Mormonism

[Garland-Green]

Shadows-shine

What calling? He didn't have a calling....

What was implied here was treasure hunting.  

[Garland-Green]

Shadows-shine

Moroni only stated he was an angel.

In A.D. 421 the prophet Moroni buried sacred records of his people in the Hill Cumorah. Returning later as a resurrected being, he told Joseph Smith about the ancient record, which contains the fulness of the gospel as delivered by the Savior to ancient inhabitants of the American continent. That record is the Book of Mormon.

Info from:
http://www.lds.org/library/display/0,4945,104-1-3-6,00.html


Moroni burring the plates in the Hill Cumorah

Eventually, the body of the believer in Christ will die. What happens then? The spirit of the believer goes to be with Christ [2 Corinthians 5:8]. The believer does not become an angel. It is interesting that both Elijah and Moses were recognizable on the Mount of Transfiguration. They had not transformed into angels, but appeared as themselves—although glorified—and were recognizable to Peter, James and John.  

[Garland-Green]

Information from the National Museum of Natural History SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20560
Your recent inquiry concerning the Smithsonian Institution's alleged use of the Book of Mormon as a scientific guide has been received in the Smithsonian's Department of Anthropology.
The Book of Mormon is a religious document and not a scientific guide. The Smithsonian Institution has never used it in archeological research and any information that you have received to the contrary is incorrect. Accurate information about the Smithsonian's position is contained in the enclosed "Statement Regarding the Book of Mormon," which was prepared to respond to the numerous inquiries that the Smithsonian receives on this topic.
Because the Smithsonian regards the unauthorized use of its name to disseminate inaccurate information as unlawful, we would appreciate your assistance in providing us with the names of any individuals who are misusing the Smithsonian's name. Please address any correspondence to:

■Public Information Officer
Department of Anthropology
National Museum of Natural History
Smithsonian Institution
Washington, DC 20560

■PREPARED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION



Archaeology Versus the Book of Mormon
by Jeffrey E. Ramey M.R.E.
Since the writing of the paper in 1982, there have been several great book written on Mormonism and the subject of Archaeology. There have also been many discoveries in North, Central, and South America. None of these have changed the outcome that this paper arrived at nearly two decades ago. Some of the references are dated but the end result is still the same. It is always the same. There is no solid evidence to support the claims of the Book of Mormon.

The Mormon Church has launched an offensive on the world. They are sending missionaries door to door to spread the Mormon message. They are now presenting themselves as a Christian mainline denomination. The missionaries make fantastic claims about proof of the events depicted in the Book of Mormon. They contend that these events have been historically and archaeologically verified, and that, since they are in the Book of Mormon, the Mormon Church is the only true church.1 This is one of their stronger selling points. These claims come from various sources. The most evident source is Mormon writers. For example, Milton R. Hunter, a typical Mormon apologetic writer, has written books and pamphlets on the subject of the archaeology of the Book of Mormon. However, Mr. Hunter and his fellow writers are not qualified to write on the subject of archaeology. Their writings and claims show a marked ignorance of several facts.2 In spite of this, Mormons still write, publish, and teach these opinions because they are convinced that they are true.

A standard reference work for Mormons is the Articles of Faith by James Talmage. Mr. Talmage treats the subject of the archaeology of the Book of Mormon as if it were a long-standing, established fact. Mr. Talmage assures his readers there is ample proof. Mr. Talmage states, "The Egyptian is not the only language to be represented in the relics of American antiquities; the Hebrew occurs in this connection with at least equal significance."3 Here Mr. Talmage tells his readers that the civilization that was here used Egyptian and Hebrew writing. This would be a key point in proving the Book of Mormon to be true.

From the very beginning, Mormon leaders have told their people of adequate proof for the Book of Mormon. Mormon Apostle Orson Pratt said, "This generation have (sic) more than one thousand times the amount of evidence to demonstrate and forever establish the divine authority of the Book of Mormon than they have in favor of the Bible."4 Bold claims such as these have inspired Mormons for generations. But this brings a curious point to light. The Articles of Faith has gone through forty-two editions with the latest one printed in 1975. The most recent date in the documentation in the section concerning archaeological proofs is 1923. The average date is around 1870.5 This would seem to reflect that there is little concern for modern scholarship or discoveries. It was not until 1938 that the first Mormon earned his doctorate in archaeology.6 This leaves a fifteen year gap between latest documentation in the Articles of Faith and the first Mormon who earned a doctorate in archaeology.

