The Truth about Mormons

[LANMaster]

Thanks for your response TS.
What bothers me is that most of those assertions about Mormonism come from sites calling themselves "Christian". The truth is always better than flinging mud at other faiths.

We still disagree on several points, but we agree that Christ is the center of our faiths, and that, IMO, is the critical factor.

I was raised Catholic. Much of my family still is. Christ is the center of that faith as well, but I disagree with many of their "tradition supremacy" above the Bible.

The myth that Mary was a perpetual virgin flies directly in the face of what the Bible QUITE CLEARLY says about Jesus' brothers and sisters. Mary was blessed to be given the birth of Jesus, but she was not a deity, and not deserving of our worship or prayers.

Many of the Apostles were married, so why are non-castrated Priests supposed to be celibate? The Bible is clear on church leaders either being married or being Eunichs (castrated). So for the church to require celibacy among the clergy is probably why the church has such extreme sexual immorality issues .... IMHO. Nothing wrong with celibacy, but if the clergy is to remain single in their dedication to purity, then the NT prescribes them to become Eunichs.

I could go on and on about Catholicism and their direct contradictions to the Bible .... just as I believe that I can WRT the Mormon church. But what good does that do?

Faith is a deeply personal issue. Ridiculing another's faith is also against the teaching of Christ.
This, I believe, is my own faith's greatest sin. We are not to follow Apollos, Peter, or Paul, but Christ, and Christ alone.

Proclaiming that any faith is an abomonation is counter productive to the cause of the Gospel. Proclaiming that someone is destined for hell is no different. My heart was not softened by someone pontifficating that their faith was the only way to salvation. I do not believe that proclaiming "my brand of Christianity is the only way of salvation" would actually draw anyone in to my way of thinking.....I say this knowing that Jesus IS the only way.

Without love added to that truth, there is no benefit for the Kingdom.

No slick advertising slogans contribute to Christ's Lingdom .... only the conviction of the Holy Spirit within an individual can bring them to a loving relationship with the King.

As Christians, we do a poor job of allowing the Holy Spirit to do what we openly say that only HE can do. It is our greatest hypocrisy. The Holy Spirit needs no help from us and our self-righteous, pius convicting.

Sharing the Gospel is our great commission, but beating people over the head with that Gospel, is akin to Moses striking the rock in the wilderness a second time after God specifically gave him different instructions.

I think many, M A N Y Christians will be shocked to learn that their efforts did more to estrange people from God, than to enrich the Kingdom. And it is the saddest part of this entire journey.

I listen to posters like JoLouis in this forum, and I cannot help but wonder what "so-called Christian" was responsible for the hardening of his heart, and that makes me ashamed.

I wonder how the Westboro Baptists feel they will be treated by God when they find themselves in the position of defending their assertion that God hates homosexuals. I think there must be a special place in hell for those who misrepresent our loving God in such a way, and lead so many people far, far away from the knowledge of our God.

I'm no universalist. I believed John's accurate quote of Jesus Christ in John 14:6. There is only one way. So how am I reconciling with those who would openly condemning others and using that passage as evidence of someone elses salvation status? Easy .... God wants everyone to come to him. Friom the mass murderer to the Alter Boy. From the fanatical Muslim to the staunchest Atheist.

Any and all are no less worthy than the salvation I have been given. Without love, my words are worse than having no effect .... they have a negative effect.

So bless you Mormons. We worship an awesome God. We should be grateful that He would have anything at all to do with any of us .... especially someone as filthy as I.

L8R

 

[JakeStarkey]

You, Truthspeaker, are making erroneous statements. Let folks read what your Apostles and Seventies from the past have said. You are not authoritative, you speak your mind and nothing else. You are entitled to your opinion.

Our prophets and apostles have spoken and already said the same thing about the Journal of Discourses. Where do you think I got the idea from? The Journal of Discourses has known errors in it. Some things were taught as doctrine but then proven as nothing more than speculation after later revelations. sorry Jake,
I am brushed up on my doctrine.

You have been proven inaccurate many times on LDS doctrine and policy, Truthspeaker. The Journal of Discourses were considered in its day binding. Today it is not. Thus, logic follows, what is said to be binding today may not be in the future. Your opinion is your own, but it certainly much of the time does not reflect what the church was teaching then and at times what it is teaching now. No, you are not authorative, or very knowledgable, at all.

 

[LANMaster]

Did you guys ever consider that Jesus' father might have prematurely ejaculated just before penetrating Mary and some of the semen got into her?
(And no, this is not from personal experience like some of you are dying to say, lol)

You like to make humor like that, because you think it weakens our faith.
You must have had a rough childhood.
I truly hope that you find peace. I suspect that you will.

Usually the most staunch Atheists become the greatest Evangelizers when their heart is illuminated by the Holy Spirit.
And while I may be able to reflect Christ's love, I cannot produce it. I can't prove God is real to you, and it would be foolish for me to try.
That is up to God to make happen. And you won't truly recognize His power until the miracle happens to you, personally.
.... but once it does .... there will be no way for you to deny the fact. You couldn't deny His reality if you wanted to, because you never could want to.

The arms that catch you, may catch you by surprise. I wish you no harm, only the joy that comes from finding out that God is not only real, but that he would have a desire to love us.

Until then, I'm sure you can do better with the rhetoric. You didn't say anything about Mary's hair or perhaps that she was wearing glasses. Come on already. At least be a little creative in your bigoted intolerance.

 

[LANMaster]

You, Truthspeaker, are making erroneous statements. Let folks read what your Apostles and Seventies from the past have said. You are not authoritative, you speak your mind and nothing else. You are entitled to your opinion.

Our prophets and apostles have spoken and already said the same thing about the Journal of Discourses. Where do you think I got the idea from? The Journal of Discourses has known errors in it. Some things were taught as doctrine but then proven as nothing more than speculation after later revelations. sorry Jake,
I am brushed up on my doctrine.

You have been proven inaccurate many times on LDS doctrine and policy, Truthspeaker. The Journal of Discourses were considered in its day binding. Today it is not. Thus, logic follows, what is said to be binding today may not be in the future. Your opinion is your own, but it certainly much of the time does not reflect what the church was teaching then and at times what it is teaching now. No, you are not authorative, or very knowledgable, at all.

This is interesting. So many people of similar faiths tear at each other like 2 hungry dogs, fighting for food, only to find that both are injured, and the cat ended up getting the meal.

I believe in the pre-tribulation rapture of the Church. Some of my brothers are of mid-trib or post-trib rapture belief.
ALL can cite Biblical reference for their firm belief .... and ALL make a good case for that belief.
But it is hardly something over which one of us will lose salvation. So while the discussion is always a good one, arguing and fomenting anger are tools of Satan in this destructive behavior.
We can doctrinally disagree, and still come together and celebrate the core belief that we share.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nobody here is really fomenting, LANMaster, except a couple of folks deficient in core spirituality. Your coments are interesting, but don't think Truth and I hate each other. He simply does not like that I can interpret LDS history and doctrine as well or better than he. But none of that is important at all, really. I don't believe in the Rapture, so I just try to live today the right way in case I am called home tomorrow.

 

[Truthspeaker]

Thanks for your response TS.
What bothers me is that most of those assertions about Mormonism come from sites calling themselves "Christian". The truth is always better than flinging mud at other faiths.

We still disagree on several points, but we agree that Christ is the center of our faiths, and that, IMO, is the critical factor.

I was raised Catholic. Much of my family still is. Christ is the center of that faith as well, but I disagree with many of their "tradition supremacy" above the Bible.

The myth that Mary was a perpetual virgin flies directly in the face of what the Bible QUITE CLEARLY says about Jesus' brothers and sisters. Mary was blessed to be given the birth of Jesus, but she was not a deity, and not deserving of our worship or prayers.

Many of the Apostles were married, so why are non-castrated Priests supposed to be celibate? The Bible is clear on church leaders either being married or being Eunichs (castrated). So for the church to require celibacy among the clergy is probably why the church has such extreme sexual immorality issues .... IMHO. Nothing wrong with celibacy, but if the clergy is to remain single in their dedication to purity, then the NT prescribes them to become Eunichs.

I could go on and on about Catholicism and their direct contradictions to the Bible .... just as I believe that I can WRT the Mormon church. But what good does that do?

Faith is a deeply personal issue. Ridiculing another's faith is also against the teaching of Christ.
This, I believe, is my own faith's greatest sin. We are not to follow Apollos, Peter, or Paul, but Christ, and Christ alone.

Proclaiming that any faith is an abomonation is counter productive to the cause of the Gospel. Proclaiming that someone is destined for hell is no different. My heart was not softened by someone pontifficating that their faith was the only way to salvation. I do not believe that proclaiming "my brand of Christianity is the only way of salvation" would actually draw anyone in to my way of thinking.....I say this knowing that Jesus IS the only way.

Without love added to that truth, there is no benefit for the Kingdom.

No slick advertising slogans contribute to Christ's Lingdom .... only the conviction of the Holy Spirit within an individual can bring them to a loving relationship with the King.

As Christians, we do a poor job of allowing the Holy Spirit to do what we openly say that only HE can do. It is our greatest hypocrisy. The Holy Spirit needs no help from us and our self-righteous, pius convicting.

Sharing the Gospel is our great commission, but beating people over the head with that Gospel, is akin to Moses striking the rock in the wilderness a second time after God specifically gave him different instructions.

I think many, M A N Y Christians will be shocked to learn that their efforts did more to estrange people from God, than to enrich the Kingdom. And it is the saddest part of this entire journey.

I listen to posters like JoLouis in this forum, and I cannot help but wonder what "so-called Christian" was responsible for the hardening of his heart, and that makes me ashamed.

I wonder how the Westboro Baptists feel they will be treated by God when they find themselves in the position of defending their assertion that God hates homosexuals. I think there must be a special place in hell for those who misrepresent our loving God in such a way, and lead so many people far, far away from the knowledge of our God.

I'm no universalist. I believed John's accurate quote of Jesus Christ in John 14:6. There is only one way. So how am I reconciling with those who would openly condemning others and using that passage as evidence of someone elses salvation status? Easy .... God wants everyone to come to him. Friom the mass murderer to the Alter Boy. From the fanatical Muslim to the staunchest Atheist.

Any and all are no less worthy than the salvation I have been given. Without love, my words are worse than having no effect .... they have a negative effect.

So bless you Mormons. We worship an awesome God. We should be grateful that He would have anything at all to do with any of us .... especially someone as filthy as I.

L8R

Now there's an honest heart. I appreciate your sentiments whole heartedly. Sure we have our disagreements. But in the end, what is important at the last day is to have what Christ described in the beatitudes. He didn't say "Blessed are the Baptists", or "blessed are the Mormons" for they shall inherit the earth. He described qualities people needed to have. Charity first and foremost, "...for he that is found possessed of it at the last day, it shall be well with him." Even if he was erroneous in some of his beliefs. For we will all need to be forgiven of something at the last day because of our sinful nature. Here is one of my fondest Joseph Smith quotes in response to a reporter asking him this question:

Reporter: Isn't it true according to Joe Smith that only "Mormons" are going to go to heaven and everyone else goes to hell?

Joseph: (sarcastically responding) YES! And a great many of THEM(meaning mormons) too if they don't shape up and repent of their sins!

 

[Truthspeaker]

You, Truthspeaker, are making erroneous statements. Let folks read what your Apostles and Seventies from the past have said. You are not authoritative, you speak your mind and nothing else. You are entitled to your opinion.

Our prophets and apostles have spoken and already said the same thing about the Journal of Discourses. Where do you think I got the idea from? The Journal of Discourses has known errors in it. Some things were taught as doctrine but then proven as nothing more than speculation after later revelations. sorry Jake,
I am brushed up on my doctrine.

You have been proven inaccurate many times on LDS doctrine and policy, Truthspeaker. The Journal of Discourses were considered in its day binding. Today it is not. Thus, logic follows, what is said to be binding today may not be in the future. Your opinion is your own, but it certainly much of the time does not reflect what the church was teaching then and at times what it is teaching now. No, you are not authorative, or very knowledgable, at all.

Curious that you would make such an assertion.

Care to tell us where the Journal of Discourses claims that it is binding anywhwere?

 

[Truthspeaker]

Our prophets and apostles have spoken and already said the same thing about the Journal of Discourses. Where do you think I got the idea from? The Journal of Discourses has known errors in it. Some things were taught as doctrine but then proven as nothing more than speculation after later revelations. sorry Jake,
I am brushed up on my doctrine.

You have been proven inaccurate many times on LDS doctrine and policy, Truthspeaker. The Journal of Discourses were considered in its day binding. Today it is not. Thus, logic follows, what is said to be binding today may not be in the future. Your opinion is your own, but it certainly much of the time does not reflect what the church was teaching then and at times what it is teaching now. No, you are not authorative, or very knowledgable, at all.

This is interesting. So many people of similar faiths tear at each other like 2 hungry dogs, fighting for food, only to find that both are injured, and the cat ended up getting the meal.

I believe in the pre-tribulation rapture of the Church. Some of my brothers are of mid-trib or post-trib rapture belief.
ALL can cite Biblical reference for their firm belief .... and ALL make a good case for that belief.
But it is hardly something over which one of us will lose salvation. So while the discussion is always a good one, arguing and fomenting anger are tools of Satan in this destructive behavior.
We can doctrinally disagree, and still come together and celebrate the core belief that we share.

LANmaster,
Jake and I do not fight each other, certainly not regarding our differing faiths, and certainly not like dogs.
My beef with him is that he claims that we believe things that we actually don't. He claims to know more about our religion than I do. I tell him that he is wrong and where. He seems to see things differently but we're not tearing at each other.

I'm just trying to make sure people ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND what we believe in spite of the likes of Jake.

 

[JoLouis]

If God was inspiring the translation process of the Book of Mormon, why were 4,000 changes necessary?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Our prophets and apostles have spoken and already said the same thing about the Journal of Discourses. Where do you think I got the idea from? The Journal of Discourses has known errors in it. Some things were taught as doctrine but then proven as nothing more than speculation after later revelations. sorry Jake,
I am brushed up on my doctrine.

You have been proven inaccurate many times on LDS doctrine and policy, Truthspeaker. The Journal of Discourses were considered in its day binding. Today it is not. Thus, logic follows, what is said to be binding today may not be in the future. Your opinion is your own, but it certainly much of the time does not reflect what the church was teaching then and at times what it is teaching now. No, you are not authorative, or very knowledgable, at all.

Curious that you would make such an assertion.

Care to tell us where the Journal of Discourses claims that it is binding anywhwere?

Read the facings of the GAs endorsements and study the sermons, and that is all one can come away with.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You have been proven inaccurate many times on LDS doctrine and policy, Truthspeaker. The Journal of Discourses were considered in its day binding. Today it is not. Thus, logic follows, what is said to be binding today may not be in the future. Your opinion is your own, but it certainly much of the time does not reflect what the church was teaching then and at times what it is teaching now. No, you are not authorative, or very knowledgable, at all.

This is interesting. So many people of similar faiths tear at each other like 2 hungry dogs, fighting for food, only to find that both are injured, and the cat ended up getting the meal.

I believe in the pre-tribulation rapture of the Church. Some of my brothers are of mid-trib or post-trib rapture belief.
ALL can cite Biblical reference for their firm belief .... and ALL make a good case for that belief.
But it is hardly something over which one of us will lose salvation. So while the discussion is always a good one, arguing and fomenting anger are tools of Satan in this destructive behavior.
We can doctrinally disagree, and still come together and celebrate the core belief that we share.

LANmaster,
Jake and I do not fight each other, certainly not regarding our differing faiths, and certainly not like dogs.
My beef with him is that he claims that we believe things that we actually don't. He claims to know more about our religion than I do. I tell him that he is wrong and where. He seems to see things differently but we're not tearing at each other.

I'm just trying to make sure people ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND what we believe in spite of the likes of Jake.

And I am trying to get folks to see clearly in spite of Truthspeaker. I don't question his devotion to goodness and Christ at all. Really, Truth is a great guy, LANMaster.

 

[JakeStarkey]

If God was inspiring the translation process of the Book of Mormon, why were 4,000 changes necessary?

Do you know how many millions of changes have occurred with the Bible and its myriad translations, JoLouis? Sometimes tu quoque is not the way to go.

 

[LANMaster]

Nobody here is really fomenting, LANMaster, except a couple of folks deficient in core spirituality. Your coments are interesting, but don't think Truth and I hate each other. He simply does not like that I can interpret LDS history and doctrine as well or better than he. But none of that is important at all, really. I don't believe in the Rapture, so I just try to live today the right way in case I am called home tomorrow.

LOL I guess you don't like that I can interpret the Bible better than you.
BTW, righteous living does not make one saved. Else the thief on the cross would not be meeting Christ in Paradise.
Salvation is salvation, period. The crown are a bonus. but I will be casting mine at the feet of Christ.
All of the workers earn the same salvation, whether they work all day or only the last hour.

I don't think you hate each other. Clearly he interprets your faith's doctrines differently than you. And because of that, you believe that you interpret the doctrine better?
I have studied the Bible since I was a child. I could quote scripture to noobs all day long knowing that I was right on the money ..... but God knows my heart. A saved noob is far more in tune with the will of God than any unsaved lifetime scholar.

Please know that I do not judge your salvation in the least. Not my job. I am woefully unqualified to judge anyone's salvation. Just making a point about who is "better" than someone else regarding their faith.

 

[LANMaster]

You have been proven inaccurate many times on LDS doctrine and policy, Truthspeaker. The Journal of Discourses were considered in its day binding. Today it is not. Thus, logic follows, what is said to be binding today may not be in the future. Your opinion is your own, but it certainly much of the time does not reflect what the church was teaching then and at times what it is teaching now. No, you are not authorative, or very knowledgable, at all.

This is interesting. So many people of similar faiths tear at each other like 2 hungry dogs, fighting for food, only to find that both are injured, and the cat ended up getting the meal.

I believe in the pre-tribulation rapture of the Church. Some of my brothers are of mid-trib or post-trib rapture belief.
ALL can cite Biblical reference for their firm belief .... and ALL make a good case for that belief.
But it is hardly something over which one of us will lose salvation. So while the discussion is always a good one, arguing and fomenting anger are tools of Satan in this destructive behavior.
We can doctrinally disagree, and still come together and celebrate the core belief that we share.

LANmaster,
Jake and I do not fight each other, certainly not regarding our differing faiths, and certainly not like dogs.
My beef with him is that he claims that we believe things that we actually don't. He claims to know more about our religion than I do. I tell him that he is wrong and where. He seems to see things differently but we're not tearing at each other.

I'm just trying to make sure people ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND what we believe in spite of the likes of Jake.

I in no way itended to imply that either of you are dogs. Please accept my apology if my analogous comment sounded in that context.

Nobody has ever misunderstood Christianity. That just never happens.

 

[JakeStarkey]

LANMaster, I suspect your analogy is off. Neither one of us is questioning each other's salvation, merely each other's interpretations of LDS doctrine and history. You may interpret the Bible than me, who knows, but you are dead on in the concept that only God knows the sinner's heart. That's why I have such hope for the unbeliever.

 

[LANMaster]

If God was inspiring the translation process of the Book of Mormon, why were 4,000 changes necessary?

I don't wish to defend a book in which I do not believe .... but what if the changes (of which you refer) were themselves God inspired?

In the Nicea council, (325AD) there were many Bible Books being used by the new Christian church for hundreds of years.
Some of those were doctrinally flawed, such as the Book of Thomas and other parts of the Apocrypha.
These were deemed not God-inspired because they had factual errors. It happens. Men writhe things that are not God inspired, which was the REASON for the council in the first place.

You guys should all read the Anti-Nicene Fathers. Especially you, Jake. .... no offense intended.
In it you will find Epistles written by such early church fathers as Clement, born in 30AD (2 years before Christ's death, and smack dab in the middle of Christ's earthy ministry)
Clement died in 100AD. His references to completed New Testament manuscripts used in the church teachings is unmistakable.
Move on to Mathete's letter to Diognetus, the Epistle of Polycarp to the Phillipians, the encyclical epistle of the church at Smyrna regarding the martyrdom of Polycarp.
Ignatius' many epistles (who was also born in 30AD .. died in 107AD)
Barnabus who travelled with Paul who wrote the majority of the NT.

While many of these weren't truly contemporaries with Jesus Christ, Himself, they were DEFINITELY contemporaries of the Apostles, including the Actual Authors of the 4 Gospels.

These writings, among others, affirm the accuracy of the NT. and the timeliness with which they were written. Far, far closer to the time of Christ than you may be willing to acknowledge.

More than anything else, the Dead Sea SCrolls affirmed that the manuscripts (copies of actual scriptures) were made to a near PERFECT replica of the originals ... and subsequent copies. Jews in History were known for their careful attention to verbatum transfer and translation of God's Holy Scriptures.

 

[LANMaster]

LANMaster, I suspect your analogy is off. Neither one of us is questioning each other's salvation, merely each other's interpretations of LDS doctrine and history. You may interpret the Bible than me, who knows, but you are dead on in the concept that only God knows the sinner's heart. That's why I have such hope for the unbeliever.

Amen to that, Brother.

 

[Truthspeaker]

You have been proven inaccurate many times on LDS doctrine and policy, Truthspeaker. The Journal of Discourses were considered in its day binding. Today it is not. Thus, logic follows, what is said to be binding today may not be in the future. Your opinion is your own, but it certainly much of the time does not reflect what the church was teaching then and at times what it is teaching now. No, you are not authorative, or very knowledgable, at all.

Curious that you would make such an assertion.

Care to tell us where the Journal of Discourses claims that it is binding anywhwere?

Read the facings of the GAs endorsements and study the sermons, and that is all one can come away with.

I already did and you have a different interpretation than i do.

 

[Truthspeaker]

If God was inspiring the translation process of the Book of Mormon, why were 4,000 changes necessary?

Because when it was literally translated it was done without punctuation and paragraphing. Diction was also cumbersome at times because the ancient language used worded things oddly sometimes ie, "The more part of them were converted" as originally used to read. Now it reads, The greater part of them were converted.

those are the only such changes made. And granted there would be thousands of them in a 500 hundred page book. punctuation and paragraphing were the bulk of the changes.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I have studied the Bible intensely for more than five decades. I love it, its stories, its timeliness and its "timelessness". The story of the Prodigal Son has always been my favorite. So, quietly and gently, LANMaster, I suggest you apply your talents and your humility in studying the Book of Mormon carefully as well. You will find truth in it that is timeless and timely. God reveals as He will to those He desires in His own ways.