As always, I am not an official representative of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I believe the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is true. (I rarely edit -- please forgive!)
I spent summer and fall journaling thoughts about 10 myths I've heard others believe about Mormons. I'm going to start a new blog about 10 myths I believe people believe about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and polygamy. I won't here outline the myths, but, rather, the topics. I'll address each one as I decide what I want to say. In similar fashion to this last summer and fall, I may write one a week or skip a week here and there. I have no timeline for this. I may want to research some topics more than others.
1. Joseph Smith and Polygamy
2. Warren Jeffs is misguided and Drastically Different than Early Polygamists of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
3. Early Polygamist Practices of the Church from Women's Perspectives
4. Early Polygamist Practices of the Church from Men's Perspectives
5. U.S. vs. Reynolds (Supreme Court Case Involving Polygamy in the Utah Territories)
6. LDS Doctrine as Contrasted with FLDS Doctrine
7. New and Everlasting Covenant (I don't know if I know enough to journal this well, but I may try. I want to be doctrinally correct.)
8. Polygamy in the Bigger Cultural Arena
9. The Canadian Legal Case Involving Polygamists: Current
10. U.S. vs. Smith and U.S. vs. Reynolds: State Involvement in Private Entities: Right or Wrong? And at What Level?
February 04, 2009
October 22, 2008
10. Myth: The Members of the Church of Jesus Christ are not Christians.
This is the last blog in a series of eleven blogs about my countering explanations of myths I've heard about Mormons in my life. They are meant to be read from the bottom up. As always, I am not an official representative of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I believe the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is true. (I rarely edit -- please forgive!)
I believe that Joseph Smith, as a fourteen-year-old boy, in reality, went into the woods, knelt, prayed, and received an actual manifestation of God, the Father and of his Son Jesus Christ testifying to him to join none of the churches about which he had asked the Lord. I believe that the same Joseph Smith did, in fact, find golden plates of ancient date and translated them, now known as the Book of Mormon, and that the Book of Mormon is an ancient American record testifying of the truthfulness of Christ's gospel. I believe it to be a second witness of Jesus Christ.
I believe temples are of God, and that work for the dead is neither perfunctory nor misguided.
But most of all, I believe that Jesus is the Christ. I believe that Christ died so that all men and women and children might live. I believe that God the Father exists and that he sent his Only Begotten Son here to pay for the sins of all mankind who would accept his gift, for God so loved the world, the gospels tell us.
I believe that Thomas S. Monson is a prophet of the God of Abraham -- that same God who was also the God of Adam, Noah, Melchizedek, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Peter, Paul, and then Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and so forth after the apostasy era. By prophet, I mean that I believe that Thomas S. Monson is an authorized voice of God on earth.
These things I testify in the name of Jesus, the Christ. Amen.
Brenda Anderson
I believe that Joseph Smith, as a fourteen-year-old boy, in reality, went into the woods, knelt, prayed, and received an actual manifestation of God, the Father and of his Son Jesus Christ testifying to him to join none of the churches about which he had asked the Lord. I believe that the same Joseph Smith did, in fact, find golden plates of ancient date and translated them, now known as the Book of Mormon, and that the Book of Mormon is an ancient American record testifying of the truthfulness of Christ's gospel. I believe it to be a second witness of Jesus Christ.
I believe temples are of God, and that work for the dead is neither perfunctory nor misguided.
But most of all, I believe that Jesus is the Christ. I believe that Christ died so that all men and women and children might live. I believe that God the Father exists and that he sent his Only Begotten Son here to pay for the sins of all mankind who would accept his gift, for God so loved the world, the gospels tell us.
I believe that Thomas S. Monson is a prophet of the God of Abraham -- that same God who was also the God of Adam, Noah, Melchizedek, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Peter, Paul, and then Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and so forth after the apostasy era. By prophet, I mean that I believe that Thomas S. Monson is an authorized voice of God on earth.
These things I testify in the name of Jesus, the Christ. Amen.
Brenda Anderson
October 20, 2008
9. Myth: The Members of the Mormon Church are Segregationist.
Draft
This blog consists of my summer and fall journaling concerning myths I've encountered in my life about Mormonism. As always, I am not an official representative of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I believe the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints it true. These blogs are meant to be read from the bottom up.
This is, I think, the most difficult blog to journal simply because it is an incredibly delicate topic. But I don't want to mince words.
I think I'll start with the psamlist's poetry found in Psalms 130:
1. Out of the depths have I cried unto thee, O Lord.
2. Lord, hear my voice: let thine ears be attentive to the voice of my supplications.
3. If thou, Lord shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?
4. But there is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared.
5. I wait for the Lord, my soul doth wait, and in his word do I hope.
6. My soul waiteth for the Lord more than they that watch for the morning: I say, more than they that watch for the morning.
7. Let Israel hope in the Lord: for with the Lord there is mercy, and with him is plenteous redemption.
8. And he shall redeem Israel from all his iniquities.
Of concern to many, I believe, is the idea that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints denied the priesthood to members of the church of African descent until the 1970s. I discussed this with a professor at the law school I attended last year: He pointed out that a guest speaker we had both heard, Sister Helen Prejean who wrote Dead Man Walking, spoke of remembering when Catholics of her acquaintance required people of African descent sit at the back of the bus, not excusing either, but, rather, this professor pointed out: Perhaps it was an American problem and not a Mormon problem.
Having said that, it is true that the Book of Mormon mentions dark skin as a mark for rebellion against God. It's needless here to write out all of the references to marks in the Bible: They are there for the earnest student to find. But I will write that I am both left-handed and a woman, and I feel not only that the Church of Jesus Christ is beautiful and utterly true: I don't feel disadvantaged because I have the symbols of cursing attached to me. Eve ate the apple, afterall, and we're doing OK.
I will not apologize for the Book of Mormon. I believe the book is true. But to any person who would use the Book of Mormon as an indication that whites are superior to blacks or who would use the Bible as an indication that right-handed people are superior to left-handed people or who would use the same as an indication that women are less than men, I would argue that they understand not the gospel of Christ.
This blog consists of my summer and fall journaling concerning myths I've encountered in my life about Mormonism. As always, I am not an official representative of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I believe the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints it true. These blogs are meant to be read from the bottom up.
This is, I think, the most difficult blog to journal simply because it is an incredibly delicate topic. But I don't want to mince words.
I think I'll start with the psamlist's poetry found in Psalms 130:
1. Out of the depths have I cried unto thee, O Lord.
2. Lord, hear my voice: let thine ears be attentive to the voice of my supplications.
3. If thou, Lord shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?
4. But there is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared.
5. I wait for the Lord, my soul doth wait, and in his word do I hope.
6. My soul waiteth for the Lord more than they that watch for the morning: I say, more than they that watch for the morning.
7. Let Israel hope in the Lord: for with the Lord there is mercy, and with him is plenteous redemption.
8. And he shall redeem Israel from all his iniquities.
Of concern to many, I believe, is the idea that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints denied the priesthood to members of the church of African descent until the 1970s. I discussed this with a professor at the law school I attended last year: He pointed out that a guest speaker we had both heard, Sister Helen Prejean who wrote Dead Man Walking, spoke of remembering when Catholics of her acquaintance required people of African descent sit at the back of the bus, not excusing either, but, rather, this professor pointed out: Perhaps it was an American problem and not a Mormon problem.
Having said that, it is true that the Book of Mormon mentions dark skin as a mark for rebellion against God. It's needless here to write out all of the references to marks in the Bible: They are there for the earnest student to find. But I will write that I am both left-handed and a woman, and I feel not only that the Church of Jesus Christ is beautiful and utterly true: I don't feel disadvantaged because I have the symbols of cursing attached to me. Eve ate the apple, afterall, and we're doing OK.
I will not apologize for the Book of Mormon. I believe the book is true. But to any person who would use the Book of Mormon as an indication that whites are superior to blacks or who would use the Bible as an indication that right-handed people are superior to left-handed people or who would use the same as an indication that women are less than men, I would argue that they understand not the gospel of Christ.
October 16, 2008
8. Myth: The Members of the Mormon Church Support Only Mormon Political Candidates.
Draft
I am not an official representative of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I believe the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is true. These blogs are meant to be read from the bottom up, the first post posted in July.
