Do mormons really belive in those crazy things?

[gabbeTroop]

Indians = lost tribe of Isreals
Magic underpaints = ....

[Katzpur]

Hello,

>>>Our critics premise is that we believe "the American Indians are the descendants of the Israelites." That is really not what we're saying. We're saying that some American Indians are the descendants of the Israelites,<<<

This perhaps is what the chruch says now, but the belief that the american indians are descendants of Israelites was a belief held by the rank and file Mormons prior to DNA ividence. The B of M tells of this one family becoming several kingdoms.

That's right. Years ago, that was the case. Most Mormons believed that most American Indians were descended from the ancient Israelites. Of course, a couple of hundred years ago, far less was known about the migration of large numbers of people across the Bering Strait. Everybody, including the Mormons, had their own ideas about who the Native Americans were.

The question of exactly where in the Americas the events described in the Book of Mormon took place has also been one that seems to have had different answers over a period of time. It's always just been speculation, and speculation is revised as new information is made available. I think that what people don't realize is that none of the statements on either of these two issues that have been made over the years has anything at all to do with the doctrines taught in the Book of Mormon. Opinions on what percentage of Native Americans may have descended from the Israelites and on whether the events in the book took place all over the American continent or just in a small area in Mesoamerica have never been doctrinal. In other words, we don't believe any of this information has been revealed, so it's just a matter of opinion.

[Furrowed Brow]

It's hard for me to imagine how anyone can seriously use the word "brainwashed" to describe what happens in the LDS Church. We have no list of "banned books."

Yes.

We have access to every single bit of information about the Church that anyone else has.

Yes.

The Church places a high value on education.

Yes.

Many of our leaders have masters and doctorates from Harvard, Yale, Duke, Berkley, etc.

Yes.

We are never told to associate only with fellow Church members.

Yes

We are never told we should not visit other churches.

Yes

We participate in interfaith councils (when we're allowed).

Yes.

I just cannot fathom how a practicing Latter-day Saint can claim to have been brainwashed.

Yes. Exactly. You have just given a list of attributes that set the LDS in a positive light. And that is the message my friend recieved and imbibed. But the criticsm is that the LDS do this in a systematic way to the point of indoctination. Yes there was a huge emphasis on education and self development but all this is within the confines and limitations of Chruch doctrine and attitudes. At every turn, meeting, testament, Tuesday night a continual and perpetual positive reinforcement leaving no room for counter ideas or reflection on the distance between "what is allowed" and what really goes on, and "what is encouraged" to what is not not encouraged"....everthing is postive positive positive reinforcement. The reality was that the Church filled her social life, her home life and her free moments, it did not matter the church never told her not to associate only with fellow church members, in practice that was what happened...which was fine because they sound like very nice people.... and on one level this was very natural harmless meeting of like minded folk....but something goes on at another level...a gentle yet persistent separation from family, friends, counter ideas, and a steering away from negative influences. At the time my friend did not see, now she does. Sometimes though she also finds herself defending this process, seeing it as a sincere attempt by the LDS to protect each other from bad influences.

The only thing I can imagine is that your friend joined the Church knowing just the basic doctrines and was, at some point during her eight years of membership, confronted by someone who presented her with anti-Mormon material and she learned, probably for the first time,

Actually very close. And think about it. She’s what six years in, she is temple worthy, and it is the first time she’s seen or even been aware there was critical material. Her experiences within the LDS was that closeting.

things that were upsetting to her. If she was unable to find answers to questions or explanations for claims that were a source of concern,

Yes and she was surrounded by some very bright and committed LDS who very quickly gave her the LDS counters. But the seed had been sewn I guess.

I can understand why she might have felt as if she'd been mislead. Since you said her "central issue" of disagreement was over issues surrounding skin color. I am aware that some of the early leaders of the Church made some comments which I, as a practicing member of the Church, can only describe as "racist," it might be that these remarks could have had something to do with her negative feelings.

Yes, that and what is in the book of Mormon, and other issues (see ADFI below). I suspect that once she began to slowly detach many other aspects of LDS began to be seen in a different light. Hence seeingthe LDS as brain washing. And as I say her attitude is conflicted. There is a large aspect of the LDS she still thinks very fondly of.

I won't tell you to dismiss what your friend has told you (not that it would do any good if I did), but I would suggest that you consider the fact that hers is but one person's experience.

Yes it is just one persons experience. But she is a critic who is not the enemy of the LDS. She still occasionally meets up with them.

Though I also note that French Parliamentary Commission list the LDS as a cult. That’s a body of folk who are an institution of a democratic government. Are they another enemy? Along with the ADFI. I lifted this sentence from wiki quoting ADFI

Criticisms include methods of evangelization, progressive split with family and friends, women status, lack of free thought and children education considered as indoctrination.

Basically that is a very neat summary of my friend's experience.

