Announcement

Collapse

LDS - Mormonism Guidelines

Theists only.

Look! It's a bird, no it's a plane, no it's a bicycle built for two!

This forum is a debate area to discuss issues pertaining to the LDS - Mormons. This forum is generally for theists only, and is generaly not the area for debate between atheists and theists. Non-theists may not post here without first obtaining permission from the moderator of this forum. Granting of such permission is subject to Moderator discretion - and may be revoked if the Moderator feels that the poster is not keeping with the spirit of the World Religions Department.

Due to the sensitive nature of the LDS Temple Ceremonies to our LDS posters, we do not allow posting exact text of the temple rituals, articles describing older versions of the ceremony, or links that provide the same information. However discussion of generalities of the ceremony are not off limits. If in doubt, PM the area mod or an Admin


Non-theists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

The Decline of Mormonism

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Apocalypticsights View Post
    Please knock off with the cult references. Mormonism is not a cult.
    One of the key factors of determining the status is extra biblical revelation - of which Mormonism is made primarily.
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

    Comment


    • #32
      Aren't all sapient beings the same exact species in mormonism? Because the have humans turning into gods like caterpillars turning into butterflies.
      If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Apocalypticsights View Post
        Please knock off with the cult references. Mormonism is not a cult.
        I do believe the 'cult' word is more like a 'stone' to throw at others who believe differently, but that does not face up to some of the real issues with the LDS church and reality.
        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

        go with the flow the river knows . . .

        Frank

        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
          I do believe the 'cult' word is more like a 'stone' to throw at others who believe differently, but that does not face up to some of the real issues with the LDS church and reality.
          Christianity is also a "cult" based on the same definitions that anti-Mormons like to use; they just don't realize it.

          Cow Poke wrote: One of the key factors of determining the status is extra biblical revelation - of which Mormonism is made primarily.

          Cow Poke has a tendency to throw criticisms at Mormonism, without realizing that those same criticisms are valid against his own faith.

          The New Testament was "extrabiblical revelation", when looking at the Old Testament as the canon of scripture.

          -7up

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
            Gerhard May does so by suppressing or waving away contrary data.
            Source: Paul Copan

            Many have suggested that the intertestamental book of 2 Maccabees states clearly the traditional doctrine of creatio ex nihilo. There a mother pleads with her son willingly to accept torture rather than recant his beliefs:

            I beg you, child, look at the sky and the earth; see all that is in them and realize that God made them out of nothing, and that man comes into being in the same way. (7:28)

            Although May thinks that this passage does not have the necessary doctrinal context for the idea of creatio ex nihilo (pp. 6, 16), others are not so convinced. For example, Gerhard von Rad maintains, "The conceptional formulation creatio ex nihilo is first found" in this passage. Moreover, to say that there was no doctrinal context at all for such a statement does not seem quite right. After all, the Jewish understanding of creation was that "the world as a whole can only be understood in the context of its coming into being." It is, then, not a far step from this assumption to creation out of nothing.

            We find another reference to creation out of nothing in the Dead Sea Scrolls (which May does not even mention):

            From the God of Knowledge comes all that is and shall be. Before ever they existed He established their whole design, and when, as ordained for them, they come into being, it is in accord with His glorious design that they accomplish their task without change. (1QS 3:15)

            The noted first-century rabbi, Gamaliel, seems to have reflected this concept of creation in his thinking (although May calls this an "isolated" reference [p. 23]). A philosopher challenged him, "Your God was indeed a great artist, but he had good materials [unformed space/void, darkness, water, wind, and the deep] to help him." Gamaliel, responded, "All of them are explicitly described as having been created by him [and not as preexistent]."

            In the early Christian homily, Shepherd of Hermas, the first command is to believe that God brought all things "into existence out of non-existence."

            © Copyright Original Source



            In fact, those in the early centuries who claimed that God created out of formless matter (Philo, Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria) were heavily influenced by Platonism (which held precisely that).

            Copan got destroyed by Blake Ostler in their debate:

            http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectiv...rmon-challenge

            Plus, that very same passage in 2 Maccabbees was CLEARLY not Ex nihilo in the way that modern Christians think of it; Do you believe that a fetus in the womb is literally created from nothing? No, it isn't. (or if you think Adam was created from nothing... wrong, he was created "from the dust" of the earth.

            This video describes the facts extensively; and at 10:20, specifically addressed Copan's utter failure at even bothering to look at the context and usage of the text in 2 Maccabbees https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhWaeyEPlAw

            -7up

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by seven7up View Post
              Cow Poke wrote: One of the key factors of determining the status is extra biblical revelation - of which Mormonism is made primarily.

              Cow Poke has a tendency to throw criticisms at Mormonism, without realizing that those same criticisms are valid against his own faith.
              Cow Poke fully realizes some of the same criticisms can be made against Christianity by unbelievers, but, unlike Mormonism, Christianity wasn't founded on a fraud and a false prophet.

              The New Testament was "extrabiblical revelation", when looking at the Old Testament as the canon of scripture.

              -7up
              Sure, but you don't predate the New Testament, do you? And the BoM falsely claims to be "another testament" of Jesus, when it is, in fact, a fictional and deceptive work by a false prophet.
              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by seven7up View Post
                Copan got destroyed by Blake Ostler in their debate:

                http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectiv...rmon-challenge
                This is the second time you've brought this up. First, you have an odd idea of what a "debate" is. What you linked to is a rebuttal, not a "debate." Second, you seem to confuse quantity with quality.
                Plus, that very same passage in 2 Maccabbees was CLEARLY not Ex nihilo in the way that modern Christians think of it; Do you believe that a fetus in the womb is literally created from nothing? No, it isn't. (or if you think Adam was created from nothing... wrong, he was created "from the dust" of the earth.
                The question is not whether I think a fetus in the womb is formed from nothing, but whether the Maccabeans did.
                This video describes the facts extensively; and at 10:20, specifically addressed Copan's utter failure at even bothering to look at the context and usage of the text in 2 Maccabbees https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhWaeyEPlAw
                Ok, I've looked at the context. It has very little bearing on the meaning of the verse. I'm not watching your video to see what tortured attempts it makes to change the meaning of the text. I'll take the time to read text, but I typically find videos not worthwhile. And I see you managed to flat out ignore the other 3/4 of my argument.
                Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                sigpic
                I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by seven7up View Post
                  Copan got destroyed by Blake Ostler
                  That's what
                  - She

                  Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                  - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                  I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                  Stephen R. Donaldson

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by seven7up View Post
                    Copan got destroyed by Blake Ostler in their debate:

                    http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectiv...rmon-challenge
                    I agree with Cow Poke. This was not a formal debate where both sides have the opportunity for a series of arguments and rebuttals.

                    No, no one was destroyed in this response.
                    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                    go with the flow the river knows . . .

                    Frank

                    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by seven7up View Post
                      Christianity is also a "cult" based on the same definitions that anti-Mormons like to use; they just don't realize it.

                      Cow Poke wrote: One of the key factors of determining the status is extra biblical revelation - of which Mormonism is made primarily.

                      Cow Poke has a tendency to throw criticisms at Mormonism, without realizing that those same criticisms are valid against his own faith.

                      The New Testament was "extrabiblical revelation", when looking at the Old Testament as the canon of scripture.

                      -7up
                      I agree that all religions and churches face these issues and there are problems with absolute claims of the scripture as some how revealed directly by God. The Book of Genesis and parts of the rest of the Pentateuch, and likely the Psalms are rooted in Canaanite and pre-Babylonian writings, and most likely evolved and were not written by a specific author. Most of the Bible including the New Testament has been subject to editing and compilation and change over time by the evidence. There is sufficient evidence that both the Old and new Testament are set in known history and archeology of the Middle East.

                      I consider the lack of evidence for the historical context of the Book of Moron to be more problematic, than the New Testament. There is insufficient evidence that the Book of Mormon was set in known history and archeology of the Americas.


                      There is a basis for accusing them all as manmade "cults" but I do not go there as the extreme skeptics claim.
                      Last edited by shunyadragon; 12-24-2015, 10:34 AM.
                      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                      go with the flow the river knows . . .

                      Frank

                      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                        Cow Poke fully realizes some of the same criticisms can be made against Christianity by unbelievers, but, unlike Mormonism, Christianity wasn't founded on a fraud and a false prophet.
                        This is your biased opinion.



                        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                        Sure, but you don't predate the New Testament, do you?
                        Irrelevant, you missed the point. The New Testament is considered by Jews to be "extra-biblical". That doesn't stop you from believing in it.

                        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                        And the BoM falsely claims to be "another testament" of Jesus, when it is, in fact, a fictional and deceptive work by a false prophet.
                        Again ... that is like ... your opinion ... dude.

                        -7up

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by seven7up View Post
                          This is your biased opinion.
                          Well, do you believe Christianity WAS founded on fraud and a false prophet?

                          Irrelevant, you missed the point. The New Testament is considered by Jews to be "extra-biblical". That doesn't stop you from believing in it.
                          A) I'm not a Jew
                          2) I'm a New Testament Christian
                          C) Saul, based on Jewish teachings, tried to destroy Christianity, only to become one of its greatest proponents

                          Again ... that is like ... your opinion ... dude.
                          Based on much research and confirmation of the Holy Spirit, dudette.
                          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            It has been reported, "Smith asked which religious sect he should join and was told to join none of them because all existing religions had corrupted the teachings of Jesus Christ."
                            . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

                            . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

                            Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by 37818 View Post
                              It has been reported, "Smith asked which religious sect he should join and was told to join none of them because all existing religions had corrupted the teachings of Jesus Christ."
                              And, therefore, he started his own religion, based on his own testimony, his own "visions", his own money digging, his own writings, his own wild imagination, his own grand ego, his own sexual fantasies, his own.......

                              It's all about Smith.

                              Christianity is all about Jesus, buried, crucified and risen again.
                              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                It should be noted that Smith accused other Christians of not being genuine Christianity in the first place. And then they cry when non-Mormon Christians say they [Mormons] are not Christians. And of course they're not. And the sad part is they [Mormons] do not know why.
                                Last edited by 37818; 01-01-2016, 04:54 PM.
                                . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

                                . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

                                Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X