Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

There are 31996 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

#23410 Apr 12, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
It figures that's Tanner's logic makes sense to you. Especially since she's what you're not, a civil polite intelligent anti-Mormon that doesn't usually lie to make a point.
Next, she does a bit of a twist in her statement. Smith couldn't imitate the existence of a specific type of writing in all the right places if he knew nothing about it. Tanner doesn't mention that fact. That's called deception by purpose.
What Tanner doesn't tell you is someone that doesn't know what their copying, they'll reword it in all the wrong places and maybe a few right places because they don't know what their re-writing as Smith is accused of doing.
Therefore it's a fact that Smith in rewriting a specific undiscovered type of writing, he would have massacred it over and over. Those later recognizing Chiasmus, they would have been able to read Smith's book and could point to where he destroyed what should have been Chiasmus and where he unknowingly wrote out chiasmus correctly.
But it's been noted that Smith rewrote Chiasmus as correctly as it was written into the OT without knowing it. Tanner doesn't go over that fact because she can't explain it herself. So it's easier for Tanner to just excuse it away with Smith got lucky in that he didn't slaughter any Chiasmus in rewriting it in the BOM.
Exactly!

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#23411 Apr 12, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Time will tell who the idiot is.
The only idiocy here is those that think a religion that is based on God setting up for a purpose a man and a woman for a marriage and family, that this is the core reason for mankind's existence in this religion, the only idiocy belongs to those that think this religion will just roll over and destroy itself because of popular opinion.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#23412 Apr 12, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
You're debating BS. I never said the churches don't collect tithe, I said they don't have tithing settlements. You're the one that said they do. You.
Oh you're so very correct! I am debating a huge amount of your BS, that's a fact Jack!
You're debating that Christian church ministers don't sit down with individual members of any church and discuss what their monthly pledge will be according to their income. You're debating they do no such thing. You said Christian ministers "DON'T HAVE TITHING MEETINGS/SETTLEMENTS/SESSIONS/ DISCUSSIONS/PLEDGES" with their members. That is what you just stated again.
That means according to your BS thinking, Christian ministers know how much it costs to run their church each month but they have not a clue if that'll be done because they don't talk about tithes to individual members. The minister to your BS thinking passes out a basket each sunday and by the last Sunday of the month he just hopes and prays that there's enough to pay the bills with.
See, you and nomo are missing a bit of real time information. Of you I expect this idiocy. But of nomo, she claims to have been on the financial boards of churches so she knows for a fact steady regular tithe payers PAY THE FRICKING BILLS. You can't pay those bills unless YOU KNOW IN ADVANCE THAT THE MONEY WILL BE THERE TO PAY THOSE BILLS.
Therefore ministers DO HAVE ONE ON ONE TITHE SESSIONS with regular tithe paying members to see what they will pay monthly into the church kitty. Than the minister will know if he'll have enough to pay the monthly bills with. And if he comes up short, it's bake time and donation time and fast.
But according to you and nomo, the Christian ministers you two know don't worry about monthly bills because their so well off they don't need tithes to pay bills. And that thinking proves how far off in la-la land you two live. Get it?

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#23413 Apr 12, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
No, worthless, I moved from one location far from another 4 times, requiring me to find a new church each time. The only thing that floats is you cockamamie excuses for posts.
<quoted text>
Never said that. Again you try to change the topic, which usual when you stick foot in mouth.
<quoted text>
And you need to stop being a 5 yr old throwing hissy fits when you are caught being stupid. I've been talking about tithing settlement. You've been talking crap.
That's what I said. You floated from one church to the next. What didn't you understand?
Actually that's what you did state in so many words. You stated none of your ministers sat with the members of your church so he could find out if there were any regular tithe payers or not. That implies all the ministers you have had didn't need tithes to pay monthly bills. That implies they had a money source other than tithes to pay all their bills. That defines them as financially self sufficient. that means your ministers didn't have a care if they got $10 or a $100 in the collection plate because according to you, they didn't need to know what they would receive from tithes because they didn't need those tithes. That is what you stated.

