Mitt Romney’s second campaign for President is, predictably, generating a lot of talk about Mormonism. And, again predictably, Mormons are stepping up their online efforts to set the record straight. Latter-day Saint Dinah Chance from Freeport, Florida wrote a letter to the editor of The Northwest Florida Daily News in which she stated,
“If Christians would put aside their petty doctrinal differences and love one another in the name of Jesus Christ, great changes would occur in our beloved country. Baptist, Evangelical, Methodist, Catholic and a host of other Christian religions are founded on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Sadly, it seems they just can’t love one another because of too much pride in their doctrinal differences.
“How Christian is that? What does Jesus think? Did He die for this?
“My point: Mitt Romney is a Christian! Mormons are Christians! Anyone who says differently is an uneducated person.
“…Christians need to love and band together for the sake of this country.”
As is obvious from her stated “point,” Ms. Chance was not talking about the “petty doctrinal differences” between “Baptist, Evangelical, [and] Methodist” denominations (etc.); she was talking about the differences between Christian faiths and Mormonism.
We’ve talked about many of these doctrinal differences before. They include things like: the nature of God, the nature of man, the nature of salvation, the nature of the Atonement, the nature of grace, the nature of prophets, the nature of Scripture, etc. (there is virtually no end to these doctrinal differences). By no means “petty” issues.
Frankly, it’s surprising to hear Mormons suggest that the doctrinal differences between Christianity and Mormonism are of little importance or trivial. Didn’t Joseph Smith say false doctrine was one reason God needed him to remain separate from Christian churches in 1820 and restore the true church? Smith wrote:
“My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join. 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.’” (Joseph Smith—History 1:18-19)
If these abominable creeds reflected mere petty differences, if what was taught for doctrine was really of little importance, why bother with the whole Restoration? Did Joseph Smith have “too much pride in [his] doctrinal differences” to love Christians and work with them for the greater good?
I invite Mormons everywhere to set aside whatever petty (as you say) doctrinal differences you have with biblical Christianity to band together with Christians in love and worship of the One True God – not for the sake of the country, but for the sake of your souls, and to fulfill the higher call of Christ for His glory.
Stop with the quotes already. I told you many comments ago that we would just throw out the quotes and use LDS canon instead, since my quotes of your LDS leaders are thrown out with the wave of your hand, yet I’m to consider every quote you post as the gospel truth! LDS leaders are all over the place with teachings, not only about polygamy, but with everything. Your LDS apologists will tell you that whatever past prophets and leaders have said “doesn’t count” because the LDS follow the current prophet. They have to say that! All LDS prophets contradict one another constantly! God says he’s not a God of confusion! Mormonism is one big mass of confusion! If the LDS church was truly of the true and living God of the Bible, there would be no confusion as to who he is, He would never have led the LDS to believe that he was part of the Holy Trinity, no wait! I’m just one of many gods and you can become one too! No wait! I am really Adam!!! No wait I’ve decided that I’m really just one of many gods and you can be one too! What will it be next week Helen? Next month? Next year? Your calling me an apostate isn’t lost on me Helen. I know that in the LDS church the worst thing a person can be is an LDS apostate. So you can claim that you are not my enemy, but every time you use that word, I see your true heart. You can go ahead and claim that isn’t true for the people here who have never been in the religion, but you and I both know the truth. No worries though, I have a thick skin and like I told falcon in another post, I would rather be a loner and die in Christ than live the Mormon lie. I have no problem or confusion over Mormonism Helen. God has opened my eyes to his truth. The reason you can’t see it is because you are blind in Him. I pray that one day God will open your eyes too. He is so much more than you will ever get out of Mormonism.
Kate, you said LDS prophets cannot agree, so here is some information you might find useful and for Helen to think about.
JS claims over in D and C 135:3-4 he has done more except Jesus has, well if this is the case why is it that the apostles like Paul, John, Peter and others have books of the Bible named after them and not Joseph? We read in the book of revelation that the names of the 12 apostles will be written on the gates of heaven but no where are any LDS apostles or prophets mentioned, strange how not even the super prophet JS is not mentioned if he ranks second to Jesus?
Now we read J Smith saying in the book History of the Church vol 4, pg 461. “I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by it’s precepts, than any other book.”
Then over in the book, Teachings of the prophet Joseph Smith on pg 71 we read, ” Take away the book of Mormon and the revelations, and where is our religion? we have none.”
Now lets look at what the prophet, Joseph Fielding Smith said. Notice Joseph Smith was the first “prophet” Joseph F Smith was the 10th “prophet/president” of the Church. So as not to confuse with the close names.
We read in the book,
So we find here two prophets disagree on just how important the BoM really is?
Now lets add to this what Ezra Taft Benson taught. He taught the 14 fundamentals of following the brethren. This was the SECOND: The Living Prophet is More Vital to Us Than The Standard Works.
So now we have 3 people, all prophets teaching different things. This leads to another question, if D and C is over the book of Mormon, why do the Mormon missionary’s not pass that out? And if the Prophet is over all the 4 standard works, why bother passing them out at all? Why not pass out books of the prophets teachings?
Now lets move on to a sore subject in Mormonism that shows more contradictions. The issue of Plural Wives.
I would like to share my thoughts on this subject. I feel that it was a doctrine of man, by man and for man. Not from God and here is why I say this. In the Journal of Discourses number 5 pg 203 Heber C Kimbal said this and I quote extra for context that some seem to feel people leave out.
Let us add to this
Their, You read it and heard it, so this applies to you, not only to a select few as Mormons claim, otherwise God lied.
Also Since when is new and everlasting only 50 or so years. Everlasting means forever, without end. Again did God lie? It was reveled unto all who hear and read, yet all who hear and read reject this, by saying everlasting means a limited time and limited people. This defies logic.
Read verse 5-6. it is a LAW that you MUST obey. Verse 8 says, Behold, mine house is a house of order, saith the Lord God, and not a house of confusion. I’m sorry but everlasting only lasting about 50 years, and God said this is for all but Mormons claim it was only for some, is confusion.
Who gave this new and everlasting covenant? The lord did. The lord said for all who have this law revealed unto them MUST obey it. Well if you read D and C or just read what I wrote, you fall under all who have it reveled unto them. Now you must obey it. Not only are Mormons not following D and C 1:14 but the concept of on going revelation now shows it’s flaws. Ezra Taft Benson taught the prophet does not need to say thus saith the lord to give us scripture. But the lord was clear he gave us that scripture. But the counsel backed it up as I stated above.
Then Ezra Taft Benson also taught the prophet cannot lead the church astray. so which prophet is leading us astray? The prophets of old followed and taught it, but now deny it.
So did God lie? He states it is a new and everlasting covenant. Again since when is everlasting only 50 plus years. Also if God did not lie who did? Mormons teach that the plural wife teaching was for a select few men, God said it was for all that it was reveled unto. Again if you heard it, it was reveled unto you, why are you not obeying it?
Now lets look to the book of Mormon. In Jacob 1:15-19 and 2:21-25 it teaches David and Solomon did evil by having many wives. Then in Mosiah 11:2 it teaches many wives is a sin. Now here is a contradiction because in D and C 132:37-39 it says it was not a sin for David Solomon and others to have many wives. Now I thought God could not lie? But Gods word is both in the B.O.M and D and C. So either man wrote it and messed up or God lied.
If the BOM is the fullness of the Gospel why then does it not support D and C 132 About the topic of Plural wives forever.
Then Again if the BOM is the fullness why do we read in Mosiah 11:2 and Ether 10:5 plural wives is a sin, this goes against D and C 132. Add to that Jacob 3:5, the Lamanites are called filthy yet at the same time they are more righteous in their actions because they don’t practice plural wives.
D and C 19:26 and 42:12 states both the Bible and BOM contain truth and are the word of God, yet they deny the teaching of plural wives as a good God ordained teaching.
Moroni 8:18 teach’s God is unchangble yet he changed his stance, saying plural wives is an abomation by allowing it to happen in D and C 132?. Now I know LDS will reply by saying Plural wives was practiced in the Bible. It was a sin even in the Bible, If God were to punish us with death every time we sinned there would only be plants and animals left on this planet. Now if you want to give your Bible scripture on plural wives please give a scripture(s) from the Bible as clear as D and C 132 Where God says here you go a gift of many wives or Hey you I commanded you to take wives and the more the better. It is not in there. Yes the people sinned and disobeyed the Lord by taking them but God never said this is what I want/commanded you to do.
Let me ask again. Who in Mormonism can we trust?
Now, Mormons claim they are christens also, Lets look at what the Prophets of old said about Christians and I quote:
If this is the case how can you say you are Christians. Along this lines I would like to ask also, if you are Christians then why do you try and convert Christians to the Mormon faith if we all are Christians?
OK, Now I will just post problems in general otherwise known as contradictions. But the problem with these is, either The Prophet Joseph Smith claims God told him or God himself said this stuff, Again, who in Mormonism can we trust?.
Over in D and C 7 it teaches John the apostle was to live and preach till the lord returns. Read 3 NEPHI 28:6-7 It teaches the apostle John, Who walked with Jesus, Was told he will never die. Then over in ETHER 12:17 3 more disciples were also told they would never see death. Then read D and C 7:1-8 Ok now if this stuff is true there could never have been a total apostasy of the church, Because there were people who were living that had the gospel truth.
1 NEPHI 1:8 It says ” I THOUGHT I SAW GOD” You either did see God or you did not, You cannot say I thought I saw God. Not only that but the Bible teaches no man can see God and live, Also over in D and C 84:19-22 Says if you do not have the priesthood you cannot see God and live. Here is another problem, When this guy said I thought I saw God, There is no mention of him having the priesthood. Also when Joseph Smith first had his vision and said he saw God, Then later said God came and baptized him he did not have the priesthood. So if Joseph Smith could see and talk with God then receive the priesthood, That means D and C 84 is wrong other wise the only other option is Joseph Smith lied. Either way someone lied.
Now here is the subject of Negros and them not being able to receive the same rights as white people according to the Prophet B Young and Bruce Mc. But even this has since changed and has been tried to be buried.
In the 1958 edition Mormon Doctrine ( I happen to own a copy), pg 477 says,
So please explain how we go from UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES to the change that it is ok in the newer versions of Mormon Doctrine? Also please explain this, B Young clearly states here in
Again how can this be the law of God THAT WILL ALWAYS BE SO, YET IT IS NO LONGER SO?. Any thoughts on why the doctrine changed. In light of the fact that the PROPHET spoke this and claimed it was a LAW of God.
Ok, here is another doctrine that has caused many Mormons major embarrassment. it’s the Adam God Doctrine. In short, B Young taught Adam from the garden of Eden is our God and father. This is found in vol 1 of the journal of discourses. there is to much to post here. I am posting very little of what B Young said on this subject. But if any Mormon reads this and feels I am wrong please explain how and why. I Own the entire JoD and have read in context the entire Adam God teachings.
this is his teaching.
Notice what B young is about to say here,
MORMONS REJECT THESE TEACHINGS, AS YOU SEE HE CLEARLY TEACHES THIS IS DOCTRINE. are you gonna be dammed for denying it.
Now lets look at something else B Young said. In the book Discourses of BY pg 194 1925 edition also found in JOD vol 1 pg 237 a person ask’s BY a question.
Now according to BY, if he believes the Bible as it is, Then I believe we could apply that to other LDS teachings. When I said LDS redefine meanings, God said I am eternal, hell is everlasting and eternal. Yet when I point out God the father was not once man who progressed first because the Bible does not teach it, also God the father states I am eternal. Now according to LDS eternal Really means He had a beginning, yet the dictionary claims Eternal is without a beginning. You name it, we disagree because you guys when we take something at face value and point out the LDS teach… then all of a sudden the meaning is twisted to fit LDS definition so as to mean something different.
Now here is a nice little bit of things to think about.
If Jesus taught ALL things why are we missing at least 12 major lds doctrine from the BOM. Also read over in
Now how can the BOM claim Jesus taught all things but yet not all things are written for us. The biggest problem I see is LDS teach the Bible is missing books and precious parts, well it would appear by these verses so is the BOM?
But over in D and C 18:4 and 20:8-9 it teaches all things are written in the BOM, so are they or not?. Then over in D and C 42:12 it teaches principles of Jesus gospel are in the Bible and BOM, so again if this is true, why are we missing major doctrines from it?. Then again on the topic of missing books from the Bible, what about 1 Nephi 1:15-16. it says a full account of the things made unto him, so did the Lord only show some things which make up the full account.
Ok over in 1 Nephi 13:26-27 it says the plain and precious things are missing. Can anyone tell me what these things are, and how can you prove they are the plain and precious things, not just any ol list you choose.
Alma 34:32-35 claims no second chance after death, IE no baptism for the dead. Yet Mormonism teaches baptism for the dead. But Mormonism also teaches God cannot change, so it appears he has changed.
2 Nephi 11:7 teaches if God did not exist there would have been no creation. Yet there were other Gods before God the father according to Mormonism, I would be willing to suspect they could have done it instead.
Mormonism teaches the Trinity is 3 separate Gods, Born Again Christians say 3 people who form ONE ETERNAL GOD. 2 Nephi 26:12 says Jesus is the Christ THE ETERNAL GOD. Not a God or one of the Gods. It teaches HE (Jesus) is God.
So who really can we trust and even if you said well we can trust so and so or his teachings, how can I really know for sure that their correct. If I follow mormon logic and “pray about this” and feel that it is correct, yet another LDS member prays about something totally different (contradictory) and they feel they are correct then we are back at square one again.
here is an example, in Doct of Sal vol 2 pg 1 of chapter 1 heading says SALVATION.
below that it says THE PLAN OF SALVATION.
Joseph F Smith feels this is of major importance. If it is then how can we know what is correct and what is false if no one can seem to get things straight. If salvation is of major importance then how come the Bible teaches we must call upon the name of the Lord to be saved, no works needed, look at the jailer in Acts. Then no mention of all the works needed to be saved in the book of Mormon, yet Mormonism teaches we must obey all the laws to be saved.
read pg 9 of doc of salvation vol 2. Here J.F.S states what I said.
In that section there J.F.S. states eternal life is the same as exaltation and no works expect belief are mentioned. But in an earlier post from the same book he stated not half the LDS will be saved. If belief as he states is all that is needed then you could be lead to believe LDS don’t believe.
Now here is two more problems. First one is, Joseph Smith stated in “Teachings of the prophet Joseph Smith pg 107” His brother Alvin entered into the exaltation with out doing a thing, not even baptism which according to the LDS is a requirement. know Joseph Smith states here in Doc of Salvation vol 1 pg 98, “Joseph Smith taught a plurality of Gods, and that man by obeying the commandments of God and keeping the whole law will eventually reach the power and exaltation by which he also will become a God.
I find it interesting how the prophets brother makes it into exaltation with out keeping the law, yet these two prophets seem to disagree. One disagree’s or contradicts himself, by stating his brother was in and he admits this was a surprise, but then goes on to say we must obey the WHOLE LAW. Then the other prophet states we need only to believe. This is why I feel their is much confusion, and even though you feel Bruce was wrong on some issues, that fact remains that every one disagrees with some one within the LDS church or they disagree with the 4 standard works.
I pointed out some time ago how these 2 prophets even disagreed as to the BOM or D and C being more important. So the question still remains who is correct in all of this and even after you or someone else say this person is correct how can we truly trust that person to be correct? I also would point out along this lines that within Christian circles, lets say pastors from a few different demonitions were to write books on the church, the gifts, holy spirit, ect and it denied the Bible, well then that’s easy, the pastors are wrong the Bible is correct. Not so with in Mormonism, to much confusion, so much so that so-called prophets even disagree with each other and the 4 standard works.
Well I have shown plenty of the Prophets and Presidents and how they don’t agree with each other or the 4 standard works. So let me end with this last few things. This is a teaching of the LDS that I happen to follow very faithfully. (SHOCK) a non-lds Member that really is following the church’s teachings, yep for once I am. Here it goes.
Read pg 188 of Doct of Salvation vol 1.
I am just trying to look at Mormonism in a logical way and point out what I believe are problems. I find it interesting that Mormons of old were willing to tell others they were wrong or be open to talks. but it does not appear to be that way today. I hope this really makes you examine your faith.
Kate, the word apostate is not something you should be ashamed of, the true meaning is to forsake ones religion. You accomplished your mission to find God and God incarnate the Son, Jesus Christ. You have found the Bible to be the word of God, in doing so you also believe that this is most likely the last words God spoke to man. Subjective feeling or experiences are now done away with, you feel more comfortable with hard evidence, which most likely has replaced Faith to a greater degree. Reading through your post I notice that you seemed to have prayed, most likely again after reading the BOM, yet received no validation. This is not unusual, in fact we hear this quiet often, many a young man has left for his/her mission and not yet experienced that burning in the bosom or subjective event that gives them a strong testimony, many still cling on to the testimonies of their parents. Is this bad? hardly, we know that all men and women have to experience truth for themselves, like you did when you found a better religion, one that answered all your questions.
Congratulations, but why do you seem to fight so hard against your old religion? that is suspect to me.
Rick B. quoted BY and misrepresented what he stated.
Paraphrase, I anyone denies plural marriage and continues to do so they will be dammed.
Rich B. why did you conveniently leave out the rest of the quoted sermon. Is there something that might not be to your likening or should we say throw a wrench in your agenda to misrepresent. Look it up, comment if you want, or ask me to quote it fully and then we can discuss your little twist and manipulations. 🙂
Helen and Louis
You know what Helen, the truth is very important to me. I’m not fighting against anything, I’m simply (like you) showing “corrections.” Mormonism is badly in need of correction. If Mormonism were true, no one would need to lie or cover anything up, hiding it behind the phrase “milk before meat” which by your own admission Mormons, especially the LDS missionaries do. You aren’ t even ashamed to admit the lies. You justify it by trying to say that Mormons have to lie or potential converts will run away like people ran away from Noah and Jesus. It’s twisted. As for being ashamed of being a Mormon apostate, nothing could be further from the truth. I was simply stating what apostate means to a Mormon. You are the one who keeps throwing the word at me.
You said: You have found the Bible to be the word of God, in doing so you also believe that this is most likely the last words God spoke to man. Subjective feeling or experiences are now done away with, you feel more comfortable with hard evidence, which most likely has replaced Faith to a greater degree. ”
Yes I have found the Bible to be the Word of God, something that isn’t found in Mormonism. No, hard evidence hasn’t replaced faith. I would say that I have more faith now than ever. But my faith is no longer placed in men, my faith is in Christ and him crucified. I don’t need men to stand between me and the savior. Neither do you.
If your showing corrections then why does Rick B. and you occasionally not fully quote your references?
Context means everything and quoting BY’s one sentence snippet does not do anyone justice but only shows that they are afraid of the whole truth for it may change the clarity and meaning one is trying to manipulate. I will quit with the “apostate” label since if seems to be a very sensitive issue with you.
So Kate, what is Faith and how does one know that Jesus Christ is Lord and Savior? is it evidence or revelation?
I can assure you I quote far more of a piece than most mormons do. And I cannot exactly post an entire book or chapter simple for a verse or two. Plus You said we cannot know if BY really said these things, So it gets back to the question you avoided, Why can you quote from these sources as if they are truth and fact, yet when we do, were told they cannot be trusted?
Rick B. It’s not about the number of quotes you brag about, the truth is in the value, correctness and relativity to what one is either validating or criticizing. I never said if he they said these things, I said that BY was being recorded by others and also stated that we will just have to wait and see about the meaning behind his sermons, some we agree with, some we questions, and some we will just have to wait and see.
I only quote from these sources to express the entire sermon and not a few sentences. Rick B. you have to know that taking something out of context only confuses the whole of the idea. You did the same just now when you paraphrased what you thought I said, I can go back and honestly tell you that I stated the Adam God Theory for example, is something I will look forward to the day when I can sit at BY’s feet and hear him address the subject and give us more clarity. I said this exactly to you, I can wait to see.
Kate stated, “You know what Helen, the truth is very important to me. I’m not fighting against anything, I’m simply (like you) showing “corrections.”
Kate, this is great, we can then talk about that which is correct and well documented, hence the idea of BY stating that only those who practice plural marriage and the more correct version that you failed to quote, that at least one must at least believe that God instituted plural marriage, but one man and one women can reach exaltation by following the ordinances found in the Temple and being sealed as man and wife for all time and eternity. For you to state otherwise is only something you will have to resolve as either your truth or your misrepresentation.
Let me re-word it then, what verse by B.Y. are correct? What verses do you agree with? and why? What verses do you need to wait and see on? And how do you come to these conclusions?
My guess is, what ever verse or phrase by BY you agree with is good, the ones that speak against what you believe cannot be trusted or need more info, is that fairly accurate?
Read the whole paragraph and other statements that all state that only a person needs to show faith in Gods law (Plural Marriage) they don’t have to practice it.
Book of Mormon states exactly the same thing and only when God commands it, but otherwise cleave to you one wife.
You want so badly to believe your talking points that you will do everything but actually read in context what is left out by the many enemies of Mormonism, strange that the truth is left to be divulged by people like me who come here to correct the many mistakes, misrepresentations, and false notions that are all given as old hackneyed talking points.
First of all, I don’t believe a word Brigham Young said. What he said was made up in his mind. There is no truth to his word so no, God did not institute plural marriage. It’s a Mormon myth. We’ve shown you from the Bible. You reject God’s Word and turn yourself to fables. I’m thinking you should go back and look at quotes you have posted. As I said before, it’s just great and acceptable for you to quote a line or two, but expect the rest of us to post a novel. I would think that if you have a problem with the parts that are quoted by everyone else, you could easily go check out that quote for yourself (and so could anyone reading here.) After all, that’s how I blew the whistle on John Hay’s article that you quoted as gospel truth because it came from FAIR. This is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. I’ve also decided that I’m finished answering your questions. You haven’t answered 99% of mine, but just carry on like you didn’t read them. Honestly I’ve grown quite bored with the polygamy discussion and I’m moving on.
Kate exactly what in “John Hay on the Trial of the Smiths’ Assassins makes your point about the two who were assumed dead?
Quotes from your own source.
Joe Smith died bravely. He stood by the jamb of the door and fired four
shots, bringing his man down every time. He shot an Irishman named Wills,
who was in the affair from his congenital love of a brawl, in the arm;
Gallagher, a Southerner from the Mississippi Bottom, in the face; Voorhees,
a half-grown hobbledehoy from Bear Creek, in the shoulder; and another
gentleman, whose name I will not mention, as he is prepared to prove an
alibi, and besides stands six feet two in his moccasins.
It was impossible that the matter should be allowed to pass entirely
unnoticed by the law. Besides, Governor Ford, who considered the murder a
personal disrespect to himself, was really anxious to bring the perpetrators
to justice. Bills of indictment were found at the October term of court
against Levi Williams, Mark Aldrich, Jacob C. Davis, William N. Grover,
Thomas C. Sharp, John Willis, William Voorhees, William Gallagher, and one
Allen. They were based on the testimony of two idle youths, named
Brackenbury and Daniels, who had accompanied the expedition from Warsaw to
Carthage on the 27th of June, and had seen the whole affair.
The next May, all the defendants appeared, according to agreement, to
stand their trial.
The case was closed. There was not the a man on the jury, in the court,
in the county, that did not know the defendants had done the murder. But it
was not proven, and the verdict of NOT GUILTY was right in law.
Nothing in the whole account shows they did not appear for trial. So exactly what was your point.
I still am of the opinion, note I said opinion, that these three individuals came to trial, the two who were supposed dead as of yet has not been proven.
Minor detail? except that critics should quit making the claim that based on Brothers Taylor account they were dead. He never witnessed their deaths so that can be thrown out as not creditable evidence to support Bills claim. There have been conflicting reports about to what extent members of the mob were injured during the attack, and whether any of them were killed. Shortly after the events occurred, John Taylor wrote that he had heard that two of the attackers that Joseph Smith had shot with his pistol had died.
Kate said, Helen has not answered 99 percent of my questions.
We all know Helen that this is not true. You have avoided 99 percent of Kate’s question as well as about 99.999 percent of mine.
You tell me it’s ok for you to Quote BY, But when any of us quote Him you tell us, we need more info from him, or thats not what he meant, or we did not add enough. Please, your so full of bull your eyes are brown.
I also am done with you, you refuse to answer questions, You dodge them by saying, I am only here to correct error. No your not, your here to waste people time. I am friends with many of the posters, they also are friends with others that I dont have the address to. I will send a email to those I can, and ask them to forward it onto others stating, No matter what Helen says, Completely ignore anything by her like she never posted until she starts answering questions and taking things seriously. Then you will be left talking to your self.
For any people that simply lurk here, they can read for themselves and see you are not serious and dont care.
Good by Rick B. you never really were very good at criticizing Mormonism, without a book or web site to go and get your information you are really just another person, kicking against the P r i c k s.
I don’t need to have a conversation with you or anybody else since I will just continue to pick out the major misrepresentation and correct them. At least they will be archived for ever and a witness against those that intentionally twist, misrepresent, assume and never verify, or verify by quoting out of context sentences.
Good luck and God bless, Helen/Louis 🙂