Discussions
-
-
mellyw
I think this site is to give reviews of books you have READ. Not just to take pot shots at people's faith. But maybe I misunderstood the purpose of this website.
posted 5 years ago.
-
lola1275
The Church of Jesus Christ is not a cult. You have probably talked to the wrong people that have given you the wrong information. Sorry you feel that way.
posted 5 years ago.
-
cassie l
The LDS church is not a cult. If you don't believe me, read the Book of Mormon yourself and attend one of the LDS church meetings. Don't just assume things. I'm sorry that you believe it is a cult.
posted 5 years ago.
-
Heather K
If believing in the sacredness of the family as the basic unit of a healthy society, caring for those around you, and striving to live free of sin is scary, the other stuff going on in the world must cause you to shiver in your boots! The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints teaches us how to live happily in the world around us, and I for one am glad for the knowledge and inspiration it brings into my life.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Barbs
What is a cult anyway? I don't think you know the meaning of that word. Look at you posting a picture of two people engaged in kissing. What are you trying to prove?
posted 4 years ago.
-
Claire D
I have to agree with you. First off when I read the BOM I was blown away by the "fact" that Jesus was born in Jerusalem. God Almighty got it right the first time around, why would He not get it right the second time around? After all it is prophecy and we all know that prophecy has to be 100% correct. Also, I found descrepancies in the animals which were found here way, way to early before they actually arrived on the American continent.
The Bible is VERY clear about false teachers and prophets. The Jesus of the Bible is God in the flesh. Jesus of the Bible is the one who created everything! Including the angels which Lucifer is one. He is NOT the "spirit brother of Christ." If you believe in the BOM Jesus then you will not be saved. How sad to be caught up in something that totally gives a person a false sense of security.posted 4 years ago.
-
Jimmy McGuirt
here is the www.dictionary.com definition of the world CULT: a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies." So if I was to ask you ..based on this meaning of a cult...if your church was a particular system of religious worship? What would you tell me? The answer would be.. "well yes...it is. So that means every church or religion is a system of religious worship. Heck even on my mission people would yell out at us and say, "You mormons are a cult...I'd smile back and them and say.. "DUH...come one people...look up the meaning...God bless....and let's get back to enjoying Shelfari for sharing books that we have read instead of religious debates...
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
-
Barry
Joseph Smith is one of the greatest Americans of all -time; frontiersman, flim-flam man, city builder, church builder, lecher, deviant, freemason, prophet, charlatan. The true prophet of the true JerUSAlem, where every man will rule a star; and every second year get a brand new car.
posted 5 years ago.
-
RamSam
Recently got the CDs in my car and listen while I drive around- the way the histories intertwine astounds me- I don't always pick up on that while I read it in bits and pieces.
posted 5 years ago.
-
Alex Blance
yeah, it helps me a lot to clear all my doubts by reading the Book of Mormon,it help me resolved scriptural puzzles about its relationship with the Bible..Christ truly visited people of the ancient america..and the Book of Mormon will always be the answer together with the Bible...I believe it
posted 5 years ago.
-
-
-
Sarah D
The Book of Mormon has definitely been a part of my regular reading. You can read it over and over again and still learn something different everytime.
posted 5 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
as a non mormon, i grew up thinking this book was silly, now, as an agnostic, i find myself wondering why i thought my bible made perfect sense and all other holy books were foolish...
posted 5 years ago.
-
Jenny T
Something new and inspiring always jumps out at me when I read the Book of Mormon. I know it's true and if you read it with an open mind you will know it is true and your life will be changed.
posted 5 years ago.
-
RoLee G removed this reply 5 years ago
-
RoLee G
A true book full of answers, I could read over and over again and feel good about myself. It changes your life, a good change.
posted 5 years ago.
-
Kaitlyn
I love this book. I read it everyday because it is that good. I am sorry but you most have heard wrong because we are not a cult.
posted 5 years ago.
-
Marie T
A delicious and clarifying book, that gives a history of some who left Jerusalem and a pattern for living today, as well as testifying to the divinity of Jesus Christ.
posted 5 years ago.
-
Monica W
I love this book! I haven't had the chance to read it too many times, but I did when the prophet told us to. I am rereading it now, very slowly, but surely.
posted 5 years ago.
-
Sharifa F
I'm about a third of the way through. It's an interesting story, and I find it a rather strange one.
posted 5 years ago.
-
Sci-Fi Guy
This is one of the most inspiring books I've ever read. I'm recently on my fifth time reading it.
posted 5 years ago.
-
Rose ~ I have no clue what to put here.
Okay - I need some help. I am in a group called "let's try and see if everyone on shelfari can join one group!" and there is a discussion post called "There is only ONE way to Heaven." The person who started it (name is Jesus Freak) believes that the BOM is a pack of lies compiled by Joseph Smith, that Mormons are a cult, and that our teachings are not aligned with the bible and therefore ours is a false belief system. I just need some help 'defending' the BOM and our religion as a whole...
so... if anyone who has read it and has a testimony of it's truthfulness, PLEASE come over and help...posted 4 years ago.
-
carriskis
I would simply recommend that he read the Book of Mormon with a desire to know if it is correct realizing that we believe in and study from the bible as well. There is no convincing someone. There is a sharing of beliefs and testimony, but he won't find out until he puts in an honest effort. The only thing he can't refute is your personal beliefs and testimony.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Rose ~ I have no clue what to put here.
thanks - I'm going to post a few scriptures that might help on that point. :)
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Candace Salima
This book provides insight, teachings, knowledge and understanding into the Gospel of Jesus Christ in a pure and simple way. Every principle taught in the Bible is taught in its pure form in the Book of Mormon. There is nothing in the Bible that is not purely taught in the Book of Mormon. Those who call it pack of lies have no knowledge or understanding of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and perhaps only a nodding acquaintance of the Holy Ghost and his ability to testify of truth. It saddens me that this precious book of scriptures is one of the attacked books in the world, and yet, at the same time, it is considered to be one of the most precious, a voice from the dust as it were, books on the gospel ever published.
posted 4 years ago.
-
I do not deny that Christ lives in the hearts of some Mormons. If you confess with your mouth and believe- you will be saved. However, those who are entangled in its false teachings beware. Please check your Book of Mormon and additional doctrine with the Bible. I think you will find much in contradiction. Keep an open mind and an open heart, allow God, the true God, to speak into your heart. Those who seek truth will find it.
posted 4 years ago.
-
JamesBrown
Mark Twain called the Book of Mormon "Chloroform in Print" but I think he was being generous.
If you think this is the truth I have this bridge....posted 4 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
jamesbrown, compared to what religious text, do you find the book of mormon more unbelievable? all religious texts require a tremendous amount of faith to accept the stories and the teachings as "gospel"
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Candace Salima
Ah Joey, to be so deceived by the lies perpetuated both those I cannot begin to understand. The Book of Mormon is a second witness of Jesus Christ and the teachings of His Gospel. It is the history of those who lived in the Americas and our Lord's visit to them after His resurrection. Plain, simple truths are taught which lighten the heart and mind. As a voracious studier of both the Bible and the Book of Mormon I find that the second teaches nothing that is not in the first. Of course, I read the King James version of the Bible, therein may be the difference.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Ray W
Ahhh Candace...You are correct!
The Book of Mormon doesn't teach anything that isn't in the K.J. Bible...it isn't meant to replace the Bible it is another testiment that Jesus is the Christ.
It is the same Gospel and the author like the Bible is Jesus Christ!posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Otto_Maddox
I can't believe people read this and in the same breath discredit the apocryphal texts such as the gospel of Judas or Mary Magdalene.
God's creation surrounds us, man's creation confounds us. To that end, the book of Mormon is great fiction-great meaning it can teach us much, fiction in that it completely obliterates the true spirituality of Native Americans. The book is made for and by Europeans. If you want to learn about Native American spiritual beliefs and experiences, go and learn some of their oral histories from first hand accounts.posted 4 years ago.
-
Victoria M
But native americans came from the nephites. Because the nephites were destroyed, they branched out and started believing other stuff. It was written by them in their time. Your right about the great part- it does teach us much. But it is NON-fiction, because they did write, Not the europeans. Just open up and ponder them. you'll see.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Genni
I know that the Book of Mormon is true, and that it is a first-hand account of the inhabitants of North America in ancient times. Have you read it? It glorifies God and tells about the value that everyone has in His eyes. I am a very small part Native American (eventhough I don't look it) and I know, without a doubt, that this book is true and that it can be a great source of happiness in anyone's life. Please read it, and think about the principles. I promise that you will feel the truth of it too, if you will have an open heart.
posted 4 years ago.
-
emily v
The book is NON-Fiction! Joesph Smith translated it for us to read. The europeans didn't write it.
And it is not about the the Native Americans. It was about the Nephites and written by them. about what happend at there time.
Read it and see.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
SW removed this reply 4 years ago
-
SW
The Book of Mormon
As part of the Restoration of the gospel, God brought forth the Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ. By the power of God, Joseph Smith translated this book from an ancient record written on gold plates. The Book of Mormon is “a record of God’s dealings with the ancient inhabitants of the Americas and contains, as does the Bible, the fulness of the everlasting gospel” (Introduction to the Book of Mormon).
The Book of Mormon is a powerful witness of Jesus Christ. It helps us understand His teachings, including those in the Bible. Examples of Book of Mormon witnesses of Christ include:
*Nephi, who saw the birth and death of Christ in a vision ( 1 Nephi 11:13–15).
*The brother of Jared, who saw the Lord because of his great faith ( Ether 3:7–16).
*The prophet Samuel the Lamanite, who prophesied of Christ’s coming and gave the signs of His birth and death ( Helaman 13–14).
*Christ Himself, who, after His Resurrection, appeared to the people of ancient America and invited them to come forward one by one to see and touch Him until “they had all gone forth and had witnessed for themselves” ( 3 Nephi 11:13–17).
In the Bible, Jesus told His Apostles, “Other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd” ( John 10:16). Soon after He was resurrected, the Lord visited these “other sheep”—the inhabitants of ancient America. During this visit to the American continent (recorded in the Book of Mormon), Jesus Christ:
*Invited people to feel the wound marks in His hands and feet and side.
*Taught His gospel.
*Called twelve disciples to teach His gospel.
*Healed the sick.
*Prayed for the people.
*Performed miracles.
In September 1823, Joseph Smith was visited by a heavenly messenger named Moroni, in the same way that angels often appeared to Church leaders in the New Testament. Moroni informed Joseph that God had a work for him to do and told him that a record of the ancient inhabitants of the American continent was buried in a nearby hill. He stated that the record contained the fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ ( Joseph Smith—History 1:27–34).
In September 1827, Joseph received the record, which was written on thin plates of gold. Joseph translated the book into English by the inspiration of God and called the book the Book of Mormon. It is named after Mormon, an ancient prophet who compiled the sacred record. The book verifies, as another testament of Christ, the reality and divinity of Jesus Christ. It is, then, a second witness that affirms the truth of the Bible. Since its publishing in 1830, the Book of Mormon has blessed the lives of millions of people through its powerful message about Jesus Christ and His gospel.
For more information about the Book of Mormon please see www.mormon.org or www.lds.orgposted 4 years ago.
-
Annette m
well i am a roman catholic, live in Leeds, England, and you are wondering why i bought and have been reading this book, well lets just say in all honestly im a open-minded christian, and does it not say in the bible
" In my Father's house there are many mansions ", well i chose to read about this one, as with alot more we are all creatures imperfect, sinners, human belonging to our creator and i find it inspiring, and i can sleep well on a night.
When these people visit my home, i invite them in, they have english tea, scones, and we have a good chat, not necessarily about bible sections verses we gossip about life, living today how the world is changing due to global conditions, how the young today value life, which to me they value so little, taking drugs, stabbing people excessive alcohol intake, and when you ask them they sAY the church, going bores them, so its about time all you priests nuns other religious ministers woke up, and make their service in their church interesting .
at present im using their library to find ancestors on my family tree, and they in utah, have been so helpful over this, this bible remains at my bedside and when im i say I am lonely, then thses inspiring written words puts my heart, mind and soul at ease. So its a welcome edition to my shelf annette m godbless one and all.posted 4 years ago.
-
Martha T
I am glad that there are so many posting good things about this book beacuse that is what it is GOOD. It is a book that can help you feel enormous amounts of peace and strengthen your relationship with God. I have read it before and will continue to read it again and again and again as I have also done before. I believe that all written in this book is true and that it has made such a positive effect in my life. I love God and believe he loves me and sent this book through his prophets and time for all of us Children on earth to have and enjoy.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Stewart Ellington
A work of fiction by a charalatan charismatic teasure hunter who has amazingly afftect many gullible and brainwashed people.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
I have always Hated going to church and reading this book. But my mom told me, in a way that i could better understand, about the stories.
I listened to her, then she told me she would read Fablehaven If I read the Book of Mormon. I was a little discontent about it. but i did. Whenever I tried reading it, i would only make it to the end of chapter one. But I stuck it out and when i read farther and farther into the book. I couldnt stop. my eyes kept racing through the worlds wanting to have more.
When I finnaly finnished it. I felt this wonderful peace. Like, well its unexplainable. But I know that the events that were in this book did happen. and k=now in church i understand what they are talking about. Its like I was blind, but know I do see the way. I still dont get the whole bit about the olive tree, but every time you re-read a book. you find things that help you better understand it. So, to those who havent yet read it; Do.
As Nephi has said, "I will Go and do the things which the lord hath comanded. For I know that the Lord givith no comandments unto the children of men, save he shall prepare a way for them that they may accomplish the thing wich he had commanded them." 1 Nephi 3:7
Now I will re-read the Book of mormon before I turn 15. Please read it if you havent as of yet. I know that you will be blessed. and those who are of other religion. I promise you that you will find a peace, and a love, and I know you will be blessed.
Go and Do
:O)posted 4 years ago.
-
Jenny F.
Thank you for sharing that with the world. You have a really strong testimony. I know sometimes it can be hard to read it, because I forget to occasionally; and sometimes, I don't feel the Holy Ghost with me at all. But when I read the Book of Mormon it gives me a peace of mind, and I love it. Thank you for sharing your testimony, it really brightened my day.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Alizabeth S
Thank you so much for sharing. That was awesome. And you're so young. That is super impressive.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
THE BOOK OF MORMON IS TRUE AND ITS RIGHT IT CAN GET U THRO TUFF TIMES ( IF U HADNT NOTICED YET IM MORMON!)
posted 4 years ago.
-
Ray W
I agree with you it can help with the tuff times...
But it is great during the best of times as well (yes I'm L.D.S. also)posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Jeremy B
I was born and raised a Catholic. I am still a Catholic. However, unlike most Catholics, I have read the Book of Mormon. It was primarily because I was in Basic Training and could only read religious books. I read this book with an open mind. I will admit, the book offers a very unique and wonderful perspective. However, I do not feel that this book is anything more than a work of literal fiction.
In addition, I don't think that I will burn in hell for not believing that the LDS Church is the one true Church. The Book of Mormon is a wonderful piece of American Literature and I will never debate that. I'm just simply stating that there is no concrete evidence to suggest that these events have taken place, besides the words of Joseph Smith.
Non-fiction writing needs to have at least some degree of historical fact. This book does not.posted 4 years ago.
-
Breezysla
First let me say that is not meant to affend but to inform. I don't know where you got your information that you will "burn in hell" for not believing the LDS church. We DON'T believe that people will burn in hell. I'm glad that you read the Book of Mormon. But there is something else that you should read before you make untrue statements about the LDS church. The Articles of Faith. They are basic beleifs of our church. One of them state that everyone is free to worship as they see fit. As far as the event in the Book of Mormon have no concrete evedince, other than the word of a man. The same thing can be said for the Holy Bible the you and I read. Because all of those prophets are long since dead. Once again I'm sorry if I have offended you. But the church and The Book of Mormon is something that I hold near and dear to my heart. Also I have put a great deal of study into it. If you have questions don't take someone's word for it, study it for yourself.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Miracle
& I am a muslim.. I got The Book of Mormon from Marriott hotel back when I was in Milan - Italy. I did not start reading yet.. I just skimmed through its pages. I do have the Holy bible {King James version} & {New Revised Standard version}.. I have read Songs of Solmon and most of the stories mentioned in the OLD TESTAMENT.. To my Surprise, most of the stories mentioned in the old testament were also mentioned in the holy quran. As a matter of fact, our holy quran's major stories revolve around the stories of Moses and Jesus.. There is a whole chapter called (Mariam) which means Virgin Mary.
I do recommend reading the translated version of the Holy Quran even though it is much nicer once you read it in ARABIC.posted 4 years ago.
-
Dani
I agree with what breezyzla had to say. What I say is also not meant to be offensive. In order to feel that this book is more than a "work of literal fiction" you have to pray and ask your Heavenly Father. The Book of Mormon promises that if you do this you will know for yourself that the book is true.
As for the book not having any concrete evidence to suggest that these events have taken place, I think that was how it was all planned out. We have to have faith to know it was true, just like with the Bible. "Faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things; therefore if ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true."(Alma 32:21)posted 4 years ago.
-
Zach E
There is way more evidence that this is a factual book, including 11 other testimonies at the begining of your book. Also you have the words of millions of members of the LDS church that will testify of the truth. Including me, I know that this book is factual and was truly written by inspired prophets on the American continent before, during and after the time in which Christ walked on earth. Non-fiction doesn't require historical fact, it has to be true and I know that this book is true.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Heather K
A prophet in the LDS Church, President Ezra Taft Benson, made a prophetic promise that I have always remembered. He said "There is a power in the book which will begin to flow into your lives the moment you begin a serious study of the book. You will find greater power to resist temptation. You will find the power to avoid deception. You will find the power to stay on the strait and narrow path. The scriptures are called “the words of life”, and nowhere is that more true than it is of the Book of Mormon. When you begin to hunger and thirst after those words, you will find life in greater and greater abundance." I add my testimony of that promise, as I personally experience that power every day that I seriously study the Book of Mormon. It is more than a collection of stories about people and their interaction with God. It is a way to allow the Power of God to flow into your life, to truly live a better life. I have lived that promise for the past 15 years, and bear my living testimony of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon.
The link to the magazine article is below; it is a present day Prophet, like unto those in the Bible, teaching about why The Church of Jesus Christ values the Book of Mormon. But the main thing to know is this: We believe in the Book of Mormon, and treasure it, because the purpose of every word contained inside of that book is to draw us closer to Jesus Christ.
http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=50db94bf3938b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1
Thank you for your open mind about the Book of Mormon. I respect your Faith in God, and admire you for your respect of mine.posted 4 years ago.
-
Kellye W
Hey Jeremy. You know, I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and I just wanted to let you know that I don't think you will burn in hell for not believing. But I do have to say this, I agree with Heather K. It is the act of "studying" not merely reading The Book of Mormon that you begin to understand and gain a testimony of the life and teachings of the Savior. This book really isn't meant to be a book of stories, it's meant to draw people closer to Christ. I think it is really cool that you took the time to read it. If you ever get the chance again, try studying it as a companion to the Bible. You will see how the Book of Mormon is another testament of Jesus Christ. Out of the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established. Matthew 18:16 Keep up the faith! : )
posted 4 years ago.
-
Nicole W
I just have two things to add...
There is much historical evidence to support the events describe in the Holy Bible, all you have to do is look for it and you'll find it even in secular sources.
Also, I have been visited by missionaries, have recieved a copy of the Book of Mormon, have read it, and have even prayed to God about it. What I received from Him was a warning in my heart to stay far away from the Book of Mormon because it wasn't His words. So I gave it an honest try and God showed me the truth.posted 4 years ago.
-
Alizabeth S
Just wanted to echo Breezysla, there is no way you will burn in hell just for not believing the LDS Church is the only true one. That is definitely not Mormon Doctrine. So if any mormon has ever told you that, they are crazy.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
The Artist FKA Hoopidy Fly Pimp Mac Daddy Re-Kleiner O-19er Coming In For A Landing Boy He's A Hella Fresh Taco Bell Connoisseur
is it possible to be a mormon and not like this book? probably a silly question, but i am curious.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Cherper
Yep. I am a Mormon, and to quote Mark Twain, "It is chloroform in print. If Joseph Smith composed this book, the act was a miracle -- keeping awake while he did it was, at any rate."
I agree with him, some of the most boring bad prose on Earth.posted 4 years ago.
-
Campeche
It is absolutely possible to be an active Mormon and not like this book just as it is possible to be Catholic and not like the Bible. While I consider the Book of Mormon to be scripture just like the Bible, it can be tedious and boring to read (just like the Bible). Mark Twain called it "Paper Chloroform"! It is the kind of book you would read/study on an on-going basis but it's definitely not a "beach book". A big difference between the Book of Mormon and the Bible (especially The Old Testament) is that the
B of M hasn't been through umpteen translations so it's more straight forward and requires less study helps to understand it.
However, it is full of tedious phrases such as "And it came to pass" and "Behold" - which for me is a recipe for sleep.
Why couldn't the scriptures have been written by Junot Diaz or Ernest Hemingway?!posted 4 years ago.
-
Jessica F
I guess it is possible to be Mormon and not love to read this book, but it is the cornerstone of our religion, which means even if you don't like to read it, you need to believe in it.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Susannah D removed this reply 4 years ago
-
-
Heather H
I'm sure it is possible. When I read it as a young teen I found the language tedious, just like the language in the bible can be tedious. Studying it with someone conversant with hebrew and native-american studies was what really made it interesting to me. Rereading it as an adult also helped, because I "got it" more than I did as a teen. Also, if you have a short attention span, which I do, it can be hard to enjoy.
posted 4 years ago.
-
I was a mormon, and had myself excommunicated for so many reasons … I love Cherper's response — it is BORING and BAD writing. There are Mormons who do not list this book at the top of their list, I know a lot of them. This is a book purporting theology, not engaging in the act of creating art with words. Look elsewhere for that.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
I have been visited by Mormon missionaries on numerous occasions, but when I ask certain questions, all they say is, "I know what I say is true." That is not an answer; it's an affirmation. I have no wish to offend, but I would like to ask some questions that have never been answered to my satisfaction. I'll wait for a response.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Too Busy Reading to Write
I don't know if I have any answers for you, but you can ask me whatever you like. I am an active member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, served a mission for the church 10 years ago and my husband and I are raising are children to be "Mormons".
Nicoleposted 4 years ago.
-
Megan R
Hi. I am also a member of the church and a former missionary. Your questions are valid and deserve an answer, but I feel that the average member is unable to answer them. Many people do not feel the need to dig into every single detail to find if something is true, believing that divine revelation from God through prayer is enough. For some, however, more hard facts are important. There is a book entitled "The Book of Mormon Evidences" that may help you. Although many books have been written to disprove the Book of Mormon, there are many other books which are persausive the other way. Reading convincing evidence from both sides can also throw you into more confusion, however. I believe that you cannot really know the truth of this book by just comparing modern studies on both sides. There is an element of faith that is required to believe, and can only be obtained by the person seeking the answers. Study it out to your heart's content, but don't be afraid to ask the Lord in faith if it is true. This takes far more courage than decades of studying.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Bryan M
Why is the Book of Mormon written in Shakespearean English? Why not the English of 19th Cent. America. I find it unreasonable to believe that God spoke in the language of the King James Bible in 1830.
Not unreasonable at all. The Book of Mormon is a translation. The translator choosing words familiar to him to convey the meaning of words and phrases being translated. Clearly, Joseph Smith had access to the King James Bible which he knew well (see Joseph Smith history Ch1). This was no doubt, an important source for him as he clothed the translation with English words.
But there are terms that have an obvious similarity to the nineteenth-century culture. However, since those language similarities only exist on the level of vocabulary and cannot be seen in the way to the political, and situational concepts that are worked out in the text, we may confidently ascribe the nineteenth-century similarities to the translation layer. It is really very easy to demonstrate that the translation layer was the result of a nineteenth-century production culture. Of course, that has never really been in question at all.
When scholars dive below the surface of the vocabulary of the translation and attempt to deal with the event structures of the text, the situation is dramatically different. Where the translation layer fits comfortably into the nineteenth century, the event structures are discordant with it. In the case of political, economic, and war and social structures, we find that they do not match with the expectations of vocabulary at all. They do, however, fit into the context of time and place that best fits the geographic features described in the text. This last type of evidence is particularly important because it comes directly from the unconscious and unwritten portions of the text.
In fact, while words and phrasing is 19th century English culture as well as well as Old King James English, the sentence and idea structuring is altogether not. There have been dozens of Hebraisms and Middle Eastern language patterns discovered in the Book of Mormon – virtually all being brought about by pattern recognition of computers in this century. The Book of Mormon is clearly an ancient Middle Eastern text. The evidence is overwhelming.
The Book of Mormon makes complete sense as a historical document, but does so only when we place it in the correct historical context. Without the correct production culture, the text is anomalous and sometimes foreign to human experience--as in the contextless reading of Ammon at the waters of Sebus. Placed in the correct production culture where the unstated assumptions writer become explicit for the reader, the text authentically describes human motivations appropriate to that historical time and place.
There was supposed to be an epic battle near Palmyra NY. The LDS church owns this property, but they haven't undertaken any archealogical digs to recover artifacts. Yet, the church sends members to Central America to find evidence of Christ's return. Why not dig in Palmyra.
None of us would be any more convinced of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon if such artifacts were discovered. Let me put this another way – you and I wouldn’t wait for the tablets of the 10 commandments to be unearthed by archaeology before we believe them and live them. Spiritual truths come from revelation, by confirmation of the Holy Ghost to the heart of the individual, and in no other way. It seems (according to current archeological theories) that the Book of Mormon locations fit much more accurately with Central America based on topography and overlay maps. Either Moroni deposited the plates in upstate New York after what he describes as “wandering for many years,” or whether those events took place closer to that region are not certain. But an absence of evidence is certainly not evidence against a thing.
However there have been substantial finds relative to the Book of Mormon. For instance, critics for years scoffed at the idea of metal, or gold plates used to keep records – and the idea of sealing a text. Over the past 50 years, several examples of metal plates stored in stone boxes have come to light the middle east. Examples of portions of these texts sealed with a metal band or metal cord have been found. There have been discoveries of geographic and climate regions, locations of metal ore described by Nephi in the Eastern Saudi Arabia that critics once scoffed at. Cities and names of locations in the Saudi Arabia which match the travel time and direction clues left us by Nephi’s party traveling out of Jerusalem. There have been discoveries of Horses in South America which have quieted criticisms, and on and on and on. The critics just change channels. In fact, I’m amazed recently how many mullet-sporting anti-Mormon fanatics have all suddenly become DNA experts…an area they actually know nothing about.
Supposedly, the Central Americans are descendants of the Hebrews. However, the DNA evidence clearly indicates that the native Central Americans are from Central Asia. How can this be?
So, genetic attacks on the Book of Mormon focus on the fact that Amerindian DNA seems closest to Asian DNA, and not DNA from "the Middle East" or "Jewish" DNA. However, this attack ignores several key points.
Lehi (the prophet lead at the time of Jeremiah to the New World) and his family are clearly not Jews. They belong to the tribe of Manasseh (Alma 10:3, 1 Nephi 5:14), and married into Ishmael's family, the tribe of Ephraim.[1] These tribes were carried away captive by the Assyrians, and only contributed to a marginal degree to the current genetic mix of the Middle East.
Furthermore, the Middle East is located at the crossroads of three continents, and has seen a great deal of immigration, mixing, and intermarriage. To use modern Middle Eastern DNA as the "standard" against which to measure what Manasseh and Ephraim DNA must have been like 2600 years ago is extraordinarily sloppy science. No one knows the DNA pattern of Lehi, let alone Sariah or the family of Ishmael for that matter.
Next, the Book of Mormon text clearly indicates that the continent was populated by other peoples when the party of Lehi arrived. We know of at least 4 groups that are mentioned. Given the fact that the record that became the emphasis of the record kept by the prophet Mormon in 412AD intentionally was Spiritual and delt exclusively with the dealings of God and the prophets. Records dealing with political, economic, population and other matters were kept on other records which Moroni states were extensive. That is to say, just because Lehi’s small group came to the New World across the ocean is in no way, nor ever has been, incompatible with our current scientific theories of Western migration from the Bearing Strait, or with DNA studies.posted 4 years ago.
-
emily v
The mormon missionaries really do beleive and know it is true. They probably wouldn't be a missionary if they didn't know it was the true gospal. Its just something that you have to believe and have faith in your heart that its true. What did you ask them???
posted 4 years ago.
-
Mary L. Simonsen removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Elizabeth S removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Too Busy Reading to Write
Dictation is not the same as translation. I translate Spanish for a living and what I translate is not words, but images. I also make word choice based on my audience. For instance I can translate the same work several different ways depending on what country of origin my audience is: you cannot use the same exact language for people from Spain, Mexico, or Paraguay. There are also educational and socioeconomic factors to consider in word choice as well.
As for the gentleman who was never sealed to his 2nd wife, that must have been his own choice. There would be nothing but his choice and personal worthiness from preventing that.
Theories that make the Book of Mormon to be a product of nineteenth century understanding are undermined by the Arabian Peninsula evidences, chiasmus, Hebraisms, metal plates, warfare in the Book of Mormon, and many other issues.
However, the biggest proof comes from a personal knowledge, and that is why the missionaries always come back to that. We believe that God speaks to individuals through the power of the Holy Ghost. The invitation is made to all to try it out. Read with a heart desiring to know the truth, study the doctrines and concepts laid out there, and ask God in the name of Christ if these things are true. I have received confirmation for myself and the way the Lord spoke to me in my heart and my mind is clear evidence to me of the truthfullness of the Book of Mormon.
-Nicoleposted 4 years ago.
-
Mary L. Simonsen removed this reply 4 years ago
-
-
Michael D
Then you were not really asking questions. I am not saying this sarcastically at all or attacking but you have been given great answers here to your questions and if nothing has changed then you were really just trying to make a point rather than asking a true question.
I have to admit that I find it curious that people will belive anything that supports thier view. Such as...
About 10 years ago there was symbol that was found over and over in the central american area and when a (non-Mormon) doctor discovered its meaning it was pretty big stuff.
The meaning of the symbol was "And it came to pass". I do not need to tell the Mormon folks here how huge that is BUT, it means nothing. The person who "wants" it to be false will just blow it off because it doesn't fit their mind set and it will make someone who believes say "wow" but it will not create a testimony of the Lord's work.
Only true study of the scriptures themselves with prayer and fasting will allow the Holy Spirit to give somebody an answer of it's truthfullness, and I do not mean reading it to prove it one way or the other but an open minded, trust in God to give the answer reading of it.
Just some thoughtsposted 4 years ago.
-
The archeologist Michael is referring to is David Stuart. As far as I can tell this is a Mormon myth. I have read a lot of Stuart's work and not come across this at all. If someone can show where Stuart made this claim I would appreciate it.
Even if this were true it would really mean nothing unless you are claiming that Mayan's used Reformed Egyptian(fictional language used by Nephi). That would be a false claim because they obviously didn't. Mormon did not abridge the record of Nephi to my knowledge. The language should have remained in Reformed Egyptian which means that even if the Mayans used this the Egyptians did not. So, Nephi's language would have had more in common with the Egyptians language. Yet "And it came to pass" appears a lot in 1st and 2nd Nephi.
Also, it is insulting to claim that the Mayans came from Jerusalem. They were a very advanced culture and were one of the only groups of people to develop their own written language(I think there were 4 other writing systems capable of representing every aspect of the spoken language). They had published thousands of works and were a very advanced non-Jewish and non-Christian society. You do all Native Americans a disservice when you rob them of their ancestry which came over the ice bridge. You shouldn't change history to validate your beliefs.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Ray W
I first read this book in early 1978.
Since then I've reread it at least 14 times.
I am re-reading it again and hope to finish it by the end of the year.posted 4 years ago.
-
Elizabeth O
I am a christian and I know that God's word is true. God's word is the Bible and there is no other book (no matter the author or the church or gathering that uses it) that is comparable to the Bible. I have read lots of books because I am an avid reader, I love reading and learning new things. However, the word of God (the Bible) still stands true and it gives no credence to any other book other than the bible as the infallible word of God. There are many differences infact disagreements between the bible and the book of mormon, any book inspired by God will not contradict the bible in any way. The bible is all I need to use to know about God.
The bible says:
"Beware let any man spoil you with philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ But [now] I am fearful, lest that even as the serpent beguiled Eve by his cunning, so your minds may be corrupted and seduced from wholehearted and sincere and pure devotion to Christ.
For [you seem readily to endure it] if a man comes and preaches another Jesus than the One we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the [Spirit] you [once] received or a different gospel from the one you [then] received and welcomed; you tolerate [all that] well enough!"
Salvation is only in Jesus (born of a virgin; not through Mary's physical union with God!) and that is the basis of Christianity, I think we should just stick to Jesus, why not focus on the "major" rather than on the "minor". Anyway, the good thing with God is that He gave us a free will, intelligence, a sound mind and we are free to choose/decide how we want to live, what we want to believe -God doesn't force anything down our throats! But of course that freedom has an end when we ALL shall give account of ourselves to God and face Judgment.posted 4 years ago.
-
Kevyn V
Mormons full heartedly believe in the Bible. There are not any disagreements between the Bible and the Book of Mormon. When that statement is said, it is very much mis-understood.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Gish girl G
Elizabeth,
I read your post and couldn’t help but want to reply. I have to agree with you, the bible does stand true today, it is the word of God, but, in my belief, it is not the only word of God now on the earth today. There have been arguments about the differences between the Bible and The Book of Mormon, but from the arguments I’ve heard the arguments seem one sided. A lot of the arguments I’ve heard against The Book of Mormon come from those who haven’t read it or who have partially read it.
Also, I believe that The Book of Mormon is just an add, and confirmation to what the Bible says. The LDS church (Mormons) believe in Christ, the Book of Mormon confirms that. You quoted in your comment that we should "Beware let any man spoil you with philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ… that even as the serpent beguiled Eve… your minds may be corrupted and seduced from wholehearted and sincere and pure devotion to Christ.” I will say again, that the LDS (Mormons) believe in Christ. Even the name of their church (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) says it. Why would they incorporate his name into their church if they didn’t believe it? Why would they read doctrine that would go against that belief?
Lastly, I have to say that I am part of the LDS church and I have never heard of God having a physical relationship with God, if I remember correctly she was “carried away in the spirit” , it was never told that she had physical intercourse with our Father in Heaven. One last thing to add, the scriptures are our laws and rules, but!, we still have the choice to follow them. Everyone makes mistakes, and the more we know what is right or wrong the more we are accountable for what we do, what we choose. But that’s what forgiveness is for, that’s what Gods mercy is for, we do have choice, that’s why were on this earth, to choose, A test to see if we will follow God or Satan.
I’m glad you care enough to share your opinion, I hope you continue, I also hope that you do not judge the Book of Mormon unless you have read and studied it personally yourself. If you have, I would like to discuss it with you further.
Enjoy.posted 4 years ago.
-
lola1275
You have just fulfilled a prophesy from the Book of Mormon by stating a Bible, we need no other Bible. Thank you! If you read Isaiah 29, that is where the evidence is of another book of scripture.
"Isaiah 29:10 For the Lord hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep asleep, and hath closed your eyes: the prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he covered.
11 And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed:
12 And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.
13 ¶ Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:
14 Therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvellous work among this people, even a marvellous work and a wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid."
The marvellous work and wonder is the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, as so many plain and precious truths from the bible have been taken away by men. It contains the fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ. I doubt you will find very many members of the LDS church that will force the Book of Mormon down anyone's throat, as we believe that we are born to choose for ourselves the path in lfve to take, but we just want others to know the truths taught by the Savior himself, and find true happiness in this life.posted 4 years ago.
-
“Don't worry a significant portion of the Book of Mormon is copied directly from the Bible. You'll find that even the mistakes from the edition of the Bible that J.S. had are in the Book of Mormon. If you really want to get the "true" word you should read the Joseph Smith translation of the Bible it fixes most contradictions between the Bible and the BOM.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Kevyn V
I had put the Book of Mormon on my Shelfari Shelf, and it brought me to this page. I just want to say for those of you that are curious, we believe that the Jesus Christ visited the ancient America's also. He had other sheep (his children) he needed to teach. We didn't have the internet or radio at the time. In the Bible He actually says "Other Sheep I have to teach, which are not of this fold". To make a very long story short, this is where the Book of Mormon came from. The book of Mormon does not compete with the Bible. It is an help mate to the Bible. It is another Testament of Jesus Christ. I believe it with all my heart.
posted 4 years ago.
-
maddie A
thanks!! that was nice to read something postitive about the book of mormon! I love the book too!!
posted 4 years ago.
-
shdean
Not being a believer in any religion at this time, I still have to say that the Book of Mormon is one of the greatest religious frauds ever--those gold tablets (!!why did no no one ever SEE them?)--that psuedo-Biblical language (King James English was long gone by this time; Angel Moroni qpparently not aware of that!) and the enormous fiction perpetrated by Joseph Smith and that the LDS fell for. It is less believable than the original Hebrew scriptures, which were authored to try and explain the unexplainable with an omnipotent and omnicient being that they called Yahweh, which no one who has a brain would accept at this time in history. Religion is, was, and always will be just another way of exerting control on other humans and setting oneself up as superior to those who do not subscribe to a particular belief, and in most cases, justify the murder of those same people. Paradise--heaven--hell--purgatory---all lies and delusions. The Book of Mormon is a travesty on the Old Testament and a patent phony. Incidentally, the LDS establishment in Salt Lake City is one of the tackiest and most tasteless edifices I've ever seen.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Brooklyn V
I think that the book of Mormon is a great book to read. There are different kinds that don't use fancy words like thee, ye, thou and more. It may be hard to understand at first but eventually you will feel the spirit in you.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Kaia B
All you need to do is look up The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. 2 young men will come if you contact them, and they will probably give you a copy!
posted 4 years ago.
-
Jimmy McGuirt
or if you don't want the Missionaries coming to your home...read the book online... http://scriptures.lds.org/en/contents
posted 4 years ago.
-
Crystal W
Another way to get your own free copy is to call 1-888-537-2200. You can get one mailed to you. You can also request or decline members of the church to talk with you; it's up to you!
posted 4 years ago.
-
melissa h
I think you should definitly start reading it. you might find some blessing comin towards you! It might give you the strength, hope, and understanding in your life!
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
melissa h
k ryan i am not going to yell at you this time but do you find any hope for anyone and just suck it away because whenever i see a nice comment on this website you and shannon just somehow have to get involved. it seems a little strange. and maybe this person decieded to read it so he marked was reading it then noticed he wasnt going to be on for awhile so he marked it as i have read. and when i first got my shelfari for at least over a month i only had one book on my shelf and i hadnt gotten on for over a month. so its not that hard to believe.
posted 4 years ago.
-
I am not trying to hurt anyone. I just want people to be informed about the book. I was brainwashed from Primary until 2 years after my mission. I only read Mormon sources. One day, I called my companion and he told me about Brigham Young's Adam God Theory. I told him that he was ridiculous and that he should stop reading anti-Mormon literature.
Still, I was curious so I looked it up and found that it came from the equivalent of a conference talk by Young. After that, I read everything I could find on the Mormon Church's history from the Mormon point of view. I found a lot of inconsistencies and found that regular history books had better support and that the Mormon Church had been spinning and hiding things. Naturally, now I feel the obligation to share that information:) Best of luckposted 4 years ago.
-
melissa h
okay that doesnt do anything to me so again ryan bye. and i have read anti-mormon books or read parts of them and so have my friends butt i know that it isnt true.well i do, you may not but i do.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
Too Busy Reading to Write
You can start at the Introduction, which explains a little about the background of the book. Then you can continue reading in order, or you can jump to the highlight of the book: Christ's visit to the American Continent on page 427 (3 Nephi chapter 11). There is also a sacred promise to all who read the book found on page 529 (Moroni chapter 10, verses 3-5). You can read this book straight through, or go at a slower pace using the footnote guide to cross reference scriptures in the Bible.
I highly recommend reading this book! I love reading books that show me a new perspective, or can change me. This book has changed me more than any other and continues to feed me insights and understanding as I re-read it over and over again.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Chad P removed this reply 4 years ago
-
maddie A
I'd start with scripture references. that's how I started. my favorite scripture is John chapter 14 verse 18 and it says: "I will not leave you comforless, I will come to you." can get your own copy of the book of mormon at deseret book, and youy can read it online at http://scriptures.lds.org/john/14/18#18
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Marianna v
you can go the website www.morman.org then you click on "request a copy" link. I hope you enjoy it I love it and ive read it many many times
posted 4 years ago.
-
Marianna v
you can go the website www.morman.org then you click on "request a copy" link. I hope you enjoy it I love it and ive read it many many times
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
Heather K removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Heather K
What is your favorite scripture, and why has it helped you in your life? I have a few, but the one closest to my heart is in the Book of Mormon, Helaman 5:12 "And now, my sons, remember, remember that it is upon the rock of our Redeemer, who is Christ, the Son of God, that ye must build your foundation; that when the devil shall send forth his mighty winds, yea, his shafts in the whirlwind, yea, when all his hail and his mighty storm shall beat upon you, it shall have no power over you to drag you down to the gulf of misery and endless wo, because of the rock upon which ye are built, which is a sure foundation, a foundation whereon if men build they cannot fall." I still remember in high school when I felt like everything was coming apart, I didn't feel like I could trust my friends anymore, and I felt so alone - then I read this verse, and it spoke to me that I had been placing my foundation on my friends, on things that would always fail, because they were just as imperfect as I am. This lead to my love of my second favorite scripture, in the Old Testament, Proverb 3:5-6, "Trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy path." When I do trust and lean on Him, He truly does lead.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Sandra McDaniel Wilkerson removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Sandra McDaniel Wilkerson
My favorite scripture comes from the Holy Bible. Prov.3:5,6
posted 4 years ago.
