PBS special "The Mormons" made me furious!

[Wheetsin 714]

Discussion about faith are hard to defend, because it is based on faith, not so much facts and those wanting to beleive only in facts are never satisfied with faith based answers.

This is a really good point. I am definitely a facts-oriented person, but I understand the concept of faith. It doesn't make much sense to me in the concept of religion, but if it did, I wouldn't be me.

I was looking for something I posted a very long time ago, because that's easier than re-typing it. I couldn't find the exact post (though I could find one that references it), but here's something similar:

That's why debates based in theology are more difficult from our perspective. In my opinion. (I've posted this before, so I'm just giving the short version). One side has some unseen, unknown, unproven "magical" entity that can do everything and anything imaginable. Kind of like someone with every superpower ever conceived of, all rolled into one. The other side has to try and rationalize against that, which to us is "common sense," but when you believe in the entity, it's all the answer you need - apparently. We tend to see things in terms of the Epicurean riddle, while those with religious faith tend to see things in terms of Because it's god.

Point being, if you come to any forum online or not, with the expectation of entering into a religion-based argument/debate/discussion with the intentions of "winning," you will never succeed because there is no win, there is only share beliefs and at the end of the day it's probably a matter of agree to disagree, but wither way chances are great that both sides walk away knowing more about the other than they did before the dialogue occurred.

[ousooner 1]

Sincere question here. Why do you suppose that is?

It wasn't meant to disrespect. By saying this I just meant that for me, personally, I don't need scientific proof to validate my faith. For some, they need that. I can't prove that God exists, its my faith that he does. I can't prove the Bible is true, its my faith that it is. We are all different and come to our belief system differently, thats all. If someone were to ask me to prove that God exists, I can't prove it, I can only share my experiences and my beliefs. Just as I don't believe in sweethots religion, I respect her for her faith and her respectfulness, just I do everyone else's.

[marjon9 6]

It wasn't meant to disrespect. By saying this I just meant that for me, personally, I don't need scientific proof to validate my faith. For some, they need that. I can't prove that God exists, its my faith that he does. I can't prove the Bible is true, its my faith that it is. We are all different and come to our belief system differently, thats all. If someone were to ask me to prove that God exists, I can't prove it, I can only share my experiences and my beliefs. Just as I don't believe in sweethots religion, I respect her for her faith and her respectfulness, just I do everyone else's.

These comments are not meant to be an "attack," but just some questions and issues. To me the issue is not that I need scientific proof. To me the issue is, if the Bible is "true," then 95% of all humans who ever walked the earth are destined to burn in hell for eternity (at least based on certain fundamentalist views of what the Bible means). If the only way to heaven is to accept Christ as your personal savior, and all others are "lost," then I just can't accept something like that under any circumstances. Most of the world's population has never had a realistic opportunity to learn about Christ and accept Christ. Even if someone has "heard" of Christ, if that person grows up in rural Tibet, that person has not had a realistic opportunity to "accept" Christ. How can the punishment for such a person be to burn in hell for eternity? How can anyone believe in a God that would be that cruel, unfair, and arbitrary? If this is who "God" is (which I seriously doubt), then I don't want any part of it. I just don't see how a person can buy into a belief system like that, through "faith" or otherwise, that involves so much pain and unfairness. Wouldn't God want us to think at all?

[ousooner 1]

These comments are not meant to be an "attack," but just some questions and issues. To me the issue is not that I need scientific proof. To me the issue is, if the Bible is "true," then 95% of all humans who ever walked the earth are destined to burn in hell for eternity (at least based on certain fundamentalist views of what the Bible means). If the only way to heaven is to accept Christ as your personal savior, and all others are "lost," then I just can't accept something like that under any circumstances. Most of the world's population has never had a realistic opportunity to learn about Christ and accept Christ. Even if someone has "heard" of Christ, if that person grows up in rural Tibet, that person has not had a realistic opportunity to "accept" Christ. How can the punishment for such a person be to burn in hell for eternity? How can anyone believe in a God that would be that cruel, unfair, and arbitrary? If this is who "God" is (which I seriously doubt), then I don't want any part of it. I just don't see how a person can buy into a belief system like that, through "faith" or otherwise, that involves so much pain and unfairness. Wouldn't God want us to think at all?

Hi Mark,

I certainly respect your views. I am not a great debater (as I've said ) I don't have all the aswers, but I do beleive God is fair and just and wouldn't do that. If I understood it as you do, I wouldn't want to be a part of it either.

[marjon9 6]

Hi Mark,

I certainly respect your views. I am not a great debater (as I've said ) I don't have all the aswers, but I do beleive God is fair and just and wouldn't do that. If I understood it as you do, I wouldn't want to be a part of it either.

Neal, you may not want to get into this because it is personal or whatever. But I do wish someone would explain to me what the "other view" is. If the Bible says what it says, what is the other view? I'm not trying to force you to debate or defend yourself, I'm just curious. But like I say, I don't mind of course if you'd rather not get into it. I just hope a "believer" will some time be willing to explain why my view is not accurate. It's hard to get people to talk about that.

[Wheetsin 714]

Even if someone has "heard" of Christ, if that person grows up in rural Tibet, that person has not had a realistic opportunity to "accept" Christ. How can the punishment for such a person be to burn in hell for eternity?

When I asked such questions in a previous threads, the replies were along the lines of: god understands if people haven't gotten the word, and while disappointed that they didn't give in to the "natural" inclination to have faith in him, he can be forgiving for those who didn't have the opportunity. It's pretty much the answer you'd expect to get, no? There are pbviously a lot of mini debates hiding in that answer.

[marjon9 6]

When I asked such questions in a previous threads, the replies were along the lines of: god understands if people haven't gotten the word, and while disappointed that they didn't give in to the "natural" inclination to have faith in him, he can be forgiving for those who didn't have the opportunity. It's pretty much the answer you'd expect to get, no? There are pbviously a lot of mini debates hiding in that answer.

Thanks for passing that along. It provides a place to start in thinking about the topic. And, as you say, it raises additional questions for me. Such as, if god understand if people haven't gotten the word, what does that mean? I guess it means they don't go to hell, but they also can't go to heaven, so where do they go?

And what does it mean if you "haven't gotten the word?" Can you have "heard" of Christianity? What if there is no church within 1000 miles?

Anyway, the questions go on and on. But it's interesting to hear the answer you sent along.

[WASaBubbleButt 41]

It wasn't meant to disrespect. By saying this I just meant that for me, personally, I don't need scientific proof to validate my faith. For some, they need that. I can't prove that God exists, its my faith that he does. I can't prove the Bible is true, its my faith that it is. We are all different and come to our belief system differently, thats all. If someone were to ask me to prove that God exists, I can't prove it, I can only share my experiences and my beliefs. Just as I don't believe in sweethots religion, I respect her for her faith and her respectfulness, just I do everyone else's.

This is a perspective I have a great deal of respect for. People have faith, so be it. I find nothing in the world wrong with the concept. My only frustration is when people claim their beliefs are fact. That kinda gets under my skin. If they had facts they wouldn't need faith. But when someone words it as you do I personally have a great deal of respect for the author.

No, you didn't show any disrespect. I'm the queen of one liner questions and my intent doesn't show through when I do that.

[rubylyn 0]

Thanks for explaining all that sweethot143. I too am Mormon. It's frusterating when people don't know the whole story about being LDS. Where did you husband serve his mission?

[marjon9 6]

Mark

I think this is a good question and one that we all ask at some point. I am no Biblical scholar either, but there are many who are. I took a few moments to go and read what they had to say. I thank you for prompting that inquisitiveness in me. See below.

****************************************************

What Happens to Those Who Have Never Heard?

by: Hank Hanegraaff

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Q: What happens to those who have never heard the gospel? Are they sent to hell because they didn't accept a Jesus Christ they never heard about?

A: Men and women are not sentenced to hell based upon whether or not they have heard of Jesus Christ. Rather, they are justly and fittingly condemned based upon the fact that they are sinners. Indeed, they are sinners who have failed to act responsibly on what God has already revealed to them -- whether through the light of creation (Rom. 1), through the light of conscience (Rom. 2), or through the light of Christ (Rom. 3). If people respond to whatever light they do have, then God will send them the light of the gospel. Because no one has been kept in the dark about God's existence, we're all accountable directly to Him (Luke 12:47-48).

While the Bible affirms that Christ is the only Savior (Acts 4:12), it also states that God is truly just (Job 34:12) and that He loves humanity with an everlasting love (John 3:16). Let us, therefore, labor all the more to bring God's message of reconciliation to a world in desperate need of salvation (Rom. 10:13-15), knowing that there is no other way to reach Him except through His Son -- the Lord Jesus Christ (John 14:6).

Finally, we should ask, if those who have never heard the gospel are indeed bound for heaven, why should we attempt to evangelize them? Wouldn't it be more prudent to just keep everyone in the dark? In fact, if you really draw this argument out to its logical conclusion, Jesus Christ would not have come to seek and save those who are lost, but to seek and lose those who are already saved! He would then not be the great Savior of the world; He would become its great destroyer.

*****************************************************

What about those who've never heard about Jesus?

Such a question implies that God lacks compassion because he's imposed his plan of salvation on us. Often such inquirers seem to imply that they're more compassionate than God!

An important biblical principle to understand is that no one has ever remained lost who wanted to be found. Just as God sent the apostle Philip to the seeking Ethiopian (Acts 8:26-39), Jesus promises all who seek will find (Matthew 7:7-8).

Very, very long - but awesome answers.

http://www.christian-thinktank.com/hnohear.html

http://home1.gte.net/thetruth77/neverheard.html

http://www.bethinking.org/resource.php?ID=175

Leatha, I appreciate that, but that "answer" is really not at all satisfying. It's just a circular response blaming people who live in Tibet for not wanting to find god. I guess I am not surprised at this type of answer. It lets Christians off the hook for believing in something that involves so much unfairness and cruelty. I certainly do believe that I am more compassionate than god if god blames people from some far off land for not finding their way to Christianity.

Another thing about this answer is particularly offensive. It says that men and women are not condemned to hell based on whether or not they heard of Jesus Christ. Rather they are "justly and fittingly" condemned because they are sinners. I feel so sorry for people who believe that human beings are essentially "sinners." And I feel so sorry for people who believe that your everyday human who is out there living life the best way he or she can "deserves" to be condemned to hell. What a horrific world view. I truly feel sorry for you. Oh, but that's right, I should not feel sorry for you because you, after all, are "saved."

I am not sure whether there is a god or not, but if there is one, I could never disrespect him or her enough to believe that god's creations are born "sinners." As a child of god, I would always know that I could never be less than perfect exactly as I am.

When I asked my question earlier, I really had expected to hear answers that explained how a person from another land who never heard of Christ would somehow be forgiven. Silly me. Now I know that these people actually "deserve" to go to hell because they failed to find their way to Christianity. I'm really disappointed. It just takes my breath away that my fellow human beings could believe such things. It's even worse than I thought.

[WASaBubbleButt 41]

When I asked my question earlier, I really had expected to hear answers that explained how a person from another land who never heard of Christ would somehow be forgiven. Silly me. Now I know that these people actually "deserve" to go to hell because they failed to find their way to Christianity. I'm really disappointed. It just takes my breath away that my fellow human beings could believe such things. It's even worse than I thought.

I can't really say I am surprised by the answer, it's about what I expected considering the source.

However, it does make me wonder. What if it is the xtians worshiping the wrong God and not finding the correct God. They could all be condemned to an eternity in a hell belonging to one of the other many religions out there.

What's good for the goose and all that stuff. I mean let's face it, faith is nothing more than hoping for the best. Not a lot of facts in there to work with. More of... what they were born into. If they would have been born in India they'd likely have a very different set of beliefs.

[WASaBubbleButt 41]

Who in the world are you writing to?

[Morsaille 4]

Leatha, I've got a serious question. Not being sarcastic or facetious, promise.

I really liked the part of your (now deleted) post that you restated in bold print. That is what is making me ask the question.

I consider myself to be an Atheist. I am just not wired for faith, the idea of a Deity is not something that I am able to wrap my mind around. I tried to find faith, once upon a time, I REALLY worked at it. No luck.

The answer will be different in each faith or even congregation, I understand that in advance. In fact, I do not believe in Heaven or Hell. Just curious as to your philosophies.

to the question -

If I have no problem viewing nature and humanity with awe and reverence (though I have been exposed to the church), and I do my best to live a life that helps and inspires others (in your opinion) would someone like me be entitled to the same divine compassion?

QUOTE: whether through the light of creation (Rom. 1), through the light of conscience (Rom. 2), or through the light of Christ (Rom. 3). If people respond to whatever light they do have, then God will send them the light of the gospel. Because no one has been kept in the dark about God's existence, we're all accountable directly to Him (Luke 12:47-48).

[Sunta 5]

My issue in this particular discussion is not whether or not God exists, or which religion is "right", nor am I asking for proof of God or scientific facts, or anything like that.

My issue in this discussion is the abuses of women and girls (and Gays) within the Mormon religion; abuses which are well-documented by mainstream Mormons and which, yes, make me angry.

Just because I am angry over these abuses does not make me an "angry person" or "bitter" in general, or any of the other things I've been called here.

Actually it really concerns me even further when people do not become "angry" about such things, because silence and turning a blind eye like that further purpetuates the abuse, especially by people who could seek to change the way things are, such as Mormon women.

It's really convenient to say "oh you're just an angry, bitter person and I'm soooo happy I have the Lord and I'm not like you!" while meanwhile the antidepressant use in Utah is more than double the rest of the country and women and girls are subjected to atrocious emotional manipulation and abuse. That's nice for the people who can turn a blind eye and not give a shit about other people, but I do care and it makes me really angry to see injustice in any way, shape, or form.

And I don't just rant about it, believe me. I do my part to assist in creating change where it's desperately needed.

Actually, the most shocking thing is that the Mormon women here wouldn't be upset over the mental anguish of the women and girls in Utah, and wouldn't attempt to learn more about it and open their minds to the possibility that some parts of the Mormon doctrine are extremely denigrating of women and girls. That's really a shame, and it's a big reason why this kind of treatment is allowed to continue.

I wonder if any those who are arguing with me ever get angry when they see women being stoned to death in Iraq? I do. Does that make me just an angry person? Well I submit that Mormon men participate in the emotional stoning of women here in the United States.

Finally, did any of the Mormons on here even read the paper? Or would learning something that challenges the status quo be too upsetting?

[Alexandra 55]

I can't really say I am surprised by the answer, it's about what I expected considering the source.

Bubble, by "considering the source" I hope and assume you mean the publication Leatha quoted, the article by Hank Hanegraaf, not Leatha herself. Am I right?

Once again, everyone, please let's keep the discussion about the ideas, not the people.