Why are some Apostate Mormons ‘re-instated’ into the Church after their death and promised the Celestial Kingdom if all are to be judged according to their works in this life?
There have been many, some murderers, but I would like to focus on one man: an Apostle called by Joseph Smith, who was later ex-communicated for apostasy. After this man died, he was ‘restored’ to all his former blessings and one descendant was told by a prophet they would be with his family in the afterlife if they (the living family members) stayed worthy and that is only available in the Highest Degree of Glory in the Celestial Kingdom. This man was Amasa Lyman.
Lyman was a special counselor to Joseph Smith and was ordained an apostle by Brigham Young. He was married to Christina Partridge, (Daughter of Edward Partridge, First Presiding Bishop of the Church) and had other plural wives. Lyman was ordained an Apostle to replace Orson Pratt, but when Pratt repented and was restored, Lyman was bumped out of the Quorum.
Lyman followed Brigham Young to Utah, but began to believe in spiritualism and to deny the Atonement of Christ. Excerpts of a sermon given in 1859 show he believed that:
[Jesus] “was a good man.” He acknowledged that Jesus “died for the world,” but added, “and what man that ever died for the truth that he died for, did not die for the world? … Have we found redemption through them? … We may talk of men being redeemed by the efficacy of [Christ’s] blood; but the truth is that that blood had no efficacy to wash away our sins. That must depend upon our own action.” – JOD:7:297-299
Stripped of his Apostleship in 1867, he was finally excommunicated in 1870 after joining the “New Movement,” which was organized to oppose the political and economic control of Brigham Young in Utah. New Movement leaders [The Godbeites], who embraced spiritualism, named Lyman President of their Church of Zion.
Caroline left Amasa after this and was sealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith. As her daughter later recorded:
[she] “felt she must have the protection and the security of the Priesthood in her and her children’s lives. … Evidently in her dire circumstances she felt that the Prophet was the only secure anchor to be sealed to.” (source below)
After Lyman’s death and at Caroline’s funeral in 1908, Francis M. Lyman (President of the Quorum of the Twelve) told
“President [Joseph F.] Smith of my desire to do something for father. Told him of my dreams and my Sister Martha’s, how father had appeared to us and pied his cause. How President Snow told me that there was no doubt but that he could come out all right in the end.” (source below)
A short time later Francis M. told his son Richard (who later became another Apostle),
“This is one of the most important and happiest days of my life. In the temple today, President Joseph F. Smith placed his hands on my head, and by proxy restored my father to all his former blessings, authority and power.” (see, Loretta L. Hefner, “From Apostle to Apostate: The Personal Struggle of Amasa Mason Lyman,” in Mormon Mavericks, John Sillito and Susan Staker (eds.), Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2002.) quoted from: http://www.signaturebookslibrary.org/Mormons/amasa_lyman.htm#lyman
“President Smith said during his talk that he was sure that Amasa Lyman had paid the penalty for his wrong doing & would have all his wives and children who were worthy in eternity. He also said that the celestial order of marriage, or polygamy could never have been carried out successfully had it not been for the Partridge sisters.” http://www.finarv.org/history/histcepl.htm
How can one pay the penalty for wrong doing after one has already died? Is President Smith saying that he had the power to judge Amasa Lyman?
Bruce R. McConkie states this about “Restoration of Former Blessings”:
“Temple and priesthood blessings, as well as all others pertaining to the Church, are lost upon excommunication. In the event of repentance and subsequent rebaptism, all or part of these former blessings — those pertaining to the priesthood, to endowments, and to sealings — may be restored by a member of the Council of the Twelve upon authorization of the President of the Church.” -Mormon Doctrine:634
But how does one ‘repent’ if one is dead? McConkie is strangely silent on this question. Spencer Kimball, after quoting D&C 132, says in The Miracle of Forgiveness that this life is all you get:
“’For strait is the gate, and narrow the way that leadeth unto the exaltation and continuation of the lives, and few there be that find it, because you receive me not in the world neither do ye know me.
“‘But if ye receive me in the world, then shall ye know me, and shall receive your exaltation; that where I am ye shall be also.
“‘This is eternal lives-to know the only wise and true God, and Jesus Christ, whom he hath sent. I am he. Receive ye, therefore, my law.
“‘Broad is the gate, and wide the way that leadeth to the deaths; and many there are that go in thereat, because they receive me not, neither do they abide in my law.’ -D&C 132:22-25. (Italics his, bold mine)
“How impressive the Lord makes the time element! Why should he so emphasize it over and over if there were no significance to it? Would these phrases in the world and out of the world mean that one could go haphazardly through the years of mortality ‘eating, drinking, and being merry,’ ignoring all the commandments and failing to keep his life clean and still receive the blessings?” -MOF: Chapter 1, page 12 (bold mine)
Kimball is clearly in line with the Book of Mormon on this point. Alma 32:34 says:
“For behold, this life is the time for men to prepare to meet God; yea, behold the day of this life is the day for men to perform their labors.”
Joseph Smith said this regarding Apostates:
“All sins shall be forgiven, except the sin against the Holy Ghost; for Jesus will save all except the sons of perdition. What must a man do to commit the unpardonable sin? He must receive the Holy Ghost, have the heavens opened unto him, and know God, and then sin against him. After a man has sinned against the Holy Ghost, there is no repentance for him. He has got to say that the sun does not shine while he sees it; he has got to deny Jesus Christ when the heavens have been opened unto him, and to deny the plan of salvation with his eyes open to the truth of it; and from that time he begins to be an enemy. This is the case with many apostates of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. When a man begins to be an enemy to this work, he hunts me, he seeks to kill me, and never ceases to thirst for my blood. He gets the spirit of the devil—the same spirit that they had who crucified the Lord of Life—the same spirit that sins against the Holy Ghost. You cannot save such persons; you cannot bring them to repentance; they make open war, like the devil, and awful is the consequence.” -Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith:358 (bold mine)
Isn’t this just what Amasa Lyman did, who was an Apostle, a special witness to Jesus Christ? Why then, are these Restoration of Blessings performed? How can one Prophet say that an Apostate “had paid the penalty for his wrong doing & would have all his wives and children who were worthy in eternity,” while another says “You cannot save such persons; you cannot bring them to repentance”? Do the Mormon Prophets have the power to ‘grant dispensations’ and set aside the sins committed in this life like the Catholic Pope, or forgive sins like the Catholic Priests? Are they using their influence to ‘favor’ certain individuals and return their blessings?
