Jenda

Cal, I'm sorry, did you state something that disproved JS's claim and I missed it? Your assertion that he was a good storyteller is just your opinion and nothing more. There are just too many ifs and maybes in the antis claims. I have read everything that you have written many, many times before, and it is just not convincing. Maybe it is to some who don't have faith, but to those who have faith, it is baseless. There are just as many positive proofs as there are negative ones. It all depends on whether you choose to have faith in God or not. JMHO. I don't need to defend the BoM with facts and reason. To me, there is enough circumstantial evidence to make the story believable, and I don't even need that. It is just fun to read those things. My faith is all I need. If faith isn't good enough for you, Cal, then you will never be able to take anything on faith. That includes the love people say they have for you, the love God claims he has for you, anything. You will just erode things away till you are left with a belief in nothing. I really do feel sorry for people like you. You might be a really nice guy, but people who demand proof before they believe in anything are just pessimistic at heart. You can't take anything on faith, and it is a drag. Sorry. Just MHO. Guess I touched a nerve, there, Cal. Huh??? My comment about faith was to show that you have prejudices and NOTHING, probably not even God, himself, would be able to sway your thinking on them. There are more 'evidences' than you can shake a stick at regarding the BoM, but your heart is so hardened that that you probably don't even ponder and pray about them. There is nothing that will satisfy your hard heart short of a sign that someone might dredge up from somewhere that says "LEHI WAS HERE" (carbon dated and everything). And I even doubt that that would do it for you.

Ditto! Thanks, Traveler.

Discussion time for 1 Nephi 4.

There is lots of circumstantial evidence that has appeared through the years since the book was published (that was not known in JS's day), in and of itself is not proof, but makes it obvious that the things that are described in the book could have actually happened when, where and why they said they did.Each little piece taken by itself might mean nothing, but all of them put together makes quite a stack of evidence. Not proof, but evidence.

God originally gave the authority to man, from there it passes from man to man. God does not convey authority with each new generation.Let me clarify that, though. All authority comes from God, but it is passed on through ordination in two ways. From priesthood member to new priesthood member, and from God to new priesthood member (because the priesthood stand in the stead of Christ.)

Josephus talks about Christ and James, his brother.

Whether or not that was the exact route taken is not the point. The point was that the presence of places like that lend credence to that part of the story. Not proof, but credence.

I used to live there when I was in college. So, yes I know what it is like there.God is the one who made Independence, MO the centerplace, and it is where I wish to gather to. Say, Elinz, do you know Randy Johnson?

The answers to #5 and #9 are yes.Here is a good test to take to see if you really know your Bible. http://home.cinci.rr.com/dancers/wmdbq/

Cal, I'm sorry, did you state something that disproved JS's claim and I missed it? Your assertion that he was a good storyteller is just your opinion and nothing more.There are just too many ifs and maybes in the antis claims. I have read everything that you have written many, many times before, and it is just not convincing. Maybe it is to some who don't have faith, but to those who have faith, it is baseless. There are just as many positive proofs as there are negative ones. It all depends on whether you choose to have faith in God or not. JMHO. I don't need to defend the BoM with facts and reason. To me, there is enough circumstantial evidence to make the story believable, and I don't even need that. It is just fun to read those things. My faith is all I need.If faith isn't good enough for you, Cal, then you will never be able to take anything on faith. That includes the love people say they have for you, the love God claims he has for you, anything. You will just erode things away till you are left with a belief in nothing. I really do feel sorry for people like you. You might be a really nice guy, but people who demand proof before they believe in anything are just pessimistic at heart. You can't take anything on faith, and it is a drag. Sorry. Just MHO.

That is awesome. I love the St Louis temple. Heather and I got the chance to visit St Louis a few months ago and it was one of the greatest experiences of my life (kinda says more about my life than it does about St Louis though lol) j/k. I really did like it there and thought it was really cool how it was just right there next to the freeway. The Temple Lot is just a big lawn. There's a visitors center, but that's it. The "Reformed" Church has some big temples nearby. And every other church you can imagine has built there too. Now THAT'S funny... Ahem. Ahem. That's the "Reorganized" Church. The LDS have a visitor's center and a stake office on the Temple Lot in Independence. I wish I lived where you do. That is my dream.

Okay. Let's suppose there is a 'gay gene" and those people are "abberations" (I think you mean "aberration"), could a Down Syndrome person stop being a Down Syndrome person? If homosexuality is genetic, how can they help being what they are? My 5 year old daughter has Down syndrome. By the way, the correct way to refer to trisomy 21 is Down syndrome, not Down's syndrome. Anyway, I believe that when she is eventually resurrected that she will no longer have Down syndrome because she will be made perfect. Do you think if there is a "gay gene" that those who have it now will be made perfect in the resurrection and not be gay anymore? Behunin, I personally believe that we will all be raised to a perfected state. However, since I am not LDS, I don't have to worry about beliefs about exhaltation, etc., so in my concept of the glories, we might know and remember each other as friends and family members, but we won't be family in the here-after, we will be perfected humans who will all live as brothers and sisters and sexuality won't have a part in it. I believe that that (our sexuality) is part of our trial here on earth and will not be with us when we move on.

Okay. Let's suppose there is a 'gay gene" and those people are "abberations" (I think you mean "aberration"), could a Down Syndrome person stop being a Down Syndrome person? If homosexuality is genetic, how can they help being what they are? Whether or not being homosexual is genetic or a choice or nature or nurture or environmental or whatever, does not change the fact that it is not normal and wrong. Everyone has trials in life that we must overcome, to sacrifice for God's greater good, the good of building the kingdom, etc., and putting off a life of sin is one of them. It is the main one, as far as I am concerned. And while this discussion is surrounding homosexuality, it goes for any sin that we are committing, whether intentionally or unintentionally. God calls us to rise above ourselves, to deny the Adam to admit the holy. BTW, thanks for your excellent grammar skills. Where would we be without them? Does that give me permission to edit your posts whenever they contain incorrect grammar?

If there ever was a universal flood, there would be something (anything!) in the geologic record to show it. There isn't, therefore there wasn't. There is evidence of many local floods, many of them quite catastrophic. The most likely source of the flood stories (IMHO) was the rise in ocean levels at the end of the last ice age. It doesn't seem strange to you that every major civilization (even savage civilizations) have a great flood myth. Not just those who's culture stems from the middle east. Could you provide references for all of them please? No, but if you know how to hit the search button at the top of your browser, you can do it yourself.

I am going to have to go rent that movie. It has been so long since I saw it that I can't remember it.

If there ever was a universal flood, there would be something (anything!) in the geologic record to show it. There isn't, therefore there wasn't. There is evidence of many local floods, many of them quite catastrophic. The most likely source of the flood stories (IMHO) was the rise in ocean levels at the end of the last ice age. It doesn't seem strange to you that every major civilization (even savage civilizations) have a great flood myth. Not just those who's culture stems from the middle east.

Or Peter Pan, Santa Claus, The Easter Bunny, Men on the Sun... Oh, good. Another doubter!

Basically everything in the OT before Abraham violated the laws of physics, and space and time. If Noah could fit 2 of every animal into that boat, Adam could have lived in Missouri, and there could have been an extremely fast continental drift that split the continent into 7 pieces in 40 days and 40 nights. Ever think that that could have been what caused the flood to begin with? hhmmmmmmmm???? B)

Down Syndrome is caused by an extra chromosome. It's easy to identify. Gay people don't have an extra chromosome or other obvious genetic differences than straight people. I believe that some gay people are born to be attracted to the same gender. I would think it would be caused by hormone levels though and not an actual "gay gene." I also think some people are seduced into the gay lifestyle and choose it. Rock Hudson is an example of this. There was a study that was able to show a "gay gene" in one of the insect family. It was only present in the males of the society, they were not able to find it among the females. And the study was not reproducible. So, it is questionble whether or not there is really a gene for being homosexual. That aside, even if there was one, it would be an abberation, just like extra chromosomes are abberations. This is entirely aside from the fact that some do, indeed, choose the gay lifestyle.

I don't disagree that there might be a gene found in gay men that could be called a "gay gene", but what does it prove? There is a gene present in those who have Down's Syndrome, too, but that doesn't make it normal. It is an abberation. Meant to die out with the person (since gay's can't reproduce with their choice partner.) That being said, all of us are God's children. And we all deserve to be treated with love and respect. We don't have to agree with personal beliefs, and we shouldn't expect everyone to agree with ours, but we need to be respectful.

I don't ever hear this taught at church, but my son was taught this in Seminary this year. Also that Noah lived in America before the flood. He was quite disturbed by the teaching and didn't believe a word of it. Why would something like that disturb him? What possible difference could it make?

In this time, it is the going thing to deny that Jesus was the Christ. That he was the divine son of God who came to earth to die for our sins. Millions of (Christian) children are growing up without this teaching as part of their belief system. I believe it is time for those who do continue to believe that to take a stand. It is the only way that that message will continue through to the next generation. I applaud Mel Gibson, and the others who have been ostrasized, for being willing to put their careers on the line to stand up for what they believe in the day and age that it is popular to take no stand at all. Praise God! that he created people with such strong beliefs and the will to do what is right.

I believe that the Garden of Eden was in America. I have believed Tao's theory about the flood thing for a long, long time. Does that make me an apologist?

Cal, I'm sorry, did you state something that disproved JS's claim and I missed it? Your assertion that he was a good storyteller is just your opinion and nothing more.There are just too many ifs and maybes in the antis claims. I have read everything that you have written many, many times before, and it is just not convincing. Maybe it is to some who don't have faith, but to those who have faith, it is baseless. There are just as many positive proofs as there are negative ones. It all depends on whether you choose to have faith in God or not. JMHO.

Well, I'm just telling you what I think. Please, in the future, if you're going to accuse me of lying, be specific, otherwise some of the sheep will assume you're referencing the entire post instead of a portion; so when their Thought Terminating Cliche reflex kicks in they'll only TTC part of my post instead of the entire thing. One of the problems with relying on the Witnesses for the authenticity of Mormonism is the testimony of David Whitmer given later in life. Whitmer declared, "If you believe my testimony to the Book of Mormon; if you believe that God spake to us three witnesses by his own voice, then I tell you that in June, 1838, God spake to me again by his own voice from the heavens, and told me to 'separate myself from among the Latter-day Saints, for as they sought to do unto me, so should it be done unto them.' In the spring of 1838, the heads of the church and many of the members had gone deep into error and blindness. I had been striving with them for a long time to show them the errors into which they were drifting, and for my labors I received only persecutions." His quote creates a problem. If one accepts Whitmer's testimony regarding his experience with the angel and the gold plates, then must not one also accept his testimony that God also declared the current Mormon church is in a fallen state? To disavow the revelation he received stating that the Mormon church since 1838 has "gone deep into error and blindness" means we must hold as suspect his testimony to the Book of Mormon. Doesn't create a problem for me since it is, more or less, what the RLDS church has proclaimed all along.