Mormon Recruiting in an Evangelical Church

[Norah63]

How sad that you discarded the only thing that could have given us some helpful information, or maybe even led to better understanding.
Now only your account of an incident of years ago is stated in a public forum.
How would any of us like that to happen to us?

 

[Catherineanne]

Is it ethical to proselytize like Ken did?

Yes.

There is nothing unethical in attending a meeting, and then writing a polite letter to the person running the meeting to explain a different point of view. This is a very honest thing to do, I would say.

I am not sure this letter even counts as proselytising; it is an invitation to a discussion. The person receiving the letter is free to accept or reject that invitation. The writer is perfectly honest about wanting five hours of the recipients' time, in order to present his case fully. I see nothing dishonest, nothing unethical, nothing inappropriate at all in this letter.

Therefore, this gentleman was not lying. He attended a meeting, felt it right to write a letter, and did so. He did not regard that as proselytising, and neither would I.

If I attend any church service anywhere, and then want to write to any member of the congregation who I happen to have met, then I will do so. I don't think it is at all necessary to check with the pastor first, regardless of the denomination.

 

[drstevej]

Yes.

There is nothing unethical in attending a meeting, and then writing a polite letter to the person running the meeting to explain a different point of view. This is a very honest thing to do, I would say.

I am not sure this letter even counts as proselytising; it is an invitation to a discussion. The person receiving the letter is free to accept or reject that invitation. The writer is perfectly honest about wanting five hours of the recipients' time, in order to present his case fully. I see nothing dishonest, nothing unethical, nothing inappropriate at all in this letter.

Therefore, this gentleman was not lying. He attended a meeting, felt it right to write a letter, and did so. He did not regard that as proselytising, and neither would I.

If I attend any church service anywhere, and then want to write to any member of the congregation who I happen to have met, then I will do so. I don't think it is at all necessary to check with the pastor first, regardless of the denomination.

Thanks for your input.

 

[williamgramsmith]

Yes.

There is nothing unethical in attending a meeting, and then writing a polite letter to the person running the meeting to explain a different point of view. This is a very honest thing to do, I would say.

I am not sure this letter even counts as proselytising; it is an invitation to a discussion. The person receiving the letter is free to accept or reject that invitation. The writer is perfectly honest about wanting five hours of the recipients' time, in order to present his case fully. I see nothing dishonest, nothing unethical, nothing inappropriate at all in this letter.

Therefore, this gentleman was not lying. He attended a meeting, felt it right to write a letter, and did so. He did not regard that as proselytising, and neither would I.

If I attend any church service anywhere, and then want to write to any member of the congregation who I happen to have met, then I will do so. I don't think it is at all necessary to check with the pastor first, regardless of the denomination.

Kudos.... You have summarized the facts and the reasonableness of the situation perfectly, and showed the wrongness otherwise.

Excellent post.... I'm glad there are some who are so enlightened.

 

[Catherineanne]

Thanks for your input.

You are more than welcome.

Had the person concerned started handing out LDS leaflets to people in a meeting at an evangelical church, THAT would be prostelytising, imo. Or if he had stood up and talked about his own church, or if he had caused trouble, or harangued anyone in public.

He did not do any of that. He just wrote a letter to the leader of the group. The polite response would be for the recipient to write back and say thanks but no thanks. Handing it to someone else, and then that someone else calling the sender in to attempt to trap him in a 'lie' of some kind would seem to be something of an over-reaction.

 

[Catherineanne]

Kudos.... You have summarized the facts and the reasonableness of the situation perfectly, and showed the wrongness otherwise.

Excellent post.... I'm glad there are some who are so enlightened.

Thank you.

In the interests of clarity, however, I have to say that I think Mormon theology is barking mad, and Joseph Smith a complete charlatan.

Individual Mormons may have integrity and behave with honour; they may even be accepted by the Lord as his followers; that is not for me to say. However, in my view the Mormon church is built upon lies. The theology upon which it is based bears no relation whatever to that of Our Lord, or the Bible, and it is certainly not Christian theology. Equally certainly it has nothing to do with any revelation from an angel.

Apart from that, I have no problem with Mormons.

 

[Norah63]

I would suspect that DRsteve is on guard from anyone coming into his meetings and saying their hail mary's also. Is that considered recruting? Dr?
I would not be bothered by it in any meeting. Not being insecure has its benefits.

 

[drstevej]

We have many Catholics who attend our church and I know none of them that write letters recruiting our members to become Catholics and to attend RCIA. So we welcome them. If they do what Stan did I would confront that too.

Had Stan simply attended without seeking to recruit no one would have minded.

