Blake Ostler - A Response To Mormon Neo-Othdodoxy

Rating:	★★★★
Category:	Other

http://sunstonemagazine.com/audio/SL89065.mp3

Blake is the second speaker and most interesting of the three. The part I found most interesting is that I was given a concrete reason why LDS use the term "transgression" when referring to the fall of Adam. He also stated why he doesn't believe in Original Sin. First and foremost is that it wasn't a sin. In order to sin, you have to have a knowledge of Good and Evil, which was lacking and really the point of the myth. Adam didn't know Good or Evil, and hence, could not sin. I know that the BoM could be read that way but I never thought it in such simple terms before. He does spell out other reasons why "Original Sin" can't exist, and even in his latest book, does it exaustively. I still like that little snippet though.

http://www.defensorveritatis.net/?p=860

http://www.defensorveritatis.net/?p=860
An absolutely WONDERFUL discussion on deification.

Catholic Parish wants LDS missionaries charged.

All I can say is, "Jerks."

Deseret Morning News | Parish angered by 3 LDS missionaries

Quote:

Parish angered by 3 LDS missionaries Associated Press Published: March 10, 2008 SAN LUIS, Colo. — Members of the Sangre de Christo parish of the Roman Catholic Church voted Sunday to pursue criminal charges against three Mormon missionaries who allegedly vandalized a shrine and committed sacrilegious acts in the church. Although the incidents occurred in 2006, they only came to the attention of the parish when they were seen on the Internet site "Photobucket." Alonzo Payne, a parishioner and lawyer, said he was asking the Costilla County Sheriff to pursue charges on behalf of the parish. Sheriff's Cpl. Scott Powell told the Pueblo Chieftain the men, who were not identified, could face up to six charges, including felonies for criminal mischief and conspiracy. Robert Fotheringham, in charge of the LDS Church's missionary program in parts of four states, and whose region includes the San Luis Valley, declined to release names of the missionaries. He confirmed the three seen in the photos, which have been removed from the Internet, were Mormon missionaries. He said they would be disciplined, though he declined to go into detail. "We're just mortified this has happened. This is not what we're about," he said. The Internet photos showed the three vandalizing the Shrine of the Mexican Martyrs in 2006 and mocking the Roman Catholic faith. One missionary was seen holding the severed head of a statue. The head was found and restored. Another photo showed a missionary appearing to preach from the Book of Mormon inside the Chapel of All Saints. A third showed one missionary pretending to sacrifice another on the altar at the Shrine of the Mexican Martyrs. Members of the parish built the shrine. No damage estimate was available. "What they did was extremely imprudent, extremely uncharitable and inflammatory," the Rev. Pat Valdez told parishioners at a meeting Friday night. "You have worked hard, and this whole community has worked hard to build that shrine as an expression of our faith." Fotheringham, meanwhile, met with parishioners to deliver a written apology from one of the three missionaries, signed by an R. Thompson. "I realize that my companions and I have made a mockery of that which is most sacred to many of the residents of San Luis and the rest of the world. I should have known better because I have seen many of the same types of blasphemies made against my own church and I have been appalled," the statement said.     Some Followup: LDS Church apologizes to Catholics Missionaries may face legal, church sanctions Deseret Morning News and Associated Press Published: March 11, 2008 The LDS Church issued a strongly worded statement Monday apologizing to the Roman Catholic Church for the actions of some of its missionaries in Colorado. "Leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints were dismayed this weekend to learn of the insensitivity and disrespect shown to religious artifacts of the Sangre de Cristo Catholic Church in San Luis, Colorado, and that Latter-day Saint missionaries were evidently responsible during their missionary service in 2006," said Bruce Olsen, managing director of the church's public affairs department. "Their actions do not represent the high standards of behavior for which our missionaries are known all over the world." Photos that had been posted on the Internet showed three LDS missionaries mocking a Catholic shrine and holding the broken head of a statue of a saint there, a Catholic official said. Costilla County Sheriff Gilbert Martinez said deputies on Monday were beginning to investigate whether the men vandalized the Shrine of the Mexican Martyrs at the Chapel of All Saints, which stands on a butte overlooking San Luis. The photos show young men holding the broken head of a statue, preaching from the Book of Mormon at an altar and pretending to sacrifice one another. The vandalism apparently occurred in 2006, though damage to the statue went unnoticed until last week, when a parish member saw the photos on the picture-sharing Internet site Photobucket. They have since been taken down. Olsen said the LDS Church has initiated a "thorough investigation" of the incident and has arranged for a meeting with Catholic leaders to offer apologies. "We are providing the names of those involved to law enforcement officials and will continue to cooperate fully with those investigating the incident as well as with officials of the Roman Catholic Church. Those missionaries who have since returned home will face disciplinary action from the church," the statement read. "The missionary who was still serving in Colorado has also been disciplined and his mission terminated." "The community is sad; it feels they've been victimized," Sangre de Cristo Parish Council spokesman Alonzo Payne said Monday. The parish has nine churches and about 450 families across Costilla County. The damaged statue seen in one of the photos depicts Manuel Morales, who was the 28-year-old president of Mexico's National League for the Defense of Religious Liberty when he was executed in 1926 for refusing to recognize laws he considered anti-religion. He was among more than two dozen Mexican saints canonized in 2000. The broken head had gone unnoticed because it had been placed back on the statue. The parish council, based near the New Mexico border in San Luis, voted Sunday to ask for the investigation. The sheriff said charges could include desecration of a venerated object, criminal trespass, defacing property and bias-motivated crime. Payne would not rule out a lawsuit seeking the cost of replacing or repairing the statue. The Rev. Patrick Valdez, the parish pastor, referred questions to Payne. Olsen called the missionaries' actions "inexcusable" and said respect for other faiths is a "cardinal tenet" of the LDS Church. "The church has worked for many years side by side with leaders and members of other faiths, including the Roman Catholic Church, and has often helped them with construction or renovation of buildings for religious worship. We have also worked hand-in-hand with Catholic Charities in providing humanitarian assistance to alleviate suffering across the globe," he said. "The church expresses its profound regret and sincere apologies to the members of the Roman Catholic faith, to the members of the Sangre de Cristo Catholic Church and the townspeople of San Luis, for this senseless act." Olsen said church leaders would look for ways to repair the damage that has been caused to relationships with the community. Photobucket released a statement saying that it had no record of the shrine photos but that its rules forbid content that is illegal, obscene or threatening. © 2008 Deseret News Publishing Company | All rights reserved

Kirby: You're called by God, but still an idiot

Robert Kirby
Tribune columnist
Article Last Updated: 03/14/2008 09:35:40 PM MDT


Years ago, my roommates and I got into a water fight with a bunch of kids. The day was brain-damage hot. Getting soaked was a refreshing break from the drudgery of our work.
The fight started innocently enough. The kids knocked on the door of our apartment and squirted us. It became an immediate arms race: squirt guns, then cups, on to jugs, from there to hoses, and finally total annihilation.
Going for the big win, my roommates and I hauled a garbage can onto the roof filled with the most noxious stuff we could find: spoiled milk, syrup, laundry detergent, rotting vegetables, dead rat, moldy flour, etc.
It took three of us to lug it to the edge of the roof. To avoid being spotted from below, we guessed where the kids were and upended the garbage can.
We missed the kids and hit some lady walking her dog. The deluge of muck knocked her flat and almost drowned her dog.
A number of things were terribly wrong with this incident, not the least of which was that the poor woman didn't deserve it.
Also, my roommates and I were LDS missionaries, personal representatives of Jesus Christ. Nothing we had been taught indicated that the Savior endorsed knocking down old ladies with buckets of swill.
The woman was in no mood for an apology. When we tried to help, she shook us off and shrieked for everyone to come and see what the awful Mormons had done to her.
Half of the ensuing crowd was sympathetic to her plight, the other half found it hysterically funny. The laughter made her all the madder.
We prepared ourselves for a long stretch in a South American jail but the cops never came. We still had to live it down, though. For weeks, people in the town scolded or congratulated us for what we'd done.
I'd like to say this is the only untoward public stunt of my entire mission. It isn't.
During my mission we had elders thrown in jail for blithely taking pictures of military installations.
Some got arrested for saying things about the government they shouldn't have. One hit a nun in the head with a football. Another killed a family's chicken with a karate chop. A couple got shot when they ran an army roadblock in the dark.
So, it doesn't surprise me that three LDS missionaries are in trouble in Colorado now for a juvenile prank that violated a Catholic shrine. What surprises me is that it doesn't happen more often. We are, after all, talking about kids.
I was 19 once myself. I helped raise three 19-year-olds. I know that being 19 makes a person only slightly smarter than a hound dog. The human brain doesn't even stop developing until 25.
Going on a mission doesn't change any of that. You may be called by God, but you're still an idiot. The only difference is a huge increase in the responsibility, so you have to let it show as little as possible.
I'm not saying that the missionaries in Colorado shouldn't be in trouble, or that they shouldn't have to take their lumps. For people like me, that's actually the fastest way to become smarter.
I do think we should look on the bright side though. With 50,000-plus kids serving missions in some pretty scary places, it's a miracle that international incidents aren't daily occurrences.
rkirby@sltrib.com

