Bill McKeever, founder of Mormonism Research Ministry
I mainly pointed out that the term itself doesn't seem appropriate... I'm not "Anti-Mormon" in the sense that I'm against Mormons... My best friend IS Mormon. For the specifics on the post please use the link above :)
This time, I'd like to focus on the claims of "Anti-Mormons". Whether or not this Anti-Mormon literature should be viewed by Mormons or Christians.
If you don't know already, I (Paul) have been looking into Mormonism extensively for about 2 years now. In talking to Bryan, we decided it would be a good idea to try the "Moroni Promise". Which basically means to read the Book of Mormon, then pray to ask God if it's true or not. Well, I did just that... and over 14 months later, I've yet to receive confirmation either way as to the Book of Mormon or Joseph Smith having any authority from God.
In my conversations with Bryan ever since my first attempt to gain this 'testimony' of the BOM he spoke of, he didn't have any idea why I haven't received one... That is until I got his last letter.
In his last letter Bryan posited that the reason I may not have received my testimony is due to the amount of "Anti-Mormon Literature" I've subjected myself to. He also said that This type of literature is likened to "Spiritual Pornography" that it damages the spirit.
I was actually surprised at this seeing as Bryan and I had at one time agreed that Anti-Mormon literature wasn't a big deal and that anyone could read whatever they want. (Within reason of course).
After reading this I looked up past conversations I have had with Bryan to try and see where he was coming from... or if this was really what he believed, or if was an answer someone else suggested.
I found this bit that I had sent him back in July of '09: Anti-Mormon. Mormon J. Nelson-Seawright writes that "the terminological sleight of hand involved in the label ‘anti-Mormon’ allows [Mormons] to ignore the differences between honest and honorable men and women who oppose us, on the one hand, and unprincipled villains, on the other." Mormon Joni Hilton advises fellow members: "First of all, anti-Mormon literature, Internet sites, conversations, ideas, etc. are like spiritual pornography. Once they are in the mind, they are very difficult to get rid of. As you try to reach out to your husband, I would advise you to avoid any material, even if you think it might help you understand him better. You don’t want those seeds of doubt planted in your own mind, because no one is immune to them." -found from mrm.org
Bryan never responded to that email (He was usually pretty busy, no fault on his part) He did say this when I asked if it was ok for him to even read this stuff: "We can find and read anything…. Just type anything in google, and you can read stuff. I have talked to two bishops about the things I am learning with you. They don’t have a problem with anything. They are happy I am learning more about the church."
I can't go back and 'un-learn' all the "Anti-Mormon" literature I've ever read, but I can be shown that it was in error... I have to say that I would never join a church or religion without doing my own investigation into both the good and the bad. (Not that I haven't made the mistake of doing just the opposite in the past...) I don't expect the history of the LDS church to be perfect. But I do become concerned when I find that certain truths are being 'hidden' or 'harder to find'. If I was a missionary of the LDS church I would give as objective a picture as possible to those I was trying to convert. I wouldn't want to white-wash history and present a favorable view of the religion just to get numbers. (Not saying this is what Bryan's doing... in fact we made an agreement that he would never 'trick' anyone into the church by using shady tactics or omitting key information that would otherwise deter their joining the LDS church.)
Even within Christianity... As a Christian, I am disgusted at the mirrors and smoke employed to show Christianity in a favorable light. The dirty truth is that almost every early follower of Christ was called to serve as a martyr. Believing in Christ is not a way to get rich or "Live Your Best Life Now". It's not a means to get more friends or be accepted. I want so much to inform potential converts of true Christianity. That they may die for Christ, that it's easier for a camel to fit thru the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven. That we must take up our cross and follow Him, forsaking all others... Not even "wasting the time" to bury your own father. If this type of thing were to be considered "Anti-Christian Literature then I would be buying it in bulk and distributing it to every serious believer I encounter. Oh wait, I guess that is what I'm doing. Haha.
So if Anti-Mormonism is what's keeping me from having a testimony of the truth of the LDS church then I would that Elohim just keep His testimony. For if He's not strong enough to overcome a few misled "Mormon haters" then He's not who I thought He was.
What do you think? Should Mormons read "Anti-Mormon" material? Should Christians read Atheistic material? Would/could this material be the cause to keep someone from seeing the truth? Or might it be possible for God to make Himself real to even Christopher Hitchens before he succumbs to his cancer? (I pray for your healing Christopher)
Grace and Peace!
Paul,
ReplyDeleteI have enjoyed reading anti-Mormon literature ever since I was a teenager (now over 40 years); but I wouldn't recommend that everyone imbibe. I used to feel guilty having it in my home because it does convey a spirit that is opposed to righteousness--but I read everything I could find. I even attended Walter Martin's Bible study for months. I noticed that if I spent too much time with anti stuff, I would eventually feel a little bit dirty. I noticed a similar feeling once while watching a TV show on evolution. After several hour long episodes, I noticed that I was beginning to doubt the creation account of the Bible. I determined that I would give an equal time to reading the Bible that I had given to the evolution program, and within a short time, I realized that there was much I did not know but that God did know and could help me understand.
I've also noticed that it isn't a good idea for gullible people to read anti-Mormon literature because they're easily taken in by bogus arguments. I'm naturally skeptical about lots of things and don't take much at face value. That's probably one reason I have enjoyed anti literature so much. I like to analyze it and find where it's dishonest (and after 40+ years, most of it is very dishonest.) So, I think some Mormons should and others should not. If one begins from a standpoint that recognizes that it is basically evil (as is anti-Catholic, anti-whatever literature), and fundamentally opposed to the fruit of the spirit (love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness and faith --Gal. 5:22) and then compares its message with actual teachings of Mormonism, he won't go far wrong in reading it.
A couple of final observations: the word "Mormon" is an adjective as well as a noun. Many people who say "I'm not anti-Mormon, I like Mormons," are using a bad form of illogic. Nobody who objects to anti-Mormon literature seriously thinks of it as being opposed to Mormons but rather to things pertaining to Mormonism. Claremont college has a "Mormon Studies" department. They're not studying Mormons but rather the beliefs and theology of Mormonism.
Anti-Mormon literature is notorious for its use of double standards. If a standard applied to Mormonism isn't allowed to apply equally to so-called Christian theology, it is bogus.
Alma,
ReplyDeleteI am happy to say that this has been one of the kindest and most honest responses I've even encountered on this humble blog :P Thank you sir for joining the conversation, I'm honored that you've taken the time to contribute.
Your point on "Anti-Mormon" not meaning "Anti-Mormon-Person" is well received and shall not be soon forgotten.
The issue of gullibility is an interesting one. Gullible people, will of course be gullible, but it seems that they'd accept the Mormon religion with the same amount of gullibility as they'd receive the Anti stuff.
Should those same people not listen to pro-Mormon material?
I think the best solution would be to fix gullible people ;) by asking all people to be more skeptical. This way, if Mormonism is the true religion, skeptical people will have a better chance of getting out of what regional religion they were 'born' into. I just think that skepticism is the best means to obtaining truth.
But as you said, the standards need to be "standardized"... I too have seen way to many anti-mormon claims that make me cringe to think they're representing Christianity...
I even asked Christian Apologist William Lane Craig (Someone I greatly admire) about how to discern which Spiritual witness, the Christian's or The Mormon's was true. The response he gave me doesn't seem to cut it for me. You can take a read for yourself, but I just can't accept his response without further clarification... it just seems stacked against Mormons for no good reason.
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=8237
Also, Alma, as a Mormon, what would be the best way for me to find if the Mormon church is true? I really do want to know, it's a sincere desire of mine. Would it be best for me to keep trying the Moroni's promise? Or would you have some advice or me in this area. Just to warn you, I am a Christian and I am convinced that I'm on the right path. I desire truth above all else, if Mormonism is true I want it.
I think you’re probably right that gullible people face a two edged sword either way; but I think that anti-literature (of any sort), can be destructive to the naïve or gullible when it won’t be to others of a more skeptical or an informed perception. I don’t think, though, that the reverse is true of any “pro” material—Baptist, Presbyterian, Mormon, JW, Waldensian or whatever. Joseph Smith’s paraphrase of Paul sums that up: “If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.”
ReplyDeleteThe negative aspects of “anti” literature are what I think are dangerous. I don’t see Paul or Peter or even the Savior giving lectures on “what’s wrong with this sect.” Jesus did explain to the Sadducees that they erred in not understanding the scriptures, but that was far different than providing an apologetic about their errors (except in behavior). We’re supposed to give a reason for the hope that lies within us, not necessarily a reason why someone else is wrong.
Another reason is related to Jude’s comment about Michael, who dared not bring a railing accusation against the Devil. It seems that if anyone ever deserved a railing accusation it would be Satan; yet Michael “dared not” do so, instead, he suggested that the Lord rebuke him. That’s because the Devil is the “accuser of the brethren” and Michael would not use his tactics. Anti literature of all sorts doesn’t exercise the same caution; and does accuse quite a bit.
I read Dr. Craig’s response, and I too think it relies on circularity too much.
As a Mormon, I’m firmly convinced that the only way to find out if Mormonism is true is to ask God, with real intent and real faith. You mentioned that you had not received an answer yet. I’d like to suggest a couple of possible reasons for that:
1) God answers our prayers when He determines that we are ready to receive and act on that answer. The fundamental principle of faith in Jesus Christ is at work in this. If God determines that you do not have the faith necessary to act on what He gives to you, the answer won’t come. (Most people think that “faith” is a really really strong hope; but that’s just really really strong hope. The Greek term is related to a surety bond in a contractual arrangement—the “assurance” or “substance” of things hoped for. It is closer to “commitment” than it is to “hope.” Most people won’t even ask because they’re afraid they will get an answer and they don’t have the faith necessary commit to that answer. “Let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed. For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord.” (James 1:6-7)
2) In the Book of Mormon, God spoke to Laman and Lemuel with a still, small voice; but they were “past feeling” and could not “feel His words.” Sometimes we aren’t willing to listen and don’t hear it. Moroni’s promise is more detailed than many people realize. It requires not only faith in Christ, a sincere heart and real intent, but also the need to remember the mercies of the Lord and to ponder those things in your heart. Try this: Kneel down before God and thank Him for your blessings. Then tell Him you are going to read from the New Testament and ask Him to enlighten your mind to understand it. Then read for 20 minutes without any other distractions. Then kneel down again, thank Him again, and ask again for help in understanding what you read. Then ponder on what you read without any other distractions. The next day, do the same thing with the Book of Mormon. Don’t be afraid to ponder; because that’s when answers will come. You do have to have a listening ear before you can hear.
3) Your behavior has to coincide with your profession of faith. Jesus came preaching the kingdom of heaven, telling the people to repent. (Matt. 4:17) Everyone has to repent, and our behavior is the “fruit meet for repentance.” It’s all summed up in faith.
So, keep asking in faith until you get an answer.
I'm sure we both understand that most of the material in question is not written with the intention of being labeled "anti" anything. The main issue you seem to have is when someone points out "what's wrong" with a faith he doesn't belong to (Please correct me if I'm mistaken).
ReplyDeleteIn my experience (I'm only 25 so it's limited, please bear with me ;) ), I've come to understand that positives and negatives are just two sides of the same coin. Jesus could make a terribly positive statement, such as "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6). Yet at the same time, by making this positive statement for a faith He's endorsing as the Only Way, He's making an opposite claim of every other attempt to come to the Father. Jesus is being both absolutely positive and absolutely negative at the same time.
I would agree that it's more profitable to preach the positives of truth than to preach the negatives of error. However, for me, negatives of error (double negative) would be positive preaching ;). It would be a type of offensive defense. :)
So I feel that in reading about truth, regardless of whether it's pro or anti in nature, I am following Paul's admonition. Of course I do not feel the same when the presentation of that truth employs broken reason or deceitful tactics (Which I'm sure is in every religion, both pro and anti). Needless to say if the information I'm reading is inaccurate or fabricated, it is by no means glorifying to God. This doesn't mean the author of such a work was intentionally trying to deceive, but I do think there is a greater level of accountability when it comes to Christian material on the subject of Mormonism.
As for New Testament reaction to error, Jim has an article at PCM. http://www.pleaseconvinceme.com/index/pg83275
I had to read the entire book of Jude to find your reference ;). I'm not exactly sure what a "railing accusation" is... Other translations say "He dare not condemn Him for slander" Slander then meaning: "a malicious, false, and defamatory statement or report". I don't think slander is appropriate in any case, yet as you said, if anyone deserved it... ;). This being an angel vs. Devil interaction I would have reservations about it being applied to people conversations... That's just me tho :P
Thanks for reading the article, I'm still trying to figure out if I'm missing something :P He's just the top apologist for Christianity... I think I'm entitled to believe I may lack the capacity to fully understand him ;)
I sincerely appreciate your advice as far as my attempting a testimony is concerned. I will be including it in my next letter to Bryan (My best friends (LDS) and original co-author of this blog).
Again, a pleasure Alma.
This doesn't mean the author of such a work was intentionally trying to deceive, but I do think there *NEEDS TO BE* a greater level of accountability when it comes to Christian material on the subject of Mormonism.
ReplyDeletefix*
I hope you didn't take up too much of your day reading the whole epistle...next time I'll give a verse. Interestingly, in English "to rail" is to "complain violently," while the Greek word is our word for "blaspheme." You may want to look into a very good electronic resource on the Bible found at e-sword.net. I use it extensively. It's free and more than worth it. You can download several Bible translations, and commentaries and it is a remarkable tool. I just wish it were available for my phone.
ReplyDeletePeter also mentions the fact that angels are unwilling to bring railing accusations (probably referencing the same source as Jude) in 2 Peter 2:11 --and he brings it up in connection with the ungodly who do speak evil of dignities.