Why are people mormon considering it is obvioulsy fabricated?

[ricko]

Would you say this if she were meeting with nice lutherns, methodists, penecostals, baptists…etc…

It sounds like the Inquisition is alive and well…

YES. Christ’s wish is that all men know the truth.

AND

YES. The Rack is dusted off and ready. Care to be the first customer?

 

[dianaiad]

So you want to believe.

I don’t want to believe it, Rebecca.

However, the evidence indicates that you do very little else but criticize the Mormons and Mormonism. I don’t remember you saying much of anything positive about either since January (about when I started posting) and you certainly have not had anything positive to say about Mormons or Mormonism in your last 150 posts…ALL of which, I might add, have been on threads devoted to the discussion of Mormonism.

I will say that you fall more to the ‘critic’ side of the aisle than you do “anti-” but then I have some very strict requirements before I call someone an anti. However, ‘critic’ you definitely are.

 

[dianaiad]

And it is quite obvious from Mormon missionary efforts that they also do not believe that it is okay for people to believe as they see fit. Mormons give a great deal (personally to support their children missionaries) to spread their understanding of the gospel. They believe it is important for people to come to their understanding. And yet again it is bad when Catholics feel that their beliefs matter and that they should not declare them and defend them to others, but it’s perfectly okay for mormons to shout their beliefs and proclaim them as the “truth”.

Of course it is OK for Mormons to do this. It is ALSO OK for Catholics to do this. What’s the matter with you, Z? How can people have freedom of choice, and freedom of religion, if they aren’t allowed to learn about other religions, and actually, y’know,* make that choice*?

 

[dianaiad]

You are serious? Perhaps you truly need psychiatric help! 11 people saying ‘yup, I saw gold plates’ is in no way a serious testimony to events that supposedly happened over a thousand years before!

I could get thousands of people to say ‘Yes! I saw the bible being printed, it must be true!’

Get a grip and compare apples to apples.

Rebecca, speaking of getting a grip…

You do realize that if those plates actually exist, all golden, engraved and bound as they were, that this explodes all theories of Joseph Smith having written (or plagiarized) the Book of Mormon, don’t you?

You aren’t comparing apples to apples here…you are trying to equate the stone tablets of the Ten Commandments with the Wycliff bible.

 

[dianaiad]

I have never heard that jesting. Can you reference it?

It’s a standard joke, Whyme…a wry acknowledgment that we really aren’t sending our most knowledgeable religious scholars out. Mind you, our young missionaries generally know a whole lot more about their religion than people their age in most other religions know about theirs, but, well…the young men have only had time to put a year of college in before they go, and the young women may have had time to finish college, but most haven’t.

They DO know the basics; and that’s what they are to teach others. The basics of our beliefs.

 

[dianaiad]

YES. Christ’s wish is that all men know the truth.

AND

YES. The Rack is dusted off and ready. Care to be the first customer?

That’s actually funny, in a disturbing sort of way…

Or is that the other way around?

 

[Eliza10]

I don’t want to believe it, Rebecca.

However, the evidence indicates that you do very little else but criticize the Mormons and Mormonism. I don’t remember you saying much of anything positive about either since January (about when I started posting) and you certainly have not had anything positive to say about Mormons or Mormonism in your last 150 posts…ALL of which, I might add, have been on threads devoted to the discussion of Mormonism.

I will say that you fall more to the ‘critic’ side of the aisle than you do “anti-” but then I have some very strict requirements before I call someone an anti. However, ‘critic’ you definitely are.

Wow, this comes off like a mean slam on Rebecca. I like what Rebecca has had to say here. I have not researched her posts, as you have, to learn exactly which forums and topics she has been commenting on since she has been a member. I haven’t researched yours either but it would probably be a safe guess than the majority of your posts are about defending Mormonism, even if you don’t stick to your main topic as much as Rebecca.

So what if Rebecca is focused on the one topic while here on the forum? From what I read she is defending the truth. She is likely motivated to get at the root at why Mormons overlook facts and truth about their religion. That is one of my wonderings.