To better understand the points of controversy on the subject, a description of the Americas will be given according to the Book of Mormon. The civilization under question was alleged to be made up of Jews and extant from 600 B.C. to 421 A.D.7 The people spread from north to south and from sea to sea (Helaman 3:8, Mormon 1:17). As the people covered the entire land, they built great fortified cities with many temples and synagogues (Helaman 3:8-9). The people were industrious and warlike (Ether 15:2). They had the use of iron, copper, and brass. They had machinery and manufactured tools, spears, swords, armor, and other things (Jarom 1:8, 2 Nephi 5:15, Alma 43:18-19). A monetary and an extensive trade and shipping system had been developed (Helaman 3:7-12, Alma 11:5-20).

The natural surroundings are depicted in detail in a few areas. Elephants were a common animal used as a beast of burden (Ether 9:19). There were horses and cattle in abundance (Ether 9:19) as well as cureloms and cumons that were even more useful than elephants (Ether 9:19). There was every kind of fruit growing in the land (Ether 9:17). Farmers grew wheat, barley, and other types of grain as well as kept sheep, goats, and pigs for food (Ether 9:17-18, Mosiah 9:9). This is the way the Book of Mormon presents life in the Americas at this time.

Drawing from the Book of Mormon, the following should depict accurately a day in the life of one of the inhabitants, a Nephite Jew. In the morning you would wake up to a breakfast of ham, fruits and bread made from wheat flour ([Mosiah 9:9, Ether 9:18]. After finishing your morning meal, you get dressed for work. You dress in silk and fine linen because they are plentiful materials (Alma 4:6, Ether 10:24). You bid your wife and children farewell, and you mount your trusty curelom and you ride off to work (Ether 9:19).
As you ride through the great fortified city you live in , you admire the many beautiful buildings and temples with their fine workmanship (Jerom 1:8, Helaman 3:9). Leaving the city, you pass by busy shops where spears, swords and other weapons of warfare are made, and you hear the noises of hammers on anvils and machinery ([Jerom 1:8]. You stop in and pick up and order for a dozen iron axes for your company. Your hurry to leave so you can meet your crew. Soon these sounds fade behind you as you pass the many fields of barley and wheat in the countryside (Mosiah 9:9). Just before you arrive at work you pass a military patrol of chariots (3 Nephi 3:22).
When you arrive at work, you find that you have a busy day ahead of you. You supervise a crew of lumberjacks, and there is a severe shortage of lumber in the northern part of the country (Helaman 3:10-11). Your crew puts in a hard day's work. They cut down a record number of trees with their new iron axes. The trees you cut down are removed by elephants (Ether 9:19) and then taken to a central shipping warehouse and are shipped north to areas where trees are scarce. (Helaman 3:7-11). Before you leave for home, your boss pays you and your crew in cold hard cash. You get a bonus senine of gold and all your men get seven ezroms of silver (Alma 11:5-20). After this, you leave for home.

As you approach the city passing the fields of grain and the factories, you decide to stop by the temple to see if any of the prophets are speaking (Alma 16:13). You may want to stop by the archives and read up on the history of your people that has been written in your native language, Reformed Egyptian (Helaman 3:15, Mormon 9:32). You then return home to your wife and children. This concludes an average day in the life of a Nephite as per the Book of Mormon. There are several problems with the preceding description. Many of the items mentioned present severe problems when put in the light of archaeological research and findings. Most of the statements are far beyond reconciliation to the facts.

The food and dress mentioned in the Book of Mormon pose a problem, The grains such as wheat and barley were not known in the pre-Columbian America. They were brought over in the early 1500's by the Spaniards and other explorers.8 The linens and silks mentioned were not in existence on this side of the world. England tried to introduce silk production into the Colonies in the 1600's and 1700's and failed. The Book of Mormon fails to mention the types of cloth that have been found. Cotton was woven into an exceptionally fine cloth. There were clothes made of bark fibers, rabbit hair, and even woven bird feathers. There is no mention of any of these in the Book of Mormon.9
The working animals and livestock present similar difficulties. Elephants were not native nor are they native to the Americas. They are here today because of circus business and zoos. Cattle, horses, sheep, and pigs were not native to pre-Columbian America. All of these animals were introduced to the New World by the Spaniards in the early 1500's. No proof of these animals being here has ever been found for the time period in question.10 The cureloms and cumons must remain a mystery. This writer could find no information on them in books concerning animals now living or extinct.

