A question for logical Mormons in the know.

Great Debates
221

If you folks want to argue scriptural contradictions, just type in a google search: “Mormonism, contradictions” or type in “bible, contradictions” or use the word “inconsistencies” to further your search. I take my leave now, this has gone to the dogs if it’s just references and quotes and cites of religion quoting itself, which is what religion is all about, but not what reasons for avoiding it is all about. I want to start another thread dealing with farm policies or something benign, but I reserve the right to return.

Oops:

http://www.kc-cofc.org/Study%20Articles/Mormonism.htm

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html

222

Brian, about your remarks on the ceremony of endowment; It has changed, most notable in April of 1990. One concerned a portion where a lucifer hired a christian minister to preach false doctrine.

Heres a quote for ya: “ALL other churches are ENTIRELY destitute of All authority from God, and anyone who receives baptism from their hands will highly offend God, for He looks upon them as the MOST corrupt of all people.”
Apostle Orson Pratt, The Seer.(Could it be any clearer that other churches are of the devil?)

That means all other churches except LDS.

Hows this: “No woman will get into the celestial kingdom, except her husband receives her>” Jounal of Discourses 5:291.
Too bad for the single women then.
You cannot get to the “celestial kingdom” without being married.
What does this mean to gay Mormons? Marry a woman; you must to get to the celestial area(and what Mormon doesn’t want to get there?)
Deny your sexuality! Good teachings there…

On black people:

2 Nephi 5:21-23 And God caused cursing to come upon them because of their iniquity. Wherefore, as they were white and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did casue a skin of blackness upon them.
2 Nephi 30:6 Their scales of darkness shall fall from their eyes, save they shall be a white people.

Brigham Young: “You may inquire of the intelligent of the world whether they can tell why the aborginies of this country are dark, loathesome, ignorant and sunken into the depths of depravity.”

Oct. 1960 General Conference Spencer Kimball:
“Indians are fast becoming a white people. The children in the home placement program in Utah are often lighter than their brothers and sisters on the reservation.”

Joseph Smith: “There is a reason why one man is born black, while another is white.
We once had an estate before we came here (to earth). Those who were faithful received greater belssings here.” DOctrines of Salvation 1:61.
1:64-66 All took sides, either with Chrsit of with Satan. The Negro, evidentally, is receiving the reward he merits.

Brigham Young: “Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the Penalty under Law Of God is death on the spot. THIS WILL ALWAYS BE SO.” Jounal of Discourses 10:110.

HArold B. Lee: “If it is not in the standard works, it is speculation, if it contradcits what is in scripture, it is not true.”

So when they changed their “laws” to allow black men to hold “priesthood” authority in 78, apparently It will NOT ALways Be so. God caves to politcal pressure, apparently.

223

I am not quite sure why I keep coming back to this thread. At the beginning, I found it quite informative since I hadn’t known many details of the history and beliefs of Mormons.

Lately, it has wandered from some of the issues I was most intrigued by.

To get back all the way to the OP. The OP listed several websites with “information” about the LDS. Since they seem to be affiliated with rival churces, I take their information with a grain of salt.

However, this website which describes “editing” of the scriptures was very interesting.

As was this website which describes efforts to verify the accounts related in the Book of Mormon.

To wind up my long winded question:
“What is the official interpretation of the literal veracity of the Latter Day scriptures?”

If it is A) A divine revelation put into words by a human and fallible agent or B) A large metaphor of a greater truth, then nitpicking inconsistencies is pointless and “Take it on faith and the truth will follow” is a valid defense.

However, if the official interpretation is that the Latter Day scriptures are divinely authenticated literal accounts, the issues of the OP have more merit.

Such as, how can you rationalize post-editing the scriptures? If you had a new revelation, reveal the new revelation. To change the old revelation seems underhanded and misleading.

And how can one face the complete lack of evidence in support of the Book of Mormon occurences in archeological searches? I am not asking that the proof of God be found, which would defeat the message of Faith, but rather some independent assurance of historical significance. (for example: there are parts of the New Testament which can be verified such as Pontius Pilate, the census, crucifixion as punishment, etc. while leaving the divinity of the man Jesus to be a question of faith).

