Undoubtedly all Non-LDS scholars, right?



I know there is nothing I can post that will change your mind, and vise versa.  

Just curious if you have ever read the Book of Mormon yourself, or just read about it?

The empirical and scientific evidence is secondary to knowledge that comes from the Spirit of God...

Sometimes, antagonists ask first for real evidence before seeking spiritual knowledge... I found that a lot when I was a missionary.

The "long list of scholars" who believe that Smith made it up... Probably has some cross-pollination with scholars who don't "believe" a single word in the Holy Bible, also...

I know you don't do this O_P, I am speaking generally here... But be careful when picking your enemies to the Latter-Day movement. They might be your own enemies you are lifting-up...

Kind of reminds me of the "Christian" Pastor who attacked Romney's religion on atheist Bill Mahers program during the last run-up. They both got some easy-shots in at the LDS culture on the program. They both got some un-answered comedy shots in on our beliefs. They laughed at how "funny" Latter-Day beliefs are compared to the Nicene-based religions of the day... And the "Chrisitan" Pastor gave some good foundation and credibility for Mahers contempt of LDS families.

Then the very next week...

Maher was back at mocking *all* religions, and mocking God generally... And making fun of both Latter-Day and creed-based "Christian" families... Maher has whole segments mocking modern "Christian" beliefs and families... Why would any "man of God" go on Mahers show to improve the Mahers money and ratings, and help Mahers reach in denigrating God? Do creed-based "Christians" really hate everyone else *that* much?!

I know you don't do it, but it is interesting to see common enemies, and enemies of God get treated with utmost respect when they take their sights off of *all* religions, and briefly aim solely at the Latter-Day Church of Jesus Christ... It is interesting to read "Christians" link to articles published by atheists... Yeah, they might have "studied" the Latter-Day movement to disprove it... They have also "disproved" creedal-based "Christianity" also... Makes no absolutely no sense to me...

Yeah, using empirical and scientific evidence with someone with no spiritual knowledge is not a tool I find effective all the time... Unbelievers ask for it, constantly, though...

But yeah, there are long, long lists of "scientists" who can "disprove" the teachings of the LDS Church...

Turns-out that on that list is a bunch of "scientists" who can also "disprove" (and mock) the teachings of creed-based Christianity too...

And I am sure they are all referenced, peer-reviewed, and totally-unbiased...

In all the non-LDS "research" I have read that is academic, referenced, peer-reviewed, and unbiased... I have never seen a chapter heading with the word "cult" in it...

Scientific and peer-reviewed means somebody else with academic standards looked at the data, and verified it...

And that means absolutely, absolutely nothing when you are looking for *spiritual* answers...

The "scientific" and historical evidence, etc. answers just create a circle... The Bible cannot be proven with archeology, and "science," why should we expect the Book of Mormon to be any different...

Seriously...

Well... To be honest... I had never heard of the study he referenced.  And when trying to prove something that can only be proven by *faith* any "study" is more-than-likely bordering on useless.




Somehow I doubt that any study done at Berkeley has a whole lot of LDS folks involved...

I wasn't trying to lecture you... Even if an LDS guy conducts a "study." It can be peer-reviewed by non-LDS academics, and published in a non-LDS academic paper... Which would corroborate extractrs claims "Not all the evaluators were Mormons..." In my opinion.

If it was peer-reviewed by non-LDS folks, and if it was published in a non-LDS academic paper, then I think extractrs claims would be accurate... If those are the facts...

Which --to be completely honest-- are completely useless, or at least trivial at best, in a discussion about faith...

Wasn't trying to lecture, just to point out how he could be correct, given the information...

I think it goes without saying that if Joseph Smith wrote the BoM, he was one talented author.

For everyone who is going to say someone else wrote it and Smith stole it, let me clarify: if a single person wrote the BoM, that person should have considered a career as an author of fiction.

That's your opinion.



I have mine.



That is why you are a Christian and I am no longer one.
 

Thus why I said mostly non LDS authors.   He was the only LDS guy.  That is what makes it different then most of the studies out there.  Both sides you could say we're involved with the research.  Most studies opposing the church as well as supporting it are not surprisingly only one sided.

