What causes people to be extremly ant-mormon?

[Elena_Villanueva]

You know i was talking to a lot of people and lots of times people don't have a real reason so i wanted to see what other people think.

[Misshalfway]

Fear.

[pam]

Misunderstanding

[Celica]

People just beliving what they've heard from unrealiable sources and don't make an effort to find out for themselves.

[Maureen]

Sometimes it comes from how they have perceived the LDS church in their life. Like my husband; when he looks back growing up Mormon he sees the church as very suffocating. His whole life revolved around the church. Some people can accept that, others need more space, more room for other ideas, other choices. I would say he was more "anti" a few years ago, and lately he's mellowing in his views.

M.

[Traveler]

You know i was talking to a lot of people and lots of times people don't have a real reason so i wanted to see what other people think.

It is the pattern that was established 2000 years ago when the Pharesses and Scribes established the anti movement against Christ. For the main part the methods and arguments are the same.

The Traveler

[Seanette]

A lot of the anti-Mormon stuff I've seen comes down to a few categories:

Disgruntled ex-members with a grudge

Clergy of other denominations who fear losing their livelihood if members of their congregations leave

People who just need some target for hatred, feeling inadequate or insecure, and so on

People who've been indoctrinated with all the lies that spread around

There is a bright side to antis - in a lot of cases, people start checking out the claims they're making and find out the truth about the Church, which leads to conversion (summary of my own conversion story)

Edited May 29, 2009 by Seanette
punctuation fix

[the Ogre]

I can only speak of the antis I know personally. They are all former Latter-day Saints. Their reasons are several, legion even, but to me their biggest reason is rejection. We rejected them, they rejected us. Rejection followed by rationalization. "Mormons reject me because I'm a free thinker. They reject me because I'm different, because I stand out, because they only want more mo-clones. I reject them because who can believe in G-d anyway. I reject them because they cannot tell me how to live. I reject them because they are so judgmental. I reject them because I am a free-thinker. I reject them because whatever and whatever and whatever and whatever . . . "

Bah! Who cares? They have their reasons. I know a few who have said very hateful things. Some who have been treated very poorly by members of the church. I know one who is mad at something our dad said when he was fifteen. All I know for sure is that I have experienced a lot of pain because of them. I have not only experienced their pain, but I know their desolation, I know their deception, I know their anger, and I know they are so filled with rage they will not stop until there is a wall built around the church with stenciled warnings that say: Warning! There is zealotry inside.

I have charity for them and the ones in my life I treat with courtesy, friendship, and love, but they know me: I will not tolerate their willful destructiveness and I will always give them a face to spit into so long as I am the one they are fighting with and not with others who do not know of or understand their hurt.

Edited May 29, 2009 by the Ogre

[MikeUpton]

The Devil.

Edit: He is the father of lies. He is also apparently the father of a lot of stupid too, because most anti-mormon material is chock full of it. Listen to Hugh Nibley have a field day with it here:Speeches Website

I remember you said in your introductory posts that your parents did not like the church. Probably boils down to misunderstanding for them, they probably want what is best for you in life.

Anti Mormons 'R Us: Come for the brownies, stay for the bigotry.

Edited May 29, 2009 by MikeUpton

[MikeUpton]

I can only speak of the antis I know personally. They are all former Latter-day Saints. Their reasons are several, legion even, but to me their biggest reason is rejection. We rejected them, they rejected us. Rejection followed by rationalization.

this scripture is very telling:

28 Now the greatest number of those of the Lamanites who slew so many of their brethren were Amalekites and Amulonites, the greatest number of whom were after the order of the Nehors.

29 Now, among those who joined the people of the Lord, there were none who were Amalekites or Amulonites, or who were of the order of Nehor, but they were actual descendants of Laman and Lemuel.

30 And thus we can plainly discern, that after a people have been once enlightened by the Spirit of God, and have had great knowledge of things pertaining to righteousness, and then have fallen away into sin and transgression, they become more hardened, and thus their state becomes worse than though they had never known these things.

Alma 24

[the Ogre]

. . . He is also apparently the father of a lot of stupid too, because most anti-mormon material is chock full of it . . .

I would be very careful. You are underestimating them. What they are is very deceptive. Their skill at twisting the facts is incredible. They are very good at pouncing on someone who is filled with doubts or has committed some type of sin and are feeling guilty. They prey on doubts and on controversy real or created. They depend most on their audience being ignorant.

A latter-day Saint who has educated themselves can avoid most of these traps, but a well read saint is not who they are the most interested in.

Edited May 29, 2009 by the Ogre

[ztodd]

Could I ask something related to this? I'm just a little curious what y'all think of this - What is the definition of anti-mormon?

If an article tells some true things about the LDS church, maybe even mostly true things, but it also tells some false things, or paints the church or it's leaders in a bad light, would you call that article anti-LDS? Is it even possible that something that's entirely accurate concerning our history and doctrine, could be considered anti-mormon?

[MikeUpton]

I would be very careful. You are underestimating them. What the are is very deceptive. Their skill at twisting the facts is incredible. They are very good at pouncing on someone who is filled with doubts or has committed some type of sin and are feeling guilty. They prey on doubts and on controversy real or created. They depend most on their audience being ignorant.

A latter-day Saint who has educated themselves can avoid most of these traps, but a well read saint is not who they are the most interested in.

Its true what you say, and I dont personally make a big habit of reading the stuff, but all of what I've read and seen is pretty stupid. Hugh Nibley agrees. They are very deceptive, as you say to the uninformed, or those who are not trained to spot sensationalism or errors in logic. I should be careful when I speak in front of many people what I feel about them though. Many people might very well be decieved. For myself, I usually tend to spot people pretty easily who create sensationalism without anything substantial to back it up. I don't claim to be perfect at it, but its one of the main reasons I hate the television. Listen to the Hugh Nibley talk though, if you care to. I found it funny.

Edit: I think so much of it is like the dihydrogen monoxide prank, with an evil twist. Dihydrogen Monoxide Research Division - dihydrogen monoxide info

Its a prank group getting petitions signed to ban the use of dihydrogen monoxide. (water.)

2nd edit: I think the main key though to being decieved lies not in being humble to the anti mormon, but being humble to God.

Edited May 29, 2009 by MikeUpton

[MikeUpton]

Could I ask something related to this? I'm just a little curious what y'all think of this - What is the definition of anti-mormon?

If an article tells some true things about the LDS church, maybe even mostly true things, but it also tells some false things, or paints the church or it's leaders in a bad light, would you call that article anti-LDS? Is it even possible that something that's entirely accurate concerning our history and doctrine, could be considered anti-mormon?

I think it generally has to do with the intent of the person.

[the Ogre]

Could I ask something related to this? I'm just a little curious what y'all think of this - What is the definition of anti-mormon?

I paint my definition with broad stripes. If someone is the opposite of an apologist, or someone who is a skeptic, who is a scholar and does not care about the eternal progression of individuals, but who writes critical analysis; then I do not consider them an anti-mormon. I do not like the skeptics and apologists. I think both are nearly as dangerous as anti-mormons, but not quite.

Anti-mormons are those who oppose the Mormon church and want every mormon to convert to another faith. I do not mean every Korean-Evangelical I met on Seoul's subway were antis, they thought telling me I was going to hell was quite sincere and typical of their approach to everyone (a shot-gun approach as it were). The professional ministries active on the web who spend all their money on trying to "save" Latter-day Saints are however. Those who come on this site who claim to know more about mormonism than do we and then try to prove it are anti-mormons.

The ex-mos who preach from anger and rage and do nothing but condemn church leadership and often the general membership for whatever reason are anti-mormons.

I do want to warn that there are allies or just plain friends who are not anti-mormons. They believe differently, but do mind our beliefs and often enjoy the conversation and the friendship.

To review:

Shot-gun approach witness-missionaries: not typically.

Scholarly-skeptics: no, they're just plain over-educated idiots.

Ax-to-grind ex-mos: yes.

Professional mormon-ministries that publish extensively about the falsehood of the church: yes.

Trolls on an LDS forum: yes.

Freinds who truly are just interested in the conversation: no.

Your neighbor with a deluded minister: no, but then it depends on how shrill they get.

A nice question is: am I an anti-evangelical? Not typically, it just depends on how I get treated. I however do not attack their faith, only their motives, sincerity, and methodology. I have not called someone an anti to their face in years because I don't want to be called an anti-Chr-stian.

Late Edit: Economics might also be a part of it. A type of natural business competition. For example the Coke v. Pepsi thing. It just seems that when congregations compete for congregants it just gets vicious regardless of the specific denomination being jumped.

Edited May 29, 2009 by the Ogre

[MikeUpton]

Those who come on this site who claim to know more about mormonism than do we and then try to prove it are anti-mormons.

Those guys bewilder me. I think of all the light I have recieved in the true Church of Jesus Christ, the beauty and wonder added to my life, the hope for a glorious tomorrow, the powerful relationship I have been able to obtain with my father in heaven and his son my savior Jesus Christ through the restored gospel. Its a glorious church filled with noble and beautiful truth.

Then some dude comes along and says, "yea I know more about your church than you do. Look what Brigham Young said yadda yadda"

Then, regardless of how much they know, which in my own experience (not on this website) they often knew far less than the average missionary, they know nothing of it in its context, the context of light, truth, and experience.

I guess my point is if you're against the church there's no way you can know more about it on the important level, the level of the spirit. If they knew what they were speaking against, one would hope they would stop.

Edited May 29, 2009 by MikeUpton

[Guest Godless]

You know i was talking to a lot of people and lots of times people don't have a real reason so i wanted to see what other people think.

