Mormons believe that in 1820 a young Joseph Smith went into the woods to pray. In answer to that prayer, they believe, Joseph was visited by God the Father and Jesus Christ. Today this is called the First Vision. As Joseph reported this vision (in the version that has since been named “official”), he asked the Deities which sect or church was right, and which one he should join. Joseph wrote,
“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…” (Joseph Smith—History 1:19)
Mormonism entered into the religious scene swinging. According to Mormonism’s founding prophet, if you are not a Mormon, your church is wrong, your beliefs are abomination to God, and you and your fellow professing church members are all corrupt.
I wonder if Mormons would see this as an example of “the blessings of faith [that] carry the responsibility of civil and respectful debate” that Mitt Romney has been talking about recently?
Last weekend Dallas Pastor Robert Jeffress publically identified Mormonism as a theological cult. Dr. Jeffress used the term “cult” as a theological classification, not as a pejorative, but that point seems to be lost on Mormons and the mainstream media.
Since Dr. Jeffress’ comments have been made known, Mormons have been vocally decrying his “bigotry,” his “hatred,” and his “fanaticism.” Truthfully, this all too common knee-jerk Mormon reaction grows wearisome.
Mormonism’s very existence is unseverable from the “poisonous language” of its founders and leaders. Why was The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints established? Because all existing churches in 1820 were declared wrong–they had abominable creeds and corrupt members professing those creeds. The Mormon Church was established because (it claims) true Christianity had vanished from the earth; it had fallen into complete and total apostasy:
“Every Latter-day Saint knows that following the death of the apostles, Paul’s prophecy was fulfilled, for there were many ‘grievous wolves’ that entered the flock, and men arose ‘speaking perverse things,’ so that the doctrines were changed and the true Church of Jesus Christ ceased to be on the earth. For this reason there had to come a restoration of the Church and a new revelation and bestowal of divine authority. The Church of Jesus Christ and the Holy Scriptures are, therefore, not responsible for the changed doctrines and unscientific teachings of those times, when uninspired ecclesiastics controlled the thinking of the people.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Man, His Origin and Destiny, pp. 467)
Consider just a few of the “punches” Mormonism has thrown in its fight against Christianity:
“Christians—those poor, miserable priests brother Brigham was speaking about—some of them are the biggest whoremasters there are on the earth, and at the same time preaching righteousness to the children of men. The poor devils, they could not get up here and preach an oral discourse, to save themselves from hell; they are preaching their fathers’ sermons—preaching sermons that were written a hundred years before they were born.” (Heber C. Kimball, July 26, 1857, Journal of Discourses 5:89-90)
“Should you ask why we differ from other Christians, as they are called, it is simply because they are not Christians as the New Testament defines Christianity.” (Brigham Young, July 8, 1863, Journal of Discourses, 10:230).
“What does the Christian world know about God? Nothing…Why so far as the things of God are concerned, they are the veriest of fools…” (John Taylor, May 6, 1870, Journal of Discourses 13:225)
“I do not wish to say anything in relation to other forms of religion; I do not know that it is necessary that I should do so; but no thinking man can admit that Christianity so-called—I call it a false Christianity, untrue to its name—satisfies the wants of humanity at the present time.” (George Q. Cannon, July 15, 1883, Journal of Discourses 24:185)
“The false and corrupt institutions, and still more corrupt practices of ‘Christendom,’ have had a downward tendency in the generations of man for many centuries. …The overthrow of those ancient degenerate races is a type of that which now awaits the nations called ‘Christian,’ or in other words, ‘the great whore that sitteth upon many waters….” (Parley P. Pratt, Key to the Science of Theology, 1978, p. 106)
“A false Christ…is a false system of worship, a false church, a false cult that says: ‘Lo, here is salvation; here is the doctrine of Christ. Come and believe thus and so, and ye shall be saved.’…We hear the voice of false Christs when we hear the Athanasian Creed proclaim that ‘whosoever will be saved’ must believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are incomprehensible and uncreated, that they form a Trinity of equals, who are not three Gods but one God, and not one God but three Gods, and that unless we so believe we ‘cannot be saved,’ and ‘shall perish everlastingly.’” (Bruce McConkie, The Millennial Messiah: The Second Coming of the Son of Man, p. 48.)
“False creeds make false churches. There is no salvation in believing a lie. Every informed, inspired, and discerning person is revolted by the absurdities and scripture-defying pronouncements in the creeds of Christendom…” (Bruce R. McConkie, The Mortal Messiah: From Bethlehem to Calvary 1:30. Footnote 2)
“To say that Satan sits in the place of God in Christianity after the time of the Apostles is not to say that all that is in it is satanic…Still, ‘the power of God unto salvation’ (Rom. 1:16) is absent from all but the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which the Lord himself has proclaimed to be ‘the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth (D&C 1:30). Satan’s goal of hindering many of God’s children from returning to their Father’s glory is thus realized.” (Kent P. Jackson, “Early Signs of the Apostasy,” Ensign, December 1984, p. 9)
Given the statements I’ve quoted above, I’m astonished that Mormons cry foul when any Christian declares that Mormonism is outside the theological boundaries of Christianity. Do Mormons really believe it is reprehensibly one-sided for evangelical Christians to use strong language to define the fact that there are vast differences between Mormonism and Christianity? Apparently so; a Mormon calling himself Eichendorff went on record with this non sequitur: “no Latter-day Saint makes a point of condemning the beliefs of Evangelicals.”
Mormons who complain about Christians questioning the theology of Mormonism–protesting against any suggestion that Mormonism isn’t Christianity with cries of “bigotry,” “hatred,” and “fanaticism”—need to take a look at the historical discourse found in their own church. I would like to see Mormons abandon this hypocritical name-calling and (changing sports metaphors here) step up to the plate for real, thoughtful discussion. As Bill McKeever is fond of saying, “If Mormons want to be in the religious Big Leagues they need to knock it off.”
Henry, I think you’re missing the point here. It is’nt that these doctrines ( authority/
priesthood/ sealing power ) are’nt taught in the New Testament church of Jesus Christ .
If you could take some time and read the New Testament book by book and try not to
mentally inject Mormon doctrine onto the texts you’ll discover what the N.T. reveals
about these doctrines . Mormon prophets have made these issues way more complex than
the scriptures reveal. As with other important doctrines, Mormon authorities have ran way
past what the N.T. reveals , feeling as they do, that God is revealing new truth to them yet all
the while claiming that they are merely advertising the same Gospel that Jesus gave to His
original apostles. False prophets love to emphasize their “restoration ” of long lost saving
truths, etc. The Gospel has not been lost , or hidden, it’s been available . When a Mormon
authority [ Wilford Woodruff ] believes that until 1820, the Gospel was not among men ,
then we need to reject him ( Rev.2:2 ) in favor of those Apostles mentioned in the N.T.
