Haven't Anti-Mormons Completely Destroyed the Credibility of Mormonism?

jefflindsay.com ^ | Nov. 5, 2006 | Jeff Lindsay

[restornu]

CTR

[Always Right]

I am anti-anti-Mormonism. I am sick of hearing the sour grapes from the Romney camp, as if Romney did not have a ton of other bigger issues that turned off voters.

[lonestar]

I’ve heard some idiots make remarks about the Mormon religion but I thought they were idiots BEFORE they started in on Mormons.

[svcw]

Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
No it was over when Mandy asked Greg to the hotel.

[farmer18th]

Rather than attempt to address the entire body of critics as merely being “anti-Mormon,” and thus, perhaps unfairly, lumping those who have honest intellectual agreements with the LDS church with those who are on a vendetta, I would like to see a comprehensive discussion of one highly particular issue—the authorship of the “Pearl of Great Price”—that seems to require a more “robust” defense than has been given so far. Either that was just an Egyptian funeral text or it was not. What do Mormon scholars say about that critique of Mormon church holy writ?

[cripplecreek]

I’ve heard some idiots make remarks about the Mormon religion but I thought they were idiots BEFORE they started in on Mormons.

LOL no kidding.

No problem with Mormons from me. Most Mormons that I know tend to be good conservative people. However screaming "bigot" at anyone who wasn't thrilled with Romney didn't do Mormons a lot of good.

[restornu]

Excuse me this is the Religion forum, there is no Romney here, you should try the News/Activism forum!

[ladyinred]

While I am sure there are distortions on Mormons just like any religion, once again, I went to the LDS bookstore, got the material they told me to read, bought it , read it, and I totally disagree with it. Not all I see here on this forum that is denied is untrue according to the LDS books. I am not trying to bash you who do believe, it is fine with me if you do. What does upset me over and over is the denial of things you do believe. If you believe it, defend it, but don’t deny it.

[restornu]

Rather than attempt to address the entire body of critics as merely being “anti-Mormon,” and thus, perhaps unfairly, lumping those who have honest intellectual agreements with the LDS church with those who are on a vendetta, I would like to see a comprehensive discussion of one highly particular issue—the authorship of the “Pearl of Great Price”—that seems to require a more “robust” defense than has been given so far. Either that was just an Egyptian funeral text or it was not. What do Mormon scholars say about that critique of Mormon church holy writ?

I see you did not read this thread

What is an anti-Mormon? Anyone who disagrees with you?

This is a poorly defined term, but I would say that only the activists who attack the Church in a way intended to generate misunderstanding, fear, and shock are the ones who deserve the epithet of "anti-Mormons." Many such "Mormon bashers" feel that the end justifies the means, and use tactics that are incompatible with the truthful example of Christ.

There is plenty of room for decent people to disagree with us. Sometimes I even disagree with "us." Most Protestants and Catholics who disagree with us are not "anti-Mormons" but simply people of another denomination. But when someone strives to stir up anger toward the Church and relies on misinformation or half-truths, then I'm inclined to apply the anti-Mormon label--especially when they do it for a living.

On the borderline are well meaning people who feel an evangelical duty to battle "cults" (which tend to be any group that disagrees with them) and write articles regurgitating the sensationalist and shocking diatribes of full-blooded anti-Mormons. I tend to call such critics anti-Mormons as well (I sense that they usually don't mind the title, unless they are posing as "loving friends of the Mormons" in order to launch more effective assaults on our faith). Those of other faiths who disagree with us and engage in civil discourse with us about their differences are usually not "anti-Mormons" but perhaps simply critics or just adherents of a different faith.

*****

Hello farmer18th this is my thread you can do what you like on your thread!

[restornu]

While I am sure there are distortions on Mormons just like any religion, once again, I went to the LDS bookstore, got the material they told me to read, bought it , read it, and I totally disagree with it. Not all I see here on this forum that is denied is untrue according to the LDS books. I am not trying to bash you who do believe, it is fine with me if you do. What does upset me over and over is the denial of things you do believe. If you believe it, defend it, but don’t deny it.

There are ways to ask questions and people have ways of couching questions to muddy the water before the person can respond to and I think that there in lies the crux of the problem.

If some one was sincere or curious and wanted to know that is different than so many time a strawman type questions that makes it impossible at the moment to answer the question.

