Critics say the Book of Mormon is not the word of God, that it is a fraud and false. So then what is your explanation for the existence of the book? It must have come from somewhere. Joseph Smith had an elementary school education and wasn’t known for having great writing skills. Did he write it on his own? Could you, even with the help of your college education and the Internet write such a book? Before you answer, have you actually read the book from cover to cover? The idea that Joseph Smith, or any other person or group of persons, could write such a book, even today, is hard to believe. I’d be willing to bet that if you got 20 of the smartest people together with degrees in archeology, Meso-American culture, Hebrew studies, theology, and Central American geography, they might be able to write a book, but I bet it could be conclusively and obviously proven to be an invention within a matter of days.
But hey, give it your best shot. If you don’t believe Joseph Smith was a prophet who translated the Book of Mormon from ancient plates with God’s help, where do you think the book came from?
There are actually many substantive theories about how the book was written. First, it is useful to note that many of the facts in the book of mormon are inaccurate or false (like where the people living in the Americas came from, where the plates could have been buried, etc.). But, as to your specific blog post about how Joseph Smith could have written the book (given his education level), a particularly interesting theory is put forth in the book, “An Insiders Perspective on Mormon Origins.” Smith, despite having a low level of formal education, was widely regarded as being intelligent. The author discusses an analysis of the book of mormon and compares it to the word structure used in many sections of the King James Bible. The study finds that the word use (both the words used, the order they are placed in, etc) are very similar in both books. His conclusion is that Joseph Smith likely copied sections of the bible changing names and details in order to tell a new story. It’s an interesting read that I highly suggest.
GIVE ME A BREAK….JOSEPH TOOK THE KJV OF THE BIBLE AND JUST CHANGED THE WORDS??? ARE YOU KIDDING???
IF YOU WANT TO SPEND YOUR TIME DEBATING AUTHENTICITY, TRY THE BIBLE….HALF OF THE AUTHORS OF THE BOOKS CALLED THE BIBLE ARE UNKNOWN. NONE OF THE BOOKS WERE WRITTEN IN THE TIME THE STORIES OCCURED. AND JUST WHO DECIDED WHICH BOOKS GOT IN THE BIBLE AND WHICH DIDN’T?
my brother is 8 years old, and his “made up stories” are just as good as joseph smith’s. how could mormons believe in Christ, yet also believe the writings of joseph smith?— he is no prophet, he’s just a lonely story teller wanting some attention. why can’t the places in the book of mormon be found? sure i’ve heard it’s in new york city, but no one has found anything. places and names are all made up. don’t believe in this rubbish. for example, bible states man must marry a woman…. not however many joseph smith married….but polygamy was okay because joseph said “god accepted it” … give me a break.. when joseph was murdered (that’s right… not died for anyone else’s sin nor resurrected in 3 days) he’s didn’t wake up in heaven….. now you mormons need to wake up, truth be told, christ’s coming soon….you’re not going to heaven if you don’t repent… and there’s no such thing is the planet kolob.
bible tells us to “test the spirits because not all of them are good” so test out mormonism, research joseph smith, find those places that are mentioned… least everything in bible have existed or the places are still there to this day.
1. I’ve been a Mormon for 33 years and I’ve never found any conflict between Joseph Smith’s teachings and those of Christ.
2. Not much archeological work on the Book of Mormon was done until the last few decades, and there are quite a few discoveries that have been and continue to be made that lend credence to the Book of Mormon narrative. To say no one has found anything is patently false. Just because you haven’t heard about it yet doesn’t mean the evidence isn’t there.
3. The Bible has examples of prophets marrying multiple women at the same time, apparently with God’s approval. Even if it didn’t, lack of evidence that plural marriage is approved by God is not proof of His disapproval.
4. Yes, Joseph was murdered, nobody claims otherwise, and we don’t claim that he’s our Savior in any way. This isn’t about Joseph Smith vs. Christ. Christ is our Savior, Joseph Smith is a prophet, like Moses or Peter.
5. How do you know there’s no such thing as the planet Kolob?
6. Is your entire belief in the Bible based on archeological evidence?
Unfortunatley Joseph Smith fails the prophet test, Read Deuteronomy 18 20-22, False prophecy, I am not, nor was I a christian, or a person who cared about Mormonism or any other religion but I did test and question him because of any man saying later in human life after the bible had been around for 1500 years, supposably having a new revalation of God, Seems fishy, so If you test him, Joseph Smith had many false Prophecies, even if one did not come true he is a false prophet, Most mormons are so deep into their faith by way of upbringing that they deny what is truth, Not one of the prophecies in the bible has ever been proven false, I search for 3 years in literature, history and study of Greek and hebrew, and have to say that you can’t find one. Good luck and prove it to me as I tell anyone. It was easy to find Joseph Smiths false prophecies, as well as Rusell with the JW’s also many false prophecies, seems to be a trend with the new so called revalation prophets.
For the record, this is what Deut. 18:20-22 says:
20 But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.
21 And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken?
22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.
Dr. T., you say it’s easy to find Joseph Smith’s “false prophecies” yet you don’t provide us with a single example. Would you be so kind as to give us some evidence of your claim? By the way, here is a list of many prophecies of Joseph Smith that have been fulfilled.
This is the problem I have with religions. All it takes is someone to say they were sent from god and if people believe them they are in like sin.. so to speak.
Personally I don’t believe in good or evil either. Right and Wrong and human concepts. I’m not saying they are not important but we don’t need a deity to tell us that smashing open our neighbours head for the sweetmeats within and raping his wife is wrong. Most of us know it is wrong and not acceptable behaviour.
When people think they can “talk with god” or are on some mission then they believe the normal rules do not apply to them which is very dangerous.
Perhaps as humans we are largely afraid of the unknown and therefore try to put some meaning to life. It’s too easy to say “if I do this in this life I will be rewarded in the afterlife”. The question religious people always like to throw out there “but what if your wrong?”. Well right back to ya. What if YOUR wrong? You have just wasted the one life you had following what your religion expects from you.
It’s also too easy with religion to prey on the weak minded to gather a following. All it takes is one person out to make a name for themselves and have their story and teachings live on after they have died. All they have to do is claim they were sent from God and have enough people believe them. The parents will in turn force.. er I mean teach their children that religion who will then spread it further and further.
IMO there have been many of these kinds of people in the past who have done just that. Hubbard, Smith, Jesus, Muhammad, Jim Jones. The list goes on. Just my opinion of course but really any religion is just one person or one groups opinions and rules on life.
Yes there is a lot of things out there that we have absolutely no understanding about and are unexplainable.. for now. But just as early man looked up at the planets and thought them to be gods we too like to try think there is someone or something out there looking out for us. Makes us feel all warm and fuzzy inside thinking that someone has a plan for us. Because lord knows (yes, I see the irony of using that statement) that we don’t have a plan for ourselves.
Next time make your own plan. Enjoy YOUR own life. Do the best in life that you can do and don’t tell others how to live their lives. But like I said. That’s just my opinion. You can tell me to go f myself for all I care. No sweat off my b41ls what you do or don’t do with your lives.
You bring up an interesting point with the “What if you’re wrong?” question, but the logical conclusion to that train of thought would be to join a religion or at least live in accordance with some set of rules associated with God. Logical, because if there is no God, then there’s no harm in joining a religion. But if there is a God, then at least you’ve got a shot at joining the right religion or living the right rules and reaping the benefits thereof. On the other hand, if you believe there isn’t a God and therefore do whatever you want in this life but it turns out there is a God, then you might be in a bit of trouble down the road, right? Therefore, even if you don’t believe God exists, it’s still logical to live as though God did exist, because at least you’ve got an insurance policy just in case.
If there truly is no God you can’t claim that anyone “wasted” their life following religious principles because if there is no life after this one then nothing matters, and therefore nothing is a waste of time, no matter what it is.
But we’re talking as though there’s no way to know whether God exists or not, and that’s one way in which Mormonism differs from most religions–from the first lesson those interested in Mormonism receive they’re invited to find out for themselves whether this church is the one and only true church of God or not. This idea, that man can communicate directly with God and that God communicates directly with man, is one of the fundamental tenets of our religion, and so it’s not necessary for people to run around speculating or making assumptions one way or the other–they can find out for themselves.
You in turn raise some interesting points there my friend.
For me personally I am not going to live my life the way someone else tells me to “just in case”.
If I sold you soul insurance. Insurance that if you died and did not go to heaven then your family or any relatives you had left behind would be compensated does that sound like something you might be interested in?
Or how about Platypus insurance? You never know when you may go to Australia and be attacked by one of these little buggers. Or whatever “insert highly unlikely occurrence” insurance you want. It’s the same principle. Your buying into it because of a what if factor, regardless of the unlikelihood of it.
And don’t get me wrong. I am in no way saying that a life devoted to whatever God you choose to believe in is wasted. In fact I think most religions have some pretty good core value systems, but if Islam is right then everyone else is screwed when we die. If the Jewish people are right then ditto, as with Christianity or even Mormon’s. They are all saying pretty much the same thing. If you don’t believe in this then you will be punished in a place that we can’t prove exists and in an afterlife that we “surprise surprise” can’t prove exists either.
It’s much like the insurance salesman in my mind. It’s using fear to get them to see something your way. But that’s my view on it. And I’m sorry, but any omnipotent being that says worship me or else is not someone I want to spend eternity with anyway.
And it’s not that I have a problem with religion… any religion really(except for the ones that would do others harm). The ideals and thoughts behind a set of life governing rules are usually pure and innocent. It’s the people who corrupt it along the way that get me. The humans that have at one time or another wanted either more power/fame/money for themselves that sway people to their way of thinking.
Those parents that force their children into the way they want them to grow up without ever giving them a choice and lastly the people who use religion as an excuse for brainwashing and/or violence towards others.
But those are not the reason that I choose not to be part of a religion in the classical sense. I don’t believe in heaven/hell. I don’t believe in god and the devil. I do believe there may be something out there. But logically if we think about it then it is unlikely to be a all powerful being who just has always been. They had to come from somewhere. Be it a multi-dimensional being of pure energy or a collective of all the souls past and future I think there could be something out there. Now I’m not going to worship this being, if it does exist then I would like to think it is beyond petty human emotions of jealousy, rage and spite, so in my mind we are on good terms. I will live my life and do my best to add something good to it. I will love my friends and family with all my heart. I try not to harm others. I will do my best in life. If that’s not enough to get me into the cool kids afterlife party then so be it.
I think it is great that you guys do that. But again, if it is up to the individual to find their own relationship with god you are still putting it in the person’s hands.
Walk down this completely hypothetical lane with me for a spell if you will.
Lets say a guy who is schizophrenic is brought up hardcore religion X by his parents. He knows he has voices in his head but ignores them as best he can and never mentions it to anyway for fear they would think him possessed. One day while out in the field by himself on of his multiple personalities takes on the form of an angel. The angel tells him that the ways of the church have been lost and that god has sent the angel to him to bring his children back into the light. So he re-writes the holy book according to the “angel” and shows his workings to the world. Most claim he is mad and they are right about him having mental problems. But because the boy has such faith and conviction in the “angel” he sways some to his new correct religion.
Over the years those people who devoted their lives to this religion have children and tell their children the same stories they heard with such passion and fire that those children follow in their parents footsteps. And so on. Until one day the religion has millions apon millions of people all believing the same/similar things.
Now, was that kid the messenger of God. Or was it just his mental illness manifesting itself around the religion his parents had forced onto him and did it in such a way that he could cast off the religious shackles his parents put on him but still maintaining the principles?
Who’s to know. After a few hundred years gossip and hearsay becomes legends where the original truths are so distorted by Chinese whispers that very little if any original facts/truth remains.
Alternatively, if this same kid had told his parents he heard voices in his head then proceeded to beat him and chain him up to try get the devil out of him. Then the kid grows up and the voices instead tell him to kill his parents and anyone else of that religion because they are the evil ones. That man would not be seen as a prophet or a messenger of god. They would just see a crazy killer.
But if the first option went down and years later someone said that they heard their “prophet” was nothing but a raving loony with voices in his head then he is liable to be tarred and feathered by some of the more hardcore fanatics of said religion.
But this is all hypothetical.
Going back to your communicating directly with god. Yes, it is a step up from most religions that seem to suggest only certain people can talk to god.
But again, if I were to ever even try something like that I would be breaking it down to logic too much which is why religion is not really for me. For instance. We walk into a temple to have a chat with god. The choir is singing softly in the background. I feel an enormous rush of peace and tranquillity when I sit down and pray.
Now I would say the enormous rush of peace would be coming from the beautiful temple I am in. That warm tranquillity I feel is the soft hymns being sung that send a shiver down my neck.
That peace I find when praying is the same peace I find when meditating. It’s not god then IMO, it’s just me, calming my mind to block out all the everyday worries and woes.
Thats not god doing that and giving me that peace. It’s just little old me, finding my own centre of being and holding it.
But again, just my opinion. Which is why religion is not for me.
And if I am wrong. Well, life’s a game. Sometimes you win, sometimes you loose. If I die and that’s it then so be it. If I die and am re-incarnated then so be it (funnily enough out of all the possibilities this one sounds the most plausible to me. Not that I believe that’s how it would go down but if any of the religions were correct I would put my money on the ones where you get re-incarnated. If the soul if eventually energy then it has to go somewhere after you die. Why not right back here on earth?). If I die and wake up in hell with Satan poking my bum with his red hot poker (so to speak), then so be it.
I’ll let the cards fall where they may. If god exists and has a plan for me then I’m sure I’ll be the first to know about it.
As for you. Enjoy your life. Thats the only thing I ask of others. Nothing more, nothing less.
PS: Sorry for the length and if it is a bit ranty.
Actually, Mormonism is a little different than other religions in that we don’t think non-Mormons are “screwed” when they die. I think Joseph Smith put it best when he said “The difference between Mormonism and other faiths is that they believe we are going to hell whereas we believe that even they can be saved.” I’m actually paraphrasing there, but it’s pretty close. We believe it’s risky to reject the truth in this life, but we definitely don’t believe that those who never hear of Mormonism are condemned, and we don’t even necessarily believe that those who reject Mormonism are condemned. We’re of the opinion that you can’t reject what you don’t understand, and so if the truth is taught to you in a way that doesn’t make sense to you, or you’ve got so much intellectual baggage that you don’t see things clearly, then that’s not necessarily your fault.
I suppose you’ve got a point when it comes to the weakness of the insurance analogy in that the same logic could be applied to the flying spaghetti monster.
Anyway, you and I agree on most things you’ve mentioned in this last comment. Like you, I wouldn’t worship a being that was subject to “jealousy, rage and spite” or a being that said “worship me or else.” I wouldn’t worship a being if I didn’t have proof of their existence.
Now, when it comes to proof, how do we know what is true? For many intellectuals brought up in Western culture, the very concept of God seems crazy, let alone the Joseph Smith story. I think it’s very debatable how much of that is due to indoctrination vs. logic, but I can easily see how people think it’s all insanity. But it’s as simple as this; If it’s false, it’s insane, and if it’s true, it’s not insane. The question is whether or not your desire to know what is true overrules your desire to stay within your comfort zone and live your life as you currently want to.
A lot of people, when taught something new, will effectively or directly say “Even if it’s true I don’t want to know.” I’ve had discussions with people where they actually say those words, although I think a lot of them are really saying “I don’t think it’s true and I don’t feel like making the effort to find out if something is true if I already think it isn’t.”
But let’s suppose you hear the Joseph Smith story, or you want to know if it’s true or not, or maybe you just heard about the Mormon concept of “God” for the first time, and you want to know if there is a God or not, and if he’s a sentient being who can communicate with us. I would gather that most people would think it a logical conclusion that if God exists, and if he wants us to know that he exists, then if we ask him directly if he exists as though he did exist, that he would respond. If he doesn’t respond, then either he doesn’t exist, or there’s something wrong about the way we’re asking him.
But suppose you ask and you get a feeling. I’ve had feelings and wondered “Is that coming from God or just my head?” How do I know I’m not just plugged into a big computer like in The Matrix and everything I feel is just simulated feelings being pumped into me?
I’m not sure the best way to explain it, and perhaps this is a weak attempt, but first, lets take for granted that there is a God. I know you don’t necessarily believe in my idea of God, but just for the sake of argument, let’s assume he exists, that he’s a sentient being like you and me, except he’s all powerful and all knowing. Imagine you have another sense, in addition to smell, touch, sight, etc. and that sense allows you to receive communication from God, and when you receive that communication you are able to “know” that it’s authentic. How do you know? Well, that’s the tough part. How do you know that 2 2=4? It’s sort of like that. It’s logical, it’s obvious, but if someone asks you how you know, you can’t explain the details of how you know. You can tell how you learned that 2 2=4, you can tell about the first time it made sense to you, but you can’t say why it’s true other than to weakly say “Well, it’s obvious.”
The only way you can understand what I know is to follow the same steps and get the same results. Then you’d be able to say “Oh, ok, I get it.” We still wouldn’t be able to explain it to each other, but we’d understand each other.
The most common mistake people make, however, is to ask God questions about things they don’t really want to know. Answers from God have consequences in that you’re responsible for the knowledge once you get it. If God tells you he exists, but then you just go on your merry way, then that doesn’t help you, it actually hurts you, so if you ask just to satisfy your curiosity without any intent of changing your life then God’s not going to tell you he exists. Obviously if you’re asking because you want to get a negative answer so that you can tell people “I prayed and I didn’t get an answer” then of course you’re not going to get an answer.
What it really comes down to in the end, then, is that the only people who find the truth are those who; 1) are so intent on finding the truth that they don’t care what it is, they just want to know it, or 2) those who already want the truth to be what it is. If what you want is a life where you feel that you’re “independent” and not beholden to anyone, then it’s going to be difficult to accept the truth as we Mormons see it, unless your desire to know the truth is stronger than your desire to live your life the way you want to live it.
Josh Steimle….You are @#$##$ in the head just like all other Mormons. I pity anyone who is non-mormon to argue with a mormon. Why do it? They are all wackos. It’s the biggest joke cult started by a loser, down on his luck piece of @#$# named Joseph Smith. You guys have got to be freakin kidding. He’s the kind of guy you would see trying to scam a quick buck on a street corner…and he has the court record to prove it.
Have a nice time on planet Kolob, @#$#$. hahahahahahahaha
I always find it interesting that when a person is incapable of logically debating a topic he will frequently resort to meaningless insults.
I find it interesting that the Mormon religion is incapable of logically debating anything, much less defending themselves in an intellectual conversation.
My initial comment was on the level of the Mormon church. Actually, I take that back…my comments actually have some truth to them. Ouch.
And to address where the Crook ( I mean book of course) of Mormon came from…Not sure…doesn’t really matter considering most of the enlightened world views mormonism as a sham. However, I do know where they can stick that book. Right up Gordon Hinkleys ass…Which coincidentally is where all mormons seem to have their heads anyways. Guess they can read it there.
Once again, you merely throw out more insults and barely attempt to make a point. If you want to have an intellectual debate then say something intellectual. That generally means you make a claim and then present evidence to back it up.
You’re welcome to continue posting comments with insults, but so far you’re doing a better job of proving that your accusations regarding Mormons are more accurately to be directed towards yourself.
If you read my first post you would notice that I said it is pointless to debate with a mormon, for mormon’s are too far gone in the depths of stupidity and blinded by the words of a useless nobody named Joe.
Is mormonism a cult?
And no…my comments should not be directed at myself…I’m talking about the mormon cult members (like yourself) who have a very big imaginations.
One more thing, there is no such thing as having an intellectual debate about the mormonism cult. Mainly because there is nothing intellectual to say about mormonism. Secondly, no educated man would ever defend the mormon cult.
All mormon cult members do is make claims…nothing ever backed up.
Joe Smitty is a fraud. His interpretation of the Egyptian scrolls were bogus. And what happened when they were interpreted by an eqyptologist? They did not say the same thing…hmmm….and what was their defense? Oh, it was different fragments that he was interpreting….ok, where are those fragments then? Hmmm…cant find them eh? Crook of Abraham is a sham. Bummer.
And your silence confirms it. What would your earthly “divine” leader of the mormon cult think?
You obviously haven’t done much research on Mormonism, Mike. And you’re a bit quick to jump in with the “silence” bit. You see, I actually research my claims and provide evidence to back them up, which takes a little time.
1. “there is nothing intellectual to say about mormonism” – Nice claim, do you have any evidence to back up the claim?
2. “no educated man would ever defend the mormon cult” – What is your definition of “educated”? College degree? PhD? Multiple PhDs and scores of peer-reviewed publications? There are plenty of people defending Mormonism who are “educated” by any reasonable definition of the word, unless you only believe people are “educated” if they blindly agree with your own prejudices.
3. “All mormon cult members do is make claims…nothing ever backed up.” – Go check out http://farms.byu.edu. You could spend the next 10 years of your life reading highly researched materials that back up the Mormon faith and still only scratch the surface of the evidence that’s out there. Just because you haven’t bothered to read anything anyone has written backing up Mormonism doesn’t mean nobody is doing it.
4. “His interpretation of the Egyptian scrolls were bogus” – Here’s 25 pages of evidence backing up Joseph Smith’s interpretation of the scrolls. It goes a bit beyond what you claim Mormons claim as evidence. If you have any sources that credibly and intellectually refute anything put forth on that webpage I’d love to see it.
And regarding one of your posts further up the thread… All it would take to create such a phony story would be a few Hollywood screen writers. Many of which do not have degrees.
Oh ok. So I guess you’re not in on the joke. Yikes. You’re part of it.
Why would anyone waste 10 years of their life reading bogus researched materials on the mormon cult? Not something a smart man would do. And wow, there’s a whole state of these people. Lame. I wish my grandma didnt live in Salt Lake City. Shes not of your cult by the way.
I’m starting to wonder if you’re for real…I mean, you’re not actually a Mormon pretending to be an anti-Mormon just to make anti-Mormons look foolish, are you? Because however well-intentioned, doing such a thing would undermine the legitimacy of this blog and not really help anyone. Seriously, if this is really the case just let me know and I’ll delete all our posts going back and forth.
That was a pretty lame attempt at humor. @#$# mormons cant do anything right.
Instead of just deleting just OUR posts back and forth, I think you would do yourself and the whole world wide web a favor by deleting your whole site. Boom.
And my definition of an educated man is not someone who earned a rubish degree from a mormon university.
When does the space ship leave for planet kolob? You guys are all astronauts. Way out there. But, oh yea, we anti-mormons are the foolish ones.
You believe in the mormon cult because you want to believe in it. Not because you have any evidence suggesting you should. Admit it. You were indoctrinated as a kid and now its just who you are…its cool.
The difference between the mormon cult and normal people is that when our parents take us to a worthless church, we separate ourselves from it eventually. I guess if you could live like Warren Jeffs, why not stay, huh?
1. “Critics say the Book of Mormon is not the word of God, that it is a fraud and false. So then what is your explanation for the existence of the book? It must have come from somewhere.”
-For the book to be considered Scripture it must have external and internal agreements. External factors include archeology. To this date there is no concrete evidence of an ancient world in the Americas existing as the BOM claims. There is no evidence of metalurgy, horses, and elephants prior to the exploration of Europeans. Internal factors are those that agree within itself. If there is an agreement why is the verbage incorrect? I was told JS wrote in such a way that God commanded him to. Yet, in the Bible I see the OT, written in Hebrew and Amaric,and the NT, written in Greek, were translated into our language of English. Here is a prime example of what would be agreement: in the NT, Jesus says he is the Alpha and Omega. If he were to say this in the OT he would say he is the Alef and the Tav. Another example of agreement is the in the OT a prophet named Elijah (means: The Lord is God) shows up. In the KJV Translation of the NT Elijah is translated to Elias. This is the same person, but his name translates differently into other languages. However, the BOM translates a language, that is Greek, that was unknown at the time to Israelites and Egyptians into English. The greatest factor of internal evidence is where prophecies are made and then they are shown as revealed (OT vs. NT of Bible).
2. One internal discrepency of the BOM is the use of Egyptian language by Israelites. This factor shows the lack of understanding of the Hebrews. They considered themselves special and outsiders, the non-Jews, as corrupt. Therefore, they would not permit themselves at such a time to use any language other than their own when speaking to one another or in their writings. If you don’t believe me then ask a Rabbi.
3. “Joseph Smith had an elementary school education and wasn’t known for having great writing skills. Did he write it on his own? Could you, even with the help of your college education and the Internet write such a book? Before you answer, have you actually read the book from cover to cover?”
-Do not be suprised that the 3rd grade level of education in Smith’s day far surpasses the 8th grade education of today. John Quicy Adams was an American Ambassador at the age of 14. What level of education do you think he had?
-I have read it and found it exactly as you said, “Joseph Smith was not known for having great writing skills.”
4. ” The idea that Joseph Smith, or any other person or group of persons, could write such a book, even today, is hard to believe.”
-It is very believable. With the expasnion of technology writing a book has been made easier. Just a simple copy and paste for those lacking in education. If you doubt me, you should see the 7 year olds, like my youngest son, who have little education, but are a whiz with a computer and internet.
5. “I’d be willing to bet that if you got 20 of the smartest people together with degrees in archeology, Meso-American culture, Hebrew studies, theology, and Central American geography, they might be able to write a book, but I bet it could be conclusively and obviously proven to be an invention within a matter of days.”
-Then please explain why the BOM has been explained away with as an invention of one’s own mind that men, women, and children will oppose that view. If it is fact then please show us where there is evidence, other than FARMS, that prove the BOM.
6. “But hey, give it your best shot. If you don’t believe Joseph Smith was a prophet who translated the Book of Mormon from ancient plates with God’s help, where do you think the book came from?”
-If you believe in demons then you can believe that demons know the past and present. They would not know the future as God knows. You would also know that demons can influence man. Any person claiming to know the things of God will not deny that Adam and Eve were tempted and gave into their temptation. Satan tempted the Christ using Scripture. Scripture that the devil took out of context. Judas, son of Simon Iscariot, was overcome by the devil. There is a parable that Christ speaks of involving unclean spirits. Therefore, it is the work of the spirit of antichrist as spoken of by the Apostle and Prophet John.
The greatest challenge to anyone in the LDS religion is what are you going to do when the logical and spiritual evidence shows the BOM is imaginative and its author was never a prophet of God?
7. Why not do what the first century church did when the men of God spoke to them? They searched the Scriptures (the Old Testament) to see if what they said were so.
I’ve added some numbering to the previous comment to make it easier for readers to understand what I’m responding to. None of the actual content of the comment has been modified.
1. “For the book to be considered Scripture it must have external and internal agreements.” If we are to say the Book of Mormon is not scripture due to a lack of archeological evidence, are we also to disbelieve those parts of the Bible that are not supported by such means? Where is the conclusive archeological record to support the Garden of Eden, the Great Flood, the Israelites spending 40 years in the wilderness, or the resurrection of Christ? It is this type of thinking that has led many experts, even so-called Biblical scholars, to arrive at the conclusion that the Bible is mere mythology and shouldn’t be taken as accurately describing real events.
And besides, your claims about a lack of archeological support aren’t exactly true. For example, there is evidence of horses in pre-historic America from National Geographic. Although it refers to horses that lived 10,000 years ago, considering that a few decades ago experts thought there had never been horses and now there is concrete evidence there were, we have to admit the possibility that perhaps there will be future discoveries of horses living during the periods described in the Book of Mormon. Here’s another resource on horses and the Book of Mormon you may want to check out. Here are some other resources on archeology and the Book of Mormon.
The problem with using archeology in an attempt to disprove the Book of Mormon is that we don’t have a complete archeological record. At best an extremely small percentage of the potential archeological work in Meso-America has been done, and it would take decades and perhaps hundreds of years at the current rate to complete the rest, and who knows what discoveries might come to light during that time. While there may be a lack of evidence to give you the “concrete” proof you’re looking for, a lack of evidence doesn’t prove the Book of Mormon to be false, it merely fails to prove that it is true.
2. “One internal discrepency of the BOM is the use of Egyptian language by Israelites. This factor shows the lack of understanding of the Hebrews. They considered themselves special and outsiders, the non-Jews, as corrupt. Therefore, they would not permit themselves at such a time to use any language other than their own when speaking to one another or in their writings. If you don’t believe me then ask a Rabbi.”
This is pure speculation. A modern-day Rabbi cannot be depended on to know exactly what a Jew of 600 BC would or wouldn’t have done when it comes to using certain languages. I would suppose many Rabbis wouldn’t be exactly supportive of the New Testament either. Additionally, the primary Jew in the Book of Mormon who would have been responsible for the use of any Egyptian language being adopted by the Book of Mormon peoples would have been Lehi, who was not necessarily like other Jews of his own day. Based on the Book of Mormon, he appears to have been a merchant who traveled widely, and he likely did business in Egypt and had to have an understanding of their language. Since the Egyptian language was more compact, it was more efficient when it came to writing on a limited resource, namely gold plates, than was Hebrew.
3. “Do not be suprised that the 3rd grade level of education in Smith’s day far surpasses the 8th grade education of today. John Quicy Adams was an American Ambassador at the age of 14. What level of education do you think he had?”
The educations received by Joseph Smith and John Quincy Adams were quite different. Adams’ father was a Harvard graduate, a lawyer, and a statesman. He was one of the most educated men of his time, and his wife was arguably smarter than he was. Adams was raised in Boston and Europe and received perhaps the best education imaginable for that time. Joseph Smith lived on the frontier of civilization and his parents were barely literate. Joseph’s wife, Emma Smith, said he couldn’t write a decent letter to save his life. Years after Joseph’s death and Emma’s estrangement from the Mormon church, Emma was asked this question by her son with the following answer:
Question. Could not father have dictated the Book of Mormon to you, Oliver Cowdery and the others who wrote for him, after having first written it, or having first read it out of some book?
Answer. Joseph Smith could neither write nor dictate a coherent and well-worded letter, let alone dictate a book like the Book of Mormon. And, though I was an active participant in the scenes that transpired, and was present during the translation of the plates, and had cognizance of things as they transpired, it is marvelous to me, “a marvel and a wonder,” as much so as to anyone else.
4. This is speculation on both our parts. You think it is easy, I think it is impossible, and I so suppose we’ll have to agree to disagree until someone tries.
5. People continue to believe in the Book of Mormon despite evidence given against it because the evidence given against it is not very credible once you begin to research it.
My intent is not to prove to anyone that the book is true, only to prove that it is not false. The only way a person can find out whether the book is true is to read it and then ask God if it is or isn’t. Anyone who does this with sincerity of heart will find out that it is. Anyone who lacks sincerity will not.
6. I’ve been examining the logical and spiritual evidence for 30 years and the more I learn, the more convinced I am that Mormonism is true.
7. I’ve done this, and the more I study the Bible the more convinced I am that Mormonism is true.
Good for you Steimle. Dedicate your life to something you can’t prove as true…and take comfort in knowing (in your mind anyways) that it can’t be proven as false. You’re quite the contrarian.
I can prove to myself it’s true, but I don’t pretend to be able to do the same for others. Everyone has to find out for themselves and the best I can do is remove some of the impediments.
Sure, buddy. What you mean is that your mind blurs the boundaries between reality and fantasy, however you can’t make us blur those same boundaries, hence, you can’t make us believe.
Sorry it’s been a while. I lost interest and then forgot about this place and saw some comments were made so decided to check it out again.
I wouldn’t say that I have a closed mind. I relish finding the truth wherever I can. I don’t think my non-moving views on this subject count as me being too closed minded to see the truth.
I have tried in my younger years to speak with god. I prayed thanking him/her for the things in my life. Never asking a thing from said deity, never asking for answers to life or for me to win the lottery (though if he/she is out there and wants to help me win the lottery rollover this week I might start believing. he he). Back then I would say I wanted it to be true. After a time I stopped believing because I didn’t feel anything. I didn’t feel what you obviously think you felt when you communicate with god. I didn’t ever get someone talking back to me.
Interestingly though, the one time I made a wish on a shooting star it came true. From that result perhaps I should start praying to celestial bodies as I got the feeling closest to what you were describing when my wish came true. That and it’s track record is a lot better than gods at the moment.
And yes, while I agree it is possible that there may be another sense that allows some to communicate it’s just not true. All the other senses we can measure, record and prove exist.
Because if you then theres nothing in your mind to say that other senses and abilities could not exist. This opens the flood gates for telekinesis, telepathy, mind control, etc.. etc..
Unless you believe these things exist too?
Oh, and we know that 2 2 = 4 not from just knowing. But because it is provable. If you have 2 apples and you add another 2 apples you get 4 apples. It’s a fact. There is no such proof for god. There is no equation that says Faith man = heaven. There is no way to prove such a thing.
But yes, who knows if we are not just plugged into the matrix and these are all just bits of data flying around in the virtual construct. Heck, I even realise it’s a possibility that we are nothing more than a dream of some higher being. Personally my proof against such an argument is that life is too random.
Like me stumbling onto this site for instance. If I hadn’t been bored at work that day I might never have found it. Or if my boss had walked in at the wrong time I would have closed down the browser before typing my first post.
Or even the random event of the earth’s formation and mutation of single celled organism’s to create the plethora of life we currently have on earth.
So yes, I can see that Mormonism is different from some religions. But then again like I said. If you ask any devout member of any religion they would argue the same points you have. That they know their religion is the right one because they have communed with their deity.
You can’t all be right can you?
And if you are all right then damn god’s got some split personality’s.
Unfortunately the only way any of us will really know and understand all these things (or not if there is indeed nothing after life) is when we die. And then it’s too late to change your mind.
So yes. I think there is more to life then we will know in this lifetime. But if my end findings in the search for the truth ends up differently to yours simply saying “You obviously don’t want the truth enough to see it” or “Your wrong because…” doesn’t necessarily make it so.
But I’ll make you a deal. If it turns out I’m right then I’ll try come back as a ghost to tell you. And if your right then you can give me a boost over the pearly gates, or at least put in a good word for me with the big man.
Argh, I hate it when I spent 20 minutes typing in a long response, and then I click “submit” and the page freezes and I can’t even copy my comment to paste it again and I have to start all over. There’s no way I re-writing all that, so here’s the short response to one part of your response:
“…while I agree it is possible that there may be another sense that allows some to communicate it’s just not true. All the other senses we can measure, record and prove exist.”
The ability to measure or record something does not determine its existence, it merely says something about the methods and tools we have at our disposal. If you went back in time to the 1500s and tried to explain the concept of radio wave transmission and reception to a farmer in Germany he would think you were crazy and then he might kill you for blasphemy.
In the case of spiritual communication the methods and tools are available to everyone. But instead of certain metal parts touching other metal parts and conducting electricity to the right areas so that a receiver is tuned into the right frequency, it’s a matter of being in tune spiritually which is more about attitude than physics. It’s more like how your friend will tell you a secret if he thinks he can trust you than just being able to push a button. If God trusts your intentions and you’re in the right frame of mind (humble, submissive, meek, open-minded, etc.), then he communicates with you in a way that you can understand. If you’re not tuned in, then you don’t receive the communication and to you it’s as though it didn’t exist. If you try to measure it using technology and lab sciences then you can’t prove it exists any more than you can use the same tools to prove that you love one of your children–and yet you know that you do.
Yea…except for the fact that kids are tangible living and breathing things, and so are the tools for transmitting radio.
If anything, Steimle, you’re talking to the devil. God, if there is one, doesn’t recognize the Mormon cult. Sorry.
I’m not sure we’re speaking the same language, Mike. Yes, of course kids are tangible things, I never said they weren’t. Love, however, is not a tangible thing. Yes, the tools for transmitting radio are tangible today, but they weren’t in 1500. If you’re going to enter into the debate you might as well take the time to understand what your opponent is and isn’t saying, otherwise you end up arguing a point that nobody is making. This does nothing to advance your point of view but instead makes you look foolish…and quite frankly I’m still not convinced that you are who you say you are. I’m still worried you’re really a Mormon who is just trying to make anti-Mormons look bad and I’m playing into it, because I’m having a hard time believing anybody could sincerely be saying the things you’re saying unless you’re a 12-year old or something.
“The problem with using archeology in an attempt to disprove the Book of Mormon is that we don’t have a complete archeological record. At best an extremely small percentage of the potential archeological work in Meso-America has been done, and it would take decades and perhaps hundreds of years at the current rate to complete the rest, and who knows what discoveries might come to light during that time. While there may be a lack of evidence to give you the “concrete” proof you’re looking for, a lack of evidence doesn’t prove the Book of Mormon to be false, it merely fails to prove that it is true.”
“Joseph Smith lived on the frontier of civilization and his parents were barely literate. Joseph’s wife, Emma Smith, said he couldn’t write a decent letter to save his life. Years after Joseph’s death and Emma’s estrangement from the Mormon church, Emma was asked this question by her son with the following answer:
“Question. Could not father have dictated the Book of Mormon to you, Oliver Cowdery and the others who wrote for him, after having first written it, or having first read it out of some book?
“Answer. Joseph Smith could neither write nor dictate a coherent and well-worded letter, let alone dictate a book like the Book of Mormon. And, though I was an active participant in the scenes that transpired, and was present during the translation of the plates, and had cognizance of things as they transpired, it “is marvelous to me, “a marvel and a wonder,” as much so as to anyone else.
“4. This is speculation on both our parts. You think it is easy, I think it is impossible, and I so suppose we’ll have to agree to disagree until someone tries.”
Yet, the question posed by the son appears to have a good sentence structure as well as the answer given by the wife of Smith. Yet JS’ dictation’s to his scribes were well thought out (please refer to the Doctrines and Covenants). One does not need to have a school diploma to have intelligence to speak. Learning doesn’t always take place in a classroom. Therefore, by the time Smith became an adult he would have had enough learning to use comprehensive speech.
“5. People continue to believe in the Book of Mormon despite evidence given against it because the evidence given against it is not very credible once you begin to research it.”
The most credible test is that of internal evidence. I was told by several LDS missionaries to consider the D&C as “The Book of Joseph Smith.” If anything in the D&C conflicts with the BOM then which one is true? It is commonly said by LDS members that if JS is a false prophet then the BOM is not true.
“My intent is not to prove to anyone that the book is true, only to prove that it is not false. The only way a person can find out whether the book is true is to read it and then ask God if it is or isn’t. Anyone who does this with sincerity of heart”
If the book is not false then it must be true. The opposite of true is false. To prove something is either true or false is to put it through thorough examination, or testing. It is doubtful that a God that would say, “Come let us reason together”, “Come test Me on this”, and “The heart of man is wicked. It cannot be trusted”, or a man of God saying, “Every word of God is tested”, would want us to put trust into something that cannot be proven. Faith with logic is a key factor.
“I can prove to myself it’s true, but I don’t pretend to be able to do the same for others. Everyone has to find out for themselves and the best I can do is remove some of the impediments.”
How would you logically support that BOM is another “testament” of Jesus Christ? The title does not say “companion” rather is says “testament”. Synonyms for testament in American English are: attestation, colloquy, confirmation, covenant, demonstration, earnest, evidence, exemplification, instrument, proof, testimonial, testimony, will, witness.
Notice that the common reference is that which involves proof. Therefore lack of evidence to prove the BOM as true or false leaves it in the realm of a theory. Whereas it cannot be confirmed nor denied as truth then it would be considered more on the side of fiction. Fiction equates to non-factual. For example, Aesop’s fables contain moral issues, but it does not mean the book is factual.
Personal conviction on a matter does not mean it is true in an all encompassing nature. Personal conviction is equal to opinion.
If this book is to be taken as truth then their will be evidence to support such a claim. It is simple as that. To remove any impediment is through the use of fact. Facts based on internal and external evidence. We have improved in the realms of archeological discovery and still the contents of the BOM are lacking in supportive evidence. Please note that many archeological discoveries that were found were first intended to discredit the Bible. Many discoveries were not done by followers of Christ. Unfortunately, the archeological discoveries since the 1930’s have done more to give credit to the authenticity of the Scriptures. Since the 1930’s there has been a large amount of external evidence to support the Bible we should also see an array of support for the BOM. However, we do not see this type of external evidence. Internally for the book to be fact then it must agree with the OT and NT of the Bible. Unfortunately, through careful examination, this is not the case.
I understand the LDS followers use the phrase, “based on the testimony of two or more witnesses” to prove the BOM true. The BOM contains the names of these witnesses in its preface. However, no explanation is given to why the BOM can be a work of fact when indeed several of the witnesses had left the church or had been excommunicated. How can the testimony of an apostate founding member of an organization hold credibility? In this case the phrase, “By their fruits ye shall be known” helps bring this matter into the light.
“Therefore, by the time Smith became an adult he would have had enough learning to use comprehensive speech.”
Comprehensive, yes, but hardly on the level of what would be required to write any book, let alone a book like the Book of Mormon. If you go back and read any letters of Joseph Smith in his own words (as opposed to documents that were revelations or documents written by others who may have written down the ideas Smith was communicating rather than his exact words) this becomes quite obvious. The idea that Joseph Smith was a literary genius who could have written or dictated the Book of Mormon in two months time simply doesn’t hold up against the large body of evidence showing that he was in fact no more educated than what you would expect from someone with a 3rd grade education.
And to say that writing a book like the Book of Mormon could be done by someone without education is absurd. One need only read it to see that this simply would not be possible, and anyone who claims otherwise hasn’t really read it or is simply pushing an agenda without care for finding out the truth.
“It is doubtful that a God …would want us to put trust into something that cannot be proven.” Anyone can obtain proof that the Book of Mormon is true. All you have to do is read it and sincerely ask whether it is true or not and God will tell you. I can’t prove to you that the Book of Mormon is true, but you can prove it to yourself. If you don’t receive a positive answer than the problem most likely has something to do with your level of sincerity.
Once God tells you the Book of Mormon is true (or the Bible for that matter), external and internal evidences don’t matter. You know there must be an explanation and that it all works out somehow, even if you don’t know exactly how. To say one must be able to have proof from internal and external evidences (other than God himself) is like saying a person must know all the inner and outer workings of a car before driving it. Why? It’s enough for me to know that if I turn the key it will start and if I push the pedal it will go. It’s enough for me to know that the Bible and Book of Mormon are true because God tells me so. I don’t need archeological or linguistic evidence to prove that to me. If I base my beliefs on such factors then every time some knew bit of knowledge comes along I’ll have to reconsider everything. It’s very inefficient, and would put the gospel beyond the reach of the uneducated masses of the world.
“How would you logically support that BOM is another “testament” of Jesus Christ?”
The word testament in this case is synonymous with “witness,” as in a witness at a court trial. The Bible is one witness of Christ, and the Book of Mormon is a second which confirms and clarifies the first.
“We have improved in the realms of archeological discovery and still the contents of the BOM are lacking in supportive evidence.” Not true. See Book of Mormon Evidences. Of course none of this proves definitively that the Book of Mormon is true, but neither does any archeological evidence prove definitively the truth of the Bible. But to say there is no archeological, or internal or external evidence of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon, is patently false.
“However, no explanation is given to why the BOM can be a work of fact when indeed several of the witnesses had left the church or had been excommunicated. How can the testimony of an apostate founding member of an organization hold credibility?”
Actually, numerous explanations have been given for about 150 years, it just appears you haven’t run into any of them yet. The fact that several of the witnesses left the church and/or were excommunicated adds to the credibility of their testimonies. If all these people signed their names to statements saying that the angel of God appeared and showed them the original plates from which came the Book of Mormon, wouldn’t you expect them to deny that once they denied the LDS Church and Joseph Smith as a prophet? And yet in spite of leaving the church, they still insisted that they had seen an angel and that the angel had shown them the plates. Their testimony would, in reality, be quite a bit less credible if they had all stayed in the church and never left it.
“Anyone can obtain proof that the Book of Mormon is true. All you have to do is read it and sincerely ask whether it is true or not and God will tell you. I can’t prove to you that the Book of Mormon is true, but you can prove it to yourself. If you don’t receive a positive answer than the problem most likely has something to do with your level of sincerity.”
This logic doesn’t add up. So essentially what your suggesting is that if I asked and prayed to god to tell me the truth, if I don’t get an answer then I am the one at fault for not being sincere enough regardless of my level of faith? Nothing at all to do with the possibility that I am right and not you?
And what if I got a different answer to yours? ie: Was told by God that the correct relgion was Islam, Buddism etc? Is that the devil speaking?
So lets imagine for a second that God has verified that the bible/bom is true and not some other religion. You were truly god and wanted “your children” to follow your teachings, knowing how human nature is when someone dismisses what you believe to be true and knowing there are many other religions in this world, you would “if you were a logical god that is” create some irrefutable evidence to back your holy scripture.
Also knowing the wars that have been started in the name of religion. All he/she would have to do is give a little evidence and most of the violence would stop.
Or even, why hasn’t the Devil come forward with some false evidence to sway people the wrong way? It would be easy enough for him and be to his advantage. The most logical reason is neither exist.
The fact that the only evidence you have is a book with no other backing that the church’s own and you telling me that it’s true is no real proof at all.
By using that same logic if I wrote some scripture (I only just finished high school, and not very well. So there is no way I could write a whole scripture), then went around claiming to have been visited by an angel and spoken with God who told me this is the next scripture on from the BOM. Then I get some followers. Would you believe me?
Likely not. And with good reason.
If indeed there is a god then no religion is correct 100% IMO. Because, like I previously stated. Any person of faith in any denomination of any religion will all say the same as you. That they read the scriptures, asked god and was answered that yes, that is the correct religion. Either they are all right or they are all wrong.
And if indeed like you suggest there is a specific “channel” that some are tuned into to speak directly with God it would be crazy to suggest that only people of a particular religion could tune in. You don’t hear about any mass walkouts from the Vatican because god told them they were following the wrong religion do you? And why hasn’t God proved this by giving a person of pure faith the lottery numbers so that he can end world hunger hmmm? Or at least some other sort of evidence that he could take to show people that his/her religion is the one true religion. Wouldn’t even need to be anything big. But it hasn’t happened. Why do you think that is?
“So essentially what your suggesting is that if I asked and prayed to god to tell me the truth, if I don’t get an answer then I am the one at fault for not being sincere enough regardless of my level of faith?”
Depends what you mean by the word “faith”. I see them as being more or less the same thing, which is this–if God tell you the Book of Mormon is true, that means that Joseph Smith was a prophet, that means the LDS Church is God’s one and only true church, and that means you plan to join it and actively participate in it. If you pray merely to satisfy curiosity, or with the set thought that the book is false, or with the intention of not getting an answer so that you can say “I prayed and didn’t get an answer” then you’re not going to get an answer. You have to be willing to change your entire life based on the answer you get, otherwise you’re not ready for the answer.
The logic of it all depends on your reference point of view. If you don’t already know the Book of Mormon is true then of course it logically has to be true or false. In which case it does no harm to sincerely ask God. From your point of view anything is possible. But from my point of view I already know it’s true, so I know you’ll receive a positive answer if you’re sincere, and that the only way to not receive an answer is to not be sincere. Each of our views are logical based on the information available to each of us.
“And what if I got a different answer to yours? ie: Was told by God that the correct relgion was Islam, Buddism etc? Is that the devil speaking?”
Assuming that someone is praying with regards to the LDS Church/Book of Mormon etc., yes, I would suppose so. I find it difficult to believe that God would allow someone to be exposed to the true religion but tell them to follow another. But who knows, I could imagine there being exceptions. I think there are definitely cases where people are told by God to follow other religions in the absence of Mormonism. I happen to believe that Islam, Buddhism, and many other religions were inspired of God. I think they fit into his purposes in that they move people in the right direction. If you look at who was converted by Islam initially, it was people who previously worshiped multiple Gods and idols and such, and so Islam is an improvement over that and has brought hundreds of millions closer to the truth than they otherwise would have been. Do I believe Mohammad received revelations from God? Do I believe those revelations told him to move in a different direction than Mormonism? Yes and no. I think Islam and Mormonism (and almost every other religion) move people in the direction of God. I have no doubt that those who sincerely strive to live by the teachings of Islam, Buddhism, or the Bible will be saved because I believe anyone who lives up to the knowledge they’ve been given will be saved. But if they’re presented with additional truth and reject it because they’ve made up their mind that they’ll believe what they already believe and no more, then they’re damned in the sense that they’re stopped and can’t progress until they open their mind.
Regarding the rest of what you say, you and I have fundamentally differing perspectives on the purpose of life, who God is, and how God operates. If I accepted the same basic ideas you have about what God should be like, then I would agree with you on just about every point you make. I’m afraid this may not be short, but I’ll do my best…
The purpose of life and everything God does is happiness. That’s the goal. Not happiness in every moment or everything, and not the kind of happiness that is associated with fun or laughing or simple pleasures, but the kind that last forever and which can exist in spite of terrible things also existing. Let’s just call it “eternal happiness” for now.
What makes God happy? Having children and raising them to be like him, or in other words, creating more gods. So God begets spirit children (don’t ask me how, I haven’t a clue). We’re all his spirit children. The spirit is the individual part of us that makes us different than everyone around us. It’s our personality. Our spirit body is like our physical body, but can’t be destroyed or damaged, and it’s made of different material than our physical body. I don’t understand it all and I understand this sounds crazy, but bear with me.
Before this life, we all lived in the presence of God as his spirit children. We could do most of the things we can do here like walk and talk and progress intellectually. But we were limited by not having physical bodies. We couldn’t reproduce and raise children, we couldn’t feel pain, or go through any of the other experiences we have due to having a physical body.
God has a physical body, but it’s a perfected physical body. It can’t be damaged or killed and doesn’t wear out like ours. And God is omniscient (knows everything) and omnipotent (can do anything). So how does God get these spirits to bridge the gap and become like him? Apparently we can’t become like God unless we really want to become like him. And we can’t just say “Yeah, I want to be like God”, we have to really want to be like him. That’s where the earth comes in. It’s a testing area to allow us to prove to ourselves and God what we really want to become.
We’re born on the earth and our minds are wiped virtually clean of all memory. This gives us the freedom to choose. If we could remember living with God and we knew everything about the plan, then it wouldn’t be much of a test. In fact it would all be pointless.
God sends us prophets and scriptures and other evidences that he exists and he tells us what we’re supposed to be doing down here, but he does it in such a way that we can still doubt. If the evidence were too convincing then we wouldn’t exactly be free to choose. Of course most people haven’t been and won’t be exposed to Christianity during this life, but they still have the opportunity with every choice they make to prove what type of person they are and what they want to become. They do it when they choose to beat their wife or be nice to her, when they choose to take some of their time to serve others or they focus on themselves, when they get married and raise children or indulge in physical pleasures by sleeping around.
The problem with this plan is that we all do bad things in this life. We all make mistakes. In God’s world, imperfection has immediate and permanent consequences. This is where Satan came from. He was one of God’s spirit children along with all of us, but he rebelled against God, and because of the knowledge he had the consequences were immediate and can never be changed. Satan is eternally cut off from God and can never become like him. Although the rest of us were “incomplete” we were still perfect. But down here, we aren’t perfect. But having lost our knowledge of everything from before, the consequences are not immediate, and so we’re in a sort of limbo. We’ve got problems, but the consequences haven’t kicked in yet. How to fix this? That’s where Christ comes in.
Don’t ask me the details of how it works, but somehow Christ (who was also one of those spirit children along with all of us) does it. He was born with different traits than the rest of us because we was literally half-god and half-mortal. He lived a perfect life, and then suffered all the consequences of our mistakes. He also suffered all our pain, sickness, etc.
Somehow, like a chemistry experiment I don’t understand but which produces interesting results, the combination of all these factors enables Christ to “pay” for our mistakes, and then, if we fix our mistakes, they get written off, or forgiven, like a bad debt. In order for the debt to be written off, we have to do what Christ says, and what he says is “be perfect” because again, becoming like God, who is perfect, is the ultimate goal. Christ knows we’re not going to become perfect here on earth and we’ll continue to make mistakes, but the important thing is to be heading in the right direction when we die, because when we die the situation changes, and per my understanding it becomes a bit harder to fix our mistakes, or repent, than it is to do here.
After death, we go on progressing and if we’ve made the right choices we ultimately become like God and the cycle continues. Not everyone becomes like God, but that’s because not everyone wants to be like God. It’s kind of like how everyone says they want a big, nice mansion to live in, but do they really? I don’t. I find a townhouse much easier to take care of and I like being able to talk to my family without an intercom. Not to say that people who live in mansions are more godly, but you get my point. Before we came to earth we may have thought we wanted to be like God, but here on earth we may prove to ourselves that we really don’t want to do all that work that it takes to become like God, or that we really aren’t as inclined to be as self-sacrificing and charitable as he is.
I should mention that life here is not just about testing, it’s also about learning. We learn from our experiences, and those experiences can teach us to become more like God. Mother Theresa certainly learned how to be more like God. But so may the guy who’s completely illiterate, works in an open-pit gold mine in Africa, and at the age of 14 is killed for his $3 paycheck by a co-worker. It’s hard for us to begin to judge what people are learning from their experiences, which is why God commands us not to make judgments about whether people are going to heaven or hell–we’re not very good at it, and there’s no point since it’s not our decision.
This life is merely a blip in the eternal scheme of things. We’ve got billions of years behind us and billions of years ahead of us, and this life is a mere speck of time, although it is the most critical time of our entire existence because it determines everything about what we do after this life.
You could ask why God reveals anything of himself, if this testing mechanism works so well. Why establish a church at all if people can still be tested and learn without the church? I might speculate upon the reasons, but I don’t know. All I know is that he has established his church, and that if I reject it I’m in trouble, but if I accept it I’ll not only be better off for it in the next life, but I’ll be happier here as well.
So why doesn’t God give irrefutable proof of his existence? Why doesn’t he make it obvious to everyone that the Bible is true? Why doesn’t he make it obvious which church people should join? Because it would destroy his plan to do so. If God removes doubt, he removes freedom to choose, and without freedom, this life is pointless when you consider God’s long-term plans for us.
Why does God allow suffering? Why does he allow children to be molested? Why does he allow people to go hungry? People suffer, are molested, and go hungry because of the choices people make. The only way for God to prevent these terrible things would be for him to take away freedom, and once again, the plan would be ruined. People must be allowed the freedom in this life to commit the most horrible atrocities that; 1) they might prove to themselves and God who they really are, and 2) to allow people to commit the greatest good works. Take away world hunger, and you also take away the opportunity for people to sacrifice their own wants to help those who are hungry. Take away slavery and you take away the opportunity for people to commit acts of heroism to release slaves from bondage. Take away sadness, and you also take away happiness. Everything would be gray, drab, meaningless.
And besides, it’s all taken care of after this life. The child who is molested, tortured, and murdered is, on the other side, welcomed into Christ’s arms and Christ takes away the pain. He already suffered that child’s pain, and through some miracle is able to take it away so that the child doesn’t suffer anymore. The suffering of the parents who lose a child this way is taken away in the next life, and can be softened in this life. All those who suffer in this life receive 100% comfort in the next, and can receive at least some measure of comfort in this one.
The genius of God’s plan is that everyone gets a fair and equal chance. Any advantage or disadvantage is the result of personal choices, and thus nobody can blame anybody else or God for how they end up. In the next life I believe the test results will be startlingly obvious.
So the question becomes one of whether you’re the type of person who wants everything, or are you satisfied with what you’ve got? If you’re satisfied with what you’ve got and just want to live your life in peace, then you’re free to make that choice. It doesn’t mean you’ll go to hell in the next life, it just means you may be stuck on a lower level of progression. I’m sure you’ll be happy and feel like you got what you wanted. For me, that’s not enough. I want everything God is offering me. I want to live the kind of life God lives. I wouldn’t be completely happy with anything less, and membership in the LDS Church is the only guarantee I have of being able to get there. I don’t really believe you’d be satisfied with anything less either, but that’s for you to decide.
God gave us the Bible to help us along the way. Anybody who lives the teachings of the Bible is well on their way to living the kind of life God lives. The Book of Mormon is additional truth which confirms and clarifies the Bible and helps us even further along the way. People can reject it, but only at the risk of being stopped in their progress.
God doesn’t want to force anyone to believe in either the Bible or the Book of Mormon. His goal is not for everyone to join his church, his goal is for as many of his children who desire it to live the life he lives. Membership in his church during this life is not a requirement, but accepting all the truth that is revealed to us is, and God gives us ways to identify the truth such that we can trust in it. But those methods only work on an individual basis. I can’t prove to you that the Book of Mormon is true, or that God exists, but you can prove it to yourself. That’s all that really matters.
1. Joseph Smith could read and understand the KJV of the Bible well enough to ask what church to join. If not then the stories told of him are false. If he could read the KJV well then why couldn’t he dictate a book based on his own ideas? His mother, in a book, says that he was a tale bearer…and very good at it.
2. One can pick and choose what parts of history they want to believe, but it does not get rid of the facts. Facts of archeological discoveries in Asia prove the existence of events and people that are mentioned in the Bible. Mayan, and other Aborigine American, discoveries in the Americas dismiss the BOM. Why is that? Why won’t the Smithsonian Institute use to BOM to help locate archeological sites?
3. What of the fact that there is no mention in the Bible of a newer covenant after the new covenant?
4. If anything else then flip to the pages of the BOM where it speaks of the sacrifices made according to Moses. These are sacrifices being made in the Americans contrary to the Law. Under the Law:
-It can be only Levite priests to make the sacrifices
-Only a Levite a descendant of Aaron could be high priest who was to go into the Holy of Holies once a year on the Day of Atonement to sprinkle blood on the mercy seat on the Ark of the Covenant.
-All male Jews had to be in Israel, specifically in Jerusalem at the temple (that’s where the tabernacle was), 3 times out of the year for the appointed sacrifices
-If a Levite had a spot or blemish he could not serve as a priest because he would be unclean.
5. Anyone can pray for an answer to something, but it doesn’t mean the answer is true. I guess the only way to prove the BOM correct by a previous standard is to do what Joseph Smith did and wait to hear a voice from heaven and the appearance of God and/or angels. I logically believe this would be proof enough for a non-believer. Then again, if this were so then ALL the Jews who left Egypt with Moses would have believed and not perished. Even in the midst of a column of fire and seeing the wonders of God people wouldn’t believe. Even if one were to rise from the dead doesn’t mean anyone will believe.
6. If God wanted us to use blind faith dealing with His word then what would be the point of having Scripture? Why even try to have a discussion of right or wrong Scripture if none are willing to look at the facts? Why go so far to say it is logical to trust ones own heart that the facts? Why bother having a logical discussion only to come back with nonsensical words? If one only had to pray to receive revalation then why do we bother convicting crimminals even when they were told to do it by some supernatural force? After all, it was right to them and they knew it in their heart.
1. If being able to read a book were equal to the task of writing a book we’d have a lot more authors. There is simply no credible argument to be made that Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon, either from his own mind or from copying other books. Every effort has been made over the past 150 years to prove this and nobody has been able to provide anything but the most tenuous circumstantial evidence that can withstand only the most superficial examination but nothing more.
2. “Facts of archeological discoveries in Asia prove the existence of events and people that are mentioned in the Bible.” Where is archeological proof of arguably the most important event of the entire Bible, namely the resurrection of Christ? The most important events of the Bible do not have much if any archeological evidence to back them up. Certainly not enough to prove the Bible is true beyond any doubt. Those who claim the Bible is true take it on faith, as do those who believe in Book of Mormon.
“discoveries in the Americas dismiss the BOM” – This isn’t factually true. As I already mentioned above, there is substantial archeological evidence backing up the Book of Mormon narrative. I’ll post this link once again which covers just some of the archeological evidence, which it appears you missed the first time I posted it – Book of Mormon Evidences.
3. What of it? This proves nothing. The Bible is neither a comprehensive record of everything said by every prophet, and even if it were that doesn’t mean that if you collected everything every prophet ever said that it would contain everything that would ever happen in the world.
4. I’m no expert on this, but here’s the short answer based on what I can gather. The restrictions which enabled only descendants of Levi to perform certain ordinances was a restriction that was placed solely upon the people of Israel for a defined time period (from the time the restriction was given until Christ). The people of the Book of Mormon were a separate people from those at Israel, and operated under different restrictions that God gave them for their circumstances.
5. You are correct in saying that seeing God, Christ, angels, or visions is not enough to spark real faith, or as you pointed out the Israelites of Moses’ day wouldn’t have been so pigheaded. Enduring faith comes through communication with the Holy Ghost. Everything else may strengthen one’s convictions after they have received a testimony via the Holy Ghost, but without the witness of the Holy Ghost even the most “convincing” proof such as seeing and talking with God is not enough. It is this witness of the Holy Ghost that the Book of Mormon promises as an answer, rather than visions or visitations.
6. Who said God wants us to use blind faith? How is either of us in this debate not willing to look at the facts? If I haven’t responded to a question you’ve asked and that gives the appearance of me avoiding the matter than I assure you it was unintentional. I’m also not sure if you’re referring to my words as being “nonsensical” or something else. If you think something I’ve said doesn’t make sense, then by all means tell me what it is and I’ll explain it until it makes sense.
“Why go so far to say it is logical to trust ones own heart that the facts?” I don’t trust my heart, if by “heart” you mean my own feelings. I trust the witness of the Holy Ghost. It’s true that this witness is commonly referred to as a “feeling” but that’s only for lack of a more descriptive and accurate word. Either way, it is not a feeling that comes from within from from without. It is a form of external evidence.
“If one only had to pray to receive revalation then why do we bother convicting crimminals even when they were told to do it by some supernatural force?”
Our system convicts criminals based on their verifiable actions, not on what is in their heart. Only God can judge the heart because only he knows what is in our hearts.
Ok.
Well here’s a question for you then.
Do you believe that it is possible for a person to become like god through their own sets of morals and/or deeds (or achieve access to heaven) and without the works of Christianity or Mormonism?
Well.. its actually more like a 2 part question. Firstly the one above and then, Do you believe that anyone who believes in another religion other than those specified above are able to get to that same level of “being like god” if they were a devout Buddhist for instance? Or a Muslim? Or someone of the Scientology faith perhaps?
Wait as sec… Ignore that last one, it isn’t a proper religion.
Yes and no (you’re right, it really is a two-part question).
What’s necessary for exaltation (becoming like God) is to accept all truth. Damnation (halted progress) is a natural consequence of the rejection of truth, the same way that falling to your death is a natural consequence of stepping off a cliff.
Truth isn’t the exclusive domain of Mormonism. All religions possess varying amounts of truth. If I, as a Mormon, were to reject the truths found in other religions I’d be just as damned as members of those religions would be for rejecting the truths found in Mormonism.
What’s different about Mormonism is that it contains “saving truths” that aren’t to be found anywhere else. If this life were the only shot one had at getting it right, then yes, everyone would have to become a Mormon in this life to be saved. But this life isn’t the only chance. Those who would have accepted Mormonism had it been explained to them in such a way that they could understand it, or who would have accepted it had they been exposed to it, will have the chance to accept it in the next life. So yes, Muslims, Buddhists, Scientologists, other Christians, and even Democrats can all be saved, even if they aren’t converted to Mormonism in this life.
Per my understanding, the only people who are in danger are those who recognize the truth and reject it.
So basically you are saying that to progress past a certain point at some point in their “soul development” they would HAVE to become a Mormon?
So what if I had my own “ethos” that incorporated all the “saving truths” as well as many others completely independent of any exposure to Christianity/Mormonism. Would I still get to the same level of “being god” as someone who has been a devout Mormon over many lifetimes?
Could you perhaps give me an example or 2 of these “saving truths”?
Jimboom, you make some excellent points. But let me make some different arguments.
Let me preface my comments by simply stating that I think it’s much easier to believe in the Bible than it is the Book of Mormon or Joseph Smith. Thus, being an Evangelical Christian today is much easier than being a truth-seeking Mormon.
Quite simply, those who believe in the Bible and consider themselves Christians are very much like members of my own church that don’t search out the entire truth. Unfortunately, however, it is not a fair comparison (Christianity versus Mormonism). If Christianity today was examined under the microscope that Joseph Smith and Mormonism are and if there existed the same abundance of information on Christianity that exists on Mormonism, I think it’s not too far fetched to say that Christianity would not fair much better than Mormonism. But the reality is, outside of what is written in ancient books, we know next to nothing about the lives of the actual characters living in Biblical times (new or old). Seriously, how many opinions from neighbors of Jesus or His family exist? What do we know about the people that wandered with Moses in the desert for 40 years? Who was there to write about the weaknesses of Peter or Paul?
My point is that it’s so easy for so many to blatantly accept Christianity and so easy to condemn Joseph Smith. But in reality what’s so different in believing that Smith saw angels and conversed with God and what Paul experienced in the New Testament or Moses parting the Red Sea or Jesus walking on water or Noah building an ark that could hold all of the earth’s inhabitants? Why are the latter “miracles” so readily accepted and yet Joseph Smith so quickly damned.
I’m not saying that this makes Smith a prophet of God. I’m simply saying those attacking Smith and the church need to adjust their expectations and study the account with more humility, fairness.
I, myself, have a tough time with much of the Joseph Smith saga. There are indeed ample evidences where I think he is being deceptive – but not necessarily to get gain. But I also find the story profound. Why would anyone continue a fraud for so many years – especially with regard to both getting and then hiding the golden plates? How was he able to translate the Book of Mormon in the manner that is so well documented? I doubt someone who also had to work during this time would have had time to write out such a well thought out manuscript. And if there was a fraud, how was it so well conceived that no one ever recanted or no evidence found to refute his claims? Sure, some left the church but none ever recanted their witness to having seen the plates or their experience in translation (or transcription).
My personal feeling is that Joseph Smith was extremely insecure about his calling. I think he often exaggerated his abilities in order to convince others (examples would be the Book of Abraham, translation method, some of his claims, some of his revelations specifically for other people). Of course, you could also claim that this was because he was a fraud. But there is a certain simplicity and humananistic to both what he accomplished and also where he failed. The problem is we don’t really have any other Biblical prophet or leader by which to give a fair comparison.
But, what he brought to Christianity (or brought back) are some basic concepts.
1) God had a plan for humanity (ie, Adam’s eating of the forbidden fruit was an eventuality and the Fall of Man had a purpose)
2) All people living or dead will have a chance to accept the Gospel. While not much is known about how this really works, the idea is that since man is God’s creation, God is ultimately more interested in man’s progression than he is our damnation. Thus, we will each be judged by what “talents” we are given and what we do with those “talents” or gifts.
3) Through the guiding of the Holy Spirit, one can consult God in one’s daily life. It’s not to say that every trivial thing may get an answer or that we may get the answer we want, but the idea is to be worthy to receive inspiration.
Finally, to answer your question about saving truths, I would simply refer you to point number 2 above. Ultimately, I do not believe you have to be a Mormon to either glorify God, progress, be happy, etc but I do believe that Mormonism, in its true form, is the easiest path to God.
I find this site very interresting!! i see there are some that really want to gain some knowledge and others who sit behind their computer and make comments with no real logic behind it.. i wish i knew more about computers to join in the debates properly.. even though i dont like fighting, only giving insights and giving food for thought.
people in these days remind me alot of the people in the bible when a prophet like for example noah says that it will be flooding soon, no one believes him and probable he got some insults like many give to joseph smith… well what happened to them? i just feel sorry for people who make such harsh judgements and fight against something that they cannot prove wrong.. oh what horror awaits the man who persistently fights against truth proven or in the process thereof…
that counts for any religion, book or theory about truth. if i dont like something i leave it alone and put it away… but people are atracted to”mormonism” for some reason… their curiosity can help them learn very deep and interresting things and perhaps if they get that far they can be strengthened spiritually, but it can also have the adverse effects on those who seek its destruction.
You make some good points Gerhard. Yes, prophets have always had it bad.
Though from a normal everyday person’s perspective it’s easy to see why people ignored prophets.
I mean if you were to put it in modern terms. You see a guy on the street with a sign saying “The End is Neigh” and spouting all kinds of things about how God came to him and told him that the sins of the world would be doused by god’s fiery wrath.
Most people would ignore him or even brand him as a loon.
Though if 10 years from now the earth was hit by an asteroid and most of the world was wiped out then anyone who remembers that “crazy guy” on the street corner would call him a Prophet and if he was still alive probably follow him and whatever he preached…. even if he was technically crazy or on drugs and guessed the whole thing.
Portlandcoug. Yes, I agree that all religions should be held under the same scrutiny. The problem is that devout followers of any religion don’t generally like it when you question anything about their religion. This is why I have said that Mormonism seems to be ahead of the pack in this point.
For me though I think there is no way to really be able to 100% verify a religion one way or the other. I mean sure you can take peoples word for the fact that they have “spoken with god”, or “seen the light”. But as for physical evidence. It is not really possible to provide physical evidence for something so spiritual.
But spirituality has been part of human nature since back when we worshipped the sun and the stars. So to completely ignore this as part of our nature would be to ignore a part of ourselves.
I have done a decent amount of research into the Mormon Church and I have several issues that prevent me from believing that the church is indeed true
1) Joseph Smith has released many different accounts of the “first vision”. These accounts are highly varying. In some accounts he claims to have seen one personage, in others more than one, in some a visitation of angels, and in the currently accepted version he claims to have seen God and his son Jesus Christ. However, the bible tells us that no man can see the face of the Lord and live. While, there are several passages that may sound as if Moses and others have actually seen the Lord, I cannot accept the fact that a man such as Joseph Smith was able to see the Lord.
2) Joseph Smith had a history of being a treasure seeker, using “seer stones” to find treasure. What a coincidence that he would end up using stones to translate the plates.
3)Joseph Smith translated the plates in his hat??? And when Martin Harris lost the 116 pages he had to abandon that work and move on to the story of Nephi, which was very similar but just from a different perspective.
4) I 1842, Joseph Smith became a Mason. However, on the same day of his joining he rose to the highest rank of Master Mason. It seems that he would have had to have some previous contact with them to rise to this rank in only 1 day
5)It is now known that Joseph Smith had at least 33 wives, several of these women were already married, this is complete adultery. Joseph Smith attempted to cover up his fornication by claiming it was “ordained by God”
6)There are many prophecies from Joseph Smith that have failed and thus disprove him by the prophet test given in Deuteronomy. For example, Joseph Smith prophesied that Jesus would return in 56 years (History of the Church Volume 2, pg. 189), He prophesied that a temple would be built in West Missouri during his generation (Doctrine and Covenants 84: 2-5), He even claimed that the moon was inhabited by 6ft tall men (The Young Woman’s Journal, p. 263). I would consider all of these to be false prophesies
In the Journal of Discourses, Brigham Young (A supposed prophet of God) makes many racist remarks. I do not believe in a racist God, nor do I believe that a prophet of his would harbor such feelings.
7) When Joseph Smith died, in his pocket was a Jupiter Talisman. This talisman is supposed to have the superstitious power to bring one fortune, power, and women. Why would a prophet of God carry and believe in the power of one of these?
9) The whole deal with Temples and the ceremonies within, to me, seems to be just a creation of Joseph Smith influenced by his membership in Free Masonry. I particularly like the old part of the ceremony where members would pretend to slit their throat as a symbol of their dedication.
10) The whole conversion method used by missionaries to convert people is absurd. Asking people to read the Book of Mormon and then pray for a “burning in their bosom” SERIOUSLY??? A funny feeling give me a break. The bible tells us that the heart is the very deceptive (Jeremiah 17:9, Proverbs 12:20) so we are going to prove a book and religion true by a feeling we get. Similar feelings can be produced by the body as a result of many things. Such a feeling does not prove anything.
Overall, I do not believe Mormonism is the true religion ordained by God. However, I know several Mormons and they are great people. If Mormonism works best for someone, I would advise that they remain in the church. If the church makes you a better person, it would be a sin for me to pull you away from it.
Hi there everyone! I saw some new posts on the site and decided to leave some of my own remarks. Firstly I want to thank MikeChad for his comments. I respect the fact that you you mention that mormons can be good people and that the church probably helps us to be so. Most people make us feel so down about what we believe and try to destroy our hope and faith with vicious remarks and all negative info they can find.
I just wanted to explain how I got to be a part of this church…
It started many years ago with my father who was a very good man and had a good upbringing in the dutch reformed church. I think he was about in his late twenties when he came to an awareness of this church because of his brother being taught by missionaries here in South Africa. My dad was a very sceptical person by nature and I am sure he wasn’t out searching for a church. He was introduced to the book of mormon ever so briefly. The story continues and my dad was alone one day in a park and his mind was turned to the church and this book.
He decided to say a sincere prayer and ask Heavenly father about this story, keep in mind my dad was a sceptical person not looking for a religion as such.
In his own words which he recounted to me, he told me he recieved an answer to his prayer as clear as anything, as if a voice as clear as the voice of a person speaking to you in person, not in his ears he said, the following: ‘Dit is waar en niks anders maak saak nie!’ in english that translates to: It is true and nothing else matters…
He was so certain that the God that he prayed to which he was taught about in his upbringing in a christian home and a recognised christian church, was the one who answered his prayer that day.
And who was he to deny an answer from God? who is anyone to do so? He phoned his brother who was in contact with the church and he told him he wants to join the church as soon as possible. He then needed to be seen by the missionaries and he was baptised two weeks later. In the church it is highly uncommon for people to be baptised so quickly as it is a lot to commit yourself to.
Well he grew older and stayed commited to what he knew he needed to follow. At the age of 33 he started a two year mission for the church. Yet again highly uncommon for someone that age to serve a mission. A few more years passed away and he met a lady in the church whom he married at age 44.. the lady is my mom. I have five brothers so there are six of us.
I am not active in the church because I was brainwashed or manipulated, I was brought up in the church and have my own choice what to believe now. I am married now and still active in the church I have questioned many things, but I feel satisfied with all the answers that I have researched.
Well I just have a question to all those out there bashing my religion and my faith. What does a person go to after he leaves this church? The organisation in most christian churches are so questionable and unstable. They all are gathered under the same wing and yet they have such conflicting practices for example baptism. After so much knowledge etc how can we leave this and go elsewhere, that is why people who leave the church tend to fight against it, there is not much else to do..
I know it is always easier to point out negatives and not positives. I dont want to even start explaining all the loop holes in the so called christianity sector of religion… the most confused group of people in the world. I ascribe it to a lack of organisation. I also dont want to go into what the catholic church did back in the day and the fact that most of the organised christian churches we know today that are registered and recognised stem from the catholic church after realising that things were out of line. These guys helped to open the way for the world to have more freedom in religion. They tried their best to reform the christian practices and get things going the right way.. they did a good job, but now it is out of hand. Churches everywhere with ministers getting paid quite well after paying for biblical studies.. just like any other career… In fact If felt like it, I can go to the tertiery institutions and sign up for a degree in religions and a few years later I can open my church and call it …followers of god/gospel craze/bible buddies or whatever.
Anyway, I will leave it at that and say that I hope everyone the best. I will probably meet you all in front of the judgement bar of Jesus Christ and then we can get some more clarity.
Take care my friends,
Gerhard.
MikeChad,
Your point 5 is exactly why I don’t believe in most religions. People by in large are very susceptible to religion and therefore all it takes is someone coming along who wants to make a name for themselves and they decide to create a religion.
And years ago (i’m talking hundreds if not thousands of years ago) I’m going to take a pot shot that it was pretty easy to sway and impress the masses with a little sleight of hand.
Hell, is there any way to be 100% sure that some of the stories of Jesus in the bible were not just in fact con men taking advantage of this Jesus guys name and curing people for a fee or something like that?
Then this great story of Jesus coming to a town and healing all their sick would be born. Even if he didn’t actually cure anyone once the story is out there there is no way to squelch it.
This is not helped by the fact that back in Christ days they were very desperate times. Promising people something in the “afterlife” for them following you and your word in this life seems a pretty sweet deal.. or at least it would have to slaves I am sure.
I think the reason people are so quick to turn to religion is that they feel they are missing something spiritual in their lives and religion is a quick easy fix for that. What most people don’t realise is that spirituality can be achieved from within without the need to join one religion or another.
But thats just me.
Oh and lastly. If you were looking for that hotline to god then how would you know what religion to go for? It’s not like there is one religion that goes “Oh yea, all the other ones are just as good as this one, they are all much of a muchness”. No, they pretty much all go “This is the one true religion, you HAVE to follow this religion or at least share some of it’s beliefs to get into heaven.. otherwise… well you don’t wanna know what happens to you”.
I just want to say that this is ridiculous. If you are open minded and do your research, the mormon church is not true. Otherwise, you are following the counsel of the church and any information outside of LDS published literature is Anti-Mormon. What a ridiculous way to live. I am soo fed up with it, I went on a two year mormon mission and grew up in the church. I was even a zone leader and AP in my mission for the record. When you do the research, it doesn’t make sense. What about blacks receiving the priesthood? The “prophet” Brigham Young, said that the Blacks will never recieve the priesthood and if they did then the church had gone astray. What about that? Please respond to that. President Kimball was very brief in his comments that times have changed and the blacks can now receive the priesthood. Please admit that the mormon church was manmade, it’s crazy. What about the eight witnesses. Mormons would like you to believe that they physically saw the golden plates. In actuality, they saw the plates in two seperate groups of 4 and they saw them in a “Vision”, not physically. What about the connection between the Mormon Temple ceremony vs. the Masonic Temple ceremony? They’re soo similar it’s ridiculous. Read about it! Joseph Smith was a mason. He manufactured a temple ceremony out of the masonic ceremony. By the way, the mormon Temple ceremony has been changed multiple times since the time of Joseph Smith. More to come later, but do your research and you will find the truth. Organized religion is a joke. Believe in God and the Bible, Treat others as you would like to be treated. Pray to God for forgiveness. But don’t let some religion try to make you feel overwhelmed with guilt for not following their superstitous teachings and doing everything so perfectly. For in organized religion, nothing is ever good enough. Please respond. I would love to see what you have to say! Joseph Smith was a savvy swindler and smooth talker. If he thought a woman to be attractive, he would say that he received revelation from on high that she was to be with him and that it was no sin, that he had received revelation that it was OK. What a convenient way to get what you want and live like a King. Be a good person and live by the golden rule. The LDS teachings are “out in space”.
Josh,
I enjoyed your article and appreciate your convictions. I do have a problem with the premise of your arguement though. My take on your position is that unless we (the unbelieving), can tell you (the believing), where the BOM came from other then Josephs claim then it must be true. Please correct me if I have misinterpreted your position.
By this logic must we believe that a magician posses magical powers simply because some of us can’t explain how they performed a magic trick. The arguement is flawed from the beginning. We may never know the exact origins of the BOM. We can however see the many flaws that exist. I’d be happy to make a list but I’m sure that you are already familar with the lack of evidence to support the BOM. I find the BOM to be a great representation of 19th centurey religious views as well as a neat look at the 19th (though incorrect) assumptions concerning the American Indians. Many therories can be presented as to how Joseph Smith came to write the BOM. Solomon Spaulding inspite of what Holland says is a viable option to it’s origins. I am tired of JS being portrayed as some uneducated nit wit. He was very intelligent and came from a family of accomplished authors. He had a firm grasp on the English language and was absolutely a religous genius. He was capable of convincing 30 women 11 of which were married to sleep with him and keep it secret (for the most part). While this seems humorous it is no small feat.
Could you, even with the help of your college education and the Internet carry on so many relationships with out your wife and local church members knowing about it. Joseph Smith was an amazing man as is evident by the legacy he left behind. I don’t think people give him the credit that he is due and I say that in all seriousness. Thanks again for your article.
In response to Jed Smith, that’s all good stuff which I’d like to research and respond to elsewhere on this blog, but none of it attempts to answer the question on this thread of where the Book of Mormon came from, assuming Joseph Smith was a fraud.
In response to MQ_2, yes, you have misinterpreted my position. I’m not trying to prove the Book of Mormon is true, I’m only challenging others to prove it false. If it cannot be proved false, then that at least means it may be true, and that’s as far as I’m trying to go here. I’ve heard a lot of theories about where it may have come from (other than Joseph Smith’s claim), but none of the theories is conclusive, and the more I research them the weaker they become.
I’ll be totally open about my feelings when I started this blog–I was a little bit scared. I had grown up in the LDS Church and everything I knew was from the LDS Church point of view. I went on a mission, where a lot of people like me get exposed to anti-Mormon literature for the first time, but that didn’t happen to me. I went to a remote part of Brazil where hardly anybody knew who Mormons were. So when I started this website I realized I was opening a can of worms, not knowing what I would find or what it might mean about what I had believed to be true all my life. But I pulled the trigger, deciding that if my religion were true, then I didn’t have to worry.
I started doing research on various topics on the Internet, and every time I started researching a new topic I would feel that same bite of fear in the back of my mind, saying “What if all these anti-Mormon people are right? What if you find conclusive evidence the church isn’t true and it’s all a lie?”
I would do my research and read through all the anti-Mormon websites out there, trying to find the most damning evidence I could. I would invite people to comment here on the blog. And so far, I have to say I’ve been terribly disappointed. In every case as I’ve researched and talked with people about the popular anti-Mormon theories I’ve found myself thinking “Are you serious? That’s the best you’ve got?” I was really expecting to be shaken in my beliefs and have to do some serious soul-searching. I thought I was going to find myself in situations where my dedication to believing the truth, no matter what it was, would be brought into conflict with LDS doctrines. Instead, I’ve found people recycling anti-Mormon theories that were disproved conclusively 100 years ago. I’ve found people using the weakest logic imaginable. I’ve found people who think they’ve got something that will bring the LDS Church to its knees, but when I look at what they’ve got I find they don’t have a clue about LDS doctrine and have proved a point nobody cares about because it doesn’t matter.
Instead of being shaken by anything I’ve learned, I’ve instead found more and more evidence that what I believe is indeed true. I find myself saying “You think I’m an idiot? You think this is all a fraud? Fine, prove it with conclusive evidence, and I’ll give it all up.” But don’t give me this circumstantial, so-called “evidence”. Don’t give me the same recycled stuff people were using 100 years ago that has already been resolved conclusively. If you’re going to shake me, you’ve got to come up with something pretty good, and so far, I haven’t seen it, despite having spoken with some pretty intelligent people who have left the church. The more I talk to people, the more I’m convinced I’m not going to find anything to shake me, although I try to keep an open mind about it. I’m willing to thoughtfully consider anything anybody wants to put in front of me. But I’m afraid I’ve pretty much lost my faith in the ability of anyone to present any halfway-convincing evidence against the LDS Church.
Hi Jed, with regards to your question about Brigham Young saying “that the Blacks will never recieve the priesthood and if they did then the church had gone astray.” Can you send me some references so I can research it further? I can find plenty of references to Brigham Young saying some variation of the first part, but nothing where it is combined with the statement that “if they did then the church had gone astray”.
Thanks
BTW, there is a pretty good Q&A article on the subject of blacks and the Mormon church at http://www.fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences/2003_LDS_Church_and_the_Race_Issue.html. Turns out slavery was permitted by Brigham Young in Utah for about 10 years. Did you know that? I didn’t. I surprised I hadn’t already heard that used.
Josh thanks for your response. Thats cool that you are willing to put your beliefs out there for anonymous readers to view and respond. I’m sorry that I misrepresented your position.
“I’m not trying to prove the Book of Mormon is true, I’m only challenging others to prove it false.” Proving it false is a seperate issue from proving it’s origins.
The Book of Mormon has provided me with many insights, and answers to prayers. However, I also remember feeling the spirit when my mom played me tapes of my favorite GA Paul H Dunn. His lies impacted me in a positive way. But they were still lies. Why is it up to the non-believers to prove it false? I would expect those who make the claim to be willing to prove it true. The lack of evidence is overwhelming.
You refer to anti-mormon material a few times. What is your definition of anti-mormon? The reason I ask is that most active LDS members look at anything that isn’t faith promoting, or put out by the church as anti-mormon. That’s a pretty narrow window to view the world from. As Packer said to a group of seminary teachers “some things that are true are not very useful.” But does that make it anti-mormon? I am very skeptical of anyone that says don’t worry about the truth it may lead to you losing your testimony. Imagine if a salesman said that to you. Why is religion any different? I want to know the truth. Let me decide how it impacts my faith.
You seem sincere and I wish you the best of luck.
Note: MQ_2’s comment has been copied and pasted in its entirety in order to create a new post, since it is off-topic for this particular discussion. Read What’s up with Brigham Young and all those racist statements he made? to continue the discussion there.
Note: Jed’s comment has been copied and pasted in its entirety in order to create a new post, since it is off-topic for this particular discussion. View the new topic Are the 11 witnesses of the Book of Mormon reliable witnesses?.
Funny thing about those pesky witnesses….NONE EVER RETRACTED their “tall tales.”
I wish people would stop criticizing Mormons for what they believe….So what if they believe in “extra stuff.” Does it detract from Christ?
At the judgement, do you think the Lord will send Mormon’s to hell because they did extra things?
Mormons won’t criticize “mainstream Christians” for doing to little if those folks don’t criticize them for doing too much!
Ok, I moved the last two comments from Jed Smith and MQ_2 to new posts, since they’re entirely new topics of conversation. Now, to respond to MQ_2’s previous comment:
1. “Why is it up to the non-believers to prove it false? I would expect those who make the claim to be willing to prove it true.”
It’s not that I expect non-believers to prove the Book of Mormon or anything false, unless they’re trying to change my mind. The attitude of many non-believers seems to be “If you can’t prove to me that it’s true, then why do you believe it?” My response is “Why are you asking me to doubt it if you can’t prove that it’s false?”
As for proving the Book of Mormon is true, I fully recognize I can’t prove that to anyone else. I’ve already proved it to myself, but the only way someone else can know if it’s true is to prove it to themselves. Nobody else can do it for them. But there’s a perfectly legitimate and scientific way to prove it to yourself–just read the darn book and ask God if it’s true with an open mind and humble heart. Of course people say “I did this, and I didn’t get an answer!” but so far everyone who has said that to me seems to have been reading the Book of Mormon and praying about it with the intention of NOT getting an answer, just so they can argue that point.
2. Man, you guys are helping me create more content than I’ve put on this site in months! – My definition of “anti-Mormon”.
” 1. But there’s a perfectly legitimate and scientific way to prove it to yourself–
2. just read the darn book and ask God if it’s true with an open mind and humble heart. Of course people say “I did this, and I didn’t get an answer!” but so far everyone who has said that to me seems to have been reading the Book of Mormon and praying about it with the intention of NOT getting an answer, just so they can argue that point.”
1. Please tell me that you don’t really feel that that is a “perfectly legitmate and scientific way to prove it” I want to know if Einstiens therory of relativity is true. Should I pray about it and then see how I feel? There is nothing scientific about your method.
2. “so far everyone who has said that to me seems to have been reading the Book of Mormon and praying about it with the intention of NOT getting an answer”
I’ve read it over 20 times. I read it cover to cover 3 times and prayed about it at the end of each reading. When I was 15 I read it from cover to cover then went out in the woods like Joseph Smith did and prayed about it. Nothing. I felt disappointed, I thought maybe I did something wrong and didn’t read it with enough gusto or pray with enough faith, I even felt that it might not be true but I quickly pushed those thoughts out of my head. I read it again in highschool and then prayed about it. Again nothing. I remember having those thoughts again that it might not be true. But there was no way that could be since my parents were so smart and they believed it. My bishop was smart and he told me that I would know it was true if I just prayed sincerely and with real intent. The third time I read it I was 18 and was working on a fishing boat in Alaska. I was in an environment with pornography everywhere, drugs, alchohol and a bunch of rough neck workers all stuck on the same boat for 6 months. I remember reading the BOM and feeling a peaceful feeling. Kinda like the feeling you have when you’ve been away from home for awhile and you walk into your home to the smell of a familar dinner being cooked and seeing your family all together in the livingroom waiting to greet you.
I was convinced that this was the answer I had been seeking all those years. I did my duty by going on a mission and serving diligently. I was called to positions of leadership and continued to read the BOM over and over and over again. There was something that was seriously nagging me. It was your so called “perfectly legitimate and scientific” method or Moroni’s promise. “By the power of the holy ghost you shall know the truth” this religous experience is common to nearly all religions. Born agains feel the spirit of Christ and they “know” that they have accepted Christ. It’s not just religious experiences its patriotism, the feelings I get when I read letters from old girlfriends, touching movies, hugging my kids… It’s a real feeling. But its not from a supernatural source its an emotional response, endorphins are released into our blood and suddenly we have the spirit testifying to us.
My journey out of the church didn’t start with no evidence to support the BOM, church history, rascism, sexism, the prophets statutory rape of teenage girls, constantly evolving teachings (lately we have been having lessons on the new and everlasting covenant. Suddenly it’s about celestial marraige. 20 years ago it was still understood that it was about Polygamy) changing temple ceremony, prophet never prophesying, the church treating tithing like it is money to be invested, Church buying cattle ranches, malls, hotels, and companies….
My journey began after I came home from my mission. I followed my mission presidents, and patriarch’s advice and sought guidance from the Spirit in all of lifes major decisions, like where to go to college, what to study, who to date… The more I prayed the more I felt the spirit. The more I followed the spirit the more confusing my life became.
The spirit will never be a consistent guide to ones decisions in life or to finding out if something like the BOM is true. It took several years of prayer, and studying to finally realize this simple truth: The spirit is all in your head. Once I realized that I became very interested in understanding the true history of the church. Not to be an “anti-mormon” but because understanding my culture and heritage has been fascinating. I still attend church every Sunday.
3.“Why are you asking me to doubt it if you can’t prove that it’s false?”
I’m not asking you to doubt. I just posted in response to your original question:
Critics say the Book of Mormon is not the word of God, that it is a fraud and false. So then what is your explanation for the existence of the book? It must have come from somewhere.
If you want to believe it Awesome. It most likely won’t lead you to fly a plane into a building, drink poisoned kool-aid, or sit in a burning house watching your kids die. So knock yourself out. Give 10 percent of your money to the temple building corporation, buy some magic undies, and enjoy the funeral potatoes and jello. It doesn’t hurt anyone else so have fun.
Just take some time to study the real history of the church, think about times in your life that you have felt the spirit outside of the normal religious experiences, and ponder it in your heart. And when you shall recieve these things, I would exhort you to use your brain, common sense and little bit of logic while reasoning if these things are not true. And if ye shall study with a sincere heart, with real intent, having an open mind, your ability to reason and use your brain in place of emotions the truth will be manifest unto you by the power of your mind. And by the power of your own mind you may know the truth of many things.
Good luck Josh
Josh,
So what is your answer? Just say “Jesus come into my heart” and that is it?
To tell you the truth, I had the same problems you had. I questioned everything. I thought if the Prophet was wrong once, it was all over……I was wrong.
The modern Church is probably the way the original Church should have been.
Modern Church leaders (Prophets/Apostles) have learned to just shut their mouths on every topic or question. Joseph Smith answered every question put to him like he was responding for the Lord. He drew “thus sayeth the Lord” like a six-gun.
Bottom line is that the Church does nothing that detracts from Christ or His mission.
Mormons may do a lot extra, but that doesn’t count against them.
Do you really think the Lord God will judge Mormons harshly.
BTW…. who wrote the Book of Mormon? I doubt it could be written today.
Sorry…. I was responding to MQ 2.
1. The difference between praying about the theory of relativity and the Book of Mormon is that there is no statement within the theory of relativity such as there is in the Book of Mormon.
2. Well, I don’t know quite what to say about your experience. It’s not much different than my own, yet we seem to be on different sides of the question. I’ve grappled with the idea that it all might be in my head since I was a child. When I was a kid I used to wonder if life was like the Matrix, and everything I felt was being generated by a computer or aliens or something, including my emotions and what I thought was the spirit. It really bugged me for years. But at the same time there was always something in the back of my mind that I couldn’t get rid of, some sense of what was “real” and what wasn’t, and the gospel always felt real. When I would seriously think about it I would feel like not believing the gospel is real would be like saying that seeing the sun or stubbing your toe and feeling the pain is an illusion. Even more than that, it would be like denying that my consciousness or existence is real, and to me, if I’m thinking, then it’s real. I don’t see how consciousness and self-identity could be fabricated. Maybe I’m not using the right words, so forgive me if I’m not making sense.
But I think a lot changed for me on my mission, and maybe this is where our paths diverge a bit. I don’t think I knew what “following the spirit” meant when I went on my mission. But during my mission I had hundreds of experiences where I would take a step back and say “Ok, what are the chances of that being a coincidence?” And then I’d think “What are the chances that all these hundreds of experiences are all coincidences?” Since my mission, I feel like I’ve gotten more attuned to listening to that inner voice that doesn’t say anything, but just nudges me and says “Nah, that’s not what you should be doing.” or “You should probably do such and such…” And the more I’ve paid attention to it and have stopped rebelling against it (which has been terribly difficult for me to do, because I like testing the limits of things and seeing what happens, plus I can be quite lazy if I don’t want to do something), the more things have worked out for me. I’ve had literally thousands of experiences that from my perspective are beyond coincidence, and beyond my ability to make happen subconsciously. I can’t find any way to explain things that have happened to me other than to say that it’s God.
But it’s not just a bunch of coincidences that make me believe it all. It’s a sense of surety, of things making sense and being logical. It’s a sense of peace and joy, but it’s not an emotion like what I feel when I’m watching a movie or feel patriotic or any of those things, it’s quite different. I’ve felt it plenty of times outside of church, prayer, reading the scriptures, or “outside the normal religious experiences”, but always in relation to truth, knowledge, and learning. Reading what you’re saying makes me wonder if you’ve ever felt what I have. It doesn’t sound to me like we have, or that you remember it if you have. I don’t meant that as a put-down or anything, just an observation.
As for using my brain, common sense, logic, etc., I’ve used that all my life and the more I do, the more the gospel, Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon, etc. all make sense to me. That’s part of what I love about it all. I can read a one-page article that somebody spent hours working on, and find holes in it, and even more when I read the critiques of other people on that article. With everything related to the gospel, whenever I find a hole and start researching it, the hole gets filled in and goes away, or in situations where facts are difficult to come by I can at least find a possible explanation of how the hole might be able to be filled in. I think it comes down to people believing what they want to believe, which is the whole genius of God’s plan.
I’ve got a friend who left the church several years ago. He spent 10-15 years intently studying church history and trying to resolve his doubts. He studied special collections and all sorts of stuff not available unless you go to BYU and get access to the rooms where they keep original manuscripts and such. I’m not sure there are many people around with more knowledge of anti-Mormon literature combined with church history knowledge. He knows most of the anti-Mormon stuff is illogical garbage, but he found enough stuff he couldn’t get over that he ended up leaving the church. I’ve talked with him at length and he’s brought up just about everything you have and quite a bit more, and he’s referred me to all sorts of books and bits and pieces of church history I didn’t know about. He’s told me the core things he couldn’t get over and explained how he sees things. Before he did, I had that same feeling of fear I had when I started looking into all of this. But when he explained it all, I thought “Are you serious? 15 years of research and that’s it?”
For him, it was largely a culmination of things and he finally got to the point where he thought “This just can’t be true.” I guess I look at things differently. I’ve read about Joseph’s wives and how some of them were married to other men and all that. I don’t understand it, and it all sounds horrible, but I look at it and think that first of all, we don’t have all the facts. We don’t know the exact nature of these relationships because a lot of it is based on hearsay, much of which comes from sources antagonistic to the prophet. I’m not saying I doubt that he married the wives of other married men, that seems to be well-documented by credible sources, but were the relationships the act of a sex-crazed maniac, the way Joseph Smith is portrayed by his enemies? Or could there be another explanation for it, or another perspective from which to see things? When I look at things from the framework of our modern-day societal standards, then it seems crazy to even consider Joseph Smith being anything but a sex-crazed egomaniac. But then again, if I were exposed to the customs of every culture in our world today, I’m sure I would think half of them were crazy until I took the time to see things from their perspective and understand where they’re coming from. So how presumptuous is it of me to judge Joseph’s actions based on my present-day perspective without having more than the most superficial information about it? I’m not saying we should turn a blind eye to things that bother us, only that when we judge based on our limited understanding which seems so straightforward and correct to us, we can end up making mistakes.
As I said above, I think it ultimately comes down to the fact that people will believe what they want to believe. Everything I know and learn about the gospel is something I want to believe. I want it to be true, and I see things from that perspective. It’s my opinion that the majority of those who leave the church are looking for an excuse, and latch onto whatever makes them feel as though they’re maintaining their intellectual integrity. I think my friend, despite his claims to the contrary, wasn’t trying to prove the gospel to be true, but was trying to find a way out because the “church life” wasn’t the life he wanted to live.
This is what I think is so great about God’s plan. Everything is set up so that you can never be 100% sure what is real. It’s all in limbo. And so we’re free to create the reality for ourselves that we want. If I want to believe there is no God and we all evolved from green algae there’s plenty of evidence for that…although no actual proof. But enough that I can feel like I have proof. If I want to believe that God exists but is ethereal and not involved in our daily lives and doesn’t really care what we do, I can find evidence to back me up, and then I can live my life accordingly. And this works for everyone no matter what their situation is, no matter what has happened to them, where they live, what they’re taught, etc. We each get to create the world we want to live in to the best of our abilities, and so when we go for the judgment, there won’t be any arguing or pleading. It will be plainly obvious to ourselves and everyone else what we wanted, because our lives will an open book containing billions of daily decisions that spell it all out.
I’ve come to a different conclusion about the nature of Joseph Smith and other prophets. One thing to consider is that Joseph was well past the point of “freelancing” and that he was not martyred, but his life was terminated by Higher Powers.
I think Joseph was one of the deepest thinkers and ponderers there has been. After his visions, he probably concluded EVERY THOUGHT was inspiration. The Modern Church leaders have learned to keep their mouths shut on many topics and questions put to them. Joseph, Brigham and others did not.
I can now accept a falable/fallable Prophet. I can now accept some they was some false doctrine. That uncomfortable path creates the environment necessary to establish true faith….faith cultered in an environment of doubt.
To come to the highest level of faith requires one to sincerely search through both positive and negative experiences. The more Anti material out there, the harder it is to reach that level of faith. It is hard to look at a few actions, ideas or practices which don’t seem to add up to Godlike inspiration. It is hard to realize that our leaders were not and are not inspired 24/7/365. On must accept the evolution of the Gospel from a simple and dramatic beginning to a more refined and sifted form of religious practice.
Can a prophet be a prophet even when he has not been fully correct? This is the hardest thing a Mormon has to face and get through.
I’ve traveled that path and lived with great doubts. I’ve concluded in my heart, that Joseph Smith was not inspired in all that he said, wrote or put into place. BUT…. that does not detract from the core fundamentals we have today.
I wish all of our leaders and Prophets in particular, had not spouted off on all the issues of the day nor all the questions put to them. I think at times they clearly thought they were speaking for the Lord and in fact were not.
Bottom line is that I feel very very very comfortable with the modern Church’s culminating dogma and practices. NOTHING THAT I DO OR DON’T DO AS I PRACTICE MORMONISM WILL BE THOUGHT OF NEGATIVELY BY THE LORD JESUS CHRIST WHEN I STAND BEFORE HIM AT THE TIME OF MY JUDGEMENT.
IF WE ERROR, IT IS ERRORING ON THE SIDE OF A MORE INVOVLED AND EXTENSIVE WORSHIP OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST AND OUR EFFORTS TO BRING HIS MESSAGE TO BOTH THE LIVING AND THE DEAD.
“I can now accept a falable/fallable Prophet. I can now accept some they was some false doctrine. That uncomfortable path creates the environment necessary to establish true faith….faith cultered in an environment of doubt.”
Kris, I appreciate your honesty. Most Mormons refuse to look at things logically and draw logically conclusions. For a long time I had the same thoughts that you stated above. Maybe Joseph Smith was just a Fallen prophet as most of those close to him suspected at the time they found out about his extra-curricle activities.
Most Mormons take Josh’s stance “…it all sounds horrible, but I look at it and think that first of all, we don’t have all the facts. We don’t know the exact nature of these relationships because a lot of it is based on hearsay, much of which comes from sources antagonistic to the prophet. I’m not saying I doubt that he married the wives of other married men, that seems to be well-documented by credible sources, but were the relationships the act of a sex-crazed maniac, the way Joseph Smith is portrayed by his enemies? Or could there be another explanation for it…”
No matter how damning the evidence, regardless of what common sense should be telling you they will say as Josh does: “Could there be another explanation for it…” If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then there could be another explanation for it.
Josh I was wondering why you refused to address any of the concerns I brought up. Mentioning them is not addressing them. However, after reading this statement I understand: “When I was a kid I used to wonder if life was like the Matrix, and everything I felt was being generated by a computer or aliens or something, including my emotions and what I thought was the spirit.” I think that anyone that could wonder about things like this is extremely susceptible to cults and superstitious thinking, I’m just glad it’s Mormonism and not fundemental Islam, the Branch Dividians, or a member of Jones Town. My statements are falling on deaf ears. Good luck
That’s the thing MQ_2, there’s common sense and “common sense”. For many people, an appeal to common sense is just a way of saying “I don’t know how to debate this logically, so I’m just going to claim that I have common sense and you don’t.” Claiming that Joseph Smith wasn’t a prophet and appealing to common sense without irrefutable logic to back it up is no better than me claiming Mormonism is true and saying it’s common sense without logic to back my claim up.
You say it’s because Joseph Smith married other men’s wives. Fair enough, but where does it say a prophet can’t do that and still be a prophet? The logical place to go would be to say the 10 commandments. But the 10 commandments also say we shouldn’t kill, and yet in other places God commands people to kill. So if God sometimes commands people to kill, and other times commands them not to kill, then isn’t it logical that while he may command someone to not marry the wife of another man, or even commit adultery (I’m not entirely sure there’s even proof of that…I’m trying to remember what I read in Rough Stone Rolling, which seems to be the most comprehensive and well-researched history of all that stuff), isn’t it possible that God could command the opposite? Now where am I not being logical and reasonable? How is it not logical to believe that whatever God commands is right, no matter what it is?
As for thinking I would be susceptible to cults and superstitious thinking, what’s more likely, that someone who thinks deeply, questions everything, and takes nothing for granted would be susceptible to group-think and irrational thought, or someone who relies on common sense without evidence? Aristotle and a number of other famous philosophers also question reality. It’s called metaphysics. If you think Aristotle was likely to be caught up in a cult and victim to superstitious thinking, then I’m happy to be that kind of company, not that I agree with everything Aristotle believed, but I think he was a pretty good thinker.
I think it is easier to explain (accept) that Joseph was probably wrong about plural marriage (though there is a good explanation regarding the need at that specific time) than it is to accept his marriage to other men’s wives. I can’t imagine the Lord condoning the marriage of ANY MAN, in particular Joseph, to ANY MAN’S EXISTING WIFE.
Thank God (I say that reverently) that I now am completely comfortable in Stage 4 and look at the Church today, not 50 years ago, not 100 years ago and LOVE IT! It makes so much sense. It runs so smoothly. Worldwide consistency!!!!
WHO CARES WHAT JOSEPH WAS RIGHT ABOUT OR WRONG ABOUT….. It’s a given….it has to be a fact….that he was wrong about something he said or wrote.
Live the Latter-Day Saint life, principles and ordinances and then let GOD SORT IT OUT!!! I’m betting that my extra efforts at trying to expand basic Christianity-lite are for the better of Christianity (and the dead) and I’ll let the Lord judge me and the Church membership.
When you change your mind about your true condition,
you quickly realize that you are unable to earn favor with god.
Forgiveness of sins is completely dependant on his true identity.
Matthew 4:7 Jesus answered him, “Again it is written, ‘You shall not put the Lord, your God, to the test.’”
Q. If Joseph Smith was a fraud where did the Book of Mormon come from?
A. From Joseph Smith, of course.
One doesn’t have to be a rocket scientist to know that it was Joseph Smith who was the author. If Joseph Smith did not author the book then it would not exist.
Amen.
That would make Joseph Smith one of the greatest American authors to-date. Are you all prepared to say that? Are you prepared to say a guy with his lack of education could write such a book?
Give me a break!
When we get down to the basic question it is only obvious that the book came from Joseph Smith. In a way, the question posed assumes that Joseph Smith was a fraud. You don’t have to be truthful to write a book or to dictate words that are translated into a book. Our libraries and bookstores are filled with books that have these types of authorship. There are books written that are fact and books that are fiction. Just because one authors a book a book doesn’t make one a great author. As I stated before, if Joseph Smith did not author the book then it would not exist. That is a plain and simple statement. No one else claimed to author the book. Only he did.
There can be many more questions indeed. Here are a few:
Q. If Joseph Smith was a fraud would that make the Book of Mormon a fraud too?
Q. If Joseph Smith was a fraud would that make him a false prophet or a prophet of God?
Q. If Joseph Smith was a fraud does it mean the LDS church is based on a lie?
Q. If Joseph Smith was a fraud then who’s more foolish, him or the people that believe him?
Yet, none of the above questions were asked. I think those would be interesting to answer. Even better if they were followed by “why?”.
When we get down to the basic question it is only obvious that the book came from Joseph Smith.(WHY IS THAT OBVIOUS?) In a way, the question posed assumes that Joseph Smith was a fraud. You don’t have to be truthful to write a book or to dictate words that are translated into a book. Our libraries and bookstores are filled with books that have these types of authorship. There are books written that are fact and books that are fiction. Just because one authors a book a book doesn’t make one a great author. As I stated before, if Joseph Smith did not author the book then it would not exist.(AUTHOR OR TRANSLATOR?) That is a plain and simple statement. No one else claimed to author the book. Only he did.
There can be many more questions indeed. Here are a few:
Q. If Joseph Smith was a fraud would that make the Book of Mormon a fraud too?
IF JOSEPH SMITH WERE FRAUDULENT IN ALL ACTIONS,INCLUDING THE BofM…TRUE. BUT WHAT WAS HE PROVEN TO BE FRAUDULENT IN?
Q. If Joseph Smith was a fraud would that make him a false prophet or a prophet of God?
IF JS WERE FRAUDULENT IN ALL ACTIONS, INCLUDING ALL ACTIVITES AS A PROPHET..TRUE. BUT WHAT WAS HE PROVEN TO BE FRAUDULENT IN?
Q. If Joseph Smith was a fraud does it mean the LDS church is based on a lie?
ONLY IF HIS FRAUD WAS PROVEN AND IT INCLUDED ALL ASPECTS TO HIS CLAIMS OF DIVINE VISITATIONS, TRANSLATION OF THE PLATES, ETC ETC.
Q. If Joseph Smith was a fraud then who’s more foolish, him or the people that believe him?
IF YOU CAN PROVE HE WAS A FRAUD IN ALL ASPECTS OF HIS CLAIMS, THEN WE WOULD BE FOOLISH TO BELIEVE IN HIS CLAIMS…..WHERE IS YOUR PROOF.
Yet, none of the above questions were asked. I think those would be interesting to answer. Even better if they were followed by “why?”.
JOSEPH SMITH MAY HAVE BEEN A FRAUD AT ANY POINT IN HIS “LDS LIFE.” THE QUESTION IS WAS HE? WHEN WAS HE? IF HE WAS INCORRECT, IS THAT FRAUD?
Ya know,it’s really hard to get Mormons to see our point of view when clowns like Mike Jones write on here. While I am non-denominational, I definitely lean more toward the Protestant faiths than Catholic/Orthodox/Mormon. However, it does make me shiver when I see Baptists getting slapped down in debates by Mormons, and I see it ALL THE TIME!!
Therefore, to Mike Jones and the rest of his ilk: PLEASE do not speak for us Protestants anymore. Just go away and go pig out at Shoney’s breakfast buffet with the rest of your “saved” brethren. Picking you to be on my side is like choosing Mister Bill to QB my team instead of Peyton Manning. Just do me a big, huge favor and GO AWAY!!!
Just to follow up on ‘Embarrassed Christian’ – and incidentally that is not me. Mike Jones’ comments are totally out of place.
Yes I am a Christian, and I live near a Mormon temple.
Coming from Australia I am trying to understand the various ‘cultures’ in North America. I was interested in the original question as to how Joseph History could write the ‘Book of Morman’ (if it was not through divine intervention).
After reading the various emails, I am none the wiser. I would have expected better replies from those who considered the book to be a scam rather than the replies currently posted. Dr. T (if you really are a doctor), your response was totally inadequate – not one substantial fact.
If anyone has something useful to say, please post.
Stephen
Stephen,
As far as I know, all Native Americans are of mongoloid descent. I have not taken any history courses in nearly a decade, but I do remember that. I also read it is quite possible that not all (even though most) of the Native Americans over here crossed the frozen Bering Strait 10,000 years ago but that some could have actually crossed the Pacific. However, I do not know of any that are of Causcasian descent. I DO know that there was a group of Indians in the Pacific Northwest of the U.S. that practiced capitalism; they owned private property while the rest of the Indians in our country were communal. I have often wondered about their descent because, if memory serves me correctly, they did look “different” than the other Indians. Like I said, though, it’s been 10 years so I have to dig up my notes and check it out. Even if they were not of the same descent as our other tribes, that still does not explain other Mormon theories I have read on here, like the Nephites and Lamanites being from Central America or the discovery of the Golden Plates in upstate New York (the NorthEASTERN part of our country).
I’ll do more on my research of the “capitalist” tribe. Somebody help me out with one thing – did the Hebrews in biblical times lean toward a communal society or were they capitalist?
I have been raised mormon all my life. When I turned 16, i did research for myself and found that the church presented by the Mormans was not only a false docrtrine, but more than against what our God told us to believe. I converted to Christianity on my own against my family’s wishes. If you believe in God and in the bible, then this one verse should change your mind. Galatians 1 6:9 says . . . 6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7 which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! 9 As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!
The above passage tells all of us Mormon, Christian, Jewish, everyone that there is only one true word of God and if you stray from that, there will be consequences. Ponder this . . .
“……Apr 25th, 2009 at 9:04 pm
Josh Steimle….You are @#$##$ in the head just like all other Mormons. I pity anyone who is non-mormon to argue with a mormon. Why do it? They are all wackos. It’s the biggest joke cult started by a loser, down on his luck piece of @#$# named Joseph Smith. You guys have got to be freakin kidding. He’s the kind of guy you would see trying to scam a quick buck on a street corner…and he has the court record to prove it.
Have a nice time on planet Kolob, @#$#$. hahahahahahahaha”
What nerve my friend to speak such harsh words. i feel sorry for you!!! I would rather end up on kolob than on the place of a person who hates his neighbour for what they believe, who do you believe in and respect.. surely not God? If so, go speak to your pastor or someone about your problems… Shame on you !!!!
Hey everyone, I ran across this blog tonight and I wanted to share a few thoughts of mine. Sorry they are a little long but I believer they are insightful. I was born in the Mormon church but left at the age of 18. On the first Sunday of each month, Mormons have a Testimony meeting. These meetings particularly bothered me as the most common phrase was something along the lines of: “I KNOW THE CHURCH IS TRUE” or “I KNOW THE GOSPEL HAS BEEN RETORED IN THE LATTER-DAYS”. I have a serious issue with people saying these phrases and I would like to explain why
If I were to ask a Mormon whether or not their were eternal consequences for sin and eternal blessings for righteousness, they would most likely agree. I believe this concept can be accepted as a doctrine of the church and a doctrine of many other faiths. The problem lies in the fact that if a Mormon truly KNEW that the LDS gospel was true, they would NEVER SIN! You might at this point argue that this is not true because they are simply sacrificing the eternal rewards of the future for the temporary pleasure of today. However, this is not the case.
Let me provide a scenario. Say I am a banker (who can only tell the truth) and I offer you 1 dollar today or 1.1 dollars one year from now. While some people might take the 1.1 dollars, I would imagine the majority of people would prefer the immediate 1 dollar. Now say I offered you 1 dollar today or 50 dollars one year from now. Now the majority of people will take the 50 dollars, but perhaps a few prefer the 1 dollar. As we can see, the % of people who take the 1 dollar decreases as the rate of return increases. Now let’s say I offered you 1 dollar today or an infinite amount of dollars one year from now. In this situation, everyone who understands that a dollar is a store of value will opt to wait 1 year or whatever amount of time necessary for the reward of infinite value. Once again, as the rate of return increases so does the % of people who opt to wait. Therefore, if the rate of return is infinite then 0 of the people will wait.
From this, it can be concluded that if a Mormon knew their doctrine was true, then they would never sacrifice the eternal reward for a temporary reward on this earth by sinning. Now many of you might say that the reward or rate of return is not infinite. However, an eternal reward is the same as a infinite one in this situation. Let’s just imagine here that you are person A and you have been more righteous than person B. For this you make the celestial kingdom and person B makes the Telestial kingdom. Lets say that one day in the celestial kingdom as opposed to the Telestial kingdom is worth 500 dollars to you (I know dollars seem out of place but it is important to remember that a dollar is a store of value and therefore we can use them to describe the value in this situation). You might conclude that $500 is not infinite therefore I am wrong. However, this reward of yours is eternal. What’s 500 multiplied by infinity. The answer is infinity. Therefore because the reward is eternal it is also infinite.
Now the key point I am trying to make is that no one who truly knows about this infinite reward would ever sin to give it up for a temporal and non-infinite pleasure from sin. Therefore, ANY MORMON WHO SINS DOES NOT KNOW THE MORMON GOSPEL IS TRUE. I know this sounds harsh, but even the Book of Mormon says that faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things. If it is of knowledge, then it is no more of faith.
So the key thing I want to say here is for you members of the LDS church to stop telling people that you KNOW the church is true or that you KNOW Joseph Smith was a prophet… because you don’t. The fact that you sin proves that you don’t. I agree that you may have faith and believe these things, but you don’t know them. So in the future, when you go up to bear your testimony please refrain from telling everybody what you know and tell them what you believe. I it seems weird to say “I believe the Book of Mormon is true” or “I believe this church has the restored gospel” but it’s what’s true. Thanks for reading and please comment if you disagree with anything or need clarification.
AGAIN – let me reiterate on what I said previously:
GVS, go away. That was pure, venomous garbage you just spewed. I happen to have some Mormon friends who are anything BUT whackos. They seem much more educated and polished than you do. Also, more Christian than you. So again, thanks for shaming our religion. At least say what denomination you are so I can distance myself from it.
Smith a loser, huh? He started his own town and began a denomination that has nearly 15 million worldwide followers. Heretic? Probably. Loser? Anything but.
Wanna know some more heresies, gvs? How about John Calvin and his abominable predestination garbage, that got specifically created some people to burn in hell? Sick! Some medieval popes? Instigated a few pograms against Jews on their way to the Crusades. Just getting the troops warmed up, I suppose. No wonder God let the Muslims win that one! How about Augustine and various other old timers who said unbaptised babies are heading to hell? Nice, real nice.
What’s my point? Even though Calvin spread his barbaric tripe through Presbyterianism, that does not mean that denomination is unChristian. Many Catholics are extremely devout Christians despite their church’s past antics. Pope John Paul II was an awesome Christian; anybody that can survive the trials of Nazism AND Communism like he did is a testament to my religion.
I guarantee you most denominations have heresies within them. But to call somebody a non-Christian that believes in Jesus as Lord and Saviour – hey, if you wanna do it, go for it.
But do it in a polite, Christian manner. In other words, gvs, GO AWAY!!!
grace-works.net
Christianity is black and white. I bleieve that by Gods grace we are are saved. All we need to do is ask for it.
When we pass from this life and are met at Heavans gates, do you really think that God is going to discuss doctrine before you enter into heavan?
Andrew… I also get irritated to hear people from all angles making such statements…
but not all the time. I do believe that some people do Know these things to be true. And others don’t. As we read in D&C to some it is given to know that Jesus is the Christ and others to believe on their words….Not 100% quoted, go see for yourself if I quoted it in line with what it should be…
So yes, many who say that they KNOW….probably don’t… or at least not to the extent that you might refer to.
My point is that anyone can Know these things to be true. I have felt on quite a number of ocasions that there are people who know. I treasure that…
I also know when you get irritated with church or people in it or you do something that is out of line with the gospel, it becomes natural to get more and more irritated with being at church and listening to imperfect people teaching you to be perfect.
I know…. and no jokes… the power of the spirit is real and powerful beyond mortasl reasoning. and when you feel that and become aquanted with that feeling you will recognise that you feel it when you understand truth or hear it from another an have it be a chance for the spirit to testify to you that more of the doctrines and principles are in fact…truth.
gvs… do you know that the LDS church is true?
i find it interesting that so many people find this “religion” worth talking about, but then again i’m crazy enough to too, for i googled info about Mormons so guess i’m a little bit like you nuts as well, huh? how is it we can waste so much time either trying to prove or debunk Mormanism, i guess those that don’t believe it simply feel so insulted that so many fellow humans have fallen for something so blatantly false. are we humans so guilty of wanting so badly to believe in something higher that ourselves that we’ll fall for anything that sounds convincing? yup, we need only look as far as religious fanatics to answer that!
I responded to my friend’s invitation to attend a Mormon “testimony” service. Andrew, one thing that struck me was the constant references of Mormons “knowing” the Book of Mormon to be true. I’m not sure why they have to keep saying it; it’s as if they are all trying to convince themselves. I’m not saying that all first impressions are correct, but that was definitely the first impression I had of the church members.
I believe that “faith” and “knowing” are not synonymous. I was not there when Smith wrote – or translated – the Book of Mormon any more than I was there when Jesus rose from the dead. I can only state that I “know” the truth when I have seen it with my own eyes. Instead, what I have to do is rely on scripture along with other eyewitness accounts of biblical messages, and I have to have “faith” that they are correct.
“Blessed are they that do not see yet believe.” Believe, not know. I just have to have faith.