Mormonism

[em200727]

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

[Curious]

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 as proof of the authenticity of the original metal engravings, why were the plates then taken back by the angel(was there a shortage 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?

[foshizzle]

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

Actually, this was in Genesis. The commandments were given later, in Exodus.

[Tycho23]

(sorry, people, I've been off vacationing)

Good point Foshizzle...

I guess I can then relate to the time in which God commanded Moses to kill all the people in the camp at the base of mount siani that would not commit to the gosspel (in a sense). This was after he brought the plates down (thousands were killed?).

For Currious:

All the answers that you seek are in The Book of Mormon... I know, how lame is that, but just take the time to read it and you'll understand. If you don't wish to read it however, your next best chance of getting those answers is speaking face to face with your local Mormon neighbor, Leader, or Missionary...

For em200727:

Yep, sorry about that... I probably should've said in resemblance of Christ. My time sequences are all thrown off lately, (Lucky that did'nt interfere with my finals).

[jade012064]

Everyone,
I just joined this subforum. Let me say that I joined the Mormons in 1977, went on a mission for them to Indiana in 1984-5, and ceased active attendance with them in 1988. Six months after Desert Storm, I joined The Community of Christ (RLDS) on Apr. 19, 1992, was a Missionary Commissioner for this church from late 1993 to early 1995, and ceased active attendance with this church in 1997 or 8. I left the Mormons as a result of their rejection of absolute monotheism and I left the RLDS, the largest Mormon splinter group, as a result of the hyper-liberalism of the RLDS. I doubt there isn't a question that I don't know the answer to about those movements and the movement in general. Just ask me!
Jamie

[Tycho23]

What did you think of your mission to Indiana?

What was it that upset you about the LDS Church?

Dilettante:

There was never a single original, unified Christian church to begin with

What do you think Jesus was trying to do when he came here in the first place? There is a single gospel set forward by Christ when he lived on Earth. Innaceptance, bad communication, and confussion was what split the true gospel apart the moment Christ was cruscified.

[jade012064]

What did you think of your mission to Indiana?

What was it that upset you about the LDS Church?

Tycho23,
My mission was an average one, I guess. In any event, I thought I explained what my reason for leaving it was (i.e., absolute monotheism).
Jamie

[em200727]

Dilettante:

There was never a single original, unified Christian church to begin with

and there will never be one until Jesus comes for his 1000 year reign!

[Dilettante]

Dilettante:

There was never a single original, unified Christian church to begin with

What do you think Jesus was trying to do when he came here in the first place? There is a single gospel set forward by Christ when he lived on Earth. Innaceptance, bad communication, and confussion was what split the true gospel apart the moment Christ was cruscified.

I won't pretend to know what Jesus had in mind. All I know is what the New Testament says, and I can't be sure that it's 100% reliable. I am just stating the historical fact that the early Christians were already divided both about doctrines and practices. There isn't a single gospel, but four. There may have been a single message, but interpretations varied even back then.

[Tycho23]

jade012064:

Sorry I guess I'm thinking about somthing else when you say 'absolute Monotheism'. Could you mabey clarrify a bit.

Dilettante:

There isn't a single gospel, but four. There may have been a single message, but interpretations varied even back then.

Yes! Different people may see the same event differently, but nevertheless, it was still the same event. Jesus's teachings to the appostles were the true and unadultrated gospel, but as soon as it was spread in mass... Things fell apart... and not even the apostles could wring it back together into one understanding... As, Em200727 stated, we'll all know what's true when Jesus returns...(and when we die)

Also, the reason that Your Spanish Book Of Mormon may be in mordern spanish is to make it easier for Missionaries that come from all over the world of different nationalities to teach its doctrine. Instead of taking half a year in the MTC to learn ancient Spanish along with pressent day Spanish, they need to only learn the modern day Spanish in about three weeks - to a month. The Prophet Joseph Smith didn't feel a need to do this with the orriginal english printing since most of the people reading the book of Mormon and teaching it would already be well versed in English. At least, untill the church started to grow outside America.

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

An athiest may say:
"I am prepared to argue the following, for starters:

1. The Bible is nothing but a collection of ancient, fancy philosophy.
2. Christianity has done more damage to world than good.
3. Moses never parted the red sea. (The earth was not made in a week.)
4. The 'word of God' is not creadible as in it's just a bunch of missguided wishes to be part of 'somthing bigger'.
5. That all the people that believe in Christinaity and feel that there must be some sort of moral compensations of their 'actions' are completely being fooled by the mainstream thinking of the world. "

I would like to know how you feel you can distinguish the still small voice from your own voice... and no... 'I just know'... won't work if it doesn't work for me.

"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.

Most mormon bibles are the King James Version with foot notes that refer the reeder to the corrections provided by the Prophet Josep Smith. I feel this helps them keep an open mind about the bible.

I have a couple of hagiographic books about Joseph Smith... They don't address any of the problems... I found that Fawn Brodie's biography ("No Man Knows My History") is richer and more vivid.

I myself also have some books about the development of the major branches of Christianity. They don't address any of the problems though... I find that "Christianity on Trial" is much more complete and reveals the truth rather well.


Yes I do consider myself Christian so don't let any of this stuff confuse you about my possition... I'm just trying to point out how old these arguments are... (they have good bases, but just not mmuch leverage (in my oppinion))....


Whoa.... OK... I'm done

[Dilettante]

Tycho23 wrote:

Also, the reason that Your Spanish Book Of Mormon may be in mordern spanish is to make it easier for Missionaries that come from all over the world of different nationalities to teach its doctrine. Instead of taking half a year in the MTC to learn ancient Spanish along with pressent day Spanish, they need to only learn the modern day Spanish in about three weeks - to a month. The Prophet Joseph Smith didn't feel a need to do this with the orriginal english printing since most of the people reading the book of Mormon and teaching it would already be well versed in English. At least, untill the church started to grow outside America.

That makes sense (at least the first part about being more practical to teach missionaries modern Spanish). However, it does not explain why Joseph Smith, writing in 19th century America and preaching to speakers of 19th century American English, felt he had to use 17th century British English (as in the King James Bible). It would have made more sense to write his revelation in 19th century American English so that everyone around him could understand. Unless, of course, he was trying to sound "churchy". It is obvious that he was not well versed in 17th century English because he makes some grammar mistakes in the BOM itself. Besides, the King James Bible (first published 1611) has undergone three major revisions and is not currently considered the best translation in English.

An athiest may say:
"I am prepared to argue the following, for starters:

1. The Bible is nothing but a collection of ancient, fancy philosophy.
2. Christianity has done more damage to world than good.
3. Moses never parted the red sea. (The earth was not made in a week.)
4. The 'word of God' is not creadible as in it's just a bunch of missguided wishes to be part of 'somthing bigger'.
5. That all the people that believe in Christinaity and feel that there must be some sort of moral compensations of their 'actions' are completely being fooled by the mainstream thinking of the world. "

I would like to know how you feel you can distinguish the still small voice from your own voice... and no... 'I just know'... won't work if it doesn't work for me.

An atheist may certainly argue that... and I would have to agree that, on most of those points, the evidence is certainly on his side. In other words, he is more likely to be right than wrong (that's why I'm agnostic). I have no "little voice" in my head telling me about the metaphysical world. All I have is reason and logic, which is common to all humans--whether or not they choose to ignore them.

It's a great thing that you are willing to read all sorts of material... keep investigating and don't just trust your feelings. Feelings can be really misleading.