Lightning Strikes Oquirrh Mountain Temple

63 Responses to Lightning Strikes Oquirrh Mountain Temple

1. Olsen Jim says:

   June 17, 2009 at 6:13 pm

   Aaron,

   Just a lurker for a long time. But the degree to which you take pleasure in the misfortunes of others is stunning. Lightning strikes a church or temple- and you find enormous meaning in that? You even seem to revel in it. Seems so contrary to what the Bible teaches.
2. Ralph says:

   June 17, 2009 at 10:27 pm

   So Falcon,

   I guess that you have irrefutable evidence of the resurrection of Jesus. Can you please share that with me so I can show my athiest friend here at work and convert her to Christianity. How about evidence of Moses parting the Red Sea – can I have your evidence of that. Can you give me the proof of the miracles that Jesus did, especially His walking on water – that would be one some of my friends would love to do in the surf life saving club – it will help them rescue people easier.

   Of course you have no firm evidence, so yes that qoute does apply to you. I don’t care if you put it there as a ‘trap’. It applies to any type of belief whether religious or not. Science is one area it fits in, especially evolution and research.
3. Martin_from_Brisbane says:

   June 18, 2009 at 7:21 am

   I don’t know what’s funnier…

   The “zapped” angel, or the quote that Ralph dug up from from a (presumably skeptic) website…

   …all I can add is…

   ROFLMAO!
4. Ralph says:

   June 18, 2009 at 2:40 pm

   Martin,

   I got it from a website discussing whether Christianity is a cult or not. Obviously this person thinks it is.

   Gundeck,

   After rereading some comments I have a question – do you consider everyone outside of your denomination Christian, or do they class you as Christian? Do you believe that they are saved or going to hell? From what I understand you belong to a group that believes that we should not depict deity (ie Heavenly Father and Jesus) in any form (eg sculpture or picture), otherwise that is breaking the 2nd commandment. This means that all the other denominations out there who have statues and pictures of Jesus have graven images and they are doing it willingly against the command of God. This difference is a big difference in core doctrine, especially since it is a ‘works’ based principle. Just trying to understand how your denomination fits in with this big difference in basics.
5. gundeck says:

   June 18, 2009 at 5:06 pm

   Ralph,

   Yes, I do think that they are Christians. You have made a couple of incorrect assumptions.

   First I do not think that the Reformed view of the second commandment is an essential of the faith such as things like the Bible being divine revelation, the nature of God, salvation by faith in Christ, etc.

   Second, while I do find in the second commandment a prohibition of pictures of any of the three persons of the Trinity, the denominations who do not believe this are not willfully violating an interpretation that they do not hold. There argument would be that I am taking to broad of a view of the second commandment and incorporating things not specifically forbidden. My view is that when looking at matters of worship we should only do what is prescribed. This regulative principal of worship and what is prescribed for Christian worship is debated both in and out of Reformed denominations. We do not have the luxury of having a man to tell us what color shirt to wear to church.
6. shematwater says:

   June 20, 2009 at 1:35 am

   GUNDECK

   If you can give that curtesy to others who have a different interpretation, why can you not give it to the LDS.

   Just a thought I had here. You speak of the debate between denominations about regulation of worship. In your opinion, does it matter which side is right?

   Also, I am very grateful that I have a prophet who can settle such questions through the devine power he holds, thus ending such debates (like Peter did with circumsition).
7. gundeck says:

   June 21, 2009 at 12:21 am

   Shem,

   If you believed in the same God I did and the same gospel you would be amazed at how open minded I am. The problem is that in 1838 your founding prophet claimed that my religion was an abomination. So until your Church declares that Joseph Smith was in error and that the first vision is in fact a heretical declaration I don’t think that we can come together over doctrine. This does not mean that I will not be respectful of you, just that our religions are diametrically opposed.

   What has your prophet done lately? I have lost track after the declaration that woman should only wear one earring per ear.
8. setfree says:

   June 21, 2009 at 2:34 am

   Micah 3:5 “Thus saith the LORD concerning the prophets that make my people err, that bite with their teeth, and cry, Peace; and he that putteth not into their mouths, they even prepare war against him.”
9. shematwater says:

   June 22, 2009 at 4:35 pm

   GUNDECK

   What of my question concerning the various beliefs on the second commandment?

   My point is that no two churches that teach different doctrine can both be true. If there is a difference in doctrine taught then one is right and the other wrong.
   Now, I am perfectly willing to admit all those who believe in Christ into the wide umbrella of Christianity, which is all I was asking about. However, I never claim to be a Baptist, or Methodist, or Calvinist, so I will not call these denominaitions LDS.
10. Aaron Shafovaloff says:

    June 22, 2009 at 7:43 pm

    shematwater, when you say “different doctrine”, are you exclusively referring to what is contained in your canon, or are you also including First Presidency statements and authorized church literature meant for wide distribution? Putting aside extra-biblical LDS canon for a moment, if you affirmed the latter (that “doctrine” for you here expanded beyond the canon) then how do you affirm your church as being true when it has reversed some of its own First Presidency statements and temple dedication prayers, etc.?
11. gundeck says:

    June 22, 2009 at 9:33 pm

    Shematwater,

    I am sorry, I misunderstood your question, I thought that you were asking why I cannot accept Mormonism as Christian. The problem that I am going to have is separating orthopraxy from orthodoxy. As a confessional Protestant I see the second commandment as connected to all parts of worship, this would encompass what God is worshiped, how God is worshiped, what we believe about God, etc. Belief, piety, and practice need to make a single coherent whole. I understand that this is harder for Mormons to make a logical whole of their theology. Its not youfault its your early prophets who felt pretty free to throw around the “Thus says the Lord”

    I can not take communion in your sacrament meeting because you do not believe in the spiritual presence of Christ. I do not accept your baptism as a sacrament rightly administered because of your view on the Trinity. Your views on regenerational baptism and the Holy Ghost are schizophrenic. Your order of salvation is backward, your view of repentance turns grace into works. I do not buy your prophets continuing revelation and your practice of debasing the Bible. The BoM is…words fail me. The PoGP and D&C…words still fail me. You and your leaders have turned a priesthood pointing to Christ into a manmade bureaucracy. You have a low view of sin and a high view of man, giving him libertarian free will at the expense of the sovereign God. Unlike your Greek philosophical (hello Plato meet Joseph Smith) view of creation there is no such thing as uncreated intelligence. Don’t even get me started on your view of the end times. Independence, Missouri?

    There is nothing personal in this but the idolatry of your religion goes far beyond the gold statue of a man/angel on top of your temple. Thinking about it you
12. shematwater says:

    June 23, 2009 at 2:44 pm

    GUNDECK

    You still did not really answer my question. My original question was not about the LDS faith, but about all faiths. If a Christian denomination disagrees with the daoctrine taught by your denomination, does this matter?
    In other words, is there only one absolute truth that must be followed, or is there one core truth and many related truths which people can pick and choose which to believe?

    This is my point about Christianity. If your church teaches one thing, and another church teaches differently (say baptism by immersion vs. sprinkling) which is true, or do you except both as being equally true and lagitimate (sorry about spelling)?

    “Belief, piety, and practice need to make a single coherent whole.” I have had no trouble with this. However, I must say that I find many things in Christianity confusing (like the verious forms of truth that seem to be out there, as I stated above).
13. Enki says:

    June 30, 2009 at 3:30 am

    I have heard of the steeple of a NON-LDS church falling on a husband and wife who came to watch their church getting an upgrade.

    What about a christian getting struck by lightning? In the long course of history I guess thats never happened? Any LDS members struck by lightning?