Are we enemies?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
User avatar
Runtu
God
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm

Are we enemies?

Post by Runtu »

asbestosman mentioned in another thread his philosophy for dealing with enemies, and I realized that I don't consider anyone here my enemy, and I do not consider myself anyone's enemy. I am also not an enemy to the church. I have a calling, which I do to the best of my ability, even though I do not believe in the church. Yes, sometimes I vent my frustrations toward the church, but I don't hate it, and I don't wish it would cease to exist.

For the record, I think the church works for some people. I know a lot of people who would be far worse off if they did not have Mormonism in their lives. I don't believe I'm one of those people, but I don't begrudge them for getting something out of the religion that I don't.

What do you think? Are we enemies, or just people who disagree passionately?

User avatar
Rollo Tomasi
God
Posts: 4085
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:27 am

Re: Are we enemies?

Post by Rollo Tomasi »

Runtu wrote:For the record, I think the church works for some people. I know a lot of people who would be far worse off if they did not have Mormonism in their lives. I don't believe I'm one of those people, but I don't begrudge them for getting something out of the religion that I don't.

What do you think? Are we enemies, or just people who disagree passionately?

I don't view those who disagree with me as my "enemy." I guess I'm fiercely libertarian in the sense that, in general, anyone should be able to say anything at anytime; that the core of being a human being is to think and talk as you like. I can't be angry at anyone who speaks their true feelings and opinions.
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."

-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)

User avatar
Southern Redneck
Star A
Posts: 86
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 8:41 pm

Re: Are we enemies?

Post by Southern Redneck »

Rollo Tomasi wrote:
Runtu wrote:For the record, I think the church works for some people. I know a lot of people who would be far worse off if they did not have Mormonism in their lives. I don't believe I'm one of those people, but I don't begrudge them for getting something out of the religion that I don't.

What do you think? Are we enemies, or just people who disagree passionately?

I don't view those who disagree with me as my "enemy." I guess I'm fiercely libertarian in the sense that, in general, anyone should be able to say anything at anytime; that the core of being a human being is to think and talk as you like. I can't be angry at anyone who speaks their true feelings and opinions.
That is one of the things that has bothered me about the Mormon outlook that I have experienced since coming out as a non-believer. That this somehow translates as me hating the church and all of it's members. They use the term "anger" or "angry" to push us aside.

Far from it. I find that I am more mello then ever, and finding that it is easier to feel love for those whom I previousely didn't.

I feel the doctrine and culture of the church does much damage, but that does not equal me hating the church or members.

are we enemies? No.

User avatar
OUT OF MY MISERY
Savior (mortal ministry)
Posts: 922
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 8:32 am

Post by OUT OF MY MISERY »

If anyone has been reading my posts they already knw my answer we are not enemies.

I as Rollo do not like when they use my anger as an excuse not to listen to me.

anyone will tell you never disrepect my anger because you don't not want to deal with my feminist viewpoint.!!!!!!

I am a angry feminist does anyone really wonder why????

Cause you will be sorry as many of you have found out when you call me dumb.
When I wake up I will be hungry....but this feels so good right now aaahhhhhh........

harmony
God
Posts: 18195
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:35 pm

Post by harmony »

Mormons view the world as Us against Them. And, as our leaders regularly remind us, if you aren't with Us, you're with Them. Mormons are especially hard on those who have rejected church membership. In the old days, we had Blood Atonement, actual killing of apostates. Then we just did it symbolically in the temple. Now we just shun and ridicule them. Mormons can feel pity for the Them who have never been members, because they've never had the privilege of knowing what Mormons feel is the Truth (capitalized). Mormons can't deal with former members who have forsaken their covenants and prefer the darkness to the Mormon light. So they either kill them, pantomine killing them, or cut them out of their lives.

And we are the Enemy Them, even if we're still members. All or nothing, black or white. There is no middle ground.

User avatar
wenglund
God
Posts: 4947
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:25 pm

Post by wenglund »

Do you folks consider yourselves as periodic adversaries, or opponents, or foes of the CoJCoLDS?

What would an "enemy" of the Church look like to you?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

User avatar
asbestosman
God
Posts: 6215
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 4:32 pm

Re: Are we enemies?

Post by asbestosman »

Runtu wrote:What do you think? Are we enemies, or just people who disagree passionately?


We are not enemies. However, I still find that scripture about being kind to enemies useful becuase it shows that kindness is useful even toward them (so why not toward everyone). The second scripture I quoted shows how to reprove friends. That one is far more applicable.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
I support NCMO

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22509
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Post by moksha »

With some of the hash that has been flung around here lately, I could have sworn a few were avowed enemies of others. If this is not the case, then perhaps it is time to retract our collective claws and simply enter into civil disagreement.

By the way, I applaud Rollo for being a fierce libertarian. Someone needs to defend the Dewey Decimal System.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

Mister Scratch
Master Mahan
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 2:13 pm

Post by Mister Scratch »

I personally do not consider myself an enemy of the Church. I would like to see the Church improve in some areas, though.

rcrocket

Post by rcrocket »

But you are the enemy.

Posting anonymously challenges and attacks upon the Church makes you antithetical to the Church's mission. You are out of harmony; you oppose the Brethren, the only legitimate representations of the Lord Jesus Christ on this earth. That you do so anonymously makes you cowardly. That some of you do so anonymously and are otherwise active in the Church makes you hypocritical cowards. That some of you do so anonymously, are active, and tell us all that you are active makes you true enemies, for the best enemy comes from within. (1 John 2:19 ["they went out from us, but they were not of us"].)

Rollie makes the point that he is a libertarian and he ought to say what he wants without consequence. That certainly sparked my interest. I am a libertarian. I support libertarian causes. One of my partners is on the board of trustees of one of the nation’s best-known libertarian organizations. I think I know whereof I speak, even though my live-and-let-live philosophy may not square with the typical LDS political philosophy.

But, libertarianism does not teach that one can say what one wants without the consequences that follow. Libertarian thought pertains to one's relationship with government, not to one's church or Elk’s Club, or Gay Rights’ Club. A fundamental point of libertarianism is the freedom of association; the ability to associate with others of like mind and thought, and the power to include or exclude without force or compulsion from government. You all, and especially Rollie (who in the past has subscribed somewhat to the notion of using government compulsion to force a change in the Church – tax laws), have thoroughly confused the right to say what you want with the right to be critical of a First Amendment organization and remain in good standing therein.

Nor does labeling you the enemy necessarily imply that the Church is a hate-monger. Although I can easily see the language and actions of hate on both sides, you who are enemies of the Church simply assume at all times that the disagreement with your actions by those among the faithful are the acts of those who hate. I don’t think the Savior’s repeated denunciation of hypocrites means that he hated them.

The best course of conduct if you doubt is to adopt the Gamaliel solution.
Last edited by rcrocket on Fri Nov 10, 2006 1:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

christopher
Valiant A
Posts: 177
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 8:17 am

Post by christopher »

Plutarch wrote:... you oppose the Brethren, the only legitimate representations of the Lord Jesus Christ on this earth.


Stupid ass statements like the above, which polarize friends and families, and do not allow for common ground, are the reason that I would gladly wear the title of enemy of "the church".


Chris <><

christopher
Valiant A
Posts: 177
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 8:17 am

Re: Are we enemies?

Post by christopher »

Rollo Tomasi wrote: I can't be angry at anyone who speaks their true feelings and opinions.


I can....think NAMBLA


Chris <><

rcrocket

Post by rcrocket »

christopher wrote:
Plutarch wrote:... you oppose the Brethren, the only legitimate representations of the Lord Jesus Christ on this earth.


Stupid ass statements like the above, which polarize friends and families, and do not allow for common ground, are the reason that I would gladly wear the title of enemy of "the church".


Chris <><


Well, there are some on this thread who dispute they are enemies, so my comment was not directed to you.

"Common ground" is really a hard thing to find amongst orthodox believers of any religion. But, it is a fundamental belief of the Church that Gordon B. Hinckley is the only man on earth who holds all of the keys of the Lord Jesus Christ. Without that belief one should not be baptized, receive the Melchizedek Priesthood, or attend the temple.

P

harmony
God
Posts: 18195
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:35 pm

Post by harmony »

The best course of conduct if you doubt is to adopt the Gamaliel solution.


