Why do most anti mormons use info that is OVER 100 YEARS OLD?

Question

My reason for asking is the Omaha Sunday World Herald has an article that says just that for CORRECT info. on the Mormon church go to a library with recent info.

Answer 1

Why bother when critics can use Smith's own words against him?

Like claiming steel weaponry and chariots in the Americas when there hasn't been so much as a iron knife found? Or The presence of hroses and oxen before they had been bought over by the Europeans? Like the "sacred Egyptian" heiroglyphs he "translated" turning out to be ordinary furnerary documents? Like claiming certain locations as battle sites where thousands supposedly died...and yet somehom managed to not leave any remains or weapons to be found by archaeologists?

Answer 2

That is when the church was built. There was a lot of faulty and rotten things that were used to build the foundation of the LDS church.
By analogy, if you don't have a good foundation under a house, the upper floors will shift and possibly collapse. The same applies to churches. If Christ is not the foundation, then it is built upon the ideas of men (book of Mormon, Joseph Smith being a prophet of God, salvation by works etc.)
Would you rather that we would use current information? There is enough to go through that is current.

Answer 3

Because the word of god is supposed to be unchanging and eternal. 'Old arguments' keep popping up because mormonism simply cannot shrug them off anymore.

Sooner or later you're going to have to accept that mormonism is a tall tale invented by a unscrupulous man, because of the overwhelming avalanche of evidence that supports that premise. The longer the church keeps it's collective mouth shut trying to ignore it, the more truth is uncovered (except for anything remotely "nephite').

Hopefully the Theocracy of Utah will be replaced with a real democratic government.

We could discuss the latest DNA news from a former LDS bishop - or is that "Old News" still?

Answer 4

As a Mormon, YOU know you are not suppose ot be on those sites anyways, s o assuming you know this, I knwo you weren't, the only info on thses sites that is 100 years old is the info on Jo Smith and Brigham Young, because they are dead and you can't find anything current about them unless the missing 113 pages of the book of Mormon all of a sudden show up, so your info is incorrect.

Answer 5

A bad tree cannot bear good fruit. The old info shows what fraudulent hoaksters you are. I have lots of new info. Lets talk temple , baby. Just for fun I "borrowed" my Mormon brothers Temple Recommend and went tripping through the temple. (I am not even a member) You people are CRAZZZYYYY. If that aint enough, how about Magic Underwear. "Melchizedek Preisthood"? You are out of your mind.

Answer 6

Well if people can find information that can be used for an attack, then that is what will be latched onto. If the information is older, it at times can be harder for those who might not know about it to defend it.

I just try to appretiate it when people use outdated info, instead of just making up the random stuff about my beliefs.

Answer 7

Great, now tell me how to find an American library with info less than one hundred years old!

Answer 8

Because it is entirely too much like work to review all documentation. Few even can bother to read the BoM, and after having read it myself, it is easy to understand why: it is a bunch of pretentious drivel, boring as all get-out, and too silly to be believed by anyone with the intelligence of a gnat.

Answer 9

Members have been asking this question for years. My guess is that things have changed (attitudes, social norms, etc) and it takes them going back to the early days of the church to find anything wrong with us.

Answer 10

Because it's easy for them...

Hell, many christians still use arguments that were deftly defeated over 150 years ago... however they're not educated enough to know these arguments were defeated so they continue to be perpetuated by people thinking they're still legit arguments.