Tuesday, July 22, 2008

A Short List of Some of the Things I would have to Believe in to Accept Mormonism Again

A recent anonymous poster sugggested that I would someday return to the religion of my birth...I disagree...but it made me think of some of the things I would have to believe to again return...this is a start to the list of things I would have to believe. (I will be adding more items to this list from time to time, as I have the time)



1. That God actually exists, I see no evidence of this. (he never helped me find my car keys I guess)

2. That this non-existing God created our earth, heavens, solar system, universe {again there are better, more logical explanations for how our universe came into existence excluding a God figure}


3. That God created Adam and Eve…the "FIRST" earthly humans.

4. That Adam and Eve, according to Mormon doctrine, exited the Garden of Eden, which was in Missouri, 6,000 years ago, after the Fall. That with the Fall, physical and spiritual death entered the earthly realm for the very first time. This is where the wheels of belief already start to fall off. The evidence so overwhelmingly supports the existence of man on earth for 100’s of thousands of years and death has been a constant part of earthly existence since life began, literally millions and millions of years ago. Only in Mormonism’s “reality suspension” was there no death prior to 6,000 years ago.

5. I would have to believe that the earth is 6,000 years old as stated in Mormon scripture D&C 77, something that I just find totally unbelievable based on all of the examinable evidence to the contrary.

6. That God lives on some actual planet near some planet called Kolob which shares its light with our sun. Now the interesting thing is that the word “Kolob” comes from the Book of Abraham, a book that has been so summarily debunked and proven to any thinking person, to be a fraud…that to again be able to believe in Kolob I’d have to believe in the Book of Abraham.

7. So let me address the Book of Abraham. It claims to be a translation of an Egyptian papyri written by Abraham, in his own hand. (see title page) The book is clearly NOT what it claims to be. Only in Mormonism’s twisted convoluted world, where actual truth and reality don’t matter can the BoA be real. So to believe in the BoA, I can’t believe in it for what it claims to be…but I must make some huge mental gymnastic leap and view the papyri as something it never claims to be…”a mystical revelation channeling device” through which Joseph Smith decoded some secret code, only he could see, imbedded within the papyri. But the evidence doesn’t support this. Joseph claimed to translate the papyri, he even took characters from the papyri and wrote their so-called translations in long hand. Clearly he wanted his audience to think he was making an actual translation of the papyri script. Bottom line, the Book of Abraham is a poorly crafted fraud which I would have to suspend reality in order to regain a belief in.

8. I would also have to believe in the Book of Mormon and believe it is what it claims to be. So let me examine what it claims to be.

A. a translation of a never discovered language

B. a religious history of a bronze-aged civilization living among a stone aged civilization with NO transference of their bronze aged technology.

C. A middle eastern Jewish people that left NO DNA footprint.

D. A people with horses, cows, camels, elephants, goats, yet were able to remove all evidence of their existence.

E. A people that were proficient in the working of metals such as gold, silver, steel, etc yet were able to remove all evidences of excavations, mines pits forges and all other sign of this technology.

F. A people who didn’t eat any of the known fruits and vegetables in the America’s such as the sweet potato, corn/maze…yet ate fruits such as figs, grapes whose pre Columbian existence has NEVER been found.

G. Basically the Book of Mormon describes a bronze aged civilization that thrived in the America’s yet left not one trace of their existence.

9. I would have to believe that the man Joseph Smith who claimed to see the physical God the Father and Jesus Christ couldn't get the details of his story right with each retelling of this fanciful story. (not something one would do if the story was actually true) In fact with each retelling the story only became more glorious and spectacular. I would also have to beleive that this same Joseph, who saw them in their physical bodies would within 10 years teach that God had no physical body and was merely a spirt...THEN...change his story again and claim that No God actually had a physical body. Joseph's godhead in reality...evolved throughout the years.

10. I would need to believe that God would command Joseph to use a stone Joseph had dug up while digging a well, to help in the translation process for the Book of Mormon. That God would instruct Joseph to use this same rock that Joseph had knowingly used to defraud people out of their money in his treasure digging scam. That God would instruct Joseph to place this same stone used in Joseph’s fraud in his hat and by putting his face in the hat with the stone he could also translate golden plates that were given to him by an angel named Moroni.

11. I would also need to believe that Joseph could translate these Golden Plates without the plates actually being present in front of Joseph…as he claimed that sometimes he would place them in a tree truck out in the woods and still be able to translate.

12. I would need to believe that this translation, from God’s mouth to Joseph’s ear via the peep stone, was so perfect that it only required a couple of thousand corrections after God had given Joseph Smith a word for word dictation on special parchment that would appear in his magical hat and then disappear once the correctness had been confirmed.

13. Perhaps the most difficult thing, regarding the translation of the Book of Mormon, I would have to again believe in to be a faithful believing Mormon...is the Official whitewashed translation story...which is actually a bunch of unbelievable bunk and lies...taught as the church had wanted this foundational story to have happened rather than how it actually did happen.

14. I would have to believe in a literal flood and a literal Noah of which even God’s so-called late-prophet believes when he declared…“There was the great Flood, when waters covered the earth and when, as Peter says, only ‘eight souls were saved’” – Gordon B. Hinckley, If We Are Prepared Ye Shall Not Fear, 175th Annual General Priesthood Meeting.

But was there really a great flood that resulted in only 8 surviving humans as declared by God's so-called prophet? If not, it significantly discredits Christianity in general and Mormonism specifically. Perhaps the greatest arguments against the traditional Mormon view of the universal flood, which supposedly baptized the earth, a doctrine proclaimed by Mormon’s so-called prophets, can be found HERE This article ironically written by two BYU Professors…pretty much sums up the impossibility of Mormonism’s traditional flood doctrine and why I find it impossible to reconcile it with reality.



To be continued…

10 comments:

Nephi Mormon said...

to see the LDS church gave you so much stress in your life. I am still a believer. Chack out my blog some time:
realmormonism.blogspot.com

Molly Mormon said...

Hi Craig, I know people don't often leave comments, so I wanted you to know someone in cyberspace was reading. Sometime I'd like to read what you did that got you in trouble but made you open your eyes. How has your marriage handled all of your changes? I think you'd enjoy my blog, so check it out sometime.
www.celestialsex.blogspot.com

Anonymous said...

Hey Craig,

How do you feel about people who leave the LDS and become Baptist, Catholic, etc?

To me, the funniest thing in the world is watching Evengelicals and Mormons debate each other. It's like debating whether Santa or the Easter Bunny is better. MY book of fairy tales is better than YOUR book of fairy tales! (Watching Jews and Muslims argue is pretty funny also)

Anonymous said...

One more point you forgot, do you think that the Mormon church should accept the doctrine of adultry for you to believe again? It seems that this was the root of your fall. Perhaps you could tell us in a little more detail about the fall.

Cr@ig said...

Anonymous SaidOne more point you forgot, do you think that the Mormon Church should accept the doctrine of adultery for you to believe again? It seems that this was the root of your fall. Perhaps you could tell us in a little more detail about the fall.



Cr@ig’s Reply LOL...So the brave sanctimonious anonymous poster “assumes” that I committed adultery, as IF that is the only offence one could commit to be excommunicated from the Mormon cult. Must I remind you that just 2 weeks ago, the cult excommunicated one of its members for merely publishing a calendar of topples men? Ohhh such a terrible excommunicable offence…fucking cult! Come out of your protective anonymity and let me kick your cyber-ass…But I won’t hold my breath.

It's SOOOO easy to dismiss me and my claims that Mormonism is a fraud if all you do is discount my message because I was excommunicated...then you have an excuse to stay within your Mormon mind control bubble and never examine the underbelly of Mormonism’s fraudulent foundational claims.

Follow the prophet ...He knows the way...even if that same so-called prophet has knowingly lied to support the fraud of his church....well if you want to blindly to be led with false hope...be my guest.

Bishop Rick said...

I believe Cr@ig mentioned that he was surprised at being excommunicated. This indicates (to me at least) that it was not adultery.

Maybe Cr@ig was excommunicated for being offended by someone or because he wanted to sin. Aren't those the only reasons people leave the church?

Remember, deep down inside, Cr@ig knows the church is true.

LOL

TB said...

Cr@ig, I recall you saying in the comments of a previous post something to the effect of 'establishing what is actual LDS doctrine is like nailing jelly to a wall'. I think there's a great deal of truth in that personally. But isn't it inconsistent to say that, but then to turn around and suggest there's some kind of list of things that must be believed by TBMs? The doctrines of Mormonism are either so clearly defined that one must believe them, as you suggest in this post, or they're amorphous and prone to revision, as your 'jelly on the wall' comment suggests. It can't be both.

Cr@ig said...

TB Says: Cr@ig, I recall you saying in the comments of a previous post something to the effect of 'establishing what is actual LDS doctrine is like nailing jelly to a wall'. I think there's a great deal of truth in that personally. But isn't it inconsistent to say that, but then to turn around and suggest there's some kind of list of things that must be believed by TBMs? The doctrines of Mormonism are either so clearly defined that one must believe them, as you suggest in this post, or they're amorphous and prone to revision, as your 'jelly on the wall' comment suggests. It can't be both.

Cr@ig’s Reply: G’day and Welcome TB. And in these parts of the world we call it Jell-O. Now as to what I actually said… more or less… was that trying to get a “Mormon Apologist” to pin down Mormon doctrine is like nailing jell-O to the wall. However since I have no idea where I posted those comments (I do recall making them) I could be mistaken. But either way, Mormon doctrine is firm and fixed until it is backed into a corner…then it becomes very squishy. Take the proclamations of Mormon’s so-called prophets as an example. They are the mouth pieces of God…until their pronouncements are either found to be faulty or controversial…THEN...These subordinates of God become mere men…speaking as such…dare I say squishy.

With respect to my list…it is a list of things that “I” would have to believe in to again accept Mormonism…Most believing Mormon’s are unaware of most of these items that I currently have listed or will list in the future.

Cr@ig said...

TB,

Here is exactly what I said regarding my Jell-o analogy:

Trying to pin Mormonism and its so-called prophets down on it's doctrine is equivilent to trying to nail Jell-o to the wall. Not going to happen.

Everytime you point out a lie, whitewash, misspeak, unfulfilled prophacy, discrepancy etc....Mormon's apologist merely jiggle and wiggle Mormonisms teachings and doctrines or imbarrassing beliefs by saying...Oh they were only speaking as a man not a prophet...or as GB Hinckley so famously stated on "Larry King Live" when asked directly if Mormon's believe that they can become God's. Hinckley said "Oh Larry I don't know that we teach that, its more of an old couplet"... WTF? My jaw literally fell to the ground when I heard my then so-called prophet LIE on national TV with my own ears.

So trying to get a Mormon to admit to it's bizaar doctrines...I'd have better luck licking that Jell-o off the floor...


Yes I stand by this Statement of mine.

Rebeckah said...

"One more point you forgot, do you think that the Mormon church should accept the doctrine of adultry for you to believe again?"

I thought it did -- I mean, how many married women did Joseph Smith ummm, share his special "blessing" with? How many of them were "excommunicated" for that adultry? How about Joseph, was he "excommunicated"?