The Book of Mormon

[twopekinguys]

Agreed. Those sorts of responses are annoying.

Double

 

[TexanKnight]

So, you are freely admitting you cannot engage, and discuss, let alone refute anything that has been stated. Not uncommon.

So, in addition to being unwilling/unable to defend the BoM, you choose to attack the very forum that allows you to post here.

I tell you what. You get the people/mods over at MADB, to let honest discussion take place, then we’ll talk about the behavior and moderation over here. OK?

I for one think the mods over here do a great job of letting a free exchange happen here. Sometimes it can get a little testy, but the mods step in only as a last resort, and are quite even handed.

Personally, I think your “vision” is a slap in the face of the moderators.

Trust me, this forum used to be Dodge City on a bad day, and Eric has done a fantastic job cleaning the place up. Catholic as well as non Catholics have had their hands slapped, and even worse.

I agree. I was banned for a year because I was out of line more than once. It is not just LDS who get banned.

McMullan did what almost all of them do. They come here to “teach us a few things” and when they realize how prepared we are, how much we know, and we ask the tough questions, they run for the hills…

When they get here, they find that we are:

10 … strengthened in the Lord, and in the might of his power.
11 Put you on the armour of God, that you may be able to stand against the deceits of the devil.
12 For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places.
13 Therefore take unto you the armour of God, that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and to stand in all things perfect.
14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of justice,
15 And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace:
16 In all things taking the shield of faith, wherewith you may be able to extinguish all the fiery darts of the most wicked one.
17 And take unto you the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit (which is the word of God).

 

[TexanKnight]

I see the LDS are still hiding.

 

[CarolNoel]

Texan Knight I did not know you could be “banned” for a year and then able to come back on the forum. Just want to say how glad to see you here.

 

[compuadam]

With apologies to Tex for my extreme lateness, here is my response to his past argument.

Please do. I find it extremely difficult to tell what you believe I have and haven’t dodged.

U huh. That was just another way of dodging. Heck, I even asked you to go back and address the points in recent posts, but, instead, you make another “tell me” post and what you were asked to respond to falls back deeper and deeper.

Odd. You accuse me of dodging, yet I’ve asked you to make a list of points I’ve never responded to twice now. Seems kind of hypocritical if you ask me. Yet again, I would love to adress the points you mention, just point them out to me(preferably in a list form).

Incorrect. Find me a quote that says differently.

Another dodge. A whole list of racist comments were posted. Stop wasting my time and respond to them

Yet again, incorrect. The list posted earlier was a jumbled mess of quotes, many of which appear to have been made up on the spot.

I don’t necessarily disagree with you saying that LDS leaders have made racist statements. Prophets aren’t infallible. Didn’t Moses directly disobey The Lord when he was asked to speak to a rock, and instead hit it with his staff?

Ah…so misusing a stick 4000 years ago is the same as making horribly racist comments? One was disobeying God…what your false prophets did was act like God was a racist.

You could accuse Jonah of the exact same thing. He was extremely racist towards the Assyrians, yet he was a prophet none the less. Brigham Young, likewise, was racist towards African Americans. As for your comment about Moses “misusing a stick 4000 years ago”: It was a far more serious sin than you let on. Moses had been ordered directly by God to do one thing, and did something else instead. He even went as far as to take glory away from God by taking credit for the miracle himself.

I’m not sure exactly what document you’re referring to. I did an extensive internet search and couldn’t find any book titled “Smith 1977”. Find a reference to the actual book that this came from.

Doesn;t change the fact of the quote.

Beg to differ. Unless you can find the reference that this quote came from, it is invalid. It doesn’t help your case that the only place I could find this quote was on a Wikipedia article.

Here’s another quote from JS to think over: “(referring to slavery) it makes my blood boil within me to reflect upon the injustice, cruelty, and oppression of the rulers of the people. When will these things cease to be, and the Constitution and the laws again bear rule?” (History of the Church, 4:544).

Does not surprise he that he waffled. False prophets do that. heck, the man had 9 different versions of his “first vision”, Stands to reason he woud have at least versions of an opinion.

1. He never waffled. These were the policies and opinions he kept his entire life.
2. The first vision is a different debate altogether.

Yet again, you’ve given me one verse, which I have responded to. Also, you never answer why, If Joseph Smith was the racist you let on, he would have included 2 Nephi 26:33 in his book.

I gave you several verses.

You did not give me several verses. You’ve given me one.

But, regardless, your comment is odd. The verses I posted prove my point. Your point seems to be the same as a guy saying, “you only showed me the body of ONE person I killed. That does not make me a killer”

If I may I ask, how does that analogy have anything to do with the point I made? Regardless, you’ve still never explained why the horrible racist you make Joseph Smith out to be would have included 2 Nephi 26:33 in his book.

