Some time ago, I posted an entry complaining of Governor “Finn’s” crack about Mormon doctrine. Anti-Mormons respond to our taking offense by claiming that we don’t like it when Christians “speak the truth in in love” about us. Up to now, my reply is that anti-Mormons state our beliefs in such a way as to make the Church seem bizarre, even sinister. While that is still true, I think I’ve found another reason.
Recently, Republican activist Bob Cunningham put Democrats up in arms by stating Senator Obama’s [D-IL] full name: Barack Hussein Obama. Senator John McCain [R-AZ] quickly apologised, and denounced Cunningham. Several right-wing personalities, such as Sean Hannity, defended Cunnungham, with words to the effect of, “Why get mad at the truth?”
Here’s why: As the New York Times indicates, Senator Obama’s middle name is Muslim in origin. Anybody remember the late Iraqi dictator from Gulf Wars I and II? Such pranks lead people to think that Senator Obama is a Muslim when he is a Christian (While Obama’s Church may be quite wacky–or worse, it is Christian nonetheless.). In short, using Senator Obama’s middle name is tantamount to using a true statement to give an untrue impression.
Anti-Mormons do the same thing when they point out that Satan and Jesus are brothers in LDS doctrine. Actually, they do more than that. While in LDS doctrine, ALL beings of spirit have God as a Father [Hebrews 12:9], and yes, that does include Jesus and Satan, anti-Mormons go on to at least imply that this true doctrine means that, in LDS doctrine, Satan is somehow Jesus’ equal–and Jesus’ ally. Indeed, more than one of my Evangelical acquaintences are at least honest enough in their hatred of all things LDS (Do you see why I cannot call them “friends”?) to tell me outright that our doctrine means exactly that.
Where I come from, using true statements to convey falsehoods is false witness. Elder Marvin Ashton tells us that “A lie is any communication given to another with the intent to deceive.” Both Cunningham’s and “Finn’s” statements were designed to deceive people into thinking falsehoods, and hence, both statements are lies. Christians–including Latter-day Saints–are–or should be–better than that.
Great post! The tactics used by many vocal anti-mormons are disgusting and some of our new members here have also pointed it out.
I wonder how much of this is cultural difference, outside of clear religious boundaries. Most LDS in the U.S. are going to be westerners; there’s going to be a culture clash between the west and the bible belt almost every time.
Personally I’ve started acting in a positive direction, trying to follow Elder Ballard’s recent pleas as a personal way of purging the disgust. 😛
I would think that an apologetic blog would hesitate to call an entire church “wacky or worse” because of the comments of one of its pastors. One would hope that people would not judge the LDS faith on the political comments of President Benson, for example (remember, he even said some of them over the pulpit at conference).
Amen Nate!
Excellent point, Nate!
Obviously I used the wrong word. The United Church of Christ (the religious body which sponsors the place where Senator Obama worships) is definitely not “wacky”–at least not as a whole. Perhaps I should have said, “…congregation….”
Moreover, note that I said that it “may be ‘wacky–or worse’….” Certainly, such an argument could be made about a pastor who spouts conspiracy theories about the government intentionally casusing AIDS among Blacks and others (I used to work for the federal government; the bureaucrats therein couldn’t do it–especially keeping it out of the media–if their lives depend ont it! 😉 ), and about a congregation that eats it all up–without question.
That said, I would be hesitant to equate Reverend Wright’s conspiracy theories with anything said by President Benson. While President Benson was certainly displeased with some acts of the US government–and certainly believed some conspiracy theories–he never invoked Divine condemnation of the American people–certainly not during a war for our lives.
Telling half of the truth can sometimes be worse than lying. I can think of several examples from current events, but I’ll refrain from listing them to avoid upsetting anyone unnecessarily. But it’s clear that political activists love the art of the half-truth.
My point is that you are exactly right that just because you are stating a true fact, does not mean that you are not lying, at least by Elder Ashton’s standard, or at least being intentionally misleading. (Sorry for the double negative)
This will be my last post on the subject, as I agree with the point of the post and don’t wish to threadjack. I just wanted to say that I really don’t think it’s fair to say that the “congregation eats [Rev. Wright’s speeches] up without question.” That statement contradicts everything this site stands for as far as I’m concerned. We don’t denounce Joseph Smith for polygamy, Brigham Young for calling for the death penalty for race mixing, Ezra Taft Benson for calling on the government to squash the civil rights movement, or Bruce R. McConkie for calling the Catholic Church the church of the devil. We don’t because among all of that, we have found something that is so valuable to us that we’re willing to take the time to harmonize those remarks with the truth we have felt. To accuse others of being wacky or “eating up” the views of a leader because they choose to stay shows a lack of the very same courtesy that we wish others to show to us.
