Anti-Mormons

[Palerider]

Palerider,

In case you didn't notice both of your questions were answered. Perhaps it was the use of more than one syllable that made it difficult for you to notice that. Or perhaps you were just too busy being snide to notice? Nahhh...couldn't be, right? It must be a problem with me. It must be since you were so nice and posed your query in such a non-aggressive manner. Right?

When you can discuss things like a decent person I will respond in kind. Until then I'll just give you the same treatment you give others.

For the record, I am neither anti-Mormon nor an ex member. I am a current member of the church. Just in case your vitriole was based on another stupid assumption, though I suspect you don't need reason to be as you are. Frankly I refuse to address you anymore after this post. Hope you grow up. I'll pray for you.

i am not a decent person....only you apparently.....and your name calling and assumptions are awesome...:)

[OtterPop]

Otterpop might I post a question to you. I am honestly wanting your input on this. For those that leave the Church...for whatever the reasons might be...why do so many continue to frequent an LDS website?

I'm happy to answer any questions asked honestly, and I think I would wonder this, too, if I were you.

I like talking about Mormonism. Mormonism is part of my heritage (not in the pioneer sense, because my parents were converts). Mormonism also still affects my life day-to-day, because I live in Salt Lake. I work with Mormons, I have friends who are Mormons, I have family members who are Mormons.

When it comes to grass-roots, ward-level Mormonism (and Mormons), I have a great affection. I have no regrets about being raised Mormon. (I do not have this same affection for the corporation of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.)

I have enjoyed participating on some boards in the past. If you've been online for any length of time, you know that boards change in tone and activity. My previous boards have either disappeared or become dull. I liked the tenor of this one, so I signed up. I'll stay as long as it suits me.

I am truly at peace about having left Mormonism, but growing up in Mormonism and practicing it is an intense experience. I see Mormonism as not just a religion but also as having many of the same characteristics as an ethic group. Imagine me as being like someone who comes from an Orthodox Jewish family, but who has chosen not to be an observer of the commandments. It doesn't mean I'm not Jewish, even though I have no intention of attending synagogue or taking part in any of the Jewish practices. (As I think about it, this is a good exploration of why some people can't "leave it alone.")

Bottom line for me is that I do leave the LDS Church alone, but I don't need or want to abandon my "ethnic" Mormonism.

I also don't want to alienate my Mormon family or friends or make them uncomfortable with conversations about my experience of being an ex-Mormon, so I'd rather talk about it online.

[pam]

I appreciate your answer. I live in the Salt Lake area as well.

[OtterPop]

Are people who become in-active and live outside of church teachings for many years any different from people who become ex-mormons? Other than never officially have there names removed. Unless they actively fight against the church.

Being an ex-Mormon is a choice, just like being an active Mormon is. It takes action to be removed from the membership records. In my experience, very few people who are just "inactive" take the steps to have their name removed. People generally take action only if they have a reason to take action.

Some people who reject the LDS church purposely don't have their names removed, because to them it's just paperwork and it just doesn't matter to them.

Although it's kind of an old-fashioned term, I think the idea of a jack-Mormon is a useful one -- someone who has drifted away, doesn't live "Mormon standards," but still thinks the Church is true or at least may be true.

I was inactive for a few years when I was at BYU (before they had the requirement to attend church), but I believed the Church was true then and I always intended to go back at some point. I really did not enjoy attending church at BYU. Student wards just didn't suit me. But I didn't quit living LDS standards because I was inactive.

There's all kinds.

[OtterPop]

I appreciate your answer. I live in the Salt Lake area as well.

I looked at your profile when I got your welcome message (thanks!), and saw that you live in Sandy. I do, too. I just say "Salt Lake" because it's more recognizable to those not in Utah.

[pam]

Wow small world. That's awesome. Maybe we are neighbors. lol

[Palerider]

Wow small world. That's awesome. Maybe we are neighbors. lol

was going to say something....but I better pass.....i know I am a meanie:)

[Snow]

did you think you were the only one who knew about this??? kinda curious why you decided to share this with us....

For what it's worth, on another thread recently there was a poster that was claiming, adamantly and incorrectly, that it wasn't true - that GAs have a modest income.

[Palerider]

hey snow....I hope I don't sound rude....but I do remember that...:)

[SeattleTruthSeeker]

From someone who has been there... majority of the Anti Mormon tactics, antics and articles are misconstrued strawman arguments put together to hopefully deceive people. I have read Bill Mckeevers Mormonism 101. Alot of fallacious arguments in that work. I have read and seen the God Makers, Ed Decker is a joke. I have read alot of works by these so called Christian Ministers who seemed to think they know more about the LDS Religion.

When I was on the other side of the fence and an anti mormon (my fiance still says I am an anti mormon and we don't talk religion in the house, but we are getting more and more comfortable on the subject - we have home teachers that come see us and we go to church infrequently. She says we are going, I say okay and then she cops out and I ask why are we not going?). Anyway.

