Informing non-members about Mormonism- suggestions

[_Roger Morrison]

Thanks Trevor, for this civil exchange between we, you & me, who have different interpretations of terms. Really, it is often communication-lacks that create problems between individuals and/or collectives... I'm in red

You are probably correct again. However that does not nullify those elements being consistant in cults. Very few members IN any collective see what is seen by others who are not indoctrinated. IF/WHEN they perceive the negatives to out-weigh the positives, of their collective what ever it might be, they will probably exit.

My unsophisticated definition of "cult" is a group that isolates, coerces, dominates, and destroys its members. "unsophisticated" rather colloquial, and incomplete. Sort of like the word, "intercourse" snapping many minds erroneously to "sexual"... I do not perceive the LDS Church as operating in this extreme fashion. I was never held against my will and forced to chant the doctrines of the church in week-long vigils in which I was denied food and sleep. Nor was I. That behaviour represents extreme cultism. I was never told to turn over all of my money to Gordon Hinckley so that the god-king GBH could drive a Rolls. Nor was I. But, to advance spiritually--according to Mormon doctrine--I, and all others did-&-do have to contribute 10% of all earnings to the LDS church. I view Mormonism as a very inconvenient religion, and I can imagine that most people don't want that inconvenience. I do not see it as a cult. That's my opinion, and I think it is a fair and reasonable one. It is if you want to remain in a state of semi-ignorance. Why would you not want to fully understand terms of reference?

Germany being a fairly recent example.

I don't believe that WWII-era Germany was a cult. I believe it was a nation in the grips of a destructive ideology that played on preexisting desires and fears. There's that boogey-man Communication again. My bad! I didn't intend to suggest preWWII Germany was a cult. What I meant was that they were oblivious to the wrongs/evils that were obvious to those outside of their collective. I should have taken more time to explain that. Then you would have known my intent. Ever learning...

Suggestion re your "tag": A person would have to know You to understand it as You intend. One of the parochial/provincial trends in small groups--speak assuming everyone is an insider. Not good, in my seriously considered opinion. Breaks down communication. My opening sentence alludes to this very thing. (IMSCO :-)

Duly noted. It is just so much less funny to me if I have to explain it to everyone.

Yes-but, yer another unknown like me, playin' in a BIG arena :-)

Warm regards,

Roger :-)

[_Trevor]

"unsophisticated" rather colloquial, and incomplete. Sort of like the word, "intercourse" snapping many minds erroneously to "sexual"...

OK, but when one is talking to a person whose understanding of the word "cult" is informed mostly by popular culture, then why would one, say, introduce scholarship on NRMs? It would seem to me that the important point is that no one is going to ask them literally to drink the Koolaid in Mormonism.

Nor was I. That behaviour represents extreme cultism.

Which is precisely what most people associate with the word "cult."

Nor was I. But, to advance spiritually--according to Mormon doctrine--I, and all others did-&-do have to contribute 10% of all earnings to the LDS church.

The concept of the tithe has a long history in Judaism and Christianity.

It is if you want to remain in a state of semi-ignorance. Why would you not want to fully understand terms of reference?

This is loaded with faulty assumptions about me.

Yes-but, yer another unknown like me, playin' in a BIG arena :-)

Yes, I am.

[_antishock8]

Ignoring your request for "Jason or some other Mormon", I'm going to comment anyway.

I think that when you begin a series of criticism with an emotionally loaded or inflammatory phrase, such as "It's a f*** up cult", the remainder of the criticisms are not well received.

That's fine, but I want to know HOW it's not an unbalanced statement.

cult   

1. a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
2. an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, esp. as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.
3. the object of such devotion.
4. a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.
5. Sociology. a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.
6. a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.
7. the members of such a religion or sect.
8. any system for treating human sickness that originated by a person usually claiming to have sole insight into the nature of disease, and that employs methods regarded as unorthodox or unscientific.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... =screwed+up

First of all I think my use of "cult", to be sure, is an accurate description of a group of people that venerate a deity and/or a man. In Mormonism's case, Jesus and Joseph Smith, to include subsequent prophets, merit the usage of the word "cult", in the manner in which Mormons venerate them. It's not my problem if the Mormon assign's a negative value to the word. That's HIS view, not mine.

Secondly, to use the term "f***ed up" is simply to denote something that is waaaaay out of the mainstream, in the sense that 90% of the population would NOT participate in the rites and rituals of the cult because it's so off-putting. I can guarantee you that MOST of the people I have ever known do NOT want anything to do with the idiosyncrasies of Mormonism because they're "f***ed up". Seriously f***ed up.

The idea that Mormonism ISN'T f***ed up is actually UNbalanced. Jewish Amerinds? Funny underwear? No coffee? Prophets? 10% tithing? Missions? Polygamy? Polyandry? Book of Abraham? On and on... The idea that Mormonism ISN'T f***ed up; that is lies within the bell curve of normalcy is completely myopic and in of itself a notion that is unbalanced. It's about as normal as Moonies or Taliban Islam. It's crazy.

[_msnobody]

MsNobody seemed to think it was a Mormons-only phenomena. It's not.

My comment only had to do with LDS leaving the LDS church. I can leave the Baptist or Methodist church and no one is much going to give a rip.

I do know what you're talking about though, Harm.

[_msnobody]

I think Gospel Principles would be all some folks would need to read to make an informed choice. I mean, if I go to my neighbor and tell him he is a god in embryo, he'd likely raise one eyebrow or furrow his brow. This ad below is in my personal posting space. Too close to my post. Grrr!

[_Dwight Frye]

This ad below is in my personal posting space. Too close to my post. Grrr!

Hit return a bunch of times and then type a period or something. Like this:








.
ad

[_Roger Morrison]

Hi Trev, we're getting a bit picky, but one-more-time in red :

(Trevor) OK, but when one is talking to a person whose (mis) understanding of the word "cult" is XXformed mostly by popular culture, then why would one, say, introduce scholarship on NRMs? An opportunity to "smarten-up" rather than "dumby-down"??? It would seem to me that the important point is that no one is going to ask them literally to drink the Koolaid in Mormonism. Nor in any other church...

The concept of the tithe has a long history in Judaism and Christianity.

True, but not with the strings the Mormon Church attaches to it. Generally it is an expresion of faith. In LDSism, it also expresses obedience, and cruxes one's entry into the highest order of Mormon-heaven. The "carrot-stick" thing. More Cultish than Christian.

This is loaded with faulty assumptions about me.

It might be. However, the question is not intended for any purpose but clarity...

I think if you read (again?) Anti-8's definition you will see he also is using an informed source of cult definition. Unfortunate that others do not accept the long-standing, encyclopedia definition that lists Mormon characteristics quite clearly.

Christianity might be described by some of those traits as well. So what? Personally, I'm not saying, "cult is bad".

As fundamentalist churches go, Mormonism is probably one of the better ones. They are all established upon the same mythology and hope.

Unfortunately they pretty much all resist teaching Jesus' social-gospel. Can't do that and seek after riches. Folks don't seem to understand the "Fall" wasn't in Eden thousands of years ago.

It is NOW in America and its look-alikes that have been living by Aristocratic greed principles for centuries. Hypocritically professing to be Christians while waging wars and creating havoc as they violate the very principles Jesus is said to have taught... Blah, Blah, Blah...

Lets hope Obama can turn things around...

Roger :-)

[_Trevor]

Hi Trev, we're getting a bit picky, but one-more-time in red :

Well, it's obvious we see things differently. I reject the notion that introducing controversial terminology helps clarify anything. You don't. I do not see the rejection of such terminology as inherently problematic in any way. If we return to the initial premise of the thread, then I stand by the idea of informing people in a relatively straightforward way that does not get mired in jargon or terms that are likely to be misinterpreted. My guess is that most folks around here use the term "cult" in reference to LDSism not simply to be informative, but to denigrate the church. I am not joining that chorus. We disagree, and that's fine.

True, but not with the strings the Mormon Church attaches to it. Generally it is an expresion of faith. In LDSism, it also expresses obedience, and cruxes one's entry into the highest order of Mormon-heaven. The "carrot-stick" thing. More Cultish than Christian.

Mormons would say that they simply take these commandments seriously. I don't really see how they are wrong in that or go overboard. You feel differently. Meh.

It might be. However, the question is not intended for any purpose but clarity...

Well, I am glad it was for clarity, because it looked more like misplaced condescension. I am relieved it was not.

I think if you read (again?) Anti-8's definition you will see he also is using an informed source of cult definition. Unfortunate that others do not accept the long-standing, encyclopedia definition that lists Mormon characteristics quite clearly.

What is his informed source? What is that source's value? Is it an "encyclopedia"? Does the "encyclopedia definition" represent the best understanding of "cult" or the best theory for grappling with issues involving New Religious Movements? If not, then I would say that its rejection should be counted as a virtue, not something to lament.

Personally, I'm not saying, "cult is bad".

The fellow who could so ably critique my signature should see the problem with this thinking.

[_Jason Bourne]

WHOOPS! Looks like Jason is surfing on his lunch-break. Great guy! From his post is pasted below, into which are my insertions:

... briefly, the LDS Church is not a cult... In your respected opinion No more than any other religion...Jason, in most protestant churches, Officers are nominated, and elected, by members. Clergy may be selected from beyond the narrow--and sometimes very-limited limited choice--geographical dictates of Head-office. There are no off-limits areas to any of their members. There is no bar of family members to weddings under any pretense (did you mention that in your disclosure list?) in spite of what you call propaganda I think most active LDS families are generally happy and well off As they are in most Assembly of God churches. And as I see in Joel Osteen's congregation, and the number of various churches I frequent as an "Investigator"
and I think the Church helps them be this way. As do those just mentioned above.

I unhesitatingly agree--as usual--with Harmony: You, Jason Bourne, whoever You are, should be attending a Mormon Seminary--too bad there isn't such an open-door--to be educated, in real terms, in preparation to Ordination as a Mormon Pastor, paid for your full-time, Professional employment in service to "God" and Congregation. With a possible career path to a General Authority, and what might lie beyond. Arriving there by other than obedience to out-dated traditions and unquestionable policies!

Maybe, after enough funerals? When All church leaders will have been born in the post 50's?

Warm regards, Roger :-)

Roger

Some valid points! And by the way, were I prophet for the day the first thing I would change is the policy about temple weddings.

[_solomarineris]

Informing non-members about Mormonism- suggestions?

Are you suggesting there's a chance for an educated person falling for this pure fantasy
religion in today's information age?