The Truth about Mormons

[Truthspeaker]

How can you Avatar, or Truthspeaker(Such a presumptuous, and prideful user name, by the way, for an alleged Christian; totally lacking in humility, or humbleness, as patterned by our Savior and His disciples and truly H.S. filled followers.) know for sure that your personal revelations are from God, without going to the scriptures as the Bereans did when Paul or anyone came to them to speak, to verify that a received message is of God?

There was more to the post, but I think this pretty much sums up your problem. You've never had an exprience with the Holy Spirit. You've never learned anything from God. Because if you had experienced the power of God, if you had heard the Spirit of the Lord, you wouldnt have to ask how you know it's from God. You would be immediately humbled and acknowledge the Glory, power, and love of God that comes with the whispers of the Spirit. They are undeniable.

I know that my revelations are from God the same way Moses did. Experience. Who am I to deny God when He has been so clear? I've seen the darkness and confusion that comes from the Adversary as well.

It's from the Spirit I learned that Jesus is the Christ. I learned the Bible and Book of Mormon were true because of that same Spirit. I learned that Joseph Smith was a Prophets because of the Holy Spirit. You can only learn things of the Spirit from the Spirit.

And that's why you don't know. You are trying to reason it out. At least you have enough faith to accept the Lord even when you don't know, but there is more to the Lord then what we can reason from the scriptures. Youll learn more in 5 mins with the Spirit then by reading the Bible hundreds of times without even if you do figure out some of the basic principles correctly.

You've walked over the precipice with your Moses parallel. The bible says that no man has ever lived with greater faith or close relationship to God than Moses. Note: I said man-only; as Jesus is man and God, and not a mere man.

Secondly, your statement that you've had/have a relationship with the H.S., and I have not. That is the presumptuous attitude of Mormons. Your fellow members, hang onto the experiential, without worrying one "iota" if it is from God. Obviously, the enemy of God, isn't stupid, nor does he make himself obvious to those in whom he deludes.

If and when, if possible, you ever come to the point of questioning your visions, revelations, dreams, burning bosoms, with total objectivity, which God wants us to exercise at all times, you may, just may be able to see the forest for the trees.

The whole foundations of the LDS church is built upon subjective, experiential personal knowledge/encounters, and the acceptance of a most dubious piece of writing, called the BOM. Also the Journal Of Discourses, and Pearl of Great Price, and other writing of both J.S. Jr., and B.Y., make Scientology seem credible.

Your church meets the complete criteria of a "cult", as it's adherents, don't live by objective truth, but seek the subjective, as dictated by your doctrine.

You just don't understand that the H.S. works quietly, subtely, but with power, in the souls of the "saved", not commonly via visions, dreams, etc., but by urgings within the soul that counter the power of sin that is constantly at work against the true Christian's new nature in Christ.

You get your confirmation from the "feeler"/emotions part of your human makeup, but that is a most unreliable gauge of truth.

If you could just take that leap of faith, and resoundingly leap that canyon of basing your belief system on what pops up in your mind, dreams, and "loud" urgings, and really, I mean really let the bible speak to you, rather than let the bible confirm your hoped-for agenda, you would know what I mean.

The scriptures for thousands of years have been used to promote false belief systems, when it is "used" out of context. The Mormon church has gone one further and minimized the bible's contents, as it pertains to their 1830's era doctrine.

The J.W.'s have used another tact. With their NWT bible they have actually changed key words to minimize/destroy Christ's divinity, and present Him as a mere created being; Archangel Michael. The Mormon church has also followed similar suit, but making up the notion that Christ was once a mere man, and then become "exalted", yet Jesus told the crowd that was about to stone Him that He was the "I AM"(Alpha to Omega; Begining and Last); forever existent!

I understand your spirited defense of your church. It is the whole foundation of your being, but true freedom for you and Truthspeaker will be, hopefully when you are able to surmount that deep denial within your soul, that has been programmed into you by your church. God's Word is like food, but it is food for the soul. When the true Christian reads the bible, the H.S. within, agrees with the scripture, as it is agreeing with Itself, namely God is agreeing with "God Breathed" words, that God-inspired men recorded through the centuries.

You know for a fact that the bible does not speak to you, nor feed you, but you need all the "extra" stuff that you church provides, beside your constant personal revelations direct from God, aside from written scripture.

You walk on very dangerous ground, as again you fullfill the very tenents of cultic belief, but relying on the "subjective" to validate the "objective" part of your being.

God gave us the capacity to "feel" and or have "emotions" to enhance our human experience in the world, and life, but He never wanted us to rely on that part of our humanity to substantiate truth, and falsehood.

Just as our U.S. Constitution is the guide that our Justices are supposed to follow when making decisions, the bible is the ultimate constitution for the Christian.

In a sense the Mormon church is following a similar path to those that were or are called "reconstructionists" or believe that the U.S. Constitution is a code word, "Living, Breathing, Document". I.E. the liberals believe that the U.S. Constitution can be redefined to validate their "subjective" based bent on life, culturally, socially in this country. Yet, Justices like Clarence Thomas, abhor that, and see the Constitution as a document that says what it says, clearly, and is not in need of "redefinition".

The LDS church basically is taking the bible, and thousands of years of God's might work in this world, and upon mankind, and "redefining" it to the pleasure of their founder's beliefs.

When God says, that there will be "no other" Gods before Me, that is clearly defined, yet the LDS church says that there was, and still will be many more gods, like Christ, and God the Father. It is a mere act of mankind to reach godhood by obedience to the god before him, so that he/man may perpetuate another godhood.

When one is so caught-up in a cult, they can't see the forest for the trees. That is a fact. Some cults are blatantly strange on the outside, and others hide their strange concocted beliefs with a sugar-coated exterior that seems like the norm.

Even in my own Christian life; years ago, I had to face the fact that I was relying too much on experiential life/feelings to "gauge" my faith or relationship with God. I finally had to face the fact that I was going to live the life existence that needed constant "feeding" of subjective input, in order to substantiate my faith. I was totally going against scripture, and was prepping myself for a really "downer" as a Christian. It was a tough step, but I had to realize that the Christian life was a daily step-by-step process of faith in God's provisions, clearly revealed in the bible.

Yes, I've had my times where I knew that God gave me an urging or a type of communique, because I made sure that it didn't go against His Holy Word, the bible/scriptures.

Well, once again, I must point out to you that your opinion of us mormons being wrong, fallen, in denial etc. is just your opinion. I am not here to debate my religion being better than yours. If you are crusading to "save" mormons, you have come to the wrong place. Avatar and I have thoroughly dealt with all your assumptions and attacks. Do you have anything new?

 

[Avatar4321]

You've walked over the precipice with your Moses parallel. The bible says that no man has ever lived with greater faith or close relationship to God than Moses. Note: I said man-only; as Jesus is man and God, and not a mere man.

No it doesnt. Moses himself stated that He wished all men would become prophets like Him and know the Lord as He did. In fact, He spent years preparing the Children of Israel to enter into the Lord's presence and to be Prophets, Priests, and Kings. Yet they were hard in their hearts and refused to learn the lessons and sanctify themselves, so God made them wander in the desert for 40 years for their sins.

Secondly, your statement that you've had/have a relationship with the H.S., and I have not. That is the presumptuous attitude of Mormons. Your fellow members, hang onto the experiential, without worrying one "iota" if it is from God. Obviously, the enemy of God, isn't stupid, nor does he make himself obvious to those in whom he deludes.

I made no such presumption based on the fact that im Mormon and you are not. I made the presumption from your own words which state that you have no clue how to recognize the Spirit. You dont know what it's like to recieve a revelation. If you did you wouldnt be questioning how to know whether its from God or not. Because when you experience the Holy Spirit and the power associated with Him, it's very obvious to tell the difference between the Holy Spirit and other spirits and/or our own feelings and thoughts.

I know many non-mormons who know and recognize the influence of the Holy Spirit. In fact, Paul spells it out pretty nicely in Galations 5:

16

This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.
17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.
18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. 24 And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
26 Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another.

The Holy Spirit is what gives us power to know the things of God. The Holy Spirit is the one that teaches us the truth of all things. When Christ prepared His disciples for His death, He did not tell them He was giving them the Bible to show them all the things they need to do. He told them He was giving them the Spirit to do so.

When Peter and the Apostles waited after the ascension of Christ for instruction, they did not wait for the Bible. They waited for the Holy Spirit. And on the day of Pentecost when the Holy Ghost fell upon them they preached with power and converted thousands in a single day.

The idea that we are somehow to ignore the Holy Spirit and rely solely on what our mind can understand from the Bible is faulty, unbiblical, and contrary to the plan of God in every dispensation we have. The Bible is clear that Israel is to be directed by the Spirit through those called as Aaron was. It was Christ and the Apostles teaching by the Spirit with power and not the scribes and Pharisees teaching from the Bible that were correct.

In other words, stop exalting the Bible over God. The Bible is there as a tool to help us come to the Lord. It's not there to replace the Lord. and Its definitely not there to allow us to use our imperfect rationalization of scriptures to act contrary to the Spirit.

If and when, if possible, you ever come to the point of questioning your visions, revelations, dreams, burning bosoms, with total objectivity, which God wants us to exercise at all times, you may, just may be able to see the forest for the trees.

Why would I reinvent the wheel? I questioned whether the revelations I recieved were from God years ago. I tested them years ago. The Lord has proved Himself again and again. Why should I doubt Him simply because you do?

