Mormons (or church of latter-day saints)

Flamed Diving

What are your thoughts on these guys? Apparantly Jesus came to visit native americans or something like that. What is the theological argument for rejecting these claims? No trolling, I'm just curious.

philologos

Well the question should be what are the reasons for accepting them?

Flamed Diving

Well, these guys claim that they have a new gospel. I take it that most of Christianity disagrees with them. So the question is, why?

wolfsbane

Flamed Diving wrote: »

What are your thoughts on these guys? Apparantly Jesus came to visit native americans or something like that. What is the theological argument for rejecting these claims? No trolling, I'm just curious.

On the American claim, utter lack of evidence.

On their wider claims - their theology contradicts a lot of the New Testament (for example, they claim to have a Levitical priesthood still in operation).

They are a new religion, drawing on bits of the Bible, much as Islam did. Islam too believes in Jesus - just not the Jesus of the New Testament.

robindch

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Apparantly Jesus came to visit native americans or something like that. What is the theological argument for rejecting these claims?

As wolfsbane points out, the theological argument is fairly simple and it's much the same as the one applied by jewish believers to christian texts, by jewish and christian believers to muslim texts, and by jewish, christian and muslim believers to mormon (etc) texts, and so on. Which is that the truth claims of later prophets are false because they disagree in one manner or another with the interpretations held by believers of the earlier texts.

...quite apart from the fact that it really is amazingly obvious that the book of Mormon was written in the 19th century, containing as it does, large chunks of text lifted from the OT and much of the rest written in the same overblown style.

.

wolfsbane

robindch wrote: »

As wolfsbane points out, the theological argument is fairly simple and it's much the same as the one applied by jewish believers to christian texts, by jewish and christian believers to muslim texts, and by jewish, christian and muslim believers to mormon (etc) texts, and so on. Which is that the truth claims of later prophets are false because they disagree in one manner or another with the interpretations held by believers of the earlier texts.

...quite apart from the fact that it really is amazingly obvious that the book of Mormon was written in the 19th century, containing as it does, large chunks of text lifted from the OT and much of the rest written in the same overblown style.

.

The difference is that the Jews lived in expectation of a coming Prophet and Messiah, so claims to be such could not be ruled out automatically, whereas Christians do not look for another Prophet or Messiah and any claims to be such can be automatically dismissed.

Flamed Diving

wolfsbane wrote: »

The difference is that the Jews lived in expectation of a coming Prophet and Messiah, so claims to be such could not be ruled out automatically, whereas Christians do not look for another Prophet or Messiah and any claims to be such can be automatically dismissed.

But if it is so obvious they are wrong, why don't they see it that way?

PDN

Flamed Diving wrote: »

But if it is so obvious they are wrong, why don't they see it that way?

You could apply that argument to almost any belief or ideology.

Flamed Diving

PDN wrote: »

You could apply that argument to almost any belief or ideology.

I guess so, but at least with other beliefs most of the events involved happened thousands of years ago, and were written by several different sources. Yet according to Wolfy, the mormons have little or no evidence.

robindch

wolfsbane wrote: »

whereas Christians do not look for another Prophet or Messiah and any claims to be such can be automatically dismissed.

Um, so Jesus isn't coming back?

Asiaprod

Flamed Diving wrote: »

I guess so, but at least with other beliefs most of the events involved happened thousands of years ago, and were written by several different sources. Yet according to Wolfy, the mormons have little or no evidence.

The mormon bible, which is an interesting read by the way, referes to events that took place during the 4th century AD.

philologos

It also refers to events that took place during the 6th century BC. Apparently the reason there were two tribes of Jews in America was that a prophet was called to leave with his family by God during the Assyrian invasion of Judah.

wolfsbane

robindch wrote: »

Um, so Jesus isn't coming back?

Yes, He is. But it will not be a subject of debate as to His authenticity, as is is with all claims to date; when He returns no one will doubt it:

2 Thessalonians 1:6 since it is a righteous thing with God to repay with tribulation those who trouble you, 7 and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, 8 in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, 10 when He comes, in that Day, to be glorified in His saints and to be admired among all those who believe, because our testimony among you was believed.

