The latest speculation about Mormon doctrine comes from lawyer turned “apostle” D. Todd Christofferson who spoke about the subject at the April 2012 General Conference, calling it “The Doctrine of Christ.”
In this talk Christofferson makes the following observation:
“In some faith traditions, theologians claim equal teaching authority with the ecclesiastical hierarchy, and doctrinal matters may become a contest of opinions between them. Some rely on the ecumenical councils of the Middle Ages and their creeds. Others place primary emphasis on the reasoning of post-apostolic theologians or on biblical hermeneutics and exegesis. We value scholarship that enhances understanding, but in the Church today, just as anciently, establishing the doctrine of Christ or correcting doctrinal deviations is a matter of divine revelation to those the Lord endows with apostolic authority.”
According to Christofferson, then, Mormon doctrine is the teaching of “authorized” church leaders given by “divine revelation.” He continues,
“At the same time it should be remembered that not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. It is commonly understood in the Church that a statement made by one leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, not meant to be official or binding for the whole Church. The Prophet Joseph Smith taught that ‘a prophet [is] a prophet only when he [is] acting as such.’
“President Clark, quoted earlier, observed:
“ ‘To this point runs a simple story my father told me as a boy, I do not know on what authority, but it illustrates the point. His story was that during the excitement incident to the coming of [Johnston’s] Army, Brother Brigham preached to the people in a morning meeting a sermon vibrant with defiance to the approaching army, and declaring an intention to oppose and drive them back. In the afternoon meeting he arose and said that Brigham Young had been talking in the morning, but the Lord was going to talk now. He then delivered an address, the tempo of which was the opposite from the morning talk.’”
In a footnote, Christofferson adds that Clark didn’t actually know if the story his father told even happened. So for Christofferson and Clark, an unverified story, perhaps folklore, illustrates the principle that even the President of the Church himself may not always be moved upon by the Holy Ghost when he addresses the people? This is not what those like Orson Hyde said about Brigham Young:
“Some persons say that Brigham does not give revelations as did Joseph Smith. But let me tell you, that Brigham’s voice has been the voice of God from the time he was chosen to preside, and even before. …He possesses skill, wisdom, and power that trouble wise men and rulers. God will make him a greater terror to nations than he ever has been. I will now quote a few passages from the revelations of God as contained in the Book of Doctrine and Covenants:—‘My words shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice out of the heavens, or by the voice of my servants, it is the same.’ Again, concerning his servants—‘Whatsoever you shall speak by my Spirit shall be Scripture—shall be the word of the Lord, the will of the Lord, the mind of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation.’ Again, from the New Testament, Jesus says, ‘Whosoever heareth you (whom I send) heareth me.’” (Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses 8:234-235, October 7, 1860)
Which Mormon “prophet,” will they claim, didn’t have the “constant companionship” of the Holy Ghost? If they can’t tell us that, then they can’t say the “prophet” did not always speak by his power.
“Apostle” Moses Thatcher claimed that unlike “hireling” Christians, Mormons speak the truth when delivering doctrine to the “saints”:
“They [the elders of Israel] speak as they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost and not as those paid with a price. A true servant of God is not afraid of public opinion, but will rebuke that opinion if wrong. …I bear to you my testimony that Wilford Woodruff is a prophet of the Most High God. I know that he speaks by revelation. He communes with Brigham Young, though Brigham Young, we say, is dead. Joseph, the great modern prophet since death, has communed with our venerable living leader. Thus are we lead step by step through the inspiration that comes from God and his servants;…” (Brian Stuy, Collected Discourses 2:316-317, November 2, 1891)
Brigham Young was emphatic that neither he nor anyone authorized by him ever taught false doctrine and challenged the world to show otherwise:
“You may ask the question: Has no one Elder in Israel ever taught false doctrine? Yes, but no man has who has been authorized to teach, guide and direct the Saints. Did Jesus, Peter, James, John or Joseph Smith ever teach a false or incorrect doctrine? Not that you or I know of; we cannot find it.” (Journal of Discourses 12:310, November 29, 1868)
“I am at the defiance of earth and hell to put a finger on the place or time that a false doctrine was taught to any one, a wrong taught to any one, or when evil was justified in any one, all the liars and all the lies on earth and in hell to the contrary notwithstanding.” (Journal of Discourses 13:217, July 17, 1870)
This would include Young’s teachings on Adam-god, blood atonement, and the priesthood ban on blacks.
Brigham Young also said that false doctrine, if taught, would be detected by the “saints” almost immediately:
“I can say this for the Latter-day Saints, and I will say it to their praise and my satisfaction, if I were to preach false doctrine here, it would not be an hour after the people got out, before it would begin to fly from one to another, and they would remark, ‘I do not quite like that! It does not look exactly right! What did Brother Brigham mean? That did not sound quite right, it was not exactly the thing!’ … I will defy any man, to preach false doctrine without being detected; and we need not go to the Elders. of Israel, the children who have been born in these mountains possess enough of the Spirit to detect it.” (Journal of Discourses 14:205, August 13, 1871)
What is Christofferson talking about when he says that “It is commonly understood in the Church that a statement made by one leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, not meant to be official or binding for the whole Church?” He gives no specifics, but I can provide examples from Conference Addresses when the speaker gives his opinion — and clearly states that it is an “opinion.” Here’s one:
“In my opinion, there were classes and races, and separation into different groups and conditions before we came to this world, and all are getting what they are entitled to receive here.” (Melvin J. Ballard, Conference Report, April 1915, 62. For a few more examples see Journal of Discourses 1:220, 8:21; Collected Discourses 4:277; Conference Report October 1951, 85)
The Conference Addresses of the Church (from the Journal of Discourses to the present) are full of such opinions. How can you know when these men are giving their opinions? Why, they tell you so.
Christofferson would have members think Church leaders are prone to intermix opinion, speculation and folklore in with their doctrinal teachings without mentioning it, perhaps forgetting that they are (and were) commanded to speak by the power of the Holy Ghost. Wilford Woodruff taught the opposite:
“When the Apostles and Elders of Israel are called to teach you, when they are called to go abroad and to teach the inhabitants of the earth, they are commanded of the Lord to speak as they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and when a man speaks as he is moved upon by the Holy Ghost, it is the word of the Lord, it is the mind of the Lord, it is the will of the Lord, it is Scripture, it is the power of God unto salvation unto every one that believes. If we do not have the Holy Ghost we have no business to teach. But when the Elders of Israel do teach you by the Holy Ghost, you have the revelations of God to you. We have these revelations lying before us for our guidance day by day, as well as the living oracles.” (Brian Stuy, Collected Discourses 2:46, April 6, 1890)
Try to pin down these current “apostles” about how and when Mormon “prophets” and “apostles” did not have the gift of the Holy Spirit, or when their “apostles” were not authorized to teach and proclaim doctrine. They will not give any satisfactory answers. What is the doctrine of Christ according to Mormon Scripture? It is the voice of Christ spoken through his servants by the power of the Holy Ghost:
“What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same.” (D&C 1:38)
Since no Mormon audience that we know of ever spoke out against any of the sermons in the Journal of Discourses or subsequent Conference Reports, we can rest assured that these men were speaking by the “power of the Holy Ghost” and were indeed teaching doctrine and scripture unless (as they did frequently) they indicated that they were just giving their opinion.
There is an old adage: The Pope declares himself to be infallible and no one believes him and the Mormon Prophet declares himself to be very fallible and no one believes him.
Joseph Smith rightly observed that: ” a prophet is a prophet only when he is acting as such.”
In other words there may be times when a prophet speaks or acts in his capacity as a weak and fallible individual who is quite limited in his understanding and knowledge. Not every utterance made by a prophet is necessarily divinely inspired. Such utterances will be tinged by the individual’s prejudices, biases, and limited understanding. We clearly observe this with many of Brigham Young’s assertions (Adam/God, etc.) of which he often stated that he was expressing his personal opinion.
It is not difficult for Latter-day Saints to understand that their leaders are just mere mortals with all of the incumbent frailties and foibles that mere mortals are subject to notwithstanding the sanctity of their divine callings. On the other hand, critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints condemn the ‘merest speck in the eye’ of the prophet or other Church leaders while ignoring the ‘beam’ of prejudice that blinds the critic’s perception. Critics hold a double standard when condemning modern prophets for their personal shortcomings while accepting without question or scrutiny the very fallible individuals of the Bible who God chose as prophets. Did the fact that Abraham almost sacrificed his son Isaac make him any less a prophet? Of course not. Did the fact that Moses was a murderer make him any less of a prophet? Of courses not. Did the fact that Lot got drunk and had sexual intercourse with his two daughters make him any less of a holy man? Of course not. Yet Mormon critics are quick to condemn modern prophets for much lesser offences.
Unfaithful Israelites ignored the dead prophets and scorned (even to the point of stoning) many of the living prophets of the Old Testament and the Apostles of the New Testament. These same stiff-necked and hard-hearted Israelites found every sort of fault with the Lord Jesus Christ calling Him a blasphemer and wicked man and had Him crucified at the hands of the Romans. This same spirit of intolerance and scorn resides in the heart of many critics of modern prophets of God.
Let’s get one thing straight from the outset. Mormonism has no prophets that reveal anything or speak inspired words from God.
They are false prophets. Mormons brag about these guys until it is pointed out how totally inane and down right stupid these masqueraders are then all of a sudden (the prophets) are fallible, speaking their own opinions, and are instituting what later becomes known as “folk doctrine”.
Do Mormons seriously think that anyone with an ounce of spiritual discernment would take these Mormon prophets seriously?
And then we get these guys like Alex showing up here interpreting Mormonism and Mormon prophets for us. He’s more lost than they are as it truly is a case of the blind leading the blind. Let me give you an example from a blog called “Pure Mormonism”.
He writes:
“I have a testimony of the Christ. I also have a testimony of the Book of Mormon, the purpose of which is to lead men to Christ, and in my case that book was instrumental. And I have a testimony that God raised up Joseph Smith as a prophet through which He revealed many important things.”
“But I don’t have a testimony of “the Church.”
