An interesting post appeared on the LDS & Evangelical Conversations blog last week. Eric, raised Evangelical but converted to Mormonism a dozen years ago, wrote “What Mormons Should Know About Evangelicals.”
For the most part, Eric’s comments are very helpful. He addresses many basic areas where Mormons misunderstand Evangelicals and the way Christian churches operate. The focus of Eric’s post is non-doctrinal, though he does touch on doctrinal issues. Eric writes about things like diversity within Evangelical worship, misconceptions over paid clergy, and reverence in prayer. Doctrinally, he writes that Evangelicals have a testimony of Jesus, have a significant part of the Gospel, and believe good works are important.
In his conclusion Eric writes,
“I have no desire here to ignore or downplay the differences between Evangelical Christians and LDS Christians; they are real, and they are substantial. But we also share a love for Jesus Christ and a gratitude for the Heavenly Father sending his Son to Earth to set an example for us and to die for us. We have much we can learn from each other, but we can do that only if we make efforts to understand each other and to see each other not as people to demonize but as children of our Heavenly Father and who are sincerely, even though possibly mistaken, trying to heed the teachings of Jesus Christ.” (emphasis his)
I appreciate Eric’s contribution toward greater understanding between Mormons and Evangelicals. I whole-heartedly agree that we all need to make a determined effort to that end. Yet, overlooking the fact that Mormons and Evangelical Christians worship a different God while at the same time appealing to our “shared” love for what are actually disparate Christs, is not helpful in the long run. At least not for Evangelicals.
Evangelical Christians seek to understand Mormons (spiritually speaking) for the ultimate purpose of evangelism. We hope to be used by God to speak His truth to Mormons in order that, in the words of 2 Timothy 2:25-26, “God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will.”
Therefore, Evangelicals cannot give a nod to the fact that Mormonism is substantially different from Evangelical Christianity and then find some sort of solace in the fact that Mormons love a false god–even if this false god goes by the same name as the one true God.
As I said earlier, I appreciate Eric’s post at LDS & Evangelical Conversations. It is helpful as far as it goes, up to his conclusion. But for Evangelicals, peace with God is the goal. And this peace is available only through the authentic Christ:
Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God. (Romans 5:1-2)
Christian theologian R.C. Sproul wrote,
“We’re living in time where theological conflict is considered politically incorrect, but to declare peace when there is no peace is to betray the heart and soul of the gospel.”
As much as we may share with Mormons in terminology and outward appearance, the “real and substantial” differences between us totally eclipse any misperceived spiritual union whatsoever. Yes, we can and should be friends; we can and should work toward understanding one another better. But we cannot and must not pretend that Mormonism and Evangelical Christianity share even the most rudimentary spiritual truths. To do so is to betray the very heart and soul of the Gospel.
———————-
Comments within the parameters of 1 Peter 3:15 are invited.
———————-
Yes, I have struggled with this since the first time it was presented.
LDS and Evangelicals believe in a different Christ. It finally has sunk in and I have come to terms that some Evangelicals really believe this. I have many Christian friends though that would disagree with you.
Interesting that Christ of the Bible can be so completely misunderstood. But when you have to deal with man made creeds it really muddies up the waters for some Evangelicals. Hence, believing in a triune god, but not being able to articulate the what, how and why of it’s meaning. Or that Christ being the literal Son of God, and missing the mark completely when compared to scripture, Interesting indeed.
R.
The Mormon Church has been very successful in
the last 30 years, especially, in their effort
to be publically acknowleged as a Christian
church.This success was predictable.The recipe
for this has two ingredients, 1.those in other
churches show a poor knowledge of basic Bible
doctrine.2.These same Church goers have little
knowledge about Mormon beliefs.A recent(2007)
N.Y.Times article bears this out as 57% of
respondents to a CBS poll said they know little
or nothing about Mormon beliefs and practices.
This has afforded a great opportunity for the
Mormon Missionaries to say in effect, “we’re
Christians just like you”.
It needs to be gently and consistantly stressed
that there indeed is a massive difference between
major Mormon beliefs and traditional Christian
beliefs.
We don’t really do anyone a favor if we try to gloss over significant differences in religious doctrine in an effort to get along. We are talking about the eternal destiny of someone’s soul. TV preacher Joel Olsteen showed little or no understanding of the difference between Christianity and Mormonism when in an answer to Larry King’s question about Mitt Romney being a Christian said something on the order of “if Mitt Romney had accepted Jesus as his personal savior he’s a Christian.”
Whoa hold on their Nellie, or rather Joel. We need to ask the all important question, “Describe this Jesus who you have accepted as your personal Savior.” One thing we have learned is that aberrant religious sects are masters at high-jacking the language of evangelical Christianity. In order to be born again, a person has to get God right. Mormons don’t get God right and no amount of desire to find common ground will set that straight. Doctrinally there is no getting along with Mormonism. And when one considers that Mormonism claims to be restored Christianity, the gulf is way to wide to over come with a desire to find common ground.
I have said it before and will say it again.
Not only Did Paul say in Gal 1:8-9 that if ANY PERSON, or Angel Preaches any other gospel let them be accursed.
The LDS gospel and Christian gospel are worlds apart, Just because you say you believe in jesus, does not make him the real Jesus.
Also read the ENTIRE book of Job, Job’s 3 friends were wrong on so many things that by the time God finally spoke to Job, God harshly rebuked Jobs 3 friends and said,
Falcon,
I am sure Joel Olsteen was being polite, and while doing so he could have well had many reservations about LDS doctrines. As you say so yourself, if its not jesus, than it doesn’t count. How do you know that there aren’t some mormons that share your exact view? Some have left the LDS church after they found out that some of the belief wasn’t what they wanted.
