Best Evidences For And Against The Church Being True...

[omni]

I realize that for most spiritual confirmation will be number one, but please expand. I also realize that many of the same evidences will continue to pop up, that's okay, I as it will probably confirm which are the strongest. I'll go ahead and give mine in no particular order:

Pros:

1. The eleven witnesses.

2. Internal complexity of the BoM.

3. NHM/Nahom

4. No apostles or members of the presidency have left the church (since the beginning days of the restoration) after rising to the top and seeing the man behind the curtain.

Cons:

1. Polygamy/polyandry.

2. Blacks and the priesthood.

3. BoM (anachronisms, King James style English used, scripture taken directly from a future New Testament, all spot on specific prophesies occurred before Joseph's time period or involved him).

4. BoA obvious mistranslations.

5. Changing doctrine (Adam/God theory, blood atonement, black less valiant).

6. Gays-current doctrine teaches they didn't choose to be gay, so why would God deny them marriage and all the blessing that come with it?

7. Becoming god-like...I've just never been able to wrap my mind around this one.

8. Kinderhook plates

[Nathair/|\]

I don't understand why #1 should be a con. At worst, it's neutral, and may be taken as evidence for the "restoration of all things" in the "Dispensation of the fullness of times."

For me, though, it all comes down to the Book of Mormon. Either (as MFBukowski would say) it "works" for it's intended purpose or it doesn't. As far as I can tell: there's no better reason to believe in Christ as unique among the gods, indeed as God of gods than the Book of Mormon, it would be nearly impossible for a mortal to fake given how well it fits in the setting it claims for itself and it would be stupid for Satan to do so (I suppose one of the Fair Folk could have done it, but it seems like too much effort for too little entertainment for them).

[Rivers]

Pros:

1.The missionaries haven't ruined it.

Cons:

1.Supernatural claims.

7. Becoming god-like...I've just never been able to wrap my mind around this one.

This is one of the best doctrines mormonism has to offer. I can't fully wrap my mind around it either but I find it to be a sweet-tasting doctrine.

Edited January 27, 2013 by Rivers

[Rob Osborn]

My number 1 pro would be the fruits of the church- what it does for people throughout the world. Many large religions do many good things but they are so disconnected with their members as a whole. LDS on the other hand share nearly identical lifestyles, beliefs and togetherness whether one lives in Japan, Africa, or here in the USA. If Gods house is truly a house of order, then the LDS church is about the closest thing to "order" as one is going to find anywhere on the earth. My number one con is LDS church history. It seems very hard to get the right answer as to how it all really went down. Often times you will hear two different sides of the story and research shows both parties are guilty of a few untruths or lack of telling the real truth.

That aside, I see the BoM as the number one support to making the religion work. I see absolutely no problem with the writing style it was translated into. JS used a language that he was raised on in translating it. I would find it unbelievable if it was translated in some style no one could recognize or relate to.

[Alvino]

For:

The image of a God much closer to us than other Christianities.

Con:

I really hope I'm not offending anybody here but the utter lack of profundity in Church leaders is appalling. They are supposedly the earthly leaders of a Church that needed restoring yet they produce material way below other ones.

Edited January 27, 2013 by Alvino

[Jude2]

1, “the people had multiplied, insomuch that they were spread upon all the face of the land, and that they had become exceedingly rich,…who were lifted up in pride, such as the wearing of costly apparel, and all manner of fine pearls, and of the fine things of the world. And from that time forth they did have their goods and their substance no more common among them. And they began to be divided into classes…” 4 Nephi

“The role of elites in the Ancient Maya civilization is examined today. Experts' views are changing, as new evidence is uncovered concerning commerce's function in politics. The majority of experts believe the trade of luxury goods empowered elites with greater prestige and status during the Classic Period….Embroidered cloth was particularly important in signifying status….”

http://www.mexconnec...mmercial-empire

Archaeologists in southern Mexico have discovered the 2,700-year-old tomb of a dignitary inside a pyramid that may be the oldest such burial documented in Mesoamerica…..The older man was buried with jade and amber collars and bracelets and pearl ornaments.

http://www.guardian....mb-mexico-olmec

2, “And it came to pass as timber was exceedingly scarce in the land northward, they did send forth much by the way of shipping….”Helaman 3

“NOAA-sponsored explorers are searching a wild, largely unexplored and forgotten coastline for evidence and artifacts of one of the greatest seafaring traditions of the ancient New World, where Maya traders once paddled massive dugout canoes filled with trade goods from across Mexico and Central America. …Scientists believe the port was part of an important trading network and was used at various times between about 800 B.C. and A.D. 1521,”

http://www.noaanews....ritimemaya.html

3, Abraham 1:9 “And it came to pass that the priest made an offering unto the god of Pharaoh, (the crocodile god or Sobeck) and also unto the god of Shagreel, even after the manner of the Egyptians. Now the god of Shagreel was the sun.(Ra)”

Sobek-Ra was an entity who combined the essence of two deities: the crocodile god and the sun god. This dual god is depicted as part animal to convey his strange and awesome divine powers. In particular, he has the strength, cunning, and longevity of the crocodile and power over the life-giving waters of the Nile. The solar disc in the headdress conveys that Ra, god of life-giving light, is manifesting himself in his form of Sobek. He is depicted as part human to allow him to interact with the king and offer him the ankh, the symbol of life. The statue group is intended to show, and by showing to bring about, the desired loving relationship between the king, representing humanity, and Sobek-Ra, representing the gods.

You can see a picture of him here;

http://symbolankh.de...05663-sobek-ra/

[Mudcat]

Con: Given the disagreement between Nephite and Lamanites, I think the idea that no serious corroboration to the BoM, by the critics of it's age detracts from it's credulity.

In other words, we don't see much in the way of any historic examples of anti-Nephite literature by the Lamanites.

But surely the Spainards burnt it all up, if it existed in the firsplace. Right?

Edited January 27, 2013 by Mudcat

[Freedom]

Cons:

1. Polygamy/polyandry.

Why? This same criticism can be used against the Abraham

2. Blacks and the priesthood.

Why? This same criticism can be used against the Savior

3. BoM (anachronisms, King James style English used, scripture taken directly from a future New Testament, all spot on specific prophesies occurred before Joseph's time period or involved him).

KJ style is evidence of it being false? Don't follow you. The anachronisms are shrinking as more evidence comes forward. The teachings from the NT prove that the teachings were not unique to the early saints but rather consistent with eternal principles

4. BoA obvious mistranslations.

Obvious to who? The BoA has been proven consistent with other documents that have been discovered after JS translated it.

5. Changing doctrine (Adam/God theory, blood atonement, black less valiant).

None of these are changing doctrines. None of these were ever doctrines.

6. Gays-current doctrine teaches they didn't choose to be gay, so why would God deny them marriage and all the blessing that come with it?

People don't choose to be ADHD, schizophrenic, hot tempered and host of other character flaws. We are born with weaknesses and can either conquer them or succumb to them.

7. Becoming god-like...I've just never been able to wrap my mind around this one.

So you reject the teachings of the bible? Why else would God, our Father, tell us to be like him and promise us that inherit all that he has?

8. Kinderhook plates

Read the history, this is a non-issue.

[Sky]

For me, the pros are:

1. We are a Christ-centered church.

2. Living prophets and apostles who testify of the living reality of the Savior, Jesus Christ.

3. A commonality, sense of belonging, and brotherhood and sisterhood.

4. Opportunities to grow by exercising faith and serving in callings in the Church (some of which can be rather challenging).

5. Temple ordinances, which give comfort and assurance that death is not the end of our existence, nor is it the end of our associations with our loved ones.

6. Gives purpose and meaning to our life here.

7. Takes an active role in making our communities better.

8. The welfare side of the Church - the efficient way in which it helps the poor and responds to global disasters or emergencies.

9. The scriptures are an open cannon - God's words are not limited to only the Bible..."We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God."

10. It keeps getting better...

Cons:

1. Inability to understand certain things, or lack of a logical explanation, such as the blacks and the priesthood issue.

2. Would have liked it if the Church would have taken a more progressive role in things like the black Civil Rights Movement.

3. Statements by Church leaders in the past that weren't necessarily doctrine as we understand it today, yet still continue to come back to haunt the Church. It can be a huge obstacle for many people.

4. It's treatment of homosexuals hasn't always been the best, but is getting better...

5. Coffee and tea are against the Word of Wisdom, but Coke and Mountain Dew are just fine. In principle, I think the WOW is great, though.

For the record, I believe the pros outweigh the cons. As it says on the title page of the Book of Mormon, "if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgement-seat of Christ."

[Jude2]

Cons:

1. Polygamy/polyandry.

Why? This same criticism can be used against the Abraham

2. Blacks and the priesthood.

Why? This same criticism can be used against the Savior

3. BoM (anachronisms, King James style English used, scripture taken directly from a future New Testament, all spot on specific prophesies occurred before Joseph's time period or involved him).

KJ style is evidence of it being false? Don't follow you. The anachronisms are shrinking as more evidence comes forward. The teachings from the NT prove that the teachings were not unique to the early saints but rather consistent with eternal principles

4. BoA obvious mistranslations.

Obvious to who? The BoA has been proven consistent with other documents that have been discovered after JS translated it.

5. Changing doctrine (Adam/God theory, blood atonement, black less valiant).

None of these are changing doctrines. None of these were ever doctrines.

6. Gays-current doctrine teaches they didn't choose to be gay, so why would God deny them marriage and all the blessing that come with it?

People don't choose to be ADHD, schizophrenic, hot tempered and host of other character flaws. We are born with weaknesses and can either conquer them or succumb to them.

7. Becoming god-like...I've just never been able to wrap my mind around this one.

So you reject the teachings of the bible? Why else would God, our Father, tell us to be like him and promise us that inherit all that he has?

8. Kinderhook plates

Read the history, this is a non-issue.

Amen to all of the above

[Stargazer]

For:

The image of a God much closer to us than other Christianities.

Con:

I really hope I'm not offending anybody here but the utter lack of profundity in Church leaders is appalling. They are supposedly the earthly leaders of a Church that needed restoring yet they produce material way below other ones.

Not offended, but puzzled. I have read any number of books and talks produced by general authorities and have found much profundity. On the other hand, if you are thinking of local bishops and stake presidents, well, consider that one such as I was once called to be a branch president. Local leaders are supposed to be salt-of-the-earth, or at least regular folks. And consider that they are taken from all walks of life. My own ward bishops have included the following: retired airline pilot; state trooper; Boeing personnel manager; orthodontist; property management executive; and office building owner. Not a single person with a divinity degree.

[Alvino]

Not offended, but puzzled. I have read any number of books and talks produced by general authorities and have found much profundity. On the other hand, if you are thinking of local bishops and stake presidents, well, consider that one such as I was once called to be a branch president. Local leaders are supposed to be salt-of-the-earth, or at least regular folks. And consider that they are taken from all walks of life. My own ward bishops have included the following: retired airline pilot; state trooper; Boeing personnel manager; orthodontist; property management executive; and office building owner. Not a single person with a divinity degree.

I had the general authorities in mind; sorry for not being clear. About you finding them profound, all I can say is that that hasn't been my experience and, when I try and read or watch things said by them, I get terribly disappointed.

Would appreciate if you directed me to good material, though. What are some of the talks you think are the most profound of the general authorities?

Edited January 27, 2013 by Alvino

[Stargazer]

I had the general authorities in mind; sorry for not being clear. About you finding them profound, all I can say is that that hasn't been my experience and, when I try and read or watch things said by them, I get terribly disappointed.

Would appreciate if you directed me to good material, though. What are some of the talks you think are the most profound of the general authorities?

OK. But here we are going to find ourselves struggling with the meaning of the word "profound". Given that you are not a believer in God, let alone inspiration via the Holy Spirit, what I imagine you are looking for in the way of profundity is quite worldly. You and I are certainly going to have differences of opinion on that.

But just to put a couple out there, I find that General Conference talks given by Henry B. Eyring are consistently uplifting and profound. Dallin H. Oaks is likewise very good.

Try these:

• Henry B. Eyring: Mountains to Climb
  
• Dallin H. Oaks: Sacrifice
  

[Rivers]

I had the general authorities in mind; sorry for not being clear. About you finding them profound, all I can say is that that hasn't been my experience and, when I try and read or watch things said by them, I get terribly disappointed.

Would appreciate if you directed me to good material, though. What are some of the talks you think are the most profound of the general authorities?

I would say that there is a lot of profundity in most of Pres. Uchdorf's talks.

Even if most his talks involve airplanes.

Edited January 27, 2013 by Rivers

[Alvino]

I would say that there is a lot of profundity in most of Pres. Uchdorf's talks.

Even if most his talks involve airplanes.

What's his best or some of hist best? I've seen him many times; I'm not that unfamiliar with your authorities.

[Stargazer]

I would say that there is a lot of profundity in most of Pres. Uchdorf's talks.

Even if most his talks involve airplanes.

Yes, try this one: Of Things That Matter Most

Early on in the talk he says: "At this point some of you may be thinking, “That’s all very fine and good, but what does it have to do with flying an airplane?” Well, let me tell you."

[Alvino]

Yes, try this one: Of Things That Matter Most

Early on in the talk he says: "At this point some of you may be thinking, “That’s all very fine and good, but what does it have to do with flying an airplane?” Well, let me tell you."

Can't help but notice the ironies here. I ask you for something profound and you offer me a talk about going back to the simple teachings and the basics.

Also, President Uchdorf says, "The reason we return to these foundational principles, to the pure doctrines, is because they are the gateway to truths of profound meaning. They are the door to experiences of sublime importance that would otherwise be beyond our capacity to comprehend"

What is that talk? Is it itself basic of is it part of the truths of profound meaning (or a middle point) ? If it is basic then by your own source you didn't offer me what you thought I was looking for. If it is profound then it doesn't seem very beyond anyone's capacity to comprehend and what even Uchdorf considers profound just isn't.

I just thought that was funny. Again, I hope not to offend you but that wasn't what I would consider profound. I did like the analogy at the beginning, though. Please apologize the fact that by the very nature of my concern, to defend it is going to make me seem like a smug and pretentious individual.

