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

[huckelberry]

I do not think I can find any portion of my mind which would accept the idea that a religion, any religion should be beyond or exempt from criticism. I think it is a human duty to consider criticism. Now there is a difference between criticism and demonization. Demonizing the other corrupts all around I think.

Criticism which fails to try to understand the other position may not be as bad as demonizing but subtracts from peoples respect and care for each other.

I decline a judgement of the Tanners, they start from inside the LDS community so start with an insiders understanding. They have provided information which others must decide what to do with for themselves. I see a valuable service there. It is possible that the information has amped up prejudices against Mormons in some quarters but such feelings were vigorous before the Tanners.

I never said any religion should be beyond criticism.

Kishkumen, I was not trying to contradict you. I think you are speaking to a valid concern. I do think it could be clearer. That may not be easy so your simple division has some meaning. It leaves me rather blank as to how i should consider my own actions however. It sounds a bit close to the view that if you leave the church you should shut up about it. You are not this strict however. Can you be a critic and remain in the church? The authorities incline against that.

I incline towards encouraging all to think, and to be open to rethinking. It can be a messy business and I am not sure if I always remain guiltless . There are horrors in the antimormon realm, care is valuable.

[Markk]

In doctrine, Mormonism attacks Christianity, can you concede that? When I was LDS I believed we were the only true Christian church....didn't you?

Mormonism does not call Christians Satanic or demonic, does not deny they are Christians, does not say they are in a cult.

Sure it does, it is in their standard works....It still reads what I believed as a saint, that Christian Doctrine is an abomination before God....and all that profess Christian Doctrine are corrupt.

19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”

In the Hebrew sense an abomination before God is bad, very bad, very very bad. It is unmoral, unclean, and perverted. You would be hard pressed to try to say that was not "Satanic" in context. In the Greek sense it is something that defiles God, in every way.

Kisk this is about as doctrinal as it comes in LDS thought and doctrine....it is claimed it came from the lips of Christ. I suggest you do a study of basic core LDS doctrine, as I did when I was going through my faith crisis 35 years ago.

The Book of Mormon teaches there are only two churches, only two. The church of Christ or the church of the Devil....please see 1 Nephi 14:10. There is no logical way anyone can combine the first vison account, and 1 nephi 14:10 and say the LDS church, doctrinally, does not call the Christian church Satanic...no way.

heck....BRM a LDS Apostle said that the Catholic Church was founded by Satan, and that the protestant church (evangelicals( are it's harlot daughters.

I can give you many such examples plus antidotal examples, like as a child I was not allowed to spend the night at Catholic friends homes. We were taught to reject the cross.


And Kish, once again your are ducking my question/s about the Tanners, vs. Vogel and RFM. Why, I can only continue to ask.

Thanks

[I Have Questions]

I consider myself a critic of the LDS Church, not anti-Mormonism.

That’s an interesting take on it. I think the LDS Church would perhaps view your criticisms as anti-Mormonism, even if you don’t. I agree that you aren’t an anti-Mormon, you are lacking an intention to oppose Mormonism as a whole. You want it to continue and thrive.

Personally I don’t believe a lot of the core beliefs of Mormonism. I don’t want it to thrive in its current form because I believe it to be fundamentally corrupted in the way it treats certain people, and the beliefs about certain people that it promotes. I don’t want it to thrive because I believe it to be financial corrupted, and because it’s leaders are basically wilfully dishonest. I believe it promotes the idea of inequality, with Mormons as a superior form of belief. It’s an obnoxious and arrogant religion in what it teaches about itself.

With any organisation that has a hierarchy drawn from within. The gene pool decreases over time and certain personalities rise to the top. That’s fine for a business corporation that wants to grow at all costs. But those personality types aren’t the best examples of how to live a Christlike life. And those kind of Turkey’s don’t vote in favour of Thanksgiving. They aren’t going to change anything unless forced to. They don’t tell the truth until they are caught in a lie. They cannot be trusted to do the right thing when they think nobody is looking.

I’m definitely anti the institution of Mormonism. Local wards are a much better examples of how a Christian community should behave. The leaders would do well to follow the members example. But they won’t. So I am anti them, anti the inequalities they promote, anti their misuse of donated funds.

[Moksha]

Local wards are a much better example of how a Christian community should behave. The leaders would do well to follow the members' example.

Excellent point. The tail should not be wagging the dog. I think the Church's truth lies in its members' goodness.

[Kishkumen]

Kishkumen, I was not trying to contradict you. I think you are speaking to a valid concern. I do think it could be clearer. That may not be easy so your simple division has some meaning. It leaves me rather blank as to how i should consider my own actions however. It sounds a bit close to the view that if you leave the church you should shut up about it. You are not this strict however. Can you be a critic and remain in the church? The authorities incline against that.

I incline towards encouraging all to think, and to be open to rethinking. It can be a messy business and I am not sure if I always remain guiltless . There are horrors in the antimormon realm, care is valuable.

No worries, huckelberry. I just wanted to clarify my position on criticism by saying I don't think religions are above criticism. I was too brief, but that is all I felt I needed to say, as I agree with much of the rest of the post, including the positive contributions of the Tanners. I don't think that if you leave the Church you must shut up about it. That said, I don't care for the model of a "ministry" in attacking or undermining Mormonism, which is what the Tanners had.

My concern with Christian exclusivism and railing against other religions goes beyond Mormonism and encompasses their way of demonizing non-Christian faiths. This is a problem that goes all the way back to antiquity, when Christians decided that polytheistic deities were demons and destroyed temples and statues of gods all over the Roman Empire. What a loss!

