There are numerous passages in the Book of Mormon that are strictly word for word from the Bible. Mormons explain this by pointing out that the "brass plates", which were obtained by Nephi after he killed their rightful owner, were actually the Old Testament. As Nephi studied the brass plates, he put his favorite quotes into his own writing and that is why they appear in the Book of Mormon. Plausable, not likely, but plausable.
For the Mormon's sake, lets say that they are right. The brass plates actually were the Old Testament. That being the case, we should expect to find that all the quotes in the Book of Mormon all come ONLY from the Old Testament.
There is no possible way that text from the New Testament could show up in the Book of Mormon because the two books were being written at the same time on opposite sides of the world. It would have been impossible for Nephi to quote from the NT, because it had not been written yet. In fact, Nephi was around 600 plus years before the authors of the NT.
Thus, if it were shown that text from the NT did actually appear in the Book of Mormon, what would that imply? It would imply that whom ever wrote the Book of Mormon had access to the New Testament. But how can that be, seeing as how the two Books were thousands of miles apart from each other?
If the Book of Mormon was really true, there would be no text AT ALL from the New Testament.
But there is...
Compare:
III Nephi 12:3-48;13;14
to:
Matthew 5-7
Now, of course, Mormons will say, "Of course they are the same because Jesus is sharing the same teachings to both groups of people."
Sure, if that was true, the text would be similar. But word for word?
The Bible has undergone extensive revisions and translations. The Book of Mormon was abridged by Mormon. What are the chances that the two sections of text turn out identical? Keep in mind that the LDS use the King James version of the Bible. Yes, the teachings would be similar, but the chances of them being word for word are almost nothing.
The same argument could also be made for the Old Testament quotes. They are even older than the New Testament quotes, and yet, somehow, they show up in the Book of Mormon word-for-word. The only plausable explanation is that whom ever wrote the Book of Mormon had access to a King James version of the Bible.
Mormon didn't.
Nephi didn't.
Joseph Smith did.
Friday, February 12, 2010
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Greg asks: Just what is it about SPAM that infuriates them so?
http://spamlds.ning.com/profiles/blogs/just-what-is-it-about-spam
Greg, I know you believe in the LDS church and you have a right to defend it. I wouldn't expect anything less.
The reason why we are "infuriated" is because your attitude stinks. You come across as cocky, holier-than-thou, condescending, know-it-all, and arrogant.
Everyone who is not Mormon automatically gets the title of "anti-Mormon" from you.
Anyone who disagrees with you is "narrow minded".
You try to make all "anti-Mormons" appear to be stupid and gullible.
But probably the worst, is that you censor. You don't allow people to defend themselves. You bash and trash them and then refuse to let them respond.
The only thing you have stated on your website that I agree with:
"The most despised TBM site on the internet!"
Greg, I know you believe in the LDS church and you have a right to defend it. I wouldn't expect anything less.
The reason why we are "infuriated" is because your attitude stinks. You come across as cocky, holier-than-thou, condescending, know-it-all, and arrogant.
Everyone who is not Mormon automatically gets the title of "anti-Mormon" from you.
Anyone who disagrees with you is "narrow minded".
You try to make all "anti-Mormons" appear to be stupid and gullible.
But probably the worst, is that you censor. You don't allow people to defend themselves. You bash and trash them and then refuse to let them respond.
The only thing you have stated on your website that I agree with:
"The most despised TBM site on the internet!"
More Hate and Intolerance Brought to You by SPAMLDS
Greg, of SPAMLDS, is up to his usual stone casting from the safety of his lair:
http://spamlds.ning.com/forum/topics/antimormon-pastor-involved-in
Unfortunately, some Baptist people were arrested while trying to take some kids out of Haiti. While it was illegal, most people believe they were genuinely trying to help.
Greg, who can't stand it unless he's stirring the pot, wrote a little blip about one of these Baptist preachers who isn't actually a baptist preacher, but an "anti-Mormon preacher". He accuses the man of using his pulpit to spread anti-Mormon hatred and intolerance.
Come on Greg, don't you think you're pushing it just a little bit too far?
If, by simply being Baptist, he is automatically an anti-Mormon, then you, by being Mormon, are anti-Baptist. By labeling the guy as you have, you are the one spreading intolerance. So someone has a different view point than you...
GET OVER IT!
Have you actually been to his church and heard him preach hate and intolerance? If not, then you're actually the one guilty of spreading hate and lies. He might have shared with his congregation the reasons why he believes the LDS church is not true, but I have news for you:
THAT IS NOT HATE AND INTOLERANCE!
To Greg, if you're not Mormon, then you are anti-Mormon. If you're not with him, then you are against him. If Greg has EVER told anyone the reason why he believes the Baptist church (or any church) is not true, then he, by his own definition, is guilty of hate and intolerance.
You have a serious persecution complex, Greg.
GET OVER IT!
You know how annoying and holier-than-thou those Evangelical Christians are? Greg makes them look like pussies! Greg is a Mormon extremist and if the prophet told him to defend it with violence, I wouldn't put it past him.
I despise this Greg guy more than I despise the Mormon leaders... and that's saying something.
http://spamlds.ning.com/forum/topics/antimormon-pastor-involved-in
Unfortunately, some Baptist people were arrested while trying to take some kids out of Haiti. While it was illegal, most people believe they were genuinely trying to help.
Greg, who can't stand it unless he's stirring the pot, wrote a little blip about one of these Baptist preachers who isn't actually a baptist preacher, but an "anti-Mormon preacher". He accuses the man of using his pulpit to spread anti-Mormon hatred and intolerance.