I hope you can understand this .
Spartacus, I’m a little hesitant of getting into the political side of this thread for fear of
it developing into a long rabbit trail . I personally could’nt vote for a Muslim or a
communist , or a zealous ” New Ager “. I’ll just say Mr. Romney would’nt be my last
choice by any means. My wife and I lean towards Herman Cain at this time, and that’s all
the farther I’m going to stick my neck out on this !
I appreciate your participation here.
Grindael
“They could not find any people who would accept their message? They were that ineffective as apostles of Jesus?”
They could probably have found such, it’s just that it wouldn’t have went anywhere until the world was ready, and God does not create dispensations frivolously.
“Are you saying that God is arbitrary? He just took away authority because he felt like it?”
God is not arbitrary, but what he wants us to do and what level of theology we are ready to accept is a function of social circumstances which are.
“But this is a flat out contradiction. There were FOUR apostles still alive on the earth WHO COULD NOT DIE.”
Your right in this case Grindael, the text you quoted from LDS.org simply got it wrong; they never should have said none of the apostles were still alive. Well done for spotting that.
Lets talk about these biblical contradictions. I’m not surprised to see you go through each of the four verses that says God leis and try to dismiss them. I am surprised at how much sense your way of getting rid of Jeremiah 4:10 made.
“Jeremiah apparently assumed that the prophets who had been prophesying peace were speaking the word of God, hence his complaint of deception in 4:10 “
If you are happy to believe that Jeremiah was mistaken then your claim makes a lot of sense- I retract my claim that Jeremiah 4:10 contradicts the idea that God does not lie.
Your attempt to get rid of the other three doesn’t get you anywhere. In each case you simply point out that the people God is deceiving are wicked and lawless people, and in many cases already deceived. But that is completely beside the point Titus 1:2 says “God never lies”, not’ God never lies to his followers, but sometimes
lies to wicked people’. Hebrews 6:18 says it “is impossible for God to lie”. Not that its impossible for God to lie to good people, but it’s impossible for Him toile at all
Either Titus 1:2, Hebrews 6:18 and Numbers 23:19 are right and God never lies, or Ezekiel 14:9 1 kings 22:23 and 2 Thessalonians 2;11 are right and God can deceive the wicked. If that isn’t a contradiction then you had better tell me what could possibly be.
Andy
You are clearly very smart and what you say is very compelling. As much as I would like to engage you on all of it, I neither have the time, patience or amount of posts allowed to do so. So I am going to select a few things you said to comment on, but don’t assume I am unable to reply to the others.
If I am reading you correctly the you are claiming to have an argument against Mormonism based on Matthew 16:18 “and on this rock (Christ) I will build my church and the gates of hell (actually Hades) will not prevail against it”
One question immediately comes to mind: What are these gates of hades that Jesus speaks of? Most Christians interpret them as an analogy for forces of darkness or forces of Satan. A lot of Mormons do that to, naively in my view. Some looser translations even put it there explicitly., such as The Amplified Bible which has ‘the gates of Hades (the powers of the infernal region)”
Is this the correct meaning of gates of hades? I put it to you that we have good reason to reject this idea.
Jesus would only have used “Gates of Hades” as an analogy for forces of Satan if he thought that Satan lived, was in charge
of and had forces in Hades. But such an idea, that Satan and his demons are in hell and rule over it is clearly unbiblical. I challenge you to find a single verse that suggests he has any power there- Iv’e looked hard and never found any. Instead we find that Jesus has power over hades, not Satan Revelations 1:18. Satan instead is described as having Power over the world. He owns all the Kingdoms of the World Matthew 4:8-11, is the “Prince of the World” John 12:31 John 14:30 and is even called the God of the world 2 Corinthians 4:4.
So if Gates of hades doesn’t mean forces of Satan, what does it mean? One of the rules of Biblical interpretation is that you try to take averse literally when there I no reason to think it is an analogy. I take it Literally. I think that when Jesus said that hades gates wouldn’t beat the church (necessarily implying that the Church would beat the gates) He quite literally meant that the church would knock down the gates of hades and seize control of it, following Jesus lead in 1 Peter 3:18-20. Given that in the very next verse Matthew 16:19 we read Jesus giving power to the church over heaven, wouldn’t it make sense if in this verse he was giving them power over hell
Spartacus said:
“1) “religious test” is kind of a vague term and I haven’t heard anyone explain exactly what they mean by this…”
All that is meant by this is membership or non membership of a particular faith tradition cannot be used to determine if a person is qualified to hold office. For example most churches do require a “religious test” for certain employees…a Lutheran layperson would not be hired as pastor of my Baptist church, for example, nor would I ever be called as president of the Relief Society in your ward. Qualifications to hold public office are restricted to citizenship and age. As voters, we do tend to have religious tests that determine who we vote for, but, while the fact that Abernathy Z. Treehugger is a druid may cause him to fail my religious test, it doesn’t disqualify hom from running for office.
I hope this makes sens. It’s nearly the end of my shift, and my cognitive powers are waning. 😉
Phooey. All that hard work to keep the spelling right, and two of ’em slip past. Plus I still can’t get the tags right.
Mike R. I would love your explanation of the following:
‘I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven’ [Matt 16:19]
Specifically Keys, not one key but Keys. Could you list these for me? Since you claim this is not a very complex issue, I’m sure Christians can scripturally accommodate us with a simple answer.
Andy Watson: “There are two key pillars that can possibly validate Mormonism being the true religion: Joseph Smith being a true prophet and a great apostasy of Christianity. If either one or both of these pillars is broken, then the whole LDS building comes crumbling to the ground.”
So true, never has a statement been stated as clearly as this, we are either part of a Restoration, (authority, priesthood, office) or we are the most lost of all Churches on the face of the earth.
Andy: ““…upon this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” What is “this rock”? It’s the confession that Peter just made in verse 16. Jesus Christ is the rock: 1 Cor 10:4. The Mormons have to agree with this because their own scriptures state the same: Helaman 5:12 and Moses 7:53.
The rock? “The testimony of our Lord: the testimony of Jesus, which is the spirit of prophecy –
Christ is the Rock: the Rock of Ages, the Stone of Israel, the Sure Foundation – the Lord is our Rock!”
