Have you read the Book of Mormon?

[JHow]

… oddly enough, if you go to Monticello, you can see a mammoth jaw and tooth fossil that was brought back by the Lewis and Clark expedition. It is of course,ancient, (like the the Pleistocene-era Columbian and wooly mammoth fossils from La Brea), but I could see someone finding fossil bones and ivory and not realizing how ancient they were.

 

[PeanutBono]

I never have thought about the destruction of almost all of the cities in the Book of Mormon that took place in 3rd Nephi nor the burying of all of the weapons of war by a good portion of the Lamanite’s later in the book of Mormon until I read them again a couple of nights ago in my nightly scripture reading time.

 

[PaulDupre]

I never have thought about the destruction of almost all of the cities in the Book of Mormon that took place in 3rd Nephi nor the burying of all of the weapons of war by a good portion of the Lamanite’s later in the book of Mormon until I read them again a couple of nights ago in my nightly scripture reading time.

You should have read a bit further. In 4th Nephi they prosper greatly and rebuild the cities that had been burned.

And burying weapons does not prevent archaeologists and others from finding them.

 

[PeanutBono]

You should have read a bit further. In 4th Nephi they prosper greatly and rebuild the cities that had been burned.

And burying weapons does not prevent archaeologists and others from finding them.

the cities that were burnt were rebuilt but the cities that were swallowed up by the sea were not rebuilt.

People who try to debunk the Book of Mormon Authenticity use the same old data
Modern technology gives us so much more access to information.
Google Archaeological discoveries in the America’s it is amazing at the discoveries that are made yearly including horses, elephants and yes a civilization of 20 million people as late as 800 BC. I am not claiming authenticity to this article as I just found it on google but it does help debunk the debunkers arguments against the Book of Mormon.
washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/03/AR2010090302302.html
10 Commandments in Hebrew found in Americas?
imaginativeworlds.com/forum/showthread.php?17595-Latest-Top-10-Bizarre-Archeological-Discoveries

These are not Pro-Mormon websites just simple google searches.

 

[RebeccaJ]

I just found it on google but it does help debunk the debunkers arguments against the Book of Mormon.
washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/03/AR2010090302302.html

That article doesn’t support the BoM.

10 Commandments in Hebrew found in Americas?
imaginativeworlds.com/forum/showthread.php?17595-Latest-Top-10-Bizarre-Archeological-Discoveries

These are not Pro-Mormon websites just simple google searches.

I hope you really aren’t expecting people to be that gullible.

from wikipedia:

The first recorded mention of the stone is in 1933, when professor Frank Hibben, an archaeologist from the University of New Mexico, saw it. Hibben was led to the stone by an unnamed guide who claimed to have found it as a boy in the 1880s. The 1880s date of discovery is important to those who believe that the stone was inscribed by a lost tribe of Israel. The Paleo-Hebrew script is practically identical to the Phoenician script, which was known at the time, thus not precluding the possibility of fraud. One argument against the stone’s antiquity is its apparent use of modern Hebrew punctuation, though amateur epigrapher Barry Fell argued that the punctuation is consistent with antiquity.

Other researchers dismiss the inscription based on the numerous stylistic and grammatical errors that appear in the inscription.

Most modern scholars question much of Hibben’s research today because of his work with alleged pre-Clovis sites. In at least two separate incidents, Hibbens fabricated some or all of his archaeological data to support his pre-Clovis migration theory. These missteps call the rest of his work into question, and, for many, undermine the validity of his claims about the Los Lunas Decalogue Stone.

see also pseduoarchaeology
**
Conspiracy theories are not evidence.**

 

[Returning_Home]

Conspiracy theories are not evidence.

I never click on links that apologists submit as evidence because it’s a lazy and dishonest way of refuting something, but, given your response, I gather he tried to use the Los Lunas Decalogue Stone as evidence for ancient Hebrew in America. Now that’s just plain sad because even Hugh Nibley denounced it as a fraud and the ‘discoverer,’ Frank Hibben, has been widely suspected of fabricating previous finds.

I didn’t think anyone took that as a serious element of support for LDS claims.