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up.

So if anyone claims to be Christ in the future but is not accompanied with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, you can safely ignore them.

Flamed Diving

"8 in flaming fire taking vengeance"

That is the loving, peaceful God, right?

wolfsbane

Flamed Diving wrote: »

But if it is so obvious they are wrong, why don't they see it that way?

Yes, it seems amazing that modern cults like the J.Ws and the Mormons can prosper, given that their origins, leaders and doctrinal flip-flops can be checked. I think it is all about how they came to the cult: they were looking for something that the cult offered, so they ignored the need to test the cult's primary claims.

The cult then re-enforces that by threatening their salvation (and obviously whatever attracted them in the first place) if they allow doubts in their minds. One of the common mantras is, When we give an order, the thinking has been done (i.e, you don't need to worry your pretty head about it, just trust us).

When confronted by the facts on their origins, leaders and false prophesies, etc., the member just pretends it cannot be or assumes the leaders have a full explanation. Thankfully, those of them who sincerely seek the facts are soon enlightened, and either leave or are excommunicated. I know several who have went on to find the True God.

wolfsbane

Flamed Diving wrote: »

"8 in flaming fire taking vengeance"

That is the loving, peaceful God, right?

Correct - He is loving and peaceful to all who repent and believe. For the rest,
indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek.

I take it you have only heard of the caricature God, the heavenly Granddad with a white beard, who treats sin as if it were the squabbles of the grandkids.

As you can see, that is not the God of the Bible.

Flamed Diving

wolfsbane wrote: »

Yes, it seems amazing that modern cults like the J.Ws and the Mormons can prosper, given that their origins, leaders and doctrinal flip-flops can be checked. I think it is all about how they came to the cult: they were looking for something that the cult offered, so they ignored the need to test the cult's primary claims.

The cult then re-enforces that by threatening their salvation (and obviously whatever attracted them in the first place) if they allow doubts in their minds. One of the common mantras is, When we give an order, the thinking has been done (i.e, you don't need to worry your pretty head about it, just trust us).

When confronted by the facts on their origins, leaders and false prophesies, etc., the member just pretends it cannot be or assumes the leaders have a full explanation. Thankfully, those of them who sincerely seek the facts are soon enlightened, and either leave or are excommunicated. I know several who have went on to find the True God.

Don't you see the paralells in what you just wrote there?

wolfsbane

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Don't you see the paralells in what you just wrote there?

Please enlighten me. I have no experience of that in the churches I fellowship with.

Flamed Diving

Well, I am sure you could show that passage you wrote to different religious groups and they would all find the story quite familiar. Stories of people being misled by a 'rival' religion, but then leaving and finding the 'true god'. I mean, I'm sure there are people who were once part of your (broader) church and left to find whatever other 'true god' they subsequently found. I guess I find religion to be ambiguous and that perplexes me!

wolfsbane

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Well, I am sure you could show that passage you wrote to different religious groups and they would all find the story quite familiar. Stories of people being misled by a 'rival' religion, but then leaving and finding the 'true god'. I mean, I'm sure there are people who were once part of your (broader) church and left to find whatever other 'true god' they subsequently found. I guess I find religion to be ambiguous and that perplexes me!

No bother with that statement. Leaving one and joining another is no proof of either one being right. I was just stating what happened.

Yes, there are many religions, all making claims to ultimate truth. That doesn't mean all are false. So how do you find the true? God has given you a conscience to inform you of your sinfulness; has provided the universe around you to witness to His eternal power and Godhead; has provided Christians who bring you His gospel, calling you to repent and believe. If you are sincere in seeking after the Truth, earnestly consider these things, read His word, ask Him to open your eyes if He is there. When you seek Him with all your heart, you will find Him.
Acts 17:22 Then Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus and said, “Men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are very religious; 23 for as I was passing through and considering the objects of your worship, I even found an altar with this inscription:

TO THE UNKNOWN GOD.

