Blogger on "The Alarming Truth Behind Anti-Mormonism"

[Hamba Tuhan]

14 minutes ago, Johnny Ghost said:

Can you explain this to me without the circular reasoning?  Is that possible?

I can try! (And you can let me know if I possess the necessary capacity!)

If you were writing a biography of a still-living figure, you would no doubt consult the historical record (written accounts from the past), but knowing that the historical record is always fragmentary, it would be wise also to consult the figure her-/himself. 'I read that this is what you did? Does that sound right?' The person could then confirm or correct your understanding of the past.

That's how we can know how God operated in the past ... because He is here in the present with us and can directly confirm or correct what we've read about Him from fragmentary past accounts.

[Hamba Tuhan]

7 minutes ago, Johnny Ghost said:

What if deception is involved ... ?

I think you mean, what if the original report is deceptive? Well, that's specifically where replication comes in. During my PhD research, I tried following a lead from a leading researcher in my area. But I couldn't do it. He'd fudged the citations to make it look like he was dealing with primary source material, but, as I finally discovered, he'd actually quoted another researcher, who had got the information wrong. I never would have known that, though, if I had either (a) just accepted what he wrote or (b) hadn't invested myself heavily in trying to replicate his research.

[Teancum]

46 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Because God in the present teaches us how truth can be known and tells us that this has always been His way.

God has told you this?  Or have your read it in scripture, which can be considered an attempt at some historical narrative, heard LDS leaders say this  and thus you conclude it has always been thus?  In what way has God told you this and what was it based on?

[Hamba Tuhan]

15 minutes ago, Teancum said:

God has told you this?  Or have your read it in scripture, which can be considered an attempt at some historical narrative, heard LDS leaders say this  and thus you conclude it has always been thus?  In what way has God told you this and what was it based on?

Please see my statement above: 'That's how we can know how God operated in the past ... because He is here in the present with us and can directly confirm or correct what we've read about Him from fragmentary past accounts'.

The heart of 'Mormonism' has always been -- and of necessity always will be -- personal revelation. As other historians have noted, this was one of the passions that drove Joseph Smith to the very end. He knew it wasn't enough for people just to conclude that he had been telling the truth; they had to know it for themselves in the same way that he knew it for himself.

It is, simply, the only way to build a church such that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

[Bobbieaware]

3 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Please see my statement above: 'That's how we can know how God operated in the past ... because He is here in the present with us and can directly confirm or correct what we've read about Him from fragmentary past accounts'.

The heart of 'Mormonism' has always been -- and of necessity always will be -- personal revelation. As other historians have noted, this was one of the passions that drove Joseph Smith to the very end. He knew it wasn't enough for people just to conclude that he had been telling the truth; they had to know it for themselves in the same way that he knew it for himself.

It is, simply, the only way to build a church such that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

I'm always caused to wonder why people who know very well the Church teaches the only way one can know if the Restored Gospel is true is by personal revelation still insist they be provided with the kind of non-revelatory proof that would hold up before the Supreme Court. And then when sufficient empirical evidence isn't provided they scoff. I'm trying to understand why people of this sort can be told the same thing a thousand times but still demand earthly evidence, as powerful and convincing as revelation, so they can ignore Moroni's challenge.

Edited January 11, 2017 by Bobbieaware

[Johnny Ghost]

2 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I think you mean, what if the original report is deceptive? Well, that's specifically where replication comes in. During my PhD research, I tried following a lead from a leading researcher in my area. But I couldn't do it. He'd fudged the citations to make it look like he was dealing with primary source material, but, as I finally discovered, he'd actually quoted another researcher, who had got the information wrong. I never would have known that, though, if I had either (a) just accepted what he wrote or (b) hadn't invested myself heavily in trying to replicate his research.

That works well in empirical research but not so much in religion.  Supposedly other religions don't have all the truth or are entirely false.  Yet, adherents in these other sects believe as you do that they have found the truth, through a spiritual experience that you claim to have had also.  Nevertheless, they are in error, supposedly, because they aren't following the one and only.  You may say, well those people need to replicate my experience and if they do they will agree with me.  But they will say that you need to replicate theirs and you will agree with them.   

[Hamba Tuhan]

10 minutes ago, Johnny Ghost said:

Yet, adherents in these other sects believe as you do that they have found the truth, through a spiritual experience that you claim to have had also.  Nevertheless, they are in error, supposedly, because they aren't following the one and only.  You may say, well those people need to replicate my experience and if they do they will agree with me.  But they will say that you need to replicate theirs and you will agree with them.   

Your response has reminded me of the man born blind and the Pharisees who disagreed with him over the role of Jesus in recovering his sight. Like that man, I can only know what I have experienced for myself: 'One thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see'. What would you have had the man say differently?

By the way, what 'spiritual experience' have I claimed to have had?

By the way #2, I believe that all sincerely religious people are following 'the one and only'.

Edited January 11, 2017 by Hamba Tuhan

[mfbukowski]

3 hours ago, Johnny Ghost said:

What if deception is involved and through deception, one is invited to experience the spiritual experience that everyone raves about? Is deception a valid means to the spiritual ends?  I would guess that you would say yes because the result is all that matters?

In that context, what does "deception" even mean?

 Is it deception  to tell soldiers to die for freedom?

How does one show that that is deception? In order for your allegation of deception to hold you would have to be able to Show an example of true spiritual experience and then contrast it with deceptive spiritual experience. You are simply begging the question. There is no objective way to show what is deception and what is not in this context. If thousands say the Sun spinned at Fatima how do you show that they were wrong?

 if one person says he heard the voice of God how do you show that he is wrong? How do you show that experience was deceptive?

Edited January 11, 2017 by mfbukowski

[Yirgacheffe]

21 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

No, those would be called subjective and personal issues, and demonstrate Bob's point perfectly.

Spiritual, social, emotional, intellectual, those are all subjective and personal, and as such can't be determined by another.  If a person says "I did A because of spiritual prompting" I don't get to say no you did it because of an emotional response.  The same holds true when someone says I did A because of intellectual musings.  The individual describing their reality is the definitive source for their reality.

[Gray]

11 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Too vague- I have no clue what you mean

Let's say someone leaves because they understand that there is evidence to suggest that the restoration of the Melchizedek priesthood was a story that was fabricated several years after the alleged events. That's an intellectual issue. A historical analysis won't tell you to leave or stay over it - the decision to leave or stay is always a personal value judgment. Whether or not someone has correctly understood the history, they've left over intellectual concerns (which have in turn affected their confidence in the institution). 

That's very different from someone who leaves because they haven't been socialized into the ward. 

Edited January 11, 2017 by Gray

[LittleNipper]

12 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Well then that does in the Bible

No rapture, no second coming, no lotsa stuff.  All this was to happen in the same generation.   Didn't happen, therefore by your logic, the bible was written by false prophets.

That would be Isaiah, Daniel, the New Testament etc etc.   OOPS!

And no one says you have to be a Mormon to have an excellent relationship with God

There are no false prophecies in the Bible. Mr. Smith was time specific -- the Civil War was certinally not the World War he had envisioned. And that is wonderful ( that one doesn't have to be a Mormon to have an excellent relationship with God) , because there are plenty of Bible believing Methodists, Presbyterians, Lutherans, Moravian, Baptists, Angelican, Pentecostal, Mennonite, And Independent Bible believers who thought Mormons taught otherwise!  Frankly, all any individual, anywhere needs is to believe in salvation by grace through faith in the shed blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ --- no more or less.

Edited January 11, 2017 by LittleNipper

[pogi]

14 hours ago, LittleNipper said:

A person does not have to ever hear of Joseph Smith to have an excellent Father and son like relationship with the Lord.  

I would never argue otherwise.  You can compare Joseph Smith to Hitler and justify his abuse and murder all you want, but from my perspective Joseph Smith was a man of God.  Joseph has done nothing but nurture my personal relationship with the Lord.  That is something that no intellectual heaving can take from me.  That would be like trying to intellectually convince me that Philippine mango's don't taste good.

If your intent here is to dissuade me  from believing in Joseph Smith, you are wasting your time and I would persuade you to adopt more of the spirit of Joseph Smith and Krister Stendhal, a Sewdish Lutherine Bishop who welcomed the building of a LDS Temple near Stockholm in the early 1980's.  These are their words:

Joseph Smith:

Quote

Meddle not with any man for his religion

Quote

“We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.”

Quote

I have the most liberal sentiments and feelings of charity towards all sects, parties, and denominations; and the rights and liberties of conscience I hold most sacred and dear, and despise no man for differing with me in matters of opinion

Quote

The Saints can testify whether I am willing to lay down my life for my brethren. If it has been demonstrated that I have been willing to die for a “Mormon,” I am bold to declare before Heaven that I am just as ready to die in defending the rights of a Presbyterian, a Baptist, or a good man of any other denomination; for the same principle which would trample upon the rights of the Latter-day Saints would trample upon the rights of the Roman Catholics, or of any other denomination who may be unpopular and too weak to defend themselves.

Quote

I  have no enmity against any one; Father, forgive me my trespasses as I forgive those who trespass against me, for I freely forgive all men. If we would secure and cultivate the love of others, we must love others, even our enemies as well as friends

Krister Stendhal:

Quote

If you want to know what others believe, ask them. Don’t ask their critics or their enemies.

Quote

When looking at the religious faith of others, compare your best with their best, not their worst with your best.

Quote

Always leave room for “holy envy.”

 

Edited January 11, 2017 by pogi

[Gray]

9 minutes ago, LittleNipper said:

There are no false prophecies in the Bible. Mr. Smith was time specific -- the Civil War was certinally not the World War he had envisioned. And that is wonderful ( that one doesn't have to be a Mormon to have an excellent relationship with God) , because there are plenty of Bible believing Methodists, Presbyterians, Lutherans, Moravian, Baptists, Angelican, Pentecostal, Mennonite, And Independent Bible believers who thought Mormons taught otherwise!  Frankly, all any individual, anywhere needs is to believe in salvation by grace through faith in the shed blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ --- no more or less.

There are many false prophecies in the Bible. Daniel and Isaiah have several. 

[LittleNipper]

7 minutes ago, pogi said:

I would never argue otherwise.  You can compare Joseph Smith to Hitler and justify his abuse and murder all you want, but from my perspective Joseph Smith was a man of God.  Joseph has done nothing but nurture my personal relationship with the Lord.  That is something that no intellectual heaving can take from me.  That would be like trying to intellectually convince me that Philippine mango's don't taste good.

If your intent here is to dissuade me  from believing in Joseph Smith, you are wasting your time and I would persuade you to adopt more of the spirit of Joseph Smith and Krister Stendhal, a Sewdish Lutherine Bishop who welcomed the building of a LDS Temple near Stockholm in the early 1980's.  These are their words:

Joseph Smith:

Krister Stendhal:

 

Mistakes of Joseph Smith (prophecies unfulfilled)

1. History of the Church
   1. Prophecy about Jesus' return within 56 years--Jesus did not return within fifty-six years when 1891 arrived. False
2. Doctrine and Covenants
   1. Prophecy that the temple would be built in Missouri within Smith's Generation--This prophecy stated that the generation present when the prophecy was declaired would not pass away until the temple was built at the western boundaries of the state of Missouri which is in Independence.  False
   2. All Nations would be involved in the American Civil War--For, the Southern States shall be divided against the Northern States, and the Southern States will call on other nations, even the nation of Great Britain, as it is called, and they shall also call upon other nations, in order to defend themselves against other nations; and then war shall be poured out upon all nations. Wrong
   3. Prophesy that the earth will tremble and the sun be hidden in "not many days": "For not many days hence and the earth shall tremble and reel to and fro as a drunken man; and the sun shall hide his face, and shall refuse to give light; and the moon shall be bathed in blood; and the stars shall become exceedingly angry, and shall cast themselves down as a fig that falleth from off a fig-tree," Wrong
3. Pearl of Great Price
   1. Prophecy that Isaiah 11 was about to be fulfilled--"In addition to these, he quoted the eleventh chapter of Isaiah, saying that it was about to be fulfilled. He quoted also the third chapter of Acts, twenty-second and twenty-third verses, precisely as in the New Testament. Wrong

[LittleNipper]

26 minutes ago, Gray said:

There are many false prophecies in the Bible. Daniel and Isaiah have several. 

You may honestly wish to read the following. It is very well presented. http://evidenceforchristianity.org/can-you-explain-all-the-unfulfilled-old-testament-prophecies-listed-at-rationalwiki/

Edited January 11, 2017 by LittleNipper

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, Yirgacheffe said:

Spiritual, social, emotional, intellectual, those are all subjective and personal, and as such can't be determined by another.  If a person says "I did A because of spiritual prompting" I don't get to say no you did it because of an emotional response.  The same holds true when someone says I did A because of intellectual musings.  The individual describing their reality is the definitive source for their reality.

We're that true the sciences would not exist, much less the social science or humanities.

This kind of thinking is exactly the problem.

I think there was no President Lincoln.

[Gray]

6 minutes ago, LittleNipper said:

You may honestly wish to read the following. It is very well presented. http://evidenceforchristianity.org/can-you-explain-all-the-unfulfilled-old-testament-prophecies-listed-at-rationalwiki/

Sources matter, methodology matters. If you just wish to make a theological claim that all the prophesies came true, no one can contradict you. But from a historical critical perspective, they didn't. 

[mfbukowski]

38 minutes ago, LittleNipper said:

There are no false prophecies in the Bible. Mr. Smith was time specific -- the Civil War was certinally not the World War he had envisioned. And that is wonderful ( that one doesn't have to be a Mormon to have an excellent relationship with God) , because there are plenty of Bible believing Methodists, Presbyterians, Lutherans, Moravian, Baptists, Angelican, Pentecostal, Mennonite, And Independent Bible believers who thought Mormons taught otherwise!  Frankly, all any individual, anywhere needs is to believe in salvation by grace through faith in the shed blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ --- no more or less.

Perhaps you didn't read my comments.

Your reply is irrelevant. Where is the rapture? You are still writing so I guess you are here?

And for at least the fifth time how do you know the Bible is the word of God?

Because you were raised to believe it and never questioned it?

And whose hand wrote it? A human's?

[mfbukowski]

8 minutes ago, Gray said:

Sources matter, methodology matters. If you just wish to make a theological claim that all the prophesies came true, no one can contradict you. But from a historical critical perspective, they didn't. 

There are no facts, just interpretations ; )

 

[RevTestament]

39 minutes ago, Gray said:

There are many false prophecies in the Bible. Daniel and Isaiah have several. 

No they don't. I will be happy to demonstrate that if you care to outline your charges.

[Robert F. Smith]

On 1/9/2017 at 9:50 AM, california boy said:

Just to be crystal clear, this is the quote you are trying to defend by posting these article links.

You already tried this approach to defend you OPINION.  Throw a bunch of articles on the wall and see if anything sticks.  while the articles do talk about people leaving religion, not A SINGLE ARTICLE SUPPORTS YOUR POSITION.  Not a single article has any studies to back up your claim.  Not a single article presents any concrete evidence that agrees with your statement.  Not a single article can be used to support your position.

If you disagree, then post an actual study.  Like I said, your statement is just your opinion.  You can't even support it with a single study.  

Now I think I have repeated the same thing over and over enough so that you actually get what the question is.  I have asked the question in all caps.  I have put the type in bold letters.  I have italicized the question.  I have done everything I can to get you to focus on the actual question.  I have read your articles and found no study in them to support your position.  If you ignore the CFR this time, then you are obviously blowing smoke.  And just in case you still haven't gotten the question, here it is ONE MORE TIME

Your claim 

Quote

Most Mormons who leave the LDS faith do so based on their social comfort level, and any judgment made about the BofM is merely ancillary to that social feeling

CFR any study that supports your claim

You and rockpond both continue to ignore the obvious and are in denial about the primary reason why some people leave Mormonism.  Even other anti-Mormons frankly disagree with you:

Quote

Don’t try to explain with facts and logic why you left the church, at least when talking with believing family members or friends. Chances are, it’ll either have zero effect on them, or will actually cause them to hold tighter to their beliefs and more fully reject the idea that you have a legitimate reason to leave. Focus more on how you feel, while staying respectful of their beliefs. (As difficult as it may be — I know I’ve wanted to scream at people for being so illogical more than once!)
Good luck. It’s a thrill ride.  Zelph on the Shelf, “Conversion and Deconversion Are Emotional, Not Logical,” online at http://zelphontheshelf.com/conversion-and-deconversion-are-emotional-not-logical/ .

The Book of Mormon is simply not among the primary reasons for leaving the faith:  For example, “For those who are former Mormons, what triggered your deconversion?” Quora, May - Aug 2016, online at https://www.quora.com/For-those-who-are-former-Mormons-what-triggered-your-deconversion ; compare also http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=433614 (one person oddly claiming to be a former Mormon who got irked because the LDS ignored Xmas and Easter, but celebrated Joseph Smith's birthday).

The scholars share this same view on deconversion:

Quote

Religion plays a major role in easing the convert’s transformation by providing an institutionalized set of guidelines for beliefs, behaviors, and expectations that are socially supported and reinforced (Berger; Gooren). One’s ideological destination is identified, embraced, and immediately available. A positive emotional response arises from a sense of control and reliance on a higher power, a sense of assurance, feelings of ecstasy, and liberation through self-surrender (James; Mahoney and Pargament).

 * * * * * 

. . . deconversion is a perspective, a discourse, and a cultural repertoire.
* * * * * 
Exit narratives told from a deconversion perspective can counter religious hegemony by using stories about the social and emotional consequences of non-conformity to unmask and potentially de-reify religious domination.
* * * * * 
. . . perhaps the most significant finding and contribution of my research, deconversion was eventually a liberating experience that evoked feelings of freedom, relief, and happiness.   Lori L. Fazzino, “Leaving the Church Behind: Applying a Deconversion Perspective to Evangelical Exit Narratives,” Journal of Contemporary Religion, 29/2 (2014):249-266. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13537903.2014.903664?src=recsys 

Quote

The most common pattern of religious movement is out of religion altogether. Additional analyses show that religious switching patterns are congruent with explanations stressing the switcher's desire to worship with individuals of similar socioeconomic status, that some switching is the result of an individual moving to the religion of a stable spouse, and that movement out of religion is disproportionately composed of young people.  Frank Newport, "The Religious Switcher in the United States," American Sociological Review, 44 (1979), 528-552. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2094586?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents .

Quote

I argue that the process of exit and the way that it is interpreted is significantly determined by the power and social location of the organization from which exit occurs. . . . the position of the organization in the social order influences the way that the exit process is structured.  David G. Bromley, “Linking Social Structure and the Exit Process in Religious Organizations: Defectors, Whistle-Blowers, and Apostates,” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 37/1 (Mar 1998):145-160. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1388034?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents .  See also his ed. 1988. Falling From The Faith: Causes and Consequences of Religious Apostasy. Newbury Park: Sage Publications. 

Although intellectual claims are sometimes made, 

Quote

page 3, Mauss, in his observations of Mormons, linked deconversion to disintegrated social bonds, such as the loss or absence of close friends in the church.  Citing Armand L. Mauss, 1969 “Dimensions of Religious Defection.” Review of Religious Research 10: 128-135.
page 3, As Mauss wrote, some people leave the church because they believe that “regular church goers are hypocrites” and that “churches are interested only in money” (Mauss, 130).  Bradley Wright, et al. “Explaining deconversion from Christianity: a study of online narratives,” Journal of Religion & Society, 13 (2011):1-17, online at   https://dspace2.creighton.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10504/64291/2011-21.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y .

None of us should be surprised at the power of socialization in such matters (B. Altemeyer and B. Hunsberger. 1997. Amazing conversions: Why some turn to faith & others abandon religion. Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books; M. Chaves, 1994. “Secularization as declining religious authority.” Social Forces 72:749-774; L. Guiso, P. Sapienza, and L. Zingales. 2003. “People’s opium? Religion and economic attitudes.” Journal of Monetary Economics 50:225-282), and "“In this century, secularization is probably the more common way that people lose their faith" (J. D. Barbour, 1994. Versions of deconversions: Autobiography and the loss of faith. Charlottesville, Virginia: University of Virginia Press, page 2,  https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=w0whChb6hFQC&oi=fnd&pg=PP15&dq=Barbour,+J.+D.+1994.+Versions+of+deconversions:+Autobiography+and+the+loss+of+faith.+Charlottesville,+Virginia:+University+of+Virginia+Press&ots=BPU275EDkE&sig=uAw7X_qW4ONnP9E2-LxbTFzcDBU#v=onepage&q&f=false ).

The upshot being that "Most disaffiliates from Mormonism were always marginal members, and the metaphor of drift applies to their experiences" (H. M. Bahr and S. L. Albrecht. 1989. “Strangers once more: Patterns of disaffiliation from Mormonism.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 28:180-200. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1387058?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents ).

In other words, those leaving Mormonism are for the  most part not traditional adherents to the faith:  

Quote

. . . kids of certain faiths, such as young Mormons, evangelicals, and Jews, are more likely to stay in the fold than are those of other denominations.  Emma Green, “Keeping the Faith: How childhood influences churchgoing,” Atlantic, Nov 2014, online at http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/11/keeping-the-faith/380799/ , citing Bengtson et al., Families and Faith: How Religion Is Passed Down Across Generations (Oxford, Nov 2013).

For, as Lewis R. Rambo points out:

Quote

At least the studies that I’ve seen of sociologists in the United States and Europe show that most people remain in the religion into which they were born. The exceptions are people who were born to parents who had a mixed religion. Often, they will change. So, we can begin with the premise that most people stay in the family religion. Those that do change were in situations with a bit of conflict, and were perplexed about the issue.  Lewis Rambo, “The Psychology of Religious Conversion,” delivered at the International Coalition for Religious Freedom Conference on "Religious Freedom and the New Millenium" Berlin, Germany, May 29-31, 1998, online at http://www.religiousfreedom.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=356&Itemid=18 .  See also his Understanding Religious Conversion (1995).

Most apostates are, in any case, "young persons with quite liberal social values" (C. K. Hadaway, 1989. “Identifying American apostates: A cluster analysis.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 28:201-215. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1387059?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents ).

Edited January 11, 2017 by Robert F. Smith

[Gray]

23 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

There are no facts, just interpretations ; )

 

Sure. But there are historical interpretations and there are theological interpretations. They operate under very different rules and assumptions, as you know

Edited January 11, 2017 by Gray

[pogi]

39 minutes ago, LittleNipper said:

Mistakes of Joseph Smith (prophecies unfulfilled)

1. History of the Church
   1. Prophecy about Jesus' return within 56 years--Jesus did not return within fifty-six years when 1891 arrived. False
2. Doctrine and Covenants
   1. Prophecy that the temple would be built in Missouri within Smith's Generation--This prophecy stated that the generation present when the prophecy was declaired would not pass away until the temple was built at the western boundaries of the state of Missouri which is in Independence.  False
   2. All Nations would be involved in the American Civil War--For, the Southern States shall be divided against the Northern States, and the Southern States will call on other nations, even the nation of Great Britain, as it is called, and they shall also call upon other nations, in order to defend themselves against other nations; and then war shall be poured out upon all nations. Wrong
   3. Prophesy that the earth will tremble and the sun be hidden in "not many days": "For not many days hence and the earth shall tremble and reel to and fro as a drunken man; and the sun shall hide his face, and shall refuse to give light; and the moon shall be bathed in blood; and the stars shall become exceedingly angry, and shall cast themselves down as a fig that falleth from off a fig-tree," Wrong
3. Pearl of Great Price
   1. Prophecy that Isaiah 11 was about to be fulfilled--"In addition to these, he quoted the eleventh chapter of Isaiah, saying that it was about to be fulfilled. He quoted also the third chapter of Acts, twenty-second and twenty-third verses, precisely as in the New Testament. Wrong

I take it that you will not adhere to the spirit in the words of Krister Stendhal and Joseph Smith. Good day sir, I'm going to eat me some mangoes!

[RevTestament]

52 minutes ago, LittleNipper said:

Mistakes of Joseph Smith (prophecies unfulfilled)

1. History of the Church
   1. Prophecy about Jesus' return within 56 years--Jesus did not return within fifty-six years when 1891 arrived. False

Not a revelation nor a prophecy, but an opinion of Joseph Smith. The whole quote demonstrates that. The Lord did NOT tell Joseph "56 years should wind up the scene." That is an obvious personal conclusion of Joseph's. 

Quote

1. Doctrine and Covenants
   1. Prophecy that the temple would be built in Missouri within Smith's Generation--This prophecy stated that the generation present when the prophecy was declaired would not pass away until the temple was built at the western boundaries of the state of Missouri which is in Independence.  False

Not in the prophetic sense also used by Jesus who said He would return in this "generation" which refers to this generation of the earth rather than a single human generation.

Quote

1. 1. All Nations would be involved in the American Civil War-- For, the Southern States shall be divided against the Northern States, and the Southern States will call on other nations, even the nation of Great Britain, as it is called, and they shall also call upon other nations, in order to defend themselves against other nations; and then war shall be poured out upon all nations. Wrong

Joseph Smith did not do his own scribal work. His scribes put in punctuation where they believed was appropriate. Joseph received revelation like in days of old in one long run-on sentence often with many "and/s" in true Hebrew form. Here is the correct punctuation for this revelation:  "For, the Southern States shall be divided against the Northern States, and the Southern States will call on other nations, even the nation of Great Britain, as it is called. And they shall also call upon other nations, in order to defend themselves against other nations; and then war shall be poured out upon all nations." 

This prophecy occurred exactly as described but just over 2 wars. The civil war did start with the cessation of S. Carolina as prophesied. The south did call on the help of European nations, including Great Britain. But by that time Britain had done away with its slave trade. About 40 years later, it was Britain which called upon other nations to defend themselves against other European nations: Germany, Bulgaria, and the Ottoman Empire, and war was poured out on the world in the first World War involving more than 60 million Europeans and Asians ie Ottoman Empire and Russia. It was the largest war in history up to that time.

 

Quote

1. 1. Prophesy that the earth will tremble and the sun be hidden in "not many days": "For not many days hence and the earth shall tremble and reel to and fro as a drunken man; and the sun shall hide his face, and shall refuse to give light; and the moon shall be bathed in blood; and the stars shall become exceedingly angry, and shall cast themselves down as a fig that falleth from off a fig-tree," Wrong

This prophecy includes an allusion to the prophecy of Jesus in Matthew concerning the parable of the fig tree. This is indeed coming to pass now. 

Matthew 24:32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:

Traditional Christianity has no idea what Yeshua is talking about here since they have misinterpreted the OT.

Quote

1. Pearl of Great Price
   1. Prophecy that Isaiah 11 was about to be fulfilled--"In addition to these, he quoted the eleventh chapter of Isaiah, saying that it was about to be fulfilled. He quoted also the third chapter of Acts, twenty-second and twenty-third verses, precisely as in the New Testament. Wrong

We are indeed at the end of the prophecy of Daniel 10, and the Ancient of days has "stood up." The prophesied day of trouble is at hand.

Edited January 11, 2017 by RevTestament

[Johnny Ghost]

9 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

In that context, what does "deception" even mean?

 Is it deception  to tell soldiers to die for freedom?

How does one show that that is deception? In order for your allegation of deception to hold you would have to be able to Show an example of true spiritual experience and then contrast it with deceptive spiritual experience. You are simply begging the question. There is no objective way to show what is deception and what is not in this context. If thousands say the Sun spinned at Fatima how do you show that they were wrong?

 if one person says he heard the voice of God how do you show that he is wrong? How do you show that experience was deceptive?

I think you understand what I am driving at.  Religion shouldn't get special privileges and be subject to special pleading in order to fit your narrative.  Or do you believe that fraud and deception is impossible to show in all contexts because there is no way to objectively show what it is?  If so, maybe the criminal law and the civil law concerning fraud and deception should be changed?  Nevertheless, I am asking if "spiritual" experience is valid if it is based on deceptive history?