-
Sandra McDaniel Wilkerson
It says "Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths" My husband was a mormon for many years, andhe was gloriously saved when he found out about the blood of Jesus Christ.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Too Busy Reading to Write
I love that scripture, too. It reminds me to be humble and teachable and seek out his will for me.
Nicoleposted 4 years ago.
-
-
How can this show up first on "Highest rated books"??? Was shelfari founded by crazy mormons/christians?
posted 4 years ago.
-
sixpalz
Maybe because anyone who takes the time to read it thoughtfully finds that it really is worth every one of its 5 stars.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
Whitney M
Probably, and plus there are many people who have read the book of mormon and have liked it!
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Julia T
I know many will take umbrage at this, but there is a concerted effort on the part of members of the church to keep the Book of Morman and other LDS books at the top of these types of lists. The popularity of these books are highly skewed.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Too Busy Reading to Write
Step21, why would someone be crazy for being Mormon/Christian? Do you feel all religious peope are insane, or just the Christian folk? Is a Buddhist or a Jew not as insane? How about an Atheist?
Julia, how in the world can LDS people "skew" the popularity of the books? Shelfari asks us to include on our shelves what we read, what we are reading, and what we want to read--beyond that I would not even have a clue as to how to begin to skew the lists. I don't think many people on this website really care about the lists of the most popular reads. Do you?posted 4 years ago.
-
joy removed this reply 4 years ago
-
CAROLINE B removed this reply 4 years ago
-
CAROLINE B
If Shelfari was founded by "crazy mormons/christians" what would you do about it? NOTHING! 'Cause you can't. Sorry that you're so concerned with what people like to read. I was forced to join this for my school for part of my grade, if I had a choice I wouldn't be a part of it. But, you are and so I suggest you learn to deal with the world in a better way. =] For questions try going onto the Jerry Springer show or visiting a psychiatrist.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Mormons feel like they are doing missionary work by "bearing their testimony" about the Book of Mormon. No Mormon will give it a 4 and generally only Mormons are going to rate it. It is very sad that it has a 5 but what can you do? The only reason it is on my shelf is because I wanted to help lower the rating. I don't like admitting that I have read this book.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Liz D
I haven't read the book, but people are entitled to read books that pertain to religion and get a lot out of it. OR people could simply want to learn more about other religious beliefs. We have religious freedom in America and no one should judge what others believe in. Shelfari itself has nothing to do with how people on the site rate the books they read...
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Katbyte52
It is one of the most read books in the world. It has been translated into virtually every language in the world. No, mormons are not crazy. We just believe that we are closer to Heavenly Father because the BOM gives us more knowledge and we believe in prophesy from our Prophets.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Katbyte52 said:
"It is one of the most read books in the world."
I looked on all the major countries top read books list. It wasn't on any of them. You are welcome to correct me and I will concede the point if you have proof.
Katbyte52 said:
"It has been translated into virtually every language in the world."
So, what? What is your point? The Mormon church translates the book and puts a lot of effort into this. It really doesn't say anything about the text.
Katbyte52 said:
"No, mormons are not crazy. We just believe that we are closer to Heavenly Father because the BOM gives us more knowledge and we believe in prophesy from our Prophets.”
More knowledge than who? Some Mormons are crazy, obviously. If you don't believe that then you haven't been to a fast and testimony meeting.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Jimmy McGuirt
Ok during my 2 years as a LDS missionary we came upon many people that say our religion is a cult..well here is the webster's dictionary meaning of a cult: a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies. So I guess in that since we are a cult...meaning we are a system of religious worship..so that means that Catholics, Baptists, Methodist...are all cults...because they are a form of religious worship. ANyways, I love the book...read it 23 times on my mission..read the KJV bible 3 times on mission and I still read the bible...great COLLECTION OF INDIVIDUAL BOOKS)... LATERZ
posted 4 years ago.
-
neenuh?
i dont understand why people are so critical about mormons and the book of mormon. like honestly. who cares? i have friends who are catholic and go to seminary with me becuase they like the general message, and they like learning about Christ. it's not a bad thing.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Michael D
When people are not sure of themselves and what they stand for the first reaction is to attack. We have seen this in history over and over and not just in religious context but in others as well.
Take a look at the whole racial prejudice thing... only people who do not understand others and are afraid of the unknown are those that hate with so much passion.
Just some thoughts :)posted 4 years ago.
-
Jimmy,
You can't just pick your favorite one and say that is the definition. Number 3 from Webster and Number 6 from dictionary.com are what people are really claiming. People think Mormons are a cult in the was that they would view a church that did human sacrifices a cult. Although Mormons have not done human sacrifices to my knowledge Blood Atonement comes pretty close. Or maybe they might consider you a cult because you do magical secret handshakes in your temple and make pacts that seem unreasonable to the average person with your church. Frankly, the fact that you don't drink coffee is scary enough to me.
From Webster(http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cult)
1: formal religious veneration : worship
2: a system of religious beliefs and ritual ; also : its body of adherents
3: a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious ; also : its body of adherents
4: a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator [health cults]
5 a: great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book) ; especially : such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad b: the object of such devotion c: a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion
From dictionary.com
cult [kuhlt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
2. an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, esp. as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.
3. the object of such devotion.
4. a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.
5. Sociology. a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.
6. a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.
7. the members of such a religion or sect.
8. any system for treating human sickness that originated by a person usually claiming to have sole insight into the nature of disease, and that employs methods regarded as unorthodox or unscientific.
–adjective
9. of or pertaining to a cult.
10. of, for, or attracting a small group of devotees: a cult movie.posted 4 years ago.
-
Katbyte52
Your multiple postings are very good. Keep them up. I am tired of Ryan's postings and you had some good replies. Thanks.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Daycare Mama
You may obtain a free copy of this book at www.mormon.org. Then click on the "Request a Copy" link. There is no obligation or cost to you. If you don't like it, then you can stop reading it.
I believe it is a fascinating book and I have read it many times. I believe it to be the word of God. Why would God only speak to the people anciently who were living in Jerusalem and the surrounding area? Why would Christ exclude his "other sheep" which He speaks of in the Bible? This book is a record of the ancient people in the Americas, and their prophets. It is a true book and if read with a prayerful heart, it can change lives. I hope you will give it a try. Really, what have you got to lose?posted 4 years ago.
-
I have to say this book is written very poorly. Sections of it are copied from the Bible. It claims to be authentic but is historically inaccurate. There is little to no benefit from reading this fraudulent piece of trash. I am only writing this because I have not seen an actual review of this book. I only read the "I read this everyday and it brings me closer to God" reviews. This is not a religious website. You are supposed to discuss books not make this site an extension of your chapel. Why can't you discuss the actual content of the book rather than kissing up Joseph Smith. I guess according to you he will judge you at the last day. Even so be realistic with your reviews.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Maddie J
Historically inaccurate is something that has been said before and I can see why you would say that because the Book of Mormon has not been proven historically. (it wasn't meant to be proven historically) Fraudulent piece of trash seems to be a harsh explanation for a book that has improved the lives of millions. I am not sure if you are just angry or if you always are critical of things you don't understand but it is hard to take your book critique seriously. Usually words like yours come from someone who has strong negative feelings that have nothing to do with a book critique but instead are an expression of other problems or other issues you have with religion. You are also wrong about Joseph Smith judging people when they are dead and it does sound a little ridiculous to say that others would kiss up to someone who is no longer alive. I hope that someday you get the chance to really see why this book was written and also experience the same thing that millions of other people have experienced.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Actually, it doesn't seem ridiculous to kiss up to someone if they are dead. Let me explain, if you believe that JS is a spirit then he is conscious and it would make just as much sense as if he was alive. Also, Mormons do believe that J.S, Jesus and God will judge them because he is the dispensational prophet. The book is trash and so I claimed it is not because of my negative feelings for the Mormon church though. The author was a horrible man, that does have a bearing on my review. I tend to judge a fruit by the source of it. Apple trees yield apples and frauds yield fraudulent works.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Maddie J
Ryan, it seems that you used to be a member of the mormon church. It is not surprising that you are attacking the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith the way you are. It is just like a story that is in the Book of Mormon and that might be another reason you are so negative.
That story involves other people like you who left the church and joined the Lamanites. (you know these names) Those people were so angry that they lead the Lamanites in battle. They were chosen as generals because they hated the Nephites or members of the church so much. In fact, there is one point where the Lamanites don't want to fight anymore but because of the hatred of their generals they are forced to continue fighting.
This is not a new idea. There is someone else that became offended and decided to leave the truth and the light to go out on his own. This person hated those who loved him and continues to attack and destroy anyone he can because he wants them to be miserable like him. His name is Satan and just like him you have decided to tear down something that is good and right because you were offended.
If the Book of Mormon was not true and Joseph Smith wasn't a prophet than you wouldn't waste your time on either one of them. You wouldn't care. But the Book of Mormon IS TRUE and Joseph Smith WAS and IS a prophet and you know it. That is why you can't let it go. I hope you do let it go and I hope you return to things that you know are right even though you think you hate them. The least you can do is stop tearing down something that is good. The only reason Mormonism or the Book of Mormon ever seems negative is because people choose to notice the weaknesses of others who believe in the Book of Mormon and then attribute those weaknesses to the book. Bagging on it or anything for that matter will never benefit you or anyone else.posted 4 years ago.
-
Wow, so because I don't like the Book of Mormon you are comparing me to the devil. That is amazing. Rather than judging me why don't you attack the facts that I mentioned in the review. Actually, this is not a Mormon site and people go here to get reviews on literature. I am entitled to review this book however I decide to.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Can Lit Lvr
Wow - why so angry? I will address some of your "facts" that you put forth in your review. Yes, the bible is QUOTED in the book - not copied. Credit is given to the original author - no one is claiming to have come up with these passages on their own and they are conveniently identical to the bible. Certain biblical passages are used by prophets in the Book of Mormon to strengthen and support their teachings. If you feel the book is fraudulent, it's because you don't believe it. One could say the same thing of the bible, or the Koran, or any other religious text. However, for those who do believe the book, it provides guidance and instruction on how to live a better life, and be a better person. I completely disagree that it is written poorly. There are certain parts of this book that are so beautiful and poetic - whether you believe it or not.
You say there is little to no benefit from reading this book - I also disagree with this statement. First - I think the book is inspirational and spiritual, even for those who aren't Mormon. Second - there is always a benefit to reading something that millions of people worldwide believe. I think that everyone can benefit from increasing their cultural knowledge, finding out information themselves through original sources, rather than making judgments based on other people's opinions. I think the world would be a much more peaceful place if we were all a little more willing to see life from other people's point of view. Isn't that the beauty of literature? Through literature, I have been able to experience many different cultures and lifestyles, and come to understand and have empathy for things I would have never otherwise known about. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but should be allowed to form them from an unbiased beginning. You can choose whether or not to believe the Book of Mormon, but the fact is, it is a religious text that like I said earlier, millions of people believe with all their heart. Calling those people stupid and dismissing this book doesn't really help anyone.
As for your claims about what Mormons do and do not believe - you are obviously not a member of this faith, whether or not you ever have been doesn't really matter. You are inaccurate in your statements and therefore, one could accuse you of writing a "fraudulent piece of trash". If this site is for book reviews only, then keep religious beliefs out of it.
I would encourage people to read this book for themselves - not because I think you will necessarily find it to be true and up and join the Mormon church. I don't care if you do or don't. But I think everyone should make accurate and fair judgments about controversial texts such as this. You may or may not get something out of it - I personally find it to be an inspiring and beautifully written book, Mormon or not, fiction or non-fiction. It is an intriguing history of a people - a saga that spans 600 years and tells of these people's humanity. It has many heroes and villains, as well as those who are confused about their own beliefs and path. It speaks of family, relationships between parents and children, siblings and spouses. Of course it also tells of these people's belief, or disbelief in Christ. It is an interesting look at nature verses nurture, whether or not we as humans are inherently good or bad, what makes us this way. What drives us, what inspires us, what tempts us, what we will sacrifice, what we are capable of - both good and bad.
Like I said, even if you consider this work a piece of fiction, you can't deny the literary significance of it. Read it - you might be surprised.posted 4 years ago.
-
Andrea H
First of all, we do not believe that Joseph Smith will judge us at the last day. I don't know where that information came from. That is not his responsibility, nor anybody else, except for God and Jesus Christ. What mindset were you in when you read the Book of Mormon? Like any other book, if you have a bad outlook on it before or while you're reading it, you won't enjoy it. Since the Book of Mormon does have passages from the Bible, there is even more the reason that they are tied to each other. I do encourage you to go to www.mormon.org and find the answers to any questions you may have about the Book of Mormon. I have greatly benefited from reading this book and it is not fraudulent by any means.
posted 4 years ago.
-
I am looking into some of your claims. I hope you will do the same...I am fairly certain you will not. I have read it. I do deny its alleged literary significance. I am not angry. I am annoyed with the ignorant reviews I have found on Shelfari about the BOM. I am very familiar with Mormon theology. Also, I think the Koran and Bible are not any better than the BOM. I hold that it is written poorly as well. However, my beliefs do not have any use in this conversation. I am saying the BOM is a poorly written piece of literature. Yes, I did use the word trash because in my opinion that is exactly what it is. I will get all of you the information on the sections Smith copied directly from the Bible but that won't matter. Maddie, not everyone believes in what you do so maybe you shouldn't make ridiculous assertions. I can't let this go because Mormons won't go away and I can't stand seeing them. I'll make you a deal if you get Utah to set up its own internet and if all the Mormons move to Utah then I will forget that you guys exist.
Obviously, that wasn't serious but maybe it helps you understand that some people don't like when missionaries knock on your door. Or when the prophet tells you to use social networking sites to do missionary work. Some people don't like when you make the BOM a top rated book when it doesn't deserve such merit. That's about all I have to say. I intend on staying active on this thread to balance out all of your ridiculous claims about this book:)posted 4 years ago.
-
Helge M
Whether or not this is a religious website, there's nothing wrong with a review that says "this book brings me closer to god," or whatever. This may not be a religious website, but it ain't a lit-crit site, either. :-)
posted 4 years ago.
-
It is a "lit-crit" site hence the reviews. I guess I couldn't dictate a better book out of a hat though. If I were to compliment JS on something it would be that he really did pull a religion out of his hat. I guess all those divining rods and seer stones weren't the only magicians' tools he had.
posted 4 years ago.
-
I said I would look into the copying of BOM passages directly from the Bible. Here is some information on that. Not that any of you will read it. This list was compiled by Jon Gary Williams.
FRAUDULENT LANGUAGE
In the original edition of the Book of Mormon, there is much evidence of fraud—that is, the use of
words, phrases, and sentences that reveal an obvious attempt to deceive. Instances of this are so numerous
and so blatant they cannot be ignored. The following provide just a few examples.
Alma 37:38, dated at 73 B.C., speaks of the people using a “compass.” However, such an instrument
was not invented until about A.D. 1100. How could there be a divinely inspired translation of a word
describing something that did not exist? This is a mark of fraud.
1 Nephi 18:25, dated at 589 B.C., speaks of “horses” and “asses.” But, these animals were unknown
in the Western Hemisphere until the Spaniards introduced them about 450 years ago. Can anyone
honestly believe that such a bungled mistake occurred as a result of divine revelation?
Ether 9:19 speaks of “elephants” being in America when the Jaredites arrived, which was supposed
to have been around 2250 B.C. However, it is a well-known fact that elephants were not native to
America. To suggest that they were is absurd, and proves the Book of Mormon to be erroneous. If
someone were to argue that elephants might possibly have been brought to America in the Jaredites’
boats, such an argument could be disproved easily since elephants were not native to Bible lands either.
Surprising as it may seem, no less than six times the Book of Mormon employs the abbreviation
“&c” (and so forth), a usage peculiar to the nineteenth century (subtitle of 2 Nephi; Jacob 1:11;
Mosiah 8:8; 23:5; Alma 3:5). It can hardly be suggested that such a symbol is a “translation” from
ancient writings. This kind of mistake is clear and compelling evidence of the recent origin of the
book.
In Jacob 7:27, the French word adieu occurs. But how could a modern French word have found its
way into those ancient plates? This is additional evidence of fraud, and presents grounds for rejecting
the Book of Mormon.
In Jacob 3:11 and Mosiah 29:14, the word “faculties” appears. However, this is a term dating back
no earlier than middle English. Strange, indeed, that it would be “translated” from a word on an ancient
plate dating over 1,000 years earlier.
2 Nephi 29:3 reads, “A Bible, A Bible, we have got a Bible...” This statement is made in reference to
the Jewish Old Testament, which is dated at about 550 B.C. However, the word “Bible” is the English
transliteration of the Greek term “biblos,” which came into use over 1,500 years later. In using the
word “Bible,” the writer of the Book of Mormon made a serious blunder that shows the book to be of
recent origin and, hence, fraudulent in its claims.
3Nephi 15:21 is a word-for-word quote of John 10:16 (from the King James Version). However, this
version is somewhat less than 400 years old. And, to make matters worse, the Book of Mormon
even quotes the italicized word “and” that was supplied by the King James translators. Here, the
writer of the Book of Mormon unwittingly demonstrates his work to be plagiarism.
The entire fourteenth chapter of Mosiah, made up of 12 verses, is a duplication of Isaiah 53:1-12.
Interestingly, all eleven of the italicized words in the King James text are quoted, yet none is placed
in italics, which indicates that the writer of the Book of Mormon apparently was unaware that the
KJV translators used italics to highlight words that were not in the original manuscripts employed in
the translation process. Thus, Mosiah 14 had to have been copied from the King James Bible.
Moroni 7:45, which is a quotation of 1 Corinthians 13:4-7 in the King James Version, is another example
of fraud. In citing this verse, the writer included the italicized word “easily” (“...is not easily
provoked”). However, the word “easily” is not in the original, but was placed there (incorrectly) by
the King James translators. [It is omitted, correctly, from later versions.] That the writer included this
word shows that Moroni 7:45 was copied from the KJV.
In 2 Nephi 31:13 and other places, reference is made to the “Holy Ghost.” But, the term “ghost” did
not come into use until many hundreds of years after the Book of Mormon was supposed to have
been inscribed on ancient plates. That the writer borrowed this from the King James Bible is indisputable.
The word “baptism” is found in 2 Nephi 31:13 and other places. But this cannot be an actual translation
of a word found on ancient plates, because “baptism” is a transliteration of the Greek word baptisma,
and was peculiar to the King James Version. This word is clearly a copy of an early English
term, demonstrating again the fraudulent nature of the Book of Mormon.
The word “epistle” in 3 Nephi 3:5 is an obvious copy from the King James Version. Like baptism,
the word “epistle” (epistolos) was left in its original Greek form, but given an English ending. This
shows the writer of the Book of Mormon was not very careful in selecting his words.
The words “alpha” and “omega” appear in 3 Nephi 9:18. These, of course, are the English spellings
of Greek words found in the Bible (Revelation 1:8; 21:6; 22:13). Since the Book of Mormon was not
recorded in Greek, why were these words used? The simple fact is, they were copied from the King
James Version.
3 Nephi 20:23-26, dated at A.D. 34, refers to Moses’ prophecy about the Christ (Deuteronomy
18:15,18-19). However, the writer unwittingly used Peter’s New Testament paraphrase of this
prophecy (Acts 2:22-26), which was not written until around A.D. 63. This was almost 30 years too
soon, and thus proves the Book of Mormon is a hoax.
In the Book of Mormon there are numerous instances where the writer uses words that were not relevant
to his time. Rather, these are words peculiar to the English spoken in the early 1600s (“prayest,”
“durst,” “thou,” “thee,” “thy,” “thine,” “hast,” “doth,” “knoweth,” “hearest,” “cometh,” “thirsteth,”
etc.). Did God really select these words for the Book of Mormon? This obviously shows the writer’s
exposure to King James terminology. [NOTE: Scores of passages in the Book of Mormon, either in
part or whole, exact or paraphrased, have been taken directly from the King James Version. Some researchers have estimated that as much as 4% can be traced to this English translation.]
Here is the weak explanation given by fairmormon.org
http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon_anachronisms:Translation_Errors_from_the_KJVposted 4 years ago.
-
Mellocat
Your comment is far from a literary review. And, it tends to show your lack of knowledge about the book and religion you appear to be badmouthing.
Rather than slam the people who share their personal response to the content of a book they have read, thought seriously about, and have actually incorporated the principles of into their personal lives, perhaps you could exhibit true tolerance and general respect. How about you actually write a true literary review of the book, and leave out your pre-disposed opinion and antagonism of the subject?
You want someone to discuss the actual content of the book? Based on the comments you have made concerning this and other books that relate to this book and the religion, I doubt you would really care to hear about it. You seem more than content with your vitriolic opinions. You pretty much state so elsewhere.posted 4 years ago.
-
Robin B
I've read your comments and looked at your profile. You are an atheist who seems to have a fascination with reading books about Christian theology - mostly Mormonism. I don't know why that is. Either you are searching for something other than atheism or something has happened in your life to make you extremely angry and bitter toward the Mormon church. The problem with reading books about religion is that you must have a belief in God and the faith necessary for the message to touch you. Since you don't believe in God all you can see are words on a page. When you add hatred for a particular religion into the mix then you start to find fault in the placement of each comma or exclamation point.
For the literary part of your review, the book was not written by professional writers in accordance with today's literary standards. It first must be established that Joseph Smith was an uneducated man as far as formal schooling went. He knew how to read and write in the most basic sense. He had never traveled and was not a scholar.
It has been proven by non-Mormon Middle Eastern scholars that the names and language used in the BofM are authentic to their time. In the BofM the writers state that they write in "reformed Egyptian" (Mormon 9:32:33) for reference. Thus there is a combining of names from Hebrew, Egyptian, Hittite, Arabic and Ionian found in the book. Again, established by non-Mormon scholars.
There are Egyptian linguistic patterns in the books as well. Colophons, which all writers educated in Egypt during the time period of the book, are found throughout. A proper Egyptian colophon states the author's name, his parents and what their virtues are. Now, read the very opening of the book "I Nephi, having been born of goodly parents . . ." and then continues with an assurance that the author wrote the book himself.
There are Semitic linguistic patterns (Lehi's family came from a Semitic society) and, what I think is the most revealing evidence are the Hebrew linguistic patterns. The book is full of a Hebrew form of poetry called chiasmus. It's a complicated poetic form of inverted parallelism. The Book of Mormon has some very long and very complicated chiasms. Again, Joseph Smith was an uneducated man. Even Middle Eastern scholars didn't rediscover chiasms until 25 years after the BofM was first published.
But, the thing is this, anyone approaching this book with intent to reject, revile, or dismiss is going to find exactly what they're looking for. The reason Jesus taught in parables (I know you don't like the Bible either) was because (and I paraphrase) it is given unto the believers to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven . . . whosoever receives the spirit it shall be given, whosoever continues not to receive it shall be taken away. He speaks to them in parables because some when they see they see not, when they hear, they hear not, neither do they understand. He goes on to say that if at any time they will see with their eyes, hear with their ears and understand with their hearts they will be converted. (Matt. 13:10-15). I believe this is why you only see the Book of Mormon as a poorly written book. You do not understand it's content for what it truly is.
As to your comment that this is not a religious website - it is also not a website to trash other people's religious views by calling a book that is important to their lives fraudulent or that the book's translator was a horrible man when you have no basis in fact. I think if I were to say that the Harry Potter Series (which I know you like) makes me feel like a kid again, it's also OK for me to say that reading the Book of Mormon changed my life.posted 4 years ago.
-
Robin B removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Mellocat
You should be honest and forthright in your comments on this book. You fail to tell people that you are an apostate to the religion you are bad mouthing. You say so elsewhere within Shelfari.
So, who is really doing potential readers of this book a disservice with their "reviews"? Those who have found value in it and say so, or someone who clearly has an ax to grind and repeats the same tripe and vitriol as every other person who has ever left or hated said religion?
If someone reads the book and ultimately finds no value in it, what are they out? The time for reading it. Yet, if someone chooses not to read the book because they listen to a disgruntled apostate of the religion like you, they lose the chance to possibly find any value at all in it. Seems like in the latter scenario, you have just imposed your thoughts on them instead of letting them use their own brains and intellect.
Ironic, since at least at superficial surface level you claim to be asking people to be rational and engage their brains.
You are not capable of giving an unbiased review without putting your particular agenda and spin on things, and yet have the audacity to call foul on those whose reviews reflect positively on that which you appear now to loathe and hate. How pathetic. Being a dissident, apostate, or even a self-proclaimed whistle blower of any organization, group, religion, or company does not equate to being a subject matter expert. Most people have enough smarts to realize that. Rather, it raises the natural skepticism into the reliability, accuracy, and verifiability of anything that individual has to say about the subject.posted 4 years ago.
-
I cannot keep up with all of you. I don't have time. Yes, I was a member of the Mormon church. Calling me apostate is an attack on me and not my review. While I did find the BOM to be false and did have my name removed from the Mormon roles that has nothing to do with the validity of my review. If you claim that because I feel strongly about the BOM that I can have no opinion that also disqualifies all of you(well if you believe it). I did not conceal my identity and did not claim that I was not an ex-member of the Mormon church. I don't see how it is relevant. I was writing the review as someone who has read the book and who has read the comments. I don't parade around screaming that I used to be Mormon. Please attack my arguments, and if you are going to claim that my arguments are unreasonable be explicit on which are and if you make a good argument I will concede on that issue:). Just saying that my arguments are unreasonable is not an effective way of arguing your points. For the most part, I have remained respectful and only talked about things not pertaining to the book or author in one of my posts(Where I called the Mormon church a cult). I do believe that the Book of Mormon is a piece of trash and I stand by that as MY OPINION that I am entitled to share on this PUBLIC site.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Robin as much as I would like to dispute your views I am not sure I have the time to discredit them all right now. I will try and get around to it but I am very busy writing computer code at the moment. Thank you for at least contributing to the conversation with your alleged facts. I don't accept anything as fact until I have checked it with a reasonable source. When I left Mormonism I based everything on Mormon books and records. I took them to my Bishop and Stake president who also said they had "similar doubts" but had put them on the "shelf". Coming from a background that everything could be known through prayer this was unacceptable and I prayed and found out that it was not true. I appreciate you basing your response in something that is more than a mere opinion though. Even though people here may insult my character I did what I thought was right at the time and have never regretted it. I believe it is essential that as long as Mormons are reviewing the BOM the way they are someone has to give the other side "opposition in all things" right? Well, I have already been compared to the devil so whatever.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Mellocat
Sorry if you felt that bringing the truth of your relationship to the religion and book as an apostate was viewed as an attack. It was not. I think every person who believes in the book you have called a "fraudulent piece of trash" likely found that to be an attack. I didn't realize that the dictionary definition "One who has abandoned one's religious faith, a political party, one's principles, or a cause." was offensive. You yourself said you left the religion. My apology.
My use of the word apostate was simply to give everyone who reads the comments you have been making about the book and religion a little context. No where in your so-called review do you explicitly state that what you say is your opinion or that you once were a member of the religion and believed in the book. You only explicitly do so once someone else confronts you with those facts.
And yet, you blast those who clearly are stating their opinion in support of the book and religion.
So maybe you don't want people to use this venue as a bully pulpit for something you once believed but now do not believe. That is fine. You still need to be respectful of their right to share their opinions. Show some restraint and don't be guilty of the converse. Using this venue as your bully pulpit to badmouth them and their beliefs while trying to convince others of your beliefs is just plain bad form.posted 4 years ago.
-
Alright, I get what you are saying BUT I disagree. I can bully a book or an author all I want. I have not attacked a person yet. Yes, I have attacked your belief system. None of you are your belief system even though it may define a large part of you. Many Mormon general authorities claim the BOM will stand up to the toughest scrutiny. I am simply scrutinizing it. While it may be disrespectful to call it a piece of trash, I believe it is justified. I have no issue with bullying a book or author. I harshly scrutinize many books. I wasn't a huge fan of Goosebumps when I was a kid. A lot of kids really liked them but I thought they were literary trash. My wife loved them when she was a kid. I have called them trash to her and while she does debate me on my claim, she makes no assertion that I am bullying R.L. Stine or the book. She understands that criticism is what defines a book.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Ok so I found a few minutes to reasearch your claims.
"For the literary part of your review, the book was not written by professional writers in accordance with today's literary standards. It first must be established that Joseph Smith was an uneducated man as far as formal schooling went. He knew how to read and write in the most basic sense. He had never traveled and was not a scholar."
Not sure what you are getting at with this. If you intend to claim that JS wasn't intelligent enough to write the BOM then I have heard that one before. What people neglect to mention is that Oliver Cowdery his scribe was a school teacher and 3rd cousin of Smith. This proves nothing but it does disprove the notion that the writing would not have been impossible given the education of Cowdery. You will likely claim that the BOM is written too well for even Cowdery to have written it. I have yet to hear of a non-mormon scholar that has claimed that it is written well at all. You could not trust Mormons or Ex-Mormons with this evaluation since they would be very biased. So, that statement really says nothing.
"It has been proven by non-Mormon Middle Eastern scholars that the names and language used in the BofM are authentic to their time. In the BofM the writers state that they write in "reformed Egyptian" (Mormon 9:32:33) for reference. Thus there is a combining of names from Hebrew, Egyptian, Hittite, Arabic and Ionian found in the book. Again, established by non-Mormon scholars."
Where might one come by this evidence? Are all the names you speak of not in the Bible? Are there few enough to consider it a coincidence?
"There are Egyptian linguistic patterns in the books as well. Colophons, which all writers educated in Egypt during the time period of the book, are found throughout. A proper Egyptian colophon states the author's name, his parents and what their virtues are. Now, read the very opening of the book "I Nephi, having been born of goodly parents . . ." and then continues with an assurance that the author wrote the book himself."
I looked around for this one also I was not able to find Colophons in the way you talked about them. The only things I was able to find were along the lines of this this.
col·o·phon
Pronunciation:
\ˈkä-lə-fən, -ˌfän\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Latin, from Greek kolophōn summit, finishing touch; perhaps akin to Latin culmen top — more at hill
Date:
1501
1 : an inscription placed at the end of a book or manuscript usually with facts relative to its production
2 : an identifying mark, emblem, or device used by a printer or a publisher
I would like to read this though. If you know where I can find it let me know please.
"There are Semitic linguistic patterns (Lehi's family came from a Semitic society) and, what I think is the most revealing evidence are the Hebrew linguistic patterns. The book is full of a Hebrew form of poetry called chiasmus. It's a complicated poetic form of inverted parallelism. The Book of Mormon has some very long and very complicated chiasms. Again, Joseph Smith was an uneducated man. Even Middle Eastern scholars didn't rediscover chiasms until 25 years after the BofM was first published."
I have heard of chiasmus before. This is not a compelling argument because using chiasums is common in 18th century English poetry. The Book Of Mormon was written at least 20 years after the end of the 18th century.I validated this many places on the internet. Not surprisingly only sites run by LDS members claimed that Chiasmus were not common to the 1800's. Here is one such link "http://everything2.com/e2node/Chiasmus".
"But, the thing is this, anyone approaching this book with intent to reject, revile, or dismiss is going to find exactly what they're looking for. The reason Jesus taught in parables (I know you don't like the Bible either) was because (and I paraphrase) it is given unto the believers to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven . . . whosoever receives the spirit it shall be given, whosoever continues not to receive it shall be taken away. He speaks to them in parables because some when they see they see not, when they hear, they hear not, neither do they understand. He goes on to say that if at any time they will see with their eyes, hear with their ears and understand with their hearts they will be converted. (Matt. 13:10-15). I believe this is why you only see the Book of Mormon as a poorly written book. You do not understand it's content for what it truly is."
Alright, this is a common problem with having unshakeable beliefs. This argument implies that you cannot be convinced if you read something you disagree with, or you will not like something if you go into it with a bad attitude. That is simply not true. I didn't want to go see "The Notebook" with my wife and I really was not happy about going. The movie was excellent and now is one of my favorites. When I read "The God Delusion" I was still Christain but it was so convincing I changed my point of view completely. If the Book Of Mormon was really as amazing as Mormons claim it is then it should be able to influence a person who is not completely unreasonable. It fails at this. Every year the Mormon church has 70,000 missionaries handing these out daily to many people and the majority of those that read them fall asleep out of boredom and never get baptized. So, how is it so convincing and amazing...it simply isn't.
"As to your comment that this is not a religious website - it is also not a website to trash other people's religious views by calling a book that is important to their lives fraudulent or that the book's translator was a horrible man when you have no basis in fact. I think if I were to say that the Harry Potter Series (which I know you like) makes me feel like a kid again, it's also OK for me to say that reading the Book of Mormon changed my life.”
I am going to say this again. I can trash a book in a review all I want. I can say it claims to be something it is not. I can say the author was a liar or that he wasn't qualified to write the book. That is all I have done. True, my language is harsh but most critics are harsh.posted 4 years ago.
-
Can Lit Lvr
Ryan - I have read all your posts. One thing I am seriously confused about is why you care so much? I am constantly amazed at people who have anti-religious points of view and the fervor with which they go about trying to attack and tear apart certain religions. I understand that the Mormon church is proactively seeking membership, but you don't have to open the door, or let the missionaries in. A simple "no thank-you" would suffice. No prophet has ever told members to go onto social networking sites to do missionary work.
I couldn't care less about your life choices - why must you attack others? I just don't get why you are obviously spending so much time and energy (when you are so busy coding) trying to get people to see your point of view? Isn't it enough for you to make your own decision, leave the church and go on your merry way? Why do you care if other people choose to believe in something, simply because you do not? Why do you carry this hatred and anger around with you? Can't you let it go and move on?
Who cares that the Book of Mormon is one of the highest rated books on Shelfari - so are the Twilight books and a bunch of other trashy books that I would never read. So a bunch of people like the Twilight books - not sure why, but I'm not going to read them just because they are the highest rated books on Shelfari. I am also not going to put them on my shelf just to give them a lower rating - you know, to balance it out.
As for not everyone who reads the book not loving it - you're right. Because not every single person who opens it thinks it is the greatest piece of literature ever written, it must be a complete waste of time. Because everyone I know just LOVES Moby Dick, War & Peace, Shakespeare, Tale of Two Cities and on and on and on. That is a ridiculous statement to make.
My point - I don't care if you like the book, I don't care if other people like the book. Since this is a literary review site, sure, state your opinion ABOUT THE BOOK - not the religion. I'm not sure why you find it so important to use this forum to tear apart a religion you are no longer part of. So you don't like the book. Great - I'll take that into consideration.
As for your other "facts" that I supposedly won't look into because I am so indoctrinated - you asked not to be judged - please don't judge me. You have no idea who I am and what I have or haven't read. I'm not going to bother disputing your claims because a) this is not the place for that and b) it's SO not worth my time and c) I don't care and you don't care.
And "The Notebook"? Really? Now THAT'S a good piece of literature...posted 4 years ago.
-
That is a fair question. Why do I care so much? I suppose it is because I feel like there is a lot of false information out there that is presented as fact. My parents were baptized in 1983 and I hope that if they had been given the facts that they may have made a more rational decision. I believe that if I can prevent people from believing in this book, then I can prevent someone like me from wasting 22 years as a Mormon. So, my purpose is to help some avoid having to go through what I did. Does that answer your question?
I don’t even like the fact that missionaries knock on my door. I concede the point that General Authorities asked you to share the “gospel” on the internet. That was actually just a topic at a BYU devotional. I think you and I both know that people are using whatever means they can to try and share “that glass of orange juice”(Monson).
I don’t know whether it is a literacy problem or whether you people are trying to look like victims. I have not attacked a single one of you. I reviewed a book. I was harsh in my review so accept it. I am not using that much energy to do this. I know a lot about Mormon history both from the member point of view and from a realistic historical point of view.
PLEASE SHOW ME WHERE I HAVE ATTACKED SOMEONE!
Also, why do you assume that I am full of hatred? What evidence do you have? I have some regret for the time I wasted as a Mormon but not hate sorry to disappoint.
“As for not everyone who reads the book not loving it - you're right. Because not every single person who opens it thinks it is the greatest piece of literature ever written, it must be a complete waste of time.”
Can you please explain that?
“ Isn't it enough for you to make your own decision, leave the church and go on your merry way? Why do you care if other people choose to believe in something, simply because you do not?"
If this was valid reasoning then why does the Mormon church have 70,000 missionaries? Of course, I want to influence what people believe. As for your comparison with twilight, you know that fiction and religious texts carry a far different weight. Please, let me know if I didn’t answer your questions sufficiently or if you have any more.posted 4 years ago.
-
Katbyte52 removed this reply 4 years ago
-
I would like to argue with the first response to this post made by Maddie who made the claim that the BoM has improved the lives of millions. The BoM has caused more pain than joy. You should investigate the "lost boys" of the FLDS or think of the women who married Joseph Smith whilst already being married to the men they loved because Joseph Smith said that an angel with a sword threatened him. Or to people like my husband, whose family said CRAZY things and raised him in a CRAZY manner because of the church's doctrine. It's a vile organization, and I hope for your own sake that you have the courage, concern, and tenacity (it takes tenacity) to seek the truth. Look into the origins of the Book of Mormon. Look into previous "eternal doctrines" of the Church. You will hate to be affiliated with so much hate.
posted 4 years ago.
-
sixpalz
I don't know about the rest of you, but after reading all of the posts from Ryan and Shannon, my heart breaks for his family.
posted 4 years ago.
-
My parents are very disappointed in me you are right. I feel very sorry for them as well. They truly believe in Mormonism. My mother and father are reminded constantly that their entire family will not be together forever because some of us chose to follow a different path than them(3/6 children and counting). It must be dreadfully painful for them to see their children falling away from something that they really wanted for them. I feel a lot of empathy for my parents.
Unfortunately, I cannot live a lie and will not. There was a long period where we did not speak because they could not accept that I did not share their religious beliefs. I know you meant that as a personal hit to me but it doesn't really hurt me. I understand that people need to make their own choices and that they should have the liberty to do so. Consequences should only be natural consequences and not supernatural. That is really the difference between you and I, I hope you read, get smarter and get out of Mormonism. You hope God punishes me until I fall on my face and pray.
I think my way is a little healthier. Also, I left Mormonism 2 years ago and I have been happier in the last 2 years than I have in my entire life combined.posted 4 years ago.
-
sixpalz
You said "You hope God punishes me until I fall on my face and pray." No, actually I don't hope that at all! I would never wish punishment on anyone. I hope you stay as happy as you say you are and I wish you and your wife would leave me and all those who are happy with the Book of Mormon alone. You enjoy your happiness and let us enjoy ours. It's not your job to save us from Mormonism, just like it's not our job to save you. Jesus Christ has already done all the saving.
posted 4 years ago.
-
I really wish I could respect that. If Mormons stuck to themselves and didn't try to convert others or were honest about their past then I would not feel obligated to comment on this site. The problem is that they ask people not to read from any sources outside the church and I can't accept that. I believe that you have to look at things from all angles and that since this site is public there should be a fair view. That means some defend the book while others criticize it. I am not trying to be malicious I just want a fair view. Everything I have commented I believe and consider to be a matter of historical fact.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Person with the horse face profile pic:
According to Mormon doctrine, Jesus hasn't saved anyone. Well, I suppose it depends on your definition of saved. We are left to decide whether we want to accept the gospel or not, according to Mormon faith. That puts us in control of our individual destinies. Still, Mormons have missionaries who spread this gospel because they believe everyone should hear this message. Well, comparable to these missionaries, we feel that we should share what we believe is true and, unlike Mormon missionaries, we feel we should share what is actually true.
Also, just a reminder, this is a site that encourages discussion of a book. We aren't trying to make you unhappy.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Marna V
If sections of The Book of Mormon appear to be the same as parts of the Bible it is because they were also written by prophets who of course received the same doctrines that were received by prophets in the Bible. God doesn't teach different doctrines to different people, but is the same yesterday, today and forever.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Or you could consider this as well. This was compiled by Jon Gary Williams.
FRAUDULENT LANGUAGE
In the original edition of the Book of Mormon, there is much evidence of fraud—that is, the use of
words, phrases, and sentences that reveal an obvious attempt to deceive. Instances of this are so numerous
and so blatant they cannot be ignored. The following provide just a few examples.
Alma 37:38, dated at 73 B.C., speaks of the people using a “compass.” However, such an instrument
was not invented until about A.D. 1100. How could there be a divinely inspired translation of a word
describing something that did not exist? This is a mark of fraud.
1 Nephi 18:25, dated at 589 B.C., speaks of “horses” and “asses.” But, these animals were unknown
in the Western Hemisphere until the Spaniards introduced them about 450 years ago. Can anyone
honestly believe that such a bungled mistake occurred as a result of divine revelation?
Ether 9:19 speaks of “elephants” being in America when the Jaredites arrived, which was supposed
to have been around 2250 B.C. However, it is a well-known fact that elephants were not native to
America. To suggest that they were is absurd, and proves the Book of Mormon to be erroneous. If
someone were to argue that elephants might possibly have been brought to America in the Jaredites’
boats, such an argument could be disproved easily since elephants were not native to Bible lands either.
Surprising as it may seem, no less than six times the Book of Mormon employs the abbreviation
“&c” (and so forth), a usage peculiar to the nineteenth century (subtitle of 2 Nephi; Jacob 1:11;
Mosiah 8:8; 23:5; Alma 3:5). It can hardly be suggested that such a symbol is a “translation” from
ancient writings. This kind of mistake is clear and compelling evidence of the recent origin of the
book.
In Jacob 7:27, the French word adieu occurs. But how could a modern French word have found its
way into those ancient plates? This is additional evidence of fraud, and presents grounds for rejecting
the Book of Mormon.
In Jacob 3:11 and Mosiah 29:14, the word “faculties” appears. However, this is a term dating back
no earlier than middle English. Strange, indeed, that it would be “translated” from a word on an ancient
plate dating over 1,000 years earlier.
- 8 -
2 Nephi 29:3 reads, “A Bible, A Bible, we have got a Bible...” This statement is made in reference to
the Jewish Old Testament, which is dated at about 550 B.C. However, the word “Bible” is the English
transliteration of the Greek term “biblos,” which came into use over 1,500 years later. In using the
word “Bible,” the writer of the Book of Mormon made a serious blunder that shows the book to be of
recent origin and, hence, fraudulent in its claims.
3Nephi 15:21 is a word-for-word quote of John 10:16 (from the King James Version). However, this
version is somewhat less than 400 years old. And, to make matters worse, the Book of Mormon
even quotes the italicized word “and” that was supplied by the King James translators. Here, the
writer of the Book of Mormon unwittingly demonstrates his work to be plagiarism.
The entire fourteenth chapter of Mosiah, made up of 12 verses, is a duplication of Isaiah 53:1-12.
Interestingly, all eleven of the italicized words in the King James text are quoted, yet none is placed
in italics, which indicates that the writer of the Book of Mormon apparently was unaware that the
KJV translators used italics to highlight words that were not in the original manuscripts employed in
the translation process. Thus, Mosiah 14 had to have been copied from the King James Bible.
Moroni 7:45, which is a quotation of 1 Corinthians 13:4-7 in the King James Version, is another example
of fraud. In citing this verse, the writer included the italicized word “easily” (“...is not easily
provoked”). However, the word “easily” is not in the original, but was placed there (incorrectly) by
the King James translators. [It is omitted, correctly, from later versions.] That the writer included this
word shows that Moroni 7:45 was copied from the KJV.
In 2 Nephi 31:13 and other places, reference is made to the “Holy Ghost.” But, the term “ghost” did
not come into use until many hundreds of years after the Book of Mormon was supposed to have
been inscribed on ancient plates. That the writer borrowed this from the King James Bible is indisputable.
The word “baptism” is found in 2 Nephi 31:13 and other places. But this cannot be an actual translation
of a word found on ancient plates, because “baptism” is a transliteration of the Greek word baptisma,
and was peculiar to the King James Version. This word is clearly a copy of an early English
term, demonstrating again the fraudulent nature of the Book of Mormon.
The word “epistle” in 3 Nephi 3:5 is an obvious copy from the King James Version. Like baptism,
the word “epistle” (epistolos) was left in its original Greek form, but given an English ending. This
shows the writer of the Book of Mormon was not very careful in selecting his words.
The words “alpha” and “omega” appear in 3 Nephi 9:18. These, of course, are the English spellings
of Greek words found in the Bible (Revelation 1:8; 21:6; 22:13). Since the Book of Mormon was not
recorded in Greek, why were these words used? The simple fact is, they were copied from the King
James Version.
3 Nephi 20:23-26, dated at A.D. 34, refers to Moses’ prophecy about the Christ (Deuteronomy
18:15,18-19). However, the writer unwittingly used Peter’s New Testament paraphrase of this
prophecy (Acts 2:22-26), which was not written until around A.D. 63. This was almost 30 years too
soon, and thus proves the Book of Mormon is a hoax.
In the Book of Mormon there are numerous instances where the writer uses words that were not relevant
to his time. Rather, these are words peculiar to the English spoken in the early 1600s (“prayest,”
“durst,” “thou,” “thee,” “thy,” “thine,” “hast,” “doth,” “knoweth,” “hearest,” “cometh,” “thirsteth,”
etc.). Did God really select these words for the Book of Mormon? This obviously shows the writer’s
exposure to King James terminology. [NOTE: Scores of passages in the Book of Mormon, either in
part or whole, exact or paraphrased, have been taken directly from the King James Version. Some researchers have estimated that as much as 4% can be traced to this English translation.]posted 4 years ago.
-
Marianna v
that is true. If you want to find out more about the mormans go to www.morman.org
posted 4 years ago.
-
Brooke F
Sure, you can check off all the "discrepancies" found in the book. One major factor is being forgotten. Any writer of the text, were he truly a prophet, would have seen our day, known our words and so on. This word is called REVELATION. Also, keep in mind the translator. He is an imperfect human being. Makes mistakes. The Lord reserves the right to correct any translation mistakes AT ANY TIME. This is called REVELATION. Also, keep in mind, the person transalting the text will be translating into the words he knows and understands at the time (as well as words he is familiar with reading in other Holy Texts". For example, when one writer is closing his book with "adieu", which translates directly to "to God". The writer probably used a word that literally meant "to God", but Joseph Smith, knowing we did not have that exact equivalent in english that doubled as also a "good-bye", used a word he knew, and what other contemporaries of his knew. This is just an example. (Same situation for the word "faculties", "compass", "epistle", "baptism" and so on.)
Another example would perhaps be to the animals that were listed as being on the American continent. We often fall into the trap of taking things at there literal meaning. It could have been animals, now extinct many centuries later, that "resembled" an elephant. (Can we think of any elephant-like remains found on the American continent?) And other such animals that might have resembled the description in the old reformed Egyptian text of perhaps horses, donkeys or whatever? Just a reminder to those who will read to immediately discredit, do your own research before citing biased and unelightened opinions! This all goes back to whether or not you believe in Revelation. Because it is a true prinicple, an event which does actually exist. Divine communication between Deity and man. If you truly believe the Bible contained it, then after obtaining your own personal revelation, you will find truth in the Book of Mormon as well. (And not to get all caught up in what you THINK you know of the history of the world.) You'll be a less spiteful person, and a much happier one! A true seeker of truth will find it through personal Revelation, not based on their own limited understanding and biases.posted 4 years ago.
-
Wow, that is an awfully convenient way of looking at the world Brooke. Unfortunately, it is also extremely unreasonable to make such excuses just to safeguard your beliefs. If you can justify it for yourself I suppose that is all you need to do to stay Mormon. Or you could try considering reality. What about the discrepancies I listed that essentially prove text was copied from the Bible. You neglected to address those:)
posted 4 years ago.
-
sixpalz
Brooke F: You stated exactly what I would have, and anyone with a shred of faith knows. I questioned a lot of those words myself and when I realized that obviously Joseph would put things into words that he and WE would be familiar with it just made so much sense. Ryan's comments are just an example of "choking on a gnat." I wish that those who disagree with the Book of Mormon would just leave it at that and stop bashing. I don't go on other sites and spew hate about books I read and don't agree with, do you?
posted 4 years ago.
-
sixpalz
Ryan: have you forgotten that Joseph Smith also translated the Bible and corrected many of the mistakes? Do you know the origins of the Bible and how Constantinople basically convened a bunch of scholars to determine what should be included so that everyone could agree? It is called the Nicene creed. Was Constantinople a prophet?
I'm sorry that you have lost your testimony of the Book of Mormon, but mine burns strong every day of my life.posted 4 years ago.
-
sixpalz
I just went back and read all the posts from Ryan and those who have taken the time to thoughtfully answer him and so, Ryan: please don't bother responding to my post above.
posted 4 years ago.
-
“"Spewing hate" when did I do that? I am simply arguing that the BOM is not a good book. You guys have really been trying to make me look like I am an angry disgruntled person. I'm not. I am simply trying to share what I believe about this book. True, my words are harsh but only about the book and author.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Mikayla
This is one of THE BEST books that ony one could ever read! These past few months it has made a huge difference in my life and helped me with many of the problems I've been faced with!
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Mikayla, I love the name. Anyways, just because something makes you feel good, doesn't make it true. Muslims feel great when reading their scripture. It doesn't mean that they're in the true church, if you will. Billions of people are deluding themselves, you must agree. I happen to believe you're one of them.
posted 4 years ago.
-
sixpalz
Shannon and Ryan, (I had an "aha" when I saw that you are married.)
Thanks for your concern for all of us who are "deluded." Why don't you just leave us alone? It seems like you take every possible chance to cut down people who are just posting their honest feelings about the Book of Mormon. We all know how you feel--just leave us alone!
I'd much rather be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and get to judgement day and find out that wasn't true, having lived the kind of life it has taught me: service, love, family values, faith in the atonement of Jesus Christ, than to not be a member and get there and find out it was true and I rejected it the way you have.posted 4 years ago.
-
Sixpalz, I value service, charity, and family. I didn't need any organization to teach me that, though. Most people are not Mormons, and most people are arguably decent, good-hearted people. And when I engage in service, I do not do it to benefit any organization or deity--I do it for those I am serving.
My bishop told me that I left the Church for good reasons, and that if he was right (lol) and the Church is true, God would be proud of me for caring so much about the truth. I am very happy with the way I live my life, an advocate for reason and truth.
Again, this is a discussion group. I can freely discuss. There are several children on here who read what I've written about temple ordinances and polygamy and think that I must be making it up 'cause it's so out there. I am just presenting facts to these kids and everyone else for that matter. While you are talking about your feelings, I am talking about evidence.
And yes, I am married to m'darling Ryan. We mention that a lot on here. He's the best :-Dposted 4 years ago.
-
sixpalz
My point was that I am one hundred percent happy and comfortable with the church and all I have experienced as a member for 36 years. You can point out whatever "out there" stuff you want, and allude to whatever you want about how your husband was raised. But I would bet that most members feel like I do--we don't care about that stuff! The gospel is about how we treat each other, how we raise our children to be good people, and how we follow Christ. The rest just doesn't matter.
posted 4 years ago.
-
If by “rest” you mean lies told to you to cover up the truth about the history of the LDS church then I can’t see how that wouldn’t matter. “Out there” stuff? What does that even mean? What have we said that is “out there” or not true? You of course will not answer this.
I realize you don’t care but people that do care have the right to know and should be encouraged to look. You can plug your ears close your eyes and say “it’s true” over and over again or you can look into it and think for yourself. One approach seems more reasonable than the other.
We don’t comment on here for members of the LDS church but for those that may read this site and then read the BoM. We want to make sure that everyone has the chance to hear the truth about Mormonism before they are baptized or whatever.
If the gospel is about how we treat each other then why are there so many mean comments by Mormons on here? Some comments were made specifically to hurt me. I don’t care but it seems awfully hypocritical to me. The bottom line is Mormons have been opposed to free speech since their inception. Joseph Smith burnt down a printing press because they printed the truth, that he was a polygamist. After burning it down, people were angry so he declared martial law. That was a treasonous act and he went to jail for it. This was completely legitimate. The mob was full of desperate people who didn’t like where their home was headed and so they killed Smith but not before he killed 2 others.
Today, you are trying to make people who are opposed to your church shut up, Mormons call anything about the real history of the church “anti-Mormon” even some books written by LDS apostles or words uttered by LDS prophets. People deserve the option of knowing the truth without feeling guilty for looking into it.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Marianna v
the book of morman helps you come closer to heavenly father I love this book and did you know Stephine Meyer is morman and David Archulata
this proves that mommans are just like everyone else. I got a warm feeling in my heart when I read it.posted 4 years ago.
-
Katbyte52
The Book of Mormon will bring you closer to Heavenly Father. And, yes, we mormons are just like every other person, we just have more knowledge about our Heavenly Father.
posted 4 years ago.
-
That does not prove that Mormons are like everybody else. Matthew Shepherd's killer was Mormon. That's not meant to mean that all Mormons murder gay people. Some people care to really investigate the church, and others choose to blindly follow. I really hate to come across as an intellectual bully. I assume you're very young.
Mormons are not like everyone in that they believe God the Father is a polygamist and that underwear with Masonic symbols on it can be sacred. The Book of Mormon was read, in part, out of a hat. You belong to the ONLY church to receive scripture through a "prophet" putting a hat to his face and reading off of "seer stones". Your church is false.
Katbyte52, that is the most arrogant thing I have ever heard. Don't you think that persons of other religions think that same thing. You are deluding yourself.posted 4 years ago.
-
melissa h
i think you are deluding yourself from actually trying the religion we are in. we only are opposed to poligamy and gay people because thats not how heavenly father planned it to be. Heavenly Father and i believe marrige is to be between a man and a woman not a man and a man or a woman and a woman. I dont believe that it is approprreite to participate in this kind of practice. also how would you feel if one night your kid came home and said i am gay or i am lezbo, would you apprecaiate seeing your child kissing someone from the same sex? would that be ok with you? now really answer me of how much you think we judge!
posted 4 years ago.
-
It would be 100% find with me if my children were homosexual. No problem at all.
Secondly, I "tried" the religion you are in. I was LDS. My husband Ryan served his mission in Spain, and we were married in the Washington D.C. Temple.
You are really misinformed. You do not know your church's teachings. Polygamy is not being practiced now, but it is practiced in the Celestial Kingdom. If you are good enough, you can be married to a man who has oodles of wives and have his spirit children and create future planets together. That is the great plan lol. Also, your Heavenly Father is a polygamist. Talk to your bishop! And then read and investigate these things further!posted 4 years ago.
-
So you know, it was largely Abraham Lincoln who forced the Mormons to quit practicing polygamy. It has been a little over 100 years, which is not a long time (especially if you have an eternal perspective ;-), since the LDS Church stopped practicing it. But it's still an essential part of the Plan of Salvation and of your religion as a whole.
Read Section 132 Doctrine and Covenantsposted 4 years ago.
-
melissa h
what are you smoking girl?????? i believe you are totally misinformed shannon!! you dont really know the teachings of the gosple for morons. and also why would it be practiced in the celestial kingdom if it was our heavenly father who told the pioneers to stop poligamy not abraham lincon! ok and you make fun of that girl for not spelling mormans right well why dont you go get an educatin because you cant speelll a simple word like "find"! and the mormons now dont have many wives or husbands !!!!!!!!!! and how would you know if our heavenly fater was poligamist... you lost all memory of what happend ther after you passed throught the veil! and you may not remember this but i know its true, but when you were in heaven you and heavenly father decieded on some of the trials you would have and you promised to keep that and stay true to him. and do you know how iknow that is true????????? well because your here! if you hadnt decieded to take this challange to become more like him then you would be down there with satan . and i also know for a fact that every person was sent down here at this time for a certain reason and i know that i can stay true to my babtisimal covenants, my promise to him, and to the ten commandments! and my friend has a question... how long had you been in the church before you left.
sincerely ,
melissssaposted 4 years ago.
-
You are the one who is misinformed, Melissa. You called it the “gospel for morons” but I think you meant the “gospel for Mormons.” Both work for me.
In July 1862, Abraham Lincoln signed the Morrill Anti-Bigamy Law. The 1882 Edmunds Act was an amendment to strengthen the Anti-Bigamy Law.
Where did I misspell “find”? I am a senior at the University of Pittsburgh by they way, and my husband graduates this semester--congratulations, Ryan! The following are some of the words you misspelled, Melissa:
Spell
Gospel
Polygamy
Education (go figure?)
Father
Don’t
Polygamist
Happened
There
Through
Decided
I Know
Hadn’t
Challenge
Baptismal
Also, use "you're" not "your" when you mean you are...posted 4 years ago.
-
melissa h
well see i kinda was purpously doing that because you totally are getting mad at people for spelling things wrong and so i decieded to see what your reaction was. see its okay for me to spelll things wrong well because i kinda am getting an education. well gotta go to bed now!
most non sincerely,
melissa
P.S: why would i care if ryan is graduating i dont even like him at all! not to be offenseive but it was just very random. and creepy !posted 4 years ago.
-
Wow! You just keep misspelling words, but it's on purpose, right? ;-)
I don't expect you to care about m'hubby's success. Our family is just thrilled about it. He's so smart. I'm just very proud of him :-D
Melissa, did I teach you some history? Do you see how Lincoln is related to the ban on polygamy? Can you reason that at all? You never admit when you're wrong. You make wild accusations without follow-up. I think you need to humble yourself.
Sincerely,
Shannonposted 4 years ago.
-
melissa h
okay there "einstien" well the only thing you have taught me is to lie when i am wrong... wait that is you. and how come everytime i talk to you, you make more false accusations? well the thing is i am humble but i can tell you arent. oh and by the way you and ryan go perfectly togerther... you both like to make fun of the church and oh ya you two like to make false accusations and also all your words are full of bull crap to me and probably everyone else. and you think i have no proof look at you, you say the things but where is the proof. see in this world you need reall proof not just words. well i have nothing else to say and i see we have totally different view and that we will never agree so i suggest you leave me alone and never talk to me again unless you want to hear how i really feel inside about you right now!!!!!!!!
most hatredly,
melposted 4 years ago.
-
melissa h
oh and one more thing see we are like everyone else,you are no different than me. see mit romney got discriminated because he was mormon and the thing i dont get is all of the other canidates were differnt religouns but no the only the mormons get discriminated! and in the first remark you put on this discussion was that mormons werent like everybody else, well lets see thats just like racism. and its like how Palin was discriminated because she was a girl well that is sexist but its tthe same thing. i just want to say this last thing i know my church is true and you can never change that shannon! i know that if i get married in the temple i can live with my husband for all eternity! and i know that the word of god is true and that we do have true prophets that have been on this planet and that are still here. and i do believe in the holy ghost! and i know that if i follow gods plan for me i can live with him in the celetial kingdom again! you can make fun of my testimony all you want but i know its true and this is the last thing i will ever write to you and i am done with this fighting and i cant stand you anymore so bye!
posted 4 years ago.
-
I may be able to swallow that Mitt Romney faced some discrimination. I don’t think it is the reason that he lost and neither does he. Palin was not discriminated against. She was just a very unintelligent person. It came out after(and during) that Palin had a sub par understanding of the world. Things she didn’t know were Africa is a continent and not a country, which countries were part of NAFTA and many other things that the average high school student would know. Don’t cry discrimination unless you have some evidence of it. Also, just so you know, people arguing against your beliefs is not discrimination either. I hope you enjoy life though and bye.
posted 4 years ago.
-
melissa h
what part of leave me alone dont you two get? if i say leave me alone i mean i never want to hear from u again. and i am definatly not talking to you ryan. i would rather talk to shannon. and in my life you guys have just made my life 10 times more difficult and thats why i say leave me the freak alone that means i need no reply from you at all!
posted 4 years ago.
-
Wait! You shouldn't dislike either of us. We haven't done anything to you personally. Melissa, relax, seriously.
To add on to Ry's comment, Romney deserved any discrimination he received, specifically because he's required to give 10% of his income to an organization that supports legislation that I--and President-elect Barack Obama--oppose.
Also, I work in a couple of research laboratories, including an adolescent depression one, and I think you may be clinically depressed, Melissa. You didn't start this discussion so you aren't receiving e-mails when someone comments on it. Therefore, a little deductive reasoning leads me to conclude that YOU keep returning to see if anyone commented. You should leave this discussion alone if you are not strong nor mentally stable enough to reasonably discuss the BoM...or David Archuleta.
Without hate silly girl,
Shannon :c)posted 4 years ago.
-
Alizabeth S
Poor Marianna, she wrote a wonderful review and the rest of you turned her comment into a platform of hate. Anyway, Marianna I hope you read this. I just wanted to tell you that the warm feeling in your heart was the Holy Ghost, also known as the Holy Spirit. We believe He is part of the Godhead, there to lead us to what is right. That is why you felt that warm feeling in your heart, becasue the Book of Mormon is trued! I know it. And I hope you have had the chance to pray and ask God for yourself whether it is true or not. Thank you so much for sharing your experience of reading the book with me. I loved it!
posted 4 years ago.
-
Seriously Alizabeth, you find Marianna's comment inspirational? How bad are your testimony meetings? She included Meyer and Archuleta, suggesting that this proves Mormons are like everyone else. That's a ridiculous conclusion to reach. Let me tell you something that I hope you take into account with your other life decisions: just because something makes you feel good or "warm inside" does not mean that this something is true or moral. You can manipulate your cognitive and emotional processes.
For example, pretend for a day that Paris Hilton is God, and I bet you'll find signs that suggest this is true. You may see a picture of the Eiffel Tower or someone eating a baguette. This will confirm your belief. And if you pray after being indoctrinated for a considerable length of time that this is true, (this is done by having parents tell you it's true and by associating predominately with others who share this same delusion), I bet you will receive the answer you expected to, JUST LIKE YOUR FRIENDS!
It's hard to overcome these biases. Please don't start worshiping Paris Hilton. That was just an experiment suggestion.
posted 4 years ago.
-
melissa h
Alizabeth,
by the way i am terribly sorry that i did mess this conversation up. but anger got the best of me. and to shannon well its kind of hard to believe when you are telling the truth and when you arent but it is kinda true but there are times in everyone's life when they feel depressed and i have good reason to be. see my grandma is dying, my family is falling apart, my dad is about to lose his job, all my uncles on my moms side are dying from cancer and plus being a teen. go ahead and make fun of me all you want but all i want is for you to forgive me for the mean things i said. you dont have to but i would greatly appreaciate it. and please dont go and turn this into a political thing when we are just spossed to express our feelings on the book not anything more than that. i got to personal of my feelings in the other comments i made to you. well i am done being angry all day at reading these so i am done! good bye forever.posted 4 years ago.
-
melissa h
and also marianna please i am so sorry for being a jerk on your comment it was no way of offending you. and i think it is great that you read the book of mormon. and i know that warm feeling inside is really truely real. and hold onto the spirit because there are some people out there who really dont want you to feel the spirit.
your friend,
melissaposted 4 years ago.
-
-
Hey Melissa,
No worries. I am sorry that life is tough for you right now, but I know from this discussion site that you're a strong person, a fighter and will get through it. :):):) I absolutely forgive you for saying harsh things. It happens, and I sincerely don't have any negative feelings towards you. I have shared with you the truth, and I believe you when you tell me that you are sharing what you believe to be true. I honest to goodness respect that.
I do hope you will examine and investigate what I have presented you on your own time. For now, best of luck managing the challenging times facing you and your family. If you ever want to discuss religion or anything else, feel free to contact me. I will make sure to hear you out better than I have on this site.
You're a gem, and I wish you the best.posted 4 years ago.
-
melissa h
well ryan i forgive you if you can possibly forgive me. and i know i that i shouldn't be that mean to anyone and all i can say is thanks for the compliments and i will try to see that in myself. and i am truely sorry for the anger i have vented onto this site.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
Brooke F
If you set aside the content and focus on this book as merely a book, and truly study it to study it, to enjoy it- (not already deciding beforehand your opinion)- then upon close scrutinization you will find that as each new author of a section is introduced, the voice changes. The writing style changes. Just as one person will have a different style of writing, so did the authors of the different sections that compile the "Book of Mormon" as we know it today. The one man who compiled all of these books, whose name was- can you guess? Mormon, took these orinigally metal plates which were at that point not all combined together added a sense of continuity, linking the chronological events into an easy to follow and understandable flow of events. This was so the reader would focus more on the spiritual content, rather than get "hung up" on its imperfections. The doctrine is the same as what is found in the Bible. You will find in each book people who lived the mosaic law before the time of Christ, and once he came to earth and lived then sacrificed Himself, lived the higher law (since His death eliminated the need for burnt offerings, symbolic of His sacrifice.)
Anyway, the Bible is constrcuted in precisely the same way. Each is a compilation of teachings from prophets (who received similar instruction from on High) over the course of many centuries, and then put together by certain people inspired to do so. You will find many similarities between the two, but the Book of Mormon has gone through much fewer translations than the Bible (only once into English), therefore the error in its writings will be infinitely less than in the Bible, which has gone through many hands over the millenia. Thus the quote in the introduction by Joseph Smith, the translator, that he believes a "man can get get closer to God" by reading it "than any other book". We are all truly lucky to have this gift from our Father in Heaven, as it will guide our lives for good, should we choose to do so.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
Stuart W
The doctrine is the same as found in the Bible? Are you serious? If this is true why do we need the book of Mormon? Why are you taught that you need to read the book of Mormon to clarify the Bible if the doctrine is the same?
The bible teaches that God is a non-corporeal being and that he is the ONLY God. The Mormons have no true equivalent for the holy trinity of the bible.
I'm a full time EMT and I spent nearly a year working with a Mormon partner. We spent much of our time debating the doctrinal differences between the two books. I have much respect for this gentleman and his knowledge as a leader and teacher within the Mormon church. I have nothing against Mormons and I fully expect to see my old partner in heaven.posted 4 years ago.
-
My university instructors of religious studies will tell you that the Book of Mormon plagiarized from the Bible. To see the passages that were taken right out of the Bible and put into the Book of Mormon, check out this web site:
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/BOM/index.htm
Joseph Smith died before finishing his version of the Bible. His edits were hilarious, though. I recommend checking them ouposted 4 years ago.
-
-
Marianna v removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Marianna v removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Marianna v removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Marianna v
The book of morman is a true doctrine of god. It talks about what happened with other prophets who lived in the americas before and after christ.
It is true and it deserves to be on the most read. When you read it and ponder it you will get a warm feeling in your heart that is the holy ghost testifying that it is true. If after you read it and want to know more go to www.mormans.org or find your local church of jesus christ of latter day saints.posted 4 years ago.
-
Why is it that everyone who doesn't like this book is assumed to have "already decided their opinion"? This is a common response to both the kind reviews and malicious reviews. Why do you feel justified in claiming that anyone who has an open mind will accept the BOM and not hate its message? I had an open mind when I was a member and I still didn't like it. When I was on my mission I taught from the Bible more because I didn't enjoy the BOM. I believed in the Mormon church then so I definitely didn't have a closed mind.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Too Busy Reading to Write
You are totally entitled to your opinion, and have the right to post your feelings and review this and any other book from Shelfari in any appropriate way that you so desire. . . as is every everyone else here.
As for "hating" the message of the Book of Mormon, that's rather an extreme way to view a tome that eschews the accumulation of wealth and pride over the care of our fellow beings, decries corruption, teaches total commitment and love in families, among other truths. More importantly for me, the Book of Mormon taught me that Jesus is real and he loves me. It taught me that I am a unique individual beloved by Heavenly Parents. These teachings were not necesarily communicated directly from the text, but through very real experiences I had while reading the book and seeking to know if communication from a heavenly source is real and/or possible. I was changed from the inside out as I read this book and applied the principles I learned there. Before reading the Book of Mormon I always loved and enjoyed Bible Stories, but after reading the Book of Mormon the Bible came alive for me and I treasure the words of the Savior and wish that I could have been an eyewitness to his life and ministry. The words of the New Testament help me know how to be a better person as I study the life of my Master.
If you have had a different experience, so be it.
Do you still enjoy the Bible, Ryan?posted 4 years ago.
-
The first rating you can give in Shelfari for 1 star is "I hated it". I can hate it all day long. I can say I hated it and I am well within the purpose for this site. I hated the BOM for its boring language, racist message, fraudulent nature, and egotistical polygamous author. No, I don't enjoy the bible either although at least it was written by more than 1 person and really translated from ancient documents. This is a book review, so please stop telling me how I can and cannot review a book. I am not obligated to review a book according to your standards:)
posted 4 years ago.
-
Too Busy Reading to Write
Did you read my post? I agreed that you indeed DO have a right to your review AND opinion. If you don't like the word "appropriate", too bad because Shelfari will not allow abuse, scams, or spam--these are not my "standards" but the standards of this site.
MY opinion is that "hate" is an extreme view, but I didn't say you weren't entitled to think anyway you choose. Sounds like you're just in the mood to argue . . .enjoy!posted 4 years ago.
-
" I agreed that you indeed DO have a right to your review AND opinion. If you don't like the word "appropriate", too bad because Shelfari will not allow abuse, scams, or spam--these are not my "standards" but the standards of this site."
I don't understand what you mean by this? I get what you are saying with the rest. I am simply defending my views. Everyone is entitled to do that I don't think we are in disagreement there.posted 4 years ago.
-
Too Busy Reading to Write
"This is a book review, so please stop telling me how I can and cannot review a book. I am not obligated to review a book according to your standards"
This is what I was trying to address as I felt my post in no way infringed upon your reviews or opinions. After all I ascribe to the following (it may be familiar): "We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may" or, if I might add, nothing at all.
Happy reading, Ryan. May you find many more books that you enjoy far better than the one most beloved by me. :)!posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
David Brukiewa
I've read the BOM and I agree with you Ryan. The best parts are the parts Joseph Smith plagiarised from the Bible. The rest of it is a poorly written fiction about the history of life in the Americas. There's no historical or geographical evidence outside the BOM to support any of it's claims.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Katbyte52
You are entitled to your opinion but I think you have done enough bashing. Get off this site and allow those of us who do believe enjoy our conversations without you butting in. You have made your opinion very clear/ It is very obvious that you are a former member. You have said enough. Now gi away.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
-
Katbyte52
This discussion should just be called Ryan's "I Hate the Book of Mormon" column. I have read the BOM many times and I know the book is true. It has always given me great comfort. For those asking how to start to read it. Pray for understanding and open the book to any chapter and start reading. You do not need to read it from front to back to get it's meaning. Eventually you will have read the entire book. Pray before reading and you will get a warm feeling in your in your heart. It is written by many authors just like the Bible so the language will change but that does not matter. Don't let Ryan's negative postings discourage you. It is frustrating that for every positive posting he has a negative one. Ryan, don't you have a life outside of negative postings. You seem to be online waiting for someone to post so you can "shoot it down." Get a life.
posted 4 years ago.
-
He has a life. He's a university student who has an adoring wife--me. If he wants to critique the book and the behaviors/cognitive biases of those who support it, that's fine, too. This is a site for open discussion.
You may have faith that the BoM is true, but you do not know it is. The Book of Mormon is a literary/grammatical mess. Your comment has inspired me to spread the truth about the origins of the BoM even more fervently. Thanks!posted 4 years ago.
-
melissa h
i believe you are right in every way! i am glad there is someone here with their right mind! the fact that there is someone here gives me hope in my heart!!!!!
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
melissa h
actually i was reffering not to you shannon i was refferiing to katbyte52. i am a proud mormon teen and i am going through major struggles and you and mr.ryan over there are not helping me out. and i aprreaciate katbyte52 for her faith in the book of mormon. i am not trying to tell people they cant say thier opinion but i have a question shannon why do people like that question the book of mormon and lthe gosple? that is one question that is burning in my heart right now!
posted 4 years ago.
-
melissa h
Hi this is Melissa's friend. She was not talking to you becuase she and I have a very strong belief in its truth and i do have a testimony that it is true and it came from a prophet of God. I also DO KNOW that it is true and do not say that I "cant really know that it is true" becuase it is and i know it! you may try to tell me that it is not and try to change my opinon. I also have a brother on a misson and i know that i can feel his spirit and excitment about the gosple so you cant say much!
posted 4 years ago.
-
Hey Melissa,
Sorry to hear about your struggles. I wish you the best with the them. I really don't understand the question you asked. Could you rephrase it? I'd gladly answer. My younger sister's name is Melissa. Did you know that is a Greek name, meaning Bumblebee? Kind of neat.
And to Melissa's friend, I just encourage you to examine your logic. You "know" it's true because you feel it's true, but Muslims "know" that Islam is true because they feel it, too. Same with most religions. It is actually very arrogant to think you have the truth and that others are misleaded or misguided. I also encourage you to look into Mormon history and doctrine. Are you around 14? Helen Mar Kimball at 14 married Joseph Smith who was in his late 30s at the time, because a scary angel with a sword "told" him he would be killed otherwise. Don't you think that is strange of God? To send an angel to threaten a man to marry a kid?
That is just one example. I hope you look into more. You can buy "In Sacred Loneliness" from Deseret that details the stories of Smith's wives, many of whom were already married when marrying him.posted 4 years ago.
-
melissa h
see the thing is shannon that muslum and lds is very different. ture we feel the spirit and we know its true because we have had it help us. like here is an example of the spirit ok, see when i was 8 i hated being alone at home and there i was home alone in a major thunder and lightn9ing storm that was freaking me out. and all of the sudden i had this strong feeling that i should lock all of the doors... so i did and like a minute later i heard someone shaking the doorknob frantically. i crawled over toward the door and saw a masked figure at the door, he saw my face and ran. i have many expeirences like that that i could share with you that says i dont question my religion. and my question was supposed to mean why does your husband make funn of the book of mormon and your telling me that iarrogant we are saying people are misleading and misguied. . and why would you say we are 14???????????and i would rater not read that book, no affence. there never was a devilish angel that came down with a sword and said," you have to marry a child thats half your age, he had a choice, weve always had the choice." so you cant believe everything that you hear ether. and now we dont believe in poligamy. i am not trying to offend you but i am just saying what i believe.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Again Melissa, what you write is historically unsupported. I assume you're around 14, because of the way you write and your "friend" asks more questions than you do. Happy reading:
"The same God that has thus far dictated me and directed me and strengthened me in this work, gave me this revelation and commandment on celestial and plural marriage, and the same God commanded me to obey it. He said to me that unless I accepted it, and introduced it, and practiced it, I, together with my people would be damned and cut off from this time henceforth. We have got to observe it. It is an eternal principle and was given by way of commandment and not by way of instruction."
- Prophet Joseph Smith, Contributor, Vol. 5, p. 259
"When that principle was revealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith ... he did not falter, although it was not until an angel of God, with a drawn sword, stood before him; and commanded that he should enter into the practice of that principle, or he should be utterly destroyed, or rejected, that he moved forward to reveal and establish that doctrine."
- Prophet Joseph F. Smith, "Plural Marriage for the Righteous Only-Obedience Imperative-Blessings Resulting", Journal of Discourses, Vol.20, p.28 - p.29
"Joseph was commanded to take more wives and he waited until an angel with a drawn sword stood before him and declared that if he longer delayed fulfilling that command he would slay him."
- Hyrum Smith, Elder Benjamin F. Johnson's Letter to George S. Gibbs, 1903
"I know whereon I stand, I know what I believe, I know what I know and I know what I testify to you is the living truth. As I expect to meet it at the bar of the eternal Jehovah, it is true. And when you stand before the bar you will know. He preached polygamy and he not only preached it, but he practiced it. I am a living witness to it. It was given to him before he gave it to the Church. An angel came to him and the last time he came with a drawn sword in his hand and told Joseph if he did not go into that principle, he would slay him."
- Sister Mary Lightner, Address to Brigham Young University, April 14th, 1905, BYU Archives and Manuscripts
Also See: http://www.ldshistory.net/pc/merlbyu.htm
"His brother, Hyrum, said to me, "Now, Brother Benjamin, you know that Brother Joseph would not sanction this if it was not from the Lord. The Lord revealed this to Brother Joseph long ago, and he put it off until the Angel of the Lord came to him with a drawn sword and told him that he would be slain if he did not go forth and fulfill the law." He told my sister to have no fears, and he there and then sealed my sister, Almira, to the Prophet."
"Soon after this he was at my house again, where he occupied my Sister Almira's room and bed, and also asked me for my youngest sister, Esther M. I told him she was promised in marriage to my wife's brother. He said, "Well, let them marry, for it will all come right.""
- Joseph Smith's personal secretary and church patriarch, Elder Benjamin F. Johnson, My Life's Review
"The Prophet Joseph Smith there and then explained to me the doctrine of plurality of wives; he said that the Lord had revealed it unto him, and commanded him to have women sealed to him as wives; that he foresaw the trouble that would follow, and sought to turn away from the commandment; that an angel from heaven then appeared before him with a drawn sword, threatening him with destruction unless he went forward and obey the commandment."
"He further said that my sister, Eliza R. Snow, had been sealed to him as his wife for time and eternity. He told me that the Lord would open the way, and I should have women sealed to me as wives. This conversation was prolonged, I think, one hour or more, in which he told me many important things."
"I solemnly declare before God and holy angels, and as I hope to come forth in the morning of the resurrection, that the above statement is true."
- Prophet Lorenzo R. Snow, sworn affidavit.
"19 year-old Zina remained conflicted until a day in October, apparently, when Joseph sent [her older brother] Dimick to her with a message: an angel with a drawn sword had stood over Smith and told him that if he did not establish polygamy, he would lose "his position and his life." Zina, faced with the responsibility for his position as prophet, and even perhaps his life, finally acquiesced." (In Sacred Loneliness, page 80-81)posted 4 years ago.
-
Again, you still "believe" in polygamy, if you will. It's part of Mormon doctrine, an eternal principle. Ask your bishop, who will likely tell you to read D&C. Polygamy is practiced in the highest level of the celestial kingdom, when one becomes a god. Yay.
Will you do me a favor, Melissa, and just admit that I have been right about these things. You can at least appreciate that I've presented you with references, right? You just keep telling me how you feel and what you believe when I present you with facts and citations. It reminds me of Hayden. He keeps arguing that the green apron is not a part of temple clothing but it absolutely is. I find it strange that he cannot accept that yet accept a book that says one should be condemned for eating shellfish. Oh, people.
Now I have to vote! Toodles.posted 4 years ago.
-
melissa h
okay shannon we can play this game your way! see i cant admit your right because your totally wrong.see back in joseph smiths day it was a practiced thing, but now we dont believe in it. we are against it like we are against same sex marrigaes.and no matter how many refferences you "find that are true" i cant believe you. see for all i know you are making it up. see and it could go vice versa. but no matter what you try make me believe i will always stay true to my heavenly father. and i know in my heart that poligamy was practiced for a certain reason back then and no one will know that reason but it was there for a reason. and things have totally changed since then. and i ask you why is it so hard for you to realize that you arent allowed to wear green in the temple okay. and thts like saying i got babtised in a pink tutu with neon green shoes! and you give me that scripture about the shellfish to prove it cuz now only you are sounding crazy.
non sincerely,
melissaposted 4 years ago.
-
Melissa, you just don't learn. Use "you're" for "you are" statements, not "your." It's a common mistake, but I know you are competent enough to improve. Moving along, I've asked you a half dozen times to ask your bishop and other church leaders about the facts I've presented. I'm sure you aren't looking at the references I've provided. Nonetheless, I again ask you to have a discussion about the apron and polygamy. You are terribly misinformed, and if you ever go through the endowment ceremony, you will realize that I was correct.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
melissa h
okay shannon i dont give a crap about my spelling because i am young and still improving. and why should i ask my bishop when i know you are totally wrong. and why should i read your refrences when the are full of bs. and when i go through an endownment ceremony i know for a fact that u would never wear an apron or a chef hat and what you are saying is bs. and that shellfish its a website in which i cannont know is true so i will not even try i will if you give me the scripture... i mean it shouldn't be so hard if its so important to you, i mean you have "reasearched" everything else for me. and jews dont eat shellfish because its meat jews dont like meat that much or do you have more "refrences" for me.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Melissa,
I don't know if you noticed but none of the adults disputed the temple clothing mentioned. I remember my first time going through the temple. I was called to serve in the Spain Las Palmas mission and it was a couple months before I left. I went to the Washington D.C. temple and that is what they wore. The green apron is made to represent the leaves that Adam and Eve used to cover their nakedness. I am not sure what the hat is for. You will see one day that we are right. You can ask your bishop and know now or you can wait till you get to the temple. Either way, unless they change the temple again you will see we were right.
As for your claim that we are lying. That is understandable. I wouldn't believe us either. It is unreasonable to not look into it though. What is the danger in verifying our claims. Are you afraid they may be true? Or are you lazy? There must be a reason. There are a lot of Mormons who accept most of the things we have written as truth and are still Mormon. A good Mormon and I believe there are very few left should know the history of the Mormon church from a historic view both from the inside and outside of the Mormon Church. You should never trust a single source.
I think we can all agree that The FLDS church is crazy and somewhat different from the LDS church. They are not allowed radios or outside books. Do you know why? Their church leaders know that knowledge is a dangerous thing. They know that if people hear things from other sources it will not have the spin they want.
Read "Rough Stone Rolling" it is definitely spun in a Mormon way. It does give you the facts though. When I was meeting with my Bishop to talk about my doubts he recommended it. While it is biased it will validate many of the claims that we have made. If you read it carefully you will notice that the author dances around the issues quite eloquently but it is still rather obvious. This is a pro-mormon book as well.
One piece of evidence that struck me as unusual was the many marriages of Joseph Smith. If you look on www.familysearch.org(A Mormon run site) you can find this record http://www.familysearch.org/Eng/Search/af/individual_record.asp?recid=7762167 . If you read through his wives you will find a girl name Zina. Zina had just married her husband when Joseph Smith told her that God had commanded her to marry him. They were married and Joseph stole Henry Jacobs' wife. This was not the only time this happened. Maybe now, you can understand why I think Joseph Smith is a bad person. You can find a lot of historical records on this.
Of course, I doubt any of you will actually look into it but if you do then good on you.
posted 4 years ago.
-
It doesn't seem like you are trying to improve your spelling, Melissa, but I most certainly encourage you to try. Anyways, I didn't just give you a link, which has additional scripture referenced mind you, I also gave you a specific biblical reference. You can know if that's true by just READING THE BIBLE. Good grief.
You know what? I think I get what you're doing, Melissa. You write that Jews "don't like meat much" but no functioning human being can possibly think that. I bet you're an anti-Mormon, only pretending to be LDS so you can make church members look xenophobic and dumb.
Brava.posted 4 years ago.
-
melissa h
shannon you are so flippin wrong. and you too ryan. k see i am not improving on my spelliing because i dont feel like it. and i am a true mormon and why would someone impersinate one. and your slightly right in a very twisted way. see i cant trust many sources like you guys but i can trust in the leaders of my church. and flds is totally different than lds the only thing in common is the letters. and for the final time i am not falling for any of your crap about the apron and the hat. and may i say for the last time i am done with you and all your lies. you have pissed me off and i dont like you so i have decided to just leave it at this. we dont have the same views and we never will, i will never change your guys veiw and you will never change mine so just give it up. you wanted a reaction well you got one. k go ahead and mock me but i know what i am sticking up for is right and no one can change that. and i dont even want you guys to comment back to me on this cuz all you will get is no answer at all. because i am tired of all this crap.
posted 4 years ago.
-
You said you wouldn’t answer last time but you did. Obviously, Shannon was being sarcastic when she said you were an anti-mormon. If you can trust your bishop then you should ask him. What are you afraid of? The great thing about public sites is we can continue to comment even if you don’t want us to because they are public. we are entitled to share our opinion so long as we are not offensive to the average(non-mormon) user. Non-mormons are not offended by what we have to say.
The FLDS church has a lot of similarities to the LDS church. They believe in the Book of Mormon. They believe in Joseph Smith. They practice what is taught in D&C. They are a splinter of the Mormon Church with the same roots. In fact, they practice the teachings of D&C better than the LDS church in my opinion.
Also here is a description of the temple clothing. It is taken slightly out of context but it describes it. THIS IS FROM YOUR CHURCH’S WEBSITE
http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=79e72150a447b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
The Book of Mormon was read, in part, out of hat. Joseph Smith, a gold digger by trade, put two “magical” rocks into a hat, put the hat to his face, and “read” the words that would appear. Google the words “Book of Mormon hat” and search for the silly images. Joseph Smith also married a 14 year old girl (this was less than 200 years ago when the average age to be married was 21), sisters, and women who were already married!!!!!!!!!! What a pervert!
The 3 Witnesses were equally insane. Martin Harris, a religious zealot, claimed to have walked with Jesus in the form of a talking deer. Joseph Smith did have little formal education, but his principal scribe, who also happened to be his third cousin, Oliver Cowdery was a teacher. None of the witnesses, including David Whitmer, said that they had actually touched the plates. They simply used a “spiritual eye”.
To get a better idea of the passages copied directly out of the Bible, check out:
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/BOM/index.htm
I also recommend looking into the temple ordinances of this organization. I used to be Mormon, and I was married in the temple. I learned secret handshakes, including the patriarchal grip, which as a Mormon you marry with your hands in this position. At least the Church no longer required a blood oath like they did 30 or so years ago when you had to make the gesture of slitting your throat and promise never to tell anyone about temple ordinances.
Google "temple clothing" for images. My husband was wearing a chef's hat and I was wearing an apron when we married. Also google (yes, I'm using it as a verb) "Mormon garments" to see the Masonic underwear worn by endowed Mormons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_garment
I won't even go into the horrendous treatment of blacks. At least not yet.
I know it's hard to leave a belief system that encompasses most aspects of your life, but you can do it and be happier and healthier than ever before. :-D
I encourage you to read:
(These can be bought on deseretbook.com)
Early Mormonism and the Magic World View
In Sacred Loneliness
I also recommend reading "Escape," which is an autobiography of a woman who left the FLDS cult.
Be well!posted 4 years ago.
-
melissa h
okay before you go and make fun of mormon principals you should first get words straight! in the temple you dont have to slit your throat and you never had to! and we treat black people just as we would anyone in their right mind would treat a normal person. and i am seriously doughting that you were marrried in the temple because if you had you would know that all you said is crap! and by the way FLDS is totally different than LDS!!!!!!!!!!! oh and the apron and chef hat is just the stupidest thing i have ever heard ! and martain haris wasnt a religous zealot, and he never claimed to have walked with jesus in the form of a talking deer. now my only question to you is what the crap are you smoking to say all this trash about something you have no clue about!!!!!!
posted 4 years ago.
-
melissa h
okay before you go and make fun of mormon principals you should first get words straight! in the temple you dont have to slit your throat and you never had to! and we treat black people just as we would anyone in their right mind would treat a normal person. and i am seriously doughting that you were marrried in the temple because if you had you would know that all you said is crap! and by the way FLDS is totally different than LDS!!!!!!!!!!! oh and the apron and chef hat is just the stupidest thing i have ever heard ! and martain haris wasnt a religous zealot, and he never claimed to have walked with jesus in the form of a talking deer. now my only question to you is what the crap are you smoking to say all this trash about something you have no clue about!!!!!!
posted 4 years ago.
-
Wow. You are representing Mormons in such a trite manner. Thanks! My words are very straight, honey. Your reading comprehension is so low. I didn't say that they currently make the gestures to slit your throat. Talk to your bishop, and he will confirm how this temple ritual has changed. I doubt (not dought) that you have been to the temple. I can send you my wedding pictures, outside of the temple of course, if you'd like. Also, my temple name was Abish lol. Seriously, ask your bishop about this quote:
Adam--"We, and each of us, covenant and promise that we will not reveal
any of the secrets of this, the first token of the Aaronic priesthood,
with its accompanying name, sign or penalty. Should we do so, we agree
that our throats be cut from ear to ear and our tongues torn out by
their roots."
Secondly, black people were treated horribly in the Mormon Church. Brigham Young is notorious for being racist. Also, many universities refused to play football with BYU because of the Church's racist practices. Here's a nice quote for you:
You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable, and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind. . . . Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin.” (Journal of Discourses, Volume 7, Page 291, 1859)
Let me continue to present facts while you just make poor accusations. The FLDS Church is not totally different. They use the Book of Mormon. They practice polygamy like the first four presidents of your church did, and as you probably hope to in the celestial kingdom, right? In your religion, if you have been righteous enough, you will engage in plural marriage like your perverted Heavenly Father.
Use this link to see temple clothing, dearie: http://www.concernedchristians.org/images/he2lg.jpg
I don't appreciate you accusing me of abusing drugs. I am very sober. I'm also much, much smarter than you. It doesn't have to be that way. Hopefully, this will have opened your eyes and mind. Go investigate for yourself. Read! I'd like you to present me with a rational argument one day.posted 4 years ago.
-
He was indeed a religious zealot. He was baptized into many churches. I was looking into Harris, and I thought you might be interested in reading this:
"Harris was a religious enthusiast who had been a Quaker as his wife was still a Universalist, a Baptist, and a Presbyterian and whose sanity it would have been difficult to establish in a surrogate's court The Rev Dr Clark who knew him intimately says He had always been a firm believer in dreams visions and ghosts. Howe describes him as often declaring that he had talked with Jesus Christ angels and the devil and saying that Christ was the handsomest man he ever saw and the devil looked like a jackass with very short smooth hair similar to that of a mouse..." (Page 35)
The Story of the Mormons, from the Date of Their Origin to the Year 1901
By William Alexander Linn
Published by The Macmillan company, 1902
Original from the University of Michigan
Digitized Sep 21, 2007
http://books.google.com/books?id=1SFKAAAAMAAJ&dq=Martin%20Harris%20religious&pg=PA35&ci=68,505,778,339&source=bookclip
By William Alexander Linn
http://books.google.com/books?id=1SFKAAAAMAAJ&printsec=titlepage&dq=Martin+Harris+religious&source=gbs_summary_r&cad=0#PPA35,M1posted 4 years ago.
-
Margie C
para sacar trapos sucios sobre la reliogion que dejo atras, los cristianos se matan, drogan, violan, discriminan. Las religiones y no cultos son para dar confort, si otras personas no desean escuchar o la palabra de Dios es otra cosa.
Estos son libros, para que las personas tengan un lugar donde recurrir cuando necesitan de la presencia de Dios, otros recurren a musica otros recurren a sus idolos porque la presencia de Dios esta en todas las religiones.
Si fue mormona o fue budista o pertenecio a cientology eso no le da derecho ha hablar mal de las otras personas que estan congregandose.
Siempre me recuerda un amigo budista que me dice que todo lo que dices y haces regresa a ti de alguna manera.
Lo importante es que uno este feliz donde desee estar y que se somete a la presencia de Dios por que es la unica manera de ser feliz.posted 4 years ago.
-
Not the best comment Margie, I tolerate this religion and do not respect it. Respect is earned. This site is secular, it is just like discussing a book on the street. It becomes private when you form groups. I do not go into your chapels and rant, but I do talk to your missionaries on the street. This is the street. As for things coming back to bite me or Shannon, I'm not that superstitious and she isn't either. I am still wondering why none of you haven't raised your right hand to the square and told me to get off this site in the name of Jesus Christ;)
posted 4 years ago.
-
emily v removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Emily, what do you mean you nearly turned 12 this year?
Anyways, it really saddens me when members of the LDS Church do not know the origins of the Book of Mormon and the Church's doctrine. Please do your OWN search, investigate for yourself that part of the Book of Mormon was read out of a hat. Ask your bishop, for the love of all that is good. Seriously, please ask him. Google "book of mormon read out of hat" and a bunch of sites and pictures will come up. There are a lot of images of this, too. Here are some references for you, but I encourage you to search for yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uD9h5ljJmHc
“Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and on that appeared the writing. One character at a time would appear, and under it was the interpretation in English. Brother Joseph would read off the English to Oliver Cowdery, who was his principal scribe, and when it was written down and repeated to Brother Joseph to see if it was correct, then it would disappear, and another character with the interpretation would appear. Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, and not by any power of man.” (David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ, Richmond, Mo.: n.p., 1887, p. 12.)"
There's also a rather funny South Park episode about this.
Happy learning, Emily!posted 4 years ago.
-
emily v
Shannon,
Sorry for my rude comment. I was just mad and lost my temper. I hope that you find peace in what ever you are doing and I wish you the best.posted 4 years ago.
-
Don't think twice about whatever you wrote about me, Emily. We all have bad days. It wasn't that long ago that I was defending the Church. I can imagine how you are feeling, and I respect you for following through with what you believe.
I hope the rest of your life is delightful :-)posted 4 years ago.
-
-
So, even though I have only reviewed the book and have not attacked a single person here, you are going to attack me? If those are the rules you want to play by, then fine. I am online constantly...so what? I am a college student which means I am at my computer a lot. I don't understand what the problem with reviewing a book is? You like the book, I don't. Regardless of what I say, I am expressing an opinion which any reader can judge based on my argument. Debate me on my points.
I have responded to people’s arguments and even conceded on points. You will find critics with any book on Shelfari. If you don’t like it maybe you should stick to sites that only have Mormon members. I would prefer to leave Mormon history out of the argument and restrict the discussion to the author and the book. I will not continue to be fair if you do not display this courtesy.
Keep it classy.posted 4 years ago.
-
I'm not a concerned Christian, but since some disagreed that temple clothing consisted of a chef-like hat and an apron, I wanted to encourage you all to check this out:
http://www.concernedchristians.org/images/he2lg.jpg
Snazzy?posted 4 years ago.
-
Hayden O
I am sorry for your ignorance, but those are not what we wear in the temple. Everything is white, not green as like in that picture. You aren't allowed to take pictures in the our temples, so don't tell me someone took this photo there.
I hope you have taken the blindfold off your eyes and decided to research things before you tell the whole world something you don't know is true of not.
Hayden,
Deacons Quorum Presidentposted 4 years ago.
-
You have obviously never been to the temple. I have many times. The green apron is part of temple clothing. I can't believe you're calling me ignorant. This is absolutely factual. I wore the female version of that over my wedding dress when I got married loll. ASK YOU BISHOP IF YOU WEAR A GREEN APRON IN THE TEMPLE. The answer is yes. I know it's crazy, and you should be shocked. Wait until you actually put it on, you do more weird stuff.
When you go to the temple and discover this is the outfit you wear, I want you to consider all of the other things that you may be wrong about haha.
I know it's only wikipedia, and I REALLY want you to ask your bishop about this, but it mentions the green apron:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_robesposted 4 years ago.
-
-
One last thing, Hayden. I want you to know what you do in the temple. You wear that outfit while watching a video about Adam and Eve and you make really strange hand signs and give odd handshakes. You get married by having your hand in the patriarchal grip. Read this or google "patriarchal grip" and, again, ask your bishop:
http://www.goodmorals.org/mormons/index.asp?poetlist=ChapterOne.htm
Here is a quote from the site:
In the fourth handshake, known as the Patriarchal Grip, one interlocks pinkies with the other person and at the same time extends the forefinger to press against the wrist of the other person. Known as the Sure Sign of the Nail, this grip symbolizes the nail that supposedly was driven through the wrist of the crucified when the original nail tore out of His Palm. At a Mormon Temple marriage ceremony, the couple kneel at an altar, join hands across it in the Patriarchal Grip, and are thus "sealed" together.
Honestly, the first time you go through the temple you will likely realize you are in a cult. You will also realize that I'm not ignorant. I have been supplying you with truth while you are indoctrinated with lies.
Read, Hayden! Best of luck to you!posted 4 years ago.
-
sixpalz
Temple clothing and ceremonies have been around since the very first temples. Are you going to mock the Jews or Catholics for their ceremonial clothing and rites? The only reason it comes across as strange to some people is that they are out of touch with the significance of religious ordinances to our lives.
posted 4 years ago.
-
People did not always wear the snazzy green aprons though. I am not saying ancient religion is any better. They used to slit the throats of lambs; that was weird too. The hat is terribly strange as well. It would have been nice to have a normal wedding rather than wearing that clothing. My wife and I regret that we married in the temple constantly. It would have been nice to say "I do" rather than "yes" and not hold each other's hands in the patriarchal grip. People should be freaked out by it though because the oaths are just weird. Why do you consecrate all your money to "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints" instead of just to God. If the oaths are eternal then the money should be directed at God instead.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
emily v removed this reply 4 years ago
-
emily v removed this reply 4 years ago
-
-
Again, Ms. Emily, I have been to the temple, many times in fact. I also specified that the picture I showed was the male version. We women wear a veil instead of the hat. We do wear an apron during the endowment ceremony. You do only wear white clothing when doing baptisms for the dead, which is what I think you are thinking of. When you get endowed, you will know this is the attire you wear. I suppose you haven't learned the secret handshakes or received your new name, yet. Just wait until you get married or serve a mish, k? Then, feel free to apologize for YOUR rudeness. I have only told the truth.
Also, as I told Hayden through our emails to each other, ask your bishop and you will know I am right.
Best wishes Emily :)posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Michael D removed this reply 4 years ago
-
-
Margie C
Este lugar es para hablar constructivamente, sobre los libros no sobre religiones o las personas que visitan las iglesias. Por favor si desea hablar mal de alguna religion le solicito que se busque su propia pagina de internet y alli escriba todo lo que desee. Se que es brillante, pero, su inteligencia viene de Dios y su soberbia viene del mal. Citando libros, frases como si fuera una clase de filosofia no funciona. Aqui lo que queremos es entretenerlos sobre otros libros y los temas.
Asi que como dice DON FRANCISCO FUERA!!!!!FUERA!!!!!posted 4 years ago.
-
Look, you are incorrect. This site is to talk about books. Not just constructively but also to criticize them. You are welcome to make a group to talk about the book the way you want to. I have cited books only to back up historical claims that have been disputed. Is there a reason you chose to use Spanish? This is a public discussion and is open to public opinion. My responses have been inspired only by the irrationality of testimony given by many of the people who have written on this wall. You cannot claim that it is their right to say the book is true and that I cannot dispute it. You speak Spanish well and I appreciate your kind tone aside from the FUERA your message seemed very nice. Had everyone been as nice as you I think we could have stuck to just discussing the book's truthfulness or lack thereof.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Clarisse T
I was under the impression that Shelfari was for serious readers to discuss books, authors and topics without condeming, criticizing or ridiculing others for their beliefs, however strongly one might disagree. There are plenty of other sites where a person can rant about whatever to their heart's content. This is certainly not the forum to make fun of someone's beliefs, whether one is Christian, of another religious persuation or an aethist. As for those who have left the LDS church and get a kick out of making fun of things that are considered sacred to others, grow up and move on. What's the old saying? Oh, yes......live and let live.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Live and let live. I am all about that. I think tolerance is of extreme importance.
First of all, I am not preventing anyone from living. Live on, Clarisse.
Secondly, my fervor for tolerance results in disliking Mormonism, the Book of Mormon, and most Mormons. I wish more people had tolerance. The Mormons who were involved in the Mountain Meadows Massacre, the bishops who made 14 year old gay boys go to BYU for aversion therapy (porn is only acceptable when you're shocking a kid to get him on that "straight" and narrow path), and the Church leaders who allowed the practice of human tithing (cursed black people, right?) should have been more tolerant, I suppose.
You, my dear, do not belong to the most tolerant organization.posted 4 years ago.
-
Clarisse T
Goodness, such anger. I too believe tolerance is important, however having correct information is vital and it is evident by the rhetoric you present that this has more to do with your personal feelings and bias than actual facts. I'm sorry if a member of the LDS church offended you at some time causing you such anger and obvious pain. If what you claim about your own previous membership in the church is true, then you also know that we have never claimed to be perfect people. As for belonging to a tolerant organization, we will never agree on that issue. I have served in soup kitchens, on humanitarian committees, in service organizations outside the church and alongside people of many and no religious affiliation as well as given freely of my income for a variety of humanitarian projects. And if you look into the numbers you will find the church has long had a history of giving, supplying resources and helping those not of our faith. So if you are going to speak of tolerance be careful. It is a two way street and one cannot speak of wishing more people had tolerance as you express your own intolerance of Mormons. One may choose to live in any manner they desire, but not choose the consequences of that behavior. So I will live on, happy and devoted to my faith, true to what I know is right, and will allow you and everyone else the priviledge of deciding for themselves the same, whether we agree or not.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Clarisse,
Why do you insist that Shannon is angry? I see nothing in her writing that reflects this. Are you attempting to label her as an angry person to meet your criteria of people that dislike the Mormon Church? Believe it or not all people who dislike the Mormon Church are not disgruntled people who really believe that Mormonism is true. When I left Mormonism, I also handed the Bishop my temple recommend. I was living a very “worthy” life. I left because the Mormon Church portrays its history in an unrealistic way, it makes ludicrous claims about its previous beliefs and I just plain didn’t believe it. As I educated myself, I could no longer believe in the vain traditions of my fathers.
Have you ever looked at how much the Mormon Church actually gives? I mean from an outside source. Not from the General Conference talk but from someone outside the Mormon Church. I think you will find it is far less than you thought. I have looked into this. The Mormon Church was able to swing ONE BILLION DOLLARS for a Salt Lake City mall. You can find that story from numerous newspapers.
Tolerance? Are you aware that same sex couples are not allowed to hold hands on the city block where the mall I mentioned was?http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/04/27/MN219163.DTL
That is intolerant. People on here claiming that I am not allowed to discuss what I want to in this public place are intolerant. People who have told me to leave, they are intolerant. Shannon and I have listen to everyone’s points and responded. The responses remained focused on the BoM until others swayed off topic and attacked me personally.
As for demeaning something that is sacred to you, reason is sacred to me. Every time that one of you types a message you degrade something very dear to me. Every single time that you make arguments without premises and give falsified facts, without having the courtesy of verifying them before spewing them onto the internet, you make a mockery of reason. Reason is building block of intelligent society and you have no respect for the intelligent when you make arguments that don’t make sense.posted 4 years ago.
-
Wow. Projecting anger, much? I'm a very jolly person! If you think that discussing injustices like slavery makes me angry, then yeah, you are correct.
It's rather silly to believe that because an organization does good things, it cannot also do completely horrendous things. Even NAMBLA makes charitable donations. Tolerance and respect differ. Do I tolerate Mormons? Sure do. Do I respect them? Not often.posted 4 years ago.
-
Arthur S
Sure clarisse, live and let live by sending tens of thousands of missionaries to tell people that Christian churches are an "abomination". Discussions of the book of mormon certainly are serious discussions, when you have a book that purports to not only be factual but also scriptural. The book of mormon falls into the category of historical fiction, a part of American folklore.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
Ana M
I have read this book many times. It has given me guidence and direction in my life. I'm grateful for a religion that has taught me to be accountable for my own actions and to come to know Jesus Christ. This book testifies of Jesus Christ. You don't have to be LDS to appreciate the goodness of this book. What's wrong with a book that teaches that Christ died and atoned for our sins? Or a book that teaches that we should follow his example of kindness and love? A book that teaches us to rise above adversity. I have a testimony of this book to be the word of God and not because someone told me to but because I prayed and felt the whisperings of the Holy Spirit bear wittness to me. I have a firm conviction of this. I also know the bible to be the word of God and together with the Book of Mormon I have the full picture. I also know that the gospel of Jesus Christ is not a gospel of contention. Everyone is entitled to their own opinnions and it's not for us to contend with each other. As far as the Temple ordinances go they are not secrets but sacred to those who truely understand their purpose. What I learned in the temple is not tangiable it is spiritual. I go there to pray and receive greater light and knowledge. It is a beautiful place of worship. I feel peace and the weight of the world off my shoulders when I attend. It is a personal experience every time. I'm grateful to have a place of refuge from the rat race of the world. When I return home to my family I want to be a better wife, mother, friend, neighbor etc. I can say the same for the Book of Mormon. My hope is that if you read it do so with an open mind and an open heart. If you read to pick it apart to find fault that's exactly what you will find. May I also say that I attended other churdhes before I joined the LDS church and I will not put down other religions. In fact I'm grateful because they a stepping stone of the faith I have today. I appreciate anyone who has a faith that teaches them to love God and be good people. I think what is needed here is mutual respect for each others faith. You don't have to believe in the Book of Mormon to respect that there others who do. Just because you read it doesn't mean you understand it or it's purpose. You have to pray for understanding. It took me several times before I understood many things about it. Every time I read it I learn something new. Let's just be nice and be fair! The truth is that I understand my religion and wouldn't dream of claiming to understand someone elses.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Please define "fair", I don't see how we have been unfair. We cited our sources and people can verify whether they feel they are reliable. Just because you feel something is true doesn't mean I should respect it. Look at your general authorities. Bruce R. McConkie one of your previous apostles published horrible things about the Catholic Church. Once Mormon doctrine gains my respect I will begin to respect it. I respect many people's rational beliefs.
I am happy that you believe you have found happiness, that does not mean that I cannot criticize this book, the culture that came with it, and the injustices that Mormons have committed against their fellow citizens(Burning a printing press for publishing literature they didn't like, Mountain Meadows Massacre, racism, blood atonement,spousal robbery, and treason)posted 4 years ago.
-
Michael D
Ryan... your own words are the very foundation of not fair.
This is all from well known anti Mormon lit that you read or heard and has nothing to do with actual research you have done. To take those words as fact without doing fair and balanced research of the writings refuting it is nit talking about flaws but trying to antagonize.
In the past I have had conversations with Anti Mormon leaders like James White (He and I talked for a couple of years quite often and had lunch on many occasions) and have pointed out flaws in his writing that he acknowledged and then would not change... Is that fair?
If this site is for discussing books then why are you bringing up Mormon History, or what you think is History when it has othing to do with the actual book? You have been told by the Shelfari folks that discussions are about the book and nothing else but you want to try to cause contention by bringing up things not in the book.
So when someone says fair they are probably refering to the anti Mormon attitude and not the actual discussion of a book.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Simon m
Well, well, it seems that Marx was right - religion is the opium of the people. Just say no...
posted 4 years ago.
-
Susannah F
I received a few dozen of these for free from door to door solicitors of Joseph Smith
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
-
-
-
I'm guilty of knocking on many doors. The sister missionaries and I, after 5 minutes of consideration, decided to knock on one door that actually had a sign reading, "No Jehovah's people or solicitors!!!!!!" The guy who came to the door was really nice and hopefully altered his sign to underscore Jehovah's people or add "any religious people".
lolposted 4 years ago.
-
-
Amanda
I just want to remind everyone that we appreciate your discussions on these book pages. However, our Terms of Service (http://www.shelfari.com/TermsOfService.aspx) clearly do not allow inappropriate comments or harassment. Please be respectful of others who might have differing points of view so that deleting comments does not become necessary. If you have any questions, please let me know! Thanks, Amanda (feedback@shelfari.com)
posted 4 years ago.
-
“So what are your thoughts concerning the following historically inaccurate claims in, say, 1 Nephi, and do you think you can find value in the Book of Mormon like some find value in the Old Testament, as a collection of fables:
"I make a record in the language of my father ... the language of the Egyptians." That's a strange language an Israelite around 600 BCE to write in! There is no evidence of the use of Egyptian writing in pre-Columbian America. 1:2
It only took Nephi and his family three days to travel from Jerusalem to the Red Sea. (A distance of 250 miles) 2:6
Nephi named a "continually running" river that flowed from Arabia to the Red Sea after his son Laman. But there are no permament rivers n Arabia, and there hasn't been since the Pleistocene. 2:8
God made the New World just for Nephi and his family. (For though it had been occupied by the Native Americans for tens of thousands of years, God made it for Nephi, not for them.) 2:20
Laban's sword blade was made of steel, long before steel existed. 4:9
Laban's servant figured Nephi was Laban and that he spoke for the church. What church? The Jews in 600 BCE didn't have churches, did they? 4:26
Nephi breaks his bow, "which was made of fine steel." But the technology for making steel did not exist in 600 BCE. 16:18
They come to a place that they call Bountiful, "because of its much fruit and also wild honey." But the Arabian coastline does not abound in fruit or honey, and hasn't for many thousands of years. 17:5
"We did work timbers of curious workmanship." But where did Nephi get the lumber? There are very few trees in the Arabian desert. 18:1
Nephi used a compass to navigate with about 1800 years before compasses were discovered. 21
After arriving in the New World, Nephi and company planted all of the seeds that they brought from "the land of Jerusalem" and "they did grow exceedingly." Yet there is no evidence that Near Eastern crops ever grew in the New World
in pre-Columbian times. 18:24
Nephi found cows, horses, oxen, asses, and goats and goats when he arrived in the New World in 590 BCE. Yet none of these domesticated animals existed in North America before the Europeans brought them over 2000 years later. 18:25posted 4 years ago.
-
S'sMum
I have also read the book of mormon. It was interesting to say the least. It was not life changing for me. I do know people who love that book and they are quite friendly and polite.
After reading the comments, I have one of my own..."Shannon, get a life."posted 4 years ago.
-
Why the rudeness? Do you have a problem when people point out flaws in a document that claims to be historical? I don't see how commenting on a board implies that one does not have a life? I repeatedly hear this on here. Are you aware that active Mormons spend 3-4 hours a week practicing their religion. I am sure Shannon spends far less time than that commenting on this wall.
The bottom line is that she has presented actual arguments about the validity of the text being discussed. That is the purpose of this site. I know people who like the book who are friendly and polite too. I also know people who aren't. What's your point?posted 4 years ago.
-
-
I second that question lol. Is it because I have responses to everyone's malarkey that makes you conclude I have no life? FYI: I have a FAB life! True, I'm a university student so most of my time is spent studying. I'm about to start my honors thesis, which thrills me, AND my husband and I are looking to purchase a puppy. If that's not an awesome life, then I don't know what is.
Shelfari is wonderful, encouraging us to discuss this book. There's no need to be rude. Your mama should teach you some manners. Be well :-Dposted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
sixpalz
Actually, no, not really. I was simply applauding someone who shared their honest feelings in a very appropriate manner.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
A surprise to no one, Mark Twain hated the BoM. I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts concerning this quote:
Wherever he found his speech growing too modern -- which was about every sentence or two -- he ladled in a few such Scriptural phrases as 'exceeding sore,' 'and it came to pass,' etc., and made things satisfactory again. 'And it came to pass' was his pet. If he had left that out, his Bible would have been only a pamphlet. -- Mark Twain, Roughing It, Chapter 16
How often REALLY is "And it came to pass" in the BoM? Check it out:
1 Nephi
1:4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 12, 14, 19,
2:1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 14, 16, 17, 19,
3:1, 2, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29,
4:1, 10, 12, 28, 29, 30, 32, 35, 37, 38,
5:1, 9, 14, 20,
7:1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 16 (2), 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 (2), 22,
8:1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 23, 24, 32, 32, 36,
10:2, 11, 17,
11:1, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 19, 25, 29, 30, 32, 36,
12:1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 13, 15, 20, 23,
13:1, 4, 6, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, 20, 34, 38,
14:1, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18,
15:1, 2, 5, 6, 19, 20, 21, 32,
16:2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30, 31, 32(2), 33, 34, 35, 39,
17:1, 6, 7(2), 8, 10, 11, 16, 19, 23, 31, 48, 49, 52, 53, 54,
18:1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 12, 15, 21(2), 22, 23, 24(2), 25,
19:1, 22(2),
22:1, 20
2 Nephi
1:1
3:20
4:8, 10, 12(2)
13
5:1, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 26, 27
30
9:15
10:8
12:2,11
13:24
14:3
17:1, 21, 22, 23
18:21
20:12, 20, 27
21:11
24:3, 4
25:14
26:10, 19
27:6, 15, 19
24
28:3
29:13,14
30:7,8
Jacob
1:1, 12, 15,
4:1,
5:4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 14, 15, 16(2), 17, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 35, 38, 39, 41, 48, 49, 55, 70, 72, 75,
7:1, 2, 6, 13, 15(2), 16, 17, 20, 23, 24, 26
Enos
1, 9, 12, 19, 21, 25
Jarom
1:7, 10, 12, 13
Omni
1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 13, 15, 18(2), 19, 20, 29
Words of Mormon
10, 13, 14, 15, 16
Mosiah
1:2, 9, 15, 18,
2:1, 5, 8,
4:1, 3,
5:1, 9, 10,
6:2, 3, 6,
7:1, 2, 3, 8, 17, 18,
8:1, 4, 5,
9:5, 11, 13, 15, 16,
10:1, 3, 6, 8, 9, 10, 20(2), 10:21,
11:1, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 20, 22, 23, 24, 26,
12:1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 17, 18, 20, 31
13:5, 25,
16:1,
17:1, 5, 13, 15, 16,
18:1, 4, 6, 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 30, 32, 34,
19:1, 5, 10, 11, 13, 14, 18(2), 22, 24, 25, 27,
20:2, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 24, 25(2),
21:1, 2, 6, 8, 11, 16, 22, 33,
22:1, 2, 3, 9, 11, 14, 15,
23:17, 17, 19, 20, 24, 25, 26, 29, 33, 36,
24:1, 8, 10, 13, 15, 16, 18, 24,
25:5, 12, 17, 19, 23,
26:1, 6, 7, 9, 14, 25, 33, 34, 37,
27:1, 2, 10, 17, 23, 32,
28:1, 5, 8,
29:2, 37, 39, 41, 42, 43, 45, 46
Alma
1:1, 2, 5, 7, 11, 15, 19, 33,
2:1, 5, 7, 9, 14, 15, 19, 20, 23, 26, 29, 30, 35, 38,
3:1, 9, 11, 20, 21,
4:1, 5, 6, 11, 15,
5:1,
6:1, 2, 3, 7,
8:1, 3, 5, 8, 14(2), 18, 21, 22, 28, 32,
9:1, 31, 33, 34,
10:8, 16, 17, 24, 28, 30,
12:19,
13:21,
14:1, 4, 6, 7, 14, 17, 19, 20, 23, 25, 27,
15:1, 5, 6, 14, 16,
16:1, 3, 4, 6, 7,
17:1, 9, 10, 12, 13, 24, 25, 31, 32,
18:1, 8, 12, 15, 16, 40, 43,
19:1, 3, 11, 12, 16, 24, 25, 29, 33, 35,
20:1, 3, 8, 11, 28,
21:4, 10, 12, 17, 18, 23,
22:2, 12, 15, 17, 19, 26, 27, 33,
23:1, 4, 16, 17,
24:1, 17, 20, 25, 26,
25:1, 7, 13,
26:10,
27:1, 2, 11, 13, 15, 16, 20, 21, 22, 25, 26,
28:1,
30:1, 2, 5, 6, 21, 22, 30, 46, 56, 58, 59,
31:1, 19, 36,
32:1, 2,
34:1,
35:1, 3, 6, 7,
36:10, 17,
38:8,
40:12, 13,
43:1, 4, 5, 15, 18, 22, 23, 24, 27, 34, 36, 39, 41, 48, 49,
44:1, 8, 13, 16, 17, 20, 27,
45:1, 2, 15, 18, 20, 22, 23,
46:1, 6, 11, 12, 17, 21, 28, 29, 31, 32, 35, 36, 39,
47:2(2), 7, 10, 11 (3), 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 20, 23, 24, 27, 28, 31, 34, 35,
48:1, 6, 7,
49:1, 9, 17, 21, 25(2), 26, 28,
50:1, 7, 9, 13, 24, 25, 28, 31, 34, 35, 37, 39
51:1, 5, 7(2), 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23(2), 25, 28, 29, 30, 32(2), 33, 34,
52:1, 3, 4, 7, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 23, 24, 27, 31, 33, 35, 38,
53:1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 13, 16, 22,
54:1, 2, 15,
55:1, 4, 5, 13, 14, 25, 26, 27, 28, 33,
56:1, 18, 22, 27, 32, 33, 35, 36, 39, 41, 42, , 52, 54, 55,
57:1, 6, 7, 9, 12, 13, 17, 18, 24, 25, 28, 30, 32, 33(2), 36,
58:1, 4, 7, 8, 11, 14, 18, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23(2), 26, 28, 30,
59:1, 3, 4, 5,
60:1,
61:6,
62:1, 3, 5, 7, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18(2), 21, 22, 23, 27, 28, 30, 31, 32, 34, 36, 37, 38, 42, 46, 52,
63:1, 3, 4, 5, 8(2), 9, 10, 14,
Helaman
1:1, 5, 6, 8, 14, 18, 19, 21(2), 30, 33,
2:1, 6, 8, 14, 18, 19, 21(2), 30, 33,
3:1, 3, 8, 10, 12, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 32, 36, 37(2),
4:1, 3, 4, 9, 10, 15, 18, 20,
5:1, 4, 13, 17, 18, 20, 21, 23, 26, 28, 29, 30, 32, 34, 36, 37, 40, 42, 46, 50, 52,
6:1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 15(2), 18, 20, 22, 32, 37, 38, 41,
7:1, 10, 11, 13,
8:1, 7, 10,
9:1, 3, 9, 10, 12, 13, 16, 18, 37,
10:1, 2, 3(2), 10, 12, 15, 17, 18,
11:1, 3, 7, 8, 17, 20, 21, 23, 24, 28, 29, 30, 32, 37,
13:1, 2(2), 4, 18,
14:1, 7, 8,
16:1, 13, 17
3 Nephi
1:1, 4, 7(2), 9(2), 10, 12, 15, 19(2), 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27, 28,
2:1, 3, 10, 11, 13, 14, 17,
3:1, 11, 17, 22,
4:1, 5, 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, 20, 23, 31,
5:2(2), 4,
6:1, 2, 7, 10, 13, 26, 27,
7:11, 14, 15, 18, 21,
8:1, 2, 5, 19, 20, 23,
9:1,
10:1, 3, 8, 9, 18,
11:1, 3, 4, 8, 9, 12, 13, 15, 18,
12:1,
13:25,
14:1,
15:1, 2, 11,
17:1, 5, 9, 11, 13, 14, 18, 19,
18:1, 8, 9, 17, 26, 36, 38,
19:1, 4(2), 7, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17, 19, 24, 25, 31, 35,
20:1, 3, 10, 20,
21:8, 11, 14, 19, 20,
23:6, 7, 12, 13, 14,
24:1(2),
26:1, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20,
27:1(2), 16, 33,
28:1, 12, 16, 23, 23,
4 Nephi
1:1, 2, 4, 11, 13, 14, 15, 19, 21, 22, 27, 35, 36, 38, 40, 42, 45, 46, 47, 48
Mormon
1:6, 8, 10, 11(2), 12, 19,
2:1, 2, 3, 4(2), 7, 9, 10, 12, 15, 16, 20(2), 21, 22, 23, 25(2), 26,
3:1, 2, 4, 7(2), 11, 16,
4:1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 13, 15, 19, 22,
5:1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 20,
6:1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15,
8:2,
Ether
1:35, 37, 38, 39, 40,
2:1, 4, 5(2), 6, 13, 14, `6, 18, 21
3:1, 6, 21, 28
6:2, 4(2), 5, 6, 7, 8, 13, 16, 21, 22, 25(2), 26, 27, 29
30
7:1, 3(2), 7, 8, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 24(2)
8:1, 2, 4, 5, 6(2), 13, 14, 15, 18, 25
9:1, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 14, 15, 23, 24(2), 25, 25, 27, 29, 30, 32, 33, 34
10:1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 12, 13, 15, 17, 18, 19, 29, 30, 32
11:2, 5, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14(2), 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 23
12:1, 5, 36, 37
13:15, 18, 19, 22, 23, 27, 28(2), 29
14:4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19, 26, 29(2), 30
15:1, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 24, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32
You know what, I think it's catchy. Kudos, Smith, kudos.posted 4 years ago.
-
Michael D
“I am impressed that you read the book and came up with all of these verses... YOU did read the book right? this is not copied out of another text right?
I always get a good laugh when somebody ties this tact... It has not worked for over a hundred years but it is still being used. I guess you have not heard about the discovery in Central america of a symbol that is ALL OVER the area down there that was translated by a NON MORMON but was quoted as saying "Oh boy... the Mormons are going to love this one" because this symbol all over the place means "and it came to pass"
So according to you theory above that the folks that lived down there were all in on the scam 100's of years before the book was translated.
When the book was translated it was basically written down as the translation was given. So to try and tell the members that believe that things in the book that make no sense to you is the equvilant of telling God he was wrong... not a really good idea.
Now, if you are acting as a anti Mormon preditor to try and grab somebody that is at a low point inthier life then you might have some luck.
Mike ”posted 4 years ago.
-
“It seems that the only point to the message that you are responding to was that "And it came to pass" was used a lot. I assure you Shannon has read the BoM. She obviously didn't count the times "and it came to pass" was used though. My question to you is "What have you read about Amerindian history?" You claim that "And it came to pass" is all over central America. Have you been there? Have you even read from an archeologist that this is true? Who exactly discovered this amazing find? My guess is that you heard this in sacrament meeting and never validated it.
Even if this were true and the Mayans did use "and it came to pass" what does that prove? So what? Are you claiming that as reasonable proof that the BoM is historically accurate? That seems pretty unreasonable. Of course, judging from your post you seem to be a rather unreasonable character. You made some awfully wild assertions about Shannon.posted 4 years ago.
-
Yes, Mike, I have read the book several times. I've also read books that look into its development. Shocking, I know, but I bet your local library can provide you with books that weren't written by a professional gold digger who married kids and had a habit of putting a hat to his face and reading "scripture" off of magical rocks that his religiously zealous friends saw with their "spiritual eyes".
Happy reading.posted 4 years ago.
-
Michael D
Interesting... so you are suggesting a man with no education and no knowledge of anything out side a 20 mile radius just got completely lucky?
And yes... I read the account of the man who translated it himself.
Why are we not shouting from the roof tops? Why are we not making a big deal out of it? (It happened about 7 years ago by the way) We have never done that and we will never do it, no matter what the proof is. Why?
To try and prove or disprove the BOM by history does not create converts that have a testimony or create a testimony in anyone else. It can help folks that believe to feel stronger but it has nothing to do with a testimony.
The reason I say that? Because It is near impossible to prove or disprove things by history.
The Savior himself is not in the official records of his time and yet I have no problem with him being real. But I have had people who do not believe in God use that over and over to prove he never existed.
I remember when a mini series called the blue and the gray came out and one of the leading histororical groups came out an said "This is as close as we will ever come to what really happened".
If we are not sure about what really happened in this HUGE event in our history why in the world would we think it possible to prove or disprove things that do not have as many records?
It is up to the personal relationship with God that a man or woman has and what the Spirit whispers to thier heart.
Not whether this fact in history happened this way or that.
Give you another example... You cite the Mountain Meadows Massacure as this terrible thing that the Church did
.
It was terrible, no question on that, but it has NEVER been proven, even with ctitics trying as hard as they can, that the "Church" had anything to do with it.
Were there members... yes there were, were tey scared of these people that had just come from the state where it was legal to kill Mormons with no fear of the law? Yes they were... should they had even thought about it? NO, they shouldn't have.
But to say it was the Mormon Church that did it is wrong... it was people that did it and some were Mormon. Tey were wrong and they will receive wat they should at the hand of the Lord but it is not my place or yours to say what that is.
To read nothing but Anti books and then quote them as fact is not research.
For the elections this year I did not just listen to McCain and believe every word because I am a republican... I studied both men and thier views and then voted the way my heart told me to with the knowledge I had. Anything short of that is not being honest.
That is why I went out and befriended several Anti-Mormon leaders in AZ when I lived there to see thier point of view. I weighed the evidence and then took before Heavenly Father and I did what my the Spirit told my heart to do. Nothing more... Nothing Less.posted 4 years ago.
-
Michael D
“Yes, Mike, I have read the book several times. I've also read books that look into its development. Shocking, I know, but I bet your local library can provide you with books that weren't written by a professional gold digger who married kids and had a habit of putting a hat to his face and reading "scripture" off of magical rocks that his religiously zealous friends saw with their "spiritual eyes".
Happy reading."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your anger and hatred is quite amazing. You can't even talk without insults and sarcasim and yet you claim to just be discussing a book.
I have also read the book and if you see my last post I have seen other books as well written by some of the leading Critics of the Church. So who is right or wrong you or me?
I am not writing these words in anger or sarcasim in any way but I hope that some day that you can find peace in your heart. I understand you have made a decision and I totally respect that, but to go out of your way to try and make others feel the anger you do is not helping you least of all.
I know... I know... you claim not to be angry but re-read your words... the name calling and sarcastic remarks about the people associated with the books are not the words of somebody at peace.
I wish you no Ill will but hope that you will find that peace one day.posted 4 years ago.
-
“ Interesting... so you are suggesting a man with no education and no knowledge of anything out side a 20 mile radius just got completely lucky?"- Michael
Your ignorance saddens me. There was a public library in Palmyra. A library is a place with lots of books on various subjects. Interestingly, according to his own mother, Joseph Smith (before ever claiming to have seen a dead Native American floating around in his bedroom) entertained the Smith family in the evenings by telling tales about the Indians, their customs, their great battles, etc. She says, on page 85 of the 1853 edition of Biographical Sketches of Joseph Smith The Prophet...":
"During our evening conversations, Joseph would occasionally give us some of the most amusing recitals that could be imagined. He would describe the ancient inhabitants of this continent, their dress, mode of travelling, and the animals upon which they rode; their cities, their buildings, with every particular; their mode of warfare; and also their religious worship. This he would do with as much ease, seemingly, as if he had spent his whole life among them."
Also, Mohammed, for example, was also a completely uneducated young man, and yet he produced the Koran, which a billion Muslims (a thousand million - a hundred times as many as there are Mormons!) revere as the revelation of God.
The fallacy in that reasoning should be obvious. Even if it seems surprising that a man like Smith could have produced the book, that does not have to mean that we must accept his explanation of how he produced it. The rules of evidence and the scientific method (the "Law of Parsimony" or "Occam's Razor") require us to prefer any possible natural explanation of an event over a miraculous or divine one. And any number of other (and more reasonable) explanations are possible: he had help (the Spaulding manuscript theory); he based it on other reading (the View of the Hebrews theory); he "channeled" it; he just made it up out of his vivid imagination, etc. In view of the great number of anachronisms in the book, its dependence on the King James Version of the Bible (including its incorrect translations), its complete lack of confirmation by archaeology, and other problems with its claims, one should have no problem in recognizing it as not what it claims to be.
There are many theories on how the BoM could have been developed.However he managed to produce it, there is a mountain of evidence which says that it's not authentic.posted 4 years ago.
-
Michael D
"So what are your thoughts concerning the following historically inaccurate claims in, say, 1 Nephi, and do you think you can find value in the Book of Mormon like some find value in the Old Testament, as a collection of fables:"
You are under an impression that the book is supposed to be an exact history book? Where are you coming up with this? Never mind, I already know... I saw your Concerned Christian post a little lower so I know what you are doing.
To keep this short... Thanks for confirming that a man living in New York with no knowledge of anything outside of his small little world and third grade education knew about all of this... couldn't ask for a better testimony of the BOM!! :)posted 4 years ago.
-
"Thanks for confirming that a man living in New York with no knowledge of anything outside of his small little world and third grade education knew about all of this... couldn't ask for a better testimony of the BOM!! :) "
Noone confirmed that. You are just making stuff up now to prove your point.posted 4 years ago.
-
If you saw my concerned Christian link and read the message along with it, you know that I am not a Christian, just a reader of the Book of Mormon discussin' my views :)
Also, many people with little formal education have become accomplished writers. Maya Angelou comes to mind. Did you know that Joseph Smith's principal scribe was an educated schoolteacher? Wow!
Oh and if you think living in New York in the 1800s makes you isolated in a "little" world", then I suggest you read a book other than the BoM.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Michael D
“I was under the impression that Shelfari was for serious readers to discuss books, authors and topics without condeming, criticizing or ridiculing others for their beliefs, however strongly one might disagree. There are plenty of other sites where a person can rant about whatever to their heart's content. This is certainly not the forum to make fun of someone's beliefs, whether one is Christian, of another religious persuation or an aethist. As for those who have left the LDS church and get a kick out of making fun of things that are considered sacred to others, grow up and move on. What's the old saying? Oh, yes......live and let live.”
Clarisse,
I have delt with Anti-Mormons for years and got so board of it after nothing new was ever brought up I finally quit saying the same thing over and over.
I have already sent a complaint to Shelfari because this is not a discussion of a book but a forum for some folks to push an agenda.
Not to worry... Instead of copying and pasting parts of Anti-Mormon books that just tear down, hopefully they will go a read some books that are uplifting and worry about thier own beliefs... or the lack there of.posted 4 years ago.
-
I fully intend on continuing posting here to discuss this book. Just because we don't agree doesn't mean we are breaking the TOS of Shelfari. Shelfari will not take your side. We are entitled to discuss this book in any way we want as long as we are not rude and do not personally attack anyone. Since we have been personally attacked consistently it is more likely that they will take our side. So, by all means file your complaint.
posted 4 years ago.
-
I am a serious reader, you silly goose. As I mentioned to Amanda, I think its wonderful that Shelfari allows us to discuss our views on a book's origin, implications, and of course content. It isn't wrong, Michael, to criticize someone for believing something irrational and/or dangerous. How is it anti-Mormon to mention that "And it came to pass" was written a lot in the BoM? When I was LDS I joked about this all the time with my LDS friends. It's rather funny. You can use it in all sorts of ways.
And it came to pass that Michael developed a sense of humor.posted 4 years ago.
-
Mellocat
ryan, shannon...
I would venture a guess that Amanda from Shelfari made her post because of the sheer number of complaints others have logged with them concerning the posts you two have been making in this book's discussion area.
I would also venture a guess the complaints have been centered on the nature and disposition of your posts, not that you are merely posting opinion contrary to those that believe the book and religion, as you claim is all you are doing.
You originally stated you wanted to discuss the book, but it is evident by your posts you are more interested in attacking a whole religion in a very uncivil manner. It seems that if we are to believe you, anyone who counters your opinions or posts is personally attacking you. How convenient for you. Yet, are you not the ones who came into this discussion area several weeks ago "with both guns blazing" --as it were -- ridiculing the individuals (and baiting them into contentious debate) who believe and belong to the religion in a rather harrassing manner? In our ultra-PC culture, were it any other denomination or protected class or minority, the type of comments you have been making would be tantamount to hate speech against them.
Attacking the beliefs of said church does not represent a discussion on a book (which its members hold as sacred) anymore than claiming Steven King sacrifices small animals and pours weed killer on his neighbors' lawns has to do with a discussion of one of his best selling novels (which his fans like).
People get it. You two, for whatever reason, were members of said church for a period. You became disaffected, for whatever reason, and you left said church. You two now have nothing good to say about said church or it's beliefs. If you were interested in discussing the merits of the book itself, you wouldn't need to be referencing third party websites and non or psuedo-scholarly writings that are clearly written for the purpose of tearing down and discrediting a religion.
You've said your peace, and then some. Maybe this is just one of those things you will have to agree to disagree with those who don't share your opinion. So, how about saving your bandwidth and lowering your frustration level now by just letting it be?posted 4 years ago.
-
Not true, Mellocat (LOVE the name). I have good things to say about the book and, in fact, its followers. I think its important to inform you that discussion of any book includes its origin and implications, as well as its content.
I have been called an idiot, retard, and whore on this site by those who favor the Book of Mormon. This deserves a complaint to Amanda. However, as I've discussed with her, MY discussion posts in no way go against the Terms of Service. I do not call people names. I am sarcastic at times, but it is in response to such outrageous, often hateful accusations. I utilize humor so that this isn't as tense as it would be otherwise.
I also want to explain to you that it is not wrong to criticize someone's beliefs, no matter how sacred some may find them. Polygamy, racism, sexism, bigotry, marrying women who are already married, Masonic underwear, the improper use of hats and stones, talking with Christ in the form of a deer--this is all ridiculous regardless of the doctrine behind them.
I am not frustrated, but thank you for your concern. When I was LDS, I was very active in missionary work. It's kind of the same deal still. I want to share the truth. I was able to help people realize they belonged in an organization that was misguiding them. I really hope to discuss the book, but no one really makes remarks other than "I know it's true". This is just not sufficient book conversation. Please, tell me of your experience with book. I will not criticize you for writing that it helped you through a hard time, but if you present it to me as a book that was inspired by deity, then I will explain my disagreements with such a claim.posted 4 years ago.
-
Mellocat, you called Ryan an apostate in a previous discussion. Ryan and I both actually asked to have our names removed. Are we still considered apostate? Yes, by definition, it means forsaking a faith. Thus, several of the first presidents of the Church were apostates, having left religions. We left Mormonism in a very calm, polite manner. There's such a negative connotation with that word in the Church, implying sin on our part. I don't think it is fitting. We left because of our moral convictions. It was wrong of Smith to marry women who were already married. It was wrong and definitely not God-inspired to accept human-tithing and so on.
I think you owe my husband an apology. :(posted 4 years ago.
-
Mellocat
As said in my post above, it must be terribly convenient for both of you to cry foul every time some one disagrees with you. And it must be terribly convenient for both of you to define the "rules" and "fouls" and who is guilty of them in this rather immature form of baiting debate you to employ.
Pick and choose your points of offense and being offended. Distort things, misrepresent things, and maybe even throw in some outright falsehoods to catch the unwary individual to show how much "smarter" you are than the rest of the field.
If you feel upset that the word apostate was used sometime ago when trying to talk with you two, that is your own issue. It was not used as a form of insult. An apology was offered in the followup post if it was felt to be hurtful. By definition, regardless of whether you resigned your membership or were excommunicated from the church you are attacking, the word fits. It is not an attack. It is a fact.
If in nothing else, in this one thing, you can not change the scenario or definition to suit your purpose or mindset. I think Forrest Gump would say something along the lines of "apostate is as apostate does."
Your sardonic "humor" is not found humorous by those whose religion you are criticizing, but I think you already know that, don't you? Something really isn't that funny if all parties involved aren't laughing... Have some individuals been on the rude side towards you two? Yes a couple have. But it was instigated by and has been more than reciprocated by both of you, even when others have tried to disengage and keep things civil.
If you have anything positive to say about the book, try balancing by sharing that instead of the constant criticism and derision of a religion, and putting down of those who favor the book -- even if all they have to say is -- as you put it -- "I know it is true."
If your ultimate goal is to get people to not read the book, by and large, you will be frustrated. This is because the more "controversial" something is, the more intrigued people will be to find out for themselves from the source. That is human nature for most people who are not stupified by the Oracle of Wikipedia (or in other words someone posted something somewhere on the internet, so it must be true...).
I choose not to discuss this book in this venue at this time, because of the atmosphere you and ryan have created. I have noticed that even when people have tried to talk about things in the book other than the "I know it is true" -- as you put it -- you both are quick to dispute and attack it with your self-appointed, psuedo-intellectual SME responses. That is not a discussion, particularly when your criticism extends to the not so subtle browbeating of other individuals' responses as sub-par and unworthy of consideration simply because their post is an "I know it is true."
Maybe we could have a discussion on how this book shows true types of things that are going on today... perhaps even how something as mundane as the attitudes and beliefs that were prevalent in the narrative are seen abundantly today. But, I think you may find that too painful.
Anyway, I select to converse on this discussion thread on my own terms, not yours. The point is, many people are of the opinion Shelfari is not the venue for the two of you to be grinding your ax against the church and religion you once belonged to. The discussion thread is for discussion of the book, not the dogma you now espouse. If all some people are able to talk about when discussing the book is the unsophisticated "I know it is true" scenario, at least that is a lead in to civil discussion and transfer of subjective to objective. Most of the comments you two have made in this discussion come across as demonstrably uncivil and confrontational in content and intent.
And that is all I will say.posted 4 years ago.
-
Mellocat: In order to effectively respond to you I will do it one paragraph at a time.
Mellocat said:
“As said in my post above, it must be terribly convenient for both of you to cry foul every time someone disagrees with you. And it must be terribly convenient for both of you to define the "rules" and "fouls" and who is guilty of them in this rather immature form of baiting debate you to employ.”
My response:
I see where you are going with this and EVERYONE needs to stop focusing on the personal beliefs and characteristics of the writer of the posts. I have only said people have been using foul play a few times( I believe they are warranted but I respect your right to dispute that) Name-calling is against the Shelfari TOS and we have refrained from using that. Anytime we have called anyone a name was a mistake and we shouldn’t have done it.
Mellocat:
“Pick and choose your points of offense and being offended. Distort things, misrepresent things, and maybe even throw in some outright falsehoods to catch the unwary individual to show how much "smarter" you are than the rest of the field.”
My response:
If anything we have said is false you are welcome to research it and dispute it. Some people have but most people just get mad and feel like they are being persecuted. I conceded one point because someone proved me wrong on that specific point. I would concede others if someone had a decent response”
Mellocat:
“If you feel upset that the word apostate was used sometime ago when trying to talk with you two, that is your own issue. It was not used as a form of insult. An apology was offered in the followup post if it was felt to be hurtful. By definition, regardless of whether you resigned your membership or were excommunicated from the church you are attacking, the word fits. It is not an attack. It is a fact.”
If in nothing else, in this one thing, you can not change the scenario or definition to suit your purpose or mindset. I think Forrest Gump would say something along the lines of "apostate is as apostate does."
My response:
“You know as well as I do that the word apostate is something used negatively in the Mormon Church. It is also relevant to a point of view. To the Catholic Church you are an apostate. Would you be offended if a Muslim called you an infidel? It is essentially the same.”
Mellocat said:
“Your sardonic "humor" is not found humorous by those whose religion you are criticizing, but I think you already know that, don't you? Something really isn't that funny if all parties involved aren't laughing... Have some individuals been on the rude side towards you two? Yes a couple have. But it was instigated by and has been more than reciprocated by both of you, even when others have tried to disengage and keep things civil.”
My response:
When in all of human history has every party found the same joke funny? You would not have found the jokes made by John Stewart a few nights ago funny but that does not diminish their comedic value. I don’t think we have even been rude. Many of the Mormons have been much less polite than we have. One gentleman accused my wife of infidelity and called her an idiot. Another person called us “retards”. I find both of those insults to be in bad taste. You cannot judge a people by one or two persons but I think it is fair to say that the majority of Mormons on here have been overly rude. Regardless of our behavior the Mormon people have not represented themselves well.
Mellocat said:
“If you have anything positive to say about the book, try balancing by sharing that instead of the constant criticism and derision of a religion, and putting down of those who favor the book -- even if all they have to say is -- as you put it -- "I know it is true."”
My response:
I don’t live in a delusional world of marshmallow clouds, chocolate steams where the sun shines every day of the year and candy is healthy. I have no respect for the Book of Mormon and am not obligated to praise it in any way. I appreciate your request but I wish to decline it
Mellocat said:
“If your ultimate goal is to get people to not read the book, by and large, you will be frustrated. This is because the more "controversial" something is, the more intrigued people will be to find out for themselves from the source. That is human nature for most people who are not stupified by the Oracle of Wikipedia (or in other words someone posted something somewhere on the internet, so it must be true...).”
My response:
I agree people tend to read things that are sensationalized. My goal is simple, I am balancing the equation. I want people to get both sides. It is not fair to only present one. Even my worst comments are far more founded than any I have read from members of the Mormon Church.
Mellocat said:
I choose not to discuss this book in this venue at this time, because of the atmosphere you and ryan have created. I have noticed that even when people have tried to talk about things in the book other than the "I know it is true" -- as you put it -- you both are quick to dispute and attack it with your self-appointed, psuedo-intellectual SME responses. That is not a discussion, particularly when your criticism extends to the not so subtle browbeating of other individuals' responses as sub-par and unworthy of consideration simply because their post is an "I know it is true."
My response:
Psuedo-intellectual? You better back that up. I have spent years studying the Mormon church and a majority of what I have shared on this page comes from “Rough Stone Rolling”(An apologetic highly acclaimed Mormon text). While there are a few comments that have been founded in information obtained by other sites, I have verified almost every single detail. I greatly value intellectualism. People should be ready to defend their positions. That is what a discussion is.
Mellocat said:
“Maybe we could have a discussion on how this book shows true types of things that are going on today... perhaps even how something as mundane as the attitudes and beliefs that were prevalent in the narrative are seen abundantly today. But, I think you may find that too painful.”
My response:
I have no problem with this. The only problem I foresee is that people tend to pull out vague verses that are out of context. I think you will find that “The Book of Mormon” doesn’t tell you anything about the present time. If it does it is probably vague and by mere coincidence.
Mellocat said:
“Anyway, I select to converse on this discussion thread on my own terms, not yours. The point is, many people are of the opinion Shelfari is not the venue for the two of you to be grinding your ax against the church and religion you once belonged to. The discussion thread is for discussion of the book, not the dogma you now espouse. If all some people are able to talk about when discussing the book is the unsophisticated "I know it is true" scenario, at least that is a lead in to civil discussion and transfer of subjective to objective. Most of the comments you two have made in this discussion come across as demonstrably uncivil and confrontational in content and intent.”
My response:
Please use examples when you make a claim about me. How are you supposed to convince me I am doing something wrong when you make such general comments. I read the posts and do consider them. In order to make a good argument against them you have to weigh them.
When you examine a book you take into account its author, the setting in which it was written, the story, and its effect on society. For “The Book of Mormon” that is very broad because of the many churches that have formed around it and its historical importance to our history. Since it claims to be a historical account then historical facts also get tied in.
I do understand that the temple is only transitively related to the book. IT IS RELATED but not to the degree to which we have discussed it. That mostly occurred because people will not allow people to discuss the book. You will notice that if you go back and read nice comments from others who did not like the book many people left nasty comments about them which was uncalled for.
I hope I have cleared up all of your concerns. I hope you have a nice evening:)posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Michael D removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Michael D
To the good folks at Shelfari...
What does this have to do with a discussion of a book? This is pure rudness and is offensive to people who are of this faith. The anger and offesnive words in this post are way beyond your own rules. Please do something about this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“The Book of Mormon was read, in part, out of hat. Joseph Smith, a gold digger by trade, put two “magical” rocks into a hat, put the hat to his face, and “read” the words that would appear. Google the words “Book of Mormon hat” and search for the silly images. Joseph Smith also married a 14 year old girl (this was less than 200 years ago when the average age to be married was 21), sisters, and women who were already married!!!!!!!!!! What a pervert!
The 3 Witnesses were equally insane. Martin Harris, a religious zealot, claimed to have walked with Jesus in the form of a talking deer. Joseph Smith did have little formal education, but his principal scribe, who also happened to be his third cousin, Oliver Cowdery was a teacher. None of the witnesses, including David Whitmer, said that they had actually touched the plates. They simply used a “spiritual eye”.
To get a better idea of the passages copied directly out of the Bible, check out:
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/BOM/index.htm
I also recommend looking into the temple ordinances of this organization. I used to be Mormon, and I was married in the temple. I learned secret handshakes, including the patriarchal grip, which as a Mormon you marry with your hands in this position. At least the Church no longer required a blood oath like they did 30 or so years ago when you had to make the gesture of slitting your throat and promise never to tell anyone about temple ordinances.
Google "temple clothing" for images. My husband was wearing a chef's hat and I was wearing an apron when we married. Also google (yes, I'm using it as a verb) "Mormon garments" to see the Masonic underwear worn by endowed Mormons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_garment
I won't even go into the horrendous treatment of blacks. At least not yet."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
posted 4 years ago.
-
Yeah, I discussed the consequences and origins of the Book of Mormon. Not a thing wrong with that, Michael. The Book of Mormon, along with other religious scripture, claims that God curses sinners with colored skin. I don't think it's wrong to fervently hate racism and discuss its current role in society and religious organizations.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Michael D
That was a very nice try, but according to you it opens it for discussion of anything that you want that has the word Mormon on it.
I do not believe that is direct discussion of the book itself.
I AM trying to figure out what Temple clothing has to do with the book but I guess you guys are making up the rules so you can say anthing you want but if somebody questions it you act like my kids when they look at me and say "What?" :)posted 4 years ago.
-
Sacred clothing is discussed in the Book of Mormon, as is the importance of temples. I think it's reasonable to discuss Mormons' sacred attire and temple ordinances :-) Maybe I will start writing and posting links on the D&C discussion group, too. Great idea!
You are quite a kettle. You haven't discussed the book at all! Please, please, please do.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
The BoM is used by multiple faiths. LDS members cannot claim it as their own. The FLDS church and the Community of Christ church also use this book. Also, this is a site to talk about literature and that is what we are doing.
posted 4 years ago.
-
I actually just read a great book called "Escape" by Carolyn Jessop, a former member of the FLDS Church. She married a man thirty years her senior. It reminds me of how 14 year old Helen Mar Kimball married Joseph Smith. Yup, Joseph Smith LOVED YOUNG GIRLS. Smith married women who were already married, sisters, and these children:
Fanny Alger 16
Sarah Ann Whitney 17
Lucy Walker 17
Flora Ann Woodworth 16
Emily Dow Partridge 19
Sarah Lawrence 17
Maria Lawrence 19
Helen Mar Kimball 14
Melissa Lott 19
Like how many of Smith's wives married Brigham Young, the FLDS pass on wives, too. Warren Jeffs actually married his stepmothers! The Fundamentalist Mormons just love the Book of Mormon. Did you know, Ryan, that Warren Jeffs, a proclaimed descendant of Joseph Smith (just like a lot of folks in Utah), admitted to being a false prophet and manipulating/deluding THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of faithful Mormons whilst in prison for sexual misconduct among other reasons? Many of the FLDS still believe that their church is the true one, though. I really recommend reading "Escape" and these books:
Daughter of the Saints: Growing Up In Polygamy
God's Brothel: The Extortion of Sex for Salvation in Contemporary Mormon and Christian Fundamentalist Polygamy and the Stories of 18 Women Who Escaped
Stolen Innocence: My Story of Growing Up in a Polygamous Sect, Becoming a Teenage Bride, and Breaking Free of Warren Jeffsposted 4 years ago.
-
Michael D
Actually, both faiths are break offs of the Mormon faith... But we never said we claimed it as our own... we claim it for the world.
It is the Anti-Mormon community that keeps saying it is ours alone :)posted 4 years ago.
-
-
If you are looking for further support of my argument above consider this.
The Community of Christ retained the land owned by the church at the time of Joseph Smith's death. Also, Emma Smith followed this sect.
The fundamentalists retained the practice of the actual doctrine taught by Smith(Polygamy, Blood Atonement and others)
The LDS really only took the majority of the membership which really isn't as significant. Of course, that last part is simply my opinion and doesn't carry as much weight as a rational argument.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
(edited)
Which of the following is your FAVORITE image of Joseph Smith dictating parts of the Book of Mormon out of a hat by reading disappearing words off of magical rocks, aka seer stones:
http://www.imagesoftherestoration.org/blog/wp-content/nggallery/Mormon%20Art/newtreasurehuntingsketch.jpg
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.mormonthink.com/trans5.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.mormonthink.com/transbomweb.htm&h=350&w=676&sz=165&hl=en&start=2&um=1&usg=__uKONTO7rU9hv_gXbm8alvkbqffQ=&tbnid=rAXlrwIjtvz8dM:&tbnh=72&tbnw=139&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmormon%2Bread%2Bout%2Bof%2Bhat%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN
http://www.cephasministry.com/ldsjshat.gif
http://www.i4m.com/think/jpeg/south_park_translation.jpg
You know my favorite artistic interpretation is that of the South Park creators. They're such talented young men. Please tell me your thoughts, friends!posted 4 years ago.
-
Michael D removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Michael D
Once again... your post below has nothing to do with discussing the book but has everything to do with anger, and hatred.
Like I said in another post... I hope you find Peace one day.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Thanks so much, Michael, for wishing me well! I hope you find reason and truth one day. Gifts for everyone!
I hate racism, child sexual abuse, and superstitions/belief in magical powers, so I am obviously angered by much of Mormonism, but I don't hate you or anyone on here. I want to make that very clear.
Hey, why don't YOU discuss the book instead of making a new post every two seconds about what you perceive the intent of my discussions are. Hope to learn more of your views on the book! Enjoy the rest of your Sunday, Mike.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
Michael D
Sorry guys, I have no more time for this. It was fun and thank you for showing me that the good old anti's haven't come up with anything new in that two decades! :)
I hope you guys find what you are looking for. The mocking, name calling, and basically trampling things that are sacred to others is not really normal behavior unless there is resentment and anger associated with it and then it is quite normal.
I really do hope you find the balance in your lives that the Lord can give you, and that you will find peace in your hearts so that you can be comfortable with who you are and the desicions you have made.
I know... I know... you are happy and at peace... I have seen where you have said that but your actions are speaking so loudly I can't hear a word your saying.
posted 4 years ago.
-
No apologies, Mike. You shouldn't be able to hear a word I'm saying as this site does not utilize voice recognition technologies. Nevertheless, have a fab night.
P.S.
I kindly request that you do not label me as an "anti"-- I am not labeling you as a child molester or pervert as I do Joseph Smith, nor am I labeling you as a witch as someone who utilizes a dividing rod like Joseph Smith might be called. I own up to being angry at racism, bigotry, and sexual abuse. I think you'd call that righteous anger, like Jesus had!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Since this is indeed a book site, I recommend reading "Mormonism and the Magic World View". You can buy it from Deseret. :-Dposted 4 years ago.
-
The fact that you can't hear a word we're saying makes sense. You seem to not be responding to us. Also, thanks for the label. That was very kind of you to label us anti-mormon but I prefer pro-reason. Funny that you mention that anti's don't come up with anything new. You know who else doesn't come up with anything new.. your prophets. The same scripture that Smith came up with is still the only cannon around. Of course, there are 2 chapters of D&C that could counter my point but that is still more than 100 years old.
I don't think people need any more to discredit the Book of Mormon. It has been discredited and isn't really taken seriously by the majority of people. As for my actions, they really aren't saying anything that would suggest we aren't happy. I resent the Mormon Church but I haven't done any name calling. It is you and your companions who have made personal claims about myself and Shannon.posted 4 years ago.
-
Please provide evidence for this name-calling business. As for trampling on what others deem sacred, well, that's actually normal behavior. Have you ever taken a religious studies or history course? I want you to consider what some people hold sacred. For example, Hindus value the lives of cows, but that doesn't prevent you from dining on burgers, right? That's a valid argument, wouldn't you agree?
Again, I told you that I am angry with racism, bigotry, and child sexual abuse--all associated with the Book of Mormon. I think it's disgusting and am glad to HATE it. If you want to support those things, then I don't really appreciate you either.posted 4 years ago.
-
Clarisse T
Thanks, Michael....I couldn't agree more. Nothing new or substantial in any of their arguments...same old garbage that's been around for decades, not only disproven but insubstantiated to begin with. Some people find it easier to point fingers than to look inward for their own transgressions. I can't believe how much time they choose to spend criticizing other's personal beliefs. The fact that they denegrate and ridicule others speaks more loudly of their own animosity and anger than of any kind of reasoning or search for truth. I myself will no longer respond to any postings by this couple as they are not interested in respectful dialog. They simply want to vent.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Yes, Clarisse, you haven't responded to my most recent response to your email. You cannot provide any examples of what we have described and referenced. Instead, you just label us as transgressors. It's silly. You are deluding yourself, and I think you're afraid of truth. Feel free, as always, to email me with a valid argument. I'll gladly consider your views. I love to learn. I only wish you were more open and considerate of what I have shared.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
(edited)
So I was just rereading parts of the Book of Mormon concerning garments, you know, the unattractive Mormon underwear that has Masonic symbols on it. Some of my Mormon friends still use the one-piece garments--gross! You can see the evolution of garments by checking out the links I've provided. I really like this passage about garments from the Book of Mormon:
2 Ne. 27: 19 Only those who wash garments in Christ's blood can enter Father's rest.
What's your favorite scripture concerning garments from the BoM?
I took a pair of my old garments to one of my university anthropology classes last semester and passed them around. I was giving a presentation on polygamy and people got really interested in Mormon attire, including temple clothing. Again you can check out this link for more on that: http://xmo.lege.net/packham/m1-sign.jpg
http://www.mormoncurtain.com/topic_garments.html
http://home.teleport.com/~packham/garment.jpg
http://www.i4m.com/think/temples/mormon-garments.htm
"Each individual should be provided with the endowment clothing they need. The garments must be clean and white, and of the approved pattern; they must not be altered or mutilated, and are to be worn as intended, down to the wrist and ankles, and around the neck. These requirements are imperative; admission to the Temple will be refused to those who do not comply therewith."
- President Joseph F. Smith, "Instructions Concerning Temple Ordinance Work," President of the Salt Lake Temple 1898-1911posted 4 years ago.
-
(edited)
I forgot to add this youtube video concerning temple ceremonies that stem from the Book of Mormon:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKG5kMnZZcM
I should email this to Hayden who may have already asked his bishop if the green aprons are a part of the ceremony. Let's spread this video around, shall we? The first time I entered the temple for the Endowment Ceremony was in 2006 so some of the rituals in the video are no longer practiced and thus, I didn't experience them. They no longer touch you underneath your garments. THANK GOODNESS! But poor Ryan was endowed before this ended so he was groped. Awkward, but yet that's not the most awkward part of temple ordinances.posted 4 years ago.
-
(edited)
I thought it was important to post this comment made by Michael and my response to it. It concerns how Joseph Smith, a man with little FORMAL education, could create the Book of Mormon without receiving inspiration from God to put his face in a hat and read disappearing words off of magical rocks.
“ Interesting... so you are suggesting a man with no education and no knowledge of anything out side a 20 mile radius just got completely lucky?"- Michael
Your ignorance saddens me. There was a public library in Palmyra. A library is a place with lots of books on various subjects. Interestingly, according to his own mother, Joseph Smith (before ever claiming to have seen a dead Native American floating around in his bedroom) entertained the Smith family in the evenings by telling tales about the Indians, their customs, their great battles, etc. She says, on page 85 of the 1853 edition of Biographical Sketches of Joseph Smith The Prophet...":
"During our evening conversations, Joseph would occasionally give us some of the most amusing recitals that could be imagined. He would describe the ancient inhabitants of this continent, their dress, mode of travelling, and the animals upon which they rode; their cities, their buildings, with every particular; their mode of warfare; and also their religious worship. This he would do with as much ease, seemingly, as if he had spent his whole life among them."
Also, Mohammed, for example, was also a completely uneducated young man, and yet he produced the Koran, which a billion Muslims (a thousand million - a hundred times as many as there are Mormons!) revere as the revelation of God.
The fallacy in that reasoning should be obvious. Even if it seems surprising that a man like Smith could have produced the book, that does not have to mean that we must accept his explanation of how he produced it. The rules of evidence and the scientific method (the "Law of Parsimony" or "Occam's Razor") require us to prefer any possible natural explanation of an event over a miraculous or divine one. And any number of other (and more reasonable) explanations are possible: he had help (the Spaulding manuscript theory); he based it on other reading (the View of the Hebrews theory); he "channeled" it; he just made it up out of his vivid imagination, etc. In view of the great number of anachronisms in the book, its dependence on the King James Version of the Bible (including its incorrect translations), its complete lack of confirmation by archaeology, and other problems with its claims, one should have no problem in recognizing it as not what it claims to be.
There are many theories on how the BoM could have been developed. However he managed to produce it, there is a mountain of evidence which says that it's not authentic.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Patricia,
Just because the facts imply that the Book of Mormon is a fraud does not imply that Shannon would not "hearken to the promptings of the Holy Ghost". Essentially, if someone says something intelligent you will throw out this scripture to try and discredit them unless of course, they agree with you, in which case you will probably claim the knowledge came from God.
So, it basically boils down to people that disagree with you are bad, learned and evil. People that agree with you are wise, spiritual and righteous. That seems pretty biased.posted 4 years ago.
-
Patricia, I suggest reading "Anti-Intellectualism in American Life" by Richard Hofstadter and "The Assault on Reason" by Al Gore, which I'm currently reading. I've read the BoM and am none the wiser due to its content.
My bishop once told me to put my doubts on the shelf as well as my history books. Skepticism is important. You can blindly follow, and that obviously doesn't make you smart, nor does it make you wise.
The good ol' dictionary provides this definition of wisdom: knowledge of what is true or right coupled with just judgment as to action. I know it is wrong to marry a prepubescent girl and women who already have husbands they actually love by way of manipulation and threat, and I know true scripture would not be dictated out of a hat by the use of magical stones, therefore I share this with those who have their doubts and books on shelves.
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.cephasministry.com/ldsjshat.gif&imgrefurl=http://mormonismexposed.blogspot.com/&h=339&w=287&sz=94&hl=en&start=2&um=1&usg=__OHs23Whessb3DGBA8v_PCqFYNfA=&tbnid=9iDnYz7FTdhjXM:&tbnh=119&tbnw=101&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dbook%2Bof%2Bmormon%2Bread%2Bout%2Bof%2Bhat%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DNposted 4 years ago.
-
-
Andrew H's reply was removed by an admin 4 years ago
-
““"Good old anti's" I thought we were the ones doing the name calling? We are not "anti-mormons" we are "pro-reason" do you consider yourself an "anti-Baptist" or "anti-Catholic"? Yet you claim that they have fallen away from God and their religion is false. You attempt to assert this with what you consider facts. In that way we are not doing anything to you that you have not done to Catholics.
We are not "anti-mormon" we are just opposed to the historical inaccuracies accepted by the modern member of Mormon faiths (The Community of Christ, The LDS Church and The FLDS church) with respect to the writing and coming forth of this work. Please, labels are for soup cans not people. If you expect respect, then you also have to give it.”posted 4 years ago.
-
According to the Smithonian there is no evidence that any of these items existed in the Americas between the years 600 BC to 400 AD(The majority of the timeline of the BoM)
Silk—Alma 4:6, Nephi 13:7, Alma 1:29
Horses—Enos 1:21, Alma 18:9, 3 Nephi 3: 1, Nephi 18:25
Steel—Jarom 1:8, 2 Nephi 5:15,16, 1 Nephi 4:9, 16:18
Iron—2 Nephi 5:15, 20:34, Jarom 1:8, Mosiah 11:8
Coins—Alma 11:5-19
Donkeys—1 Nephi 18:25, Mosiah 5:14, 12:5
Cattle, Cow, and Oxen—Enos 1:21; 3 Nephi 3:22, 6: 1 Nephi 18:25
Pigs—3 Nephi 7:8
Grain and Wheat—Mosiah 9:9; Helaman 11:17
I guess science is wrong again. Wow, we really should stop listening to those scientists again. Let’s just accept what the gold digger says! This essentially proves that this book is historical fiction and is not nonfiction. We all know there is way more proof than this but it has to be a true book because our Mom and Dad said it was and they wouldn't lie. Right?posted 4 years ago.
-
Hector M
ok u need to shut up ok u can belive w.e u want but ur goin in the wrong direction
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
Amanda removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Look, I'll get around to looking into your claims. You really need to be more precise in your argument it seems to bounce around a lot. The first time reading it it just seems like a lot of babbling about what you think with little evidence. I will try and find time tonight to analyze your argument.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
What facts are you disputing Patrick? Have you looked at any of the sources we have listed? No, you haven't. When you make such nasty remarks about someone you should probably back it up with something:) I will try and respond to your "argument" later.
posted 4 years ago.
-
I cannot believe he wrote that I cheated on you! My loyalty factor is so high, as you know! It's absolutely disgusting when these trite, misogynistic Mormon men make such accusations. The real perversions of marriage are had by those who practice polygamy or believe they may in the afterlife. As Jon Stewart jokingly said, "If there is one value that the Mormon Church has always held dear it's that marriage must be between one man and..."
I'm so glad I married a feminist :c)posted 4 years ago.
-
-
sixpalz
I take issue with that! I have quite a few friends on this site as well as a large shelf of books. I have been a regular on Shelfari for over a year, how about you? Fake what? You should do your research before you diss people on here.
posted 4 years ago.
-
First of all, thank you for reading Ryan's discussion post and my comments. Secondly, research isn't required to jokingly suggest that someone made a fake profile. Be reasonable. The length of your membership and the copious amount of friends you have does not prevent you from being able to make a fake profile. Anyone can do it.
posted 4 years ago.
-
sixpalz
Actually, I don't really read any of your posts, I just glance through the short ones--that's how I noticed that you mentioned me. I have much more to do in life than create a fake shelfari account so I could respond to you. I think you are wasting your efforts here.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
Patrick L
Book of Mormon Evidences, Part II, continued.
15. Almost every tribe and culture in Central and South America bear the legend of a white God who visited them, healing the sick and working many other miracles … going on to promise that he would someday return. The legend of the “White Bearded God,” known as Quetzalcoatl in Mexico (many variations of His name exist) is found in many cultures of the Native Americans throughout North America as well. See Mattson; “The Dead Sea Scrolls and other important discoveries,” Pgs 77, 92.
We know this to be Christ, following his resurrection and ascension into heaven.
In John 10:16 Christ says, “And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.” In 3 Nephi 11 we read of the appearance of Jesus Christ following his crucifixion and resurrection. In 3 Nephi 15: 21-24 it reads: “And verily I say unto you, that ye are they of whom I said: other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. Ye have both heard My voice and seen Me; and ye are My sheep….”
The famous archaeologist, Kingsborough, states that “the legendary Christ of America performed miracles and taught Christian doctrines.” Kingsborough; “Antiquities of Mexico,” Vol. 8, Page 277.
Rosales recounts the story that “A wonder man had come to Chile who performed many miracles, cured the sick with water, kindled fire at a breath, caused it to rain and their crops to grow, healing at once the sick, and giving sight to the blind.” Las Casas; “Apologetica Historia de las Indias,” Vol. 1, Pgs 426-427
One of the most famous symbols is that of the feathered serpent, a symbol of Quetzalcoatl, the white bearded God prevalent through Mexico and other parts of Central and South America. The symbol taught the people to be “wise as a serpent and harmless as a bird.” Yorgason, in his book New Evidences of the Book of Mormon, writes: “When Christ first appeared to the people in Ancient America after his resurrection, He descended out of heaven as if he were a bird. The Quetzal bird is a fitting symbol for Christ since, with its beautiful long, green feathers, it is one of the most beautiful creatures in all the Americas … significant also since green was the color that symbolized resurrection in ancient Egypt.”
Among the Aztecs it was said in their legends that He [Quetzalcoatl] was of maj-esjestic presence, chaste in life, averse [opposed] to ward, wise and generous in actions, and delighting in the cultivation of the arts of peace.” A Catholic writer in the sixteenth century wrote this about the Peruvian version Quetzalcoatl: “So closely did His teachings resemble the precepts of Jesus that nothing was lacking in them but His name and that of His Father. Brinton; “Religions of Primitive People,” Pg. 251
Cortez, in 1519, and Francisco Pizarro in 1531 (among others) were greeted as
“returning Gods,” a distinction they obviously used to their cruel advantage.
16. Of course, as anyone who has a testimony of the Book of Mormon will attest—and as millions around the world already know—the greatest, most enduring “evidence” of the Book of Mormon is the sweet confirmation by the Lord and the Holy Spirit that the Book and its testament of Jesus Christ are true!
Replete … throughout the volume … are compelling and touching reminders that an uneducated farm boy of 14 years old could never have translated the book, let alone written it, without divine intervention. Literary proofs like the Hebrew writing style, Chiasmus, which is found throughout the book. Historical insights that were either unknown or limited to the highly educated in the early 1800’s. Archaeological understandings such as those highlighted herein. And, as if these were not enough, and perhaps since our Father in Heaven knew that many of us would need more … there remains one final and all-important evidence: the promise that one can KNOW the Book is true … if s/he will only go to the Lord and ask Him if it is.
In the last chapter of the Book of Mormon, the prophet Moroni, the last prophet to record his testimony in the ancient writing, records a promise to all who read the book. Moroni 10:3-5 (page 529) … “… he will manifest the truth of it unto you … and by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.”
I don't have anymore time for this. I leave it for anyone who really wants to know the truth about the Book of Mormon. Ryan ... Shannon ... whoever else wants to dispute these claims, I wish you the best. The facts speak for themselves. Take care. PLposted 4 years ago.
-
Patrick L
Like I said, if we're going to REALLY discuss the Book of Mormon, let's discuss the academic facts, not just a bunch of bitter rhetoric from a few individuals who obviously have too much time on their hands to do anything constructive with their lives. Why, I ask you, would a person want to tear down another's faith, especially a faith that is doing so much good in the lives of families, individuals and communities all over the world? You want the TRUTH about Mormons? Go visit www.lds.org or www.mormon.org and make your own judgment. If you want to understand the beauty and sacredness of the temple? Join the LDS church, meet the requirements, and GO THERE YOURSELF (it's open to anyone and everyone who is willing to meet certain standards). And it isn't secret, it's sacred! It's the House of the Lord, and the most beautiful, special and incredible place in the world. Heck, just walk on the grounds (and anyone can do this who wants to) of one of the 125+ temples worldwide, and you will feel the spirit of the place. Make your OWN judgment. Don't listen to people who hate or ignorants who rant and try to mislead people who just don’t know the facts. Come on, guys. Are you really that angry, immature or just plain ignorant? Did someone hurt you so badly that now you're out to hurt everyone else? What happened...? I'd really be interested in knowing.