I have tried to put the question on level playing ground but with many who have an agenda that is not going to happen!

[farmer18th]

It just seems that the only way you’re going to determine whether a critique flows out of this stipulated definition of “anti-Mormonism” is to rigorously analyze specific critques. Even then, I suppose, you would be engaged in the business of determining motives. I won’t mess up your thread with the Pearl of Great Price, though, if that’s what you prefer.

[meandog]

***Some pastors and ministers who might consider themselves as anti-Mormons are sincere in their differences with LDS theology and write intelligently and honestly about their views. They can differ without distorting the truth and can be respectful and kind in their discussions. I guess that intelligent and honest writing doesn't sell well, because the vast majority of popular writing against the Church is ugly, deceptive, and inflammatory. This is the stuff that I tend to call "anti-Mormon."***

It might interest you to know that LDS is currently listed as the fastest expanding protestant religion in the U.S.
Having said that, the disagreement I have with Mormonism is the same I have with fundamentalist evangelicals believing in the literal truth of the Bible and RCs blindly accepting the non-Scripturally sound pronouncements of Popes venerating the Virgin Mary.
The factual evidence of science documenting that the earth is a lot older than the 10,000 years the Bible indicates and neither it nor the universe could have been created in a mere six 24-hour periods should be enough for most rational-thinking people...that is not to say there isn't a God or that there was an "intelligent design" in the making of it.

On the subject of Dr. Hugh Nibley, while a distinguished linguist he's, IMO, the right-wing equivalent of Noam Chomsky (also a noted linguist)...he was hardly a historian; in fact he was a little bit kooky. You may have known that he is the guy who fought against the BYU dress code in the 60s etc., urging some of the administration to allow students to "let their hair down" (i.e. hippie style).

[Alex Murphy]

On the subject of Dr. Hugh Nibley, while a distinguished linguist he's, IMO, the right-wing equivalent of Noam Chomsky (also a noted linguist)...he was hardly a historian...

Not only was he not a historian, he wasn't even right-wing...

[muawiyah]

Interesting array of information. At the same time there's another group called RLDS, or Reorganized Latter Day Saints. It's pretty much a Midwestern operation, but it has its own splinter groups.

One of the popular names for four of the groups is "Church of Christ", just the same as Obama's church.

No doubt some of the folks who posted some of the "insider" stuff on the Mormons are actually RLDS people who have a history of preparing their own apparantly anti-Mormon stories.

Not exactly sure that when a Mormon (which the RLDS branch are) says nasties about Mormonism that he or she is being anti-Mormon ~ more like a dispute between the Episcopals and the Catholics ~ who say far worse things about each other all the time!

Having read through all the threads that anyone has said had anti-Mormon materials on them I got the distinct impression that a good deal of it came from these "other" Mormon sources. Seemed terribly familiar if ya' dig!

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

***It is a common myth that anti-Mormon attacks have completely overwhelmed the intellectual position of Latter-day Saints, leaving us with nothing but blind faith in “warm feelings” we get about the Church.***

“Anti-Mormons” are not the ones that started this fight way back in the 1820’s when some dude from the backwoods of New York claimed to have found golden plates and then started attacking all other churches.

[muawiyah]

Smith attracted the attention of some unsavory characters when he started talking about “gold”, plates or otherwise.

[restornu]

***It is a common myth that anti-Mormon attacks have completely overwhelmed the intellectual position of Latter-day Saints, leaving us with nothing but blind faith in “warm feelings” we get about the Church.***

“Anti-Mormons” are not the ones that started this fight way back in the 1820’s when some dude from the backwoods of New York claimed to have found golden plates and then started attacking all other churches.

If you read carefully it was not some dude from upstate NY who made those comments, it was the Lord himself who was once again preparing to restoring his Church on earth and needed to get a few things straight before proceeding.

Isa. 29: 13.
13 ¶ Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

I know the world consensus is up set with this but who are in Charge here some Men in 325 AD our Jesus Christ himself!

Now I know many for what ever reason feel differently but there are about 13 millions of us who did receive a witness from the Lord!

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

***Now I know many for what ever reason feel differently but there are about 13 millions of us who did receive a witness from the Lord!***

And did the Montanists, the Marcionites, Paulicians, Donatists, Caprocrations and Cathari also receive the “witness of the Lord” as they all claimed?

And that is just the “short” list.

[fproy2222]

Thanks for the post