Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

There are 32098 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.

sportxmouse

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#22144 Mar 16, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
No you don't, or you would have posted it already, CAROL!!!
Carol, lying for the LDS church daily. LOL!!!!
No see...
I don't owe you to tell you where it is.
I am not your slave.

You wrote it,
You live it down

!!!
Sockiepuppet

Lufkin, TX

#22145 Mar 16, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
To tell the truth about Mormonism.
You said that you don't care about what we think,so why are you trying to convince us so much?
BTW:that's GREAT that you think that,but you don't have to RUB IT IN OUR FACES!
Sockiepuppet

Lufkin, TX

#22146 Mar 16, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
It's good you know why you're going to hell, CAROL! Keep reading it until you see the light! LOL!!!!!!!!!!
Umm,you know how sportxmouse said that she found you changing other ppls posts,and you said that you weren't;well you just did.
Sockiepuppet

Lufkin, TX

#22147 Mar 16, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Carol, you mad? LOL!!!!!!!!!!
Please stop insulting sportxmouse,when you have your own time.
BITCHH.PLEASE.
Your life was just wasted by reading this.
Sockiepuppet

Lufkin, TX

#22148 Mar 16, 2013
Sockiepuppet wrote:
<quoted text>
Please stop insulting sportxmouse,when you have your own time.
BITCHH.PLEASE.
Your life was just wasted by reading this.
LOOOLLLL!
You are so fu cking stupid!
Looooolllll!!!

“I will not keep calm”

Since: Mar 08

Raise hell...change the world

#22149 Mar 16, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
<quoted text>
You are such a manipulater.
No Surprise is not Carol... you have been posting back and forth in this thread and others before your fantasies of everyone who does not support you being Carol.
Carol actually exists. He was a Mormon who wrote him a letter and confided in him... and he used her personally information to slander her and her family. Her family has been notified.
Those are your words... where are Sam and Not Ashamed's words about their position? I have not seen them say that.
My position on what ?
Sockiepuppet

Lufkin, TX

#22150 Mar 16, 2013
not ashamed wrote:
<quoted text> My position on what ?
In this conversation.
Derr

sportxmouse

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#22151 Mar 16, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Not Ashamed has seen your letter, she thinks you are Carol also. Sam just doesn't like your filthy ways, doesn't care if you are Carol or not. He wants you at least act like you've attended a Mormon church you want to claim you are LDS. You come here as sportmouse and post nicer(but still ignorant, because you are under topix regs then), then you unlog and get nasty as whatever you want to claim you are, you both just happen to post at the same time. Only a crack addict wouldn't see through your scam. You think you're clever, but you're not. Just like your claim of lawsuits, you are just hot air pissing in your pants because someone can show the lies and deceptions of Mormonism logically and effectively. You are a little child throwing hissy fits because I don't kiss the ass of the Mormon church. You act like a pig in the mud to try to protect it, but to no avail. You are a pathetic old woman who has lost her mind and all good manners, if you ever had any. But you are Carol.
Not Ashamed,

This is what I was asking about?

Do NOT feel obligated to respond to the question. If it makes you feel awkward in any way just ignore the question.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#22152 Mar 16, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
What makes me correct is what the verses actually say, not how you want to spin or misunderstand them.
Words mean something, I'm giving you the plain meaning of what is being said, you are trying to twist them.
Absolutely not. You add to what the verses don't say. Doing that will never make you correct.
Jesus told the thief he'd be with him in paradise. You can't prove what paradise is or whom went there, the forgiven and or the sinner. Jesus never said the thief was forgiven and would be in paradise. That's your twisted version you have added to it and your wrong doing it.
Paul was teaching a people that practised idolatry, worshipping statues and in temples that his God didn't dwell in them. Paul was telling them their statues and temples they had built, Paul said his God didn't dwell in them. But Paul never stated that his God wouldn't dwell in a temple. That's your twist of what Paul didn't say. While Paul was teaching those people that thing, God was in fact dwelling within the temple he had commanded to be built in Jerusalem that hadn't yet been destroyed by unbelievers as yourself.
Of eternal marriage, you refuse to take into context what Jesus said to the Pharisees that didn't believe in a resurrection. And will will be your problem till you do it. Jesus said nothing concerning eternal marriage. So missing evidence proves nothing.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#22153 Mar 16, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope, the only one twisting is you.
<quoted text>
Jesus also knew the temple was going to be destroyed. He never said to rebuild it or to replace it. He wasn't merely foretelling the destiny of the building at hand, Herod's temple, He was prophesying the future of the temple of the old covenant in general. However, Jesus did replace the man-made temple with one that was not made by man. Paul, Peter, and John describe the temple of the new covenant as the church. Christians are described collectively as a building, with Jesus Christ as the cornerstone:
"Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God's people and members of God's household, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. In him the whole building is joined together and rises to BECOME A HOLY TEMPLE in the Lord. And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit." (Ephesians 2: 19-22)
Since you're taking that verse literally, you will have to take the verses literally that Jesus is the bridegroom and all of us shall be his wives in the after life which also proves Jesus validates polygamy...lol...you're really pathetically ignorant sometimes.
You do know what 'figurative' speaking means don't you? Please tell me you really don't believe Jesus is a piece of rock. Please tell me you really don't believe the apostles and prophets aren't foundation stones?
Jesus never replaced the temple that he as God ordered to be built before he was ever born. He never said a word about REPLACING the existing temple in Jerusalem with anything.

“I will not keep calm”

Since: Mar 08

Raise hell...change the world

#22154 Mar 16, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
<quoted text>
Not Ashamed,
This is what I was asking about?
Do NOT feel obligated to respond to the question. If it makes you feel awkward in any way just ignore the question.
I don't mind answering the question. Yes, I have seen the letter Dana speaks of and yes I do believe it is you. A persons style of writing speaks volumes.
You post here under several names and when someone says something you do not like, you run like a coward to use a different name and post insults and far from Christ like responses. You will never win anyone over to Mormonism OR Christ using your particular approach.
The worst part is you do the very same thing so many anti-Mormons do. You judge others as a whole. You don't bother getting to know a person, instead you take a few things they say and turn it into what you want it to be.
You do not have to agree with a person to show some form of civility. Dana and I will never agree on religion, however we get along just fine. I understand that while he loves Christ he does not love Mormonism and he understands that I love both.

Your post on these forums DOES NOT represent what a Mormon should be.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#22155 Mar 16, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
Funny I have never read "spirit prison" in the words he was giving to the thief. He was giving him a hope, a promise, good news, not a punishment.
Luke 23:43 ESV
And he said to him,“Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”
Revelation 2:7 ESV
He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To the one who conquers I will grant to eat of the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God.’
Even the Mormon church agrees that Paradise is where the righteous dead wait for resurrection:
"Paradise is that part of the spirit world in which the righteous spirits who have departed from this life await the resurrection of the body. It is a condition of happiness and peace. "
You can't prove what paradise is from the Bible. You can't prove the thief was forgiven. You have to stick to the Bible and it affords you no explanation of paradise. You can reference opinions and that is all.
lolol...and than you reference Mormon beliefs to give foundation to your beliefs???? How fricking hypocritical of you and why am I not surprised...lol.
Twice Jesus spoke of a place that wasn't heaven. Once in mentioning a word paradise and once in the parable of Lazarus and the rich man. We know nothing else.
Next, the Bible teaches nothing of a post mortal life and neither does it teach about the spirit life after death. So you have absolutely not a thing to say except for opinions. Jesus didn't forgive the thief and that's the fact. See, when Jesus did forgive someone, the NT is full of instances where he said in one way or another.."Thy sins are forgiven thee." Jesus didn't tell the thief his sins were forgiven and he'd also be in paradise that day.
It's a tradition of Christian thinking that teaches Jesus forgave the thief when the NT fact remains Jesus said no such thing.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#22156 Mar 16, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
Where? God left the temple at the time of the crucifixion:
Matthew 27:51
And behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth shook and the rocks were split.
Mark 15:38
And the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom.
Luke 23:45
because the sun was obscured; and the veil of the temple was torn in two.
That is God leaving the building. He never came back because the last sacrifice was made, his son on the cross.
Hebrews 7
23 The former priests, on the one hand, existed in greater numbers because they were prevented by death from continuing, 24 but Jesus, on the other hand, because He continues forever, holds His priesthood permanently. 25 Therefore He is able also to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them.
26 For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens; 27 who does not need daily, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people, because this He did once for all when He offered up Himself. 28 For the Law appoints men as high priests who are weak, but the word of the oath, which came after the Law, appoints a Son, made perfect forever.
Why don't you read to understand and leave your agenda behind you?
In the holy of holies once a year a high priest would offer a blood sacrifice for the sins of all the people. In kind God would accept the blood sacrifice.
When Jesus died, figuratively he tore the veil shielding the holy of holies and became that figurative blood sacrifice. Meaning to those that understood hearing that veil had been torn at his death, that once a year ritual didn't need to be done any more.
The tearing of the veil had nothing to do with invalidating the temple that Jesus had commanded to be built before he was born of flesh. The temple still remained a house of worship. Jesus stated that was it's purpose. Call him a liar if you wish to.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#22157 Mar 16, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
I wasn't even born, and I have never worshiped Roman gods, failed again. Where does it say he was still there after the crucifixion?
<quoted text>
He didn't say he needed them forever.
<quoted text>
If you don't see forgiveness in the message he gave the thief, the problem is yours, not mine. Everyone else I know see a message of hope and forgiveness. The problem is yours.
<quoted text>
I'm calling you the liar because you refuse to see what Jesus was clearing saying. An ongoing problem for you. There isn't one verse in the whole Bible that calls marriage eternal, not one. It doesn't matter what the Jews think, it matters what Jesus taught.
Your so worried about what the Jews think, ask one if they think the LDS temple ceremony was performed in them and see how hard they will laugh at you.
What the Jews thought reflected what the prophets taught them that God wanted of them. I know you don't like that fact. Jews did believe in eternal marriage. That's a Jew fact you love to hate. The Jews got their beliefs from God through prophets. The fact that they had beliefs of eternal marriage means God gave them knowledge about such a thing even if Jesus didn't elaborate on it.
I don't see forgiveness for the thief on the cross. I see where Jesus said he'd be in paradise but I see where Jesus didn't say all his sins he'd been unrepentant of had been instantly forgiven. Jesus said no such thing. So your opinion is an opinion, not a fact.
Can you show proof that God didn't have temples built in the days of Adam to Noah? No. Can I show they existed? No. But isn't it curious that after being held captive by the Egyptians as slaves for 300 to 400 years, after being freed and in the wilderness one of the first things God had Moses build was a portable tabernacle?
There is no evidence God would not have another temple or a hundred temples built in the latter days. So continue to declare what God won't do as you usually will lay a claim to saying.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#22158 Mar 16, 2013
not ashamed wrote:
<quoted text>I don't mind answering the question. Yes, I have seen the letter Dana speaks of and yes I do believe it is you. A persons style of writing speaks volumes.
You post here under several names and when someone says something you do not like, you run like a coward to use a different name and post insults and far from Christ like responses. You will never win anyone over to Mormonism OR Christ using your particular approach.
The worst part is you do the very same thing so many anti-Mormons do. You judge others as a whole. You don't bother getting to know a person, instead you take a few things they say and turn it into what you want it to be.
You do not have to agree with a person to show some form of civility. Dana and I will never agree on religion, however we get along just fine. I understand that while he loves Christ he does not love Mormonism and he understands that I love both.
Your post on these forums DOES NOT represent what a Mormon should be.
Thank you. We both know she'll now come back as psycho Google and make personal attacks, but she got your message.

I love you.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#22159 Mar 16, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
You can't prove what paradise is from the Bible. You can't prove the thief was forgiven. You have to stick to the Bible and it affords you no explanation of paradise. You can reference opinions and that is all.
lolol...and than you reference Mormon beliefs to give foundation to your beliefs???? How fricking hypocritical of you and why am I not surprised...lol.
Twice Jesus spoke of a place that wasn't heaven. Once in mentioning a word paradise and once in the parable of Lazarus and the rich man. We know nothing else.
Next, the Bible teaches nothing of a post mortal life and neither does it teach about the spirit life after death. So you have absolutely not a thing to say except for opinions. Jesus didn't forgive the thief and that's the fact. See, when Jesus did forgive someone, the NT is full of instances where he said in one way or another.."Thy sins are forgiven thee." Jesus didn't tell the thief his sins were forgiven and he'd also be in paradise that day.
It's a tradition of Christian thinking that teaches Jesus forgave the thief when the NT fact remains Jesus said no such thing.
Hint: if you die and wake up with Jesus, that's a good thing, no matter how you want to spin it. Whether you like it or not, Jesus was giving good news. And yes, I'm using Mormon sources along with Biblical verses because that is what you are defending.

You can lead a horse to water....

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#22160 Mar 16, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Why don't you read to understand and leave your agenda behind you?
In the holy of holies once a year a high priest would offer a blood sacrifice for the sins of all the people. In kind God would accept the blood sacrifice.
When Jesus died, figuratively he tore the veil shielding the holy of holies and became that figurative blood sacrifice. Meaning to those that understood hearing that veil had been torn at his death, that once a year ritual didn't need to be done any more.
The tearing of the veil had nothing to do with invalidating the temple that Jesus had commanded to be built before he was born of flesh. The temple still remained a house of worship. Jesus stated that was it's purpose. Call him a liar if you wish to.
The veil was torn because the work was finished, Jesus said: "It is finished". God's body of believers became the temple of the Lord. There was never another commandment by his Apostles to build another temple.
It has been spelled out to you, whether you believe it or not isn't my concern, but you are deceiving yourself with your fantasies created by Joseph Smith

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#22161 Mar 16, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Since you're taking that verse literally, you will have to take the verses literally that Jesus is the bridegroom and all of us shall be his wives in the after life which also proves Jesus validates polygamy...lol...you're really pathetically ignorant sometimes.
You do know what 'figurative' speaking means don't you? Please tell me you really don't believe Jesus is a piece of rock. Please tell me you really don't believe the apostles and prophets aren't foundation stones?
Jesus never replaced the temple that he as God ordered to be built before he was ever born. He never said a word about REPLACING the existing temple in Jerusalem with anything.
Whether he said it or not isn't a requirement. He did it. And yes I know the difference between literal and figurative meanings, but the church was never, ever commanded to build temples, because they are not needed.
The veil was torn, the work is finished.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#22162 Mar 16, 2013
Sockiepuppet wrote:
<quoted text>
You said that you don't care about what we think,so why are you trying to convince us so much?
BTW:that's GREAT that you think that,but you don't have to RUB IT IN OUR FACES!
And using your logic, you don't have to send out missionaries, do you?

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#22163 Mar 16, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Hint: if you die and wake up with Jesus, that's a good thing, no matter how you want to spin it. Whether you like it or not, Jesus was giving good news. And yes, I'm using Mormon sources along with Biblical verses because that is what you are defending.
You can lead a horse to water....
lol...that is how blind you prove you are to the obvious. I haven't defended Mormon doctrine. I have questioned the way you look at it as I have questioned the way you look at the Bible. But specifically defending Mormon doctrine, I haven't done that. I have discussed how you have such hate and anger for it. I have discussed the way you twist things at times. I have discussed the way you use unreliable anti-Mormon information.
But to specifically defend a doctrine of the Mormons, you'll have to paste something to prove that. Good luck :)

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.

South Salt Lake Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Gay couple denied baby through surrogate challe... Sep 16 Pilots nail drivi... 31
News SLCPD detective who arrested nurse had been dis... Sep 16 ducky d 1
I love Utah farts Sep 15 Flatulencia Toiletta 5
News The Latest: Mayor: Probe shows policies broken ... Sep 14 cindy 1
Apartments that forbid pitbulls in So SLC (May '16) Jun '16 ThomasA 4
News Lawmakers to consider 'grand boulevard' entranc... (May '16) May '16 Cheri 1
News Man arrested, charged with kidnapping woman for... (Oct '15) Oct '15 Tiffany Watson 1

South Salt Lake Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

South Salt Lake Mortgages