Anti-LDS sites

[HiJolly]

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

I know you didn't ask me, but ...

Step #1: eliminate all paid Seminary and Institute teaching positions. Do it all on a volunteer church-calling basis. No more priestcraft within the Church!!

..um, did I come on a bit too strong?

HiJolly

[bytor2112]

My best friend is a lifelong member and had no idea that Joseph had more wives than Emma. I think that these things catch newer members off guard because they have a vision in their mind of Joseph and Emma etc. But I do think that focusing to much on these issues plays right into the hands of the anti's. There is a great deal of early Church history that is difficult to understand. We peer at the 19th century through 21st century glasses and try to reconcile the huge quantities of information that is available, some reliable and some not so much. This Apostle said this or Joseph or Brigham Young said that.... is the basis for many anti sites. In the end, it is mostly here say and conjecture, not doctrine and doesn't lead to Eternal life. I enjoy reading church history, especially the history that focuses on the incredible faith of the pioneers and our early leaders. They were without a doubt, a very elect group of people with the kind of faith I am sure that we all wish we can attain in this life. As far as the antis who twist every tid bit into something awful, they are spiritually deaf. As I told Sandra Tanner, if Joseph was the awful monster you have portrayed him to be, how has something so that is so obviously a force for good have spread throughout the world.? Of course, she doesn't think it is good, but that is her misfortune.

[Misshalfway]

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.

Agreed and understood. But what will talking and teaching about all the details ever do to stop the anti movement? I mean wasn't that your original idea? That church headquarters should do more to stop the anti's?

Not only does the church have a mission, but it has a budget too! Money and time. I mean how much money should the church invest in broadly publishing these so called "essential details"? Not to mention the struggle to get in all the teachings of one lesson into a 30 min time slot at church on Sunday.

MyDogSkip said it best. Nothing we do or say will stop it or squash it. That is the Spirit's job anyway and the willingness of the individual to open their hearts. This movement will be there in its viciousness until the end when Christ comes again and all shall bow, kwim? The moving forward with our mission, the testifying, the sharing, the living right! That is the sword that will make the biggest difference.

Edited June 24, 2008 by Misshalfway

[bytor2112]

"The church is like a great caravan-organized,prepared, following an appointed course,with its captains of ten and captains of hundreds all in place. What does it matter if a few barking dogs snap at the heals of the weary travelers. Or that predators claim those few that fall by the way? The caravan moves on. Is their a ravine to cross, a miry mud hole to pull through,a steep grade to climb? So be it. The oxen are strong and the teamsters wise. The caravan moves on. Are there storms that rage along the way, floods that wash away the bridges, deserts to cross and rivers to ford? Such is life in this fallen sphere. The caravan moves on.Ahead is the celestial city,the Eternal Zion of our God, where all who maintain their position in the caravan shall find food and drink and rest. Thank God that the caravan moves on!" - Bruce R. McConkie Nov. 1984

Edit/Delete Message

[Guest User-Removed]

"The church is like a great caravan-organized,prepared, following an appointed course,with its captains of ten and captains of hundreds all in place. What does it matter if a few barking dogs snap at the heals of the weary travelers. Or that predators claim those few that fall by the way? The caravan moves on. Is their a ravine to cross, a miry mud hole to pull through,a steep grade to climb? So be it. The oxen are strong and the teamsters wise. The caravan moves on. Are there storms that rage along the way, floods that wash away the bridges, deserts to cross and rivers to ford? Such is life in this fallen sphere. The caravan moves on.Ahead is the celestial city,the Eternal Zion of our God, where all who maintain their position in the caravan shall find food and drink and rest. Thank God that the caravan moves on!" - Bruce R. McConkie Nov. 1984

Edit/Delete Message

Yumm...anyone who quotes Bruce R....Is OK in muh book...bwahahahahaha

Was this quote out of New Witness for the AoF?

[Misshalfway]

"The church is like a great caravan-organized,prepared, following an appointed course,with its captains of ten and captains of hundreds all in place. What does it matter if a few barking dogs snap at the heals of the weary travelers. Or that predators claim those few that fall by the way? The caravan moves on. Is their a ravine to cross, a miry mud hole to pull through,a steep grade to climb? So be it. The oxen are strong and the teamsters wise. The caravan moves on. Are there storms that rage along the way, floods that wash away the bridges, deserts to cross and rivers to ford? Such is life in this fallen sphere. The caravan moves on.Ahead is the celestial city,the Eternal Zion of our God, where all who maintain their position in the caravan shall find food and drink and rest. Thank God that the caravan moves on!" - Bruce R. McConkie Nov. 1984

Edit/Delete Message

You are my favorite read of today! I have read a number of your posts in the last little bit and have been inspired. Thanks for sharing your brain with the likes of me! I feel blessed!

