Cumorah

  • Thread starter Thread starter SirThomasMore
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
dianaiad said:
Of course. Fair is fair. If the critics go for the minutia and cherry pick, then they have to be VERY sure that the cherry isn’t a grape.

The problem with apologetics, for any faith, is that everything hangs on the interpretation of words…thus NOT getting it right isn’t a minor misstep. It’s a major problem. It can change everything.
Click to expand...
You mean like D&C 132:4 calling celestial marriage a ‘new and everlasting covenant’ but that it actually meant 47 years?
 
Returning_Home said:
Do you think the church goes through old texts and recordings, trying to clean up the messes left by previous prophets as the new one takes office?
Click to expand...
If they have, I don’t think they’ve done a very good job of it.
 
I think we’ve beaten up enough on the Mormons and the LDS. We’ve presented our beliefs and proofs in rebuttral of what they believe and consider proofs. We in our efforts have shown the LDS to be false in almost every aspect and respect. It is now up to the individual LDS to examine ALL of the contra-evidence we have all presented and then make up their own mind as to whether or not they wish to continue in what is proven error. Let us all pray to the Holy Spirit to help and guide them to make the right decision.
God Bless All.

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem
 
Javl said:
I think we’ve beaten up enough on the Mormons and the LDS. We’ve presented our beliefs and proofs in rebuttral of what they believe and consider proofs. We in our efforts have shown the LDS to be false in almost every aspect and respect. It is now up to the individual LDS to examine ALL of the contra-evidence we have all presented and then make up their own mind as to whether or not they wish to continue in what is proven error. Let us all pray to the Holy Spirit to help and guide them to make the right decision.
Click to expand...
I don’t think anyone’s beaten up on them, but rather given them the facts that their church won’t give them. Beyond that, yes, the choice is up to them and I hope they make the right one.
 
twopekinguys said:
I recently started listening to him too, and he makes a whole lot of sense.

I also like that he has all of his programs archived at www.hotm.tv
Click to expand...
Shawn is a great guy with a charasmatic personality-- and knows Mormonism as he was a high ranking one for years, however be careful–he’s no friend of Catholicism–or any other denomination–but especially Catholicism–he will let ppl rant & rave on his show what they or he THINK’s Catholicism teaches–really quite sad. We’ve corresponded a few times–I’ve corrected something he said off the cuff–I’m glad he’s bringing the LDS to the real Christ however listen to him cautiously–😉
 
usingreason said:
Shawn is a great guy with a charasmatic personality-- and knows Mormonism as he was a high ranking one for years, however be careful–he’s no friend of Catholicism–or any other denomination–but especially Catholicism–he will let ppl rant & rave on his show what they or he THINK’s Catholicism teaches–really quite sad. We’ve corresponded a few times–I’ve corrected something he said off the cuff–I’m glad he’s bringing the LDS to the real Christ however listen to him cautiously–😉
Click to expand...
I’ve corrected him a couple of times myself…😃

Even he admits he doesn’t know much/anything about the Catholic Church.

I even talked to him about how he recommends different churches in the area, but yet he is against organized religion…I don’t think he liked that part, but he agreed.

I take all of them with a grain of salt. Him, Joel Osteen, Jim Bakker, etc. etc.
 
Y’er darn tootin. I wrote it. I could finish every sentence if you quoted the first ten words. Of course, I try to write in short sentences. 😃
 
SirThomasMore said:
One thing that has puzzled me…
Click to expand...
One thing that puzzles me is that this forum apparently frowns on saying things that are “uncharitable.” And yet, here I see uncharitableness taken to its nadir:
SirThomasMore said:
I propose that LDS leaders KNOW the BM is false and that the reason they have done ZERO excavation is because they KNOW they will find NOTHING.

More proof that the BM is false and the CoLDS is a false church and that it depends on lies and deceit to attract and keep its members.
Click to expand...
SirTom, there exists, in another universe you’ve apparently never heard of, something called “Interfaith dialogue.”

It begins with the simple acknowledgement that the mere fact that you don’t believe something is no reflection upon those who do.

Next comes the rather simple acceptance of the rather simple fact that if others profess to believe something, the most likely explanation is because they do.

I realise that, despite your claimed experience with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, you really have very limited understanding of LDS life and teaching; in witness whereof, I point to your muddled description of the Book of Mormon.

Among the things you don’t know is the fact that all of the leaders of the Church got to where they are by being selected – without applying for anything – from among the ordinary members. As Jesus anciently called Peter and Andrew from their nets, so the Church today calls its leaders from among those who have demonstrated their belief in lives of action. And that means untiring good works. Every single “LDS leader” has done more hours of unpaid service in the Church than you can imagine.

Now I know you have your issues with the Church. You have a perfect right to disagree with the Church, or any of its members, about any of its doctrines. But if you want to talk about what the leaders think about things, your starting point ought to be that they genuinely believe all of the Church’s truth claims.

Because they do.

And it is grossly uncharitable – and maliciously untrue – to accuse them of the kind of insincerity that you impute to them here.

Regards,
Pahoran
 
Pahoran said:
One thing that puzzles me is that this forum apparently frowns on saying things that are “uncharitable.” And yet, here I see uncharitableness taken to its nadir:

SirTom, there exists, in another universe you’ve apparently never heard of, something called “Interfaith dialogue.”

It begins with the simple acknowledgement that the mere fact that you don’t believe something is no reflection upon those who do.

Next comes the rather simple acceptance of the rather simple fact that if others profess to believe something, the most likely explanation is because they do.

I realise that, despite your claimed experience with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, you really have very limited understanding of LDS life and teaching; in witness whereof, I point to your muddled description of the Book of Mormon.

Among the things you don’t know is the fact that all of the leaders of the Church got to where they are by being selected – without applying for anything – from among the ordinary members. As Jesus anciently called Peter and Andrew from their nets, so the Church today calls its leaders from among those who have demonstrated their belief in lives of action. And that means untiring good works. Every single “LDS leader” has done more hours of unpaid service in the Church than you can imagine.

Now I know you have your issues with the Church. You have a perfect right to disagree with the Church, or any of its members, about any of its doctrines. But if you want to talk about what the leaders think about things, your starting point ought to be that they genuinely believe all of the Church’s truth claims.

Because they do.

And it is grossly uncharitable – and maliciously untrue – to accuse them of the kind of insincerity that you impute to them here.

Regards,
Pahoran
Click to expand...
lol…nice red herring.

The leaders KNOW that the claims in the BM are false, otherwise, they would be excavating Cumorah to find those hundreds of thousand dead folks with chariots, etc.

But, since the BM is false, they choose to put on a pageant…

I find that humorous
 
SirThomasMore said:
lol…nice red herring.

The leaders KNOW that the claims in the BM are false, otherwise, they would be excavating Cumorah to find those hundreds of thousand dead folks with chariots, etc.
Click to expand...
That especially vile statement is three things:

  1. *]It is a textbook example of the fallacy of the non sequitur; your conclusion does not follow from, well, anything at all.
    *]It is yet another example of your massive ignorance of what the Book of Mormon actually says. The Book of Mormon does not describe Cumorah in New York at all, but just north of a geographical feature it calls “the narrow neck of land,” usually identified by serious Book of Mormon scholars (as opposed to those who, like yourself, are not) with the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Likewise, it never mentions “chariots” in connection with warfare, which is always carried out by infantry.
    *]It is a malicious, baseless, brazenly false and utterly uncharitable accusation.

    And that’s all I want to say about your favourite lie today.

    Regards,
    Pahoran
 
Pahoran said:
The Book of Mormon does not describe Cumorah in New York at all, but just north of a geographical feature it calls “the narrow neck of land,” usually identified by serious Book of Mormon scholars (as opposed to those who, like yourself, are not) with the Isthmus of Tehuantepec.
Click to expand...
Serious non-Mormon BoM scholars say that it only roughly fits many geographies because it is FICTION. And Cumorah roughly fits Cahokia, which has been subjected to archaeological exploration. So why hasn’t Cumorah been subjected to archaeological exploration?

As for a northern location for the book, I understand that Rod Meldrum’s contingent is quite large, and his interpretation does not do as much violence to a literal reading of the text. Why are you so opposed to that interpretation?

Chariots are mentioned, as are elephants, cows, horses, wheat, oxen, flax, silk, donkeys, iron smelting, steel…
 
Pahoran said:
That especially vile statement is three things:

  1. *]It is a textbook example of the fallacy of the non sequitur; your conclusion does not follow from, well, anything at all.
    *]It is yet another example of your massive ignorance of what the Book of Mormon actually says. The Book of Mormon does not describe Cumorah in New York at all, but just north of a geographical feature it calls “the narrow neck of land,” usually identified by serious Book of Mormon scholars (as opposed to those who, like yourself, are not) with the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Likewise, it never mentions “chariots” in connection with warfare, which is always carried out by infantry.
    *]It is a malicious, baseless, brazenly false and utterly uncharitable accusation.

    And that’s all I want to say about your favourite lie today.

    Regards,
    Pahoran
Click to expand...

  1. Ah, so what you are saying is that either your “prophets” are not preheats of God or that they lie. This thread has several quotes from LDS “prophets” where they emphatically state that the cumorah in new York is where those 2 battles took place. So, if you say I am lying about it, then so must your “prophets” be lying about it. Again, each argument you make is an admission that your “prophets” are not prophets of God. So, keep up the good work.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top