Student received a book of mormon

[PaulDupre]

Quinn is a respected historian who has been black balled by the the LDS. He isn’t presenting beliefs. He is presenting historical fact.

Well, that’s the real problem, isn’t it? It seems Fawn Brodie had the same problem.

 

[dianaiad]

Well, that’s the real problem, isn’t it? It seems Fawn Brodie had the same problem.

Yes. Fawn Brodie did indeed have a problem with presenting facts. She had a very bad habit of presenting conjecture and opinion AS fact, and was caught doing so.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Uhm…are you telling me that there are no Catholics anywhere that are Holocaust deniers?

I would like to think that this is true, but…unfortunately, I know that it is not true. Their opinion of the Holocaust has nothing whatsoever to do with their religion, however.

That’s not what he said.

He said certain segments of the Catholic Church.

That is not true.

 

[dianaiad]

That’s not what he said.

He said certain segments of the Catholic Church.

That is not true.

I guess you both will have to define ‘segments,’ then.

 

[zaffiroborant]

First, we interpret that as a lesson in going to God in prayer when we want the truth of any religious thing. JOSEPH’S purpose was to ask which church to join. It could have been any question at all. The ‘evil’ was Satan, not ‘other churches.’ and the presence of God and His Son was what chased away that evil. Only after Satan–evil presence–doubt–however you want to interpret that yourself–was gone were Joseph’s questions answered. The one had nothing to do with the other.

Well I don’t see it as a stretch to say that Satan is linked to other churches in the paragraph I quoted.

Yes, it is “wrong for a teacher of Catholicism to say why they believe the LDS are wrong” UNLESS they are absolutely certain that they are presenting those beliefs accurately. Not, please note, “positively,” but ACCURATELY. It is wrong to teach a child this UNLESS they know for a fact that the child’s parents support him completely in what he is teaching. If the CDC teacher is undermining what the parents are doing, he isn’t doing the kid any favors at all.

I’m lost in regards to the bolded sentence, are you saying that a CCD teacher should not teach that the LDS church is wrong if a parent doesn’t want their child to learn that?

…and if we were all that worried about our kids learning about other religions, we wouldn’t have faculty like Juliana Boerio-Goates at Brigham Young University–

I can see I must of expressed myself poorly, the thought that LDS were worried about their kids learning about other religions never crossed my mind.

As to your interpretation of Joseph’s vision…well, it’s not one that we share or teach our kids.

IMO the two quotes from the MADB show that someone taught that interpretation.

 

[PaulDupre]

I did, and yes, Paul, a statement like “where you claimed you served your mission” is generally read as a challenge to the veracity of the claim.

I’m sorry that I misinterpreted it.

I’m sorry too. For the record, I never used the word “claim”. What I said was

Here is the result of a google search on “Mormon baseball baptisms”. Note that they took place mainly in the UK, where you say you served a mission.

Say, not claim. Please don’t misquote me.

Paul

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

For me, a ‘good’ one would simply be an accurate one. In my experience, non-Mormons who attempt to present Mormon doctrine get something wrong, and it’s usually something pretty important.

If we could find objective observers, that would be great; but religions aren’t cars. There’s no such thing as an objective opinion! So…since nobody is objective about religion (not possible…) you’d best go for the bias that you can predict; that of the believer. You KNOW that he is going to present his beliefs in a; the best light, b; as truthfully as he can because he believes he has TRUTH–and wants to share that.

So you know where and how wide his bias is.

Everybody else? You can’t know, except that you know that everybody else has a vested interest in presenting that belief in as bad a light as they can, and unlike the believer, most of them have no real incentive to be factual. I mean, they know the religion is wrong, yes? So what does it matter if what they say is wrong with it is actually not true? whatever keeps the lost sheep away from it is acceptable.

I have found this to be true no matter what the target religion is; so far the antis and the true believers all follow the form; the true believers are the best place to get the information, and the anti’s always, ALWAYS, give lousy and inaccurate information. They may not even mean to or think they are—but they do. Every time.