[Jenamarie]

I think I came across wrong. I'm not expecting the church to "squash" the Anti's (they couldn't), what I'm saying is they could greatly reduce their effectiveness if information about the controversial stuff the anti's like to throw out there were more readily available. Many ex-members I've met mention feeling "betrayed" and "lied to" about the Church's past. That argument would no longer fly if the information were more out there. Of course people will still leave, but I feel less people will leave because of feelings of having been decieved.

[bytor2112]

I think many members who fall victim to anti propaganda should have dedicated more time to being well versed on the "saving" doctrines of the church before they began to study Church history. I am not certain that teaching members, old or new, in depth lessons on polygamy or controversial issues would do anything but invite a spirit of contention. And we all know where that comes from...... As far as being betrayed, I often wonder if that was just the escape hatch they chose rather than facing the trials of their faith and testimony. Blessings usually come after the trials. My wife got a bit caught up in this after noticing that Brigham Young's multiple wives were not mentioned in the training manual. But I think she now sees that it would invite conversations that might not capture the Lord's intent for the lesson.

[rameumptom]

I think I came across wrong. I'm not expecting the church to "squash" the Anti's (they couldn't), what I'm saying is they could greatly reduce their effectiveness if information about the controversial stuff the anti's like to throw out there were more readily available. Many ex-members I've met mention feeling "betrayed" and "lied to" about the Church's past. That argument would no longer fly if the information were more out there. Of course people will still leave, but I feel less people will leave because of feelings of having been decieved.

But their "betrayal" because they weren't told things is kind of a two-edged sword. Yes, we do not discuss polygamy or Adam-God theories in Gospel Doctrine. Guess what? Gospel Doctrine isn't the place for those to be discussed! Over half our membership has joined in the last 15 years, and so the teachings have to be focused upon our current doctrines and teachings, and not on past mistakes made by prophets and others in our history. Knowing about the Mountain Meadows Massacre will not save anyone. Knowing that Joseph Smith was a polygamist that married a few teenagers will not save anyone.

Finding out if Joseph Smith was a prophet of God is what matters. God uses people in their weaknesses. BTW, marriage was common for teenagers in the early 1800s. Adulthood came at a very different time than it does now, considering many women died early during childbirth, etc. In some areas of the nation, a woman's life expectancy was under 35 years. Given that, 14 years of age is almost middle aged! It is too easy to get caught up in such silly and stupid stuff that has nothing to do with whether God really called Joseph as a prophet or not.

Moses was called as a prophet, yet annhilated entire cities of women and children! How many people leave Judaism or Christianity over such barbarism? If Moses was truly called of God, then we can be sure that God does not always choose the touchy-feely methods to do his work.

If most Christians were to know the "true past" of their religions, they wouldn't feel betrayed by their pastors, etc. What's the difference? How many Catholics leave because at one time there were three Popes that excommunicated each other? Or how about John Calvin burning people at the stake for heresy from his heresy from Roman Catholocism?

Why is there a different standard for Mormons?

The reality is that most of that information IS available to most members and non-members. They've been discussed in several books by both pro and anti groups. Heck, you can even find the various flavors of temple endowment rites on the Internet! I just do not see how these things could be a shocking and disgusting surprise to them.

For many of them I see it more as an issue of finding an excuse to leave, and this becomes an excuse to do so.

I have no problem with a person having an honest difference over doctrine and leaving the Church over issues of belief. Even Elphaba's atheism has a basis in some logic that I cannot easily argue with. If I weren't LDS, I would be an atheist, as the same arguments made against Mormonism would destroy Christianity.

[Misshalfway]

Well, Jen I came to answer your last post and found two wonderful posts who said everything I felt. So I won't belabor the point.

[Jenamarie]

Well I'm knocked off my horse.

[PapilioMemnon]

I have researched and read some of those literature a looooong time ago, and just found interesting the way they think, and go way out of their way to do that to the LDS church/members!

