Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

Oct 12, 2011 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: CNN

Editor's note: Dean Obeidallah is an award-winning comedian who has appeared on TV shows such as Comedy Central's "Axis of Evil" special, ABC's "The View," CNN's "What the Week" and HLN's "The Joy Behar Show." He is executive producer of the annual New York Arab-American Comedy Festival and the Amman Stand Up Comedy Festival.

Comments
19,581 - 19,600 of 32,001 Comments Last updated Friday Jul 25

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20611
Feb 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
That is interesting, coming from the person who claimed that you couldn't get soda at BYU, a school where a variety of soda is available at most eating venues on campus.
Dana likes to make claims whether they are true or not. If he would come back and say he was incorrect that would be nice but Dana is short of apologies.
He also claimed wine was never made from water. Even after I sent him information that the home made wine industry uses water for their wines and that it was a huge industry, he wouldn't concede he was incorrect. Instead he said he was talking about manufactured wines that used fruit, something he didn't state in his initial statement.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20612
Feb 23, 2013
 
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
But this can't be true, No Surprise says the LDS church has never taught that!(Yet he can't proved any evidence for what he claims they do teach) Pathetic!
You should go back and read my initial post concerning what I actually stated debate coward :)
concerned in Egypt

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20614
Feb 23, 2013
 
Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
First, I think the burden is on you to establish that what you have posted above is ACTUALLY Mormon doctrine found in church published materials. Why would I want to engage in a wild goose chase in the Book of Mormon for things that are not really Mormon doctrine at all? If you want to play this game, give me church published sources and quotes for all of the above listed concepts. Several of the questions are poorly worded and don't represent actual church doctrine.
-I'll only take church published sources. If it wasn't published by the church, it wasn't said by the church as a whole, and therefore is not doctrine. A great place to start is lds.org
Good luck!
So for you it does not matter what J.S. and B.Y. taught on Sunday's as declared prophets and leaders of a new Sect.

How about you just go through the list be honest tell the thread what statements you do believe and then I will just deal with the ones you say you and LDS don't believe.

Again please stop greasing the pig, please be forth right and declare your beliefs.

ARE you ashamed of what you believe?

Is that why you play this game of I won't tell you what I believe unless you can show me what I believe?

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20615
Feb 23, 2013
 
Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
That is interesting, coming from the person who claimed that you couldn't get soda at BYU, a school where a variety of soda is available at most eating venues on campus.
Another Mormon with reading comprehension problems. I said one time that you couldn't get a soda with caffeine in it. Posted a newspaper article about students who are wanting them brought in.

Here's another one: http://www.abc4.com/content/news/watercooler/... proving I was right.

Some more: http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/54875621-78...

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-09-17...

Here is a report about Mormon Stormtroopers stopping the students from passing out cola's: http://universe.byu.edu/beta/2012/09/14/caffe...

All proof I was very much telling the truth.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20616
Feb 23, 2013
 
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
You should go back and read my initial post concerning what I actually stated debate coward :)
You should actually give some evidence that what I'm saying is wrong instead of throwing hissy fits and out & out lying.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20617
Feb 23, 2013
 
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Dana likes to make claims whether they are true or not. If he would come back and say he was incorrect that would be nice but Dana is short of apologies.
He also claimed wine was never made from water. Even after I sent him information that the home made wine industry uses water for their wines and that it was a huge industry, he wouldn't concede he was incorrect. Instead he said he was talking about manufactured wines that used fruit, something he didn't state in his initial statement.
That is what you consider proof I'm lying about Mormonism? Pathetic.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20618
Feb 23, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
First, I think the burden is on you to establish that what you have posted above is ACTUALLY Mormon doctrine found in church published materials. Why would I want to engage in a wild goose chase in the Book of Mormon for things that are not really Mormon doctrine at all? If you want to play this game, give me church published sources and quotes for all of the above listed concepts. Several of the questions are poorly worded and don't represent actual church doctrine.
-I'll only take church published sources. If it wasn't published by the church, it wasn't said by the church as a whole, and therefore is not doctrine. A great place to start is lds.org
Good luck!
Denial won't save the Mormon church. I was taught all he posted as a member, as is everyone else.