I remember when I first wanted to actually start using a computer I wanted to learn something. My first goal was to learn a thing or two about Catholicism, that religion that was puzzlingly right on many things, but just had to be wrong somewhere. When my husband forbade me to learn about that evil religion, and when I had reconciled - at that point - that it was God’s will that I obey my husband, I had to find another topic.

The topic I zoned in on, as you allege Rebecca has zoned in on a topic too, was Gothardism. I traced the reason we Evangelicals so strongly taught wifely submission-in-all-things to Bill Gothard. Then I spent many months dicussing this ONE man and his teachings whenever I was on the computer, with others getting to the root of the teaching of this man. We had several persistent “Gothardites” there solely to defend the man and his “principles” and “rhemas”, and there were a LOT of similarities with the Mormons here. A lot. Like being more-righteously-nice, blind loyalty to the leader and taking offense to any detraction of Gothard, and other things.

Eventually I realized the topic was spent and moved on. Not long after, it came to me that something I learned there, from my fellow Evangelicals: that no one, not even a husband, is to stand as a barrier between God and conscience. This turned out to be the key to my decision to learn Catholciism - which I knew at that point was most likely going to lead to the discovery that She is what She says She is and then I would have to gulp -be Catholic. What a crisis! But God was with me.

I leaned so much more those months on “one topic” and I am sure Rebecca is learning so much too. I think she expresses herself thoughtfully and well and I am glad for her contribution to these threads. Maybe you are tired and frustrated with her persisting in speaking the truth??

 

[dianaiad]

Wow, this comes off like a mean slam on Rebecca.

No, it’s not a slam at all.

It is an observation, followed by a compliment. As I mentioned, Rebecca has not had anything positive to say about Mormonism or Mormons in her last 150 posts (yes, I looked at them to see), and those 150 posts have all been on threads regarding Mormonism.

I have been posting on CAF non-Catholic religions for seven months, now, and in all that time, I have very seldom seen Rebecca say anything positive about Mormons or Mormonism. I honestly do not remember anything, but since I didn’t take the time to look at each and every post she has written since January, I’m not going to say that she absolutely hasn’t said anything positive.

At the same time, I have very seldom seen her cross the line from ‘critic’ to 'anti."

To me, a ‘critic’ is simply someone who disagrees with a belief system and says so. A critic has definite opinions and doesn’t hesitate to express them, and a critic is, generally civil in that disagreement. I wish more people were critics, rather than antis.I like critics; they keep the mind sharp and the questions coming. Critics make me work and do the research.

An anti, on the other hand, is someone who is willing to lie about the target belief system, misrepresent the beliefs, is willing to insult, degrade, mock, demonstrate…who will publish books, articles and pamphlets critical of the target faith that are inaccurate, insulting and mocking. An anti-Mormon, for instance, would applaud (if not join) the guy who put the “The deceased is in hell and you will soon follow if you don’t leave the Devil Mormon church!” under the windshield wipers at my husband’s funeral.

Rebecca doesn’t do that. She gets really irritated at me, and can sometimes lose her cool, but that’s understandable. I’m irritating. I don’t MEAN to be, but…

I like what Rebecca has had to say here. I have not researched her posts, as you have, to learn exactly which forums and topics she has been commenting on since she has been a member. I haven’t researched yours either but it would probably be a safe guess than the majority of your posts are about defending Mormonism, even if you don’t stick to your main topic as much as Rebecca.

Eliza, I’m a Mormon. It would be extremely rude of me, not to mention stupid, to join threads that discussed Catholic beliefs in any forum but non-Catholic religions. The only time I address Catholic beliefs is when I am a: defending what they are and b: absolutely certain that there is an honest to goodness Catholic right there to keep me out of trouble. I’m SUPPOSED to be only on threads that discuss Mormonism. Rebecca is a Catholic. It’s OK for her to post elsewhere, too. Really.

So what if Rebecca is focused on the one topic while here on the forum? From what I read she is defending the truth. She is likely motivated to get at the root at why Mormons overlook facts and truth about their religion. That is one of my wonderings.

You are looking at it from a different perspective, Eliza. However, whether you approve of her posts or not, the fact is, she is constantly critical. I was simply responding to her claim that she wasn’t.

I remember when I first wanted to actually start using a computer I wanted to learn something. My first goal was to learn a thing or two about Catholicism, that religion that was puzzlingly right on many things, but just had to be wrong somewhere. When my husband forbade me to learn about that evil religion, and when I had reconciled - at that point - that it was God’s will that I obey my husband, I had to find another topic.

The topic I zoned in on, as you allege Rebecca has zoned in on a topic too, was Gothardism. I traced the reason we Evangelicals so strongly taught wifely submission-in-all-things to Bill Gothard. Then I spent many months dicussing this ONE man and his teachings whenever I was on the computer, with others getting to the root of the teaching of this man. We had several persistent “Gothardites” there solely to defend the man and his “principles” and “rhemas”, and there were a LOT of similarities with the Mormons here. A lot. Like being more-righteously-nice, blind loyalty to the leader and taking offense to any detraction of Gothard, and other things.

Eventually I realized the topic was spent and moved on. Not long after, it came to me that something I learned there, from my fellow Evangelicals: that no one, not even a husband, is to stand as a barrier between God and conscience. This turned out to be the key to my decision to learn Catholciism - which I knew at that point was most likely going to lead to the discovery that She is what She says She is and then I would have to gulp -be Catholic. What a crisis! But God was with me.

I leaned so much more those months on “one topic” and I am sure Rebecca is learning so much too. I think she expresses herself thoughtfully and well and I am glad for her contribution to these threads. Maybe you are tired and frustrated with her persisting in speaking the truth??

Eliza, you are begging a question here. The thing is, she is not “speaking the truth.” She is critical. Always critical. That’s not a sin—but her claiming that she is NOT always critical is inaccurate. Since you and she both believe that she is “speaking the truth,” why do either one of you object to my saying that she is always critical?

 

[zaffiroborant]

Of course it is OK for Mormons to do this. It is ALSO OK for Catholics to do this. What’s the matter with you, Z? How can people have freedom of choice, and freedom of religion, if they aren’t allowed to learn about other religions, and actually, y’know,* make that choice*?

I was talking to whyme ( not that you can’t answer ) and his insistence that Catholics should quit beating people with doctrine. He goes on about this, we should quit pointing out and defending our doctrine because doctrine doesn’t really matter. Just be nice. I just wanted to point out that doctrine is important to LDS, that they are interested in defending and teaching it to others as they should be.

When we defend our doctrine he calls us dogmatists, I don’t see him criticizing LDS posters for doing the same thing If he is going to insist that Catholics should quit wasting their time defending and teaching their faith he should also be calling the LDS on it’s equal waste of time spent on defending and teaching of their doctrine.

If it is a waste of time for Catholics to defend their faith, it is a waste of time for LDS to do the same.

 

[RebeccaJ]

I think it was C.S. Lewis who said something about, reducing Christianity to being nice, is the greatest travesty.

 

[dianaiad]

I was talking to whyme ( not that you can’t answer ) and his insistence that Catholics should quit beating people with doctrine. He goes on about this, we should quit pointing out and defending our doctrine because doctrine doesn’t really matter. Just be nice. I just wanted to point out that doctrine is important to LDS, that they are interested in defending and teaching it to others as they should be.

When we defend our doctrine he calls us dogmatists, I don’t see him criticizing LDS posters for doing the same thing If he is going to insist that Catholics should quit wasting their time defending and teaching their faith he should also be calling the LDS on it’s equal waste of time spent on defending and teaching of their doctrine.

If it is a waste of time for Catholics to defend their faith, it is a waste of time for LDS to do the same.

Oh, don’t get me on my soapbox, Z.

“Defending the faith” means that you defend YOUR faith, not attack others. If you get on a forum devoted to the discussion of, say, Mormonism, and you are constantly criticizing Mormon Doctrine (or at least what you think Mormon doctrine is…not necessarily the same thing) then you are NOT defending the Catholic faith. You are attacking the Mormons.

but the Mormon is defending HIS.

