One Eternal Round

[ebeddoulos]

I converse with the antiMormon. Depending on the focus I may agree or disagree with the antiMormon. In moments of naive optimism, I think the anti-Mormon is becoming charitable, tolerant and broad-minded. The antiMormon even smiles and proclaims his Christian love for the Latter-day Saints. However, behind the smile I sense nothing but cold darkness and a determined, almost evil presence. I am repelled and then appalled by my naiveté but again I enter the fray to repeat the cycle anew ... but wonder why.

Doe anyone else’s experience parallel my own?

EDIT: Sorry about this late edit but it appears as though this post is my 1000th.

Edited September 16, 2011 by ebeddoulos

[Nathair/|\]

Yer mad, I tells ya, mad! Of course, so am I.

[ERayR]

I converse with the antiMormon. Depending on the focus I may agree or disagree with the antiMormon. In moments of naive optimism, I think the anti-Mormon is becoming charitable, tolerant and broad-minded. The antiMormon even smiles and proclaims his Christian love for the Latter-day Saints. However, behind the smile I sense nothing but cold darkness and a determined, almost evil presence. I am repelled and then appalled by my naiveté but again I enter the fray to repeat the cycle anew ... but wonder why.

Doe anyone else’s experience parallel my own?

It do get frustrating.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I converse with the antiMormon. Depending on the focus I may agree or disagree with the antiMormon. In moments of naive optimism, I think the anti-Mormon is becoming charitable, tolerant and broad-minded. The antiMormon even smiles and proclaims his Christian love for the Latter-day Saints. However, behind the smile I sense nothing but cold darkness and a determined, almost evil presence. I am repelled and then appalled by my naiveté but again I enter the fray to repeat the cycle anew ... but wonder why.

Doe anyone else’s experience parallel my own?

Sadly; yes.

[Questing Beast]

Labels are never helpful. Anti-Mormon is not a classification of mindset. It is a perceived classification, not reality. Because many people who disagree with the LDS faith, or rather aspects of it, do not have anything against its people. It is one thing to disagree on beliefs. And it is altogether another thing to resent, evilly, the existence of the people who share those beliefs.

The title of this fatuous thread is inaccurate: if you can track the "go-rounds" with various debaters, then a repetition of the same kind of debate is hardly "one eternal round". It is a series of repeated "go-rounds". If they are not merry, then you ought to find something that better occupies your attention; something that produces merry feelings, perhaps....

[Jesterss]

Labels are never helpful. Anti-Mormon is not a classification of mindset. It is a perceived classification, not reality. Because many people who disagree with the LDS faith, or rather aspects of it, do not have anything against its people. It is one thing to disagree on beliefs. And it is altogether another thing to resent, evilly, the existence of the people who share those beliefs.

The title of this fatuous thread is inaccurate: if you can track the "go-rounds" with various debaters, then a repetition of the same kind of debate is hardly "one eternal round". It is a series of repeated "go-rounds". If they are not merry, then you ought to find something that better occupies your attention; something that produces merry feelings, perhaps....

Great post... exhibits my beliefs as well..

[Vance]

Doe anyone else’s experience parallel my own?

Oh yeah!

[Vance]

Labels are never helpful.

A false statement to be sure.

Labels are how we define the world we live in.

Anti-Mormon is not a classification of mindset.

Ok, maybe it is just a classification of behavior.

It is a perceived classification, not reality.

As someone who hasn't experienced it, I suppose that makes you an expert on the subject. Right?

Because many people who disagree with the LDS faith, or rather aspects of it, do not have anything against its people.

And many do. So now what?

It is one thing to disagree on beliefs. And it is altogether another thing to resent, evilly, the existence of the people who share those beliefs.

Yup!

The title of this fatuous thread is inaccurate: if you can track the "go-rounds" with various debaters, then a repetition of the same kind of debate is hardly "one eternal round".

Again, your experience with the anti's makes you an expert?

It is a series of repeated "go-rounds". If they are not merry, then you ought to find something that better occupies your attention; something that produces merry feelings, perhaps....

And why are you here?

[Rob Bowman]

ebeddoulos,

You wrote:

I converse with the antiMormon. Depending on the focus I may agree or disagree with the antiMormon. In moments of naive optimism, I think the anti-Mormon is becoming charitable, tolerant and broad-minded. The antiMormon even smiles and proclaims his Christian love for the Latter-day Saints. However, behind the smile I sense nothing but cold darkness and a determined, almost evil presence.

Whew! Good thing you threw in that qualifier "almost."

Edited September 15, 2011 by Rob Bowman

[ebeddoulos]

Labels are never helpful. Anti-Mormon is not a classification of mindset. It is a perceived classification, not reality. Because many people who disagree with the LDS faith, or rather aspects of it, do not have anything against its people. It is one thing to disagree on beliefs. And it is altogether another thing to resent, evilly, the existence of the people who share those beliefs.

Labels are actually quite helpful. That is why we have so many of them. They are also known as nouns. I know the difference between an antiMormon and a critic. I have given this much thought. In fact, I have gone so far as to formally distinguish the difference.

• an•ti•Mor•mon 1. An individual, group or organization who is extremely intolerant of the restored Church of Jesus Christ, its beliefs, doctrines, teachings, practices, and leadership, 2. Any covert intolerance or overt contentious, combative, or violent action against the restored Church of Jesus Christ, its members, leadership or property, 3. An individual, group or organization who participates in, financially subsidizes or whose income is derived in full or in part from publishing tracts, books, films, web-sites; or organizes demonstrations to disturb meetings or dedications of new buildings; or produces lectures, conventions, seminars, television or radio programs; or related activities which promote intolerance against the restored Church of Jesus Christ or its leadership and members, 4. An individual, group or organization which deliberately deceives by use of lies, concealments, equivocations, exaggeration or understatement in an effort to damage or bring harm to the Church of Jesus Christ, its leadership or members. Note: The term should not be confused with or used as a synonym of Mormon Critic. See Critic
  Crit•ic A person who disagrees with the restored Church of Jesus Christ, its beliefs, doctrines, teachings, practices, and leadership yet promotes honest, fair, reasonable dialogue and true Christian tolerance.
  Note: The term Critic should not be confused with or used as a synonym of anti-Mormon. See antiMormon.

