Matt's Mormon Thread

[sanabas]

most males 19-21 go on two year missions to somewhere in the world to preach and do community service. I will likely be leaving CFC in 8 months or so to do this myself.

Is it compulsory or just encouraged? And why no females evangelising? And why don't they teach you enough logic to avoid contradicting yourself in your basic pitch?

For the record, one example of a basic contradiction from last time I talked to one of your evangelists: He was telling me I should believe in god, as how could a world as perfect as the one we've got have happened by chance. The world being as perfect as it is implies a designer. A bit later, he was telling me how Jesus would be returning, fix all the problems in the world, and make it perfect again, and didn't I want to be a part of that? I pointed out that he'd already said the world was perfect now, and so wouldn't that make Jesus' return superfluous? After a bit of thought, he replied that Jesus would make it 'more perfect'.

 

[Cuivienen]

I was incorrect about the date. I just checked, 1894 is correct. Cant verify thats the reason though...also heard there were tax reasons for it, and there was a huge male shortage (a large band left to fight in the spanish american war)

also, the mormons werent the only ones practicing polygamy in the country at the time....the goverment had a large-scale anti-polygamy policy at the time.

Just channeling from my brother's boyfriend, who is a Mormon. The reasoning makes sense, too - encourage large families that have many children in order to make sure the small religion doesn't die out.

 

[Hundegesicht]

You just described treatment of native Americans by most settlers. The Mormons are no more or less guilty than anyone else.

Sorry, Eyrei, but I think you've misread what he said.

What actually happened was that the Native Americans (who were good friends with the Mormons in the Utah teritory), held up a band of settlers (from New York, I think, though I'd have to look it up). During the fighting, the white Mormons came in and "saved" the settlers by convincing the Indians not to attack the wagon train, and then convinced the settlers to give up their guns. After the settlers gave up their guns, the men and women were blindfolded and shot. (The children, IIRC, were allowed to go free)

This was done mainly to discourage non-Mormon immigration. While tying up and blindfolding the victims before shooting them sounds very barbaric (and indeed it was), it was done to try and prevent casulties amoung the Indians who would've suffered many losses if they had to attack a fully armed wagon train. It wasn't done to be cruel.

Unlike brutality against the Indians, brutality and murder by the Mormons of non-Mormon whites was relatively rare, but many modern day anti-mormons still use it to show how evil Mormons are. The irony (that, unlike other groups, the Mormons largely didn't participate in the genocide of native Americans), of course, is lost to such people.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

I'd like to jump into this thread, as I came off my Mormon mission about a year ago. To answer Sanabas, I have no idea why a missionary would say the world is perfect - it is one of our doctrines that the world in which we now live is sub-optimal (well, those words aren't usually used) and "fallen", and in fact that is part of the point - we have to experience suffering now to fully understand joy in the next life.

Regarding the Meadow Mountain Massacre, although it is controversial and there are varying accounts, most scholars agree that the church hierarchy itself didn't have anything to do with it. The man who started it, John Lee, although he was a bishop (leader of a congregation), was excommunicated for his role in it afterwards.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Now that I look at Sanabas' thread again, I see the missionary was using the 'argument from design' to prove the existance of God. They don't actually teach us that - we are supposed to use spiritual, not logical, means, in our preaching. I see why he would want to say that, but I had enough experience with atheists before my mission to know why that argument doesn't work.

 

[Aramazd]

This was done mainly to discourage non-Mormon immigration. While tying up and blindfolding the victims before shooting them sounds very barbaric (and indeed it was), it was done to try and prevent casulties amoung the Indians who would've suffered many losses if they had to attack a fully armed wagon train. It wasn't done to be cruel.

If the settlers gave up their guns then it was cruel because the Indians would have been safe because the settlers didn't have their guns.

 

[Hundegesicht]

If the settlers gave up their guns then it was cruel because the Indians would have been safe because the settlers didn't have their guns.

I think you misread my post. I was explaining the reason for the way in which settlers were murdered. Not the reason for their murder. (Which was to keep non-Mormons from settling Utah)

 

[sanabas]

Now that I look at Sanabas' thread again, I see the missionary was using the 'argument from design' to prove the existance of God. They don't actually teach us that - we are supposed to use spiritual, not logical, means, in our preaching. I see why he would want to say that, but I had enough experience with atheists before my mission to know why that argument doesn't work.

So I just had a sub-optimal missionary then? To be fair to the guy I talked to, he quite obviously did believe what he was telling me, and it appeared he believed due to argument from design, and found it inconceivable that anyone wouldn't accept argument from design, hence his use of it.

Have you found any arguments that do work on atheists yet?

And what about the other two questions? Why no females evangelising, and is it compulsory or just encouraged for males?

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

So I just had a sub-optimal missionary then? To be fair to the guy I talked to, he quite obviously did believe what he was telling me, and it appeared he believed due to argument from design, and found it inconceivable that anyone wouldn't accept argument from design, hence his use of it.

Have you found any arguments that do work on atheists yet?

And what about the other two questions? Why no females evangelising, and is it compulsory or just encouraged for males?

It's not so much that he is a sub-optimal missionary, it's just that for the most part we are less effective dealing with atheists for the simple reason that accepting our beliefs is a lot easier if you already have something in common. I'm sure he would do just fine with a non-Mormon theist. As far as 'arguments that work with atheists', like I said, we try to go more spiritual than logical (it's very likely your missionary actually believed for greater reasons than the argument from design) and although I think I could answer any questions a sincere atheist had, most would not want to listen to us in the first place - and there's nothing we can do about that.

