God Makers

[Landy77]

I am new to the church, but I have spent quite a lot of time while investigating to have an understanding of truth and fiction pertaining to LDS. I watched the movie "God Makers" and noticed not a single shred of information given was true. In addition it was presented in a misleading way that has no regard for the truth. I read that this movie has been the most damaging ani-mormon publication out there. If someone spent one percent of the time and energy it took them to watch this they would figure out it is bogus.

[RipplecutBuddha]

Ah, the God Makers...I've seen it myself, and I have reached the same conclusion you have, however the matter isn't as clear cut as we would like it to be.

People believe what they want to believe. It's always been that way. If someone wants to believe that the film contains truth, they will, and nobody will be able to dissuade them from it. To you and I it is painfully obvious how wrong the film is, but to some that have never been taught the real doctrines and principles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, it can be a very powerful movie.

While it may be highly damaging, it is far from mainstream; I can't even find a copy available for viewing through inter-library loan programs. Its circulation seems to be through long-established anti-Mormon programs. As such, it won't go away, but it also won't get the exposure desired by those trying to share it still.

It's an old film, the claims and questions it raises have been answered for a long time. Those interested in the truth will want to hear our take on it before making their decision.

[cjmaldrich]

This is an interesting website to look through:

The Truth About "The God Makers," Table of Contents

I haven't seen the movie myself, and that website is far too huge for me to look at every page without seeing it... But I don't plan on seeing it voluntarily, so I probably will never read the whole website

But I've looked through it at a couple key points of interest to me. I would guess that as huge as the website is, they've pretty well debunked every single claim the film makes...

[NeuroTypical]

I watched the movie "God Makers" and noticed not a single shred of information given was true.

Not sure where this comment comes from. There's plenty that's true in the Godmakers.

* Mormons have temples.

* Mormons go to their temples.

* Mormons have two eyes and one nose.

* Mormons tend to walk around on two feet.

Just about everything else in the movie is nonsense.

LM

[gabelpa]

LM, I didn't know Mormons had two eyes! Amazing facts from the Godmakers!

On another note, I seem to remeber the video oculd only be bought buy ministers for something ridiculous like $120 per VCR tape. Yeah, this was back in the day.

[prisonchaplain]

I actually saw Godmakers II...basically a rehash of the first, but this time with an evangelical couple showing the video to their Mormon neighbors. In film 2 the LDS couple are very upset with their neighbors, because their church is showing such a horrible film. But, of course, by the end, they admit that everything in the film is true, and it wasn't so mean after all.

Perhaps film #2 is even more insulting than the first, because the LDS couple obviously isn't--LDS that is. And yet, the goal is to lend credibility to the first film by setting it in a seemingly reasonable and objective context.

When I watched Godmakers I, as a teen, how could I know better? Yes, I thought this was an actual portrayal/expose of LDS teachings. What I see now is that there are elements of truth throughout the film, but, of course, doctrine is presented in the worst possible light. The cartooning and music add insult to injury.

As for me...I'm going straight to the source. Besides LDS.net, there's a temple opening about three hours from where I live...so I'll get to it by going straight to one of the holiest places in LDS spirituality. :-)

[deseretgov]

I watched the cartoon part online. It makes a great comedy. Not only the information but the animation style.

[Dravin]

When I watched Godmakers I, as a teen, how could I know better? Yes, I thought this was an actual portrayal/expose of LDS teachings. What I see now is that there are elements of truth throughout the film, but, of course, doctrine is presented in the worst possible light. The cartooning and music add insult to injury.

In all honesty how many LDS would buy hook line and sinker such a film against say... Scientology? Baha'i? Heck, it would be pretty easy to teach your average American all sorts of falsehoods about Islam's core doctrines.

I read that this movie has been the most damaging ani-mormon publication out there. If someone spent one percent of the time and energy it took them to watch this they would figure out it is bogus.

Godmakers is not aimed at the informed, it is designed the destroy the potential understanding of the uninformed by poisoning the well. If I took someone with a blank slate and taught them that "The Atonement" meant child sacrifice do you think you might have some difficulties to get passed if you wanted to talk to them about the wonders of the Atonement? Particularly if that understanding came from something that was endorsed as truthful by someone they trusted?

My understanding is that the concepts and ideas talked/lied about in the film do have a basis (that is to say as Traveler brought up, We do have Temples), so you teach them a corrupted idea of what the temple is and every time someone who is LDS talks about the wonderful time they had in the temple their mind recalls the falsehood and good luck explaining to them what it really is.

[dazed-and-confused]

and, as it has ever been, spiritual politcs corrupts the truth so a few can attempt to control many.

i mean, really....has NO ONE learned from history?

[mrmarklin]

I am new to the church, but I have spent quite a lot of time while investigating to have an understanding of truth and fiction pertaining to LDS. I watched the movie "God Makers" and noticed not a single shred of information given was true. In addition it was presented in a misleading way that has no regard for the truth. I read that this movie has been the most damaging ani-mormon publication out there. If someone spent one percent of the time and energy it took them to watch this they would figure out it is bogus.

Never saw the movie but read the book.

Every slander about J Smith and the church was really an outright lie. I researched every one I didn't immediately know the answer to. Even more disappointing in the book was the fact that all the references and footnotes of "sources" for the lies were other discredited anti Mormon tracts, books and articles! All "straw man" stuff. No real scholarship whatsoever.

I have no quarrel with disagreements in doctrine. We can agree to disagree based on various interpretations of scripture. But I draw the line when lying becomes part of the equation.

[prisonchaplain]

In all honesty how many LDS would buy hook line and sinker such a film against say... Scientology? Baha'i? Heck, it would be pretty easy to teach your average American all sorts of falsehoods about Islam's core doctrines.

I believe there is a FOX film about radical Islam entitled "Obsession." While every line in the film may be a quote and a truth, the picture painted is very distorted. Yet, I understand that some churches have shown the film, supposedly as a prayer tool. Brilliant. Demonize a group, then let them know you're praying for their ignorant miguided souls. Not so wise.

[Guest mormonmusic]

My father took me to viewing of the Godmakers right before I left on a mission. It just felt wrong, and so unlike all the people I knew and I trusted. Then I read "The Truth about the Godmakers" and felt much better.....I agree - go to the source. I never accept third party descriptions of what other religions believe -- I always prefer to ask the people in the religion themselves.

[GADBabaganoosh]

I love how they tell us "What we beleive". The strongest anti's would always say that. "You guys beleive this, and you guys beleive that!" And I would think to myself, "Since when?" It was especially true of pamphlets. I refuse to watch the Godmakers. I could, to prove to myself its wrong and that the Church is right, but then again, I already know that, so I'll save myself 2 hours or whatever, and read scriptures instead.

[Dravin]

Brilliant. Demonize a group, then let them know you're praying for their ignorant miguided souls. Not so wise.

I've never found it particularly good for warming the cockles of my heart. I imagine other folks (non-LDS Christians included) feel the same way. Tell people they are evil/deluded/liars/other negative stuff and they tend to tune you out. :)

[rameumptom]

As for me...I'm going straight to the source. Besides LDS.net, there's a temple opening about three hours from where I live...so I'll get to it by going straight to one of the holiest places in LDS spirituality. :-)

Are you going to wear your "Ed Decker Rocks!" t-shirt to the temple open house?

[rameumptom]

Not sure where this comment comes from. There's plenty that's true in the Godmakers.

* Mormons have temples.

* Mormons go to their temples.

* Mormons have two eyes and one nose.

* Mormons tend to walk around on two feet.

Just about everything else in the movie is nonsense.

LM

Of course, most people miss the last two, because they are mentioned in the final credits. Of course, they do also note that along with two eyes and one nose, Mormons also have horns, and their two feet are cloven hooves....

[Blackmarch]

I am new to the church, but I have spent quite a lot of time while investigating to have an understanding of truth and fiction pertaining to LDS. I watched the movie "God Makers" and noticed not a single shred of information given was true. In addition it was presented in a misleading way that has no regard for the truth. I read that this movie has been the most damaging ani-mormon publication out there. If someone spent one percent of the time and energy it took them to watch this they would figure out it is bogus.

I find southpark to be more informative, respectfull, professional in about every way (which isn't saying much).

Edited April 5, 2010 by Blackmarch

[prisonchaplain]

Are you going to wear your "Ed Decker Rocks!" t-shirt to the temple open house?

I'm torn between that one my "Walter Martin for Sainthood" sweatshirt. Neither one is white though.

[Guest mormonmusic]

I'm not sure whether to wear my "Chocaholics for Weight Loss" T-shirt, or my "Ex-Mormons for Jesus" T-shirt. Neither of mine are white either, for some reason..strange, isn't it!

[prisonchaplain]

"Java's Witnesses for Joseph?" Nah...none of this is working. . . .

[rayhale]

One thing that I don’t like is Christian Scholars that write editorials/books about OTHER faiths/religions, even if they are respectful, objective, and have people of whatever faith/religion that they are writing about speak for themselves. I would still be suspicious of their motives, and I don’t think anyone outside of any faith/religion will ever understand the heart, the soul, of what the faith is about.

[Blackmarch]

"Java's Witnesses for Joseph?" Nah...none of this is working. . . .

I'm gonna vote for that shirt..... Right after the "Valdemort for President" one.

[prisonchaplain]

One thing that I don’t like is Christian Scholars that write editorials/books about OTHER faiths/religions, even if they are respectful, objective, and have people of whatever faith/religion that they are writing about speak for themselves. I would still be suspicious of their motives, and I don’t think anyone outside of any faith/religion will ever understand the heart, the soul, of what the faith is about.

I had this point of view at one time. Our professor had us read Fire from Heaven, written by a Harvard theology scholar. In the book he relays his experience surveying global pentecostalism. He includes a good deal of admiration, and some criticisms. Many of us students were uncomfortable with the work, and wrote fairly critical reviews of the book. Our professor, one I considered an unofficial mentor, gave most of us a B. Me too! Now, this was my favorite subject area, and I was one of a handful of students that usually mustered an A from this rather difficult man. So...why the Bs? We were all so clouded with defensiveness and suspicion that we failed to see some very legitimate observations. The work was fair-minded, well-written, and did offer a worthwhile perspective.

Far better to encounter an open, honest and respectful critic than someone who offers non-commited respect, and yet has a closed heart.

Edited April 5, 2010 by prisonchaplain

[Blackmarch]

I had this point of view at one time. Our professor had us read Fire from Heaven, written by a Harvard theology scholar. In the book he relays his experience surveying global pentecostalism. He includes a good deal of admiration, and some criticisms. Many of us students were uncomfortable with the work, and wrote fairly critical reviews of the book. Our professor, one I considered an unofficial mentor, gave most of us a B. Me too! Now, this was my favorite subject area, and I was one of a handful of students that usually mustered an A from this rather difficult man. So...why the Bs? We were all so clouded with defensiveness and suspicion that we failed to see some very legitimate observations. The work was fair-minded, well-written, and did offer a worthwhile perspective.

Far better to encounter an open, honest and respectful critic than someone who offers non-commited respect, and yet has a closed heart.

I've enjoyed conversations/presentations where an individual can present why something is right or wrong or should be one way or another from a sensible standpoint and using good supportive evidences and statements... and if in discussion is able to use the other parties views correctly. I've just found that to be rarer and rarer in general.

I do not find mocking, parody, sarcasm, baiting, flaming, ignorance, aversion to be good ways to criticise something. Parody is fun for entertainment but as a serious debate item it does not work.

Edited April 6, 2010 by Blackmarch

[rameumptom]

There's no way any person can be totally objective. however, a person can recognize their personal biases and attempt to remedy it. For years, most LDS-written histories on Joseph Smith had him walking 3 inches above the water. He did no wrong.

Of course, they neglected to write on the difficult issues or blamed another party for the problems. Joseph wasn't blamed for giving the manuscript to Martin Harris, Martin was entirely to blame, etc.

Thankfully, we now have LDS scholars writing histories that are faithful but also truthful at the same time.

Some Non-LDS scholars have also written decent histories, as well. Scholars like Jan Shipps, Sarah Barringer Gordon, and others have done some excellent work over the years.