|
From: JR
Received: Saturday, 24 March 2007
I have not viewed the anti-Mormon dvd, not will I waste my time with it. I have already read many books, both pro and con. However, after being an active member of the church for over 20 years, inactive for the last 5 or so, I can understand the sentiments. The church rarely mentioned Jesus Christ in most talks and Sunday school lessons when I attended. It was always about Joseph Smith and his importance. Oh, did I miss the stories and teachings of Jesus! Of course the church has since changed it's views, but a bit late for me.
- Latter-day Saints do spend a lot of time focusing on the mission of Joseph Smith because he is the prophet who was called to restore the gospel the last days. This can feel unusual or unfamiliar to converts from Protestant or evangelical Christianity. But although Latter-day Saints discuss Joseph Smith, we also "talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ" (2 Nephi 25꞉26). Jesus Christ is the center of our devotion and worship. All prayers are given in his name, and all talks are closed with his name. The sacrament is administered in every regular Sunday meeting, memorializing Jesus' atonement and renewing the covenants Latter-day Saints have made with him. As important as Joseph Smith is to the Saints, he does not compare in any way to the Lord Jesus Christ.
If we do not follow Joseph Smith's "revelations" we will not be able to gain access to the highest level of Heaven and meet God personally. After many months of prayer and study I've come to realize that God would not admit us to the highest level of heaven only if we play a little game and pretend to meet him first and give him a secret handshake. Also, if God truly wants us to make it back to Heaven, he would not have left the instructions with only one human being, especially one with so many "imperfections", for all of humanity to follow. (In 1st or 2nd Corinthians it is mentioned the answer will be always be given to more than one).
- The point is not about following Joseph Smith, but about following the ordained prophets of God whatever age in which they have been called. Joseph Smith is not alone in his witness—many prophets came before him, and many have come after. All of them were human beings with imperfections, but they delivered God's message to the best of their capacity. JR's caricature of LDS temple ordinances also dramatically oversimplifies and distorts the importance of the temple covenant and ritual.
When I have asked questions in the past of bishops, or visiting and home teachers, I have been told I'm not to question anything. I have read the ten rules for following a prophet blindly, no matter how wrong I feel he might be. Am I to abandon my Holy Spirit when I do this? Or my Free Will? Or my Intelligence?) And where are some of these righteous people today? One recent visiting teacher is now in jail in Las Vegas for prostitution. One of my home teachers is in jail for child pornography, another in jail for murdering his wife. These are the ones that told me that my answers were not of God since they were different from theirs. While I am not judging the church based on these people, it does give me an indication that perhaps my prayers are correct.
- Latter-day Saints are mortal, fallible, and imperfect. Some of them commit very serious sins. Unfortunately, JR seems to have met more than her share of them.
- There is nothing in LDS teaching that requires believers "not to question anything," nor to "follow a prophet blindly." In fact, numerous scriptures in the Doctrine and Covenants speak of using our God-given intelligence to study and learn, and to use that knowledge, coupled with inspiration from the Holy Ghost, to come to a knowledge of truth. (See DC 88꞉79; DC 88꞉118; DC 90꞉15; DC 130꞉19.)
It is interesting how questions seem to be answered with questions in your responses to the dvd. It is also interesting you quote Bruce McKonkie [sic] when it suits your argument, but slap his hand when he deviates from the teachings of the church. In the many years I was involved in the church I found that to be the case with the Book of Mormon as well. Very few Mormons have read the book cover to cover. Only a tiny bit is used to support lesson plans for Sunday school. It was frustrating to ask questions raised by reading the Book of Mormon, to be told "I don't need to read it - I prayed about it!" Many people told me this.
- Elder Bruce R. McConkie wrote and spoke widely, and many of the things he wrote and said are correct. Some of the things he wrote and said were his own opinion, or ventured into areas where there is no definitive revelation on the subject, or where faithful Latter-day Saints disagree. As stated previously, we do not believe prophets are infallible, but they do have a special commission and it is in our best interest to consider what they say carefully.
- It is difficult to respond to JR's claim that the Book of Mormon wasn't read or used much by Latter-day Saints she knew. Certainly leaders of the Church—especially over the last 20 years—have repeatedly asked the Saints to read the Book of Mormon. According to BYU's General Conference Scripture Citation Index, speakers in General Conference from 1986 to 2006 quoted from the Book of Mormon 5,727 times, compared to 5,109 from the New Testament and 4,291 from the Doctrine and Covenants. We spend one year out of ever four in our Sunday School lesson cycle studying the Book of Mormon. In August 2005, President Hinckley challenged all Latter-day Saints to read the Book of Mormon cover to cover before the end of the year. So JR's criticism seems to be without merit. (In fact, one of the frequent criticisms we respond to at FAIR is that Latter-day Saints put too much focus on the Book of Mormon!)
Another point of contention I have with the church not working for me personally is the teaching that no matter how righteous a life I lead, it is solely up to the discretion of my husband to "call me over to the other side." This is why he is allowed to know my new temple name but I am given his. How can a loving God leave my fate up to another human being? Does a woman have no choices in the church?
- Since this involves temple ordinances, we are limited in what we can say in this case. Certainly, though, Latter-day Saints believe that the wife of an unrighteous or unbelieving husband would not be hindered by him in any way in receiving her exaltation.
I don't mean to denigrate Mormonism - it works for many people. But please consider there may be other avenues to the highest level of heaven. If Mormonism were more tolerant of other religions, then perhaps other religions would follow suit. It's called the Law of Attraction.
- Latter-day Saints believe there is much truth and much good in all religious beliefs, and that all truths should be believed, regardless of their source. Our loving Heavenly Father will give everyone the appropriate opportunity in God's own time to accept the grace of his Son through the proper ordinances and covenants.
- And JR is correct that Mormons do need to be more tolerant of others' beliefs. President Hinckley has said precisely that on several occasions recently.
|
|
From: JD
Received: Sunday, 25 March 2007
As a convert, born and raised as a Catholic, I understand some of the frustrations non-LDS people have. When people question our faith in Jesus Christ, they in actuality are questioning their faith. I have often wondered why do they act that way, then I hear in my head the Lord is saying "Forgive them Father for they know not what they do." It is so easy to find fault in the other guy.
People are afraid of what they do not know or wish to know. Without the comfort of the Holy Ghost some sheep will be lost forever.
I'm retired and loving all of the scriptures is a passion, if there is anything I can do to help, please don't hesitate to write. God Bless.
|
|
From: MR
Received: Sunday, 25 March 2007
I disagree with the statement [on the "Who Is Jesus?" page]: "Satan's plan, and his offer to implement it, was never consistent with God the Father's plan of salvation." The inference is that Satan had a distinct plan that contrasted with and was offered to us along with the Father's plan. The Father was the only one to offer a plan. Satan and Jesus each offered to implement the plan in his own way. I think you should get rid of the "Satan's plan" and make it "Satan's offer." Maybe this is a minor point, but I keep hearing people say from the pulpit that two plans were presented, God's and Satan's, as if we all democratically "voted" on which plan to accept. This notion makes Satan appear at the same level as God the Father.
- FAIR volunteers discussed this wording quite a bit before we settled on the final version. Ultimately we felt that this really came down to semantics, and that most Latter-day Saints would be familiar with the phrase "Satan's plan." Technically, though, MR is correct: The Father described Jesus as "my Beloved and Chosen from the beginning" (Moses 4꞉2). It was the Father's intent from the start to offer Jesus as a redemptive sacrifice for all mankind; Satan's offer was not a choice between two equal plans.
|
