More DVD Fun!

[Paloma]

Kenngo,

Thank you for believing me, and for your kindness.

I do understand that the examples of inappropriate behaviour I mentioned are by far the exception rather than the norm, especially when it comes to the extreme comments and actions.

Part of the reason I'm hesitant to talk about it much (apart from not wanting to be contentious or provoke argument) is that I've had an overwhelmingly positive experience with many, many missionaries, both men and women, over the years. I certainly don't dwell on the "offensive bits". As I've said elsewhere, I've worked with teens and young adults for years and have long since learned not to take things personally.

Were we to sit down together and talk about it, I think you'd understand the whole situation better. And together we'd have a fairly good understanding of possible reasons the missionaries reacted to me as they did.

I think you must have been - and are -a very fine missionary with lots of patience and compassion. Had you come to my home, I expect we would have got along together really well. (And I did end up getting along well too with some of the initially offensive missionaries.) I think I've mentioned also that I could see that missionary companions were very upset, embarrassed and ashamed with the rudeness of the "offenders".

You would have been one of the "good guys"!

[jwhitlock]

Hoops:

Let me see if i have this correct. lds believe they are Christian. if one were to show them how they are not, that is tearing them down? my goodness, you guys are awfully sensitive. if lds think they are christian then who cares. of course, i can understand how this board has responded. the entire world view of lds is based on feelings and it's persecution complex. for evidence, i note post above.

There are quite a few people out there who are offended because I claim to be Christian, because I claim to have a relationship with Jesus Christ, and because I claim to see His hand in my Mormon oriented life. And they get downright nasty about it, in their self righteous attempts to show me how I am mistaken in all those claims. There was some of that nastiness on the recent Evangelical Outreach DVD. And you wonder why we sometimes sound a little sensitive??

Your oversimplification about the LDS worldview is really off base. Do you know anything about the Church and its people, or were you just trying to kick the beehive?

[consiglieri]

To be more explicit as to why I doubt Paloma's story that a Mormon missionary damned Paloma to hell:

Damning somebody to hell is simply not in the Mormon lexicon, due to our different understanding of hell.

I have never heard any Mormon at any time or any place damn somebody to hell.

I have heard, however, my evangelical Christian brothers and sisters damn me to hell for being a Mormon.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[Tanyan]

I have experienced that wrath as well. But have been shown Love as well- it's a 50-50 deal .

[Tanyan]

I have experienced that wrath as well. But have been shown Love as well- it's a 50-50 deal .

I take that back now that I think of it, its more 10-20% negative 80-90% positive.

[Bsix]

Do I believe Paloma that some Mormon missionaries say stupid things? Yes.

Do I believe the dialog and verbatim's Paloma reported are true? Maybe.

Do I believe that we have the context of both sides of the conversation? No.

The crude, hostile, and attack-oriented witnessing style of Evangelical countercult ministries is pretty well documented. As such, I'm not sure that I think Paloma's subjective and unverified quotations as a fair and liable basis to say that the LDS Church engages in equally negative witnessing.

That is not to dismiss any offense that our missionaries caused Paloma. If the missionaries said the things they are claimed to have said...provoked or not...I apologize for their behavior. We should do better than that.

Thanks,

Kim

[Kenngo1969]

I hope that no one is arguing that one must "be stupid, dishonest, or morally bankrupt" to believe the claims of the COJCLDS.

Maybe not â?¦ but the producers-purveyors of the DVD certainly come close. If one buys into all of their characterizations of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, its doctrines, and itâ??s leaders, it would be difficult to come to any other conclusion than that an adherent to such a religion is stupid, dishonest, or morally bankrupt. Itâ??s difficult to imagine anyone wanting to remain a member of the Church of Jesus Christ if the DVDâ??s characterizations of the Church, its doctrines, and its leaders were true.

Denominational differences are not the best way to argue for one's case at this point, I'd say. Splinter Restorationist movements are on their way to outstripping their traditional Christian peers, at this point. There are perhaps, let's say, 50-75 splinter Restorationist movements that have existed in Restorationist history over the last 170 years. Some of them are defunct; many of them are not.

I donâ??t care if there are, or have been, a million splinter groups off of the Salt-Lake-City-headquartered Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and I donâ??t care how many adherents their leaders have been able to persuade of the genuineness of such leadersâ?? claims to authority. The fact of the matter is that there has only been one restoration, and such claims to authority are undercut by Doctrine & Covenants 42:11:

Again I say unto you, that it shall not be given to any one to go forth to preach my gospel, or to build up my church, except he be ordained by some one who has authority, and it is known to the church that he has authority and has been regularly ordained by the heads of the church.

The bottom line (and I think the â??Jesus Josephâ? DVD suffers from this failing pretty abundantly) is that oftentimes, when we members of the Church of Jesus Christ say, â??I believe what I believe, I do what I do, and I live how I live because the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ bears abundant good fruit in my life. I am given abundant bread and fish because of it,â? detractorsâ?? only recourse (since theyâ??re backed into a corner) is to say, in essence, â??Yeah, maybe; but if you stop to think about how it really tastes, your â??fruitâ?? is actually kind of â??thistle-y,â?? your â??breadâ?? is kind of â??stony,â?? and your â??fishâ?? is actually kind of â??serpenty.â??â? See Matthew 7:9-11. Whatever points of doctrine we may disagree on, if you tell me that the Gospel of Jesus Christ as you understand it bears abundant good fruit in your life, Iâ??m apt to say, Halelujah! The last thing Iâ??m gonna try to do is argue that you donâ??t get good fruit, bread, and fish when you ask for them. The DVDâ??s producers/purveyors, however, donâ??t share that benevolence toward their Mormon brothers and sisters.

I would also dispute that there are 13,000,000 active members of the official Utah-based LDS Church.

Youâ??re beating up a straw man, because I never said that. Iâ??ll repost what I did say for you, with appropriate emphasis:

I wish they [the DVDâ??s producers-purveyors] had acknowledged that one need not be stupid, dishonest, or morally bankrupt to recognize an appeal in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints â?¦ that there has to be some deeper reason for thirteen million people to want to commit themselves, to varying degrees and at different times, to it.

That is to say that yes, I know that all thirteen million of us have equal testimonies, are equally committed, or participate equally. I know that levels of commitment, testimony, and participation wax and wane. But the fact of the matter is that if all of these people were sufficiently swayed by the power of the message to feel the desire to unite themselves by baptism to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints at some point, and thatâ??s still an impressive achievement.

I wish they hadnâ??t relied so much on character assassination in their attempts to air their disagreements with us.

Silence from you in response to this point. Why? Itâ??s just a guess, but I would estimate that fully one-third to one-half of the DVD is devoted to attempts to assassinate Joseph Smithâ??s character. Your silence is particularly telling in light of that fact.

wish they had allowed for at least a little of Krister Stendahlâ??s â??holy envy.â?

Silence from you in response to this point. Why? Donâ??t you realize how much these people have shot themselves in the foot (time and time again, not just in this DVD, but also in numerous other such efforts) by stubbornly clinging to the view that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is essentially evil, with but a thinnest possible veneer of goodness â?¦ just for appearanceâ??s sake? You canâ??t allow for any â??holy envyâ? if youâ??re convinced that the subject under discussion is evil to the core!

[cksalmon]

Silence from you in response to this point. Why? It’s just a guess, but I would estimate that fully one-third to one-half of the DVD is devoted to attempts to assassinate Joseph Smith’s character. Your silence is particularly telling in light of that fact.

Hi Kenngo--

You may be reading someone's mind, but, unfortunately, it's not mine. "Silence from [me]" mainly because my interest in the thread has (by page ten) waned and I've been reading mostly elsewhere here on the board as I have the time and opportunity.

Best to you, though.

CKS

PS. I really don't care to defend all aspects of the DVD per se, but I suppose I could try to respond more substantively if you're really that interested in my opinion.

[auteur55]

To be more explicit as to why I doubt Paloma's story that a Mormon missionary damned Paloma to hell:

Damning somebody to hell is simply not in the Mormon lexicon, due to our different understanding of hell.

I have never heard any Mormon at any time or any place damn somebody to hell.

I have heard, however, my evangelical Christian brothers and sisters damn me to hell for being a Mormon.

Unfortunately there are some real wack jobs in the church. This was my mission experience. They would say horridly offensive things to people, act unchristian, and held to a skewed, unhealthy version of Mormonism. I avoided these people like the plague and knew they were doing damage to the church. Some of the things that came out of missionary's mouths were shocking.

yet that was only a mere 10%. Most were kind, courteous, loved the people and seeked to bring more happiness into their life. Just like the church teaches them to do. Whenever you get a group of several people together a good 10 to 20% will be rotten apples. Shame they don't have a christian apathy test before sending them on missions.

[owl]

After reading ten pages, I find both sides did way to much attacking and defending. I'll excuse defending on both sides, but I'm disappointed in those LDS board members who engage in attacking the opposition or its message, however distateful. Comments tarring the whole DVD with being hateful, full of falsehoods, exhibiting a low standard of schollarship, etc. are not useful to either side even if they were wholely true. (Note: I do not consider pointing out one specific quote and refuting it to be attacking. In fact I'm sure those posters see it as defending.)