Rick B,
“…if ANY PERSON, or Angel Preaches any other gospel let them be accursed.”
Getting more specific, is there anything one can observe about a person so accursed? Is there anything that will manifest in a person, or group of people within their lifetime? Is this dependent upon someone KNOWING its wrong, or does it apply to someone who honestly believes something to be true when it is false?
So many years ago, I went to a Billy Graham revivial, and I prayed that if he was teaching something false, that his voice would be stopped. I saw him get up to speak, and he just paused for a long time, and then stepped away from the podium, and someone else started talking. He couldn’t talk! I didn’t know then, but later found out years later on a documentary about his life. Maybe it was just a chance thing, or maybe it was just what he was going to say that day. Who knows.
Enki,
You really need to read the Bible, and if you do, you need to read it better.
Paul warned us about false prophets and ravening wolves rising from with in our own ranks.
Do you know why deception is so deceitful? Because you don’t know your being deceived, if you knew, you would not be deceived. Also Enki, you were asking can we know if someone is deceived.
The simple answer is yes, read Acts 17:11, we need to search the scriptures. How do bankers know if they get bogus money? They study the real thing, not the fake. We study Gods word. If you think I am wrong, then give me a detailed answer in your own words of why the Bible warns us about false prophets, wolves, and tells us to search the scriptures and not be ignorant.
Why would the bible tell us all this stuff if we had no way of knowing? Why would Paul speak about a different gospel if their were not false gospels? Also if you dont agree with Paul on the Gal 1:8-9 then what is this different gospel he speaks of and who does it apply to?
One thing I notice about LDS, they dont believe Gal 1:8-9 applies to them, but also they cannot seem to say who it does apply to, can you answer that question? Rick b
HankSaint,
Your comment makes me wonder how well your Christian friends understand Mormon, or maybe their own?
Gundeck, well maybe they know how to act as Christians, and understand that Charity starts with them. What I find here are lies, misunderstood doctrine, false accusations that Joseph Smith committed adultery, and guess what, not any shred of evidence. Hmmm, wonder what it say in the scriptures about being a false witness?
R.
HankSaint,
I am all for trying to understand different religions but how exactly does one act like a Christian if you don’t believe as a Christian? I do not find it particularly charitable to compromise the historic doctrines of the Church to make peace with a false gospel. What gives them the right to compromise the gospel?
There is a quote from Martin Loyd Jones on the Against Heresies Blog…
“What is the Christian church? That is the question. You cannot discuss church unity unless you are clear in your mind as to what the church is. Now here is the great divide. The ecumenical people put fellowship before doctrine. We are evangelicals; we put doctrine before fellowship.”
And to be honest, I could care less how many wives Smith or your other prophets had, the simple fact that polygamy was against the law in the United States and its territories answers your question about adultery.
R.
Smith DID commit adultery, defined by the law of Illinois in the 1830’s. Polygamy was against the law in Illinois, and Smith practiced it. What don’t you understand about that.
If I were to start my own church now, and say I could have as many wives as I wanted, I would be locked up for violating the laws of the land.
It is the reason Smith destroyed the Expositor Press, and one of the reasons he was murdered.
David Koresh did the same thing, and you see what happened to him.
I can quote many many speeches he gave about obeying the laws of the land, but he only obeyed those that suited him.
He was a liar and a fraud.
HIS Jesus is not our Jesus no matter how much the smithians try to whitewash their religion. Wake UP!
You are being deceptive and inaccurate. I don’t understand this fantasy world Smithians live in. You can’t accept the facts, and it will be your damnation if you don’t wake up and pray to God that he delivers you from this pervasive ungodly cult.
I have prayed to know if JS and the BOM is true, and I was led out of the church. I KNOW by the power of the Holy Spirit that he was a false Prophet.
I pray for you and the other mormons here, that you will do so too.
Rickb,
Ok, so someone that is ‘accursed’ won’t have the sign green blood or what not…
MORMON JESUS…VERSUS CHRISTIAN JESUS…
mormon jesus is the literal son of the Father and his goddess wife…
According to the Bible Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit, and there is no goddess wife.
mormon jesus was born in Jerusalem, was of the tribe of Benjamin.(Alma 7:9-10)
According to the Bible Jesus was born in Bethlehem, of Davidic descent.
mormon jesus is a spirit brother of all. He is the spirit brother of lucifer.(satan)
According to the Bible, satan is an angel who was created by Jesus, (who created all angels)
mormon jesus was married and had many wives. In heaven he will be married to his wives forever.
According to the Bible, Jesus was not married and did not have wives. Jesus said there is no celestial marriage. “For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven” (Matthew 22:30).
mormon jesus was a polygamist.
According to the Bible, Jesus was not married and did not have wives.
mormon jesus is part of a 3 god triumvirate.
According to the Bible, There is only 1 God, but many false gods.
mormon jesus is one of many gods in a long lineage of gods, all exalted men.
According to the Bible, Jesus teaches us that God is a spirit. Man was not co-eternal with God. Jesus created man. God did not procreate with celestial wives.
mormon jesus had a beginning. He was created.
According to the Bible, Jesus did not have a beginning. Jesus is the Eternal God.
mormon jesus could not cleanse us from all our sins.
According to the Bible, Jesus atoned for sin on the cross alone. His atoning death on the cross was able to cleanse all sins.
mormon jesus will return to a temple (if they ever build it) in missouri
According to the Bible, Jesus will return to Jerusalem in Israel.