Spencer Kimball intimated that there is such power in the Church and supported his understanding with a lengthy quote from J. Reuben Clark. At that time he was first counselor in the LDS First Presidency, and he said in part:
“There is in the Church… the power to remit sins, but I do not believe it resides in the bishops. That is a power that must be exercised under the proper authority of the priesthood and by those who hold the keys that pertain to that function.” -MOF:Chapter 21, page 333 (ellipsis in the original)
But do they have the power to do this after one is dead? How are these claims of restoration of blessings and forgiveness of sins after death justified in the light of Hebrews 9:27, John 14:6, Isaiah 53:12, Hebrews 7:25, & 1st Timothy 2:5?
Good job grindael,
But here’s the deal, Mormonism can be whatever it wants to be at any particular moment. It’s called progress. In Mormonism everything is subject to update. That’s what makes it so exciting to its members. Their prophet is in constant contact with the Mormon god who is also making progress. It’s like new and improved religion.
These people don’t care about being consistent. That’s why they can come up with the most unbelievable explanations for any number of things and put the Mormon tag line on it “therefore the church is true.” Murder is unforgivable? Well let’s revisit that. Let’s just walk that back a little.
The arrogance of Mormon leadership, past and present knows no bounds.
The bottom line with Mormons is that the (Mormon)church is true. Therefore any thing that the leadership/church does is true. It doesn’t have to make sense, and it frequently doesn’t. To give-up that belief, is the end of Mormonism for the member. The church is perfect; the people aren’t but the church is goes the old Mormon adage. We Christians don’t think like Mormons. We actually process information in a completely different manner. We don’t have the Mormon “church is true” millstone wrapped around our necks. So we can evaluate information in a totally free manner. We see time and again where Mormons have to “eat it” when it comes to their religion. Once a Mormon starts questioning it’s game over.
Grindael,
You asked the question: ” How are these claims
of revelation of blessings and forgiveness of
sin after death justified in the light of…..”
The answer is that those scriptures you listed
are all from dead Apostles.Today there are among
us living Apostles who receive personal insight
from God on spiritual matters such as this.
These revelations of “new light” take priority
over what any dead Apostle( or prophet) provides.
We need not worry about being led astray thru
this arrangement.
Make sense?
No wonder we need Joseph Smith to help judge. How could god ever keep straight the different rules that applied to the different people?
There is a real problem when people base their “witness” or “testimony” on a belief that God spoke to them. This is from a guy (me) who is a full Gospel believer that doesn’t confine the miraculous work of the Holy Spirit to the Book of Acts. If there is one thing more abused than revelation from God, I don’t know what it is.
Mormons are in free-fall mode when it comes to revelation, personal or that of their faux prophets. But in Mormonism, once a person signs on to the program and gives a testimony of the BoM, all questioning must stop. All contrary thoughts regarding the truthfulness of the BoM, Joseph Smith, the current prophet or the Mormon church are said to be Satan pulling the Mormon away from the true church.
That’s a total manipulation and designed to keep the Mormon locked into the system. So things can change on a daily basis in Mormonism whether trivial matters or those of fundamental importance. That’s why blacks are out and than in the priesthood. That’s why sacred and eternal rituals get changed. That’s why the intro to the BoM gets changed and the gospel principle that once assumed that the current head boys actually have seen Jesus now becomes a mere knowing or testimony of sorts. Polygamy used to be necessary to get to the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom and that goes away under societal pressure.
It’s all OK of course because the church is “true”. It’d be funny if it weren’t so sad.
I appreciate what you’re doing here, grindael, by inviting people to look more closely at the historical facts of Mormonism. People should be aware of this sort of thing. I wonder though if in addition to analyzing Mormon historical figures you could run a series of posts about Protestant historical figures.
I don’t say this to excuse the wretched things that have surfaced from Mormon leaders, but to suggest that when you get down to it, all organizations have got some pretty ugly falsehoods embedded in their history.
Protestants, like Mormons, owe a great debt to a few human beings, “Protestant prophets,” if you will. These are generally terrific men: Martin Luther, John Calvin, William Tyndale, Jonathan Edwards, Roger Williams, etc. Even now most of the non-denominational churches are being heavily influenced by men like Rick Warren, Joel Osteen, or Ted Haggard. American protestants all owe something to the influence and work of these men.
While I’ve got respect for the preachers I’ve listed above (okay, maybe not quite as much for Haggard), I would guess that if you started digging you’d find some corruption on their bones. Perhaps some of them would look pretty clean next to Amasa Lyman, perhaps some would look a little worse.
This is just to say that if you’re going to play the game of criticism you should play fair: compare the worst of Mormon history with the worst of Protestant history. Don’t pretend that Protestantism came ex nihilo, when it came through inspired but flawed mortal men just like the Mormon church did.
What you might find, if you analyzed Protestant flaws alongside Mormon flaws, is that we have more in common than either of us thought.
God bless.
some terrific points grindael and Mike. you too falcon 🙂
Grindael,
Falcon is right. My post was “tongue and cheek”.
I thought your rebuttal was right on the money.
Your research shows again that Mormon leaders
are not reliable to interpret the Word of God.
As I read this thread it kind of reminded me of
the episode with John D. Lee.He was executed for
his role in the murder of immigrants at mountain
Meadows, yet quietly some 80 years later his
former priesthood blessings were “restored” to
him. Do you see similarity between him and
Amasa Lyman?
Mike,
Can I get your e-mail? [email protected]
Grindael,
For the simple purpose of defending somebody who is being misrepresented I will comment.
You are off the mark in equating Amasa Lyman with a son of perdition. Personal Apostasy does not necessarily warrant such a designation. Leaving the church does not make a person a son of perdition (thankfully for you– ha!ha!- I am joking).
Joseph said a man must know Christ and “have the heavens open unto them” and then fully turn against and fight the truth. What does it mean to “have the heavens open” unto a person? What does it mean to fully turn against the truth?
Performing baptisms for Lyman after his death is really not an issue- we do it for all people that have died who don’t have those ordinances. (People have ridiculously claimed that under “our system” Hitler will be in the Celestial Kingdom because ordinances have been performed for him).
We do not believe that everybody that has ordinances performed for them will go to the Celestial Kingdom. We believe that the ordinances must be performed for every person so that they can fully account for their choices and choose for themselves. It places all people on equal grounds. It doesn’t ensure entrance into the Celestial Kingdom. The rebaptism of John Lee doesn’t guarantee anything, MikeR.
The issue with Lyman is whether he could be forgiven of his personal apostasy after his death. I do not claim to know how to judge such an individual. Once again, I am relieved that Christ is the ultimate judge.
I do find it interesting and will point out the fact that a person who denies the divinity of Christ and the saving role of His atonement is not in agreement with the doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Bravo- you are correct in such a conclusion and statement.
By the way, didn’t Christ tell His apostles “ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
Jim,
How can you tell me I’m misrepresenting when you obviously don’t know what you are talking about?
