Different takes on Mormon faith from Republican rivals [Mormon exodus underway]

...rivals Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman are both Mormons whose ancestral roots run deep into the church’s pioneer history...

But in public remarks they have drawn strikingly different religious self-portraits. Romney is highly active and orthodox...he has embraced his church unequivocally: “I believe in my Mormon faith and endeavor to live by it," he said in a major speech in 2007.

...a growing debate about whether this relatively new religion can accommodate a more elastic definition of what it means to be Mormon.

“Normally it’s either all in or all out-that’s both how Mormons view themselves..." said John Dehlin, a Mormon...whose “Mormon Stories" podcast (mormonstories.org) has drawn a growing audience of nontraditional and ambivalent Mormons. “Liberals and progressive [Mormons] were elated at Huntsman’s characterizing himself that way...because it helps...opening up the discourse about unorthodox Mormonism."

Some of the questions gripping Dehlin’s audience are unremarkable in older faiths but still provocative in Mormon circles. In a strict church that asks much of its members, is it possible to be selectively observant, yet still a part of the community?

Doubts about church doctrine can...be difficult to negotiate for Mormons, who, when speaking in church, often conclude with the words, “I know this church is true."

...the Internet has made historical and archeological critiques of the Book of Mormon and other texts Smith published more widely available. The online world has also given questioning Mormons an opportunity to voice misgivings about the literal truth of the scriptures, as well as other issues...

A “Mormon Stories" gathering...this summer vividly illustrated the difficulty some Mormons encounter in negotiating what conference organizers called “an open approach to Mormonism." A number of participants broke down in tears as they described the conflict they felt...

From the article: ...a growing debate about whether this relatively new religion can accommodate a more elastic definition of what it means to be Mormon. “Normally it’s either all in or all out-that’s both how Mormons view themselves..." said John Dehlin, a Mormon...whose “Mormon Stories’’ podcast (mormonstories.org) has drawn a growing audience of nontraditional and ambivalent Mormons. “Liberals and progressive [Mormons] were elated at Huntsman’s characterizing himself that way...because it helps...opening up the discourse about unorthodox Mormonism." Some of the questions gripping Dehlin’s audience are unremarkable in older faiths but still provocative in Mormon circles. In a strict church that asks much of its members, is it possible to be selectively observant, yet still a part of the community?...A “Mormon Stories" gathering...this summer vividly illustrated the difficulty some Mormons encounter in negotiating what conference organizers called “an open approach to Mormonism." A number of participants broke down in tears as they described the conflict they felt...

********************

#1, Here's a good sample broadcast of John Dehlin's approach to an "open Mormonism" [Disclaimer: While I love Dehlin's open approach to discovering Lds history, etc...Keep in mind that Dehlin has simply taken the same route a LOT of mainline Christian denominations have gone: Treat Biblical history as historically irrelevant...didn't really happen...but we'll at least keep the "community"]:

Part 1: Early Sexual Allegations against Joseph Smith [ 1:00:13 ] and Part 2: The Story of William and Jane Law [ 1:06:39 ] [Settle down for a while to listen to these podcasts...and others...tho there are some I would hardly even begin to endorse content-wise...]

**************************************

#2, Now why would "an open approach to Mormonism" -- especially Mormonism's past be extremely problematic for the Mormon church?

Well, starting in the late 1990s the Mormon church began publishing a sort of "best of series" of ALL of its past "prophets." The Brigham Young book was published by the church in 1997 (Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young).

What's interesting is the Brigham Young quotes the church chose on pp. 80-81 -- to communicate its almost spiritual dictatorship/brainwashing/absolute control nature:

"When a man begins to find fault, inquiring in regard to this, that, and the other, saying, 'Does this or that look as though the Lord dictated it?' you may know that that person has more or less the spirit of apostasy. Every man in this Kingdom, or upon the face of the earth, who is seeking with all his heart to save himself, has as much to do as he can conveniently attend to, without calling in question that which does not belong to him. If he succeeds in saving himself, it has well occupied his time and attention." (Originally published in "Discourses of Brigham Young," p. 83 -- selected by Lds "apostle" John Widtsoe and published in 1941...with this quote re-published by the Lds church on pp. 80-81 in 1997).

Now...why did I use the word "brainwashing"??? Because look at the way Brigham Young -- and by extension the 1997 Lds church quoting Young -- attempted to stigmatize 100% of people leaving the Lds church?

