The New Anti-Mormons Are Lds

[Avatar4321]

Attaching labels like anti_mormon to another member is simply an effort to place yourself as a member of the us in us vs them and give yourself permission to label yourself as one of the good guys

not if the label is accurate and the one objecting to it just wants to avoid it to deceive others.

Edited October 3, 2014 by Avatar4321

[Calm]

The line is "Lead me, guide me ...."

Lead me, guide me, walk beside me, help me find the way.  Teach me all that I must do to live with him someday.

 

https://www.lds.org/music/library/childrens-songbook/i-am-a-child-of-god?lang=eng

 

 

PS:  I want that parasol….

Edited October 3, 2014 by calmoriah

[Avatar4321]

Scott Lloyd, It has been awhile since I have heard the song.  Thank you for pointing that out to me.  I am sure that no one on board knew what I was talking about until you straightened it all out.  Hugs,  Jeanne

i encourage you to study and relearn the faith of your youth. You may find you don't have as many problems with it as you might think.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

1) I disagree with your assessment of sniffer. He, like others, will soon be forgotten. Hopefully with few ultimately being deceived. It is a fascinating case study though.

2) all truth is within the purview of Mormonism. No question is discouraged if it's asked in faith. Because that's how you learn. It's asking questions in attempting to encourage disbelief that is the problem.

 

What you interpret as "attempting to encourage disbelief" may be a completely honest and sincere question being "asked in faith". How do you pretend to judge the difference?

[Avatar4321]

What you interpret as "attempting to encourage disbelief" may be a completely honest and sincere question being "asked in faith". How do you pretend to judge the difference?

excellent question. I don't pretend to judge anything. Moroni showed us the way to judge.

not to mention the Holy Spirit is very useful with discernment.

[Brian 2.0]

2) all truth is within the purview of Mormonism. No question is discouraged if it's asked in faith. Because that's how you learn. It's asking questions in attempting to encourage disbelief that is the problem.

 

This is an interesting one.  Because we often as questions in missionary work with the attempt bring in new coverts.   Those questions may encouraging faith towards Mormonism, but it may implicitly be discouraging faith in their religion.

[Guest]

It used to be, not that long ago, that so-called anti-Mormons were the only ones who asked the questions on this board that self-professed Mormons are asking today.

Some of you remember and participated in answering the non-LDS anti-Mormons who used to frequent this board and ZLMB before it, with gusto and sound reason. But it is almost as thought they slipped into your own camp and are identifying themselves as LDS. Your own people are asking about and complaining of the same lame stuff that has been answered satisfactorily many times. As a non-LDS who has been around LDS sites for almost as long as there have been sites, it bewilders me how distrustful and disrespectful supposedly devout Latter-day Saints now seem to feel about the leadership of those who they say are the Apostles of Jesus Christ.

It seems like a sea-change to me. That is because it seems like you used to do such a good job of answering your critics. But now that your critics are Mormon...It leaves me bewildered and in a way dismayed, to see Mormons doubtful and critical of Mormonism for all the wrong reasons. Oh and, 3DOP, I have never know you to be anti-Mormon. But hey, I am a passionate person, by family loves it, my friends love it and my Ward and Stake leadership are thankful for it

Rory

I never thought that true-blue-Mormons who find themselves on the outs (on sites that were once for the defense of the Church). It seems that so many see our faith as some round table coffee shop discussion. Or just an academic pursuit...and God forbid any should take offense and be bold in their faith. On most boards bearing one's testimony is prohibited. It will be evident next week when we see many pick apart the sermons at General Conference. I have a testimony, and God compels me to share it and I cannot do away with emotion as many would like, because the Church and the words of the Prophets stir emotion. I would rather be condemned for approaching the gospel boldly, rather than being popular and dispassionate. Or as Christ puts it "I would rather Ye be hot or cold, for if Ye are lukewarm I will spew you out of my mouth". Edited October 3, 2014 by Pa Pa

[Ahab]

I understand you fine... but do you accept as a possibility that in your model "The Mormon Way" could, in the end, not involve Mormonism, Joseph Smith, or Jesus Christ?

Think some more about what is or could be involved in the best way to live and helping others to know what the best way to live is. Or if it helps you to think about what you must exclude from your life to be able to live the best way, think of any reason why you would need to exclude any of those subjects or people you mentioned because they would make it impossible for you to live the best way, as if they would be in opposition to you living the best way. If you can think of something like that, I wouldn't call that the Mormon way.

[EllenMaksoud]

It used to be, not that long ago, that so-called anti-Mormons were the only ones who asked the questions on this board that self-professed Mormons are asking today.

Some of you remember and participated in answering the non-LDS anti-Mormons who used to frequent this board and ZLMB before it, with gusto and sound reason. But it is almost as thought they slipped into your own camp and are identifying themselves as LDS. Your own people are asking about and complaining of the same lame stuff that has been answered satisfactorily many times. As a non-LDS who has been around LDS sites for almost as long as there have been sites, it bewilders me how distrustful and disrespectful supposedly devout Latter-day Saints now seem to feel about the leadership of those who they say are the Apostles of Jesus Christ.

 

It seems like a sea-change to me. That is because it seems like you used to do such a good job of answering your critics. But now that your critics are Mormon...It leaves me bewildered and in a way dismayed, to see Mormons doubtful and critical of Mormonism for all the wrong reasons.

 

Rory

I am not ready to be called Anti-Mormon. I feel like downward communication within the church is Godly and well placed. I just wish that I felt like there was some upward communication, and when I say that some one is sure to come out with prayer is your upward communication path. Perhaps I just need more patience. Yes, there are those who want some things changed and I just don't know what the issues are. The one issue that I really cared about, I just decided that God was welcome to. I feel like there were some mistakes made, but I can do nothing, so that is the end of it.

[Brian 2.0]

Think some more about what is or could be involved in the best way to live and helping others to know what the best way to live is. Or if it helps you to think about what you must exclude from your life to be able to live the best way, think of any reason why you would need to exclude any of those subjects or people you mentioned because they would make it impossible for you to live the best way, as if they would be in opposition to you living the best way. If you can think of something like that, I wouldn't call that the Mormon way.

 

I have thought about it, a lot, and I continue to think about it.  We obviously come to different conclusions... which is my whole point.  We're both honest truth seekers arriving at different "best ways".  

 

And for the record, I don't exclude everything Jesus taught or anything like that.  His teachings have a lot of good and are well worth applying.  But I also don't believe in teaching that belief in Jesus Christ is the only way to get to heaven or back to God.  That is my personal belief in trying to live "the best way"/"the Mormon way".

 

As for what is the actual "best way" (if that even exists) is not known for sure, you said so yourself... but we are after the same thing -- living the best we can.

 

If we were both high jumpers and I felt the Straddle Method was the best way for me, and you felt the Fosbury Flop was the best way... would you really call me "Anti-High Jump"?

 

There is the option that there is no universal "best way" or "Mormon Way" as you call it, and there are many, varied paths that are good/true/right/whatever you want to call it.

[3DOP]

I never thought that true-blue-Mormons who find themselves on the outs (on sites that were once for the defense of the Church). It seems that so many see our faith as some round table coffee shop discussion. Or just an academic pursuit...and God forbid any should take offense and be bold in their faith. On most boards bearing one's testimony is prohibited. It will be evident next week when we see many pick apart the sermons at General Conference. I have a testimony, and God compels me to share it and I cannot do away with emotion as many would like, because the Church and the words of the Prophets stir emotion. I would rather be condemned for approaching the gospel boldly, rather than being popular and dispassionate. Or as Christ puts it "I would rather Ye be hot or cold, for if Ye are lukewarm I will spew you other of my mouth".

 

Good post Papa. What you said is my kind of Mormonism, and it's pretty darn good Catholicism too, in my book. Simple. True to your roots. I'd love to go to church with you Papa. God help us.

 

The round table discussion never initiated a religion. The diversity crowd never starts anything. They show up after some great unifying voice has vivified a sacrificial body of believers and then tries to claim that their skepticism represents the same thing as the faith of our fathers. Somebody claimed that such a view as I present is divisive. "Us vs. Them." Yeah, I guess so. I'll concede that I see it that way. Believers vs. unbelievers? That seems like a rather natural division that I didn't make up. I divide belief and unbelief? No, unbelief divides itself from belief. Believe and you are welcome to unity. Disbelieve and the faithful (of any religion) reject your "diversity" (disbelief).

