Mormonism....Why?

[IvanKaramozov]

This isin’t intended to be an insult, but why in the world would, on a rational evaluation of the evidence, anyone come to believe that Mormonism has any bearing in truth?

 

[BeluvdLily]

I have wondered this a lot myself. I do not mean to be offensive in any way but I do not understand what there is that would convince anyone this is the truth.

Okay, I guess I’ve pretty much repeated the original post, lol, but seriously this does cross my mind. It just sounds very “made up” to me.

Amie

 

[LaMar]

This isin’t intended to be an insult, but why in the world would, on a rational evaluation of the evidence, anyone come to believe that Mormonism has any bearing in truth?

Mormonism is as much an ethnicity as it is a religion. We (Mormons) have a common history that included our own religious state (Deseret). It is its own tradition, the same way Italian Catholics and German Jews have their own tradition.

In that regard the “truth” of Mormonism is irrelevant. I personally don’t see Joseph Smith (a con-man) and his numerous conflicting stories as any more a problem than the historical non-existence of a literary characters named Jesus, Moses or Abraham. Joseph Smith, at least, actually existed as a historical character. There’s no evidence that there was any such character as Jesus Christ who ever existed. He was just a character in a story written by Saul of Tarsus.

Ultimately, it’s a tradition that goes back in my family for hundreds of years. I don’t believe in a literal God and in that regard I’d be comparable to a lot of my catholic friends. It’s about a framework to do good works and concentrate on building community, rather than pretending a lot of middle-eastern mythology and unproven theories about life after death are “true”. The important thing for me is concentrating on building a better world in the here and now. Mormonism provides me an avenue for that, in the same way the Catholic framework surely provides millions of adherents of your faith the same opportunities.

 

[PaulDupre]

LaMar,
It’s interesting that you say that. When I heard Mormons testify that the church was “true”, I often got the impression that what they were really saying is “I like my life as a Mormon. My friends here at the ward are nice and my whole family is LDS so I’m gonna stick around”.

What do you think?

Paul

 

[IvanKaramozov]

Mormonism is as much an ethnicity as it is a religion. We (Mormons) have a common history that included our own religious state (Deseret). It is its own tradition, the same way Italian Catholics and German Jews have their own tradition.

In that regard the “truth” of Mormonism is irrelevant. I personally don’t see Joseph Smith (a con-man) and his numerous conflicting stories as any more a problem than the historical non-existence of a literary characters named Jesus, Moses or Abraham. Joseph Smith, at least, actually existed as a historical character. There’s no evidence that there was any such character as Jesus Christ who ever existed. He was just a character in a story written by Saul of Tarsus.

Ultimately, it’s a tradition that goes back in my family for hundreds of years. I don’t believe in a literal God and in that regard I’d be comparable to a lot of my catholic friends. It’s about a framework to do good works and concentrate on building community, rather than pretending a lot of middle-eastern mythology and unproven theories about life after death are “true”. The important thing for me is concentrating on building a better world in the here and now. Mormonism provides me an avenue for that, in the same way the Catholic framework surely provides millions of adherents of your faith the same opportunities.

That’s a very clear and honest response, I should have been more clear, I understand why family/community ties could prompt one to stay mormon, or why emotional factors, such as latino’s likeing it’s teachings on family’s, could induce one to join, but what utterly flatters me is why anyone would say they converted to Mormonism because of rational discourse.

Your point about historical accuracy is well taken, I think the difference is that these are often overlooked as their events are so distant.

 

[LaMar]

LaMar,
It’s interesting that you say that. When I heard Mormons testify that the church was “true”, I often got the impression that what they were really saying is “I like my life as a Mormon. My friends here at the ward are nice and my whole family is LDS so I’m gonna stick around”.

What do you think?

Paul

I think that’s “true” (LOL!) in many cases, particularly in Utah.

I’m often simultaneously amused and horrified by people bringing their young children to the microphone to bear testimony which goes “I know this church is true”. I don’t know if you experienced that where you attended, but it happens often in my parents’ ward. Of course a five-year old girl doesn’t know anything of the sort. When she grows up though, she’ll have an emotional attachment to that phrase and it will tie her into home and family, like you point out above.

There are true believers in all facets of religious and cultural life. Mormonism certainly has its share.

 

[PaulDupre]

I’m often simultaneously amused and horrified by people bringing their young children to the microphone to bear testimony which goes “I know this church is true”. I don’t know if you experienced that where you attended, but it happens often in my parents’ ward. Of course a five-year old girl doesn’t know anything of the sort.

It happened at F&T Meeting (aka Open Mike Sunday) in every ward I ever belonged to in the U.S. I always found it particularly silly. I never saw it in Taiwan, though. The Chinese have more sense, I guess. Maybe that’s why the convert retention rate there is about 5%.

Paul

 

[LaMar]

That’s a very clear and honest response, I should have been more clear, I understand why family/community ties could prompt one to stay mormon, or why emotional factors, such as latino’s likeing it’s teachings on family’s, could induce one to join, but what utterly flatters me is why anyone would say they converted to Mormonism because of rational discourse.

Your point about historical accuracy is well taken, I think the difference is that these are often overlooked as their events are so distant.

I think you’re right on all counts.

Religion to me is not about making sense, or studying history, or anything like that. It’s about tradition, making the lives of other people a little bit better, and maybe pondering the unexplainable in the process. My tradition isn’t better than anyone else’s (despite what my fellow Mormons often like to claim) but it’s mine and I’m fairly comfortable with it.

 

[belgianwaffles9]

I personally don’t see Joseph Smith (a con-man) and his numerous conflicting stories as any more a problem than the historical non-existence of a literary characters named Jesus, Moses or Abraham. Joseph Smith, at least, actually existed as a historical character. There’s no evidence that there was any such character as Jesus Christ who ever existed. He was just a character in a story written by Saul of Tarsus.

What history books are you reading, again? Because Jesus’ existance is a well-documented historical fact. His existence is attested to by many non-Christian sources, including Jewish and Roman historians, as well as other. Check your history.

 

[IvanKaramozov]

What history books are you reading, again? Because Jesus’ existance is a well-documented historical fact. His existence is attested to by many non-Christian sources, including Jewish and Roman historians, as well as other. Check your history.

I know of a Jew who while writting for the Romans after the rebellion, other than that, who?

 

[PaulDupre]

I know of a Jew who while writting for the Romans after the rebellion, other than that, who?

Roman historian Tacitus. In his Annals he reports how Nero put the blame for his burning of Rome on the Christians:

Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.

• Tacitus, Annals 15.44, emphasis mine.

 

[LaMar]

What history books are you reading, again? Because Jesus’ existance is a well-documented historical fact. His existence is attested to by many non-Christian sources, including Jewish and Roman historians, as well as other. Check your history.

While I respect your own beliefs and the conclusions you’ve come to, I’m afraid I’ll have to agree to differ with you on this point.

I’ve known a fair number of Secular Catholics over the years (and as a Secular Mormon I’ve had great conversations with more than a few) who share my views on the matter. I doubt there are many here on this forum, and I’m not here to bash you guys or cause you to question your own interpretations. It’s not that I’m shy about any of it, but just a question of good manners. (I notice you have your share of arrogant anti-Catholics running around here…I don’t think anything I would have to offer would be nearly as entertaining as their antics anyway).

If you’re really interested in a decent description of how I see the historicity of the New Testament, you can catch a popular documentary called The God That Wasn’t There. It should be available on Netflix or Blockbuster.

Of course, I could be wrong. Maybe there’s some evidence. Even if there were though, I wouldn’t change the way I see the world. I like Jesus and value him as a literary character, so I don’t think it matters whether he actually did any of the stuff Saul said he did. The underlying message is what’s important to me.

 

[TOmNossor]

This isin’t intended to be an insult, but why in the world would, on a rational evaluation of the evidence, anyone come to believe that Mormonism has any bearing in truth?

It is my sincere and considered opinion that the reason that you would ask this question is that you have not been exposed to the full evidentiary picture concerning Mormonism. As this page of this thread shows:
http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=224052&page=14
Some of the better informed voices on this message board are unaware of very important aspect of LDS thought and unwilling to even follow a link to inform themselves before passing judgment.
Add to these voices folks like PaulDupre and LaMar who are willing to mock that which LDS consider sacred, and this becomes quite a hostile environment for assessing the strength of the evidentiary case for the CoJCoLDS.

This is why you ask the question you ask IMO.

I am a former Catholic. I believe the evidence indicates that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is more likely to be God’s church on Earth than the Catholic Church.
I believe the evidence supports an apostasy and a restoration.
I believe the BOM is far better explained within a CoJCoLDS ancient/divine record than within a Catholic ??? framework.
I believe there are numerous other areas in which the CoJCoLDS wins the evidentiary debate over the Catholic Church and that this is sufficient to overcome areas where the CoJCoLDS looses the EVIDENTIARY debate (because not all battles are won by the CoJCoLDS when assessing evidence).

Anyway, the reason LDS such as myself believe that the CoJCoLDS survives a “rational evaluation” is because it does. At the very least the case is a lot more balanced than it might appear amid the mocking and misinformed.

Charity, TOm

 

[thomasf]

First, I’d like to say it is refreshing to find a mormon willing to take an honest look at his religion and admit why he stays there. Even if his views on Jesus are plain wrong. Thanks.

I considered mormonism for a while when I was out of the church. One of my favorite authors is a mormon, and I strayed from reading his fiction to reading his religious fiction. It was very appealing to me, very tight nit and close families and communities. People seemed happy, had a place in life, etc. It is very welcoming and I found myself drawn to it.

But then when I did an honest evaluation of the religion and started to learn what they believe below that first layer, and below the next layer, etc. That’s when it all came to light to me that the whole thing wasn’t what I thought it was. And I realized I couldn’t be in that.

From a personal viewpoint, coming from a cradle catholic family, mormonism seemed very familiar. It’s a culture within the greater culture, there are a lot of rituals and family aspects to it. It seemed like catholicism taken to a ‘tighter’ step, on the surface. But when I looked at it seriously, it just wasn’t true.

Ironically, when I went through this I had a close friend who was warning me away from it. Flash forward 5 years and that same friend converted to mormonism so he could marry his wife. At first he was just going to ‘play along’ for her sake. But soon he was in full bore. He confided to me last summer that he didn’t believe his religion was true completely, and he didn’t believe a lot of it. But he likes being in it, he likes the community, and he thinks it is a great place to raise a family. So he decided to stay.

Frankly, I think this is what a lot of mormons think. Most just won’t admit it.

 

[why_me]

Ironically, when I went through this I had a close friend who was warning me away from it. Flash forward 5 years and that same friend converted to mormonism so he could marry his wife. At first he was just going to ‘play along’ for her sake. But soon he was in full bore. He confided to me last summer that he didn’t believe his religion was true completely, and he didn’t believe a lot of it. But he likes being in it, he likes the community, and he thinks it is a great place to raise a family. So he decided to stay.

Frankly, I think this is what a lot of mormons think. Most just won’t admit it.

How many people actually do believe their religion to be true completely in general? Not very many. We live in cynical times and it is very easy to begin to disbelieve and pick and choose what to believe and what not to believe. The Pew Center’s recent research seems to support the idea that one’s religion isn’t very important anymore.

Have you told you friend that he is a true bore these days?

 

[why_me]

As to why people become mormon or choose to stay mormon, I would say it is because for many the holy ghost has testified to them of its truthfulness. Very few can stay mormon for very long without such a testimony. The mormon faith is not a faith for just sunday worship. It is a way of life. No alcohol, no coffee, no sex (outside of marriage), no porn, good living, moral living, and a lifestyle that tends to be just the opposite of the lifestyle of the world, if one lives in the mormon faith and yet, lives in the world.

But people stay in the faith because the book of mormon has not been proven false and because people believe that the LDS church is true.

 

[J_C]

Anyway, the reason LDS such as myself believe that the CoJCoLDS survives a “rational evaluation” is because it does. At the very least the case is a lot more balanced than it might appear amid the mocking and misinformed.

Charity, TOm

making a case for any particular religion isn’t very hard when the jury has itchy ears. A decent apologist from any chrisitian religion can make a strong sounding case and if the listener is ready to make a change then that case may be convincing. That doesnt’ mean the argument hold water but only that the convert was ready to hear the argument and be convinced.

 

[po18guy]

…the historical non-existence of a literary characters named Jesus, Moses or Abraham. Joseph Smith, at least, actually existed as a historical character. There’s no evidence that there was any such character as Jesus Christ who ever existed. He was just a character in a story written by Saul of Tarsus.

Uh, you might check into the writings of a certain Roman named Pliny the Younger. He documented Jesus. Christ was also written of in the Hebrew world, at least according to Michael Medved, a devout non-Catholic.

Christ’s peace.

 

[J_C]

As to why people become mormon or choose to stay mormon, I would say it is because for many the holy ghost has testified to them of its truthfulness. Very few can stay mormon for very long without such a testimony. The mormon faith is not a faith for just sunday worship. It is a way of life. No alcohol, no coffee, no sex (outside of marriage), no porn, good living, moral living, and a lifestyle that tends to be just the opposite of the lifestyle of the world, if one lives in the mormon faith and yet, lives in the world.

But people stay in the faith because the book of mormon has not been proven false and because people believe that the LDS church is true.

i believe the same is true of every religion to some extent. The holiness issues you mention are esepecially true of the catholic faith which is a hard religion to practice honestly and fully. As you know not all mormons practice their faith fully and honestly, and some are indifferent to the demands made upon them to keep sacred teh teacchings about communion and the other sacraments.

but i am very intrigued by this witness of the Holy Ghost, because i am confirmed by an internal witness which I am convinced is that of the Holy Ghost telling me that not only is christianity true, but that the Catholic faith is the fullest form of it. I could never waiver from this conviction because it is so powerful for me, and yet I am presented with others who make the same statement about religions that are very different and antagonistic towards mine. Is it possible the same Holy Ghost is giving various convictions?

 

[LaMar]

It is my sincere and considered opinion that the reason that you would ask this question is that you have not been exposed to the full evidentiary picture concerning Mormonism. As this page of this thread shows:
http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=224052&page=14
Some of the better informed voices on this message board are unaware of very important aspect of LDS thought and unwilling to even follow a link to inform themselves before passing judgment.
Add to these voices folks like PaulDupre and LaMar who are willing to mock that which LDS consider sacred, and this becomes quite a hostile environment for assessing the strength of the evidentiary case for the CoJCoLDS.

Hi TOm,

First of all, I’m sorry to hear your feelings were hurt by something I wrote. I haven’t seen PaulDupre mock anything that any Mormon considers sacred. He’s been very circumspect in all the articles I read.

I once had a friend who converted from Mormonism to Judaism. He converted for a chick, but eventually he really got into the religion. He started holding to all the ceremonies and reading all sorts of Zionist magazines, keeping a kosher house, speaking Hebrew, and after about a year he ended up so devout that he drove his (shebrew) wife a little bit crazy. This is called “convert’s zeal”, or so I’m told. Like my college pal, who became more Jewish than any of the local Jews, I’m sure you’re a much better Mormon than I ever will be, and a much more observant Mormon than any member of my (descended from the Nauvoo days) family. Nothing wrong with that.

I have never seen any evidence to support the story of Lehi and family as anything more than a literary excursion. I don’t personally believe that Native American/First Nations peoples are descended from this Jewish family who came across the Atlantic on a homemade boat, built with wood they somehow found in treeless Arabia. It all seems a little bit silly to me. Same with the story about a fellow who died but came back to life three days later.

Do our differences really matter? I don’t think they matter as much as we might assume. What really matters is the fact that we sit together on Sunday morning and pass the sacrament tray back and forth. After church we go out and have ice cream with our Catholic friends who just went to mass and we all enjoy life.

We all as human beings commune with the unknowable, and we all approach the divine in our own way. That’s as I think it should be.

Take Care,

LaMar