"People do, however, leave this Church, but they leave it because they get into darkness... (Widtsoe,p. 85, 1941; re-cited by Lds church in Teachings..., p. 81, 1997)

And why did I mention the Lds church's attempt at "absolute control?" Well, notice this Young quote from the same sources just cited:

"There is no such thing as...two sides to the question in the house of God; there is but one side to the question there."

'Tis yet another reason why Ldsism IS a cult.

From the article: A “Mormon Stories’’ gathering...this summer vividly illustrated the difficulty some Mormons encounter in negotiating what conference organizers called “an open approach to Mormonism.’’ A number of participants broke down in tears as they described the conflict they felt...

Truly sad to realize the emotions these Mormons are feeling as they recognize that Mormonism is based upon a house of cards...their family and friends and church relationships are all suddenly in jeopardy (ostracism; stigmatization, etc.) Part 2 of the podcast I cited in post #1 mentions how some Lds bishops advise Mormon wives to leave their apostate husbands -- all because of how important a "celestial marriage" is for a woman to live forever (or not) with Heavenly Father. [Such blasphemy that living forever with Heavenly Father depends more on a spouse in Mormonism than Jesus Christ!!!!]

When I look at those emotions involved, I think of these quotes:

"Nothing is more sad than the death of an illusion." -- Arthur Koestler
"The worst deluded are the self-deluded." -- Christian Nestell Bovee

You see, a relationship with THE true God and the TRUE Jesus Christ is exactly that...a relationship...not a religion per se.

Note that "religion" is used only ONCE in the entire Bible...James used it to describe helping the poor, etc. Otherwise, "religion" includes that which is more false than reality.

Hence, there is a lot of truth in what this writer wrote: "Religion is the way we honour our ancestors' errors." (Mark M. Otoysao)

So many "religious" people outside of those in Christ wind up being myth-embracers: "The trouble ain't that people are ignorant: it's that they know so much that ain't so." (Josh Billings)

People have added onto what's in the Bible via Joseph Smith -- and other Lds "general authorities" -- pretensions:

"Pretension almost always overdoes the original, and hence exposes itself." (Hosea Ballou)

Reaganaut, GF, SVCW -- pings for mentions below:

From the article: Doubts about church doctrine can...be difficult to negotiate for Mormons, who, when speaking in church, often conclude with the words, “I know this church is true.’’

Ex-Mormon Reaganaut, a Freeper, has oft said on these threads: “For the LDS it is all about “the Church”. LDS ‘testimonies’ often start out with “I know the Church is true”.

Last December, I noted how a BYU published article highlighting the annual third week of December Utah State sermons focusing on Joseph Smith mentioned how: "Many...Smith memorial speakers emphasized the need for all those present to obtain this personal witness of Joseph Smith....Joseph Smith lies at the heart of it all..."
Source: "Praise To The Man": A Review Of The Annual Joseph Smith Memorial Sermons [Mormon Merry Smithmas]

I asked then: Aren't we to have a personal testimony of Jesus Christ and not Joseph Smith?

Didn't Jesus say even the Holy Spirit testifies of Jesus (not Joseph)?

“When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father—the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father—he will testify ABOUT ME." (Jesus, speaking of the Holy Spirit, John 15:26)

And yet one of those Mormon Memorial speakers at Utah State claimed "Joseph lies at the heart of it all."

Wow! Here we thought Jesus was the One lays at the heart of it all!

Greyfoxx39 published a thread from an official Lds church Web site which sought to sort of “school” Mormons on what their testimony-bearing should focus on: How to construct a stronger, more pure testimony Mormon (OPEN)

FREEPER svcw...after reading the “Mormon Times” article, noted the four key “rules” the Mormon church was trying to steer a testimony toward:

The first is that Jesus is the Christ, the Savior, the Mediator and Redeemer of the world.
The second is that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God.
The third is that all of the Presidents of the Church since Joseph Smith have been successors in that power and authority.
The fourth is that President (Thomas S. Monson) is the only prophet of God upon the earth, holding all of the keys, powers, and authorities of the Church in the earth today. -- President James E. Faust
(svcw post #5)

Note that “rules” 2-->4 all hovered around Lds “prophets”...who largely replace Jesus Christ.

You do know that Mormon missionaries on the street know your FR name, don't you?

