The world has always rejected the claim that the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter Day Saints is even Christian, let alone the restored Church of Christ
written of in the Bible. Lies, contentions, and persecutions may
rage against us and even rise to levels of the past with mobs and violence.
But, we have infinite hope that our greatest rewards are not of the world, but
in the testimonies we develop and the works we do to glorify the Savior.We are a peculiar people who have never been more tempted to minimize
ourselves because of scrutiny from a mainstream culture that has departed so far
from our values in this day. It would be so easy to become bothered
and saddened by the world's take on us. But only in and through the
redemptive power of the Savior can we bear the shame of all the crosses of the
world to stand in holy places and be not moved.This is our time to
shine forth the light and truth of the Gospel by works and not subject ourselves
to worldliness or worldly lies, but rise above them henceforth and forever.
Thank you Stacie and I hope you have sent the American Bible Society a copy of
your column as well as a request for an apology.
Ms Duce highlights the problem with organized religion. The
animosity towards the "religious" is very often from others who are
"religious".It is very easy to SAY that we are accepting of
other religions, but oftentimes those are just words. And people believe it,
while unaware of their own animosity towards other faiths.Seriously.
Think about the general public perception of Scientologists. Or Muslims. Or
Jehovahs Witnesses. Or the FLDS. Think about YOUR personal perception of these
religions. Be Honest. Then tell me that those perceptions
don't affect how you view or treat those groups.Even the
religious cant come to agreements.This is why religion should be
kept out of the public square.
I've reviewed the study. I came away with the same impression as the
author. LDS and other Christian-based religions that were not Protestant or
Catholic were dismissed as "other." The ABS web site claims
that the ABS adheres to four core principles, one of which is "unity."
It quotes John 17:21: "I want all of them to be one with each other, just as
I am one with you and you are one with me." It also claims
"respect" as a core principle.I do not find this irony
Having taken a few statistics courses In my day I had to laugh at the bizarre
way they grouped the data. Statistics can be manipulated so easily after the
fact to achieve a pre-determined end.... That's what lit looks like they
did. My mother, a non-Mormon who reads the Bible daily, was similarly
marginalized.... It's a silly study.
You get 'em Stacie!!.... Is a copy of this article being forwarded to the
ABS, I hope??? It should be.
ABS folks have sunk back into a tired old rant re: the Latter Day Saint faith
which raised it's narrow-minded chorus ever since the Restored Church began
to gain serious traction mostly since the beginning of the nineteen hundreds.
Simply put: "if your doctrinal beliefs, most especially the knowledge of the
person(s) of Deity differ from ours you cannot be Christian".
I am still confused on who is entitled to handout the "Christian"
titles. Both sides are guilty of it. For example, Mormons decide which Mormons
can be and should not be considered Mormons. The FLDS are Mormons, they define a
live their lives as Mormons however mainstream Mormons treat them as rejects,
the red-headed stepchildren who are not Mormons. Today, Christians still have a
hard time considering Mormons as Christians, for many more reasons than the few
that Mormons deny FLDS. It is not fair, everyone should just accept who they are
and be happy who they believe they are!
@AucklandTwo significant comments you make need to be corrected due to
their inaccuracy: First: LDS do not "crave the acceptance of
sectarians". We merely seek to correct half truth and in some cases outright
lies. Second: how can those who clearly break from the First Presidency continue
to lay claim to being Mormons? Perfect example of the marching ban analogy where
all 99 are out of step and only one is in step.
Dont the LDS believe that their religion came about because "all of
Christianity is an abomination in the eyes of the Lord"Has
anything changed? So, why is it so important to now be a considered
part of that group? And, is it any wonder why these other groups don't
want to include you.Brings to mind the quote "I wouldn't
belong to any club that would have me as a member"
A very good article. I agree with the author. Enough already. Christians from
other faiths who continually deny that Mormons are Christians are in for a real
shocker at the Second Coming. As the world becomes more secular and Mormonism
stays true to traditional Christian values, I think individuals from other
faiths will reevaluate their views on whether Mormons are Christians. By their
fruits (good deeds) ye shall know them (Christians).
The American Bible Society was founded to promote the Bible by making copies
available to every person in his own language. Now they are categorizing
specific religious groups as well as non-religious readers. What do they mean by
‘scripture haters?’ That provocative term sounds like the ABS is now
pursuing a whole other agenda from its original mission.
