The Truth about Mormons

[Unkotare]

Talking to a Mormon is like talking to a mentally challenged 25 year old who still believes in Santa. .

It's too bad the irony of such a statement is lost on you, but then the fact that you are too stupid to understand it is a big part of your problem.

 

[JoeB131]

NO, SCREW hateful bigots and self-obsessed yet existentially insecure atheist shitstains like YOU. The only thing you "realized" 30 years ago is that you are too weak and frightened to ever be a complete human being. You responded like any dull child could be expected to, and now you try to hide your shame by pretending it's something to be 'proud' of. You're not fooling anyone, least of all yourself. So keep chasing your own tail but know that you're not going to get anywhere and that being a hateful, insecure little asshole won't make your fears go away.

Pukey, what I realized 30 years ago was that there are no sky pixies. Never were. In fact, I would say I realized that 40 years ago, when the nasty old nun told us how it was great that God drowned all the babies because they were "wicked". The problem with the Bible God and the Book of Mormon God is that he doesn't stand up to simple logic and reason. A cosmic being who is so needy he has to have the mere mortals on their knees kissing his butt.

You can live on your knees. You can be a serf to an imaginary sky friend. I refuse to do it.

 

[JoeB131]

Talking to a Mormon is like talking to a mentally challenged 25 year old who still believes in Santa. .

It's too bad the irony of such a statement is lost on you, but then the fact that you are too stupid to understand it is a big part of your problem.

I understand it perfectly.

The Book of Mormon is a lie. Since you claim to not be a Mormon, you know it is as untrue as I do.

I mean, I have to assume you haven't run off to the Temple and signed up, right?

Because you know it's bullshit.

But you don't want to hurt anyone's feelings.

 

[Unkotare]

Talking to a Mormon is like talking to a mentally challenged 25 year old who still believes in Santa. .

It's too bad the irony of such a statement is lost on you, but then the fact that you are too stupid to understand it is a big part of your problem.

I understand it perfectly.

The Book of Mormon is a lie. Since you claim to not be a Mormon, you know it is as untrue as I do.

I mean, I have to assume you haven't run off to the Temple and signed up, right?

Because you know it's bullshit.

But you don't want to hurt anyone's feelings.

Your post - of course - demonstrates that you have no fucking idea what I was talking about. Not surprising, since you are a dim-witted, hateful fool.

 

[Unkotare]

NO, SCREW hateful bigots and self-obsessed yet existentially insecure atheist shitstains like YOU. The only thing you "realized" 30 years ago is that you are too weak and frightened to ever be a complete human being. You responded like any dull child could be expected to, and now you try to hide your shame by pretending it's something to be 'proud' of. You're not fooling anyone, least of all yourself. So keep chasing your own tail but know that you're not going to get anywhere and that being a hateful, insecure little asshole won't make your fears go away.

Pukey, what I realized 30 years ago was that there are no sky pixies. .

Thanks for demonstrating my point once again, idiot. You are just plain animal stupid and will never get closer to being a human than any other cow grazing in the field.

 

[JoeB131]

It's too bad the irony of such a statement is lost on you, but then the fact that you are too stupid to understand it is a big part of your problem.

I understand it perfectly.

The Book of Mormon is a lie. Since you claim to not be a Mormon, you know it is as untrue as I do.

I mean, I have to assume you haven't run off to the Temple and signed up, right?

Because you know it's bullshit.

But you don't want to hurt anyone's feelings.

Your post - of course - demonstrates that you have no fucking idea what I was talking about. Not surprising, since you are a dim-witted, hateful fool.

There are only two approaches you can take towards Mormonism.

1) Joseph Smith was a prophet, where do I sign up.

and

2) Joseph Smith was a pedophile con man. What a crock of shit.

There isn't a gray area on this one.

 

[Listening]

When you present real evidence and establish criteria whereby someone is deemed a con artist...I'll listen. There are finding new groups all the time that lived in the Early America. The science is never complete.

:

No, guy, the science is pretty definitive.

Only because you bitterness requires that it be.

 

[Listening]

There are only two approaches you can take towards Mormonism.

1) Joseph Smith was a prophet, where do I sign up.

and

2) Joseph Smith was a pedophile con man. What a crock of shit.

There isn't a gray area on this one.

That pretty much covers it.

Then, of course, there is the question of whether or not God exists....after all...hard to be a prophet speaking on behalf of something or someone that does not really take up space in the universe.

And you can apply the same kind of logic.

But, even if you believe Joseph Smith was a prophet....you have decide just how interested you are in what it is that he has to say.

Many members of the church (in fact almost all) still claim membership (there is way to get your name removed), but many have decided that full devotion isn't for them.

Free Agency and all that.

 

[Unkotare]

I understand it perfectly.

The Book of Mormon is a lie. Since you claim to not be a Mormon, you know it is as untrue as I do.

I mean, I have to assume you haven't run off to the Temple and signed up, right?

Because you know it's bullshit.

But you don't want to hurt anyone's feelings.

Your post - of course - demonstrates that you have no fucking idea what I was talking about. Not surprising, since you are a dim-witted, hateful fool.

There are only two approaches you can take towards Mormonism.

1) Joseph Smith was a prophet, where do I sign up.

and

2) Joseph Smith was a pedophile con man. What a crock of shit.

There isn't a gray area on this one.

As I said, you have no fucking idea what I was talking about, you fucking dim-wit.

 

[JoeB131]

There are only two approaches you can take towards Mormonism.

1) Joseph Smith was a prophet, where do I sign up.

and

2) Joseph Smith was a pedophile con man. What a crock of shit.

There isn't a gray area on this one.

That pretty much covers it.

Then, of course, there is the question of whether or not God exists....after all...hard to be a prophet speaking on behalf of something or someone that does not really take up space in the universe.

And you can apply the same kind of logic.

But, even if you believe Joseph Smith was a prophet....you have decide just how interested you are in what it is that he has to say.

Many members of the church (in fact almost all) still claim membership (there is way to get your name removed), but many have decided that full devotion isn't for them.

Free Agency and all that.

Well, Smith could be a con man whether there was a God or not.

I don't think there is a God, at least not in the Judeo-Christian sense.

I don't think Smith was a prophet because he was proven wrong too many times. Kinderhook, Book of Abraham Papyrus, Quakers on the Moon. Lots of this guy said was just proven wrong. So whether or not there is a God is irrevenent to the issue. He clearly wasn't talking to one.

 

[Listening]

I don't think Smith was a prophet because he was proven wrong too many times. Kinderhook, Book of Abraham Papyrus, Quakers on the Moon. Lots of this guy said was just proven wrong. So whether or not there is a God is irrevenent to the issue. He clearly wasn't talking to one.

You are welcome to your opinion, but "proving" he was wrong is different story.

His whole effort and it's legacy has been the subject of many studies that call it unique.

The federal government has studied the church welfare program in detail.....something else that came from a later "prophet"...one of several who have been talking about the decline of the family for several decades.

All the powder you put up gets argued by apologists inside the church who have rational arguments that I don't care to follow to deeply. It does not matter.

Jospeh Smith was someone who preached a spiritual experience as did Brigham Young.

If you want to base your choices on taste, touch, smell, sound, and sight....that is your choice. If you believe those are the only senses......that is your choice too.

What we accept in today's world would blow the mind of someone from the 1800's and I suspect that will be the case a couple hundred years from now.

You don't know what you don't know.

 

[JoeB131]

What we accept in today's world would blow the mind of someone from the 1800's and I suspect that will be the case a couple hundred years from now.

You don't know what you don't know.

This is a bit closer to a reasoned argument than you normally get. So let's explore.

The fact that he was able to create this cult is not really an accomplishment. You have Scientology, the Unification Church, etc. All you need are 1) a clever guy with no ethics and the ability to talk BS and 2) a lot of less smart people who are willing to go along with it because there are huge voids in their lives. So, no, I'm not impressed. Maybe depressed we haven't been able to outgrow it.

Yes, we have expanded our knowledge since 1800. That's the point. We know Smith was a fraud because the science has advanced.

He tried to pass off the book of Abraham as a Biblical Text because in 1830, no one could read Heiroglyphics.... until someone decoded the Rosetta stone and real scientists got a hole of the original papyri...In short, Science filled in the missing information with facts, not faith or hope or magic...

He could spin these fanciful tales of Hebrews in the Americas because that was a popular theory in 1830 when the Missipiani civilizations was being excavated and no one could explain it. Then the real scientists got to work on the problem.