Also, my problem with Christian exclusivism includes the Christian emperor Justinian's decision to destroy further Roman republicanism by removing rights from non-Christian citizens of his empire. At the present time this part is especially grating to me, because once again we see Christian intolerance robbing others of their rights to make sure everyone follows Christian rules.

I have nothing against Christianity, but I do have something against this exclusivism and bullying of others.

[Kishkumen]

That’s an interesting take on it. I think the LDS Church would perhaps view your criticisms as anti-Mormonism, even if you don’t. I agree that you aren’t an anti-Mormon, you are lacking an intention to oppose Mormonism as a whole. You want it to continue and thrive.

You are right 100% on all accounts in your comments above.

Personally I don’t believe a lot of the core beliefs of Mormonism. I don’t want it to thrive in its current form because I believe it to be fundamentally corrupted in the way it treats certain people, and the beliefs about certain people that it promotes. I don’t want it to thrive because I believe it to be financial corrupted, and because its leaders are basically wilfully dishonest. I believe it promotes the idea of inequality, with Mormons as a superior form of belief. It’s an obnoxious and arrogant religion in what it teaches about itself.

I see a lot of the same problems you see, and this is why I do not affiliate with the LDS Church. I think everyone tends to imagine that their own form of belief is superior to others. That's why they chose it. Unfortunately, Christianity has a history of not just believing it is a superior form of belief but of also violently suppressing other beliefs. Ministries teaching against other religions is a milder form of the same but still a big problem. As a missionary, I would go to Christian bookstores and see anti-Mormon, anti-Catholic, anti-Muslim, and anti-Hindu literature on the shelves in the bookstore. The anti-Catholic stuff was about as bad as the anti-Mormon stuff. I don't approve of that kind of ministry. I have never seen that kind of section in an LDS bookstore.

Local wards are a much better examples of how a Christian community should behave. The leaders would do well to follow the members example. But they won’t. So I am anti them, anti the inequalities they promote, anti their misuse of donated funds.

I agree with you about the local wards and the problems with LDS leadership. And, for what it's worth, I would rather have lunch with Sandra Tanner than any one of the current LDS Twelve Apostles.

[Markk]

Hi Kish,

I guess you won't answer my questions, but reading your last few posts to others it seems you believe, and you can correct me if i am wrong because I am forced to just guess, that the difference between the Tanners exposing the church and it's lies vs. those of Vogel and RFM, is the Sandra and Jerald were/are Protestants and defend their adopted new faith in their ministry.

I showed you clearly that the Mormon church attacked and still does doctrinally attack traditional Christian doctrines and those that profess it. I am not sure why you protect the church in that aspect, but maybe you were just unaware of their doctrines on and against the Christian church, I will take that view.

What is kind of Ironic in my opinion is that in the PoGP.... it reads that the traditional American Church (Protestants) and their believers draw near to God with their lips, but their hearts are skewed, yet todays LDS church promotes unity, yet keeps a canonized doctrine, modern revelation, that condemns the Protestant church and it's believers as an abomination with corrupted hearts.

You started this conversation by asserting that my view of Mormonism is shaded because I found the truths that the church was withholding from me by reading the Tanners work, and from reading your response to my question, or better put lack of, I still 100% disagree with your assertion.

Thanks

[Kishkumen]

Hi Kish,

I guess you won't answer my questions, but reading your last few posts to others it seems you believe, and you can correct me if i am wrong because I am forced to just guess, that the difference between the Tanners exposing the church and it's lies vs. those of Vogel and RFM, is the Sandra and Jerald were/are Protestants and defend their adopted new faith in their ministry.

I showed you clearly that the Mormon church attacked and still does doctrinally attack traditional Christian doctrines and those that profess it. I am not sure why you protect the church in that aspect, but maybe you were just unaware of their doctrines on and against the Christian church, I will take that view.

What is kind of Ironic in my opinion is that in the PoGP.... it reads that the traditional American Church (Protestants) and their believers draw near to God with their lips, but their hearts are skewed, yet todays LDS church promotes unity, yet keeps a canonized doctrine, modern revelation, that condemns the Protestant church and it's believers as an abomination with corrupted hearts.

You started this conversation by asserting that my view of Mormonism is shaded because I found the truths that the church was withholding from me by reading the Tanners work, and from reading your response to my question, or better put lack of, I still 100% disagree with your assertion.

Thanks

Where are the anti-Protestant ministries and anti-Protestant bookstores among the Mormons, Markk? There are none. The fact that Mormon scripture presents Mormonism as superior to Protestant Christianity is not the same as fanning the flames of prejudice and hatred in ministries, films, publications, radio programs, sermons, and bookstore inventories designed to attack Mormonism, which is what I have personally seen from Protestant Christians.

Your argument is one of false equivalence. You excuse anti-Mormon ministries on the basis of some LDS scriptures, when it is obvious that there really is no equivalent anti-Protestant ministry among LDS people. Christianity is unfortunately tarnished by a history of hatred and violence aimed at people outside of its community, whether that was pagans in antiquity, or Catholics in the South who had to contend with the KKK. Any Christian who supports that hatred, bigotry, and violence, or seeks to justify it in any way, is living in heresy and tarnishing the name of Christ.

[Kishkumen]

Mark 9:38-41:

38 “Teacher,” said John, “we saw someone driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us.”

39 “Do not stop him,” Jesus said. “For no one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, 40 for whoever is not against us is for us. 41 Truly I tell you, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to the Messiah will certainly not lose their reward.

[Dr. Shades]

I agree that you aren’t an anti-Mormon, you are lacking an intention to oppose Mormonism as a whole. You want it to continue and thrive.

You are right 100% on all accounts in your comments above.

Why on earth would you want such a corrupt institution to continue and thrive??