What's so bad about the Book of Mormon?

[fatboys]

fatboys, she said she read it and formed the judgment for herself. How is that "[relying] on others for truth instead of finding out for themselves"?

Do you believe that the Book of Mormon is made up

 

[RhaegarTargaryen]

So part of your proof is an ancient book that you translated that has over 500 pages that you wrote the whole thing in less than two months. This should be interesting what are you calling it?

Yes, I have a book which is just as ancient as Joe's. I'm still translating it, from Old Zyxifloxian, though. But it's totally legit. Now, give me $10000000

 

[RhaegarTargaryen]

Do you believe that the Book of Mormon is made up

It's faker than Pamela Anderson's attributes.

 

[Ironhold]

Relevance?

Basically, the church's teachings already discourage the kind of behavior that critics of the church claim is supposed to happen when a "patriarchal" society exists.

 

[smaneck]

Basically, the church's teachings already discourage the kind of behavior that critics of the church claim is supposed to happen when a "patriarchal" society exists.

What you don't seem to understand is that a patriarchal society in itself is an offense to women whether or not it becomes abusive. Of course there are plenty of religions that don't allow women into the priesthood, but in the Mormon Church virtually every boy 12 years or older is a priest. That makes women's exclusion especially onerous.

 

[Zoness]

Okay but what is object able in the Book of Mormon

The Book of Mormon's claims are dubious in terms of history, archeology and linguistics. Those are the first things that jump out at me besides the bizarre phrasing that sounds like it comes from a different century than the book was written. The history is so many miles off that it simply hurts the credibility elsewhere. For example, why in Alma 18:9-12 does it mention chariots when its pretty well documented that no such thing as a chariot existed in Mesoamerica during the time? Same thing with horses. It seems odd to me that they'd be mentioned in an "ancient" text when the Spaniards didn't even bring them to the Americas until the 16th century. There are many such problems with the text relating to species of animals, languages, materials and so forth. I remember mentions of silk in Alma, Ether and (maybe? I forget) 1 Nephi but silk wasn't available in the Americas during the timeframe of the writing either. I suppose we could keep going down that rabbit hole but you wanted a high-level explanation.

I know you asked specifically about the Book of Mormon but I have major problems with the Book of Abraham as well, its origins and validity.Maybe the Book of Abraham should be a separate discussion thread?

What about claims of others who witnessed events and that were the same story. Are they lying

I'd have to say so or they were simply misled. The main motivator of my suspicion is multiple, contradictory accounts of Joseph Smith's First Vision. What did he see; an angel? two angels? Jesus? His original hand-written testimony said that he knew there was no correct church on Earth but years later his writer's said that he DIDN'T know that all existing Christian denominations were wrong. Upon perusing the accounts further it seems like there's some contradiction in what Joseph's age was when he had the vision. Combining that with the motive of the vision is dubious as well.



Long story short; there's too many glaring holes for me to overlook to them defer my entire worldview to a man that I do not trust....that is simply asking too much of me. It appears to me that the foundation that Mormon doctrine is constructed on is simply not compatible with history. I've met many wonderful Mormons over the years and I'm glad to call several of them good friends of mine but I simply cannot overlook these things in my evaluation of the religion and believe me, I've tried. I'm constantly seeking the truth and trying to find what belief system (if any) is worth adhering to and what the truth of the universe is, if there is any. We're all in this together.

 

[fatboys]

Yes, I have a book which is just as ancient as Joe's. I'm still translating it, from Old Zyxifloxian, though. But it's totally legit. Now, give me $10000000

It's in the mail

 

[mmksparbud]

Eden in Missouri---Is that not a glaring, neon, flashing red signal that somebody has their facts a tiny bit off?? How can anything they said be taken seriously with statements like that?---For crying out load---when somebody tells a joke, don't get mad at the audience for at the very minimum, chuckling.

 

[smaneck]

The Book of Mormon's claims are dubious in terms of history, archeology and linguistics. Those are the first things that jump out at me besides the bizarre phrasing that sounds like it comes from a different century than the book was written. The history is so many miles off that it simply hurts the credibility elsewhere. For example, why in Alma 18:9-12 does it mention chariots when its pretty well documented that no such thing as a chariot existed in Mesoamerica during the time? Same thing with horses. It seems odd to me that they'd be mentioned in an "ancient" text when the Spaniards didn't even bring them to the Americas until the 16th century.

Horses actually originated in the Americas and began migrating to Asia across the land bridge of Beringia at the same times as humans migrated the other direction. They were extinct in the Americas by 7500 years ago. There is evidence that humans hunted them during the Clovis period but they were never domesticated and Native Americans certainly had no chariots. In fact, they never made use of the wheel period except to make pottery. Chariots were first invented by Indo-Europeans around 3000 B.C.

 

[fatboys]

The Book of Mormon's claims are dubious in terms of history, archeology and linguistics. Those are the first things that jump out at me besides the bizarre phrasing that sounds like it comes from a different century than the book was written. The history is so many miles off that it simply hurts the credibility elsewhere. For example, why in Alma 18:9-12 does it mention chariots when its pretty well documented that no such thing as a chariot existed in Mesoamerica during the time? Same thing with horses. It seems odd to me that they'd be mentioned in an "ancient" text when the Spaniards didn't even bring them to the Americas until the 16th century. There are many such problems with the text relating to species of animals, languages, materials and so forth. I remember mentions of silk in Alma, Ether and (maybe? I forget) 1 Nephi but silk wasn't available in the Americas during the timeframe of the writing either. I suppose we could keep going down that rabbit hole but you wanted a high-level explanation.

I know you asked specifically about the Book of Mormon but I have major problems with the Book of Abraham as well, its origins and validity.Maybe the Book of Abraham should be a separate discussion thread?



I'd have to say so or they were simply misled. The main motivator of my suspicion is multiple, contradictory accounts of Joseph Smith's First Vision. What did he see; an angel? two angels? Jesus? His original hand-written testimony said that he knew there was no correct church on Earth but years later his writer's said that he DIDN'T know that all existing Christian denominations were wrong. Upon perusing the accounts further it seems like there's some contradiction in what Joseph's age was when he had the vision. Combining that with the motive of the vision is dubious as well.



Long story short; there's too many glaring holes for me to overlook to them defer my entire worldview to a man that I do not trust....that is simply asking too much of me. It appears to me that the foundation that Mormon doctrine is constructed on is simply not compatible with history. I've met many wonderful Mormons over the years and I'm glad to call several of them good friends of mine but I simply cannot overlook these things in my evaluation of the religion and believe me, I've tried. I'm constantly seeking the truth and trying to find what belief system (if any) is worth adhering to and what the truth of the universe is, if there is any. We're all in this together.

If your life was put under a magnifying glass how do you think you would fair. How many ways would people remember the things you said or did.

 

[mmksparbud]

If your life was put under a magnifying glass how do you think you would fair. How many ways would people remember the things you said or did.

It's one thing to have ones life story out in public--autobiographies are common, and well liked by most and usually taken at face value unless there are glaring lies and inconsistences. It is quite another to claim to be the voice of God, claim the bible is corrupted and that you have the only true way to salvation and rewrite history. Expect scrutiny with a 10X magnifying glass.

 

[smaneck]

Eden in Missouri-

Really. New Zealand would have been a so much better choice.

 

[Zoness]

Horses actually originated in the Americas and began migrating to Asia across the land bridge of Beringia at the same times as humans migrated the other direction. They were extinct in the Americas by 7500 years ago. There is evidence that humans hunted them during the Clovis period but they were never domesticated and Native Americans certainly had no chariots. In fact, they never made use of the wheel period except to make pottery. Chariots were first invented by Indo-Europeans around 3000 B.C.

Huh I didn't really know that much about horses in the Americas, thanks for the information Susan.

If your life was put under a magnifying glass how do you think you would fair. How many ways would people remember the things you said or did.

That depends, who is putting me under a magnifying glass and why? To see if I've committed crimes or if I am a good person? In the latter case, then how are we measuring "good"? I cannot presume to answer this question without a bit more information. That said, if we're talking about Joseph Smith. The man has made extraordinary claims and now has the burden of proof. His beliefs require me to believe that certain acts and heck even certain kinds of people are evil. It requires me to submit to a church organization and the guidance of men that I am not familiar with. I am absolutely going to dissect his beliefs.

In terms of witnesses and contradictions, many of the contradictions I listed were made by Joseph Smith himself. Again, if this a religion for the ages and I need to drop everything about my life to follow it (let's be honest, caffeine? I love the stuff.) then I'm going to require internal consistency first of the doctrine and foundational claims made.

 

[Zoness]

Really. New Zealand would have been a so much better choice.

Hah and I thought I was the only one thought this.

 

[smaneck]

Hah and I thought I was the only one thought this.

New Zealand is where God goes on vacation.

 

[MehGuy]

I do not know very much about Mormonism other than what I've seen from South Park, lol..

Regardless, I have to say that Mormons have about the coolest idea of an afterlife. Having your own planet and having endless celestial sex.

Unless I'm mistaken on that point, lol.

 

[Ironhold]

I do not know very much about Mormonism other than what I've seen from South Park, lol..

Regardless, I have to say that Mormons have about the coolest idea of an afterlife. Having your own planet and having endless celestial sex.

Unless I'm mistaken on that point, lol.

The "endless celestial sex" bit is a fabrication created by J. Edward Decker, a critic of the church.

Decker had been a member at one point, but faced excommunication for serial adultery; his first wife divorced him for the same reason. At some point later he wound up following his latest lady into her Protestant congregation, at which point he began making himself available as a speaker for those people who wanted material to trash the church with. "Sex" has come up quite a bit in his works, such that one could be forgiven for wondering if he has a fixation on the topic.

 

[drstevej]

http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/...ter-to-Ed-Decker&p=91674&viewfull=1#post91674

Ed Decker denies your claims Ironhold:

3) ed,have you ever committed adultery?

!no... How about you?

 

[Ironhold]

http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/...ter-to-Ed-Decker&p=91674&viewfull=1#post91674

Ed Decker denies your claims Ironhold:

His ex-wife says otherwise:

In an affidavit provided for the Brown's book on Decker and in photocopies of court documents, however, Decker first wife, Phyllis, contends that it was she who filed for divorce on the grounds of adultery and mental cruelty (Brown and Brown 1995:11-23). In her affidavit, Phyllis Decker Danielson alleges that "[during] the first ten years Ed and I were married, we moved twenty-six times [Phyllis also gave birth to five children in those ten years]. We moved a few more times in the remaining three years we were married. Ed had affairs for seven of those years and I was continually advised by the LDS church to forgive him" (Danielson, quoted in Brown and Brown 1995:9). Since Decker neither appeared in divorce court or made answer to the charges on which the divorce was sought, a default judgment was ordered in Phyllis Decker's favour on 29 April 1969 (cf. Brown and Brown 1995:12-5).

 

[smaneck]

Huh I didn't really know that much about horses in the Americas, thanks for the information Susan.

I'm just full of trivia. Camelids got their start in America as well, and traveled to Asia 2 or 3 million years ago.