The Truth about Mormons

[JakeStarkey]

That's an opinion, Joe, a very weak one.

Let folks study realclearpolitics aggregrate polling for the last week, and they will see that you cherries got popped.

Perry is an empty suit that will be sent to the cleaners, ironed, and then sent home to Texas by February.

 

[JoeB131]

That's an opinion, Joe, a very weak one.

Let folks study realclearpolitics aggregrate polling for the last week, and they will see that you cherries got popped.

Perry is an empty suit that will be sent to the cleaners, ironed, and then sent home to Texas by February.

I've studied the polling. Once Perry was in, Romney was done.

His best hope is that the MSM will attack the guy, but the attacks all seem to be bouncing off.

Let's give it a couple more weeks, though, and see if your boy is doing any better..

He won't be.

 

[JoeB131]

And since you want to look at just the aggreget at RPC, let's look at where the other candidates are.

Palin is at 11% in the aggregate. When she finally doesn't run, she'll probably endorse Perry, and Perry can add her 11% to his own.. Bachmann is at 9.5% in the aggregate. But she's probably done after she places second or third in Iowa. Her supports will go to Perry before they go to Romney.

So where does Romney really expand beyond his 18% aggregate? I guess he might pick up Cain's 5% because they are both corporate types. Maybe Gingrich's 5% after Newt qualifies for the matching funds and gets out. Paul's 9% will probably be in until the end... and it's only a matter of time before Romney sinks below Ron Paul.

 

[JoeB131]

And since you want to look at just the aggreget at RPC, let's look at where the other candidates are.

Palin is at 11% in the aggregate. When she finally doesn't run, she'll probably endorse Perry, and Perry can add her 11% to his own.. Bachmann is at 9.5% in the aggregate. But she's probably done after she places second or third in Iowa. Her supports will go to Perry before they go to Romney.

So where does Romney really expand beyond his 18% aggregate? I guess he might pick up Cain's 5% because they are both corporate types. Maybe Gingrich's 5% after Newt qualifies for the matching funds and gets out. Paul's 9% will probably be in until the end... and it's only a matter of time before Romney sinks below Ron Paul.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The aggregate right now does not support your contentions. Palin's voters are not enough in numbers to affect the polls significantly. Palinistas may have effect in South Carolina. If Romney comes out of SC solidly, he can then sweep the board.

The polling does not support you. Anyone who wants to mine down can go to realclearpolitics.com and study the polls carefully.

As an aside: I find it a hoot that an atheist's opposing a Latter Day Saint so an evangelical can be elected. Romney would probably be the one among Perry, Palin, and Romney to offer you the right hand of fellowship while aware of your lack of faith.

 

[JoeB131]

As an aside: I find it a hoot that an atheist's opposing a Latter Day Saint so an evangelical can be elected. Romney would probably be the one among Perry, Palin, and Romney to offer you the right hand of fellowship while aware of your lack of faith.

ignoring your fantasies about polling, because they are tiresome...

As an atheist (really, more an agnostic), I have no problem supporting an evagelicals, I've known evangelicals, most of them are pretty decent people.

Mormons, on the other hand, are the scum of the universe. Never have I met such snaky, backstabbing people in my life.

So, yeah, I'll vote for Perry to prevent ROmney from getting in. And if by some light he loses, I'll support Obama.

 

[Unkotare]

Mormons, on the other hand, are the scum of the universe. Never have I met such snaky, backstabbing people in my life.

So, yeah, I'll vote for Perry to prevent ROmney from getting in. And if by some light he loses, I'll support Obama.

You are a low-life bigoted scumbag.

 

[JakeStarkey]

As an aside: I find it a hoot that an atheist's opposing a Latter Day Saint so an evangelical can be elected. Romney would probably be the one among Perry, Palin, and Romney to offer you the right hand of fellowship while aware of your lack of faith.

ignoring your fantasies about polling, because they are tiresome...

As an atheist (really, more an agnostic), I have no problem supporting an evagelicals, I've known evangelicals, most of them are pretty decent people.

Mormons, on the other hand, are the scum of the universe. Never have I met such snaky, backstabbing people in my life.

So, yeah, I'll vote for Perry to prevent ROmney from getting in. And if by some light he loses, I'll support Obama.

so (1) you say the polls support Perry overwhelmingly over Romney when in fact the polls state (2) Perry may be 2% overall ahead of Romney, while you ignore (3) that Romney is kicking perrytail in NH.

your atheist hatred for mormonism reveals a truly dark side in your character.

