The New Mormon Threat!

[zerinus]

From what I know, modern Mormans are a well-educated, higher income group than they may have been in the past. Are the converts from other countries of a similar demographic or are they less educated or lower income?

Mormon converts as a general rule come from the lower to middle income groups, which is also reflected in their level of education; but because of the Church’s emphasis on education, hard work, and accomplishment, second and third generation Mormons turn out to be better educated than their parents, and doing better in their professional and public life.

It is rare to find a very prominent person in business, or politics, or law, or arts or sciences etc become a Mormon; but it is not uncommon for a third or forth generation Mormon to achieve such positions in life. Interestingly, that is how it was in the early days of the Christianity, as Paul explains:

1 Corinthians 1:

26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:

I agree with your last point. I think money, not fear or hate was the cause.

You have to give them credit though that they have allowed us to freely discuss it on these boards. I know many places which wouldn’t have.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

Under St. Peter’s in Rome are the old Catacombs. Tradition tells us that Peter himself is under the alter itself. Now, many have laughed at that notion. Several years ago, a resoration process came upon bone intered in a location that was dated to the first century. The markings indicated that it was a Christian and it was Peter. Carbon dating and DNA testing were done on the bones. The date was established as first century. The DNA showed that the bones belonged to a man who was of Palestinian Jewish descent. Now, that does not mean that it WAS Peter, but it is strange that there is a first century Palestinian Jew burried where Peter was supposed to be. By the way, the area had been undisturbed, so these were not planted bones.

Now, what does this have to do with the Mormons? Nothing at all. Unless you talk about historical proof or DNA proof that the timeline laid out is correct. DNA does not support it and archeology doesn’t either. This does not mean that you should quit being Mormon. Go right ahead. Just please do not expect us not to mention it as a reason that we choose not to accept the BoM.

I commend the LDS for all of the good work that they do. I commend them for the good lives they live. I commend them for putting into practice all they claim to hold dear. These are better proofs of the validity of the faith.

And in your estimation that proves the Bible or Christianity to be true? Is that what your faith in the Bible is founded on?

Z,
I find it funny that any Mormons who did not live lives beyond reproach left the Church. Something about that seems strange. Did they leave, get left, or after death were they removed from the roles? Is it an argument like the OSAS people: if you sin, you weren’t really saved?

I was making a general statement. I did not mean any of those things. You seem to be unaware of the history of early Mormonism, and their persecutions and forced migrations from city to city, and state to state, until they moved West to Utah, and the terrible hardships they suffered at the hands of their persecutors; nor of the history of the early pioneers who migrated to Utah. If so, it might be a good idea to get hold of a good unbiased history of early Mormonism, and read it. Then come back and ask me these questions.

In those days there were some who apostatized, and joined the persecutors; but the majority remained faithful, and endured their hardships patiently, and followed the prophetic counsel of their leaders, went to Utah, and built a great city and community that is now the headquarters of the LDS Church. Their faith, virtue, and goodness is evident for all to see.

zerinus

 

[ralphinal]

And in your estimation that proves the Bible or Christianity to be true? Is that what your faith in the Bible is founded on?

No, my faith is not based on that. But, I should point out that I love it when my faith is supported by history or science. It shows how right I am.

I was making a general statement. I did not mean any of those things. You seem to be unaware of the history of early Mormonism, and their persecutions and forced migrations from city to city, and state to state, until they moved West to Utah, and the terrible hardships they suffered at the hands of their persecutors; nor of the history of the early pioneers who migrated to Utah. If so, it might be a good idea to get hold of a good unbiased history of early Mormonism, and read it. Then come back and ask me these questions.

I am more aware of these things then I let on. I have studied some, and always from unbiased sources (an advantage of not having the internet as a student years ago). True, they were persecuted and had hardships, but it seems that there were some troubles sent back the other direction, too

In those days there were some who apostatized, and joined the persecutors; but the majority remained faithful, and endured their hardships patiently, and followed the prophetic counsel of their leaders, went to Utah, and built a great city and community that is now the headquarters of the LDS Church. Their faith, virtue, and goodness is evident for all to see.

zerinus

ok.

