Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

There are 32001 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.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#28269 Oct 18, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
<quoted text>
Which version of the Bible are you going by?
Who wrote the Bible that you have in your possession?
//
I doubt it was one of the ORIGINAL Bibles because the Church of Rome burned the ORIGINALS and KILLED the OWNERS for having them or anyone in possession of one or Mothers for teaching their children the Lord's Prayer.
The Church of Rome had Saint Jerome http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerome translate the Bible into LATIN... read about it.
"He was given duties in Rome, and he undertook a revision of the Latin Bible, to be based on the Greek manuscripts of the New Testament. He also updated the Psalter containing the Book of Psalms then at use in Rome based on the Septuagint. Though he did not realize it yet, translating much of what became the Latin Vulgate Bible would take many years and be his most important achievement (see Writings– Translations section below)."
DID YOU SEE THE WORDS HE UPDATED THE PSALTER CONTAINING THE BOOK OF PSALMS? That means he changed it.
Now, from translation to translation to translation to translation words change the ORIGINAL meaning to different things... and in certain cases part of the text was taken out. This was mans doing not Christs doing. Christ wanted HIS word to go forth not mans.
I'm going by the version that clearly teaches salvation by grace and not by works. It's in all the versions you mentioned. In fact the version I use in daily life comes from manuscripts older than the Vulgate.
If you had real knowledge of what was taught in the New Testament, the translations wouldn't be an issue any more than the Book of Mormon being translated into over 50 languages would be. A translation does not automatically mean a change in meaning. And as many of the translations you refer too can still be found, feel free to prove me wrong. All the translations demonstrate the change in language over time, not a change in meaning. And if the KVJ isn't correct, why isn't the JST the official version of the Bible for the church? Doesn't the Mormon church trust it's own founder? Apparently not.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#28270 Oct 18, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
<quoted text>
This Forum is not about No Surprise worth! You will say ridiculous things to pervert the truth. No Surprise has his reasons and it's none of your business. It is between him and Christ.
He is the one making worthiness an issue. Don't be a cry baby because I'm using his standards,(or lack of) against him. Stop being a hypocrite, he can't shut up about my relationship with God and speculating if I'm a real Christian or not. If he was taking his kids to the LDS church and didn't get rebaptized, it's because he couldn't met the standard. The reason he got kicked out. I wasn't kicked out, I left the church. Could rejoin at anytime, if I wanted too. He can't. What's good for the goose...
Realpeople

Ashburn, VA

#28271 Oct 18, 2013
If mormons were real christians then they would not be following joseph smith and the book of mormon. They would follow JESUS CHRIST and the bible and nothing else.

sportxmouse

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#28272 Oct 18, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm going by the version that clearly teaches salvation by grace and not by works. It's in all the versions you mentioned. In fact the version I use in daily life comes from manuscripts older than the Vulgate.
If you had real knowledge of what was taught in the New Testament, the translations wouldn't be an issue any more than the Book of Mormon being translated into over 50 languages would be. A translation does not automatically mean a change in meaning. And as many of the translations you refer too can still be found, feel free to prove me wrong. All the translations demonstrate the change in language over time, not a change in meaning. And if the KVJ isn't correct, why isn't the JST the official version of the Bible for the church? Doesn't the Mormon church trust it's own founder? Apparently not.
.. 1) The writings were by hand... typically on scrolls, there was no such thing as a printing press at that time. Plus it wasn't written in English... it was written mostly in Hebrew.

.. 2) Taking the writings that were available and transcribing them to another language *with changes* and destroying the rest of the writings so nobody can ORIGINALS for themselves and then killing people whom they suspected of heresy... you need to read Fox's Book of Martyrs. http://manybooks.net/titles/foxej2240022400-8...

Regarding the Book of Mormon being translated into other languages...

1) There is still the Original to verify the interpretations are correct.

