Mormonism lack of evidence.

  • Thread starter Thread starter thephilosopher6
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
pnewton said:
Absence of evidence is not proof of anything. It is only evidence when such absence should not exist. In the case of Joseph Smith, the evidence is very strong. We should have, we should have know, there should be a tradition, of the events of that era, prior to Joseph Smith drawing his first breath. We should have known of this "reformed Egyptian language, prior to 1830. There is as much evidence of its existence as there is of Klingon or Elvish.

Then you have the alleged Gold Plates, the most sacred of all artifacts, except, we don’t have them. There is nothing at all, in terms of evidence, except for witness testimony from a couple of people. Now this sort of testimony can be powerful, when witnessed by the death of martyrdom, unlike the death of Joseph Smith, who died in a gun battle during an attempted escape, unlike Brigham Young who fled religious persecution, only to inflict religious persecution on others.
Click to expand...
Exactly! Why won’t the LDS do archeological excavation of the sites mentioned in the BoM? If the BoM is true, why not prove it?
 
Marie5890 said:
By your screen name, Philosopher, it’s clear that you are, and appreciate thinking thru things as part of your journey in coming to see and understand truth.

Philosophy isn’t something that is part of LDS thinking, however, for whatever reason. Nor do they have a need or a desire to look to the sciences as a part of the journey into see and coming to understand truth. That is a general statement on my part, however.

It’s my understanding that in the late 90’s, early 2000’s, there was a BYU DNA project (sorry don’t know the name of it) that studied the DNA of those who were considered decedents of the group of people in the Book of Mormon known as “Lamanites”.

These groups of people were Native Americans, both from North and South America, the Polynesians. At the time, within the LDS community, (well at least at BYU) they were referred to as the Lamanite members. In fact, there was a BYU performing group known as the “Lamanite Generation” whose members were made up of Native Americans, Latinos, and Polynesians. They went around the world with their cultural dances and music etc.

As time went by with this project, it became clear thru DNA studies that the above mentioned groups did not decend from Israel, but rather Asia, the group’s name was changed to “Living Legends” and the emphasis that the Book of Mormon was a historical record, de-emphasised.

Now the BoM is held up and said to be more of a spiritual record.

That was a 180 degree shift on the BoM from when I was at BYU (I had friends in the “Lamanite Generation” ) and from Ezra T Benson’s mantra that the “Book of Mormon was the most correct book on the planet” and his strong emphasis in using it.

Im not sure how the LDS Church deals with scientific discoveries that clash with it’s belief systems, or how they encourage their people to deal with it. But there does seem to be an encouraging of a “blind faith” when science and faith collide and an embracing of their testimonies that is seen as given to them by the Holy Spirit.

So evidence doesn’t really matter much to them. Their testimonies trump that.
Click to expand...
Mormonism is the antithesis of reason and philosophy.
 
thephilosopher6 said:
Mormonism is the antithesis of reason and philosophy.
Click to expand...
Ya think?

Ok I’m being facetious. I’ve lived among the LDS most of my adult live, even a few years in Utah while in college. I still do not understand how they can ignore the evidence out there proving the BoM can’t be true and therefore the basis of the LDS is false. I once asked a co-worker why he remained in the LDS church. His answer was surprisingly honest. He loves his wife, she believes she can’t get to heaven without an LDS husband, and he doesn’t want to hurt her. So he goes week after week, fulfilling his callings, but he doesn’t believe. Another male co-worker explained his wife converted and they attending on Sundays because they live in a hugely LDS population and they want their kids to have opportunities in school and other activities. He doesn’t believe either.
 
Horton said:
Ya think?

Ok I’m being facetious. I’ve lived among the LDS most of my adult live, even a few years in Utah while in college. I still do not understand how they can ignore the evidence out there proving the BoM can’t be true and therefore the basis of the LDS is false. I once asked a co-worker why he remained in the LDS church. His answer was surprisingly honest. He loves his wife, she believes she can’t get to heaven without an LDS husband, and he doesn’t want to hurt her. So he goes week after week, fulfilling his callings, but he doesn’t believe. Another male co-worker explained his wife converted and they attending on Sundays because they live in a hugely LDS population and they want their kids to have opportunities in school and other activities. He doesn’t believe either.
Click to expand...
Wow. Those must be bad situations to be in. I wonder what exactly they do believe.
 
superwimp said:
I have looked and all I could find was a printers copy of the witness testimony held by the Community of Christ. There may have been one at one time, and there may not have been. All we have now is a testimony in the BOM similar to the one on the printers copy with the printed names of the people who it is claimed signed the testimony.
Click to expand...
Royal Skousen says that both the 3 witness statement and the 8 witness statement were written by Joseph Smith although Joseph Smith Histories 1832-1844 states that Oliver Cowdery was the likely author.

timesandseasons.org/harchive/2012/06/who-authored-the-three-witness-statement/

timesandseasons.org/harchive/2012/06/who-authored-the-eight-witness-statement/
 
Horton said:
Ya think?

Ok I’m being facetious. I’ve lived among the LDS most of my adult live, even a few years in Utah while in college. I still do not understand how they can ignore the evidence out there proving the BoM can’t be true and therefore the basis of the LDS is false.** I once asked a co-worker why he remained in the LDS church. His answer was surprisingly honest. He loves his wife, she believes she can’t get to heaven without an LDS husband, and he doesn’t want to hurt her. So he goes week after week, fulfilling his callings, but he doesn’t believe. Another male co-worker explained his wife converted and they attending on Sundays because they live in a hugely LDS population and they want their kids to have opportunities in school and other activities. He doesn’t believe either.**
Click to expand...
This is becoming more common. Especially the one with the husband remaining for the sake of his wife and marriage.

There is also Mormons who self-identify as New Order Mormons. They remain for cultural and family reasons, not so much because they believe that the LDS is the Christ’s church.
 
thephilosopher6 said:
  • I in no way intend to offend or upset members of the LDS community. I only intend to help create dialogue and understanding between members of mainstream Christianity (Catholic, Orthodox and Protestants) with members of Mormonism and other heterodox “Christian” movements (Jehovah Witness, Christian Science etc.) -
The Book of Mormon contains many stories about events that happened in the Americas from a period roughly in-between 2500BC to 400AD. Many of the tale’s in the Book of Mormon include accounts of great kingdoms or large battles and wars between different groups. They even include an account that Jesus visited America. The problem with these tale’s is that there is no archeological evidence for them. They also directly contradict many of the things historians know about the history of civilization in pre-Columbian America.

There is also lack of evidence for such things as the Golden Plates, where the accounts of the Book of Mormon supposedly came from. No one but a very small handful of people saw them. And their accounts are questionable. Also, we have things such as the “Book of Abraham”, an ancient Egyptian papyri which Joseph Smith claimed to be additional accounts of Abrahams journeys between Canaan and Egypt. Yet, when the papyri for the Book of Abraham was rediscovered, many scholars concluded that hieroglyphics contained on it depict nothing more but embalming ceremony’s preformed by an Egyptian god.

Mormonism seems to be based on blind faith. Now, Christianity does put importance on faith. But not on blind faith. Christianity does have something to back its faith up, which would be the resurrection of Christ. As Paul says, "If Christ is not raised, then your faith is futile and you are still in your sins." - 1 Corinthians 15:17 Christianity is based on the resurrection. Mormonism is based only on the word of Joseph Smith. A man who came 1800 years after Christ yet claimed to know more about Christ than anyone did.

So, how do you continue to be Mormon when facts and reality simply don’t seem to be in your favor? I am genuinely curious.

Is Mormonism nothing but a bunch of tale’s with no evidence whatsoever and must be accepted with blind faith and gullibility?
Click to expand...
As Jesus said in Matthew 24:10-11
And then many will fall away; people will betray one another and hate one another.
Many false prophets will arise; they will deceive many,
 
Memaw said:
And I wonder if they are concerned about what their children grow up believing!! God Bless, Memaw
Click to expand...
My sons think Mormonism is quickly moving toward becoming more of a Mason-like group. Rituals, temples and exclusive memberships and “religious” beliefs that focus on activities for the family.
 
RebeccaJ said:
I don’t know the ratio of those that agree and those that don’t. In ex Mormon forums that are dominated by now-atheists, I’d say anecdotally, most do not agree Jesus was a real person. I venture a guess that Jane Doe is familiar with the now-atheist, once-Mormon, group.

But here we are on a Catholc forum where once-Mormons are now Catholic. Obviously the sarcasm doesn’t fit to the audience. But it shows the attitude of Mormons who I view as being trained quite efficiently to become atheists.

There is the difficulty, of the Jesus Mormonism teaches not being a real person but in my personal experience, the problem is more with their concept of the Father. In my atheist years I viewed Jesus as a real person but along the lines of an exceptional example of humanism. I didn’t view him as divine but that came a lot from what I was taught as a Mormon. It’s just one small step from the Mormon concept of Jesus to not agreeing that Jesus is divinity.

In addition I view Joseph Smith as a closet atheist. Using religion to manipulate people I don’t see that he believed in any religious ideas but rather rejected them entirely during his teens. His new “religion” being a farsical and sarcastic parody of multiple religious beliefs, but mainly of Christianity.
Click to expand...
Our family friend that is now ex-Mormon claims if his church lied to him then all churches lie to their followers. I have heard this type of “reasoning” from other Mormons as well.

I think Mormons are spoon fed for so long many don’t learn to think for themselves. When their structure is removed they completely fall apart.

You are right. If God and Jesus are just better versions of ourselves, what’s the big whoop?
 
thephilosopher6 said:
Wow. Those must be bad situations to be in. I wonder what exactly they do believe.
Click to expand...
The first I’m not sure what he believes. It’s been many years since we worked together. The second I believe is most likely agnostic more than anything.
 
venite_adoremus said:
The LDS had their share of schisms, their own fruit of the Reformation pattern. Before the main body of LDS believers headed west, easily half their pre-1846 number split off. They followed variant prophets including Lyman Wight, James J Strang, Sidney Rigdon, and others.
Click to expand...
There are still Strangites (two denominations or more) and Rigdonites (back down to a single denomination last I heard), and I have visited and been visited by both. Have you met any, Venite Adoremus? I rarely see them even mentioned. Sadly, there numbers are too few and their interest too low (I suspect) to ever post in Catholic Forums, though it would be great if they would.
 
jane_doe said:
Why do I not accept the Catholic claims of being the one True church? Because upon thorough investigation of the Catholic church, her beliefs, and her claims, I find them to be false.
Click to expand...
You are free with your words for someone who so easily feels “insulted” by questions and disagreement.
jane_doe said:
The same answer applies for creedal Christianity in general.
Click to expand...
Your answer is indeed brief, as you said it would be. That’s a comment on your answer not on you personally. But it is so brief as to be uninformative. That statement is intended as a stimulus for further explanation of your views. “False” doesn’t say very much. That’s a comment on the word “false,” not on you. It would be helpful if you could outline a little of the investigation that you did that was thorough, and what specific elements were shown to be false, both in Catholicism and “creedal Christianity” from which I believe you are excluding creedal-holding Mormonism. That statement is more of a request with elaboration, and not an insult on you, your beliefs, the church you attend, or anything or anybody anywhere in the world.
jane_doe said:
Why am I am member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints? Because upon thorough investigation of the LDS church, her beliefs, and her claims, I find them to be True.
Click to expand...
“That’s what they all say.” - Jesus, Paul, Buddha, Muhammad, Joseph Smith.
 
Tarquin said:
You are free with your words for someone who so easily feels “insulted” by questions and disagreement.
Your answer is indeed brief, as you said it would be. That’s a comment on your answer not on you personally. But it is so brief as to be uninformative. That statement is intended as a stimulus for further explanation of your views. “False” doesn’t say very much. That’s a comment on the word “false,” not on you. It would be helpful if you could outline a little of the investigation that you did that was thorough, and what specific elements were shown to be false, both in Catholicism and “creedal Christianity” from which I believe you are excluding creedal-holding Mormonism. That statement is more of a request with elaboration, and not an insult on you, your beliefs, the church you attend, or anything or anybody anywhere in the world.

“That’s what they all say.” - Jesus, Paul, Buddha, Muhammad, Joseph Smith.
Click to expand...
Tarquin, as I said earlier, if you (or anyone else) wants to talk further, feel free to PM me.
 
jane_doe said:
This is a series of questions actually. I’ll answer them, but I’m going to keep my answers brief— I do not wish to offend any of my Catholic hosts here, anger the mods, or start arguments. If you want a more thorough answer, feel free to PM me and I’ll give you my personal email for communicating.

Why do I not accept the Catholic claims of being the one True church? Because upon thorough investigation of the Catholic church, her beliefs, and her claims, I find them to be false. The same answer applies for creedal Christianity in general.

Why am I am member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints? Because upon thorough investigation of the LDS church, her beliefs, and her claims, I find them to be True.
Click to expand...
Your testimony is consistent with the OP’s claim that Mormon belief in their church is based upon blind faith and not empirical evidence. Empirical evidence proves the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham are not what Joseph Smith claimed them to be. Therefore Joseph Smith’s claim of being a prophet is highly suspect.

In keeping with the subject of this thread: How do you keep your testimony when empirical evidence does not support any of Joseph Smith’s verifiable claims?
 
jane_doe said:
Tarquin, as I said earlier, if you (or anyone else) wants to talk further, feel free to PM me.
Click to expand...
A serious question. Why is your stock answer to PM you rather than answering on the open forum? It’s not against forum rules for you to explaine your beliefs. It’s only against the rules to try to convert others. This particular forum is for non Catholics to discuss their beliefs with Catholics.
 
Horton said:
A serious question. Why is your stock answer to PM you rather than answering on the open forum? It’s not against forum rules for you to explaine your beliefs. It’s only against the rules to try to convert others. This particular forum is for non Catholics to discuss their beliefs with Catholics.
Click to expand...
I feel more comfortable and feel that higher quality dialogue happens in a 1 on 1 setting.
 
Horton said:
This particular forum is for non Catholics to discuss their beliefs with Catholics.
Click to expand...
Like me! 😃 In fact because I share a different opinion than most of the CAF members I can grow spiritually and be more well rounded in my faith. (Of course I can’t speak on behalf of the others with different beliefs. This is my personal relation with those here on these forums.)
40.png
jane_doe:
I feel more comfortable and feel that higher quality dialogue happens in a 1 on 1 setting.
Click to expand...
As are most people. But I must disagree with you on the quality of dialogue. Though 1v1 conversations are more personal, having a discussion openly with many others doesn’t diminish anything (unless we spam each other with cat pictures, I suppose…)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top