Friends of MRM,
We are down to a mere month and a half before we hold our 2011 Compassionate Boldness Conference (Oct. 14-15, 2011). Unlike MRM’s Compassionate Boldness Symposiums, the conference features the expertise of a number of people who are actively engaged in sharing the gospel message with our Latter-day Saint friends and loved ones. We thank Pastor Terry Long of Calvary Chapel Salt Lake City for graciously hosting this event.
This year Rob Bowman will be our main plenary speaker. He will be addressing the subject of LDS exaltation. What does the Bible say about this and is this really just a another version of theosis? Our wide range of topics will be an asset both to those who are familiar with Mormonism, and those who are just getting acquainted with this fascinating religion.
We hope you will help us make this conference a great success by mentioning it to your friends, congregations, Facebook pages, web sites, etc. I have attached a variety of promotional material. This is includes flyers, post cards, and bulletin inserts. Feel free to print and distribute whatever works for you. In order to encourage early registration we are offering substantial tuition discounts.
I thank you for your past support and hope you will pray that God will use this event to encourage Christians to share their faith with compassion and boldness.
I look forward to seeing you October 14-15, 2011!
Promotional material
Bill McKeever, “This year Rob Bowman will be our main plenary speaker. He will be addressing the subject of LDS exaltation. What does the Bible say about this and is this really just a another version of theosis? Our wide range of topics will be an asset both to those who are familiar with Mormonism, and those who are just getting acquainted with this fascinating religion.”
Well stated, ” fascinating religion”, finally someone who addresses our Religion and can do it with a civil tone. Glad to see that the usual labeling is starting to be less useful and Christians are waking up to the fact that negative descriptions don’t make for useful tools when trying to convince Mormons they have it wrong. Some here could take a few pointer from Bill.
I have read everything by Rob Bowman I can get my hands on. Wish I was going. I would love to meet him. _johnny
So Helen,
Let me get this straight. If people like Rick and I would just change our tone and some of our vocabulary, people like you would leave Mormonism in droves?
It’s not a matter of the actual content of what we write about, it’s the way we write it?
If we would just get rid of our edge then Mormons would see the light and abandon Mormonism.
Help me out Helen. Give me some new vocabulary with which to describe Joseph Smith’s taking of fourteen year old girls and married women as wives. Was that sentence that I just wrote objectionable? It’s pretty difficult to write to TBMs because they see any challenge to the history and doctrine of Mormonism as an attack and persecution.
I can see you rather liked Bill calling Mormonism a “fascinating religion”. Now what do you think Bill meant by the word “fascinating”? You obviously took it as a compliment.
Go and watch some of Bill’s videos, especially where he talks about Joseph Smith and the connection to folk magic, and tell me if what he says meets your approval.
BTW, will you be going to the conference? If I knew you were, I might hop a plane and attend also. We could do lunch!
Mormons need to get over the “persecution” bit. To a Mormon, anyone who challenges Mormonisms history, doctrines or practices is “labeling” and “negative.” Let’s look at how Mormons have talked about Christians over the years:
“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, First Vision.
“Both Catholics and Protestants are nothing less than the ‘whore of Babylon’ whom the Lord denounces by the mouth of John the Revelator as having corrupted all the earth by their fornications and wickedness. Any person who shall be so corrupt 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”
– Apostle Orson Pratt proclaimed, The Seer, p. 255
“an abominable organization (Christianity), founded by the devil himself, likened prophetically unto a great whore, whose great aim and purpose was to destroy the souls of men in the name of religion.”
– Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, The Joseph Smith Translation, pp. 12, 13
Helen,
What do the LDS missionaries say when they go knocking on doors? Are they not trying to convince people that Christianity is an apostate religion? Just because they do it with a smile on their faces doesn’t make them nice or accepting of Christians or the doctrines of Christianity. I would rather have someone say the truth of what they believe openly to my face, than hide their lies (by omission) behind their smiles or good works.
So Helen, you goiing??????? Wish I could be there. Encouragement, blessing and prayers for all involved in ministering to the Mormon peoples and to Sharon, Aaron, Rob S., Eric, Kate, Flacon, Brian R, Rick B (I know I left some out) and all the other Christian posters that I didn’t mention but who do a wonderful of job of defending the faith on this blog.
So let me get this straight,
Everything amounts to how it is said, Done or delivered?
So a guy wants to rape a women, but if he says please, and I wont swear at you, will do it with a smile, then it’s ok?
How about a serial killer knocks on your door, says please can I kill you, Im being honest in what I want to do, showing you my chainsaw in advance and knocking on your door, not breaking in while your sleeping.
Please, thats stupid. You really need to read the words of Jude, or the Bible in general, tell me does this make it false since Jude was pretty mean, or Jesus making a whip of cords.
I can see where it’s not real effective for people to stand out in front of General Conference and yell and scream at Mormons. It doesn’t really serve the purpose of bringing people to Christ. There’s a line.
However when we think about people going into Christian churches today, many don’t want to be convicted of their sin. They want to be told they are misunderstood and emotionally hurt. I’ve even heard one TV preacher say, “We’ll never judge you!” Actually God does the judging so I see that. However there really isn’t any point in keeping people protected from the consequences of their sin.
They talk about Johnathan Edwards preaching his sermon “Sinners in the hands of an angry God”. It’s said that Edwards didn’t even really “preach” the sermon, he just read it. There were people, it’s said, who were holding on to the pillars of the church afraid they’d slip into hell. I don’t know if that’s true or not but I’ve read that they didn’t want Edwards to finish but just give the invitation to go forward and receive Christ as Lord and Savior.
I’ve explained it before but for those who are new here, my goal is to provoke Mormon lurkers to go out and do some research to prove me wrong. Because I know something. What I know is that when exposed to the truth about the Mormon religion that they haven’t been taught or misled about, they will be shocked. That shock will lead to more study and more questions and those questions will lead them to make a decision.
One of those decisions is in regards to whether or not Mormonism is true. The second deals with coming to Christ and receiving the gift of eternal life that Mormonism can’t provide.
Falcon suggests: “If we would just get rid of our edge then Mormons would see the light and abandon Mormonism. Help me out Helen.”
I already did my friend. I had to make note too Rick B. that labeling and name calling were most likely not part of the Forum’s thinking when they first started it many years ago. As for you, well I already mentioned this before but mocking and ridiculing are not really useful tools for gaining entrance into someones home to tell them the evils of Mormonism, who knows you might just be knocking on the home of a member. Ya think?
Bill McKeever had enough sense not to scare off potential proselytes ( fascinating religion), especially those who are in the doubt stage. Love then in and then drop the bombs, right? Now since you and Rick B and some others even after Sharon told everyone to take a deep breath and calm it down have continued in the same vain, what say you? Want to try and be a little more calmer, who knows you might get even more doubters to tune in.
Helen,
You act as if you never did anthing wrong. As people stated, Lying by leaving things out is still lying.
Jesus flat out said to some people, You are in error of scripture, Wow, Jesus told people they were wrong and in error of Scripture, well, thats sad, since that was not very Christ like of Jesus to say and do. Jesus also seems to have dropped the ball when he made a whip of cords, Called his own apostles Fools and slow of heart.
Paul should really be rebuked for calling Down Blindness upon a person, man it seems to never end.
Then when I point things out about you Helen, and say you are a liar for example, I really dont see you correcting me and saying, No rick, I did not. here is what you accuse me off, here is where with atime stamp I said….
This shows your wrong. It seems to me you dont like being corrected, and we see in the bible people being correct and rebuked. Also the Bible tells us to sharply rebuked those that are hertics, and not to even wish the godspeed. I could go on, I dont simply say stuff to you and leave it at that, I go back and provide quotes and evidence of why I said what I said. If you dont like it, then change your actions, or if you feel I am wrong, back it up with why. That wont happen since you cannot do that.
Everyone knows your simply playing games and causing problems for everyone. Sadly I am about the only person to really point it out and keep mentioning it, it almost seems as if your given a pass since your a mormon and we want mormons here to talk with.
Helen Here is a perfect example of what I am talking about, You said in this topic
Then under the topic of the pre-exsitance you said about us Christians
Correct me if I am wrong Helen, but did you just do to us what your accusing us of doing? You know their is a word for that and I have used it many times with you, can you guess what word that is?
rick,
Excellent post. It seems that our Mormon friend has a beam in her eye and she’s running around trying to remove splinters from the eyes of others.
Yea, I know the name for this Rick, but Helen will never get it. It’s not in her character.
Rick B. actually this is in reference to a doctrine that teaches babes can sin, which you categorically agree is true.
“But then again, this is the apostate preachings of a dead religion who has no keys, no authority and no priesthood, why? because you want to tell God how to run His Church, members make the rules and God takes a back seat. Amazing. ”
I did not use the word hypocrite, liar and other labeling descriptions that have been used to attack me.
Seems you don’t understand the difference between ad hominem attacks versus my opinion of a apostate teaching.
Ok Falcon, I will bite and waste another one of my limited 6 posts a day, “Mormon Coffee should be focusing on the issues, not on one another’s assumed shortcomings”. (Sharon).
“It seems that our Mormon friend has a beam in her eye and she’s running around trying to remove splinters from the eyes of others”.
Sharon encourages us:
August 24, 2011 at 3:25 pm
Thanks to everyone for their scholarship and insights on this topic. I can see this going in several directions, so before it goes further I’d like to ask you all to step back for a minute, take a deep breath or two, ask the Lord for guidance, and enter back into the conversation with an eye toward respectful discussion and clear communication on these important issues. Thanks, everyone!
Sharon Lindbloom says:
September 4, 2011 at 8:39 pm
Helen has already posted six comments today, but has submitted another one in which Helen expresses concern over name-calling here at Mormon Coffee. Helen brings up 1 Peter 3:15. I ask everyone to please consider this directive found in God’s Word and season your speech accordingly. Thank you.
Sharon Lindbloom says:
July 17, 2011 at 9:37 pm
It’s that time again. Time to remind you all that the conversations here at Mormon Coffee should be focusing on the issues, not on one another’s assumed shortcomings. I ask you all to please take a couple of deep breaths, refocus on the issues, and when you disagree, disagree with one another respectfully.
falcon says:
July 18, 2011 at 5:35 am
Good reminder Sharon.
I was reviewing my own give and take with some of the posters a week or so ago and found myself asking if these conversations weren’t creeping down to the level of “YOU SUCK!”, “NO YOU SUCK!”
Helen,
You either understand what I am saying and simply dont care and ignore it and avoid the truth, or you really that ignorant, and I suspect your not ignorant.
When I say your a hyproicte or a liar, as I said, I back it up with evidence and dont simply say it for the sake of saying it, so either your are acting that way and doing those things or you are not.
Now many times I have pointed out Jesus called people hyproictes and said they were in error, but then I get many people saying, He could say that you cannot, So let me ask this. Since when as Believers do we simply ignore people lying and being hyprocites? Do we say, Well if I speak the truth to them it might offened them? Well if the truth offends and we say, I cannot tell them the truth for fear of offending them, then why bother talking at all.
I can look at the world around me and see, Courts reviewing the evidence and saying, from everything I see this person Lied. We dont as believers run and tell the Judge, You cannot say that, you are offending them.
What if I see my co-worker stealing, do I shut up because I might offened him/her? Give me a break. People need to grow a spine and start being honest. If someone really is lying or being a hyprocite, we should be able to say so if we have evidence and can support it. It’s one thing to simply run around and call names for no reason. And as I said, Helen I never see you proving me wrong. You call me a liar or hyprocite, I can tell you righjt now, I will be asking you to back it (Cont)
Up with evidence and support it. I get tired of people simply allowing Mormons or anyone for that matter a free pass to say what evber they want or act however they want and we try and justify it by saying, Well they are unredemeed sinners and simmply will act that way. Well if thats the case lets empty the jails out and set all killers and rapists free since that is to be expected they will do that since they dont know Jesus.
If your a drunk and I call you a drunk, I am not attacking you, I am simply saying the truth and saying what you are. Helen Since you wnet back and showed Falcon some stuff, why not go back and review the topics and show us where you answewr every question, How your not wasting peoples times, or how you are the perfect mormon on this blog and are the perfect example of being truly persacuted? O yea, You cant, LOL, silly me for thinking your the poster child of being a perfect example of Christs love on this Board.
I lost track of how many times I told you you have no love, care or concern for us. You accuse us of being clueless about LDS doctrine, yet never show the Love of Christ by telling us where, why and How we are wrong and setting us straight. You instead avoid questions, tell us we need Milk before meat, say we would not understand and judge us by saying, Were not really interested in hearing the truth. So again Helen, Where is the Love?
Helen said
So if your Church teaches it, is ok to say something about us because it’s true? Yet if Jesus said or taught some hard things, Like telling people they were in error of scripure, or The apostle Paul saying, Follow me as I follow Christ, and they said and did some hard things, Then it’s ok for me to say and do those things. O wait, It’s not ok since you dont trust the Bible and probally what they said and did in the way of the hard things were added in by ememies of the church. Gee sounds a little… (You know) To me.
Helen,
Thank you for that post. It shows that I’m able to examine what and how I write and when necessary make adjustments as needed. I appreciate your support in showing that I’m big enough to admit when I think I’m getting too close to the line.
Now I would suggest that you do the same. Rick and I have asked you very direct questions which you refuse to answer. I imagine that this is consistent with your convictions as a Mormon which you choose to accept or reject (doctrine) depending on how you feel about them.
For example, you believe that the BoM is a testimony of Jesus Christ however by your continued silence on the matter, we must assume that you don’t believe that the BoM is archeologically, scientifically, linguistically or historically accurate.
As has been pointed out, your beliefs at least in part, appear more in line with the Community of Christ. They give their members the option of viewing the BoM as a spiritual work only.
Rick
I think from now on when Helen doesn’t answer questions repeatedly, we should just assume the answer. She’s a renegade Mormon who has designed her own program but yet wants to tell us how we get things wrong about Mormonism. Isn’t that ironic? She came here to point out all of our supposed errors and yet she’s definitely in over her head when it comes to knowing the details about Mormonism running to FAIR/FARMS instead of seeking real answers.
“For example, you believe that the BoM is a testimony of Jesus Christ however by your continued silence on the matter, we must assume that you don’t believe that the BoM is archeologically, scientifically, linguistically or historically accurate.”
Yes, by Faith and revelation, not the fuzzy little warm feeling thingie, but like you pure revelation that tells me the Book of Mormon is true, kind of like that same spirit that tells you it is false, oh boy, this could be problematic. So wherein you fall back on objective evidence as you main stay, I can only preclude that what hasn’t been found or totally discovered does not mean its not there.
I guess the flat earth idea and the sun circulating the earth must have been difficult for those who decided the evidence was right there in front of them, bingo, look the sun is going around the earth and the earth is flat because my eyes tell me so. So until the evidence was actually shown the theories were pretty much gospel. So I can wait to be proven wrong or right, depending upon further investigation into the archeologically, scientifically, linguistically or historically findings.
Bill, I would really love to be there next month and meet everyone involved in
this Conference. Next year I’ll be financially able , I can’t wait. My wife and I
stopped in Salt Lake City in 1986, it’s a beautiful area , the Wasatch mountains,
the western front range of the Rockies dominating the landscape , I enjoyed the
visit. It’ll be much better next time for us though as we will get to meet you and
Eric .
Rick, you can relax God’s in control here. From time to time we have Mormons like
Helen visit this blog . She’s been on here long enough for everyone to see her m.o. , so
you don’t have to be so persistent in requesting her to answer all your questions. She’s
asked some thought provoking questions that have made us dig for the answer, she’s
also confirmed the failure of Mormonism to be the “restored” gospel of Jesus Christ by
many of her responses . We only defend the true gospel of Jesus and let God handle the
rest . God has ministered to Mormons like Helen in the past and He will continue to do
so .
Helen,
That’s all any of us have been looking for and what you’ve finally admitted. The evidence is not there to support the notion that the BoM is an actual history of an actual people that lived on the North American continent. There is no trace that they were ever here. The theory that the American Indians were descendants of a lost tribe of Israel was a common theory at one time. It has been proven to be false.
So you’re basically left with a desire to believe something and that desire has led you to believe that a god has revealed to you what you desire to believe. You’re holding out hope that some day and in some way what you want to believe is born-out by actual evidence. Never underestimate the power of desire to lead us to believe something that is false. I wouldn’t hold my breath Helen that suddenly all of the problems associated with the BoM will evaporate.
You need to consider a couple of other things. The first relates to the latent power of our souls. There lies within us the ability to produce phenomenon that appear to be spiritual. I won’t go too deeply into it but that’s often time where those who traffic in the occult draw their power. The second relates to the spirit world itself and is addressed by the Apostle Paul when he said that we don’t war against flesh and blood but the principalities in the heavenlies. Neither of these two things relate to the BoM but has more to do with the spiritual ambiance created within false religious sects like Mormonism
Here’s the problem Helen. Your immortal soul depends on you getting it right about God. I know the mind-set your locked into.
We’ve had an extraordinary week or so here at MC.
Helen has told us that she has a personal freedom within Mormonism to accept or reject what Mormon prophets, past and present proclaim. She says she can do this as long as she doesn’t “teach” what she believes in church. She has told us that she can speak openly about her personal opinions about the revelations of the Mormon prophets without any sort of sanction.
I find this somewhat intriguing since Mormons believe that their prophets are hearing directly from the Mormon god, that their prophets will never lead them astray and that when the Mormon prophet speaks, the thinking has been done.
Also, I’ve been under the impression that individual Mormons are not so free to express their opinions, doubts and reservations regarding Mormon history, doctrines and practice. I can only assume that different types of Mormonism are practiced in various geographic locations; some being more liberal while others more conservative. I can’t help but think, however, that this pick-and-choose type of approach to Mormonism undermines that basic idea that the Mormon prophets are hearing from the Mormon god.
Helen has also tacitly admitted that there is no real evidence to support the notion that the BoM is an actual history of an actual people that lived at a given time here on North America. She believes it based on personal revelation contrary to any evidence that would support the notion that her revelation is true.
What’s kind of ironic, I think, is that Helen came to MC with the expressed purpose of enlightening all of us to why we have it wrong about Mormonism. Now we find out that she’s operating by a sort of personal revelation approach.
It’s been a revealing few days!
Helen,
You and all LDS are really gambling with a lot at stake, Your eternal souls.
To say you will wait for evidence is crazy, not only can you find more than enough evidence to support the Bible as fact and Gods Holy word, but it almost seems you really dont want evidence since you clearly reject Gods word and the evidence.
It seems to me if the Mormon god were real, he would come forward and prove it, kinda like the story of Elijah and the false prophets a baal and Mount caramel. Our God gave us a brain to you and seek out evidence and we found it, Our God gave you a brain to you and sadly you use to to believe lies and false prophets that our God even warned against, and sadly you still reject it. It’s a huge gamble to lose and its a sure bet you will lose.
Lovely spin and summation of poor little Helen. 🙂
Spin 🙂 “Helen has told us that she has a personal freedom within Mormonism to accept or reject what Mormon prophets, past and present proclaim.”
Not only do I have this freedom to think for myself, but knowledge that God is the best source where I can get confirmation and verification of what our Prophets are telling us is true. Only a idiot would take anything just for granted. Joseph Smith, Brigham Young were Prophets of God and Thomas S. Monson, is now the 16th President of The Church. How do I know, I asked for confirmation.
Continuing with the spin,
“She says she can do this as long as she doesn’t “teach” what she believes in church. She has told us that she can speak openly about her personal opinions about the revelations of the Mormon prophets without any sort of sanction.
What I believe outside the Standard Works is not essential to my personal Salvation or Eternal life
Heven forbid if I was to share my thoughts with another member, at least according to Falcon and his carefully crafted assumptions of me and sanctions, I must be nuts not to think I would be sanctioned.
I wonder if I still believed in Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny that would be sanctioned if I shared that with a friend. They might think me extreme and maybe even having dementia, but I doubt anyone would say, hey Hellen knock it off, quit telling friends about Santa and Easter eggs laid by Rabbits.
Brothers and Sisters today my Sacrament talk is about Mr. Santa Clause and my personal friend Easter bunny. Listen up! 🙂
Falcon stated, “Helen has also tacitly admitted that there is no real evidence to support the notion that the BoM is an actual history of an actual people that lived at a given time here on North America. She believes it based on personal revelation contrary to any evidence that would support the notion that her revelation is true.”
I didn’t say there was no evidence, at least the evidence we feel is viable is not exactly the same validity that other Historian give it. South America is filled with ruins, temples etc. of a lost generation and civilization we really are only scratching the surface about.
Since the introduction of the Book of Mormon in 1830, both Mormon and non-Mormon archaeologists have studied its claims in reference to known archaeological evidence. Latter Day Saints generally believe that the Book of Mormon describes ancient historical events in the Americas. Mainstream historians and archaeologists do not regard the Book of Mormon as a work of ancient American history.
So what is it, truth or fiction, let the digging continue and the facts laid out with no regrets of the outcome.
Falcon, I think there are Mormons ( like Helen ? ) that feel they can “pick and choose”
what they want from whatever the prophet teaches them etc. At least this is what they
tell non-LDS . It does’nt look good in this day and age to admit to non members and
investigators that your relationship to God is measured by how well you submit to the
doctrinal pronouncements of one man . I’m sure that those LDS who state that they can
simply reject or dismiss their prophet’s counsel at any given time are also the ones who
are quick to testify that God speaks thru one prophet today and that this man is the
head of their church , all other churches constituting the church of the devil . How much
Helen actually disagrees with the doctrinal pronouncements of her prophet is not going
to be admitted to any one here , it would be ” casting her pearls before swine ” etc. In the
end it really does’nt matter that much because Mormonism is the teachings of it’s prophet
and apostles, not the Helen’s of this world. Mormons feel that they are striving to serve God,
they are good people, but we know that even good people can be misled by false prophets.
When the Mormon prophet promises his followers that he will never lead them astray , never
teach false doctrine [ Gospel Principles 1979 ed. ] the Mormon people simply trust him , no
need to take the apostle John’s counsel to heart — 1 Jn 4:1 . How tragic .
