What's new
By:

The Official "Ask A Mormon" Thread

Hartsock said:
Here is my problem with calling Joseph Smith a fraud, not saying you were PKM, but just in general. Isn't it possible he truly believed what he saw? Just because he may or may not have been mistaken doesn't mean he is being fraudulent. What about Mohammed, what about Moses, what about Jesus? If a religion, any religion, when lived as taught makes you a better person then who really cares whether it is true or not? When you get down to the basis of basically all religions they are exactly the same. Be a good person and treat others well. The rest is just semantics IMO.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the difference between Jesus and Mohammed & Smith, is that Jesus himself was the evidence. People interacted with him. His disciples wrote about him and these stories were scrutinized by people who were around at the time. Nobody would have believed the gospels if there were people denying Jesus' existence or what he was able to do. If I remembered correctly, the gospels were written 30 years after Jesus' death? That's enough time for people who had seen Jesus to point out the discrepancies between the gospels and what he'd done (if that was the case).

However in the case of Mohammed and Smith - who were visited by angels - we've got to take it by faith alone that what they're telling us is true. That whatever they said about the angels appearing to them is true. There is no way of verifying that. (except for the 12 witnesses).
 
Hotttnickkk said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the difference between Jesus and Mohammed & Smith, is that Jesus himself was the evidence. People interacted with him. His disciples wrote about him and these stories were scrutinized by people who were around at the time. Nobody would have believed the gospels if there were people denying Jesus' existence or what he was able to do. If I remembered correctly, the gospels were written 30 years after Jesus' death? That's enough time for people who had seen Jesus to point out the discrepancies between the gospels and what he'd done (if that was the case).
Click to expand...

Since you asked, you're wrong. Even with Paul writing some 10 years after the fact (and there is very little of a physical Jesus in Paul's early writing), no one was around who wanted to take the time and effort to travel a few hundred miles to skeptically investigate some claims about the guy executed over a decade ago. It would be harder for them than for you to travel to Africa today. Would you go visit Somalia to debunk some claim that some guy who was shot to death in the 1990s was a resurrected, because some 30 people who gather in a little place in the city told you so?

By the time the gospels are written, it's 40 years after the fact. By comparison, try finding out who lived at 3001 LaClede Ave., St. Louis, MO in 1973. If I tell you they laid their hands on some blind people and restored their sight, how would you go about finding evidence one way or the other?

I don't know if there was a Jesus/Joshua in Palestine around the time of 30 AD who was the model for the figure in the book. However, the notion that evidence of such a person would be easy to find is laughable.
 
CONAN said:
So 2 of the 3 changed their story a little on the plates but didn't completely deny it. Am I reading that right? And these guys were all a bit off when it came to their lives but you are going to pin them down on those statements?
Click to expand...

No, you're reading it the way you want to read it. Two of the three had long periods where they stated that they never physically saw the plates. That's what I'm telling you.
 
One Brow said:
Since you asked, you're wrong. Even with Paul writing some 10 years after the fact (and there is very little of a physical Jesus in Paul's early writing), no one was around who wanted to take the time and effort to travel a few hundred miles to skeptically investigate some claims about the guy executed over a decade ago. It would be harder for them than for you to travel to Africa today. Would you go visit Somalia to debunk some claim that some guy who was shot to death in the 1990s was a resurrected, because some 30 people who gather in a little place in the city told you so?

By the time the gospels are written, it's 40 years after the fact. By comparison, try finding out who lived at 3001 LaClede Ave., St. Louis, MO in 1973. If I tell you they laid their hands on some blind people and restored their sight, how would you go about finding evidence one way or the other?

I don't know if there was a Jesus/Joshua in Palestine around the time of 30 AD who was the model for the figure in the book. However, the notion that evidence of such a person would be easy to find is laughable.
Click to expand...

Quick question, what are you beliefs? Or are you an atheist/agnostic?
 
MoTown16 said:
I'd venture a guess that "active" membership is probably about the same as any other Christian religion. And it also depends upon what your definition of active is. Do you need to attend worship services one time a month, one time a year? Do you exclude elderly people who no longer attend services but consider themselves to be "active" in their faith?
Click to expand...

Apparently the REAL number of mormons in Brazil is closer to a quarter million.

https://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/blogsfaithblog/54497395-180/church-census-lds-reported.html.csp

The Brazilian government believes there are far fewer Mormons in the country than the LDS Church does.

The 2010 Brazilian census found that 225,695 people identified as Latter-day Saints whereas the LDS Church reported 1,138,740 members in Brazil in 2010.
"These findings indicate that self-identified Latter-day Saints on the census account for only 20 percent of total membership officially reported by the church in Brazil," writes Matt Martinich, an independent LDS researcher. "Furthermore, the percent of official LDS membership self-affiliating as Latter-day Saint on the census has declined over the past decade."
In 2000, the census reported 199,645 Latter-day Saints, or 26 percent of Mormon membership reported for that year (775,822) by the Utah-based Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
To Martinich, who lives in Colorado Springs, the "most concerning finding" was about the LDS Church's growth rate.
The church reported that Brazilian "membership increased by 362,918 members between 2000 and 2010 yet the censuses for these two years indicate a mere 26,050 increase in self-identified Latter-day Saints," Martinich wrote on his blog. "In other words, the increase in census-reported Latter-day Saints was only 7 percent of the membership increase reported by the church."
The numbers were "surprising," Martinich said in a phone interview. "The church has experienced such steady congregational and stake growth over the last decade, especially the past five years."
That's a trend the LDS Church noted as well.
"A good indicator for membership growth and activity in any area can be found in the construction of meetinghouses and temples," church spokesman Scott Trotter said Monday. "We only build them where members need them, not in anticipation of future growth. Our construction of both types of buildings in Brazil continues at a brisk pace."
Because he doesn't know Portuguese, Martinich, project manager for the Cumorah Foundation, which tracks LDS growth, couldn't read background on Brazil's census to know if there was any difference in the data collection this time around.
In many Latin American countries, for example, only the head of household fills out the census forms, he said. "If the father is Catholic, and his wife and children are Mormon, he might fill out the form as if everyone is Catholic."
Still, the numbers are concerning, said Martinich, who is Mormon.
"We know that the church is struggling to maintain self-sufficiency in Brazil, with Brazilians staffing all 27 missions. The church can't do it, even with all the members they have."
During the same period, the census revealed that Protestants have experienced major growth reflected in both church-reported members and census-reported members. In the past 30 years, the Brazilian census has revealed that the percentage of Protestants in the population jumped from 6.6 percent to 22.2 percent.
It is clear, Martinich said, that the LDS Church continues to have "significant convert-retention issues in Brazil."
Click to expand...

Many religions actually lowball their estimates of global membership (see Jehovah's Witnesses and 7th Day Adventists). The LDS' membership assumptions are, and always have been, extremely aggressive. Not quite Scientology aggressive, but close. I haven't gone to church in years. I'll be on the membership roster until I'm at least 90 based on current policies.
 
I'm an active Mormon but there are two questions/issues I struggle with. No person has been able to give me a sufficient answer on these. So I figure Jazzfanz is my last resort :)

1. Why did Joseph Smith allow blacks in the Priesthood only to have Brigham Young ban them around 1848?

2. Why did the church continue Plural marriage even after the "revelation" of the 1890 Manifesto?


I'm not trying to cause issue but I would really like answers to these to clear my mind. The only thing I can offer up is that leaders of the church make mistakes and sin and these were clearly human policy mistakes that were of human error.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top