Mormons and Frisbee

[I.P. Freley]

>>>But I do not expect seriousness from someone that dismisses the Bible as you have.<<<

Nor do I expect you to come to any other conclusion than that... Your statement "the miracles in the Bible are larger than life: they have been validated" tells me all I need to know, and all I have come to know, about your desire to see the Bible as anything other than fact. Even questioning it is an affront to you.

Simply, I disgree. Vehemently, categorically, and without a question in my mind. I don't share your faith. Period. This perplexes you, but I make no apologies for it. I find it curious that you use a document I don't accept as absolute truth or "proof" of your position when you try to prove me wrong, as in my estimation it just moves you further away from anything that I will accept as a valid argument.

What more can I say? I'm already composing your response to the above paragraph in my head, since it's pretty predictable. You've shown no respect for any position other than your own. Your accusing me of thinking myself an "expert" makes me giggle helplessly, since your level of self-awareness is so totally lacking I simply can't help it. Pot calling the kettle black, you know. I ask questions, I don't offer judgments beyond pointing out that attacking the BOM is head-scratchingly weird to someone who doesn't share YOUR faith in the Old and New Testaments.

>>>I find this criticism just as distasteful a rant as any allegation you've raised.<<<

Ummm, my suggestion that we shouldn't take the word "day" (or, perhaps, "horses") should not be taken literally is "distasteful"? This allegation of yours is totally preposterous. If any simple question is "distasteful", you'd better stop reading... It only gets worse below....

>>>perhaps you can give us all the definite reading of the Hebrew word for day, yom <<<

In case you hadn't gathered this already, I have never read any of the Bible in Hebrew. King James, yes. If you wish to twist my point to say something other than what it did, feel free. The Bible that I read says "day"... As in "On the fifth day.." So, am I to take this literally? No.

Is it possible that someone ELSE'S holy book has passages that are also not meant to be taken literally? Distastefully of me, my answer is YES.

>>>I would also challenge you with all the ways that God has used water through Moses and Elijah to show that it was not necessary to flood the entire Earth to a depth of 30,000 feet, but only that the water had to be piled up to cover all the earth that was inhabited.<<<

Challenge away. Although the Noah story is a little vague about how high the hills are (there is mention of 15 cubits rise in the water level), but the following is pretty unmistakable:

>>>And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and ALL the high hills, that were under the WHOLE heaven, were covered.<<< (emphasis added)

So sure, it doesn't SAY that Everest and K2 were covered, thus coming up with a rise of some 30,000 feet, but how about the native americans who lived in the Rockies? The Andes? The peoples of the foothills of Everest? Surely the flood would have to be well over 5000ft above current sea levels to flood all inhabitable areas of the Earth.

Either way, the language saying ALL the high hills under the WHOLE heaven is pretty unmistakable... As is the assertion that every living thing that walked or crawled or flew over the earth was extinguished, save that which was on the Ark.

If your answer is "well, that's not what it said in the original Hebrew", I officially give up. You have thousands of years of partisan Bible scholarship backing you up, you have the desire to search through it to stomp down on anyone who disagrees with you... And the desire to make light of someone else's Holy Book, basically calling it a fraud. If you don't recognize how "distasteful" it is to attack the COLDS, I can't help you any further.

 

[A Squared]

not on mine, thank the lord...that's gotta be the most pointless game ever...

More pointless than say .... football? Soccer? basketball? polo?

In their essesnce, they each (ultimate frisbee included) have exactly the same point, to move an object to a goal at one end of a designated playing area following certain rules, while the other team attempts to prevent this, following certain rules. Just because one may be more popular, or more televised than another doesn't somehow make it more purposeful ... thay are all pointless games, that's why they are called games. Not that it's a bad thing, games are good, they provide exercise, mental stimulation, encourage self inprovement....provide a whole bunch of benefits. Pointless is sitting watching someone else play games.

And, no I am not some ultimate frissbee fanatic who is offended by your words, I've played maybe 2 or 3 games, ever, and that was more than 2 decades ago .... I was just struck by the absurdity of declaring one game "pointless" while presumably, other games are "pointful???"