My thought is that majority of the anti mormon literature are based upon their misconstrued interpretations and rehashments of old arguments dressed up in new presupposed logical reasonings.

Majority of these people can't even back up the originality of their statements. Most of them don't even understand the Bible, Christian History and Religious ideals and how religious doctrines have evolved over time. To them, it is one or the other. The fact remains, Christians can't even agree on one single point of doctrine from a biblical standpoint.

And, finally, what authority and right do these people have to bash someone elses religion? They don't. People will believe what they want to believe. We must understand and share what we know is to be true and let God do the convicting and the drawing forth.

[omega0401]

Correct me if I’m wrong but in a nutshell, Otterpop left the church because of its teachings. I respect him for it. Everyone has their free agency to chose to accept the doctrine or not. People will continue to leave the Lord’s church because they don’t agree with what the Lord is teaching. They are on the road to apostasy. Hopefully, some of them will have a change of heart and realize that those teachings really did come for the Lord and repent and come back into the fold.

But, what if the restored church is truly the Lord’s church that he restored himself through His prophet Joseph Smith? I hope that question will always be in the minds of those who apostatize.

Then again, someone will ask me what if it is not true? And if that were the case and I left the church where would I go? I believe that all those other churches are man-made churches. Some of those people are very sincere in what they believe but they can’t all be right when they don’t agree on some or many points of doctrine. But my testimony is strong enough to know that this is the Lord’s church. I have that testimony spoken to me by the spirit.

But here is another thought. There will be those like Otterpop who leave the church because of it’s teachings and will look for another church. And if they don’t find a church that believes in all the interpretations of the scriptures the way they do they will continue to look for another church. They will find it hard to find a church that believes exactly the way they do in all points of doctrine. Remember that scripture, “...toss to and froth with every wind of doctrine.” That is still happening even today. Some even start their own church after searching in vain.

With my testimony of the restored gospel, I am very happy where I am at. I would never leave it. And those who do, we still care about them and hope, even pray, that they will return back some day.

Edited July 20, 2008 by omega0401

[Snow]

Correct me if I’m wrong but in a nutshell, Otterpop left the church because of its teachings. I respect him for it. Everyone has their free agency to chose to accept the doctrine or not. People will continue to leave the Lord’s church because they don’t agree with what the Lord is teaching. Those people are on the road to apostasy. Hopefully, some of those people will have a change of heart and realize that those teachings really did come for the Lord and repent and come back into the fold.

Why do you respect someone for rejecting the Lord's teachings?

Seems a rather contrary reason to respect someone.

[Snow]

hey snow....I hope I don't sound rude....but I do remember that...:)

You rude?

Impossible. You're a sweetheart.

[SeattleTruthSeeker]

Why do you respect someone for rejecting the Lord's teachings?

Seems a rather contrary reason to respect someone.

Respecting does not equal agreeing and supporting them. Respecting means that you respect them as a human being, a person whom God loves and an individual that lives their life. Parents respect their children, even when those children disappoint them. So in a sense, yes I respect the person for who they are. So, why would you ask if I respect someone who rejects the Lord's teaching? I respect them for who they are, not what they believe in.

How would you arrive to the conclusion that respect equates to agreeing with what someone believes that is in opposition to what you believe in?

[omega0401]

Why do you respect someone for rejecting the Lord's teachings?

Seems a rather contrary reason to respect someone.

First, you can respect a person for being honest about what he believes because the alternative is that he would not be honest and instead be a hypocrite and I would not respect hypocrites. Second, he is entitled to his own opinions and beliefs as you and I are.

I can listen to others like Otterpop but it doesn't mean I have to agree that what they say is true. They respect what I believe and they, hopefully respect my beliefs.

[pam]

Ummmm..btw...Otterpop is a she not a he.

[omega0401]

Ummmm..btw...Otterpop is a she not a he.

Thank you Pam for correcting me and my humble apologies to Otterpop. As you can tell by now, I don't always go to a person's home page to read their profile to find out such things. But...this is a good reason to or I'll embarrass myself yet again. Yikes.

[OtterPop]

. . . what I personally believe is true, the war that was fought in the pre-existence continues.

That's interesting, but not really in keeping with what Mormonism teaches. Feel free to correct me if you think I'm wrong, but by Mormon teachings, I kept my first estate. I'm certainly not a daughter of perdition, as I never had a sure knowledge of the Mormon gospel. So, in the Mormon belief system, I will inherit the Telestial Kingdom and have salvation, though not exaltation.

But for others, those who find the "strait and narrow", he looks for other ways to lead them away. I think that one way is by drawing attention away from the sacred truths we learn by the power of the Holy Spirit and spreading lies mingled with truth about the early history of the Church. Trying to understand 19th century church history through 21st lenses is a real challenge, and people have been trying to tear down this work since the beginning. The doctrines of Salvation are what is important....... not so much past views or ideas or comments from early leaders.IMHO.......

