LDS

[Foster Zygote]

Someone sent me a private message in regards to my membership status and I want to make a couple of things clear.

1. For those who want to have their names removed from the records they simply need to follow the steps outlined here. I personally know many people who have done this. If there is a Mormon member reading this and is thinking about leaving, do NOT inform your bishop. They can make your life hell.
2. Once you denounce your membership the church cannot then retaliate and excommunicate you.

Finally, my NIC is meant to criticize the Mormon practice of counting inactive members. If and when they change that practice I will change my NIC.


No, I'm not a Mormon. I'm an Ex-Mormon. Some of my non-believing friends friends call themselves "cultural Mormons" but I do not.

I have a friend who describes himself as a "recovering Baptist".

 

[Pup]

@Pup,

From the couple of posts of Mrs. Pup's thoughts on Mormonism, I get the impression hers may be her own personal version Mormonism. It doesn't quite agree with what I'm hearing from others as the official dogma.

Is that a fair summary? More importantly, does she feel she could express her thoughts openly within the LDS Church and still be welcome? What would the reaction be?

She's actually in the process of getting her own account here approved so she can post herself. She's waiting for verification, but look for Cat Tale soon. "Kitten" was already taken. But briefly...

She says that just like anything, there are different kinds of Latter-Day Saints, and it runs the entire spectrum. Where we live, the church is made up almost entirely of converts and people bring baggage with them from their life before joining. There are those who cling to the most conservative of religious views and those who are much more liberal. Among the educated LDS there tends to be a more liberal movement toward science, while among others, they are similar to any conservative Christian religion that's afraid of evolution, and there's everything in between.

She originally joined the church in a university ward and she says that she could have said almost anything openly and it would have been accepted. She sees the educated church members moving more in a science-based direction, but there are others who come from conservative Protestant backgrounds who are more like Janadele, etc.

She said that on some things she has views which the church doesn't have an official stand on so members can go their own way, but other views would not necessarily be official doctrine, such as her views on the barley question (i.e. that the Book of Mormon is not infallible when it comes to specific facts). She says her beliefs have not prevented her from being a member in good standing, since she believes the moral principles as taught by the church are true.

[Note this earlier post about the thoughts of some BYU professors, for example. --Pup.]

 

[RandFan]

Perhaps you overreach when you write "everyone [emphasis added] has one thought. . . ."

The following from the title page of the BoM is noteworthy. It won't carry any weight with you, but that circumstance renders it nevertheless noteworthy.

And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God. . . .

 

[tyr_13]

Unless I'm wrong you've never admitted that there are multiple definitions of the word "faith" and you have never attempted to disambiguate. Further, you have intentionally taken my use of the word "faith" out of context.

When I use the word faith to describe a belief based on observation and experience you then imply that my usage is the same as religious or blind faith. This is equivocation. The first time was excusable but it was then explained to you and you continued to equivocate. That's dishonest.

I don't have "blind faith". I question my feelings, hunches and assumptions (as much as possible). I do not rely on faith to determine what is or is not true. I might act on faith, like turning on a light switch, but that is a faith borne of observations. I've seen it work before.

I do believe that the word you are looking for is 'trust'. I don't have 'faith' in the findings of any given scientific tests, I trust them to a certain degree. I don't have 'faith' that the clock on my cell phone is correct, I trust that it is because it's been shown to be correct almost always. Because I trust, and don't have faith, I check to see that it's right sometimes when I have reason to believe it is not giving me the right time.

Contrast this with religious faith. It's right because it's right no matter what shows it wrong. The things it gets 'right' for most individuals can't actually be identified as either right or having been caused by the faith.

I'm 6'3" 230 lb's with shoulderish long hair and a lifelong love of Bigfoot (sadly I'm not a believer tho.... I kinda wish I could recapture the wide eyed wonder I felt as a kid... I still enjoy the lore tho!)

My friends have taken to referring to me as Sasquatch or Squatchy all the time ! lol, it's a lot of fun!

To be fair, my avatar is actually a picture of me!

DragonLady's is a picture of her too!

 

[jsfisher]

Would either skyrider44 or Janadele care to give their perspectives on the question Mrs. Pup was addressing or her response?

She's actually in the process of getting her own account here approved so she can post herself. She's waiting for verification, but look for Cat Tale soon. "Kitten" was already taken. But briefly...

She says that just like anything, there are different kinds of Latter-Day Saints, and it runs the entire spectrum. Where we live, the church is made up almost entirely of converts and people bring baggage with them from their life before joining. There are those who cling to the most conservative of religious views and those who are much more liberal. Among the educated LDS there tends to be a more liberal movement toward science, while among others, they are similar to any conservative Christian religion that's afraid of evolution, and there's everything in between.

She originally joined the church in a university ward and she says that she could have said almost anything openly and it would have been accepted. She sees the educated church members moving more in a science-based direction, but there are others who come from conservative Protestant backgrounds who are more like Janadele, etc.

She said that on some things she has views which the church doesn't have an official stand on so members can go their own way, but other views would not necessarily be official doctrine, such as her views on the barley question (i.e. that the Book of Mormon is not infallible when it comes to specific facts). She says her beliefs have not prevented her from being a member in good standing, since she believes the moral principles as taught by the church are true.

[Note this earlier post about the thoughts of some BYU professors, for example. --Pup.]

 

[tsig]

Perhaps you overreach when you write "everyone [emphasis added] has one thought. . . ."

The following from the title page of the BoM is noteworthy. It won't carry any weight with you, but that circumstance renders it nevertheless noteworthy.

And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God. . . .

How do we tell the difference between the mistakes of men and the things of god?

 

[bruto]

Perhaps you overreach when you write "everyone [emphasis added] has one thought. . . ."

The following from the title page of the BoM is noteworthy. It won't carry any weight with you, but that circumstance renders it nevertheless noteworthy.

And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God. . . .

That would be a noble sentiment if there existed any evidence that these are "the things of God" other than the very authority of the men whose mistakes are so tentatively admitted.

If I'm out fishing with a couple of friends, and one of them catches a largish fish that gets away, and we all see the event, then we can acknowledge at least that there was a fish, even if he distorts the account. If he went out alone and his account has obvious lies in it, we are perfectly within our rights to question it all - not just the details, but whether there was a fish, and whether he even saw the water.

 

[Giordano]

Perhaps you overreach when you write "everyone [emphasis added] has one thought. . . ."

The following from the title page of the BoM is noteworthy. It won't carry any weight with you, but that circumstance renders it nevertheless noteworthy.

And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God. . . .

Fancy that! I fully agree that all the faults in the BofM are the faults of men. But it's not because I think there is a perfect god...

 

[Janadele]

Any LDS member who does not support the First Presidency and Twelve Apostles and the Doctrines and Teachings of the Church have a moral obligation and responsibility to remove their own name from the membership.

... The Church should also report the number of active member.

 

[Janadele]

In addition to LDS Scriptures and teachings, I recommend, for those who would like to know the truth, "Jesus The Christ" by James E. Talmage, and
"A Marvellous Work and a Wonder" by LeGrand Richards

Both books are inspired writings on Jesus Christ, published by the Church of the Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and geared to all of Christianity.
I have embarked on a project to record both as Audio Books, and have completed the first six chapters of Jesus The Christ which will be available shortly as an eBook for free download, and on CD/CD-ROM.

 

[Janadele]

No Shalamar, non believers who question are not counted as anti-Mormon.

Anti-Mormons are a group of obsessive fanatics who devote their life and resources to producing and distributing literature and videos which deliberately present cunning lies, deceptions, misinformation and twisted focus on the LDS Church.

Lucifer is well aware that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the restored Church of Christ and arrays his army against it. Other enemies of the LDS Church who promote and distribute these products are also included in the term.

I started this thread to answer off topic questions which were being asked in another thread. The purpose of this thread was to present and discuss the actual teachings and doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, not to present anti-Mormon propaganda and literature. My continual requests for another thread be created for such posts have been ignored. I can therefore no longer participate in this thread.

I do have a question for you, however. Is someone 'anti-Mormon' if they question and ask about the discrepancies you holy texts, and does not accept them with blind faith?

 

[StankApe]

What is your evidence that the information produced by these "anti-mormons" is false?

 

[StankApe]

Back on topic,

I am no Mormon expert (most of my knowledge is based on questions asked of a mormon solder when I was in the army) but I was under the impression that the official word on what happened to the "Golden Tablets" was that JS lost em. On this thread I head something about "ascending to heaven" so am I wrong about my "lost" assumption?

 

[Last of the Fraggles]

Anti-Mormons are a group of obsessive fanatics who devote their life and resources to producing and distributing literature and videos which deliberately present cunning lies, deceptions, misinformation and twisted focus on the LDS Church.

