From: wcsa@cbnews.cb.att.com (Willard C. Smith)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: AR ANSWERING
Summary: CONTEXT IF YOU PLEASE.
Date: 21 Dec 92 12:40:46 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs

In article <a8n602ry2fMp01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> agr00@juts.ccc.amdahl.com (TONY ROSE) writes:

|Your statements are amazing.  During the time of Brigham Young several
|individuals considered his words so important that they DIED to show
|their acceptance of this teachings.  Brigham SUPPORTED their deaths
|showing his approval.  Joseph Smith said you either accept what he teaches
|or you can lump it.  According to Mormonism Joseph Smith sealed his beliefs
|by dieing for them.  It is ANTI-intelligent to take a current culture and
|and beliefs and apply them to a culture and time in history.  To be
|intelligent you MUST take the events of the time and apply those events
|to what was said to arrive a correct answer.
|Your current attempt to defend Brigham, in Brigham's time would have cost
|your dearly, ex-communication at the very least.

Like so much of what you post to the net, you fail to provide supporting
statements, context, and exactly what beliefs people gave their lives
for. Did individuals give their lives for everyword that came out of
Joseph Smith or Brigham Young's mouth. D&C 135, verse 3 describes exactly
what Joseph and Hyrum Smith's deaths testified for. Can you point out
exactly where that verse expresses the VERY SPECIFIC *doctrines* that you
claim we believe in. I doubt it.

|Mormons use published statements of General Authorities on a regualar bases,
|however, the instant someone outside the church applies the same practice
|you first classify him as "anti-Mormon", then try to explain why this is
|practice is wrong.  If I quote, Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, who quotes
|Brigham Young, you attack me by saying I'm taking it out of context or
|that it is not church doctrine.  Yet, NOT ONCE have you explained why or
|how you know MORE about Mormonism than an Apostle, who had constant contact
|with the living prophet.

I believe Mr Rose that I have supplied you with several quotations from Bruce
R. McConkie expressing his views about _Mormon Doctrine_ in which even
he down played its significant and in which even he allowed members of
the Church the right to disagree with him. You have not suppied anything
from Bruce R. McConkie that suggests that he considered _Mormon Doctrine_
the inerrant official pronoucement of Church Doctrine. That makes my
position quite secure and your position non-existant - purely retorical
and nothing else!

Yes, Mormons do use published statement of General Authorities on a
regular basis, however they do not take their statements as the inerrant
word of God. As for whether or not you are taking things out of their
context, I leave that as a judgment for other net Mormons to decide. At
this point, I doubt that very many non-Mormons (with the exceptions of
Anti-Mormons) are following these threads.

What is very significant to me is that not very many Mormons (if any) are
supporting your interpretations or points of view. Having been one of the
primary authors of the Mormon FAQ and having participated on several Mormon
e-mail groups, I know how out spoken Mormons can be and how quick they are
to disagree on points of doctrine ESPECIALLY in a public forum.

Your interpretations of the Mormon view of God are really something. You
seem to evidence absolutely no knowledge of how flexible the Mormon
views are. I know many other Mormons who would disagree with my
particular point of view, yet we would both be absolutely orthodox
within the "Official" view of the LDS Church. What I think galls many
Anti-Mormons is that the LDS Church's "official" position is not tacked
down into absolute technical terms as some of the 4th and 5th Century
creeds.

On the other hand, attempts to interpret Bruce R. McConkie's statements
concerning God outside of the context of D&C 93 (something that you are
definitely guilty of) make your arguments absolutely laughable. IMHO,
if one understands McConkie's views IN LIGHT of ALL the LDS Canon, I find
that he is quite accurate. However, Most Anti-Mormons that I have read
seem to be ignorant of the LDS Canon, or the ramifications of what it
presents, and choose instead to quote McConkie, place his comments within
THEIR context and claim, that they understand Mormon Doctrine.

Way back when I took my undergraduate sociology core classes that behavior
was called Ethnocentricity. In short I am accusing Anti-Mormons of being
ethnocentric in their interpretations of Mormon writings and hence very
inaccurate when it comes to defining Mormon Doctrine.

|It is time for you to throw away your double standard and face the facts.

For one who knows so little and assumes so much, you are bold and insulting!
-- 

              Willard C. Smith
  Oh God, Make my Words Palatable and Sweet, | att!cbnews!iwtgo!wcsa
   Because I Might have to Eat all of Them.  | wcsa@iwtgo.att.com
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc