Is the LDS church a shining example of Christian Nationalism?

[drumdude]

drumdudes opening link includes a view of what Christ's kingdom means which is like my view and unlike what appears to be expected by some other people.

I first skipped the opening link but went back and enjoyed it. Thanks Drumdude.

I hoped many here would resonate with it! It was a really refreshing perspective, one that I think is sadly very rare.

[Moksha]

Both Mormon Authorities and Christian Nationalists believe religion should be involved in running the government.

Huckleberry, I see nothing but bad things arising out of the Kingdom of Deseret and the New Confederacy. They would try to recreate both of the twin relics of barbarism.

[huckelberry]

Both Mormon Authorities and Christian Nationalists believe religion should be involved in running the government.

Huckleberry, I see nothing but bad things arising out of the Kingdom of Deseret and the New Confederacy. They would try to recreate both of the twin relics of barbarism.

I suppose with half a glance at humor on could look at the enthusiasms for living more biblically and see people hoping to reestablish polygamy and slavery.(or people unthinkingly stumbling in that direction.

It is hard to think of a goal more ridiculous than seeking to live by or reestablish the social rules of a society 2500 years ago. Yes I believe some ideas from that time are still of value but they would not function the same now nor should they be the last world now.

To take the Bible as the last word instead of a beginning word is a trainwreck.

[Doctor Scratch]

lol. I see that the Afore is erupting with rage over my earlier comment on this thread, where I predicted that he wouldn’t bother to respond to a comment that argued that scientific progress was impossible without Christianity. “I’m confident that, at this point, he would prefer that his prediction be forgotten,” writes the Afore.

No: I don’t mind one way or the other. I actually *had* forgotten which thread I’d made the comment on. And anyways, my basic prediction turned out to be largely accurate: I said, “The commentator will not be gently corrected or educated—not by the Afore, anyway. The myth that Christianity is the sole source of science—or that it is the principal source—will be allowed to prevail, and the Afore will say nothing in defense of Islam’s contributions.”

I’m happy to acknowledge that the Afore *did* manage to take time out from his incredibly busy schedule to mention some of Islam’s contributions to science; however, my point that “the commentator will not be gently corrected—not by the Afore, anyway,” was 100% correct. And how! Almost immediately, the withering condescension was cranked up to 11, as the Afore devoted considerable time and energy to making “Mr. McKinney” look as buffoonish as possible:

If I weren't such a gentleman, Mr. McKinney, it's at this point that I would make an observation about your apparently defective reading skills and your unfortunate tendency to substitute insult for evidence and argument.

Classic. Is this the point where I should admit that I made my initial comment knowing that it would very likely prod the Afore into attacking this guy (especially since the guy is not LDS)? Well, hey: I bet he relishes the nostalgia of getting to kick the crap out of someone guilty of “Protestant triumphalism,” and what’s more, he can boast about to all his loyal readers!

[drumdude]

lol. I see that the Afore is erupting with rage over my earlier comment on this thread, where I predicted that he wouldn’t bother to respond to a comment that argued that scientific progress was impossible without Christianity. “I’m confident that, at this point, he would prefer that his prediction be forgotten,” writes the Afore.

No: I don’t mind one way or the other. I actually *had* forgotten which thread I’d made the comment on. And anyways, my basic prediction turned out to be largely accurate: I said, “The commentator will not be gently corrected or educated—not by the Afore, anyway. The myth that Christianity is the sole source of science—or that it is the principal source—will be allowed to prevail, and the Afore will say nothing in defense of Islam’s contributions.”

I’m happy to acknowledge that the Afore *did* manage to take time out from his incredibly busy schedule to mention some of Islam’s contributions to science; however, my point that “the commentator will not be gently corrected—not by the Afore, anyway,” was 100% correct. And how! Almost immediately, the withering condescension was cranked up to 11, as the Afore devoted considerable time and energy to making “Mr. McKinney” look as buffoonish as possible:

If I weren't such a gentleman, Mr. McKinney, it's at this point that I would make an observation about your apparently defective reading skills and your unfortunate tendency to substitute insult for evidence and argument.

