Anti-Mormons

[rameumptom]

The experience of being LDS is an intense experience. It isn't like many Christian churches, where you sit in a pew for an hour a week, and then go about your own life the rest of the time. Being a Mormon requires committment to accept callings that may be above your comfort level. Expectations of keeping commandments, serving, doing family history, attending the temple, etc., can overwhelm many people - particularly if they mistake the busy stuff with the actual gospel.

And I think that many fall away because they overwhelm themselves with too much trying to save their own hides, rather than experiencing the atonement and allowing that experience to then lead them to the service and actions they should do.

Others leave because they forget the testimonies they once received, and begin believing the words of those who oppose us. If they believe we are of the devil, then their efforts against us are doing God a favor. Sadly, they do not realize that they do the same thing that Jesus told his apostles would happen to them, as apostates would kill them thinking they were doing God a service (Matthew 24).

Either way, an intense feeling fills them. They lose the feeling most LDS experience, of love and faith (if they ever experienced it in the first place); and replace it with an anger that this intense Mormon experience has ruined their lives and they seek others from suffering as they feel they have.

Sadly, the anger engendered at anti-Mormon/ex-Mo sites seems to become a growing cancer that leaves them smelling putrid from the gangrenous remains of their tortured souls. Instead of excising the cancer/anger, they insist on living with it, as a badge of honor against those they feel have betrayed them.

[prisonchaplain]

They should spend more time protesting the con artists found on TBN. Talking about Priestcraft......"and they rob the poor for their fine sanctuaries..."

You mean like these?

http://www.ondoctrine.com/10tbn.htm

http://www.ministrywatch.com/mw2.1/F_SumRpt.asp?EIN=952844062

[prisonchaplain]

The experience of being LDS is an intense experience. It isn't like many Christian churches, where you sit in a pew for an hour a week, and then go about your own life the rest of the time. Being a Mormon requires committment to accept callings that may be above your comfort level. Expectations of keeping commandments, serving, doing family history, attending the temple, etc., can overwhelm many people - particularly if they mistake the busy stuff with the actual gospel.

There is a saying that 20% of the people do 80% of the work. This is generally true in most organizations, including churches. I've read repeatedly, often here, that 40% of LDS are active, and 60% inactive. Of the active, perhaps half are truly diehard (this is my own guess), which means the church is right on track with most other churches.

Instead of formal callings, with all members expected to do something, our leaders informally ask members to pitch in with particular ministries. The most sincere members do as much as an active LDS person with callings does, I would imagine. Others do some, but not as much, and some are pew-warmers.

Where you may have a point is that it is hard to be active without pitching in, so you may have fewer pew-warmers--they simply go inactive.

Others leave because they forget the testimonies they once received, and begin believing the words of those who oppose us. If they believe we are of the devil, then their efforts against us are doing God a favor. Sadly, they do not realize that they do the same thing that Jesus told his apostles would happen to them, as apostates would kill them thinking they were doing God a service (Matthew 24).

Those who see themselves as Orthodox will always do this to those seen as heretics. Consider how you might respond to the FLDS.

[rameumptom]

I don't respond to the FLDS. How they live their lives, as long as they are not abusing children, is their own business.

And the LDS do require more of their own than other churches. While a priest or minister is paid to work full time, our bishops are not paid, yet most put 20-40 hours a week into their callings. I'm a high priest group leader, and easily put 20+ hours a week into my main calling, not including home teaching, helping with Scouts, and other responsibilities that come up.

And while most Protestant/evangelical churches teach on salvation through faith/grace alone, we do have a Catholic view that ordinances and obedience are important for achieving a higher level of salvation. with this concept, some members over exert themselves and suffer from burn-out.

Also, I haven't seen other religions expect 10% tithes (plus other offerings), sons to go on missions for 2 years at their own cost, etc.

IOW, there is a big difference. If I were in another church, I would be considered at least a part time minister and being paid for it. Instead, I work a 40+ hour a week job, and THEN add my church duties on top of it all, paying into the system, rather than being paid.

