The LDS problems in Sweden

[_Kittens_and_Jesus]

My view is that Joseph Smith may have had one (or more) encounters with hyper-advanced beings

I beat you to it.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=30296&start=42

[_Tobin]

Tobin, I'm not dodging anything. You asked 3 questions and I gave you 3 straightforward answers. If you don't like the answers that's your problem.

Posting a limited choice logical fallacy twice doesn't change the fact it's still a logical fallacy.

So, are eternal non corporeal beings a natural species that evolved on our planet or is it alien to our world?

If It is eternal it would have always existed and always will exist.

Eternal: without beginning or end; lasting forever; always existing

Evolved, as it relates to the definition of eternal, is non sequitur. As far as "location"; something that's non corporeal would not be restricted to "our planet or another world".

If you can't admit to yourself that such a being is completely alien to our existence and anything we know in our world, then I simply can't help you. I find it kind of funny you'd insist otherwise and are completely unable to recognize and admit that.

[_Bazooka]

A failure to be able to satisfactorily answer skeptical member questions with anything other than "put it on the shelf" is a virus infecting the upper echelons of the people whom, supposedly personally, God chooses; speaks with; directs; inspires etc. The answers to troubling questions usually lead down a path to where it becomes obvious that previous senior Church leaders either lied or deliberately misled the Church on matters which are of consequence to the credibility of the Restoration.

Answering those members who have bothered to do a minimal amount of research, into an Organization that creams ten percent off the top to be spent on nobody knows what, with "don't look behind the curtain" and "pray, pay, obey" responses, is getting less and less acceptable. The Church (either as a Church or as a viable business model) has three significant problems that it has no real way of addressing.

1. Dwindling membership outside of the mothership in Utah or the as yet, informationally immature, parts of the world.
2. Painfully low retention rates of converts.
3. Less and less retained profits as tithing income shrinks.

These three problems are caused because truthful, factual but contradictory information about various Church matters, policies, claims etc is widely and readily available to anyone who looks, from sources other than the one that has ultimate responsibility for telling its members the truth.
The Church is now, very very slowly, trying to peel away the plaster without the patient realising they had a sticking plaster on in the first place. Do the leadership really think members are that naïve? Are the members that naïve? Well, worrying amounts of them aren't.

[_sock puppet]

Answering those members who have bothered to do a minimal amount of research, into an Organization that creams ten percent off the top to be spent on nobody knows what, with "don't look behind the curtain" and "pray, pay, obey" responses, is getting less and less acceptable. The Church (either as a Church or as a viable business model) has three significant problems that it has no real way of addressing.
policies, claims etc is widely and readily available to anyone who looks, from sources other than the one that has ultimate responsibility for telling its members the truth.

Perhaps they feared 18 year old boys and 19 and. 20 year old girls are more and more doing the minimal amount of research--better get them shipped off before so many of themfigure it out.

[_Bazooka]

Answering those members who have bothered to do a minimal amount of research, into an Organization that creams ten percent off the top to be spent on nobody knows what, with "don't look behind the curtain" and "pray, pay, obey" responses, is getting less and less acceptable. The Church (either as a Church or as a viable business model) has three significant problems that it has no real way of addressing.
policies, claims etc is widely and readily available to anyone who looks, from sources other than the one that has ultimate responsibility for telling its members the truth.

Perhaps they feared 18 year old boys and 19 and. 20 year old girls are more and more doing the minimal amount of research--better get them shipped off before so many of themfigure it out.

Certainly the boys going at age 18 is because the Church wants a chance at indoctrination before they realise they are adults and can make their own decisions about the Church. The girls going a year earlier...not sure what that's all about other than Monson trying to grab some Prophetic headlines to mark his tenure before he rattles off and faces the question from God "Well, what did you do?". It might also be an attempt to stem the tide of 18/19 year old boys leaving their missions early. A few more girls around the place might keep their attention.

[_Megacles]

In my opinion, Kevin, a careful reading of history paints a much richer, much more complex picture than the simplistic one you have described above. This picture needs to be painted for the common membership, and it should be understood within its historical, sociological, and religious context.

