Please Let Me Wonder

16 May 2006

Mormon Post Part Three: The Final Frontier

To get up to speed, you can read parts One and Two.

To put your mind at ease (in case you were worried): I didn’t convert. I didn’t get kidnapped, deprived of sleep, and then brainwashed into becoming a Mormon. I didn’t even get politely but persistently persuaded into becoming one. They didn’t wear me down with quotes from the Bible and requests to come to church on Sunday. So in that respect this is a rather anti-climactic conclusion to the story.

The meetings with the missionaries were interesting, but after a while I had to stop visiting them. They were there to save another soul, and I was there for some stimulating conversation about religion. I slowly realized that they wouldn’t stop trying to convince me to come to church, and the only way out for me was to stop the visits. Yeah, I’m quite dense sometimes….

My main interest was learning more about Mormonism, so I didn’t go there with the intention of confronting them on the shortcomings of their religion and make them lose their faith. In a previous entry I talked about DNA testing and how it showed that tribes in Peru claimed to be Hebrew by Mormons were not actually Hebrew at all. At the third meeting I had with the missionaries, I brought this up and we talked about it. They listened politely, and mentioned some LDS-funded archaeological work named FARMS that might address it.

Lately I’ve been interested in anachronisms (click on the word for its definition). The reason they interest me is because I like to look for the source of information. To just say “because the Bible says so” is not enough for me to accept. For example, when talking about the Old Testament I want to know how the Flood happened, when it happened, and what all those animals ate for 150(+) days whilst ark-bound. Call it natural curiosity….

Here are two anachronisms I found. To show I am not ranting against Mormons, I have one from the Book of Mormon and one from the Bible:
Click on the links above for the details; I’m not going to rewrite them here. But to show just how Fair and Balanced I am, you can read responses by apologists to these alleged anachronisms here (Mormon) and here (Christian).

The Mormon apologist’s response bothers me because while it is possible for cows to be confused with bison or buffalo, the author neglects to address the fact that Water Buffalo were only recently introduced from Asia and North American Bison never came to South America. South America is where this Hebrew tribe supposedly lived.

The Christian apologist’s response basically says “the writer of Chronicles used the word Daric because that’s the coin he knew when writing the book (400 years later)”. The problem is around King David’s time (c. 1011 and c. 971 BCE), when the story takes place, coinage of any kind was rare. And all the other gifts mentioned in 1 Chronicles 29:7 were described by weight, not coinage. So why the Daric is even mentioned in the first place does not make sense.

I’m not trying to shake anyone’s faith here. Obviously if you are a True Believer, my little rants are going to have no affect of your faith. My goal is to explain what I believe, and how I approach religion. Personally, I believe that faith and spirituality are good things. Faith and spirituality give people hope and help them to make sense of a chaotic, changing world. Religion can also give a strong value system, telling the believers what is right and wrong. That's a good way to keep people from killing each other for no good reason (in theory).

At the same time, I like to take things apart and analyze them. It’s been that way ever since I was a little kid and it’s why I became an engineer. Maybe sometimes I analyze things too much, but I can’t help it. I can understand the benefits of religious beliefs (i.e., people don’t kill each other). But when I see large and complex belief systems with an extremely specific method for “salvation” I have to ask, “Where did these rules come from?”

The Mormon missionaries invited me to play a game of volleyball with them, which I did. It turned out to be just me and three groups of missionaries playing against each other. Since I hadn’t done much physical activity here, I enjoyed the game. But what was more interesting was listening to the missionaries talk about their daily routines. They have very structured lives during mission trips. Two missionaries live together, with the day beginning at 6:30 and lights out at 10:30 at night. Bible study time is also scheduled at the same time each day (I forget when). Also, they are allowed only a few telephone calls to home PER YEAR. That bothered me the most, considering these mission trips last two years or more.

So that’s it, the end of my Austrian Mormon saga. Thanks for reading and don’t worry, my next post will be much less weighty. Perhaps some photos of mountains….

5 Comments:

  • Click on "Read More!" in order to, um, read more. I'm quite proud of my HTML editing....

    By Blogger ScottyB, at 16 May, 2006 08:18  

  • Scott,
    Do you think your take on religion has evolved through the years? Was there an "epiphany" moment for you and how your beliefs were interpereted? I appreciate your open-minded take on things. Keep it up!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 18 May, 2006 11:49  

  • JeffO, I definitely feel that my take on religion has evolved. But for me there was never any epiphany moment. I've always been interested in science, and the more I learned about it the harder it was for me to believe in a strict literal interpretation of the Bible.

    Sorry it took me so long to respond. I was traveling last week in Hungary and Vienna. Hopefully I will have a new blog post soon!

    By Blogger ScottyB, at 29 May, 2006 04:57  

  • I wonder how common this is for engineers and other "science" types. I too feel a growing distancing between my traditionally taught beliefs and what I feel has to be true. It can be difficult to reconcile the two sides. As an example, if you don't believe the science behind carbon dating or other means of archaeological dating, how can you believe anything else science has to offer? It is all based on the same principles. And yet there is so much unexplained out there that I feel a definite need to believe in something greater than ourselves. Carl Sagan is the man to turn to regarding this subject: "Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep insights can be winnowed from deep nonsense." or on the flipside: "Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality. ".

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 06 July, 2006 16:10  

  • To me it seems like a quite normal progression. The more you learn about science, the harder it is to accept the strict literal beliefs such as a young (8,000 year) earth. Sometimes I wonder how people can put their trust in airplanes, cellular phones, and computers and yet think that Radiometric dating techniques are flawed. Man, that last sentence sounded nerdy...

    I agree that science can be a great source of spirituality. I believe in a higher power that encourages the quest for knowledge. For me, it is a way to become closer to the universe.

    By Blogger ScottyB, at 07 July, 2006 08:30  

Post a Comment

<< Home