Funny how you can have rational conversations at times:thumbsup:

 

[zerinus]

Funny how you can have rational conversations at times

That depends on whom I am conversing with at the time, and what is being discussed!

zerinus

 

[Elric]

The problem is that there is no proof that the bible is true. The same evidence would need to apply to the bible. And that is the rub. Religion is faith based. What we have are books that testify of christ and yet, we have no proof that they are real. Both could just be made up stories. Religion is not based on evidence or reason. It is based on faith and on ‘testimony’.

People believe because they want to believe based on their own understandings. But not on evidence.

Stop with this re-direction rubbish.

You are answering the request for proof that the BoM is true, physical evidence that validates what it says.

Stating that there is no evidence that the Bible is real doesnt answer that, its being evasive and changing the subject. We are not talking about the Bible, we are talking about the BoM.

If you cant answer the request, then at least be honest and say so. I would rather you did that, and respect you more for that, than you continuing with this dishonest evasive rubbish.

 

[tundramom]

The problem is that there is no proof that the bible is true. The same evidence would need to apply to the bible. And that is the rub. Religion is faith based. What we have are books that testify of christ and yet, we have no proof that they are real. Both could just be made up stories. Religion is not based on evidence or reason. It is based on faith and on ‘testimony’.

People believe because they want to believe based on their own understandings. But not on evidence.

Not so why me.

I’ve been to Jerusalem. I’ve walked the streets where Jesus actually walked. I’ve swam in En Gedi, and the Dead Sea. I’ve taken a boat ride on the Galilee.

Have you been to the ACTUAL Hill Cumorah, which even your scholars don’t believe is where your pageant is held? Where exactly IS Zerehemla?

in Christ
Steph

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

I think the so-called mormon threat is much adieu about nothing.

Jacob 7:27

"…and to the reader I bid farewell, hoping that many of my brethren may read my words. Brethren, adieu."

??? how does a french word find its way into reformed egyptian thousands of years before the French language existed?

 

[swariffin]

The problem is that there is no proof that the bible is true. The same evidence would need to apply to the bible. And that is the rub. Religion is faith based. What we have are books that testify of christ and yet, we have no proof that they are real. Both could just be made up stories. Religion is not based on evidence or reason. It is based on faith and on ‘testimony’.

People believe because they want to believe based on their own understandings. But not on evidence.

Jesus was really exist. Jesus was reported by Roman spy named Josephus. Josephus was never be a Christian. In fact, Josephus was somekind of an anthropologist working for the roman empire. He testified that Jesus was a Jewish man performing miracles. In the US, you can find his writing in english quite easily. I have to ordered one from the Amazon.com since it is not available in my country. Stories in the bible sometimes can be proven scientifically, such as the crossing of the Israelite through the red sea. BTW, I agree with you. The bible is a book of faith, not science nor history although some of the stories in the bible can be proven either scientifically or historically.

 

[swariffin]

From what I know, modern Mormans are a well-educated, higher income group than they may have been in the past. Are the converts from other countries of a similar demographic or are they less educated or lower income?

I agree with your last point. I think money, not fear or hate was the cause.

You are correct, dear Raplhinal. In my country, some of non Catholic Christians open their services in remote areas, entice people with somethings or some money, and require the receipient to be baptised. Once the baptism quota were met, they get funding from rich countries non Catholic Christian institutions. Their acts are highly criticized by concern muslims group and created tension which impact the Catholics too.

 

[swariffin]

If you want an example of an individual within the Momon Church who has devoted his life and wealth in doing good for humanity, look at John Huntsman and the Huntsman Cancer Institude. Of couse he nor any of the others mentioned above would wish to be praised for their service.

Many other examples could be given. The person through whom the Lord restored His Church preceded them all as Zerinus has already highlighted.