So can you point to the literature and/or videos that RandFan has distributed to earn the title of Anti-Mormon in your eyes?

 

[Craig4]

Any LDS member who does not support the First Presidency and Twelve Apostles and the Doctrines and Teachings of the Church have a moral obligation and responsibility to remove their own name from the membership.

Why? Where is the moral responsibility to be bound by the rules of an organization someone no longer is a member of? It's the height of arrogance to attempt to place a moral obligation to someone who longer belongs your your group.

 

[Craig4]

No Shalamar, non believers who question are not counted as anti-Mormon.

Anti-Mormons are a group of obsessive fanatics who devote their life and resources to producing and distributing literature and videos which deliberately present cunning lies, deceptions, misinformation and twisted focus on the LDS Church.

Lucifer is well aware that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the restored Church of Christ and arrays his army against it. Other enemies of the LDS Church who promote and distribute these products are also included in the term.

I started this thread to answer off topic questions which were being asked in another thread. The purpose of this thread was to present and discuss the actual teachings and doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, not to present anti-Mormon propaganda and literature. My continual requests for another thread be created for such posts have been ignored. I can therefore no longer participate in this thread.

I am anti Mormon in the sense that I'm very much anti religion. My most sincere hope for the human race is that we abandon the silly fairy stories we kill each other over from time to time. It is though incorrect to say I've devoted my life to being anti Mormon. Such devotion is not required to determine that Smith was a liar and a fraud and Young was a self serving pervert. Learning that took no more than an afternoon.

All religions are based on lies and myth. The lies in your religion are just so shabby that finding them is easier than in most.

 

[jimbob]

I am anti Mormon in the sense that I'm very much anti religion. My most sincere hope for the human race is that we abandon the silly fairy stories we kill each other over from time to time. It is though incorrect to say I've devoted my life to being anti Mormon. Such devotion is not required to determine that Smith was a liar and a fraud and Young was a self serving pervert. Learning that took no more than an afternoon.

All religions are based on lies and myth. The lies in your religion are just so shabby recent and well documented that finding them is easier than in most.

FIFY.

I was brought up as non-devout CofE, but interestingly enough, those fairy stories still feel less ridiculous to me than those of other religions, although there is no rational, non-emotional reason for me to think so compared to many other religions.

Actually, given how obviously Mormonism is modelled on Christianity, its claims are more ridiculous. Similarly for spiritualism or Jehovah's Witnesses.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

.....
And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God. . . .

Now isn't that just darn right convenient...

I'm reminded of some words from a country song.. " .... I tell the truth, 'cept when I lie. "

 

[Pup]

FIFY.

I was brought up as non-devout CofE, but interestingly enough, those fairy stories still feel less ridiculous to me than those of other religions, although there is no rational, non-emotional reason for me to think so compared to many other religions.

Actually, given how obviously Mormonism is modelled on Christianity, its claims are more ridiculous. Similarly for spiritualism or Jehovah's Witnesses.

The bold part shows the depth of manipulation, or whatever you want to call it, that religion can accomplish when it dominates a culture, and as I've posted elsewhere on this thread, mainstream religions in the US, at least, use it to divide and conquer.

When Protestants and to some extent nowadays Catholics dominate society as the "normal" religion(s), they can convince people that what they believe is the default, while every smaller demographic is too weird and strange.

So the atheists, for example, who ally with Protestants in thinking that Mormons are more weird, are helping support the very same culture which Protestants use as a weapon against atheists. And the same is true for every other non-mainstream segment.

The arguments are eerily similar: Mormons aren't really Christian because they've added to the Bible, so they can't be trusted. Atheists don't believe in the Bible, so they have no morals. Wiccans aren't Christian and the Bible warns us about them. Etc. etc.

Gradually, other demographics such as Catholics can get accepted by the U.S. mainstream, but only if Protestants feel that they're not a danger to Protestantism.

 

[Pup]

The purpose of this thread was to present and discuss the actual teachings and doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, not to present anti-Mormon propaganda and literature.

Well, I'm disappointed. Every point I raised was sourced to either a church-sponsored website, or a book or article written by a faithful Mormon and published by a pro-church source, and you didn't seem interested in discussing the questions I raised either, such as the Book of Abraham papyrus discrepancies, the LDS professors who teach evolution, etc.