Anti-Mormon Protestors

[Patriot]

Each April and October, members of The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints attend General Conference to be inspired, motivated,
and instructed. Along with the tens of thousands of faithful saints
on Temple Square there is always a contingent of clamorous,
disrespectful, and obnoxious protesters. Although most Latter-day
Saints are aware that these protestors appear at General Conference,
many do not realize that similar protests, often by the same
individuals, occur at nearly every public Church event.

For several years, Allen Wyatt and other FAIR members have observed
and documented many of these demonstrations. The intensity of the
antagonism towards Latter-day Saints and the Church and the vitriolic
criticism of LDS beliefs and practices are shocking to those
unfamiliar with the anti-Mormon tactics.

Wyatt has put together a collection of pictures from the April 2004
General Conference and the 2004 Mesa Easter Pageant. He includes
comments and explanations for many of these photos, along with
responses to many of the attacks on the LDS faith.

The photo essay of anti-Mormons at General Conference can be seen at

http://www.fairlds.org/apol/antis/200404gc.html

The photo essay of anti-Mormons at the Easter Pageant can be seen at

http://www.fairlds.org/apol/antis/2004mesa.html

by Allen L. Wyatt

[xexon]

Mormons have the same right of religious expression as anyone else. But when it is imposed upon others, a line has been crossed.

I've been to Utah several times. They certainly have an agenda there. The Tabernacle is a real work of art. Acoustically perfect.



x

[Slipped Mickey]

Those protesters are something else. It amazes me that idiots think that they are going to make a difference. How many people do know who have changed their ways because of a protest sign?

Those "Christians" (and they aren't) are advocating hatred. And they believe sowing seeds of hatred will create love?

[Albert]

What amazes me is that Catholics, Methodists and Lutherans don’t protest some of the real bad apples like the Christian Identity Group. My only beef with the Mormon’s (and it’s more with law enforcement) is that they don’t do more to wipe out the Mormon Fundamentalists who live in small conclaves and have multiple wives as young as 14. I honestly don’t know enough about what the Mormon Church is doing to stop it but it just makes me sick.

[cpwill]

lol, did you know the mormon church buys parts of streets?

on these sections, there is a dress code, you're not allowed to spit, i think even your beverages are limited.

:P

[Texsand]

I'm a fifth generation Mormon on my mother's side and you better know they have an agenda. Although frankly its getting harder to determine the difference between theirs and the rest of the right wing christian wing nuts.

[cpwill]

(*i thought you said you were adopted?)

[Texsand]

(*i thought you said you were adopted?)I was and both my biological mother and my adoptive mother are descended from the first members of Mormons. It's called Mormon social services and Mormons having children out of wedlock were and usually are adopted by other Mormons. Get it. They keep it in the Mormon Church.

[cpwill]

hotcha. well at least that's admirable, then.

do you feel they are a cult? (this is often a charge brought against them)

[God]

Mormons are a cult. Latter Day Saints are not.

There are many differences between Mormons and Latter Day Saints.

Latter Day Saints just practice mormonism. They don't follow all of mormonisms beliefs, either. For example, Mormons practice polygamy, and LDS do not.

I am an LDS, not a practicing one, mind you, because I believe that they have potential to be a cult. There are so many things that they restrict. But, if you look at the Catholic church, the same things are restricted. So, why, of all religions, is Mormonism the one that is persecuted and scapegoated? Why not the church that everyone knows faults continuously?

[cpwill]

caffiene?

also, as i understand it, when you die, you get to become "god of your own planet", but only if you're male, women just "make spiritual babies" for eternity, or something of that nature...:rolleyes:

or am i totally off here?

[Thermopylae]

Cp-

Are you the reincarnated soul of a Knight Of Templar?

[Patriot]

But when it is imposed upon others, a line has been crossed.

Have you had an experience where you felt a LDS members was imposing their religion on you? Help me understand what you mean. It's contrary to how missionary work is advocated.

When the Olympics came to Utah the Prophet Gordon B. Hinckely asked the full-time missionaries to suspend their proselyting so as to be sensitive to all visitors that the Church wasn't trying to take advantage of the event.

Agenda? The mission of the Church is public knowledge; 1) Perfect the Saints, 2) Proclaim the Gospel, and 3) Redeem the Dead.

[Patriot]

What amazes me is that Catholics, Methodists and Lutherans don’t protest some of the real bad apples like the Christian Identity Group. My only beef with the Mormon’s (and it’s more with law enforcement) is that they don’t do more to wipe out the Mormon Fundamentalists who live in small conclaves and have multiple wives as young as 14. I honestly don’t know enough about what the Mormon Church is doing to stop it but it just makes me sick.

Mormon Fundamentalists? In our Church there is no such thing as a 'Mormon Fundamentalists.' That name or label might be used by whomever, but it has nothing to do with the LDS Church.

Any member participating in polygamy is excommunicated. That is their only jurisdiction. I don't think you'd what the Church getting police cars and arresting these polygamists would you?

[Patriot]

I'm a fifth generation Mormon on my mother's side and you better know they have an agenda. Although frankly its getting harder to determine the difference between theirs and the rest of the right wing christian wing nuts.

Are you active in the Churh, Texsand? Do you still consider yourself a Mormon or an ex-Mormon? What Church do you attend weekly? Just trying to understand what you mean by 5th gen. Mormon.

[Patriot]

Mormons are a cult. Latter Day Saints are not.

There are many differences between Mormons and Latter Day Saints.

Latter Day Saints just practice mormonism. They don't follow all of mormonisms beliefs, either. For example, Mormons practice polygamy, and LDS do not.


I don't what to argue per se, but much of you say is simply not true. I am a Mormon and a Latter-day Saint. Mormon is a nickname because the The Book of Mormon. Literally translated it means "More Good." And Latter-day Saint is the official name of members given that the name of the Church is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

To prove that your statement isn't correct one has to only go to two official Church websites, www.lds.org and www.mormons.org

[Patriot]

hotcha. well at least that's admirable, then.

do you feel they are a cult? (this is often a charge brought against them)

cpwill, because of my respect for you and your faith, I want to take the time to clarify why the "cult" charge is simply name-calling so that you can at least recognize it for what it is. I'm full of energy and feel like typing, so please be patient with me as I attempt to bring to light this "cult" charge.

As you know, the ad hominem fallacy is described as indulging in name-calling rather than actually answering an opponent's arguments. These arguments "against the man" focuses on the emotions and prejudices felt toward a person or group rather than on the logic of their arguments.

To be short, ad hominem arguments in religious controversies amounts to nothing more than saying, "Boo for you religion, and harrah for mine."

The nasty name most frequently flung at The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) by its detractors is "cult." Undoubtedly the term is meant to call up images of Druids burning captives alive in wicker baskets, of painted priests flinging virgins into volcanoes or of satanic rituals performed in the dark of the moon.

When critics call the LDS church a "cult," the implied logic seems to be that there are objectvie criteria for distinguishing "cults" from "religions" and that since Mormonism is a "cult" and Christianity is a "religion," Mormons can't be Christians.

One flaw in this logic is that there are in fact no such objective criteria for distinguishing cults from religions. Webster's 3rd New International Dictionary shows "cults" as:

1) religous practice: worship
2) a system of beliefs and ritual connected with the worship of a deity, a spirit, or a group of deites or spirits
3) the rites, ceremonies, and practices of a religion: the formal ascpet of religouis experience, Roman Catholicism
4) a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious

One can clearly see that in definitions 1, 2, & 3 there is no distinction between a cult and a religion--the terms are in fact quite synonymous.

#4 comes close to the meaning desired by anti-Mormons. However, use of the term "cult" in this latter sense says nothing objective about a religion itself. It's merely a negtative evaluation, or name-calling menaing "one I don't like."

"Cult" is a word that communicates information about the speaker rather than about the thing described.

"Cult" is therefore a totally subjective rather than objective term.

To both the pagans and the Jews, earliest Christianity was a "cult," but this says nothing objective about Christianity except that it was dislike by those who so described it.

There is no objective definition for the word "cult" in standard English that does what the anti-Mormons want it to do.

To summarize, "cult" is a subjective word meaning, to the particular person using it, "a religoin I don't like." When someone refers to The LDS Church as a "cult" that simply tells us that the speaker doesn't like the Church.

Christianity itself was once a new religion with dynamic leadership, strong in-group bonding, high moral expectations, and additional scriptures, all of which greatly offened the mainl-line religions of its day.

Its leaders were not professionally trained clergy, but they did attempt to convert the world to a truth no one else had. By most of the objective definitions that have been proposed for the term "cult," early Christianity was one.

And so far any general definition of a cult what would fit the Latter-day Saints will also fit New Testament Chrisianity.

But that's not bad company to be in!

Note: Adapted from "Are Mormons Christians" by Stephen E. Robinson

[cpwill]

alright, so the charge of being a cult could be taken a number of ways.

within the generalized meanin that society has agreed to, i think that we can find several different factors that go into whether or not a "belief system" comes to be labled a cult. simply going off the top of my head, i know that i would include.

1. often not so much a belief system as it is bein wrapped around a charismatic individual

2. seeks to control the members entire lives; not necessarily a "let the spirit or truth" guide you so much as a "let us guide you." often this requires limiting of contact with the entire world for a period of time, and may involve rejection of society at large. in general cults usually discourage it's members from leading individual lives, or of developing their own belief systsem. abberation is dealt with swiftly, usually through physical rejection or possibly intimidation.

3. typically, they are rather small, and only last for one, possibly two generations.

4. belief systems that are outside of what folks would consider the historical norm. ie: it is okay to believe that there is a greater after life, or in reincarnation as both of these have a proven history. believing that we all morph into space aliens at which point we are forced by werewolves to feed on the brains of the living is probably a little out of touch.

i found this list online, it seemed to have a fairly good hold on what i was trying to say as well.

Lovebombing : Group promotes displaying excess consideration or even affection towards a new recruit in order to give him a sense of belonging and keep him in the organisation.
Cognitive dissonance : Contradictions are used in conditioning members to accept the group's doctrine or mechanisms. The act of accepting and rationalizing these contradictions is an important element of brainwashing.
Charismatic leadership : Emphasis is placed on the leader or leaders. These leaders can issue commands or edicts obeyed without question. Worshipping and loyalty are paramount.
Deception in recruiting : When one is involved in the group, lies and deceptions in the recruiting material are soon apparent.
Exploitation : People work for virtually nothing, usually to the profit of the leaders.
Separation from friends and family : People are invited to stop talking to friends or family who do not encourage their participation in the group.
Non-critical thinking : Doubting questions about the mechanisms or doctrine of the group are deflected or rejected. Usually, one must experience or be a leader in order to "understand".
Discrediting outside information : Any criticism from the outside is wrong. Only people on the inside really know what the doctrine or mechanisms are all about.
Loss of independant judgment : The person must rely on other people, usually people above him in the hierarchy, before making any kind of decision, even personal decisions.
Fear of leaving : Group promotes the idea that leaving the group is a very bad decision, which may make the member's future life hellish (in religious doctrines, literally hellish).
Sleep deprivation : Group forces its members to work unusually long hours. Sleep deprivation can also be used to help brainwashing.


i have to admit, i know very little about the actual mormon church, how it is run, or exactly what it's beliefs are (i do know the planet and spirit babies thing), but i do have several friends who have had extensive contacts with mormons in their daily life, one of whom i know refers to herself as an "escaped" former mormon (ie: her mother took her and ran); and they seem to be fairly unanimous that all is not kosher within the church of latter day saints; it is from them that i have heard the word "cult". as they are the ones' who hae experience with it, and i do not, i'm willing to give them a listen.

however, i'll be the first to admit i don't know enough to really make a judgement either way.

[DeathMonkey]

As you know, the ad hominem fallacy is described as indulging in name-calling rather than actually answering an opponent's arguments. These arguments "against the man" focuses on the emotions and prejudices felt toward a person or group rather than on the logic of their arguments.

To be short, ad hominem arguments in religious controversies amounts to nothing more than saying, "Boo for you religion, and harrah for mine."

2. seeks to control the members entire lives; not necessarily a "let the spirit or truth" guide you so much as a "let us guide you." often this requires limiting of contact with the entire world for a period of time, and may involve rejection of society at large. in general cults usually discourage it's members from leading individual lives, or of developing their own belief systsem. abberation is dealt with swiftly, usually through physical rejection or possibly intimidation.
...
Non-critical thinking : Doubting questions about the mechanisms or doctrine of the group are deflected or rejected. Usually, one must experience or be a leader in order to "understand".
Discrediting outside information : Any criticism from the outside is wrong. Only people on the inside really know what the doctrine or mechanisms are all about.
Loss of independant judgment : The person must rely on other people, usually people above him in the hierarchy, before making any kind of decision, even personal decisions.