The whole foundations of the LDS church is built upon subjective, experiential personal knowledge/encounters, and the acceptance of a most dubious piece of writing, called the BOM. Also the Journal Of Discourses, and Pearl of Great Price, and other writing of both J.S. Jr., and B.Y., make Scientology seem credible.

The Church of Jesus Christ is built upon revelation and the Spirit of Prophecy, as it has been in every age of mankind. The idea that you can deny such and claim to be of God is rather befuddling if you accept the Scriptures as they speak.

Have you read the Book of Mormon? it's one of the most powerful witnesses that Jesus is the Christ out there! It's a completely independent concurrent witness to those of the Old World by Eye witnesses who saw the living Christ. As is the Pearl of Great Price and the D&C.

The Journal of Discourses, as you should well know, are not considered scriptures. They are at best short hand accounts of selected sermons that were never edited to ensure accuracy and reliable inasmuch as the Spirit indicates.

And btw, you really need to do than make assertions if you want your points considered proven.

Your church meets the complete criteria of a "cult", as it's adherents, don't live by objective truth, but seek the subjective, as dictated by your doctrine.

The Truth's of God are hardly subjective. You just disapprove of learning through the Spirit.

You just don't understand that the H.S. works quietly, subtely, but with power, in the souls of the "saved", not commonly via visions, dreams, etc., but by urgings within the soul that counter the power of sin that is constantly at work against the true Christian's new nature in Christ.

I understand the power of the Holy Spirit completely. You were the one saying you had no clue how to recognize the Spirit, not me.

God has always used visions, dreams, and pure testimony to teach His word. Your protestations otherwise do not demonstrate a flaw with my faith, but with yours.

You get your confirmation from the "feeler"/emotions part of your human makeup, but that is a most unreliable gauge of truth.

I get my confirmation from the Holy Spirit based on the fruits of the Spirit as described by Paul above. The fact that you deny this says much more about your experience with the Spirit than mine.

If you could just take that leap of faith, and resoundingly leap that canyon of basing your belief system on what pops up in your mind, dreams, and "loud" urgings, and really, I mean really let the bible speak to you, rather than let the bible confirm your hoped-for agenda, you would know what I mean.

Your assumptions here are completely false. It is in fact, the Bible that stands as one of the strongest witnesses of Church of Jesus Christ. It was through reading the Bible and through the Holy Spirit that I was taught the power and love of God.

But yet, you reject my witness because I have to be honest with myself and God and proclaim the Book of Mormon as true as the Bible because the Holy Spirit told me it was. And who am I to deny God?

Let God judge between you and me, and grant us both mercy.

The scriptures for thousands of years have been used to promote false belief systems, when it is "used" out of context. The Mormon church has gone one further and minimized the bible's contents, as it pertains to their 1830's era doctrine.

I agree with the first part, you have been providing perfect examples of using the Bible out of context. For example, denying the Doctrine of Diefication and believers partaking of the Divine nature is pretty clear in the Bible as Ive demonstrated and yet you repeatedly deny as false.

You are however, incorrect. The Bible and its contents are not minimized in the leasts. They are enhanced with more of the Word of the Lord.

The J.W.'s have used another tact. With their NWT bible they have actually changed key words to minimize/destroy Christ's divinity, and present Him as a mere created being; Archangel Michael. The Mormon church has also followed similar suit, but making up the notion that Christ was once a mere man, and then become "exalted", yet Jesus told the crowd that was about to stone Him that He was the "I AM"(Alpha to Omega; Begining and Last); forever existent!

What the J.W.s do is neither here nor there. I understand your tactics, you are trying to smear mormonism by associating JWs and Scientology, both of which, in your eyes are discredited. But guilt by associate only works when you are accurately describing those you are associating. I have nothing against JWs. nor do i think you are accurately describing their views. So the tactic is quite useless.

More to the point you are completely ignoring what Mormons actually teach About Christ. For one, you are ignoring the New Testament that clearly teaches that the Son of God became a man, so that men could become the sons of God. We have four Gospels testifying of the condescension of God. That Christ was made mortal.

Yet to you this is false doctrine. Why?

And you also continually ignore the clear and unambiguous teaching in other scriptures of the Church. The Book of Mormon clearly teaches the condescension of God. That Christ became flesh. That He is our Lord and Savior. That He is the Great I Am.

This has been pointed out to you multiple times. Yet you continue to still falsely assert that Mormons deny the Divinity of Christ. Why?

I understand your spirited defense of your church. It is the whole foundation of your being, but true freedom for you and Truthspeaker will be, hopefully when you are able to surmount that deep denial within your soul, that has been programmed into you by your church. God's Word is like food, but it is food for the soul. When the true Christian reads the bible, the H.S. within, agrees with the scripture, as it is agreeing with Itself, namely God is agreeing with "God Breathed" words, that God-inspired men recorded through the centuries.

And who gives you authority to decide who is a true Christian or not? Who ordained you to govern the Kingdom of God?

We do agree with God's inspired records. You are the one who is preaching contrary to it. You preach against revelation. You falsely claim it says that we believe Christ is not the Lord. You deny the clear and unambiguous words of Christ Himself concerning diefication. You deny the fruits of the Spirit.

And yet we are the ones who disagree with the scriptures.... Your conclusions are unfounded and not based in reality.

You know for a fact that the bible does not speak to you, nor feed you, but you need all the "extra" stuff that you church provides, beside your constant personal revelations direct from God, aside from written scripture.

The Bible isnt supposed to speak to me. Nor to feed me. Thats the Lord's job.

We are commanded to live off every word that proceeds forth from the mouth of God. Not the ones we like. But every one.

You walk on very dangerous ground, as again you fullfill the very tenents of cultic belief, but relying on the "subjective" to validate the "objective" part of your being.

I am perfectly confident about the ground I walk on because I trust in the Lord Jesus Christ and not in my own understanding as some here do.

God gave us the capacity to "feel" and or have "emotions" to enhance our human experience in the world, and life, but He never wanted us to rely on that part of our humanity to substantiate truth, and falsehood.

So the converts at Pentecost were wrong for accepting the truth of the Apostles based on their hearts being pricked? The disciples on the road were wrong to recognize the Living Lord when their hearts burned within them? We are not supposed to recognize the fruits of the Spirit the way Paul stated through joy, love, peace etc?

Youre arguments have no basis in the scripure.

Just as our U.S. Constitution is the guide that our Justices are supposed to follow when making decisions, the bible is the ultimate constitution for the Christian.

No, GOD IS.

In a sense the Mormon church is following a similar path to those that were or are called "reconstructionists" or believe that the U.S. Constitution is a code word, "Living, Breathing, Document". I.E. the liberals believe that the U.S. Constitution can be redefined to validate their "subjective" based bent on life, culturally, socially in this country. Yet, Justices like Clarence Thomas, abhor that, and see the Constitution as a document that says what it says, clearly, and is not in need of "redefinition".

We have a living breathing God. We are not limited to what you seek to constrain Him with.

The LDS church basically is taking the bible, and thousands of years of God's might work in this world, and upon mankind, and "redefining" it to the pleasure of their founder's beliefs.

Actually, we simply accept the Bible says what it says.

When God says, that there will be "no other" Gods before Me, that is clearly defined, yet the LDS church says that there was, and still will be many more gods, like Christ, and God the Father. It is a mere act of mankind to reach godhood by obedience to the god before him, so that he/man may perpetuate another godhood.

Paul stated that there were gods and lords many both in heaven and on earth. God Himself declared Himself the God of gods and the Lord of lords. Christ stated that those who believe in the word are gods. Paul also stated that we are joint heirs with Christ and inherit all the things the Father has. John said that when we see Christ we will know Him because we will be like Him. Peter said we are partakers of the Divine nature.

But all these people and God Himself is lying in the Bible, because according to you that no man can become a god. You dislike us because we believe what the Bible actually says on the matter. Believe me Im more than happy to stick with God and what He actually says then rely on you to interpret.

When one is so caught-up in a cult, they can't see the forest for the trees. That is a fact. Some cults are blatantly strange on the outside, and others hide their strange concocted beliefs with a sugar-coated exterior that seems like the norm.

I have no reason to deny that we are strange. Peter stated it clearly in the Bible when He called the Saints a peculiar people. We are. But thats just more evidence that we are who we claim to be.

Even in my own Christian life; years ago, I had to face the fact that I was relying too much on experiential life/feelings to "gauge" my faith or relationship with God. I finally had to face the fact that I was going to live the life existence that needed constant "feeding" of subjective input, in order to substantiate my faith. I was totally going against scripture, and was prepping myself for a really "downer" as a Christian. It was a tough step, but I had to realize that the Christian life was a daily step-by-step process of faith in God's provisions, clearly revealed in the bible.

So you felt you werent following the scriptures and decided to commit yourself more. Then stop denying revelation. Stop denying visions and dreams. Stop fighting against the Spirit. Follow the Doctrine of Christ and exercise faith in Him to repentence and be baptized and recieve the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands.

Yes, I've had my times where I knew that God gave me an urging or a type of communique, because I made sure that it didn't go against His Holy Word, the bible/scriptures.

You cant know the Word without the Spirit. It's the Spirit that proves the Bible true. Not the other way arond. Stop putting your personal understanding the book above the Lord. Let go and trust the Lord and He will teach you things never concieved of by man.

 

[Eightball]

This is an astounding read. Though, I'm not of the Catholic branch of the Christian church, this author is, but presents a very concise, well-researched, and excellent writing on the very fundamental, and weak core of LDS/Mormon doctrine. Regards, Eightballsidepocket

The Gods of the Mormon Church

The Gods of the Mormon Church

George Orwell, in his novel 1984, did biblical/Christian apologists a great favor by coining the term "doublethink," which he defined as "the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them." It’s the most succinct way of describing certain religious beliefs. For an illustration of doublethink one need look no further than the Mormon church’s doctrines about God.

Joseph Smith, Mormonism’s founder, taught the doctrine of a "plurality of gods"—polytheism—as the bedrock belief of his church. He developed this doctrine over a period of years to reflect his belief that not only are there many gods, but they once were mortal men who had developed in righteousness until they had learned enough and merited godhood.

The Mormon church uses the term "eternal progression" for this process, and it refers to godhood as "exaltation." Such euphemisms are used because the idea of men becoming gods is b.asphemous to orthodox Christians. Needless to say, Smith encountered much hostility to these doctrines and so thought it wise to disguise them with unfamiliar terminology.

Although he softened his terms, Smith minced no words in explaining his beliefs. "I will preach on the plurality of gods. I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may see" (King Follett Discourse).

Mormonism’s founder concluded that his flock didn’t understand the nature of God. No mortal entirely does, of course, but this particular group was handicapped, not helped, by the strange theories expounded by Smith.

True to his word, Smith took away the veil of misunderstanding, only to replace it with a monolithic wall of doublethink. After all, to teach that the all-sovereign God, the infinite and supreme being, the Creator and Master of the universe, is merely an exalted man is a fine example of what Orwell had in mind.

Progressive Revelation To Smith

In 1844, shortly before his death in a gunbattle at a jail in Carthage, Illinois, Joseph Smith delivered a sermon at the funeral of a Mormon named King Follett. The King Follett Discourse has become a key source for the Mormon church’s beliefs on polytheism and eternal progression. It’s short and can be purchased at any LDS bookstore for about a dollar. You can read it in half an hour.

To appreciate the extent of Smith’s departure from traditional Christian thought, it’s important to realize that his doctrines weren’t "revealed" to his church all at once or in their present state. From his first vision in 1820 until his death in 1844, Joseph Smith crafted and modified his doctrines, often altering them so drastically that they became something else entirely as years passed.

Early in his career as "prophet, seer, and revelator" of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, Smith wrote the Book of Mormon, which he claimed to be the "fullness of the everlasting gospel." In it are passages that proclaim there is only one God and that God can’t change.

The next time you speak with Mormon missionaries, cite these verses:

"I know that God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity" (Moroni 8:18).

"For do we not read that God is the same yesterday, today and forever, and in him there is no variableness, neither shadow of changing? And now, if ye have imagined up unto yourselves a god who doth vary, and in whom there is shadow of changing, then ye have imagined up unto yourselves a god who is not a God of miracles" (Mormon 9:9-10).

It’s hard to be more explicit than that. In his early years Smith did not believe in the "law of eternal progression." He had an orthodox understanding of God’s immutable nature. But at some point in his theological odyssey, he veered into the land of doublethink.

Contradictory Views



Remember, Smith maintained the inspiration and truth of the Book of Mormon at the same time he believed the following: "God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret. If the veil were rent today, and the great God who upholds all worlds and all things by his power, was to make himself visible—I say, if you were to see him today, you would see him like a man in form—like yourselves in all the person, image, and very form as a man; for Adam was created in the very fashion, image, and likeness of God, and received instruction from, and walked, talked and conversed with him, as one man talks and communes with another" (King Follett Discourse).

This is one of Smith’s more spectacular displays of doublethink. Fourteen years after penning the Book of Mormon, he contradicts his earlier writings with this sermon—but he doesn’t throw aside his earlier teaching. Both are to be accepted.

The Missionary’s "Testimony"

If you question a Mormon missionary, he’ll be familiar with the King Follett Discourse (or should be), and he’ll have a "testimony" about the truth of the doctrine of eternal progression. If you have both the Discourse and the Book of Mormon on hand, read these passages to the missionary. Watch his reaction and press for an explanation. Ask him how it’s possible to hold both positions. Mormons revere Joseph Smith as the highest authority in their church. What he said is scripture, and they’re stuck when it comes to this topic. These two teachings from the prophet obviously don’t agree with each other. This is where doublethink kicks in. If Mormons couldn’t believe two contradictory doctrines at once, they’d be forced to throw up their hands in bewilderment.

They can’t believe that God is at once immutable and changing, that from all eternity he was as he now is, yet he evolved from a mere man. To Mormons this theological contradiction poses no problem because they don’t think through the ramifications of such a position. Your job as an apologist is to show them there is a problem and then to offer a solution to it.

It’s not enough to say God is eternal and to leave it at that. We need to take his infinite perfection into account. This is where the Mormons falter. They believe that although God is perfect now, he wasn’t always so. Once he was imperfect, as a mortal, and he had to arrive at perfection through his own labor. (You might call it a sort of "hyper-Pelagianism.")

Jesus Christ

According to Mormon teaching, at one point in the eternities past, this man-become-God, or "Heavenly Father," begat the spirit body of his first son. Together with his heavenly wife, the Father raised his son in the council of the gods.

Before the creation of this world, Jesus Christ presented to his father a plan of salvation which would enable the billions of future human beings the opportunity of passing through mortality and returning to heaven, there to become gods of their own worlds. At the same time, another son of the Heavenly Father and brother of Christ offered a competing plan. When Christ’s was chosen, the rejected Lucifer led a rebellion of one-third of the population of the heavens and was cast out.

In time, Mormons believe, the Heavenly Father came to earth and had physical, sexual intercourse with the Virgin Mary. Rejecting both the testimony of Scripture (Luke 1:34-35) and the constant teaching of the Christian Church, Mormons believe Christ was conceived by the Father, and not by the Holy Spirit. (Journal of Discourses 2:268.)

Moreover, Mormons teach that Christ is a secondary, inferior god. He does not exist from all eternity. (Nor, for that matter, does his Father.) He was first made by a union of his heavenly parents. After having been reared and taught in the heavens, he achieved a certain divine stature. Through carnal relations with her Heavenly Father, the Virgin became pregnant with this lesser god.

Mormons now believe that Christ’s divinity is virtually equal to that of his Father’s. As we have seen, this is a compromised godhood: Jesus Christ merely joins the end of a long line of gods who have preceded him, an infinite "regression" of divine beings whose origin Mormons cannot explain. (Nor, for that matter, can they explain its end, as we will see when we discuss the doctrine of men becoming gods.)

The Holy Ghost

The LDS church teaches that all men must pass through mortality in human bodies before they can reach godhood. Yet their third, separate god, called the Holy Ghost, has not yet received a mortal body, even though he is considered to be another god. Mormon theology typically does not address this contradiction.

However, that’s not to say that the Holy Ghost is without any body. In fact, he has a "spiritual body," in the actual shape of a man, with head, torso, and limbs. He can be in only one place at once (in this he’s no different from his two superiors in the Mormon "Godhead.")

Though to the Holy Ghost is now ascribed the power of each Mormon’s individual "testimony" or feeling concerning the truth of Mormon doctrines, he was not always so honored. In fact, Joseph Smith originally acknowledged only two divine personages, referring to the Holy Ghost merely as the "mind" of the two. (Lectures on Faith, 48-49.)

Latter-Day Saints do not believe that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are the only three gods there are. Rather, they believe in (though do not worship) a "plurality" of gods, gods without number, each one ruling his own creation. Thus, the three separate gods who rule our universe are finite in power—they sustain and govern only a tiny portion of all that exists.

The other gods have either preceded or followed the Heavenly Father who organized our world. In fact, men living today on this planet will one day become gods of their own universes. As such, they will mate with heavenly wives, beget spirit children, populate new worlds, and receive the worship and obedience we are now expected to give to our particular, current God.

Smith—And All Men—To Be Gods

The Mormon founder taught that faithful Mormon men can ascend to divinity. In the King Follett Discourse, Joseph Smith said, "My Father worked out his kingdom with fear and trembling, and I must do the same. And when I get to my kingdom [godhood], I shall present it to my Father, so that he may obtain kingdom upon kingdom, and it will exalt him in glory. He will then take a higher exaltation, and I will take his place, and thereby become exalted myself."

In any discussion with a Mormon about Mormonism’s conflicting teachings on the nature of God, you have to cut away the camouflage. You have to get to the central facts. It’s simple, really. Just show them how the Book of Mormon conflicts with Smith’s later teachings. If he was right about God, when was he right? Take your pick, but you can’t pick both, and neither can a Mormon, except if he uses doublethink. If a Mormon chooses either teaching as correct and admits the other must be wrong, Smith’s credibility as a prophet collapses.

Don’t Aim to Win an Argument

Be forewarned that your first discussion about the nature of God won’t produce any visible change in your Mormon acquaintance. He’s unlikely to admit the cogency and simplicity of your argument. He’s probably working in good faith, and he’s sincere in his beliefs. But psychologically you’re at a disadvantage, since he wants to maintain his faith as he’s known it. Be patient as you help him see these theological "black holes."

Keep in mind your ultimate goal isn’t to win an argument, but to win a soul for Christ. What the Biblical apologist offers isn’t just sound logic, or a preponderance of Bible quotations, or even the blunders Joseph Smith made. No, what he offers is the truth of the Christian/biblical faith.

But you do need sound logic, buttressed by thorough homework, and you need patience that’s sustained by charity. Above all, you need to pray that God will use your efforts to prepare your acquaintance’s soul for the gift of faith. Doublethink isn’t invincible. It’s just an intellectual impediment, and it can be overcome.

