Debate Rounds (3)
If you would like to contend the truthness of or an aspect of this gospel, i made this debate for you.
thank you for your time.
Here are my issues with Mormonism's 'truth':
Mormons teach that a race was cursed with dark skin (ie the Native Americans). There are several racist doctrines in the Book of Mormon, including 2 Nephi 5:21, Alma 3: 6, and 3 Nephi 2:14-15. These scriptures (specifically the one in 3rd Nephi) sugjest that white skin is the ideal skin tone. The Book of Mormon also inderectly sugjests white supremacy by stateing multiple times that white skin is 'beautiful and fair' while dark skin is 'a curse', sugjesting racist doctrine. Furthermore, Mormons taught both that Blacks could not receive the preisthood until it was socially acceptable in 1978. However, Mormons also claim to be the 'one true church' upon the earth. If Mormonism is the true chuch, and God is its leader, than Mormon doctrine should have always been completely and utterly true. Unless of course you beleive racism to be the right thing to do. Furthermore, Brigham Young is quoted in saying '"..Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so." Mormons beleive their prophets speak, God speaks through them. While many other Christian denominations have racist pasts, they never claimed their church to be 'the completely true gospel of Christ'. If Mormonism is completely true, than it has no flaws, which I find it hard to beleive.
Both the Bible and the Book of Mormon denounce polygamy. However, Joseph Smith and many of his followers practiced polygamy for many years afterwards. It is completely and utterly immoral for obvious reasons. It contridicts scripture. Furthermore, Mormons conviniently had a vision that it was outlawed by God after it became illegal.
3. Joseph Smith
Since I'm debating on Mormon grounds, I will not mention that Joseph Smith was a liar and Charlaton. I will instead give examples of a few false prophisicies:
'I prophesy by virtue of the holy priesthood vested in me, and in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, that, if Congress will not hear our petition and grant us protection, they shall be broken up as a government, and God shall damn them, and there shall be nothing left of them, not even a grease spot'
The government never granted the Mormons their petition, and yet the Congress remained in power
Doctrine and Covenants 114:1: 'thus saith the Lord: It is wisdom in my servant, David W. Patten, that he settle up all his business as soon as he possibly can, and make a disposition [sic] of his merchandise, that he may perform a mission unto me next spring, in company with others, even twelve including himself, to testify of my name and bear glad tidings unto all the world'.
David Patten was killed before he could serve this mission. The biblical God knows the end from the beginning, and we can rest assured that He never gave this false prophecy to Joseph Smith. As usual the LDS offers a selection of excuses (so that we can take our pick), ignoring the fact that the Bible teaches that no amount of excuses can justify a false prophecy. One of their excuses is that the Lord actually called David on mission to the Spirit World. Another excuse is that he wasn't worthy of a mission, so the Lord killed him. But the revelation was that his mission was to the whole world, not just to the spirit world. And the second excuse it makes it seem as though the LDS God is not properly equipped for his task of being a God. It insinuates that he has such a lack of foresight that it would have been a miracle in itself if any of Smith's prophecies had ever come true. How is it that the biblical God had no such problems?
Furthermore, when the 116 pages were lost, it seems pretty convinent that there was an 'extra page' but it was translated just 'a little differently' than the preivous translation (see the South Park episode, its very acurate)
That's just a few
4. The evangellical beleif of the Bible
The Mormons beleive that the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible is completely and utterly true. Evangellical Christians, and, in this case, Mormons, have some explaining to do if this is true. I'll give one example for now....
The Complete contridiction of Christ's teachings in the New Testement and the Old Testement. For example, Christ taught peace and love in the New Testement. However, in the Old Testement God is litterally furious when the Children of Israel did not slaughter every soul. God is angry with Saul when he dosen't kill the animals of the Cannanites, when he commanded Saul to kill the aniimals AND HUMANS completely. It advocates mass genocide. Furthermore, the Cannanites had the land first. The Israelites were not defending their homes. They were acting (and succeeding) like the wicked Laminites in the Book of Mormon. For some reason, though, it was bad for the Laminites to do it, but good for the Israelites.
Homosexuality is not a choice. It is obviously something from birth. It is only because of literal translations of religous teaching is this still beleived. There have been numerious attempts to 'degay' homosexuals, none have worked. Furthermore, who would want to be gay? If you're walking down the hall, a common insult is 'that's so GAY'. Homosexuals are persecuted to the point they often kill themselves. There have been multiple scientific findings of gay genes. If you doubt, I'd be happy to prove it. Even if it is a choice, than why do Mormons want to make it illegal if their so bent on 'free agency'. Shouldn't gays have a choice of their agency? Aren't you following the devil's plan when he tried to take away agency. If you say Mormon policy is not against homosexual choice, the Mormon church fought actively in Proclomation 8. The Mormon Church is undoubltedly anti-homosexual. Since it is the only 'true church' all Mormons must think the same way. I'll bring more of that up in the next round
when the Indian war happened the army asked for a Mormon battalion, which killed off many people, and the population of Mormons were dwindling. we where commanded to practice polygamy. we no longer practice this.
The government was corrupt at the time, and I'm not sure where you are sourcing from.
If you are righteous, you will do your mission in heaven, God loves, "it is far greater for one to die then a whole nation dwindle in unbelief" I quote this not for David, but for the other wicked people in the bible or in the book of Mormon.
south park is in no way a source. a scientist wanted to look at the pages, so Joseph smith prayed 3 times if it was alright to lend them. the lord said no the first 2 times, but on the 3rd, he granted permission. Joseph smith lost permission to translate the plates for a short time after they were lost.
if you have a problem with the bible Mormons use the king James version.
"marriage between a man and a wife is ordained by god"
'Dark skin was a label, or a curse but only because of the wickedness of the people.'
'white=pure in heart, when the dark skinned people (lamanites) repented and joined the gospel they became white and pure again.'
This sounds pretty racist to me. If your skin is dark, you're labeled as wicked. Maybe the Mormon faith has conveniently claimed, 'there was a time and a place for it', but it does seem that they are saying that white skin symbolizes righteousness while dark skin symbolizes wickedness. Why should anyone want to be any color than what they are? Why can't a black person, who is proud of being black, want to be black now AND in the next life? If being white is so great, than what's so special about it? If God curses the wicked by making them black and celebrates the righteous by making them white, than why wasn't Martin Luther King jr. white and Adolph Hitler Black? I'm sorry if this is offensive, but it is necessary to say against such prejudice speech: this kind of thinking is what creates segregation to begin with. Black people, or Native Americans (in this case) did not make any 'immoral choice' concerning if their skin was white or black. This is further proof that the Book of Mormon is false. If skin color is such a sign of saint hood than why are so many white people evil and so many black people good?
'With the priesthood issue, no one had thought of it until then and there weren't a large amount of black (pardon) members.'
They obviously had thought about it. They banned black people from receiving the priesthood. If they hadn't thought about it than there would never have been a ban. Furthermore, refer to the previous quote by Brigham Young (in the last round), it explains a lot
Brigham Young obviously believed that black people were unworthy to intermingle with holy white men. Although Mormonism has changed over time, they have a history of racial prejudice. While most Christian sects do have a history of racial prejudice, none of them claim to be the only true church. If you're the only true church, your church will have a perfect history. Mormonism does not.
2. Evangelical Christianity/Mormonism
'If you have a problem with the bible Mormons use the king James version.'
I'm quoting from the King James Version:
Joshua 6: 17; 21- ' And the city shall be accursed, [even] it, and all that [are] therein, to the LORD: only Rahab the harlot shall live, she and all that [are] with her in the house, because she hid the messengers that we sent.....And they utterly destroyed all that [was] in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and donkey, with the edge of the sword.'
That is only one in many scriptures in the King James Bible that glorifies or even encourages mass genocide. If you consider every part of the Bible to come strait from God, than you believe that mass genocide is sometimes the right thing to do, such as was instructed to the Israelites against Canaan. Saul, in fact, was reprimanded by God because he didn't commit complete genocide, but only a part of it. This act is no different than when the Crusaders left to the 'Holy Land' to slaughter Muslims when the 'Holy Land' was OBVIOUSLY meant for God's followers: the Christians.
' "it is far greater for one to die then a whole nation dwindle in unbelief" I quote this not for David, but for the other wicked people in the bible or in the book of Mormon.'
This quote proves my point. Mormons believe if a whole people do not follow their form of 'righteousness', and if 'God commands', than they have the responsibility to slaughter them all. (To give the Mormons credit, they are not the only Christian group who believes this)
3. Joseph Smith
'south park is in no way a source. a scientist wanted to look at the pages, so Joseph smith prayed 3 times if it was alright to lend them. the lord said no the first 2 times, but on the 3rd, he granted permission. Joseph smith lost permission to translate the plates for a short time after they were lost.
I know the Mormon version of the 116 pages. Although South Park paints it in a negative fashion, the facts are dead on in the episode. Watch it. I mentioned South Park because it paints, like no other source I could have cited, the fact that it was awfully convenient that when Joseph Smith lost those 116 pages there was magically a similar set that was only 'a little different'.
By the way, Martin Harris was a farmer, not a scientist.
"Marriage between a man and a wife is ordained by god"
Why? Why is heterosexuality so great? What makes a heterosexual more holy than a homosexual? The fact heterosexuals can have kids? What about heterosexual barren women? They can't have kids. Does that make them sinful? However, Mormons obviously think white skin means holiness, so maybe being heterosexual means you're holy as well. Why is homosexuality immoral? Is it because their not apart of 'traditional family values' or a homosexual family is simply weird? I have found this fact to be true without exception: just because something is 'weird' doesn't mean it's evil. There must be more to it. Furthermore, there is proof of the gay gene:
- 'In the new study, scientists analyzed DNA from pairs of brothers, both of whom were gay, in nearly three dozen families with a history of homosexuality on the mother's side. Focusing on the female X chromosome that men inherit from their mother (they also get a male Y from their father), the researchers found that two-thirds of the gay siblings shared a distinctive pattern along a segment of their X chromosome. Scientists say the possibility is remote that this genetic pattern would appear by chance.
Read more: http://www.time.com...
I would like to know how you can discredit the proof and why homosexuality is so immoral, for reasons other than 'it's weird', 'I don't like it', 'they can't have children', or 'the Bible/Book of Mormon says it's wrong (when MEN, not GOD, in the Bible said it's wrong)
Marriage has a lot more to do with love and affection than reproduction. The families of many Mormon homes were hurt and torn apart by polygamy. Emma Smith was so hurt that she latter psycologyically convinced herself that Joseph Smith never was a polygamist and Brigham Young started the whole thing (she started the RLDS).
The Mormon Church seems a lot like the Old Middle Aged church. What they say goes, or you're going to Hell. If you're different in a way they don't like, you go to hell.
I know I've been pretty offensive, but this is a debate, and I want to do what I can. I know several Mormons and they're some of the best people I know. However, Mormons do claim to be the only true and living gospel, yet they have a very shaky past and even present. I know there are a lot of great, unique Mormon doctrines, such as a strong combative to pornography. I like many aspects of Mormonism. There are many good things about Mormonism and it is one of the best, if not the best, Christian doctrines. However, it claims full truth, which it does not have.
TT forfeited this round.
SuperMethodist7777777 forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Bodhivaka 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||4|
Reasons for voting decision: Con ultimately presented a much more convincing case -- Pro was unable to present any compelling defense, and Con therefore gets points for arguments. Seeing as how Pro forfeited, Con gets points for conduct, as well.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.