Discussion on the invalidity of Mormonism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-08-2015, 11:34 AM
RE: Discussion on the invalidity of Mormonism
(05-08-2015 11:31 AM)Alla Wrote:  [quote='Bucky Ball' pid='825848' dateline='1438795401']

That's what I was afraid of. Weeping
Smile
Don't be afraid, my friend.

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-08-2015, 11:42 AM (This post was last modified: 05-08-2015 12:26 PM by goodwithoutgod.)
RE: Discussion on the invalidity of Mormonism
(05-08-2015 10:50 AM)Alla Wrote:  ONE MORE TIME (I hope I do not have to repeat it again)
my question is only about this:

Did Egyptologists prove that Joseph Smith was wrong?

Egyptologist Bell said: Joseph Smith's understanding was CORRECT.

So, if Egyptologists change their opinions like underwear I do not have to BELIEVE everything they say.
I KNOW why I believe in God and why I believe that Joseph Smith understanding was CORRECT.

Why is crocodile at the burial sight?
Dead person on the bier is either naked or wrapped NOT dressed.
Person on the picture that Joseph Smith used is alive not dead like Ritner said. Because besides he is dressed, besides the crocodile is at the scene, he has both hands above his face, his legs are not on the beir.

Man on the bier is about to be sacrificed and crocodile is patiently waiting.
Joseph Smith had it right.

ANOTHER THING TO REMEMBER
Egyptologists like Ritner or Bell are certainly qualified to examine the facsimiles and, to the extent that they are legible, tell us what they say as Egyptian pictures.
But they are not qualified to comment on what other uses they might be put to, or what other meanings they might convey, either anciently or modernly.

My next post will be about DNA.
back to you, goodwithoutgod

Aw isn't she cute folks? She discovered google.

For transparency, lets first look at the official LDS position on this matter(Note the matrix level efforts to explain away the inconvenient truth...and I get it, one can't admit the evidence is solid because their multi-billion dollar empire would collapse overnight as everyone walked away shaking their heads), but anyway...here:

https://www.lds.org/topics/translation-a...m?lang=eng

I especially like these portions: "Neither the Lord nor Joseph Smith explained the process of translation of the book of Abraham, but some insight can be gained from the Lord’s instructions to Joseph regarding translation. In April 1829, Joseph received a revelation for Oliver Cowdery that taught that both intellectual work and revelation were essential to translating sacred records. It was necessary to “study it out in your mind” and then seek spiritual confirmation. Records indicate that Joseph and others studied the papyri and that close observers also believed that the translation came by revelation. As John Whitmer observed, “Joseph the Seer saw these Record[s] and by the revelation of Jesus Christ could translate these records.”

Laugh out load Yes, *wipes tear* yes, I am sure he did.

or how about the infomercial conclusion? :"The veracity and value of the book of Abraham cannot be settled by scholarly debate concerning the book’s translation and historicity. The book’s status as scripture lies in the eternal truths it teaches and the powerful spirit it conveys. The book of Abraham imparts profound truths about the nature of God, His relationship to us as His children, and the purpose of this mortal life. The truth of the book of Abraham is ultimately found through careful study of its teachings, sincere prayer, and the confirmation of the Spirit."

yes...yes of course, it all makes sense now.

Anyway, lets move onto Alla's fav website and its spin on the information, find it here:

http://en.fairmormon.org/Criticism_of_Mo...acsimile_1

*slow clap* you gotta give them credit for trying....they know they are on the titanic, and the band is playing, and the ship is sinking...quick....quick....come up with SOMETHING! lol Now lets look at the response to "fair mormon" which exposes how they manipulated information to persuade uneducated and delusionally gullible believers like Alla to drink the kool aid (disclaimer, really long debunking and complete dismantlement of the lies of the church and their apologists, but since the level of spin is so great, it requires a studious breakdown, and this breakdown is a complete evisceration of the attempts of mormon apologists to explain away and plant fake evidence to support their story):

http://cesletter.com/debunking-fairmormo...raham.html

One of my fav portions:

"While FairMormon is attempting to distract and divert their readers' attention on irrelevant stripes (kilt), penis, wings, hands, and mummy vs. Osiris differences, FairMormon is failing to tell the rest of the story to their readers that Larson and Bell agree 100% on where it really matters:

- Joseph is incorrect in his translation of the “idolatrous priest of Elkenah” with a human head and a knife. It is instead the jackal-headed pagan Egyptian god Anubis. FairMormon agrees that the figure is supposed to be Anubis.
- The “Angel of the Lord” bird is supposed to be a human-headed bird representing the “ba” of the deceased Hor.
- The body on the altar is not Abraham but rather the resurrected pagan Egyptian god Osiris. FairMormon likewise agrees with this one.
- Under no circumstance would the jackal head Anubis hold a knife as Joseph depicts the “priest of Elkenah” holding in his reconstruction of Facsimile 1.
- Joseph’s translation and interpretation of this 1st century CE pagan Egyptian mortuary scene is nonsense.
-Joseph’s context of the scene with an “idolatrous priest of Elkenah” and Abraham have absolutely nothing to do with what the papyri shows and instead everything to do with being an Egyptian Breathing Permit created close to 2,000 years after Abraham lived.

What matters here is that despite some trivial differences in reconstruction, Charles Larson, Lanny Bell, and every other respected non-Mormon Egyptologist are in agreement that Joseph’s translation and interpretation of the context and content of Facsimile 1 is complete and absolute nonsense."

uhoh

Dont even reply back on this area until you read that page and absorbed the facts Alla. Nice try though, I give you a C+ for google search, an A+ for level of self delusion, and an F for level of actual knowledge.

[Image: 2s9ayd2.jpg]

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
05-08-2015, 11:44 AM (This post was last modified: 05-08-2015 03:19 PM by dancefortwo.)
RE: Discussion on the invalidity of Mormonism
(05-08-2015 10:34 AM)Alla Wrote:  
(04-08-2015 10:45 PM)dancefortwo Wrote:  Bwahahahahahaha. Holy shit, I'm a believer now. This special Mormon rock has me convinced.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. This is rich. Hahahaha Laugh out load
dancefortwo,
only an idiot will try to convince an atheist to believe.
Only an idiot will conclude that if Joseph Smith was RIGHT about pictures it means he is a Propohet of God.

So, save your eggs for yourself.

The dialogue that goodwithoutgod and I have IS NOT about convincing an atheist that God is real or that JS is a Prophet of God.
The dialogue is about this:
Did Egyptologists prove that Joseph Smith was WRONG?
PERIOD.

Making a magic Mormon "seer stone" public for the first time give everyone the opportunity to examine the absurdity of this religion. One can compare this magic rock with other religious magic wafers or magic water or magic incense. All religions use the same method that rely on snake oil salesmanship, wishful thinking, embellished storytelling and human gullibility.

You don't like it? Well, sometimes the truth is hard to take.

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like dancefortwo's post
05-08-2015, 11:53 AM (This post was last modified: 05-08-2015 12:06 PM by goodwithoutgod.)
RE: Discussion on the invalidity of Mormonism
(05-08-2015 11:00 AM)Alla Wrote:  ABOUT DNA.
Before I start this dialogue I want to remind it is NOT about whether Book of Mormon is Word of God or fraud.
This dialogue is about whether DNA proves anything or disproves anything.
(03-08-2015 03:42 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  - The BoM says that the Native Americans descended from Hebraic (Semitic) origins. However through archaeology and DNA testing, we know that Native Americans descend from Asiatic origins
Really?!Shocking
BoM says that the native Americans are descended from Hebraic(Semitic) origins?!

I wonder why I do NOT know this?Blush
back to you, my friend.Kiss

1. Lamanite Identity

On November 9, 2007, Carrie Moore, writing for the LDS-owned Deseret News, announced that the year before the LDS Church had quietly made a change in the Introduction to the Doubleday edition of the Book of Mormon.

Change in Introduction to the Book of Mormon
The change is to be incorporated in future church printings of the Book of Mormon. The sentence under discussion reads as follows:

After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians.

The Doubleday edition and future LDS editions will read:

After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are among the ancestors of the American Indians.

While only one word was changed its implications are astounding. This simple word change signals a retreat from past claims that all American Indians are descended from the Book of Mormon people. The Deseret News article stated:

A one-word change in the introduction to a 2006 edition of the Book of Mormon has reignited discussion among some Latter-day Saints about the book's historicity, geography and the descendants of those chronicled within its pages (Deseret Morning News, November 9, 2007).

uhoh


Wait....there's more..

The same article goes on to quote retired BYU professor John L. Sorenson that the change only "eliminates a certain minor embarrassment in the use of language." However, the change seems to fly in the face of the majority of statements by LDS Church leaders in the past that the descendents of the Book of Mormon people are to be found in the American Indians from Alaska to Chile, from the east coast to the Polynesian islands. This was not just a casual identification, but one made by various LDS Church presidents and apostles for over one hundred and fifty years. President Spencer W. Kimball certainly held such a position. In the Ensign magazine we read:

The translation by the Prophet Joseph Smith revealed a running history for one thousand years—six hundred years before Christ until four hundred after Christ—a history of these great people who occupied this land for that thousand years. Then for the next fourteen hundred years, they lost much of their high culture. The descendants of this mighty people were called Indians by Columbus in 1492 when he found them here.

The term Lamanite includes all Indians and Indian mixtures, such as the Polynesians, the Guatemalans, the Peruvians, as well as the Sioux, the Apache, the Mohawk, the Navajo, and others. It is a large group of great people ("Of Royal Blood," Ensign, July 1971).

President Hinckley has repeatedly associated the American Indians with the descendents of Lehi. In Hinckley's October 1997 conference speech he referred to the Navajos as "these sons and daughters of Father Lehi" (Ensign, Nov. 1997, p. 67). While attending the 1999 dedication of the new LDS temple in Guayaquil, Ecuador, Hinckley referred to "the descendants of Father Lehi" that were in the congregation and observed: "So very many of these people have the blood of Lehi in their veins" (Ensign, Oct. 1999, p. 74). Thus we see that the president of the church was equating Book of Mormon peoples as being in both North and South America as late as 1999.

(For further information on Lamanite identity problems see our #103 Messenger and the article "The Use of 'Lamanite' in Official LDS Discourse" by John-Charles Duffy, in the Journal of Mormon History, Vol. 34, no. 1, Winter 2008.)

With the Mormons changing who is to be considered a descendent of the Book of Mormon people, how are those who have been told all their lives that they are descended from Father Lehi to think of themselves? Hugo Olaiz, a third-generation Mormon from Argentina, wrote:

I have fond memories of being a Lamanite. As a Mormon boy growing up in Argentina, I often sang a Primary song that went like this:

. . . [I am a young Lamanite of humble birth, but I gratefully carry a song in my heart.]

Social stereotypes aside, the song was intended to tell the members in Latin America that they are a special people with a special racial identity, a once prevalent message from which Church leaders are now retreating. In past years, discourse about "Lamanites" played a key role in the missionary program in Latin America, used both as a proselytizing strategy and as an explanation for missionary success. . . .

The change came only after years of resistance to mounting DNA evidence, including threats of excommunication to those who called attention to the mismatch between LDS claims that Amerindian peoples were of Middle Eastern ancestry and the overwhelming genetic data showing their descent from Asian peoples ("How is it That Ye Could Have Fallen!," by Hugo Olaiz, Sunstone, December 2007, p. 68).

If the Mormons cannot identify who are Lamanites how are they to fulfill the charge to take the Book of Mormon to them? In one of Joseph Smith's earliest revelations in 1828, God instructed him that. . . this testimony shall come to the knowledge of the Lamanites, . . . for this very purpose are these plates preserved, which contain these records . . . that the Lamanites might come to the knowledge of their fathers, and that they might know the promises of the Lord . . . (Doctrine and Covenants 3:18-20 ).

The blurring of the identity of who is a Lamanite is just another step back from the claims of the founder of Mormonism. In recent years various church writers have been trying to limit the Book of Mormon lands. The Book of Mormon claims that by approximately 49 BC the Nephites and Lamanites did multiply and spread, and did go forth from the land southward to the land northward, and did spread insomuch that they began to cover the face of the whole earth, from the sea south to the sea north, from the sea west to the sea east (Book of Mormon, Helaman 3:8).

Nineteenth and twentieth century church leaders spoke of the Nephites and Lamanites as occupying the whole land mass of North and South America. But now BYU scholars are pushing for a very limited Book of Mormon geography encompassing southern Mexico and Guatemala. This places the story in the same area as the Mayans. However, genetic research of the Mayans has not shown any link to Semetic people, only to Asian ancestry. Cody Clark, writing for the Provo, Utah Daily Herald reported:

A primary sticking point for some scientists—namely that DNA profiling of American Indians reveals no signs of the DNA that Nephite and Lamanite forebear[er]s would have brought with them from Israel—is captured in the 2004 book Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA and the Mormon Church. The book was written by Simon Southerton, a molecular biologist and former LDS bishop who is no longer a member of the church.

"We are certain that American Indians are essentially all descended from Asian ancestors," Southerton said via e-mail. "Israelite DNA has escaped detection after tests on more than 12,000 individuals. How could the massive Book of Mormon civilizations not leave a significant genetic trace?" (Daily Herald, Nov. 24, 2007 )

While there has been extensive research and excavations done in the Mayan area no archaeological sites, writing samples or artifacts have been identified as Nephite, Lamanite, or Jaredite. Also, there is no official LDS Church map designating the location of the Book of Mormon story.

Another change that is being made in the Book of Mormon Introduction has not received as much attention. Carrie Moore reported:

Another change in the book's introduction may be of interest to those who question whether Latter-day Saints are Christians, but church officials declined comment about when that change was made.

The second sentence of the introduction in many editions says the book is "a record of God's dealings with the ancient inhabitants of the Americas and contains, as does the Bible, the fullness of the everlasting gospel."

The 2004 edition produced by Doubleday for non-Latter-day Saints omits the phrase, "as does the Bible." A church spokesman declined comment on when the change was first made or an explanation of why (Deseret News, Nov. 8, 2007 ).

One possible explanation could be that the statement would raise questions in the reader's mind as to the need for the Book of Mormon if the Bible already contains the "fullness of the everlasting gospel."

However, the same question could be asked about the need for the Doctrine and Covenants and Pearl of Great Price if the Book of Mormon contains "the fullness of the everlasting gospel." For example, neither the Bible nor the Book of Mormon contain any teaching on the need for eternal marriage in the LDS temple ceremony in order to inherit eternal life. This doctrine is taught in sections 131 and 132 of the Doctrine and Covenants. Also, the Book of Mormon has nothing in it about three kingdoms of heaven or about ordinance work for the dead (see our article, Contradictions in LDS Scriptures). Thus it seems that the whole sentence in the Book of Mormon Introduction should have been removed as neither it nor the Bible contain all necessary components of the LDS gospel.

BAAM!

Look at you learning shit Alla!

Reference retrieved from http://www.utlm.org/newsletters/no110.htm#Lamanite

[Image: oh6d06.jpg]

[Image: 2le2jhv.jpg]

Flex

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
05-08-2015, 12:40 PM
RE: Discussion on the invalidity of Mormonism
Girl_nails

Smartass

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-08-2015, 02:32 PM
RE: Discussion on the invalidity of Mormonism
I would say that the emperor has no clothes, but I think the more appropriate phrase would be
"the holy underwear has giant skidmarks"

(22-08-2015 07:30 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  It is by will alone I set my brows in motion it is by the conditioner of avocado that the brows acquire volume the skin acquires spots the spots become a warning. It is by will alone I set my brows in motion.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Octapulse's post
05-08-2015, 02:37 PM
RE: Discussion on the invalidity of Mormonism
(05-08-2015 02:32 PM)Octapulse Wrote:  I would say that the emperor has no clothes, but I think the more appropriate phrase would be
"the holy underwear has giant skidmarks"

oh...oh it is to easy....should I? Could I?......

[Image: 91gi95.jpg]

Big Grin

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
05-08-2015, 02:55 PM
RE: Discussion on the invalidity of Mormonism
I just found out the name of the angel that delivered the golden plates was "Moroni." That is hysterical. Not "I'm-a-fraud-i" or "people-are-gullible-fools-i" but this is almost as good.

Incidentally, if anyone is interested mark twain wrote a review of the BoM that is a fun read. It also seems sir Arthur Conan Doyle was not a fan either. The latter called Brigham young a murdering rapist, which led me to actually follow up on it and while it's a bit fuzzy there do seem to be some evidence for that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like natachan's post
05-08-2015, 03:29 PM
RE: Discussion on the invalidity of Mormonism
(03-08-2015 04:51 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  Mormons are a very special level of stupid. Proof, if any were needed, that some people will believe anything.

Mormonism is a very special level of stupid. It's members have their idiots like any group I suppose. As a former member myself I understand that they are mostly just sheep in a flock who have been systematically broken down and indoctrinated. They use well documented and understood mental manipulation techniques which allow them to first control information, thus influencing the emotions, thoughts, and behavior of the members. The system is so effective, the indoctrination so severe, most of the members using the techniques don't understand what they are doing. The blind and manipulated become leaders of the blind and manipulated.

I know you didn't mean to disparage people like me. I wasn't offended. From the outside, they look like idiots.

Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness.

-Karl Marx
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dark Phoenix's post
05-08-2015, 03:43 PM
RE: Discussion on the invalidity of Mormonism
(05-08-2015 03:29 PM)Dark Phoenix Wrote:  
(03-08-2015 04:51 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  Mormons are a very special level of stupid. Proof, if any were needed, that some people will believe anything.

Mormonism is a very special level of stupid. It's members have their idiots like any group I suppose. As a former member myself I understand that they are mostly just sheep in a flock who have been systematically broken down and indoctrinated. They use well documented and understood mental manipulation techniques which allow them to first control information, thus influencing the emotions, thoughts, and behavior of the members. The system is so effective, the indoctrination so severe, most of the members using the techniques don't understand what they are doing. The blind and manipulated become leaders of the blind and manipulated.

I know you didn't mean to disparage people like me. I wasn't offended. From the outside, they look like idiots.

Very true. My father is a decent, good and kind man. Has been his whole life, has always been a hard worker, kind to others and genuinely loves his wife and his church. It pains me to see him subscribe to mormonism, and see the earnestness in his eyes as he tries to convince me to join....there are good people in religion, just misguided, exploited, brain-washed and socially engineered away from reason. I pity them, and hope that my efforts steer an occasional person or two away from embracing religion, if so, then it was a worthwhile effort.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: