Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Have you thought about learning about the faith from actual members of the LDS church? Would you go to a vegan website to learn how to cook a steak?
Waaaa???? You could ask someone who was no longer a vegan what it meant to be one. Just because I am no longer a JW does not mean I have forgotten what they believed.
Maybe the people who are Mormons could reply to the accuracy of the beliefs stated instead of attacking the source.
Scientologists, Mormons, Protestants, Athiests - Do each think the others are crazy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1insider
With beliefs so different I would think that a member of any of these groups must think all the others are looney. The Scientologists and Mormons seem the craziest to me with their recently formed religions but that's probably because of the way I was raised (southern Baptist). I was taught that all other beliefs lacking acceptance of Jesus as Lord and Saviour, even Catholics, were going to Hell. Maybe they are. Maybe none are. The Baptists had zero allowable tolerances when it came to salvation so I've always figured they all do.
See the title there at the top of the thread? This is a thread about whether some religious adherents (or non-adherents) think other religious people are crazy.
I see no reason to think we need long, extended, repetitive posts detailing some particulars about any one belief system to meet the purpose of the thread. A sentence or two to bring a topic up should suffice
Remember, if your purpose in being here is to bash one religion, we'll help you find your way out.
I'm a Christian. I think atheists are lying to themselves. To look around and see no evidence of a creator, nothing that gives pause, is hard to believe. Agnosticism is a much more honest approach.
I don't know who is what on here except for a few. I don't even consider it when responding (I think). I was objecting to DDI using a tactic that is used to silence people who leave the JWs. I have heard almost that exact same line of reasoning thrown about because, there is NO good reason to leave the JWs. I imagine it is used almost universally in high control groups. I am glad DDI isn't LDS because that would be a HUGE red flag.
You need not engage in any type of discussion you don't want to. We are all here under our own terms. It's not your responsibility to get anyone's facts straight for them.
You need not engage in any type of discussion you don't want to. We are all here under our own terms. It's not your responsibility to get anyone's facts straight for them.
As I said, I am always willing to engage in discussions about my religion, and my terms are these:
1. The questions must be asked respectfully -- one at a time and not eight or ten in a single post. It takes longer to adequately address a single claim than to rattle off a dozen half-truths.
2. A thread should be devoted to the topic of Mormon doctrine, so that nobody's thread ends up getting hijacked.
3. I am an honest person and I don't lie about my religion. When people imply that I am being less than honest in my answers or that I don't really know what my own religion teaches, I can't be bothered to continue to respond to them, so I don't.
I can't imagine how anyone could find these terms to be objectionable in any way.
I'm a Christian. I think atheists are lying to themselves. To look around and see no evidence of a creator, nothing that gives pause, is hard to believe. Agnosticism is a much more honest approach.
Good thing that virtually all atheists, even the "fundamentalist" ones are, in fact, agnostic...
As I said, I am always willing to engage in discussions about my religion, and my terms are these:
1. The questions must be asked respectfully -- one at a time and not eight or ten in a single post.
2. A thread should be devoted to the topic of Mormon doctrine, so that nobody's thread may be hijacked.
3. I am an honest person and I don't lie about my religion. When people imply that I am being less than honest in my answers or that I don't really know what my own religion teaches, I can't be bothered to continue to respond to them, so I don't.
I can't imagine how anyone could find these terms to be objectionable in any way.
I have noticed that you hold yourself to that standard when addressing others as well. #3 might get dicey if your viewpoints don't match stated LDS policy though. You have stated that you are liberal in your beliefs. I noticed that there is a group of LDS women trying to get the Church to recognize women for whatever you call your leaders. So, there is room for change in the Mormon faith. Not in my old one unfortunately, there is no dissent allowed there. A group of women trying to do that would all be immediately excommunicated and shunned by their friends and family.
I have noticed that you hold yourself to that standard when addressing others as well. #3 might get dicey if your viewpoints don't match stated LDS policy though.
When I am asked questions that pertain to specific doctrines, I don't give my own interpretations; I do my utmost best to give answers that I would feel comfortable having anyone in the LDS top leadership read. You're still pretty new here. I can appreciate that you might not yet be willing to accept my explanations at face value. I think that if you stick around here, that will likely change.
Quote:
You have stated that you are liberal in your beliefs.
I have stated this, and will continue to do so. It's important to understand, though, that I am pretty orthodox in terms of my acceptance of LDS doctrines and dogmas. It's social issues and policies I frequently take a more liberal stance on.
I have noticed that you hold yourself to that standard when addressing others as well. #3 might get dicey if your viewpoints don't match stated LDS policy though. You have stated that you are liberal in your beliefs. I noticed that there is a group of LDS women trying to get the Church to recognize women for whatever you call your leaders. So, there is room for change in the Mormon faith. Not in my old one unfortunately, there is no dissent allowed there. A group of women trying to do that would all be immediately excommunicated and shunned by their friends and family.
Nah, Katz is pretty good about distinguishing normative Mormon practice from her own convictions, when the two diverge. The big problem is the same thing you see on the Islam board, lots of non-Muslims trying to explain to practicing Muslims that they don't understand their own faith.
Don't get me wrong, I find Mormon theology unconvincing, but I am sure that I am getting a clearer picture of how Mormons view their own faith from folks like Katzpur, than I am from a wiki.
Good thing that virtually all atheists, even the "fundamentalist" ones are, in fact, agnostic...
Of course, you knew this though,didn't you?
-NoCapo
I've not seen any here say that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