Yes, as a scientist I know that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. But a continued lack of evidence in the face of extensive search for evidence will necessarily create a great deal of doubt.

IMHO, these are the logical questions which the OP wanted answered and I have not seen addressed to my satisfaction.

224

vanilla, people around here don’t take too well to people who bombard a thread with inflammatory questions and then ignore the responses. That’s called trolling. I’ve responded to your quote about righetousness from the Bible, and if you can’t answer it, please stop heaping more vitriol into the mix.

Awaiting an answer…

225

vanilla, when someone throws a bunch of inflammatory accusations into a thread, and then ignores the responses, that’s called a troll. I’ve called you on the word “righteous” and you’ve ignored it. If you’re going to continue to ignore posts which show flaws in your argument, please take your trolling posts elsewhere.

226

Nope, I’m not a troll.
You however, don’t seem to be able to counter the facts I’ve stated about your religion.
Lets hear you answer some of these quotes from your “prophets”.
Go ahead, I’m waiting.
No double talk now.
You know perfectly well that LDS leaders say something is straight from God, it will never change, then suddenly it changes!
Answer some of My charges, if you can.
Just providing the facts about your religion. I didn’t think you’d be able to handle them.
I’m just providing facts for those who want to know the truth about Mormonism. I won’t change your mind, but I willand have shown your religion for what it is; a religion that isn’t christianity.
How about that quote from Your leader that says ALL other churches are wrong and corupt except LDS? Huh? Hello?

227

Yet I have. I’ve shown how your shallow interpretation of the bible and incomplete quotes are the grounds for fallacious and conflicting conclusions. You have not responded. See page 4, the post at 01-22-2001 12:45 PM. See page 5, the post at 01-24-2001 01:41 PM.

You have ignored these responses. Why is that? I’d think that you’d find quotes from the Bible to be more authoritative than the LDS prophets. And yet you’ve ignored the quotes I’ve posted. I see little point in responding if you can’t even address these simple obvious problems.

228

Okay, Vanilla, I’ll bite. I will answer one of your questions per day, but ONLY one. The technique of bombarding LDS people with a multitude of questions that NO ONE could possibly answer all at once is a common anti-Mormon technique some people call “flip-flopping.” It means that as soon as you are called and proven wrong on one issue, you won’t acknowledge it but instead move right on to ten other issues.

Okay. For today’s question: You wrote:

  1. You are quoting from “The Seer.” Maybe you didn’t know this, but “The Seer” was a work which was denounced as preaching false doctrine by none other than the leaders of the LDS Church. It was denounced by Brigham Young as such and is not official LDS doctrine.

  2. I have already provided you with the definition of “official LDS doctrine.” Official LDS doctrine is limited to the four standard works and to doctrines voted on in General Conference to become official and binding on the Church as a whole. “The Seer” and Journal of Discourses, two works that anti-Mormons love to point out flaws in, are not official LDS doctrine.

  3. I’ve already provided you with some quotations from other non-LDS church leaders, including John Wesley, Roger Williams, and Martin Luther, denouncing the Christianity of their day as false also, so you can’t say that ONLY Mormons are accused of that. Many churches consider themselves to be the One True Church. The LDS Church considers itself to be such, but considers other Christian (and non-Christian) denominations to also have some truth to them, to varying degrees.

If you’re going to ignore all this and keep posting vitriol, that’s fine, but I’m here saying that there are answers to the questions you are pondering about the LDS Church.

That’s all I’m writing today.

229

Vanilla,

Their tried and true technique is to place the burden of proof on anyone who disputes their case. They can’t even prove the basic assumptions of necessity, probability, or that Joseph Smith is credible. I’m outa here as well, I just dropped by to see if anyone was calling me a liar again. I get the feeling the Mormon apologists around here would have been the pin pain of Joseph Smith in his day. Thankyou all again.

230

Brian Bunnyhurt wrote:

At first when I read this, I was a bit offended. But the feelings in my heart tell me that Brian is right (concerning me, at least, not other Mormons participating in this thread). Joseph Smith would have been ashamed of me due to my immorality and hypocrisy. In one thread I’m talking as if I represented the LDS religion, and in another, I’m saying I’ll “wipe my butt” with Brian’s speeches. Although I don’t agree with most of Brian’s conclusions about Mormonism, I do recognize self-hypocrisy when it is pointed out to me.

