Boy, I had forgotten about this thread. And a couple of weeks ago, I re-listened to the Mattsson's interview, just because I'm stuck at home and I love to hear their soothing accents. So I have a few questions, if I may, about the account you have written here.
I have no reason to dispute your story, and clearly this is going to be a he said/she said kind of thing between you and Tom Phillips. So I'm even going to concede to you that your version is absolutely correct, and that Tom Phillips's story is a load of bollocks. Fair enough?
So how are you absolutely sure that the Mattsson's are lying about their experience?
Just because in your version of events Tom Phillips is being less than truthful about being there that day, does it logically follow that the Mattsson's are? Are you assuming that all ex-mormons are liars and deceivers? All the Mattsson's said about Tom Phillips in their interview is that his account of the second anointing was correct, and that was their experience with the ordinance as well. And listening to the interview, I'm sure Brigitta said it just to cut to the chase about the details of the ordinance. So I'm not sure you can paint the Mattsson's with the same brush that you are trying to paint Tom Phillips with, especially as their second anointing took place on another date, in the Frankfurt temple. Unless you are a roving security guard for all the temples in Europe?
And to me, if anything, your account simply confirms that the ordinance exists, it's super secret, and it doesn't matter to me if both Tom Phillips and the Mattssons are lying about it, it's the ordinance that's the problem. It's a church within a church, it's elitist, it makes Jesus irrelevant, and as alas stated earlier in this thread, it is simply un-Christian.
So I do thank you for your account, again I have no reason to dispute it, but it certainly doesn't change my mind.
"And I don't need you...or, your homespun philosophies."
"And when you try to break my spirit, it won't work, because there's nothing left to break."