I am a Christian, a Mormon, and a member of the LDS church. Those three things
are not synonomous. Of course, most Christians are not Mormons, but there are
also a bunch of Mormons who are not LDS.A Mormon is someone who
believes that the Book of Mormon is the real deal - that it is a real ancient
record and its teachings are genuine.If we want to deny a few
Christian churches a monopoly on the term "Christian", then we
can't turn around and claim a monopoly on the term "Mormon". While
I disagree with all the splinter group of the LDS church, I can't deny them
calling themselves Mormons.
A comment above reminds me of politics:It is very easy to SAY that
we are accepting of other political persuasions, but often, those are just
words. And people believe it, while unaware of their own animosity towards other
political thinking.Seriously. Think about the general public
perception of communists. Or socialists. Or tea party adherents. Think about
YOUR personal perception of these political persuasions. Be honest. Then tell me that those perceptions don't affect how you view or treat
those groups.Even the politicians cant come to agreements.This is why politics should be kept out of the public square.
Interesting that growing up faithful Catholic we didn't study the Bible at
home. We knew the Gospels and Epistles because they were read over the pulpit
at mass on Sunday. Since joining the LDS Church I study the Bible intensely.
One of the marvelous latter-day blessings is reference material between the
different books of scripture. The Bible and Book of Mormon are great companion
In response to a couple of the comments; the term Christian applies to those who
believe in Christ. The term "Mormon" is a nickname specifically given
to members of our church. Since the FLDS are not members of our church, it
doesn't make sense to refer to them as such. But I think we would be happy
to hand over the nickname. In fact, recent talks in general conference have
encouraged us to drop the nickname all together. I for one am happy to let them
have it.Much of the Christian world tries to deny us the right of
being called Christian because our doctrine differs from theirs. But by
definition, a follower of Jesus Christ is a Christian, and we do follow Him, so
they cannot claim a monopoly on the term. But ive heard some who, when a member
told them we believe in Jesus Christ, said, " No you don't. You just
think you do." These kinds of ignorance and prejudice take time to conquer.
to JoeBlowI consider myself areligious not irrreligious. I agree
alot of the contention is infighting amongst sects. "Religion is
regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as
useful.- attributed to Seneca the Younger" Speaking of quotes,
the one in your post moments ago is attributed to the great Groucho Marx.
Aldous Huxley: Facts do not cease to exist simply because they are ignored.
Apparently the ABS ignored the obvious, that as part of the Mormon curriculum is
the teaching of the Old and New Testament. And that the Bible is considered
part of the 'Standard Works' in Mormondom.How
'Christians' can't comprehend the Father and Son visiting a young
boy but can accept and comprehend, Christ conceiving himself or continually
talking to his 'father' through the New Testament. What
others say about my religion has absolutely no impact on what I believe or how I
live. I love the opportunity to explain our differences when given the facts
and then allow the listener to make up their own minds.
Sometimes all one needs to do is look up a definition:Chris·tian
(krĭs′chən)adj.1. Professing belief in Jesus as
Christ or following the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.2. Relating to or derived from Jesus or Jesus's teachings.3. Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus; Christlike.4. Relating to or characteristic of Christianity or its adherents.5. Showing a loving concern for others; humane.n.1. One
who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the
life and teachings of Jesus.2. One who lives according to the
teachings of Jesus.Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter
Day Saints (Mormons) on all the above 7 definitions, check, check, check, check,
check, check, check. Just because a lot of society doesn't view us as
Christian, doesn't mean we aren't. We know in our hearts we are. We
believe in the King James version of the Bible, and the Book of Mormon as the
word of God and both as testaments of Jesus Christ.
The author makes some good points.To be fair, however, I must offer
my observations. Because I am married to the best Mormon alive (and only because
of that), I have spent thirty years attending Mormon Church meetings, studying
Mormon scriptures and doctrines, and even completing educational credentials
from BYU (where I met my LDS wife). Based on that experience, I can attest that
I frequently (very frequently) hear talks, comments in classes, and
conversations where Mormons do not hesitate to denigrate the Bible when it does
not confirm their own beliefs. I have heard all the usual criticisms: the Bible
scribes added false doctrines, removed "plain and precious truths",
eliminated entire books and gospels (that may be among the Dead Sea scrolls, or
the Nag Hammadi library) and so thoroughly corrupted the Biblical text that it
is effectively worthless in discovering "the fulness of the Gospel"
(according to Mormonism).So I think Mormons should be more
circumspect and thoughtful and refrain from dismissing this idea that Mormons
are not friendly to the Bible. The idea has much more merit than you think.
Obviously lumping them into the "other" category is faulty since they
use the Bible, but I don't see how the "other" category is
automatically just "haters".
If you're not at the table...you're on the menu.Utah
Republicans/Mormons feel they have a rightful seat at the table along with other
Republicans/Baptists/Evangelicals etc..It is a rude shock for Utah
Republicans/Mormons to realize there are denominations/societies, in America,
who want the Utah Republican/Mormon vote and money...yet continue to deny Utah
Republicans/Mormons a seat at the Christian table.
I am unconcerned how this study classifies the LDS and other groups. The study
results are flawed from the beginning by categorizing certain groups as
"Bible Haters." Really, very few people HATE the Bible, including
Muslims, Taoists, or even atheists. They should have divided folks into two
groups: those who read the Bible on occasion and those that never read the
Bible. Obviously, these results would not have served their predetermined
purpose.This reminds me of the study that was reported earlier this
year of a breakdown of "Bible readers" by religion, determined by which
people used their own proprietary online Bible. Since, LDS typically read the
Bible online using the www.lds.org website, we showed up as non-readers of the
Bible.These studies are more amusing than enlightening.
@Rikitikitavi"Second: how can those who clearly break from the First
Presidency continue to lay claim to being Mormons?"Depends on
the definition of "Mormon". One definition people use is "LDS
member", another definition people use is "Book of Mormon believer".
They'd qualify under the latter. Perhaps that's part of why the church
at times discourages the use of the word.
First of all, as church leaders have asked us to do - We are members of The
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. True, other groups might refer to
themselves as 'Mormons' and I guess they have that prerogative. This,
however, is a different matter than determining who may be a
'Christian'. As I understand the term, a Christian is
someone, Anyone, who feels that they follow the teachings of Christ. People can
argue all they want on how well such adherence is actually accomplished.I consider myself a Christian. My next door neighbors - the ones who
never go church do to, and I will not deny them the honorable title of
Christian. By the same token I must question those non-Mormons who claim to
believe in the Bible, and yet consider much of it to be a book of folk-stories
and fairy-tales. I consider it to be the word of God.
As a young boy, Joseph Smith was inspired by a verse in the King James Bible
that led to his being called as a boy prophet by the glorified resurrected
Interesting that the 'report' lists as its objectives to determine:-Perceptions of the Bible-Bible penetration-Bible engagement-Bible literacy-moral decline and social impact-giving to
non-profit organizationsWhy is the bigoted segregation of sects even
important, if these were the goals?What I really think is
interesting is, if they asked about actual penetration - number of bibles per
household member - it would have skewed their numbers severely in favor of the
"non-Christians". I am quite sure that in most Mormon households where
the youngest is over 8 years of age, there are more bibles than family members -
and in multiple languages.But to get their desired results, this
would not do. No, no, no, no....
A Scientist,"....Mormons should be more circumspect and
thoughtful and refrain from dismissing this idea that Mormons are not friendly
to the Bible...."______________________________Mormons
selectively use the Bible to support their beliefs. But that doesn’t
distinguish the LDS so much as it puts them squarely in the Christian tradition.
The Bible serves theology rather than vice versa. Not many Christians want to
Enough already! Gay people believe in God also! Enough! Maybe it is about time
people treated us like they should! You might be surprised how much we believe.
A Scientist,I can see how attending Church services might create the
perception of not appreciating the Bible. We affirm the Bible is
correct as long as translation was proper to original revelations. We also know
from what God reveals in these latter days there are missing pieces of context
and doctrine in the Bible. But, that does not take away from our admiration of
it as God's word revealed in ancient days.Consider, if the
Bible was complete, then why would so many people, groups, and churches
interpret the doctrine so differently? Why would there be a need for a new
religion that claimed authority from God as does the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter Day Saints? If the Bible was true and final, how would that support
God's promise of His unchangeable nature of restoring His Church once again
as expressed throughout the Bible?Having a Mormon wife for 30 years
and attending many Church services, have you not yet desired to know if the work
is true from God (and not from other people)? If you want truth about God,
religion, etc., the best source is from Him directly.
I, as a member of the LDS Church, absolutely love the Bible and all the members
of the church I know fit into that same category. In fact, I think it could be
claimed that our church loves the Bible more than any other church because we
believe and teach ALL of it, not just a few favorite verses. I have
seen some churches built around a single verse and they hammer on it at every
meeting, completely ignoring the rest of the scripture. When asked about some of
these other verses they say something like, "We just get to the most
important part of it. The rest is not worth what this one verse means." Thus
they are in ignorance of many things, yet somehow this article labels them as
"Bible Believing Christians" and we are "Bible haters"?Somebody is trying to make a point for some reason, but its pretty hollow when
examining the facts.
@ JoeblowOh so we can let people in that are more focused / know
more what is going on in a distant galaxy than what is going on in their own
neighbor because their is a consesus among them?Is that what you are
saying? Maybe their is a consenus among scientist because a good chunk of them
are so focused on their own branch of science that they really don't care
what is going on in the other branches?I would rather have people
actually living on planet earth dealing with societal problems than someone that
has got his head in the clouds of another planet of a far off galaxy.
RE: Craig Clark, A Scientist makes some good points. AoF#8 “As
translated correctly.”KJV/3 Nephi Sermon on the Mount. LDS
Scholar Dr. Larson finds 12 examples where JS copied the 1769 KJV errors.Mt 6:13 KJV and 3Nephi 13:13 Both have the doxology, For thine is he
Kingdom and power and the glory forever amen. The KJV is based on 9th to 12th
century texts. Earlier and better manuscripts do not contain the doxology. One
example,more upon request. “A great portion of 3 Nephi seems
to be "borrowed and lifted" from the KJV Bible. Larson found that 3
Nephi holds exactly the same sort of errors that are unique to the 1769 version
of the KJV Bible Joseph Smith owned.” The MS discoveries
since the KJV have provided a much better understanding of the Sermon on the
Mount. Greek MS 200 A.D. thru Latin, Syriac, Coptic and patristic early support,
which leads to the original text. These are earlier and better texts of Matthews
Sermon on the Mount. There is unanimity support by modern scholars, but The BoM
never takes us to a verifiable text in antiquity..
"religion should be kept out of the public square". Interesting concept.
What other discussions, topics, beliefs and groups do you feel should be
silenced. After all, freedom of speech is only valid for those that want to
speak their own mind...right?
This is about as poorly structured and unscientific a poll as I could ever think
to create—speaking as a political science major who spent quite a bit of
time studying statistics and how polls are created and constructed. But then
again, it's about as "scientific" as I would expect coming from the
source that it does.Admittedly I don't tend to read the Bible
as I do other scriptures (frankly other scriptures explain Biblical principles
better and more accurately than the Bible itself does), but to put Latter-Day
Saints in the same category as agnostics simply because we use other scriptures
in addition to the Bible is just about the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
Speaking in Paris, France on June 4th, Frankfurt, Germany on June 5th, and in
Geneva, Switzerland June 6th, 1998, LDS President Gordon B. Hinckley spoke of
the Jesus of Mormonism;“In bearing testimony of Jesus Christ,
President Hinckley spoke of those outside of the Church who say that Latter-day
Saints ‘do not believe in the traditional Christ. No, I don’t. The
traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak. For the
Christ of whom I speak has been revealed in this Dispensation of the Fullness of
Times. He, together with His Father, appeared to the boy Joseph Smith in the
year 1820, and when Joseph left the grove that day, he knew more of the nature
of God than all the learned ministers of the gospel of the ages‘”
(The Church News, June 20th, 1998, p. 7)
Joe BlowPresident Hinckley said we have no argument with any other
churches or religions. In fact from what I've seen the leaders of the LDS
Church seem to welcome and embrace other believers in God/Christ, and willingly
work with them when possible. I'm sure President Monson would agree. If
it's good enough for them it's good enough for me, and hopefully all
LDS. As for keeping religion out of the public square, from what I've seen
lately, the public square is full of pot smokers. That can't be good for
society.SharronaJoseph Smith when translating recognized the
familiar words from his own Bible, and therefore used that as his templet. All
of the Book of Mormon as first translated into English had the unique qualities
of his known use of language at the time. Nothing suspicious there at all.
That studies have shown a change in authorship and style of writing is what is
amazing about the Book of Mormon, which proves multiple authors. Joseph could
never have accomplished that himself, even if he had thought of it in the first
Great article Stacie!
