LDS - Page 9

Slowvehicle · 29th December 2012, 07:26 AM

Originally Posted by Janadele

Nonsense. Copying lists from anti-Mormon sites and then expecting me to spend my time researching their claims, will not work. I have better things to do with my time. No doubt there are apologists who have already refuted their lists, over and over and over again... look them up.

Nonsense.
Post #167? Those claims are from your book. Be so good as to explain them.

I have done the research. I want to know your take on the inaccuracies.

...or are you claiming that The Book of Mormon is an "anti-mormon site?

(BTW: the "quote" function helps make it cleas to whom you are addressing your posts...)

Cleon · 29th December 2012, 07:38 AM

Originally Posted by Janadele

Nonsense. Copying lists from anti-Mormon sites and then expecting me to spend my time researching their claims, will not work. I have better things to do with my time. No doubt there are apologists who have already refuted their lists, over and over and over again... look them up.

Hand-waving doesn't make them go away, sorry. This isn't copied from some anti-Mormon site; I read the BoM itself. It mentions animals (like horses) and technology (like steel) that simply didn't exist in the American continent at the time. There's no getting away from that simple fact.

Cleon · 29th December 2012, 07:38 AM

Originally Posted by Janadele

You will need to enquire elsewhere for information on the Community of Christ. It is not my interest to discuss or criticise other denominations.

I'm looking for a compare/contrast. CoC and LDS both look to the Book of Mormon. Why is LDS correct, and CoC incorrect?

Janadele · 29th December 2012, 07:46 AM

What inaccuracies? Whatever is in the Book of Mormon is fact. It is Scripture.

So are you saying that you did not copy lists from anti-Mormon sites, but that instead you yourself read the Book of Mormon and isolated these quotes and researched yourself to prove that they were inaccurate?

How did you do such research? You were not living at that time and place in mortality. You may well have witnessed as a pre mortal spirit, but then you have no memory of that time.

Agatha · 29th December 2012, 07:47 AM

It's not anti-Mormon to point out that there are errors of fact contained within the book of Mormon. Nobody is saying you should not believe, if that's what you choose.

What we are asking is your position on these errors, such as the mention of a compass 1800 years before the compass was invented, or cows and horses being in the Americas 2000 years before they were actually brought there. There's a list of quotes from the Book of Mormon in this post. http://forums.randi.org/showthread.p...93#post8876193

Do you claim that the book of Mormon is right, and historians/biologists/physicists/archaeologists (etc) all round the world are wrong, or do you accept that there are errors in the book of Mormon? If you do accept that there are clear errors of fact, how do you rationalise these with your faith?

Asking questions and pointing out errors is not anti-Mormon and it's not anti-faith. You came here to talk to people about your faith, nobody forced you to come here. We've done you the courtesy of listening, so now please return the same courtesy and explain your faith instead of running away from the questions.

sackett · 29th December 2012, 07:50 AM

Do you sorta get the feeling that Janadele has never read the entire Book of Mormon? Few have; certainly I never kept awake past the 100th. And it came to pass.

Here's a title I'm pretty damn sure she's never cracked: No Man Knows My History, by Shawn Brodie. It's a cracking fine bio of Joe Smith, written by a Mormon.

That's right, Janadele: I dare ya!

Cleon · 29th December 2012, 07:52 AM

Originally Posted by Janadele

What inaccuracies?

As said before: Horses, chariots, steel, compasses, etc.

Quote:

Whatever is in the Book of Mormon is fact. It is Scripture.

So are you saying that you did not copy lists from anti-Mormon sites,

I've don't recall ever actually having visited an anti-Mormon site, believe it or not.

Quote:

but that instead you yourself read the Book of Mormon and isolated these quotes and researched yourself to prove that they were inaccurate?

Other way around. I studied North American archaeology and ethnohistory prior to reading the BoM. By the time I was through I Nephi it was obvious to me that the book was anything but fact.

angrysoba · 29th December 2012, 07:57 AM

Originally Posted by sackett

do you sorta get the feeling that janadele has never read the entire book of mormon? Few have; certainly i never kept awake past the 100th. And it came to pass.

Here's a title i'm pretty damn sure she's never cracked: no man knows my history, by sh Fawn brodie. It's a cracking fine bio of joe smith, written by a mormon.

That's right, janadele: I dare ya!

ftfy

Janadele · 29th December 2012, 08:01 AM

Fawn Brodie is an anti-Mormon and was excommunicated from the LDS Church.

sackett · 29th December 2012, 08:06 AM

Originally Posted by Janadele

Fawn Brodie is an anti-Mormon.

My lord, you have just ridden over her dead body.

eir_de_scania · 29th December 2012, 08:25 AM

No wonder I feel sympathetic towards neo-pagam movements; their followers thinks it's up to you to find your own path.

