Im with Freelancer on this one. And that lady calling was just creepy. I dont like when anyone tries to push anything.

Oh and the telemormons comment was priceless haha



haha I saw that episode! my friend johnny and steve were always quoting that about my ex boss. That was a great episode, then again which south park isnt hilarious:)



Kieran does make a great pt. there, but as far as the information Freelancer has provided regarding his practices and marrying a 14 or 15 year old, that's just wrong. Again I cant be one to judge, but I do personally find that practice odd and wrong. Although I'm sure in some places that isnt seen as bad, and even in oldddd days women were supposed to marry young, but now a days, an older man marrying a girl that young just seems like he's taking advantage of her, I dunno that's just my opinon though

Laura

I've had a similar experience to Brian's. Is there a reason Missionaries always come in pairs other than to strongarm the people they door to door? Anyways, the two guys walked up to the door, and rang the doorbell. Rather than just ignoring them like I normally would, I decided (after noticing they were the same two guys who had come by about two weeks earlier) to ask them not to stop in anymore.

I opened the door, and asked if I could help them. With a wry smile, one of them said, "No, but I think we can help you." He then extended his hand to me, which I shirked off and did not shake. They then asked if I'd like to recieve some "literature" about the Church of Latter Day Saints. I politely told them no, and the other then responded, "are you afraid of your damnation?" This tipped me off. I don't know a single Christian who would DARE say this to a person of Jewish beliefs, and my household is a known Jewish house. I then pointed to the Mezuzah hanging on the doorframe, and asked if he knew what it is. The ignorant b**tard said "A Jewish Cross?" I said it was the Torah, and that some time he should read it, realize that the Jews are God's people, and that he should consider his damnation. I then told him to tell the rest of the LDS Tabernacle to quit baptising members of the Wailing Wall because it pisses me off. I slammed the door and listened to them grumble away.

I never recieved another missionary after that.

haha you and brian are great. yeah some of our families closest friends are jewish, and great people. They even had some family in the holocaust. If i'm not mistaken David used to live in Jerusalem before moving here. It was wrong of them to know that you are of a diff. faith (by seeing the Mezuzah on the doorframe) and still proceed to ask if you are afraid of damnation. See now that's just insulting someone and saying their "belief" is better then yours. That's not right. Anyways I think u handled that the right way at least they never came back kudos yecti

Laura

One of them actually said "are you afraid of your damnation?" The nerve! I would have lost it if that happened to me. I don't know what I would have done, but it wouldn't have been pretty. Admittedly, serving a mission is no walk in the park, though. Going on a mission sounds more like damnation to me than rejecting the Mormon faith. Did you guys know they don't get paid for doing that? In fact, they have to shell out roughly 10,000 dollars of their own money to serve a mission, while the old geezers in Salt Lake City get paid a very handsome salary for sitting around. Unbelievable, isn't it?

All leaders of the church are unpaid.

The Quorum of the Twelve apostles are all retired men who live on the money they earned before their tenure.

That's a little misleading.. Of course all the church employees get paid a nice salary.. I'm almost positive some GAs do too. I'll have to do some more research..

And I don't agree with it either. But that does not give me the right to insult and flame the people, though I sure will speak out against the practice.

Then would you be willing to say that Catholicism is no more true or even less so than Taoism or Hinduism?

And those are invasions of privacy as well. So to me, that sort of religious recruiting is nothing more than spam and should be treated as such and banned along with the rest of spam.



Yeah that's what I'm saying. Maybe she didn't have bad intentions, but there are issues where people need to just keep their noses out of. There are several things people don't want other people to be involved with, even if they have good intentions.



Theres lots of other types of calls that you can get that would be deemed "unharmful" such as obscene ones. This to me is about as the same level as a stalker calling you for information or just to "hear you voice." The call itself isn't really harmful depending on what information you give out, but it is just plain wrong.

I think stuff like this should be banned unless you yourself have expressed interest in getting information.

If atheists started calling around like that I'm sure there'd be hell to raise at that point, but I think it's hypocritical that an organized religion can get away with it. I just think NOBODY should be doing this. They just need to butt-out.

Sorry if it seems like I'm attacking you, don't mean for it to sound like that. I just feel really strongly against people pushing their religion onto you since that's happened twice to me and I think it's BS to do.

That I do

You win.

Yes I would. I feel everyone has a right to believe in whatever they believe, but there comes a pt. when people start trying to shove religion down your throat when you dont want to hear it, and that is when it crosses the line and you are then violating that persons rights to believe something else, or not believe something else.

I'd never never say that since someone is not of my religion that they are going to hell. I have the belief that God forgives all, and I am a strong Catholic, does that mean that I"m die hard Catholic? no. I agree with many things in the Church and disagree with other things. Do I think the Church is always right? No, it was clearly seen that at one pt. the Catholic Church believed the world was flat and it was heresy to say otherwise, only to later be proven wrong.

Although I claim Catholicism as my religion, when it finally comes down to it, the only thing I have strong faith is, in the Lord. I pray for forgiveness of sins, and I do not preach to other people saying that my faith is "correct" or "the best." The only one who knows which was the original religion or the correct religion is God (or Allah or I dont know who, for those who dont believe in God). Regardless there is no way for sure we would ever know.

My belief is God, my religion is Catholicism, I would not and will not ever say someone will go to Hell for believing something else, but I do not agree with forcing your religion upon someone who doesnt want to hear it, or condemning them when you really cant prove your religion is the right one. And I will never agree with someone like a grown man having relations with a young girl, to me that's taking advantage of someone, and not right.[/end rant]

Laura

OK, then, what about the millennium and a half of Catholic doctrine that was just thrown out by the Protestants? Or Apocrypha that they just threw out?

Judaism may not equal Christianity, but does Mormonism equal Christianity? The line between different religions and sects of the same religion is not an easily defined one.

RE: the Revelations "no more after this" bit. Obviously it's referring to itself; it talks about adding prophecy... and the rest of the Bible is not prophecy. It's history (or historical fiction, or just plain fiction, depending on your beliefs). What it's saying is that it doesn't want the prophecy in revelations being altered. At any rate, wouldn't that plague the protestants, who removed the Apocrypha?

Whoah, nevermind what I said earlier. Now Laura wins.

I have a good Mormon friend, really cool and all, but they do piss me off sometimes.

However, I would like the Mormon explanation of the cases of racisim in their institutions o so long ago (1978). For all of you who don't know, up until 1978, the Mormon church did not allow blacks/Afro-Americans into theur churches and schools (BYU, et al.). They only started accepting blacks after the U.S. government got involved, saying that they would shut down the schools and churches for racist practices. The Mormons suddenly got a revelation form god (biiiiiiig coincidence:p) saying that they must open their doors to blacks. Not surprisingly, the number of blacks asking to join the church has been miniscule.

By the way; for those of you who are looking for an "I win" button when dealing with Mormons, there is a very good one. The Mormons have thirteen articles of faith which they believe in. The eleventh article of faith reads, and I quote:



So if they're sticking their noses where they don't belong, simply remind them of their eleventh article of faith. This usually quiets them right away. Sadly, hardly any Mormons I've assoicated with are aware of this article of faith which outlines their beliefs. It is one of the thirteen primary beliefs of a Mormon, yet they show utter disregard and even contempt for it in their recruiting practices. So, anyway, there you go. Total immunity from Mormons. I've never seen one refute being quoted the eleventh article like that.

Nightwind, that is far from accurate. They have always let blacks into their churches; what they refused them was the "priesthood." Simply, this allows an ordained male member to hold leadership positions and it supposedly grants him the ability to use the power of God according to God's will. However, I do agree that it was racist and highly suspect. I'm just saying it's not accurate to say they wouldn't let them into their churches. As far as BYU is concerned, I must admit I don't have the slightest idea whether or not your claim is true. I'll say this, though; it sure as hell wouldn't surprise me.

The thing that really bugs me about that whole fiasco is that they were behind the rest of the world as far as racism. You'd think that a church which supposedly has a prophet would be *ahead* in social issues, not behind.

The only thing I disagree with is this, but it is purely on a personal level. I don't see it as wrong, I see it as an annoyance.

People seem to think I'm advocating the use of telemarketing in religion or whatever. I'm not. I'm working against people simply hating and polarizing something for the sole reason that they don't agree with it or find it inconvenient. That's prejudice.

And my respect for Laura grew.

I guess I made an error - I should have said SOME Mormon churches didn't allow blacks in, some did. I know for a fact this was true, and has been documented. Thanks for the correction, Freelancer True about the preisthood thing though. Oh, and we still haven't recieved an explanation from any of you Mormons out there... Can God simply choose when and when not racism is acceptable?