Great apostasy, whenever the Church left the principles of revelation they ceased to be the Church of God.
We are accused of warm fuzzy feelings and subjective testimonies, yet as is accurately described in the Bible: Peter answered, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” “Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona,” said Jesus, “for flesh and blood hath not revealed this unto thee, but my father which is in heaven, and upon this rock will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it”
“Revelation” that Jesus is the Christ is the foundation of the true Church, not evidence but Faith and Revelation.
Mick,
The only contradiction is the ones you are inventing. You are the one denigrating the Bible here. Even your own Church upholds that aspect of the Bible (that God does not lie and these scriptures do not contradict him). If you want to personally go with that faulty assumption, (Red Herring all the way) go right ahead. You are making up a contradiction that doesn’t exist, and is commonly used by atheists. I find it very disingenuous of anyone who uses these sorts of tactics. I question the faith of anyone who uses such tactics, and see them only as a provocateur.
From lds.org:
(26-40) Ezekiel 14:9 . Does the Lord Ever Deceive Prophets?
In Joseph Smith’s inspired translation of the Bible, he corrected Ezekiel 14:9 to read: “And if the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord have not deceived that prophet.”
The fact is, it didn’t need to be corrected, for those who truly understand the Bible know that it was saying just that. I can go through and do this for all your contradictions. Your argument is an atheist red herring. _johnny
Henry,
Yours and the LDS Church’s conspiracy theory about the Christian church going into apostasy is just that – a conspiracy theory. You can join your fellow brethren, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, who put forth the same conspiracy theory about Christianity in futile hopes of claiming both of your religion’s existence on earth. Yes, Christianity’s rock is Jesus Christ. He is the foundation, cornerstone, and the Rock (Ephesians 2:20; 1 Cor 10:4). It has been clearly put forth and demonstrated in my previous posts that your (Mormon) proposition and theory is bogus, false, and in error. You have nothing. You have no claim. Joseph Smith and the deceived people that follow him are wannabes. You want to be the true church. Well, you aren’t. Your religion’s foundation isn’t in Jesus Christ, but rather a false “jesus” and a false prophet. Your religion’s very existence stands and falls on Joseph Smith.
“Mormonism, as it is called, must stand or fall on the story of Joseph Smith. He was either a prophet of God, divinely called, properly appointed and commissioned, or he was one of the biggest frauds this world has ever seen. There is no middle ground. If Joseph Smith was a deceiver, who willfully attempted to mislead people, then he should be exposed, his claims refuted, and his doctrines shown to be false, for the doctrines of an imposter cannot be made to harmonize in all particulars with divine truth. If his claims and declarations were built upon fraud and deceit, there would appear many errors and contradictions, which would be easy to detect. The doctrines of false teachers will not stand the test when tried by the accepted standards of measurement, the the scriptures.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Jr., 10th LDS President, Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 1, p. 188)
Mick stated: “Andy, you are clearly very smart and what you say is very compelling. As much as I would like to engage you on all of it, I neither have the time, patience or amount of posts allowed to do so…One of the rules of Biblical interpretation is that you try to take averse literally when there I no reason to think it is an analogy.”
Mr. Garrone, you seem to have plenty of time for rhetoric, argumentation, philosophy, and logic when it suits you according to your presuppositions, format, and ground rules. You’ve come to the blog trolling for sparring partners to enter into the realm of debate and philosophical nonsense mainly offline with my Christian brothers in the faith. Like you claim, I also do not have time to engage in academic exercises of this sort with those just for the sake of arguing. That is a sin. You have somehow found Mormonism logical. I find that conclusion and the religion of Mormonism illogical. You and Bart Ehrman are identical in your background. Neither of you were ever believers in Christ. You left Christianity because you never was one of us (1 John 2:19). You are dead in your sins (Ephesians 2:1). You cannot please God in anything you do (Romans 8:7-8). You cannot make yourself born again in Christ. You can do nothing except to call out to God in your rebellion and repent while begging Him to give you ears to hear Him and bring you out of your blindness.
I have studied biblical interpretation for my Biblical Studies major in college, and I have never heard this rule you are putting forth. Where did you receive your biblical training? You have no idea what you are talking about. Please stop the “trainwreck.”
Andy, “It has been clearly put forth and demonstrated in my previous posts that your (Mormon) proposition and theory is bogus, false, and in error. You have nothing. You have no claim.”
Of course it’s clear to you since anything other then the Rock, is Jesus Christ and the foundation of Christianity. Question, why did Jesus say — “Thou art Peter” first? was he saying that Peter was the rock upon which he would build his church? Did not Jesus give Peter this nickname, “Cephas”
do you know what that translates too? Look it up.
John 1:42
42 And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called aCephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.
Maybe the rock wasn’t Peter but was in fact the Savior’s mission and atonement. Seems unusual that He (Jesus), would refer to Himself in the 3rd person. One must wonder what is more clearly stated.
A. “and upon this rock will build my church”
B. “and upon this “Jesus Christ will build my church”
C. ” and upon this rock, (“revelation”) will build my church”
What revelation? That Jesus Christ is Lord and Savior, Jesus is the Christ.
Who did Peter say Jesus was, “Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
How did Peter answer? Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Who revealed this to Peter? ” flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
So clearly your version is lacking in clarity and you have failed to demonstrate by any means you nailed it.
Henry,
What in the world are you talking about? That was the most convoluted, twisted and just plain amateurish attempt at Biblical interpretation I’ve ever seen on this blog. I know, you’re a Mormon and you’re feeling it. Your attempts here are consistent with what Mormonism has brought forth since the days of Joseph Smith.
Of course it’s convoluted, revelation is dead to a dead Church, it’s called the Great Apostasy.
Henry,
What has been “nailed” is this:
1. Mormons do selective reading. You didn’t read my posts where I quote extensively the Mormon church’s own material on this subject demonstrating that your church has no claim for its existence and relevance on our fair earth.
2. The Mormon church’s foundation is built on Joseph Smith. If not, your church could survive even if Joseph Smith were a fraud, which he is. I didn’t say it. Your prophet stated it above. He isn’t the only one. If Smith lied, the Mormon Church goes up in smoke. It will eventually which will be a day of great sorrow. Therefore, your church should be renamed The Church of Joseph Smith and his Latter-day Saints. If Smith goes down, then you go down to the pit with him. So much for Jesus being your foundation.
3. Mormons love conspiracy theories.
4. Mormons don’t leave their comfort zone and do research by reading historical sources which show their church to be lying about Christian church history.
5. Mormons place their priorities on feelings rather than known facts.
6. Mormons show their ignorance of the Bible every time they attempt to do biblical exegesis.
7. Mormonism is the great “chameleon” religion of the 21st century.
8. Trying to nail down Mormons on what is authoritative or trying to get them to be consistent is like trying to nail jello to a wall or hold on to an slippery eel in swamp water.
9. If Joseph Smith and Brigham Young were alive today they would anathematize the Utah brand of Mormonism in Salt Lake City.
10. Mormon missionaries should be pitied because the LDS Church has left them and its parishioners do their bidding for them. They are naive and grossly ignorant of what the LDS Church really believes.
What revelation, Henry? What new does the LDS Church have to offer the world since the birth of their false prophet in 1805 and subsequent trip supposedly from the woods in 1820? The gospel has been fully preached and given (Rom 15:19). The Bible contains the gospel message which gives everything that God wanted us to know. He will tell us all the truth and everything that we need to know from the very beginning. God wasn’t sitting on His “hands” waiting for precious Smith to appear on the scene.
It’s called the great apostasy only in the delusional minds of the Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and other cults that were birthed in 19th century America. What I don’t understand is the inconsistency of your General Authorities. I’ve heard them give conference reports and write positively about the Reformers (Martin Luther and others). Meanwhile, there wasn’t any known resemblance of the Christian church? I have to tell you, this claim by the Mormons is one of the primary reasons why your church, the Witnesses and other sects will never be viewed as credible by mainstream Christianity which it so desperately wants acceptance and approval. Sure, if you and the other LDS faithful want so badly to believe in it, then go ahead. The Sovereign God will certainly let you believe in such nonsense coupled with your exalted man-god who lives with his polygamous lives on/near Kolob procreating spirit babies.
I have already demonstrated by your church leader’s own statements, your scriptures, and your authoritative definitions that there was no apostasy. Therefore, your church has no claims for its existence. The LDS church’s foundation is built on Joseph Smith. Read the quote I gave you above. You can pick and choose what you want to read to your own self-deception.
Andy Watson, “What revelation, Henry? What new does the LDS Church have to offer the world since the birth of their false prophet in 1805 and subsequent trip supposedly from the woods in 1820?”
In your haste to distance yourself from what Peter said and what Perter received you then go on and sling whatever mud available too deflect the real issue, “Rvelation” which was my whole point.
You give a very simple reply, “The gospel has been fully preached and given (Rom 15:19), as if this is the end of the conversation and this settles all disagreement, amen.
Revelation?
Revelation which confirmed to me that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and His mission to Preach the Good New to the whole world, that Jesus Christ died for us and gave all mankind the free gift of Salvation, meaning that all will be resurrected and judged according to their Faith and Works.
Works? Well how about Repentance, Baptism, Charity and keeping the Commandments of God, which include all the covenants and ordinances of Christ true Church as taught in the NT.
Personal Revelation as was given to Peter, this revelation will come as we study scriptures, listen to and follow the counsel of the prophets and other Church leaders, and seek to live faithful, righteous lives.
Your doctrine, a apostate doctrine, teaches nothing about personal revelation. In place of what Peter received is the apostate Theology of a God who now speaks only from the Bible in word and backed by evidence. The prospect of one having a burning in the bosom is ridiculed and mocked.
Revelation?
“Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
“For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened,” (Matthew 7:7-8).
Taking sufficient time to search the word of God is paramount to receiving personal revelation.
“Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me,” (John 5: 39).
“Wherefore, I said unto you, feast upon the words of Christ; for behold, the words of Christ will tell you all things what ye should do,” (2 Ne. 32: 3).
Faith and Works?
“Be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.
“But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed,” (James 1:22,25).
How to receive personal revelation?
“Then shall ye call upon me, and ye shall go and pray unto me, and I will hearken unto you.
“And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart,” (Jeremiah 29:12).
Apostate Doctrine teaches the false belief that the Cannon of Scripture is closed and God does not speak, and has not spoken for thousands of years. Why do some believe this compared to the Restored belief in the following?
The ninth Article of Faith of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is: “We believe all that God has revealed, all that he does now reveal, and we believe that he will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.”
Henry,
Are you telling me what you wrote above is revelation? Is this your personal revelation or the revelation that is claimed by Mormon prophets? All I can say is that you rightly characterized it when you agreed with me that it’s convoluted. That’s the best description of what Mormon prophets do and have done through-out the history of the Mormon church.
I especially love the “revelation” that Brigham Young brought forth regarding Adam-god. The revelation of the on again off again doctrine of polygamy was also a hallmark. We should also point to Joseph Smith’s revelation regarding the changes he made to the King James Bible.
Mormonism is a game and revelation is its favorite toy. And the thing about Mormon revelation is that in the minds of Mormons it’s always right even if it’s contradictory of what was revealed previously. The OT is right when it said of the false prophets of that day that they prophesy out of their own imaginations. That is a perfect way to describe Mormon revelation.
God gave His Holy Spirit to the Church on the day of Pentecost. It was the promise of the Father as foretold by Jesus just before His ascension. Jesus told the Apostles that they would receive power when the Holy Spirit came upon them. The Church, being the Mystical Body of all believers in Jesus, is populated by born again, Spirit filled believers in Jesus.
Mormonism is void of the Spirit of God because the religion doesn’t acknowledge that Jesus is God. To Mormons Jesus is the spirit off spring of a mother father god living on the planet Kolob.
Mormonism is devoid of the Spirit and lacking in any power except the imaginative power which emanates from the souls of those who worship a false god.
Falcon, Henry,
Are you telling me what you wrote above is revelation?
I’m staying on topic of what we find in the scriptures about personal revelation. Question, did Peter receive revelation for the Church that Jesus is the Son of the living God, or did Peter receive revelation that was personal and for him only?
The answer is yes, I have not strayed from what Peter received, personal revelation. If you could not personally denote my line of thinking which brings to light the difference between a living Gospel, wherein God is not consigned by man to being silent and man choosing to closing the cannon of scripture and replacing it with objective evidence, I plead guilty.
My comparison is between the Restored NT Gospel and Revelation which has been replaced with the dead apostate teaching of; God does not communicate personally but only through His Word.
It seems you are quick to deflect, meaning the changing of the topic to Adam God which is a nice trick but is seen for what it projects, a lack of communicating your own Christian Doctrine that does not address personal revelation or what Peter the Rock received from God in heaven and not from flesh and blood.
