Anti-LDS sites

[bytor2112]

I have had some interesting e-mail conversations with some Anti-LDS folks. Most notably Sandra Tanner. It is interesting that the so called ex-members never mention experiencing the Holy Spirit. In my dealings with Sandra Tanner she will never answer if she had a testimony or felt the Spirit. Her standard response is that the Bible warns us not to trust our feelings. My Bishop said we should avoid these sites like pornography. I understand his point, there are some very persuasive sites out their can definitely harm a fragile testimony. I am guessing that internet access has made missionary work much more difficult.

[rameumptom]

It has both effects. It has also opened up opportunities to share our testimonies with others.

Ex-Mos, like Sandra, tend to attack the concept of emotions as Spiritual experience. What they ignore, intentionally or not, is that the Spiritual experience is more than emotion, which is just one component of a spiritual experience. Alma 32 tells us that the soul is expanded, the mind enlarged, the bosom burns (emotion), and it become "delicious." D&C 9 tells us that the Lord will speak the truth to our hearts AND minds.

But it seems like a constant to ex-Mos to ignore that fact. It is too convenient for them to claim to be the Vulcan, with logic and knowledge on their side; while Mormons are emotional and illogical creatures that should be pitied and/or shot, depending on whether they are foaming at the mouth, or not.

It amazes me to see many call Dr. Daniel Peterson an idiot, considering his stance in Arab studies, etc. But for some reason, other ex-Mos prefer a smart person with few or no credentials, over the emotional and illogical Dan Peterson, et al.

[bytor2112]

I actually read one site that gave advice on how to witness to Mormons. Among the advice were such silliness as: Never let them offer prayer because it is to a different God??? If they bare their testimony, drop a book or something because they are going into a mind controlled trance and the best one is: never witness to a Mormon alone because they may convert you. My mom is a recent convert and has a very weak testimony and I has stopped going to church recently. By her remarks I can tell she has been on these sites...... really burns me up and makes me very sad.

[rameumptom]

I actually read one site that gave advice on how to witness to Mormons. Among the advice were such silliness as: Never let them offer prayer because it is to a different God??? If they bare their testimony, drop a book or something because they are going into a mind controlled trance and the best one is: never witness to a Mormon alone because they may convert you. My mom is a recent convert and has a very weak testimony and I has stopped going to church recently. By her remarks I can tell she has been on these sites...... really burns me up and makes me very sad.

Sorry to hear it. Perhaps a reading of Alma 5 with her can help her remember the mighty change of heart she once had?

[prisonchaplain]

I have had some interesting e-mail conversations with some Anti-LDS folks. Most notably Sandra Tanner. It is interesting that the so called ex-members never mention experiencing the Holy Spirit. In my dealings with Sandra Tanner she will never answer if she had a testimony or felt the Spirit. Her standard response is that the Bible warns us not to trust our feelings.

Whether you agree with her theology or not, you surely see that her answer makes sense? What if, as a member, she did sense something that seemed really positive and assuring, when she embraced the LDS faith. Then, over time, she comes to believe it is not true, that she was wrong. She's going to believe that at best she was deceived by her own runaway desire to embrace the LDS faith, and at worse that it was a spirit, but not THE Spirit. So, her natural inclination at this point would be to look to the Bible, rather than trust her own unreliable feelings.

P.S. I doubt that outside the context of a discussion about LDS beliefs, she would say she never seeks the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Also, it's this very problem of believing that feelings/spirits mislead, that cause some who leave your church to stay away from religion all together.

[bytor2112]

I do believe that she is sincere in her beliefs and that members of other faiths are as well. As a convert myself, formerly Southern Baptist, I completely understand misgivings regarding the LDS faith. Particularly as a Baptist. They are very outspoken in their criticism of the LDS church and have classes for their members specifically about the dangers of the LDS doctrine. I am always suspicious of those claiming to have been a very active member of the church and then decide to not only leave the faith but try to tear the faith down as well. Her web site and books are designed to point out how wrong we are instead of promoting her own Christian beliefs. I think the question is a fair one, regarding the Holy Spirit, especially in the context of the conversation she and I were having. But again her response is typically a non response as are most other anti's on this issue. If she felt as you described, fair enough, but she has written enough that she could surely address the subject or just say "no" she never had that experience.