I could go on, but these are the major differences… mormon jesus, or the real jesus… you decide
RickB,
From the sounds of it being ‘accursed’ is a more severe form of excommunication. Did such a sentance go beyond that?
Your verse would most definately apply to the LDS faith, if it is another gospel as you say. Along with Muslims, hindus, Jews, and perhaps even other christians that don’t believe as you do, or as you read the bible. I didn’t know what was meant by ‘accursed’.
“How do bankers know if they get bogus money? They study the real thing, not the fake. ”
Indeed. Money and the banks are not really the standard for what is ‘reality’, especially not now. The vast majority of US dollars are completely digital, only the smallest percentage are actually in tangible bills and coins. I would bet that this is the case for a number of other countries as well.
‘Zeitgeist addendum’ goes into this in detail, noting that faith in the monetary system goes way deeper than faith in any religion.
http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/
Grindael,
“mormon jesus was born in Jerusalem, was of the tribe of Benjamin.(Alma 7:9-10)”
” But behold, the Spirit hath said this much unto me, saying: Cry unto this people, saying—Repent ye, and prepare the way of the Lord, and walk in his paths, which are straight; for behold, the kingdom of heaven is at hand, and the Son of God cometh upon the face of the earth.
10 And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God.” Alma 7:9-10
I don’t see any mention of Benjamin here anywhere. Is there any supporting evidence of this being an LDS belief?
As far as the Jerusalem thing goes, LDS folks explain this as an approximate location, hence, “Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers”. According to mormons the first audience to hear this prediction were in the Americas. I just looked up the distance between Jerusalem and Bethlehem, its six miles.
If I described to you the town ‘Eagle river’ Alaska, you probably wouldn’t have the slightest idea, where it is, unless you have traveled there or lived nearby. But if I said ‘Anchorage’ you probably would have a pretty good guess. And if you were traveling from Florida by road to eagle river, directions to anchorage would get you there, as you will pass through Eagle river before getting to Anchorage.
Was Jesus born “at Jerusalem”?
http://www.mrm.org/jerusalem
Very interesting post, I think it draws out the importance and sheds light on why Evangelicals do what they do in regards to Mormons. It is quit obvious that there are substantial differences in the two organizations. I don’t know if I would call myself an Evangelical, but I know I believe in Christ and the teachings of the Old and New testament have very valuable lessons in them.
What I find most interesting is the Mormon culture and how there is not much “peace” with in the LDS population. I am sure Mormons do not want to acknowledge the abuse that is prevalent with in their walls, exclaiming that they don’t have any more problems then anyone else, and that the church is prefect but the men who run it are not; well I see as a pacifist position to take.
I have many friends in Wyoming, particularly in the Big Horn Basin. A place that was settled by the Mormons, hence a high LDS population. The stories of spiritual abuse and physical abuse are as common as football talk in Texas, but only as of recently; I think because it is safer to come out of the closet about getting abused. Wyoming is not an isolated incident. I recently had a friend attend BYU and she had a friend who had to have “the talk” with her bishop about a sexual transgression. Lets assume the worst, she had sex, although I do not know that for a fact, arguments sake. I know both girls, and both are honest and trust worthy people; this happened at a time when I was a member. Anyway, the girl who had committed the transgression was forced into a 90min meeting where the bishop pried into details, asking questions like, was is hand warm as it caressed your…(add any body part), or did you feel his breath on your neck. This girl was traumatized and wanted to leave school. So what did the bishop tell her to make her stay? and I quote, “If you leave, you will never make it into the celestial kingdom, there is not a worthy man who will have you, you are an already chewed piece of gym.”
I made the above post because of culture in the LDS org. The issue that I take up with it is that it is the bishops duty if not right, to interrogate teens in this fashion, holding ecclesiastic discipline over there heads. Now most of these kids are trying to make theirs parents happy. These kids do not want their parents to cut off their love and support as Holland suggested in the Oct 2009 G.C. talk. So I ask, how does this create peace? I wonder how a parent can send a child into a meeting, knowing full well that the bishop is going to talk to them about sex. Personally I see that as an issue between Parents and their children, not the ward leader, who in there eyes, has some power, (aka mind control).
To tie this back into the topic post. It is very disturbing to me, to see, abuse of power at any level, religious or secular. So the doctrinal differences leads to a much greater, and in my opinion, damaging environment of emotional and physical abuse. I think if we are going to address the spiritual issues, lets address the cultural issues.
I am kind of on the war path because of recent stories I have read where a man sexual abuse a child and the bishop pressured the family to let it go because, “He is a good man, and if what you claim is true, he will be punished in the next life”. The authorities were never contacted, the girl committed suicide four years later, after reading a statement that said something about a girl should fight to the death, then loss he chastity. It was by some church leader, I just don’t remember the whole quote,; hopefully my mrm friends can help me out.
In all, I would say protected by the priesthood is par for the course, who can find peace in that environment?
Maybe this is for another post. I don’t want to hijack the thread, if I am to far off topic I’ll gladly accept a yellow card.
As a side note, I am fully aware that the LDS org. puts forth a booklet of instructions regarding abuse cases. The question then, if anyone wants to take the stance that Mormons have policy’s that dictate how to handle abuse is, why is it not followed?
Yes – yes, I know they are men, they are not prefect. I would understand this statement if these where isolated cases, they are not. It is cultural.
Specifically, the cover ups and holding power over someones head.
Kevin,
What can I say? You finished with the premise “It is cultural” Yes, I guess it could be cultural, but which culture – LDS? American? Victorian? Family? Human?
