Definition of "anti-Mormon"

[Billy]

Opposition to Mormonism is anti-Mormonism. It's that simple.

Would opposition to basic tenets of Christianity be anti-Christian?

[Ray Agostini]

For the third time, I've not paid enough systematic attention to rhinomelon's posts to have the basis for an opinion.

Then you should not have expressed an opinion without knowing the facts. The thread was started by rhinomelon!

If he's actively opposed to Mormonism to a significant degree, then, to that degree, he is an anti-Mormon in the way I define the term and have always defined the term.

But how would you know?

I presume it was Bsix. Bsix acknowledged that his definition of anti-Mormon seemed to represent a minority position. I said that I agreed with his definition.

Which endorsed his branding of rhinomelon as an "anti-Mormon".

However, for the fourth time, I'm not in a position from which I can judge whether that definition applies to rhinomelon. I've not paid sufficient systematic attention to rhinomelon's posts to have the basis for an opinion. If he's actively opposed to Mormonism to a significant degree, then, to that degree, he's an anti-Mormon in the way I define the term and have always defined the term.

Then maybe you'd better study his posts on here, and make a more informed judgement before endorsing Bsix's opinion, which was negative to rhino.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Would opposition to basic tenets of Christianity be anti-Christian?

Only if they were opposed to them solely because they are Christian.

Disagreement does not make one anti.

[Daniel Peterson]

Would opposition to basic tenets of Christianity be anti-Christian?

Yes.

And, sigh, I know where you intend to go with this. Please don't waste your time. The point has no merit at all.

[Daniel Peterson]

Then you should not have expressed an opinion without knowing the facts.

I cited the matter I agreed with, and said that I agreed with the thing that I cited.

I knew the relevant facts for the opinion that I expressed, and I stand by the opinion that I expressed.

The thread was started by rhinomelon!

So what? That's utterly irrelevant to the point that I cited, and on which I commented.

But how would you know?

I would know if I knew more about the depth and extent of rhinomelon's commitment, if such there is, to opposing Mormonism.

Which endorsed his branding of rhinomelon as an "anti-Mormon".

It didn't. The definition was separate, and logically distinct, from its application to rhinomelon. I endorse the former, and said nothing whatsoever about the latter.

Agreeing upon a definition of cardiac arrhythmia doesn't necessarily mean that patient X has cardiac arrhythmia. The question of definition is quite distinct from the question of diagnosis. It would be remarkably foolish to chide a doctor for agreeing with another physician's definition of cardiac arrhythmia on the grounds that the first doctor hadn't yet examined patient X. Even if the second physician had already pronounced patient X to be suffering from cardiac arrhythmia, the first doctor would scarcely be "expressing an opinion without knowing the facts" if, in fact, while agreeing with the definition, he declined to diagnose cardiac arrhythmia in a patient he hadn't examined.

Then maybe you'd better study his posts on here, and make a more informed judgement before endorsing Bsix's opinion, which was negative to rhino.

By endorsing his definition of anti-Mormon, which I do, I've said nothing whatsoever about rhinomelon nor about Bsix's application of that definition, which I endorse, to rhinomelon. Meditate on that fact. Reflect upon it. Commit it to memory. And please stop attributing opinions to me that I do not hold, and that I have denied multiple times.

[Cold Steel]

I disagree. I don't see non-Mormon and anti-Mormon as synonyms.

You are correct. My thinking is fuzzy. Too late....

[Ray Agostini]

By endorsing his definition of anti-Mormon, which I do, I've said nothing whatsoever about rhinomelon nor about Bsix's application of that definition, which I endorse, to rhinomelon. Meditate on that fact. Reflect upon it. Commit it to memory. And please stop attributing opinions to me that I do not hold, and that I have denied multiple times.

Well I'd just like it registered that I totally disagree with your endorsement of Bsix's definition of "anti-Mormon", and I understand his definitions. Quite clearly.

It is still of some surprise to me that you agree with Bsix, but nevertheless, that's your choice.