It helped revise my beliefs, and really find out if I did indeed believed in what I stand for, and I'm glad I found at the time that I indeed had a strong witness & testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Days Saints and its teachings... so... I have left those things/people/site behind...

Why?... In a different way, I learned not to flirt with Satan... He thought me a great lesson that I will never forget !!! He is much more clever, cunning, and suble... You just can't see him coming,... and then... it might be too late... you may not even realize!

I read an article on "Your strengths can be your downfall''... and indeed... I thought I was too strong to "flirt a bit" with him in a subject I took too lightly the counsel of the Prophets/Apostles... and then... .... .... .... I fell big time!

I'm just glad the Lord allows us to repent :), and I've learned to listen carefully to the Special Witnesses of the Lord, and dismiss him (Enemy) as soon as I notice... Hopefully I will learn to notice sooner, and sooner...

I feel it's much more important to me to focus on the things that will save me, and try to help others see those things...

[Misshalfway]

Well I'm knocked off my horse.

So cute! lol! Don't worry. It will probably be my horse next! hahahah!

Edited June 24, 2008 by Misshalfway

[Maya]

I have been following a netsite in Finland and there the same "questions" emerge again and again so that I can almost chek my calender with them... Also the same "new" accusitions seem to pop up in USA just a bit before or simultaneously.

A friend of mine, as he was visiting USA, a man came to talk to him and offered money for anti-mormonism work to him. He laughed, wrong man!

I find this beeing betrayed accusitions that they have found out to cover the real reasons... those people were not interested enough to investigate any further than they had to.

I think maybe there should be made a sundayschool class or a middleweek class for defenders or those that need more, than just the basics, to people who already have a strong basic belief that can not be shaken and who burn for misionary work or studying.

Asundaychool that wouldtake 2years for each scriptureand one or two for church history. A grown up institut for strong ones.

[Moksha]

The power of the Tanner's site to influence unsuspecting Mormons comes from furnishing uncoated history that may contradict many Church legends. If we are unfamiliar with history and the onus is really upon us to learn it, I would suggest reading the Tanner's site and then coming here for some faith affirmation and a chance to discuss it.

Otherwise, just stick to legends and avoid this history stuff.

[Guest User-Removed]

The power of the Tanner's site to influence unsuspecting Mormons comes from furnishing uncoated history that may contradict many Church legends. If we are unfamiliar with history and the onus is really upon us to learn it, I would suggest reading the Tanner's site and then coming here for some faith affirmation and a chance to discuss it.

Otherwise, just stick to legends and avoid this history stuff.

Why does this Apostate Codswallop not surprise me????

Sandra and her late husband are nothing more than profiting off their lies....

[Jenamarie]

The power of the Tanner's site to influence unsuspecting Mormons comes from furnishing uncoated history that may contradict many Church legends. If we are unfamiliar with history and the onus is really upon us to learn it, I would suggest reading the Tanner's site and then coming here for some faith affirmation and a chance to discuss it.

Otherwise, just stick to legends and avoid this history stuff.

Could you give an example of these "legends" Moksha? I've heard them referred to before, but never heard one specifically mentioned. You could PM me an example if you'd rather. :)

[HiJolly]

Why does this Apostate Codswallop not surprise me????

Sandra and her late husband are nothing more than profiting off their lies....

Skip, I don't like what Sandra Tanner does for a living anymore than you do, I'm sure, but your comment (bolded above) is just wrong. Moksha's comment was not apostate at all! I'll grant you, most people would not enjoy reading the garbage on the UTLM website, but for those who really study the Church, it may be the only convenient way to find, say, the 1852 April conference reports. Since the Church didn't publish them.

And I know for myself that the first place I ever heard of Adam-god and peep-stones in a hat, was from people attacking the Church, like Sandra. Guess what? They were right, those things DID happen. Dang!

So *I* think Moksha makes a very good point. Too many LDS don't even know what happened in the Church 100 years ago. Shame on them, and if they don't learn the truth themselves, they'll get it handed to them with an 'anti-' spin by people like Sandra. And some will leave the Church over the shock and spin.

You WANT that? Sure sounds like it to me, but I know you don't, really.

