What is "anti-Mormon'...?

[_Ceeboo]

Hey FS,

I know you were asking Quasi, but, if it's OK, I wanted to intrude.

For the purpose of extreme clarity, I am not questioning nor debating. I am simply asking as I find your response to be interesting.

Could you elaborate on your response a little? (perhaps define happiness, and maybe offer your thoughts on happiness being rooted in the LDS Church, and if you think the majority who might have left the fold {for whatever reason} are less happy now because of it)

Thanks!

Peace,
Ceeboo

I know you Ceeboo you are always looking for an argument! :)

Bear with me here because I am mostly thinking out loud and have never really tried to articulate my own definition of happiness.

For me a large part of happiness is being comfortable with who I am. I think this holds true for most people. I don't think happiness is rooted in the LDS Church or the Catholic Church or religion at all. I think it has a lot more to do with our self image and who we think we are and where we think we belong. My family, for example, believes they belong to the only true Church there is and they believe they are favored by God for being part of it. It is sort of like being a fan of the team that wins every game and gets to take home the trophy.

I do not know if the majority of the people who have left the fold, from the LDS church or any other church for that matter, are happier or not. I think a lot would depend on if they were able to replace the community and fellowship the church offered with another one. When I read the stories about all those members early in the church that left and came back, I get a sense that many of them came back, not because they realized their reasons for leaving were wrong, but because they realized they would be happier being part of that group.

So back to my comment about my family. I cannot imagine what it would take to replace the role the Church plays in their lives. Pretty much every aspect of their lives is focused on the Church. If that were suddenly to be taken away from them, I don't see them as being happier, I see them as totally lost. Perhaps over time they could adjust to something different but in the end I don't think they would be happier.

Thanks, FS

I understand (as much as I can being who/where I am) and do indeed appreciate the reply. :)

Peace,
Ceeboo

[_Fence Sitter]

Is ignorance bliss? From my point of view (gathered from good evidences here on this board and elsewhere) the Book of Mormon is untrue. Consequently, my view of Mormons is of a people that have been duped by liar and conman for many generations.

I see this as sad. Is it better for the victims to continue being duped if they are happy in the illusion? Hard to say.

Personally, I prefer the admission that I don't know the truth over pretending that I do.

Do you think most religious people have been duped?

Do you think our view of history in general is affected by the culture within which we are raised?

Does understanding how our views are affected by the culture within which we are raised make us happier?

I am not convinced that it is ignorance that drives a world view, it is more of a need to fit in and not rock the boat.

[_Quasimodo]

Fence Sitter wrote:

Do you think most religious people have been duped?

Sort of. I don't think that most have been deliberately duped. Joseph Smith and his prophecies are a singular case. I think he was deliberately trying to dupe people. There is a good amount of evidence to indicate this.

I think the prophets of the old and new testaments were just trying to explain the world as best they could with the knowledge they had at the time. They weren't dishonest, just working with what they had.

Do you think our view of history in general is affected by the culture within which we are raised?

Sometimes. Depends on how much education you have had. If you have a real interest in history, you learn much more than your native culture has to offer.

Does understanding how our views are affected by the culture within which we are raised make us happier?

I think people that value knowing what is true are happier knowing more than just what culture dictates.

I am not convinced that it is ignorance that drives a world view, it is more of a need to fit in and not rock the boat.

Many "world views" intentionally ignore truth in favor of old, unproven cultural beliefs (an intentional ignorance). I guess the question for everyone is whether it is better to fit in or seek the truth, wherever that may lead.

[_moksha]

I've sometimes wondered whether anti-mormonism was a volatile enough substance to require containment behind a stasis field. Though observation, I have determined it to be the source of impassioned outbursts and voltage fluctuations, much like when the voltage is cranked up for prison electric chairs and the lights dim.

.

[_Fence Sitter]

I don't think that most have been deliberately duped. Joseph Smith and his prophecies are a singular case. I think he was deliberately trying to dupe people. There is a good amount of evidence to indicate this.
I think the prophets of the old and new testaments were just trying to explain the world as best they could with the knowledge they had at the time. They weren't dishonest, just working with what they had.

I am not sure how much I think he was trying to dupe people and how much he really believed in what he was doing. I go back and forth on it. I don't think you can say it was all of one or the other.

Is there a difference to us today between those people that follow a prophet that we view as a fraud and those that follow prophets of old? Frankly I find the stories from the Biblical prophets a lot harder to believe.

Many "world views" intentionally ignore truth in favor of old, unproven cultural beliefs (an intentional ignorance). I guess the question for everyone is whether it is better to fit in or seek the truth, wherever that may lead.

I agree. I might even go so far as to suggest they all do. I also think, for most people, the answer is to fit in. You and I on the other hand are a different story. Perhaps that is why we chose the screen names we did.

[_Quasimodo]

Fence Sitter wrote:

I am not sure how much I think he was trying to dupe people and how much he really believed in what he was doing. I go back and forth on it. I don't think you can say it was all of one or the other.

For me, his attempt to swindle his neighbors by using his peep stone to find treasure (for which he was arrested and pleaded guilty) is enough to cast ultimate doubt on his honesty. There are many other historical events that cast doubt, as well.

Is there a difference to us today between those people that follow a prophet that we view as a fraud and those that follow prophets of old? Frankly I find the stories from the Biblical prophets a lot harder to believe.

I find the old prophets hard to believe, as well. I'm just guessing that their intention was not to deceive, though. Joseph Smith's intention was to fool as many people as he could for fun and profit (not prophet).

If there is a difference in followers of one or the other, it may be that Joseph Smith is a recent historical figure with much historically provable baggage to explain. There are a lot of serious indiscretions in his life to overlook before one can believe him.

The history of the prophets of old is lost. We only have their writings to go by. Maybe a little easier to accept.