 

[Returning_Home]

As a matter of fact…I do own a copy of “Mein Kauf” and the “Satanic Bible” by Anton LaVey…and yes…they do teach me deep thing of the Spirit in regard to humanity…the Light dwelled even in Adoph Hitler…but the Light was dimmed almost to extinction by his hate and bigotry and his blindness to the worth of persons.

Anton LaVey saw only hypocricy in those who professed to be “Christian”…and in the “Satanic Bible” I read about a longing to know the Light…and the quest for the Light in a world of darkness.

That’s nice. I’m sure God worked wonders through those two lovely tomes for many people.

I, too, have read both; Mein Kampf was a long-winded diatribe that would bore even the most ardent Nazi to sleep. The Satanic Bible, however, is more of a self-help book for people who are looking for confirmation that selfishness is healthy and normal.

Neither man had anything to teach us about being good, Christian people except, perhaps, as a bad example. They chose their own paths and will have to answer for it, no matter what God chooses to do with them.

And, as I understand, Adolph Hitler has been baptised by proxy into Mormonism so he’s now allegedly in the telestial level of Heaven. A just reward for a job well done, I suppose, eh?

While I can find no mention of Lavey being raised Catholic, it’s not hard to see that his Satanic Mass is a bastardization and a parody of the RCC’s Mass. If God were working through him, it doesn’t make much sense that he’d do so with a naked woman pretending to be an altar as the backdrop.

“Moral relativism”…interesting arguement made by man Catholics on this board toward anyone…ANYONE who would disagree with them on any given subject…from politics…social justice…religous convictions…peace and violence. Some only see “violence” as being physical…“violence” can be quite verbal.

You obviously know nothing about me because I made it clear two days ago that Mary was not the eternal virgin that Catholicism claims her to be, using the Bible as the basis for proof. If that doesn’t put me at odds with most members here, I don’t know what would. God gave me common sense for a reason and I use it for his glory, not mine.

That said, I don’t believe for a moment that God will condemn anyone to Hell for not believing that Jesus had real brothers and sisters (half siblings in reality); it’s just one way that we squabble over being more right than someone else. That, however, has nothing to do with Mormonism holding up a fictional book written by a false prophet featuring a fraudulent jesus who wants us to become gods. That is another gospel, not of the Biblical Jesus.

Violence? Please don’t play the victim role; I’m calling it the way I see it.

The BoM is and can be used by God to bring people into a greater understandin of the Light Within. He can take our brokeness and our failures…and our ignorance…and transform them to be used for His purposes…that millions have been touched by the words contained in this book…is no surprise to me…much of the “wisdom” of the Book of Mormon that some people find comfort in is directly from the Light Himself…He is able to make all things work together for His purposes…but it is because of His great Love and Mercy for us that he takes our most base failures and brings about a “marvelous work and wonder” in the lives of those who will only listen to Him…no matter where His words are found.

If anyone is touched by what’s in the BOM, it’s not God that’s touching them. It’s a cheap copy of the Bible recounting fictional people who never lived and events that never happened. It’s considered historical fact, not fiction with a message. The people who find comfort in it don’t yet know the real, true, and living God of the Bible because of the restrictions that Mormonism puts on the Word of God.

 

[Izdaari]

I have a copy of it in my library, and have read parts of it. I am not a Mormon and I’m pretty sure I never will be… but I like to know what other religions believe.

 

[LongJourney]

I never have thought about the destruction of almost all of the cities in the Book of Mormon that took place in 3rd Nephi nor the burying of all of the weapons of war by a good portion of the Lamanite’s later in the book of Mormon until I read them again a couple of nights ago in my nightly scripture reading time.

Peanut, it is just FICTION. Badly written with themes and content borrowed from MANY works. FICTION,FICTION,FICTION. Burial of weapons of war does not eliminate them from the probability of archaeological discovery. Burial of bodies has never prevented people from digging them up. There is no evidence. And what evidence there is goes the other direction. Clavigero’s book, The History of Mexico, was very popular in that time. There are so many parallels between the two works that it is IMPOSSIBLE to read both, and start thinking.archive.org/details/historyofmexicoc00clav Read it for yourself. I believe that is both volumes in one file.

 

[LongJourney]

Peanut, it is just FICTION. Badly written with themes and content borrowed from MANY works. FICTION,FICTION,FICTION. Burial of weapons of war does not eliminate them from the probability of archaeological discovery. Burial of bodies has never prevented people from digging them up. There is no evidence. And what evidence there is goes the other direction. Clavigero’s book, The History of Mexico, was very popular in that time. There are so many parallels between the two works that ANYONE who reads both will start thinking.archive.org/details/historyofmexicoc00clav Read it for yourself. I believe that is both volumes in one file.

Evidence of pre-Conquest Christian influence; a general who becomes disgusted
and resigns; royalty split by blood-feuds, intra-familial conflict and murder;
conspiracies, deceit, and treachery; high level of civilization; primitive tribes devalued
in comparison to “civilized” tribes; twice, a leader apparently disappears;
commentary on the medical skills of the Mexicas; interest in genealogy; election of
rulers; a general misses some battles because of a leg injury; two related peoples who
commit genocide against each other; a people looking for a new homeland arrive at
the site of a ruined civilization; a corps of young and very successful warriors; native
women complimented; humble people hiding a leader with many enemies; constant
wars; famine; massive death-tolls and destruction; fast population growth; apocalyptic
prophecies; priests who exploit and abuse people; primitive people eating raw meat;
three princes arrive at court of a ruler and ask to become his subjects; refugees;
subservient person or people who gain respect of the ruler by lopping off body parts
in battle and presenting them to the ruler as evidence of courage; a very strong and
respected man who eventually dies in disadvantaged combat; royalty rising from the
dead, and people fainting from shock with such a happening; a man with six sons, one
of whom is named something very similar to “Nephi,” settling in a new land; a vision
with similar components to one in the BoM; translated texts; a deposed ruler who
cannot be consoled; a heroic king who speaks from a high platform before all his
people and gives an impressive performance; prayer delivered from a high place;
many speeches by kings and nobles during transition of leadership.

 

[Alexander_Roman]

To my Mormon friends,

As a Catholic, I do respect your faith and your faith commitment! In Toronto during World Youth Day in 2002, Mormons actually distributed food and water to Catholic youth attending here (with no proselytism thrown in at all).

I don’t accept the Mormon position re: the 19th century as I don’t see how this meshes with Christ’s word to us that He will be with His Church always, even unto the end of the world. I see Mormonism as a “child” of the 19th century, together with some other groups that developed then, that tended to mix Evangelical Protestantism with millenarianism together with a view of how the early Christians and Fathers saw Christianity.

Unlike those other groups, Mormonism stands out by its dedication to study. I see it as biased study, but then again, as a Catholic, I’m biased too!

I think however, that a biased study of the Fathers, like that of the Scriptures, can serve to get more converts, but it isn’t a good way to approach the study of anything i.e. taking quotes out of context. It would be a lot like me taking quotes from the Mormon scriptures out of context to prove Catholicism (I’ve read the Mormon scriptures and I think I could do it!).

I’m also often at a loss when I try to understand Mormon theology based on what I read and on the answers I get from Mormon missionaries at the door. For example, could any Mormon hear explain what the LDS believe about the Trinity? Is Jesus, in your theology, equal to the Father or is He not? Why do you not have bread and wine in communion? Why the denial of the form of the cross?

There is just not the evidence there for mainstream Christianity to deny what it has always practiced and believed for 2,000 years to go after something that resembles some of the historical sects condemned by the Church but which has a decidely modern twist on things.

That is how I see Mormonism as a Catholic. And also since I have an avid imagination (so I’ve been told), what if I wrote some of my own scriptures and then presented them as a latter-day revelation? Could I get North Americans and others to believe me? Yes, I could.

The point is not whether Mormonism is like that. The point is whether Mormonism can present itself as something other than a 19th sect that has amorphed into a modern religious organization that is attractive to others not because of its theological premises in the first instance, but because (as I and others see it) of the social and psychological supports that it offers to its members at the outset (and if you do, that is something Catholics and others can and should learn to do more of ourselves).

And can you show how your theology meshes with the New Testament and the early Church Fathers beyond the selective choices that Mormon missionaries make beginning from their own weltanschauung as an a priori? I think you owe it to yourselves to show why you hold those a priori’s over and above mainstream Christianity in the first place.

God bless,

Alex

 

[Barbkw]

cosmicfingerprints.com/audio/newevidence.htm (pg 8 of 19)

Astrophysicist Dr. Hugh Ross on why he can’t be Mormon:

"But we want these supernovae exploding early in the history of the galaxy. We don’t want them going off now. If the star Cereus goes Super Nova, we’re in serious trouble because it’s only eight light years away. It would exterminate life on our planet.

We observe in our galaxy that there was a burst of Super Nova explosions early in its history, but it tapered off to where it isn’t a threat to life that is now in existence. The Super Nova explosions took place in the right quantity and in the right locations so that life could happen here on Earth.

What does location have to do with it? Life is impossible in the center of our galaxy, or in the heel of our galaxy. It’s only possible at a distance 2/3 from the center of our galaxy.

***Mormon Astronomy - Accurate or not?

That’s why I’m not a Mormon. Mormons tell us that life originated on a master planet right smack at the center of our galaxy. That’s probably also why I’ve never met a Mormon astronomer. ***

The stars at the center of our galaxy are jammed so tightly together that the mutual gravity would destroy the planetary orbits. Moreover, their synchrotron radiation would be destructive to life molecules. But we don’t want to be too far away from the center, either. If we get too far away, then there aren’t enough heavy elements from the exploded remains of supernovae to enable life chemistry to proceed.

There’s one life essential element that the supernovae do not make, however, and that’s Fluorine. Fluorine is made only on the surfaces of white dwarf binaries. A white dwarf is a burned out star. It’s like a cinder in a fireplace, just glowing.

Orbiting this white dwarf is a star that hasn’t yet exhausted its nuclear fuel. It’s an ordinary star, like our Sun. The white dwarf has enough mass relative to the ordinary star orbiting around it that it is capable of pulling mass off of the surface of the ordinary star and dragging it down so that it falls on its surface. When that material falls on the surface of the while dwarf, it ignites some very interesting nuclear reactions that produce Fluorine.

We need a white dwarf binary whose gravitational interactions between the white dwarf and the ordinary star are such that a strong enough stellar wind is sent from the white dwarf to blast the Fluorine beyond the gravitational pull of both stars, putting it into outer space, so that future generations of stars can absorb it. Then we have enough Fluorine for life chemistry."

**“New Scientific Evidence for the Existence of God”

A Seminal Presentation by Astrophysicist Dr. Hugh Ross, given in South Barrington, Illinois, April 16, 1994 **

 

[Publisher]

That’s nice. I’m sure God worked wonders through those two lovely tomes for many people.

I, too, have read both; Mein Kampf was a long-winded diatribe that would bore even the most ardent Nazi to sleep. The Satanic Bible, however, is more of a self-help book for people who are looking for confirmation that selfishness is healthy and normal.

Neither man had anything to teach us about being good, Christian people except, perhaps, as a bad example. They chose their own paths and will have to answer for it, no matter what God chooses to do with them.

And, as I understand, Adolph Hitler has been baptised by proxy into Mormonism so he’s now allegedly in the telestial level of Heaven. A just reward for a job well done, I suppose, eh?

Just a question…would you bar Adoph Hitler from the Presence? Those Mormons that were baptized by proxy for Adoph Hitler did in the hopes that whatever process may occur in the “here after” to bring about the salvation and eternal life of man, Adoph Hitler has the resources and opportunity available to him to find peace and forgiveness. To with hold that from him becasue of his deep evil…would be evil too. I do not believe that baptism for the dead accomplishes anything…no more than baptism for the living in my beliefs…but I do not begrudge those with different beliefs in the matter in performing those rites and rituals THEY BELIEVE will make a difference in the "here after."

While I can find no mention of Lavey being raised Catholic, it’s not hard to see that his Satanic Mass is a bastardization and a parody of the RCC’s Mass. If God were working through him, it doesn’t make much sense that he’d do so with a naked woman pretending to be an altar as the backdrop.

How the Light works through individuals is God’s Business…not mine…“the Spirit goes where it will”…just like the wind…the Spirit of God cannot be controlled…nor can where He goes be dictated nor determined by humanity.

You obviously know nothing about me because I made it clear two days ago that Mary was not the eternal virgin that Catholicism claims her to be, using the Bible as the basis for proof. If that doesn’t put me at odds with most members here, I don’t know what would. God gave me common sense for a reason and I use it for his glory, not mine.

If I made reference to YOU directly indicating I “know something about you”…I apologize…YOU PERSONALLY was not necessarily the subject of my post…again if I indicated otherwise, I am sorry.

That said, I don’t believe for a moment that God will condemn anyone to Hell for not believing that Jesus had real brothers and sisters (half siblings in reality); it’s just one way that we squabble over being more right than someone else. That, however, has nothing to do with Mormonism holding up a fictional book written by a false prophet featuring a fraudulent jesus who wants us to become gods. That is another gospel, not of the Biblical Jesus.

**The “Jesus” of the BoM is the same Christ you and I believe in…just viewed differently…understood…differently…and while in my estimation…and obviously yours…the Mormon view is “lacking”…but it IS the Christ whom Mormons seek…they MAY seek Him through errant views and beliefs…but it IS HIM WHOM they seek.

I do not believe God leaves them to their own devices…no more than I believe He leaves me or you to ours…He is at work to bring us to Himself…just as He is with the LDS.**

Violence? Please don’t play the victim role; I’m calling it the way I see it.

**Friend, I had the violence you do to yourself by your angry harsh words in mind…not any violence you’d do to me. I was “thinking out loud” that “violence” is not only physical…but can be verbal and spiritual…and those that engage in it…hurt themselves more than they do the ones to whom the violence is directed at.

If YOU were to beat me up…my wounds would heal in just a matter of days and I would go on with my life…would yours heal so quickly? This is not an accusation…this is more rhetorical in nature. **

If anyone is touched by what’s in the BOM, it’s not God that’s touching them. It’s a cheap copy of the Bible recounting fictional people who never lived and events that never happened. It’s considered historical fact, not fiction with a message. The people who find comfort in it don’t yet know the real, true, and living God of the Bible because of the restrictions that Mormonism puts on the Word of God.

**God touches those whom He touches…and any…ANY who call upon Him…even those in ignorance as to His “true nature”…He will hear and answer…which I am very thankful for…who among any of us knows the whole correct nature of God? In this world…we “see through a glass darkly…but then face to face I will know…”…Mormons may IMO not see God as “clearly” as I…but they don’t have to…it is GOD WHO SEES AND HEARS THEM and knows their hearts much better than I do. **

 

[PeanutBono]

To my Mormon friends,

As a Catholic, I do respect your faith and your faith commitment! In Toronto during World Youth Day in 2002, Mormons actually distributed food and water to Catholic youth attending here (with no proselytism thrown in at all).

I don’t accept the Mormon position re: the 19th century as I don’t see how this meshes with Christ’s word to us that He will be with His Church always, even unto the end of the world. I see Mormonism as a “child” of the 19th century, together with some other groups that developed then, that tended to mix Evangelical Protestantism with millenarianism together with a view of how the early Christians and Fathers saw Christianity.

Unlike those other groups, Mormonism stands out by its dedication to study. I see it as biased study, but then again, as a Catholic, I’m biased too!

I think however, that a biased study of the Fathers, like that of the Scriptures, can serve to get more converts, but it isn’t a good way to approach the study of anything i.e. taking quotes out of context. It would be a lot like me taking quotes from the Mormon scriptures out of context to prove Catholicism (I’ve read the Mormon scriptures and I think I could do it!).

I’m also often at a loss when I try to understand Mormon theology based on what I read and on the answers I get from Mormon missionaries at the door. For example, could any Mormon hear explain what the LDS believe about the Trinity? Is Jesus, in your theology, equal to the Father or is He not? Why do you not have bread and wine in communion? Why the denial of the form of the cross?

There is just not the evidence there for mainstream Christianity to deny what it has always practiced and believed for 2,000 years to go after something that resembles some of the historical sects condemned by the Church but which has a decidely modern twist on things.

That is how I see Mormonism as a Catholic. And also since I have an avid imagination (so I’ve been told), what if I wrote some of my own scriptures and then presented them as a latter-day revelation? Could I get North Americans and others to believe me? Yes, I could.

The point is not whether Mormonism is like that. The point is whether Mormonism can present itself as something other than a 19th sect that has amorphed into a modern religious organization that is attractive to others not because of its theological premises in the first instance, but because (as I and others see it) of the social and psychological supports that it offers to its members at the outset (and if you do, that is something Catholics and others can and should learn to do more of ourselves).

And can you show how your theology meshes with the New Testament and the early Church Fathers beyond the selective choices that Mormon missionaries make beginning from their own weltanschauung as an a priori? I think you owe it to yourselves to show why you hold those a priori’s over and above mainstream Christianity in the first place.

God bless,

Alex

Yes we all seem to be biased on our religions, we are all saying we are the true church, it is very confusing I wish I knew how figure which of all the different sects I should join. Any Ideas?
By the way we do Believe Christ is equal to the Father but that Christ is obedient to his Father. That is a principle of our faith in that God will share all that he has with his children who become clean through the blood of Christ. We do take Bread for the Sacrament anD we use water instead of wine as indicated in the Doctrine of Covenants. We do believe God never Changes, if he did change he would cease to be perfect and cease to be God See Mormon 9

 

[Alexander_Roman]

Yes we all seem to be biased on our religions, we are all saying we are the true church, it is very confusing I wish I knew how figure which of all the different sects I should join. Any Ideas?
By the way we do Believe Christ is equal to the Father but that Christ is obedient to his Father. That is a principle of our faith in that God will share all that he has with his children who become clean through the blood of Christ. We do take Bread for the Sacrament anD we use water instead of wine as indicated in the Doctrine of Covenants. We do believe God never Changes, if he did change he would cease to be perfect and cease to be God See Mormon 9

Dear PeanutBono,

Thank you! I’m happy to read that Christ is equal to the Father in Mormon theology, although I’ve heard conflicting views from individual Mormon missionaries. But why would you take water instead of wine when the New Testament indicates wine? Whatever the Doctrine of Covenants is, surely it cannot annual the New Testament? And if it purports to do so, is this not a problem/conflict?

In that sense, you have answered the question on the sects, have you not? I’m not telling, I’m asking. And ultimately, one should never, as a principle, join any “sect.” One should only join the Church.

The Catholic Church was one from the beginning and when it was attacked by heresies, such as Arianism, it condemned it. The Church of Christ is the one that existed from the beginning and it is the one that continues to exist today. The Fathers of the Church, which the Mormon church says it follows as well, believed the Catholic Church to be the Church of Christ as well (especially when we take their writings as a whole without trying to “correct them”). I believe it is the Catholic Church and if there is evidence to the contrary, I wouldn’t mind hearing it.

Primarily, I wouldn’t mind hearing when the Mormon Church existed prior to the 19th century. What is the evidence and who other than Mormons acknowledged their existence?

If only Mormons acknowledge that they existed two thousand years ago, then this is infallible proof that it is a sect and not the true Church.

If Mormonism believes that when it came into being in the 19th century after the Church fell into apostasy for all those centuries, then is it any different from other 19th century sects who taught and teach the same? I’m asking, not telling, although I have already come to my own conclusion. How can we contradict the clear words of Christ Who, in the New Testament, said He would be with His Church always? Has Christ told an untruth, according to the LDS? Again, these are the issues that glare at me when I consider Mormon theology. This is not to denigrate Mormons as they are good-living people, to be sure!

But if the truth of Christ is to be found, is it to be found in Mormonism as a system of thought?

Finally, if I may, and if I’m perceived as being rude, then I will just go away, when you quote this or that holy book of Mormonism - why should I or any Christian accept it as “gospel?” Who declared those books to be an adjunct of the Bible? Certainly, not Scripture nor the Fathers (whom the Mormons quote to support their views) nor anyone prior to the 19th century. And then what becomes of the scriptural injunction not to listen to any other gospel or even angel, if he were to come down from heaven?

Is Mormonism’s viewpoint that because an angel dictated things to Mr. Smith then we should change the Church and the New Testament a valid one? Does it not directly contradict the New Testament? Following Mormonism’s logic, if I became a Mormon because I believed that an angel spoke to Joseph Smith, what will prevent me from changing my views and going against Mormonism because someone else comes along and tells me that an angel spoke to them etc.?

In other words, on what basis (and Mormons at my door have told me to simply read the Mormon books and find out for myself that they are true - not good enough by half) on what basis can we even entertain the legitimacy of the Mormon books? I don’t see it. Whatever Mr. Smith (and I understand that he had his own issues with respect to the law in his day) had written, what makes him any different from any other 19th century “prophet” (like the founder of Seventh Day Adventism) who sought to change the Tradition given to the Saints long ago?

