Why Accept Joseph Smith?

[TheosisM]

I agree…the claim by Dianaiad wasn’t about this though. She was a claiming that there are 13-14 million mormons who are true believing mormons…more like half that, if even that, as that number includes non-baptized children under the age of 8.

Oh okay, if she was claiming that, then I agree, that’s certainly false. My view was just that, just as how there aren’t 13-14 million practicing Mormons, there aren’t 1 billion practicing Catholics, or 34 million practicing Baptists per Xavierlives. Catholic statistics also include infant baptisms as “new church members”, at least the USCCB does.

 

[AtticusFinch]

Well, you have convinced me, Jesse. John Smith was definitely not a prophet.

He was as much of one as Joseph.

Of course, to hear Joseph, he thought he was better than Jesus. He claimed he had done more than even Jesus for the Church…

 

[TheosisM]

Theosis, I’m curious–do you mean that the argument is invalid? I don’t hang around at CARM so I don’t know what the specifics of what is said there. But I would indeed imagine that the number of practicing Catholics would be less than the number of baptized Catholics, same as with the LDS.

Personally I think it is a silly game, exaggerating the number of adherents. At one point in history I would imagine that a majority believed the world was flat–it didn’t make it true. Same with religion–a large number of adherents doesn’t make a faith true.

I completely agree with you. I’ve seen some LDS use the “numbers argument” vs. the other Mormon-related churches (i.e. CoC), and I’ve seen some Catholics use the “numbers argument” vs. all other churches. I’ve seen both types claim things like “well, if this isn’t God’s church, then why would He let it grow so big?!” Then I think, well look at Islam and Hinduism.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Oh okay, if she was claiming that, then I agree, that’s certainly false. My view was just that, just as how there aren’t 13-14 million practicing Mormons, there aren’t 1 billion practicing Catholics, or 34 million practicing Baptists per Xavierlives. Catholic statistics also include infant baptisms as “new church members”, at least the USCCB does.

I agree.

 

[sablouwho]

I agree…the claim by Dianaiad wasn’t about this though. She was a claiming that there are 13-14 million mormons who are true believing mormons…more like half that, if even that, as that number includes non-baptized children under the age of 8.

Dianaiad’s claim wasn’t about what? Sorry, I lost you there for a sec. And I didn’t mean to change the subject, if I did so it wasn’t intentional. Sorry!

I agree that claiming there are 13-14 million TBMs is inflated–but then, this number does seem to come straight from Church HQ. The favorable numbers don’t surprise me, though–they come from a church that likes to tell it’s members a “faith promoting history” and gloss over some of the parts that don’t jive with current teachings and/or make things look ambigous or even bad.

As an aside, I have a temple-going LDS friend who is not a TBM, as he certainly doesn’t swallow the whole enchilada. He and I were talking once day about the number of LDS adherents and he rolled his eyes when referring to the church claiming so many adherents as quoted above.

 

[sablouwho]

I completely agree with you. I’ve seen some LDS use the “numbers argument” vs. the other Mormon-related churches (i.e. CoC), and I’ve seen some Catholics use the “numbers argument” vs. all other churches. I’ve seen both types claim things like “well, if this isn’t God’s church, then why would He let it grow so big?!” Then I think, well look at Islam and Hinduism.

Exactly. Or, in addition to Muslims and Hindus, there also seem to be a lot of atheists/agnostics. Not to mention a new category that I’ve seen on a certain online dating website in which I participate–to describe ones faith there are several check boxes and one of the options is “spiritual but not religious”. I have utterly no idea what that actually means, though!

 

[RebeccaJ]

Dianaiad’s claim wasn’t about what?

Something being made true by a membership count.

Sorry, I lost you there for a sec. And I didn’t mean to change the subject, if I did so it wasn’t intentional. Sorry!

No problem.

As an aside, I have a temple-going LDS friend who is not a TBM, as he certainly doesn’t swallow the whole enchilada. He and I were talking once day about the number of LDS adherents and he rolled his eyes when referring to the church claiming so many adherents as quoted above.

Yes, mormons will often speak of a “shelf”, where they put things (doctrines, teachings, practices, history) they don’t agree with or are confusing to them.

Put it on a shelf and don’t worry about it any more.

 

[sablouwho]

Yes, mormons will often speak of a “shelf”, where they put things (doctrines, teachings, practices, history) they don’t agree with or are confusing to them.

Put it on a shelf and don’t worry about it any more.

Indeed, I have heard something like that. But not from this particular friend–he will actively tell me about some things that are part of the official beliefs that he thinks are total baloney. It’s refreshing! Too bad he’s in the minority.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Indeed, I have heard something like that. But not from this particular friend–he will actively tell me about some things that are part of the official beliefs that he thinks are total baloney. It’s refreshing! Too bad he’s in the minority.

Pretty much that is everyone at newordermormon.org…mormonism done cafeteria style.

 

[AMDGtoo]

Dang, lady, I’ve heard of conspiracy theorists, but you have to be up for some sort of award.

Seems to be a result of this strange coincidence: Just about everytime I “Google” the “offficial” Mormon sources you mentioned, I get harrassed by sets of Mormon Missionaries -on one occassion there was a trio. (It’s seemed to stop, but only because I don’t do my research over the internet.) For years I was getting Mormon catalogs and Mormons would phone and call me “Sister ___”, strangers walking by have assumed that I belong to the “Relief Society” and just doing my “duty” when I visit my daughter, (a Mormon child followed me around at my daughter’s “Open House” Reception asking me “what ward are you?”), and the Mormon Missionaries that lived next door to her would stare so hard at me that one walked into a door! (it stopped after I complained bitterly about the unwelcome stareing).

 

[Xavierlives]

I completely agree with you. I’ve seen some LDS use the “numbers argument” vs. the other Mormon-related churches (i.e. CoC), and I’ve seen some Catholics use the “numbers argument” vs. all other churches. I’ve seen both types claim things like “well, if this isn’t God’s church, then why would He let it grow so big?!” Then I think, well look at Islam and Hinduism.

Well I think the main thrust of Diana (or the Mormons) argument is that the church has grown and “God has blessed” the Mormon Church. Now, you can insert Islam and Oil. (One of the ironies I see in life is that Israel is the promised land… but it lacks Texas Tea, Black Gold… OIL!)

 

[MrZetterlund]

Really?

That would make us all a bunch of real hypocrites, wouldn’t it? Do you really want to go there?

M’goodness, you have a very low opinion of every single Mormon if you think we honestly stick to a belief system we 'know" is wrong. I mean, really…why would any of us do that? Think about it; Mormons are laughed at, mocked, discriminated against…look what happened to Mitt Romney; he wanted to be President rather badly, y’know, and one of the biggest reasons he didn’t get nominated was because he was a Mormon. Boy, did everybody have a good time with his religion!

(Of course, that could be because he was a Republican and a Mormon. Harry Reid doesn’t seem to have a problem combining politics and Mormonism…)

Do you really believe that, if he ‘knew’ that he was wrong about it, that he wouldn’t have done something about it a long time ago?

Even Joseph Smith went through some very nasty times because he didn’t change his beliefs. After all, he wasn’t just murdered–he was tarred and feathered (as a direct result of which his infant son died), he was jailed many times, beaten…he certainly died broke.

Most of his followers lost their homes more than once, and were driven from one city to another, from one state to another, and eventually out of the nation all together…do you REALLY think they would have put up with all that if they 'knew they were wrong?"

Mr. Z…we may BE wrong. You certainly think we are. However, please do us the courtesy of accepting that WE BELIEVE WHAT WE SAY WE DO. We really do…or we would leave, find another religion and believe THAT.

Diana, I have especially argued with you on the subject on whether or not JS was a prophet. Forgive me if I have offended you, but I just don’t see how you can remain convinced he’s really a prophet. Appearently you do, I just don’t see how.

 

[dianaiad]

No. I don’t think you know you are wrong. I think that is the sad part. If you knew, you might repent. If Mormons knew the Bible, then they would know the truth. They would not have “Joseph Smith revised and added scriptures” versions of the Bible. But a revised truth is not the truth. A truth with added parts is not the truth. Truth is the truth unedited, unrevised, unmanipulated, unamputated, unamended. That truth is the truth that Mormons choose to ignore, choose to revise, choose to manipulate, choose to amend. The knowing you have things wrong comes from the knowing that your faith actively did those thing. When a Mormon accepts those manipulations that is a “knowing…” Some might not understand it at first. Some might be born into it. Some might be too far from light that they only see the shadow puppet and actually believe that what they are viewing is a real bunny. They are not seeing the truth. They are seeing a mere shadow. Little manipulations of the truth to look right, but when you have seen the truth, your understanding of a shadow puppet is made clear. Mormons are not seeing the light, they are seeing the darkness.

I am amazed so many Christians follow Glen Beck. Talk about being brainwashed.

Even as a conservative, I can see Beck’s amazing slant.

A: I’m not a bit surprised that you don’t like Glen Beck.
B: But I’m curious; do you not like Glen Beck because he is libertarian/conservative, or because he’s a MORMON?

 

[dianaiad]

You are certainly free to believe that the earth is flat. This, however does not make it so. Just as the earth has been proven to be round, so has Joseph Smith and the “religion” that he invented been proven to be fraudulent, very similar to Scientology, invented by L. Ron Hubbard.

You think that Mormonism is similar to Scientology?

Well, that pretty much takes care of your credibility, hosemonkey.

 

[dianaiad]

Theosis, I’m curious–do you mean that the argument is invalid? I don’t hang around at CARM so I don’t know what the specifics of what is said there. But I would indeed imagine that the number of practicing Catholics would be less than the number of baptized Catholics, same as with the LDS.

Personally I think it is a silly game, exaggerating the number of adherents. At one point in history I would imagine that a majority believed the world was flat–it didn’t make it true. Same with religion–a large number of adherents doesn’t make a faith true.

No…nor does attempting to deflate the number of the opposing faith make it UN-true. In fact, if you go to percentages rather than sheer numbers, it can get rather embarrassing for Catholics and Baptists…what percentage of each group is actually 'active?"

Which is why most of 'em don’t go there.

The thing is, there is only one way any religion can count its members…and that’s by who is on the roles. Catholics count by birth records; if you were baptised, you are Catholic. That’s it.

I’m not certain, but I imagine that Protestant churches use the same sort of record keeping, and so do we. I can’t help but ask those who constantly want to tell us that we don’t EITHER have 14 million members just how many they think we DO have, and what group we are supposed to be counting?

(shrug)

 

[dianaiad]

Something being made true by a membership count.

That’s a lie, Rebecca. There is NO way that I would use an argumentum ad numerum argument. Truth is not now, never has been, and never will be determined by the number of people who believe something.

My point with Mr.Z was to take exception to his catagorical claim that NO Mormon actually believes what he or she claims to…or to put it the way he did, that we 'all know we are wrong."

No problem.

Yes, mormons will often speak of a “shelf”, where they put things (doctrines, teachings, practices, history) they don’t agree with or are confusing to them.

Put it on a shelf and don’t worry about it any more.

Hmmn…rather like the Catholic 'It’s a mystery?"