“And for or a variety of reasons. Chief among those reasons is that I find no place in scripture where the Lord commands, encourages, admonishes, or expects His followers to cultivate, develop, or express such a testimony.”
And there’s more:
“But perhaps our confusion is based on our misunderstanding of what exactly we mean when we speak of “the church.” That definition seems to have changed dramatically from how it was understood in Joseph Smith’s day. Today we constantly hear latter-day Saints speaking of “the church” being true as though the word church was interchangeable with the the gospel.”
“And that, I think is where our problem lies. The Church and the Gospel are not even close to being the same thing.”
http://puremormonism.blogspot.com/
So that’s the way it goes in Mormonism. This guy is Alex on steroids. This is what Mormonism breeds because of it’s false prophets, many of the current crop of members take their own shot at defining what Mormonism or the “gospel” is.
Mormons are told on the one hand to follow their leaders they will never lead you astray. Then they are told, “Hay don’t take all this stuff so seriously were just speculating and after all, we’re just mere men.”
Mormons need to decide exactly if they’re going to give their leaders rock star status or bring them down a peg or two.
I probably shouldn’t give this guy so much free pub but I think his thinking illustrates what goes on in Mormonism and why we get Mormons showing up here, trying to defend Mormonism spouting their own opinions of what it all really means, and eventually getting themselves all twisted up and walking off in a huff after bearing their testimony.
So this is what this guy has to say. I don’t know where it places on the Mormon spectrum but we have 100 different sects of Mormonism and a wide variety of views from the “New Order Mormons” to the folks over at “Mormon Think”.
Here it goes:
“I’ve had a lifelong interest in what the early Latter-day Saints understood to be the “pure theology” of The Restoration, unfiltered by many of the common assumptions prevalent among a majority of modern Mormons today. In Joseph Smith’s time, a teaching was accepted as valid only if obtained through divine revelation from God. Today, much of what passes for doctrine among my fellow Saints appears to contain “the philosophies of men mingled with scripture.” I’ve been further intrigued by warnings of the falling away of the latter-day saints in our day as foretold in the Book of Mormon, and this blog was created as a forum for discussing some of the possible signs of that prophesied derailment.”
Catch that? He wants to uncover “The pure theology of the restoration”.
Maybe Alex could help him out with that! Isn’t amazing how there was all this confusion in the time of Joseph Smith and he arose and restored everything the way it was in the first century Church and yet all this confusion reigns in Mormonism as to what it was that he exactly restored?
So our writer over at “Pure Mormonism” wants to find the pure theology of Joseph Smith.
First of all why would someone have to search to find the pure theology of Mormonism? Well let me state the obvious. The obvious answer is that the Mormon “family” of sects all have their own interpretation of what pure Mormon theology is and they all claim to have the truth.
Joseph Smith’s premise, his reason for creating his religion, was that the original gospel had been lost after the death of the Apostles and he, Smith, had been chosen to restore first century Christianity.
But here’s the problem. Smith fell away from the restoration almost as soon as he provided for it, right?
Indulge me here please because I did post this on another thread but it’s applicable here.
“Some members of the Church were confused because they knew the truth of the Gospel; but confused by the new doctrines introduced by ministers they trusted, that were not found in the Bible or Book of Mormon. These doctrines included the consolidation of power into the hands of one man as “Prophet” (not unlike the Pope) the offices of a High Priest and a First Presidency, the practice of baptism for the dead, the belief in a changeable God and the mysticism of Free Masonry. The name of the Church had even been changed to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”
‘Throughout the years since the death of Joseph Smith, Jr., the Church of Christ has been the only church that has made a consistent effort to follow, point by point, the original organization and doctrine which was instituted by Jesus Christ in the ancient New Testament church and restored by God in 1830.”
http://www.churchofchrist-tl.org/about.html
So there you have it! The problem for all these various Mormon sects trying to find the pure theology of the restoration is that their ideas are based on a false premise. I don’t see any where in the Bible, the history of the Christian Church, the traditions of the Church, the writings of the Church Fathers or the writings of the early heretics, anything that resembles Mormonism in any of its various sects/forms.
When folks start embracing the ideas of a guy who says that he had all sorts of visitations by a variety of spirit beings, you’ve got trouble right from the get go. It’s not an uncommon claim. All false prophets have some form of spirit beings appearing to them or revelations that everyone is wrong and now they, the true prophet, will reveal the truth.
The folks who follow these nimrods would do well first of all to go to the NT instead of depending on revelations and their various interpretations from guys who claim the mantle of prophet or apostle.
Matthew Gill’s visitations are so similar to Joseph Smith’s that I’m wondering why all Mormons aren’t flocking to his sect of Mormonism. It’s a miracle that someone is receiving revelations in this day and age where Mormonism is concerned! I think Warren Jeffs has been receiving some as well, but the rest of the Mormon prophets are left out in the cold where revelation is concerned. Why is the Mormon god only speaking to a couple of these prophets? When has he ever spoken to Thomas Monson? When did he speak to Gordon Hinckley? Ezra Benson? I think the last time a LDS prophet heard from the Mormon god was Spencer Kimball and HE contacted god concerning the Blacks and the priesthood, god didn’t contact him. Why should I follow men who god doesn’t speak to?
Forgive me but I thought that general conference was for the prophet to speak to us concerning the will of the Lord. Doctrines and teachings. The LDS general conference has turned into a faith promoting story time with a few announcements such as age change on missionaries and where the newest temple is to be built. Where are the revelations? Where is the information the Mormon god wants Mormons to know? If Mormon prophets aren’t any more informed than myself, why on earth would I follow them?
Where in the faith promoting stories is Thomas Monson speaking as a prophet? Is the story just his opinion? I think for him to speak as a prophet he first has to be spoken to by the Mormon god right? I am so glad I exchanged a false prophet for the true and living Christ of the Bible. There truly is freedom in Him.
” a prophet is a prophet only when he is acting as such.” Oh, Thats why the crazy stuff prophet say is no longer relevant! I see the light now! The LDS prophets may not be a wholesome and awesome as we Church falsely leads us to believe, but it doesn’t count because they were speaking as a man. This kind of reminds me of the whole Bill Clinton/Monica Lewinsky thing.
So when exactly is a prophet being a prophet and when is he not?
The problem is, modern day LDS want their cake and they want to eat it too. They pick and chose what is said “as a prophet” and what is said “as a man”. Interesting to note, this varies from Mormon to Mormon. Maybe that is because the spirit that is supposedly leading them is nothing more than emotionalism and feelings, unique to each human being. I’ve talked to more than a few crotchety old Mormons who still don’t think blacks should hold the priesthood. They feel that the prophet in the moment he made that declaration wasn’t truly speaking as a prophet but as a man. Younger generations, that are removed from racism, think it is wonderful that blacks may now hold the priesthood and believe this change was truly brought around by divine revelation.
This is where Mormonism can become the burger king of religions, you can “have it your way”. When the prophet says something you don’t feel good about you can say he “was not speaking as a prophet”. When the prophet says something you feel good about you can say he “was speaking as a prophet”.
Am I the only one who see’s how terribly subjective this is?
Also has anyone else noticed Mormons moving further and further away from calling their leaders “prophets” and replacing their title with the word “president”. I would like to think that it is a nice gesture to be more honest.
Oh Mormonism…
Alex
“This same spirit of intolerance and scorn resides in the heart of many critics of modern prophets of God.”
Why do Mormons love to feel persecuted?? You are trying to draw a parallel that isn’t there.
Your prophets fail the test of prophet presented by God. It’s just that simple. They aren’t prophets. Your making mormonism seem like it is falsely persecuted.
Maybe, the reality is that the truth hurts and you can’t take it. You have too much at stake? Too much invested? If the church isn’t true, what do you have to stand on? If your anything like the LDS I know, so much of who you are is intrenched in the church that you can’t critically examine it. Your missing out on so much of Christ because you are only willing to seek him through Mormon lenses. Have you ever even read the bible just to see what it says about God? ABout God’s people? Or do you only read it long enough to confirm your beliefs about the LDS church?
You talk about how the prophets are fallible men… That is not the picture painted by the LDS church.
The Bible is transparent about the faults of it’s prophets. The LDS church, not so much.
LDS films on the prophets, esp JS. The way the painting and pictures of prophets adorn the walls of faithful mormons. The LDS worship their prophets. Truthful conversations about the fallibility of LDS prophets are almost no existent within the LDS church. And when there are conversations about the fallibility of prophets it is only used as a way to excuse false doctrine/prophesy.
Yes in deed Mormons need to get back to the simple and pure theology of the restoration gospel. But, alas, they really don’t know what that pure teaching is I guess with the exception of the Church of Christ and perhaps the Community of Christ. The FLDS is full throttle into Brigham Young Mormonism and the LDS, well, they seem to be struggling.
So what did Joseph Smith “restore” that he claimed was part of the original first century Christian Church? And was all the stuff he added after he abandoned the original Book of Commandments really just apostasy?
I’ve yet to have a Mormon present any evidence that what any of their “prophets” taught existed in the first century Church.
Yes we do reject these Mormon prophets just like Jesus told us to. I’m proud to do that in His name.
Awe yes, the persecution. Alex can’t help that if he was born into Mormonism. Some of my earliest memories are of me sitting in primary listening to the teacher tell us how persecuted Mormons have always been. That’s why we had to move to Utah. Out in the wilderness with the Indians. So many Mormons were killed for their beliefs. Can anyone say indoctrination? I have pointed out before that Mormons killed twice as many “Gentiles” in one act alone. The Mountain Meadows Massacre. So get over the constant persecution already. What wilting flowers Mormon prophets are. They can’t stand any scrutiny at all. I say if a prophet can’t stand to be put to the Biblical test without screaming persecution, then he’s a false prophet indeed. If followers of these prophets can’t bare to have their prophets put to the Biblical test without screaming persecution, then what a false prophet indeed. True prophets of God weren’t afraid to be scrutinized because they knew they were speaking to and for God. Put away your false prophets and follow Jesus!