Some churches didn't let them in the door? Sorry if I'm still a little bit skeptical about that. I just can't see it. Though I would be willing to reconsider if you show me where I can learn more about this happening. As for the response - you won't get one. I've never heard a direct response to that question in the 18 years I was an active Mormon. It is one of the taboo subjects that is always dodged.

ok...

The statement from the National Geographic Society states:
I referred your inquiry to Dr. George Stuart, the Society's staff archaeologist. He told me he knows of no archeological evidence that verifies the history of the early people of the Americas as presented in the Book of Mormon. Although many Mormon sources claim that the Book of Mormon has been substantiated by archeological findings, THIS CLAIM HAS NOT BEEN VERIFIED SCIENTIFICALLY (emphasis added).

The Smithsonian Institute writes, "The Smithsonian Institute has never used the Book of Mormon in any way as a scientific guide. Smithsonian archaeologists see no direct connection between the archeology of the New World and the subject matter of the book."

The document then has seven paragraphs explaining why this is so. But what about the Bible?

The National Geographic Society states:
But archaeologists do indeed find the Bible a valuable reference tool, and have used it many times for geographic relationships, old names, and relative chronologies. On the enclosed list, you will find many articles concerning discoveries verifying events discussed in the Bible (note: more than thirty articles are listed).

The Smithsonian Institute acknowledges:
...much of the Bible, in particular the historical books of the old testament, are as accurate historical documents as any that we have from antiquity and are in fact more accurate than many of the Egyptian, Mesopotamian, or Greek histories. These Biblical works can and are used as are other ancient documents in archeological works.

-----from http://www.dtl.org/cults/article/bible-bm.htm


And also...

http://www.biblestudylessons.com/cgi-bin/gospel_way/mormonism.php

So basically, there is no historical evidence of the book of mormon's validity, yet scientifically, and archaelogically, the bible is used as a historical document, one even better than egyptian scripts.

Anyone care to show how the book of mormon could be verified historically?

Plus the other stuff it said in that second link.

And I"m still looking for proof that it said in the bible "no books after this"...

Oh my... are you sure those were Mormon missionaries that did all of those things? I've known many missionaries, and I can't think of one doing such offensive things. I mean, LDS aren't commies with brain-washed minds... they're just regular people who honestly believe in their faith. As for me, yes, I do believe the things that I've been taught. Also, if you're judging the LDS religion by scientific facts, you are naive... that is completely defeating the purpose of a religion. Also, if there was proof, it wouldn't change most of your minds. To believe in any kind of faith, you must overlook the physical facts and feel/believe that it is real. At the end of the day, LDS doctrine (and any other religion) is a test of believing something that is seemingly contradicted. Besides, if God does exist, that means He is omniscient, meaning He can do anything, and is in control of everything. I don't think most of you get the weight of this statement... He is not bound by the physical laws of this universe. In Heaven, there's no such thing as time or space! I can't comprehend it, but that doesn't mean I won't believe it, nor is it untrue. The key is to feel with your heart, not think with your mind.

Besides, the Church has taught me great morals and values. I don't regret any of it And for the record, Mormons are Christians. If you have any questions, feel free to ask.

Well put, Wolfy. [Whelly too]

And Brian, I have heard of Jehovah's Witnesses doing that sort of thing, but LDS missionaries are specifically instructed not to be that abrasive. Keep in mind that despite the fact that they do their best to represent the church well, they are still 19-21 year old males (generally). They can be immature at times, particularly on days when they feel especially home-sick. Two years away from family is a tough commitment.

I heavily agree with Veger.

No.



He's Whelly. I'm Wolfy.

http://www.answers.org/theology/add_to_scripture.html

I e-mailed a guy and he sent me that link. I found it enlightening (no pun intended...for buddhists...or anything.)

QUOTES:

-Finally, a fallacy of begging the question needs to be avoided. One cannot quote the Book of Mormon to prove the Book of Mormon. If one claims that the Book of Mormon has internal statements saying its message is the same as as the Bible, then one is merely using the contents to prove the whole.


-The Mormon scriptures do not carry the same gospel message as the Bible. There are strict warnings by the Apostle Paul about following a different gospel. Second Corinthians 11:4 says, "For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive another spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted -- you may will put up with it!" In Galatians 1:6-8 he says, "I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed."

