Hi Shiloh
First, I appreciate the kind and warm manner you have chosen to reply to me. I will do my very best to return this same courtesy to you.
Shiloh wrote:Hello Mr. Boo. I haven't read through the entire thread so forgive me if I'm repeating something stated earlier.
If we take the 1838 FV account at face value we see a very stern condemnation of *creeds.* Those ministers who taught those creeds drew near to God but their hearts were far from him because the creeds prevented true communion. That is how I've always read the FV account, anyway. The "corruption" flowed from the faulty creeds. If you look at how Joseph Smith interacted with those of other faiths -- especially during the Nauvoo years -- I think it would hard to make a case that Joseph Smith was opposed any specific organized religion. Rather, he took issues with creedal doctrine. Just semantics? Yes and no.
Mormons and Catholics are similar in that we don't define ourselves by what we are not. Rather, we both make the case for who we believe we are. The Pope has reitterated that the Catholic Church is the one-true-church. Great. So do the Mormons.
Let me put it this way: when I was growing up I never went to a Wednesday YM/YW activity to be taught why another religion was false. The EV church down the street did a "How to witness to your Mormon friends" seminar about twice a year. They also held a session on Catholics. :) These clowns are anti-Mormon AND anti-Catholic.
Believing Catholics aren't anti-Mormon and believing Mormons aren't anti-Catholic -- by default. I'm sure we can find some zealots out there but in my experience, neither Catholics nor Mormons waste must time fighting each other.
If you don't mind, I would like to shelf the Mormon/Catholic discussion. The purpose of this thread was an attempt for me to get a deeper understanding/perspective as to what an anti-Mormon is and what it really means to be one (I am still not sure if I am one or not?). I would rather not muddy the waters with discussions on Catholicism. If you wanted to start another thread to discuss this, I would be happy to offer my thoughts on the topic. I hope that seems fair.
Given Joseph Smith's ecumenical streak I very much disagree with this assessment.
In my mind, this directly speaks to the OP.
If you're willing, I would like to drill down on your above comment some more.
Ecumenical = Promoting of fostering Christian unity throughout the world.
You offer that that Mr. Smith possesed an "ecumenical streak".
Can you elaborate on this?
In an effort to be transparent and fair with you, I do not believe Mr. Smith encouraged, proposed, or taught "Christian unity" at all. It is my opinion that he developed and spread an entirely new set of beliefs about Jesus Christ that did not (and do not) reflect the basic and core beliefs of Christianity.
Thanks for the discussion!
Peace,
Ceeboo