<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Bringing Down Holy Books</title>
	<atom:link href="http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/12/14/bringing-down-holy-books/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/12/14/bringing-down-holy-books/</link>
	<description>Reasonable Thoughts on Religion, Science, Skepticism, and Atheism</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Sep 2010 14:22:50 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Sakura</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/12/14/bringing-down-holy-books/#comment-77128</link>
		<dc:creator>Sakura</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Dec 2009 12:31:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=8601#comment-77128</guid>
		<description>Speaking from experience with Mormon parents...I have brought up the validity of the claims of the book of mormon (as well as it&#039;s proprietor, Joseph Smith, and his little history with the law) and the only response I would EVER get is &quot;Those documents are false and it&#039;s just Satan&#039;s way of deceiving people and you have to have faith to know that Joseph really did have the plates&quot; and as far as the validity of the book &quot;It&#039;s a direct correspondence of God given to Joseph and it&#039;s more correct than any version of the bible that exists&quot;

=_= Yes...they pull that &quot;gotta have faith&quot; crap no matter how much evidence I give them and even ask them to ask leaders in the church how they know this stuff is true (and just get back an answer along the lines of &quot;You have to have faith that they know what they&#039;re teaching&quot;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Speaking from experience with Mormon parents&#8230;I have brought up the validity of the claims of the book of mormon (as well as it&#8217;s proprietor, Joseph Smith, and his little history with the law) and the only response I would EVER get is &#8220;Those documents are false and it&#8217;s just Satan&#8217;s way of deceiving people and you have to have faith to know that Joseph really did have the plates&#8221; and as far as the validity of the book &#8220;It&#8217;s a direct correspondence of God given to Joseph and it&#8217;s more correct than any version of the bible that exists&#8221;</p>
<p>=_= Yes&#8230;they pull that &#8220;gotta have faith&#8221; crap no matter how much evidence I give them and even ask them to ask leaders in the church how they know this stuff is true (and just get back an answer along the lines of &#8220;You have to have faith that they know what they&#8217;re teaching&#8221;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Janet Greene</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/12/14/bringing-down-holy-books/#comment-76661</link>
		<dc:creator>Janet Greene</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 21:41:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=8601#comment-76661</guid>
		<description>Yeah, same with me. Can&#039;t really remember when I suddenly realized that I KNEW the whole thing was a huge hoax.  I remember feeling guilty for many years, knowing that christianity was true but that I was backslidden (and would definitely land in hell if I died); then I remember a long phase where I was terribly angry at christianity, but also scared of the rapture/hell (so I must have still believed it); then suddenly, rapture/hell didn&#039;t scare me at all anymore because I realized that there was absolutely no truth to any of it!  It was so gradual...a journey of about 10 years of reading, thinking, and discussion.  I do remember a few books that were VERY important on my journey.  They were &quot;christian&quot; authors who, in reality, are not christian at all but atheists claiming to be christian.  These include Celia Murray Dunn (Religion that Harms, Religion that Heals - wonderful expose on the psychological harm of a christian upbringing, and essential to my journey); John Shelby Spong, and Gretta Vosper.  These &quot;christian&quot; writers had more influence on my journey to atheism than the &quot;new atheists&quot;, all of whom I have read vociferously also.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, same with me. Can&#8217;t really remember when I suddenly realized that I KNEW the whole thing was a huge hoax.  I remember feeling guilty for many years, knowing that christianity was true but that I was backslidden (and would definitely land in hell if I died); then I remember a long phase where I was terribly angry at christianity, but also scared of the rapture/hell (so I must have still believed it); then suddenly, rapture/hell didn&#8217;t scare me at all anymore because I realized that there was absolutely no truth to any of it!  It was so gradual&#8230;a journey of about 10 years of reading, thinking, and discussion.  I do remember a few books that were VERY important on my journey.  They were &#8220;christian&#8221; authors who, in reality, are not christian at all but atheists claiming to be christian.  These include Celia Murray Dunn (Religion that Harms, Religion that Heals &#8211; wonderful expose on the psychological harm of a christian upbringing, and essential to my journey); John Shelby Spong, and Gretta Vosper.  These &#8220;christian&#8221; writers had more influence on my journey to atheism than the &#8220;new atheists&#8221;, all of whom I have read vociferously also.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Janet Greene</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/12/14/bringing-down-holy-books/#comment-76659</link>
		<dc:creator>Janet Greene</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 21:32:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=8601#comment-76659</guid>
		<description>There was a South Park episode about exactly that - a Mormon family who admitted they know the whole thing was bunk but continued to practice the &quot;faith&quot; because it worked for them anyway.  I have a hard time understanding how anything you know to be untrue can be a help or a guide.  For example, the minute I disbelieved in Santa, from that moment I was no longer compelled to be good in order to get a stocking next year.  So how can a disbelieving person continue to practice their religion?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There was a South Park episode about exactly that &#8211; a Mormon family who admitted they know the whole thing was bunk but continued to practice the &#8220;faith&#8221; because it worked for them anyway.  I have a hard time understanding how anything you know to be untrue can be a help or a guide.  For example, the minute I disbelieved in Santa, from that moment I was no longer compelled to be good in order to get a stocking next year.  So how can a disbelieving person continue to practice their religion?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Janet Greene</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/12/14/bringing-down-holy-books/#comment-76658</link>
		<dc:creator>Janet Greene</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 21:30:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=8601#comment-76658</guid>
		<description>And their male gods were really, really, (*whew*) hot!!!!  None of this robe &amp; sandal-wearin&#039; hippy stuff....these guys were buff!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And their male gods were really, really, (*whew*) hot!!!!  None of this robe &amp; sandal-wearin&#8217; hippy stuff&#8230;.these guys were buff!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Janet Greene</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/12/14/bringing-down-holy-books/#comment-76657</link>
		<dc:creator>Janet Greene</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 21:28:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=8601#comment-76657</guid>
		<description>Worked for me!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Worked for me!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Caton</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/12/14/bringing-down-holy-books/#comment-76570</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Caton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Dec 2009 21:52:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=8601#comment-76570</guid>
		<description>My advice:  full-frontal attack on something that people have socially and emotionally identified with their core principles is never effective.  (Think about it:  somebody starts off with &quot;let me tell you why atheism is stupid and Christ is the way&quot;, you&#039;re probably not very receptive.)  Two things that are of immediate importance to people are their social identity, and their values, both legitimately important questions.  So work on the values angle:  instead of the full frontal attack, gradually illuminate the disconnect between how they make day to day decisions, and what their book says (and unless they&#039;re all-out maniacs, there will already be a huge disconnect.)  Ask, &quot;Is the lineage of Native Americans that important to whether you behave morally, or to how I do?  Exactly how?&quot;  Since you both will likely agree on what is the right thing to do in most situations, think of a moral decision they made, no matter how trivial it may seem, and point out that there&#039;s no connection between Indian DNA (or maybe even, the Book of Mormon as a whole...) and their moral decision process.  Make a point of flattering their moral sense in the process.  They&#039;ll probably come away at least thinking about your points, and having trouble condemning atheists as immoral.  You obviously, even as an atheist, must have good moral sense since you were able to appreciate their own moral decision-making process.  :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My advice:  full-frontal attack on something that people have socially and emotionally identified with their core principles is never effective.  (Think about it:  somebody starts off with &#8220;let me tell you why atheism is stupid and Christ is the way&#8221;, you&#8217;re probably not very receptive.)  Two things that are of immediate importance to people are their social identity, and their values, both legitimately important questions.  So work on the values angle:  instead of the full frontal attack, gradually illuminate the disconnect between how they make day to day decisions, and what their book says (and unless they&#8217;re all-out maniacs, there will already be a huge disconnect.)  Ask, &#8220;Is the lineage of Native Americans that important to whether you behave morally, or to how I do?  Exactly how?&#8221;  Since you both will likely agree on what is the right thing to do in most situations, think of a moral decision they made, no matter how trivial it may seem, and point out that there&#8217;s no connection between Indian DNA (or maybe even, the Book of Mormon as a whole&#8230;) and their moral decision process.  Make a point of flattering their moral sense in the process.  They&#8217;ll probably come away at least thinking about your points, and having trouble condemning atheists as immoral.  You obviously, even as an atheist, must have good moral sense since you were able to appreciate their own moral decision-making process.  :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nazani14</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/12/14/bringing-down-holy-books/#comment-76452</link>
		<dc:creator>nazani14</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Dec 2009 04:42:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=8601#comment-76452</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m fairly sure that the guys who attended the Council of Nicea were brownish, mostly Mediterraneans.  I agree with the maintaining power bit, but great wealth did not always accompany religion back then.  However, they did not have to earn a living like everybody else.  I suspect that was the origin of priesthood - some guy who was a lousy hunter figured out that the rest of the tribe would feed him if he did chants and dances to bring the others luck with the hunt.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m fairly sure that the guys who attended the Council of Nicea were brownish, mostly Mediterraneans.  I agree with the maintaining power bit, but great wealth did not always accompany religion back then.  However, they did not have to earn a living like everybody else.  I suspect that was the origin of priesthood &#8211; some guy who was a lousy hunter figured out that the rest of the tribe would feed him if he did chants and dances to bring the others luck with the hunt.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nazani14</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/12/14/bringing-down-holy-books/#comment-76451</link>
		<dc:creator>nazani14</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Dec 2009 04:36:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=8601#comment-76451</guid>
		<description>When people say they&#039;re studying the Bible I give them copies of Bart Ehrmann&#039;s books.  Fascinating guy, who started out a fundie, and then found himself un-converted after he actually studied ancient languages and manuscripts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When people say they&#8217;re studying the Bible I give them copies of Bart Ehrmann&#8217;s books.  Fascinating guy, who started out a fundie, and then found himself un-converted after he actually studied ancient languages and manuscripts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Again</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/12/14/bringing-down-holy-books/#comment-76257</link>
		<dc:creator>Again</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2009 09:09:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=8601#comment-76257</guid>
		<description>Thanks SteelMag.  I have run into the testimony retreat before in the past and I think you are right.  I most certainly was pushing too hard.  What sorts of questions do you think are piercing, yet gentle enough to get them thinking and trying to discover the answers?  For example, if I were to say, &quot;Hey, you know the Book of Abraham is a total fraud.  How can you believe that garbage?&quot;  I&#039;m going to antagonize them and probably shut them off.  But I&#039;m not quite sure how I can bring up the issue without blatantly challenging the veracity of it.  Anyways, if you have any thoughts I would be grateful to read them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks SteelMag.  I have run into the testimony retreat before in the past and I think you are right.  I most certainly was pushing too hard.  What sorts of questions do you think are piercing, yet gentle enough to get them thinking and trying to discover the answers?  For example, if I were to say, &#8220;Hey, you know the Book of Abraham is a total fraud.  How can you believe that garbage?&#8221;  I&#8217;m going to antagonize them and probably shut them off.  But I&#8217;m not quite sure how I can bring up the issue without blatantly challenging the veracity of it.  Anyways, if you have any thoughts I would be grateful to read them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Again</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/12/14/bringing-down-holy-books/#comment-76255</link>
		<dc:creator>Again</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2009 08:58:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=8601#comment-76255</guid>
		<description>&quot;One approach to take, rather than attempting to show the flaws of their Book point by point, is to engage the believer on what exactly convinced him or her that the Book was in fact the Word of God. What attributes does it possess that other books do not? What transcendent doctrines are contained within the text that must have divine origin? What do they know about the Book’s origin and history? Do you find their reasons convincing? Why not?&quot;

I think this is great stuff.  What I have always run into with Mormons is their &quot;testimony&quot;.  What separates the BOM apart, according to Mormons, is that you can know the truthfulness via a special feeling, a burning in the bosom, that can only equate to the truthfulness of the message.  I have taken a couple different tactics with this:

1) I point out that catholics, muslims, and jehovahs witnesses all &quot;know&quot; and feel in their hearts that their church is the one true church, the one true path to salvation.  If you look at their doctrine they all cannot be right as they teach contradictory things.  So someone is wrong.  Yet they all have strong feelings that they say equates to truth.  Someone is either mistaken or deceiving themselves.  There is no other conclusion.  As Mormons they look at them all and say that they are either mistaken or being deceived.  But those in the opposing faiths look at Mormons in the same way.  What non-biased reason do they, the Mormons, have for not thinking they could be deceived too?  &quot;The feeling is indescribable and unmistakable,&quot; they say.  But that is what the people of the other faiths say too.  So what does this tell us?  Doesn&#039;t it indicate that feelings are a little shaky as the ultimate way to gain truth?  &quot;Well, just give it a chance,&quot; they inevitably say, ignoring what I was trying to get at.  

So I try #2:

I point out that their whole feeling based test is circular.  They ask you to pray because the BOM says that is the way to gain truth.  But how do I know the BOM is true?  Because if you pray you will get a burning in the bosom that tells you so.  Well how do I know that burning actually tells you about truth?  Because the BOM says it does.  But how do I know...and so on.  So I try to show that even if I were to pray and get a special feeling I wouldn&#039;t have any justifiable reason to think it meant that the BOM was true.  It could just as easily be due to me talking myself into it (imagine that...).  

Do you think I should skip this entirely and focus on more substantial issues within the book or do you think the epistemic stuff is enough to get people thinking?  My goal with all this is to show them that &quot;feelings&quot; ain&#039;t all they think they are and evidence and reason should be our tools for investigation.  The thought is that if I succeed in this, and they are willing to start caring about evidence then it is curtains for the BOM.  It is just too easy to demolish if you are willing to accept empirical evidence.  

I&#039;m curious what you think of this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;One approach to take, rather than attempting to show the flaws of their Book point by point, is to engage the believer on what exactly convinced him or her that the Book was in fact the Word of God. What attributes does it possess that other books do not? What transcendent doctrines are contained within the text that must have divine origin? What do they know about the Book’s origin and history? Do you find their reasons convincing? Why not?&#8221;</p>
<p>I think this is great stuff.  What I have always run into with Mormons is their &#8220;testimony&#8221;.  What separates the BOM apart, according to Mormons, is that you can know the truthfulness via a special feeling, a burning in the bosom, that can only equate to the truthfulness of the message.  I have taken a couple different tactics with this:</p>
<p>1) I point out that catholics, muslims, and jehovahs witnesses all &#8220;know&#8221; and feel in their hearts that their church is the one true church, the one true path to salvation.  If you look at their doctrine they all cannot be right as they teach contradictory things.  So someone is wrong.  Yet they all have strong feelings that they say equates to truth.  Someone is either mistaken or deceiving themselves.  There is no other conclusion.  As Mormons they look at them all and say that they are either mistaken or being deceived.  But those in the opposing faiths look at Mormons in the same way.  What non-biased reason do they, the Mormons, have for not thinking they could be deceived too?  &#8220;The feeling is indescribable and unmistakable,&#8221; they say.  But that is what the people of the other faiths say too.  So what does this tell us?  Doesn&#8217;t it indicate that feelings are a little shaky as the ultimate way to gain truth?  &#8220;Well, just give it a chance,&#8221; they inevitably say, ignoring what I was trying to get at.  </p>
<p>So I try #2:</p>
<p>I point out that their whole feeling based test is circular.  They ask you to pray because the BOM says that is the way to gain truth.  But how do I know the BOM is true?  Because if you pray you will get a burning in the bosom that tells you so.  Well how do I know that burning actually tells you about truth?  Because the BOM says it does.  But how do I know&#8230;and so on.  So I try to show that even if I were to pray and get a special feeling I wouldn&#8217;t have any justifiable reason to think it meant that the BOM was true.  It could just as easily be due to me talking myself into it (imagine that&#8230;).  </p>
<p>Do you think I should skip this entirely and focus on more substantial issues within the book or do you think the epistemic stuff is enough to get people thinking?  My goal with all this is to show them that &#8220;feelings&#8221; ain&#8217;t all they think they are and evidence and reason should be our tools for investigation.  The thought is that if I succeed in this, and they are willing to start caring about evidence then it is curtains for the BOM.  It is just too easy to demolish if you are willing to accept empirical evidence.  </p>
<p>I&#8217;m curious what you think of this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Again</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/12/14/bringing-down-holy-books/#comment-76254</link>
		<dc:creator>Again</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2009 08:42:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=8601#comment-76254</guid>
		<description>I have had quite a few interactions with Mormons, but the most recent is with a couple of missionaries, a recent convert as of three years ago, and another, a lifer. The convert is a single girl.  Basically, she has told me that she has a book of questions and, on their missions, they don&#039;t have enough time to look deeply into things but when she gets home she wants to go through each one.  I also asked her if there was any conceivable way that she could see herself being wrong.  In other words, is there any evidence that could make her not believe in the LDS Church.  And she actually answered yes.  &quot;Could I be wrong?  Well, I guess so.  Yeah, it&#039;s possible.  But I don&#039;t think I am.&quot;  So she seemed like an interesting case compared to other Mormons I have spoken with.  For example, one of my old college professors was Mormon and he recently told me that there is no empirical evidence that would convince him of his error.  The only way he would leave the church is if he had a spiritual experience that ushered him out (he never explained how that could happen if the church wasn&#039;t true...).  This is the sort of answer I have most frequently seen given.  The &quot;testimony&quot; or feeling factor is given primacy.  Whether that is just all talk when push comes to shove and certain evidence comes to light, I don&#039;t really know.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have had quite a few interactions with Mormons, but the most recent is with a couple of missionaries, a recent convert as of three years ago, and another, a lifer. The convert is a single girl.  Basically, she has told me that she has a book of questions and, on their missions, they don&#8217;t have enough time to look deeply into things but when she gets home she wants to go through each one.  I also asked her if there was any conceivable way that she could see herself being wrong.  In other words, is there any evidence that could make her not believe in the LDS Church.  And she actually answered yes.  &#8220;Could I be wrong?  Well, I guess so.  Yeah, it&#8217;s possible.  But I don&#8217;t think I am.&#8221;  So she seemed like an interesting case compared to other Mormons I have spoken with.  For example, one of my old college professors was Mormon and he recently told me that there is no empirical evidence that would convince him of his error.  The only way he would leave the church is if he had a spiritual experience that ushered him out (he never explained how that could happen if the church wasn&#8217;t true&#8230;).  This is the sort of answer I have most frequently seen given.  The &#8220;testimony&#8221; or feeling factor is given primacy.  Whether that is just all talk when push comes to shove and certain evidence comes to light, I don&#8217;t really know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SteelMag</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/12/14/bringing-down-holy-books/#comment-76250</link>
		<dc:creator>SteelMag</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2009 08:02:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=8601#comment-76250</guid>
		<description>@Again:
I understand the difficulties in speaking with Mormons, especially regarding contradictions within the BoM and their other texts.  If one is born into the religion, the familial and cultural pressures are nearly insurmountable, but some do leave.  Their missionary effort is specifically set up to ensnare seekers by making them feel special and giving them a good feeling about what is being taught.  They purposely introduce the BoM first as it is the most unassuming of their texts.  Once a member of the church, the new seeker begins to learn about other doctrine and texts that have even more discrepancies, but by that time are too enmeshed in the church to do anything about it. They have also accepted the authority within the church (of Joseph Smith and any past or present prophets), so any discrepancy is easily brushed off.  

Mormons hate arguing about their texts and if they are backed into a corner, will promptly give their testimony, i.e. &quot;I believe that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is the true church, and Joseph Smith is a true prophet of God...&quot;  Being gentle will get you far.  If you question the BoM, you may be referred to their institute (FARMS) at BYU that has been set up to &quot;prove&quot; that the people of the BoM existed. 

If you plan on speaking to many Mormons, you may want to familiarize yourself with the Pearl of Great Price and the Doctrines and Covenants which were also written by Joseph Smith.  The PofGP is particularly intriguing especially when you consider the Book of Abraham.  It was originally purchased by Smith from a traveling mummy exhibition.  He &quot;interpreted&quot; it and called it the Book of Abraham; this contains some of their most interesting teachings, including the only mention of the star Kolob, which is nearest to where God lives.  The Rosetta Stone had not yet been discovered, so nobody at the time challenged J. Smith, but later it&#039;s been found to be an Egyptian burial rite.  

Anyway, it will likely take a long time to convince a Mormon that their texts are false, but humility and gently being persistent with your questions, and allowing them to discover the answers rather than being told, will help you out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Again:<br />
I understand the difficulties in speaking with Mormons, especially regarding contradictions within the BoM and their other texts.  If one is born into the religion, the familial and cultural pressures are nearly insurmountable, but some do leave.  Their missionary effort is specifically set up to ensnare seekers by making them feel special and giving them a good feeling about what is being taught.  They purposely introduce the BoM first as it is the most unassuming of their texts.  Once a member of the church, the new seeker begins to learn about other doctrine and texts that have even more discrepancies, but by that time are too enmeshed in the church to do anything about it. They have also accepted the authority within the church (of Joseph Smith and any past or present prophets), so any discrepancy is easily brushed off.  </p>
<p>Mormons hate arguing about their texts and if they are backed into a corner, will promptly give their testimony, i.e. &#8220;I believe that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is the true church, and Joseph Smith is a true prophet of God&#8230;&#8221;  Being gentle will get you far.  If you question the BoM, you may be referred to their institute (FARMS) at BYU that has been set up to &#8220;prove&#8221; that the people of the BoM existed. </p>
<p>If you plan on speaking to many Mormons, you may want to familiarize yourself with the Pearl of Great Price and the Doctrines and Covenants which were also written by Joseph Smith.  The PofGP is particularly intriguing especially when you consider the Book of Abraham.  It was originally purchased by Smith from a traveling mummy exhibition.  He &#8220;interpreted&#8221; it and called it the Book of Abraham; this contains some of their most interesting teachings, including the only mention of the star Kolob, which is nearest to where God lives.  The Rosetta Stone had not yet been discovered, so nobody at the time challenged J. Smith, but later it&#8217;s been found to be an Egyptian burial rite.  </p>
<p>Anyway, it will likely take a long time to convince a Mormon that their texts are false, but humility and gently being persistent with your questions, and allowing them to discover the answers rather than being told, will help you out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dan</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/12/14/bringing-down-holy-books/#comment-76248</link>
		<dc:creator>dan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2009 07:41:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=8601#comment-76248</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think you can convince them.  However, I know for many ex-Mormons, finding out about the Book of Abraham was a big problem for their faith.  It is a fairly well documented fraud by the Mormon founder Joseph Smith.  It is considered to be one of their extra Holy Books just like the Book of Mormon  It is fairly easy to look up information about it on the web.  Just ask them if they can explain it.  
http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4168

Probably not something to bring up initially, but another challenge to Mormon faith is finding out more about Joseph Smith&#039;s wives.  Most Mormons only know about his first wife and are unaware that he &quot;spiritually&quot; married and slept with many women.  One was 14 years old, many were already married and told to keep their &quot;spiritual&quot; marriage to Joseph secret from their husbands.
I left the Mormon Church before I found out about either of these, but even many years later it was really surprising to learn about these.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think you can convince them.  However, I know for many ex-Mormons, finding out about the Book of Abraham was a big problem for their faith.  It is a fairly well documented fraud by the Mormon founder Joseph Smith.  It is considered to be one of their extra Holy Books just like the Book of Mormon  It is fairly easy to look up information about it on the web.  Just ask them if they can explain it.<br />
<a href="http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4168" rel="nofollow">http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4168</a></p>
<p>Probably not something to bring up initially, but another challenge to Mormon faith is finding out more about Joseph Smith&#8217;s wives.  Most Mormons only know about his first wife and are unaware that he &#8220;spiritually&#8221; married and slept with many women.  One was 14 years old, many were already married and told to keep their &#8220;spiritual&#8221; marriage to Joseph secret from their husbands.<br />
I left the Mormon Church before I found out about either of these, but even many years later it was really surprising to learn about these.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/12/14/bringing-down-holy-books/#comment-76082</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:27:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=8601#comment-76082</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think that anyone really believes that stuff. I think that they are more concerned with what other people would think if they said that they didn&#039;t believe it. The bible was compiled by a bunch of rich white guys with political agendas. Religion would not survive if it were not for the acquisition and maintenance of great wealth and political power. Remove the money and the politics from religion and you have no religion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think that anyone really believes that stuff. I think that they are more concerned with what other people would think if they said that they didn&#8217;t believe it. The bible was compiled by a bunch of rich white guys with political agendas. Religion would not survive if it were not for the acquisition and maintenance of great wealth and political power. Remove the money and the politics from religion and you have no religion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neophyte</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/12/14/bringing-down-holy-books/#comment-76038</link>
		<dc:creator>Neophyte</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2009 03:06:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.com/?p=8601#comment-76038</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think it&#039;s possible.  It has to be an event born of self-discovery.   I think challenging the person(s) will make them ever the more adamant.  Good luck.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s possible.  It has to be an event born of self-discovery.   I think challenging the person(s) will make them ever the more adamant.  Good luck.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
