Book of Mormonisms

Did they really say THAT?

Study shows Mormons and JW’s least TOLERANT!

Posted by coventryrm on Monday, June 23, 2008

Massive study finds most Americans devout, tolerant

“As Americans rub shoulders with people of other religious traditions, they are less judgmental, and less likely to offer pronouncements about other people’s eternal life.”

The most striking exceptions are Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses

http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2008/06/pew_study_finds.html

Advertisements

35 Responses to “Study shows Mormons and JW’s least TOLERANT!”

  1. Many people think they know what the LDS Church teaches by taking an odd item here and another from there. But does the church really teach that stuff? Is it really doctrine or just the opinion of some long dead guy? Is it doctrine? I have posted on my blog what the dean of BYU Religious Education said to the BYU religion professors in 2003 about the hard questions Mormons were faced with answering. You might be surprised. I was. http://mormonthing.wordpress.com.

  2. blazeheliski said

    I saw a show on the History channel the other night about “Armageddon.” The show basically broke down the biblical version and how it might relate to events in history.

    The interesting part was that it talked about a group called the “Millerites” named after their fiery preacher William Miller. He whipped people into a frenzy when he predicted some exact dates for the 2nd coming of Christ. He had huge tent revivals all over the Northeast United States around the 1840s. People were flocking to him based on his prophecy ( sounding familiar?) When the dates of the 2nd coming arrived – Miller had thousands of followers. Sadly, they ended up all disappointed. The “Millerites” eventually became the current “Seventh Day Adventists.”

  3. SkiUtah said

    Joseph Smith started the LDS religion based on a visit from God and Christ who unequivocally tell Joseph that all other religions are abominations, incorrect, and corrupt.

    Any religion founded that way will generate a culture of intolerance…

  4. JLFuller said

    SkiUtah
    I beg to differ with you. He said thier creeds were an abomination, not the churches. There is a huge difference. In fact they are noit the same thing at all. Look at what was happening at the time – slavery, oppression of women and minorities, destructionof entire native peoples all in the name of the dominant religions of the day. People in Europe were being burned at the stake for such things as translating the bible into English or thrown into prison for disagreeing with the practices of the time. Wars were fought over differences in biblical interpretation and doctrine. Were not these abominations?

  5. SkiUtah said

    okay, “their creeds were an abomination”. This also creates a culture of intolerance.

    The ironic thing is that Mormons don’t view themselves as intolerant…

  6. coventryrm said

    JL Fuller
    I am somewhat perplexed at the point I think you are trying to make, God was telling Joseph the creeds or practices of the religion at the time were an abomination to him. I can agree that things you listed were horrible, God aside, abominations to humanity period all done in the name of God and religion.

    JS and Mormonism was God’s answer to such abominations I think is the point you are attempting to make.

    The Problem I have with that is all a person needs to do is crack open the J of D and quickly find that Mormonism held to the religious party line when it came to such issues as

    “slavery, oppression of women and minorities”

    The other items you mention for the most part you are off a couple hundred years in regards to stake burnings and such in Europe during JS’s time, I am not sure the Puritans in America were even doing that much after the 1700s.

  7. JLFuller said

    coventryrm
    Go back to http://mormonthing.wordpress.com and scroll down to Doctrinal Parameters where Millet talks about this subject. Briefly, he says:

    “#3. In determining whether something is a part of the doctrine of the Church, we might ask: Is it found within the four standard works? Within official declarations or proclamations? Is it taught or discussed in general conference or other official gatherings by general Church leaders today? Is it found in the general handbooks or approved curriculum of the Church today? If it meets at least one of these criteria, we can feel secure and appropriate about teaching it.”

    None of the things you bring up meet that threshold. The JD is not scripture. Read what else Millet has to say.

  8. JLFuller said

    Coventryrm
    Millet says before the quote I copied:

    “2. Very often what is drawn from Church leaders of the past is, like the matter of blood atonement mentioned above, either misquoted, misrepresented, or taken out of context. Further, not everything that was ever spoken or written by a Church leader in the past is a part of what we teach today. Ours is a living constitution, a living tree of life, a dynamic Church (D&C 1:30). We are commanded to pay heed to the words of living oracles (D&C 90:3-5). “

  9. JLFuller said

    SkiUtah
    You said above “The ironic thing is that Mormons don’t view themselves as intolerant…” How are we not tolerant?

  10. JLFuller said

    Coventryrm

    The Spanish Inquisition was not discontinued until 1834. But that isn’t the only aspect of creedal abomination. An abomination is anything that separates man form God. The Creeds changed God’s nature which left His children with a false understanding of who He was. There are other things too. If you really want to know how Creedalism is an abomination go to http://byubwmv.byu.edu/sperry/2004/JWelch04.wmv where you can watch Dr. Welch give his presentation or you can hear it or read it.

  11. JLFuller said

    Sorry I goofed that up. No way to edit it after I post it. I’ll do better next time.

  12. SkiUtah said

    >> How are we not tolerant?

    My TBM brother once protested against a Hooters being built in Phoenix. He (and other Mormons) said they would not tolerate another Hooters being built in the area.

    That’s not being very tolerant, and it didn’t make any local residents (mostly males) very happy either…

  13. coventryrm said

    JLFuller

    I went ahead and did the edit for you.

    There is a major flaw in your argument “The JD is not scripture” I am not even going to go into the Millet quotes at this point as it will not have any bearing on my current point, so I will save that for later.

    I am familiar with this apologetic tactic of arguing a point using an unrelated piece of information.

    For example you made the following point –

    “Look at what was happening at the time – slavery, oppression of women and minorities, destruction of entire native peoples all in the name of the dominant religions of the day. “

    Implying that God visited JS because of this abomination referring to the time period of Joseph Smith – I pointed out that the writing and actions by the Mormon Church at “THAT TIME” would indicate however that JS and Co pretty much went along with the religious party line on many of those issues ie “slavery, oppression of women and minorities”

    Your counter point is to Quote Millet and apply today’s standard which is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand which was about what was going on during the “TIME” of the supposed restoration.

    Based on the criteria you set down the J of D does not fit the criteria “NOW” but it certainly fit the criteria “THEN” and that is what we are talking about “THEN not “NOW”

  14. JLFuller said

    “A living prophet is better than a dead one”. President Hinckley said that and so it is. The D&C says we are to follow the living prophets and apostles guidance. Why,because people, times and circumstances change. If you went to Millet’s piece, you would read that doctrine is what we find in the standard works, general handbooks or approved curriculum of the Church today, official declarations or proclamations, general conference or other official gatherings by general Church leaders today. If it meets at least one of these criteria, we can feel secure and appropriate about teaching it. That is how we decide what doctrine is. The Church gets to decide what is our doctrine my friend. And the JD is not in the mix you included.

  15. JLFuller said

    If you went on in Millet’s piece you would read that he says “Very often what is drawn from Church leaders of the past is, like the matter of blood atonement mentioned above, either misquoted, misrepresented, or taken out of context. Further, not everything that was ever spoken or written by a Church leader in the past is a part of what we teach today. Ours is a living constitution, a living tree of life, a dynamic Church (D&C 1:30). We are commanded to pay heed to the words of living oracles (D&C 90:3-5).”

    So, if the Church says the things you discussed are not meet doctrine, why continue saying it does? It isn’t doctrine and we don’t teach it.

  16. deaconj123 said

    SkiUtah

    Joseph Smith and Brigham Young would have welcomed Hooters into their neighborhoods. The early day Mormon prophets all had mini-Hooters establishments in their own homes.

  17. JLFuller said

    Ski, that’s cute and kind of resonates inside me somewhere but as a father I see the behavior of these young women waitresses as a type of model for other kids to emulate. It does not work in the long run and in fact only complicates the lives of people who admire it. Ask any divorce lawyer, family counselor or minister about the damage infidelity does to a relationship. Once we invite destructive behaviors into out heads they stay there. They tend to invite others too. The longer we support them by adding new ones, the more solid they become until they are like concrete. They become embedded into our subconscious and stoke our imaginations. Throughout our lives this thinking will drive our behavior.

  18. JLFuller said

    For any Christian, bearing false witness is a very serious matter. So when someone knowingly continues to disseminate something they have been told is not accurate, they are guilty of this offense. Do not bear false witness against us.

  19. coventryrm said

    Why would you keep quoting Millets ideas they don’t fit any of the criteria either so what he is saying is JUST his opinion. So applying your standard his words are meaningless.

