I know of a lot of people who think Mormons aren’t “real” Christians. I always thought that was an interesting and hypocritical view because so many of the Christian denominations spun off because of a similar view of another denomination. To my knowledge, Mormonism is the only one that stood away on its own because of an additional revelation and not just a new understanding of the same scriptures used by everyone else. (Although, to a smaller degree this did happen when Protestantism became a thing and so there’s a difference between the Catholic and Non-Catholic bibles.)

I recall one gal I am fond of, and who is a very devout young lady, telling me that Mormonism is a cult. To that I simply reminded her that in its own formative years, original Christianity (which of course wasn’t called that then) was THE picture definition of a cult: Smallish group of people who saw a human as a man-god and made a new religion from it. (AND a Middle Eastern cult, no less, which really made her cringe)

For a lot of reasons I won’t go into here, I explore Mormonism when I have the time. It’s low on my priority list because I’m not at all looking to change paths, but I do like to understand the world as much as possible and I’m somewhat curious by nature. I’ll tell you now that I’m usually more intrigued by what I read than I am put off. If you remove Mormonism from arenas like politics where it’s too easy to force views onto other people, and just start digging to see how deep you can go just to see the religion as religion, then you may be surprised. As a gay person, I can say that there is certainly a hard line that prevents Mormonism from ever being anything I could seriously consider – too much on their various sites confirms a general consensus that I am, at best, second class and in need of fixing. Been there, done that (with the Baptists) and I have no interest in a repeat. But all that aside, which is really putting aside A LOT,  there are many things about the Mormon path that I find to be encouraging and helpful.

In some of my studies, I sometimes find things that most who are simply curious would maybe not come across. I’m usually looking for things that set it apart from being just one more bland denomination of Christianity. One of those is “Kolob” and I wanted to write just a little about it because the hymn has very much impressed me.

Below you’ll see a short, modern music video of a hymn that is uniquely Mormon and to say I love it would be a great understatement. It’s called “If You Could Hie to Kolob” and I love it because it seems to parallel some deep teachings of Hinduism in some unexpected ways… At least, that’s the case from where I sit, and I love seeing where religions overlap. Before you read more and start to feel the need to correct me on anything let me be clear about something: I’m viewing this through Hindu lenses. My understanding or interpretation may or may not fall in line with what Mormonism teaches, but that’s not at all my concern. Anyway, there are a number of YouTube videos showing different renditions of this hymn and I encourage you to search them. You can click here for a display of the lyrics offered by the Latter Day Saints, although below I’ll share more about the lyrics.





From various LDS sources (misc. websites and blogs, etc…which I’m not going to cite here) I’ve learned much. I’ve learned that Kolob is a planet-star that is physically the nearest to the actual physical location of Heaven or God. My understanding of the Mormon layout of the universe has Kolob as among the very first of all creations in the physical universe, thus the physical proximity to God, Itself. Creation expanded out from God which is the Source and Center of all and everything and there also seems to be a natural hierarchy and status of everything which correlates directly to a thing’s proximity to God in the physical universe. So the farther you are from God the “lower” you are… kinda. Get the idea?

With that understanding, Kolob is extra special, extra exalted, and extra symbolic. From a physical standpoint, Kolob is the nearest to God and so presides over what is less near. Additionally, Kolob symbolically represents Jesus who is the Christ of the Christians. Jesus is the first “creation” and sits nearest the Father and has dominion over that life which is less near to the Father. And this extra layer of meaning, regardless of the mistakes I might have just made in explanation, is one way the hymn really impresses me.

The first verse of the hymn (284) goes like this…

“If you could hie to Kolob in the twinkling of an eye, And then continue onward with that same speed to fly, Do you think that you could ever through all eternity, Find out the generation where gods began to be?”

Speakers of modern English don’t know the word “hie.” It’s basically synonymous with the verb to hasten. “If you could hie to Kolob” is kind of explained by the second line which uses “twinkling of an eye”… AKA If you could get to Kolob REAL fast. But stopping at the closest place to our Source isn’t enough – we need to actually get there if we can (“… and then continue onward…”). The end of this first verse ties it directly into the second one.

If you could speed your way toward God, toward the Source, then you could pass the generation in which the first gods arose, the grand beginning where space came to be, and (in my interpretation, at least) into even the last cycle of the universe when gods and matter ceased. The last three lines of the second verse really speak to something Heartfulness and Sahaj Marg and Hinduism consider among the most supreme ideas: The idea of pure space where nothing has a place is the Zero, the Central Region. Most religious people, regardless of how they define words like “God” or “Gods,” won’t entertain idea of what might have been “before,” but here it seems to be a direct consideration.