I didn't leave because of church history. I left because the power because the spirit led me to a path different from Mormonism.

You likely do not believe that this is possible. I know that it is.

[OtterPop]

Correct me if I’m wrong but in a nutshell, Otterpop left the church because of its teachings. I respect him for it. Everyone has their free agency to chose to accept the doctrine or not. People will continue to leave the Lord’s church because they don’t agree with what the Lord is teaching.

No offense taken on the "he" thing. Now, if you'd seen me in person and called me "he," I would have been a little hurt . . .

I didn't leave the LDS church because of its teachings. I left for spiritual reasons. I didn't go looking for a church that I would agree with on every point. I am as sure that I have taken the right path for myself as you are that the LDS church is the one true church.

I believe that you do have a testimony, that you have had a spiritual witness. I also have had a spiritual witness. The difference between us appears to be that you believe that your witness somehow applies to me, and that I would be wise to substitute your testimony for my own witness. I don't believe that my guidance applies to you, or to anyone but myself.

[OtterPop]

Why do you respect someone for rejecting the Lord's teachings?

I understand that you believe I rejected "the Lord's teachings." You and I disagree on that point, and you are not the authority on my spiritual experiences.

[Over43]

There are a lot of reasons why someone would specifically move against the church when they had previously been members. I feel bad for them, because it takes a lot to go through the process of leaving the church officially. To go through all that just to disassociate with a religious group means somebody really feels wronged for some reason. If they just got bored with the church or just lost their testimony chances are they would just be inactive members, not antis.

I've spoken one on one with some adamant antis, and a lot of them have really sad experiences with the church. My heart breaks for them, because nobody should have to feel unsafe or unhappy in their church. But at the same time, it's no reason to blame the entire institution and the scripture it's based off.

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.

This is an interesting post. Ealier in the evening a happened upon an "anti" website by ex members. Most of their stories were not unique, most of their rationalizations were very similar. What I was "amazed" at was their seeming inability to let go. Just walk away. Many had hundreds of posts about this or that.

Your end statement was right on, It is just best to be loving towards them, anything else just seems to fuel their furnace.

Jon

[Snow]

Respecting does not equal agreeing and supporting them. Respecting means that you respect them as a human being, a person whom God loves and an individual that lives their life. Parents respect their children, even when those children disappoint them. So in a sense, yes I respect the person for who they are. So, why would you ask if I respect someone who rejects the Lord's teaching? I respect them for who they are, not what they believe in.

How would you arrive to the conclusion that respect equates to agreeing with what someone believes that is in opposition to what you believe in?

Regardless of whether the poster merits respect for being a human being, rejecting the Lord's teachings is hardly a valid reason for respecting someone as omega said.

[Snow]

I understand that you believe I rejected "the Lord's teachings." You and I disagree on that point, and you are not the authority on my spiritual experiences.

I don't know anything about what you have or haven't done. I was responding to omega who thinks you have and are therefor, as a result, worthy of respect.

[pam]

It appears to me that Otterpop is a very nice decent individual. Because she has chosen to take her life in a direction that would not be of my own choosing does not mean that I can't respect her as an individual.

[SeattleTruthSeeker]

Regardless of whether the poster merits respect for being a human being, rejecting the Lord's teachings is hardly a valid reason for respecting someone as omega said.

How do you define respect? I am actually curious to know.

What I believe you are meaning to say is that it does not merit supporting what they believe.

I respect someone's opinion. In your understanding, does that mean that I am supporting their opinion, or acknowldeging their opinion as being their opinion?

Are we to respect what other people believe? Isn't that what one of the articles of faith are about is respecting one anothers viewpoint?

I am not going to beat this into the ground, because there is no need to. The question you brought up is valid, but is in error on the premise of the thought that when you respect someone you support what they believe. I have never heard that. My fiance's son is in Taekwondo and the children are from a variety of cultures, walks of faiths (and yes there is one gentleman who is a member of the LDS Faith there that is an instructor). They teach children Respect and what it means to respect. The Master is Korean, they are taught to respect other people of different ethnics, cultures and backgrounds. Does that mean that these children are taught - again by your own definition - that respect equals supporting?

Again, respect is acknowledging and understand the person for who they are, beliefs and all. That does not mean you support their lifestyle, their political views, their religious views.

For instance, I respect John McArthur, Charles Stanlely, RC Sproul. I respect them because they are an exemplary men of integrity. I respect my father but can't stand him at times. I respect my ex wife parents but disagree with them. I respect people that I know, but disagree with them on certain things.

If you can show me how respect is equated to supporting and accepting their beliefs, then I will change my view. Until then, why make an issue out of respecting someone who they are? That is my question.

No, I do not support the anti mormons. I don't support what they do, what they represent, what they teach and what they write. However, I respect people who are willing to discuss and see where they may error in their arguments and willing to sit down and have a decent conversation without name calling.