Question for non LDS Christians.

[Lstinthwrld]

Why do you think LDS people in general are so quick to get defensive when questions on their faith/doctrine are presented.

(be nice with your replies please)

[Dr T]

My person view is that it's like somebody talking bad about one of your loved ones. It is a lifestyle issue, a devotion, and a philosophy. As humans, we also don't like to be told that we messed up, are wrong, and ought to have done something differently. Other times, it could just be that somebody is approaching the topic in a rude way, maybe one of the people invovled had a bad day that day, maybe it confirms their own questions about your church, etc. What I'm trying to say is there are multiple reasons.

[AnthonyB]

If you suffer enough ridicule, scorn and denegration than you naturally go on the defensive. There are many things about LDS doctrine and practice that are suprisingly enchanting once you understand them but on the surface level there are a number of things that other peope just don't get or can easily be misunderstood or misrepresented. Things like baptizing for the dead, garments etc are easy targets but for LDS are meaningful and beautiful actions and the scorn I would guess digs deep when done about things that are precious to you.

[ADoyle90815]

Another easy target for ridicule and negativity is temple weddings, since parents and family members of converts aren't able to see the ceremony. In other Christian churches, anyone who is invited to a wedding can see the ceremony, even if they're not members of that denomination. Once people learn that the LDS church views temples as being too sacred for non-members and those not prepared for the temple, they're less likely to be offended by having to miss a wedding ceremony.

[ADoyle90815]

If you suffer enough ridicule, scorn and denegration than you naturally go on the defensive. There are many things about LDS doctrine and practice that are suprisingly enchanting once you understand them but on the surface level there are a number of things that other peope just don't get or can easily be misunderstood or misrepresented. Things like baptizing for the dead, garments etc are easy targets but for LDS are meaningful and beautiful actions and the scorn I would guess digs deep when done about things that are precious to you.

That's what I think as well, and one other practice that is misunderstood is the idea that non-LDS family members aren't allowed inside the temple for weddings. On the surface, it might seem as offensive to non-members, but since the wedding is such an important thing for LDS, they act defensive.

[prisonchaplain]

Timing and relationship may be issues to. When I came here, I took my time to look around, considered myself a guest, asked a few questions, and listened real hard. Quite frankly, I took a lot of my early cues from my training in cross-cultural communications (plus 6 years on the mission field). The only times I've seen defensiveness, or hostile tone, is when a new poster jumps into a string and makes presumptions (largely based upon my avatar, I'd guess).

Another trigger is sincerity, or the perceived lack there of. It's amazing to me how many of my evangelical bretheren (and the occasional sister) come here pretending to be interesed in the LDS faith, hinting that they might even convert, only to resort to "questions," that are all too stock. In that respect, clearly posting one's non-LDS faith actually helps. My pic. with collar clearly identifies who I am, so there is no perception of trickery. Also, when non-LDS view my posts, there's never an accusation that I've falsely pretended to present an LDS perspective.

So...taking the time to build relationship, and being very open, sincere and straight forward will do away with 95% of the defensiveness. That's my perscription, anway. :-)

[AnthonyB]

PC,

As the non-LDS moderator is there any reason why the "faith tradition"/religion was taken off the user info on every post. (When I first posted here posts included that information) It is tiresome to continually have to clearly differentiate myself (although my desire to be known simply as a Christian probably might confuse some). It is especially confusing in topics where due to my holding some beliefs from my faith tradition in common with LDS that differ from most of my fellow "evanglelical like Christians" (eg baptism remits sins) people might mistake me for LDS.

Edited August 23, 2009 by AnthonyB

[prisonchaplain]

Don't know Anthony...but there were many changes when LDSTalk became LDS.net. My guess is they just wanted a cleaner look. You could PM Heather, the site administrator, with that question. Barring any changes though, you could always put something in your signature that identifies your faith...."Saved through the waters of baptism Evangelical"--)

[NeuroTypical]

Why do you think LDS people in general are so quick to get defensive when questions on their faith/doctrine are presented.