I wrote this in a paper last year. (it was a christian class at a christian school...the paper was "show why Christianity can be proven over some major religions" or something (that's not word for word, mind you I'm in a rush right now)

James 1:5 states “If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously without giving fault, and it will be given to him.” Mormons often use this to back up their claim that they must pray to verify the Book of Mormon. Assuming that if you are “sincere,” then God will answer you, is easily disproved. In Romans 3:10-12,

and Ephesians 2:3, it is stated that there is no good in people. God does not look into the hearts of people to find good qualities so he might give them wisdom. Also, wisdom is not the gaining of knowledge, but it is the right use of knowledge in situations. James 1:5 refers to gaining wisdom, not knowledge.

Summed up...
Ask for wisdom, not facts. Ask for the ability to judge, not the truth. Don't "feel" the truth. In my opinion anyway.

And also...



Is that not a form of scientific or empirical study or observation or application of a fact or theory to support information?
Which is...science if I"m not mistaken.

*blinks* I'm confused. What are you referring to in the quote with your last statement?

Nein. Not true.

- Historically, only until recently have Mormons wanted to be Historically, only until recently have Mormons wanted to be called Christians, preferring not to be included with Christian denominations, which Joseph Smith said were, "all wrong ... all their creeds were an admonition in his sight, and that those professors (Christians) were all corrupt" (Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith, 2:18-19).
- The god of the Mormons is not the God of the Bible. To the Mormons, Jesus is the firstborn son of an exalted "man" who BECAME the god of this world. The man-god of Mormonism was made the god of this world because of his good works on another planet somewhere out in the universe. He "earned" godhood, and was thus appointed by a counsel of gods in the heavens to his high position as the god of planet Earth.
- The God of the Bible is not an "exalted man". The God of the Christian Bible is omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient. The Bible says He is the only God and there are no other Gods. HE HAD NO BEGINNING OR END and he is a spirit being and never was a mortal man.
- Brigham Young said, "When the Virgin Mary conceived the Child Jesus ... He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost. And who is His father? He is the first of the human family" (Journal of Discourses, pages 50-51) In the Bible, it is clearly stated that Jesus was the ACTUAL one true son of the ONE AND ONLY God. You must believe this to be a member of the Christian faith.
- Just believing in Jesus' existence will not make you a Christian.

(Most of the above was written by an ordained Christian minister, Pastor Cooper P. Abrams, III.

I was trying to say that Whelly is judging his own religion with semi-science information, referring to God as omniscient, and him not being bound by physical things of the world.
This, though an interesting piece of information, and one that can be taken in or believed as true by faith, can be used as a "proving" piece of information, to "prove" God's lack of physicalness and his ability to control everything. He is using that information to back up that he believes that religion is something that should be felt, not scientifically understood.

Though it is kind of an annoying point, I can see (that is to say, my point sounds like an "but you did it, so why can't I," deal...or I'm stating that MY point is kind of annoying), it's true though. Whelly is using information to show how he thinks religion, or what he believes Mormonism, or hte relationship to God, or the proof of Mormonism's validity (one or all of those), to back up that he believes you need to "feel it in your heart." His very description of God's incomprehensibly complex (by human standards) existance was, in turn, a "fact" to understand how to practice or understand his (or a) religion (or even religion in general).

More specifically, I'm trying to say that I believe you "should" search the knowledge, and "use your mind" instead of feel what is true. I'm also trying to show that even in stating his fact, Whelly used his "mind" in a sense to show it, so using the mind isn't all that bad of a thing.

My first (preceding/other) point, also, addressed specifically, why I don't think you should use your "feeling" to discern your religion.

I think what Veger is saying, is that you should study the foundations of your religion as well as feeling it in your heart, instead of just letting your feelings decide blindly what you believe in.

Or maybe I'm way off.

Dang you for summing it up in one sentence.

Sorry guys, but I've literally spent a few hours for days in a row in front of a computer debating with personal friends on a forumn about stuff like this, because at the time I was learning about it almost daily. I've been trying to lay off of the religion debating lately but this sparked something to make me want to bring it back up.

I'll try to lay off it a bit.

Please don't, Veger. It's worthwhile to hear about the issue from different perspectives. It's also refreshing to hear from someone so enthusiastic about the subject.



I find it interesting that the Mormon Church has revised this doctrine since Brigham Young's time. They now teach that Jesus was in fact conceived by the Holy Ghost. Brigham Young also taught the doctrines of Adam-God and blood atonement, both of which have been abandoned by the LDS religion.

He taught that God the father was literally Adam. He also taught that certain sins (specifically murder and adultery) required the shedding of the sinner's blood to be forgiven of his sins.

What proves the church false is that Brigham Young explicitly states in the Journal of Discourses that he was, in fact, speaking as a prophet in the name of God while teaching these doctrines. Furthermore, he claims that these doctrines are God's everlasting doctrines and will never be changed. Thus, the present-day LDS church is not the same church of Brigham's time. He also teaches that the penalty of interracial marriage is death, according to the word of God, and that this law will also never change.

There is some seriously ****ed up stuff in the Journal of Discourses.

Wow. There are a few things I have to say here. Keep in mind, I have no problem with Mormons or really any religion. People are free to believe what they wish, so long as it doesn't cross the line into hate...etc. (It's all outlined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, for me)

First, the phone call to the younger sister, that was out of line I think. Specifically when dealing with kids, that's not appropriate. I mean, I'm an adult if you want to phone me I can deal with you and I am my own person. I also am not as easily intimidated as a 10-year old would be. There's a difference. Most telemarketers (the ones I have talked to) ask if I am a resident over the age of 18. This is approriate.

Second, physically holding the door open when you asked them to leave is wrong. Infact, after you asked them to leave it was trespassing and if the put any part of their body or anything in their possession into the house, that is B&E (atleast in legal terms it is). Besides that its not approriate. As for children not being able to close the door...THEY SHOULDN'T BE ANSWERING THE DOOR FOR STRANGERS. C'mon people, we all learned this on Seasme Street.

I've really never had these problems with anyone. I can imagine that anyone approaching me would not make a very good case, and my belief system would remained intact. Their free to try, if I'm not busy or anything. But that means I get an equal chance to show them my religion. You have to be fair after all.

I had a pair knock on my door sometime over the summer. Told them I wasn't interested and they left, so I've never had a problem. I have feeling that the people who cross the line aren't doing so maliciously. They are jsut really passionate about what they are doing and feeling they are doing a good thing. That doesn't make it right.

If you just sock him one, do you think you'd get off from any GBH charges? I mean, he is trespassing, violating your privacy without permission.. surely that is worthy of a sharp fist in the face?

pants==bad

we can all agree here.

Umm, probably not. I know that in Canadian Law there is a thing called "reasonable force", and just punching them is not reasonable unless they physically attack you first or you feel you are iminate danger of attack. Now unless the Mormon mafia is knocking at your door, I doubt that they are going to physically harm you.

Okay, hopefully this will not be very long winded, nor overly opinionated. I am a member of the 'mormon' church, but I hope to just lay things out in a very non-confrontational way.

1) Regarding the incident itself: All I can say is that there are stupid people everywhere. As others have stated already, sometimes people are overly pushy. It is not, however the doctrine of the church for it's members to be so. You just get those people who want to shove things down other's throats. They aren't just in our faith, nor just in religion. They are in all walks of life, but for what it's worth, Dash, I apologize.

2) Regarding the attempts to prove the church false: Hey, everyone is welcome to their own opinions, their own visions of right and wrong, and their own facts. My thing is, I'd rather everyone here try to prove their religion right rather than saying 'this is why yours is wrong' -- after all, there may be Massassians looking for faith, and seeing a lot of 'this faith is wrong' (speaking of any faith now) doesn't exactly lead them to the right answer, or at least their right answer.

3) Regarding Mikus' "Mormowned" picture: I know he was just trying to be funny, but it was offensive to me. Nobody else has to think so, and obviously most Massassians don't. That's okay. But I believe that book to be sacred, so it was somthing that bothered me. It's like someone mocking my wife. That's not their wife, so it's no big deal, but she's mine, and I love her.

Now, hopefully we can end all the debating. It never really goes anywhere. If we want to talk about what happened to Dash, that's something I could handle. But a lot of us are buds here, and it's not any fun to be the one being 'mormon bashed'.

So..........Truce?

But Tazz, making fun of other religions is one of the highlights of my visits to Massassi!

I mean, what other religion claims that the Native Americans were jewish?...

sorry couldnt help it.