[Vort]

But we're not bitter.

[prisonchaplain]

I don't respond to the FLDS. How they live their lives, as long as they are not abusing children, is their own business.

Your church repeatedly announces that the FLDS has no connection with the LDS, that polygamy is an offense leading to excommunication--in essence, that they are heretics. I'm not suggesting that your church should not do this, btw.

And the LDS do require more of their own than other churches. While a priest or minister is paid to work full time, our bishops are not paid, yet most put 20-40 hours a week into their callings.

You can offer me anecdotes of people who put in long hours for no pay, and I could likewise point out many of our ministers who are also voluntary, and who work full-time so they can minister full-time. OK, I'll grant that your bishopric gets special notice for being an entirely volunteer lay-clergy.

But, for most members, those who are actively involved in the church are largely similar to those actively involved in Protestant churches. Those who are inactive largely mirror those who warm our pews.

I'm a high priest group leader, and easily put 20+ hours a week into my main calling, not including home teaching, helping with Scouts, and other responsibilities that come up.

And we have deacons who usher, do parking lot duty, join the pastor on calls to homes, etc. You may believe that your people do what we do to a greater degree, and that a higher percentage are involved...and you might be right, overall. But, it is a matter of degree, and the gap may not be quite so wide.

And while most Protestant/evangelical churches teach on salvation through faith/grace alone, we do have a Catholic view that ordinances and obedience are important for achieving a higher level of salvation. with this concept, some members over exert themselves and suffer from burn-out.

Don't confuse our teaching about conversion with a belief that Christians don't need to do nuthin'. Again, many of our people are very busy about the Father's business, within the church and in parachurch ministries on the outside. The doctrinal difference is that they labor out of gratitude, rather than to ensure they "survive to the end."

Also, I haven't seen other religions expect 10% tithes (plus other offerings),

Most churches teach tithing. Some even teach those considering membership that it is an expectation. Compliance is not 100%, but in both Southern Baptist and Assemblies of God churches giving is at 5% (which I take to mean that approximately half of the members tithe, with the other half throwing a dollar in the plate...:)).

sons to go on missions for 2 years at their own cost, etc.

We don't send all of our sons on two year missions, but many do short-term missions, and some give themselves over to lifelong missions.

IOW, there is a big difference. If I were in another church, I would be considered at least a part time minister and being paid for it.

Or not. Our average church has 140 members, one full-time minister, one part-time youth pastor, and several lay-leaders (voluntary). The particularly church I belong to has four ministers (sometimes 5), two of whom are paid. None of our deacons, teachers, and other workers are paid.

Instead, I work a 40+ hour a week job, and THEN add my church duties on top of it all, paying into the system, rather than being paid.

I applaud you, but would also inform you that many do likewise in Protestant churches.

[rameumptom]

I'm not bitter. All of the work I've done in the Church over the last 32 years has taught me many things, especially patience. There have been spiritual experiences I would have missed out on, had I not had these opportunities.

I just wanted to point out that there's a big difference for many LDS versus those in other churches.

[CatchTheRedeye]

There are also antis who have absolutely no experience or knowledge of the church. I don't feel so sorry for them, because it only makes you look stupid to berate the Book of Mormon when you haven't even read it. Maybe they are concerned for our salvation, but some are just there to feel pious.

Every church has to face criticism at some point in it's existence. It's best to just be loving to them and ignore their words.

I've read your Book of Mormon a couple of times and I admit it is fascinating. Did Smith really write (translate) that when he was real young? Can his young age be proven or is it just legend? I don't know how he could have made that all up. If Isaac Asimov (an atheist) had written that before he died everyone would say it was a great alternate history work and it would be highly touted.

