Giving a Presentation on Mormon Theology

[_bcspace]

Full title: Mormonism and the Nature of God: A Theological Evolution, 1830-1915.

Thanks, Ray!

I just ordered it from Amazon. One Click rules!

Sounds like you'll not actually be giving a presentation on Mormon Theology.

[_moksha]

I hope I don't seem like such an anti-Mormon that you believe I have nothing positive to say about the Mormon church. Mormonism is my heritage, really, even if I'm no longer a believer. And I believe as a group they do many things well. I've expressed that many times to my non-Mormon friends and acquaintances and wouldn't give any presentation without mentioning what fine people Mormons are.

KA

Sounds like you will do a fine job then Kimberly. Sorry if my previous post sounded too cautious.


.

[Guest]

Thanks, Ray!

I just ordered it from Amazon. One Click rules!

Sounds like you'll not actually be giving a presentation on Mormon Theology.

God I am green with envy and jealousy!

You get to share the ugly gospel truth with folks who already consider it a cult AND you have the under garments of our own bcspace in a bunch!

I think that I would point out that their outward kindness is nothing more than a facade which conceals a dirty steel jawed bear trap.

[_neworder]

Just show "The God Makers" :)

[_Sethbag]

I think something that should be important to each and every honest, respectful discussion on Mormonism (or any religion) is that it makes sense to those that believe it. Perhaps it's that I'm an academic, but it does little good to ever explore any system of thought if one does not catch a glimpse into the reasoning and justifications within one's belief structure to truly understand what they believe. Does that make sense? Although you will probably never be able to fully paint a picture of a Mormon's worldview, to most members of the LDS church, it makes perfect sense.

I wanted to quote Hobart's post in its entirety because I think that's a crucial point. Mormons have constructed an entire, internally-supported, and internally-consistent (for the most part) worldview, which makes sense to its adherents. This is the same with the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Catholics, the Hindus, the Muslims, etc. Whenever we are tempted to hear about the beliefs of someone else and think to ourselves "ack, that makes no sense whatsoever!", we must remember that to the believers, whose whole worldview has been tuned to this belief system, it does in fact make sense.

It may not ultimately be true, but all of the enduring religions' worldviews, when viewed from the inside by believers, make some kind of sense. They are specifically refined, over time, to do so.

So whatever you say about Mormon theology, you ought to remind people in the congregation that, whatever you're telling them, and however little sense it may make to most of them, to Mormons it makes perfect sense.

[_antishock8]

Wow. 20 minutes to explain that, in Richard Packham's words (I believe), trying to determine Mormon doctrine/theology is "like trying to nail pudding to a wall". Good luck with that. Everything you say about Mormonism can be claimed by a Mormon to not be True, or accurate, or uttered with inspiration by the utterer.

Frankly, I would approach it from that angle.. I would tell the congregation that within Mormonism nothing is rock solid, whether it be the nature of God, or the succession of prophets, but with the exception of two things:

1) The Church is True.

2) Pay your tithing.

Everything else is up for debate, dismissal, tweaking, weasel wording, backpedaling, etc. But within Mormondom two things are immutable:

1) The Church is True

and

2) Pay your tithing.

That's it. That's Mormon theology in a nutshell. Period.

[_John Larsen]

20 minutes does not give you much time. I would focus on three areas briefly:
1. The nature of God vs. the Trinity
2. The plan of salvation (pre-existence, earthly probation, kingdoms, exaltation).
3. The fall, original sin and faith & works.

That should highlight the key differences between Mormonism and mainline protestantism.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

Richard Bushman's contribution to Oxford's ongoing "A Brief Introduction" series would probably be good. Here's the Google preview:
http://books.google.com/books?id=6m059l ... &ct=result

I also suggest making a point to build on common ground. Being ecumenical is a plus.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

You might also take interest in the review of the book you purchased. Paulson is a very good read in my opinion:

http://www.farmsresearch.com/publicatio ... m=2&id=392

[_KimberlyAnn]

I'm unsure that I'll be able to include information from the book Ray suggested in my presentation.

I just ordered it and probably will not receive it in time to read and digest it before I must outline my message. Mostly, I just ordered the book for my own perusal.

But, thanks for the review. I'll read it.

KA