Obviously, there's more to it than the brief one-liner sentences I posted,

I appreciate that within the Christian world folk wish to deny the LDS are Christian, and within the secular world they are often spoofed.

We're saying that some American Indians are the descendants of the Israelites, but that due to a number of factors (which I have explained on other threads), they no longer carry the mtDNA of sole middle-eastern female ancestor of 2600 years ago.

Hmmm..OK...sounds very dubious.

In other words, we don't believe any of this information has been revealed, so it's just a matter of opinion.

Then why believe/say it? There is no evidence of it and the idea is sustained by an evidence gap and even then this still requires the idea have its edges clipped to form a lesser proposition to the one that use to have LDS currency.

[sniper762]

i appreciate that within the Christian world folk wish to deny the LDS are Christian, and within the secular world they are often spoofed

just how is a "christian" person or religion defined?

and per the above situation, was "your friend" married to a mormon priesthood holder, then divorced?

[Furrowed Brow]

just how is a "christian" person or religion defined?

Someone who believes in the gopels I guess?

I know my friend has faced such criticisms from folk who would say they are Christian. Along with Catholics I am aware of this kind of criticism on the web been thrown at the LDS. It don't seem to come from non Christians (e.g. atheists, Muslims, etc)

..and per the above situation, was "your friend" married to a mormon priesthood holder, then divorced?

No. I think if she had married a priestholder she would still be LDS now.

[sniper762]

i was just wondering. sometimes personal vendettas can leave a bad taste for the church among participapants.

[sleepyhead]

Hello,

>>>Our critics premise is that we believe "the American Indians are the descendants of the Israelites." That is really not what we're saying. We're saying that some American Indians are the descendants of the Israelites,<<<

This perhaps is what the chruch says now, but the belief that the american indians are descendants of Israelites was a belief held by the rank and file Mormons prior to DNA ividence. The B of M tells of this one family becoming several kingdoms.

That's right. Years ago, that was the case. Most Mormons believed that most American Indians were descended from the ancient Israelites. Of course, a couple of hundred years ago, far less was known about the migration of large numbers of people across the Bering Strait. Everybody, including the Mormons, had their own ideas about who the Native Americans were.

The question of exactly where in the Americas the events described in the Book of Mormon took place has also been one that seems to have had different answers over a period of time. It's always just been speculation, and speculation is revised as new information is made available. I think that what people don't realize is that none of the statements on either of these two issues that have been made over the years has anything at all to do with the doctrines taught in the Book of Mormon. Opinions on what percentage of Native Americans may have descended from the Israelites and on whether the events in the book took place all over the American continent or just in a small area in Mesoamerica have never been doctrinal. In other words, we don't believe any of this information has been revealed, so it's just a matter of opinion.

Hello Katzpur,

I glossed through the book of Ether this morning. Maybe I'll actually read it soon. According to Ether, just prior to the arrival of the Nephites there was a large war where millions of the Jeredites were killed. They gathered people form all over so that they could have their big battle. The possibility that the Nephites blended in to the rest of the people would be impossible if one believes the book of Ether because the inhabitants were all dead.

[sniper762]

BUT his arrival, the brother of jared started a whole new generation

[Katzpur]

I glossed through the book of Ether this morning. Maybe I'll actually read it soon. According to Ether, just prior to the arrival of the Nephites there was a large war where millions of the Jeredites were killed. They gathered people form all over so that they could have their big battle. The possibility that the Nephites blended in to the rest of the people would be impossible if one believes the book of Ether because the inhabitants were all dead.

Heavens! The book of Ether doesn't say that all of the inhabitants of the American continent were dead. The Nephites intermarried with the people who were living here when they arrived, most of whom probably came across the Bering Strait.

[Katzpur]

I glossed through the book of Ether this morning. Maybe I'll actually read it soon. According to Ether, just prior to the arrival of the Nephites there was a large war where millions of the Jeredites were killed. They gathered people form all over so that they could have their big battle. The possibility that the Nephites blended in to the rest of the people would be impossible if one believes the book of Ether because the inhabitants were all dead.

Wait a sec! Ether doesn't say that the entire population of the American continent was wiped out! The Nephites intermarried with the people who were here when they arrived. How quickly this happened is not said, but there were certainly people on this continent in 600 B.C.

[sleepyhead]

Hello sniper,

I don't understand what point your attempting to make or who your responding to.

Hello Katzpur,

I'm going to give you a reading assignment to read the last chapter of Ether. It says that all the people in the land were involved in many battles. Whether or not that means the entire continent I don't know but it would certainly mean all the people in a certain radius of where all the battles were, and since the final battle involved millions I would think the radius would be pretty large. This is the location where the B of M says Lehi arrived and he arrived just as this last battle was ending. There was noone for Lehis descendants to intermarry with.