Professional Antimormons' Efforts: Do They Achieve Their Aims?

[The Nehor]

Yeah right.  Like it or not, Gerald and Sandra Tanner are responsible for leading more than a few people out of the Church.  Indeed, I can't think of many critical arguments which do not have at least some beginning with the work of the Tanners.

 

I'm certainly not endorsing their historiographical methods.  But I would not doubt their effectiveness.

I would.

[stemelbow]

Yeah right.  Like it or not, Gerald and Sandra Tanner are responsible for leading more than a few people out of the Church.  Indeed, I can't think of many critical arguments which do not have at least some beginning with the work of the Tanners.

 

I'm certainly not endorsing their historiographical methods.  But I would not doubt their effectiveness.

In the end we simply don't know the net positive or negative of their efforts. Every person has their individual story and many come and many go.

[sdc999]

Professional Antimormons, Professional Mormons  -  is there really much difference?  I would say the Professional Mormons get a bigger 'stipen' than the antimormons but they are both dependent upon the all mighty $$$$$.     Let Monson live like a missionary for a year, dependent upon members and not the executive condo with people waiting on him hand and foot.   Let the anti's live the same way.... they will both go away.    

Mormons will get to those they get to and Anti's the same.   I would say that the anti's are winning the battle though..  Just guessing so not CFR can be provided but I bet that for every 1 that is baptized, 10 say no because of an anti's persuasion.  

[Guest]

Yeah right.  Like it or not, Gerald and Sandra Tanner are responsible for leading more than a few people out of the Church.  Indeed, I can't think of many critical arguments which do not have at least some beginning with the work of the Tanners.

 

I'm certainly not endorsing their historiographical methods.  But I would not doubt their effectiveness.

Seth, and then there are those who wish they led people out. Remember you article in your blog (and not my sing line) about Theo, the self appointed nanny of CARM?

I had the his comment in my sig line for years...

"There is no such thing a Christian tolerance! (His words and punctuation).

At least the Tanner's could cite wins (for lack of a better term) for there cause.

Also Texas Eagle, who would use State sponsored comparative classes to preach again Mormonism. Until they made him stop.

[cdowis]

Professional Antimormons, Professional Mormons  -  is there really much difference? 

 

You cannot see the difference between a hate monger and those who carry a prophetic calling.  That is truly pathetic.

Edited May 21, 2014 by cdowis

[readstoomuch]

I am sure President Monson has lived in spartan circumstances. I think Lawrence Foster's article is very interesting and a version was in Dialogue. I bet it is available just googling. He is a non-mormon and his perspective interesting.

[Rain]

Professional Antimormons, Professional Mormons  -  is there really much difference?  I would say the Professional Mormons get a bigger 'stipen' than the antimormons but they are both dependent upon the all mighty $$$$$.     Let Monson live like a missionary for a year, dependent upon members and not the executive condo with people waiting on him hand and foot.   Let the anti's live the same way.... they will both go away.    

Mormons will get to those they get to and Anti's the same.   I would say that the anti's are winning the battle though..  Just guessing so not CFR can be provided but I bet that for every 1 that is baptized, 10 say no because of an anti's persuasion.

It's always funny to me when people assume things about where he lives. I don't know where he lives now, but until a few years ago he did NOT live in executive condos (a friend of mine was in his ward.) If he lives in them now it wouldn't phase me because of his age and schedule because it would be really good to have him close to 'work'.

[sethpayne]

I would.

 

Feel free to live in a fantasy world.  Just because we don't like what the Tanners do doesn't mean they aren't very good at it.

 

Of course we could get in an argument about whether people are leaving the Church or not but since neither of us have any data to support the claim one way or another the argument would prove fruitless.

 

Having said that, I think there is plenty of anecdotal evidence that supports the idea that the fruit of the Tanners has led more than a few people out of the Church.  They were among the first to discuss:

 

Adam-God

Book of Abraham

Mark Hoffman as a forger 

The NT and post-Lehi OT in the BoM

etc....

 

If you would like to think that none of these issues has been the genesis of doubt, be my guest.

[sethpayne]

In the end we simply don't know the net positive or negative of their efforts. Every person has their individual story and many come and many go.

 

Quite true.  None of us have hard data.  But to think that the Church isn't facing a real challenge due to the widespread availability of information that may shock faithful members just doesn't jive with reality, IMO.  If you look at most anti-Mormon material these days much of it can be traced directly back to the Tanners.

[USU78]

37 votes just now:

 

17 "agree/mildly agree"

 

20 "various shades of disagree"

 

Nobody strongly agrees, and 6 strongly disagree.

 

So . . . the agrees are, like myself, barely interested, while the disagrees tend to be more exercised on the subject.

 

Interesting results thus far.  Let's see if things change.

[stemelbow]

Quite true.  None of us have hard data.  But to think that the Church isn't facing a real challenge due to the widespread availability of information that may shock faithful members just doesn't jive with reality, IMO.  If you look at most anti-Mormon material these days much of it can be traced directly back to the Tanners.

I didn't say "the Church isn't facing a real challenge due to the widespread availability of information that may shock faithful members". Indeed, I"d agree this challenge is alive and well for the Church. I daresay plenty of people will see information and decide the Church is not what they thought it was and decide to leave. I'm an advocate for being forthcoming, put information for people to see and digest, and let the chips fall where they may. The church is not for everyone, and I might suggest even in God's perspective He'd think it best for some individuals to remain out of the Church. Helps Him accomplish His work in other ways.

In my mind, antimormons by profession should be unnecessary.

[The Nehor]

Feel free to live in a fantasy world.  

I wish I did. Know of any magical wardrobes I can use to get to one?

[Tacenda]

Quite true.  None of us have hard data.  But to think that the Church isn't facing a real challenge due to the widespread availability of information that may shock faithful members just doesn't jive with reality, IMO.  If you look at most anti-Mormon material these days much of it can be traced directly back to the Tanners.

 

Part 1 - http://mormonstories.org/sandra-and-jerald-tanner-the-early-years/

 

Part 2 - http://youtu.be/wQlYADfAeAY

Part 3 - http://youtu.be/XbnN76P_D2E

 

Part 4 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyP2dQpnyWI&index=5&list=PLxq5opj6GqODZPewqYxZWLoD_fD1MtZiM

 

In these podcasts with JD, it appears the Tanners did bring up some information that was hidden and were the first to discover or put out.  I was dismayed at some of their tactics, and it did turn me off, but truth is truth.  But to a TBM, that hasn't lived on these boards or the internet involving Mormon History, I can see them balking at this info as pure bunk because of their tactics. I did listen recently to another podcast with Grant Palmer, whom has an incredible belief in the Saviour, along with Sandra and it shows the reasons they are unwilling to give up on revealing information that they hope will reach members.  Grant would probably still be in the church if the church hadn't came after him, he only wanted the church to be open and honest about the history and then move to basing religious life entirely on worshipping the Christ.    ETA:  I haven't voted, can't decide. 

Edited May 21, 2014 by Tacenda

[Calm]

" he only wanted the church to be open and honest about the history and then move to basing religious life entirely on worshipping the Christ"

Dont buy it. Not from someone who claims all the apostles know the Church is a fraud.

Edited May 21, 2014 by calmoriah

[Tacenda]

" he only wanted the church to be open and honest about the history and then move to basing religious life entirely on worshipping the Christ"

Dont buy it. Not from someone who claims all the apostles know the Church is a fraud.

I definitely agree that he is clearly wrong claiming that.  I can't believe he'd say such a thing.  Crazy.  But that's what this whole deal does to a once believer...makes you go almost crazy or crazy!

[danielwoods]

Professional Antimormons, Professional Mormons  -  is there really much difference? 

 

 

You cannot see the difference between a hate monger and those who carry a prophetic calling.  That is truly pathetic.

 

 

Dont buy it. Not from someone who claims all the apostles know the Church is a fraud.

 

Impugning motives is a similar error. 

 

I would contend there is no such thing as a "professional" anti-mormon, or mormon. Nor do I think that those who disagree with someone else's doctrine is a "hate" monger. 

 

Just as no one knows what "all the apostles know..." so also, we can't know what motivates people, truly. 

 

If you ask them they'd probably say that they feel the Spirit leading them to do the work they are doing, just as the LDS claim the same for their work. Does that indicate hate on either side? 

 

Some who are labeled as "anti-mormon" do make money, does that make what they do wrong or bad? IF an Apostle of the Church defends the teachings of the church how is it that his motives can't be questioned, when he has a lot to lose if the teachings are found to be in error? 

 

To me analyzing one anothers motives is a fools errand. We can guess, but we must always be humble and willing to accept that we might be mistaken. 

Edited May 21, 2014 by danielwoods

[cdowis]

Impugning motives is a similar error. 

 

I would contend there is no such thing as a "professional" anti-mormon, or mormon. Nor do I think that those who disagree with someone else's doctrine is a "hate" monger. 

 

 

 

I agree, but there are those who go beyond simple "disagreement" with LDS doctrine.  I am very careful in my choice of words.  Don't ask, because I have no interest ion pointing specific individuals.

 

Just check out youtube.

 

Finally you are mistaken where you declare there are no "professional" antimormons, but I'm not going to argue with you except to say I have been in this business over 25 years and I really do know what I am talking about.

Edited May 21, 2014 by cdowis

[danielwoods]

I agree, but there are those who go beyond simple "disagreement" with LDS doctrine.  I am very careful in my choice of words.  Don't ask, because I have no interest ion pointing specific individuals.

 

Just check out youtube.

 

Finally you are mistaken where you declare there are no "professional" antimormons, but I'm not going to argue with you except to say I have been in this business over 25 years and I really do know what I am talking about.

 

Do your "professional" antimormons claim to be professional antimormons? Is that what they call themselves? 

[sethpayne]

Seth, and then there are those who wish they led people out. Remember you article in your blog (and not my sing line) about Theo, the self appointed nanny of CARM?

I had the his comment in my sig line for years...

"There is no such thing a Christian tolerance! (His words and punctuation).

At least the Tanner's could cite wins (for lack of a better term) for there cause.

Also Texas Eagle, who would use State sponsored comparative classes to preach again Mormonism. Until they made him stop.

 

 

Ah yes!  The Tanners have certainly produced an interesting set of critics.  Some better than others.  

[sethpayne]

In my mind, antimormons by profession should be unnecessary.

 

Well I certainly agree with you on this point.  Any group or individual who dedicates their efforts to discrediting others is on a fool's errand, so to speak.

 

However, I do respect those Christians who sincerely and charitably take issue with Mormonism and attempt to "witness" to us LDS folks.  I respect it when this is done in a kind, non-offensive manner.  Much like our own missionary work, I suppose.  

[mnn727]

 

 

I would contend there is no such thing as a "professional" anti-mormon, 

 

What would you call someone who makes their money from creating and selling anti-LDS material, like the Tanners?

[danielwoods]

What would you call someone who makes their money from creating and selling anti-LDS material, like the Tanners?

 

What do I call them? I call them people. To "call" them something is to create a label. It might be accurate and it might not. What I am asking is what do they "call" themselves? What do they label themselves as doing? What do they believe they are doing? Do they see themselves in such a negative light? 

Edited May 22, 2014 by danielwoods

[strappinglad]

A paranoid Schizophrenic may consider himself perfectly sane and the rest of the world quite bonkers. Perhaps he is correct, but just because he labels himself sane, does not make it so.

To be a professional one must be paid for the work one is doing. There is implied a strong measure of competency and success in the label ' professional ' . By those criteria can we label the Tanners ( now just Mrs. Tanner ) professional_____________?????

[cdowis]

Do your "professional" antimormons claim to be professional antimormons? Is that what they call themselves? 

 

Of course not.  They are the masters of obfuscation and rhetoric ==>> they have a "ministry".  They have received a calling to witness to the Mormons.  That makes it sound so ......Christian.

 

They give speeches in churches, publish SS manuals to inform Christians of the dangers of the cults.  My daughter attended a SS class (they did not know she was Mormon) and she was shocked to hear what they were saying about us.  When I called the minister, he gave somewhat of an apology and said they were just using the curriculum texts published by their organization.  The churches then "support" their ministry thru contributions, tax deductable, of course.

 

I have an annoying habit of calling it what it is.

Edited May 22, 2014 by cdowis

[3DOP]

Another important "aim" for antis of any persuasion is to intercept those who might be inquiring about the faith they oppose. It would be pretty difficult to gauge how successful they may be in that way.