My Take on Why Mormons Become Athiests

[BigJulie]

And you said the the same arguments that I use against Mormonism could be used against Christianity. Yet you have yet to validate this claim. I never once asked you about the 6 days of creation How about stepping up to the plate and proving your claim?

I am asking you do think a little deeper here Billyray. I am asking you why YOU believe what you do regarding the creation. You said that faith is based on evidence remember---so I am asking you to provide your evidence regarding this belief.

[Billyray]

Okay---so--are you now saying that you can provide absolutely no proof regarding the creation? ?

Nor can anyone give us an eyewitness account of the creation of the universe. Do you think science gives us a eyewitness account of creation of the universe?

[BigJulie]

There is no doubt that there are eye witness accounts. The issue is whether or not a person believes those accounts. The same goes for an eye witness on the stand. He can give us his testimony and it is up to each person to decide if they believe that witness or not.

Okay, so---what do you do when someone questions these eye-witness accounts based on the scholarly works of others. Is that the only reason you believe is because of eye-witness accounts?

[BigJulie]

Nor can anyone give us an eyewitness account of the creation of the universe. Do you think science gives us a eyewitness account of creation of the universe?

Okay---so, why do you believe the Biblical version of the creation as you have no proof to it--no eye-witnesses, nothing.

[Billyray]

I am asking you do think a little deeper here Billyray.

I asking you to back up your bogus claim. What arguments have I used that if used against Christianity would destroy it?

[Billyray]

Okay---so, why do you believe the Biblical version of the creation as you have no proof to it--no eye-witnesses, nothing.

I have already told you on more than one occasion J.

Now who on earth can give you eyewitness testimony of the creation of the universe? What a bogus argument.

[BigJulie]

I have already told you on more than one occasion J.

Now who on earth can give you eyewitness testimony of the creation of the universe? What a bogus argument.

Billyray---so, if no one can give an eye-witness, why do you believe it? And is the only reason you believe the Bible is the eye-witness accounts given later?

[Billyray]

Billyray---so, if no one can give an eye-witness, why do you believe it?

You request is bogus because not a single person on this earth can give a eyewitness account of the creation of the universe.

[BigJulie]

You request is bogus because not a single person on this earth can give a eyewitness account of the creation of the universe.

Billyray, I am asking YOU why you believe it? Why do you believe the Bible account of the creation? You readily admit it can't be because of an eye-witness account and so why do YOU believe it?

I am asking you, why do you have faith in the account of the creation?

[Billyray]

Billyray, I am asking YOU why you believe it?
Give me a single person who has an eyewitness account of the beginning of the universe.

[Billyray]

I am asking you, why do you have faith in the account of the creation?

I have already told you why I believe it. If you are interested you can go back and read it again.

[BigJulie]

Give me a single person who has an eyewitness account of the beginning of the universe.

Billyray, as you readily acknowledge that NO ONE can have an eye-witness account of the Biblical creation, why do YOU believe it is true?

[BigJulie]

I have already told you why I believe it. If you are interested you can go back and read it again.

You said because of eye-witnesses who give an account of Christ and Christ tells us it is true, right?

But, now try to understand a person who also tries to understand something by an "eye-witness" account...what happens to that person when they are not sure about these "eye-witness" accounts because scholars using historical documents including ****ysis of the Bible say they are not accurate. What do you tell that person? Is the only thing they have to rely on eye-witness accounts?

[Billyray]

Billyray, as you readily acknowledge that NO ONE can have an eye-witness account of the Biblical creation, why do YOU believe it is true?

Do scientists have an eyewitness account? No. As I said you request is a bogus one. And I have already given you my answer--go back and read it.

[Billyray]

Now when are you going to back up your bogus claim that the arguments that I have used can be used to destroy Christianity?

[BigJulie]

Do scientists have an eyewitness account? No. As I said you request is a bogus one. And I have already given you my answer--go back and read it.

Billyray, are you pretending to be d.ense, or do you really not understanding what I am asking? I am not saying that scientists have an eye-witness account. I am not saying that anyone has an eye-witness account. What I am asking you is BECAUSE there are no eye-witness accounts, why do you believe it?

I believe you said it was because of the eye-witness accounts of Jesus Christ. BUT, what about those who question these accounts and believe the argument of scholars (such as I showed you.) Do you have no other way in which a person can believe the creation other than the eye-witness accounts of Christ?

[BigJulie]

Now when are you going to back up your bogus claim that the arguments that I have used can be used to destroy Christianity?

I am trying to get you to answer a simple question and have not even succeeded at that yet.

My question is, if someone questions the reliability of an eye-witness account of Christ, do you have anything else in which a person can gain a testimony of the Biblical creation?

[Billyray]

I believe you said it was because of the eye-witness accounts of Jesus Christ. BUT, what about those who question these accounts and believe the argument of scholars (such as I showed you.) Do you have no other way in which a person can believe the creation other
Any eye witness gives a testimony and each person has to determine if they believe that testimony. There is no doubt that we have eye witness testimony of Jesus. Some will believe these witnesses and some will not. I happen to be one who believes that testimony.

[BigJulie]

Any eye witness gives a testimony and each person has to determine if they believe that testimony. There is no doubt that we have eye witness testimony of Jesus. Some will believe these witnesses and some will not. I happen to be one who believes that testimony.

So, what makes the difference between one who believes the testimony and the one who doubts these testimonies based on the scholarship of others? Why do you not believe scholars when they say that these testimonies give an inaccurate picture of history based on their ****ysis?

[Billyray]

Why do you not believe scholars when they say that these testimonies give an inaccurate picture of history based on their ****ysis?
Each critic has a specific reason so it depend on the specific critic. Pick one and we could talk about it. For example one critic would be the Mormon church itself. They claim plain and precious things have been removed. I disagree. Prove your case.

[BigJulie]

Each critic has a specific reason so it depend on the specific critic. Pick one and we could talk about it. For example one critic would be the Mormon church itself. They claim plain and precious things have been removed. I disagree. Prove your case.

I asked you why you don't believe the critics (scholars) regarding the accuracy of the history of the Bible. Why believe one critic over another? Why ignore the ones you do?

That is the question I asked and one you have yet to answer. What do you tell the person who questions the eye-witness account and believes the critic over you? What makes you choose to ignore these critics regarding the Bible?

You said "prove you case." I am asking you how you do the same. How do you prove your case when you have scholars criticizing the Bible as historically accurate and you have no eye-witness of the creation--in fact, you have no record until Moses. So, how do you direct the person who believes the critic of the Bible? What do you tell them?

[Billyray]

I asked you why you don't believe the critics (scholars) regarding the accuracy of the history of the Bible. Why believe one critic over another?
Each critic has a different claim. Let's start with the LDS church which is a big critic of the reliability of the Bible. Make you claims as to why you believe the NT is inaccurate and then I will respond.

[BigJulie]

Each critic has a different claim. Yes, so why do you believe one critic over another? That is the question you have yet to answer.

[Billyray]

Yes, so why do you believe one critic over another? That is the question you have yet to answer.

I am more than happy to answer J. Let's start with the critic you are most familiar with and that is the Mormon church. Do you want to know why I don't believe your claims with respect to criticism of the Bible? let's talk about it OK?

[James Banta]

Yes, so why do you believe one critic over another? That is the question you have yet to answer.

Just because they expose different he****s of mormonism doesn't mean that they are in conflict on any area of their study.. Just that they have more to say on one subject than an other..

Some point out the problem with eternal marriage. Others the idea of God being a created being. I think it's better to know all you can about the total error that in mormonism.. So which one do I believe.. All who have approached mormonism from a scholarly position.. IHS jim

[Billyray]

How do you prove your case when you have scholars criticizing the Bible as historically accurate and you have no eye-witness of the creation--

Is there a single person in the entire world who was an eye witness of the creation of the universe?

[BigJulie]

I am more than happy to answer J. Let's start with the critic you are most familiar with and that is the Mormon church. Do you want to know why I don't believe your claims with respect to criticism of the Bible? let's talk about it OK?

Actually, I am just as familiar with critics of the Bible as I am with the Mormon church---as all one has to do is read the news--it is all over there. So, what makes you believe one critic over another. Why is one scholar's view deemed right and another scholar's view deemed wrong to you if both are using scholarly approaches?

[Billyray]

So, what makes you believe one critic over another.

Let's talk about it starting with the criticisms from the Mormon church.


The Mormon critics of the Bible claim that it is not translated correctly. What proof do you have to support this claim and I will tell you why I don't believe you criticism.

[BigJulie]

Let's talk about it starting with the criticisms from the Mormon church.


The Mormon critics of the Bible claim that it is not translated correctly. What proof do you have to support this claim and I will tell you why I don't believe you criticism.

Billyray, this thread is about why mormons become athiests---not why Mormons become evangelicals. So, with that said, we are looking at why Mormons believe the critics of christianity in general--Mormon as well as Christian.

So, on that basis, I am asking you why you believe one critic over the other. If you base your faith on evidence, as you said, then why ignore the evidence provided by those who criticize the Bible?

[Billyray]

Billyray, this thread is about why mormons become athiests---not why Mormons become evangelicals.

You are the one who brought up critics of the Bible and the Mormon church criticizes the Bible so let's start with that and then we can move on.

[BigJulie]

You are the one who brought up critics of the Bible and the Mormon church criticizes the Bible so let's start with that and then we can move on.

I brought up the similiarities between Christians and Mormons as both of their "scriptures" are criticized by "scholars." I know you are trying to avoid this like the plaque, but the honest question is why would you believe one set of critics but not the other--as athiests obviously believe both set of critics. Since you say your faith is based on "evidence"---why stop as some of the "evidence" provided you and not another?

[Billyray]

I know you are trying to avoid this like the plaque, but the honest question is why would you believe one set of critics but not the other--
I am not trying to avoid this topic at all, in fact I have tried over and over again to talk about it but you don't want to talk about. I will try again. Each critic brings his own criticism about the Bible. Mormons are critics of the Bible so lets start here. LDS criticism is that the Bible is not translated correctly. Give me your proof of this criticism and I will then tell you why I don't believe your criticism.

[Billyray]

Okay, so---what do you do when someone questions these eye-witness accounts based on the scholarly works of others.

I think it is healthy to look at the critics and see their angle. Just because someone has criticism doesn't mean that they are right or that their criticism or argument holds water. They may have some good points or they may not any good points. Bottom line is that each person needs to look at both sides of the argument, weigh the facts, and then make a decision. Lets look at the criticism that the Mormons level at the Bible. They claim that sections have been ripped out of the NT record and the the Bible has been translated incorrectly. This is a clear criticism against the Bible. But when you press the critics to back up their claim they waffle. Step up to the plate J, you critic of the Bible and give me your argument.

[BigJulie]

[QUOTE=Billyray;113552]I think it is healthy to look at the critics and see their angle. Just because someone has criticism doesn't mean that they are right or that their criticism or argument holds water. They may have some good points or they may not any good points. Bottom line is that each person needs to look at both sides of the argument, weigh the facts, and then make a decision. So, to you, scholars who show "proof" that the Bible is not historically accurate are not as scholarly as those who say that the Book of Mormon is not historically accurate. Is that your take?

Why do you think then, that Mormons who become athiest do not see this as you do? Why do they believe both sets of critics?

[Billyray]

So, to you, scholars who show "proof" that the Bible is not historically accurate are not as scholarly as those who say that the Book of Mormon is not historically accurate. Is that your take?


Lets look at the criticism starting with Mormon criticism. You claim that the bible is not translated correctly. What proof do you have for this?

[Billyray]

So, to you, scholars who show "proof" that the Bible is not historically accurate are not as scholarly as those who say that the Book of Mormon is not historically accurate. Is that your take?


For the Book of Mormon there is no evidence to try and disprove.

[alanmolstad]

Something that we keep seeing on boards like this one from critics of Mormonism is the idea that Mormonism is not true or false based on anything other than Mormonism.


The critics use this as an excuse to refuse having an actual discussion or dialogue about faith or Jesus Christ.

So whenever a critic is asked to engage in an actual discussion, meaning they also answer questions about THEIR positions and beliefs, they hide behind this self-made cloak to avoid sharing their beliefs of what they believe to be true.



I have no idea what this comment is saying to us...?

I went over it a few times, but I think I need a bit of help understanding the point of the statement before i could think about its implications....

[The Pheonix]

Yes, indeed. This is one of my pet peeves about "some" of the critics of Mormonism (not all, but "many"). And, I think, often, it is done out of ignorance, but exactly as you said, Sir, (and also said by "I think"?? Gordon B. Hinckley)...you don't tear down a man's house, before you have built him a new one. That just doesn't make good sense. And, those who advocate tearing down a man's religion, before they show him "a new one" (we would ***ume a BETTER ONE), is just asking to leave that person out in the cold, with no where to go. I think that is one of the reasons we find so many LDS turning to atheism. They haven't been shown anything that is better...sometimes, it appears that, what is out there, is much worse (judging by the behavior of some of the believers). Sad, but true. That's why behavior on boards like this is so important, if you are TRULY and sincerely interested in leading people to Christ.They, the anti-Mormons want us out of Mormonism and do not care, even if we become atheists. Most have an axe to grind against the Church and it's members.