Edited October 3, 2014 by 3DOP

[Ahab]

I have thought about it, a lot, and I continue to think about it. We obviously come to different conclusions... which is my whole point. We're both honest truth seekers arriving at different "best ways".

And for the record, I don't exclude everything Jesus taught or anything like that. His teachings have a lot of good and are well worth applying. But I also don't believe in teaching that belief in Jesus Christ is the only way to get to heaven or back to God. That is my personal belief in trying to live "the best way"/"the Mormon way".

Even if it weren't the only way to get back to God it would still be the best way, if you correctly understand what that means.

As for what is the actual "best way" (if that even exists) is not known for sure, you said so yourself... but we are after the same thing -- living the best we can.

I don't know where you got the idea that I think the best way can't be known. I know it and I'm living it, and I call it the Mormon way.

If we were both high jumpers and I felt the Straddle Method was the best way for me, and you felt the Fosbury Flop was the best way... would you really call me "Anti-High Jump"?

What the heck are you talking about? Why don't you use a more realistic example? If you are opposed to following Christ as the best way to live then I would call you anti-Christ just as I would call you anti-Mormon if you were opposed to following Mormonism as the best way.

There is the option that there is no universal "best way" or "Mormon Way" as you call it, and there are many, varied paths that are good/true/right/whatever you want to call it.

That is a false option, though. A lie. Because there really is a best way and the Mormon way is it.

[why me]

 

 

Why have anti..TBM's division anyway?  This is (should) be a board that can discuss all things within board rules and answer questions, give opinions and try to understand eachother because God gave us a brain to do so.

 

 

I think that the problem comes when active members come to the board and more or less use critic tactics against the lds church. I don't think that it is very interesting to defend the church over and over again with a lds person who is active but yet, extremely critical of the church. But that being said, this is no longer an apologetic board. It is just a discussion board and not a board to defend the church. Back in the day, the board was different. We had great apologists and great critics. And the debate was very good and hard hitting. Now, such apologists are more or less gone and the critics too. So, we are left with members being critical of the lds church and its leaders and others who respond to the criticisms. The board dynamics have changed. If you were on the board 10 years ago, you would know a true blue critic by their posts. But very rarely if at all did we have active mormons adopting critic arguments.

[DBMormon]

Think on this idea in your mind for a while:

"The best way can also be called the Mormon way."

With that understood, you should now be able to see that the Mormon way can't ever be NOT the best way.

If you don't understand yet, just keep repeating that idea in your mind while trying to understand what it is that makes the best way the best way.

my way is always the mormon way in my mind, so who has the right to label me anti-mormon

[CV75]

Most of the times when I see mormon credentials pop-up in an argument it is in direct response to a challenge to a posters faithfulness. In other words, the "faithful defender" claims someone else must be an atheist because of their views, or an anti-mormon (reference any thread here on the flood, evolution, or same-sex marriage). 

In either case, I find the claim to be faithful or the charge of not being faithful to be irrelevant to the exchange of ideas, more so when discussions become crucial. To me, it is on a par with name-calling and labeling—just shortcut to win a fight rather than to uncover truth. I find this to be the case in any conversation, whether face-to-face or on a message board—but especially on a message board where (due to anonymity and/or the lack of non-verbal cues; the two-dimensional communication) interpersonal relations tend to be more superficial and imaginary than those we have in real life. Naturally we sense the passion in some posts, and some are very good at expressing themselves through this media, but these folks may tend not to name-call for the sake of winning an argument.

 

I think 3DOP’s point is a great reminder for Internet safety about people posing as something they are not. Some have indicated an emotional or spiritual vulnerability to their sense of deceivers coming on board, but by taking proper measures, people can keep their involvement in perspective and protect themselves.

