Is Mormon discussion more of a anti Mormon forum

[_deacon blues]

I dislike the term anti-Mormon. It tends to equate criticism with persecution. There IS a difference between criticism and persecution, although some may disagree about where to draw the line.

[_bomgeography]

I am curious. If you think you are defending Mormonism effectively, why doesn't the Church itself publish and promote the very same arguments, sources & evidences you do?

The church does not need to prove anything. Its relies on the spirit to confirm all truth.

[_Maksutov]

I am curious. If you think you are defending Mormonism effectively, why doesn't the Church itself publish and promote the very same arguments, sources & evidences you do?

The church does not need to prove anything. Its relies on the spirit to confirm all truth.

And that's why so few people believe it. (It's falling even behind that farfetched Seventh Day Adventist church.) It's not believable unless you have presupposed its truth and ignored the boatloads of evidence against it.

Not that the church has a coherent view of its own history or its own doctrine. Its only coherence lies in its business administration, wherein profits have come to replace prophets without anyone noticing because they are too busy being intoxicated with "the spirit". Works for lots of scammers in Utah, every day of the week. It's why we're the MLM capital of the world...and remember that it also stands for "Mormons losing money", usually to other Mormons.

[_bomgeography]

Your right in the sense that the church has a lot of well educated leaders prophets and members who are not only very smart but know when the spirit testifies of truth. Im sure they seek the lords council and favor in everything they do including missionary work and business after all the spirit has touched millions of members and has assets worth billions of dollars. That benefit its members and all the worlds people.

[_tapirrider]

Your right in the sense that the church has a lot of well educated leaders prophets and members who are not only very smart but know when the spirit testifies of truth. Im sure they seek the lords council and favor in everything they do including missionary work and business after all the spirit has touched millions of members and has assets worth billions of dollars. That benefit its members and all the worlds people.

Except when those apostles are dedicating temples in Guatemala. Then they don't seek the spirit or they aren't smart enough or the spirit doesn't testify correctly or they just don't know when the spirit testifies of truth. Because bomgeography knows better than the well educated leaders and prophets that Mayans are not the seed of Lehi.

[_Fence Sitter]

I am curious. If you think you are defending Mormonism effectively, why doesn't the Church itself publish and promote the very same arguments, sources & evidences you do?

The church does not need to prove anything. Its relies on the spirit to confirm all truth.

Clearly the Church needs to prove things or they would not have published the essays.

If your arguments are effective why isn't the Church using them?

[_bomgeography]

The essays are the churches take on church history and science that supposedly contradicts Book of Mormon claims. The essays are not proof.

[_Fence Sitter]

The essays are the churches take on church history and science that supposedly contradicts Book of Mormon claims. The essays are not proof.

Well I certainly agree they are not proof.


Are you implying that if proof (like DNA evidence) existed that the Church would not have included it in the essays?

[_bomgeography]

The essays are the churches take on church history and science that supposedly contradicts Book of Mormon claims. The essays are not proof.

Well I certainly agree they are not proof.


Are you implying that if proof (like DNA evidence) existed that the Church would not have included it in the essays?

They probably would have and its proven that DNA from the Middle East is found in North American Indians but it's not that obviously cut and dry

[_Xenophon]

Are you implying that if proof (like DNA evidence) existed that the Church would not have included it in the essays?

I know that bomgeo won't appreciate it and I see he has already weaseled his way around it. But I want to highlight how eloquently you just destroyed him with just one sentence. Well played, Fence Sitter!