[hordak]

It has both effects. It has also opened up opportunities to share our testimonies with others.

Ex-Mos, like Sandra, tend to attack the concept of emotions as Spiritual experience. What they ignore, intentionally or not, is that the Spiritual experience is more than emotion, which is just one component of a spiritual experience. Alma 32 tells us that the soul is expanded, the mind enlarged, the bosom burns (emotion), and it become "delicious." D&C 9 tells us that the Lord will speak the truth to our hearts AND minds.

But it seems like a constant to ex-Mos to ignore that fact. It is too convenient for them to claim to be the Vulcan, with logic and knowledge on their side; while Mormons are emotional and illogical creatures that should be pitied and/or shot, depending on whether they are foaming at the mouth, or not.

It amazes me to see many call Dr. Daniel Peterson an idiot, considering his stance in Arab studies, etc. But for some reason, other ex-Mos prefer a smart person with few or no credentials, over the emotional and illogical Dan Peterson, et al.

I have always found the "logical" attacks to be absurd. If I applied the same logic to the other denominations that they apply to LDS i wouldn't just leave "the evil of mormanisam" as they say but would leave the evil of Christianity all together.It reminds me of what Jesus said about the moat and beam

[prisonchaplain]

Bytor...although I've heard of the Tanners, I've not frequented their site...so do not want to say too much...as it would be speculation. However, as a former Southern Baptist, you know well that Baptists, Fundamentalists, and some other branches of Christianity, are very skeptical of emotion, feelings, and claims to spiritual direction. They not only criticize your church, but mine as well (Pentecostal). So, I'm not fully aware of where the Tanners or other "ex-Mos" are coming from. It just made sense to me that they would be "gun shy" about trusting seemingly spiritual feelings, when they rejected a faith that had been born out of those very same ones.

[bytor2112]

Prison Chaplain- You are very right. They are very skeptical. Ironically they speak about the Spirit often but seem to have little understanding about the Spirit. My wife's Grandmother is Pentacostal. She is awesome and a women of great faith. I hope that one day I can have that kind of Faith. Sandra Tanner is a well known Anti LDS author and has a website. I will not post the address, because I don't want others to be tempted by the deceit that is found their. She has an axe to grind.... claims to have been deceived by the church. As you know we (LDS) believe that it is by the power of the Holy Ghost that we may know if the church is true. That is why I asked her about this, because she was a long time member and a direct descendant of Brigham Young. Her last response to me was to offer to sell me a book about not trusting our feelings. But she was very polite though.........

[rameumptom]

I agree that feelings can be deceptive. However, the Spirit's workings are more than just emotional, whether it is in the LDS or another Christian faith. How does one explain healings or speaking in tongues? Those are held as works in the LDS Church, as well as many other Christian faiths. Yet, those issues are not brought in in regards of our belief in the Spirit. They do not bring up revelation, visions, dreams, or inspired thoughts that occur in our Church.

So, for them to take one type of spiritual experience and expand it to supposedly be the only experiential event in a Mormon's life, is essentially a deception.

It would be on the same level as a Mormon simplifying another Christian's spiritual experience down to either non-existent or inspired of the devil (which sadly, some LDS do). I believe the scriptures and prophets when they state that many are inspired to lift and assist the peoples they serve, if they but remain humble and righteous.

[PapilioMemnon]

It makes me sad to see people who cannot comprehend the language of the Holy Ghost, and go actively against the Church... I was born into a different faith, but as I moved away because I didn't think it fitted the Bible, I didn't go actively against it, and preached, wrote books about it... I was without anything for about 2-3 years before I learned of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Days Saints.

I researched many other faiths because I like to know what people believe, and try to understand what they see and believe, but I don't go to any extent against them, to their sites, and write about how they are wrong, and throw my beliefs on them, and contrast with theirs on their turf. That's not logical to me!

I only present it if I'm asked; if I go to another faith's website, it is to find out about them, not to throw mine at them!