God bless

 

[Stephen168]

With apologies to Tex for my extreme lateness, here is my response to his past argument.

I think you have stayed away long enough, so that you can change the subject. Trying to defend the Book of Mormon is an impossible task.

In the Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith claims the Book of Mormon is the source of the aboriginal people of America. This is also what my Mormon friends believed in 1970’s; all American Indians were Semitic people who came from the middle-east about 2,000 years before Christ. I understand until very recently, Native members and investigators were still being told they are the people of the Book of Mormon.
At the time they told me the basic story of the Book of Mormon, scientists knew the American Indians came from Asia over 10,000 years before Christ. They knew by comparing their languages, physiology, and archeological evidence.
Since the 1970’s, DNA confirms what Scientist have know about the true source of the American Indians. Additional evidence has also pushed back the date the first Asian arrival by 2 to 4 times; making the Book of Mormon wrong by 20,000 years, and Joseph Smith wrong about the story being true.
The fact that BYU is the only place that claims to disagree with the rest of the science community on this issue would tell me that it is not science. As a Catholic I don’t have to rely on Catholic universities for the truth of Catholic history.

 

[RebeccaJ]

You could accuse Jonah of the exact same thing. He was extremely racist towards the Assyrians, yet he was a prophet none the less. Brigham Young, likewise, was racist towards African Americans.

I’d like to see where Jonah taught anything comparable to what Young taught, as God’s divine order of humanity bases on race. Do you have that.

We all have our prejudices. Young claimed his prejudices were divinely ordered, caused by behavior in a previous life, and having eternal consequences in the next life. While Jonah lived in a time that had not yet put all into the context of Jesus Christ, Young claimed to be leading Christ’s church… His teachings were solidly the opposite of Christ, which he never, ever, presented as his personal opinion. Not once. The opposite is the truth, he claimed to speak for God.

Other than that, when the weakness of the prophets is shown in the OT, there is always a corresponding grace. So the point of weakness in the OT stories isn’t to demonstrate that you should be weak yourself, that you should accept weakness as a sign of truth, or that un-Christlike behavior is acceptable.It is so you understand the endless Mercy that comes from God.

 

[TexanKnight]

With apologies to Tex for my extreme lateness, here is my response to his past argument.

Odd. You accuse me of dodging, yet I’ve asked you to make a list of points I’ve never responded to twice now. Seems kind of hypocritical if you ask me. Yet again, I would love to adress the points you mention, just point them out to me(preferably in a list form).

Another dodge. Go figure

Yet again, incorrect. The list posted earlier was a jumbled mess of quotes, many of which appear to have been made up on the spot.

Another dodge. Nothing was made up. Your failure to address them speaks for itself

You could accuse Jonah of the exact same thing. He was extremely racist towards the Assyrians, yet he was a prophet none the less.

Ah…you defend BY horrible racism by using Jonah who never said ANYTHING as bad as BY…and BY was in the 1800s…it is a typical WEAK argument to compare people of a different culture 6000 years ago with an American “prophet” in the 1800s. So, the typical dodges followed by the typical weak comparison.

Beg to differ. Unless you can find the reference that this quote came from, it is invalid. It doesn’t help your case that the only place I could find this quote was on a Wikipedia article.

Another dodge.

1. He never waffled. These were the policies and opinions he kept his entire life.
2. The first vision is a different debate altogether.

Depends on which of the many versions. The nice thing about LDS visions and teaching are they are like a cafeteria…you get to pick and choose which ones you like

 

[TexanKnight]

I think you have stayed away long enough, so that you can change the subject. Trying to defend the Book of Mormon is an impossible task.

it is how they always act

 

[Nicea325]

In the LDS view, the “primitive church” would not be the Catholic Church, but something before that.

And that is the whole core of the issue: The church LDS has different views about almost everything.

 

[Nicea325]

Here is the bottom line:

There is NO geographical proof to the B of M accepted by any non- LDS geographers.
But there IS geographical proof to the Bible accepted by non-Catholic and Non Christian geographers.

There is NO Archaeological proof to the B of M accepted by any non- LDS archaeologists
But there IS Archaeological proof to the Bible accepted by non-Catholic and Non Christian archaeologists

There is NO linguistic proof to the B of M accepted by any non- LDS linguists
But there IS linguistic proof to the Bible accepted by non-Catholic and Non Christian linguists

There is NO historical proof to the B of M accepted by any non- LDS historians
But there IS historical proof to the Bible accepted by non-Catholic and Non Christian historians

There is NO scientific proof to the B of M accepted by any non- LDS scientists
But there IS scientific proof to the Bible accepted by non-Catholic and Non Christian scientists

LDS “Prophets” teach one thing
Later teach some thing different.

LDS prophets break the law and lie about it

LDS prophets give conflicting doctrine

LDS god changes his mind constantly, especially in matters of money.

Is this a church you want to put your faith in?

