I Baptize Dead People

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Part of the problem here is that specific questions aren't really answered, or they are danced around.

I'm going to steal from Cheese...

One prophecy was that there would be a second coming in 56 years. It didn't happen, how do you explain that?

It's pretty straightforward. It was never really answered though. All we get is "if it didn't come directly from the church website..."which is not really an answer at all. First of all, I don't expect that the church would list false prophecies on their website. Why would they? Just because they don't have it up there doesn't mean it didn't happen though.

Maybe a better way to put the question to an expert (a Mormon) would be "did Joseph Smith say their would be a second coming that didn't happen"? It's really a "yes or no" kind of a question.

"I don't know" is also a possible answer, I guess.

"If it's not listed on the official LDS website, then no" isn't really an answer.

Actually, Rathji said he wasn't familiar with that being in the Doctrine and Convenants...which is an answer IMO.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Of course not, but I don't have an agenda either.

LOL...my agenda is the truth. Is that an issue? I ask questions and rarely get answers.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Actually, Rathji said he wasn't familiar with that being in the Doctrine and Convenants...which is an answer IMO.

Rathji needs to study a wee bit more about his religion then...doesnt he?

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Cheese

LOL...my agenda is the truth. Is that an issue? I ask questions and rarely get answers.

I didn't realize you were referring to yourself. So you were taught all of this stuff as a Mormon?

[eddly]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Part of the problem here is that specific questions aren't really answered, or they are danced around.

I'm going to steal from Cheese...

One prophecy was that there would be a second coming in 56 years. It didn't happen, how do you explain that?

It's pretty straightforward. It was never really answered though. All we get is "if it didn't come directly from the church website..."which is not really an answer at all. First of all, I don't expect that the church would list false prophecies on their website. Why would they? Just because they don't have it up there doesn't mean it didn't happen though.

Maybe a better way to put the question to an expert (a Mormon) would be "did Joseph Smith say their would be a second coming that didn't happen"? It's really a "yes or no" kind of a question.

"I don't know" is also a possible answer, I guess.

"If it's not listed on the official LDS website, then no" isn't really an answer.

I don't recall reading that Joseph Smith ever set a date for the second coming. By saying that, I'm not saying it didn't happen. It is just hard for me to comment on it if I have never heard about it till reading your post. In the 1800s it was common among some religions to make such claims. So my answer is "I don't know".

I have read many sites, lds approved and others that are considered anti-mormon. Claiming that everything on an "anti-mormon" site is a lie is ridiculous. Many of it is actually fact, but often the context is not explained. Regarding Cheese's question, I have never come across a quote stating that Joseph Smith had declared a day or year for when the second coming would occur. Please show me the source for it, I would love to read up on it.

[photon]

I don't think all ex-mormons who create those sites have an agenda either.. Just like every other religion, I'm sure there are groups of Mormons who are far more, um, enthusiastic than others and just like every other organization out there people have bad experiences with them.

So on one hand you can't discount what sites like exmormon.org since the people bring their stories to sites like that do so from those extreme groups, and on the other hand you can't characterize every single Mormon you meet by the way some groups inside the organization behave.

[eddly]

Originally Posted by Cheese

Rathji needs to study a wee bit more about his religion then...doesnt he?

It is rather hard to have every verse memorized. Assuming you believe in the Bible, do you have it thorougly memorized? Also, no need to belittle him as you are doing...

[eddly]

Originally Posted by photon

I don't think all ex-mormons who create those sites have an agenda either.. Just like every other religion, I'm sure there are groups of Mormons who are far more, um, enthusiastic than others and just like every other organization out there people have bad experiences with them.

So on one hand you can't discount what sites like exmormon.org since the people bring their stories to sites like that do so from those extreme groups, and on the other hand you can't characterize every single Mormon you meet by the way some groups inside the organization behave.

Good post photon. I agree, exmormon.org can be a great source of information. I have browsed several times over the last 10 years (I believe it has been around for 13 years now). Another good source is www.postmormon.org (they are generally less bitter about the church than the visitors of www.exmormon.org can be).

[photon]

Originally Posted by eddly

It is rather hard to have every verse memorized. Assuming you believe in the Bible, do you have it thorougly memorized? Also, no need to belittle him as you are doing...

Heh, you're barking up the wrooooong tree.

Though I would say a lot of ex-whatevers (Christians etc) have more knowledge about their religious books than the average active member, at least in my limited experience.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by photon

Heh, you're barking up the wrooooong tree.

Though I would say a lot of ex-whatevers (Christians etc) have more knowledge about their religious books than the average active member, at least in my limited experience.

I would agree with that, especially where the bible is concerned.

[eddly]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

I would agree with that, especially where the bible is concerned.

Certainly true in mormonism. I'm surprised sometimes by what my father does not know about the history of the church. He has held several fairly high level positions where I live. What you have to understand is the fact that we as Mormons are not actively taught every little detail about church history. Essentially we are given a very bare version. So when someone asks a question here and we don't have an answer, don't be surprised and assume we are hiding secrets that we know... it really isn't the case. As with most, if not all religions, belief is based on faith not facts alone.

Mormons generally don't care that they don't know every single detail about the early church. They feel that they received a spiritual witness of its truthfulness and that trumps everything. Therein lies the problem as people in other religions also feel that they have received a witness proving that their church is correct. So much confusion in this world.

At the end of the day, if you are happy worshiping as you do, and it does not negatively impact others I really don't care what you believe and would not want to tear down what someone believes.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Part of the problem here is that specific questions aren't really answered, or they are danced around.

I'm going to steal from Cheese...

One prophecy was that there would be a second coming in 56 years. It didn't happen, how do you explain that?

It's pretty straightforward. It was never really answered though. All we get is "if it didn't come directly from the church website..."which is not really an answer at all.

He said that this specific prophecy was in the Doctrine and Covenants, to which I asked him where in the D&C it was. I didn't specificly recall such a prophecy so I was asking him to point it out.

These are claims that are in the D&C? If so, could you provide locations for them. If not, then what is your source? I don't recall any claims specific to the ones you are making.

He could not point it out, but instead pointed me towards websites.

To which I responded

Anyone can post something on a website and claim it is what the LDS Church believes. If you can point out a website where the LDS Church itself claims it believes something, then I will answer any questions about that. If you can find something in the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants or Pearl of Great Price, I will try and answer your questions about that.

If you want to know why the website www.antimormon.com says that Joseph Smith raped 300 monkeys in whore houses, you are out of luck here. I will give you a hint though, and it has something to do with if you should be believing everything you read on the internet.

Which I thought was a pretty straightforward way of saying that him asking me about a random claim was not going to get an answer unless he provided a reference to something the church taught. To simplify the discussion I asked him to keep his questions to material that was published and that I could access. I am sure there is more information out there, but since I dont have access to it how could I make any reasonable response?

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by eddly

I don't recall reading that Joseph Smith ever set a date for the second coming. By saying that, I'm not saying it didn't happen. It is just hard for me to comment on it if I have never heard about it till reading your post. In the 1800s it was common among some religions to make such claims. So my answer is "I don't know".

I have read many sites, lds approved and others that are considered anti-mormon. Claiming that everything on an "anti-mormon" site is a lie is ridiculous. Many of it is actually fact, but often the context is not explained. Regarding Cheese's question, I have never come across a quote stating that Joseph Smith had declared a day or year for when the second coming would occur. Please show me the source for it, I would love to read up on it.

Heres a wiki on JS and his prophecies eddly...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophec...seph_Smith,_Jr.
It has the prophecy on the 2nd coming about 2/3s of the way down.
Again Im not trying to suggest you are wrong...Im just saying there are literally hundreds of sites that have the same "factual" info out there. As a matter of fact Id suggest there is likely more factual sites out there than LDS supported sites.
Thanks for suggesting that not everything on the anti-sites is a lie...thats important...like I said...if you think half of it is a lie...that means half is correct.
How do you justify the lies as a Mormon?

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by eddly

Certainly true in mormonism. I'm surprised sometimes by what my father does not know about the history of the church. He has held several fairly high level positions where I live. What you have to understand is the fact that we as Mormons are not actively taught every little detail about church history. Essentially we are given a very bare version. So when someone asks a question here and we don't have an answer, don't be surprised and assume we are hiding secrets that we know... it really isn't the case. As with most, if not all religions, belief is based on faith not facts alone.

Mormons generally don't care that they don't know every single detail about the early church. They feel that they received a spiritual witness of its truthfulness and that trumps everything. Therein lies the problem as people in other religions also feel that they have received a witness proving that their church is correct. So much confusion in this world.

At the end of the day, if you are happy worshiping as you do, and it does not negatively impact others I really don't care what you believe and would not want to tear down what someone believes.

My final question to you eddly...I promise I wont bother you with this anymore. You suggest in this post that "Mormons are not actively taught every little detail about church history" and "Mormons generally don't care that they don't know every single detail about the early church" yet you obviously have bought into the system 100%.
IF I was to tell you that you could use that same reasoning and try to get a job as a doctor/lawyer/engineer...would it work? If not why wouldnt you study every little piece of church history you could find. Isnt it important to have all the knowledge?

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by Cheese

Thanks for suggesting that not everything on the anti-sites is a lie...thats important...like I said...if you think half of it is a lie...that means half is correct.
How do you justify the lies as a Mormon?

If a website is lying about Mormons, I really don't think anyone but the website owner needs to justify what they are lying about. My personal opinion is they have far to much free time on their hands to be concerned enough about what a religion they don't belong to believes in that they are willing to make a website about it.

I couldn't begin to guess why though.

Originally Posted by Cheese

If not why wouldnt you study every little piece of church history you could find. Isnt it important to have all the knowledge?

Sure it might be good to know every single thing, but personally I don't have time to document every possible version of events that happened almost 200 years ago. I know what is important and/or interesting to me. I don't try and believe that people who have been members of the LDS church were always perfect, but some of the claims that people make about stuff that happened have no historical backing at all, yet are presented as fact. If me not believing that stuff makes me ignorant, then so be it, guilt as charged. However I would much sooner doubt the logic of the person who woud believe something just because it is posted on the internet that cannot provide any sources to back up their claims.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Rathji

He said that this specific prophecy was in the Doctrine and Covenants, to which I asked him where in the D&C it was. I didn't specificly recall such a prophecy so I was asking him to point it out.


He could not point it out, but instead pointed me towards websites.

To which I responded


Which I thought was a pretty straightforward way of saying that him asking me about a random claim was not going to get an answer unless he provided a reference to something the church taught. To simplify the discussion I asked him to keep his questions to material that was published and that I could access. I am sure there is more information out there, but since I dont have access to it how could I make any reasonable response?

It's a pretty strong accusation to make about a guy who (afaik) is considered a prophet within the LDS community. Your answer of "I never heard that, but I'm not sure" doesn't seem to have much conviction behind it.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I expect(ed) adherents to know if it's true or not. No maybes about it.

But that could be my own bias or misunderstanding talking. Maybe y'all believe he was capable of making mistakes and that's part of the deal and you don't make a big hubbub about it. That would make sense.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

It's a pretty strong accusation to make about a guy who (afaik) is considered a prophet within the LDS community. Your answer of "I never heard that, but I'm not sure" doesn't seem to have much conviction behind it.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I expect(ed) adherents to know if it's true or not. No maybes about it.

But that could be my own bias or misunderstanding talking. Maybe y'all believe he was capable of making mistakes and that's part of the deal and you don't make a big hubbub about it. That would make sense.

I don't recall the text that he was refering to and I am sorry if this offends you, but I can't pull chapter, verse and specific contents out of my memory. This is why I asked him for clarification, because as far as I knew the scripture didn't exist. If he pointed it out, then I would know it did exist, and I would be able to make a comment on it.

If my answer is not satifactory to you or you feel that because I do not know off hand without a reference that I am not qualified to respond then I am sorry.

[photon]

I have one question actually.. what's the general Mormon view of their scripture? Is it closer to an "evangelical" view of it being perfect and infallible? Or a more liberal view? Or is Mormonism like Christianity in that it has different groups within it that hold varying views?

Reason I ask is I remembered the last time many many years ago I had a Mormon at my door discussing things, and when they popped this little tidbit they lost me totally: that all Natives in the Americas and Polynesia are descended from Israel.

I don't know if he was the exception or the rule.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Rathji

I don't recall the text that he was refering to and I am sorry if this offends you, but I can't pull chapter, verse and specific contents out of my memory.

You can't offend me. And you don't have to pull chapter and verse out of memory. The question boils down to "did he make prophecies that didn't turn out to be true"? The answer is "I don't think so". I'd expect it to be stronger than that. But whatever.

I've really got no beef with Mormons. Like someone said earlier, if you are practicing your faith and not harming anyone else* then I'm in no position to hack on you for it. I'm just kind of curious. I'm not in the business of trying to convince anyone of anything.

*I don't consider door-knocking to be harmful. I do consider (and Mormons don't do this) bringing religion into public institutions and using it as justification for oppression** and violence*** to be harmful, so some other sects are fair game. The taxes thing does kind of bug me though.

** that's a whole 'nother can of worms
*** and so is that

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by photon

I have one question actually.. what's the general Mormon view of their scripture? Is it closer to an "evangelical" view of it being perfect and infallible? Or a more liberal view? Or is Mormonism like Christianity in that it has different groups within it that hold varying views?

Reason I ask is I remembered the last time many many years ago I had a Mormon at my door discussing things, and when they popped this little tidbit they lost me totally: that all Natives in the Americas and Polynesia are descended from Israel.

I don't know if he was the exception or the rule.

As to your first question, I will refer you to the Articles of Faith, which is basicly a point for explaination of what mormons beleive.

Articles of Faith

8 We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

So for the most part, scripture is considered correct and the truth. That does not mean that it should always be interpreted literally though.

As to your second, yes the Book of Mormon tells of a family who escaped from Israel before Jerusalem was destroyed about 600 BC. This family managed to make it to the North American continent and established a civilization here. I am not sure of the actual Church position on this matter, but it is my belief that these people grew into the civilizations we know as the Aztecs, Mayans and eventually to what we know as Native Americans today.