Therefore, the One whom you worship without knowing, Him I proclaim to you: 24 God, who made the world and everything in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands. 25 Nor is He worshiped with men’s hands, as though He needed anything, since He gives to all life, breath, and all things. 26 And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings, 27 so that they should seek the Lord, in the hope that they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; 28 for in Him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said, ‘For we are also His offspring.’ 29 Therefore, since we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man’s devising. 30 Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent, 31 because He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained. He has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead.”

philologos

Flamed Diving wrote: »

"8 in flaming fire taking vengeance"

That is the loving, peaceful God, right?

And a fair judge. I think it's actually rather loving and just to judge those who have no remorse for making others lives a misery.

Rookie72

TO be honest, all I see written here is a lot of hatred against a a group of people who believe in Jesus Christ.

I believe on Christ, He is my Saviour, my Lord and my King. everyone will live for eternity. that was a free gift to all mankind.

The Book of Mormon is another witness of Jesus Christ. We dont claim it as our "Bible" we use the Bible also in our studies.

I love the Bible, especially the New Testament.

oh and to throw my cents worth in... what does the stick of Joseph and the stick of Judah mean to you all?

I follow Jesus Christ, I do not follow blindly. I chose to follow and remain a member of the "mormon" CHurch.

I dont mind Questions

philologos

Rookie72, but that leads to confusion. There cannot be another Gospel according to Christianity, and essentially the BOM is another Gospel (Galatians 1:8).

Rookie72

Galations 1:8... hmmm
Lovely scripture, I totally agree with it... I got one...

2 Corinthians 12:

11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:


The name of of Church denotes the HEAD of our faith... The Church of JESUS CHRIST...
... not the church of John the Baptist, or any other name... the name MORMON is a name of an ancient prophet who lived in the ancient Americas, and is used as a nick name for our church. It ISNT the name of our church.:D

Oh we do teach the same gospel that was taught in the biblical times too.;)

2 Cor. 13: 1
1 This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.

The Book of Mormon must be used with the Bible, to truly bear witness that Jesus is The Christ, the Saviour of the World, and that ONLY through Jesus Christ can we return to Live with God our Father.;)

Nodin

Flamed Diving wrote: »

I guess so, but at least with other beliefs most of the events involved happened thousands of years ago, and were written by several different sources. Yet according to Wolfy, the mormons have little or no evidence.

Zero evidence, to be precise. However they wouldn't be the first to head down that kind of route. At one stage, everybody wanted to be descended of some bunch mentioned in the Bible.....For instance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Israelism

philologos

Nodin wrote: »

Zero evidence, to be precise. However they wouldn't be the first to head down that kind of route. At one stage, everybody wanted to be descended of some bunch mentioned in the Bible.....For instance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Israelism

Unfortunately this kind of mentality has caused difficulty in terms of ethnic divides too. It doesn't matter what race you are, as Christians we welcome absolutely everyone to our fold whether you are European, Arab, Asian, Jewish, and so on. If one looks to what is said in the Pauline letters and what is said by Christ, Christianity is for everyone, and I'm glad that that is the main ideology discussed in the New Testament.

It's often difficult to describe what Christianity is though I guess.

Rookie72

Nodin wrote: »

Zero evidence, to be precise. However they wouldn't be the first to head down that kind of route. At one stage, everybody wanted to be descended of some bunch mentioned in the Bible.....For instance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Israelism

What evidences are you looking for? sheesh, are we not relying upon faith anymore? I'll give you a few insights to the Church of Jesus Christ..:

"1 We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.

2 We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.

3 We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.

4 We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the hgift of the Holy Ghost.

5 We believe that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.

6 We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth.

7 We believe in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, and so forth.

8 We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

9 We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.

10 We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory.

11 We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

12 We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

13 We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul—We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things. "


So all in all I only bear witness and defend the faith which is belittled by others. And called a "Cult".;)

philologos

If one could show me DNA evidence of Semitic tribes living on the American continent, I would be actually quite receptive of it.

Nodin

Rookie72 wrote: »

What evidences are you looking for? sheesh, are we not relying upon faith anymore?

Well I'm an athiest, so no, somebody just saying it doesn't cut it with me. Now obviously theres a whack of things that can't be disproven or proven to anyones satisfaction, but as Jakkass mentions there, theres a few specific claims of mormonism which can be tested, and a method for doing so.

Rookie72

Jakkass wrote: »

If one could show me DNA evidence of Semitic tribes living on the American continent, I would be actually quite receptive of it.

receptive for how long? How many intelligent men/women have sought the same thing, and the only way one can ever truly be receptive is by the witness of the Hold Spirit. Which can and will come when the truth is borne withness of.

After all back in the "19th Century" people wanted to see the "Gold Plates", why? to melt the gold, to hide the truth, to what ever the case, noone no matter what wanted to see the plates without it being genuine, except those who were chosen to witness the plates.

I bear witness that the Holy Spirit bore witness to me of the Truthfulleness of the Book of Mormon. And that Thomas S. Monson is a Prophet of God and is a witness of the Messiah.

What joy it brings to my soul, what peace it brings to my heart!

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

Flamed Diving

Rookie72 wrote: »

After all back in the "19th Century" people wanted to see the "Gold Plates", why? to melt the gold, to hide the truth, to what ever the case, noone no matter what wanted to see the plates without it being genuine, except those who were chosen to witness the plates.

Anything but intelligent people merely wanting to see the plates, as evidence for these claims.

philologos

Yes, however we do know some things about the Christian message:

1) Many scholars are agreed that a man called Jesus of Nazareth existed.
2) Many scholars are agreed that Paul of Tarsus existed.
3) We can confirm that the spread of Christianity did occur through Europe, and we have historical documents which attest to this.
4) We can also confirm the existence of Christians in the Middle East by their continued existence, but also because of the Aramaic texts that we have.
5) We can confirm that there was a Jewish nation in Biblical Israel.
6) We have copies of the Biblical text to translate from and to study.

You seem to take a very fideist approach to faith, i.e just dive in, the leap to faith and so on, however there is a rationalist view that faith and reason should be taken by the same token in Scripture. We are meant to discern certain things about the way the world is. You say that you do not follow blindly, but isn't that what fideism is?

I follow Christianity because I honestly believe it to be true.

As for the golden plates, that's still not good enough though. Where are they, and why can't manuscripts be made from the original language to allow scholars to take a serious look at it? I don't think it's fair to say that other Christians would want to destroy the truth if they are indeed truly seeking it in their heart.

I mean this with no offence, but I just can't understand how this works. I'd love it if you could explain this to me.

Húrin

Flamed Diving wrote: »

"8 in flaming fire taking vengeance"

That is the loving, peaceful God, right?

Are you derailing your own thread?

Nodin

Rookie72 wrote: »

receptive for how long? How many intelligent men/women have sought the same thing, and the only way one can ever truly be receptive is by the witness of the Hold Spirit. Which can and will come when the truth is borne withness of.

Either a lost tribe of Israel ended up in the US, or it didn't. Its a specific claim, which refers to the physical world, not the supernatural.

Flamed Diving

Húrin wrote: »

Are you derailing your own thread?

Trying my best!

MatthewVII

Jakkass wrote: »

If one could show me DNA evidence of Semitic tribes living on the American continent, I would be actually quite receptive of it.

I find it somewhat disturbing that you start turning to science to disprove a rival religion when one shows up when your own is impenetrable to it. The points you raise about Jesus's likelihood as really existing giving your faith strength is very strange to me. You throw yourself into believing an incredible amount of fantastical things with no proof other than the fact that someone with his name probably lived. You challenge someone from the Church of Latter Day Saints because he believes similarly supernatural things but without the flimsy support of existence of semitic tribes in america. I say this is no more an unacceptable leap of faith than going from "someone called Jesus once lived" to "someone called Jesus, who is also God, who is also God's son, came down from heaven, performed miracles and was raised from the dead"

philologos

I'm not "turning" to science, you act as if I haven't considered anything that has come out of the scientific community before. I'm using the product of mathematical and computer science to even write this message. As for rejecting science on disproving the divinity of Christ, there isn't anything in modern science that actually refutes it. I'm just curious about this. If there was DNA to suggest this, then it could be an interesting thing to spur on further discussions about how Mormonism could be true. Am I not allowed to question another? Or is that right reserved for atheists?

Fanny Cradock

Jakkass wrote: »

Or is that right reserved for atheists?

I would suggest an 'Atheist only' thread for that!

MatthewVII

Jakkass wrote: »

I'm not "turning" to science, you act as if I haven't considered anything that has come out of the scientific community before.

You did a good job of refusing to consider evolution on the thread over on A+A. It seems you accept science as long as it doesn't contradict your religion. To do this is not to accept science at all.

I just don't see how you can call Rookie72's views fideistic without acknowledging the blatant fideism in your own religion.

Húrin

MatthewVII wrote: »

I find it somewhat disturbing that you start turning to science to disprove a rival religion when one shows up when your own is impenetrable to it.

Jakkass is turning to science to disprove the falsifiable claims made by Mormonism. Christianity's falsifiable claims should and have been subject to testing. Examples include the idea that the earth was created a few thousand years ago. Now that we know it is much older than that, only a fringe of Christians do not accept it as fact.

The points you raise about Jesus's likelihood as really existing giving your faith strength is very strange to me. You throw yourself into believing an incredible amount of fantastical things with no proof other than the fact that someone with his name probably lived.

In fairness, you don't know that Jakkass does not have any evidence (proof exists only in maths) for his "fantastical" beliefs about Jesus.

Jesus' existence is a falsifiable natural claim. It has not been disproven. If it had been disproven, Christianity would be untenable.

You challenge someone from the Church of Latter Day Saints because he believes similarly supernatural things but without the flimsy support of existence of semitic tribes in america.

Jakkass challenged that claim on scientific grounds because it is not a supernatural claim.

I say this is no more an unacceptable leap of faith than going from "someone called Jesus once lived" to "someone called Jesus, who is also God, who is also God's son, came down from heaven, performed miracles and was raised from the dead"

But none of these hypotheses are falsifiable, with the possible exception of the latter. The resurrection has not been disproven. If it was, Christians would have to admit that the Jews were right all along!

Why don't Christians have the right to subject beliefs, including their own, to scientific testing? Atheists did not even invent the scientific method.

philologos

MatthewVII wrote: »

You did a good job of refusing to consider evolution on the thread over on A+A. It seems you accept science as long as it doesn't contradict your religion. To do this is not to accept science at all.

Are you trying to be obtuse? Did you even read the thread?

I said I believed in theistic evolution, I in no place in that thread denied evolution, I also in no place in that thread refused to consider evolution. I don't believe that evolution was an unguided process, in a similar fashion many other Christians believe that God guided evolution. I was asking questions throughout the whole thread to seek an atheists understanding of the subject. Seriously go back and read the entire thread and then comment.

MatthewVII wrote: »

I just don't see how you can call Rookie72's views fideistic without acknowledging the blatant fideism in your own religion.

See above.

MatthewVII

Húrin wrote: »

Jakkass is turning to science to disprove the falsifiable claims made by Mormonism. Christianity's falsifiable claims should and have been subject to testing. Examples include the idea that the earth was created a few thousand years ago. Now that we know it is much older than that, only a fringe of Christians do not accept it as fact.


In fairness, you don't know that Jakkass does not have any evidence (proof exists only in maths) for his "fantastical" beliefs about Jesus.

Jesus' existence is a falsifiable natural claim. It has not been disproven. If it had been disproven, Christianity would be untenable.


Jakkass challenged that claim on scientific grounds because it is not a supernatural claim.


But none of these hypotheses are falsifiable, with the possible exception of the latter. The resurrection has not been disproven. If it was, Christians would have to admit that the Jews were right all along!

Why don't Christians have the right to subject beliefs, including their own, to scientific testing? Atheists did not even invent the scientific method.

I just don't see the relevance of the falsifiability of minor things (like whether or not there was a real person called Jesus, without any record of him being special in any way) compared to the leaps of faith needed to believe the important parts of religion (whether he was the son of god, died for sins etc). Are the minor details really important?