I encountered a pair a couple of months ago. When after some attempt on their part to begin their spiel, I cut them off quickly, telling them I already knew all about their "religion", and that I learned it on Free Republic. [smiles]

They started spitting out freeper names. The [seemingly] less-up-to-speed of the two asked me if I was yourself, then if I was Elsie (he knew Elsie was a man) but both myself and the other thought that probably a dumb thing to ask, as I had said that I "had learned", not that I taught others.

I said "no, but they ARE FRiends of mine" then smiled and laughed. They mentioned a few other names also, but I'll not include them for now, as I do not wish to publish mistaken information.

"They" have indeed taken notice. Take due care.

Have no fear. Let the Spirit be your Guide. The Lord can warn one when others are intending harm. It is written in the Word, both by example, and further promise that He has, and will do so. I'm not the only guy who can bear personal witness to the same.

As I've said before, the more Mormons rely upon a decent bible (not one of their home-made translations, certainly not Joey Smith's corruption, or that fantasy-land Mormon monstrosity book) then the better the chances of them becoming Christians.

SOme may have been unorthodox enough to have already made it. Or so I suspect. Staying out of the temple system could help immensely.

Read the right book. Even the catechism of the Catholic Church says some can come to faith that way. And this without their own guidance or direction.

...a growing debate about whether this relatively new religion can accommodate a more elastic definition of what it means to be Mormon.

Where can we find an 'OFFICIAL MORMON' teaching website??

Official sites are sites supported by LDS officials unless said official sites are considered unofficial by said officials.

At that point such sites are unofficial unless officially referenced for official purposes by officials who can do so officially.

This should not be misconstrued as an indication that official sites can be unofficially recognized as official nor should it be implied that unofficial sites cannot contain official information, but are not officially allowed to be offical despite their official contents due the their unofficialness.

Official sites will be official and recognized as official by officials of the LDS unless there is an official reason to mark them as unofficial either temporally or permanently, which would make the official content officially unofficial.

This is also not to imply that recognized sites, often used on FR by haters and bigots cannot contain official information, it just means that content, despite its official status, is no longer official and should be consider unofficial despite the same information being official on an official site elsewhere.

Even then the officialness my be amended due to the use of the unofficial information which may determine the officialness of anything be it official or unofficial depending on how and where it is used officially or unofficially.

I hope this clear things up for the lurkers out there.

The haters tend to make things complicated and confusing when it is all really quite crystal clear.

--Ejonesie22

(click)

Praise to the Man!

Praise to the man who communed with Jehovah!
Jesus annointed that Prophet and Seer.
Blessed to open the last dispensation,
Kings shall extol him, and nations revere.

Chorus
Hail to the Prophet, ascended to heaven!
Traitors and tyrants now fight him in vain.
Mingling with Gods, he can plan for his brethren;
Death cannot conquer the hero again.

Praise to his mem'ry, he died as a martyr;
Honored and blest be his ever great name!
Long shall his blood, which was shed by assasins,
Plead unto heav'n while the earth lauds his fame.

Chorus
Hail to the Prophet, ascended to heaven!
Traitors and tyrants now fight him in vain.
Mingling with Gods, he can plan for his brethren;
Death cannot conquer the hero again.

Great is his glory and endless his priesthood.
Ever and ever the keys he will hold.
Faithful and true he will enter his kingdom,
Crowned in the midst of the prophets of old.

Chorus
Hail to the Prophet, ascended to heaven!
Traitors and tyrants now fight him in vain.
Mingling with Gods, he can plan for his brethren;
Death cannot conquer the hero again.

Sacrifice brings forth the blessings of heaven;
Earth must atone for the blood of that man.
Wake up the world for the conflict of justice.
Millions shall know 'Brother Joseph' again.

Chorus
Hail to the Prophet, ascended to heaven!
Traitors and tyrants now fight him in vain.
Mingling with Gods, he can plan for his brethren;
Death cannot conquer the hero again.

Note that “rules” 2-->4 all hovered around Lds “prophets”...who largely replace Jesus Christ.

WHAT!!??

That SURELY can't be TRUE!!!!

In conclusion let us summarize this grand key, these “Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet”, for our salvation depends on them.

1. The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything.
2. The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works.
3. The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet.
4. The prophet will never lead the church astray.
5. The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time.
6. The prophet does not have to say “Thus Saith the Lord,” to give us scripture.
7. The prophet tells us what we need to know, not always what we want to know.
8. The prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning.
9. The prophet can receive revelation on any matter, temporal or spiritual.
10. The prophet may advise on civic matters.
11. The two groups who have the greatest difficulty in following the prophet are the proud who are learned and the proud who are rich.
12. The prophet will not necessarily be popular with the world or the worldly.
13. The prophet and his counselors make up the First Presidency—the highest quorum in the Church.
14. The prophet and the presidency—the living prophet and the First Presidency—follow them and be blessed—reject them and suffer.

