The Term Anti-Mormon

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_RockSlider
_Emeritus
Posts: 6752
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:02 am

Re: The Term Anti-Mormon

Post by _RockSlider »

LDSToronto wrote:I went to the temple for the first time in 1994 and so missed out on that pre-1990 stuff. This claim always confused me because I couldn't quite figure out if:

1. Satan was telling the truth and he really did rule the earth
2. Satan was lying to get Adam and Eve to listen to him
3. It was a metaphor - Satan is the god of worldly pursuits


"its a symbol of my powers and priesthood" i.e. Satan being the brother of Jesus with 2.5 billion years of pre-this-world-mortal experience is a powerful individual, possibly approaching Jesus's powers and priesthoods.

something along the lines of:

"we shall allow Lucifer, our common enemy to test and try them, that by their own experience they might learn to choose the good from the evil."

I always took it as a solid number 1 in your list.
_Shiloh

Re: The Term Anti-Mormon

Post by _Shiloh »

Fence Sitter wrote:
Shiloh wrote:
I like this idea of a spectrum. Mormons critique the doctrine of other Church's doctrine relative to the truth claims of Mormonism just like other Church's critique Mormon doctrine.

This doesn't make Mormons "anti-[ ]" -- just like those who critique Mormonism aren't necessarily anti-Mormon. Donut Boy, Bad Haircut, and the Jedi Sheep Humper would do well to remember that.

I would reserve the anti- label for those who have an antagonistic and negative attitude/behavior towards the religion of others.


I understand what you are saying but having been around it for so long sometimes I feel like the member who claims to love me in spite of my beliefs seems a lot more offensive than someone who will tell me how wrong I am straight out.


I would say that any member who chooses how/whom to love based on belief isn't worthy of the name Latter-day Saint. Sadly, I know the type of member of whom you speak. Blech.
_Shiloh

Re: The Term Anti-Mormon

Post by _Shiloh »

LDSToronto wrote:
I went to the temple for the first time in 1994 and so missed out on that pre-1990 stuff. This claim always confused me because I couldn't quite figure out if:

1. Satan was telling the truth and he really did rule the earth
2. Satan was lying to get Adam and Eve to listen to him
3. It was a metaphor - Satan is the god of worldly pursuits

H.


LDST -- go and find the transcript for the pre-1990 version. It makes a hell of a lot more sense.

Whoever did the script editing for the 1990 version did an awful job and introduced a lot of ambiguity where there was none before.
_RockSlider
_Emeritus
Posts: 6752
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:02 am

Re: The Term Anti-Mormon

Post by _RockSlider »

Shiloh wrote:LDST -- go and find the transcript for the pre-1990 version. It makes a hell of a lot more sense.

So your vote is for number 1, 2 or 3?
_Shiloh

Re: The Term Anti-Mormon

Post by _Shiloh »

RockSlider wrote:
Shiloh wrote:LDST -- go and find the transcript for the pre-1990 version. It makes a hell of a lot more sense.

So your vote is for number 1, 2 or 3?


To tell you the truth Relief Society, I'm going to have to go read it again. I just recall having the same question about Satan, reading through the older version and going .... "Oh..... by cutting out THAT line of the ceremony it introduces all this ambiguity."

I have my homework. I'll return and report.

ETA: If I recall correctly, the ambiguity introduced seemed completely unintentional and came as a result of horrible editing. I don't think there was a theological motive.
_Ceeboo
_Emeritus
Posts: 7625
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 1:58 am

Re: The Term Anti-Mormon

Post by _Ceeboo »

Hey Rock! :smile:

RockSlider wrote:
p.s. ceeboo did you see my post on temple teachings in this regard?


Yes, I am, and have been, aware of this (past and now modified versions).

Thanks for the contributions in the thread.

Peace,
Ceeboo
_RockSlider
_Emeritus
Posts: 6752
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:02 am

Re: The Term Anti-Mormon

Post by _RockSlider »

Shiloh wrote:I have my homework. I'll return and report.


