Did you actually see the musical? If not perhaps you should.
I don’t know if that’s more or less weird than the hat thing in your eyes.
Time to link to this fan made (really well made) animation of The Book Of Mormon Comes To South Park (To the tune of ‘Hello’).
I love the part when Jesus shows up. :)That’s also talking about seer stones, although it doesn’t mention the hat. It seems equally weird to me.
Shielded? Not the RC’s I’ve lived with. And I associate Jesuits with Casuistry and Sophism, not ignorance and shielding.
I confess that I was surprised that the Catholic school system would think that it was important to teach justification of the Inquistion, but clearly they didn’t avoid the topic.
Our conversation was way before South Park was on, even. How far along he was did not come up, but I had the impression it was a fair number of those home visits after you’ve invited them back, and not just the initial door query.
I don’t know how much training the missionaries get to ensure their message is homogenized before being unleashed on the world; perhaps you could enlighten us some on that. As part of the volunteer safety and mediation force at Burning Man (the rangers) we are cautioned about intemperate or off the cuff responses to inquiries; as trusted authorities, what we say carries more weight than some random participant’s. And that’s just a good time in the desert, not a matter of faith.
I do know that when some Sisters were invited in to witness by DesertRoomie they mentioned the golden plates and were promptly interrupted by DR with. “Wait a minute. Gold? How heavy were they?” The Sisters didn’t know. Since even the Wiki article cites most folks who claimed to handle them, if only in a pillowcase or box, estimated the weight as anywhere from 14 to 28 kilos, I found that curious.
In a similar vein, like I said in my original response, I was surprised at the “accepted Christ” opener, to the point of glancing at their nameplates to affirm my original impression they were LDS. I’ve never heard it before or since; perhaps he’d decided to color outside the lines.
I’m curious, how were you aware of the translation in the hat? This wasn’t common knowledge back then.
Trying to recall conversations from over 15 years ago is problematic, I understand, but I wonder if your friend talked to the missionaries about the translation and the detail of the hat was supplied by you. A missionary of that era simply would not discuss that. Period.
Here is a rather long explanation of why. I’ll put it in spoilers becauseof the length.
[spoiler]HurricaneDitka linked to the official explanation. That story is part of the canonized LDS scripture. It is not to be contradicted lightly. In fact, doubts to the official account have only been more widely understood in the last 10 to 15 years and the use of the peep stone in the translation process has led people to leave the church.
There are a couple of reasons. First is that the use of a peep stone directly links Smith to his conman days prior to the start of the Mormon church. He would take money from people by using that stone to find lost objects (it’s said that he was involved in the object becoming lost) or in the treasure hunting business.
Smith Sr., young Joseph’s father was a ne’re do well, heavy drinking man more interesting in the the next get rich scheme than hard work. At the time the Book of Mormon was published the Smith family was impoverished.
Smith Sr. and Joseph were involved in treasure hunting, looking for gold buried by the ancient inhabitants or the Spanish. Joseph claimed that through the use of the stone in the hat, he could see gold treasure protected by the spirit of a dead Indian. Speculators would buy the rights to these treasures. This was an important source of income for the Smith family.
After Smith was put on trial for fraud in regards to these activities, and under pressure from his father-in-law, he said that he was going to quit money digging. Instead, through the use of the stone in the hat, he could see the golden plates protected by the spirit of a dead (white) Indian.
Obviously the Mormon account of this is different, and even if one doesn’t accept this version, you can see why a missionary would not likely know this, or if he did, would not certainly discuss it with outsiders. Discussing the hat gives credence to the money digging days and that’s simply best left in secret.
With the dissemination of various troublesome issues of Mormonism through the Internet, starting in the 2000s, more people are becoming aware of this. The LDS church finally acknowledged the existence of the peep stone in 2015, but here in a rather boring article in the LDS magazine the LDS church first acknowledges the peep stone, it still does not discuss the particulars of how it was used, and they don’t mention the hat at all. The art work on the lengthy article show all the ways it didn’t happen in reality. [/spoiler]
Very much so. When I was a missionary we were required to be able to “pass off” the discussions. That is, to be able to recite them word for word. This was changed about 2004 or so, to allow some more flexibility in the words spoken. The concepts are still standardized but I’m not familiar with the current format.
We were discouraged from that sort of thinking.
Also note that Mormonism simply doesn’t use the same vocabulary as other Christian churches. Mormons don’t talk about “witnessing.”
I would also be surprised if I heard an account of a Trump supporter approaching potential recruits during the election using a line such as “Don’t you think that it’s time for more government regulations?”
As I said, it makes no sense in terms of doctrine or as a logical approach. You don’t want people to accept Christ, you want them to join the church.
Of course, we’re talking about 18-year-old kids, so it’s possible that someone is just messing around.