For a cult JW sure distribute very well. One of their old tracts, “The Truth That Leads to Eternal Life” had I believe over 130 million copies distributed before it was rendered out of print.
As for them not being a cult . . .
I walked in one morning and had Webster’s dictionary’s definition of cult on my desk one morning. I had a discussion with an office athiest the day before about Christianity (which I was deep into at the time) and made a comment about the LDS or JW (I forget which). He asked what was a “cult”. I explained it in the Christian way I had been taught to do. Then I found this on my desk.
So, I guess it IS a cult. But according to Webster, any religion can be defined as such.
Just thought I’d share.
needs2Know:
Actually, they’ve predicted the end of the world dozens of times since the late 1900’s. The most recent exact date was 1975, but JW sources were claiming over the past few years it would happen before the year 2,000. I don’t think that last one was truly official, though.
slick_willie:
If the definition of a cult is the inability to come or go as you wish, the JW’s are a cult. It’s not too difficult to get in, but once you’re baptized it’s very hard to leave. When a member is disfellowshipped all the others are forbidden to speak to him; they must cut off all contact, no matter how close a family member he is. Many (if not most or all) JW’s experience extreme psychological trauma when leaving the fold; the numerous support groups on the internet for former JW’s attests to this.
Annie X-mas:
In the JW book, “The Greatest Man Who Ever Lived”, the JW take on Jesus is explained. They do not believe he is a god; he is the son of God but while on earth he was entirely human. He had to be a perfect human being to fulfill the “ransom” (a major JW tenet). That is, Adam was a perfect human; he screwed up. In order to make up for it, another perfect human had to be sacrificed. The only other perfect human that ever lived was Jesus.
JW’s do not believe in the trinity.
slick_willie:
Charles Taze Russell was also an ardent fan of all things Egyptian (this was quite a fad at that time). His first predictions as to the end of the world were based on measurements from the pyramids. His gravestone is modeled after a pyramid, as well.
Polycarp said
If ya hadn’ta said “couple,” I’da thought we were related.
My dad, too, is a devout and well-informed Episcopalian and he used to do the same thing when I was growing up. During his college days at Seton Hall he had taken a bunch of Philosophy of Religion courses, so when people came evangelizin’, he was ready. Invariably, after my dad had theologically cornered them, I would hear one of the evangelists say, “Well, we don’t want to take up any more of your time, sir.”
They never lasted more than half an hour.
But my mom is Catholic, so I’m pretty sure you’re not him, right?
Mormons where special temple garments.
Probably JWs, because I’ve never seen a Mormon do this.
That’s a very very simplistic view.
I’m not sure what you are talking about here.
Actually, this sounds like a really messed up misunderstanding of the Mormon practice of baptizing the dead. They don’t dig people up! It’s a symbolic thing. I’ve never personally seen it done, but a friend of mine told me she had done it, which leads me to believe that you don’t need to have any special kind of authority to do it. Pepper, do you have any more info on this?
BTW, I personally find this practice abhorrent, no matter how symbolic it is.
The JW’s also refuse blood transfusions, because they view it as a form of eating blood. Causes major problems if a child of a JW is in an accident and needs a transfusion, but the parents refuse consent - there have been several court cases on it.
As a Latter-day Saint it’s hard to answer questions like this because of the way they’re phrased. There is an element of truth but it is warped into something that is almost unrecognizable. Typically such questions are asked as a method of confrontation. I will, however, assume that El Guapo did not mean to offend and provide some answers:
Faithful adult Latter-day Saints may observe a special ceremony in an LDS temple known as the “endowment.” Part of the endowment includes the introduction of the garment of the holy priesthood (or “garment” for short) that the inductee is instructed to wear throughout his or her life. The blessing in the ceremony promises that the garment will be a “shield and a protection” to the wearer if they do not defile it. What exactly that protection is is not explained in detail.
I have always considered it to be a spiritual, not a physical, protection – it reminds me of who I am, the promises I have made, and the promises I have received from God. Because it’s something I put on every day, I am reminded daily, much as orthodox Jews would wear an apron or Muslims would heed the call to prayer five times daily.
Perhaps the lack of specific instruction on the “protection” issue has lead some Latter-day Saints to believe that physical protection is provided by wearing the garment. This, in my view, is not warranted by the language of the endowment ceremony.
This is a silly, bordering on inane, description of our practice of baptism for the dead. The practice actually involves baptizing the LIVING in behalf of, or as proxies for, those who have died.
For the Straight Dope on this issue, see what Joseph Smith himself wrote about it:
http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/128
The concept of humans becoming divine by God’s blessing is Biblical and was believed by many early Christians. It is still believed by many branches of the Orthodox Christian Church today. Oh, and Latter-day Saints believe it too.
Whether we will become “gods of [our] own planet” is not specified in our scriptures. That is not a phrase we use.
This criticism is often leveled against Latter-day Saints, even though such a teaching is not in our scriptures nor in any authoritative book, pamphlet or letter. A few early LDS leaders publicly speculated on the nature of Christ’s conception, and their speculations have been elevated to the status of true and binding doctrine by critics of the Latter-day Saints, even though the Latter-day Saints themselves do not feel in any way bound to them.
Ask almost any Latter-day Saint exactly how Christ was conceived and he or she will say, “I have no idea.”
I (speaking for myself) have no idea, nor do I care. My salvation and standing in the Church are not dependent upon such knowledge.
It sounds as if you picked these up from reading “anti-Mormon” literature – works that distort our teachings in an effort to “save” Latter-day Saints from “Mormonism.”
Perhaps it would be wiser to read LDS literature and allow us to speak for ourselves. ( <---- This is not meant to be hostile.)
MrWhipple
(Who was about to start an Ask the Mormon Guy thread until Pepper beat him to it. Darn. But good job anyway, Pepper!)
MrWhipple, you are more than welcome to my thread. I don’t feel I’m the most qualified to answer the questions, but I wanted to start one anyway, because I do have a knowledge of the Church. But I would deeply love and appreciate your help. Thank you.
Absolutlely no offense meant. And they were extremely oversimplified as I only recall reading them over the years from various sources. And yes, the sources could probably be considered anti-Mormon or/and anti-JW, as they were from various mainstream Christian books, such as those written by Jack McDowell (his comes to mind in particular). Although I’m pretty sure I read about the undergarments in a Straight Dope column, but my search provided no leads. Maybe it was all a dream.
Was Joseph Smith the one talking to the angel Maroni and finding the plates with supposedly Egyptian writing on them? Then how was the JW founded? I’m sure I’ve still got books on this laying around, but then I’d have to go to the attic and I don’t want to start rummaging around up there!
I just know when I was in the Christian scene that we were told that both the LDS and JW were dangerous cults and to either keep away or try showing them the error of their ways.
El Guapo wrote:
Cecil did a column on the topic once. It’s an older one and, like all the columns before 1994, has now been pulled from this site. I remember reading it and coming across a number of inacurracies. Sadly, I can’t remember what they were to comment on them…
Joseph Smith was first visited by Moroni (notice the spelling; and it’s pronounced “moe-ROE-nigh”) in September 1823. Moroni was a prophet and the last surviving member of his people, the Nephites (“NEE-fights”) who lived somewhere in the Americas between 600 BC and AD 400. Moroni’s father, Mormon, had compiled and abridged the sacred history of the Nephite people onto golden plates (tablets). Moroni, who came to Joseph Smith as a heavenly messenger (angel), delivered this record to Joseph in September 1827. Joseph translated it with divine aid. It’s called the Book of Mormon.
You can read Joseph’s account of these experiences for yourself:
http://scriptures.lds.org/js_h/1
The portions with Moroni begin in the 27th verse, but I recommend you read the previous material for the backstory.
You can also get the Book of Mormon online here:
http://scriptures.lds.org/bm/contents
(And, to be clear, I’m not trying to convert you; I’m just providing this for reference.)
Perhaps this might be helpful:
http://www.watchtower.org/library/br78/modern.htm
Sadly, such attitudes are common within the Evangelical Christian community, notably Southern Baptists, the Christian and Missionary Alliance, and numerous independent “born-again” faiths.
Latter-day Saints have much in common with these groups: The desire for strong families, opposition to pornography, prostitution, drug use, extra-marital sex and other community problems. We also believe in and use the Authorized (King James) Version of the Bible. Our faith centers in the redemption and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Admittedly, Latter-day Saints have some unorthodox beliefs (some of which I noted in a previous post). This tends to run up against the Evangelicals’ zeal to bring everyone to (their view of) Christ. Hence the hostility.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of works written against “Mormons” by Evangelical Christians contain distortions at best and outright falsehoods at worst (the “digging up dead people” one is an example of the latter). Most of this is simply passed on as “anti-Mormon” writers copy from one another. Occasionally something new pops up.
I’m certainly willing to discuss any such issues on this board. If anyone’s interested, that is.
-----MrWhipple
Not true. They believe that God is, well, god and that Jesus is his son. I don’t know exactly where you got your information but if you could, please cite publication, pg. number, et cetera. Or did you just hear this from word of mouth. Either way, I recomend that you read up on it some more.