Calling and Election Made Sure
The Internet is really a great tool for learning. I remember when I went to school, there was no Internet to turn to when I did not understand something in school, and the text book was not clear enough. When I needed information about something I had to go to the library and hopefully I would find something. But it was really time consuming.
How different is today. If I have a question I can probably find some kind of information online.
So it was when I first joined the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons). The material about the Mormon Church was limited, and to find a book translated in my language (Italian) was also rare, we only had a few books. In fact, my initial reason to learn English was to be able to read Church books, including some very interesting book by Elder Bruce R. McConkie (The Messiah series).
However, now is so different, and the material available on the Internet is growing daily. For example, last week someone mentioned to me the well-known (but not well understood, including by me) principle of making our calling and election sure and asked me if I had the book Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith or Bruce R. McConkie’s Doctrinal New Testament Commentary.
I had to say that I did not have them. However, I just did a quick internet search a few minutes ago, and I found very easily what I was looking for, without the need to buy them, or even go to the library.
On page 321 of the Teaching of the Prophet Joseph Smith we read:
That which hath been hid from before the foundation of the world is revealed to babes and sucklings in the last days.
The world is reserved unto burning in the last days. He shall send Elijah the prophet, and he shall reveal the covenants of the fathers in relation to the children, and the covenants of the children in relation to the fathers.Four destroying angels holding power over the four quarters of the earth until the servants of God are sealed in their foreheads, which signifies sealing the blessing upon their heads, meaning the everlasting covenant, thereby making their calling and election made sure. When a seal is put upon the father and mother, it secures their posterity, so that they cannot be lost, but will be saved by virtue of the covenant of their father and mother.
It is a comforting doctrine for fathers and mothers who may be struggling with some of their kids. There is a lot more about calling and election made sure in the Bruce R. McConkie’s Doctrinal New Testament Commentary 3:325-353.
If you are interested in this topic, it is worthwhile to spend some time reading those pages. Below I copied just the first paragraph, to give you a taste of it.
Among those who have received the gospel, and who are seeking diligently to live its laws and gain eternal life, there is an instinctive and determined desire to make their calling and election sure. Because they have tasted the good things of God and sipped from the fountain of eternal truth, they now seek the divine presence, where they shall know all things, have all power, all might, and all dominion, and in fact be like Him who is the great Prototype of all saved beings–God our Heavenly and Eternal Father. (D&C 132:20.) This is the end objective, the chief goal of all the faithful, and there is nothing greater in all eternity, “for there is no gift greater than the gift of salvation.” (D&C 6:13.)
The Papal Schism and a New Mormon Prophet
I am reading an interesting book by Will Durant, ‘The Reformation” and particularly a chapter that discusses the famous Papal Schism.
It was clearly a time of confusion, when politics and religion were mixed. According to Will Durant,
The Papal Schism (1378-1417)…like so many of the forces that prepared the Reformation, was conditioned by the rise of the national state; in effect it was an attempt by France to retain the moral and financial aid of the papacy in her was against England.
Because of the schism, there were two popes, or better two lines of popes both claiming to have the authority.
Will Durant comments:
…the divided Church became the weapon and victim of the hostile camps. Half the Christian world held the other half to be heretical, blasphemous, and excommunicate; each side claimed that sacraments administered by priests of the opposite obedience were worthless, and that children so baptized, the penitents so shriven, the dying so anointed, remained in mortal sin, and were doomed to hell – or at best to limbo – if death should supervene….
The Council of Pisa met on March 25, 1409. It summoned Benedict and Gregory (the two popes) to appear before it; they ignored it; it declared them deposed, elected a new pope, Alexander V, bade him call another council before May 1412, and adjourned. There were now three popes instead of two. Alexander did not help matters by dying (1410), for this cardinals named as his successor John XXIII, the most unmanageable man to mount the pontifical chair since the twenty-second of his name.
Not all popes were elected in a situation so extreme, amid so much confusion, but it is good to know that we have a simple but effective system in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints when a new prophet needs to be called.
It is a system in which the senior apostle become the new prophet, so that there is no space for campaigning, confusion, or fights when it is time to decide who will be the next prophet.
Mormons running for President: Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman
Filed under: Mormon Church, Mormonism, News & Politics
It is becoming always more interesting the debate about Mormons and politics. In the next presidential elections there will be two Mormons trying to become the President of the United States, John Huntsman and Mitt Romney.
But as someone said,
one of these two guys could be our next president….the other one is John Huntsman (Colbert report).
Many Americans still do not know what Mormons believe and therefore are a little bit suspicious, but this presidential campaign is helping people to know Mormonism better, or at least it helps to put Mormon beliefs in perspective, even when this is done with a good amount of irony.
For example, again in the Colbert Report, the “weird” beliefs of Mormonism were compared to the similarly “weird” beliefs of Christianity and Judaism.
Mormons believe that Joseph Smith received golden plates from an Angel on a hill, when everybody knows that Moses got stones tablets stones from a burning bush on a mountain
Many may have never noticed how strange is Moses’ story while at the same time they attack Joseph Smith.
In another case, in an article titled ” The ultimate organization Men”, the author James Carrol does an interesting job of explaining the “organizational” propensity of the Mormon Church (and many of its members) as a consequence of Mormon theology. He writes,
For the Mormon God is not like other gods. God did not create the world out of nothing, as in other monotheistic traditions; according to the revelation given to Joseph Smith, God “organized it out of chaos.’’ Drawing order out of preexisting “elements. . . [that] may be organized and reorganized, but not destroyed,’’ God was working with what was already there.
But what most impressed me in this article is when the author humbly recognizes the need of correcting himself from something he had written previously.
The distinction between God as creator and God as organizer matters because the perennial religious call to imitate God made organizing a defining act of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. (Note to readers: In my last column, I omitted “Jesus Christ’’ from the formal name of the Mormon religion – a not insignificant mistake.)
Not everybody who writes about Mormon obviously is so ready to correct their own mistakes, but this campaign will help to make Mormon beliefs better known among the public, someway forcing the media to be more careful when they talk about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Some of the wrong information that was so commonly disseminated in the past will have to be more carefully reviewed before publication.
Even this article (with a video) on CNN.com is probably a consequence of the political campaign and is fair enough.
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/06/24/explain-it-to-me-mormonism/?iref=obinsite
Is the Mormon Jesus the Brother of Satan?
Filed under: Jesus Christ, Mormon Church, Mormonism
I started paying attention to this comment about Jesus being the brother of Satan only in the last few years here in the US. I became a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon Church) in Italy and I had never heard this argument when people tried to attack the Mormon Church.
While living in Brazil I heard it only a few times, but I thought that it could be dismissed very easily, since it seems to me a very dumb comment anyway.
Since we are all children of God, brothers and sisters in spirit, then Jesus is the brother of Satan the same way some of us have brothers and sisters, but this fact doesn’t really tell us anything about what we believe, or it does not mean that the Mormon Jesus is someway “friend” with Satan or that they stand for the same things
However, during the General Conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints I began noticing people who were raising signs like the one below.
Clearly, some people extrapolate all sort of meanings from the simple belief (and fact) that Jesus and Satan (and all of us) were spiritual brothers and sisters before this life.
I think that a recent article from MDL.org helps to understand how this belief is twisted to attack Mormon beliefs.
Many anti-Mormons claim that Mormons are not Christian. But Mormons believe in Jesus Christ and in His Atonement for our sins. It is only through Jesus that we are saved. Many Christians who claim you only have to accept Jesus to be saved have a problem with Mormons because we likewise accept Jesus as our Savior and Redeemer, despite our doctrinal differences. So, the thought goes among some who refuse to accept us as Christians, that we must believe in a different Jesus, not the Jesus of the Bible. As supposed proof, these critics argue that the so-called “Mormon Jesus” is the brother of Satan, and therefore it doesn’t matter if Mormons accept him or not because he is the wrong Jesus. Alternatively, to other detractors, accepting the “Mormon Jesus” actually matters very much, because following the “Mormon Jesus” would be the same as following Satan, his “brother.”