[Daniel Peterson]

Well I'd just like it registered that I totally disagree with your endorsement of Bsix's definition of "anti-Mormon", and I understand his definitions. Quite clearly.

It is still of some surprise to me that you agree with Bsix, but nevertheless, that's your choice.

It seems to me, given both the etymology and the standard English definition of the prefix anti-, that understanding anti-Mormonism to mean "opposed to Mormonism" is not only reasonable but transparently obvious and indisputably accurate. I can imagine no plausible objection to that definition. I've certainly seen none.

[Ray Agostini]

It seems to me, given both etymology and the standard English definition of the prefix anti-, that understanding anti-Mormonism to mean "opposed to Mormonism" is not only reasonable but transparently obvious and indisputably accurate.

Okay Dan, you win. I happily declare myself an anti-Mormon. And if I have to sink into the "despair" of other anti-Mormons, that okay with me. I will gladly align myself with them.

In regard to Mister Scratch, he is "small fry" compared to you, Dan, whoever he is. You are a big boy, with a big name in apologetics. Mister Scratch is a minor poster on one board, who takes you seriously. There's a real human being behind that moniker, even though I don't know who it is. You could have ignored him, but you fed the flames. He's a "nobody" compared to you.

Just my misguided opinion. Maybe I care too much about human beings, and their feelings, and their disappointments and grievances, and why they rebel.

[Yirgacheffe]

I agree.

So is someone devout in another religion say a Muslim or Hindu Anti-Mormon? Is believing that LDS are wrong anti?

[Daniel Peterson]

So is someone devout in another religion say a Muslim or Hindu Anti-Mormon? Is believing that LDS are wrong anti?

As I've said numerous times in this thread, and innumerable times on this board, No. No! NO!

NO!

Non-Mormon and anti-Mormon aren't synonyms. Disagreement and opposition are not synonyms.

Okay Dan, you win. I happily declare myself an anti-Mormon.

I've really been puzzled by your comments over the past several hours. You keep attributing positions to me that I don't hold, that I've even expressly denied numerous times on this very thread, and now you're acting as if I somehow want you to identify yourself as an "anti-Mormon."

What's the deal? I genuinely don't get it.

And if I have to sink into the "despair" of other anti-Mormons, that okay with me. I will gladly align myself with them.

Your alignments are entirely your business, as is whether you choose to sink into "despair" or not.

I've said nothing whatsoever about "despair" being universal among anti-Mormons as I define them. They can be happy, sad, optimistic, pessimistic, kind, cruel, hopeful, desperate, honest, dishonest, literate, illiterate, scholarly, ignorant, independent, aligned with a group -- the whole range. The only thing common to them is active opposition to Mormonism.

If you're actively opposed to Mormonism, Ray, then you're an anti-Mormon. But that fact says nothing about whether you're nice or cheerful or fair or informed or not.

In regard to Mister Scratch, he is "small fry" compared to you, Dan, whoever he is. You are a big boy, with a big name in apologetics. Mister Scratch is a minor poster on one board, who takes you seriously. There's a real human being behind that moniker, even though I don't know who it is. You could have ignored him, but you fed the flames. He's a "nobody" compared to you.

I'm aware that my attempts to reason with him served only to inflame him. That's why I've stopped trying to reason with him. It's pointless. But I tried, both because (at the first) I hoped to persuade him to be reasonable and because, all along, I wanted to make sure that his small audience understood that I don't concede his charges that I'm a racist, homophobic, murderous, mercenary, slanderous bigot who delights in the suffering of others. I think the reasonable people on his board understand that now, and the unreasonable ones never will.

Maybe I care too much about human beings, and their feelings, and their disappointments and grievances, and why they rebel.

If you're trying to suggest by that that I don't care, you're utterly and completely wrong, Ray. And you, of all people, should know it.

Why are you bringing Mister Scratch up, anyway? He hasn't figured in the discussion on this thread. He's irrelevant to it.

