Fair

[Anakin7]

Well, if you want to call those who oppose Mormonism an anti-Mormon, thats your prerogative.

I've been called anti-Mormon before, and all it does is automatically shut down any chance of engaging in further fruitful discussion. Also, "anti" (to me at least) clearly carries a pejorative sense.

How about you are just a critic of Mormonism in which it's adherants need to be Hugged !. Is That better ?.

In His Debt/Grace

Anakin7

LDS JEDI KNIGHT

[Scott Lloyd]

Also, "anti" (to me at least) clearly carries a pejorative sense.

What about anti-porn, anti-crime, anti-slavery, anti-fascist, anti-pollution, anti-arson, anti-poverty? Do you see those as pejoratives?

Edited November 21, 2011 by Scott Lloyd

[diglot]

What about anti-porn, anti-crime, anti-slavery, anti-fascist, anti-pollution, anti-arson? Do you see those as pejoratives?

No, but I would see anti-puppies, anti-children, etc as pejoratives. I guess, for me, it depends on the object that goes along with "anti" that decides whether it is being used as a term of disparagement.

I disagree with Mormonism in general, but I don't consider Mormonism to be some wicked evil. I just view it critically just like I do every other religion (including my own). So when someone calls me anti-Mormon, I'm just left thinking, "uh what?! How am I anti-Mormon"

I probably just need to get over the usage of anti-Mormon.

Edited November 21, 2011 by diglot

[jskains]

No, but I would see anti-puppies, anti-children, etc as derogatory. I guess, for me, it depends on the object that goes along with "anti" that decides whether it is being used as a term of disparagement.

I disagree with Mormonism in general, but I don't consider Mormonism to be some wicked evil. I just view it critically just like I do every other religion (including my own). So when someone calls me anti-Mormon, I'm just left thinking, "uh what?! How am I anti-Mormon"

I probably just need to get over the usage of anti-Mormon.

Except you specifically follow Mormonism and its followers around to prove it wrong. Do you go to Catholic or Buddist or Scientology websites and discuss how much you disagree with them?

That is where the labeling often begins.

JMHO

[ERayR]

No, but I would see anti-puppies, anti-children, etc as pejoratives. I guess, for me, it depends on the object that goes along with "anti" that decides whether it is being used as a term of disparagement.

I disagree with Mormonism in general, but I don't consider Mormonism to be some wicked evil. I just view it critically just like I do every other religion (including my own). So when someone calls me anti-Mormon, I'm just left thinking, "uh what?! How am I anti-Mormon"

I probably just need to get over the usage of anti-Mormon.

To me it is a usefull label, nothing disparaging about it.

[diglot]

Except you specifically follow Mormonism and its followers around to prove it wrong. Do you go to Catholic or Buddist or Scientology websites and discuss how much you disagree with them?

That is where the labeling often begins.

JMHO

Actually no I don't follow Mormons around to prove them wrong. The reason I post here is to learn about Mormonism. If I see someone post something that I consider to be inaccurate, then I will naturally respond to it. But my primary reason for being here is to learn.

I am majoring in theology right now in school. Outside of theology, my main area of research is early Christian studies. I also very much enjoy studying all religions, including the various streams of Christianity that have emerged (e.g. Mormonism). I've learned that the best way to learn about a religion is to (1) read its sacred texts for yourself, and (2) talk to members of that religion. The latter reason is why I come here to talk.

Edited November 21, 2011 by diglot

[jskains]

Actually no I don't. The reason I post here is to learn about Mormonism. If I see someone post something that I consider to be inaccurate, then I will naturally respond to it. But my primary reason for being here is to learn.

I am majoring in theology right now in school. Outside of theology, my main area of research is early Christian studies. I also very much enjoy studying all religions, including the various streams of Christianity that have emerged (e.g. Mormonism). I've learned that the best way to learn about a religion is to (1) read its sacred texts for yourself, and (2) talk to members of that religion. The latter reason is why I come here to talk.

If that is honestly your purpose, you should not be disagreeing with Mormonism, and one wouldn't be focused on just one religion.