[3DOP]

I think that the problem comes when active members come to the board and more or less use critic tactics against the lds church. I don't think that it is very interesting to defend the church over and over again with a lds person who is active but yet, extremely critical of the church. But that being said, this is no longer an apologetic board. It is just a discussion board and not a board to defend the church. Back in the day, the board was different. We had great apologists and great critics. And the debate was very good and hard hitting. Now, such apologists are more or less gone and the critics too. So, we are left with members being critical of the lds church and its leaders and others who respond to the criticisms. The board dynamics have changed. If you were on the board 10 years ago, you would know a true blue critic by their posts. But very rarely if at all did we have active mormons adopting critic arguments.

 

Obviously, some of the old timers are seeing the same thing. Ten years ago, non-LDS brought the arguments and criticisms against your church. They were frequently called "anti-Mormons". Assuredly, there is a difference between an active Mormon bringing the accusations, and a non-Mormon. But they ARE the same old accusations. I do not care what they want to be called. I did not make up the term nor do I insist on retaining it.

 

I have deliberately avoided naming names or even citing subject matter. Some have objected to being "labelled" in this thread with whom I am barely familiar. I don't know if they fit the category I have identified or not, but they seem to think so.

[HappyJackWagon]

 

excellent question. I don't pretend to judge anything. Moroni showed us the way to judge.

not to mention the Holy Spirit is very useful with discernment.

 

Discernment is a great tool in allowing you to judge others.

 

Statements like "I call it the Mormon way" or "you are my kind of Mormon" tell the story. Each person can define things in their own unique way which is fine but when you pretend that your way is the only way and that anyone who disagrees with that is anti-Mormon is.

 

TeddyAware was bemoaning the fact that in the thread about racism and the priesthood ban/theories about the preisthood ban, people disagreed with him and just couldn't fathom why. As one who opposed his view in that thread I think it is an example of honest disagreement. To me it sounds like he is saying the sky is white instead of blue and he likely sees me in the opposite way. The point is that there is much more room for discussion and much less room for certainty that every member must adhere to. There are some fundamental doctrines BUT the majority of church teachings allows for individual interpretation. If I interpret the Race/Priesthood issue as evidence of racism and TeddyAware takes great offence at that we simply disagree and can try to show each other a differing view. But it is wrong to lose an argument and then call other apostate or anti-mormon. It's just weak.

[Boanerges]

Discernment is a great tool in allowing you to judge others.

 

Statements like "I call it the Mormon way" or "you are my kind of Mormon" tell the story. Each person can define things in their own unique way which is fine but when you pretend that your way is the only way and that anyone who disagrees with that is anti-Mormon is.

 

TeddyAware was bemoaning the fact that in the thread about racism and the priesthood ban/theories about the preisthood ban, people disagreed with him and just couldn't fathom why. As one who opposed his view in that thread I think it is an example of honest disagreement. To me it sounds like he is saying the sky is white instead of blue and he likely sees me in the opposite way. The point is that there is much more room for discussion and much less room for certainty that every member must adhere to. There are some fundamental doctrines BUT the majority of church teachings allows for individual interpretation. If I interpret the Race/Priesthood issue as evidence of racism and TeddyAware takes great offence at that we simply disagree and can try to show each other a differing view. But it is wrong to lose an argument and then call other apostate or anti-mormon. It's just weak.

 You make a good point HJW. In my mind an anti-Mormon is an individual who tries to tear down the church and/or make it look false, generally while using lies and half truths.

 As one who has doubts and questions, that is not my aim at all - I love the church and would never do anything to harm it. I don't see how asking sincere questions to find truth is anti-Mormon in any way - and I actually think nothing could be more Mormon. I think the top leadership of the church understands this and why they make statements about questioning being OK and why Pres. Uchtdorf can say things like everybody has had some doubts. One of the very purposes of the church is to build faith, which can be accomplished by telling the truths that overcome doubts. Questiong or doubting and being anti are not the same thing, and what better place to ask such questions than on boards like these? Would you rather it be done in Sunday School?

[HappyJackWagon]

 You make a good point HJW. In my mind an anti-Mormon is an individual who tries to tear down the church and/or make it look false, generally while using lies and half truths.

 As one who has doubts and questions, that is not my aim at all - I love the church and would never do anything to harm it. I don't see how asking sincere questions to find truth is anti-Mormon in any way - and I actually think nothing could be more Mormon. I think the top leadership of the church understands this and why they make statements about questioning being OK and why Pres. Uchtdorf can say things like everybody has had some doubts. One of the very purposes of the church is to build faith, which can be accomplished by telling the truths that overcome doubts. Questiong or doubting and being anti are not the same thing, and what better place to ask such questions than on boards like these? Would you rather it be done in Sunday School?

AND ... being hesitant to accept weak answers and pushing back for a better answer doesn't make one anti either.

[Brian 2.0]

Even if it [Jesus Christ] weren't the only way to get back to God it would still be the best way, if you correctly understand what that means.

In your opinion.

 

I don't know where you got the idea that I think the best way can't be known. I know it and I'm living it, and I call it the Mormon way.

I got the idea from you. Here's from a page back:

If you don't know now you might find out later, but the best way to be and the best way to live is, very simply, the best way. Not necessarily the way you think is the best way, or the way I think is the best way either, but the way that is really and truly the best way. And another name for that "best way" is what I refer to as the Mormon way.

And to be anti-Mormon is to be anti-"the best way".

I understand you believe in this "best way of all possible ways". And you admitted that it may not be the way I think is best or the way you think is best either. I don't know what you meant by that because you've followed it up that your way is the best way.

 

What the heck are you talking about? Why don't you use a more realistic example? If you are opposed to following Christ as the best way to live then I would call you anti-Christ just as I would call you anti-Mormon if you were opposed to following Mormonism as the best way.

That's fair enough I guess. And by those standards you are "Anti-Muslim" and "Anti-Hindu" and "Anti-[any other religion]", correct?  And every non-member of the church is "Anti-Mormon"

You are conflating "Christ" and "Mormonism" with "the best way" and then basically calling someone "ANTI-the best way"... even if they are trying to live "the best way" they know how.  Doesn't that seem arrogant and disrespectful?

Tell me where this dialogue goes wrong, if it ever does in your mind:

Sally: I try to live my life in the best way.

Jack: Me too! So you're a Christian?

Sally: No.

Jack: Oh, so you're anti-Christ.

Sally: I wouldn't say I'm "anti" Christ. I think a lot of the teachings of Jesus are good and great and apply them to my life, but I don't believe in his divinity or that worship of him is necessary for my salvation. Does that make me anti-Christ is your mind?

Jack: Yes. And you're also "Anti-the-best-way".

Sally: What? I try to live my life in the best way possible I know. I'm not anti-the-best-way.

Jack: You are anti-Christ, so you are anti-the-best-way, because Christ is the best way.

Sally: So you know what the best way is, for you and for me?

Jack: Yes.

Sally: And I don't know what the best way is for me?

Jack: Correct, you do not, since you don't believe in Christ.

Sally: And because of that I'm actually Anti-The-Best-Way.

Jack: Correct.

Sally: Nice chatting with you.

[Ahab]

my way is always the mormon way in my mind, so who has the right to label me anti-mormon

Maybe all that is needed is that you define what you mean by "the Mormon way", just in case other people define "the Mormon way" differently than you do. That's what you would do if other people had a different idea in their mind about "the best way" to live, wouldn't you? That's what I do when I'm interested in helping others understand what I see as the best way, and I often find people who are opposed to what I have in mind as the best way, which I also call the Mormon way. And that's when I see them as anti-"the best way" or anti-Mormon. Edited October 3, 2014 by Ahab

[Ahab]

I got the idea from you. Here's from a page back:

My point was the best way is the best way regardless of what we believe is the best way, just as the truth is the truth regardless of what we believe the truth is. I didn't mean I don't know what the best way is, and I also didn't mean it's the best way just because I think it is.

I understand you believe in this "best way of all possible ways". And you admitted that it may not be the way I think is best or the way you think is best either. I don't know what you meant by that because you've followed it up that your way is the best way.

I hope you now understand what I meant.

That's fair enough I guess. And by those standards you are "Anti-Muslim" and "Anti-Hindu" and "Anti-[any other religion]", correct? And every non-member of the church is "Anti-Mormon"

No, because I see parts of the Mormon way in all of those various ways, even those those ways are corrupted by some false ideas.

You are conflating "Christ" and "Mormonism" with "the best way" and then basically calling someone "ANTI-the best way"... even if they are trying to live "the best way" they know how. Doesn't that seem arrogant and disrespectful?

Whether or not they believe their way is the best way their way is either the best way or it isn't, and I do try to be respectful when pointing that out, without arrogance.

Tell me where this dialogue goes wrong, if it ever does in your mind:

Sally: I try to live my life in the best way.

Jack: Me too! So you're a Christian?

Sally: No.

Jack: Oh, so you're anti-Christ.

Sally: I wouldn't say I'm "anti" Christ. I think a lot of the teachings of Jesus are good and great and apply them to my life, but I don't believe in his divinity or that worship of him is necessary for my salvation. Does that make me anti-Christ is your mind?

Jack: Yes. And you're also "Anti-the-best-way".

Sally: What? I try to live my life in the best way possible I know. I'm not anti-the-best-way.

Jack: You are anti-Christ, so you are anti-the-best-way, because Christ is the best way.

Sally: So you know what the best way is, for you and for me?

Jack: Yes.

Sally: And I don't know what the best way is for me?

Jack: Correct, you do not, since you don't believe in Christ.

Sally: And because of that I'm actually Anti-The-Best-Way.

Jack: Correct.

Sally: Nice chatting with you.

I see that as a missed opportunity to teach what the best way is and why the best way is the best way.

[HappyJackWagon]

 

I often find people who are opposed to what I have in mind as the best way, which I also call the Mormon way. And that's when I see them as anti-"the best way" or anti-Mormon.

The hubris is astonishing. If people oppose what you believe is the best way then you see them as anti-Mormon.

 

Sadly, this kind of arrogance is common in the church which is why people need to stand up against it, not because they are anti-mormon but because they are anti-pride and anti-judgementalism. People need to be protected from this kind of unchristlike judgement.

 

Insert snark- My best way, which I call the Mormon way, is for people not to presume to speak for a church they have no authority to speak for or lable people as bad, or anti, or apostate because they don't agree. If people don't follow my best way, my Mormon way, then they are anti-mormon. End Snark.

 

Ahab, seriously brother, you must see how ridiculous that is. Right?

[Brian 2.0]

No, because I see parts of the Mormon way in all of those various ways, even those those ways are corrupted by some false ideas.

 

So it needs to be broken down the to individual actions or thoughts, correct?  People can do Mormon way things, and people can to anti-mormon way things.  So what again is the point of labeling a PERSON, a whole person, as anti-mormon to you?

 

I don't believe Christ was divine, but I apply many of his teaching into my life.  Am I anti-Christ?

I don't believe the BOM is a historical document or that God restored his true church through Joseph Smith.  Am I anti-Mormon? 

Edited October 3, 2014 by Brian 2.0

[Ahab]

The hubris is astonishing. If people oppose what you believe is the best way then you see them as anti-Mormon.

So what are you doing? Has it a name? You seem to be saying that I am wrong because... why? Because you don't see my way as the best way? Looks to me like you may be as opposed to my way as I am to any way that is not what I see as the best way, so maybe now we can get into any reason why maybe I should consider your way or any other way as the best way. You didn't expect me to blush or fall away from my way because you ate now pointing your finger at me and ridiculung me or my way, did you?

Sadly, this kind of arrogance is common in the church which is why people need to stand up against it, not because they are anti-mormon but because they are anti-pride and anti-judgementalism. People need to be protected from this kind of unchristlike judgement.

Am I to suppose that you calling me arrogant means that I really am arrogant? I didn't say you were arrogant, but there you are calling me arrogant while you also say I am making unchristlike judgments, as if I really am, and as if you are not arrogant in saying that. Do you really believe that is the best way to handle this situation?

Insert snark- My best way, which I call the Mormon way, is for people not to presume to speak for a church they have no authority to speak for or lable people as bad, or anti, or apostate because they don't agree. If people don't follow my best way, my Mormon way, then they are anti-mormon. End Snark.

Ahab, seriously brother, you must see how ridiculous that is. Right?

Heh, the irony here is amazing. If only we agreed on the best way to be.