Come on Greg, don't you think you're pushing it just a little bit too far?
If, by simply being Baptist, he is automatically an anti-Mormon, then you, by being Mormon, are anti-Baptist. By labeling the guy as you have, you are the one spreading intolerance. So someone has a different view point than you...
GET OVER IT!
Have you actually been to his church and heard him preach hate and intolerance? If not, then you're actually the one guilty of spreading hate and lies. He might have shared with his congregation the reasons why he believes the LDS church is not true, but I have news for you:
THAT IS NOT HATE AND INTOLERANCE!
To Greg, if you're not Mormon, then you are anti-Mormon. If you're not with him, then you are against him. If Greg has EVER told anyone the reason why he believes the Baptist church (or any church) is not true, then he, by his own definition, is guilty of hate and intolerance.
You have a serious persecution complex, Greg.
GET OVER IT!
You know how annoying and holier-than-thou those Evangelical Christians are? Greg makes them look like pussies! Greg is a Mormon extremist and if the prophet told him to defend it with violence, I wouldn't put it past him.
I despise this Greg guy more than I despise the Mormon leaders... and that's saying something.
Monday, February 8, 2010
True Blue
I chuckled this morning as a humorous thought crossed my mind. I was thinking of Jim Carrey and his role of Fletcher, the hot-shot lawyer who can't survive for five minutes without telling a lie. But when his son makes a birthday wish that his dad can't lie for one day, Fletcher has to learn that there are certain people you should never lie to.
In one scene, Fletcher has discovered that he is physically unable to tell a lie and his day is going to pot. In the privacy of his office he tries desperately to "lie" about the color of his blue pen. Unable to do so, he eventually ends up on the floor of his office (with pen marks all over his face) admitting defeat:
"The pen is blue! The goddamn pen is blue!"
Watch the scene here:
I was laughing because not only is this a funny scene, but how it actually reflects the Mormon churches view of the world.
All the evil anti-Mormons who are so busy making up their lies, like Fletcher, have to lie. Without deception, they can't function. Lying is all they know.
Remember the statement: Every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is the Christ. I couldn't help but notice the correlation (not only symbolic but also nearly word for word) between Fletcher and all the "anti-Mormons" who, at the second coming of Jesus, will wring their hands and shout in dispair:
"The church is true! The goddamn church is true!"
In one scene, Fletcher has discovered that he is physically unable to tell a lie and his day is going to pot. In the privacy of his office he tries desperately to "lie" about the color of his blue pen. Unable to do so, he eventually ends up on the floor of his office (with pen marks all over his face) admitting defeat:
"The pen is blue! The goddamn pen is blue!"
Watch the scene here:
I was laughing because not only is this a funny scene, but how it actually reflects the Mormon churches view of the world.
All the evil anti-Mormons who are so busy making up their lies, like Fletcher, have to lie. Without deception, they can't function. Lying is all they know.
Remember the statement: Every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is the Christ. I couldn't help but notice the correlation (not only symbolic but also nearly word for word) between Fletcher and all the "anti-Mormons" who, at the second coming of Jesus, will wring their hands and shout in dispair:
"The church is true! The goddamn church is true!"
Thursday, February 4, 2010
My Response to the "17 Points of the True Church"
17 Points of the True Church of Christ:
1. Christ organized the Church (Eph 4:11-14)
2. The true church must bear the name of Jesus Christ (Eph 5:23)
3. The true church must have a foundation of Apostles and Prophets (Eph 2:19-20)
4. The true church must have the same organization as Christ's Church (Eph 4:11-14)
5. The true church must claim divine authority (Heb 5:4-10)
6. The true church must have no paid ministry (1 Cor 9:16-18; Acts 20:33-34; John 10:11-13)
7. The true church must baptise by immersion (Matt 3:13-16)
8. The true church must bestow the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands (Acts 8:14-17)
9. The true church must practice divine healing (Mark 3:14-15)
10. The true church must teach that God and Jesus are seperate and distinct individuals (John 17:11; 20:17)
11. The true church must teach that God and Jesus have bodies of flesh and bone (Luke 23:36-39; Acts 1:9-11; Heb 1:1-3)
12. The officers must be called by God (Heb 4:4; Ex 28:1; 40:13-16)
13. The true church must claim revelation from God (Amos 3:7)
14. The true church must be a missionary church (Matt 28:19-20)
15. The true church must be a restored church (Acts 3:19-20)
16. The true church must practice baptism for the dead (1Cor 15:16&29)
17. "By their fruits ye shall know them." (Matt 7:20)
And my response:
1. Joseph Smith organized the LDS church.
2. While many Christian churches do not bear Christ's name, many others do. Besides, there are numerous references in the Bible where the church is called the "Church of God."
3. This reference is clear that the body of true saints should be organzied with apostles and prophets. However, even a false church could use the Bible to structure themselves in a similar manner. Just because a church claims to have apostles and prophets does not make it a true church.
4. Points 3 and 4 are making the same argument. For my response to #4, please read #3 above.
5. Every Christian church on the planet claims divine authority.
6. This point is actually correct. It's too bad that the top level leaders of the LDS church ARE paid.
7. Again, the LDS church is not the only church that baptizes by immersion. Many others do as well. Does that mean they are true too? There is evidence that the Catholic church used to perform immersion.
8. Many Christian churches practice "laying on of hands".
9. What "divine healing" have you ever witnessed an LDS priesthood holder perform? Common colds and such don't count because they would have gotten better anyway. Show me the healing of a genetic disease and you'll have me convinced.
10. Many Christian churches teach that God and Jesus are separate individuals.
11. The reference to Luke 23:36-39 has absolutely nothing to do with God's body. The reference to Acts 1:9-11 is talking about the ascention of Jesus. He rose into heaven. He will descend from heaven. It's not talking about his body. It's talking about the manner in which he will re-appear. If Hebrews 1:1-3 is talking about God's body, I somehow missed it.
12. Preachers and ministers all over the world claim to be called by god.
13. Since the arguments in #5 and #13 are practically the same, please see my response to #5.
14. Lots of churches are missionary churches. Does that make them all true?
15. Acts 3:19-21 is not specifically talking about a restored church, but it appears to be talking about reversing the effects of the fall of Adam.
16. The reference in 1 Cor:15:16,29 is very vague. Paul does seem to be arguing for the case of baptisms for the dead. However, if baptisms for the dead was such an important detail, wouldn't there be more than one vague reference to it in the Bible? Wouldn't there be much more detail?
17. That's a poor argument. Many non-believers do much more good in this world than believers do. Judging the truth of a religion by the way it's members act is a very stupid thing to do. Even false churches produce good people and do good things.
Even if all 17 points did actually indicate that the LDS church is true, using fiction to prove more fiction is fruitless. Would you actually try to use a childrens book to prove that Humpty Dumpty was real? Just because Humpty Dumpty is in a book, it doesn't make him an actual entity.
Just because presents "show up" on Christmas morning, that doesn't mean that Santa Claus is real. Just because people do things in Jesus' name, it doesn't make Jesus real.
Not only that, but the Bible lists other characteristics as well that the true church should have. Some of them are listed in the previous post. Whoever put together this list of 17 was already a member and was looking only for points that already described the LDS church. If any of the points did not describe it, they left them out. So even if all the 17 points did indicate that the LDS church is true, it actually does not because the list is incomplete. It has been put together for the purpose of proving the LDS church true, not for a genuine search for the true church...
I rest my case.
1. Christ organized the Church (Eph 4:11-14)
2. The true church must bear the name of Jesus Christ (Eph 5:23)
3. The true church must have a foundation of Apostles and Prophets (Eph 2:19-20)
4. The true church must have the same organization as Christ's Church (Eph 4:11-14)
5. The true church must claim divine authority (Heb 5:4-10)
6. The true church must have no paid ministry (1 Cor 9:16-18; Acts 20:33-34; John 10:11-13)
7. The true church must baptise by immersion (Matt 3:13-16)
8. The true church must bestow the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands (Acts 8:14-17)
9. The true church must practice divine healing (Mark 3:14-15)
10. The true church must teach that God and Jesus are seperate and distinct individuals (John 17:11; 20:17)
11. The true church must teach that God and Jesus have bodies of flesh and bone (Luke 23:36-39; Acts 1:9-11; Heb 1:1-3)
12. The officers must be called by God (Heb 4:4; Ex 28:1; 40:13-16)
13. The true church must claim revelation from God (Amos 3:7)
14. The true church must be a missionary church (Matt 28:19-20)
15. The true church must be a restored church (Acts 3:19-20)
16. The true church must practice baptism for the dead (1Cor 15:16&29)
17. "By their fruits ye shall know them." (Matt 7:20)
And my response:
1. Joseph Smith organized the LDS church.
2. While many Christian churches do not bear Christ's name, many others do. Besides, there are numerous references in the Bible where the church is called the "Church of God."
3. This reference is clear that the body of true saints should be organzied with apostles and prophets. However, even a false church could use the Bible to structure themselves in a similar manner. Just because a church claims to have apostles and prophets does not make it a true church.
4. Points 3 and 4 are making the same argument. For my response to #4, please read #3 above.
5. Every Christian church on the planet claims divine authority.
6. This point is actually correct. It's too bad that the top level leaders of the LDS church ARE paid.
7. Again, the LDS church is not the only church that baptizes by immersion. Many others do as well. Does that mean they are true too? There is evidence that the Catholic church used to perform immersion.
8. Many Christian churches practice "laying on of hands".
9. What "divine healing" have you ever witnessed an LDS priesthood holder perform? Common colds and such don't count because they would have gotten better anyway. Show me the healing of a genetic disease and you'll have me convinced.
10. Many Christian churches teach that God and Jesus are separate individuals.
11. The reference to Luke 23:36-39 has absolutely nothing to do with God's body. The reference to Acts 1:9-11 is talking about the ascention of Jesus. He rose into heaven. He will descend from heaven. It's not talking about his body. It's talking about the manner in which he will re-appear. If Hebrews 1:1-3 is talking about God's body, I somehow missed it.
12. Preachers and ministers all over the world claim to be called by god.
13. Since the arguments in #5 and #13 are practically the same, please see my response to #5.
14. Lots of churches are missionary churches. Does that make them all true?
15. Acts 3:19-21 is not specifically talking about a restored church, but it appears to be talking about reversing the effects of the fall of Adam.
16. The reference in 1 Cor:15:16,29 is very vague. Paul does seem to be arguing for the case of baptisms for the dead. However, if baptisms for the dead was such an important detail, wouldn't there be more than one vague reference to it in the Bible? Wouldn't there be much more detail?
17. That's a poor argument. Many non-believers do much more good in this world than believers do. Judging the truth of a religion by the way it's members act is a very stupid thing to do. Even false churches produce good people and do good things.
