I'm going to focus on Mormon ideology mainly.

Mormonism is more than just doctine and history, it is an ideology

And the main ideology is everyone needs to be mormon. Mormons crave and are addicted to getting less actives and nonmormons to become Mormon. That is how your Mormon family ,friends, acquaintances operate. The underlying feeling is that Mormons are superior because they have the truth, and doing Mormon stuff, mainly attracting others to Mormonism is the most noble thing.

There are also subplots, like leadership is great, you are furthering the work and get recognition. Having lots of kids is noble and gets attention. The top 85 leaders get the "stipend" of 120k. Money, power, control, fame is their ideology.

There are also tangent ideology in Mormonism. If you do Mormon stuff you will be blessed primarily with money. Bad things won't happen to me because I'm a tbm. Bad things will happen to exmos and nonmos and they deserve to suffer. I can divorce my spouse if they aren't 100% tbm or have looked at porn.

You don't need to question, research, or can't say no. You have to pay tithing before other bills. Anything negative about Mormonism is a lie and anti.

Here is the problem with Mormon ideology. They will shun you if you don't want to be mormon. If you do hang with them, they want to get you to church (which I find extremely offensive) They aren't interested in what you do now for religion. If you do have a discussion with a tbm about the church they probably will get argumentative, bear their testimony and leave in a huff.

As a Mormon, you are emotionally connected to the culture of Mormonism, which is a very very strong emotional connection. It's like being in love, an addictive kind of love. Some love being a leader, some love the being recognized, some love being "parental" some love being a missionary, some love to brag from the pulpit, some love the community feel, some love the 15 geriatrics, some love the famous Mormons, some love the feeling that the church is building and growing...

What Mormons don't have is a strong emotional connection to Jesus.

Mormons don't understand Christian ideology, and by extension many exmos don't understand as well. I didn't after I left, so I made a point of trying to understand what it means to being Christian.

What if found actually stunned me. I decided to set aside what others have interpreted Jesus to mean, and to read one of the Gospels to understand what Jesus was actually trying to communicate. If Jesus didn't say it, I don't have to do it.

The promised Saviour is here...what does he say? Clearly his ideology and Mormon ideology are miles apart. Jesus was very concerned that we absolutely need to treat others the way we want to be treated. We need to help those in need, the types of others that can't return the favour. We can't brag about helping the needy, but need to give the glory to heaven.

We need to bow our heads and ask for forgiveness, not stand up and brag how we are better than others. We are all equal in that we all sin, and the harlots and public's will be in heaven before the Scribe and Pharisee types. Jesus and the atonement is this most important focus.

Mormons aren't emotionally connected to Jesus in a significant way, so when one leaves the cult, they have no emotional connection, and the once strong emotional connection to the cult is now turned negative as we have realized that we have been lied to and taken advantage of.

I'm actually amazed at the ideology if Jesus. A human couldn't have written it or made it up. Humans always want the worldly perks of women, fame, power, control, fancy clothes, money... Jesus wasn't about that.

6 iron wrote: "I'm actually amazed at the ideology if Jesus. A human couldn't have written it or made it up."

Seriously, you might want to read more world literature and mythology.


You sound much like a Mormon who can't imagine that an ordinary man could have written the BoM- complete with testimony.

For what its worth, I know Mormons far more Christ-like than the money grubbing mega churches preaching Jesus.

The BofM is just a story, a made up story devoid of an ideology except perhaps be good, get rich, turn evil, repeat.

The ideology of Jesus would prevent many disfunctional relationships. If we truly understood that we absolutely have to treat others like ourselves, bullying might be minimized, relationships might be more nurturing, children might be less rebellious, the cult wouldn't be a cult because the members might not be taken advantage of, the leaders wouldn't need to make 120k.
The needy would get assistance.

Imagine if the leaders actually had a conscience, if they didn't lie, didn't need the perks while they "preyed on widows houses" If leaders like JS realized that preying on female followers as young as 14, wasn't treating others like you want to be treated.

If your overall life philosophy is to treat others like you want to be treated, you would attract others like yourself, and not marry a narcisstic, heartless tbm.

6 iron Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The ideology of Jesus would prevent many
> disfunctional relationships.

Sure, like this part of the "ideology of Jesus:"

“If any man come to Me and hate not his father and mother, and wife and children, and brethren and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple." (Luke 14:6)

That's great advice for preventing disfunctional relationships.
Oh, wait... no it's not.
Never mind then.

> If your overall life philosophy is to treat others
> like you want to be treated, you would attract
> others like yourself, and not marry a narcisstic,
> heartless tbm.

That "philosophy" didn't originate with the bible Jesus stories, nor is belief in bible Jesus necessary to adopting it.

You're kind of mean, you know that?

Want to destroy Sant Claus just because he only gives presents to rich white western children and basically lets the rest of the planet literally starve to death in squalor?

Lol. Keep it up. Worshipping an imaginary character for what you wish it was instead of what it actually represents is dangerous and stupid. Christ is the Savior of nothing.

So...the golden rule?

The one first iterated in ancient Egypt, that we know of, by very not Christian people?

Huh? I don't know if that comment is addressed to hie or the OP.

When your comment isn't correctly threaded, you are the one being confusing.

Assuming you were addresding me, I was being sarcastic and addressing Hie.

- Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When your comment isn't correctly threaded, you
> are the one being confusing.
>
> Assuming you were addresding me, I was being
> sarcastic and addressing Hie.

The "threads" can be confusing, but...
I got that you were replying to me. And being sarcastic :)

This is what I can't understand about Christianity: the doctrine of Jesus "dying for our sins".
As I understand it (and perhaps I am wrong) Jesus death on the cross pays for all of his follower's sins, past, present and future. Therefore there is no penalty for screwing someone over, and no reward for doing otherwise. What then is my motive for "treating others as I would want to be treated"?

Even assuming a reward exists in Heaven, which is a perfect place with no suffering, what is a reward worth if it is given in a place where there is no need? I could feed the hungry all my life and my reward can only be given in a world where I cannot eat. Where is the justice in that?

Catholics believe Christ died for every sin ever committed. There is a growing recognition that his grace extends to everyone who ever lived and that ultimately God will keep working until everyone turns to him. This doctrine is spreading through Christianity.

http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/universal_salvation_roman_catholic.html

From what I can tell, the primary difference between Jesus-based ideologies and others that also stress compassion, love, sharing one's blessings etc. is that Jesus said we gotta follow HIM. It's all about HIM. The others are more about one's own altruistic actions.

Me, I'll stick with trying to do the right thing. I didn't and don't need Jesus to tell me this, and I don't need to follow him or anyone else to do so.

Jesus also gave a framework for leadership in religious frameworks. It is Jesus vs the Chief priests, Scribes and Pharisees.

I don't think many of you realize how specific Jesus was. Perhaps you should do the exercise I did and read one of the Gospels, only paying attention to what Jesus said.

He said if we do something for someone and they return the favour, there is NO reward in heaven. If we help someone in need and brag about it, there is NO reward in heaven. By extension, if you personally get rewarded or paid for helping someone in need, there is NO reward in heaven.

In fact, he compared the Chief priests, Scribes and Pharisees to harlots and Publicans saying the later would be in heaven before the leaders. They made a hypocritical mockery of being leaders by demanding perks and self agrandizement.

Turn the other check means to not play the victimizing game of others, just walk away.

He doesn't just wash away sins of believers, we need to get to the point where we are humbled and repulsed by our victimization of others. How can victimizers and their victims coexist in heaven, unless there is genuine sorrow, and asking your victim for forgiveness. Justice has to be satisfied. If Jesus refuses to forgive you, the you will suffer for your own sins, which could be lengthy and brutal.

After Jesus died he claimed he went to the spirits in prison to preach which were disobedient in the days of Noah. That is approx 2300 years stuck in spirit prison.

Jesus is very specific, but his burden is light. Mormonism never fully taught Jesus' ideology in any meaningful way. My RM son didn't believe me when I told him that helping others needs to be done without proclaiming it to brag.

Getting up in F@T MTG and bragging how you keep Mormon commandments is against what Jesus said. He said we need to bow our head in humility and say forgive me Father for being a sinner. As we recognize that we sin and feel sorrow, we keep getting to a place of humility.

The leader is to be the servant. Religious ego gratification needs to be replaced with love of your fellow man. He came not to condemn but to save. Mormons condemn, punish and shame.

Always pretending Christ stands for the good and ignoring the BLOOD ATONEMENT when the rest of us can forgive without murder.

The Christ story is convoluted nonsense wrapped in a pretty bow soaked in blood.

The atonement started in the Garden and ended on the cross. It HAD to end in death because the Bible states that dieing for someone else, there is no other greater way to show love for another than to die for them.

He had to physically show his love for those that believe in him.