HiJolly

[Moksha]

Could you give an example of these "legends" Moksha? I've heard them referred to before, but never heard one specifically mentioned. You could PM me an example if you'd rather. :)

Yikes, this is a tricky question and I do not want to get into too inflammitory of territory. Here is a safe and I think non-controversial example. Once upon a time, the Church denied any Mormons took part in the Mountain Meadows incident. Juanita Brooks was even Xed for writing about it. The Tanners had it in all it details. Now however, since last year, the Church released a updated mea culpa type admission as to what happened, vindicating Juanita Brooks and confirming for the most part the Tanner's account.

Hope that helps. I will need to think about other safe examples.

[HiJolly]

Hope that helps. I will need to think about other safe examples.

I think the peepstone in the hat is a good start, since it was (eventually) in the Ensign magazine (like MMM).

HiJolly

[Moksha]

I think the peepstone in the hat is a good start, since it was (eventually) in the Ensign magazine (like MMM).

HiJolly

Yes, that is a good example and like Dr. Dan Peterson says, it is really no more of a leap of faith than the legendary Urim and Thummim.

[Snow]

The power of the Tanner's site to influence unsuspecting Mormons comes from furnishing uncoated history that may contradict many Church legends. If we are unfamiliar with history and the onus is really upon us to learn it, I would suggest reading the Tanner's site and then coming here for some faith affirmation and a chance to discuss it.

Otherwise, just stick to legends and avoid this history stuff.

If someone is interested in history, why on earth would they want to read the Tanner's site?

Neither of the Tanners is a historian and there are plenty of legitimate and accomplished LDS historians in the world to choose from. The only reason I can imagine for wanting to read the Tanner's site is if you wanted a highly biased and antagonistic interpretation of LDS history from an Evangelical perspective.

You are giving very bad advice.

[Snow]

Why does this Apostate Codswallop not surprise me????

Sandra and her late husband are nothing more than profiting off their lies....

They don't profit very much from what I can tell, but what lies, specifically, are you referring to?

[Guest User-Removed]

Yikes, this is a tricky question and I do not want to get into too inflammitory of territory. Here is a safe and I think non-controversial example. Once upon a time, the Church denied any Mormons took part in the Mountain Meadows incident. Juanita Brooks was even Xed for writing about it. The Tanners had it in all it details. Now however, since last year, the Church released a updated mea culpa type admission as to what happened, vindicating Juanita Brooks and confirming for the most part the Tanner's account.

Hope that helps. I will need to think about other safe examples.

Juanita was NEVER excommunicated....she was frankly treated shabbily...but she wasn't ex'd.

Me thinks you've been hanging around too many LDS Historians, sniffing the varnish they use on those legends....

Moksha...stick to your second rate humor and yuck yucks.....

[Guest User-Removed]

Skip, I don't like what Sandra Tanner does for a living anymore than you do, I'm sure, but your comment (bolded above) is just wrong. Moksha's comment was not apostate at all! I'll grant you, most people would not enjoy reading the garbage on the UTLM website, but for those who really study the Church, it may be the only convenient way to find, say, the 1852 April conference reports. Since the Church didn't publish them.

And I know for myself that the first place I ever heard of Adam-god and peep-stones in a hat, was from people attacking the Church, like Sandra. Guess what? They were right, those things DID happen. Dang!

So *I* think Moksha makes a very good point. Too many LDS don't even know what happened in the Church 100 years ago. Shame on them, and if they don't learn the truth themselves, they'll get it handed to them with an 'anti-' spin by people like Sandra. And some will leave the Church over the shock and spin.

You WANT that? Sure sounds like it to me, but I know you don't, really.

HiJolly

Jolly...I grew up in a family that possesed 5 peep stones, one allegedly used by the Prophet himself. I have in a special box, 2 of those peep stones on display. I'll confess, they make many of my LDS friends very nervous.

So I grew up knowing about the peep stones AND the Adam-God Theory. I also grew up on a healthly doses of "other" arcane pseudo-doctrine. As interesting as alot of it is/was, I realized that most of it HAS NOTHING to do with my eternal salvation.

It's been my sad experience that people who base their testimonies on arcane bits of Church History...are actually working on finding the door marked "exit". People who seek to validate their testimonies based on refuting the likes of liars like the Tanners, Ed Decker and others...I suspect, never really had a testimony to begin with.

Attempting to find the truth on UTLM...is akin to believing Dick Nixon when he exclaimed "I'm not a crook"...

Edited June 25, 2008 by MyDogSkip
correct spelling errors...