Internet Mormons vs. Chapel Mormons thread on MA&D

[_Bond James Bond]

I just looked in there for the first time in a while and read this on a spinoff thread:

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index. ... opic=44371

Hello, Danny.

Do this again on our board and I'll get rid of the lot of you without even blinking.

Without. Even. Blinking.

[_moksha]

Wouldn't Dr. Shades have to attend Gospel Doctrine class and Priesthood meeting regularly, for at least a four year cycle, in order to be able to form a somewhat accurate picture of what a chapel Mormon is? Does he? I don't think anecdotal stories collected from dates (Scottie) is very useful.

Shades has apparently been previously worked over at the MAD forum by Scottie's anecdotes, perhaps to make him less credible or in retribution or both. Too bad Scottie did not post links to Shades' mission journal blog so the above poster could be better informed.

.

[_Gadianton]

idea that this monolith has other groupings each claiming their version of perceived truth, you become a postmodernist

Why me, plain and simple here, can you give me a list of postmodern theorists whose work you have either read directly, or read summaries of?

[_Daniel Peterson]

However, for a TBM both internet and chapel Mormons are united in their belief that the LDS church is true and their truth is absolute truth since it is god's church.

Just like both Warren Jeffs and Thomas S. Monson are united in their belief that Mormonism is true and their truth is absolute since it is God's church.

Thanks for providing this illustration of your continuing allegiance to the "two distinct religions"/"two entirely different churches" absurdity. It spares me the need to have to search.

[_Seven]

It is amusing to see how vehemently MADites fight against the very obvious dichotomy in the church between the two groups.

from Dr. Shades:

In this way, apologists have collectively (and perhaps inadvertently) redefined what most Mormons have been taught regarding the role and importance of prophets. Unfortunately, and perhaps most importantly, the prophets themselves have never defined their own role the way the apologists have. Therefore, a dichotomy has been created: Mormonism as interpreted by the apologists, and Mormonism as interpreted by the average member and by the prophets themselves.

You only need to quote the Sunday School cirriculum taught to children and adults on the role of Mormon Prophets in comparison to the beliefs of internet Mormons to prove the dichotomy exists.



I also find these terms useful when discussing which Mormons have studied the unvarnished history vs. those who remain faithful to safe official church publications.
But since internet Mormons deny that the majority of LDS members are really in the dark on the contraversial issues in church history, they will not even use the terms to describe that clear divide.


An "internet Mormon" (in real life) apologist friend recently argued with me that most LDS know Joseph Smith practiced polygamy in Nauvoo. She was sure that I had been a sheltered naïve member who had never read any church history or my scriptures in depth.
I argued that in my opinion, many LDS do not know he had mortal wives besides Emma (and couldn't name you one of them) and challenged her to ask the women in her Ward what they know. I also asked her to show me where I would have come across this information in my lifetime of church activity from church endorsed sources and teaching materials. I had felt very misled by the church about Joseph's marriage to Emma when I first learned of Nauvoo polygamy.

She shook her head in disbelief at my claim and stood strong in her opinion that I was the exception. It was a little offensive that she viewed me as some kind of lazy incompetent fool who should have known if I had been more dilligent in my LDS studies.

Then I confessed to her that if she hadn't shared the Fanny Alger story with me years ago, I might still be in ignorant bliss about Joseph Smith. It was because this information came from a believer that I didn't brush it off as an anti Mormon lie like I would have had it come from a non LDS source. It made her feel pretty bad to know that her casual discussion with me about a dark topic had been the catalyst for my faith crisis. (and I don't blame her at all!)

She recently brought the topic up to me a few months later, admitting she had been wrong. I guess she approached some LDS women in her Ward who were discussing the FLDS and said "You know Joseph Smith was a polygamist don't you?" The women looked at her with shock and said
"What are you talking about????"
I guess they were pretty shaken by it.

Her husband told her to keep quiet about the topic from now on before she causes more damage to the church.

[_JohnStuartMill]

Even if there isn't a strict dichotomy of beliefs, and there's more of a spectrum from literal to liberal interpretations of Mormonism's claims, this is still problematic for Mormondom. The incongruity of harmony and bcspace being in "the same" church isn't mitigated by the existence of people pursuing a middle way.

[_EAllusion]

Thanks for providing this illustration of your continuing allegiance to the "two distinct religions"/"two entirely different churches" absurdity. It spares me the need to have to search.

I think you misread that. Shades in this instance was just attempting to show an example of two categories of belief within a larger category of belief.

By the way, do you agree with whyme's postmodern assessment?

[_Daniel Peterson]

Even if there isn't a strict dichotomy of beliefs, and there's more of a spectrum from literal to liberal interpretations of Mormonism's claims, this is still problematic for Mormondom.

The simplistic dichotomous either/or of Shades's claim is its unique claim to fame, and is precisely the reason I find it so ludicrous. That there exists something of a spectrum of beliefs within the Church is so obvious as to be banal.

The incongruity of harmony and bcspace being in "the same" church isn't mitigated by the existence of people pursuing a middle way.

Harmony is, to put it mildly, an extreme example. Whether she's actually "in" the Church is -- with all due respect -- not entirely obvious.

If she decided to publicly advocate her views (e.g., that Joseph Smith was a fallen prophet after sometime in the early-to-mid 1830s and has probably been damned, that the Brethren are arrogant elitists, that the Doctrine and Covenants and Pearl of Great Price are, to some considerable extent, bogus and to be jettisoned, etc.) under her own name, as "apologists" openly advocate their views, that would probably constitute a sound test of the notion. I'm pretty confident that I know how things would go.

Thanks for providing this illustration of your continuing allegiance to the "two distinct religions"/"two entirely different churches" absurdity. It spares me the need to have to search.

I think you misread that. Shades in this instance was just attempting to show an example of two categories of belief within a larger category of belief.

If Shades hadn't explicitly been attempting to peddle his forced dichotomy many times over the past several years, it would never have occurred to me, from this instance alone, that somebody could be claiming to seriously believe such a thing.

By the way, do you agree with whyme's postmodern assessment?

Sorry. Haven't been paying attention.

[_EAllusion]

Harmony is, to put it mildly, an extreme example. Whether she's actually "in" the Church is -- with all due respect -- not entirely obvious.

What about Ben McGuire?

Sorry. Haven't been paying attention.

Yeah, Reagan's 11th commandment and all that jazz. Well, if you haven't been paying attention, then it's no wonder that you misread that statement from Shades. You have to understand whyme's charge against Shades to understand what he was saying in that reply.

[_Some Schmo]

If Shades hadn't explicitly been attempting to peddle his forced dichotomy many times over the past several years, it would never have occurred to me, from this instance alone, that somebody could be claiming to seriously believe such a thing.

LOL... this is great coming from the biggest Internet Mormon there is.

100% Denial Peterson in every post!

Nice, danny.