• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Anything Goes LDS Thread (Everyone Welcome)

FFH

Veteran Member
I thought the Book of Mormon movie was one of the dumbest movies ever. I could do better special effects and sets in my garage with cardboard.
I've been on two "Touched By an Angel" sets, one at night (outdoor) and one during the day (outdoor).

You really cannot grasp an understanding of how much man power, equipment and money is involved in making a simple 10 or 15 minute scene.

Add post production, musical scores, advertising, investor payoffs, etc. and you are quickly in the millions for any movie or T.V. series.

I was offered to be a permanent extra on the set of "Touched by an Angel". The shift was from 6 am to 6 pm, 12 hours a day, 10 bucks an hour (the pay is higher now) so multiply that by a huge number of extras being used on the set each day, not to mention the technical and professional crew as well as the professional actors.
 

Sola'lor

LDSUJC
You really cannot grasp an understanding of how much man power, equipment and money is involved in make a simple 10 or 15 minute scene.

Actually I can. I work in the TV industry. I've studied film making most of my life. But I can understand your response considering my quip about set production. But that still doesn't redeem the poor quality of the BoM Movie.
 

kadzbiz

..........................
Actually, that is what I'm suggesting. Lots of evidence has been uncovered that suggests these ancient inhabitants had baptismal fonts, temple worship, and other religious ceremonies consistent with the teachings of the Nephites. But, of course, since most of the scientists have no knowledge of the Nephites they're not going to tie the two together, are they? Looked at objectively there are some very fascinating discoveries. I fear though that you're asking the questions because you reside only in the skeptical camp...

Well, I'm going on what I've watch in doco's and the experts used in them have stated that no writings or artifacts have ever been found to signify the presence of the Nephite people. I did a search on google and found only a handful of articles that had any reference at all, but they all refered to the BoM apart from one which shows a newspaper article, which says barely anything except the fact that it was Mormons who made some discovery. I don't think that was very independant or verified by anyone independant. If you can refer me to any articles where it shows otherwise, then I'm happy to look at them.

I don't reside in a skeptical camp thankyou very much. I am open to many things, it's just that I ask confrontational questions that upset some people.

What kind of evidence do you believe would be conclusive?

Good question. What about evidence of battles, weapons, skeletons, crops, metallurgical sites, Nephi's replica of Solomon's Temple, written documents, temples and the cities themselves - and, I don't know a lot about them, but where are the golden plates that Joseph Smith located?

.....by the way you're very good at discussing religion...... You're a tremendously talented individual.

I concur.
 

FFH

Veteran Member
Actually I can. I work in the TV industry. I've studied film making most of my life. But I can understand your response considering my quip about set production. But that still doesn't redeem the poor quality of the BoM Movie.
What do you expect with little or no investors willing to come forward and help ???
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
Good question. What about evidence of battles, weapons, skeletons, crops, metallurgical sites, Nephi's replica of Solomon's Temple, written documents, temples and the cities themselves - and, I don't know a lot about them, but where are the golden plates that Joseph Smith located?
My guess is that you're not going to find anything conclusive, anything that is going make you say, "Wow! That's proof!" However, many of the accusations our critics have thrown at us over the years have been proven to be false. In terms of "Such and such did not exist in the Americas prior to the Spanish Conquest" types of arguments, some very interesting finds have been discovered recently. Since I really don't have the time to go into detail myself, here is a link to an excellent site where this topic is addressed pretty extensively: Book of Mormon Evidences. By the way, did you bother reading the link I posted to the article about DNA and the Book of Mormon?

From the link I am recommending:

The information included also provides links to other pages of mine, such as pages on The Book of Mormon and metal plates; chiasmus; the controversial issue of DNA and the Book of Mormon (or, should modern Native Americans have Jewish DNA?); Mesoamerican fortifications; alleged Book of Mormon problems; questions about plants and animals in the Book of Mormon; metals and weapons in the Book of Mormon, a response to the Smithsonian Institution's Statement Regarding the Book of Mormon, a discussion of 2 Nephi 12 and the Septuagint, and more.
 

kadzbiz

..........................
My guess is that you're not going to find anything conclusive, anything that is going make you say, "Wow! That's proof!"

How unfortunate.

However, many of the accusations our critics have thrown at us over the years have been proven to be false. In terms of "Such and such did not exist in the Americas prior to the Spanish Conquest" types of arguments, some very interesting finds have been discovered recently. Since I really don't have the time to go into detail myself, here is a link to an excellent site where this topic is addressed pretty extensively: Book of Mormon Evidences. By the way, did you bother reading the link I posted to the article about DNA and the Book of Mormon?
From the link I am recommending:

The information included also provides links to other pages of mine, such as pages on The Book of Mormon and metal plates; chiasmus; the controversial issue of DNA and the Book of Mormon (or, should modern Native Americans have Jewish DNA?); Mesoamerican fortifications; alleged Book of Mormon problems; questions about plants and animals in the Book of Mormon; metals and weapons in the Book of Mormon, a response to the Smithsonian Institution's Statement Regarding the Book of Mormon, a discussion of 2 Nephi 12 and the Septuagint, and more.

Okay, you've given me a lot of work there. Give me time to go through it. I'm trying to keep three young kids entertained, so give me some time. But without having read all your stuff yet, can't I have a simple answer to the current situation of the gold plates?
 

trugschlusskadenz

New Member
Well, in this case, it symbolizes something else. There is really nothing I can do about that.
the term "skin-deep" does not cover inboard- but surface-matters, which makes me believe that a "skin-curse" has to be something referring to "periphery".
changing the meaning of defined expressions lacks authority.

The Church does not condemn same-sex attraction as a crime. It condemns sex outside of marriage, whether it be homosexual sex or heterosexual sex. I would agree with you that we don't choose our sexual orientation.
since your church does not condemn same-sex-attraction you could legalize same-sex-marriages, which bannes sex outside of marriage, and homosexuals do get a fair chance to live their relationship eternally.

We do, however, choose our actions.
wish you were right, but i fear you are not.
to a vast extent our actions can be considered as conditioned response to breeding, education, society standards, a.s.o.
the small rest of our freedom to decide is narrowed by vital drives.

no offence, i am just investigating by no means cornering.

.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
Okay, you've given me a lot of work there. Give me time to go through it. I'm trying to keep three young kids entertained, so give me some time. But without having read all your stuff yet, can't I have a simple answer to the current situation of the gold plates?
Sure. Joseph Smith returned them to Moroni, who gave them to him. If your next statement is going to be "Oh, how convenient!", let me assure you that it is not.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
the term "skin-deep" does not cover inboard- but surface-matters, which makes me believe that a "skin-curse" has to be something referring to "periphery". changing the meaning of defined expressions lacks authority.
I can't think of a single good reason why we shouldn't be able to interpret our own scriptures authoritatively, can you?

since your church does not condemn same-sex-attraction you could legalize same-sex-marriages, which bannes sex outside of marriage, and homosexuals do get a fair chance to live their relationship eternally.
My Church does not make the laws of the land, though. I have no personal quarrel with same-sex marriages, but my Church does. The fact remains, though, that we do not control the U.S. Congress.


wish you were right, but i fear you are not.
to a vast extent our actions can be considered as conditioned response to breeding, education, society standards, a.s.o.
the small rest of our freedom to decide is narrowed by vital drives.
Sure, we are influenced by our education, culture and a myriad of other factors. But as a heterosexual female, I made the choice to remain a virgin until I got married. Since my husband as I dated for 3 years before marrying, I won't tell you it was easy. But since I believed it to be the right thing for me to so, I made a commitment which I kept.

no offence, i am just investigating by no means cornering.
No problem.

 

trugschlusskadenz

New Member
My Church does not make the laws of the land, though. I have no personal quarrel with same-sex marriages, but my Church does. The fact remains, though, that we do not control the U.S. Congress.
in europe you either get married at a city hall - you are a legal couple by state-laws then - or else have a representative of a church to wed you - which makes you a legal pair before the lord;
i know married (heterosexual) people who only got married in church. no need to bother congresses.
.
 

TrueBlue2

Member
And there's a lot of debate and discussion about the Hill Cumorah as well. I guess will just let this one go. For the future, however, you might want to lay off the personal attacks such as "bit off more than you can chew" and "you should do this or that."

By the way, welcome to the forums.

I fully recognize the ambiguity of exact BofM geographic locations, and I conceded the point just to avoid the debate that you seem to be seeking. But make no mistake about it - I could make a strong case for the Nephites being on both continents, and am confident that I am right. But I'll leave you to guard the gate on that one.
 

TrueBlue2

Member
By the way I'm sure this thread was started with the best of intents. Now suddenly we've got Mormons debating Mormons over the most trivial stuff (like Movies). I suggest that everyone quit believing they have to be 'right' on everything and allow this thread to be used for better purposes.
 

TrueBlue2

Member
Okay, you've given me a lot of work there. Give me time to go through it. I'm trying to keep three young kids entertained, so give me some time. But without having read all your stuff yet, can't I have a simple answer to the current situation of the gold plates?

Trying to prove the Book of Mormon is real and true using scientific methods is like trying to prove God is real using the same methods. Or how about Noah's ark? Where's the undisputed evidence that Noah's ark is real? And if scientists suddenly did make a discovery that corroborated everything we've been saying about the BofM would people believe it? To me the evidence is everywhere that God exists and yet people still dispute it. Scientists could find a city tomorrow with an old signpost that read "Zarahemla" and it really wouldn't make any difference.

As with all things spiritual the answers to the Book of Mormon are found in reading and studying it, lots of personal prayer, and waiting for the personal witness to the Holy Ghost.

Good job, Katzpur, with all that info.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FFH

Francine

Well-Known Member
Trying to prove the Book of Mormon is real and true using scientific methods is like trying to prove God is real using the same methods.

How about we just prove the Book of Mormon is false and untrue using scientific methods. There are no continually flowing rivers that empty into the Red Sea (1 Nephi 2:8). There are not even rivers which flow for four months into the Red Sea, which is how long Lehi and company camped along the River Laman. There are no valleys which would indicate there even used to be a River Laman. There are no secular records of such a river, which would have been an important water source for travelers in the desert of Arabia.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
For that matter, how can Christ's mother be a virgin if the Father is a physical being in Mormon theology?
Hmmm. I wonder how I missed this question. Are you saying that a human female who is a virgin can become pregnant without sexual intimacy, as long as the baby's Father is not a physical being? But if the baby's Father is a physical being, the same miracle cannot occur?
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
How about we just prove the Book of Mormon is false and untrue using scientific methods. There are no continually flowing rivers that empty into the Red Sea (1 Nephi 2:8). There are not even rivers which flow for four months into the Red Sea, which is how long Lehi and company camped along the River Laman. There are no valleys which would indicate there even used to be a River Laman. There are no secular records of such a river, which would have been an important water source for travelers in the desert of Arabia.
No records of such a river? Think again. From Book of Mormon Evidences:


An excellent candidate location for the River of Laman and the Valley of Lemuel has been found in an entirely plausible location. Photographic evidence and other documentation is provided in George D. Potter's article, "A New Candidate in Arabia for the Valley of Lemuel," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, Vol. 8, No. 1, 1999, pp. 54-63. Potter reports that in looking for a well in Arabia, about 8 miles north of Maqna on the Gulf of Aqaba, he stumbled across a magnificent narrow canyon that ended in a palm-lined cove on the coast of the Red Sea. The canyon actually has a small stream that flows continually, throughout the entire year, and is surrounded by very tall mountain walls. This valley is known as Wadi Tayyib al-Ism ("Valley of the Good Name")...
potter1.jpg
potter2.jpg


Other photos from the video on the Valley of Lemuel and other photos of interest from the Arabian Peninsula are shown in a photogallery at NephiProject.com. (While some of the findings reported in various videos at NephiProject.com may be somewhat speculative, I am particularly impressed with the work done regarding the Valley of Lemuel.)

To really understand the amazing strength of this evidence in favor of the Book of Mormon, I highly recommend the video mentioned above. Further information on the video is provided at a new Web site, The Nephi Project, at Welcome to the Nephi Project. It shows, for example, that following Nephi's directions almost inevitably would lead one to encounter the oasis and the spring that is the source of the "River Laman" at the beginning of the Valley of Lemuel, and that this is just where the Book of Mormon says it is. It is there--and no one in the Americas knew of it in Joseph Smith's day. Few experts know of it in this day. But it is there, an incredibly rare perennial stream in Arabia. After seeing the video, one can understand why Lehi would have been impressed with the setting and would have referred to the valley as a symbol of strength and firmness. The video also shows the grains, dates, and other edible plants available in the area, along with clear evidence that the stream flow all year round. The video also shows pottery fragments and remnants of possible altars dating to the first millennium B.C. that have been found there, adding to the plausibility of the Book of Mormon account. (The video is not highly professional, but presents the evidence clearly and is definitely worth owning.)

Could Potter's small stream, shallow and just a few feet wide, at most, qualify as a river? In the published article, Potter notes that there are several Hebrew words which could qualify as the "river" of 1 Nephi 2, most of which refer to any running stream. They could also refer to seasonal waterways, such as the "River of Egypt," which is Wadi El-Arish, a wadi that fills only after storms (see Anchor Bible Dictionary, 1992, Vol. 2, p. 321, 378). Or it can refer to large rivers like the Euphrates. The small stream found by Potter keeps vegetation green and healthy even when there has been no rain for months. It flows continuously, in spite of being reduced in volume by pumping upstream for use at a coast guard post and by many motor-driven pumps in the area tapping into the aquifer that is the source of the spring. In fact, it appears that the stream once had much greater flow, for there is heavy erosion of the lower canyon walls and water-laid calcite deposits on the valley floor that can be as wide as 15 to 20 feet, much wider than the stream. The river currently descends into rocky rubble as it approaches the Red Sea. According to Dr. Wes Garner, a retired geologist from King Fahad University of Petroleum and Minerals in Saudi Arabia, movement of the continental plates has caused the canyon to rise significantly since Lehi's time--the rocky place where the stream disappears as it approaches the Red Sea was previously submerged. Lehi probably would have faced a larger river that visibly flowed into the Red Sea.

The shady canyon and the stream of fresh water, originating from a spring, would have provided welcome relief to the travelers and undoubtedly would have been a place where the voyagers would camp and recharge. They may have stayed here long enough to learn that the river really does flow continuously, though they may have inferred that based on the green vegetation supported by the river.

How about the location? The Book of Mormon text appears to say that Lehi and his family traveled for three days in the wilderness after the reached the Red Sea (after "he came down by the borders near the shore of the Red Sea"). Is the candidate for the Valley of Lemuel in a reasonable location to match the text? Yes--it's 70 miles south of Aqaba--that's the land distance that must be traveled by foot (or by camel), not the distance along a straight line. That's a plausible but challenging distance on foot for three days travel, and a piece of cake by camel.

Potter provides photos, a map, and detailed directions on how to get there. More remains to be learned about this amazing site--but it must be regarded as another powerful and verifiable piece of evidence supporting the plausibility of the Book of Mormon. An anti-Mormon laughingstock has become one more piece of evidence for them to ignore.
 

Francine

Well-Known Member
Hmmm. I wonder how I missed this question. Are you saying that a human female who is a virgin can become pregnant without sexual intimacy, as long as the baby's Father is not a physical being? But if the baby's Father is a physical being, the same miracle cannot occur?

I'm not saying that, one of your Prophets said that:

''The birth of the Savior was as natural as are the births of our children ; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood--was begotten of his Father, as we were of our fathers'' (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses Vol. 8 page 115)
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
I'm not saying that.
For the record, you did say this: How can Christ's mother be a virgin if the Father is a physical being in Mormon theology? So let's not backpedal, okay?

One of your Prophets said that:

''The birth of the Savior was as natural as are the births of our children ; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood--was begotten of his Father, as we were of our fathers'' (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses Vol. 8 page 115)
You're already up to volume 8? Wow! I'm impressed! :D

Okay, so that's what Brigham Young said. Brigham Young was saying what he believed; he had every right to his opinion on the matter.

The following statement by James E. Talmage, clarifies what we really teach. It does not in any way contradict that which is found in the Bible. Therefore, it can be understood to be an accurate representation of what the Church teaches to be true.

We believe that Child to be born of Mary was begotten of Elohim, the Eternal Father, not in violation of natural law but in accordance with a higher manifestation thereof; and, the offspring from that association of supreme sanctity, celestial Sireship, and pure though mortal maternity, was of right to be called the 'Son of the Highest.' ...Miracles are commonly regarded as occurrences in opposition to the laws of nature. Such a conception is plainly erroneous, for the laws of nature are inviolable. However, as human understanding of these laws is at best but imperfect, events strictly in accordance with natural law may appear contrary thereto... ...True, the event was unprecedented; true also it has never been paralleled; but that the virgin birth would be unique was as truly essential to the fulfillment of prophecy as that it should occur at all. James E. Talmage, Jesus the Christ: A Study of the Messiah and His Mission According to Holy Scriptures Both Ancient and Modern, p.77.)
 
Top