Mormonism

em200727 · Post by **em200727** » Tue May 03, 2005 3:10 pm

Hey i would like to know more about Mormonism. I love researching other religions so if anyone has any questions, or would like to discuss that would be great

Dilettante · Post by **Dilettante** » Tue May 24, 2005 6:30 am

Tycho23 wrote:

I'm sorry, but for any referances that orriginate after all the original apostles of Christ were killed off, I won't be going for. I believe in the great apostasy as mentioned in Thesalonians 2: 1-3. I believe it happened from the time in which the apostles were killed to the time at which Joseph Smith saw the first vision, as mentioned in Revelations 14: 6-7 (angel Moroni).

Still, you have not provided reasons why you think this apostasy includes every Christian denomination except Mormonism. And you have not given us any reason to support your belief that Joseph Smith was a prophet, or even that the Book of Mormon is an ancient document rather than a 19th century fiction. Appeals to totally unsupported blind faith are not acceptable in rational debate.

I'm sorry, Moses writing the book of Genesis was aparently pulled from the back of my recolection. Who wrote Genesis after all?

Three unindentified authors are recognized, the one referred to as "J" or the the "Yahwist" (because that's the name he uses for God), then there's "E", the Elohist" (because he calls God Elohim) and "P" or the "Priestly" one. All three narratives are intertwined. Other parts of the Old Testament were written by "D" or "Deuteronomist" and "R" or "Redactor".

There may be a large amount of metaphorical, not literal, content in the bible, and the creation of Earth in six days may be one of them, but I hope you don't consider the immpossible feat of stuffing two of every species of animal into a large wooden boat to be metaphorical...

I'm afraid I do. It's a beautiful myth, though.

Joseph Smith, using revelation from God, proof read the King James version of the bible and made any nesesary corrections in an attempt to return its text back as close as possible to its orriginal meaning.

I find this much less plausible than the more likely possibility that Joseph Smith just made the corrections in an attempt to bring the Bible in line with his book. It also does not explain why he didn't rewrite the whole thing in 19th century English for everyone to understand, or why the Book of Mormon is written in imitation of 16th century English, if not because the KJV is the source of the BOM and he wanted both to sound equally solemn. The KJV uses the language of the time when it was first printed. The BOM doesn't. Isn't this curious?

With every belief you have, a risk must be taken (sorry for ill choice of wording). A risk that you might be wrong and others are right as opposed too: you and God being right, and everyone else being wrong.

Shouldn't we then minimize the risk by proportioning our belief to the evidence? I'm curious to know how you decided that Mormonism posed less of a risk of error than other religions.

And lastly, the anti-litterature aproach is marely a personal decission (almost everything is in the Mormon church: but you must be held accountable for your actions). I myself (16) have chosen to read several different things denouncing mormonism.

I respect your decision of reading the "anti-literature" and give you credit for that. If you like, I can suggest two or three titles for your consideration.

em200727 · Post by **em200727** » Tue May 24, 2005 3:56 pm

im sorry tyco23 but i think you are really taking the Bible out of context!

the thing about God being a man i dont know the exact place where it is but people i have talked to that are Mormons are always saying that God was not always God.

and about many wives, it is condmened as in icky def not!
Jacob 1:15
2:23,24,27,31
MOsiah 11:2,4
Ether 10:5,7
so the Mormon church might state that it is good to have one wife but the Book of Mormon says dont! besides there is some shakiness on that. ive been reading about it lately!

convince me why should i believe in the Mormonism? To me the Mormon church is full of mistakes and its very contradicting(thats my opinion i dont mean to sound harsh but thats just how i feel about it)

Tycho23 · Post by **Tycho23** » Wed May 25, 2005 12:45 am

For em200727,

On polygomy: read from Doctrine and Covenants 132: 58-66 and then read over 34-39. This is were the Mormon church found justification in it's momentary practice of polygamy.

As for seeing Mormonism as full and complete like I do... You really can't make descissions about it untill you see the whole picture. It's definately easy for me to see everything, make sense and conections when I look at it and study it up close, but yet again, you may not see all the details and the meaning of the picture if you're standing far off and to the side as you look

But if that's as close as you want to get, I understand...

If you feel it's necessary, get your magniflying glass out and study the picture in as much detail as possible. Then again, make sure it's the original painting. If it isn't the original, blemishes could ruin the entire picture.

For Dilettante:

The apostacy includes every denomination in that time period, because none of them had the true and unadultrated gospel that Jesus brought forth and established. We believe that the Mormon church has this unadultrated gospel.

Read Joseph Smith-History. It would be usefull for anyone that was interested in why people believe in him to read it. A for the Book of Mormon - Joseph Smith is practicaly the switch. If Joseph Smith was wrong, then everything that came from him is wrong... If Joseph Smith was correct, then everything that came from him is Right...

Joseph smith translated the book of Mormon into the 16th century English because the Book of Mormon goes hand in hand with the Bible. That has always been how we look at the book of Mormon.

AS for me deciding that Mormonism is the most riskless religion out there: read my first post in this thread. I saw that there were no loose ends to the religion, I prayed about it, and then I reached my conclussion.

You can recommend any thing you want as long as I can recommend anything that I want...

For Foshizzle:

Read Joseph Smith-History, that should help...
As for my explenation of translations of the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon has been translated into at least thirty different languages.
I also found a small note in the introduction of the newest Book of Mormon
" About this edition: Some minor errors in the text have been perpetuated in past editions of the Book of Mormon. This edition contains corrections that seem apprproiet to bring the material into conformity with prepublication manuscripts and early editions editted by the Prophet Joseph Smith." This seems to be the official explenation for all these 'changes' that the web is raving about. I'm sure you could see photographs of the orriginal manuscripts if you want to do the comparisons yourself.

Also look into the 'Testimony of Three Witnesses' as well as 'The testimony of Eight Witnesses'.

foshizzle · Post by **foshizzle** » Wed May 25, 2005 3:15 am

I also found a small note in the introduction of the newest Book of Mormon
" About this edition: Some minor errors in the text have been perpetuated in past editions of the Book of Mormon. This edition contains corrections that seem apprproiet to bring the material into conformity with prepublication manuscripts and early editions editted by the Prophet Joseph Smith." This seems to be the official explenation for all these 'changes' that the web is raving about. I'm sure you could see photographs of the orriginal manuscripts if you want to do the comparisons yourself.

Why would the inherent word of God have errors?

em200727 · Post by **em200727** » Wed May 25, 2005 4:16 pm

i agree with foshizzle
if this is the word of God and was divinely given then why would it have errors God doesnt make errors besides why would he?
why would the Book of Mormon go against the Doctrine and Covenents? thats kinda weird

Tycho23 · Post by **Tycho23** » Wed May 25, 2005 4:32 pm

It is not the work of God that cause these errors, it is the work of man over time. If you were copying something down over and over and over and over so that thousands could read it over a period of two hundred years, there would undoubtedly be some human errors in the work.
This is true for both the Book of Mormon and the Bible.

Luckily, most of the original transcripts that Joseph Smith translated from the Golden Plates are being kept by the church. The errors hadn't been noticed until recently due to how inconspicuous they were and the long period of time in which they appeared.

and yes, God does not make mistakes. Men do...

Tycho23 · Post by **Tycho23** » Wed May 25, 2005 4:41 pm

em200727:

I see it as a doctrine that was meant for a certian people at a certian time.

God commanded the people of the old testament to sacrifice the first born of their flock in remembrance of Christ. Yet, as soon as the profecy was fulfilled, the commandment was recinded.

Abraham was commanded to sacrifice/murder his son when God had clearly stated before that thou shalt not kill.

Remember, mormons believe in direct revelation from God. Revelation from God that concerns the entire people comes through the Prophet. Revelation that is personal and beneficial to a single person comes through an individual's prayer and study. However, no personal revelation should ever contradict the revelation provided through the current prophet.

Dilettante · Post by **Dilettante** » Wed May 25, 2005 8:07 pm

The apostacy includes every denomination in that time period, because none of them had the true and unadultrated gospel that Jesus brought forth and established. We believe that the Mormon church has this unadultrated gospel.

The Bible does not give a specific time frame for the apostasy. And I still don't know why you believe that Mormonism is a restoration of "the real thing", since Christians were divided over practice and doctrinal points from the very beginning. There was never a single original, unified Christian church to begin with, but many different churches. That came later, with the councils and the theological disputes.

Read Joseph Smith-History. It would be usefull for anyone that was interested in why people believe in him to read it. A for the Book of Mormon - Joseph Smith is practicaly the switch. If Joseph Smith was wrong, then everything that came from him is wrong... If Joseph Smith was correct, then everything that came from him is Right...

I have a couple of hagiographic books about Joseph Smith (one by his mother, and one by a guy called Truman Madsen. They are basically unconditional panegyrics, idealizations. They don't address any of the problems (his arrogance, his water-witching, his rocky love life, his mistaken "translation" of an Egyptian fragment of the Book of the Dead as "Book of Abraham", how he was tricked by the Kinderhook plates, etc) I found that Fawn Brodie's biography ("No Man Knows My History") is richer and more vivid.

Joseph smith translated the book of Mormon into the 16th century English because the Book of Mormon goes hand in hand with the Bible. That has always been how we look at the book of Mormon.

As I said before, I have very good reasons to believe he never translated anything. He did write a "corrected" version of the Bible (the "Inspired Version") but I've heard that Mormons don't use it, but prefer the KJV instead. This is odd, since it's supposed to be the inspired work of a prophet.
Anyway, the argument that the BOM goes hand in hand with the Bible, so it had to be written in the same variety of English doesn't hold water. To begin with, the Old Testament goes hand in hand with the New Testament, yet they were written in different languages. Also, I have a copy of the BOM in Spanish and it's not written in 16th century Spanish. Why? Is the archaic language only necessary for English speakers?

AS for me deciding that Mormonism is the most riskless religion out there: read my first post in this thread. I saw that there were no loose ends to the religion, I prayed about it, and then I reached my conclussion.

You wrote that you were a Mormon because you had been born one and because you had a "testimony", whatever that is... All Mormons I know say they prayed and prayed, apparently until they got the desired answer. But they couldn't explain how they could tell the difference between the "little voice of God" and their own.
I could point to a few loose ends in Mormonism. But since Mormonisn doesn't seem to have a rigorous theological corpus and new revelations keep changing the doctrinal line, it would probably be impossible to pin down, sort of like nailing Jello to the wall. Anyway, I am prepared to argue the following, for starters:

1. That Joseph Smith never translated any ancient writings.
2. That the Book of Mormon is a 19th century creation.
3. That the American Indians are not descended from the Jews.
4. That the sources of the BOM are traceable to other books.
5. That the Golden Plates' "witnessess" were gullible people (many of
them members of Smith's family) who were predisposed to believe

You can recommend any thing you want as long as I can recommend anything that I want...

OK. How about "For Any Latter Day Saint--One Investigator's Unanswered Questions" by Sharon Banister? There is an excerpt here: http://web.9plus.net/banister/exerpts.htm

em200727 · Post by **em200727** » Sat May 28, 2005 7:04 pm

Tycho23 wrote:em200727:

I see it as a doctrine that was meant for a certian people at a certian time.

certian people at a certain time? why wouldnt it be for all the people all the time the Bible is for all the people all the time some verses strike people differently at differnt times though

Tycho23 wrote:God commanded the people of the old testament to sacrifice the first born of their flock in remembrance of Christ. Yet, as soon as the profecy was fulfilled, the commandment was recinded.

wait in remeberance of Christ? in the old testament? Christ had not been to earth yet. do you have scriptures for that? sorry im confused

Tycho23 wrote:Abraham was commanded to sacrifice/murder his son when God had clearly stated before that thou shalt not kill.

God was doing to test Abrahams faith because did God let him kill his son? NO

Curious · Post by **Curious** » Sat May 28, 2005 7:49 pm

I'd just like to know how you account for the fact that :
1) non of the original inhabitants of America had ever heard of these so called factual events or of any of the characters depicted in the Book of Mormon?
2) If the signatures of the witnesses was meant to prove the authenticity of the original gold engravings why were the plates then taken back by the angel(was there a shortage of gold in heaven at the time)? Surely they would have been far more compelling as evidence than any signed statement.
3) why would someone who, if you can believe the records, had a history of being a liar and a swindler be chosen to receive this revelation