Have you ever found yourself in a discussion about faith only to feel manipulated, undervalued, or attacked personally? Unfortunately, this is often the work of toxic apologetics fueled by narcissistic traits. For Latter-day Saint Christians and Evangelicals, recognizing and addressing these behaviors is crucial for meaningful and respectful dialogue.
Narcissistic traits in religious discussions can undermine your sense of worth and distort genuine faith conversations. Apologists with such tendencies can be manipulative, aiming to assert dominance rather than seek truth. With apologetics expanding through digital platforms, it's increasingly important to discern and protect against these toxic influences.
Through this guide, we'll explore how these traits manifest and provide insights into safeguarding your faith and integrity. Understanding these dynamics will not only help in navigating complex discussions but also ensure that the defense of your beliefs remains respectful and constructive.
Unmasking Gaslighting: Navigating Healthy Conversations in Apologetics
This article explores the topic of gaslighting in apologetics, discussing its definition, impact on mental well-being, common tactics, and strategies for addressing and protecting oneself from gaslighting behavior in faith-based discussions.
Gaslighting in apologetics can take various forms, including the use of nonsensical logical fallacies, the manipulation of language, and the distortion of facts to coerce individuals into accepting certain religious beliefs or to make them doubt their own understanding of their faith. Therefore, understanding the insidious nature of gaslighting in apologetics is crucial for fostering healthy and respectful conversations within religious communities, promoting understanding, empathy, and the pursuit of genuine truth.
Gaslighting within apologetics can manifest in various ways, such as through the use of nonsensical logical fallacies and psychobabble to justify certain faith-based positions. This manipulation can lead individuals to question their own sanity and doubt the validity of their experiences, ultimately undermining their confidence in their beliefs and values. For instance, when a person raises a legitimate concern about a religious belief, the gaslighter may shift the focus of the discussion onto the individual's supposed shortcomings, deflecting from the original issue and inducing self-doubt in the individual's mind.
Furthermore, gaslighting tactics in apologetics can have a detrimental impact on an individual's mental and emotional well-being. By distorting the truth and coercing individuals into questioning their own experiences, gaslighting can lead to feelings of anxiety, depression, and self-doubt. The use of manipulative strategies , such as denial, shaming, and blaming, can create an environment of psychological distress and emotional turmoil for those involved in apologetics discussions, ultimately hindering healthy and respectful dialogue within faith-based communities. This highlights the urgent need to recognize and address gaslighting behavior in apologetics to foster a supportive and constructive environment for engaging in discussions related to faith and beliefs.
One specific example of gaslighting in apologetics is when individuals raise genuine questions or concerns about certain religious beliefs and are met with dismissive responses that aim to invalidate their experiences and perceptions. This can lead to self-doubt and confusion, ultimately undermining the individual's confidence in their faith and contributing to emotional distress.
Understanding Gaslighting in Apologetics
Gaslighting in the context of apologetics involves manipulating someone into questioning their own beliefs, perceptions, and experiences, leading them to doubt their sanity and judgment. In the realm of faith and religious discussions, the application of gaslighting tactics distorts the intended purpose of apologetics, which is to provide a rational and logical defense for one's faith or position. Instead of fostering an environment of open dialogue and mutual respect, gaslighting in apologetics undermines the fundamental principles of healthy discourse and respectful engagement within faith-based communities.
Gaslighting tactics in apologetics discussions may involve the use of nonsensical logical fallacies, psychobabble, and manipulative language to coerce individuals into questioning their own beliefs and experiences. This can create an atmosphere of uncertainty and doubt, leading to emotional distress and undermining the pursuit of genuine understanding and truth within religious conversations. Therefore, recognizing and understanding the detrimental impact of gaslighting in apologetics is essential for fostering an environment of healthy and constructive dialogue within faith-based communities.
An example of gaslighting in apologetics is when individuals express genuine concerns or doubts about certain religious teachings and are met with dismissive or shaming responses that aim to invalidate their experiences. This manipulation can lead individuals to question their own beliefs and perceptions, ultimately compromising their emotional well-being and the integrity of the apologetics discourse.
The Toxic Effects of Gaslighting in Apologetics
Gaslighting in apologetics can have severe negative impacts on an individual's mental and emotional well-being, leading to feelings of anxiety, depression, and self-doubt. When individuals engage in discussions or debates related to faith and beliefs, the manipulative tactics employed in gaslighting can erode their confidence and sense of reality. This can create a significant emotional toll, causing distress and confusion as individuals grapple with the covert attempts to undermine their beliefs and experiences.
In addition, within religious communities, the use of gaslighting can be particularly damaging. When individuals seek spiritual guidance and support, they are often in a vulnerable position, looking for validation and reassurance. However, when gaslighting is employed in these settings, it can lead to self-harm and suicidal ideation among vulnerable individuals. The constant state of insecurity, doubt, and fear induced by gaslighting can create an environment ripe for exploitation, ultimately jeopardizing the mental and emotional well-being of those involved in the discussions. The impact of gaslighting in apologetics, especially within religious communities, underscores the critical need to address and prevent such behavior to protect the overall well-being of individuals engaging in faith-based discussions.
The toxic effects of gaslighting in apologetics extend beyond individual experiences and can permeate entire faith-based communities. The use of manipulative tactics to coerce individuals into accepting certain religious viewpoints or to doubt their own experiences and beliefs can lead to a breakdown of trust and the erosion of healthy discourse within these communities. This can contribute to strained relationships, emotional distress, and a lack of genuine understanding and support, ultimately compromising the integrity and well-being of faith-based environments.
Recognizing Gaslighting Behavior
Recognizing gaslighting behavior in apologetics is crucial for maintaining healthy and respectful discussions within faith-based communities. One common warning sign of gaslighting is denial, where individuals may dismiss valid concerns or questions raised by others, causing the victim to doubt their own perceptions and experiences. For instance, if someone expresses doubts about certain religious teachings and is met with responses like, "You're imagining things" or "That never happened," it can be a sign of gaslighting, leading the individual to question their own beliefs and understanding.
Another red flag is blame-shifting, where the focus of the conversation is redirected to the perceived faults of the individual raising questions. This tactic can make the victim feel guilty or ashamed of expressing their genuine thoughts and concerns. In apologetics, this can be observed when individuals are made to feel responsible for their doubts or beliefs, being told that their skepticism is a result of their lack of faith or commitment. By shifting the blame onto the victim, the gaslighter aims to exert control and manipulate the individual's beliefs and emotions.
Furthermore, shaming is a prevalent gaslighting tactic in apologetics discussions, where individuals are made to feel inadequate or inferior for expressing their genuine thoughts or experiences. This can take the form of labeling someone as "weak in faith" or "spiritually immature" for questioning certain religious doctrines or beliefs. By using shame as a tool, gaslighters aim to undermine the victim's confidence and self-worth, making it easier to control and influence their beliefs and behaviors within the faith community.
It's important for individuals to be aware of these signs of gaslighting in apologetics discussions to protect their mental and emotional well-being. Recognizing these behaviors can empower individuals to set boundaries, seek support, and disengage from toxic interactions, fostering an environment of mutual respect and understanding within faith-based communities.
A specific example of recognizing gaslighting behavior in apologetics is when individuals express genuine concerns or questions about certain religious beliefs and are met with dismissive or shaming responses that aim to invalidate their experiences. This manipulation can lead individuals to question their own beliefs and perceptions, ultimately compromising their emotional well-being and the integrity of the apologetics discourse.
Common Gaslighting Tactics in Apologetics
Gaslighting in apologetics conversations often involves more subtle tactics that aim to sow seeds of doubt and confusion in the minds of those engaging in the discussion. One common tactic is the use of nonsensical logical fallacies to defend certain beliefs, which can leave the other party feeling confused and uncertain about their own position. For example, when a person questions a specific belief, they might be met with circular reasoning or ad hominem attacks, making them doubt the validity of their concerns and inquiries.
Another common gaslighting tactic in apologetics is the use of psychobabble to justify particular positions about faith. This can manifest in the form of attributing doubt or questioning to a lack of faith rather than addressing the legitimate concerns raised by the individual. By dismissing genuine inquiries as a lack of spirituality or faith, the person engaging in the discussion is made to feel inadequate in their beliefs and may begin to question their own reasoning and intuition.