That's also evident in the thousands and thousands of animals sacrificed by one of 3 sacrifices in a symbolic anticipation of the unblemished first born Son of God.

6 iron Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The atonement started in the Garden and ended on
> the cross. It HAD to end in death because the
> Bible states that dieing for someone else, there
> is no other greater way to show love for another
> than to die for them.

What the bible says is right because the bible says it HAS to e that way?
Really?

> He had to physically show his love for those that
> believe in him.

I'm not a 'god' or omniptent or omniscient or anything, yet I can personally think of hundreds of other ways to show 'love' for people than through human sacrifice. Too bad your 'god' can't, huh?

And why only 'love' people who believe in him? That's awfully ego-demanding. Sounds more like a dictator than a benevolent all-powerful god-thing.

> That's also evident in the thousands and thousands
> of animals sacrificed by one of 3 sacrifices in a
> symbolic anticipation of the unblemished first
> born Son of God.

Sure, let's justify the ignorant sacrifices of millions of animals to appease the anger of an imagined 'god' by pretending they were precursors to an equally appalling human sacrifice. Oh, what a religion of love you embrace. Not.

"Heaven" is not real to me. I am physical, I have always been physical, I have no understanding of that which is not physical. My afterlife is also physical, as indicated by the groundbreaking research of Ian Stevenson.

Trying to explain the extra-physical to me would be like trying to explain the advanced theories of quantum physics to my cats. "Schrodeger says I am both alive and dead, well which am I?"

The physical world has problems. If I am making a personal sacrifice in order to solve a problem or protect others from it, such as the $3600 I give every year to fight the population problem, I have a right to protection from the effects of this problem. If God keeps score, as reason would have me believe, this entitles me to a certain amount of protection from this problem, and perhaps others as well.

You can call that pride if you want to, but I have every right to reward for right behavior and every right to expect it.

Wouldn't the world be a better place if people did the right thing, even if it was for the "wrong" reason?

Um, not necessarily. If we do "good" for wrong reasons, we are corrupting ourselves. We are exalting ourselves, and becoming prideful and egocentric.

Love has a hard time coexisting with egocentric narcissism.

There are many children in poor countries who would be tremendously grateful for my "corruption", were they to meet me. My "corruption" gives them more and better food, more education, better medical care, and hopefully in the long run a cleaner environment and a better future for their descendants.

If this is what "corruption" does it is probably the only way to save the world from certain destruction.

I love my "corruption".

My point is if you glorify yourself, there is no reward in heaven. You are basically deceiving yourself that you are doing good.

So, sure the needy get a reprieve, but you are harmed. You've essentially become a Chief priest, Scribe and Pharisee, and the NT has shown that they were the ones that eventually had Jesus Crucified. Their hearts had closed shut to the love of Jesus' teachings and miracles.

6 iron,

When did I ever say I wanted to go to heaven, to receive a reward, or for any other reason? If such a place exists it would be wrong, in my opinion, for me or anyone else to go there.

I am reincarnating so I can continue to work for the progression of the human race, which is every human being's responsibility.

Reincarnation has more credible evidence to support it than any other theory of what happens when we die. Reincarnation is the way it is and the way it SHOULD be! I am convinced of this beyond a reasonable doubt and fully accepting of it.

Read Ian Stevenson.

I don't need Jesus to know all of that, and much more.

I've read it. I thought it was silly.

6 iron Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't think many of you realize how specific
> Jesus was. Perhaps you should do the exercise I
> did and read one of the Gospels, only paying
> attention to what Jesus said.

It's a mistake -- a HUGE one -- to assume that because someone doesn't agree with you, they haven't read the same material you have.

I pointed out one example of what Jesus supposedly said that completely contradicts your claims. And you ignored it.

Should I suggest that you're the one who hasn't read the gospels, then? Or perhaps you're just cherry-picking what Jesus supposedly said, ignoring the stuff that doesn't fit what you want his "ideology" to be?

Then there's the little problem of none of the 'gospels' being written by anybody who ever saw 'Jesus," making it more than a bit silly to conclude that 'Jesus" ever said anything that's in them...

