Mormons... Seriously.... Why?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MrZetterlund
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MrZetterlund

Guest
I was watching a Mormon documentory about “the Lost Book of Abraham” that Joseph Smith “interprited.” I give it two words:

EPIC. FAIL.

I couldn’t even finish the documentory, it was sooo sad. 😦 Mormons, I’m going to try and be as charitable as I can possibly be about this. Here’s how the story goes:

Once upon a time, Joseph Smith was traveling along and he met a merchant who sold him an ancient piece of Egyptian papyrus that was ten feet long, and he presented to his town as “the Lost Book of Abraham.” whoah… :eek: He claimed it was written in a language called “REVISED EGYPTIAN!” facepalm Now, after I heard this part I looked like this guy > :rotfl: But seriously, revised egyptian. I’m STILL stuck on that. Alright, now then, continuing on:
His congregation asked if he could interprit it, and he said he would. So he recorded the hyraglyphs in his journal, along with the picture which was of a man lying on a table, with another man standing over him with a knife extended over the man on the table. Which Joseph Smith interprited to be an angry Pharroh going after Abraham. Recently, in more advanced society, we happen to have had Joseph Smith’s “Book of Abraham” sitting in a museum. However, this papyre had the head of Pharroh ripped off, along with his hand that was holding the knife. The LDS church took it to Egyptologists to be translated. They replyed saying that it was difficult taking Joseph Smith’s claims seriously, since the picture was actually of the god Horus ressurecting Pharroh. The picture is a popular one in egyptology. They said it was hard to take him seriously because he turned a ressurection into an entirely different story, that being the story of Abraham and the angry Pharroh.
So after the LDS church find out Joseph Smith was completely wrong, they take it back to the museum and say, “It can’t be his, because the one Joseph Smith used was ten feet long.”
I was like… :eek: REALLY? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?
The hyroglyphs on the papyre matched the ones recorded in his journal, and if Joseph Smith had no problems ripping the head and hand off of Horus then I’m sure he’d have no problem ripping a few feet off of the scroll! (Not to meantion it’s been through a fire.)
This is one of the points that Mormons complain that the “anti-Mormon” documentory didn’t touch on; whether or not the papyre in the museum was the same one Joseph Smith used. Mormons obcuse the video of being “anti-Mormon,” but the video doesn’t display any bias, and even shows the LDS church the benefit of the doubt throughout the documentory. The video is made to allow the viewer to decide for themselves. Here’s the film if you’re interested:

youtube.com/watch?v=hcyzkd_m6KE
 
You wrote: “I’m going to try and be as charitable as I can”

This starts out with a lie does it not? It can be seen as you get into the first sentence.

Personally that’s as far as I read. I see no reason to continue reading. In this I know I will find common ground with the LDS here.

I hope you killed your own post here…

My suggestion would be to look deep into your heart and pray often
In Christ

www.utahmission.com
 
I read the entire post, because I wanted to know what was said, regardless of whether it is charitable 🙂

I think you are spot on. Highly suspicious if you ask me.

Here is neat link on when different religions were founded.

catholic.com/thisrock/1997/9701drag.asp
 
Its the silly emoticons that take away the charity part of the statement. You cannot have both. I could not get past that to read it either.
 
Yeah the rolling on floor laughing emoticon is a little much.

But I am watching the documentary and am struggling to find how Mormons defend their faith.

For example. Imagine if one, two or even all 11 apostles that were martyred, had just before they died, recanted and said “Okay, okay, we did not see Jesus resurrected.” Would this have changed Christianity? Or would followers simply have said, “They only said that because they were facing death. They really did see Jesus resurrected.”

To me, this is the same as the Book of Abraham that Joseph Smith translated. I mean, they have the scrolls, or parts of them. The pictures match up.

Also, someone said in the show, “Why would Egyptians put a scroll written by Abraham in with a mummy?”