Perhaps you did not read the quote by Smith close enough, or the other quotes:
Smith is not saying one or two, or even a few: he is saying MANY. (And I did not say ‘everyone’ who had the ordinances performed would go to the Celestial Kingdom) Not everyone in the Church has the ear of the current Prophet … it depends upon your standing & influence. (Look how many family members get high posts in the Church & you don’t even want me to go into the past, it was MUCH worse, like B. Young ordaining his son an apostle at the age of 12.)
And what exactly do Mormons claim an Apostle is? Now I’m not talking about the watered-down versions of the Apostles today. I’m talking about what the EARLY CHURCH designated Apostles to be. If you study your Church History, you will find that it was an altogether different Church than it is today. But let’s explore what an Apostle is SUPPOSED to be according to Oliver Cowdery, who McConkie thought important enough to quote in his book the Promised Messiah:
Has this changed? Amasa Lyman was an Apostle to Jesus Christ wasn’t he? But that is not the case these days, they just talk about stuff & agree and have a ‘burning in the bosom’ and that is all there is to Latter-day Revelation today. But in the EARLY CHURCH (The REAL Mormonism) it all tied in with the doctrine of having your calling and election made sure, ( 2nd Anointing) which Smith states is this:
It was the belief in the Early Mormon Church that these men had this experience as part of the qualification of their calling to an apostle
If they have a perfect knowledge of the mysteries of the kingdom of God, then why would they teach doctrines that were not in harmony with what God revealed to them? Why did Lyman teach Jesus was just a man? If he was an Apostle and could never fall, why did he? Because it is all a lie.
McConkie goes on to say:
And then, he concludes with this: “All of the elders in the kingdom are expected to live the law as strictly as do the members of the Council of the Twelve, and if they do so live, the same blessings will come to them that flow to apostles and prophets.”
If this is the case, we should have thousands of Mormons who have seen Jesus proclaiming it from the rooftops. They should be able to answer any question of the kingdom with perfect knowledge and clarity. The burning in the bosom would not be necessary to sustain you for your whole life, why you have the obligation and the means to see Jesus face to face, just like all the apostles do. Why is it not one Mormon testifies to this? When I left the church, I was not told by anyone, but hey you can’t leave, I’ve SEEN Jesus, and you can too! MANY of the earlier saints professed this, but the modern Mormon church is strangely silent as they backpedal and backpedal.
Here is McConkie again:
No Mormon I know can or will profess this. Oh by golly, it’s tooooo sacred. We don’t want to go there. Paul had no problem proclaiming Christ and it showed in his life. That is what a ‘witness’ to Jesus is. A WITNESS. I HAVE SEEN HIM AND HE LIVES. Not ‘I know Jesus is the Christ.’ Doggerel learned in Sacrament meetings from childhood on up. Amasa Lyman is a typical example of a Mormon Apostle. Confused and in the dark. Then when he leaves the Church, to placate his relatives (son & grandson were Apostles) they ‘restore’ his blessings and guarantee him the Highest Degree of the Celestial Kingdom.
JonBlogden
Thanks for the comments.
There is a BIG difference between those men you mentioned and the Mormon Prophets and Apostles. Those men never claimed to be ‘spokesman for God’ in the sense that Mormons do, and they never claimed a phony ‘Priesthood’ and that only they had the authority to baptize, etc. They had their problems, to be sure. But they did not teach God was Adam, God was a man who once lived on a world and was a sinner and who still progresses in knowledge. BIG difference.
JonBlogden,
One of the men you mentioned, I don’t think Joseph Smith thought he was terrific. The theological inheritors (Presbyterians) of John Calvin get special attention by the Mormon prophet Joseph Smith. In the Mormon Scripture Joseph Smith – History, Smith says that: “I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.””
An ABOMINATION, all corrupt – not exactly terrific. Interesting that the creeds (basically a distillation of Christian doctrine from Scripture) are said to be an abomination.
The Presbyterians, whose theology comes from John Calvin and John Knox were singled out as false – and those who had the great inheritance of this Christ centered theology were said to be propagating an abomination and most likely in league with the Adversary, Satan:
Joesph Smith History: ““I have learned for myself that Presbyterianism is not true.” It seems as though the adversary was aware, at a very early period of my life, that I was destined to prove a disturber and an annoyer of his kingdom; else why should the powers of darkness combine against me? Why the opposition and persecution that arose against me, almost in my infancy?”
I think you need to take up your argument with Joesph Smith on whether the reformers were terrific men. He thinks they propagated creeds that are an abomination, and those that inherited the cross centered theology are false and possibly working for Satan.
No Christian thinks John Calvin or Martin Luther were prophets. No one. If error is found in their theology, no one thinks they were writing Scripture. On the other hand, the Mormon ‘prophets’ are stuck with their falsehoods.
jonblogden commented
…what, like original sin and total depravity. In other words, we all have an innate tendency to introduce the stuffing up of things even when there is no external cause to do so; and even in the most noblest and purest of our actions there is the shadow of self and evil.
So, if we all share these very human traits, what hope is there? Obviously, we can’t just “try harder”, because we have already tried and failed, personally and corporately.
What we need is a direct intervention from God Himself; something that’s not initiated by us, because what we initiate is always tainted by sin; something that starts “outside” of our imprisonment because we’re locked in; something that comes into our humanity, absorbs its evil and overcomes, bringing us into a new life in a new creation.
(Romans 7:24-26)
This is the message that the Christian Church has proclaimed from the start, and its the message that Joseph Smith and his prophets rejected.
Yes, we share a common humanity and a common need for a savior. His name is Jesus.
The problem with the Mormon prophets is that they never met Him. If they had, they would not have tolerated the equivocations and falsehoods that permeate modern Mormonism.
Here is where some get confused, and why “Restoration of Blessings” after death is simply a misuse of the so-called ‘sealing power’. What exactly are the qualifications to have this ordinance done? Some Apostles and Prophets have spoken on it (if you believe them), Mormons seem to pick and choose what statements from their leaders they wish to believe.
First you have the Hebrews Scripture:
Then there are the statement by Spencer Kimball who is adamant about this life is all you get, so there are no “second chances”. He makes that clear with the quote from Alma. Restoration of Blessings is a second chance. But there are qualifications to having it done, and that is why those who perform it by proxy for those already dead are in error. Consider this statement made by M. Russell Ballard:
These statements make it clear that repentence is a process that must be accomplish in this life. To illustrate the point of exactly why the Ordinance was done for Lyman, a little history might be appropriate.
Then after Lyman died, Martha Lyman Roper, eldest daughter of Amasa and Caroline Lyman, had a “manifestation or dream wherein her father was calling for help. When she heard and saw him she had the impulse to run and embrace him but he warned her to beware and pointed out a great yawning chasm between them, over which she couldn’t go to him nor he to her. He requested Martha to appeal to his son, Marion, to help him for he was the only one in a position to do so. He also told her that he was very weary and tired of his black clothes and that he did so want to be with his family, his wives and his children whom he loved and longed for.”