There is a lot of disinformation out there about what LDS beliefs are in the first place. It is possible to have innocent questions wrapped up in such disinformation. Questions like "you do know Joseph Smith was a fraud, right?", or "So, why are you polytheists like the Egyptians", or "Why do you shun family members who leave your church" may spring from innocent ignorance, or they may be hurled jabs from people who want to start a fight and make us look like the aggressors.

Anyway, dealing with such questions isn't easy for anyone, therefore, a lot of LDS folks aren't good at it either.

LM

[Moksha]

Another area of concern to some Mormons, is when other Churches hold classes or seminars expressly designed to attack LDS beliefs.

[jadams_4040]

Why do you think LDS people in general are so quick to get defensive when questions on their faith/doctrine are presented.

(be nice with your replies please)

I,m lds but want to give my answer; and that would be that i get defensive. {in a good way} because the acusations being made are always completely false and spoken in ignorance. axctual questions are always welcome without getting defensive at all; but ignorant accusations are differant.:)

[AnthonyB]

Don't know Anthony...but there were many changes when LDSTalk became LDS.net. My guess is they just wanted a cleaner look. You could PM Heather, the site administrator, with that question. Barring any changes though, you could always put something in your signature that identifies your faith...."Saved through the waters of baptism Evangelical"--)

PC,

There has been a number of cases where people have been confused and a number of cases where people have put the wrong tag on their profile and confused people.

I could resort to my favourite Alexander Campbell quotes but I don't know that would be a big enough hint for most people to get. If I used the most common overall term "Restoration Movement" that would probably still leave some LDS thinking I might be LDS.

BTW It wouldn't be "saved through the waters of baptism Evangelical" but "saved by grace through faith, normally at the time of baptism, evanglelical Christian". I wouldn't want it to appear that the baptised are all saved and the unbaptised are all damned, but that baptism is a normal and expected part of God's plan of saving people.

Why not swap "country" with "faith"? I'll PM Heather but does she really have control over the new boards layout? On second thoughts maybe I'll run a poll and see what people think before I get the mods to change anything.

Edited August 24, 2009 by AnthonyB

[Carl62]

As an LDS, it's not usually so much the question that's being asked as it is the attitude or tone behind the question. I honestly don't mind if somebody asks a sincere question or two about my faith and I'm more than glad to answer them, but when asked in a way that sounds disrespectful, negative or condescending, like "is it true you wear some kind of magic underwear?" or "if Brigham Young was a true prophet, then why did he say (insert negative comment)?" then I do get in a 'roll my eyes' kind of mindset which may end up coming out in a curt or slightly sarcastic response. I honestly believe that this is true not just with Mormons, but people of any religious faith. It usually takes about the first two questions to figure out where the person's coming from and whether or not you need to let your guard. Once you figure out which page the both of you are on, then you can decide where you want to take it from there.

[Lstinthwrld]

Isn't one of the precepts of the christian faith in general to be humble and sincere in your dealings with the world. Wouldn't someone asking in ignorance and challenge be seen as a chance to talk to and enlighten that lost soul. If the belief is an honest belief then any defensive posture or even a guard to lower is in my opinion inappropriate. Yes mormons are demonized quite frequently but this does not mean you all need to put up a guard or act defensively. It just means that you have to show more patience and understanding in the face of ignorance and persecution. Being under a microscope as the mormon religion is means you have to be a good example of your beliefs as much as possible.

[RiversideGuy]

Why do you think LDS people in general are so quick to get defensive when questions on their faith/doctrine are presented.

(be nice with your replies please)

I have never gotten defensive with regard to my own faith. The only real reason I can imagine is that one may feel insecure in what one believes.

[Lilac]

I think some questions are not sincere questions and are trying to "trap" the person. People can sense that a mile away.

[RiversideGuy]

I think some questions are not sincere questions and are trying to "trap" the person. People can sense that a mile away.

Maybe, but isn't it just easier to say --- "I don't know, let me look into that --- and I will get back to you."

It could also be that the one posing the question wants to know if that person really knows what he says he believes and why.

[thews]

Why do you think LDS people in general are so quick to get defensive when questions on their faith/doctrine are presented.

(be nice with your replies please)

Seems like most of the answers in this thread are from LDS, but I am a non-LDS Christian that was born and raised a Mormon with heritage that goes back to polygamy. There are a lot of aspects regarding the Mormon church's history that are hard to rationalize for Mormons and it kicks in a defense mechanism. Two cents:

Polygamy/Polyandary - Just because this subject is not practiced by mainstream LDS, it was by the founding members (including their prophet of God in Joseph Smith) and is still part of the LDS doctrine, and it is how it's going to be in the LDS version of heaven. When confronted with the histoprical data (like the letter Joseph Smith wrote to Sara Ann Whitney), it shifts the focus of what is today, to what was then. The differences of the LDS religion today and back then are vast, and I think LDS members need to defend the fact that it's not practiced today, which is where the defensive attitude comes into play.

Racism - Until 1978 black people could not hold the Mormon priesthood based on the color of their skin, and the doctrine defines "Dark and loathsome" as "cursed" skin. When attitudes regarding race changed in America, so did the doctrine. The words "White and delightsome" were changed to "Pure and delightsome" in the doctrine. Again this is part of the LDS history, and I think LDS members need to defend the fact that it's no longer a part of the doctrine.

The Book of Abraham - Many aspects of the BOA are hard for Mormons to defend IMO, and there's a lot of angst when facts are referenced. There has been no critical examination of the papyrus and Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar (written by Joseph Smith), though the LDS church has had these documents since 1967 (they were not burned in a fire). Since there is no critical examination to reference, it creates a lot of confusion IMO.

There are many more sensitive topics, and when people (non-LDS) want to point them out in the form of questions, an attack mode is what's given back, because it encompasses defense of their religion based on the question asked. If they feel attacked by outsiders asking questions, they will attack back in return. Having been in many debates with LDS people, people critical of the church are deemed "Anti" though the information is simply factually based history in most cases. I question what I believe and why often, but it's not easy. /2cents

"A Foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds." Ralph Waldo Emerson

Note that I expect to be attacked for stating this opinion.

[Just_A_Guy]

Note that I expect to be attacked for stating this opinion.

Indeed. Two Danites carrying violin cases will be appearing on your doorstep posthaste.

[FunkyTown]

I would say that you are most likely incorrect in all of your assumptions. You can consider that an attack if you wish, but it's nothing more than a complete disagreement.

Ta dah!

As for the original question: I would suggest they don't get defensive so much as sick and tired of answering the exact same 'Questions' over and over and over again. Especially when it's not asked in the spirit of learning, but of offending. You can usually tell very quickly.

Some are hilarious, though, like the guy who claimed they were asking questions about whether they would go to hell for self-pleasure and that they were a fourteen year old Mormon boy, then put a picture of a Catholic altarboy up as their own pic. I outed him in... What? 10 seconds? Highfive!

Seems like most of the answers in this thread are from LDS, but I am a non-LDS Christian that was born and raised a Mormon with heritage that goes back to polygamy. There are a lot of aspects regarding the Mormon church's history that are hard to rationalize for Mormons and it kicks in a defense mechanism. Two cents:

Polygamy/Polyandary - Just because this subject is not practiced by mainstream LDS, it was by the founding members (including their prophet of God in Joseph Smith) and is still part of the LDS doctrine, and it is how it's going to be in the LDS version of heaven. When confronted with the histoprical data (like the letter Joseph Smith wrote to Sara Ann Whitney), it shifts the focus of what is today, to what was then. The differences of the LDS religion today and back then are vast, and I think LDS members need to defend the fact that it's not practiced today, which is where the defensive attitude comes into play.