If we look at history we find many instances of abuse – sexual, physical, spiritual, etc. Much of this is covered up by those who perform the acts and the victim is threatened or feels threatened if they come out about it. It is found in many Christian cultures and societies in both school and church groups, as well as Muslim, Hindu, etc. It happens all over the place. Why are you saying that it is much worse and indement in the LDS society without giving any proof other than a couple of stories? I can give you a couple of stories from other religions and places other than the LDS church – can I make a case it is worse in those areas than in the LDS church?
All you are looking at is human culture, not LDS. No one really wants to look at the ugly side of human nature and out of sight out of mind comes into play. If it is swept under the carpet and not discussed openly then maybe it might go away. That is how it used to be treated. But now that many victims are getting the right therapy and assistance they are talking up more and pointing out the abuse. Look at the Catholic church and what has happened to it. Here in NSW there is a school that had 3 or 4 teachers in the past month been accused and convicted of sexual abuse. It was a pact between the teachers to cover for each other. There is a religion in India where the girls are ritually gang raped by the priests after their first period. The parents are told it is a blessing for the child and even though the mothers know differently because it happened to them, they still go along.
The list goes on. And it is all covered up because of HUMAN NATURE AND CULTURE – NOT LDS culture.
Can anybody answer this question – How long before Jesus gets his own world?
Bill McKeever,
I’m sorry, but if someone really wants to believe something, they will. No matter how well researched, and presented, I don’t know if any LDS faithful will take “at Jerusalem” in any other light.
Larry Clark,
Jesus gets his own world next thursday.
I think until Mormons are willing to go deeper on the teachings and history of the Christian church, their ability to engage in thoughtful meaningful discussions with (Christians) will be severely hindered. Take for example the Mormon lack of understanding of what the Christian creeds are all about. Just for fun I did a google search yesterday by simply looking for “apostle’s creed”. I instantly had a ton of information regarding the different creeds, the purpose and the history behind them.
Now the problem for Mormons is that the information blows the premise of Mormonism out of the water. Joseph Smith said that God told him that all the creeds were an abomination. This was Smith’s way of creating his own religion. Interestingly enough, when we examine the core beliefs of say the Community of Christ Mormon sect, they pretty much run along the lines of the historic Christian church. These folks repudiated Smith’s teachings on the nature of God, men becoming gods, polygamy and on and on. The CoC accurately reflect early Mormon (preNauvoo) beliefs.
So my point is, that when Mormons open themselves up to some solid information and quit repeating the pithy little mottos and slogans taught down at the wards, their knowledge base expands and their built in prejudices against Christianity begin to melt away. But the problem is, it’s really difficult to maintain their faith in Mormonism in light of the new information. That’s why they flee anything that makes them feel uncomfortable. I believe it’s call cognitive dissonance.
“Why are you saying that it is much worse and indement in the LDS society” I am not saying it is worse, and I am not making a compassion to other organizations.
If you are making the comparison to other organization, then you are saying that your organization is no better then anyone else’s; if that is the point then your organization doesn’t have any special appeal, which is true.
“And it is all covered up because of HUMAN NATURE AND CULTURE – NOT LDS culture.” I will have to disagree with this statement, completely!
I do not believe that it is human nature to cover up something bad, that someone else did. There is the whistle blowers act to protect individuals who shed light on criminals, as an example. Think about it, if everyone cover up each others crimes, the world would be in a lot worse shape. Not only do I disagree with this statement, I think it is a scary point of view to have about your fellow human. I do not know how it is done in the Land Down Under, but I have heard that at one time it was a criminal colony, cause and affect?
Second, it is absolutely LDS culture. A person does not have to go far to find evidence that is specific to the Mormons. Now I know we are getting off topic so please look at the “idea” not the example. Mormons have been on the opposite side of every civil rights movement, including oppression of women, blacks, and gays. Weather you want to admit it or not, an organization that fosters these beliefs is creating an environment that breeds destructive behavior. Are there other organization in the same position? Yes there is, but we are not talking about “other” organizations, we are talking about Mormons!
So make your cross comparison if you want to, but it doesn’t help you argument.
It is LDS culture, it is common to have a teen talk to the bishop about sex, even when there is not a transgression. This is the recipe for abuse to happen. This is LDS culture. There is no peace , where they say there is peace
Human Nature: the shared psychological attributes of humankind that are assumed to be shared by all human beings
So I ask, is it human nature to do (or want to do) something bad? Is it human nature to try and cover up the bad thing that some one else did?
The most terrible crimes are done by such a small portion of sociality, to lump us all into the “Human Nature” calculation is stereotyping, the whole freaking population.
Most of the people I know are good people, who do good things. I don’t have anyone personally in my life who has done criminal activities, like abuse cover up as a co-conspirator.
I am beginning to think that those who live outside the U.S., and have never seen the true LDS Culture, do not really understand how it is done. This must create a blind spot when doing an examination. This is a different blind spot then simply ignoring the evidence and facts.
But this is not the point here. The culture of the Mormons is a direct reflection of the teachings of the Mormons. The result of that correlation is the sum of how Mormons handle them selfs. Now, not all Mormons are Sexually abused, or abusers. But you must ask yourself, in an organization that breeds oppression (aka abuse), is it not plausible for some people to get addicted to the power and oppresses people with that power? I bring this up, because Mormons claim to have the “one true Religion of God”. Why would God be on the oppressive side of human civil rights? Why would God create an organization that breeds abuse and ecclesiastic cover? Why would the “one true church” implement all 8 of Lifton’s mind control techniques?