By your standard the temple endowment ceremony wouldn't be considered LDS teachings because it isn't published by the church.
concerned in Egypt

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20619
Feb 23, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
Practicing the same form since its inception?
-What about selling indulgences? Was Christ telling people they could sin if they gave him money?
-Did Christ get baptized, was he baptized by immersion or sprinkling? Christian churches all over debate whether baptism is essential. How can you claim Christianity has been the same when churches today can not agree on what is necessary for salvation?
-Have holy rights, holy water, and prayer beads always had a place in Christianity?
-Has all of Christianity always thought that devotion is best expressed in the confines of a secluded society?(as monks or nuns)
The very question of if and how Christianity had changed is what brought the great reformers like Martin Luther to take a stand against the prevailing religious institutions of their time. Of course Christianity has changed and is being practiced in varying forms through out much of the world.
I once met a pastor and a deacon of the same Baptist Church who thought differently on the matter of Baptism. The Pastor of the BAPTIST church felt that Baptism wasn't necessary while the Deacon felt that it was absolutely necessary to have baptism by immersion. Forms are being debated and changed. Much of Christianity is different than it was 2000 years ago.
Again your logic is flawed because one Religious group is practicing an abhorrent teaching does not mean elsewhere in the world Christians did not and keeping the faith. One false practice does not even mean the sect is not Christian but if an essential Christian belief it would make them non-Christian
It does not mean as J.S. And B.Y. claim Christianity ceased to exist with the death of the Apostles.

At the time of Indulgences the GREEK orthodox the Chinese Orthodox the Coptic Christians in Africa all were not practicing Indulgences all were in existence as were Hussites and many other people groups who practiced Christianity as did the 1st Century church.

Because the Word of God never ceased to EXIST because Christianity never ceased to exist Because all the Greek and Hebrew texts were preserved in the Reformers day the Sect practicing indulgences was rebuked and shown their ERROR.

On the same WORD of God that indulgences are rebuked your False LDS sects Doctrines are rebuked.

-baptism for the dead
-temple marriages
-Polytheistic Theism
-BOM is god's word
-holy underwear
-Blood atonement
-Adam God Doctrine
-Blacks were not as Noble in pre-existence as were whites

I could list so many more.
concerned in Egypt

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20620
Feb 23, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
My apologies, I don't mean to become the "grammar" police here, but your posts would be much easier to read if you included some more punctuation. All of the quoted text above has only one period. It would be much easier if you signified the end of one thought and the beginning of another with a period.
My statement was completely logical. All of us were spiritually created by the Father hence, His spiritual children. Christ was the only one to be both spiritually created and physically created. Physical creation is indicated by "begotten."
You are such a wet noodle I don't mean to be the grammar police but I choose to be..... you can't even say that with out a back door exit if someone should challenge you.

YOUR faith is not faith at all as you have an emergency exit door if anyone should challenge you.

Instead of giving a defense for your faith you run and hide behind it's not in an official LDS publication.

So what if its not.

The Bible never was an officially published anything since when did that become the criteria for what is TRUTH? Since when has that been needed to declare what your FAITH is and your BELIEFS are?

Did Paul ever say to the Bereans hey don' tell me what I believe unless you can find it in a officially published first century Christian book.
NOR did Moses
NOR did any prophet of God.
IF they were prophets of God their word was God's word where they declared it as such.

So we are showing you where B.Y. Taught that ADAM God doctrine was GOD's truth his words during a LDS service, he is a Recognized Prophet of God by LDS but now some 100 years after the fact you say because its not in an official LDS publication it don't count. LOL ROFL another good reason the LDS is a big old CULT.

If you are unable to speak candidly and straightforward for the reasons you believe your Faith is the REAL and true one of God then its not REAL and its not Truth and if you can't agree with that you are of the world and it's Lord the evil one.