To claim that members of the Mormon church only support Mormon candidates would be to then assume that Mormons haven't been voting in national elections in any primary or general election without a Mormon candidate, which have been not a few. Of course Mormons vote for non-Mormon candidates. And there is no church-authority-driven pact among Mormons to vote for a Mormon candidate.
The claim is just silliness.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has reaffirmed its neutrality about candidates for this presidential election and letters so declaring were read in ward sacrament meetings -- well, one was read in mine, and I assume that the same letter was read church-wide simply because that is how the church operates: http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/news-releases-stories
/church-reemphasizes-political-neutrality.
To quote the church's official web site cited above: "The Church’s mission is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ, not to elect politicians. The Church’s neutrality in matters of party politics applies in all of the many nations in which it is established."
The letter read in my ward did reaffirm the church's Constitutional right to express its opinion on public matters.
How is this not the same as not having an opinion about candidates? Candidates are complex beings supporting vast majorities and minorities of many views: I'm sure the church authorities understand this and comprehend that it's possible that any given candidate could support some of the church's goals and some of the church's concerns. I'm sure the church authorities can see support for the church's views and against the church's views from both sides. It leaves it up to the members to make their best judgment call.
I appreciate it.
I am not an official representative of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I believe the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is true. These blogs are meant to be read from the bottom up, the first post posted in July.
To claim that members of the Mormon church only support Mormon candidates would be to then assume that Mormons haven't been voting in national elections in any primary or general election without a Mormon candidate, which have been not a few. Of course Mormons vote for non-Mormon candidates. And there is no church-authority-driven pact among Mormons to vote for a Mormon candidate.
The claim is just silliness.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has reaffirmed its neutrality about candidates for this presidential election and letters so declaring were read in ward sacrament meetings -- well, one was read in mine, and I assume that the same letter was read church-wide simply because that is how the church operates: http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/news-releases-stories
/church-reemphasizes-political-neutrality.
To quote the church's official web site cited above: "The Church’s mission is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ, not to elect politicians. The Church’s neutrality in matters of party politics applies in all of the many nations in which it is established."
The letter read in my ward did reaffirm the church's Constitutional right to express its opinion on public matters.
How is this not the same as not having an opinion about candidates? Candidates are complex beings supporting vast majorities and minorities of many views: I'm sure the church authorities understand this and comprehend that it's possible that any given candidate could support some of the church's goals and some of the church's concerns. I'm sure the church authorities can see support for the church's views and against the church's views from both sides. It leaves it up to the members to make their best judgment call.
I appreciate it.
October 02, 2008
7. Myth: The Members of the Mormon Church are Hoping to Establish a Political Kingdom Known as Zion.
DRAFT
This is a blog that discusses my view of ten myths about Mormonism I've encountered in my life. The blog is meant to be read from the bottom up.
As always, I am not an official representative of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I believe the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is true.
Moreover, in relation to the topic of this blog in particular, I am no expert on the affairs of the Middle East. I have cursory knowledge of what the situation really is there, and will only be mentioning political situations there in order to contrast how the House of Israel as a religious entity exists as opposed to the political nation of Israel.
An earlier post explains the following: Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints consider themselves members of the House of Israel. In the Bible, Abraham fathered Ishmael and Isaac, and Isaac fathered Jacob and Esau -- the birthright was given to Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel. Israel by way of two wives and two handmaidens given to him by his wives had twelve sons. These twelve sons fathered the thirteen tribes of Israel, technically, whereas the two sons of Joseph, the eldest son of Israel's wife Rachel, Manassah and Ephraim, born to him of an Egyptian wife.
From Ishmael's line comes the Muslim community. From Isaac's line, as explained above, comes the House of Israel -- often mistakenly only taken to be the Jewish nation.
Mormons consider themselves are rightful and actual members of the House of Israel.
The doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints supports the gathering of Israel. This is not a political gathering until Christ comes, which, scriptural will not be a debatable subject (see George Will standard discussed in earlier blog), as I understand it. The gathering of Israel, though, is a literal physical gathering in some respects -- while still supporting the government of each established land.
The gathering of Israel, though, is not declaring war on Muslim nations to reestablish the House of Israel's dominance in the Jerusalem of the Middle East, thus the New Jerusalem, I'm guessing.
There's not much more to say on this, but I do have a story I want to tell. I once worked with a junior high administrator who was from the country Jordan. He had converted to Christianity.
One afternoon, the faculty was preparing for a parent open house celebrating diversity day in which the kids celebrated differences in the world. I was in the main entry of the school and was placing tape on the back of small tributes to Holocaust victims created by my language arts eighth graders from cards I had obtained at the Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC. This assistant principal I'll call Mr. Mussuf passed me and asked if I needed help hanging the many tributes. Yes, I said, and he started to help me tape the cards. I said something to the effect of, "What happened here was terrible."
"Yes," he responded along those lines. He said that these things that happened in the Holocaust should happen to no one.
But, he then told me, he had seen many, many atrocrities happen to relatives of his in the name of Zionism.
I understood him and told him so. And we taped the cards in silence for awhile, as I recall.
I can't speak for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, but I think I can safely claim that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, in no way, supports violence as a means of gathering Israel.
Jesus is the Christ and the God of Israel is my testimony. Christ's ways have fulfileld and surpassed the eye for an eye laws established during the earlier Law of Moses era. I'm most certain that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints promotes the building of a New Jerusalem, not the violent reconquest of ancient lands. Does the church support the United States' efforts to secure peace in the region? Of course would be my non-representative response.
This is a blog that discusses my view of ten myths about Mormonism I've encountered in my life. The blog is meant to be read from the bottom up.
As always, I am not an official representative of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I believe the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is true.
Moreover, in relation to the topic of this blog in particular, I am no expert on the affairs of the Middle East. I have cursory knowledge of what the situation really is there, and will only be mentioning political situations there in order to contrast how the House of Israel as a religious entity exists as opposed to the political nation of Israel.
An earlier post explains the following: Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints consider themselves members of the House of Israel. In the Bible, Abraham fathered Ishmael and Isaac, and Isaac fathered Jacob and Esau -- the birthright was given to Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel. Israel by way of two wives and two handmaidens given to him by his wives had twelve sons. These twelve sons fathered the thirteen tribes of Israel, technically, whereas the two sons of Joseph, the eldest son of Israel's wife Rachel, Manassah and Ephraim, born to him of an Egyptian wife.
From Ishmael's line comes the Muslim community. From Isaac's line, as explained above, comes the House of Israel -- often mistakenly only taken to be the Jewish nation.
Mormons consider themselves are rightful and actual members of the House of Israel.
The doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints supports the gathering of Israel. This is not a political gathering until Christ comes, which, scriptural will not be a debatable subject (see George Will standard discussed in earlier blog), as I understand it. The gathering of Israel, though, is a literal physical gathering in some respects -- while still supporting the government of each established land.
The gathering of Israel, though, is not declaring war on Muslim nations to reestablish the House of Israel's dominance in the Jerusalem of the Middle East, thus the New Jerusalem, I'm guessing.
There's not much more to say on this, but I do have a story I want to tell. I once worked with a junior high administrator who was from the country Jordan. He had converted to Christianity.
One afternoon, the faculty was preparing for a parent open house celebrating diversity day in which the kids celebrated differences in the world. I was in the main entry of the school and was placing tape on the back of small tributes to Holocaust victims created by my language arts eighth graders from cards I had obtained at the Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC. This assistant principal I'll call Mr. Mussuf passed me and asked if I needed help hanging the many tributes. Yes, I said, and he started to help me tape the cards. I said something to the effect of, "What happened here was terrible."
"Yes," he responded along those lines. He said that these things that happened in the Holocaust should happen to no one.
But, he then told me, he had seen many, many atrocrities happen to relatives of his in the name of Zionism.
I understood him and told him so. And we taped the cards in silence for awhile, as I recall.
I can't speak for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, but I think I can safely claim that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, in no way, supports violence as a means of gathering Israel.
Jesus is the Christ and the God of Israel is my testimony. Christ's ways have fulfileld and surpassed the eye for an eye laws established during the earlier Law of Moses era. I'm most certain that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints promotes the building of a New Jerusalem, not the violent reconquest of ancient lands. Does the church support the United States' efforts to secure peace in the region? Of course would be my non-representative response.