If I understood President Hinkley in Conference we are to assume good motives on the part of our non-LDS acquaintances, and treat them that way even if they do not reciprocate. God loves even virulent anti-Mormons. I'd like to see a little more love from the supposed TBM's.

I really appreciated those few on either side who seemed to be trying to understand the other point of view and find common ground. The warm tone of their posts is refreshing.

Owl

PS It is nice when a poster quotes a single sentence at a time and then comments on it. This is almost equally true when there is a series of short quotes with comments on each item.

It is harder to get anything useful, from posters who quote a page long post in its entirety and write a page long response.

It is also irritating to read so many posts saying the same thing as though one more repetition will make it all clear. (I realize if two posts arrive in close proximity the second responder did not know what the first responder was going to say. However when posts are pages apart they should not repeat previously heard arguments so little changed. I'll forgive an "X had it right when he said 'Quote'" provided the endorsement is given in a loving context.

Just an opinion, but it applies to to many threads on this board.

[consiglieri]

Unfortunately there are some real wack jobs in the church. This was my mission experience. They would say horridly offensive things to people, act unchristian, and held to a skewed, unhealthy version of Mormonism. I avoided these people like the plague and knew they were doing damage to the church. Some of the things that came out of missionary's mouths were shocking.

yet that was only a mere 10%. Most were kind, courteous, loved the people and seeked to bring more happiness into their life. Just like the church teaches them to do. Whenever you get a group of several people together a good 10 to 20% will be rotten apples. Shame they don't have a christian apathy test before sending them on missions.

Hi, auteur55!

Can I ask you a question, in an effort to test my thesis?

In all your experiences, even with the "real whack jobs in the church" on your mission, who said "horridly offensive things to people," did you ever hear a Mormon missionary "damn somebody to hell"?

I have never heard a Mormon missionary say such a thing, and my thesis is because it really doesn't make a lot of sense given the Mormon concept of hell.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[jwhitlock]

owl:

I'm having a hard time understanding your comments. You say:

Comments tarring the whole DVD with being hateful, full of falsehoods, exhibiting a low standard of schollarship, etc. are not useful to either side even if they were wholely true. (Note: I do not consider pointing out one specific quote and refuting it to be attacking. In fact I'm sure those posters see it as defending.)

And:

If I understood President Hinkley in Conference we are to assume good motives on the part of our non-LDS acquaintances, and treat them that way even if they do not reciprocate. God loves even virulent anti-Mormons. I'd like to see a little more love from the supposed TBM's.

How on earth, in your opinion, should we approach the DVD? Just assume (despite its hateful content) that the producers had good motives, and try to find common ground? Do you understand that anti-Mormons do not want to find common ground with us?

I see no problem with identifying things for what they are. If they are worthy of condemnation, they should be strongly condemned. Or do you think that which is evil should be approached in a different manner?

[consiglieri]

Jwhitlock's post reminds me of a story about President Joseph F. Smith, who was walking down the streets of Salt Lake City with his brother when who should they see walking toward them, but the editor of the Salt Lake Tribune, who was at the time running editorials savagely criticizing the Church.

President Smith's brother greeted the editor and shook his hand, but President Smith did not.

As they walked away, President Smith said to his brother, "I swear you would shake hands with the devil himself!"

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[auteur55]

did you ever hear a Mormon missionary "damn somebody to hell

Does Emma count. There was a missionary who argued that Emma was burning in hell. He was confused to say the least. My only point is there are many members who misunderstand the gospel as they are growing in spirituality.

But no, I never heard a missionary tell a non-member that they were going to hell. As least not to their face.

[selek]

Jwhitlock's post reminds me of a story about President Joseph F. Smith, who was walking down the streets of Salt Lake City with his brother when who should they see walking toward them, but the editor of the Salt Lake Tribune, who was at the time running editorials savagely criticizing the Church.

President Smith's brother greeted the editor and shook his hand, but President Smith did not.

As they walked away, President Smith said to his brother, "I swear you would shake hands with the devil himself!"

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Okay, now I feel slighted. Brother Smith never shook hands with me! Does this say something about my eternal worth and destiny?

[Doctor Steuss]

Okay, now I feel slighted. Brother Smith never shook hands with me! Does this say something about my eternal worth and destiny?

I'll shake your hand... but then again, this is me at my graduation:

[jwhitlock]

I'll shake your hand... but then again, this is me at my graduation:

Old Scratch himself, with an acolyte dressed in the robes of an apostate priesthood!

[selek]

I'll shake your hand... but then again, this is me at my graduation:

Uhh....Doc?

Which one are you ?