The organization behind this study has diminished its own credibility by failing
to be inclusive of all individuals who read the Bible. This study shows the
unprofessional biases of its authors when they dismiss the faith of those who
are not Catholic or Protestant. In truth, it is the Mormons and Jews
who show a high level of Bible literacy, according to a reputable survey
conducted by a reputable organization. (Pew Forum, 2010 "U.S. Religious
Knowledge Survey) It is too bad that prejudice got in the way of
this study truly determining what role the Bible plays in the role of Americans
Religion is so self defined and subjective that just about anyone can claim
anything and not only not have to offer up proof, but refute any argument to the
contrary. If you want to call yourself whatever, that's fine. Whatever the
claims, I tend to hear them filtered through the strains of John Lennon singing
If you are Jewish or Mormon you are not permitted to attend the private charter
school known as "Cornerstone," which I believe has schools across the
country, although they will take donations from Mormons and Jews. This is what
they told me when I was looking into other alternatives to public school for my
**sigh**This article contains numerous inaccuracies and completely
mischaracterizes the ABA report. The American Bible Society is a distinguished
organization that is nearly 200 years old. Anyone who actually reads the entire
report will find:1. It never refer to Mormons as "Bible
Haters." The report found a spectrum of opinions about the Bible from
"fully engaged" to "skeptical" and Mormons are never identified
as being on the negative end. Please read the full report.2. The
author states, "To the ABS, it doesn't matter that each member of my
family has a personal copy of the King James Bible." This is simply not
true. In fact the report notes the high ownership of Bibles in Mormon
households. Please read the full report.3. The ABA does not
characterize Mormons and Agnostics as being the same. This is a statistical
segmentation of the results by the researchers. It is simply identifying groups
of people who had statistically distinct answers. Please read the full
report.There are plenty of groups who hate Mormons. The ABA is not
one of them. This carelessly written article is accusing the wrong people. The
Deseret News can and should do better.
I am a convert to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I'm the
only member of my direct line family who is. And, I know what it means to be on
"the other side,". As Christ taught us in the NT, I love my
neighbor, as I would love myself, regardless of their religious beliefs. Never
would I stoop to insult their beliefs or their sincerity in their beliefs I
love the words of our Fathers who went before us, as Prophets of God. Their
lives and how they handled those who would speak against them,re great examples
to us all. To our Protestant Christian and Catholic friends, I say,
"love thy neighbor as thyself," and know that this is what our Savior
taught us. Whether you believe as we do, is your choice, but don't
denigrate or publicly insult those who have no hatred of you. We are not your
enemy, Satan is. Let's join in telling him to get behind us and leave us.
After that, let our (Mormons) faith and free agency guide us in our lives. It
is not for anyone but Christ to judge.
I also know many Bible believing Mormons and so this in unfortunate. But
unfortunately, there is also history of the Mormon church saying that all
Christians are an "abomination". I'm so happy this is changing, but
change is slow. God Speed!
RE happy2bhere,A short list of Significant translation errors: 3
Nephi 13:12, (Jesus)“ deliver us from evil”(KJV). Jesus taught the
Nephites an abstract prayer in 34 A.D.? The correct translation, Mt 6:13 NIV
is “deliver us from “the evil one”( Satan G,= tou ponerou).(H of C, 1844) J S said,“Eloheim is from the word Eloi, God is
singular number; and by adding the word heim ,it renders it Gods. Wrong, In Hebrew the form of the word Elohim, with the ending -im, which
normally indicates a masculine plural, however with Elohim the construction is
usually grammatically SINGULAR# 430 Strong’s. And in(Gen 1:1 Greek LXX)
In the Beginning God (ho theos).Not gods.The Textual Problem of Luke
22:43-44, “Blood”, because of the serious doubts to these
verses’ authenticity, they are in brackets and noted by Modern
translations (ESV,NASB,NIV,NET,NRSV,).. Honest scholars have nothing to hide.
see Mosiah 3:7 "In *Bethlehem in Judea," "for this is
what the prophet(Malachi) has written: ".'"( MT 2:5),, Fulfilled
Prophecy is what separates the Holy Bible from all other books.. Not*Jersusalem
… (Alma 7:10).
Henry Drummond,"....The ABA does not characterize Mormons and
Agnostics as being the same. This is a statistical segmentation of the
paragraph has how it reads in the report:"....No faith/Other
faith: Individuals who do not consider themselves Christian(including
atheists, agnostics and other faiths) Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses are
also included even if they describe themselves as Christian...."The folly of grouping Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses with atheists and
agnostics under a category labeled NO FAITH/OTHER FAITH seems so obvious that
the editor of the ABS report should have caught how it would read to people. It
just goes to show that careful proofreading is critical before publishing
whether we’re talking about the American Bible Society or the Deseret
sharronaDo you really believe those things are a valid basis for the
untruthfullness of the Book of Mormon? What about all the things written in it
that neither Joseph Smith, or anyone else for that matter, could have known?
And it was done in a very short period of time. For all the so called errors
you claim, there are truths about the Book that far supercede them. And Joseph
Smith himself said that if there are any errors in the book they are of man, not
of God. Consider this. Try translating the Bible into another language and not
have similar errors as you point out with the Book of Mormon. And, the Book of
Mormon was translated from an unknown language into English. That's much
more difficult than having it come from two known languages, say English to
Spanish. The Book required a huge amount of spiritual inspiration and influence
from the Holy Ghost to translate, which is much different than what today would
be typical translation.
What other Christian organizations are speaks for themselves. During the First
Vision Jesus Christ told Joseph Smith that other churches' CREEDS were an
abomination in His sight, not the churches themselves. Although, the Book of
Mormon speaks plainly about the Great and Abominable Church and it isn't
too hard to figure out who Nephi is talking about in a modern context. The doctrine of Biblical inerrancy or infallibility is silly and easily
disproven by scripture itself instead of history. We respect the right of
everyone to believe and practice their religion as they choose but we are not
going to be held hostage to nonsensical ideas and man-made creeds in order to be
able to affirm our Christianity. John Lennon's imagine is
essentially advocating communism. It is revealing for a person to state how much
he or she admires the words of that song. Personally, I think Paul McCartney was
the real talent behind the Beatles.
@ John Locke"To our Protestant Christian and Catholic friends, I
say, "love thy neighbor as thyself," and know that this is what our
Savior taught us. Whether you believe as we do, is your choice, but don't
denigrate or publicly insult those who have no hatred of you."The same could be said of your religious brethren. As a Catholic (I am NOT a
non-Mormon) who was born and raised in Utah, I can attest to the animosity shown
towards me and my family by "Christian" Mormons. But I do agree,
"Love thy neighbor as thyself" is simply beautiful. It is the way I have
tried to live my life and shown my kids how to live. To all people,
who cares what others think of your religion? Live it true to yourself, not to
to There You Go Again"If you're not at the
table...you're on the menu."Possibly the pithiest saying
Henry Drummond,I'm sighing at your sigh … Don't tell us
to read the full report when reading the 64 page document is sufficient to agree
with Ms. Duce. In 64 pages, there's no break out of Mormons' answers
… they're lumped with those of no faith. Don't defaim her or the
Des news … I'm sure you've got some explaining to do to your
Mormon supporters, so spend your time fixing relations and then do the survey
better next year. I think the results will surprise you and the ABA.
"If you were of the world the world would love his own .... " It's
ironic that the verse most aptly describing the Evangelical rejection of Mormons
as Christians would come from THE BIBLE. John 15:19.
Let's be honest with ourselves. Much of this view is driven by our Churches
past negative comments about the Bible. Many of our leaders have claimed the
Bible to have been changed so much that it could not be trusted, and even the
Prophet Joseph re-wrote much of it. How can we cast stones when people say we
hate the Bible today, when our past leaders clearly sent a message that would
imply as much? This is just another flip flop moment is it not?
Hugh Drummond,I, too, am sighing at your sigh. The author of this
article never claimed that the report referred to Mormons as "Bible
Haters." Rather, the author specifically mentioned that the "Bible
Hater" lingo came from a Christianity Today article headline that discussed
this report. Please read the article more carefully.
@There You Go Again ... "If you're not at the table...you're on
the menu."Not if you're the chef. There are
exceptions to everything.
As an active member of the LDS Church, I sometimes am just as appalled at the
animosity a few of our members express towards other religions as some from
other religions express towards us. Thankfully, I believe they are in the
minority, but unfortunately they get a lot more than their share of attention.
What I see from most active members of our Church is reaching out to find common
ground and understanding, rather than knocking other religions. I would think
that it probably is the same on the other side of the aisle as well.
Sorry, Scientist, but the official position of The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints is that BOTH the Bible AND the Book of Mormon contain the
fulness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Maybe if you were converted and received
the Gift of the Holy Ghost it would be easier for you to discern the reverence
with which the Saints love the scriptures.
qcjeep "For example, Mormons decide which Mormons can be and
should not be considered Mormons. The FLDS are Mormons,"That is
just incorrect: Mormon is a nickname for a specific denomination; not a
religious tradition. I.e. Quaker is a nickname for the Society of Friends who
are also protestant. All protestants are NOT Quakers.The problem
is: there is no nickname for all people who believe in the book of Mormon there
is ONLY a nickname for the LDS Church
This "Bible-hater" reads the Good Book every four years, making it 10
times over the last 40 years. I currently read three chapters a day and am
mid-way through 2nd Kings. Some of my kids learned how to read in family
scripture study class. One of my daughters could read "feast of the
tabernacle of the congregation" by the age of four. Am I weird or what?
Is American Bible Society the cousin to Westboro Baptists?
@Beaver NativeI'm sorry BN, but if you think the Church has a history
of embracing others beliefs then you have not studied much of our Churche's
history. Many of our Prophets have said some horrible things about the catholics
and protestants. This view of embarcing other people's beliefs is a farily
recent flip flop.
@Joe: I firmly disagree with your negative outlook on the LDS faith and religion
in general. I find it ironic that one whose position is that religion be out of
the public square is here on the web, the most public square of all, all but
painting LDS and followers of Christ in general as the most hypocritical.
Comments that focus on negative aspects of LDS members, or members of any faith,
especially ones formed of straw aren't insightful nor thought-provoking.
I'd like to see more comments about Mormons and people of other Christian
faiths overcoming barriers in a time when Jesus is the focus of blatant
persecution, as are his followers. If the past sits in judgment of the present,
there is no future, I believe it was said. A famous Baptist recently spoke at
BYU and said that it is likely "we" (Mormons, non-Mormons) will one day
likely share a jail cell together because of our faith. I would be proud to
share that cell with anyone of any faith where Christ is the center, but I
respect other faiths as well. That's my two cents, for what it's
Comments like this are why I, as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter Day Saints, do not want prayer in school and religion taught by my
kids' teachers. I do not think LDS kids living in the Bible Belt should be
taught in school that they are not Christian. Similarly, I don't think
Baptist kids living in Utah should be taught in school that they are not a
member of the true faith. I learned long ago that I'm never going to
convince a fundamentalist Christian that I am also a Christian. I can only live
my life in the most Christian way possible. Arguing will never convince anyone.
I cannot fathom why they don't think LDS are Christians, but I've
given up trying to argue with them about it.
@J.D. ... Saying horrible things about people either shooting at you or
condemning you to eternal perdition for no other reason than your beliefs seems
rather tame to me. @Wonder ... I can remember praying, as a
1st-grader in class, to God in the name of Christ. Any
'indoctrination' ended at that. One day during drills to survive
Russian nukes, I ducked under my desk the wrong way and got 3 stitches for my
efforts. Point is, I survive praying, but politics scarred me for life. @BYR... Yes, they are related. Distant cousins, not kissing, but family
nonetheless. I say this as a former 'evangelical'. One day I woke up
and asked myself why the distinction between 'Christian' and
'evangelical Christian'. A few months later I joined the Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.@HeresAthought ... re
"That's my two cents, for what it's worth." Nice philosophy.
I'd put your 2 cents worth about $3.15.
I don't know anyone who "hates" Mormons; it's just that
Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses and others like them have very different
beliefs about Jesus Christ and his divinity. Jesus was never simply a man like
you or me. As Jesus replied to the Jewish elders, Before Abraham was, I AM. In
his earthly ministry Jesus said, I and the Father are one. A
Christian is not just someone who admires or follows the teachings of Christ. A
Christian is one who in his heart believes the claims of Christ about himself:
that he is God, and has the power to save sinners like myself. Jesus saved the dying thief, who may have never entered a synagogue, heard any
of the Scriptures read or done any good deed. Yet Jesus said, Today you will be
with me in Paradise. The thief was saved because of his confession. I believe
in that Jesus.
@Moontan,So our ealry leaders mistreatment of others was somehow
justified by others mistreatment of them. Have you ever heard of logical
fallacies. The one you just used is called tu quoque and is a good example of an
invalid argument. The men we should admire are those that care about others in
spite of how others treat them don't you think?...Your argument just
reaffirms to me that the leaders who we held in such high regard are not really
any better than anyone else. Why follow them at all if that is the case?
RE: Moontan, The distinction between Mormons and 'Evangelical Christians
believe God becomes man not man becomes God. E.g…In the
beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God(John
(1:1) Versw.,14 And the Word was made flesh.God was manifest in the
(Jesus)flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the
Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory(1Tim 3:16)RE: Wonder, why they don't think “LDS are Christians”. What’s in a name .“Christian’ Scientists, not all are
scientists .They deny the bodily resurrection of Christ. They also ” 1
Deify man: Man can become God(exhaltation). 2. Deny God is one eternally. 3.
Minimize sin, Instead of man’s very nature. 4. Ostracize and add to
scripture.Vs,1John 5:20 ESV) we know that the Son of God has come
and has given us(Christians) understanding, so that we may know him who is true;
and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He(Jesus) is the true
God and eternal life”.
@J.D.... Very familiar with logical fallacies, none of which are present there.
I was responding to your "Prophets have said some horrible things". I
see we've moved on to 'mistreatment'. Re. "Your argument just
reaffirms to me that the leaders who we held in such high regard are not really
any better than anyone else. Why follow them at all if that is the case?" If
you truly believe that to be the case, I'd recommend you not follow them. I
certainly wouldn't if I thought that. But first I'd assess the wisdom
of rejecting leaders based upon one post by a virtual stranger. @Sharonna ... Why is it anti-or-non-Mormons who use John 1:1 as a
'gotcha' verse almost NEVER include John 1:2? "He was in the
beginning with God.…" That's two beings there, friend. Sorry.
@Moontan My apologies if my statment came across as mistreatment. That was
certainly not my intention. The problem with online post is that it does not
allow for the conversational voice that lets someone know a persons spirit.
I'm truly sorry. I'm afraid it was not your single post that has
caused me to question our leadership. I have stacked so much on my shelf over
the past couple of years that it just can't hold any more. My recent study
on the BOA (what scholars say versus what Joseph claimed)was enough to show that
what I had been taught all my life was just not the least bit true. So, your
post really had nothing to do with it and my apologies if I led you to think so.
I wish you the very best in your studies and hope you find truth regardless of
@J.D... I was referring to your mention of leaders mistreating others, not any
mistreatment of me. Your posts are fine. No apology necessary, sir. But to sum
... We're called to rightly divide the word, separate the wheat and chaff,
etc. As long as God works through human beings, I expect a certain amount of
ridiculousness, nutty beliefs and questionable behavior. I love the Psalms, for
example - written by an adulterer and murderer. I reject David's behavior
there, but embrace his devotion, his frequent angst. If I ever found myself
rejecting a leader because he was, after all, human - then I'd worry about
myself. Same with LDS leaders: I can benefit from an apostle's knowledge of
Scripture, and not be bothered about his beliefs concerning lunar inhabitants.
At one time or another, all of us - all - act and believe as if we are 2
sandwiches short of a picnic. This doesn't diminish our areas of expertise
or our callings in life. It just means we're human, ergo sometimes just
down right silly. I give LDS leaders the same sort of break I'd want others
to give me. 4th post here I think.
@Moontan, RE: John1:2 “The same was in the beginning with
God.” Jesus’ eternal existence, with the Father, and eternal
deity.Verse 3, All things were Made by him… ”( Grk,
ginomai)“came into existence. E.g..Origen taught the
‘False doctrine’ of pre-existence(Platonic). The Council of
Constantinople in 453 CE excommunicated him. 1 Cor. 15:46, The spiritual did
not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual.@David
repents from his sinful nature. “ I was born a sinner, yes, from the
moment my mother conceived me”(Psalm 51:5 NLT) “a contrite
heart”(Psalm 51:17).JS, “I have more to boast of than
ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole
church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood
by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man
ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him; but the
Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet. (D.H.C. v 6. P 408,409)
Ultimately, since the Lord himself knew that "all sorts of fruit would
cumber the ground" of His vinyard, or in other words, there would be
numerous sects claiming Christ and that confusion would reign after nearly 2000
yrs of the dark night of apostasy, He gave us the tell tell sign of those who
would be His true followers... how you could pick them out. He said, " By
this ye shall know if ye are my disciples, If ye have love one toward
another." I have seen His disciples everywhere, among all sects. He also
said "contention is not of me, but of the devil who is the father of
contention." Those are a couple of real good clues for both introspection
and identifying true disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ. Then we move on to
ordinances and their associating covenants and which church has the authority to
administer those ordinances... but that is a discussion for another time. A clue
though, is that the Apostle Peter was given those keys, so whoever has authority
to administer those ordinances must have an unbroken Priesthood line of
authority that includes Peter who was given those keys by Christ himself.
This irrational doctrinal disputation between Christian factions has no end to
As someone who lived as a Mormon for 40 years after converting at 17, I would
say Mormons are Bible-tolerators not Bible-lovers. When comparing the Bible to
the Book of Mormon, the shortcomings of the Bible are always mentioned.
I still remember the first time I started researching the Mormon Church and saw
that the entire King James bibles was linked to the Mormon website I was
reading. That was comforting and makes this article seem silly to me.Too bad someone could not write a more interesting article on a more
meaningful topic such as what Jesus meant when he told Peter that on this rock I
will build my church. Or what he meant when he said the gates of Hell will not
prevail against the church.
Mormons do believe in the bible, to the extent that it agrees with their
theology. The minute a scripture contradicts their beliefs.... all of the sudden
it wasn't translated correctly.
Perhaps we can say that Mormons are not Bible lovers, but fair weather friends
of the Bible?