Questions for Mormons

[Denmark]

..

 

[Ran77]

I don't know much about Mormonism but I have read in The Book Of Mormon and I have seen the Joseph Smith movie.

I would like to ask this:
Apart from the witness of the spirit, why do you think that Joseph Smith was sincere in his claims?

For me it is the Book of Mormon. I believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God because of the Book of Mormon, rather than the other way around. I had read the Book of Mormon all the way through, several times, before the topic of Joseph Smith ever came to my mind. When I read the Book of Mormon I feel the comforting feeling of the spirit and know that whenever I am having problems in life I can start reading it and will soon have an answer to my current dilemna. There is no doubt in my mind as to the Book of Mormon being the word of God (along with the Bible).

I also find that the teachings of Joseph Smith make sense to me. Much more so than the doctrines of orthodox Christianity. Or should I say, what many people consider orthodox Christianity, because I believe that the teachings Joseph Smith gave on Bible topics matches the original teachings found therein.

I hope that answers your question, if not feel free to ask more.

 

[joneysd]

Hi.

First of all I want to make it clear that I do not have a problem with the LDS church. In fact I admire their art and music.

I don't know much about Mormonism but I have read in The Book Of Mormon and I have seen the Joseph Smith movie.

I would like to ask this:
Apart from the witness of the spirit, why do you think that Joseph Smith was sincere in his claims?

I think it is the elephants in america and all the archaeological proof that helped me know it was the truth.

 

[Denmark]

I think it is the elephants in america and all the archaeological proof that helped me know it was the truth.

Can you be more specific?

 

[joneysd]

Can you be more specific?

the book of mormon speaks about elephants in the americas, the places stated in the book are all clearly true as is all the currency they have found along with all the weapons and bodies from the battles.

 

[TasteForTruth]

Hi.

First of all I want to make it clear that I do not have a problem with the LDS church. In fact I admire their art and music.

I don't know much about Mormonism but I have read in The Book Of Mormon and I have seen the Joseph Smith movie.

I would like to ask this:
Apart from the witness of the spirit, why do you think that Joseph Smith was sincere in his claims?

Apart from a witness of the spirit, I believe Joseph Smith was sincere because through reading his own words, and through "observing" his consistency as presented in histories about him and his life—histories both favorable and unfavorable toward him and his role as a prophet—I have judged him, in spite of his obvious flaws and weaknesses, to be someone whom I can trust. As a man, I judge him to be trustworthy. I have looked very closely at, and have "listened" very intently to, his own words. I have considered the charges against his character. I have examined the motives that critics have assigned to his various actions and works. I have compared these with the facts that history has surrendered to us—always paying careful attention to Joseph's responses in life to the same, or similar, charges—and I have found Joseph's testimony (generally speaking) to be internally consistent, and consistent with what facts are ours to examine.

I have not found that the choices he made, and the persistence with which he acted in alignment with his claims, were indicative of a person who could not be trusted. I have judged him to be a man willing to suffer great pains and losses to remain true to his conscience, and to the reality that he proclaimed, rather than submit to pressures from both friend and foe which most certainly would have secured for him a life devoid of persecution.

Were I a gambling man (and I'm not, although I used to be), I would place all my money confidently and without hesitation on the space that reads, "Joseph Smith was sincere in his claims." I don't think that necessarily makes his claims easier for any given person to believe or accept, but it is my honest and sincere answer, barring any of the other responses I could give which are more related to things spiritual (as if judging a man to be sincere and trustworthy were not as much a spiritual matter as it is a legal one).

 

[joneysd]

i think his seer stone made him seem very believable.

 

[joneysd]

Apart from a witness of the spirit, I believe Joseph Smith was sincere because through reading his own words, and through "observing" his consistency as presented in histories about him and his life—histories both favorable and unfavorable toward him and his role as a prophet—I have judged him, in spite of his obvious flaws and weaknesses, to be someone whom I can trust. As a man, I judge him to be trustworthy. I have looked very closely at, and have "listened" very intently to, his own words. I have considered the charges against his character. I have examined the motives that critics have assigned to his various actions and works. I have compared these with the facts that history has surrendered to us—always paying careful attention to Joseph's responses in life to the same, or similar, charges—and I have found Joseph's testimony (generally speaking) to be internally consistent, and consistent with what facts are ours to examine.

I have not found that the choices he made, and the persistence with which he acted in alignment with his claims, were indicative of a person who could not be trusted. I have judged him to be a man willing to suffer great pains and losses to remain true to his conscience, and to the reality that he proclaimed, rather than submit to pressures from both friend and foe which most certainly would have secured for him a life devoid of persecution.

Were I a gambling man (and I'm not, although I used to be), I would place all my money confidently and without hesitation on the space that reads, "Joseph Smith was sincere in his claims." I don't think that necessarily makes his claims easier for any given person to believe or accept, but it is my honest and sincere answer, barring any of the other responses I could give which are more related to things spiritual (as if judging a man to be sincere and trustworthy were not as much a spiritual matter as it is a legal one).

by that you don't think it is odd that under smith doctrine changed, the vision he claimed he had changed many times, since then the book of mormon has under gone many changes.
the fact that the next "prophet" can come along and totally change everything from the previous would give rise for concern.

 

[TasteForTruth]

by that you don't think it is odd that under smith doctrine changed, the vision he claimed he had changed many times, since then the book of mormon has under gone many changes.
the fact that the next "prophet" can come along and totally change everything from the previous would give rise for concern.

What I said sufficiently states my position and why it is my position. I needn't examine it through the lens of your interpretive bias.

 

[joneysd]

What I said sufficiently states my position and why it is my position. I needn't examine it through the lens of your interpretive bias.

so are you denying the vision has changed, are you denying the next prophet cannot change everything that went before them?

 

[TasteForTruth]

so are you denying the vision has changed, are you denying the next prophet cannot change everything that went before them?

What I am denying is that your bias has anything to do with my post.

 

[joneysd]

What I am denying is that your bias has anything to do with my post.

so if you are not denying the vision has changed many times and you are not denying that the next prophet can change everything that came before them it is not my bias is it, it is clearly fact.

 

[spiritandtruth2]

so if you are not denying the vision has changed many times and you are not denying that the next prophet can change everything that came before them it is not my bias is it, it is clearly fact.

I did read the Book of Mormon but is only about 180 years old and what I couldn't grasp was, to the Mormons, God is a glorified, perfected man.

He has a body of flesh and bone, but not of blood, in which dwells an eternal spirit which was difficult for me to comprehend.

We know none of the holy books can accurately trace human history back through 6,000 years, as does the Bible, which gives real insight to the truth, so I had a problem with it, as the Bible is to my mind is the only book with a universal message for all of mankind.

 

[joneysd]

I did read the Book of Mormon but is only about 180 years old and what I couldn't grasp was, to the Mormons, God is a glorified, perfected man.

He has a body of flesh and bone, but not of blood, in which dwells an eternal spirit which was difficult for me to comprehend.

We know none of the holy books can accurately trace human history back through 6,000 years, as does the Bible, which gives real insight to the truth, so I had a problem with it, as the Bible is to my mind is the only book with a universal message for all of mankind.

the BOM is not a great book that is the fact

 

[Ran77]

the BOM is not a great book that is the fact

No, it is an opinion. And if you can't tell the difference then I believe that the rest of your statement become suspect because of it.

 

[joneysd]

No, it is an opinion. And if you can't tell the difference then I believe that the rest of your statement become suspect because of it.

i think when you take in to account the lack of archaeological backing, the lack of geographical backing, the errors throughout it kinda says all you need to know.

 

[Moodshadow]

the next prophet can change or totally contradict what the last prophet said came from God without anyone even worrying.

This is technically true. A sitting LDS president - sustained by the body of the church to be a "prophet, seer, and revelator" - is believed to have the authority directly from God to make whatever changes are deemed appropriate in the church, no questions asked, even if it is in 180-degree opposition to a previous "revelation," and even though revelations are taught to be straight from the mouth of God, and even though God and His teachings are taught to be eternal. Polygamy is one example; extending the priesthood to the black races is another; the many changes to LDS scriptures and the temple ceremony and the so-called First Vision are others, and the list could go on and on. Current revelation trumps past revelation, and the members are supposed to fall in step. "When the prophet speaks, the thinking is done" is a sort of motto within the church, and while there is no hard-and-fast actual compulsion to obey, there certainly is unspoken pressure exerted, in many forms - which is a topic probably best left for another discussion.

 

[joneysd]

This is technically true. A sitting LDS president - sustained by the body of the church to be a "prophet, seer, and revelator" - is believed to have the authority directly from God to make whatever changes are deemed appropriate in the church, no questions asked, even if it is in 180-degree opposition to a previous "revelation," and even though revelations are taught to be straight from the mouth of God, and even though God and His teachings are taught to be eternal. Polygamy is one example; extending the priesthood to the black races is another; the many changes to LDS scriptures and the temple ceremony and the so-called First Vision are others, and the list could go on and on. Current revelation trumps past revelation, and the members are supposed to fall in step. "When the prophet speaks, the thinking is done" is a sort of motto within the church, and while there is no hard-and-fast actual compulsion to obey, there certainly is unspoken pressure exerted, in many forms - which is a topic probably best left for another discussion.

i find it amazing that the next prophet can contradict what came from God, allegedly, from the the last prophet, it makes no sense.

 

[Moodshadow]

i find it amazing that the next prophet can contradict what came from God, allegedly, from the the last prophet, it makes no sense.

You are correct - but it happens in the LDS church.

 

[joneysd]

You are correct - but it happens in the LDS church.

I know it does, I cannot understand why no one within the Lds questions the changes and turn a rounds.