How do people buy into any cults? Mormonism is no different a cult than Methodism, Catholicism, Scientology, Baptism etc…
The topic isn’t every other religion and why you shouldn’t buy into them, it’s about Mormonism. Most other religions have people saying their miracle stories aren’t supposed to be literal but I have yet to see the Church of the LDS say a similar thing.
What branch of Christianity claims that the whole Jesus Christ thing isn’t the literal truth? I think you will find the great majority of Christian denominations really do think Christ was actually the son of God, was crucified, and really did arise from the dead and was assumed into heaven. They’re not shitting you; they actually believe that happened.
The Socinians
-
In Joseph Smith’s day, the “Burned-Over District” of New York was excited by a recent religious revival and ready for new religious ideas, even very radical ones.
-
Multiple wives?! Sign me up!
-
The early experience of Mormons – persecution, flight across the desert to found a new Zion – just seemed so apt in light of the American Protestant narrative WRT to the sufferings of the ancient Hebrews. A lot of Americans are descended from people who came here in the first place to found a new Zion.
-
Nowadays a lot of people are born and raised in the LDS faith. Hard to rebel against that, you know? Even without the polygamy (sigh).
-
Those dorky bicycle missionaries in the short-sleeved shirts and ties are just so nice! They might not win a lot of new converts, but they win some.
-
Donnie and Marie, etc., make the whole thing seem just so wholesome and non-threatening.
-
The doctrine of “continuing revelation” leaves the elders with the flexibility to jettison the really objectionable parts for the sake of building the church, e.g., polygamy, or the weird racial theories.
-
Of course it’s dumb, but is it really any dumber than the Bible (or Torah, or Koran) by itself? The “reasonable person” part of your formulation has no reasonable application in this context. If most people were like that we’d all be Unitarians.
-
At least they’re not Jehovah’s Witnesses! :eek:
You know you did, you know you did, you know you did.
Okay, I’ll say it.
“Live and let DIE!!”
Just so it’s stuck in everybody else’s head, too.
By the way, Mormons are crazy, along with all the rest of them. Unless you believe in my particular brand of flying sky creatures who secretly control us all, you’re crazy too.
Hi, I’m Mormon.
-
As has been said, I don’t see how anything we believe is stranger than the central belief of Christianity, or most other religions.
-
Anywhere outside of Utah/Idaho, about half the congregation is going to be converts. Outside the US, that jumps to at least 70%. Outside Europe (say, Asia), it’s more like almost 100%. Of my LDS relatives, only my siblings were raised LDS; my parents and two sisters-in-law are converts, as is my FIL and another SIL or so on my husband’s side.
-
If you have actual doctrinal questions that are asked in a civil manner, I’ll do my best to give good answers, and I’m sure the other LDS Dopers will do the same. Otherwise, I don’t think I’ve got much more to say.
You kids really need to get out more.
There’s a really good Jane Seymour joke here, but it’s 4:30 in the morning and it’s just out of my reach.
it is. If Christianity is ice-cream, Mormonism is a Sundae. You have a base of christianty on the bottom, then spray some fluffiness on it and sprinkle some nuttiness.
I would add the proverbial cherry on top but that is more of a Catholic thing
c’mon. This is clearly a bashing thread (not even sure why this is in GD). Civil factual questions will have to be posted elsewhere to avoid the splashing that will continue here for a while.
Don’t make any of it. My religion is more often than not on the receiving end of this type of critcism. Comes with the territory 
I truly don’t want to turn this into a “historicity of the Bible” question, and I grant fully that there are numerous passages that are not borne out by history, ethnology, or archaeology – the “Table of Nations” in Genesis 10, large parts of Exodus and Joshua, and the whole Book of Esther, for starters. But as a general rule the Bible refers to history and ethnicities that are verifiable outside its covers – perhaps it may have a strongly slanted view of them, but it is more like a Lithuanian history telling European history from a stongly Lithuano-centric perspective, or being aware of the Welsh only through the remnant of their Pampas colony, than whole-cloth invention of groups and history. The Hittites, the Philistines, the Chaldeans, the Aramaeans are all real nationalities whose cities, writings, artifacts and such can be dug up. While the Bible gives a very skewed version of Middle Eastern history, focused mostly on who impacted Israel when and how, other than Esther and Daniel the figures and kingdoms named are real, independently-verifiable individuals.