Classic. Is this the point where I should admit that I made my initial comment knowing that it would very likely prod the Afore into attacking this guy (especially since the guy is not LDS)? Well, hey: I bet he relishes the nostalgia of getting to kick the crap out of someone guilty of “Protestant triumphalism,” and what’s more, he can boast about to all his loyal readers!

I generally enjoy what he writes about Islam. He’s knowledgeable and doesn’t have an axe to grind or a church to prop up. I think he would have created a lot more value if he stuck to his profession and stopped trying to write books on every other subject under the sun than the one he’s qualified in.

[Doctor Scratch]

Indeed. Merely stating the facts would have been sufficient; there was no need to make the dig about the guy’s reading comprehension. But that’s Mopologetics for you.

[Kishkumen]

Personally, I would say “No.” The LDS Church has been in an essentially marginalized place for pretty much its entire existence. Maybe the idea here is that Mormonism can be lumped into “Christian Nationalism” more broadly, to which I say: Lol!! Offenders for a word anyone?

Regardless, I saw a comment recently on the blog of a leading Mopologist in which the commenter made the point that scientific progress never would have happened without Christianity. Bear in mind: this comment is being made on the blog of a person whose expertise is *Islamic History.* So, will a correction be made, in which this well-meaning Latter-day Saint is informed about the Islamic Golden Age and its contribution to modern science? Or, better to stay quiet and preserve the facade? Remember: the Afore has been taken to task many times for being insensitive to other faith traditions, and yet his response is always, “I devoted my life to studying Islam!” Just watch, though: nothing will be said here. The commentator will not be gently corrected or educated—not by the Afore, anyway. The myth that Christianity is the sole source of science—or that it is the principal source—will be allowed to prevail, and the Afore will say nothing in defense of Islam’s contributions.

An interesting question, albeit a controversial one, is whether Islam would exist without Christianity. I tend to think not.

[huckelberry]

Personally, I would say “No.” The LDS Church has been in an essentially marginalized place for pretty much its entire existence. Maybe the idea here is that Mormonism can be lumped into “Christian Nationalism” more broadly, to which I say: Lol!! Offenders for a word anyone?

Regardless, I saw a comment recently on the blog of a leading Mopologist in which the commenter made the point that scientific progress never would have happened without Christianity. Bear in mind: this comment is being made on the blog of a person whose expertise is *Islamic History.* So, will a correction be made, in which this well-meaning Latter-day Saint is informed about the Islamic Golden Age and its contribution to modern science? Or, better to stay quiet and preserve the facade? Remember: the Afore has been taken to task many times for being insensitive to other faith traditions, and yet his response is always, “I devoted my life to studying Islam!” Just watch, though: nothing will be said here. The commentator will not be gently corrected or educated—not by the Afore, anyway. The myth that Christianity is the sole source of science—or that it is the principal source—will be allowed to prevail, and the Afore will say nothing in defense of Islam’s contributions.

An interesting question, albeit a controversial one, is whether Islam would exist without Christianity. I tend to think not.

Kishkumen , that is an interesting thing to point out. Islam's own self description sees itself growing upon Jewish and Christian foundations. Islam grows in areas that though Christian had been subjected to violent repression of views and groups seen as wrong by the power on the northern side of the Mediterranean. That second observation sticks in my mind as a warning against using power to enforce orthodoxy. That is a warning that I think should be remembered as important.

As to science perhaps one could mention the obvious, that science was built upon the foundation of pagan Greek and Roman thought and technological development.(preserved by Islamic scholars while neglected in Christian areas)

[Moksha]

How badly could fundamentalist Christianity and Mormonism damage science in their effort to wipe out vaccines, evolution, and Jewish space lasers?

[Kishkumen]

As to science perhaps one could mention the obvious, that science was built upon the foundation of pagan Greek and Roman thought and technological development.(preserved by Islamic scholars while neglected in Christian areas)

Good point! Not totally neglected, but a lot of the Greek sources remained inaccessible to the West until the fall of Constantinople.