Comments about ‘At BYU forum, Evangelical Mark DeMoss says Christians must be civil’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Jan. 24 2012 8:55 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Free Agency
Salt Lake City, UT

De Moss's point is well taken--especially when we now see Mitt Romney turning into an attack dog and aligning with guys like Chris Christie, one of the most uncivil people I've heard.

But as civilly as Evangelicals might speak to "non-believers," there's a constant undertone in their interactions--whether spoken or not--of "You're going to be tortured by God for all eternity, with no escape, if you don't believe what I do."

Mormons, at least, grant everyone (except the comparatively few Mormons destined for Outer Darkness) an equal chance at a nice eternity, whether they become Mormon in this world, or not.

Thus, as a non-Christian, I take Mormon civility sincerely. I can't say the same for Evangelical "civility," because of its terrorist theology.

Ultra Bob
Cottonwood Heights, UT

AZRods.

No one denies the right of Americans to speak their piece.

But when you say that the right of free speech also applies to religions I disagree. Churches, religions, corporations, people speaking for groups are not the same as individual people and should not have free speech.

I disagree also about what our founding fathers fought for.

First I dont believe the business politicians usually refered to as founding fathers did much actual fighting.

Second, In order to raise an army they made a lot of blue sky promises about the nature and worth of the common man and how they would let him participate in his government if they won the war.

Third, their actual motivation was the take over control of the economic power that was currently sending much wealth to England and denying them the profits they wanted.

I believe the same thing is going on today between the states and the federal government.

Capella
Bakersfield, CA

ute alumni, can we all follow the same rules of civility here? Would that be fair? Because villifying someone as a "hater" because he calls you a "false representer of the Biblical Christ" (modern term, "cultist", Webster definition #6), is being uncivil. They are just defining you according to your own stated doctrines. As every LDS prophet has reiterated, Mormons do not follow the "traditional
Christ of historic Christianity". Gordon B. Hinkley and Thomas S. Monson's words, no one else's. This has been Mormon doctrine from 1830 on. Why doth thou protest your own doctrines?

Can I use the Prophet Joseph's same words about how he considered all Christian denominations? I think "abomination" violates the rules, so you can go to your own source documents. I'm looking at it now.

Would you prefer that Biblical believers ignore their Lord's commands to vigorously defend the faith that was first delivered to the saints? Does the Biblical text say that you are to embrace every opinion, new doctrine and revelation? How about radical, aberrant, false teachings? How about ones that claim: "We have supposed that God is the same forever, but I am here to refute that."

Ultra Bob
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Mimi said:

Our light cannot shine, as Christ said it should, if it's kept hidden inside our mind, behind closed doors, or under a bushel.

The problem is that all people dont believe as you, and the Constitution of our nations says that you are not allowed to try to make us believe as you do.

So when you shine your light in our eyes and cause us irritation we are allowed to say Stop it.

Ultra Bob
Cottonwood Heights, UT

USAlover.

There is a rule, regulation, a law against posting private -*advertising in the public square. The law applies to all Americans, non-Americans, even religious Americans. It is a good law. It protects our citizens by not allowing an unfair and unwanted advantage in the struggle for the pursuit of happiness.

There is a law that gives people the freedom of religion, that same law gives people the freedom from religion.

sharrona
layton, UT

@Free Agency:I take Mormon civility sincerely. I can't say the same for Evangelical "civility," because of its terrorist theology.
Mosiah 2:39) mercy has no claim on that man; therefore his final doom is to endure a never ending torment. see(2 Nephi 28:21-22).

(Mt 10:28)fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul; but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.(gehenna)see(Rev 14:11).

@LDS4: Picketing temples, which we hold sacred, intentionally causes offense. Making inflammatory claims about magic underwear intentionally causes offense. That is problematic and wrong.

(Ether 8:19) the Lord worketh not in secret combinations. JS advised against secret societies . Free-Masonry has many secret ceremonies in common with Mormons, like under-garments. My Father was a Free-Mason

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

You can say what you want, based on stuff that could easily be totally be made up, and not have to prove any of it. This is not a recipe for civil discourse.

UtahBlueDevil
Durham, NC

AzTim - you said...

"Former Sen. Karen Hale pointed to her favorite term "liberal" in the Book of Mormon, "...and they were liberal to them all." Found in Alma 1:30, this chapter recounts that "because of the steadiness of the church" the people began to prosper and they began to take care of the poor. It was a voluntary, Church oriented expression of "liberal" treatment of the less fortunate. It was NOT a government imposed program."

Here is the thing. The whole voluntary thing didn't work here in the states. And it didn't work in the church either. Unfortunately, people by nature just don't care about their neighbors enough to not need some encouragement to do the right thing.

It is like saying we don't need speed limits because ideally we should all know to now drive at a unsafe speed. We know what that speed is, and yet we still rely on speed limits, or stop signs to have us drive civilly. We don't live under a king, nor a theocracy. We live under a government where "we the people" choose what we as a society choose to do together to take care of the poor among us.

Bebyebe
UUU, UT

My opinion of LDS civility was made when the first person said "If you don't like it you can leave."

Free Agency
Salt Lake City, UT

@Sharrona

In your quote from (I assume) the Book of Mormon, you don't state what "that man's" offense is. I'm not Mormon, but my understanding of Mormon teachings about the "non-believer" in the Afterlife is this:

Whoever doesn't accept the Gospel in this life will get an opportunity to accept it in the next. Everyone goes to some level of heaven except those Mormons who, once having accepted the Holy Ghost, subsequently deny It. Those people go to Outer Darkness--the torment of which is eternal separation from God. But none of the flames, pitchfork poking, thirsting for water but never being given a drop, etc., of Evangelical theology.

If I'm mistaken on this, please correct me. Also, please inform me of what "that man's" offense was that he'd be made to endure a "never ending torment." (And what form would that torment take?)

chris8484
South Jordan, UT

It seems that Governor Romney is not following the advice of his advisor. In Iowa he began the mudslinging when Speaker Gingrich promised a positive campaign focused only on the issues. Now he is receiving what he gave. I find the lack of civility of politics not only un-Christian but wrong on every level.

John Pack Lambert of Michigan
Ypsilanti, MI

Evangelicals do not matter as much in Florida as in SC. There are lots of Cuban Catholics in the GOP there, and a few Mexican Catholics like Colomba Bush. There are also lots of northern retiree Catholics, and many other demographics that are much smaller in SC. It is a different state, I once read a little of a book on Florida subtitled "South of the South".

John Pack Lambert of Michigan
Ypsilanti, MI

Florida has actually elected a Mormon to the senate (and it was after I was born, although just barely).

John Pack Lambert of Michigan
Ypsilanti, MI

It is unfair to lump all Evangelicals together. It is unfair to judge all Mormons by how some act. However Evangelical Christianity is made up of hundreds of Churches, many of which are totally indepdent and not connected with any other Church. There is no way to generalize about all of them, and even defining who exactly is an Evangelical Christian is difficult. Of the current presidential candidates only Ron Paul is.

John Pack Lambert of Michigan
Ypsilanti, MI

In my expeirence the faculty at BYU has much broader policial views than at other institutions of higher learning. They run the full spectrum of political views, as opposed to the narrow lock-step all ultra-left views of the faculty here at Eastern Michigan University. Of course considering my univeristy is being sued because it forced a student out for refusing to renounce her religious views, this should not surprise anyone. There is a reason I say I am in the belly of the beast.

lds4gaymarriage
Salt Lake City, UT

sharrona
@LDS4: Picketing temples, which we hold sacred, intentionally causes offense. Making inflammatory claims about magic underwear intentionally causes offense. That is problematic and wrong.

(Ether 8:19) the Lord worketh not in secret combinations. JS advised against secret societies . Free-Masonry has many secret ceremonies in common with Mormons, like under-garments. My Father was a Free-Mason

LDS4
Huh? I don't understand. Are you saying that the above somehow gives you the green light to disobey the Bible's command to not cause unbelievers offense? Really? It seems to me that many anti-LDS don't really care about what Paul said. They seem only to care about harming the LDS Church. Many anti-LDS feel free to cause offense and excuse those that do so. Many anti-LDS feel free to "lie for Jesus".

Is the goal of life to do everything possible to destroy the LDS Church or is it to live according to the guidelines the Bible provides about how Christians should live? It appears to me that many anti-LDS believe it's #1.

Is this really being an example of the believers?

sharrona
layton, UT

RE: LDS4, Huh? I don't understand. Are you saying that the above somehow gives you the green light to disobey the Bible's command to not cause unbelievers offense?

Jesus replied, "Everyone knows what I teach. I have preached regularly in the synagogues and the Temple, where the people gather. I have NOT spoken in Secret.(John 18:20 NIV)

Re: LDS4, Many anti-LDS feel free to "lie for Jesus". I dontInstead,[I]we will speak the truth in love, growing in every way more and more like Christ, who is the head of his body,the church(elect). (Ephesians 4:15 NLT)

I have many Mormon neighbors and family,and we exchange Christmas presents, but
"the communication of thy faith may become effectual by the acknowledging of every good thing which is in you in Christ Jesus.(Philemon 1:6 KJV)

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son(*monogenes), that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. (John 3:16 NIV) *Relationship indeed but must be distinguished from generation applied to man.

Capella
Bakersfield, CA

@Jon.Eddy (3:04pm, 1/25)

1- Because I love my LDS family and community, and because you asked why I challenge their understanding of their history, I will explain, civilly of course..

It is obvious from the daily, deeply upset posts here that there is not an awareness that one cannot attack all other Christians as as an abomination, without incurring a response. There has been no change, new revelation or rescinding of that moniker, to my knowledge. When LDS leaders continue to claim that other churches aren't just incorrect, but "all their creeds (are) an abomination...and those professors all corrupt", that condemnation calls the rest of professing Christians "vile, shameful, detestable", (Webster- abomination, def#1-3).

Words have meanings and consequences.

Every missionary's knock, every General Conference, every testimony of Joseph Smith is reaffirmation of that attack, whether or not you understand that.

2- To answer your smack on my cheek, I am beyond sad that one religious sect (JS's word) can claim to nullify all prior 21 centuries of practicing Christianity as valid, and then cry "bigots, haters, prejudice" when their victims respond.

3- I agree that we know an opinion from an attack.

Munk
Cottonwood Heights, UT

"It is never an option to claim Christ as my Savior and behave toward anyone in an uncivil manner,â

Yes.. and in my opinion it is usually the non LDS that initiate uncivilized behavior. I am a Catholic and I have seen it first hand. I have also seen some pretty rude LDS, but in my experience that is not the norm.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments