61 (where Mike blandly justifies genocide & a host of other things) everyone is saying “I’m born & bred Mormon, Mike, but I have never in my life heard this doctrine/etc.” Also, I am just mystified by the utter cult of Joseph Smith worship. Mike seemed incapable of talking about himself or answering any question except by regurgitating Sunday school lessons, scripture etc, or personal adulation; it was like listening to someone with an autism obsession. A revalatory podcast…not necessarily in a good way…

Leave A Reply

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