All religion claim to be true, why pick one where you have to wear uncomfortable special underwear?

Janadele · 29th December 2012, 08:27 AM

Personally I have no interest in refuting anything in the Book of Mormon. It is Scripture, as is the Holy Bible, Pearl of Great Price, and Doctrine and Covenants.

The following link to Fair addresses such issues for those who have concerns,
Fair is not an official LDS site.
http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Anachronisms

Shalamar · 29th December 2012, 08:33 AM

Janadele, it's obvious that you are not here to actually discuss your church. You want to discuss your faith, however these are or the same things.

You believe what you believe because you believe it. Circular, though it makes most people scratch their heads. Others here have pointed out the problems that exist I your own holy book, and you seem to be unwilling to discuss them. To me, that means you really don't have faith, let alone an understanding of your religion. You stick your fi gets your ears while claiming that you won't hear the words of satan or those who disparage your church. You cannot face them, I your own thread, that you cared to discuss your religion!

You follow a religion. That seems to treat certain segment to of their followers as second class citizens. Homosexuals are denied the love they feel, and the intimacy they crave, because your vile book demands it. Even worse, your church tries to e vice this practice on tone who do not believe in Mormonism! Then you haw women who appear to be expected to marry and have children early on life. No dreams for them! No careers, no life outside having children and obeying their husband. Can women even be priests? Hold offices of power over men In your religion?

DragonLady · 29th December 2012, 08:33 AM

Originally Posted by Janadele

Fawn Brodie is an anti-Mormon and was excommunicated from the LDS Church.

Okay; so now she's been excommunicated, what does that mean for her immortal, eternal soul?

RandFan · 29th December 2012, 08:33 AM

Originally Posted by Janadele

Fawn Brodie is an anti-Mormon and was excommunicated from the LDS Church.

Fawn Brodie was a decent honest and very intelligent woman. Her work is scholarly and has stood the test of time and there is no evidence that Brodie was malicious.

Cleon · 29th December 2012, 08:34 AM

Originally Posted by Janadele

Personally I have no interest in refuting anything in the Book of Mormon. It is Scripture, as is the Holy Bible, Pearl of Great Price, and Doctrine and Covenants.

Yes, I'm sure you don't want to talk about the blatant fraud that is the "Book of Abraham."

Quote:

The following link to Fair addresses such issues for those who have concerns,
Fair is not an official LDS site.
http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Anachronisms

Yeah, I've seen that site before. They "address" the anachronisms by simply making stuff up. For example, by "horses," maybe the BoM really means "deer." I'm not making that up - that's seriously the kind of ridiculous crap they come up with.

There's a reason why "FAIR" isn't taken seriously by, well, anyone outside of the Church.

Janadele · 29th December 2012, 08:38 AM

No one "has" to do so. In fact only members who are worthy to hold a Temple Recommend and whose recommend is current, are allowed to enter an LDS Temple and be issued with Temple Garments.

Originally Posted by eir_de_scania

... why pick one where you have to wear uncomfortable special underwear?

RandFan · 29th December 2012, 08:43 AM

Originally Posted by Cleon

Yes, I'm sure you don't want to talk about the blatant fraud that is the "Book of Abraham."

Yeah, I've seen that site before. They "address" the anachronisms by simply making stuff up. For example, by "horses," maybe the BoM really means "deer." I'm not making that up - that's seriously the kind of ridiculous crap they come up with.

There's a reason why "FAIR" isn't taken seriously by, well, anyone outside of the Church.

There are things that are spectacularly wrong. Why wheat and barley and not maize? Smith could not have known about DNA but he could have known about native crops had he done some research.

Janadele · 29th December 2012, 08:44 AM

That is not so Rand. Being excommunicated is not a light matter.

Originally Posted by RandFan

Fawn Brodie was a decent honest and very intelligent woman. Her work is scholarly and has stood the test of time and there is no evidence that Brodie was malicious.

TheRedWorm · 29th December 2012, 08:47 AM

I asked this in another thread, and I'll ask it again here, as no one responded.

Why would a being as powerful as believers think that god is give too much of a care about our brand of particularly hairless ape?

Agatha · 29th December 2012, 08:48 AM

Originally Posted by Janadele

Personally I have no interest in refuting anything in the Book of Mormon. It is Scripture, as is the Holy Bible, Pearl of Great Price, and Doctrine and Covenants.

The following link to Fair addresses such issues for those who have concerns,
Fair is not an official LDS site.
http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Anachronisms

You weren't being asked to refute anything. You were being asked whether you accept that the Book of Mormon contains errors.

