British Pageant

[Scott Lloyd]

Technically, both options are wrong and one should say copies of the Book of Mormon.

Volgadon is absolutely right here. There is one Book of Mormon with many copies thereof.

Think of applying the construction to other titles. You would say, "The library has five copies of War and Peace," not "The library has five Wars and Peaces."

Edited August 10, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[cdowis]

There is one 'small' matter to consider about irresistable grace - the Bible teaches it.

There is one small problem with your post -- the Bible "teaches" many things, and those doctrines contradict each other, depending with whom you are speaking.

"The inerrant Bible is a moot issue until you have an inerrant interpretation of the Bible."

Edited August 10, 2013 by cdowis

[Scott Lloyd]

Do you know I was mulling that over in my head.

Copies of Jane Eyre... not Jane Eyres

Copies of Hamlet... not Hamlets

The second one would be a box of cigars where I'm from.

I see you were already thinking along the same lines as I.

We could come up with other absurdities: Doctrines and Covenantses. Les Miserableses.

[canard78]

I see you were already thinking along the same lines as I.

We could come up with other absurdities: Doctrines and Covenantses. Les Miserableses.

I have to give the credit to Hamba - I was still stuck on the pluralisation of the title and trying to pick which part.

I enjoyed your pluralisation or the already plural titles

[canard78]

It seems to me that there's a substantial and obvious difference between attempting to convert everybody to your point of view, on the one hand, and, on the other, deliberately targeting a specific group for conversion -- and particularly so if the targeting is directed, to any significant degree, to converting that specific group away from its particular viewpoint.

The first is evangelism. The second rapidly becomes anti-[whatever-the-targeted-group-is].

Was Jesus anti-Jewish? I'm not aware that he preached to anyone other than them.

I suppose the term 'anti' is another of those 'hot-words' that actually has a fairly neutral definition.

If someone is anti-(something) then they are only "A person opposed to a particular policy, activity, or idea." In that sense, MrG. would probably be reasonably represented as someone who is opposed to the Mormon description of Jesus, Grace and the purpose of life.

But when Mormons use the term 'anti-mormon' I think it has more baggage than this simple definition and implies the spirit in which the message is borne.

[Scott Lloyd]

Was Jesus anti-Jewish? I'm not aware that he preached to anyone other than them.

I suppose the term 'anti' is another of those 'hot-words' that actually has a fairly neutral definition.

If someone is anti-(something) then they are only "A person opposed to a particular policy, activity, or idea." In that sense, MrG. would probably be reasonably represented as someone who is opposed to the Mormon description of Jesus, Grace and the purpose of life.

But when Mormons use the term 'anti-mormon' I think it has more baggage than this simple definition and implies the spirit in which the message is borne.

The anti- prefix carries its own inherent baggage. One can hardly be against -- or anti- -- something without being hostile to it.

Like anything, it can be misapplied. But when applied correctly, it is a perfectly serviceable term. Those who truly are anti-Mormon ought to own the label and not dissemble (see my sig line).

[Daniel Peterson]

Was Jesus anti-Jewish? I'm not aware that he preached to anyone other than them.

There weren't a lot of Tongans available in first-century Palestine.

Anyway, the Jews had a special status in the biblical tradition to that point, and the rules for Jewish interaction with Gentiles were quite strict. The revelation changing that wouldn't arrive until after the Resurrection.

By contrast, Mormons in England have to be sought out, and, although I'm not familiar with the specific group that was there at the temple grounds in Chorley, I'm unaware of any Evangelical group that is required to interact only with Mormons while avoiding contact with any other non-Evangelicals.

I suppose the term 'anti' is another of those 'hot-words' that actually has a fairly neutral definition.

In my usage, it has a very neutral definition.

If someone is anti-(something) then they are only "A person opposed to a particular policy, activity, or idea." In that sense, MrG. would probably be reasonably represented as someone who is opposed to the Mormon description of Jesus, Grace and the purpose of life.

I would think so, yes.

But when Mormons use the term 'anti-mormon' I think it has more baggage than this simple definition and implies the spirit in which the message is borne.

Not when I use it, it doesn't.

Edited August 11, 2013 by Daniel Peterson

[Scott Lloyd]

Was Jesus anti-Jewish? I'm not aware that he preached to anyone other than them.