2) The Church of Rome was very ruthless and killed Christians who would not recant... some were buried alive, some beaten to death, some boiled to death. These people who they killed were Christians trying to practice what Jesus taught. But they couldn't even read the Latin version... if they were caught doing so they were killed. They changed the language so nobody could understand it except those who they "allowed" to.

3) Read about John Huss http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bio/7.ht... "Huss had begun to denounce various church abuses in his sermons." His disputes with authority where about matters of church discipline and practice.

sportxmouse

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#28273 Oct 18, 2013
****
4) This is how obscene and ridiculous their actions were. John Wycliff http://www.christianitytoday.com/ch/131christ...

He deepened his study of Scripture and wrote more about his conflicts with official church teaching. He wrote against the doctrine of transubstantiation: "The bread while becoming by virtue of Christ's words the body of Christ does not cease to be bread."

He challenged indulgences: "It is plain to me that our prelates in granting indulgences do commonly blaspheme the wisdom of God."

He repudiated the confessional: "Private confession … was not ordered by Christ and was not used by the apostles."

He reiterated the biblical teaching on faith: "Trust wholly in Christ; rely captionogether on his sufferings; beware of seeking to be justified in any other way than by his righteousness."

Believing that every Christian should have access to Scripture (only Latin translations were available at the time), he began translating the Bible into English, with the help of his good friend John Purvey.

The church bitterly opposed it: "By this translation, the Scriptures have become vulgar, and they are more available to lay, and even to women who can read, than they were to learned scholars, who have a high intelligence. So the pearl of the gospel is scattered and trodden underfoot by swine."

Wycliffe replied, "Englishmen learn Christ's law best in English. Moses heard God's law in his own tongue; so did Christ's apostles."

Wycliffe died before the translation was complete (and before authorities could convict him of heresy); his friend Purvey is considered responsible for the version of the "Wycliffe" Bible we have today. Though Wycliffe's followers (who came to be called "Lollards"—referring to the region of their original strength) were driven underground, they remained a persistent irritant to English Catholic authorities until the English Reformation made their views the norm.

*** The OBSCENE thing is: he died before they could declare him a heretic so they unburied his bones 40 after his death declared him a heretic burned his bones and threw them in the River Swift.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Wycliffe

"He died in 1384"

"In 1428, at Pope Martin V's command, Wycliffe's corpse was exhumed and burned and the ashes cast into the River Swift, which flows through Lutterworth"

sportxmouse

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#28274 Oct 18, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm going by the version that clearly teaches salvation by grace and not by works. It's in all the versions you mentioned. In fact the version I use in daily life comes from manuscripts older than the Vulgate.
If you had real knowledge of what was taught in the New Testament, the translations wouldn't be an issue any more than the Book of Mormon being translated into over 50 languages would be. A translation does not automatically mean a change in meaning. And as many of the translations you refer too can still be found, feel free to prove me wrong. All the translations demonstrate the change in language over time, not a change in meaning. And if the KVJ isn't correct, why isn't the JST the official version of the Bible for the church? Doesn't the Mormon church trust it's own founder? Apparently not.
You are claiming you use the same version as the people who killed Jesus Christ?

Are you claiming you have a version that the Church of Rome didn't burn that was an ORIGINAL?

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#28275 Oct 18, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
****
4) This is how obscene and ridiculous their actions were. John Wycliff http://www.christianitytoday.com/ch/131christ...
He deepened his study of Scripture and wrote more about his conflicts with official church teaching. He wrote against the doctrine of transubstantiation: "The bread while becoming by virtue of Christ's words the body of Christ does not cease to be bread."
He challenged indulgences: "It is plain to me that our prelates in granting indulgences do commonly blaspheme the wisdom of God."
He repudiated the confessional: "Private confession … was not ordered by Christ and was not used by the apostles."
He reiterated the biblical teaching on faith: "Trust wholly in Christ; rely captionogether on his sufferings; beware of seeking to be justified in any other way than by his righteousness."
Believing that every Christian should have access to Scripture (only Latin translations were available at the time), he began translating the Bible into English, with the help of his good friend John Purvey.
The church bitterly opposed it: "By this translation, the Scriptures have become vulgar, and they are more available to lay, and even to women who can read, than they were to learned scholars, who have a high intelligence. So the pearl of the gospel is scattered and trodden underfoot by swine."
Wycliffe replied, "Englishmen learn Christ's law best in English. Moses heard God's law in his own tongue; so did Christ's apostles."
Wycliffe died before the translation was complete (and before authorities could convict him of heresy); his friend Purvey is considered responsible for the version of the "Wycliffe" Bible we have today. Though Wycliffe's followers (who came to be called "Lollards"—referring to the region of their original strength) were driven underground, they remained a persistent irritant to English Catholic authorities until the English Reformation made their views the norm.
*** The OBSCENE thing is: he died before they could declare him a heretic so they unburied his bones 40 after his death declared him a heretic burned his bones and threw them in the River Swift.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Wycliffe
"He died in 1384"
"In 1428, at Pope Martin V's command, Wycliffe's corpse was exhumed and burned and the ashes cast into the River Swift, which flows through Lutterworth"
None of this proves your claims the Bible was changed in meaning. It only shows restrictions of use for a time. Indulgences was never written in the Bible by the church, even if they did practice it. Scripture wasn't changed.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#28276 Oct 18, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
<quoted text>
.. 1) The writings were by hand... typically on scrolls, there was no such thing as a printing press at that time. Plus it wasn't written in English... it was written mostly in Hebrew.
.. 2) Taking the writings that were available and transcribing them to another language *with changes* and destroying the rest of the writings so nobody can ORIGINALS for themselves and then killing people whom they suspected of heresy... you need to read Fox's Book of Martyrs. http://manybooks.net/titles/foxej2240022400-8...
Regarding the Book of Mormon being translated into other languages...
1) There is still the Original to verify the interpretations are correct.
2) The Church of Rome was very ruthless and killed Christians who would not recant... some were buried alive, some beaten to death, some boiled to death. These people who they killed were Christians trying to practice what Jesus taught. But they couldn't even read the Latin version... if they were caught doing so they were killed. They changed the language so nobody could understand it except those who they "allowed" to.
3) Read about John Huss http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bio/7.ht... "Huss had begun to denounce various church abuses in his sermons." His disputes with authority where about matters of church discipline and practice.
You are incorrect on 2 areas. The original manuscript of the Book of Mormon is suppose to be the golden plates, and no you don't have them. Also there has been over 3,000 changes made in the Book of Mormon over the years. Some of those changes include changing the actual meaning of the verses.

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#28277 Oct 18, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>You are incorrect on 2 areas. The original manuscript of the Book of Mormon is suppose to be the golden plates, and no you don't have them. Also there has been over 3,000 changes made in the Book of Mormon over the years. Some of those changes include changing the actual meaning of the verses.
And yet they leave the racist crap in...how messed up is that??

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#28278 Oct 18, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
And neither the Mormons or the Christians want you. Now what?
Oooohhh, you so hurt my feelings dana, boo hoo hoo, I'm gonna go cry. Fricking whacktoid you would have something immature and childish to say.
PS...if you represent any Christians that don't want me, I thank you for your rejection from the bottom of my *ss...lol...*amm you can be so down right pathetic.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#28279 Oct 18, 2013
Realpeople wrote:
<quoted text>Who is the birth right mother? Real Christians follow Jesus Christ and his teachings in the bible. End of story. If you don't do this then you are not a real Christian.
Ahhh not. You should read some actual history just suggesting. See, after the death of Jesus and the apostles it wouldn't be till the 3rd century when the NT would begin to actually take form of what we read today. But the first Bible wasn't printed till the fourteenth century by the church of Rome.
Everything you read to know about Jesus came through that early church. So that church is your mother church all the way around. Understand?

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#28280 Oct 18, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>Oooohhh, you so hurt my feelings dana, boo hoo hoo, I'm gonna go cry. Fricking whacktoid you would have something immature and childish to say.
PS...if you represent any Christians that don't want me, I thank you for your rejection from the bottom of my *ss...lol...*amm you can be so down right pathetic.
Poor poor, pitiful..the mos kicked you out and you can't bring yourself to re-up..after all these years. Is it the commit or did you do something awful?..or just an awful in morg standards?

I learned a really valuable tip from prop h8, btw:) I wish I had known it when those creepers stalked me and my family years ago, when we moved to Utah.

...if the mishies come to my door and I tell them I'm gay, they don't stalk me. It's sad and awesome all at the same time, isn't it?

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#28281 Oct 18, 2013
NoMo wrote:
<quoted text>Poor poor, pitiful..the mos kicked you out and you can't bring yourself to re-up..after all these years. Is it the commit or did you do something awful?..or just an awful in morg standards?

I learned a really valuable tip from prop h8, btw:) I wish I had known it when those creepers stalked me and my family years ago, when we moved to Utah.

...if the mishies come to my door and I tell them I'm gay, they don't stalk me. It's sad and awesome all at the same time, isn't it?
Hubby calls it "the power of repulsion"
LOL

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#28282 Oct 18, 2013
NoMo wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, noprize..you can always get rebaptized and be a mo again..what gives???
lol ;)P Somethings are better not to be discussed with those who would trample such information underfoot as they always do with personal info. I won't mention you and dana as 'those'...I did. My bad :)

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#28283 Oct 18, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Apparently he can't or clearly he would have done so by now. Apparently the reason they kicked him out is still a problem. He isn't worthy to be LDS.
Keep guessing.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#28284 Oct 18, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Your history of posting here is the proof. You have defended any perversion of Joseph Smith. His lying, his stealing, his murdering, a deviant among deviants. You have supported every racists, and bigoted action of the Mormon church, made justification of it's perversions of the gospel of Jesus Christ. You deny clear scripture showing Mormonism is a lie, and a man made pile of crap.
That is the proof.
Jews 2000 years ago could show clear scripture the Jesus prophet was a wolf in sheeps clothing and a liar like you use the Bible to make the same claim of J Smith and Mormonism. You're no different in your theistic rhetoric then the Jews of 2000 years ago.
Next. I have never defended a perversion or anything like it as you claim. I have questioned you repeatedly concerning your statements of Smith that is true. And you don't like that. Because you like to lie and use the darkest foulest thoughts of Smith to prove what a great Christian you are concerning a dead guy you love to speak about.
Speaking of racists, I speak to you and you were(still are?)one. What's the difference? You're an accomplished liar in these threads. You've committed murder according to Jesus because you said you'd murder Smith if you had the chance. You're a real diviant in these threads as you have also used homosexual slurs to put others down with, you have spoke ill and wrong about people here in the filthiest foulest ways imaginable. You have nearly done all the things you claim Smith did/said. And you think you're better than him? lol...really sad. You've proved over and over you have the blackest, darkest filthiest mind for thinking things to say of others and to others with the hopeful intent to harm them emotionally. And than you call yourself a Christian. To fricking pathetic dude. Seriously.

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#28285 Oct 18, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>lol ;)P Somethings are better not to be discussed with those who would trample such information underfoot as they always do with personal info. I won't mention you and dana as 'those'...I did. My bad :)
I understand..but you have to admit..being booted and yet still sticking up for that creepy amway religion..did you have to sit in the middle of a circle..a fishbowl? A court of love? That you endured all that complete bs and still believe their spiel..it's really bizarre. Don't you wish you had filmed it? Can you imagine, I hope you can...it's legal in Utah to record conversations as long as there is one party consenting.

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#28286 Oct 18, 2013
NoMo wrote:
<quoted text>I understand..but you have to admit..being booted and yet still sticking up for that creepy amway religion..did you have to sit in the middle of a circle..a fishbowl? A court of love? That you endured all that complete bs and still believe their spiel..it's really bizarre. Don't you wish you had filmed it? Can you imagine, I hope you can...it's legal in Utah to record conversations as long as there is one party consenting.
The truth is one YouTube click away:)

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#28287 Oct 18, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm going by the version that clearly teaches salvation by grace and not by works. It's in all the versions you mentioned. In fact the version I use in daily life comes from manuscripts older than the Vulgate.
If you had real knowledge of what was taught in the New Testament, the translations wouldn't be an issue any more than the Book of Mormon being translated into over 50 languages would be. A translation does not automatically mean a change in meaning. And as many of the translations you refer too can still be found, feel free to prove me wrong. All the translations demonstrate the change in language over time, not a change in meaning. And if the KVJ isn't correct, why isn't the JST the official version of the Bible for the church? Doesn't the Mormon church trust it's own founder? Apparently not.
lol...and you have real knowledge of what's written in the NT? Pllllllleaseeeeee...lol. If the 'so called real knowledge' of the version of the Bible you use had any meaning to you, you would never ever of stated you wanted to commit premeditated murder of even a dead guy. You would never have uttered the filthy black things you have stated with hopeful purpose to inflict emotional harm/distress on others. And that makes you a wannabe xtian. You're half there. You wannabe a Christian but you're not willing to make character sacrifices to become something better than you are at present.
And these older manuscripts you speak of, their no more to be trusted than any other version of the Bible. Jerome made a complete REVISION of the Vetus Latina and produced the Vulgate by order of a pope. He didn't care for the earlier version. So you're so claimed older manuscripts are no more worthy in trusted content than any others of that time. You have early Catholic church writings any way you look at it.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#28288 Oct 18, 2013
Dana Robertson said without thinking...
(Let's take the following apart and insert some truths shall we?)
1. He is the one making worthiness an issue.
1a. Wrong. I made worthiness an issue with just you because you claim you're a kind loving caring Christian. The Christian that said he'd commit murder of a dead guy. The Christian who constantly finds it a good thing to think of the vilest, foulest things to say to others to put them down etc. Those are things making up your true self proved worthiness.
2. Don't be a cry baby because I'm using his standards,(or lack of) against him.
2a. You'll never use my standards or you would have to change the entire present makeup of your present dark, filthy, vileness you love to bring out to others.
3. Stop being a hypocrite, he can't shut up about my relationship with God and speculating if I'm a real Christian or not.
3a. I don't speculate. I know what a real Christian is and I know what one isn't. And among other things they refrian from a real Christian refrains from speaking ill of others, doesn't wish to murder a dead guy, doesn't use homosexual slurs against others, doesn't think of things to say to hopefully cause emotional harm and distress to others etc all of which you have done and still do.
4. If he was taking his kids to the LDS church and didn't get rebaptized, it's because he couldn't met the standard. The reason he got kicked out. I wasn't kicked out, I left the church. Could rejoin at anytime, if I wanted too. He can't. What's good for the goose...
4a. Still guessing....

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
West Valley Gang Bangers.. (Nov '08) 4 hr lil lazy loc 71
Trashy Sasha Simone Parrish Mon Ewwwwwgurl 1
Sasha Simone Parrish who is this person? Sun S0uths1d3 1
Older woman/sugar momma (Nov '13) Feb 7 Amad 3
News Concerns raised about sustainable energy bill Feb 6 Solarman 1
Review: AMSCO Windows (Jan '10) Feb 4 James Dorsey 68
White men! Date a woman with bi-racial kids? (May '11) Feb 3 Tony 50
More from around the web

Personal Finance

South Salt Lake Mortgages