Kate,
First to correct your misconception, I was not born into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints but rather I am a convert. I was raised an Anglican, attended Anglican parochial schools and was well on my way to becoming an Anglican priest. I have quite an extensive academic training in Biblical studies and Church history. Then I met two Mormon missionaries, read the Book of Mormon, prayed about it, and received a powerful witness to the veracity and truthfulness of the Book of Mormon, was baptized and later served a mission. I have held numerous callings including many leadership positions in the LDS Church since.
Mormons feel that they are persecuted precisely because they are persecuted in word and deed. Practically every year somewhere around the world an LDS Church chapel is torched by an arsonist. It is interesting that many such instances the act arson is preceded by some evangelical preacher who whips up local sentiment against the “g-d” Mormons. Such vitriolic preaching unfailingly leads to some low-life malcontent to take matters into his on hands and he cowardly sets the local chapel ablaze. This is a low level of persecution but it is persecution none the less.
The second point I wish to affirm is that LDS prophets are indeed ordained and sanctified prophets of God. Any individual seeking the veracity of such a claim is invited to ask of God whether or not this is true. If that individual will approach the Lord with a humble and contrite heart and with real intent the Holy Ghost will bear witness of the truth. The key condition of course is that the individual must approach the Lord with a humble and contrite heart and with real intent. This precondition of humility is simply absent from critics of Mormonism. It is this lack of humility which prevented the Pharisees from recognizing their Messiah. Instead of worshipping their Messiah, they crucified Him.
Falcon writes: ” we have 100 different sects of Mormonism ”
This is a commonly made falsehood. In reality, most of these purported sects consisted of a few discontented individuals and their families. Almost all of the sects became extinct shortly after they were founded. Today there are only four groups with a membership over 10,000: the FLDS with 30,000 to 50,000; the RLDS or Community of Christ (now recently split in two) with about 190,000in each schism; and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints based in Salt Lake City with over 15 million members. It is not difficult to discern which church bears the mantle of the prophet (hint it is the church which the evangelicals love to mock and malign).
Falcon, your lack of even a basic understanding of the LDS Church, its doctrine and practices never ceases to astound me. It is as if you have never taken the time to actually read any of the primary documents of the LDS Church. Oh, excuse me, I see that you haven’t.
Brewed writes: “Also has anyone else noticed Mormons moving further and further away from calling their leaders “prophets” and replacing their title with the word ‘president’. ”
This is also false.
Given all the vitriolic venom being spewed by the critics of the LDS Church I can’t help but feel that had these same critics been in Jerusalem during the time of Jesus of Nareth they would be screaming “Blasphemer!” and “Liar!” just as much as the Jews who crucified their Messiah.
Brewed, great comments , you nailed it . Alex the critic resorts to using his usual red
herring and straw man tactics . He tries to convince us that Brigham Young’s teaching
Adam God was an individual prejudice ,or bias on the part of Young ! Amazing .
Then he tries to sell the old repeated reasoning concerning how some O.T. men failed
morally so that means if Mormon prophets have lapses in moral behavior then no
problem because that can be used as an alibi to move over and offer as a excuse for any
doctrine by these modern prophets that a Mormon will choose to distance themselves
from lest non Mormons see them as followers of false prophets . Mormons have been
assured that their prophets will never teach them false doctrine nor condone incorrect
doctrines be taught by those officers under them , and they cite Eph 4:14 as an example
of what this would produce in their flock , after all this one of the very fruits that all
the other churches are suffering from because their leaders/teachers have no authority
from God and thus have had to depend upon their own wisdom to teach correctly , and
as a result much of what they teach to their flocks is only their own ideas instead of
gospel truth . That is one of the very accusations Mormon authorities resorted to in
their attacks on all the other churches around them during Young’s time especially .
Lastly, you noticed that Alex the critic accused others of intolerance and scorn in how
they treat Mormon prophets . That sounds similar to how Mormon authorities have
described some non Mormons . Enough said .
Alex, One thing I want to add to what Brewed said is this, YOUR CHURCH, the LDS prophets and leaders have taught that the prophets do not need to say “Thus saith the Lord” To declare scripture to us.
So to me it seems strange when LDS prophets claim boldy that what they said was/is Doctrine/scripture. Yet some how you and many other average LDS members can clarify what LDS prophets really meant and said. Please explain how that is possible.
Also if Prophets dont need to say, thus saith the Lord, then it stands to reason, if you dont agree with what they said, then it is simply their opinion, but if you agree with it, then it is scripture.
So please explain how we are to know what is Doctrine or of and from God when they just speak in a general way and never say one way or the other. Seems pointless to have Prophets if we dont hear from God.
Falcon , you asked , ” So what did Joseph Smith ‘ restore’ that he claimed was part of the
First Century christian church?”
What Mormon authorities claimed was restored was the very same gospel that Paul taught ,
and the very same church that Jesus established . In fact the claim has been made that the
Mormon church is a perfect reproduction of the church Jesus had established 1700 years
earlier . But His church became extinct, died off, after lasting hardly more than 2 generations !
Sadly , people embrace these falsehoods .
“The Pope declares himself to be infallible and no one believes him and the Mormon Prophet declares himself to be very fallible and no one believes him.”
Not a very good “old adage.” It’s not even correct. I think there is a very large number of people who believe the Pope, and there is a small but decent number of people who believe the Mormon prophet. Unless what the “old adage” means by “no one” is “not everyone.”
I’m not Roman Catholic but the Pope’s got a lot better story than Mormonism when it comes to believability.
I am a little tired of Mormon’s trying to say to stop ragging on Mormon prophets because of their shortcomings. The thing is that the shortcoming people usually are referring to is their ability to be prophets, not that they are human and make mistakes. But a mistaken prophet is also an unreliable one which Mormon history has time and time again shown. Mormon prophets don’t even seem to know when they are acting prophetically themselves. The Mormon people figure out “he wasn’t speaking prophetically,” when they don’t think he was making any sense, it’s embarrassing, or they just don’t like it anymore.
Why have your church founded on men, who are not doctrinally reliable, when you could have your faith founded on Christ himself and his very apostles, who I don’t hear a lot of people saying, “Well, they didn’t mean that, they weren’t speaking prophetically.”
I am having a really hard time understanding what is so special about a Mormon prophet. Nowadays, the Mormon prophet has basically turned into a counsel of men deciding what they think is doctrine. So I am confused why Mormons are so against the early Church counsels. Because Mormons believe the Holy Spirit abandoned those counsels? Why would the Holy Spirit do that? Because they are fallible men? Fallible men, like the Mormon prophets? Why is the Holy Spirit willing to work with the fallible Mormon men, but not the fallible early Christian leaders.
One common answer is usually something to the effect of, “Well, WE have the authority.” Which, basically comes down to because Joseph Smith says so. I just don’t get why Mormons don’t get that it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever that God would found His Church on the very WORD OF GOD, that He would abandon the Church established by HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON, just to refound it on some farm boy with a shady past, who doesn’t always know if he is receiving revelation from God or the devil. I just don’t get it, and I was Mormon. When I really took time to think about it, a light bulb went on, and I said, “Mormonism doesn’t make sense.” It just doesn’t. So God’s plan all along was to end the Church just a few generations from Christ, mainly just because he wanted to, to found it on this other guy, but THIS TIME God guarantees he won’t let his Church go astray. What makes this new set up so special, so immune to losing the Holy Spirit, and not the early Church started by God himself?
Alex,
You wrote:
“Falcon, your lack of even a basic understanding of the LDS Church, its doctrine and practices never ceases to astound me. It is as if you have never taken the time to actually read any of the primary documents of the LDS Church. Oh, excuse me, I see that you haven’t.”
Alex,
It’s obvious that you know little or nothing about the religion you embrace and try to defend. Your above comment is merely a throw-away. You continue to demonstrate that you are lazy and can’t defend your version of Mormonism so you just make snide comments. Basically what you’re giving us is your opinion. I’ve read and studied Mormonism thoroughly. Being on MC for about five years I’ve seen your type come and go. It’s always the same thing, limited knowledge and bomb thrower tactics.
I’ve really gotten to you haven’t I posting all of that information about the Church of Christ and the guy who writes on Pure Mormonism? You can’t stand up to it so you make that laughable charge that I don’t know Mormonism. You know better and everyone sees your childish game.
So here’s a short list of what we know?
That Joseph Smith put a magic stone in his hat and said he could interpret some gold plates that weren’t even present, by shoving his face in the hat keeping out all the light.
That Mormonism teaches that there are millions perhaps billions of gods in the universe all of whom used to be men but were able to follow the Mormon system to become gods.
That Mormons believe that by going to their temples, dressing up in costumes and performing rituals taken from the Free Masons, that they will rise to the level of being gods.
That Mormons believe that the god men will resurrect their wives by calling out her secret name. That they will together procreate spirit children who will then obtain mortal bodies and populate the worlds the god/goddess pair will rule.
That Joseph Smith identified the Mormon god in the BoA as the Egyptian fertility god Min depicted sitting on a throne with an erection.
That Mormons believe they have to earn their place in the Celestial Kingdom.
I don’t know, I could go on here. Why do you think your branch of the LDS church is losing members by the truck load every day? People are just flowing out of the LDS church at an alarming rate.
BTW, I prayed for you, Shem, FOF and Ralph during church service on Sunday. I still see your hardened heart breaking, actually obliterated would be a better choice of words.
You see Alex, I know your god doesn’t exist. But God will have His way with you. As you know, this site is populated mainly by former Mormons who used to believe like you, many having a much stronger testimony than you do.
If you want to remain Mormon, this is not a good place for you……but I want you here so we can continue to minister to you as the Holy Spirit leads us.
Alex,
You have to know that your LDS sect is falling apart at the seams. It’s foundation can’t crumble because there is no foundation. It reminds me of those sink holes I’ve been seeing down in Florida.
There’s only one foundation upon which we can build and that is the foundation of Jesus Christ. You are putting your faith in a false religious system in the hopes of becoming a god. If you just do enough, work hard enough, get out and earn it, you can make it into the Celestial Kingdom and be a god, just like you believe the generations of gods before you did.
Bad move Alex.
The Lord God testifies about Himself in the Bible. We know who He is. He says there are no other gods. He says He knows of no others. That puts you in a very bad position Alex. (Isaiah 43:10)
You can come to Him in faith this very night and secure for yourself eternal life. Your standing there spiritual with your hands extended out pushing Him away. You want your own god. You want to be a god. Your lack of willingness to recognize and acknowledge the Lord is your greatest sin.
I will remember you in my devotion time tonight and ask the Lord if He has a Word for you. He wouldn’t put it on our hearts to pray for you if you weren’t important to Him.
There is nothing like a personal relationship with the living God through His Son Jesus Christ. I think the Lord has given me this verse for you since it’s come to me several times today regarding you.
“In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.” John 1:1
I believe the Lord is telling me to tell you to read His Word the Bible without your Mormon presuppositions. It is there that you will find Him and in doing so find eternal life.
Yes Jo did say that “a prophet is only a prophet when he is acting as such, but the context of that statement had nothing to do with revelations. For his views on that, you need to be aware of another statement that Jo made, which is (as Dallin Oaks quoted in a Conference Address):
In a sermon preached a little over a month before he was martyred, he declared, “I never told you I was perfect—but there is no error in the revelations which I have taught” (The Words of Joseph Smith, ed. Andrew F. Ehat and Lyndon W. Cook [1980], 369).
Jo said nothing about SPEAKING as a “weak and fallible individual”, on the contrary, he said there was “no error” in the revelations he received. This would include speaking as a prophet when he was teaching because Jo constantly said that “The Testimony of Jesus is the Spirit of Prophecy”. This old argument by Mormons is taken out of the context it was meant to be given in, which Alex does above perfectly. Brigham Young on dozens and dozens of occasions did make “assertions” or give his opinion, but he always stated so when he preached. He did NOT say that his teachings on Adam was his opinion. Again, Alex tries to subvert what Young actually said with his false dichotomy, which is right out of the Mormon Apologetic Playbook.
Smith also said,
But again, this has nothing to do with what he TAUGHT. If you believe that, then you can say that polygamy was taught by Jo because he was so weak in the flesh with passion that he had to invent polygamy to cover up his insatiable desire for women. Ok, I’ll buy that. But you won’t see any Mormons giving credence to that argument, will you? They love to employ a double standard with Jo, and Brigham and the rest of the Salt Lake Branch of “seers” and “revelators” that they sure don’t apply to those like Warren Jeffs.
And most of Smith’s “persecutors” came from within his own church who rejected his “revelations” about God, polygamy, and his theocratic government that made him king over the earth. If Smith had had the sense to separate Church and State, he may have had less opposition to his teachings and had more time to “testify of His revealed will”.
Falcon writes: “I’ve read and studied Mormonism thoroughly.”
Yet he openly boasts of never having actually read the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price or any other foundational Mormon text. This is akin to a student boasting that he has read and studied Shakespearian literature thoroughly and yet has never bothered to actually read a play by William Shakespeare or even one of his beautiful sonnets. Such a student would receive a “F”. Really Falcon your hubris is pathetic and fraudulent and your deserve an “F” on Mormon studies.
This begs the question Falcon, you have been on this blog-site for five years, why not spend a little time to read the BoM or D&C? Are you afraid of catching Mormon “cooties” or are you just plain lazy? Perhaps you enjoy being ignorant of the subject matter on which you claim to be an expert. Your ignorance of even basic LDS doctrines and practices is painfully evident to any one who actually has a taken the time and made the effort to honestly study the subject.
Sadly, your ignorance on the subject of Mormonism is repeated by most Mormon critics (including most ex-Mormons) who have never really studied the Book of Mormon or the Doctrine and Covenants and generally do not know what they are talking about when it comes to Mormonism.
Easy to say but much harder to prove Alex. You have not shown that you know much about Mormonism. Maybe you should take your own advice to study more?
Alex,
You know whats really sad, I have read all 4 standard works, plus many other LDS books. I read them cover to cover. Mormonism is a joke with false prophets. But whats even sader is, You claim Falcon and others here know nothing about Mormonism, but yet you cannot and do not refute what we say, You also never tell us exactly what you do believe. So it seems your a liar.
Alex, FofF, Shem
I’m not going to add anything new to the ‘prophet debate’ I’m just going to ask Alex & any other Mormon who cares to reply, the same question as I have asked in 3 previous posts on 2 different topics without ever receiving an answer from anyone.
Joseph Smith was deeply into the occult as were the people he associated with; there is a huge amount of well-documented evidence to show this. These things have been mentioned many times in here so I wont say any more apart from it making an interesting contrast with what we find in Deuteronomy 18:10-12
Now look at Deuteronomy 18:20-22 & what it tells us about a prophet ordained by God, then apply the same criteria to Smith.
So, my question once again is this. Do you, any of you, taking into account Joseph Smiths occult practices & his prophetic record of being ‘roughly’ correct, i.e. making good guesses, 5 times in 65 attempts, (7.6% accuracy) also given his predilection for bedding not just single but married women, still believe that he was a prophet ordained by God or would you say that Jeremiah 23:14 is probably a much more accurate description of Smith?
I wont hold my breath waiting for an answer. In the unlikely event that I do receive one that needs a response I will have to leave it to others as I’ll very soon be off again for a while.
Alex said this.
“The second point I wish to affirm is that LDS prophets are indeed ordained and sanctified prophets of God. Any individual seeking the veracity of such a claim is invited to ask of God whether or not this is true.
That is totally non scriptural, the test of a true prophet is outlined in Deuteronomy
How many times have I seen this old standby brought out, it seems to be ingrained into Mormon thought?
“If that individual will approach the Lord with a humble and contrite heart and with real intent the Holy Ghost will bear witness of the truth. The key condition of course is that the individual must approach the Lord with a humble and contrite heart and with real intent.”
Muslims do pretty much the same thing & they receive confirmation that the Quran is from God so your test is invalid. It’s impossible to gain knowledge of the veracity of anything simply by praying about it. For your test to work a person has to want it to be true & conversely, if that person doesn’t believe it to be true then there will be no confirmation. It’s a simple matter of mental gymnastics. Try it for yourself using Baye’s Theorem.
If people don’t get the ‘feeling’ you want them to have it’s very easy to say they weren’t contrite or sincere, say it to them often enough & they will eventually get the required feeling, & that to be frank, is just so much rubbish. Oh, while I’m on the subject, have you ever prayed to see if what we say is true? Why not do that as well, with a humble & contrite heart of course.
Read what is said about feelings in Jeremiah 17:9 The heart being the seat of emotions. Has it never occurred to you that God gave us minds so that we might be able to work things out for ourselves? Do you really think that God would confirm as true something that logic dictates is impossible? Do you really believe for example that a few Jews sailed thousands of miles in logically impossible barges & then populated an empty continent in about a thousand years by having a logically impossible population growth rate?
If you truly want to know the truth then you should take as an example the Bereans in Acts 17:11-12 they didn’t trust to feelings, they did what God would have all of us do. I’ll leave you with Matthew Henry’s commentary as to what that was.
“Their readiness of mind to receive the word was not such as that they took things upon trust, swallowed them upon an implicit faith: no but since Paul reasoned out of the scriptures, and referred them to the Old Testament for the proof of what he said, they had recourse to their Bibles, turned to the places to which he referred them, read the context, considered the scope and drift of them, compared them with other places of scripture, examined whether Paul’s inferences from them were natural and genuine and his arguments upon them cogent, and determined accordingly…… Those that read and receive the scriptures must search them (John 5:39), must study them, and take pains in considering them, both that they may find out the truth contained in them, and may not mistake the sense of them and so run into error, or remain in it and that they may find out the whole truth contained in them, and may not rest in a superficial knowledge, in the outward court of the scriptures, but may have an intimate acquaintance with the mind of God revealed in them..”
“Sadly, your ignorance on the subject of Mormonism is repeated by most Mormon critics (including most ex-Mormons) who have never really studied the Book of Mormon or the Doctrine and Covenants and generally do not know what they are talking about when it comes to Mormonism.”
Hahaha! Thanks for the laugh Alex! Mormons are leaving in droves, confirmed by one of your apostles. Why are so many leaving? We are talking faithful Mormons of 30,40,50, even 60 years! We are leaving because we finally ARE starting to study Mormonism. We no longer allow ourselves to be spoon fed a bunch of whitewashed faith promoting crap from the LDS church. Studying is bringing lost Mormons to the true and living Christ of the Bible. Sadly studying is also sending many Mormons into Atheism. Instead of throwing insults, why don’t you teach us where we are wrong and just what it is we don’t know or understand? Help us understand why your prophet is the true prophet and why we should choose him over other Mormon prophets. Sorry but the numbers game doesn’t work. Please fill us in!
Grindael,
I have been studying and teaching LDS doctrine for over 30 years. I do know what I am talking about when it concern Mormonism and I also know that you and pretenders like Falcon and Rick B. simply do not.
Rick you claim: “I have read all 4 standard works, plus many other LDS books. I read them cover to cover.” You may have read them but you certainly do not understand the contents of those books. I would wager that you could not retell even the simple narratives from the Book of Mormon which any 8 year old LDS boy or girl could.
You call me a liar yet you are the one who falsely claims to be a Mormon. You are delusional my friend.
The word “opinion” appears 310 times in the Journal of Discourses alone. Brigham Young was well aware of the difference between his opinion and teaching by the Spirit. For example, take this sermon from 1853:
Not one person spoke out against Brigham Young that he didn’t “have Zion” or that he did not preach by the power of the Holy Spirit. In fact, in a private meeting that Wilford Woodruff recorded in his Journal in January of 1860 (over Orson Pratt’s rejection of Adam-God and his teachings about the Godhead in the Seer that clashed with Young’s teachings about Adam) Wilford Woodruff recorded:
Every single one of those present, (the entire Quorum of the Twelve and the Presiding Bishopric) affirmed Brigham Young’s Adam God teachings, and that he was right and that Orson Pratt (who taught what current Mormon “prophets” teach) was wrong. They also affirmed that it was YOUNG who had the Holy Ghost, and PRATT who did not. There is no way to sidestep this issue. Young taught Adam God as a REVELATION, it was affirmed by the entire Hierarchy of the Church (even Orson Pratt at a later time) and now it is called false doctrine by Mormon “prophets” today. There is something seriously wrong with Mormonism.
Saying it doesn’t make it true my friend. You have proven nothing here, instead you act like a drive-by troll. I have no confidence that you know anything about Mormonism. You only have opinions like that above. I feel sorry for you Alex, I really do. Your claims are simply pathetic.
“Mormons feel that they are persecuted precisely because they are persecuted in word and deed. Practically every year somewhere around the world an LDS Church chapel is torched by an arsonist. It is interesting that many such instances the act arson is preceded by some evangelical preacher who whips up local sentiment against the “g-d” Mormons. Such vitriolic preaching unfailingly leads to some low-life malcontent to take matters into his on hands and he cowardly sets the local chapel ablaze. This is a low level of persecution but it is persecution none the less.”
Cry me a river. Have you seen what is going on in Egpyt right now? Christian churches and Christian homes are being torched. How many Christians were murdered last year around the world just for being Christian? It was 105,000. How many Mormons were murdered last year for being Mormon? I couldn’t find any. You don’t see Christians screaming persecution when others question our faith. We are to give every man an answer. We gladly accept questions. I even answer the few Atheists that I know, and they aren’t very nice about Christianity. Never have I ever thought I was being persecuted for them not agreeing, believing, or having questions or doubts about my faith. Not so when I was LDS, I had it pounded into my head that I was persecuted just like all LDS before me. Looks like it’s been pounded into yours as well. It’s all so ridiculous!
Alex said
Like Grindeal, I feel your a joke Alex, You claim to be so smart, yet you never seem able to answer our questions, and you never seem to share what you feel we are missing. Old man pointed out no one has answered Him even though he has asked like five times.
I have so many questions that go avoided, and the big one that gets avoided is, you guys claim we must follow Gods commandes, I have asked FoF and Shem to give me a list of these so called commandes that you feel we must follow and we dont. Yet no one has been able to give me this list.
Why is it so hard, you claim we must follow these things, but then cannot list them for me, makes me wonder if you are lying. Then you claim Falcon does not know or understand Mormonsim becasue he never read the BoM or the D and C, yet I read them and then you still have excuses about me. Wow, You just proved to us we cannot win, you will believe what you want no matter what we know.
I’m thinking you’re fighting a losing battle here Alex.
Mormonism isn’t all that difficult to learn about. The four standard works of the LDS religion are probably the worst place to learn about the history, beliefs/doctrines and practices.
The BoM has been changed so many times that it’s really not a reliable work. The BoA is a total farce and if you haven’t figured that out it shows how little you know about it.
How about the Journal of Discourses? Is that a good place to learn about Mormonism?
One thing you have to consider, the other leading sects of Mormonism wouldn’t touch a couple of your standard works with a ten foot pole.
No, learning about Mormonism isn’t all that difficult. In fact it’s a piece of cake. The only arrow you have in your quiver is to accuse those of us here of not knowing anything. I’d say you’re getting buried, you know it and all you’ve got left is some childish playground rants.
Grindael,
You mine quote to misrepresent the LDS position. Yet you have real no understanding of the issue.
I am not about to waste my time discussing what Brigham Young said or didn’t say regarding his rather convoluted concept of Adam/God as he said many contradictory statements. As Bruce R. Mckonkie wrote: “He (Brigham Young) expressed views that are out of harmony with the gospel. But, be it known, Brigham Young also taught accurately and correctly, the status and position of Adam in the eternal scheme of things. What I am saying is that Brigham Young, contradicted Brigham Young, and the issue becomes one of which Brigham Young we will believe. The answer is we will believe the expressions that accord with the teachings in the Standard Works.” Bruce R. McKonkie, letter to Eugene England, (19 February 1981)
A good synopsis of the LDS position is presented by BYU Professor Stephen Robinson who wrote:
“Yet another way in which (Mormon) critics misrepresent LDS doctrine is in the presentation of anomalies as though they were the doctrine of the Church. Anomalies occur in every field of human endeavor, even in science. An anomaly is something unexpected that cannot explained by the existing laws or theories, but which does not constitute evidence for changing the laws and theories. An anomaly is a glitch…A classic example of an anomaly in the LDS tradition is the so-called “Adam-God theory”. During the latter half of the nineteenth century Brigham Young made some remarks about the relationship between Adam and God that Latter-day Saints have never been ever to understand. The reported statements conflict with LDS teachings before and after Brigham Young, as well as with statements of President Young himself during the same period of time. So how do Latter-day Saints deal with the phenomenon? We don’t; we simply set it aside. It is an anomaly. On occasion my colleagues and I at Brigham Young University have tried to figure out what Brigham Young might have actually said and what it might have meant, but the attempts have always failed. The reported statements simply do not compute – we cannot make sense of them. This is not a matter of believing or disbelieving it; we simply don’t know what “it” is. If Brigham Young were here we could ask him what he actually said and what he meant by it, but he is not here.
For the Latter-day Saints, however, the point is moot, since whatever Brigham Young said, true or false, was never presented to the Church fore a sustaining vote. It was not then and is not now a doctrine of the Church. (Stephen E. Robinson, Are Mormons Christian? Deseret Book, 1993, pp 18-21)
Sadly Grindael, your limited knowledge of Mormonism is scanty indeed.
My point, as from the beginning of this post, is that Latter-day Saints are not afraid to admit that their leaders are fallible and make mistakes. The great Apostle Peter was a very fallible individual as was Paul as has been every single prophet ever called of God. God choses whom He so choses – not because of their inherent human weaknesses but because of their divine potential.
Evangelicals profess to follow Christ but verbally stone the Lord’s ordained and appointed prophets.
Kate writes: “Cry me a river… You don’t see Christians screaming persecution when others question our faith.”
You make a false accusation. Nobody is screaming persecution for questioning LDS doctrine. However, when evangelicals burn down LDS Chapels at the behest of evangelical preachers that is a form of persecution. Of course you respond in saying “Cry me a river”. Well – how Christian of you.
Kate further writes: “Hahaha! Thanks for the laugh Alex! Mormons are leaving in droves”
Actually Kate, for every Mormon who leaves the LDS Church and becomes an evangelical, ten evangelicals find the authentic Jesus of the Bible and become a Mormon. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is gaining about 270,000 converts every year. Not bad for a church that is supposedly dying on the vine.
Rick B writes: ” you guys claim we must follow Gods commandes”
Yes Rick, we must follow God’s commandments. As the Lord Jesus Christ Himself affirmed:
John 14:15 “If ye love me, keep my commandments”
Rick, this is Jesus speaking to His disciples. Jesus is saying that He indeed has commandments and that if you really love Him then you must keep those commandments. There is no ambiguity here. If you truly love Jesus then you must keep His commandments. Not half way, not partly if you feel so inclined, but completely keep his commandments.
Jesus further continues on this subject of commandment keeping when He tells His disciples in John 14:24
“He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me.”
Rick, Jesus is telling His disciples that those who do not keep His sayings (commandments) do not love Him. Jesus further tells his disciples that these commandments come from the Father “the word ye hear is not mine but the father’s which sent me.” The Father and the Son are not the same individual. Jesus is not the incarnation of God the Father but is the Son of the Father – a distinction Trinitarians fail to comprehend.
Thus Jesus commands us to keep His commandments and if we do not keep His commandments then we do not truly love Jesus. What are these commandments of Jesus you ask. Well consider every imperative of Jesus in the Four Gospels to be a commandment. Think of Love God with all you heart might and mine, Love your neighbor as yourself, think of the beatitutdes etc.
Rick you profess to be a Christian. How is it that you do not know these simple sayings of Jesus?
Falcon writes: “Mormonism isn’t all that difficult to learn about.”
That is true. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is beautifully simple and simply beautiful. However, one must actually expend a little effort in order to actually to read the Book of Mormon or the Doctrine and Covenants.
Falcon further writes: “The four standard works of the LDS religion are probably the worst place to learn about the history, beliefs/doctrines and practices.”
That is just plain silly and juvenile. That is like saying the Old and New Testament is the worst place to learn about God.
Falcon writes: The BoM has been changed so many times that it’s really not a reliable work.”
That is completely false. The changes referred to are grammatical and syntax edits to the original translated text which contained numerous scribal errors (some 4,000 according to Jerald and Sandra Tanner). These changes hardly constitute such a change in the meaning or message of the Book of Mormon as to render it unreliable. But Falcon, how would you know given that you have never bothered to actually read the Book of Mormon.
Falcon further writes: “The BoA is a total farce”
Actually I find the Book of Abraham to be amongst the most profound scripture ever written. Clearly not the product of semi-literate farm boy. Again Falcon, how would you know given that you have never bothered to actually read the Book of Abraham. You have absolutely no idea of what I am referring to as all you have read on the subject are the silly writings of Mormon critics who themselves have not thoroughly read and comprehended the profound spiritual truths contained in the Book of Abraham.
It has been my experience that Mormon critics have a very shallow understanding of Mormonism (in Falcon’s case an almost cartoonish perception). The reason for this lack of basic knowledge concerning the topic of Mormonism is that Mormon critics for the most part simply have not studied Mormonism or the fundamental texts (i.e. the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price, or History of the Church) nor have they bothered to read the many scholarly volumes on the subject. The complete lack of objectivity among Mormon critics is telling.
LOL. You mine quotes from FAIR. There are too many instances of Young teaching Adam God. He called it a revelation from God. Funny thing is, you have no quotes to show that I am misrepresenting anything. Keep copying and pasting from FAIR. It shows your lack of intelligence, and that you are simply too lazy to do any research yourself. PATHETIC.
Of course not, because you have no argument to refute it. People like you just ignore it, while telling critics that they don’t know what they are talking about. Funny thing is, you are the one who doesn’t know what he is talking about, and Young did not make ANY contradictory statements. FAIR mines his quotes to try and prove just that. Try again. Oh yeah, you won’t because you would wind up looking foolish.
Why don’t you quote the whole letter, genius? In it, McConkie quotes the BOM which says that WOE unto those who teach false doctrine, they will be thrust to hell, and then calls Young a great prophet who earned his reward. McConkie was an idiot, and your own church won’t even print his books anymore. Try again. That argument is ridiculous.
Another Apologist that is worse than McConkie. I’ve heard this before, genius. Brigham Young did not contradict himself, nor Jo, nor those who came after until Charles Penrose called it a theory and Joseph F. Smith said that it was too precious a pearl to cast before swine and they threw Brigham under the bus. Like I said before, something is seriously wrong with Mormonism. And “an anomaly?” Are you kidding me? That is like calling the Gnostic teaching that Jesus didn’t come in the flesh an anomaly. They are so desperate, they come up with the most ridiculous explanations. Robinson failed to comprehend Young because he was too stupid to take him at his word. Young was crystal clear what he meant and any dummy can figure it out — except for Mormon apologists, it seems.
A sustaining vote? That means nothing. This doesn’t refute anything. It just shows how much of an idiot and deceiver that Stephen Robinson is. He is simply lying here, but no surprise there.
Again, your cuts and pastes do nothing to back up what you say. You did not address any of my arguments or quotes. You only give your opinion which is worthless. Like I said before, PATHETIC.
For those who are not familiar with McConkies nonsensical letter to Professor Eugene England, go here for the entire letter. Now, lets take him apart:
McConkie states (I requote relevant portions here for convenience):
McConkie’s letter is full of illogic, and let me say how. He starts off by saying that he is an ‘admirer’ of Brigham Young, calling him ‘a mighty prophet’. Then the backpedaling begins. Having no recourse but to tell the truth (for England knew what Young taught all too well) McConkie endeavours to explain just how a ‘mighty prophet’ can teach false doctrine. This is especially troubling, for it has to do with the very nature and identity of God Himself. McConkie then says, “prophets make mistakes, sometimes they err in doctrine’. He then pulls out the famous quote by Smith that ‘a prophet is only a prophet when he is acting as such’.
Was Young not acting like a prophet here? Did McConkie also forget that Smith said, “I never told you I was perfect, but there have been no error in the revelations I have taught.”? He later adds this excuse to the list:
“No single individual all the time is in tune with the Holy Spirit”. The thought immediately comes to mind, when would there be a better time to be in tune with the Holy Spirit, if not then? But this is not what Wilford Woodruff states, first in 1854 after Young gave the most detailed address on Adam God that he ever gave, of which he said it was,
“the greatest sermon that was ever delivered to the Latter Day Saints since they have been a People.” (entry October 8th 1854) And then in the meeting with All the Church Hierarchy (except a few) on January 27th 1860 (where they were questioning Orson Pratt for his disagreement with Young & Woodruff directs this at Pratt):
This all reminds me of a statement made by Moses Thatcher in 1885:
McConkie readily admits that Young did indeed teach that Adam was God and that he was wrong to do so. (Sorry Stephen Robinson, McConkie shows you that it CAN be understood) He then quotes a scripture from the New Testament to try and justify why this could happen. Of course he quotes the King James Version, which has mistranslated the passage. Instead of the word heresy, it should be translated division:
This excuse by McConkie is nonsense, especially in the light of the passage from the Book of Mormon that he quotes, that all who teach false doctrine ‘shall be thrust down to hell’. He then states: “This clearly means that people who teach false doctrine in the fundamental and basic things will lose their souls. The nature and kind of being that God is, is one of these fundamentals.” Why he fails to include Young here is astounding. Either McConkie clearly does not understand why Young would teach true and false doctrine, or he has chosen to ignore the fact that many Mormon leaders have done so in the past. Jo did it with polygamy. So did many of his “apostles”. They flat out lied about it. He also states, “Again, the issue is, which Brigham Young shall we believe and the answer is: We will take the one whose statements accord with what God has revealed in the Standard Works.” Perhaps McConkie was not familiar with this story Young once related:
Is believing in the words of those who call themselves ‘prophets’, the “allurement of the world, or the philosophies of men?” Are they or are they not authorized to speak for God? What about the statements of other prophets that the Lord would never allow the President of the Church to lead it astray, that God would take him first? Orson Hyde defines that for us, by saying that Young could NOT teach false doctrine, for that would be ‘laying the axe to the tree’ and that ‘God would take him first’. And who is a better person to go to , to solve our problems than a prophet of God? Ezra Taft Benson has stated:
One must ask the question if these are truly prophets, how could they teach false doctrine about the fundamental nature of God? As Moses Thatcher stated: “God neither changes nor is he a respecter of persons; the causes, therefore, which lie ordained to produce certain results in one age will produce them in another.” If Mormon prophets are teaching a different Christ than the one in the Bible (who is NOT the son of Adam, or a spirit son of some other god) than how can that NOT be leading them away from the REAL Jesus of the Bible?
Mormon Apologists have no answers to these problems.
The last part of that letter is also worth quoting, just to show you what an idiot McConkie was,
First he tells him he can only write “faith promoting” lies. If the head of the Church has an obligation to teach what is only in the standard works, then why did Jo teach polygamy when the standard works in his time clearly taught that marriage was between one man and one woman? See how stupid this is? If your leaders err, shut the hell up. Now that’s a Church run only by the vote of the members. Riiiigghhht. Leave it in the “hands of the Lord”. What a cop out. That is a recipe for dictators, and disaster. Did England want to teach Adam God, or explain it? Of course he didn’t want to teach that it was a doctrine of the church, he wanted to teach its history.
McConkie is an idiot. If the “brethren” err, that is THEIR PROBLEM, your job is to shut up and OBEY. It is axiomatic that God has given apostles and prophets for the edifying of the body of Christ… err.. wasn’t that what Brigham Young was doing? I just love this stuff. He shoots himself in the foot time and time again. Wasn’t it Young’s province to “teach the church what doctrine is”? Yes it was. Only later “prophets” didn’t like it, so they called it false, but still hail Young as a “true prophet”. Ridiculous logic. Something is terribly wrong with Mormonism folks. Do you want these guys in charge of your eternal salvation? Stick to Jesus and the Bible, please. This is the only course of safety.
Alex,
grindael leaves me little to say; he so thoroughly takes you apart. That’s why it’s so laughable your charge that the folks posting here don’t know anything about Mormonism. That sort of a statement shows a form of denial that serves as a convenient prop to hold up your own ego and weak testimony of Mormonism. A person ought to be wise enough to know when they’ve been defeated. You’ve been defeated.
Probably the people who know the least about Mormonism are Mormons and that includes you.
The former Mormons who post here didn’t know the details of the history of Mormonism until they began to work their way out of the cult. That’s what leads people to dump Mormonism. They start to uncover information that they previously had no knowledge of.
How many Mormons don’t know that Joseph Smith was a polygamist? I could go on and make a comprehensive list of information that Mormons have been lied to about or things that are kept well hidden from the rank and file.
The internet is killing Mormonism. Now people can have access to information and suddenly they discover that the LDS religion isn’t what it claims to be.
The fact that you find the BoA inspiring just testifies to the spiritual fog bank you’re in. Talk about the height of deception. It’s obvious you either are totally ignorant or totally deceived. What’s good to know I guess is that you worship the Egyptian fertility god Min depicted sitting on a throne exposing himself. Now that’s your god. Unbelievable.
Now this idea of not knowing anything about the BoM or BoA unless you actually read it, that’s just plain dumb. How could you make such an ignorant uniformed statement as that? Your saying that a person could not learn who the characters are or what the plot line is unless you actually read these books? That a person couldn’t find the details of either work any other place but between the covers of those books is making a claim that exposes your ignorance?
Here’s what your problem is. It isn’t that I don’t know about Mormonism or the four standard works or whatever you want to haul out; it’s that I don’t believe it.
That’s what rubs you the wrong way. Your equating having information with believing that information. So if you don’t believe it, than you don’t “know” it as you defining “knowing”.
And BTW Alex, my guess is that I’ve probably visited more Mormon historical sites and took the tours conducted by Mormons then you have. I sat right in front of the window that Joseph Smith dove out of trying to escape the mob at the Carthage Jail. I listened to the story told by the guides. Guess what, I knew more about the events leading up to that climax than anyone on the tour including the guides. So I guess Alex according to your reasoning a person can’t get information on the Carthage Jail House shoot out unless you actually visit the site. Right?
I’ve been to all of these places and heard the presentations and you’d claim that the only place to get the information is on site. I had the information before I ever stepped foot there.
So according to Alex, the only way to know about a book like say “Moby Dick” is to read it. There’s no other way to obtain the information about the author, his motivation, the characters, the plot line, the symbolism, how the book was received, what the historical context surrounding the writing of the book was…………come on Alex, even you can’t be that void of basic common sense.
BTW, I know most of what I just listed and I’ve never read “Moby Dick”. So in your world I don’t know any of this information because I never read the book.
That’s a big “duh” on you Alex.
OK, now just for fun. Here’s a listing of various pieces of information contrasting the LDS and CoC. Now Alex will claim that I don’t know what I’ve just posted…..?????? That’s Alex and his Mormon logic. This information points to the fact that there is no definitive Mormonism.
Now according to Alex, I or anyone else who isn’t a Mormon, can’t know this information. Figure out that twisted logic.
Here we go………..
Both groups accept the Book of Mormon as part of its scripture; however, the LDS Church has made numerous “corrections” to their edition which have not been included in the CofC edition.
The LDS Church considers the following four books to be scripture: the Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and Pearl of Great Price. The CofC has never recognized the Pearl of Great Price and insists that the Book of Abraham contradicts teachings found in the Bible and Book of Mormon.
The LDS Church teaches that God is a glorified, exalted human being and that there was a time in history when God was not God. The CofC espuses a deity who was eternally God and “independent of any external or prior cause” (Some Differences Between the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, pg.1).
The LDS Church teaches that there is a myriad of Gods on various worlds. The LDS Godhead is tri-theistic, or composed of three separate and distinct Gods, the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. According to its official website, the CofC states, “We affirm the Trinity – God who is a community of three person. All things that exist owe their being to God: mystery beyond understanding and love beyond imagination. This God alone is worthy of our worship.”
The LDS Church claims that men are Gods in embryo and that righteous Mormons can become Gods in the next life. The CofC does not teach that men can become Gods.
Utah Mormons believe that in order to become a God, the faithful member must participate in esoteric temple “endowment” ceremonies. The Mormons only allow “worthy” members to enter their temples and participate in its rituals. The CofC owns two buildings called temples (Kirtland, OH and Independence, MO), and both are open to the public. The CofC “rejects the whole system of temple rituals, secret names, signs, oaths, and handshakes which the Church in Utah proclaims are essential to the ultimate salvation of man” (Fundamental Differences, 1960, pg. 230).
Utah Mormonism teaches that marriages performed in LDS temples can continue after death. The CofC teaches that marriage relationships pertain only to mortal life.
The CofC utilizes the symbol of the cross on its buildings, whereas the LDS Church has refused to use this symbol.
Now in the world according to Alex, it’s not possible to know any of this information because………why? A person can’t do some research and learn things?
Alex,
My buddy Andy Watson used to carry around this messenger bag chocked full of Mormon publications all the way from the four standard works to the Journal of Discourses and on and on. He’d get into a discussion with Mormon missionaries or the rank and file and they’d tell Andy what he was saying wasn’t true. So he’d haul out the LDS publication and show them that what he was saying was indeed true right from their own publications. Guess what? They’d continue to deny it even though their own publication stated it.
So according to you, a person reading say “Rough Stone Rolling”, “In Sacred Loneliness”, “Mormonism: A Magical World View”, “No Man Knows My History” and a number of other books would learn nothing about Mormonism. That all of the information contained in these books is false?
…….and you’re telling us that all of time that grindael, for example, spent in the archives of BYU doing research, yielded no factual information?
Come on boy, you haven’t drank so much Mormon Kool Aid that it’s pickled your brain to that degree, has it? You have the mind of the true believer who is so shut off from reality as to live in a bubble of total delusion.
“You make a false accusation. Nobody is screaming persecution for questioning LDS doctrine. However, when evangelicals burn down LDS Chapels at the behest of evangelical preachers that is a form of persecution. Of course you respond in saying “Cry me a river”. Well – how Christian of you.”
Please provide evidence that LDS churches are being burned down at the behest of evangelical preachers.
You completely ignored the rest of my post. Every Mormon who has posted here cries persecution, including you. I am merely showing you that you don’t really understand true persecution. Put yourself in Egypt right now as a Christian. Put yourself anywhere in the world where Christians are being murdered just for being Christian. That is persecution. Early Mormons brought about the treatment they received. They gave as good as they got and as grindael pointed out, most of the persecution came from other Mormons.
I am not saying that the occasional Mormon hater who burns down an LDS chapel isn’t committing a hate crime, but it is a far cry from the persecution you believe your church suffers. Do you know how many Mormons have been killed for being Mormon in the last 180 years? Less than 50. Mormons murdered more than twice that many Christians at Mountain Meadows.
It’s no secret that Mormons feel persecuted when others challenge their beliefs or their beloved church. We see it here all the time.
“Kate further writes: “Hahaha! Thanks for the laugh Alex! Mormons are leaving in droves”
Actually Kate, for every Mormon who leaves the LDS Church and becomes an evangelical, ten evangelicals find the authentic Jesus of the Bible and become a Mormon. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is gaining about 270,000 converts every year. Not bad for a church that is supposedly dying on the vine
Read up on convert retention rates. They make up a huge part of the numbers leaving. Missionaries show up selling a whitewashed version, lying by omission and pressure people into Baptism within a few weeks of that first knock on the door. How many converts do you think your church would get if they required a year of study and church attendance before baptism? How many would convert if they knew what past prophets have taught and practiced? A lot of those converts you mention are in South America and don’t even bother to show up to be confirmed. You need to research before you speak.
Alex
You don’t have a clue about persecution; your church was never persecuted. As Kate rightly said almost all so-called persecution came about because of the way Mormons behaved. If you want to know what REAL persecution is about then follow this link.
http://catholiceducation.org/articles/persecution/pch0042.html
That kind of thing, admittedly not to the same degree, is happening all over the world, it’s real, it’s not imaginary & it’s NOT the result of Christians trying to impose their will on non-Christians as did Mormons in the mid 19th Century. Anyway, read the story on that site & then compare it with the Mormon version of persecution.
Ps, I’m still waiting for a response to my queries, 4 times I’ve asked & 4 times I’ve been ignored, not just by you but by the other Mormon apologists in here. To be honest I don’t believe there is any genuine defence that can be made but you could at least try. Better yet you could admit that you don’t have an answer but unfortunately that would mean being honest, something that doesn’t come easily to apologists.
Alex said that my view of Mormonism is almost “cartoonish” in nature.
Yea I’d say that is an apt description of Mormonism except cartoons are usually funny. There’s nothing funny about Mormonism. It’s not funny to reject God and His Christ and then promote an idea that men can become gods.
I don’t think it’s funny that people invest their time, treasure and energy into a false religion that keeps them from God.
Say Alex since you don’t think anyone here knows anything but you, why don’t you put together a test for us with questions to answer. I’d be very willing, for example, to answer questions you might pose about the BoM or the BoA.
Let’s see how knowledgeable I/we are.
Falcon, Alex does’nt have much to offer in the way of convincing anyone that Mormon prophets
are not those whom Jesus pre warned would come in these latter days —Matt 24:11 . He simply
chooses to resort to old rhetoric and false assumptions much of the time .
Since he claims that Mormonism offers , ” the authentic Jesus of the Bible ” , then he should
enlighten us about what his leaders have taught about their Jesus . This would be line with the
thread topic at least . The Book of Mormon , and Book of Abraham ? Good luck , but that looks
like a long rabbit trail to me 🙂
Just a few comments
The prophets have revelations all the time. The problem is that you don’t understand what a revelation is. When God reveals his will it is through revelation. If that will is to reduce the age of missionary service than that is a revelation. If that will is for the prophet to address the church and admonish them concerning a particular point of doctrine or practice, than that is a revelation. If all he wants is for the prophet to give a message of encouragement and help build faith that is a revelation.
However, at times the Lord simply gives permission for the prophet to voice his own thoughts and opinions. This does not mean that the prophet does not have the spirit; it simply means that he is not speaking by the spirit. There is a great difference there.
The question has been asked as to how we know when they are speaking by the spirit and when they aren’t. The answer is very simple. If your heart is open to the Spirit than the Spirit of God will tell you if what you hear or read is from God or is from the man. As it says “…when a man speaketh by the power of the Holy Ghost the power of the Holy Ghost carrieth it unto the hearts of the children of men. But behold, there are many that harden their hearts against the Holy Spirit, that it hath no place in them; wherefore, they cast many things away which are written and esteem them as things of naught.” (2 Nephi 33: 1-2) And I know people will get riled up when I say this, but the reason you can’t tell is because you don’t have the spirit.
Now a few words on persecution. I don’t want to spend too much time on this as it is a pointless topic that can generate no real good. However, a few points need to be made.
Whether people want to admit it or not the LDS are, indeed persecuted. It doesn’t matter if that persecution is as acute as what is inflicted against other people in various areas of the world. To claim that the severity of other persecution somehow negates the lesser persecution is not only illogical but infantile. It is like saying that a man who hasn’t eaten in 24 hours isn’t hungry because someone else hasn’t eaten in three days. While it is agreed the three days produces a more acute hunger than the 24 hours, to deny the lesser hunger is itself a form of persecution. The same can be said if you deny that a person with a sprang ankle isn’t really in pain because someone else was shot. Both cause pain, though one is more acute than the other.
Now, most LDS are not, nor are they likely to be persecuted in a physical manner. That is uncommon in the modern day. But persecution comes in many forms, and the LDS are subject to emotion and social persecution, despite the critics claims that it doesn’t happen. These are simply forms of persecution that are very subtle and thus are easily ignored, especially by those who don’t really like the LDS in the first place.
In this article you will read an example (http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765588504/Arson-determined-for-LDS-church-fire-in-Arizona.html?pg=all) It is a more infantile example, but it still illustrates the point.
falcon
Once again you prove your lack of understanding in your lists, though I think you did a little better this time.
“That Mormons believe that by going to their temples, dressing up in costumes and performing rituals taken from the Free Masons, that they will rise to the level of being gods.”
This shows a very low level of understanding. First, we don’t believe they were taken from the Free Masons. We believe the Free Masons took them from the true religion that existed at the time of Christ, and thus they were preserved in a corrupted form. Second, it is not simply by doing these things that we gain the reward. We also must have faith and endure to the end. To say it is the ordinances themselves that save us is wrong and shows a lack of understanding.
“That Joseph Smith identified the Mormon god in the BoA as the Egyptian fertility god Min depicted sitting on a throne with an erection.”
Despite your own perversions of the truth this was not what Joseph did or claimed. I really don’t care what the Egyptians drew or believed. Joseph Smith identified God as our eternal Father and ruler of both heaven and earth. These truths were later corrupted by the Egyptians, as shown in the Book of Abraham, but to say anything else is to give false information.
So once again you mix false claims in with what is basically correct, though not fully understood. You have not yet been able to give a single list that accurately portrays our doctrine.
Old man says:
Q. Do you, any of you, taking into account Joseph Smiths occult practices & his prophetic record of being ‘roughly’ correct, i.e. making good guesses, 5 times in 65 attempts, (7.6% accuracy) also given his predilection for bedding not just single but married women, still believe that he was a prophet ordained by God or would you say that Jeremiah 23:14 is probably a much more accurate description of Smith?”
A. There is no verifiable record of his having relations with any woman that was not his wife, despite the desperate attempts of critics to prove otherwise.
He never once uttered a prophecy that was not fulfilled to the last detail.
As to the occult, considering that it was a common practice among most Christians at the time, and see that most of what is recorded has its parallels in the Bible, and can thus be shown to simply be corruptions of truth that people once had, the fact that at a young age he was attracted to the ideas and later learned the originals truths behind them means little.
So, yes, I believe he was an ordained prophet of God, called to usher in the Dispensation of the Fullness of Times and restore the true gospel to the Earth for the last time.
“That is totally non scriptural, the test of a true prophet is outlined in Deuteronomy”
This is perfectly scriptural. It states it rather directly in the Book of Mormon. Of course I think when you use the term scriptural you are referring only to the Bible, in which case I would point you to James 1: 5 in which we are directed to ask God in faith and we will receive an answer. It does not restrict what topic we can inquire about, but actually makes this so broad as to encompass anything that we feel the need to have God clarify for us. This would also be the case when Christ said to Ask and ye shall receive.
Kate
“Read up on convert retention rates…You need to research before you speak.”
Maybe you should think before you speak. There is a very simple test to determine not only the retention rates but the active attendance rates as well. You see, it is church policy to only build where attendance has increased to generate the need for additional buildings. They also only split wards and stakes when attendance is such that doing so would increase the effectiveness of the members and local leaders. While we do record nearly 300,000 converts a years, the really telling statistics are the increase in buildings and units. This why I never put much stalk into these claims that the church is losing membership faster than they are gaining it. They simply wouldn’t be expanding the organization and buildings in the manner they have been if this was true.
You might also like to look at this survey from the Pew Forum. While no survey can give a completely accurate picture, it pretty good. (http://religions.pewforum.org/portraits) You will note that 75% of those who claim to be Mormon attend church weekly and another 9% attend monthly. That is over 80% that can be considered active. On the other hand only 58% of evangelicals attend weekly and less than 70% attended monthly.
It seems we have a very nice retention rate.
Alex, Again, you can only lie, otherwise you are extermaly ignorant of what your church teaches. I asked the same question of FoF and Shem, yet they both ignored my question, and Shem even said, ask any question and I will answer it.
I even have the time stamped reply from shem to prove it.
Now you did not really answer my question, you said many things to make it seem as if you did. You guys claim we dont know what were talking about when we claim your church teaches X-Y and Z. Yet you never come on here and say, no, this is what we believe, you guys just cannot be plain and come out and tell us. This was part of your reply to me.
Now here is the problem, You claim Jesus said, keep His commandments, yet you wont give a list of them, you simply say, I should know what they are and I guess I must not know the Bible then. I know this, LDS deny Salvation by Grace Alone. LDS claim, grace PLUS WORKS, AFTER ALL WE CAN DO.
Now you wont tell me what these works are we must do, because they goes againt what Jesus said and taught. So put on your Bibb as this will get messy having to spoon feed you again, and we know how much you dont enjoy the truth.
The religious leaders asked Jesus, What work(S) must we do. Notice they said works (Plural), meaning more than one work. Jesus replied with, the only work you must do is to believe on Him who God sent. Notice Jesus said ONE WORK (Singular). So do I believe you or Jesus? Then Jesus said all of His commands and laws are summed up in Love. If We Love Him and Love our neighbor we are living out all His laws and commandes. So we dont have as you imply, this long list of works we must do. Now to add to that, lets see what your church and leaders say about what we must do, as in after all we can do.
Read what after all we can do means.:
The Prophet Spencer Kimball Achieving a Celestial Marriage manual pg 30 makes it very clear we must do certain things to enter the temple to be saved. He gives a list of 6 things called (TEMPLE RECOMMEND INTERVIEW). It says When you are interviewed for a temple recommend you will be asked about,
1. Church attendance
2. Payment of tithes and offerings
3. Loyalty to Church leaders.
4. Moral cleanliness.
5. overall faithfulness and worthiness.
6. Obedience to the Word of Wisdom.
Notice it says “Obedience to the Word of Wisdom.” Yet Many LDS members do not follow this. Also we read in Gospel Principles pg 125: WE MUST KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD. To make our repentance complete we must keep the commandments of the Lord (see D and C 1:32). we are not fully repentant if we do not pay tithes or keep the sabbath day holy or obey the word of wisdom. We are not repentant if we don’t sustain the authorities of the church and don’t love the lord and our fellow man. Yet again many LDS do not meet this requirement.
If we do not do these things, we cannot be saved, Grace is free and comes as a result of God loving us, Not because of the works we do.
So Alex, how come you LDS claim to be honest to the point sharing what you teach and believe about your church, but all that I posted, you cannot openly state this, it takes effort on our part to find these things out? Thats a form of lying. And I bet if you were really honest, you would admit your not doing everything listed by your leaders, Are you?
Shem said
The Problem shem is this, When the prophets say, This IS SCRIPTURE, or THIS IS DOCTRINE, And you guys dont like it or agree with it, then it is their opinion. Funny how that works.
Shem said
Shem, This simply is not true, Again, when you prophets claim what they said and taught was doctrine and scripture, and you dont like it, then you claim it was simply their opinion. Then what you said does not agree with the Bible. The Bible tells us our hearts are deceitful and desperately wicked. The Bible tells us that the devil can come in the form of an angel of light to deceive us, and the Bible warns us about false prophets, false teachers, and wolves in sheeps clothing.
According to you, we should never be deceived since our hearts would know if we were being lied to, yet we know some of your so called prophets were deceived into buying fake letters thinking they were real. Funny how God did not speak to them and say, Hey Guys, your being lied to, those letters are fake. Yea Shem, keep believing the lies.
Shem said,
I would point you to James 1: 5 in which we are directed to ask God in faith and we will receive an answer. It does not restrict what topic we can inquire about, but actually makes this so broad as to encompass anything that we feel the need to have God clarify for us. This would also be the case when Christ said to Ask and ye shall receive.
I say,
I completely agree that God will give wisdom to those who ask in faith the only argument is as to the form that that wisdom is given.
I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately and I have some questions for the Mormons here if they don’t mind.
1) Have you prayed and received and answer about all the books other than the BOM that claim to be scripture for example the book of Leviticus or the Gospel of Thomas or the Qur’an?
If not why not?
2) Was it necessary to read those other book before you make a determination on their claims. If not why not?
3) What about the other Mormon scriptures is your testimony regarding the DOC of the same nature and as strong as it is regarding the BOM? If not how can you be sure it is scripture?
4) What about individual parts of the BOM, is your testimony regarding 1st Nephi of the same nature as that regarding Jarom? What about individual sections of the books.
I find the BOM to be a mixture of good and some very bad doctrine does that mean that I have a partial testimony?
I am very curious about how relying only on your own private perceptions of the Holy Spirit’s leading to judge the authenticity of scripture works out in practice.
Thanks in advance
peace
Shem,
You said, “You might also like to look at this survey from the Pew Forum. While no survey can give a completely accurate picture, it pretty good. (http://religions.pewforum.org/portraits) You will note that 75% of those who claim to be Mormon attend church weekly and another 9% attend monthly. … It seems we have a very nice retention rate.”
If a worldwide poll were conducted of people who claim to be Mormon there would only be around 5 million people who claimed to be members rather than the 14 million that the corporation claims. They are constantly conflating their numbers. For example, in the 2000 Mexico census only 200,000 people claimed to even be Mormon while the corporation claimed that there were 800,000 members there. Go to cumorah.com to see that active LDS members (claimants) is at about one-third of what is purported to be by the mysterious shadow government. 5 million active Mormons worldwide? There are over 6 times that many Orthodox in Ethiopia, and twice that many Protestants to boot. Keep rolling along my friend, but don’t plan on filling the earth because at this rate it will take you about 40,000 years to reach one billion members (of the current population of seven billion). If the Mormon Jesus were so concerned about this wouldn’t politician Romney have won the election to help out the brethren?
Shem,
Do we have to go over this again?
“Sociologist Armand Mauss stated that “75 percent of foreign [LDS] converts are not attending church within a year of conversion. In the United States, 50 percent of the converts fail to attend after a year.”[52] This postbaptismal attrition is heavily front-loaded. Elder Dallin H. Oaks noted that “among those converts who fall away, attrition is sharpest in the two months after baptism,”[53] and missionaries report being told in the MTC that up to 80 percent of inactivity occurs within two months of baptism. In some parts of Latin America, 30 to 40 percent of new converts do not even return to church after baptism to be confirmed.[54] In contrast, Adventist News Network reported in 2001 that worldwide Seventh-day Adventist member retention rates had fallen from 81 percent in previous years to a still very impressive 78 percent at present.[55]”
“Studies investigating church growth through independent parameters document that real LDS growth is modest, with high attrition. Christian researcher George Barna issued the dunning declaration: “Turnover in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints appears to be the highest of any church in the U.S.”[56]
Here , I will provide a link where you can learn more.
http://www.cumorah.com/index.php?target=law_harvest&chapter_id=7
Along with Alex you need to research before you speak. Four million active lds members worldwide is kinda pathetic. The Seventh Day Adventists have almost 18 million members and they put their statistics online for all to see. They started in the 1840’s, several years after Joseph Smith, does that make them more true than your church? The numbers game Mormons like to play is ridiculous. People are leaving in droves as confirmed by your apostle, and convert retention rates are low.
What I’d like to know is how many Mormons are in the god maker program. I would guess that it is probably aroud 25% of active Mormons.
Mormons would have us believe that all of the quacky doctrines revealed by their prophets were just their opinion or folklore, they claim their prophets are just fallible men and only human. Maybe they didn’t get the message by Ezra Taft Benson.
President Ezra Taft Benson cautioned: “There have been and continue to be attempts made to bring [a humanistic] philosophy into our own Church history. … The emphasis is to underplay revelation and God’s intervention in significant events and to inordinately humanize the prophets of God so that their human frailties become more apparent than their spiritual qualities” (“God’s Hand in Our Nation’s History,” in 1976 Devotional Speeches of the Year [1977], 310).
Speaking of these attempts, President Benson cautioned teachers, “We would warn you teachers of this trend, which seems to be an effort to reinterpret the history of the Church so that it is more rationally appealing to the world” (The Gospel Teacher and His Message [address to religious educators, 17 Sept. 1976], 11).
This is exactly what our Mormon poster do. According to their own prophet, this is not OK.