Why are people mormon considering it is obvioulsy fabricated?

[Stephen168]

However, the evidence indicates that you do very little else but criticize the Mormons and Mormonism. I don’t remember you saying much of anything positive about either…

Is there anything uniquely positive about Mormonism? I can’t think of any.

 

[dianaiad]

No, its not important. It still amounts to either God being falliable or the BoM being fiction.

translation: I got caught in a fib/exaggeration/error, proving that I don’t know as much about Mormonism as I claim to; let’s just ignore what this indicates and change the topic.

Riiiight.

Your sarcasm doesn’t change the fact that I AM right about this, and for reasons that I have already given.

The only differences is with the books themselves. One has other things to support it as well as physical evidence, the other has nothing to support it and no physical evidence.

Plus the BoM make some pretty “bold” claims that go beyond the unreliability of the bible.

Care to list a few?

Well they didnt have much faith in the work if they could only put out a shoddy copy of it. Seriously this is supposed to be the work that God wants us to follow, I wouldnt want to knowingly put out a faulty copy of it.

What you would have done under the circumstances is duly noted.

Considering what they supposedly had, that isnt a reason at all.

Your opinion of it is also duly noted, and given every inch as much consideration as you have given my arguments.

 

[dianaiad]

Careful Rebecca! That didn’t really sound very critical! In fact it didn’t really sound critical AT ALL! And you have a reputation to preserve!

You have a very high tolerance for criticism if you think that her comment wasn’t critical, Melanie. Doesn’t the fact that she completely misstated the claim and presented it as precisely the opposite of what it was give you pause?

 

[dianaiad]

OK, I’m confused. To:
" Religio71:

Yeah, and I would not put Mormonism in the same category as Scientology.

you write:

While you may wish to do that philosophically, it cannot be done from a legal standpoint. The LDS church meets the normal ‘criteria’ of religion with leaders, structures, rules and deities. Scientology does not.

Did you mean to do that?

 

[dianaiad]

While I was still in Utah many LDS scholars were excited about the Monte Verde site found in southern Chile. It dates to something like 1200 BC (May be 12,000 BC) AFAIK not much has been found yet. Of course, Diana, with the University of Utah having the best Anthropology department in the western US they were going to be the ones going.

Bryan
B.S. Anthropology
University of Utah

Bryan, I admire and respect your devotion to your Alma Mater. Really.

So tell me: how many new discoveries have we made archeologically and anthropologically in the last five or so years? How many do you expect us to make in the next few?

 

[PaulDupre]

I believe that the claim was 'no serious historian,* believer or not*, Paul.

The problem with that contention, Diana, is that Mormons dismiss as “not serious” any historian who favors the Spalding-Rigdon hypothesis. If you ever read the latest evidence, you would reconsider your pre-programmed dismissal and admit that it was at least reasonable.

 

[dianaiad]

Is there anything uniquely positive about Mormonism? I can’t think of any.

It would be rather surprising if you did, Stephen, but don’t worry about it. Asking you to find something uniquely positive about Mormonism would be rather like asking Bryan to think of something uniquely positive about any school but the University of Utah.

Now me, since I AM Mormon, it would logically follow that I see quite a few uniquely positive things about Mormonism. I would have to, or I wouldn’t BE Mormon.

That said, in terms of this general conversation, who said that there has to be something uniquely positive about Mormonism in order to see anything positive about Mormonism? I mean, it is true that Utah has the fewest out-of-wedlock births of all fifty states, and that has a great deal to do with the major religion, but NOT getting pregnant when you are a teenager isn’t exactly unique, is it? Just…positive.

 

[dianaiad]

The problem with that contention, Diana, is that Mormons dismiss as “not serious” any historian who favors the Spalding-Rigdon hypothesis. If you ever read the latest evidence, you would reconsider your pre-programmed dismissal and admit that it was at least reasonable.

I have read it, and it is not reasonable; it stretches possibilities far too much. (and yes, I’m aware of the ironic nature of that claim.)

My problem with this is that there were several well respected and NON Mormon authors and authorities listed, and I get the feeling that those names must have been typed in invisible fonts for all the attention being paid to them.

 

[kikkichan]

Synneve,

Hi, welcome, and good luck! I’d like that you keep including the URLs in addition to any comment you may add. But that’s just me talking. And any independent analysis that you could point to would be most welcome.

thanks,
-kc

If people have already read them, we can discuss them.

If they haven’t already read them, but intend to expound upon the subjects the articles treat, they should read the articles.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Careful Rebecca! That didn’t really sound very critical! In fact it didn’t really sound critical AT ALL! And you have a reputation to preserve!

I have picked up my very own personal critic.

 

[RebeccaJ]

I appreciate your passion, however, in my experience Deseret Book and other LDS publishers or authors, pump out books on JS at a good pace.

You may appreciate the passion, Rebecca, but you didn’t pay attention to it or you wouldn’t characterize authors published by well respected and mainstream non-Mormon publishers as "pumped out’ LDS published books on JS.

Who isn’t paying attention?

 

[cthulhubryan]

Bryan, I admire and respect your devotion to your Alma Mater. Really.

So tell me: how many new discoveries have we made archeologically and anthropologically in the last five or so years? How many do you expect us to make in the next few?

In the last 5 years, many. None related to the B.o.M. but many. That is one of the joys/frustrations with the process. They could open up Monte Verde and find all kinds of stuff immediately or they could explore for 20 years and find nothing and then as they get ready to close up a child could wander in and find something.