"OK fellas,Irony Police here. Pull over. Lets see some ID."

[Patriot]

alright, so the charge of being a cult could be taken a number of ways.

1. often not so much a belief system as it is bein wrapped around a charismatic individual

2. seeks to control the members entire lives; not necessarily a "let the spirit or truth" guide you so much as a "let us guide you." often this requires limiting of contact with the entire world for a period of time, and may involve rejection of society at large. in general cults usually discourage it's members from leading individual lives, or of developing their own belief systsem. abberation is dealt with swiftly, usually through physical rejection or possibly intimidation.


OK, I'll address each point.

Charismatic leaders in the bible: Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, James, Paul, John the Baptist, and Jesus Christ.

Certainly Jesus Christ must be reckoned a strong and dynamic leader. Is there any doubt that Jesus was in completed control of his followers, or that the disciples would have done anything for him, including the giving of their lives?

Jesus asked his followers to give up everthing (Matt. 19:27-29), 16:24-26), and on occasin refused permission to his disciples even to carry out social obligations to their families (Luke 9:57-62).

Was New Testament Christianity a "cult" because Jesus was a strong and dynamic leader in complete control of his followers?

[cpwill]

no, because it fails to meet other qualifications. for instance, you'll notice Jesus rarely tries to ever intimidate anyone to do his bidding, nor does the group seem to be set up for His benifite.

however, yes, i see the point you are trying to make.

i'm less interested in the whether or not LDS could be defined as a cult (personally i think it's too large and too long-lived to be; but as i said, i have little experience with it) and more interested in what the basic belief system is.

[Patriot]

interested in what the basic belief system is.

cpwill, a good place to start is The The 13 Articles of Faith of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints .

First I'll tell the background, then list out the Articles.

It was a response to a newspaper editor's questions in 1842 that led directly to the 13 Articles of Faith that today describe the essential beliefs and practices of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
The 13 Articles of Faith were first written in a letter from Church founder Joseph Smith to John Wentworth, editor and proprietor of The Chicago Democrat.

Wentworth reportedly asked for information on behalf of a friend who was writing a history of New Hampshire and wanted to include information about "the rise of Mormonism." Joseph Smith responded with a brief history of the 12-year-old Church, concluding with 13 core statements of belief now known as the Articles of Faith.

"The Articles of Faith do not constitute a summation of all Latter-day Saint beliefs, and they are not a creed in the traditional Christian sense," says Utah historian David J. Whittaker. "But they do provide a useful authoritative summary of the Church's fundamental scriptures and beliefs."


1) We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.

2) We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression.

3) We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.

4) We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.

5) We believe that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.

6) We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth.

7) We believe in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, and so forth.

8) We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

9) We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.

10) We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory.

11) We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

12) We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

13) We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul—We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.

[Texsand]

hotcha. well at least that's admirable, then.

do you feel they are a cult? (this is often a charge brought against them)
It's a closed system of belief. Yeah I think it's a cult. I was raised not to have friends that weren't LDS or Mormon. There are fundamentalist Mormons that still believe in and practice polygamy. The fact that the church excommunicates anyone that either publically disagrees with the General Authorities or publishes any literature that somehow discredits the nice clean image of the church for me makes it a cult. Their bottom line belief is they are the chosen ones.

They believe anyone outside of the Church are gentiles including Jews. They believe that yes they can become as God. It's a passage in the Doctrine and Conventants that says basicially "As man is now God was once, as God is now man may become". They are out to convert the world to their system of belief in God. I'd really hate to see them ever take power in the US. They further believe that Mormon men holding the priesthood are chosen to prepare the way for the Second Coming of Christ politically and the world will come together with their leadership called the United World Order, at least that is what they called back in my childhood days.

[cpwill]

hmmm... patriot, how do you respond?

[God]

I don't what to argue per se, but much of you say is simply not true. I am a Mormon and a Latter-day Saint. Mormon is a nickname because the The Book of Mormon. Literally translated it means "More Good." And Latter-day Saint is the official name of members given that the name of the Church is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

To prove that your statement isn't correct one has to only go to two official Church websites, www.lds.org and www.mormons.org
Gosh. I am an LDS. I've been to those websites. All throughout the time that I've been an LDS my teachers and leaders have been telling us not to call ourselves mormons, because we weren't. We just simply followed mormonism. We were supposed to call ourselves LDS because we wanted to get away from the rumors, like polygamy. So, whether or not we agree that they are the same thing, I still believe that they're not. It's what I've grown up being taught in the same church you say I'm wrong about.

[Texsand]

hmmm... patriot, how do you respond?
Let me add this cpwill, Mormon have the right to worship however they choose, as long as they don't interfere with anyone else's right to believe as they desire. I do know from first hand experience the kind of indoctrination member are put through. I also know how difficult it is to leave the church. The only way to do so is to send in writing to the Bishop of your ward a letter stating your intention. They then let you know in no uncertain terms your baptism is invalid along with your confirmation and any other blessing or ordination given by them.

[Ghost]

Here's just my 2 cents...

As an American citizen, you can have any religious beliefs you want. That's fine. Worship Christ, Muhammad, or even Curious George. I don't really care. Just be able to back up what you believe, don't believe it blindly.

I do not, however, like Mormonism. In my experience, it's all about being uptight and elitist, shoving your opinions on other people. The restrictions that their religion puts on them seem kind of ridiculous to me. Can't drink caffeine? Can't drink alcohol? Can't drink non-alcoholic beer? Can't see rated-R movies? Mormonism also hasn't exactly been pro-women's rights. The main thing that bothers me about Mormonism is the power that it puts in the hands of a human being. At any time, their leader can receive 'revelations' which radically change the church's teachings and structure. If the leader says he had a revelation, then as far as everyone else is concerned, he did. That is a power which is far too easy to abuse.

[Patriot]

It's a closed system of belief.

Texsand, I've asked you a question and you did not respond. I'll post it again.

Originally Posted by Texsand :I'm a fifth generation Mormon on my mother's side and you better know they have an agenda. Although frankly its getting harder to determine the difference between theirs and the rest of the right wing christian wing nuts.


Are you active in the Church, Texsand? Do you still consider yourself a Mormon or an ex-Mormon? What Church do you attend weekly? Just trying to understand what you mean by 5th gen. Mormon.

[Patriot]

hmmm... patriot, how do you respond?

cpwill, listening to Texsand about what LDS believe and don't believe is like listening to Judas about Jesus the day he betrayed Jesus into the hands of the enemy.

Texsand is bitter, angry, and anything but LDS, and misinformed and prejudice. Texsand is super proud of the abortion she had 25 years ago, so she can't reconcile her actions with any belief in the LDS faith, let alone be taken seriously as a source of what LDS believe or not.

Texsand is an apostate, and as the Prophet Joseph Smith said, they are more bitter towards the faith any other persons.

How do I respond? Unless Texand has a URL from lds.org or mormons.org, I would not trust anything she has to say about the LDS faith. Why, despite the state of apostasy she is in, she is reflecting on memory of 30+ years ago.

[earth]

Concerning the talk of LDS or Mormonism as a "cult" it would be best to recognize the fact that all religions are cults. The only difference is the number of members.

[Patriot]

It's a closed system of belief.

Elucidate? Why is that good or bad?

I was raised not to have friends that weren't LDS or Mormon.

Hmm, contrary to how I raise my 5 kids and ever other LDS family I know. Texsand, if we are out to convert the world as you allude, pray tell, how can we do that if are only friends are non-LDS?

There are fundamentalist Mormons that still believe in and practice polygamy.

Utterly false. There is no such thing in the LDS faith as "fundamentalist Mormons." It's as impossible as having "Pagan-Christians" or "Islamic-Christians" or "anti-Jesus Christians" it simple does not exists.

Any member who practices polygamy is no longer a member; they are excommunicated. And because they are excommunicated, they can be "fundamentalist Something," but can not be "fundamentalist Mormons" because, a) they are not Mormons, and b) in Mormonisms they isn't any "fundamentalist" to begin which.

Complete flapdoodle.

The fact that the church excommunicates anyone that either publically disagrees with the General Authorities or publishes any literature that somehow discredits the nice clean image of the church

Again, hogwash and tripe. FARMS & BYU are both funded and owned by the LDS faith. I've read plenty of articles from FARMS & BYU that are not favorable to the "nice clean image" and no one has ever been excommunicated for that.

What is more, "anyone that either publically disagrees with the General Authorities" is another ridiculous statement. I have a very extensive library of LDS authors, both General Authorities and non-General Authorities. Those that "publically disagrees with the General Authorities" are not excommunicated. In fact, one such educator and intellectual is Dr. Hugh Nibley. No person in LDS academia is more revered and honored by General Authorities and members alike than Dr. Nibley. If anyone would be excommunicated based on Texsand's criteria, Dr. Nibley would be the first!

Again, complete and utter silliness.

Their bottom line belief is they are the chosen ones.


Elucidate? What exactly do you mean? Why is that good or bad? Israel believes they are the "chosen ones." Why is that good or bad?

They believe anyone outside of the Church are gentiles including Jews.

Here Texsand is just flat out wrong.

They believe that yes they can become as God.

Correct. It's a biblical view, and we believe it.

They are out to convert the world to their system of belief in God.

Mark 16: 15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every ccreature.

16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

And your point, Texsand?

They further believe that Mormon men holding the priesthood are chosen to prepare the way for the Second Coming of Christ politically and the world will come together with their leadership called the United World Order, at least that is what they called back in my childhood days.

Chosen to prepare the way, sure, that is the purpose of the Church.

As to "politically" that's false. One common complaint amongst non-LDS Christiains is that LDS are not political enough. As Jesus said, "Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world."

"United World Order" please find one article or reference on this United World Order as I've never heard of it before.

[Patriot]

indoctrination member are put through


Please expound, tell us what members go through, this "indoctrination" you mention.


I also know how difficult it is to leave the church. The only way to do so is to send in writing to the Bishop of your ward a letter stating your intention. They then let you know in no uncertain terms your baptism is invalid along with your confirmation and any other blessing or ordination given by them.

Did you write a letter, Texsand, asking for your name to be removed from the membership lists?

And you think that writing a letter is "difficult" in order to leave the Church? How absurd! It's got to be the easiest method I know of leaving a Church or any other organization for the matter.

They "let you know in no uncertain terms your baptism is invalid along with your confirmation and any other blessing or ordination given by them," well, duh, that is what was wanted by writing the letter to begin with!

[Texsand]

Texsand, I've asked you a question and you did not respond. I'll post it again.

Originally Posted by Texsand :I'm a fifth generation Mormon on my mother's side and you better know they have an agenda. Although frankly its getting harder to determine the difference between theirs and the rest of the right wing christian wing nuts.


Are you active in the Church, Texsand? Do you still consider yourself a Mormon or an ex-Mormon? What Church do you attend weekly? Just trying to understand what you mean by 5th gen. Mormon.
No I'm not active, I consider myself an Episcopalian. But 5th generation means my mother's ancestors came to Utah with a handcart company, but were Mormon before that, since the late 1840s. I don't attend any church weekly. What do you think 5th generation Mormon would mean?

[cpwill]

cpwill, listening to Texsand about what LDS believe and don't believe is like listening to Judas about Jesus the day he betrayed Jesus into the hands of the enemy.

Texsand is bitter, angry, and anything but LDS, and misinformed and prejudice. Texsand is super proud of the abortion she had 25 years ago, so she can't reconcile her actions with any belief in the LDS faith, let alone be taken seriously as a source of what LDS believe or not.

Texsand is an apostate, and as the Prophet Joseph Smith said, they are more bitter towards the faith any other persons.

How do I respond? Unless Texand has a URL from lds.org or mormons.org, I would not trust anything she has to say about the LDS faith. Why, despite the state of apostasy she is in, she is reflecting on memory of 30+ years ago.

patriot, i am suprised at this.

[Texsand]

Elucidate? Why is that good or bad?
Why would any closed system of belief be bad? And I absolutely think any closed system of belief is bad without questions or doubt. If you need my reasons then it proves my point that a closed system of belief isn't capable of sustaining independent thought or reasoning, and that most definitely is bad.



Hmm, contrary to how I raise my 5 kids and ever other LDS family I know. Texsand, if we are out to convert the world as you allude, pray tell, how can we do that if are only friends are non-LDS?
"Every member a missionary" Friends don't need friends trying to convert them to their way of believing. And when those friends don't convert many Mormons will move onto the next leaving behind some puzzled "friends".

