LDS

[Cat Tale]

I'll second that question.
Why bind your faith and honour to something you know to be false?

I never said it was false. I just believe there are errors in the translation. Otherwise, again, I believe what I believe even though there is no logical reason for it, and if it makes me the happiest I've ever been, well... there's something to be said about that too!

 

[RandFan]

Exactly, and that was my point in my last post. Actually, it didn't rock my faith that much, but what it did was teach me that I can't rely on evidence to prove what I believe. I believe what I believe because I believe it. It actually, in the long run made me stronger, and I can look at things from a different perspective. And recently I moved to the strongest I've ever been. I'm in a position now where I can study things out in my mind not having to worry about where I arrive, and at the same time have the Church, so I'm extremely happy where I am.

Cool. Thanks. So here are two questions that smacked me up side the head when I was a missionary:

1. How could I get others to question their testimony of the truth if I wasn't willing to question mine?
2. If faith leads to truth why does it lead so many away from truth?

I could never reconcile that in any way that stopped the cognitive dissonance. Francis Collins, a brilliant mind and the head of the Human Genome project soothed his dissonance over the Holy Trinity when he saw a waterfall frozen into three streams. Those kinds of cognitive tricks never worked for me.

 

[SezMe]

Here's a fraction of the "library":

The Mormon Mirage: Seeing Through the Illusion of Mainstream Mormonism, Hank Hanegraaff; Trouble Enough: Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon, Ernest H. Tares; Mormonism: One Nation Under Gods, Richard Arbanes; The Kingdom of the Cults, Walter Martin; Covering Up the Black Hole and Mormonism: Shadow or Reality?, Jerald and Sandra Tanner; Counterfeit Gospel of Mormonism, Norman L. Geisler; Behind the Mask of Mormonism, John Ankerberg and John Weldon; Inventing Mormonism: Tradition and the Historical Record, H. Michael Marquardt and Wesley P. Walters.

There is much more, some of it brim with religious bigotry."

You went to all that trouble to list the library of bigotry. My request, however, was for just one piece of writing:

Are there any critics of the LDS that are not bigots? If so, can you link to some writing that is both skeptical (or critical or questioning, or doubtful, etc.) and not bigoted?

Would you please deign to answer my request.

 

[pakeha]

But if the claims about the ancient history of North America in the Book Of Mormon are demonstrably false, isn't losing your testimony a good thing?

Why would you want to testify to something that is false?

I never said it was false. I just believe there are errors in the translation. Otherwise, again, I believe what I believe even though there is no logical reason for it, and if it makes me the happiest I've ever been, well... there's something to be said about that too!

I'm sorry if I've made you uncomfortable.
Errors in the translation? How can you even know what is correctly translated and what is not in the BOM?


Even so, of course you are right to defend your right to believe as you please, Cat Tale.

 

[skyrider44]

Let's see: We have disagreement whether someone was convicted of a particular crime. There is much less disagreement as to whether there was an arrest and a trial.

You get ahead of yourself. Did a legal authority/officer of the law bring charges against Joseph Smith? No. Stowell's* sons or nephew brought the charges, and Joseph was taken to Judge Neely. William Purple took minutes of the trial and noted: "the sons of Mr. Stowell. . .were greatly incensed against Smith. . .[seeing] that the youthful seer had unlimited control over. . .their sire. They caused the arrest of Smith as a vagrant, without visible means of livelihood" (FAIR, "The 1826 Trial of Joseph Smith," Russell Anderson). Stowell had agreed to pay Joseph "high wages" for undertaking the work, a fact that probably initiated the sons' (or nephew's anger). Please recall that it was Joseph, "high wages" notwithstanding, who urged Stowell to abandon the effort. *Spelling varies.

: A guilty conviction was entirely plausible outcome of the trial, consistent with the facts. Yet, skyrider44 would require compelling, unambiguous evidence, a high standard indeed.

Kindly note that under New York law, only Stowell could claim that Joseph had cheated him. That's why the prosecution thought Stowell would be their star witness. But it didn't turn out that way, did it? Stowell spoke in Joseph's defense. Consequently, had NY law been enforced, "A guilty conviction could not have been "entirely plausible."

I suggest you dig a little deeper.

 

[Cat Tale]

Cool. Thanks. So here are two questions that smacked me up side the head when I was a missionary:

1. How could I get others to question their testimony of the truth if I wasn't willing to question mine?
2. If faith leads to truth why does it lead so many away from truth?

1. 
   
   Wow, tough questions. I wish I had an answer to it. It may have been slightly easier for me due to the fact that I'd already questioned my faith. I grew up in a Protestant church and from my very earliest memory I knew it wasn't where I belonged, when I went to college I called the missionaries... So I already had questioned my birth faith.
   
   I don't know if I'd said it's "faith" that leads people away. The reasons people leave are Legion, but among them are the usual pride, jealousy, envy, difficulty in keeping the Commandments, disagreements with Church policy, feel uncomfortable, really most any reason people leave any religion.

 

[RandFan]

Wow, tough questions. I wish I had an answer to it. It may have been slightly easier for me due to the fact that I'd already questioned my faith. I grew up in a Protestant church and from my very earliest memory I knew it wasn't where I belonged, when I went to college I called the missionaries... So I already had questioned my birth faith.

I don't know if I'd said it's "faith" that leads people away. The reasons people leave are Legion, but among them are the usual pride, jealousy, envy, difficulty in keeping the Commandments, disagreements with Church policy, feel uncomfortable, really most any reason people leave any religion.

Thanks but that's not my question. I'm not asking what leads people away from the truth. Such a proposition is begging the question. We cannot presuppose the truth but must instead start with the null hypothesis.

My question is why does faith result in people believing false things? You believe you have the truth because of faith. Catholics believe their religion is true because of faith. Muslims believe their religion is true because of faith.

There can only be one conclusion from those facts. Faith leads people to false conclusions. It doesn't matter where those people started as that would be presumptuous to the question.

So, again, why does faith result in so many contradictory and false beliefs?

 

[Cat Tale]

So, again, why does faith result in so many contradictory and false beliefs?

Sorry, I misunderstood your above post, gotcha this time.

What I've never been comfortable with is saying to people that we're the "only true religion." That was my toughest part of missionary work.

The classic answer that I always heard was simply that all churches contain some truth, it's just that the LDS contains all the truth. Therefore people can be lead to various religions due to the truthes that they contain. I believe that's the only way to reconcile this, though I can stand corrected.

 

[RandFan]

Sorry, I misunderstood your above post, gotcha this time.

What I've never been comfortable with is saying to people that we're the "only true religion." That was my toughest part of missionary work.

The classic answer that I always heard was simply that all churches contain some truth, it's just that the LDS contains all the truth. Therefore people can be lead to various religions due to the truthes that they contain. I believe that's the only way to reconcile this, though I can stand corrected.

Thanks Cat. Of course I don't believe that the LDS church contains all the truth (whatever that means ). I can live with that. I really do appreciate your contributions. to the thread.

 

[abaddon]

Having a plethora of wives speeds things up.

Or have sneaky pre-marital sex, like the BVM.

 

[StankApe]

How can you believe that crap though? it's the silliest thing this side of scientology!!! It's not rational! Jesus never existed much less visited America!

it just boggles my mind

 

[abaddon]

The classic answer that I always heard was simply that all churches contain some truth, it's just that the LDS contains all the truth.

Whoa, whoa, whoa there. What about the religions which have no reference to any christian god, do they contain some truth?

 

[dafydd]

How can you believe that crap though? it's the silliest thing this side of scientology!!! It's not rational! Jesus never existed much less visited America!

it just boggles my mind

It would have been a long walk across the water, even for him.

 

[dafydd]

Whoa, whoa, whoa there. What about the religions which have no reference to any christian god, do they contain some truth?

A very good question. I often ask Christians here if they believe that the Hindu pantheon of gods exist, but have yet to receive a straight answer.

 

[StankApe]

A very good question. I often ask Christians here if they believe that the Hindu pantheon of gods exist, but have yet to receive a straight answer.

It IS a good question because by believing in any god, one has opened themselves up to the idea that any deity could exist really. So it seems that any religious person woul be more likely to believe that another religion has some truth. (yet this tends to not be the case as many religious people see their religion as the ONLY TRUTH)

 

[Cat Tale]

Whoa, whoa, whoa there. What about the religions which have no reference to any christian god, do they contain some truth?

I said all churches, right? That would mean Xian and otherwise, in my opinion. I met a very nice Hindu lady while on my mission. She was really cool, dressed me in her real gold spun sari, one day, that was neat! She was with the Indian [iirc] government.

 

[dafydd]

Devout Hindus believe that their gods exist. Devout Christians believe that their god exists. Why should I believe the Christians and not the Hindus, that is what I want to know.

 

[Cat Tale]

Thanks Cat. Of course I don't believe that the LDS church contains all the truth (whatever that means ). I can live with that. I really do appreciate your contributions. to the thread.

I mean honestly, the questions the others are not answering are questions that I'm sure we both faced day after day in the mission field. It's not like these are anti-Mormon, they're just what we deal with. IOW, as I just said, they do get asked by honest, sincere people. Just like here.

 

[RandFan]

The classic answer that I always heard was simply that all churches contain some truth, it's just that the LDS contains all the truth. Therefore people can be lead to various religions due to the truthes that they contain.

Forgive me but I would like to say a bit more on this.

Cat, I don't know if you have taken a course in philosophy or critical thinking but this explanation of yours is a prime example of ad hoc explanation.

 

[RandFan]

I mean honestly, the questions the others are not answering are questions that I'm sure we both faced day after day in the mission field. It's not like these are anti-Mormon, they're just what we deal with. IOW, as I just said, they do get asked by honest, sincere people. Just like here.

Agreed.