Matt's Mormon Thread

[Merzbow]

@Merzbow- It seems to me that your "checklist" is very judemental of religions. On numbers 1-3 fanatical "anti-cult" people could basically say that any and all religions are wrong. Also, number 4 is very personal and indiviualised, so unless this checklist is meant for people to decide themselves what religions seem acceptable to follow, this is not an appropriate question. Personally, the only religions that I would consider "rejectable outright" for their practices are those that the Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance consider "doomesday cults." Here is the link to their site, ReligiousTolerance.org. http://www.religioustolerance.org/

The list is not meant to be some kind of a universal standard for what constitutes a religion, but simply my view of what constitutes a healthy religion. I sincerely believe that reasonable people should be able to agree on whether any given religion meets any of the first three criteria for exclusion. The 4th I list because even if a given religion meets the first three criteria it's useless for you personally unless you have faith in it. If all this sounds judgmental, well, it's supposed to.

 

[Methos]

Googling the history of the Book of Abraham brought up a lot of interesting information. First is that Joseph Smith was murdered. I didn't know that.

After reading many articles, on both sides, its really hard to believe anything on the Book of Abraham. There has been several 'attacks', or criticisms, over the years on whether or not it was fabricated by Smith, and so far I'm not seeing much in the ways of a good argument for the book.

I mean no offense, but I honestly do not see how a knowledgable Mormon can come to the conclusion that the origins of the Book of Abraham are not fabricated.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

That's only because you are expecting it to fit into a 'scholarly' translation. I realize that this sounds implausible to those who do not already accept that Joseph Smith was a prophet, but I personally see no reason why the writings on the existing papyrus have to match what he translated. He was not using his own knowledge but the power of God to do so; God could have inspired him to write Abraham's words even if they were not in front of him. I am well aware how ridiculous this sounds if you think Joseph wasn't a prophet, but I can't say how God does or doesn't decide how to pass on ancient writings.

 

[Methos]

I realize that this sounds implausible to those who do not already accept that Joseph Smith was a prophet, but I personally see no reason why the writings on the existing papyrus have to match what he translated.
<snip>
I am well aware how ridiculous this sounds if you think Joseph wasn't a prophet, but I can't say how God does or doesn't decide how to pass on ancient writings.

I can understand what you are saying. It is somewhat similar to evolution and the Creation as stated in Genesis. Scientific proof/theory/whatever shows other than how the Bible states it. A non-believer questions why Christians believe as they do when scientist point otherwise.

Granted, like Sir Bugsy, I believe evolution is/was a tool of God. To state that God is mandated by what man considers as a 'day' is foolish.

I still question the Book of Abraham and its truthfulness, no offense.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

That is certainly understandable. If I were to rely only on a 'rational' explanation, I wouldn't believe it either. I have other reasons for doing so; the same goes with the Book of Mormon, and the Bible (which has its own set of internal inconsistencies, but overall I accept as true). What I am saying is that my explanation is plausible, and consistent with other claims made by Mormonism.

And I too consider Evolution to be a tool of God. He spoke in parables and metaphors throughout the Bible; why not in Genesis 1?

 

[ironduck]

Just popping in for a sec..

but I personally see no reason why the writings on the existing papyrus have to match what he translated. He was not using his own knowledge but the power of God to do so; God could have inspired him to write Abraham's words even if they were not in front of him.

So god gives Joseph Smith some papyrus and says 'this is what they say, write it down'. But the papyrus doesn't actually contain what god says it contains? Why didn't god just give Joseph some papyrus that actually said what god was talking about? Did god misplace the right papyrus and accidentally give him the wrong one? Or was god incapable of actually finding the proper papyrus?

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Well, since God is much smarter than me, His particular method is probably better than mine. Perhaps Abraham never actually wrote on papyrus or it was lost, but Joseph needed it as an aid to help him translate, perhaps it was something else. I don't know. I realize that speaking from a scholarly viewpoint I would have no reason to accept the Book of Abraham as real, but as I already believe in the 'supernatural' and modern revelation it is plausible from a spiritual viewpoint.

 

[Merzbow]

Just popping in for a sec..



So god gives Joseph Smith some papyrus and says 'this is what they say, write it down'. But the papyrus doesn't actually contain what god says it contains? Why didn't god just give Joseph some papyrus that actually said what god was talking about? Did god misplace the right papyrus and accidentally give him the wrong one? Or was god incapable of actually finding the proper papyrus?

Why doesn't God just beam into our minds the holy scriptures and bypass all the messy details of prophets running around and getting themselves persecuted? It's an imperfect science, that's the beauty of life.

 

[El_Machinae]

Actually, it's the fact that prophets aren't obviously so that bothers me. Why have a prophet, and a system to test prophets, if 'the trick' is to avoid making prophecies that can be tested?

 

[Merzbow]

Actually, it's the fact that prophets aren't obviously so that bothers me. Why have a prophet, and a system to test prophets, if 'the trick' is to avoid making prophecies that can be tested?

Again we come back to faith - as Jesus correctly observed, you don't test God. You obey him and observe the meaningful improvements in THIS life and hope for a better NEXT 'life'. If you want to test and experiment, then talk to your local scientist.

 

[ironduck]

Why doesn't God just beam into our minds the holy scriptures and bypass all the messy details of prophets running around and getting themselves persecuted? It's an imperfect science, that's the beauty of life.

It's not a science at all, I'm sure we can agree.

The mormons tell the story of the angel that visited Joseph Smith and showed him the golden plates that he then translated. So apparently that is supposed to be a true story - they claim there are witnesses to the existence of the plates, for instance.

Now, if god gives Joseph Smith some papyrus that doesn't say what god says that it says, then why go through all the trouble? And why put any weight on the existence of the golden plates if it doesn't matter if they were real anyway?

To me there's an enormous contradiction here.

 

[Merzbow]

It's not a science at all, I'm sure we can agree.

The mormons tell the story of the angel that visited Joseph Smith and showed him the golden plates that he then translated. So apparently that is supposed to be a true story - they claim there are witnesses to the existence of the plates, for instance.

Now, if god gives Joseph Smith some papyrus that doesn't say what god says that it says, then why go through all the trouble? And why put any weight on the existence of the golden plates if it doesn't matter if they were real anyway?

To me there's an enormous contradiction here.

Because God wants us to spice up our existence. Again, how boring would it be if the scriptures were simply beamed into our minds? Isn't it far more fun to have them delivered on golden plates?

I'm not just being facetious here. According to the Mormons at least we're spirit children, and our time on Earth is a test. Sure it's a challenging test, but God is a kind and loving God, so why make it needlessly boring? And God beaming instructions into our mind would come perilously close to violating the presumption of free agency. God's words must come to us INDIRECTLY in order for us to be culpable for choosing to obey them or not.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

And the reason why God does it slightly differently every time? Darned if I know. But the thing that must be remembered is this: if God truly is how we think He is, He is smarter than us; if He is smarter than us, than what He does is the best way every time even if it doesn't seem that way to us. This is often where nonbelievers cry foul, but the fact is that it makes perfect sense. After all, the things parents do often don't make sense to their children, not because the parents are wrong but because the children are not capable of understanding the way parents do.

 

[ironduck]

Because God wants us to spice up our existence. Again, how boring would it be if the scriptures were simply beamed into our minds? Isn't it far more fun to have them delivered on golden plates?

I have no problem with playing by a concept here of god making it a little adventure to spice up our existence.

The problem is that there doesn't seem much point in making it the little adventure, and then screwing it up using the wrong papyrus. If god wanted to make it all cool and exciting he could at least have used the right papyrus.

Apparently (we are going by this for the example), the papyrus are not the ones god claimed they were. Well, this makes people like me suspicious of the whole deal. In other words, I'm a lot less likely to look further into mormonism because it makes Joseph Smith appear to be a fraud from my viewpoint (just for this example).

I thought one of the basic principles of mormonism was to spread the message to get more people to become mormons. Well, by using the wrong papyrus god is doing the exact opposite thing from my point of view. He is making people less likely to become mormons.

See the problem?

 

[ironduck]

Eran, if you're just going to play the 'he's smarter than us, so don't bother trying to understand' card I suggest you find another thread.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

What are you talking about? I am not saying that God screwed up and gave Joseph the wrong papyrus; either the parts that got lost were really the writings of Abraham or else the papyri were only an aid to translation, because it is a learning process, and Joseph hadn't completely got the knack of receiving revelations from God without a 'crutch'.

And what do you mean by that last comment? I genuinely don't understand why it is such a hard concept that a being smarter than us will do things that don't make sense to our perspective. That's exactly what you should expect.

And, 'find another thread'? I am here to answer questions that people have about Mormonism.

 

[ironduck]

but I personally see no reason why the writings on the existing papyrus have to match what he translated.

The above is what you said. That's what I'm going by. It may be true or not, that's not relevant for this discussion. I'm talking about the principle of it.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Ok, what I meant is that it is not necessary, for the Book of Abraham to be a genuine account of the life of Abraham, for it to have been revealed by God, and for it to have true doctrine, to actually have been written on the particular papyrus that Joseph thought it was. Either it was written on the parts of the papyrus that were lost, or else it was never written on papyrus and God used another method to show it to Joseph Smith.

 

[El_Machinae]

Again, how boring would it be if the scriptures were simply beamed into our minds?

Yeah, Adam must have had it really boring, knowing God directly (just being facetious)

But, my point was that Smith made some prophecies, and it appears that some of them are testable. Now, either he made the prophecies, and they're true or not, or he didn't. It's all very confusing.

 

[ironduck]

Which leads to the argument I made above about that whole shenanigan making it harder, not easier to get people to become mormons. Therefore it seems highly contradictory to the very purpose of mormonism. Mormons wants more members after all.

Edit - above was in response to Eran