LDS depression, or What is bad journalism

When you see the above picture, what exactly are your thoughts? In the LDS context, this is meant to imply that being a member of the church causes depression. The story in question is to be found at http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=4403731&page=1 and how I found out about it was at http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?s=cdeffbb640a393d1701b5c484efe6b81&showtopic=33649.

Quote:
The still waters of the Great Salt Lake run deep -- and dark.

Take Wendy, a 40-year-old teacher and mother of three from Utah County. To all appearances, she led the perfect life. Just as she was expected to, she went from high school cheerleader to Mormon missionary to wife and mother.

"But life has a funny way of not being perfect," she said. "Three years into my marriage my husband was drinking, using drugs and stepping out on me. "

I don't see how there are dark waters in Salt Lake other than it implies that there is something to hide. I also don't see why it is implied that the church must somehow ensure the happiness of this person. Are they saying that because she was a missionary, she married a loser? Does the church encourage drinking, drug use and adultery?

"I knew I was depressed and needed help, but there is a stigma about depression in this area," said Wendy, who asked that ABCNEWS.com not use her last name. "People think it's a sign of weakness. It means you're not capable of being a good mother or wife or teacher."

Wendy's secret is Utah's secret. The postcard image of Utah is a state of gleaming cities, majestic mountains and persistently smiling people. But new research shows a very different picture of the state, a snapshot of suicide and widespread depression.

I think there are other contributing factors. First, if there is a stigma, it is not the church's making. Many of the Relief Society meetings have the women talking about how to cope with the pressures of the world, pressures that everyone has to deal with, regardless of religion. I don't know many women who chase after perfection. Most are trying to cope, just like my wife. BTW, my wife works for LDS Family Services. It is a function of the church and is available to every member, most of the time free of charge. I used it while attending school there because of a relationship I was in. I certainly didn't blame it on the church but because of some choices I made.

Also, Utah has a large teen population. I don't know if you were ever a teen, but that isn't a great time.

The LDS do not use alcohol. So the self-medication that is common in other parts of the country doesn't happen there. Would you want them to start boozing it up instead of going to a doctor?

At the end of the article we finally read this

"I don't think it's clear that there's a crisis in Utah," said Brent Scharman, a psychologist and the assistant commissioner of LDS Family Services, a church network that provides counseling. "You've got one camp that says there is more depression and another camp that says we just have more consumers." Scharman said studies on organized religion and depression found that religious people were generally happier than nonreligious people, and that held true for Mormons.

So, after all this, it isn't the church's fault. Mormons are happier.

"It always boils down to the issue of what influence the LDS lifestyle has on the depression phenomenon," he said. "Non-LDS and some LDS people say this is a kind of driven lifestyle and that we push too hard and smile too much. But studies show, and those living it out see, that religion is good support. It creates a positive network and helps people get through crises and deal with long-term problems.

"Are there people who feel 'I'm not living up to the LDS ideal,' or 'I'm not living up to my family's expectations'? Absolutely, there is no question. But having done counseling outside the LDS community, I saw people there, too, who were depressed because of perfectionism," he said. "I wouldn't say it is any worse here than in more diverse communities."

This article was horrible journalism.

For another response, go here. http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/onionmagazine_archive_116a_web.jpg

The Rise of the Papacy

Rating:	★★★★
Category:	Books
Genre:	Religion & Spirituality
Author:	Robert B Eno

While this is a very complex topic which even the author claims that is incomplete, I found this a very interesting read. It doesn't come out and say that the papacy flat out didn't exist in the early church, but it strongly suggests it.

1) Rome did not have a single bishop.
This is from some interpolation and other sources that suggest that there wasn't a "bishopric" as we now know the term, but ruling elders. This cooresponds with some NT contexts.

"...(Ignatius) does not greet a bishop in Rome nor does he ever mention such a person in this letter. One might object that Ignatius had never been in Rome, he did not know the bishop's name. He could have spoken to or of a bishop even if he had not known his name....But we have only his silence, which leads many to conclude that Ignatius did not address such a person because the roman community of the time had no such leader."

He leads into this by suggesting that the first three "popes" of rome were actually a group of elders that lead the church and this would explain some of Clements other comments.

Page 28
"In general, neither Clement nor anyone else appears in a position anything like that of the bishop as described by Ignatius. "

Page 29
"This evidence (Clement, Hermas, Ignatius) points us in the direction of assuming that in the first century to the second, there was no bishop of Rome in the usual sense given that title. ... If there was no bishop of Rome, in what sense can one speak of a Petrine succession."

2) No knowledge of succession by other bishops at the time.
In a response to Stephen's attention to African practice, Firmilian mentioned.

Page 63.
"He remarked, for instance, that Stephen's unkindness had at least the result of bringing Cyprian and himself together. Stephen is "bold and insolent", "manifestly stupid", "a disgrace to Peter and Paul", with a "slippery, fickle and uncertain mind".

"He who so glories in the place of his episcopate and contends that he has the succession of Peter on whom the foundation of the Church was established, should introduce many other rocks and constitute new buildings of many churches while he maintains by his authority that baptism is there."

"This is the first known appeal of a roman bishop to Peter's authority, indeed to the classical Petrine Gospel texts. But we must note as well that Firmilian not only does not accept the claim, he seems never to have heard of it before. He notes for example that in many liturgical customes, Rome differs from Jerusalem. There are variations from one church to another, "and yet, on account of this, there has been no withdrawal at all from the peace and unity of the Catholic Church". "How can you live in communion with such a person?" Rome insists on uniformity but other bishops, such as Irenaeus and Firmilian, not that all have gotten well up until now with varying customs."

Page 65
"His own opening remarks sum up his views on this question of a world leadership for the Church:

"For neither does any of us set himself up as a bishop of bishops nor by tyrannical terror force his colleagues to a necessity of obeying; inasmuch as every bishop, in the free use of his liberty and power, has the right of forming his own judgement, and can no more be judged by another than he himself can judge another.
But we must all await the judgement of Our Lord Jesus Christ, who alone has the power both of setting us in the government of his Church, and of judging of our acts therein."

In conclusion, the author seems to state that the papacy is a development, not something that Peter even contemplated, as the source of this development was in the mid 300s.

I found the book interesting as it covered a lot of characters and strong willed individuals. His comment about Newman was interesting in that he thinks Newman did not set well with the papacy once he was under their control. I'll have to look that up.


BTW, while leaving my library, I noticed a new book. "Electing Our Bishops". In the minute I gave the book, it mentioned in detail how election of the bishops took place in the early church. Not unlike the LDS system, I suppose. Anyway, it might be something to check out.

http://www.amazon.com/Electing-Our-Bishops-Catholic-Leaders/dp/0742558207/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1204928818&sr=8-1

MormonTimes - homepage

http://www.mormontimes.com/
Deseret news is trying to get a bit more money out of their content, it appears. And Orson Scott Card once again is selling himself out. That man is everywhere on the LDS net.

People stopped buying the Church News I guess. I stopped long ago.

"Book of Mormon Historicity: Implications of the Various Views." -- Blake Ostler

Rating:	★★★
Category:	Other

http://sunstonemagazine.com/audio/SL86001.mp3
Ostler, Blake T. (as panelist), and others. "Book of Mormon Historicity: Implications of the Various Views." Sunstone Salt Lake Symposium [Audio Recording: August 20, 1986]. Available from http://sunstonemagazine.com/audio/SL86001.mp3; Internet; accessed January 17, 2008.

I am not one to work too much with the Book of Mormon. I doesn't hit me as much as other works of JS. This recording seems to wander around but it does offer some insight into Mr. Ostler. He is quite opinionated and doesn't seem to suffer fools very well. He is a believer though, and many of his critics at Sunstone aren't...which makes me kind of wonder about their sanity.

Then again, I'm not Hindu and I still like to read about it.

Noble Qur'an

Rating:	★★
Category:	Books
Genre:	Religion & Spirituality
Author:	?

http://www.islamhouse.com/d/files/en/ih_books/signal/en_Translation_of_the_Meanings_Quran.pdf

This book was the first version of the Qur'an that I have received. It was sent to me by the King Fahd society. It is interesting to note that post 9/11, they no longer sent out this book but a smaller translation by Ali that was without commentary. I know I didn't get too far into this book before I just became angry and frustrated. It should be noted that the download above is around 30MB.

Amboy_IL

Here's the plaque that announces the creation of the RLDS church. It is posted on the side of one of the 7 bars on the street...and the street isn't very long.

Pictures from a gold mine.

These are pumping stations the pump the cyanide to the piles.

From a gold mine.

'Smug' Mormon takes on 'brazen' evangelical

I liked this article because it humorous. Not that I necessarily subscribe to how either side is presenting itself. The comments were kind of funny too.

 

http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695256840,00.html

 

Published: February 28, 2008

On Saturday, I spent a couple of hours chatting with a friend who runs an evangelical bookstore. He set the shop up in the heart of Mormon country and has kept at it for 30 years.

"I have to say, I admire your devotion," I tell him.

"I never take credit for personal virtue," he says. "That's you guys."

It's the way things are between us. We don't play a lot of slap and tickle. We know where we stand.

Evangelical faith comes out as confidence and boldness, which Mormons often see as brazen.

Mormon faith comes out as obedience, which evangelicals often see as smug.

"But you do see yourself as a sinner," I say.

"Yes."

"Well," I say, "among your many sins, I don't see 'lack of devotion."'

He smiles.

I don't mind playing to type.

He says he likes talking with me because I'm an "old returned missionary." The new returned missionaries, he says, speak in the same earnest voice and say the same things in the same way.

The comment strikes me as curious. I've never seen evangelicals as a colorful bouquet of religious style and thought.

He says he can size people with one question: "Are you a good person?" If they say "yes" or "I try to be," they haven't been saved. True Christians, he says, see themselves as sinners, washed in the blood of Jesus.

True Christians, I think to myself, behave like true Christians.

I suppose it's why our faiths are natural rivals. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints sends thousands into the world to show people they can live better lives. Evangelicals send out thousands to tell people it doesn't matter what they do. Yes, they see Mormonism as a cult because we stress behavior. But they also see Catholicism as a cult, along with Jehovah's Witnesses, large swaths of the Episcopal Church, Muslims, most Quakers and probably Jews. In fact, the only reason I can see for Mormons to be so concerned about being accepted by evangelicals is politics. Evangelicals control the right wing of the Republican Party. If druids controlled the Republican right, political Mormons would look for ways to bond with their druid brethren.

"Your good works aren't bad works," my friend is saying. "They're just dead works. Meaningless."

"The Jesus I believe in would find that a bit harsh," I say.

He opens his Bible to let me know my Jesus isn't Paul's Jesus.

I tell him my Jesus shows up in the gospels.

We're like two old men playing checkers in the park. We know each other's moves. We just play the game out for company.

I tell him I have to go.

He says he'll pray for me. He sees me getting older and fears I soon may be beyond rescue.

I leave, knowing what I've always known. True believers can be civil to each other, they can even join hands. But they can never join hearts. That's just a pipe dream of people who don't know true believers.