Seems like mass confusion…:whacky:

 

[twopekinguys]

it is how they always act

 

[kimg901]

I watched the Hobbit last night

 

[TexanKnight]

I watched the Hobbit last night

I believe if Joseph had read the Hobbit instead of “A View of the Hebrews”, his book would have taken place in Middle America and instead of gold plates, the scriptures would have been inscribed on a ring.

And the exact location would still be as unfindable (I made up that word)

We are approaching Holy Week. I pray our LDS Brothers and Sisters will see the true Light and come home.

 

[kimg901]

I believe if Joseph had read the Hobbit instead of “A View of the Hebrews”, his book would have taken place in Middle America and instead of gold plates, the scriptures would have been inscribed on a ring.

And the exact location would still be as unfindable (I made up that word)

We are approaching Holy Week. I pray our LDS Brothers and Sisters will see the true Light and come home.

I agree, with the last part of your statement

 

[Marie5890]

Helping Mormons and former Mormons to come to the truth will be based in profound love. Not in an self-righteous prideful attitude of “we are right, you are wrong, NA NA NANA NA”

Mormons are and have been deceived and they dont realize it. Being spiritual bullies wont bring them to the Truth. It just won’t .

If anything, it will just confirm to them, in a distorted way, that they are right. Why? Because they are being “persecuted”.

Charity, real sincere charity, matters. Scoring “brownie points” is NOT the Lord’s way.

 

[kimg901]

Helping Mormons and former Mormons to come to the truth will be based in profound love. Not in an self-righteous prideful attitude of “we are right, you are wrong, NA NA NANA NA”

Mormons are and have been deceived and they dont realize it. Being spiritual bullies wont bring them to the Truth. It just won’t .

If anything, it will just confirm to them, in a distorted way, that they are right. Why? Because they are being “persecuted”.

Charity, real sincere charity, matters. Scoring “brownie points” is NOT the Lord’s way.

Are you speaking in general or towards others here?

 

[twopekinguys]

We are approaching Holy Week. I pray our LDS Brothers and Sisters will see the true Light and come home.

This may be a beginning. Article

 

[Marie5890]

Are you speaking in general or towards others here?

As Catholics we are always, ALWAYS, admonished to examine our consciences. Always.

The Lord wasnt joking, not by a long shot, when He gave us the parable of the Pharisee and the Publican (tax collector)

He knew how spiritually devastating it is for anyone to have an attitude of spiritual pride, how we can be spiritual bullies.

It’s why we have it in the scriptures to warn us against…

We should always heed His warning.

Better to be a humble sinner than a self-righteous, holier-than-thou-Catholic.

 

[Ezekiel_Stone]

I’d like to see where Jonah taught anything comparable to what Young taught, as God’s divine order of humanity bases on race. Do you have that.

We all have our prejudices. Young claimed his prejudices were divinely ordered

Do you have any source at all for the proposition that Brigham Young ever claimed revelation for banning blacks from the priesthood? My understanding was that he said it was “common sense” or something like that.

caused by behavior in a previous life, and having eternal consequences in the next life.

I think you’ve confused Brigham Young with some later leaders. And those attempts to theologically justify Young’s prejudice were rejected by the decision process outlined in the D&C, since the quorum of the 12 never approved.

While Jonah lived in a time that had not yet put all into the context of Jesus Christ,

I don’t think that any group today has yet put all into the context of Jesus Christ.

Jesus’ own apostles erred, Peter refused to eat with gentiles, even after the vision from God. God has never required that his prophets or apostles be perfect. Yes, Brigham Young said and did some shameful things.

His teachings were solidly the opposite of Christ, which he never, ever, presented as his personal opinion. Not once. The opposite is the truth, he claimed to speak for God.

That’s simply not true. There were times that he spoke for God. There were times when he made clear that he was speaking his own opinion. There are other times, more than I’m comfortable with, where he didn’t make clear whether he was speaking his own opinion or God’s.

Other than that, when the weakness of the prophets is shown in the OT, there is always a corresponding grace.

That is nicely said.

So the point of weakness in the OT stories isn’t to demonstrate that you should be weak yourself,

No one said that BY should have been weak. He was weak in some areas, strong in others.

.[stories of weakness exist] so you understand the endless Mercy that comes from God

Well said and agreed!

that you should accept weakness as a sign of truth, or that un-Christlike behavior is acceptable

from anyone else I would call that a misleading straw man. I think that you’re sincere, though, so I’d say that what you just said only makes sense if you assume that whatever a prophet does is “acceptable” before God. Rebecca, that assumption does not make any sense at all in a Christian context. It’s only in Islam that anything that a prophet does is automatically acceptable, and something that you should emulate. Mormons aren’t muslims and Catholics shouldn’t be either, so please, let’s not judge other religions based on assumptions that contradict the basic premises of Christianity.