Jersey Girl wrote:Are you a member of the one true Church of Jesus Christ?
I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Part of our beliefs are that we hold the whole truth, restored from ancient days. That doesn't mean nobody else has truth; we believe that all religions which do good in the world have some measure of truth (some, probably, more than others). I do not make websites that attack other faiths. I do not post on message boards attacking other faiths. I do not write books which attack other faiths. In short, I don't believe in attacking other faiths.
MrStakhanovite wrote:Something could be an evil, racist, anti-mormon website that gave no thought to accuretly presenting the other side and still offer up good criticisms. Motivation doesn't invalidate anything.
And that's acceptable, as long as you do not claim your site is a balanced review of that faith. Rich believes his site is "just presenting the truth" when it is far from it.
Jersey Girl wrote:Belmont,
Am I an anti-Mormon? Please explain the reason for whatever your answer might be.
Thanks, Jersey Girl
I have seen nothing you've said here that would indicate that you are an anti-Mormon.
Simon Belmont wrote: And that's acceptable, as long as you do not claim your site is a balanced review of that faith. Rich believes his site is "just presenting the truth" when it is far from it.
Don't the fine folks at FAIR or Mormon.org believe themselves to be "just presenting the truth"? They don't offer any more of a "balanced view" than Rich does, nor do they present links to sites that are critical of the Church. Yet, you think they are okay.
Morley wrote:Don't the fine folks at FAIR or Mormon.org believe themselves to be "just presenting the truth"? They don't offer any more of a "balanced view" than Rich does, nor do they present links to sites that are critical of the Church. Yet, you think they are okay.
Morley wrote:Don't the fine folks at FAIR or Mormon.org believe themselves to be "just presenting the truth"? They don't offer any more of a "balanced view" than Rich does, nor do they present links to sites that are critical of the Church. Yet, you think they are okay.
They aren't attacking. They are defending.
That's not entirely true. They've tried pretty hard to eliminate straight-up attacks (I think that Roger Nicholson was a driving force behind this), but there was some extraordinarily nasty stuff on there about Bob McCue at one point.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
Daniel Peterson wrote:In my judgment, this statement from Professor Criddle -- made, if I'm not mistaken, on the so-called "Recovery from Mormonism" message board -- is quite sufficient evidence to ground my view of him as an evangelizing anti-Mormon:
"I refuse to be labeled Anti-Mormon. I am Pro-Mormon. Those who would deceive my Mormon loved ones and associates are the Anti's."
This is a pretty standard sophistry on the actual evangelical Protestant anti-Mormon front, too. Very familiar, indeed almost formulaic.
Morley wrote:Don't the fine folks at FAIR or Mormon.org believe themselves to be "just presenting the truth"? They don't offer any more of a "balanced view" than Rich does, nor do they present links to sites that are critical of the Church. Yet, you think they are okay.
They aren't attacking. They are defending.
No attacks = no need for defense.
Rich would probably say he's defending Christianity. And many would say that FAIR does, indeed, attack. As far as the Church itself goes, isn't the phrase "the great and abominable church" (also called the "great whore of all the earth") that is used to refer to Christianity after the so-called "great apostasy" something of an attack?