Let's compare Joseph Smith, Jr. and L. Ron Hubbard

#51
#51
nbakerld said:
Well, from what I understand about JW's, they believe 144,000 go to heaven, and the other righteous are in a paradise on earth living forever so it's not necessarily the "ole high hard one".

One common misconception about Mormons is that people think they believe they are the only ones to go to heaven. The truth is only righteous Mormons live in God's presence while anyone who was a decent person still goes to heaven, no matter their beliefs.
Click to expand...

Paradise on Earth? That sound like a hard sell to those excluded from the 144K.

How many "levels" of Mormon Heaven are there?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#54
#54
rjd970 said:
Among other things, the BoM mentions horses, elephants, cattle, swine, bees, barley, and wheat...none of which were available in pre-colombian meso-america.
Click to expand...

Mormons have answers to pretty much every objection. Not saying these are right, but:

Disappearing Breeds

Here is a list of Mormon animals that might have existed but whose remains disappeared:

1. Elephant The only place where elephants are mentioned in the Book of Mormon is in Ether 9:19 which was written in approximately 2500 B.C. Thus any elephants existing upon the American continents need not have survived past about 2400 B.C. While the jury is still out, there are a number of North American Indian traditions that recount legends of giant stiff-legged beasts that would never lie down, had a big head and large leaf-like ears, round footprints, forward bending knees, and had a fifth appendage coming out of its head.8 In addition to the legends, five elephant effigies have been found in ancient Mexico and two in Arizona.9 Scientists agree that mammoths and mastodons once inhabited the Americas, and an article in Scientific Monthly, entitled “Men and Elephants in America,” suggests that these proboscidean animals (elephants, mammoths, mastodons) may have survived in the Americas until 1000 B.C. — well within the time frame demanded by the Book of Mormon.

2. Horse. There have been a number of horse bones discovered in America that might date to Book of Mormon times. The surviving remains from such finds are currently undergoing testing to determine their antiquity.11 Misnomers and Other Namesakes Here is a list of New World animals that might have been re-labeled by the Nephites:

1. Cattle and Cows. The term “cattle” is used three times in the Book of Mormon (Ether 9:17-19; Enos 1:21; 3 Nephi 3:22), while the term “cow” is used twice (Ether 9:18; 1 Nephi 18:25). The Jaredite record is unclear as to whether “cattle” and “cows” are the same animals, or if “cows” are a subcategory of “cattle.” When the Miami Indians, who were familiar with cows, first encountered the unfamiliar buffalo they simply called them “wild cows.” Likewise the explorer DeSoto called the buffalo “vaca,” which is Spanish for “cow.” The Delaware Indians named the cow, “deer,” and a group of Miami Indians labeled sheep, which they were unfamiliar with, “looks-like-a-cow.”12 2. Horse. Could the Nephites have used the term “horse” for deer or some other animal? It is not impossible considering the above examples. Figurines, for example, of the pack bearing South American alpacas — which are related to the camel — have been unearthed as far north as Costa Rica.13 An early pre-Spanish incense burner discovered in Guatemala shows a man riding on the back of a deer. A stone monument dating to 700 A.D. shows a woman riding a deer. Another similar figurine was found in central Mexico, and until recently, many people in Siberia rode on the backs of deer. In such cases the deer served as “horses.”14

Hunting for Elephants in the Book of Mormon Book of Mormon “Anachronisms” Part 1: Fauna, Animals
 
#56
#56
nbakerld said:
The one I smashed I ended up marrying so I know what you mean.

Declaration010.jpg
Click to expand...

Just curious... how much does a set of those cost?

To use the age old cliche... you outkicked your coverage on that one.
 
#60
#60
nbakerld said:
Mormons have answers to pretty much every objection. Not saying these are right, but:

Disappearing Breeds

Here is a list of Mormon animals that might have existed but whose remains disappeared:

1. Elephant The only place where elephants are mentioned in the Book of Mormon is in Ether 9:19 which was written in approximately 2500 B.C. Thus any elephants existing upon the American continents need not have survived past about 2400 B.C. While the jury is still out, there are a number of North American Indian traditions that recount legends of giant stiff-legged beasts that would never lie down, had a big head and large leaf-like ears, round footprints, forward bending knees, and had a fifth appendage coming out of its head.8 In addition to the legends, five elephant effigies have been found in ancient Mexico and two in Arizona.9 Scientists agree that mammoths and mastodons once inhabited the Americas, and an article in Scientific Monthly, entitled “Men and Elephants in America,” suggests that these proboscidean animals (elephants, mammoths, mastodons) may have survived in the Americas until 1000 B.C. — well within the time frame demanded by the Book of Mormon.

2. Horse. There have been a number of horse bones discovered in America that might date to Book of Mormon times. The surviving remains from such finds are currently undergoing testing to determine their antiquity.11 Misnomers and Other Namesakes Here is a list of New World animals that might have been re-labeled by the Nephites:

1. Cattle and Cows. The term “cattle” is used three times in the Book of Mormon (Ether 9:17-19; Enos 1:21; 3 Nephi 3:22), while the term “cow” is used twice (Ether 9:18; 1 Nephi 18:25). The Jaredite record is unclear as to whether “cattle” and “cows” are the same animals, or if “cows” are a subcategory of “cattle.” When the Miami Indians, who were familiar with cows, first encountered the unfamiliar buffalo they simply called them “wild cows.” Likewise the explorer DeSoto called the buffalo “vaca,” which is Spanish for “cow.” The Delaware Indians named the cow, “deer,” and a group of Miami Indians labeled sheep, which they were unfamiliar with, “looks-like-a-cow.”12 2. Horse. Could the Nephites have used the term “horse” for deer or some other animal? It is not impossible considering the above examples. Figurines, for example, of the pack bearing South American alpacas — which are related to the camel — have been unearthed as far north as Costa Rica.13 An early pre-Spanish incense burner discovered in Guatemala shows a man riding on the back of a deer. A stone monument dating to 700 A.D. shows a woman riding a deer. Another similar figurine was found in central Mexico, and until recently, many people in Siberia rode on the backs of deer. In such cases the deer served as “horses.”14

Hunting for Elephants in the Book of Mormon Book of Mormon “Anachronisms” Part 1: Fauna, Animals
Click to expand...

Yeah, I've heard all the explanations, horses were really a version of a deer, etc. Needless to say, I am simultaneously unimpressed and awed at the lengths people will go to rationalize the completely irrational.

Just out of curiosity, how do you handle the DNA evidence of native americans that have absolutely zero Mediterranean genes and can instead be traced back to a bearing strait crossing? To me, that refutes one of central historical precepts of the book itself. If there ever is a smoking gun the whole thing is false, that would be it.

Also, I would suggest reading the Apocrypha...names like Nephi, Lehi, etc all show up and are important characters to those books.
 
#63
#63
rjd970 said:
Yeah, I've heard all the explanations, horses were really a version of a deer, etc. Needless to say, I am simultaneously unimpressed and awed at the lengths people will go to rationalize the completely irrational.

Just out of curiosity, how do you handle the DNA evidence of native americans that have absolutely zero Mediterranean genes and can instead be traced back to a bearing strait crossing? To me, that refutes one of central historical precepts of the book itself. If there ever is a smoking gun the whole thing is false, that would be it.

Also, I would suggest reading the Apocrypha...names like Nephi, Lehi, etc all show up and are important characters to those books.
Click to expand...

Most BOM scholars believe Mayans are the Lamanites, I don't know if they are included in your Native American DNA research. The Nephites were killed off. And Lamanites were "cursed by God" with darker skin and if you believe Jesus can die for your sins than you probably would believe that God can change a people's DNA.

The DNA is a good argument, but the names as an argument I don't understand, and I see it as very weak. If they came from the middle east wouldn't Nephi and Lehi possibly be common names? How does that disprove anything. Like I said, if you want to believe it, you can rationalize it. If you don't want to believe it, then you might view this stuff as indisputable proof to the contrary.
 
#66
#66
Nice, turn of events. Started off with a let's compare two guys no body cares about, then got on track about the authenticity of some guy's wife's boobs.
 
#68
#68
nbakerld said:
1. Elephant The only place where elephants are mentioned in the Book of Mormon is in Ether 9:19 which was written in approximately 2500 B.C.
Click to expand...

Writing wasn't present in the new world until about 1000 BC. So what was Ether written in?
 
#69
#69
IPorange said:
Writing wasn't present in the new world until about 1000 BC. So what was Ether written in?
Click to expand...

The Jaredites were either wiped out or left the Americas, I can't remember.

"The record of the Jaredites, taken from the twenty-four plates found by the people of Limhi in the days of king Mosiah." which would have been about 300 BC or so.

Ether
 
#71
#71
nbakerld said:
Most BOM scholars believe Mayans are the Lamanites, I don't know if they are included in your Native American DNA research. The Nephites were killed off. And Lamanites were "cursed by God" with darker skin and if you believe Jesus can die for your sins than you probably would believe that God can change a people's DNA.

The DNA is a good argument, but the names as an argument I don't understand, and I see it as very weak. If they came from the middle east wouldn't Nephi and Lehi possibly be common names? How does that disprove anything. Like I said, if you want to believe it, you can rationalize it. If you don't want to believe it, then you might view this stuff as indisputable proof to the contrary.
Click to expand...

That's true for just about anything, but your point is well taken.

Personally, I think the uneducated boy writing the BoM is a pretty weak argument. There are a number of more plausible explanations, especially given JS history and other frauds, that are for more believable then angels visiting a farm boy in upstate NY telling him plates written by a lost people are buried in a hill that is right next to his house.

Like I said, I'm atheist, my feelings about any religion are the same basically. I just find Mormonism particularly interesting because it is so far outlandish and unbelievable. No offense to you (or certain members of my family), just the way I see it.
 
#73
#73
rjd970 said:
That's true for just about anything, but your point is well taken.

Personally, I think the uneducated boy writing the BoM is a pretty weak argument. There are a number of more plausible explanations, especially given JS history and other frauds, that are for more believable then angels visiting a farm boy in upstate NY telling him plates written by a lost people are buried in a hill that is right next to his house.

Like I said, I'm atheist, my feelings about any religion are the same basically. I just find Mormonism particularly interesting because it is so far outlandish and unbelievable. No offense to you (or certain members of my family), just the way I see it.
Click to expand...

I, like nbakerld, was raised Mormon but I did not go on a mission, nor did I participate in seminary so I'm probably much less knowledgeable than nbakerld. I have not gone to church in a number of years but I still do not engage in discourse disparaging to the church.

That being said - how are Mormons any more crazy relative to bible-only Christians than are Christians to Jews? Mormons are generally well-regarded and honest people.

Everyone has the right hate on who you want but IMO there are groups that are much more deserving. Hate can only be spread so thin and you may as well save your hate for the more deserving groups.
 
#74
#74
azVolFan said:
I, like nbakerld, was raised Mormon but I did not go on a mission, nor did I participate in seminary so I'm probably much less knowledgeable than nbakerld. I have not gone to church in a number of years but I still do not engage in discourse disparaging to the church.

That being said - how are Mormons any more crazy relative to bible-only Christians than are Christians to Jews? Mormons are generally well-regarded and honest people.

Everyone has the right hate on who you want but IMO there are groups that are much more deserving. Hate can only be spread so thin and you may as well save your hate for the more deserving groups.
Click to expand...

I don't equate an attack on any church as equal to attacking its members. Mormons are outstanding in their reputation as a whole, but the BOM is a religious book, like the Bible, or the Koran, and religion is a volatile subject often because of that said religion's history. I always talk to Mormons when they come by and even though I don't respect the church's history, I still respect the members.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#75
#75
One of my good buddies in high school was Mormon. We used to tease the hell out of him about the whole "masturbation leads to homosexuality" thing they believe.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top