Yes, the Holy Ghost does bear witness of the truth, and the way to discern is through our thoughts & feelings (mind & heart - the two channels the Lord speaks to us, one to confirm the other. Thought of what nature, what do they induce us to think about. - Feelings: Waht feelings follow the thoughts? What are their nature?).

Gal. 5: 22

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith

D&C 9

8 But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right.

9 But if it be not right you shall have no such feelings, but you shall have a stupor of thought that shall cause you to forget the thing which is wrong; therefore, you cannot write that which is sacred save it be given you from me.

Remember that Moroni taught how to discern if something is from God or not, chapter 7; read it carefully - Moroni 7

We need to learn the language, and the way the Lord speaks to us so that we know which Spirit is the one influencing us, the Lord's or not, or even ourselves.

I heard quite a few talks on this subject to learn... and have heard from R.G. Scott himself the way to discern.

It is essential to learn this...

Edited June 24, 2008 by PapilioMemnon

[Snow]

I have had some interesting e-mail conversations with some Anti-LDS folks. Most notably Sandra Tanner. It is interesting that the so called ex-members never mention experiencing the Holy Spirit. In my dealings with Sandra Tanner she will never answer if she had a testimony or felt the Spirit. Her standard response is that the Bible warns us not to trust our feelings. My Bishop said we should avoid these sites like pornography. I understand his point, there are some very persuasive sites out their can definitely harm a fragile testimony. I am guessing that internet access has made missionary work much more difficult.

She's a nice enough lady - at least she has been nice enough to me, but she isn't particularly rational. She warns against trusting your feelings - if you are LDS - but she is entirely content to trust her own feelings that her understanding of Christianity is true while our understanding of it is not true.

[WANDERER]

I find it interesting to look at anti sites with certain criteria: who are they and what are they doing now; why did they leave or why are they anti; what are the main points that they are getting across and what is their agenda by establishing the site? Are they still on a spiritual journey? Are they back a step; in the same place or moving forward? Are they happy with their choices? What is their alternative to being LDS? It invites investigation doesn't it? There are lessons to be learnt..but possibly not what they think they are communicating ; ).

From there, it's interesting to look at LDS who face the same challenges and trials and questions and how they deal with them and why they remain LDS.

There's a different feeling altogether about what is happening when you compare things.

[Dale]

I have had some interesting e-mail conversations with some Anti-LDS folks. Most notably Sandra Tanner. It is interesting that the so called ex-members never mention experiencing the Holy Spirit. In my dealings with Sandra Tanner she will never answer if she had a testimony or felt the Spirit. Her standard response is that the Bible warns us not to trust our feelings. My Bishop said we should avoid these sites like pornography. I understand his point, there are some very persuasive sites out their can definitely harm a fragile testimony. I am guessing that internet access has made missionary work much more difficult.

It is necessary in my opinion for me to do some study by visiting these websites. I have read more than my fair share of anti-Restoration books, tracts. You should see my collection of Anti-Mormon films. I attended when i could Anti-Restoration lectures. I found myself being informed improved my ability to counter-witness to such people. Prior to such study experience i was telling such people i don't have an answer way to much. Such ignorance of basic anti-Restoration issues only leaves the person feeling justified they rejected an intellectual unsound religion.

I do not see it as sound advice one should totally avoid anti-Restoration websites. I understand via someone at FAIR that it has effected the LDS missionary program. People listen to the LDS missionaries and Google Mormonism and up pops link Anti-Restoration websites. To me it is better to tell the person you think it like pornography, but that they will run into opposition websites. And that there are websites from an LDS perspective answering the same issues.

I am not LDS but Community of Christ/RLDS. We get anti-Community of Christ stuff, but with minor adjustments to take into account our different doctrinal and historical tracks from LDS. I use as an basic answer resource the FAIR and FAIR Wiki websites. LDS FAIR Apologetics Homepage

My own advice would be to encourage preparation not avoiding all Anti-Restoration material.

My favorite Evangelical resources are. Some use for me and not with nob Book of Mormon Believers.

1.Reasoning From the Scriptures With The Mormons by Ron Rhodes and Marion Bodine. I like to double check any proof text i use for my beliefs with the Evangelical counter-interpretation.

2.Understanding The Trinity by Allister E. McGrath.