YOu can believe it was God or Space aliens, but science is filling in all the blanks nicely without either.

 

[Listening]

What we accept in today's world would blow the mind of someone from the 1800's and I suspect that will be the case a couple hundred years from now.

You don't know what you don't know.

This is a bit closer to a reasoned argument than you normally get. So let's explore.

The fact that he was able to create this cult is not really an accomplishment. You have Scientology, the Unification Church, etc. All you need are 1) a clever guy with no ethics and the ability to talk BS and 2) a lot of less smart people who are willing to go along with it because there are huge voids in their lives. So, no, I'm not impressed. Maybe depressed we haven't been able to outgrow it.

Yes, we have expanded our knowledge since 1800. That's the point. We know Smith was a fraud because the science has advanced.

He tried to pass off the book of Abraham as a Biblical Text because in 1830, no one could read Heiroglyphics.... until someone decoded the Rosetta stone and real scientists got a hole of the original papyri...In short, Science filled in the missing information with facts, not faith or hope or magic...

He could spin these fanciful tales of Hebrews in the Americas because that was a popular theory in 1830 when the Missipiani civilizations was being excavated and no one could explain it. Then the real scientists got to work on the problem.

YOu can believe it was God or Space aliens, but science is filling in all the blanks nicely without either.

I really don't care....

As I have said before....this is about a spiritual existence. There are some many combinations of things we can't possibly understand or know that I really don't spend a lot of time worrying about it.

It works for me on several levels.....

There are guys like this:

Does DNA Evidence Refute the Book of Mormon? Where is the Lamanite DNA?? Does DNA Offer Proof?

Who have apparently spent a lot of time as apologists who make arguments against your arguments. But don't ask me to referee.

 

[Listening]

What we accept in today's world would blow the mind of someone from the 1800's and I suspect that will be the case a couple hundred years from now.

You don't know what you don't know.

This is a bit closer to a reasoned argument than you normally get. So let's explore.

The fact that he was able to create this cult is not really an accomplishment. You have Scientology, the Unification Church, etc. All you need are 1) a clever guy with no ethics and the ability to talk BS and 2) a lot of less smart people who are willing to go along with it because there are huge voids in their lives. So, no, I'm not impressed. Maybe depressed we haven't been able to outgrow it.

Yes, we have expanded our knowledge since 1800. That's the point. We know Smith was a fraud because the science has advanced.

He tried to pass off the book of Abraham as a Biblical Text because in 1830, no one could read Heiroglyphics.... until someone decoded the Rosetta stone and real scientists got a hole of the original papyri...In short, Science filled in the missing information with facts, not faith or hope or magic...

He could spin these fanciful tales of Hebrews in the Americas because that was a popular theory in 1830 when the Missipiani civilizations was being excavated and no one could explain it. Then the real scientists got to work on the problem.

YOu can believe it was God or Space aliens, but science is filling in all the blanks nicely without either.

I really don't care....

As I have said before....this is about a spiritual existence. There are some many combinations of things we can't possibly understand or know that I really don't spend a lot of time worrying about it.

It works for me on several levels.....

There are guys like this:

Does DNA Evidence Refute the Book of Mormon? Where is the Lamanite DNA?? Does DNA Offer Proof?

Who have apparently spent a lot of time as apologists who make arguments against your arguments. But don't ask me to referee.

And you have this from those who dispute the whole Book of Abraham tact......

The Book of Abraham: Divinely Inspired Scripture - Michael D. Rhodes - FARMS Review - Volume 4 - Issue 1

Do I really care what they say ? Not really.

But you can argue with them.

Barf all you want....it just sounds like more bitterness to me.

 

[JoeB131]

I really don't care....

As I have said before....this is about a spiritual existence. There are some many combinations of things we can't possibly understand or know that I really don't spend a lot of time worrying about it.

It works for me on several levels.....

There are guys like this:

Who have apparently spent a lot of time as apologists who make arguments against your arguments. But don't ask me to referee.

Do I really care what they say ? Not really.

But you can argue with them.

Barf all you want....it just sounds like more bitterness to me.

You don't care, but you've been at this for a week now.

