Replies

I don’t think they are talking about tempered discussions between people of opposing viewpoints who nevertheless respect each other. They are counseling against contentious adrenaline laden verbal sparring matches.

I'm not sure I agree that's all that's at stake.

The Saints quickly get into trouble when they run into someone who is well informed about their religion.

For example, this individual might bring up topics such as the dozens of obvious errors in the Book of Mormon, the Book of Abraham, the thousands of changes to Mormon Scripture, the nine different versions of the First Vision, sexual perversion (including D&C Section 132), the obvious contradictions among Mormon scripture, the failed prophecies by Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, the Adam-God doctrine, the Kinderhook Plates, the United Order, the Kirtland Safety Society, the sins committed in the time of preexistence by the spirits born into bodies as African-Americans, the Satanic Mormon Temple Ceremony, the LDS' connection to the occult, and much, much more.

Articles posted earlier on this forum indicate LDS membership may be overstated, and there may now be more ex-Mormons than practicing Saints. And much of this is due to their exposure to the truth.

I therefore can easily interpret the article as advising Mormons to avoid discussions with people who have opposing viewpoints because they might be handed facts which will cause them to loose their faith in Joseph Smith and their Church.

I think the same is true of any religion, certainly Christianity as a whole, mainly because the internet has spread information to widely. One does not have to wait for the latest scholarly book debunking the story of Noah’s flood or quibbling with the reality of Sodom and Gomorah. it can all be found quite readily and explained fairly simply on the internet—which can then lead one on to more scholarly cited articles if desired. As a result argument over all brands of Christianity have decreased as people are better informed, at least in my experience living in the Bible Belt.

“I therefore can easily interpret the article as advising Mormons to avoid discussions with people who have opposing viewpoints because they might be handed facts which will cause them to loose their faith in Joseph Smith and their Church.”

Quite so as any disagreement or exposure of LDS history and doctrine is called an attack by the LDS leadership. How many LDS posters are willing to explain what they are actually taught about Adam, who and what he was and what supports their view?
I can understand ignoring hecklers but someone alleging error is not the same thing and anyone that can't tell the difference should post as a caucus.