I have long believed that no church is necessary for salvation, That it may actually be detrimental to it.

Because one only can understand the objective word of god when it has been subjectively interpreted by fallible human beings.



 

I don't want to be above 75% of the US population, just equal to it.



Not to mention, this is GD.  We have a condescending attitude to everyone who has an opinion opposite of ours.



Name a topic that this isn't true for.





 

Thanks for your posts Criley (and O_P, Grazer, Zhukov, Shane, Mobil1, and everybody else).  I'm learning a lot in this thread.



"If we have the truth, it cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not the truth, it ought to be harmed.”
– President J. Reuben Clark –

http://cesletter.com/Letter-to-a-CES-Director.pdf


I was pretty impressed with some of the things I've observed about the LDS, and began genuinely wondering if they had something I was lacking and needed in my life.  I visited the local LDS Church three times, they were pretty friendly.  I then ordered a copy of the BoM that fall and prayed and began reading.  I only got about half way through and had to stop.  It was a constant struggle and I couldn't force myself to read any more of it.  It is definitely not for me.  I spent many an hour on many a night asking questions via email and reading online material.  I tried really hard to ignore all the Mormon bashing that seamed to literally abound on the web, and sought to give them the benefit of the doubt.  I know how much bashing Christianity receives, so I figured it was probably just the same.  I can unequivocally say that I could never believe in the BoM, and I felt spiritually imperiled for even having tried to read it.  It was not what I was expecting....

As some others have previously said, I'll defend their right to their beliefs all day, but it is certainly not for me.  

I do sort of have a complaint against their faith, and that is this:  Why in the world aren't you guys more up front about some of the controversial things you believe?

I mean come on.....    You believe that God used to be a mortal man?  And further-- that men can become Gods just like him?  And to top it off, you didn't think that'd be noteworthy for prospective members of your faith to be told about up front?  I waisted literally days of my life (were it all added up) doing research and trying to debunk claims against you guys, only to find out you really do believe that kind of stuff?

My issue really isn't that you do believe it, so much as it is that you don't advertise it up front.  Has the thought ever crossed your minds that that's going to make people suspicious when they finally find stuff like that out?  It isn't like it just slipped your mind and you forgot to tell me....?

Irritated rant: OFF

I found a lot of my own concerns mentioned and answered seemingly pretty convincingly in the link up above.  I found it posted early in this thread (yes--- I actually read all 43 pages), and while I've seen many claims against the LDS in this thread rebuffed because they came from non-LDS folk, that wouldn't seem to be the case with the fellow above.  I saw zero responses to it (maybe my now half-blind 43 page eyes missed it?), and thought it odd.

What is you guy's take on the "Letter to a CES Director"?

The letter quotes many of the same controversial points that have already been asked and answered in this thread.   It has largely been ignored due to the fact that the author is very disingenuous on many claims about the church, and the fact that this thread is mainly christians agains mormons and the author of the letter is an avowed athiest.
One question I have for you, what in the BoM gave you the feeling that you were spiritually imperiled?

The side I tend to take is that of the "people who commit grievous sins after a profession of faith were never truly born again" group.  There are Biblical defenses of this position but they can (and have) been interpreted in different ways, so I'll hold off on those for now.

More to the point of sins and what one does about them, going by Psalm 37:12 as one of many examples to the same effect, unsaved people plan their grievous sins in advance.  A born-again will still commit sins, but they are (I believe) generally unplanned, and/or non-grievous sins.

I would (and this example is in my mind only) still accept a person as born-again if he, say, as a youth pastor has consensual sex with a girl in the youth group, and admits his wrong-doing to God and halts that behavior. (generally unplanned/non-grievous)

I would NOT accept a person as born-again if he does the above, denies (to God) that it is wrong, and continues it in a "committed" fashion. (planned behavior)

I would NOT accept a person as born-again if he does the above, except it was rape instead of consensual.  (grievous sin)

Again, this is one example and not meant to be all-inclusive.

...however, I want to be clear on something since I think you're anticipating me saying the opposite, so here goes:

Avoiding sin is not a "good work." If anything, it is a neutral work.

Confessing sin is also not a "good work."  

Accepting grace is only a "good work" insofar as it is God's work in giving you grace in the first place; so it has nothing to do with YOUR actions but rather HIS love and HIS power to wipe you clean of sin.

All our good works are as filthy rags per Isaiah 64:6.  Only one sin mixed in amongst our lifetime's good works WILL keep us out of heaven if it is not asked forgiveness for (through the grace given by the Christ), prior to death.

To believe anything apart from the above is to deny God's nature, God's grace, and God's promises...in which case it logically follows that you will not receive grace (and forgiveness for your sins) and, upon death, will be condemned to an existence permanently separated from God.

A Mormon who calls himself a Christian is covetous.

A Mormon who believes Joseph Smith is a prophet (and that Moroni is an angel, or that the golden plates were ordained by God) is an idolator.

A few Mormons in this thread have conducted themselves like railers.

You would do well to read Matthew 20:1-16.

I post in these threads because because:

1. People are sinners who need to be reconciled to God, and God made that possible for us through what He did for us on the cross. Jesus bore our sins, died to pay for our sins, and rose again from the dead.  He did ALL the work and He paid ALL the price.  Salvation is a gift freely offered by God.  Those who take God up on His offer have their sins forgiven.

2. There are counterfeits out there.  Mormonism isn't the only one.  God didn't give men religions to save them...  God saves sinners Himself.  Some people need to be shown the difference between a religion and a relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ.  Some prefer their religion.  They are free to choose, but religions save no one.

Glad you are being informed.

God bless.

YES.

....and I'll actually explain this part: He was asking this as a form of witness to the people around Him.  As a (human) man, God forsakes (turns away) from man's sins, and Christ was demonstrating this literally as He, as a man, was taking on all of man's present and future sins.

God was literally turning away from Christ's body (because of how it became sin), making Him (Christ's body) ask that question for our benefit.

Kinda like a rehearsed question from a "random" person in the audience at a talk show, political rally, etc; both the person asking and the person answering know the subject matter already, and are having the verbal exchange for the benefit/consideration of everyone else present.

Maybe those feelings of animosity were justified.

Me neither.  Southern Baptist General Conventionist reporting in.  

Thanks for that, you gave me a good chuckle,  especial the part where your call us covetous idolaters and then accuse US as being railers! This scripture has been quoted already in this thread but is very pertinent to your comments, at least that is how I see it
"1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."

What about Ethan Smith, the guy that wrote View of the Hebrews and the KJV Bible? What is the similarity to those two?





 

So, there must be a maximum age after which a person can no longer "see the light" and become a Mormon, right?  

Not a lot of time or ability to do many works after a whole life of unrighteousness at, say, age 80.  

Interesting point.  I had never thought of it that way before.

Good analogy.

Psalm 5:5

This thread is still going?

"Thread", "evangelical dog[ma] pile", "train wreck", etc, etc, etc. I check back now and then to see if water is still wet. Sure enough... it is!






Awesome. A LOT of "theologians" hitting people over the head with their bibles right here in this thread. Wonderful stuff as always. Very educational. Very graceful/gracious. (Matt 7:3-5)

Trying to take power away from God and pervert His word, one verse at a time.

Yup, sure does fit Joseph Smith quite well.

That's what I was just thinking.

 

Some people just are not getting it... and so they ask "What sins can or can't you commit and still be saved?"

Human beings are sinners and HAVE NO RIGHTEOUSNESS of their own, according to their Creator.

Religious people are self-righteous.  They perform religious ritual and think their participation in those rituals makes them acceptable in Gods eyes.

There is only ONE WAY to be acceptable in God's eyes and that is to have the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ.

That righteousness is GIVEN to those who humble themselves before God and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.

A person either has, or doesn't have God's righteousness imputed to them...

ALL of us are guilty.

Jesus alone is righteous.

Jesus went to the cross bearing ALL of our sins.  He paid for them ALL - sins of the past, present and future.

Jesus saves SOULS.  He didn't save our bodies - they are still just as sinful as ever.  The world is still just as wicked as ever.

But what we do have is the indwelling Holy Spirit that helps us resist temptations and/or points our sins out to us...  and if we sin leads us to repent.  Some saved souls resist the Spirit - grieving the Spirit - and their consciences are seared.  That's why the Bible tells Christians that there is a sin unto death - God will take some souls out in some situations - but they are still saved.

