Former Mormons Get A Hobby

[ibkc]

Plus, I have told nuns that I defend the mormon faith on this board because of the unchristian-like comments I read about the lds church. They seem to understand.

I’m sure they are praying for you, like I am.

I do a good job when I read. And people have commented on what a good reader I am. I think that the priest is satisfied with my work.

Does he know that you are a tirelessly dedicated apologist for the LDS church? I noted that you say you told some nuns, but you said nothing about telling the priest.

 

[BDawg]

that’s a very ethnocentric viewpoint. the Catholic church is universal while the “covenant race” of "white and delightsome " folks living in the “promised land” tends to be a very narrow demographic. a lot more than just education is at play here. (although that is significant as statistically, not only are catholics less educated than mormons but education appears to play a significant role in likeliness to get an abortion according to the studies presented on this thread)

The fact is that about half the Mormons in the world are in the US. So it seems most reasonable to compare US Mormons with US Catholics, don’t you think? Where else would they likely even collect such data on Mormons? In any case, what is your argument? Are you arguing that if we were to find data on abortions performed in other countries, the Catholics would come out looking better than the Mormons on that score? I was making an argument based on the data I had available that seemed to allow for reasonable conclusions. So do you have some more data you want to introduce, or were you just using this as an opportunity to imply that Mormons are racist?

I will say though that it’s a bit arrogant to try and apply localized American studies to a global religion and portray the results as somehow proving that mormons are more pro-life than Catholics.

Waiting for data…

None? Well, my point in the beginning was that Mormons typically see ourselves as strongly “pro-Life,” whereas some people on this board are trying to paint us as at the opposite extreme. I understand that our official policy is less stringent than yours, but the fact is that individual Mormons are IN FACT (at least in the USA) less likely to actually get abortions than Catholics. So I can’t see why any of you would want to bring up an argument like that, since it is obviously shooting yourself in the foot. “By their fruits shall ye know them,” said Jesus. Not “By their big talk shall ye know them.”

I think also that you must admit that the truth is that mormons are pro-choice with very strict guidelines on how to exercise said choice.

Quite a fair statement, except that I would add that Mormons typically think that US laws should be changed to make such guidelines much more strict for everyone. And if it had been presented that way by the Catholics here on this thread, you wouldn’t have heard a peep from me.

 

[East_Anglican]

Mormons are not our brethren. They have not and know not Christ. They have a false belief which contains a false Christ in it. Mormons are not Christians. I repeat, mormons are not Christians. Mormonism is a pagan religion and we must expose it for what it is because The Bible tells us to do so.

I’m not a former Mormon. I just like kicking heresy down.

 

[BDawg]

In what field?

Apparently people foward this DNA issue are PhD scientists as well.

See my reply to majick about my PhD.

Assuming that by “people foward this DNA issue” you mean “people who have brought up this DNA issue,” here’s my reply. They made an argument. Some of the scientific issues were overblown. (Happens all the time–I’m an associate editor of two scientific journals, so I know.) They only painted their scientific conclusions as an argument against a particularly narrow reading of the Book of Mormon that most educated Mormons hadn’t accepted for decades.

So did/does the BoM say that the Indians are the descendants of the people in the BoM or not?

Yes.

But wasnt it disproved by people who actually know how science operates and know about population genetics?

No.

What is the other side of the argument?

You can find a good summary here:

jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/DNA.shtml

 

[BDawg]

I’m not a former Mormon. I just like kicking heresy down.

Thank you, Torquemada.

 

[majick275]

I am not teaching my children that the lds church is true but I am also not teaching them that it is false. They can decide for themselves since they are now adults. I just know that they support me when I attend the catholic church. Now isn’t that nice?

no it;s not. you have an obligation to teach them that the catholic church is true. UNLESS you don’t believe that. IF you believe that the Mormon church is true then you have an obligation to teach them that.

 

[Jerusha]

Assuming that by “people foward this DNA issue” you mean “people who have brought up this DNA issue,” here’s my reply. They made an argument. Some of the scientific issues were overblown. (Happens all the time–I’m an associate editor of two scientific journals, so I know.) They only painted their scientific conclusions as an argument against a particularly narrow reading of the Book of Mormon that most educated Mormons hadn’t accepted for decades.

What kind of evidence would it take to prove to you that the Book of Mormon is something other than what LDS believe it to be?

 

[Jerusha]

no it;s not. you have an obligation to teach them that the catholic church is true. UNLESS you don’t believe that. IF you believe that the Mormon church is true then you have an obligation to teach them that.

Either Catholicism is true or Mormonism is true. One cannot be both. :knight1: :knight2:

 

[majick275]

Wow. I thought it would be clear that a PhD scientist is a scientist with a PhD… in a science. I know enough not to reveal a lot of personal info on a forum like this, but since you asked I’ll just say that my PhD is not in population genetics, but it is in a field that required me to study some evolutionary biology (a related subject.) I’m a university professor, and an active researcher with federal grants. So, as I said, I can read the arguments and make my own evaluation of how conclusive they are. And they aren’t very conclusive.