Peter was giving his Personal Testimony, not a sermon or the preaching of Gods Word, not some hard or historical evidence, just a Spiritual, heart felt, sincere, and humble admission of the knowledge that Jesus is the Christ, and upon this principle (revelation) I will build my Church. Christ did not say, “and upon this “Jesus Christ, will build my church” Christ would most likely not talk in the third person.
And upon this “Rock” of revelation will I build this Church.
Henry said
Thats not true. You guys dont believe in Adam God, Blood Atonement, and many other things. You guys blow it off as It was mere Opinion, yet these guys said at the time, God said these things and the prophets said, It was scripture.
You ask what revelation?
A. That Jesus is the Christ, the resurrected Son of God and Lord and Savior to all mankind.
B. What is the Mission, to preach His word, that Jesus is the Christ and Lord and Savior to all mankind.
His message was never, your objective faith and historical evidences will save you and give you Salvation by the Grace of God. His message was, I am alive, the living Son of God, who sits at the right hand of my Father and will judge all man by their Faith and Works.
“And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.”
Rick B, my whole discussion is on Revelation, why do you insert Adam God, Blood Atonement.
Do you or can you show why you believe that Peter, who was called the “Rock” and His Personal revelation that Christ is the Son of the Living God is not part of the Foundation of the NT Church?
The topic is why the need for the restoration if there was no need of a restoration. I would love to hear your views.
Henry,
Here’s a good one for you regarding Mormon revelation. Brigham Young is a warehouse of nonsense and stupidity and a fine example of what passes for revelation from Mormon prophets.
“Who can tell us of the inhabitants of this little planet that shines of an evening, called the moon?…when you inquire about the inhabitants of that sphere you find that the most learned are as ignorant in regard to them as the ignorant of their fellows. So it is in regard to the inhabitants of the sun. Do you think it is inhabited? I rather think it is. Do you think there is any life there? No question of it; it was not made in vain.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 13, p. 271)
Your problem Henry is that the Mormon church’s prophet Young taught that what he preached was as good if not better than Scripture. And above is a fine example of Mormon “Scripture”.
Henry Mormonism has a different God and therefore the revelation that comes to Mormons comes from a spirit other than the Holy Spirit that was given to the Church at Pentecost. When a born again believer is baptized by the Holy Spirit the Gifts of the Spirit are made available to him/her. Read carefully First Corinthians 12, 13 and 14 for a thorough explanation.
Of course God gives revelation to His Church, the Mystical Body of born again believers. But the Cannon of Scripture is closed. We have the revelation of who God is. The on-going nature of revelation in the Church supports Scripture. Mormonism is all over the ballpark with creative utterances of false prophets who are void of the Spirit of God and are instead led by their own imaginations and a false spirit.
Until you get born again Henry you’re lost.
So again, can you get back to Personal Revelation and the Biblical teachings? Side tracking does not really challenge me, what challenges me is interpreting scripture correctly, Christians admitting or acknowledging that the Cannon of Scripture is closed and God has decided that further revelation is of no importance to a changing world, a corrupt world, and one that is in need of Repentance.
H.
Henry,
Do you read what I write? I spent a whole post answering you regarding personal revelation. I pointed you to Scripture. I discussed the indwelling of the Holy Spirit of those who are born again (by the Spirit of God). I reminded you that the God you acknowledge and the spirit that leads you is not the God of the Bible nor the Spirit that was given by the Father on the day of Pentecost. I’ve pointed out to you the nonsense revelation of Mormon prophets.
The bottom line is that Mormons are receiving their “revelation” from their own souls and/or a familiar spirit who is the spirit of Mormonism. Your famed prophet Smith was a practitioner of occult folk magic and the spirits that appeared to him were familiar spirits. He and his homeboys practiced second sight vision through which they claimed connection to the spirit world. One of your prophets even claimed the Signers of the Declaration of Independence appeared to him demanding temple work be done for them. Mormons have claimed to have seen spirits of the dead while engaged in temple ceremonies.
So Mormonism is an occult religion that gives credence to spirit entities that are more than happy to provide a Mormon with all sorts of spiritual experiences and faux revelations.
All of this is of course very entertaining for Mormons as the spirit of Mormonism is more than willing to provide all sorts of thrills and chills for those who willing give themselves to him. From his perch atop the fictitious planet of Kolob, the Mormon god and his spirit envoys swoop in and around the Mormon temples infiltrating the Free Masonry rituals and laugh themselves silly as the truly devoted jump in and out of water tanks getting nothing but wet.
Henry, sorry t0 took so long to reply , Saturday was a very busy day outside for me. As I’m
getting ready for Church I’ll have to make my response to your question about “keys” , in
Matt 16, somewhat shorter than usual . I think this term Jesus used was simply a way to
illustrate the authority He was giving His apostles. Jesus was addressing His disciples there
gathered and while Peter spoke up , Jesus by saying “keys” was telling all of them that each
would have the “key” ( authority) to represent Him . Now concerning authority from God ,
this is a common theme with those who claim to be prophets in our day and Mormon leaders
are one among many with this exclusive claim to be the sole mouthpiece of God on earth today.
Most of these modern day prophets competing for our attention today claim to trace their
authority back to those apostles Jesus personally picked to spread His gospel. My wife was
once a member of a religion that was led by “God’s sole spokesman ” today whom God had
restored the fundamental truths thru in 1879 . Another individual who has claimed a following
of several million , has claimed to be the “Lord of the Second Advent” , when he was asked for his
authority he testified, ” I spoke with Jesus Christ in the spirit world. And I also spoke with John
the Baptist. This is my authority. ” His ministry all started in 1936 when he was visited by a
heavenly messenger. Mormonism is not alone in it’s claims of authority from Jesus.
[ cont]
Henry,
The verse in question in Matthew reads:
And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (KJV)
Are you saying that the “it” here, is not referring to “the church”? _johnny
[cont]
Looking at Mormonism’s claims of authority we see that this message is specific , as one
Mormon apostle testified, ” …we preach the same Gospel in all it’s simplicity and plainness
that Jesus preached….” . But only Mormon leaders faithfully preach this gospel today
because the claim is also made that Jesus’ gospel had been lost , polluted , changed , only
to be restored by God thru a modern day prophet ; the claim : ” salvation and the gospel
is ” once again available ” . I just don’t buy there lofty claims . The Gospel has always been
available and hence followers of Jesus have always been present . The following claim from
Mormon church curriculum is representative of the problem I’m discussing : ” This is not a
continuous church, nor is it one that has been reformed or redeemed. It has been restored
after it was lost . It was lost—the gospel with it’s powers and blessings— sometime after the
Savior’s crucifixion and the loss of his apostles. The laws were changed , the ordinances were
changed and the everlasting covenant was broken that the Lord Jesus Christ gave to His people
in those days. There was a long period of centuries when the gospel was not available to people
on this earth, because it had been changed. ” [ Doct. of the Gospel, student manual ,p.60 ].