Helen,
“South America is filled with ruins, temples etc. of a lost generation and civilization we really are only scratching the surface about.”
How arrogant. Yes South America is filled with ruins of the Mayans, Toltecs, Aztecs etc, but this is not LDS history! The Mayans for example have one of the oldest written languages if not THE oldest. They have their own unique history and NONE of it resembles the people in the BoM. They didn’t ride around on horses, they didn’t have coins, they didn’t use steel swords, etc. I am a history buff and it absolutely infuriates me that Mormons seek out to take away the rich and unique history of these South American people. Can’t find the history in the BoM? No problem! Just steal someone elses!
A revelation to Joseph Smith, “it must needs be that one be appointed of the high priesthood to preside over the Priesthood and he shall be called President of the high priesthood of the Church … and again the duty of the President of the high priesthood is to preside over the whole church.
LDS Church’s Doctrine and Covenants D&C 28:2, 6-7 “the President of the Church is the only man empowered to receive revelation for the entire church and to clarify doctrine.” “W can always trust the living prophets” and that one’s “greatest safety lies in strictly following the word of the Lord given through His prophets.” “Authorized to counsel and dictate in the greatest and what might be deemed the most trifling matters, to instruct, direct and guide this Saints. ”
Members are taught to rely on the Holy Ghost to judge, and if a revelation is in harmony with the revealed word of God, it should be accepted.
This ones for falcon:
Bruce R. McConkie said:
“With all their inspiration and greatness, prophets are yet mortal men with imperfections common to mankind in general. They have their opinions and prejudices and are left to work out their own problems without inspiration in many instances.”
“Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets” (Amos 3:7).
Thus saith the Lord is not necessarily something one would hear at a General Conference, but we do here often messages of inspiration that alway fall within The Standard Works, we have been counseled to reject statements that otherwise contradict the same, “”regardless of the position of the man who says it”.
“I say to Israel, the Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as president of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the program. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so he will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty. God bless you” (Discourses of Wilford Woodruff, pp. 212-13; see also Official Declaration 1).
So if I was to reject everything spoken by Brigham Young and as is stated here that the Adam God Theory was eventually rejected as doctrine, then why was BY not removed out of his place?
The Church still maintains BY was a prophet of God, could it be that the members were not ready to hear of the mysteries of Godhood. Could it be that BY got it right? could it be that even though I have not rejected his teaching, I can still talk openly about them and not be sanctioned. Does the Church tell me that I can’t discuss the theory or talk about it with other members, Falcon thinks so.
I disagree, no man, no church and not body will tell Helen what I can say, what I can read.
Mike,
Yes we know Helen’s MO, But really not everyone else does. I have openly posted my email many times over the years and have had people write me. Just recantly a Mormon lurker wrote me to ask me about something I said. So we wrote back and forth for a short time. He said he does not have the time to post here and does not have an account, he also said he has not and not read everything that is said or written. So he did miss a lot of what Helen said and did.
So I remind people over and over in case these lurkers are new to the board and are not aware of the Helen’s and their MO. Also if you remember Twice, Once from Aaron and one from Bill, they both were talking with LDS and asked them a question, the LDS refused to answed and they were warned to answer or be removed. Granted I am not a Mod and cannot remove anyone, but I can publicly state that I think someone like Helen who refuses to answer questions and simply gets called out with evidence over and over for her, well I wont use the two words lest I offeded someone, but you know what they are. So I figure if mormons got booted for what I though was less, then I see no reason why I cannot ask.
Helen, you old smiley button sweetheart.
I get such a kick out of you. You basically repeat everything I say, insist that I’ve got it wrong and then proceed to confirm what I say. You truly think like a Mormon. This is so typical and Rick has pointed it out also. We ask Mormons to tell us where we have it wrong and they just spin themselves into the ground without ever really explaining it to us.
This is rich!
Mormons have a prophet who’s hearing from the Mormon god, but individual Mormons get to pick and choose, to determine if the dude is really receiving an inspired message.
So actually Helen, as I’ve pointed out, we here do the same thing. We listen to what the Mormon prophets say. We read what they write and then, led by the Spirit of God, make a determination if it’s true. This is no different than what you claim you’re doing. Based on revelation, we’ve determined that the Mormon prophets are wrong. Helen, again, it’s just a matter of degree.
Now as to the BoM. You say you have a revelation that it is a witness to Jesus. Which edition of the BoM are you following? Are you following the original or the one, the apostate one, with all of the changes?
There are sects of Mormonism who believe that Joseph Smith is a fallen prophet. They know this based on revelation; no different really from what you are doing. After the Book of Commandments, it’s said, Joseph Smith fell into apostasy. I think their revelation of this is as good as yours.
Helen,
You have no idea what image you project. You have a blind spot that all of us can see, but you are totally ignorant of. 🙂
(Cont)
So if the prophet is the only man that can speak for the Lord, then this sort of poses a problem, How can he speak for the Lord, but then not tell us if it is scripture or not? We are left to decide for ourselves. That poses a problem.
Then your prophet taught
So why bother reading any of the standard works or even passing out BoM’s?
Check out this bit of confusion among the LDS prophets.
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.”
Joseph Fielding Smith said
(Cont)
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?
Yet we have mormons that could care less about this confusion, Make excuses as to why it’s ok, and never see the prophet come for GC and say, He went to the Lord in prayer to clear this confusion up.
Joseph Smith taught that polygamy was ‘approved by God’, and a doctrine NECESSARY for one’s salvation. This of course was NOT in the standard works at the time, the ‘Article on Marriage’ was, (voted on by the Church as binding doctrine). Smith did not go to the Church to reverse this, he went behind everyone’s back and did so, and lied about it. We then find the Word of Wisdom not a commandment, but then a commandment, again, contradicting the Standard Works. The argument that if a prophet’s statements as ‘claimed revelation’ like Adam-god, contradicts the Standard Works, it is ‘not binding’ is fine, but it does not address the issue of why the prophets have and do give and reveal doctrines that are not found in the Standard Works, or contradict them. Adam-god was given as a revelation, and Young called it that. One then has to explain how since God will do nothing but he reveals his secrets to his servants the prophets – he revealed that to Brigham Young, and the whole church rejected it. The argument, ‘because it contradicts the standard works’ doesn’t fly, because that has been done before, with no objections. (And after, with the Word of Wisdom). The verse in Amos is taken out of context by Mormons, for Paul made it clear that the days of prophets like they were in Israel were over:
“In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, (Hebrews 1)
Mormonism is full of contradictions and misapplied Biblical Scripture and like Rick said, “Yet we have mormons that could care less about this confusion.” _johnny
Rick, the new argument by Mormon Apologists is that the Book of Mormon is not a ‘history book’. Another contradiction. That is what happens when men who claim to be ‘prophets’ take up the mantra of the apologists, clutching at any straw, yet don’t give those same apologists any authority to say anything, and won’t clarify anything themselves. They now ‘have enough revelation’, so don’t look for any more, or one single prophecy that will confirm that these men are real prophets. It just won’t happen, and I’ll stand by these words, because those men are frauds. They are now doing the same thing their former leaders have condemned all of Christianity of doing, closing their canon to further revelations, and saying they have enough now, that Smith laid the foundation and they don’t need more. Well, that is just what Christians say about Jesus. We have Jesus, they have Joseph Smith. I’ll take Jesus any day.
Helen and her , “what’s only in the Standard Works” alibi , gets old . Mormon leader
Ezra T. Benson once answered this alibi when he referred to an experience that past
prophet Wilford Wooduff reiterated that occurred in the days of Joseph Smith at
a church meeting in Kirkland in reguard to the written Word and the “living oracles”
(Mormon leaders) . A leading man spoke on the Standard Works and said, ” and you
who give revelations should give revelations according to those books…..we should
confine ourselves to them…” When he was done Joseph asked Brigham Young to speak
to this issue of the written word and the living oracles. Young took the stand and placed
the Bible , BM and the D&C down before them and said, ” There is the written word of
God to us…..when compared with the living oracles those books are nothing to me; those
books do not convey the word of God direct to us now as do the words of a Prophet or man
bearing the holy priesthood in our day and generation. I would rather have the living oracles
than all the writing in the books.” When Brigham was through Joseph said that Brigham has
“told you the word of the Lord and he has told you the truth.” In light of this statement we
find that the Mormon has no basis for truth other than what he or she wants to personally
believe. It boils down to their personal preference . So much for advertising the Standard
Works as their only approved standard for doctrine .
“what’s only in the Standard Works” alibi.
Mike, mike, mike what is one suppose to do, can’t win for loosing I suppose or better yet, you got me between a hard spot and a rock. Smiling 🙂
No matter my answer until I roll over and admit I’m just plain wrong and you are right, Joseph Smith was a false prophet and I must have been smoking something when I read the Book of Mormon
or what else could be the explanation of my hallucinatory moment when the Sprit whispered to me.
Some more: 🙁
“So much for advertising the Standard Works as their only approved standard for doctrine .”
Gee Mike, kind of like when Evangelicals get accused of following the whacked out Christian Creeds.
You know supposed Creeds in the Bible
Ireneaus Rule of Faith
Hippolytus’ account of the baptismal service
The Apostle’s Creed
The Creed of Nicaea
I have been told time and time again, well we use the Bible as doctrine, Gods Word where the Creed are only for clarity and make clear to us what the Scriptures mean. Oh yea, I get it now, excuse me for saying that the Standard Works are about the Plan of Salvation and yet for some reason any new revelation is going to add to it or change it, don’t think so.
grindael,
“The new argument by Mormon Apologists is that the Book of Mormon is not a ‘history book’.”
Honestly, I don’t see any other way out of it for the Mormons. They have to smoothly transition their followers to believe this because there is no historical, linguistic, or archeological evidence. They are backed into a corner. How deceitful. The sad part is, Mormons will just go along with it. Believing in their “burning in the bosom” that it is true anyway. At least the peoples of Central and South America can have their own unique history back.
Mike,
Great post! I would imagine Helen’s brain is getting a little fatigued trying to do the mental gymnastics that it takes to defend all of this. I was never taught that what a prophet reveals has to be in the Standard Works or else we can reject it. How on earth could there be continuing revelation then? The LDS no longer add revelation to the D&C. The last thing added was Blacks holding the priesthood in 1978, and before that it was 1918. Other sects of Mormonism continue to add to D&C. Can we take this to mean that God is still speaking to those prophets, but not to the LDS prophet?
Kate, that is because you never understood the Standard Works, Jesus Christ’s Plan of Salvation.
Remember you gave it up for bigger and better, Orthodox Christian Creeds, a bunch of hooey invented by men to explain their interpretation of Gods Word and pushing God out of the picture completely.
Why? because man wanted to reinvent the Plan of Salvation, go figure.
Helen,
You are right. I don’t understand the LDS standard works. I don’t understand how self proclaimed prophets can totally reject God and what he has said, to come up with, what did you call it? A bunch of hooey to explain their interpretation of God’s Word while they push God out of the picture completely to pave the way for they themselves to become God! Hon, one day you are going to have to admit that men are not God and never will be God. We are God’s creation. He tells us so in the Bible. The plan of Salvation is in the Bible. From the mouth of Jesus, John 5:24. Mormonism is another gospel that Paul warns us about, Galatians 1:6-12.
The thing that bothers me most about you Helen, is the fact that you disrespect the Bible so much. You really don’t care what is in it. You are a truly lost soul.
Helen said
I cannot believe Helen just said this, You really dont think before you speak do you. Since you said Kate does not understand the standard works and Chists plan of salvation your implying that the plan of salvation is in the standard works. So I will write the mods asking them to hold you to this and answer it or be removed.
Show me Christs plan of salvation as the LDS teach it, in the Bible. It’s not their. For that matter show me from the BoM, I read it, It’s not their, show me from any of the Standard works, It is not their. You the one who does not understand, The plan you believe in comes from other sources and not the Standard works. The Bible even contrdicts the LDS plan of salvation. Now start working on your reply, as I am writing the Mods right now. You avoid way to much, I cannot let this one slide and will say something so it does not slide by. Rick
Helen, by the way you responded to my last post I think that it struct a nerve. This
could very well the Holy Ghost attempting to get your attention . To be honest , your
reply was a little strange . I did’nt quite follow your reasoning on “Evangelicals” being
accused of following the creeds etc. The creeds are not our “approved standard for
doctrine” , and to place them on par with holy scripture is silly , but as a Mormon
you are in a position where the scriptures can be by-passed
as they are all from dead prophets. At any given time your leadership can change a
doctrine and thus add one more rung on the ladder of commandments Mormons are
counseled to keep to gain eternal life. Speaking on this theme : ” President Lee has
said, ‘ In this day the scriptures are the purest at their source, just as the waters were
purest at the mountain source, the purest word of God , and the least apt to be polluted ,
is that which comes from the lips of the living prophets who are set up to guide Israel in
our own day and time. ‘ ” [ Ensign Nov.1976 Henry D. Taylor ] . In their role as spiritual
guides Mormon prophets have claimed to reveal the mind and will of God for 180 yrs now
by issuing new requirements , especially to enter the ” gate of heaven ” [ Temple] .
So to say that the “plan of salvation” is only to be found in the Standard Works is not
totally accurate. [ cont.]
cont.
Helen , you said, ” Oh yea I get it now , excuse me for saying that the Standard Works
are about the Plan of Salvation and yet for some reason any new revelation is going to
add to it or change it, I don’t so . ”
In 1978 there was a revelation given that did change the plan of salvation for a
whole segment of our society—black people. I guess before this date there were two
plans for man , one for white’s and another one for blacks.
You seem to think that this is some kind of contest between you and me , I’m right and
you’re wrong , is that it ? I’m sorry you feel that way . You said , ” No matter my answer
until I roll over and admit I’m just plain wrong and you are right , Joseph Smith was a false
prophet and I must have been smoking something when I read the BM or what else could be
the explanation of my hallucinatory moment when the Spirit whispered to me. ”
I don’t feel you hallucinated when you heard/felt confirmation that the BM was true. I can’t
judge that moment. Perhaps it was confirming that Jesus is the Christ since the BM teaches
that truth. What I can do, and what scripture advocate, is to evaluate your beliefs , i.e. the
teachings of Mormon prophets/apostles. I need to say that if I kept every law, commandment,
ordinance , as taught in the BM I still would not gain eternal life as there are more requirements
needed apart from the BM . The BM is from dead prophets like the Bible, remember ?
For Rick B. the plan of salvation in the Book of Mormon.
“And now, my beloved brethren, I would that ye should come unto Christ, who is the Holy One of Israel, and partake of his salvation, and the power of his redemption. Yea, come unto him, and offer your whole souls as an offering unto him, and continue in fasting and praying, and endure to the end; and as the Lord liveth ye will be saved.”
The Book of Mormon, Omni 1:26
Kate misrepresents as usual, “I was never taught that what a prophet reveals has to be in the Standard Works or else we can reject it. How on earth could there be continuing revelation then?”
Thanks Kate, but I never said that, mind correcting yourself or go back and actually read what I stated.
Peace 🙂
Helen said
Helen, I would like to point out a few things.
1. Do you even read what most of us right? You claim the creeds are in the Bible, so after you answer the question of where the plan and what exactly the plan of salvation is according to as it is laid out in the standard works, please fill us in on where the creeds our in the Bible.
I told you before I only read the bible, LDS books so I can honestly debate with LDS, And cook books since I am a chef. Outside of that I pretty much dont read books from Christians, My thinking is, If Jesus said it, taught it or the apostles said or taught it, then why not go directly to them, why read some book from some body that trys telling me what he/she thinks they said or meant?
We as christians, Or at least the christians I know do not follow the so called creeds you mention, We follow Jesus, as I said before, It is Jesus, Period. Not Jesus and…. Creeds, Works, Being a cheerful Bloke, you name it. It is Jesus Period.
You have been told this over and over, Your not helping yourself look like a very honest person when you say these things knowing you have been told otherwise. So since Kate was a former 40 mormon, and you told her she does not understand the plan of salvation according to the standard works, please tell us with scriptures to support it, then tell me where these creeds are in the Bible.
Helen you said:
“Members are taught to rely on the Holy Ghost to judge, and IF A REVELATION IS IN HARMONY WITH THE REVEALED WORD OF GOD, it should be accepted.”
Does this mean that if it’s NOT in harmony with the revealed Word of God that it’s to be rejected? Isn’t this saying it needs to be in the Standard Works to be accepted?
“Thus saith the Lord is not necessarily something one would hear at a General Conference, but we do here often messages of inspiration that ALWAYS FALL WITHIN THE STANDARD WORKS, we have been counseled to reject statements that otherwise contradict the same, “”regardless of the position of the man who says it”.
Does this not say that if what someone is saying in GC does not fall within the standard works, or contradicts what is in the standard works, it’s to be rejected,regardless of the man who is saying it? Why do we need continuing revelation then? If all we need for Salvation is already in the standard works, the world doesn’t need a prophet, seer and revelator now does it? Continuing revelation isn’t needed. You really should do more research in the Journal of Discourses. Most of what LDS prophets and leaders taught is not in your standard works. Rick has asked you about LDS doctrines that are also not in the standard works. So are they all to be rejected because they aren’t in harmony with the revealed Word of God ?
Helen, (cont.)
“So if I was to reject everything spoken by Brigham Young and as is stated here that the Adam God Theory was eventually rejected as doctrine, then why was BY not removed out of his place?”
Because Brigham Young was a powerful man in his time. No one dared go against him. And why would they? He was all about blood atonement and he did have his Danites to do his bidding. It was completely different back then. He’s still considered a prophet by the church today because to oust him would mean to publicly say he was a false prophet. To publicly say he is a false prophet would bring down the LDS church.
Adam-god is NOT a theory. That is a lie perpetuated by Charles Penrose. Try discussing Adam-god in Sunday School class and see how far you get. Yes, Falcon is right. You can teach/discuss it all you want in private, or here, but not in a Mormon Church, (unless you are coming out against it) certainly not if you put it in terms of it’s being a ‘mystery’ that was not understood. I guarantee that anyone who calls Adam-god a ‘theory’ knows nothing about it. Spencer Kimball is a liar. Brigham Young was not removed, because he wasn’t a prophet in the first place. None of them are. See how simple that is?
The Book of Mormon contains the Mormon Plan of Salvation? Really? If everything one needed to ‘get back into the presence’ of the Mormon god were in there, they why the need for those other books of ‘revelation’? Understanding Mormonism is like peeling back the layers of an onion. Some Mormons love to deceive others with blanket statements, (like Helen does constantly), but the truth is, anyone can generalize anything. The proof though, the actual proof of any statement made by Mormons, is in the details. Yes, and the Devil is indeed in the details of Mormonism.
Whenever Helen is called out on details, she invariably fails to make her points. I’ve been busy and have only been posting here lately, and I’ve caught Helen in many errors. (Adam-god is just one of the many).
Let’s see what some Mormon ‘authorities’ have said about the Mormon ‘Plan of Salvation’. First though, let’s analyze Helen’s ‘scripture’ that she uses to ‘prove’ her point. Let’s take the Book of Mormon, and see if it can get a Mormon back to their god by using just the BOM.
Helen said,
“Yea, come unto him, and offer your whole souls as an offering unto him, and continue in fasting and praying, and endure to the end; and as the Lord liveth ye will be saved.”
Now, let’s contrast that with what those ‘authorities’ have said:
“The plan of salvation, or code of laws, which is known as the gospel of Jesus Christ, was adopted in the heavens, before the foundation of the world was laid”. (Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 1:75) Fielding Smith goes on to define this:
“The new and everlasting covenant IS the fullness of the gospel. It is comprised of ‘all covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations” that are sealed upon members of the Church by the holy spirit of promise, or the Holy Ghost, by the authority of the President of the Church who holds the keys. The President of the Church holds the keys of the Melchizedek Priesthood. He delegates authority to others and authorizes them to perform the sacred ordinances of the priesthood. Marriage for eternity is a new and everlasting covenant. Baptism is also a new and everlasting covenant, and likewise ordination to the Priesthood, and every other covenant is everlasting and a part of the new and everlasting covenant which embraces all things.” (Answers to Gospel Questions, 1:65, emphasis mine.)
Also,
“What is the new and everlasting covenant? I regret to say that there are some members of the Church who are misled and misinformed in regard to what the new and everlasting covenant really is. THE NEW AND EVERLASTING COVENANT IS THE SUM TOTAL OF ALL GOSPEL COVENANTS AND OBLIGATIONS.” (Doctrines of Salvation, emphasis was Smith’s, Vol. 1:156, emphasis mine)
Are all these ‘covenants’ to be found in the BOM? Nope. The BOM simply teaches resurrection. It does not teach ‘exaltation’.
It also does not teach that the dead can repent and have everything make hunky-dory if someone here does your ‘works’. This is what is known as a ‘loophole’. The BOM does not teach the caste system of Mormonism.
The BOM is simply a ‘draw’, or an attention-getter. It’s like all those folks who fell for the offers of Mortgages during the past 10 years or so. They thought what they were getting was good, a house. But it was the details that destroyed them, and the financial institutions that bought into the invented term: “derivatives”. What you signed up for, wasn’t really what you got. Peeling back the Mormon “Plan of Salvation” onion, is an experience in futility. For you find that what you find at the center, is as vague and contradictory as what is on the outside.
But since I’m limited for space, lets take an example, (one of many) to illustrate my point. Bruce McConkie explains for us that,
“There is the “unconditional or general salvation.” (resurrection) Then there is “conditional and individual salvation.” The former comes to all men and is synonymous with immortality. (exaltation) The latter comes only to those who obey the alleged and imaginary “restored gospel” of Mormonism. (Mormon Doctrine, Page. 669).
He explains:
“Full salvation is attained by virtue of knowledge, truth, righteousness, and all true principles. Many conditions must exist in order to make such salvation available to men. Without the atonement, the gospel, the priesthood, and the sealing power, there would be no salvation. Without continuous revelation, the ministering of angels, the working of miracles, the prevalence of gifts of the spirit, there would be no salvation. If it had not been for Joseph Smith and the restoration, there would be no salvation. There is no salvation outside The Church