Wringing your hands over being accepted by other religions is a waste of a good pair of hands. Better to use them to hold to your ideals. Let the Founder sort it all out.

Unlike politics, in Christianity, his vote is the only one that counts, anyway.

---

Jerry Johnston is a Deseret Morning News staff writer. "New Harmony" appears weekly in the Mormon Times section.

---

E-mail: jerjohn@desnews.com

Blake Ostler - Mormon Finitism and Absolutist Preconceptions & The Adequate Object of Religious Worship

Rating:	★★★
Category:	Other

From http://www.blakeostler.com/complete_works.html and http://sunstonemagazine.com/audio/SL82019.mp3

An interesting talk on how we deal with God, like asking for things in prayer, and how this conflicts with "traditional" theology. It specifically addresses things like omnipotence is really impossible under current logic and philosophy.

Great techie site

http://www.geekologie.com/
I love this site, and I must say that the sister sites, thesuperficial.com and Iwatchstuff.com are also entertaining.

Jihad Watch: Blogging the Qur'an

http://www.jihadwatch.org/articles/bloggingtheq.php
There's no reason for me to continue posting the links, when someone else does it for me.

Entry for January 08, 2008

From http://deseretnews.com/article/content/mobile/0,5223,695242228,00.html

Better duck — if you're a Mormon

By Doug Robinson
Deseret Morning News

Published: January 8, 2008

Imissed the memo that said it's A-OK to make disparaging and often erroneous statements about Mormons.

Apparently, they are fair game.

Sure, these are hypersensitive times, when name-calling or perceived bias against any group will get you the Don Imus treatment, but you get a free shot with Mormons. You can say what you want about them with impunity.

If you denigrate a racial group, you're racist.

If you denigrate women, you're sexist.

If you denigrate Mormons, you're hip.

No one would openly suggest that you shouldn't vote for Hillary Clinton because a woman can't lead the country, especially an ornery one.

Nobody would dare say that you shouldn't vote for Barack Hussein Obama because he's black, or of Muslim descent, or because he has a name that sounds like a terrorist. One Clinton worker even apologized for alluding to Obama's use of drugs as a youth, so apparently it's wrong to disparage former drug users, too.

But nobody is shy about saying you shouldn't vote for Romney simply because he's a Mormon. It doesn't even register on the PC-O-Meter.

Just like that, 6 million Americans have been virtually disqualified from running for president. They've been rendered second-class citizens. They're foreigners living in America. They face a glass ceiling.

How un-American is that?

It would be one thing if most of those who oppose Romney did so because they disagreed with his politics or character. But Romney is one of the few candidates who has no character issues, a "squeaky clean" man who has a distinguished record of accomplishments, success and service, with no divorces, no affairs, no scandal. The only thing opponents can say about him is that he belongs to a church they don't understand.

A Harvard law professor called Romney the most qualified of all the candidates and "the perfect candidate for this moment in time." But there is his Mormonism, he noted.

Even the self-styled PC chief of police, Al Sharpton, once jumped in on the action, saying, "As for the one Mormon running for office, those who really believe in God will defeat him anyways."

Mormons don't believe in God?

For his penance, all Sharpton had to do was endure a family home evening in Utah.

It's open season on Mormons. A few days ago, Miami Herald columnist Dan Le Batard stated on ESPN and in the newspaper that part of the reason fired coach Cam Cameron failed was because he got stuck with a Mormon quarterback — not a rookie quarterback (which he is) but a Mormon quarterback.

"And you'll have a hard time finding a leader anywhere in sports who was as unlucky this year as Cameron," Le Batard said, noting that because of injuries, Cameron was forced to play "a United Nations huddle of a Mormon quarterback, Mexican receiver, Samoan fullback and some guy named Lekekekkkkerkker."

Now Mormons are foreigners?

Ignorance makes no difference. You can say Mormons have four wives or that they aren't Christian, and no one cares.

Imagine the uproar if Le Batard had written that the Dolphins suffered because they had to play a black quarterback for part of the season? Or a Catholic?

The Salt Lake Tribune has had a field day for more than a week since learning that Mike Leavitt and some of his like-minded cohorts met early in the morning to discuss Mormon theology and governance while he was Utah's governor. What if it had been a Bible study?

Nobody seems to mind when former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee says his religion "defines me." Or when Obama says his church guides "my own values and my own beliefs."

People worry that Romney will take his orders from his church leaders. They don't worry that Obama will take orders from his church, whose "10-point vision" includes two references to its "non-negotiable commitment to Africa," with no mention of America. Oh, and the church statement begins by noting on the Trinity United Church of Christ Web site, "We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black."

It's a different set of rules for some out there. You can print newspaper cartoons disparaging Mormons. You can harass their families as they walk to their biannual conference with all sorts of foul language. When someone commits a crime, you can note the criminal's religion, but only if he's Mormon. You can make them a one-liner on Leno. Good luck reconciling all this with the paranoid political correctness that's so in vogue.

Meanwhile, the most politically correct presidential election field ever assembled — a woman, a black, a Mormon, a Baptist, etc. — has gone politically incorrect, but only when it comes to you know who.

Bushman "On the Road with Joseph Smith"

This is taken from "On the Road with Joseph Smith" by Richard Lyman Bushman, page 15 - 16. An excerpt from a letter.

Quote:

I wish I could strike a responsive chord in Christians like you. Mormons wonder why all Christians don't understand that we believe in the Book of Mormon on the basis of a spiritual witness. It is very hard for a Mormon to believe that Christians accept the bible because of the scholarly evidence confirming the historical accuracy of the work. Surely there are uneducated believers whose convictions are not rooted in academic knowledge. Isn't there some kind of human, existential truth that resonates with one's desires for goodness and divinity? And isn't that ultimately why we read the bible as a devotional work? We don't have to read the latest issues of the journals to find out if the book is still true. We stick with it because we find God in its pages--or inspiration, or comfort, or scope. That is what religion is about in my opinion, and it is why I believe in the Book of Mormon. I can't really evaluate all the scholarship all the time; while I am waiting for it to settle out, I have to go on living. I need some good to hold on to and lift me up day by day. The Book of Mormon inspires me, and so I hold on. Reason is too frail to base a life on. You can be whipped about by all the authorities with no genuine basis for deciding for yourself. I think it is far better to go where goodness lies. I keep thinking other Christians are in a similar position, but they don't agree. The keep insisting their beliefs are based on reason and evidence. I can't buy that--the resurrection as rational fact? And so I am frankly as perplexed about Christian belief as you are about Mormons. Educated Christians claim to base their belief on reason when I thought faith was the teaching of the scriptures. You hear the Good Shepherd’s voice, and you follow it. I guess we could go on and on. I hope I am telling you the truth about myself. The fact is I am a believer and I can't help myself. I couldn't possibly give it up; it is too delicious.

Entry for January 07, 2008

From Orson Scott Card...about Romney that devolves into trinity.

Deseret Morning News | Theology: LDS god is in harmony with the Bible

An article / transcript on philosophical underpinnings of the trinity and why LDS view is why it is.

The Fallacy of Fundamentalist Assumptions

On this second article, I admit that it is hard to follow. I'm not a philosophy kind of guy but I did like some of the reasoning. I'll get into the details later.

Feel free to pick the articles apart. I feel no real need to defend them, but I think it will be an interesting exercise.

Mormons are so stupid.

On several other boards I've been on, when I mention my LDSness, I get questions as to my intelligence, motives, etc. I got it on this board when I first joined and occasionally by the new interlopers as they join. I found a good post. I hope you read it.

Mormanity: "How Can Anyone Be So Stupid?"

Wisdom from Kirby

This was too good to pass up. Bolding is mine.

