- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I was blown away by the essay to which I’m linking. Literally, I was left almost speechless – and everyone here knows how hard that is to do. 
I am not going to start with any specific quotes, since I don’t want to bias your reading in any way. Rather, I encourage everyone to read it and post your own excerpts and reactions.
“
Mormonism Obsessed with Christ” – Stephen W. Webb ( http://www.firstthings.com/article/2012/01/mormonism-obsessed-with-christ Very interesting. I thought the analogy to people talking about someone’s beloved grandfather at a funeral was helpful to the evangelical / Mormon dialogue. Of course, I’m just a materialistic Mormon . . . I have often felt that our “materialism” as he calls it (our belief that the flesh is also divine along with the spirit) is one of the more compelling points of our theology. We can’t hate the body. We can’t hate the earthly experience. We are tied to it, and it is tied to us. Great article! Thanks for posting it, Ray. I love that the writer acknowledges that reading the BOM changing his opinion about Mormons.
I also love that he described the BOM as the most lackluster literature ever. Haha!
He writes very clearly — doesn’t gush about us, but also is deeply respectful….a very different view of Mormonism from the outside that I’m used to. Old-Timer wrote:I was blown away by the essay to which I’m linking. Literally, I was left almost speechless – and everyone here knows how hard that is to do…I am not going to start with any specific quotes, since I don’t want to bias your reading in any way. Rather, I encourage everyone to read it and post your own excerpts and reactions. “
Mormonism Obsessed with Christ” – Stephen W. Webb… This was interesting article to me; especially this observation:
Quote:Mormons are more Christian than many mainstream Christians
Although he meant this specifically as Mormons typically taking the literal divinity of Jesus very seriously more than many mainstream Christians currently do, my interpretation of the same idea is that one of the main things that the Church still has going for it is that Mormons are often relatively nice, decent, and trustworthy people compared to everyone else on average. Personally, I think that’s the kind of thing the Church should focus on (treating others well) more than trying so hard to promote complete acceptance of so many dubious traditions at the same time.
I appreciate that the author of this article is trying to understand Mormonism and the way it is perceived. However, in my opinion Pharisee-style intolerance and self-righteousness exhibited by many Church members and leaders is where many of the negative impressions of Mormonism really come from more than any misconceptions or having doctrines that sound unusual and unbelievable to many outsiders. If people are already partial to their own church or non-religious lifestyle then seeing the level of aggressive missionary work done by Mormons sometimes offends them in a personal and perfectly understandable way. For inactive, non-believing, or former Church members the personal investment in criticizing the LDS Church is even higher in many cases if they feel like they were pushed too hard by their parents and other Church members or feel like they were lied to and taken advantage of by the Church.
Quote:in my opinion Pharisee-style intolerance and self-righteousness exhibited by many Church members and leaders is where many of the negative impressions of Mormonism really come from more than any misconceptions or having doctrines that sound unusual and unbelievable to many outsiders.
I see these elements as mutually-reinforcing.
Iow, people who come into it with doctrinal issues (especialy those who have been taught that Mormonism is a devilish cult), they automatically see the intolerant and self-righteous among us as the norm; when people are in an area dominated by intolerant and self-righteous Mormons, they automatically see doctrinal issues as foundational. When, however, people know tolerant, non-self-righteous Mormons, they discount the importance of docrinal uniqueness – and even, often, credit that uniqueness with creating the kind of people they know; when people like the doctrinal uniqueness to some degree or another, they automatically see the tolerant, non-self-righteous among us as the norm.
Having said that, I agree completely that more people are influenced by the members they know than by the doctrines of “pure Mormonism” – that “practical religion” is much more important than “theoretical religion” for most people. The biggest issue for many, imo, still is that they really don’t know very many members very well – so they accept the default view taught by those who are “opposed” in some way.
Ray, I agree with what you said. The same thing happens with other religions too. I know many people think they understand what a Muslim believes (for example) based on news reports, etc.
I have thought the same way myself until I met a Muslim & asked her to tell me what it her faith meant to her.
Some very interesting things happened to me when I can talk with someone on a personal level about their own beliefs.
Many times, if I didn’t know the difference, I would think that I was talking to a Bishop or Relief Society President from my own Stake or Ward.
Mike from Milton.
I was very impressed with this article too and the author’s perspective. I liked the analogy of the funeral of a grandfather with two different groups of family members or friends telling different stories of the grandfather as a comparison between the Bible and Book of Mormon. It also reminded me of the scripture in the Bible where Jesus’s apostles were complaining to Jesus that there were some not of them baptizing and doing things in Jesus name but without authority. Jesus tells them to leave them alone because if they are not against us, they are for us. The Book of Mormon had always been lackluster to me too. I did not like reading about all the wars and cycles of righteousness and evil not to mention the many, “It came to pass” and they ‘dwelt in a tent’ repititons. But, this author’s article helped me to see how the Book of Mormon’s main focus is of Christ and I appreciated that. I also agree with others comments on this thread that non-members and in-active members may focus more on doctrine and precieved beliefs when they know nothing about Mormons or have met bad Mormons. People have images of Jehovah Witnesses and Gay people that are inaccurate until they get to know them. Whenever I had people tell me what a devilish cult the Mormon church is, I always shared that I was raised in this church and it helped me to not smoke or drink, stay morally clean, be a honest good citizen, unselfish, and caring individual. Actions always speak louder than words and people would rather see a sermon than hear one.
I, too, liked the analogy of the grandfather’s funeral and the overall respectful tone of the article. I’ve got to say, though, that the author still has a long way to go before he understands our religion. Several of his statements left me wondering how much time he’s continuing to spend on anti-Mormon websites. One example: We deny the virgin birth? That sure comes as news to me. How on earth could he have come to that conclusion after having read The Book of Mormon? Katzpur, I am sure that statement is from a literal reading of those early Mormons who speculated that Jesus’ birth literally was a result of sexual activity between God, the Father, and Mary. I loathe that idea (but not just for the same reason many Christians do), but it’s not exactly dead in the Church, even now – so, technically, according to that idea, Mary wasn’t a virgin when Jesus was born. Yeah, that’s one that I wish had been self-regulated before it was uttered.
:thumbdown: 😡 :shh:
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.