*shrug*

[diglot]

If that is honestly your purpose, you should not be disagreeing with Mormonism, and one wouldn't be focused on just one religion.

*shrug*

Why shouldn't I be disagreeing with Mormonism? That makes no sense.

And considering that I work full time and am a full time student, I barely have time to do in-depth study on one extra religion, let alone multiple religions at the same time. Before I started learning about Mormonism, I was studying Islam. The reason I stopped studying Islam and switched to Mormonism was because some Mormon missionaries visited my wife and I, which got me intetested.

You really should not just automatically impute to me the agenda that I only come here to follow Mormons around and prove them wrong.

Edited November 21, 2011 by diglot

[selek1]

....I only come here to follow Mormons around and prove them wrong. I have better things to do with my time than merely doing that.

Yep- because endlessly/needlessly flogging Mormons about the use of a perfectly reasonable and descriptive word makes sooooo much better use of your time.....

To be honest diglot, the last page or so of this thread seems to make it clear that you ARE intent on proving us wrong- at least on that one point.

Edited November 21, 2011 by selek1

[Storm Rider]

Actually no I don't follow Mormons around to prove them wrong. The reason I post here is to learn about Mormonism. If I see someone post something that I consider to be inaccurate, then I will naturally respond to it. But my primary reason for being here is to learn.

I am majoring in theology right now in school. Outside of theology, my main area of research is early Christian studies. I also very much enjoy studying all religions, including the various streams of Christianity that have emerged (e.g. Mormonism). I've learned that the best way to learn about a religion is to (1) read its sacred texts for yourself, and (2) talk to members of that religion. The latter reason is why I come here to talk.

We sound very similar. Nothing is better than learning about other religions than from the religion and its adherents themselves. When I am studying other religions, I am generally looking at similarities and differences. I focus on the similarities because I am primarily a student of truth and it never fails that I find truth in all relgions.

To me, it seems like all religions have truth in them. They are not false so much as they are incomplete. I am glad you are here and I appreciate many of your comments.

As far as the term anti-Mormon, if it does not pertain to you, ignore it. I do use the term, but I try to do so with discretion. Some are anti-Mormons while others are just critics. Still others are just curious and may be clumsy in their statements.

I see a wide divide between those who seek to destroy the religion of others and those who seek to proclaim truth. One seeks to teach while the other seeks to disprove. They are motivated from completely different places.

[diglot]

Yep- because endlessly/needlessly flogging Mormons about the use of a perfectly reasonable and descriptive word makes sooooo much better use of your time.....

To be honest diglot, the last page or so of this thread seems to make it clear that you ARE intent on proving us wrong- at least on that one point.

Yip, its amazing the amount of time one has to spend arguing over banalities on forums. If only I could resist the urge to reply to every post aimed at me, then this thread would probably be a whole page less. But alas, I am an imperfect being

[thesometimesaint]

diglot:

IF you are really studying a subject it really isn't a good idea to have already made up your mind on it.

[diglot]

diglot:

IF you are really studying a subject it really isn't a good idea to have already made up your mind on it.

I don't think it really matters. I study religions only to learn about them from an academic perspective; not to decide whether I should convert.

I'm actually open to changing my religious beliefs quite drastically though. I've done so before when I switched from Zen Buddhism to mainstream Christianity. And I've done so again over the past couple years as I've changed from a conservative exclusive evangelical Christianity to a progressive inclusivistic Christianity.

Its certainly possible I could join the LDS Church, just as its possible I could join any other religion or church. I would say that its highly unlikely I would ever convert to another religious stream though. If I ever was to drastically change my religious beliefs again, it would probably just be to pluralism.

Edited November 21, 2011 by diglot

[jskains]

I don't think it really matters. I study religions only to learn about them from an academic perspective; not to decide whether I should convert.

I'm actually open to changing my religious beliefs quite drastically though. I've done so before when I switched from Zen Buddhism to mainstream Christianity. And I've done so again over the past couple years as I've changed from a conservative exclusive evangelical Christianity to a progressive inclusivistic Christianity.

Its certainly possible I could join the LDS Church, just as its possible I could join any other religion or church. I would say that its highly unlikely I would ever convert to another religious stream though. If I ever was to drastically change my religious beliefs again, it would probably just be to pluralism.

Your missing the point. If your learning from an Academic perspective as you claim, then you don't go in with opinions and to tell them they are wrong.

If you go into an African Village to learn the local customs and religious views, you don't also include going around and telling them how they are wrong, or how their religious ideas are based on a fraud. Otherwise you stop learning and start preaching.

JMS

[thesometimesaint]

diglot:

Self fulfilling prophecy.

[diglot]

Your missing the point. If your learning from an Academic perspective as you claim, then you don't go in with opinions and to tell them they are wrong.

The only thing I really remember telling Mormons they're wrong about is eisegetical interpretations of biblical texts, faulty understandings of church history, etc (just as I've done with the evangelicals on CARM). And I do that precisely because of my academic approach to the subject.

Edited November 21, 2011 by diglot

[diglot]

diglot:

Self fulfilling prophecy.

What is?

[jskains]

The only thing I really remember telling Mormons they're wrong about is eisegetical interpretations of biblical texts, faulty understandings of church history, etc (just as I've done with the evangelicals on CARM). And I do that precisely because of my academic approach to the subject.

Faulty understanding of Church History? Boy is that loaded.

*eyeroll*

JMS

[diglot]

Faulty understanding of Church History? Boy is that loaded.

*eyeroll*

JMS

No, not loaded, just what I've seen.

Many Mormons display a very skewed and erroneous understanding of early church history. Just as many evangelicals display a skewed and erroneous misunderstanding of Mormon church history.

Roll your eyes all that you want, but it aint going to change the fact that Mormons can approach church history with as much bias and misunderstanding as mainstream Christians.

Edited November 21, 2011 by diglot

[diglot]

If you go into an African Village to learn the local customs and religious views, you don't also include going around and telling them how they are wrong, or how their religious ideas are based on a fraud. Otherwise you stop learning and start preaching.

JMS

And I don't think I do that. Where have I just started preaching that Joseph Smith is a fraud?

If I went to this hypothetical village and they started to misrepresent my faith, I would be obliged, in pursuit of truth and fairness, to correct their misunderstandings about my faith.

[jskains]

No, not loaded, just what I've seen.

Many Mormons display a very skewed and erroneous understanding of early church history. Just as many evangelicals display a skewed and erroneous misunderstanding of Mormon church history.

Roll your eyes all that you want, but it aint going to change the fact that Mormons can approach church history with as much bias and misunderstanding as mainstream Christians.

LOL, misunderstanding? So now your the expert while we are the idiots being lead around?

Yeah, you don't have motives.

JMS

[diglot]

LOL, misunderstanding? So now your the expert while we are the idiots being lead around?

Yeah, you don't have motives.

JMS

Please don't bother responding to me again if you're just going to twist my words into something that I never said. Its deceptive and not appreciated.

Edited November 21, 2011 by diglot

[jskains]

Please don't bother responding to me again if you're just going to twist my words into something that I never said. Its deceptive and not appreciated.

That's a cheap trick to avoid the problem. You imagine yourself to be some expert and are coming here to teach us Mormons about our own history. How is that not disrespectful and not appreciated?

JMS

[LeSellers]

Anti-Mormons who are rightly characterized as such are not typically interested in discussing so much as in opposing, vilifying, mischaracterizing, caricaturing, etc. Anti-Mormon might be regarded as a shorthand way of observing that they are engaged in doing those things.

"As shorthand way of ..." is a the very definition of "label", and labels exist for the hoary purpose: to make communication easier and more effective.

Those who want to do away with labels are typically those with something to hide. Those who want to change the definitions of labels are also trying to hide the motives, typically.

Lehi

[diglot]

That's a cheap trick to avoid the problem. You imagine yourself to be some expert and are coming here to teach us Mormons about our own history. How is that not disrespectful and not appreciated?

JMS

Please. I don't come here to teach you about Mormon history. Where have I done this?

I never said I was an "expert". Stop twisting my words.