I don't think there is a spiritual existence becasue there is no evidence for it. So they various religions arguing over who has the best path to something they can't prove exists is to me a bit silly.

My problem with holy texts is that they are basically illogical. They talk about a God who has all this power, but that God could make himself clearly known now. He doesn't.

Now, for my bitterness. I have to admit, my opinions about Mormons were formed in 1983, when I was at an ROTC camp for six weeks with some creepy as shit, backstabbing LDS types from BYU. And then for a decade or so, I really didn't think about it again. Honestly, didn't even bother to read about the details of their faith. Then I started encountering you guys on the internet on various topics and forums. I think it started on a Sci-Fi forum when I off-handedly referred to LDS as a "Cult" when discussing Glen Larson and the original Battlestar Galactica.

I started researching it more when defending that position, and then arguing against nominating Romney four years ago. And frankly, yeah, what I see bothers me.

Mormonism bothers me for the same reason Scientology bothers me. That we are such weak creatures that such outright fraud can gain a foothold. L. Ron Hubbard publically announced he was pulling a con. "Why write Science Fiction for a penny a word when you can start a religion and make millions?" He said to his fellow Sci-Fi writers.

Joseph Smith was an con artist who decided that treasure hunting schemes actually required you to find treasure once in a while, but Religion, you can make up any bullshit, and people will not only give you their money, but let you sleep with their daughters.

What a sad commentary on humanity.

 

[Listening]

I really don't care....

As I have said before....this is about a spiritual existence. There are some many combinations of things we can't possibly understand or know that I really don't spend a lot of time worrying about it.

It works for me on several levels.....

There are guys like this:

Who have apparently spent a lot of time as apologists who make arguments against your arguments. But don't ask me to referee.

Do I really care what they say ? Not really.

But you can argue with them.

Barf all you want....it just sounds like more bitterness to me.

You don't care, but you've been at this for a week now.

I don't think there is a spiritual existence becasue there is no evidence for it. So they various religions arguing over who has the best path to something they can't prove exists is to me a bit silly.

My problem with holy texts is that they are basically illogical. They talk about a God who has all this power, but that God could make himself clearly known now. He doesn't.

Now, for my bitterness. I have to admit, my opinions about Mormons were formed in 1983, when I was at an ROTC camp for six weeks with some creepy as shit, backstabbing LDS types from BYU. And then for a decade or so, I really didn't think about it again. Honestly, didn't even bother to read about the details of their faith. Then I started encountering you guys on the internet on various topics and forums. I think it started on a Sci-Fi forum when I off-handedly referred to LDS as a "Cult" when discussing Glen Larson and the original Battlestar Galactica.

I started researching it more when defending that position, and then arguing against nominating Romney four years ago. And frankly, yeah, what I see bothers me.

Mormonism bothers me for the same reason Scientology bothers me. That we are such weak creatures that such outright fraud can gain a foothold. L. Ron Hubbard publically announced he was pulling a con. "Why write Science Fiction for a penny a word when you can start a religion and make millions?" He said to his fellow Sci-Fi writers.

Joseph Smith was an con artist who decided that treasure hunting schemes actually required you to find treasure once in a while, but Religion, you can make up any bullshit, and people will not only give you their money, but let you sleep with their daughters.

What a sad commentary on humanity.

I am on a thread called the truth about mormons where you continually put out this concept of Joseph Smith as a con artist. You indicate he is "wrong" or "false" by virtue of your reasoning. And yet, the discipline of logic all works its way back to original premises that are either true or they are not.

We can deal with those based on what we want to believe for the rest of our lives. There is no final arbiter.

I provided some web sites that counter your arguments. I hvae never seen the sites I provided as being very strong in their arguments and, frankly, I don't get mormon apologetics.

You will never prove mormonism just like you will never prove christianity in general. It is all based on faith.

I sometimes sit in Sunday School or Priesthood meeting and get a little annoyed at the "Wow...look at how good we are." attitude that some members have. I don't buy into that either.

We are what we are.

And I thought that was what this thread was about.

There is no doubt in my mnd that the men who lead the church now do so earnestly. They give up titles and treasure to serve in ways that would make most peoples heads spin.

