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.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#20807 Feb 27, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
<quoted text>

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.
Baptism for the dead is found in the bible.
Temple marriages are restored truth.
We are monotheistic. We only worship one God.
The Book of Mormon is the word of God just as much as the Bible.
References to holy garments are found in the Bible.
Adam God Doctrine? The same book you use to pull out fringe doctrine denounces the Adam-God Theory. Even the fringe sources denounce this far flung idea.

Noble in the pre-existence? I don't think it is our place to cast judgement. I feel that anyone who declares otherwise is speak out of turn. I don't think God dwells on our past, he looks more to our potential. Whether we were noble and great in the pre-existence should have little bearing on how we view ourselves now, so I don't think God would reveal if some one was less valiant. It wouldn't serve any Godly purpose to reveal that.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#20808 Feb 27, 2013
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.
The point is: a lot of you guys are saying the church said things that were never stated by the church as a whole. A few people got a little off base and said some things that shouldn't have been said. People are not perfect. But just because those things were said doesn't mean that it should be interpreted as doctrine. A lot of things are also taken out of context. Doing what you guys do is like me reading Hebrews 6:1 and saying that Paul is telling us to leave the gospel of Christ.

"Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection...."

Some one could twist this and say "Hey, Paul says that in order to be perfect, we must leave the doctrine of Christ!" You need to read much more of Hebrews and have an understanding of church history to understand what Paul was getting at here.

You need to read much more of the Book of Mormon, Gospel Principles, Doctrine and Covenants as well as understand some church history in order to understand what you guys are reading.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#20809 Feb 27, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
<quoted text>
already posted the LINK to you today wivesofjosephsmith again you just blah blah and never do any research.
So once again the thread will notice only hot air from you no evidence that can be verified sad you are.
Just sanyn
all you're posting is ignorance. You said Smith had children by his wives other than Emma. He didn't. DNA testing was done for several years by a DNA scientist that's a Mormon that WANTED to prove Smith had descendants. He believed Smith had descendants. Every one has believed Smith had descendants for some of his 30 wives for the last 150 years. Books were written using strong evidence to show these descendants existed. Some liked to brag they were actual descendants.
They were all tested, every one that had possible direct lineage connection to one of Smith's wives. They all were proven by science to be unrelated.
Sorry to hear that you won't even accept scientific established facts but that is your problem not mine :)

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#20810 Feb 27, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
<quoted text>

Your not one of those accountants that keeps two sets of books are you? Apparently you do with your faith.
PS: Some corporations and individuals actually do keep two legitimate sets of books. One for financial reporting purposes, and one for reporting to the IRS. Financial numbers and IRS numbers often vary. For example: depreciation can be calculated several different ways for financial reporting purposes.(the main guiding rule is that you are consistent) However, the IRS doesn't let you choose how you depreciate assets. It doesn't let you choose the rate, recovery period, and in some cases - the value. You get your rates and recovery period off a chart. So in some cases, corporations keep a separate set of records for tax purposes.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#20811 Feb 27, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
The above is called a 'dodge.' You 'dodged' my questions (as you did last time) because you can't find another person that claimed what Smith claimed happened more than 2000 years before Smith was born. No one else wrote a book about it and no one else wrote even a paper pertaining to 2000 years in the past of the Americas and how things were.
So I'll ask the questions again.

Again intentional stupidity will not save the Mormon church. Theories of Jews coming across the ocean and settling in America began as early as the 1600's. Almost 200 years before Smith was even born.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/israel/losttribe...

[QUOTE]"So give me links to an educated person in America who believed prior to 1832 that two thousand years ago and more men sailed across the seas from the old world to the new world.
Next, give me a link to a book or written paper in 1832 or before, where a single author also proclaimed natives of America 2000 years ago built multi-storied buildings, were experts in agriculture, astronomy, making large cities, herding of animals, had a written language and had extensive knowledge in mathematics. That the natives warred on large scale battles and sacrificed captives."
Now either dodge them like a coward or answer them with the civil intelligence God blessed you to have.
Waiting...
View of the Hebrews, which also answers your first question. There is nothing original about the BoM. But there were many books written before Smith speculating about the Indians being Jews.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#20812 Feb 27, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
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).
I believe that we existed as intelligences before we were formed spiritually. However, we were less in intelligence, experience, power, wisdom, and capacity than God. However, the general concept that is trying to be captured in the statement above is that even as simple intelligences we have the same potential as God.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#20813 Feb 27, 2013
Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
Noble in the pre-existence? I don't think it is our place to cast judgement. I feel that anyone who declares otherwise is speak out of turn. I don't think God dwells on our past, he looks more to our potential. Whether we were noble and great in the pre-existence should have little bearing on how we view ourselves now, so I don't think God would reveal if some one was less valiant. It wouldn't serve any Godly purpose to reveal that.
Yet that is just what Mormonism was saying when it taught that black skin is a curse from God.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#20814 Feb 27, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
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.
I believe in what was said in the Gospel Principles Book. I don't know about God having multiple wives. I believe that we existed before this life. I believe that we are all sons and daughters of God and that we wanted to progress and become more like our Heavenly Father, so God created a plan to gain a body, learn, and receive some godly powers and allow us to prove our selves. This time is a type of mortal probation, allowing us to experience, learn, grow, and return better individuals.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#20815 Feb 27, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
To Progress, the Spirits Needed to be Clothed with Physical Bodies
Do you as a Mormon member of the LDS believe the following. Yes or No.
"Our heavenly parents...knew we could not progress beyond a certain point unless we left them for a time. They wanted us to develop the godlike qualities that they have. To do this, we needed to leave our celestial home to be tested and to gain experience. We needed to choose good over evil. Our spirits needed to be clothed with physical bodies. We would need to leave our physical bodies at death and reunite with them in the resurrection. Then we would receive immortal bodies like those of our heavenly parents....we would have all power in heaven and on earth; we would become heavenly parents and have spirit children just as he does (see D&C 132:19-20)" (Gospel Principles, p. 13-14).
Yes or NO
Yes

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#20816 Feb 27, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
War in Heaven
Do you as a Mormon member of the LDS believe the following. Yes or No
Two of God's son's Jesus and Lucifer, put fourth their own suggestions of how humanity should be tested on earth. Jesus suggests that humanity have their free will in choosing good or evil, but Lucifer suggests taking their free will away and to force them to give him honour:
"We needed a Saviour to pay for our sins and teach us how to return to our Heavenly Father. Our Father said, "Whom shall I send?(Abraham 3:27). Two of our brothers offered to help. Our oldest brother, Jesus Christ, who was then called Jehovah, said, "Here am I, send me" (Abraham 3:27). Jesus was willing to come to the earth, give his life for us, and take upon himself pour sins. He, like our heavenly Father, wanted us to choose whether we would obey Heavenly Father's commandments. he knew we must be free to choose in order to prove ourselves worthy of exaltation. Jesus said, "Father, thy will be done, and the glory be thine forever" (Moses 4:2)".(Gospel Principles, p. 17).
After hearing both Jesus and Lucifer speak, God said:
"I will choose the first [Jesus](Abraham 3:27)"
Lucifer is filled with rage, rebels against God, and incites a 3rd of the heavenly hosts to join him in his rebellion. God casts them down to earth, and they are denied the right to receive bodies of flesh and bone.
"Because our Heavenly Father chose Jesus Christ to be our Saviour, Satan became angry and rebelled. There was war in heaven. Satan and his followers fought against Jesus and his followers. In this great rebellion, Satan and all the spirits who followed him were sent away from the presence of God and cast down from heaven. One-third of the spirits in heaven were punished for following Satan: they were denied the right to receive mortal bodies." (Gospel Principles, p. 19).
Yes or No
Yes, thanks for providing the appropriate citation and context.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#20817 Feb 27, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
Some of the Spirit Children are 'Cursed' with Black Skin
Do you as a Mormon member of the LDS believe the following. Yes or No
"There is a reason why one man is born black and with other disadvantages, while another is born white with great advantages. The reason is that we once had an estate before we came here, and were obedient, more or less, to the laws that were given us there. Those who were faithful in all things there received greater blessings here, and those who were not faithful received less...There were no neutrals in the war in heaven. All took sides either with Christ or with Satan. Every man had his agency there, and men receive rewards here based upon their actions there, just as they will receive rewards hereafter for deeds done in the body. The Negro, evidently, is receiving the reward he merits." (Doctrines of Salvation, by Joseph Fielding Smith, 1954; 1:61, 65-66)
"...negroes are not equal with other races where the receipt of certain spiritual blessings are concerned, particularly the priesthood and the temple blessings that flow therefrom, but this inequality is not of man's origin. It is the Lord's doing, is based on his eternal laws of justice, and grows out of the lack of Spiritual valiance of those concerned in their first estate." *(Bruce McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 1966 edition, pp. 527-528).
"We will first inquire into the results of the approbation or displeasure of God upon a people, starting with the belief that a black skin is a mark of the curse of Heaven placed upon some portions of mankind. Some, however, will argue that a black skin is not a curse, nor a white skin a blessing. In fact, some have been so foolish as to believe and say that a black skin is a blessing, and that the negro is the finest type of a perfect man that exists on the earth; but to us such teachings are foolishness. We understand that when God made man in his own image and pronounced him very good, that he made him white. We have no record of any of God's favored servants being of a black race...every angel who ever brought a message of God's mercy to man was beautiful to look upon, clad in the purest white and with a countenance bright as the noonday sun." (Juvenile Instructor, Vol. 3, page 157, October 15, 1868)
I've already addressed this issue. Bruce R McConkie said it doesn't matter what was said prior to the revelation that blacks could receive the priesthood. Those things that were said were said with limited light, knowledge and understanding of God's plan.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#20818 Feb 27, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet that is just what Mormonism was saying when it taught that black skin is a curse from God.
See the above comment.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#20819 Feb 27, 2013
concerned in Egypt wrote:
The basis for the above questions comes from
http://www.spotlightministries.org.uk/ep.htm
www.spotlightministries.org.uk
Check out SPOTLIGHT MINISTRIES at the above links.
I checked out the link. I think it is sad that this website tells people not to pray and ask God for guidance.

http://www.spotlightministries.org.uk/praying...

Why NOT pray about it? I believe in a God who cares about us enough to answer prayers and tell us where we can find truth. Telling people NOT to pray about something negates the individual relationship each of us is entitled to have with God if we nourish it. God is concerned about our welfare, he loves us, and he wants to us receive his blessings. However, sometimes all we need to do is ask, and he will give us what we need. He just wants us to ask.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#20820 Feb 27, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
View of the Hebrews, which also answers your first question. There is nothing original about the BoM. But there were many books written before Smith speculating about the Indians being Jews.
I'm not speaking or addressing originality of the BOM. If that were the case, we could pretend the BOM began from the old world to the new world and than was about Mars and Jupiter and Smith claiming men went their by worm holes and preached Jesus to little green people. But as long as Smith made a correct statement in his BOM of what was taking place on the Americas 2000+ years ago, he got it correct. And no one else did. Not even View of the Hebrews got it correct. That book gave no specific time period as Smith made claim to. And like that writer of that book, Smith grew up hearing the stories that American natives were a lost tribe of Israel. But hearing that information says nothing of when Jews may have came or how and what they may have accomplished while being here.
Smith got it correct about things that men of science wouldn't validate as having been true till decades to a century later after Smith was dead.
Can the BOM names, events, geography be proved true? Certainly not, not yet.
Were Smiths descriptions of ancient American societies 2000 years ago correct? In many instances yes. Down to elephants being here as testified by elephant head relief's carved into stone monuments.
Tough factual information to swallow for a guy that hates Smith I understand :)

sportxmouse

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#20821 Feb 28, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Let us know when you actually have something new to say. You're like a bad rerun of the Love Boat, which was horrible to watch even the first time.
Dana,

You TRY to TWIST EVERYTHING possible.

You LIE constantly.

//

AND, you constantly fetish on everyone's genitals and underwear.

YOU MOCK GOD the FATHER.

NOTHING YOU SAY CHANGES THE FACT THAT GOD WILL WIN IN THE END!

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#20822 Feb 28, 2013
Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
I've already addressed this issue. Bruce R McConkie said it doesn't matter what was said prior to the revelation that blacks could receive the priesthood. Those things that were said were said with limited light, knowledge and understanding of God's plan.
Yet they were discriminated against for 150 yrs. How could this have happened with prophets and apostles who were suppose to be receiving direct revelation from God? That is a whole lot of "limited light". It's downright blindness for a church claiming to be the "restoration" of the early church. It also means the church was not the "only true church" during that time period to have gotten something this major so wrong.
Also, the LDS church is still teaching that dark skin is a curse through the BoM and the Book of Abraham. When are those mistakes going to be removed from "the most correct book on the earth"?
And if you can't trust that, why trust anything that came out of the mouths of your leaders? What to say that everything that is taught in Mormonism isn't "limited light"? That's a screw up of major proportions.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#20823 Feb 28, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
<quoted text>
Dana,
You TRY to TWIST EVERYTHING possible.
You LIE constantly.
//
AND, you constantly fetish on everyone's genitals and underwear.
YOU MOCK GOD the FATHER.
NOTHING YOU SAY CHANGES THE FACT THAT GOD WILL WIN IN THE END!
Still waiting for something original from you Carol... and waiting... and waiting... and waiting...

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#20824 Feb 28, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
lolol....absolutely not. I couldn't care if you said Smith was *ucki*g his *hor* wives up the *ss.
See, all you prove to one and all who read your posts is that you have an issue with using real civil type language. What you have proven is you would rather use a gutter slurring language than a polite, civil language. So it's not hard to imagine that how you speak in here, that's the type of language you have preferred to use to raise your children with. Thus your children language wise are your split image because you made them that way.
Now if you wish to claim that isn't true, that you use polite and civil English with your kids as they grew, than that would leave us to really wonder why a guy that speaks so polite and civil off the web would feel the need to speak foul gutter language when on the web.
See, if you use gutter language off the web, it would stand to reason you would use gutter language on the web. If you speak politely and civilly off the web, reason would say you would speak that way on the web.
But to speak politely and civilly off the web and to be totally opposite on the web, that would denote internal mental problems and or stress causing a person like that to show such a hyde/jeckel verbal personality.
So you don't use foul gutter language to jerk my chains dude...lol...you use gutter language because that's how you like to speak. At least fricking be honest about it lol.
No, you don't care, you just cry like a little girl all the time about it. LOL!!!

sportxmouse

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#20825 Feb 28, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Still waiting for something original from you Carol... and waiting... and waiting... and waiting...
nope, you still haven't changed your ways and

NOTHING YOU SAY CHANGES THE FACT THAT GOD WILL WIN IN THE END!

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#20827 Feb 28, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet they were discriminated against for 150 yrs. How could this have happened with prophets and apostles who were suppose to be receiving direct revelation from God? That is a whole lot of "limited light". It's downright blindness for a church claiming to be the "restoration" of the early church. It also means the church was not the "only true church" during that time period to have gotten something this major so wrong.
Also, the LDS church is still teaching that dark skin is a curse through the BoM and the Book of Abraham. When are those mistakes going to be removed from "the most correct book on the earth"?
And if you can't trust that, why trust anything that came out of the mouths of your leaders? What to say that everything that is taught in Mormonism isn't "limited light"? That's a screw up of major proportions.
Different people receive the fullness of the gospel at different times. Everyone will have an opportunity to accept all of it. There are several examples in the scriptures of God giving his gospel to different people at different times. Why should our time be any different?

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.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Trump's plan will seek to 'harden' schools agai... 3 min Get Out 1,534
News Liberals say immigration enforcement is racist,... 3 min Barros 1,110
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 4 min Bear Claw 80,383
News President Donald Trump has demanded answers abo... 6 min Sandra 279
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 11 min Julia 1,761,518
News Sanctuary officials could get 5 years in prison... 18 min southern at heart 77
News Donald Trump calls unauthorized immigrants 'ani... 19 min amadsadradtroll 303
News Barack and Michelle Obama sign Netflix deal to ... 2 hr Used to be a Demo... 166