Janadele · 29th December 2012, 08:51 AM

I love the book of Abraham. It is enlightening. This is one of my favourites:

In the Pearl of Great Price. The Book of Abraham, Chapter 3 verses 22 to 27 we read:

22 Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the Noble and Great ones;

23 And God saw these souls that they were good, and He stood in the midst of them, and He said: These I will make my rulers; for He stood among those that were Spirits, and he saw that they were good; and He said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born.

24 And there stood one among them that was like unto God, and He said unto those who were with Him: We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell;

25 And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them;

26 And they who keep their first estate shall be added upon; and they who keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom with those who keep their first estate; and they who keep their second estate shall have glory added upon their heads for ever and ever.

27 And the Lord said: Whom shall I send? And one answered like unto the Son of Man: Here am I, send me. And another answered and said: Here am I, send me. And the Lord said: I will send the first.

Originally Posted by Cleon

Yes, I'm sure you don't want to talk about the blatant fraud that is the "Book of Abraham."

Janadele · 29th December 2012, 08:53 AM

Red Worm,
We are His Children.

Originally Posted by TheRedWorm

I asked this in another thread, and I'll ask it again here, as no one responded.

Why would a being as powerful as believers think that god is give too much of a care about our brand of particularly hairless ape?

sackett · 29th December 2012, 08:53 AM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Fawn Brodie was a decent honest and very intelligent woman. Her work is scholarly and has stood the test of time and there is no evidence that Brodie was malicious.

All true.

I would only opine that maybe Brodie was a little too much the psychologist-historian, that is, she enjoyed shrinking her subjects' heads more than is necessary to tell their stories. Certainly in our own time we've learned to identify a smirking con-man like J. Smith after just one whiff of snake-oil, and don't need to analyse him very extensively. The narcissistic personality is easy to detect, and, once detected, easy to avoid.

I think Brodie rather liked Smith, maybe even had a crush on him (many did), and was saddened by his trajectory. Malice? She saved that for worthier targets, like Richard Nixon.

No Man Knows Etc. would make one helluva fine movie. A comedy, of course.

RandFan · 29th December 2012, 08:54 AM

Originally Posted by Janadele

That is not so Rand. Being excommunicated is not a light matter.

She was excommunicated for her conscience.

The Mormon Church has the right to kick her out of the Church but it demonstrates absolutely nothing and an attempt to use the excommunication as proof of something is a fallacy as it's self serving. The Mormon Church is not a neutral party. You can't use a self serving act to demonstrate anything.

BTW: It's what all cults do. It's actually one of the signs of a cult. Shaming. Ostracizing. IMO: It's a monstrous thing that often divides families unnecessarily. The purpose of religion is to control people and make money. The best way to make money is to get people to give it to you for doing nothing.

You wanta make real money, you gotta start a religion! --L. Ron Hubbard

TheRedWorm · 29th December 2012, 08:54 AM

Originally Posted by Janadele

Red Worm,
We are His Children.

No, we are not. We are our parent's children. Why should a god care about our particular evolutionary lineage?

RandFan · 29th December 2012, 08:56 AM

Originally Posted by Janadele

I love the book of Abraham. It is enlightening. This is one of my favourites:

It's a demonstrable fraud.

Shalamar · 29th December 2012, 08:58 AM

Originally Posted by RandFan

It's a demonstrable fraud.

Link seems to be broken there.

Pup · 29th December 2012, 09:07 AM

Originally Posted by Janadele

Pup... Our Heavenly Father is the greatest of all mathematicians and scientists, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not refute true science, but certainly does not support the theories of Darwin... as also does not Henry Eyring. The word evolution does not automatically mean human beings come from monkeys... far from it. I would suggest you read Henry Eyrings books for the real meanings and not take words out of context or from dubious publications.

So how do you feel about Stephen L. Peck? Those were his own words I quoted, with a link to a complete essay he wrote and chose to have published in a Salt Lake City newspaper, which seems to meet your standard of evidence above.

You simply cannot escape the fact that there are many faithful members of the LDS Church in good standing, who support the theory of evolution and the fact that humans evolved from animals.

Refusing to believe it is your choice, but it is not a requirement to be a member of the church, and your words above would be in conflict with many members of the church. Including my wife.

RandFan · 29th December 2012, 09:09 AM

Originally Posted by Shalamar

Link seems to be broken there.

Fixed. Thank you. Here it is again.

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4168

Janadele · 29th December 2012, 09:11 AM

Shalamar: Of course not, why would they?

The responsibility of holding the Priesthood of God is only given to worthy males.

Women have the sacred duty of Motherhood... they also teach, speak at services, play the organ, sing in choirs... and assist in many important ways.

They do not need to "Hold offices of power over men".

Originally Posted by Shalamar

Janadele... Can women even be priests? Hold offices of power over men In your religion?

RandFan · 29th December 2012, 09:12 AM

Originally Posted by Janadele

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not refute true science, but certainly does not support the theories of Darwin...

BYU teaches evolution.

BYU:Evolution and the Origin of Man

RandFan · 29th December 2012, 09:16 AM

Originally Posted by Janadele

They do not need to "Hold offices of power over men".

Men don't need it either.

Shalamar · 29th December 2012, 09:18 AM

Originally Posted by Janadele

Shalamar: Of course not, why would they?

The responsibility of holding the Priesthood of God is only given to worthy males.

Women have the sacred duty of Motherhood... they also teach, speak at services, play the organ, sing in choirs... and assist in many important ways.

They do not need to "Hold offices of power over men".

And why not? Women can be, and are, leaders of industry, CEO's of companies, and even rulers of countries. Why would your church limit women who would have the capacity to lead well, and force them to merely 'assist'?

This is only one of the bigoted things I do not like about your religion. It holds people back.

RandFan · 29th December 2012, 09:21 AM

Originally Posted by RandFan

BYU teaches evolution.

BYU:Evolution and the Origin of Man

BTW: That is the Church's official postition and not the BYU course. Sorry.

Quote:

The scriptures tell why man was created, but they do not tell how...

Leave geology, biology, archaeology, and anthropology, no one of which has to do with the salvation of the soul of mankind, to scientific research, while we magnify our calling in the realm of the Church....

DragonLady · 29th December 2012, 09:31 AM

Quote:

25 And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them;

26 And they who keep their first estate shall be added upon; and they who keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom with those who keep their first estate; and they who keep their second estate shall have glory added upon their heads for ever and ever.

And what of those who do not "keep their estates"? Is it -in your heart- morally acceptable for a higher being to play favorites?

It makes me think of Noah's flood. So many Christians seem to just focus on the handful of survivors, and completely wave off the deliberate destruction of everyone else. The idea that it's morally acceptable for God to commit genocide in order to prove a point is something I cannot wrap my head around.

Mormonism is clearly no different. You have those you believe made all the right choices, and they are the favorites...and on down the line 'til you reach those who heard a different drummer, and they are outcasts or worse.

How do you reconcile that? How can you think that through and decide it's okay?

Cleon · 29th December 2012, 09:47 AM

Originally Posted by RandFan

It's a demonstrable fraud.

s/demonstrable/blatant/.

It must've sounded really good back before we learned how to read Egyptian hieroglyphics.

kerikiwi · 29th December 2012, 09:58 AM

Originally Posted by Janadele

Shalamar: Of course not, why would they?

The responsibility of holding the Priesthood of God is only given to worthy males.

Women have the sacred duty of Motherhood... they also teach, speak at services, play the organ, sing in choirs... and assist in many important ways.

They do not need to "Hold offices of power over men".

May I ask why you think men need to hold offices of power over women?
And what are the consequences for women who fail to fulfill their scared duty of motherhood?

Oh, and may I also ask that you quote first, then reply.
It is a more logical sequence.

RandFan · 29th December 2012, 10:04 AM

Originally Posted by Cleon

s/demonstrable/blatant/.

It must've sounded really good back before we learned how to read Egyptian hieroglyphics.

Oh yeah. Funny thing is that the Rosetta Stone had already been discovered (1799) ensuring the montebank would eventually be exposed.

jsfisher · 29th December 2012, 11:18 AM

Ever watch the TV series, The Prisoner? It is something of an underground classic, and well-worth the viewing time. In one of the episodes (Episode 6, curiously enough), all the residents of the village are exposed to "Speed Learn" in which a three-year college sequence in history is instilled in a matter of minutes.

There are several aspects of the episode I won't dwell on here (although they are topical); I bring it up because it turned out that the students of Speed Learn translated any question they were asked into one of the questions they were taught.

I have now asked twice, Janadele, about how do you know that most dead mortals await one of the ordinances by proxy. Each time, you have responded to a question I did not ask. Perhaps my question was easily misinterpreted, so permit me to try again:

Please, you said:

Quote:

Most deceased mortals are waiting anxiously for their families to do this work for them

How do you know that it is most dead mortals, not just some; and how do you know they wait anxiously?

29th December 2012, 07:26 AM	#321
Slowvehicle Master Poster Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: ...not where I seemed, nor was calculated to be...but no-one need worry... Posts: 2,156	Originally Posted by Janadele Nonsense. Copying lists from anti-Mormon sites and then expecting me to spend my time researching their claims, will not work. I have better things to do with my time. No doubt there are apologists who have already refuted their lists, over and over and over again... look them up. Nonsense. Post #167? Those claims are from your book. Be so good as to explain them. I have done the research. I want to know your take on the inaccuracies. ...or are you claiming that The Book of Mormon is an "anti-mormon site? (BTW: the "quote" function helps make it cleas to whom you are addressing your posts...)
	__________________ "Science is a wall against which we crash all of our ideas. The ones that survive are the ones we keep, but they are still subjected to periodic crash tests." -Foster Zygote "And in science the default is that you're wrong. EVERYONE is wrong. You only can be not wrong if you have evidence to back up your claim." -Dinwar "That is not my circus; those are not my monkeys." -Howard Tayler

29th December 2012, 07:38 AM	#322
Cleon King of the Pod People Moderator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 20,510	Originally Posted by Janadele Nonsense. Copying lists from anti-Mormon sites and then expecting me to spend my time researching their claims, will not work. I have better things to do with my time. No doubt there are apologists who have already refuted their lists, over and over and over again... look them up. Hand-waving doesn't make them go away, sorry. This isn't copied from some anti-Mormon site; I read the BoM itself. It mentions animals (like horses) and technology (like steel) that simply didn't exist in the American continent at the time. There's no getting away from that simple fact.
	__________________ "People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz." - Newt Gingrich

29th December 2012, 07:38 AM	#323
Cleon King of the Pod People Moderator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 20,510	Originally Posted by Janadele You will need to enquire elsewhere for information on the Community of Christ. It is not my interest to discuss or criticise other denominations. I'm looking for a compare/contrast. CoC and LDS both look to the Book of Mormon. Why is LDS correct, and CoC incorrect?
	__________________ "People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz." - Newt Gingrich

29th December 2012, 07:46 AM	#324
Janadele Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: East Coast Australia Posts: 1,736	What inaccuracies? Whatever is in the Book of Mormon is fact. It is Scripture. So are you saying that you did not copy lists from anti-Mormon sites, but that instead you yourself read the Book of Mormon and isolated these quotes and researched yourself to prove that they were inaccurate? How did you do such research? You were not living at that time and place in mortality. You may well have witnessed as a pre mortal spirit, but then you have no memory of that time.
	__________________ All articles reproduced are in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use, for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Choose ye this day whom you will serve. As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

29th December 2012, 07:47 AM	#325
Agatha Winking at the Moon Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: UK Posts: 4,215	It's not anti-Mormon to point out that there are errors of fact contained within the book of Mormon. Nobody is saying you should not believe, if that's what you choose. What we are asking is your position on these errors, such as the mention of a compass 1800 years before the compass was invented, or cows and horses being in the Americas 2000 years before they were actually brought there. There's a list of quotes from the Book of Mormon in this post. http://forums.randi.org/showthread.p...93#post8876193 Do you claim that the book of Mormon is right, and historians/biologists/physicists/archaeologists (etc) all round the world are wrong, or do you accept that there are errors in the book of Mormon? If you do accept that there are clear errors of fact, how do you rationalise these with your faith? Asking questions and pointing out errors is not anti-Mormon and it's not anti-faith. You came here to talk to people about your faith, nobody forced you to come here. We've done you the courtesy of listening, so now please return the same courtesy and explain your faith instead of running away from the questions.
	__________________ People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually, from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly... timey wimey... stuff.

29th December 2012, 07:50 AM	#326
sackett Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Detroit Posts: 3,610	Do you sorta get the feeling that Janadele has never read the entire Book of Mormon? Few have; certainly I never kept awake past the 100th. And it came to pass. Here's a title I'm pretty damn sure she's never cracked: No Man Knows My History, by Shawn Brodie. It's a cracking fine bio of Joe Smith, written by a Mormon. That's right, Janadele: I dare ya!
	__________________ Dyslexic and prond!

29th December 2012, 07:52 AM	#327
Cleon King of the Pod People Moderator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 20,510	Originally Posted by Janadele What inaccuracies? As said before: Horses, chariots, steel, compasses, etc. Quote: Whatever is in the Book of Mormon is fact. It is Scripture. So are you saying that you did not copy lists from anti-Mormon sites, I've don't recall ever actually having visited an anti-Mormon site, believe it or not. Quote: but that instead you yourself read the Book of Mormon and isolated these quotes and researched yourself to prove that they were inaccurate? Other way around. I studied North American archaeology and ethnohistory prior to reading the BoM. By the time I was through I Nephi it was obvious to me that the book was anything but fact.
	__________________ "People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz." - Newt Gingrich

29th December 2012, 07:57 AM	#328
angrysoba Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 8,509	Originally Posted by sackett do you sorta get the feeling that janadele has never read the entire book of mormon? Few have; certainly i never kept awake past the 100th. And it came to pass. Here's a title i'm pretty damn sure she's never cracked: no man knows my history, by sh Fawn brodie. It's a cracking fine bio of joe smith, written by a mormon. That's right, janadele: I dare ya! ftfy

29th December 2012, 08:01 AM	#329
Janadele Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: East Coast Australia Posts: 1,736	Fawn Brodie is an anti-Mormon and was excommunicated from the LDS Church.
	__________________ All articles reproduced are in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use, for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Choose ye this day whom you will serve. As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord. Last edited by Janadele; 29th December 2012 at 08:06 AM.

29th December 2012, 08:06 AM	#330
sackett Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Detroit Posts: 3,610	Shawn? Fawn? Don't bother me with details! Originally Posted by Janadele Fawn Brodie is an anti-Mormon. My lord, you have just ridden over her dead body.
	__________________ Dyslexic and prond!

29th December 2012, 08:25 AM	#331
eir_de_scania Thinker Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: South Sweden Posts: 153	No wonder I feel sympathetic towards neo-pagam movements; their followers thinks it's up to you to find your own path. All religion claim to be true, why pick one where you have to wear uncomfortable special underwear?
	__________________ Never mind what should be or what might be or what ought to be. It's what's things are that's important" Granny Weatherwax

29th December 2012, 08:27 AM	#332
Janadele Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: East Coast Australia Posts: 1,736	Personally I have no interest in refuting anything in the Book of Mormon. It is Scripture, as is the Holy Bible, Pearl of Great Price, and Doctrine and Covenants. The following link to Fair addresses such issues for those who have concerns, Fair is not an official LDS site. http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Anachronisms
	__________________ All articles reproduced are in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use, for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Choose ye this day whom you will serve. As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

29th December 2012, 08:33 AM	#333
Shalamar Dark Lord of the JREF Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Super Star Destroyer Executor Posts: 2,396	Janadele, it's obvious that you are not here to actually discuss your church. You want to discuss your faith, however these are or the same things. You believe what you believe because you believe it. Circular, though it makes most people scratch their heads. Others here have pointed out the problems that exist I your own holy book, and you seem to be unwilling to discuss them. To me, that means you really don't have faith, let alone an understanding of your religion. You stick your fi gets your ears while claiming that you won't hear the words of satan or those who disparage your church. You cannot face them, I your own thread, that you cared to discuss your religion! You follow a religion. That seems to treat certain segment to of their followers as second class citizens. Homosexuals are denied the love they feel, and the intimacy they crave, because your vile book demands it. Even worse, your church tries to e vice this practice on tone who do not believe in Mormonism! Then you haw women who appear to be expected to marry and have children early on life. No dreams for them! No careers, no life outside having children and obeying their husband. Can women even be priests? Hold offices of power over men In your religion?
	__________________ "The truth is out there. But the lies are inside your head."

29th December 2012, 08:33 AM	#334
DragonLady Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Under the Starry, Starry Night Posts: 1,829	Originally Posted by Janadele Fawn Brodie is an anti-Mormon and was excommunicated from the LDS Church. Okay; so now she's been excommunicated, what does that mean for her immortal, eternal soul?
	__________________ It's NOT denial. I'm just very selective about the reality I accept. -- Calvin (Calvin and Hobbes) The Gweat and Tewwible Winged One

29th December 2012, 08:33 AM	#335
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,156	Originally Posted by Janadele Fawn Brodie is an anti-Mormon and was excommunicated from the LDS Church. Fawn Brodie was a decent honest and very intelligent woman. Her work is scholarly and has stood the test of time and there is no evidence that Brodie was malicious.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

29th December 2012, 08:34 AM	#336
Cleon King of the Pod People Moderator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 20,510	Originally Posted by Janadele Personally I have no interest in refuting anything in the Book of Mormon. It is Scripture, as is the Holy Bible, Pearl of Great Price, and Doctrine and Covenants. Yes, I'm sure you don't want to talk about the blatant fraud that is the "Book of Abraham." Quote: The following link to Fair addresses such issues for those who have concerns, Fair is not an official LDS site. http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Anachronisms Yeah, I've seen that site before. They "address" the anachronisms by simply making stuff up. For example, by "horses," maybe the BoM really means "deer." I'm not making that up - that's seriously the kind of ridiculous crap they come up with. There's a reason why "FAIR" isn't taken seriously by, well, anyone outside of the Church.
	__________________ "People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz." - Newt Gingrich

29th December 2012, 08:38 AM	#337
Janadele Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: East Coast Australia Posts: 1,736	No one "has" to do so. In fact only members who are worthy to hold a Temple Recommend and whose recommend is current, are allowed to enter an LDS Temple and be issued with Temple Garments. Originally Posted by eir_de_scania ... why pick one where you have to wear uncomfortable special underwear?
	__________________ All articles reproduced are in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use, for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Choose ye this day whom you will serve. As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

29th December 2012, 08:43 AM	#338
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,156	Originally Posted by Cleon Yes, I'm sure you don't want to talk about the blatant fraud that is the "Book of Abraham." Yeah, I've seen that site before. They "address" the anachronisms by simply making stuff up. For example, by "horses," maybe the BoM really means "deer." I'm not making that up - that's seriously the kind of ridiculous crap they come up with. There's a reason why "FAIR" isn't taken seriously by, well, anyone outside of the Church. There are things that are spectacularly wrong. Why wheat and barley and not maize? Smith could not have known about DNA but he could have known about native crops had he done some research.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

29th December 2012, 08:44 AM	#339
Janadele Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: East Coast Australia Posts: 1,736	That is not so Rand. Being excommunicated is not a light matter. Originally Posted by RandFan Fawn Brodie was a decent honest and very intelligent woman. Her work is scholarly and has stood the test of time and there is no evidence that Brodie was malicious.
	__________________ All articles reproduced are in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use, for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Choose ye this day whom you will serve. As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

29th December 2012, 08:47 AM	#340
TheRedWorm I AM the Red Worm! Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Body: Michigan, Heart: Chicago Posts: 3,886	I asked this in another thread, and I'll ask it again here, as no one responded. Why would a being as powerful as believers think that god is give too much of a care about our brand of particularly hairless ape?
	__________________ See I'm not a monster, I'm just ahead of the curve. -Joker Working them to death is murder. Making them live like pigs and dying from disease is murder. Shooting them next to a ditch is murder. Digging them up and burning them to hide your murder, is extra credit evil. -beachnut

29th December 2012, 08:48 AM	#341
Agatha Winking at the Moon Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: UK Posts: 4,215	Originally Posted by Janadele Personally I have no interest in refuting anything in the Book of Mormon. It is Scripture, as is the Holy Bible, Pearl of Great Price, and Doctrine and Covenants. The following link to Fair addresses such issues for those who have concerns, Fair is not an official LDS site. http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Anachronisms You weren't being asked to refute anything. You were being asked whether you accept that the Book of Mormon contains errors.
	__________________ People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually, from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly... timey wimey... stuff.

29th December 2012, 08:51 AM	#342
Janadele Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: East Coast Australia Posts: 1,736	I love the book of Abraham. It is enlightening. This is one of my favourites: In the Pearl of Great Price. The Book of Abraham, Chapter 3 verses 22 to 27 we read: 22 Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the Noble and Great ones; 23 And God saw these souls that they were good, and He stood in the midst of them, and He said: These I will make my rulers; for He stood among those that were Spirits, and he saw that they were good; and He said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born. 24 And there stood one among them that was like unto God, and He said unto those who were with Him: We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell; 25 And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them; 26 And they who keep their first estate shall be added upon; and they who keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom with those who keep their first estate; and they who keep their second estate shall have glory added upon their heads for ever and ever. 27 And the Lord said: Whom shall I send? And one answered like unto the Son of Man: Here am I, send me. And another answered and said: Here am I, send me. And the Lord said: I will send the first. Originally Posted by Cleon Yes, I'm sure you don't want to talk about the blatant fraud that is the "Book of Abraham."
	__________________ All articles reproduced are in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use, for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Choose ye this day whom you will serve. As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

29th December 2012, 08:53 AM	#343
Janadele Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: East Coast Australia Posts: 1,736	Red Worm, We are His Children. Originally Posted by TheRedWorm I asked this in another thread, and I'll ask it again here, as no one responded. Why would a being as powerful as believers think that god is give too much of a care about our brand of particularly hairless ape?
	__________________ All articles reproduced are in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use, for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Choose ye this day whom you will serve. As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

29th December 2012, 08:53 AM	#344
sackett Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Detroit Posts: 3,610	Originally Posted by RandFan Fawn Brodie was a decent honest and very intelligent woman. Her work is scholarly and has stood the test of time and there is no evidence that Brodie was malicious. All true. I would only opine that maybe Brodie was a little too much the psychologist-historian, that is, she enjoyed shrinking her subjects' heads more than is necessary to tell their stories. Certainly in our own time we've learned to identify a smirking con-man like J. Smith after just one whiff of snake-oil, and don't need to analyse him very extensively. The narcissistic personality is easy to detect, and, once detected, easy to avoid. I think Brodie rather liked Smith, maybe even had a crush on him (many did), and was saddened by his trajectory. Malice? She saved that for worthier targets, like Richard Nixon. No Man Knows Etc. would make one helluva fine movie. A comedy, of course.
	__________________ Dyslexic and prond!

