|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
tomato
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: I get so little foreign language experience, I must be in Koreatown, Los Angeles.
|
 Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:11 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
One reason I don't believe in the Holocaust denial is that one cannot share a secret with thousands of people.
Mormons have defected and told us all about their temple ceremony and their lingerie.
Scientologists have defected and told us all about Xenu.
Moonies have defected and told us all about "heavenly deception."
Why haven't any Holocaust perpetrators or prisoners defected and told us all about how the whole thing was staged? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tomato wrote: |
One reason I don't believe in the Holocaust denial is that one cannot share a secret with thousands of people.
Mormons have defected and told us all about their temple ceremony and their lingerie.
Scientologists have defected and told us all about Xenu.
Moonies have defected and told us all about "heavenly deception."
Why haven't any Holocaust perpetrators or prisoners defected and told us all about how the whole thing was staged? |
Whether it was staged or "faked" is secondary compared to the question of to whose benefit was it orchestrated?
CUI BONO?
The truth is likely quite straight forward  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kepler
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 8:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have long thought that the strongest evidence against Joseph Smith is The Book of Abraham. Joseph Smith purchased some ancient Egyptian papyrus scrolls from a travelling antiquities dealer in Kirtland, Ohio. Joseph Smith claimed the scrolls contained the writings of Abraham and his translation was published as The Book of Abraham. http://scriptures.lds.org/abr/contents
At that time no one in America could read Egyptian so no one could check his translation. Thanks to the discovery of the Rosetta Stone, Egyptologists can now read Egyptian. These scholars have examined the writings on the scrolls that fell into Joseph Smith's hands. These scrolls were thought to have been destroyed in a fire but were later discovered in 1966 to be in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City. With the scrolls was a letter from Emma Smith certifying that they had belonged to Joseph Smith. According to Egyptologists, these scrolls are a common Egyptian funerary document and have nothing to do with Abraham. Even before this discovery, Egyptologists had known that Joseph Smith's explanations of the facsimiles in The Book of Abraham were false. A very well done video about this subject can be viewed at-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcyzkd_m6KE
If he didn't have the ability to translate ancient languages then his claims about The Book of Mormon should also not be trusted. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
contrarian
Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Location: Nearly in NK
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 9:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Keplar. accodring to some scholars Abraham was not translated correctly, others differed. Simply producing them does nothing to establish or question its provenance.
Now can your establsh the provenance of the various books of the Bible. Some have had proofs in Archeology but very very few. The very nature of religious practice is the acceptance of some things on faith.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
contrarian
Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Location: Nearly in NK
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 9:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Keplar. accodring to some scholars Abraham was not translated correctly, others differed. Simply producing them does nothing to establish or question its provenance.
Now can your establsh the provenance of the various books of the Bible. Some have had proofs in Archeology but very very few. The very nature of religious practice is the acceptance of some things on faith.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 9:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| contrarian wrote: |
| Keplar. accodring to some scholars Abraham was not translated correctly, others differed. Simply producing them does nothing to establish or question its provenance. |
What scholars? It seems pretty straight forward. The church produced the original papyrus, they were translated, and found to have zero to do with the Book of Abraham. It's not about missing a word here and there. It's about flat out lying by Smith.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_abraham#Analysis_of_the_papyrus
| Quote: |
| Now can your establsh the provenance of the various books of the Bible. Some have had proofs in Archeology but very very few. The very nature of religious practice is the acceptance of some things on faith. |
There's a huge difference here. A christian or an atheist can read the original and come up with roughly the same translation. A non believer oddly does not come up with the book of abraham. And as kepler stated, if smith is just making up one book out of whole cloth, using roughly the same story, you have to a great deal of skepticism about the other book he "translated". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dogbert
Joined: 29 Jan 2003
Location: Killbox 90210
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 9:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Many's the time I wished I had my own ummim and thurim.
I keep checking eBay, but no luck so far. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tomato
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: I get so little foreign language experience, I must be in Koreatown, Los Angeles.
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Keplar, thanks!
I just finished watching the video, and I enjoyed it.
Dogbert, I'm like you.
I have a couple of old Korean folk songs which I'm doing my dangdest to translate, and I can't even find a Korean who could understand them because of the antiquated language.
I wish I had the power which Joseph Smith claimed to have. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PRagic
Joined: 24 Feb 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 2:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I view Mormons the same way I view other religions; personal choice, just don't breathe it my way. Nice enough people if you just avoid the talk. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr. Pink
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Location: China
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 5:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| krats1976 wrote: |
Latter-day Saints understand angels to be ante- or post mortal people. For example, the angel Moroni who visited Joseph Smith was the post-mortal Moroni who was the last prophet to write in the Book of Mormon. Jesus and Satan, like all of us, were children of God. Satan was rebellious and tried to take the glory of God for himself, resulting in the war in heaven (referred to in Revelations). When he lost, he and his followers were cast out of heaven. They lost the chance which we all have to come to earth, gain a mortal body, be tested and tried, and to return to our Father in Heaven. This fact leads them to live out eternity in a subservient role because they have no opportunity for increase or advancement.
NB...There is some flexibility in this concept, however. There is nothing in our canon that says there aren't other types of angels; in other words, beings that are of some other nature than us. However, there is nothing in our canon to tell if these exist and if so, their nature and purpose. |
Thanks for answering my questions...some interesting things there. I wonder if all LDS are as informed as you, C, and CC? In my experience most fundamentalist evangelical Christians are idiots when it comes to knowing the history of their doctrine, or why they believe what they do. Or perhaps, you guys like the study of religious history? I find it an interesting field.
About the above quote, I won't say that your answer bothered me, as it opened up more questions:
If you believe that we were spirits, do you believe in predestination? Or do you believe we are spirits after we die? I am unclear on what comes first.
Now, the Bible states that Jesus was there "in the beginning" - as well, Satan was there before the creation of man. We know that he fell before we were created, and when he saw we were created, the whole serpent thing occurred (which i might add most people have trouble believing)...so then, how is it that the LDS believe that we were around before our mortal bodies were created? Or before God created us physically? Why would there be much need to discuss our "spiritual" selves in the New Testiment, or the need for Jesus himself to come and save us from sin?
How does the LDS interpret the Holy Spirit then?
Back to Satan, I can't buy that him and Jesus were brother and sister. Does the LDS believe that Satan is still around doing evil? (along with the other 1/3rd of the fallen angels)
How about the arch-angel Michael and Gabriel what position does the LDS hold onto these two? (They are only briefly mentioned in the Bible...one is the warrior angel and the other is the messenger angel - however, Satan was mentioned as an archangel as well...so 3 arch-angels...) Do you believe there are other arch-angels?
Okay, I think that is all the questions that came up. I am interested how other religious groups interpret the Bible about such things.
| Quote: |
| I think it should be obvious why the Catholic and the LDS church structure would have similarities. After all, they both adhere to the concept of Apostolic Succession. The offices in each church are different; however, they both have a hierarchial structure. Due to that fact, it's easy enough to equate LDS Bishop to Catholic Parish Priest and LDS Apostle to Catholic Cardinal. |
CC what's up with the tone? If it was obvious, I would not have asked the question. First of all, I was unaware that the LDS adheres to the concept of Apostolic Succession. I knew that you had a leader, kind of like the Pope, but I did not know that you claim he is a divine leader, like the Catholics think the Pope is. I was aware that there was a similar structure, that is why I asked the question: I was curious how they were similar.
I could go read those sites you pointed out, but this thread is about discussion and perhaps others have the same questions I do... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CentralCali
Joined: 17 May 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 5:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mr. Pink wrote: |
| Thanks for answering my questions...some interesting things there. I wonder if all LDS are as informed as you, C, and CC? |
Oh, no. They're not. I participate on an LDS online forum and a number of the posters there aren't all that up on the doctrines of our church. To be fair, those posters are trying to learn the official doctrine. The usual advice given to them is, "Attend your church meetings." Every time I see that, I get a laugh.
| Quote: |
| In my experience most fundamentalist evangelical Christians are idiots when it comes to knowing the history of their doctrine, or why they believe what they do. |
In my experience, the most vocal of the Fundamentalist Evangelicals are barely one step above functional illiterates. The most vocal ones I've encountered know very little about the Bible, let alone their denomination's, or Christianity's as a whole, history. My personal opinion is that they have elevated a book they cannot understand to the status of idol and are offended that someone else does not do the same. They seem to think that simply because someone else believes differently than they do, that is an actual attack on their own faith.
| Quote: |
| Or perhaps, you guys like the study of religious history? I find it an interesting field. |
I'm addicted to Comparative Religion. It's really a fascinating field. Religious history has to be part of that.
| Quote: |
| If you believe that we were spirits, do you believe in predestination? |
There's a concept in LDS theology known as foreordination. Basically, it means that in the pre-existence, spirits are ordained to what they may become in this life. It's kind of a looking-back thing: Moses was a prophet so therefore he was foreordained to that office.
Otherwise, we don't hold to predestination.
| Quote: |
| Or do you believe we are spirits after we die? I am unclear on what comes first. |
We go with the idea of pre-existence, this life, then the afterlife.
| Quote: |
Now, the Bible states that Jesus was there "in the beginning" - as well, Satan was there before the creation of man. We know that he fell before we were created, and when he saw we were created, the whole serpent thing occurred (which i might add most people have trouble believing)...so then, how is it that the LDS believe that we were around before our mortal bodies were created? Or before God created us physically? Why would there be much need to discuss our "spiritual" selves in the New Testiment, or the need for Jesus himself to come and save us from sin?
How does the LDS interpret the Holy Spirit then? |
We believe that our spirits, not our physical bodies, were created before this life. The LDS take on the Garden of Eden is a bit different than other denominations but, in short, it holds to the idea that man disobeyed God and thus became subject to physical death. The sinning bit is the rationale for the Redeemer's necessity.
| Quote: |
| Back to Satan, I can't buy that him and Jesus were brother and sister. |
Brothers, just like you and Jesus are brothers spiritually.
| Quote: |
| Does the LDS believe that Satan is still around doing evil? (along with the other 1/3rd of the fallen angels) |
Yes.
| Quote: |
| How about the arch-angel Michael and Gabriel what position does the LDS hold onto these two? (They are only briefly mentioned in the Bible...one is the warrior angel and the other is the messenger angel - however, Satan was mentioned as an archangel as well...so 3 arch-angels...) Do you believe there are other arch-angels? |
I suppose it's possible. As mentioned upthread, we believe that angels are spirits.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| I think it should be obvious why the Catholic and the LDS church structure would have similarities. After all, they both adhere to the concept of Apostolic Succession. The offices in each church are different; however, they both have a hierarchial structure. Due to that fact, it's easy enough to equate LDS Bishop to Catholic Parish Priest and LDS Apostle to Catholic Cardinal. |
CC what's up with the tone? If it was obvious, I would not have asked the question. First of all, I was unaware that the LDS adheres to the concept of Apostolic Succession. I knew that you had a leader, kind of like the Pope, but I did not know that you claim he is a divine leader, like the Catholics think the Pope is. I was aware that there was a similar structure, that is why I asked the question: I was curious how they were similar.
I could go read those sites you pointed out, but this thread is about discussion and perhaps others have the same questions I do... |
I didn't mean for it to come across with a negative tone. I guess I had shifted into "lecture mode."
We consider that anyone in any church position (we call those positions callings) has "been called of God" to that position. We also believe in personal revelation in connection with one's calling. The President of the Church has a more extensive calling than the local ward's Bishop, but we consider them both to be inspired.
I think you've posed some good questions. No tone meant earlier.
Last edited by CentralCali on Thu Oct 25, 2007 6:58 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 6:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Court: Freemasonry a Religion ... Sort of
Contributed by Cary McMullen - Posted: October 11, 2007 1:56:30 PM
A court in Los Angeles has ruled that Freemasonry is a form of "religious exercise," comparable to Christianity and Islam. "We see no principled way to distinguish the earnest pursuit of these (Masonic) principles ... from more widely acknowledged modes of religious exercise," said the ruling. The case involved the Los Angeles Scottish Rite Cathedral and the Scottish Rite Cathedral Association of Los Angeles. The groups had leased out the cathedral for events such as dances, in apparent violation of zoning rules that restrict it to Masonic events only. The Masons had sought relief under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons (RLUIPA) act. But even though the court ruled the Masons are a religious group, it said RLUIPA didn't apply to them, so it was a Pyrrhic victory.
Both my grandfathers were Masons. When I was a kid, one of them showed me his guidebook, which technically he wasn't supposed to do because Masons are sworn to secrecy about their rituals. No harm done -- I didn't understand any of it, in part because it was full of strange symbols. Basically, I always figured Freemasonry was a practice that sort of supplemented Christian belief.
I just wonder if the secrets of the Masons were revealed in court?
MORE ...
http://blogs.theledger.com/default.asp?item=686680 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CentralCali
Joined: 17 May 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 7:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| IGTG: seek help. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 2:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CentralCali wrote: |
| IGTG: seek help. |
Agreed. How this guy can operate in society is beyond me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 6:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So witch RU then? Freemasons or Mormons?
IF you're Mormons you shold at least be aware of the historical parallels.
If you're Masons, you should re-consider selling your soul 
Familiar with this scripture?
"Forsake not yourself to secret oaths. Let your yes be a yes, and your no ... a no ..."
Hall-el-u-jah. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