Moving on to verse two….

“Or see the grand beginning where space did not extend? Or view the last creation where gods and matter end? Methinks the Spirit whispers, ‘No man has found pure space, nor seen the outside curtain where nothing has a place.'”

The rest of the hymn is descriptive and continues to add to the layers of meaning and insight – a very Hindu trait.

“The works of God continue and worlds and lives abound. Improvement and progression have one eternal round. There is no end to matter; there is no end to space. There is no end to spirit; there is no end to race. There is no end to virtue; there is no end to might. There is no end to wisdom; there is no end to light. There is no end to union; there is no end to youth. There is no end to priesthood; there is no end to truth.”

That’s most of the rest of the hymn and chunks stand out like shining stars to me…. Worlds and lives abounding, improvement and progression having an eternal round, no end to matter or space, no end to wisdom, no end to light, no end to truth. I’m sure I’m seeing these is some ways very different than the meaning meant in the Mormon context, but I don’t think that matters. I’m sure my view and theirs are more alike than not and even if that’s not the case I’m still very much enjoying to find such possible depth in a place so surprising to me.

I’ll close by spelling out a last verse of the song, which shares two very significant lines from the hymn – there is no end to love and there is no end to being.

“There is no end to glory; there is no end to love. There is no end to being; there is no death above.”

Aum Shri Mahaganeshaya Namaha | Aum Shanti


Two Sides – Same Coin

Yesterday I reposted something on Facebook that I knew would catch the attention of a few specific people. What I reposted can be accessed by clicking here. It’s a piece written by Spencer Hall for the KSL website (ksl.com) and relates to recent changes made in “Handbook 1” (Administrative Handbook).

At the top of the article you can find a video clip of the news agency reporting on the matter. According to that video,  these changes relate to children of same-sex couples and state that

  1. There can be no baby blessing.
  2. No baptism until age 18.
  3. No longer live with a gay parent in a gay relationship.
  4. Must disavow same-sex relationships.
  5. Any adults who are in a same-sex marriage or otherwise in a same-sex relationship are at risk of “punishment” based on grounds of apostacy (rejection, being renounced).

There is also a quote by Eric Hawkins, a Church spokesman, that basically reiterates that while the Church is and has been officially “against” anything same-sex, these changes to the Handbook aren’t in any way a rebuttal of “the law of the land” and that the Church recognizes that people are free to think or feel differently. There are apparently many parallels between how the Church views and treats polygamous situations.

Later in the video we find a quote by Troy Williams, the Executive Director of Equality Utah who said, “In America all churches have the religious liberty to welcome or exclude whomever they desire. We know that children of same-sex parents are treasures of infinite worth. In our universe, all God’s children have a place in the choir.”

The article below the video restates what the video did (which I’ve numbered above), plus shows “snip-its” of what appears to be the Handbook 1 modifications. I appreciated that this resource seemed to state the changes flatly. There was no, “OMG they’re devils!” The most emotional part of it was the quote by the Equality Utah Director – but I expected that and, frankly, I agree with his sentiment. All people ARE infinite treasures and should be treated as such.

I was browsing my Facebook newsfeed this morning and, as I expected there would be, there were a few posts related to the stuff I’d reposted. I’m assuming these had something to do with the strong opinion I expressed on my own Facebook page. One of those posts was to discuss the “9 Facebook Myths” about the Mormon Church’s policy on gays. (Click here to see it.) The very first thing that I noticed is that it came from a Latter Day Saints website. On one hand, I think all sides have to be heard and if anyone should have a voice on their behavior it’s the one behaving. On the other hand, you can ask a pedophile about pedophilia and the answer you’ll get is likely to be anything but objective. So, there’s that. But for the sake of showing the alternate side of the coin, let’s also look at the LDS page posted.

Two things in relation to the two changes are noted before tackling the myths. Those two notes are:

  1. Change to the definition of apostasy – Entering a gay relationship / marriage is apostasy.
  2. For children of gays to be baptized, they must first reach adult age and be cool with the Mormon definition of eternal marriage.

Now onto the Facebook myths, as well as my take on them.