3.Witnessing To Mormons brochure by Jerry and Dianna Benson.

4.Mormonism Unmasked by R. Philip Roberts of the SBC.

5.How Wide the Divide by Craig L. Blomburg and Stephen E. Robinson. The dialogue between this LDS and Evangelical scholar is rejected by Sandra's ilk. But it is not Anti-Mormon.

6.The Mormon Puzzle film by the Southern Baptist Convention.

My favorite LDS apologetics stuff is by FAIR. FAIR i think is selling it now, but Deseret soon a new book. It is called Shaken Faith Syndrome by Mike ask. It deals if i understand it right with key Anti-LDS issues and is helpful on sorting through doubt and question issues. Mormon apologetics and Discussion Board has a more precise discussion of the book.

Basically as a habit when studying Anti-Restoration stuff i have given up on becoming an apologetics expert. But i do practice answering the basic stuff in my head while reading. I have survived several attempts persons made to witness to be as i had the same witnessing study they had. On deeper topics i will either have to share resources, or review my Anti-Mormon stuff. It is impossible to remember everything.

I do keep three binders with sheet protecters filled with answer articles. If it is an issue i run into in my material i try and have an answer at my disposal.

With feelings they can be trusted if we apply the Barean test to them. (Acts 17:11) Sandra would not agree with the results of my test as i still tust my feelings. Someone like that will try to bully you into agreeing with them. That is why they throw a mountain of trivia and arguments at you. They want to overwhelm your brain. I do not see Sandra Tanner as saved from outer darkness. To me she has a false assurance of salvation she has bought into. (Matthew 7:22,23)

-------------

To me if you don't want the internet pornography to effect investigators you have to inform them of the internet threats. I think the new FAIR book is one way to inform someone of the stuff they will run into. It is much better that they read something from a friendly than unfriendly source. If they have the internet they need to know about resources at the start.

To me people are harmed when you do not educate them enough. My encounter with the stuff hurt me because i ran into stuff i had never heard.

[HiJolly]

(snip)

My favorite LDS apologetics stuff is by FAIR. FAIR i think is selling it now, but Deseret soon a new book. It is called Shaken Faith Syndrome by Mike ask. It deals if i understand it right with key Anti-LDS issues and is helpful on sorting through doubt and question issues. Mormon apologetics and Discussion Board has a more precise discussion of the book.

Dale, small typo: The author is Mike Ash.

To me people are harmed when you do not educate them enough. My encounter with the stuff hurt me because i ran into stuff i had never heard.

I was caught unawares when *I* did not educate myself. I think it has to be a personal choice, and it's tough to teach when people don't care. I've found that to be the case in my family -- most don't want to know anything more than what they get in Church. ...and I have to admit, for them it doesn't seem to be a problem.

Of course it's wonderful when people listen to learn, but I somehow don't bump into these folks very often...

HiJolly

[Guest User-Removed]

I have had some interesting e-mail conversations with some Anti-LDS folks. Most notably Sandra Tanner. It is interesting that the so called ex-members never mention experiencing the Holy Spirit. In my dealings with Sandra Tanner she will never answer if she had a testimony or felt the Spirit. Her standard response is that the Bible warns us not to trust our feelings. My Bishop said we should avoid these sites like pornography. I understand his point, there are some very persuasive sites out their can definitely harm a fragile testimony. I am guessing that internet access has made missionary work much more difficult.

I have yet to see any good come from visiting anti sites...or even conversing with scum like Sandra Tanner.

Sounds to me like you have a rock solid testimony of the Gospel...Hence, you're not the kind of person Sandra is trawling for.

As for your Bishop's advice...Spot on

[HiJolly]

We need to learn the language, and the way the Lord speaks to us so that we know which Spirit is the one influencing us, the Lord's or not, or even ourselves.

I heard quite a few talks on this subject to learn... and have heard from R.G. Scott himself the way to discern.

It is essential to learn this...

Yes, I agree.

BTW, (off topic) it's uncanny how your avatar resembles the Brazil national flag. Is that on purpose? Every time I see it, I'm thinking "Brazil!!"

HiJolly

[Guest User-Removed]

She's a nice enough lady - at least she has been nice enough to me, but she isn't particularly rational. She warns against trusting your feelings - if you are LDS - but she is entirely content to trust her own feelings that her understanding of Christianity is true while our understanding of it is not true.

Your post brought to mind...John Bytheway's famous talk to the youth on the War Chapters in Alma...

He said something like...and YES...I'm paraphrasing..."You ever notice how Satan never hollers and screams...he isn't demanding and bossy...he's always just the coolest guy around..."

Kinda like Sandra...Satan is just a "nice" guy....

[PapilioMemnon]

Yes, I agree.

BTW, (off topic) it's uncanny how your avatar resembles the Brazil national flag. Is that on purpose? Every time I see it, I'm thinking "Brazil!!"

HiJolly

Yes, indeed! :)

I thought it was very clever whoever did it!

Some thought it's was Hulk's long lost cousin with jaundice issues though...

[Jenamarie]

I agree that WE are responsible for our own education about church history. Could the Church do a better job on what's taught on Sundays? Deffinately. But even if they improved they still couldn't begin to cover *everything*.

I recently met someone who lost their Testimony when they "discovered" that Joseph Smith had more wives than just Emma. I scratched my head at this, because I'd known it since I was a child. I even remember a Value poster they had on the wall in my ward's Young Women's room that had a picture of Eliza R. Snow with a paragraph undernieth that said (summerizing here): "Eliza R. Snow, one of Joseph Smith's wives, wrote many faith-building hymns that are included in our hymn books". To ME it was no big deal, it had always been a part of my knowledge of the church. To her it was faith shattering because she felt "lied to" by the church, because somehow she had never heard it mentioned during a Sunday meeting.

[Guest User-Removed]

I agree that WE are responsible for our own education about church history. Could the Church do a better job on what's taught on Sundays? Deffinately. But even if they improved they still couldn't begin to cover *everything*

I'd love to hear your ideas on how SLC could improve on CES...

[Jenamarie]

I'm no education expert. My one suggestion though would be to cover the "contreversial" bits a bit more. That "anti's" would lose a lot of the wind to their sails if members were better armed with the church's side to the story. I think how they're currently handling the Mountain Meadows Massacre is a great example of the kind of "facing our skeletons" I'd like to see the church do more of. Then people won't be so shocked and disoriented when they find out that the church isn't as "great" as they'd always thought it was. It has it's own moles and pock marks and such. It's full of humans, after all.

[Misshalfway]

Originally Posted by Jenamarie

I agree that WE are responsible for our own education about church history. Could the Church do a better job on what's taught on Sundays? Deffinately. But even if they improved they still couldn't begin to cover *everything*

How could the church improve it? From my experience, I have received much.....if not too much focused attention on church history. Even controversial parts! And so much of it is right there for anyone to research if they so desire. Not sure what church central should do? And anyway, what does the microscopic details of church history really have to do with the 3 fold mission of the church?

Anti's will find their fodder one way or another. Do we go after them by watching our backs all the time? Or do we move forward with our mission and let them eat our dust?!?

Edited June 24, 2008 by Misshalfway

[Jenamarie]

Well, in my personal experience, I've had to dig through lds.org searches to try to find the church's answers to some of the controversial issues presented by Anti's. And some of the "newest" articles I read on some of the topics were decades old. I know that the reason for Joseph Smith's imprisonment leading up to his murder (ordering the destruction of the Nauvoo Expositor) was never mentioned in any of the church history lessons I attended growing up.

[Guest User-Removed]

How could the church improve it? From my experience, I have received much.....if not too much focused attention on church history. Even controversial parts! And so much of it is right there for anyone to research if they so desire. Not sure what church central should do? And anyway, what does the microscopic details of church history really have to do with the 3 fold mission of the church?

Anti's will find their fodder one way or another. Do we go after them by watching our backs all the time? Or do we move forward with our mission and let them eat our dust?!?

Anti's and Apostates are like a Greek Tragedy...for every monster you slay...three more pop up...

I'd like to point out that there is more to CES than simply Sunday School, RS and Priesthood. Almost every college campus (at least here in the West) has an Institute of Religion. Excellent source for "advanced" learning.

I might also recommend Ed Week at BYU...