Don't worry about the history

[_why me]

Who is demanding, and you are forgetting who you are talking to. You are talking to people who were very faithful for many years to decades, but who do think history and evidence is important.

History is not that important because history is written and made by imperfect people. Sure, it would be great to have a perfect history, one that is satisfies all. But that is impossible. Do you want evidence that god exists? Or that the true is true? Not possible. If we had conclusive evidence that the church was true, we can forget about free agency or free will and attend church every sunday and control our carnal desires because we know that god lives. We can all walk on eggs throughout our lives in order not to offend god.

Since we do not have such evidence you can now write what you want as you did above.

[_why me]

A great deal of the history of the church is actually doctrine. That makes it something worthy of major study and consideration.

Doctrine is important. At least, it is if you stay in a religion for theological reasons.

Polygamy is not only history it is doctrine.
The Book of Abraham is not only doctrine it is alleged history and its advent is part of the church history.
The priesthood ban is not only history it was based on doctrine.

I guess I'd like to see an example of a piece of LDS history that we don't need to worry about because it has never had anything to do with the doctrines or practices of Joseph Smith or the LDS church.

Most history of the church is not doctrine. Your statement was wrong. People were making Mormon history from the first moment it came on the scene. People make history and god makes doctrine. The persecution of the Mormons had to do with hatred and prejudice. Nothing to do wih doctrine. And the everyday history of building towns, schools, churches, stores inside Mormon communities was everday history made by Mormons. Likewise for those who committed apostacy. They are included in Mormon history as is the kirkland banking crisis.

[_why me]

At the Lady Gaga concert, Mother Monster said, "I hate the truth. In fact, I hate the truth so much, I’d prefer a giant dose of b***s*** any day, over the truth. SHOW ME YOUR TEETH.” Now, I don't get the teeth thing and she likely stole this quote from someone else (like she steals many other things) but her presentation was very amazing and I give her credit for that. My experience with her was religious and I'm sticking to that story, dang it! Oops, how did this turn into a Gaga post?

Good for you zee. Glad that you are now following lady monster. Of course her message is the opposite of Mormonism which claims truth. But yea, zee, much better to follow lady gaga and her no truth claim as long as you go to her concert and buy her CDs. Eventually lady gaga will get older and her message and presentation will change accordingly.

[_Polygamy-Porter]

Most history of the church is not doctrine. Your statement was wrong. People were making Mormon history from the first moment it came on the scene. People make history and god makes doctrine. The persecution of the Mormons had to do with hatred and prejudice. Nothing to do wih doctrine. And the everyday history of building towns, schools, churches, stores inside Mormon communities was everday history made by Mormons. Likewise for those who committed apostacy. They are included in Mormon history as is the Kirtland banking crisis.

Please apply your logic and reasoning to the membership of the FLDS faith.

[_why me]

Please apply your logic and reasoning to the membership of the FLDS faith.

They make their history inside a compound. With religion, history and doctrine can be intermingled at times. But history is still made by men and women through their everyday actions. And this is what we see in Mormonism.

[_Polygamy-Porter]

Please apply your logic and reasoning to the membership of the FLDS faith.

They make their history inside a compound. With religion, history and doctrine can be intermingled at times. But history is still made by men and women through their everyday actions. And this is what we see in Mormonism.

The FLDS have endured much more persecution for their beliefs than the LDS have.

Why does this not make them more "true" than LDS?

[_DrW]

You're being very general and vague. I don't know what you're talking about. How's about something to consider?

Thanks for your response to my earlier post. I need to get back to work now. I will respond in detail, with examples, later today or tomorrow.

(You can count on it.)

stemelbow,

Got a phone call at zero dark thirty this morning from the Middle East and have to be on a plane to Beirut, Lebanon in a couple of hours. If the thread is still alive when I return, I will post something less vague and general.

I apologize.

(Fortunately, such calls do not come all that often any more.)

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Hello,

One of the great things about Mormon history is we have enough information about it thanks to its scribes, writings, journals, & practices to draw legitimate opinions about its foundational & historical claims.

It has a useful place for many as a social and spiritual outlet, but its truth claims are demonstrably false. This is, of course, presupposing you're not some raging fool who thinks nothing is really real or provable thus anything can be what you perceive it to be.

V/R
Dr. Cameron

[_Chap]

Hello,

One of the great things about Mormon history is we have enough information about it thanks to its scribes, writings, journals, & practices to draw legitimate opinions about its foundational & historical claims.

It has a useful place for many as a social and spiritual outlet, but its truth claims are demonstrably false. This is, of course, presupposing you're not some raging fool who thinks nothing is really real or provable thus anything can be what you perceive it to be.

V/R
Dr. Cameron

I agree with this to only a limited extent.

If, for instance, it is a foundational claim of the CoJCoLDS that there is a deity of the specifically LDS kind, I think it is possible to hedge that claim with unfalsifiability to an extent that makes actual disproof impossible. This is in fact habitually done by such sub-claims as that this deity will never give us clear evidence of his existence, since then we would be acting on the basis of simple knowledge rather than 'faith'.

On the other hand, I think it is possible to say that there is enough evidence about the CoJCoLDS, its founder and early leaders, for us to be able to say with practical certainty (that is, enough certainty to warrant making major life decisions about) that if there is a deity of any kind in or beyond this universe, it is unlikely that the CoJCoLDS has any more authority to speak about him, her, or it, than I do.

[_Themis]

History is not that important because history is written and made by imperfect people.

Maybe not to you, but it is very important to the church and it's faithful members.

Sure, it would be great to have a perfect history, one that is satisfies all. But that is impossible.

No one is suggesting that historical evidence is perfect, but we do have plenty of evidence to be confident about some historical events and how they may have occured. Some events just do not have enough evidence to be confident about. The issues here are about the ones that many feel have more then enough evidence to support.

Do you want evidence that god exists? Or that the true is true? Not possible.

It's not possible because it's not true. :)

If we had conclusive evidence that the church was true, we can forget about free agency or free will and attend church every sunday and control our carnal desires because we know that god lives. We can all walk on eggs throughout our lives in order not to offend god.

BS Why is it that people can know certain things are bad for them and still do them. You need to read the Book of Mormon some time whyme. Lamam and lemuel had great knowledge and still choose not to follow God. This does not support your reasoning. This is just an excuse for why people cannot back up their beliefs. It's stupidity to think one should have belief based on no evidence. How is one going to even know their beliefs are the correct one? The spiritual expereince is used by many religions in order to get people to believe in their particiular beliefs.