The Instigator
Donser
Con (against)
Winning
17 Points
The Contender
MistahKurtz
Pro (for)
Losing
15 Points

The Mormon church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, is the one true church.

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/2/2009 Category: Religion
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,196 times Debate No: 8074
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (5)

 

Donser

Con

The Mormon church claims it is the "one true church" and that is has the "fulness" of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The Mormon church, putting it simply, is false. I will provide several reasons, but the things listed are far from exhaustive.

The modern Mormon church teaches that Joseph Smith prayed to God and that God and Jesus Christ appeared to him as two separate beings. The Mormon church bases everything on this vision. From the former president of the church, Gordon B Hinckley, Ensign magazine Nov. 1998 pp70-71, "Our entire case as members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints rests on the validity of this glorious First Vision. ... Nothing on which we base our doctrine, nothing we teach, nothing we live by is of greater importance than this initial declaration. I submit that if Joseph Smith Talked with God the Father and His Beloved Son, then all else of which he spoke is true."

If this vision is so important then we would expect it to be a part of the founding of the religion. The version of the First Vision as taught by the church today was unheard of until 18 years after the event occurred, 10 years after Smith had started his missionary efforts. The oldest version, which was written in Smith's handwriting, is from 1832; 10 years after the event occurred. In fact there are 10 known versions of the First Vision, see http://www.irr.org...... for the full listing.

Why was this vision that is so important unknown for so long? Why do the different stories change the facts including his age and year it occurred as well as who visited him? The answer: it never happened. Smith made it up.

After the First Vision, Smith claimed to be visited by angels on many occasions and one showed him the location of the Golden Plates. These Plates were the record that Smith would claim to translate into what became the Book of Mormon. Smith claimed the Book of Mormon was the "most correct" book on this earth. He said it held the "fulness of the gospel" of Jesus Christ.

The Book of Mormon was not translated in a normal fashion. In a talk given by Elder Russell M. Nelson, Ensign, July 1993 pg.61, he states how Smith translated these plates: "Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and on that appeared the writing. One character at a time would appear, and under it was the interpretation in English. Brother Joseph would read off the English to Oliver Cowdery, who was his principal scribe, and when it was written down and repeated to Brother Joseph to see if it was correct, then it would disappear, and another character with the interpretation would appear. Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, and not by any power of man."

Now if the book was translated as such and being the "most correct book" it would lead one to believe there would not be any errors in it. Since it was printed there have been a couple thousand grammatical and spelling changes, as well as a couple changes to reflect the church's changing policy. A book translated by the "power of God" would not require any changes.

Then there is the story in the book itself. It tells of civilization that lasted for around a thousand years, covering both North and South America, being familiar with all manner of things from Old World culture, and are the principal ancestors of the Native Americans. The book mentions silk, chariots, seven day week, cimeters, bellows, brass and iron, breast plates and copper, gold and silver currency, silver, steel swords, cattle, oxen, donkeys, horses, goats, sheep, swine, and elephants. There is no evidence of any of these supposedly very common things existing in the Americas before Columbus arrived, and the list is far from exhaustive. The book also does not list many of the common things found in the Americas before Columbus as well.

There is no way for a civilization as large as the one in the Book of Mormon would have left no trace of its existence. In one battle alone there were over one million people killed by the sword, but there are no signs of the these massive battles: no mass graves, no swords, no shields, no arrow heads, no chariots..there is no evidence whatsoever for this great civilization.

Joseph Smith stated that the Book of Mormon contained the "fulness" of the gospel, but most of the doctrine that make it unique from other sects of Christianity are either not found or completely different in the Book of Mormon. For a list please see http://packham.n4m.org....... In fact most of the unique doctrine come from the Pearl of Great Price and the lost Book of Abraham. For details on this "lost" book and its orgins see www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcyzkd_m6KE

Mormons will state that in order to test if the Book of Mormon is true and if Joseph Smith is a prophet is to pray about it. You should "feel the spirit" testifying the truth to you. It is a little different for everyone but it has been described as a warmth or "burning in the bosom." This feeling is an emotion and emotion is not the basis for determining truth. No matter how strongly I feel about something it is an emotion only. Truth is determined by fact, and they truth is there is no fact in the story of the Book of Mormon and there is no truth in the First Vision.

This is only part of the information available, but I believe I have made my point. The Mormon church is false.
MistahKurtz

Pro

I'd like to thank my opponent for creating this biased, bigoted debate and I would like to know reascend this hurtful arguments against the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Now my opponent's case may seem fairly convincing on the surface, but I assure you that underneath it is hallow and empty. Today I -will not- prove that every tenet of the Church of the Latter-Day Saints is absolutely true. I will try to argue for you to put your faith into this church, but as we are dealing with issues of religion, it will be quite impossible to prove beyond on a reasonable doubt. I will, however, prove to you that the Mormon church is to be trusted over Christianity, Buddhism and every other church.

My first point is that of reliability. Let us look at Christianity; it has been almost 2000 years since we've had a credible vision. Since then, religious documents (the Bible) have been translated, rel-translated, scribed, re-translated, etc. several hundred times. Christianity now finds itself in a crisis of faith in that the foundations of their belief have been proven to be written several hundred years -after- the appearance of Christ. Furthermore, there has been compelling conjecture to suggest that the documents were deliberately changed by various ambitious people. What's more, some of the translations and understandings may not even be correct (the Roman idea of 'hell' was literally a burning rubbish dump outside of the city.) Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism are just as dated and equally untrustworthy. Don't even get me started on Judaism. Mormonism is not even 200 years old; well within to the age of skepticism and enlightenment. If given the choice, I would take the teaching of an educated American of the 19th century over the ramblings of an ancient group of people in the desert. This is, of course, not a discreditation of Christianity, merely an acceptance that, given the conditions Christians have accepted Jesus, they must accept Joseph Smith. What makes one prophet more profitable than another? (If you'll pardon the pun)

Secondly, Mormonism is backed up by eyewitness accounts. Twelve witnesses all confirmed to have either seen the angels or been in the presence of the golden plates given to Joseph by Jesus. Furthermore, despite many of them leaving the church later in their lives (due to disagreements with Joseph Smith Jr.) they continued in their unwavering support for the faith, with not one of them changing their testimony.

My opponent, obviously not a theological scholar, has decided to go through the book of Mormonism and try to take every entry literally. I'm sure he would have a fun time doing this in the King James Bible or the Qu'ran. Anyone who has opened themselves up to other religious documents would know that the use of metaphors and parable are ripe. Furthermore, I do not totally discount the possible existence of errors in the text, as one must expect from most books dating back before the dawn of the information age, but I would argue that it is infinitely more reliable than any other religious text.

But this debate has come down to semantics. The resolution before us today is that the Church of Latter-day Saints is the one true church. I believe this must be absolutely affirmed if for not other reason than every other church is fundamentally unreliable. If we are to truely embrace the ideas of enlightenment, we must not put our faith into the religious teachings, but rather into -man-. If we are to trust ancient civilizations over our own, a logical disconnect opens therein that we do not trust ourselves.

I await my opponent's response with anticipation.
Debate Round No. 1
Donser

Con

Donser forfeited this round.
MistahKurtz

Pro

My opponent is running scared.
Debate Round No. 2
Donser

Con

Donser forfeited this round.
MistahKurtz

Pro

I suppose you'll have to only have to read the first arguments to form an opinion. I believe I have absolutely won.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Debatenewbie14 7 years ago
Debatenewbie14
I agree with you on the church but I don't think this is the place to do that.
Posted by mongeese 7 years ago
mongeese
Now there are two reasons why noone will accept.
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
"Open Debate
This debate challenge is open to the first member that accepts it.
You cannot accept this challenge because you do not match the Instigator's age and/or rank criteria."

My gosh. You must be very picky. And I bet you put age as criteria.
Posted by Lawsonishere 7 years ago
Lawsonishere
no ones gonna accept this
Posted by resolutionsmasher 7 years ago
resolutionsmasher
Persistant son of a gun ain't ya?
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by apologia101 6 years ago
apologia101
DonserMistahKurtzTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
DonserMistahKurtzTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Vote Placed by Debatenewbie14 7 years ago
Debatenewbie14
DonserMistahKurtzTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by MistahKurtz 7 years ago
MistahKurtz
DonserMistahKurtzTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by studentathletechristian8 7 years ago
studentathletechristian8
DonserMistahKurtzTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70