The title of this fatuous thread is inaccurate: if you can track the "go-rounds" with various debaters, then a repetition of the same kind of debate is hardly "one eternal round". It is a series of repeated "go-rounds". If they are not merry, then you ought to find something that better occupies your attention; something that produces merry feelings, perhaps....

meh ... bleh

Edited September 15, 2011 by ebeddoulos

[Vance]

an•ti•Mor•mon 1. An individual, group or organization who is extremely intolerant of the restored Church of Jesus Christ, its beliefs, doctrines, teachings, practices, and leadership, 2. Any covert intolerance or overt contentious, combative, or violent action against the restored Church of Jesus Christ, its members, leadership or property, 3. An individual, group or organization who participates in, financially subsidizes or whose income is derived in full or in part from publishing tracts, books, films, web-sites; or organizes demonstrations to disturb meetings or dedications of new buildings; or produces lectures, conventions, seminars, television or radio programs; or related activities which promote intolerance against the restored Church of Jesus Christ or its leadership and members, 4. An individual, group or organization which deliberately deceives by use of lies, concealments, equivocations, exaggeration or understatement in an effort to damage or bring harm to the Church of Jesus Christ, its leadership or members. Note: The term should not be confused with or used as a synonym of Mormon Critic. See Critic

Crit•ic A person who disagrees with the restored Church of Jesus Christ, its beliefs, doctrines, teachings, practices, and leadership yet promotes honest, fair, reasonable dialogue and true Christian tolerance.

Note: The term Critic should not be confused with or used as a synonym of anti-Mormon. See antiMormon.

Works for me.

[Maidservant]

[i posted this originally right when the server went out, so tried to re-write my thoughts, sigh, hopefully this turns out okay ]

Evil? Of course not.

Anti-mormon? Your anti-mormon is my human being.

Doing the go-rounds on this board is a very narrow swath of experience and I am leery of generalizing it.

On the other hand, growing up from being a child into an adult, I have had the bewildering experience of realizing that I am hated for my class (Mormon). And I do feel attacked. And I don’t like it. (I’m a human being, too.)

However, growing into hopefully a more perceptive adult, I realize that those who feel threatened give threats, and I have compassion for a person feeling threatened, because that is a very unpleasant thing to experience.

“Anti-mormon-ness” . . . I dunno. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and the gospel of Jesus Christ do not need my defense. They do not need to be proved. They do not need TO prove anything. The Church has already “won” any “argument” simply by being what it is . . . the stone cut without hands, rolling to fill the earth.

So when I am engaging with those whose point of view differs and may also be inaccurate, my only objective is to see what I CAN LEARN about where they are coming from. And if I can offer anything that helps them on their spiritual journey, then that is great also.

Some years back, there was a pastor (?) that moved into our area, and he began to publish ads in the religious section of the newspaper. The ads were inaccurate and provocative and condemnatory and dealt with some subjects such as gold plates, visitations by heavenly beings, and homosexuality. This person gave their address in each ad, so finally I wrote to him to set him straight, as I could not respect his opinions. I do not know what I wrote, but I have never been a person to get all mad. In any case, he and I continued to correspond and had a phone conversation or two. I came to know him as a very nice, sincere, zealous individual who obviously loved God and loved to serve Him. He sent me a box of “anti mormon literature” which I read (not sure how that went for me), and I sent him a box of LDS literature including copies of some hymns such as Hymn 136 (I Know That My Redeemer Lives). I went to two of his Wednesday night church meetings, and also met his wife and two little girls, and spoke with his wife at length. I enjoyed myself at these meetings; he was new and trying to grow his congregation, there were about 25 people in a little rented room. I found out he was planning a missionary trip to Hungary. I knew a Hungarian LDS lady, so I connected these two people so that he could get help on the language and such. Anyway, he and I eventually stopped talking mainly due to life-goes-on types of things.

Oddly enough, my died-in-the-wool Mormon hubby and in-laws were freaking out that I was being turned to the dark side, that somehow I was going to come to the realization that the Church was not true after reading some Tanner (give me a break) and attending meetings of another church.

Chin up. We’re all in God’s hands.

[picture of the original ancestors of what will, in thousands of years, become the two species “Mormon” and “Anti-Mormon”; mutations have not occurred yet]

[Calm]

Labels are never helpful.

So I take it if one would walk into your pantry all the labels would be removed from your cans as distracting or unhelpful.

Because many people who disagree with the LDS faith, or rather aspects of it

How strange, I could have sworn you just denounced the use of labels and yet here you are using one: "LDS faith".

Very confusing.

Edited September 16, 2011 by calmoriah

[KevinG]

It helps me to remember that some of the lurkers and posters questioning LDS claims and history may be on their first time around for a particular subject. Despite the fact that I may be on my 10th time around.

There are those however who intentionally perpetuate things that have been corrected or misrepresent what we believe in order to malign us. I have less patience for those who should know better. I figure if they are bearing false witness it will only condemn them.

I have had more than one experience where a "Christian" was nice to my face but spreading lies behind my back. I prayed for one of these "enemies" so successfully that he got a new job and moved away.

[ebeddoulos]

Whew! Good thing you threw in that qualifier "almost."

For you ... I can make an exception.