For those who don't know, the Gamaliel Solution is "leave well alone and let God do the sorting out". All very well and good, except for another time-honored saying: "All that is required for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing." I will not sit by and watch my church descend into mediocrity and lukewarmness. Call me a crusader, but I will continue to do as I do, and if that means suffering the slings and arrows of P and his friends, so be it.

rcrocket

Post by rcrocket »

harmony wrote:
The best course of conduct if you doubt is to adopt the Gamaliel solution.


For those who don't know, the Gamaliel Solution is "leave well alone and let God do the sorting out". All very well and good, except for another time-honored saying: "All that is required for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing." I will not sit by and watch my church descend into mediocrity and lukewarmness. Call me a crusader, but I will continue to do as I do, and if that means suffering the slings and arrows of P and his friends, so be it.


Anonymity evokes the language of a coward. I, thus, cannot call you a crusader.

P

User avatar
Runtu
God
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm

Post by Runtu »

Plutarch wrote:But you are the enemy.

Posting anonymously challenges and attacks upon the Church makes you antithetical to the Church's mission. You are out of harmony; you oppose the Brethren, the only legitimate representations of the Lord Jesus Christ on this earth. That you do so anonymously makes you cowardly. That some of you do so anonymously and are otherwise active in the Church makes you hypocritical cowards. That some of you do so anonymously, are active, and tell us all that you are active makes you true enemies, for the best enemy comes from within. (1 John 2:19 ["they went out from us, but they were not of us"].)

Rollie makes the point that he is a libertarian and he ought to say what he wants without consequence. That certainly sparked my interest. I am a libertarian. I support libertarian causes. One of my partners is on the board of trustees of one of the nation’s best-known libertarian organizations. I think I know whereof I speak, even though my live-and-let-live philosophy may not square with the typical LDS political philosophy.

But, libertarianism does not teach that one can say what one wants without the consequences that follow. Libertarian thought pertains to one's relationship with government, not to one's church or Elk’s Club, or Gay Rights’ Club. A fundamental point of libertarianism is the freedom of association; the ability to associate with others of like mind and thought, and the power to include or exclude without force or compulsion from government. You all, and especially Rollie (who in the past has subscribed somewhat to the notion of using government compulsion to force a change in the Church – tax laws), have thoroughly confused the right to say what you want with the right to be critical of a First Amendment organization and remain in good standing therein.

Nor does labeling you the enemy necessarily imply that the Church is a hate-monger. Although I can easily see the language and actions of hate on both sides, you who are enemies of the Church simply assume at all times that the disagreement with your actions by those among the faithful are the acts of those who hate. I don’t think the Savior’s repeated denunciation of hypocrites means that he hated them.

The best course of conduct if you doubt is to adopt the Gamaliel solution.


Wow, this post really breaks my heart, Plutarch. I have never assumed that church members who disagree with me hate me (some probably do, but that's beside the point). So, I guess I can count at least one enemy here.

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22509
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Post by moksha »

Plutarch wrote: But, it is a fundamental belief of the Church that Gordon B. Hinckley is the only man on earth who holds all of the keys of the Lord Jesus Christ.


Can he perform a resurection? Can he grant salvation?
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

rcrocket

Post by rcrocket »

moksha wrote:
Plutarch wrote: But, it is a fundamental belief of the Church that Gordon B. Hinckley is the only man on earth who holds all of the keys of the Lord Jesus Christ.


Can he perform a resurection? Can he grant salvation?


Could St. Peter?

rcrocket

Post by rcrocket »

Runtu wrote:Wow, this post really breaks my heart, Plutarch. I have never assumed that church members who disagree with me hate me (some probably do, but that's beside the point). So, I guess I can count at least one enemy here.


Gee. Where did I ever say that?

User avatar
Runtu
God
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm

Post by Runtu »

Sorry if I misread you, but you said this (among other things):

you who are enemies of the Church simply assume at all times that the disagreement with your actions by those among the faithful are the acts of those who hate.


As I said, I have never assumed that. I don't hate you, and I am not your enemy.

User avatar
wenglund
God
Posts: 4947
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:25 pm

Post by wenglund »

I think Plutarch is correct in suggesting that many here wish to evade personal responsibility and accountability--to the point of not even honestly acknowledging they are periodic adversaries, or opponents, or foes of the CoJCoLDS (connotations and synonyms for the word "enemy").

In fact, I think much of the opposition to the Church is due to a lack of open and honest introspection and an averson to taking personal responsibility for difficulties and challeges experienced in the Church.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Post Reply