You need to do some homework first, of course. You need a solid understanding of God’s nature. The bible will suffice.

You should also have on hand, a copy of the Book of Mormon and of the King Follett Discourse. If you have your references already marked in these books, you’ll be ready the next time a Mormon missionary comes to your door.

 

[Avatar4321]

This is exactly why people get frustrated talking with you. You completely ignore conversastion and simply cut and paste another page with the same exact things that have been answered for the past nearly 100 pages of text. It gets tiring.

You really are never going to convince people youre correct by ignoring them and talking down to them. It just doesnt work that way.

 

[We Are They]

Avatar, can your god's planet be seen through the hubble telescope? What's it called?

 

[Truthspeaker]

Avatar, can your god's planet be seen through the hubble telescope? What's it called?

I'm sure it's quite out of reach of the meager power of the Hubble. space being so big, it's harder to find a needle in an ocean than to find Kolob with the Hubble.

 

[We Are They]

Avatar, can your god's planet be seen through the hubble telescope? What's it called?

I'm sure it's quite out of reach of the meager power of the Hubble. space being so big, it's harder to find a needle in an ocean than to find Kolob with the Hubble.

Hubble can see back to the beginning of time, so your fake planet is either there or it isn't, make up your mind.

 

[Truthspeaker]

Avatar, can your god's planet be seen through the hubble telescope? What's it called?

I'm sure it's quite out of reach of the meager power of the Hubble. space being so big, it's harder to find a needle in an ocean than to find Kolob with the Hubble.

Hubble can see back to the beginning of time, so your fake planet is either there or it isn't, make up your mind.

hmmmm.... how to answer that statement.....

No... the hubble cannot see back in time. The planet is there but the Universe is a slightly bigger pond than you think it is. Especially since it's ever expanding. Your saying because you don't hear the tree fall in the forest, that it didn't fall and maybe didn't exist. Just as well would be to think that you don't exist because you have socratically argued away your own existence.

Anywhoooo....
Like I've said before. Again... I am only here to answer questions about my religion and not to try and disprove other religions, including the religion of irreligion.

 

[Eightball]

I'm sure it's quite out of reach of the meager power of the Hubble. space being so big, it's harder to find a needle in an ocean than to find Kolob with the Hubble.

Hubble can see back to the beginning of time, so your fake planet is either there or it isn't, make up your mind.

hmmmm.... how to answer that statement.....

No... the hubble cannot see back in time. The planet is there but the Universe is a slightly bigger pond than you think it is. Especially since it's ever expanding. Your saying because you don't hear the tree fall in the forest, that it didn't fall and maybe didn't exist. Just as well would be to think that you don't exist because you have socratically argued away your own existence.

Anywhoooo....
Like I've said before. Again... I am only here to answer questions about my religion and not to try and disprove other religions, including the religion of irreligion.

The Hubble as well as the naked eye can see "back in time/history" as the stars you see in the sky are pictures or images of that star that are coming at the speed of light, but have been traveling for a few to many years to reach our planet.

If a star is 4 1/2 light years away, then the image of that star that you see on a clear night with your eyes started traveling 4 1/2 years ago.

I.E. If that star blew up right at this moment, you wouldn't see that blowing-up/happening for another 4 1/2 years.

So, yes indeed, the Hubble as well as the naked eye when viewing the universe is seeing/viewing what already happened or the past, or history.
*******
As for these planets that Joseph Smith Jr. dreamed up as part of his neat little scam, or psychosis, they will never be found, as they only exist in fable/fiction.

Sadly millions of human earthlings have bought into this fable/religion, and J.S. Jr. and B. Y. will face a very sad, and scarey judgement for this, unless they repented and accepted the biblical Jesus as their Savior and Lord shortly before their deaths.
******

 

[Avatar4321]

The Hubble as well as the naked eye can see "back in time/history" as the stars you see in the sky are pictures or images of that star that are coming at the speed of light, but have been traveling for a few to many years to reach our planet.

If a star is 4 1/2 light years away, then the image of that star that you see on a clear night with your eyes started traveling 4 1/2 years ago.

I.E. If that star blew up right at this moment, you wouldn't see that blowing-up/happening for another 4 1/2 years.

So, yes indeed, the Hubble as well as the naked eye when viewing the universe is seeing/viewing what already happened or the past, or history.
*******
As for these planets that Joseph Smith Jr. dreamed up as part of his neat little scam, or psychosis, they will never be found, as they only exist in fable/fiction.

Sadly millions of human earthlings have bought into this fable/religion, and J.S. Jr. and B. Y. will face a very sad, and scarey judgement for this, unless they repented and accepted the biblical Jesus as their Savior and Lord shortly before their deaths.
******

While I dont really care about the hubble issue, it can't see back in time. It simply takes time to see the information thats already happened.

What that has to do with mormonism is certainly unknown since kolob is an analogy for Jesus Christ and that's about all we know. If it exists outside analogy, we have no clue whether its visible from earth. So pointing it out in the sky is a rather pointless endevour and can neither prove nor disprove the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Not surprising that it's not the doctrine that's under attack. The truth is difficult to argue against.

As for your plates comment. If you were informed, and I know you are since I've told you, youd know no one dreamed anything up. There are over 12 witnesses. Interestingly enough the same number called specifically to testify of the resurrection of Jesus. If we are supposed to disbelieve the eye witnesses of the Book of Mormon because the plates are reserved to God, we would have to disbelieve the resurrection of Christ because Christ was kept from the world at large.

For some reason, I dont think you are proposing that we through out the testimonies of the Apostles simply because Christ hasnt physically appeared to the world. Although, I am certain the Adversary would love people to follow your similiar logic.

The truthfulness of the Book of Mormon can be determined the same way we can determine the truthfulness of the Resurrection of Christ: The powerful witness of the Holy Ghost.

It's a shame so few people will listen to the Holy Ghost, or seek Him out. Even among believers, they are too content to rely on their understanding of the scriptures like the pharisees did. Unfortunately, putting a stake up and saying God can only do certain things endangers our Eternal welfare. Trying to rely on our own understanding and not on the Spirit is a dangerous dangerous path. It stops us from learning and becoming like God.

 

[hoMohammed]

mormons are the devil's disciples. Only Islam is the one true religion and path towards god. Jesus was a knobhead, so it follows that you're all knobheads too for following that liar.

 

[Eightball]

mormons are the devil's disciples. Only Islam is the one true religion and path towards god. Jesus was a knobhead, so it follows that you're all knobheads too for following that liar.

Well, you just insulted Mohammed himself, as he proclaimed in his writings that Jesus was a prophet of Allah, and in very good standing.

The Quran reveals nothing but respect for Jesus within it's pages.

You, are a very ignorant of your own religion's beliefs, and have made a fool of yourself before your fellow Muslims.

When I refer to Jesus, it is the Jesus of the bible, not the concoctions of Mormon founder, Joseph Smith Jr..

 

[Truthspeaker]

98 percent well spoken. Funny that you speak better of Mohammed than you do of Joseph Smith, a man who stated that "It is by Christ, through Christ and of Christ we are saved."
You seem to have more problems with such a man, than with prophets of a completely un-Christian religion. Interesting.

 

[Truthspeaker]

mormons are the devil's disciples. Only Islam is the one true religion and path towards god. Jesus was a knobhead, so it follows that you're all knobheads too for following that liar.

Ok friend. by the way would you please explain to us heathens exactly what a "knobhead" is. Perhaps if I were more "enlightened" by your religions teachings, then I would know better how to insult my religious foes.

 

[N4mddissent]

When I refer to Jesus, it is the Jesus of the bible, not the concoctions of Mormon founder, Joseph Smith Jr

The Jesus who was the concoction of which of the biblical writers? And why is their concoction of Jesus better than Smith's concoction of Jesus?

 

[Truthspeaker]

When I refer to Jesus, it is the Jesus of the bible, not the concoctions of Mormon founder, Joseph Smith Jr

The Jesus who was the concoction of which of the biblical writers? And why is their concoction of Jesus better than Smith's concoction of Jesus?

Quite a legitimate point. From my standpoint they are both claiming the same things. That Jesus is the savior of mankind. However, the sad thing is that both are no longer alive to clarify to some people that they are both on the same page. Individual interpretations will always hold back the general populous. How valuable would it be to get a chance to talk to Joseph Smith today and any of the Biblical authors for just 5 minutes?

 

[Avatar4321]

The Jesus who was the concoction of which of the biblical writers? And why is their concoction of Jesus better than Smith's concoction of Jesus?

If the people complaining knew what they were talking about, they would realize that their concoctions are identical.

 

[Arawyn]

The Jesus who was the concoction of which of the biblical writers? And why is their concoction of Jesus better than Smith's concoction of Jesus?

If the people complaining knew what they were talking about, they would realize that their concoctions are identical.

Exactly.

 

[Truthspeaker]

The Jesus who was the concoction of which of the biblical writers? And why is their concoction of Jesus better than Smith's concoction of Jesus?

If the people complaining knew what they were talking about, they would realize that their concoctions are identical.

Exactly.

I am instantly in love with you. Lord of the Rings is my favorite book!

 

[Arawyn]

If the people complaining knew what they were talking about, they would realize that their concoctions are identical.

Exactly.

I am instantly in love with you. Lord of the Rings is my favorite book!

Hahahaha, what's not to love...

Seriously, I've heard this argument towards our faith for years. That our Jesus is somehow different from their Jesus and it just isn't true. I believe we just have a richer understanding.