Whichever the case, this ridiculous notion is a “straw man” or a gross misrepresentation of actual LDS belief…In short, the entire argument is a disingenuous attempt to demean and belittle Mormons. It is bigotry pure and simple.
Mormons are Christians: Messiah Jesus Christ Website
It is obvious to me and many others, but unfortunately it is not to some, that members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are Christians, not just because of the name of the Church, but especially because of the teachings of the Church about Christ.
Many articles and books have been written in favor or against, some saying that Mormons are Christians and some saying that they are not. This website can help to show what is true and what is not, and it will give valuable insights about what really Mormons believe regarding Jesus Christ.
Sincere seekers of the truth and members of the Church of Jesus Christ will really like the website.
The Messiah website http://messiahjesuschrist.org contains videos and text created by and for the Neal A. Maxwell Institute. The More Good Foundation has been involved in the creation of the websites in English and in other six languages (Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, Germans, French, and Japanese).
The websites are all at different stages of completion, but there is already a lot that can be already found in each of them.
Book of Mormon Video
Filed under: Book of Mormon, Mormon Church, Mormon Videos
The Book of Mormon is the word of God, like the Bible. It is Holy Scripture, with form and content similar to that of the Bible. Both books contain God’s guidance as revealed to prophets as well as religious histories of different civilizations. While the Bible is written by and about the people in the land of Israel and surrounding areas, and takes place from the creation of the world until shortly after the death of Jesus Christ, the Book of Mormon contains the history and God’s dealings with the people who lived in the Americas between approximately 600 BC and 400 AD.
In the video below, a living Apostle explains what the Book of Mormon is and how anyone can know that it is true.
I have a testimony of the Book of Mormon, and this means that I have read the book, and thought about its teaching, and prayed about it, and I know by the power of the Holy Ghost that is a true book, written by ancient prophets. The Book of Mormon contains the word of God, and if we live by its precepts we will be blessed in our lives.
Joseph Smith (Mormon Prophet) Film Now Available Online
Filed under: Joseph Smith, Mormon Church, Mormon Prophets and Apostles, Mormon Videos
I am really excited to see the new version of the movie about Joseph Smith.
When I first arrived to the US (in 2001) I went several times to watch the movie The Testaments, one of my favorite movies ever. When they finally released the Joseph Smith movie I thought that it could not be better than The Testaments, but I was actually impressed by the new movie. I have not decided yet which one is better, but the few things I have heard about the new version make me feel that I will probably like it even more now.
According to LdsMediaTalk,
This is the first full-length motion picture the Church has released on the Internet. It is a revised version of the film that has been shown since 2005 in the Joseph Smith Building in Salt Lake City and in 19 visitors’ centers around the world. The revisions are to make it more easily understood by a wider audience, now that it is available to everyone online.
Ron Munns, who produced the original film, said, “The first Joseph Smith film was excellent and was well received by many. However, some parts were not easily understood if you did not already know the story. Everyone comes to the film with different backgrounds and knowledge and we wanted to make sure that every person who sees the film walks away with a better understanding of the Prophet Joseph and what he did.”
In the new version, “there is less focus on Joseph the man and more focus on Joseph the prophet. It’s the same story, just with a different emphasis,” said John Garbett, who produced the new movie. For example, a scene showing a leg operation Joseph had as a young boy was removed because it was less essential to the purpose of the film. Those who have seen the film before will notice that the revised version has a new narrator: an actress representing Lucy Mack Smith, Joseph’s mother.
“We chose this device to tell the story because Lucy Mack Smith was an eyewitness to everything that happened,” Garbett said. “This is a mother talking about her son in her own words.”
Now, I need to leave and go take a look at the movie!
How to Write an Anti-Mormon Book
According to Hugh Nibley a few general rules are observed by all successful writers in the “fascinating and lucrative field” of anti-Mormon literature.
I suggest the reading of the full text, as found in the Maxwell Institute website, How to Write an Anti-Mormon Book (A Handbook for Beginners). There is obviously a lot of irony in Hugh Nibley’s writing, but this irony should not distract us from the seriousness of the arguments used by Nibley.
Every anti-Mormon book is a sermon, and the most effective of sermons is the one, as Augustine long ago observed, that excites to action by running away with the emotions and leaving reason and judgment far behind. Here is how Ann Eliza sums up her Thousand and One Nights: “Yet all these incredible distortions of reckless fancy have become veritable facts. They have been crystallized into a monstrous system of wickedness, guarded by a band of loathsome ogres, who feast upon the spoils of their victims and . . . take delight in their misery. . . . The American people therefore must continue their holy crusade against this antichristian system.” (Nibley, page 554)
Not bad for a “fair” description of Mormonism…
Cartoon from the late 19th century, depicting Mormonism as a threat to society. .
So there are the rules (there is a lot more if you read the original text by Hugh Nibley)
RULE 1: Don’t be modest! Your first concern should be to make it clear that You are the man for the job, that amidst a “mass of lies and contradictions” you are uniquely fitted to pass judgment: “I emerged from my researches . . . with my objectivity unblurred,” writes Mr. Wallace. “If I enjoyed or suffered any deviations from neutral observer, they were slight.”
RULE 2: A benign criticism of your predecessors will go far towards confirming your own preeminence in the field. Refer gently but firmly to the bias, prejudice, and inadequate research, however unconscious or understandable, of other books on the subject.
RULE 3: Curtsies and bouquets to everyone can be delivered in a profuse and unctuous appendix or introduction and go a long way toward establishing the image of the writer as a really good fellow who admires and respects everybody and is therefore the last man in the world to distort or exaggerate. What could be more magnanimous and disarming than Mr. Wallace’s master stroke, a favorite device of anti-Mormon writers: “I want to acknowledge, also, my thanks to a number of high-ranking Mormon Church officials whose objective c
RULE 4: Proclaim the purity of your motives, especially your freedom from mercenary considerations. But again, don’t overdo it!
RULE 5: Proclaim your love for the Mormon people. Even Ann Eliza does this touchingly and often: “I feel that I must pay this tribute to the Mormon people. Naturally, they were a law-abiding, peace-loving, intensely religious people”; ”humble, spiritual-minded, God-fearing, law-abiding”; ”their faith was sublime in its exaltation,” etc.
RULE 6: Allow the Mormons a few normal human failings. That will make your story more plausible, establish you as a fair-minded and tolerant reporter, and so render your verdict all the more damning when you choose to lower the beam.
RULE 7: Furnish documents! “Nowadays,” writes H. R. Trevor-Roper, “to carry conviction, a historian must document, or appear to document, his formal narrative.” In former times documentation was largely the work of imaginative engravings: thus in Mrs. Young’s book we behold serried ranks of finely uniformed dragoons in flawless drill formation, their banners proudly flying, advancing on the huddled victims of the Mountain Meadows massacre; or we see the huge victory parade celebrating the murder of the widow Jones in Payson; Mr. Beadle shows us actual drawings of “Hickman killing Yates, by order of Brigham Young,—Hosea Stout holding the lantern,” of “Hickman delivering the murdered man Yates’ money to Brigham Young,” etc. These drawings are, however, no longer acceptable as evidence. In fact, viewed with a critical eye, they tend rather to discredit than corroborate the tales they illustrate. Therefore modern scholars like Wallace, while telling the identical stories, consciously or otherwise omit illustrations that show only too plainly how little the original tellers bothered themselves about the truth.
RULE 8: Avoid footnotes! This is not only the easiest but also the safest rule to follow. The student who compares Mrs. Brodie’s footnotes with the actual sources indicated by them will quickly appreciate the wisdom of Wallace in simply lumping his sources together in an appendix. Seeing them in that form, the reader assumes that the author has read with equal care all the books and articles named and made proper and proportionate use of each…
RULE 9: Be lavish in your appendix! Pour it on! Name everybody and everything: Mr. Wallace speaks his gratitude to people who are quite unaware of having been accessory to his performance and by no means pleased at finding themselves among his valued informants.
RULE 10: Be a name dropper! The average reviewer is the last person in the world to be seriously critical of sources (why should he seek for trouble?) and will be only too glad to go along with a writer who is good enough to include real names from time to time among the usual harvest of “it is said,” “it was reported,” “it was believed,” etc.
RULE 11: Control your sources! When, for example, Ann Eliza brings a particularly damning and patently false charge of murder against Brigham Young, Mr. Wallace dismisses it with a good-natured chuckle: “But it must be remembered that at this time Ann Eliza was an angry wife.
RULE 12: Wave your credentials! Remind the reader from time to time of your “years of intensive research.” If you need high authorities you can always promote your helpers to meet the demand. Note with what easy dominion Mr. Wallace not only bestows the doctorate on one Wilford Poulson, M.A., for his welcome gossip, but with it the title of “Foremost living authority on Mormonism,” heading the parade of the “host of scholars” (unnamed) who instructed Mr. Wallace “on various aspects of the Mormon past.”
RULE 13: Establish immediate intellectual ascendancy by opening your book, as is the fashion, with a tremendous blast of meticulous erudition to intimidate the reader and discourage any smart-aleck questions.
RULE 14: Have something new to sell. Every anti-Mormon writer is selling what has already been sold again and again, like Mr. Wallace, peddling old clothes in a shiny new pushcart. See to it that your pushcart looks shiny and new! To do this you must add some ingredient of your own.
RULE 15: Get an inside track! Aside from your personal qualifications and zeal, you must enjoy the position of a privileged observer. No one, but no one, according to Mrs. Stenhouse, has any business writing on Mormonism except a “woman who really was a Mormon and lived in Polygamy,” i.e., Mrs. Stenhouse. Mrs. A.E.W.D.Y.
RULE 16: Don’t answer questions! Remember the useful phrase “But as this comes from a Mormon source it must be discounted.” of men?
RULE 17: In place of evidence use Rhetoric! When one is making grave criminal charges, either directly or by broad implication as all anti-Mormon writers do, questions of evidence can be very bothersome unless one has the wisdom and foresight to avoid all such questions. Surprisingly enough, this can be done rather easily. As Housman has just reminded us, the writer who is telling the public what it wants to hear will never have to answer embarrassing questions about evidence. The ancients discovered that any public prefers rhetoric to evidence, and the modern historian will soon learn the truth of the time-tested and timeworn maxim of the Doctors of old, that rhetoric and not truth is the key to success in this world. The basic principles of the classical rhetorical method are two: (1) eikos, that is, the building up of a case not on facts but on probabilities, and (2) the use of loci communes, standard responses to standard situations (hence our word “commonplace”), the appeal to familiar stock phrases to avoid thought and the use of emotive words of tested reliability to avoid evidence.
RULE 18: Use lack of evidence as evidence! No knack is more useful than that of turning one’s lack of information into a definite asset in dealing with the Mormons. For example, the involvement of the Church in the Mountain Meadows massacre raises a number of quite unanswerable questions; note, then, how cleverly Mrs. Stenhouse admits that fact while turning it to a new incrimination against the Mormons: “No answer can be returned to these questions without disclosing secret scenes of sin and shameful iniquity at the mention of which even the souls of fiends might stand aghast.” Does that answer your question? Remember, the worst crimes are those for which there is no evidence even that a crime was committed: “There were crimes then perpetrated in secret which will never be known until the Day of Doom.”
RULE 19: Use the unfulfilled condition to make out a case against the Mormons where there is neither evidence nor absence of evidence, i.e., where nothing at all has happened. “The spirit of assassination still remains,” writes Ann Eliza, “and were it unchecked hundreds would be . . . sent into eternity without a moment’s warning, for no crime at all except daring to differ, if ever so slightly, from those in authority.”
RULE 20: Be generous with hints—they are very effective and you never have to prove anything. When Ann Eliza writes, “It is no wonder that suicides have been so common among the Mormon women,” who is going to stop the train to ask for an explanation: are suicides common? They must be because it is no wonder. Be virtuous about your hinting as you announce the things you refuse to talk about: “There are events of daily occurrence which decency and womanly modesty forbid my even hinting at.” Isn’t that a clever bit of hinting? Isn’t that nicer than trying to tell a story which cannot possibly be as bad as the story you don’t have to tell, running the risk of disappointing your reader and getting yourself involved in that nasty business of evidence?
RULE 21: Use quotation marks without sources—the most effective hinting device, and the most popular with anti-Mormon writers.
RULE 22: Discuss motives; read minds! This is a must in dealing with Mormon history. Here we have people claiming divine revelation and as a result doing all sorts of unusual things; since there is no such thing as divine revelation, how do we explain the unusual doings? Only by reading the minds of the actors.
RULE 23: Be cute! Lytton Strachey has amusingly described the quixotic General Gordon with “his fatalism, his brandy-bottle and his Bible.” The brandy bottle, Trevor-Roper informs us, is Strachey’s own invention: “The real object had been not a brandy-bottle but a prayerbook. Unfortunately, ‘brandy-bottle’ is funnier than ‘prayer book’; Strachey could not resist that final touch of absurdity.
RULE 24: Make atmosphere your objective. “Nowadays,” writes Trevor-Roper, “to carry conviction, a historian must document, or appear to document, his formal narrative, but his background, his generalizations, allusions, comparisons remain happily free from this inconvenience. This freedom is very useful: against an imaginary background even correctly stated facts can be wonderfully transformed.”
RULE 25: Attack not the thing but the Image! For your readers Mormonism is what you say it is: it is to establish that thesis that you have been at such pains with your personal buildup. Once entrenched as an official guide, you can take your readers where you please; it is not the thing you are showing them from then on, but your interpretation of the thing. It has been the practice of religious polemic in every age to attack not what the opposition practice and preach but our impression of what they practice and preach. “Blasphemy!” was the heading of the first published report on the Book of Mormon, and Alexander Campbell sincerely believed it was blasphemy. The early anti-Christian writers were just as sincere: Blasphemy had been from the beginning the stock charge against Jesus and the Apostles, just as it is the favorite word of anti-Mormon writers.
RULE 26: Enjoy the prerogatives of “unequal scholarship,” i.e., “the scrupulous straining at small historical gnats which diverts attention from the silent digestion of large and inconvenient camels.
RULE 27: Be literary! As a creative writer you should feel free to say whatever you please without having to answer to anybody. No one can call you to account for what is put down as pure fiction.
RULE 28: Develop a special vocabulary of loaded and emotive words. As a literary artist, you have this prerogative. Mrs. Brodie does wonders with such sure-fire psychic terms as plastic, intuitive, and magnetic, which sound important enough but can’t be pinned down.
RULE 29: Study the techniques of gossip. To the discerning reader of the Sisterhood of Mormon Bondage the word that comes most often to mind is bound to be “gossip.” For that very reason the student should follow Mr. Wallace’s example and scrupulously avoid ever using the word, which would be sure to let the cat out of the bag. Let us admit that our anti-Mormon classics are clearinghouses of gossip. What else are those swarming quotations without sources, or the constantly recurring “it is said,” “it was reported,” “I know one woman who . . . “?
RULE 30: Preserve a gap between your readers and the Mormons. At a passage where even the most obtuse reader might boggle at the sheer excess and enormity of your tale, do not hesitate to remind him that he is in no position to know about things happening in the far away Tibet of the Rockies. “No one outside of Utah and Mormonism can understand it in the least,” says Ann Eliza, “because nowhere else is there a possibility of such wretchedness to exist.”
RULE 31: Learn when to be silent. Nothing you say about the Mormons can be more damning than what you fail to say. The really competent anti-Mormon writer does not only exploit gaps—he creates them, by omitting relevant information.
RULE 32: Be bloody, bold, and resolute! What the public wants in an atrocity story is straight horror, not namby-pamby explanations: the propaganda artists of World War I proved that once for all. As the murder mystery demonstrates so often, the emotionally involved reader is a functionally blind reader who will not see the evidence that is staring him in the face.
RULE 33: Uphold the tradition! Correct and improve the legends! By the time Joseph Smith was twenty-five years old, everything bad that could be said about a man had been said about him, publicly, loudly, and often. This left his critics with no new heights to scale in the art of vituperation and small room for advancement in the invention of new atrocities.
RULE 34: Be patriotic. Anti-Mormon classics tend to be of a strong patriotic tone. Ann Eliza’s 1908 volume is a perfect demonstration of how patriotism can be exploited to make Mormon-baiting pay.
RULE 35: Join the ladies. Any anti-Mormon writer does well to follow Mr. Wallace’s example and take his stand with the ladies or behind their skirts. All the most effective anti-Mormon books have been written by women—Nancy Towle, Orvilla Belisle, Ettie V. Smith, Maria Ward, Fanny Stenhouse, Ann Eliza Webb Dee Young Denning, Mrs. Dr. Horace Eaton, Emily Austin, Ellen Dickinson, Lily Dougal, Winifred Graham, Fawn M. Brodie—to name a few, because we can think of no others just now. Women have always worked with the clergy, who through the years have been the principal promoters of anti-Mormon literature.
RULE 36: Your target is Mormonism! Anti-Mormon books are not written to describe or discuss the human foibles of any group or individual but to discredit a doctrine. Every episode, however trivial, irrelevant, or fictitious must be made to serve as the text for a single sermon—the monstrousness of believing in revelation. The bad thing about the “heartless and mercenary” handcart fiasco is “that all this should be done ‘in the name of the Lord.’ . . . Take this home to yourself, and you will be able to appreciate as never before the horrors of Mormonism.” Therein resides the horror: “A better people—aside from their religion . . . it would be difficult to find. Their fault was in their faith. ”
Earthquake,Tsunami, and Nuclear Fears in Japan
Filed under: Humanitarian services, Mormon Church, News & Politics, Videos
Yesterday I read as the governor of Tokyo apologized on Tuesday for saying the earthquake and resulting tsunami that left thousands dead were divine punishment for Japanese egoism.
“I will take back (the remark) and offer a deep apology,” Tokyo Gov. Shintaro Ishihara said at a Tuesday news conference, according to Japan’s Kyodo News.
On Monday, Ishihara had told reporters, “I think (the disaster) is tembatsu (divine punishment), although I feel sorry for disaster victims.”
After reading that on CNN.com I thought of a passage in the Bible:
There were present at that season some who told Him of the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. And Jesus answering said unto them, “Suppose ye that these Galileans were sinners above all the other Galileans, because they suffered such things? I tell you, nay; but unless ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. Or those eighteen upon whom the tower of Siloam fell and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all other men that dwelt in Jerusalem? I tell you, nay; but unless ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish” (Luke 13:1-5).
It is true that we are told that in the latter days many calamities and destructions will visit this planet and its inhabitants, but as the previous scripture reminds us, the people who lost their lives or their possessions were not “sinners above all the others”. Our duty is to help, not to judge.
It is impossible to know, and useless to speculate, whether a specific calamity is a natural consequence of the way our imperfect physical world operates, or whether is the consequence of our sins.
Everything is imperfect in this world, and those calamities may serve as a reminder to all of us that this world will not last forever, and that we should not spend all of our time and efforts on what has no eternal value, but that we should focus on what really matters.
Follows a video about what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon Church) is doing and plans to do to offer relief in Japan
Mormons know the Bible (more than other Christians)
Who said that Mormons only know the Book of Mormon? Yes, Mormons believe the Book of Mormon to be a sacred book, but they also study the Bible and are familiar with its stories and precepts.
According to the recent U.S. Religious Knowledge Survey (2010), by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, Mormons score better on overall knowledge of the Bible than white evangelical Protestants, atheists and agnostics, black Protestants and Jews.
The Pew Forum’s religious knowledge survey included 32 questions about various aspects of religion: the Bible, Christianity, Judaism, Mormonism, world religions, religion in public life, and atheism and agnosticism. Overall, the three groups that performed best in this survey were atheists and agnostics, Jews, and Mormons.
According to the same survey, Mormons do better on questions about the Bible, but Mormons do not perform as well as the other two groups on questions about world religions such as Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism.
In the same Survey, three questions were also asked about Mormonism.
Overall, 51% of Americans identify Joseph Smith, founder of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, as a Mormon (not an Amish), and 44% know that Mormonism was founded after 1800. Also, 40% of the respondent know that according to the Book of Mormon, Jesus appeared to followers in the Americas.