[Ray Agostini]

If you're trying to suggest by that that I don't care, you're utterly and completely wrong, Ray. And you, of all people, should know it.

I trust that you care. I trust that you value all human beings - even your "enemies".

[charity's child]

I know I'm late in the thread, and I definitely don't have time to read the whole thing to catch what other people have said, but I'll toss in my two cents anyway. You missed something in your definitions - the hatred. An anti-mormon isn't working to save the members of the LDS church from their delusions or mistaken beliefs or what-have-you. An anti-mormon hates the LDS church and anyone who participates in it or defends it. That's my personal definition. I honestly believe most anti-mormons would cheerful see the lot of us burn in hell forever.

An while I agree that mocking the LDS faith is definitely an anti-mormon behavior, I didn't see the behavior I most associate with anti-mormon: targeting the LDS members as either topics or subjects for various rantings and railings. I have run across a couple of people who assume that if the LDS had anything to do with it, it must be evil. Music, for instance. Even if the same words are sung as would be sung by a mainstream Christian, the LDS created it and therefore it is wrong. And in some extreme cases I've met an LDS church building may not be entered, even to watch a basketball game or participate in a community health fair or anything of that sort. Walking into the building somehow means you are endangering your soul. I have seen that type of attitude. That is what I deem anti-mormon.

[Bsix]

Who voted for Rhino as the archtypical example of an antiMormon? I have no idea. As I recall, I voted "All of the above" which represents a full spectrum of styles, approaches, and activities related to being antiMormon.

I think that Dan has pretty accurately understood my comments and intent regarding how I define 'antiMormon.'

For the record, I do not believe that being a non-Mormon means that you are antiMormon. Most who are not Mormon could care less about Mormonism. They know virtually nothing on the subject. Most who are not Mormon are not opposed to Mormonism as they are in favor of something else. There are some who go beyond simply believing in something other than Mormonism or holding that LDS theology is wrong because it disagrees with what they hold true.

Billy asked: "Would opposition to basic tenets of Christianity be anti-Christian?"

My answer is "yes" anti-Christian has the exact same application as antiMormon.

In fact, I think it would be fair to apply my definition of 'anti' to my position on traditional Christianity. I am opposed to traditional Christianity. Hence, I am anti-traditional Christian.

I do not picket their events. I do not publish a website attacking traditional Christian doctrines. I do not go to traditional Christian websites and debate and debunk their religion. I do not target traditional Christians for conversion. (I am an equal opportunity member missionary.) I really admire the values and morals of traditional Christians. I believe that to the extent that they sincerely follow the Lord, they are blessed by him. I believe traditional Christianity to lift billions to better lives. In many ways, many traditional Christians are better people than I.

I do however disagree with traditional Christian theology. I debate and disagree on matters of traditional Christian doctrines with visitors (Who happen to be traditional Christians) on Mormon message boards. I am guilty of at least one hostility point...I loathe Evangelical witnessing methods as fundamentally unChristian.

So for all that, I suppose that I can accept the same etymological use of the term 'anti' to describe my position on traditional Christianity.

I mean no disrespet to Rhino by categorizing him as antiMormon. I am using him to represent a type of opposition to the LDS Church. To me, Rhino is not just a passive disbeliever of Mormonism. Nor is he simply in favor of his religion. He is pretty deep into the subject of Mormonism, and is an he proactively opposed to Mormonism. He has years of participation in LDS message boards. He has done a great deal of studying of Mormon history, theology, and doctrine. He has on many occasons endorsed the approach employed by Evangelicals that uses debunking argumentation to sway Mormons from the faith. He endorses at least some Evangelical ministries that target Mormons for conversion. Now...Rhino's style is very kind and nice. He exhibits a great deal of respect toward Mormonism. He is slow to bickering and contention. He has condemned Evangelical ministries that employ hostile or confrontational methods. Rhino is opposed (anti) Mormon...in the nicest way you can be.

Regards,

Six