September 16, 2008
6. Myth: The Members of the Mormon Church Would Follow a Prophet's Orders Over the Law of the Land.
As always, I am not an official representative of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, also called Mormonism. I believe the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is true. This blog is a series of summer and fall comments about ten myths about Mormonism I've encountered in my life.
Faithful members of the Mormon church would not follow a prophet's orders over the law of the land for two reasons:
1) The prophet would never require it because 2) it is against the twelfth Article of Faith of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints:
12. We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.
An example of how this once played out in the United States, see the discussion of President Woodruff's advice to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints in relation to polygamist practices in the late 1800s as discussed in my last blog entry about myth number five on my list.
The Articles of Faith
of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
History of the Church, Vol. 4, pp. 535-541
as cited in The Pearl of Great Price, published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, 2007, pp. 60-61
1. We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.
2. We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression.
3. We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.
4. We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.
5. We believe that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.
6. We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors [the footnote references bishops], teachers, evangelists [the footnote for this references patriarchs], and so forth.
7. We believe in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, and so forth.
8. We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.
9. We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.
10. We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisical glory.
11. We claim the privilege of worshipping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.
12. We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.
13. We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul--We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.
Joseph Smith (as cited above)
When I read these words of Joseph Smith, I wonder at how any person could have ever considered him a threat. I have no idea.
Faithful members of the Mormon church would not follow a prophet's orders over the law of the land for two reasons:
1) The prophet would never require it because 2) it is against the twelfth Article of Faith of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints:
12. We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.
An example of how this once played out in the United States, see the discussion of President Woodruff's advice to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints in relation to polygamist practices in the late 1800s as discussed in my last blog entry about myth number five on my list.
The Articles of Faith
of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
History of the Church, Vol. 4, pp. 535-541
as cited in The Pearl of Great Price, published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, 2007, pp. 60-61
1. We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.
2. We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression.
3. We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.
4. We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.
5. We believe that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.
6. We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors [the footnote references bishops], teachers, evangelists [the footnote for this references patriarchs], and so forth.
7. We believe in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, and so forth.
8. We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.
9. We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.
10. We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisical glory.
11. We claim the privilege of worshipping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.
12. We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.
13. We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul--We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.
Joseph Smith (as cited above)
When I read these words of Joseph Smith, I wonder at how any person could have ever considered him a threat. I have no idea.
August 30, 2008
5. Myth: A Mormon Prophet is Followed Without Judgment on the Part of the Followers.
(This specific blog entry of 30 August 2008 is in uber-draft form -- I'm writing off the top of my head, and it's a bit light-hearted.) As always, I am not an official representative of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I believe the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is true.
If President Monson, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints told me by way of commandment to shave my head, buy a Volkswagen mini-van (those bug kind), build a tree house in the desert, and go and live there while I made macrame plant holders (and nothing against macrame or anyone who makes it even though I'm making fun of it right now), I would choose to do it. I really would. But President Monson would never ask it. Why wouldn't President Monson ever ask me to do this? Because President Monson is sane.
To me, it's like teaching at a school. Some administrators ask teachers to do unreasonable things. Others lead well. The administration of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day leads well and always does. This is an organization whose judgment I trust and is accord with my own thinking.
Perhaps what makes some people nervous about Mormons is that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints believes in modern revelation, not only personal revelation, but revelation that is given to a prophet of God who then directs members. The best way to address this topic, I think, is to talk about dreams because this is something everyone has perhaps had personal experience with.
In a rightly empirical world, dreams cannot and should not stand as witness against anything. Dreams can be random reflections from one's life or divine, in my opinion: But dreams are only personal revelation -- revelation to dictate that person's actions only -- even if the images in the personal dream are archetypal and fit into the collective ideas of Jung's collective unconcious. Nonetheless, one cannot and should not be able to use information gained from a personal dream in, say, a court of law. That's just silly. And evil.
For instance, I once had a dream in which I found myself driving around a mall parking lot in a vehicle I had at the time. In my dream, I drove around and around in a circle in this huge empty parking lot (I don't know why it was completely empty.) I would start to drive, and then I would press down on the brake and nothing would happen. And then, my vehicle would, in my dream, just roll to a stop. This happened over and over.
When I woke up, I initially forgot the dream. And then, perhaps a day later? Maybe two? My brake light went on. I went to a mechanic's and he looked over my brakes. They were fine. And the brake light went off. And then, when I was driving away, the brake light went on again. And so I drove back. The mechanic said that he could check one more thing: And to his and my surprise, I was completely out of brake fluid. He fixed it; I paid him.
Later I remembered my dream. Was it a revelation? I have no idea.
Now, if the mechanic would not have found the brake fluid problem, would I be able to sue him because I had had the dream? Of course not. That's ridiculous. But the dream was for me if divine -- to perhaps insire action. A sleep dream is much like a willful day dream in which a person imagines what he or she wants: It's not real until it's real in an empirical world. Dreams cannot act as evidence. They can only act as invitations.
Personal revelation cannot be used to tell others what to do.
And what about people who dream horror dreams and are good people? In my opinion, dreams only come from three sources: God, evil, or the magnigicent human body.
I believe that God can give personal revelation through dreams and through other means. I also believe that Satan, if a person is allowing evil influences to exist in his or her life, can probably operate through such avenues as dreams. Likewise, our minds are amazing and still medically mysterious tools, and who knows what images they can conjure when they rest?
The key to using a dream to one's advantage is to learn how to be a decision maker. One must learn to discern. What dreams are inspired? (And these can be archetypal.) What dreams are temptations? (These, also, can be archetypal.) What dreams are my body sorting through images it's seen and making up an archetypal story? An archetype is a method of thought formation and not a guarantee that something is good or bad -- well, sort-of, but I don't have time to journal my thoughts on this.
BLOG TOPIC: How does this relate to following a prophet? A prophet is collective, not personal. His job is to be the means through which the living Christ directs his church. While some may view this as blasphemous, many, many, many cultures -- all through the Bible -- have had prophets as representatives of Christ on Earth. It's not new, but, perhaps ironically, it's the only way to get new information.
God would not talk to people in the past and then just give up on future generations, in my opinion. This concept is logical to me. I can't imagine a god who feels fine talking to Adam, to Noah, to Moses, to Abraham, to Christ (who is the Son of a Heavenly Father and therefore, also God himself as well as a prophet while he was here in the flesh -- it was a two-fold mission), to Peter and Paul, and then just say, "Well, that was great. Good luck to you all."
But, a prophet is only a prophet to those who choose to follow him: It's why prophets are not and cannot be political entities. They can't be the law: Because of the very nature of revelation -- which is much like a dream, as I understand it -- choice must -- MUST -- exist. Followers must be able to choose whether or not they follow a prophet's council. But also like dreams, a prophet's council only comes to fruition when acted upon by the members and it plays out in an empirical world.
One of the perhaps most well-known revelations known to members of Mormon culture happened when Mormon prophet President Wilford Woodruff (president from 1887 -- 1898) wrote the Manifesto testifying that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints had ceased the practice of plural marriage. As I understand the history, when members of the Church fought President Woodruff on this revelation that the practice was to cease, he told them that he had seen two visions: One in which the practice continued and what would happen to the members of the church -- it was a vision of imprisonment and a ceasing of work for the dead -- and what would happen if the church ceased the practice -- it was a vision of the church moving forward.
President Woodruff decided to proclaim the practice over so the church could move forward. Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints who wished to choose to move forward with the church adhered to the revelation of the prophet. Those who wished to not move forward with the church went their way. It is from these off-springs of the original Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints that group such as the Warren Jeffs organization have come. They have stayed in a non-sanctioned philsophy for some 100+ years leading to the situation that now exists for practicing polygamists who attach themselves to what they term to be Mormon doctrine which, in fact, is not so.
Another very well-known revelation -- well-known to Mormons -- in Mormon history is the June 1978 revelation by President Spencer W. Kimball (president from 1973-1985) that worthy persons of African descent were to receive the priesthood. Some members of the church fought this revelation and departed. Others rightly decided to move forward with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.
Prophets have given revelation about storing food for financial times of need and in the event of natural disasters. They have given revelation about not watching porn, not smoking, not drinking, and more. Every member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has the right to follow or not follow the revelations of a prophet, but many, many members can testify about how following the prophets' revelations have played out in beautiful ways in their empirical worlds.
Prophets in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints are not alone. They have two counselors who have had almost as much experience as they have had. There are also the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles with similar powers who help him. And then there are the Quorums of the Seventies who help. And then there are the stake presidents, and the many, many amazing bishops all over the world. And the mission presidents. And the quorums of priesthood holders in each ward or branch all over the world. And the missionaries themselves are powerhouses.
And then there are the women -- wives of these men and daughters and missionaries themselves and Relief Society Presidents and primary workers and more, more, more: Don't be fooled, women of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints have more power than any woman in any group in the world, in my opinion.
As Sheri Dew says about Mormon women, they are the Lord's secret weapon. Things are good for gals in this organization. I would explain how, but it's a secret :). If we're going to be accused of being a cult, I may as well take advantage of it sometimes.
But what is notable about prophets of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints not being alone is that it is easy for a church member to follow a prophet's suggestion simply because a Mormon prophet is not a random guy by himself holed up in a unidentified location's wooded back-country shed sending out information to some 13 million members about what to do. For readers who don't adhere to the logic that God is watching a prophet of God and dictating what he does, I offer the argument that many men of considerable world and church experience and their wives and more are watching what President Monson does every single day. Just among the 15 first presidency members and apostles alone, there is a former heart surgeon who attended Harvard, a man who ran a state-wide newspaper, a German pilot, a former Utah State Supreme Court justice, a lawyer who clerked for the federal judge who tried the Watergate scandals while they were being tried, and two former university presidents: one of Brigham Young University, Provo, and one of Brigham Young University, Idaho. I'm sure the histories of the other apostles and presidency members are equally amazing, I'm just not as familiar with those histories. I'm just saying that if President Monson were to feel inspired to tell the people to do something not sane, which he never would because he, himself, is amazing and sane, but if he were to make a mistake, one of these amazing men would say, "Are you sure?" A wall of men that one sees during biannual General Conferences of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints helps to testify of this truth of logic tempering inspiration. As once I heard General Relief Society President Bonnie Parker once testify, "Good information makes for good inspiration." Revelation does not mean that men of revelatory power do not use their minds.
This is partly why, in my opinion, the sustaining process in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is so important. Members of the church must sustain leaders. We do this by raising our right hands in meetings. Not a few people have supposed that this is a meaningless process: Not so. It gives every member of the church not the right to decide for the leadership, but, rather, to indicate that he or she is still agrees with what is going on.
Finally, it's important to know that the First Presidency and the Apostles and General Authories are not paid. Mormons pay tithing, but the tithing goes to the building of temples, meetings houses, and missionaries. Bishops in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints receive no salary at all for the many, many hours they contribute to others. The church is 100% voluntary. The prophet cannot benefit from giving a revelation that is politically or business slanted one way or the other.
If President Monson, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints told me by way of commandment to shave my head, buy a Volkswagen mini-van (those bug kind), build a tree house in the desert, and go and live there while I made macrame plant holders (and nothing against macrame or anyone who makes it even though I'm making fun of it right now), I would choose to do it. I really would. But President Monson would never ask it. Why wouldn't President Monson ever ask me to do this? Because President Monson is sane.
To me, it's like teaching at a school. Some administrators ask teachers to do unreasonable things. Others lead well. The administration of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day leads well and always does. This is an organization whose judgment I trust and is accord with my own thinking.
Perhaps what makes some people nervous about Mormons is that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints believes in modern revelation, not only personal revelation, but revelation that is given to a prophet of God who then directs members. The best way to address this topic, I think, is to talk about dreams because this is something everyone has perhaps had personal experience with.
In a rightly empirical world, dreams cannot and should not stand as witness against anything. Dreams can be random reflections from one's life or divine, in my opinion: But dreams are only personal revelation -- revelation to dictate that person's actions only -- even if the images in the personal dream are archetypal and fit into the collective ideas of Jung's collective unconcious. Nonetheless, one cannot and should not be able to use information gained from a personal dream in, say, a court of law. That's just silly. And evil.
For instance, I once had a dream in which I found myself driving around a mall parking lot in a vehicle I had at the time. In my dream, I drove around and around in a circle in this huge empty parking lot (I don't know why it was completely empty.) I would start to drive, and then I would press down on the brake and nothing would happen. And then, my vehicle would, in my dream, just roll to a stop. This happened over and over.
When I woke up, I initially forgot the dream. And then, perhaps a day later? Maybe two? My brake light went on. I went to a mechanic's and he looked over my brakes. They were fine. And the brake light went off. And then, when I was driving away, the brake light went on again. And so I drove back. The mechanic said that he could check one more thing: And to his and my surprise, I was completely out of brake fluid. He fixed it; I paid him.
Later I remembered my dream. Was it a revelation? I have no idea.
Now, if the mechanic would not have found the brake fluid problem, would I be able to sue him because I had had the dream? Of course not. That's ridiculous. But the dream was for me if divine -- to perhaps insire action. A sleep dream is much like a willful day dream in which a person imagines what he or she wants: It's not real until it's real in an empirical world. Dreams cannot act as evidence. They can only act as invitations.
Personal revelation cannot be used to tell others what to do.
And what about people who dream horror dreams and are good people? In my opinion, dreams only come from three sources: God, evil, or the magnigicent human body.
I believe that God can give personal revelation through dreams and through other means. I also believe that Satan, if a person is allowing evil influences to exist in his or her life, can probably operate through such avenues as dreams. Likewise, our minds are amazing and still medically mysterious tools, and who knows what images they can conjure when they rest?
The key to using a dream to one's advantage is to learn how to be a decision maker. One must learn to discern. What dreams are inspired? (And these can be archetypal.) What dreams are temptations? (These, also, can be archetypal.) What dreams are my body sorting through images it's seen and making up an archetypal story? An archetype is a method of thought formation and not a guarantee that something is good or bad -- well, sort-of, but I don't have time to journal my thoughts on this.
BLOG TOPIC: How does this relate to following a prophet? A prophet is collective, not personal. His job is to be the means through which the living Christ directs his church. While some may view this as blasphemous, many, many, many cultures -- all through the Bible -- have had prophets as representatives of Christ on Earth. It's not new, but, perhaps ironically, it's the only way to get new information.
God would not talk to people in the past and then just give up on future generations, in my opinion. This concept is logical to me. I can't imagine a god who feels fine talking to Adam, to Noah, to Moses, to Abraham, to Christ (who is the Son of a Heavenly Father and therefore, also God himself as well as a prophet while he was here in the flesh -- it was a two-fold mission), to Peter and Paul, and then just say, "Well, that was great. Good luck to you all."
But, a prophet is only a prophet to those who choose to follow him: It's why prophets are not and cannot be political entities. They can't be the law: Because of the very nature of revelation -- which is much like a dream, as I understand it -- choice must -- MUST -- exist. Followers must be able to choose whether or not they follow a prophet's council. But also like dreams, a prophet's council only comes to fruition when acted upon by the members and it plays out in an empirical world.
One of the perhaps most well-known revelations known to members of Mormon culture happened when Mormon prophet President Wilford Woodruff (president from 1887 -- 1898) wrote the Manifesto testifying that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints had ceased the practice of plural marriage. As I understand the history, when members of the Church fought President Woodruff on this revelation that the practice was to cease, he told them that he had seen two visions: One in which the practice continued and what would happen to the members of the church -- it was a vision of imprisonment and a ceasing of work for the dead -- and what would happen if the church ceased the practice -- it was a vision of the church moving forward.
President Woodruff decided to proclaim the practice over so the church could move forward. Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints who wished to choose to move forward with the church adhered to the revelation of the prophet. Those who wished to not move forward with the church went their way. It is from these off-springs of the original Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints that group such as the Warren Jeffs organization have come. They have stayed in a non-sanctioned philsophy for some 100+ years leading to the situation that now exists for practicing polygamists who attach themselves to what they term to be Mormon doctrine which, in fact, is not so.