Here is a hypothetical situation: a couple of Mormon missionaries come to your door. They start a lesson about the Godhood, and you soon get ear-deep in a discussion of the Trinity. They keep asking questions and presenting the reasons for their beliefs, and you respond by presenting the scriptures and reasons you believe in your version of the Trinity. You are defending your faith.

Another situation…not very hypothetical at all. There is this forum dedicated to the discussion of non-Catholic religions. Several of the threads are dedicated to Mormonism. You join them, and all your points are about how stupid, cultish, evil and nasty Mormonism is. You claim that Mormons believe this thing, or that thing…and you never once discuss what Catholics believe about the issue under discussion or present scriptures/reasons for that belief.

In the meantime, the Mormons on that thread are either defending their beliefs (that is, if you got their beliefs right, which happens every so often) or are saying that no, they don’t either believe THAT, they believe THIS…and are not discussing the Catholic beliefs on the matter at all.

In THAT case, Z, you are not defending your faith. You are attacking theirs. THEY are defending their faith.

Here’s my third and last hypothetical situation: suppose that a Mormon went into, oh, any other sub-forum BUT 'non-Catholic religions" and proceeded to tell everybody there that they were idol worshipers or cannibals or Mary worshipers (you know, the standard anti-Catholic claptrap). You respond to that person, explaining the truth of your beliefs and debunking his erroneous claims about you. NOW you are defending your faith.

The phrase “The best defense is a good offense” only applies in war and politics, Z. So much so that if you use it in religion, it *becomes *war and politics.

By the way; I haven’t looked, but I’ll predict that there aren’t any Mormons in those other forums in CAF doing any such thing. Further, I’ll predict that the moderators haven’t had to keep any Mormons from going onto other forums in CAF to do any such thing–and if there is one, lemee at him.

 

[PaulDupre]

I have been posting on CAF non-Catholic religions for seven months, now, and in all that time, I have very seldom seen Rebecca say anything positive about Mormons or Mormonism.

For those of us who have been Mormon and know Mormonism for what it is, there is nothing positive to say about Mormonism.

 

[dianaiad]

For those of us who have been Mormon and know Mormonism for what it is, there is nothing positive to say about Mormonism.

We have a glorious choir, y’know.

…and Glen Beck.

…and Harry Ried.

(pick your extremist…)

Oh…and BYU IS a tier 1 school.

We live longer, divorce less, and go to church more often than almost everybody else.

We love our spouses, our children, emphasize education and our women exercised full voting rights before any other American women.

We do not go around saying that “there is nothing positive” about any other faith.

 

[zaffiroborant]

It’s a standard joke, Whyme…a wry acknowledgment that we really aren’t sending our most knowledgeable religious scholars out. Mind you, our young missionaries generally know a whole lot more about their religion than people their age in most other religions know about theirs, but, well…the young men have only had time to put a year of college in before they go, and the young women may have had time to finish college, but most haven’t.

They DO know the basics; and that’s what they are to teach others. The basics of our beliefs.

The old joke “you’re eighteen now, move out while you still know everything” comes into play here. A know it all nineteen year old, on a mission from God, with a inaccurate understanding of what I believe is just…tiresome. Sorry I wasn’t really fond of or patient with teenagers when I was one and I still don’t have any patience with the know it all ones.

 

[RebeccaJ]

I don’t want to believe it, Rebecca.

However, the evidence indicates that you do very little else but criticize the Mormons and Mormonism. I don’t remember you saying much of anything positive about either since January (about when I started posting) and you certainly have not had anything positive to say about Mormons or Mormonism in your last 150 posts…ALL of which, I might add, have been on threads devoted to the discussion of Mormonism.

I will say that you fall more to the ‘critic’ side of the aisle than you do “anti-” but then I have some very strict requirements before I call someone an anti. However, ‘critic’ you definitely are.

oh, the usual attack. Saw it coming though, with the “I’m in rebellion” comment. Just impossible to believe that I am quite sincere about what I have to say. Explain it away. Demonize me and other former mormons. blah. blah. blah. Been there done that. As predictable as the sunrise.

