Does it take more faith to stay, or to go?

[_jon]

Thews, just picking up on the point about knowing or not knowing the secret handshakes. (I agree with your stated positions and admire the fact that you are willing to concede that despite what you believe and why, there is possibility for error - what a shame most Mormons aren't that realistic).

Here's why I don't believe the handshakes are from God.

Scenario 1.
You have been to the temple and learnt the handshakes etc. You live a fully obedient Mormon life, you die and get to the pearly gates. St Peter....oops, Moroni asks you for the secret handshakes. You cannot remember them - do you not get in? Of course you get in because it's abut how you lived your life, not a test of memory.

Scenario 2.
You have been to the temple and learnt the handshakes etc. You live a totally non obedient, debauched and evil life, you die and get to the pearly gates. St Peter....damn, Moroni asks you for the secret handshakes. You can remember them exactly - do you get in? Of course not because it's about how you lived your life, not a test of memory.

There is no circumstance that I can think of where God would require secret signs, tokens and handshakes. Especially when you have to buy them...

[_KevinSim]

Yes, I might be wrong. My ability to be certain about anything would require the knowledge of what exists in the afterlife. I acknowledge I may be wrong and I won't exist at all. The point is, hell isn't logical and doesn't make sense.

..........snip..........

Are you just as willing to consider the possibility that you might be wrong in your opinion on the divine inspiration of Mormonism?

No, because I'm not wrong. What I know about Joseph Smith's doctrine is based on fact that it's false. The facts regarding Joseph Smith's use of seer stones to see evil treasure guardians for hire using occult magic doesn't agree with the part of me that places faith the Jesus Christ was God, as the two are completely opposing.

So, Thews, are you saying that it's easier to believe that you might be wrong about the existence of Hell than it would be to believe that you're wrong about Joseph Smith's doctrine being false? Are you saying that it's more likely that Biblical Christians may be right that a large amount of people are going to end up spending the rest of eternity in unbearable agony than it is that the good God that controls the universe actually inspired Joseph Smith to say the things he said and do the things he did?

[Guest]

Thews, just picking up on the point about knowing or not knowing the secret handshakes. (I agree with your stated positions and admire the fact that you are willing to concede that despite what you believe and why, there is possibility for error - what a shame most Mormons aren't that realistic).

Here's why I don't believe the handshakes are from God.

Scenario 1.
You have been to the temple and learnt the handshakes etc. You live a fully obedient Mormon life, you die and get to the pearly gates. St Peter....oops, Moroni asks you for the secret handshakes. You cannot remember them - do you not get in? Of course you get in because it's abut how you lived your life, not a test of memory.

Scenario 2.
You have been to the temple and learnt the handshakes etc. You live a totally non obedient, debauched and evil life, you die and get to the pearly gates. St Peter....damn, Moroni asks you for the secret handshakes. You can remember them exactly - do you get in? Of course not because it's about how you lived your life, not a test of memory.

There is no circumstance that I can think of where God would require secret signs, tokens and handshakes. Especially when you have to buy them...

The handshakes are a byproduct of the Masonic influence. If I wanted to, I'm sure I could find a decent "how-to" diagram of it, but that wouldn't even be interesting... much less useful. What if I did? Would I be able to use it to trick the gatekeeper?

Another Mormon concept is the poor wretched souls wandering aimlessly in limbo waiting for their dead-dunk so they can be given the chance to accept the doctrine of Joseph Smith. What if they were never given a birth record? Would they be eternally screwed? Will I get a re-baptism dead dunk because I rejected Mormonism? Why not?

I've heard stories about people so scared to put their magic Masonic jammies down, that they hold them outside the shower while they're inside... cause we all know water is the devil's tool. Isn't that why missionaries can't swim? How can one look at themselves in the mirror with Masonic symbols on them and think to themselves they have made some darn good choices about a God based on Christianity?

To summarize, all these man-made tools used to control and instill fear are required to make one actually believe God lives on Kolob and they will someday be judged by Joseph Smith. If I'm judged by Joe Smith, I'm screwed... I'm good with that.

[_thews]

Yes, I might be wrong. My ability to be certain about anything would require the knowledge of what exists in the afterlife. I acknowledge I may be wrong and I won't exist at all. The point is, hell isn't logical and doesn't make sense.

..........snip..........

Are you just as willing to consider the possibility that you might be wrong in your opinion on the divine inspiration of Mormonism?

No, because I'm not wrong. What I know about Joseph Smith's doctrine is based on fact that it's false. The facts regarding Joseph Smith's use of seer stones to see evil treasure guardians for hire using occult magic doesn't agree with the part of me that places faith the Jesus Christ was God, as the two are completely opposing.

