I am restricted by time and therefore must be brief.
The website for LDS [mormon.org] provides a chat service where you are connected with a missionary with whom you can talk and ask questions about their faith.
Now, I attened a private christian school in Cumming, Georgia. Many of the bible classes in my school have begun to use this service to, not change these missionaries beliefs, but plant seeds of doubt in their minds.
I know that this website does not support nor advicate any religion, but we have been challenging these missionaries (politely and inquizitively) with our own beliefes and doctrine. Providing disevidences within their doctrine and teachings.
On top of usually getting the response something along the lines of "There is no need for worldly evidence when you have faith. I urge you to pray and ask God for revelation regarding the truth of the Book of Mormon."
This is not to say that no missionary has shown defense and aggression (because some have.)
But basically, when we attemp to access this chat from our school's network, we are no longer connected to a missionary. We have resonable suspicion that they have identified and chosen to ignore our IP address, or have blocked it from being able to connect.
I urge you to use this service and ask the hard questions, using their doctrine as your disevidence, because until you do, you may not understand how truely deceived these missionaries are.
Good-day and God bless.

...but everyone knows that all you Bahble-believing fundies are on solid ground with your particular and special version of religious superstition, right?

en passant Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ...but everyone knows that all you
> Bahble-believing fundies are on solid ground with
> your particular and special version of religious
> superstition, right?


Well, I suppose your statement makes sense and is, to an extint, true.
But "Bahble-believing fundies" who have actually done real and reliable research on topics such as the origin of the universe, biodiversity (how we came to be with all the living things on the planet), and personal revelation have found that Christianity is truely the most logical choice. I know that that seems rediculous, but honestly, if there was MORE evidence for ANY other belief system (whether another religion or atheism) I would 'convert' on the spot.
This, however, is not a fault in my beliefs. My beliefs are based on faith, which I have because of the evidences for them, and because of the disevidences for other religions/atheism.

Cam W. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> en passant Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ...but everyone knows that all you
> > Bahble-believing fundies are on solid ground
> with
> > your particular and special version of
> religious
> > superstition, right?
>
>
> Well, I suppose your statement makes sense and is,
> to an extint, true.
> But "Bahble-believing fundies" who have actually
> done real and reliable research on topics such as
> the origin of the universe, biodiversity (how we
> came to be with all the living things on the
> planet), and personal revelation have found that
> Christianity is truely the most logical choice. I
> know that that seems rediculous, but honestly, if
> there was MORE evidence for ANY other belief
> system (whether another religion or atheism) I
> would 'convert' on the spot.
> This, however, is not a fault in my beliefs. My
> beliefs are based on faith, which I have because
> of the evidences for them, and because of the
> disevidences for other religions/atheism.


What "real" research on the origin of the universe, and biodiversity have these religious groups you support done? I'm genuinely curious because I've looked and can't find anything. Even a few years back in that Kentucky school board case they could not produce any research or evidence supporting their beliefs to the judge outside of what the Bible says. No peer reviewed articles. No evidence. Nothing. Nada. Zip.

Mormon beliefs are based on faith and personal revelation as well. Interesting you criticize other faiths for coming to different conclusions using the same basis of reasoning.

And you're right about there being no "evidence" for an atheistic stance. One cannot prove a negative. You make an assertion then vaguely reference some evidence that exists somewhere without telling us what that evidence is or how to find it, then tell the atheist to prove it doesn't exist when it's your responsibility to black up your own claim. Atheism is simply the neutral stance taken until further evidence is provided. Just as one would confidently say there is no Santa Claus, fairies, unicorns or leprechauns, I can confidently state there is no god.

You have an atheistic stance on Zeus, Thor, Allah, the Mormon god, the flying spaghetti monster, and all other gods except your own. You cannot disprove these gods didn't/don't exist, and base your atheism toward their myths on their failure to provide convincing evidence. You are an atheist with the exception to your own god through avenues of special pleading. A true atheist simply does not make that exception and dismisses one more.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/09/2010 01:26PM by vhainya.

vhainya Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Cam W. Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > en passant Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > ...but everyone knows that all you
> > > Bahble-believing fundies are on solid ground
> > with
> > > your particular and special version of
> > religious
> > > superstition, right?
> >
> >
> > Well, I suppose your statement makes sense and
> is,
> > to an extint, true.
> > But "Bahble-believing fundies" who have
> actually
> > done real and reliable research on topics such
> as
> > the origin of the universe, biodiversity (how
> we
> > came to be with all the living things on the
> > planet), and personal revelation have found
> that
> > Christianity is truely the most logical choice.
> I
> > know that that seems rediculous, but honestly,
> if
> > there was MORE evidence for ANY other belief
> > system (whether another religion or atheism) I
> > would 'convert' on the spot.
> > This, however, is not a fault in my beliefs.
> My
> > beliefs are based on faith, which I have
> because
> > of the evidences for them, and because of the
> > disevidences for other religions/atheism.
>
>
> What "real" research on the origin of the
> universe, and biodiversity have these religious
> groups you support done? I'm genuinely curious
> because I've looked and can't find anything. Even
> a few years back in that Kentucky school board
> case they could not produce any research or
> evidence supporting their beliefs to the judge
> outside of what the Bible says. No peer reviewed
> articles. No evidence. Nothing. Nada. Zip.
>
> Mormon beliefs are based on faith and personal
> revelation as well. Interesting you criticize
> other faiths for coming to different conclusions
> using the same basis of reasoning.
>
> And you're right about there being no "evidence"
> for an atheistic stance. One cannot prove a
> negative. You make an assertion then vaguely
> reference some evidence that exists somewhere
> without telling us what that evidence is or how to
> find it, then tell the atheist to prove it doesn't
> exist when it's your responsibility to black up
> your own claim. Atheism is simply the neutral
> stance taken until further evidence is provided.
> Just as one would confidently say there is no
> Santa Claus, fairies, unicorns or leprechauns, I
> can confidently state there is no god.
>
> You have an atheistic stance on Zeus, Thor, Allah,
> the Mormon god, the flying spaghetti monster, and
> all other gods except your own. You cannot
> disprove these gods didn't/don't exist, and base
> your atheism toward their myths on their failure
> to provide convincing evidence. You are an
> atheist with the exception to your own god through
> avenues of special pleading. A true atheist
> simply does not make that exception and dismisses
> one more.


Well, as the test for the truthfulness doctrine's go, the evidence for the Bible is in it's proof that somethings in it are unmistakably true. There are events that are explained in detail that are also recorded in seperate manuscripts that are dated to the same time period and sited to a realiable author. Obviously this can't lead someone to believe other things in the Bible (by which I mean, just because a war or some other event is recorded correctly doesn't mean that records of super natural instances are accurate), but my faith and personal revelation is NOT based on blind faith and contradictions. I've found that everything in the Bible that could possibly be proved or accounted for, is.
Things such as the ressurection of Jesus, obviously can't be proved, but there are records of His existance on the earth other than the Bible, no one denies that He, as a person, existed at the time that the Bible says. There are also clear records of Him being crucified, hung on a cross, for His claim of being the Messiah. Now, other than those who recorded being eye witnesses of Him being alive AFTER said crucifiction, no realiable person ever wrote down anything about Him being alive.
But, can you deny that it's the largest religious movement of all time? Have as many people lived for, gone to war over, and died for any other cause? Something had to have happened for so many people to have accepted this belief. Believe it or not, people don't give up their lives for nothing. If someone were holding a gun up to your head, would you not say anything to have them NOT kill you? For someone to NOT to say anything to save their own life, they must have a true passion for what they believe.
Now, it is true that crazy people can be passionate about something that isn't true, but unless you're claiming that every person that has ever died in the name of Christ had serious psychological disorders, than you have to accept that something huge happened. Something as huge as a resurrection, whether or not it was actually a resurrection come to personal revelation.

Personal revelation is found upon acceptance of The Word (the Bible), but you have to actually believe in something before you receive anything like revelation. A true Christian bases for revelation is study, evidence (which I just provided...) and THEN prayer. Mormon "revelation" is based on praying alone, just pray, pray, pray, and pray and God will tell you what you want to know. Now, when people are "praying" and expecting to receive a particular answer (in this case, they expect God to tell them that the Book of Mormon is true) they can come up with the answer themselves. You yourself have had random thoughts pop into your head with no doubt that those thoughts come from your own mind, but mormons simply sit and wait for God to answer, so if they happened to have the thought "the Book of Mormon is the truth" they may solely believe that it's God putting it in their head. The Christian and Mormon definitions of "Revelation" are not even comprable.

Now as far as "atheism" is concerned. Atheism is not a disbelief in one thing, I don't posses atheism in other religions, I just don't believe in them. Atheism, according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, is "the doctrine that there is no diety". I DO believe in a diety, so whatever point you were making there kinda just fell apart.
I think I covered everything, if you don't mind, anybody who is/wants to participate in this discussion, please E-mail me at "camwharton@gmail.com". This thread was meant for the discussion I initiated, thank you, and God bless.

Some of the comics tie to real events and the theres a lot of "truthfulness" within those comics?

Alright, just for other people's amusement I'll go ahead and take this on.

> Cam W. Wrote:
> Well, as the test for the truthfulness doctrine's
> go, the evidence for the Bible is in it's proof
> that somethings in it are unmistakably true.

The bible is true because the bible says it's true. Circular reasoning.

> There are events that are explained in detail that
> are also recorded in seperate manuscripts that are
> dated to the same time period and sited to a
> realiable author. Obviously this can't lead
> someone to believe other things in the Bible (by
> which I mean, just because a war or some other
> event is recorded correctly doesn't mean that
> records of super natural instances are accurate),
> but my faith and personal revelation is NOT based
> on blind faith and contradictions. I've found
> that everything in the Bible that could possibly
> be proved or accounted for, is.
> Things such as the ressurection of Jesus,
> obviously can't be proved, but there are records
> of His existance on the earth other than the
> Bible, no one denies that He, as a person, existed
> at the time that the Bible says. There are also
> clear records of Him being crucified, hung on a
> cross, for His claim of being the Messiah. Now,
> other than those who recorded being eye witnesses
> of Him being alive AFTER said crucifiction, no
> realiable person ever wrote down anything about
> Him being alive.

Again you vaguely reference sources without telling anyone what they are or where they came from. As far as I have been able to find there are no references to Jesus outside of the Bible except for one third party document written AFTER the bible that is believed to be a forgery.

Even if Jesus did exist, why assume he is the son of god who performed supernatural acts? There's no evidence of his divinity or power as anything but a regular man. We have no records written by Jesus, no journals, nothing at all except the elaborate musings of third party "witnesses" (none outside the bible) who started making the claims some 50 years or more after he died.

> But, can you deny that it's the largest religious
> movement of all time? Have as many people lived
> for, gone to war over, and died for any other
> cause? Something had to have happened for so many
> people to have accepted this belief. Believe it
> or not, people don't give up their lives for
> nothing. If someone were holding a gun up to your
> head, would you not say anything to have them NOT
> kill you? For someone to NOT to say anything to
> save their own life, they must have a true passion
> for what they believe.
> Now, it is true that crazy people can be
> passionate about something that isn't true, but
> unless you're claiming that every person that has
> ever died in the name of Christ had serious
> psychological disorders, than you have to accept
> that something huge happened. Something as huge
> as a resurrection, whether or not it was actually
> a resurrection come to personal revelation.

This is an argument from popularity, and the assertion that Christianity wins the popularity contest is not true either. Islam is the largest, and most popular religious movement in the history of mankind. Islam is growing while Christianity is in decline.

> Personal revelation is found upon acceptance of
> The Word (the Bible), but you have to actually
> believe in something before you receive anything
> like revelation.

More circular logic. You have to already believe something is true to receive personal revelation that it's true. You're making me dizzy here.

A true Christian bases for
> revelation is study, evidence (which I just
> provided...)

You haven't provided any evidence. Where is this astonishing "proof" you keep talking about?

and THEN prayer. Mormon "revelation"
> is based on praying alone, just pray, pray, pray,
> and pray and God will tell you what you want to
> know. Now, when people are "praying" and
> expecting to receive a particular answer (in this
> case, they expect God to tell them that the Book
> of Mormon is true) they can come up with the
> answer themselves. You yourself have had random
> thoughts pop into your head with no doubt that
> those thoughts come from your own mind, but
> mormons simply sit and wait for God to answer, so
> if they happened to have the thought "the Book of
> Mormon is the truth" they may solely believe that
> it's God putting it in their head. The Christian
> and Mormon definitions of "Revelation" are not
> even comparable.

I'm just going to quote you here: "but you have to actually believe in something before you receive anything like revelation." Can you please apply your beliefs consistently? It would be so much less confusing.

>
> Now as far as "atheism" is concerned. Atheism is
> not a disbelief in one thing, I don't posses
> atheism in other religions, I just don't believe
> in them. Atheism, according to the
> Merriam-Webster dictionary, is "the doctrine that
> there is no diety". I DO believe in a diety, so
> whatever point you were making there kinda just
> fell apart.
> I think I covered everything, if you don't mind,
> anybody who is/wants to participate in this
> discussion, please E-mail me at
> "camwharton@gmail.com". This thread was meant for
> the discussion I initiated, thank you, and God
> bless.

Actually, the primary definition states, "a disbelief in the existence of deity," but the semantics aren't important to my point either way, which is why I didn't pull out the Webster's dictionary when making it. Regardless, you've successfully avoided addressing the point I made, so congratulations; those dance lessons on how to side-step have paid off.

Dang, vhainya, you wrote that so prettily. Well put!

LOL - you've done your research and there is plenty of hard scientific evidence backing up all your beliefs, right?

Truth is - if your school offered a "chat with a Fundy" service on its website, you'd have a bunch of Mormons and all comers chatting to try and plant seeds of doubt in your minds.

Christians don't convert Mormons because they both use the same arguments which rely on special pleading.

... and emotional blackmail.

They want to bleat their message from the hills, but they are unwilling to hear anyone else. Maybe you guys could use some sort of proxy server.

The "pray about it and you'll know it's true" gag is their last defense, and I think it's the one to discuss with them. The way I would like to debunk it is to explain that it is circular logic. How can you know if Book of Mormon is true? By a physical manifestation that supposedly occurs when you pray about it. How do you know that this physical manifestation is God telling you that the Book of Mormon is true? Because that's what it says in the Book of Mormon. Circular logic.

Then talk about how this feeling is not infallible. You get this same feeling in a stirring patriotic event, a football game, a first kiss, or even when you want to make an expensive purchase. In fact, a good salesman knows to get people to make an emotional decision instead of an intellectual one, and isn't that what the Mormon church is trying to get you to do by praying for this physical manifestation?

I haven't figured out a simpler way to present the problem, but maybe you guys can. Best wishes to you.

What sort of questions have you and yours asked these "online missionaries"?

Also, are you still in Georgia? Atlanta here.

I think you are doing a good service. HOWEVER, please do not attempt to 'convert' others to any other religion. Otherwise you open yourself up to the same attacks and reasoning that you are using against the Mormon missionaries.

Just focus on exposing Mormons to the problems of Mormonism that they don't know about. Perhaps you should enlighten them about the Book of Abraham or the fact that Joseph Smith married 11 women that already had husbands.

Good Luck

Those Mormon missionaries could be our children, or other family member. Any effort to help keep our loved ones from being sucked into a lying cult is WORTHWHILE!

Don't pay attention to the critics. There are some Mormons who post on here, too.

i don't want this to sound too rude.... but I hope your school has some spelling classes! I received a good edumacation(:)) from 1-6 grade in Catholic schools. there was no spell checkers then. perhaps that is the problem nowadays!

bignevermo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> i don't want this to sound too rude.... but I hope
> your school has some spelling classes! I received
> a good edumacation(:)) from 1-6 grade in Catholic
> schools. there was no spell checkers then. perhaps
> that is the problem nowadays!


I'm 16, speeling (:)) is not my strong suit, apologies.

S'OK.... MAYBE WORK ON IT THOUGH!!! ...ooops maybe i should work on my caps lock!! :) and BTW i aint a perfect speller either! :)

Seems to me atheists are allowed to be rude, but people with faith have to be sweet and polite and PC. I'm onto it. That's f*cked!

And he's 16! A bunch of meany pantses.

Where was anyone rude?

How can you divine someone's belief in a deity from what was posted here?

And where does someone get a pass on BS because of their age?

A school that encourages 16yr olds to proselyte to mormon missionaries is f*ked. Please don't tell me you belong to a religon like that!

Please explain how a belief in Christianity is any different than a belief in Mormonism. They are different brands of the same nonsense.

tillamook Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Please explain how a belief in Christianity is any
> different than a belief in Mormonism. They are
> different brands of the same nonsense.

EXACTLY. it's all bullshit to me quite frankly.

There is not a thing about the so-called divinity of your version of religion that you can prove with verifiable information. Nothing, nada, zip, zilch.

In this way you are EXACTLY the same as Mormons. EXACTLY! And you are the same as every other believer who feels the burning of their testimony in their bosom, heart, brain, toes, or zits. Exactly the same.

You throw around words like "biodiversity" without knowing the meaning, you invent "words" like "disevidence," and you think in some bizarre way that what you believe is right and what everyone else believes is wrong. And in this way too, you are just like Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Muslim suicide bombers.

Grow up.

Cam,

I went to high school in suburban Atlanta. I was one of a few Mormon kids surrounded by protestant/evangelical Christians trying to talk us out of Mormonism via biblical arguments. And it didn't work. It was easy to shoot down the usual arguments ("Mormons believe in works!"/"But faith without works is dead" or "Revelations says there's nothing after the bible"/"So does the Old Testament"). In fact, shooting down these arguments served to STRENGTHEN my faith in LDScorp. I'd come away thinking those bonehead protestants had nothing on us Mormon experts. It was the same on my mission. Every time we'd tangle with an evangelical trying to convert us, we'd come away feeling like the bible gives huge evidentiary support to LDScorp.

Trying to convince Mormons that mainstream christianity makes more sense than LDScorp is bound to fail because--at risk of being unkind--it DOESN'T make any more sense. So your efforts are more likely to harden these young missionaries' resolve than they are to plant the seeds of doubt.

If you want to make them doubt, don't quote the bible to them. Show them the physical evidence against their beliefs.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/09/2010 07:05PM by mateo.

"...because until you do, you may not understand how truely deceived these missionaries are."


Of all the things you wrote though, this may have been the most ignorant, borderline insulting. This board is full of returned missionaries that found the courage to admit they were deceived, and were brave enough to act on it.

because it's pulling the bandaid off slowly. You get to stop when it's halfway off and you can live a real life, go to church with nice people and not be abused.

Some people continue to pull on the bandaid. They end up atheists because the same critical thinking that got them out of Mormonism applies to Christianity as well.

It's a choice to choose a lawyer or represent yourself. When it comes to God, I'd rather represent myself than pay 10% for you to do it.

Anagrammy

PS. The fear of atheism and outer darkness is an intense conditioning point for the cult. How many times have I heard people exclaim piously, eyes rolling to heaven, "I don't know what I would be without this church- I don't WANT to know!" Well, I found out it is WONDERFUL to be able to be yourself. You find out that you're a decent person without the stick OR the carrot. Now that's a reason to "remember who you are."

@ Cam

Man you sure stirred up a Hornet's nest with this one. I'm gonna offer you some friendly advice. I'd just stop talking if I were you. You are way outclassed on this one.

Cam W.,

I applaud your efforts. Clearly, your Fairy Tale is correct and those Mormons are brainwashed.

If you were honest enough to apply the same scrutiny to your own faith that you are asking of these missionaries, you would find that your Fairy Tale is just as ridiculous (it just happens to be culturally mainstream whereas Mormonism isn't).

Have you ever asked yourself hard questions about the historicity of Jesus?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

Have you looked to critical information by non-Christians?

No?

Then don't bother Mormon missionaries. You're a hypocrite. As long as you are entitled to your Fairy Tale, the Mormons are entitled to theirs! At least Mormons have the guts to believe in a religion despite it being unpopular. You believe in the Fairy Tale that everyone else believes in. Hardly impressive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKG07305CBs

GOOD DAY, SIR!