Think for a moment about the amount of garbage (food remnants, dead skin, hair, trash, etc.) you and say 250 of your closest neighbors generate. Now for 20 years toss it into a big hole that is open to the air so that birds and bugs and critters can get in as well. After 20 years dump 100 tons of dirt on top of it and then wait 200 years and dig it up. How much of that junk will tell you much about you and your neighbors?

One researcher finds about 100 small flat rounded sticks and determines that part of the culture was medical in nature as there are tongue depressors present. But actually your neighbors daughter loved popsicles.

It could be any amount of time.

 

[cthulhubryan]

OK, I’m confused. To:

you write:

Did you mean to do that?

We were discussing the legal standing of Scientology. I was mentioning that the same arguments that allowed Germany to deny Scientology legal status as a religion would not work with the LDS church as it is clearly a religion.

 

[cthulhubryan]

It would be rather surprising if you did, Stephen, but don’t worry about it. Asking you to find something uniquely positive about Mormonism would be rather like asking Bryan to think of something uniquely positive about any school but the University of Utah.

Not Fair!!! I can say many things positive about other schools. Even about the Y. I cannot help it if their football and basketball teams drink deeply from the fountain of suck.

 

[dianaiad]

Who isn’t paying attention?

You, m’dear. The authors she was referring to are mentioned here:

Synneve:

There is no sign that Robert Remini, the eminent non-Mormon historian and Smith biographer, accepts it. There is nothing to suggest that John Brooke, the prize-winning non-Mormon historian of early Mormon thought, accepts it. The famous Smith biographer Fawn Brodie, who was definitely not a believer, rejected it. The contemporary Smith biographer Dan Vogel, who is definitely not a believer, rejects it.

 

[RebeccaJ]

You, m’dear. The authors she was referring to are mentioned here:

We were discussing Bushman, and how his book is the most eminent and anticipated book on JS. (Cue highly dramatic entry music.)

But if you want to throw authors in, here are three more authors who were stellar examples of “highly anticipated and revered”, and now, are poo-poo’d as “opinion”.

McConkie - “Mormon Doctrine”, and his “Jesus The Christ” series.
Brigham Young - “Journal of Discourses”
Joseph Smith - “King Follet Sermon”

It’s only a matter of time.

 

[dianaiad]

In the last 5 years, many. None related to the B.o.M. but many. That is one of the joys/frustrations with the process. They could open up Monte Verde and find all kinds of stuff immediately or they could explore for 20 years and find nothing and then as they get ready to close up a child could wander in and find something.

Therefore, I think, you can see my point.

IThink for a moment about the amount of garbage (food remnants, dead skin, hair, trash, etc.) you and say 250 of your closest neighbors generate. Now for 20 years toss it into a big hole that is open to the air so that birds and bugs and critters can get in as well. After 20 years dump 100 tons of dirt on top of it and then wait 200 years and dig it up. How much of that junk will tell you much about you and your neighbors?

One researcher finds about 100 small flat rounded sticks and determines that part of the culture was medical in nature as there are tongue depressors present. But actually your neighbors daughter loved popsicles.

It could be any amount of time.

Yep, you see my point.

I’m not claiming that archeology proves that the Book of Mormon is true, or based in fact. I believe that there will always be someone who comes up with reasonable alternative explanations for anything that is found, and that’s fine.

My problem is only with those who point to what has not been found and claiming that lack of absolute archeological proof for the Book of Mormon proves that it is untrue. Come back to me in a few hundred years, after the entire Amercian hemisphere has absolutely been covered, all archeological sites have been found, classified and accurately interpreted, and then talk to me.

In the meantime, what I see happening is that critics will claim that the Book of Mormon must be false because it mentions cement, or barley, or some other thing that hasn’t been found yet, and then cement, barley or something else GETS found, and nothing changes. the objection just disappears and the target changes.

I don’t think that finding cement cities in South America proves that the Book of Mormon is true. All it does is prove that the Book of Mormon claims that the ancient Americans used cement, and guess what—they used cement. How about that.

The objections aren’t about real archeological problems, you realize; they are about the fact that the objectors don’t believe that the Book of Mormon, or Mormonism, can possibly be true, so they will grab anything they can that seems to support that view, and trumpet it as proof that it is not true.

…and, if one of their objections gets debunked, that’s ok–they will simply go to the next one. There is no amount of archeological evidence that would convince these people that the Book of Mormon is true. There never will be any.

That’s actually a good thing, y’know. Religious truth has to be arrived at through religious means, not physical ones.

 

[dianaiad]

We were discussing the legal standing of Scientology. I was mentioning that the same arguments that allowed Germany to deny Scientology legal status as a religion would not work with the LDS church as it is clearly a religion.

Right. So you are actually agreeing with Religio on this matter. Thank you.

 

[dianaiad]

Not Fair!!! I can say many things positive about other schools. Even about the Y. I cannot help it if their football and basketball teams drink deeply from the fountain of suck.

Bryan, I didn’t graduate from the Y. None of my kids did. The school I graduated from only became a class A athletic school two years ago, and they suck at everything.

Come to think of it, USU is having some problems in that area (sportswise) too.

I can’t win.

 

[Dee_Dee_King]

You must not be an American. I love the constitution just the way it is, thank-you-very-much, and I don’t want it changed. If they outlaw someone else’s religion, what’s to say mine won’t be next? The founding fathers knew what they were doing when they wrote the 1st amendment. Amendments are for adding rights, not taking them away.

germany makes scientology illegal. if our country would acknowledge christianity as the foundation for our values–we could have some laws forbidding certain cults which are proven fabricated–like mormonism and scientology. other than those two, i can’t think of any others that can be proven to be false. i don’t believe that anyone should be forced into conversion to any religion. but i also don’t praise any government or constitution that doesn’t acknowledge Christ as King.