    “Very often what is drawn from Church leaders of the past is, like the matter of blood atonement mentioned above, either misquoted, misrepresented, or taken out of context. ”

    The historical record is pretty clear on the issues of

    “slavery, oppression of women and minorities”

    Try as you might denial simply does not change what actually happened and the LDS Church can rewwrite change twist and spin all they want. Willet’s piece only makes sense to those like yourself that are going to believe whatever the LDS Church tells them to believe regardless of all the emperical evidence to the contrary. The Head in the sand approach seems to still work for many, people are leaving the LDS Church in record numbers as they begin to really apply some common sense, reason and rational thought and truly able to look at the information available.

  20. SkiUtah said

    >>Once we invite destructive behaviors into out heads they stay there. They tend to invite others too.

    Take Joseph Smith for example, once he figured out he could say that God was telling him to marry teenagers, and people believed it, there was no turning back…

  21. coventryrm said

    I would like to see the data that supports the correlation between Hooters and infidelity.

    “Ask any divorce lawyer, family counselor or minister about the damage infidelity does to a relationship.”

  22. J L Fuller

    You said

    “doctrine is what we find in the standard works, general handbooks or approved curriculum of the Church today, official declarations or proclamations, general conference or other official gatherings by general Church leaders today. If it meets at least one of these criteria, we can feel secure and appropriate about teaching it. That is how we decide what doctrine is.”

    You included general conference as meeting your criteria about deciding what doctrine is .

    Lots of the JOD sermons were from general conferences so it was doctrine .

    The reality is the church hasn’t a clue what it is talking about and having to continually shift to outside influences.

    It always has done eventually ( dragging its heels in defiance ) …..and always will .

    Revelation plays no part whatsoever , because there isn’t any in the LDS church.

  23. SkiUtah said

    JLFuller, your quote ” How are we not tolerant?”

    Do a google search on “intolerant mormons”, interestingly, you’ll get about 500,000 hits…

  24. Bishop Rick said

    fuller,

    All you have done here is quote other people. You haven’t given one original thought. Have you noticed that? This is a problem typical in the LDS church. Members really don’t know how to think for themselves.

    It’s sad.

  25. JLFuller said

    Rick
    Where does learning come from if not others? All of what I understand comes from what I read, study and get from listen to others. I refer to sources because more often than not, they know more about the subject than I do. Otherwise I would be just another opinion bouncing around in a sea of other opinions. At some point we have to settle on what is most accurate and which is conjecture. That is the difference between you and me I guess. I am not happy with just one man’s opinion. I want to know what the consensus is. So I read the opinions of a lot of people, Mormon and non-Mormon. But I always compare that with what the Prophet and Apostles say. Either you trust them or you don’t and I do.

  26. JLFuller said

    elder Joseph
    JOD is history mixed with opinion, conjecture and musings. It is the recordings of Joseph and others by other people with fallible memories and some “best as I can recall” stuff. Joseph didn’t write. That isn’t to say there is no truth in it though. But It is not all doctrine. If it is not in keeping with current church teachings it isn’t doctrine regardless of who says it. That includes Brigham Young and Joseph Smith.

    I keep reading all the pronouncements here and elsewhere about how the Church is this or that. But you all are all wet. Your boogeyman notions of the Church don’t hold water. Sorry. Blame me if you want, but you guys are off base. You don’t know what you are talking about. I look at your so called evidence but it just isn’t there.

  27. coventryrm said

    “JOD is history mixed with opinion, conjecture and musings. It is the recordings of Joseph and others by other people with fallible memories and some “best as I can recall” stuff. Joseph didn’t write. That isn’t to say there is no truth in it though..”

    “Letter From the First Presidency

    Great Salt Lake City, Utah Territory, June 1, 1853,
    Elder Samuel Richards, and Saints abroad.

    Dear Brethren-It is well known to many of you, that Elder George D. Watt, by our counsel, spent much time in the midst of poverty and hardships to acquire the art of reporting in Phonography, which he has faithfully and fully accomplished; and he has been reporting the public Sermons, Discourses, Lectures, &c., delivered by the Presidency, the Twelve, and others in this city, for nearly two years, almost without fee or reward. Elder Watt now proposes to publish a Journal of these Reports, in England, for the benefit of the Saints at large, and to obtain means to enable him to sustain his highly useful position of Reporter. You will perceive at once that this will be a work of mutual benefit, and we cheerfully and warmly request your co-operation in the purchase and sale of the above-named Journal, and wish all the profits arising therefrom to be under the control of Elder Watt.

    Brigham Young
    Heber C. Kimball
    Willard Richards

    First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints “

    We don’t know what we are talking about, but JLFULLER Does…..

    I do want to thank Mr Fuller for giving us a wonderful example of how TBM apologetics operate, deny, twist, without any actual answers other that you are wrong because I say you are….

    “you all are all wet. Your boogeyman notions of the Church don’t hold water. Sorry. Blame me if you want, but you guys are off base. You don’t know what you are talking about. I look at your so called evidence but it just isn’t there.”

    Yes the information is there, you can chose to deny and rationalize it or actually accept it. Remember the Truth shall make you free.

  28. JLFuller said

    You cut out the rest of what I said. “That isn’t to say there is no truth in it though. But It is not all doctrine. If it is not in keeping with current church teachings it isn’t doctrine regardless of who says it. That includes Brigham Young and Joseph Smith.”

  29. JLFuller said

    Taking any single thing and claiming it represents the whole is disingenuous and misleading. The point remains the same. Things written in the JOD are doctrine unless the Church teaches it today. Why is that so hard to accept? I don’t get to declare what doctrine is neither do you. You can make up what ever you want to fit whatever story you conjure up but that doesn’t make it doctrine. Accept it. my friend. You have taken a nickels worth of opinion and tried to turn it into a dollars worth of fact and it just isn’t so.

  30. coventryrm said

    There I fixed it, still doesn’t change my point. They said these things they said them claiming to be Prophets and Apostles sorry if it offends you that I like to post the the silly things your Church leaders past and present like to say.

  31. JLFuller said

    coventryrm
    You have accurate information regarding how to distinguish official Church doctrine from the opinions of those who preceded us. If you choose to ignore it, as you have so far, I have no way of stopping you. But remember you are deliberately spreading false information about us. You are bearing false witness. People who think like you have made many of the same or similar claims as you, going back to the restoration of the Gospel. But Christ’s Church continues to grow and blossom throughout the world. No power on earth can stop it.

  32. blazeheliski said

    Bearing false witness means ” to lie.” You knowingly speak a falsehood for your own gain or your own reasons.

    If coventryrm reads the information and sees one thing, and you read the information and see another thing, that is called “differing perceptions.” You see what you “see” and he see what he “sees.” There is no “bearing of false witness.”

    You need to pull your head out of the scriptures for a few minutes and look around a bit. 😉

  33. coventryrm said

    JLFuller

    Like I said earlier thank you for the wonderful examples of how LDS apologetics tend to debate and attack and have such an intolerant view of others opinions I will repeat myself to answer your question as to “How are the LDS intolerant”

    “LDS (JLFULLER) is unable to tolerate or accept that our worldview and experiences are different than his so therefore must be false.” Or take it further accuse me of bearing False witness (Lying)”

    No where to I say that any of these things are STILL considered doctrine I have simply posted those things that were said and have been and are still published by LDS owned publications.

  34. SkiUtah said

    JLFuller said “He said thier creeds were an abomination, not the churches.”

    hmm…

    D&C 29:21: And the great and abominable church, which is the whore of all the earth, shall be cast down by devouring fire, according as it is spoken by the mouth of Ezekiel the prophet, who spoke of these things, which have not come to pass but surely must, as I live, for abominations shall not reign.

    1 Nephi 13:8: And the angel spake unto me, saying: Behold the gold, and the silver, and the silks, and the scarlets, and the fine-twined linen, and the harlots, are the desires of this great and abominable church.

    2 Nephi 28:18: But behold, that great and abominable church, the whore of all the earth, must tumble to the earth, and great must be the fall thereof.

    I say tomato you say potatoe…

  35. skiutah said

    A good quote on abomination by an LDS church leader:

    “all the baptisms and sacraments administered by modern Christian churches are an abomination in the sight of God. All persons who shall suffer themselves to be baptized, or partake of these ordinances through the administration of these illegal unauthorized persons, after having been duly warned of the evil thereof, will bring themselves under great condemnation before God, and unless they repent of that sin they can in no wise be saved. ” — Orson Pratt’s Works page 39-40.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: