CWK: Becoming a god: deification in Mormonism and Orthodox theosis

[Kishkumen]

I don’t agree with the lifetime pursuit of tearing the religion of others down.

Did she say anything about Mormonism that wasn't true?

So, you contend that everything she has said about Mormonism is true. How can that possibly be the case, Shades? Think about it.

[Markk]

Again...I couldn't disagree more. What did they frame in a prejudicial light and the percentages of doing so would be my question. They wrote so much.

Where to begin, eh? I mean, they apply criticism to Mormonism that they do not apply to their own faith, for one thing. I have heard Sandra speak to this issue, but I didn’t think much of her answer. From the position of one following a flawed religion, she takes it upon herself to attack the religion of others, as though her faith were inherently superior. I don’t think it is any solider in historical terms than Mormonism. If anything, Protestantism, having abandoned much of Christian tradition and lacking authority, arguably, is on perhaps even shakier ground. I don’t begrudge her finding a new faith to her liking. I don’t agree with the lifetime pursuit of tearing the religion of others down.

??? It was her religion, she had to work through the lies for years? Do you feel the same way about Vogel and RFM? Or is only because she is evangelical? It appears and you can correct me here, that your issues with the Tanners is their faith, not their "scholarship" and research?

Sandra has been open and clear about her faith, and transparent....what do you believe? Do you believe Joseph Smith was prophet of God?

[Kishkumen]

??? It was her religion, she had to work through the lies for years? Do you feel the same way about Vogel and RFM? Or is only because she is evangelical? It appears and you can correct me here, that your issues with the Tanners is their faith, not their "scholarship" and research?

Sandra has been open and clear about her faith, and transparent....what do you believe? Do you believe Joseph Smith was prophet of God?

Markk, how can anyone possibly ignore the fact that she made a career of being an anti-Mormon? That she contributed to the prejudice against Mormonism in the United States, even if only a bit--but that bit was actually not negligible? I don't think that hiding behind faith whitewashes the prejudicial nature of the enterprise. And, frankly, I do have a big problem with that aspect of Protestant Christianity that seeks to render other traditions Satanic. I think any person of good conscience should. I know for a fact that at least one close associate of Sandra views Joseph Smith's revelatory sources to be demonic. This is exactly the view we get from the worst kind of anti-Mormon tripe. These activities have negative consequences, and of course I do not condone the prejudice against my people. Don't be absurd.

[I Have Questions]

I do not condone the prejudice against my people.

What act of anti-Mormonism do you believe the Tanners perpetrated that was unreasonable?

[Kishkumen]

What act of anti-Mormonism do you believe the Tanners perpetrated that was unreasonable?

I don't think there is any reasonable anti-Mormonism, just as there is no reasonable anti-Christianity, anti-Judaism, anti-Islam, anti-Hindu, anti-Buddhist, or anti-atheist.

[I Have Questions]

What act of anti-Mormonism do you believe the Tanners perpetrated that was unreasonable?

I don't think there is any reasonable anti-Mormonism, just as there is no reasonable anti-Christianity, anti-Judaism, anti-Islam, anti-Hindu, anti-Buddhist, or anti-atheist.

So would you say that being (for example) anti-Trumpism is unreasonable? (I’m not trying to be inflammatory, I’m asking questions to explore the parameters of your position)

[Kishkumen]

So would you say that being (for example) anti-Trumpism is unreasonable? (I’m not trying to be inflammatory, I’m asking questions to explore the parameters of your position)

Yeah, no worries. It is a good question. I don't consider Trumpism a religion but a political movement. It certainly draws on and exploits religious communities, but it is not a religious community. Also, I think there is a big difference between communities that live as decent citizens of the secular republic and movements that actively seek to create a theocracy of sorts or make non-believers second class citizens. It would be difficult to say that a major religion, like Christianity or Islam, is especially devoted to overthrowing our system. Trumpism, on the other hand, seeks to overturn our republic.

[I Have Questions]

So would you say that being (for example) anti-Trumpism is unreasonable? (I’m not trying to be inflammatory, I’m asking questions to explore the parameters of your position)

Yeah, no worries. It is a good question. I don't consider Trumpism a religion but a political movement. It certainly draws on and exploits religious communities, but it is not a religious community. Also, I think there is a big difference between communities that live as decent citizens of the secular republic and movements that actively seek to create a theocracy of sorts or make non-believers second class citizens. It would be difficult to say that a major religion, like Christianity or Islam, is especially devoted to overthrowing our system. Trumpism, on the other hand, seeks to overturn our republic.

But wasn’t that Republic born out of overthrowing the indigenous system that already prevailed across the country? It’s a Republic formed by hostile takeover, isn’t it? It was anti-native-American.

I think what we are seeing, and where your position comes from, is tribalism. One person’s unreasonable “anti” is another persons righteous freedom fighter. The Mormon people, as you put it, cannot honestly protest prejudice whilst simultaneous carrying out prejudices against targeted sections of reasonable society. Making out gay people to be akin to pedaphiles is a crime far worse than anything the Tanners may have perpetrated. But that’s my perspective, it may not be yours.

[Kishkumen]

But wasn’t that Republic born out of overthrowing the indigenous system that already prevailed across the country? It’s a Republic formed by hostile takeover, isn’t it? It was anti-native-American.

I think what we are seeing, and where your position comes from, is tribalism. One person’s unreasonable “anti” is another persons righteous freedom fighter.

So, I think you can in seeking the perfect become the enemy of the good and invite the terrible in the door. Sure, what we have is far from perfect but overthrowing it now would result in pandemonium. Trumpism is about rejecting the flawed on the bet that an authoritarian solution will benefit its supporters, welfare of others be damned.

Mormonism is flawed, but it manages to produce a lot of productive, decent people, and I think it has *some* noble objectives (making good people better). Is Mormonism perfect? Do Mormons believe what we would ideally want them to believe? Probably not, but there are worse alternatives. A more robust, better Mormonism might have been able to keep more of its people from embracing Trump.

[I Have Questions]

A more robust, better Mormonism might have been able to keep more of its people from embracing Trump.

A more noble, honest, and better Mormonism wouldn’t have needed people like the Tanners to get the truth out there. Unfortunately the institution of Mormonism and it’s senior leadership team, lacks the integrity present in most of its individual members. The leaders/institution cannot be trusted to do the right thing when they think nobody is looking. People like the Tanners is where positive change in Mormonism is driven from. Let’s not decry the Tanners for not being perfect, because they done a lot of good for a lot of people within the Mormon people. Good that would not have happened without anti-Mormonism.

Nemo is an anti Mormon, yet he was one of the driving forces that led to the Church improving child safety. The Church would not have done that without pressure from anti sources.

Without anti-Mormons, Mormons would be much worse off. Members kids in the UK are safer at Church because of a person the Church excommunicated for being anti-Mormon, not because the Church wants to do all it can for its people. Sure, some anti-Mormons go too far, but doesn’t Church leadership do that too?