Dealing with Anti-Mormon Literature, p. 14

Post by **_Tarski** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 3:25 am

Ray A wrote:
"The Church" is a large body of people with many varied opinions. You're trying to nail jello to a wall.

And what color jello might that be?
LOL

_Ray A · Post by **_Ray A** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 3:28 am

Tarski wrote:
Ray A wrote:
"The Church" is a large body of people with many varied opinions. You're trying to nail jello to a wall.

And what color jello might that be?
LOL

Pink, as in Pink Elephant.

Post by **_Sethbag** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 3:28 am

Ray A wrote:
Jason Bourne wrote:What is critical. Well and adult member who was at my home saw a copy of one of Quinn's Mormon Hierarchy books and was surprised I would have such negative material in my home. I guess it is in the eye of the beholder.

I think it is. A stake presidency member in my area in the late 80s wondered why I was reading "anti-Mormon" literature like Dialogue and Sunstone. As usual the pedants are trying to trap DCP with their semantics: "You must define anti-Mormon literature!"

Actually it's DCP who is trying to play semantics on what is anti-mormon or not. For example, he says he would never consider the Quinn and Compton works anti-mormon, and equivocated about Larson's book, whereas I think the overwhelming majority of the LDS membership would class all three authors' works into the "anti-Mormon" rubric.

As far as the eye of the beholder goes, I agree with Jason's comment, and I think there are an awful lot more LDS beholders who aren't nearly as subtle in their views of what is and isn't anti-Mormon, than there are beholders who see things like DCP does.

Post by **_harmony** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 3:32 am

Sethbag wrote:
Ray A wrote:
Jason Bourne wrote:What is critical. Well and adult member who was at my home saw a copy of one of Quinn's Mormon Hierarchy books and was surprised I would have such negative material in my home. I guess it is in the eye of the beholder.

I think it is. A stake presidency member in my area in the late 80s wondered why I was reading "anti-Mormon" literature like Dialogue and Sunstone. As usual the pedants are trying to trap DCP with their semantics: "You must define anti-Mormon literature!"

Actually it's DCP who is trying to play semantics on what is anti-mormon or not. For example, he says he would never consider the Quinn and Compton works anti-mormon, and equivocated about Larson's book, whereas I think the overwhelming majority of the LDS membership would class all three authors' works into the "anti-Mormon" rubric.

As far as the eye of the beholder goes, I agree with Jason's comment, and I think there are an awful lot more LDS beholders who aren't nearly as subtle in their views of what is and isn't anti-Mormon, than there are beholders who see things like DCP does.

Which is what I was trying to get at. Dr Peterson is no more the average Mormon than I am (for very different reasons). What he sees as "anti-Mormon" is not at all going to agree with what the average Mormon sees as anti-Mormon, nor will it agree with what the FP and the 12 see as anti-Mormon. The average Mormon is going to agree with the FP/12, not Dr Peterson. If it's in the bookstore, it's probably okay. If it's not in the bookstore, the average Mormon (who is obeying that particular piece of counsel) isn't going to read it, and will likely avoid it like the plague, and that includes Quinn, Compton, etc.

_Ray A · Post by **_Ray A** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 3:33 am

Sethbag wrote:Actually it's DCP who is trying to play semantics on what is anti-mormon or not.

Not in my opinion, because he obviously doesn't fit neat categories, which some are begging him to fit into.

Sethbag wrote:For example, he says he would never consider the Quinn and Compton works anti-mormon, and equivocated about Larson's book, whereas I think the overwhelming majority of the LDS membership would class all three authors' works into the "anti-Mormon" rubric.

So what? Remember, the Church is a large body of people with varied opinions.

Sethbag wrote:As far as the eye of the beholder goes, I agree with Jason's comment, and I think there are an awful lot more LDS beholders who aren't nearly as subtle in their views of what is and isn't anti-Mormon, than there are beholders who see things like DCP does.

No doubt. I still don't think Sunstone and Dialogue are anti-Mormon, but I'm not sure if the stake presidency member I encountered still does.

_Ray A · Post by **_Ray A** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 3:40 am

harmony wrote: The average Mormon is going to agree with the FP/12, not Dr Peterson. If it's in the bookstore, it's probably okay. If it's not in the bookstore, the average Mormon (who is obeying that particular piece of counsel) isn't going to read it, and will likely avoid it like the plague, and that includes Quinn, Compton, etc.

Well it must be okay: http://deseretbook.com/store/reviews?sku=3210062

Post by **_silentkid** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 3:45 am

Ray A wrote:I still don't think Sunstone and Dialogue are anti-Mormon, but I'm not sure if the stake presidency member I encountered still does.

I wonder if the BYU bookstore still keeps the recent Sunstone and Dialogue issues on the bottom shelf of the General Religion section. That's where they were when I was a student there a few years ago. You nearly had to dig to find them. Not to mention the looks you'd get from fellow students if seen carrying one of those issues around.

_Ray A · Post by **_Ray A** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 3:49 am

silentkid wrote:You nearly had to dig to find them. Not to mention the looks you'd get from fellow students if seen carrying one of those issues around.

All you had to do was ask for a brown paper bag.

Post by **_silentkid** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 3:50 am

Ray A wrote:All you had to do was ask for a brown paper bag.

LOL!

Post by **_Polygamy Porter** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 3:50 am

Ray A wrote:
harmony wrote: The average Mormon is going to agree with the FP/12, not Dr Peterson. If it's in the bookstore, it's probably okay. If it's not in the bookstore, the average Mormon (who is obeying that particular piece of counsel) isn't going to read it, and will likely avoid it like the plague, and that includes Quinn, Compton, etc.

Well it must be okay: http://deseretbook.com/store/reviews?sku=3210062

LOL look at the dumbass review, obviously left by a chapel Mormon:

This book takes away from the spirit and I would not recommend it to anyone; there are too many false and/or misrepresented facts.

First red flag for this book is that it is published by Signature Books, NOT a reputable company for good LDS literature. In fact, many LDS bookstores have pulled some signature books off shelves because of their questionable material.

The second red flag with this book is that I found when I started reading, the spirit left the room.

This book has a lot of false and/or misrepresented facts. If you really want to learn about Joseph Smith, there are much better books out there. This is not a book to read. It only takes away from the spirit and I do not recommend it to anyone.

Mormons and their self induced emotional epiphanies...