I quit the Church!!!

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Ray A

Re: I quit the Church!!!

Post by _Ray A »

Yong Xi wrote:
I am not sure the claims that the Book of Mormon is of divine origin can be separated from historical claims. Who was Moroni?


Many non-Mormon scholars accept it for what it is - pseudepigrapha.
_Polygamy-Porter
_Emeritus
Posts: 8091
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 1:07 am

Re: I quit the Church!!!

Post by _Polygamy-Porter »

why me wrote:
Polygamy-Porter wrote:Fine Walmart, here is your chance.

Tell us YOUR middle ground of Mormonism.

Do you attend church services AT ALL? No
Pay ANY TITHES? no
Attend temple? no
Do home teaching? no
Have home teachers over? yes
Married? no In the temple? yes
Wear gaments? no
How many years ago did you do any of the above? don' remember

Do you drink alcohol? no
Smoke?
Drink coffee or tea? no
View porn? what is porn?
Masturbate? solitary sex?

Please be candid and honest. It's not like any one on these boards knows you in real life.


Such is my middle way.
Thank you for your reply.

in my opinion, you are less of a member than I am.
New name: Boaz
The most viewed "ignored" poster in Shady Acres® !
_Nevo
_Emeritus
Posts: 1500
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:05 pm

Re: I quit the Church!!!

Post by _Nevo »

Yong Xi wrote:I am not sure the claims that the Book of Mormon is of divine origin can be separated from historical claims. Who was Moroni?

I'm not sure that they can either. Bill Hamblin, for example, has argued strenuously that the view that Joseph Smith wrote "inspired" pseudepigraphy is untenable for the reason that there were either gold plates and an angel or there weren't. And if there weren't any plates or an angel, then Joseph Smith was a fraud (either lying or deluded)—not a prophet (since God wouldn't be a party to fraud).

I find Hamblin's logic compelling, but at the same time I wonder how to reconcile what I take to be Joseph's sincerity in his prophetic claims with a scripture that I regard as religiously meaningful but less than completely ancient.
_Yong Xi
_Emeritus
Posts: 761
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 1:56 am

Re: I quit the Church!!!

Post by _Yong Xi »

Nevo wrote:
Yong Xi wrote:I am not sure the claims that the Book of Mormon is of divine origin can be separated from historical claims. Who was Moroni?

I'm not sure that they can either. Bill Hamblin, for example, has argued strenuously that the view that Joseph Smith wrote "inspired" pseudepigraphy is untenable for the reason that there were either gold plates and an angel or there weren't. And if there weren't any plates or an angel, then Joseph Smith was a fraud (either lying or deluded)—not a prophet (since God wouldn't be a party to fraud).

I find Hamblin's logic compelling, but at the same time I wonder how to reconcile what I take to be Joseph's sincerity in his prophetic claims with a scripture that I regard as religiously meaningful but less than completely ancient.


You may not be able to reconcile that.
_Yong Xi
_Emeritus
Posts: 761
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 1:56 am

Re: I quit the Church!!!

Post by _Yong Xi »

why me wrote:The mantra that there is no middle way is just wishful thinking since many could not find their own middle way as members. But it does exist. There are many inactives or semiactives that are not hostile against the lds church and would defend it, if they were given the chance.


Yes, the church has tribal members. No surprise there.
_JohnStuartMill
_Emeritus
Posts: 1630
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 12:12 pm

Re: I quit the Church!!!

Post by _JohnStuartMill »

asbestosman wrote:
JohnStuartMill wrote:Also, I don't think you're an idiot -- far from it. In fact, that's why I try so hard with you: I think that, perhaps unlike Gazelam and bcspace, you ought to know better.

*sigh*
You may mean well, but I don't like it when I'm compared to others in a way that tacitly puts them down. Furthermore I disagree--I don't find myself smarter than them. In math / computer engineering (my talents / passions) yes, but I see them tell good jokes and think of things I hadn't thought of (and probably couldn't have).
I'm not even necessarily saying that you're smarter than they are. I'm just saying that I know you're capable of following an argument to its conclusion, based on my interactions with you, and that I can't say the same for Gazelam and bcspace.

I also think Daniel Peterson is much more capable (academically) than I am and I believe his testimony is stronger than mine. I'm not living on his borrowed light. I'm just saying that I don't think one should suspect that academic ability or history should somehow imply that one is more likely to agree with you because it makes him more logical or academic or whatever you think the key difference is (I don't know what you are thinking, but it appears to be related to academic ability).