Whatever. I have nothing to say positive about mormonism, the religion. I see it as nothing but a way to keep people from knowing truth, as it did myself, for most of my life. The people, I have no problem with, other than, they can be as mean and vindictive as they can be nice. Tends to engender this non-trust of mormons. Which definitely, I don’t trust a mormon. Not one.

 

[dianaiad]

The old joke “you’re eighteen now, move out while you still know everything” comes into play here. A know it all nineteen year old, on a mission from God, with a inaccurate understanding of what I believe is just…tiresome. Sorry I wasn’t really fond of or patient with teenagers when I was one and I still don’t have any patience with the know it all ones.

Zaffiorborant…you are no longer nineteen. Your understanding of what I believe can’t be described as anything but inaccurate. Since that is true, don’t you think you should cut them some slack? they aren’t SUPPOSED to know what YOU believe, after all.

 

[dianaiad]

oh, the usual attack. Saw it coming though, with the “I’m in rebellion” comment. Just impossible to believe that I am quite sincere about what I have to say. Explain it away. Demonize me and other former mormons. blah. blah. blah. Been there done that. As predictable as the sunrise.

Whatever. I have nothing to say positive about mormonism, the religion. I see it as nothing but a way to keep people from knowing truth, as it did myself, for most of my life. The people, I have no problem with, other than, they can be as mean and vindictive as they can be nice. Tends to engender this non-trust of mormons. Which definitely, I don’t trust a mormon. Not one.

Rebecca, how can you say that I am insulting you by simply noting what you have yourself just, rather proudly, proclaimed?

In fact, I didn’t insult you. I actually gave you a compliment. If you would rather be considered an ‘anti’ rather than a critic, all you have to do is act like one. Trouble is, even when you try, you can’t seem to keep it up.

You are just going to have to settle for being a critic.

 

[why_me]

oh, the usual attack. Saw it coming though, with the “I’m in rebellion” comment. Just impossible to believe that I am quite sincere about what I have to say. Explain it away. Demonize me and other former mormons. blah. blah. blah. Been there done that. As predictable as the sunrise.

Whatever. I have nothing to say positive about mormonism, the religion. I see it as nothing but a way to keep people from knowing truth, as it did myself, for most of my life. The people, I have no problem with, other than, they can be as mean and vindictive as they can be nice. Tends to engender this non-trust of mormons. Which definitely, I don’t trust a mormon. Not one.

And that is your problem which leads you from being a good catholic. You are judging a whole group of people who happen to be mormon by stating that you don’t trust a mormon. Now of course, we can make comparisons in history. Hitler for example didn’t trust a single jew so he them killed. It didn’t matter who it was or what kind of person he or she was…off they went to be slaughtered. And then of course, we have catholic history equating jews with christ-killers. All Jews were christ-killers…it is this kind of thinking that is dangerous.

For you, the entire group is the same and so all deserve the same treatment. Dangerous.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Rebecca, how can you say that I am insulting you by simply noting what you have yourself just, rather proudly, proclaimed?

In fact, I didn’t insult you. I actually gave you a compliment. If you would rather be considered an ‘anti’ rather than a critic, all you have to do is act like one. Trouble is, even when you try, you can’t seem to keep it up.

You are just going to have to settle for being a critic.

Whatever.

 

[why_me]

Rebecca, how can you say that I am insulting you by simply noting what you have yourself just, rather proudly, proclaimed?

In fact, I didn’t insult you. I actually gave you a compliment. If you would rather be considered an ‘anti’ rather than a critic, all you have to do is act like one. Trouble is, even when you try, you can’t seem to keep it up.

You are just going to have to settle for being a critic.

I am still trying to understand how Rebecca can live in Utah. Her disdain for anything mormon must be a problem. She would be much happier in Lithuania or Poland. It would be like me judging all jews as dishonest living in a jewish part of town. I would be forever looking over my shoulder or have the feeling of being cheated with every transaction in a shop.