You know, your Father in Heaven still loves you, even though you're hurting him and so many others with your actions. He's waiting for you. I'm sure a lot of people are. Are you really, truly peaceful in your actions? I find that hard to believe. I'm just a "stupid Mormon, though," right? Go figure.
BOOK OF MORMON EVIDENCES—PART TWO
1. Authorities generally agree that there were at least two separate and distinct migrations from Asia to the new world by sea: the Archaic about 4000 years ago [about the time of the Tower of Babel], and the Maya-Toltec [around 600 B.C.] Albert Galatin, a famous philologist, and the archaeologist Lowry both affirm that “the first settlement was made … and the time of their … arrival could not have been long after the dispersion of the human family, shortly after the confusion of the languages at the Tower of Babel.” Galatin; “The Native Races,” Vol. 5, Page 19
According to the Toltec traditions as compiled by Veytia, “the Toltecs came from Babel upon the confusion of tongues, they went forth, consisting then of seven families.”
The great historian, Bancroft, speaking of the migrations, says: “The Yucatans have a tradition they originally came from the Far East, passing through the sea,” as though in a submarine. Never do the Indian legends say the “second main group” came “through the sea”—it’s always the more ancient group who did this.
As we know, the eight barges (boats) of the Jaredites were built like submarines: watertight as a dish (top, bottom and side) and the length of a tree, peaked on each end, built with a vent top and bottom; dark and airless inside when the water-tight doors were closed (even if they were completely turned over, the occupants could survive—thus, a submarine like ship. Crowley; “Book of Mormon Treasury,” Pgs 133-150
2. Scientists are still confused why the later, smaller migration, the Mayan-Toltec migration, flourished then died within a thousand years. Authoritative researchers say that the Mayan-Toltec migration occurred about 600 B.C. then flourished until it reached its peak between the second and fifth centuries A.D. But what happened to them? All we can tell is that a great catastrophe took place, which almost wiped out this ancient civilization and left it in the condition that the Spaniards under Cortez found it.
The scientists ask: what happened after the civilization had reached its peak? What caused the people to walk out of their cities by the thousands, with no evidence of pestilence, famine or war? In some cases, cities were left that held over a million people. The Book of Mormon has the answer: the Nephite nation was hopelessly outnumbered; so they left their cities to gather to one place to make a last stand together … a war they ended up losing. The Lamanites won.
3. When the Book of Mormon was published, antagonists criticized the reference to “white skinned Indians.” In the early 20th century, scientists brought four members of the Tule Tribe, a white-skinned tribe inhabiting the Darien Peninsula of Panama. Medical doctors determined they were not albinos. They had the same physiological structure and blood types of their darker relatives. Their hair was golden brown, their eyes brown or blue, and their skin a pinkish tan.
4. The Book of Mormon states that the Nephites brought from the old continent certain records known as the “Brass Plates of Laban” (the Old Testament writings up to, but not including, the capture of Jerusalem by the Babylonians). In 1830 there was no evidence to support that statement. Now scientists are finding much.
Many native legends tell of the time when a “tower was erected for the purpose of reaching the clouds....” There are also numerous references to Jacob (Israel) and his twelve sons. The pyramid at Teotihuacan, Mexico has 12 small temples in front of it. The native leaders of the ancient Guatemalan town of Totonicapan recorded that their ancestors were descendants of Israel and that they were the sons of Abraham and Jacob. Yorgason; “New Evidences of Christ in Ancient America,” Page 280
The “Newark Decalogue Stone” is an example of Old Testament teachings appearing in artifacts found in the Americas. The stone, unearthed in a burial mound ten miles south of Newark, Ohio contains an abridgement of the Ten Commandments in Exodus 20.
The Mayan expert DeRoo explains that “part of Mexican belief was that man was created in the image of God, and they knew all about Eve.” If that isn’t an Old Testament teaching, I don’t know what is.
More evidence was found when the Catholic priests were first able to communicate through the Native’s sign language. They were startled to find that the Natives already knew many of the Old Testament stories and teachings.
The story of the flood was widely known. There is no other book where the promise of the rainbow is given, except the Holy Bible; yet the Native people knew about it.
Bishop Diego de Landa of Yucatan and Father Juan de Torquemadea of Mexico (a Spanish priest in the 1600’s) recorded that the Toltecs and Maya Indians all knew of the creation of the world, the destruction by the flood, and that the world would end by fire.
The odds, the sheer volume of evidence, and the many different areas from which it comes, makes coincidence impossible. And because the natives knew all these things before the first Catholic priests were able to communicate with them, we can’t claim that they learned it from the Spanish or anyone else. The only answer is their answer. They brought all of this knowledge with them from the old world.
5. A few similarities between the ancient Hebrews and Indians: They both offer their “first fruits,” keep their New Moons, observe the Day of Atonement at the end of September or in the beginning of October, and they both divide the year into four seasons corresponding with the Jewish Festivals.
6. Physically: the Indians possessed essential physical characteristics of the ancient Hebrews: broad nose, high cheekbone, black hair, dark, heavy eyebrows, sunken but brilliant eyes. Both worshipped one God, the Great Spirit or Jehovah.
7. Scientists have found numerous relics in ancient America ruins that show both Hebrew and Egyptian influences. They have found this dual influence puzzling. One such scientist was Dr. Marett, an archaeologist who excavated a tomb in Monte Alban, Mexico. Among other things, some five-foot-tall stone carvings were located, the “Danzantes.” They are on display at the ruins of Monte Alban and they have markings on their backsides, one showing definite Egyptian markings, the other with distinctly Hebrew markings.
Anyone who knows the story of Joseph of Egypt should not be surprised his descendants have strong Egyptian influences in their art, culture and written language. The tribe of Joseph (Lehi’s family, etc.) would have taken with them elements of their forefather, undoubtedly.
8. Writing on gold? Hundreds of gold disks have been recovered from places like ‘The Sacred Well’ (or Cenote Sagrado) in Chicen-Itza, covered with Egyptian and Hebrew writings and hieroglyphics.
9. The American continent has numerous examples of pyramids as well, one of the largest being the ‘pyramid of the sun’ at Teotihuacan, Mexico (which means “The place where men become gods.”) It once served as a foundation for a temple of the Aztecs where the people paid homage to Quetzalcoatl (see below).
The pyramids of the Americas are very similar to those of Egypt, and some are even larger. The one at Cholula, Mexico is so big you could place three copies of the largest pyramid of Egypt inside its base, and you would still have enough room left for a baseball field.
And, as if in direct copy of the Egyptian, the size of the pyramid base at Capan, Mexico is identical with that of the great pyramid of the Nile. The pyramid at Cholula, Mexico is exactly twice the base measurement of the other two. It is scarcely possible that these relational dimensions could have been coincidental.
10. In 1830 people jeered at the statement that the Book of Mormon people built cities, highways and buildings with cement. John MacAdam, a Scotch engineer, is accredited with developing the first cement, the “MacAdam Road System.” Unknown to the rest of the world, 2,000 years earlier, the Mayas used the same fine principles of engineering on the roads built in the Yucatan. 3rd Nephi 6: 8 refers to the system of highways that existed at that time. Numerous examples remain to this day, Dzibilchaltun, with 20 square miles of ruined pyramids and temples full of cement … a cement causeway at Palenque raised six to eight feet of the ground, wide enough for four automobile lanes. One (perfectly straight) street in Palenque is 18 miles long. Gann; “The Americas before Columbus,” Page 99-100. Archaeologists have discovered highways that run the full length of Central and South America. One of these, the largest of its kind in the world, extends over 2,400 miles! And one other interesting insight: no highways south of the Panama Canal have evidences of cement. This correlates with the Book of Mormon’s claim to the people in only the “Land Northward” using cement. We find no reference to—and no actual cement—south of the Panamanian “Narrow Neck.”
There are over 4,000 miles of the same continuous highway in Central America alone—every inch of it covered with fine quality cement with a polished flatness as smooth as tile. Mattson; “The Dead Sea Scrolls and other important discoveries,” Page 70
11. The Book of Mormon also claims that ancient people actually used hardened copper tools. This is amazing, because the hardening of copper was a lost art for many centuries! Most experts in 1830 thought the Native Americans were a stone-age people.
The Egyptians, however, knew how to harden pure copper and the Hebrews learned it from them. Over 10,000 ancient copper tools have been found in the Americas north of Panama alone, to say nothing of the thousands unearthed in South America. An experiment was even done where some ancient hardened copper surgical instruments were lent to the hospital. Two of Lima’s most distinguished surgeons, Doctors Francisco Grana Reyes and Esteban Rocco completed a cranial operation with them that took only 14 minutes.
12. The next claim is that the ancient peoples had machinery. Alma 18: 9-12 and 3rd Nephi 3:22 prove they did have machinery and also wheels … both of which were hotly contested when the book was first published.
In Mexico City, a construction crew was digging a foundation for a new building and discovered ancient Mayan-Toltec remains. In the grave of a child, they found the first evidence of the wheel. West; “The Trial of the Stick of Joseph,” Page 67
On the shores of Lake Titicaca archaeologists discovered four giant wheels nine feet in diameter and 16 inches wide on the tread.
Scientists now believe the ancients used a wood stronger than our “iron-wood” for axles and spacers between the two pairs of wheels. The axles were square at the ends to fit snugly, and rounded and greased in the center. Strong rope was looped around the axles to form a rope cradle. These wagons could carry loads in excess of 300 tones.
They also used a form of lathe to turn their huge pillars, as evidenced by the lathe spindle holes at the ends of the pillars. They also used cog wheels of hardened copper, and had threaded nuts of metal as well as of obsidian.
13. The Book of Mormon writings claim that the ancients actually used horses and elephants as beasts of burden (see Ether 9:19 and Enos 1:21). The first evidences of these were found in some Mayan glyphs which showed some elephants heads. An elephant-headed toy / figurine was also discovered in Jaina, an island off the coast of Campeche, Mexico. How or why would the Maya create such things if they were unfamiliar with the elephant?
Archaeologists in Arizona have discovered elephant remains with arrows heads embedded in them indicating that they were contemporaries with man.
Elephant bones have been found in human burial plots in Tiahuanaco, Bolivia and are still on display in the National Museum in La Paz, Bolivia.
Horse bones and teeth have been unearthed on two separate occasions in Maya cave dwellings. Scientists found it hard to reconcile the fact that these bones were found alongside Maya pottery, since they thought only prehistoric horses inhabited the area.
14. We’ll discuss the most important “legend” of Ancient America, next, but first … we all know that the Book of Mormon claims that at the time of the Crucifixion of Christ, a great and terrible destruction occurred in the Ancient Americas. Entire cities were completely destroyed, burned, buried under mountains, or sunk into the sea. Once again, evidences prove this is true.
Two examples, briefly: off the coast of Honduras an American college spent over a million dollars building a semicircular sea-wall out into the water around some ancient ruins. They pumped the interior dry to reveal a giant city which had been swept off into the sea by what must have been an ancient tidal wave. The site: Xunantunich.
Other sites of sunken cities include Fonseca Conchaga Viega and Agua Catal, Paso Real in the Laguna de Terminos in Guatemala.
Fully buried cities, like those discovered underneath modern Mexico City, are being excavated on an ongoing basis throughout Central and South America.
Continued below….posted 4 years ago.
-
Patrick L
I agree with the comment below about how this discussion seems less about the Book of Mormon and more about slamming a religion. (Seems outside the scope of a "Shelfari Book Discussion," but that's just my opinion). Personally, I am a convert to the LDS church and have had several very special, very sacred experiences confirming it's true. I'm also a scholar though, and thought all of the readers below would be interested in the FACTS about the "evidence" concerning the BofM, especially since "ryan" (whoever that is) felt the need to make such an all encompassing, and false, statement about the Smithsonian. And Shannon? What’s your deal. Do you really enjoy tearing down others … for what purpose? What does making light of things sacred to another accomplish? And what in the world does it have to do with a book discussion?
Please everyone, check out the following (Parts 1 and 2), and decide for yourself which "argument" rings more true:
BOOK OF MORMON EVIDENCES—PART ONE
Points of Interest:
• Today … there are over 38 versions of the bible in English.
• There are 8 versions of the King James Version bible alone.
• There are 20,000 different denominations in the world, each claiming authority from God and each organizing the church in a different way.
Much religious confusion exists, even today:
• Only 38% of ministers believe in the miracles of Christ, 40% of members.
• Only 23% of ministers believe in the reality of Satan, 27% of members.
The LDS Doctrine and Covenants, 10:63 says “…Satan doth stir up the hearts of the people to contention concerning the points of my doctrine; and in these things they do err, for they do wrest the scriptures and do not understand them.”
The Solution?
God prepared a key to help us decipher the truth in the midst of all this confusion: The Book of Mormon. It is the key to not only knowing the truth of Christ’s gospel but also of the message restored on earth by the Prophet Joseph Smith.
The Book of Mormon is the KEYSTONE of the Mormon religion … the key to knowing whether both the church—and the whole story—are true. It's why we're CALLED Mormons, because we are the only religion with it (except for a handful of off-shoots, the RLDS and Community of Christ, etc.).
In short? The book MUST be either True or False [ there is no other option ].
If FALSE … it is one of the most cunning, wicked, bold, deep-laid impositions ever palmed upon the world, calculated to deceive millions.
If TRUE … it is one of the most important messages ever sent from God to man, affecting both the Temporal and Eternal interests of every people under Heaven.
The bible has many examples of when God spoke to and chose boys to perform his work, such as Joseph of Egypt, Samuel, David and others. There are also numerous accounts of when prophets were visited by angels, men like Abraham, Peter and Moses.
If God doesn’t change … if He is the same yesterday, today and forever … then he will continue to do what he has always done (i.e. call young men as prophets and communicate with mankind by way of angelic ministration).
Revelations 14:6 states, “I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue and people.”
John (the Revelator) was told these things by an angel himself. He recounts “And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things.”
JOSEPH SMITH
Sept 21, 1823: Joseph is visited by the angel Moroni 3 ½ years after his First Vision. Joseph saw the plates, the Urim and Thummim and Laban’s sword all on Sept 22, 1823. He was forbidden from taking the plates for four more consecutive years, until September 22, 1827.
Through all of this, Joseph suffered terrible injustices “….And while they were persecuting and reviling me and speaking all manner of evil against me falsely, my heart was asking, “Why persecute me for telling the truth? I have actually seen a vision; and who am I that I can withstand God, or why does the world think to make me deny what I have actually seen? For I had see a vision; I knew it, and I know that God knew it; and I could not deny it, neither dared I do it … and come under condemnation.”
Joseph Smith didn’t even have an 8th grade education. In fact, he only got through the 3rd grade. There is no way he had the education or background to write such a book (espec-ially in just 70 days). No—he had to have translated it by the Gift and Power of God.
Questions to ponder:
1. Would a man endure constant persecution and even death for something untrue?
2. Would a righteous man be faithful to his testimony in spite of all opposition?
THE GOLD PLATES
Ancient metal plates, similar to the Golden plates Joseph describes, have been discovered all around the world since Joseph Smith’s time. They date from 2000 B.C. to 800 A.D. and have been uncovered in the Americas, Europe, the far East and Korea. Many have even been discovered preserved in stone boxes.
A noteworthy fact is that the earliest of these plates wasn’t discovered until 1854, ten (10) years after Joseph Smith’s death (Cheesman “Ancient Writing on Metal Plates,” et al.)
WITNESSES OF THE TRUTH
Eleven others also saw the plates, more than enough to provide sufficient testimony or even convict a man in any court in the land were they to stand as witnesses today. The first three of these eleven witnesses are as follow: Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer and Martin Harris. They were told: “These plates have been revealed by the power of God, and they have been translated by the power of God. The translation of them, which you have seen, is correct, and I command you to bear record of what you now see and hear.”
OLIVER COWDERY
Note: in 1838 Oliver was excommunicated from the church and became bitter towards Joseph Smith. In 1848 he asked for and received forgiveness from the Church. On November 23, 1848 he was re-baptized. He never denied the experience he had or the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon, even during the time he was antagonistic / out of the Church. He actually got sick and passed away at David Whitmer’s house. His last words were “Brother David, be true to your testimony of the Book of Mormon,” March 3, 1850.
DAVID WHITMER
David tells of times when Joseph, who was illiterate and not well-versed in Biblical lore, was at times compelled to spell the words out, not knowing the correct pronunciation. It was obvious” he says “that he was not capable of creating such a vast work without help.”
David was excommunicated on April 13, 1838, after completely rejecting the leadership of Joseph Smith. He started the Church of Christ, never did return to the LDS Church, and came to dislike Joseph Smith very much. And yet, he never once denied the testimony or experience that he had. In fact, when he was accused of covering up Joseph’s “fraud” he called on 19 of the most influential and prominent men of the state, none of whom belonged to the Church, and asked them to testify regarding his integrity. They did exactly this, agreeing wholeheartedly “that David Whitmer [was] completely honest and above reproach.” This testimony was published in The New York Times and The London.
On his deathbed he testified “I know the Book of Mormon is true.” Following his death, the local newspaper, the Richmond Democrat, reported: “Skeptics may laugh and scoff if they will, but no man can listen to Mr. Whitmer as he talks of his interview with the Angel of the Lord, without being most forcibly convinced that he has heard an honest man tell what he honestly believes to be true. (Vestal and Wallace, “The Firm Foundation of Mormonism.”)
MARTIN HARRIS
At one point, Martin was instructed to go to New York City with some of the characters and show them to experts to fulfill a prophecy in Isaiah 29: 10-14. These verses read (11) “And … the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, “Read this I pray thee.” And he saith, “I cannot; for it is sealed.”
He took them to the home of Dr. Charles Anthon, LLD, of Columbia College, in NYC. He was a young linguist who would later become of the greatest classical scholars in the United States. Professor Anthon, upon seeing the characters, said they were true and the translation was absolutely correct. He said the characters were Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyrian and Arabic. Martin asked him if he would give a certificate of authenticity to show the people of Palmyra, New York, which he did. He wrote it up and gave it to Martin. Martin put it in his pocket and prepared to leave. Just as he was leaving, though, Professor Anthon called him back and asked him how Joseph found out there were gold plates in the hill. When Martin told him an Angel of God revealed the records to him, he said “Let me see that certificate … there is no such thing as ministering angels,” and he tore it up, asking Martin to bring him the plates so he could translate them. Martin responded, “I can’t. Part of the plates are sealed, and we are forbidden to show them to anyone.” Professor Anthon, fulfilling prophesy, retorted, “I cannot read a sealed book.”
Shortly after, Professor Anthon, at a meeting of scientists, verified that he had given Martin the certificate then afterward tore it up. In fact, Anthon was later teased by his fellow professors who joked about him being written of in scripture. This proves that Martin didn’t just make up the story.
He next took the characters to other learned men. One of these men was Senator Samuel Latham Mitchell, vice president of Rutgers Medical College. He, as well as the others, confirmed what Anthon had said about the characters and the translation.
By the way, Joseph paid back every dime + of the $3,000 Martin paid to publish the Book of Mormon.
Today the book is translated into dozens of languages and hundreds of thousands of copies are distributed around the world every year!
Continued below....posted 4 years ago.
-
Patrick L
Shannon ... Ryan ... there's no need to get "nasty." (Interesting, isn't it, how the Book of Mormon engenders such deep, emotional feelings in so many different people). Says something about it, doesn't it.
I wish you the best in your journey/s. PLposted 4 years ago.
-
You, Patrick, got nasty. You either deleted the post where you called me an idiot and suggested that I cheated on my husband or an admin did at my request. Either way, you should humble yourself and publicly apologize to me for these demeaning, unfounded, and untrue remarks.
Your discussions are in very poor taste. You should not call anyone on here names. Again, please apologize.
As for this discussion, the Book of Mormon, like "A Million Little Pieces" by James Frey, absolutely causes emotional arousal, as most things do for Homo sapiens. This is no way says that it is inspired by a deity or "true". However, your remarks concerning my fidelity to my beloved husband say a lot about you.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
The Book of Mormon's claim that Native Americans are descendants of Israelites is considered malarkey by the scientific community and the majority of literate people. The Mormon Church has long been at odds with many of those with Jewish ancestry. The Mormons are in the process of removing the names of Jewish Holocaust victims from its genealogy index, thankfully.
A number of investigators have used genetic and blood testing studies to show that Native Americans are related closely to the inhabitants of Siberia . However, Thomas W. Murphy decided to examine whether DNA analysis would confirm that many, perhaps most, Native Americans are descended from ancient Israelites. According to the LA Times, "He analyzed data collected by a multimillion-dollar 'molecular genealogy' project at Brigham Young [University] as well as other, similar projects that track ancestry from people worldwide via DNA in blood samples."
Murphy concluded that over the last few thousand years, modern-day Jews and modern-day Native Americans do not share common ancestors. If they did, then genetic markers would be found in Natives identical to those in the descendents of ancient Hebrews.
Simon Southerton wrote a book which uses DNA evidence to contradict the Book of Mormon's teachings. It is titled "Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church," and was published in 2004. Referring to the LDS' teachings on the origin of Native Americans, he said: "We know from evidence that that's completely false. The church needs to modify its doctrine.''
In sum, the Book of Mormon is historically inaccurate. You may find parts of it inspirational, but that does not say anything at all about its validity. Seriously, you can find inspiration from pretty much anything folks. Why find it from a book that was, in part, read out of a hat? That's just silly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uD9h5ljJmHcposted 4 years ago.
-
Hector M
if i were you i would shut up and keep your negative comments about my religion to yourself
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
“I know many of you are in disbelief that part of the Book of Mormon was read out of a hat by the use of a magical rock Smith found in a well as a child. I encourage you to investigate the origins of this book and the character of Joseph Smith and his "witnesses". Martin Harris claimed to have walked and talked with Jesus in the form of a deer. Jesus was the deer, mind you. Although Joseph Smith had little FORMAL education, his principal scribe Oliver Cowdery was a teacher and third cousin. The final witness, David Whitmer, like the others, said that he had never ACTUALLY touched the plates but saw them with a "spiritual eye." ;-) ;-) ;-)
The content below can be found at this site: http://www.mormonthink.com/transbomweb.htm
There were numerous witnesses to the translation of the Book of Mormon by Joseph Smith. They all tell essentially the same story. Joseph would put a stone in a hat, then burying his face in the hat he would proceed to dictate the Book of Mormon to the scribe. Joseph claimed to see in the darkened hat the words he dictated. The gold plates were either always covered in a cloth, where no one including Joseph could even see them or they were not even in the room at the time Joseph was translating. The seer stone, that Joseph put in the hat as he translated, was a stone that he found in a well that he helped dig when he was employed as a treasure seeker years before the Book of Mormon plates were claimed to have been retrieved by Joseph. Even Smith's wife, (which one you ask?--Emma), said she only saw her husband bury his head in a hat, not the plates.
For Halloween, you can easily dress up like Joseph Smith. All you need to do is put a hat to your face and go around saying "And it came to pass"!!!!!!!!posted 4 years ago.
-
Hector M
all u retards that diss the mormons and their book are all losers i care because im a proud mormon and for the person that wrote this is fiction they are retarted because this is a factual book
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
shannon p
thank you! why doesn't anybody actually look into the facts anymore??!! i am also a proud mormon, and a little light in the darkness helps a lot.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Shannon,
Are you condoning Hector's statements? He's childishly name-calling AND insulting a defenseless population.
http://www.bestbuddies.org/site/c.ljJ0J8MNIsE/b.1162355/k.BF9F/Intro.htm
Also, the book isn't factual simply because the 'rents told you it is. The scientific community has denounced this book.
You can check out this site, which also details the use of a hat and seer stones in the dictation of the BoM:
http://www.mormonthink.com/scienceweb.htmposted 4 years ago.
-
-
“Patrick, are you serious? Quetzalcoatl wasn't even considered a humanoid. He was half serpent and half bird. I am not going to waste my time responding to all of your points when most of them are historical accounts. I could find historical accounts from different witnesses to say anything. People can read that and judge for themselves. Also, I don't think I am even going to read your pages of posts. Maybe, you should try discussing one thing at a time so we can all talk about it.
I am not opposed to having an objective discussion on one topic and being FAIR. Fair to me means that I hear you out and you hear me out. It also means that you only give biased sources a limited amount of credit. FARMS and FAIR are just as biased as most anti-Mormon sites. I'll even let you pick the topic:)
I have plenty of research papers that I have written on Mormon dogma and history that I could paste into here as well but I believe people should be able to dispute my points. By the way, please don't disrespect my wife again. That was in poor taste and personal attacks are definitely not a fair tactic and are against the Shelfari TOS.posted 4 years ago.
-
-steward -
Who needs history? The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is trying to establish a theocracy in California more intolerant than al-Quaida. Just look at current events.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
-
-
I wanted to start a discussion concerning Michael's comment (in quotes) below:
“Interesting... so you are suggesting a man with no education and no knowledge of anything out side a 20 mile radius just got completely lucky?"- Michael
My response: There was a public library in Palmyra. A library is a place with lots of books on various subjects. Interestingly, according to his own mother, Joseph Smith (before ever claiming to have seen a dead Native American floating around in his bedroom) entertained the Smith family in the evenings by telling tales about the Indians, their customs, their great battles, etc. She says, on page 85 of the 1853 edition of "Biographical Sketches of Joseph Smith The Prophet":
"During our evening conversations, Joseph would occasionally give us some of the most amusing recitals that could be imagined. He would describe the ancient inhabitants of this continent, their dress, mode of travelling, and the animals upon which they rode; their cities, their buildings, with every particular; their mode of warfare; and also their religious worship. This he would do with as much ease, seemingly, as if he had spent his whole life among them."
Also, Mohammed, for example, was also a completely uneducated young man, and yet he produced the Koran, which a billion Muslims (a thousand million! - a hundred times as many as there are Mormons!) revere as the revelation of God. This also reflects light onto Patrick's consideration of the BoM being "true" due to its being translated into many languages and even the Church's growth rate, which obviously includes inactive members. Just because something is plentiful, does not make it "true."
The fallacy in that reasoning should be obvious. Even if it seems surprising that a man like Smith could have produced the book, that does not have to mean that we must accept his explanation of how he produced it. The rules of evidence and the scientific method (the "Law of Parsimony" or "Occam's Razor") require us to prefer any possible natural explanation of an event over a miraculous or divine one. And any number of other (and more reasonable) explanations are possible: he had help (the Spaulding manuscript theory); he based it on other reading (the View of the Hebrews theory); he "channeled" it; he just made it up by using the vivid imagination his mother described; the relative who predicted that Smith would be a prophet could have written much of it, etc. In view of the great number of anachronisms in the book, its dependence on the King James Version of the Bible (including its incorrect translations), its complete lack of confirmation by archaeology, and other problems with its claims, one should have no problem in recognizing it as not what it claims to be. However he managed to produce it, there is a mountain of evidence which says that it's not authentic.posted 4 years ago.
-
sixpalz
To any who have come to this discussion site trying to decide whether or not to read the Book of Mormon:
If you take the time to read through many of these posts you will undoubtedly read things that may pique your curiousity, may make you decide never to open it, or may make you decide you have to read it for yourself.
If you are a person who believes in God, it would make sense that you would value the opinions of those who also believe in God rather than those who consider themselves athiests. You will find both types of people posting here, so the choice of whose opinion you use in determining to read this book is yours.
Hundreds of pages of "facts" refuting the Book of Mormon, thousands of websites making their claims of falsehood toward the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, or post after post of comments here on Shelfari don't change a personal witness for its truthfulness that is shared by millions of members around the world. The key is a personal witness. If you are the type of person that understands what that can mean in your life then reading the Book of Mormon is something you should do.
Some on here claim a personal witness that the Book of Mormon is false and that is their right. But don't let them persuade you to not find out for yourself. Should you receive it one way or the other, a witness from God is the most powerful conviction you can have.
Happy Reading!posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Here are some historical events for you to consider as you pray to God about the Book of Mormon:
1819/1820 Joseph Smith, Jr. discovers a chocolate-colored stone in a well he helps dig for the Chase family. Smith begins using this rock as a "seer stone" to locate buried treasures, stolen goods, and silver/gold deposits. He and his family practice divination and rural New York folk magic.
1825 Joseph Smith, Jr. is now regularly finding employment who want him to find buried treasure through his occult skills. For example, Josiah Stowell contracts Smith to locate a silver mine near Harmony, PA since Smith has such a strong reputation as a metal-digger, fortune-teller, and seer.
1826 Joseph Smith, Jr. is arrested, tried, and convicted as a glass-looker. This is not his last arrest. He will later have a printing press destroyed for informing the community that he and his followers are practicing polygamy--marrying women who are already married, sisters, and girls as young as 14.
1826-27 Joseph Smith, Jr. begins spreading a story about an 1823/24 dream wherein he learned from a bloody ghost about the secret location o f some gold plates in a hill. 3 to 5 years later, the bloody ghost dream develops into a vision of spirit, then into a vision of an angel named Nephi and/or Moroni. Smith now claims that in 1827 he retrieved these plates. He then changes his story, eventually claiming that the plates are actually a theoretical treatise about America's ancient inhabitants. Smith soon attributes religious significance to them.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Here is some information concerning the content of the BoM, including a brief discussion of some of the plagiarism accusations:
The Book of Mormon discusses two warring, migrant Jewish parties in the ancient Americas, the Nephites (faithful members of the Church) and the Lamanites (the rebellious ones). The Nephites were "white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome" while the Lamanites were cursed with "a skin of blackness." If a Lamanite repented and married a Nephite, his "curse was taken from him, and his skin became white like unto the Nephites." One day Jesus Christ appeared to them, offering his gift of salvation. Strangely, the words of Jesus in the Book of Mormon are often exactly the same as the words found in the 1611 King James Version of the New Testament, even though the BoM was supposedly written 1,000 years before the publishing of the Bible in England, grammatical mistakes and all. The accounts of these peoples were then buried in the Hill Cumorah in NY. For centuries, they remained undisturbed until Joseph Smith, Jr. found them, as claimed by Smith of course.
One of the biggest arguments against the Book of Mormon concerns the idea that the Native Americans are descendants of the Israelites. You know, in a better world, the biggest argument against the Book of Mormon would involve the notion of God cursing people with skin color. Moving along, there has never been a professional non-Mormon anthropologist, archaeologist, or geneticist who has given merit to the idea that Native Americans are descended from Israelites.
However, Joseph Smith, Jr. was not original when it came to linking the Native Americans with Israelites. In 1567, Fredericus Luminius put forth his idea that the New World's inhabitants were the lost Ten Tribes of Israel. Smith was very interested in the Native Americans, and as I've mentioned on here before, his mother would tell stories of her son as a child making up tales of the American Indians. Thomas Thorowgood in 1650 promoted the idea that Native Americans were descendants of the Native Americans. Before advancements in science were had, speculation existed as to the notion that Native Americans were of Jewish ancestry. Joseph Smith knew of this.
In recent years, it has been proven that Smith not only drew inspiration from contemporary works linking Native Americans to Israel, but that Smith actually copied portions of these works into the Book of Mormon. For example, parts of the BoM match with parts of “The Wonders of Nature and Providence Displayed” by Josiah Priest and “View of the Hebrews” by Ethan Smith. In the early 1800s, Ethan Smith wrote of a discovery in a place called Indian Hill in Massachusetts of buried parchment that supposedly contained Hebrew characters. This may helped Joseph Smith, Jr. with his story of a buried book written by the Native Americans.
Interestingly, Ethan Smith’s book was even published in the small town where Oliver Cowdery, Joseph Smith’s third cousin and principal scribe of the BoM, resided. The Cowdery fam just so happened to be associated with the very same church led by, you guessed it, Pastor Ethan Smith, author of “View of the Hebrews.”
For examples of plagiarism, please read “One Nation Under Gods” by Richard Abanes.posted 4 years ago.
-
Clarisse T
As usual the tag team is busy! Too bad they don't spend as much time helping in a food kitchen, on humanitarian projects or something to build up instead of tearing down others beliefs. So far, the 'intellectuals' haven't given us anything we haven't heard of, and the so-called 'facts' they do give have either been disproven numerous times or were never substaniated to begin with. It's actually quite humerous to read through their posts...their arguments are repetetive and so full of holes they resemble moldy swiss cheese.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Clarrise,
Thank you kindly for your judgment. If there are holes in our arguments point them out. Shannon and I are very involved in the community. I don't see why I need to tell you about the charitable things I do. That is pretty irrelevant. Shannon has been very involved in PAAR(Pittsburgh's Action Against Rape) and I have done a lot of service. Currently, I manage a website for underprivileged youth in inner city areas of Pittsburgh. I don't see why that matters. I guess because you are attempting to portray us as evil selfish intellectuals who only care about themselves. I also consider writing on here a service to our country.posted 4 years ago.
-
I just spent 8 hours volunteering to conduct autism research, Clarisse. Posting this will take less than 8 minutes. Don't assume you know what I do in my free time. Secondly, you have a lot of complaints but you lack specific examples. Please, encourage truth! Tell me where I am wrong, specifically. I will gladly correct any erroneous statements I have made. I am humble enough to do so.
I don't think our "arguments" are repetitive. Yesterday, I discussed plagiarism accusations for the first time. Again, challenge specific examples and not our sense of charity. Keep it classy :c)posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
I think it is noteworthy to discuss the author. I think the incident with the sword is when J.S manipulated Zina Huntington(that wasn't her maiden name and she was married) to marry him. These are all good questions. In my opinion, J.S. was not fit to be an instrument in a righteous God's hands. I think the majority of the people from any era would have been a cleaner vessel.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
To any who have come to this discussion site trying to decide whether or not to read the Book of Mormon:
I encourage you to do so. You can get a free copy, and it's easy read. I simply encourage you to read other books as well. Read of other religions, the stories of other "prophets". If you like books that promote white supremacy, then the Book of Mormon is for you! If you like to marry teenagers and women who are already married, then you may consider joining one of the Mormon sects; you may have to wait until the afterlife to practice plural marriage if you join the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, though.
A guy by the name of Joseph Smith had to actually bury his head into a hat to read words off of "seer stones" to compose this book. That had to be strenuous. Get yourself a copy now to learn that Native Americans are actually descendants of Jews!posted 4 years ago.
-
shannon p
the book of mormon does not promote white supremacy, mormons do NOT practice polygamy, as of like 150 years ago, we do not have sects, Joseph Smith did NOT bury his head into a hat to read words off of seer stones to compose the book. you are sick, lady. get the facts before you read trashy articles about something you don't know.
you want the truth? go to mormon.org. trust me, i know all i have said is true, for i am mormon, and i know what i believe in, and the story of the founder of my church. stop spreading rumoursposted 4 years ago.
-
Hello Shannon,
I do know what I'm talking about for, up until two years ago, I was LDS. I even married in the temple. I've worn the apron and learned the handshakes (e.g. Patriarchal Grip). Joseph Smith DID read part of the Book of Mormon out of a hat. It was one of the methods of dictation he used. Please ask your bishop about this and check out what lds.org has to say about this event: http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=05169209df38b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1
Secondly, the Book of Mormon has very racist passages that many men, most notably Brigham Young, used to deny marriage between African Americans and European Americans. Many universities refused to associate with BYU because of their racist teachings. In fact, white people were told NOT to marry black people because blacks could not hold the Priesthood and thus, marry in the temple. Also, human tithing (the tithing of slaves) was encouraged by Young. Have you ever read the BoM? The wicked Lamanites are cursed with black skin while the good ol' Nephites are exceedingly white and fair.
As for polygamy, it has been only over 100 years since the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints stopped officially practicing it. However, polygamy is part of life in the Celestial Kingdom and Heavenly Father is a polygamist according to LDS doctrine. There are other Mormon sects. The FLDS Church practices plural marriage. They've been in the news recently. You may have heard of Warren Jeffs. He's a descendant of Joseph Smith and prophet of that church. Like Joseph Smith, he had romantic relationships with teenage girls.
The FLDS Church uses the Book of Mormon, just like the Community of Christ Church, which used to be called the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. There are many, many more Mormon sects. There are over 40 organizations that use the Book of Mormon as their scripture.
You need to learn more about Mormon history and doctrine, Shannon. I encourage you to read "Rough Stone Rolling", which can be bought from Deseret. From there, you may want to read "One Nation Under Gods: A History of the Mormon Church", which is not endorsed by your church, but I suggest reading whatever you want.posted 4 years ago.
-
Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in
the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and
in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something
resembling parchment would appear, and on that appeared the writing.
One character at a time would appear, and under it was the
interpretation in English. Brother Joseph would read off the English
to Oliver Cowdery, who was his principal scribe, and when it was
written down and repeated to Brother Joseph to see if it was correct,
then it would disappear, and another character with the interpretation
would appear. Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and
power of God, and not by any power of man." (David Whitmer, An Address
to All Believers in Christ, Richmond, Mo.: n.p., 1887, p. 12.)posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick, first of all, where's my apology? Remember when you suggested that I was kicked out of Mormonism for cheating on my husband? I think it is really gross that you--a total stranger (and a seemingly much older one)--would make any remark about my sexual behavior. To make light of sexual assault service is in very, very poor taste, Patrick. As for getting joy out of hurting others, I do not, but you apparently do, as you made an unfounded assertion on this public discussion board concerning my sexuality. And still, no apology.
My husband mentioned my work with PAAR and other organizations to exemplify my concern for others when it was being denied by a Mormon on here. I am happy to be associated with such services.
I have to run off to class, but I will respond to your remarks soon after.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L
I just wrote a huge commentary (see above). Forgive me. Like I've said before, it's a curse of mine--the fact I can't say anything quickly. That's why I'm a writer and a speaker, I guess). Seriously, though: for those of you who are really searching for answers, here's a write-up I did 20 years ago or so about the Book of Mormon and its story that I've shared with hundreds of people over the past several years. Take it or leave it, I give it to you freely and hope it helps in your ongoing search. All I can really say is, "Put it to the test yourself. It's the only way! Only YOU can discover for yourself if the Book of Mormon is true, and if or when you do you'll start to feel, maybe even understand, the passion and the fervor that surrounds the book and its message."
The Big Picture and The Book of Mormon
Several years ago I was introduced to a book and a message that have both changed and enriched my life. The book is much more than just a biography or a history book, and the message it bears is far more as well. It’s called the Book of Mormon and is considered by millions to be “another testament of Jesus Christ.” What this means, at risk of oversimplifying, is that the Book of Mormon is additional scripture. It is similar to and in perfect harmony with all the Bible is and teaches.
The Book of Mormon has a number of similarities to the Holy Bible, as well as a handful of important differences. Just like the Bible, it was written by ancient prophets: it teaches of Christ, of patterning our lives after His, of seeking to understand His will and of following it more fully in our lives. The prophets whose writings make up the Book of Mormon however did not live in Ancient Israel. Though of Jewish descent, their words come to us from the other side of the globe.
The narrative begins in Jerusalem in 600 B.C. A prophet by the name of Lehi was commanded of God to take his family and leave the city, as it was about to be destroyed. At this time the inhabitants of Jerusalem had become so corrupt that they had already killed many of the prophets and even threatened Lehi’s life. (History books tell us that the city was in fact burned to the ground and its inhabitants carried off into bondage circa 581 B.C.). Lehi was obedient to this command and with his family and a small group escaped unharmed into the desert.
After a number of years, traveling through the desert, the group arrived at the sea, built a ship, and crossed the ocean to what they refer to as the “Promised Land” (the same land that would later be called the Americas—the New World). After landing somewhere in Central or (northern) South America, the group split and became two separate (sometimes peaceful, sometimes warring) nations. These civilizations are the principal ancestors of the Incas and Mayas and similar groups.
As mentioned, the group’s leader, Lehi, was a prophet of God. He and his descendants (many) spoke with God and were guided throughout their journeys. Lehi’s son Nephi and many others after him were also called as prophets. Each kept a written record of his experiences. These records were inscribed on plates of gold so as to withstand the elements and last throughout the centuries to come.
Besides being a history of this people, the Book of Mormon contains the teachings of the prophets in Ancient America. This meant a lot to me when I first learned of it for it answered a question I had had for many years. Very simply, why would God call men to teach His Word in just one corner of the world? Doesn’t He care about us all? To learn that He did and does was for me very exciting to discover.
The teachings in the Book of Mormon are very much in line with those of the Holy Bible. Where the Bible tells us what Christ taught, the Book of Mormon goes on to teach us why it’s so important. As the Bible teaches us how Christ died, the Book of Mormon explains why He had to die … and expounds upon the effect His sacrifice has upon our lives today. These are just good two examples of many.
The capstone event of the Book of Mormon is its account of the visit of Christ Himself to the people of Ancient America. The inclusive chapters tell of the resurrected Christ descending from heaven to bless and instruct his followers throughout the land. This incredible account is a powerful testimony to the validity of Christ’s resurrection, as well as to His love for us all (see 3 Nephi 11). Regardless of where we live, God is mindful wants us to know and understand this basic truth (see John 10:16: “And other sheep I have who are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.).
One of your questions might be why the book is called the Book of Mormon. That’s easy. Even though the book was written by many prophets the writings were compiled and abridged by a prophet historian named Mormon. And here’s an interesting point: while abridging the record, Mormon states numerous times that he is including only those parts that will be of greatest help to a later day and age.
This seems to be a recurring message throughout the Book of Mormon, the fact that it was prepared not for the people of its day but for us and our twentieth century problems. The people of its time never had it. The Aztecs or the Mayas or the early Native Americans never knew it existed (though their legends do speak of a white god who visited them and said he would one day return. (“Quetzalcoatl”—the fair skinned, blue eyed figure for whom Cortez and other explorers were later mistaken.) Just think, though: Christ in America! The prophets writing for US! God Himself guiding them all in preparing a help for our unique challenges today!
Moroni, Mormon’s son and the last prophet of the Book of Mormon, wrote the following passage just before he passed away: “Behold, I speak unto you as if ye were present, and yet ye are not. But behold, Jesus Christ hath shown you unto me, and I know your doings.” He then describes our society’s problems in almost frightening detail. (And he wrote this over 1400 years ago!)
As mentioned, the Book of Mormon contains answers to many of the questions we all ask ourselves. Why are we here on earth? Where did we come from? Do we go somewhere when we die? Are God and Christ the same, are they different … are they real? What has amazed me as I’ve read is just how clear the book’s messages truly are. I’ve also been touched by how applicable the teachings are—applicable to our day and our problems. It’s a compelling witness of how much our Father in
Heaven does care and is concerned about the welfare of His children everywhere. In September of 1827 the record was finally introduced to the world. A young man by the name of Joseph Smith was guided to where the ancient record lay by Moroni himself, a resurrected being sent from the presence of God (Moroni had hidden it in a hill in what was later to become Upstate New York—in about A.D. 421). For hundreds of years it had lain in wait for the chosen day. Joseph, a 14 year-old farm boy with very little education, was chosen, as many prophets are, in his youth and in spite of his various shortcomings to bring to pass what the scriptures refer to as this “marvelous work and a wonder” (see Isaiah 29:14).
This story is incredible, admittedly: it is to millions—even to those of us who know the story to be true. But it also makes a lot of sense, if you really think about it. For one thing, if God has always called prophets to lead his work, why wouldn’t He continue to do so? He has always been the same. He is unchanging, the scriptures tell us. And if so, why would He ever stop doing what He has always done. Second, since America was established so that freedom of religion could exist, isn’t it ironic that immediately following our Independence (miracle # 1) we see the Lord call a latter-day prophet to restore His Church on earth again (miracle # 2).
The basic message of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (known as the Mormons because they possess the Book of Mormon) is that it is the SAME church established by Christ while he was on the earth. If you read the history books, you know that the Church of Christ fell into ruin following the deaths of the apostles. Whole books have been written on the “break-up” that followed their martyrdoms, providing substantial proof that an apostasy or a “falling away” did take place. The authority to act in God’s name was lost, many changes in the Bible took place, men and women began interpreting the scriptures on their own, and numerous churches began to branch out. We see it today with how many churches exist. But all that has changed. The Church of Jesus Christ exists again today—in its original state.
Did you know that this is today the fastest growing religion in the world? There are over 13 million members, over 50,000 young volunteer missionaries, about 120 temples dotting the globe, and the numbers just keep growing larger. These missionaries are voluntary, self-financed, and are sharing their message worldwide. It’s a message they know to be true, which brings us to another fascinating point.
Just before hiding up the Book of Mormon, the prophet Moroni included a promise to whoever read the book. He exhorts us to read these things, to ponder them in your hearts, to consider what they say...and to pray to know if they are true. In his own words, “And if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you by the power of the Holy Ghost.” (Book of Moroni, chapter 10 verse 5).
You see, along with the Church’s message that it is the restored Church of Jesus Christ, along with the Book of Mormon and as an inherent part of the message it bears, lies the promise: You too can know for yourself that it is true! It’s a true promise and real challenge that millions worldwide are responding to as we speak.
When Joseph Smith first learned about the golden plates, the record that later became the Book of Mormon, it was by following the counsel of a similar passage in the Bible. The verse is James 1:5 and it reads: “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, who giveth to all men liberally and upbraideth not, and it shall be given him.” Joseph chose to follow this counsel. He went into the woods near his home and prayed out loud. As shocking as it was to him, he was called to be a prophet. In addition, he was instructed to translate the Book of Mormon into English and to establish the Church of Jesus Christ once again upon the earth, which he accomplished over the next few years with divine direction and help.
As shocking as this was for a young farm boy, to actually be called as a prophet, isn’t the timing that it came about intriguing? The technological age was just about to begin, with its industry, information systems, satellites, television, etc. It is today so much more practical for a prophet on earth to direct an international Church. But let me repeat: the Church is not growing because of these advances alone. Though they help, its explosive growth is due to the simple fact that people are putting Moroni’s promise to the test. They are finding that it works, that God does answer prayers, and that they too can know for themselves that the message is true.
It’s really quite difficult to put into words. When I think about it, I am almost overwhelmed by the beauty and majesty of the Book of Mormon and its message. Not only is it bringing people everywhere a greater sense of hope and self-worth, it is changing the way we understand and even value Jesus Christ Himself.
In addition to all this, the Book of Mormon is the key to knowing that the message of the Church of Jesus Christ is true for oneself. It offers the best way to gain an understanding of the authenticity of this message. If the Book of Mormon is true … then Joseph was a true prophet of God … the Church of Jesus Christ is everything it professes to be … there are a prophet and twelve apostles on earth today … and the guidance they offer is real and true and right. Just think?! A living prophet today! Twelve living apostles on earth today! Answers and guidance—direct from Heaven—today! What a truly exciting time to be alive.
I know for myself that these facts I’ve shared with you are true. The story is true and is unfolding even as we speak. I have studied it, I’ve prayed about it, and I’ve received numerous answers that it is real. I know that God loves us, that He knows intimately who we each are, and that He has a plan for us—we are literally His sons and daughters! There’s so much more that I could say and I appreciate your listening to these thoughts. This knowledge has made me very happy and is helping many find happiness as well.
Again, sorry so long-winded. Thanks for listening though. PLposted 4 years ago.
-
So you remove the post and thus my comment as I ask for an apology?
You--a total stranger and a seemingly older man with a CHILD nonetheless--publicly questioned my sexual behavior on this discussion site, and I think it speaks volumes about your character. Not only would you suggest that I cheated on my beloved husband but you are also arrogant enough to remove a post and thus my comment just to make yourself seem less creepy.
I remind you that you're doing the Mormon Church a disservice, let alone Jesus. You are a terrible representative of anything virtuous. I encourage you to humble yourself, as I do when I am wrong, and apologize to me and my husband for your perverted and unfounded remarks.
Yes, I'm requesting an apology on both of your comments. I did swap the word "disgusting" with "perverted". It seems more fitting.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Patrick L's reply was removed by an admin 4 years ago
-
So you remove the post and thus my comment as I ask for an apology?
You--a total stranger and a seemingly older man with a CHILD nonetheless--publicly questioned my sexual behavior on this discussion site, and I think it speaks volumes about your character. Not only would you suggest that I cheated on my beloved husband but you are also arrogant enough to remove a post and thus my comment just to make yourself seem less creepy.
I remind you that you're doing the Mormon Church a disservice, let alone Jesus. You are a terrible representative of anything virtuous. I encourage you to humble yourself, as I do when I am wrong, and apologize to me and my husband for your disgusting and unfounded remarks.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
My response to the lengthy notes below:
PATRICK: Can I just say, you two sound fairly intelligent, you're obviously passionate about your topic, and you sound like you're trying to do some good in your community in various (other) ways ... but what is your GOAL here? What are you seriously hoping to accomplish...?! I mean, "Autism work?" ... "Rape victim help?" ... "Service for the underprivileged?" ... and "Tearing down the faith of others?!" What's that jingle, again? "One of these things is just not like the other...!?"
ME: I think criticizing a book that promotes racism (in this case the Book of Mormon) and a false prophet (Joseph Smith) is on the same page as conducting psychological research and volunteering at a rape crisis center. I do these things, because I find them beneficial to individuals and hopefully a whole community. I’m sure you would tear down the FLDS Church and its belief. Following in Joseph Smith’s polygamist footsteps, they marry teenagers and then pass on these wives in hopes of becoming gods in the afterlife. Like Joseph Smith, who was arrested at least twice in his life, they are breaking the law.
PATRICK: Seriously though. I'm being facetious (a little) but I really am confused by it all, despite the fact I've heard the same lame attacks for decades now! You asked for a few specifics and I've got a few minutes. I could list several more but I really don't have time. Personally, I have a life outside of Shelfari. (I know, it only takes you "8 minutes" to sling the poison and the venom that you do, Shannon. But, what can I say. That's pretty impressive, if I do say so myself, especially after your 8 hours of community service that preceded it. What happened? You felt the need to offset your "good deeds" with a little bit of "intolerance"? Can someone please explain this for me?)
ME: I will gladly explain it to you, Patrick. I’m sorry you feel personally victimized. My comments have understandably upset you, but it’s not like I made any personal attacks against you like, say, suggesting you had an extramarital affair (still waiting on that apology, Pat). Yes, you may feel that as I insult Mormonism I am insulting you, but I have not made any character attacks against you or your family. You cannot honestly say the same, which is very unfortunate. Two years ago, when I was LDS, I strived to be a good representative of Christ. You present yourself in such an unChristlike manner, with no compassion or kindness that you are doing a disservice to the Mormon Church. I know there are good-hearted, well-intentioned Mormons out there. It’s disappointing that I cannot discuss the book with them on this site.
Nonetheless, I am in fact tolerant of Mormons. There is a distinct line between respecting a group’s beliefs and respecting a group’s rights. I do not deny you civil rights. I don’t respect thieves, but I’m not going to threaten their lives. Does that make sense to you?
Look for my responses to your 10 "proofs" :-Dposted 4 years ago.
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
-
My response to Patrick’s 10 points, Part One!:
PATRICK: 1. Anti-Mormons have, for years, latched on to seemingly innocent tidbits and then twisted them into mistruths to try to support their hatred. Here we see several examples of the same. So, Joseph "regaled his family with stories of the Native Americans as a kid." So, he was fascinated by the native people of America and could talk in some detail about them. Does that mean that a boy with an approximate 3rd grade education could have written a book replete with Hebraic and Egyptian literary forms throughout, convinced 12 men respected in their communities to witness they saw the metal plates, produced a book that millions of educated and respected people worldwide bear testimony to be true, a book that has led to the greatest religious movement in 200 years and the fastest growing church in the world today? Seems like a pretty incredible feat for a boy of less than 20 to accomplish, I would think.”
ME: Joseph Smith first wrote of the “First Vision” in 1832. He was 27. This description, again written in his own hand, is quite different from the official story had by the Mormon Church today. He wrote “in my sixteenth year of my age…” (as opposed to 14) Jesus appeared. There is no mention of God the Father or even a second personage here. Since Smith didn’t add the Father to this First Vision story, he did not write “This is my beloved Son, hear him.” In the 1835 version of the First Vision, Smith claims that two personages (without giving them titles) and “many angels” appeared to him. Again, this differs from the account used by the LDS Church today.
Secondly, let’s just say that Joseph Smith saw God the Father and Jesus Christ in 1820 and the current LDS First Vision story is correct, it should be surprising that in spite of having TWO GODS tell you not to join any church that Smith became a member of a Baptist Church in 1824. In 1828, he even sought membership with the Methodist Episcopal Church in Harmony, PA.
Again, formal education is not necessary to be able to write a book or accomplish other amazing feats. For example, Ben Franklin dropped out of school at the age of 10. George Burns left school in the fourth grade. Charles Dickens dropped out of school at the age of 12. The Book of Mormon isn’t even a GOOD book from a literary point of view. Secondly, you are assuming that Smith wrote the book, while you should be assuming that he translated it ;-). There are many alternatives as to who authored this work.
As for having credible witnesses, Jo Smith did not. To quote myself: Martin Harris, a religious zealot, claimed to have walked with Jesus in the form of a talking deer. Joseph Smith did have little formal education, but his principal scribe, who also happened to be his third cousin, Oliver Cowdery was a teacher. None of the witnesses, including David Whitmer, said that they had actually touched the plates. They simply used a “spiritual eye”.
As for the LDS Church being the fastest growing one, Merrill Bateman said this: agreed the LDS Church's worldwide membership, reported at 12 million, includes many who no longer consider themselves Mormon. In the United States, Mormons are departing from the faith as fast as fast as converts are joining. Converts rarely remain active in the Mormon Church.
This is from the Salt Lake Tribune: The Seventh-day Adventist Church reports it has added more than 900,000 adult converts each year since 2000 [compared to the Mormon Church’s conversion of only 241,239 in 2004] (an average growth of about 5 percent), bringing the total membership to 14.3 million. The Assemblies of God now claims more than 50 million members worldwide, adding 10,000 new members every day.
I only hope that Monson doesn’t burn down the Salt Lake Tribune. Regardless, membership rates mean little.
PATRICK: 2. So, now the fact that there was a LIBRARY in Palmyra is being cited as evidence that Joseph Smith was a fraud. Oh, please. Should I make my kids turn in their library cards in hopes of keeping one of them from becoming a cult leader and leading the world astray someday? That's a little ridiculous, don't you think?
ME: Your logic is terribly flawed, Patrick. How can one function in this world with such little reason? My mention of the library was not meant to provide evidence but rather support for the argument that one can live in a rural area and learn of global affairs. It was silly of that other Mormon guy to say that Smith had no idea what was going on in the world because he was isolated in New York.
PATRICK: 3. You mention "white supremacy in the Book of Mormon"? I find this interesting since the Lamanites (the darker skinned people in the history) were the more blessed and more righteous of the people at many times throughout the account. (Remember King Lamoni, "Samuel the Lamanite," etc., etc.)
ME: This is all I will comment about those righteous Lamanites, brother:
3 Nephi 2:14-15
"And it came to pass that those Lamanites who had united with the Nephites were numbered among the Nephites; and their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites. And their young men and their daughters became exceeding fair.."
Stay tuned...posted 4 years ago.
-
jebediah f
don't want to interrupt everyone's "discussion", but I thought it was worth mentioning that the quote about Martin Harris and the Deer is from Dan Vogel's Early Mormon Documents Vol 2 page 271. It isn't a direct quote, rather something that an Episcopal priest, John A. Clark, said Martin Harris had told him in an letter written in 1840. It is hard to say if Harris really said that or whether the Episcopal priest in a Mormon dominated town was badmouthing the competition.
In any case, Martin Harris seems to have been a fairly superstitious guy - something that wasn't too unusual at that time and place. However, he continued to uphold his statement about seeing the Book of Mormon and had another 10 witnesses to back him up.
It's worth mentioning that there are quite a few valid points against mormonism. However, too often those who go up against the mormon church spread information they found from anywhere- they take it and run with it and aren't as critical about it as they are about their opposing side of the issue. True, the mormon church is not forthcoming and honest about their history, and a lot of this has to do with the time in which it has developed, as well as their general purpose as a religion. This does not mean that everything you read about this history that opposes the mormon church's view is relevant, factual, or credible.
Also, I'd like to mention that though there is a great tendency to see the "dark skins" in the Book of Mormon as a reference to race within and outside of the Mormon church, that isn't in fact what the book refers to. A careful reading and cross referencing of the mormon footnotes suggests "skins" in the bible and book of mormon don't actually reference race, but have more to do with "countenance". If you'd like to know more about this other than just an easy study of the mormon scriptures, you can watch "blacks in the scriptures", put together by Marvin Perkins and Darius gray. They are both mormons, so it may be slightly biased to you, but I think it would add to your credibility a great deal if you understood it.
Despite what I have said above, I am not defending racist policies by the mormon church, which I think is an entirely different issue. Unfortunately, many mormon scholars are beating their heads against the wall at the ignorance of the general membership when it comes to these issues, and so it may take a generation or two for the church's membership to understand the implications of past policies on race. I am just clearing up what I believe to be misconceptions in your characterization of the mormon church. Again, there are valid and credible questions for the mormon church, but the past comments in this forum by all of the commenters seem less to do with valid issues ad discussion and more to do with proving who is right, who is wrong, who is ignorant, and who needs to repent.posted 4 years ago.
-
Jebediah,
First of all, let me thank you for actually bringing a worthwhile critique to the table. I agree you really cannot be sure that Harris did say that from historical accounts. Harris was a religious zealot, so it wouldn't surprise me. Shannon and I do check our sources. When we are corrected we generally do not repeat false information(If the correction was reasonable like yours) I will have to look into that one.
I disagree with your comment on racism in The Book of Mormon and I think if you re-read Shannon's explanation you may find it more compelling. Many Mormon scholars do bang their head against the wall I am sure but many of them, like Hugh Nibley, lie as well. I would argue that the so-called "anti-mormons" portray a much more accurate history of the Mormon Church than The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Not only that but they are better about citing their sources.
Thank you for contributing to the discussion.posted 4 years ago.
-
More info on the Harris/deer debacle (and my main source is "One Nation Under Gods":
John A. Clark letter, August 31, 1840 in EMD, 2: 271: "No matter where he went, he saw visions and supernatural appearances all around him. He told a gentleman in Palmyra, after one of his excursions to Pennsylvania, while the translation of the Book of Mormon was going on, that on the way he met the Lord Jesus Christ, who walked along by the side of him in the shape of a deer for two or three miles, talking with him as familiarly as one man talks with another." According to two Ohio newspapers, shortly after Harris arrived in Kirtland he began claiming to have "seen Jesus Christ and that he is the handsomest man he ever did see. He has also seen the Devil, whom he described as a very sleek haired fellow with four feet, and a head like that of a Jack-ass." Vogel, EMD 2: 271, note 32.
True, Harris was a religious fanatic, prone to visions and other supernatural phenomenon. He also claimed to experience angelic visitations, ghostly encounters, and meetings with Jesus Christ. Numerous historical documents show that the "witnesses" only saw the plates through visionary experiences. Martin Harris was the first, I believe, to mention that none of the eight witnesses ever actually saw the plates. Check out "The Changing World of Mormonism" page 108 for this quote by a former Latter-day Saint who wrote the following after hearing Harris lecture:
"When I came to hear Martin Harris state in public that he never saw the plates with his natural eyes only in vision or imagination, neither Oliver nor David & also that the eight witnesses never saw them & and that he had hesitated to sign that instrument for that reason."
Oliver Cowdery died at the home of fellow witness David Whitmer, who had also left the Mormon church. Whitmer makes it clear that Cowdery "died believing as I do to-day," which included a belief that Joseph was a fallen prophet, and that the Doctrine and Covenants contained false revelations (An Address to All Believers in Christ, 1887, pp. 1-2).
I found some great questions directly off of this site: http://www.exmormon.org/file9.htm
There are also some questions left unanswered, such as, were there really gold plates, or did Joseph produce a prop which he kept covered in a cloth and allowed only certain relatives to see and lift? He had four years between when he announced he discovered the gold plates, and when he actually claimed to get them out of the ground. When did Joseph, Harris, Whitmer & Cowdery first find out there would be three special witnesses? The D&C records two different times when Joseph claimed to receive a revelation regarding BOM witnesses. The first came at the request of Martin Harris in March of 1829 (D&C 5). It warned Joseph not to show the plates except to those whom God commanded (vs. 3). This revelation went on to say that three witnesses would be given special power to see the plates, but "to none else will I grant this power" (D&C 5:13-14). According to this revelation, there would only be three witnesses.
Me again: I'm not a historian, and when it all comes down to it, I don't think much of what is discussed on here matters as far as making a decision to become/stay Mormon. It's the doctrine and ordinances of the Church that I dislike. As far as the racism issue, I am familiar with the "countenance" argument, but it doesn't seem like an adequate excuse to me when a prophet of the Church uses these scriptural passages to support his racist "revelations". I think the Mormon God, like many other Gods, is a racist one if we go by what he reveals to his prophets. (Insert your choice Brigham Young quote here).
My question to you, Jebediah, is when were these specific footnotes put into the Book of Mormon? James E. Talmage in the 1920s edited the footnotes to be what they are today, right? And aren't these passages used to explain the skin color of Native Americans?
Great comment. Thanks!posted 4 years ago.
-
jebediah f
Shannon- I'm not sure what the bulk of your message was meant to be- other than text copied and pasted from the site you mentioned. I don't think you addressed my earlier point that the quote from Martin Harris is questionable.
Shannon said: "As far as the racism issue, I am familiar with the "countenance" argument, but it doesn't seem like an adequate excuse to me when a prophet of the Church uses these scriptural passages to support his racist "revelations". I think the Mormon God, like many other Gods, is a racist one if we go by what he reveals to his prophets. (Insert your choice Brigham Young quote here)."
Brigham Young was most certainly racist, as were many in his time (and long after). I would have to research more but I'm not aware of Joseph Smith being racist. I know of a number of instances where Blacks held the Priesthood, and just off the top of my head I can think of him condemning slavery (which, I'm aware doesn't clear you of racism, these are just the examples I can think of at this moment). I'm wondering if you think the book itself is racist or the interpretation of the book is racist? It sounds like you are implying the interpretation since you brought up Brigham Young. In response to your argument about the footnotes: I'm actually not sure what you are arguing here. Are you saying that because the footnotes were added in the 1920's, after Brigham Young's words and policies regarding Blacks, that they are "band-aids", an effort by the church to get away from the racist rhetoric of Brigham Young? Is that a good characterization of your argument? Can you clarify?
Shannon said: "I found some great questions directly off of this site: http://www.exmormon.org/file9.htm"
I take issue with sites like these, usually because of the biased point of view. Yes, it may be appeal to your own cognitive biases but each issue should be evaluated just as carefully as the issues on the opposing side. It's like watching Bill O'reilly. The conservatives agree with him. He's smart, but he has an agenda, right? Likewise, sources are more credible if they are independent of their own agenda. Again, exmormon is an enjoyable read to the exmormon just as Bill O'Reilly is enjoyable to many conservatives. However when you are trying to prove that one book is false (BOM), using sources that proclaim to lean to one side (even if you feel that side is the truth) is not an adequate way to do it.
"We are a Christian nonprofit corporation founded upon the call of God to witness Jesus to those lost in Mormonism and other cults" When a site proclaims that, you know you won't get any information that might contradict that claim. Just like Bill O'reilly conveniently omits information that doesn't make his audience feel great about their party and bad about those damn Socialists!posted 4 years ago.
-
Hey Jebediah, I'm still lovin' your name. Anyways, I referenced the exMormon site because it has references that I do not. I'm kind of a poor college student, and my library doesn't have too many books concerning Mormon history. I obviously prefer to reference literature I own, but I want to make it clear when I don’t. I actually agree with much of what you've written, and I want to thank you again for writing. To my knowledge, Smith wasn’t a raging racist. If I remember correctly, he even ordained an African American to the Priesthood, which Young later mocked.
Joseph Smith did say, “Had I anything to do with the negro, I would confine them by strict law to their own species.”
January 2, 1843, HC (Salt Lake Ciry: Deseret Book Company, 1976/1980) vol. 5, 217-218
I find that racist, but I admit to being sensitive when it comes to racial oppression.
I think Mormonism consists of racist beliefs and doctrine. Apostle Mark E. Petersen’s 1954 description regarding the doctrine that the darker the race and the skin the less righteously a spirit behaved during their pre-mortal life is worth noting:
“Can we account in any other way for the birth of some of the children of God in darkest Africa, or in flood-ridden China, or among the starving hordes of India, while some of the rest of us are born here in the United States? We cannot escape the conclusion that because of performance in our pre-existence some of us are born as Chinese…some as Latter-day Saints. These are our rewards and punishments. A Chinese, born in China with a dark skin, and with the handicaps of that race seems to have little opportunity. In spite of whatever they might have done in the pre-existence to justify being born a Chinaman, if they now, in this life, accept the gospel” yada yada yada.
Similarly, Joseph Fielding Smith, the 10th prophet of the Church, wrote in his book “Doctrines of Salvation”:
“There is a reason why one man is born black and with other disadvantages, while another is born white with great advantages. The reason is that we once had an estate before we came here.”
I may be quote happy, but in a 1947 letter, the LDS First Presidency condemned interracial marriage (not in a life-threatening manner like Young):
“There is a growing tendency.. toward the breaking down of race barriers in the matter of intermarriage between whites and
blacks, but it does not have the sanction of the Church and is contrary to Church doctrine.”
You agree that Young was racist, but do you believe that the racist things he taught as God’s word were indeed the words of your deity? If so, your god would be a racist one, correct? Otherwise, would you say that you believe Young was not a prophet or at the very least a misguided one (and if so, why the heck wasn’t he struck down)? Do you consider Young a prophet? Are you Mormon-Mormon, as in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Mormon? Or do you belong to a sect that followed a different "prophet" after Smith's death?
I do think the book contains racist passages. Mormons claim to accept the Bible as the literal word of God, not allegorically like other religions. Well, I suppose since Joseph Smith edited the Bible it isn’t meant to be a 100% literal to Mormons. Nevertheless, when I read “skin” I think “skin” and the church presidents’ "inspired" interpretations of this scripture add to my conclusion that Mormonism is synonymous with racism. In my opinion, if Smith was able to use the word “adieu” because a more fitting word wasn’t available, then he could have easily used the word “countenance” instead of “skin” having been familiar with that word.
Does that make sense?posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
PATRICK: 4. Personally, I love how Joseph's account of the angel Moroni appearing to him is rewritten by you, Shannon, as "a dead or even 'bloody' native floating around his room." (1) Messengers from God have appeared to many prophets throughout history, and if "God is the same yesterday, today and forever," as the scriptures say He is, shouldn't HE get to choose if he makes that come to pass again or not, not you or I? (2) Here's Joseph's own account in his own words. Sure, it's incredible. The whole story is! It's hard to believe if you haven't found out for yourself that it is true! I'll be the first to admit that. Joseph's account is a little more beautiful and transcendent than "bloody corpses haunting his bedroom," though, don't you think? Well, one thing is for sure, "Joseph Smith HAS had good and evil spoken of him." It's happening in this write-up (how do like knowing you're helping fulfill prophesy with all your venom, Shannon and Ryan?)
ME: I didn’t make up the bloody part, Pat. As Richard Abanes writes, “Joseph begins spreading a story about an 1823/24 dream wherein he learned from a bloody ghost about ht secret location of some golden plates hidden in a hall. The plates supposedly contain information relating to the location of a buried treasure” (pp. 60). The look of the angel matters very little. You always miss the point. The point is that Joseph Smith’s visions, as I touched upon in the discussion post below, have significantly changed throughout the years. I find it strange that Smith excluded God the Father from his first written account of the First Vision.
Secondly, don’t most folk have people speaking good and evil about them? I just read a great article in Scientific American about the function of gossip; you may like it. I don’t appreciate you calling me venomous haha. Well, it is kind of funny so you may continue doing so.
PATRICK: 5. You claim that no non-Mormon archaeologists have ever cited evidence supporting the Book of Mormon's Ancient American claims. You know, you look kind of ridiculous making blanket statements such as this that are neither true nor substantiated. I myself shared a dozen or more examples with the readers last week in my two long write-ups, Evidences of the Book of Mormon. I even cited their writings. Few if any of them were from LDS experts.
ME: I did NOT through out a blanket statement. Please give me names, AS I HAVE, of specific scientists who have validated the Book of Mormon. I looked through your flood of posts, but couldn’t find any mention of one. I would love to investigate these anthropologists and further this discussion with you, Patrick.
PATRICK: 6. I do agree with your comment about Mohammed and the Muslim religion. There are a LOT of muslims in the world, in fact, a lot more than there are Mormons. Of course, the Muslim religion has been around since about 600 AD, over 1,200 years before Joseph Smith was even born. Kind of puts it into perspective, don't you think? (though, of course, "perspective" is one thing most Anti-Mormons, including yourselves, try to leave out of their discussions, for obvious reasons). The Mormon church, by the way, is growing at over 30% per decade. Why is that? It's certainly not because a bunch of immature 19 year-old missionaries are that compelling or convincing, but if not, what is it? [Read # 10 below for the answer!]
ME: Hey, you know that Muslims should be capitalized. Don’t capitalize ‘Mormons’ and not ‘Muslims’. That is disrespectful. I’ve already addressed the growth rate issue (please see my previous post). I once again want to mention that growth rate has little to nothing to do with “truth.” Not all missionaries are 19, mind you, and if you’ve served a mission then you’d know as well as I would that many members join without having read the book. I’ve been a part of baptizing over 15 people, none of which had read even half the book. So many of them had no idea that they couldn’t drink coffee or were supposed to pay tithing. Also, you’re probably aware of how many people get baptized in South America. I know oodles of Mormon missionaries with light hair and skin who came home S. A. engaged. The Mormon Church also teaches its missionaries to use the most persuasive methods of indoctrination. The Commitment Pattern. Puh-lease.
PATRICK: 7. Personally, I still haven't heard any of the evidences I shared previously disputed, even though they were provided (and I gave references) by several NON-Mormon scholars who completed the research, as I said. I hear lots of generalizations and vague commentary, but not a lot of substance. I hear the same old broken record-player of accusations with no clarity or conscience that we have heard for 170 years now. They rarely carry a lot of weight for those who are sincerely seeking answers with open minds and humble hearts. (Personally I'm grateful the Book of Mormon "proves its own truth" for anyone who puts it to the test. It must be confusing for folks, hearing all the differing opinions. I know I had to find out for myself. Once I did, though, I've never looked back).
ME:You know, there aren’t really ten points here, Patrick. How misleading. I find it arrogant of you to assume that my heart has not been open or my mind, open. What ward do you attend? I would like to talk with your church leaders. You need a talkin’-to, my friend.
Honestly, Patrick, you copy and paste too much into one post. I would really like to discuss individual concerns with you. Please start a discussion that is concise.posted 4 years ago.
-
Hopefully, my FINAL response to Patrick:
PATRICK: 8. Shannon, you really seem fixated on the "book read out of the hat" point, as twisted as you've tried to make it. Even though in your words the image of Joseph trying to stare through a base ball cap or a felt top hat come to mind (your goal, I'm sure), neither is accurate or appropriate, as you know. As I've asked before? What exactly is your point? Is this just the most silly thing you could come up with? Are you just seriously grasping at straws? My question for you is, how long did you personally believe in, support, testify of and maybe even cherish the history and truths you now, for some reason, are trying to down? You were a member once, right? You were even married in the temple at one point. What happened? You don't go through the steps to prepare to enter the temple--i.e. personal worthiness, study, preparation, recommend and entry, etc.--without being pretty serious about it. What happened to make you so bitter and angry now? I'm serious. I'd really like to know? I think all of us would.
ME: I don’t think Joseph Smith burying his head in a hat and reading off magical stones is the silliest part of Mormon history. You are using hyperbole with the ball cap remark, and I ADORE that literary device! So why am I so interested in Smith’s old hat trick? Well, funny story, and I’m glad you inquired. My friend Erick, years and years ago, told me that he saw a South Park episode where Joseph Smith used a hat to dictate the Book of Mormon, and I thought Erick was crazy for this, much like how the children and young adults on this site who know very little Mormon history and doctrine think I am crazy when presenting this little factoid. People on here have called me a liar for saying that Smith buried his head in a hat! I value honesty and truth, and I obviously dislike being called a liar.
Will you do me a favor, Patrick, and just tell these kids that a green apron is part of temple clothing? They thought I made that up, too haha. I encouraged them to talk to their bishops, though, and received a couple of apologies. :c)
You are asking me a lot of personal questions, and I would like to keep that to a minimum. You’ve already made assumptions about my sexual morality. To be honest, I find you kind of skeevy. I’ll just say that when I believed in Mormonism, I definitely represented my church and my god better than you do.
9 & 10 aren’t even points, so I won’t respond to them. And congratulations, you have offended me by questioning whether I—a PAAR advocate—would engage in the raping of women.
I just want to point out your hypocrisy, Patrick. You say that you’ll defend but you won’t defame, yet you have questioned my sexual morality on this BOOK site. You have a child, right? How dare you, as a father, ask questions concerning the sexual behavior of a young woman like myself? It’s G-R-O-S-S.
Oh to start a new discussion, did anyone see that TLC show last night focusing on polygamy? It is terribly sad that these Mormon men are manipulating young girls into being sexual. The incest level in this cult is obviously astronomical. Yuckposted 4 years ago.
-
Alizabeth S
Ryan,
Thank you for your answer to my question. I was curious because my Aunt has left the Church and she like you, tries to tell everyone about it instead of just walking away. I feel terrible that people are so rude to you and Shannon on this page of Shelfari. I wish it would all just stop. Everyone has their own free agency, that's one of the most basic beliefs of the Church, and no one should judge you or hate you just because you've used your differently than others may want you to have used it.
Best of luck with everything,
Lizposted 4 years ago.
-
Thanks Liz,
People are very defensive about their beliefs so it is understandable that they would get aggressive when challenged. I admit I have said a few things on here that have not been kind. I prefer to keep it to a discussion of the material. My mission president used to say that The Book of Mormon would hold up against the strongest scrutiny. I do think that is a false statement and judging by this discussion I think Shannon and I are the only ones who have presented a historical, logical argument. That is my opinion and everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan said: “Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts”. I think that sums up everything that I am really trying to get across in this discussion.
Thanksposted 4 years ago.
-
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L
Shannon (and anyone else following these discussions), you and your husband Ryan make some good points and, if nothing else, you're absolutely right: it would be nice to be able to discuss the Book of Mormon in a well-intentioned manner. In fact, I think there are a lot of folks who would enjoy that and it's definitely more along the lines of what these book discussions are meant to be. I'll be the first to admit I respond emotionally to the type of "intolerance" you seem so quick to dish out, but that's my own issue to deal with. You may not intend to come across as intolerant as you do, but it certainly seems that way.
Tell me, is it really possible for you to have a good-natured conversation without laying on your obvious Mormon-prejudice so thick? Personally, I don't think it's your agenda to do anything other than harm, but that's just me. Maybe you're right and it's un-Christlike for me even to say such things. It's a weakness of mine, I admit. I say what I think. I'm sorry, it's true. I tell it how I see it, much to my own chagrin on occasion.
I would be the first to admit, from the sounds of it all, that you really seem to believe what you're saying and that you really are trying to do some good in the world (certainly in other areas of your life). It sounds like you are giving service in your community and trying to make the world a better place in general. I still don't quite get how destroying the faith of others falls into that though. It certainly doesn't seem like something a mature or "tolerant" person would ever do. I really don't understand what the thrill is you get out of it...?!
Throughout most of your write-ups we [the audience] have heard little of your own beliefs and even less about the Book of Mormon. Sacred temple ceremonies ... Joseph Smith the Prophet ... the beauties of the gospel? All have been trampled underneath and mocked. It's baffling and disconcerting, admittedly, to many of us. We--all of us--are subjected to your inexplicable "venom" (there's that word again) toward a church and a people that are doing much good in the world. (I ask you: if I wrote like you do about Jews, Muslims or anyone else for that matter, wouldn't I be labeled a racist, an anti-semitic, a white supremacist or an ignoramus at the very least)? Why is it any different with you and the bias you show toward Mormonism? Why is it unacceptable directed at anyone else but you seem to think it's okay when it comes to members of the LDS Church? (I used to be a member of Toastmasters. Since I've left I don't go around berating them to everyone I meet).
Personally, I have had many good conversations with many open-minded and considerate people in and out of our faith. I enjoy these conversations very much and we've all learned a great deal in the process. We learn FROM each other and WITH each other. Your supposed "tolerance" of Mormons, Shannon, and what we believe is hurtful; do you realize that? Your comment about "respecting one's rights without respecting their beliefs" makes little sense. I mean--what's the difference, really? Does that mean you can be offensive and cruel as long as you don't break any laws? I guess you're right, but ... is it really RIGHT?
If I had nothing else to do with my time, I would write several more specific arguments, but you would undoubtedly just return with another 10 pages of unfounded rhetoric. It's a lose-lose proposition. It's like fighting quicksand: all you do is just sink in further, regrettably. I really would love an UNbiased conversation. It's hard, though, I know, for anyone who feels passionately I supposed.
Four short comments before I go:
(1) Joseph Smith did give different accounts of his First Vision on various occasions to various people; you're absolutely right. How those are remembered or to whom they were given created longer or shorter versions of the same account. We all know that but anti-Mormons like yourselves love latching onto it and waving it out there as "proof," but proof of what? Every one of us has shared experiences at later dates in our lives and omitted or added in details we either remembered more clearly or felt were more relevant at the specific time? I never have understood this argument.
(2) Joseph Smith Jr. never joined another church after his first vision in 1820 and making claims like this doesn't do much for your case either. I mean, it sounds good but it's not true. Citing anti-Mormon literature and anti-Mormon authors as your "experts" doesn't either. As for the experts (many non-Mormon) to whom I've previously referred, here are just a few:
Farnsworth — The Americas Before Columbus
Lowry — Schoolcrafts Enthnological Researches, Vol. 3
Galatin — Bancroft's Native Races, Vol. 5, p. 19
Bancroft - Native Races, Vol. 5, pp. 20-22, 210
Brinton —American Hero, pp. 145-146 and
Religions of Primitive Peoples, p. 251
Jordan — Americans, p. 21
Spinden — Ancient Civilizations of Mexico, pp. 75, 49
Putnam — Prehistoric Remains Ohio Valley, and
Century Magazine Article, March, 1890
De Roo — History of America Before Columbus pp. 41, 65
Colton — Origin of the American Indians
Kingsborough — Mexican Antiquities, Vol. 6, p. 401
Kingsborough — Mexican Antiquities, Vol. 8, p, 3 Scraps, p. 277
Lee — The Great Migration, p. 63
Rosales — History of Chile
Saville — The Goldsmiths Art in Ancient Mexico, p. 175
Willard — City of the Sacred Well, pp. 134, 88-90
Marett — Archaeological Relics in Mexico, p. 29
Thompson & Gann -- People of the Serpent, p. 228
Bradford — American Antiquities, pp. 158, 159
Charnay — Ancient Cities of the New World, p. 69
Nodaillac — Pre-Jostproc America, p. 181
Grana Reyes - Time Magazine Article, Oct. 26, 1953, p. 54 (Regarding Hardened Copper)
Poindexter — The Ayar-lncas, pp. 230-231
Mason — Columbus Came Late, pp. 198, 64
Murray — Man’s Unknown Ancestors, pp. 47-49
Encyclopedia Brittanica (ancient horses, elephants)
Times Encyclopedia & Gazetteer, Vol. 4
New Americanized Encyclopedia, Vol. 5, p. 3197
Morley — Carnegie Institution Bulletin No. 57 (1915)
Morley — Carnegie Institution Bulletin No. 219 (1920)
Baldwin — Ancient America, p. 176
Gann — Maya Cities, Ancient Cities, pp. 99-100
(3) I totally agree with your point about Muslims and Mormons. Both names should be capitalized. My not doing so was a typo at best, an oversight at worst. My apologies, especially to my own Muslim friends (with whom many, by the way, I have had great conversations about the Book of Mormon and the Qur’an both).
(4) Joseph Smith, as you mentioned, was arrested on a number of occasions. (You said "at least two times"; it was actually on many more times throughout his life). He was persecuted all of his life up to and including his martyrdom at the age of 38 on June 27, 1844 together with his brother Hyrum, but he was NEVER convicted of a single thing. Most of the cases were actually thrown out by the judges as ludicrous. I think Joseph's own words are the best summary of how he personally felt about this (again, sorry so long-winded):
Joseph Smith History 1: 22-25. vs 22 "I soon found, however, that my telling the story had excited a great deal of prejudice against me among professors of religion, and was the cause of great persecution, which continued to increase; and though I was an obscure boy, only between fourteen and fifteen years of age, and my circumstances in life such as to make a boy of no consequence in the world, yet men of high standing would take notice sufficient to excite the public mind against me, and create a bitter persecution; and this was common among all the sects—all united to persecute me. vs 23 It caused me serious reflection then, and often has since, how very strange it was that an obscure boy, of a little over fourteen years of age, and one, too, who was doomed to the necessity of obtaining a scanty maintenance by his daily labor, should be thought a character of sufficient importance to attract the attention of the great ones of the most popular sects of the day, and in a manner to create in them a spirit of the most bitter persecution and reviling. But strange or not, so it was, and it was often the cause of great sorrow to myself. vs. 24 However, it was nevertheless a fact that I had beheld a vision. I have thought since, that I felt much like Paul, when he made his defense before King Agrippa, and related the account of the vision he had when he saw a light, and heard a voice; but still there were but few who believed him; some said he was dishonest, others said he was mad; and he was ridiculed and reviled. But all this did not destroy the reality of his vision. He had seen a vision, he knew he had, and all the persecution under heaven could not make it otherwise; and though they should persecute him unto death, yet he knew, and would know to his latest breath, that he had both seen a light and heard a voice speaking unto him, and all the world could not make him think or believe otherwise. vs. 25 So it was with me. I had actually seen a light, and in the midst of that light I saw two Personages, and they did in reality speak to me; and though I was hated and persecuted for saying that I had seen a vision, yet it was true; and while they were persecuting me, reviling me, and speaking all manner of evil against me falsely for so saying, I was led to say in my heart: Why persecute me for telling the truth? I have actually seen a vision; and who am I that I can withstand God, or why does the world think to make me deny what I have actually seen? For I had seen a vision; I knew it, and I knew that God knew it, and I could not deny it, neither dared I do it; at least I knew that by so doing I would offend God, and come under condemnation."
A powerful testimony, indeed. I am sorry [Ryan, and maybe Shannon too], you tried for so many years to receive your own confirmation of these extraordinary events. I don't know why it comes so easily to some and so slowly to others. All I know is it comes, eventually ... it's real, and it changes your life when you've received it.
I'm going to stop now. Honestly, I've meant to offense and I've really just been trying to share something I KNOW to be true. I don't think, hope, believe or wonder if it's true: I KNOW IT. So ... I've shared my thoughts and if anyone wants to have a POSITIVE conversation about the Book of Mormon (or books in general, for that matter), I'm open to it. I've written what I have just because I want to make sure BOTH sides of the story are being told. It's important. Everyone deserves to hear a balanced, TWO-sided discussion, and draw their own conclusions without pressure or coercion. As I've said before and will say again--no one can convince you [the reader] that this is true or not. Only you and your Father in Heaven can come to a conviction like this of your own, and it's very personal. I hope that you will do so. I wish you all the very best.
Until then, Shannon ... Ryan ... whoever else reads this ... I hope you can find what you're looking for, whatever that might be. I do apologize if I've offended anyone (I still don't know what you're talking about, by the way, Shannon: I don't remember saying anything about your "morality," but you keep referring to this). Whatever made you feel this way, please accept my apologies.
Most of all, I hope you find happiness in whatever you do, if you don't now have it. If you do, best of luck. Your Father in Heaven loves you and I do too, really. We're all brothers and sisters, right? ... sometimes arguing, sometimes caring, sometimes regretting what we say, and other times not.
Hopefully we're all growing and learning and getting better along the way.
Thanks for listening everybody.
Take care,
Patrick Lposted 4 years ago.
-
Patrick,
I appreciate your attempt at meeting us halfway. I don't believe that you have read both sides of the argument and I don't believe you have looked into what we have said. I can respect the gesture though. The bottom line is there were really no discussions about the Book of Mormon occurring here when we started talking. It was just fast and testimony meeting. Nothing of any non-religious value was said. In fact, we have inspired all kinds of people to speak and defend their faith. I am sorry to say they all failed pretty miserably and fell back into the "I know it's true argument".
A group recently formed for people who want to discuss the Book of Mormon in a positive light. I am sure someone can make you aware of it. I wish you the best of luck. Regardless of what people say on here we will continue to refute bad points. No offense is intended to you or anyone else.
One last question, why do you consider faith a good thing? Don't quote Ephesians or Alma please. I have heard that a million times and it is not convincing. What I want to know is, why shouldn't I be opposed to people believing things that have no compelling evidence? That is even a good "gospel discussion" for you. i want to remind you that people have faith in every religion and not just yours. It doesn't seem to work out well for the world when people act on faith. I am not being sarcastic and would be interested in hearing your answer.
Best,
Ryanposted 4 years ago.
-
Again, we would all appreciate it if you would be more concise with your discussions. Also, please respond to any disagreements you have with my claims on the post in which these claims are being discussed. I don't want to spend my time reading all of what you have to write, and I'm sure I am missing out from skimmin' it. I would really enjoy and think we could both learn a lot from having discussions on specific topics.
These statements did catch my eye:
"I still don't quite get how destroying the faith of others falls into that though. It certainly doesn't seem like something a mature or "tolerant" person would ever do."
I have explained to you a half dozen times what tolerance means. See my previous posts. I think you're trying to bore me with this type of repetition in hopes that I'll leave. Secondly, destroying faith in a bad thing is GOOD.
Thanks for your attempt at an apology. I know it's not easy for you. I've asked for it many times, including on the post that you subsequently deleted that had the perverted content about my sexual behavior in it. You also called me an idiot, but I am too disgusted by the other remark to discuss it. I hope you acknowledge your immaturity and represent your god and the Mormon Church in a better manner. Even as an exMormon, I am ashamed of your behavior and attitude. You already have my forgiveness, but you should try to earn it.
Try sincerity. It'd be good for you.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Ana M
I am a devout Latter-day saint and I'm very happy in my religion. I'm very grateful for it. I will defend it and the Book of Mormon. But I think this site is not about the LDS church. This site for those who want to share the love of reading and give each other tips on good books. Why don't you agree to disagree! You can't make someone believe who doesn't want to believe! You can't make people like the Book of Mormon and you can't stop people from trying to prove it wrong. Enough already please stop!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Maybe you should get each other e-mails address and continue your heated discussions else where!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
Ana, you'll be happy to know that several of the children and one adult have emailed me and we discussed these things further. Thankfully, one actually asked his bishop about things I've mentioned and found out I was indeed telling the truth. So I've received some apologies, which is nice. I do the same when in fault.
The discussions get heated when people, like Patrick, name-call. Faith is a very personal topic, but talking about a young woman's sexuality, especially as an older man with children, crosses the line. I was upset by that. Fo' to the sho'. :)
I don't just discuss the LDS Church. As I've explained to the youngsters, the Book of Mormon is used by many sects.posted 4 years ago.
-
Michael D removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Michael D
Man, I pop back in for a sec :)
Shannon, did you have permission to discuss things with the kids from thier parents? Are you talking to them behind the parents back?
I taught Seminary for 16 years and I had kids bring over non-member friends all the time to discuss the Church. I would always start with "Do your parents know that you are here?" If not the discussion would end until they had thier parents permission.
Talking to under age kids without the parents knowledge and acceptance is WRONG no matter what you think you are doing.
If you had kids would you want me going behind your back and discussing things you would not want discussed?
Please stop doing this... Children will have plenty of time when they are older toget into whatever discussion they want and make decisions for themselves.
Mikeposted 4 years ago.
-
I understand where you are coming from, Michael. I appreciate your concern. For the most part, I assumed they were children by the way they write. Secondly, if you read my posts, I always encourage chidren to speak with their parents and church leaders, specifically bishops. This can be dangerous. Think of the Mormon boys who told their bishops they were gay and subsequently experienced aversion therapy at BYU. Think of the "lost boys" of the FLDS Church.
I also recommend books that can be bought from Deseret and are likely had in their church/local library. I may suggest they read books that are written by nonMormons, too, and examine both accounts. I don't discourage prayer or meditation.
If you read what both Ryan and I have discussed, we strongly encourage everyone to investigate these things further. Yes, children will hopefully be able to later discuss doctrine and the moral implications of their associations (say that ten times fast), but that doesn't mean they shouldn't question now. I love how inquisitive children are, and I always do my best to honestly answer their questions.
Doesn't your church baptize 8 year olds who are expected to come to their own decision that the Church is true? Don't these 8 year olds pay tithing? Are you "protecting" these kids from this? It seems you are most concerned with protecting the rights of parents, which includes the right to isolate and indoctrinate their children with any beliefs they hold dear (e.g. charity, bigotry).
As for my future children, I plan on discussing many religions with them and allowing them to learn of these religions from others who claim(ed) membership. I will certainly encourage them to read any books on the subject.
I have quite a nice collection of books, and it's not like I'll put them into a safe when they're born, because it conflicts with what I hope to instill in my children. Will I try my best to monitor who they email? Absolutely. Luckily for the parents of these children (who emailed me btw), I am always nice and respectful to anyone with sincere concerns about Mormonism.
Satisfied?posted 4 years ago.
-
It is a parent's responsibility to know who their kids are talking to on the internet. You cannot censor the entire world. If they ask a question or argue with an adult it is completely ethical to respond (except when inquiries are of a sexual nature) It is not like other members of Shelfari have not written them to warn them about us (they have). By your logic they would also need the parents permission. At that point, why even have Shelfari?
posted 4 years ago.
-
Michael D
You are absolutley correct i am protecting the parents. In the worlds view and otherwise it is thier responsibilty to raise thier children.
I lost a Son to drugs and if I had known I could have helped stop it before it started but even the little things were driven in to him to be secret by those around him.
Now he suffers because of his addiction and trying to overcome it and it breaks my heart.
All you need to say to children is go and talk to your parents if you see something here that bothers you. No discussions, No reccomended books or websites, or anything else.
This is the only place where I have a real problem with all of this. Children should be and ARE the responsibilty of thier parents.
You do what you do for whatever reason, but there are only two things to me that are off limits... Children and Going into the Temple under dishonesty to record or write it down.posted 4 years ago.
-
Michael D
Ryan... it is at this point that you have shown that you don't have a very high moral fiber. To say that it is the parents responsibility is correct but we both know that is very difficult without spying on every little thing a child does and unless they have given their parents a reason not to trust I do not see parents doing that in great detail.
You are also saying that because it is the parents responsibility that you are in the free and clear you even called it Ethical.
That is like saying "It is the stores employees job to stop anyone from stealing so it is OK if I do it and get away with it.
What ever happened to individual responsibility to do the right thing whether somebody is watching or not? I am glad you added sex talk as an exclusion but saying what you do is very much different is mind boggling to me.
The reason Sex talk is off limits is because it can scar the child for life (if not worse if they actual met the dirt bag) and it can cause things that will take years to get over and make both child and family very sad and hurt.
Why is it not against the law for adults to engage in Sex Talk? because the law sees them as responsible enough to make their own decisions and suffer what consequences that come.
When they are adults you can attack them all you want... if it makes you feel better then more power to ya but you talk to child behind a parents back and do so willingly you can cause all sorts of problems.
Like I said in my original post If a non-member child (teenager even) came to me asking about our faith I MADE SURE THE PARENTS WERE AWARE AND OK WITH IT!! PERIOD... no justifying what is ethical and what is not... it is not my decision to make and it shouldn't be yours.
Children by the law are the responsibility of their parents whether it be for good or ill and with exception of abuse it is THEIR decision what they are taught in schools and other places and it is THEIR decision what they are taught at home.
If you have children I would not go on the Internet and try to undo what you believe should be taught them. I would have to much respect for you as a parent and that sacred responsibility that has been given you even though I would not agree with it si all I am asking is that you give that respect to others that you absolutely be livid about if it wasn't given to you.posted 4 years ago.
-
Michael D
Shannon,
You asked about tithing and baptism...
The church recommends that children are baptized at the age a accountability, I have never been told that they are to be told the church is true and that they have to think that also. I see parents teaching their children what is near and dear to them as they should... some do it better than others but the "Church" doesn't command it.
Tithing is just another teaching... Would you teach your children to be kind and make the kind of decisions that you think are correct? Would you teach a child to read or write?
Of course... Parents asking their children to pay tithing is no different... it is a teaching moment to respect God and give back to him a very little of what they have been blessed with. no more or no less. Please do not try and make into anything else.
I taught Seminary for 16 years full time and I know what the teachings of the church are on this so please do not try to twist it around into something different... opps... Forgot who i was talking to... twist away! :)posted 4 years ago.
-
Michael D
I apologise to everyone for getting so worked up about this but when it comes to children I am very protective... guess it comes from years of teaching them and doing my best to ALWAYS respect the rights their parents have in their raising.
I will leave with this thought.
You are either honest and respect the rights of Parents to raise their children with any more added interference than is normal or you are Dishonest and you go behind their backs PERIOD.
Now, I will go and let those who will try and justify themselves in that dishonesty go to work. I have said my piece.
Talking to a child putting ideas in their head and then saying go ask your parents about it IS NOT HONEST AND RESPECTFUL.
You can argue all you want but if you do not have permission to talk to the child about changing something as deep as their belief system you are not a good person. PERIOD.
Now, I will go and let those who will try and justify themselves in that dishonesty go to work. I have said my piece.
and by the way... Ryan, why have Shelfari? To discuss books not to attack others beliefs. You my friend and your wife are Anti-Mormons... you can yell and scream about that title all you want but you are. Every single way you argue and construct you words, every single action screams that you have interest in discussing anything but that you want to destroy so others can be as unhappy as you are.
I used to argue with folks like you all of the time... James White and Ed Decker and the likes and it was just that arguing. The only way you would ever stop attacking is when others give in. Never agree to disagree but keep pounding. Truth has nothing to do with it... the kill is all that counts. It is very Sad.
Now deny away all you want to but there is a reason you two are so hateful about the church and the leaders past and present... I hope once again you will discover that reason and find peace.posted 4 years ago.
-
Michael,
You said (This is not edited or taken out of context):
“You can argue all you want but if you do not have permission to talk to the child about changing something as deep as their belief system you are not a good person. PERIOD.”
I recall a story where 2 individuals came to a 14 year old and told him not to join any church. Both this boy’s parents were very religious. Yet these individuals told him that they were going to use him as a religious tool.
My question for you Michael is “Would you consider these men bad?”
By your logic God and Jesus Christ are bad (if they live by your moral system).
Parents rights? Why does nobody ever think about children’s rights? I was lied to for 20 years and had little choice in it. It is not wrong to speak to a minor about history. It is not wrong to challenge what their parents taught them. It is their choice what they believe and they are permitted to be inquisitive. Children should not be expected to believe everything their parents tell them. How many children have been saved from an abusive parent because someone on the outside talked sense into them and got them help? I don’t consider Mormonism abusive, in most ways, but the point is still valid.
This is a moral topic and we can have opposing views and that is fine. I have not asked you to adopt my moral system so I would appreciate the same courtesy.
Michael, I would appreciate it if you would stop projecting things on us. I am not an angry person. I am actually one of the most mellow people that you have ever talked to. You are beginning to annoy me with your labels. I am not an “Anti-Mormon” as you suggest. I just like history to be shown in an accurate way. I have told you many times that I will concede points if I am proven wrong. You just keep on spewing words of hate labeling me as a way of discrediting me. I find your posts to be ignorant and rude. I truly hope you are more pleasant in your personal life.
If I am “tearing down” beliefs it is only because they are built on a wobbly foundation. The truth can only set us free; so why are you so afraid to explore and consider it.
Best of luck, and please be a little more polite in your next post. I have done nothing to merit such impolite treatment. (I haven’t even talked to kids not that it would be any of your buisness)posted 4 years ago.
-
First of all, I try not to discuss Mormonism with persons who do not follow it well (e.g., those who watch football games on Sunday--common of Mormons here in Pittsburgh, those who watch R-rated films, those who are obese, etc.). I am breaking a norm by responding to you, Michael. From your profile picture, it is obvious you do not follow the Word of Wisdom. So let the response begin:
MICHAEL: You asked about tithing and baptism...
ME: Someone doesn’t understand a rhetorical question.
MICHAEL: The church recommends that children are baptized at the age a accountability, I have never been told that they are to be told the church is true and that they have to think that also. I see parents teaching their children what is near and dear to them as they should... some do it better than others but the "Church" doesn't command it.
ME: I’m uncertain as to whether your reasoning is poor or if it’s your reading comprehension. Mormon children hear“the church is true” AT LEAST monthly during Fast and Testimony meeting. Then , typically, when asked to pray about it parents bear their own testimonies of it being true. The Church does command that parents teach their children the Gospel. What kind of Mormon parent were you? I will reference your drug addicted son shortly. I do hope he overcomes his addiction(s).
MICHAEL: Tithing is just another teaching... Would you teach your children to be kind and make the kind of decisions that you think are correct? Would you teach a child to read or write?
ME: My point, which is repeatedly lost on you, is that you find it acceptable to allow parents to indoctrinate their children, yet you are bothered by these children who look for other sources of information. There is little wrong with a child asking a person questions concerning his or her area of expertise.
MICHAEL: I lost a Son to drugs and if I had known I could have helped stop it before it started but even the little things were driven in to him to be secret by those around him. Now he suffers because of his addiction and trying to overcome it and it breaks my heart.
Me: When I read that first sentence, I assumed your son was dead ‘cause you wrote “I lost a son…”, but he is only suffering with an addiction. You can help“find” him. Don’t give up. This is just encouragement from someone who has worked with addicts. You are the father of a struggling child. In my opinion, you should NOT be on here discussing a book if a family member’s life is in danger.
MICHAEL: Children should be and ARE the responsibilty of thier parents. You do what you do for whatever reason, but there are only two things to me that are off limits... Children and Going into the Temple under dishonesty to record or write it down.
ME: Some parents are unwilling or incapable of being responsible for their children. As Ryan mentioned (and his rationale is in part why he will be such an exceptionally good father), the State should be responsible for abused and neglected children.
Finally, Michael, I wanted you to consider your statement regarding the “two things” that are off limits to you. Don’t you think you should have included drugs in that? Especially as a Mormon? I guess if a Mormon isn’t following the Word of Wisdom, then there is no reason for his child to do the same.posted 4 years ago.
-
jebediah f removed this reply 4 years ago
-
jebediah f
Somehow our original discussion got deleted... so I apologize, i am unable to respond to your points Shannon.
However I must say I was very discouraged by your reply to Michael. We can disagree on here without flat out insulting the person we are disagreeing with, and while we tend to be offensive while talking about religion and things we disagree with, I felt your reply crossed the line. Ryan gave an edgy but more respectful response in saying we can disagree, and that's ok. It's too bad you chose to let the discussion degrade.
"Michael. From your profile picture, it is obvious you do not follow the Word of Wisdom." That's just very rude. Using someone's own religion to insult them on their physical appearance is immature and shows your lack of empathy for others. I hope you don't resort to this sort of tactic when everyone disagrees with you.
"I’m uncertain as to whether your reasoning is poor or if it’s your reading comprehension." Again, rude and has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
"In my opinion, you should NOT be on here discussing a book if a family member’s life is in danger." It's obvious you have no idea what Michael is going through, and this statement is just ridiculous. I suppose if you had a family member on drugs, you would never get on the internet, watch tv, read a book, or do anything but spend every waking moment with this person? This statement is just a poor attempt to accuse Michael of being a poor father, and shame on you for resorting to that sort of rhetoric during this discussion.
As I've read through the comments on this thread, I've noticed you repeatedly accusing Patrick of sexually harrassing you. I didn't see the original comment which you are referring to, but I noticed you went from saying "it's offensive to accuse me of cheating on my husband" to "It's offensive to talk about a married woman's sexuality" to "I demand an apology for your unchristlike actions of talking about my sexuality" to "I still haven't gotten my apology for you sexually harrassing me". It's a bit hyperbolic, don't you think? Going from someone accusing you of cheating on your husband to sexual harrassment... I don't see any good logic there. Don't you think that's a little excessive when you yourself are insulting the "reading comprehension", "reasoning", parenting skills, and health of someone else? Please clean up your discussion so that it can be meaningful again.”posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Patrick L
Great comment, Ana, and I totally agree. Please know ... like I said in my last comment, I've written what I have not to try to prove to Shannon or Ryan or anyone else that they're evil or bad or even wrong, for that matter--I realize that's not going to happen and it has never been my intention. I've only written to try to help other readers hear both sides of the story, not just one slanted version. That's all. I don't really have time for this and don't plan to be back in the future. Your point is taken. Hasta la vista. Thanks.... PL
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Hasta la vista. ¿Lo prometes?
Uh, thanks for not trying to suggest that I am evil. Yet YOU wrote on this BOOK site that I cheated on my husband which resulted in my being excommunicated (this didn't happen btw; I asked to have my name removed...and I hope it goes without saying that I have never cheated on my husband). You also called me an idiot. I may have considered your logic flawed and your arguments weak, but I have not insulted you or your family. You cannot honestly say the same, Patrick.
I hope you never stoop so low again.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
dis⋅cus⋅sion[di-skuhsh-uhn]
–noun
an act or instance of discussing; consideration or examination by argument, comment, etc., esp. to explore solutions; informal debate.
I am wondering what exactly people expect from a discussion. Here is what I expect:
Possible agreement
Possible conflict
Convincing arguments
Exchange of "facts"
Dispute of facts
Acceptance of facts
I think that is the environment that we have developed here:)posted 4 years ago.
-
jebediah f
This is a great post over at a popular mormon blog:
http://mormonmatters.org/2008/11/18/history-as-narrative-fallacy/
I think it's relevant to all faithful mormons, doubting mormons, ex mormons and recovering mormons. This kind of thing seems more discussion worthy than what has been going on over here the last couple of days.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
It seems like they are essentially explaining belief bias. Good topic Jebediah. The thing that really gets me is the Journal of Discourses. Brigham Young checked what was written in there and approved it. Mormons today don't believe it but they still believe Brigham Young was a prophet. Most of the time they just claim he didn't say the things he did.
posted 4 years ago.
-
In response to Ryan's comment, it has been said that we are less a thinking species than a believing one. It is awfully convenient (and awesome) to have the power to denounce previously taught "eternal" doctrines. Brigham Young gets mentioned more frequently than other LDS prophets who claimed to be the mouthpiece of their racist god.
As I read over the blog post, this comment stuck out:
"One of my biggest struggles with Church history is the ban of the Priesthood to African Americans. I did a lot of research on it, and prayed to understand it. My feeling, which you can debate is from the spirit or just a conclusion based on my life and experiences, was that the ban was not from God but from imperfect men."
It just seems strange to me that God would call upon racist men, time and time again, to be his spokesperson. It's like how those blasted aliens always probe uneducated rural workers!posted 4 years ago.
-
Bradford L
@shannon
Are you religious? Do you believe in the Bible? If you do, having God withhold something from a group of people isn't news. Just like Peter and the Gentiles, God will reveal when and how and to whom He will give to. Whether or not the Gospel wasn't taken to the Gentiles sooner due to the Apostles prejudice is impossible to tell, but regardless God made it known that it SHOULD be, just as he did with African Americans and the priesthood.
If you don't believe in God or of in the Bible, then you have no basis wherewith to understand what I just wrote.posted 4 years ago.
-
Bradford L
@shannon
In addition, the early Mormon Church leadership were considered "radical" in their abolitionist views on slavery and was a cause of much of the tension between them and the locals when they were in pro-slavery states. To call them racist in historical context is asinine.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
I noticed a note about me not being willing to evaluate or comment on a note that Patrick made. I decided not to deal with his claims because he was not concise. The long winded babble of his first post was mostly incorrect (I did respond to Quetzalcoatl being Jesus because this God is half bird and half serpent and to my knowledge Mormons don't think Jesus is). I made a comment about this and told you why I was not responding and talked about one of his misguided claims.
First, you say I spend too much time on here and then because and then because I didn't respond to one of his 3 page posts I am somehow incapable of doing so? I didn't have time that day. I will respond to any single or small group of claims you have Patrick. Michael seems to struggle with reading because I said this before and I guess he disregarded it.
Which claims did you want me to answer? I can answer any of them reasonably Michael. By the way Shannon responded to his 10 points which weren't even rational points. If you claim that I cannot respond to all the possible incoherent illogical arguments you can make up then you are right. I will however, respond to reasonable arguments (I have yet to see one). I am just glad that everyone that sees this discussion who is not Mormon will see the book for what it is a fraud.posted 4 years ago.
-
“So those who dislike and denounce the Book of Mormon are often erroneously called Anti-Mormons. Would Mormons consider themselves Anti-Muslim and Anti-Hindu because they denounce the Koran and the Vedas as scripture?
I am not anti-Mormon. I am NOT against Mormons as individuals. Go ahead and consider me anti-Mormonism, but please don't consider me anti-Mormon. I care a great deal about many Mormons, but I dislike their beliefs. It is possible to do both. I've explained the notion of tolerance a zillion times on here.
Can we all agree to stop labeling people as such? Seriously, just call me Shannon.posted 4 years ago.
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L's reply was removed by an admin 4 years ago
-
I wanted to start a post concerning the Book of Mormon and racism, and I'd like to dig deeper into the unfair treatment of blacks by the Church. It has been touched upon, but I think too many sweep it under the rug.
I'll start from with a quote by Brigham Young, the second president of the church:
"Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so." (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 10:110)
And now I'll quote another president of the church, Joseph Fielding Smith:
"Joseph Fielding Smith stated, "Not only was Cain called upon to suffer, but because of his wickedness he became the father of an inferior race" (The Way to Perfection, p.101).
"The negroes are not equal with other races where the receipt of certain spiritual blessings are concerned, particularly the priesthood and the temple blessings that flow therefrom..." (Mormon Doctrine, p.527, 1966 ed.)
Spencer W. Kimball, later 12th President of the Mormon church, commenting on the Native American Indians as folows:
And here's a quote from another president of this arguably racist church, Spencer Kimball the 12th prophet of a truly racist deity:
"I saw a striking contrast in the progress of the Indian people today as against that of only fifteen years ago. Truly the scales of darkness aref allign from their eyes, and they are fast becoming a white and delightsome people....For years they have been growing delightsome, and they are now becoming white and delightsome, as they were promised..."(Spencer W. Kimball, Improvement Era, Dec. 1960, pp.922-3)
As for the Book of Mormon, here are some passages that have been used to engage in racist acts:
2 Nephi 5:21
"And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them."
In a 1947 letter, the LDS First Presidency condemned interracial marriage, :“There is a growing tendency.. toward the breaking down of race barriers in the matter of intermarriage between whites and blacks, but it does not have the sanction of the Church and is contrary to Church doctrine.”
They Mormon Church currently opposes same-sex marriage, another issue of civil rights, but let's focus on racism, shall we? Any comments on how the recent acceptance of blacks into the LDS Priesthood contradicts earlier dogmatic statements by LDS president Brigham Young (and others)?posted 4 years ago.
-
In the Journal of Discourses, Mormon "prophet" Brigham Young says these vile words:
'Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African Race? If the White man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so.
Vol. 7, pg. 290-291
"Cain slew his brother. . . and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin.
You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind. The first man that committed the odious crime of killing one of his brethren will be cursed the longest of any one of the children of Adam. Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin. Trace mankind down to after the flood, and then another curse is pronounced upon the same race--that they should be the "servant of servants."
So those who email me concerning racism in Mormon history, let's just discuss it here. Thanks! Since this is a book discussion, I want to know what specific passages from the Book of Mormon do you think were in Young's heart when the Mormon God, Elohim, "inspired" these racist remarks.posted 4 years ago.
-
Another Mormon racist, John Taylor, Millennial Star, Vol. 14, pg. 418:
"For instance, the descendants of Cain cannot cast off their skin of blackness, at once, and immediately, although every soul of them should repent,....Cain and his posterity must wear the mark which God put upon them; and his white friends may wash the race of Cain with fuller's soap every day, they cannot wash away God's mark."
Wait. Wait. Do you think Taylor, as a white friend, took a bar of Dove soap to the face of a black man in attempt to wash away this curse? Why did Elohim, the Mormon God, curse a people with black skin? I'm going to reread those Book of Mormon passages concerning this racism right now. According to Mormon theology, the righteous will be white in the Celestial Kingdom. The take away message from the Book of Mormon is that black is not beautiful.posted 4 years ago.
-
I don't think you will find many people Mormon or not that deny that the Mormon Church was racist in its early years. The question really is whether these acts were caused by The Book of Mormon or were these statements just these men's personal beliefs? It is doubtful that these were entirely caused by the BoM.
One can make the claim that the BoM gave these powerful men justification for racism. The statements made in the BoM are undoubtedly racist but I think it was these men's own prejudice that compelled them to make the remarks they did. Even today there are very few people of African descent in leadership positions in the LDS church.
I remember baptizing some gentlemen from Nigeria on my mission. After I left the area some missionaries that followed me decided to tell these men that they were descendants of Cain. It was not pretty and they left the church. Today, I feel horrible that they were hurt but proud that they were freed from an institution with such a racist history,posted 4 years ago.
-
-
That was really awkward. Back then I didn't think that it was part of LDS history. I never understood how someone could claim "We believe that men will be punished for their own sins and not for Adam's transgression" and then believe that these "descendants of Cain" could be punished for his.
posted 4 years ago.
-
you know what ryan? You cannot not say that the church is racist. There is not one part of the church that supports racism. We deny racism in everything we do and want it stopped. Sure "maybe" the missionaries did that. But that was their own decision. They will answer for it at the last day. The church does not support what they did. You say you're a missionary but you sure don't stick up for the church, and you are giving it a bad name!
posted 3 years ago.
-
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L's reply was removed by an admin 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Patrick L
P.S. Here are three great sites for those seeking real answers about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and documented responses to the anti-Mormon blabber that unfortunately exists.
http://www.fairlds.org/
http://www.lds.org/
http://www.mormon.org/
Happy Holidays!posted 4 years ago.
-
Patrick L
Hi everybody. I hope everyone had a nice Thanksgiving holiday. I wanted to share a short email I received that puts into perspective one of the two main reasons I write what I have on this discussion board.
First, as I've explained, one reason I write occasionally is that I feel driven to ensure that "both sides of the story" are being told, not just the anti-Mormons' "smoke and mirrors" versions, but also the true facts, history and documented evidences of the Book of Mormon.
Second, I write what I do because I believe it's important to stand up against prejudice, whatever the form or source might be. I'd do the same thing for any of my Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist or non-Mormon/Christian friends, were they under attack in the way we as Mormons are and have been on this site. It's reprehensible what goes on here, and I'm saddened by it.
(I don't mean to offend but I'm also saddened by the fact that I'm the only one who seems bothered by it all or willing to say something about it. Ana M, or whoever else might read this: if you are truly strong members of the LDS church, shouldn't you say something about your faith, your own feelings, WHAT you believe and WHY YOU BELIEVE IT, instead of just standing by?!)
The early Mormon pioneers, when they were being raped and murdered and driven from state to state, didn't just stand idly by and accept what was happening. They didn't fight back very often, since they were counseled not to, but they weren't OKAY WITH IT either. They certainly didn't try to pretend the mobs didn't exist or that the intolerance they were experiencing would never change so, "what the hey."
Are you really saying (Ana, etc.) that we should just pretend like it's okay for someone to be so blatantly racist. Are verbal hate-crimes today okay? Is it "no big deal" when Ryan and Shannon (etc.) drag the sacred ceremonies of the temple, the memories of our beloved apostles, the very essence of WHO WE ARE through the mud? I can't imagine this is what you're saying, but not saying anything is as good as acceptance.
I agree, this is a book site and should be focused on books. It hasn't been, though. It's turned into a forum for anti-Mormon intolerance. Can I ask: is ANYONE reading this okay with the hatred and prejudice we have been submitted to on this site? (I have noticed it's been almost two weeks since R & S have raised their heads. Does that mean we can all be spared from their misdirecting hatred from now on? If so, believe me, you won't hear anything more from me...!)
Like I said, though, I received an email yesterday that touches on this subject. It's an apt reminder of what I'm talking about. Let me share with you a couple of passages from the write-up (the Rabbi / writer is referring to some recent hate-crimes against several LDS members in California). Please ask yourself folks, "What if it was me?"
WE ARE ALL MORMONS by Rabbi Shifren
....People have perhaps wondered: why the Mormons? Answer: they are a small, yet vocal Christian minority. They have been selected by the mobs as vulnerable, a group that might not have such massive support among America's Christians.
We who are friends of the Mormons, their patriotism, their family values, will not falter in our continued support of these dear Americans. Let us recall the Christian minister Niemoller, whose admonition during those dark years of Nazi Germany moved us to our core:
"When they came for the gypsies, I said nothing, because I wasn't a gypsy. When they came for the homosexuals, I said nothing, because I wasn't a homosexual. When they came for the Jews, I said nothing, because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I said nothing, because I wasn't a Catholic......then they came for me, and there was no one left to defend me."
My fellow Americans, in the coming battle for the heart and soul of America and everything we cherish, may this call to arms be the mantra of every concerned patriot: "WE ALL ARE MORMONS!"
Rabbi Nachum Shifren - Lecturer and Teacher
Just food for thought.... Take care everybody, and thanks for listening. PLposted 4 years ago.
-
jebediah f
"Is it "no big deal" when Ryan and Shannon (etc.) drag the sacred ceremonies of the temple, the memories of our beloved apostles, the very essence of WHO WE ARE through the mud? I can't imagine this is what you're saying, but not saying anything is as good as acceptance. "
I don't think that saying nothing is acceptance. True, Mormons believe they should always bear witness to the truthfulness of the Gospel. But it also means to choose your battles. It's easy to be pulled into a flame war, especially with people who have an irrational obsession with tearing down the Mormon church. This kind of interaction is not the kind of behavior that Mormon leaders have encouraged. In fact, most Mormon leaders counsel members to avoid sources that speak poorly about the church.
Let's be clear about one thing- whether you believe in the church or not, there are many valid questions for the church. Much of the membership is oblivious to the issues that so called anti-mormons raise. Many anti-mormons grab any information they can to swing at the church. Saying the anti-mormons spread false information isn't exactly accurate. fairlds.org is a source that explains the kinds of issues anti-mormons talk about, but a look at some of these issues can inspire the christian believer to have compassion for these so called anti-mormons, because a lot of what they say has some truth to it.
Does that mean the Mormon church is wrong or bad? That's not a question for anyone to answer but your own self. The mormon church has always encouraged its members to be educated and to seek for truth so that they can find their own personal witness of the truthfulness of the mormon gospel. Some people think that believing in the church means not believing anything that casts it in an unfavorable light. For example, many people don't know that Joseph Smith had multiple wives. Many people don't know that there are multiple accounts of the First Vision. When faced with this factual information (information many mormon scholars and general authorities know), they call it false, bad, anti-mormon, etc. There is value in understanding the truth of mormon history, especially as a believer.
That being said, you must be careful not to take the information and run with it. Sometimes information is just information. When you put your own narrative to it, or assign it some value in your argument of whether the church is true or not, you are on shaky ground. Many so called anti-mormons take historical data and use it as "proof" Joseph Smith was a fraud. Many so called anti-mormons take not so historical data as "proof" as well. The important thing is for people to be critical of information they come in contact with.
So, in reply to your post Patrick, I think it is inappropriate to say that mormons aren't doing their job by standing by as people flood the message boards with information that doesn't put mormonism in a favorable light. It's obvious that the discussions that have seemed to go on here the last few weeks have a very emotional and personal component to those who wrote them, and so it is almost impossible to have a christian discussion with people whose emotions have most certainly taken over. That being said though I think it is important for members to know more about their faith and not mistake the whitewashed version of history for truth. Some of what R & S have said is historically accurate. That doesn't mean their conclusions are accurate. But it is important to know the difference.posted 4 years ago.
-
sixpalz
Patrick,
Thanks for all that you have been posting here in our defense. I have been missing from this discussion forum for several weeks now because I was being totally dragged down by what has been going on. It's not that I haven't wanted to shout from the rooftops, but like jebediah said, "you choose your battles." The hate that R and S have plastered all over these pages has reaffirmed to me that the adversary is alive and well and honestly, I just haven't felt like letting that evil into my daily life.posted 4 years ago.
-
Michael D removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Michael D
“Patrick, to say that once you have given your thoughts and it does nothing to effect another (in the case of Ryan and Shannon) and you walk away from it is to not care is just plain silliness.
You think you were the only one defending here? I spent a huge amount of time writting back and forth with the administrator here showing her that these people were not discussing a book but were slandering people who are not here to defend themselves and attacking the Church by talking about things that were not even in the book.
The result? They are not here anymore are they. You don't think it was the overwhelming evidence you showed them that caused them to not only stop posting but leave Shelfari altogether?
You did a great job at showing them things they couldn't refute (even though they acted like they were refuting it) but it did nothing to stop them from Posting here and E-Mailing people (especially the youth here) and spreading thier lies and hatred of truth.
My time, after wasting some of it here trying to help two people understand truth that could have a cared less about truth, was spent showing how these folks were using this forum to not discuss books but to slander and spread lies about people and thier beliefs.
I am guessing... and only guessing that that effort had more to do with them leaving.
So please... before you suppose that others are not doing anything to defend the truth, please make sure that they are not before you pass judgement.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
katrina r
I agree that we should not be cruel about peoples religious beliefs. Yes, I believe in the truth of this book and Yes, I am mormon. Rude comments do not change this. They just make the person who says them look mean. It's like our parents teach us as children. Treat others the way you want to be treated. People will respect your opion better if you give it respectfully :)
posted 4 years ago.
-
Eruviel Tindomerel
I certainly agree. We should not bash on other religions because they are not our own. I am a steadfast Latter Day Saint and I am proud to be one. Please, if you do not like us Mormons I implore you to not write degrading things about us. Everyone should be respected for what they believe.
posted 3 years ago.
-
-
Moses L
While respecting someone else's religion should be the aim of all people, I don't think that's an excuse to be immune from rational criticism. We should be willing to critique one another's view in order to show where our beliefs are faulty or flat out incorrect. None of us are perfect but if God is real and He is perfect, then we should suck it up and follow truth when our belief systems are completely abased by logic and evidence. This is why I cannot belief Mormonism and why I came to believe in the Bible which led to me to become an evangelical Christian (grew up in a Buddhist family).
posted 3 years ago.
-
-
Emily L
If this doesn't make you feel the spirit then you are crazy.
I love the book of mormon. It is a powerful book.
A testimony of the book of mormon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUqNW_PTTp0posted 3 years ago.
-
Moses L
Then I guess I am crazy. Thanks for the insult. I'm sure as a Mormon you believe in the Bible. Well this is what the Bible says in Jeremiah 17:9, "The heart is more deceitful than all else And is desperately sick; Who can understand it?" How can you tell me to trust in something based on my feelings when my heart is deceitful? Rather, wouldn't it be better if we base everything on truth found in the Bible my Mormon friend? http://www.carm.org/problems-with-the-book-mormon
posted 3 years ago.
-
-
-
Julianna
This is such a wonderful and precious book that has truly helped me to feel the spirit thru my whole life! I can't help but feel uplifted every time I read it.
posted 3 years ago.
-
-
Sophie F
Religious beliefs are important i am in 2 Nephi, and i love the Book of Mormon and if anyone has a problem with Mormons don't post anything because we know what we are doing its our life and if we spend our life on what is right then its our choice and no one should change other peoples feelings or bring them down by saying rude things about us Mormons. i grew up in the church i am a proud Latter Day Saint and i don't let anyone make me feel like i don't need to be a Mormon and i don't let Satan steer me off the righteous path to my father in Heaven.
please do not post anything hurt full or mean or rude comments because it just makes the person who said that look mean and stupid. thanks
the Book of Mormon is a powerful book and it makes me sad by how many people there are in the world who don't know what they are missing.posted 3 years ago.
-
New Era
I am a convert to the church 24 years ago, I am not American but an Asian. Being baptised into the church was the Best Decision I had ever made so far, I enjoyed every bit of my life being a LDS/Mormon.
If anybody denied the Book of Mormon was due to they have not open their hearts to God (Being humble before God the Almighty) & had not read the Bible well enough.
"16 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:
17 And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.
18 ¶ And when the children of thy people shall speak unto thee, saying, Wilt thou not shew us what thou meanest by these?
19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I will take the stick of aJoseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand."
(Ezekiel 37: 16 -19)
And the Savior Jesus Christ knew the pride of men that were blind the proud to reject the Book of Mormon:
And because my words shall hiss forth—many of the Gentiles shall say: A Bible! A Bible! We have got a Bible, and there cannot be any more Bible.
4 But thus saith the Lord God: O fools, they shall have a Bible; and it shall proceed forth from the bJews, mine ancient covenant people. And what thank they the Jews for the Bible which they receive from them? Yea, what do the Gentiles mean? Do they remember the travails, and the labors, and the pains of the Jews, and their diligence unto me, in bringing forth salvation unto the Gentiles?
5 O ye Gentiles, have ye remembered the Jews, mine ancient covenant people? Nay; but ye have acursed them, and have hated them, and have not sought to recover them. But behold, I will return all these things upon your own heads; for I the Lord have not forgotten my people.
6 Thou fool, that shall say: A Bible, we have got a Bible, and we need no more Bible. Have ye obtained a Bible save it were by the Jews?
7 Know ye not that there are more nations than one? Know ye not that I, the Lord your God, have created all men, and that I remember those who are upon the isles of the sea; and that I rule in the heavens above and in the earth beneath; and I bring forth my word unto the children of men, yea, even upon all the nations of the earth?
8 Wherefore murmur ye, because that ye shall receive more of my word? Know ye not that the testimony of two nations is a witness unto you that I am God, that I remember one nation like unto another? Wherefore, I speak the same words unto one nation like unto another. And when the two nations shall run together the testimony of the two nations shall run together also.
9 And I do this that I may prove unto many that I am the same yesterday, today, and forever; and that I speak forth my words according to mine own pleasure. And because that I have spoken one word ye need not suppose that I cannot speak another; for my work is not yet finished; neither shall it be until the end of man, neither from that time henceforth and forever.
10 Wherefore, because that ye have a Bible ye need not suppose that it contains all my words; neither need ye suppose that I have not caused more to be written. "
(2 Nephi 29: 3 - 10)
If anybody so lacks of Wisdom (to know if Book of Mormon is a word of God) -
"If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
6 But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed. "
(James 1: 5 - 6)
If anybody claim that they believed the Bible ONLY, then OBEY & FOLLOW what Apostle James taught in New Testament!posted 3 years ago.
-
Rando Calrissian
Bashing the religion of another will do nothing but make your religion look weaker.
posted 3 years ago.
-
-
Andie L
Hey guys,
Is this an accurate portrayal of Mormonism?
''http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ervaWt03Z3w''
Thanks in advance.posted 2 years ago.
-
Becky
The best place to find an accurate portrayal is going to
http://mormon.org/posted 2 years ago.
-
-
Elise
Stop saying that our religion is not true. Because it is. 100%. We are Mormons and this is what we believe in. Just cuz' you don't believe in it doesn't mean you have to even talk about the Book of Mormon.
posted 2 years ago.
-
-
