Mormons and Mormon critics: What do you consider the Tanners work?

Question

1. Purely anti-Mormon
2. Critical of Mormonism but not anti
3. Some parts anti and other parts critical but not anti

Mweyamutsvene: Since bias apparently equals anti in your opinion, does that mean that Mormon apologists are “anti” non-Mormon world views instead of “critical” of non-Mormon world views? After all, Mormon apologists are probably equally as biased as the Tanners.

Thanks SirNetwork, I will add the fourth option.

4. Purely pro-Christ and pro knowledge

Answer 1

I had the pleasure of knowing Jerald and I know Sandra. I think they have sacrificed their lives and friends honestly telling the truth about what they believed and why they no longer believe it.

"anti-Mormon" is a term that has little if no use. Anyone who is critical is labeled anti. I am a critic of the LDS group, but I personally care for them and about them. I have been labeled anti- for years.

Purely critical, based upon facts and a ministry that has helped thousands.

Ath

Answer 2

Disclaimer: I'm LDS.

Those are broad strokes that you're asking us to paint with.
Let me give you another possibility:
4. Purely pro-Christ and pro knowledge
(Maybe a hint of 2. above)

When I was investigating the church as an atheist, I spent a lot of time on their website reading their criticisms and research, sprinkled in with their opinions. They made me think about all of the tough questions that had to be answered through further study and prayer.

I answered those challenges and moved forward. The Tanners seemed to do everything with love and great study, but came to different conclusions than I did. Great people with great intent, and I was sorry to hear of Gerald's death.

Answer 3

The difference between critical and anti is the amount of professionalism associated with a certain work. The Tanner's books and writtings contain so many opinionated adjectives and adverbs that they can scarcely be considered "critical works."
I would define critical works as more of an unbiased study - its easy to tell how which bias the Tanners subscribe to from any of their writtings.

Answer 4

The Tanners performed a great and remarkable service, doing meticulous research and exposing the fraud that is Mormonism in the days before the Internet. If Mormons have a complaint with the Tanners, they should take it up with all those dead "prophets" who left the clues behind for the Tanners to find.

Answer 5

A complete waste of time.

If the LDS church is God's true church on earth, then there is nothing that the Tanner's or any other "critic" can do about it. They will have wasted precious time that could have been spent serving the Lord and reading His word rather than counting "errors" in the Book of Mormon.

If the LDS church is not true, then it will fail without the help of the Tanners.

Answer 6

I think it's a shame that I even have to defend my religion, in a country that was founded on the basis of free religion. In fact, I find it puzzling that anyone would spend their valuable time trying to pull down someone else's religion, especially when that religion shares far more in common with their own religion, than it has differences. It is a shame that people that claim to be Christian do such an un-Christian thing, like putting other religions down, and focusing on their discredit, rather than simply live by Christ's teachings, and focus on improving ourselves in preparation for eternal aspirations.

"The Mormons seem the very embodiment of 'family values,' and you couldn't invent a religious culture that lived more consistently with Biblical messages. ... On the scale of American problems, the Mormons don't even register." — Wall Street Journal editorial

No matter your opinion on the LDS Church, I reccommend you read this article: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695233910,00.html

Answer 7

I think its great. I had left the church before I looked at their site. The are not saying the church is a bunch of devil worshippers, altho i lived in UT and UT had a problem with devil worshippers when I was there, its not to say they were mormons, but something was drawing them to UT. Back to the tanner's...I would have liked to meet them, I had never heard fo them until I left the state.

Answer 8

For me, I would say #3. I have been to their web-site and while some of the things they say have some truth to it, some of the things smack of Decker, and he is a real Anti. The Tanners are more studied, have tact and are not completely loony.

Answer 9

Probably 3. They do not rant. They do not base their arguments on underwear. They offer a higher level of test of faith than most on this site.

Answer 10

The answer to your question may be answered in "The Browns" Book (They lie in wait to Deceive)