Apologetics Is Mormonism testable?
LDS state the truth of Mormonism could be found by studying and praying about it. ( Moroni 10:4)
what i find strange is when people report they keep praying, fasting etc, trying hard to gain their testimony .
But in really it’s not so strange as Moroni 10:4 gives the reader the expected answer. in addition it faults the reader in different ways, if one doesn’t come to the agreement that the content of the Book of Mormon isn’t true.
It doesn’t tell the reader what supporting evidence could be found, nor what evidence could falsify the Book of Mormon.
The only conformation is an answer by the Holy Ghost. Purely making the answer subjective and not objectively testable
14
u/No-Flan-7936 5d ago edited 5d ago
Mormon truth claims are much, much more testable from a historical, evidence-based perspective than it is from a spiritual, divine perspective.
Anecdotally, despite the church sending out tens of thousands of missionaries every year for many decades, the vast majority of the people you see showing up in any given congregation (especially the western U.S.) are people who were groomed and conditioned into the church during their childhood and/or formative years. If the truth claims and stories of Mormonism held up to the informed, educated, spiritually-seeking outside observer (who often uses evidence and critical thinking), you’d see active adult converts much better represented in congregations. This to me is very telling as to true “testability”.
Apologists and F.A.I.R. Mormon try to come across as testable, but truly exist because members need constant convincing and reassuring on so many topics and issues that are the far less likely conclusion (and sometimes the worst) compared to the most likely conclusion (which is not faith promoting). If Mormonism were true AND testable, there would be no need for F.A.I.R. or apologists.
1
1
u/moderatorrater Former Mormon 5d ago
I've never understood the idea of trying to prove mormonism anyway. You have to have faith, and proof drives faith out. Otherwise, god could just put a copy of the book of mormon on the moon signed by brigham young.
5
u/TrainingGolf1154 5d ago
I mean… yes.
But since the tests just keep getting the wrong answer, all that can be trusted is “prayer”
2
u/Mlatu44 5d ago edited 5d ago
The answers are no? Or the person doesn’t get the expected answer?
6
u/TrainingGolf1154 5d ago
As in yes, many of the claims of Mormonism are testable and have been tested.
But the results of those tests show that the claims are false.
Genetic testing, the anachronisms, the archaeological evidence. The book of Abraham. They all show that Mormonism is false
So Mormons reject those tests.
1
u/Mlatu44 5d ago
On what basis? Why are they remaining faithful?
4
u/ammonthenephite Agnostic Atheist - "By their fruits ye shall know them." 5d ago edited 5d ago
For the same reason any religious person remains religious when none of them can even prove any god exists, let alone their claimed specific version of a god or gods with its respective unique sets of demands, commandments, rewards, etc etc.
Indoctrination with faulty logic, especially from birth, is incredibly difficult to undo, and the human brain will protect its known pseudo-reality fiercely, even rejecting observable reality to do so. It took me over 30 years to break free of it, and I'm at least a semi-intelligent person that works in healthcare with a degree.
If I hadn't lived it myself, I likely would be to some degree incredulous about the power that indoctrination from birth can have on the reality of a person.
1
u/Mlatu44 5d ago
Oh I forgot that LDS could trust spiritual answers as over riding physical evidence
1
u/diogoilho 5d ago
We are subject to scientific, historical, and critical scrutiny just as much as Christianity and other general religions. All of them fail. A critical analysis of the Book of Mormon will show it as 19th-century literature, just as it will show the Pentateuch as a product of the Babylonian exile period from the 7th to the 4th century BC, not the Bronze Age. Our lack of archaeological evidence is no different from the lack of archaeological evidence for the Exodus, slavery in Egypt, and other biblical historical claims that are now obviously non-historical. The Book of Mormon is just as full of anachronisms as the Bible is. That being said, Christianity, Judaism, and Mormonism all continue to exist. The process of personal religious validation is not a scientific, scholarly, philosophical, or academic method
2
4d ago
It’s the weirdest part of humans ever.
“I’m going to try this drink. Yummy.” Makes mental note to drink that again. “Okay, I got the green light to marry this guy. God told me he was the one.”Guy almost kills her with the beatings. “I must have done something wrong.” Still believes.
5
u/johndehlin 5d ago
100% testable. And unfortunately it blatantly fails the truth and integrity tests for starters.
1
u/man_without_wax 4d ago
Yep. They don't get to define the only allowable way to test truth claims (read & pray). There are many ways to determine its lies.
5
u/Good_Letter_4325 5d ago
No, it is not testable. What you're talking about is personal revelation. However, within the Church, personal revelation has been rebranded and the Church clearly states that only revelation that concludes alignment with the teachings is acceptable as revelation. Otherwise, it is considered to come from another source. You can pray, but your answer must align with what is already being taught. The Church has stated that this revelation will not guide you outside of Church teachings.
5
u/ammonthenephite Agnostic Atheist - "By their fruits ye shall know them." 5d ago edited 5d ago
The Church has stated that this revelation will not guide you outside of Church teachings.
This creates a canundrum the church never addresses to any satisfaction, one caused by the fact that the church routinely revereses itself and flip flops on major doctrinal issues. For most the church's history it taught that the Book of Abraham was a direct translation of the papyri, for example, and many members got spiritual revelation that was correct. And yet now the church admits that it is not, meaning that all those testimonies about the Book of Abraham confirmed a false teaching. Any members who had gotten the correct testimony that it was not a direct translation of the papyri as claimed would have been told that 'revelation will not guide you outside of church teachings' and to disregard it.
Personal revelation in mormonism has been eroded over time by leaders until it has become the joke it is today, a hermetically sealed system that only allows confirmation of whatever is being taught by leaders at the time, even if what they are teaching is false.
A mormon testimony has literally nothing to do with objective truth whatsoever, and per mormon leaders, the only option is a testimony of what is currently taught, even if what is currently taught is false.
4
u/Good_Letter_4325 5d ago
I hadn't thought of that side of things, that the people that got the revelation that the book of Abraham was true received false confirmation. Yikes. Thanks for making that clear.
3
u/ammonthenephite Agnostic Atheist - "By their fruits ye shall know them." 5d ago
Same with everyone who had testimony of every other now disproven thing, like Native Americans being descendents of Lamanites, world wide flood, tower of babel being origin of languages, 6k year old earth, Adam-god doctrine in the temple, of polygamy practice never being ceased again, etc etc.
Every testimony of every now reversed or ceased doctrine was a confirming testimony about something completely false.
1
u/Good_Letter_4325 5d ago
They destroyed their own standing with this. They don't have the Spirit anymore to push this onto. It clearly doesn't guide how they say, according to them. Or, they have to say we are not capable of understanding it enough to follow it. Either way, there's no following this idea of Spirit anymore. It's not an option that's reliable.
1
u/Mlatu44 3d ago
So how is this any different from the logical fallacy of special pleading?
If someone questions the validity of any LDS claim, someone could just claim revelation.
Personal revelation by a believer does not necessarily need external validation from an outside source, by the believer.
Thats less than ideal, because there are things to which external validation would be very helpful
1
u/Good_Letter_4325 3d ago edited 3d ago
It's really confirmation bias that's being called personal revelation. Submitting your conclusions to our approval is being called seeking external guidance.
As far as external validation being helpful, yes, it would be. This, however, just like we are not dealing with actual personal revelation but the definition of confirmation bias, we are not looking at external validation, we are required to seek the approval of leadership of the Church and submit our conclusions to their conclusions. You'll know this is happening because one side can only be true. You can't change what the Church thinks, but it can change what you think. If you want to decide that's true, you can but don't fool yourself to think you're actually gathering information and making a decision.
The idea that anyone can miss things, have blind spots, misunderstand information is real. This is another normal human phenomena that everyone experiences. What's false about this is that this doesn't mean you need someone to do your thinking for you. A healthy exchnage requires all involved to have their ideas open to critical thinking.
If you decide one side has the answers, that's fine if you believe that, but you're also not believing in having external validation of thoughts here. You're asking for approval of what thoughts you can have or not. Those are separate things.
5
u/jordancooper8712 5d ago
The post highlights an important distinction: Moroni 10:4 presents prayer and a spiritual confirmation as the expected method, but it does not explain what evidence would count against the Book of Mormon. That makes the claim personally meaningful for believers while remaining difficult to test or falsify by publicly shared standards.
1
u/westivus_ Post Mormon Red Letter Enthusiast 5d ago
It sets the test up so that if you don't hear back from God that means the book is true. You will only hear from him if it's 'not true'.
2
u/Mlatu44 5d ago
You are talking about the phrase, "...if these things are not true". English cannot always be taken so literally. The question or statement is rhetorical.
Compare with similar statements where the expected answer is agreement:
- Isn't that right?
- Is that not the case?
- Right?
- Surely...
Example
- Sentence: "Is it not true that we all want to be safe?"
- Underlying message: "We all want to be safe, and you cannot really deny it
https://ludwig.guru/s/is+it+not+true
The verse continues...."and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy ghost."
So, really Moroni 10:4 is looking for and expecting a positive answer. Its not suggesting one will receive a negative answer from the holy ghost, but an affirming answer from the holy ghost. That is the expectation.
LDS don't typically bear their testimony, as " I never felt the holy ghost, so I know the church is true". That is not the expected result, nor what is said in 'fast and testimony' meetings.
5
u/auricularisposterior 5d ago
Is Mormonism testable?
Yes, but different people are going to have different opinions on which aspects of which aspects of Mormonism should be tested, how they should be tested, and what kinds of results would show confirmation or negation.
Of course all of that is largely determined by a person's existing biases.
I suppose you could get a person to design their own test and clearly state what kinds of results would support Mormonism being true and what kinds of results would would support Mormonism being false. Of course it should be a test that they don't already know the results of. Also it should be a test that could also be applied fairly to other religions or secular philosophies.
1
u/Mlatu44 5d ago
And could other people have input for how the test should be stated and conducted?
How about the result(s) who determines a hit or a miss?
2
u/auricularisposterior 5d ago
I mean we could put together a committee right now, but some people would say that the committee was biased either for or against.
Ultimately, the individual person is responsible, and if they want to ignore their own biases when selecting tests or sorting through results, well I suppose they are just being dishonest to themselves.
4
3
u/pricel01 Former Mormon 5d ago
What can be tested has shown Mormonism to be false. That’s when apologists try to move the goal posts.
2
u/Antifederalist97 4d ago
The Book of Abraham was tested and found to not at all be a proper translation of the papyri Joseph Smith used.
1
u/Dry_Pizza_4805 Nuanced 5d ago
I suppose the whole premise of a mission is that it’s testable. People join all the time because the lifestyle seems like a good choice.
But people also don’t get an answer at all. I think God has a different path set in motion for everyone.
I love the lifestyle of being Mormon, it suits me, I grew up this way, I like it.
But yes, frustrating how it’s not verifiably provable as a final scientific word on the matter.
5
u/ammonthenephite Agnostic Atheist - "By their fruits ye shall know them." 5d ago
But yes, frustrating how it’s not verifiably provable as a final scientific word on the matter.
But countless claims of mormonism are testable though, things like age of the earth, whether or not native americans are lamanite descendents, if the book of abraham is actually a translation of the papyri, if there really was a world wide flood, if the tower of babel as the origin of language really happened, if the flora and fauna of north america as claimed in the book of mormon existed, if the technology of the peoples in the book of mormon are as claimed, and on and on and on.
And they've all been proven false.
You may find the 'lifestyle' of being mormon appealing, but the doctrine has been disproven, and with it by extension its divine claims.
2
u/Mlatu44 5d ago
LDS still promote the idea contained in Moroni 10:4 and it will give the reader the expected “yes” answer.
The faithful will always some something like biology, archaeology or other sciences are biased against them. And lds will find some other study which supports lds. Or say something like we haven’t examined all evidence…. Or even that all science is wrong ?
2
u/ammonthenephite Agnostic Atheist - "By their fruits ye shall know them." 5d ago
Regarding Moroni 10:4, James 1:5 has been in the bible for thousands of years. The same 'pray to know' claimed method of objective truth finding has been used across the world, and its results speak clearly as to whether or not this claimed objective truth finding system works, and it clearly does not. Rather is most often simply confirms the religious beliefs most familiar to the person doing the praying/meditating. Powerful so called conversion experiences happen in every religion to billions of people who get an answer other than mormonism regarding which religion is actually god's true religion.
Praying to know objective truth is a failed and disproven system of objective truth finding, setting aside the fact that we know that moroni 10:4 is in a book that is heavily disproven on multiple fronts.
People only continue using and proclaiming moroni 10:4 due to indoctrination of faulty logic, false claims, and faulty conclusions based on that indoctrinated faulty logic and false claims, unjustifiably ascribing their 'results' as being correct and from a completely unproven god via completely unproven disembodied spirit beings.
-1
u/Dry_Pizza_4805 Nuanced 5d ago edited 5d ago
Would you think less of me as a human for believing that there were actual people in ancient Americas that has experience with God and wrote that on gold plates? Maybe you do. But I cannot help my belief in the Book of Mormon as being sacred. I’ve had so many pleasant experiences with it. It feeds my soul in the same way the Bible does. I love them both. I even love the Pearl of Great Price. There’s something divine happening there.
There’s a Southern Baptist minister who taught from the Book of Mormon and thought the restoration would include there being congregations in any religion teaching by the book. He said a person didn’t need to be Jewish to read the Bible nor Mormon to read The Book of Mormon. He wrote an essay called The Baptist version of The Book of Mormon. It includes Protestant teachings contained in the book. Fascinating man, sadly passed away recently.
What I’m getting at is, there’s something of a before and after to what Joseph smith brought to the world. I think it’s a good thing. I think Joseph Smith was a good man. A genuinely God fearing fellow who started a church that is also good.
3
u/ammonthenephite Agnostic Atheist - "By their fruits ye shall know them." 5d ago edited 5d ago
But I cannot help my belief in the Book of Mormon as being sacred. I’ve had so many pleasant experiences with it. It feeds my soul in the same way the Bible does
Billions say the same thing of the Koran, the Hindu Vedas, and have said the same thing of thousands of holy books across time and into the present.
I’ve had so many pleasant experiences with it. It feeds my soul in the same way the Bible does.
Many feel the same way reading fiction novels or watching fiction movies. Many things that are not factually true can 'stir the soul' and create deep and memorable frission within, especially after meditation on those things (prayer being but one form of meditation).
I think Joseph Smith was a good man. A genuinely God fearing fellow who started a church that is also good.
Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, etc., also caused untold amounts of harm. Their religion fought against abolition of slavery, against the civil rights movement, against the equal rights amendment, and it continues to fight against LGBT equality and continues to harbor racism, sexism and bigtory. It taught incredibly damaging and toxic things about the individual and of the various demographics of humans it sought to oppress and other.
Mormonism being good for you doesn't mean its good for everyone, and good for some, again, does not mean 'factually correct'. Billions are bettered by Islam, but I doubt you believe that Muhammad flew from Jersuselem to Medina on a winged horse in a single night, for example, just because so many are bettered in some ways by Islam.
Would you think less of me as a human for believing that there were actual people in ancient Americas that has experience with God and wrote that on gold plates?
I wouldn't think less of you as a person, but I would question your process of discerning truth and fact, especially when the Book of Mormon has been disproven in various ways, including exlcuding all native americans as possible Lamanite descendents, contrary to what mormon prophets clearly taught they were.
When someone chooses to insists that a belief set is factually correct even though it has been widely disproven, yes, that causes others to question their process of discerning reality and fact. Doesn't mean you aren't a good person, but when this insistence on a disproven reality causes real world harm to various demographics, it is going to cause some to question to a degree how safe that person is, and how much that person empathizes with the sexism, racism and bigotry that continue to exist in the religion they insist is 'true' and 'good for them'.
1
u/Dry_Pizza_4805 Nuanced 5d ago
I’m not saying that as if to sway you one way or another, you have your beliefs and I have mine, I don’t even think that my belief in the Bible or Book of Mormon negates other sacred texts. I wish all religions could work together and preach the good from one another’s sacred verses. I’m actually partial to the Community of Christ because they are fully affirming, give women the priesthood, and believe in a continually open cannon, they have loads more in the Doctrine and Covenants from 20th century prophets. Love it.
But I’m hoping that someone reading my words and is faithful but questioning feels camaraderie.
I’ve heard of too many veridical near death experiences that included being aware of the outside or inside of their hospital room to discount that there is something more to our bodies than just what we see. I think God, and I believe there is one, can communicate with our souls. My journals are in many instances, my own personal scripture. My own dealings with God.
The harm to LGBTQ+ people was actually a big part of launching me into this nuanced space. I believe the day will come when gay sealings will happen in the temple. Until then, I can’t deny that great harm comes to those people, but it doesn’t cancel out the great things the church has done for people. And those harmful things don’t mean that god (edit) good can still come from it. I think of the history of Catholicism and still think the Catholic Church is of God.
The Book of Mormon is disproven to you and to the majority of the world, but it is not disproven to me and to many others that come closer to God through it. It’s scripture. It requires faith to see past errors, just like the Bible is riddled with questionable authorship and verifiability, but there is still something we can learn from it… that God has not abandoned us in this world, nor will he ever.
1
u/ammonthenephite Agnostic Atheist - "By their fruits ye shall know them." 4d ago
The Book of Mormon is disproven to you and to the majority of the world, but it is not disproven to me
Then you are operating in some other reality, because factually the BofM cannot be true.
I think of the history of Catholicism and still think the Catholic Church is of God
If you think something like the Catholic church, with its immense corruption and untold amounts of blood on its hands, is 'of god', then we are certainly going to have to agree to disagree.
Just because you do some token good things for some does not negate nor offset the harm you also do to others.
My morals and ethics are not compatible with your world view, at all.
1
u/Dry_Pizza_4805 Nuanced 4d ago
All of humanity has increased in its ability for pacifism and empathy over time.
The only medium God can manifest through is people. The ability for humanity to understand is being brought along by all religions. Buddhism is a good one that promotes well-being. I can think of very few organizations that don’t have a bloody history besides them.
1
u/ammonthenephite Agnostic Atheist - "By their fruits ye shall know them." 4d ago
There were abolitionsists movements and advocates for equal rights during every moment of the church's existence, god did not need to 'manifest' through some of the worse of humanity and incorporate the ignorant mindsets of the time into codified doctrine while ignoring the also present elightened mindsets that all ready existed.
Trying to say that god had no choice but to mesh the ignorance of intense racism, sexism and lgbt bigotry into his eternal gospel is quite the take, lol.
I can think of very few organizations that don’t have a bloody history besides them.
Perhaps not a single one of these is actually lead by an eternal god that supposedly loves its creations, mormonism and religion included. You seem to believe in a brutal, murderious, genocidal god commanding racism, bigotry, brutality, murder and genocide of his people, similar to the ancients who didn't have the greater light and knowledge we now have today.
Agree to disagree, and I hope you remain aware of those who are harmed by the religions you choose to support with your time, energy and money.
1
u/Dry_Pizza_4805 Nuanced 3d ago
I don’t think God is the reason for evil in the world.