On the other hand, there is vanishingly small archaeological or ethnological evidence for the Nephites, the Lamanites, “Reformed Egyptian,” and many other “historical facts” to be found in the Book of Mormon.
Jim, I am not going to write the sociopolitical/religious-politics history of the early 1500s for what I think would be the 11th time. Search it out. Or Google up a good objective history of the period. Yes, Henry VIII’s head was turned by Anne Boleyn. But that was only a small element of the problem. At least as important was the fact that the Holy Roman Emperor had the Pope in his back pocket, with marionette strings. And, for the record, Henry did not want a divorce – it was an annulment. While that sounds to moderns strongly like a distinction without a difference, Henry had the problem that his gonads and his religious scruples were leading him in the same direction, and it was ticking off his wife’s nephew and the Supreme Pontiff figuratively engaged in anilingus upon the latter.
Thank you for your polite answers and civil offer. I agree with **Sapo ** that you would be better off answering questions on your faith in a more polite thread/forum.
Polycarp: good point on the annulment vs. *divorce * but the growing movement in England to separate from the RCC only succeeded at that junction for the wants of the King, not for religious reasons. The Lutherans can at least claim it was the wants of the populace. The Church of England was legitimized for the “wants” of the King. I will admit it was both lust and political power. Still Crass.
Jim
“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.” --Stephen Roberts
Having several Mormons in the family (in-laws) and among my friends and colleagues, I think the attraction of Mormonism is its American Genesis. The Bible, both old and new testaments, is a re-hash of almost a dozen old Middle-Eastern and European mythologies. Everything from great floods to the resurrection of gods was pretty old stuff by the time Christianity was founded.
Mormonism’s mythology is new and has a distinctly American (or at least New World) flavor, even if the story lines are somewhat pedantic and predictable. It was written specifically to appeal to that time (mid-19th century) and has retained that appeal, especially for Americans looking for simple answers to complex questions. It’s worth noting that Mormonism’s spread outside the U.S. is considerably slower than was the spread of Christianity, which I would attribute to its uniquely American nature.
Nor do I. And I’ll defer to your superior knowledge of both the Bible and the Book of Mormon if you claim that, in general, the Bible is more historically accurate. When I posted my comment, I was thinking specifically of things like the Nephilim, antediluvian life expectancies, and the Tower of Babel.
But, regardless of the specifics, the idea that the Book of Mormon is alone among religious texts in claiming things contrary to now common knowledge is just foolish. The Bible was just the first one that came to mind (and the only one I know enough about to defend at least slightly).
Because, just as GD is the assigned Forum for witnessing, it is the assigned Forum for “anti-witnessing” and kids who have a desperate need to “prove” that religion is false (or has other problems of one sort or another) who want to argue the situation rather than just ranting about it are pretty much compelled to use GD to display their views.
(OTOH, no one else is compelled to participate if they find the topic boring, strained, or unanswerable.)
Getting back to the OP -
IMHO a lot of religions share a few components that resonate with congregants: membership in a community, promise of “a better world”, the assumption of something larger and more powerful than the self, the presence of goodness in a outwardly hostile world. These are the products that religion sell. In order to sign on one must profess “belief”. I suspect that there is a grey area for many that can more readily be described as “a willing suspension of disbelief”.
If you are comfortable not personally challening this willing suspension of disbelief, you receive the promised products.
As others have pointed out, any other religion you list has strong mythical elements. Mormonism, Scientology, Christianity, Islam, etc. But, the underlying products and requirements for belonging are essentially the same.
Hey dangermom. I clicked into this thread hoping to find a response like yours. Because, frankly, the piling on of skeptics interests me very little (and I am myself a skeptic, not only of Mormonism but religion generally). I have a few questions, which I am happy to put respectfully. I have others, but these will do for a start. BTW, comments from other LDS Dopers are welcome, from fellow skeptics not so much.
-
Do you accept as literally true the story of the gold tablets? Relatedly, do you believe the Witnesses saw the tablets literally or in visions?
-
One of the more problematic constructs of the Book of Mormon is that the Indians (native Americans) were of Hebraic origin. Do you accept this tenet?
-
What do you make of the Book of Abraham?
Not me! Taking Pascal’s Wager to its logical extreme I make the appropriate sacrifices to Jupiter, Juno, Mars, and the rest, plus their Greek equivalents. And pay homage to Vishnu, the Buddha, and Pele. With the religious holidays I get to take off I never have to go to work!