So, relating this dream to Joseph F. Smith, he performed the Ordinance of ‘Restoration of Blessings” upon Lyman’s son, Apostle Francis Lyman, RESTORING Lyman to all his former blessings, AUTHORITY AND POWER. It seems that this family was all caught up in necromancy, and the prophet of the Church went right along with it. How could Lyman fulfill this part of the repentance process, when he was DEAD:
The Church Handbook of Instructions outlines the procedure for ‘Restoration of Blessings’ and there is no mention of performing the ordinance after death:
Lyman could have no ‘reformation of life’, his time was passed. How could he be ‘interviewed and found worthy’ when he was dead? So why perform the ordinance in the first place and do it on the word of someone who communicated with a dead person who they said ‘felt sorry’ for himself? Here we have the true Mormon Gospel revealed: nepotism & misuse of ‘priesthood powers’ to placate a current Apostle and his family. The purpose here was to RESTORE LYMAN TO ALL HIS FORMER POWER AND AUTHORITY. Then Jos. f. Smith tells her that her father will be with his family, and that is ONLY available in the HIGHEST degree of the Celestial Kingdom.
I’m doing “broken record” here and grindael’s presentations are indeed eye-opening and fasinating, but to the average Mormon, it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter on several levels one of which is that it all happened a long time ago. In Mormonism, a long time ago could be last week. My second point, again, is that to a Mormon, the church is true. End of discussion. And we can probably throw in, “none of this effects the truth of the restored gospel one bit.” The last one takes a whole lot of mind bending, twisting and shaping but since to a Mormon “the church is true”, anything can work.
The early Mormons were pretty heavy into visitations and other forms of spiritual manifestations. Pick up one of my all time favorite books “Temple Manifestations: Heavenly Manifestations in Temples built by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.-1836-1930.” Unbelievable reports of all sorts of dead people showing up to entertain the saints. Mormons really suck this stuff up. My favorite is the report by President Wilford Woodruff that the signers of the Declaration of Independence including George Washington showed up demanding temple work be done for them.
Modern day Mormons, it seems, especially the apostles that were suppose to have a visitation from Jesus, have fallen on hard times. Not the same old time Mormon religion.
We’re really hitting at the primary foundation of Mormonism here which has to do with the credibility and veracity of Mormon prophets, apostles and thus the Mormon church itself. Mormonism is basically a “make it up as you go along” religion which is justified by the evasive principle of “continuous revelation”. Mormonism is a never ending chain of do-overs and/or redos. But those who buy into the Smith fantasy have so much invested, not only in time and treasure but most importantly emotionally, that they will do whatever is necessary to keep the dream alive. Reading the early Mormon accounts including those by Smith is like reading something out of Tom Sawyer or Huckleberry Finn. The yarns that are spun are fantastic beyond belief because they are beyond belief. And that, unfortunately, is the attraction to so many Mormons.
The early Mormons, especially Smith, were heavy into spiritual manifestations especially that which was conjured-up by the use of folk magic. It doesn’t matter if it was Smith’s magic rock serving as the conduit for the occult spirits or the use of second sight vision to manifest “heavenly” appearances, these folks were digging it. It’s all masked of course with Biblical sounding language and righteous appearing moral standards. It’s a great way to suck people into the cult painting a beautiful exterior on an evil spiritual core.
Thankfully, most people get out of Mormonism, but those who are left fight like a drowning man to maintain faith in this false religious system.
Grindael,
Nowhere is Amasa Lyman named a son of perdition. Yes, Joseph said many apostates were of that spirit. Did he mention Lyman? No, he did not. Did Lyman really fight against the church and attempt to destroy it? You are really forcing a definition and a person into something that simply is not justified.
It is consistent with our doctrine to provide the vicarious ordinances of baptism, the gift of the Holy Ghost, Ordination to the Priesthood for men, Endowment, and Sealing for all people. As Apostle is an office in the Priesthood, I find it to be no problem for that to have been performed for Lyman. The degree to which he will receive those blessings is between him and God. In practice and principle, it is no different than performing the ordinances vicariously for any other man- Lyman had simply been previously ordained an Apostle within the Priesthood.
The charge to the twelve to seek the face of God does not mean every apostle has seen the face of God. They were charged to pursue such a witness until it happened. Are you saying that, according to our beliefs, this guarantees Lyman saw Christ? Was he the model apostle among the LDS leaders (excommunicated twice)? The speed with which you jump to conclusions is dizzying.
Your interpretation of the verse from Hebrews is also forced: “And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment.”
Your interpretation insists that the very moment a person leaves this life they are judged. The verse does not say that. The verse says that judgment is after death. Do you really not see other possibilities other than the one you insist upon? I was born after Christ’s resurrection. Does that mean that my mom gave birth to me the instant after Christ’s rose from the grave?
If judgment really occurs right after death, are resurrection and judgment then totally separate in time? Do you have any scriptural basis for such a claim?
Necromancy? What of these verses:
“And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.” Matt 27:52
“And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.” Matt 17:3
“And a vision appeared to Paul in the night; There stood a man of Macedonia, and prayed him, saying, Come over into Macedonia, and help us.” Acts 16:9
There are plenty others.
Do you know how many stories there are in the Bible of angels appearing? Are these angels not spirits?
You are the ultimate spin doctors. The comparisons and labels you promote are laughable.
Grindael- I saw your video wherein you compared Joseph Smith to David Koresh, Marshall Applewhite, and Jim Jones. You even compare Thomas Monson to Adolph Hitler. You have absolutely no credibility to people with ANY reason and judgment. You are so extreme in your opinions and conspiracy theories, you are no different than those who believe Bush planned 9/11 or that aliens are running the world.
Grindael,
Yes, there are differences between Mormon leaders and Protestant leaders, very important ones at that.
But I would hope that Protestants believe that their founders were inspired by God. For instance, I would hope that they believe that Martin Luther spoke by the influence of God when he wrote the 95 theses and when he preached that faith alone can save us. You do believe that the idea that faith alone can save us is the word of God, don’t you? Well, that idea wasn’t being emphasized until Luther came around and proclaimed it (i.e. spoke the word of God).
If you believe that Luther spoke the word of God when he emphasized faith and you believe that he was still a flawed man when he said it, then you believe the same thing I believe about Joseph Smith: that he was a flawed human being with some supernal insights.
Mobaby,
When Joseph Smith said that Presbyterian Creeds were an abomination he was in the same tradition as Martin Luther. Luther’s 95 Theses were just that: a declaration that the old church was an abomination in the sight of God.
So Mormons and Protestants have yet something else in common: both our founders rejected old religious traditions.
Martin from Brisbane,
What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? Thanks be to God – through Jesus Christ our Lord!
I love that verse. I think Mormon leaders and Protestant leaders need that grace just like you and I do. We can be delivered by no one but a Savior, despite our every effort.
OJ,
Give me a break. We’ve been down this road with Mormons on this blog continually in the past and my conclusion is that Mormons will take any kind of spirit appearance and assign the Mormon good house keeping seal of approval to it. That’s the point. Mormons practice no spiritual discernment what-so-ever. You quote a Bible verse and then apply it liberally to any spiritual manifestation. That’s why Mormons are so totally duped when it comes to Smith and his home-boy followers and their folk magic.
This is all part of Mormonism. A false prophet, a false god, a false scripture, mixed in with a bunch of spiritism and you’ve got the recipe for a cult. The Bible tells us that Satan will come disguised as an angel of light. Bingo for Mormonism.
You my friend are without excuse! You’ve had the Gospel of Jesus Christ laid out plainly for you by the Christians on this blog. You have had a mountain of evidence presented clearly showing that Smith was a con man. You have been exposed to the difference between Mormon spiritism which taps into the occult world, and the Spirit of God. You appear to have no capacity to discern the truth.
Jim,
Pay attention. Amasa Lyman Apostasized from the Church after Smith died. DUH.
The 12 are REQUIRED to see Jesus as a qualification of their calling:
“Your ordination IS NOT FULL AND COMPLETE till God has laid his hand upon you. WE REQUIRE AS MUCH TO QUALIFY US” (But maybe it’s different now, like I said it’s a different Church now)
Pretty cut and dry. (And there is ALWAYS some disqualifier when it comes to Mormonism – say one thing – when it doesn’t happen – it really doesn’t mean that) Have ANY of the 12 claimed to have seen Jesus lately? I doubt it.
Necromancy:
”In the 1850s Lyman had secretly participated in seances and automatic writing with like-minded Mormons in San Bernardino. He openly embraced spiritualism during the last years of his life. His daughter Hilda often served as a medium during his seances. “Such deceased relatives as his father, father-in-law, children and aunt delivered comforting messages from beyond the veil. Likewise former Mormon leaders Heber C. Kimball, Hyrum Smith, Jedediah Grant, Newell K. Whitney, and Joseph Smith himself paid occasional visits.”
The whole bunch of them were involved in it. Lyman supposedly appeard to his daughter who appealed to Jos. F. Smith and he acqueised to her wishes.
Smith had magic peep-stones and it (they) are still in possession of the Church.
You did not address how you can even have restoration of blessings when you must repent first to have it performed. Do they conjure up the dead person and ask them? What about what Kimball and a host of other say, THIS LIFE is all you get? So why perform the ordinance, Lyman can’t change his life.
“he has got to deny Jesus Christ when the heavens have been opened unto him, and to deny the plan of salvation with his eyes open to the truth of it… This is the case with MANY APOSTATES of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”
Lyman fits this to a tee.
Your Prophet Monson validates the life of Brigham Young, instigator of the Mountain Meadows Massacre & other atrocities like Blood Atonement. In so doing, he puts himself in the same company as all who condone violence and take Temple Blood Oaths. Blood Atonement is a doctrine of the Church, and it wasn’t until 2004 that death by firing squad was FINALLY changed in Utah.
Joseph Fielding Smith wrote, “man may commit certain grievous sins–according to his light and knowledge–that will place him beyond the reach of the atoning blood of Christ. If then he would be saved, he must make sacrifice of his own life to atone–so far as in his power lies–for that sin, for the blood of Christ alone under certain circumstances will not avail…. Joseph Smith taught that there were certain sins so grievous that men may commit, that they will place the transgressors beyond the power of the atonement of Christ. If these offenses are committed, then the blood of Christ will not cleanse them from their sins even though they repent” (Doctrines of Salvation 1:134, 135).
Is that book still in print? Until there is admittance to Young’s and others crimes by the Church, and the refutation of the Blood Atonement Doctrine, there is still a chance it could happen again, so I stand by my video.
Grindael,
I am finding it more difficult to take you seriously as a result of the conclusions you come to from information that does not warrant those conclusions.
Examples:
1. Apostles being encouraged and told to seek God’s face means every one of them has achieved such without exception from the day of their calling to the apostleship. You say that seeing Christ is a “qualification” for being an apostle.
2. You are claiming that Heber C. Kimball, Hyrum Smith, Jedediah Grant, Newell K. Whitney, and Joseph Smith took part in seances? Ridiculous conclusion from what source?
3. Brigham Young was the “instigator of the Mountain Meadows Massacre (ridiculous).” And by association Gordon Hinckley is a murderer.
The majority of your claims about the church are in reality not supported by the data you provide.
Seriously- you are so anxious to do damage to the church that you become atrocious in your arguments. Talk about religious bloodlust.
That was supposed to be President Monson, not Hinckley in my post above.
Now the spirit of divination named in the above account was the type of spirit that Joseph Smith, armed with his magic divination rock, operated with. In Acts 19:18-19 we read; “Many also of those who had believed kept coming, confessing and disclosing their practices. And many of those who practiced magic brought their books together and began burning them in the sight of all; and they counted up the price of them and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver.”
Joseph Smith operated by magic. It’s a spirit. And it’s by this spirit that he founded Mormonism and it’s by this spirit that Mormonism is maintained today. Not only did Joseph Smith scry using a seer stone stomping about the country side looking for buried treasure, but he also claimed second sight vision by which he saw all kinds of strange things.
But to those who are enchanted with Smith’s tales of spirit beings appearing to him, the more stories the better. I know, it was a long time ago and doesn’t count any more. Except when modern day Mormons march into the Mormon temples in full costume hoping that just maybe some long dead person might appear to them. Be careful what you wish for Mormons!
Martin Luther’s 95 theses do not contain the word “abomination”
The Book of Concord – the confession of the Lutheran Church contains the word abomination in a few places, here are some:
1) those who defend evil (taken from Scripture)
2) the selling of indulgences
3) the monastic vows (separation from society, poverty, no marriage, etc.)
4 the sacrifice of the wicked (unrepentant sinners) (taken from Scripture)
Joseph Smith attacks the very foundation of the Church – the creeds come from the Bible – they are a distillation of Biblical theology.
Quite frankly – those things in the Book of Concord that are called an abomination are rightly said to be so – selling indulgences, or doing something for the dead in order to gain them favor in the afterlife – WRONG – completely non-biblical.
That which Joseph Smith claimed was an abomination was in no way an abomination. Martin Luther in no way said all Christian theology was an abomination – there were practices that had come into the Church that were wrong, but God used Luther to REFORM the Church. I am convinced the reformation was correct. I am equally convinced that Joseph Smith did not hear from the Lord when Smith said “all their creeds are an abomination.”
Joseph Smith did not propagate a theology that would support Martin Luther or John Calvin being “terrific men” as you said. According to Smith they were propagators of an evil abomination. I believe much of what the reformers taught was right – leading people to faith in the crucified Lord Jesus Christ, and Smith was a false prophet, leading people astray into false temple works and the false promise of godhood, serving a false god.
There is no equivalency between Joseph Smith and the Reformers, Luther or Calvin. The train wreck of Mormon theology cannot be justified by comparison to Christian Reformers.
Jim, no.
Biblically, dead(/unborn) people are not angels. Angels are angels. They are a different creation than we are.
Can I point out something to you? Well, two things. One, playing around with “familiar spirits”, such as in the verse that the LDS claim for Mormonism-support, is a BAD thing.
Lev 19:31, Lev 20:6,27 Deut 18:10,11,12, 2 Kings 21:6, Mark 5:13, Luke 8:2 (for example)
Two, when the dead rose from their graves, and Jesus talked to Elijah and Moses… this was something GOD WAS DOING! God can do what He likes! Do you see how God can and should have ultimate rights over something like this? Can God call the dead out of their graves? Can He call on the two people who represent the Law and the Prophets? You bet He can, and He’s the only One who should think of doing such a thing.
Men try to call up spirits for their own gain… Men are WRONG, and putting themselves into DANGER by getting so involved. This is where Joseph Smith and others fit in. Joseph saw lots of spirits, while he was treasure hunting, didn’t he? And many more after, apparently. Did he call on them? Look for them? Want them to appear? yes, he did. This was not God’s doing. It’s was Joseph Smith’s doing.
It’s not unusual that on the fringes of a move of God that the spiritual forces of darkness might lurk. One of the leaders of the Azusa Street revival in Los Angeles in the early 1900s wrote:
“Though reports of the miraculous were sometimes exaggerated, the church didn’t mask the revival’s problems. Seymour wrote several letters to Parham asking advice in dealing with spiritualists and mediums from occult societies, who were trying to conduct seances in the services. And the church publicly admitted that not everyone at the meetings felt the presence of the Spirit. ‘While some in the rear are opposing and arguing, others are at the altar falling down under the power of God and feasting in the good things of God. The two spirits are always manifest, but no opposition can kill, no power in earth or hell can stop God’s work’……..Parham was shocked at what was being called spiritual manifestations. At what Seymour viewed as God-sent, Parham cringed with disgust, even labeling some adherents as spiritists. ‘I sat on the platform in Azusa Street Mission, and saw the manifestations of the flesh, spiritualistic controls, and saw people practicing hypnotism at the altar over candidates seeking the baptism, though many were receiving the real baptism of the Holy Ghost. After preaching two or three times, I was informed by two of the elders, one who was a hypnotist….that I was not wanted in that place.” (The Rise of Pentecostalism; Christian History, Issue 58 pp. 16-17)
Joseph Smith had two competing forces operating in his life. He certainly was exposed to the Spirit of God through the revivals that spread through the area in which he lived. But he also was drawn to and practiced folk magic. In the end he gave into the occult and made it the foundation of his religion. This counterfeit was made to look something like Christianity. It was enough to fool some people and continues to do so today. But the roots of this religion remains firmly planted in the spiritual forces that oppose God.
Setfree,
In the Bible, when angels appear and deliver messages, they certainly sound like appearing human-like. My question above was “are angels not spirits?” Consider Psalms 104:4: “Who maketh his angels spirits.”
How about this one: “Then the angel of the LORD put forth the end of the staff that was in his hand, and touched the flesh and the unleavened cakes….. Then the angel of the LORD departed out of his sight. And when Gideon perceived that he was an angel of the LORD, Gideon said, Alas, O Lord GOD! for because I have seen an angel of the LORD face to face.”
So angels are spirits that look like humans. But this is another topic.
Even if I give you the point for argument’s sake, you cannot show that the saints arising and appearing to others, Moses and Elias appearing on the Mount, or the man from Macedonia appearing to Paul are qualitatively any different than the claimed visions of Joseph Smith. Saying that those in the Bible are from God and those of Joseph are evil is laughable. On what basis can you determine that?
You are right- God can send messengers, humans or angels, whenever He darn-well pleases.
Joseph saw spirits while treasure hunting? Where are you getting that? When did he “call on them?” Are you pulling that out of a hat? (Pun intended).
Joseph had many visions, often in answer to prayers to God. This is no different than those events recorded in the Bible.
It is perfectly fine for you not to believe that Joseph experienced what he claimed. But your claim that his experiences were obviously of the devil is nowhere supported by the Bible or the logic you offer. There is no reason to say his experiences were “necromancy” while the Biblical accounts were not.
For anyone who wants to know about Mountain Meadows, read this:
http://www.mrm.org/mountain-meadows-massacre
And take particular note of the end article by Sharon. It will answer all the questions and you will see just WHO was behind it and why.
Lyman’s family claimed it, I’m just quoting it.
I’m not saying seeing Christ is a ‘qualification’ for being an apostle, McConkie and Cowdery said it, I’m only quoting Mormon sources.
It is sad that Mormons don’t see the Dark Side of the Cult. And all the bloodlust, that was in the Temple oaths:
“I will pray, and never cease to pray, and never cease to importune high heaven to avenge the blood of the Prophets on this nation, and I will teach this to my children, and my children’s children unto the third and fourth generations”
Or this:
“This is loving our neighbor as ourselves; if he needs help, help him; and if he wants salvation and it is necessary to spill his blood on the earth in order that he may be saved, spill it.…That is loving mankind.…Now, brethren and sisters, will you live your religion?” –Young,(JOD 4:53; 4:220).
There are also too many statements about the destruction of the U.S. Government, etc., etc. Too much violence.
I’m living my religion, I’m just afraid Mormons will start to someday re-live theirs.
Oj
Your posts revealing that you think that any manifestation of a spirit being is legitimate is mind boggling. You continue to quote the Bible where angels appear and then make the assumption that it’s what Joseph Smith experienced. Your use of the word “logic” is an add on as if using the word actually means something in the context you use it.
You want to know on what do we basis the claim that Joseph Smith’s visions were different from those in the Bible. It’s very simple, Smith was wrapped up in the occult. Where do you think his “visions” and “appearances” are coming from. The guy ran around with a magic rock looking for treasure. He used his magic rock to “translate” his greatest treasure, some golden plates (which he actually never found).
Add on to this that Smith changed his story of his first vision, what five times ought to tell someone that the guy made it up. Smith also said, on about the third or fourth try, that God the Father and Jesus appeared to him. The Bible clearly teaches that God is a spirit. So what did the guy see? I would say probably nothing; he made the whole vision up and modified it every time there was a crisis of his leadership.
We can also look at Smith’s doctrine and religious teachings to know what spirits he was hearing from came from the dark side.
Smith and his followers were clamming to see all sorts of spirits. They used second sight vision to peek into the spirit world. At every turn Smith’s methods reveal a guy who not only told fabulous woppers but was so tied into occult practices that only people willing to be duped would buy his tales.
I saw a bumper sticker yesterday that said “Don’t believe everything you think!” I thought it would be an excellent motto to attach to Mormon leadership past and present and also the Mormon faithful. These false Mormon prophets were so impressed with themselves that anything that popped into their minds became holy writ. That’s why Mormonism, with its fits and starts and jerks and jumps from one doctrine or practice to another is as totally flakey as it appears. All that’s necessary is to have a bunch of duped followers that are willing to accept every idle word that proceeds from the mouth of these unaccountable seers.
Mormon thought process is a wonder to behold. But it reveals a much larger problem and that is the willingness of the Mormon faithful to search high and low to find any shred of information to validate the inconsistencies and ought right stupidity and in many cases immorality of their leadership.
But, again, if someone wants/desires to believe something, any explanation will do. It doesn’t have to make sense and usually doesn’t. All the better to fit in with this very strange religion.
Jim,
I would strongly encourage you to read the book “Joseph Smith’s New York Reputation Reexamined”
What it is, is a counter-argument to those written by Hugh Nibley and others who tried to refute the affidavits and testimonies given by the Smiths’ neighbors. After the author argues the Nibley (etc) arguments, he presents again the affidavits, and even more that he found.
If you read the book, you will see that the affidavits are at least something to seriously consider.
Here is the free book online:
http://www.signaturebookslibrary.org/york/chapter1.htm
You are correct.. what angels look like at any given time is a separate topic. That they do or don’t come looking like us does not make them human.
Let’s see.
We have Mountain Meadows Massacre, Joseh Smith with his magic rock, and reference to statements from “neighbors” revealing Joseph’s true character.
That is pretty much what I would expect on every single thread on this site- tangents galore.
Do you people ever get tired of the same unscrutinized, knee-jerk positions?
I followed the discussion about the nature of God and monotheism. Daniel absolutely shredded you guys and showed very clearly that your arguments are anything but linear and coherent.
You talk about being in a spiritual war with evil. In reality, you guys are the loons on the sidelines at the football game screaming obscenities, throwing sodas, and flipping off the team you don’t like.
I think your propensity to cut corners intellectualy and in representing what people actually say is obvious to all objective observers. I can show how things I have said have been turned and twisted several times just within this thread.
But that would not change anything. This site is on auto-pilot. No thought required. Same fall-back positions and arguments, no matter where we start.
OJ,
You do try and you’re fall back positions to refute Mormon critics is to use sloganeering and mottos like “logic”, “cut corners intellectually”, “words have been turned and twisted”, “this site is on auto-pilot”, “no thought required”, “fall-back positions and arguments”. My friend, I can always tell when you and the other Mormons are backed into a corner and you’ve exhausted your intellectual resources. What you write is a variation on the “I bear my testimony” theme that Mormons use when they’ve depleted the five blank bullets that they fire from their antiquated intellectual firearms.
I can tell you’re frustrated because the Christians who post here a dumping truckloads of factual referenced material on you and you can’t keep up or refute it.
Why don’t you just say that you believe Mormonism because you want to and leave it at that and go to some Mormon blog where you folks can entertain yourselves with stories of the mighty warrior Zelph?
BTW folks if you want to get a good look at the peculiar and wacky world of Mormon tale telling, just google “mormon folklore”. What you will find is quite entertaining and gives some excellent insights into the Mormon thought process.
I would encourage our readers to take a trip over to: http://www.holyfetch.com
The left side of the frame has the topics and if you click on them you will be treated to a bevy of Mormon folklore and myths. One article I was reading on another website talked about how Mormon tales often have an element of the dead returning to encourage the Mormon faithful. True or not, it seems our Mormon friends have never figured out that this is a real no, no. But Joseph Smith was encountering all forms of spirit visitors including a few of the apostles.
The willingness to believe and accept this type of nonsense is at the root of Mormonism and the peculiar type of thought process known to inhabit the Mormon faithful. At the core of this thinking is that which is seen in many cults and can be summarized by one of my favorite quotes “…the more obscure and convoluted a subject, the more profound it must be…” to the cult member.
Mormonism is a club and the faithful who really get into it and embrace its culture, are very happy souls.
I’ve heard from some exMormons though, that they just got sick of trying to defend the indefensible when it came to Mormonism. But in their own little world, it’s all seashells and balloons and everyday is a trip to the Mormon amusement park where reality doesn’t have to be dealt with but the rides provide thrills and allows them to shout “weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee” with every dip and turn in the fantastic ride through the Mormon fantasy world.
Jim,
From what I’ve read out here, nearly all of us, to some degree or another, bring in off-topic topics, or tangents. Is this a bad thing?
Yesterday I asked you why you eat fluffy white bread morsels and drink water for Sacrament Meeting. While you can point the finger at me and say I’m changing the subject, what I’m really doing is approaching exactly the same subject from a different angle.
For me, it all boils down to 1- can you see that the Mormon church is against the Bible? and 2- will you believe the Bible and be saved?
Why didn’t you join in on the ONE GOD thread? Why don’t you care what God said, in every possible way, to make His point? Why don’t you care Jim? Cuz the next post will be here in a few more days, and you can join in again then?
That’s not the point! The point, overall, is that God said THERE IS ONE GOD, and Joseph Smith says Jim can be a god. God says there is ONE LAMB, who was slaughtered for your sins, and Joseph Smith said he was a lamb too, and that you must deny yourself of all ungodliness.
You flee the scene when you can’t answer, just like Daniel did. Daniel had one point that he tried to drill down on, and no matter how many Christians from how many angles refuted him, he was stuck to his point. Why? Ultimately he wants to believe that there are many gods. And you want to believe that too.
Can you answer the question: why do you eat fluffy white bread and drink water at Sacrament meeting? It’s important that you know why. Not so that one of us can win an argument. But so that Jesus can win your soul…
It was said:
“In the days of Joseph [Smith] it was considered a great privilege to be permitted to speak to a member of Congress, but twenty-six years will not pass away before the Elders of this Church will be as much thought of as the kings on their thrones,” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 4, p. 40).
This is a prophet? 26 years came and went…but read on:
“If any miserable scoundrels come here, cut their throats.” Brigham Young ( JOD 2:331)
The above quote is TYPICAL rhetoric from the early leaders of the Mormon Church. What a contrast to HIM who said ‘turn the other cheek’. Are we to believe that men like this are PROPHETS OF GOD? It doesn’t matter WHAT the circumstances, these statements are inexcusable. When you see Brigham Young making these kind of statements over and over, isn’t it obvious at who’s direction those good Christian folk were murdered in 1857.
