Originally Posted By jonvn "But a servant which Jesus Christ?" According to them he is. That's all that matters. If they are happy with their ideas, leave them alone.
Originally Posted By melekalikimaka I have to say that while I don't share the same faith as you do, josh, you do seem like a very nice, earnest man. I'm glad you have found what works for you.
Originally Posted By jonvn Every mormon I've ever met has been a very nice person. One of the things that surprises me are these stories of them turning their back on others. That was just never my experience with them.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Every mormon I've ever met has been a very nice person.<< Me, too. Without exception.
Originally Posted By EighthDwarf I agree that Mormons are generally very good, nice, wholesome people. And josh, you seem to epitomize all these qualities so I echo mele's comments. I would like to ask some questions though - not about Mormons, but about your beliefs. If Joseph Smith restored the true church of Jesus Christ and the "fulness of the gospel", why has the Mormon church changed so much in the last 170 years? One belief that Mormons share is that the original teachings of the church of Jesus Christ (when he was on the earth 2000 years ago) was lost over time. However, it seems like the same has happened with the church Joseph Smith brought about. I know the standard answer is that the Mormon Church benefits from ongoing inspiration through the prophet. Well, couldn't the original Christian church claim this to be the case as well? That they changed the teachings over time because they were also guided because of ongoing inspiration? The church Joseph Smith founded is vastly different today than it was, which is a good thing for current members. But claiming to have the restored church of Jesus Christ seems quite a stretch when modern Mormons have thrown aside many of the restored church's original teachings.
Originally Posted By EighthDwarf The original church was very utopian in nature, trying to isolate themselves from the world, waiting for god to return, etc. The leaders made many speeches that current Mormons wish they never had. The original temple was more of a meeting house than a place for secret/sacred rituals. They practiced polygamy as an eternal principal (not a temporary one) and they tried to distance themselves from mainstream Christianity as much as they could. All these things led to persecution and further isolation so it's great for modern Mormons that the church has changed so much over the years.
Originally Posted By ecdc Josh, the problem with this thread is it underscores the reason some people still think of Mormonism as a cult. Cults notoriously do not trust any information about the organization that comes from outside said organization. I absolutely agree with you that people are better off learning from the faith - initially. But Dug's point is well-taken. There's plenty of fair, objective (at least as best they can be) sources you might point people to that would give you more credibility to than simply pointing them to church-owned websites. Try "Mormon America" or the PBS doc, "The Mormons."
Originally Posted By utahjosh <If Joseph Smith restored the true church of Jesus Christ and the "fulness of the gospel", why has the Mormon church changed so much in the last 170 years? > If you're really interested, there are probably good articles about the topics you have in mind on <a href="http://www.lds.org" target="_blank">http://www.lds.org</a>. Those answers will probably be better than mine. But to me, the key is that there have been no changes to the doctrines of salvation - what it's really all about. The essential teachings of salvation in Jesus Christ, and following Him through baptism, etc are the same. The teaching of the restored Priesthood authority, the nature of each member of the Godhead, the Plan of Salvation - the really important things - have not changed since the days of Joseph Smith. <I know the standard answer is that the Mormon Church benefits from ongoing inspiration through the prophet.> This answer is a good one if it's true, right? Keep in mind that the changes that have happened are more changes of procedure, of culture. Cosmetic changes for the most part. Polygamy, gathering into one place, and other practices were required at the time, and not now. Why? Lots of great guesses aboutnd: Gathering may have been important to help the Church grow and stay strong. Polygamy may have been necessary to restore an ancient law for a time, and to care for the widows - all guesses. We don't always know why, but we have faith that God is guiding the church through His called leaders. But the crucial truths pertaining to our purpose on earth and how we can fulfill that purpose through Christ have not changed.
Originally Posted By utahjosh <Try "Mormon America" or the PBS doc, "The Mormons."> I've seen both of those productions. They are pretty fairly balanced - I hope those kind of projects continue. <I absolutely agree with you that people are better off learning from the faith - initially.> That's who my message here is for. People curious about the church who want to start finding out a little more.
Originally Posted By utahjosh There is no better place to find out what LDS people believe than the official sites. That's what we REALLY believe. It's all out there for the taking, to read and criticize and review.
Originally Posted By jdub >>Every mormon I've ever met has been a very nice person.<< To be honest, my aunt was a little wacky & edgy. But it seems to run in the family.
Originally Posted By ecdc Since the (now) three different threads on Mormonism seem to all have mentioned secrecy, I thought I'd post this excerpt from a new article on Mormonism. This is by Helen Whitney, a great documentary filmmaker who just made the PBS documentary, "The Mormons." I recommend the entire article to anyone interested in Mormonism and how she made the film - it's fascinating. (Note, this is a PDF file) <a href="http://www.sunstoneonline.com/magazine/issues/148/148-32-45.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.sunstoneonline.com/ magazine/issues/148/148-32-45.pdf</a> But this part is appropriate to the current discussion; it's the perspective of a very knowledgeable outsider on the secrecy issue and the things that make Mormonism suspect to outsiders, and her suggestions to the LDS church: "Secrecy. The old chestnut. It never seems to go away. Why? We live in a time of total transparency. People are shouting their innermost secrets on rooftops, on Oprah, or on the steps of their churches. In politics, transparency is considered the best disinfectant against corruption. But the LDS temple remains a no-fly zone for outsiders. You can chant "sacred but not secret" until the sun goes down, but the temple drives people crazy. Even the fair-minded evangelical theologian Dr. Richard Mouw, who is one of the Mormons' greatest friends, wonders about the secrecy of the temple. Mormons don't tell us what they believe. I can't tell you the number of times I have heard this criticism. My experience has been that it is the rare devout Mormon who will own the big, bold ideas of Mormonism when speaking with non-Mormons. When asked about Joseph’s powerful final vision about humans becoming Gods, they usually substitute "godlike" instead. Even LDS Church President Gordon B. Hinckley, when asked by Larry King about the man/God theology, seemed to disown it. "We don’t know much about these things," is what he said. And then President Hinckley comes home to Utah and discusses the interview with a large group of Mormons and basically says, of course we know about these beliefs. Don’t listen to what I said on Larry King Live. Polygamy, I am told by some Mormons, was never really central to Mormon belief. The Beehive House tour guides never even mention Brigham’s fifty-plus wives. Nor is polygamy mentioned in the Joseph Smith exhibition at the Library of Congress that the Church helped create. Some say that barring blacks from the priesthood was never official doctrine; it was simply a practice. But isn’t this a semantic difference that denies its importance? It was a practice that was accepted as doctrine with profound implications for white and black Mormons. Mormons aren’t making absolutist claims, so I am told; they are just adding a new scripture, a new fullness. They aren’t claiming the sole truth. And yet, salvation, according to Mormons, is achieved only through Mormon ordinances. That sounds pretty absolutist to many who consider the purposes of LDS temple and missionary work. I know that Mormons are wounded by not being considered Christian. Many have told me this. Fair enough. But in all honesty, do Mormons truly believe that Christians are truly Christian? Not if you take your theology seriously. There is the sense that you want it both ways. And you are not the only ones. Pope Benedict XVI’s recent statements suggest that he, too, wants it both ways. According to him, other religions, even Christian denominations are "deficient," and yet at the same time, even he would say that Protestants are in some way undeniably Christian. The Pope has been—-appropriately—-criticized for his absolutism and his slipperiness. I am sympathetic to those who tell me that Mormons feel protective of their different beliefs because they are so often ridiculed. In fact, Apostle Dallin Oaks mentioned this to me when I asked him about the Church’s reticence in acknowledging its polygamous past. My response is: Own your beliefs, don’t shave off the rough edges so they fit the mainstream Christian mold. Step into the ring with the rest of us, take your knocks, or the smell of evasiveness and deceit will persist. People who are uneasy about Mormons sometimes say Mormons are smug. They speak about Mormon certainty, which I discussed earlier. They are baffled by the phrase, "I know." Mormon certainty can seem presumptuous, even arrogant. Of course, "born again" Christians and evangelicals are dogmatic in their certainties. Still, that phrase "I know" especially rankles.... Mormons do not have a monopoly on leaders or followers with feet of clay. All religions have their share of flawed human beings. But when Mormons proclaim their virtues so loudly, there is danger of being accused of hypocrisy. One example is Mormon belief in the family-—in the eternal family. I do believe that Mormons have placed an importance on family that is different in degree and kind than that of other religions. And I have been impressed by that—-even envious. But at the same time, and this is an irony frequently commented upon, the Mormon "family" seems to include only those members of the family who fit. For a religion so centered on family, many of its members-—whether its gay members or those who have left the faith-—have been harshly rejected in the name of family values."