You're comparison here is problematic, since Jesus was the God of ancient Israel, He Whom they professed to follow.

[Scott Lloyd]

If someone is anti-(something) then they are only "A person opposed to a particular policy, activity, or idea." In that sense, MrG. would probably be reasonably represented as someone who is opposed to the Mormon description of Jesus, Grace and the purpose of life.

Most Mormons who I observe using the term do use it in that sense.

However, anti- can also connote opposition to a people, as in antisemitic.

The Anti-Mormon political party in Illinois in the 1840s arguably detested Mormons themselves, not just their ideas or religion.

[canard78]

There weren't a lot of Tongans available in first-century Palestine.

Anyway, the Jews had a special status in the biblical tradition to that point, and the rules for Jewish interaction with Gentiles were quite strict. The revelation changing that wouldn't arrive until after the Resurrection.

By contrast, Mormons in England have to be sought out, and, although I'm not familiar with the specific group that was there at the temple grounds in Chorley, I'm unaware of any Evangelical group that is required to interact only with Mormons while avoiding contact with any other non-Evangelicals.

If interested they have a website. They spent the day preaching in Chorley town centre and the evening at the Pageant. They are not on an "anti-Mormon mission" but instead are preaching their understanding of Christ to as many as they can find. Not just Mormons. They are less anti-Mormon and more anti-[any one who doesn't teach Christ in the way they believe it to be taught].

Does that make them anti? Or does that make them pro-[their perspective of Christ].

In my usage, it has a very neutral definition.

I would think so, yes.

Not when I use it, it doesn't.

I appreciate that. But it's also important to consider the weight of words when using them and the impact on the reader/hearer.

If I call certain church leaders "racist" ("a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others") or "liars" ("someone making a false statement"), I am also being technically accurate, but I try to avoid the words as I appreciate that for some it carries "baggage."

[Calm]

Was Jesus anti-Jewish? I'm not aware that he preached to anyone other than them.

He preached to those that came to him for the most part, did he not? If there were nonJews among them, he didn't order them to be kicked out and if they asked him questions, he responded according to the scriptures and blessed them when they exhibited faith as in the Roman Centurion (Matt 8:5-13) Granted he traveled around, but it makes sense that he stayed pretty local.

He also didn't visit the Jerusalem temple for the purpose of condemning the rituals and beliefs of those who participated there even if he did condemn those he saw as desecrating it.

Edited August 11, 2013 by calmoriah

[canard78]

He preached to those that came to him for the most part, did he not? If there were nonJews among them, he didn't order them to be kicked out and if they asked him questions, he responded according to the scriptures and blessed them when they exhibited faith as in the Roman Centurion (Matt 8:5-13) Granted he traveled around, but it makes sense that he stayed pretty local.

I'm not saying he was anti-Jew and was typing in a rush.

I was planning on saying that sometimes we perceive things from a distance but that on closer examination it's not actually the case.

I'm suggesting that, on closer examination, we may find that MrG is not anti-Mormon but pro-[his understanding of Christ].

[Calm]

I'm suggesting that, on closer examination, we may find that MrG is not anti-Mormon but pro-[his understanding of Christ].

Unfortunately if that is his actual focus, it does not come across with a title like "Mormonism Investigated UK".

Also this:

Welcome to Mormonism Investigated UK, this blog seeks to educate Christians about the beliefs and difficulties within Mormonism both biblically and historically,

http://mormonisminve...ed.co.uk/about/

Where is the sharing of Christian faith in this?:

http://mormonisminvestigated.co.uk/2013/08/07/towards-a-more-fully-representative-history-of-the-british-mormon-experience-part-2/

Edited August 11, 2013 by calmoriah

[canard78]

Unfortunately if that is his actual focus, it does not come across with a title like "Mormonism Investigated UK".

Also this:

http://mormonisminve...ed.co.uk/about/

Where is the sharing of Christian faith in this?:

http://mormonisminvestigated.co.uk/2013/08/07/towards-a-more-fully-representative-history-of-the-british-mormon-experience-part-2/

That is the focus of that website but his blog also talks about the other activity that they undertake. He is preaching a broader message than being against the Mormons. He is preaching what he understands to be the correct understanding of Christ.

As I've said already I accept that in the direct definition of the English word, MrG is opposed to the teachings of Mormonism. I don't think there's any dispute in that. But I don't think that labelling a board participant as "anti-mormon" (with all the baggage that the term carries) is particularly conducive to good dialogue.

Similarly hot words like "racist," "bigot," "liar," and "anti-Christ" are not helpful even if they are technically accurate. Didn't Elder Packer once say something similar?

As we sometimes say at work when our research has bad news for a client's project: "How would you describe an ugly baby."

[MrG]

That is the focus of that website but his blog also talks about the other activity that they undertake. He is preaching a broader message than being against the Mormons. He is preaching what he understands to be the correct understanding of Christ.

As I've said already I accept that in the direct definition of the English word, MrG is opposed to the teachings of Mormonism. I don't think there's any dispute in that. But I don't think that labelling a board participant as "anti-mormon" (with all the baggage that the term carries) is particularly conducive to good dialogue.

Similarly hot words like "racist," "bigot," "liar," and "anti-Christ" are not helpful even if they are technically accurate. Didn't Elder Packer once say something similar?

As we sometimes say at work when our research has bad news for a client's project: "How would you describe an ugly baby."

Appreciated!

[Ragster]

Well, I enjoyed the pageant very much - despite the overacting couple (who were supposed to be the comedy aspect, I suspect.)

Nevertheless, it was well presented, interesting, and fun, I thought.

The reception with President Murray, David Rutley MP, FrankField MP, The Mayor, et al., was very pleasant too.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Because I would MUCH rather they leave to become Christians (again I appreciate thats a big discussion). Im an idealist.

Also I have been to Utah 3 times doing this type of thing at Manti etc. Though sunstone could be fun, these trips are far from free though!

The first time I came across a real Calvinist was talking at this guy at Manti about 13 years ago. He brought up every single verse of scripture that you have so far. The verses in Romans and Moroni and 2nd Nephi. I might have even talked to you if you were there in 2000. But the dude I talked with didn't seem British so a.. Edited August 12, 2013 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[Antoni]

I appreciate there are many apologetic responses to the issues that us "Anti-Mormons" raise with these verses. However many day to day Mormons that we spoke too did not know for sure that they have eternal life.

And I can find you plenty of "Christians" (by your definition - which I presume is Evangelical which is itself a small subset of worldwide Christendom) who also aren't sure of their eternal salvation. It appears for you, assurance of eternal life = qualification to receiving it? Perhaps your time would be better spent building up your own community of faith rather than pointing fingers at LDS?

With regards the pageant, is this an annual event ? - if so I'll make the effort to go up next year.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

And I can find you plenty of "Christians" (by your definition - which I presume is Evangelical which is itself a small subset of worldwide Christendom) who also aren't sure of their eternal salvation. It appears for you, assurance of eternal life = qualification to receiving it? Perhaps your time would be better spent building up your own community of faith rather than pointing fingers at LDS?

I missed this little bit. Most LDS "aren't sure if they have eternal life" because this life is not over and thus the test is not over. One can fall from grace. THere is not such thing as eternal security. THere is not such thing as "Pray this prayer and you are saved and can never be damned after that". If I continue on my way that I have been taught and follow the gospel and seek forgivness then I will have eternal life. For that is what the scriptures say.

[Tacenda]

Who is this guy? I'm listening to this podcast on FairMormon Blog. He is very interesting. He also sets some things straight that some LDS misunderstand. He goes over Grace and his understanding of it. He even said that it is not of ourselves but faith only. Then he goes onto the group that we've been discussing, the Mormonism Investigated UK group. Anyone know this guy, Ned Scarisbrick? I really like what he had to say!

http://www.fairblog.org/

Edited August 15, 2013 by Tacenda

[Calm]

Who is this guy? I'm listening to this podcast on FairMormon Blog. He is very interesting. He also sets some things straight that some LDS misunderstand. He goes over Grace and his understanding of it. He even said that it is not of ourselves but faith only. Then he goes onto the group that we've been discussing, the Mormonism Investigated UK group. Anyone know this guy, Ned Scarisbrick? I really like what he had to say!

http://www.fairblog.org/

Ned is a good man...

http://www.fairblog....1-introduction/

Edited August 15, 2013 by calmoriah