29th December 2012, 08:54 AM	#345
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,156	Originally Posted by Janadele That is not so Rand. Being excommunicated is not a light matter. She was excommunicated for her conscience. The Mormon Church has the right to kick her out of the Church but it demonstrates absolutely nothing and an attempt to use the excommunication as proof of something is a fallacy as it's self serving. The Mormon Church is not a neutral party. You can't use a self serving act to demonstrate anything. BTW: It's what all cults do. It's actually one of the signs of a cult. Shaming. Ostracizing. IMO: It's a monstrous thing that often divides families unnecessarily. The purpose of religion is to control people and make money. The best way to make money is to get people to give it to you for doing nothing. You wanta make real money, you gotta start a religion! --L. Ron Hubbard
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

29th December 2012, 08:54 AM	#346
TheRedWorm I AM the Red Worm! Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Body: Michigan, Heart: Chicago Posts: 3,886	Originally Posted by Janadele Red Worm, We are His Children. No, we are not. We are our parent's children. Why should a god care about our particular evolutionary lineage?
	__________________ See I'm not a monster, I'm just ahead of the curve. -Joker Working them to death is murder. Making them live like pigs and dying from disease is murder. Shooting them next to a ditch is murder. Digging them up and burning them to hide your murder, is extra credit evil. -beachnut

29th December 2012, 08:56 AM	#347
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,156	Originally Posted by Janadele I love the book of Abraham. It is enlightening. This is one of my favourites: It's a demonstrable fraud.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith Last edited by RandFan; 29th December 2012 at 09:09 AM.

29th December 2012, 08:58 AM	#348
Shalamar Dark Lord of the JREF Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Super Star Destroyer Executor Posts: 2,396	Originally Posted by RandFan It's a demonstrable fraud. Link seems to be broken there.
	__________________ "The truth is out there. But the lies are inside your head."

29th December 2012, 09:07 AM	#349
Pup Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 3,589	Originally Posted by Janadele Pup... Our Heavenly Father is the greatest of all mathematicians and scientists, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not refute true science, but certainly does not support the theories of Darwin... as also does not Henry Eyring. The word evolution does not automatically mean human beings come from monkeys... far from it. I would suggest you read Henry Eyrings books for the real meanings and not take words out of context or from dubious publications. So how do you feel about Stephen L. Peck? Those were his own words I quoted, with a link to a complete essay he wrote and chose to have published in a Salt Lake City newspaper, which seems to meet your standard of evidence above. You simply cannot escape the fact that there are many faithful members of the LDS Church in good standing, who support the theory of evolution and the fact that humans evolved from animals. Refusing to believe it is your choice, but it is not a requirement to be a member of the church, and your words above would be in conflict with many members of the church. Including my wife.
Pup Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 3,589

29th December 2012, 09:09 AM	#350
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,156	Originally Posted by Shalamar Link seems to be broken there. Fixed. Thank you. Here it is again. http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4168
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

29th December 2012, 09:11 AM	#351
Janadele Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: East Coast Australia Posts: 1,736	Shalamar: Of course not, why would they? The responsibility of holding the Priesthood of God is only given to worthy males. Women have the sacred duty of Motherhood... they also teach, speak at services, play the organ, sing in choirs... and assist in many important ways. They do not need to "Hold offices of power over men". Originally Posted by Shalamar Janadele... Can women even be priests? Hold offices of power over men In your religion?
	__________________ All articles reproduced are in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use, for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Choose ye this day whom you will serve. As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

29th December 2012, 09:12 AM	#352
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,156	Originally Posted by Janadele The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not refute true science, but certainly does not support the theories of Darwin... BYU teaches evolution. BYU:Evolution and the Origin of Man
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

29th December 2012, 09:16 AM	#353
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,156	Originally Posted by Janadele They do not need to "Hold offices of power over men". Men don't need it either.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

29th December 2012, 09:18 AM	#354
Shalamar Dark Lord of the JREF Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Super Star Destroyer Executor Posts: 2,396	Originally Posted by Janadele Shalamar: Of course not, why would they? The responsibility of holding the Priesthood of God is only given to worthy males. Women have the sacred duty of Motherhood... they also teach, speak at services, play the organ, sing in choirs... and assist in many important ways. They do not need to "Hold offices of power over men". And why not? Women can be, and are, leaders of industry, CEO's of companies, and even rulers of countries. Why would your church limit women who would have the capacity to lead well, and force them to merely 'assist'? This is only one of the bigoted things I do not like about your religion. It holds people back.
	__________________ "The truth is out there. But the lies are inside your head."

29th December 2012, 09:21 AM	#355
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,156	Originally Posted by RandFan BYU teaches evolution. BYU:Evolution and the Origin of Man BTW: That is the Church's official postition and not the BYU course. Sorry. Quote: The scriptures tell why man was created, but they do not tell how... Leave geology, biology, archaeology, and anthropology, no one of which has to do with the salvation of the soul of mankind, to scientific research, while we magnify our calling in the realm of the Church....
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith