If plates then God

[Gadianton]

I wasn’t aware that he was a believer in the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

You are aware, are you not, that a person can be a theist and NOT believe in Jesus?

Those beliefs and traditions in many cases disallow/inhibit them from looking at the restoration narrative with open eyes and a trusting heart

Just like your own indoctrination prevents you from looking at the beliefs you've been fed by your leaders your entire life critically. There isn't anything special about "creeds" that makes Christians more stubborn in their traditions than you are in yours.

You only have a trusting heart for the lies you've been spoon-fed from the time you were a toddler.

[MG 2.0]

I wasn’t aware that he was a believer in the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

You are aware, are you not, that a person can be a theist and NOT believe in Jesus?

Yes, but germane to Mormonism and the restoration narrative it all comes down to Jesus and His resurrection. If one does not believe in the resurrection of Jesus I think it would be almost impossible to give the restoration narrative any credit at all. It’s basically a non starter.

That seems to be the position of you and a number of others here.

I would imagine that at the end of the day you would also chuckle under your breath at those that believe Jesus died but then lives again in the heavens.

So again, as I’ve said multiple times now, “How wide the divide”.

But I think it’s important to get the positions of believers and non believers out in the open so that others can weigh things out in their own mind and hopefully give a good deal of thought and may I dare say prayer to those things that are before them.

At the same time realizing that it’s different strokes for different folks. I think God is BIG enough to allow people to take various paths based upon their own reasoning, life experiences, and capabilities to adhere to and obey certain principles and commandments and make certain commitments with long range ramifications.

I mean, look, even on this board there have been folks that have alluded to the fact that they would prefer to keep all their money without giving up ten percent or more. Those that would just as well not spend the time going to church on Sunday, obeying the WofW, etc.

The gospel isn’t for everyone. And that’s OK.

What I don’t fully understand, however, is why the Church seems to still be such a draw for them in discussions, etc. And yes, I’ve heard all the standard reasons…but I still don’t get it. Seems like you would rather be doing other stuff. I mean, Marcus is doing stuff here what almost seems 24/7 (a bit of exaggerating). You would think that she, you, and others would find time better well spent doing so many other things rather than dissing the church, its prophets, and its members to some extent.

There’s a lot of good fiction out there. Family activity and excursions and the like. Yeah, I know you probably do stuff unrelated to thinking and posting stuff against the church…but you could do so much more!

Just leave it all behind. Cold turkey. You might have some night sweats for a while, but they’ll go away.

Regards,
MG

[huckelberry]

I wasn’t aware that he was a believer in the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

You are aware, are you not, that a person can be a theist and NOT believe in Jesus?

Those beliefs and traditions in many cases disallow/inhibit them from looking at the restoration narrative with open eyes and a trusting heart

Just like your own indoctrination prevents you from looking at the beliefs you've been fed by your leaders your entire life critically. There isn't anything special about "creeds" that makes Christians more stubborn in their traditions than you are in yours.

....

I am curious what in the creeds would make a person unable to fairly look at the restoration?

As a believer in the resurrection of Jesus I see no reason to assume Joseph's story is false. Nor would I assume it is true. I do not recognize any aspect of the creeds which dictate such an observation. History of Christianity shows a variety of Christian leaders not all of whom are trustworthy. Perhaps that suggests reason for caution.

Trusting heart? trust what? I can see trusting God, trusting reality to give you a base to think with. Trusting salesmen only with reservations.

[Chap]

The gospel isn’t for everyone. And that’s OK.

Um, I can't remember that from the New Testament. Can someone guide me to the appropriate passage?

[Gadianton]

I am curious what in the creeds would make a person unable to fairly look at the restoration?

God as a man is basically ruled out by the creeds, but that isn't unfair, necessarily. However, in my response to MG, I had nothing in particular in mind. it's an indoctrination he underwent for decades that told him traditional Christianity is enslaved by "creeds" whereas Mormonism operates on "revelation". However, it is true that Christian culture would bias a person against Mormon beliefs. And so I don't mind "the creeds" being a place holder for cultural bias for the sake of interacting MG.

Since you brought it up though, it is interesting how an MG will look at something like "creeds" as the explanation -- something that doesn't have an obvious corollary in Mormonism in order to escape the point about cultural conditioning applying to Mormonism just as it does anyone else.

[Kishkumen]

Does Mormonism even have an official theology of God to conflict with anything? It seems to me that the theology always boils down to what’s in the manual and what doesn’t get you in trouble with the leaders.

[Gadianton]

I would imagine that at the end of the day you would also chuckle under your breath at those that believe Jesus died but then lives again in the heavens.

You miss the point for at least the second time this morning. I don't chuckle under my breath at resurrection myths or plates myths. I chuckle out loud at you personally MG, for your embarrassing reasoning to justify the plates and your arrogance about the whole thing. Instead of just having faith, you return time and time again to the barn for a fresh shovel-full of horse crap, thinking this next time you're bringing the good stuff.

So again, as I’ve said multiple times now, “How wide the divide”.

The only possible divide here is those capable of basic logic (us) and those who aren't (you). The fact that you believe isn't that big of a deal. The problem is your awful argumentation, lack of self-awareness, and nearly complete obliviousness to how insignificant Mormonism is to the rest of the world.

What I don’t fully understand...doing stuff here what almost seems 24/7 (a bit of exaggerating). You would think that she, you, and others would find time better well spent doing so many other things rather than dissing the church, its prophets, and its members to some extent.

There are lots of things that you don't understand in even the most rudimentary way let alone fully. That something can't be explained to you isn't disturbing to anyone in the least.

There’s a lot of good fiction out there. Family activity and excursions and the like. Yeah, I know you probably do stuff unrelated to thinking and posting stuff against the church…but you could do so much more!

Don't you think that having the restored gospel in all its glory would give you something better to do than argue with apostates on the Internet? Don't you think you could do much more? Visit temple square again, spend another day with the grandkids, go on splits with the missionaries? Feed the hungry? My parents didn't spend time on the Internet arguing with apostates. They were temple workers and donated part of their week in retirement to church welfare distro; they also did obsessive genealogy. Do you have your family tree mapped back to Adam? If not, what'ya here for?

I have 3628 posts. (Don't get excited High Spy) You have 3626 posts. I registered in 2020 and you registered in 2021. So who is the one with the problem?

[MG 2.0]

I would imagine that at the end of the day you would also chuckle under your breath at those that believe Jesus died but then lives again in the heavens.

You miss the point for at least the second time this morning. I don't chuckle under my breath at resurrection myths or plates myths. I chuckle out loud at you personally MG, for your embarrassing reasoning to justify the plates and your arrogance about the whole thing. Instead of just having faith, you return time and time again to the barn for a fresh shovel-full of horse crap, thinking this next time you're bringing the good stuff.

So again, as I’ve said multiple times now, “How wide the divide”.

The only possible divide here is those capable of basic logic (us) and those who aren't (you). The fact that you believe isn't that big of a deal. The problem is your awful argumentation, lack of self-awareness, and nearly complete obliviousness to how insignificant Mormonism is to the rest of the world.

What I don’t fully understand...doing stuff here what almost seems 24/7 (a bit of exaggerating). You would think that she, you, and others would find time better well spent doing so many other things rather than dissing the church, its prophets, and its members to some extent.

There are lots of things that you don't understand in even the most rudimentary way let alone fully. That something can't be explained to you isn't disturbing to anyone in the least.

There’s a lot of good fiction out there. Family activity and excursions and the like. Yeah, I know you probably do stuff unrelated to thinking and posting stuff against the church…but you could do so much more!

Don't you think that having the restored gospel in all its glory would give you something better to do than argue with apostates on the Internet? Don't you think you could do much more? Visit temple square again, spend another day with the grandkids, go on splits with the missionaries? Feed the hungry? My parents didn't spend time on the Internet arguing with apostates. They were temple workers and donated part of their week in retirement to church welfare distro; they also did obsessive genealogy. Do you have your family tree mapped back to Adam? If not, what'ya here for?

I have 3628 posts. (Don't get excited High Spy) You have 3626 posts. I registered in 2020 and you registered in 2021. So who is the one with the problem?

Well, you may be right in the sense that I ought resolve that ‘problem’.

I’m not making very many friends here! Ha ha. I should move on. It has been, overall, time mostly well spent for me.

Best wishes in your journey. And those of others.

Take care.

Regards,
MG

[tagriffy]

I reckon that a liberal Mormon could say that sure, Smith and some cronies made it up, but at least in places they were genuinely inspired, because God can be weird. They could go on to admit that a lot of the LDS church structures and practices are human inventions designed to sustain a patriarchal elite, but still believe that parts of it all work well as meaningful symbols. Against that kind of moderate apologetics I have nothing to say. It wouldn't work for me, but who am I to judge anyone else?

That's basically where I'm at. I'm not entirely sure I would call what I do apologetics. If what I do is apologetics, it's more within the intra-Mormon realm. I know just how huge the task is and that I am certainly not up to it.

What I reckon they're really doing is not apologetics, but apologetics theatre. Whether they realise it or not, they're not actually even attempting to influence anyone with genuine doubts—not neutral never-Mormon seekers, not anti-Mormon critics, not wavering Mormons. What they're doing is going through motions, so that people who aren't even interested in thinking about whether the conservative Mormon story can really be true will be able to suppose that a good strong case can be made, and is being well made, for those other poor souls who are doubting.

The structure they build doesn't hold up to inspection at all, but to a glance from afar, it looks nice. It's a house made of paint, a Potemkin apology.

Apologetics is always for those already inside the fold. It doesn't really matter how well the arguments fly; the important point is that someone is making them.

[tagriffy]

Any other explanation of Mormon apologists' activity that assumes that they seriously intend to convert sceptical non-believers requires us to assume a degree of psychological abnormality on the apologists' part that is ruled out by Occam's Razor.

What they are doing is clearly just trying to stop ordinary chapel-going Mormons worrying about what the critics are saying, and feeling that they ought to take a serious look at it one of these days. Just pray, pay, and obey, like Mom and Dad did, and raise your kids the same way, and everything will be fine.

That's pretty much it. If skeptical non-believers are actually converted, my bet is that most of the time they were already leaning toward converting and they basically needed one more little push.