With no small amount of hesitation, I’d like to point out, Steven, that not everyone agrees with your (minority) viewpoint that the Iraq war constitutes a “war for our lives.” In fact, a large percentage of Americans believe that the Iraq war was a tragic mistake and that the current administration’s “war on terror” has been a vast overreaction that has made us less safe and ruined what little international goodwill we previously had.
I realize that you have very strong feelings about this topic, and good reasons for believing what you do. Please keep in mind, however, that not everyone shares your point of view.
While I would not choose Rev. Wright’s exact words or tone, I agree with his basic sentiment — God should not bless America as long as we are the instigators of death, destruction, and related evils.
Nate: Two comments, and I’m done.
1. If somebody says that the Church “may be wacky” (and some acquaintences have!), I would invite the person to look at the evidence. To me, that person has serious questions, but is willing to be persuaded. Even if that person remains unpersuaded–even if he thinks some of our position are bizarre, at least he does me the courtesy of hearing me out. On the other hand, saying that people are irredeemably evil tends to close off all conversation.
Thus, I think that equating the allowing of the possibility of wackiness with outright mocking is off base. Note that I have refrained from calling Reverend Wright epithets. Moreover, I consistently use the proper honourific–again, as a measure of courtesy. The only exception is that I stipulated that his congregation is Christian. “The jury is out,” of course, on the wacky part.
2. From my reading of President Benson’s comments, I am unaware of any advocacy to “crush” the civil rights movement. At most, in my reading of his statements, he advocated the FBI policy of monitoring it, and dealing with lawbreakers accordingly. This is a far cry from equivalent to what Reverend Wright advocated.
1. The “war for our lives” is NOT just Iraq.
2. I do wish you’d refrain from the goo and drivel of “With no small amount of hesitation….” This implies an esteem that you either do not have, or should not have, if you truly believe that I am guilty of supporting evil, as you indicate.
3. If you agree with Reverend Wright, then why NOT use that strong a term? If we are as racist and irredeemably evil as he says we are, aren’t you honour-bound to hammer us with it–even to fight and kill us?
One thing I respect about Reverend Wright; he is crystal clear that America is incurably racist and evil, and, if he has half a chance, he will use whatever means he has to destroy that evil: Namely, US. I know EXACTLY where we stand. Ditto with Reverend Bill Keller: He makes no secret about his belief that we are a bunch of lying, demonic Satan-worshippers, and his desire to treat us accordingly.
Steven,
1. I specifically mentioned the “war on terror” in my previous message. I of course realize that Iraq is not just the only war we are currently fighting; it is merely a symptom of a much wider problem.
2. My hesitation was genuine; I considered for some time whether to enter into this discussion. My concern was that you would interpret my comments in the least charitable way possible. This is, I’m sad to say, something you do frequently.
3. Your third point is indicative of my second, above. I did not say that that you, whomever you include in your group, are “racist and irredeemably evil”; I have in mind specific individuals who are in power. The majority of Americans who support the current administration are genuinely good-hearted people who are either ignorant of America’s global misdeeds over the last 60 years, and/or are operating from misplaced hyper-patriotism. I’m not at all certain why you think I am “honour-bound to…fight and kill” people who disagree with me, though.
I believe your final paragraph typically overstates the positions of those with whom you disagree. There is no evidence that Rev. Wright wants to “destroy” the United States; rather, he wants to change those aspects of it that he does not like.
So, in conclusion, I would ask you to please stop misconstruing your opponents’ arguments and ascribing the worst possible motives to them. You don’t know what’s inside my head, just as you don’t know what’s inside Rev. Wright’s. Jesus Christ calls us to compassion, to “love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.” As representatives of FAIR, we should be living up to that charge.
Governor “Finn’s” remarks reminded of something the classicist Werner Jaeger wrote about the early Christians:
Those who equated the eucharist with cannibalism undoubtedly excused their slanders the same way anti-Mormons do today. Speaking the truth in love? Spare me the hypocrisy.