Vote for Obama? I knew you were a secret liberal.

 

[Unkotare]

Not much of a "secret"

 

[Truthspeaker]

Truth, I believe in keeping faith simple. The simpler the better. The more you bring religion into it, the more problems you have with misunderstanding and ridicule.

Take for instance the Mormon position that the American Indians were descended from Jewish tribes that immigrated to this continent in two migrations. One across the Atlantic and one across the Pacific under water.

I have fun with that with my Mormon friends and ask them about where the Nuclear Power submarines came from that allowed the Jews/Indians to breath underwater with Oxygen generators... They always have trouble with that one.

Then I ask about all the great cities that the Indians had in the New World, but none of them correspond with the actual locations of archeological digs. I had one good Mormon friend who could only theorize that there were tremendous earthquakes just before Columbus came to the Americas and that those earthquakes moved all of the Indian cities around, as much as five hundred miles in some cases. Do you realize what tremendous tidal waves that would have created? That would have wiped all of the sea ports off of the surface of the earth, yet no tidal waves were reported.

Then add to that the fact that the Indians do not have any Jewish DNA Not a drop in the pure natives of this land. There was a Jewish mountain man by the name of Goldberger who impregnated over 100 Indian women in the late 1700's and early 1800's, but all of his DNA was documented in the Cherokee and various Plaines Indian tribes. What a man!

Nope, dude, it is better that you guys stress that God does forgive sin and that all we have to do to be forgiven is repent and ask for forgiveness and then ask for guidance. IF you teach that, most people can not disagree with you and you will have many followers. That can be a very good thing in this day and age.

I think there are just a few major tenants of all religions. In Christianity it’s belief in Christ and the resurrection. In Buddhism it’s the Four Noble Truths and the Eight-fold Path, but there are also the derived believes and beliefs that come from scriptural interpretations. I really think we spend too much time and energy defending rather minor religious points.

I think the major difference is, you can debate whether there was a resurrection or even if Jesus was a real person, but you can't debate the fact that Judea was a real place, that the Roman Empire really existed.

The Mormon books insist this vast civilization existed that lasted just as long as Rome did, but yet left not a single trace of evidence. Therefore, it is logicall to conclude that Joseph Smith was making that shit up....

So you still continue to ignore the archaelogical evidence I showed you. The only response I got back from you was. "Those have been debunked."
Well this seems highly irresponsible to just dismiss without showing any "debunking". I've shown you evidence of civilizations, horses, elephants and Hebrew writing in Ancient America among others. You're not going to impress anyone if you don't address the facts. The evidence is mountainous. But evidence is always open to interpretation, even obvious evidence. Learn knowledge before you try to make statements like "no evidence".

 

[JakeStarkey]

The archaeological detail has been debunked, truthspeaker. The only path left now is go limit the geopgraphical spread of the Lehites in the Americas. You are between a rock and a hard spot.

 

[2twsted4colorTV]

This is VERY interesting indeed.

INVESTIGATING MORMONISM

excerpts:

The detailed history and civilization described in the Book of Mormon does not correspond to anything found by archaeologists anywhere in the Americas. The Book of Mormon describes a civilization lasting for a thousand years, covering both North and South America, which was familiar with horses, elephants, cattle, sheep, wheat, barley, steel, wheeled vehicles, shipbuilding, sails, coins, and other elements of Old World culture. But no trace of any of these supposedly very common things has ever been found in the Americas of that period. Nor does the Book of Mormon mention many of the features of the civilizations which really did exist at that time in the Americas. The LDS church has spent millions of dollars over many years trying to prove through archaeological research that the Book of Mormon is an accurate historical record, but they have failed to produce any convincing pre-columbian archeological evidence supporting the Book of Mormon story. In addition, whereas the Book of Mormon presents the picture of a relatively homogeneous people, with a single language and communication between distant parts of the Americas, the pre-columbian history of the Americas shows the opposite: widely disparate racial types (almost entirely east Asian - definitely not Semitic, as proven by recent DNA studies), and many unrelated native languages, none of which are even remotely related to Hebrew or Egyptian.


The people of the Book of Mormon were supposedly devout Jews observing the Law of Moses, but in the Book of Mormon there is almost no trace of their observance of Mosaic law or even an accurate knowledge of it.


Although Joseph Smith said that God had pronounced the completed translation of the plates as published in 1830 "correct," many changes have been made in later editions. Besides thousands of corrections of poor grammar and awkward wording in the 1830 edition, other changes have been made to reflect subsequent changes in some of the fundamental doctrine of the church. For example, an early change in wording modified the 1830 edition's acceptance of the doctrine of the Trinity, thus allowing Smith to introduce his later doctrine of multiple gods. A more recent change (1981) replaced "white" with "pure," apparently to reflect the change in the church's stance on the "curse" of the black race.

If you should ever decide that you made a mistake in joining the church and then leave it, you will probably find (judging from the experiences of others who have done so) that many of your Mormon friends will abandon and shun you. If you are unable to convince your family members to leave the church with you, you will find that the church has broken up your family and your relationship with them may never recover.


Consider very carefully before you commit yourself, and remember that any doubts you may have now will likely only increase.

Examine carefully both sides of the Mormon story. Listen to the stories of those who have been through an unhappy Mormon experience, not just those Mormons who may speak glowingly of life in the church.

The Mormon missionaries are often charming and enthusiastic. They have an attractive story to tell. At first it sounds wonderful. But remember the old saying, "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is!" Be careful not to fall into the trap of believing something simply because you want it to be true. Mormons may tell you that those who criticize the church are lying, misquoting and distorting. If you examine the sources used by the critics, however, you will discover that most of their source material is from official or semi-official Mormon writings. You, too, should examine those sources.

Is Mormonism a "cult"? Many experts on religious cults see in Mormonism the same fundamental characteristics as cults which have entrapped the unsuspecting, even though most people think of "cults" only as small, unknown groups. Use a "cult checklist" to evaluate Mormonism, or any group, before you commit yourself.

 

[Truthspeaker]

The archaeological detail has been debunked, truthspeaker. The only path left now is go limit the geopgraphical spread of the Lehites in the Americas. You are between a rock and a hard spot.

I guess this is evidence if not proof that Jake actually is not a "mormon". As he is arguing this point with me. please note JoeB

Now Jake,
we've been running this circle for a while now. I've shown evidence and links showing plausibility but you have not responded in kind. Your only response has been "It's been debunked." Really has it? how? Where?

 

[Truthspeaker]

This is VERY interesting indeed.

INVESTIGATING MORMONISM

excerpts:

The detailed history and civilization described in the Book of Mormon does not correspond to anything found by archaeologists anywhere in the Americas. The Book of Mormon describes a civilization lasting for a thousand years, covering both North and South America, which was familiar with horses, elephants, cattle, sheep, wheat, barley, steel, wheeled vehicles, shipbuilding, sails, coins, and other elements of Old World culture. But no trace of any of these supposedly very common things has ever been found in the Americas of that period. Nor does the Book of Mormon mention many of the features of the civilizations which really did exist at that time in the Americas. The LDS church has spent millions of dollars over many years trying to prove through archaeological research that the Book of Mormon is an accurate historical record, but they have failed to produce any convincing pre-columbian archeological evidence supporting the Book of Mormon story. In addition, whereas the Book of Mormon presents the picture of a relatively homogeneous people, with a single language and communication between distant parts of the Americas, the pre-columbian history of the Americas shows the opposite: widely disparate racial types (almost entirely east Asian - definitely not Semitic, as proven by recent DNA studies), and many unrelated native languages, none of which are even remotely related to Hebrew or Egyptian.


The people of the Book of Mormon were supposedly devout Jews observing the Law of Moses, but in the Book of Mormon there is almost no trace of their observance of Mosaic law or even an accurate knowledge of it.


Although Joseph Smith said that God had pronounced the completed translation of the plates as published in 1830 "correct," many changes have been made in later editions. Besides thousands of corrections of poor grammar and awkward wording in the 1830 edition, other changes have been made to reflect subsequent changes in some of the fundamental doctrine of the church. For example, an early change in wording modified the 1830 edition's acceptance of the doctrine of the Trinity, thus allowing Smith to introduce his later doctrine of multiple gods. A more recent change (1981) replaced "white" with "pure," apparently to reflect the change in the church's stance on the "curse" of the black race.

If you should ever decide that you made a mistake in joining the church and then leave it, you will probably find (judging from the experiences of others who have done so) that many of your Mormon friends will abandon and shun you. If you are unable to convince your family members to leave the church with you, you will find that the church has broken up your family and your relationship with them may never recover. NOTES


Consider very carefully before you commit yourself, and remember that any doubts you may have now will likely only increase.

Examine carefully both sides of the Mormon story. Listen to the stories of those who have been through an unhappy Mormon experience, not just those Mormons who may speak glowingly of life in the church.

The Mormon missionaries are often charming and enthusiastic. They have an attractive story to tell. At first it sounds wonderful. But remember the old saying, "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is!" Be careful not to fall into the trap of believing something simply because you want it to be true. Mormons may tell you that those who criticize the church are lying, misquoting and distorting. If you examine the sources used by the critics, however, you will discover that most of their source material is from official or semi-official Mormon writings. You, too, should examine those sources.

Is Mormonism a "cult"? Many experts on religious cults see in Mormonism the same fundamental characteristics as cults which have entrapped the unsuspecting, even though most people think of "cults" only as small, unknown groups. Use a "cult checklist" to evaluate Mormonism, or any group, before you commit yourself.

First I genuinely want to thank you for bringing up these points. Although there is not a single one I have not dealt with, I am happy to sink my teeth into this next answer and it's been a while since I dealt with some of these and more recently for some others. But this makes for great discussion and I will gladly respond by the end of the night since I'm at work currently and these legitimate points deserve my undivided attention. See you all later.

 

[JakeStarkey]

TruthSpeaker, the "evidence" does not stand up to scientific inquiry. It is only a hypothesis at this point, not scientific theory. You have miles and miles to go before you sleep.

But, remember, that is why we Christians, you and I, have faith in the Risen Christ, so not to worry.

 

[Truthspeaker]

TruthSpeaker, the "evidence" does not stand up to scientific inquiry. It is only a hypothesis at this point, not scientific theory. You have miles and miles to go before you sleep.

But, remember, that is why we Christians, you and I, have faith in the Risen Christ, so not to worry.

Though I am satisfied with much of the evidence, I have never claimed it to be anywhere close to complete proof. The bottom line is this... It is all trivia compared with the atonement of Christ and faith in his redemption. The Lord looks on the heart and all other knowledge is just a bonus to our character. All things will be revealed in the due time of the Lord and I am not worried about minutia.

 

[JakeStarkey]

TruthSpeaker, the "evidence" does not stand up to scientific inquiry. It is only a hypothesis at this point, not scientific theory. You have miles and miles to go before you sleep.

But, remember, that is why we Christians, you and I, have faith in the Risen Christ, so not to worry.

Though I am satisfied with much of the evidence, I have never claimed it to be anywhere close to complete proof. The bottom line is this... It is all trivia compared with the atonement of Christ and faith in his redemption. The Lord looks on the heart and all other knowledge is just a bonus to our character. All things will be revealed in the due time of the Lord and I am not worried about minutia.

Nor should you be. Christ died, Christ rose, Christ shall come again.

 

[JoeB131]

so (1) you say the polls support Perry overwhelmingly over Romney when in fact the polls state (2) Perry may be 2% overall ahead of Romney, while you ignore (3) that Romney is kicking perrytail in NH.

your atheist hatred for mormonism reveals a truly dark side in your character.

Vote for Obama? I knew you were a secret liberal.

Obama's an idiot, but he isn't a member of this dangerous, insane cult with their hidden agenda.

Oh, hey, guess what guy, new CNN Poll out today. Perry is now leading the Android from Kolob by 13 points, his widest margin yet..

RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - 2012 Republican Presidential Nomination

 

[JoeB131]

Nor should you be. Christ died, Christ rose, Christ shall come again.

Or he was a myth cobbled together from a bunch of other Man-Gods in mythology...

 

[JoeB131]

I think the major difference is, you can debate whether there was a resurrection or even if Jesus was a real person, but you can't debate the fact that Judea was a real place, that the Roman Empire really existed.

The Mormon books insist this vast civilization existed that lasted just as long as Rome did, but yet left not a single trace of evidence. Therefore, it is logicall to conclude that Joseph Smith was making that shit up....

So you still continue to ignore the archaelogical evidence I showed you. The only response I got back from you was. "Those have been debunked."
Well this seems highly irresponsible to just dismiss without showing any "debunking". I've shown you evidence of civilizations, horses, elephants and Hebrew writing in Ancient America among others. You're not going to impress anyone if you don't address the facts. The evidence is mountainous. But evidence is always open to interpretation, even obvious evidence. Learn knowledge before you try to make statements like "no evidence".

1- Nothing a Mormon produces will ever be treated as ANYTHING but a lie by me.

2- No non-LDS scientist accepts interpretations that there was a Nephite civilization.

3- A mormon wouldn't know a fact if it bit him on his ass.