In short, a complete apostasy of the Christian religion allegedly took place. This is a lie.
What’s interesting is that Mormon leaders have themselves , exhibited confusion over
“laws” ” and ordinances “, adding and discarding doctrines advertised as Jesus’ Gospel.
Responding only to the original post:
I agree with many points of the original post. As an active and devout latter day saint, the double standard of ‘hate speech’ is not lost on me. Historically Mormons have indeed been very critical of our “Christian” neighbors. We have spoken in ways that were antagonistic, disrespectful and insulting. We have questioned their motives, their devotion and their heavenly destiny. Yet, when the tables are turned, we cry foul.
We can’t have it both ways. I think modern Mormons are slowly shedding some of those negative speech patterns. I hope that the dialogue happening in the media will help bring about the polishing and refinement that we need as Latter Day Saints.
Henry,
You remind me of someone that was once here. I say that because you do the same thing They were doing, You ask a question, then you forget you asked it, then you claim we/I am changing the subject.
You said
I said that was not true, I said that BY taught things like Adam God and Blood Atonement and He taught these things as Revelation from God to us the people.
But then you said
That question you asked me shows you ignored everything I said. But thats not all, Then you said
bws71,
Thanks for joining our forum. You wrote a very thoughtful, honest and insightful post. Stick around and post again.
See everyone. The falcon can be nice!
rick,
I don’t get it! Is there a workshop that some of these Mormons go to so they end-up sounding like one another and using the same tactics? Having not spent any quality time in the Mormon world, I don’t know, but have heard that they kind of come off an LDS assembly line with a little string coming out from the back of their necks. When the string is pulled they say what they’ve been programmed to say. Maybe that’s what’s happening here with Henry. It does get a person a little suspicious though doesn’t it?
OH BTW, I used your hot powder on my chili tonight. I really like the kick. It’s also excellent on salmon and just about anything really except shredded wheat, yogurt and most fruits. I think I’ll have to make a trip over to your place and sample your new concoctions. Do you have like a coupon or something I can use?
bws71,
Greetings, it’s nice to hear from you. I appreciate your honesty and willingness to self-evaluate as an LDS member.
I thought I would ask you for a your thoughts on a related topic. LDS don’t like the word “cult” – which is just a lazy, insensitive way of saying that LDS religion is not Christian. Critics of LDS don’t like the word “anti-mormon” – which is just a lazy, insensitive, broad stroke against all critics of the LDS church. But most LDS really want to be accepted as being Christians, or at least the LDS church (leadership) does. My question to you is not whether you personally want to be considered Christian or LDS Christian, or whether you want the LDS church to be considered Christian, but whether you think that LDS should just be honest and call themselves the only true Christians as their belief of being the only true Church means. Feel free to answer all of the above, but the last is the sort of honesty that I would expect from LDS (on the “Christian” issue) just as you seem to expect from LDS (on the hate speech issue).
As a note, I wouldn’t take an LDS claim to be the Only True Christians, and more specifically the implication that I and others are not REAL Christians, as hate speech. I would just consider it incorrect and a bit arrogant, just as I do the LDS church’s claim to be the Only True Church.
Since I last posted grindael and Andy Watson have both posted replies to me
Grindael has called my argument an “atheist red herring” that is “denigrating” the Bible. He insists I am using a “faulty assumption” and “disingenuous tactics”
Yet for all his claims he has not interacted with my argument in any meaningful way. All he has done this time is to point that that the JS translation changed Ezekiel 14:9 to read that the lord does not deceive.
Grindael, I do not believe the lord deceives. When Titus 1:2 says that God does not lie, I agree with it. When Ezekiel 14:9 of the normal Bible says that God decives, I disagree with it. On the other hand, you insist on holding to Biblical infallibility, and claim to believe both Ezekiel 14:9 and Titus 1:2, insisting that the obvious contradiction is non-existent
Grindael, if you really believe that than stop running away and answer me.
Do you believe that God can or can not deceive the wicked? If not, how can you claim to believe Ezekiel 14:9, 2 Thessalonians 2:11 and 1 kings 22:23? If so, how can you claim to believe Titus 1:2, Hebrews 6:18 and Numbers 23:19?
Andy Watson also gives a lot of rhetoric. He describes me as “trolling” and my comments ” philosophical nonsense” and a “train wreck”. One would think that if my skill were as poor as he claims then refuting me would be no challenge, yet he has only commented on what is at best a minor issue in my argument.
Andy, if you are going to get on a public forum and make a case against someones religion than you can expect people to put your argument to the test to see if it holds. If you really believe your argument works,
(cont), I invite you to defend your argument directly rather than complaining and throwing insults at me.
You say that I “left Christianity because you never was one of us”. Andy, if what I was wasn’t a believer than nobody here is. I was a born-again spirit filled tongue speaking Jesus freak. Prior to my conversion I was pulling two days off of my working week to spend time helping out at my church anyway I could. I believed with all my heart, soul, mind and strength. If I wasn’t really one of you, then nobody here can claim with complete confidence that they really are.
“and I have never heard this rule you are putting forth”
Admittedly I speak as a complete amateur here. My posts show I am not adverse to retracting my claims when I have been shown wrong, so discuss this with me. I simply inferred this idea from the criticism that conservatives always give liberals- if one is allowed to just slap ‘analogy’ whenever one likes, then we have no grounds to complain against the liberal who insists the verses against Homosexuality are somehow metaphors. But we all do that, so I got my ‘rule’ from there. I would really like to know what rules do you use to decide when a verse is literal or an analogy?