Kevin,
What you were talking about in your example is called “voyeurism”. That of course is descriptive of folks who get their jollys hearing the intimate and sordid details of others’ sexual pursuits. I’ve heard many accounts of Mormon bishops who like to get all the nasty details from their (I’ll call them) victims. Even in my days as a Catholic, when I’d go to confession (every Thursday afternoon at 2:00PM) we’d “confess” in general terms.
One of the first things I learned as an adult Christian was that if someone comes to you with a particular sin they want to discuss, it’s better to deal with the general area and not specifics. The reason is very sound because the visions of those sugar plumbs are going to be dancing in your mind forever.
I remember having to deal with several children from one family who were in a horrific sexual abuse situation. The details were in the paper. I refused to read the accounts. I didn’t want that picture of what those kids had been through in my mind.
There are things within all religious cultures that tend to serve as barriers to understanding. Learning about them is very helpful when it comes to getting a picture of where someone is coming from. I had a lot of dealings with the Amish at one time. I must admit in order to get it all (understanding) I’d have had to been Amish.
But when it comes to religious doctrine, that’s not that hard to understand. The back story adds to the total picture and gives indications of why it is so difficult for people to escape from certain sects and why they have certain issues including those dealing with trust and authority.
Enki,
I cannot remember if your mormon or not. I do not have time to go on and on with you, so if you cannot answer my question please say so, otherwise I will assume you refuse to answer it.
To make a long story short, I am back in college for 21 months, I have TONS of homework, I come home, am a father to 3 kids, a husband to ONE wife, then work 5 days a week, Nights, and every Sat, some Sunday nights.
So I am not here as much as I used to be and dont have time for the games I used to play with, lets avoid questions but still ask more.
Now Enki, in Gal 1:8-9 Paul in not saying lets Excommunicate you if you preach another Gospel, He is saying, you will be Damned to hell for preaching another Gospel.
Paul goes on to say the same thing for those who do not love Jesus either.
1Cr 16:22 If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.
Yes Enki, this applies to Atheists, Muslims, Mormons, JW’s and all other humans that do not know or love Jesus.
Now as I asked before, Where do LDS stand on these verses. Who does this apply to? Why is it LDS say, these verse do no apply to us, but yet they also cannot say who they do apply to? Is it a PC thing? Rick b
Kevin,
If I remember correctly we Aussies have you Yanks to thank for being settled. America also started out as a penal colony for England, along with other groups of free immigrants. This is why there was the civil war in which the English were kicked out. Once the English could no longer send convicts to America they turned to Australia (ie saving the best till last).
When it comes to issues of abuse, be it what ever type, it does get covered up a lot. Families don’t want their dirty laundry aired out in public, so they try and keep the abuse in-house and deal with it in their own way. Even grandparents keep quiet and try and assist. Most government bodies try and do the same. Here in NSW we had a poli get quite angry at a waiter in a restaurant a while ago (google Iguanagate for the story). Because of the many witnesses they were not let off, but the initial response by their party was to try and cover it up. Same with our good old K.Rudd (the PM). He lety loose at an air line steward and because of witnesses was not let off. Again, initially cover up was tried. We get to the churches and we have cases of abuse (all types) being released into the press from the RC, Anglican, LDS, JW, etc from 50-60 years ago. In many of the RC and Anglican cases the higher ups knew about it but covered it up. They too are on trial now because of their actions or lack there of.
I still say it is human nature or societal culture to cover the abuse up, not a ‘church culture’ as you do. And to let you know, I am making my basis on personal experience, as well as stories from other people.
Why do I say its human nature – because of the fear factor, the fear of embarrasment, the fear of losing face, the fear of overreactions from the outside, in some cases fear of retribution from the abuser, etc.
Whistleblowers may have a law protecting them, but how efficient is it? Not very from the last few stories in the paper I have read.
Falcon, I agree with you, and the approach taken in regards to handling sensitive situations. The LDS org. sets up a situation where they do not respect boundaries, as a matter of fact it seems like the leaders responsibility to break threw personal barriers; and I think you are right, it is to fulfill some voyeuristic tendencies, obviously this is personal opinion based on experience and observation.
I think the root of the problems is the doctrine and teachings in the Mormon Org. Most Mormon men I have met are arrogant and condescending. How can this be? Why do they carry themselves like that? Its the culture they were raised in based on the teachings of the Mormon Org.
Funny story, when I was in elders quorum, seconds before it started, me and another guy would take bets (not for real) about who would be the biggest “Topper” of the day. (see Dilbert for Topper Explanation) Good fun.
As a side note, why is it that the Utah population is on average getting 1.7 prescriptions per year for anti-depressants, when the national average is .6? I’d think that after being that medicated you’d be at peace all the time.
I cannot give a direct link, the information is on a 604 page PDF file from the U.S. Census report
Also, The U.S. Census Bureau reports suicide accounts for 14.3 percent of violent deaths in Utah, compared to 9.4 percent in the United States.
Dear God, please bring peace to Mormons, so they no longer have to live in Fear of Embarrassment, Fear of losing face, fear of overreactions, and fear of retribution for the lies and abuse they have cause others. amen
Bill McKeaver,
“And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers…” (Alma 7: 10)
I know the grab-bag of mormon polemics is a stout one, so I’m kind of curious why you felt a need to turn to this example and argument? Maybe it was in response to Hank Saint’s censured post? I don’t know. Just seems a bit arbitrary. But I’ll humor you anyways.
Anyone who can’t accept the wording of this Alma passage as a viable generic reference to an abandoned homeland across the sea–by a refugee four hundred years removed from any Old World location–is not even in a position to provide the Book of Mormon with a quality historical critism.
But as you state in the linked article, you preclude the Book of Mormon from deserving such a criticism.
Which is why you’re committed to offering such weak and utterly partial arguments, I suppose. Personally, I think your brain is capable of much better. And if you used a little more of it in your enterprise here, I think you’d realize the Book of Mormon is worthy of better too.
Sincerely, mutu.
Enkiw wrote
I laughed my head off at this.
So, you’ve got a date. Any clues on the location – I’d love to watch.
(PS, I’m not being serious)
Kevin commented
Kevin,
I think your observation is truer than you think.
For example, I’m a compatriot of Ralph’s. He and I will disagree on many things, but at least we get somewhere near a dialog, as in a two way exchange. By contrast, the American LDS posters here seem to operate strictly in monologue.
If I were to typify this, I’d use two headers – the Liberal Expatriate Mormon and the Alpha Male Mormon. LEMs (please pardon the cheesy acronyms) are less likely to throw their weight around, but in their own ways both groups are absolutely self-assured.
Perhaps the LEMs are more circumspect because they are “playing away from home”, in other words, not in a “pure” American culture.
However, I’ve seen a pretty even mix in Mormonism between the LEMs and the bloody-minded AMMs. The verdict on the AMMs isn’t good; among my (non-Church-goer) colleagues they’re renowned for their arrogance. The LEMs typically keep their heads down.
I wonder. If you take Americanism out of Mormonism, what do you get? Perhaps you’re left with the (Narcissistic) Moralistic Therapeutic Deism that’s the bane of (American) orthodox Christianity.
Your statement also applies to me. I don’t live in the Mormon heartland, so I don’t live with the stories that you experience. That doesn’t stop me “imagining” my way to where you are, and feeling your outrage – I just have to do it by proxy.
I fully agree with your conclusion, though. If Mormonism sells itself as the One True Church because of its (alleged) righteousness (which it does), how is it possible that even one signed up member, baptized and endowed with the Holy Ghost, can misbehave?
The LDS Church has failed to live up to its marketing in this area. But then why do they dump crap on all the other Churches for (apparently) failing in exactly the same way?
Martin,
Very good characterizations. Andy Watson and I observe often how Christians write detailed posts with documentation and work point-by-point and it just goes right by the Mormons we are attempting to dialog with. It’s an amazing phenomenon. It’s almost like going to an exciting overtime football game with a friend and on the way home all he wants to do is talk about the popcorn and not the game. You wonder if you had been at the same event! Dr. Walter Martin, author of “Kingdom of the Cults” says, “…the problem is that Mormonism has altered the thinking process of Mormons in the area of religion! A Mormon can think very rationally about his job, what clothes to wear, and things like that, but when you push the button on religion he stops thinking and gives you what he has been taught.” It goes beyond being blind in the spirit. Mormons cannot hear spiritually. The apostle Paul said, “If our gospel is hid, it is hid because the god of this world had blinded their minds.” Talking to a Mormon about spiritual things is like trying to describe a rainbow to a blind man. We are talking about a rainbow to a guy who doesn’t know what color is.
Mormons aren’t simply protestants with some doctrinal problems. Mormonism is a religious system that stands in direct opposition to basic teachings of the Bible.
*Jesus Christ is the “spirit brother” of Satan (Bruce McConkie, “Mormon Doctrine”, pp.193, 589-590, 751)
*Jesus was conceived by physical sex between God the Father and the Virgin Mary (Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, pp. 50,51)
*The wedding at Cana was Jesus’ wedding and He had three wives (Journal of Discourses, vol 4, pp. 259-260, vol 1 345-346)
*one Mormon authority published a book where he said that God would cease to be God if he lost the support of the other gods. (W. Cleon Skousen, “The First 2,000 years”, Bookcraft, pp. 355-356)
*Through progression men can become gods. (McConkie pp. 238-239)
Now of course our Mormon friends will jump up and down and scream that nothing in the Journal of Discourses counts as real Mormon teaching. This is a convenient “out” for Mormons as they try to claim prophetic authority for their religion and at the same time attempt to discredit things their prophets have said and taught. This along with “continuous revelation” gives Mormons a ton of wiggle room to make it up as they go along and have a cafeteria style religion. That’s why it’s very difficult to have a reasonable rational discussion with a Mormon about spiritual matters.
*The BoM has been changed in nearly 4,000 places since it was published.
*The BoA which JS said was “the writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt,” has been proven to be a total fabrication.
*Mormonism instituted polygamy as a “new and everlasting covenant” and repeatedly swore it should never give the doctrine up and suddenly with pressure from the government tossed it out in 1890.
Finally, until we realize how much of a delusion Mormonism is, we will not have the reservoir of patience required to deal with Mormons. Our friend jackg characterizes some Mormons as at the “precontemplative” stage. In-other-words, they aren’t in a position emotionally or intellectually to consider that Mormonism is not true. Jim Spencer says that dealing with TBMs is like trying to teach a duck to sing. It’s a waste of time and annoys the duck! I think that pretty much sums it up. One exMormon says that he doesn’t waste his time having discussions with hard core TBMs. He says his goal is to help those who want to escape the Morg to get out. Pretty good advice I’d say.
Now the reason I gave the boiler plate list of significant problems hindering dialog between Mormons and Christians is because I’m wondering how many of these things Mormons are willing to cross off their list in order to align themselves with mainstream Christianity.