That’s why ecumenism is necessary - & such a good thing. Anglicans (for example) are perfectly capable of being fair to Catholicism; that’s one example (out of many) that suggests that those who don’t believe, can be fair & informative about what they don’t hold. Besides, believers can be as partisan & ignorant as any opponent of what they hold dear - sometimes, believers are not trustworthy when they speak of their own religion. Not everyone takes a polemic approach to all religions or beliefs other than his own. On boards like this, or CARM, the polemical approach is the favoured one.​

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

(grin)

Our resident Mormon artist who paints everybody as if they are Nordic body builders?

Yeah, I like those, too.

The one of Laman (I think) does make him look a bit like Arnie, but with better hair. The hair-band is very “'90s”.​

 

[dianaiad]

Well I don’t see it as a stretch to say that Satan is linked to other churches in the paragraph I quoted.

Well, WE see it as quite a stretch; so much so that I’ve never heard of this interpretation before…and it is, after all, we who are doing the interpreting. With all due respect, your eisegesis does not dictate our beliefs.

I’m lost in regards to the bolded sentence, are you saying that a CCD teacher should not teach that the LDS church is wrong if a parent doesn’t want their child to learn that?

Pretty much, yes. Of course, that’s probably moot; a parent who did not want their child to learn Catholicism wouldn’t be sending him or her to Catechism classes. Still, teaching about any religion, including one that you don’t know much about, to a child without the direct knowledge and approval of the parents seems like a very bad idea to me.

I can see I must of expressed myself poorly, the thought that LDS were worried about their kids learning about other religions never crossed my mind.

OK…then what did you mean when you were referring to LDS parents specifically;
"saffiroborant:

This is a summary of the first vision on a resource page for home and family on lds.org, While this is geared toward parents I’d bet the LDS equivalent of CCD teachers are parents and that they are quite familiar with these resources and utilize them in their teaching.

It is of course perfectly ok for the LDS to teach that even asking about other churches results in being over come by an evil power.

IMO the two quotes from the MADB show that someone taught that interpretation.

WHAT 'two quotes?" I went back through the history of this conversation and I couldn’t find them. help?

 

[zaffiroborant]

Pretty much, yes. Of course, that’s probably moot; a parent who did not want their child to learn Catholicism wouldn’t be sending him or her to Catechism classes. Still, teaching about any religion, including one that you don’t know much about, to a child without the direct knowledge and approval of the parents seems like a very bad idea to me.

The subject is going to come up in class and when it does it should be addressed. IMO briefly and as a lead in to Catholic understanding of truth. If a parent has a problem with the teachings of the church or touching on the subject of other churches it’s best they address it at home. They are after all the ones with primary responsibility to teach their children in matters of faith.

OK…then what did you mean when you were referring to LDS parents specifically;

Just that the paragraph I referred to was a resource for LDS parents and that it can be interpreted as other churches being the church of Satan. And it seems has been interpreted that way as shown by my quotes from MADB in post 148 (to answer your question below).

WHAT 'two quotes?" I went back through the history of this conversation and I couldn’t find them. help?

 

[CHRISTINE77]

**It’s not a phenomenon restricted to Mormons by any means. I’ve seen it happen to Baptists, Methodists, church and social groups of all kinds and yes, even Catholics. **
It is frowned upon, but it happens. They are joining for the wrong reason.

Diana

yeah, right. I’m sure Mormons are the ONLY ones who do this. I’m positive Catholics dont!!!

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Hi

Joseph Smith and Paul had the same ending, in my opinion.

Please elaborate on this curious statement!

 

[nebula]

That’s why ecumenism is necessary - & such a good thing. Anglicans (for example) are perfectly capable of being fair to Catholicism; that’s one example (out of many) that suggests that those who don’t believe, can be fair & informative about what they don’t hold. Besides, believers can be as partisan & ignorant as any opponent of what they hold dear - sometimes, believers are not trustworthy when they speak of their own religion. Not everyone takes a polemic approach to all religions or beliefs other than his own. On boards like this, or CARM, the polemical approach is the favoured one.​

Well, yes, it’s good to give others the benefit of the doubt. But at the end of the day, it is MORE respectful to acknowledge the fact that sometimes we have deep and sometimes irreconcilable disagreements. This is a more respectful attitude because I take seriously the fact that Mormons are sincere and do understand very well their belief system- this I’ve earned after years of fair and balanced study. To say that we are always going to get on perfectly and that whatever differences we have don’t matter is not to take the other person’s beliefs all that seriously.

