How to do you handle anti statements or actions?

[prisonchaplain]

Traveler, I mostly agree with you. Paul was one major exception, though. Perhaps the reason that evangelicals and LDS make the attempt to convert each other is that quite often even one convert will do the work of many who are born into the faith. They are so thankful for the Truth that they become zealous to promote it, and tireless in their work for it.

[Justice]

As sidenote about Paul. Many see his conversion as a great change in Paul. Actually, all that happened to Paul was he changed sides. He was active in his beliefs, just as much so before his change to Christianity. Before his conversion to Christ he thought he was on the side of truth. When he learned he wasn't, he continued his journey, only really knowing the truth this time.

[Elphaba]

I also would like to add that it all comes down to the eternal perspective. These people who come against the doctrines of the LDS Faith, do so at their own peril and demise. They do not realize exactly what it is that they are actually condemning and saying is false. It is only when they stand to give an account of how they lived their life in mortality that they will realize that they were denouncing their Heavenly Father's Plan of Salvation and are responsible for the spiritual ruination of souls that they have turned away from the True Gospel of Jesus Christ. In the End, as the cliche goes, they will get their commupence.

This is a bit much.

"Anti-Mormons" are usually people who truly believe the Church not only is not true, but is an evil cult. They were raised to believe this, and they feel it is as much their calling to proselytize to you as you believe it is yours to witness to them.

I'm not saying they're not obnoxious, rude, rigid and __________ (fill in the blank). Those who want to confront you and your beliefs are. Nor am I saying the Church's missionaries stoop to the same means. They don't.

But if they truly believe what they say to you, why would there be a "commupence"? In fact, it is my understanding that once they have passed on they will be given the opportunity to learn and accept the gospel. I can't imagine that opportunity would include a smug "I told you so."

Elphaba

[Traveler]

Traveler, I mostly agree with you. Paul was one major exception, though. Perhaps the reason that evangelicals and LDS make the attempt to convert each other is that quite often even one convert will do the work of many who are born into the faith. They are so thankful for the Truth that they become zealous to promote it, and tireless in their work for it.

Thank you PrisonChaplain: Your example is excellent. Paul was not the only example, there were a few that Jesus touched but for the most part that was not his mission.

I have used the same words that Jesus used to answer some anti’s and have great success in ticking people off. I have been banned from several “Christian” forums. What I have learned is that there is little wisdom in seeking out those that are contentious about pearls sacred to me. The main lesson I have learned is that when anti’s come to our places of worship (such as temple square in SLC during conference) rather than confront them just sit quietly in the background and video. Not necessarily for the internet but should there be a lawsuit or coverage by a new organization that there is an accurate record of what really happened.

The Traveler

[Mason]

There is a fundamental perspective/paradigm problem between the average Anti-Mormon and the typical Mormon Apologist.

On the one hand we have the Apologist who feels that every Anti question out there has been answered to suit any "reasonable" person's satisfaction. What more could joe blow ask for than that? Whereas on the other hand, the Anti feels that the answers are generally trite and a require a looong stretch of the imagination before they could be considered reasonable.

Hence the same old questions being asked by the Anti, and the Apologists continuing to be frustrated having to repeat the same answers.

Who's right, who's wrong? Depends on which side you stand.

Ultimately new questions will not be asked until satisfactory answers are given.

It's a stalemate.

[prisonchaplain]

This discussion depends on who the "Anti" is. Those guys at conferences are not intellectuals, looking for technical archeaological evidence for the BoM. On the other hand, the firebrand evangelical apologist in a university setting, who is passionate, and yet who listens, evaluates sources, and keeps the engagements focussed on doctrine, scripture, evidence, and seeking truth...Paul could be on either side of that.

[Danite]

Ya know what Alma 30 is the one scripture that deals with with almost all anti attacks. Because most anti mormom groups are not looking for the truth but to breed fear and doubt, So not engaging them is a good idea most of the time. Remeber what is right is always more important who is right.

[Traveler]

This discussion depends on who the "Anti" is. Those guys at conferences are not intellectuals, looking for technical archeaological evidence for the BoM. On the other hand, the firebrand evangelical apologist in a university setting, who is passionate, and yet who listens, evaluates sources, and keeps the engagements focussed on doctrine, scripture, evidence, and seeking truth...Paul could be on either side of that.

