What is the definition of 'anti-Mormon'? - Anti-Mormon Caucus (Just Kidding)

Mormon Times ^ | March 5, 2010 | By McKay Coppins

[greyfoxx39]

What is the definition of 'anti-Mormon'?

 

I have often heard the criticism that Latter-day Saints classify everyone who disagrees with our beliefs as "anti-Mormon." Of course, the people who say this are usually anti-Mormons. Am I proving their point? I don't think so.

I actually agree that this is a problem in our church. After all, our belief system, if firmly embraced, demands a lot of personal sacrifice, and we often become hyper-defensive when we sense a threat to our faith.

Unfortunately, this often leads to irrational name-calling and blindly neglecting to differentiate between non-Mormons and anti-Mormons.

Of course, that's not to say anti-Mormons don't exist, or that it's unimportant to identify them. We just need to properly define the term.

First of all, we shouldn't call people who simply don't believe in Mormonism "anti-Mormons." We should call them Catholics or Baptists or Muslims or atheists. People who ascribe themselves to faiths or philosophies that contradict Mormonism should not automatically be seen as antagonists. They should be credited with having their own beliefs.

Now, what about people who try to convert Latter-day Saints to their belief systems? Are they anti-Mormons?

No.

The believing Baptist who testifies of his church's doctrine to a Latter-day Saint is trying to do something he believes is constructive. Even if he attempts to point out supposed flaws in Mormon doctrine, if his genuine intent is to save a soul and he maintains a polite, rational tone, I don't think he deserves the anti-Mormon label. After all, should Mormon missionaries be considered anti-Catholics or anti-Protestants?

The line, I believe, that separates non-Mormons from anti-Mormons is motivation. Anti-Mormons are people who put down Mormon beliefs, practices and people simply for the sake of destroying their faith. Not many anti-Mormons would admit that is their primary goal, of course, but that doesn't mean it isn't so.

For the most part, anti-Mormons should be ignored. But before that can happen, they have to be identified

[T. P. Pole]

I NEVER heard of a sunrise service in any of the wards/stakes I was a member of.

It was at least 20 years since I attended one. I was in a stake that had one for the youth maybe 10 years ago. But it is not common at all, so I am not surprised you haven't heard of any.

I have been to ward where the resurrection was never mentioned on Easter.

Oh, I believe you on that. I have been in wards that seem oblivious to holidays and such. When I am involved in the music I have Christmas hymns from Thanksgiving to New Years. The ward I am in now, a few years back, only had them the two Sundays either side the Christmas.

In another ward when I selected the hymns I published a spreadsheet listing significant dates. Both holidays and church historical (restoration of priesthood, founding of Relief Society, etc.). I did this to help bishopric select the sacrament meeting topics. Otherwise we would end up with a sermon on, say, food storage for Memorial day.

To me tradition is important. On Christmas eve my family has a birthday party for baby Jesus, complete with cake (and presents the next morning - ha!). As we have gotten involved with other things it becomes crunched, but the kids still remember and insist we do it, regardless of how late it is.

And we have similar traditions for most other holidays and events. But as you have observed, that is not universal with mormons.

I am sure you have been to testimony meetings where Jesus is only mentioned at the end or in passing. That disturbs Christians like me whose entire testimony is of Jesus, not a church, not a prophet, not temples, not books. It is all about Jesus and what He did on the Cross.

Oh, yes. We sometimes play "count the Jesus's." You start with a default of four or so (open prayer, closing prayer, sacrament prayers, talk closings). Sometimes you end with that four or so.

My testimony is of the gospel of Jesus Christ - the "good news" that He came to this earth, lived a perfect life and example for me, suffered in the garden and on the cross for my sins, and was resurrected, thus allowing me to return and live with Him and Heavenly Father if I repent of my sins (i.e. accept Him as my personal Savior) and obey the commandments (which includes the ordinances like baptism). However, I also recognize that my knowledge of the gospel was completed in the restoration of the church through the prophet Joseph Smith, as well as the restoration of the priesthood that allows proper authority to perform thus ordinances. But those last bits are really a testimony of Christ's gospel and how it applies to my life. It also is what sets us apart from orthodix Christianity.

I want to know how many talks will reference the Cross, and how many of these talks will be totally dedicated to the Resurrection.

I am sure that during the Sunday morning session there will be at least one talk that is exclusively about the atonement and resurrection of Christ. But mormons believe that the atonement of Christ includes activities in the garden before the Cross, so you will find some disappointment.

For example, Easter Sunday, 1985, Bruce R. McConkie from the quorum of the 12 spoke on the garden. But he also went at length on the cross.

"We do not know we cannot tell, no mortal mind can conceive the full import of what Christ did in Gethsemane. We know he sweat great gouts of blood from every pore as he drained the dregs of that bitter cup his father had given him. We know he suffered both body and spirit more than it is possible for man to suffer except it be unto death. We know that in some way incomprehensible to us, his suffering satisfied the demands of justice.

"Then he carried his own cross until he collapsed from the weight and pain and mounting agony of it all. Finally on a hill called Calvary, again it was outside Jerusalem's walls, while helpless disciples looked on and felt the agonies of near death in their own bodies, the Roman soldiers laid him upon the cross. . .While hanging on the cross for another three hours, from noon until 3 p.m., all the infinite agonies and merciless pains of Gethsemane reoccurred. And finally when the atoning agonies had taken their toll, when the victory had been won, when the Son of God had fulfilled the will of God in all things he said "It is finished" and he voluntarily gave up the ghost.

"His rising from death on the third day crowned the Atonement. Again in some way incomprehensible to us the affects of his Resurrection pass upon all men so that all shall rise from the grave.

"And now as pertaining to this perfect Atonement, I testify that it took place at Gethsemane and at Golgotha. And as pertaining to Jesus Christ, I testify that he is the Son of the Living God who was crucified for the sins of the world. He is our Lord, our God, and our King.

"God grant that all of us will walk in the light, as God our Father is in the light so that according to his promises the blood of Jesus Christ his son will cleanse us from all sin."

Anyways, that is the type of thing we will hear in at least one talk on Easter.

“I know Jesus is the Christ” (what DOES that mean exactly? I could never get a simple definition).

I would say it is short-hand for saying that Jesus is indeed the person that did all the stuff we talk about - the "gospel" or the "atonement." Literally it means that He is the one that was annointed to be our Savior.

[applause] is a form of Praise

You are so right there. Mormons are very, very conservative. Public praise is so much out of character for us.

I am a 'she', not a 'he'.

--red faced-- Sorry. I seem to have a memory of you talking about attending priesthood meetings. Must have been someone else.

[T. P. Pole]

I have to ask, is there a service anywhere where all 10 verses are sung? :)

[T. P. Pole]

Did you ever finish that book I recommended?

Finish? No, that thing is hundreds of pages. But every now and then I open it up and read a bit. Like I had said earlier, there is much in there that I agree with. I'll try to get to it more frequently and attempt to finish it.

[ejonesie22]

Interesting, you get accused of moving the goalposts as he burns the old ones to be replaced with the new he is painting for this weeks game...

[Godzilla]

LOL, ain’t that the truth and SOP

[reaganaut]

I have to ask, is there a service anywhere where all 10 verses are sung?

- - - - - - -

I only remember singing 6 but my husband may remember singing all 10 verses of “Christ the Lord is Risen Today” in Choir, so I pinged him.

I have been to many services where 6,7,8,9 verses of a song was sung but don’t remember if it was that particular song.

[reaganaut]

I am a ‘she’, not a ‘he’.

—red faced— Sorry. I seem to have a memory of you talking about attending priesthood meetings. Must have been someone else.

- - - - - - - -
It could have been SZonian or Sentinel, they are both former priesthood holders.

And don’t worry, it happens a lot, one guy (not LDS, but I don’t remember who) was EVEN more redfaced after he freepmailed me that my posts were too “clear, concise, and academic” to be written by a woman. THAT was funny.

[reaganaut]

This question is not one of mine but one of greyfoxx’s, so I reposted and pinged her.

I want to know how many talks will reference the Cross, and how many of these talks will be totally dedicated to the Resurrection. [greyfoxx]

I am sure that during the Sunday morning session there will be at least one talk that is exclusively about the atonement and resurrection of Christ. But mormons believe that the atonement of Christ includes activities in the garden before the Cross, so you will find some disappointment.

For example, Easter Sunday, 1985, Bruce R. McConkie from the quorum of the 12 spoke on the garden. But he also went at length on the cross.

“We do not know we cannot tell, no mortal mind can conceive the full import of what Christ did in Gethsemane. We know he sweat great gouts of blood from every pore as he drained the dregs of that bitter cup his father had given him. We know he suffered both body and spirit more than it is possible for man to suffer except it be unto death. We know that in some way incomprehensible to us, his suffering satisfied the demands of justice.

“Then he carried his own cross until he collapsed from the weight and pain and mounting agony of it all. Finally on a hill called Calvary, again it was outside Jerusalem’s walls, while helpless disciples looked on and felt the agonies of near death in their own bodies, the Roman soldiers laid him upon the cross. . .While hanging on the cross for another three hours, from noon until 3 p.m., all the infinite agonies and merciless pains of Gethsemane reoccurred. And finally when the atoning agonies had taken their toll, when the victory had been won, when the Son of God had fulfilled the will of God in all things he said “It is finished” and he voluntarily gave up the ghost.

“His rising from death on the third day crowned the Atonement. Again in some way incomprehensible to us the affects of his Resurrection pass upon all men so that all shall rise from the grave.

“And now as pertaining to this perfect Atonement, I testify that it took place at Gethsemane and at Golgotha. And as pertaining to Jesus Christ, I testify that he is the Son of the Living God who was crucified for the sins of the world. He is our Lord, our God, and our King.

“God grant that all of us will walk in the light, as God our Father is in the light so that according to his promises the blood of Jesus Christ his son will cleanse us from all sin.”

Anyways, that is the type of thing we will hear in at least one talk on Easter.

[T. P. Pole]

I have been to many services where 6,7,8,9 verses of a song was sung but don’t remember if it was that particular song.

Bet everyone had sore voices after that. :)

[reaganaut]

LOL. The choir didn’t. And when I am lost in worship I don’t care how long we sing. Our church has 30-40 minutes set aside for just singing. Then the sermon is another 30-40 minutes.

[reaganaut]

“I know Jesus is the Christ” (what DOES that mean exactly? I could never get a simple definition). [Reaganaut]

I would say it is short-hand for saying that Jesus is indeed the person that did all the stuff we talk about - the “gospel” or the “atonement.” Literally it means that He is the one that was annointed to be our Savior. [Tadpole]

- - - - - - - - -
I know what the term Christ means literally, but my point was that so many LDS say it by rote, without thinking about it.

Even your definition ‘Jesus is indeed the person that did all the stuff we talk about’ is pretty vague, to be honest.

It always sounds so impersonal, even when tears are invovled. It sounds so sterile.

As a Christian, my relationship with Jesus is very personal. Jesus is my Lord and my God, Jesus is the one who went through torture and death to pay for my sins and loved me enough to do it even if I was the only one. He is my all in all, He is my EVERYTHING. I love Him more than anything or anyone else because He loved me first. I fall at His feet in worship and prostrate myself before His glory. He is the KING OF KINGS and LORD OF LORDS. And He is MY (not ‘the’) Savior. It is THAT personal.

Can you see a difference between what I described and what you see in the LDS?

[reaganaut]

We sometimes play “count the Jesus’s.” You start with a default of four or so (open prayer, closing prayer, sacrament prayers, talk closings). Sometimes you end with that four or so.

- - - - - - - -
What is sad is I know many LDS (mostly those who ended up leaving) who have said the same thing.

That is sad and telling and should be disturbing that you could end up with the same four. In our church I would lose count several times if I tried to play “Count the Jesus”. He is the ONLY focus of EVERYTHING. It is a big difference.

[reaganaut]

I’ll try to get to it more frequently and attempt to finish it.

- - - - - - -
Take you time and read what the author is really trying to show and say. And I am glad you seem to be getting something out of it.

My pastor says something that I think the author would agree with: “A personal relationship with Jesus doesn’t just make A difference, it makes ALL the difference”

[Elsie]

...effort of some 10,000 folding chairs. First, he sends out letters inviting "about 40 stakes to each bring 300 chairs," he says, then follows up with an intense phone campaign to ensure all the chairs will be delivered as planned at the designated time and date.

-SNIP-

"There's no greater service that we can do every year than to make it possible for the nearly 100,000 visitors to see the pageant...

9 out of 10 STAND??

[Elsie]

...then follows up with an intense phone campaign ...

E-mail is our FRIEND!

[T Minus Four]

Is one of the qualifications to being a "true" Christian the attendance at an Easter sunrise service?

The only qualification to being a "true" Christian is to admit you are a sinner, repent of your sins, and surrender yourelf to Jesus, trusting in Him, and Him alone, for your salvation.