In most cases, it boils down to one or both of two factors:

1. They've been sucked in by the anti-mormon literature that is circulated online and outside Temple Square.

Personally, I never gave any of this stuff a second glance when I left the Church, so I don't know what's so convincing about it. But I do know that it can be compelling enough to cause people who have been faithful members their whole lives, and who have raised kids in the Church even, to leave.

2. They've faced ostricization from LDS friends and family members due to their decision to leave the Church.

I think this one is much more hard-hitting. The nature of LDS doctrine (eternal marriage and family cohesion, etc.) makes it very difficult for members to deal with the apostasy of loved ones. There's often a lot of pain and hurt feelings involved, which can make the apostate feel rejected and alone. For many of them, the logical solution is to try to tear down the institution that they feel is responsible for their pain.

I've said it before on this forum, and I'll say it again: Mormon culture (not the Church itself) can be a very difficult thing to break away from. There is often a strong sense of community within the LDS Church, especially in areas outside of Utah/Idaho where your numbers aren't as strong. To make the conscious decision to leave that community is not an easy thing to do, especially when that community consists of family members and people who you've practically grown up with. I'm not saying that these friendships and relationships can't survive after someone has apostasized, just that it can be difficult. There are a lot of very loving and caring people in the Church, but there are also many who are wary of apostates due to the fact that we have rejected teachings and doctrines that are very dear to them.

[Jamie123]

Fear.

Fear does have a lot to do with it - especially of the supernatural and of the unknown. Those born into the Church will find it hard to understand, but there's also the fear that LDS doctrine may be false, that "testimony" (however sincere) is self-deception, and that converts to Mormonism are actually selling themselves to the devil. When I was investigating the Church, fear made me cling to a lot of anti-Mormon arguments. I desperately wanted Mormonism to be true, but at the same time I was terrified of it. This sometimes led to angry confrontations with the missionaries.

P.S. This was 20 years ago. My attitudes have changed a lot since then (or so I hope!)

[hordak]

Love.

Seriously, we may not agree with the method but most genuinely wish to save Mormons from hell fire and eternal torment. It's like missionary work (taken to the extreme in many cases) but they believe they have a better way, the right way, and wish to share it. I imagine most people would be quick to point out the flaws of L Ron Hubbard and dianetics if their family and friends joined the church of Scientology.

[Justice]

I had a longer post with a deeper explanation, but I'll simply say the "anti" sentiments started in the pre-mortal existence. The anti movement on earth is but a continuation of the same anti-Redeemer philosophy that began in the pre-mortal existence.

Anti-Mormon is the modern-world synonym for anti-Christ.

[Jamie123]

I had a longer post with a deeper explanation, but I'll simply say the "anti" sentiments started in the pre-mortal existence. The anti movement on earth is but a continuation of the same anti-Redeemer philosophy that began in the pre-mortal existence.

Anti-Mormon is the modern-world synonym for anti-Christ.

Interesting idea. My understanding is that everyone given a mortal life must have fought on Christ's side, and that everyone who fought on the other side are now devils and demons. Are you saying that the anti-Mormons are those who changed sides since then?

[Hemidakota]

You know i was talking to a lot of people and lots of times people don't have a real reason so i wanted to see what other people think.

As it was before there pre-mortal life....they bring with them the character of what was.

[YellowLight]

If you are talking about extreme anti-mormons like the garment waiving, 10 foot tall sign weilding, satan costume wearing people at GC, I think they are literally crazy. They fall under the Westboro Baptist Church segment of crazy christians. However, I think there is a full range of people that get stamped with the anti-mormon tag which may be more damaging than the crazy people at GC. It seems that there is an increasing divide on the "us vs. them" attitude of the church lately. Little lessons like "Beware the Bitter Fruits of Apostasy" is just one example. Just my outside observations.

[Justice]

Interesting idea. My understanding is that everyone given a mortal life must have fought on Christ's side, and that everyone who fought on the other side are now devils and demons. Are you saying that the anti-Mormons are those who changed sides since then?

Lucifer and his followers were anti-Redeemer or anti-Christ in the pre-mortal existence. They thought we could become like the Father (perfected and glorified) without parts of Father's plan... namely mortality, agency, and a Redeemer (all 3 go hand-in-hand if you think about it).

They came to earth without bodies. They got what they wanted because they do not have agency, mortality, or a Redeemer. They are pushing the same agenda here on those who did take on mortality (physical body that will die), receive agency (ability to choose), were given a Redeemer, but perhaps in a different way.

I find it very interesting. :)

See Alma 12: 22-26 (all of Alma 12 for the inquiring mind).

Edited May 29, 2009 by Justice

[martybess]

I think we’re talking about two different sets of folks here. Anti’s and extreme anti’s.

Most anti’s know it’s true but cannot live it so the conjure up in their mind by using satins great tool of “justifying” that’s it’s not true. Or were all stupid, or crazies or whatever.

Extremes are a whole different animal. Satin has great hold upon their hearts.

Love is the key to convincing them not debates.

-Marty