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.
Location: land of quail, bunnies, and red tail hawks
1,513 posts, read 3,390,752 times
Reputation: 3540
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by godofthunder
My point is, there is a LOT of literature that claims to tell the truth about Mormonism. Most of it is so completely false that it mindboggling. On the topic of Mormonism, there is a lot of false propaganda, so you can't trust much of what you read about them. If you want to know what they REALLY believe, you have to ask one of them.
I understand your post entirely. Actually, I think I've heard that explanation of Adam and Eve before! A point of clarification, though, is that the experience I was referencing actually didn't mention Mormonism at all. I was reading a work of fiction that had an interesting perspective on hell. I was perplexed by the depiction and wondered if it may have been based on Mormon theology since it reminded me of the multiple kingdoms of glory.
--------
I really don't want to argue with you because I know how people purposely twist and misrepresent various theologies. However, as shown on this thread, most of us know Mormons and ex-Mormons and do get much of our information from them. Some of the ideas that others have brought up I have heard directly from Mormons. Perhaps it's true that these Mormons don't know the tenets of their own faith, but some of it comes from the leaders after they have been asked. It seems there is a wide variety of personal beliefs and interpretation passed on as doctrine that apparently go against LDS guiding documents; this isn't surprising considering the size of the LDS church.
I'm not sure it's fair to say all people who write books and present exposes are lying about their experiences. When a variety of people from diverse walks of life and various areas of the country share similar experiences and have been taught similar theology, I think it's safe to assume we have a fairly accurate representation of any faith based group. I do sit up and take notice, however, when many others of the same group state that's not what the group stands for. (For example, most Christians will denounce the tactics of Westborough Baptist Church and publicly repudiate the bombing of abortion clinics. So, although these two issues make headlines, I can safely assume they don't represent true Christianity because of the vast numbers of Christians who publicly speak against these tactics. However, I have heard very few Islamic people or nationally known groups denounce the tactics of fanatical Islam. That, combined with the tenets of the Islamic faith and a view of life in Islamic countries, lead me to believe fanaticism is actually representative of the faith.)
The value of these discussion groups is that, hopefully, more fair and accurate information is disseminated. I appreciate hearing from people of various faiths as long as they are sincere in accurately representing their faith and experiences. Thank you for trying to do just that.
--------
Perhaps it's true that these Mormons don't know the tenets of their own faith, but some of it comes from the leaders after they have been asked. It seems there is a wide variety of personal beliefs and interpretation passed on as doctrine that apparently go against LDS guiding documents; this isn't surprising considering the size of the LDS church.
Most members of the LDS church do know their know faith, especially if they have served a mission and spent two years explaining it to others. But if one does not explain it everyday, it is easy to miscommunicate. Also, those hearing an explanation may not always understand correctly because what is being taught is so different than their own religious background. I once read of a woman who toured Temple Square in Salt Lake City. All she got out of it was that Mormons somehow worship Seagulls! She remembered nothing else! I found this to be a very funny story--somewhat extreme--but a good example of how religious doctrines can be miscommunicated. Also if a member of the church stresses one aspect of the church or of LDS doctrine to a friend it can be potentially misleading but not neccessarily incorrect. Another problem we LDS face is that we are often asked huge questions on the fly at work or at a party--questions such as "How is your church different than other churches?" We often have about two minutes to give an answer to such a large question. We either say too little, or most commonly we turn on the fire hydrant and try to answer too much too fast, or we completely botch the question out of anxiety.
I once read of a woman who toured Temple Square in Salt Lake City. All she got out of it was that Mormons somehow worship Seagulls! She remembered nothing else! I found this to be a very funny story--somewhat extreme--but a good example of how religious doctrines can be miscommunicated.
I feel compelled to explain Zim's comment, in that I am sure some might think he is exaggerating. I don't know of the specific experience of which he speaks; however, I do know some people don't understand or misinterpret the connection between seagulls and the LDS Church, and I would like to clarify.
In 1848, the membership of the Church was in crisis. The members were facing potential starvation, because crops were being destroyed by what are today called Mormon Crickets. These same crickets continue to be a problem in Utah, Idaho, and Nevada today. At a moment when it appeared all the crops would be destroyed and members of the Church would face starvation, seagulls arrived and began decimating the cricket swarms.
Now, one can call this nothing more than luck and coincidence, or one can call this a miracle. In any event, it is why the California Seagull eventually became the Utah state bird and why there is a monument of a Seagull in the Salt Lake Temple Square. The monument does not mean we revere or worship the Seagull; it was erected to remind all Saints of the miracles of God.
I feel compelled to explain Zim's comment, in that I am sure some might think he is exaggerating. I don't know of the specific experience of which he speaks; however, I do know some people don't understand or misinterpret the connection between seagulls and the LDS Church, and I would like to clarify.
In 1848, the membership of the Church was in crisis. The members were facing potential starvation, because crops were being destroyed by what are today called Mormon Crickets. These same crickets continue to be a problem in Utah, Idaho, and Nevada today. At a moment when it appeared all the crops would be destroyed and members of the Church would face starvation, seagulls arrived and began decimating the cricket swarms.
Now, one can call this nothing more than luck and coincidence, or one can call this a miracle. In any event, it is why the California Seagull eventually became the Utah state bird and why there is a monument of a Seagull in the Salt Lake Temple Square. The monument does not mean we revere or worship the Seagull; it was erected to remind all Saints of the miracles of God.
This is odd to me.
And please, you know me, I'm not trying to argue or flame.
But it's ironic to me that Mormons would accept and erect a statue to a seagull as representation of a miracle of God that helped save the starving, yet they are opposed to images of the cross which is the ultimate representation of salvation.
And please, you know me, I'm not trying to argue or flame.
But it's ironic to me that Mormons would accept and erect a statue to a seagull as representation of a miracle of God that helped save the starving, yet they are opposed to images of the cross which is the ultimate representation of salvation.
Do you see that irony?
Not ironic to me. Overemphasis of the cross and of images of Christ dying on the cross and the stages of the cross and of all the suffering and all the blood and pain .... doesn't exactly make me all happy and shiny inside. It's kindof depressing and seems to lead to people doing idiotic things like nailing themselves to crosses at Easter time and stigmata and so forth.
Fine, fine, fine. It's the official/unofficial symbol of Christendom. I won't knock it.
I kindof like the de-emphasis of the cross. Christ isn't dying on the cross anymore. He's already conquered and risen from the dead triumphant and has moved up to Heaven. If nothing else, not using the cross as a symbol is one means of doing things a little differently.
I think that having a statue of something other than a cross, or God or Christ doesn't make you a bird-worshipper. If someone wants to latch onto that, then they're REALLY stretching for something to criticize.
I'm at work and I'm looking directly at my bobblehead of the Evil Monkey from the Family Guy. No, I don't worship monkeys.
That reminds me of something else although I know it probably doesn't fit here. Why do we have images/renderings of Jesus as a causcasian? He has sandy hair and blue eyes? While I don't doubt that there very well may be some fair haired, blue eyed Middle East folks out there today, I kinda doubt there were that many at the time Jesus walked, at least in that region. I don't know, just a thought.
I think that having a statue of something other than a cross, or God or Christ doesn't make you a bird-worshipper. If someone wants to latch onto that, then they're REALLY stretching for something to criticize.
That's certainly not what I was implying.
I sure hope you didn't glean all that out of one observation.
All I said was that I find it ironic. That's all. Nothing more. Promise
That is a fair question. I will borrow in part from the Church's own web site to answer that question.
"The cross is used in many Christian churches as a symbol of the Savior's death and Resurrection and as a sincere expression of faith. As members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we also remember with reverence the suffering of the Savior. But because the Savior lives, we do not use the symbol of His death as the symbol of our faith."
Having said this, Alpha, I recommend you go to Temple Square if you ever get a chance. To be sure the seagull monument is there, but a gorgeous statue of the Christus is the center piece of the visitor center. You will find many pictures of Christ in our meeting houses and in our temples. We don't have anything against the cross but it is a symbol of execution and we rather make our lives and our temples thre symbol of the living Christ.
You know, the wearing of crosses is one of those things that, to my mind, is more cultural than doctrinal.
I think if someone learned about Mormonism only from the scriptures and the church lesson manuals, they would never know that Mormons don't believe in wearing crosses.
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.
A point of clarification, though, is that the experience I was referencing actually didn't mention Mormonism at all. I was reading a work of fiction that had an interesting perspective on hell. I was perplexed by the depiction and wondered if it may have been based on Mormon theology since it reminded me of the multiple kingdoms of glory.
