Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

There are 32007 comments on the CNN story from Oct 12, 2011, titled Who says Mormons aren't Christians?. In it, CNN reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at CNN.

“I will not keep calm”

Since: Mar 08

Raise hell...change the world

#22317 Mar 18, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
<quoted text>
Go back in your rabbit hole... we already know your position... you choose to follow the apostate Mormon.
<quoted text>
You confirmed that your standards haven't changed when you stuck your nose in to my question to Dana.
Thanks for nothing :)
I do not have a rabbit hole, as I need nothing to crawl into. Why do you take 2 different post I made and combine them into one?? I would say that it was in an effort to be deceiving.

I do not follow Dana. I follow the spirit of Christ. You may want to find it and follow it yourself.

Why would my standards change? There is nothing wrong with the ones I have.
Christ greatest commandment was for me to love .As long as I follow that I am doing as I was told by not only Christ but also our prophets.

You come on this forum and hide behind different aliases in an effort to be nasty to others. You will not change one persons thinking about our faith as long as you do that.
MATHEW 7_21

Yuba City, CA

#22318 Mar 18, 2013
[QUOTE who'"Dana Robertson"]"I don't have to obey any body I have the grace of Christ. Once I call on his name, I'm saved in God's kingdom. Suckers!! LoL!!![/QUOTE]

Jesus Christ and his associates ALL ACKNOWLEDGED there were going to be imposters.
JESUS CHRIST SAID ***the IMPOSTERS would NOT COME
BEARING GOOD WORKS***
-----
"BY THEIR WORKS SHALL YE KNOW THEM."
-----
***By DEFINITION of JESUS CHRIST.***
"Mat 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven."
-----

That's why he doesn't get it WHEN JESUS CHRIST SAYS

"**NOT EVERY ONE THAT SAITH unto me LORD LORD shall ENTER INto The KINGDOM of HEAVEN**
*but **HE who DOeth SHALL ENTER** therein."*

=====
One Sentence, Open and Shut.
=====

As per parallel Online Bible:
New International Version (©1984)
"Not everyone who says to me,'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
-
New Living Translation (©2007)
"Not everyone who calls out to me,'Lord! Lord!' will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Only those who actually do the will of my Father in heaven will enter.
-
English Standard Version (©2001)
“Not everyone who says to me,‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
-
New American Standard Bible (©1995)
"Not everyone who says to Me,'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.
-
Holman Christian Standard Bible (©2009)
"Not everyone who says to Me, Lord, Lord!' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of My Father in heaven.
-
International Standard Version (©2012)
"Not everyone who keeps saying to me,'Lord, Lord,' will get into the kingdom from heaven, but only the person who keeps doing the will of my Father in heaven.
-
King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
-
Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
It is not everyone that says to me,'My Lord, my Lord'', who enters the Kingdom of Heaven, but whoever does the will of my Father who is in Heaven.

====
MATHEW 21_7

Yuba City, CA

#22319 Mar 18, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
My parents pressured me to go on a Mission to thank God for what I had, I told them, If God wanted me to serve Him He could pay for it. They kept it up for awhile but they finally backed off.
You're a corporate entity whose name is "I_HATE_Mormonism_INC. "

Here
L.A.U.G.H.I.N.G. about MURDER.
L.A.U.G.H.I.N.G. about RAPE.

From http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html

"Antisocial Personality Disorder results in what is commonly known as a Sociopath.
The criteria for this disorder require an ongoing disregard for the rights of others, since the age of 15 years.

Some examples of this disregard are reckless disregard for the safety of themselves or others,
failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors,

deceitfulness such as repeated lying or deceit for personal profit or pleasure,

and lack of remorse for actions that hurt other people in any way.

People with this disorder appear to be charming at times, and make relationships, but to them, these are relationships in name only.

They are ended whenever necessary or when it suits them,

and the relationships are without depth or meaning, including marriages.

They seem to have an innate ability to find the weakness in people,

and are ready to use these weaknesses to their own ends
through deceit,
manipulation,
or intimidation, and gain pleasure from doing so.

They appear to be incapable of any true emotions,
from love to shame to guilt.

They are quick to anger, but just as quick to let it go, without holding grudges.

No matter what emotion they state they have, it has no bearing on their future actions or attitudes.

They rarely are able to have jobs that last for any length of time, as they become easily bored, instead needing constant change.