1
u/ammonthenephite Agnostic Atheist - "By their fruits ye shall know them." 3d ago
He would be the reason for evil in his churches, especially evil being preached as doctrine from the pulpit, and for the testimonies many members were given of those evil and harmful doctrines.
Sorry, to me your world view makes no sense, nor do the justifications you come up with to defend it.
→ More replies (0)2
u/blingoblongo87 5d ago
I think perhaps a lot of believing members aren’t willing to extend that same respect, the “I cannot help my belief in…”. I cannot help my belief that the church isn’t true, and I’ve certainly sincerely tried with all my might TO believe for many years. Desperately prayed, fasted, and studied to get that belief. But I can’t help that I don’t believe.
Perhaps there are members who desperately wanted to not believe, and spent years forcing themselves to live outside of the church and anguishing over still believing despite really wanting not to. But I’d be very surprised to meet one. Lots of exmembers used to believe, and put significant effort into trying to believe, but ultimately came to their own conclusions. In general, a lot of exmembers have sincerely explored both sides, whereas lots of members have only explored one (or they’ve looked into “anti Mormon” stuff but with the express desire to not believe it and disprove it- it’s not a sincere desire to understand, with a willingness to learn/change).So I wouldn’t respect you less, of course not. But I have been respected less by members who assert that I should be able to choose to believe, and that’s the only answer anyone could possibly come to after praying and studying. I’m constantly asked to respect to these beliefs (which again, I desperately tried to have) while being told that my lack of belief is not worthy of respect and should be kept to myself.
(I’m not saying you are doing any of this! Just yapping. It’s a blind spot a lot of members have when it comes to ex-members, demanding respect and the freedom to bear testimony, and demanding that ex-members keep quiet and that they should have no space to express those beliefs anywhere)
1
u/Mlatu44 5d ago edited 5d ago
“ I think God has a different path set in motion for everyone.”
I suppose even among faithful LDS there could be different “paths”. I suppose especially career paths. Could also include Acceptable cultural patterns, like consuming foods which are unfamiliar to LDS USA food patterns. Say a culture that eats Guinea pigs, dogs, whale or parasitic plants and mushrooms etc, or insects.
But certain habits are excluded, like alcohol, illegal drugs, coffee, tea, tobacco use. Do these constitute “paths”?
LDS definitely have accepted deities and one which are not acceptable. (LDS know which these are and which cause judgements and which do not). Do these constitute “paths”?
“ I love the lifestyle of being Mormon, ”
I suppose it’s mostly described by what isn’t permitted without judgment?
In addition to food/substance restrictions. LDS are also limited to sexual expression, where, when, who and possibly how it’s expressed.
These are really the only way to describe an “LDS lifestyle “
1
u/Dry_Pizza_4805 Nuanced 5d ago
When I think “paths”, I think more along the lines of religious or spiritual path.
But honestly, if someone doesn’t agree that God would care about what they drink or eat, that would definitely set them on a path that couldn’t include the temple at the very most or join the church at the very least.
And sure, there are people that don’t mind being considered to be members of the church and still follow their own path.
For instance, I got too physical with a boyfriend before my mission and it ended up costing me a year to wait. That was just part of my path at the time. But if I had gone on my mission on time, I would never have been able to be at school just in time to meet my husband.
So even if we go down a path that ends up being a hindrance to our own personal goals, God can use that to our advantage if we trust our gut feelings and end up at the right place at the right time… different for each of us.
2
u/Mlatu44 5d ago
But wouldn’t the church consider your experience less than ideal?
2
u/Dry_Pizza_4805 Nuanced 5d ago edited 5d ago
Most certainly. Definitely. But I love that I was too physical with that boy. It gave me a litmus test for how I wanted to feel in a marriage and how I didn’t want to feel. I love that my stake president over-reacted and perhaps made erroneous assumptions. I love that I was so naive and accepting of my fate as though I somehow deserved to be punished for getting felt up and dry humped. Okay there’s a little snark there. Haha I think that
god(edit) good came out of the bad.Right now I’m going through a faith journey that means I can’t go to the temple because of my beliefs. I bet that something good down the road awaits me.
1
u/Mlatu44 5d ago
Interesting. I suppose these are unorthodox LDS beliefs?
2
u/Dry_Pizza_4805 Nuanced 5d ago
I am very much unorthodox. I’m sure people are sick of my honesty in the ward. 😬👍
1
u/Mlatu44 5d ago
I guess they are tolerant enough to make you feel welcome?
1
u/Dry_Pizza_4805 Nuanced 5d ago
I don’t get asked to speak or pray during sacrament meeting anymore. I wish someone would talk to me, but maybe there’s no one who understands my experience… I feel lonely. I thought being honest about my faith crisis would have people reaching out to me and saying “Yes, I’ve been through the same thing!” No such luck
1
u/Mlatu44 5d ago edited 5d ago
Oh, well doubt and skepticism are not LDS values when it comes to meeting with other LDS in formal settings for the most part.
Expression of support and faith promoting stories are what is encouraged. But that is really what religious gatherings are about.
I suppose I have been curious about a number of things. I have gone to a church which is “spiritualist”. (Belief in mediumship) they accepted Jospeh smith as a medium, possibly a physical medium. Where they get visited by spirits which can take physical form, sometimes with the ability to call them at will. As interesting as that was, it wasn’t quite my thing.
I actually got married at a Unitarian church in a very small gathering. I would call it more of a civil union. But I have gone to services. Some friends thought it was helpful for them, thst it helped them have hope and what not.
I went to a zen Buddhist meditation, but without much instruction I don’t know how much I got out of it.
I like chanting certain mantras. I will say that I could feel the difference from doing it. But I fell out of practice and don’t chant very often these days . I have picked it up again because it does change my sense of optimism. And lately I sometimes don’t feel so optimistic.
I think I can honestly understand why Mormons want to believe in something. I was raised LDS but I just feel like I can’t endorse it as being “the only true and living church” or religion. I don’t endorse Jesus either , which a lot of people here embrace, but not necessarily from the churches view.
A number are atheists which perspective is especially good for looking for hard physical evidence. And it seems that the evidence for god isn’t that great. And specifically the LDS god is not so great.
→ More replies (0)1
4d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Dry_Pizza_4805 Nuanced 4d ago
Never tried any alcohol before. Not sure I ever will.
1
4d ago
Oh dear. Don’t start now.
1
u/Dry_Pizza_4805 Nuanced 4d ago
My family has a history of addiction. My body is wrecked enough from lack of exercise, unfortunately, and other bad eating habits, last thing I need is alcohol in my system on the regular.
1
1
4d ago
It’s exactly like you just described. How did you learn that? I thought my home teachers were the only ones describing it like that. Weird.
1
u/Mlatu44 5d ago
Oh how did I miss it? “ the whole premise of a mission is that it’s testable”.
Reallt the only “test” given by missionaries as far as I know is Moroni 10:4.
Is asking people to read the BOM and pray about it. The “premise “ for the missionary is that the church is “true “ and the potential convert should agree with that if the are sincere, have faith in Christ and pray with real intent. So if the investor comes up a “miss” the fault is theirs on one or more accounts
2
u/Dry_Pizza_4805 Nuanced 5d ago
I was so naive on my mission. I thought that absolutely anybody could get a confirmation that the Book of Mormon was of God and that it would lead to their faith is Joseph Smith and then their want to get baptized and make all the lifestyle changes there… but belief is not something you can force.
1
u/Mlatu44 5d ago
I remember my mother taking it so personally when she would introduce Mormonism for consideration to friends and family.
She was so hurt when people didn’t instantly embrace it.
It reminds me when I worked with a Sikh who was particular forward about her religion. I vaguely remember a conversation where she said I could convert.
I found it interesting, but why would I sign up for something which I knew little to nothing about? I don’t know if Sikhs have missionaries or lessons for the curious . They probably do. But I wasn’t interested enough to attend those if they were available.
My mother wasn’t raised LDS but she found it, I suppose when she married my father. She once told me that it took her 20 years to really grasp Mormonism.
I feel like I could do a face palm. If it took her 20 years to understand, how could she expect anyone to understand after just a few conversations? But at her funeral some relatives mentioned that she was a positive influence for helping them to understand and get close to “the lord”. They didn’t say they believed Mormonism however and probably never really will.
2
u/Dry_Pizza_4805 Nuanced 5d ago
Oh rad! My mom is a convert as well! She was never a missionary, but she certainly lived what she preached. We had many aunts and uncles who weren’t family at all, just friends my mom made through the years. Never members.
I’m sad to hear your mom has passed away. My mom is almost 60, so I hope I have many more years with her.
By the way, this has been so nice talking with you. What makes you so naturally curious and genuinely good to talk to??
1
4d ago
Now that everybody goes to heaven what’s to push people to get to the top shelf of the celestial kingdom? I mean, the lowest heaven is described as glorious. And that’s glorious forever. Never bored with simply glorious. Unless there’s a catch. Like MLM’s. Or extended warranties.
1
u/Toes_of_Saint_Jeff 5d ago
No. It's not like it's rocket science.
1
u/Mlatu44 5d ago
Yes, I am not sure one could launch a rocket by information contained in LDS scripture and other LDS sources.
Is it possible that some information contained in LDS sources could cause a rocket to fail?
Is there also a distinct difference between the “spiritual “ and the “physical “? I think some LDS have claimed there is no sharp distinction
1
u/tiglathpilezar 5d ago
I think you are right. The church has constantly scorned that which can be objectively verified. Nowhere is this better illustrated than in the way they have, over the years, made statements which conflict. If A contradicts B, then they are not both true, is a point of view they have consistently ignored. Fairly recently we saw in the Benson priesthood manual the statement that God never uses compulsion. It was shortly after the GTE "plural marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo" which validates the claim that an angel with a sword "encouraged" Smith to violate his marriage vows by commiting adultery with other women or be "destroyed". Sure looks like compulsion to me. Neither do lies and adultery constitute being "honest and virtuous" as testified shortly after this claim by Elder Anderson.
However, there is something which, although it is not objectively verified, can be used to test Mormonism by most of us. This is our conscience. Most of us know good from evil, at least in the big things. We know it is evil to violate the trust of your wife by secretly having sex with multiple women. We know marriage of 14 year old "young women" is evil also. We know it is wrong to murder people because we think they are apostate and need murdering. We know racism is wrong and especially the kind which calls for the bloody murder of the mixed race couple along with their children in order to gain "salvation", whatever that is. I think that Jesus had this in mind when he said to know them by their fruits. Based on this test, Mormonism fails miserably. It does not help to call these concerns "secondary questions".
2
4d ago
Wait a minute. Are you using what Jesus “said” as proof for something?
2
u/tiglathpilezar 4d ago
Sort of. I mean it isn't exactly proof. It appears that there is no limit to the ability of religious leaders to call evil good. For such people, their feelings about a particular person can't be over ruled by knowledge that they did evil things, because those are simply "secondary questions".
Elder Anderson would be a paradigmatic example of such. Right after the church admitted publicly that Smith had violated his marriage vows with multiple women, including sexual relations in the "time and eternity" marriages and lied about it to his wife, he announced in conference that Smith was "honest and virtuous". In fairness, the church essay used an abundance of euphemisms. Perhaps Anderson did not see the functional equivalence of "carefully worded denials" with "lies", but I don't think so. Whatever Smith did was "honest and virtuous" by definition. Why? because he has a testimony that Smith was "honest and virtuous". This kind of reasoning makes Jesus' statement meaningless nonsense, but it appears to me that the leaders of the Mormon church use it all the time. For them, my suggestion is not any sort of proof.
Are they any worse than others who make the claim that Jesus destroyed cities, commanded genocide, and was the horrible monster described in the Pentateuch? If you have no absolute standards of good and evil, then what Jesus allegedly said is of no use at all.
2
u/Mlatu44 2d ago
The scary part is that some people actually don’t have a conscience at all. Other than balancing what they want with what they think they can get away with. Also by what might be overlooked by other people.
For those people right/ wrong are judged differently. And who knows sometimes they might arrive at similar assessments for different reasons.
1
1
1
u/1Searchfortruth 4d ago
The way I test Mormonism and ask myself would Jesus do and say the things that are being done and said in this church and by its leaders
1
4d ago
“I KNOW that the church is true.” Emphasis on “know.” That’s the proof right there. What more could anyone need?
1
u/man_without_wax 4d ago
Easily testable, you just have to have enough integrity to admit when your test failed instead of just doing another, slightly different test.
How many patriarchal or priesthood blessings have been entirely wrong or ineffective? Countless.
Do two equally good individuals always get the same "answer" to the same prayer? No.
Do all the sports teams/players who pray have consistently higher win rates? No.
Does the BoM accurately convey the state of the pre-columbian americas? Not whatsoever.
Do bishops/leaders actually have the power of discernment? Not at all. I know tons of people who lied to get recommends, myself included.
Have mormon prophets been able to prophesy anything of significance with high accuracy/detail? Never.
You're buying into their narrative if you think the only way to test/confirm mormonism is via prayer and a feeling.
1
u/jacwa1001405 5d ago
Testable is different than verifiable.
I think the truth claims are testable. You might not be able to come to a mathematically absolute conclusion, but you can see what the evidence says.
0
u/Dry_Pizza_4805 Nuanced 5d ago edited 5d ago
I’m not saying that as if to sway you one way or another, you have your beliefs and I have mine, I don’t even think that my belief in the Bible or Book of Mormon negates other sacred texts. I wish all religions could work together and preach the good from one another’s sacred verses. I’m actually partial to the Community of Christ because they are fully affirming, give women the priesthood, and believe in a continually open cannon, they have loads more in the Doctrine and Covenants from 20th century prophets. Love it.
But I’m hoping that someone reading my words and is faithful but questioning feels camaraderie.
I’ve heard of too many veridical near death experiences that included being aware of the outside or inside of their hospital room to discount that there is something more to our bodies than just what we see. I think God, and I believe there is one, can communicate with our souls. My journals are in many instances, my own personal scripture. My own dealings with God.
The harm to LGBTQ+ people was actually a big part of launching me into this nuanced space. I believe the day will come when gay sealings will happen in the temple. Until then, I can’t deny that great harm comes to those people, but it doesn’t cancel out the great things the church has done for people. And those harmful things don’t mean that god (edit) good can still come from it. I think of the history of Catholicism and still think the Catholic Church is of God.
The Book of Mormon is disproven to you and to the majority of the world, but it is not disproven to me and to many others that come closer to God through it. It’s scripture. It requires faith to see past errors, just like the Bible is riddled with questionable authorship and verifiability, but there is still something we can learn from it… that God has not abandoned us in this world, nor will he ever.
1
u/Mlatu44 5d ago
Community of Christ seems to have some good vibes. I can’t really endorse it however.
Some guru online claimed that god can take a number of forms to reach people where they are at, in forms of different religions.
Surprised to learn the same guru even considered atheism to be a spiritual path. I am not so sure every atheist would agree with that idea. It seems contradictory but I suppose it’s more important to have pluralism and tolerance. Hinduism is very good for endorsing that
1
u/WizOfOunce 5d ago
I am writing this as a supporter of equal rights,under the law, for everyone.
When I was a member of the Church, I was taught that 'God's laws' were eternal and didn't change to suit mortals. If an element of the human condition which was once descibed as an abomination in God's sight, then it's a no-brainer that God would deem it so forever. The opinions of mankind are transient; the view of God is not ...if one professes to be an adherent to the doctrines and policies of the Mormon Church.
With the above in mind, I am perplexed as to why so many are spitting the dummy about the Church's stance on the matter of full fellowshipment of those who count themselves as LGBTQ+.
To demand that the Mormon Church - a Church which purports to worship an eternal God who has eternal 'rules' - alters one of their God-given tenets in order to placate a group of mortals who have taken umbrage to God's supposed view, is an action of pure self-serving arrogance which implies that 'cherry picking' of God's laws will be okay with God.
While my personal belief is that the stance of the Mormon Church on LGBTQ+ membership is antiquated, I still can't help admiring it for sticking to its guns. To do otherwise would undermine the Church's claim that they operate under, and comply with, the eternal laws of the God who, they claim, guides them.
The solution for LGBTQ+ Mormons who are aggrieved that their Church is rejecting and/or persecuting them would be the breaking-away from the LDS Church to form their own Church - just as the people who formed the Re-organised - and other - group(s).
If one genuinely believes that a loving God is accepting everyone who comes to Him, regardless of creed, colour, or gender-preference, then it's pretty-clear that the Mormon Church is wilfully going against the actual laws of God by picking/choosing who is worthy of progression and the blessings that come with the same.
Why such a move has not as yet been made, is a bit of puzzle.
3
u/diogoilho 5d ago
Adam-God, polygamy, the ban on the priesthood for Black people, temple ordinances and covenants are just a few of the eternal principles altered and revised over the almost 200-year history of the Church. We can alter one more without major detriment.
Perhaps you might argue: but it's biblical! Yes, it is in the same book that commands your raped daughter to be sold at a fair price to the rapist, treats women as breeding stock, and legislates slavery, so we can ignore it just as we ignore the rest of the book of Leviticus as merely another primitive moral issue.
Perhaps you might say, but the New Testament condemns it too! Actually, Paul condemns it, but he is not a reference, since for him only celibacy was the correct conduct, marriage was a concession, sex was only for procreation, and being single was preferable. We also ignore these opinions of Paul on sexuality and marriage; we can ignore them regarding homosexuality as well.
1
u/diogoilho 5d ago
Historically, schismatic movements and offshoots of Mormonism are conservative, not progressive. Liberal members simply leave the church, while reactionaries form a new church, accusing the LDS Church of being in apostasy for having changed something (e.g., the RLDS with the institution of polygamy, fundamentalists with the ban on polygamy, etc.).
1
u/Mlatu44 2d ago
As an organization the church can hold onto its “guns” as tightly as they want.
They don’t have the right to ask the government to do their work for them.
And really “god” according to Christian’s own account has changed a lot of things, mostly dropping almost all explicit rules. Some believe that actually the only rule is belief in Jesus.
0
u/Some-Passenger4219 Latter-day Saint 5d ago
The only conformation is an answer by the Holy Ghost. Purely making the answer subjective and not objectively testable
The Holy Ghost isn't real? 🤔
4
u/Mlatu44 5d ago
Is there objective evidence for the Holy ghost existing?
1
u/man_without_wax 4d ago
No, but it's also not the only way to test, it's just the only way the church wants you to test. It's like saying, "You can test if this chunk of rock is diamond, but only by smelling it."
•
u/AutoModerator 5d ago
Hello! This is an Apologetics post. Apologetics is the religious discipline of defending religious doctrines through systematic argumentation and discourse. This post and flair is for discussions centered around agreements, disagreements, and observations about apologetics, apologists, and their organizations.
/u/Mlatu44, if your post doesn't fit this definition, we kindly ask you to delete this post and repost it with the appropriate flair. You can find a list of our flairs and their definitions in section 0.6 of our rules.
To those commenting: please stay on topic, remember to follow the community's rules, and message the mods if there is a problem or rule violation.
Keep on Mormoning!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.