The self-righteous, religious person always comes up with the "Well what about ________________ (fill in the blank with some sort of sinner).  They can't be saved."

Jesus atoned for ALL sin.  Period.  The End.  He paid it all.

Trust Him and be saved.

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah... trust in Jesus... blah blah blah blah blah blah blah...  X infinity!

"Put your faith in Jesus ALONE." We get it. Cool. 'Nuff said. Your cause/mission would be well-served to leave it at that.

Or... you could just continue beating everyone around you senseless with YOUR preferred 2X4 and smugly pat yourself on the back for a good and righteous deed. (Is there ANY doubt that's how you roll?)



Cripes... religious threads in GD never fail to remind me of the Blessed Cheesemakers...

It's an honest letter from a former Mormon who looked in to all the contradictions and inconsistencies in the religion.  He wrote the letter and received no response, because there are no answers aside from the religion is not true.

Unfortunately, many Mormons not only reject their religion when they find out they have been duped, they reject the notion of God as well.

He tried religion, and it wasn't what he thought it was.  I hope the young man will heal from his experiences, and actually turn to God one day.

It's amazing that hearing about the mercy, love and grace of God angers so many people.

Especially religious people.

I agree 100%, you may not believe that but I do.

Perhaps something related to Mormons that we can all agree on.



Just listening to these on youtube recently, and can see how right on he was.  This are some small snippets from Ezra Taft Benson, former president of the LDS church. The first was from a speech given in the 60's after serving as Secretary of Agriculture under President Eisenhower.  He warns about the increase of socialism.
















And this was given later in talking about the destruction of the constitution and how the righteous citizens of this country will be the ones that save it.




He has some other good talks about standing up for freedom.

Political persuasions won't matter in eternity.

Making sure you trust the Lord Jesus Christ of the Holy Bible will.

You just keep-on keepin' on with your awesomeness. The roar of it must be deafening!  

It is delusional to think that there was "unity" in beliefs in the early church... Where do you guys come-up with this? Seriously.

The "unity" came in the form of the Nicene Creed, bought-and-paid-for by a Pagan ruler who wanted "unity."

The "unity" in the "Christian" belief about the nature of God *after* the creed came in the name of the Catholic Church.

It is delusional to think that the Pagan Constantine didn't influence the Nicene Creed. That would be like saying Bloomberg didn't influence the Colorado vote.

It is incorrect to think that there was complete unity in Christian beliefs and practices prior to the Pagan Constantine seeking more power and control and influence over the rising number of Christians under his rule...

You have to go to the post-creed church to find "unity" in beliefs...

The *early* church? There is a reason the Pagan Constantine needed to call (and pay for) a Council... Here is a clue... There *wasn't* unity until *after* the council...

The *early* church? There were still 'apostate" groups believing and practicing baptism for the dead and believing in a three-separate Godhead (among other sometimes wacky beliefs), a hundred years *after* the ink hit paper on the Pagan Constantine's creed...

The "unity" modern "Christians" talk about is the unity that came from the early creeds and in the church it created: The Catholic Church.

There was no "unity" prior to Constantine's creed... That is some stretch of the historical imagination... Given the fact that there were outlying groups still practicing baptism for the dead and believing different non-creedal beliefs about God a hundred years after the Pagan Constantine's creed...

I left it for several days almost a week ago...

Seriously.

I found it again on the first page of GD when I logged in... "This is *still* going...? That was a couple days ago...

If this isn't a world arfcom record for a Latter-Day Church of Jesus Christ bashing thread, then it has to be getting close...

Yeah... I don't think you have ever tried to disagree as anything other than a gentleman.

The same *cannot* be said of all the rest of your side of the line in this thread...



Yeah... It would be unfair to paint with too broad of a brush... And you have tried to keep your hits where they would score points... Likewise, honestly, so have I...

But... As always... Sometimes shots wander "below the belt" in these types of threads...

Yeah, I would make the call, "Mormons take pride in lying" is "LDS bashing" and most certainly an example of  below-the-belt shots common in these types of threads...