Racism - Until 1978 black people could not hold the Mormon priesthood based on the color of their skin, and the doctrine defines "Dark and loathsome" as "cursed" skin. When attitudes regarding race changed in America, so did the doctrine. The words "White and delightsome" were changed to "Pure and delightsome" in the doctrine. Again this is part of the LDS history, and I think LDS members need to defend the fact that it's no longer a part of the doctrine.

The Book of Abraham - Many aspects of the BOA are hard for Mormons to defend IMO, and there's a lot of angst when facts are referenced. There has been no critical examination of the papyrus and Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar (written by Joseph Smith), though the LDS church has had these documents since 1967 (they were not burned in a fire). Since there is no critical examination to reference, it creates a lot of confusion IMO.

There are many more sensitive topics, and when people (non-LDS) want to point them out in the form of questions, an attack mode is what's given back, because it encompasses defense of their religion based on the question asked. If they feel attacked by outsiders asking questions, they will attack back in return. Having been in many debates with LDS people, people critical of the church are deemed "Anti" though the information is simply factually based history in most cases. I question what I believe and why often, but it's not easy. /2cents

"A Foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds." Ralph Waldo Emerson

Note that I expect to be attacked for stating this opinion.

[thews]

I would say that you are most likely incorrect in all of your assumptions. You can consider that an attack if you wish, but it's nothing more than a complete disagreement.

I'd love to her what you disagree with regarding the facts in my post.

Ta dah!

As for the original question: I would suggest they don't get defensive so much as sick and tired of answering the exact same 'Questions' over and over and over again. Especially when it's not asked in the spirit of learning, but of offending. You can usually tell very quickly.

I find this response interesting. When you say you answer the same questions over again, you can tell when you are not responding for the reason of learning. I disagree, as I would sincerely like to learn from you. Can you tell me exactly what I said you that you disagree with?

(I removed the joke you inserted, because I found it offensive)

[Thethuthinnang]

People are naturally going to get defensive when they're almost constantly having hurtful, insulting, hostile comments thrown their way about their lifestyle. (Not that all Mormon critics are necessarily rude and hostile. But many are.)

[thews]

People are naturally going to get defensive when they're almost constantly having hurtful, insulting, hostile comments thrown their way about their lifestyle. (Not that all Mormon critics are necessarily rude and hostile. But many are.)

Are simple questions about the LDS faith based on factual data "hurtful" in your opinion?

[Lstinthwrld]

I would say that you are most likely incorrect in all of your assumptions. You can consider that an attack if you wish, but it's nothing more than a complete disagreement.

Ta dah!

As for the original question: I would suggest they don't get defensive so much as sick and tired of answering the exact same 'Questions' over and over and over again. Especially when it's not asked in the spirit of learning, but of offending. You can usually tell very quickly.

Some are hilarious, though, like the guy who claimed they were asking questions about whether they would go to hell for self-pleasure and that they were a fourteen year old Mormon boy, then put a picture of a Catholic altarboy up as their own pic. I outed him in... What? 10 seconds? Highfive!

Part of your job as a witness of the 'true' church is to answer these questions over and over again with patience and understanding not with a hostile defensive stance. isnt loving your neighbor (even your nonchristian neighbor who does not agree with your beliefs)as you would love yourself the single basic tenet of christianity?

[Thethuthinnang]

Are simple questions about the LDS faith based on factual data "hurtful" in your opinion?

Nah. Presented in a kind and civil manner, questions are fine. It's not at all cool to show a bad attitude over simple questions, and I'm appalled when I see people acting like that. People are sometimes simply curious. And sometimes they do have a problem with it, they don't believe it, but they have every right to their opinion, and are often very polite about expressing it.

I'm thinking more of the rude, ignorant questions, the "UR A MORMON LOL HOW MANY WIVES DO U HAVE THAT'S SO WRONG LOL" stuff.