In other words, Mormonism (and its other 19th century associates) are only valid, as I see it, if one accepts their internal a priori’s that cannot be verified “from the outside.”

I can verify the claims of the Catholic Church from the outside, which is why I choose to remain on the “inside.” One doesn’t have to - one may reject the Catholic Church, to be sure.

So for me the question you raise about which of the sects to join comes down to the faith that was once held by all Christians from the beginning and everywhere, to paraphrase St Vincent of Lerins. Sects have existed from the beginning and they have ALL maintained they were the true church. Only the Catholic/Orthodox Church can claim the direct connection with the Saviour (and this is two-thirds of all Christian believers today).

That’s how I and many others see it. I don’t know why you don’t see it that way - but then again we respect our religious commitments and admire religious zeal for the Lord.

Alex

 

[Returning_Home]

First, please don’t put your response into the same box as my words you’re addressing because that makes it much harder to go point by point. Thanks in advance.

Just a question…would you bar Adoph Hitler from the Presence? Those Mormons that were baptized by proxy for Adoph Hitler did in the hopes that whatever process may occur in the “here after” to bring about the salvation and eternal life of man, Adoph Hitler has the resources and opportunity available to him to find peace and forgiveness. To with hold that from him becasue of his deep evil…would be evil too. I do not believe that baptism for the dead accomplishes anything…no more than baptism for the living in my beliefs…but I do not begrudge those with different beliefs in the matter in performing those rites and rituals THEY BELIEVE will make a difference in the “here after.”

Of course not; that’s way above my pay grade. You’re assuming that I have much more say in this than I actually do, which is about nothing in the grand scheme of things. Adolph Hitler did that to himself; I had nothing to do with it, but the fact that I had an untold number of relatives perish in the camps fosters no love in my heart for him.

Yes, I know why Mormons erroneously perform proxy baptisms for the dead. What they believe is irrelevant when it’s based on no Biblical evidence but rather a verse taken well out of context.

I’m glad that you’re politically correct and all, but the Bible says that the Gospel itself is offensive and that we should speak in its defense (Phil 1:17). You’re giving Mormonism much more credit than it deserves and that luke-warm take on it allows it to thrive in the vacuum of not condemning it for the false gospel that it is.

While I can find no mention of Lavey being raised Catholic, it’s not hard to see that his Satanic Mass is a bastardization and a parody of the RCC’s Mass. If God were working through him, it doesn’t make much sense that he’d do so with a naked woman pretending to be an altar as the backdrop.

How the Light works through individuals is God’s Business…not mine…“the Spirit goes where it will”…just like the wind…the Spirit of God cannot be controlled…nor can where He goes be dictated nor determined by humanity.

I agree, but this sounds as if it borders more on New Age nonsense than Christianity.

If I made reference to YOU directly indicating I “know something about you”…I apologize…YOU PERSONALLY was not necessarily the subject of my post…again if I indicated otherwise, I am sorry.

No worries there; it simply sounded as if you were saying that I, as a Catholic, was being a hypocrite in condemning Mormonism. That’s the reason I pointed out that just because I indentify as Catholic doesn’t mean that I’m in 100% theological lockstep with Rome. In fact, a couple hundred years ago, I would’ve been executed had I not renounced my blasphemous views.

The “Jesus” of the BoM is the same Christ you and I believe in…just viewed differently…understood…differently… .and while in my estimation…and obviously yours…the Mormon view is “lacking”…but it IS the Christ whom Mormons seek…they MAY seek Him through errant views and beliefs…but it IS HIM WHOM they seek.

I agree they seek Christ, but the problem is that they’re not gonna find him through the lens of Joseph Smith and modern Mormonism. Why? Because the jesus (small j) wants Mormons to become gods like God, something the Bible and even the BOM say nothing about. In fact, the god of the BOM is an eternal spirit who was, is, and will be eternally the same. This is in direct conflict with what Mormonism today teaches, that he was once a man and that he became a god.

Nor do I which is the reason he left us his Word in the Bible. Our choices, however, are ours alone to make.

Friend, I had the violence you do to yourself by your angry harsh words in mind…not any violence you’d do to me. I was “thinking out loud” that “violence” is not only physical…but can be verbal and spiritual…and those that engage in it…hurt themselves more than they do the ones to whom the violence is directed at.

I’m sorry that I’m not cherubic in my take of a false gospel. If you’re so fond of Mormonism, you don’t have far to go to join up. That is, if you’re not already.

[/QUOTE]

 

[Returning_Home]

If YOU were to beat me up…my wounds would heal in just a matter of days and I would go on with my life…would yours heal so quickly? This is not an accusation…this is more rhetorical in nature.

Come now, this has never come to blows that I’m aware of, though I have been threatened with bodily hard by Mormons who aren’t ready to hear the facts about their religion. Let’s just say that the Smith who protects my family and me isn’t Joseph Smith.

God touches those whom He touches…and any…ANY who call upon Him…even those in ignorance as to His “true nature”…He will hear and answer…which I am very thankful for…who among any of us knows the whole correct nature of God? In this world…we “see through a glass darkly…but then face to face I will know…”…Mormons may IMO not see God as “clearly” as I…but they don’t have to…it is GOD WHO SEES AND HEARS THEM and knows their hearts much better than I do.

I agree here, too, and I’ve never said that God is 100% absent from the lives of Mormons, only from Mormonism as a religion. Taking one for the other, however, is their mistake, not mine.

Since the BOM is purported to be a historical account of people who lived, thrived, and died, why hasn’t one single bit of evidence to confirm their existance ever been found anywhere? If the BOM is a lie, then everything based on it falls. And if Mormonism is correct, can you please explain to me the reason that Smith couldn’t ever once be accurate?

 

[Catholic20064]

I joined the Mormon Church at 19 and stayed in the church until I was 52. I read the Book of Mormon several times. I actually found the Book of Mormon stories to be extremely uplifting. The visit of Jesus to the Nephites right after his death seemed especially touching to me. Unfortunately, I could not square real history with Book of Mormon history. I can understand why non-members are sometimes converted to Mormonism by reading it.

 

[Publisher]

I’m sorry that I’m not cherubic in my take of a false gospel. If you’re so fond of Mormonism, you don’t have far to go to join up. That is, if you’re not already.

What rites and rituals Mormons celebrate IS important for them…just as your rites and rituals performed in your tradition are important for you. I may disagree with both of you…but I believe your hearts are in the right place…you each seek to please God.

Again…a reference to me may being Mormon…just not telling anyone…wouldn’t that be dishonest? Are you suggesting that because I do not necessarily post in a “forceful…angry or rude” manner concerning Mormons…that I in fact must be one?

As before…thank you friend for the compliment.

Not sure how to post separate boxes…I’m not much of a “nerd” when it comes to computers.

 

[xixxvmcm85]

I, xixxvmcm85, having been born of goodly parents, therefore I was inculcated from a young age to read as my forebearers did, yea, even a verse a night before kneeling down to thank my Heavenly Father “for this lovely day”.

I used to not fancy doing so, having not the longstanding patience to endure repetitious language, yea, language that is longwinded, yea, that which causes sores to fester in the mouth, yea, even those one feigns in order to be relieved of one’s 5AM duty to head off to Seminary.

But it came to pass that I matured in my age and remembered what my mother would always say while slaving over a hot bowl of red water which would eventually become for us the jello of life: “Whatsoever thing ye shall ask in faith believing that ye shall receive in the name of Christ, ye shall receive it.”

Verily, verily I took this to heart and immediately went off unto my quarters to supplicate to the Lord. I begged for either the grace to continue or the mercy of deliverance!

And it came to pass that the school year ended shortly thereafter. My petition was granted. My 5AM plight was ended and lo, I beheld the glory of never having to memorize another 19th century fake KJVism until I would find myself a stranger in the land of the MTC.

And now I bid unto you all, farewell. I soon go to rest in the paradise of LazyBoy, until my socks and shoes shall again reunite, and I am brought forth triumphant out of the chair, to meet the missionaries sent to fetch me, and drag me back kicking and screaming.

Last week, my family went to Hersey Park with my aunt. At the hotel room we were staying at, I found the Book of Mormon in a drawer and gave it a look that night. As to how it got there, I don’t know (I know about the Gideons but I don’t think they do Books of Mormon), but that is besides the point.

Let me guess… Marriot hotel?