PC: I try to keep everything in perspective. It does appear to me that the Pharisees and Scribes that opposed Jesus were an excellent example of “apologist in a university (type of) setting, who is passionate, and yet who listens, evaluates sources, and keeps the engagements focused on doctrine, scripture, evidence, and seeking truth…” (See John 7:47-49 then note the answer of Nicodemus in verse 51 – in regards to doctrine and deeds)

Jesus said if we keep a teaching we will know if it is of G-d – It is interesting to me that Jesus did not suggest that we study the scriptures for answers in the same manner as did the Pharisees and Scribes. I have never met any anti (of LDS, Catholics, Baptist or the antis that opposed Jesus when he taught) that did not use the scriptures as their excuse.

The Traveler

[LDSVALLEY]

Depends on the situation. In person I tend to politily correct if appropriate or laugh it off. Via internet I often engage them in discussion. I am always careful to let them know I am not expecting to change their opinion. Nor will they change mine. It makes me sad when I see LDS argue with anti posts and get angry or upset because they can't change the persons opinion. I have read many where the LDS ends up being harsher then the anti ever was. I always remain polite and also let them know they can say what they want to me and it will not bother me. If they get personal I can always stop responding.

I've had some of the best discussions about religion from anti's speaking up and gotten a fair amount of Gospel knowledge out to others from it. Most people simply spread stuff without any personal axes against the church to grind. They are the easy ones to talk to.

[prisonchaplain]

Traveler, Nicodemus may have converted. We just don't know from the discourse in John 3. We are told that Jesus confounded the Pharisees, though. He frequently engaged them. And again, Paul was an anti of antis, yet he came around. Since we do not know the deepest recesses of a soul, perhaps we should consider passionate opposition to mean, at least in some cases, the person really is hungry for spiritual truth, deep down.

[Traveler]

Traveler, Nicodemus may have converted. We just don't know from the discourse in John 3. We are told that Jesus confounded the Pharisees, though. He frequently engaged them. And again, Paul was an anti of antis, yet he came around. Since we do not know the deepest recesses of a soul, perhaps we should consider passionate opposition to mean, at least in some cases, the person really is hungry for spiritual truth, deep down.

I am not sure that Jesus sought out the Pharisees (as his lost sheep). It appears to me that he went about "calling" to his sheep and that his sheep "knew" him and responded. I think Jesus engaged the Pharisees when they sought him in an effort to discredit him.

I do not recall that Jesus ever told his followers to "demonstrate" or attempt to distrupt the Pharisees (or anyone else) when they worshiped. It is my understanding that Jesus sent his desciples to those that would listen. Even after the anti Paul was converted Jesus sent Paul rather than sending someone to Paul.

The Traveler

Edited September 2, 2009 by Traveler

[Hemidakota]

Elder Bruce R. McConkie stated concerning the 'Lost Sheep' -

Parable of the Lost Sheep

This parable was given twice. Indeed, it may be that all of the parables were given numerous times to different groups of hearers and with differing purposes and applications.

As recorded by Matthew, the Parable of the Lost Sheep was given in Capernaum of Galilee in response to claims of pre-eminence by those who wanted to be first in the kingdom of God. In it Jesus is the Shepherd who has come to save the "little ones" who otherwise would be lost. The emphasis is on keeping the sheep from getting lost, on showing how precious the sheep are, and on how reluctant the Shepherd is to lose even one.

Luke's account tells what happened more than a year later in Perea. There the parable was given in response to the murmurings of the Pharisees and scribes that Jesus ate with sinners. This time the Master Teacher places the emphasis on finding that which is lost; he shows the length the Shepherd will go to find the sheep and the rejoicing that takes place when the lost is found. This time, in applying the parable, the complaining religious leaders, who considered themselves as just men needing no repentance, become the shepherds who should have been doing what the Chief Shepherd was doing—seeking to find and save that which was lost.

In further interpretation of Luke's account, the Prophet said: "The hundred sheep represent one hundred Sadducees and Pharisees, as though Jesus had said, 'If you Sadducees and Pharisees, are in the sheepfold, I have no mission for you; I am sent to look up sheep that are lost; and when I have found them, I will back them up and make joy in heaven.' This represents hunting after a few individuals, or one poor publican, which the Pharisees and Sadducees despised." (Teachings, p. 277.)