Tr2

I have a challenge for you. Go through the BoM and try and find current LDS doctrines and practices. Find where they are taught and what kind of scriptural basis exists for them.

Why would one think that biblical stories are metaphors or anything else? Is it because of the writing styles, the content.....? The few people that I know that do view the bible as such, are not well versed in it. Though some aspects of the bible there is no way of knowing if it is based on a historical fact or a myth, example being Job.

Traveller, Then why do we have mormons supporting the notion that there could be people living on the moon?

It will not. Our churches are set up in such a way that one cannot follow both. You follow one, the other, or neither. The core doctrines of mormonism and Christianity are so different that they cannot work towards the same goal, because both have different goals. This may be unpopular, but it is the way it is. I'll have to agree. Though, based on the interview I saw last night with Mel Gibson and Barbara Walters, he has gotten wierd. Is it a good weird? I do not know the man so I cannot determine that.

This movie is going to place a lot of significance on something that the LDS church does not value as a significant thing. I have never talked to a mormon who talked like they thought the cross was as important as Christians think it is.

Peace, Yo'd like me to justify my points, sure. 1) Joseph Smith claiming that the moon has people living on it: Young Woman's Journal, 3:1892, pp. 263-264. Are you telling me that LDS practices (doctrines or standards) have not been drawn from similar journals? Smith stating that people living on the moon, is more than proof that he is a complete moron. 2) I don't know of a lot of LDS publication that comes from historical materials. I cannot name much that is scientifically based. I don't know of a lot of mormon research that is recognized by institutions outside the LDS. Show me one researcher, who has total objectivity from the mormon church, who has validated mormonism's historical literature. Now show me the irrefutable facts that I asked for. BTW, I won't hold my breath for you to answer. You are not the brightest mormon, and much smarter ones than you haven't been able to.

It is an LDS web site, and there are many non-LDS here. This place would be very boring without non-LDS here.

That is not a common LDS practice.Adam in America? There aren't words to describe how stupid that idea is.

What in the world are you talking about? I know that you are not one of the brighter mormons here, and you are certainly proving that now. I have no idea what facts you said I slurred over. If you cannot provide some facts that prove the BoM to be historically accurate then give them, otherwise stop wasting my time with your senseless babbling.

Show me irrefutable facts.

1) Joseph Smith was quoted from LDS literature if I am not mistaken. Where he was quoted is considered valuable to mormons and their history. Certain doctrines have been adapted from the same source. Why do we except some and not others, other than to preserve your public image? Is it because you only believe what you'd like to believe? Could it be that Smith was, at times, a blithering idiot when he opened his mouth?2) The "latest material" published by the LDS church is not scientifically based, nor scientifically accurate. It is full of partial truths and partial facts. They are unfounded and non-factual opinions. Most mormon research is not recognized by anyone other than the mormon church. Your "proof" is not recognized by anyone who doesn't want to believe what you believe. History is based upon facts that are understood by people who may not like what those facts are. Mormon history has never been validated by an independent critic who has objectivity.

Why are athiests fools?

Basically what I'm being told is that if I continue to ask for a source that has been proven to be accurate I'm told, "well we don't do that around here". You post LDS scripture and when I ask you to state why it is valid I get no reason except if I don't like it I can leave or ignore it. It seems like you don't understand what you believe or why. I'm asking you to state why a source, that you volunteered to use, is valid. Since you refuse to do so I will assume that you cannot state why the BoM is valid, until proven otherwise.

There isn't much that antishock and I agree on, but this is one of them.I am continually amazed how so many seemingly intelligent people can fall for such things.

I like how those who don't accept the BoM are considered bigots.

What kind of childish response is that? Don't quote something that has no more factual base than Star Wars or Lord of the Rings. Use the bible if you want to try and prove a point about Jesus. Either than or prove the BoM. Since nobody else has, I'm not going to expect you to.

Using a source that has no credibility is logical? I am not interested in what the BoM has to say because there is no evidence to suggest it is anything more than a work of fiction.

Please show me where in the bible homosexuality is considered to be ok's by God. So because I do not accept an unhealthy lifestyle I am primitive? I have read about many animals doing very strange things in extreme circumstances. Are we condiering everything that goes on in the animal kingdom to be natural and normal? I once read about a jackal trying to kill a full grown lion so it could eat, it that natural, or a very extreme circumstance?

So because I am on a mormon board I am expected to believe everything mormon? Jesus is a historical figure, the BoM is not a historical book because it has not been proven to be. I don't believe something just because it has been published, there is a lot of crap in print.

So in other words you have no other debate other than that it is on a small scale? I said homosexuality leads to extinction, I never said it will cause it. How far it leads to extinction is not very far, I agree, but this point is not debatable.So have we determined that homosexuals cannot reproduce, thus cannot further the species, thus goes against the principles of evolution (which is nothing more than a species making itself stronger). Therefore it is NOT natural. Homosexuality doesn't fit into evolution and it doesn't fit into the bible. Where does it fit in?

I had an imaginary friend when I was 3 and there is as much validation for his reality as there is for people who live on the moon. I noticed that I am comparing current mormon things to the silly things I did when I was a little kid. I guess that is saying something.

Use the bible please, I do not hold the book of mormon to be anything special because there is no reason to think so.

Jesus blessed those who didn't deserve it, what basis is there for saying God operates any different?

Funny, that's what my mother told me about leprechauns when I was a kid. Are these people invisible? I guess the fact that there have been people to the moon, and around the moon, and they've seen no signs of people living there means nothing to you? Forget the fact there is no oxygen, nor natural resources for them to live. Do they sit around all day playing cards all day or to they play hop-scotch with moon rocks?

So in others words you are basing your eternal destiny on a few feelings you've had? I understand that feelings should play a role, but they shouldn't be the deciding factor on their own. Have you taken an objective look at your religion? Have you seriously considered the anti-mormon argument? I don't care what religion you are, if you don't take an objective look at what you believe, you are a fool. I can honestly say that mormons and Christians are the worst for this.