The Truth about Mormons

[Truthspeaker]

The majority of FARMS/FAIR (Mormon apologetic think tanks) are going to try the "Limited Geography" argument for the Jewish immigrants into an isolated area in Central or South America. The BoM and contemporary documents of the 1830s and 1840s are going to blow that defense sky high.

No actually they are not. The "Limited Geography" concept has been suggested and is most likely but the concept itself only suggests that MOST of the Book of Mormon events took place in mesoamerica. It does not prevent other events outside mesoamerica from happening. You do not understand what the "Limited Geography Argument" really is. You don't understand what the book of Mormon actually says either. Which documents are you suggesting will blow us "sky high". I think every document and attack on the book has come and gone the way of waves against a cliff. If there was a destroying argument against the book of mormon, it would have come already. It wouldn't have been revealed by you on US Message Board.

The next defense after that may be more successful. It will be the BoM is "metaphorical", the story "reflects true principles before the foundation of the world", not a literal story.

Watch and see.

That will NEVER happen. Never. No, you are the one who will see. There will be no metaphorical sidestep. We've been claiming the actual story literally happened for 169 years. We're not going to change our tune.

Like Brigham Young has stated: "Our gospel is the one that invites all scientific discovery. It invites all new revealed truths. It is one that will forever sustain science. For true science is part of the religion of God. True science, true religion. Such things any truthseeker embraces. This gospel is one of education, of intellectual discovery, and not of dogmatic dismissal. I say it in the name of Jesus Christ, with knowledge."
~ Discourses of Brigham Young

 

[Truthspeaker]

Avatar:

Your assumption goes this way........Levites=light skinned people.......

There are skin color gradations of every human race; Mongoloid, Caucazoid, Negroid, and Australoid.

All 4 recognized races can and do come in very dark pigmentation, and are not all of the Negroid race which for the most part is of African continental origin.

Your premise falls apart as the bible just says that they are Levites. Levites as well as the other 11 tribes brought with them Egyptian slaves, and also those of Egypt that went along with the Exodus. This is all in the O.T.. Of those Egyptians many were accepted into Judaism by marriage, and by strict Hebrew regulation.

No doubt many Levites were very dark skinned as well as their cousins of the other 11 tribes.

To distinguish who could participate in the LDS priesthood based on skin color really came down to separating-out those of the Negroid race in particular. Right? A person who might be of Mexican ancestry that would most likely be Caucasian and Mongoloid mix could easily have very dark skin pigmentation. Were they singled out as those of the African/Negroid race? Think about it.

You just don't listen....

Priesthood qualification has never...EVER had anything to do with skin color.

 

[Truthspeaker]

I'm sure that this has already been mentioned on here, but my issue is with polygamy.

You are right, this issue has been dealt with before. I must admit I also had my concerns. But concerns stem from different sources. Some stem from a dislike of the practice due to modern ideology that husbands and wives must be madly in love and devoted only to each other. This romantic notion is shared by almost everyone in our culture today including myself. Mostly because of movies and television portraying the euphoria of such a relationship. In reality most marriages start out that way in dating but don't stay that way during the course of the marriage. Hence the current divorce rate. The concept of sharing a spouse is repulsive to most of us for this reason because it just doesn't seem fair.

Anther concern with polygamy stems from the idea that a polygamous husband is simply indulging in his lustful desires and taking advantage of uneducated and weak minded women; seeking out a forum where he can dominate within that arena and subject the females in his harem to his every wish and command.
This would by my major area of concern because I hate everything associated with a man who does this.

However, most concerns come from people who hate it because they would never do it themselves. I don't think I could see myself doing it. I have a hard enough time making my own marriage work with just one woman. Women today are very demanding. In general much more than those of the past. But just because someone could not see themselves doing it doesn't mean they should automatically condemn those who willingly participate of their own accord and desire.
Most women are only satisfied with a monogomous romantic relationship. Others just want companionship and protection. Some are content with being alone. Some just want sex(these usually don't bother getting married.)

But we need to be careful not to judge people in these relationships too quickly. We need to first understand the mindset of the people who engage in it and what reasons they are doing it for. Polygamous relationships made much more sense in a time when women and men had clear cut distinct separate roles. Breadwinner/father and homemaker/wife. The vast majority of women only desired to embrace their roles in these times. The concept of fantastic romantic love was often considered by many no more than a childish pipe dream in those times.
A responsible polygamous man who made the commitment to marry several women instead of sleeping around with multiple mistresses is far more respectable than the typical man today who aims to do just that.
The commitment to marry meant that the parents of the bride to be given away held the man responsible for their daughters providence and love. In a different time in a different culture this idea was respectable.
But today polygamous men are seen as slime. Some definitely are but we should judge them individually and not prejudiced. We should certainly hold promiscuous men of today's age in far less regard than polygamous men. Instead, today's society just accepts it as something "guys just do" if not glamorizing their escapades in hollywood and pop culture.

I realize that this practice doesn't represent the majority of Mormons.

You are right. All "Mormons" in fact do not practice polygamy. People who go on tv as "Mormon polygamist fundamentalists" are not what they claim to be. We are the fundamentalists. Not them. They broke away from us because they failed to follow the teachings of the church.

Glenn Beck isn't helping my view. I wouldn't want him representing my faith, just as I wouldn't want Michael Moore representing it.

I've only heard good things from Glen Beck. But I notice on these boards he's getting roasted. I'd like to hear what statements he's making that are causing these harsh criticisms of him.

One of my Mormon friends recently gave me a dissertation on why polygamy was justified. There was some merit to the argument (fewer men due to war, a woman being widowed, etc...) but does that really translate to the current times?

God has commanded polygamy among his people at select times throughout history. Be it known that our teaching is that polygamy is always a sin unless done in obedience to the command of God through his true prophets. This was the case in old and new testament times and briefly during the formative period of time in our church's early history. The reasons are first and foremost God's reasons. The participants were also chosen by God to live in that generation, He knowing the desires of his children individually(hence the reason we were selected to live in THIS generation). The first reason was to speed the process of populating his church. The other reason was for the protection and providence of widows in a time where frontier life was exceedingly perilous for any person, let alone a single woman, never mind if she had children from her widower.

So no. These reasons do not translate to current times. That is why we don't practice it AT ALL today.

I hope this is a satisfactory answer for you. And thank you for the question.

 

[California Girl]

The polygamy thing is an interesting one....

Why not? As long as it is entered into freely by all parties and we don't have 14 year old girls being married off to 50 year old men, I see no reason to judge people on how they choose to live. If we accept same sex couples, why are polygamous groups any less worthy of acceptance?

 

[Skeptik]

I've only heard good things from Glen Beck. But I notice on these boards he's getting roasted. I'd like to hear what statements he's making that are causing these harsh criticisms of him.

Have you heard this little gem?

Here are some more interesting quotes.

I've never understood just what the attraction is between Mormons and the right wing. Actually, it's an unrequited love, as the right wing in general, and especially the so called "religious right", has no use for Mormons.

So no. These reasons do not translate to current times. That is why we don't practice it AT ALL today.

I hope this is a satisfactory answer for you. And thank you for the question.

NO, they don't translate well to 21st. century culture. The only way polygamy is going to work is if the men follow a leader who has the power to dictate it, and the women have no choice but to go along with it. That was the way it was in 19th. century Utah, and the way it still is in some of the backward communities dominated by so called "fundamentalist Mormons", who really aren't Mormons at all.

 

[California Girl]

Mormons, like Catholics, appear out of step with todays society. That is because our religions don't change their stance to suit public opinion. They just are. You either accept the teachings of the Church or you do not but the Church doesn't change. I like that. I'm glad they don't move on their fundamental beliefs.

 

[Truthspeaker]

Have you heard this little gem?

I saw in this video that it was trying to smear Beck without letting him finish so I'd really have to hear the rest of his explanation.

Here are some more interesting quotes.

Again with these quotes, I need some more background. I'd especially like to read the so called poem the 7 year old wrote about Africa. Having lived in and loved the people of Africa with all my heart, I'm disinclined to believe this 7 year old has any real knowledge on the subject.

I've never understood just what the attraction is between Mormons and the right wing. Actually, it's an unrequited love, as the right wing in general, and especially the so called "religious right", has no use for Mormons.

We're not really concerned with being labeled right or left. At least I'm not. We just have certain values and others label us accordingly.

NO, they don't translate well to 21st. century culture. The only way polygamy is going to work is if the men follow a leader who has the power to dictate it, and the women have no choice but to go along with it. That was the way it was in 19th. century Utah, and the way it still is in some of the backward communities dominated by so called "fundamentalist Mormons", who really aren't Mormons at all.

Having an extensive knowlege about polygamy, especially in early Mormon culture, I will have to respectfully disagree with you. Our religion has always preached the divine nature of women and how they are God's greatest creation. Just because we have preached that Men and Women have different roles does not mean we preach that women are to be subserviant to their husbands. It is written in our canon of scriptures:

D&C 121:37

"...but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man."


This scripture was in direct revelation to Joseph Smith on the responsibility of men who hold the priesthood. Many men at the time thought it was ok to "boss" their families around. This was clear instruction from God that men are not to be so.

Polygamy was not dictated to the general population. It was revealed as a commandment to a few. Not the whole community. The actual numbers are between 2 and 5 % of men engaged in the practice. Most of whom were leaders. Certainly no one was forced to engage in it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You two clearly do not understand the DNA issue, but the time will come when you will.

Truthspeaker, you better go look up Brigham Young and others' speeches about the Royal Abrahamic priesthood, lineage, and race. Your statement of denial is one of the most ignorant (meaning uneducated that I have ever read about Mormon issues) that I have ever read.

 

[Skeptik]

I saw in this video that it was trying to smear Beck without letting him finish so I'd really have to hear the rest of his explanation.

Oh, he was allowed to finish. Beck tends to open his mouth without engaging his brain first. It's likely he saw how absurd his statement was, but, once said, he couldn't unsay it.

Again with these quotes, I need some more background. I'd especially like to read the so called poem the 7 year old wrote about Africa. Having lived in and loved the people of Africa with all my heart, I'm disinclined to believe this 7 year old has any real knowledge on the subject.

I'm not sure about those quotes, either. Some of them may have been taken out of context and hyped. If you listen to him, though, you begin to get the feeling that he likes to make outrageous statements just to get attention, much like Limbaugh, Hannity et. al.

We're not really concerned with being labeled right or left. At least I'm not. We just have certain values and others label us accordingly.

Yes, I understand that, and that the church tries to be as apolitical as possible. The individual members, however, tend to the extreme right, at least in my experience. Yet, the extreme right has a vast misunderstanding of Mormon theology and how that might relate to political ideology. Did you follow the last primary, especially the candidacy of Mitt Romney? I really thought he was the best candidate, still do, and think he would most likely have been nominated had he been a Baptist or something. He would also have had a much better chance of winning than John McCain ever did.

Having an extensive knowlege about polygamy, especially in early Mormon culture, I will have to respectfully disagree with you. Our religion has always preached the divine nature of women and how they are God's greatest creation. Just because we have preached that Men and Women have different roles does not mean we preach that women are to be subserviant to their husbands. It is written in our canon of scriptures:

Yes, but going back to the polygamy as actually practiced in 19th. century Utah, it looks to me to have been at odds with the idea of the divine nature of women, or of men for that matter.

Have you ever read The 19th. Wife, by David Ebershoff? It does provide an interesting look at polygamy as practiced by the Mormon pioneers and as practiced today by the fringe groups in Utah.

 

[Truthspeaker]

You two clearly do not understand the DNA issue, but the time will come when you will.

Truthspeaker, you better go look up Brigham Young and others' speeches about the Royal Abrahamic priesthood, lineage, and race. Your statement of denial is one of the most ignorant (meaning uneducated that I have ever read about Mormon issues) that I have ever read.

Thank you for your eloquent retort. Thank you for explaining to me the meaning of ignorant. Thank you.

I've been through the DNA issue already....Did I miss something? The DNA of native americans is one of the first issues I dealt with....oh about on the first page of this discussion and several times since. So I repeat, what did I miss? Be sure to continue using small words so the ignorant likes of myself can understand your advanced scholarship.

As to the Brigham Young Speeches. I'm familiar with them all. Do you really think you are more of an expert on my religion than myself, who studies it for an hour each day for the past 20 years? And you haven't joined us yet? That is remarkable.

 

[Truthspeaker]

Yes, but going back to the polygamy as actually practiced in 19th. century Utah, it looks to me to have been at odds with the idea of the divine nature of women, or of men for that matter.

there is far more written in contemporary and publicly read books in our churches that teach the divine nature of women than the handful of cultic outcasted polygamous wives tales.

Have you ever read The 19th. Wife, by David Ebershoff? It does provide an interesting look at polygamy as practiced by the Mormon pioneers and as practiced today by the fringe groups in Utah.

I'm surprised you bring up this book since it is admittedly a work of fiction based on history. Have you read the book yourself? It won awards in Utah as one of the best fictional writings of the year.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, you have not been "through" the DNA issue or about Brigham Young.

You better go talk to Blair Hodges at the Neal Maxwell Institute to help you stop sounding like an idiot here. I am truly writing this in your best interest.

 

[Skeptik]

there is far more written in contemporary and publicly read books in our churches that teach the divine nature of women than the handful of cultic outcasted polygamous wives tales.

Yes, of course. I understand the church's position on the divine nature of women. The actual practice of polygamy seems to me to have been at odds with that teaching.

I'm surprised you bring up this book since it is admittedly a work of fiction based on history. Have you read the book yourself? It won awards in Utah as one of the best fictional writings of the year.

Yes, I've read it. It may be a work of fiction, but it is based on historical research. What is your take on it? Was the practice of polygamy by the Mormon pioneers accurately represented in the book?

 

[Truthspeaker]

No, you have not been "through" the DNA issue or about Brigham Young.

You better go talk to Blair Hodges at the Neal Maxwell Institute to help you stop sounding like an idiot here. I am truly writing this in your best interest.

Go ahead, make me look like an idiot. What did I miss?

And by the way, cut the crap like you know some huge secret the rest of us don't. You can lose the mystical shaman act. You're not the wise old guy who lives in the back simply observing the goings and doings of the young, while he muses on his Indiana Jones like experiences from his ancient past. You act almost as if you would charge people for your expositories on Mormonism. It's all been said and done before.

 

[Truthspeaker]

there is far more written in contemporary and publicly read books in our churches that teach the divine nature of women than the handful of cultic outcasted polygamous wives tales.

Yes, of course. I understand the church's position on the divine nature of women. The actual practice of polygamy seems to me to have been at odds with that teaching.

I'm surprised you bring up this book since it is admittedly a work of fiction based on history. Have you read the book yourself? It won awards in Utah as one of the best fictional writings of the year.

Yes, I've read it. It may be a work of fiction, but it is based on historical research. What is your take on it? Was the practice of polygamy by the Mormon pioneers accurately represented in the book?

I haven't read that book but I am reading the woman's actual account right now in her book Wife No. 19. She is very bitter in the words I read of hers so far. She seems very uneducated about the doctrines itself despite having grown up in the prophet's home. I'll let you know more when I finish.

 

[Godboy]

Im sure you like spouting off about all the glories of your peaceful religion, while ignoring the fact that its all based on absurd lies from the infamous con man known as Joseph Smith, and he wrote your humorous bible by looking into a hat. You people have serious issues with logic.

 

[Truthspeaker]

Im sure you like spouting off about all the glories of your peaceful religion, while ignoring the fact that its all based on absurd lies from the infamous con man known as Joseph Smith, and he wrote your humorous bible by looking into a hat. You people have serious issues with logic.

Correction 'Godboy', Joseph the Seer, translated the Book of Mormon, by the power of God through instruments provided him. He didn't commence a translation of the Bible until later.

 

[Godboy]

Im sure you like spouting off about all the glories of your peaceful religion, while ignoring the fact that its all based on absurd lies from the infamous con man known as Joseph Smith, and he wrote your humorous bible by looking into a hat. You people have serious issues with logic.

Correction 'Godboy', Joseph the Seer, translated the Book of Mormon, by the power of God through instruments provided him. He didn't commence a translation of the Bible until later.

Thats because the first time he was going through the process of having it transcribed by his assistant, the assistans wife tested Joseph smith, by getting her husband (the assistant) to pretend like he lost all the writings they made up to that date. The idea being, that if Joseph was actually telling the truth about being able to read the exact word of god word for word, while staring into a top hat, he should be able to duplicate those exact words again.

All they would have to do is compare the first 50 pages side by side and see if there was any difference. If it was identical, he was telling the truth, but if it wasnt, then he was obviously lying.

...and what was the end result of this test? Joseph flew off the handle when he found out and said god punished him for allowing the transcripts to be seen by the assistant and his wife, and now he can no longer read the stones, so making a duplicate was now impossible.

What a fucking joke, and you clowns believe it. Good luck with that.

 

[Godboy]

Should i go into detail about Josephs activities before he became your holy leader? Shall i talk about him ripping off farmers by convincing them that he could find water (during terrible droughts) using only a divining rod? History shows he was run out of more than one town after he took all their money but offered no results.

He was a fucking con man, and people are still being conned by him today.

 

[Truthspeaker]

Im sure you like spouting off about all the glories of your peaceful religion, while ignoring the fact that its all based on absurd lies from the infamous con man known as Joseph Smith, and he wrote your humorous bible by looking into a hat. You people have serious issues with logic.

Correction 'Godboy', Joseph the Seer, translated the Book of Mormon, by the power of God through instruments provided him. He didn't commence a translation of the Bible until later.

Thats because the first time he was going through the process of having it transcribed by his assistant, the assistans wife tested Joseph smith, by getting her husband (the assistant) to pretend like he lost all the writings they made up to that date. The idea being, that if Joseph was actually telling the truth about being able to read the exact word of god word for word, while staring into a top hat, he should be able to duplicate those exact words again.

All they would have to do is compare the first 50 pages side by side and see if there was any difference. If it was identical, he was telling the truth, but if it wasnt, then he was obviously lying.

...and what was the end result of this test? Joseph flew off the handle when he found out and said god punished him for allowing the transcripts to be seen by the assistant and his wife, and now he can no longer read the stones, so making a duplicate was now impossible.

What a fucking joke, and you clowns believe it. Good luck with that.

You also don't realize that if Joseph translated the words exactly they had designed that they were going to publish discrepancies in the original since they had made changes to the original text. God was not going to let them succeed in their evil design. Joseph disobeyed direct orders not to show the manuscript to anyone else and on the third time he said yes to prove to Joseph that disobedience has bad consequences.

And what kind of an upstanding individual are you? Randomly jumping in and hurling insults at a religion. Especially uneducated ones to boot.