Mormons search the web and find doubt

[LivingWaters7]

If you have never been LDS, no you wouldnt understand. How could you? It’s not part of your personal history or faith journey. How could you relate? In truth, you couldn’t.

If you have never spent hours on Sunday at the ward house in a 3 hour block of meetings, week after week, after month after month after year after year, how could you even begin to understand that what is found on LDS.org (a “new” source of info in terms of it’s 160+ years of teachings) is not what one is taught in those 3 hour blocks of times (and for those of us who attended BYU, and all the religion course required for graduation, never mind firesides and those Tues AM twice month meetings etc.,…There is no way for you to even begin to imagine how LDS.org (again NEW) doesnt reflect the every day in the trenches Mormon experience…

If you havent been there, I can understand why your posts dont reflect the reality of Mormon life…

Exactly.

As I already mentioned, a friend of mine, born and raised LDS, expressed her surprise to me when she attended a fireside by Richard L. Bushman last year and heard about the head in hat method. She had never been taught this, and I know that others had never heard of it. We’re not talking about going to LDS.org and searching “head in hat”, which you obviously must know about before you even enter that phrase into the search, and finding two quotes from 10+ years ago, out of dozens, if not hundreds, discussing the Book of Mormon. We’re talking about what we are taught in Sunday School, 3rd hour, etc. In my time as LDS, this didn’t come up, even when we were studying the Book of Mormon in Sunday School, nor in the Book of Mormon lesson this year in Doctrine and Covenants and Church History class (nor is it mentioned in the manuals, or in any of the pictures the Church puts out showing the translation). Very odd.

mormonthink.com/transbomweb.htm#full

 

[Marie5890]

Exactly.

As I already mentioned, a friend of mine, born and raised LDS, expressed her surprise to me when she attended a fireside by Richard L. Bushman last year and heard about the head in hat method. She had never been taught this, and I know that others had never heard of it. We’re not talking about going to LDS.org and searching “head in hat”, which you obviously must know about before you even enter that phrase into the search, and finding two quotes from 10+ years ago, out of dozens, if not hundreds, discussing the Book of Mormon. We’re talking about what we are taught in Sunday School, 3rd hour, etc. In my time as LDS, this didn’t come up, even when we were studying the Book of Mormon in Sunday School, nor in the Book of Mormon lesson this year in Doctrine and Covenants and Church History class (nor is it mentioned in the manuals, or in any of the pictures the Church puts out showing the translation). Very odd.

mormonthink.com/transbomweb.htm#full

Clearly, it’s not taught in the LDS ward buildings…or LDS homes…

 

[invisible_man]

Exactly.

As I already mentioned, a friend of mine, born and raised LDS, expressed her surprise to me when she attended a fireside by Richard L. Bushman last year and heard about the head in hat method. She had never been taught this, and I know that others had never heard of it. We’re not talking about going to LDS.org and searching “head in hat”, which you obviously must know about before you even enter that phrase into the search, and finding two quotes from 10+ years ago, out of dozens, if not hundreds, discussing the Book of Mormon. We’re talking about what we are taught in Sunday School, 3rd hour, etc. In my time as LDS, this didn’t come up, even when we were studying the Book of Mormon in Sunday School, nor in the Book of Mormon lesson this year in Doctrine and Covenants and Church History class (nor is it mentioned in the manuals, or in any of the pictures the Church puts out showing the translation). Very odd.

mormonthink.com/transbomweb.htm#full

I think that what I am referring to is that when Mormons go to MormonThink they can also go to lds.org to see what the LDS church says about it. And when they do, they will see that it is on their church’s website.I think that it is difficult to decide what should be taught and what shouldn’t. There is always a time consideration. In the past, it must have been taught if it was in their magazine. I am sure that it was taught in class or discussed among Mormons in the past. How much time is the average Sunday School? Probably not much.

However, it makes very little difference if the translation occurred with the head in the hat or by some other means, it doesn’t have much to do if whether the book is true or not. So, what is the problem with Mormons who discover that it was a head in the hat method? What does this have to do with the truthfulness of their church? A better question for Mormons to ask is why isn’t it written about anymore. It becomes a technical issue and not a major issue.

 

[invisible_man]

LDS.org certainly did not exists when I was LDS.

So the history was hidden, at at least whitewashed.

.

The internet is rather new. When was Catholic Answers founded? Or the Vatican site? The internet is new. What does it mean to whitewash history? I have to wonder what Catholics learn in their own religious classes. Are they given a church history lesson or a lesson in their faith and how to become closer to God? I would think the latter. At least I would hope so. What do Catholics learn in their religious classes…I mean the children and the adults. Not RCIA.

 

[Marie5890]

What does it mean to whitewash history?

1white·wash transitive verb \ˈhwīt-ˌwȯsh, ˈwīt-, -ˌwäsh\

Definition of WHITEWASH

1
: to whiten with whitewash
2
a : to gloss over or cover up (as vices or crimes)
b : to exonerate by means of a perfunctory investigation or through biased presentation of data
3
: to hold (an opponent) scoreless in a game or contest
— white·wash·er noun

What I was taught (and what I taught other when I was a SS, or a RS teacher) was not even close to accurate Mormon history.

It was whitewashed (see above definition)

What was always taught when it came to translation of BoM it was with the use of the Urim and Thummim…

 

[Marie5890]

How much time is the average Sunday School? Probably not much.

.

Actually it’s quite extensive over a life time. 50 mins each week, and all attend. Not just kids, but adults. Mormons have a 4 year cycle. So every 4 years, there is a year’s worth of study on LDS Church history.

And when one is an LDS youth, (ie High School years) all LDS youth are enrolled in what is call seminary. Again it’s a 4 year endeavor. Every week for one hour for a school year. One of those years is dedicated to LDS Church history.

And then one is an adult, somewhere in there it’s highly likely that they will be called to some sort of teaching position, whether SS, RS/Priesthood, or called to teach the children or youth (YM or YW) etc etc…

The educations of Mormons in their faith, time wise, is hardly limited. Hardly. Its very extensive, very involved.

And those who attend any of the LDS Church’s higher institution of learning (BYU) get even more.

At BYU-Provo, 14 credit hours (at least when I was there) of religion was required, 4 of those hours having to be on the Book of Mormon itself…

In that sense, Mormons do a “better job” of educating their people in their faith compared to Catholics. (Unfortunately, like I said, they really whitewash, if not down right change, what the truth is)

 

[Marie5890]

I just think that they can go to their church’s website and search for their answers. .

But why doesn’t the LDS Church put it in their official teaching manuals? Why only put it on the web?..

Why havent they put it in their manuals over the years? It was never in any of the manuals I had to teach from, or that I learned from. Why leave it out of the official teaching materials?

 

[LivingWaters7]

I think that what I am referring to is that when Mormons go to MormonThink they can also go to lds.org to see what the LDS church says about it.

The MormonThink page on the Translation of the Book of Mormon contains links to the 2 articles on LDS.org on the matter. Further, the point in my posting the MormonThink website is because I appreciate its presentation of the issue.

However again, what you seem to be ignoring is the simple fact that the difference between you, knowing about the head in hat translation method and going to LDS.org and searching for “head in hat” is that you were aware of this prior to going to LDS.org for more information. I’d venture to say that the vast majority of LDS simply are not aware of it, and wouldn’t search “head in hat”, unless they found out about it from somewhere else. Instead, the typical Latter-day Saint would believe that the translation was done as it is pictured repeatedly by the Church: Joseph Smith intently looking at the plates directly in front of him in the open, like a book. More often than not, that is what the typical LDS member would see the LDS Church as presenting the translation as, and not the two articles from 10+ years ago, among dozens of others.

And when they do, they will see that it is on their church’s website.I think that it is difficult to decide what should be taught and what shouldn’t.

See above as to why your reasoning is fallacious (and has already been addressed).

There is always a time consideration. In the past, it must have been taught if it was in their magazine. I am sure that it was taught in class or discussed among Mormons in the past. How much time is the average Sunday School? Probably not much.

This has already been discussed. How are you “sure” that it was taught in class or discussed among Mormons in the past? How do you know? And if it was taught then (odd that many of my born and raised LDS weren’t aware of it if we follow your reasoning), why not now?

As far as Sunday School, this has already been addressed as well. There are multiple opportunities to discuss the translation of the Book of Mormon. This year lesson 4 was on the matter in the Doctrine and Covenants and Church History Gospel Doctrine class, as one example. It isn’t that complicated or too long to bring up the “head in hat” method in the manual, and there is no logical reason to assume so (especially in a manual that includes in its title “Church History”).

However, it makes very little difference if the translation occurred with the head in the hat or by some other means, it doesn’t have much to do if whether the book is true or not. So, what is the problem with Mormons who discover that it was a head in the hat method? What does this have to do with the truthfulness of their church? A better question for Mormons to ask is why isn’t it written about anymore. It becomes a technical issue and not a major issue.

This is a very typical tactic: diminish the importance of something by the wave of the hand and change the subject.

The problem is not the head in the hat method per se (though separately, it does bring up the issue of why the plates were even necessary in being written, preserved, and revealed, if he didn’t need to read them. Very odd.). See here for more information as to what people are saying is the issue:

mormonthink.com/transbomweb.htm#full

 

[LivingWaters7]

The internet is rather new. When was Catholic Answers founded? Or the Vatican site? The internet is new. What does it mean to whitewash history? I have to wonder what Catholics learn in their own religious classes. Are they given a church history lesson or a lesson in their faith and how to become closer to God? I would think the latter. At least I would hope so. What do Catholics learn in their religious classes…I mean the children and the adults. Not RCIA.

Perhaps you need to demonstrate an equivalent misrepresentation by the Catholic Church. Otherwise you aren’t presenting a valid criticism (further, you seem to heavily rely on your assumptions without actual experience (“I would hope so”, “I would think”, etc), which does not hold substance for those of us with actual, real life experience, whether LDS or Catholic (or both).

 

[invisible_man]

Perhaps you need to demonstrate an equivalent misrepresentation by the Catholic Church. Otherwise you aren’t presenting a valid criticism (further, you seem to heavily rely on your assumptions without actual experience (“I would hope so”, “I would think”, etc), which does not hold substance for those of us with actual, real life experience, whether LDS or Catholic (or both).

I don’t have any misrepresentations. I am just thinking that in most sunday school classes regardless of the faith, history is not the main part of the lesson. If history is used it is for faith promotion I would assume. I am just curious. Anyway, it is interesting that Mormons can find doubt on the web and lose faith. I am sure that it can happen to anyone regardless of faith. When it happens, I am sure that it is a sad event in that person’s life.

 

[LivingWaters7]

I don’t have any misrepresentations. I am just thinking that in most sunday school classes regardless of the faith, history is not the main part of the lesson. If history is used it is for faith promotion I would assume. I am just curious. Anyway, it is interesting that Mormons can find doubt on the web and lose faith. I am sure that it can happen to anyone regardless of faith. When it happens, I am sure that it is a sad event in that person’s life.

I didn’t say that you had any misrepresentation.

See here for the misrepresentation that I am talking about:

mormonthink.com/transbomweb.htm#full

I’m curious, have you ever been LDS or Catholic?

 

[TexanKnight]

I think that what I am referring to is that when Mormons go to MormonThink they can also go to lds.org to see what the LDS church says about it. And when they do, they will see that it is on their church’s website.I think that it is difficult to decide what should be taught and what shouldn’t. There is always a time consideration. In the past, it must have been taught if it was in their magazine. I am sure that it was taught in class or discussed among Mormons in the past. How much time is the average Sunday School? Probably not much.

However, it makes very little difference if the translation occurred with the head in the hat or by some other means, it doesn’t have much to do if whether the book is true or not. So, what is the problem with Mormons who discover that it was a head in the hat method? What does this have to do with the truthfulness of their church? A better question for Mormons to ask is why isn’t it written about anymore. It becomes a technical issue and not a major issue.

sigh. There is no proof the plates ever existed. So, the credibility of js is incredibly important to determine if the lds church is true. The problem is, he has no credibility. Between being a convicted con man, he had 9 versions (at least) of the first vision. He cheated on his wife. He had several different stories about things were translated. Etc etc.

The past is incredibly important to just the veracity of the lds church

 

[TexanKnight]

The internet is rather new. When was Catholic Answers founded? Or the Vatican site? The internet is new. What does it mean to whitewash history? I have to wonder what Catholics learn in their own religious classes. Are they given a church history lesson or a lesson in their faith and how to become closer to God? I would think the latter. At least I would hope so. What do Catholics learn in their religious classes…I mean the children and the adults. Not RCIA.

let me give you an example. When I became Catholic, I was taught, by the Priest, some ugly truths about the inquisition and indulgences, etc. There was no hiding or whitewashing.

I was NEVER told about MMM by Mormons. I found about it after I left the LDS Church, and it was not until fairly recently that the LDS finally admitted some truth about it.

That is just one example. I have seen no attempts by the Catholic Church to whitewash history. I have seen it a lot with the LDS Church

 

[Miriam1947]

The reason the LDS church does not use the picture of Joseph Smith looking into his hat is because that is the way he claimed to find buried treasure. It completely contradicts the reason for the gold plates, the angel moroni, the first, second, third, fourth, etc., visions.

The picture the LDS church puts out about Joseph Smith is in fact a lie and that is what disturbs Mormons when they find out.

 

[TexanKnight]

I don’t have any misrepresentations. I am just thinking that in most sunday school classes regardless of the faith, history is not the main part of the lesson. If history is used it is for faith promotion I would assume. I am just curious. Anyway, it is interesting that Mormons can find doubt on the web and lose faith. I am sure that it can happen to anyone regardless of faith. When it happens, I am sure that it is a sad event in that person’s life.

not true. People lose faith in lds “church” because they find out the lies that have existed for almost 200 years. They see the stuff disproven that js never knew could be disproven.

Like Cumorah.

That does not happen in the Catholic Church, at least not that I have seen

 

[lynnettejane]

not true. People lose faith in lds “church” because they find out the lies that have existed for almost 200 years. They see the stuff disproven that js never knew could be disproven.

Like Cumorah.

That does not happen in the Catholic Church, at least not that I have seen

I think this discussion has run its course, IM is clearly pulling everyone’s chain here and nothing is being achieved, sorry TK, didn’t mean to quote you

 

[TexanKnight]

I think this discussion has run its course, IM is clearly pulling everyone’s chain here and nothing is being achieved, sorry TK, didn’t mean to quote you

lol

its ok

 

[invisible_man]

I think this discussion has run its course, IM is clearly pulling everyone’s chain here and nothing is being achieved, sorry TK, didn’t mean to quote you

I am not pulling anyone’s chain. I am just going by my own experience with lds.org. Somehow there is a disconnect. Information can be found on the Mormon website but this information is not taught in their classes. Seems strange to me. But if Mormons would search their own church’s website, they would get some information on polygamy, multiple first vision accounts, multiple ways the Book of Mormon was translated etc.

the title of the thread is Mormons search the web and find doubt. Why don’t they search their own website?

 

[TexanKnight]

I am not pulling anyone’s chain. I am just going by my own experience with lds.org. Somehow there is a disconnect. Information can be found on the Mormon website but this information is not taught in their classes. Seems strange to me. But if Mormons would search their own church’s website, they would get some information on polygamy, multiple first vision accounts, multiple ways the Book of Mormon was translated etc.

the title of the thread is Mormons search the web and find doubt. Why don’t they search their own website?

why doesn’t who search their own website?

and do not trust LDS.org.

It is not totally honest. They whitewash and minimize the harmful facts

 

[CarolNoel]

let me give you an example. When I became Catholic, I was taught, by the Priest, some ugly truths about the inquisition and indulgences, etc. There was no hiding or whitewashing.

I was NEVER told about MMM by Mormons. I found about it after I left the LDS Church, and it was not until fairly recently that the LDS finally admitted some truth about it.

That is just one example. I have seen no attempts by the Catholic Church to whitewash history. I have seen it a lot with the LDS Church

I was also taught the good, bad, ugly, wonderful about the Catholic Church, and this was in the 1950’s and early 60’s. We learned the history of the Catholic Church and how to live and practice our faith.