An Anti-Mormon Rorschach test.

In 1921 Herman Rorschach wrote a book called Psychodiagnostik, which was to form the basis of the famous inkblot test known today as a Rorschach test.    In a Rorschach test the subject is presented with abstract inkblots and asked to express what they see in each image.

The general goal of the test is to provide data about cognition and personality variables such as motivations, response tendencies, cognitive operations, affectivity, and personal/interpersonal perceptions, including needs and base motives.,

In 1972 the LDS church published a FHE manual which included a graphic for teaching young children about the Jesus Christs relationship to God in contrast to our own.. It was a simple graphic as follows:

It must be emphasized that the Churches intent was to illustrate a difference in genealogy as taught in the Scriptures to a young child..

The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;- Mark 1:1

16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. - John 3:16

 20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
 21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
 22 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,
 23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.  Matt 1:20-23

31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
 32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
 33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
 34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
 35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.    - Luke 1:31-35

compare to a typical chart from ancestry.com

But what do Anti-Mormons see in this graphic is quite telling about the psychology of Anti-Mormonism.

In a recent dialog on CARM this was the topic of discussion.   The anti-Mormons branded the graphic as 'Utter blasphemy!' and insisted there is a sexual inference in the graphic.

Yet as any rational thinking observer can see there is no sexual reference in the graphic at all.  No pictures of genitalia, no mention of sex.. nothing whatsoever.. It's merely a genelogical graphic designed for children who would not even know what sex was.  Yet the anti-Mormon persists in insisting that meaning exists in the graphic.

one such poster on CARM that goes by the handle "Bonnie" illustrates the psychology of anti-Mormonism.  When pressed on the objective facts regarding the graphic and it's intended message, to it's intended audience she says' the following statements..

 TO AN IMMATURE LITTLE CHILD. To a young child, it wouldn't be a sexual reference at all. Because they know nothing about that yet.  

I agree that your church is trying to teach genealogy with that diagram and not about how babies are made...it is keeping it very simple for their very young minds to grasp

.
A child's eyes would see one thing in that diagram, but those looking at it through the eyes of an adult would see something more....because adults KNOW more than a little child does. …

I never said there were graphically expressed pictures of the mechanics of how the egg is fertilized, in the picture.

 I have seen what is meant by the graphic and I have acknowledged it, that it was never meant to show HOW Jesus was produced by Mary and God, only to show genealogy . I Never said that those who originally made the graphic meant anything else.

And yet she persists despite all her admissions that their was no intended message regarding anything sexual.. she contends

Doesn't matter what is "objectively" not there,

…there is the UNexpressed idea of the mechanics that PRODUCES 'you."

 adults, who know much more than children, and who have put away childish things, will see more--much more. They will also see HOW that genealogy is passed on from mommy and daddy to the child. They will see the mechanism behind it.

And I DO accept the INTENDED message of the graphic and have said so But what I am talking about is the UNintended message in the little graphic

The unintended Message?   That would be any message but the intended message.  Which would be any message that the person chooses to IMAGINE.. and it seems the Anti-Mormon imagination is fixated on sex, for even as they acknowledge there is no sexual intent in the message the insist on discussing an un-intended message about pro-creation..

about Jesus' conception--that He was begotten in the same way, of Mary and God, as we are begotten of OUR fathers

 as a mature adult I can ALSO see all the implications of that little picture, since I DO know the facts of life and how babies are made by "mommy" and "daddy" to produce "you."

 what they refuse to say plainly, I will say for them--they mean that heavenly father had a sexual union with his own spirit daughter Mary, in her flesh, so she could conceive Jesus.

What they refuse to say plainly?   LDS say what we say.. we don't plainly say what anti-Mormon cook up in their imagination despite even acknowledging the intended message was nothing of the sort..   I think this speaks volumes of the Anti-Mormon psychology.  It really doesn't matter what the objective facts are.. They will manufacture an idea in their imagination and project it at all cost trying to assert it as LDS belief..  I say that's disingenuous. A fraud and a lie on the part of Anti-Mormons.  Which reinforces my opinion that such are not really Christian.. They may call themselves Christian but they deny the very standards Christ taught.