 

[Super 80]

Let me see, it is distasteful to "attack" the LDS when I question the bibliography of a book with no known original language and I question the textual integrity under the Biblical rule for a prophet who claims the Americas had horses which pre-existed European importation and Indians that are derived from Semitic peoples.

However, you as a non-believer are not "attacking" Christianity or me in particular when you dismiss whole sections of the Bible's Genesis accounts. But if the LDS builds its faith on the Bible, aren't you also "attacking" them by doing so?

I'm sorry, I just see a considerable amount of inconsistency in your position to such an extent that I can't really feel your pain for the wounding of the LDS. First of all, I don't expect this thread to shake their faith. I'm sure the elders (which really are the young men they send out) are ready with the LDS response for just such questions. Just as your ignorance of how events could have happened hasn't shaken mine, I don't think they're going to be too upset about just a cursory analysis. Besides, if they really are in conflict after reading this thread and started asking hard questions, I think they'd be better off for it. If their aim is to become closer to Christ, then they already have a vehicle for that in the Gospel accounts.

If you have rejected Christ that doesn't surprise me. However, your lack of faith in no way threatens mine. In a like manner my lack of faith in the book of Mormon does not have to impact a Mormon. And finally if your faith in yourself or something else is genuine, it shouldn't hurt you at all if Christians warn you of hell-fire. After all, you don't believe in such nonsense do you?

 

[ADG]

{As history, moreover, "The Book of Mormon" is riddled with egregious anachronisms and irreconcilable inconsistencies. For instance, it makes many references to horses and wheeled carts, neither of which existed in the Western Hemisphere during the pre-Columbian era. It inserts such inventions as steel and the seven-day week into ancient history long before such things were in fact invented. Modern DNA analysis has conclusively demonstrated tha American Indians are not descendants of any Hebraic race, as the Lamanites were purported to be. Mark Twain famously ridiculed the "The Book of Mormon's" tedious, quasi-biblical prose as "chloroform in print," observing that the phrase "and it came to pass" is used more than two thousand times."} Quoted from "Under the Banner of Heaven" Jon Krakauer , 2003.

I have always thought of it as a cult and not a religon.

ADG

 

[NEDude]

Funny how the Book of Mormon has caused such a heated debate on an aviation message board. That a few hundred pages of text, that a very, very small percentage of people believe in has ignited such passions in some very intelligent individuals perplexes me. Much time and effort has been spent by many people to 'disprove' the Book of Mormon, and I must ask myself why.

Enough of this thread.

I am going to go PFT at Gulfstream, then find an ALPA picket line to cross, send a large donation to the RJDC and whine about how I should be integrated into a major airlines seniority list while trying to scope the rest of you out of MY flying.

 

[transienttorque]

But what does the Book of Morman say about Frisbees?

 

[tinman]

Just a couple of things for now-

6. Have its doctrines changed a lot over the years? No.

Depends on what you mean by a lot.
Not to pick on you, just curious ATL2CDG, you said you have only been a member for a couple of years, but you don't believe in most of the doctrine? Why did you join? Again no jabs, just curious.

I really like this thread, it's very informative, whether some agree or not.

Those who have the faith believe it, and those who don't... Well, don't.

I would agree with that. I have no problem with the LDS faithful and those who have studied and honestly have come up with their own feelings and reasons for joining the church. My beef is impressionable (sp?) minds that are being taken advantage of. Example, my cousin had just got out of high school getting ready to go in the Army, met a girl who was LDS. He did his share of parties, getting into trouble and what not. He had gone to many different churches growing up and had a good idea about all of them. Well of course the girl won't give him any until he joins the church. Now all of a sudden, the mormons are the ticket. No ifs, ands or buts. He got baptized two days before he went in the service. That's just one of many stories of people I know.

By the way, where IS TB?

 

[ATL2CDG]

tinman:

First, thank you for the mature and rational tone of your post: it's a welcome change.

I was a member; I, too, chased tailed into the church. My wife and I met on one of my flights, I was rebounding from the break of a very serious, long distance relationship and, this is the real kicker, is was *gasp* attracted to me! My then love-interest and her family encouraged my conversion, but, at least early in the relationship, she did not pin our marriage or future on my joining (unlike many LDS women). Wanting to participate in the various, and at that time what I considered, positive activities of the church and feeling the need to have spiritual focus, I joined. Beforehand, being a relatively intelligent person (no comments, plz), I studied the various doctrines and ideas of the church. Given that I was born in raised in the 'bible belt', I had less than a positive image of 'those Mormons.' Many of the ideas of the church attracted me (eternal families, salvation for ALL persons, the power of personal priesthood) despite my hidden personal beliefs that are anything BUT Christian in origin. However, given the ease with which she has thrown away our marriage, I have since left the church and am enjoying the freedom of not being tied down to Christian dogma.

However, I must make a note of something I found extraordinary in your post: if your cousin's girlfriend was a devout LDS, she wouldn't be 'giv[ing] him any' until they are wed. The church as zero-tolerance for pre-marital sexual relationships and I'm flabbergasted that this girl would use your cousin's faith as a sexual bargaining chip. Oh well, LDS are human and sin just like the rest of us. Admittedly, my wife and I 'knew' each other before we were wed... suprisingly, my balls were put in a mason jar and ingored soon after the wedding cake. *sigh*

 

[I.P. Freley]

>>>First of all, I don't expect this thread to shake their faith<<<

So then... If my "defense" of them is such a mystery to you, I should be equally mystified by why you bothered to enter into this particular fray to point out what a fraud the LDS faith is.

Seems like a simple enough question.

Your answer, however, is to yet again misrepresent my questions as attacks. I didn't "dismiss Genesis", as you put it (but you sure as shootin' have dismissed the BOM, haven't ya?). I asked if possibly the "horses" thing from the Book of Mormon that you've mysteriously latched onto as your "proof" of its' lack of legitimacy was not meant to be taken literally, as we're not supposed to take 7 days literally in Genesis. Amazingly, this is interpreted by you as an attack. I have to give you credit, your blowing everything out of proportion is entertaining to read. Riveted... Riveted, I am, at your sensitivity to any questioning.

But what more should I expect from the person who has taken the Book of Mormon as such a personal attack on his own faith?

Then again, I guess I am not allowed to comment as a non-believer (which is, I guess, the greatest insult you can bestow upon a person). Being beneath contempt to you as I obviously am, I wonder why you bother. The horrible inconsistencies in my position which you refer to (which have yet to be pointed out, but oh how I look forward to your drawn-out, on-the-fringes-of-believability response) are nothing more than questions. I think it is simply questions that offend you, as questioning your faith brings out the very best (worst?) in you.

I feel no pain when you wound the COLDS, so don't feel bad that I feel bad about what you type, nor do I find it anything but laughable that you find me ignorant (oh, sir, how you do WOUND me ROFL). What I AM wounded by is your consistent murdering of common sense and consistency... Which, luckily for you, isn't a federal crime. Otherwise you'd be typing your responses from Leavenworth.

 

[tinman]

I'm flabbergasted that this girl would use your cousin's faith as a sexual bargaining chip.

I see this all the time here, don't no about the rest of Utah. Funny thing about parents, my gf in high school was LDS, and her parents didn't care for me too much(me not being LDS). 14 years later I'm good friends with her dad. He is an A&P and works out at the airport.

 

[I.P. Freley]

Yes, funny indeed.

I dated this gal about five years ago who I just KNEW would end up being an EX girlfriend because of her strong religous beliefs... And my lack of same. I dealt with it for a while but foresaw the inevitable breakup on the basis of a fundamental lack of common spiritual ground. Basically, I broke up with her before she broke up with ME (which she admitted to me later was going to happen).

So... I talked to her the other day for the first time in over three years, and what's happened in HER family? Well... Her older brother is an alcoholic and her younger brother is a recovering HEROIN ADDICT. "Recovering" meaning he went through $30k and six weeks in a clean-out facility in CA, and then ended up in the hospital after OD'ing less'n 36hrs after returning home to Long Island. Being "brought up right" is no guarantee of ANYTHING. Two girls I knew in HS, good friends, even, have gone so far off their parents' very Catholic reservation that it's amazing to behold. Their tattoo count exceeds all imagining, to say nothing of the unexpected sexual orientation of one of the daughters...

Anyway... Back to the ex. Her parents can't understand how their children have gone so very wrong after their proper upbringing, but their daughter has been a model citizen so far. She's even doing the "going overseas to preach to the heathen" thing, spending a month or more a year with the people of North Africa. As a Master's Degree-holding Nurse in NYC, she's earning far more than any pilot I know, and still affords a good chunk of her time each year to people of Africa.

And yet... Isn't offended by a heathen like me, unlike some posters on flightinfo I can name.

 

[JustInfo]

Interesting

For those close minded people that think Archaeologists have found and documented everything in the Americas...

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/04/040414003559.htm


www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1997/09/970923033351.htm


An open mind is not such a bad thing people...

 

[414Flyer]

Re: Interesting

For those close minded people that think Archaeologists have found and documented everything in the Americas...

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/04/040414003559.htm


www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1997/09/970923033351.htm


An open mind is not such a bad thing people...

Uhhh do you think it is a bit ironic that you decide to label those who dont believe the hebrew indians/ancient civilization LDS story when there is not any evidence for it, as close minded?

I mean what about those who believe that the Indians came over on a boat and founded a large civization that just disappeared without a trace, yet do not believe in the anthropological and genetic evidence that absolutely points to an Asiatic origin?

How is one group being close minded when there is no evidence to the contrary, and yet you would not think another group (LDS) is not being close minded when there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

You can believe whatever you want. But I would caution against just calling people close minded, because they, just like everyone outside LDS, do not believe in this Lamanite indians story.

 

[Mogus]

Closed-minded? You wanna talk closed-minded?

"When the Prophet speaks, the debate is over." In the Mormon church, talks given by the Prophet or the Apostles are automatically canonized as scripture, right up there with the Bible.

Anything, and I mean ANYTHING, that remotely contradicts the Mormon church on its Book of Mormon claims, its version of history, its doctine, or anything for that matter is labeled "anti-Mormon." This is a fairly effective means of keeping much of the Church wallowing in ignorance. I was reading about logistical flaws with the Book of Mormon online a while ago and my mom flew into a fit. I was no longer allowed to "view that filth" or do anything on the computer thereafter. I'm pretty sure she wouldn't have been half as angry had I been looking at hard-core porn.

Although the Church is very cordial with Christian denominations officially, there's a different story to be told in Sunday School. I often hear teachers and returned missionaries poke fun at the "crazy beliefs" and practices of other Churches. It's also very common for members to mention how the Mormon church has the perfect, full gospel, while other religions have only "partial truths."

Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera...

 

[ATL2CDG]

Closed-minded? You wanna talk closed-minded?

"When the Prophet speaks, the debate is over." In the Mormon church, talks given by the Prophet or the Apostles are automatically canonized as scripture, right up there with the Bible.

Although the Church is very cordial with Christian denominations officially, there's a different story to be told in Sunday School. I often hear teachers and returned missionaries poke fun at the "crazy beliefs" and practices of other Churches. It's also very common for members to mention how the Mormon church has the perfect, full gospel, while other religions have only "partial truths."

While the talks from the General Authorities are definitely held in high regard and often referenced in lessons and such, they are not 'canonized'. The only 'scriptures' recognized are the OT, NT, BoM, Pearl of Great Price and the Doctrines and Covenants.

And regarding LDS speaking poorly of other faiths, I would welcome you to visit a Southern Baptist church, Church of God or Disciples of Christ church during their annual 'Mormons are Evil' days. NO church is innocent of bashing other churches; heck, many Southern Baptist churches make fellow Southern Baptist churches look worse than the Mormons. Many Christians are, unfortunately, infested with the 'it's us versus them' syndrome.