In our church in Cape Girardeau we had a dozen or so members of the Worldwide Church of God visit my Sunday School class. Afterwards on came up and introduced himself and told his story. He said that he and those with him had embraced the gospel and no longer felt comfortable in the local WWCoG. I welcomed them and they still attend years later.

 

[drstevej]

Thank you.

In the interests of clarity, however, I have to say that I think Mormon theology is barking mad, and Joseph Smith a complete charlatan.

Individual Mormons may have integrity and behave with honour; they may even be accepted by the Lord as his followers; that is not for me to say. However, in my view the Mormon church is built upon lies. The theology upon which it is based bears no relation whatever to that of Our Lord, or the Bible, and it is certainly not Christian theology. Equally certainly it has nothing to do with any revelation from an angel.

Apart from that, I have no problem with Mormons.

Any kudos from the Mormon members???

 

[rockytopva]

I believe that the church ages are seven...

1. Ephesus – Apostolic – Leaving the first love… “All they which are in Asia be turned away from me…” – II Timothy 1:15
2. Smyrna – Martyrs – Persecutions ten days… Foxes Book of Martyrs describes ten Roman persecutions.
3. Pergamos – Orthodox – A pyrgos is a fortified structure – Needed for the dark ages.
4. Thyatira – Catholic – The Spirit of Jezebel is to persecute, control, and to dominate... Can invade any church!
5. Sardis – Protestant – A sardius is a gem, elegant yet hard and rigid. Doctrine in the head, little in the heart.
6. Philadelphia – Methodist – To obtain sanctification was to do so with love.
7. Laodicea – Charismatic – Rich and increased with goods and have need of nothing?

It is the spirit of Jezebel whose desire it is to control and to dominate. My perspective of Mormonism is that it yet another Jezebel trying to raise her head up, convincing its members that the sect is the only way to Salvation. The spirit of Jezebel would be ruthless if the Mormons were allowed to have their way and take over as a state religion.

But... So would anyone else. The Catholics, Calvinists, and Lutherans hated and persecuted the Ana-Baptists relentlessly.

 

[MormonFriend]

Thank you.

In the interests of clarity, however, I have to say that I think Mormon theology is barking mad, and Joseph Smith a complete charlatan.
...

I too appreciate your honest insight.

Have you ever wondered how something started from a charlatan with barking mad theology could have ever have survived the first years, let alone almost two centuries? How could it become attractive to both average persons and those showing superior intelligence? How could it cause people to give up everything, move from their homes and countries, and then to sacrifice and suffer to a degree that you and I cannot imagine, and continue to go forward with increased faith? And not only survive, but become so organized and established in a way that it has the strength and power to help not only their own, but generously to others in need. How could a "mad theology" inspire people to do this?

Indeed, Joseph Smith alone could not have done this. There were powers behind the movement that all must account for, that either come from the Heavenly Source, or the unseen powers of evil. If from evil, why are its followers compelled and devoted to do good?

Your statement does not add up.

 

[xXMikHaelXx]

I too appreciate your honest insight.

Have you ever wondered how something started from a charlatan with barking mad theology could have ever have survived the first years, let alone almost two centuries? How could it become attractive to both average persons and those showing superior intelligence? How could it cause people to give up everything, move from their homes and countries, and then to sacrifice and suffer to a degree that you and I cannot imagine, and continue to go forward with increased faith? And not only survive, but become so organized and established in a way that it has the strength and power to help not only their own, but generously to others in need. How could a "mad theology" inspire people to do this?

Indeed, Joseph Smith alone could not have done this. There were powers behind the movement that all must account for, that either come from the Heavenly Source, or the unseen powers of evil. If from evil, why are its followers compelled and devoted to do good?

Your statement does not add up.

Mormonism isn't the only religion that can boast this claim - are those ones also correct?

Your statement does not add up.

 

[drstevej]

Have you ever wondered how something started from a charlatan with barking mad theology could have ever have survived the first years, let alone almost two centuries?

Not the only case of this. Google cults and isms and you'll find quite a few.

 

[MormonFriend]

The Biblical picture doesn't have these pieces:

• peepstones
• cureloms
• Kolob
• kokoubeams
• liahonas
• JST improvements
• temple undergarments
• bread and water communion
• handshake tests
• tapir back riders
• Indian Israelites
• celestial harems
• teen elders
• borrowed Masonic ritual
• Married with Children Jesus speculation
• skin color changing to punish
• Pragmatic Official Declarations

It's like a box filled with pieces from two separate and different puzzles and you are imagining what you want it to look like and then jamming pieces together, whether they fit or not.... and then exclaiming "private revelation rocks! It speaks to me. This is the true restored puzzle. Praise to Joseph Smith, he's the Man!"

Throwing out distraction tactics again, because you do not want to address the question I asked? You are consistent!

The original statement made was that our buildings are represented by the name of Jesus Christ. You attempted to show that wrong by posting the familiar stature of Moroni on top the spires of our temples, as if it represented something other than Jesus Christ. Besides the fact that our temples all have the words engraved at the entrance: "House of the Lord. Holiness to the Lord", meaning Jesus Christ, what does the statue of Moroni represent to the LDS (and not to others)?

 

[Der Alte]

I too appreciate your honest insight.

Have you ever wondered how something started from a charlatan with barking mad theology could have ever have survived the first years, let alone almost two centuries? How could it become attractive to both average persons and those showing superior intelligence? How could it cause people to give up everything, move from their homes and countries, and then to sacrifice and suffer to a degree that you and I cannot imagine, and continue to go forward with increased faith? And not only survive, but become so organized and established in a way that it has the strength and power to help not only their own, but generously to others in need. How could a "mad theology" inspire people to do this?

See e.g. JW, SDA, UU, OP, UPCI, WWCG, non-Trin MJ,

Indeed, Joseph Smith alone could not have done this. There were powers behind the movement that all must account for, that either come from the Heavenly Source, or the unseen powers of evil. If from evil, why are its followers compelled and devoted to do good?

Your statement does not add up.

2Co 11:14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.​

 

[williamgramsmith]

Thank you.

In the interests of clarity, however, I have to say that I think Mormon theology is barking mad, and Joseph Smith a complete charlatan.

Individual Mormons may have integrity and behave with honour; they may even be accepted by the Lord as his followers; that is not for me to say. However, in my view the Mormon church is built upon lies. The theology upon which it is based bears no relation whatever to that of Our Lord, or the Bible, and it is certainly not Christian theology. Equally certainly it has nothing to do with any revelation from an angel.

Apart from that, I have no problem with Mormons.

And I'm perfectly fine and not offended if you "think" that.
Just don't misrepresent us like others do, and you'll be just fine to us.

But, just an FYI.... I'm a convert to the Church, who attended many so-called orthodox churches and otherwise prior to being Mormon, and I read the Bible for myself, and saw for myself how all these religions were accurately in many cases following what the book said and omitted a lot. I then came upon the LDS Church and it was and still is the only religion that fully fits the Bible, even after leaving the church and being anti-mormon and anti-religion for a time.

I wouldn't be in the religion unless it was literally true and fit the Bible.
And given my experience, you should tell I have good objectivity and high standards. I'm not much tolerant of man-made religion.

Might I propose to you that the "reason" you think our religion is "barking mad" is because of the perversions of our religion by our enemy's? From my varied experience I actually know this to be the case as a convert and former anti-mormon myself. Anti-Mormonism is much like Fanatical Islam in comparison or Atheists in what they say of Jews, Christians or the Bible. Thus, if I were you I wouldn't "trust" what people are saying of us, since it IS that bad.

But anyway, I appreciate your good judgment at least in this event.
And it's one reason I mentioned these things to you, because if you actually knew us, you might change your mind of our religion, even if you still weren't interested in it. But take care.....

 

[drstevej]

Throwing out distraction tactics again, because you do not want to address the question I asked? You are consistent!

The original statement made was that our buildings are represented by the name of Jesus Christ. You attempted to show that wrong by posting the familiar stature of Moroni on top the spires of our temples, as if it represented something other than Jesus Christ. Besides the fact that our temples all have the words engraved at the entrance: "House of the Lord. Holiness to the Lord", meaning Jesus Christ, what does the statue of Moroni represent to the LDS (and not to others)?

Start a thread and I'll play with you.

 

[williamgramsmith]

You are more than welcome.

Had the person concerned started handing out LDS leaflets to people in a meeting at an evangelical church, THAT would be prostelytising, imo. Or if he had stood up and talked about his own church, or if he had caused trouble, or harangued anyone in public.

He did not do any of that. He just wrote a letter to the leader of the group. The polite response would be for the recipient to write back and say thanks but no thanks. Handing it to someone else, and then that someone else calling the sender in to attempt to trap him in a 'lie' of some kind would seem to be something of an over-reaction.

And AGAIN perfectly well said....! Mi Lady...

 

[drstevej]

But anyway, I appreciate your good judgment at least in this event.
And it's one reason I mentioned these things to you, because if you actually knew us, you might change your mind of our religion, even if you still weren't interested in it. But take care.....

Send her a letter. Tell her how Joseph snatched Peter's keys. That just might make her bosom burn.

 

[williamgramsmith]

See e.g. JW, SDA, UU, OP, UPCI, WWCG, non-Trin MJ,

2Co 11:14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.​

Translation.....

No Angels of Light exist anymore, so the Mormon Angels MUST BE SATAN!!!