So, Thews, are you saying that it's easier to believe that you might be wrong about the existence of Hell than it would be to believe that you're wrong about Joseph Smith's doctrine being false?

Absolutely. I don't know anything about (supposed) hell, but what I know about Joseph Smith is based on tangible data and it's all wrong. I could create a list a mile long of all the things that prove Mormonism false, but stop and think about these things with the perspective that the null hypothesis being Mormonism is false.

1) There isn't one single shred of tangible evidence to prove one single thing in Mormon doctrine is historically accurate, which would make it a myth. If you wish to counter that there is (like Jeff Lindsay does), then please post it here. Don't give me a link to a Mormon site where I'm supposed to weed through a tangled web of arguments from silence, but just go to the point. The truth is, you can't, I know you can't, and that's because Mormonism is a myth.

2) Jesus Christ never played the God card. He didn't ask for people to bow to him, and that's (in my opinion) how God would act. Conversely, Joseph Smith claimed to be more accomplished than Jesus Christ. Now walk in the shoes of Joseph Smith... You've met God, so there's (supposedly) no doubt God exists and you are the chosen one to bring forth his new "restored" doctrine. With this knowledge, would you, again you're walking in the shoes of Joseph Smith, have sex with Fanny Alger in the barn behind your wife's back? Think about this for a minute... wouldn't this act basically prove that Joseph Smith knew that his doctrine was false? Care to argue this didn't happen... read the letter Joseph Smith wrote to Sarah Ann Whitney (then 17) where the only condition it was "not safe" was if his wife was there. There were no manufactured angry mobs waiting to pounce on the Whitneys, but the only condition it was not safe is if Emma was there. Are these the actions of a prophet of God, or a con man getting what he wanted?

3) The Kinderhook plates were "translated" by Joseph Smith and are an acknowledged hoax. Where's the out here? Throw William Clayton under the bus? Isn't this the tactic used by Mormon apologists to downplay anything negative regarding historical fact? Add to this the "translation" of the pagan book of the dead to bring you the Book of Abraham is 100% wrong. Add to this the Greek Psalter incident. At what point does the light come on and fact would dictate that Joseph Smith's truth claims are inherently flawed?

4) Seer stones are tools of the occult. Joseph Smith's brother Alvin was dug up after he died and Joseph Smith's father spoke about it int he paper. The Smith family believed in occult magic... do you? If you believe in Joseph Smith's seer stones used to see evil treasure guardians as of God then ok, but if you don't, then the hysteresis that keeps you safe in the cognitive dissonance required to place belief in Joseph Smith's doctrine has reached an impasse. I urge you to do some research outside of the "approved" sites you're told to visit. You either care about the truth or you don't... it's all there if you wish to find it.

In summation Kevin, as you selectively choose to "snip" arguments you wish to shy away from, you have to come to the logical conclusion that all of the above (and more as I could go on for pages) makes rational sense to you. Christianity isn't based on Mormon doctrine... the two oppose each other. If you can throw the Bible under the bus and somehow rationalize the "anti" data as false, if one doesn't make sense then neither does the other one.

Are you saying that it's more likely that Biblical Christians may be right that a large amount of people are going to end up spending the rest of eternity in unbearable agony than it is that the good God that controls the universe actually inspired Joseph Smith to say the things he said and do the things he did?

Let me put this as simply as I can. I don't discount God had a hand in other religions. What I choose to place belief in is that Jesus Christ was God (they are one) and the message brings meaning to my life. I don't "know" I'm right, but rather I "know" what I actually believe based on the data given to me. The data given to me proves the truth claims of Joseph Smith cannot be trusted, so I discount them. What I think is going to happen is just my opinion, and what anyone thinks is going to happen to me after I die is just their opinion... it doesn't change my opinion, because it's what I actually believe.

[_jon]

Thews, I just wanted to say that I admire your clarity of thought and exemplary use of the cognitive skills which all humans have been blessed with. I also admire the clear way you express yourself in written posts.

[Guest]

Thews, I just wanted to say that I admire your clarity of thought and exemplary use of the cognitive skills which all humans have been blessed with. I also admire the clear way you express yourself in written posts.

Thanks jon. When my daughter was diagnosed with bone cancer at 15 it was the start of a 5 year span looking death right between the eyes... only it wasn't through my eyes. The first round of chemo lasted over a year and was brutal; she recovered and was cancer free for 3 years before being diagnosed with leukemia. That round of chemo lasted a few months, followed by remission and it finally came back after the bone marrow transplant... I lost her months later.

Towards the end, she would sleep most of the time and I would be in the room with nothing to do but think. I went through so many operations with negative odds only to come away with good news. The extra time I had with my daughter was priceless and I'm very grateful for that time. Having spent literally years in children's cancer hospitals, the pain I've seen is unimaginable.

Was I ever mad at God? ...no. Why would God choose her? I remember a conversation with a guy I worked with who had a son with a different form of leukemia. His son asked him, "Dad, why me?" His reply was, "Why not you? Would you choose someone else to have this instead of you?" This may sound like brutal advice to give a child, but you have to be direct with them to get them mentally tough enough to endure the chemo and realize what they're up against.

Towards the end (the last few days) she lapsed into a comma. I held her hands and prayed, and once I was done I got the cot ready to go to sleep. I sat on her bed and held her hands and spoke to her as if she were awake. I told her that if her experience was anything like my NDE, she shouldn't be scared. I told her I loved her and I'd see her when it was my turn to go. Her hands moved from under the covers and I reached for them and held them tightly; she died moments later.

I'm not mad at God for taking her from me. I'm grateful that God chose me to be her dad and the time I did have with her. The moral of the story is that we'll all face the music eventually. 100 years from now everyone you know will be dead, including you. A thousand years from now so will everyone who lives in the next 900 years. Our perspective of time deals with death when we have to deal with it, as I think most of us assume we'll live to at least 70. When my time comes, the one thing I am absolutely sure of is that without truth, it's meaningless. To acknowledge what I believe and why I believe it is a personal choice, and one I don't fear being wrong about, because it's the truth and based on truth I've sought to solidify it. Having this experience forced me to think about it and confront it; I had to decide where I stood. Some shelve this decision, but when death has to be confronted, you don't have any more time left.

[_Yoda]

You were a good Dad, Thews. I'm so sorry for the loss of your daughter.

[_KevinSim]

Yes, I might be wrong. My ability to be certain about anything would require the knowledge of what exists in the afterlife. I acknowledge I may be wrong and I won't exist at all. The point is, hell isn't logical and doesn't make sense.
..........snip..........

Are you just as willing to consider the possibility that you might be wrong in your opinion on the divine inspiration of Mormonism?

No, because I'm not wrong. What I know about Joseph Smith's doctrine is based on fact that it's false.

Thews, then you went on to explain how you know that you're "not wrong" regarding "the divine inspiration of Mormonism." It seemed to come down to five points. (1) God would not have His prophet use an object to translate ancient records that had been used occulticly to allegedly see evil "treasure guardians." (2) God would not reveal to His prophet that things happened anciently when those things have no historical support. (3) God would not choose as a prophet someone who would claim "to be more accomplished than Jesus Christ." (4) God would not command His prophet to marry seventeen-year-olds behind his wife's back. (5) God would not choose a man as His prophet who could be fooled into believing modern manufactured plates were actually ancient documents, as in the Kinderhook incident.

Thews, is this a fair description of your argument against Joseph Smith? If not, then let me know how you differ with this summary I've presented. If so, then regarding (1), how does one determine what objects are occultic and which are not? Also, has God ever said He wouldn't have his prophet use occultic objects?

[_thews]

Yes, I might be wrong. My ability to be certain about anything would require the knowledge of what exists in the afterlife. I acknowledge I may be wrong and I won't exist at all. The point is, hell isn't logical and doesn't make sense.
..........snip..........

Are you just as willing to consider the possibility that you might be wrong in your opinion on the divine inspiration of Mormonism?

No, because I'm not wrong. What I know about Joseph Smith's doctrine is based on fact that it's false.

Thews, then you went on to explain how you know that you're "not wrong" regarding "the divine inspiration of Mormonism." It seemed to come down to five points. (1) God would not have His prophet use an object to translate ancient records that had been used occulticly to allegedly see evil "treasure guardians." (2) God would not reveal to His prophet that things happened anciently when those things have no historical support. (3) God would not choose as a prophet someone who would claim "to be more accomplished than Jesus Christ." (4) God would not command His prophet to marry seventeen-year-olds behind his wife's back. (5) God would not choose a man as His prophet who could be fooled into believing modern manufactured plates were actually ancient documents, as in the Kinderhook incident.

What I believe based on the facts is represented in the above 5 points, but there's a lot more to solidify why I believe Mormonism is false. If you don't mind Kevin, can you address the 5 points above with your take on them?

Thews, is this a fair description of your argument against Joseph Smith? If not, then let me know how you differ with this summary I've presented. If so, then regarding (1), how does one determine what objects are occultic and which are not? Also, has God ever said He wouldn't have his prophet use occultic objects?

God never said anything to me, so if your point is the fact he didn't tell me he wouldn't have "his" prophet use occult objects, that doesn't negate what the Bible says. If you believe in Jesus Christ as a part of being a Mormon, are you selectively discounting the Christian doctrine that opposes Mormon theology? Don't the two supposedly go hand-in-hand, or does the Book of Mormon Trump the Bible?

http://topicalbible.org/n/necromancer.htm

Deuteronomy 18:10-12
10 Let no one be found among you who sacrifices their son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, 11 or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. 12 Anyone who does these things is detestable to the LORD; because of these same detestable practices the LORD your God will drive out those nations before you.

When Joseph Smith attempted to join the Methodist church in 1828, he was kicked out for being a practicing necromancer.

http://www.utlm.org/onlineresources/jos ... hodist.htm

When Joseph Lewis, who was twenty-one at the time (about a year and a half younger than Smith), learned of this act, he felt that Joseph's manner of life rendered him unfit to be a member and told him either to "publicly ask to have his name stricken from the class book, or stand a disciplinary investigation." Mr. Lewis gave further details about the incident a month after the first article appeared in the Amboy paper, and he wrote:

I, with Joshua McKune, a local preacher at that time, I think in June, 1828, heard on Saturday, that Joe Smith had joined the church on Wednesday afternoon, (as it was customary in those days to have circuit preaching at my father's house on week-day). We thought it was a disgrace to the church to have a practicing necromancer, a dealer in enchantments and bleeding ghosts, in it. So on Sunday we went to father's, the place of meeting that day, and got there in season to see Smith and talked with him some time in father's shop before the meeting. Told him that his occupation, habits, and moral character were at variance with the discipline, that his name would be a disgrace to the church, that there should have been recantation, confession and at least promised reformation-. That he could that day publicly ask that his name be stricken from the class book, or stand an investigation. He chose the former, and did that very day make the request that his name be taken off the class book. (The Amboy Journal, June 11, 1879, p.1).

You have two obstacles to overcome here, in that in 1828, God supposedly had already told Joseph Smith all churches were wrong, so why would he try and join the Methodist church in the first place? Secondly, Joseph Smith was a seer for hire, and part of "seeing" the treasure buried underground was to also "see" the treasure guardian that was guarding it, and perform rituals to appease it so they could obtain the treasure. This supposed treasure guardian was a dead spirit, so to your point about what God didn't say, the aforementioned is very clear on what God finds "detestable" according to Christian doctrine.

Think about it Kevin, Joseph Smith found his first seer stone by "seeing" it through the green stone of Sally Chase. Joseph Smith owned the Jupiter talisman which is directly taken from Francis Barrett's occult book The Magus. Here's a link about Joseph Smith's Jupiter talisman that clearly ties Joseph Smith's belief to the occult: http://www.renaissanceastrology.com/jos ... isman.html


From FairMormon: http://fairwiki.org/Joseph_Smith/Seer_stones

Young Joseph Smith was a member of a specialized sub-community with ties to these very old and very respected practices, though by the early 1800s they were respected only by a marginalized segment of society. He exhibited a talent parallel to others in similar communities. Even in Palmyra he was not unique. In D. Michael Quinn's words: "Until the Book of Mormon thrust young Smith into prominence, Palmyra's most notable seer was Sally Chase, who used a greenish-colored stone. William Stafford also had a seer stone, and Joshua Stafford had a 'peepstone which looked like white marble and had a hole through the center.'" [9] Richard Bushman adds Chauncy Hart, and an unnamed man in Susquehanna County, both of whom had stones with which they found lost objects. [10] [1]

During his tenure as a "village seer," Joseph acquired several seer stones. Joseph first used a neighbor's seer stone (probably that belonging to Palmyra seer Sally Chase, on the balance of historical evidence, though there are other possibilities) to discover the location of a brown, baby's foot-shaped stone. The vision of this stone likely occurred in about 1819–1820, and he obtained his first seer stone in about 1821–1822.[2]

So Kevin, the green seer stone owned by Sally Chase was the occult object Joseph Smith used to find his first (and through that his second) seer stones, and those exact same seer stones are the only objects used to "translate" every single word of the Book of Mormon out of a stove-pipe hat, as the Nephite spectacles were taken back after the lost 116 pages. If you wish to discount this historical fact as God choosing whatever means he wanted to bring his doctrine to the earth, the other obvious scenario is that God didn't have anything to do with this, which would define Joseph Smith as a false prophet of God.

I could go on and list false prophecies by Joseph Smith, the lies Joseph Smith told in public and his incorrect translations, but if you wish to argue that it makes sense that God would choose to guide Joseph Smith to see dead spirits for personal gain, please explain to me how this directly contradicts the Bible and would make sense from a Christian perspective.

[_hatersinmyward]

Would I want to live a Lie so as to not stur a muster in my family? Maybe

Would I want my grown child to do the same for his family? No I value honesty

Would I want my grandkids to do the same.

SOMEBODYS going to have to break the line of BS.