I appreciate all the comments in this thread. Very interesting. PrisonChaplain, you are right that there are anti-Catholics and others. I shouldn't have said there weren't. It just seems that a tiny church like the Mormon church (sorry, 13 million is tiny) gets more than its share of persecution. That is one of the things that made me interested in it in the first place. So I guess the antis plan backfired in me. Thanks anti-mormons. If there was one true church and if there was a devil it makes sense that the true church would be fought against. IMNSHO :)

[VisionOfLehi]

Funny thing is, all this ante/lds persecution, makes the spirit in me stronger, it in no way makes me doubt my beliefs one little bit.

I'm the same way.

I think of it as a righteous fury, in some cases. It's a love of my faith and my Savior.

I am a warrior for God, and when they bring out the fighting words it makes my spirit battle ready!

I stood strong against Satan in one estate, and I will surely do the same in this.

[Elphaba]

C’mon people! This guy is straight out of central casting, complete with the predictable script containing every anti-Mormon pejorative in the book.

I’ve pulled out the exact words and phrases only a person with a significant amount of experience with the Church would know.

For example, the phrase "one true church," is a Mormon convention, and only someone with a fair amount of experience with LDS jargon would know of it.

Keep in mind this person is agnostic, with a couple of google searches on the web as his experience with the Church.

(Oh, sorry, I forgot: He also went to that temple square thingy, and has conveniently read the Book of Mormon a couple of times.)

1) Persecution

2) “antis” (two mentions)

3) “anti-Mormons (four mentions)

4) One true church

5) [antis] “fight against the Church.”

6) Went to Utah

7) Temple Square thingy

8) Tearing down another religion

9) Run-ins with violent Baptists and Jehovah’s Witnesses, but the Mormons are always nice and respectful.

10) I’ve read the Book of Mormon a couple of times.

11) If an atheist had written it, people would believe it is true history.

12) Did Smith really write (translate) that when he was real young?

I3) “I don’t know how he could have made that all up.”

14) 13 million

15) “The persecution is what got me interested in the first place.” (Elphaba: This is my personal favorite.)

16) Thus the “antis” plan backfired

17) True Church

18) And if there was a devil it makes sense that the true church would be fought against.

19) Thanks anti-Mormons.

Like I said, “Persecution” is my favorite. It’s a dead giveaway, as there is not one person on this planet who would consider anti-Mormonism "persecution," except a Mormon with a Cause.

Elphaba

[Bettina]

OK, Why are there Anti-Mormons and why do many of them fight against the LDS church?

Jesus had never done anything bad to anyone. That is why they had killed him. Be a bit bad, do not tell the truth, do what all do instead of following Christ, then the devil need not fight against you, because he has got you already and makes you fight against Mormons. Edited July 18, 2008 by Bettina

[rameumptom]

Your church repeatedly announces that the FLDS has no connection with the LDS, that polygamy is an offense leading to excommunication--in essence, that they are heretics. I'm not suggesting that your church should not do this, btw.

Ram: Actually, we do not consider them heretics. We believe them to be a separate Church from us, just as we view Catholics and Baptists to be separate from us. We believe that actions, such as polygamy, are an excommunicable offense, because it is only authorized in the Church, when our prophet condones it. Since we do not recognize the FLDS prophet as our own, he cannot condone plural marriages for the LDS. I haven't heard the Church call them "heretic" a single time. We are just ensuring in our media coverage that people do not mistake them with us, as we are two separate entities.

[Guest TheLutheran]

. . .

There is a big difference between someone who reads our scripture with a curious, open mind and still doesn't believe it is truth, and somebody who reads our scripture with the sole intent of picking it apart and twisting it to suit their agenda. The former are the ones that I find to be particularly offensive.

Why do you find "the former particularly offensive?" I am just curious -- no pun intended.

[WANDERER]

Some things people choose to be provoked by: apostasy, apostate, restoration to the fallen, a Prophet who wanted to be President, witnessing to other Christians, a Mormon heaven (celestial is reserved)...or whatever it is that is not trust-promoting...because it is not trusting of others. It is a mirror effect. Sorry...but I feel I should be sincere and honest.

[mightynancy]

But, for most members, those who are actively involved in the church are largely similar to those actively involved in Protestant churches. Those who are inactive largely mirror those who warm our pews.

This is true. I have a dear friend who attends a Christian Fellowship church - she puts in many hours for free, and so do her husband and teen daughter. Their congregation raises a lot of money and spends countless volunteer hours to provide a week-long summer program for kids (their Vacation Bible School). She and her husband minister to families in crisis...for free. We LDS aren't the only ones who sacrifice time and effort in selfless service.

[candyprpl]

Before I joined the LDS church I was a member in a very little Baptist church. The minister in that church was not supported by church funds because the congregation was just too small. He worked full time as a carpenter because he had a family and he worked full time as a minister. I know the Lord supported him and gave him the strength to do all this work. My father was a Deacon in that church who also did what he could to support the minister in his church work. I say he was more like a first counselor to a Bishop. When I married I joined another Baptist church because that was my husband's church. It was a bigger church and the minister did receive a small stipend for service. My husband was planning on being a minister and he would preach in Jr. church on Sundays. (kind of like our Primary). Not all denominations have paid clergy. The difference I've experienced in the LDS vs. other denominations is we know that service is a great blessing. We do it because the Lord has asked us to do what it takes to build the kingdom of God. I just didn't get that same feeling in the other churches. I'm not saying this right and some are going to take offense I'm afraid.

When I joined the LDS church I knew that I would at some point receive "a calling." At first I was quite afraid of what I might to be called to do. I didn't see myself as a very capable person. After a while through this conversion process I had a realization, a personal revelation that the Lord was preparing me. My prayers became thankful for this preparation and fear that I would be called to do something I didn't think I could do went away. I was soon called to teach in Primary (Sunday School) and 11 yr. olds were my students. I also have a calling as Assistant Activity Day Leader. I've had these callings for almost 2 years and I feeled blessed to be doing my part to build God's kingdom. I put in as many hours as I need to through the guidance of the Holy Spirit and the blessings are too many to count! My testimony of this gospel has grown so much in such a short time. That's worth more than money.

Our testimony is the only thing we will take with us when we leave this mortal life.

[ktfords]

I have asked many LDS this question in the past for clarification of LDS beliefs, it appears the LDS community, doesn't want the general population to know this.

Regarding Eternal progression. Does the LDS church believe, after meeting --Requirements of Exaltation, you can become a God?

So, far it has been denied every time. I even asked a BYU professer, ( representative for fairlds.org) After about 8-10 emails, he finally admitted they do, but, it does depend on how the question is presented, the mood. This was after I brought to his attention Blessing of Exaltation, chap 47, number two, which says "They will become gods."

Why can't the LDS present what they believe when asked, instead of deception? If I get pulled over and the police asks me a question (do you have a gun in the car?) and I decide to lie because it wasn't asked properly or his heart wasn't in the right place, will I still go to jail for not being truthful when he finds it? The answer is yes.

Just curious why a person can be less than truthful and how it doesn't compromise that person's character. It does say in Requirements of Exaltation the following: Please look at what I have left in bold.

The time to fulfill the requirements for exaltation is now (see Alma 34:32–34). President Joseph Fielding Smith said, “In order to obtain the exaltation we must accept the gospel and all its covenants; and take upon us the obligations which the Lord has offered; and walk in the light and understanding of the truth; and ‘live by every word that proceedeth forth from the mouth of God’ ” (Doctrines of Salvation, 2:43).

To be exalted, we first must place our faith in Jesus Christ and then endure in that faith to the end of our lives. Our faith in him must be such that we repent of our sins and obey his commandments.

He commands us all to receive certain ordinances:

1. We must be baptized and confirmed a member of the Church of Jesus Christ.

2. We must receive the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.

3. We must receive the temple endowment.

4. We must be married for time and eternity.

In addition to receiving the required ordinances, the Lord commands all of us to—

1. Love and worship God.

2. Love our neighbor.

3. Repent of our wrongdoings.

4. Live the law of chastity.

5. Pay honest tithes and offerings.

6. Be honest in our dealings with others and with the Lord.

7. Speak the truth always.

8. Obey the Word of Wisdom.

9. Search out our kindred dead and perform the saving ordinances of the gospel for them.

10. Keep the Sabbath day holy.

11. Attend our Church meetings as regularly as possible so we can renew our baptismal covenants by partaking of the sacrament.

12. Love our family members and strengthen them in the ways of the Lord.

13. Have family and individual prayers every day.

14. Honor our parents.

Appears black and white, I look forward to hearing your answers.

Thanks..

Edited July 18, 2008 by ktfords

[bytor2112]

This is often a difficult doctrine for members of other Christian denominations to accept or understand and often a source of contention. I don't know why LDS members beat around the bush and not take the time to explain in detail what we believe. I have found very often in conversations with my non member friends, that they prefer to tell me what I believe rather than asking for some clarification. It is usually something like," Mormons believe that God was once a man and over time became God and has many wives and creates spirit children to populate worlds and Mormons believe that they will become Gods just the same way and do the same thing." I would much prefer if some one would just ask..... what do you believe about eternal life or whatever. It is obvious we believe differently than the rest of Christendom. Some answers take "Spiritual" discernment to gain understanding. We believe that in order to believe that ours is the Restored Gospel it must be revealed by the Holy Spirit.

We believe that we are Sons and Daughters, literally, of God, our Heavenly Father. We also believe that as his children if we follow his guidance and live, as best as we are able, the example taught by the Savior, we can progress forever. Think about the life span of each of us. We enter this life as a helpless babe and are nurtured and taught how to live as an adult. As we age, hopefully, we become better people, we learn from our mistakes....some of us progress further that others. I am not sure what it means to be a God or when that may occur in the Eternities.

We do not believe that we can or will become equal to God. We believe that if we inherit Eternal life that we will return back to our Heavenly Father and can become like him. Salvation is in Christ. It is through his atoning sacrifice at Gethsemene and at Golgotha where he drank of the Father's bitter cup and took upon him the sins of all human kind, that all that will come unto him , believe in him and repent of their sins may have eternal life. It is really that simple.

[bytor2112]

Also, the Journal of Discourses, the Lectures on Faith, Mormon Doctrine,etc are not official Church publications explaining "official" church doctrine. . What some General Authority may have said as his opinion or in conversation is not doctrine. Just because Joseph Smith or Parley Pratt or Brigham Young or Bruce R McConkie or whomever may have been quoted as saying something does not make it doctrine. The Anti's love to quote these things, but again, they are not souces of "official" church doctrine. Doctrine can be found in the standard works. Namely, The KJV of the Bible, The Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants and Pearl of Great Price as well as other sources as authorized by the Church.

Does Benny Hinn or Pat Robertson or Oral Roberts represent Christianity'r beliefs each time they speak. Are the Pastors or Preachers of different churches infallable? How mant times have I heard a Christian Pastor say that God spoke to him or he was given a revalation? To many times to count.

Edited July 18, 2008 by bytor2112

[OtterPop]

bytor,

Are you suggesting that the president of the LDS church cannot receive additional doctrine for the members? I was raised LDS, and was taught many times, and have seen it written in official LDS Church lesson manuals, that the conference issue of the Ensign stands beside the standard works in importance.

If your prophet can't receive revelation about new doctrine, why have a prophet?

Many mainstream Mormons disagree with your definition of doctrine and understanding of the role of current and past LDS Church leaders.

[bytor2112]

OtterPop,

I should have included other sources like the Conference Ensign and of course the President can recieve additional doctrine for the Church. I was trying to point out that not everything is "official" doctrine of the church just because a past GA is alleged to have said it. I use Mormon Doctrine for reference often, but it is not canonized scripture. The Adam-God theory or the King Follett Sermon is also not canonized scripture. Yet the Anti's will use any and all of these sources to describe "official" church doctrine. I am sorry if I wasn't more clear. I have edited the post to make myself a bit more clear.

Edited July 18, 2008 by bytor2112

[bytor2112]

Found this at FAIR.....

A vast number of anti-Mormon criticisms rely on the following straw man argument: LDS leader “L” said statement “X”. Since it has been shown that “X” is in error this proves that Mormonism is false. Is something “official” LDS doctrine because a General Authority or Prophet said it? What is and is not “official” LDS doctrine?

Not every utterance by every general authority constitutes “official” doctrine. “There are many subjects,” we read in the First Presidency-authorized Encyclopedia of Mormonism, “about which the scriptures are not clear and about which the Church has made no official pronouncements. In such matters, one can find differences of opinion among Church members and leaders. Until the truth of these matters is made known by revelation, there is room for different levels of understanding and interpretation of unsettled issues.”

Statements by leaders may be useful and true, but when they are “expressed outside the established, prophetic parameters,” they do “not represent the official doctrine or position of theChurch.” This includes statements given in General Conference. Conference talks—while certainly beneficial for the spiritual edification of the Saints—generally focus on revealed, official truths. They do not—by nature of being given in Conference—expound “official” doctrine. As Harold B. Lee said, “It is not to be thought that every word spoken by the General Authorities is inspired, or that they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost in everything they write.” To claim that anything taught in general conference is “official” doctrine, notes J. F. McConkie, “makes the place where something is said rather than what is said the standard of truth. Nor is something doctrine simply because it was said by someone who holds a particular office or position. Truth is not an office or a position to which one is ordained.”

[bytor2112]

More insight into what constitutes official doctrine........

How do we know then, what is “doctrine”, and what is not? First it must generally conform to what has already been revealed. “It makes no difference what is written or what anyone has said,” wrote J. Fielding Smith, “if what has been said is in conflict with what the Lord has revealed, we can set it aside.” The standard works, he explains, are the “measuring yardsticks, or balances, by which we measure every man’s doctrine.”

Harold B. Lee expressed similar thoughts when he taught that any doctrine, advanced by anyone—regardless of position—that was not supported by the standard works, then “you may know that his statement is merely his private opinion.” He recognized that the Prophet could bring forth new doctrine, but “when he does, [he] will declare it as revelation from God,” after which it will be sustained by the body of Church.

The Prophet can add to the scriptures, but such new additions are presented by the First Presidency to the body of the Church and are accepted by common consent (by sustaining vote) as binding doctrine of the Church (See D&C 26:2; 107:27-31). Until such doctrines or opinions are sustained by vote in conference, however, they are “neither binding nor the official doctrine of the Church.”

[Vort]

I have asked many LDS this question in the past for clarification of LDS beliefs, it appears the LDS community, doesn't want the general population to know this.

Dang. He's onto us.

Anyone bring a neuralizer?

[prisonchaplain]

Before I joined the LDS church I was a member in a very little Baptist church. The minister in that church was not supported by church funds because the congregation was just too small. He worked full time as a carpenter because he had a family and he worked full time as a minister. I know the Lord supported him and gave him the strength to do all this work. My father was a Deacon in that church who also did what he could to support the minister in his church work. I say he was more like a first counselor to a Bishop. When I married I joined another Baptist church because that was my husband's church. It was a bigger church and the minister did receive a small stipend for service. My husband was planning on being a minister and he would preach in Jr. church on Sundays. (kind of like our Primary). Not all denominations have paid clergy. The difference I've experienced in the LDS vs. other denominations is we know that service is a great blessing. We do it because the Lord has asked us to do what it takes to build the kingdom of God. I just didn't get that same feeling in the other churches. I'm not saying this right and some are going to take offense I'm afraid.

Our testimony is the only thing we will take with us when we leave this mortal life.

I suppose I could take offense, but I won't. After all, it's your testimony. You were able to see the spiritual labor and sincerity in the Baptist churches, but believe there was a greater fullness and understanding in your LDS experience. Your perspective is honest and generous. :)