I'd post my own picture in retaliation, but doing so would run afoul of local indecency statutes, bandwidth restrictions, and probably the Geneva Conventions on the treatment and abuse of prisioners of war.

[Doctor Steuss]

[...]dressed in the robes of an apostate priesthood!

LOL

I love this Nibley speach... Leaders and Managers

Selek,

[consiglieri]

Does Emma count. There was a missionary who argued that Emma was burning in hell. He was confused to say the least. My only point is there are many members who misunderstand the gospel as they are growing in spirituality.

But no, I never heard a missionary tell a non-member that they were going to hell. As least not to their face.

That's interesting about Emma. Most missionaries know about the story where Joseph Smith said he would go to hell to get Emma (when I think the real quote is about going to hell for a woman such as Emma).

Anyway, I am sure that there are many ways in which I currently misunderstand the gospel, so I will try not to be too hard on others who understand it differently than I.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

I'll shake your hand... but then again, this is me at my graduation:

Well, now I have seen your face . . .

and I love you anyway!

All the Best!

--Consiglieri (Italian for "sloth-lover")

[auteur55]

That's interesting about Emma. Most missionaries know about the story where Joseph Smith said he would go to hell to get Emma (when I think the real quote is about going to hell for a woman such as Emma).

And don't forget what Brigham said in reply to this: "Joseph, you may have to."

[Doctor Steuss]

Well, now I have seen your face . . .

and I love you anyway!

All the Best!

--Consiglieri (Italian for "sloth-lover")

Aw shucks.

Steuglieri (Canadian for "sloth-lover-lover")

[AndyOne]

Who cares if it's hate speech or not? It's perfectly fair for the church to point to a statement by an unaffiliated group condemning a video the sole design of which is to lure members away.

[Kenngo1969]

After reading ten pages, I find both sides did way to much attacking and defending [sic].

Yeah, thereâ??s way too much defendinâ?? goinâ?? on on this here apologetic message board!

I'll excuse defending on both sides â?¦

Whew! And here I thought we were gonna hafta shut down the Board!

I'm disappointed in those LDS board members who engage in attacking the opposition or its message, however distateful [sic].

Yeah! How dare anybody attack malevolent motives, lies, distortions, mischaracterizations, overgeneralizations, sensationalizations, and caricaturizations!

Comments tarring the whole DVD with being hateful, full of falsehoods, exhibiting a low standard of schollarship [sic], etc. are not useful to either side even if they were wholely [sic] true.

I see. Lies, et cetera, are OK, but the truth â?¦ Oh, never mind! My head is starting to hurt!

If I understood President Hinkley [sic] in Conference we are to assume good motives on the part of our non-LDS acquaintances, and treat them that way even if they do not reciprocate.

Yeah. These folks have given us ample reason to trust their motives! Who cares if they lie, distort, mischaracterize, overgeneralize, sensationalize, and caricaturize? After all, theyâ??re doinâ?? it fer Jee-zuss â?¦ so the ends justify the means.

God loves even virulent anti-Mormons.

Yes, He does, but I see no reason why He should love everything they do, particularly when itâ??s designed to have a direct deleterious effect on His Church:

16 These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:

17 â?¦ a lying tongue â?¦

If the Lord isnâ??t very happy about itâ??if, in fact, he hates itâ??I see no reason why we should feel any differently about it.

I'd like to see a little more love from the supposed TBM's.

Donâ??t worry, owl! I love you! I really, really do! (There. Feel better now? )

I really appreciated those few on either side who seemed to be trying to understand the other point of view and find common ground.

Joseph Smith was a delusional, lying, scheming, conniving, manipulative, philandering sack of dung. The Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and Pearl of Great Price are cover-to-cover fabrications â?¦ a waste of countless good trees â?¦ tissues of lies, all. While the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has a deceptive, thin veneer of pseudo-Christianity, it is really a Satan-worshipping cult.

Yep. Lotsa common ground there. Where to start â?¦ where to start?

â??But Ken, the DVDâ??s producers-purveyors didnâ??t say any of that!â? (Well, maybe not in so many words â?¦ )

Owl, I suggested, in previous posts on this thread, how the DVDâ??s producers-purveyors might have changed their approach to achieve a fairer hearing among their intended audience, but ironically, Iâ??m probably one of the people you think is too â??Anti-Anti.â?

[Dale]

I took a quick break from reading the Jesus Christ/Joseph Smith book by Floyd Mcelveen. I am on page 203. I plan to watch the film later tonight. I have been exposed to enough current pro-Restoration apologetic that I just know my stuff is better. Even my favorite pro-Restoration apologetic has faults, but it's still better than the critic's poorly researched stuff.