We see where the Community of Christ Mormon sect has crossed them all pretty much off their list and have moved at least within two standard deviations of the norm of standard Christianity. They’ve got it down to where the BoM is left up for grabs as to whether or not their members want to see it as a historical book or a spiritual book. We Christians would have significant differences with them regarding inspiration and revelation but on the main points they appear to reflect Mormonism in it’s original form. Funny thing, I never run across any of these folks on blogs.
Now the SLC bunch have been willing to cross a whole bunch of things off their list but they’re still not any where on the continuum of Biblical Christianity. They’ve given up polygamy (that sacred principle that’s necessary to get to the top rung of the ladder) at least in this world but still practice it in terms of a guy’s wife dying and him picking up an additional goddess. They’ve gotten rid of the band on blacks in the priesthood. They’ve significantly changed their everlasting sacred temple rituals because the Free Masonry throat slashing and bowel dissection was found to be too offensive. They routinely dismiss the old coot prophets whose pronouncements look pretty silly by today’s standards.
Now we have to remember, there are different “types” or forms of SLC Mormonism that are practiced and believed in. Some have called it cafeteria Mormonism while other call it internet Mormonism as opposed to true believer ward level Mormonism. None-the-less it’s pretty tough to have a discussion with a TBM anyway because their brain circuits are hard wired to the clan’s beliefs.
We need to concentrate on Mormons willing to open their minds.
Mormon prophet Gorden B. Hinckley on the Jesus we (Ev’s) believe in:
“The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak.”
(Church News, June 20, 1998, p.7)
Thanks setfree,
I think you nailed in a couple of sentences what I took three or four posts to say. The point? If someone worships a different god, that pretty well ends the discussion.
Jim Spencer talks about different types of Mormons. The “true believer” Jim says, is the easiest of all with whom to deal because he is the least likely to listen. With a true believer he advises to keep expectations low. In-other-words, anticipate a negative outcome. The true believers are the least likely to change. In dealing with them we are being obedient to Jesus’ command to evangelize. We aren’t, however, responsible for the outcome. What I’ve noticed here on MC is if I don’t isolate the discussion, the Mormons will chase me around endless mulberry bushes and down empty rabbit trails.
The big difference between a true believer and say a moderate believer is that the latter is more likely to engage in a reasonable discussion. TBMs, as we’ve seen on this blog, aren’t. Doubters are the easiest to deal with. These folks have already figured a lot of things out and need information and support.
Could someone remain a Mormon and believe that Joseph Smith was a false prophet? Jim Spencer says,”I have a friend who knows Joseph Smith was a false prophet. And he knows that the BoM is not Scripture. And yet he is a Mormon college professor! None of his friends knows about his doubts. He is in church several times a week, holds responsible positions in the church and holds a temple recommend. And his is one of thousands. He says someday he will have the courage to leave. But right now his concerns for his family, his job, and his friends keep him from being honest.”
The first step in having a dialog is knowing who we’re talking to.
Hank, since you keep asserting that no Christian can explain the Trinity, this is the way that many people can understand it:
There are many kinds of beings. There are dog beings, cow beings, tree beings, and human beings, etc. One is sentient, the others are merely in a state of being. There are many different kinds and members amongst each class of being. You and I are both human beings, but we are both different persons. Your are Richard. I am Sean. We are not two persons within the same kind of person. We are two separate persons within the same kind of being.
The Bible distinctly describes each member of the Trinity as being a distinct person with thoughts, abilities, emotions, etc. The Bible also assigns the same duties at different times to each of the three members of the Godhead showing that God is One in purpose and function.
There is only One Being called God, but three separate persons within that being. So your constant assertion that God is schizo is unwarrented. There are not three persons in one person, but three persons in one being. We can understand this, but we cannot comprehend how this works. But who are we to question the ability for God to exist in that manner.
Because Smith taught that there are three distinct gods within the godhead he forever separated your church from Biblical Christianity which is a monotheistic religion as opposed the the polytheism of Smith.
liv4jc, great explanation, and thank you.
I was hoping to address this issue, as they have been again misinformed as to what the Trinity means:
http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=296&sid=8160431#
sorry, see the talk by Tad R. Callister in the above link
Joseph Smith’s teaching the Heavenly Father had a a physical incestuous relationship with Mary also defies scripture. Only Matthew and Luke record Jesus’s pre-birth and birth, and nowhere in either of the gospels is it mentioned that Mary will be defiled by her Heavenly Father. That teaching directly denies Luke 1:34-35 that says,
The origen of Smith’s and Brigham Young’s teaching arises from the use of the word “begotten” in many English traslations, and its use in the KJV. The word translated “only begotten” is the Greek “monogenes”, and should be translated in John 1:14 as something like “the only unique one…who came from the Father” and in John 1:18 as “The only One” or “only unique One”, himself God…” The NET has a great textual critical note on this text here http://net.bible.org/verse.php?book=Joh&chapter=1&verse=18 , which corresponds to Philip Comforts research in his book New Testament Text and Translation Commentary. This makes John 1:18 a book end to John 1:1, perfectly fitting John’s writing style declaring Jesus as God in John 1:1 and again declaring Jesus as God in John 1:18.
Also in John 3:16,18 the same Greek word should be translated “only unique Son” hence “mono”genous uiou”, since Jesus was never “begotten”, being fully God from eternity.
These readings also support the Trinitarian description of Jesus Christ as being co-eternal with God.
Setfree, we’ll just keep hammering away, line upon line, precept upon precept, until someone out there understands:)
liv4jc
you mislead worse than falcon
“Because Smith taught that there are three distinct gods” is wrong…3 distinct beings…still only One God and to a Mormon He is not schizophrenic as the Ev sees God….see also, dictionary and the word “personage”…..i guess soon you will try to count Heavenly Mother as another god?…the only schizo-theists here are the Paulines.
