_random_
Jewel Runner
What do you think about theories that the events in the Book of Mormon took place in Malaysia or Africa? How widespread are these among Mormons as a whole? How do people justify them with the "On this continent" thing?
That is circular logic. But since we are on the subject of Mormonism, the process of conversion most often experienced by people who meet with our missionaries, is one of experience, similar to what you said here:Plotinus said:Conversely, people cease to believe in God because they find that they do not.
To be more precise, Mormon missionaries ask "investigators" (people who are prospective converts, or at least want to know if the Church is true), to study out the doctrines, and then ask God, with faith and sincere intent, whether the doctrines are true. If the resulting experience convinces one that the doctrines are true, then the investigators are invited to be baptized and join.I think that most of the time they believe what they believe because it meshes with their experience.
I'm not sure what you mean by uncomfortable truth, but it is a topic that makes a lot of people wonder, both inside and outside the Church. Personally I believe that it was a culturally-based practice. Although some members of the church hierarchy have even attempted to explain it, there has never been an official explanation.Harvin87 said:And why it was never really explained at all? ... maybe because it's yet again an "uncomfortable truth" ?
These theories are not widely held. You can find very few Mormons who believe them. The majority believe that the events of the Book of Mormon took place in Mesoamerica. A sizable minority believe that they took place further north, closer to the Great Lakes area. Recently DNA evidence has supported this view--an obscure gene marker has been identified that occurs with any concentration in only a handful of places in the world--including Palestine and near the Great Lakes region. Here is a link to a site on the topic: http://bookofmormonevidence.org/index.phpRandomnerd10 said:What do you think about theories that the events in the Book of Mormon took place in Malaysia or Africa? How widespread are these among Mormons as a whole? How do people justify them with the "On this continent" thing?
^Yeah, it would throw a huge theological wrench into Mormonism. The theology is married to the idea of the American Continents being a promised land. The events could not have happened in Africa.
That is circular logic.
Were there ever any popular movies produced that depict the events in the Book of Mormon?
The Jews and Christians have The Ten Commandments, the Christians have The Passion of the Christ.. Are there any Mormon equivalents?
Where I live in the Iowa/Illinois border area, there are more who believe it took place in N. America, based on statements Joseph Smith made about the mound builders being Book of Mormon people, and the city of Zarahemla being formerly located across the river from where Nauvoo was sited. Like has been said though, that's a minority view.Eran of Arcadia said:Yeah, every Mormon I have met who actually has a specific opinion on the matter (and doesn't just think "the entire Western Hemisphere") associates it with Mesoamerica.
Here's the imdb page on "The Book of Mormon Movie, vol 1": link. It didn't do very well.Eran of Arcadia said:The Church has made a few movies depicting events from the Book of Mormon, but those weren't released theatrically. There was a movie that saw limited release, depicting the first parts of the Book of Mormon, but apparently it wasn't very good.
Where I live in the Iowa/Illinois border area, there are more who believe it took place in N. America, based on statements Joseph Smith made about the mound builders being Book of Mormon people, and the city of Zarahemla being formerly located across the river from where Nauvoo was sited. Like has been said though, that's a minority view.
This is for Eran, but anyone else who wants to answer is welcome.
Why do you think we have talks at baptismal services? They are uniformly on the topics of "baptism" and "the Holy Ghost." I get really annoyed by some of the patterns in the way they are given, which I feel can be counterproductive to the purpose of the rest of the service. I don't know if it's just tradition, or if it's in the General Handbook of Instructions or what, but I sure wish sometimes that they would be abolished.