Edited January 27, 2013 by Alvino

[bcuzbcuz]

I don't understand why #1 should be a con. At worst, it's neutral, and may be taken as evidence for the "restoration of all things" in the "Dispensation of the fullness of times."

For me, though, it all comes down to the Book of Mormon. Either (as MFBukowski would say) it "works" for it's intended purpose or it doesn't. As far as I can tell: there's no better reason to believe in Christ as unique among the gods, indeed as God of gods than the Book of Mormon, it would be nearly impossible for a mortal to fake given how well it fits in the setting it claims for itself and it would be stupid for Satan to do so (I suppose one of the Fair Folk could have done it, but it seems like too much effort for too little entertainment for them).

I don't mean to be argumentative but are you married? If you find polygamy or polyandry simply a "neutral" issue, I'm assuming you haven't had that conversation with your wife or future mate. I am in my second marriage, following the death of my first wife. My first wife, prior to her death, wanted me to promise to never marry again. A promise I did not make. My second wife gets uncomfortable about any mention of my first wife, even when my children talk about their mother. If mere conversations can stretch across the abyss of the grave, I don't see how it is possible to be married to two or more wives simultaneously.

I, for one, gladly live without such torment.

[Sky]

The best evidence for the Church being true is in the lives of the people that it touches, and that it works, in spite of imperfect men. And that it hasn't collapsed on itself. That God uses imperfect men to accomplish His eternal purposes - "to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man (Moses 1: 39).

There are an ample amount of resources out there for things that I would consider "profound" - good places to start are the scriptures, lds.org, mormon.org, General Conference links, and others. But you have to be willing to exert yourself and be open to learn. What is "profound" is in the eye of the beholder. And the Spirit may speak to one person differently than another person. But in order to be taught by the Spirit, one needs to seek it out.

I promise that it's there. And that it works.

[Jude2]

I don't mean to be argumentative but are you married? If you find polygamy or polyandry simply a "neutral" issue, I'm assuming you haven't had that conversation with your wife or future mate. I am in my second marriage, following the death of my first wife. My first wife, prior to her death, wanted me to promise to never marry again. A promise I did not make. My second wife gets uncomfortable about any mention of my first wife, even when my children talk about their mother. If mere conversations can stretch across the abyss of the grave, I don't see how it is possible to be married to two or more wives simultaneously.

I, for one, gladly live without such torment.

Just because you are personally uncomfortable with it, it doesn't mean it should be a con which is looked at as ‘The Best Evidences …. Against The Church Being True’. Some of us look at as a plus. Only God would ask us to go through the trial, if it was of man the Church would have collapsed a long time ago.

[why me]

For the church being true:

1. It is a lovely tree that has given the world good fruit to eat for almost two hundred years.

[rpn]

Best evidence for the church truth claims is that it has lasted this long, when no critic ever believed it would.

Second best evidence that Joseph Smith really saw Heavenly Father and Jesus in that first vision is that he was steeped and trained in the triune God of Christianity. How would would he imagine something so different from his upbringing and all of the plan around it, on his own as a fraud. It makes no sense at all that a fraud would challenge the most sacred issue in Christendom, if he was just trying to make his own church. In the hundreds of churches formed in the world today, is there any other that upends completely well-formed and historic notions of what God is and what He does? Doing that is what precipitated most of the persecution and the vilification, which even continues almost 200 years later on the same point. So why would a fraud do that?

[Deborah]

I had the general authorities in mind; sorry for not being clear. About you finding them profound, all I can say is that that hasn't been my experience and, when I try and read or watch things said by them, I get terribly disappointed.

Then you haven't been listening. But for truly profound, succinct statements, read Neal A. Maxwell who could put a whole sermon in a few words.

As I recall Christ himself spoke in very simple terms to the people, but those who were guided by the Holy Spirit understood so much more than the superficial message of his parables.

[Deborah]

Pros: the fruits of my life when I have lived the gospel vs when I did not.

Cons: those things for which even the prophets have no answer, though as I've studied more and had more experience I realize that God really doesn't give us everything and expects us to use the minds he gave us and to work things out for ourselves.

[savedbygrace]

The best evidence for the Church being true is in the lives of the people that it touches, and that it works, in spite of imperfect men. And that it hasn't collapsed on itself. That God uses imperfect men to accomplish His eternal purposes - "to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man (Moses 1: 39).

There are an ample amount of resources out there for things that I would consider "profound" - good places to start are the scriptures, lds.org, mormon.org, General Conference links, and others. But you have to be willing to exert yourself and be open to learn. What is "profound" is in the eye of the beholder. And the Spirit may speak to one person differently than another person. But in order to be taught by the Spirit, one needs to seek it out.

I promise that it's there. And that it works.

f tihs is the best evidence then any church could use it to claim to be true