Henry,
Back to your topic of personal revelation and Matt 16:17. First, make no mistake, Christians do believe in personal revelation. And the Holy Spirit does guide each of us and THE CHURCH (real Bride/Body of Christ) through the Headship of Christ. This is not the issue. Rather it is the assumption that Jesus was not the pinnacle of revelation. As he said, he came to reveal the Father, and whoever has seen him has seen the Father. I say this because it would seem if LDS truly believed that Jesus was the ultimate revelation to mankind, then this revelation would remain. It seems to either cheapen Christ as a revelation or to reduce him lower than the pinnacle to say that his revelation did not remain with mankind after his departure. As the Bible says, God’s Word does not return to him void. In this way it would seem that the Great Apostasy would have to have come about from the apostles stopping preaching the Word and that all their converts at some point never did. The Word would have returned to God void, that is without fruit, a new believer. But this seems impossible, for any real fruit, starting with the Apostles would confess Christ before men and thus continue the lineage of believers.
Instead Christians believe that Christ is the ultimate revelation of and from God and that it is so not only in itself but in it having no identical successor or any successor of any kind. All revelation after Christ is personal revelation for the hearer to accept Christ and live by Christ. All other revelation is personal and is for growth in Christ – whether about beliefs or daily choices. (contd)
Now, specifically, Matt 16:17. Jesus is talking about who he is; this is the context. First, he asks the disciples “who do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?” Then, he asks “But who do you say that I am?” In both cases the question is “who am I?”
Then he asks Simon Bar-Jonah, who replies that he is “the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus replies that he is right, and that this was not received by other men but by “My Father who is in heaven.” Now you could ignore the topic that started and went throughout this transaction, that is “who is Jesus of Nazareth,” and suggest that Jesus was just using this as a setup to get to Peter’s blessing from the Father but not just for that but for the real purpose, revelation. But this seems a bit of a stretch.
When Jesus then calls him Peter/stone, and says, “and upon this rock I will build my church…,” if I understand your position correctly, you claim that Jesus is referring to revelation (or personal revelation) as the rock and Peter is being nicknamed after this all at once. This seems like a lot of talk of revelation without ever using the word. Yes, Jesus says that it was revealed to him by God, but, in the same breath, he refers to this type of revealing as being possible from flesh and blood.(I only say this to indicate that “revelation” is neither the topic of this conversation (which is who Jesus is), nor does it seem to be a secondary topic of this conversation, as the “revealing” appears to be more of a personal side note to Peter. Rather, (contd.)
Rather, “and upon this rock” is referring to this contextual topic – who Jesus is, or rather Jesus and all He is. This would be supported by other statements by Jesus – being the revelation of the Father, building one’s house on the rock (not revelation in general but THE revelation that is Christ), and others: the foundation that is laid (Christ) 1 Cor 3:11 – For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
This is why Christ is central to Christianity and “revelation” in general is not. Christians don’t believe that Christ was just a prophet/teacher of the actions to take to get to Heaven or a spiritual brother who died that everyone would be resurrected. We believe that Christ is the revelation of the Father – not visually in form – but in the ultimate sense of them being the one God. That Christ wasn’t just sent by his spirit Father, but that he was God coming to us to save us, not just from death, but from eternal separation from Him. In this way, again, it would seem unlikely that the one whose life and act of sacrifice to bring us back into right relationship with God would begin “a” church based on this and then let it go into apostasy.
I understand why LDS value revelation, because it is part of the relationship with God that we all need. But it is just a part. Personal revelation is the communication between us and God. “Higher” revelation that changes what God has said or makes us doubt that God would keep His Word to us safe and true and changes the very nature and purpose of the life of Christ endangers that relationship.
Spartacus, you made some excellent points concerning personal revelation. Henry’s
caricature of what those non-LDS here believe about this issue seems like a straw-man
argument . When I read of Peter’s confession of who he believed Jesus was I see what
transpired in his life before this happened. Peter was a witness to what Jesus said and did
for quite a while before Jesus asked him the question recorded in Matt 16:15. Peter’s
confession was based on historical ,objective evidence — 2 Pt. 1:16 . So was Thomas’ —
John 20:28. I believe in personal revelation , I believe God does speak to those who have
come to Him through His Son , I even believe God can speak to and help non-believers
in ways . When I read about Mormon history I see where some Mormons have been so misled
by relying on their spiritual witness , especially when it comes to following some of the counsel
from their prophets and apostles. Prov.14:12 together with Matt 15:14 is relevant here.
Mick,
I haven’t “run away”. I answered your atheist argument. You don’t accept it, or obviously understand it. Read my replies again. To bring it up, in the way you did makes me seriously question your motives and faith. . You are the one postulating that the Bible contradicts itself, and therefore God is a liar. Even your own claimed faith doesn’t go that far. That came from you. that is what ATHEISTS do! Examine yourself. There is something seriously wrong with any claimed Christian who does so. _johnny
Mick, I agree with Johnny.
You and me were talking via email, and like Johnny said I also said to you, why are you not simply saying Your an atheist? I pointed out to you how you throw the Bible under the bus at every turn, every single chance you get you do. I even pointed out to you how Mormon leaders, Prophets and presidents have said various things that they claim are scripture and spoken from God Himself.
Yet you reply with, I dont care, They are dead prophets and they are not my prophet. You simply cannot blow of what your prophets have said, when they say these saying are from God himself, Yet you do and this shows you really dont care. Then you yourself said that the BoM and the Mormon prophets contradict themselves. But you simply dismiss this by saying, God revels a little here and a little there to people as they can handle it. I told you, God will not tell one person something, then a second person something else, then a 3rd and a 4th and a 5th Ect, and all 5 contradict each other.
This is not from God, God is not the author of confusion, Then right away as a typical Mormon, you blow off the problems and say, WELL the Bible Contradicts it’s self. Thats it, throw the Bible under the bus. So why bother believing and not just be an Atheist? You clearly reject Scripture, and you believe your own church contradicts it’s self and it’s scripture.
Seriously, what evidence in your own words can any one provide that you would feel is good enough to prove the Bible is real and the word of God, if you reject everything we say?
Mick,
It seems from what some people here have said to you, and I know I have said to you via private email, I guess I have to ask two questions?
1. If you admit your leaders and scriptures contradict one another, then what exactly is it about Mormonism you believe to be true? You claim your former pastor could not answer any question, yet your LDS leader can answer them all with out problem.
Funny how I know personally a few atheists that claim when they were Christians their pastors were so ignorant they could not answer any question ever asked of them, that was why they became an atheist.
I believe their are many pastors out their that dont have all the answers, But I find it hard to believe their are so many pastors that are so ignorant, they cannot answer any single question ever, but sadly that seems to be the case from all the atheists and You that I have spoken with.