 

[dianaiad]

Seems to be a result of this strange coincidence: Just about everytime I “Google” the “offficial” Mormon sources you mentioned, I get harrassed by sets of Mormon Missionaries -on one occassion there was a trio. (It’s seemed to stop, but only because I don’t do my research over the internet.) For years I was getting Mormon catalogs and Mormons would phone and call me “Sister ___”, strangers walking by have assumed that I belong to the “Relief Society” and just doing my “duty” when I visit my daughter, (a Mormon child followed me around at my daughter’s “Open House” Reception asking me “what ward are you?”), and the Mormon Missionaries that lived next door to her would stare so hard at me that one walked into a door! (it stopped after I complained bitterly about the unwelcome stareing).

So…because a curious and welcoming young child asked you what Ward you belonged to, you have decided that the church instructed Mitt Romney not to win the election because it’s afraid our ‘secrets’ would be 'exposed?"

Like I said, this is a little on the odd side.

 

[dianaiad]

Diana, I have especially argued with you on the subject on whether or not JS was a prophet. Forgive me if I have offended you, but I just don’t see how you can remain convinced he’s really a prophet. Appearently you do, I just don’t see how.

Mr. Z, the fact is, I do believe it…and it is arrogance personified for you to assume that because I disagree with you, it must be a deliberate choice on my part to be wrong; that I obviously really DO agree with you and just don’t want to admit it.

The thing is, my young friend, that most of the people on the planet disagree with you, theologically. Most of them disagree with me theologically. This does not mean that they really know that they are wrong, and are just sticking to their beliefs to spite me. I at least do them the courtesy of accepting that their beliefs are as true, as deep and as sincere in their faith as I am in mine.

You do not offend me by your belief that Joseph Smith was not a prophet. You DO offend me when you assume that my disagreement with you in this matter is because I’m too stubborn, stupid or hypocritical to admit that you are right.

You will notice that I am not telling you that YOU understand that you are wrong, and that you really know that Joseph Smith was a prophet but that you don’t want to admit it because becoming a Mormon would cause you more grief than you want to handle. Unlike you, m’friend, I am quite willing to understand that your beliefs are yours…and that when you disagree with me, you aren’t lying about it.

 

[Xavierlives]

A: I’m not a bit surprised that you don’t like Glen Beck.
B: But I’m curious; do you not like Glen Beck because he is libertarian/conservative, or because he’s a MORMON?

I disliked Glenn Beck long before I learned he was a Mormon. So, the Mormon thing is irrelevant. I dislike him because he attempts to get people worked up about nonsense. He tries to be a shock-jock for the conservative side. I find his techniques to be disengenous and he makes conservatives look like nutcases.

 

[sablouwho]

No…

Um, what were you saying “no” to?

nor does attempting to deflate the number of the opposing faith make it UN-true.

Exactly…this is what I was implying in my post.

In fact, if you go to percentages rather than sheer numbers, it can get rather embarrassing for Catholics and Baptists…what percentage of each group is actually 'active?"

Which is why most of 'em don’t go there.

Probably so, but I don’t mind. My faith isn’t based on the numbers, nor which faith is growing the fastest.

The thing is, there is only one way any religion can count its members…and that’s by who is on the roles. Catholics count by birth records; if you were baptised, you are Catholic. That’s it.

About a year or so ago I saw a study done by…I think it is the Pew Foundation (?). I don’t know how their methodology, but they did seem to figure out a way to estimate the numbers of people in different faiths. However, this was only done for the US, not worldwide.

I’m not certain, but I imagine that Protestant churches use the same sort of record keeping, and so do we. I can’t help but ask those who constantly want to tell us that we don’t EITHER have 14 million members just how many they think we DO have, and what group we are supposed to be counting?

During my time in the ward, I heard a lot of talk about disappointing new member retention rates. I think that those who suggest that the numbers are too big are suggesting that they don’t account for attrition rates. (Of course, that is true with other faiths too–the number of actual practicing adherents is going to always be smaller than counting all who were initiated into the faith.)

That said, I have no idea how hard it would be to count attrition rates in the LDS or any other faith. So it may not be realistic to calculate anything but the numbers of people baptized.