DiscussMormonism.com

Critics often publicly wonder how any honest, intelligent person can believe in the Book of Mormon, the visitation of God and angels to Joseph Smith, or the divine potential of humankind. Yet, although their honesty and intelligence are frequently questioned by anti-Mormon crusaders, many such people do exist, some of them quite well-informed. On the other side, not a few Latter-day Saints vocally marvel that anybody who knows anything could be a Catholic, and cannot see how sane, intelligent people can possibly swallow doctrines like the Trinity. But the fact is indisputable: Many of the most brilliant thinkers in the history of Western civilization have been devout Roman Catholics, and, of these, many have written on precisely the issue of the Trinity.

In the interreligous discussions and, yes, arguments that, for various reasons, are very likely to arise as Mormonism becomes more and more of a public issue in the next few months and years, it would help if each side could grant the other to be, on the whole, sincere, honest, intelligent, and sane.

Finn the human wrote:A few years ago while visiting family in Texas I attended a Stake Conference. The GA speaker (who’s name I don’t recall) lamented the fact that local Christians would get together and talk crap about all the weird Mormon beliefs. Later in his talk this GA referred to the trinity as a “stupid” belief, and that it was nonsensical. While traveling home I asked my believing family members if they noticed the hypocrisy in the GA’s talk. They of course, didn’t.

It seems like the Mormon church is often urging for more civil dialogue as Dr. Petersen is here, and I also appreciate that reminder. I’m also confident that many quotes could be found pointing our Dr. Petersens hypocrisy.

Kishkumen wrote:I agree. Human beings are complicated and the reasons for religious affiliation and belief are also complicated. Lampooning religious belief and affiliation can be an emotionally satisfying part of the process of leaving a religion, but in the long run it is arguably counterproductive and potentially deleterious.

But there is another side to this, I think. Something that cannot be ignored. When religionists seek to impose on others laws that follow from their unique beliefs they invite an inevitable blowback. Here in the US religious laws have retreated before principles of personal liberty. If your belief in the devil makes you fight the right of gays to marry, then you must accept that your exercise of political muscle to push the consequences of your beliefs on others will make you and your beliefs unpopular.

Critics often publicly wonder how any honest, intelligent person can believe in the Book of Mormon, the visitation of God and angels to Joseph Smith, or the divine potential of humankind.

I have a question wrote:Is Peterson making the point that Catholicism is true?

Kishkumen wrote: When religionists seek to impose on others laws that follow from their unique beliefs they invite an inevitable blowback.

it would help if each side could grant the other to be, on the whole, sincere, honest, intelligent, and sane.

Mr. Midgley wrote:I actually very much agree that some information about a member of the Church, or anyone for that matter, who had rough spots, but there is any even moderately good reason to believe that they had repented, then it is not appropriate to drag up unseemly details if one is telling a general history of, for example, the Church in Utah County or the Church in Fiji or wherever.