Dear BCP,

Perhaps you can elaborate further about Mr. John Huntsman and his Huntsman Cancer Institute. I do believe that any human (regardless of what religion he/she belief), doing good for humanity has the Holyspirit living in him/her. I am following closely the Tzu Chi foundation movement by Master Cheng Yen from Taiwan. Her teaching, especially how human should treat and forgive other human, closely paralel with Christianity. I don’t mind following the example given by non Catholics, though. For this case, I don’t believe that Mr. John Huntsman is a treat to Catholicism (I assume that he is a mormon, am I correct?), at least for now.

 

[lukewarm]

All Churches will fall by the wayside sure but sorry it will include the Mormon Church too. But It will be man’s abandonment of the supernatural and mysterious explanations about our reason for being here for more sound, proven, reasonable explanations that science and our ever growing knowledge provide that will yeild the death blow.

I gotta be honest I don’t know how anyone can hold to Mormonism without being completed deluded… It is that absurd and obviously man made.

 

[Paul_G]

I think the so-called mormon threat is much adieu about nothing.

Jacob 7:27

"…and to the reader I bid farewell, hoping that many of my brethren may read my words. Brethren, adieu."

??? how does a french word find its way into reformed egyptian thousands of years before the French language existed?

The same way English does I guess.

Paul

 

[Paul_G]

Not so why me.

I’ve been to Jerusalem. I’ve walked the streets where Jesus actually walked. I’ve swam in En Gedi, and the Dead Sea. I’ve taken a boat ride on the Galilee.

Your very fortunate to have not that. I’m sure it was very interesting and enjoyable.

Have you been to the ACTUAL Hill Cumorah, which even your scholars don’t believe is where your pageant is held? Where exactly IS Zerehemla?

in Christ
Steph

We don’t really know for sure yet, and for the similar loss of historical knowledge we don’t know where the real Mt Sinai is either.

 

[tundramom]

We don’t really know for sure yet, and for the similar loss of historical knowledge we don’t know where the real Mt Sinai is either.

So this is your argument? Just Mt Sinai? There isn’t a single bit of archaeological evidence that has been found in favor of the Book of Mormon.

Yet, you can go to Israel, and surrounding countries, and find a plethora of evidence of all sorts of things written about in the Bible.

in Christ
Steph

 

[PattyPryor]

I find it just interesting when the bible says there will be one sheep and one fold and all LDS people think it will just be everyone turning LDS.

As for me in my Catholic Faith I believe so many are “saved”

ALSO

Book of Mormon change: Instead of being the “principal ancestors” of American Indians, Lamanites are now…“among the ancestors of the American Indians.” [The original phrase and the changes are noted in Red and bold for emphasis]

In the Introduction to the Book of Mormon the second paragraph reads:

“The book was written by many ancient prophets by the spirit of prophecy and revelation. Their words, written on gold plates, were quoted and abridged by a prophet-historian named Mormon. The record gives an account of the two great civilizations. One came from Jerusalem in 600 B.C., and afterward separated into two nations, known as the Nephites and the Lamanites. The other came much earlier when the Lord confounded the tongues at the Tower of Babel. This group is known as the Jaredites. After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians.”
This was included in the first printing runs of the Doubleday Edition.

In the latest printing of the Doubleday Edition of the Book of Mormon, the last sentence was changed to read:

“…After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are among the ancestors of the American Indians.”
The interesting thing is this change is not published anywhere. Additionally, the new Doubleday Edition still lists itself as a first edition. I am no publisher, but my understanding was when you made changes, you listed it as a second, third, etc. edition. The second edition also indicates that it is still first printing, which would be impossible since the change was made.

…

 

[Paul_G]

So this is your argument? Just Mt Sinai?

It was offered as an example to show how things can be lost to history. There are more if you would like.

There isn’t a single bit of archaeological evidence that has been found in favor of the Book of Mormon.

What kind of information would you consider as archaeological evidence that would be sufficient to support the Book of Mormon?

Yet, you can go to Israel, and surrounding countries, and find a plethora of evidence of all sorts of things written about in the Bible.

in Christ
Steph

That is the whole point of what I was suggesting, that there has been a continuance of written history which was handed from one generation to another in the Bible lands is evident, not so in the Book of Mormon account where peoples and cites were destroyed with no written history to be passed on.

There are many pre-Columbian languages that have not been deciphered and many more that have been lost all together. I’m not saying that this supports the Book of Mormon; however it does indicate some reasons why we do not have direct hands on artefacts that we can directly link to the Book of Mormon peoples. Even if we did have some how could we know what they were.

Paul

 

[why_me]

Stop with this re-direction rubbish.

You are answering the request for proof that the BoM is true, physical evidence that validates what it says.

Stating that there is no evidence that the Bible is real doesnt answer that, its being evasive and changing the subject. We are not talking about the Bible, we are talking about the BoM.

If you cant answer the request, then at least be honest and say so. I would rather you did that, and respect you more for that, than you continuing with this dishonest evasive rubbish.

I am talking about faith. It takes faith to believe in the bible as it does in the book of mormon. No where in the bible does it prove that Jesus was the son of God. And no where does it prove that he performed miracles. What we do have are stories that say so but no proof. We have no evidence that jesus was actually the son of god.

The same holds true for the book of mormon. We have pieces and we have witnesses but no surefire proof that it is true. Thus, both the bible and the book of mormon depend on faith, not scientific evidence.

Christianity will not be proven by scientific evidence. If so, there would be no need for faith.

 

[why_me]

Not so why me.

I’ve been to Jerusalem. I’ve walked the streets where Jesus actually walked. I’ve swam in En Gedi, and the Dead Sea. I’ve taken a boat ride on the Galilee.

Have you been to the ACTUAL Hill Cumorah, which even your scholars don’t believe is where your pageant is held? Where exactly IS Zerehemla?

in Christ
Steph

No question that the story takes place in the areas that it claims to be. But that in itself does not prove that Jesus was the son of god, performed miracles and was executed for the sins of the world. It takes faith to believe that jesus was the son of god and that the New Testament is what it claims to be. We have no evidence, just accounts written many years after the events took place.

 

[why_me]

Not so why me.

Where exactly IS Zerehemla?

in Christ
Steph

Where is Nahom and Bountiful?

BOM Geography Old World:
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5358813362888703041

 

[Nan_S]

No question that the story takes place in the areas that it claims to be. But that in itself does not prove that Jesus was the son of god, performed miracles and was executed for the sins of the world. It takes faith to believe that jesus was the son of god and that the New Testament is what it claims to be. We have no evidence, just accounts written many years after the events took place.

If by “many years after” you mean “written by the witnesses themselves or their immediate pupils, and while other living witnesses to those events were still around, who (i.e., the other witnesses) rather than disputing the accounts instead assisted in copying and distributing them” yes, I’ll agree.

If, however, by “many years later” you mean 100 to 200 years later after Jesus’ living witnesses were quite dead, you need to spend some time on the main Catholic Answers website. There you’ll find that the testimony of the Early Church Fathers dates the gospels between 15 years and 50 years after Jesus’ resurrection, well within the lifetimes of living witnesses who corroborated the accounts.

The written Gospel accounts testify to Jesus’ miracles. His living witnesses accepted and spread the Gospel accounts. Many others who had heard of Jesus found in the written accounts ratification of what they had heard, not contradiction. Certain well-respected (even today) ancient historians who were contemporaries of Jesus, who themselves did not believe, still validated the Gospels’ testimony of miracles.

The Gospels themselves were not disputed, except by some of those who were NOT actual witnesses and also did not want to believe. Furthermore, Jesus’ living witnesses willingly accepted torture and death as the price for spreading the Gospels.

Short of using a time-machine to teleport a CNN news crew and cameras to the scene, you really can’t get any more reliable evidence than this.

Come to think of it, if CNN were reporting Jesus’ miracles I probably would want to send another news crew in to verify their story…