A defender of Mormonism claims that “Joseph Smith sought revelation from the Lord concerning them [the Egyptian papyri] and received in that process the book of Abraham. He might then have searched through the papyri in his possession to find illustrations similar to those he had learned by revelation.” Michael D Rhodes, Brigham Young University.

This seems highly unlikely, but I suppose anything is possible. (emoticon excluded)
 
Chessmane,
I don’t feel any need to “defend” my faith, although I have certainly tried to “explain” my faith.

I suppose you realize that Egyptian scholars also discount the entire story of Joseph in Egypt and the seven years of famine. Just because “they” say it couldn’t possibly be so, does not mean that it couldn’t possible be so. It merely means they have not found conclusive evidence they trust to substantiate something from antiquity. For me, it’s a case of “so what?” I would never expect them to find conclusive evidence, as God does not work that way, nor do I wish that He would. The purest source of spiritual knowledge is the direct source–the Holy Spirit, writing in the heart with an undeniable witness.
 
There is no validity to many of the claims of Mormonism. This is not a matter of FAITH, it is a matter of FACT. Many of the “facts” contained in the Mormon “scriptures” have been proven to be utterly false. Only someone willing to set aside ALL OF THE OPPOSING FACTS can even BRING UP Mormonism.

Mormonism will either have to abandon many of its historical roots or face the unhappy situation of exposing the faith as a total fraud. I suspect that the leaders of the faith will continue to abandon the tenets originally expounded by the founders, a bit at a time, as they have been over the last several decades, until they arrive at something that vaguely resembles Protestantism.

Mormonism co-opted many of the words/terms of Christianity and gave them a whole new meaning. In so doing, they seduced many people into believing that those words and terms meant the same thing as other Christian faiths. Mormonism uses the words and terms of Christianity but denies the meaning of those same words and terms. As such, they are not Christian in the commonly understood meaning of the term. As Mormons continue to abandon their heretical roots, their definitions will also have to evolve. Perhaps, at some point, they will be considered Christian by the rest of the Christian world. At present, they can only be considered to have some exposure to the concepts of Christian faith.
 
Mormons know what many people think of there scriptures, but the fact prevails that some of the nicest people you will meet in this world seem to be Mormon. South Park has parodied this more then once.
 
Hosh said:
Mormons know what many people think of there scriptures, but the fact prevails that some of the nicest people you will meet in this world seem to be Mormon. South Park has parodied this fact more then once.
Click to expand...
I agree, many Mormons are very nice people. That makes the fact that they have been deluded into a fraud even more of a travesty.
 
A lot of people can think a lot of things, yes. But when there is no historical evidence for what Mormons claim to be actual history, then I think we have a right to question the sincerity of their religion.
 
Regardless of how flawed the belief system of Latter Day Saints is, any Mormon who is sincerely and deliberately trying to live the covenants that they have made, is a person of honor and integrity.

Period. 🙂

In that sense they are good Christians.
 
ParkerD said:
Chessmane,
I don’t feel any need to “defend” my faith, although I have certainly tried to “explain” my faith.

I suppose you realize that Egyptian scholars also discount the entire story of Joseph in Egypt and the seven years of famine. Just because “they” say it couldn’t possibly be so, does not mean that it couldn’t possible be so. It merely means they have not found conclusive evidence they trust to substantiate something from antiquity. For me, it’s a case of “so what?” I would never expect them to find conclusive evidence, as God does not work that way, nor do I wish that He would. The purest source of spiritual knowledge is the direct source–the Holy Spirit, writing in the heart with an undeniable witness.
Click to expand...
**Sorry as I still did not read the original post…stubborness. But I feel confident that this has a lot to do with it. **

Parker of course it all comes down to faith, but it does not have to be blind faith. Every thing should fit together rather tightly, talking about those things we can prove as humans. The other things we leave to God, to faith.

One of the things that attracted me to the Catholic faith was the fact that my wife is attractive and she is Catholic.

Putting that aside she is the one who made me attend an RCIA meeting because we were going to move to Utah. She knew I had a Mormon background. To my surprise so much of the history of the Church is factual, even in our Creed we place Pilot in there to give a sense that this is real history. The line of succession intriged me as well. I could actully go online and read about all the Popes from Peter to Benedict. The New Testament is about real people in a real places. Places you can visit, touch and hear. This helped me connect to the Bible in a way I had never been able to do before. This was not just blind faith anymore. It started to become real. Jesus began to become real.

When I am asked questions about my Catholic faith I have been given sound answers to them. My brain does not feel as if it has to be tied up. It’s free! When I don’t know an answer I can go to the Catechism with the Scripture references and Apostolic Tradition …it always makes sense.

What was amazing to me as I learned this faith is that a lot of it sounded familiar to me, yet I never studied it. For instance I was told that Catholics pray to dead Saints many years before I knew anything about them. Yet I knew in my heart what it felt like to be at a loved ones grave. Remembering them, even asking for help. When I learned about original sin that made so much sense to me, things like that.

Now I find I am not special as I have seen countless people have the same revelations. I truly believe in my heart and soul that we have had the very same revelations that each Apostle had regarding Jesus, who He is and His message to us. It is so familiar. Talk about revelation that the Apostles had, I had my biggest during Mass as the bread, his body was broken. My eyes cleared.

As I help others learn about the faith what is so cool is that they continue to teach me and give me new insights into that great message of hope. 2000 years worth of conversions for Jesus. And most of the revelations they have accept for a few heretical ones (I have had a few but was corrected) go hand in hand with the Scriptures, not changing the meaning of them, just coming to an understanding about them.

Continued…
 
You have a great sense that we are all connected into one body with him. Although distorted here on earth because of our sin. Like the Scriptures say, when one part suffers we all suffer, when one part feels joy we all feel joy…. community, connected, the body of Christ (a sense of Trinity)

The Church provides us with the greatest tools to fight this sin. What is the biggest revelation that I had regarding my own sin as I learned this faith? I learned that I am not god and I saw all the gods in my life that I placed before Him, this would be I,… my mis guided desires were exposed and I could understand and not be ashamed of them. That we all had this in common. That would be original sin. The desire to have all of His knowlede, His wisom as if it comes from us.

I learned about dying to this self and what it meant. Placing what I have in Gods hands, giving Him all of me. Going to Confession when I fail Him, to keep me closer to Him. Why? For the love of my family and others in need of Him. I used my God given brain and I was converted to Him, nothing at all to do with blind faith and everyhting to do with this is real! . They took this Agnostic, evolution believing small creature and made him a believer in Christ. Retaining my own evolution theory, retaining the fact that I really don’t know what God has in store for me on earth or in heaven. His will as best I can here, His will fully in heaven.

Anyway I trust it will be really good! As a Catholic I can assure you we do not have all the answers but we know there is but One God, One Holy Spirit, and One Jesus and without this One and only God, Our Heavenly Father, we know we would not exists.

As to the after life I have always felt that God loves all of us equally through His Son. That If I thought it would be my own family in heaven that I desired most I would miss all the other families. I believe I will love through God all of Gods Creation the same as He loves us all. (Trinity) Not limited to just my wife, my children. That all of our love together will be one in God.

This to I thought of before I learned this faith. (Not heretical at all) I know it is right on now. I heard this line in a movie, maybe you know it. “You can’t handle the truth” here we cannot handle the love that is in store for us when we get home to Him. Here we would explode because it would be to much to handle in our current state. We learn about it in our own families first before we are united to our heavenly family with not us as men or women in the forefront in any way, rather Jesus being the head of us, us being given to Him by the Father, all of us His children. To share in the life of the Trinity, what Jesus and the Father have shared, will share throughout all of eternity.
Families first…or God first?
Choose the right?
Or choose the Cross?