Utterly false. There is no such thing in the LDS faith as "fundamentalist Mormons." It's as impossible as having "Pagan-Christians" or "Islamic-Christians" or "anti-Jesus Christians" it simple does not exists

Any member who practices polygamy is no longer a member; they are excommunicated. And because they are excommunicated, they can be "fundamentalist Something," but can not be "fundamentalist Mormons" because, a) they are not Mormons, and b) in Mormonisms they isn't any "fundamentalist" to begin which..
Oh yes there are indeed those who still believe in the practice of polygamy and still identify themselves as Mormon despite excommunication by the LDS Church. The D&C unless it's been changed again recently has the passages that do in fact make polygamy a revelation as coming from God, "the same yesterday, today and tomorrow". You want to quibble about semantics go ahead. They will tell you they consider themselves practicing the pure gospel as given to Joseph Smith. Polygamy was still practiced long after it was outlawed in Utah by some of the top General Authorities.

Complete flapdoodle.



Again, hogwash and tripe. FARMS & BYU are both funded and owned by the LDS faith. I've read plenty of articles from FARMS & BYU that are not favorable to the "nice clean image" and no one has ever been excommunicated for that.

What is more, "anyone that either publically disagrees with the General Authorities" is another ridiculous statement. I have a very extensive library of LDS authors, both General Authorities and non-General Authorities. Those that "publically disagrees with the General Authorities" are not excommunicated. In fact, one such educator and intellectual is Dr. Hugh Nibley. No person in LDS academia is more revered and honored by General Authorities and members alike than Dr. Nibley. If anyone would be excommunicated based on Texsand's criteria, Dr. Nibley would be the first!
Dr. Michael Quinn - excommunicated, professor of history at BYU. Sonia Johnson - excommunicated publicly wrote in favor of the ERA. There are more. However as it is such a closed system very few people ever cross those lines.

Elucidate? What exactly do you mean? Why is that good or bad? Israel believes they are the "chosen ones." Why is that good or bad?
Well either the Jews are the chosen ones or the Mormons are which is it? You either believe believe what the bible says or you don't. I never said it was good or bad those are your words.



Here Texsand is just flat out wrong.
Do some research that are not all Mormon sources and you will find that most definitely Mormons consider Jews gentiles.



Correct. It's a biblical view, and we believe it.

No the Mormon veiw is anything but bibical. Sorry.

Mark 16: 15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every ccreature.

16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
What bible are those verses from Mark out of? That sure isn't what my bible says.

And your point, Texsand?
The number of contradictions between the bible and bom.

http://www.irr.org/mit/bombible.html



Chosen to prepare the way, sure, that is the purpose of the Church.

As to "politically" that's false. One common complaint amongst non-LDS Christiains is that LDS are not political enough. As Jesus said, "Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world."

"United World Order" please find one article or reference on this United World Order as I've never heard of it before.
How new are you to the church?

[Texsand]

cpwill, listening to Texsand about what LDS believe and don't believe is like listening to Judas about Jesus the day he betrayed Jesus into the hands of the enemy.

Texsand is bitter, angry, and anything but LDS, and misinformed and prejudice. Texsand is super proud of the abortion she had 25 years ago, so she can't reconcile her actions with any belief in the LDS faith, let alone be taken seriously as a source of what LDS believe or not.

Texsand is an apostate, and as the Prophet Joseph Smith said, they are more bitter towards the faith any other persons.

How do I respond? Unless Texand has a URL from lds.org or mormons.org, I would not trust anything she has to say about the LDS faith. Why, despite the state of apostasy she is in, she is reflecting on memory of 30+ years ago.
Standard Mormon answer to anyone who finally became able to think for themselves and left.

[cpwill]

Elucidate? Why is that good or bad?

:shrug:a system which allows for thoughts and growth to only come from a very few individuals will naturally limit it's growth and ability to think and function and adapt. simply as an evolutionary tool it isn't always the best choice.

Hmm, contrary to how I raise my 5 kids and ever other LDS family I know. Texsand, if we are out to convert the world as you allude, pray tell, how can we do that if are only friends are non-LDS?

good point. one of my "sources" (if you will) is a non-mormon who grew up in Salt Lake City; i have never heard her describe this behavior.

Utterly false. There is no such thing in the LDS faith as "fundamentalist Mormons." It's as impossible as having "Pagan-Christians" or "Islamic-Christians" or "anti-Jesus Christians" it simple does not exists.
Any member who practices polygamy is no longer a member; they are excommunicated. And because they are excommunicated, they can be "fundamentalist Something," but can not be "fundamentalist Mormons" because, a) they are not Mormons, and b) in Mormonisms they isn't any "fundamentalist" to begin which.


this i have a hard time buying. every few months in the news comes around news about a case of polygamy. furthermore, i have rarely seen within the LDS church much of an enthusaism for turning in these individuals, i believe a certain amount of sympathy still exists for them.

also the claim that it is impossible to be a "fundamentalist" mormon. you are saying it is hard to be a fundamentalist mormon? on what do you base this?

if you are reffering to the case of the discovered polygamist in particular (and if indeed the LDS church does excomunicate such individuals) then i can certainly understand your point (that they are no longer considered members of the LDS community), however, certainly the definition of fundamentalist mormons is not limited to polygamy alone.

Again, hogwash and tripe. FARMS & BYU are both funded and owned by the LDS faith. I've read plenty of articles from FARMS & BYU that are not favorable to the "nice clean image" and no one has ever been excommunicated for that.

What is more, "anyone that either publically disagrees with the General Authorities" is another ridiculous statement. I have a very extensive library of LDS authors, both General Authorities and non-General Authorities. Those that "publically disagrees with the General Authorities" are not excommunicated. In fact, one such educator and intellectual is Dr. Hugh Nibley. No person in LDS academia is more revered and honored by General Authorities and members alike than Dr. Nibley. If anyone would be excommunicated based on Texsand's criteria, Dr. Nibley would be the first!

what are Dr. Nibley's main and major disagreements with the General Authorities?

Elucidate? What exactly do you mean? Why is that good or bad? Israel believes they are the "chosen ones." Why is that good or bad?

as do calivinists. i don't find that this is outside the bounds of regular religious historical teachins.

Here Texsand is just flat out wrong.

well then, does the LDS use the term "gentile" and, if so, in what manner?

Correct. It's a biblical view, and we believe it.

:raises eyebrow:
A) what exactly do you mean by this and
B) where do you find this in the bible?

Mark 16: 15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every ccreature.

16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

point for you, most religions spread. it is natural for someone who thinks they have something great to want to share it with others.

Chosen to prepare the way, sure, that is the purpose of the Church.

eh, to a small extent. we are called upon to prepare ourselves. however, the call to "prepare the world for the coming of Christ", to me, has always held conotations of A) God requires our help and B) we can manipulate and speed up the timing, both of which are patently false.

As to "politically" that's false. One common complaint amongst non-LDS Christiains is that LDS are not political enough. As Jesus said, "Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world."

:raises eyebrow again: everything i have read on the subject has led me to believe that the LDS control the politics of Utah, indeed, i have never come against anything which argues anything but....

[Texsand]

patriot, i am suprised at this.
I'm certainly not. It's standard fare for those that leave the church. You have the info now I believe.

And yes, while I can be a harsh critic of hypocrisy when I see it, but I never say a person can't believe as they wish, as long as that belief doesn't harm another's freedom to think or speak.

[cpwill]

however, it is not standard fare for patriot (as i have seen him.) at all.

[Texsand]

Please expound, tell us what members go through, this "indoctrination" you mention.
Name any other organized Christian sect that has church lasting 3 hours on Sunday. Name any other organized religion that requires a lessons from missionaries before baptism is possible?




Did you write a letter, Texsand, asking for your name to be removed from the membership lists?

And you think that writing a letter is "difficult" in order to leave the Church? How absurd! It's got to be the easiest method I know of leaving a Church or any other organization for the matter.
Many of those letter go by the wayside and requires the person to check back often to find they have not been removed from church rolls.

They "let you know in no uncertain terms your baptism is invalid along with your confirmation and any other blessing or ordination given by them," well, duh, that is what was wanted by writing the letter to begin with!
I will tell you as I told them, my faith in Christ has nothing to do with the church that baptized me and you statement again goes to the closed type of belief system they have, that only their baptism is valid. And apparently the men doing it is more important that the person's faith in God.

[Texsand]

however, it is not standard fare for patriot (as i have seen him.) at all.
It's standard fare for a Mormon or LDS member of the LDS priesthood. Sorry.

[cpwill]

Name any other organized Christian sect that has church lasting 3 hours on Sunday. Name any other organized religion that requires a lessons from missionaries before baptism is possible?

my dad spends 9 hours at church every sunday.


....of course, he is the minister...;)

honestly, i'm not sure this is a strong portion to attack on. the one-hour service, while standard, is hardly required by law in the New Testament. services used to last up to 48 hours at a time, depending on what part of american history you go to, and there are churches today in the south that have long services as well, typically with breaks in the middle for "meet n greets" etc.:)

Many of those letter go by the wayside and requires the person to check back often to find they have not been removed from church rolls.

why would such a person care?

I will tell you as I told them, my faith in Christ has nothing to do with the church that baptized me and you statement again goes to the closed type of belief system they have, that only their baptism is valid. And apparently the men doing it is more important that the person's faith in God.

have you ever considered the methodist church?;)

[Texsand]

my dad spends 9 hours at church every sunday.


....of course, he is the minister...;)

honestly, i'm not sure this is a strong portion to attack on. the one-hour service, while standard, is hardly required by law in the New Testament. services used to last up to 48 hours at a time, depending on what part of american history you go to, and there are churches today in the south that have long services as well, typically with breaks in the middle for "meet n greets" etc.:)



why would such a person care?



have you ever considered the methodist church?;)
I joined the Episcopal church over ten years ago. :)

[cpwill]

ah, that's right, i forgot you were homosexual. that would make more sense, then.

[Patriot]

patriot, i am suprised at this.

Well, cpwill, I'm surprised you are surprised. Texsand has made several digs and baits and belittlements towards the LDS faith on various forums and treads directed towards me. She apparently has a hugh chip on her shoulders about the LDS faith and goes out of her way to change the topic and condemn my posts on whatever topic I'm writing about (even when it has nothing to do with religion) merely because I'm LDS.

Now, cpwill, I'm bold but not overbearing in my posts.

What is more, cpwill, you of all people ought to appreciate my position. Would you like TampaWRX to define what Christianity is and is not? If TampaWRX has an opposing view from yours, should I believe TampaWRX or you as it relates to what is and what isn't Christianity? Extrapolate that into any other non-Christian believer and any topic in regards to Christianity, and you will clearly see what I'm driving at.

In fact, already on this tread you are questions if my view of the LDS faith is correct or if Texsand view should hold more credibility. Which is exactly the reason I pointed out how unreliable Texsand is for a source on what LDS believe or don't believe.

Either LDS can define their beliefs and such, or they can't. Which is it, cpwill?

[Texsand]

Well, cpwill, I'm surprised you are surprised. Texsand has made several digs and baits and belittlements towards the LDS faith on various forums and treads directed towards me. She apparently has a hugh chip on her shoulders about the LDS faith and goes out of her way to change the topic and condemn my posts on whatever topic I'm writing about (even when it has nothing to do with religion) merely because I'm LDS.

Now, cpwill, I'm bold but not overbearing in my posts.

What is more, cpwill, you of all people ought to appreciate my position. Would you like TampaWRX to define what Christianity is and is not? If TampaWRX has an opposing view from yours, should I believe TampaWRX or you as it relates to what is and what isn't Christianity? Extrapolate that into any other non-Christian believer and any topic in regards to Christianity, and you will clearly see what I'm driving at.

In fact, already on this tread you are questions if my view of the LDS faith is correct or if Texsand view should hold more credibility. Which is exactly the reason I pointed out how unreliable Texsand is for a source on what LDS believe or don't believe.

Either LDS can define their beliefs and such, or they can't. Which is it, cpwill?
You don't seem to know anything about early church history or you'd know about the United Order. So I have to question how much reliability you have. Which by the way was started with the intent that every member turn all their property over to the church. Read to your heart's content. But don't ever question my veracity. I don't have any hard feelings toward Mormons, however I think the structure of the Church is a cult. Joseph Smith had a fully armed militia that he turned loose against the people in Missouri and in Illinois. He was arrested and convicted on charges of fraud. And were he around today he'd be just another David Koresh.


"God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted Man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens. That is the great secret."

"The Scriptures inform us that Jesus said, "As the Father hath power in himself, even so hath the Son power"--to do what? Why, what the Father did. The answer is obvious--in a manner, to lay down his body and take it up again. Jesus, what are you going to do? To lay down my life, as my Father did, and take it up again. Do you believe it? If you do not believe it, you do not believe the Bible."

"You have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all Gods have done before you,--namely, by going from one small degree to another, and from a small capacity to a great one,--from grace to grace, from exaltation to exaltation, until you attain to the resurrection of the dead, and are able to dwell in everlasting burnings and to sit in glory, as do those who sit enthroned in everlasting power."


http://www.helpingmormons.org/TLC_Manti/RefLibraryFolder/JournalOfDiscourses/Vol%2017/JD17-Contents.html

http://www.helpingmormons.org/TLC_Manti/RefLibraryFolder/JournalOfDiscourses/Vol%2017/JD17-047.html

[Patriot]

You don't seem to know anything about early church history or you'd know about the United Order. So I have to question how much reliability you have. Which by the way was started with the intent that every member turn all their property over to the church. Read to your heart's content. But don't ever question my veracity. I don't have any hard feelings toward Mormons, however I think the structure of the Church is a cult. Joseph Smith had a fully armed militia that he turned loose against the people in Missouri and in Illinois. He was arrested and convicted on charges of fraud. And were he around today he'd be just another David Koresh.


http://www.helpingmormons.org/TLC_Manti/RefLibraryFolder/JournalOfDiscourses/Vol%2017/JD17-Contents.html

http://www.helpingmormons.org/TLC_Manti/RefLibraryFolder/JournalOfDiscourses/Vol%2017/JD17-047.html

You said "United World Order," not "United Order."

You say, "But don't ever question my veracity." Sorry, when you are wrong, I'll point it out, as I've shown many times so far.

And you use an anti-Mormon site to show what Mormons believe? Oh, that's rich! :lol: :rofl: :sleep:

Here, let me assist you with sites you can trust about what the LDS believe and don't believe.

Note, I will not answer any posts or questions from anti-Mormon sites.

www.lds.org
www.mormon.org
http://farms.byu.edu/
http://www.fair-lds.org/

[Texsand]

You said "United World Order," not "United Order."

You say, "But don't ever question my veracity." Sorry, when you are wrong, I'll point it out, as I've shown many times so far.

And you use an anti-Mormon site to show what Mormons believe? Oh, that's rich! :lol: :rofl: :sleep:

Here, let me assist you with sites you can trust about what the LDS believe and don't believe.

Note, I will not answer any posts or questions from anti-Mormon sites.

www.lds.org (http://www.lds.org/)
www.mormon.org (http://www.mormon.org/)
http://farms.byu.edu/
http://www.fair-lds.org/
I wouldn't touch those sites you list with a 10 ten foot pole as they are absolutely biased in keeping the LDS image clean and attractive. All I posted was the link to Mormon literature as it was originally written. I didn't post them you Patriot. I posted them for anyone else that has questions about what the Mormons really believe.

[Patriot]

I wouldn't touch those sites you list with a 10 ten foot pole as they are absolutely biased in keeping the LDS image clean and attractive. All I posted was the link to Mormon literature as it was originally written. I didn't post them you Patriot. I posted them for anyone else that has questions about what the Mormons really believe.

And you think I'm biased!

The sites I listed are not biased, the first three are official. While the last one could be biased in defense of the faith.

Do you see, cpwill what I mean? Here Texsand says that if you want to know what LDS believe, don't go to the official sites with a 10 foot pole!

What is more, the only place you can truly go to find out what LDS believe is not from them, but rather, anti-Mormon sites! Only at anti-Mormon sites will you truly know "what the Mormons really believe." :lol:

This is by far, the worst case of bigorty I have ever come across. The LDS cannot define their religion or what they believe. Rather, only an anti-Mormon truly understands and respresents what the LDS believe.

See, cpwill, see what I mean? Do you understand now why I was and am so bold when it comes to her? This proves beyond doubt I was right about her. Case closed.

[DeathMonkey]

Anyone see the Mormon South Park episode?

[cpwill]

Well, cpwill, I'm surprised you are surprised. Texsand has made several digs and baits and belittlements towards the LDS faith on various forums and treads directed towards me.

this is correct, but i was a bit suprised that you were responding almost in kind.

She apparently has a hugh chip on her shoulders about the LDS faith and goes out of her way to change the topic and condemn my posts on whatever topic I'm writing about (even when it has nothing to do with religion) merely because I'm LDS.

such action is not only stalking, it is bigotry, and i would urge you to report it when it happens so that such behavior can be dealt with.

What is more, cpwill, you of all people ought to appreciate my position. Would you like TampaWRX to define what Christianity is and is not? If TampaWRX has an opposing view from yours, should I believe TampaWRX or you as it relates to what is and what isn't Christianity? Extrapolate that into any other non-Christian believer and any topic in regards to Christianity, and you will clearly see what I'm driving at.

In fact, already on this tread you are questions if my view of the LDS faith is correct or if Texsand view should hold more credibility. Which is exactly the reason I pointed out how unreliable Texsand is for a source on what LDS believe or don't believe.

Either LDS can define their beliefs and such, or they can't. Which is it, cpwill?

sorry about my silence on this, i assumed it communicated agreement. you have a very strong point here; people should define what they are and what they are about rather than having those opposed to them do it instead. certainly i would hate for (say) zapata to be the one in charge of defining America today.

however i think your placing a refusal-to-answer on anti-mormon sites was a mistake within the context of the debate; it makes it appear that both of you are interested in making sure that only your sources are heard. the best way to defeat a charge is to face it head on and show it to be weak. if Texsand says she has the "original documents" that put mormonism in a bad light; then show how her selections are innacurate, or have been taken out of context, etc. this is hardly the first time you've seen such an argument; how many debates have we witnessed on these boards concerning the early documents of christianity?

so yes, mormons should be free to define mormonism via what they truly believe, however, they should also be willing to take and answer counter-charges.

[Patriot]

this is correct, but i was a bit suprised that you were responding almost in kind.



such action is not only stalking, it is bigotry, and i would urge you to report it when it happens so that such behavior can be dealt with.



sorry about my silence on this, i assumed it communicated agreement. you have a very strong point here; people should define what they are and what they are about rather than having those opposed to them do it instead. certainly i would hate for (say) zapata to be the one in charge of defining America today.

however i think your placing a refusal-to-answer on anti-mormon sites was a mistake within the context of the debate; it makes it appear that both of you are interested in making sure that only your sources are heard. the best way to defeat a charge is to face it head on and show it to be weak. if Texsand says she has the "original documents" that put mormonism in a bad light; then show how her selections are innacurate, or have been taken out of context, etc. this is hardly the first time you've seen such an argument; how many debates have we witnessed on these boards concerning the early documents of christianity?

so yes, mormons should be free to define mormonism via what they truly believe, however, they should also be willing to take and answer counter-charges.

Thank you and well said.

Hmm, you say, "not only stalking"...wow, never thought if it like that. I'm filling for a restraining order today! :cool: :thinking: :rofl:

[some_crazy_red]

These anti-Mormon demonstrators are like Fred Phelps- they've forgotten the message of Christ, whom they supposedly follow to the letter. It makes me sad and angry to see how far from the peaceful and loving teachings of Christ fundamentalist 'Christianity' has come.

[earth]

You said "United World Order," not "United Order."

You say, "But don't ever question my veracity." Sorry, when you are wrong, I'll point it out, as I've shown many times so far.

And you use an anti-Mormon site to show what Mormons believe? Oh, that's rich! :lol: :rofl: :sleep:

Here, let me assist you with sites you can trust about what the LDS believe and don't believe.

Note, I will not answer any posts or questions from anti-Mormon sites.

www.lds.org
www.mormon.org
http://farms.byu.edu/
http://www.fair-lds.org/

See now this confuses me. This is NOT critical thinking. Think about it. Would a "pro-mormon" site post any information that would be critical of it's religion? No.

So how do you expect to get unbiased information from your sites. And in your defence, Texasand can not get unbiased information from hers. The fact is the truth always lies in the middle. This angers me much in the way of the "patriots" and their blind support of GWB.

Just because a website is either "anti-mormon" or "anti-bush" does not unanimously prove their message wrong. As I said the truth lies in the middle. Both pro + con sites contain truths about mormonism. If you refuse to look at either side you're doing yourself a great disservice. If you feel that your side can do no wrong that you're truly living in ignorance.

Religion is, after all, quite fallible. I think even cpwill has attested to that.

[Patriot]

earth, I hear what you are saying quite clearly and thoroughly. And for the most part it reflects cpwill's thoughts "however i think your placing a refusal-to-answer on anti-mormon sites was a mistake."

However, your conclusions are wrong and I'd like to correct it if I may. (I'm not feeling well, got some sickness and am on OTC meds that are making me feel dizzing, so I'll try and me as clear as I can in this state).

See now this confuses me. This is NOT critical thinking. Think about it. Would a "pro-mormon" site post any information that would be critical of it's religion? No.

earth, because I will not address anti-mormon sites or whatever on this board, doesn't imply a lack of "critical thinking" on my part or in my life. Only that this isn't the forum or method or place I do my thinking upon such a topic.

Not to brag or boast or inflate my ego, but when it comes to anti-mormon material, I've read it all; and by all, I mean I have no issue or quandary or hesitation in looking at a web site or book or whatever in regards to anti-mormon literature; I do that all the time.

I visit non-LDS Christian book stores, and enjoy perusing anything "new" or "hot" on the topic. Last week I went to Barnes & Nobles expressly for the purpose of finding anything "new" or "hot" on the topic.

To illustrate and prove my point, my wife & I in 2003 every week invited "John" over to our house to dicuss his views and "concerns" for us. We often provided dinner and went to some effort to make him fell welcomed and comforable. See, "John" is an active proselyting member & leader of a nationally based "anti-mormon Christian" ministry. "John" brought all kinds of material and books and topics and arguments and ... and ... and ... for a year to my house.

So while your conclusion on what I do on WS isn't "critical thinking," that doesn't resonate with my life's experiences and the choices I make in my personal life.

Would a "pro-mormon" site post any information that would be critical of it's religion? No. So how do you expect to get unbiased information from your sites.

Here you are incorrect. As you know, apologetics is the branch of theology that is
concerned with defending or proving the truth of doctrines, or the formal argumentation in defense of something, such as a position or system.

I provided a URL http://www.fair-lds.org/ which is one of the best "pro-mormon" sites that also contains the most popular "anti-mormon" arguments. The Foundation for Apologetic Information & Research (FAIR) is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of LDS (Mormon) doctrine, belief and practice.

FAIR's job is to "post any information that would be critical of it's religion" and defend it. So, on this point, you are wrong. They are many others "pro-mormon" sites where one can see "information that would be critical of it's religion," but I just choose to share this URL because it's one of the best.

Just because a website is either "anti-mormon" or "anti-bush" does not unanimously prove their message wrong. As I said the truth lies in the middle. Both pro + con sites contain truths about mormonism. If you refuse to look at either side you're doing yourself a great disservice. If you feel that your side can do no wrong that you're truly living in ignorance.

Religion is, after all, quite fallible. I think even cpwill has attested to that.

Never argued that because it's on an anti-mormon site it's automatically wrong. Colored, bigoted, deceptive, biased, incomplete, most likely, but "automatically wrong," never said that or believe it, although in many cases, they are wrong.

The key here is that less educated or informed people my believe that LDS believe something as interpreted trough the eyes of an anti-mormon "minister," when in fact such representation is either a) only 1/2 the story, or b) utterly false.

Let Catholics define the Catholic faith, and don't get your view of them from an anti-Catholic site. Allow Mormons the same respect and dignity. Get the "truth" of it from the pure source at the headwaters, not the muddy waters downstream.

earth, a questions for you: What is theology as opposed to religion?

[earth]

Colour me uneducated. Thank you for clearing thing up Patriot :). I am, after all, not mormon.

Theology as opposed to religion?

I don't know. To me they're really the same thing. Theology, to me, is just a more in-depth look at religion. I am not a religious man. I am a man of faith. To me, there is the difference.

[Texsand]

Colour me uneducated. Thank you for clearing thing up Patriot :). I am, after all, not mormon.

Theology as opposed to religion?

I don't know. To me they're really the same thing. Theology, to me, is just a more in-depth look at religion. I am not a religious man. I am a man of faith. To me, there is the difference.
earth,

The Mormons if they were to have their way would establish the same kind of theocracy they have in Utah across the US and around the world. I was raised a Mormon but had enough sense to leave that church over 30 years ago. I don't get my information from anti mormon websites. I don't have to. I got the religion first hand and know all I need to know about it.