But, hey, do what you like. Just be aware that your arguments aren't at all convincing to people who actually HAVE read the 'gospels' honestly and objectively.

ificouldhietokolob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 6 iron Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I don't think many of you realize how specific
> > Jesus was. Perhaps you should do the exercise I
> > did and read one of the Gospels, only paying
> > attention to what Jesus said.
>
> It's a mistake -- a HUGE one -- to assume that
> because someone doesn't agree with you, they
> haven't read the same material you have.
>

Like your claim to have read everything Ian Stevenson has ever written but you can't discuss the specifics of even one of his cases?

got2Breal Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Like your claim to have read everything Ian
> Stevenson has ever written but you can't discuss
> the specifics of even one of his cases?

a) I've never claimed to have read EVERYTHING he wrote
b) I have discussed the "specifics" of many of his cases, and why they're so patently ridiculous.

Try some honesty next time.

both are total B.S.

Not really.

Think about it. What would be the most important thing to say to humanity ?

I think it would be to love/treat your fellowman as you want to be loved/treated.

Also to help those in need first, and not to brag about it, so you don't become an arrogant prick.

Imagine how life would be if everyone was rich. We would all be arrogant doucebags. Imagine marrying an arrogant doucebags. You would live in DC and she would live in NY, lol.

We need to learn noble emotions like selflessness, empathy, humility.

Mormonism preaches brag at FT, be a controlling dbag leader, go to Temple, save yourself through works, get paid 120k for being a top leader, while devouring widows houses.

Mormonism created self righteous dbags devoid of caring if you're not mormon

6 iron,

I have a question for you: Do you give money to charity? If so, do you deduct these contributions from your income tax?

If you do, according to your logic I think you should reconsider doing this. You are benefiting from your good works and this could be depriving you of your reward in heaven.

how does any of that require religion ?

How it requires religion is because...

When we expose ourselves to truth, we feel edified. Our spirit connects to the heavens.

And people need constant reminders that to be Christian requires us to stop victimizing others, stop thinking you're superior to others, and that we need to be an asset to those in NEED, not just members in your own tribe, AND we shouldn't brag about

This ideology of Jesus needs to be preached over and over every Sunday.

And Mormons don't preach this, they preach a Chief priest, Scribe and Pharisee ideology, as evident by their shunning, superiority, helping only other Mormons and secretly wishing that exmos suffer.

They are dangerous to have as so-called family members.

Why does being reminded of any of those things require Jesus?

Because the ideology of Mormonism is to only help other Mormons, to shun exmos, to be sexual shaming youth interviews, to make poor pay tithing regardless, while the top 85 make 120k, to suspend rational thought and reason and research, to never say no to a leader.

To get up in FT MTG and brag how superior you are to nonmos and even other mos, to be under constant scrutiny of HTing Temple attendance, callings, mission...

To have conditional love, have more kids than you can probably afford, to be indoctrinated to marry another tbm in the temple and then it will all work out.

Jesus, the anticipated son of God, came with heavenly ideology that needs to be studied from what he said in the NT. If Jesus said it in the NT, then that is what we need pay attention to. If he didn't say it, then we don't have to do it.

He was very specific in how he expects us to interact with others. And the only way to understand is to read a NT gospel until it sinks in, and you understand how it is a higher law. Paying attention how he contended with the Chief priest, Scribe, and Pharisees we can clearly see how they were seriously incorrect.

6 iron Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> To have conditional love, have more kids than you
> can probably afford, to be indoctrinated to marry
> another tbm in the temple and then it will all
> work out.

Replace "marry another tbm in the temple" with "marry another catholic in the church," and you just described Catholicism :)

> If Jesus said it in the
> NT, then that is what we need pay attention to. If
> he didn't say it, then we don't have to do it.

Jesus didn't say in the NT that we have to pay attention to what Jesus said in the NT. So I guess we don't have to do it.
Problem solved :)

Neither Mormon ideology nor Mormon actions follow Christian ideology, IMO. Example: Let's say someone asks for help from the bishop for food to get by for a month, or maybe financial help (not thousands of dollars worth). That person goes through a million hurdles and hoops and even then, it usually winds up in rejection. Compare this with when Christ fed the 5,000. He didn't put any conditions on it, and didn't ask things like: "How long ago did you last eat? An hour ago? Sorry, go to the back of the line." "Have you gone to your family first for help?" "Do you pay your tithing? No? Sorry." "What about your food storage?" "Don't have any? Well, I suggest you get started on it."

To me, Mormons and mainstream Christians arguing over whose version of Jesus is more correct or authentic is like two bald men fighting over a comb.

Thus spake Mujun.

If by "ideology" you mean specific beliefs, there are handy comparisons out there.

If you mean "worldview" that's harder to specify -- but probably more important. But good summaries in RfM.