Gordon B. Hinckley was 97 when he passed away. During the time that most people his age are sightseeing, golfing, and taking it easy, he was working long hours to lead the church. He got after the church membes who were overleveraging their houses. He came down hard on spouse and child abuse. He came down hard on gambling. He continued to hold up the same banners that the church has always held up.....mostly around individual responsibility.

What truth is in there ? You can read his own words and see if they ae consistent. It is up to each of us to make thos choices.

But, when it comes to talking about truth...I am always interested to know what the facts are. I recently listened to a podcast where it was stated that 2/3 of the church is innactive. I was stunned. But, I can see that being the case. That would be a statistical truth. If that is the case, then we really only have about 5 million active members of the church. And if that split is proportional to the membership outside the U.S., then there are less than 3 million active membes in the U.S. Those would be facts. That is less than 1% of the population of the U.S.

I always appreciate knowing what things really are.

If you want to talk testimony and conversion and personal behaviour...that is a different topic.

This thread was entitled "The truth about the mormons"

 

[JoeB131]

I am on a thread called the truth about mormons where you continually put out this concept of Joseph Smith as a con artist. You indicate he is "wrong" or "false" by virtue of your reasoning. And yet, the discipline of logic all works its way back to original premises that are either true or they are not.

We can deal with those based on what we want to believe for the rest of our lives. There is no final arbiter.

I provided some web sites that counter your arguments. I hvae never seen the sites I provided as being very strong in their arguments and, frankly, I don't get mormon apologetics.

You will never prove mormonism just like you will never prove christianity in general. It is all based on faith.
This thread was entitled "The truth about the mormons"

Mormonism is false because Smith made claims that he said he knew because he had been chatting with God. We now know, by virtue of science, that all these things are NOT true.

As for faith, Mark Twain had it right when he said, "Faith is believing in things you know ain't so."

I go by what I can prove, what I can test, and what I can measure. Nothing more, nothing less. If you tell me a fantastic story, I look for the holes. That is my nature. It got me more than a few wooden rulers over the knuckles by frustrated lesbians in habits who thought htey could pray away the gay.

Now, if your argument is, "Well, we are all nice people, so please excuse the batshit crazy beliefs" that's fine. Frankly, the Mormons I've met personally or on line aren't the nice ones, I guess.

But you all are trying to foist one of your own on the rest of us as President, and frankly, now would be a good time for some scrutiny.

 

[Unkotare]

But you all are trying to foist one of your own on the rest of us as President, and frankly, now would be a good time for some scrutiny.

Nobody is "foisting" anyone. We are going to have an election, you dumb fuck.

 

[Listening]

Mormonism is false because Smith made claims that he said he knew because he had been chatting with God. We now know, by virtue of science, that all these things are NOT true.

If you mean by virtue of testing....the sites I listed counter any argument that I have heard with regard to so-called "science".

As for faith, Mark Twain had it right when he said, "Faith is believing in things you know ain't so."

Boy that was real scientific.

I go by what I can prove, what I can test, and what I can measure. Nothing more, nothing less. If you tell me a fantastic story, I look for the holes. That is my nature. It got me more than a few wooden rulers over the knuckles by frustrated lesbians in habits who thought htey could pray away the gay.

I don't know what you do, but as a skeptic, scientist and engineer, I am always aware of the possibility of circumstances and facts that I don't have that could be used to explain things. I deal with it all the time. It is really humbling to know how much you don't know.

I would say that to believe nothing beyond your five senses is pretty narrow minded. I am glad the great scientists of the past and the innovators of today don't do the same.

Now, if your argument is, "Well, we are all nice people, so please excuse the batshit crazy beliefs" that's fine. Frankly, the Mormons I've met personally or on line aren't the nice ones, I guess.

Strawman....never made that argument. We are taught to be nice....but free agency rests with each person.

But you all are trying to foist one of your own on the rest of us as President, and frankly, now would be a good time for some scrutiny.

A religious litums test...how wonderful !

Sorry, but while there is a place for Romney at the table, I am afraid the kind of bitterness you carry is what started the KKK (and I'd rather have a harmless Satan worshipper sitting next to me than someone wearing a white hood).

 

[Listening]

But you all are trying to foist one of your own on the rest of us as President, and frankly, now would be a good time for some scrutiny.

Nobody is "foisting" anyone. We are going to have an election, you dumb fuck.

It is good to know that people understand the difference.

Thanks.