And no majick, that’s not why you’re going to spend an eternity in hell.

well phd scientist to me sounded redundant. I would expect a scientist to hold a doctorate. I have found LDS professors to be somewhat suspect since the ones who weren’t adequately faith promoting seem to get exed/fired alot. kind of provides a strong bias in my opinion. I also see a radical difference in the collective opinions of LDS scientists as opposed to others. I will still disagree with you on the DNA issue. so why am I going to spend eternity in hell?

Why is it a red herring? One of the ex-Mormons here posted something about it in this very thread–see post #104 by xmormon. (I see you didn’t object to it being a red herring back then, though.

it just seemed to be a shotgun post covering a lot of subjects that seemed different than the most immediate posts. I don’t object, i just made an observation.

I don’t ignore those revelations. I do think that pretty much all the native americans around now are descended from the Lehi colony. I just think that they have lots of other ancestors, as well.

fair enough. I think that makes the DNA evidence difficult for you to overcome. I respect that you “own up” to the principal ancestors.

And FYI, do you have any idea how “Limited Geography Theories” of the Book of Mormon came about? By reading the Book of Mormon. If you pay attention to descriptions of distances and travel times, it is clear that the whole civilization was in an area around a “narrow neck of land,” and a few hundred miles from North to South. So do you really mean “rewrite,” or have you just not read the Book of Mormon carefully? As for all the other objections you mention, some of them are somewhat reasonable, but not conclusive by any means. See Jeff Lindsay’s LDS FAQ website if you really want information about what Mormons typically say about them.

I prefer the great lakes LGT since I believe it was made up locally in that region. I think all of the LGT’s are problematic though due to the cultural descriptions given in the BoM and the sheer size of the populations. I have had enough of Jeff Lindsay thank you. I don’t consider his site to be the least bit interested in anything other than grasping at straws. I consider his arguments to be similar to the weekly world news. I’m not a big FAIR or FARMS fan either but at least they don’t stray so far out into “it could have happened” land. (Jeffs honeybee article was a prime example of this in my opinion)

Wait a minute. “Xmormon” also previously mentioned that “rabbit trail” on this thread. So once again, you didn’t give a peep when he said it, but now you’re acting like your the ever-so-patient martyr who has to stop the Mormon trolls from changing the subject. Nice try.

once again I’m not objecting to you bringing it up it’s just that we were on a very focused subject and then you seemed to try and mention everything at once.

In any case, I understand that the Book of Mormon says that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are “one God.” I understand that Jesus is called “the Father of Heaven and Earth” several times. But I also know that the Book of Mormon depicts Jesus praying to the Father in Heaven (3 Ne. 17:15). I also know that the BofM has Jesus saying the he was “with” the Father in the beginning (3 Ne. 9:15), and ascended up to be with the Father after his resurrection (3 Ne. 26:15). And 600 years earlier, Nephi reported hearing the voices of both the Father and the pre-incarnate Son (2 Ne. 31:11-15). I also know that Joseph Smith’s Book of Moses, written a few months after the Book of Mormon, reports a 3-way conversation between the Father, Jesus, and Satan.

all of which are very trinitarian in nature as we see three persons who are one eternal God. the trinitarian One God is very different than the henotheistic LDS eternal progression. BTW (and yes I am now doing exactly what I said you did) the BoM also has the faithful worshiping and praying directly to Jesus and makes very clear that it is a good thing. Yet LDS teaching doesn’t allow this. this in my opinion demonstrates that when the BoM was written the mormon doctrine was very much 3 persons, one God (see testimony of three witnesses in current BoM) all are God therefore you could/should pray to all 3. yet later they became binitarian (LoF) and now full blown henotheistic with god was a man just like us who earned exaltation and you can too. (the ultimate pyramid scheme)

So the truth is that from the Book of Mormon, we get the idea that in some way the Trinity is “One,” and in some way they are “more than one.” Gee, that’s the same thing you can get by quoting similar passages in the Bible. And yet, the real issue between Catholics and Mormons is not “whether” they are “one,” but “how” they are “one.” The only biblical passage I can find that seems to address this question is in John 17, where Jesus prayed to the Father that his disciples would be one together, and one in Jesus and the Father “as” (meaning “in the same way”) Jesus and the Father are one. Ok, so however the Trinity is “one,” we can be “one” with God in the same way.

Can you find another passage that says “how” the Trinity is “one”?

John 1 they are co-equal, eternal and consubstantial. John 14 is a good read on this as well.

Don’t know him, and I don’t actually participate in any LDS boards of any type.

just a coincidence then.

 

[majick275]

I do a good job when I read. And people have commented on what a good reader I am. I think that the priest is satisfied with my work. Plus, I have told nuns that I defend the mormon faith on this board because of the unchristian-like comments I read about the lds church. They seem to understand.

what a good reader you are isn’t the issue. I’m a good speaker, many people loved my Gospel doctrine class and my talks when I was LDS. should I be giving talks in LDs church ow? of course not. You bear testimony of JS and the BoM. you believe the first vision. therefore you support that the creed that is professed in every mass is an ABOMINATION! in the sight of God. how is that not scandal? your priest must not know.

 

[majick275]

Many the antimormon posters more christian is a worthwhile goal in my opinion. I do believe that many of the antimormons that post here need to confess their sins of speaking ill about another person’s religion. As one priest said: If a person is happy in their faith, it is not his business to convert them to catholicism. I feel the same way. When the catholic antimormon posters begin to have respect for the lds church and for what it has done in the world, I would claim that they are now becoming more christian in their outlook.

that priest was wrong and his words contradict the commandment given by Christ and the teaching of the Apostles in the Bible. it also contradicts the catechism. The LDS church is spreading the false doctrines of false prophets aggressively throughout the world. what does it matter if they are nice? do you think Islam is okay too?(they gave us algebra) wiccans? (they believe in doing good to everyone) you don’t think catholics should seek converts but you’re okay with mormons doing it and with them claiming every other church derived from apostasy with abominable creeds and all who profess them corrupt? this level of cog dis is rare even for a mormon.

 

[majick275]

you sure you’re not BDawg the well known BYU Law school student?

 

[BDawg]

you sure you’re not BDawg the well known BYU Law school student?

I’m sure. I don’t even like lawyers, usually.

 

[MHalsey]

Many the antimormon posters more christian is a worthwhile goal in my opinion. I do believe that many of the antimormons that post here need to confess their sins of speaking ill about another person’s religion. As one priest said: If a person is happy in their faith, it is not his business to convert them to catholicism. I feel the same way. When the catholic antimormon posters begin to have respect for the lds church and for what it has done in the world, I would claim that they are now becoming more christian in their outlook.

How is it a priest can say something like that? How does he reconcile it with Jesus’ command in the Gospel of Matthew 28:

18 Jesus came up and spoke to them. He said, ‘All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
19 Go, therefore, make disciples of all nations; baptize them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
20 and teach them to observe all the commands I gave you. And look, I am with you always; yes, to the end of time.’

So does he think a satanist should not be converted if he’s “happy” in his religion? I will pray for your priest.

 

[BDawg]

What kind of evidence would it take to prove to you that the Book of Mormon is something other than what LDS believe it to be?

Jerusha, it would be easy for me to come up with some kind of hypothetical evidence (that would be conveniently almost impossible to ever get) that would supposedly prove to me that the Book of Mormon is false. Too easy. But the fact is that we can’t predict what evidence is going to show up, so why don’t we just stick to the evidence that people have already proposed to use in this way? I don’t think it’s particularly convincing. And in fact, I think there are a number of things about the Book of Mormon that are really hard to explain away for people who don’t believe in it. I don’t claim to be the perfect, unbiased observer, or anything like that, however.

 

[BDawg]

well phd scientist to me sounded redundant. I would expect a scientist to hold a doctorate.

Lots of professional scientists only have MS degrees. Usually academics have PhDs.

I have found LDS professors to be somewhat suspect since the ones who weren’t adequately faith promoting seem to get exed/fired alot. kind of provides a strong bias in my opinion.

Well, that issue is overblown, IMO. For instance, Michael Quinn tries to play the ex’ed heretic card, but the fact is that he is openly gay, was gay at the time, and that’s what he was really ex’ed for. In any case, look at what has happened in many Catholic universities. Some of the theology departments have at some points been very anti-Catholic places, and the American bishops have struggled to get control back. Same with some “pink” seminaries and the like. Can you really blame the LDS Church for trying to keep their universities from going there?

I also see a radical difference in the collective opinions of LDS scientists as opposed to others. I will still disagree with you on the DNA issue.

I don’t. The main issue between them is how to read the Book of Mormon responsibly–not how to interpret DNA studies. I side with the LDS scientists who have spoken up about the issue.

so why am I going to spend eternity in hell?

For using too many emoticons. Nyuck, nyuck, nyuck.

fair enough. I think that makes the DNA evidence difficult for you to overcome. I respect that you “own up” to the principal ancestors.

I’m not sure what you think is so difficult for me. Bruce McConkie wrote an introduction to the Book of Mormon that nobody considered “inspired” any more than the footnotes or chapter headings he created. He said the Book of Mormon people were the “principal” ancestors of the native Americans. So what? People have published LGT interpretations in official church periodicals for decades and decades, and it was always considered within the bounds. Why now that some DNA studies support the idea that the “entire hemisphere” theory is bunk (like the LGT theorists had been saying all along,) are we suddenly forced to accept it if we want to stay Mormons?

I prefer the great lakes LGT since I believe it was made up locally in that region. I think all of the LGT’s are problematic though due to the cultural descriptions given in the BoM and the sheer size of the populations.

My problem with the great lakes LGT is that 3 Nephi contains an absolutely stunning portrayal of a pyroclastic volcanic eruption. Eyewitness accounts of these events agree in every detail with the destruction described in 3 Nephi. There are tons of pyroclastic volcanoes in Central America, and exactly none in the Eastern USA.

I have had enough of Jeff Lindsay thank you. I don’t consider his site to be the least bit interested in anything other than grasping at straws. I consider his arguments to be similar to the weekly world news. I’m not a big FAIR or FARMS fan either but at least they don’t stray so far out into “it could have happened” land. (Jeffs honeybee article was a prime example of this in my opinion)

Some of Jeff’s stuff isn’t meant to “prove” anything. It’s just interesting to a lot of people, and in my experience he doesn’t go overboard by claiming that it’s proof. He is a good writer, though, and he does a good job of summarizing a lot of issues for lay audiences.

all of which are very trinitarian in nature as we see three persons who are one eternal God. the trinitarian One God is very different than the henotheistic LDS eternal progression. BTW (and yes I am now doing exactly what I said you did) the BoM also has the faithful worshiping and praying directly to Jesus and makes very clear that it is a good thing. Yet LDS teaching doesn’t allow this.

Since when? We don’t typically pray to Jesus–he said to pray to the Father in his name–but the commentaries I’ve read on the Book of Mormon all say that when Jesus is standing right there, it’s perfectly natural to worship/pray to him. Again, I think you are trying to impose the strictest and most naive interpretation of the Book of Mormon on us, so that you can have an easier time refuting it. It’s called a straw-man.

this in my opinion demonstrates that when the BoM was written the mormon doctrine was very much 3 persons, one God (see testimony of three witnesses in current BoM) all are God therefore you could/should pray to all 3. yet later they became binitarian (LoF) and now full blown henotheistic with god was a man just like us who earned exaltation and you can too. (the ultimate pyramid scheme)

I’m perfectly willing to believe that LDS doctrine has developed over time–it’s one of our central claims, after all. But the fact is that we still believe in “three persons, one God.” We just think they are also “separate” in such a way that it is legitimate to call them “multiple gods,” as well. So what? St. Justin Martyr called Jesus a “second God.”

John 1 they are co-equal, eternal and consubstantial. John 14 is a good read on this as well.

I get that the Word “was God” (and so in a sense “co-equal” with the Father,) who existed “in the Beginning,” but I’m struggling to figure out where you get the “consubstantial.” If you mean “one nature,” then I’m with you. Can you explain what you mean?

 

[RebeccaJ]

The source I cited did poll a good sampling of Catholics, but Mormons were not singled out. However, Utah is about 70% Mormon, and the church activity rates in Utah are similar to those in the rest of the USA. If Catholics have abortions at a rate identical to the national average, and Utahns have abortions at about 1/3 of the national average, I think it is fair to say that you have very little wiggle room here. Even if ALL the abortions in Utah are done on Mormon women (and this is a ridiculous hypothetical,) then that means that the Mormons in Utah have abortions at about 1/2 the national average rate, while Catholics still would be getting abortions at about twice this rate. If you don’t believe me, go ask a statistician. You’re caught.

“You’re caught” cracks me up. I am not one of your students and I am not cheating.

You are making assumptions about both surveys.

 

[Jerusha]

I prefer the great lakes LGT since I believe it was made up locally in that region. I think all of the LGT’s are problematic though due to the cultural descriptions given in the BoM and the sheer size of the populations.

Obviously, quite well agreed.

 

[Jerusha]

I don’t. The main issue between them is how to read the Book of Mormon responsibly–not how to interpret DNA studies. I side with the LDS scientists who have spoken up about the issue.

How can one read the BOM “responsibly” if it is so racist? Can one be racist and responsible?

My problem with the great lakes LGT is that 3 Nephi contains an absolutely stunning portrayal of a pyroclastic volcanic eruption. Eyewitness accounts of these events agree in every detail with the destruction described in 3 Nephi. There are tons of pyroclastic volcanoes in Central America, and exactly none in the Eastern USA.

Perhaps 3 Nephi was taken from Ethan Smith’s “View of the Hebrews” olivercowdery.com/texts/ethn1823.htm Ever read it? Maybe there could be a different interpretation of “Jesus coming to North America”?

 

[Jerusha]

Perhaps you might want to read the “Real Presence” thread.

And think about a different timeline.