Buffalo wrote:Do you have any factual objections to his claims?
I don't know if it matters. Does he have any factual support for his claims? I mean to prove the cause of the "situation" he alludes to is probably a bit more complex and a bit too ambiguous. Yet, its far easier to blame Mormons or Mormonism I suppose. I don't know if he can back up any of his claims with anything more than explaining things away into obscurity. But we can see.
Love ya tons, Stem
I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.
Dan Vogel wrote: I think your view of things is distorted. I understand Mormons like to view their history in this fashion, because Joseph Smith exploited the persecution narrative to unite his people and explain his failures. To be sure, the violent persecution Mormons experienced can never be justified, but it should never be confused with so-called anti-Mormon publications. It’s unrealistic to expect the world, specifically the world of Christianity, not to respond to Mormonism’s attack on their beliefs. In this respect, Mormonism is the aggressor plain and simple.
How can one exploit the persecution narrative when as you claimed the Mormons experienced violent persecution? Without the violent persecution, they would be no exploitation of the persecution. Also, there were antimormon publications feeding the flames of persecution at the time of Joseph Smith. The antimormon publications at the time of Joseph Smith added to the prejudice and ill feelings of the mobs.
Christians have been attacking each other much longer than the birth of Mormonism. The religious wars in europe which lasted well over a hundrend years is proof of that.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
Mormon Doctrine, Bruce R. McConkie, denouncing (passim) various "false" beliefs of other religions and attributing the categorical apostasy of every other denomination to Satan
Doctrines of the Gospel, Institute student manual ("The long night of apostasy lasted well over a millennium. During this period, man-made creeds and practices were substituted for the plan of salvation that Jesus had taught.")
The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, page 425 ("“The brilliant minds with their philosophies, knowing much about the Christian traditions and the pagan philosophies, would combine all elements to please everybody. They replaced the simple ways and program of the Christ with spectacular rituals, colorful display, impressive pageantry, and limitless pomposity, and called it Christianity. They had replaced the glorious, divine plan of exaltation of Christ with an elaborate, colorful, man-made system. They seemed to have little idea of totally dethroning the Christ, nor terminating the life of God, as in our own day, but they put together an incomprehensible God idea.")
Books which promote a particular faith or doctrine are not attacks on everything that isn't that particular faith or doctrine.
If I wrote a book called "The History of Midget Wrestling," would you consider that an attack upon everything that isn't midget wrestling?
The books and talks I cited are all by Latter-day Saints, they are "remotely similar" to the "anti-Mormon" works you cited, and they are all attacking core beliefs of other denominations. They are not merely "pro-LDS." They are, in fact, explicitly "anti-every-other-denomination." LDS general authorities, official LDS curriculum, and self-appointed LDS authors/commentators routinely criticize the cherished beliefs of other Christian denominations.
Darth J wrote:The books and talks I cited are all by Latter-day Saints, they are "remotely similar" to the "anti-Mormon" works you cited, and they are all attacking core beliefs of other denominations. They are not merely "pro-LDS." They are, in fact, explicitly "anti-every-other-denomination." LDS general authorities, official LDS curriculum, and self-appointed LDS authors/commentators routinely criticize the cherished beliefs of other Christian denominations.
Darth J wrote:The books and talks I cited are all by Latter-day Saints, they are "remotely similar" to the "anti-Mormon" works you cited, and they are all attacking core beliefs of other denominations. They are not merely "pro-LDS." They are, in fact, explicitly "anti-every-other-denomination." LDS general authorities, official LDS curriculum, and self-appointed LDS authors/commentators routinely criticize the cherished beliefs of other Christian denominations.
I have read all of the Mormon books/talks in question. I have not read all of the works that you characterize as "anti-Mormon." So you are correct in your insinuation that I could be wrong. The alleged anti-Mormon works may very well be substantially more tolerant and open-minded of other beliefs than those of the LDS authors I cited.
And when are we going to start seeing examples of all these data/quotes I am supposedly taking out of context? We've been waiting a long time for you to finally humiliate me and expose me for the data-miner/quote-miner that I am (and that Wiki Wonka told you I am not):
Although I will admit that you have the upper hand here. You could never be accused of data mining, seeing as how your posts are so blissfully free of data or factual bases.
And you are also correct in your reference to grasping at straws. My attempt to hold an internet Mormon to reasonable standards of objective fact is indeed the part where I try "to depend on something that is useless; to make a futile attempt at something."