 

[nebula]

Well, yes, it’s good to give others the benefit of the doubt. But at the end of the day, it is MORE respectful to acknowledge the fact that sometimes we have deep and sometimes irreconcilable disagreements. This is a more respectful attitude because I take seriously the fact that Mormons are sincere and do understand very well their belief system- this I’ve earned after years of fair and balanced study. To say that we are always going to get on perfectly and that whatever differences we have don’t matter is not to take the other person’s beliefs all that seriously.

I should add as well that Mormons take very seriously the notion that they have the one true church on the face of the planet- the only church that does authorized baptisms, etc. Trying to sweep over that claim would be insulting.

 

[paarsurrey]

Please elaborate on this curious statement!

Hi

In terms of Deutrenomy, they both did not die a natural death, they both were killed hence were not true Messengers, in my opinion.

I love Jesus

Thanks

 

[dianaiad]

The subject is going to come up in class and when it does it should be addressed. IMO briefly and as a lead in to Catholic understanding of truth. If a parent has a problem with the teachings of the church or touching on the subject of other churches it’s best they address it at home. They are after all the ones with primary responsibility to teach their children in matters of faith.

It IS? Why in the world would it? I thought this topic was presented as an anomaly–not something that happened a great deal. However, your solution to the matter is pretty good: deal with it…I would answer it this way: “I don’t really understand what they (whoever ‘they’ may be) teach about this…but here’s what WE teach about this…” and go on.

Just that the paragraph I referred to was a resource for LDS parents and that it can be interpreted as other churches being the church of Satan. And it seems has been interpreted that way as shown by my quotes from MADB in post 148 (to answer your question below).

OK, thanks…yes, I went back to those quotes. The reason I didn’t ‘recognize’ them as examples of believing that it was the evil churches that weighed Joseph down at the beginning of his vision is because…they aren’t.

I would like to have seen the context of both, but lets take a look at them as they sit; each one talks about the form/teachings of the churches, and each one also mentions that there are good ‘Christians’ (as you would define them) in them. The first comes right out and says so. The second references the “Telestial” glory…which, if you know about the “levels of heaven” we believe in at all, still very much ‘heaven’ and not hell. Christians aspire to. There is also this: whoever wrote the second quote is actually, y’know, wrong.

The point is, you are the first person in all my sixty years to have interpreted Joseph’s vision in that manner. So if WE do not interpret it that way, then it’s pretty obvious that we don’t teach our kids your interpretation.

 

[dianaiad]

yeah, right. I’m sure Mormons are the ONLY ones who do this. I’m positive Catholics dont!!!

That has to be sarcasm.

Please let it be sarcasm…

 

[zaffiroborant]

It IS? Why in the world would it? I thought this topic was presented as an anomaly–not something that happened a great deal. However, your solution to the matter is pretty good: deal with it…I would answer it this way: “I don’t really understand what they (whoever ‘they’ may be) teach about this…but here’s what WE teach about this…” and go on.

Bringing in another faith’s religious texts is an anomaly, having questions about other faith’s is a matter of course. I’ve even had it come up in my Brownie meetings and on the playground after school.
Ashes on the forehead, cheese sandwiches on Friday: long dresses and hair, no jewelry or make-up: head coverings, kids notice these things. How can kids not be curious about the faith’s practiced by friends, classmates and neighbors? Not to mention mixed faith families. Of course questions about other religions are going to come up.

 

[paarsurrey]

Of course questions about other religions are going to come up.

Hi

I think no harm for the question. Question of children should be anwere reasonably and logically, that would increase their faith in religion- any religion, that is the need of the hour.

I love Jesus and Muhammad

Thanks

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Hi

In terms of Deutrenomy, they both did not die a natural death, they both were killed hence were not true Messengers, in my opinion.

I love Jesus

Thanks

How do you feel about John the Baptist? Some say he was Elijah come back to life. However, he was beheaded. I love Jesus too!