I testify that these fourteen fundamentals in following the living prophet are true. If we want to know how well we stand with the Lord then let us ask ourselves how well we stand with His mortal captain—how close do our lives harmonize with the Lord’s anointed—the living Prophet—President of the Church, and with the Quorum of the First Presidency.

Ezra Taft Benson

(Address given Tuesday, February 26, 1980 at Brigham Young University) http://www.lds.org/liahona/1981/06/fourteen-fundamentals-in-following-the-prophet?lang=eng

So where did the Mormon Church get the authority to collect tithes?

"Now the way he translated was he put the urim and thummim into his hat and Darkned his Eyes than he would take a sentance and it would apper in Brite Roman Letters. Then he would tell the writer and he would write it. Then that would go away the next sentance would Come and so on. But if it was not Spelt rite it would not go away till it was rite, so we see it was marvelous. Thus was the hol [whole] translated."

---Joseph Knight's journal.

"In writing for your father I frequently wrote day after day, often sitting at the table close by him, he sitting with his face buried in his hat, with the stone in it, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us."
(History of the RLDS Church, 8 vols.

(Independence, Missouri: Herald House,1951),

"Last Testimony of Sister Emma [Smith Bidamon]," 3:356.

"I, as well as all of my father's family, Smith's wife, Oliver Cowdery and Martin Harris, were present during the translation. . . . He [Joseph Smith] did not use the plates in translation."
---(David Whitmer,

as published in the "Kansas City Journal," June 5, 1881,

and reprinted in the RLDS "Journal of History", vol. 8, (1910), pp. 299-300.

In an 1885 interview, Zenas H. Gurley, then the editor of the RLDS Saints Herald, asked Whitmer if Joseph had used his "Peep stone" to do the translation. Whitmer replied:

"... he used a stone called a "Seers stone," the "Interpreters" having been taken away from him because of transgression. The "Interpreters" were taken from Joseph after he allowed Martin Harris to carry away the 116 pages of Ms [manuscript] of the Book of Mormon as a punishment, but he was allowed to go on and translate by use of a "Seers stone" which he had, and which he placed in a hat into which he buried his face, stating to me and others that the original character appeared upon parchment and under it the translation in English."

"Martin Harris related an incident that occurred during the time that he wrote that portion of the translation of the Book of Mormon which he was favored to write direct from the mouth of the Prophet Joseph Smith. He said that the Prophet possessed a seer stone, by which he was enabled to translate as well as from the Urim and Thummim, and for convenience he then used the seer stone, Martin explained the translation as follows: By aid of the seer stone, sentences would appear and were read by the Prophet and written by Martin and when finished he would say 'Written,' and if correctly written that sentence would disappear and another appear in its place, but if not written correctly it remained until corrected, so that the translation was just as it was engraven on the plates, precisely in the language then used."
(Edward Stevenson, "One of the Three Witnesses,"

reprinted from Deseret News, 30 Nov. 1881

in Millennial Star, 44 (6 Feb. 1882): 86-87.)

In 1879, Michael Morse, Emma Smith's brother-in-law, stated:

"When Joseph was translating the Book of Mormon [I] had occasion more than once to go into his immediate presence, and saw him engaged at his work of translation. The mode of procedure consisted in Joseph's placing the Seer Stone in the crown of a hat, then putting his face into the hat, so as to entirely cover his face, resting his elbows upon his knees, and then dictating word after word, while the scribes Emma, John Whitmer, O. Cowdery, or some other wrote it down."
(W.W. Blair interview with Michael Morse,

Saints Herald, vol. 26, no. 12

June 15, 1879, pp. 190-91.)

Joseph Smith's brother William also testified to the "face in the hat" version:

"The manner in which this was done was by looking into the Urim and Thummim, which was placed in a hat to exclude the light, (the plates lying near by covered up), and reading off the translation, which appeared in the stone by the power of God"

("A New Witness for Christ in America,"

Francis W. Kirkham, 2:417.)

"The manner in which he pretended to read and interpret was the same manner as when he looked for the money-diggers, with the stone in his hat, while the book of plates were at the same time hid in the woods."

---Isaac Hale (Emma Smith's father's) affidavit, 1834.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.