Wow, I can’t tell you how long and how nervous it felt to make this video! It’s a good opportunity for me to see some weaknesses in pronunciation and such. Anyways, I hope y’all can understand it! It’s a long video (10 minutes), so you might only want to watch it if you are at all interested in 종교/기독교/몰몬교/예수 그리스도 후기성도 교회/말일성도 예수 그리스도 교회 (yes, they’re all the same). To my knowledge, this is the first video of it’s kind (in Korean). Here’s the script for it:
대본
제가 한국 몰몬 회원과 구도자를 위에 이몰몬교의 숨은욕사에 때한 비디오를 만들었습니다. 몰몬교가 말일 성도 예수그리스도 교회 예전에 불렸지만 현재 이름은 예수 그리스도 후기 성도 교회(The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints/LDS)입니다. 저는 회원의 가정에서 태어나 자랐고 2년 동안 전임 선교사였기에 이 교회의 가르침을 잘 알고 있습니다. 제가 이 교회를 통해 많은 좋은 것을 배웠지만 교회에 대한 새로운 사실들을 발견했기 때문에 이 교회에게서 떠났습니다. 제가 배운 사실과 역사가 영어로만 있기 대문에 이 비디오 만들고 한국분들이 이것을 통해서 그것들을 알 수 있는 기회가 됐으면 합니다.
이거 욕설아닙니다. 많은몰몬교 회원과 비회원인 학자들이 아직 이사실과 역사를 확인했습니다.
일부다처(一夫多妻)
몰몬교의 첫번째 선지자인 조셉 스미스가 몰래 33 소녀와 여성이랑 일부다처하고 당시에 공식적으로 또 부인에게도 부인했습니다. 조셉이 결혼한 여자랑까지 결혼하려고 했습니다. 그 여자들은 저음에 거부했을 때 조셉은 한 천사가 조셉이 일부다처 안한다면 조셉을 죽이겠다고 말했다고 주장했습니다. 칼이 있는 천사의 이야기 참고한 교회 회장과 조셉의 친구와 그 여자들이 많습니다. 조셉 에프 스미스 회장님 솔트레이크시티 1878년 7월 7일 성막에서 간증하면서 그 천사의 협박에 대해 얘기하고 일부다처 안하면 조셉을 죽이겠다고 말했습니다.
조셉 스미스와 다른 교회 지도자들이 공적으로 조셉의 일부다처에 대해 계속해서 거짓말했습니다. 그 소문 긑마치도록 조셉이 새로운 교리까지 받아들였습니다. 몰몬 경전에 있는 교리와 성약(Doctrine and Covenents/D&C) 1835년 에디션101편 이렇게 말했습니다. “이 교회가 일부다처제로 비난 받으니 우리는 한 남편이 한 아내만 있을 수 있다고 믿고 한 아내가 한 남편만 있을 수 있다고 믿습니다.” 조셉은 일부일처의 교리가 정해지기 2년전 1833년부터 일부다처를 행했습니다.
조셉 스미스가 죽은 후, 두번째 선지자인 브리금 영1852 년에 조셉의 일부다처 명령하는 계시 발행했습니다. 그분이 교리와 성약 1835년 에디션101편의 일부일처 교리 있었어라도 일부다처 참되다는거 가르쳤습니다. 1876년까지 101편 있었으나 지워졌고 대신에 일부다처를 명령한 132편으로 대체 되었습니다.
많은 첫번째 시현 기록
다른 숨은 사실은 몰몬 경전에 있는 조셉의 첫번째 시현과 첫번째 시현은 많은 다른 시간에 다르게 쓰여진 버전중에 하나입니다. 그리고 조셉 스미스가 1842년까지 1820첫번째 시현에 대해 쓴 기록이 없습니다. 그 22년 동안 공무의 교회 역사 포함되어 많은 교회 자료 출판됐지만 첫번째 시현에 대한 것은 없었습니다.
버전에 따라 조셉 스미스가 천사, 하나님 그리고 예수 그리스도 또는 그들의 단체의 모습을 봤습니다. 다른 모순도 있습니다. 예를들면 조셉이 이 세상에 참된 교회가 없다는 것을 미리 알고 있었다거나 그가 하나님에게 참된 교회를 알기위해 기도했을때의 그의 나이가 몇 살이었는지 등입니다. 조셉의 일기와 올리버 카우드리의 쓴 기록중에 혼란스러운 점도 있습니다.