[reaganaut]

About the Atonement. The LDS believe it that the sin bearing started (or primarily took, or even COMPLETELY took place - I have heard all three) in the Garden. How can you reconcile the LDS view with what the Bible clearly, clearly teaches.

The Bible always points TO the Cross and back TO the Cross as the place of atonement in FULL. The garden is never mentioned that way. Yes, Jesus sweat and was in agony in the Garden, but He was preparing for what was to come, what He must do, there is NOTHING that says our implicates that any sin bearing took place in the Garden or that the ‘atonement’ took place over a long period of time. The atonement was His sin bearing and death on the cross. IT DID NOT (as McConkie claims) ‘reoccur’, that would be ridiculous on its face.

The resurrection is not part of the atonement. The resurrection is proof Jesus was who He claimed to be, and that He overcame death and Hell. The LDS have it all skewed and out of focus.

In fact, the Bible shows that the sin bearing could not have taken place in the Garden. Christ’s sacrifice was a sin offering and sin offerings required the shedding of blood and death of the sacrifice (Lev. 14).

Furthermore, in the Garden, Jesus was attended by Angels. If that is where the sin bearing took place then we have a problem. God cannot abide sin, He cannot stand it’s presence. Yet God sent Angles to comfort His Son while He carried all the sins. That does not make sense.

In contrast, on the Cross, Christ was without the presence of the Father for the first (and only) time EVER. When Christ was on the Cross, the sins of the world came upon Him, when this happened God turned His back on Jesus, He HAD to because God cannot stand sin. There was no angel to comfort Him, because Christ had to die alone, when He cried out “my God, my God, why have you forsaken me”, Jesus experienced something He never had before, not having the presence of the Father.

I don’t deny Christ went through agony in the Garden, the Bible says so, but that agony was a preparation for what was to come, not the beginning of it.

It is the DEATH of Christ that is the focus. It is the Cross that is center, not the Garden. If the Atonement began or took place in the Garden WHY isn’t IT the focus??

Just a few examples:

1 Corinthians 15:1-3 he wrote, “I delivered unto you first of all ...that Christ DIED for our sins.”

Romans 5:8- “But God commendeth His love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ DIED for us.”

Galatians 6:14- “But God forbid that I should glory, save in the CROSS of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.”

Philippians 2:8- “And being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the CROSS.”

Here are some other resources that I find valuable on the topic. I encourage you to give them a read and consider them seriously in light of what the Bible says. Also feel free to discuss any objections you have with the contents.

http://www.mormonoutreach.org/topics/Did%20the%20Atonement%20Happen%20in%20the%20Garden%20of%20Gethsemane,%20or%20on%20the%20Cross%20of%20Calvary.html

http://www.carm.org/mormonism-and-atonement-of-jesus

http://www.mrm.org/gethsemane

[Tennessee Nana]

Today our pastor taught on

“The God of just-in-time Vs a god of just-in-case”

He used Exodus 32 The golden calf and Acts 17...The just-in-case UNKNOWN GOD

He said “Prosperity will mask your idols, but adversity will reveal them”

and “Success will cover them, if you lost it (sucess) your world will crumble”

He gave us some things that people make idol’s of...

Money
Success
Being smart
Attractiveness
Relationships
Pleasure
Church
Work

When he said “church” I immmediately thought of the mormon chant “I love my CHURCH”...

Yeppers mormons have made an IDOL of their so called “church’

Plus many of the other things on the list belong with the mormon mistaken idea that Mitt Romney is qualified and/or entitled to be president...

According to the mormons...Romney is better than anyone with less of these things...

Romney has lots of money ...$400 Million of it so he is qualified...

Romney appears to be successful in business, and there are some who claim he “saved” the Olympics...

Romney has the appearance of being smart..Harvard law school etc, so called ideas on the economy

Romney appears to some mormons to be attractive, regardless of his real looks and age..

Romney is touted as having relationships that all others envy...one wife, five sons, many grandchildren...

Romney has pleasure activities such as skiing that are regarded as worthy of a future president...

Romney belongs to a religion that demands the members idolize the “Church”

Romney is said to accomplish excellently whatever work he starts, far and beyond how a non-mormon would do it...

In other words, to many mormons. Williard Mitt Romney is an IDOL...

[SZonian]

EJ22 said no go on those, not flattering at all. We opted for a green apron with pockets for nails and such.

[SZonian]

G, just a point of clarification here... "3. I never said that being anti-mormon was a bad thing, did I?"

We're anti-mormonISM, not anti-mormon.