As per your other question - a mission for young men is highly encouraged but not required. Although many of the more devout young ladies out there say they will only date/marry returned missionaries, a guy who doesn't still has the same opportunities in the church. Some of our leaders missed going on missions because of World War II and Vietnam, which placed restrictions on our missionary program. Young women of 21 and older can also go, although it is noticably rarer. You will see them less mostly because the majority of people only see our missionaries when they are tracting (door-to-door) which as a general rule sister missionaries (ie women) do less than elders (ie men). Even so, under the most extreme circumstances a missionary will still spend no more than half of his evangelizing time in tracting.

 

[shortguy]

One of my high school friends was a Mormon; it's a very interesting belief system to be exposed to.

One question, though: Is it true that the church requests your financial statements to ensure that you're tithing appropriately?

 

[Steph]

haha, saw this one coming.
First, let it be known to the world that the Mormon church DOES NOT practice polygamy. I have a dad and a Mom. I only have one girlfriend. We havent been doing this for over 150 years.
[/url]

From a Mormon, project manager for Age of Empire at ensemble Studio
"Do you know the penalty for polygamy in Utah?"
"Two wives!"

 

[Mr. Blonde]

The Mormons I met (usually couples of missionaries) were all very polite. However, it must be hard to go abroad for afaik 2 years into a foreign land.

As a sidenote: I lived in a student´s hostel with my neighbour being a devout muslim. He once invited two mormon missionaries. They all tried to convert each other for more then 3 hours, sometimes the voices were very loud, and luckily noone was hurt. I don´t think they came to an agreement, though I didn´t join the discussion as my atheism would have made me the target for conversion from both sides and my neighbour already got heavily on my nerves in this manner.

 

[Stapel]

Matt, what exactly is the purpose of the Mormon church in Zoetermeer (10 miles east of The Hague)?
There are dozens (hundreds?) of young Americans (all male?), wearing a suit (or rather a uniform) with their name tag on it, occasionaly wandering through town.

 

[Esckey]

Theres also a thing about missionary partners aren't excatly aloud to leave each others sight(I think), two missionaries aren't aloud to be alone with one person of the opposite sex(I think) And isn't there something about eating meat? I think I remember reading in the words of wisdom something about healthy diets about wheat and veggies is vauled over meat.

And yes women go on missions, 1 year and 6 months long instead of two years and many women want to marry guys that have gone on mission(which sucks) theres also the Temple and what you can and cannot wear when going there.

 

[sanabas]

It's not so much that he is a sub-optimal missionary, it's just that for the most part we are less effective dealing with atheists for the simple reason that accepting our beliefs is a lot easier if you already have something in common. I'm sure he would do just fine with a non-Mormon theist. As far as 'arguments that work with atheists', like I said, we try to go more spiritual than logical (it's very likely your missionary actually believed for greater reasons than the argument from design) and although I think I could answer any questions a sincere atheist had, most would not want to listen to us in the first place - and there's nothing we can do about that.

As per your other question - a mission for young men is highly encouraged but not required. Although many of the more devout young ladies out there say they will only date/marry returned missionaries, a guy who doesn't still has the same opportunities in the church. Some of our leaders missed going on missions because of World War II and Vietnam, which placed restrictions on our missionary program. Young women of 21 and older can also go, although it is noticably rarer. You will see them less mostly because the majority of people only see our missionaries when they are tracting (door-to-door) which as a general rule sister missionaries (ie women) do less than elders (ie men). Even so, under the most extreme circumstances a missionary will still spend no more than half of his evangelizing time in tracting.

No worries, thanks for that. I'm yet to have a mormon knock on my door tracting, the ones I have talked to have been hanging around in public places looking for people, but I'm still yet to see a female doing it. If I have nothing better to do, I don't mind talking to them. So far I remain unconverted, and I don't think I've converted any of them. I've had a couple of interesting conversations though. Even though they prefer to avoid logic as much as possible and stick to the spiritual, most of what they present as spiritual evidence still boils down to argument from design and/or argument from personal incredulity. Which explains keeping the logic out of it, as both arguments fall down when logic appears. It's often still interesting talking to someone with such a completely alien & irrational (to me), yet still sincerely held worldview. So if they're willing to listen to me, I'm willing to listen to them.

 

[Che Guava]

Are the rumors that mormons believe that God (Jehova, Yahwe) is actually an alien from another world with great powers, but there are other aliens like him, and that we can become God-Aliens and rule our own planet ourselves?

I think you are thinking of the Jehova's Witnesses, who do hold the beleif that the truly devout can become lords of thier own planets (at least I think...)

 

[bhsup]

Che, where do you hear such things? I've had long coversations with Jehovah's Witnesses when they come a' knocking and have never heard anything remotely like that.

Really, I don't think such things should be spread about another person's faith without at least a (reputable) link backing it up.

 

[Che Guava]

Che, where do you hear such things? I've had long coversations with Jehovah's Witnesses when they come a' knocking and have never heard anything remotely like that.

Really, I don't think such things should be spread about another person's faith without at least a (reputable) link backing it up.

Hmmm, I tried finding a good link, but the only places I can see mention of this is on anti-JW sites. I guess it's just a rumour that I had heard. My appologies!

 

[bhsup]

Heh, no need to apologize, and I'm sorry if that came across too strident. It's just that I really have had very in depth conversations with Jehovah's Witnesses and never, ever heard anything even remotely like that. I disagree with some of their interpretations of the Bible, but that's about how far our differences go.

 

[Homie]

Hundegeschist, I am confused. From your account of the killings, this is how I read it: Some settlers from the east (maybe NY) came to Utah, there some Indians wanted to kill them, then the mormons stepped in and meddled between the parties, the parties accepted a truce. The settlers were to give up their guns and the indians were to not harm them. The settlers held up their end of the bargain and then the indians went and executed them now that they were defenseless. How could you possibly defend this? I can't think of anything more immoral and cowardly. No wonder the white man butchered the indians.