Mormon Teachings

How has this thread effected your veiw of the LDS church?

  • Veiw the church more favorably

    Votes: 7 12.7%

  • Less favorably

    Votes: 19 34.5%

  • No change

    Votes: 20 36.4%

  • No more and no less than any other church out there

    Votes: 11 20.0%
  • Total voters
    55
The traditional view holds that the first Americans were trekkers from Siberia who crossed a land bridge into Alaska during the last Ice Age

second paragraph to the second link

Beside's does that primitive technology help tell you if they can build a boat that could travel 8,000 miles?
 
Traditional theories are suffocating while new evidence and discovery shows otherwise.
 
. . . . well i'll leave it up 2 you 2 read more. instead of me reading it again and quoting all the evidence, and the scientist' modern opinions.
 
i read it all and i don't doubt it but how does it really help us find out how israelite's could have sailed 8,000 miles with primitive technology..... besides the boats wher made by tools very simular to making canoo's like it said, this doesn't give enough evidence to say that they could have sailed across an ocean..,,,

a side theory is group's of people could have been forced out of country's making them move northern until they reached syberia, where they then over populated or over hunted, and went across the bearing straight

very simular to the orignal theory but still provide's some kind of a more reasonable answer, other then they sailed across an ocean with tool's used to build canoo's
 
Just because you doubt it doesn't mean it's not possible...
 
Well, lets hold an open experament. You can only use the tool's and wood that the native american's used to build a boat..... then try to sail across any ocean
 
Ricky Houy said:
Well, lets hold an open experament. You can only use the tool's and wood that the native american's used to build a boat..... then try to sail across any ocean
Click to expand...

There's one thing you're forgetting: God is the one who made those trips possible--He commanded Nephi to build a ship, and He directed the Jaredites to build their barges.

So in your little experiment, you have to be commanded by God to do it, and then protected and watched over by God as you go. I'll just bet that God is able to get a ship across the ocean with no problems.
 
i woudn't doubt it but if so wouldn't there be strong sign's of christianity in the native american's instead of them warshipping sun gods?
 
Ricky Houy said:
i woudn't doubt it but if so wouldn't there be strong sign's of christianity in the native american's instead of them warshipping sun gods?
Click to expand...

Hello? You don't know your Book of Mormon, do you? The Jaredites and the Nephites were completely destroyed, leaving only the Lamanites left (along with other non-Lehite civilizations). If Christian Native Americans died out around 421 C.E., why do you expect their non-Christian enemies to be Christians?

Did you know that there is no record of Moses in Egyptian archaeology? Yet I'll bet you believe Moses existed and did what the BIble tells us he did.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again:

ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE IS NOT EVIDENCE OF ABSENCE.
 
Marlin said:
Hello? You don't know your Book of Mormon, do you? The Jaredites and the Nephites were completely destroyed, leaving only the Lamanites left (along with other non-Lehite civilizations). If Christian Native Americans died out around 421 C.E., why do you expect their non-Christian enemies to be Christians?

Did you know that there is no record of Moses in Egyptian archaeology? Yet I'll bet you believe Moses existed and did what the BIble tells us he did.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again:

ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE IS NOT EVIDENCE OF ABSENCE.
Click to expand...


well they built city's appereantly they can build city's but leave no trace's of them

Weird, but i suppose its possible, but not likely. Further more there entire civilization would still have STRONG influence's of hebrew decent. It's not like they came from israel split into 3 tribes and just forgot about about there hebrew ancestor's. Story's would have been passed down telling of some kind of an event. If you say that isn't true, then you are a fool, because if that isn't true then the biblical story's we hear today wouldn't be around. There would be some kind of evidence, little or large sayin they came from israel.

Plus, im not sure which native american culture it was but whatever culture that saw the second comming of jesus, would surly have known and the light's you are to see of the second comming of jesus would be seen around the world!(remember in the bible it says you will know the second comming of the lord for you can see the lights from the north east south and west) The second comming of Jesus is also supposed to come after the 4 horseman, the ffour horsemen have no came yet obviously. There for Jesus would have not came back to keep peace between the tribe's. He would not have came back or he would be a FALSE prophet.

If Jesus was a flase phrophet which or religion is seeming to unconciously be out to do, then your religion is wrong already. Jesus will not return until armeggedon..... you cannot argue this otherwise.
 
ok i read through a little of that i will as well get back to it later but im getting the idea of it and starting to like this debate quite alot
 
Nisus said:
Traditional theories are suffocating while new evidence and discovery shows otherwise.
Click to expand...
since there is so much evidence, could you at least post a link?

cause if I read this map right, it's an awful route to Mexico from S. Arabia, see here:
http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/8q_1.html

& you'd have to zig & zag through the 10000's of islands in the Indonesian Archipelago, like so:
http://www.baliblog.com/05-12/indonesia-has-another-10000-islands-to-name.html
 
Theres no actualy proof that any of this is true. Period. It could be, or the hundreds of other beleifs. But when you have atleast 5 major beleif systems saying "my way is the only way" it becomes quiet silly. Your right about the black thing, it was an isolated incident. I appoligize for the incorect statement. However when a person says THIS IS TRUTH you have to prove it. If you cant prove it then its just an openion, a theory.

My parents were both born in Utah and married in the temple once they moved from utah and looked at what they were taught they ... were shocked to say the least (looking back on there experiences at least). I was "blessed" when i was born, they even sent me a neat little card of varification i figure i will show this to the person attending the gates of heaven? I just hope they got my info right. If the book of morman helps maintain a good family with... close ties and "morals" then that is a possitive thing. But when you get into qouting verses as if there some proven fact then that is simply arrogent. Its taught that the church of Ladder Day saints is the only true church... and after hearing so many other churches say that im curious as to which might be right. Then again if god was caring and compassionate then it wouldnt matter if you made some silly little oath. It would matter what you did in life how you treated other people and what your thoughts revolved around. But, being human i guess i cant claim to know what "god is thinking". I could write a good book today called "the book of See-Mei" i could claim to be a prophet and even get guallable people to beleive me. Then a hundred years from now they might even still be practicing it, who knows!
 
Also the whole temple deal, with tithings 10% of your income.... Sounds just as bad as scientology except with scientology its a one time fee per level. Not to mention the secrecy with what go's on in the temple. Only 3 out of 40 close relatives (aunts, uncles, grandma and grandpa's arent paying tythings and are "sealed" to my parents through the temple) so i have had a LOT of experience with this teaching.

(turned out it was only teachers at my mothers seminary in utah (elective class for school) who were saying that about black people, just an isolated area of racists which is possible for every religion and every region)
 
Marlin said:
Many gentiles shall reject the Book of Mormon—They shall say: We need no more Bible—The Lord speaks to many nations—He will judge the world out of the books thus written. [Between 559 and 545 B.C.]
Click to expand...
Considering that the only "Bible" known at that time wasn't even called a Bible, but "the Law", what does the Book of Mormon add to it? The Jews were in Babylonian exile from 486BC to 536BC, and those left behind (the people who became the Samaritans) still consider only the Pentateuch to be canonical. The "gentiles" (non-Jews) - either in America or the East - had no single collection of books that might be called that. God speaks to the nations, it says, but do you accept all their scriptures as "Biblical" (a "gentile Bible")? Strictly speaking, only the Jews have a Bible, and when the anointed King came, He gathered everybody who believed in Him - Jew or gentile - to himelf. That's already more than "two nations". The gospel describes this event, and the epistles testify to it and explain it. This can certainly go on forever, but the canon was fixed around the historical person Jesus, and the people and words that immediately surrounded Him (as a means of measuring other words, not for limiting them - Mormons have started doing the same in practice, no matter what you say about your prophets). At best, the words above would indicate the advent of Christ, and his rejection based on "scripture", the Hebrew Bible.
John 5:39 You study the Scriptures, because you think that in them you will find eternal life. And these very Scriptures speak about me!​
The contention here isn't that God stopped speaking - no Christian ever believed He did:
Matt. 10:19-20 When they deliver you over, do not be anxious how you are to speak or what you are to say, for what you are to say will be given to you in that hour. For it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.​
- but whether everything God speaks and does is supposed to become scripture...
John 21:25 Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.​
The reason the Bible is unique in authority is because of its proximity, in space and time, to the coming of God's kingdom in Christ. You are just using the Book of Mormon to attack a strawman.
 
Last edited:
Marlin,
Marlin said:
If they sponsor articles against the Church via anti-Mormons like Simon Southerton; if they provide "answers" against pro-Mormons like FARMS; if they name-drop a General Authority as questioning BofM authorship; if they say the BofM is divination rather than translation; and if they seek to find contradictions between the BofM and the Bible;

Then, my friend, there's a good chance they are anti-Mormons. Pro-Mormon sites do not seek to tear down LDS doctrines.
Click to expand...
You do realize that you are practically ensuring that only what you believe will ever be repeated back to you? That's what "pro-Mormon" means. It's not that a source is anti-Mormon that bothers you, but that it doesn't support you. You would do the same if the evidence came from a Mormon. In fact:
Another serious challenge comes from historians. David Wright was fired from Brigham Young University, which is run by the church, for his unpublished opinion that Joseph Smith, not ancient authors, wrote the Book of Mormon, the church's original scripture. Wright, who still professes belief in Smith as a prophet, now teaches at Brandeis University. Meanwhile, D. Michael Quinn resigned under pressure from B.Y.U. for publishing Early Mormonism and the Magic World View, which detailed Smith's involvement with folk magic and the occult before becoming the church's first prophet. Quinn had earlier published an article indicating that despite the church's official disavowal of polygamy in 1890, high officials secretly continued to practice and sanction additional polygamous nuptials. Both Quinn and Wright have been excommunicated. The very act of reporting on dissent is severely discouraged. When Lavina Fielding Anderson, editor of Journal of Mormon History, published a piece detailing the pressures faced by church intellectuals, she too was excommunicated. -- Time Magazine, June 13, 1994 Volume 143, No. 24.​
This doesn't seem to leave any room for objectivity. Whether it comes from Mormons or non-Mormons, it will be simply be considered anti-Mormon, and ignored.
 
WildBlueYonder said:
since there is so much evidence, could you at least post a link?

cause if I read this map right, it's an awful route to Mexico from S. Arabia, see here:
http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/8q_1.html

& you'd have to zig & zag through the 10000's of islands in the Indonesian Archipelago, like so:
http://www.baliblog.com/05-12/indonesia-has-another-10000-islands-to-name.html
Click to expand...

Just wanna let you know WBY, anyone that knows you here, knows that what you say isn't worth reading at all.

Not even for a few seconds are your words worthy, of even the smallest particle of consideration. You have your mind so raveled up and secluded in ignorance and deceit, I'd be really suprised if you can live a normal life without being the bi-product of your Anti-Mormonism.

See some people wrap their lives around the ideals of the LDS church, and center their faith on Christ. You wrap your life, and the energies of your mind around the dissolution of the establishment.

Indirectly and indavertantly you are a bi-product of your hatred for what we believe, and your inability to conceive the possibilities. Without the LDS church there would be no WBY.

Every last possibility being seered our of your mind because of your disbelief.
Anyways, like I've said to you before, you should undertake charity and things of this nature. Because your investment of time and energy in trying to thwart and dissolve peoples faith couldn't be more vain.

See the powers that brought these things into motion were very mindful of how to stimulate the chemistry of Faith. For example the gold plates were taken by Moroni, and other things of this nature, that peoples minds wouldn't be centered on an actual witness, but by FAITH.

There couldn't be any more room for FAITH, than there is now, and therein you will find the strength of the followers that are incorporated into the body of The Church of Jesus Christ.

Faith
Repentance
Baptism by immersion for the remmision of sin
Laying on of hands to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost

Get to work on your faith.
 
Jenyar said:
Marlin,

You do realize that you are practically ensuring that only what you believe will ever be repeated back to you? That's what "pro-Mormon" means. It's not that a source is anti-Mormon that bothers you, but that it doesn't support you. You would do the same if the evidence came from a Mormon. In fact:
Another serious challenge comes from historians. David Wright was fired from Brigham Young University, which is run by the church, for his unpublished opinion that Joseph Smith, not ancient authors, wrote the Book of Mormon, the church's original scripture. Wright, who still professes belief in Smith as a prophet, now teaches at Brandeis University. Meanwhile, D. Michael Quinn resigned under pressure from B.Y.U. for publishing Early Mormonism and the Magic World View, which detailed Smith's involvement with folk magic and the occult before becoming the church's first prophet. Quinn had earlier published an article indicating that despite the church's official disavowal of polygamy in 1890, high officials secretly continued to practice and sanction additional polygamous nuptials. Both Quinn and Wright have been excommunicated. The very act of reporting on dissent is severely discouraged. When Lavina Fielding Anderson, editor of Journal of Mormon History, published a piece detailing the pressures faced by church intellectuals, she too was excommunicated. -- Time Magazine, June 13, 1994 Volume 143, No. 24.​
This doesn't seem to leave any room for objectivity. Whether it comes from Mormons or non-Mormons, it will be simply be considered anti-Mormon, and ignored.
Click to expand...

Uhhh sounds like those people were really confused about whose side they were on, and it doesn't say the least about the veracity of the BofM and the LDS Church.

That's about 3 peoples ideas and the consequences that follow their lives in the decsions they make.


Why do you use what those people did to judge wether the BofM is true or not? You need to study the source first if you want your words to have any bearing.

And tossing verses of scriptures like flower pedals, doesn't have anything to do with God revealing another volume of scripture and calling Latter-Day prophets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top