Our Thoughts

4 Responses to “Anti-Mormon”

1. john scherer said:
   

   There are probably several directions this could be taken in. I take that question as asking if there are any who fight against the church from within the church. The answer to that obviously being yes.
   Your viewpoint on this, however, may depend on your level of orthodoxy and your definitions of Mormon and Anti-Mormon.

   20 Jan 2006 @ 09:02 | Permalink

2. RoastedTomatoes said:
   

   Well, someone can certainly be called an anti-Mormon and still be a Mormon at the same time. The name calling’s a response that Richard Bushman’s biography of Joseph Smith, for example, has generated in one or two conversations I’ve had recently… But Bushman is obviously a Mormon.

   So I guess the answer to your question revolves around what sort of definition you adopt of “anti-Mormon.” Is it enough to be given that label, or must one meet objective criteria?

   20 Jan 2006 @ 09:45 | Permalink

3. Mark IV said:
   

   Can someone be a so-called “anti-mormon” and a Mormon at the same time?

   But of course, Kim! We have anti-Nephi-Lehis, why can’t we have anti-anti-Mormons? :-)

   20 Jan 2006 @ 10:31 | Permalink

4. Kim Siever said:
   

   You’re probably just being facetious, Mark, but in case you’re not, I think “anti” in “Anti Nephi Lehi” is different than “anti” in “anti-Mormon”. Since Anti-Nephi-Lehi was the name of Lamoni’s brother, I have a feeling “anti” is a prefix (with an undetermined meaning) similar to that used in Antionum and Antiparah.

   24 Jan 2006 @ 12:05 | Permalink

Leave a Reply