  1. The Changes Punish Children.
    1. The challenge to this supposed myth is that children are allowed to attend all services, etc… But that’s kind of sugar coating it. The rebuttal to this myth states, “All people can receive all the ordinances of salvation and exaltation.” But that’s awfully misleading. The truth is that all people can, including children of gay people, so long as you formally cut yourself from those who are officially banned. Saying that “all” people can receive “all” the good stuff is a simplistic kind of dishonesty. Most of the discussion for this myth seems really concerned with divorced families – an interesting take on why rules need to be implemented for children of gays. This, too, seemed to be thinly-veiled ridiculousness.
  2. Gay People Are Treated Worse Than Other Sinners.
    1. Kudos to the Mormons for recognizing that gay marriages are legal marriages and adjusting some of their perspective in regard to gay relationships equating fornication. That’s at least SOMETHING. But it’s not enough for the rest of us. Time and time again the whole, “love the sinner hate the sin” crap has proven to be impossible and impractical for religious people to actually and successfully live. It simply doesn’t work. I don’t feel that the Mormons treat gays as worse than another sinner, but that’s not the issue. The issue is that gayness, which is 100% natural and inherent throughout Creation, is viewed as sin. For the purpose of this post, though, I side with the Mormons. My kind aren’t treated any worse than anyone else they hate.
  3. Violation of the Church’s 2nd Article of Faith
    1. “We believe that men will be punished for their own sins and not for Adam’s transgression.” This is an area I think the Mormons stand out from the bulk of Christianity and this is an area that, superficially, I agree with them. In the same way I don’t think a person of my generation is uniquely and personally paying for, say, the alcoholism of his great-great-great-grandfather, I don’t think any of us are suffering because Adam listened to Eve. The Mormons are definitely right on rejecting that doctrine. The thing I definitely disagree on though, insofar as this supposed myth is concerned, is that it says that children of gays are protected from repercussions by requiring they wait … blah blah blah. What’s it’s requiring is that these children eventually choose the Church and its Handbook over the parents and family who love them.
  4. Children Are Required to Reject Their Parents
    1. This supposed myth obviously relates directly to the prior one. The rebuttal here is that the individuals in question aren’t required to say anything to their parents in regard to rejecting that part of who they are. This practically screams “crazy-ass loophole.” So we gay people are supposed to be okay with our children seeing us as broken – because they aren’t forced to communicate that to us? “Children must simply recognize the Church’s teachings on sin.” Are you kidding me? The rebuttal for this “myth” also indicates that there’s a disconnect of sorts with those who have a problem “loving the sinner but hating the sin” and then states that these same people often believe that sexuality is the primary factor in personal identity. I, for one, see hating the sin but loving the sinner as total bullcrap AND also don’t see sexuality as a primary factor in personal identity. Kind of like an earlier myth, this rebuttal goes off on a side note and steers away from the original issue. If it doesn’t strike someone as somehow “off” to suggest “your kids are allowed to join our club wherein they’ll have to disavow who you (their parents) are, but it’s okay because they don’t have to tell you they agreed to believe you’re broken” then you yourself may well be “off.” It actually makes all of this sound a bit cultish – which is usually something I defend Mormonism on.
  5. Newborns As Apostates
    1. The first thing in this myth’s rebuttal that seems to glare at me is, “The new policy recategorizes same-sex marriage as apostasy instead of fornication.” This is to say, “You used to be a sinner, but now you just have to get out. (And we still think you’re a sinner.)” My question is, how is this an improvement of any kind? If you really think something is a sin that some folks are struggling with, how is altogether kicking them out a good thing? How does that help that poor old sinner? Beyond this, I think I agree with the rest of the rebuttal to this myth. I’ve known of a number of families where one parent adheres to one religion and the other belongs to another. It can lead to drama within the family and even divorce. I think it’s a matter for families of split-religious identity to sort out, though, and not something the Church should be governing.
  6. Church is Depriving Itself of Gay Members
    1. The last sentence of this rebuttal is really all that anyone needs to read. The Church carries the understanding that It is correct because It knows and understands the God of the universe better than anyone else and so people who are in disagreement are the issue. The Church isn’t depriving Itself, people are.
  7. This Hurts Me Personally
    1. This myth, and one or two others so far, are ones I’m not at all familiar with. I’ve not seen this / these on Facebook anywhere or even elsewhere online – but that doesn’t mean they aren’t out there. The majority of this rebuttal is sentiment I agree with. Emotions are CRAZY things and have so much destructive potential when not properly governed or caged. I’ve written about it a dozen times here on Sthapati Samanvayam. I do agree that emotion shouldn’t govern or influence policy or standards. However, one area I can see people saying this and it being a legit thing to say is, for example, lets say I (a gay person) have a child who wants to become a Mormon. As the loving parent of my child, I can and would support virtually any decision my child makes – including joining any religion of his or her choosing, regardless of my opinion of that religion. But it WOULD pain me on a very personal level to know that something my child wanted to pursue, which carries much potential for good (as Mormonism does), would require them to jump through hoops that would ultimately lead to them “agreeing” to doctrines that say their loving and supportive parent (me!) is a doomed sinner they have to disavow. Any person facing that kind of thing would naturally feel conflicted and, as a parent, knowing my child would need to endure that kind of bullshit to join a religion would be personally painful. Absolutely.
  8. The Church Lost and Should Move On
    1. Whoa. This myth is another that I haven’t seen anywhere online, but the rebuttal is really something else. The first thing that caught my attention is that the rebuttal says that the Supreme Court doesn’t dictate how churches should behave – but a rebuttal of an earlier myth indicated that the church is trying to go by the law of the land. Which is it? Does the law of the land matter and need regarded, or no? I also disagree greatly with the statement that implied the Supreme Court decision on gay marriage is just a “popular trend.” Aside from those two glaring pieces of idiocy, I agree with this rebuttal. Churches shouldn’t be “forced” to participate in marriages they don’t agree with, and the rebuttal points out that the decision to list gays and gay marriage under apostasy is a means to protect the church from being made to do things that go against what it believes. The funny thing is, nobody is flocking to anti-gay churches (like the Mormon Church) to force them to sanction gay marriage. This is all ENTIRELY unnecessary. The religious organizations that affirm gay relationships are known by gays and are where gays are going to get married – for those who want married in a church. Because gays, above many other groups, are keenly aware of the Separation of Church and State we tend to let those who don’t want us not have us. We don’t want your religious hate dictating whether we have the right to marry or visit our spouses in hospitals and we don’t want you to marry us. It’s really that cut and dry. The Church is separate from the State – and should be – and so the Mormon Church already has the protection is thinks it’s now securing.
  9. These Changes are Eternal Doctrine
    1. This is probably the most confusing to any non-religious person or any person entirely unfamiliar with Mormonism. This rebuttal almost made me say, “OF COURSE” out loud. After all the fuss and mess created and 9.5 myths dissected, there’s gotta be a way to weasel out. So, let’s play a game that’s probably 50% semantics and close by saying that things could change as additional revelation becomes available – and advise people to, in the meantime, just do what you’re told.

One thing I admire about the Mormon Church is that, regardless of what their beliefs are or aren’t, they’re generally peaceful about them. On the record and off the record, the Mormons I know (and the Mormonism I know) are generally really good about practicing the whole “live and let live” idea. They’re totally fine with staying in their own bubble and agreeing to disagree – which is something I respect and value greatly.

Aum Shri Mahaganeshaya Namah | Aum Shanti


After You’re Gone


Some time ago, I ranted on Facebook about how offensive I found the Mormon practice of “baptizing the dead.” I feel very strongly that this practice violates some kind of cosmic rule of live and let live. When I ranted, a number of my own family members who became Mormon after my grandfather’s passing, spoke up and said that I was wrong about that ritual and that I shouldn’t speak out about things like this because it makes me some kind of hypocrite. To be clear, it’s my understanding that this kind of baptism merely presents the dearly departed with a chance to accept the Mormon belief structure and gain the Mormon afterlife. Also, the hypocrisy referenced by my disgruntled relatives is apparently in regard to my critical attitude about someone else’s views or practice which my family members – knowing next to nothing about Hinduism – think goes against Hinduism. In this case, they would perhaps not be wrong within certain contexts, but in this context specifically they are still not necessarily right, either.

This weekend I’m spending more time at the computer than is usual because it’s my turn in my department’s on-call rotation. As I was logging on recently, I saw some kind of news headline mentioning that two popes were gaining sainthood “to bridge a divide” or something. It struck me… These two dudes were resting in peace, burning in hellflame, or maybe tossing crowns at Jesus’ feet or something (do only Protestant souls do this or Catholics, too?) and now their own afterlives are about to change entirely when they are sainted and begin interceding on behalf of Catholic believers who want something.

All this afterlife meddling. WTF?

Whatever happened to simply offering food and a little homage to our deceased relatives and letting past lives be past lives? I’ll admit, it’s a little tough for me to understand how devout people can be cool with trying to change the afterlives of their loved ones without their permission. But who am I?

Aum Shri Mahaganeshaya Namaha
Aum Shanti

Sit – N – Spin

Sometimes, often even, I wonder about the direction my life actually has. I’m doing things, and I’m happy, but often enough I glimpse how very little control I actually have over anything. I think most people are on one side of me or the other: they either feel like they’re the one pulling all strings, or they feel entirely powerless.

I feel within myself the ability to grab all the strings I want, but then about the time I do, I decide not to yank as hard as I had previous thought I might. One way this manifests is in my book-buying habits.

I love buying books. A lot. And I do it as frequently as I am able. Even when I shouldn’t, or don’t actually have the money, I’ll still go book hunting. Recently, on Valentine’s Day, I decided that I needed more books. I’ve been working my way, with much focus, through a few others I’ve been meaning to finish and had been feeling a sense of accomplishment… so, naturally, I need to add to the pile again.

I bought a number of books – all of which I’m pleased to own now. One was a steal AND a gem. I mentioned it on Facebook. Another is titled, “Shuddha Bhakti” by Swami B.V. Tirtha Maharaja. The others include a study guide for Sanskrit ( my religion’s sacred language), a version of the Shri Ishopanishad by Swami Prabhupada that matches the other books by him that I already own (I’ve had other copies of Shri Ishopanishad, but I was particularly pleased to find a hard copy that is the same size, etc… of my other ISKCON books), and lastly I bought a large black tome titled, “Jesus Christ Message to All Nations.” It’s fabulous. It’s some kind of gospel written by Warren Jeffs and pretty much bitches out every nation currently on our globe. It’s apparently a message that Jeffs channeled for the Lord God, who seems really upset and angry. Threats abound in this book. Unfortunately complete sentences, proper punctuation, and coherent thoughts do not. Amused, I read some to my beloved where God is supposedly warning the USA about her relationship with China and the Koreas. Fabulous stuff, although he wasn’t nearly as amused. I only bought the book to place it on my bookcase next to the Book of Mormon I have – which itself is only even in my home because after my father’s sister-in-law passed more than a third of my family joined the Mormon church. I don’t think the Mormon Church is any more a cult that the rest of Christianity, but this Warren Jeffs stuff seems to be more along the cultish lines, and a find like this book was too precious to pass up.

These book purchases are indicative, though. Imagine being a grocery store cashier and someone comes through your checkout lane with whipped cream, dental floss, a package of ink pens, and four tealight candles. Truthfully, I think most cashiers don’t give customers’ purchases a second though. But if you were a cashier, and you DID pay attention to what people were buying, and those items were what a single customer bought… WTF? Such randomness, no? I mean what’re the chances someone’s going to consider a trip to the grocery, start a list of items needed, and think, “Let’s see… Just ran out of whipped cream. Better get more dental floss. I’m getting low on ink pens, oh, and yes, I need FOUR tealight candles.”? Totally random, and you can’t even argue it.

But that’s me at any book store.

And I think it’s why I often feel like I have the ability to pull a million strings and get somewhere and go someplace and do something, but it’s also why I sometimes feel like I’m not actually pulling any of those strings. For instance, if I bought ONLY books on Mormonism… by now I’d be a damned expert. And the same can be said about a number of things I choose to study. What usually results, though, is that I end up knowing “a whole lot” about many many things, but end up knowing everything about nothing.

As frustrating as this is sometimes, I often feel like I’m still a little ahead of the game – but never as ahead as I’d like. All of this, serves as a constant reminder to me of the potential my life (and anyone else’s) has. We all have a billion strings we could be pulling. And also a reminder of my laziness. The Gita says that no effort is ever wasted when one exerts it toward betterment and realization. But one has to actually make the effort.

Om Shanti

The Night I Bit Clear Through My Tongue, or Pot/Kettle/Black

In class recently I had the wonderful experience of dropping eaves on a nearby conversation taking place between some of my classmates.

Those chatting were three in number.

  • One mid-late thirties white (mostly) heterosexual male who is nearly as broad as he is tall, although rather firm, and also mostly unintelligent. (For the record, I’m totally making an assumption about his intelligence, I can explain as much, if requested, although it’s neither here nor there.)
  • One middle-aged white heterosexual female/wife/mother of numerous small humans. A happily self-proclaimed “army brat,” who married another such individual, and with whom she raised even more army brats. She’s rather chatty in her own way, and seems inclined toward needing to impress others.
  • One middle-aged black heterosexual male, far taller than he is wide. Aside from his shared military history with the others, I’m not very familiar with stories of his own background. I think he’s married, or rather was, and now has a chip on his shoulder regarding this.

At the beginning of class, as happens often enough, the faculty insisted on an ice breaker. However, instead of being creative with this ice breaker, the faculty simply pulled out Microsoft Excel and, working some columns and rows with one or another formula, shuffled us into three lists and instructed us to mingle and chat, before being shuffled again and repeating the whole thing. Sadly, it didn’t take long for me to realize that i had very little in common, indeed, with any of these three. Though, I will admit the black fellow seemed most appealing to me. You see, of the three of them, he was the only one capable of carrying a conversation with others without turning it, sooner or later, to centering around army/military talk.

Fine. Dandy.

Since then, the three have been veritable peas in a pod. I believe they may actually be on a learning team together, or something, which would account for some of his cohesion to a degree. I’ll allow that, at least. I’ll also allow that, by and large, most of their prattling hardly amounts to much more than mere annoyance. I find myself wanted desperately to interrupt and emphatically request that they talk about something else -anything else. But, alas, I give them their space and attempt directing my attention elsewhere. Tonight was a challenge, though.

The conversation started with the woman, who I’d just as soon leave roadside somewhere, although that wouldn’t be very nice of me. She had her laptop out and was boasting about her husband’s miliary retirement ceremony (the photos of which she was sharing from her computer), which apparently took place in Utah. After talking about Utah as though it’s some kind of heaven compared to Indiana, she started in on those evil Mormons. <sigh>

She, and the black guy, and the somewhat-flabby-somewhat-meathead went on and on about how cultish the Mormon religion is, mentioning that it’s not Christianity, and they all agreed more than once that they (Mormons) don’t like you much if you’re not one of them, and will try hard to make you one of them. They also chatted briefly about the history Mormons have regarding blacks. Virtually everything they said about the Mormon religion is true. Not everything, but much.

The woman in the conversation finally admitted that she was denied a job while in Utah because when asked what ward or stakehouse she belonged to, she gave the wrong answers. (By her account, she answered with some military number that applied to her husband for her answer to the ward question, and said something like Outback Steakhouse for the other answer) Ultimately, when her interviewer clarified, she answered that she isn’t Mormon, rather she is a Southern Baptist.

And stop. Please, for God’s sake, allow me to explain a few things.

  1. Mormons ARE Christians. To deny this is ignorant and mean, and frankly petty. I’ve seen this a lot within Christianity. An example would be when I’ve told someone about how I was tossed out of the Church as a teen for being gay. Often the response I get is something like, “How horrible! Those people weren’t real Christians! Real Christians show Christ’s love to everyone!” Ummm… bullshit. The people who hated me for being gay are equally as much Christians as any others, and saying they aren’t just because they make the Faith look as mean as it is, doesn’t make them bad guys. It really pisses me off when Christians turn on each other like this -another very telling indicator of that religion. Truth be told, the Mormon branch of Christianity is one of the highest educated and most productive. Look it up. You’ll see.
  2. Mormons ARE cultish, but virtually no other branch or denomination of Christianity has any room to talk at all, so stuff it. In fact, what 99.99999% of most Christians either fail to realize or choose to ignore is that their own religion literally began as a middle eastern cult that had a knack for either convincing folks to join their ranks or, eventually, killing them for refusing to. Christianity’s very violent and bloody history is full of “Us versus Them” moments, which continue into today. At its dawn, Christianity was an exclusionary minority group, following their own exalted leader, and shunning many of the practices of the culture it sprang from. Mormonism may well be a (ridiculously large) cult, but Christianity -in word and deed- is the very same.
  3. It’s particularly and absolutely hypocritical that a Southern Baptist gal had the nerve to say those things, in a derogatory manner, about Mormons. I was once a Baptist, and I could have easily told you why every other religious/spiritual path was doomed for damnation. In fact, I feel comfortable saying that that’s one of the things Baptists specialize in. The last I knew, Baptists were the largest denomination in the Protestant Christian world, and if there’s any one denomination in the Christian religion that’s cultish, exclusionary, and inclined toward hating others, it’s the Baptists. No joke.

Suffice it to say, in an effort to “bite” my tongue for the sake of keeping silent, I nearly bit clear through it. It’s a good thing this class is half over -I’m running out of tongue to bite!

Om Shanti