Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Kozaru

All About Mormons

Recommended Posts

ryanw:

now in saying that, all of you will say "it isn't swept under the rug, I know about it" but you are all a different breed. as i mentioned earlier, the last 24 missionaries i've spoken with do not know about the story, every single one of my and my wife's friends do not know about it, and our families do not know about it.

And I know very very few people who understand that the laws of physics that we know and love (Newton, Einstein) are wrong. That matter doesn't really behave the way we think it does -- the way we get taught in grade school. Is this being covered up? Or are people free to go read up on Quantum Physics all they want? Does the fact that most people don't know about it and don't care even slightly mean that it has been covered up? Or are some people just not interested enough to delve into it?

i think it should be made public and is something that is shown in the videos or discussions.

Why? In what way is it important? It's been a while, but I don't recall that the discussions covered the method of translation at all. Why should they?

But I'd really be interested in an answer to my original question. In what way is the "rock-in-a-hat" story more ridiculous than the "magic spectacles" story? Honestly, if I were to choose between the two based on pure marketability, I think I'd opt for the rock in a hat.

Share this post


Link to post

There are certainly some innaccuracies, but when has South Park ever been accused of being accurate? Like usual, the characters exploit some shady areas of a particular group/sect, etc. It was accurate in many ways, but slanted to make Mormons look foolish. BTW, who hasn't thought that the 116 pages bit was a little bit off? I sure did. I'm not sure about its affect on missionaries, but my little brother saw it and laughed his butt off. I said, "What did you think?" He said, "I'm not as 'Mormon' as the rest of my family, so I thought it was awesome." As a big brother, that is not something you want your little bro to say, but he seems to be alright.

DaSox.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm LDS and i enjoy South Park. Makes me laugh with a type of sense of humor only people my age group can really understand (23 to 35). Which is why that guy that posted was laughing and his kids weren't. They dont get the jokes. Trey and Matt are just reliving their childhood through theses characters. Now, what all of you must understand, and what took me a while to understand, is that South Park picks on EVERYONE. They do not just focus on the Mormons, and just because there have been a few episodes where they talk specifically about Mormons doesnt automatically make the creators exmormons. If you ever watch the show they pick on jews and catholics all day long. Anyone seen the Passion of Christ episode? All it talked about was christians and jews. Have any of you seen the commercials for South Park? They list all the people they make fun of and say, "if we've missed you or left you out, don't worry, we're not done yet" or something to that effect. Basically, dont take it personally if we've made fun of you, cause we make fun of everyone.

The south park mormon episodes though inaccurate allow us to poke fun a bit at ourselves. I mean it's a pretty incredible story, and only the Spirit of the Holy Ghost witnessing it confirms the truth to it. Which why our enemeys don't ever understand it (Spirit aint near em).

As bad or "blasphamus" that you might think South Park, there is always a very good moral to the end of the show. Anyone seen the Mormon episode in question when the mormon boy tells Kyle and the boys to "suck my balls" cause he didnt care whether they converted to mormonism or not he just wanted them to be his friends? Minus the crude language, they have a very good point, we need to be friends with everyone regardless of their beliefs.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, I agree the South Park episode was for the most part accurate as far as "facts and events"......but obviously made as a mockery.

Same as Fahrenfeit 911,,,,,,different format and genre and subject matter.

But I did definitely laugh at South Park,,,,,,you can't help it.

Share this post


Link to post
Yes, I agree the South Park episode was for the most part accurate as far as "facts and events"......but obviously made as a mockery.

Same as Fahrenfeit 911,,,,,,different format and genre and subject matter.

Farenhiet 9/11 was a decent flick, however extremely one sided, but since when has Michael Moore ever been known to be fair?

Share this post


Link to post

It was a wake up call for me when I was the person being mocked. I had laughed everytime Cartman called (is it Kyle or Stan, I cannot remeber) a "damn Jew." I had split my gut when Cartman became an evangelist preacher, but I was appalled when it was me. That is why I stopped watching that show.

Also, I think the LDS are offended more due to the fact that Trey and Stone are the same guys who created the movie "Orgazmo" (a film about an LDS missionary who became a porn star to finance his temple marriage...WTH??)

Share this post


Link to post

Tresspassers, the story about the spectacles and the story about the hat are both ridiculous to me. But I agree with you and if I had to pick which is less ridiculous it would be the hat.

Share this post


Link to post

and they didn't replace one ridiculous story with another. there are different accounts from different scribes as to the manner in which joseph translated. david whitmer wrote that he put a rock in a hat and put his face in it to block out light.

Share this post


Link to post

Here is something I found funny...

When people are speaking of the translation of the Book of Mormon, you can tell if they're LDS or not.

The non-LDS call the interpretors "Spectacles" and the LDS call them "The Urim and Thummum."

:P

Share this post


Link to post

and while he describes them as the urimm and thumim, the description sounds a lot like.....

Share this post


Link to post

He calls them intepretors and the Urim and Thummum throughout, something that the Non-LDS don't do, for obvious reasons. It wasn't a criticism to begin with, but an observation.

Share this post


Link to post

They resembled spectacles but they weren't called that. Non-LDS call them 'magic spectacles' to mock us with their idiotic biggotry.

Share this post


Link to post

so how often do you hear those of us who wear glasses call them by their proper name of "corrective lenses"?

Share this post


Link to post

Are you going to contribute to anything or just spam. Try going into more detail other than "ridiculous". You be smart and tell us why its ridiculous. Anyone who read the artical on the 4th post would know the full extent of the misrepresentation known as South Park. In fact anyone who thinks South park is politically correct on anything needs mental health care now.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't need to go into more detail. As I have already said, I think the whole idea of using a rock to make words magically appear in a hat is silly. I don't believe it. The whole story does not make sense. But I have also already said I don't believe in anything in the bible either, which has even more ridiculous stories.

Share this post


Link to post

Why is it ridiculous? Because, if the prophets today sat in conference with their face in a hat with that magic rock in it, waiting for it to tell them what to say to the congregation, would you still believe in it? SO, if that same scenario can be construed as implausable today, it is not likely that it happened back then.

Share this post


Link to post

ryanw, I wouldn't dare attack all religions regardless of the facts, when one could be more wise and cautious with their conclusions.

Being intelligent means making the best use of what we have. We do not wait until things are handed to us out of someone else's mouth or a book, we take chances and experiment, but you don't care do you? Just a waste of bandwidth, who has already made up his mind and is pointless to talk to.

Share this post


Link to post

That is not the definition of intelligence, but I've balanced hope and evidence. EVERY religion says they have proof of god and his glory. I say that it is impossible to prove any one of them right since god does not appear to any of us to tell us which is right. So I decided to be agnostic since it is impossible to prove any of them right or wrong. I think that religion in general can best be explained using John Watson's study of Behaviorism.

Share this post


Link to post

The whole process can be entirely rational: One can deduce logically that there must be a God. If there is a God he must answer prayers. One prays, He answers. This is all very rational.

Since all societies believe in religion of some kind, is powerful evidence from an evolutionary point of view. There must be some very powerful advantage in religion for EVERY society to adopt it. No atheist society has ever survived.

Share this post


Link to post
Why is it ridiculous?  Because, if the prophets today sat in conference with their face in a hat with that magic rock in it, waiting for it to tell them what to say to the congregation, would you still believe in it?  SO, if that same scenario can be construed as implausable today, it is not likely that it happened back then.

Your problem is basically a lack of exposure to the use of seerstones and gemstones through history. They were believed to have psychic and spiritual powers, including among the American Indians.

http://www.crystalhealing-aora.com/gemfams.html

"A rock in a hat" is a very crude description. If you care to read Quinn's Early Mormonism and the Magic Worldview (Signature Books), or do some real research you might reach a different conclusion.

Rvelation 2:17

He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes, I will give some of the hidden manna. I will also give him a white stone with a new name written on it, known only to him who receives it.

Isn't the Lord a strange bloke? Giving people who inherit the Celestial Kingdom a "white stone"? What could that possibly be?

Share this post


Link to post

A few points:

1. According to Martin Harris, Joseph Smith did find the plates.

These plates were found at the north point of a hill two miles north of Manchester village. Joseph had a stone which was dug from the well of Mason Chase, twenty-four feet from the surface. In this stone he could see many things to my certain knowledge. It was by means of this stone he first discovered these plates.

2. Joseph Smith referred to them as spectacles.

...Martin Haris who became convinced of the visions and gave me fifty Dollars to bare my expences and because of his faith and this rightheous deed the Lord appeared unto him in a vision and shewed unto him his marvilous work which he was about to do and <he> imediately came to Suquehanna and said the Lord had shown him that he must go to new York City with some of the c<h>aracters so we proceeded to coppy some of them and he took his Journy to the Eastern Cittys and to the Learned <saying> read this I pray thee and the learned said I cannot but if he wo=uld bring the plates they would read it but the Lord had fo<r>bid it and he returned to me and gave them to <me to> translate and I said I said cannot for I am not learned but the Lord had prepared spectticke spectacles for to read the Book therefore I commenced translating the char=acters and thus the Prop[h]icy of Is<ia>ah was fulfilled which is writen in the 29 chapter concerning the book...

Joseph Smith, The Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, compiled and edited by Dean C. Jessee [salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1984], 4-8.

3. The stone in the hat translation method is particularly disturbing because it involves the use of a seer stone that Joseph possessed prior to ever obtaining the plates.

Share this post


Link to post

2. Brief slang, non-members on purposely say spectacles to avoid saying anything biblical, like Urim and Thummin.

3. Before he obtained the plate, however not before he had already seen the plates and angel?

Share this post


Link to post

One cannot deduce logically that there is a god because every book of scripture goes against what science would tell us today. Just because people throughout time have believed in god, that doesn't mean there is or isn't one. There is no proof that prayers are answered. For all anyone who prays knows, the sequence of events following prayers could have happened anyway. It's funny that when someone prays and it is "answered" they say god loves them and answers their prayers, yet when it goes "unanswered" they say that god is teaching them something that they haven't discovered yet.

Every civilizations belief in god can come from every civilization being cultivated by humans. Religion is a behavior that is taught. For example, if an infant is placed in front of a stuffed animal and a loud, startling noise happens behind them, they will in time LEARN to be afraid of stuffed animals because of that noxious stimuli behind them. Parents who bring their kids up in a religious household are doing the same thing. They teach their kids to do this or an evil, red, horned demon will keep them in a lake of fire forever. This is going to teach a child to stick with church and to FEAR leaving it or thinking anything other than what they have been taught.

Share this post


Link to post

There are few (if any) limits to scale in this universe. Whatever you think of there is always something smaller, or bigger, or stronger, or weaker, or nearer, or further. Whenever someone says "this is all there is," it is a safe bet that they will ultimately be proven wrong. So, it is probably arrogant foolishness to assume that the humans we see are the most intelligent and powerful beings in the universe or beyond.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...