Even if all 17 points did actually indicate that the LDS church is true, using fiction to prove more fiction is fruitless. Would you actually try to use a childrens book to prove that Humpty Dumpty was real? Just because Humpty Dumpty is in a book, it doesn't make him an actual entity.
Just because presents "show up" on Christmas morning, that doesn't mean that Santa Claus is real. Just because people do things in Jesus' name, it doesn't make Jesus real.
Not only that, but the Bible lists other characteristics as well that the true church should have. Some of them are listed in the previous post. Whoever put together this list of 17 was already a member and was looking only for points that already described the LDS church. If any of the points did not describe it, they left them out. So even if all the 17 points did indicate that the LDS church is true, it actually does not because the list is incomplete. It has been put together for the purpose of proving the LDS church true, not for a genuine search for the true church...
I rest my case.
The 17 Points of the True Church
By Richard Packham
There has been floating around for some time a list of "Seventeen Points of the True Church" that supposedly was compiled by a group of people studying the Bible as students (or servicemen, or whatever), based on the church Jesus established as described in the New Testament. According to the story (of which there are conflicting versions), when these people broke up and went on about their lives (after college, after the war, whatever), each of them searched diligently among the various religions for the "true church" according to the list of points. Many years later, they all discovered that each of them had independently found... Guess! Yes, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints! Oh, isn't that a heart-warming testimonial?
Here is the list.
17 Points of the True Church of Christ:
1. Christ organized the Church (Eph 4:11-14)
2. The true church must bear the name of Jesus Christ (Eph 5:23)
3. The true church must have a foundation of Apostles and Prophets (Eph 2:19-20)
4. The true church must have the same organization as Christ's Church (Eph 4:11-14)
5. The true church must claim divine authority (Heb 5:4-10)
6. The true church must have no paid ministry (1 Cor 9:16-18; Acts 20:33-34; John 10:11-13)
7. The true church must baptise by immersion (Matt 3:13-16)
8. The true church must bestow the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands (Acts 8:14-17)
9. The true church must practice divine healing (Mark 3:14-15)
10. The true church must teach that God and Jesus are seperate and distinct individuals (John 17:11; 20:17)
11. The true church must teach that God and Jesus have bodies of flesh and bone (Luke 23:36-39; Acts 1:9-11; Heb 1:1-3)
12. The officers must be called by God (Heb 4:4; Ex 28:1; 40:13-16)
13. The true church must claim revelation from God (Amos 3:7)
14. The true church must be a missionary church (Matt 28:19-20)
15. The true church must be a restored church (Acts 3:19-20)
16. The true church must practice baptism for the dead (1Cor 15:16&29)
17. "By their fruits ye shall know them." (Matt 7:20)
Quite by coincidence, I recently received the following from an old high school pal of mine:
Dear Richard,
I know you are interested in questions having to do with religion. You might find the following of some interest.
During my college days a group of us fellows used to get together to discuss religion. We all belonged, more or less, to different churches, but none of us was very devout or spiritual, and we realized that our lack of enthusiasm for the churches of our birth was because we weren't certain that we were in the "true church" of our Lord. But we felt we needed something in our lives, and so we met regularly with our New Testaments and studied carefully, making notes of what points we might look for, to find the True Church. After about a year of meeting, studying, and praying together, we had our list of twenty points. If we found a church with all twenty, we would know we had found the True Church, and we promised to inform all the other members of the study group.
We parted, and our lives took us each in a different direction. But each of us carried the list, and each continued his solitary search. Here is our list. After you have studied it, I will tell you the amazing result of our searches.
THE TWENTY POINTS OF THE TRUE CHURCH
Teachings of the True Church:
1. There will be no physical, visible coming of the Kingdom of God (John 18:36, Luke 17:21).
2. The celebration of the Lord's supper includes bread, wine (Matt 26:26-29) and the washing of each others' feet (John 13:4-15).
3. Marriage and divorce are frowned upon (1 Cor 7, Matt 19:9, Mark 10:2-12).
4. The Jewish Temple ritual will be observed (Acts 2:46).
5. The Church takes priority over family (Luke 14:26, 12:51-53, Matt 10:21).
6. Women must cover the head while praying (1 Cor 11:5-10).
7. Eunuchs will have special respect in the Church (Matt 19:12).
8. Only two commandments: Love God and love thy neighbor (Matt 22:36-40).
Members of the True Church can be recognized by the following:
9. They hold all things in common ownership (Acts 2:44-45).
10. They do not sin (1 John 3:6-9).
11. They can drink poison without harm (Mark 16:18).
12. They do not strike back if you strike them (Matt 5:39).
13. If you ask to borrow anything from them, you do not have to return it (Luke 6:30).
14. They never have to hire movers or earthmoving equipment, or use UPS; they can literally move anything by the power of God (Matt 17:20, 21:21, Mark 11:23).
15. They have no retirement plans, savings account, or food supplies stored away (Matt 6:25-34). And no possessions (Matt 19:16-21, Mark 16:21, Luke 18:22).
16. They never pray in public (Matt 6:5-8).
17. They are like sheep or children (Matt 19:14, 18:3-4, Mark 10:15, John 10:2-27, Heb 13:20).
18. They do not go to a doctor when ill, but heal each other with prayer (James 5:13-15, Mark 16:18).
19. Their children are not rebellious; they kill them if they are (Matt 15:3-9).
20. They do not die (John 8:51, 11:25-26).
I confess that I never found a church that fulfilled all twenty of these points as described in the New Testament. Recently I happened to meet another member of the group, whom I had not seen since our days together, and he had made the effort to track down every member of that original group. And here is the amazing part of our story: Every single one of us had independently come to exactly the same conclusion:
THERE IS NO TRUE CHURCH!"
There has been floating around for some time a list of "Seventeen Points of the True Church" that supposedly was compiled by a group of people studying the Bible as students (or servicemen, or whatever), based on the church Jesus established as described in the New Testament. According to the story (of which there are conflicting versions), when these people broke up and went on about their lives (after college, after the war, whatever), each of them searched diligently among the various religions for the "true church" according to the list of points. Many years later, they all discovered that each of them had independently found... Guess! Yes, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints! Oh, isn't that a heart-warming testimonial?
Here is the list.
17 Points of the True Church of Christ:
1. Christ organized the Church (Eph 4:11-14)
2. The true church must bear the name of Jesus Christ (Eph 5:23)
3. The true church must have a foundation of Apostles and Prophets (Eph 2:19-20)
4. The true church must have the same organization as Christ's Church (Eph 4:11-14)
5. The true church must claim divine authority (Heb 5:4-10)
6. The true church must have no paid ministry (1 Cor 9:16-18; Acts 20:33-34; John 10:11-13)
7. The true church must baptise by immersion (Matt 3:13-16)
8. The true church must bestow the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands (Acts 8:14-17)
9. The true church must practice divine healing (Mark 3:14-15)
10. The true church must teach that God and Jesus are seperate and distinct individuals (John 17:11; 20:17)
11. The true church must teach that God and Jesus have bodies of flesh and bone (Luke 23:36-39; Acts 1:9-11; Heb 1:1-3)
12. The officers must be called by God (Heb 4:4; Ex 28:1; 40:13-16)
13. The true church must claim revelation from God (Amos 3:7)
14. The true church must be a missionary church (Matt 28:19-20)
15. The true church must be a restored church (Acts 3:19-20)
16. The true church must practice baptism for the dead (1Cor 15:16&29)
17. "By their fruits ye shall know them." (Matt 7:20)
Quite by coincidence, I recently received the following from an old high school pal of mine:
Dear Richard,
I know you are interested in questions having to do with religion. You might find the following of some interest.
During my college days a group of us fellows used to get together to discuss religion. We all belonged, more or less, to different churches, but none of us was very devout or spiritual, and we realized that our lack of enthusiasm for the churches of our birth was because we weren't certain that we were in the "true church" of our Lord. But we felt we needed something in our lives, and so we met regularly with our New Testaments and studied carefully, making notes of what points we might look for, to find the True Church. After about a year of meeting, studying, and praying together, we had our list of twenty points. If we found a church with all twenty, we would know we had found the True Church, and we promised to inform all the other members of the study group.
We parted, and our lives took us each in a different direction. But each of us carried the list, and each continued his solitary search. Here is our list. After you have studied it, I will tell you the amazing result of our searches.
THE TWENTY POINTS OF THE TRUE CHURCH
Teachings of the True Church:
1. There will be no physical, visible coming of the Kingdom of God (John 18:36, Luke 17:21).
2. The celebration of the Lord's supper includes bread, wine (Matt 26:26-29) and the washing of each others' feet (John 13:4-15).
3. Marriage and divorce are frowned upon (1 Cor 7, Matt 19:9, Mark 10:2-12).
4. The Jewish Temple ritual will be observed (Acts 2:46).
5. The Church takes priority over family (Luke 14:26, 12:51-53, Matt 10:21).
6. Women must cover the head while praying (1 Cor 11:5-10).
7. Eunuchs will have special respect in the Church (Matt 19:12).
8. Only two commandments: Love God and love thy neighbor (Matt 22:36-40).
Members of the True Church can be recognized by the following:
9. They hold all things in common ownership (Acts 2:44-45).
10. They do not sin (1 John 3:6-9).
11. They can drink poison without harm (Mark 16:18).
12. They do not strike back if you strike them (Matt 5:39).
13. If you ask to borrow anything from them, you do not have to return it (Luke 6:30).
14. They never have to hire movers or earthmoving equipment, or use UPS; they can literally move anything by the power of God (Matt 17:20, 21:21, Mark 11:23).
15. They have no retirement plans, savings account, or food supplies stored away (Matt 6:25-34). And no possessions (Matt 19:16-21, Mark 16:21, Luke 18:22).
16. They never pray in public (Matt 6:5-8).
17. They are like sheep or children (Matt 19:14, 18:3-4, Mark 10:15, John 10:2-27, Heb 13:20).
18. They do not go to a doctor when ill, but heal each other with prayer (James 5:13-15, Mark 16:18).
19. Their children are not rebellious; they kill them if they are (Matt 15:3-9).
20. They do not die (John 8:51, 11:25-26).
I confess that I never found a church that fulfilled all twenty of these points as described in the New Testament. Recently I happened to meet another member of the group, whom I had not seen since our days together, and he had made the effort to track down every member of that original group. And here is the amazing part of our story: Every single one of us had independently come to exactly the same conclusion:
THERE IS NO TRUE CHURCH!"
Friday, January 29, 2010
Apologist Logic
How might an apologist respond to my argument that:
1) Animals don't talk.
2) There are talking animals in the Bible, so therefore
3) The Bible is not true.
The following steps might be the logic an apologist would come up with:
1) There are talking animals in the Bible.
2) The Bible MUST be true.
3) Parrots can talk
4) An ancient civilization has two words for "parrot" and "snake". These two words are very similar.
5) Therefore, it was actually a talking parrot in the Bible and the translator accidentally put "snake" instead of "parrot".
6) Yeah! It must be true afterall!
7) Elaborate the above 6 points with heaps of irrevalent bullshit.
Can you see that no matter how absurd their defense is, they actually believe it explains away all their troubles? Any answer, no matter how completely far fetched, will do. As long as there IS an answer, it doesn't matter what it is. Truth is expendable as long as the myth is defended.
Internet Mormons are no different. In the end, something has to change in order for the rest of the story to stay true. In this case, the snake was changed to a parrot. But does this argument hold water? Let me show you why it wouldn't, using LDS scriptures and prophetic teachings...
D&C 76: 28
"And while we were yet in the Spirit, the Lord commanded us that we should write the vision; for we beheld Satan, that old serpent, even the devil, who rebelled against God, and sought to take the kingdom of our God and his Christ—"
Notice how, in the D&C, Satan is referred to as the serpent. Now, if it actually was a parrot in the Garden of Eden, wouldn't prophets be teaching the correct principle? Isn't that what the restoration was all about? To correct the mistakes of the old church and the Bible? So if the animal in the Garden of Eden was actually a parrot, why do modern scriptures and prophets still teach that it was a snake or serpent?
Point this out to an Internet Mormon and he will probably come up with some bullshit about why the actual type of animal form satan took is not really relavent. In other words, he will shrug it off with a desperate explanation and then testify that he still knows it's true.
This, of course, is just an example that I came up with out of my head. I don't know if there is any ancient civilization that actually has two similar words for snake and parrot. But if I was an apologist, it doesn't matter. Just tell them that there is and they will believe you. You're the "scholar" so you must know.
This type of reasoning is used to defend all aspects of Mormonism. I was recently talking with Seth R., an internet Mormon, who was trying to explain to me why the proof that the Book of Abraham is false is irrevalent. He tried using defenses like, "Egyptian pictograms were popular in certain quarters and were often taken, copied, and adapted to stories beyond the original Egyptian meaning."
Is that so? Where is the reference you conveniently forgot to supply? (If you give me a reference to any FARMS or FAIR material, then I will just laugh in your face. Where is their reference?)
My argument: The papyrus was dated 2000 years after Abraham's time.
Seth's reply: It was actually a copy produced by a scribe 2000 years later.
My argument: Sounds plausable, but Joseph Smith claimed that the papyrus was literally written by the hand of Abraham himself.
Seth's argument: So? What is to stop the scribe from just writing that down. That was really common practice (no reference provided).
My argument: If a scribe wrote a copy of Abraham's writings, then why does the translation have nothing to do with Abraham?
Seth: Because you need a deeper understanding to be able to translate the actual message.
Do you see how the bullshit just keeps getting thicker and thicker? Seth is digging himself into a hole that takes more and more BS to maintain. The simple explanation is simply that Smith found a piece of papyrus and pretended to be able to translate it. That's the only explanation that does not require a TON of mental gymnastics.
Oh, and make a reference to "mental gymnastics" or "jungle gym" and suddenly his next defense tactic is to accuse you of calling names.
When you point out that he's full of shit because you have never called him a name (and that "jungle gym" is not a name) he will next accuse you of getting agitated and will then tell you that he's won the debate because you lost your cool first.
What the fuck? That's your pathetic defense?
Here's a link to the comment section where this discussion took place. Then you can see that nothing I have stated here is out of context (because that will be his next argument). https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6889091745815151535&postID=2237199548309222494
A lot was said in this comment section. The discussion about the Book of Abraham begins about 2/3 of the way through it.
1) Animals don't talk.
2) There are talking animals in the Bible, so therefore
3) The Bible is not true.
The following steps might be the logic an apologist would come up with:
1) There are talking animals in the Bible.
2) The Bible MUST be true.
3) Parrots can talk
4) An ancient civilization has two words for "parrot" and "snake". These two words are very similar.
5) Therefore, it was actually a talking parrot in the Bible and the translator accidentally put "snake" instead of "parrot".
6) Yeah! It must be true afterall!
7) Elaborate the above 6 points with heaps of irrevalent bullshit.
Can you see that no matter how absurd their defense is, they actually believe it explains away all their troubles? Any answer, no matter how completely far fetched, will do. As long as there IS an answer, it doesn't matter what it is. Truth is expendable as long as the myth is defended.
Internet Mormons are no different. In the end, something has to change in order for the rest of the story to stay true. In this case, the snake was changed to a parrot. But does this argument hold water? Let me show you why it wouldn't, using LDS scriptures and prophetic teachings...
D&C 76: 28
"And while we were yet in the Spirit, the Lord commanded us that we should write the vision; for we beheld Satan, that old serpent, even the devil, who rebelled against God, and sought to take the kingdom of our God and his Christ—"
Notice how, in the D&C, Satan is referred to as the serpent. Now, if it actually was a parrot in the Garden of Eden, wouldn't prophets be teaching the correct principle? Isn't that what the restoration was all about? To correct the mistakes of the old church and the Bible? So if the animal in the Garden of Eden was actually a parrot, why do modern scriptures and prophets still teach that it was a snake or serpent?
Point this out to an Internet Mormon and he will probably come up with some bullshit about why the actual type of animal form satan took is not really relavent. In other words, he will shrug it off with a desperate explanation and then testify that he still knows it's true.
This, of course, is just an example that I came up with out of my head. I don't know if there is any ancient civilization that actually has two similar words for snake and parrot. But if I was an apologist, it doesn't matter. Just tell them that there is and they will believe you. You're the "scholar" so you must know.
This type of reasoning is used to defend all aspects of Mormonism. I was recently talking with Seth R., an internet Mormon, who was trying to explain to me why the proof that the Book of Abraham is false is irrevalent. He tried using defenses like, "Egyptian pictograms were popular in certain quarters and were often taken, copied, and adapted to stories beyond the original Egyptian meaning."
Is that so? Where is the reference you conveniently forgot to supply? (If you give me a reference to any FARMS or FAIR material, then I will just laugh in your face. Where is their reference?)
My argument: The papyrus was dated 2000 years after Abraham's time.
Seth's reply: It was actually a copy produced by a scribe 2000 years later.
My argument: Sounds plausable, but Joseph Smith claimed that the papyrus was literally written by the hand of Abraham himself.
Seth's argument: So? What is to stop the scribe from just writing that down. That was really common practice (no reference provided).
My argument: If a scribe wrote a copy of Abraham's writings, then why does the translation have nothing to do with Abraham?
Seth: Because you need a deeper understanding to be able to translate the actual message.
Do you see how the bullshit just keeps getting thicker and thicker? Seth is digging himself into a hole that takes more and more BS to maintain. The simple explanation is simply that Smith found a piece of papyrus and pretended to be able to translate it. That's the only explanation that does not require a TON of mental gymnastics.
Oh, and make a reference to "mental gymnastics" or "jungle gym" and suddenly his next defense tactic is to accuse you of calling names.
When you point out that he's full of shit because you have never called him a name (and that "jungle gym" is not a name) he will next accuse you of getting agitated and will then tell you that he's won the debate because you lost your cool first.
What the fuck? That's your pathetic defense?
Here's a link to the comment section where this discussion took place. Then you can see that nothing I have stated here is out of context (because that will be his next argument). https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6889091745815151535&postID=2237199548309222494
A lot was said in this comment section. The discussion about the Book of Abraham begins about 2/3 of the way through it.
I don't need to call anyone names. If you use these types of defense tactics, then you ARE a moron!
Monday, January 25, 2010
How Would You React?
Mormons, what would you do if you turned on the news one day and saw Thomas S. Monson announce that he really isn't a prophet and none of the church presidents before him were prophets as well?
What if he confessed that Joseph Smith made up the Book of Mormon and was guilty of many affairs on his wife? What if he admitted that the church was nothing but a huge fraud? What if he admitted that they have lied for years and years about certain events in church history? What if the other leaders and authorities said so as well?
What if it came right from the horses mouth? What would you do?
I know some of you would keep believing anyway, because you "know" it's true. Others of you will say that would never happen so I'm not even going to think about it.
But to those with a shred of common sense, what would you do? Seriously, what would you do?
What if he confessed that Joseph Smith made up the Book of Mormon and was guilty of many affairs on his wife? What if he admitted that the church was nothing but a huge fraud? What if he admitted that they have lied for years and years about certain events in church history? What if the other leaders and authorities said so as well?
What if it came right from the horses mouth? What would you do?
I know some of you would keep believing anyway, because you "know" it's true. Others of you will say that would never happen so I'm not even going to think about it.
But to those with a shred of common sense, what would you do? Seriously, what would you do?
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Enjoy Life
Tonight I was in bed and was thinking about a lot of things. I was hungry too, so while the oven is warming up to cook me a midnight pizza, I will write out some of my thoughts.
Life is meant to be enjoyed. From an atheist perspective, this life is the only one we have. There is no god in heaven who is watching us under his microscope. There is not a huge list of commandments that god demands that we obey.
I honestly and sincerely hope there is an afterlife. I would love to once again see loved ones who are gone. But I'm not putting any money on it. I do not believe there is an afterlife.
I underwent a fairly simple surgery. As I laid on the operating table and the sedative drugs began to take effect, I slipped off into a peaceful nothingness. While I was unconscious, the doctor was able to open my body and do the procedure. I felt nothing. I remember nothing. In fact, the two-hour surgery went by in a split second.
When the drugs knocked me out, everything went dark and then I was opening my eyes and it was over. Two hours went by in the blink of an eye. That is what being dead is like. You just shut your eyes and you become nothing. You are completely unaware of your surrounding and even your own existance.
You feel no pain, sorrow, love, hate, etc. Nothing.
I am very grateful for my surgery because it showed me what death will be like. It's nothing to fear. You just close your eyes and cease to exist.
So, while I sincerely hope that there is an afterlife, I seriously doubt that there is. This life is it. This life is my only chance to live. To laugh. To love. If I waste it following some imaginary god and his imaginary rules, then what a sad life that is.
Now is the time to cherish loved ones. Now is the time to enjoy life. Now is the time to live.
The atheistic view of life might seem sad and depressing to believers. If there is no afterlife, then what is the purpose of life? I don't know. If we just die and cease to exist, then why are we even here? I don't know. While, yes, it is sad to think that this life could be it, it only makes the time we have here that much more precious. It makes our time here and now with loved ones that much more meaningful.
Why look to an uncertain future when we are here and in the now? Don't waste the now dreaming about some fairy tale future. Enjoy the now because it most likely is all you have.
So, go sky diving. Have a one night stand. Get so wasted that you can't remember the night before (maybe just do that once, LOL). Go back to school. Help others. Do whatever you need to do to make your life good.
Life is not meant to be endured. It is meant to be enjoyed.
Life is meant to be enjoyed. From an atheist perspective, this life is the only one we have. There is no god in heaven who is watching us under his microscope. There is not a huge list of commandments that god demands that we obey.
I honestly and sincerely hope there is an afterlife. I would love to once again see loved ones who are gone. But I'm not putting any money on it. I do not believe there is an afterlife.
I underwent a fairly simple surgery. As I laid on the operating table and the sedative drugs began to take effect, I slipped off into a peaceful nothingness. While I was unconscious, the doctor was able to open my body and do the procedure. I felt nothing. I remember nothing. In fact, the two-hour surgery went by in a split second.
When the drugs knocked me out, everything went dark and then I was opening my eyes and it was over. Two hours went by in the blink of an eye. That is what being dead is like. You just shut your eyes and you become nothing. You are completely unaware of your surrounding and even your own existance.
You feel no pain, sorrow, love, hate, etc. Nothing.
I am very grateful for my surgery because it showed me what death will be like. It's nothing to fear. You just close your eyes and cease to exist.
So, while I sincerely hope that there is an afterlife, I seriously doubt that there is. This life is it. This life is my only chance to live. To laugh. To love. If I waste it following some imaginary god and his imaginary rules, then what a sad life that is.
Now is the time to cherish loved ones. Now is the time to enjoy life. Now is the time to live.
The atheistic view of life might seem sad and depressing to believers. If there is no afterlife, then what is the purpose of life? I don't know. If we just die and cease to exist, then why are we even here? I don't know. While, yes, it is sad to think that this life could be it, it only makes the time we have here that much more precious. It makes our time here and now with loved ones that much more meaningful.
Why look to an uncertain future when we are here and in the now? Don't waste the now dreaming about some fairy tale future. Enjoy the now because it most likely is all you have.
So, go sky diving. Have a one night stand. Get so wasted that you can't remember the night before (maybe just do that once, LOL). Go back to school. Help others. Do whatever you need to do to make your life good.
Life is not meant to be endured. It is meant to be enjoyed.
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Why Are Mormons So Afraid of A Lie?
I've decided recently that if I come across a real hefty Mormon blogger that I would post a link to their site/blog on my side bar. That way, no one can accuse me of cherry picking. Not only that, but I strongly feel that everyone should hear BOTH sides of the story. If a church investigator found my blog, I would NOT want them to make a decision to not join the church until they have heard the churches version as well.
That is because I truly am pro-truth.
And if an investigator reads my blog and ends up choosing to join the church anyway, then I wish him or her all the best.
I will tell you right now, that TBM's do not share my sense of honor in this matter. If they had their way, they would hack this blog and delete it and let god fry me with a thunder bolt. They, unlike myself, will NOT encourage investigators to hear both sides. They will do anything they can to prevent an investigator from finding a site like mine.
If they have all the truth and if god is on their side, then what the hell are they all so afraid of?
That should tell you something right there. If they are so afraid of the opposition, then what are they hiding? You would think that an organization that claims to have all truth and all power, would actively encourage members and investigators to read and study "anti-Mormon" literature. If it is nothing but lies, then what do they have to fear?
A lot, obviously. Hmmm, maybe they aren't lies afterall...
Oh, by the way, every Mormon blog that I have ever tried commenting on censors. They will either moderate your comment, or delete it shortly after it is posted. Again, I ask, what are you all so afraid of? The only comments I delete here are SPAM. Everyone else has the right to say WHATEVER they want, for or against the church.
If the tactics of anti-Mormons are just to lie, lie, lie, then the pro-Mormon tactics are to sensor, sensor, sensor. They can't prove that our arguments are lies (although in their Mormon minds they think they already have), however, we can prove that they do sensor. How? Leave a comment against the church on any of their blogs and see how long it is before it disappears.
Seriously, though. If all we anti's can do is lie, then what are you afraid of? Why do our lies require you to juggle your beliefs and twist the stories? If our lies are so easily debunked, as you all seem to think, then why do they continue to convince thousands of people each year to leave the church? If we engage in nothing but lies, then why do you even bother to debate with us?
I think the LDS church is shaking in their collective boots.
That is because I truly am pro-truth.
And if an investigator reads my blog and ends up choosing to join the church anyway, then I wish him or her all the best.
I will tell you right now, that TBM's do not share my sense of honor in this matter. If they had their way, they would hack this blog and delete it and let god fry me with a thunder bolt. They, unlike myself, will NOT encourage investigators to hear both sides. They will do anything they can to prevent an investigator from finding a site like mine.
If they have all the truth and if god is on their side, then what the hell are they all so afraid of?
That should tell you something right there. If they are so afraid of the opposition, then what are they hiding? You would think that an organization that claims to have all truth and all power, would actively encourage members and investigators to read and study "anti-Mormon" literature. If it is nothing but lies, then what do they have to fear?
A lot, obviously. Hmmm, maybe they aren't lies afterall...
Oh, by the way, every Mormon blog that I have ever tried commenting on censors. They will either moderate your comment, or delete it shortly after it is posted. Again, I ask, what are you all so afraid of? The only comments I delete here are SPAM. Everyone else has the right to say WHATEVER they want, for or against the church.
If the tactics of anti-Mormons are just to lie, lie, lie, then the pro-Mormon tactics are to sensor, sensor, sensor. They can't prove that our arguments are lies (although in their Mormon minds they think they already have), however, we can prove that they do sensor. How? Leave a comment against the church on any of their blogs and see how long it is before it disappears.
Seriously, though. If all we anti's can do is lie, then what are you afraid of? Why do our lies require you to juggle your beliefs and twist the stories? If our lies are so easily debunked, as you all seem to think, then why do they continue to convince thousands of people each year to leave the church? If we engage in nothing but lies, then why do you even bother to debate with us?
I think the LDS church is shaking in their collective boots.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)