It was said again:
.
Below is what the early leaders have said about Christians. That the current bunch in SLC laud them all as ‘divinely inspired’, they obviously believe these statements also, otherwise they would not publish these statements, and would decry them with a loud voice. But all you hear from SLC is … nothing. The thing they should be burning is not the ‘bosom’ but the books they publish with this trash in it. Here is Mormonism for all to see. Their lame ‘it’s not in the standard works’ is so out of harmony with ‘follow the prophets’ that anyone with the Spirit of Peace and Love can see this is not of God.
When will those men in suits admit that these men were not inspired? But then the whole ‘kingdom of god or nothing’ would become NOTHING. Take a stroll down memory lane all you LURKERS, and see what your prophets think of their fellow Christians and then you will know why we denounce these men ( and all who laud them)” on this blog:
“Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the Church of the Lamb of God and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore whoso belongeth not to the church of the lamb of God belongeth to that great church; which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth.” (The Book of Mormon, 1 Nephi 14:10)
“I was answered that I must join none of them (Christian Churches), for they were all wrong…that all their creeds were an abomination in His sight” (Joseph Smith History 1:19).
”…orthodox Christian views of God are Pagan rather than Christian.” (Mormon Doctrine of Deity by B.H. Roberts, p.116)
“…the God whom the ‘Christians’ worship is a being of their own creation…” (Apostle Charles W. Penrose, JD 23:243)
“What! Are Christians ignorant? Yes, as ignorant of the things of God as the brute best.” (John Taylor, JD 13:225)
“What does the Christian world know about God? Nothing…Why so far as the things of God are concerned, they are the veriest fools; they know neither God nor the things of God.” (John Taylor, JI) 13:225)
“Believers in the doctrines of modern Christendom will reap damnation to their souls.” (Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p.177)
“…brother Joseph B. Nobles once told a Methodist priest, after hearing him describe his god, that the god they worshiped was the “Mormon’s” Devil-a being without a body, whereas our God has a body, parts and passions.” (Brigham Young, JD 5:331)
“..brother Heber C. Kimball was beset by a number of Baptist priests who had been attending a conference.
He read them all down out of the New Testament….With regard to true theology, a more ignorant people never lived than the present so-called Christian world.” (Brigham Young, JD 8:199).
“The Roman Catholic, Greek, and Protestant church, is the great corrupt, ecclesiastical power, represented by great Babylon….” (Orson Pratt, Orson Pratt, Writings of an Apostle,”Divine Authenticity,” no.6, p.84).
“…all the priests who adhere to the sectarian religions of the day with all their followers, without one exception, will receive their portion with the devil and his angels.” (The Elders Journal, Joseph Smith Jr., editor, vol.1, no.4, p.60)
“And any person who shall be so wicked as to receive a holy ordinance of the gospel from the ministers of any of these apostate churches will be sent down to hell with them, unless they repent of the unholy and impious act.” (Orson Pratt, OP-WA, “The Kingdom of God,” no.2, p.6)
“…all other churches are entirely destitute of all authority from God; and any person who recieves baptism or the Lord’s supper from their hands will highly offend God, for he looks upon them as the most corrupt people.” (Orson Pratt, The Seer, pg. 255)
“Evil spirits control much of the so-called religious worship in the world; for instance, the great creeds of Christendom were formulated so as to conform to their whispered promptings.” (Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p.246)
This is how Young describes Jesus (as taught from the Bible):
“You may hear the divines of the day extol the character of the Saviour, undertake to exhibit his true character before the people, and give an account of his origin…I have frequently thought of mules, which you know are half horse and half ass, when reflecting upon the representations made by those divines. I have heard sectarian priests undertake to tell the character of the Son of God,
and they make him half of one species and half of another, and I could not avoid thinking at once of the mule, which is the most hateful creature that ever was made, I believe. I have thus thought many a time” (Journal of Discourses 4:217).
It was said again:
You can laugh but I don’t when a so-called ‘prophet’ says “cut their throats” or this:
“3 & a half years after the massacre at Mountain Meadows Brigham Young made a tour of southern Utah and met with John D. Lee. Young told Lee that those killed had been relatives of those who had murdered the prophets and so had merited their fate. Six days later Young visited the massacre site. He found that a pile of stones 12 feet high had been erected by American soldiers as a monument to the dead. Topping the rock cairn was a wooden cross bearing the inscription: “Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.” Young read the inscription aloud, but altered it to reflect his own feelings. Accounts vary, but Young is remembered saying either, “Vengeance is mine saith the Lord; and I have taken a little,” or, “Vengeance is mine saith the Lord; I have repaid.” Then, lifting “his right arm to the square,” Young silently directed his men to destroy the monument. “[I]n five minutes there wasn’t one stone left upon another,” one of those present reported. “He didn’t have to tell us what he wanted done. We understood” (Blood of the Prophets, p.247;Mountain Meadows Massacre, p.182-183).
Just read the BIBLE. Read the BIBLE. In it is the words of LIFE, of JESUS. Though we are called an abomination, & Christianity laughable, this is the most serious thing you can ever do. Compare the statements of these so called PROPHETS with the Master of PEACE and LOVE, our Lord and GOD Jesus. When you look at it with an open mind, and let HIM come and give you HIS PEACE, you will find THERE IS NO COMPARISON.
grindael
BEAUTIFUL!!!
The bottom line as one poster accurately described it, LDS believe the truth that they have confirmed to them, accepting the truth as we find through the Holy Ghost (To testify). Therefore any thing the leadership/church does according to approved Doctrine and principles can be confirmed. Is the Church Perfect? interesting question, in a sense we can see that the Doctrine is perfect, but the Church and its men; GA, Area Presidents, Mission Presidents, Stake Pres. Temple Pres. Bishops, etc etc, all being part of the body of the Church are not perfect. If we are to separate Church Leaders and Doctrine then it makes sense, but as we see with the OP one can find criticism very easily with many aspects of Context spoken in Church meetings, and I suppose any of our Church gatherings by men who hold the Priesthood of God, yet teach personal opinions they hold to dearly that might not always be correct. The Government of the Church and some callings have been changed over time, there was a time that a Seventy was a Stake calling for life, and then it was changed to belong to a position under the direction and part of the General Authorities. Game over? hardly. Smirking criticism such as this along with Mormons have to “eat it” when it comes to our religion is just more of the steady stream of criticism of those who least understand our Doctrine in the first place. The OP is really irrelevant, hence so much more the Church can provide for the honest in heart, those who have a desire to study, and pray for additional light and knowledge.
Janet.