Quote:

Kirby: No one is fair when it comes to religion Robert Kirby Tribune columnist Article Last Updated: 12/14/2007 07:10:42 PM MST During a recent interview, presidential candidate Mike Huckabee (R-Baptist) talked about fellow candidate Mitt Romney (R-Mormon). Huckabee posed the question: "Don't Mormons believe that Jesus and the devil are brothers?" The question was perceived by some as an opportunity to hold an element of Mormon theology up for ridicule. As a Mormon, I wasn't bothered because, well, it's true. It gets weirder. Not only is Satan our brother as well, he looks exactly like KSL meteorologist Kevin Eubank, only redder. OK, I made that part up. But Mormons do believe a lot of things that seem pretty strange, if not downright crazy. So do you. Imagine that the average presidential candidate rings your doorbell tomorrow. Male, affluent and not visibly deranged, the candidate offers some really cool ideas about running the country. He wants your vote. Before you can answer, the candidate casually mentions that the driving force in his life is a profound belief in a cosmic walrus that sets the world spinning each new day with the force of its benevolent flatulence. As the average American voter (Christian), your response would be laughter followed by incredulity. In parts of the country, you might even be legally entitled to assault the candidate. After all, the real god is a shape-shifting entity, born of a virgin, who cured blindness with spit and busted out of his tomb after being lynched - a god you periodically honor by ritualistically eating him so that he won't kill you when he comes back. Well, that wasn't really fair, was it? I hope not. Since when did religious belief ever have anything to do with fair? Muslim, Pagan, Christian, Jew, Buddhist - one of the great ironies of all spiritual belief is that cold, brutal logic should be applied to every version but yours. If you're Hindu, for example, you might find the idea of Christian communion ludicrous. Why would anyone even pretend to eat a god? Conversely, Christians find the notion of God having the head of an elephant completely ridiculous. Extra arms? Ha! We don't even want to talk about one with multiple sex organs. What's going on here isn't real logic. It's not even insight. It's simply comparing your beliefs against those of others and egotistically concluding that you are the only one who can't be dismissed as an idiot. Incidentally, this is a human condition that affects secularists as well. The absence of religion doesn't make people moral anymore than its presence guarantees morality. Is religious belief bad? It damn sure can be. People are certainly bad when they become contemptuous of others, and religion far too often provides us with the place to do just that.

Entry for January 05, 2008

Finally typed the quote I liked the most. Like I mentioned, he spends about 300 pages breaking down assumptions of the classic trinity and the completes on this chapter.

Quote:

Chapter 14 A Mormon Christology Mormonism’s distinctive understanding of God derives from its commitment that Jesus the Christ is the preeminent revelation both of what God is and what humans are. Mormonism takes Jesus as the model of what it means to be truly and fully human and truly and fully divine. We take it for granted that we know what it is to be human even thought we rarely realize our full humanity. Insuperable problems for Christology are created by the conventional belief which posits an ontological dichotomy between the Creator and the created which can never be bridged no matter how much progress humans make. Mormonism’s belief that Godhood and humanity form a continuum—that divinity is fully mature humanity—allows it to avoid the most intractable logical problems confronting Christology. Mormonism’s commitment that Jesus experienced mortality in the same way that humans do—by leaving and temporarily forgetting his exalted, preexistent status while growing in mortality from grace to grace and confronting genuine temptations in concrete situations, experiencing both pleasure and pain as a necessary condition to gain experiential knowledge – helps it to confront the historical problem. Mormonism’s unique contribution to Christology arises from its redefinition what properties are essential to divinity and which are essential to full humanity, for it is only such a redefinition that allows the logical problem to be coherently addressed. Although Mormon scripture, like Judeo-Christian scripture in general, is precritical in its approach and understanding of who and what Jesus is or was, it more directly addresses the issue of Christology than the New Testament writings. The Mormon scriptures expressly grapple with the problem entailed in asserting that “God became a man,” an assertion not found in the Old or New Testaments. Indeed it is doubtful that the Judeo-Christian scripture asserts that Jesus Christ is God in the same sense that the Father is God. I am not asserting that the Mormon scripture addresses either the historical or logical problems elucidated above—indeed, the scriptures reveal little awareness of the historical and logical problems on which I have chosen to focus. Nevertheless, Mormon scripture develops a Christology beginning with the Book of Mormon, at least in seed, which follows an identifiable trajectory through the Nauvoo period. I thin it is fair to say that the distinctive Mormon view of God is a result of its understanding that Jesus of Nazareth is a revelation of the nature of both God and man.