Now the other question is, What evidence can we provide that would be good enough for you? It seems to me that no matter what I say in private, or what anyone here on this blog says to you, you seem to have a reply for everything, and nothing we say is ever good enough? In the Bible we see Jesus Raising the dead, Yet the religious leaders reply with, Lets kill Lazarus. Good Grief, he was dead and you want to kill him again, they denied what Jesus did. Jesus healed the lame, gave sight to the Blind and all the religious leaders did was accuse Jesus of breaking the sabbath or claiming His power was from Satan. It was clear no evidence was ever good enough, and they kept (Cont)
(Cont).
throwing Jesus under the Bus at every turn. I have meet and spoken with Atheists that have said, even if someone found Noah’s ark, and they put it on display in Macy’s Day parade, they would still deny God exists. Some people simply dont want God to be real, otherwise they will be held accountable to him.
Their is a guy named Dr Rick Oliver, he was a big name evolutionist. He taught evolution for 40 years and hated Christians, His goal was to prove them wrong and even said while he taught in schools, He would give lower grades to people who professed to be Christian. He one day gave his life to Jesus and has been teaching Evolution and Creation to people. He teaches both sides and allows people to decide based upon the evidence to think for themselves.
He Gave a quote from a college of His, I will watch the video again after I borrow it this Thursday and get it for you. This college of Ricks teaches and believes in evolution, He said he knows their is zero evidence for evolution and it has been thoroughly debunked, yet he still would rather believe in evolution knowing it is false, than to believe a God who he will be held accountable to Exists. This shows that for some people, No amount of evidence will ever be good enough. I believe this is you, but do please tell us, what evidence if any will ever be good enough. Seems to me you believe in a man despite the over whelming evidence that he is taking you straight to hell, while rejecting the truth that can set you free claiming it is not good enough.
Mick,
Those on here claiming you were never a Christian I think are correct. I would use your own defense of your previous Christian standing as proof:
You said: “You say that I “left Christianity because you never was one of us”. Andy, if what I was wasn’t a believer than nobody here is. I was a born-again spirit filled tongue speaking Jesus freak. Prior to my conversion I was pulling two days off of my working week to spend time helping out at my church anyway I could. I believed with all my heart, soul, mind and strength. If I wasn’t really one of you, then nobody here can claim with complete confidence that they really are.”
Clearly you thought, and still think, Christianity is about works, doing things – spirit filled, Jesus freaking, speaking in tongues, working for the Church two days a week, whew!- and I am sure that’s just part of your list. You’re missing grace, free grace, unmerited forgiveness – openly receiving God’s unmerited favor given to us in the bloody cross. No wonder you quit! I would get tired of all that performing as well… and I suspect you will get tired of the new works you’re now performing in hopes of pleasing a god you will never please. You traded one set of obligations for another – endless working without end – in hopes of achieving something you never could achieve.
Mr. Garrone,
I have defended my argument regarding the bogus LDS claim of a worldwide Christian apostasy. I wrote seven posts earlier giving a full, apologetic defense of my position and claim using multiple LDS sources coupled with Holy Scripture and writings of the early church fathers. I’m sorry that you missed that somewhere along the way. The complaining and whining seems to be on your end. You are like Goliath in the Old Testament who comes out and taunts the people of God asking for formidable foes to come forth and engage you in battle. Apparently you don’t think anyone here is up to your master level in logic and pagan, atheistic philosophy. Guess what? I don’t fit that criterion either because that isn’t my expertise. However, I do know a little Christian theology and Bible. I have also studied Mormonism for a number of years.
Quit “banging your drum” and ask your questions if it pertains to the topic at hand. I have skimmed back through your posts and I haven’t seen any questions that you have asked of me. The post directed to me stated that you didn’t “have the time, patience, or amount of posts allowed to do so”. If that is the case, then please make up your mind. Ask your question (s); I will do my best to answer them.
You know how I can prove that you never were a Christian? It’s simple, Mr. Garrone. It’s because you are a Mormon now. The elect/redeemed of God will not fall away into paganism. They will persevere to the end because they are firmly in the Father and Son’s grasp (John 10:27-29). They were chosen before the foundation of the world and their names recorded in the Book of Life (Eph 1:4; Rev 13:8).
Mick,
I was coming home from work and was thinking about how you said your pastor could not answer any of your questions. I will tell you what I was thinking in a minute. But I will say this, I dont believe for one minute you will say, yep Rick your correct.
Any way I was thinking, Is it more a matter of, Your pastor was unable to answer you, you simply did not like or agree with the answers, so you feel he did not or could not answer you? I say this because I notice you feel none of us can answer you, we do give answers, you just dont agree or like what we say, so you come back with, You cannot answer me.
All religions have been critical of each other, but the difference lies in that Mormons don’t write entire books or run entire “research ministries” dedicated to digging dirt on other religions. Catholics and Jews don’t either; only Evangelical Christians resort to that mode of attack.
Sorry Nelson but you’re quite mistaken. You sound just like someone who has had a bad
experience with some “Evangelical” . That’s unfortunate . Admittedly, there are those who
don’t show much respect for Mormons out there , but your emotions have steered you away
from the fact that there are those who do respect the Mormon people and seek to warn them
of danger, spiritual danger. We must take Jesus’ warning in Matt 7:15;24:11 very seriously
don’t you think ? After all , I’m sure you’ll agree that there are indeed many men today that
are claiming to be prophets . But does it really matter what a person believes ? Are all prophets
harmless ? Just this summer one such religious leader claimed to have the date for the end of
the world , but it did’nt happen . Harmless ? No, because news reported of some people who
had committed suicides in fear of world wide calamity starting . We here also see a danger with
prophets , particularly those who teach false on spiritual issues. Many people are quick to thank
the FDA when it warns of dangerous pathogens in our food supply, but some of these same people
( perhaps like you ) see little reason to take dangerous spiritual teachings seriously . Jesus was
concerned over this , so are we, and so should you be. This ministry seeks to simply warn people
of false prophets, and remember not all false prophets are conniving, immoral individuals. Some
are simply wrong on relaying God’s messages to us , but even this error of theirs can have
serious consequences . I share this in respect. Thanks .
Nelson,
To add to what Mike said, Their have been some false teachers that have told their followers they need to kill themselves so the can get to the space ship that is coming behind the comet, or that they need to drink the kool-aid Then they died. Would you be happy if one of your friends or family members died at the hands of these false prophets? Would you be happy if someone told them (Warned) them and they left before they died? The Bible talks about how we are to warn people of the danger to come, and if we do and they refuse to listen, then their blood is upon their hands. But if we know the truth and say nothing, then their blood is upon us.