Academic ability is not the standard I'm using here, no. I know too many educated idiots and too many profoundly sensible high school dropouts to fall into that simple trap. Remember that I don't make fun of bcspace because he lacks a rigorous education; I make fun of bcspace because he lacks a rigorous education AND he tried to pull academic rank on me.
"You clearly haven't read [Dawkins'] book." -Kevin Graham, 11/04/09
_Trevor
_Emeritus
Posts: 7213
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:28 pm

Re: I quit the Church!!!

Post by _Trevor »

Nevo wrote:Bill Hamblin, for example, has argued strenuously that the view that Joseph Smith wrote "inspired" pseudepigraphy is untenable for the reason that there were either gold plates and an angel or there weren't. And if there weren't any plates or an angel, then Joseph Smith was a fraud (either lying or deluded)—not a prophet (since God wouldn't be a party to fraud).

I find Hamblin's logic compelling, but at the same time I wonder how to reconcile what I take to be Joseph's sincerity in his prophetic claims with a scripture that I regard as religiously meaningful but less than completely ancient.


A constipated man strains strenuously at his stool, too, but it doesn't mean that what he's giving birth to is a lump of gold. I am sure we can all be confident Bill knows exactly what God will or will not do. That's why they pay him the big bucks down there at the Y.
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”
_Tchild
_Emeritus
Posts: 2437
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 2:44 am

Re: I quit the Church!!!

Post by _Tchild »

Nevo wrote:I find Hamblin's logic compelling, but at the same time I wonder how to reconcile what I take to be Joseph's sincerity in his prophetic claims with a scripture that I regard as religiously meaningful but less than completely ancient.

Now that is interesting. I would be curious to know how you believe the Book of Mormon could be partly ancient. Which parts do you believe to be authentically ancient and which would you suggest are creations of its author Joseph Smith?

If you've got the time and all.
Last edited by Guest on Sun Oct 25, 2009 10:40 pm, edited 2 times in total.
_Nevo
_Emeritus
Posts: 1500
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:05 pm

Re: I quit the Church!!!

Post by _Nevo »

Tchild wrote:Now that is interesting. I would be curious to know how you believe the Book of Mormon could be partly ancient. Which parts do you believe to be authentically ancient and which would you suggest are creations of its author Joseph Smith?

I don't think the Book of Mormon is a patchwork of ancient and modern pieces. If there are both ancient and modern elements in the book, then I expect we're dealing with something along the lines of Blake Ostler's theory of the Book of Mormon as a modern expansion of an ancient source.
_thews
_Emeritus
Posts: 3053
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 2:26 pm

Re: I quit the Church!!!

Post by _thews »

why me wrote:It would be great if someone would prove the Book of Mormon false. I would celebrate that happening. No one should be living a fraud. But that hasn't happened yet. Wishful thinking on the part of the antimormons just doesn't cut it. Until the book is proven false, I am under no delusions.


New to this board, but I find your opinion of ex-Mo's and anti-Mormons quite typical of judgmental Mormons who point their fingers in a patronizing manner as if you somehow know what's inside their heads or what motivates them more than they do. I am an ex-Mo and an anti-Mormon (a.k.a. "critic"), and I assure you that the Book of Mormon is false and can be proven false if you could possibly think critically. Joseph Smith was nothing more than a con man with a narcissistic personality disorder, and the other "saints" were in it for the women they'd be "given." But, in order to decide whether or not something is true or false, one has to want to know the truth and be able to think critically. If you don't want to know the truth, then you can keep rationalizing all the things that don't make sense to balance the scales of your cognitive dissonance.


To Paul O - I've read most your responses and I think your attitude is a very healthy one. Looking at the world objectively without being driven by fear will bring you truth. You'll probably find LDS friends that will shun you for deciding to think for yourself and make a choice in your life. It is your life, and the people you'll meet and experiences you'll have in the real world should be fun. When the simple task of buying underwear you want to wear feels like freedom, things like beer and football on Sundays will knock your socks off. Welcome to the real world... figuring out who God is will be the hard part, or if you believe in God, but as long as it's your choice based on your truth you can't be wrong.
2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.
2 Tim 4:4 They will turn their ears away from the truth & turn aside to myths
Post Reply