off the subject of the video, but interesting nonetheless... http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0117mormonword0116.html?&wired it looks like the lds church is backing away (and continues to back away) from doctorinal teachings that have been around since joseph smith was a young lad.
You know as well as I that it would be very, very easy to pull absurdity out of the Bible, but Thomas is so much fun! For instance, Does Elton John have to ask for forgiveness for being gay? Who would want to take part in that kind of god? Elton John is a boss! <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dfY5566r0QA?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dfY5566r0QA?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
It certainly isn't. [quoteTo be clear then, are you saying that for a belief to be illogical, there must be absolute proof that it is wrong? First, this is different from your initial "it's logical if it illustrates an impt principle" argument. [/quote] Again I think the context of the belief is to be considered. If I hold to a literal interpretation that is clearly contradicted then I think that would be illogical but if I look at it metaphorically as an illustration of principle then within the context it is very logical. You may be right that is not what arno_ed meant by "logic" in that case perhaps a better term would be "common sense." Such things probably defy common sense but common sense isn't exactly the same as logic. Logically you can't necessarily rule out the fantastical completely and the most that could be said of something like that is they are highly unlikely. Even Occam's Razor doesn't absolutely rule out totally the fantastical just that the simplest explanation is the most likely. Anyway a question of likelihood isn't the main determinant of whether something is logical in regard to a belief system. If the basis of Christianity is that Jesus is divine then it is logical to believe in the miraculous proof of that divinity. As I have said I have spoken to self-proclaimed Christians who have that view and have heard it expressed here on Clutchfans. I can't think of anyone specific off the top of my head and not being involved in any Christian church can't say whether they would be considered heretics or excomunicated. Such views though are not new as even Thomas Jefferson re-edited the Bible to remove such supernatural events to focus on the message of the Bible. Thank you for the good debate.
I always wondered why those Mormon guys in white dress shirts are so motivated, walking around neighborhoods in 100 degree sun, in rain, cold, etc... They want to be gods! That part about black people is funny! But I have met some black Mormons. Can someone explain?
In a letter from Thomas Jefferson to John Adams on April 11th, 1823. "The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus by the Supreme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter." Thomas Jefferson
i can't explain per say... but i do have a few black friends that are LDS. one doesn't take the church serious anymore (upon finding all the racist stuff AFTER being a member for a few years). the other married into a VERY CONSERVATIVE lds family and feels trapped. his wife is pretty cute (she's brazilian) so he goes along... but we've had conversations - he would leave if she let him. so i guess what i'm saying is that it depends on the person, but most who find out about the black stuff after the fact don't take too kindly to it.
According to the book Under the Banner of Heaven, (IIRC), the bit about people with dark skin being sub-moral and not-church-worthy was more or less church doctrine but, as with many religions with any sensibility whatsoever, they changed for the better. If you go to the temple in SLC you walk into a (very hawt, actually) Benetton ad worth of multi-cultural women of all hues. You don't become the world's fastest growing religion without sincerely accepting people of all colors (and their dead relatives, but that's for another day.)
It wasn't "more or less church doctrine": it came directly from the Book of Mormon, straight out of 2nd Nephi. Doesn't it seem like they were a bit late coming to the right decision? Most people had come to the conclusion that black people weren't loathsome/cursed long BEFORE 1978: what took the LDS so long? Also, doesn't it seem rather convenient that the great "revelation" came just in time to ensure that the LDS retained it's tax-exempt status and help pave the way for expansion to Brazil?
QFT. Jehovah's Witnesses came around on that issue sooner than Mormons, 'coming around' being relative LOL.
Yeah, like I said, church doctrine. (Sorry I didn't look up the book; that's why I said "more or less.") Relax. Anyway, YES, of course they were late coming to the right decision, and the original idea was horrific itself. The catholic church only forgave Galileo in.. what? ... the last 20 years or something? There are not a lot of brilliant leadership groups for churches. I'm not defending this particular church, just trying to add a bit. You should check out the temple in SLC though, even just for the cultural anthro of it all.
is this horrific enough for anyone? a few brigham young quotes: case closed. you can't defend stuff like this. or even add a bit.
Sorry if my reply seemed a bit vehement. My bad. It just sounded a bit like you were trying to de-emphasize whether or not the doctrine existed, when in fact, it was very much central to the church, preventing people of color from being ordained or participating in certain rites. They were most definitely treated as 2nd-class citizens. True, but the Galileo pardon is a completely different situation. It didn't affect church policy directly, and definitely didn't have anything to do with racial equality. It was more political than anything else. The LDS doctrine was much, MUCH worse, amounting to church-sanctioned racism. For it to last as long as it did seems to indicate that the church was heavily motivated in keeping it around, which makes me question how much true progress there could be in changing the viewpoints of the leaders of the church in a scant 30 years. I'm sure it's a beautiful place, and culturally interesting. Next time I'm in Utah (yeah, right ), I'll check it out.
I got a visit from a couple missionaries today! unfortunately they seemed to be in a hurry, they just gave me the spiel and handed me a new years themed tract, I just thanked them and they were on their way. I always thought my first encounter with a missionary would yield more arguing and blood.
My guess is that they treat this like mass sales. If you meet somebody who is interested in arguing then you are wasting your time that could be spent on someone who is more receptive to the message.
I think it also depends on upbringing and where you are from. A few years back I met a Nigerian Mormom who graduated from BYU. My first question to her was how did you get to Utah, because your Nigerian accent is still very strong. She told me that Mormon's came to her village and converted them to the Mormon faith many years ago, so when it was time for her to go to college in America BYU was the only choice. Blew my mind. But again, that's what she was raised in. I bet most people are still in the religion that they were brought up in.