Your not one of those accountants that keeps two sets of books are you? Apparently you do with your faith.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20621
Feb 23, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

concerned in Egypt wrote:
<quoted text>
You are such a wet noodle I don't mean to be the grammar police but I choose to be..... you can't even say that with out a back door exit if someone should challenge you.
YOUR faith is not faith at all as you have an emergency exit door if anyone should challenge you.
Instead of giving a defense for your faith you run and hide behind it's not in an official LDS publication.
So what if its not.
The Bible never was an officially published anything since when did that become the criteria for what is TRUTH? Since when has that been needed to declare what your FAITH is and your BELIEFS are?
Did Paul ever say to the Bereans hey don' tell me what I believe unless you can find it in a officially published first century Christian book.
NOR did Moses
NOR did any prophet of God.
IF they were prophets of God their word was God's word where they declared it as such.
So we are showing you where B.Y. Taught that ADAM God doctrine was GOD's truth his words during a LDS service, he is a Recognized Prophet of God by LDS but now some 100 years after the fact you say because its not in an official LDS publication it don't count. LOL ROFL another good reason the LDS is a big old CULT.
If you are unable to speak candidly and straightforward for the reasons you believe your Faith is the REAL and true one of God then its not REAL and its not Truth and if you can't agree with that you are of the world and it's Lord the evil one.
Your not one of those accountants that keeps two sets of books are you? Apparently you do with your faith.
Let me add:

From the "14 Fundamentals of Following a Prophet"

Fourth: The prophet will never lead the Church astray.

President Wilford Woodruff stated:

“I say to Israel, the Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as president of the Church to lead you astray. It is not in the program. It is not in the mind of God.”(The Discourses of Wilford Woodruff, pp. 212–13.)

President Marion G. Romney tells of this incident which happened to him:

“I remember years ago when I was a bishop I had President Heber J. Grant talk to our ward. After the meeting I drove him home … Standing by me, he put his arm over my shoulder and said:‘My boy, you always keep your eye on the President of the Church and if he ever tells you to do anything, and it is wrong, and you do it, the Lord will bless you for it.’ Then with a twinkle in his eye, he said,‘But you don’t need to worry. The Lord will never let his mouthpiece lead the people astray.’”(Conference Report, October 1960, p. 78.)

Sixth: The prophet does not have to say “Thus saith the Lord” to give us scripture.

Sometimes there are those who argue about words. They might say the prophet gave us counsel but that we are not obliged to follow it unless he says it is a commandment. But the Lord says of the Prophet,“Thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you.”(D&C 21:4.)

And speaking of taking counsel from the prophet, in D&C 108:1, the Lord states:

“Verily thus saith the Lord unto you, my servant Lyman: Your sins are forgiven you, because you have obeyed my voice in coming up hither this morning to receive counsel of him whom I have appointed.”

Said Brigham Young,“I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call scripture.”(Journal of Discourses, 13:95.)

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20622
Feb 23, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Dana likes to make claims whether they are true or not.Pathetic.
I said nothing specific about you lying...lol
I really love this post of your's. Know why? You prove for a fact that you don't read for actual content, you read what you interpret something to mean even if it doesn't state your interpretation.
Want and example?
My very first sentence explained my entire post and you totally with purpose to a fault ignorantly missed it.
I stated in the very first sentence...
"Dana likes to make claims whether they are true or not."
Let's past that again so you can read it slowly. Than go bact to that post and you'll see it had no specific reference to 'just Mormonism.'
"Dana likes to make claims whether they are true or not."
You have made claims about non-religious discussions and religious discussions. I was referencing all those different claims when I stated...
"Dana likes to make claims whether they are true or not."
You make a lot of claims and when you're wrong, you never ever have the honesty and or courtesy to say admit it.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20623
Feb 23, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
You should actually give some evidence that what I'm saying is wrong instead of throwing hissy fits and out & out lying.
As usual, you jumped into a conversation without reading to see what had been previously said. In doing that you took out of context what I said and that is normal for you.
So if you wish evidence for a conversation you known nothing about, go back and read about it than make an intelligent reply. Not a tough thing to do :)

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20624
Feb 23, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me add:
From the "14 Fundamentals of Following a Prophet"
Fourth: The prophet will never lead the Church astray.
Seems to have been quite an accurate prophecy so far for the last 180 years that this church has had prophets. Can you show differently?
The RLDS lost their prophets and have been totally reorganized. Other off shoots of the main church have came and went.
Smith said his church would spread to the four corners of the earth. No church can do any such thing as long as it has corrupt leaders seeking their own gain.
Not a single prophet of this church since Smith has led it to ruin. And no matter what you dislike or hate about these prophets, every single one has helped this church continue to exist and spread across the face of the earth.
Show me another American Christian church began before 1850 by a prophet who's church still exists. Shoot, just give me a list of American Christian religions that were founded before 1840 that exist today with most of the same early doctrines/teachings still in place. Show me American Christian religions that were founded before 1840 that still teach today that homosexual relations aren't the way of the Lord. Show me American Christian religions founded before 1840 that have spread to the four corners of this earth.
concerned in Egypt

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20625
Feb 24, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me add:
From the "14 Fundamentals of Following a Prophet"
Fourth: The prophet will never lead the Church astray.
President Wilford Woodruff stated:
“I say to Israel, the Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as president of the Church to lead you astray. It is not in the program. It is not in the mind of God.”(The Discourses of Wilford Woodruff, pp. 212–13.)
President Marion G. Romney tells of this incident which happened to him:
“I remember years ago when I was a bishop I had President Heber J. Grant talk to our ward. After the meeting I drove him home … Standing by me, he put his arm over my shoulder and said:‘My boy, you always keep your eye on the President of the Church and if he ever tells you to do anything, and it is wrong, and you do it, the Lord will bless you for it.’ Then with a twinkle in his eye, he said,‘But you don’t need to worry. The Lord will never let his mouthpiece lead the people astray.’”(Conference Report, October 1960, p. 78.)
Sixth: The prophet does not have to say “Thus saith the Lord” to give us scripture.
Sometimes there are those who argue about words. They might say the prophet gave us counsel but that we are not obliged to follow it unless he says it is a commandment. But the Lord says of the Prophet,“Thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you.”(D&C 21:4.)
And speaking of taking counsel from the prophet, in D&C 108:1, the Lord states:
“Verily thus saith the Lord unto you, my servant Lyman: Your sins are forgiven you, because you have obeyed my voice in coming up hither this morning to receive counsel of him whom I have appointed.”
Said Brigham Young,“I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call scripture.”(Journal of Discourses, 13:95.)
Thanks for that

What every MORMON that declares the J&C should read.
http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm/compoundobje...

Page 6 of J&D vol.1 Message from the Presidency.

It was by LDS council Mr. Watt recorded the sermons found in the J&C. It was by official LDS council that they were to be made. That the sermons contained with in were recorded by Phonography.

That he did it faithfully

The J&D were created by the offical LDS council the called for and approved them to be made.

The Only reason they were published the way they were I.E. a non official LDS publisher was at the direction of the Official LDS council headed by LDS Prophet Brigham YOUNG so Watt could get some financial gain for working two years with out pay and maintain his status as a reporter.

Far as

Brigham Young
Herbal Kimball
Willard Richards

Were all concerned it was official LDS endorsed and requested publication.

The Journals were a set of REPORTS already reviewed by the Council which I remind you again was headed by Brigham YOUNG.

The J&D are and were official LDS publication.

Brigham YOUNG no less says so in his opening to them.

The only reason is by the REQUEST of B.Y. they were not published by a LDS publisher was so WATT could receive the profits for his time and effort.

Again I doubt any LDS on this thread has ever read Page 6 of Vol. 1 but has been lied to by their Bishop at their local stake that they were not published by and official LDS publisher therefore not a official LDS publication. But that did not make them any less official had they been as shown for the reasons above.

TRUTH MATTERS the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help us God.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20626
Feb 24, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
I said nothing specific about you lying...lol
I really love this post of your's. Know why? You prove for a fact that you don't read for actual content, you read what you interpret something to mean even if it doesn't state your interpretation.
Want and example?
My very first sentence explained my entire post and you totally with purpose to a fault ignorantly missed it.
I stated in the very first sentence...
"Dana likes to make claims whether they are true or not."
Let's past that again so you can read it slowly. Than go bact to that post and you'll see it had no specific reference to 'just Mormonism.'
"Dana likes to make claims whether they are true or not."
You have made claims about non-religious discussions and religious discussions. I was referencing all those different claims when I stated...
"Dana likes to make claims whether they are true or not."
You make a lot of claims and when you're wrong, you never ever have the honesty and or courtesy to say admit it.
Again with the childish word games that only demonstrate your dishonesty. That I was a liar was certainly implied. When are you ever going to get honest with even yourself?
concerned in Egypt

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20627
Feb 24, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me add:
From the "14 Fundamentals of Following a Prophet"
Fourth: The prophet will never lead the Church astray.
President Wilford Woodruff stated:
“I say to Israel, the Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as president of the Church to lead you astray. It is not in the program. It is not in the mind of God.”(The Discourses of Wilford Woodruff, pp. 212–13.)
President Marion G. Romney tells of this incident which happened to him:
“I remember years ago when I was a bishop I had President Heber J. Grant talk to our ward. After the meeting I drove him home … Standing by me, he put his arm over my shoulder and said:‘My boy, you always keep your eye on the President of the Church and if he ever tells you to do anything, and it is wrong, and you do it, the Lord will bless you for it.’ Then with a twinkle in his eye, he said,‘But you don’t need to worry. The Lord will never let his mouthpiece lead the people astray.’”(Conference Report, October 1960, p. 78.)
Sixth: The prophet does not have to say “Thus saith the Lord” to give us scripture.
Sometimes there are those who argue about words. They might say the prophet gave us counsel but that we are not obliged to follow it unless he says it is a commandment. But the Lord says of the Prophet,“Thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you.”(D&C 21:4.)
And speaking of taking counsel from the prophet, in D&C 108:1, the Lord states:
“Verily thus saith the Lord unto you, my servant Lyman: Your sins are forgiven you, because you have obeyed my voice in coming up hither this morning to receive counsel of him whom I have appointed.”
Said Brigham Young,“I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call scripture.”(Journal of Discourses, 13:95.)
Again thanks for that.

I was reading your post again and some of these quotes I had never picked up on before.

It brought a thought to come to my mind.

We know LDS are not Christian but are they even MORMON anymore.

The real question that needs to be asked in this day and age have they been so overly Politically correct that they have distanced themselves from the teachings of the MORMON founders in J.S. and B.Y. they are not even MORMON anymore.

Hence the Identity crisis and the need to be called Christian because deep down they know they don't want to be Mormon.

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20628
Feb 24, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

concerned in Egypt wrote:
<quoted text>
... blah, blah, blah...

TRUTH MATTERS the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help us God.
Exactly!!!

//

So, go back to the O.R.I.G.I.N.A.L. documents...

the uncut,
the unedited,
the unaltered BIBLE!

//

But, where are you going to find it?

Where does your truth come from?

lol... we have already seen your "ninja anti-key copy paste skills" at work...

NOW PUT UP OR SHUT UP AND PRODUCE that O.R.I.G.I.N.A.L. Bible...

You know: the uncut, the unedited, the unaltered O.R.I.G.I.N.A.L. version!

//

Funny how you think that only one group of people had the Bible...
(Not the Book of Mormon, the Bible)

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20629
Feb 24, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Try reading:

1)**** "The Annals of the Cakchiquels Title of the Lords of Totonicapan"

2)**** "A short work on the Popol Vuh and the traditional history of the Ancient americans, by Ixt-Lil-Xochitl"

3)**** "Popol Vuh The Sacrad Book of the Ancient Quiche Maya"

4)**** "Shreds of Evidence for the Book of Mormon - The Nibley Series 1st and 2nd Nephi"

5)**** "Archaeology and the Book of Mormon"

6)**** "The Incredible Incas and their timeless land"

7)**** "Ancient America and the Book of Mormon"

8)**** SACRED SITES Searching for Book of Mormon Lands"

9)**** The Dead Sea Scrolls

10)*** THE Book of Mormon

---

humble yourself... face the facts...go do some research... read the entire book... not just what others say about it and just copy then paste what they say...

Come back educated and under a different alias next time... stop embarrassing yourselves.
concerned in Egypt

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20630
Feb 24, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

The following posts are to Sambrotherofnephi

I am going post a set of posts all with the following Question to them.

Do you as a Mormon member of the LDS believe the following. Yes or No.

Intelligences

According to Mormonism, we have all existed eternally, firstly as "Intelligences".

"Use of this name [intelligences] designates both the primal element from which the spirit offspring were created and also their inherited capacity to grow...until such intelligences...become like their Father, the Supreme Intelligence" (Bruce McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 383).
Joseph Smith said that these intelligences were eternal, co-equal with God, and that God never had the power to create them:
"...the soul, the mind, the immortal spirit. All men say God created it in the beginning. The very idea lessens man in my estimation...The mind of man is as immortal as God himself...their spirits existed co- equal with God...I take my ring from my finger and liken it unto the mind of man, the immortal spirit, because it has no beginning...God never did have power to create the spirit of man at all. God himself could not create himself: intelligence exist upon a self existent principle, it is a spirit from age to age, and there is no creation about it...The first principles of man are self existent with God..." (Joseph Smith, Times and Seasons, Vol. 5, pp. 615).
concerned in Egypt

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20631
Feb 24, 2013
 
Pre-Existence

These Intelligences were then born as spirit children to God the Father and one of his goddess wives. The popular Mormon book, Gospel Principles, tells us:

"All men and women are...literally the sons and daughters of Deity...Man, as a spirit, was begotten and born of heavenly parents, and reared to maturity in the eternal mansions of the Father, prior to coming upon the earth in a temporal [physical] body (Joseph Fielding Smith, The Origin of Man, Improvement Era, Nov. 1909, pp. 78, 80)".(Gospel Principles, p. 11).
Mormon writer Milton R, Hunter wrote:
"The stupendous truth of the existence of a Heavenly Mother, as well as a Heavenly Father, became established facts in Mormon theology. A complete realization that we are the offspring of Heavenly Parents - that we were begotten and born into the spirit world and grew to maturity in that realm - became an integral part of Mormon philosophy. Those verities are basic in the Gospel plan of eternal progression." (Milton R. Hunter, The Gospel Through the ages, p. 98).

If yes how when the Bible teaches the opposite.

But the Bible says nothing about us pre-existing as children born from a sexual act between a heavenly father and a heavenly mother. We are not the literal offspring of God, but are rather 'adopted' as sons through faith in Jesus Christ:
"But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name." (John 1:12)
Galatians 3:26, 5-7 says:
"For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus...in order that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying "Abba! Father!" Therefore you are no longer a slave, but a son; and if a son, then an heir through God."
A popular verse which Mormons often use in an attempt to justify the doctrine of pre-existence from the Bible is Jeremiah 1:5 which has God saying to Jeremiah:

"Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations." (Jer 1:5 KJV+)
But what we must remember about this verse is the simple fact that it is God who is saying these things to Jeremiah. If Jeremiah said that he knew God before he was created in the womb then this verse may be used to support such a doctrine of pre-existence. God is all knowing (omniscient) and being as such, knows in advance the calling which each of us will have in life.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••

North Salt Lake Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

North Salt Lake People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

North Salt Lake News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in North Salt Lake
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••