Anti-Mormon Literature/web

[annewandering]

What is the purpose of reading lies? Why would I deliberately read lies about the church? I suppose it helps the have a general idea of the things that are told about the church in order to refute. Lately, I was happy to post my views on Lawrence O'Donnell's lies about Joseph Smith.

It a site is out and out trying to destroy the church it is antiMormon and it is pointless to go there. If a person drops a comment or two about the church that is untrue, it seems like its appropriate to correct them, if not for their sake, then for the sake of their readers.

Going to pure anti Mormon sites is pretty much inviting the spirit of satan into your life, not something to do lightly.

[Bensalem]

Without a debate, I am just curious as to what constitututes anti-mormon literature or research to you personally. Since we are counseled to avoid anti-mormon literature, how do you categorize it?

If it is something that isn't writeen by a member that means Dickens or Tom Clancy are off limits...so membership or not doesn't seem the right criteria.

The same would hold true of publisher......we can't exclude something just because it isn't published by Deseret Books.

Is it anything that says something negative about the church or church leaders?

Or for you is it that you paraphrase Justice Potter Stewart, "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description (Anti-Mormon Literature); and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it..."

Curious.

-RM

For me, anything that attempts to raise doubt about LDS doctrine or belittles my faith in it is anti-Mormon. However, I do not take the advice of counsel to avoid it because I know that my testimony cannot be shaken.

I learn from anti-Mormon literature what the enemy is up to. I can then prepare for the defense of my faith. I am rarely taken by surprise because most of the negative stuff is simply parroted from a few sources. It's not like they are thinking for themselves.

Some are genuinely looking for answers, but most are just doing the devil's work.

[Blackmarch]

I have something of a different take on anti-mormon literature. I spent the last 8 months investigating the church before converting last November. During this period, I deliberately sought out and read a lot of anti-mormon literature, and, on balance, it helped me make the decision to convert. At times, I was hoping the anti-mormon stuff would be convincing, but oh well.

I was shocked, one month into my membership, to hear in Relief Society a young twenty something woman say with real fear in her voice that her brother was reading anti-mormon literature and voice fear that his faith might be weakened. I chose not to say anything, but my reaction is, how can anyone say their faith is strong without reading the counter arguments?

To address the OP's question, there are different types of anti-mormon literature, including

a. Well meaning: such as warning folks the church doesn't define scripture as just the 2 books of the bible or the church is non-trinidarian (I think that's a word - but it's certainly mispelled). Yep - that's right.

b. to recruit folks away from the Mormon church - well, again, ok, as long as language isn't deceptive

c. to recruit folks away from the church using horrible lies or well designed deception - actually, this is the only stuff I truly consider anti-mormon, and this can be truly vicious. There is one site called something like what mormons truly believe, and it lists approximately 25 things that mormon believes, starting with accurate truths, becoming slightly incorrect, and morphing into hugh mischaracterizations.

d. sites dealing with historical accuracy = such as long diatribes on why horses should not be in the BOM. I'm glad I am aware of that point of view = but does it change my belief? No.

anti literature is very good at causing individuals to anger, and when that happens the spirit is lost. When the spirit is lost our sight can easily become short and our vision and reasoning clouded. so yes there is a very real danger with it, spiritually speaking.

But is having critics of the gospel a good thing? Ultimately i say yes for it keeps us on our toes, as well as provide motivation to seek out greater understanding of the gospel. As well as a humbling factor.

[Guest Ivo_G]

I have something of a different take on anti-mormon literature. I spent the last 8 months investigating the church before converting last November. During this period, I deliberately sought out and read a lot of anti-mormon literature, and, on balance, it helped me make the decision to convert. At times, I was hoping the anti-mormon stuff would be convincing, but oh well.

Same thing here I was an investigator for about a year and during this period I went through all the major anti-mormon websites and literature out there - initially I was just curious about this strange thing called "LDS church" and the most interesting (in a shocking way that is) info about the church is found on those "anti" websites Of course when I started comparing all the sensational stuff I read there with the actual facts - I realised the church wasn't as demonic as those websites were describing it to be

Then I met with missionaries, read the BoM etc. but my initial interest in the church was sparked by the "antis"...

What's interesting though is that now that I got baptised my attitude toward the anti-mormon literature/websites is changed and I try to avoid them because (as Blackmarch said) now it just makes me angry and I can literally feel how I'm loosing the Spirit because of that anger...

p.s. btw I was also baptised last November :)

Edited April 7, 2012 by Ivo_G

[embleau]

I agree that understanding the anti-stuff is not for the people with a weak testimony but I feel it's invaluable for someone who is a ward missionary or someone who is has a strong testimony that loves to share it with non-members.