President Gordon Hinckley on the fulfillment of the prophecy in Isiah 9:6
“”He is the Savior and Redeemer of the world,” through whose loving atoning sacrifice is extended to “every son and daughter of God, the opportunity for eternal life and exaltation in our Father’s kingdom, as we hearken to and obey His commandments…. I worship Him as I worship His Father, in spirit and in truth…. We approach the Father through the Son. He is our intercessor at the throne of God.” He affirmed that the Holy Ghost is a distinct spirit being who is the Comforter and the Testifier of Truth, and that the “perfect unity between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost binds these three into the oneness of the divine Godhead.”
Wow Sub, Hinckley sounds almost Evangelical in that statement. If that was the historical position of your church and we could ask the now deceased president a few well placed questions we may be able to reconcile our churches on the issue.
Can I get a referee to settle this issue between my assertions and Sub’s as to the nature of the Smithian god? Is this really what Smith’s church teaches and has always taught? Are there really three beings in one being as Sub suggests or are there three separate gods as I stated?
From the LDS Bible Dictionary (in the back of the 1989 LDS edition of the Bible) under “God”: “The supreme Governor of the universe and the Father of mankind. We learn from the revelations that have been given that there are three separate persons in the Godhead: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost… When one speaks of God, it is generally the Father who is referred to;… the Son, known as Jesus Christ, and who is also a God…The Holy Ghost is also a God…”
Another relevant teaching: “I will preach on the plurality of Gods. I have selected this text for that express purpose. I wish to declare I have always and in all congregations when I have preached on the subject of the Deity, it has been the plurality of Gods. It has been preached by the Elders for fifteen years” (Joseph Smith, History of the Church, 6:473). See the entire sermon here.
Grindael provided a list which contrasted the
true Jesus with the Mormon Jesus.It’s very
important that the public are given a chance
to see the great differences in Mormon teach-
ing as compared to that of other churches.It
seems that the important differences are being
downplayed by the LDS public-relations dept.
I was reading an article by the late Wesley
Walters where he critiqued the Mormon Mission-
ary lessons. This was 30 years ago.In the LDS
missionary manuel,”The Uniform System for Teach-
ing Families” Walters states,” If the person
contacted objects that he already has his own
religion,the missionary is to say,’ Wonderful,
our message is for families of all faiths.'(B-5)
However, further along the prospect will learn
that his position is not so ‘wonderful’ for the
LDS reguard all other churches as wrong,lacking
in authority to minister in the Lord’s name and
teaching false doctrines.More-over, the mission-
aries are expected to press the prospect into
leaving his church and joining the Mormon church
by baptism (A-2)”.
I don’t know if this particular approach is still
used by Mormon missionaries.What I do know is
that if a person stays in the Mormon church long
enough they will learn what Mormonism teaches
about others:
1.Only the Mormon Church is the true church.(that
would make all other churches false)
2.”…modern Christianity in all its parts…”
has “perverted” the gospel.(The Millenial Messiah
p.54-55, by Bruce McConkie).
3.Both Catholics and Protestants are nothing less
than “the whore of Bbaylon”. (Apostle Orson Pratt
the SEER,p.255. also George Q.Cannon, in Gospel
Truth,p.324)
4.The Christian world are “heathens” as to the
knowledge of God (Brigham Young,J.of D.vol.8 p171)
5.The Christian world, when it comes to the
things of God are,”fools”.(John Taylor,J.of D.
vol.13 p225)
6.The doctrine of salvation by faith alone thru
God’s grace is,”one of the most fallacious
doctrines originated by Satan…”
cont.
(The Miracle of Forgiveness, by Spencer Kimball
p.206)
7. “the gods of christendom…there is little
profit in serving them, and certainly there is
no salvation available through them…”(A New
Witness For the Articles of Faith,p.545,by
Bruce Mcconkie)
8.”To say that Satan sits in the place of God in
Christianity after the time of the Apostles is not
to say that all that is in it is satanic….still
‘the power of God unto salvation(Rom.1:16) is
absent from all but the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-Day Saints…” (Kent Jackson, Ensign Dec.
1984,p.8).
It does seem that for constructive dialogue to
take place with our LDS neighbors,the huge
differences need to be acknowleged, and when
a sincere LDS says,”but we’re christians like
you” etc. then we must gently ask them to
compare LDS teachings with the Bible,and the
first one should be, “who is your Jesus?”
We’re dealing with cross cultural communications as well as a vast difference in religious dogma when we’re dealing with Mormons, especially the hard core folks. I’m convinced that the people who want to get out can find the information from a variety of sources, in fact from what I’ve seen there’s a predictable pattern for those who exit. To a degree, dialog is basically useless with someone at the precontemplative stage; in my opinion.
My reason for writing here is to provide information for those seeking a way out. Writing here also provides me with opportunities to do research which I find enjoyable. Lastly, being interested in the psychology of cult members, I get all kinds of interesting observation opportunities on MC.
Sharon
current Bible dictionary still has same definition even though it is a little more thorough than the snippets you provided. It is plain to see that Out Hevenly Father is the “One”. To try and paint Mormons as “worshipping” beyond the Godhead is just wrong, and that is what is consistently being charged.
We are commanded in the Bible to be holy as He is holy, and strive to achieve salvation and an eternal life….what exactly does the Ev envision is going on here? It is quite literal in the Bible what has been provided for us to achieve.
Tree of knowledge, Tree of Life…”like us”…rather bluntly put in the begining of the Book, would you not say?