Originally Posted By u k fan <<For a religion so centered on family, many of its members-—whether its gay members or those who have left the faith-—have been harshly rejected in the name of family values.">> As a Mormon with a gay family member, and from other families I know, I can tell you this hasn't been my experience at all!!!
Originally Posted By ChurroMonster For better or worse, the Mormon church is very different today than it was a hundred years ago. In the early days the term, "prophet" actually had meaning. Members believed that the prophet actually received revelations directly from God. Today, the prophet is an administrator who occasionally addresses the faithful with nothing new at all ever. In my 26 years as a devout Mormon I never heard anything from any prophet or apostle of the church that was considered to be revelation from God. In the early days of the church, the core beliefs set the members so at odds with their Christian neighbors that violence ensued. Nowadays, the members and, indeed the leaders, emphasize how much they have in common with their Christian neighbors. Polygamy was indroduced as an eternal principle. It was supposed to have been from God. It was supposed to part of the chruch forever. But the church officially ended the practice when political pressure forced Utah Mormons to choose betweeen following what Joseph Smith taught or becoming a state. Mormons chose statehood. Mormons are good and nice people for the most part. I don't think anyone here would argue that at all. It's just a little scary when you have a belief system that you invest all of heart and mind into and yet find no need to question it at all, as so many Mormons seem to do. I would encourage Mormons to explore why their temple ceremonies and symbology are so similar to that of the Freemasons. Find out why political pressure sometimes negates revelation. Ponder the paradox of trying to appear more like a mainstream Christian church when the founder of the church explained that the failing of mainstream Christianity was why the Mormon church exists in the first place. Explore the life of Joseph Smith and find out how many wives he had (and how many of them were teenage girls). Why is the Word of Wisdom now church law when it was intended to be a health guideline only? Why does the Book of Mormon exist? What new insight does it have about Jesus Christ is if it supposed to be such an important witness of him? These are things most Mormons I know (including almost all of my immediate family) intentionally remain ignorant about while claiming to "know" that their belief is correct. I'm sorry. But if you don't know why you believe something you don't really know what you believe.
Originally Posted By jonvn "yet find no need to question it at all" Without questioning, faith can have no meaning.
Originally Posted By utahjosh I'd like to repeat that anyone interested in what LDS people REALLY believe, they visit <a href="http://www.lds.org" target="_blank">http://www.lds.org</a>. Churro's thoughts and the article by Whitney are NOT valid sources on what we believe. Instead, they are valid outside sources and opinions about the church.
Originally Posted By Mr X Of course those things are VALID, Josh. It's a real stretch to say that the only way to learn valid info is at the groups own website. Heck, do you think I could get a valid take on the molestation, payoffs and coverups that occured in the catholic church by visiting www.thevatican.com? Of course not. The thing is, all I've seen people write haven't been anything that could be seen as "invalid". Not at all. In fact, it's pretty obvious that many sources (some very close to the group) are saying the same exact thing. In fact, the only real reason you are able to say "not valid" is the fact that the source itself is so secretive. If I were to write "hey guys, the mormons do ritual killings and are the secret owners of the country of Jamaica and have a base on the moon", well, then sure...of course what I'm saying is not valid. That's not the case here. But anyway, I don't really see what you're getting so upset about, because I haven't really seen all that much terrible stuff written here. Pretty much the worst of it has been that the mormon church is "cult-like", and whether or not you approve of the term has nothing to do with the fact that organizations that are secretive, keep close tabs on their members, and stuff like that (I'm not going into detail here, but you get the drift I'm sure) ARE part of what defines cult behavior. Certainly a lot more than the mainstream religions, in any case.
Originally Posted By sherrytodd I would like to echo what was said about Morman friends. I used to work with several Mormans and they were very nice people and I never felt excluded; quite the contrary. They went out of their way to include me, I was invited to their homes and I even did the MS150 bike ride with them. Yet they were very respectful of my beliefs. My husband was baptised as Morman but long since stopped practicing. Every Christmas someone from the church drops by and brings us a little gift. Never any strings attached. It used to freak me out a little that no matter where we moved they would find us, but I've gotten over it.
