Gadianton wrote:Just to help the apologists out here a little, if you want to make friends with the EVs a) you've got to forsake Skinny-L tactics no matter how deserving you think some EVs are. b) you need to quit trying to be "one of them". If I were FLDS, I would not write:
FLDS and other LDS will continue to disagree on many things. But, if I'm correct, the doctrine of (fill in blank) need not loom quite so large among them.
The LDS don't want the FLDS to be one of them anymore than Evangelicals want LDS associated with them. A better tactic would be to emphasize less theological agreements. The prop 8 charade was pure brilliance.
In fact, as far as human nature goes, if FARMS were able to show that LDS and EVs are very similar theologically, and if they are right, it will only piss of the EVs more. (that's why posters at MAD get banned for showing FLDS to be similar to LDS).
Interesting comments Gadianton:
Illustrated here is the continuing evolution of Protestant reform. Each group wants to insist that its
interpretation is correct over all the
other interpretations. It’s not only
marketing, it’s an attempt to assert it’s dogma as superior or
absolutely correct as opposed to all other myth dogmas.
Similarity is an anthem to
warring religious myths. The thrust of the Protestant Reformation began an articulation of differences, not similarities.
You are surely correct that: “The LDS don't want the FLDS to be one of them anymore than Evangelicals want LDS associated with them.” It is no less the case that various
other Protestant groups wish to disassociate themselves from groups with which there may be much similarity. As you likely well know, various (many) Baptist groups (for example) which identify themselves by
different names actually have much in common. Yet, they compete (marketing) for allegiance to
their particular group/organization.
While most people don’t recognize religion as a competitive area, the fact is that it is competitive.
JAK
Roger