Another very well-known revelation -- well-known to Mormons -- in Mormon history is the June 1978 revelation by President Spencer W. Kimball (president from 1973-1985) that worthy persons of African descent were to receive the priesthood. Some members of the church fought this revelation and departed. Others rightly decided to move forward with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.
Prophets have given revelation about storing food for financial times of need and in the event of natural disasters. They have given revelation about not watching porn, not smoking, not drinking, and more. Every member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has the right to follow or not follow the revelations of a prophet, but many, many members can testify about how following the prophets' revelations have played out in beautiful ways in their empirical worlds.
Prophets in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints are not alone. They have two counselors who have had almost as much experience as they have had. There are also the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles with similar powers who help him. And then there are the Quorums of the Seventies who help. And then there are the stake presidents, and the many, many amazing bishops all over the world. And the mission presidents. And the quorums of priesthood holders in each ward or branch all over the world. And the missionaries themselves are powerhouses.
And then there are the women -- wives of these men and daughters and missionaries themselves and Relief Society Presidents and primary workers and more, more, more: Don't be fooled, women of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints have more power than any woman in any group in the world, in my opinion.
As Sheri Dew says about Mormon women, they are the Lord's secret weapon. Things are good for gals in this organization. I would explain how, but it's a secret :). If we're going to be accused of being a cult, I may as well take advantage of it sometimes.
But what is notable about prophets of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints not being alone is that it is easy for a church member to follow a prophet's suggestion simply because a Mormon prophet is not a random guy by himself holed up in a unidentified location's wooded back-country shed sending out information to some 13 million members about what to do. For readers who don't adhere to the logic that God is watching a prophet of God and dictating what he does, I offer the argument that many men of considerable world and church experience and their wives and more are watching what President Monson does every single day. Just among the 15 first presidency members and apostles alone, there is a former heart surgeon who attended Harvard, a man who ran a state-wide newspaper, a German pilot, a former Utah State Supreme Court justice, a lawyer who clerked for the federal judge who tried the Watergate scandals while they were being tried, and two former university presidents: one of Brigham Young University, Provo, and one of Brigham Young University, Idaho. I'm sure the histories of the other apostles and presidency members are equally amazing, I'm just not as familiar with those histories. I'm just saying that if President Monson were to feel inspired to tell the people to do something not sane, which he never would because he, himself, is amazing and sane, but if he were to make a mistake, one of these amazing men would say, "Are you sure?" A wall of men that one sees during biannual General Conferences of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints helps to testify of this truth of logic tempering inspiration. As once I heard General Relief Society President Bonnie Parker once testify, "Good information makes for good inspiration." Revelation does not mean that men of revelatory power do not use their minds.
This is partly why, in my opinion, the sustaining process in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is so important. Members of the church must sustain leaders. We do this by raising our right hands in meetings. Not a few people have supposed that this is a meaningless process: Not so. It gives every member of the church not the right to decide for the leadership, but, rather, to indicate that he or she is still agrees with what is going on.
Finally, it's important to know that the First Presidency and the Apostles and General Authories are not paid. Mormons pay tithing, but the tithing goes to the building of temples, meetings houses, and missionaries. Bishops in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints receive no salary at all for the many, many hours they contribute to others. The church is 100% voluntary. The prophet cannot benefit from giving a revelation that is politically or business slanted one way or the other.
August 23, 2008
4. Myth: Mormon Women Wear Gingham Dresses Over Jeans and Mormon Men Wear Checked Shirts, Jeans, and a Hat.
As always, I am not an official representative of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I believe the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is true. (This is a draft form of this subject.)
I have often marveled at the fact that Mormons simultaneously have managed to have a reputation of being both ritualistic, cult-like people and like the Amish. I'd rather be compared to the Amish, by far. I admire them. As a Mormon, I never know whether or not I will encounter a non-Mormon not familiar with Mormonism who believes that I'm great, I'm secretly doing cult-like activities, or I'm going home to churn butter. (Actually, I have had Mormon-churned butter before, as I recall: It's lovely.)
In the recent news, many pictures of a polygamist cult-like group who wear early 1900-style western frontier wear have created some confusion about who is a Mormon and who isn't. The polygamist group shown in the news are not Mormons, but, rather, a self-created spin-off group not connected to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints at all. I would say something light here, but many women, young women, young boys, and children are suffering in that organization. And they need assistance. I just don't have the heart to make fun of it.
Non-Mormons seem to have a perception that while Mormons feel good about themselves (ourselves), they (we) must not really understand how we fit in the world, and if they (we) did, they (we) would surely be embarrassed.
My friend and I were just talking of this: Mormons do not feel inferior to the rest of the world. At all. Sorry for the directness, but this perception is laughable. I think that many non-Mormons see Warren Jeffs's (and the "s's" is conventionally correct) followers and think they are Mormons. Most mainstream Mormons are a little more Steve Young in their self-perception and a little less downtrodden, sincerely abused person psychologically existing in the past. Again, I don't want to mock people who have been injured like Warren Jeffs's followers, but I want to be clear about who is who.
A friend of mine from a Catholic law school in Minneapolis had Mormon missionaries visit her home: I'm 99% positive she believed I sent them. I didn't. In her direct, but kind way, she explained to me that she had curtly sent them on their way. She had hoped they would be OK after her rejection. "They're fine," I laughed. I explained that many, many (some 53,000, I believe -- I think the for-sure number could be found at lds.org) missionaries serve for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. All of the guys I grew up with served missions: Japan; Greece; Portugal; Spain; Arizona (not a parallel construction in English, but a parallel construction in Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints mission lists); Washington State, Laotian-Speaking; Brazil; the Dominican Republic; Minnesota; France; South Korea; and more. It's a rite of passage. All worthy Mormon men of age 19 are expected to serve for two years, the location being selected by the Church. Worthy Mormon women have the choice to serve at the age of 21 for a year and a half. Two of my friends of youth who were girls served missions: one in Germany and the other in Spain. A collegue friend of mine with whom I also went to high school, but she was younger than I was so we didn't know each other as well when we were young, served in Argentina.
The very unique cultural landscape of Utah involves the complexity that while racially, we tend to be homogeneous -- although, that is beautifully changing -- many, many, many Mormons have served missions. So it is common, for instance, that the most ordinary man living down the street or working down the hall from you once lived in Mexico for two years and was fluent in Spanish: all over the state. For example, I worked down the hall from a science teacher at a junior high in Bountiful whom the kids loved. He also worked in construction before teaching science. He dressed simply and had a charming personality, and few would know that when he was 19, 20, and 21, he lived in Japan and was fluent in Japanese. Similar stories are true of many Utahns. As a teacher, if you need an artifact from, say, Argentina, or Ghana, or Brazil, or South Korea, it's easy to find with a few phone calls. This is a reality that many people outside of Utah perhaps don't understand about the culture here.
Not a few men here are bilingual or were at one time.
I don't think most Mormons feel inferior, even if they happen to don gingham and/or churn butter. (On a side some few weeks later after initially writing this blog: I live in a house my grandpa owns. Yesterday, I was digging through the storage room to find something and realized I had forgotten that we, yes, have an old red wood-handled and glass butter churn. Karma. Note to self: Don't mock people who think you might churn butter before checking to see if you have a butter churn in your very house. ;)
I think most members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints feel as though they are part of a marvelous work and a wonder.
I have often marveled at the fact that Mormons simultaneously have managed to have a reputation of being both ritualistic, cult-like people and like the Amish. I'd rather be compared to the Amish, by far. I admire them. As a Mormon, I never know whether or not I will encounter a non-Mormon not familiar with Mormonism who believes that I'm great, I'm secretly doing cult-like activities, or I'm going home to churn butter. (Actually, I have had Mormon-churned butter before, as I recall: It's lovely.)
In the recent news, many pictures of a polygamist cult-like group who wear early 1900-style western frontier wear have created some confusion about who is a Mormon and who isn't. The polygamist group shown in the news are not Mormons, but, rather, a self-created spin-off group not connected to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints at all. I would say something light here, but many women, young women, young boys, and children are suffering in that organization. And they need assistance. I just don't have the heart to make fun of it.
Non-Mormons seem to have a perception that while Mormons feel good about themselves (ourselves), they (we) must not really understand how we fit in the world, and if they (we) did, they (we) would surely be embarrassed.
My friend and I were just talking of this: Mormons do not feel inferior to the rest of the world. At all. Sorry for the directness, but this perception is laughable. I think that many non-Mormons see Warren Jeffs's (and the "s's" is conventionally correct) followers and think they are Mormons. Most mainstream Mormons are a little more Steve Young in their self-perception and a little less downtrodden, sincerely abused person psychologically existing in the past. Again, I don't want to mock people who have been injured like Warren Jeffs's followers, but I want to be clear about who is who.
A friend of mine from a Catholic law school in Minneapolis had Mormon missionaries visit her home: I'm 99% positive she believed I sent them. I didn't. In her direct, but kind way, she explained to me that she had curtly sent them on their way. She had hoped they would be OK after her rejection. "They're fine," I laughed. I explained that many, many (some 53,000, I believe -- I think the for-sure number could be found at lds.org) missionaries serve for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. All of the guys I grew up with served missions: Japan; Greece; Portugal; Spain; Arizona (not a parallel construction in English, but a parallel construction in Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints mission lists); Washington State, Laotian-Speaking; Brazil; the Dominican Republic; Minnesota; France; South Korea; and more. It's a rite of passage. All worthy Mormon men of age 19 are expected to serve for two years, the location being selected by the Church. Worthy Mormon women have the choice to serve at the age of 21 for a year and a half. Two of my friends of youth who were girls served missions: one in Germany and the other in Spain. A collegue friend of mine with whom I also went to high school, but she was younger than I was so we didn't know each other as well when we were young, served in Argentina.
The very unique cultural landscape of Utah involves the complexity that while racially, we tend to be homogeneous -- although, that is beautifully changing -- many, many, many Mormons have served missions. So it is common, for instance, that the most ordinary man living down the street or working down the hall from you once lived in Mexico for two years and was fluent in Spanish: all over the state. For example, I worked down the hall from a science teacher at a junior high in Bountiful whom the kids loved. He also worked in construction before teaching science. He dressed simply and had a charming personality, and few would know that when he was 19, 20, and 21, he lived in Japan and was fluent in Japanese. Similar stories are true of many Utahns. As a teacher, if you need an artifact from, say, Argentina, or Ghana, or Brazil, or South Korea, it's easy to find with a few phone calls. This is a reality that many people outside of Utah perhaps don't understand about the culture here.
Not a few men here are bilingual or were at one time.
I don't think most Mormons feel inferior, even if they happen to don gingham and/or churn butter. (On a side some few weeks later after initially writing this blog: I live in a house my grandpa owns. Yesterday, I was digging through the storage room to find something and realized I had forgotten that we, yes, have an old red wood-handled and glass butter churn. Karma. Note to self: Don't mock people who think you might churn butter before checking to see if you have a butter churn in your very house. ;)
I think most members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints feel as though they are part of a marvelous work and a wonder.
August 15, 2008
3. Myth: All Mormons Are Cheery All the Time
As always (these blogs are meant to be read from the bottom up), I am not an official representative of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. This is the third blog of a list of blogs outlined at the bottom discussing ten myths non-Mormons appear to have about Mormons and Mormonism.
All Mormons are not Donny and Marie Osmond, who are lovely people.
All Mormons are not Donny and Marie Osmond, who are lovely people.
August 06, 2008
2. Myth: Mormons Have Horns on Their Heads
(This is in draft form for now.) As always, I am not an official representative of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I am a member and believe the doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is true.
The claim that Mormons have horns on their heads obviously is a super fun and ludicrous claim and not believed by any reasonable human being regardless of what he or she thinks about Mormons otherwise. Nonetheless, I have heard it joked that outsiders have thought this before: Perhaps this is a myth spread to indicate that we are somewhat cult-like. I should scratch my head in a notable fashion from time to time to help perpetuate this funny thought (but that would be naughty).
Mormonism is not a cult. I have never once met members of the church (or anyone, for that matter) in a secret meeting in the woods for a bonfire: I have had bonfires in the woods on camping trips or with friends for a weekend bonfire trip, but they were in the open and we made s'mores, etc. Unlike cult-like groups, a Mormon wearing red is someone who perhaps just looks good in red. Or feels like it. Likewise with any color under the sun. Yes, symbolism is very important in Mormonism, which may bring to mind cult-like activities, but I would argue that symbolism is important in Catholicism, the Islam faith, other Judeo-Christian traditions (which Christian tradition best describes Mormonism, although, Mormonism also has many Eastern aspects in my opinion), the Jewish faith, etc.
And I will discuss this more when I discuss how I understand Mormonism to fit into Christianity, but for now I'll just write that Mormons consider themselves as members of the House of Israel. LeGrand Richards best explains this concept in his book A Marvelous Work and Wonder on pages 208-210 (not quoted here because I'm unsure of the copyright restrictions on blogs). The basic gist of the concept comes from the fact that before the meridian of time (when Christ was in the flesh --when B.C. changed to A.D.), the House of Israel developed into two kingdoms: the Kingdom of Israel -- ten of the twelve tribes of Israel that dwelt in the northern part of the House of Israel's original whole territory -- and the Kingdom of Judah -- the tribe of Judah and a small part of the tribe of Benjamin, as I understand it, who occupied the southern part of the original territory of the House of Israel.
The Bible explains that the Kingdom of Israel was conquered by countries in the north and, we can assume, were assimilated into those peoples. LeGrand Richards explains that general knowledge today supports the idea that the "House of Israel" is only the tribe of Judah, which isn't Biblically consistent. It is true that at Christ's birth, the only political entity left connected to the House of Israel was the Kingdom of Judah. Nonetheless, the House of Israel consists of twelve tribes -- and, there are technically thirteen tribes if the researcher counts Joseph's sons Ephraim's and Manassah's descendants as two separate tribes. Mormonism is connected to this Biblical history as follows:
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has a three-fold mission: 1) to perfect the Saints, 2) to proclaim the gospel, and 3) to redeem the dead.
Proclaiming the gospel is an effort to gather Israel.
I think two things most make non-Mormons feel that Mormonism is a cult: the gathering of Israel and temple worship.
The gathering of Israel is literal, but not political, is my understanding, until Christ comes (more later in another blog). The Book of Matthew in the King James version of the Bible informs readers of the following:
Matthew 24:23-27
23. Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
24. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
25. Behold, I have told you before.
26. Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold he [Christ] is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
27. For as the lightening cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
The eighth Article of Faith for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints states:
8. We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.
It is my understanding that the second coming of Jesus Christ as a political leader will be evident to everyone, and if it is not evident to everyone, it has not happened and will not happen by members of the Church. I have jokingly told my family and friends of what I refer to as the George Will Standard (of the Second Coming). I like to read and emulate great contemporary and historical writers: Excluding the obvious writing heroes of mine such as Fitzgerald, Emerson, Hawthorne, Dostoevsky, Cather, etc., for a long time I was a dedicated Dave Barry fan and when he retired, I moved my eyes to the right and read a George Will article and he has been my most recent writer of interest. When I was little, for instance, I loved writers such as Madeline L'Engle, etc. I view Mr. Will as one of the most logical men on the planet. My George Will Standard is this: If Mr. Will (and myself, as a Mormon, I playfully add to my family and friends -- and I don't know Mr. Will at all: I have never met him once) does not agree that Christ has split the sky with a chariot of fire and descended on the Earth in glory, and anyone else does not agree that this is true, then no person claiming to be Christ is nor can claim political power as such. The scriptures tell us that all -- all -- will confess that Jesus is the Christ at the judgment day: I think this also applies to the second coming of Christ. Again, it is my understanding that if there is even one person on earth who says that any given person is not the Christ, the second coming has not occurred. (Mind you, if Mr. Will, his talented wife, and family become Mormons, then the George Will standard could become the someone else standard. Which thought leads me to another point: Anyone -- Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Catholics, members of the Baha'i faith, Punjabi Sikhs, etc. -- anyone can become a member of the House of Israel through conversion. This is a longer topic than I have time for now.)
As a result, it is not necessary for non-Mormons to worry that Mormons are secretly meeting to plan the next world leader. Our doctrine does not support such a thing. If a Mormon is running for the President of the United States (and, for the record, I've been supporting Senator Obama while still thinking that Mitt Romney is a very nice and talented man -- again, not all Mormons support only Mormon candidates), it is because he wants to and others think he (or she) can lead and not because Mormons are planning on getting a president in office and then raising up a New Jerusalem in Missouri and making him king: You may laugh, but I'm pretty sure there are some who think that's what's going on in our heads (that do not have horns).
We do believe in the literal building of a New Jerusalem, but it is less imposing than it sounds. It is a little more like a New York than an Atlantis. And certainly not like an Alamo.
In relation to the second concern I think people most have about Mormons, temple worship is simply an outward physical indicator of an inward commitment: I view it much like the physical paper on which a marriage license is written being an outward indicator of an inward commitment, to steal a phrasing from Mormon Elder Bednar, a member of the Twelve Apostles of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (but he used the phrase in relation to something else, a compass in the Book of Mormon -- which instigates an even longer blog idea in my mind). In fact, the KJV Bible compares Christ's church to a bride and Christ as the bridegroom.
Mormons are not cult members: I find that most cult myths exist about Mormons because people just lack a little fact here or there.
The claim that Mormons have horns on their heads obviously is a super fun and ludicrous claim and not believed by any reasonable human being regardless of what he or she thinks about Mormons otherwise. Nonetheless, I have heard it joked that outsiders have thought this before: Perhaps this is a myth spread to indicate that we are somewhat cult-like. I should scratch my head in a notable fashion from time to time to help perpetuate this funny thought (but that would be naughty).
Mormonism is not a cult. I have never once met members of the church (or anyone, for that matter) in a secret meeting in the woods for a bonfire: I have had bonfires in the woods on camping trips or with friends for a weekend bonfire trip, but they were in the open and we made s'mores, etc. Unlike cult-like groups, a Mormon wearing red is someone who perhaps just looks good in red. Or feels like it. Likewise with any color under the sun. Yes, symbolism is very important in Mormonism, which may bring to mind cult-like activities, but I would argue that symbolism is important in Catholicism, the Islam faith, other Judeo-Christian traditions (which Christian tradition best describes Mormonism, although, Mormonism also has many Eastern aspects in my opinion), the Jewish faith, etc.
And I will discuss this more when I discuss how I understand Mormonism to fit into Christianity, but for now I'll just write that Mormons consider themselves as members of the House of Israel. LeGrand Richards best explains this concept in his book A Marvelous Work and Wonder on pages 208-210 (not quoted here because I'm unsure of the copyright restrictions on blogs). The basic gist of the concept comes from the fact that before the meridian of time (when Christ was in the flesh --when B.C. changed to A.D.), the House of Israel developed into two kingdoms: the Kingdom of Israel -- ten of the twelve tribes of Israel that dwelt in the northern part of the House of Israel's original whole territory -- and the Kingdom of Judah -- the tribe of Judah and a small part of the tribe of Benjamin, as I understand it, who occupied the southern part of the original territory of the House of Israel.
The Bible explains that the Kingdom of Israel was conquered by countries in the north and, we can assume, were assimilated into those peoples. LeGrand Richards explains that general knowledge today supports the idea that the "House of Israel" is only the tribe of Judah, which isn't Biblically consistent. It is true that at Christ's birth, the only political entity left connected to the House of Israel was the Kingdom of Judah. Nonetheless, the House of Israel consists of twelve tribes -- and, there are technically thirteen tribes if the researcher counts Joseph's sons Ephraim's and Manassah's descendants as two separate tribes. Mormonism is connected to this Biblical history as follows:
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has a three-fold mission: 1) to perfect the Saints, 2) to proclaim the gospel, and 3) to redeem the dead.
Proclaiming the gospel is an effort to gather Israel.
I think two things most make non-Mormons feel that Mormonism is a cult: the gathering of Israel and temple worship.
The gathering of Israel is literal, but not political, is my understanding, until Christ comes (more later in another blog). The Book of Matthew in the King James version of the Bible informs readers of the following:
Matthew 24:23-27
23. Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
24. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
25. Behold, I have told you before.
26. Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold he [Christ] is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
27. For as the lightening cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
The eighth Article of Faith for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints states:
8. We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.
It is my understanding that the second coming of Jesus Christ as a political leader will be evident to everyone, and if it is not evident to everyone, it has not happened and will not happen by members of the Church. I have jokingly told my family and friends of what I refer to as the George Will Standard (of the Second Coming). I like to read and emulate great contemporary and historical writers: Excluding the obvious writing heroes of mine such as Fitzgerald, Emerson, Hawthorne, Dostoevsky, Cather, etc., for a long time I was a dedicated Dave Barry fan and when he retired, I moved my eyes to the right and read a George Will article and he has been my most recent writer of interest. When I was little, for instance, I loved writers such as Madeline L'Engle, etc. I view Mr. Will as one of the most logical men on the planet. My George Will Standard is this: If Mr. Will (and myself, as a Mormon, I playfully add to my family and friends -- and I don't know Mr. Will at all: I have never met him once) does not agree that Christ has split the sky with a chariot of fire and descended on the Earth in glory, and anyone else does not agree that this is true, then no person claiming to be Christ is nor can claim political power as such. The scriptures tell us that all -- all -- will confess that Jesus is the Christ at the judgment day: I think this also applies to the second coming of Christ. Again, it is my understanding that if there is even one person on earth who says that any given person is not the Christ, the second coming has not occurred. (Mind you, if Mr. Will, his talented wife, and family become Mormons, then the George Will standard could become the someone else standard. Which thought leads me to another point: Anyone -- Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Catholics, members of the Baha'i faith, Punjabi Sikhs, etc. -- anyone can become a member of the House of Israel through conversion. This is a longer topic than I have time for now.)
As a result, it is not necessary for non-Mormons to worry that Mormons are secretly meeting to plan the next world leader. Our doctrine does not support such a thing. If a Mormon is running for the President of the United States (and, for the record, I've been supporting Senator Obama while still thinking that Mitt Romney is a very nice and talented man -- again, not all Mormons support only Mormon candidates), it is because he wants to and others think he (or she) can lead and not because Mormons are planning on getting a president in office and then raising up a New Jerusalem in Missouri and making him king: You may laugh, but I'm pretty sure there are some who think that's what's going on in our heads (that do not have horns).
We do believe in the literal building of a New Jerusalem, but it is less imposing than it sounds. It is a little more like a New York than an Atlantis. And certainly not like an Alamo.
In relation to the second concern I think people most have about Mormons, temple worship is simply an outward physical indicator of an inward commitment: I view it much like the physical paper on which a marriage license is written being an outward indicator of an inward commitment, to steal a phrasing from Mormon Elder Bednar, a member of the Twelve Apostles of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (but he used the phrase in relation to something else, a compass in the Book of Mormon -- which instigates an even longer blog idea in my mind). In fact, the KJV Bible compares Christ's church to a bride and Christ as the bridegroom.
Mormons are not cult members: I find that most cult myths exist about Mormons because people just lack a little fact here or there.
August 02, 2008
1. Myth: Polygamy is Still Practiced by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
I am not an official representative of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Also, I think the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is the only true church. While I believe that many truths exist in other religions, I believe that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has the fulness of the gospel.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints no longer practices polygamy. Some religious, but not legal, complexities exist in the church because men and women are sealed together in temples in a marriage ceremony (which broads aspects, but not specifics, are generally known to the public) to each other and to God for eternity: Some men are still sealed to more than one woman in situations where death or divorce have occured.
A widower who wishes to be sealed to a second wife can do so. A divorced man who wishes to be sealed to another woman in this life can do so by either having the first sealing cancelled by the authorities of the church or by getting written permission from his wife whom he's divorced and permission from the authorities of the church (is my understanding).
This does not create a legally polygamist situation: The first wife is still legally separated from the husband even if she is still sealed to him, and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints upholds the law of each land always.
I asked the temple president of the St. Paul, Minnesota, Temple of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints if a religiously sealed but legally divorced wife who left a sealing in place by giving permission to her ex-husband to be sealed to another woman in order still be sealed to her children, who also felt that she no longer, though, wanted to be sealed to her husband, was considered still religiously bound to her husband: The temple president responded that a sealing is a sealing and not a binding, was said or implied. The temple president told me that it was his understanding that the minute one of two people wishes to no longer be sealed, the sealing is no longer in place. The temple president's general message to me was that a sealing is a blessing and not a curse. His answer to me was that if such a woman left her sealing in place and wanted to be sealed to her children but not to her ex-husband, so it was.
This would be in accordance with the in-house (to Mormons) oft-quoted verses of the text of Doctrine and Covenants 121:33-46:
33. How long can rolling waters remain impure? What power shall stay the heavens? As well might man stretch forth his puny arm to stop the Missouri river in its decreed course, or to turn it up stream, as to hinder the Almighty from pouring down knowledge from heaven upon the heads of the Latter-Day Saints.
34. Behold, there are many called, but few are chosen. And why are they not chosen?
35. Because their hearts are set so much upon the things of this world, and aspire to the honors of men, that they do not learn this one lesson--
36. That the rights of the priesthood are inserparably connected with the powers of
heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness.
37. That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.
38. Behold, ere he is aware, he is left unto himself, to kick against the pricks, to persecute the saints, and to fight against God.
39. We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.
40. Hence many are called, but few are chosen.
41. No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;
42. By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile--
43. Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him who thou hast reproved, lest he estemm thee to be his enemy;
44. That he may know that they faithfulness is stronger than the cords of death.
45. Let thy bowels also be full of charity towards all men, and to the household of faith, and let virtue garnish thy thoughts unceasingly; then shall thy confidence wax strong in the presence of God; and the doctrine of the priesthood shall distill upon thy soul as the dews from heaven.
46. The Holy Ghost shall be thy constant companion, and thy scepter an unchanging scepter of righteousness and truth; and they dominion shall be an everlasting dominion, and without compulsory means it shall flow unto thee forever and ever.
I am sure that there are some who abuse the concept of sealings in their minds as still being in a polygamist relationship. Regardless of the beliefs of individual members, a man who has a physical relationship with a woman to whom he is sealed but not married would be considered an adulterer.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints does uphold the practice that men can be sealed to more than woman, which is pragmatical given situations of divorce and death. I individually sustain that, which choice to sustain or not sustain belongs to each member.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints no longer practices polygamy. Some religious, but not legal, complexities exist in the church because men and women are sealed together in temples in a marriage ceremony (which broads aspects, but not specifics, are generally known to the public) to each other and to God for eternity: Some men are still sealed to more than one woman in situations where death or divorce have occured.
A widower who wishes to be sealed to a second wife can do so. A divorced man who wishes to be sealed to another woman in this life can do so by either having the first sealing cancelled by the authorities of the church or by getting written permission from his wife whom he's divorced and permission from the authorities of the church (is my understanding).
This does not create a legally polygamist situation: The first wife is still legally separated from the husband even if she is still sealed to him, and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints upholds the law of each land always.
I asked the temple president of the St. Paul, Minnesota, Temple of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints if a religiously sealed but legally divorced wife who left a sealing in place by giving permission to her ex-husband to be sealed to another woman in order still be sealed to her children, who also felt that she no longer, though, wanted to be sealed to her husband, was considered still religiously bound to her husband: The temple president responded that a sealing is a sealing and not a binding, was said or implied. The temple president told me that it was his understanding that the minute one of two people wishes to no longer be sealed, the sealing is no longer in place. The temple president's general message to me was that a sealing is a blessing and not a curse. His answer to me was that if such a woman left her sealing in place and wanted to be sealed to her children but not to her ex-husband, so it was.
This would be in accordance with the in-house (to Mormons) oft-quoted verses of the text of Doctrine and Covenants 121:33-46:
33. How long can rolling waters remain impure? What power shall stay the heavens? As well might man stretch forth his puny arm to stop the Missouri river in its decreed course, or to turn it up stream, as to hinder the Almighty from pouring down knowledge from heaven upon the heads of the Latter-Day Saints.
34. Behold, there are many called, but few are chosen. And why are they not chosen?
35. Because their hearts are set so much upon the things of this world, and aspire to the honors of men, that they do not learn this one lesson--
36. That the rights of the priesthood are inserparably connected with the powers of
heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness.
37. That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.
38. Behold, ere he is aware, he is left unto himself, to kick against the pricks, to persecute the saints, and to fight against God.
39. We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.
40. Hence many are called, but few are chosen.
41. No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;
42. By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile--
43. Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him who thou hast reproved, lest he estemm thee to be his enemy;
44. That he may know that they faithfulness is stronger than the cords of death.
45. Let thy bowels also be full of charity towards all men, and to the household of faith, and let virtue garnish thy thoughts unceasingly; then shall thy confidence wax strong in the presence of God; and the doctrine of the priesthood shall distill upon thy soul as the dews from heaven.
46. The Holy Ghost shall be thy constant companion, and thy scepter an unchanging scepter of righteousness and truth; and they dominion shall be an everlasting dominion, and without compulsory means it shall flow unto thee forever and ever.
I am sure that there are some who abuse the concept of sealings in their minds as still being in a polygamist relationship. Regardless of the beliefs of individual members, a man who has a physical relationship with a woman to whom he is sealed but not married would be considered an adulterer.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints does uphold the practice that men can be sealed to more than woman, which is pragmatical given situations of divorce and death. I individually sustain that, which choice to sustain or not sustain belongs to each member.
July 28, 2008
Understanding Mormonism
I'm not an official representative of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.
Last winter, I decided that I wanted to better understand the issues that exist in the Middle East, and I purchased a copy of the text An Idiot's Guide to Understanding Islam. I've been thinking since then that such a text should exist for Mormonism, if it doesn't already.
My experiences have led me to believe that not a few myths exist about Mormonism.
I've been thinking I'd like to journal about Mormonism: What it is to me; What it isn't to me; What I think others think it is; etc. It seems to me that many non-Mormons filter thoughts about Mormons through some not-necessarily-true assumptions already in place. What are these assumptions? Are some of them correct? Which ones are incorrect? How does Mormonism fit into Christianity? I think my journaling this summer will attempt to answer these questions as a fun exercise.
Top Ten Myths/Falsities About Mormons:
1. Polygamy is still practiced by the proper Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.
2. Mormons have horns on their heads.
3. All Mormons are cheery all the time.
4. Mormon women wear gingham dresses over jeans and Mormon men wear checked shirts, jeans, and a hat.
5. A Mormon prophet is followed without judgment on the part of the followers.
6. The members of the Mormon church would follow a prophet's orders over the law of the land.
7. The members of the Mormon church are hoping to establish a political kingdom known as Zion.
8. The members of the Mormon church support only Mormon political candidates.
9. The members of the Mormon church are segregationist.
10. The members of the Mormon church are not Christians.
I may journal about each of these in the next weeks.
Last winter, I decided that I wanted to better understand the issues that exist in the Middle East, and I purchased a copy of the text An Idiot's Guide to Understanding Islam. I've been thinking since then that such a text should exist for Mormonism, if it doesn't already.
My experiences have led me to believe that not a few myths exist about Mormonism.
I've been thinking I'd like to journal about Mormonism: What it is to me; What it isn't to me; What I think others think it is; etc. It seems to me that many non-Mormons filter thoughts about Mormons through some not-necessarily-true assumptions already in place. What are these assumptions? Are some of them correct? Which ones are incorrect? How does Mormonism fit into Christianity? I think my journaling this summer will attempt to answer these questions as a fun exercise.
Top Ten Myths/Falsities About Mormons:
1. Polygamy is still practiced by the proper Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.
2. Mormons have horns on their heads.
3. All Mormons are cheery all the time.
4. Mormon women wear gingham dresses over jeans and Mormon men wear checked shirts, jeans, and a hat.
5. A Mormon prophet is followed without judgment on the part of the followers.
6. The members of the Mormon church would follow a prophet's orders over the law of the land.
7. The members of the Mormon church are hoping to establish a political kingdom known as Zion.
8. The members of the Mormon church support only Mormon political candidates.
9. The members of the Mormon church are segregationist.
10. The members of the Mormon church are not Christians.
I may journal about each of these in the next weeks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