All I'm saying is that squabbling over minor shreds of evidence is rather pointless, since the faith needed to accept the supernatural aspects of any religious figure far outweighs any proof that can be gleaned

MatthewVII

Jakkass wrote: »

I said I believed in theistic evolution, I in no place in that thread denied evolution, I also in no place in that thread refused to consider evolution. I don't believe that evolution was an unguided process, in a similar fashion many other Christians believe that God guided evolution.

To believe in "guided" evolution is to deny science. Evolution is incompatible with the idea of a designer or a force behind change, it is only compatible with natural selection. That is why I believe you are turning a blind eye to science, because you are trying to find god in a model which forcibly excludes him.

philologos

You're clutching at straws here Matthew. There's nothing inherently that says that evolution cannot be guided by a higher power. I found it interesting that you think that questioning to find out more about the science behind evolution is somehow a denial of science? This just shows that you are closed minded and unwilling to actually help people grow in understanding which is actually what I was intending to do. By the time I had gone into that thread trolling was basically starting to begin, so I thought why not ask a few questions. You consider asking questions the equivalent of denying evolution. I find that to be quite odd, and is infact the objection that many atheists have to religious societies, not allowing their questions to be heard.

Flamed Diving

Húrin wrote: »

In fairness, you don't know that Jakkass does not have any evidence (proof exists only in maths) for his "fantastical" beliefs about Jesus.

Jesus' existence is a falsifiable natural claim. It has not been disproven. If it had been disproven, Christianity would be untenable.

So Jesus can never be disproven, and neither can his visit to America and all the other claims.

Flamed Diving

Jakkass wrote: »

There's nothing inherently that says that evolution cannot be guided by a higher power.

Ok, this is for the 'you know what' thread, but you know this is nonsense. Even if someone badly reads a book on evolution would know this.

MatthewVII

Jakkass wrote: »

I found it interesting that you think that questioning to find out more about the science behind evolution is somehow a denial of science? This just shows that you are closed minded and unwilling to actually help people grow in understanding which is actually what I was intending to do.

I guess then I misunderstood you. What it seemed to be was you refusing to accept natural selection even though it explains everything about how species change over time in an incredibly simple and easy to understand way. What your continued battle seemed to be was a desire to find god in something in which god is not necessary.

For what it's worth, I don't think that constantly choosing to believe that god guides evolution when there is no evidence for this is trying to grow in understanding. I think it's conjecture without reason or need.

Blessings to you this night

philologos

MatthewVII wrote: »

I guess then I misunderstood you. What it seemed to be was you refusing to accept natural selection even though it explains everything about how species change over time in an incredibly simple and easy to understand way. What your continued battle seemed to be was a desire to find god in something in which god is not necessary.

No problem, we all make mistakes in interpretation of peoples posts.

MatthewVII wrote: »

For what it's worth, I don't think that constantly choosing to believe that god guides evolution when there is no evidence for this is trying to grow in understanding. I think it's conjecture without reason or need.

If evolution was isolated on it's own this perhaps would be less of an issue, however evolution is interdependent on so many other things that happened in earlier cosmology. It's hard to see given the enormous odds of all of these things, that they all occurred one after the other without some form of intention behind them.

MatthewVII wrote: »

Blessings to you this night

And to you, apologies if I got a bit frustrated earlier, I just don't like when my views are misrepresented.

wolfsbane

Rookie72 wrote: »

What evidences are you looking for? sheesh, are we not relying upon faith anymore? I'll give you a few insights to the Church of Jesus Christ..:

"1 We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.

2 We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.

3 We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.

4 We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the hgift of the Holy Ghost.

5 We believe that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.

6 We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth.

7 We believe in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, and so forth.

8 We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

9 We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.

10 We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory.

11 We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

12 We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

13 We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul—We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things. "


So all in all I only bear witness and defend the faith which is belittled by others. And called a "Cult".;)

You also have priests, both Aaronic and Levitical?

You believe that God the Father was once a man like us?

You believe that when we die/in eternity each man has wives and they go on to populate new planets?

Nodin

Now, now. No need to boldy go extra-solar system when we haven't even got the Semites to the Americas yet.

wolfsbane

Nodin wrote: »

Now, now. No need to boldy go extra-solar system when we haven't even got the Semites to the Americas yet.

:D:D