Care to elaborate? What is so "rich and complex" about Mormonism's history in making all viewpoints readily available to its prospective converts and current members? What we're seeing now is unprecedented.

It is not just Mormonism's history that is rich and complex, it is history in general, I believe. The reason for the complexity is that when we are examining historical events, we are really examining the people involved. People by their very nature are complex--their sociocultural influences, their motivations for having made the choices they made, their personal belief system (as nuanced as a snowflake)--and I do not believe it is fair to make judgements about history or historical figures that are as simplistic as your statements in this thread have been.

[_Maksutov]

It is not just Mormonism's history that is rich and complex, it is history in general, I believe. The reason for the complexity is that when we are examining historical events, we are really examining the people involved. People by their very nature are complex--their sociocultural influences, their motivations for having made the choices they made, their personal belief system (as nuanced as a snowflake)--and I do not believe it is fair to make judgements about history or historical figures that are as simplistic as your statements in this thread have been.

Hey, it could be very rich and complex and still be the story of lying horndog Joseph Smith. Call it myth or religion, festoon it with deepities. Whatever gets you through the night.

[_Megacles]

Hey, it could be very rich and complex and still be the story of lying horndog Joseph Smith. Call it myth or religion, festoon it with deepities. Whatever gets you through the night.

It is Joseph Smith himself--his beliefs, his thoughts, his worldview, the influences of the culture, time and place in which he lived, the experiences he had (or did not have) and their nature--who is rich and complex, like each of us. You believe it to be a fraud, and that is your choice. I disagree with overly simplistic caricatures of historical figures, and of historical events.

[_aussieguy55]

Sometimes we want to believe something because it does not suit our preconceived ideas. This happened with the Thomas Jefferson/Sally Hemmings issue. Sally was the result of Jefferson's father-in-law bonking Sally's mother. So sally was the half sister of Jefferson's first wife.
Madison, Sally's son said that his mother was Jefferson's concubine. But who would believed a black person's testimony. Annette Gordon-Reed deals with this issue. DNA evidence just like the Indian/Book of Mormon problem has addedd strength to the Sally Hemmings/Jefferson connection.

When you read the silly story of the Jaradites making it accross the ocean and were blown by a strong wind and took 344 days. Columbus with sails took a considerably shorter time. by the way how did the people on the barges get rid of their own waste matter as well as their own if the boats were sealed?
BH Roberts book on the Book of Mormon rightly points out the stories are crazy, thought up by someone with not too many brains.

[_Tobin]

Sometimes we want to believe something because it does not suit our preconceived ideas. This happened with the Thomas Jefferson/Sally Hemmings issue. Sally was the result of Jefferson's father-in-law bonking Sally's mother. So sally was the half sister of Jefferson's first wife.
Madison, Sally's son said that his mother was Jefferson's concubine. But who would believed a black person's testimony. Annette Gordon-Reed deals with this issue. DNA evidence just like the Indian/Book of Mormon problem has addedd strength to the Sally Hemmings/Jefferson connection.

When you read the silly story of the Jaradites making it accross the ocean and were blown by a strong wind and took 344 days. Columbus with sails took a considerably shorter time. by the way how did the people on the barges get rid of their own waste matter as well as their own if the boats were sealed?
BH Roberts book on the Book of Mormon rightly points out the stories are crazy, thought up by someone with not too many brains.

aussieguy55, what you may feel are crazy stories may not be what they seem when you think about it. The craft may have been designed by advanced beings. We only get scant details of how these craft were designed and they sound rather marvelous. Craft that can travel the oceans propelled only by wave action and that can turn over while the internal contents remain right-side up are beyond our technology even today!!! So what you dismiss because of your ignorant assumptions and misconceptions about how these craft may have been designed and how they operated may be completely unfounded. For example, they were designed to remain water-tight only while submerged. We do not know how often or how long this was for. We do not know the internal structures of and what machinery were within these craft. And you certainly wouldn't make such a ridiculous assertion that submarines that the US navy operates were unable to remain underwater for months at a time because of waste. What you are completely failing to grasp and missing is there may be technology at work here. Which is even more surprising considering the technological world you live in today.