The fortified cities, temples, and the materials used, present still another gigantic problem. There are thirty-eight major cities mentioned in the Book of Mormon. Not one of these cities has been found. There is no evidence to support the claim that there was a great civilization here. No temples or synagogues of Jewish nature have been found. There was no use of concrete here during this time. No machinery has been found. Nothing has been found to substantiate the claims of metal workings in iron.11 This Is perhaps the most difficult area for Mormon archaeologists to try to explain.
The people here are represented as being very warlike in nature. They were concerned with war, the manufacture of war articles and the use of chariots. Again, the facts will not support this. The technology to produce many of the weapons like the steel sword was not available. Since there were no horses, chariots would not be very useful. They were never used over here. The life philosophy of the inhabitants of the Americas during this time seems to have been a peaceful one. All indications from archaeological evidence points to a peaceful people.12 Mormons are quick to point out that the American Indians were warlike; however, this was only after they were cheated out of their lands and treaties had been broken.

The Book of Mormon lists several types of gold and silver coins. Mormons claim that the Mayans had a lot of gold. This is true, but they used it for decorative and ornamental purposes. There was never any type of coin system in pre-Columbian America. From records found, the method of trade was the barter system. Feathers, flint, cotton cloth, gold ornaments and cacao beans were the items used in trade. The cacao bean seems to have been the closest thing to a monetary standard in the Mayan world. Non of these alleged coins has ever been found.13 Mayan tax records show the use of this type of barter system to pay all taxes.14

Writing in the pre-Columbian Americas as portrayed in the Book of Mormon presents a few problems. The Technology to make the engraved metal plates as described in the Book of Mormon did not exist at that time. There was never a universal language in the New World as portrayed. The earliest signs of literacy appear with the Mayans in 328 A.D., and there is no resemblance between Mayan writing and the alleged Reformed Egyptian.15 The Reformed Egyptian writing brings to light still other problems. There have been no instances of Egyptian or Hebrew writing found in the artifacts of pre-Columbian America. The Smithsonian Institution16 and National Geographic Society17 are just two of many who substantiate this. A copy of some of the characters were shown to Dr. Charles Anthon of Columbia University in 1828 shortly after their discovery. Dr. Anthon stated, "The whole story about pronouncing the Mormon inscription to be reformed Egyptian hieroglyphics is perfectly false."18 From the very start, the language in question has presented enormous problems. Besides, why would Jewish people write in Egyptian?
The New World, as described in the Book of Mormon, seems to be vastly different than what archaeologists and historians describe. There are many anti-Mormon works that attack this point of conflict. There are nearly as many defending the claims of the Book of Mormon. One of the best ways to settle a conflict of opinions, in many cases, is to bring in an objective third party.
The Smithsonian Institution has received thousands of letters concerning the historical value of the Book of Mormon. This led to the development of an official statement concerning this book. Part of the statement reads, "The Smithsonian Institution has never used the Book of Mormon in any way... archaeologists see no connection between the archaeology of the New World and the subject matter of the Book of Mormon."19 The National Geographic Society has received similar questions. They admit to having used the Book of Mormon as a guide for a few excavations, but they have had no recognizable results. In speaking of the overall claims of the Book of Mormon, they said, "...your quotations do not agree with the archaeological data of the New World."20 The Museum of Natural History also finds no connection between archaeological findings and the Book of Mormon.
This writer, not satisfied with the available data, wrote the Mormon Church concerning these apparent discrepancies. The letters were never answered. The Grolier Research Service was contacted, Grolier is the company that publishes the Encyclopedia Americana and other reference works, and requested to find out if there was any archaeological evidence and if so to furnish some documentation. In their reply Grolier stated that they had contacted the Communications Office of the Mormon Church, the official public relations agency for the church. They admitted that there was no proof to date.21 Grolier also contacted a writer on the staff of Archaeology Magazine that had been working in Mexico for several years. The writer said that he was aware of Mormon excavations in the area for the past several years and that they had never contacted him concerning any discoveries.22
With the weight of evidence against them, many honest Mormon scholars and leaders have a difficult time explaining these contradictions. Dr. Marvin Cowan wrote a very pointed and direct letter on this subject to President Joseph Fielding Smith, then leader of the Mormon Church. Dr. Cowan asked for answers. President Smith responded by evading the issue. The content of the letter to Dr. Cowan contained statements like, "I bear my testimony that I know that this record is true history of these people-- (sic) the fathers of the "Indians" (sic) on this hemisphere." The only statement relating to Dr. Cowan's questions that President Smith made was that he did not know of any cities that had been discovered using the Book of Mormon as a guide.23
Since 1938 the Mormon Church has had an archaeologist with a doctorate. In 1946 Brigham Young University added a department of archaeology.24 The following is an example of what honest Mormon scholars have brought to light. Dee Green stated, "The first myth we need to eliminate is that the Book of Mormon archaeology exists." He also stated that the present Mormon works were full of half-truths.25 He also made the statement, "I do not see that the archaeology myths so common in our proselytizing program enhances the process of true conversion."26 Dee Green here admits that the Mormon Church publishes books with half-truths, and that the missionaries use myths as part of their witnessing tactics.

Ross T. Christensen, Mormon scholar, urges, "...the spirit of caution... for the reason that there are a number of points where correspondences should have been found but to this date have not been."27 Mr. Christensen's concern is expressed as a compliant by fellow Mormon dissident, Dr. J.L. Sorrenson. Concerning existing Mormon works on the subject of archaeology he states, "Some are clearly on the oddball fringe; others have credible qualifications." He goes on to say that the most prolific writers in this area are not qualified to write on the subject.28 Dr. Hugh Nibley, one of the more qualified Mormons in this area, would like to see the whole matter of both side dropped.29 For all the time, work, and money, this is all the Mormon Church can produce from its most honest and qualified people.

Professor Dee Jay Nelson was the most qualified Egyptologist in the Mormon Church. After examining a papyrus fragment and doing some translation work on it, he found some of the long standing claims of the Mormon Church to be false. The Mormon Church would not even hear of any contradictory evidence, and they dismissed it. Professor Nelson then resigned from the Mormon Church.30

In an effort to hold their ground, many Mormons claim that they have not been given enough time to find all of these things.31 They have had a Department of Archaeology at Brigham Young University for the past thirty-five years. There have been many opportunities during this time to find something. In the past thirty-five years there have been enough artifacts discovered to establish the credibility of the Bible. Coins, war artifacts, cities, and writings have been found.32 Archaeologists have failed to produce one coin, one chariot, or one sword in proof of the Book of Mormon.
To say that Mormons have come up with no archaeological findings would not be true. They have been finding artifacts for many years. One such find has come to be known as the Kinderhook Plates. These were six bell-shaped plates that were supposedly excavated from a mound outside of Kinderhook, Illinois in 1843. The founder of Mormonism, Joseph Smith, examined these plates and pronounced them to be authentic and written in Reformed Egyptian. He began to translate these plates. Before Joseph Smith finished his translation, an important fact came to the public's attention. The fact was that this was a well-planned prank devised to be played on Joseph Smith. A couple of the local residents of Kinderhook admitted to the whole thing. The letters on the plates were poor reproductions front the lid of a Chinese tea can.33

In 1885 a relic, known as the Batcreek Stone, was brought to the attention of the Mormon Church. It was claimed to be part of an inscription found on Jewish coins minted in and around Israel from about 70 A.D. until 135 A.D. Many years later a non-Mormon archaeologist, Dr. Gordon, confirmed this. This was seen as a revelation from God for the Mormons. Mormons upheld the Batcreek Stone and Dr. Gordon as positive proof. This left them open for a great amount of criticism. First, how would a people that arrived here in 600 B.C. know a slogan on a coin minted on the other side of the world in 70 A.D.? Second, the Batcreek Stone was supposed to be Hebrew. The Book of Mormon claims the official written language to be Reformed Egyptian. Third, some of the artifacts of jewelry found with this stone were found to be of eighteenth or nineteenth century origin. Fourth, Dr. Gordon was found to be a man of less than honest academic reputation. His fellow archaeologists had a low opinion of his work. Some of his work had been proved to be wrong. Fifth, the Batcreek Stone was finally dismissed as a recent forgery.34
In the early 1950's the Smithsonian Institution unearthed a stone in Mexico which came to be known as Stelah 5. The stone was supposed to represent a vision that a man named Lehi had (1 Nephi 8:2-30). The names of three of the characters in this vision are supposed to appear on this stone. However, this claim was made by Dr. Jakeman, a Mormon that used a questionable means to arrive at such a statement. Dr. Jakeman stated that the names were symbolically interpreted from characters on the carving. The most professionally qualified person in the Mormon Church opposed this interpretation, as did other top Mormon scientists. Dee Jay Nelson stated, "I found nothing which translated into the three names." He continued in further writings to state that Dr. Nibley and Dr. Sorrenson also agreed with Dee Green on this point.35

The Book of Mormon has been evaluated by archaeology in this paper. To be fair in material presentation, the Bible will briefly be evaluated in a similar manner for the purpose of comparison.
The Bible mentions several cities. Every major city of the Bible has been found. For example, Shechem was excavated in 1903,36 and Ur was excavated in 1854.37 There have been thousands of exampled of identifiable and translatable writings found.38 These have been verified by reputable scholars of many nations and many faiths. Every coin and monetary amount mentioned in the Bible has been found.39 The weapons of war and even the war records of some biblical events have been found. Sennacherib's chronicles have been found and translated. Concerning the incident of his conquest of Jerusalem when Hezekiah was king his records read, "As for Hezekiah, the Judean, I shut him up as a bird in a cage."40 This coincides with the biblical narrative. The Bible has been confirmed by archaeology.  

[Shadows-shine]

You have given me a lot to respond to. It may take me a few days to gather all my notes and reply back. Sorry for the delay in advance.  

[SinfulGuillotine]

As much as I try to be open-minded about beliefs different from my own...Mormonism has always left a bad taste in my mouth. I'll admit that a great deal of that is probably because I first learned about Mormonism in any depth and detail from a book called Under the Banner of Heaven, which while historically accurate, is written with a definite bias against the faith and much of its history.

And though I know that the mainstream LDS church makes a huge effort to separate itself from various Fundementalist sects, what goes on withinthose Fundementalist compounds makes me ill. Girls just barely old enough to menstruate married off to men old enough to be their father twice over, forced into sexual slavery as one of the many wives of the "prophet," who is, in reality, nothing more than a horny old borderline ******. Maybe some of them are actually crazy enough to believe their own spritual hocos-pocus BS that they spout, justifying serial sexual abuse, but that doesn't make them any less evil.

AGAIN, I KNOW THAT MAINSTREAM LDS DOES NOT ENGAGE IN OR SUPPORT SUCH BEHAVIOUR, but, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, but such behaviour WAS practised and encouraged by people such as Smith and Young, and that sort of polygamy was indeed included in original Morman teachings, whether mainstream LDS renounces it now or not.

And it really seems to me that Mormonism is about as Christian as Christianity is Jewish...possibly even less so. I feel like the more I learn of their theology the further from Christianity it seems to get.

I could go on, but I don't want to be any more disrespectful than I've already been. I really mean no disrespect (unless you happen to be the sort of Mormon who supports and/or commits child rape; then I absolutely mean all the disrespect I can possibly muster).  

[Aoife]

Quote:

According to Mormon writings (Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith - History 1:1-25), on a day in 1820, Joe was praying in the woods when he received a vision from God the Father and Jesus. It was revealed to Joe that the church was in apostasy and he was the chosen one to launch a new dispensation.
...
Joe put his "calling" on hold for three years. Then, according to his own account (Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith - History 1:29-54), he was paid a bedside visit by the angel Moroni in 1823.

I believe this was the "calling" that was being spoken of...

I am curious please Shadow, since you say you don't believe in the trinity, does this mean that you do believe in multiple gods?

I did a little research around and found this which I thought was awesome, I hope you'll read it. http://www.contenderministries.org/mormonism/sttestimony.php
if you won't click on the link, I can copy/paste it all, but it was kinda long, I didn't want to have to if you'll look.  

[Garland-Green]

Shadows-shine

He did dig up the brass plates containing the record of the Book of Mormon. And the Urim and Thummim were not a giant pair of spectatcles..... They were stones. Some thing similiar is described in the Old Testament I believe. Aaron, Moses' brother used a set too.

What happened to his golden plates, and how did he manage to carry them?
From what I gather the stones were set in a pair of silver frames... They would have the appearance of spectacles. This is not how the Urim and Thummin was used in the Old Testament.


They were objects connected with the breastplate of the high priest, and used as a kind of divine oracle. Since the days of the Alexandrian translators of the Old Testament it has been asserted that mean "revelation and truth" (δήλωσις καὶ ἀλήθεια), or "lights and perfections" (φωτισμοὶ καὶ τελεότητες); the τελειότης καὶ διδαχή of Symmachus (Jerome, "perfectio et doctrina"; Field, "Hexapla" on Deut. xxxiii. 8]; and the φωτισμοί καὶ τελειώσεις of Aquila and Theodotion. The Vulgate has "doctrina [after Symmachus; Old Latin, "ostensio" or "demonstratio"] et veritas." There is, however, no foundation for such a view in the Bible itself. Ex. xxviii. 13-30 describes the high-priestly ephod and the breastplate with the Urim and Thummim. It is called a "breastplate of judgment" ("ḥoshen ha-mishpaṭ"); it is four-square and double; and the twelve stones were not put inside the ḥoshen, but on the outside. It is related in Lev. viii. 7-8 that when, in compliance with the command in Ex. xxix. 1-37, Moses consecrated Aaron and his sons as priests, "He [Moses] put upon him [Aaron] the coat, and girded him with the girdle, and clothed him with the robe, and put the ephod upon him, and he girded him with the cunningly woven band [A. V. "curious girdle"] of the ephod, and bound it unto him therewith. And he put the breastplate upon him: and in the breastplate he put the Urim and the Thummim." Deut. xxxiii. 8 (R. V.), in the blessing of Moses, reads: "And of Levi he said: Thy Thummim and thy Urim are with thy godly one, whom thou didst prove at Massah, with whom thou didst strive at the waters of Meribah" (see Steuernagel, "Deuteronomium," p. 125, Göttingen, 1898; Bertholet, "Deuteronomium," p. 106, Freiburg, 1899; Driver, "Deuteronomy," in "International Critical Commentary," p. 398, New York, 1895; Baudissin, "Gesch. des Alttestamentlichen Priesterthums," p. 76). The most important passage is I Sam. xiv. 41, where Wellhausen and Driver have corrected the text, on the basis of the Septuagint, to read as follows: "And Saul said: Lord, God of Israel, why hast thou not answered thy servant this day? If this iniquity be in me or in Jonathan my son, Lord, God of Israel, give Urim; but if it be in thy people Israel, give Thummim. Then Jonathan and Saul were taken by lot; and the people escaped" (Driver, "Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Books of Samuel," p. 89, Oxford, 1890; Budde, "The Books of Samuel," in Polychrome Bible, p. 63; H. P. Smith, "The Books of Samuel," p. 122; Kirkpatrick, "The First Book of Samuel," in "The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges," 1891, p. 137).

- jewishencyclopedia

Urim and Thummim Exodus 28:30 And thou shalt put in the breastplate of judgment the Urim and Thummim; they shall be upon Aaron's heart when he goeth in before the Lord. The Urim and Thummim was God's way of answering His people. Urim (אורים) means

[the] Seer Stone was the shape of an egg though not quite so large, of a gray cast something like granite but with white stripes running around it. It was transparent but had no holes, neither on the end or in the sides
fairmormon.org

As a chastisement for this carelessness [loss of the 116 pages], the Urim and Thummim was taken from Smith. But by humbling himself, he again found favor with the Lord and was presented a strange oval-shaped, chocolate colored stone, about the size of an egg, but more flat which it was promised should answer the same purpose. With this stone all the present book was translated
fairmormon.org

Lucy M. Smith, mother of Joseph Jr., described them as "two smooth, three-cornered diamonds set in glass, and the glasses were set in silver bows, which were connected with each other...as old fashioned spectacles."