If you read my testimony earlier in the thread you know that my ex-wife was a pitbull toward missionaries. Missionaries had no clue as to why she believed the way she did, so they had no way to relate the lessons or adapt them to her. Knowing the source to WHY an evangelical is sitting there telling you that you belong to a cult is more effective than just shrugging it off then continuing to try to go through the lessons with them. Same with a friend or a co-worker who asks you the same thing.

Small Example Would be explaining to an evangelical the priesthood and understanding why they reject that. Would you know where to target your discussion and study then? You'd exactly know the answer if you knew that they're anti "knowledge" was. Being prepared for the hard question. Because like my ex-wife. The second you are asked a question that you don't have a good answer or something new to them, it is dismissed and you are labeled brainwashed. Sad truth. Being Prepared is the best way to help.

Edited April 7, 2012 by embleau

[SightByFaith]

I agree that understanding the anti-stuff is not for the people with a weak testimony but I feel it's invaluable for someone who is a ward missionary or someone who is has a strong testimony that loves to share it with non-members.

If you read my testimony earlier in the thread you know that my ex-wife was a pitbull toward missionaries. Missionaries had no clue as to why she believed the way she did, so they had no way to relate the lessons or adapt them to her. Knowing the source to WHY an evangelical is sitting there telling you that you belong to a cult is more effective than just shrugging it off then continuing to try to go through the lessons with them. Same with a friend or a co-worker who asks you the same thing.

Small Example Would be explaining to an evangelical the priesthood and understanding why they reject that. Would you know where to target your discussion and study then? You'd exactly know the answer if you knew that they're anti "knowledge" was. Being prepared for the hard question. Because like my ex-wife. The second you are asked a question that you don't have a good answer or something new to them, it is dismissed and you are labeled brainwashed. Sad truth. Being Prepared is the best way to help.

I'm not sure who may have suggested that missionaries just shrug off when investigators say things like "You're a cult." A simple, "What makes you say that?" might elicit some of the reasons. Then you can ask, "Where did you hear that? That's not what we believe." Peharps that will lead into a more meaningful (to them) discussion of our real doctrines. Just asking questions will usually uncover the "anti" material, so I continue to believe the the best preparation—and that spoken of by the Lord which will make us to "not fear"—is a knowledge of truth. But I agree that if people do just shrug off such statements in order to "keep teaching," that may not be the best approach. Each situation will differ, and being open to guidance of the Spirit in the moment will always be a good course.

[Vort]

I agree that understanding the anti-stuff is not for the people with a weak testimony but I feel it's invaluable for someone who is a ward missionary or someone who is has a strong testimony that loves to share it with non-members.

If you read my testimony earlier in the thread you know that my ex-wife was a pitbull toward missionaries. Missionaries had no clue as to why she believed the way she did, so they had no way to relate the lessons or adapt them to her. Knowing the source to WHY an evangelical is sitting there telling you that you belong to a cult is more effective than just shrugging it off then continuing to try to go through the lessons with them. Same with a friend or a co-worker who asks you the same thing.

Small Example Would be explaining to an evangelical the priesthood and understanding why they reject that. Would you know where to target your discussion and study then? You'd exactly know the answer if you knew that they're anti "knowledge" was. Being prepared for the hard question. Because like my ex-wife. The second you are asked a question that you don't have a good answer or something new to them, it is dismissed and you are labeled brainwashed. Sad truth. Being Prepared is the best way to help.

I have a different point of view. Profitable conversation is based on mutual respect -- indeed, it is possible only when there exists such mutual respect. When someone says "Your church is a cult!", that is an absolutely sure sign that no mutual respect exists. Therefore, conversation with that person is useless. Explaining why he's wrong is irrelevant. He won't listen, because he has no respect for you.

[kduncan99]

I have a different point of view. Profitable conversation is based on mutual respect -- indeed, it is possible only when there exists such mutual respect. When someone says "Your church is a cult!", that is an absolutely sure sign that no mutual respect exists. Therefore, conversation with that person is useless. Explaining why he's wrong is irrelevant. He won't listen, because he has no respect for you.

This is the correct response. I have a missionary in the field and serve at the MTC. They are taught to teach from the scriptures and from the Preach My Gospel manual, and give their testimonies. Every time the missionary tries to wing it or discuss other things or be put in a confrontational situation they fail; the spirit is not there. I have seen humble missionaries come from all over the world teach, in a language they hardly know, MTC "investigators" who know the gospel forwards and backwards and can play a pretty good non-member week after week be brought to tears from a simple testimony of the missionary.

If a person insists on confronting a missionary with anti mormon questions the missionary will see if they can come back with a ward mission leader or some other person in the investigators area for further discussion.