God Bless
Rich
www.utahmission.com
 
Hosh said:
A lot of people think the same of all religious people.
Click to expand...
My experience is those people are just as uninformed as Mormons, but they like to think of themselves as “enlightened”. This sort of self-congratulation has no value.

Are you here to make a valid point or just stir the pot?
 
ParkerD said:
Chessmane,
I don’t feel any need to “defend” my faith, although I have certainly tried to “explain” my faith.

I suppose you realize that Egyptian scholars also discount the entire story of Joseph in Egypt and the seven years of famine. Just because “they” say it couldn’t possibly be so, does not mean that it couldn’t possible be so. It merely means they have not found conclusive evidence they trust to substantiate something from antiquity. For me, it’s a case of “so what?” I would never expect them to find conclusive evidence, as God does not work that way, nor do I wish that He would. The purest source of spiritual knowledge is the direct source–the Holy Spirit, writing in the heart with an undeniable witness.
Click to expand...
The history channel did an entire documentory on this called, “the Exodus Decoded.” And they found evidence of Hebrews living in Egypt which was documented in “the Search for the Red Sea Crossing.” They were builings familiar to traditional Hebrew housings.
We’re not asking for conclusive evidence, but the evidence we have contradicts what you claim; We’re not bothered by the fact that we can’t proove it, we’re bothered by the fact that it contadicts the evidence!
 
MelanieAnne said:
My experience is those people are just as uninformed as Mormons, but they like to think of themselves as “enlightened”. This sort of self-congratulation has no value.

Are you here to make a valid point or just stir the pot?
Click to expand...
Just to point out the age old adage: “People that live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones”. I’m glad you think Einstein was uninformed. Along with Freud he felt that belief in a personal god was childish and immature. Only about 7% of top U.S. Natural Scientists believe in God, so I guess they must unenlightened as well.

If you consider me to be stirring the pot for defending someones belief system so be it. I am just a spoon, It is you who are providing the stew, take it away and there is nothing to be stirred. I see most religious beliefs through the lens of “The Denial of Death”. Deep in the Psyche there doesn’t seem to be all that much difference to me.
 
Hosh said:
Just to point out the age old adage: “People that live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones”. I’m glad you think Einstein was uninformed. Along with Freud he felt that belief in a personal god was childish and immature. Only about 7% of top U.S. Natural Scientists believe in God, so I guess they must unenlightened as well.

If you consider me to be stirring the pot for defending someones belief system so be it. I am just a spoon, It is you who are providing the stew, take it away and there is nothing to be stirred. I see most religious beliefs through the lens of “The Denial of Death”. Deep in the Psyche there doesn’t seem to be all that much difference to me.
Click to expand...
Too bad so many of your facts are flawed. Maybe you should check them out! And perhaps you should try reading sources OTHER than those that agree with your preconceived notions!

Goodbye, I won’t be reading what you write anymore as I do not believe it would be a productive use of my time. So I will put what you post on “ignore”. I see this forum as a place to exchange ideas, not to beat people up. Obviously you are seeking to demean people for their beliefs. You should be ashamed of yourself. You are not a nice person if that is your purpose for posting here.
 
MelanieAnne said:
Too bad so many of your facts are flawed. Maybe you should check them out! And perhaps you should try reading sources OTHER than those that agree with your preconceived notions!

Goodbye, I won’t be reading what you write anymore as I do not believe it would be a productive use of my time. So I will put what you post on “ignore”. I see this forum as a place to exchange ideas, not to beat people up. Obviously you are seeking to demean people for their beliefs. You should be ashamed of yourself. You are not a nice person if that is your purpose for posting here.
Click to expand...
🤷
All my facts were correct, I read a lot, and the subjects of my reading are quite diverse. If you consider me “beating people up” by pointing out what well respected individuals have said to form an argument perhaps you should weigh it against your own words first. That is… Is it not more demeaning to a persons beliefs to call someone a deluded fraud? I find you to be the one in contradiction to your own ideals of using this for for the exchange of Ideas. Peace be with you 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top