Shame on me for acting like someone I’m not. Why can’t I learn?

231

Ah I see. The folks who point out the inconsistencies and unbiblicalness of Mormonism are called techniques.
I suppose you must go to school and take courses on this?
Now Mormons have names for us “flip-floppers”. How nice and Godly.
In answer to your question, snark:WHy can;t you learn? Well, becasue youre mentally ill remember?
You change your mind every hour, infinitum.
We’ve proven enough (nothing could ever be proved to the Mormons however).
Brain, go home, have a nice day, jmullaney, Lets go get ourselves some iced tea and talk about politics!

232

Ummm…no? SnarkHunter said that anti-Mormons use a technique whereby they bombard Mormons with dozens of questions. Frankly it seems like a pretty accurate assessment given some of the posts in this thread. I think Snark’s offer of one discussion point per day seemed pretty reasonable.

**
I know you have some ‘issues’ with Snark, but if you’ll look at the words he actually wrote, he’s discussing an argumentative technique. He didn’t call anyone any names. Saying someone’s engaging in reductio ad absurdum is NOT the same as saying that the person is absurd.

**
Congratulations on winning the “insensitive boor of the week award”. Given Snark’s honesty about his situation, this has to be one of the most mean-spirited, ugly, cheap-shots I’ve ever read.

**

Frankly, coming from someone who’s neutral (not pro or anti-Mormon) neither side has proved much of anything. Snark’s comments in his last post looked like the first possible glimmerings of an actual discussion. However, instead of responding, you quit. :rolleyes:

Fenris

233

Heres answering threads
http://www.mrm.org/articles/8-myths.html
and
http://www.mrm.org/articles/no-salvation.html

234

BULLSHIT!!!

(1) It is a free, weekly publication that is operated solely on advertisements.
(2) I grab this publication each and every week on the way into my office. Very, VERY seldom is there NOT an article critical of Mormon beliefs or origins. I think you are either confusing your publications, lack reading comprehension, or you are a liar.
(3) Again, BULLSHIT!

I was raised in the LDS church, almost all family members are still devout members, I have been agnostic/atheist for a number of years. I have very strong reasons why I do not believe in the LDS religion. I refuse to debate religion on a message board and I won’t begin now. However, I think you need to pull your head from your ass before you make such erroneous claims.

Tom Green is NOT LDS, nor does he represent your average practicing polygamist.

Personally? Quite a few. No, they didn’t specifically state that the bankruptcy was caused from tithing, but when a person is in financial strain, it doesn’t help their situation to be forced to pay 10 percent of their income to the Mormon Church. (Forced is a strong word, but when members are taught from day one that paying tithing equals financial and divine blessings, it is psychologically forced). I have known many church members almost living at poverty level who upon receipt of wages or government check immediately send their club dues before they buy food for their children. I actually see a lot of this working as a social working in the State of Utah.

So vanilla, are you saying that mentally ill people are unable to learn?

235

Still waiting for a response vanilla. I called you on your bible quotes. You’re posting, but not responding to a simple question.

Sing together everybody (to the tune of “Rawhide”):
Trolling, trolling, trolling…
Keep those posts a’trolling…
Trolling, trolling, trolling…

236

One more thing -

Brian - Nice attempt at backpeddling when Phil so thoroughly and completely made you look like a total idiot with your LSD/John Lennon B.S.

Dumbass.

237

[star trek]
“What’s the matter with him?”

“Too Much LDS in the 60s.”
[/star trek]

238

Diane:

[Moderator Hat ON]

Cool it or take it to the Pit, Diane.

[Moderator Hat OFF]

239

I have been around and posted a lot more often than you, emarkp.
Hello kettle youre black.
I don’t see YOU answering to ANY of MY questions; because you can’t refute them.

240

vanilla:

And this has what relevance? Writing more frequently doesn’t add any validity to what you write.

Fraud. I did in fact post references to where I had answered your “questions.” I guess that’s not enough, so let me requote them:

You have not responded to this. Furthermore you claim that I haven’t responded to any of your questions. I hope this is clear that I indeed have, and that you’ve ignored the refutation.

But let’s continue.

You ignored this as well.

Still waiting for a response.