Is Mormonism any less true or sillier than other religions?

[whatthebutlersaw]

Here's the thing with me and Mormons: I grew up in the one town in Sweden where the Mormons have an historical presence. (Established already in 1850, courtesy of converted, homeward bound seafarer John Erik Forsgren.) There were bound to be Mormons in my class, yet, I knew crud all about them until a couple of years ago. (Some of that information, courtesy of Southpark.)

I first came across them as they were re-enacting Forsgren's transportation from Sweden and that's where I got to know Elder Strong and Elder Johnson. Who spent the next year of their mission placement very carefully not trying to convert me. (They did, however, spend a lot of the time tugging their neckties, blushing and stumbling over each other's feet.)

As someone who grew up in a free church-rife part of Sweden, that was already one up for them. Not converting me always gets me on my good side. (And they were cute with their ill fitting suits - no one under 50, under SEK8M/annum or severely twattish wears a suit in Sweden - even VPs and GDs will come to work in jeans and sneakers - and their perpetual blushes. ) Jehovites and Scientologists will have a go at any chance: Jehova's, aggressively and Scientologists, passive-aggressively and stalkery. The Jehovites in class could derail any subject.

There are three markers I will consider, when I measure a religion on my personal silliness scales: Outlandishness of claims, Impact on the own group and Impact on Society.

And I really see no big difference between, for example, transubstantiation and talking into your hat. To me, that's equally silly. One problem with Mormonism is that it makes claims that are checkable against recorded history which can therefore be disproven.

Outlandishness of claims.

A small subset of things claimed in world religions, large new religions or New Age, I found equally silly to speaking gibberish into a hat:

* Transubstantiation.
* Hell
* Re-incarnation
* 40 Virgins
* Thetans
* Return tenfold
* Karma
* If you wear polyester you will DIE.

So, OK. To me, Mormonism comes off as no more or no less silly than the Holy Rollers. The claims are outlandish, but not moreso than writing "i rly, rly want an ipodd" on a piece of paper and sticking it to a tree with a sticky paste made of flour and menstrual blood.

Impact on the own group. Well, this is two-fold: As with any religion, moderates and hardcores will vary wildly. Let's stick with the moderates, because if we get into the hardcore of all religions, we'll be here all day.

The Mormons I have come across generally come off as well adjusted, succesful and social. They socialize and date outside their religion and generally don't behave in an offputting way, like proselytizing. This is true of moderates of most religions. (With the possible exception of Scientologists.) Unlike moderates, or lukewarms, of other religions, even moderate Mormons will usually stick to the non-drug policy. If that's a problem when socializing, I may argue that the problem isn't actually theirs. There also seems to be a strong sense of community (primarily revolving around service, pot lucks and cobbler) and a propensity to take care of each other and give a leg up. On the other hand, that very likely has the same back side of ring fenced life path and social pressure as any close group.

So far, Mormons are faring no better or no worse than any other religions.

Impact on Society.

I don't really have any data (I can go google later) so I am really unsure in what way being a Mormon would influence your impact on society in the US. Where I grew up the only way you even knew they were there was because they wore suits, and that was only the missionaries, so this is where I need help. I can't assess this, because I don't have enough data.

Do Mormons bring their agenda - to any further extent than any other religion - to situations like running for office etc? Are they anti-abortion, and if so: are they activists or do they simply silently disapprove and don't have any for themselves? Do they - like for example the Amish - provide a safety net for health care or investments to each other? Are they prevalent as employers?

Travis, I know you already pointed out that they do a lot of charity work and that they are quite efficient compared to other smaller free churches. What types of charities do they focus on? Is it available to non-Mormons?

On a personal level, I have yet to meet a Mormon I didn't like and omg, they tend to be cute.

Now, about that magic underwear...

 

[DC]

I never saw any racism when I was in the church. I should get that out now.

and the cartoon linked to, does that represent what they believe?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

and the cartoon linked to, does that represent what they believe?

No, it does not. It's an excerpt from Ed Decker's movie The God Makers.

 

[DC]

No, it does not. It's an excerpt from Ed Decker's movie The God Makers.

thanks for that.

 

[Travis]

Travis, I know you already pointed out that they do a lot of charity work and that they are quite efficient compared to other smaller free churches. What types of charities do they focus on? Is it available to non-Mormons?

My own branch (divided into two wards) would offer food and shelter to pretty much anyone that would ask for it. Shelter was more problematic as they didn't have a facility. But if someone was homeless they could show up and talk to the Bishop and someone would have a free room for you to stay in at least for a little while.

There would be no questions about if you were a member and generally no attempt at conversion because it was considered "uncool" to preach to captive audiences.

On a personal level, I have yet to meet a Mormon I didn't like and omg, they tend to be cute.

Seems Elders Johnson and Strong thought the same about you.

And for good reason if you ask me.

 

[Darat]

Well, roughly speaking, doesn't Mormonism require a belief in the Old Testament and the New Testament, plus the Book of Mormon? In one sense, that makes it less true than mainline Christianity in that it asserts not only the claims that other Christian faiths do, but also some additional counter-historical facts.

Have to disagree with that: Roman Catholicism requires adherents to believe a lot more than the OT & NT you are meant to believe in the dogma and creed of the church. Mind you it can also be argued that it doesn't require a belief in the OT & NT, but just in the dogma and the creed of the RCC.

 

[GrandMasterFox]

The big difference is that we know Mormonism was a scam, just like Scientology. The origins of many other religions are less clear.

This preety much.
It's not that scientology and xenu are any dumber than the god who sacrificed himself for himself because a woman got an apple from a talking snake, but the fact that it was made in the 50s (or was it 60s?) by a person whose history we have tons of knowledge so we can debunk his credibility with ease makes it seem dumber.

It is not the faith that is dumber, it is the creator.

Mormonism is similiar like that.

When it comes to budhisim, christianity, hinduism, islam or whatever, we don't know as much on the people who founded it.

 

[Pup]

http://www.mormoncurtain.com/topic_dna.html#pub_881830034

many of the basic historical notions found in the Book of Mormon had appeared in print already in 1825...

It's pretty clear that Smith didn't invent anything new, as far as the origins of the American Indians, the health advice in the Word of Wisdom, etc.

The usual spin is that therefore, it's proof Smith made it up, rather than it being a new revelation from God. But what people tend to forget, I think, is that in the period, his followers interpreted it the other way around. The revelations seemed true because they were reinforcing what some cutting-edge scientific minds were already discovering.

It's like how people toss in "quantum mechanics" or "multiple universes" or other scientific jargon as part of their woo theories today. Believers don't think, "He said quantum mechanics, so he must have just copied the idea from some article in Scientific American." They think, "Since he said quantum mechanics, and I know they talk about that in Scientific American, it's probably true."

The problem is that advancing knowledge has shown the scientific speculation in Smith's day was incorrect (except some of the health advice), which kinda leaves him hanging out to dry.

It's like when people talk about the Bible as having no more insight than bronze-age goat herders could have had. The Mormon religion has no more insight than a 19th century farmer could have, but if you're a 19th century farmer, that sounds convincing.

The church has since had to transition from a position of providing actual truth to providing unprovable mythology, and it did surprisingly well, though you'll still find die-hards convinced that the big archaelogical discovery is right around the corner.

 

[Somthing Witty]

On a personal level, I have yet to meet a Mormon I didn't like and omg, they tend to be cute.

I'll definitely second this.

Though an Amish woman churning butter is also pretty hot...especially if she's showing just a hint of cankle.

For anyone who's unaware, the Irrereligiosophy podcast is a great reference. Two former LDS members, now atheists, devoted a lot of their early episodes to Mormon "scripture" and the history of the church.

 

[godless dave]

To be a good Mormon you must believe in modern revelatory experience. People not only talk to God, but God talks back.

But modern revelatory experience isn't any sillier than the idea that God talked to people in the past, but stopped.

 

[Antiquehunter]

Nevermind.

 

[Captain_Snort]

Mormons are completely hatstand.

They send kids over to do try and convert people, they call at my door and give me much hilarity, while I try and spill tea, coffee or beer over their nice suits (hey it's my door, I never asked them to call, I have no desire to be polite.)

I have had them claim that the universe is like a big glass bowl. Then I was asked if it was dropped, could I put it together, because god could. He was a bit taken back when I said it could be put back together.

Using the old entropy arguement, another claimed to have studied and be qualified in astronomy but was off the day they did entropy.

They refuse to stand there when I offer to test their claims of the body armour underwear by stabbing them.

Once, I was asked if I could read!!, and surprisingly I can, they said would I read a book for them, I said OK, if you read a book for me. They started to hand over the book of mormon, while I offered them the old Hari Krishna book with the interview with George Harrison. I had been stopped in Edinburgh and given the book a few days before so it was by the door.

It is rather good when they leave you as they claim you are not listening to them and wasting THEIR time.

The Jehovahs seem to be learning, they bring children with them so people will not swear directly at them. Doesn't always work.

 

[Travis]

This preety much.
It's not that scientology and xenu are any dumber than the god who sacrificed himself for himself because a woman got an apple from a talking snake, but the fact that it was made in the 50s (or was it 60s?) by a person whose history we have tons of knowledge so we can debunk his credibility with ease makes it seem dumber.

It is not the faith that is dumber, it is the creator.

Mormonism is similiar like that.

When it comes to budhisim, christianity, hinduism, islam or whatever, we don't know as much on the people who founded it.

Why exactly does it matter that we don't know much about the origins of other religions and do know the origin of Mormonism? And why does it matter that it is young? In America people switch faiths all the time. How is converting to Mormonism (as my family did) any different than converting to Hinduism or some crystal healing religion?

 

[Somthing Witty]

Why exactly does it matter that we don't know much about the origins of other religions and do know the origin of Mormonism? And why does it matter that it is young? In America people switch faiths all the time. How is converting to Mormonism (as my family did) any different than converting to Hinduism or some crystal healing religion?

It doesn't matter so much that Mormonism is young, what is important is that we're near enough in history to have evidence to judge its veracity.

If it could be proven that Judaism was created by a single person...Moses, for instance...and there existed independent evidence of his life and character, then his potential motives could be examined.

Such that, if it became known that Moses continually stated he could run up the side of a mountain and come down with orders from god, and that he used this self-proclaimed ability to defraud people several times, it would undercut the claims of the faithful that, several years after his criminal enterprise began, he was genuinely successful.

Now, in the above, replace Moses with Joseph Smith and "orders from god" with "treasure".

 

[Travis]

Okay, so Mormonism won't be considered silly if it just sticks around for a few millenia?

And, believe it or not, Joesph Smith is talked about much less in the Mormon church than by people outside of it. Sometimes people even forget he was the original "prophet." Within the church it is all about Brigham Young.

 

[whatthebutlersaw]

How much of Mormonism is religion and how much is lifestyle? (If that question makes any sense.)

 

[Somthing Witty]

Okay, so Mormonism won't be considered silly if it just sticks around for a few millenia?

And, believe it or not, Joesph Smith is talked about much less in the Mormon church than by people outside of it. Sometimes people even forget he was the original "prophet." Within the church it is all about Brigham Young.

No, it will still be considered "silly" because the origins of the church will always be known. If there were a stronger historical record when older religions were founded, they'd just be less respected. If Joseph Smith is being pushed into the background of the Mormon faith, I wouldn't be shocked. He's not an easy man to defend...aside from his criminal past, he has a number of other albatrosses around his neck... such as engaging in polygamy before receiving the word from god that it was an acceptable practice, that his seer-stone failed at least as early as the Book of Abraham, etc.

However, that Young is stressed is a bit odd. After all, Prophets are supposed to speak the word of god and, therefore, never be wrong in religious matters. So, I'm wondering how it is that Young can still be considered a prophet after committing himself to the now-disavowed Adam-God doctrine.

 

[JWideman]

I suppose if it didn't try to push itself as a sect of Christianity then it could be considered no sillier or less true. And if its founder wasn't known as a conman. And if he didn't make claims as part of the core beliefs that have since been proven to be false.
I'll even go so far as to say it is less silly than Scientology (though probably not as dangerous).

 

[Trantor]

I remember my first brush with Mormonism, was back when I was in my second year of college. I had been working a partime job and one of my co-workers was a rather cute girl who was a Mormon. Besides being cute, she seemed intelligent and was a good person. It was a time in my life when I was searching for truth. I was in the process of getting out of my Baptist Christian beliefs that I was raised with, and so checking out other religions, made some sense. Of course, the fact that my Mormon friend was so cute, had a lot to do with my desire to learn about Mormonism.

We talked a lot about religion. She knew that I was questioning my Baptist faith and that my family was not too happy about it. I guess she decided that I was ripe for conversion to the truth; which of course was Mormonism. We actually went out on several dates and I met her family on two occasions. She had a huge family; I don't remember the exact number of kids, but she had around 8 or 9 brothers and sisters. She told me that large families were normal in her faith.

She gave me the Book of Mormon to read, as well as other Mormon writings. I read about one third of the Book of Mormon, before deciding that it was even nuttier than the Bible, which was looking more and more nutty to me. She asked me to come to her church and hopefully in time, become a member of the church.

I saw where this was going and told her of my doubts about the Bible and her Book of Mormon. At this point, she informed me that she would only have a romantic relationship with someone who believed as she did. I saw no need to continue down that path. We ended the short lived romantic relationship. About a year later, she left for Africa as a Missionary.

 

[Quad4_72]

I went to middle school and high school in Utah. Mormons are nuts. There is nothing like having a girl break up with you because you are not Mormon, not being able to hang out with certain people because their parents spoke to god and he said that it was not good for them to be hanging out with you, watching all of your friends go to retarded ass seminary while in public school, and having everyone look down on you because you are not mormon. Mormons are awful people.