Excellent, perhaps you can also report if Satan did not hire ministers, and that the only true religion was to be found in what Peter, James and John would privately share with Adam and Eve. Thus if you have not received it from the resurrected Peter, James and John, via appropriate names signs and tokens ... you are hearing the gospel of the god of this world.

In the case of Catholics, not only are they a church of the god of this world, but have excelled to the wonderful point of being referred to as the whore of the earth.
_Shiloh

Re: The Term Anti-Mormon

Post by _Shiloh »

RockSlider wrote:Excellent, perhaps you can also report if Satan did not hire ministers, and that the only true religion was to be found in what Peter, James and John would privately share with Adam and Eve. Thus if you have not received it from the resurrected Peter, James and John, via appropriate names signs and tokens ... you are hearing the gospel of the god of this world.

In the case of Catholics, not only are they a church of the god of this world, but have excelled to the wonderful point of being referred to as the whore of the earth.


I think we all know that in the pre-1990 version Satan hired a protestant minister. :) This was introduced by BY and is not surprising given how Protestants in the US were politically and religiously opposed to the Mormons in Utah. I think it is a remnant of 19th century dynamics.

BRM is an idiot and his claim that the Catholic Church was the whore of babylon has never been widely accepted (thank goodness) by the Church. Even David O. McKay thought he was an idiot for putting that little nib in MD.
_Ceeboo
_Emeritus
Posts: 7625
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 1:58 am

Re: The Term Anti-Mormon

Post by _Ceeboo »

Shiloh wrote:
Ceeboo wrote:
Moving past water, if we were discuss things like Joseph Smith, Jesus, God, Salvation, etc, I can't imagine that we would find agreement on what is or is not true. Can you?


I think we would find a lot of agreement. God loves us. God created the world. Jesus is the messiah. Yes, we'll disagree on a lot of metaphysics and specific dogmas. Meh. I don't think those dogmas are all that important and I imagine that when we get to the other side we'll all be surprised.

???? (Confused)

The sources are contradicting!
How does one decide what is true in this case?



My point here is that if we choose our ideology (Mormonism, Catholicism, Conservatism, Socialism) and place it before truth then we are likely to turn to our ideology for answers first, rather than seek them out for ourselves.

It is for each individual to decide what is true and what works for them. No one -- not a Mormon, Catholic, or Muslim -- can instruct humankind on how to identify spiritual truth.


One example: Mormonism teaches that Jesus was/is our literal brother, a created being, and that our salvation (In addition to the blood spilled from the cross) rests upon many other things that we must do to earn our salvation.... and that those many other things that we must do are found only within the LDS church.....and that if we do not do all of these things, we will not be dwelling with Almighty God for all eternity.

Biblical Christianity teaches an entirely different "truth" as to who Jesus is/was and what is needed for our collective human salvation.



Well, I think you are oversimplifying Mormon doctrine a bit but I know what you are saying.

You are focusing on the minutia of metaphysics. Does God sit inside or outside time? I don't know and I don't really care given that knowing the answer to this question -- as if there is an answer we humans could grasp -- would help me be a better Christian and a better husband.

Take it up a metaphysical level, Mr. Boo. The truth Catholics and Mormons share is obviously true: care for the poor, seek peace, and live in kindness.

Dogma about the nature of Christ, "spirit brotherhood" etc.... ultimately doesn't mature, in my opinion. But it makes for interesting conversation!


Rather than force the issue and risk things not coming across as I would intend/like to come across (These boards can be a really challenging and tough gig when it comes to human communication using only typed words), I will simply and only say thanks for all the contributions to the thread.

Peace,
Ceeboo
_Shiloh

Re: The Term Anti-Mormon

Post by _Shiloh »

Ceeboo wrote:Rather than force the issue and risk things not coming across as I would intend/like to come across (These boards can be a really challenging and tough gig when it comes to human communication using only typed words), I will simply and only say thanks for all the contributions to the thread.

Peace,
Ceeboo


Mr. Boo:

You are a proud Catholic and I personally respect that very much. If my words came across as offensive in any way, I apologize.

I simply lean towards universalism.

Oh, and I don't think you are anti-Mormon. I think you critique Mormon doctrine relative to your own Catholic faith. Nothing wrong with that. Not one thing.
Post Reply