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#23414 Apr 12, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
I wasn't speaking about what Mormons call it. You were.
You and nomo spoke offensively of the tithing Mormons make. I didn't.
I made a comparison the Christian ministers expected tithes from their members as the Mormon leaders expect from their members. You two didn't like that comparison and denied it took place.
I was speaking about terminology ministers used for their members when discussing tithing pledges. You continued to reference Mormons.
I was speaking about the value tithing holds for most Christian churches that aren't financially self sufficient. You didn't. You denied there was any such importance.
You and nomo declared churches you two attended didn't ask for tithes, insinuating the churches you two attended were so financially set that they didn't need tithes to help pay monthly costs.
Get it yet?
Whining because you made an idiot out of yourself again? Hahahaha

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#23415 Apr 12, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
That's what I said. You floated from one church to the next. What didn't you understand?
Actually that's what you did state in so many words. You stated none of your ministers sat with the members of your church so he could find out if there were any regular tithe payers or not. That implies all the ministers you have had didn't need tithes to pay monthly bills. That implies they had a money source other than tithes to pay all their bills. That defines them as financially self sufficient. that means your ministers didn't have a care if they got $10 or a $100 in the collection plate because according to you, they didn't need to know what they would receive from tithes because they didn't need those tithes. That is what you stated.
Hahahaha.....you failed. Have some dignity, man.

sportxmouse

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#23416 Apr 12, 2013
I am not sure why attacking people for their opinions is necessary... defending the truth should be honorable.

This thread is supposed to be about
"Who says Mormons aren't Christians?"

Can we just get back to the topic... and stop attacking each other and other people.

I myself have gotten caught up in the trap... I have tried very hard to get back on topic. Let try not take it all so personal. I think I have to agree with Sam on that issue.

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#23417 Apr 12, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
I am not sure why attacking people for their opinions is necessary... defending the truth should be honorable.
This thread is supposed to be about
"Who says Mormons aren't Christians?"
Can we just get back to the topic... and stop attacking each other and other people.
I myself have gotten caught up in the trap... I have tried very hard to get back on topic. Let try not take it all so personal. I think I have to agree with Sam on that issue.
Tolerance is a TRAP! Ask Boyd K PaKKKer.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#23418 Apr 12, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
<quoted text>
You were not instructed to do so by God ...
You do not have the knowledge God gave Noah to build the Ark...
It would be difficult for you to do it with out God's assistance.
If you come up with an Ark all on your own in the shape and form of Noah's Ark I would like to see it.
Good luck with that!
The Nephites weren't instructed to build pyramids either.

Some Noah's Arks you can visit today:
http://www.djc.com/news/ae/12000092.html

http://www.peoplepets.com/people/pets/article...

http://www.godissues.org/when-did-you-board-t...

http://thepetwiki.com/wiki/Noah%27s_Ark

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#23419 Apr 12, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
<quoted text>
I have told you already the landmarks have been determined to exist. It is your problem you won't listen.
What did Jesus say when he was speaking:
John 3:12
12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?
John 5:47
47 But if ye believe not his awritings, how shall ye believe my words?
So, there should be maps in the BoM, right? Why isn't there any? If the LDS church doesn't support those so-called locations, why should I?

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#23420 Apr 12, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
Then what happened?
They crucified Jesus because he taught the truth...
that is if you believe in the Bible... which you won't say if you do or not. You just keep going back to anti-Mormonism sites and copy pasting what they say.
Having a Carol moment?

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#23421 Apr 12, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
Malachi 3:1
"Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts."
This prophecy was fulfilled on April 3, 1836 in the Kirtland, Ohio. Joseph is the "messenger", who had prepared the way for the Lord through the restoration of all things. The Lord, Jesus Christ, did indeed come suddenly to His temple in Kirtland, Ohio, appearing to the prophet, Joseph, and to Sydney Rigdon. During that same experience Moses and Elijah appeared to them also and conferred the keys for missionary and temple work.
Ezekiel 37:16-20
"Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions: And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand. And when the children of thy people shall speak unto thee, saying, Wilt thou not shew us what thou meanest by these? Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand. And the sticks whereon thou writest shall be in thine hand before their eyes."
This is a reference to the Book of Mormon and the Bible being companion books that compliment each other. The Book of Mormon is a true volume of scripture, prophesied in the Bible, and brought forth by God. Since the Book of Mormon is the fulfillment of Biblical prophecy then Joseph Smith is indeed a Prophet of God.
Denying the true meaning of those verses isn't going to make Mormonism true.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#23422 Apr 12, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
The Bible also testifies of Jospeh Smith,
Isaiah 29:11-12
Malachi 3:1
Ezekiel 37:16-20
YOU can't fraudulantly deny the artifacts... the evidence in Meso-America...
So you never address it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Step_pyramid
DENY THAT... LOOK AT THE SIMULARITIES IN THE STEPS OF THE PYRAMIDS...
https://www.google.com/search ...
hmmm...
YOU CAN'T Snap your fingers and make them disappear...
ADDRESS the facts...
ADDRESS the scriptures testifying of Joseph Smith...
ADDRESS the artifacts in found today...
I have address them. The Nephites didn't build pyramids. You keep making the same ignorant statements when proven time after time you are wrong. And you're right, Joseph Smith was mentioned in the Bible:

Matthew 7:15
[ A Tree and Its Fruit ]“Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.

Matthew 24:11
Many false prophets will arise and will mislead many.

Matthew 24:24
For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect.

Mark 13:22
for false Christs and false prophets will arise, and will show signs and wonders, in order to lead astray, if possible, the elect.

Luke 6:26
Woe to you when all men speak well of you, for their fathers used to treat the false prophets in the same way.

2 Peter 2:1
[ The Rise of False Prophets ] But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves.

1 John 4:1
[ Testing the Spirits ] Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#23423 Apr 12, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/ 414
Interesting factual hitorical find... teotihuacan
The Nephites, Jeridites, and Mulekites landed in Meso America.
There are many guesses from many people... but the truth is revealed his archeologic facts.
Good Luck to you in your search.
You're right, they show that there were never any people called "Nephites" in America.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#23424 Apr 12, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
Luke 8:17
For nothing is hidden that will not be made manifest, nor is anything secret that will not be known and come to light.
True, and Joseph Smith has been expose as the fraud he is.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#23425 Apr 12, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
I wasn't speaking about what Mormons call it. You were.
You and nomo spoke offensively of the tithing Mormons make. I didn't.
I made a comparison the Christian ministers expected tithes from their members as the Mormon leaders expect from their members. You two didn't like that comparison and denied it took place.
I was speaking about terminology ministers used for their members when discussing tithing pledges. You continued to reference Mormons.
I was speaking about the value tithing holds for most Christian churches that aren't financially self sufficient. You didn't. You denied there was any such importance.
You and nomo declared churches you two attended didn't ask for tithes, insinuating the churches you two attended were so financially set that they didn't need tithes to help pay monthly costs.
Get it yet?
And I just see you as trying to be slick, as usual. I was talking about tithing settlements, and that you don't see them in any other church. You, lying as usual to try to make Mormonism Christian, said they do.
Just more of your BS.
Chuck

Carrollton, TX

#23426 Apr 12, 2013
TGIF!

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#23427 Apr 12, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
City of Nephi (Guatamal/Kaminaljuju)
10 days = 80 miles
*to
Water of Mormon (Lake of Atitlan)
8 days = 65 miles
*to
Land of Helam (Almolonga)
1 day = 8 miles
*to
Valley of Alma (Quetzaltenango)
12 days = 96 miles
*to
City/Land of Zarahemla (Chiapas Depression)
So, where can I find a BoM map published by the LDS church?

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#23428 Apr 12, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
It figures that's Tanner's logic makes sense to you. Especially since she's what you're not, a civil polite intelligent anti-Mormon that doesn't usually lie to make a point.
Next, she does a bit of a twist in her statement. Smith couldn't imitate the existence of a specific type of writing in all the right places if he knew nothing about it. Tanner doesn't mention that fact. That's called deception by purpose.
What Tanner doesn't tell you is someone that doesn't know what their copying, they'll reword it in all the wrong places and maybe a few right places because they don't know what their re-writing as Smith is accused of doing.
Therefore it's a fact that Smith in rewriting a specific undiscovered type of writing, he would have massacred it over and over. Those later recognizing Chiasmus, they would have been able to read Smith's book and could point to where he destroyed what should have been Chiasmus and where he unknowingly wrote out chiasmus correctly.
But it's been noted that Smith rewrote Chiasmus as correctly as it was written into the OT without knowing it. Tanner doesn't go over that fact because she can't explain it herself. So it's easier for Tanner to just excuse it away with Smith got lucky in that he didn't slaughter any Chiasmus in rewriting it in the BOM.
You go with that. LOL!!!

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#23429 Apr 12, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
http://www.ancientamerica.org/ library/media/HTML/vd6l8c4c/7. %20STELA%205.htm?n=0
This is a link about "The Tree of Life Stone"
It was left in by the Nephites 200 BC
Quote
http://www.moroni10.com/lehi_stone.html
"Izapa Stela 5: The Lehi Stone
This stone, currently possessed by The Smithsonian, was discovered in the ancient Mesoamerican city of Izapa, in 1941, by archaeologist Matthew W. Stirling. The stone carving has been dated to the Preclassic Guillen Phase between 300 BC and 50 AD. While both LDS and Non-LDS scholars debate the interpretation of the carving, it's hard to ignore the striking similarity it has to Lehi's dream of the "Tree of Life" found in 1 Nephi chapter 8. The tree of life, the people eating fruit, and other resemblances to the account of Lehi's dream, coupled with the location it was found, and it being dated dead on to the Book of Mormon timetable, makes this an intriguing evidence of Book of Mormon authenticity. But like all faith evidences, this won't make people believe who don't already."
Even many Mormon apologists call that bunk:
The elements highlighted above should be kept in mind. It is these points which popular apologists compare to IS5: the Tree of Life is identified with Lehi's tree, the figures in the IS5 with Lehi and his family; the writing figure with Nephi recording the vision; the river with the river; the hooded figure with a blind person who has lost his way (contrary to Jakeman!), and the rod of iron with a heavy line along the bottom of IS5.

So is there any substance to this analysis, or is it, after the manner of The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark, merely a stretch of imagination? On this account, the leading Mormon apologists are not agreeing with Jakeman. Two items in the first 1999 edition of the Journal of Book of Mormon Studies ("The History of an Idea" by Stewart Brewer; "A New Artistic Rendering of Izapa Stela 5" by John Clark) make these points, first from Brewer:

Even at the earliest, Jakeman relied on a little creativity to fit IS5 with the vision. "For example, the large field he believed was represented by a small uncarned segment of the background. He argued that it stood conceptually for a large field but could not be shown larger because the scene was so crowded."
Norman's later work, which involved extensive photography and examination of IS5, referred to "errors in detecting details" which "plagued" Jakeman's interpretation, and decided that much of his work was thereby "rendered invalid." However, he went on to suggest a "road of life" theme for the IS5 that he felt did not invalidate Jakeman's hypothesis, but rather "deepened its meaning."
A non-Mormon researcher, Suzanne Miles, provided the first significant non-Mormon look at IS5 and described it as a "fantastic visual myth." Her interpretation did not in any way lend support to Jakeman's. Somewhat before Miles another researcher, Clyde Keeler, offered an interpretation which also disagreed wirth Jakeman's. In 1982, a BYU graduate, Gareth Lowe, interpreted IS5 as a creation myth.
Hugh Nibley, the premier LDS apologist, dismissed Jakeman's interpretation as wishful thinking, offering criticism for his failure to check for parallels in Far Eastern art and in other Mesoamerican art; ignoring or explaining away contrary evidence; "gross errors in elementary matters of linguistic and iconographic evidence", and offering unlikely interpretations over simple ones.
More recently, however, popular Mormon apologist Michael Griffith and BYU professor of ancient scripture Alan Parrish have come out in support of Jakeman's interpretation.

http://www.tektonics.org/qt/stela5.html

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 Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 4 min Jonah1 14,827
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 min mdbuilder 1,404,725
News Donald Trump encourages Russia to hack Hillary ... 5 min Jaimie 13
News Texas Dems to DNC: Pick a Castro, Any Castro St... 5 min anonymous 1
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 5 min Blitzking 201,426
News Poll: Trump supporters unfazed by reversal on s... 8 min Mite Be 215
News Trump Isn't Bluffing, He'll Deport 11 Million P... 8 min woodtick57 5,482
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 13 min katrina 88 391,370
News Hacked emails show Democratic party hostility t... 33 min gwww 228
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 35 min Skylar 233,187
News Sarah Silvermana s rebuke to the Bernie-or-bust... 3 hr Le Jimbo 64
More from around the web