They live for the moment, forgetting the past, and not planning the future, not thinking ahead what consequences their actions will have. They want immediate rewards and gratification.

There currently is no form of psychotherapy that works with those with antisocial personality disorder, as those with this disorder have no desire to change themselves, which is a prerequisite."

=====

Dana Robertson wrote:
"I go to the Salvation Army because they are the best group set up to serve God the way I want to serve God the most.

***The Army is only a tool I use to serve God.***

The people at my local Army do know my feelings on homosexuals while they disagree with it.

I believe the Army can be fixed from within...

Even if the LDS church were to accept homosexuals 100% tomorrow, the core teachings of the LDS church still lead the members away from the true Gospel of Jesus Christ.
No, YOU are just

a tool.

And the readers are probably more focused on fact of your outright admission
that YOUR mission
at the Salvation Army is
*Infest/Molest*.

A movement you claim you're married,
"but feel a 'special need' to spread."

Your CORPORATE NAME is "I_HATE Mormons."
MATHEW 21_7

Yuba City, CA

#22320 Mar 18, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
"Your Mormon leaders

said God is Jesus Christ's ACTUAL, NATURAL Father over and over.

The idea God could get a woman pregnant

and HER STAY a VIRGIN is so crazy I'm surprised you can even keep a straight face.

God can't do that,

nobody can, or ever could.

God, is NOT a MAN, God is NOT, Jesus

Christ's FATHER.

NATURAL is DEFINED as HAD SEX."
=====

No, you're just a scoffing mocker.

From Scoffing Mocker University, Wikipedia:

"Natural cycle In-Vitro-Fertilization"

"IVF can be performed by collecting a NATURALLY selected egg from woman’s NATURAL menstrual cycle without the use of any drugs.

IT IS KNOWN as NATURAL cycle IVF.

The first test tube baby Louise Brown was born following NATURAL cycle IVF. "
==========

the NAME of the IN VITRO PROCESS most like that described in the Bible is *NATURAL IN VITRO*

==========
In Vitro Fertilization: The NATURAL Way
By Jacques Kadoch, MD
Fall 2005

There has long been a demand for an IVF technique that works on a woman’s NATURAL cycle,

***without ovarian stimulation***.
----------
The answer is NATURAL cycle IVF.
----------

Increasing numbers of infertile couples are

attracted to this alternative protocol, which

seems to come closer to

the ideal IVF scenario:

to conceive an embryo with high implantation

potential at the start of a single pregnancy –

but with minimal medical intervention.

----------
History
Twenty-five years ago, Edwards and Steptoe achieved the first human pregnancy through IVF

*after transferring an embryo from a NATURAL cycle.*

*** In these early years, doctors had to depend entirely on the cycle’s NATURAL timing.

This meant that oocyte retrieval

***often took place in the middle of the night***

***under general anesthetic***

and required a laparoscopy.
----------
Note two of the above are mentioned SPECIFICALLY in the BIBLE DESCRIPTION of the CONCEPTION
of Jesus Christ
by his MOTHER
& FATHER.
----------
More ON WHY THIS IN VITRO is REFERRED TO as

"THE NATURAL WAY"

" With natural cycle IVF the treatment cycle relies on the spontaneous development of one follicle only and therefore the aspiration of only one egg from the follicle

(it is possible however that the cycle can have more than one egg or no eggs).

There is nothing new about natural cycle IVF, in fact Louise Brown, the world’s first ‘test-tube baby' was conceived using this method in 1978."
----------

So
of ALL the METHODS

of IN VITRO there is ONE type called

"THE NATURAL WAY"

That's often used for older fathers who have wives who are young, when the father already has children but wants one with the mother,

that involves the woman being in a deep sleep,

that involves doing the procedure late at night,

and involves fertilization of ONE egg produced.

Yeah words mean something.

The very method MOST LIKE that

described IN the BIBLE has a SPECIFIC
MEDICAL

NAME:

"NATURAL"

in vitro fertilization.

We told you it would be natural and it would be virgin.

You told us that's impossible.

Then again you also told us the Jews weren't polygamous for 4,000 years.

So yeah words mean something and it turns out the METHOD NAMED by MEDICAL SCIENCE as "THE NATURAL method"

is the one described near IDENTICALLY in the Bible.

But you insist that

God the FATHER

isn't the FATHER.

That Mary the MOTHER
didn't get IMPREGNATED

by the FATHER

of her SON Jesus Christ.

By the NATURAL in vitro method.
Seriously

Washington, DC

#22321 Mar 18, 2013
Joseph Smith was NOT a true prophet. He was what the Bible descirbes as a false prophet. Legitimate prophets are NEVER wrong. They don't make mistakes - period. If he had truly received an honest, dyed-in-the-wool, real and for truly Holy Spirit revelation, IT WOULD NOT HAVE CHANGED TO THIS DAY! He said (in a nutshell) that polygamy was the way - God's way. If that had been a true revelation of God, Mormons would still practice polygamy today. Satan is a LIAR and Joseph Smith saw an angel alright - an ANGEL OF LIGHT - a demon disguised. Period.
Mathew 7_21

Yuba City, CA

#22322 Mar 18, 2013
Seriously wrote:
Joseph Smith was NOT a true prophet. He was what the Bible descirbes as a false prophet. Legitimate prophets are NEVER wrong. They don't make mistakes - period. If he had truly received an honest, dyed-in-the-wool, real and for truly Holy Spirit revelation, IT WOULD NOT HAVE CHANGED TO THIS DAY! He said (in a nutshell) that polygamy was the way - God's way. If that had been a true revelation of God, Mormons would still practice polygamy today. Satan is a LIAR and Joseph Smith saw an angel alright - an ANGEL OF LIGHT - a demon disguised. Period.
MOSES was kept OUT of the HOLY LAND for DISOBEYING the Lord in the matter of striking a rock twice when he was told to, in order to give the people water.

JOHAH told the people of Ninevah they would all be DESTROYED: but they repented some so the Lord DIDN'T destroy them and Jonah was FURIOUS with the Lord about it.

Peter denied even KNOWING Jesus Christ when he was afraid for his life and he was an Apostle AT that time.

I think there was another record of a prophet or maybe a whole GROUP of prophets of the Lord killed being set upon by wild animals, for their decision to do something, I think going somewhere.

There is also the case of Jesus' disciples not being able to cast out demons, whereupon Christ Himself was summoned and did it.
They were prophets of the Lord, able to cast out demons and heal etc.

There's also the case of the apostle stepping out onto the water and, through power of his belief, stand upon it briefly but then, when his belief failed so did his miraculous capacity to stand thereupon.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#22324 Mar 18, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
Maybe you both should get together and "circle jerk", It will be about as productive.
lol...and that statement comes from the sour lips of a wannabe Christian that can't speak as a Christian because most of their rude comments are sexually based. So as you think, so as you speak, so as you prove what you aren't. And you overwhelmingly prove you aren't a Christian. You have just proved as usual all your good at is speaking dark filthy garbage and your TRUE god applauds you for such great dark filthy language.
It doesn't have to be that way, just saying :)
One can claim to believe in God. The devils believe in God also. But the road to true repentance begins with how one thinks which is reflective in how one speaks. Anonymous
Zombie Corpse Rental

San Jose, CA

#22325 Mar 18, 2013
Who cares what Mormons, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, or other magical-thinking dingbats believe?

ANYONE who thinks an invisible man in the sky is going punish or reward you after you croak is clinically retarded.

Ignore them. Spend your time with humans who engage in rational thought.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#22326 Mar 18, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
The Five Skills Of An Anti- Mormon
The Five Skills Of An Anti- Mormon
1) Editorialize and label the doctrine/teachings as "garbage," point out that such teachings are so foul that it would be undignified to even credit such teachings with a civil intelligent answer. Enlarge on how non Christ-like the author is, and thus declare victory in the debate.
2) Explain how nothing can be absolutely "proved" by evidence anyway, and besides the evidence is based on unacceptable assumptions and is therefore tenuous, and ultimately it is all a matter of faith. And remind the critic that the lack of evidence does not prove that something DID exist. Declare the criticism refuted once and for all.
3) Carry-on as if the current criticism is exactly like past criticisms and therefore can be automatically discredited because the past ones are no longer published, presumably because they were all refuted (therefore the current criticism is ultimately invalid because it too will someday be disproved).
4) When confronted with an argument, suggest that if the same category of criticism were used against the critic's religion that it would destroy all his basis for religious faith. Use this tactic to show the critic that his criticism is worthless because he is using a DOUBLE STANDARD.
Start out by insisting that incomplete information is the same as NO information, and with NO information there is no such thing as contradictory information.
Point-out that the critic is relying on "non-comprehensive" bodies of information to support his doctrinal positions and therefore does not have real proof to support his views either. Also insist that non-comprehensive information is not enough to discriminate between consistent and contradictory information.
Lastly behave as if the LDS "no evidence" situation and Christianity's "non-comprehensive evidence" are the same thing because neither provides absolute proof of anything.
Declare the critic a hypocrite and a fool for playing with such dangerous kinds of information, and you have won the argument!
5) Provide a snow job of correct sounding, but distantly related trivia that are really irrelevant to the critical issue.
Declare victory once and forevermore, based on the sheer volume of your regurgitation.
Now who does that sound like here?(Dana)
Zombie Corpse Rental

San Jose, CA

#22327 Mar 18, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
lol...and that statement comes from the sour lips of a wannabe Christian that can't speak as a Christian because most of their rude comments are sexually based. So as you think, so as you speak, so as you prove what you aren't. And you overwhelmingly prove you aren't a Christian. You have just proved as usual all your good at is speaking dark filthy garbage and your TRUE god applauds you for such great dark filthy language.
It doesn't have to be that way, just saying :)
One can claim to believe in God. The devils believe in God also. But the road to true repentance begins with how one thinks which is reflective in how one speaks. Anonymous
I remember where it says in the New Testament, "And the LORD said, DUDE, WTF man, you can't cuss and be a Christian!". And then the LORD killed a fig tree and proclaimed Himself the Prince of Peace, and His followers Moooed and Baaa-ed and Clucked and Barked, and it was good."
Seriously

Washington, DC

#22328 Mar 18, 2013
Mormons are not Christians. They are wanna be gods of their own planets, but ONLY if they are married in the temple. Ridiculous!

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#22329 Mar 18, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
What aren't always actual problems with Mormonism:
1. In the first "History of the Church," written by Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith in 1834, there is no mention of Joseph Smith's"first vision" (where God the Father and Jesus appeared and told him that all churches of the day were "abominations"), even though the church leaders today insist that this vision is the basis and beginning of Mormonism.
1a. There is no actual problem there. It can be made to seem to be a problem but it actually isn't unless that's how one wishes to view it.
2. Although Mormons claim that they are "family oriented," they exclude non-Mormon family members - even parents - from weddings in the temple, since only "worthy" Mormons are allowed to enter a Mormon temple.
2a. That reasoning can also be applied to Mormon parents sending a child on a mission for two years where neither Mormon or non-Mormon relatives can go to be with said child. Wow, that really proves their not "family orientated" I suppose. lolol...how fricking stupid of a statement...why am I not surprised...
3. Mormon scripture (D&C 84:86, 91) says that true missionaries from God will not rely on their own money or supplies ("purse or scrip") for support, and this will be a test to distinguish them from false missionaries. Modern Mormon missionaries now rely on themselves for support; i.e., they do "carry purse [and] scrip."
3a. There's an actual point there. But before we pass judgement, let's ask Dana since he claims to be a missionary for the Lord if he is doing his mission as Jesus said with nothing but the clothes on his back and nothing else. And let's ask Christians if they go on missions with nothing but the clothes they wear and nothing else. Case closed. Next.
4. The Book of Mormon says that the horse was used as a beast of burden or draft animal in ancient America. This is false. The ancient Americans had no beasts of burden or draft animals, and especially not the horse.(The Incas domesticated the llama, but not until long after Book of Mormon times.)
4a. Missing evidence doesn't make a statement false. It just means the statement hasn't been proved true. The BOM also spoke of elephants being in America. We now know the Maya carved elephant head relief's into their buildings proving elephants did exist at some time in the America's for the Maya to know what they looked like though they don't exist now. Case closed. Next.
5. Originally the terms "eternal marriage" and "celestial marriage" as used in D&C 132 meant "plural marriage," as interpreted by the 19th century Mormon leaders. Now the church has changed the meaning so as not to imply polygamy, although the terms were introduced in the revelation which authorized polygamy. The church today claims that the divine plan for marriage is one man to one woman. But D&C 132 is still scripture, and still authorizes a man to marry more than one woman at a time.
5a. The divine plan of a one man one woman existed in Smith's time along with polygamy. Not all church elders were allowed to partake in polygamy. Abraham, David, Jacob (Israel), Moses were all polygamists and practised polygamy while one man one wife marriages were also practised.
Continued

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#22330 Mar 18, 2013
Continued..

6. Joseph Smith asserted that Mormons believe in obeying and sustaining the law (Articles of Faith 12), but he continually flouted the law, as in his establishing the illegal Kirtland Bank (for which he was found guilty and fined) and his entering into illegal bigamous (polygamous) relationships.
6a. The articles of faith as you pointed out weren't a commandment when first given. So Smith or any other Mormon did no wrong in not "toeing the line" to be totally obedient to the articles of faith. And as the mayor Smith broke no law in setting up a city bank. Some more of your lying twists.
7. Joseph Smith claimed that he told his family about his "first vision" in 1820, in which he said that God and Christ had told him that he should join no church at that time because they were all false. However, several family members did subsequently join the Presbyterian church, and Joseph Smith applied to join the Methodist church in 1828, thus casting doubt on whether he had had the vision as claimed.
7a. Smith claimed on more than one occasion of having a "vision". He also described it in various ways as he aged. There is no actual doubt that Smith believed he had a vision. The doubt is to you, not Smith.
8. Until 1978 the church excluded from the priesthood and from the temple any member who had "Negro" blood. Now the church claims that it was never "racist."
8a. By the definition of the word it wasn't a racist act. It can be defined as an act of discrimination that is true.
9. Mormons teach that the process of going from the pre-existent life as spirit offspring of God requires obtaining a body, following all of God's commandments in this life, being resurrected with a perfect physical body and proceeding to godhood. No satisfactory explanation is given as to how the third member of the Mormon godhead (the Holy Ghost) can have status as a god but lack a physical body.
9a. Actually there are Mormon sources that give a satisfactory explanation for why the Holy Ghost doesn't have a body. So you make a problem appear to be where one doesn't actually exist and why am I not surprised you have done that.
10. The Book of Mormon says that elephants were a useful domestic animal in ancient America (Ether 9:19). This is impossible because there were no elephants in America at that time. It may be that Joseph Smith included elephants in the Book of Mormon because a woolly mammoth skeleton had recently been found in America, and this led some people to think that elephants were known to the Indians' ancestors. However, the mammoth (or mastodon) had become extinct about six thousand years before the events in the Book of Mormon are dated.
10a. is an out right anti-Mormon lie. Mayan temples have elephant head relief's of modern day elephant heads that don't even remotely look like mammoths. Mayans knew what a modern elephant looked like. Science knows that because Mayan's carved elephant heads into their buildings, that means they had seen modern elephants. Case closed. Next.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#22331 Mar 18, 2013
Seriously wrote:
Legitimate prophets are NEVER wrong. They don't make mistakes - period.
Peter's a prophet and lied and tried to commit premeditated murder on a guard. What now?

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#22332 Mar 18, 2013
I think some people join the Church for other people and don't have a true understanding of the teachings and history that the Church is based on.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#22333 Mar 18, 2013
1. In the first "History of the Church," written by Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith in 1834, there is no mention of Joseph Smith's"first vision" (where God the Father and Jesus appeared and told him that all churches of the day were "abominations"), even though the church leaders today insist that this vision is the basis and beginning of Mormonism.
1a. There is no actual problem there. It can be made to seem to be a problem but it actually isn't unless that's how one wishes to view it.[QUOTE]

No, it was only suppose to be the biggest event in modern Christian(if you believe it) but that isn't a problem at all.

[QUOTE]2. Although Mormons claim that they are "family oriented," they exclude non-Mormon family members - even parents - from weddings in the temple, since only "worthy" Mormons are allowed to enter a Mormon temple.
2a. That reasoning can also be applied to Mormon parents sending a child on a mission for two years where neither Mormon or non-Mormon relatives can go to be with said child. Wow, that really proves their not "family orientated" I suppose. lolol...how fricking stupid of a statement...why am I not surprised...
A marriage in a family is one of the biggest events of a family, Mormon or not. Non-members are allowed to also go to a missionaries going away party if they wanted, and is hardly the event a wedding is. When a non-member mother can't attend her daughters member wedding, that is sick, plain and simple. Thank you for your demonstration of a mind brainwashed in a cult, and the sickness it causes.
3. Mormon scripture (D&C 84:86, 91) says that true missionaries from God will not rely on their own money or supplies ("purse or scrip") for support, and this will be a test to distinguish them from false missionaries. Modern Mormon missionaries now rely on themselves for support; i.e., they do "carry purse [and] scrip."
3a. There's an actual point there. But before we pass judgement, let's ask Dana since he claims to be a missionary for the Lord if he is doing his mission as Jesus said with nothing but the clothes on his back and nothing else. And let's ask Christians if they go on missions with nothing but the clothes they wear and nothing else. Case closed. Next.
Why should non-members have to abide with Mormon scripture? It is LDS scripture, and only the LDS should have to abide with it. Others don't have to follow your cult.
4. The Book of Mormon says that the horse was used as a beast of burden or draft animal in ancient America. This is false. The ancient Americans had no beasts of burden or draft animals, and especially not the horse.(The Incas domesticated the llama, but not until long after Book of Mormon times.)
4a. Missing evidence doesn't make a statement false. It just means the statement hasn't been proved true. The BOM also spoke of elephants being in America. We now know the Maya carved elephant head relief's into their buildings proving elephants did exist at some time in the America's for the Maya to know what they looked like though they don't exist now. Case closed. Next.
Well, you just go find those missing horses and let us know when you find them. Don't hold your breath looking! LOL!!!

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#22334 Mar 18, 2013
5. Originally the terms "eternal marriage" and "celestial marriage" as used in D&C 132 meant "plural marriage," as interpreted by the 19th century Mormon leaders. Now the church has changed the meaning so as not to imply polygamy, although the terms were introduced in the revelation which authorized polygamy. The church today claims that the divine plan for marriage is one man to one woman. But D&C 132 is still scripture, and still authorizes a man to marry more than one woman at a time.
5a. The divine plan of a one man one woman existed in Smith's time along with polygamy. Not all church elders were allowed to partake in polygamy. Abraham, David, Jacob (Israel), Moses were all polygamists and practised polygamy while one man one wife marriages were also practised.[QUOTE]

Abraham, David, Jacob, never taught that polygamy was something you had to do or "be damned." D&C 132 did. It was the "new and everlasting convenant."

“The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy.”
- Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, v. 11, p. 269

[QUOTE]7. Joseph Smith claimed that he told his family about his "first vision" in 1820, in which he said that God and Christ had told him that he should join no church at that time because they were all false. However, several family members did subsequently join the Presbyterian church, and Joseph Smith applied to join the Methodist church in 1828, thus casting doubt on whether he had had the vision as claimed.
7a. Smith claimed on more than one occasion of having a "vision". He also described it in various ways as he aged. There is no actual doubt that Smith believed he had a vision. The doubt is to you, not Smith.
If he had really had seen God the Father and Jesus Christ, and they had told him to "join none of the churches, they were all an abomination" Why would he become Methodists?
9. Mormons teach that the process of going from the pre-existent life as spirit offspring of God requires obtaining a body, following all of God's commandments in this life, being resurrected with a perfect physical body and proceeding to godhood. No satisfactory explanation is given as to how the third member of the Mormon godhead (the Holy Ghost) can have status as a god but lack a physical body.
9a. Actually there are Mormon sources that give a satisfactory explanation for why the Holy Ghost doesn't have a body. So you make a problem appear to be where one doesn't actually exist and why am I not surprised you have done that.
Don't claim it, prove it.

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#22335 Mar 18, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
I think some people join the Church for other people and don't have a true understanding of the teachings and history that the Church is based on.
Milk before meat

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#22336 Mar 18, 2013
NoMo,

Your opinions don't offend me... your guilt from not stepping in and helping that boy is understandable.

You don't know all that was in his mind, all that he was going through. He may have been suffering from mental illness. I don't think it was your fault.

IDK if you have thought about getting counseling about this, but maybe you should.

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#22337 Mar 18, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
...Don't claim it, prove it.
You don't like the truth, so YOU claim it isn't the truth.

Nobody can prove truth to you. You have an authority issue... you will not listen to anyone. In fact, you respond to every post that you disagree with.

It must be nice to have that much time on your hands.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Salt Lake City Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
stupid utah drivers (Feb '08) Sat The Judge 117
News LDS Apostle visited Tonga (Feb '14) Jul 31 MORMON HUMAN RIGH... 30,182
News Mormons: We are Christians, too (Apr '07) Jul 31 MORMON HUMAN RIGH... 28,891
Water Turned Blood Red in Canada! Jul 30 dogma tv 1
Apocalypse Signs Fish falling from Sky Jul 30 dogma tv 1
Man Saves A 375 Pound Black Bear From Drowning Jul 30 dogma tv 1
What product has the highest ORAC value? (May '07) Jul 29 troyeagleye 7
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Salt Lake City Mortgages