[JudoMinja]

When someone says "Your church is a cult!", that is an absolutely sure sign that no mutual respect exists. Therefore, conversation with that person is useless. Explaining why he's wrong is irrelevant. He won't listen, because he has no respect for you.

Unfortunately it isn't always that simple. There are many who believe our church is a cult, not out of disrespect but out of simple misinformation. Dismissing anyone and everyone who says anything that came from an originally anti and/or incorrect source as also being anti or not worth further conversation will leave us with few people to talk to about our faith- especially in this time that we are being encouraged to reach out through the internet and social media to share what we believe so that the more accurate information is more readily available.

My first experience with something truly anti happened on youtube. I was digging up videos from and about the church to add to my favorites, as I have some friends I no longer live near who like to look at my youtube channel, and I thought it might pique their interest to watch them and learn more about what I believe. I came across one called "Are Mormons Christian?" that seemed to be from a credible lds friendly source due to the name for the channel, but that name was deceptive. The entire channel was anti-Mormon. I was going to just pass on by and shrug it off, but I felt prompted to leave a comment on the video.

The conversation that followed between myself and the channel author was what you would expect from a conversation with an anti, but it brought up things I'd never thought about or researched- things where I didn't immediately know the answers and had to go digging. I knew nothing I said would make any difference to the person with whom I was holding the conversation- he was clearly arguing with a spirit of contention and had no interest in learning the truth- but I kept feeling prompted to continue when I would have preferred to just "walk away". Eventually, the conversation reached about where the prompting to continue ceased, and I left a "We'll have to agree to disagree" comment and that was that.

I don't know if there was someone reading our conversation who benefitted from what I had to say- maybe that was the reason I kept feeling prompted to continue- but I know that it has filled me with a desire to keep digging and searching and studying with a far greater intensity and dedication than I ever have before. As I've continued studying and continued seeking ways to share online, I've come across many others who ask questions that I can tell have come from anti sources, but these people are just genuinely curious and misinformed.

I know that knowledge and debate isn't going to convert anyone. The gospel is about faith and following the promptings of the Spirit, not about reason or proof. But it is also important to understand how to speak to and relate to people who do rely on reason and proof if you plan on carrying on any kind of conversation with them. I may not be able to answer all their questions or relate many spiritual experiences that would build up a growing testimony as they wouldn't respect the sanctity of such experiences, but if nothing else my careful delving into these topics has strengthened me as an individual.

More than ever, I've been feeling prompted to prepare myself with the "whole armor of God". I have my shield of faith to quench the fiery darts, am striving to maintain my breastplate of righteousness and rely on my helmet of salvation to the best of my abilities, and am girding my loins with truth, my feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace, and sharpening my sword of the Spirit by fervently studying the word of God. If I were reading anti material just for the sake of reading it out of curiosity, without the continuous work on strengthening this "armor", I'm sure it would tear me down- but as I feel the urge to seek out opportunities to share, I'm finding more and more that the adversary has prepared the way with landmines- and I'm learning how to defuse them.

There are those who have set the landmines and those who have fallen victim to them. I know I have no hope of helping those who set them, but perhaps my efforts could save some of the victims and/or prevent some from stepping on them at all. Not everyone is given such precarious work, but I sincerely feel that this is what the Lord wants me to do. And I think He wants me to do it specifically because there are so many people out there who have "learned" about the church through anti sources but are not really hostile themselves. They are just looking for the truth- and hopefully I can prepare a way for them out of those landmines so they can find it.

[Dravin]

There are many who believe our church is a cult, not out of disrespect but out of simple misinformation.

Baring word games there is no way to accuse someone's church of being a cult in a respectful manner. If someone is misinformed but otherwise seeking to engage in respectful dialog they don't accuse someone's religion of being a cult.

An example aside from "Your church is a cult!"

Non-trinitarian to Trinitarian: Hey, you believe in a schizophrenic God!

That's not seeking to engage in respectful discourse. Now in some cases the phrasing of the question/opening comment may be a bit inartful (from the LDS perspective), for example, "I heard Joseph Smith had like 100 wives and that he's now chilling on his own planet. What is up with that?" But, "Your church is a cult!" is not inartful phrasing seeking respectful discourse.

Edited April 8, 2012 by Dravin

[Traveler]

Strange as it may there are two spirits - one is the spirit of G-d - that spirit is kind and loving and gives encouragement. As Jesus pointed out in the parable of the Good Samaritan the spirit of G-d is always kind and loving even with those of very different faith and belief.

The other spirit is the spirit of the devil - this spirit is critical, unkind and makes accusations. I would point out that part of taking upon you that name of Christ is taking his name of advocate. Part of the name of Jesus is advocate. In contrast a name of Satan is accuser. When we act as an advocate we act in the name of Christ. When we act as accuser we act in the name of Satan.

It is impossible to be double minded - we all serve either Christ or Satan. In scripture we find that Jesus never comes to Satan to convince him he is wrong - but we always see Satan coming before the L-rd to challenge and contend. Bottom line we cannot serve Christ and Satan - when we deal with others we can only have one spirit or the other - never both. Therefore, I suggest that when we feel an accusing spirit - regardless of how right we are - we simply drop the conversation, walk away and see no more conversation. At minimum until that accusing spirit leaves and is gone and replaced with a loving and kind spirit. And in case anyone is interested this plays not just with anti-Mormons but even with one’s wife and children.

The Traveler

[Suzie]

I think there are many definitions out there about what constitutes Anti-Mormon literature. Some people seem to believe that is any material that talks negatively or against the Church, for others any controversial topic that is presented in a critical manner (or not so critical) is Anti-Mormon literature. Once, talking with someone about Plural Marriage and commenting about Joseph Smith being sealed to some women who were already married, the comment I got: Have you been reading Anti-Mormon literature?.

I am not advocating Anti-Mormon literature of course, having said that it concerns me how quickly some members dismiss historical data and label it as "anti" just because they either cannot believe what they are hearing/reading because they don't know much about Church history or early teachings or they never bothered to research.

[Bensalem]

Therefore, I suggest that when we feel an accusing spirit - regardless of how right we are - we simply drop the conversation, walk away and see no more conversation.

Even when giving someone the other cheek you have to stand your ground.

Although Jesus slipped away in the crowd a few times, he for the most part addressed the accusers. He answered their questions and taught them the truth using their own scriptures.

The Word is on our side.

[Backroads]

I think there are many definitions out there about what constitutes Anti-Mormon literature. Some people seem to believe that is any material that talks negatively or against the Church, for others any controversial topic that is presented in a critical manner (or not so critical) is Anti-Mormon literature. Once, talking with someone about Plural Marriage and commenting about Joseph Smith being sealed to some women who were already married, the comment I got: Have you been reading Anti-Mormon literature?.

I am not advocating Anti-Mormon literature of course, having said that it concerns me how quickly some members dismiss historical data and label it as "anti" just because they either cannot believe what they are hearing/reading because they don't know much about Church history or early teachings or they never bothered to research.

Indeed. I've run across people who would automatically put any mention of the stuff you mentioned and similar things in the category of "anti-Mormon". Then, when they actually come across it in "approved Church literature" they get upset and even leave the Church.

[bytor2112]

Even when giving someone the other cheek you have to stand your ground.

Although Jesus slipped away in the crowd a few times, he for the most part addressed the accusers. He answered their questions and taught them the truth using their own scriptures.

The Word is on our side.

Indeed. I suspect many heard the Savior's words and felt as though they were being accused.

Edited April 9, 2012 by bytor2112

[Guest ziwenga]

One is always on a strange road, watching strange scenery and listening to strange music. Edmonton Escort Then one day, you will find that the things you try hard to forget are already gone. Edmonton Escort

Happiness is not about being immortal nor having food or rights in one's hand. Edmonton Asian Escort It’s about having each tiny wish come true, or having something to eat when you are hungry or having someone's love when you need love. Edmonton Asian Escort

[Monkeyzenz]

My Mission President once told me that The Anti-Mormon literatures... If they do not sustain the Church Leaders, Our believes..... Obviously its to destroy us. Personal Apostasy begins by just a small lil' doubt. It could shake our testimony doesn't matter what state we are in. So Avoid them is the best thing we could do.

[MichaelPAGuy]

I can personally speak for anti-mormon literature. this is what helped to destroy my testimony of the church at the time. Once you get started with it you cannot stop reading the stuff and watching the videos. Of course, over time I made my way back to the church. I now stay away from anything anti-mormon 100%

[Canuckistani]

My Mission President once told me that The Anti-Mormon literatures... If they do not sustain the Church Leaders, Our believes..... Obviously its to destroy us. Personal Apostasy begins by just a small lil' doubt. It could shake our testimony doesn't matter what state we are in. So Avoid them is the best thing we could do.

+1

Even though I'm Catholic, I tend to avoid Anti-Mormon literature since I am in the process of converting (which btw, I'm very exciting for!). Plus, I don't want anything getting in the way of my conversion with the one and only true Church (the LDS).

[pntkl]

If we gain our testimony by our own personal relationship with the Father, how great that testimony is. If by other means, yet lacking that personal relationship; we find ourselves with much to be desired. So much more unshakeable is that which is through His embrace.