몰몬경(Book of Mormon)의 번역
첫번째 시현이 그랬던 것처럼 급판이 어떻게 번역했는지에 대해서 많은 바뀜이 있었습니다. 지금 공식적인 교회 자료에 따라 조셉이 바로 금판을 읽었거나 특별한 구도인우림과 둠밈 사용했다고 기록합니다만 직접 봤던 사람들은 그분이 그 것들을 안했다고 말했습니다. 올리버 카우드리, 데이비드 휘트머 그리고 조셉의 아내 엠마 스미스는 조셉이 모자안에 있는 예언수정(seer stone)에 보고 그렇게 금판 번역했다고 했습니다. 조셉은 급판을 사용할 필요가 없는것 같았고 그가 번역할 동안 자주 그들을 다른 방에 있게 했습니다. 금판 찾기 전에 조셉 스미스가 보물 찾기 위해 독같은 예언수정을 사용했습니다. 법원에서 조셉이 보물찾는것에 대해서 유죄를 선고 받았습니다.
아브라함서(Book of Abraham)
조셉이 몰몬경 말고도 다른 번역한 책 있습니다. 조셉은 몰몬 경전에 있는 아브라함서가 아브라함이 손으로 쓴 책이라고 주장했습니다. 조셉 스미스의 시대에 아무도 이집트어 번역할 수 없었습니다. 조셉 스미스가 자기말대로 자기는 참된 선지자 이기 때문에 어느 언어든지 번역할 수 있다고 말했습니다. 어느 날 조셉이 애급 미라와 두루마리를 샀습니다. 그 두루마리를 통해 아브라함서 말들었습니다.
이제 조셉이 번역한 두루마리 조각 찾아졌습니다. 로제타석 대문에 학자들은 그 원래 상징들의 의미을 번역할수 있습니다. 학자들의 번역에 보면 조셉의 번역이 완전히 틀렸습니다. 아브라함서의두루마리는 애급 사자의 서입니다. 그 것은 이집트의 민속적인 가르침으로 구성되어있습니다.
몰몬 엔다우멘트와 메이슨단 의식의 견련
회원들은 특별하고 성스러운 엔다우멘트이라는 의식을 합니다. 대부분의 회원들은 조셉이 계시를 통해 만들었다고 믿습니다. 조셉 스미스가 몰몬교 설립한 후 메이슨단 회원 되고 그들의 비밀 의식을 똑같이 몰몬교의 의식으로 사용했습니다.
엔다우멘트의 변경
많은 것들이 엔다우멘트에서 없어졌습니다. 회원들은 의식에서 옷을 다 입지 않기도 했고 1990년 전에 엔다우멘트 동안 기독교 목사님이 사탄에게서 돈을 받고 틀린 복음을 가르쳤습니다. 그리고 당시에 회원들은 엔다우멘트에 대해서 다른 사람들에게 얘기하지 않겠다고 목숨걸고 약속한 부분도 빠졌습니다. 마지막으로 1927년 전에 회원들은 조셉 스미스의 피가 미국에 복수를 하겠다고 약속했습니다.
끝
저는 여러분이 제 마음과 이 비디오 만든 목적 이해하기를 바랍니다. 저는 사람들은 뭐 믿어야 한다고 할 수 없습니다. 그래도 이 모든 내용은 역사입니다. 들어주셔서 감사합니다.
Have you ever thought about being a non-denominational Christian? Do you have anything opposed to Christianity?
If Jesus is who he said he was (Lord and Savior), then we have to follow what he said in the Bible.
@tim
Yes, I thought about it. I believe there isn’t a god, so Christianity is off the table.
What are your reasons for not believing in a God?
If you said it in the video, I’m sorry, but I do not know too much korean.
@tim
I just don’t see any evidence. Although I believed there was a god growing up, looking back I don’t believe I ever really saw anything which said that there is a god. It’s really as simple as that. So, like Christians and others who believe I also make the same level of argument as they are able to make. Although I don’t have a ‘sure’ knowledge, I believe that there isn’t a god and I believe all the evidence out there points to there not being a god.
I think that you should find out if Christianity is true or not. It is the easiest religion to disprove. If you can disprove Christ’s resurrection, you disprove Christianity. I believe religion is the most important thing in life. Most religions hold that there is an eternity afterwords, and I would rather live my life to make that eternity god than this short life here that is but a vapor. As I have heard before, I would rather live my life as if there was a God and die to find out there isn’t than the other way around.
Also, I think that there is substantial evidence for God. All scholars and historians say that the person of Jesus Christ actually lived. And Jesus Christ declared himself Lord. If this is true, than Jesus is either a liar, a lunatic, or he actually is Lord.
I got the last argument from a book by C.S. Lewis called Mere Christianity. I think that it would be well worth your time to read it. The first 7 pages can be read at http://books.google.com/books?id=OF-YSMKCVwMC&printsec=frontcover&dq=mere+christianity&source=bl&ots=ycmPWjf2wY&sig=TfNPilfzP_Y9-S9Wdrtu3oxX-hQ&hl=en&ei=I8nwS9mPApSGswP1q6W7Ag&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CFYQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q&f=false.
It goes through several arguments for the existence of a God, then for the existence of Christ. However, it is not an easy read. But as I explained before, I think finding out about religion is most important.
@tim
I researched deeply into it, I found out enough to say it probably isn’t true. The burden of proof, in my opinion, is on Christianity (LDS/Mormonism is Christian BTW so I know all about it). I’ve looked through extensive ‘proof’ for Christianity and found it lacking. Anyways if I don’t believe there’s a god then there’s no reason to believe any religion. There is absolutely nothing you or anyone can give me which proves it’s true. People can only believe through faith and I don’t and can’t have it until I personally think there’s a god. Most likely, that will never happen because there probably isn’t a god.
@tim My brother has been doing a lot of research on Christianity, Jehova’s Witnesses, and Mormonism over the past year or so, and even delved into Catholicism a bit. He has had arguments and debates with many apologists, creationists, and plain old religious people and hasn’t found any grounding in any of their claims. After hearing the same claims from others myself and watching many videos from creationists and atheists alike we have come to the conclusion that, and no offense here, religious individuals tend not to listen to anything an atheist has to say.
May I suggest watching the following video series about a person’s journey away from religion? Start with this link and continue watching the videos starting with 2.X on the same channel. I am not suggesting this in an attempt to convert you, I’m suggesting it in an attempt to offer you a view from an atheist’s perspective WITHOUT being anti-religion, which is how most atheist material is inevitably produced (similarly to how religious material is produced pro-religion). This series is quite unbiased in comparison. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOmSYHzeoNA
Also, watch this video on Pascal’s wager: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZpJ7yUPwdU
Matt, I know you have extensively looked for proof for Christianity, which in your case was LDS, but, if you do not mind, I would like to know what in particular is most faulty with it. Is it the problem of evil, the lack of the historicity and archeology of Jesus Christ, the lack of theological or philosophical evidence for God, creation, or something else?
Also, qklilx, I definitely agree that many religious individuals tend not to listen to anything other religions have to say. Most Christians, I think, could not give an adequate reason for why they are a Christian and have wrong views of Christianity. Most are not considerate of listening to other religions. They are in direct opposition of what the Bible says. Although they are in the wrong, I do not think that their wrong actions prove or disprove the Bible.
Also, if you don’t mind, I would like you to try to convert me to atheism, because I think it will strengthen my trust in Christianity. I would rather have very hard and challenging questions about my faith now to make certain I should believe what I believe.
Thank you for showing me the video. They are very interesting and very well done. I will definitely watch them and maybe write a comment under the videos.
I think that there is substantially more reason for Christianity than atheism and that it takes a lot more faith to believe in atheism than Christianity. Christianity should never be believed in just by faith, one should use science to back up their belief.
@tim
I don’t want to get into a big thing. Basically the Bible and Jesus are extremely questionable. Pretty much the only things out there to prove them are … themselves. You can go look up whatever you want on the internet. I suggest looking up what the other side has to say about the bible and Jesus. If that doesn’t convert you, well, that’s your opinion and I wouldn’t hold it against you.
When I was a Christian, I did the same things you did. I investigated various things about Christianity and felt it made my testimony more strong. While it did at the time, in the end I conceded that I was just asking the same questions your asking and using anything the other party told me to justify what I already believed. It’s a pretty common strategy among believers. Everyone does it, whether they state it like you did or not. That doesn’t just cover religion, all people do it with any opinion one can make.
I don’t like telling people what to believe and what not to and why. Just go look at the facts on your own and make your decision however you feel is right, I really couldn’t care less.
Sorry, science (as in the pure sciences) doesn’t prove squat for religion. Literally, nothing. Call it whatever you want, maybe our terminology is different, but it’s faith.
@tim Any atheist will tell you that it does not take more faith to be an atheist. The very definition (most dictionaries seem to be biased, so I won’t cite one) is a _lack of faith in God or gods_.
One more video. After you finish watching this, Theremin Trees’s video, and Evid3nc3′s series, please do write back here with your thoughts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jk6ILZAaAMI
What about the transcendental argument for the existence of God. The transcendental argument infers that something is necessary in order for something else to be true. For example if a child exists, there must be a mother and father of that child. Atheism says humans are the result of blind chance and that only physical things exist. The problem with this is that there are many things that are not physical. Love is not physical. Numbers are not physical. Also, if our mind is a result of blind chance, then how can we trust our own mind? Our mind would be similar to a computer that downloaded software at random. We would not be able to know if it gave us true information. If evolution were true, then maybe we survived as a result of not knowing the truth about the world. Maybe our minds lie to us and that helps us survive.
C.S. Lewis put’s a spin to it and argues that you can’t use thought to disbelieve God. By this, he means that we cannot trust our own thinking to be true if we are merely the by-products of chance. And if you cannot trust you own thoughts, then it is impossible to use thought to disprove God. If our brains were produced by random chance, how do you know that your brain is thinking clearly? It makes much more sense to think that our thought processes are from processes of previous reasoning.
The problem with atheism, though, is that you cannot have ethics that apply to everyone. Why should people be nice and why should we follow government rules in which we know we will not get caught? Why should we say what Hitler did was wrong?
As far as the youtube videos, thank you for giving me the links. I enjoy learning about arguments against Christianity. I just posted comments on the videos. My user name is tim5392 if you want to see it. I did not post them here because my responses scattered on several different topics. I have posted on all the links and up to 2.3 on the deconversion videos.
@tim
No, atheism does not say humans exist by blind chance. It’s called evolution and natural selection. There’s a huge difference.
I would say that if you are going to infer that we cannot trust our own thinking, then that fits into my model of not believing there is a god. To me, it looks like a lot of people trust their thoughts and feelings of there being a good. That falls exactly into how you seem to characterize atheism in my opinion.
How do I think our brains think clearly? I have no idea but I’m not about to attribute it to some god.
Ethics in atheism work just like in religion. A bunch of people say there are rules to follow. Many follow because they think it’s right while others who disagree do it in private and face the consequences. There are good and bad people on both sides of the fence, the only difference is that the people on the religious side people can’t question if god is right or not. Many bad things have been done in the name of God (like the Spanish inquisition), yet nothing has been done in the name of ‘atheism.’ I heard a quote once: ‘Bad people do bad things and good people do good things, but only religion can make good people do bad things.’ I don’t think it can be universally applied, but I can’t help but feel it’s true in a lot of cases.
@tim Your reference to the transcendental argument is partially addressed in the Betting on Infinity video I linked you to. And as Matt pointed out, you CAN have morals without God. That is addressed here if you’re interested. This man explains it better than I can: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCovYF51qHE
sorry for the late response, my computer hard drive crashed.
Anyhow, how can one declare what is good or bad. With religion, good is declared by a god or his attributes. But with atheism good and bad can only be an opinion-what one thinks it is.
I am curious, and i don’t mean to intrude, but because I meet a lot of non Christians i am wondering, what would convince you to turn away from atheism; would reason and scientific fact do it alone. If there was, say 50 arguments against it, would that be enough. I know for me it would be nearly impossible because I have seen miracles and the Holy Spirit work in the world. I see God like the sun in that I can not see it directly, but i can see his effects.
Lastly, as I have used a couple C.S. Lewis quotes before, I challenge you to read at least the first five chapters of his book. I do not see how it could hurt. I think it will provide a lot more answers to many of the questions you had as you changed to atheism. I found the book at the website http://www.philosophyforlife.com/mctoc.htm Please let me know what you think of the first chapter
@tim
I believe society is pretty good at determining what is good and what is bad. I think religion simply takes what is society’s values and wraps it up in a package and declares God as the creator. Then it adds some junk on there that doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.
Nothing short of meeting God would bring me away from atheism. Anything else is (in my opinion) blind faith. I believe I can look at what you call miracles and the ‘Holy Spirit’ and say that they have nothing to do with a god. Those kinds of things are not proof at all, simply speculation and faith. What you would call a miricle because of God’s intervention I would probably call an unexplained miracle (not assuming a source) whether it be because of the miracle of the human body, mind, or science.
You can’t directly see the Sun? I can. In fact, I can send a probe closer if I want a better picture. Not a good example (IMHO).
I read the first chapter, it was interesting. I also skimmed the next few. Again, these are interesting social behavioral observations but don’t point to some Creator. If anything I believe what Lewis talks about shows that religion was created as a solution to these types of problems between individual and social interactions. While it may be true that religion helps people to adhere to the rules, it doesn’t imply anything about a supreme being.
While many believe it okay to be in a religion simply because it will make themselves or their children better people, I cannot adhere to such a philosophy. Personally, it makes me sad to think that so many people accept that there’s a god simply because churches seem to make people better (which may or may not be true). It’s a question of priorities and my personal priority is that I must actually believe in something to take part in it. In other words I must first believe in a god before I accept that morals are divinely instructed.
The Christian God declared morals that basically revolve around Him. He also told everyone not to kill while in the mean time He went and caused mass destruction all over the place and endorsed all sorts of behavior which we would consider immoral today. Matt is an atheist. He does not use foul language or take the Lord’s name in vein. He instantly has that moral under his belt that a lot of Christians do not have.
If religion were required in order to have morals then places like Sweden would be horrible to live in; most of their population does not believe in a god.
50 arguments against atheism won’t convince me unless those 50 arguments draw upon concrete evidence that demonstrate that God or gods exist. So far not a single one exists, at least that has been published.
2 Nephi Chapter 2
Coming a bit late into the discussion, I feel there is an important note that must be made regarding something you wrote. Mstrum, you said: “Nothing short of meeting God would bring me away from atheism.”
Many atheists view themselves as intellectuals, using their alleged exhaustive power of reasoning to “prove” God’s inexistence, so I will treat you as such.
Objectivity requires consistency, something I find you lacking. You say nothing short of meeting God will prove his existence, yet, do you hold that same standard to every other object/idea in the universe? Do you doubt the existence of France, or Australia? Do you doubt the existence of wind? What about the many infinitesimal organisms, too small for the human eye—do you doubt them?
No, of course you don’t. Unless you doubt the entire external world not under the present gaze of your vision, you believe in many things which you do not see, and will likely never see. You take other people’s word for it as legitimate, authoritative evidence.
But you do not do so with God. Why? How can you shrug off the written testimonies of millions dead, and billions alive, that there is a God? As a whole, we may disagree the exact nature of God, and how we should worship that God, but to deny entirely God’s existence requires you to look past the personal evidence of countless people
If you believe in things which you cannot see, and do so because you accept other people’s testimonies of it, but do not believe in other things which you also cannot see because you reject those same people’s testimony of it, then the problem isn’t the evidence.
You do not wish to believe. You do not want to believe that you are wrong, and that you will be held accountable for your actions. You will sputter and quarrel within yourself, desperately spitting out false arguments and misleading “facts.”
We have evidences all around us that there is a God, evidences you will continue looking over. You strive for that unobtainable position of the objective analyzer, the calculating critic, the logical academic.
“Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things. […] Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever.” (Romans 1:22-33, 25)
If you believe in nothing, that’s exactly what you’ll get.
We don’t have any evidence that there’s a god, we have a lot of testimony which proves absolutely nothing. I will not create something from nothing. If the nothing I get means I don’t create a universe in my mind which doesn’t exist than so be it.