Keep in mind: Smith didn't worry his head about such things. Nor whether it held together.

"I'm actually amazed at the ideology if Jesus. A human couldn't have written it or made it up. Humans always want the worldly perks of women, fame, power, control, fancy clothes, money... Jesus wasn't about that."

_______________

You are making the unfounded assumption that either a single human, or a god, "made it up."

It took centuries for the bible you are referencing to be written. Hundreds, thousands and thousands of of humans contributing to the best (and worst) ideas (oral stories) of morality to be offered by ever-organizing civilizations, and a historical (dead, miraculous) figure on whom to pin the "revelations."

You assume that since a single human couldn't have "done it," it must have been a god. It's a bad assumption on at least two counts. First, that those are the only those two options, and then it ignores the history of the bible. Without even touching on the supernatural aspects, your reasoning fails.

Talk about black/white thinking, and this is the very definition. The birth of the warm fuzzies.

So let's say you swell up with the "power" of "knowing" it to be "true," unwilling to part with all of that "joy." In what way is this humble?

Humility is in knowing that you don't know.

You, on the other hand, are sure that you do know, and more than that, have the temerity to state that since exmos can't have ever had such a relationship with "Jesus," they couldn't possibly know the joys of "knowing."

Another bad assumption, 6 Iron. Some have had "Mormon" knowing, followed by (or joined in), a "Jesus" knowing, and came to the realization that one was just like the other, varying only in the source of the "revelations." In Mormanism, we can personally witness and track the human nature of the "revalators," and it becomes a simple matter to see why early Christians were so ignored and/or reviled. With so much distance from those who carved the revelations of the bible into stone, the pain they caused others - those dreaded apostates, it becomes an exercize in ignorance.

I don't know you, so only you could say if you ever had the "Mormon" knowing, but I think maybe not. Not TBM, on the inside, all the way through.

I think that you should consider how you never had to "forgive" Jesus and his gang for all of the pain that they never inflicted on you, personally. Empathy, you said? Not really. Only an illusion to which you stubbornly cling, so that you can pridefully "know" that you are "empathetic."

Oh, and the "new" testament? Oh, lordy, look how much it's based on that older book, the one that became secondary to the "new" prophet, the one causing so much trouble, that everyone, except his followers, wanted to (and did) kill.

Does that description refer to Jesus, Joseph, or both?

Mormonism different? Nope, it is just in your personal face with it, whereas with Jesus and his Q, you "know" them only in your bosom.

That is Mormon arrogance, but if ou disagree, please say how.

At the time Jesus came into the Jewish religion picture, the Chief Priests, Scribes and Pharisees ran the show.

He always contended with the CP, S, and Pharisees. They followed a letter of the law, be saved by works ideology. Mormonism resembles Pharisees more than Jesus. In fact, Jesus isn't actively preached or needed in Mormonism. In Mormonism, the church and having a TR saves.

So those of us raised by cultic parents, or that married a cultic Mormon surely must realize the conditional love, and the heavy burden Mormonism is.

Mormons think they are superior to nonmormons, exmormons, and even active Mormons the judge as being less invested. So your parents probably raised you that you must do everything Mormon to make them look good. Your tbm spouse probably had/has conditional love based on your compliance to Mormonism. Mormons only help other Mormons who usually do even need the help, IE helping a doctor move into the ward. Mormons think they are only blessed as they do Mormon stuff, and try to get others to be Mormon.

Jesus was very specific in how we should deal with others. The Good Samaritan, the Prodigal Son. Also helping someone that returns the favour, there is no reward in heaven, only if we help those in need and can't return the favour. If we brag about helping the needy, there is no reward in heaven. We have to glorify heaven and not ourselves.

If we exalt ourselves we will be abased, but if we humble yourselves we will be exalted. The Pharisees exalted themselves, and the resultant hard hearts caused them to reject and crucify Jesus.

Mormonism is a culture of bragging, doing things to be seen of others, to always put on a fake pretence of being ultra tbm, being extremely judgemental over silly things like bare shoulders, having conditional love, and to avoid critical thought.

So if you are in a habit of helping the needy that can't return the favour, then you a practicing Jesus' ideology.

JS took advantage of his followers. He wasn't there to help the needy, but to take advantage of the vulnerable. There is always a trail of money, women, power, control, perks, unquestioning obedience, punishing and shaming into conformance... of human religion leaders. Jesus freely forgave, loved, served, healed, washed his disciples feet, and submitted himself and gave the glory to the father.