The Old Testament seems to indicate that the urim and thummin faded from use during the early days of Israel’s monarchy, and are only referred to once after the Babylonian exile. This may be so because the institution of monarchy God inaugurated the office of prophet. The prophets now participated in God’s heavenly court and communicated God’s messages to the courts in Jerusalem and Samaria. Apparently prophets who revealed God’s word to the king replaced the urim and thummin, through which He revealed His mind to the priest. Nevertheless, we still find Ezra using this device to determine the ancestry of the priests who returned from the exile in Ezra 2:63. After this the Bible never mentions the urim and thummin again. God did not preserve it for His people. They are one more allowance from God to assist His people at a certain point in history.”


 

[Shadows-shine]

SinfulGuillotine

As much as I try to be open-minded about beliefs different from my own...Mormonism has always left a bad taste in my mouth. I'll admit that a great deal of that is probably because I first learned about Mormonism in any depth and detail from a book called Under the Banner of Heaven, which while historically accurate, is written with a definite bias against the faith and much of its history.

And though I know that the mainstream LDS church makes a huge effort to separate itself from various Fundementalist sects, what goes on withinthose Fundementalist compounds makes me ill. Girls just barely old enough to menstruate married off to men old enough to be their father twice over, forced into sexual slavery as one of the many wives of the "prophet," who is, in reality, nothing more than a horny old borderline ******. Maybe some of them are actually crazy enough to believe their own spritual hocos-pocus BS that they spout, justifying serial sexual abuse, but that doesn't make them any less evil.

AGAIN, I KNOW THAT MAINSTREAM LDS DOES NOT ENGAGE IN OR SUPPORT SUCH BEHAVIOUR, but, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, but such behaviour WAS practised and encouraged by people such as Smith and Young, and that sort of polygamy was indeed included in original Morman teachings, whether mainstream LDS renounces it now or not.

And it really seems to me that Mormonism is about as Christian as Christianity is Jewish...possibly even less so. I feel like the more I learn of their theology the further from Christianity it seems to get.

I could go on, but I don't want to be any more disrespectful than I've already been. I really mean no disrespect (unless you happen to be the sort of Mormon who supports and/or commits child rape; then I absolutely mean all the disrespect I can possibly muster).

One: cite your sources as to where you heard this. Two: Joseph and Brigham married both young and old women so they could have an income and a husband to support them. Also, back then it was common practice for women to marry young. I've read several history books where girls got married as young as 14. Three: of course I don't support child rape! That's dispicable!  

[Shadows-shine]

Aoife

Quote:

According to Mormon writings (Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith - History 1:1-25), on a day in 1820, Joe was praying in the woods when he received a vision from God the Father and Jesus. It was revealed to Joe that the church was in apostasy and he was the chosen one to launch a new dispensation.
...
Joe put his "calling" on hold for three years. Then, according to his own account (Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith - History 1:29-54), he was paid a bedside visit by the angel Moroni in 1823.

I believe this was the "calling" that was being spoken of...

I am curious please Shadow, since you say you don't believe in the trinity, does this mean that you do believe in multiple gods?

I did a little research around and found this which I thought was awesome, I hope you'll read it. http://www.contenderministries.org/mormonism/sttestimony.php
if you won't click on the link, I can copy/paste it all, but it was kinda long, I didn't want to have to if you'll look.

Joseph didn't receive his calling as a prophet until several years after the First Vision.
And I was always under the impression, even when I did believe in the trinity, that it was a form of soft polytheism. Doesn't it divide God into three parts. Hence the prefix of tri.  

[Garland-Green]

Shadows-shine

Only legal wife? What?

1 From the very beginning God set the pattern by creating a
monogamous marriage relationship with one man and one woman,
Adam and Eve (Gen. 1:27; 2:21-25).
2 This God-established example of one woman for one man, was
the general practice of the human race (Gen. 4:1) until
interrupted by sin (Gen. 4:23).
3 The Law of Moses clearly commands, "You shall not multiply
wives" (Deut. 17:17).
4 The warning against polygamy is repeated in the very passage
where it numbers Solomon's many wives (I Kings 11:2), warning
that "you shall not intermarry with them, nor they with you."
5 Our Lord reaffirmed God's original intention by citing this
passage (Matt. 19:4) and noting that God created one "male and
[one] female" and joined them in marriage.
6 The New Testament stresses that "each man [should] have his
own wife, and let each woman have her own husband" (1 Cor. 7:2).
7 Likewise, Paul insisted that a church leader should be "the
husband of one wife" (1 Tim. 3:2, 12).
8 Indeed, monogamous marriage is a prefiguration of the relation
between Christ and his bride, the Church (Eph. 5:31-32).

In fact, the Bible reveals that God severely punished those who
practiced polygamy, as is evidenced by the following:

1 Polygamy is first mentioned in the context of a sinful society
in rebellion against God where the murderer "Lamech took for
himself two wives" (Gen. 4: 19,23).
2 God repeatedly warned polygamists of the consequences of their
actions "lest his heart turn away" hom God (Deut. 17:17;
cf. 1 Kings 11:2).
3 God never commanded polygamy - like divorce, he only permitted it
because of the hardness of their hearts [Deut. 24:1; Matt. 19:8].
4 Every polygamist in the Bible, including David and Solomon
(1 Chron. 14:3), paid dearly for his sins.  

[Garland-Green]

Shadows-shine

How can one plagarise the Bible? There is no copywrite and it is not written by any one author.... The Book of Mormon uses quotes of scripture from the prophets in the Bible. What's so wrong with that? Isn't the Bible full of prophets quoting other prophets? I guess by your defnition that's plagarism too.

It is wrong if the Bible is used to support an erroneous doctrine, or if it is used in ways it was not intended by its authors. Using parts out of context to support a view the original text does not allow. A prophet quoting another is fine, since they follow the idea and intent of the prophet before them. Maybe plagarise was not the right word...  

[Garland-Green]

Shadows-shine

The account in the first five books of Moses, were written by Moses long after the events of Genesis occured.

Quote:

This is strange since the plates were supposed to have been in the ground many centuries before the King James Bible was completed in 1611!

You can't quote anything before it exists. The King James was not there to be quoted. It had not been translated yet, so plates that are older then the translation they quote is not logically possible.  

[Garland-Green]

Shadows-shine

There is no such thing as a perfect translation! The english word elephant might have been the closest word to whatever Hebrew word that was written on the plates.

But he used the Urim and Thummim to translate the text... If these stones were from God, to be used for this purpose why would they be wrong? Why would they translate the wrong word?

In the year 1823, while praying one evening in his home, young Joseph Smith was visited by a heavenly being. This angel told him of an ancient record, similar to the Bible, written on plates of gold, that lay hidden, buried in a hill near his home. Joseph was led to the spot where he uncovered these gold plates. Four years later, after years of preparation and instruction by the angel, Joseph was eventually commanded to take the record and translate it into what would later be known as The Book of Mormon.

Buried with the plates were special instruments which would assist him in translating the sacred book. These instruments are called Urim and Thummim and are described by Joseph as "two stones in silver bows—and these stones, fastened to a breastplate, constituted what is called the Urim and Thummim ...  

[Garland-Green]

Shadows-shine

Here we criticize Joseph for polygamy, but yet we don't complain that Abraham, Issac, Jacob, David and Solomon (just to name a few) were polygamists as well and all of them had hundreds of children... and yet God declared them righteous in His eyes...

Abraham was declared righteous because of Faith, not his actions. More so despite of his actions. David and Solomon all had problems because of their wives. It is misinterpreting the text to claim that because Abraham had many wives I am allowed to, when so much in the text speaks against polygamy. See my previous post.  

[Garland-Green]

Shadows-shine

Which he had no right to do. The LDS Church is the only church in the history of the United States, (a country which promises freedom of religion, the right practice said religion any where one chooses, by the way), that had an extermination order set against us. That extermination order was not lifted until the mid 1900s

While the order is often referred to as the "Mormon Extermination Order" due to the phrasing used by Boggs, relatively few people were killed as a direct result of its issuance. However, the state militia and other authorities used Boggs' missive as a pretext to expel the Mormons from their lands in the state, and force them to migrate to Illinois. Mormons did not begin to return to Missouri until 25 years later, when they found a more welcoming environment and were able to establish homes there once more. In 1976, citing the unconstitutional nature of Boggs' directive, Missouri Governor Kit Bond formally rescinded it.

I am not saying it is ok to issue extermination orders. I am just saying the event is greatly exaggerated for what seems to me to be in order to harness support.