Furthermore, gaslighting in apologetics often involves the manipulation of language to create an illusion of certainty and correctness. This can be seen through the use of garbage rationalizations, where convoluted explanations and excuses are presented as undeniable truths. For instance, individuals may be presented with convoluted explanations that are difficult to follow, leaving them feeling intellectually inferior and more likely to doubt their own understanding of the situation.
These tactics are detrimental as they create an environment where individuals are coerced into doubting their own perceptions and beliefs, ultimately leading to a loss of confidence and emotional distress. It is essential to recognize these tactics and the harm they can cause in apologetics discussions to protect one's mental and emotional well-being.
Gaslighting tactics in apologetics can also involve the use of the "The Emperor Has No Clothes" Fallacy to undermine the beliefs and experiences of individuals expressing genuine concerns or doubts about certain religious teachings. This manipulation aims to invalidate the individual's experiences and perceptions, leaving them feeling confused and uncertain about their own beliefs.
Consequences of Gaslighting in Apologetics
For instance, in a religious setting, a person expressing doubt about a particular doctrine may be met with dismissive or shaming responses, intended to invalidate their concerns. Over time, this erodes the individual's confidence and may lead to a fear of expressing their honest questions and seeking genuine understanding. As a result, the individual's emotional well-being is compromised, and the community as a whole may suffer from the lack of open and respectful dialogue, which is essential for healthy spiritual growth.
Furthermore, real-life examples of gaslighting within religious and apologetics contexts have revealed the detrimental effects of this behavior. From individuals experiencing heightened anxiety and depression to the breakdown of meaningful connections within their faith communities, the impact of gaslighting cannot be overlooked. These examples serve as cautionary tales, highlighting the urgent need to address and prevent gaslighting behavior within apologetics to safeguard the well-being of individuals engaging in discussions about faith and beliefs.
An example of the consequences of gaslighting in apologetics is the breakdown of trust and genuine understanding within faith-based communities, leading to strained relationships and emotional distress. By coercing individuals into doubting their beliefs and experiences, gaslighting undermines the integrity of apologetics discourse and compromises the emotional well-being of those involved in these discussions.
Protecting Against Gaslighting in Apologetics
One strategy for protecting oneself from gaslighting in apologetics is to develop a strong awareness of common gaslighting tactics. By familiarizing oneself with these tactics, individuals can identify when they are being manipulated and respond to such behavior effectively. For example, if an apologist uses the "The Emperor Has No Clothes" Fallacy to dismiss legitimate questions or concerns, recognizing this tactic can empower individuals to challenge the gaslighting attempt and maintain their confidence in their beliefs.
Moreover, setting clear boundaries in apologetics discussions can serve as a protective measure against gaslighting. Establishing and communicating personal boundaries can help to deter manipulative behavior and ensure that individuals engage in respectful and constructive conversations. For instance, clearly expressing that certain gaslighting tactics, such as shaming or blaming, are not acceptable in discussions can prevent the gaslighter from further perpetuating such behavior. This proactive approach can contribute to a healthier and more conducive environment for exploring and defending one's faith or beliefs.
Seeking support from trustworthy and understanding sources is another crucial aspect of protecting against gaslighting in apologetics. Having a network of individuals who can provide validation, guidance, and perspective can help counteract the isolating and undermining effects of gaslighting. Whether it is through engaging in discussions with mentors, peers, or mental health professionals, seeking support can offer valuable insights and reassurance, helping individuals maintain their emotional and mental well-being in the face of gaslighting attempts. By implementing these protective strategies, individuals can navigate apologetics discussions with greater confidence and resilience, safeguarding themselves from the detrimental consequences of gaslighting tactics.
Addressing Gaslighting Behavior in Apologetics
When confronting gaslighting behavior in apologetics discussions, it's essential to employ assertive communication techniques. This involves clearly and confidently expressing one's thoughts, feelings, and concerns while maintaining a respectful tone. For example, if an individual feels that their beliefs are being manipulated or undermined, they can assertively communicate their boundaries and expectations within the conversation. By doing so, they can address gaslighting tactics and prevent the situation from escalating further.
In addition to assertive communication, seeking mediation may be necessary in more challenging situations. In cases where gaslighting behavior persists despite attempts to address it directly, involving a neutral third party, such as a mediator or counselor, can provide a supportive and constructive environment for resolving conflicts. Mediation can offer a platform for both parties to express their perspectives and work towards a mutually respectful resolution, helping to mitigate the harmful effects of gaslighting in apologetics discussions.
Furthermore, individuals should seek support and validation outside of gaslighting environments. This can involve confiding in trusted friends, mentors, or members of supportive communities who can offer perspective, empathy, and encouragement. By seeking validation and support from reliable sources, individuals can gain clarity and strength to navigate challenging apologetics discussions, safeguarding their mental and emotional well-being in the process. It's crucial to emphasize the importance of prioritizing healthy and respectful interactions within faith-based communities, promoting an environment of mutual respect, understanding, and constructive dialogue.
An example of addressing gaslighting behavior in apologetics is when individuals employ assertive communication techniques to express their concerns and expectations within the discourse. By setting clear boundaries and seeking mediation if necessary, individuals can address and prevent the harmful effects of gaslighting, ultimately fostering an environment of healthy and respectful dialogue within faith-based communities.
Disengaging from Gaslighting Conversations in Apologetics
Furthermore, disengaging from gaslighting conversations involves knowing when to walk away from toxic interactions. This may include taking a break from online forums, social media debates, or even in-person discussions that exhibit signs of gaslighting behavior. By recognizing the warning signs and being willing to disengage, individuals can protect themselves from the detrimental effects of gaslighting, allowing for a healthier and more balanced engagement in apologetics.
An example of disengaging from gaslighting conversations in apologetics is when individuals recognize the harmful effects of manipulative behavior and choose to set clear boundaries and disengage from toxic interactions. By prioritizing healthy and respectful conversations, individuals can protect their mental and emotional well-being, ultimately fostering an environment of constructive dialogue within faith-based communities.
Conclusion and Call to Action
Gaslighting in apologetics can have detrimental effects on individuals' well-being and beliefs, highlighting the importance of addressing and preventing this behavior within faith-based communities. It is crucial for individuals to recognize the signs of gaslighting, such as denial, blame-shifting, and shaming, to protect themselves from its harmful impact. For instance, in online discussions related to faith and beliefs, gaslighting may manifest as the constant denial of valid questions or the twisting of a narrative to deflect from the original topic, leaving individuals feeling invalidated and manipulated.
Encouraging individuals to prioritize healthy and respectful discussions in faith-based communities is essential for fostering a supportive and nurturing environment within apologetics and religious discourse. By recognizing and disengaging from gaslighting interactions, individuals can protect their mental and emotional well-being, ultimately promoting a space where open dialogue and understanding can flourish. The call to action is to create an environment where individuals feel safe and respected, enabling constructive conversations and personal growth within the context of apologetics and religious engagement.
When you think of the term victim being used - what comes to mind? For me, it presents a notion that someone is suffering some form of abuse. Maybe someone who experienced some form of crime against them. Others may have experienced the devastation of fraud. However, would it ever occur to you that someone within a religious group be considered a victim? Maybe of spiritual, physical, and/or emotional abuse. In that context and understanding, I'd agree that a person is a victim. What if being a member of a faith-based community really is what it takes to be a victim?
According to Truth in Love's Ministry approach to ministering and witnessing to members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints - we are not considered enemies of the Christian Faith. We are merely victims because of our faith in the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ. In fact, a video was posted on Truth in Love's Ministry YouTube channel on September 15, 2021 where the presenter discusses Top 5 principles for witnessing to Mormons. And the primary de facto principle is to see Mormons as victims and not enemies.
A False Premise and Perception Established
The opening portion of this 3:45 minute video presentation begins with the idea that Latter-day Saint Christians are to be considered victims.
There are everyday examples of people who see someone in need and then step into action, often without even thinking. Someone jumps into the water to rescue another who's drowning. Someone rushes into the road and pushes a child out of the way of oncoming traffic. If we see someone in danger, even complete strangers, we will rise up. We have compassion and help those in need. But sometimes a person's need is less dramatic. The danger they may be in, it seems subtle. Perhaps the victim can't articulate or maybe even doesn't realize it. Their need is still very real, and it is as important as ever to help them. This is why our first witnessing principle is seeing Mormons as victims, not enemies. Mormons really are victims, yet most don't realize it.
While I do credit the acknowledgement that there has appeared to be this perception that Latter-day Saints (Mormons) were (and still are in some Evangelical and Christian circles) considered enemies of the Christian faith. This statement of Latter-day Saints being victims appears to be subtle deception. It is one thing for someone to comment, speak, or share that they believe that what many members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teach and hold dear is false, wrong, erroneous, anathema to the Bible, et. al. However, it is another to shift gears and teach people that Mormons really are victims, and many may not be aware of it.
The question is - what are Latter-day Saints supposedly victims of? Well, the video continues:
Let me give you a couple of examples. Mormonism teaches conditional grace so any blessing from God is contingent on their obedience. They're taught the best are blessed and you may feel pretty good when things are going well. Inevitably, we all face times of trouble, and in those moments, Mormons question their relationship with God. The question of what they did wrong. In those moments, it can feel like the worst are cursed. This mindset leads Mormons to chase after blessings as the demonstration that, well, they must have God's love. As a result, Mormons are victimized by a culture of success. They want to project the image of God is pleased with them and this is never ending and exhausting.
Yet because they're surrounded by others who also must demonstrate they have God's blessing, there's very little room for weakness. So many describe suffering silently behind a mask. Most Mormons fear sharing their struggles with another Mormon. Their culture doesn't allow them to open up and be authentic. Mormonism creates pressure, but there's no release valve.
In essence, what I believe the presenter is saying, is that Latter-day Saints feel the desire and need to chase after blessings because they are experiencing struggles in life? That we hold to the idea that there is a contingency of receiving blessings by our mere obedience to God?
Yet any person who reads the Old and New Testament scriptures are amazed at the insurmountable times God has placed contingencies on blessings with obedience. In some instances, there is not only the blessings attached with obedience, but also an attached curse as part of that contingency.
Take for example the following statement that Jesus Christ himself made:
Not everyone that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my father which is in heaven.
Matthew 7:21, KJV
In another translation, we read:
Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven, only those who do what my Father in heaven wants.
Matthew 7:21, CJB (Complete Jewish Study Bible)
And we read this same passage in another translation:
Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
Matthew 7:21, English Standard Version
What we do know is that Christ spent time instructing the disciples, and those gathered around him (including the religious leaders of the day) to teach them and instruct them on the way to live life. Matthew 5 contains the beatitudes, exhortations, and parables. Matthew 6 continues with more exhortations and parables. Matthew 7 concludes with exhortations, responses to the religious leaders, and then a parable of the wise man and the foolish man. The question is - what did Christ mean by those who do the will of the Father? Certainly, we consider that Eternal life and Salvation are the epitome of all blessings granted upon humanity. To be allowed into the Kingdom of Heaven. Christ explains himself in Matthew 7:24 by likening those who hears and does those instructions he provided in Matthew 5-7 are liken unto the wise man building his house on a sure foundation of solid rock. The foolish man is those who do not hear and do what Christ taught and subsequently build their house on sandy and unstable foundations.
Another contingency we find in the teachings of the Savior relates to the following:
24 Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. 25 For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. 26 For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul?
Matthew 16;24-26, ESV
Notice that Christ says that if any person is willing to deny themselves and take up their cross and follow Him, they will receive blessings. Those who are not willing, shall lose their very own lives. This is a contingency statement. A very deep and enriching one. There are many other scriptures that speak to how blessings are tied to obedience to God's will and desire. There are also those contingencies attached that if we do not walk in obedience to God's will and desire, we will experience suffering, despair, and even judgment. Furthermore, scripture does teach that God will chide and chastise those who are following Him.
So, I am not sure how this presenter is teaching that Latter-day Saints are victims because of the idea that when we are following God, when we are devoted to Christ, and when we are walking in accordance with God's will and desire, that we will experience blessing as a "contingency" that frustrates and disappoints us.
The other observation is that the presenter appears to focus mainly on Latter-day Saints when it comes to suffering through adversity. There are plenty of Christian believers who suffer and experience adversity in their own lives. Many who question their faith. Some have even abandoned their faith and now are atheists. This form of argument appears to be a grandiose special pleadingfallacy.
Latter-day Saint Christians do hold to and understand that we will experience suffering in this life. That we will experience those circumstances where our faith and testimony will be challenged. This does not make us "victims" in the sense the presenter appears to claim. We may be a victim of natural disasters, victim of crimes committed against us. In fact, many Latter-day Saints were victimized by Evangelical Christians in the early days of the Church growth.
This form of victimization involved families being driven from their homes, men accosted and assaulted, tarred and feathered, all because they held to their belief and testimony of the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ.
As for today - Latter-day Saints being victims - only from misinformation, false teachings, and deceptive insinuations promoted and published to discourage anyone from honestly investigating our faith. Or to challenge and get people to question their faith in a manner to abandon their testimony. That is the only time Mormons succumb to being victims (outside of any form of abuse perpetrated by others).
Touching on the false perception (for that is exactly what it is) where Latter-day Saints are isolated, closed off, and unable to be transparent about their suffering? This is further from the truth. Many members of the LDS Faith utilize their ward families, bishopric, local leaders, and even close friends to share and discuss their struggles and issues with. This is the heart and soul of the ministering aspect of the LDS Faith, to reach out to those struggling. Whether it is with temporal needs, or spiritual issues and concerns. For temporal issues a person is struggling with, the LDS Faith has the following:
Addiction Recovery Program to help those suffering with pornography and/or substance abuse related issues
Family Services for those needing mental health services, counseling, and other resources
Welfare Services - Well know program to help those who are impoverished receive needed food, and other resources
Programs to develop self-sufficiency
Employment Counseling and Ministry to help those not only find employment, gain ways to access other resources - to include education
Much of this is accomplished because many members of the LDS Faith are faithful in obeying the law of tithing, and the giving of fast offerings once a month. The LDS Faith is also actively involved in providing humanitarian aid to those areas devastated by natural disasters and needing relief.
Again, there is no real credible merit or evidence to suggest that Latter-day Saints suffer alone, isolated, and in silence without the spiritual guidance of leaders, family, and friends within the ward.
Finally, Latter-day Saints are not victimized by a culture of success. If anything, Latter-day Saints are counseled and directed toward ways to improve overall quality of life. Seek out education, maintain an active savings account, live where one is self-sufficient, develop and create a healthy home environment for family. Follow wise counsel given by leaders of the Church. If anyone feels victimized by a culture of success, it is not really because of the LDS faith, it may be because of the persons own inadequacy and lack of awareness. It is quite easy to blame a group of people or a individual because of own's own inadequacy.
Unverified and False Assertions Being Presented
The presenter moves on and presents some interesting statistics:
Utah, majority Mormons, consistently ranks among the highest for depression and suicide to cope with these impossible expectations. It also has some of the highest use of pornography, anti-depressants, and plastic surgery. Those stats can be startling to Christians. Mormons are some of the nicest folks you'll encounter, yet many suffer silently. Their continued attempts to win God's love and acceptance indicate that they don't feel they have it.
If you are familiar with some of the things that are perpetuated against the LDS Faith, this is one of them.
First, regarding the statement: Utah has the highest use of pornography. This is false as evidenced by a major publisher and contributor of Porn where Utah ranked 40th Nationwide for consumption of porn. In fact, the statement itself is based on a single and unverifiable study, or any potential study that may be biased in some fashion. (See, Question: Why does Utah lead the United States in subscriptions to online adult entertainment?).
What is interesting to note is that, according to Ministry Magazine's article on pornography consumption, is that about 65% Christian men and about 15% Christian women view pornography at least once a month. This is compared to 65% of non-Christian men and 30% non-Christian women:
“Sixty-four percent of self-identified Christian men and 15 percent of self-identified Christian women view pornography at least once a month (compared to 65 percent of non-Christian men and 30 percent of non-Christian women).
“Thirty-three percent of clergy say they have visited a sexually explicit Web site. Of those who have visited sexually explicit websites, 53 percent say they have visited the sites a few times in the past year, and 18 percent said they visited explicit Web sites between ‘a couple times a month’ and ‘more than once a week.’
“Twenty-one percent of youth pastors and 14 percent of pastors admit they currently struggle with pornography.”
And regarding whether or not one may find sexual fulfillment through online pornography consumption: Christianity Today writes this:
Survey results showed that one in four American men (25.9%) and about one in six women (16.7%) say it is either very or somewhat likely they can find sexual fulfillment online. Nearly one in five Christians (18.68%) gives the same response.
The editorial published online and in their print, magazine goes on and further states this:
Focus on the Family has launched a Web-based effort to help those addicted to online pornography ( www.pureintimacy.org). The site offers a self-test to help users determine whether they have become addicted. It offers a variety of essays ranging from singer Clay Crosse's testimony about his struggle with pornography to a help page for struggling Christian leaders. (According to the site, one out of seven calls to the ministry's Pastoral Care Line concerns pornography.) There is even a page to connect spouses of porn abusers with needed resources.
Ibid.
1 out of every 7 calls Focus on the Family receives concerns pornography? That is a lot of people within the Evangelical Christian community struggling with sexual integrity issues.
I do not want to be dismissive about the issue regarding pornography. It is a billion-dollar business. It is substantially proven to be associated with human trafficking. This is no light issue. However, to make a claim that Utah leads highest in porn consumption obfuscates the real fact that even within the Evangelical Christian community, many men and women struggle with pornography themselves.
Anybody, whether Protestant, Evangelical, or Latter-day Saint Christian is struggling with pornography, there are really good resources. Get connected with your local Bishop, clergy, pastor, and get connected with ministries like New Life, focus on the Family, Celebrate Recovery, or Addiction Recovery Program of the LDS Faith. A person struggling with pornography is struggling with deep rooted spiritual issues as well and is something that ought not to be used as a means to throw out a victim card.
Third, as to the more important statement being presented to Truth in Love Ministry's viewers: Does Utah lead the highest in depression, suicide, and anti-depressant medications?
It is unfortunate that critics wish to trivialize a serious problem such as suicide—a leading cause of death in the United States—by using it as a club to beat a specific religion. They do this without any data implicating the Church, and much data which argues against the patients' religion as a causative factor."
Critics should avoid concluding that Utah data = Mormon data. This is often not true, and in this case the Mormon influence may be lowering Utah's suicide rates below those of its neighboring states.
If we follow the flawed logic of the critics, one is better off as an American by not being a Southern Baptist, since states in which they are the most common religion almost always have worse suicide rates than the nation as a whole. Clearly this logic is specious and ought to be rejected.
While Utah does have the highest rate of antidepressant use in the United States, there is no evidence that this is because of stress from the LDS lifestyle and culture. Credible research has shown that LDS women are actually more likely to identify themselves as "happy" than non-Mormon women. Religion generally (and the LDS religion specifically) has been repeatedly shown to be either beneficial or neutral for mental health and well-being.
As we see, such statements being made, well regurgitated statements without supporting reasonable evidence that merits any credible validation and acknowledgement, is quite deceptive, manipulative, and intellectually dishonest. Such misleading tactics begins to unmask the subtle attitude and behavior of the presenter, Truth in Love Ministry as nothing more than a welcoming wolf in sheep's clothing that continues to perpetuate lies and slander. This per the evidence presented and accessible to review in light of their so-called perception that Mormons are victims.
The real victims are those who view this YouTube video and are not aware of such subtle and deceptive tactics being employed. That is the sad and unfortunate reality.
Finally, the very last statement is a false dilemma based on a false premise. This is summed up in the last statement: [Mormons] continued attempts to win God's love and acceptance indicate that they don't feel they have it.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints provides insights and wisdom from the leaders on ways to live a life that is fulfilling and enriching through the infinite atonement of Jesus Christ. The stress is placed on individual and family devotion to studying and applying the scriptures. Listening to messages from the Leaders, prayerfully seek our Heavenly Father's will continually, and strive to serve within our families, communities, and live out the principle truths of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
There is no direction, encouragement, or teaching that may lead one to conclude that Latter-day Saints are victims because they are being taught that they have to walk in obedience as a means to win our Heavenly Father's Love and acceptance. On the contrary, many who feel that they may not deserve or are worthy of our Heavenly Father's love and acceptance are guided to seek Him, prayerfully meditate upon the scriptures, and seek out and discuss their concerns with their teachers, family, friends and Bishop. If anything, there are just as many Evangelical and Protestant Christians who I have spoken with that have shared the same perception - that they feel they have had to win God's love and acceptance because they don't feel it. Does not mean that I consider them a victim and need rescuing. If anything, they need love, compassion, and empathy.
Misapplication of Scripture to Support False Assertions
Inevitably, counter-cult ministries bring up some scripture, or event in the ministry of Jesus Christ as a means to substantiate their claims, perception, and assertions. In the concluding remarks of the video, the presenter focuses on Christ and the harvest field:
Friends, before sending his disciples out into the harvest fields Jesus shared the lens through which he sees the lost. When he saw the crowds, he had compassion on them. Because they were harassed and helpless like sheep without a shepherd. Jesus' heart aches for every blood-bought soul who doesn't yet know his love.
Christ's love also compels us to see Mormons through his eyes. Remember that the next time you have a conversation with a Mormon. Picture someone who's drowning in exhaustion. Picture someone whose soul is in danger on their current path. Picture someone who is desperate to be loved by God. With that mindset, you will be positioned to then share the truth in love.
From what one may gather, Latter-day Saint Christians are to be seen as:
Victims and not enemies
Living up to unrealistic expectations as evidenced by so-called statistics
Striving to seek God's love and approval and unable to attain it through a false sense of contingencies of walking in obedience for blessings
Lost sheep who are exhausted, weakened, and in need of rescuing due to being victims of the teachings of the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ
So much so to see "Mormons" as Christ sees them - as victims
What is quite sad and disappointing is how the presenter in the video appears to misapply Christ, his ministry, and the calling of the Twelve to go out and preach.
Yes, I do agree that Christ called his disciples to go out and preach. Not only did he call them to go out and preach, but he also called them to call all men unto repentance. To teach them all that He [Christ] commanded them, and to make them disciples. Such instruction is quite clear in the Great Commission. And there is nothing wrong with evangelism or missionary work.
What is appalling is attributing such a calling under the guise and premise of saying that Christ apparently views members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as victims who need rescuing. In fact, nowhere in the Gospel accounts of Christ's ministry do we find that Christ viewed those whom he ministered to as victims. He viewed them as needing compassion, love, healing, and service. Nowhere does one read where Christ may have inferred or hinted at the religious leaders as being victims either. What we do read is that the religious leaders were misled, hypocritical, proudful, arrogant, boastful, and lacking understanding of scripture and teachings. Yet nothing that may lead, even a casual observer, to conclude that such individuals were victims.
Reality of scripture is that Christ sees us as one of two ways: Lost, despondent, broken, suffering, and in need of healing, restoration, forgiveness, guidance, and restoration; or, growing spiritually, maturing, faithfully facing our challenges with courage, being of good cheer, and resilient in enduring to the end. Nothing involving a sense of being a victim.
Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are not victims of a false religion or gospel. Neither are we an enemy to evangelical and protestant Christians. Much like many members of any faith-based community, we are striving to live according to the teachings and principle truths of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Striving to bring a message of hope to individuals struggling, facing uncertainty, questioning, and experiencing a crisis of faith.
Any real and true victim are those who are being misled by false information, misleading statements, and unsubstantiated claims that lack any credible authority and truth when examined fully.
Recognizing Gaslighting Behavior
Consequences of Gaslighting in Apologetics
Protecting Against Gaslighting in Apologetics
Disengaging from Gaslighting Conversations in Apologetics